User reviews

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+

Rip-off of "Jaws". A giant grizzly bear is (inexplicably) attacking humans in a forest. It's up to Christopher George and friends to track him down.

I saw this in a theatre when I was 14 and never forgot it. At the time it (sort of) scared me. The bear itself I thought looked kind of cuddly--even when it was growling and showing its fangs. The attacks were (for a PG movie) pretty bloody and had me actually cringing in my seat! The show stoppers were when a little boy is attacked (we don't actually SEE it, but we do see half his leg torn off) and when, with a swipe of its claw, the grizzly decapitates a horse! Silly...but effective! Also there's some really beautiful scenery here (if you see it letterboxed) and a really great score.

So, this is a good gross-out movie for kids--there is a lot of blood but you don't take it seriously. As for the rest of it--the acting and characterizations are strictly by the numbers but I thought George and Andrew Prine were lots of fun. Also the dialogue is terrible and I got a good laugh out of the guy who doesn't want close the park despite the fact that people are being killed! Talk about ripping off "Jaws"! Good example of a 1970s exploitation film.

Generally after a movie comes out is when people , critics or whoever, begin making comparisons between it and other films.

If there happen to be any similarities at all then the film is labeled a rip-off and then sent off to the wonderful land of the back room shelf. This is one that I am glad stayed off the back room shelf, if anything, for nostalgic reasons.

Most film makers would tell you they were inspired by something whether it was "Spider Man" or "Black Narcissus" when they were a kid. It doesn't mean they directly ripped it off.

The story for "Grizzly" was written before "Jaws" came out, the writers didn't know each other, and though one might be able to draw parallels as far as the story goes it is not a "Jaws" rip-off. It's just that you have blood, guts and gore and so did Jaws which came out, theatrically, a year earlier.

One is on land and one is in the ocean...How exactly is that the same? No. The real rip-off movie of "Jaws" is the Italian movie "The Last Shark".

"Grizzly" came out in our nation's Bi-Centennial year. "Jaws" kept me out of the water and "Grizzly" kept me out of the woods for a LONG time. Even now though,31 years later, the film is still worth a look and it has some very interesting ideas represented and some very interesting camera shots and a couple of good scares.

Does it have a cheese factor? Of course, but overall it a pretty good low-budget flick which makes me think of guerrilla film-making and it makes the effort at trying to tell a good story..

I put it right in the middle of the scale and worth checking out depending on your own personal perception of what a monster movie should be .

To say that "Grizzly" is a rip-off of "Jaws" is only going part way to describing the genesis of the film. It has also taken a page from "The Towering Inferno" with opening credits that are so similar in their presentation that it's laughable. (There's even a lodge owner with the same type of glasses William Holden wore in "Inferno".) The film follows the basic formula (which would be copied in dozens of films thereafter) of "Jaws" with innocent people being mauled and devoured by an unseen enemy. Like Bruce the shark, Grizzly doesn't make his full appearance right away. Rather, the audience is treated to perspective shots of branches and foliage being shoved away as he approaches the next morsel...er...camper. (This approach was also utilized in the 1976 "King Kong", so the derivation continues.) George plays something akin to Head Ranger of the forest in question. When he isn't head-butting with the park supervisor (Dorsey), he's calling upon buddies Jaeckel (a naturist who prowls around with pelts on his back to better study the animal kingdom) and Prine (a helicopter-piloting Vietnam veteran) to help him track down this man-killing beast. Meanwhile, the body count rises and rises as victims fail to notice a 15 foot, 2000-lb grizzly bear coming up to them from nowhere! Finally, just when the cast is dwindling to that of a one man show, the climactic showdown between man and beast occurs with the bear getting a similar comeuppance as Bruce the shark did in "Jaws". Some of the scenery in the film is nice, though apart from the credit sequence, it is hardly ever exploited to its full potential. The three lead males do an okay job with Jaeckel scoring the most points with his quirky portrayal. It's a little sad to see George literally chain-smoking through the film when he would be dead of a heart attack in just 6 years at age 54. Prine affects a spotty cornpone accent that does little to bring his sketchy character to life. By far the worst presence in the film is that of McCall as George's love interest. Not only does her character have nothing to do with the plot or the title beast at all, but the actress is so annoying that one keeps hoping she will be next in line for the human buffet. Looking like a less-surgically-enhanced Katie Couric and with a voice twice as grating, she is a big debit to the film. WHERE was Lynda Day George?? Though the formula of "See camper, See camper die" gets more than a little tiresome, there are a couple of memorable moments. One is when the bear wants one victim so badly, he levels a towering ranger station! Among the sillier moments is one in which a female ranger says she is going to soak her feet in the stream, yet proceeds to strip down to bra and panties and let her hair out of its ponytail! There are campy bits like heads, arms and so forth being yanked off (mostly suggested rather than explicitly shown) and plenty of fake blood spewing here and there. There are worse "Animals on the rampage" flicks, but this is hardly a strong piece of movie-making. In a useless aside, both Prine and George posed for nude photos of themselves in the 70's, but here nary even a chest is in sight.

Grizzly is directed by William Girdler, written by Harvey Flaxman & David Sheldon and stars Christopher George, Andrew Prine & Richard Jaeckel. Story sees a giant Grizzly Bear terrorise campers and hikers at a state park. The head park ranger sets about capturing and killing the beast but he's met with resistance from his superior and troubled by the number of glory hunting hunters who descend upon the park.

If you pardon the pun, Grizzly was a "monster" surprise hit of 1976. Made for a paltry $750,000, it went on to make over $39 million Worldwide. It may well be a "Jaws" coat tail hugging copycat (and it unashamedly is), but credit where credit is due, William Girdler & David Sheldon spotted an opening in the market and got in there in a blaze of blood, grue and roaring ferocity. It was also one of the first of a number of "Jaws" knock offs, and while it's silly at times, and beset with bad acting, it is, however, one of the most popular and fun cult horrors of the 1970s. Filmed on location in Clayton, Georgia, Girdler's movie knows exactly what it's about. Keeping it relatively free of extraneous and expositional filler, Girdler knows (and so does the cast) that the bear is the star of the show - well more to the point, that the bear shredding and chomping down on humans is the star of the show. And so it goes, the humans - except for our hero protagonist (George) & wise sage naturalist (Jaeckel) - are annoying and lining up to be either bear lunch or to be badly proved wrong. And what fun it is. It's the sort of film that scared us to death as kids, and now makes us smile as adults.

The film has proved popular enough over the years to warrant a double disc DVD release. A release that wouldn't be out of place for some critical Oscar winning darling I might add! Now available in a quite lovely anamorphic widescreen presentation (2.35:1), Girdler's (and cinematographer William Asman) shooting around Clayton is very pleasing on the eye. Sure some of the inexperience of the editing and lighting departments exists, and the budget restrictions are now even more evident (check out the blood), but Grizzly actually does look rather nice. The extra disc is chock full of goodies, with the "Jaws With Claws" featurette enjoyable and showing the makers to be very tongue in cheek about the whole thing. So, a must for B movie creature feature fans who don't mind a bit of camp on their cheese sandwich then. Those looking for an "Alien" or "Gorilla's In The Midst" obviously need not apply, so lets mark it as 6.5/10 for the film, and 7/10 for Shriek Show's smart 2 disc DVD package.

Most every review you read of this movie points out that it is a rip-off of Jaws, so I won't belabor the point. The interesting thing, however, is that much of the movie is so implausible that you wonder if perhaps the writers are doing it for laughs. The best bit is of course the female forest ranger who strips down to bra and panties to go skinny dipping while hunting a dangerous bear that has killed two people, but there is also the park manager who decides that the best way to combat the bear is to open the hunting season and let the masses of hunters go after him. This is COMPLETELY unrealistic. I can only guess that the film is employing a certain exploitative impressionism, kind of like when you are telling your five-year old a story and you exaggerate stuff for the fun of it. As a result, this movie is actually fairly entertaining, sort of like bedtime horror story for adults.

A huge grizzly bear is terrorizing local campers at a national state park and leaving a bloody trail. The Park Ranger (George) enlists the aid of a Vietnam vet helicopter pilot (Prine) and a naturalist (Jaeckel) to help end the bear's reign of terror. Also thrown in the mix is the state park's head honcho owner who keeps making things as difficult as possible for the trio.

Sound familiar? Does a shark, Roy Scheider etc. spring to mind? Well, the similarities to "Jaws" are undeniable and they're very obvious but that doesn't mean "Grizzly" is not a decent film. It's fairly good overall, the acting is horribly stilted on occasion, the script has it's fair share of stupid dialog, the gore scenes are a tad fake looking and the constant usage of fake shots of the bear (who is clearly in a completely different location) does indicate a relatively low budget. But sometimes the faults only add to the enjoyment, as is the case here.

This was a tremendously ambitious project for it's time and the grizzly bear scenes were a horror to film (and not to mention; quite dangerous). The film had a low budget and was shot in a short amount of time. Director William Girdler, a specialist for low budget rip-offs (I'm really interested to see his blaxploitation "Exorcist" rip-off "Abby"), makes the most out of this project. It's fast paced, gory, reasonably suspenseful and obviously made with passion. The cinematography is splendid and makes the most out of the gorgeous scenery. The only nit picking I have is the music score; a completely inappropriate orchestral score that looks and sounds like it belongs in a comedy rather than a horror film.

As for the actors, Christopher George may not have been a forceful dramatic performer but he's extremely likable and what he didn't have in the acting department he more than made up for that with charisma. Andrew Prine and Richard Jaeckel are a fine pair as George's aids but pretty much everyone else has an amateur night in terms of acting.

Late director William Girdler knew how to get the most out of a limited budget (check out "Day of the Animals", a semi-sequel to "Grizzly") and would probably have made plenty of first rate B-movies had he lived longer. "Grizzly" is a fine example of what the guy could manage and it's pretty impressive.

This movie is a total rip off of Jaws and I enjoyed it almost as much. The first bear attack scene was cheap and fake looking but stick with it because the rest were pretty good. The bear can act! I enjoyed this 70s flick, it was fun. I give it a 5 because it wasn't scary enough.

What starts with a promising premise, ends with just another weak attempt to cash in on the Jaws phenomena. Here a killer Grizzly Bear wreaks havoc on a wilderness resort. Of course the local government insists on hushing up the several early casualties of this bear, which turns out to be a prehistoric type of Brown Bear. The creature just isn't effective because we ultimately have to see it. It's similar to the disappointment of seeing the shark in Jaws. Just too fake. Maybe with the CGI capabilities of today, a remake would be much more successful. Although the performances vary from pretty good, to downright Shelly Winters awful, Richard Jaeckle (great character actor) saves this film from being a total wash. His portrayal of the experienced tracker, hunting the bear (note hunting, not your typical idiot trying to "capture" a killer beast), is probably the only character the audience empathizes with. *Note there's the requisite woman getting nude despite there being no logical or realistic reason for such a happening. She just gets the urge to bathe underneath a waterfall, whilst in the midst of looking for signs of the killer bear. Thankfully she's quickly dispatched in a very awkward bear hug death. Latent sexual overtones there.

Unjustifiably criticized as a "Jaws" rip-off at the time of it's release "Grizzly" is a really good "Monster on the loose" movie. The film is about a 18 foot grizzly bear terrorizing campers in a national park with Christopher George, the Park Ranger, Andrew Prine, the Helicopter Pilot, and Richard Jaeckel, the Naturalist, teaming up together to bring the "Big Bad Bear's" rampage to an end. "Grizzly" has a storyline and flaming ending very similar to "Jaws".

There's really nothing that bad about the movie to criticize. It was made as a B-type Monster/Horror film and no one expected it to win any Academy Awards. It makes you wonder why most of it's critics put it down? Was it its lack of originality artistry and imagination?

There's a series of killings in a national park where it's found out that a giant grizzly is responsible for them. The manager of the park wants it all kept quite since the news and publicity would hurt the parks revenue and his promotion to a post in Washington D.C.

The film follows the usual "Monster on the loose" movie plot. Just when it looks like that there's no stopping the indestructible bruin, after killing some dozen people including one of the leading stars of the film. The bear is even more then a match for an armed helicopter which he brings down with one swat of his paw.The hero park ranger later, after when all seems lost, finds an ingenious way of bringing the bear down and the park is then opened for camping and hiking without anymore fear or danger of the killer bear.

That's a brief synopsis of the story and that's what most, if not all, of the people who went to see the movie expected. The acting by the top stars in the film George, Prine and Jaeckel was much better then you would expect from a B-Monster/Horror movie. I don't think people going to see "Grizzly" expected to see "Streetcar Named Desire". The photography was breathtaking at times with the script and music score was more then adequate for a B-Movie. Most of all the killer bear was truly frightening. In short, going to see "Grizzly" you not only got what you paid for but a lot more then you expected.

Like I said in the beginning of the article about "Grizzly" that it's most vocal critics were those who accused it of ripping-off "Jaws". With the rare exception of movies like "Pi" and "Momento" how many movies can we say are truly original? There were a lot of movies with a "Jaws" storyline for the writers and director of "Jaws" to learn or, as the critics of "Grizzly" would say, rip-off from.

And one last word: The biggest ripper-offer from "Jaws" was none other then "Jaws" itself. With three sequels over ten years and each one worse then the previous one and the last, "Jaws IV", being so bad and unwatchable that it wasn't even released in the theaters.

The film is what you think: A group of men end up getting together to kill this massive Grizzly Bear that is killing women to start with, then goes off to kill the men hunting it down. A Helicopter & some guns become clearly necessary to find the massive man-eating Grizzly.

There is some fake blood, or is it tomato sauce, splattered about - dripping off the dying and dead. But the film is not overly bloody - it's more talky than a lot of action.

It's okay for a one time watch - nothing I would care to see again. It's an average film and nothing really stands out to make me wanna view this one again.

4/10

Due to the year in which it was released, 1976's "Grizzly" seems to get summed up as a land-locked "Jaws" wanna-be, but people tend to forget that even before "Jaws," drive-ins were well stocked throughout the 1970s with a near endless series of killer animal/"nature takes revenge" flicks (i.e. "Squirm," "Frogs," "Night of the Lepus," etc.). So if anything "Grizzly" can merely be accused of having excellent timing, as it rode the coat-tails of "Jaws" to the tune of $39 million in box office and briefly held the title of most profitable independent movie (till it was unseated by the original "Halloween").

As for the movie itself, it's a fairly typical killer animal flick. A rogue Grizzly bear has suddenly begun tromping around a national park, munching on campers and back-packers, and the park's bad-ass head ranger (Christopher George) has to hunt it down and kill it, assisted by his two best friends, a naturalist (Richard Jaeckel) and a redneck chopper pilot. Due to its low budget nature, we don't see much of the actual bear till the film is three-quarters of the way finished, till then "attack" scenes are shown from the bear's eye view so all you see is a hairy paw reach from off camera and lots of growling on the soundtrack. Those attack scenes are still fairly brutal and gory (particularly when the bear goes after a young boy and his mother, and we see the poor kid thrown to the ground with his leg bitten off!), and when we finally do get to see the Grizzly in all his glory, he's a fearsome looking S.O.B. indeed. I won't reveal whether or not Ranger Smith (haha) manages to defeat Yogi Bear in their climactic battle, but I will say that it's the best scene in the movie, due to the total overkill weapon used by George's character.

Director William Girdler keeps the suspense level up and Christopher George is a suitable tough-guy hero, making "Grizzly" a decent night of schlocky-but-fun creature-feature entertainment, 1970s style.

Very sexy 2nd victim, brunette with long hair, who went to poop in the forest and Mr. Big Bear caught her in the small cabin. The bear played excellently, he deserves an Oscar and a BAFTA. Human actors not so much. I mean, not exactly talented. The hand of the first victim, the woman with the red checkered shirt, can be seen to be made of plastic. We really need such a bear now, to deal with Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab and company...

Released on August 25th 1976 in Paris (France)in glorious ToddAO-2.35.1 CinemaScope ratio and beautiful colors, GRIZZLY - French exploitation title : Grizzly, le monstre de la forêt - (USA 1975) directed by William Girdler was also available later in VHS SECAM in a mutilated 1.85 aspect ratio which involved a lack of letters at the beginning and the end of the credits.

But yet, movie was still worth to be discovered and screened but one who have missed its theatrical released. In the meanwhile, Canal + channel has shown it on for some evenings in - as I quite remembering - an alright 2.35 aspect ratio transfer. And that was all... till this DVD zone 1 release in... 1.33 Standard aspect ratio = "pan & scan" !!!

As far as history of video is concerned, it can be assumed that this "years 2000 circa" DVD edition of GRIZZLY is, by a dark irony of this technological age, the WORST edition ever, far below VHS and TV screenings of the years 1985 ! Incredible but true ! So I ask the question : why US distributors cannot find decent master material regarding this very good American B movie ? Why this remarkable piece of American horror movie of the XXth Century cannot be offered on DVD in a RESPECTED original aspect ratio ? It is the minimum offer expected today by "cinéphiles" market ! As a matter of fact, GRIZZLY is quite more than a B movie : truly a "part B-part A" movie, if looking its budget, magnificent scenery and natural locations photography camera work, ultra-violent gore special effects, and the presence of stars such as Christopher George & Richard Jaeckel & Andrew Prine (the two first ones are excellent as usual and the third one quite good though in a less important role and with less image timing presence)without forgetting the very good directing work of Girdler.

Girdler has been successful in trying to translate the mental and perceptual universe of the URSUS HORRIBILIS (Latin name given by Jaeckel to the Grizzly : scientific name ? I have not yet checked but such animal do exists still now in North Canada (British Columbia and Alaska, I guess : and people who work in those fields are very afraid when they check its track around) monster, in opposing it by the main way of scale variations to the human universe : he has been successful on earth in the same way as Spielberg had been so in the water and the result is as very much frightening and terrifying experience.

Some sequences are, by the way, absolutely original regarding to the quite similar thematic and aesthetic pattern to which GRIZZLY belongs. GRIZZLY is one of the most interesting variation of horror monster movies and has been quite underestimated by critics and historians of horror movies so far, in France of course at the time of its release but probably also in U.S.A. except by its public who liked it, and who was right to like it ! It deserves to be given a decent new video life on a new DVD edition that would at last, and at least, respect its original aspect ratio, preserving the beauty of this, from now on, classic horror movie.

I first saw this more than a decade ago on Sony Pix channel.

Revisited it recently.

A national park is terrorized by a man-eating grizzly of extraordinary size but we have Christopher George who makes silly n stupid decisions.

The helicopter guy Don (Andrew Prine) dies cos of Kelly (Christopher George).

Rather than shooting the bear with a bazooka and that too safely while aerial in the copter, Kelly insisted on getting down.

Our boy Kelly wanted to be the last man standing.

For a lot of time we don't get to see the bear in action but we see people being lifted up as if some supernatural stuff is holding em.

Mr Walker whose wife gets killed while doing make up in the tent looks like Quentin Tarantino n Michael Shannon combined. Man, that guy's smile (of surely getting laid tonight) before her wife's death is so funny.

The movie has a good star cast, Christopher George, Andrew Prinen n Richard Jaeckel.

The casting of George, Prine and Jaeckel marked the second time this trio of actors starred together in the same film. They had previously played supporting roles in Chisum (1970).

While Prine n Jaeckel starred together in few films.

We have Kathy Rickman (the nurse from Deliverance), she looks amazingly hot with her tight abs in this movie but she can't act.

The scenes shot from the bear's point of view was a new gimmick in the late 70s but i didn't enjoy that trick.

The movie has zero tension n suspense.

The bear chase scenes r dull n makes no sense.

There is one waterfall bathing scene which lacked the nudity n to top it all our killer bear is hiding in the waterfall like some pervert.

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.