Customer Reviews

Bottom Feeder

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

The plot is a little convoluted with the antagonist billionare skulking in the back of his limosine in an abandoned building's parking garage, while the action happens below in tunnels. The monster's creation it is genre standard stuff. All of the charactors are cliche'd in one way or another. The creature effects were decent, as were the practical effects overall.

My biggest gripes are:

1. Lack atmosphere, which I think had to do with the choice of lighting, lenses, and editing for the underground scenes.

2. Lack of tension. Without spoiling anything, there was more intensity in one particular line given by Sizemore at the begining of the third act than any menace given off by the monster in the whole film. The monster actually peeks around corners like a shy child and was slow enough to be outrun for most of the "chase". Bottom line: not scary.

3. For people running from a monster in fear for their lives , the charactors kept stopping in the middle of the hallways to stand around and spout out extended expositional dialogue.

And a word of warning: the DVD cover art touts this as "UNRATED" in bloody red letters, but I put forth that they just didn't bother to submit it to the MPAA. There isn't much blood, some standard gore (lopped off heads, nothing really new there), no nudity, and no swearing that I remember. It's actually closer to a PG-13 than an R in my opinion, and with very little editing you'll probably see it on basic cable soon.

The "Making Of" feature was a basic collection of short interviews with the director and selected cast talking about the filming experience intercut with scenes from the movie. Everyone seemed to be enjoying the themselves, but tired from the quick shooting schedule.

Overall Bottom Feeder was a mediocre little monster movie for a small budget feature. Too bad, because with more preproduction/postproduction polishing this could have been a lot better. Not campy enough to be funny, and too serious to be taken seriously, so I doubt it will be able to ever reach "cult classic" status. Most of the cast did a fair acting job, and as usual Tom Sizemore puts in a good performance. One exeption, I couldn't wait for the bum to die because his acting was so bad.

One of the trailers included on the DVD was for the upcoming zombie flick "The Mad" with Billy Zane. Looks to be a fun time as one of the "so bad it's good" campy horror releases.

Bottom Feeder actually grabs your interest while you're browsing the DVD section with its intriguing cover, however, if only the movie was that direct. This movie capatalizes on the scientist and the villian plot that takes a turn for the worse when the villian decides to use the experiment on the scientist prior to himself, what an original thought, if you believe that...Tom Sizemore leads a lackluster cast through underground trails to investigate a disturbance brought to his attention by the obnoxious member of his gardening team. When they come across the poor inflicted scientist he has already started to become the horrific creature that the villian suspected he might evolve into. The villian sends his cohorts down to investigate the scientist only to discover the hideous creature, which in turn, destroys them. This movie is barely a B film more like a D. I don't know what happened to Tom Sizemores' career that catapulted him down to this level, maybe he needed the money. I purchased the film for $5 used, I would be very fortunate to get the value of postage back. I can't even recommend this film to a group of friends that thrive on B films. If you enjoy films that have absolutely no innovation, depth, creativity or acting ability, this is the film for you.

There are only 3 other reviews here at the moment, so I won't rehash the plot since others have already done a good job of that and you won't have to dig through 50 reviews to know the basic plot.

So, on to how good or bad it is. Well, you can tell by the stars that it's not particularly impressive, but there's no huge faults and the acting is solid.

It makes for a good popcorn movie and there is some decent gore for those who like it, but you've seen it all before. This is simply another monster in shadowy hallways movie; nothing more, nothing less.

It does have one of my biggest pet peeves, though. This is probably best put down to personal taste, but there are two cliche's with horror movie monsters that I'm really getting tired of seeing: excessive drooling and a wet, slimy sheen to the body. Can't anything have dry skin and not slobber like a Saint Bernard? Does it always have to be like this?

It's a shame, too, because our hungry friend gets a lot of good screen time. This isn't one of those movies that keeps the creature hidden.

I give it two stars because I like the basic concept. A guy takes a metabolic drug that gives him an out-of-control appetite, and he takes on attributes of the things he eats (rats, a dog, etc.). So you end up with a fairly unique critter with one big rat ear, a wolfish snout, rat's teeth and bumpy, discolored skin. Shame about all the wetness and drooling. He would have looked much better with a toweling off and better spittle control.

And let's face it, a 4-star monster in a 2-star movie means a lot of fast-forwarding after the first viewing. There's nothing else here worth seeing again.

Bottom Feeder (Randy Daudlin, 2006)

Silly, but kind of enjoyable, flick about experimental medicine gone horribly awry. Not really scary, but fun enough that you won't turn it off if you stumble across it during a bout of insomnia.

Nathaniel Leech (Land of the Dead's James Binkley) is a doctor who's been working on a drug that will regenerate damaged tissue. Charles Deaver (16 Blocks' Richard Fitzpatrick) is a billionaire who was burned over most of his body in a horrible accident. He got wind of Leech's work, and has offered Leech an incredible sum of money for a course of the treatment. When the two finally meet, however, and Leech tells Deaver it's still experimental, Deaver's reaction is less than pleasant; he has his security agent, Krendal (Alien Apocalypse's Wendy Anderson), beat Leech to within an inch of his life and then test the drug on him. If it works, well, Deaver will take the cure and pay him. Problem is, the drug's got some side effects. Leech has accounted for those with a second shot, but the ingredients for that one were left on the other side of a locked door, and so the side effects take over. Meanwhile, in another part of the underground complex, a maintenance crew led by Vince Stoker (Tom Sizemore) are canvassing the tunnels to make sure no homeless folks have decided to bunk down in there. Obviously, what they find is not a homeless person...

First, the good: some of the acting. Sizemore has been a notoriously inconsistent actor for the past decade or so, but his performance here is competent at worst, and has some real moments. Also, don't overlook Amber Cull as Sizemore's niece, who would go on to a role in Lucky McKee's The Woods later that year. Pretty much everyone here does well. Unfortunately, they're all stuck with a silly script that's all too short on even the cheap jumps that have passed for horror in recent Hollywood genre outings. This is more an action film than a horror film, and let's face it, even the action isn't all that hot. Still, the acting is enough to make it marginally watchable, even if you'll find yourself staring, in the final scene, at a plot hole big enough to drive a truck through. ** ½

Bottom Feeder: Movie Review

Grade: B+

...Yes, that is seriously a line that Tom Sizemore say's in the movie. Buy if anything, the lines hold the movie up better than the monster itself. The writer must have had a wicked sense of humor; no minute goes by without some sort of black comedy, or humorous line.

As for the people that say the lines-a four man maintenance group, an eccentric millionaire, his bodyguard, and a couple of government people who work for him-well, for the most part the acting is good. Sizemore and his maintenance crew are the best of the actors, and government people are pretty convincing at times. Their wacky lines make the movie fun and enjoyable; sadly, it's not the monster-a scientist who was overdosed with his own serum-that makes the movie a good movie.

The main problem with the movie was that at times it got to unbelievable. The millionaire's bodyguard is some sort of knife-wielding ninja, and a man eats a rat because he's so hungry, and he's only been locked in a hall for about 8 hours. I know I would be hungry, but this man was like desperate for food. Maybe the serum affected his hunger before he even turned into a monster?

Bottom Feeder would have been a great movie if it wasn't for the ending though. Characters change their whole outlook suddenly, and it should have ended with the (spoilers) explosion; and the monster should have regenerated itself and survived. Yet all in all, not a bad creature-feature.

Bottom Feeder was, by no means, academy award material. Then again, if it was, it would probably suck. The first thing I thought of when I saw the cast was that Tom Sizemore is still paying his dues for all those crystal meth convictions. Yet, at the same time, this movie had all the great things I expect from Saturday evening icky bug.

There is the monster that is rampaging around in a series of tunnels under what used to be either a university or an insane asylum. I must have dozed off when they revealed that detail. However, by dozing off, I don't mean to imply that this movie was boring. The movie was great fun. The special effects were not bad, and the banter between the cast members was humorous and cheesy. My only gripe was that super vicious female agent, who in the end, didn't act at all like I expected.

The only things keeping it from five stars were no gratuitous naked chicks (that have absolutely nothing to do with the plot), and lots of f-bombs. All kidding aside, this was a fun two hours on Sci-Fi channel. If you like cheesy icky bug, I highly recommend Bottom Feeder.

Great effects, good gross factor, culd have used more scares. Good story and leaves it open for more carnage. Over all great horror film.

A disfigured millionaire has hired a doctor to find a cure for his condition. The doctor comes up with a serum that will help the body heal at a phenomenal rate. But to fuel the healing, the patient needs to consume a special protein potion. If they don't get the right potion, they will become mad with hunger and try to get it from anywhere they can. But if it is not the special protein, their body will incorporate the attributes of that which they eat. Well, a test needs to be run so a subject is wounded, given the cure, and locked in an abandoned medical facility. Unfortunately he can't get to the special protein. Our main characters are a maintenance crew headed by Tome Sizemore. Sizemore tries to earn a little extra on the side by selling the abandoned medical supplies. Guess what? They get locked in to the same facility as the test subject.

So we have a typical setting for a monster film. Diverse characters stuck in an enclosed area with bad lighting, tunnels, hungry monster, bad tempers, and all the other cliches. It becomes a typical survival struggle with the characters having to stop the monster, stay alive, and find a way out. Pretty typical but with a few cleaver little twists thrown in. Find out who survives and if the creature is defeated by watching.

Tom Sizemore immediately steals the show as a very likeable working stiff. But there is no shortage of other good characters running around this film. The effects are about average with nothing spectacular but far from cheap looking. More went into the acting and atmosphere than in the effects and it is better for it. If you want to see an above average locked-in-with-the-monster film, then this one should fit the bill. Check it out.

Bottom Feeder (Unrated) (WS)THIS IS ANOTHER GREAT MOVIE THAT I ENJOY I SAW IT MORE THEN ONE TIME.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR GOOD HORROR MOVIES
D.R.B.
DONALD BUTLER

I like to take chances and purchase unheard of titles. Some are winners, some are losers. This one falls into the latter category.