There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

I can't say there's anything truly original about the plot: A family moves out to the country to avoid the pressures of city life, only to find out there's something much, much worse waiting for them in Mountainview. This movie appears to want to be a parody of bug movies, but only succeeds in bringing campiness to a new level. If this movie were made ten years earlier, I would have enjoyed it. I just can't stand bad 90's and 00's digital effects. I think they show the same digital shot of rain and the bugs coming out of the water at least four times. Randy Quaid's face is proudly presented on the DVD cover, but I think he was one of the weakest parts of the whole movie. All his character does is say things like "I'm gonna kick some bug a**!" and shoot various firearms. In fact, I think the movie got 100 times worse once he actually showed up outside of his commercials. Scotty and Mr.Sulu appear in this film (what, the filmmakers couldn't get Captain Kirk and Spock?), but oddly enough never share a scene together. I did notice one unusual thing though: The two stupid youngsters attempting to make love at the lake are supposed to die in their first scene but don't: They actually die in different, later parts of the movie. So, overall, a fairly weak entry in the evil bug parody sub genre, which goes slowly downhill once Quaid shows up, with an exceptionally weak climax and a lame "suprise" ending.Well, I really shouldn't complain. I only spent $3.99 on it(used)after all. Well, I'm gonna go kick some bug a** now. Good night.

Bug Buster is set in the Californian town of Mountview thirteen years after the place was dusted with an experimental pesticide. Gil Griffin (Bernie Kopell) has brought a lodge in Mountview & together with his wife Cammie (Anne Lockhart) & teenage daughter Shannon (Katherine Heigl) move in, however what should be a dream life quickly turns into a nightmare as several dead bodies start popping up around the town. Bodies infested with Cockroach like insects, local veterinarian Laura Casey (Brenda Epperson Doumani) haven't seen anything like them before & thinks they may be a new species. A new species that are gradually wiping out the town...Co-produced & directed by Lorenzo Doumani this creature feature from the late 90's is a pretty forgettable & uneven mix of comedy & horror that feels like it was conceived as a cheap rip-off of Mimic (1997). The script by Malick Khoury has your standard creature feature scenario, some sort of genetically altered insect/animal starts killing off humans in some isolated location. Here for the most part it's Cockroaches although the script has plenty of holes in it. If these attacks started thirteen years after the pesticides were used what were these bugs doing for that amount of time? Why is there only one big mother bug when that Professor guy managed to make one hatch simply by putting one of the Cockroaches in water? There were also loads of eggs in the mine so why did none of those hatch? Then there are the character's whom are poor, the comedy relief bug buster General George is irritating, Shannon remains remarkably calm despite both of her parents being killed by the bugs, the fat garage attendant only there so he can sit on a toilet & fart a lot for more childish comedy relief as well as the subplot about a local resident who wanted the bugs to kill everyone so he could buy the whole town cheap & make money in the long-run which is forgotten about as soon as it is mentioned. The film also takes ages to get going, everyone goes round in circles for the first seventy odd minutes, people are dying & the local authorities discover that bugs are responsible & then spend ages going back & forth doing nothing in particular.Director Doumani misjudges the tone badly, there are some really childish, silly & just downright embarrassing slapstick comedy moments that don't work at all & are far from funny. Then the horror content is downplayed & neither the comedy or horror elements satisfy. It's certainly not scary, the scene showing Cockroaches crawling over Shannon while she is asleep is as creepy as it gets & as such the exact same scene is show no less than four times. There's no gore at all apart from one mouldy corpse. The special effects are poor too, the guy in a bad rubber suit mother bug at the end looks terrible as does the CGI. There are also lots & lots of blatant references to other films like in Scream (1996), from Jaws to The Wizard of Oz to Outbreak.According to the IMDb Bug Buster had a budget of about $8,500,000 which amazes me. In fact I am positive that Bug Buster didn't have anywhere near that much money, I think the IMDb has made a mistake & put one '0' too many. The film looks cheap & is forgettable in every respect. The acting is mixed, Randy Quaid is truly terrible & only turns up for the last twenty odd minutes. Katherine Heigl is alright & she is a real babe which helps. Two Star Trek actors make cameo appearances, James Doohan better known as Scotty & George Takei better known as Sulu have small roles. They never actually meet each other on screen though.Bug Buster is a poor creature feature that adds nothing new to the genre & is a badly judged uneven mishmash of comedy & horror. I was disappointed & I can't see too many people enjoying this.

Hi, Everyone,I was the keyboard player in the band "Trailer Park Trash" in the movie. Fortunately they misspelled my last name in the movie credits. No, just joking. It was a fun experience (making the movie was fun, watching it was a little excruciating).Johnny Legend and Melba Toast and I had performed lots of times at various Country Music spots in L.A. over the years of the 80s and 90s. We performed for the producer at some of his Christmas parties. He decided to use us for the scene in the lodge. It was very very hot when we did our scene. It was over 100 outside and hotter inside. The air conditioning had to be turned off while we were filming.It was nice to work with the cast and crew. The movie turned out pretty bad but still fun to watch if you have friends over on a Saturday night and you want to laugh at the screen. Maybe the perfect DVD to get for your mother-in-law or your wife's attorney.The bugs that attacked Johnny Legend during our musical numbers were very real. Not some special effect. There was a "bug wrangler" on the set. They are some kind of cockroach from South America or somewhere and they are as long as a grown man's index finger and as fat as a man's thumb.I would like to say something really good about the movie but I will have to come back if I can think of something.Tom Willett

Come on, people! This is one of the "worst" movies you've ever seen? I can think of dozens of much worse movies. Take a look at another bug movie, "Mimic", that played on the SF channel today right after "Bug Buster". Is it really any better than "BB"? "BB" is a low-budget movie that doesn't take itself seriously. It doesn't try to be anything more than it is. Randy Quaid does an excellent job of playing the same character he always does. The dialogue and special effects are often (intentionally) hilarious. This is not a work of art, but it's a heck of a lot better than half the pretentious, over-produced junk currently coming out of both Hollywood and the indies. Take a chill pill, kick back, and watch it for what it is...not what you think it ought to be.If you want a genuinely bad (i.e., just about unwatchable) movie, check out John Waters' "Multiple Maniacs" or some other truly deserving dreck.