Thanks for the memories!

It's Difficult NOT To Enjoy This Movie

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

The first must-see film of the year.

One of the many remakes of horror films under the Roger Corman Presents banner (other titles include HUMANOIDS FROM THE DEEP), this is largely an unnecessary item which, of course, is not as good as the original. But then what is? PIRANHA, like Gus Van Sant's remake of PSYCHO, follows the same script as the first and is virtually a shot-for-shot rehash of the original. Although it is hampered by the television movie format (as to be expected), the film is still a lot of fun as the script is still good all these years later, and if you haven't seen the original film, then you will probably enjoy it a whole lot more.Surprisingly, the acting isn't too bad this time around. I say surprisingly because if you've seen the amount of TV movies like I have (take DEADLY INVASION: THE KILLER BEE NIGHTMARE or MARABUNTA for example) then you come to expect it to be uniformly bad, but William Katt and Alexandra Paul are adequate leads, with Katt being the most fun as the grizzled, hermit-like hero. While lacking big names such as Barbara Steele and Kevin McCarthy, as the original had, the film does include James Karen as the town's governor who has to clear up all the mess afterwards. There are a lot of scenes with people being bitten underwater by the piranha (the special effects are exactly the same as they were twenty years ago) and a memorable moment where a severed arm is pulled out of the murky depths.Lots of blood flows around freely, and, unlike the first film, two bimbo actresses are quite happily to strip off in the name of entertainment. And you can't hate a film which has a dog being devoured by fish that much, can you? With lots of little kids screaming and getting bitten, a jail break, a suicide, and some pyrotechnic explosions, PIRANHA is easy viewing for all the family. Just don't expect too much violence, this is a TV movie after all. It's a remake which, while lacking Dante's natural charm and subtle references to the horror genre (although there is some blatant name dropping, like one character mentioning ATTACK OF THE CRAB MONSTERS in a minor attempt to recreate this), is still fun. A pointless yet pleasantly enjoyable surprise.

Despite being old, this remake of the classic "Piranha" movie is actually not all that shabby. And I would say that it is actually better than the 2010 remake (aside from the effects in the 2010 version).The story doesn't get any easier to follow than it is presented in the movie. The government have been experimenting on piranha fish for insertion into Russia and the East. Yeah, seems plausible enough, right? Haha... Then the project was shut down, but the experiments continued. Now, years later, the piranha are accidentally released out into the nearby river. Wait, it gets better, this new strain of piranha can live in both salt and fresh water, as well as warm and cold water. And the piranha are hungry... There, story summarized."Piranha" actually manages to keep you entertained throughout the entire feature length, and you want to see what happens next.As for the cast in "Piranha", then there were some pretty good names, such as William Katt (playing Paul Grogan) and a very young Mila Kunis (playing Susie Grogan). There are some other familiar faces on the roster as well, and of course an always welcomed face on the screen, James Karen (playing the governor)."Piranha" is worth checking out if you like cheesy horror movies. If for nothing else, then watch it for the hilarious song that plays when the end credits are rolling over the screen; killer mutant piranha...Oh, and notice how the film makers used the same footage of the swimming piranha school over and over again, and sometimes would just zoom in, but still use the same shot. That was wonderful. And also, take notice of the eagle-like cry the piranha emits when they attack, that had me laughing out loud. Priceless entertainment right there.You should check out this 1995 version of "Piranha" if you have watched the original or the 2010 remake. Trust me...

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.

I am not an advocate of Remakes, but I do recognize a good one! This is not a good one.Why would anyone bother to remake a movie if they do not intend to improve on the original? Or at least alter it slightly as to merit an "Update"? This version of Piranha is cheaper and nastier than the original.... The Original knew it was Cheap and Nasty and played upon it.... but this movie takes itself seriously. The little 'fishy' effects are worse then the original and the plot itself is identical. This is basically a frame by frame remake... why?It was made for TV and one has to question why they bothered to invest money into this when they could have easily screened a re-run of Joe Dante's original classic! I am sure more people would have stayed tuned for that one. It was obviously a clever little parody of Jaws... this is a tired and lonesome stinker!I give it 1 out of 10 For having the guts to be made at all.