Sanctum

Forget the critics, this is an awesome movie. It's fast-paced, action-packed and spectacular. I was tense the whole time and came out feeling like I'd been holding my breath for hours.

Seriously, most critics seem more interested in showing how cynical and cool they are than actually enjoying a great adventure film. I've read lots of reviews, so I'll address a few of the complaints made.

Bad dialogue: It's not Shakespeare, but it sets up the relationships between characters quickly and serves the action well. It also manages to explain the basics of caving and scuba diving (which most of the audience would be unfamiliar with) without seeming too preachy.

Bad acting: I thought everyone was pretty great with what they had to do. Again, it's not bloody Shakespeare.

Predictable: not to me. Yes, they're stuck in a cave so there's only so many things that can happen. But what does happen is really bloody exciting. I guess if you spend your whole life watching movies (as critics do) then any action movie would be predictable after a while.

Unlikeable characters: Um, since when did every character have to be likable? And even if you don't particularly like a character, surely you don't want them to die a horrible death down a cave. The truth is some of the characters you really like, some grow on you and some you almost want to drown with your own bare hands. So a good mix.

Weak roles for women: I disagree. The women are put in freaky situations and react in human ways. Though I didn't quite understand what happened to Victoria - that's one thing the film could have done slightly better.

I've also heard critics complain about too much swearing (seriously, if you've ever spent time around real-life explorers they're generally not too concerned with social niceties, especially in life-or-death situations). And some reviewers complained that there were no monsters in the cave - seriously! That was what was so great about the story - it was extreme but it all could have happened. Man vs nature and vs each other - much more interesting than another monster flick.

Anyway, Sanctum is excellent. Go see it.

Well first of all let me get something straight James Cameron is one of NINE producers, so he didn't have too much to do with it. This movie is maybe the must traumatizing movie I have ever seen! I did cry at one point. I'm not a 3D fan at all. In my opinion the only movies that should be in 3D is animated movies (with a few exceptions such as Avatar). I thought the 3D was okay (better than some movies I've seen), but still unnecessary. This movie was not just traumatizing at one point it was traumatizing during the whole movie! The visuals were fantastic! The effects were great! The acting was exceptional! I liked the movie I guess it was just too traumatizing for me. Final Summary: A good movie with great visuals, effects, and acting, but be warned the Sanctum is extremely traumatizing. If you can handle trauma go see Sanctum because it is a good movie.

For a film that goes so deep underground, Sanctum is a remarkably shallow experience. Playing out like The Descent with more water and no monsters, it's a beautifully shot survival flick but it's populated with characters so bland that you won't care one bit if they survive or not. And you'll probably be able to figure out what order they'll run out of oxygen in as well.

In fact, it's not that surprising that as his sticky fingers are all over the post-production and cinematography, this feels like a James Cameron flick where the script never got past the first draft. So when Grrr, Aaargh (Frank MacGuire), Whinging Son (Rhys Wakefield), Millionaire Jerk (Ioan Gruffudd), Comic Relief (Dan Wylie), Woman (Alice Parkinson) and Expendable Foreigner (Cramer Cain) find themselves trapped underground, you'll be more interested in how they're going to die than in the clunky dialogue.

That said, there's some eerily beautiful moments of utter horror to be found. From the ethereal splendour of a vast underwater cave to the pockets of air bubbling like mercury on the rocky ceiling, it's a feast for the eyes even when it leaves the brain starving.

Yes, it's clunky. Yes, the cave is surprisingly well-lit and yes, saying "what could possibly go wrong" before abseiling into the bowels of the earth is utterly stupid. But it's pretty, has a couple of cool death scenes (the "hair" moment is horrible) and it's much, much shorter than The Abyss.

Sanctum is an action thriller involving exploration of an extensive, world-class cave system in Papua New Guinea. The movie is inspired by an actual flood event in an extensive cave in the Nullarbor Plain of Australia in 1988. It is not a documentary, but designed to be a realistic, albeit embellished, account that includes non-stop action as the team is faced with its deadly situations and decisions. Although released in 2-D, 3-D, and IMAX formats, Sanctum is not a science fiction or horror movie. There are no monsters, weird creatures, on humanoid inhabitants, such as are found in the recent films, The Cave, The Cavern, and Descent (Parts 1 and 2). And it is not a fantasy underground adventure like the recent remakes of Journey to the Center of the Earth and Alice in Wonderland. Sanctum is about caving, an adventure sport that is practiced by knowledgeable and safety-minded people throughout the world.

Most movie goers may not recognize the authenticity of the techniques and equipment used in the film. As one who has spent over 45 years exploring and studying caves in over 35 states and several countries, I am familiar with modern caving in some of the great cave systems on the planet and I personally know many of the cavers who are making new discoveries every year. Therefore, I can attest to the great care that the director Alister Grierson and writer-producer Andrew Wight have taken to provide realism to the cave setting. In fact, Wight was a survivor of the Nullarbor event and is an experienced caver and diver. That having been said, Sanctum takes some liberties to create an exciting story. Nearly every activity in caving is included in this epic, such as climbing, rappelling and other rope work, squeezing and negotiating tight passageways, and of course cave diving. This story shows what can go wrong with each of these if care is not taken or if safety is ignored. Sanctum is an adventure thriller that consists of a long string of incidents, dilemmas, and solutions. Each situation is believable on its own merit and has happened at one time or another in caving. But in Sanctum, all of these have been combined, one after another, and continually pose challenges and demand solutions. It reminds me of the classic and entertaining cliff- hanger movies of old. This makes for an exhausting tale in which the audience feels the tense and claustrophobic situations. It is unlikely that such a string of events would ever be encountered by a single caving expedition. However, individually accidents do happen, although they are relatively rare because cavers strictly abide by established safety rules.

What disturbs me is that many of the reviewers of the movie to date miss the point of the film and show an ignorance of what caves and caving are like. Here are some typically unfair remarks and why these are so.

"There is little character development." Caving is very focused. When you are underground, you only think about your surroundings and mission. You do not think about the outside world and your life there, much less about your interpersonal relationships with your fellow cavers. It is true that when caving, you learn a lot about your compatriots and their personalities (just like in the movie), but you do belabor interpersonal relationships. Team members are selected based on their proved track record underground. If there are challenges and threatening conditions, you focus on those as a team, as in the film. Many reviewers apparently wanted more psycho-drama among the protagonists.

"The dialog is terse, unrealistic, and too loud." I disagree. Under the emergency conditions such as shown in the film, the dialog of the characters would be similar. There would be a leader and a plan would develop, just as we witnessed in 2010 in the case of the trapped Chilean miners. As for loudness and screaming, this is the only way to make yourself heard in the presence of running water in the echoing confines of cave passages. I know this from experience. One's senses in a cave are very much focused on sight and sound and the immediate surroundings.

"It is a tedious tale." Yes, trying to escape through a cave system that is flooding could easily be tedious and, given the extent of the cave in Sanctum, finding routes and traversing them would take considerable time. Cave exploration is not a fast process.

I have been on hundreds of caving trips, including some grueling ones in long and complex cave systems. For me, the representation of the features in the cave and the techniques of exploration are portrayed quite well in Sanctum. Again, this movie is an adventure story that accurately shows what caves are like, even though it combines many of the dangers into a thrilling series of unfortunate events. It is a fictional tale, but realistically portrayed.

Reviewers who expected Sanctum to be a high-culture movie or one that explores interpersonal interactions among the characters have missed the point completely. Unless they have gone on trips into extensive and wild caves, they have little idea of what caves and caving are really like and what this movie is all about. They can not possibly understand the dynamic among cavers under adverse conditions. I find more faults with the reviewers' logic and understanding than they can legitimately find in the film. The movie stays true to what extensive caves are like and the techniques used to explore them. Given that, it is also one heck of an adventure thriller.

This movie, although not James Cameron's best, is visually exciting and suspenseful. A gripping expedition becomes a race against time and human nature, when a group of explorers navigating an immense cave in Papua New Guinea during a cyclone find themselves trapped in what threatens to become a watery tomb.

The sometimes melodramatic acting and clichéd dialogue tries too hard to construct the nature of each character before the action scenes start to set in, the uncompromising and experienced leader, the rash and cocky business man, the young kid with father issues. There were plenty of chances to let these traits become apparent naturally throughout the script.

The acting gets more bearable as the number of characters starts to dwindle a little. What saves this movie is the sense of scale in the scenery, the beauty of the natural caves, and the realism with which situations become volatile and unmanageable.

Overall, if you want to see a decent, action driven film about of one of the world's last remaining unexplored landforms, then Sanctum will (probably) not disappoint. It could have done without the 3D, which seemed unnecessary overkill. Not as good as The Abyss, but a similarly excellent visual experience to Avatar, unfortunately it comes with a similar level of acting and, with momentary exceptions, emotional depth.