the audience applauded

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

There's something paradoxical about the Hollywood film industry . It's often tagged as " The dream factory " but dreams can be defined as our imagination being played back to us in our sleep . Sometimes Hollywood producers give the impression they're sleepwalking . Take this film GRIZZLY . You can just imagine that someone walked in to a cinema in 1975 , saw JAWS and shuffled out thinking they'd have a great idea for a movie where instead of a great white shark terrorising a coastal community we get a grizzly bear terrorising a forest . This isn't plagiarism but it does indicate a serious lack of imagination . That said the dream factory is an industry and like all industries it has to make a profit to survive . No profit equals no more films and where would IMDb junkies like myself be without cinema ? Sometimes a lack of imagination should be viewed as a virtue The problem with GRIZZLY is that it fails to disguise its influences in anyway . A giant grizzly bear stalks a parkland forest eating campers and it's left to Christopher George as park ranger Kelly to defeat this menace . His job is made more difficult because his bosses aren't going to close the park . Right away you're reminded of the double obstacle Sheriff Brody had with Mayor Vaughn refusing to close the beach because that's going to impact upon the local tourist industry so the protagonist finds himself battling both against the opponents of nature and the greed of human nature There's also the stylistic connections that JAWS gave the films that followed it . Quite often the animal attack is done via point of view and much of the time the monster remains unseen with its brooding presence felt rather than visualised . The problem is that once the monster is seen in its full glory it's rather disappointing . Like the shark in JAWS which looks a bit too much like a mechanical model ( Not necessarily a criticism in the CGI obsessed present day ) here the eponymous grizzly is hyped up as a terrible man eating beast over eighteen foot high when it makes its pivotal climatic appearance it looks far too cute and cuddly to induce fear .As a footnote and it's nothing to do with the producers GRIZZLY was broadcast pre watershed on the British horror channel which meant certain scenes involving the bear attack had been curtailed . Someone coming in to this film having never seen it might find it very difficult to believe that it caused children to have nightmares . You have to take onboard the context that people saw this in the 1970s and 80s but even so it's hardly a great film

Okay, I think everyone going in knows that this is another one of those "nature-runs-amok" flicks. If you're a fan of these types of movies you'll enjoy "Grizzly;" you won't be blown away or anything, but it's a nice little time-waster."Grizzly" was made one year after the hugely-successful "Jaws." It's obvious that the creators wanted to profit from that film's popularity because the plot is basically the same, albeit with a different animal, land instead of ocean, etc. The main difference, however, is that "Jaws" was a first-rate film, whereas "Grizzly" is strictly Grade B.How can one tell? Well, First rate films like "Jaws," "Raiders of the Lost Ark" or "The Bridge on the River Kwai" stand the test of time -- although you can tell they're older films for obvious reasons, they're so well done on all levels that you hardly even notice. Grade B films like "Grizzly," however, do not pulsate with creative originality, they lack that certain pizazz to set them apart.This is not to say that "Grizzly" isn't entertaining; it is, as long as you understand going in that you're seeing a Grade B Jaws-on-land type flick. We're not talking "Apocalypse Now" here.WHAT WORKS: The Northern Georgia location -- Black Rock Mountain State Park -- is a pleasant surprise. If you enjoy deep forest adventure type movies, then this film's for you.The scene wherein the bruin destroys a fire outlook post is good.WHAT DOESN'T WORK: aside from the obvious "Jaws" rip-off and Grade B film problems mentioned above, the grizzly in the picture doesn't look as big as they say it is. In the movie the bear is supposed to be a prehistoric survivor, some 15 feet tall or so. Don't get me wrong here, the thought of running into a grizzly is frightening enough, ask my wife who had a nervous breakdown on a trail in Glacier National Park, Montana (one of only two areas where grizzlies still dwell in the lower 48). It's just that the bear doesn't look as big as they SAY it is in the film.Also, as with most Grade B fare, the score is substandard and dated.FINAL ANALYSIS: Think rip-off, think Grade B, think "Paws" or "Claws," and you won't be disappointed.GRADE: C+

Perhaps the first in a long procession of rip-offs that borrowed from the epic creature feature, "Jaws" does a pretty fair job of exchanging the perils of the ocean for those concealed in the dense forests of northern America. A perpetrator of similar proportions with an equally prodigious voracity for female bait pursues the offerings of a national park as a frantic ranger and his two motley companions battle with the chief park supervisor and themselves to arrest the carnage. Christopher George as the head ranger Kelly is the suave and rugged everyman determined to protect his park and its visitors, while Joe Dorsey is the Murray Hamilton-esque park supervisor Kittridge whose political ambitions inhibit Kelly's attempts to cut off the bear's food supply, resulting in a high body count.Director Girdler, prolific in his brief career before his untimely death in 1978, shows scant regard for convention in electing to depict the mutilation of a child as one of the bear's hapless victims. The boy's death signals the end of Kittridge's stalling, and Kelly and his companions (naturalist Jaeckel and Vietnam vet chopper pilot Prine) embark their own expedition to hunt and destroy the title beast. It's all very familiar though co-producer Harvey Flaxman explains in his DVD doco that the story emanated from a personal experience, and bared no intended similarity to that of "Jaws". Unlikely, but who cares –"Grizzly" is entertaining in its own right, and has the distinction of being the top grossing independent film of its year of release.The script shows sporadic signs of wit and is generally realistic, save for the occasional corny line (victim's widow chokes back the tears as he tells how "I loved her mister and she loved me back"), while Jaeckel and Prine have a likable chemistry, their contrasting characterisations adding much needed depth to the picture. Photography is often praised (not only in this film, but in other Girdler outdoor adventures, such was his intuitive understanding of the lens and its capability in projecting scale) and the scenery is first class for such an inexpensive picture; scenes in which the bear's size is emphasised, are well scaled and the interactive attack sequences are well staged and shot."Grizzly" will forever be remembered as the first cab off the rank after "Jaws", and especially so as it did for camping what "Jaws" achieved for swimming in the sea, for its audience. Any film that can command that kind of influence, is surely a success, critically, commercially or both. A sequel was partially filmed in the mid eighties under the working title "Predator: The Concert" but was never completed, although rumours of its release often circulate.

Simian actor Christopher George is the star of this dreadful Jaws wannabe. The film's plot centers on a rampaging giant grizzly bear that we are told has survived extinction for a million years in order to wreak havoc on the forests of Georgia in 1976. Where the bear has been for the last million years is never explained but honestly does it need to be? There are a few reasons to watch this otherwise avoidable mess. First we have the always hammy Andrew Prine lighting up every scene he's in, especially with his overdone Southern accent. I particularly enjoyed the "Indian story" scene, which is I suppose this movie's version of Robert Shaw's classic USS Indianapolis speech from Jaws. I defy anyone to find a point to Prine's story, except that bears can and will kill people, which has "duh" written all over it. Also watch for the scene where the bear attacks a young boy. The child actor can't refrain from smiling throughout his vicious mauling. Another character worth watching is the TV news reporter, who bears a striking similarity to John Oates. This actor seems to have gone from his first day at acting class straight to the set to film his scenes in this movie. His role is small but amusingly memorable. Finally the most important reason to watch Grizzly is for the great simian actor Christopher George. It's a little known fact that George is actually a shaved ape. It's a shame because this wonderful animal actor deserves his recognition alongside famous animals like Lassie and Benji that have entertained moviegoers for decades. Well, if any of the reasons I listed above is enough to make you give Grizzly a shot, good luck. Otherwise I'd suggest watch Animal Planet or National Geographic Channel instead.