Review of Grizzly

Grizzly (1976)
5/10
If you have 91 minutes to kill
11 July 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The original New York Times review in 1976 and the Wikipedia page for Grizzly detail the many ways in which Grizzly replicates Jaws (1975). When not borrowing from Jaws, the film borders on incoherence. Character, action, and dialogue invoke the value of the national park system, greed at the expense of safety, science and myth, sex and the woods, and the good life. None of these ideas are developed; they're simply laced throughout a film whose only continuity is a bear that is running around and killing people whether they're in the grass, in a shed, in a tent, in a fire tower, or in a helicopter. It's fitting that the film ends by zooming out from the scene of Kelly the park ranger next to the dead body of the helicopter pilot which is next to the burning patch of grass marking the spot where the bear was killed by a rocket-propelled grenade. Bear dead ... end of story, such as it is.

All that having been said, it's interesting to note that Grizzly was made and was successful, which means that all these fragments found some resonance with a wide audience. If you're not worried about the film's quality, you can find plenty to consider, especially when put in relation to other films. Why does the bear victimize so many women? The film toys with male/female relationships, but never develops it. What is the appeal of the blend of authority that Jaws sets out and Grizzly follows so closely: the trio of legal authority, scientific authority, and hunting authority? What was the appeal to 1970's audiences of locating monstrous behavior in animals? You can wring something interesting out of Grizzly, but you might start to wonder if you're working harder than the anyone involved with the original film.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed