Did anyone notice?


The sand would engulf the women, but not really eat/tear them apart like it did with the men.

reply

They need to re-shoot the final girl kill, and just have her breasts slowly sink into the sand.

That would be academy award winning level stuff!

reply

You're right, the most gory stuff was reserved for the guys...

Good horror btw, easy, simple, yet something I had not seen before (and I've seen a lot since 1985, the year we got a VHS).

reply

Guess you never watched BLOOD BEACH, eh? Sort of like a blueprint for this one.

reply

I just saw both, but Blood Beach appealed to me cause of the scent of the 70ties, the monster ultra dissapointing... strangely enough here is this film I asked myself I want an explanation to the heck what has caused that sand to turn into a squidmonster (see end) and I did not the same in Blood Beach. There I liked only the atmosphere. Gave it a 5 here with difficulties a 4/10.. maybe for the titties. it's the difference between NEW stupid horror vs vintage 70/80ties trash vs golden trash from the 50ties. don't forget that we tend to glorify the past. But I am specialist collector of 50/60ties film and music and thus they might be more appreciated. However I constate that my scoring for IMDB is the same, just I remember the old films better and rewatch them whilst the new trash I delete and forget about.... why? because the 50ties hat so much less technical opportunities and managed to work with ATMOSPHERE (and b/w prints) which makes sometimes great impressions... (see for that film noirs restaured)... sorry so long I talk but all in all both are *beep* because we expect much more from modern horror or sci fi directors than from the good old time ones. besides, if you like old films and check back for some old German Edgar Wallas, they are abler to grip you more even though they are shot in b/w etc.. - en bref, c'est de la merde les deux LOL

--
Porque tambien somos lo que hemos perdido!

reply

It's been like that for a couple of decades now. I've also noticed this disturbing trend in movies and even network TV. On any given week I've seen far more violence against male characters as opposed to females on network TV (Gotham is a good example) and specialty channels like HBO (Game of Thrones is an excellent example. The only act of violence against a female character I can recall happened during the infamous red wedding.)

It seems that male characters are fair game and anything goes but with female characters the kid gloves come on. Why is that?

---------------------
Long live the 70s!

reply

It's been like that for a couple of decades now. I've also noticed this disturbing trend in movies and even network TV.


You are absolutely right. I grew up watching horror movies from the 70s and 80s. Back then the male characters often died more painful deaths but only SLIGHTLY more so than the female characters. But during the past 20 years, there has been a drastic shift where the male characters die WAY WAY MORE painful and gruesome deaths than the female characters. It's getting hard to watch certain horror movies because of this overkill of the male characters.

It seems that male characters are fair game and anything goes but with female characters the kid gloves come on. Why is that?


I think that today if a movie shows the same amount of violence against its female characters (in comparison to the male ones), then some people complain and label the movie misogynistic. For example, the recent X-men movie received criticism when the female lead was depicted on a billboard being strangled. Those people who were complaining disregarded the fact that for decades comic book heroes have often been depicted being strangled to emphasize the impressive struggle that the hero will have to overcome in order to beat the villain.

The bottom line is that TV/movie writers and producers fear the ludicrous criticism of feminists and others who would say that any movie showing a woman dying a death as painful as a man is a movie that 'promotes violence against women'. On the other hand, we never hear a TV show/movie being labeled as misandristic (depicting a hatred toward men) so writers/ producers do not have to face any criticism if their movies are more violent to the male characters.

reply

Come on, guys. Be real. Are any of you *really* turned on by a woman's private parts laying on a table winking at you? A breast on a plate? Let's all be honest, MOST of us wouldn't watch crap like that. Now watching a GUY get his bits whacked all to *beep* *is* great moviemaking! I can watch that crap all day long! I mean who among us hasn't fantacized about all the blokes dying brutally and me....or you, or you, or you....being the only guy left? Do any of you dream of all the babes dying and you being left alone with a billion ummmm fish sticks? Women stay in one piece. Women aren't fun to watch being dismembered. Well, some are. But that's an entirely diff thing. ;)

reply

The sand would engulf the women, but not really eat/tear them apart like it did with the men.


I agree with you 100%. In fact, I came to this message board to see if anyone else noticed how slowly and agonizingly all of the men died (most of them begging for help) whereas the women died instantly. I guess the sand monster must have been female. LOL.

reply

I noticed that the car with a dead battery kept turning over like it's real problem was it was out of gas. And that the tentacles size seemed to conveniently fit the plot. One minute they were a foot long in order to sting the guys stomach and the next they were barely an inch long so they couldn't get above boots then they were big enough to suck in the whole trashcan burrito. Still it was an entertaining enough b or c grade horror movie. I've certainly seen much worse.

fact: 87.3% of IMDB users belong to the secret society of cynics.

reply

Funny thing, they tried to get away from the car on boards and stuff but none of them thought to put a board behind the trunk to open it at the beginning of the movie. Would have been a very short movie though.

reply