Locusts: The 8th Plague (2005) Reviews

• and the 9th Plague is the film itself!

  DobraGolonka2005-12-09

  I had to watch this film twice - simply because I fell asleep during the first viewing! It really is awful! The film is heavily dependant upon CGI throughout, but, unfortunately, they appear to have been composed on a ZX80 - they are diabolical. And the acting??? That surely is a contradiction in terms! It is sooooooo wooden! If this film had been made in black and white 50 years ago, it might be classed as a decent B movie, but with today's standards? Absolute pap! 2/10 only because the first 5 minutes actually lull you into thinking it will be a decent movie to watch: at least, I was fooled! DG

  More

• Another Species Versus Humans Flick

  jrgreenmd-12006-01-28

  The Sci-Fi Channel has once again cranked out another "made for TV" movie in their tired formula of species versus human engagements. As the film title indicates, the locusts have the honor of being man's nemesis this time. A good director, cast, crew, writer, et al could have made this a passable piece of entertainment, but alas not in this case. The writing is predictable. The editing and photography are generic. The special effects are far, far from special. These scenes are particularly disappointing for a science fiction movie. While acceptable for a student film or a sci-fi spoof, they lack believability and appear to indicate a project with a meager budget. David Keith does a good job as Gary Wolf, the corporate head. He has become a staple of The Sci-Fi Channel's flicks. Among this swarm of bad acting, he is a welcome relief, but has a limited amount of screen time. Dan Cortese is very disappointing as Colt, the organic researcher and "good guy." His performance was stilted and uninspiring. However, this is not unique in this film that lacks originality and recycles old themes. The evil cooperation versus the little guy. The government drone versus the civilian. The testosterone toxic military type versus the rebel. The industry versus the environmentalist. The geneticists verses the organic farmers. ... The banal list continues culminating in the human versus species of the week theme that is reflected in the title. If you have a free moment with nothing to do and are bored out of your mind, consider this as a possible option.

  More

• The movie itself is not horrible...

  SpookyT2007-06-23

  This film is mainly fine for 'made for TV' fare. The biggest problem with this movie is the horrendous cgi effects. If it were not for the absolutely unwatchable special effects, "Locusts" would be worth it for the guilty pleasure factor. I will say that I am notoriously forgiving with regard to horror films. If I was entertained at all, I figure the movie did the job for which it was intended. I would have found this one very entertaining on the level of schlocky monster of the week movies, were it not for the extremely poor use of cgi. If you have nothing better to do and happen to find it on sci-fi... go ahead and give it a watch. There is enough unintended comedy to make use of a pizza and a couple of sodas or beers.

  More

• Killer swarm of computerized dots terrorizes Idaho

  Phillemos2006-09-02

  I expect mediocre special effects from SciFi Channel Original, but even by their standards this is bad. Basically, every time you see the "locusts" on the loose you see some CGI-based dots gliding across your TV screen, with one model locust flying directly into the camera. Anyway, here's the plot: big corporation creates killer strain of locusts and then attempts cover-up, while the locusts run amok in rural Idaho. What an original idea. I've never seen anything like it before. The hilarious part is, it's amazing how woefully unprepared the military folk are. They pinpoint the swarm to a secluded cave and try spraying it with pesticides. When the pesticides don't work, they try Plan B, shooting flame-throwers, at which time lead actor Dan Cortese says, "NO! We don't have enough firepower in those flame-throwers to contain them!" Shouldn't they have figured that out before they went in? I'm not sure why I'm giving this really bad movie a 4, but it's probably because I was (barely) able to watch the entire movie in one sitting.

  More

• Offensive to anyone with an IQ above dishwater

  billwilliams20022006-04-24

  Why this piece of cinematic effluent ever made it past the napkin it was written on is beyond me. I am almost at a loss for words to describe just how horrific it was. Think of every bad cliché you could ever put in a movie and it was in this one... twice. The acting was terrible, including a scene where the scientist trying to eliminate the swarm, has to watch her father (who was, of course, responsible for creating the super-bugs in an amazingly original twist in movie plot-line history) die in a terrific explosion, then manages to conjure up a look akin to that one might give to the meal selections in Craft Services. The editing was beyond embarrassing; at one point a group of scientist-onlookers (who have for some reason elected to stay in an area the locusts are being deliberately drawn to so they can be eliminated), duck and cover from a helicopter that has not yet started to crash but will in the scene immediately following. The CG is laughable... at various points throughout the movie the locusts (who are supposedly uniform in size and color) range from a low of about 3" in apparent length to a high of about 8" and are either brown, maroon or pink depending on the particular scene. The real-world physics are... stupid. Just stupid. Locusts chasing a crop duster, flying at full-speed, and not only keeping up but gaining on it. Sure. Right now the world's fastest insect (a locust) tops out at 20mph... this writer has his swarm exceeding 100. Seriously. Go back to school. To echo the other user who commented on this page, don't waste your time.

  More