Sign up to add this to your collection
|
Sign up to add this to your favorites
|
|
42%
Overall Rating
|
|
Ranked #9,258
...out of 20,886 movies
|
Sign up to check in!
|
A group of utility workers are trapped in a series of tunnels which, unfortunately, contain a scientist mutated by his own creation. The creature feeds instantly on a rat, becoming what it has eaten.
--IMDb
|
|
Review by Chad
Added: April 6, 2007
There are times when I want to watch a horror movie that is thought-provoking, poignant, and filled to the brim with social and / or political commentary. From those films, I expect to find smart storylines coupled with great acting and preferably capped off with a shocker of an ending. However, sometimes I just want to see a man in a monster suit terrorize a bunch of people with little rhyme or reason, and that's what Bottom Feeder is all about.
It begins when we at home discover that scientist Nathaniel Leech (James Binkley) has developed a serum that can heal just about any type of wound with just a single injection and a couple of protein packs. An eccentric millionaire by the name of Charles Deaver (Charles Fitzpatrick) who just so happens to be horribly scarred as a result of a fire offers to buy this from Leech, a deal is made between the two, and they meet in an old warehouse to finish the transaction. Unbeknownst to our scientist hero, Charles wants proof that this serum will do what he claims it will, so he has his assistant Krendal (Wendy Anderson) beat the holy hell out of Leech and fire off a couple of rounds into his legs before giving him an injection and locking him in a tunnel for the night. The plan: if Leech lives and recovers from this, the deal will be complete and Leech will be a millionaire. If he dies, well... sort of sucks for him, right?
The problem arises when Leech, unable to get to the protein packs that are a vital part of this process, starts to go mad from hunger as a result of the injection. He eats a couple of rats that are crawling around in this nasty little tunnel, and thanks to a side effect of the drug, his body starts to take on the characteristics of the very rats that he's chowing down on. Sort of gives new meaning to the old "You are what you eat" saying, huh? Meanwhile, a group of maintenance men led by Vince Stoker (Tom Sizemore) are prowling these tunnels in search of valuables to pawn off, and when they encounter rat-boy, well... the proverbial shit hits the proverbial fan.
It could easily be argued that the plot is paper-thin and is only there to give this creature an excuse to run around mauling people, but to that I'll reply... well, yeah, that actually sums it up fairly nicely. Alright, so there's really not a whole lot to be found here in terms of the storyline, but honestly: did you expect as much after taking a gander at that DVD cover? Yeah, me either. There's a few twists throughout the running time of the film and a couple of jabs are taken at our current administration, but the vast majority of the film is nothing more than rat-boy killing people and people running from said rat-boy.
Now, don't get me wrong here; I'm not saying that I didn't enjoy the movie, because truthfully, it's not bad for what it is. Viewers who want a little substance and story from their horror will probably walk away disappointed, but if you're one of those people who pine for the days when horror was a straight-forward affair consisting of the hero(es) versus the monster / giant insects / serial killer / whatever, then Bottom Feeder is something that you'll probably want to invest a little time into.
One of the things that I enjoyed most about this film was the fact that there was no CGI usage involved (at least, none that I could point out). Too many monster movies these days attempt to create the monster solely on a computer and leave the rubber suits in the closet, and the end result is a villain that you'll be too busy laughing at to fear. That is not the case here, as through the use of some good costumes and even better lighting, director Randy Daudlin has created a respectable template for how low-budget monster movies should be done even in this day and age.
It's not a perfect movie and I doubt that I'll even remember it in a couple of months, but it's not exactly a rental that I'm disappointed in either. Fans of straight-forward, man-versus-monster horror will probably enjoy it, but again, it's nothing that will top any year-end lists. 6/10.
|
|
#1:
Edd
- added April 6, 2007 at 12:32pm
I'm sorry, but this movie was way too boring for
me. Nothing semmed to come together right, and the
monster looked horrible. Maybe they needed CGI in
this one, but it was seriously not entertaining.
2/10
|
|
Rate Movie? 
