New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Animals eating people= er, well. This joke is starting to not work.

Kim Hollis: Shark Night 3D, the latest killer fish eating humans movie, has earned $14.7 million in ten days. What do you think of this result?

Bruce Hall: I think that I don't get the fascination with God's most hungry beasts. Then again, I read a lot about serial killers and violent crime, so I guess that makes me a hypocrite. Never mind.

Brett Beach: I think this result jumped under the shark. Director David R. Ellis makes very good tight trash (Cellular, another plug for Final Destination 2) and then he makes... far too knowing wink wink nudge nudge trash (The Final Destination, Snakes on a Plane, this). Seriously, you can't have a title like Shark Night 3D and then grind it down to a PG-13 rating with very little blood. Pirhana 3D was rated R, featured a penis suffering indignities no penis should suffer, and still only made $25 million in the states. If this had wound up grossing more than that, I would have been bewildered. Plus, it cost more than Piranha, the film to which it probably owes its existence. Color me very confused on the studio's plans at any and every point in the process.

Tim Briody: I know this joke's already been made, but why would anyone pay to see Shark Night, when every year there's an entire Shark Week on television for free?

David Mumpower: Between Piranha 3D and this, I find myself wondering what the inevitable James Bond 3D film will have to do to make itself memorable among all of the fish-eating-humans sequences. With regards to the box office here, Piranha 3D only managed $25 million domestically; most of its global take came abroad where it earned almost $60 million. Keeping this in mind, it's a theoretically profitable title. Shark Night 3D cost a little more to make and appears destined to earn a little less domestically but like so many studio productions these days, overseas revenue will determine whether or not it's a winner. Right now, it's clearly in the "bad idea" column. I do like the title, though.

Apollo who in the what now?

Kim Hollis: Apollo 18, the found footage sci-fi horror film from the Weinstein Company, has earned $14.9 million in ten days. What do you think of this result?

Bruce Hall: I think the producers of this film should consider themselves as lucky as I would be to survive Navy SEAL training. They should all quit now while they're ahead and go into another line of work before their good fortune runs out. This movie is an abominable, irredeemable piece of crap, and if you haven't seen it already, you should save yourself the trouble and instead spend 90 minutes Googling pictures of roadkill. At least it'll be free.

Brett Beach: It's way more than the film apparently deserves (SPOILER SPOILER: Moon rocks with legs, WTF?! END SPOILER) although Bruce appears to have found the lesson out firsthand. Since it cost about 1/5 of the budget for Shark Night and will end up grossing about the same, it is at least the winner of that two man race. My worst fear is that in 100 years, it will be used in homeschooling lessons about space exploration as actual found footage. When NASA has to issue an official statement that it is not real, I weep for for the next generation of students.

Continued:       1       2       3