Beneath Loch Ness

I had doubts about this one when I saw it in the video store. However, my son is a 'monster' buff so I decided to rent it.

Where to begin? With the plot elements from other, better sources? Jaws, Jurassic Park, there was even a bit of Moby Dick in there. The rent-a-cliche characters? The maverick scientist, the career-driven ex-wife of the maverick scientist (called 'Lizzie Borden' - puh-lease!), the obnoxious local official who disregards all dire warnings (Constable Connaghy - did they audition this guy before they got him to play a Highlander?).

The factual errors and plot holes are too tiresome to detail.

While I hate to spoil anyone's viewing of this cinematic feast, the sight of Patrick Bergin kitted out in a kilt and 'Braveheart' style warpaint going to battle the monster armed with a harpoon is one that will live long in my memory (unfortunately).

I should add in fairness that my son seemed to enjoy the film, which maybe indicates the level of its appeal.

My local movie house are showing this film which frankly is an insult to movie-goers as it is so bad its not even worth a video release. The title tells you what its about and watching it gives the impression it was made up as it went along. The acting is dreadful especially from the lady playing the blond news producer. In fact to show the contempt that the the movie makers have for the viewing public they don't even bother about people with Irish accents pretending to be Scottish. This film has no humour, no imagination, and no thrills. To call it a 'B' picture would be an insult to that genre.

This was easily one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Forget the fact that the storyline was absolutly pathetic, the acting was ten times worse! How about those accents? Whatever they were, they certainly were not Scottish. The special effects were equally terrible, espcially the "underwater" shots, which look like they were made in an ordinary dark, smokey room. If you have yet to see this film, do yourself a favor and do not even consider renting it. For the unfortunate ones out there who have seen this, I feel your pain.

I had my doubts about this but as my young son is a 'monster' buff I decided to rent it.

Where to begin? With the plot elements lifted from other, better sources: Jaws, Jurassic Park, even a bit of Moby Dick found its way in there. Maybe with the rent-a-cliche characters: maverick scientist; career-driven ex-wife of maverick scientist (called 'Lizzie Borden'? - puh-lease!); obnoxious local official who refuses to take dire warnings seriously (Constable Connaghy - did they audition this guy before they got him to play a Highlander?). Not to mention the endlessly repeated graphic of the 'monster' swimming towards us.

Factual errors and misconceptions are too tiresome to list.

At the risk of spoiling anyone's enjoyment of this cinematic feast: the sight of Patrick Bergin rigged out in kilt and Braveheart-style war-paint, going out to battle the monster armed with a harpoon is one that will linger long in my memory (unfortunately).

I should add that my son enjoyed it so that may be an indication of its appeal.

This had to be one of the biggest wastes of celluloid of all time(next to that Blair Witch thing). Blockbuster should be made to refund the money of those who thought they were renting a movie. The same, old plot devices were used (i.e. the idiot mayor/constable refusing to close the beach/loch at the height of tourist season, a smaller animal caught that was not the right one, the crusty old sea captain/fisherman with a score to settle ). I swear, I think someone even used the phrase "this was no boating accident". If Speilburg and Blatty didn't sue these guys for blatant plagerism and or copyright infringment, they should have. On the suck scale of one to five vacumn cleaners,(5 being the worst), this gets a seven.