There are some TV movies that are good, there are some that are bad. Some are that bad they are good, and some are that good they shock and amaze. 2017's "Empire of the Sharks" is an amazing masterclass of moviemaking that delights and entertains... Hang on, I've been smoking crack again. I meant to say that this is a steaming pile of crapola.
Brief Plot: In a dystopian future where the Earth is underwater a bad guy is about to meet his match.
Detailed Plot: Ian Fien is a nasty SOB that controls a small floating island as a dangerous and menacing warlord. With the majority of the world submerged under water due to events of the past, in this future version of Earth resources are sparce. With his army of trained sharks Fien and his men capture Willow, a mysterious stranger that happens to be the daughter of a "shark caller". She might just be the only person that can inspire a rebellion to overthrow the evil warlords dominion and lead whats left of humanity into a safer future.
Film stuff: EOTS is written and Directed by Mark Atkin, who has plenty of TV Movie titles under his belt, including; "6-Headed Shark Attack" (2018), "Planet of the Sharks" (2016), and "Sand Sharks" (2012). Just to be clear - I've only named the shark based films Atkin's has directed recently, but in fact he has at least 25 titles under his best as director and almost as many as writer. Atkins also worked on the camera and did the editing (along with Marq Morrison. He didn't work on the music, this is by Heather Schmidt, but I'll be honest, when you are watching this film you won't pay attention to the music with how bad the film is. CGI... CGI? Let's just skip that because it looks like everyone else skipped it too. With a runtime that's around 85 minutes, this bad film will feel like it's dragging, even with a 15 rating to spice things up a little.
Cast: John Savage plays Ian Fien, Jack Tompkins is Timor, Ashley De Lange is Willow, Jonathan Pienaar is Mason Scrim.... I could keep going, but to be honest, nobody really stands out in the film. Even those amongst the acting cast who don't give a cheesy performance are hampered by the plot that's been done and recycled many times before and the lacklustre script which could have been written as a colege project by 16 year olds. How did John Savage, who was once in "The Deerhunter" (1978) find himself in this, it must have been some downward spiral for his career.
Wrap up: This super low budget creature feature film is a straight to TV movie which is produced by The Asylum - which explains an awful lot. It's actually a sort-of sequel to "Planet of the Sharks" (2016) which I generously gave 2 out of 10 when I previously reviewed that title, so you can imagine how much I was looking forward to this film - hint, I wasn't. Shark films have been done to death and this film really doesn't do itself any justice. In an attempt to combine "Jaws" (1975), "Waterworld" (1995) and "Mad Max" (1979), "Empire of the Sharks" instead pulls its own trousers down and curls out a massive steaming turd on-screen for those unlucky enough to catch it on TV. If the first film was abysmal - this is worse than dire. Instead of wasting money making trash like this, think of the good that could have been done if the production crew had of just donated money to charity or a worthwhile cause instead. Sorry - 1 out of 10. Not even that bad that it's good for a laugh.
Brief Plot: In a dystopian future where the Earth is underwater a bad guy is about to meet his match.
Detailed Plot: Ian Fien is a nasty SOB that controls a small floating island as a dangerous and menacing warlord. With the majority of the world submerged under water due to events of the past, in this future version of Earth resources are sparce. With his army of trained sharks Fien and his men capture Willow, a mysterious stranger that happens to be the daughter of a "shark caller". She might just be the only person that can inspire a rebellion to overthrow the evil warlords dominion and lead whats left of humanity into a safer future.
Film stuff: EOTS is written and Directed by Mark Atkin, who has plenty of TV Movie titles under his belt, including; "6-Headed Shark Attack" (2018), "Planet of the Sharks" (2016), and "Sand Sharks" (2012). Just to be clear - I've only named the shark based films Atkin's has directed recently, but in fact he has at least 25 titles under his best as director and almost as many as writer. Atkins also worked on the camera and did the editing (along with Marq Morrison. He didn't work on the music, this is by Heather Schmidt, but I'll be honest, when you are watching this film you won't pay attention to the music with how bad the film is. CGI... CGI? Let's just skip that because it looks like everyone else skipped it too. With a runtime that's around 85 minutes, this bad film will feel like it's dragging, even with a 15 rating to spice things up a little.
Cast: John Savage plays Ian Fien, Jack Tompkins is Timor, Ashley De Lange is Willow, Jonathan Pienaar is Mason Scrim.... I could keep going, but to be honest, nobody really stands out in the film. Even those amongst the acting cast who don't give a cheesy performance are hampered by the plot that's been done and recycled many times before and the lacklustre script which could have been written as a colege project by 16 year olds. How did John Savage, who was once in "The Deerhunter" (1978) find himself in this, it must have been some downward spiral for his career.
Wrap up: This super low budget creature feature film is a straight to TV movie which is produced by The Asylum - which explains an awful lot. It's actually a sort-of sequel to "Planet of the Sharks" (2016) which I generously gave 2 out of 10 when I previously reviewed that title, so you can imagine how much I was looking forward to this film - hint, I wasn't. Shark films have been done to death and this film really doesn't do itself any justice. In an attempt to combine "Jaws" (1975), "Waterworld" (1995) and "Mad Max" (1979), "Empire of the Sharks" instead pulls its own trousers down and curls out a massive steaming turd on-screen for those unlucky enough to catch it on TV. If the first film was abysmal - this is worse than dire. Instead of wasting money making trash like this, think of the good that could have been done if the production crew had of just donated money to charity or a worthwhile cause instead. Sorry - 1 out of 10. Not even that bad that it's good for a laugh.