Parasite (1982) User Reviews

A couple of fun moments

[Varlaam · 5/10 · 4 October 1998]

No, this is not a very good movie at all. However, I saw it when it was first released in 1982 in 3D, and not once since then, and I still remember some creepy scenes. The big gross-out in the movie -- when the dripping parasite falls down on you from the ceiling in 3D!! -- had me squirming in my seat in 1982.

I saw a number of films during the short-lived 3D revival of the early '80's, and, believe me, there were very few kick-ass uses of the 3D effect anywhere, but Parasite had one of the better ones. (Most of the other good 3D moments are in House of Wax with Vincent Price. Even Hitchcock couldn't figure out what to do with the gimmick.)

By the way, in 1982 no one had ever heard of Demi Moore. Did we predict big things for her after seeing her in this? Yeah, right.

A sub-par B-movie with one or two high points

[silversprdave · 5/10 · 15 July 2001]

I saw this movie in the theater and still have the funny little 3-D glasses with the creature's face printed on them that came with the movie. Maybe that gives me a soft spot for the film, which was totally forgettable in almost every other way. I have written in my 1982 notes to avoid the 3-D version unless you like double vision - so maybe those stupid glasses weren't very good. Poor editing made the movie a bit hard to follow - not that it really has anything worth following, though. The most notable thing about the film is the queasy feeling that you got from the monsters, which gave me the creeps in the same way that I get when I see leaches. I suppose that means that the movie did at least something right. I rated it a "5".

Post-Apocalyptic Snoozefest...

[EVOL666 · 5/10 · 30 April 2006]

I typically dig the "post-apocalyptic" 80's films where apparently the future will be over-run with mullet-sportin', bad-music-listenin'-jerk-offs...but this one was pretty damn dull.

A scientist is infected with some sort of parasite. The parasite escapes (of course) and causes some havoc. A young Demi Moore is in it. End Of Story...

This wasn't the worst film I've ever seen, but it really has nothing going for it either. Apparently it was shot in 3-D but I didn't see it that way, so who cares. Semi-amusing for the bad acting and "futuristic" ray-gun elements (including an old Lamborghini Countach that sounds like a jet plane...), and for an early debut by Moore, but nothing I would bother watching again. Supremely mediocre - 5/10

The best 3D horror movie

[pedro_neves · 9 March 2002]

I saw this movie when I was 9 years old. My father brought me and my brother as just a day at the movies. My brother couldn't sleep for weeks. The special effects in this movie were incredible for its time. There are two scenes I will never forget. This guy gets a lead pipe put through him and as the blood drips out the 3D kicks in and the blood is dripping on your lap. The other is one of the parasites totally blows out of this ladies face. This will always be one of my favorite movies. I just wish you could get 3D on your TV at home.

3D was very short lived but for those movies that were made in this way, they will never be forgotten.

Flesh eating parasites punks and lasers.

[lost-in-limbo · 5/10 · 31 January 2009]

Good times, you'll think. One of my friends lent the DVD to me and expressed they didn't understand the hate towards the film. I've had my chances to grab it, but the not-so-flattering comments left me to pass it up, but after hearing it wasn't that bad (and I seem to share the same thoughts about particular horror films with this friend). I dived right in to it. As it stands it wasn't great, but nonetheless it was entertainingly simple b-grade fun in a post-apocalyptic backdrop.

Charles Brand in only his third feature paves the way for outrageously ham-fisted splatter effects and make-up artist Stan Winston formulates a nasty, icky looking slug-like parasite with a mean looking grin. The criticism against his design is unfair… sure it isn't first-rate but with budget associated (as this is truly low-rent feature produced by Embassy Pictures) it's an acceptable effort. Trying to be different around that time was adding a new gimmick that it would be in 3D for movie-going audiences. Sadly the DVD doesn't come with the 3D version. Anyhow it didn't destroy the mood in any way. What can really hurt it though, was that the script is slipshod and it never truly gets in any sort of groove and comes up being a little too sparse and repetitive in its actions. The atmosphere remains non-existent and tension doesn't come by easily, but Brand (unintentional or not) engraves a grimy edge to it all (with Mac Ahlberg's well-executed panning of the camera) and throws about some graphic diversions. It's hard to forget Broadway siren Vivian Blaine's encounter with a parasite and some slow-motion passages are rather funny. Richard Band's shivering score feels like it's on a loop, but seems to suit it.

There are earnest performances from the likes of Robert Glaudini, Luca Bercovici, Al Fann, James Davidson, Cherrie Currie and a quick show-in by Cheryl Smith. Demi Moore in her first on-screen role doesn't make much of a dent, but it's far from awful.

In the end it's immensely forgettable, but lately watching these modern (and sometimes leaden) Sci-fi original TV features is making me appreciate this schlock far more.

3-D or not 3-D, that is the question

[JohnHowardReid · 5/10 · 9 July 2015]

Without 3-D, this movie would probably be classed as a moderately budgeted "B" with some fair special effects, some moderately effective rough-and-tumble bits of action and a fair bit of gory suspense. Although set in the future, "Parasite" was filmed on real locations – very ordinary, desert-like terrain that's certainly atmospheric but disappointingly inexpensive. On the whole, the acting is no more than serviceable. Even Vivian Blaine does not rise above the mediocre. And it's also obvious that the movie was shot in haste. Fortunately, the editor has taken care not to dwell too long on the out-of-focus shots or the blurry or ghosted material. The general impression is much like watching a movie on a second-rate TV set with far from perfect reception. On the other hand, the producer is not afraid of crowding the movie with 3-D effects. Most of the scenes and compositions are presented in deep focus. Indeed, foreground objects often seem to have protruded right off the screen. And when objects are thrown at the audience – which they often are! – the effect can be quite startling.

G.I. Jane's indecent 80's movie-proposal...

[Coventry · 1/10 · 23 July 2006]

Totally dud and irritating early 80's monster crap that righteously would be forgotten already, if it weren't for the fact that superstar Demi Moore experienced her very first leading role here. It's often interesting to find out about the tiny low-budget productions that introduced big stars to the movie industry, but this thing is a catastrophe and it's actually a miracle that Demi Moore ever made it to the top if you see her painfully bad & amateurish performance in "Parasite". She's not just bad, she really sucks and her only consolation is that everyone and everything else sucked, too! The script is boring and filled with annoying clichés, Charles Band completely forgot to add suspense and the contemporary very popular 3-D special effects are truly childish. The events in "Parasite" supposedly take place after a nation-wide disaster, and I usually LOVE that, but director Band completely fails to illustrate an eerie apocalyptic ambiance. The populations in towns has decreased to less than 50 and you have to pay a fortune for a fresh piece of fruit, but there are no other things that indicate we're in a hopeless future. The sole scientist Paul Dean, with a parasite monster developing in his stomach, flees to a godforsaken desert town to work on a cure. There's a cruel government agent following him, and even the local imbeciles don't leave him in peace, as they steal his equipment and infect themselves with flesh-eating parasites. Those idiots! I'd like to name one (just ONE) amusing sequence or ingenious element to be not entirely negative, but I really can't think of anything. Even Stan Winston's creature designs are lousy. Skip it, people.

An 80's farce of the future!

[GOWBTW · 5/10 · 30 August 2015]

The future, only time will tell what could happen then. Well, the USA has become a total wasteland, and the government is making the biggest cover up in its whole life. Of course, the government is not running the show, it is run by an organization called the Merchants. One doctor(Robert Glaudini), creates an organism that is capable of doing exactly harm to the degeneration populace. He infects himself on purpose so he could study further, and then destroy it. He runs afoul of hooligans and a pursuer name Wolf(James Davidson), who works for the Merchants. After the hooligans steal the canister, thinking it's vital, they were in for the shock of their lives. Now it's up to the doctor, a lemon farmer(Demi Moore, in her debut) and a shop owner to take charge of the menace that is threatening the town. "Parasite" was a 3D put on. And it was most likely to be a teaser of a film. Plenty of action, and plenty of cheese. Most likely make you want to take better care of your health and life. It's not for germaphobes. 2 out of 5 stars.

Parasite

[Scarecrow-88 · 5/10 · 7 May 2009]

I have this unhealthy fondness for Charles Band's early movies, from the 80's into the early 90's mainly because I feel he grew up in love with horror/sci-fi genre classics and wanted to make movies. Granted his film PARASITE won't be held up as a groundbreaking accomplishment during his hit-or-miss career(..most would argue more miss than hit, but, heck, at least he got to make movies, and a few good ones at that), but it does represent the kinds of movies he would continue to make..genre flicks that are influenced from popular movies of the time. You'll hear comparisons to ALIEN, I guess due to a stomach bursting sequence and how the parasitic creature attaches itself to victims. And, the parasite favors the infant chestbursting xenomorph from the ALIEN franchise due to it's sharp teeth and large mouth, but that's where the similarities end. Band wisely sets his film in a post-apocalyptic desert on the outskirts of a fallen Los Angeles due to the disastrous effects of atomic fallout. It saves on budget to inform us through dialogue(..and the radiation scar on the side of the face of a diner owner, played by All Fann)what has happened...how the government desires to attain parasites for corrupt purposes.

Robert Glaudini, portrays a very stoic scientist, researching parasitical lifeforms, responsible for their growth, who maintains a stuck look of loss on his face throughout the film. As Paul Dean, Glaudini relates to us that the future is a really dark place. Well, Band goes further than Dean in showing the audience that his future is an unfit place to live. Demi Moore, in one of her first roles, doesn't really impress as Dean's only ally, Patricia, a young woman growing lemons & often fending off a hood named Ricus(Luca Bercovici)and his band of rejects who love to pillage, raising ruckus because there's nothing better to do in the wasteland they live. Through the character of Ricus, we come to understand that the government has drafted the youth in bigger cities for slave labor and those who escaped such an awful existence fend for themselves in areas like Joshua, the setting of PARASITE. The villain provided for the film is Wolf, the "Merchant", pursuing the whereabouts of Dean because the government demands for the parasite. It's established just the violent lengths Wolf will go to find Dean, blasting innocents with lasers who stand in his way or smacking around Patricia to get information. Driving one of those Lamborghini cars with doors that open themselves and sporting a suit, Wolf seems to clash quite a bit with the surroundings of Joshua. Oh, the paper money doesn't have value in the future, precious metals(..specifically silver)are what go for popular currency.

Stan Winston and those he worked with create some okay-to-decent practical effects(..the parasite in a smaller form resembles a slimy leach)such as one scene where the creature bursts from the face of a recently acquired victim. In the film, the parasitical creature moves from one human victim to the next, draining the nutrients it needs, feeding from them until they are dead. Demi Moore is often the subject of conversation regarding early performances, but PARASITE also features a young Tom Villard as well, in a very atypical role as Zeke, a member of Ricus' brood. Very minor effort from Band and company, as both a creature feature and post-apoc thriller.

Biological Paranoia Film Predictions: Monster Germs 3d

[kennywest1 · 7/10 · 12 October 2001]

I've just bought the DVD for "Parasite". The widescreen DVD is totally superior to the old vhs rental copies, and the fun of this awesome 80s prediction film only gets better with age. The debut of Demi Moore isn't even nearly as interesting as the campy story of a scientist meeting a bunch of strange early eighties punk bikers (who have to be the stupidest gang I've ever seen)and unleash a big wormy looking monster with teeth. The story is fun and scary at the same time. The world was going to come to and end in '92, well that was '83 thinking anyway. There's no end to the fury of bad films you love being promoted to DVD. This one of them.

Where is the fun?

[Boba_Fett1138 · 4/10 · 18 December 2010]

Problem with this movie is that it's being a quite boring one to watch. It picks a totally serious approach, while the story is just far from interesting or well written. There is hardly anything spectacular happening in it and as a science-fiction/horror or post-apocalyptic movie, it's a severely lacking one.

It's funny how this movie is supposed to be a post-apocalyptic movie. Once the movie starts off there is nothing to indicate that this movie is supposed to be set in a near future, in which the entire world has supposedly gone to waste, due to some kind of atomic war, presumably. But the movie simply looks like an 1982 movie set in 1982. There are only some lasers featured in it, to indicate that this movie is not being set at present time.

But to be frank, there are far more movies like that out there, that are still not being half as bad as this one though. Problem really is that this movie takes itself far too serious and tries to be more of a realistic movie, though the story has absolutely nothing clever or original in it to justify this approach. The movie really doesn't work out too well because of this. It instead makes this movie work out as a boring one, also since it doesn't have any redeeming characters or some fun or good tense horror-like moments in it.

It's actually quite amazing how bland and totally uninteresting the movie its story is, while its concept itself doesn't sound that bad at all. Seriously, this is all they could come up with? I'm surprised that a person green-lighted this project at the first place.

The characters absolutely don't work out at all, also due to its poorly and unimaginative written story. The actors also come across as bad ones because of this, since the movie features some real poor dialog as well. Doubtful that this is a movie Demi Moore is still very proud off. This movie was one of the very first ones she ever appeared in and to be honest, she was absolutely horrible in this, which is, as I said, more due to the writing and perhaps directing as well, than her actual acting skills.

But to name a good thing about this movie; it has some quite confusing looking effects and special effects make-up. No big surprise though, once you see that Stan Winston's name is attached to this.

This movie is too much of a bore and there is no reason to recommend it to anyone.

4/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

An enjoyably tacky early 80's futuristic sci-fi/horror shocker

[Woodyanders · 8/10 · 5 February 2006]

Every hardcore film buff worth his weight in celluloid has a certain special favorite film which struck a peculiarly responsive chord in him when it was first seen at a young, tender, impressionable age. The fan's deep-seated affection for this picture defies a logical, rational explanation, but holds strong throughout the years nonetheless. "Parasite," an admittedly cheesy handy dandy low budget sci-fi/horror rip-off of "ALIEN," "They Came from Within," and "Mad Max" which tells the bleak futuristic story of a man with a dangerous scientifically created killer slug growing in his belly, is that type of movie for me.

Sure, there are numerous concrete bits and pieces of "Parasite" which can be singled out as key attractive attributes. Neither Charles Band's inert direction nor the murky, uninspired script amount to anything other than merely blah, although both do considerably add to the film's overall bizarrely beguiling mediocre quality. Scrawny, swarthy, long-faced and bug-eyed longtime unsung favorite Robert Glaudini portrays the sweaty, frazzle-nerved protagonist with his customary enthralling humorless solemnity. The adorable Cheryl "Rainbeaux" Smith, looking like a scraggly, haggard, totally strung-out heroin junkie (all dingy frizzy hair, indecipherable feral grumbling and sneering facial expressions), does a welcome, albeit fleeting topless cameo as a deranged "sickie." Al Fann contributes a wonderfully warm and engaging performance as a nice guy diner proprietor. Luca Bercovici as a brutish punk gang leader makes for a perfectly hateful villain. Cherie Currie, the former lead singer of the seminal all-girl punk-rock group the Runaways, isn't given much to do, but still catches the eye with her sweetly pretty tall drink of dirty blonde water looks all the same. Mac Ahlberg's grainy, washed-out cinematography somehow manages to be oddly apropos. Richard Band's redundantly rattling score likewise weirdly works.

The lead pipe firmly embedded in a guy's abdomen profusely leaking blood gag is a genuine pip. The scene where the parasite attacks and kills Vivian Blaine by dropping from the ceiling is a corker; the moment when foul thing reduces Blaine to a dessicated, prune-faced husk before gorily bursting out of her shriveled head really hits the splattery spot. The sporadic use of strained, drawn-out and overamplified slow motion provides a few solid belly laughs. The lethargic pace slogs along at a hypnotically gradual clip. Watching the eternally obnoxious Demi Moore in her first starring role have her lip split open will forever remain a sadistically satisfying sight to behold. Stan Winston's black, slimy, and truly revolting monster design is deliciously disgusting. While all these cited specifics are credible reasons for liking -- no, scratch that, seriously loving -- "Parasite," the film ultimately gets to me and bowls me over in a way that I simply can't describe, but inevitably feel quite profoundly whenever I rewatch it. I guess you can say that for me "Parasite" has that inexplicable, yet undeniable and unmistakable mondo schlock flick zing.

Parasites of the Wasteland

[Vomitron_G · 6/10 · 25 November 2007]

Calling PARASITE a good movie is as arguable as whether or not Paris Hilton has had a breast enlargement. It's no secret that I've always had a soft spot for Charles Band's pre-Full Moon stuff. And even though I've liked PARASITE ever since I saw it in my mid-teens, I think I'm not being biased if I say that watching this movie is a worthwhile effort and it's worthy of an honourable mention as an entry in B-movie horror history set in a post-apocalyptic future. Well, "future", is somewhat of a debatable topic here, since the movie is set in the year 1992 (while having been produced in 1982).

PARASITE is noticeable for quite some aspects. One of them being that it was originally shot and released in theaters as a 3-D feature. While 3-Dimensional Photography was a popular phenomena in cinematic history during the 50's (CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, anyone?), its popularity soon fizzled out by the decade's end. Fast forward to the early 80's and we encounter director/producer Charles Band as one of the people (in collaboration with 3-D specialist Randall Larsen) who revived 3-D for a short-lived period and brought it back to theaters. PARASITE was his contribution to the sudden but short wave of 3-D features to emerge around that time (FRIDAY THE 13th PART 3, AMITYVILLE 3-D and JAWS 3-D being the most famous ones). One year later Charles would make another 3-D feature, the sci-fi/adventure flick METALSTORM: THE DESTRUCTION OF JARED-SYN (another worthwhile watch, if you ask me). The use of the 3-D gimmick is integrated nicely with the rest of the movie (e.g. during a fist-fight you can see a snake lashing out at the camera; the titular parasite creature falling from the ceiling towards the camera positioned on the ground). The two most memorable scenes involving 3-D cinematography involve one killing (a guy gets impaled by an iron pipe; when the camera slowly closes in on the hollow pipe, blood starts dripping out of it) and the parasite-creature bursting out of the head of actress Viviane Blaine (well, not her real head, of course).

The story itself is rather simplistic and sometimes moves at a slow pace, but there are a lot of enjoyable scenes to make up for that. A scientist, played by tormented-looking Robert Glaudini, flees from an oppressive paramilitary government, for which he created the flesh-eating parasite. He takes with him two specimens. One he keeps in a canister; the other creature… is growing inside his stomach. We don't get to see much of the futuristic paramilitary government, though. The only information we learn about it, is coming from the various characters our scientist meets when he's stranded in an isolated desert town (amongst them being a group of post-apocalyptic punks and a scarred-by-radiation black bartender). But... there is one black-suited (and laser-armed) villainous Government Agent (called "Wolf The Merchant" and sadistically played by James Davidson) on the hunt for him (it all leads to an enjoyable but short showdown near the end, of course). Children of the 80's will sure love the Lamborghini Countach Car he drives (complete with vertically opening doors). The acting even is fair enough for this type of movie, and another reason to watch this flick is that it stars no-one less than Demi Moore in her second motion picture role ever (although, indeed, one can clearly tell that Miss Moore was only just getting started with her acting career). She plays an all-American post-apocalyptic cutie (that even makes and sells lemonade), eventually teaming op with Robert Glaudini. A small role is also granted to Cherie Currie (Former lead singer of the Runaways).

Another aspect of PARASITE worthwhile mentioning is the work of cinematographer Mac Ahlberg. For one thing, while around the same time (early 80's) his Italian colleagues were still obsessed with getting a spontaneous erection by touching the zoom-button on their camera's, Ahlberg prefers to use slow tracking shots every now and then while equipping his camera with wide-angled lenses. His images bring a dusty and desolate feeling to PARASITE. And then there's the contribution of Stan Winston, who designed the creature and did the make-up effects. While far from being his best work (hey, the man was just getting started too), most of the effects are quite grotesque, slimy and deliciously cheesy. I wouldn't want it any other way in a movie from the early 80's.

I can understand that, to some, PARASITE might be considered a post-apocalyptic snooze-fest (with bad acting, bad special effects and whatever else they might find to nag about). But my love for it and the joy I got out of (re-)watching this slightly offbeat and rather obscure 80's gem, encourages me to be generous in my final rating. I can say one other thing too even: Once you've seen one of Charles Band's older movies and liked it, there's a big chance you'll like all his other stuff up until the early 90's too (whether he produced or directed it doesn't even matter). Reportedly, there were plans to produce an inevitable sequel back in the early 80's, simply titled PARASITE II. I think it's safe to say that, sadly, we can abandon all hope of that ever happening, in this year of writing, 2007.

Parasite sucks the fun out of B movies.

[TheCutUp · 5/10 · 25 April 2007]

(Read more reviews at TheCutUp.blogspot.com)

Paul Dean is dying and on the run. In an undated future, a man who once worked for the government creating super secret parasites, has now turned his back on them and become a fugitive. While housing one of the leeches in his own body, he dodges an agent and tries to find a cure for his infested stomach all at the same time.

He ends up in a little community that consists of desert, a couple of houses, a hotel and a garage that is shelter for a gang of thugs. As if Paul needed more on his plate of things to look out for, the gang starts roughing him up, so he finds the aid of a town girl named Patricia (Demi Moore). Together, they try to survive against a life eating parasite and what the harsh world has become.

In the future, government agents drive Lamborghini's! At least that's what Parasite, the futuristic 3D blood-sucking bug movie would have you believe. That's right, Parasite was originally intended to be and was released as a 3D movie. Most movies that are 3D don't really have much in the way of content because they're trying to support the gimmick and believe me, Parasite just adds to that pile of gimmicky monster movies.

Parasite really is a mixed bag. There are some scenes that are pretty creepy or gory yet entertaining while there are others that are boring or cheesy (yet still entertaining) or just contradict the whole idea that Paul is on the run and that the agent after him has any idea what he's doing. While watching it, you'll wish that you had the 3D glasses to see all of the scenes where you know that it's really enjoyable.

The casting is give and take. Personally, I think Paul Dean is odd looking and doesn't really give off the vibe of a hero type. He plays a doctor, but he is pushed into a hero role where he not only has to save himself, but others around him as well. I guess you could say that he doesn't look the part because in essence, he really is just a doctor but I'm not going to dig that deep. Besides, he's a very creepy looking doctor anyway; I wouldn't let him work on me. Parasite also features Demi Moore in her "first starring" role. The DVD boasts this fact and is very proud of it.

What I was really shocked about was the music. The music is good for this kind of movie, when you usually have to just deal with orchestral jabs and such. After I did a bit of research I found out that the man behind the music for Parasite, Richard Band, is the man who is also behind the music for classic B movies like The Reanimator Series, The Puppetmaster series and From Beyond (which he actually won an Academy Award for).

It's a good idea to check out everyone else who was involved in the making of Parasite on IMDb.com. For a not-so-great movie, there are a lot of recognizable b movie names in there.

My ultimate concern with Parasite is that it takes itself too seriously. There are a few scenes that are funny based on bad editing or acting but for the most part, it's just boring because everyone makes the whole movie very important and proper. What usually makes a B horror film experience swell is the fact that the actors take the part seriously but in a different direction, to the point where they forget the topic at hand. Which in turn makes their over-acting show in a glorious way. Luckily, Parasite has the bit-parters to hold up the bad acting and cheesy lines.

If you're looking for that typical boring-Saturday-afternoon type movie, Parasite really shines. If you don't mind your futuristic parasite infestation movies to be a little drab and boring in between the decent and gory scenes, then you may enjoy this B movie. If you're looking for constant cheesiness or frightful moments, it's probably best to get your life sucked away elsewhere.

Monster pic in depth

[lor_ · 12 January 2023]

My review was written in March 1982 after a TImes Square screening:

"Parasite" is a low-budget monster film which utilizes the 3-D process to amplify its shock effects. Outlook is okay to attract fans of horror pics and depth films.

Set in 1992, tale has a skimpy sci-fi peg, of scientist Dr. Paul Dean (Robert Glaudini) attempting to neutralize a strain of parasite he has developed for the government. Morbid premise (accounting perhaps for Glaudini's glum, almost laughably downbeat line readings) is that the large, worm-like parasite is in his abdomen growing while he studies another specimen, racing to somehow avert his own death and save the world from millions of offspring.

Post-nuclear war locale is a remote, western town, with fashions resembling today but gas up to $40 per gallon. Filmmaker Charles Band is weak on transitions and story development, ending many scenes arbitrarily with a fast fade. Nominal tension is generated by merchant (industrial class controlling society) James Davidson pursuing the hero while both use futuristic laser guns to deal with the young punk locals.

Pic's raison d'etre is a set of frightening mechanical and sculpted monster makeup effects by Oscar-nominated (for "Heartbeeps") Stan Winston, aided by James Kagel and Lance Anderson. Convincing gore and sudden plunges at the camera are enhanced by StereoVision 3-D filming, with cameraman Mac Ahlberg creating some interesting foreground-dominated compositions among the standard shots. Otherwise "Parasite" is lethargic between its terror scenes, making it a test of patience for all but the fanatical followers of horror cheapies.

Blah

[gavin6942 · 4/10 · 8 February 2016]

Paul Dean has created a deadly parasite that is now attached to his stomach. He and his female companion, Patricia Welles, must find a way to destroy it while also trying to avoid Ricus, his rednecks, and an evil government agent named Merchant.

Probably the only reason this movie still has any relevance at all is because it was a very early pre-fame role for Demi Moore. Not a great role, but for her fans it must be a film worth tracking down. But that is all, because even for a Charles Band film it is not that good.

I would possibly change my opinion if I saw a better copy. The one I saw was very fuzzy. A bad film is a bad film, but maybe being able to see the actual parasite would make a difference.

Bad to the nth degree

[timhayes-1 · 2/10 · 2 April 2006]

Even for a Charles Band film, Parasite is one bad movie. Band has never been known for high quality product and to be fair, its the cheesiness of most of his films that appeals to me so much. The problem here is that this film isn't cheesy fun, its cheesy bad. The script is absolutely atrocious (it took three people to write this crap?) and the special effects are horrendous. One can't quite believe that future FX guru Stan Winston made these terrible creatures. fans may want to note that Demi Moore appears in her first starring role and that its amazing that she ever went on to anything else. She's just not a good actress here. Some fans may also note future Ghoulies director Luca Bercovici in a supporting role as well. From start to painful 84 minutes later Parasite is poor film-making at its worst.

Unlike Demi, has aged poorly...

[A_Roode · 2/10 · 18 January 2006]

Let's take a moment for total and complete honesty: there is essentially no reason for you to go through the same pain that I have just done. Avoid 'Parasite' like the plague it is and lead a much happier life. Friends, I watch these films to protect you. They've taken their toll and done irreparable damage to my psyche. Make my sacrifice worthwhile and don't follow in my footsteps. If there were -- and this is a very big if -- any reason to watch 'Parasite' I will suggest three. They are as follows:

1. This is one Demi Moore's first films. Die hards might want to watch her in this although I hope they possess better judgement.

2. Fans of gore might find it interesting since the pay-offs are frequent -- albeit extremely well telegraphed -- and gruesome.

3. 3-D made a return to theatres briefly in the eighties and fans of the sub-genre might want to check it out.

Unfortunately my three reasons can be quickly countered. Moore isn't bad but she's still working on her craft here. I also suspect that this is one of those films where a fresh young actor concedes that, yes, the film is total garbage but hey, I'm in the pictures ma! Top of the World! Demi was just working on her reel and building some footage to use as audition material for superior projects.

3-D is an interesting sub-genre but a movie that employs the technique suffers damage at the same time. Very rarely has it been done well (Hitchcock's 'Dial M for Murder) and very often it has been done poorly. The main weakness is that it tends to telegraph when a 3-D scene is about to happen. If things are starting to go slo-mo, break out the glasses. In the 50's it was quaint; in the 80's just corny and bad. 'Parasite' is one of those films in a distinct class. It managed to rekindle and destroy the 3-D gimmick in the painful stretch of 84 minutes.

Which brings me to the part of my review I like to call 'product endorsement': I was able to last through this movie by using a DVD player that has a countdown clock feature. There was comfort to be had in knowing that I only had to tough it through another *shudder* forty-three minutes.

The acting in 'Parasite' is about what you would expect from Z-Grade garbage like this. Actually, that's not entirely fair and I should give credit where it is due. The cast is mostly game for the film and put up a brave performance in spite of ludicrous script and story elements. Unfortunately for us this film is a horrendous and cheesy 'Alien' rip-off. Or 'Alien' meets 'Mad Max' rip-off since they throw in the post-apocalyptic wasteland thing. and the biker gang. And the goofy costumes.

Many movies are so bad they are funny. This is not. It's just plain bad.

This one was bad even when I was a kid.

[Aaron1375 · 2/10 · 2 February 2004]

I saw this one as a kid and from what I remember it was quite bad. Though if you look at its box office take it actually did rather well cause it was really cheap. And the cheapness shows throughout. It is just stupid. They were in the future or something and this one guy is being chased by someone else that wants the super parasite monster. There is this gang also involved too somewhere in the movie. The only thing worth seeing is Demi Moore in her first feature film. It is kind of like Meg Ryan in "Amityville 3D"...I guess you have to get your start somewhere. The monster doesn't show up nearly enough and it really isn't all that great anyway. In fact, as a kid this movie was kind of boring to me, and as a kid I was more easily entertained than I am now.

Parasite: Looks great, but simply isn't very good

[Platypuschow · 3/10 · 30 November 2017]

Parasite tells the story of a doctor infested with a parasite, he is able to keep it under control but desperately seeks a way of removing it and preventing the creature from hurting anyone else.

Starring Demi Moore in her second movie at the young age of 20 this sci-fi horror simply isn't very good.

To it's credit it looks really good considering it's age but the storyline is a combination of generic and unexplained.

With a drab cast and an uninspired script this by all rights should have been better, if only a little bit.

I'm sure this will appeal to some film junkies but as for me, this was very definition of mediocre.

The Good:

SFX are quite good considering the age

Film has aged well

The Bad:

A lot is simply left unexplained

Somewhat dull

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

The way the old man invited our hero in for coffee made me very uncomfortable

Moore was in this movie to scream and repeatedly get knocked out

Sci-Fi wasteland

[haildevilman · 6/10 · 27 June 2006]

Most people are only interested in this for the then unknown Demi Moore's appearance. Seeing her in her tight shorts made this worth a check.

The lack of cast was obvious. It's as if the producers were cutting costs in the middle of scenes. Keep changing the camera direction and maybe no one will notice the two cheap sets they kept using.

Robert Glaudini did an OK job with his role. Sometimes it seemed as if he was sleepwalking though. Some rumors flew around at one point that it was really David Carradine slumming, but nope.

Demi's acting hasn't changed much. She was a wide-eyed emotional type back then too. But she looked good because she looked NORMAL. Not so much enhancement if you get my drift.

But what was her character doing there anyway?

Lots of fire and threatening gestures. But the creature itself looked pretty good. And it mostly took place during a sunny day, which was kind of different.

But I agree with Chas. Balun. "Worth a look only if you see it in 3-D, FORGET the videocassette."

I got a beast in my belly... pass the Pepto-Bismol...

[PredragReviews · 5/10 · 15 November 2016]

This was released to theaters in 1982 in full color polarized 3-D and widescreen (using the clear grey glasses) and on a low budget level was kind of fun. It is interesting today as it was Demi Moore's first film. I bet she leaves it off her resume these days. The story is fairly haphazard, and limps along hobbled by unnecessary plot points, like the bit about those populating the story are the remnants of post apocalyptic event. The only good reason I could discern for the inclusion of this was it being a way to explain why there are so few actual people in the film, which, in reality, was probably due to a limited budget. Ultimately it could have been left out (along with a number of other things), and the story would have been just as good (good, in this case meaning rotten). I'm unsure what prompted those involved to cast Robert Glaudini as the lead, as he was hardly hero material, feeling like secondary character at best here, one who would be killed off well before the movie ended. Overall the acting is pretty crummy, but this is more due to deficiencies within the script rather than poor performers, in my opinion.

The summary of the film sounds impressive, but almost nothing seems to happen in this movie. I had little idea what was going on until roughly forty-five minutes into the picture. Granted, we do get a funny slow motion fistfight scene in the beginning, along with a guy on fire towards the end, but no cars blow up here (probably due to a sluggish car market caused by the apocalypse). "Parasite" is a worthwhile film for cheese lovers, although Moore fans might wish to avoid it and watch instead some of her (supposedly) worthier projects.

Overall rating: 5 out of 10.

One of the better Charles Band movies.

[cllangkjaer · 8/10 · 3 March 2005]

oh yes! This great piece of cinema history was original shot in 3D. Cinema photographer Mac Ahlberg did a absolutely wonderful job on it. This was the first picture he and Charles Band worked on together. The hole mood and felling of the film is very dark and sinister. Then I watched this movie for the first time about 10 years ago, It really gave me goosebumps. I own the Laserdisc edition of the film and as the viewer you get the sort of fell that you are watching it in 3D. you don't need the glasses to see it, so I would say that it is properly not in true 3D. I know it is out on two DVD editions, one In true glorious 3D, if you like these 1980 Horror films? you would what to get a bag of popcorn and check this great film out. Injoy.

An okay sci fi movie with occasional action

[nzswanny · 7/10 · 13 February 2016]

Charles Band has made a lot of good movies in his time, but a lot of his movies are bad too. However, if you watch his movies older than 1999, their usually good. This is one of his movies before 1999, and I have to say, it had a brilliant hook at the start of the movie. However, after that it did introduce us that the movie was set in the future, however it kinda dragged a little on about the gangsters and other surroundings in the future. Myself, I think they could be able to shorten that bit five minutes shorter, but then again, slow movies do seem to express how the character's personalities well, and I'm usually quite forgiving. After some 30 minutes of dragging on, they finally get back to the story. Yay, finally. And ever since that, the movie actually started to become really good. So, it is recommended you go see this movie, even if it is a little slow in parts. I rate it 7.4/10.

At least it's better than "Jaws 3-D".

[gridoon · 5/10 · 9 December 2004]

Though the special effects and "infected"/"decaying" makeup of "Parasite" are good (and thus I recommend the picture mostly to students of the art or fans of Stan Winston's work in particular), they are the sole highlight of this low-budget "futuristic" horror film, which suffers from painfully wooden (Robert Glaudini) and amateurish (Demi Moore) acting and a nuisance of a subplot about a gang of punks who are first treated as the bad guys, then as the good guys; eventually it becomes clear that the movie only needs them to establish more potential targets for the title creatures. The 3-D gimmick, which possibly worked splendidly in the theaters, looks just silly and contrived when you watch the movie at home. (**)