The sheriff of a small town, a former FBI profiler, is having problems adapting his life after the disappearing of his wife. His daughter has accepted that she is very likely dead, yet he can't face the facts. Now something that could be behind her disappearance is terrorizing the little town. People are dying one by one, and some sort of animal or creature is behind it.
You know my reasons for wanting to watch this movie already. C'mon, the cheesy "Feast" rip-off cover isn't enough? I love myself terrible monster movies, and if I know they are ripping something off somehow, I want them even more. That's the only reason I have found and fell for "The Deadly Spawn", "The Terror Within" - two films that are obviously either ripping off or using the success of "Alien" to their advantage. Great! All the power to 'em. When it's cheesy monster movies I don't blame them at all. Where would we be in the monster movie world if we all wanted originals? We certainly wouldn't have a shitload of crappy shark films or all of the amazingly poor giant monsters. "Maneater" doesn't rip off "Feast" much more than with the cover, but the rest of the movie is certainly doing exactly what every other low budget monster movie has done for as long as I can remember.
How many movies can there be about something-something-something coming to a small town and strange things happen? They're not even trying! In this movie we have a small town sheriff and his daughter in the center. His wife disappeared one night and is yet to be found, but he still expects her to come home. The daughter has accepted that her mother will probably never come back. As people start to die in the small town they suspect a large animal of sorts - a bear or a puma, perhaps. But the sheriff thinks there is something a bit off about it - there's no obvious drag marks after the kills, something you would see from an animal. The thing that killed these people obviously carried the person away from there. There's also an indian cop - do you think he will have anything to do with the plot? Of course. Why else would ever an indian be pulled into an American movie? Not like they have anything to do with the country - geesh! Yeah, I won't go into details about what the monster is, but there is talk of a wendigo. It's impossible to know what that will mean since every movie has a different take on the myth (my favorite is probably the lovely crapfest "Frostbiter: Wrath of the Wendigo").
In a typical monster movie with a typical monster movie setup there's obviously gonna be a certain degree of predictability involved. "Maneater" won't surprise you at all, and except for a few things related to the ending, it doesn't try to. Nope, this movie has a so-so sentimental plot outline that no one cares about, but knows that we are mostly interested in the lovely rules set by Don Dohler: blood, boobs and beast. Blood? A bit, yeah. Not overly gory but it's certainly there. Boobs? Plenty of good ones through-out! Beast? Oh yeah, and it actually looks pretty good in a "Tales From the Crypt" sort of way, if you ignore the glowing eyes. But at least they're not glowing from a digital effect but from the practical effect. It still looks pretty stupid, though.
The acting is pretty bad, even from Dean Cain ("Lois & Clark") you have to settle for mediocre acting. I guess that's fine, right? We still have the important ingredients for a movie like this.
"Maneater" is slightly more entertaining than I thought it would be. I expected it to be a SyFy quality film, but because the monster was just a bit cooler than expected, and the gore was present, and it gave us a couple of breasties, the movie became a lot more entertaining than SyFy films are. Of course, it doesn't mean that it's a good movie - pick most 80's monster movies and you'll have more fun, but for what it is I can certainly say you could get worse crap. Brainless monster flick, that's all.