Not a knock on Korman as he was very funny on the Carol Burnett show. He was also good at playing secondary characters in Mel Brooks' movies ("High Anxiety" comes to mind). He is, however, not a person who can carry a movie in dueling roles no less. This one is basically a "Gremlins" knockoff, following a tradition of such movies as "Critters" and "Ghoulies". It is not a very good knockoff either, on par with "Ghoulies", but with a much lighter tone to it as it is no where near as dark as that movie got. In fact, this one is too light and frothy, and unfortunately many of the jokes end up falling flat. Though I did give it a 3 for a score, this is only because there is a movie that is even a worse "Gremlin" knockoff. If you watched Mystery Science Theater 3000 you know the one I am talking about...the infamous "Hobgoblins". This one has a guy finding a little critter in some underground place (I only saw this movie once a long time ago so I don't remember everything to clearly) and it starts out friendly enough. However, this creature quickly becomes unfriendly and of course more are spawned and that is the movie. More misses than hits in the joke department, and it is also really lame to see Korman playing the evil brother role. Best to skip this one, but then you may want to check it out just for kicks.
27 Reviews
About as lowbrow as they get
gridoon13 April 2005
The title creatures wreak havoc at a peaceful little desert town. That's basically the whole plot for this film, and while the scenes devoted to the Munchies themselves are somewhat fun (in a lowbrow kind of way), all the rest is just filler, and bad filler at that. From the "hero", who is a painful Woody Allen wannabe, to the ultra-dumb town cop, it's hard to pick the most irritating character in the film. There were some times when almost all of them were on the screen together and I was thinking, "OK, at least the girlfriend is cute, but why do we have to put up with the rest of those morons?". The film is also filled with pop references (from Ozzy Osbourne to Linda Blair), which probably made it already dated by the early 90's. (*1/2)
If it is good enough for Melvis...
stalinsays27 January 2007
An excellent performance by Alix Elias highlights an otherwise mis-directed and confused pile of dreck. I have seen this movie, perhaps 12 times, and with each run through, I find less and less pleasure. Why are Munchies so lustful? Is that ever explained? Are they a reflection of our wanton, boorish 'animal selves?' If they are, why not make it more obvious? Why not peal back just a touch of the subtlety that plagues this movie, and make that connection explicit? Another part of this movie that bothers me to no end - motorcycles. The jacket the little monster wears on the front cover seems to suggest 'street-wise' traveler. The sun glasses say 'pretty cool dude.' With all this I'm ready for Easy Rider meets the Muppets. All I get is Munchies (1987). What gives? Stick to the Gremlins series if you're a fan of diminutive, wise-cracking, reptile puppets - it'll give you the treatment you deserve.
This could have been something. It wasn't.
13Funbags1 July 2019
I guess this is supposed to be a parody of Gremlins and ET but they forgot that parodies are supposed to be funny. They only character who is even slightly funny is Corman's wife. Most of the comedy is just having everyone be named after a musician. The worst thing is that almost nothing that happened made any sense.
"Hey, hey we're the Munchies."
Backlash00728 March 2004
This Roger Corman produced comedy could be labeled as a Gremlins rip-off. Well, it is. The Munchies are short little dudes who multiply rapidly and are into creating mischief and wreaking a little havoc. Sound familiar? The funniest thing about the movie is all the Gremlins references. There's a newspaper with Gizmo on the cover, Robert Picardo (of Gremlins 2) stars in the film, and the absolute highlight is the Munchies driving around in a Gremlin. Truly some classic stuff. Other stars of the film include Summer Camp Nightmare's own Charles Stratton and Nadine Van Der Velde from Critters. If you want to see the extremely poor man's version of Gremlins, rent the Munchies, if you can find it.
Watterman Watterman Watterman Watter Mighty Good Man
southdavid15 December 2023
Another film watched for the "How Did This Get Made" podcast, "Munchies" is a film rather cynically designed to cash in on the success of "Gremlins" and the similar low budget versions that aped it. Having fallen asleep during my first attempt to watch the film (let's not judge it based that though) I picked up from where I could remember and finished the film.
Whilst trying to prove that Machu Picchu was built by Aliens, Simon Watterman (Harvey Korman) returns to America with his son, Paul (Charles Stratton) and a strange creature they've discovered. The creature is kidnapped by Simon's twin brother Cecil (Harvey Korman) who wants Simon's land for himself, but Cecil's stepson, Melvis (Alix Elias) gets frustrated and attempts to kill the creature, inadvertently transforming one into four. More aggressive as a group, they start to terrorise the town, whilst Paul tries to chase them down.
It wasn't the films fault I fell asleep the first time I tried to watch it, but it really didn't help itself. The budget is, as I say, modest and the puppets that result from it are pretty rubbish. Their made of a hard rubber and are incapable of much in the way of movement. The performances are generally quite poor, Korman is probably the standout, as you might imagine, but even he's struggling against a shallow and confusing plot.
I can get past those sorts of issues though, if the film is interesting around it's budgetary limitations. "Munchies" isn't though, it's predominantly quite boring and the lack of fun scenes really makes it drag to watch.
It's maybe not the worse film I've watched for the podcast, but it's a really bad time and I don't recommend it.
Whilst trying to prove that Machu Picchu was built by Aliens, Simon Watterman (Harvey Korman) returns to America with his son, Paul (Charles Stratton) and a strange creature they've discovered. The creature is kidnapped by Simon's twin brother Cecil (Harvey Korman) who wants Simon's land for himself, but Cecil's stepson, Melvis (Alix Elias) gets frustrated and attempts to kill the creature, inadvertently transforming one into four. More aggressive as a group, they start to terrorise the town, whilst Paul tries to chase them down.
It wasn't the films fault I fell asleep the first time I tried to watch it, but it really didn't help itself. The budget is, as I say, modest and the puppets that result from it are pretty rubbish. Their made of a hard rubber and are incapable of much in the way of movement. The performances are generally quite poor, Korman is probably the standout, as you might imagine, but even he's struggling against a shallow and confusing plot.
I can get past those sorts of issues though, if the film is interesting around it's budgetary limitations. "Munchies" isn't though, it's predominantly quite boring and the lack of fun scenes really makes it drag to watch.
It's maybe not the worse film I've watched for the podcast, but it's a really bad time and I don't recommend it.
What doesn't kill him, only makes him stronger.
vertigo_1414 May 2004
I suppose all the inside jokes is what made Munchies a cult classic. I thought it was awful, though given the ridiculous story and the nature of the characters, it probably could've been a much better (and funnier) movie. Maybe all they needed was a real budget.
Munchies, as many viewers have pointed out already, is something of a Gremlins parody. Hence, all the references to the movie. The movie begins somewhere in Peru during an archeological dig. An annoying dufus named Paul, aspiring stand up comedian who offers no sarcasm or witty jokes during the movie despite his career plans, is holed up with his dad in the caves. His dad is an unconventional kind of archeologist, searching the caves not for artificats or mummies or anything, but proof of U.F.O.'s. And that's where the Munchies come into the picture. Hidden in the crevice of a rock is an ugly little mutant that looks like a gyrating rubber doll with a Gizmo voice. They name him Arnold, stash him in a bag, and bring him home so Paul's dad can finally show proof of extra terrestrial life.
Paul, the idiot that he is, breaks his promise to his dad to watch Arnold (a wager he made with his dad, if he loses, it's off to community college to get a 'real' career). The creepy next door neighbor with the bad rug, Cecil (television veteran Harvey Korman), wonders what his neighbors are up to. So, he and his lazy son, some airhead hippie type (who looks more like they should've made his character a biker or heavy metal enthusiast) to go and snatch Arnold. Why? A get rich quick scheme of course. And of course, even Cecil's son is too dumb to look after Arnold. And after a few pokes and prods at Arnold, he multiplies into more Munchies.
This wasn't even a movie that was so bad it was good. It was just plain awful. I was hoping that the Munchies would've mutated and killed the morons that were always after them, even Paul and his girlfriend. At least it would be one way to get rid of all the bad acting in this movie that really hams up the movie. Not to mention poor special effects that look like hand puppets. And really bad writing all around--it wasn't even funny--not even that young cop who can really give you the homicidal twitch in your eye. Like I said, Munchies, if they had been given an actual budget and better actors, they might've been able to pull off a good parody. Pass.
Munchies, as many viewers have pointed out already, is something of a Gremlins parody. Hence, all the references to the movie. The movie begins somewhere in Peru during an archeological dig. An annoying dufus named Paul, aspiring stand up comedian who offers no sarcasm or witty jokes during the movie despite his career plans, is holed up with his dad in the caves. His dad is an unconventional kind of archeologist, searching the caves not for artificats or mummies or anything, but proof of U.F.O.'s. And that's where the Munchies come into the picture. Hidden in the crevice of a rock is an ugly little mutant that looks like a gyrating rubber doll with a Gizmo voice. They name him Arnold, stash him in a bag, and bring him home so Paul's dad can finally show proof of extra terrestrial life.
Paul, the idiot that he is, breaks his promise to his dad to watch Arnold (a wager he made with his dad, if he loses, it's off to community college to get a 'real' career). The creepy next door neighbor with the bad rug, Cecil (television veteran Harvey Korman), wonders what his neighbors are up to. So, he and his lazy son, some airhead hippie type (who looks more like they should've made his character a biker or heavy metal enthusiast) to go and snatch Arnold. Why? A get rich quick scheme of course. And of course, even Cecil's son is too dumb to look after Arnold. And after a few pokes and prods at Arnold, he multiplies into more Munchies.
This wasn't even a movie that was so bad it was good. It was just plain awful. I was hoping that the Munchies would've mutated and killed the morons that were always after them, even Paul and his girlfriend. At least it would be one way to get rid of all the bad acting in this movie that really hams up the movie. Not to mention poor special effects that look like hand puppets. And really bad writing all around--it wasn't even funny--not even that young cop who can really give you the homicidal twitch in your eye. Like I said, Munchies, if they had been given an actual budget and better actors, they might've been able to pull off a good parody. Pass.
Craving the munchies?
lost-in-limbo30 May 2009
Cute and playful, but lame and cheap. 'Munchies' is another Gremlins clone to come out from the 80s. I'm not much of a fan of the imitations.
First it was the excellent 'Gremlins'.
Then came the very average 'Critters'.
Lets not forget the lousy 'Ghoulies'.
But the complete pits would have to go to 'Hobgoblins'.
Is there more??
Now 'Munchies' for me would have to fall somewhere between 'Ghoulies' and 'Hobgoblins'. Actually I probably found it more entertaining than 'Ghoulies', but I preferred thst one's darker tone.
From the get-go it plays up its goofy nature (which it's better for it), but due to that nature the hammy acting (Alix Elias and Charlie Phillips), can get rather overbearing that you rather just see the munchies running amok. That's where the fun occurs. Mostly light-hearted fluff though, as the story mainly centres on the munchies (who are either hungry, horny and destructive) in a whole bunch of supposed comical encounters (some moments do work) in the small desert town as a couple of people are on the chase. It's silly, but strangely engaging thanks to the zippy pacing. The creatures themselves look rather bland and poorly detailed, as they're basic dolls being chucked about. Where their personalities arrived from is that they can actually speak... and with attitude.
Charlie Stratton and a feisty Nadine Van der Velde (who was in 'Critters') were fair leads. Harvey Korman was acceptable in two roles. Robert Picardo also pops up.
Amusingly low-cut entertainment for the undemanding.
First it was the excellent 'Gremlins'.
Then came the very average 'Critters'.
Lets not forget the lousy 'Ghoulies'.
But the complete pits would have to go to 'Hobgoblins'.
Is there more??
Now 'Munchies' for me would have to fall somewhere between 'Ghoulies' and 'Hobgoblins'. Actually I probably found it more entertaining than 'Ghoulies', but I preferred thst one's darker tone.
From the get-go it plays up its goofy nature (which it's better for it), but due to that nature the hammy acting (Alix Elias and Charlie Phillips), can get rather overbearing that you rather just see the munchies running amok. That's where the fun occurs. Mostly light-hearted fluff though, as the story mainly centres on the munchies (who are either hungry, horny and destructive) in a whole bunch of supposed comical encounters (some moments do work) in the small desert town as a couple of people are on the chase. It's silly, but strangely engaging thanks to the zippy pacing. The creatures themselves look rather bland and poorly detailed, as they're basic dolls being chucked about. Where their personalities arrived from is that they can actually speak... and with attitude.
Charlie Stratton and a feisty Nadine Van der Velde (who was in 'Critters') were fair leads. Harvey Korman was acceptable in two roles. Robert Picardo also pops up.
Amusingly low-cut entertainment for the undemanding.
Makes Ghoulies look good.
BA_Harrison31 March 2021
If I hot-glued googly eyes onto my rubber oven mitt, it would be a better creature than the cruddy hand-puppets in Gremlins knock-off Munchies, which make the shonky demons in Ghoulies (1985) look positively convincing by comparison. Discovered in a South American cave by archaeologist Simon Watterman (Harvey Korman) and his annoying, wise-cracking, wannabe comedian son Paul (Charlie Stratton), Arnold the 'munchie' (as it is later dubbed) is a foot-tall extraterrestrial that can divide and multiply (no, I don't mean it is good at math... when cut in half, it becomes two creatures). Simon's greedy businessman brother Cecil (also Korman, who gets to be terrible twice) lays his hands on Arnold, leaving his irresponsible stoner stepson Dude (Jon Stafford) to babysit the alien. Before you can say 'With mogwai comes much responsibility', there are mischievous little creatures all over town (or under it, in the caves where Cecil has been dumping toxic waste).
Munchies is so bad, one wonders whether director Tina Hirsch had a beef with the original Gremlins, on which she worked as editor, and found it therapeutic to make a shameless rip-off of Joe Dante's classic. Or maybe it's she's just an untalented hack cashing in on a craze (other Gremlins clones of the time included Critters and Hobgoblins). Whatever the reason for its existence, Munchies is a Z-grade stinker from start to finish, with rubbish special effects, a terrible script, lousy humour, and diabolical acting (cult favourites Paul Bartel and Robert Picardo must surely count this as a career low).
2/10. Narrowly avoids getting 1/10 for the burger joint staffed by dwarfs, and for blonde hottie Traci Huber-Sheridan in a swimsuit (this was her one and only movie: the experience obviously made her reconsider her career choices).
Munchies is so bad, one wonders whether director Tina Hirsch had a beef with the original Gremlins, on which she worked as editor, and found it therapeutic to make a shameless rip-off of Joe Dante's classic. Or maybe it's she's just an untalented hack cashing in on a craze (other Gremlins clones of the time included Critters and Hobgoblins). Whatever the reason for its existence, Munchies is a Z-grade stinker from start to finish, with rubbish special effects, a terrible script, lousy humour, and diabolical acting (cult favourites Paul Bartel and Robert Picardo must surely count this as a career low).
2/10. Narrowly avoids getting 1/10 for the burger joint staffed by dwarfs, and for blonde hottie Traci Huber-Sheridan in a swimsuit (this was her one and only movie: the experience obviously made her reconsider her career choices).
Really not that bad
uncle_lino8 October 2005
OK, now... I won't lie... This film IS basically a Gremlins rip-off, but many reviewers like to trash films solely on how they felt about it, instead of at least appreciating the artistic integrity of the film and seeing it for what it is, a rather good comedy, and may I say a blatant stab at Gremlins.
It seemed obvious to me, even as a boy, that it was intended to have a similar plot to Gremlins. This being a lighter touch on such a film, which was deemed scary by many youngsters at the time... The more comedic creature features are a fine way to introduce and draw kids in to the wide world of horror, of which I am now an avid fan and obsessed collector.
I haven't even seen this movie in years, in fact since I was about 12 or 13, but I still remember it clearly as one of the funniest B-grade 'critter-comedies' I saw as a youth.
Let's face it people... Reviews are never that much help anyway. They really are nothing more than one person's own humble opinion.
My advice: Watch any film that YOU think sounds even remotely interesting and make up your own mind. What have you lost in the end? The few bucks it takes to hire a movie and maybe the 2hrs of your time it takes to watch it.
It seemed obvious to me, even as a boy, that it was intended to have a similar plot to Gremlins. This being a lighter touch on such a film, which was deemed scary by many youngsters at the time... The more comedic creature features are a fine way to introduce and draw kids in to the wide world of horror, of which I am now an avid fan and obsessed collector.
I haven't even seen this movie in years, in fact since I was about 12 or 13, but I still remember it clearly as one of the funniest B-grade 'critter-comedies' I saw as a youth.
Let's face it people... Reviews are never that much help anyway. They really are nothing more than one person's own humble opinion.
My advice: Watch any film that YOU think sounds even remotely interesting and make up your own mind. What have you lost in the end? The few bucks it takes to hire a movie and maybe the 2hrs of your time it takes to watch it.
These dustbin muppets will bite your head off.
Creamator22 February 2000
When I saw this movie, I couldn't believe my eyes. Where these hilarious creatures, dustbin muppets with big pointy teeth, really meant to be scary? Or where they designed to have a good laugh (I sincerely hope so). If you watch carefully you can even see the strings operating them (better; dragging them across the screen). The whole was rather funny than scary and I had a good time watching the movie because I was amazed by its overall incapacity to have only one good part. It is one big joke from beginning to end and I believe this movie belongs into a new category: So unbelievable crappy you'll be laughing from beginning to end. (I'm not even gonna try to comment on the acting or all the other things)
Fun little movie
hmckiel10 July 2005
A lot of people don't like this movie. I can't imagine why. Despite the bad writing, terrible acting, and cheesy effects, this movie is pretty fun to watch,mostly to kids though. An archaeologist and his reluctant son find a strange little creature in Peru and take it home. However it gets abducted. After severe mistreating, it grows slightly larger and become more aggressive and dangerous, and gets chopped, causing there to be several of them running around town wrecking havoc. Good performances by Harvey Coreman and Nadine Van Der Velde, but everyone else was just bad. If you can forget about that, you'll have fun. Just don't think and watch the movie.
Fun Gremlin's knock-off. A minor classic.
Idiot-Deluxe5 June 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Devoted -MuNcHiEs- fan since 87'
Let's keep this brief, this cheap little flick by no means requires a detailed and lengthy review.
Producer/director extraordinaire Roger Corman was behind this delightfully cheesy little low-budget Gremlins knock-off, from 1987 we have: Munchies! It's certainly a light-weight among movies, but also very amusing and entertaining and the pacing is tight and rarely if ever slow. Clearly designed to NOT be taken with any seriousness, Munchies is a goofy, somewhat kinky take-off of Gremlin's, but unlike the Gremlin's the Munchies can talk and they prattle off a string of cheesy one-liner's throughout the film - some funny sounding voices on those critters. It stars Harvey Korman in a double-role, his "bad-guy" role Cecil Waterman - a mustachioed, slime-ball businessman, clad in a tacky looking polyester suit and topped off with a bad looking rug - is probably the funniest character. Then there's our hero "Paul" played by a shrimpy, bemulleted no-name actor, who wants to have a career in comedy, only his jokes are usually quite weak and along for the ride is his hot and curvy girlfriend Cindy, played by the lovely Nadine Van der Veld. On the topic of Nadine Van der Veld's butt, I always thought it a shame, watching her running around in those skin-tight Guess jeans, her shirt, being untucked, effectively covering from view that lovely looking derriere of hers - a missed opputunity. I'm sure it's because a lady directed the movie.
After some unforeseen meddling by Cecil and stepson, the Muchies are soon running amuck and multiplying out of control, causing mayhem through mostly rural California, starting by making a quick get-away, hilariously, in a two-toned AMC Gremiln (PERFECT CHOICE!!!). On their way, zig-zagging through the countryside they cause mischief at ice cream parlors, miniature golf courses (a 36-hole!!! course), video rental joints and Burger-Land. Then the adventure goes underground (revealing incriminating evidence which is bad for Cecil Waterman's local business empire) and my favorite part of movie happens here, it's during a scene when their all, as a group, chasing Cindy down a tunnel, their over-the-top laughter is just priceless. Sadly moments later the Munchies meet their end, when their dealt a strong dose of "Fire of the Gods". Paul sure can deliver in a pressing situation, after all he's the hero don't forget, an unlikely one - but none the less. The end sets the stage for a sequel, but as of yet I've haven't see a second Munchies movie. With a very brisk running time of only 83 minutes, the Munchies certainly falls into the "short cheapy" category.
I can't figure it, some people REALLY take things a bit too seriously. Reading through some of the reviews here, some people actually feel the need to get pissy and vinegary ("what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" or "about as entertaining as a kick to the head"), when reviewing a movie as completely harmless and goofy as Munchies - pretty ridiculous folk's. You can do so much worse then this believe me. Munchies isn't anywhere near the bottom of the barrel - not even close. I've always deemed it a minor classic and it's easily one of the better Gremlin's knock-offs. On an end-note, the cheese-factor for this (starting with it's title) is extremely high, which is a very common thing for movies made in the mid-80's. That's the main reason why it's funny, because of it's over-the-top nature. So just sit back and let any semblance of seriousness leave your mind and enjoy the Munchies.....with some munchies.
Let's keep this brief, this cheap little flick by no means requires a detailed and lengthy review.
Producer/director extraordinaire Roger Corman was behind this delightfully cheesy little low-budget Gremlins knock-off, from 1987 we have: Munchies! It's certainly a light-weight among movies, but also very amusing and entertaining and the pacing is tight and rarely if ever slow. Clearly designed to NOT be taken with any seriousness, Munchies is a goofy, somewhat kinky take-off of Gremlin's, but unlike the Gremlin's the Munchies can talk and they prattle off a string of cheesy one-liner's throughout the film - some funny sounding voices on those critters. It stars Harvey Korman in a double-role, his "bad-guy" role Cecil Waterman - a mustachioed, slime-ball businessman, clad in a tacky looking polyester suit and topped off with a bad looking rug - is probably the funniest character. Then there's our hero "Paul" played by a shrimpy, bemulleted no-name actor, who wants to have a career in comedy, only his jokes are usually quite weak and along for the ride is his hot and curvy girlfriend Cindy, played by the lovely Nadine Van der Veld. On the topic of Nadine Van der Veld's butt, I always thought it a shame, watching her running around in those skin-tight Guess jeans, her shirt, being untucked, effectively covering from view that lovely looking derriere of hers - a missed opputunity. I'm sure it's because a lady directed the movie.
After some unforeseen meddling by Cecil and stepson, the Muchies are soon running amuck and multiplying out of control, causing mayhem through mostly rural California, starting by making a quick get-away, hilariously, in a two-toned AMC Gremiln (PERFECT CHOICE!!!). On their way, zig-zagging through the countryside they cause mischief at ice cream parlors, miniature golf courses (a 36-hole!!! course), video rental joints and Burger-Land. Then the adventure goes underground (revealing incriminating evidence which is bad for Cecil Waterman's local business empire) and my favorite part of movie happens here, it's during a scene when their all, as a group, chasing Cindy down a tunnel, their over-the-top laughter is just priceless. Sadly moments later the Munchies meet their end, when their dealt a strong dose of "Fire of the Gods". Paul sure can deliver in a pressing situation, after all he's the hero don't forget, an unlikely one - but none the less. The end sets the stage for a sequel, but as of yet I've haven't see a second Munchies movie. With a very brisk running time of only 83 minutes, the Munchies certainly falls into the "short cheapy" category.
I can't figure it, some people REALLY take things a bit too seriously. Reading through some of the reviews here, some people actually feel the need to get pissy and vinegary ("what doesn't kill you makes you stronger" or "about as entertaining as a kick to the head"), when reviewing a movie as completely harmless and goofy as Munchies - pretty ridiculous folk's. You can do so much worse then this believe me. Munchies isn't anywhere near the bottom of the barrel - not even close. I've always deemed it a minor classic and it's easily one of the better Gremlin's knock-offs. On an end-note, the cheese-factor for this (starting with it's title) is extremely high, which is a very common thing for movies made in the mid-80's. That's the main reason why it's funny, because of it's over-the-top nature. So just sit back and let any semblance of seriousness leave your mind and enjoy the Munchies.....with some munchies.
As Mr Pibb is to Dr Pepper, Munchies is to Gremlins
rhyatt124 March 2005
This movie was made for people who found Gremlins too serious and Critters to hardcore. Like many of the critters/trolls/gremlins movies of the 80's this movie is bad. The sad part is that there's no punchline to that comment. It's just bad and not in a funny way.
The problem with this miniature monster movie is that it actually tries to be funny and ends up being as successful in doing that as Howie Mandell was in Walk Like A Man. What made the other 80's horror movies into classics was that they were genuinely trying to be scary, but were hilarious because they failed so miserably. Someone must have told Bettina Hirsch (yes THE Bettina Hirsch)she had a knack for comedy before she started directing this movie. Unfortunately they were wrong.
Sure seeing a weird little mutated cross between a ferret and a tumor wearing a brown trenchcoat and throwing pool balls at an outcast from the Lost Boys is amusing, but not enough to save the movie.
By far the most annoying part of the movie is the Paul character. His Paul Reiser wannabe schtick is enough to make you start fast forwarding from the time of his first scene until the ending credits only stopping once to see a scene where a munchie throws pool balls at a guy...not that I did that.
So the bottom line is run, don't walk, to your nearest Blockbuster and shake hands with the manager and thank him for not having the grapes to stock this pile of garbage on the shelves.
The problem with this miniature monster movie is that it actually tries to be funny and ends up being as successful in doing that as Howie Mandell was in Walk Like A Man. What made the other 80's horror movies into classics was that they were genuinely trying to be scary, but were hilarious because they failed so miserably. Someone must have told Bettina Hirsch (yes THE Bettina Hirsch)she had a knack for comedy before she started directing this movie. Unfortunately they were wrong.
Sure seeing a weird little mutated cross between a ferret and a tumor wearing a brown trenchcoat and throwing pool balls at an outcast from the Lost Boys is amusing, but not enough to save the movie.
By far the most annoying part of the movie is the Paul character. His Paul Reiser wannabe schtick is enough to make you start fast forwarding from the time of his first scene until the ending credits only stopping once to see a scene where a munchie throws pool balls at a guy...not that I did that.
So the bottom line is run, don't walk, to your nearest Blockbuster and shake hands with the manager and thank him for not having the grapes to stock this pile of garbage on the shelves.
Stupid "Gremlins" Rip-Off.
tfrizzell15 June 2002
Terrible little film that has small creatures from outer-space terrorizing people in the desert. Harvey Korman plays dual roles in this amazingly bad movie that is nothing but a bunch of stupid scenes pieced together and called a movie. Lowest common denominator film-making from start to finish. Turkey (0 stars out of 5).
"They laughed at me when I said I would build the worlds first miniature 36 hole golf course." Total crap.
poolandrews8 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Munchies starts in deepest darkest Peru (looks more like a dirt road to me) where archaeologist Simon Watterman (Harvey Korman) & his son Paul (Charles Stratton) are on an expedition. Simon thinks that ancient Aztec buildings were in fact spacecraft control centres & he is on a mission to gain proof that alien lifeforms have visited Earth, while in once such structure he discovers a strange small creature which he sticks in his backpack & takes back home with him to the small American town of Sweetwater in California. Simon feels that the creature is the proof he has been looking for & for some inexplicable reason decides to leave the thing at home while he goes to share his discovery. Simon ask's Paul & his wife Cindy (Nadine Van der Velde) to take care of it. Meanwhile Simon's brother & fast-food businessman Cecil Watterman (Harvey Korman again) steals the creature so his brother won't make any money out of it, but his idiotic stepson Dude (Jon Stafford) has a fight with it & chops it up with a knife but the individual parts grow back into separate little creatures that proceed to cause much havoc amongst the townspeople...
Directed by Bettina Hirsch this has to be one of the worst horror comedy's ever, if not the worst. The script by Lance Smith is so unfunny it's painful. Every joke in Munchies misses the target by the proverbial mile, I doubt the humour in this piece of crap would even appeal to pre-teens. There just isn't anything even remotely funny or even amusing in Munchies as far as I'm concerned. The basic story is crap too, they just happen to find this creature running around with no explanation of what it is, why no-ones ever seen it before, how it manages to learn English so quickly & how it learns to drive etc. The whole thing is a big Gremlins (1984) rip-off with none of the elements that made that film so good. The character's are moronic, the stupid Deputy (Charlie Phillips) & his dad (Hardy Rawls), Cecil wearing an embarrassing wig & fake moustache & his air head wife Melvis (Alix Elias) & more besides. They just plain embarrass & are ridiculous, I defy anyone to find any of this rancid rubbish funny. Basically Munchies fails spectacularly at being either a comedy or horror & ends up being, yes you've guessed it, crap.
Director Hirsch was obviously working with a low budget here & it shows, the entire thing takes place in two houses, the desert, some caves & a miniature golf course. This is really cheap & incompetent film-making. The special effects on the Munchies themselves are really awful, their just dolls that have no movement unless someone off camera pulls a string attached to it's arm. I cannot stress how bad the effects are, these things wouldn't convince my 4 year old nephew (as proved by me & him yesterday!). Total incompetence all the way, this film sucks.
Technically the film is terrible, bad special effects, lame production design, rubbish sets & well, just everything's crap. The acting is rotten through & through, from the cops to Korman who has two roles both of which prove he can't act & isn't funny.
Munchies is a really bad film that fails in everything that it tries to achieve, sure watch it if you want I won't stop you but just don't say you weren't warned! My advice would be to watch Gremlins again instead, but the decision is yours!
Directed by Bettina Hirsch this has to be one of the worst horror comedy's ever, if not the worst. The script by Lance Smith is so unfunny it's painful. Every joke in Munchies misses the target by the proverbial mile, I doubt the humour in this piece of crap would even appeal to pre-teens. There just isn't anything even remotely funny or even amusing in Munchies as far as I'm concerned. The basic story is crap too, they just happen to find this creature running around with no explanation of what it is, why no-ones ever seen it before, how it manages to learn English so quickly & how it learns to drive etc. The whole thing is a big Gremlins (1984) rip-off with none of the elements that made that film so good. The character's are moronic, the stupid Deputy (Charlie Phillips) & his dad (Hardy Rawls), Cecil wearing an embarrassing wig & fake moustache & his air head wife Melvis (Alix Elias) & more besides. They just plain embarrass & are ridiculous, I defy anyone to find any of this rancid rubbish funny. Basically Munchies fails spectacularly at being either a comedy or horror & ends up being, yes you've guessed it, crap.
Director Hirsch was obviously working with a low budget here & it shows, the entire thing takes place in two houses, the desert, some caves & a miniature golf course. This is really cheap & incompetent film-making. The special effects on the Munchies themselves are really awful, their just dolls that have no movement unless someone off camera pulls a string attached to it's arm. I cannot stress how bad the effects are, these things wouldn't convince my 4 year old nephew (as proved by me & him yesterday!). Total incompetence all the way, this film sucks.
Technically the film is terrible, bad special effects, lame production design, rubbish sets & well, just everything's crap. The acting is rotten through & through, from the cops to Korman who has two roles both of which prove he can't act & isn't funny.
Munchies is a really bad film that fails in everything that it tries to achieve, sure watch it if you want I won't stop you but just don't say you weren't warned! My advice would be to watch Gremlins again instead, but the decision is yours!
Nah...
paul_haakonsen3 February 2023
I was actually not familiar with the 1987 horror comedy "Munchies" before now in 2023, as I had the opportunity to sit down and watch it. And from what I read on the back of the movie, it seemed like this could be a fun movie.
And while "Munchies", from writer Lance Smith and director Tina Hirsch, definitely was in the likes of "Gremlins", "Critters" and such movies, then I didn't really take much of a liking to "Munchies". Why? Well, the storyline just fell short of entertaining me, and if I have to be honest, then the creatures themselves just didn't work out, as they were way too rigid, fake and laughable to look at.
I wasn't familiar with most of the cast ensemble in "Munchies", but I wasn't particularly impressed with what I witnessed on the screen. Perhaps it was because the storyline wasn't in my liking that I didn't buy into the characters and the performances of the actors and actresses.
Visually then "Munchies" was pretty bad. The special effects in the movie were not impressive. And in comparison to movies such as "Gremlins" and "Critters", then "Munchies" was just light years behind. The creatures were painstakingly obviously just puppets. And fake-looking ones at that.
Turned out that I hadn't been missing out on a particular gem in horror comedy here.
My rating of "Munchies" lands on a three out of ten stars.
And while "Munchies", from writer Lance Smith and director Tina Hirsch, definitely was in the likes of "Gremlins", "Critters" and such movies, then I didn't really take much of a liking to "Munchies". Why? Well, the storyline just fell short of entertaining me, and if I have to be honest, then the creatures themselves just didn't work out, as they were way too rigid, fake and laughable to look at.
I wasn't familiar with most of the cast ensemble in "Munchies", but I wasn't particularly impressed with what I witnessed on the screen. Perhaps it was because the storyline wasn't in my liking that I didn't buy into the characters and the performances of the actors and actresses.
Visually then "Munchies" was pretty bad. The special effects in the movie were not impressive. And in comparison to movies such as "Gremlins" and "Critters", then "Munchies" was just light years behind. The creatures were painstakingly obviously just puppets. And fake-looking ones at that.
Turned out that I hadn't been missing out on a particular gem in horror comedy here.
My rating of "Munchies" lands on a three out of ten stars.
Feels a bit like a Troma rip-off of Gremlins, but it isn't
BrandtSponseller26 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
. . . And that's a bad thing, because at least if this had been a Troma film, it would have had wanton violence and a greater sense of anarchic abandon that might have brought my rating up a bit.
So what we have instead is a very tame (rated PG), barely lukewarm, low budget (Roger Corman produced it with an unknown director who has subsequently remained unknown) Gremlins (1984)/Critters (1986)-wannabe with almost exclusively flat humor, little of the logic that made Gremlins work so well--fantasy logic or not, no suspense, no sense of adventure, and no violence or nudity to make up for it.
Although I'm sure some of the problems with the film are inherent in the script--let's face it, no one could deliver these jokes so that they would be funny--it seems like the biggest blame has to fall into the lap of the director, Bettina Hirsch. In more capable hands, Munchies could have been entertaining.
After all, it starts out like many great adventure films. Simon Waterman (Harvey Korman) and his son Paul (Charles Stratton) are in Peru on an archaeological dig. Simon is a bit of a wacky archaeologist who is always floating theories about the connections between ancient sites and alien civilizations. For example, he thinks he sees evidence of laser-cutting on ancient stonework. So they're at Machu Picchu looking for more evidence of Simon's theories when they happen upon a secret chamber. Inside they quickly find the animal they later dub "Arnold", one of the titular munchies.
They take Arnold back home to their small California desert town. Simon, who thinks that Arnold is probably an alien creature, has to go off to a colleague's lecture, and he plans on telling the colleague that he finally has an alien specimen. Paul and his extremely cute girlfriend, Cindy (Nadine Van der Velde), are left in charge of Arnold, but as they haven't seen each other in a long time, they leave Arnold unsupervised while they hop in the sack.
Meanwhile, Simon's brother Cecil (played also by Korman in a dual role), owner of a successful snack foods company, is eager to buy off Simon's home and land--they're adjacent to his own. Simon doesn't want to sell, so Cecil hits upon a scheme to steal Arnold. Things gradually spiral out of control, and the munchies, who have a mean streak to go along with their cravings for junk food, begin to overrun the town.
That reads better in a summary than it plays on the screen. The best shots in the film are those with natural landscapes in the background, such as when characters are driving on the outskirts of the desert town. Interiors, with the exception of Cecil's home, tend to look like poorly decorated, cheap sets, and more importantly, they tend to show that Hirsch is not very skilled at blocking and setting up shots. Oddly, given the paucity of the production design overall, Cecil's home is quite a gem, imbued as it is in overblown 1980s style down to the smallest details, and Cecil's stepson, Dude (Jon Stafford), was an amusing counterpoint. Too bad, then, that he's out of the film so quickly.
At any rate, Korman is a fun actor, but he comes across much better here as Simon than as Cecil. Unfortunately, Simon ends up being absent for most of the film. Cecil, who is differentiated physically by a ridiculous wig and facial hair, is not only the "evil capitalist" of the film, he's one of Korman's classic inconsiderate, boorish characters--that was one of his specialties, frequently capitalized on in "Carol Burnett Show" (1967) skits. Unlike "The Carol Burnett Show", which tended to succeed because directors Clark Jones and Dave Powers had a studied way of pushing the skits just to the brink of chaos, Hirsch reins Korman in way too far, and the Cecil character just doesn't work the way it should.
There are a lot of other director-related problems, not the least of which is wonky pacing and editing, which completely sap any possible suspense or compelling dramatic impact from the film. Even scenes that should have been shoe-ins for amping up the drama--such as when the munchies are harassing an old lady on the road--are put together far too awkwardly to have much affect.
There are also serious logical problems with the story as it stands. Where did the munchie in the chamber at Machu Picchu come from? The film's trailer seems to show an answer to this, but it was edited out of the final cut. A more serious problem is that, unlike gremlins, there is no clear reason for munchies to go from cute, cuddly furballs to menacing monsters. It just happens. Further, because Munchies was kept PG, and the violence remains toned down, when the creatures are in their monster phase, they're never very threatening. They're also easily dispatched, at least temporarily.
Admittedly, the gist of the film isn't suspense, horror, compelling drama or any of that other stuff, but humor. It's intended more as a spoof of Gremlins and the countless rip-offs in its wake. The only problem with that is that the film just isn't funny, even though I chuckled a couple times. A surprisingly high percentage of the jokes are bland clichés. Too much of the remaining material consists of non-sequiturs. Given bad timing from Hirsch, it all just falls flat. There was potential to make a film that while a spoof, was both funny and frightening, hilarious and disturbing, cheesy and suspenseful, all at the same time, ala Killer Klowns from Outer Space (1988). Too bad, then, that Munchies comes nowhere near that.
So what we have instead is a very tame (rated PG), barely lukewarm, low budget (Roger Corman produced it with an unknown director who has subsequently remained unknown) Gremlins (1984)/Critters (1986)-wannabe with almost exclusively flat humor, little of the logic that made Gremlins work so well--fantasy logic or not, no suspense, no sense of adventure, and no violence or nudity to make up for it.
Although I'm sure some of the problems with the film are inherent in the script--let's face it, no one could deliver these jokes so that they would be funny--it seems like the biggest blame has to fall into the lap of the director, Bettina Hirsch. In more capable hands, Munchies could have been entertaining.
After all, it starts out like many great adventure films. Simon Waterman (Harvey Korman) and his son Paul (Charles Stratton) are in Peru on an archaeological dig. Simon is a bit of a wacky archaeologist who is always floating theories about the connections between ancient sites and alien civilizations. For example, he thinks he sees evidence of laser-cutting on ancient stonework. So they're at Machu Picchu looking for more evidence of Simon's theories when they happen upon a secret chamber. Inside they quickly find the animal they later dub "Arnold", one of the titular munchies.
They take Arnold back home to their small California desert town. Simon, who thinks that Arnold is probably an alien creature, has to go off to a colleague's lecture, and he plans on telling the colleague that he finally has an alien specimen. Paul and his extremely cute girlfriend, Cindy (Nadine Van der Velde), are left in charge of Arnold, but as they haven't seen each other in a long time, they leave Arnold unsupervised while they hop in the sack.
Meanwhile, Simon's brother Cecil (played also by Korman in a dual role), owner of a successful snack foods company, is eager to buy off Simon's home and land--they're adjacent to his own. Simon doesn't want to sell, so Cecil hits upon a scheme to steal Arnold. Things gradually spiral out of control, and the munchies, who have a mean streak to go along with their cravings for junk food, begin to overrun the town.
That reads better in a summary than it plays on the screen. The best shots in the film are those with natural landscapes in the background, such as when characters are driving on the outskirts of the desert town. Interiors, with the exception of Cecil's home, tend to look like poorly decorated, cheap sets, and more importantly, they tend to show that Hirsch is not very skilled at blocking and setting up shots. Oddly, given the paucity of the production design overall, Cecil's home is quite a gem, imbued as it is in overblown 1980s style down to the smallest details, and Cecil's stepson, Dude (Jon Stafford), was an amusing counterpoint. Too bad, then, that he's out of the film so quickly.
At any rate, Korman is a fun actor, but he comes across much better here as Simon than as Cecil. Unfortunately, Simon ends up being absent for most of the film. Cecil, who is differentiated physically by a ridiculous wig and facial hair, is not only the "evil capitalist" of the film, he's one of Korman's classic inconsiderate, boorish characters--that was one of his specialties, frequently capitalized on in "Carol Burnett Show" (1967) skits. Unlike "The Carol Burnett Show", which tended to succeed because directors Clark Jones and Dave Powers had a studied way of pushing the skits just to the brink of chaos, Hirsch reins Korman in way too far, and the Cecil character just doesn't work the way it should.
There are a lot of other director-related problems, not the least of which is wonky pacing and editing, which completely sap any possible suspense or compelling dramatic impact from the film. Even scenes that should have been shoe-ins for amping up the drama--such as when the munchies are harassing an old lady on the road--are put together far too awkwardly to have much affect.
There are also serious logical problems with the story as it stands. Where did the munchie in the chamber at Machu Picchu come from? The film's trailer seems to show an answer to this, but it was edited out of the final cut. A more serious problem is that, unlike gremlins, there is no clear reason for munchies to go from cute, cuddly furballs to menacing monsters. It just happens. Further, because Munchies was kept PG, and the violence remains toned down, when the creatures are in their monster phase, they're never very threatening. They're also easily dispatched, at least temporarily.
Admittedly, the gist of the film isn't suspense, horror, compelling drama or any of that other stuff, but humor. It's intended more as a spoof of Gremlins and the countless rip-offs in its wake. The only problem with that is that the film just isn't funny, even though I chuckled a couple times. A surprisingly high percentage of the jokes are bland clichés. Too much of the remaining material consists of non-sequiturs. Given bad timing from Hirsch, it all just falls flat. There was potential to make a film that while a spoof, was both funny and frightening, hilarious and disturbing, cheesy and suspenseful, all at the same time, ala Killer Klowns from Outer Space (1988). Too bad, then, that Munchies comes nowhere near that.
Good Badness #3: Put on the similarly titled, non-related Wehrmacht song from their album "Beermacht" instead of watching this film.
Vomitron_G3 December 2009
Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and reproduce themselves. So far for the horror-elements this movie has. All the rest of MUNCHIES plays out like a really retarded comedy that's so stupid you won't find it funny anymore after about 15 minutes. I can imagine little kids cheering for these little boogers, but adults will be left with only those supposedly "smart" references translating to on-screen stuff like Capt. Kirk's log entries from STAR TREK, the most well-known scene from E.T., a blatant statement from the filmmakers going "Look! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' success here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint Eastwood telling us... what about his western movies exactly? That last one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves seems to be a bad thing. Don't know where they got that idea from.
Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable film to sit through, for that matter. It's just really, really dumb. And if you manage to crack a smile while watching it, you'll probably feel as dumb yourself for having done that after the film's finished.
Good Badness? Yes, but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're looking for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10.
Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable film to sit through, for that matter. It's just really, really dumb. And if you manage to crack a smile while watching it, you'll probably feel as dumb yourself for having done that after the film's finished.
Good Badness? Yes, but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're looking for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10.
Ok Creature Feature!
gwnightscream28 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This 1987 horror comedy stars Harvey Korman, Charlie Stratton and Nadine Van der Velde. This begins with archaeologist, Simon (Korman) and his
son, Paul (Stratton) finding a mysterious, alien creature that likes junk food. Paul names it Arnold and lets him eat snacks in the house. Simon's twin brother, Cecil (Also played by Korman) tries to steal Arnold, but Arnold multiplies a batch of hungry, mischievous creatures, "Munchies" and the only way to stop them is by means of electricity. Van der Velde (Critters) plays Paul's girlfriend, Cindy, Robert Picardo (The Howling), Wendy Schaal (The 'Burbs) and Paul Bartel (Chopping Mall) also appear. This is an ok creature feature that obviously follows the footsteps of "Gremlins," Ghoulies" and "Critters," but with dumb-founded/cheesy humor. Korman is amusing in it though and I'd still give it a try at least once.
MUNCHIES
BandSAboutMovies29 June 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Any movie that has Harvey Korman as a space archaeologist is pretty much one I'm going to watch. I don't know why it took me so long. I used to stare at this box in the video store and was just amazed that it had a little monster drinking a beer, smoking a cigar and looking up someone's dress.
That lil' guy's name is Arnold and he came from a cave in Peru. Simon's son Paul (Charles Stratton) and his girlfriend Cindy (Nadine Van Der Velde, who was also in Critters) lose him to Simon's evil twin, snack food magnate Cecil. The problems kick in when Cecil decides to draw and quarter Arnold after he tries to attack the snack king's son. Instead of dying, he splits into four more creatures.
How do you stop a Munchie? You electrocute it and that turns it into stone. I would not have guessed that, nor would I figure out that Machu Pichu was the toxic waste dump of the gods.
Director Tina Hirsch was assistant editor on Woodstock and Hi, Mom! Before heading out West and working for Roger Corman, editing Death Race 2000, Big Bad Mama and Eat My Dust. She also edited a lot of Joe Dante's films, like Gremlins and Explorers. She'd always wanted to direct, Corman always wanted to make a Gremlins rip-off and hey, they made this in 12 days of human shooting and 3 days of puppet pick-ups.
Seeing as how the Munchies drive an AMC Gremlim with an OHGIZMO license plate, I think that Hirsch, Corman and Dante were all on the same page.
I am also legally obligated to mention that Paul Bartel is in this.
That lil' guy's name is Arnold and he came from a cave in Peru. Simon's son Paul (Charles Stratton) and his girlfriend Cindy (Nadine Van Der Velde, who was also in Critters) lose him to Simon's evil twin, snack food magnate Cecil. The problems kick in when Cecil decides to draw and quarter Arnold after he tries to attack the snack king's son. Instead of dying, he splits into four more creatures.
How do you stop a Munchie? You electrocute it and that turns it into stone. I would not have guessed that, nor would I figure out that Machu Pichu was the toxic waste dump of the gods.
Director Tina Hirsch was assistant editor on Woodstock and Hi, Mom! Before heading out West and working for Roger Corman, editing Death Race 2000, Big Bad Mama and Eat My Dust. She also edited a lot of Joe Dante's films, like Gremlins and Explorers. She'd always wanted to direct, Corman always wanted to make a Gremlins rip-off and hey, they made this in 12 days of human shooting and 3 days of puppet pick-ups.
Seeing as how the Munchies drive an AMC Gremlim with an OHGIZMO license plate, I think that Hirsch, Corman and Dante were all on the same page.
I am also legally obligated to mention that Paul Bartel is in this.
Lots of fun
cstimpy12 July 2019
I love this movie, I first saw it as a kid and yes it is a gremlins rip-off there's no question in that but it's been awhile since I last watched it but the acting going by my memory was fine, Charlie Stratton an actor who I loved in summer camp nightmare another classic. For those who haven't seen it check it out it's a shut your brain off kind of film. I loved it as a kid and I'm 40 now and I still love it
Munchies - a fun low budget Gremlins rip off!!!
cool_cool_118 March 2006
Munchies (1986) is good fun, 2.9 is a very unfair score!!
OK so it's a very low budget rip off of the far superior Gremlins but so what, this is entertaining and the munchies are cool, i love the pool table scene and the scene where the munchies steal an old woman's car!!!
It's a rare movie, but i would give this fun comedy/horror a 7/10, if your a fan of Gremlins and haven't seen or heard of this then i recommend you to try and find it, it's better than you'd think, it's a lot better than Ghoulies 1, 3 and 4, and also better than all the Critters sequels.
OK so it's a very low budget rip off of the far superior Gremlins but so what, this is entertaining and the munchies are cool, i love the pool table scene and the scene where the munchies steal an old woman's car!!!
It's a rare movie, but i would give this fun comedy/horror a 7/10, if your a fan of Gremlins and haven't seen or heard of this then i recommend you to try and find it, it's better than you'd think, it's a lot better than Ghoulies 1, 3 and 4, and also better than all the Critters sequels.
What "Mac and Me" was to "E.T.", this is the same equivalent to "Gremlins".
mark.waltz12 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I guess the rip-off element can be forgiven since it was produced by none other than Roger Corman, the master of fun 50's and 60's deliberate schlock, and if he can create an alien out of a fat upside down ice cream cone painted red to shoot mind control bats out of its butt, then he can create a Gizmo knock-off. A double dose of Harvey Korman in the leading role is not necessarily a good thing, fine in small doses or obnoxious supporting roles, but in leads not exactly completely commanding. He plays lookalike brothers (one with a really bad wig), one an explorer who along with son Charles Stratton discovers the sweet seeming "munchie", and where there's one, there's a ton more.
There's also Alix Elias as the not so bright stepson of the other brother, slaughtering the munchie to find that this only creates more. They can also talk, not necessarily a good thing, because that exposes the ridiculousness of the script, totally forced and pointless. Nadine Van der Velde as Stratton's girlfriend smiles throughout nicely but all that asks is if she is busy thinking, "How did I get in this?" Amusing cameos by Paul Bartel and Ellen Albertini Dow (imitating the little old lady from Pasadena) manage to bring this up only a slight notch. Just violent and ugly and unfunny, truly one of the worst ripoff movies ever made.
There's also Alix Elias as the not so bright stepson of the other brother, slaughtering the munchie to find that this only creates more. They can also talk, not necessarily a good thing, because that exposes the ridiculousness of the script, totally forced and pointless. Nadine Van der Velde as Stratton's girlfriend smiles throughout nicely but all that asks is if she is busy thinking, "How did I get in this?" Amusing cameos by Paul Bartel and Ellen Albertini Dow (imitating the little old lady from Pasadena) manage to bring this up only a slight notch. Just violent and ugly and unfunny, truly one of the worst ripoff movies ever made.
Hilarious!
sthacker-0178022 October 2019
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
