Grizzly l'orso che uccide

Animal attacks are not uncommon things in the contemporary world. Humans can sometimes cross paths with a wild animal at the wrong time and place. Of course not all animals are intentionally setting out to harm individuals, but there are those moments where they had it coming. Whether it was due to their lack of awareness or just plain ignorance, certain animals should not be domesticated because it's just shouldn't be done. As explored in Steven Spielberg's ocean thriller Jaws (1975), the shark had proved to be a formidable force that should only be observed from far distances. It made a lot of people think twice about going back into the water. Smartly capitalizing on the fad and everyone's deepest fears, a producer by the name of Edward L. Montoro made this independent film focusing on a dangerous land animal. The animal of choice for this feature was the grizzly bear. So now instead of scaring the living life out of beach goers, Montoro wanted to make people fear their own backyard. Well done Mr. Montoro.

Although the film has its own credited screenwriters, the parallels between this movie and Jaws (1975) are all too familiar. Written by Harvey Flaxman and David Sheldon, the script has few differences in its story. Michael Kelly (Christopher George) is a ranger at the local park and the season for backpackers and hikers has just kicked in. To his dismay a couple of campers were mauled by a grizzly bear and now he's on the hunt with helicopter pilot Don Stober (Andrew Prine) and nature boy Arthur Scott (Richard Jaeckel). Breathing down Kelly's neck is park owner Charley Kittridge (Joe Dorsey), who wants the bear gotten rid of. See the similarities in how the events reflect what goes on in Jaws (1975)? The noticeable changes are that it deals with a bear instead of a shark and it's on land and not at sea. There are even scenes where after the campers are attacked, a posse of hunters go out to kill the bear themselves. Even Kittridge becomes greedy and becomes okay with having the publicity.

The minor changes within the story though deal with Christopher George's character. Unlike the main character of Jaws (1975), Mike Kelly is a single man who hasn't found the right woman in his life yet. Co-starring in this film is another actor by the name of Joan McCall playing Allison Corwin. She initially comes across like she could turn into Kelly's love interest but then goes nowhere. From the start Corwin explained to Kelly that she was trying to finish a project she was working on, but two thirds of the way through she completely vanishes from sight never to be heard from again. Something's a miss here. And McCall's character isn't the only one with an unfinished thread. There are a few others, and doesn't resolve much in the story. It's unbecoming that so much of the screenplay resembles another movie only to not completely take what they've learned and apply it correctly. Why bother introducing a character that adds nothing to anything?

The only true actors to come out unscathed is Christopher George and "Teddy" the bear actor. Although much of his other co-stars have been in several films like him, George is the only actor to try and make his role his own. Christopher George is probably best known for playing a role in the so-bad-it's-so-good film Pieces (1982). This feature would be his next best. The rest of the acting by Andrew Prine and Richard Jaeckel act passably but do not stand out from any other cast member. Andrew Prine would take a minor roll Ronald F. Maxwell's epic of Gettysburg (1993) and Richard Jaeckel would also play a minor role in the science fiction drama Starman (1984). For animal actors, "Teddy" the portrayed grizzly bear killer was quite a looker. In all honesty, the thought of having a real bear on scene was not thought to be likely. Apparently they did have a real bear on set though, and he is something to watch. There are some pretty serious injuries that are filmed too but the actual mauling isn't too believable.

The camera-work that goes with film is mostly doable. The only time it's too unconvincing is when the camera represents the animal attacks. The lens just moves too much to figure out everything. Other than that, the wide panning shots by William L. Asman are visually pleasing. The forest is a big place and the landscape is vast in its scope. The camera is also used as the eyes of the grizzly which has it pushing through brush so as to look like the viewer is the bear. That looks fairly accurate. Although Asman has done cinematography, his main credit is as a camera operator to films like The Rocketeer (1991) and Speed (1994). The music by Robert O. Ragland is also a supportive element to the film. It's by no means anywhere close to as recognizable as John Williams' music, but it has its moments. Sadly there's no main theme, which could've helped the movie greatly. Ragland also made the score to both The Fear (1995) and The Fear: Resurrection (1999). Hmmmmm okay.

As a calling to what could be said as the land version of Jaws (1975), this film fairs out alright but nothing truly great. Only a few actors work among the whole cast and the cinematography is the only good looking visual. The gore is average at best and the script is in a lot of ways very much the same to Jaws (1975). The music is decent but it's difficult to remember it.

To say that "Grizzly" is a rip-off of "Jaws" is only going part way to describing the genesis of the film. It has also taken a page from "The Towering Inferno" with opening credits that are so similar in their presentation that it's laughable. (There's even a lodge owner with the same type of glasses William Holden wore in "Inferno".) The film follows the basic formula (which would be copied in dozens of films thereafter) of "Jaws" with innocent people being mauled and devoured by an unseen enemy. Like Bruce the shark, Grizzly doesn't make his full appearance right away. Rather, the audience is treated to perspective shots of branches and foliage being shoved away as he approaches the next morsel...er...camper. (This approach was also utilized in the 1976 "King Kong", so the derivation continues.) George plays something akin to Head Ranger of the forest in question. When he isn't head-butting with the park supervisor (Dorsey), he's calling upon buddies Jaeckel (a naturist who prowls around with pelts on his back to better study the animal kingdom) and Prine (a helicopter-piloting Vietnam veteran) to help him track down this man-killing beast. Meanwhile, the body count rises and rises as victims fail to notice a 15 foot, 2000-lb grizzly bear coming up to them from nowhere! Finally, just when the cast is dwindling to that of a one man show, the climactic showdown between man and beast occurs with the bear getting a similar comeuppance as Bruce the shark did in "Jaws". Some of the scenery in the film is nice, though apart from the credit sequence, it is hardly ever exploited to its full potential. The three lead males do an okay job with Jaeckel scoring the most points with his quirky portrayal. It's a little sad to see George literally chain-smoking through the film when he would be dead of a heart attack in just 6 years at age 54. Prine affects a spotty cornpone accent that does little to bring his sketchy character to life. By far the worst presence in the film is that of McCall as George's love interest. Not only does her character have nothing to do with the plot or the title beast at all, but the actress is so annoying that one keeps hoping she will be next in line for the human buffet. Looking like a less-surgically-enhanced Katie Couric and with a voice twice as grating, she is a big debit to the film. WHERE was Lynda Day George?? Though the formula of "See camper, See camper die" gets more than a little tiresome, there are a couple of memorable moments. One is when the bear wants one victim so badly, he levels a towering ranger station! Among the sillier moments is one in which a female ranger says she is going to soak her feet in the stream, yet proceeds to strip down to bra and panties and let her hair out of its ponytail! There are campy bits like heads, arms and so forth being yanked off (mostly suggested rather than explicitly shown) and plenty of fake blood spewing here and there. There are worse "Animals on the rampage" flicks, but this is hardly a strong piece of movie-making. In a useless aside, both Prine and George posed for nude photos of themselves in the 70's, but here nary even a chest is in sight.

This movie is a total rip off of Jaws and I enjoyed it almost as much. The first bear attack scene was cheap and fake looking but stick with it because the rest were pretty good. The bear can act! I enjoyed this 70s flick, it was fun. I give it a 5 because it wasn't scary enough.

Okay, I think everyone going in knows that this is another one of those "nature-runs-amok" flicks. If you're a fan of these types of movies you'll enjoy "Grizzly;" you won't be blown away or anything, but it's a nice little time-waster.

"Grizzly" was made one year after the hugely-successful "Jaws." It's obvious that the creators wanted to profit from that film's popularity because the plot is basically the same, albeit with a different animal, land instead of ocean, etc. The main difference, however, is that "Jaws" was a first-rate film, whereas "Grizzly" is strictly Grade B.

How can one tell? Well, First rate films like "Jaws," "Raiders of the Lost Ark" or "The Bridge on the River Kwai" stand the test of time -- although you can tell they're older films for obvious reasons, they're so well done on all levels that you hardly even notice. Grade B films like "Grizzly," however, do not pulsate with creative originality, they lack that certain pizazz to set them apart.

This is not to say that "Grizzly" isn't entertaining; it is, as long as you understand going in that you're seeing a Grade B Jaws-on-land type flick. We're not talking "Apocalypse Now" here.

WHAT WORKS: The Northern Georgia location -- Black Rock Mountain State Park -- is a pleasant surprise. If you enjoy deep forest adventure type movies, then this film's for you.

The scene wherein the bruin destroys a fire outlook post is good.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: aside from the obvious "Jaws" rip-off and Grade B film problems mentioned above, the grizzly in the picture doesn't look as big as they say it is. In the movie the bear is supposed to be a prehistoric survivor, some 15 feet tall or so. Don't get me wrong here, the thought of running into a grizzly is frightening enough, ask my wife who had a nervous breakdown on a trail in Glacier National Park, Montana (one of only two areas where grizzlies still dwell in the lower 48). It's just that the bear doesn't look as big as they SAY it is in the film.

Also, as with most Grade B fare, the score is substandard and dated.

FINAL ANALYSIS: Think rip-off, think Grade B, think "Paws" or "Claws," and you won't be disappointed.

GRADE: C+

Grizzly was a good film the bear was pretty big and very violent too. Grizzly features big stars such as Christopher George, Andrew Prine and Richard Jackel. Most people in the mid-70's think Grizzly is a rip off of Jaws but I don't think it is that much. Grizzly has a lot of gore and blood and Robert O. Ragland's music make's the killings a lot more errier. I have seen Grizzly more than 6 times it is very good, but they DO NOT have grizzly on VHS,only DVD at the time. Director William Girdler also made Abby, and Project kill before he was killed in a crash while making a film in the Philipheens