*** Official PIRANHA 3D (2010) Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Piranha 3D". Please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "Piranha 3D" should be posted to the [COLOR= rgb(68,112,140)]Official Review Thread[/COLOR].

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.


Crawdaddy

Interesting review, Michael. To me, this is an indication of the 3D phenomenon following its usual arc--degenerating into gimmicky schlock.

How was the 3D? Was it shot in 3D or just converted like Clash Of The Titans?

 

Doug

It was not shot with 3D, just re-processed. The 3D was okay, not horrible, but not really all that essential, either.

This is at 81% at RottenTomatoes!

and would you believe a sequel is in the works!?!?

 

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2010/08/23/exclusive-piranha-3d-the-sequel-in-the-works/

Aja has said in interviews that it was 3-D from the start. Said they planned it that way and shot it that way. It certainly didn't look it but who knows.
 

It's doubtful the film is going to make $20 million at the box office so the news of a sequel is a little head-scratching but oh well... I'll be there. FRIDAY THE 13TH made a killing and yet it doesn't get a sequel and this does? Of course, we were suppose to have HALLOWEEN 3-D ready for this year but that too got pushed back. It looks like with this bombing the W. Brothers need a big hit with SCREAM 4.

 

Perhaps they can have the fish flying in the sequel. Perhaps Cameron will do a cameo at the start and get eaten by them.

According to BOMojo, the budget for Piranha 3D was only $24 million. So after worldwide theatrical release and home video sales/rentals, it should easily be profitable.

I'm sure every movie is profitable after all is said and done. It just seems like the studio would want to pump money into something that's going to open to more than $10 million. HALLOWEEN 2 got it's butt kicked last year but I'd say a third film would at least double what PIRANHA did. Of course, by this time next year, this film might gain a rather large cult following so perhaps a sequel would do better in terms of opening weekend.
 

Slightly off-topic but has anyone else noticed the recent trend of putting the final shot of a horror movie in its trailer? PARANORMAL ACTIVITY started this and I've seen it happen a couple other times and even more on direct-to-DVD releases. It happened here too, which pretty much killed the final "joke" of the film.

 

I thought the movie was like Saw meets porn. I actually liked it and really thought the 3D was a lot better than any other 3D movie lately.

Just got back from a matinee, and although I enjoyed the Dreyfuss cameo, the movie began circling the drain very quickly when he got caught in the whirlpool of piranha, and went downhill from there.

 

Too much gratuitous nudity and gore for me, and the final attack at the harbor went on way too long.

 

This remake lacked the humor and charm of the original. I'm so glad I only spent $6 to see this waste of time, and the running time was just a scant over 90 minutes (including trailers).

 

Interestingly, the usher at the entrance to the auditorium, responsible for the Dolby 3D glasses, mentioned that the majority of the people he has chatted with after the movie, most of them have told him the original was soooo much better.

 

It's a shame Joe Dante can't find a US distributor for his latest, which he shot in 3D, The Hole.

Ive never seen the original film, but guess Ill have to now.

 

I had a great time with this film. Its over the top and silly, but intentionally so. To tell the truth I was expecting more nudity and gore from the way people had been talking about it.

 

I cant even imagine the setup,staging and filming of something like the harbor attack. Crazy.

 

I dont have much interest in 3D, but this was fun schlock and Im glad I caught the 3D version of it, since alot of it seemed to be made with it in mind.

I loved it. Now normally I don't watch this type of movie, so my liking it may mean that 3D (which I despise) and horror fans might want to look elsewhere.

 

I enjoyed the Jaws take off (much of the movie was a Jaws take off, not just the opening scene), and the subversive undercurrent throughout.

 

For anyone that does end up seeing and liking Piranha, I recommend High Tension, Aja's 2003 film, the last feature he made before going Hollywood -- highly entertaining and much more of a true horror movie.

Originally Posted by JonZ  

 

I had a great time with this film. Its over the top and silly, but intentionally so. To tell the truth I was expecting more nudity and gore from the way people had been talking about it.

 

Click to expand...

Same here. It's hardly art (and I can see why people didn't like it) but I had fun.

For anyone that does end up seeing and liking Piranha, I recommend High Tension, Aja's 2003 film, the last feature he made before going Hollywood -- highly entertaining and much more of a true horror movie.

Click to expand...

You should check out Dean Koontz's Intensity (book or the film). The first half of High Tension is such an exact copy of Intensity that I'm surprised Koontz never sued them. With that in mind, High Tension is still a very good film.

 

I was planning on seeing Piranha tomorrow but apparently no one is showing it in 2D. And since I am unable to see in 3D I guess I'll have to wait for the Blu to come out. Dammit.

I think someone needs to comment on how studpid this film was. No one should pull a ripoff from jaws with everyone thinking its ok its not an oriinal movie idea and this generation needs to stop stealing from other generations.

LOL


The original was a self-admitted Jaws rip-off/homage, so it's hardly a generational thing.

Originally Posted by Acelies7

I think someone needs to comment on how studpid this film was. No one should pull a ripoff from jaws with everyone thinking its ok its not an oriinal movie idea and this generation needs to stop stealing from other generations.

Click to expand...

Welcome to Home Theater Forum Gage. Isn't it getting to the point though where just about everything has been done in some variation?

It seems we're at this point in movie history where all that has come before is "new" again. Why? It's a money-thing, I believe. Nothing more, nothing less. Some of these "new again" projects were proven to be some kind of money-makers back in the day, and the studios probably think they can do it again. Besides, it's safer to go with something that;s already proven itself rather than take a chance on an "unknown." To much financial risk. These days, I can kinda see what they mean.

Watched it last night and loved it. Is is cheesy, yep. Is the acting good, nope. The effects poorly done but damn was it a fun watch. It's exactly what a rated "R" movie should be, and used to be back in the day.