Wow. Wow wow wow wow. I really didn’t think it was possible to make the Piranha films any worse, but apparently these guys have gone and done the impossible.
On a scale of 1 to a block gorgonzola covered in melted mozarella with a heaping of parmesan, the scale still wouldn’t be cheesy enough for this splatterfest.
This blood soaked sequel is clearly catering to that elusive demographic of massive mammary obsessed boys who also hate their own brains.
“Bring me my legs.”
Urgh, I think that actually caused me physical pain. Is it possible to die from an aggressive infection of stupid?
I was going to end this article with the Piranha 3DD‘s official synopsis, but I realize that in the case of a film like this that the How, Why, Who and WTF of it all doesn’t really matter. So here is my own abridged version of the synopsis:
“Boobs. Fish. Blood. Bigger Boobs. Cheese. Hoff. Even Bigger Boobs.”
Last Updated: March 1, 2012
James Francis
March 1, 2012 at 10:44
Holy shit, I am first in line. Seriously, this looks like trash cinema at its best. More violence, more nudity more Ving, more Christopher and the m-to-the-effing Hoff. If this is being shot in real 3D and not post, I’ll got watch it on cinema.
Really? A piranha coming out of her vagina? REALLY? And that final shot looks like a great Elm Street reference. I’d rather watch this trailer back-to-back for the same timespan than sit through THAT remake again…
Who is joining me? We can smuggle in a bottle or tequila and hold a Double-D/bad one-liner shooter game.
It is a pity, though, that Aja isn’t directing. Instead it’s the guy who made Feast, which I thought was a piece of shit. But I know people who loved it…
Christo Kruger
March 1, 2012 at 14:24
I loved Piranha 3D. This one looks just as awesome. I’ll be there James!
Justin Hess
March 1, 2012 at 17:36
God that looks great. Kudos to them for looking like they’ve imaginatively taken the concept outside what we saw before.
Also, the Hoff, Christopher Lloyd AND Gary Busey? Together at last.
Gary Busey alone is often too much for one film but for a film this ridiculous, he’ll fit right in
James Francis
March 1, 2012 at 21:33
He plays the piranhas
Gavin Mannion
March 1, 2012 at 18:35
What…. was…. that….
Tracy Benson
March 1, 2012 at 22:32
Dafuq did I just watch?
Kervyn Cloete
March 2, 2012 at 06:11
Thank you, Gavin and Tracy. You have restored balance to the force.
Gavin Mannion
March 2, 2012 at 08:33
You know the world is upside down when you are agreeing with me in regards to movies 🙂
Justin Hess
March 2, 2012 at 10:06
Whoah, whoah, whoah. You guys didn’t like? What’s not to like. It looks like it follows the sequel rule perfectly. Take the concept of the original (in this case, an absurd, b grade horror film) and expand on the concept so that it adheres to what came before while taking the concept to different places (in this case, the piranhas can go anywhere providing there’s water). And it looks like the filmmakers have taken that and run a country mile with it.
And no, that does not make it the same as the Transformers films which decided to take the sequel rule of The Same But More at the minimum of what the rule required by just giving us more giant robots beating the shit out of each other.
So yeah, this looks like fun. Colour me interested
Kervyn Cloete
March 2, 2012 at 10:25
Well by that logic, then yes, this a perfectly acceptable sequel. I’m not disputing that. What I am saying is that I thought that the first movie, probably just like this one, is a massive steaming turd that happens to have a nice pair of hooters slapped onto it.
Justin Hess
March 2, 2012 at 11:03
Aaah, gotcha. I already know what you think of films that aim for being intentionally bad (for the most part, I agree with you) but where we disagree is in what we thought of the first film, which I actually liked, and given my general taste in films, it’s genuinely surprising
James Francis
March 2, 2012 at 13:47
No, there I disagree. The first film was not a steaming turd. Transformers 2 was a steaming turd. Breaking Dawn was a streaming turd. Green Lantern was a steaming turd. Due Date was a steaming turd.
Piranha 3D did EXACTLY what it said on the box. It was not pretentious, it did not pretend to be more than the sum of its part and it delivered the goods very close to what many of us expected. Compare it to Shark In Venice to see what I mean.
This sequel, as Justin points out, slaps 11 on everything and just powers ahead. There have been some dismal sequels, mainly because they didn’t get what the original was really about. Good sequels get why the first film did well and then adds tassels.
Just because it’s a bad movie does not make it a steaming turd. Piranha 3DD might suck – we all know that trailers can be massively misleading. But if I get what they show in that trailer, plus more, then I will not ask for my money back.
Kervyn Cloete
March 2, 2012 at 14:09
See, this is the thing. Yes, Piranha completely succeeded in it’s goals, but I am not a fan of those goals at all. I can’t stand these types of films, so to me, it was a bad film.
But I guess that’s the beauty of differing opinions though.
James Francis
March 2, 2012 at 14:16
What goals are you talking about? Gratuitous nudity and violence in a b-grade wrapper? I think I just described Evil Dead… Please tell me you approve of Evil Dead!
Justin Hess
March 2, 2012 at 14:48
No I get what you mean. Your problem wasn’t that it was a bad film per se so much as the fact that being a bad film was what the film aspired to. I agree with you entirely in that regard.
This slew of intentionally bad films of late have pissed me off no end. Machete is one that comes to mind but theres loads others, especially those following in the wake of Grindhouse. A film that is honestly made with the idea of being good feels more worth my time (regardless of it being good or bad) than a film that’s made as a ninety minute long nudge nudge wink wink at the audience. That kind of thing gets tiresome after a while and then you want to see something with an actual story.
The thing about Piranha (and hopefully its sequel) was that even if it was clearly made with the idea of it being a b grade film, I don’t think the filmmakers saw that as an opportunity to slack off. Yes, it’s fully aware of its own qualities and yes, that’s played with a knowing humour, but it never felt that that aspect of it was so overblown that the rest of the film suffered as a result.
That’s just my opinion though and it’s a surprising one because, by and large, I hate these intentionally bad films like I hate tuna and bovril sandwiches.
Ed Wood, generally recognised as one of the worst filmmakers in history never saw himself in that light and even as his films were universally panned, he made his movies with the sincere belief that they were good. I really do wish that more contemporary filmmakers would approach their work with the same level of sincerity
Noelle Adams
March 2, 2012 at 09:31
Well, I think we have our topic for next week’s Mouth-off;) Stay tuned…
James Francis
March 2, 2012 at 13:48
Ving Rhames with shotgun legs FTW.
You know, I bet none of the naysayers liked Hobo With A Shotgun either…
Kervyn Cloete
March 2, 2012 at 14:10
1 for 1 on that account, James.
James Francis
March 2, 2012 at 14:17
Hobo With A Shotgun was genius – everything the Grindhouse revival aimed for and failed to materialise. Machete came close, but not close enough.
Andre V
March 8, 2012 at 22:11
I liked the first one. It was so (intentionally) bad it became good. Can’t wait for the next batch of stinky cheese.
And come on…it has the Hoff in it!!