AboveDeepBuggy Some things I liked some I did not.

Executscan Expected more

Helloturia I have absolutely never seen anything like this movie before. You have to see this movie.

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Michael O'Keefe Monster movie that is so bad, there is no chance of getting better. An offshore drilling accident awakens a giant prehistoric shark. Not just a shark...a "Super Shark" than can walk with its fins on the beach and fly, yes fly. CGI mayhem and some gross flesh chomping. Corporate exec Roger Wade(John Schneider)works hard to hide some wrongdoing being investigated; while many have the wrong idea that he caused his own rig to collapse. An attractive marine biologist Kat Carmichael(Sarah Lieving)will need the aid of Skipper Chuck(Tim Abell)to brainstorm a way to kill the marine monster. Adding weirdness is disc jockey Dynamite Stevens(J.J. Walker)running a bikini contest and believe it or not the "Super Shark" is attracted to the load music. It flies in leaping bounds landing on the beach to shimmy on its fins to chomp, chomp, chomp. Fred Olen Ray not only writes, but also directs. At times it seems that Schneider is seriously trying to earn his paycheck. Others in the cast: Jerry Lacy, Catherine Annette and John L. Curtis.

Paul Magne Haakonsen There are so many horrible shark movies available, one more laughable than the other, and "Super Shark" is right up there with those movies.Lets just start off with the theme song for the movie, already there the red line cut in half and went spiraling downward fast. Just listen to the lyrics, it is so lame.The story in "Super Shark" is as you've seen in many other similar movies. A massively over-sized shark has been released from somewhere far beneath the surface of the sea, where it has been trapped and been waiting to get released. Wait, let's back it up here, shall we? If the shark has been down there for countless centuries or more, how did it survive? What has it been eating? And if hibernating for thousands of years, how fat would it had been required to have been prior to hibernating? Once a movie uses this direction with something being released from underneath the surface of something, you know you are in for something bad.As for the shark itself, well given the size of it, wouldn't it be requiring a massive food source? Why not prey on whales, big sharks and the like? No, it had to go for humans. Why? Well humans are capable of being scared and feeling terrorized, so that must be why this particularly shark turned to feeding on humans. And walking on land? Are you kidding me? That was such an epic fail on a grand level. A shark jumping around on dry land while eating people. Well, now I have seen that too. The scenes where you saw the shark swimming around in water were actually good enough, because the shark looked alright, but once it was on land, it was just a blemish to look at, what an eyesore.The acting in "Super Shark" was actually good enough. It was as to be expected of a movie of this particular type. No award-winning performances here, of course, but it wasn't as bad as in other low-budget movies.The effects in the movie were laughable. I especially enjoyed the US army tank that was walking on four legs, like the AT-ATs from "Star Wars". That was just hilarious. It looked so bad. And to make matters worse, I totally keeled over laughing when it reared up and punched the super shark with its two front legs. That was just epic. Then it was knocked over, and apparently it was made in USA, because it took very little to make it explode. You know how vehicles have a tendency of blowing up almost from just having a door slammed too hard in Hollywood movies. That was just wonderful.I managed to sit through the entire movie. Why? Well because it was so hilarious and so bad. It was so cheesy that it was actually worth sitting through. I wonder how the people that make these movies actually take themselves and their movie projects seriously. Surely this was meant as a spoof, and not an actual serious movie."Super Shark" was as bad as can be on land and the sea...

trg6 I'd like to offer some observations about Super Shark that hopefully give people a better appreciation of its merits by taking into consideration the circumstances associated with making this kind of movie.Even though the main audience-appeal of the film intended by the people who created it might be the shark itself and the attractive girls in their bathing suits, there is nevertheless a genuinely important message the author is trying to get across. The greed of the oil company to get more oil to sell by drilling through rock and pumping dangerous chemicals into the water, with all the horrible consequences, is a sobering and timely issue. These things really happen, real people suffer and die from them, and the damage they do to the ecosystem is serious enough that it's worthwhile for us to be reminded of it. There are political implications too. Just consider that at the close of the film, the oil man, now free to continue his greedy plans, quotes Sarah Palin saying 'drill, baby, dill.'And to further compound the issue, even though the oil company is ultimately responsible for all the people the shark kills, they manage to successfully bribe the whistle-blower marine biologist to get her to drop her investigation. The fact that she's on a personal vendetta after the death of her brother and was let go by the bureau she worked for is a further complication similar to Bruce Wayne in the Batman movies becoming a vigilante after the death of his parents. If the audience can separate the real situation from the distraction of the girls in their bathing suits, they will see that there's actually something relevant and worthwhile going on here.The constraints that come from the relatively low budget available for a made-for-TV film of this kind are unavoidable, and rather than condemn the people who actually created the film under these poor conditions, it would be worth it to commend them for how well they rolled up their sleeves and got to work to make the best of a less-than-ideal situation.Since one of the major selling points of the film is the computer-generated visual effects, I think they deserve some comment as well. If you try to consider for a moment how a giant prehistoric shark would actually move on land, it pays to realize that since its musculature was designed to move freely in the water, all its movements on land would be awkward and unnatural. If you've seen footage of penguins swimming with so much speed, and graceful agility under water compared to the almost comical movements they make on land, you'll realize that the way the shark is depicted is actually excellent.Also, there's a good chance that a tremendous amount of the things happening on the screen look so good the audience just takes for granted that they're real and never considers how skillfully they were created digitally. All the water splashes, water spray around the shark's fin, the v-shaped waves expanding out from the shark as he approaches and retreats, the complex curved shapes of light clinging to the body of the shark and submarine under the water, etc., are masterfully rendered by the FX team here.Consider everything that happens to the oil rig, submarine, boats and planes that has to give the impression of tremendous weight and massive size. There are dozens of big budget movies that show in the theaters that don't achieve these things as well. Consider the solidity and reflectivity of the textures for the shark's skin and the hull of the tank. Taking into account the budget and time restrictions for this kind of film, the FX work is actually remarkably good. The ultimate compliment for CG work is when it doesn't get noticed at all. If you stop to think for a moment how many images in the film went by unquestioned as simply real, you'll have a better appreciation for what you're watching.To sum up, I would encourage the audience to keep in mind that it's part of the nature of this kind of movie that the producers can't get the results they would get with a hundred-million-dollar budget and the amount of time that's spent on the huge blockbusters, but the result of their efforts is as good as it can be under these conditions, and a lot of the work here, in terms of both concept and execution, shows the same level of talent and dedication you get in the very best work on the big screen.

Kiran Grewal Worst Movie Ever! Poor directing, poor acting, poor scientific knowledge, poor music to poor special effects this movie has it all. Yes, I understand that the art of a creature feature is of a (almost) poor execution that makes you smile and gives you the pleasure of spotting a few flaws. However, this is simply unforgivable to me. The more sympathetic of you may see a redeeming feature in the fact that the sheer audacity for someone to make such a terrible film will leave you laughing to the high heavens. However, it more than likely that the unintentional comedy will be overshadowed by the realisation that you have wasted your time and you will never get it back. More productive uses of your time could be watching paint dry, watching grass grow and sticking corn back on to the cob. If you do want to see a cheesy creature feature about sharks at least for your own sake stick to mega shark or spend the next 20 minutes after the movie on IMDb warning readers of the perils of taking a chance on a disastrous creature feature.