Description: (Horror) Evil lies beneath the surface in this thrilling, edge-of-your-seat gore and monster-fest! Sizemore stars as a maintenance worker who, along with his crew, is hunted and terrorized by an indestructible creature. Featuring slick and gruesome effects in the vein of Feast, Slither, The Descent, The Cave and other recent horror hits!
Don's Review 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
Bad...just bad I like to take chances and purchase unheard of titles. Some are winners, some are losers. This one falls into the latter category.
Bottom Feeder Says it All 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.
Nothing new, but nothing horribly wrong either 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.
better than expected Great effects, good gross factor, culd have used more scares. Good story and leaves it open for more carnage. Over all great horror film.
Anything Goes Trivia
Megaton Man
Tony's Online Tips
Trevor
