Below

I enjoyed 'Below' a LOT more than I anticipated. It's a very similar movie in theme to the disappointing 'The Bunker', apart from the obvious difference of being set on a submarine of course. But unlike 'The Bunker' this movie has interesting characters that a)you can tell apart, and b) actually care about their fate. The script, direction and acting are all superior, and it's very effective in conveying the tense atmosphere of a sub in WW2, despite not being made on a mega-budget. I like David Twohy's debut 'Pitch Black', and I like 'Below' even more. It's not only a very well made suspense movie, but also a good war one. I hope Twohy fulfills his promise in projects to come.

This was only playing at one cinema in my area (off my usual track) and when I saw it listed in the paper I thought "Wait, how did I miss that?" But it was rated R (always a plus for me; for one thing, an R rating means the F-word gets used at least twice, so it'll have at least that much realism) and I had read somewhere (probably on IMDB) that it was about submarines, so I thought I'd take a crack at it. My venture was well rewarded.

Set during World War II, an American submarine rescues 3 people on a liferaft, one of whom turns out to be a woman, news of which galvanizes the sub's crew, who seem to know every female slang term ("Brillo pad" was new to me). The movie pays tribute to the German "Das Boot," the best submarine flick ever, as the camera goes darting from one passageway to another as the crewmen are introduced. Then some odd things start occurring.

Helping to win me over was the sheer copiousness of period detail with all the 1940s technology used by the crew to run their boat plus their cigarettes, girlie pin-ups, phonograph records, a Yo-Yo, etc. The actors all rang true except for the young idealistic guy. Lots of great claustrophobic atmosphere; limited but effective use of a certain kind of special effect. One needs to pay attention, such as the mirror scene, where you might think "Is that image duplicating what the guy is doing, or not?" Slow but steady heightening of tension and development of otherwordly aspects. Delightful underwater renditions with plankton & manta rays cavorting. Some drawbacks: too much use of flashbacks, some of which may be "false" (Hitchcock used a false flashback once & always regretted it); too much action occurring off-screen, to where it calls attention to itself. There's a central flashback issue that seems to call for an awful lot of expository dialogue, some of which occurs when one would suppose the characters would be engaged with more pressing matters, such as running out of air.

Given how many other recent movies have cost a lot more money, been given much more ballyhoo but have had much weaker plot, characterization and atmosphere, it seems a shame "Below" must rely entirely on word of mouth, or keyboard. I won't claim I was on the "edge of my seat" throughout but I definitely "bought into" the situation. There's a really lovely closing shot, like a shorter & underwater "Koyaanisqatsi," that no one should find overly corny or contrived.

Bottom line: if you can't find this one in a cinema or reach it before it goes away, keep an eye out for video. The studio made a mistake just blowing the movie off, it deserves better.

In one scene we see a seaman with pet fish in a tank, a nice ironic touch.

The relatively low 6-ish average rating might lead you believe this is a poor movie that's not worth your time, and that would be both doing the movie a disservice, and potentially cause you to miss out on something you would enjoy.

There is something of a limit to possible plots with submarine movies to be honest. The elements of anxiety and tension and some of the more obvious risks of being in a submarine at combat are well defined to anyone who has worked as, or with, a submariner or is well versed on those aspects of naval warfare pertaining to submarines. There ARE going to be some aspects of things you've seen in other submarine movies , it's unavoidable.

Nevertheless I feel that this movie, with it's undercurrent of something weird and disturbing going on introduces something to a submarine movie I've not seen before.

If you like movies that put you in tense, creepy situations with no obvious way to escape then this might be your movie.

Overall the acting and script were fine. I watched this again for the second time so I perhaps was left feeling that the tension would have benefitted from being ramped up even more, but I do remember being suitably chilled the first time I watched it.

This is a tense chiller, not really a horror, imo so it's important to set ones' expectations accordingly.

Definitely worth a watch if you like this style of movie. I would rate 7.5/10.

Its's a bit weird that after all these years the overall rating is 6.1. I am no movie critic but I have watched this movie in my younger years and just did it again. And I can tell that nothing is fundamentally is wrong with it :/ . Acting is OK, story is enticing, effects are decent and soundtrack is befitting the vibe of the movie. Story is quite good too. I have watched every horror movie rated above 7 except black and white oldies and I rate it 6.5 easily.

Sci-Fi escape drama that will have you on the edge of your seat and cracking your knuckles. When a WWII submarine picks up three survivors of an incident in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean in 1943, the crew suddenly experiences mysterious doings in the confined space. It appears this boat is doomed from the start. Typical problems for a submarine movie. Pretty good acting from a diverse cast that includes: Bruce Greenwood, Matt Davis, Olivia Williams, Scott Foley and Holt McCallany. Decent enough F/X and sometimes scary story line holds your interest.