Dickshark

Plot

A romantic couple get more than they expected after the husband's experiments with penis-enlargement cream go awry. Wait, this is not a porn story. Rather, it is an absurd science-fiction movie that features a curious new species, the Dickshark. In some ways this story asks the same questions that Mary Shelly did when she wrote "Frankenstein.

Cast

Not being my general type of thing I was unfamiliar with anyone except Erin Brown who is better known as her erotic movie alter ego Misty Mundae.

Verdict

Dickshark was a recommendation otherwise I'd not have likely watched it even for the novelty factor. When I looked on IMDB I facepalmed at the cover art and scratched my head at the runtime, how could this be three hours in length?

Within moments I saw what type of film this was and I use the term film very loosely. Each scene features the same formula, a guy and a girl and for often unexplained reasons she's naked, topless or in her underwear. The banter between them is juvenile, the acting non-existent and then we'll have some involvement with the "Dick Shark" and it makes Scyfy movies look like they're on 200 million budgets.

To be clear there really is no plot here, it's just three hours.....yep it really is three hours....of T&A. Girl jiggles boobs, man makes bad jokes.

The novelty element could have made for a short film but not a feature and certainly not something of this length.

Outside of teen boys I don't see who'd like this and I honestly question if they would either.

Rants

I don't get it, what were they thinking when they made this? Was it a lost bet? Was it a dare? I struggle to believe anyone actually thought this was a good idea. It's like troma mixed with softcore porn but without much sex, I'm really lost for words and blown away that this exists and this is coming from a guy who watches a LOT of weird indie flicks.

Breakdown

Constant close up female genital shots were unnecessary No plot Awful acting Cast have no place in front of the camera Everyone involved should be embarassed.

The best thing about this movie ... well is the poster and maybe the tag line. It's actually a shame, because there are things here that you could find funny - if you are in the right mood. Like the director making fun of himself and the nudity this contains and the "erotic movie" genre (with or without horror elements) ... I would not call it acting what you see - but there are some hidden gems in some of the dialog scenes.

The real issue is the other stuff. Well at least for me. I reckon if you are into Heavy Metal you can at least enjoy the music/soundtrack to a degree. That the effects would not have any kind of standard ... I expected that. I can only assume that another reviewer is trolling who praises this ... or anything at all. Also I "only" watched the 2.5 hourse cut and am surprised to read there is an even longer cut here ... I will not watch that under any circumstances ... I'd advice you to save time too.

I have mixed impressions about this title.

Production is cheap. Lighting and cinematography are dreadful. The pace is glacial, the editing frustrating, and why oh why so much slo-mo?

There's a lot of female nudity, and all the actors are obviously there for the love of it because no-one is taking themselves, the nudity or the film too seriously. They can't even suppress their mirth at times. I can forgive the cheap props, gratuitous boob shots and micro-budget film-making because the ideas expressed are quite high-brow.

Others are complaining about the dialogue. It initially comes across as silly stuff, what seems to be many ad libs, off on tangents and probably a lot was shot in one take. There are gaps in the dialogue, the actors break eyeline, look at the camera or over to where I suspect the script is available to be read off camera. The script is at times frustrating and could have been shot and edited much, much better.

But the thing that surprised me within the eccentric dialogue are the observations and commentary on modern society, such as myths and clichés accepted as fact, the poor discipline in modern education and then, importantly, the call-back to a classic by Mary Shelley.

**Ding!** Dick is a modern Victor Frankenstein, destroyed by his own power and one of his own creations. The dialogue up to that moment has reflected Shelley's themes on the uneducated and the use of knowledge for good or evil. Does Dick even consider science for good or bad, or is the pursuit of science its own reward, as well as an excuse for fondling breasts?

High brow conversation and low brow visuals.

Is this porn? No, female nudity is not porn, besides which there are no male actor's bits seen on the screen. "Dickshark" is a direct descendant of the monster-nudie and nudie-cuties of the 60's. Remember Francis Ford Coppola's first couple of movies - "The Bellboy and the Playgirls" and "Tonight for Sure"? Who could foresee "The Godfather" series or "Apocalypse Now" from those nudie-cutie origins?

I make note of a few minutes dedicated to music credits at the end. I respect Bill Zebub's effort here of one artist promoting other collaborating artists. But Bill, if you read this, please get a fresh pair of eyes to check your spelling before delivering the final product. Mistakes abound!

In summary, if you can endure the glacial pace and many shortcomings in the craft of film-making evident in "Dickshark" there is a high concept running underneath all the boob shots and ridiculous props. .....and it pays to know Mary Shelley's writing.

This entire movie is in slow motion, and it's TWO AND A HALF HOURS LONG.

I wanted to die after 5 minutes.

Right, well with a movie titled "Dickshark", then I have to say that I had absolutely zero expectations for this 2016 movie. I happened to stumble upon it by random chance, and opted to give the movie a chance, on the chance of it being a bizarre comedy.

I was wrong. Boy, how I was wrong. This movie is atrocious. It wasn't a comedy at all. This was a lewd low budget sleaze-fest of an adult movie. Yeah, nothing worthwhile to sit down here for. In fact, do yourself a favor and stay well clear of this dumpster fire of a movie from writer and director Bill Zebub.

The storyline in "Dickshark" was laughable, non-existing and just downright stupid. But then again, does sleazy movies really need a storyline? Well, it does if you were expecting it to be something quite different than what it turned out to be.

The acting performances in this movie, and I use the word "movie" with a grain of salt here, was amateurish, sluggish, wooden, rigid and not really worth watching. Needless to say that I wasn't familiar with a single performer on the cast list here, nor were I inspired to rush out to acquire other movies of anyone on the cast list here.

The special effects were non-existing. So don't get your hopes up.

Bad production, bad acting, bad writing and bad cinematography hardly constitutes a proper movie.

My rating of "Dickshark" from writer and director Bill Zebub lands on a one out of ten stars. This is definitely one of the worst movies I have stumbled upon in a long, long time.