Piranha

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.

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.

First off i love the 1978 Joe Dante Directed "Piranha" & i have done since the 90's when i discovered it & got it on video, it's a Cult Classic.

I've just discovered this 1995 Horror Gem, it seems to me although it's a made for t.v production it's still very well made & with a much better polished script than the 70's original even if not as good.

The characters here are given better dialogue & more depth with some back story to them which was missing in the 1978 original, i love Director Joe Dante (Gremlins 1&2,The 'Burbs) always loved his films from young & loved his Piranha but even i gotta admit it that this Remake fixed a few things & polished it up 90's style.

Apart from his excellent casting of the B-movie legends Dick Miller & Kevin McCarthy, this 90's version is often just as much fun!!!! Here though in the cast we have a really good William Katt from the Horror-comedy Classic House (1985), as Paul Grogan & i did like his performance better than that of Bradford Dillman from the original.

Also i preferred the performance of Alexandra Paul (Dragnet 1987) as P. I Maggie McNamara, the cast all seems to be putting alot of Drama into their performances & it really works. Yes there's some pure 90's cheesiness & some boobs that's typical of it's time but it's fun & great at the same time.

The stakes seem higher here & the feel of Danger is strong, this was a very slick & polished production. The cinematography is actually abit better too with a real Summertime atmosphere & colourful look. This 1995 version of Piranha was a very pleasant surprise, yes it used some footage from the original but it fitted in fine & didn't ruin anything & atleast this version didn't copy it completely, not totally beat for beat as we have some other bits going on that pads it out more & makes it feel fresh & interesting. We get a wannabe movie director played by Leland Orser (The Bone Collector 1999) as he's down at the lake filming a commercial there & he has a little side-bit story where he's out on the lake at night with a sexy camp councillor & things get Nasty. The gore is more brutal here too & the attacks seem more frenzied & more dramatic, the tension is high & everything is done to feel more real i suppose & less fantastical.

I definitely noticed the dialogue was way better & definitely much more depth for our main stars.

A very Decent & well made 90's B-movie Remake of a 70's Cult Classic B-movie.

"PIRANHAS" is just as good as the original & definitely better than the dull "Piranha 2:Flying Killers" & still better than the fun but silly 2000's Remake & it's sequel!!!

Watch it as a double bill with the 1978 original as a good night of summertime thrills.

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.