Frogs (1972) Online

If this movie ultimately fails to be scary (and it does), it's not because the filmmakers didn't try; they did their darnedest to make those frogs look as menacing as possible. But it was all for naught, because frogs are fundamentally un-vicious creatures and, well, they cannot be trained to look mean. They don't care about us annoying humans! They just want to hop around! So this movie can't hold a candle to, say, "The Birds". That doesn't mean it's not enjoyable though - it is, in a schlocky way. It's colorful, it's beautifully photographed, and Sam Elliott is rather cool, as 70s leading men go. (**1/2)

Despite a seemingly hokey premise, Frogs is one of the more memorable and effective entries in the nature-revenge genre.

Family living in Florida's Okefenokee Swamp have been exterminating the local wild life, now it seems that the creatures are all out to kill them!

Frogs is a movie that never fails to be sweat-inducing, especially to those who don't like reptiles! All manner of swamp wild life is used for this film - snakes, spiders, gators, lizards, heck even a turtle! So with all these critters coming for our unsuspecting human characters there's plenty of tension to be had! Director McCowan makes good use of the boggy setting and gives it an atmospheric feeling of certain doom! The eerie score also helps as well.

The films cast is good. Veteran Ray Milland is perfect as the Crockett family's stubborn elder. Young, attractive Sam Elliot is decent as a nature photographer who happens on the scene. Joan Van Ark is good as Elliot's love interest and Adam Roarke as her no-account brother. The supporting cast is also on cue.

While Frogs may be a B thriller that's best taken tongue-in-cheek, it's solidly done and is sure to cause a few chills!

*** out of ****

Statistically, this movie was a hit. Made for $200k, it grossed over $2 mill in the US alone. This was the secret of success for American International Pictures. Keep the budgets low, and the base of horror fans will show up and you'll make a profit. 1972 was the year for horror. A large number of films catered to the horror fan, many were cheaply made. But they all made a profit. Frogs is an example of a movie poster created before the movie was filmed. Frogs don't kill anyone in the film, but they made a cool poster. So they were thrown into the mix of alligators, lizards, snapping turtles, snakes, spiders, etc. Since many of these creatures make people queazy, it must have seemed like a slam dunk to film- fearmakers. However, the animal performers are less than convincing. Especially the alligator, where producers sped up the film to make him look like he's moving quickly. The acting is as good as can be expected for this type of film. Joan Van Ark and Sam Elliot debut here (Van Ark had done a soap). Milland is good as the cranky old rich stereotype. If you're looking for a "tame" horror picture to keep the kids interested, this might be it. For adults, it's value is mainly nostalgic.

The free-lance photographer Pickett Smith (Sam Elliott) is taking pictures of the pollution in a swamp in Florida for a magazine of ecology in his canoe. Out of the blue, he is hit by a motor boat piloted by Clint Crockett (Adam Roarke) and his sister Karen Crockett (Joan Van Ark) and capsizes.

Clint and Karen invite Pickett for the party in the private island of their grumpy grandfather Jason Crockett (Ray Milland), an old fashioned disabled patriarch that enjoys celebrating his birthday on the 4th July with his family.

Pickett realizes that the island is infested of frogs and reptiles and Jason has ordered his caretaker to poison his real estate to get rid of the amphibians and creepy crawlies. But soon Picket realizes that they are living the payback of nature against mankind.

The trash "Frogs" is probably one of the first movies to defend the ecology and absolutely ahead of the time. This is the first feature of Sam Elliot, who acts with the veteran Ray Milland. The story is funny and never scares but entertains. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "A Invasão das Rãs" ("The Frogs'Invasion")

While it's pretty obvious that this film was done on a low budget (i.e. the same shots are repeated over and over and over) this is a pretty effective horror movie and deserves a look. The death scenes are well executed (and the end is quite chilling), the music is appropriate (it's sounds almost like an "angry swamp"), and the locations are put to good use. It's definitely a b-movie and is not at all "great cinema", but it's still a minor classic and should have some kind of cult status.

The plot here is little more than: "Help! We're surrounded by hostile creatures!" Yet there's something about this movie that lodges in the memory and it's probably its heavy, humid atmosphere -- like a hot summer day where nothing's happening yet you know there must be a storm brewing just over the horizon. The eclectic cast is headed by Ray Milland but the star here is Sam Elliott who makes his first real impression in the movies. His let-me-strip-off-my-sweaty-shirt-and-display-my-hairy-chest scenes were SO impressive that they landed him the lead role in that piece of beefcake-nirvana called "Lifeguard."

(June 2009 update: Note how this movie finds echoes, seven years later, in another Sam Elliott movie: "The Legacy." In both movies Elliott plays a young man who, because of a transportation accident, winds up as a reluctant guest at a mansion located in an isolated spot in the country. The mansion is owned, in both cases, by a distinguished older gentleman who suffers from a physical disability. There are other guests at the mansion and during the course of Elliott's stay, these guests are killed off, one by one -- in a variety of bizarre fashions -- by a mysterious force. In both movies, Elliott performs "beefcake" scenes which have a gratuitous quality. In "Frogs," he appears twice without his shirt and in "The Legacy" he has a rear-view nude scene.)

Even though the film can never really top the brilliance of its own tagline ('Today the pond! Tomorrow the world!'), "Frogs" is a hugely entertaining and surprisingly well-made ecological horror film. These typical "creature features" were guaranteed hits back in the 70's and pretty much every animal species got turned into ravenous monsters enthusiast horror filmmakers, even the most unlikely ones like worms ("Squirm") and rabbits ("Night of the Lepus"). In this film, the frogs aren't just vicious killers but also strategic army generals that mobilize a whole island's ecosystem to commit nasty murders! The frogs are merely supervising whilst humans are being killed off by spiders, lizards, snakes, alligators and – oh yes – even a turtle! Pickett Smith is a freelance photographer who ends up at the private island home of obnoxious industrialist Jason Crockett during his annual 4th of July/birthday celebration. Also present are a dangerously increasing amount of frogs that no longer put up with the pollution and pesticides on the island and they plan a large-scaled attack on the Crockett family. "Ten Little Indians"-style, all the island's residents are imaginatively killed by ill-natured critters. The story naturally is silly and hardly ever scary, yet it's praiseworthy how director George McGowan attempts to build up an atmosphere of tension. Much like Hitchcock did in "The Birds" (only better), McGowan simply zooms in on the frogs and puts the emphasis on their eerie croaking. So, even though they're simple frogs they look a bit ominous! The best aspect of the film unquestionably is Mario Tosi's colorful camera-work that shows the beautiful environment from many creative viewpoints. The young Sam Elliot is quite good in his heroic role but the shows is obviously stolen by Ray Milland as the grumpy and bossy millionaire who thinks he can afford himself everything. The rest of the cast is quite wooden and their gruesome animal-inflicted deaths actually come as a relief. "Frogs" stands for great campy fun, not a single dull moment and a high body count! Damn, the 70's were cool.

Millionaire patriarch Ray Milland and his extended family gather together at his private island mansion to celebrate the 4th of July and have much more to worry about than photographer and ecologist Sam Elliott snooping around getting material for a magazine layout on pollution. You see, Elliott isn't the only one who's fed up with Milland's environmental poisoning, as a horde of frogs wise up and lead their swampland buddies (alligators, snakes, lizards, turtles, birds, leeches, spiders and more) in a violent revolt.

Thanks to the piercing sounds of Les Baxter's score and sheer variety of creepy crawlers on display, you are likely to cringe somewhere along the line in this ridiculous and often awkwardly directed, but nonetheless entertaining effort.

I honestly think this is an underrated movie.

The plot seems good, although it was carried out weakly, I still enjoyed the movie. Revenge of nature is not an easy thing to portray on film, and this film did its best.

Ray Milland gave an over-the-top-but-still-very-entertaining performance as Jason Crockett, the grumpy old man responsible for toxic waste dumping all along the island he lives on. Sam Elliott was great as an early-career role of Pickett Smith, the hero. Joan Van Ark was alright as the joyful Karen Crockett, the girl who has a crush on Pickett. Adam Roarke was excellent as Clint, Karen's goofy cousin. And everyone else...well... don't hold your breath.

The music was a little off-beat but good nonetheless. The effects were a little ridiculous but still alright.

Not too bad of a movie. Only watch knowing its gonna be bad.

6/10

Think about it...this movie is supposed to be about an outbreak of killer frogs. So is it any surprise that the movie is a laughably bad film? They weren't exactly trying to make a remake of Romeo and Juliet here! One of the biggest problems I initially saw (aside from the horrible over-acting of Ray Milland and the dumb plot) was that despite the title, the film has very few frogs. Most of the killer animals were actually toads, lizards, tarantulas, snakes, birds and alligators. Aside from gators and a few of the snakes, which were poisonous, it just seemed ludicrous seeing these totally harmless creatures supposedly on a mad killing spree--though none of them actually did a whole lot other than just hop scamper about--after all, they are just cute little critters.

Some of my favorite stupid deaths in the film was one where a guy seemed to be killed by Spanish moss and tarantulas. Aside from a few chigger bites, I can't see how Spanish moss could pose any health problem and a tarantula bite is about as bad as a bee sting! Another had a man killed by bottles of various poisons which cute little lizards pushed off the shelves in a nicely choreographed scene (though none of the reptiles were killed--they just scurried about the dead man's body). Another scene featured a man getting bitten and dying from a rattlesnake bite in less than 3 seconds. And my favorite was when the guy wrestled with a gator--and if you looked closely, you could see that the animal's jaws were taped shut!

From my description, you'd probably assume this was a terrible film--and it is. However, like many of the animals running amok films of the 50s, 60s and 70s, it is also strangely watchable because it is so silly. Many won't enjoy this campy a film, but bad film lovers will have a ball. If you like this wretched 70s film, also try EMPIRE OF THE ANTS (which is actually worse than FROGS) and NIGHT OF THE LEPUS (about killer bunnies). Don't say I didn't warn you!

Frogs should be classified in that 'large' horror subgenre known as Environmentalist, Anti-Pollution Horror. It's the story of nature getting back at us humans for the pollution we've dumped. The story is set on an island owned by a very wealthy, poison-spraying anti-environmentalist, Jason Crockett (Ray Milland). His family has gathered for the traditional 4th of July celebration and birthday party. But, unbeknownst to the family, the animals are planning their revenge. The swamp creatures (apparently on orders from the frogs) take turns killing the family one at a time.

My first reaction: I found it to be a fun, entertaining movie if you DO NOT take it seriously. I usually hate the word 'cheesy' when used to describe a movie, but it's the best word I can think of to describe Frogs. Milland is great as the grumpy old rich man. He dominates every scene he's in. Sam Elliot and Joan Van Ark are the other two stars/heroes most would recognize. And they do their best to make believable the unbelievable horror facing them.

One of the fun parts of the movie is trying to guess which creature will get the next turn at a human victim. And, how they will actually be able to carry out the killings. Will it be the snakes, the spiders, the lizards, the alligators, or the turtles? Yes, even the turtles get a turn in one of the most contrived death scenes ever filmed. Of course, the creatures are helped by the members of the family who seem intent on going one at a time into the woods. Their impending deaths are telegraphed from a mile away.

I can't in all honesty and in good conscious give this one a very high rating. I'll say a 6/10 for that funky, cheese filled 70s feel that Frogs has.

Almost a decade after seagulls and crows wreaked havoc on Tippi Hedren's coiffure in "The Birds" and just one year after "Willard" let his rats do the dirty work, this Nature vs. Man flick came along to continue the legacy (a legacy which would gain even more steam in the wake of "Jaws," with man thereafter having to fend off every beast and insect imaginable except for gnats!) Elliott plays a photojournalist, canoeing off an island owned by Milland, who is capsized by Milland's irresponsible grandson Roake. He is invited to Milland's mansion for a shower and some dry clothes just as an annual family celebration is taking place. The family is more commandeered to appear there by Milland rather than taking part out of pleasure, but they are present nonetheless. Before anyone can even cut the cake, a groundskeeper has been found dead from a snakebite and it isn't long before members of the family are being picked off, one by one, by snakes, spiders, iguanas, turtles(!) and pretty much everything EXCEPT frogs, which sort of watch and ribbit as the bodies pile up before staking their claim at the end. Top-billed Milland is wheelchair-bound here and barks his lines at the cast of lesser-knowns. He is appropriately steely, stubborn and unpleasant and not a little bit foolish! Elliott, near the start of his lengthy career, is hunky and appealing. His eye-poppingly revealing jeans belong in some sort of museum for erotic denim. Van Ark, also in one of her early roles, is fresh and pretty and compliments Elliott well, though her character is given precious little to do. Roarke, better known for playing tough bikers, lends a surprising and mystifying sense of homoerotica to his womanizing role. Borden plays his frustrated and complaining wife and is given one of the sillier scenes in the movie when she is "stuck" in some ankle-deep mud and gets assaulted by a giant turtle. Pace makes an impression as the model girlfriend of one of the grandsons. She's one of the few people who will give Milland what for. Irving is a memorably batty presence, traipsing off into the swamp after a rare butterfly. Others in the cast are basically on hand to croak at the opportune moment. There's an attempt here to suggest that Everglade animals finally had their fill of man's oppression and pollution and decided to retaliate. Elliott photographs endless debris over the opening credits to where one expects a teary Chief Dan George to drift by and bemoan the situation. This is rather briskly forgotten as the increasingly preposterous attacks and deaths begin to mount up. The situations of these encounters, paired with the amateurism in the acting, provide unintentional humor in ample quantities! Regardless of the fact that this is a rather shoddily-written and choppily-edited movie with some silly scenarios and, in some cases, really poor acting, it remains entertaining and compelling for most of its non-oppressive running time. Oddly, the trailer for the film shows many different takes than those which appear in the finished movie. One key scene in particular, involving quicksand/swamp water, only appears in the trailer and on the video case. The Nature vs. Man genre would continue to pop up throughout the 70's until Irwin Allen's massive bomb "The Swarm" slammed a temporary lid on the trend.

A horror movie about killer frogs?? I had to check this out. Well, it was a waste of rental-film money. It committed two unforgivable horror-flick sins: 1 - it wasn't scary; 2 - it was downright boring.

Why was I not surprised the frogs weren't scary? Why did I think because Ray Milland was in it, it might be good? (Boy, it's sad to see a man of his "Lost Weekend" stature wind up in films like this in the '60s and '70s.)

It was interesting to see such a young Sam Ellliott, who I am used to viewing as a bearded, weathered--faced cowboy over the years. Elliott was in his '20s and had mainly done just TV work prior to this movie. He sure has come a long way from "Frogs!"

The worst part of this movie was the first 20 minutes in which absolutely nothing happened. Hello?? Nice to way to grab your audience, eh? Actually, this whole movie is just way too bland.

I've always thought frog legs were a delicacy and I like frogs in general but this movie is terrible. I am embarrassed for Milland, who I have always admired as an actor.

Nature is on the rampage as various animals supposedly under the command of frogs (don't ask), attack and destroy Ray Milland and his family for polluting the environment. Yes, it's as stupid as it sounds. I saw it originally at a drive-in when I was 10 and loved it, but seeing it as an adult, I was bored and annoyed.

**PLOT SPOILERS** It's slow (at least 45 minutes go by until the first killing), has bad dialogue and all the deaths (with one exception) are bloodless. I'd LOVE to know how a huge snapping turtle kills one woman and wouldn't the animals have been killed by the poison in the greenhouse scene? Also WAY too many close-ups of croaking frogs. The acting varies--Ray Milland and a young Joan Van Ark are very good (especially considering the dialogue they have). Sam Elliott (so young and pumped up) is horrible--very wooden. On the plus side there is some nice nature photography, a really eerie electronic score worked and Elliott walking around in a VERY tight pair of jeans. Also the animated frog right after the closing credits is cool. But, all in all, it's just too dull and stupid to work. Good for laughs.

This film is absolutely ribbiting. The action really toads the line between intense and dynamic. I was swamped with delight witnessing such awesome acting by the likes of Ray Milland, Sam Elliot, and Adam Rourke. This isn't one of those "Government tried a shortcut and ended up creating a monstrosity of nature that now has to kill all mankind" type of sci-fi creature films. This is nature verses man all the way, the likes of "Jaws", that'd come out a few years later. Well okay, this is no "Jaws", but folks, I'm telling you, it's pretty darn entertaining, if not in a "fun to bag on" sense. The pace is slow but intentionally so, as the froggies move in while a group of rich people (and Sam Elliot as the token environmentalist) are about to have a outdoor picnic. Sam Elliot as the do-gooder nature guy doesn't go over-the-top, and doesn't lecture like so many "nature first" characters can do in these films (i.e., no rants). Everything in "Frogs" is pretty subtle, even the attacks by the reptiles. Mind you, the frogs themselves don't move in till the end; but they are the silent generals of the surrounding swamp land's snakes, lizards, and giant spiders. Rent, or buy, "Frogs"... It's a truly ribbiting film! (The beginning credit sequence is one of my favorites of all time; and stick around for a little surprise after the end credits...)

Attention, all: Specific Spoilers in here!

A frog little man vs. nature film great for a three-in-the-morning-insomniac-fest, Frogs may be. But it's less scary than it is a interesting comment on the social undercurrents bubbling to the surface in 1972.

We meet our characters, all the classics that populate the 1970s disaster films: Jason Crockett (the disappointing Ray Milland, even if it IS the script's fault), who represents the adults, the older generation that was being rebelled against in the just-post-hippie years. Being Crockett is a military man who likes everything to be ordered and just so, he also represents the `staid' government that youth were rebelling against at the time; Karen Crockett (Joan Van Ark), the perhaps-Carpenter-inspired anorexia glam of the 70s, (or was it Twiggy-inspired leftover, perhaps), so thin if she turns sideways she'd disappear.and Pickett (Sam Elliot), who boldly removes his shirt when he's got to leap in the water to dislodge the canoe with Karen and the two children in it, not only to provide the standard male sex symbol image so prevalent in all horror films (got to have a maverick guy to rescue everybody and be the outspoken one who's right in the end, after all), but also to illustrate `that men are still men even if there's this women's lib movement thriving. A hairy chest still turns them on.'

Now, issues. Most amusing, the comments on the leftovers of the civil rights movement. I found the woman in her voo-doo inspired garish robes and hoop earrings just a little contrived when she screamed at the two servants, `Five score and seven years ago you earned the right to make up your own minds.' Or something like that - I don't remember the line exactly. But it's a sub-plot that surfaces for all of five minutes and is resolved in all of five minutes, sticking out like the sore thumb of the screenwriter trying to get his point across just because it was `cool' or `hip' or `in' at the time.

There's even the surfacing of the anti-American government theme: well, Vietnam was going on at the time. A frog tromps blissfully across a cake shaped and frosted like the American Flag. Toward the end, a frog lodges itself against the thick arm of an ancient grammophone, putting a stop to the festive militant-sounding march music that is Crockett's attempt to soothe his nerves in the middle of the night.

And then, there's the pre- don't-pick-up-strangers-on-the-side-of-the-road mentality: Pickett secures a ride for Karen and the kids from a passing car. The woman doesn't question him getting in the car with a shot-gun. And, after all, why would she? She's only got her kid she just picked up from camp in the passenger seat.

Okay, perhaps this is all too deep for a low-budget 1970s `monster' movie. But films, no matter how bad, often reflect what's up with the country at the time and sometimes you even find evidence of that in a lousy script and bad shots of probably-harmless frogs on the `rampage.'

So when that phone rings in the last scene, leaving Milland in despair to shout, 'it can't be dead, it rang!'.don't let fear keep you up. It's just the frogs calling to tell you your beer is finished - and it's time to call it a night.

"Frogs" is set in Florida around a prominent southern family whose patriarch Jason Crockett (Millan) is polluting the island he owns. In the mean time a naturalist/photographer Pickett Smith (Elliot) is taking pictures of the area, just from a shot or two he sees the place is polluted. While in his canoe he's capsized (Flips it himself) by some of Crockett's family, Karen (Van Ark) and Clint (Roarke) who likes putting back some brews. They apologize and he comes to the mansion for a wash and talk. While all this is going on you have the constant sound of frogs and a lot of crowing. Old man Crockett can't stand the sounds of frogs and complains about them 24/7. He wants them wiped out. Crockett sent out a guy named Grover to look into this and goes missing in the swamp and you guessed it, he's been killed by the frogs or is it toads, well lets say nature. Smith gets the notion that nature may be fighting back, taking revenge for what man has done to them. Jason says that's hogwash and does not care. One by one people start getting knocked off, often in amusing and also boring ways by just about every creature you can find that slithers in a swamp. One that stands out is Kenneth (Cortland) who gets knocked off in the green house when some reptiles start breaking various glass jars containing "poison". So of course he goes over to investigate and is overcome but he fumes. The lizard's just laugh at him. Various family members and other miscellaneous people get killed and it's all very silly. To list a few, Michael (Gillian) basically trips and is over taken by canopy of spiders webs and spiders, snapping turtle attacks Jenny (Borden) stuck in mud, snake takes down Iris (Irving) along with leaches (fake as can be and way overacted,) Clint killed by a snake in the water and to top it off they kill off the blacks who worked on the estate. I mean who can't out run turtle? At least they finally brought out a gator to kill poor old Stuart (Skaff). Old man Crockett decides he's not going anywhere and will stay at the estate. Amusing how Crockett was barking out orders as if he had control over his family and workers to stay and die with him. So when the rest hightail it he stays behind with his poor dog. Smith, Karen and Clint's kids escape with some trouble and hail a driver on local road. Amusing how the driver stops and picks them up with a loaded shotgun in Smith's hand. Its hinted that this is going on elsewhere. As for old man Crockett, eventually he falls out of his wheelchair and is overcome by frogs bouncing around at his windows.

I had read about this film for some time and finally saw it on "THIS TV" network. I'm glad I didn't hold my breath to see it because it was silly indeed. It's mostly boring, rather then a terrible film. The acting is not great, that's for sure. Even Millan who is good, just sits around and bitches about the frogs all day. He plays the same angry crippled old man from The Thing With Two Heads. Joan Van Ark looked good. I'd say she was one of the better parts of the film, along with Sam Elliot doing an early role. There really weren't that many special effects accept for the opening and closing credits which I think they spent most of the budget on. The biggest problem is that Frogs aren't dangerous, so you have various other creatures from the black lagoon doing the dirty work on the humans as the frogs pull the strings from behind. It comes off as amusing far more than scary in any way. I love the toad walking around on the cake with icing on his feet and Millan blowing away the snake in the dining room. The deaths are silly to impossible. This was one the early nature strikes back films and so man more came about after this. Overall it is silly but it's actually and good watch just to pass some time, laugh a little and remember the 70's. I'm always up for seeing nature strike back at man. So, 5 out of 10 stars.

Ray Milland and friends are having a celebration on his swampy estate, whose constant polluting of the local forests send hordes of frogs, snakes, lizards, etc. on a bloody rampage. Good performances only accompany this incredibly dumb, but surprisingly scary, pre-JAWS nature-on-a-rampage flick. Scenes of alligators brutally attacking a frightened old man or spiders covering another poor person in a web are truly disturbing. Not for the squeamish!

Frogs is an exercise in inept film-making - from top to bottom. Then again, the cinematographer did a good job, but everyone else involved in the production of this terrible film should be flogged - by frogs.

Let it be known, I have a fondness for 70's drive-in cheese. Some of my favorite movies came from the Frogs period, such as Don't Look in the Basement and Funeral Home, but this film has nothing going for it. Every death scene - and I mean EVERY death scene, will elicit a laugh from your lips. The most inane death scene was when Lynn Borden gets killed by a turtle and a school of crabs. However, she is supposedly stuck in the mud, when she spots the enormous turtle, you can clearly see Lynn LIFT HER LEFT LEG out of her supposed implanted doom. Wow! This film is terrible, and not of that fun drive-in cheesy variety either.

VIOLENCE: $$ (All laughable. The characters all die at the hands - or various appendages, I should say - of the various critters hellbent on killing them for contaminating their environment. The nephew carries a rifle through the woods and proceeds to shoot himself in the leg before a pack of tarantulas descend upon him in an all-too laughable death scene Also, Sam Elliott gets to beat snakes with an oar and blast an alligator with a shotgun).

NUDITY: None

STORY: $ (The beginning is very promising. Sam Elliott, portraying a freelance photographer, takes pictures of animals at Ray Milland's island while also stopping to take photos of all the debris in the water. It has a heavy-handed environmental message at the beginning but never fleshes that out. Instead, we have a cantankerous old battle-axe who controls his family on Fourth of July -hellbent on enjoying the festivities despite his brood dying off one-by-one).

ACTING: $$ (Ray Milland plays the grandpa with over-the-top egotism. In short time you will want to punch the old buzzard in the snout. Sam Elliott gives the best acting job as Pickett Smith while Joan Van Ark compliments him well as Grandpa's proper grandchild Karen. Lynn Borden does a good job as a neglected housewife although that scene where she gets killed by the turtle - while having a conglomerate of crabs crawling up her legs - was the ultimate in low-budget cheese).

A lame entry in the `eco-horror' genre of the 70s, FROGS details the exploits of the hard-drinkin' Crockett family, who's annual Fourth of July celebration is invaded by frogs, or rather, clumsily inserted shots of frogs. The filmmakers keep insisting that just because there are images of frogs on screen, it's scary. Every scene in this movie (which mostly consist of the unpleasant family's pointless squabbling) features some drop-ins of frogs, and their croaking is on the soundtrack for 80% of the flick. It's an interesting motif, but not really all that scary.

And even though the movie is called FROGS, all of the killing are preformed by the other swampland critters. The movie could've been called LEECHES, SNAKES, SPIDERS, ALLIGATORS, TURTLE or LIZARDS, and it wouldn't have made any difference. The titular animals don't really do anything menacing, just sit around while the humans die in stupid ways. People in this movie could've survived if they tried employing radical measures like `running', `opening unlocked doors', or `not being total freakin' morons'. One great scene has the doddering butterfly enthusiast lady running through the swamp and managing to walk into every tree, vine, bush, or puddle she can find, doing more damage than the animals ever could. The snake just killed her to put her out of her misery. I did learn, however, not to store open jars of poison in my greenhouse (although the greenhouse scene in SLUGS is much better). Late in the game the frogs do get into the act, but their one skill is waiting until their victim fall over and then hopping on them. But for all this movie's pitfalls there is some great photography and a great, funny, nihilistic ending.

The mostly unlikable cast is saved by a mustache-less Sam Elliot (who has a great voice) as the sensible, denim-clad hero, Judy Pace as the only sympathetic character (and she's really hot, too), and Ray `Mr. X' Milland as the wheelchair-bound, cantankerous millionaire who owns the island. However, since they keep cutting back between Ray and bullfrogs, I kept expecting Ray to inflate all the dangling extra flesh on HIS neck.

So if you catch this AIP opus on TV, pop open a couple of beers and enjoy, although you'd be better off watching the hilarious SLUGS, the worm-movie SQUIRM, GRIZZLY, or even NIGHT OF THE LEPUS. Be sure to stick around after the credits for a brief appearance by a cartoon frog.

I would say that there were spoilers ahead, but you couldn't spoil this film, and I think it's better that you're forewarned...

'Starring' Sam Elliott (The Big Lebowski's Western dude), it features the usual array of MST-able characters. There is the crippled patriarch with a tendency to hold impromptu parties on the lawn, while listening to 78s of marching bands. There is his 'ward' of somewhat ambivalent sexuality. Sam Elliott himself must have been instructed to stand side-on to the sun wherever possible so that his batch would stand gnomon-like and tell the time. There is the alcoholic 'wayward son' with a penchant for fast vehicles, and some badly-explained backstory concerning Sam's character. Did I mention that Sam's character is an ecological researcher with a camera but no note-pad? There is the highly-sexed 'daughter', and the traditional black servant family. Did I also forget to mention that this is set on an island in the middle of the Bayou in the Southern US?

Anyhow, amidst this group of alternately unlikable and unbelievable characters, a plague of frogs arrives. They hop over some cake, but are no more than a minor irritation. Minor, perhaps, but it is enough to stir our crippled patriarch to employ someone to poison the bayou in the hopes of killing them off. Our stoic 'hero', who spends far too long sans shirt, disapproves. As does the local reptile population, who begin to pick off the island's inhabitants one-by-one in pretty unlikely ways. Our hapless louche 'personal assistant', for example, wanders into a greenhouse. Lizards lock the door, before smashing two bottles of brightly-coloured chemicals on the floor. Unsurprisingly, these mix to produce an almost instantly fatal toxic smoke, from which the only feasible escape would have been for our victim to feebly tear his way through the polyurethane walls. But he didn't think of this, so he died.

Oddly, for a film called 'Frogs', that features so much stock footage of frogs, the frogs don't actually do any killing. I think it's meant to be implied that they are somehow co-ordinating their scaly cohorts, but it's not really clear. I don't see how they could get their message through to the turtle who chases down (yes, the world's least exciting chase scene) one of the victims. And speaking of message, the whole 'Nature fights back' message is risible. Anyway, the frogs look like they might be killing towards the end where two of them leap on the patriarch after he falls out of his wheelchair. He dies, but I can't see how two frogs leaping on his back kill him. They're not big frogs. They weren't holding knives. And anyway, the 'invasion' is just a bunch of frogs. Keep your doors and ground-floor windows closed, they'll go away when they need to spawn.

Halliwell's film guide gave this a star - the same rating it gave Terry Gilliam's 'Brazil'. Halliwell was dead wrong.

I find it hard to understand how a horror movie could be equated with a bunch of frogs. Frogs aren't scary. They don't have teeth or claws. What's the worst they could do? Croak all night and hop around all over the place. How could this make for a good horror movie? I would say this director lacked any sense of horror. I could have made a better movie than this and I'm not even a director. Check out "Food of the Gods". Now THAT is scary. It's full of giant mosquitos, giant rats, giant worms and snakes, even a giant chicken,all of which could mangle a human being. But FROGS? A pitiful subject for a horror movie. (this line added simply to fill in enough space so my comments would post. When are they going to change this stupid requirement?)

OK when i was younger and seen frogs for the first time it was kind of scary,then as you get older you find all the mistakes and plot holes and such.this is no way as great as Alfred Hitchcock's the birds.this one deals with a bunch of rich people all celebrating the 4th of July.y birthdays on a Florida island.the patriarch(Ray Milland)who was a hunter before his crippling accident invites his family members all doltish and strange with the exception of his granddaughter(Joan Van Ark)and a model(Judy Pace)and a photographer(Sam Elliot)who is just passing through after his canoe is capsized by a drunken boater(Adam Roarke)the scenes with the animals attacking are really bad.and don't come off as realistic.a harmless rat snake,harmless geckos and anoles,even a snapping turtle,a slow moving one at that.there is a scene where some of the characters flag down a motorist.and the motorist stops for them one of them is carrying a rifle.OK if thats me i would'nt stop for anyone especially if they are carrying a rifle. frogs has some really interesting poster art,a frog with a human hand sticking out of its mouth.as for the plot.it does'nt exist.pity the poor actors,especially the late great Ray Milland(lost weekend,dial m for murder)this was made by Samuel z arkoff and American international pictures,i had originally seen on a double bill with the incredible 2 headed transplant,another clunker thats actually better than frogs. 1 out of 10.

The 1970s was the era of disco, blaxploitation, and eco-horror (aka nature's vengeance). George McCowan's "Frogs" is considered the first eco-horror flick. A young Sam Elliott (more recently known as the narrator in "The Big Lebowski") plays a photographer who visits a southern estate where the patriarch (Ray Milland) refuses to live in harmony with nature. The old man sprays chemicals all over the swamp with absolutely no regard for the plants or animals. So it only makes sense that the frogs -- in collaboration with the snakes, alligators, spiders, etc. -- are out to dispense some justice! On the plot's value alone, there's no reason to interpret "Frogs" as any kind of high-quality movie. We could interpret it as a warning about messing with the Earth (when you battle nature, you ALWAYS lose), or we could just view it as a plain old fun movie. Whatever the case, it's a pretty enjoyable flick, silly though it may be.

All in all, just be a little more respectful the next time that you meet any plant or animal, especially an amphibian of the order Anura.

The frogs in this movie don't do a whole lot. The just hang around croaking a bunch. The movie has this one guy who gets knocked into a swamp by some people in a boat joining a birthday party for this old guy. His entire family is there, and they are going to have a really bad time as nature goes berserk. All manners of creatures start killing people by different means, all while the frogs croak up a storm. Snakes, lizards, even birds attack the partygoers. I think the frogs contracted all the animals of the swamp to do their bidding or something. Sam Elliot stars in this one and considering the type of movie it is, he does a rather good job. There are some good deaths too, but nothing really gruesome. It is best not to take the film to seriously though and just have fun with it.