Ticks (1993) Poster

(1993)

User Reviews

Review this title
62 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
A surprisingly fun and gooey b-movie flick!
ericdetrick200215 June 2005
If you are in the mood for a fun horror movie that doesn't take itself too seriously and has all the right gross out gimmicks- check it out. If it wasn't for a friend mentioning this movie title I would have passed it up. But I trusted his judgment since he is a horror aficionado- and I read some decent reviews in some of my old issues of Fangoria/Gore Zone.

The acting is silly, but it is obvious that this is the way it was written. The key difference between a movie like Ticks (Infested) and some really bad Sci-Fi Channel movie is that everything is done in the Evil Dead 2/ Bad Taste slap stick kind of way. And they go for the gross out money shots in every other scene (lots of pulsating blistering skin waiting to explode, etc). And thank God this didn't have any of the cheesy computer animated gore and FX. I love the latex, goo, and prosthetic body parts of the old school- even if it does look fake. At least you know the actors are actually interacting with it rather then a "green screen".

So, gather a few friends, kick back a few beers or Mountain Dews, and be prepared to rewind a few scenes so you can watch them again!
21 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
T&A (Good Ticks and Great Actors)
joehed5 March 2000
This movie was pretty good, but the cast is classic! Seth Green, Ami Dolenz, and Alfonso Ribeiro. I bet Panic looks familiar, yeah that's because he's Carlton on Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. And the icing on the cake is Clint Howard. What an actor. He makes another great appearance in this film as a marahuana farmers.

This movie is not too bad, but definitely entertaining. You'll love Ribeiro's character, especially since he is a hardcore inner city kid. This total contrast to Carlton make nearly everything he says a joke.

If you're looking for a movie with a funny cast, check this movie out. What a sidetracker for a lot of these people's careers. Classic!
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Silly, gross, but pretty fun
mrosesteed10 March 2019
A jaw dropping 1990s anti-drug movie, Ticks is infested with genre and period typical cliches. With its ridiculous story and awkward script, the film is clumsy in its approach to serious issues like trauma, racism, and black market crime. However, it excels at gross out horror and intentional camp and improves (in entertainment value) as it blunders toward its over the top finale.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Lean and mean
Phroggy14 May 1999
I don't really understand the criticism about this film ; maybe if it had a 50 millions $ budget, everybody would find it "cool"? Tony Randel did his best and the movie still boasts good production value despite the numerous troubles they had on the set. This one's mean, politically incorrect (no "back-to-the-nature" crap) and without the shoddy humour and cute one-liners everybody seems obliged to include in his horror just because Freddy said so (c.f. "Nightwatchers"). I saw it three times with friends who enjoyed it as much as I did. And I don't care if some of the actors ended up in some moronic TV fodder for brainwashed teenagers. Not a great movie (unlike Brian Yuzna's "Return of the living dead 3"), but strong, however.
18 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Don't Tick me off
obe-one16 May 2000
I know this is a low budget horror film, but I liked it anyway. Not a lot of gore by today's standards, but the make-up and special effects were good. It was also enjoyable to look at Ami Dolenz, and to watch the bad guys get "ticked". Two thumbs up!
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the greats
Dave-33029 April 1999
I know that a lot of people are highly critical of this movie, because most of the plot is lacking and the acting is not impressive, but I still greatly enjoy this movie. Don't get me wrong, it is a "B" movie, but the superb direction and special effects more than make up for the lame plot. Seth Green is the main character and upon viewing this movie the first time about three years ago, I realized that he could actually act and now everyone is picking up this movie because of name recognition. That's fine by me, but to the Seth Green fans out there, he plays a total geek in this movie. Seth Green may be the main character but this movie is tailored to the die hard "B" movie fan, with Clint Howard and Ami Dolenz doing their usual bits and Peter Scolari (The other "Bosom Buddy") doing his best not to laugh as he delivers his lines. Oh yeah, the guy from "The Fresh Prince of Bel Air" is in this too, and I believe he and Howard did some of their best acting in this film. Unfortunately, Dolenz is wasted, as her character is never even remotely close to effecting the plot. She's there as something to look at and for the posters and box covers. Roselind Allen also goes through the motions and is also wasted in her role. Like I said at the start, this is a special effects and directorial masterpiece, but cheesy dialogue, a weak plot and limited acting ability hurt this film. Still if you're into effects, this movie is better than most, especially considering the perceived lack of a budget.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Excessively gross and exciting mutated killer insect extravaganza!!!
kclipper10 July 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Here's a delightfully fast-paced film from the director who brought us such pleasantries as 'Hellbound: Hellraiser II'. Originally and appropriately titled, 'Infested' is an icky, gooey good time as an experimental bi-product of a marijuana growing process accidentally infects tick eggs and caused the deadly little buggers to grow into abnormal sizes (approximately that of sea-crabs). Meanwhile, The L.A. city Wilderness retreat, a program designed to help troubled teenagers adapt to new environments, is plummeted directly into the infestation.

This is a rip-roaring homage to the classic "nature runs amok" genre, and a talented, young cast and good direction make it all work. These nasty, killer critters are fast and furious and burrow under the skin just as this flick will for it's audience as a cast of likable (and unsavory) characters must use their wits to survive in a really horrifying situation. This has above-average creature effects combined with some nice touches. (the ticks' venom causes hallucinations in their victims to add to the mayhem!). The band of youths and their adult supervision must barricade themselves into a cabin along with a couple of despicable cash-croppers, and it all lunges towards an unforgettable climax where Alfonso Ribeiro (of 'Fresh Prince of Bel-Air fame') projects one humongous insect from his writhing corpse in a spectacular showdown. Other good genre performances include Seth Green as a resourceful juvenile and Clint Howard as a wacky pot-farmer. It's a perfect example of how imaginative plot devices and suspenseful set-ups used in the right brew can make for a fun, comedic horror film.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Vampire bugs !
Coventry31 August 2003
Let's see...spiders, ants, piranha's, rabbits, bees...No, we didn't have giant murdering ticks yet. BRING 'EM ON !!! Maybe that's a bit rough, but in fact it's the basic idea behind this movie. The story is as old as horror itself but it still works and, more importantly, it's still fun !

Somewhere in a God-forsaken town, the local farmers found a new spray for their crops ( their crops are marijuana in this case. That's new! ) but of course the bugs start to grow to enormous size as well and begin to attack humans! A group of troubled teenagers who're there for some sort of consciousness-weekend become the main target. OK, Ticks is filled with the obvious "monster-clichés" but it's a well made and highly entertaining B-movie. I confess, director Tony Randall can't do much wrong in my eyes. This man made the very good Hellraiser sequel Hellbound, so I'm interested in all other films he made. Ticks also has a few familiar faces. Clint Howard to begin with. This guy is doomed again to play the weird loner who becomes the first victim of the killer bugs. Seth Green had one of his first major film roles in this film as well. He looks pretty dorky here, but it sure didn't stop him from building up a decent career in Hollywood. Alfonso Ribeiro is also a part of the cast but it's pretty laughable to picture him as a "bad-ass" from the ghetto, when you keep in mind he played Carlton in The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air for so many years. I didn't recognize the rest of the cast, but all the girls have sweet faces. Unfortunately, Ticks goes very much over the top near the end. But by then you already forgave Tony Randall and the rest of the crew for that stupid ending. Bad case of Writer's Block, I guess...
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Bloodthirsty ticks.
HumanoidOfFlesh31 August 2007
A marijuana growing farmer played with devilish glee by a horror vet Clint Howard is using herbal steroids to increase his marijuana output.Some of the steroidal juice however manages to infest a tick larva and soon all the ticks are growing bigger and bigger,nastier and nastier.Enter a group of troubled teens led by Rosalind Allen and Peter Scolari who are off for a camping adventure right near the infested area.Soon the ticks are running around chomping on everyone."Ticks" by Tony Randel is an above average animal attack flick with some disgustingly good special effects.The plot,whilst being silly and predictable,mainly consists blood,slime and all-out grossness,so I was pleased.So if you want cheesy gorefest you can't go wrong with "Infested".
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Typical giant insect movie.
Aaron137511 April 2003
This movie has some kids going on a retreat or something (been awhile since I have seen it). During their trip they run into these pot growers who don't want them there. In the place where they are growing pot somehow or another the ticks start to grow big and go on the rampage. Nothing to special in this one, but it is far from a boring and terrible movie. It moves pretty fast and there are some good kills in this one. There is also a rather cool scene where this one kid splits open. The ticks aren't to bad looking, and I don't think they were computer animated. The ending is the same old trick as in other horror movies and nothing to surprising. Though can anyone tell me why the one kid felt the need to take all those steroids when he was walking through the woods hurt? I don't believe they would have any positive impact that would help him.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Bloodthirsty ticks get the munchies real bad!
The_Void12 June 2007
Insects make good horror movie material due to the fact that a lot of people are scared of them. There have been movies about giant spiders (Kingdom of the Spiders), scorpions (The Black Scorpion) and ants (Them!), and while ticks aren't exactly the most exciting insects around; their bloodsucking nature does make them a good subject for a film such as this. As you might expect considering the fact that this film was a direct to video release, most things about it aren't exactly brilliant. However, it's obvious that the most important thing about a film like this is the gore and Ticks certainly isn't lacking in that department! The story is obviously just a means to an end and sees a class of delinquents going out into the forest for some sort of moral building exercise. However, their little trip is interrupted by a bunch of bloodthirsty ticks that have grown to massive sizes because of chemicals put on weed plants to accelerate their growth. Unfortunately for the kids, the ticks' appetites have grown with them; and now they are on the menu...

The film has a good basis for gore, as it's directed by Hellraiser 2 director Tony Randel (who also directed the less than impressive Children of the Night) and the executive producer is one Brian Yuzna, who every gore fan should recognise. The plot doesn't contain a lot of surprises, although it deserves some plaudits for staying interesting for most of the way through. The story progresses in the usual way for this sort of film - i.e. there are a few clues that something bad is going to happen, then bad things do happen and eventually everything gets out of control. The film doesn't pay a lot of respect to it's insect star as there aren't many references to real life ticks, but then again I didn't go into this movie expecting a natural history lesson. The cast is only notable for the fact that it stars a young Seth Green, although he really isn't that much of a highlight. Alfonso Ribeiro, who is more famous for playing Carlos in The Fresh Prince of Bel Air, also makes an appearance (which is completely unlike his TV persona) though he is underused. The film ends well, though too many people survived for my liking, but all the same this is good fun and recommended.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Entertaining, if you like this sort of thing
Tikkin13 April 2006
Ignore what film snobs have said about Infested (or Ticks as I know it), if you're into these kinds of films you will love it! If you like horror flicks such as Slugs then this is right up your street. I loved Slugs and I love this too.

Don't expect an intelligent storyline because you won't find it here. What you will find is slimy, gory entertainment that doesn't get boring. It follows a basic formula of a group of teenagers being sent to camp in the woods. Each teenager seems to have their own little issues and the idea is for them to bond as a group. Of course we get the usual teenage rivalry, but as they have to deal with the killer "ticks" they start working as a team. The ticks themselves are hilariously funny, we get to see one burst out of a dead dog, scurrying across the floor with a needle sticking out of it. This scene is hilarious! The ticks live inside some sort of slimy pods and attach themselves to anyone who comes close to them. They then try to bury themselves into their host (one man ends up shooting his own leg because there's a tick inside him).

If you like gory, slimy horror then this is for you.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I love bug movies!!....
stormruston26 March 2003
...and this is a average one with a few real great scenes.The typical "at camp" when things go buggy story line that we are all comfortable with.

Above average humour and effects makes this one worth watching,only the first fifteen miniutes were slow.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Fans of low budget horror and Seth Green: this one's for you!
sethfan12 January 2000
While I was watchng this movie I couldn't help but think that while Peter Scolari was filming this "Friday the 13th meets Arachnaphobia" low budget horror, his "Bosom Buddies" co-star, Tom Hanks, was off earning an oscar for Forrest Gump. Don't get me wrong...I like Peter Scolari; he just seems so out of place in this movie. That aside, if you're a fan of this genre, especially of the straight-to-video variety, you won't want to miss this one. It has everything for you: two-dimensional characters, gore, bad dialogue, gore, cheesy special effects, no plot or storyline what-so-ever, and, oh yeah, I almost forgot...gore. My only real complaint is that there is little to no camp. It's those moments of overdone camera work and melodramatic line delivery that make these "B-movie" romps real gems to have in one's video collection. The closest we get to any kind of decent camp is in the characters of Sir and his sidekick henchman, Jerry. Only these two offer us that overly theatrical style of acting that has the viewer thinking, "they've got to be geniuses!"

You will also want to check this one out if you're a fan of Seth Green. Much of the action centers around him as he has quite a bit of screen time. A very talented actor, Seth is the only cast member that actually attempts to flesh out his character and add some dimension to the role. Unforunately, this venue won't allow him to do that. It is also fun to watch Seth not take the whole thing too seriously. Watch him carefully in the vet's office during the autopsy scene–he's actually trying to hold back some laughter! All of this put together does make Ticks a worth while 85 minutes to spend watching it.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
OK mutant nature on the rampage horror film.
poolandrews26 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Infested, also known as Ticks, starts in a illegal marijuana growers hideout where a barrel of steroids, that is used to enhance the growth of their crop, begins to leak onto a tick pod which starts to pulsate... Jump to Los Angeles where Holly Lambert (Rosalind Allen) runs the 'Wilderness Project' which helps troubled teens by taking them on a trip to the great outdoors. Along with her partner Charles Danson (Peter Scolari) & his teenage daughter Melissa (Virginya Keehne) they pick up a traumatised boy named Tyler Burns (Seth Green), an idiot with an attitude Darrel Lumley (Alfonso Ribeiro), a couple of lovers Dee Dee Davenport (Ami Dolenz) & Rome Hernandez (Ray Oriel) plus a young rape victim Kelly Mishimoto (Dina Dayrit) & set off for the isolation of the woods. Meanwhile the tick pods have hatched & mutant ticks are running around all over the place laying more & more pods everywhere. Once the dysfunctional van load of teens arrive it's not long before they are menaced by the flesh eating, blood drinking ticks that infest the woods & their cabin...

Directed by Tony Randel I must confess that I was somewhat disappointed by Infested, I thought it was OK nothing more. The script by Brent V. Friedman just wasn't what I was hoping for or expecting after hearing reasonably good things about it. Nothing really holds the film together, the clichéd teenage character's become very irritating after a while, the ticks barely interact with humans until the last twenty odd minutes & the first hour of Infested feels like a pre credits sequence stretched out. The contamination of the ticks which make them grow & then after they just sort of 'hover' in the background for what seems like ages, they never really do anything or cause anything significant to take place. Finally they just spring from nowhere & attack everyone during the climax, it feels odd & I got bored waiting for Infested to come to life. I mean you have this potentially great story, cool slimy giant blood drinking ticks, annoying character's who the audience want to die in the goriest way possible & the obligatory isolated location but Infested fails to take advantage of any of these things. Instead it would rather have lots of dialogue, no deaths, an unnecessary sub plot about drug growers & not much else. There is also a flashback scene of which nothing ever becomes of. Having said all that Infested is OK I suppose, it moves along at a fair pace & is watchable, if ultimately disappointing.

Director Randel doesn't do anything to liven the film up, it's competently made but it has no real style or flair to it. The ticks themselves are OK, they are just puppets covered in slime, although I have no idea where the giant monster one comes from at the end. The gore is very sparse, there are plenty of slimy tick pods & the little critters running around but they only kill one teenager throughout the entire film, just one. They also kill three drug growers as well but when three of the four deaths happen within the last fifteen minutes you can probably understand why Infested becomes frustrating to watch. I mean I'm not watching a film about mutant killer ticks for the high drama, the emotionally driven wonderfully realised dialogue or the superb Oscar worthy acting am I? No I ain't, I want to see the mutant killer ticks do what mutant killer ticks do best, kill annoying teenagers.

Technically Infested is alright even though it was made-for-video which is never a good sign, it's generally well made but nothing stands out as being particularly brilliant. Some of the special effects are fairly impressive while others are far from impressive. The gore is tame, someone's face & body splits open & a huge tick crawls out plus someone's leg is caught in a bear trap & there are a few splashes of blood here & there but that's it. I want my money & 85 minutes of my life back. The acting doesn't impress particularly.

Infested is a clichéd, predictable, disappointing & frustrating film throughout. It could have been so much more. Average at best & only worth a watch if there's absolutely nothing else on or if you can get hold of a copy cheap, very cheap that is.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Mother nature bites back at Movie Executives who commission this kind of rubbish.
Wilbur-107 September 2000
The English video cover makes this look like some 'Alien' clone, but instead it turns out to one of those irritating man-tampers-with-nature half-baked horror films.

A group of inner-city delinquents are taken out to the woods on a survival holiday. They find themselves attacked by blood-thirsty ticks which have grown to the size of large spiders as a result of steroids used on the local marijuana crop. Needless to say the film is derivative garbage, with no attempt to haul itself onto the lowest rung of the ladder.

The cast seem to have a degree of ability but the script and storyline give them absolutely nothing to work with, and things stumble along to the inevitable conclusion as most of them escape BUT what is clinging to the underside of their van ??

This may have worked better with some 'Tremors'-like humour - the horror elements are too weak because of the one-dimensional characters; this is a film where you really do not care about anyone and the whole experience is like watching a cartoon. As such it is watchable to a degree, but leaves not the slightest lasting impression.

If the horror genre continues churning out this kind of formulaic drivel for the empty-headed teenager heaven help us. I was rooting for the Ticks all the way.
7 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not That Bad
gwnightscream29 February 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This 1993 horror film features a group of troubled teens and 2 social workers that head to a wilderness retreat and soon become terrorized by mutated ticks that grow from Marijuana plants. This isn't that bad, except for the 2 idiot villains, but it's got some grotesque make-up effects, an eerie score and Seth Green (Austin Powers), Alfonso Ribeiro (Fresh Prince of Bel-Air), Peter Scolari (Bosom Buddies), Clint Howard (Evilspeak), his father, Rance (Cocoon) and the lovely, Ami Dolenz (Miracle Beach) are also featured. Give this one a try if you're into creature features or B movies.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Dated but fun
Leofwine_draca29 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
TICKS was one of my favourite B-flicks back in the 1990s; I have fond memories of watching an old big box ex-rental VHS tape of the film back in the day. Seen these days, it's inevitably dated somewhat, and heavily flawed to boot. However, that doesn't make it a bad film. It's the perfect slice of cheesy fun, with silly characters and a plot which only makes sense in this kind of crazy B-movie universe: dope growers accidentally cause forest ticks to grow to giant size due to illegal growth chemicals they're using. The icky prosthetic effects are great fun, particularly the giant tick at the climax, while the cast has enough amusing performances from the likes of Seth Green, Clint Howard and Alfonso Ribeiro for this to be an enjoyable watch.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
"When In Doubt, Squish!"...
azathothpwiggins19 February 2019
In TICKS, Tyler Burns (Seth Green) joins a group of other -fairly typical- wayward youths for a wilderness excursion. Their adult "guides", Holly and Charles (Rosalind Allen and Peter Scolari) are goofy and mostly oblivious. Unbeknownst to them, a chemical spill at a nearby marijuana-growing operation has caused the titular arachnids to mutate, and grow to enormous proportions. Bloodsucking terror soon follows. As gross-out monster movies go, this one holds its own, mixing serviceable creature effects w/ gushy gore, resulting in 85 minutes of utterly mindless fun. Toss in a few psychotic, hillbilly cretins and we're off! Nothing can possibly prepare you for the gruesome, gargantuan finale! Both Rance and Clint Howard make cameo appearances as the Sheriff and a doomed dope enthusiast respectively...
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Great effects! No need to think
loomis78-815-9890345 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Some marijuana growers in the California forest area are using steroids to enhance their plants. Unfortunately the effect has mutated the Ticks in the area to grow to about the size of a human hand. This happens at the same time that two social workers (Scolari & Allen) have brought a van full of troubled teens into the same area on a retreat that is supposed to help the kids with their problems. The group of kids is written as obnoxious or stupid so we could care less about what happens to them. Director Tony Randel seems to know this so he brings the ticks on early and the gooey bloody fun begins. Following a 1950's style monster movie plot, this movie has fun with the crawling creepy ticks doing maximum damage. Clint Howard as one of the pot growers makes the most of his limited screen time in a truly inspired and nasty demise. He gets his leg caught in a bear trap and the ticks burrow into his flesh which includes his face as he overacts and screams into the camera "I'm infested"! A truly fun scene that should put a smile on any horror film fans face. Randel keeps the action coming and the top notch gore by KNB will amaze and keeps any monster movie fan watching. The gory entertainment continues as you continue to ignore the bad characters being introduced and concentrating on what crazy thing the creepy little ticks are going to do next. The great mix of gore and entertaining fun doesn't necessarily make this frightening, but it does make it a great no-need-to-think action horror film that delivers. You may find yourself watching this one with your feet of the ground.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
86 minutes of good gross-'em-out fun.
Hey_Sweden27 January 2013
Warning: Spoilers
The "nature strikes back" sub genre was particularly big in the 1970s after the success of "Jaws", but it's proved to have real staying power ever since, as evidenced in this no-fooling- around, gleefully gory mutant killer insect flick. The title insects have increased in size and become more vicious than usual. This is all thanks to local marijuana growers who have used herbal steroids to speed up the growth of their crops; their system has developed a leak and contaminated the resident ticks. Now a group of troubled kids and their two chaperones have come to the woods for a getaway and will serve as a potential smorgasbord for the ravenous blood sucking beasts. You know you'll be in for a good time perusing the cast list of this one: Rosalind Allen, Ami Dolenz, Seth Green, Alfonso Ribeiro, Peter Scolari, Barry Lynch (younger brother of Richard Lynch), and Clint *and* Rance Howard. The assorted young ladies are all quite attractive to look at, and the performances are all pretty entertaining. As many others before me have noted, it's hard NOT to be amused by the prospect of Ribeiro, otherwise known as Carlton from TVs' 'The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air', unleashing his inner gangsta. Green is a likable enough young hero, Clint H. is an absolute hoot as always, and Lynch is, like his sibling, good at creating a suitably scuzzy villain. Director Tony Randel ("Hellbound: Hellraiser II") keeps everything moving at a good clip, and gets things off to a truly juicy start. The KNB makeup effects group create lots of wonderful visuals bound to get the audience going "Ewww..." on a regular basis. The highlight involves a sort of giving-birth type gag, and people are sure to love it. Things build nicely to a fairly exciting climax with the characters confined to a small rural location in the "Night of the Living Dead" tradition, and a forest fire raging out of control. All in all, this is very acceptable "turn your brain off and enjoy" gooey and grisly mayhem done with style and humour, and an unsurprisingly "it ain't over yet" kind of ending. Seven out of 10.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Yuk
frankfob26 May 2002
Not yuk for the ticks--yuk for the movie. It's just about as lousy as you would expect a movie about killer ticks to be. Pretty much everything in this picture is 12th-rate, except for two things: the photography (which looks very good) and Rosalind Allen (who looks even better). Allen is just so stunningly beautiful, and is a good enough actress, that you wonder why she keeps getting herself trapped in low-budget junk like this when she can do, and has done, much better. She has the class, attitude and bearing of a Grace Kelly, which makes this cheap movie look even cheaper. If you're a Rosalind Allen fan, check it out. If you're not, then there is no reason on earth why you should come anywhere near this movie.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Stay Away......
huggy_bear17 May 2003
Not going to waste a lot of time on this one. Stay away. There is not one good thing I can say about this bad piece of work. The acting sucked, the effects sucked, and the ticks sucked (no pun intended). I keep asking myself, why they keep making movies this horrible. Why? What a tremendous waste of money and people's time. For God's sake, they could use their time more wisely by putting on orange vests and picking up trash along the I-10. PLEASE!!!!!
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
This was like watching a 1950s horror/sci-fi film.
philwages16 November 2000
This was like watching a 1950s horror/sci-fi film. Not that I'm dogging the 1950s sci-fi classics, but this came out in 1993. So, it should have been a much better acted film (or should have been released by Troma). Don't watch unless you've seen every other horror/sci-fi film in existence!
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not to be taken seriously
bowmanblue19 November 2020
There are some films when you can't claim not to like them, simply because everything you need to know about them is in the title. If you think you'd like a film called 'Ticks' then you're probably the sort of person who appreciates daft, cheesy (and gory!) B-movies, therefore you're quite willing to put your brain 'on hold' for an hour and a half and have fun.

'Ticks.' So... what's it about? Well, believe it or not, giant, mutated insects! And , of course, a small bus-load of s3xually-charged teenagers who are bound to fall victim to said bugs (or 'arachnids' to be technically correct, but then the movie doesn't address this, so why dwell on it?). A bunch of kids are taken to a remote cabin in the woods where they soon realise that they're on the menu for this creepy-crawlies.

The characters - who cares? They're possibly one of the most stereotypical bunch of cast-members you've ever seen. You won't remember anyone's name, but you're probably okay with that if you're still reading this. You may notice a young Seth Green among them, but he's about as famous as this cast gets.

But it's not just stereotypical protagonists here! As if being hunted by a swarm of flesh-eating bugs gets, the kids are being stalked by two of the most inept (human!) villains since that pair of burglars in the 'Home Alone' movies. You have a clichéd Englishman (I think he's English, judging by his accent which sort of comes and goes) and a clichéd Redneck henchman of his who looks like a cheaper version of Randy Quaid.

But, you didn't come here for the humans. What about the ticks themselves? Well, they're not that bad. This was made long before computer effects were so common, so the bugs are all 'practical' effects and they're animated pretty well. There's a decent amount of gore as far as the budget will allow.

Overall, don't scrutinise this one too closely. It's not meant for that. It knows that it's daft and plays to its strengths. Just sit back after a long day and enjoy the scuttling little creeps.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed