Alright, so last night I watched Alligator (1980) wasn't as cheesy as I expected, the production quality was actually decent.This morning before work I decide to watch Alligator II: The mutation (1991) and I'm expecting this super cheesy mutated alligator that's hardly an alligator, and what do I get? a simple re-hash of the first.
They were both decent movies in their own respects. They each had separate main characters with separate stories, the 90s one obviously featuring a sleaze bag hair greased back thinks he owns everything 90s villain.
The main thing that separated these two movies is that in the first, you started to actually feel for the main character. The second movie, while being more amusing, the main character isn't that easy to relate with.
The general plot of both movies is that an gigantic alligator (30ft in the first one) is living in the sewers of a major city, and all of a sudden they notice it's killing people (18 years later in the first). With such a crappy plot hole of why all of a sudden out of the blue when the creature is 18 years old do they FINALLY start noticing strange disappearances, did it not eat for 18 years? You assume that you're in for a simple b-grade monster flick, low budget, crappy story, mediocre acting. Honestly, this movie had decent actors, the story (other than the massive plot hole I mentioned) was good and the budget was $1,500,000 for an early 90s movie that's not too bad.
You go in expecting a b-grade but then it turns out it isn't. Alligator is the most serious movie I've seen with a b-grade idea and they actually manage to pull it off.
Honestly, if you like a monster flick, both Alligator movies are worth the watch, definitely check them out, and now IMDB links: