How bad is it? Wretched special effects and poor dialogue abound.
Should you see it? Yes - the slowly growing cult of this film is right; it's fun.
|First it's this size...|
|...and then it's this size.|
The first two Shark Attack movies gave no hint as to how bad this film would be. One actress returns from the first movie in a different role (necessarily - she was eaten in the first one) and the other roles are filled with non-actors. The idea for the film is good: there really were much larger sharks in prehistoric times, and perhaps like the coelocanth some still exist. What sinks the film, though, is that the shark keeps changing size, depending upon what it's eating - and it seems intent on eating everything in the ocean - repeatedly, the shark surfaces and whatever it's attacking is the same width as its mouth, making it between 30 and perhaps 400 feet long! The jet ski jetting straight into its maw is the worst (and therefore best) of the bad effects work.
What the film is best known for, though, is one single line of dialogue. Out of nowhere, in the middle of a tense situation, a sexual proposition is made. I actually did a spit take when I heard it, thought I must've misheard it, and watched that section again. It's worth seeing just for that line.