Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts

Saturday, January 12, 2019

Croc (2007) & Crocodile (2000)


&


never happens in movie
also never happens in movie
Well, it's January and time for everyone's favorite New Year tradition: The Killer Crocodile Double Feature. (Okay, that's not really a tradition, even here in the deadmans household.)

What actually happened was more where mrs. deadmans falls asleep on the couch while I watch something she'd rather not experience in a fully conscious state, which I totally understand. (There are times I wish I was the one sleeping on the couch next to me.)

Okay, that was weird. I went all unbidden-existential on myself for a second and saw movie-watching-me on my couch, taking in a crappy movie, with sleeping-me curled up right there next to myself. Snoring a little. Huh. At least sleeping-me wasn't laying his head on movie-watching-me's lap. That would've been too weird.

Anyway, existentials aside, neither of the movies I real-life-watched were overly painful (the missus totally could've stayed awake!), and the second one was even a fair bit of fun. Also, the two films didn't start out as a crocodilian couple: they just happened to be next to each other on my watchlist, and one night I decided to give the first one a shot. Well, it turned out to be so unsatisfying (un-sauri-fying, you might say), I had no choice but to give myself a redo with the second movie the next night. At which point my crocodilian-film-faith was restored. (Whew. Close call.)

At any rate that's the setup, and here's a mini multi movies write-up on both films....



It's Hunting Season and You're the Prey


So the first movie was a 2007 made-for-TV deal called Croc. The first bit of opening credits actually had me wondering if I'd be watching a full-on-Thai-subtitled-in-English film, which would've rocked: I've got a big and mushy spot in my heart for all things Thai. Wasn't to be, though. The movie's actually an English-language American production that was produced and filmed in Thailand.

As a matter of fact, I later found out this movie is part of that Maneater Series SyFy did back in the day. (Anyone besides me remember that series?) I caught at least a half dozen Maneater films, there in the mid-to-late aughts. Well: Strip my gears and call me shiftless, turns out the series never died and is now up to 27 movies, the last one just a few years old. (Where the heck have I been?)

Anyway, this particular movie's about a twenty foot saltwater crocodile terrorizing a (Thailand) tourist beach town. Here's the blurb from Amazon Video:
When a mysterious beast begins dismembering locals at a Thailand beach resort, Croc Hawkins sets out to capture the monster - and the $5,000 reward. But as the body count rises, Croc suspects he is dealing with a more powerful force than he ever imagined.
Would your boat do this if it was headbutted by a giant crocodile?
I'm not sure it would....
Yeah.... That's not accurate and actually sounds better than what I watched. This movie was a bit of a plodder --- even the creature scenes couldn't quite lift it out of the humdrums for me. Heck, not even having the Honorable Michael Madsen onboard was enough to get to minimum fun factor, and Madsen always brightens up the projects he's part of. Couldn't quite do it here though, bless 'im.

So why exactly did it suck?

Hmm... the effects were pretty bad. This was one of those ultra-cheap practical effect/ultra-cheap CGI mixes. Which is better than going all ultra-cheap CGI. (Generally speaking, cheap practical ends up looking way better than cheap CGI.) But you know, the second film I watched also mixed cheap practical and CGI, and it was way more enjoyable, so that can't be all that's holding this one back....

(thinkingthinking)

Okay, I think it came down to this: this movie didn't quite know what it wanted to be --- it couldn't commit. I mean it was definitely marketed as creature feature, but the film was really a mishmash of drama, romance, action thriller and family film, with an unconvincing bit of creature horror thrown in. Yeah, the more I think about it that's exactly what happened --- too many things going on in it to be able to do any one (or two) of them well.

Too bad. I will say I got the sense most everyone in front and behind the camera was putting out best effort, which means the movie at least comes away having a bit of heart once all's said and done. But even with the heart, I could only find it in my heart to give this film:

ONE AND A HALF LARGEST-LIVING-PLASTIC-AND-CGI-REPTILE BRAINS

And that, is all I have to say about it.



Ever feel like something is watching you...?


Now then, the second film (Tobe Hooper's 2000 straight-to-video Crocodile) was pretty much everything that first movie wasn't. This one knew exactly what it was going for --- teen-stereotype-creature-horror --- implemented with tongue firmly in cheek. I mean its characters were so achingly one dimensional it was ludicrous, but since everyone involved seemed to know that and be going about it on purpose, it comes off as self-aware and the stereotypes are fun rather than demeaning.

Here's the Prime blurb for it:
A group of friends goes out on a boat trip on a lake in Southern California - but their joyful weekend turns into horror when a giant killer crocodile, searching for its stolen eggs, picks off anyone who gets in its way. Can they all escape in one piece or will they slowly and painfully fall to the mammoth reptile?
"Can they all escape..."? Do we even need to ask that question? (No. We do not.)

So yeah, this thing was actually a lot of fun. It starred no one who went on to do much else, according to IMDB, but everybody did what they needed to here in guilty-pleasure-inducing ways. And it pulls off the horror/comedy bit just about perfectly. I'll bet I could name all the horror comedies I actually enjoy watching on one hand, and believe it or not this movie just became one of 'em.

I am SO dead! Except for my right hand, which is alive and tightly gripping
this plastic crocodile mouth so I don't slip out onto the floor....
Wait, one hand...?

Let's see: An American Werewolf in London, Shaun of the Dead, Young Frankenstein, Dale and Tucker vs. Evil, Invasion of the Saucer-Men, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, Lake Placid, Eight Legged Freaks.... Huh. Okay, maybe two hands. Possibly three.

Damn it, now I've negated the whole "on one hand" thing I had going back there, and I might not even hate horror comedy the way I've always thought I did. (Sigh.)

I don't know. Maybe I just hate horror comedy that isn't well done. Yeah, that could be it. It is a genre that's tough to get right, don't you think? Anyway. I digress.

Getting back to Crocodile, I'm thinking to myself that even though I compared the two, the creature effects in this one didn't suck nearly as much as that first film's did. Here they (wisely) kept to the practical side of things, leaving CGI to the few bits they couldn't think of another way to manage, which helped a ton on watchability. That first one had more crappy CGI than practical going on.

Okay, that's it I think. I'm done talking about this one as well.

Oh. The count?

THREE AND A HALF SELF-AWARE TONGUE IN TOOTH BRAINS

(Gronk!)



Till next time.

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Ice Sharks (2016) & Planet of the Sharks (2016)

So there I was, sifting through the new arrivals for Amazon Prime on the TV set.

With the missus out for the evening, I figured it was time for a little popcorn and a Dan Movie, "Dan Movie" being defined as any of the admittedly few films the missus just can't bring herself, in all her love and good-naturedness, to sit through alongside me as I watch. (And who knows, she might've been up for at least one of these two if she'd been home. But I kind of doubt it.)

Anyway, while sifting, I came across these two titles sitting right next to each other in the list. And since both looked like they might pass the minimum bar I hold for shark movies (i.e. any sharks portrayed are more or less of a natural state--not undead, roboticized, etc.--and also limit themselves to life in the water--no sand or snow burrowing, no sustained flying about in the air, and so on), I decided to give the trailers a watch. And I was actually excited when I did.

Why was I excited? Well, it wasn't because either movie appeared to be that (apparently mythical) film I've been looking for ever since the summer of 1975: a shark movie that holds even a dim, flickering candle to Jaws. No, neither of these looked to have particularly watertight (*NPI) plots, outstanding effects or remarkable performances. Even so, I was excited. The reason is, watching their trailers, I realized both movies actually take themselves and their audiences (kind of) seriously. And it is not often, my friend, that a shark movie does that.
*No Pun Intended

Well, now that I say it, I guess The Shallows was serious. And Bait 3D at least worked hard trying to be serious. But c'mon, you gotta admit the vast, vast majority of recent shark films have not only been atrocious but have run an exceedingly narrow gamut between tongue-firmly-in-cheek and outright parody. (And I'm sorry but I just cannot do tongue-in-cheek, let alone parody, with a shark movie. I just can't.)

To be sure, these two films have their shark-related gimmicks. Going completely gimmick-free is (apparently) more than I can hope for, but these films come closer than most have done in quite awhile. At the very least, there's no mention of sharks being whipped around inside tornadoes, swimming under the soil, having 2 or even 3 heads, and there were no sharktopuses, sharkensteins or airliner-snatching mega sharks to be seen anywhere. These movies pretty much stick (again, for the most part) to sharks. The kind that just swim. In the water. And like I said, both movies played it reasonably straight, to boot. No (excessive) actor-hamming, no breaking the fourth wall, etc.

I can't say any of the actors in either film are people I've seen anywhere else, and according to IMDB most of their collective work has been in movies of similar vein, but I also didn't get a sense that anyone involved was noticeably untalented. I admit there was a little watch checking going on during both films as they chugged along to their respective climaxes, but I think the mild impatience I experienced at times was more related to plotting than performances. I could see pretty much everybody in front of the cameras producing decent work, providing they had the right creative teams around them. At any rate, I was damn grateful to have any shark movie to watch which wasn't blatantly farcical.

So here's a bit about each film, and I honestly think you could do worse than give them a watch some weekend, when you're already bored and not particularly worried about losing that few hours of your life these movies will take and never give back.



Ice Sharks


So the deal here is there are a bunch of folks at an arctic research station who come across (or get camed across by) a "previously unknown variation" of Greenland sharks, lured in from who knows where due to global warming. Well, these sharks (unlike your garden variety Greenland shark) can swim at speeds of more than one mile per hour and will ravenously attack anything on, in or near the water.

Oh, and they're pack animals, too. Wolf-like, the sharks work together to separate and snack on our heroes, who eventually end up sunken (in their mostly air tight station) on the ocean floor, with hungry sharks all around them. Shenanigans and plot holes abound, until eventually those destined to survive do (survive I mean).

So yeah, nothing like that beast on the poster, but there are some twenty plus footers in the movie, and apparently that's accurate for the species in real life. Not that the filmmakers tried especially hard to have these things look life-like, a good thing, since real-world Greenlands are pretty unassuming in spite of their size. As you see below.

You can also see that the movie's sharks don't entirely stay in the water. That's okay, they don't in the next movie either. It's all still a damn site better than witnessing the horror that was Sharknado....

Unassuming Real Greenland SharkDeadly Ice Sharks Greenland Shark

TWO AND A HALF EYE-PARASITE BRAINS

You'll have to do a little research to be in the know on that parasite reference. Oh, and nice callback to John Carpenter's 1982 take on The Thing, what with this movie's rescue ship crew all being named after Carpenter's (and the original novella's) arctic research crew. Well done, with that.



Planet of the Sharks


Well the culprit here is (again) global warming: it's melted all the polar ice and 98% of the planet is underwater. Most of the planet's human population has died out, and those left have adapted to life on top of the water in the form of boats and little towns made from tied-together rafts.

Some scientist types have scrounged together just enough technological scraps to have a go at launching a whatzit into the upper atmosphere, which they hope will reverse the warming and refreeze the ice caps to get a little more land mass available for everyone. (Yeah, the "science" in the film is a little dubious, but I'm rolling with it.)

Unfortunately, about this time it becomes apparent some sharks (at least the one we see in this movie) have evolved to be able to control other sharks via some kind of hive mind, and as a result sharks have learned to attack and kill people on top of the water by leaping out and knocking the intended victim into the water. And then munching upon them.

So anyway, stuff happens and people windsurf while being chased by highly-evolved-alpha-sharks and scientists eventually save the planet as alpha sharks are destroyed and land does indeed (eventually) reappear as credits roll.

Alpha Sharks have glowey ampullae of Lorenzini......and make other sharks do this.

So yeah. This one wasn't quite as good, overall, as Ice Sharks. But it was watchable. In the right circumstances (like the ones I was in). No super obvious character callouts this time (both films were made by the same company, so I thought there might be), although we did get a character named Dr. Roy Shaw, which has gotta be an amalgam of Roy Scheider and Robert Shaw, doesn't it? (Although I suppose whoever named the character might've also just been a fan of this guy.) And then we get a Dr. Caroline Munroe, which I figure has to be a Hammer Horror reference, right? Not that Hammer ever made a shark movie (and not that she was only ever in Hammer films, but she never did a shark film at all, far as I know). Yeah. So anyway.

TWO GLOWEY ALPHA BRAINS

Sunday, February 12, 2017

Frankenstein: The True Story (1973)




Well, not really.

True, I mean. If you assume "true" refers to things happening the way they do in Shelley's original novel. And granted, the film never comes right out and says it's going to be especially faithful to the novel, even if one of it's main characters weirdly breaks the fourth wall a few minutes into the film, takes you to Mary Shelley's supposed (modern day, with cars and buses zipping by) grave site and implies what you're about to see is Shelley's original vision. Nobody comes right out and says it. So I guess the "true story" here is more like "hey, not even Shelley told you the true story, but we're about to, so hold on to your hats!"

And with that in mind, this little film mostly does alright for itself. Little as far as budget and screen size go--it was a 1970s TV movie after all--it's not small in terms of running time, clocking in at a hefty 3 hours and 5 minutes. It was originally broadcast as one of those two-night TV "miniseries" that were particularly popular in the 70s.

(I've personally always maintained that "two parts does not a miniseries make"--you gotta get at least three or four broadcasts in to call it a miniseries. But that's just me.)

So anyway, I really did watch this last night (subtitle on the site's banner is literal this time 'round), and as I started writing/image-hunting this morning, I was totally compelled to use that VHS cover above as a lead-in for the post, 'cause it's so not what the movie is. At all. I seriously laughed out loud when I came across it. Rest assured, at no point in the film does Jane Seymour, dressed in an ornamental Japanese vest and flashing side-boob, seductively eye the camera with a "come hither" expression on her face.

The movie really takes itself pretty seriously as a dramatic-with-horror-overtones period piece, but I guess the whole point of VHS and paperback cover art is to (mis)represent, with as much titillation as possible, what's actually contained inside the associated video cassette/book, and based on that this cover does it's job well. If you ever bought or rented the movie based on it, though, you'd be sorely disappointed. Granted, it is Seymour in the vest there, and at one point in the film her character is (more completely) dressed in similar Asian attire, so I'm guessing they used a publicity still or some other non-film thing to make that VHS cover.

This DVD cover is much more representative. Anyway. Let's see if I can give you the gist of this movie.

Here's a list of the main cast and who's playing who:

James Mason as Dr. Polidori
Leonard Whiting as Dr. Victor Frankenstein
David McCallum as Dr. Henry Clerval
Jane Seymour as Agatha/Prima
Nicola Pagett as Elizabeth Fanshawe
Michael Sarrazin as The Creature

Story-wise, Frankenstein is not the brains of this outfit. He's a doctor, who's partial to the idea of restoring life (his brother having recently drowned), but he's got no idea how to go about doing that, and isn't even looking to find out how, when he meets up with fellow doc Henry Clerval. Clerval is the one who's experimenting with the creation of life from death, but even he didn't come up with the idea on his own--he stole it from yet another doc by the name of Polidori. Neither Clerval or Polidori are very nice fellows, by the way, and Polidori is downright sociopathic.

So Clerval kind of pushes Frankenstein into helping him with his work (Clerval has a bad ticker and can't maintain the pace he needs to by himself), and the two of them end up with a stitched together corpse they're all set to bring to life come the next morning. After lamenting to each other about having to make due with only a peasant's brain for their creature, Frankenstein heads home, but Clerval sticks around the lab long enough to figure out his process still has some major flaws and anything they create will most likely start coming apart at the seams before too much time passes.

Well, this is important news, but before Clerval can let Frankenstein know about it, he keels over dead from a heart attack. After Frankenstein shows up the next morning and grieves (for a minute), he wastes no time pulling Clerval's brain out of his head and sticking it into the creature's (always a silver lining, right? last night's peasant brain dilemma: solved). So, when the creature comes to life, he's handsome, intelligent and good-natured to boot, and all seems right in the world.

UNTIL said creature does start deteriorating, causing both Frankenstein and creature much pain and suffering, culminating with the creature throwing itself into the sea, at which point Frankenstein (naturally) assumes it's dead and gone.

Time for Frankenstein to move on and marry Elizabeth, who's been impatiently waiting in the wings for just that to happen since the movie's very first scene. But this being a Frankenstein tale, we know what they do not: the creature's NOT dead. It's washed ashore, and has been hanging out for the last while with the story's requisite blind peasant fellow, mostly having a nice time, which niceness goes to hell when blind peasant fellow's daughter and son-in-law end up dead due to freaking out over the creature's (supposed) horrifying disfigurement.

Let's see, this is taking too long. How can I make this long story short(er)?

Okay: Dr. Polidori, who's been keeping Frankenstein's creature locked in a cell ever since it brought blind peasant fellow's dead daughter to him, uses the fact that it's still alive to blackmail Frankenstein into helping him resurrect blind peasant fellow's daughter as a she-creature. Polidori plans to turn her into ( ! ) a high-class prostitute and use her to gain international influence, what with all the state secrets she'll weasel out of her rich and powerful clients. (Okay, things are starting to go a little off-rail, plotwise, here.)

Well, during she-creature's big-introduction-to-london-society-ball, he-creature busts in and tears off her head, along with murdering a bunch of other people (he being pissed, and rightfully so, since Polidori had just tried to burn him alive a few hours prior). Next morning, Frankenstein and Elizabeth are wondering what would be a good next step. They're several months married at this point, she's got a baby on the way, and they really just want to get on with life by pretending none of this craziness ever happened.

So, they decide to hop a ship to America and start a new life there (extreme solution, but okay). Surprise! Both Polidori and the creature are also on board! (Will this nightmare never end?) Again, this being a Frankenstein tale, we know it won't. And sure enough, Elizabeth eventually ends up dead, strangled by the creature, who now has (wait for it) Henry Clerval's personality and speaks in his voice. (Because after all, that's his brain in it's head. Only a matter of time, right?)

Let's see... to hurry things up even a little more, I'll just say that Polidori ends up dead, too, and we wind up in the same arctic wilderness the novel used for it's final scene (hey, this really is the true story!). So Frankenstein and his creature end up standing face-to-face in an ice cave, Frankenstein begging forgiveness for all the evils he's visited on the creature and the creature forgiving him, just as the cave roof collapses on top of them both and so they're dead.

The End

Unless you go off the scripted-but-unfilmed epilogue, which reportedly involves an ice floe-encapsulated creature drifting into warmer melt-y waters and showing signs of life just before the credits roll.

Wow. That movie definitely started off stronger than it finished. But you know? I gotta say I liked it, in spite of all that last-act weirdness. Far from being a faithful adaptation of Shelley's novel, it's as much a mashup of previous efforts as anything else. Let's see.... Hammer did the handsome creature who deteriorates physically/mentally in 1958, and Polidori was an obvious take on Dr. Pretorius from 1935s Bride of Frankenstein. (Oh wait, maybe it's supposed to be a fictionalized version of this guy....) The ideas of Frankenstein not being the tragedy-instigating one, and being swept up in the obsessions of others are pretty unique, though.

So overall, I'd say the film's worth a few hours of your time, especially if you're a Frankenstein's Monster fan in general. And as usual I spoiled quite a few surprises here in the post, but I also left out plenty of details and even a subplot or two, so you'll have plenty to raise your eyebrows at if you decide to give the movie a go.

One thing that bugged me (besides that plot falling apart towards the end) was the movie's lack of creature-scariness. It just wasn't horrific looking, to the point I kept wondering what all those characters were carrying on about whenever they'd lay eyes on him and then start screaming or trying to kill him.

Here. I'll show you what I mean. Here's a creature pic from early on, one mid-show and one from the movie's finale (the idea was that the creature was supposed to be getting more and more hideous as things went along):

Handsome Monster

Mild Brow-Jutting and Messy-Haired Monster

Burned in a Fire Monster

See? Granted, that mid-plot pic has the creature looking a little nutty and dangerous (mostly due to expression rather than features), but horrifying to the point of running, fainting or trying to kill it just for it's looks? Nope. Even end-of-movie creature seems more pitiable than horrifying. Which would have been fine if they hadn't kept playing him as horrifying every single person he met to the point of them losing their senses. If you want to see a horrifying rendition of the creature, look no further than the square of Plainpalais in Geneva:


See? I would totally buy people losing their senses if that thing was popping out at them, but not the mild looking fellow we had in this movie. So anyway, that's my thoughts on that.

Brain count? I believe I'm gonna have to go with...

TWO AND A HALF DAVID MCCALLUM BRAINS

Oh yeah, and this would be the first official half-brain count on deadmans. You might've noticed half-brain language has been creeping in for awhile, now: "this one's a a three, but a higher three versus a lower" or "it's a two, but kind of a two-minus" and so on. So I finally decided to just go ahead and go with half-brains, to give me a little more maneuvering room and avoid 75% of my brain counts ending up as threes. (Maybe now it'll just be 65%.)

Probably I'll make some half-brain icons to go along with the current set at some point, but I'm not sure I want to mess with figuring out half-brain song lyrics for that brain count side bar. We'll see, though.

Sunday, April 17, 2016

Bionics in Miniature (Part 6: Bigfeet!)

Part 1    Part 2    Part 3    Part 4    Part 5    Part 6



Been awhile since I did a post for the ol' bionic toy line, hasn't it? (Let me take a look...) Yikes! Last one was three months back, so it's definitely time to move things along, which I will do right now by starting in on Part 6: Bionic Bigfoot(s).

First though, how about a little character background material, for those who don't normally keep up on all things Cybernetic Sasquatch? (You know who you are, I'm not gonna embarrass you by calling it out.)

Okay then. Bionic Bigfoot was a recurring friend-slash-foe of The Six Million Dollar Man's, and showed up in three different story arcs over the course of five episodes throughout the TV series. The actual episodes were:
And yes, apparently "Bigfoot V" really was named that just because it was the fifth episode to feature the Bionic Bigfoot character. Does that seem terribly lazy only to me?

At any rate, there were too many episodes for me to (want to) give you a play-by-play here, but if you follow those links above, you'll find all the information your hairy cyborg heart could ever desire. There's even behind the scenes stuff you wouldn't pick up just watching the episodes yourself.

For my part, I'll just say that in the TV show, Bionic Bigfoot was a cybernetic alien organism, created by a group of (also alien) scientists. These scientists had been hiding out in their mountain base, studying humankind, for a couple of hundred years (they could slip in and out of time, so they weren't aging very fast). They were basically using their cyborg as a deterrent, to instill a sense of mystery and awe into the locals, which they hoped would keep anyone from snooping too close and discovering them.

Which probably worked fine in the 18th and 19th centuries, but not so much when 20th century government workers showed up on the mountain to do earthquake research. Especially when one of those government workers was a snoopy bionic man.

Anyway, the first story arc was all about discovering who these aliens are and what they're doing here. The second one had an alien splinter group using Bigfoot for nefarious purposes, and the last one just kind of had Bigfoot wandering around and malfunctioning, with our bionic heroes showing up to help him out. In a nutshell. (A tiny nutshell, maybe from a hazelnut.)

And here I have to say that while I've always thought both Bigfoot and cyborgs are terribly cool, going with a Bigfoot cyborg was a little weird for me, even as a kid. Two great tastes that don't taste quite as good together, kinda like those dark chocolate peanut butter cups. But that's just me.

Could be that's why I've always slightly preferred "Day of the Robot" and "The Return of the Robot Maker" to these Sasquatch episodes. Not saying I don't love the Sasquatch stories as well (heaven forbid), just that I love the straight-on robot stories a little more. I always did have a soft spot for humany robots and cyborgs over non-humany ones.

So. Bigfoot was played by a couple of different actors, legendary Andre the Giant (in the first two parter), and Ted Cassidy after that. Both guys did a fine job, but I've always been partial to Andre's Bigfoot: At 7 feet 4 inches and 500 pounds, Andre was a much bigger man than 6 foot 9 (and relatively slender) Ted was. Andre, being bigger, just filled out the suit in a more convincing way for me.

Let's just take a quick look at our two TV Sasquatches side-by-side before moving on to Kenner's doll:

GRONK!
Andre (and Lee)
GRUNK!
Ted
And.... Done. On to the dolls.



Bionic Bigfoot (Kenner 1977)


Okay, so Kenner Bigfoot came out in 1977, about a year after he was introduced in the TV series. Now, obviously it was a great idea to make the doll: he'd already appeared on TV four times (three SMDM episodes and one Bionic Woman crossover), and 70s kids were seriously riding the Bigfoot train. I was one of 'em. I totally remember playing Steve Austin/Bionic Bigfoot (being a loner-kid, I had dual roles) in my room and out in the forest by my house. So yeah, this doll had to be a no-brainer for Kenner execs.

Sigh.

But here's the thing, and I hate to even say this out loud: Bionic Bigfoot just wasn't a very good doll. Only my opinion of course, but let's get him down from the shelf and have a look, then you can decide for yourself.

"I am only an alien beast, and I cannot spell 'articulation'."

I know. Right now you're thinking "Hey Dan, what are you being all down on Bionic Bigfoot Doll for? He looks pretty cool to me." And I totally agree. He does look cool, just standing there.

Bionic BackfootSidesquatch

Looks great from the back and side, too. This doll possesses multi-angle handsomeness, and that's nothing to sneeze at. He's channeling Ted more than he is Andre, but I'm cool with that. At fourteen and a half inches tall, he towers over thirteen inch Kenner Steve, so I'm okay with the Ted Cassidy slimness and features.

My problems with the doll (and there are exactly four of them) have nothing at all to do with his dashing looks. Y'see, this mighty man-beast has a grand total of four points of articulation. "Say what, Dan?" You heard right: four lonely joints with which to place Bionic Bigfoot into (not so) cool play poses. Hips. Shoulders. Period.

Other than standing about and looking intimidating, there are just two poses ol' BB can decently strike, and I've graciously presented them for you here:

Pose 1: Drinking Giraffe
Pose 2: Sandbox Toddler

And while this total lack of playability (we all know that articulation equals playability) irks me greatly (think if this doll had Steve or Maskatron-level articulation, or if you could pull his robotic arm off like Steve did in that first TV episode), he does have a couple of bionic features that (kind of) offset the woe.

The most obvious one is that rectangular plate you can see outlined on his chest. When Steve punches Bigfoot in the gut that plate pops off, revealing Bigfoot's bionic (or nyosynthetic, in his case) circuitry.

Ouch.

Those TV aliens from the show never did explain which parts of Bigfoot aren't flesh and blood, all they ever said was he's a cybernetically enhanced lower life form from their home planet. Maybe their version of a bionic gorilla? Anyway, this plate popping off to show a chest full of robotics makes it look like he's electronic through and through, which doesn't seem terribly accurate. But I'll take what I can get with this doll, feature-wise.

Speaking of which, the other feature Bigfoot shipped with was his "powerful spring-loaded arms." This means his arms attach to his body via a rubber band that runs through his torso, shoulder to shoulder. You can pull them apart and let them spring closed around an object (like a Kenner Steve, or a plastic boulder you happen to have sitting around in your toy box) and he'll hold the object aloft in his mighty Bigfoot grip.

At least, he could do that when he was a little newer. My doll's band has lost it's elasticity with age, so his arms don't do much but hang loosely from his shoulder joints. I read something online about how to replace the rubber band with an o-ring, but I've yet to pick one up and give it a try. Plus, I'm kind of scared to.

What if it doesn't work? I'll be stuck with an armless Bigfoot, and how un-cool will that be? Pretty sure I don't want to fork out two hundred bucks for a replacement. Even so, I'll probably try the repair one of these days. Definitely if my current doll's band snaps and he's armless anyway. Nothing to lose then, right?

I digress.

Let's see, what else can I give you on this guy? Oh. Mine doesn't have his original packaging, but here's a couple of shots I found on the web. It had two variations, depending on whether you bought him before or after Biosonic Steve came out.

Bionic Bigfoot......and Bionic Grip Steve.

The initial packaging (above) shows Bionic Grip Steve lifting Bigfoot with his Power Arm, which he wasn't actually able to do. My guess is one of the reasons they even made a Biosonic Steve at all, was so there would be a Steve who actually could lift Bigfoot. (You remember we talked about that in Part 4.)

Bionic Bigfoot......and Biosonic Steve.

As far as packaging for the later release, they just flipped that front image and added Steve's new outfit to both front and back. Notice both sets of packaging have Ted Cassidy's likeness on them.

I tried to find a copy of Bigfoot's instruction sheet so you could take a look at that, but no luck. So I guess that about covers it for Kenner's man-beast.

Let's take a look at BBPs cybernetic cryptid.



Bionic Bigfoot (Bif Bang Pow! 2012)


This little fellow has his charms, to be sure. I say "little" because he looks terribly small standing on my shelf next to Kenner's 14½ inch Bionic Beast. But at 9½ inches himself, he actually towers nicely over BBPs 8 inch Steve. It's all relative, I guess. Anyway, he was one of the first SMDM dolls BBP released, and initially you could only get him as one-half of a (separately packaged) two-pack along with Track Suit Steve. (Although these days you can get him aftermarket, on his own.)

Okay. Let's get Little Bigfoot down down off the shelf and have ourselves a look:

Bionic Bigbelly

Yeah, so there'll be no getting around us discussing Little Bigfoot's rotundness. It's the first thing I notice whenever I look at this doll. I don't know why they went for exactly this look. My best guess is they wanted to increase the doll's girth, beyond what the doll had on its own. (Surely adding stuffing to the suit was less expensive than using more plastic for the doll itself, right?) But what I don't get is why they didn't use half (or less) of the amount of stuffing we're seeing here.

I'm assuming BBP created a pattern and/or prototype for the suit, which they then sent off to some company that made the suits for them. Did the suits arrive back at BBP looking vastly different than the reference materials they'd provided, and it was too late or too expensive to have them redone? Dunno. But the doll is reasonably Bigfoot-sized without his fur suit on, and this much stuffing just takes him over the top.

Oh. I'm forgetting you haven't actually seen Little Bigfoot without his fur coat yet. I'll take it off real quick, so you can see how much of him is suit versus not suit.

Remove-A-Suit: Instant Slimming Effect!

See? This fellow is half the man without his stuffed-suit-ness. I actually think he looks more like Kenner's doll (shape-wise) without his suit than he does with it. But since Kenner's doll always struck me as a bit too slender, my take is Little Bigfoot would look just about right with some stuffing beneath his fur--maybe a quarter or half of what he ended up with. Okay. Enough with the suit.

The other thing I notice, sans suit, is that Little Bigfoot seems to have been put together from a couple of different doll types. Looks to me like he's got 8-inch-doll arms and legs attached to a somewhat-bigger-doll torso. Which looks weird at first, but I'm thinking it's not actually a bad way to give the guy some extra body girth if you're working with a tight budget (and I always assume that's the case when it comes to BBP). Plus you never see these things unless you take his fur off, anyway. So not a big deal by any means.

Now having a plus size torso helps with girth, but it looks like most of Little Bigfoot's height is coming from a little further down, with those leg extensions. These also seem a little weird at first, but again, it's a pretty inventive way of upping his height when you're working with limited funds. And the only real problem I've noticed with 'em (it's not a big one) is that having joints in the middle of his calves can make for a little weirdness when you're posing him. Obviously the extra height is worth it. Nothing worse than a supposedly giant figure clocking in at average or less than average size. (I'm talking to you, 7 inch Mego Hulk.)

Anyway, take a look at naked Little Bigfoot standing next to naked Steve. You can see those arms and legs of Bigfoot's are Steve-sized and that the two would be pretty much identical in height if Bigfoot didn't have his leg extensions. Oh, and while we're here, how many points of articulation do you see on naked Little Bigfoot? Is it four? Seven? Maybe eight? No, it's thirteen. As far as playability goes, this little guy is twice the doll at half the size. Even if his ankles are in the middle of his calves.

Standing on a 1 inch block puts Steve right up into Sasquatch territory.

So other than his stylish fur suit, what is it that makes Little Bigfoot, Bigfoot? The answers to that are his beastly head, hands and feet. So let's take a closer look at them.

Kenner's Bigfoot was pretty obviously modeled after Ted Cassidy, and BBP wisely went the other way, basing their doll on Andre the Giant. I say "wisely" only because I'm assuming more people would have been interested in a doll that wasn't just a miniature Kenner-clone. Besides, my gut tells me Andre's generally favored over Ted by fans. Anyway, Little Bigfoot's head sculpt is based on Andre, and it's really not too bad. Not a perfect likeness, by any means, but you can definitely see Andre in there. (Which is more than I can say for Lee Majors and BBPs Steve head.)

We just want to......pump you up!

As far as Little Bigfoot's hands and feet go, both sets of extremities do their jobs, but I have to say his hands turned out better than his feet. Not only are they painted to simulate fur (which you would expect at the very least), they're also slightly larger than standard 8 inch doll hands, have claws, and sport a molded-in furry look, which is a nice touch. His feet have the paint and molded-in fur, but they're pretty diminutive in size for a character named Bigfoot.

Bionic BighandsBionic Tallbutsmallfoot

So we're getting pretty close to the end of Little Bigfoot, here. About the only thing left to show you is his accessory. Like the other BBP dolls, Bigfoot has little in the way of bionic features. Well, he has no bionic features per se, at all. But since he and Track Suit Steve were originally sold as a pair, he does have a key chain that plays a few of his bionic sounds. (You'll remember Track Suit Steve's own key chain from Part 2.)

dun-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh

Nothing differentiates this key chain from Steve's, other than its color. As in both have the same logo and such, but Steve's is red (like his track suit) and Bigfoot's is brown (like his fur). Each time you press Bigfoot's Key chain, you get one of three variations on his bionic sound, with various pitch changes: one pitches low to high, one high to low, and one with no pitch change. If that makes sense. Think jumping up, jumping down, and throwing a punch.

Okay. That about wraps us up for these dolls. I'll part with a comparison shot (yay!) of both actors and their dolls. Because being the kind of guy I am, that's how I roll. Your welcome.


Next time, we'll be looking at Kenner's and Bif Bang Pow's versions of Steve's boss and sometimes friend, old Oscar Goldman himself. And that will be pretty high on the fun meter, mostly on account of Kenner Oscar's ultra-cool exploding briefcase. Now that was a cool accessory.

Until then.