Piraña: peligro bajo el mar

I don't know why this is compared to the original. That film was no classic, and at least this one doesn't pull any punches. Indeed, the DVD version is R-rated and definitely not TV fare. Mila Kunis is so young in this that one wonders if it was made earlier than 1995. Anyhow, the story is ridiculous and pretty hackneyed, but William Katt and Monte Markham add credibility. It's always a pleasant surprise when James Karen shows up too. As a cheapie horror flick it delivers exactly what it promises and holds one's interest throughout. Making films like this made Roger Corman a legend, and his contribution to this particular film is probably what makes it work.

Detective Maggie McNamara investigates a case of a missing young couple as she runs into Paul Grogan, who lives as far away as possible from the city because he doesnÕt want to meet anybody. Together, they unwillingly unleash a plague of killer piranhas created by the military. The Piranhas attack an opening ceremony for some holiday resorts, where lots of guests are in the water - including GroganÕs little daughter...

A Roger Corman-produced TV Remake to a Roger Corman-produced (and Joe Dante-directed) original. Sounds bad enough to be a warning? ItÕs almost the same movie as the original, and nothing has improved since, in fact, this has to be one of the most unnecessary remakes in the long history of unnecessary remakes. As for the special effects, almost every single shot is lifted from the original which makes this hard to defend for even the most jaded fan. Not only the special effects in this 1995 movie are from the seventies, thereÕs also still no one around to provide a cell phone when you need one. If only the very likeable William Katt were in the original...

According to my fellow IMDb users, the film is a remake. But, since I have not seen the original, I cannot vouge for that. And they also say it uses stock footage from a number of other creature features. Again, I cannot say. But, if you think of it as a TV movie that was made some seven years ago, you cannot possibly expect a classic.

PIRANHA, in my opinion, was not that bad. It was certainly better than some of the other crappy action adventure films with the same plot line. Examples: BLOOD SURF, BENEATH LOCH NESS, PYTHON (the worst movie of all time) and an endless number of others.

You should all seriously give this movie a break. After all, it never wanted to be a classic. Just wanted to be there to give off some campy good fun...if only for a short while. PIRANHA gets 3/5.

This film is a complete shamble's from start to finish i ahve seen some remakes & thought yep ok not a patch on the orginal but they have tried something different, but this i know the original was made on a shoe string but it looks like titanic when compared to this mess, i wont go into the story as most people will be familiar with the original it dosent really detract from the original script aside from a few character changes however the most shocking thing about this film is that the producer's must have thought everyone who would watch this film would have there brain removed on the way in, the performance's where lousy actor's attempting to be tongue in cheek & ironic dosent really cut it, a really bad music score as well which dosent live up to fantastic one by pino donnaggio, but the biggest crime of all is that they have used effects footage from the orginal with the orginal actor's ( like how are we gonna miss that) it's like having Jaws 2, 3 & 4 & just re using all the shark attack footage from the first film

Please do yourself a favour Avoid at all cost's & if u really need something to watch go back to the orginal as all this version does is leave a very nasty taste in the mouth

Well, it IS near identical. A lot of changes from the original had been made (the doctor minding the piranha testing center being just one of those). Still, I prefer this one. One: it provided more character detail into Paul. Two: this remake's Maggie isn't as "bumbling" as the one in the original (although she's still far from being a decent gumshoe). Three: the circumstance behind the piranhas' poisoning (just in the pool) is more believable than the original (an entire water system in Vietnam). Four: the usage of stock from the original aside, the fact that they left bones after piranha attacks makes it more believable than the original. Five: because they made this look more serious than the original, it actually made it funnier.

It's still a bad movie, but, at least the way they changed it made it a tiny bit better.