Langostas: La octava plaga

As I sat down to watch the 2005 movie "Locusts: The 8th Plague", I must admit that I weren't having much of any high hopes for the movie. Why? Well, the movie have a rather low IMDb rating. And let's just be honest, the cast ensemble wasn't exactly screaming high-end production worth here.

But still, I do enjoy monstrous creature features, so of course I sat down to watch "Locusts: The 8th Plague". But I can't claim to have been overly impressed or particularly entertained.

The storyline is pretty straight forward and generic actually, for better or worse. So you know exactly how this movie will play out and writer D. R. Rosen didn't even once veer off the generic path of how-to-make-a-killer-insect-movie blueprint. And it was something that the movie suffered from, leaving not much of anything for director Ian Gilmour to work with.

Movies such as "Locusts: The 8th Plague" need proper special effect, which was something that it actually didn't have. The locusts looked like something taken out of a mid-1990s computer game. Fairly horrible CGI textures, and not once did I actually buy into the feeling of this being a swarm of dangerous mutated locusts. It just didn't work out, and it took away so much enjoyment from the movie.

Now, I can't claim to be much of a fan of actor Dan Cortese.. But I must say that when I saw David Keith and Jeff Fahey on the screen, I thought that maybe, just maybe, the movie could pick up. But no, it didn't, and they had small and rather insignificant roles that hardly mattered for the outcome of the movie as a source of entertainment.

If you enjoy movies about killer animals - or insects, as it is with the case of this 2005 movie - do yourself a favor, and don't waste your time on "Locusts: The 8th Plague", because it just doesn't offer anything to the genre that haven't already been done and seen, and done and seen better in other similar movies.

My rating of "Locusts: The 8th Plague" lands on a three out of ten stars.

This self conscious B movie is pure fun. Being a homage to the 50's bad sci-fi ficks, all in it works bad storyline, bad actings, awful effects, creatures going wild, loads of in your face flesh. Not to be taken seriously. Good enough for a 90 minutes stand.

This film is mainly fine for 'made for TV' fare. The biggest problem with this movie is the horrendous cgi effects. If it were not for the absolutely unwatchable special effects, "Locusts" would be worth it for the guilty pleasure factor. I will say that I am notoriously forgiving with regard to horror films. If I was entertained at all, I figure the movie did the job for which it was intended. I would have found this one very entertaining on the level of schlocky monster of the week movies, were it not for the extremely poor use of cgi. If you have nothing better to do and happen to find it on sci-fi... go ahead and give it a watch. There is enough unintended comedy to make use of a pizza and a couple of sodas or beers.

I don't want to write a spoiler so I'll just say this. There are many "holes" in the story. Bad story, bad plot, bad graphics, bad acting. Most of the dialogue is laughable and pretty much and insult to the intelligence of a nine year old. Most of the lines try to use twenty dollar scientific words, but most are not used effectively. Some parts are so bad you almost laugh even though you want to cry. The movie's solution to the nemesis is fairly lame. If you watch the entire movie, your scalp will be hurting from scratching your noggin and asking "why" did I watch this movie? Do yourself a favor and push the button the remote until you find something else worthwhile to watch.

The Sci-Fi Channel has once again cranked out another "made for TV" movie in their tired formula of species versus human engagements. As the film title indicates, the locusts have the honor of being man's nemesis this time.

A good director, cast, crew, writer, et al could have made this a passable piece of entertainment, but alas not in this case. The writing is predictable. The editing and photography are generic. The special effects are far, far from special. These scenes are particularly disappointing for a science fiction movie. While acceptable for a student film or a sci-fi spoof, they lack believability and appear to indicate a project with a meager budget.

David Keith does a good job as Gary Wolf, the corporate head. He has become a staple of The Sci-Fi Channel's flicks. Among this swarm of bad acting, he is a welcome relief, but has a limited amount of screen time.

Dan Cortese is very disappointing as Colt, the organic researcher and "good guy." His performance was stilted and uninspiring.

However, this is not unique in this film that lacks originality and recycles old themes. The evil cooperation versus the little guy. The government drone versus the civilian. The testosterone toxic military type versus the rebel. The industry versus the environmentalist. The geneticists verses the organic farmers. ... The banal list continues culminating in the human versus species of the week theme that is reflected in the title.

If you have a free moment with nothing to do and are bored out of your mind, consider this as a possible option.