Deep Water

So this movie is a bit hard done by with the score at the moment I think (at a 3.8 as I write this) but unfortunately I can understand why people have given it that score.

This movie has a LOT of good points, the character writing is honestly great, the two main actors (the ships captain and the female marine biologist) are decent actors and the others are all reasonable too, the story is well thought through and keeps its focus throughout. Its also really well shot as well and the creature idea is quite unique. So why the low score?

Well despite doing all of that well, the fact is this is a creature feature film in which you really dont see the creature at all until the final scene. Before that the kills are all masked and quite unsatisfying. Its a creature feature film... which doesnt focus on the creature. Ultimately if you put this in hoping for some simple monster fun, you really dont get much of that.

Its honestly a real shame I would have liked to have given this a higher score.

OK, so it is not really a horror but a creature movie! And it starts quite nicely, some humor, some unexpected things, everything seems to head to a nice flick in the end. Faaaaar from it, pretty much all goes down the drain once you get a look at the sea-creature itself! I mean really? That was the best they could come up with?

What more to say, dialogue are pretty funny and they are meant to be that way, so one point here! The place where the action takes place, again, nice, not bad at all, you probably seen it before but still, brings a nice touch to it all. Characters, one point once again, i found them OK, they blend in great. But these are the only good things, therefore that is why i rated this movie 3 out of 10! I just can't get pass the creature, come on, XXI century, the ability to make whatever effects you want, even if a little cash short still, horrible sea-creature. And not sure if that is a SEA-monster, seriously!

So all in all, if you are simply too bored, and i mean really really bored, and you can't seem to find anything else instead, i mean it, anything else at all, maybe, just maybe, this could work...but i doubt it. My advice, look harder, you will find something out there you will like.

An Indonisan sea-creature movie, that concerns a monster type scorpion, with an interesting subplot of captive kids (working for smugglers). A 'hokey' type picture you can watch and easily enjoy.

I watched this movie in lack of having better to watch. And my interest was heightened when I saw that Brian Yuzna was behind this movie.

And now that I have seen it, I sit here with somewhat of a feeling of having just sat through a late 80's - early 90's horror movie. It didn't seem like it was from 2010 at all. The storyline was pretty much what you've seen in movies back then.

The story is pretty vague. Some researcher is doing work in the ocean somewhere in Asia, and she comes upon some awakened monster that preys upon a local fishing platform. There is some sub-plots about Tamal, about children being held against their will as work slaves and such, but there never really was a greater red line throughout the movie. And you are left wondering, where did this monster come from, how could it have survived for that long, and most importantly of all, just a big why, why, why at most things in the movie.

"Amphibious" was dragged down by a tedious storyline that would have worked better back in the 80's or 90's, but even more so was weighed down by horrible dialogue and pretty bad acting. Sure there were moments of clarity, but in overall, the acting done by the native Indonesians cast for the movie was less than halfhearted. And also one thing comes to mind, why would they be speaking English and not Bahasa Indonesia at a remote location like that? It just didn't make sense.

Now, one of the two things the movie did have working in its favor, was that it worked well at building up suspense. Brian Yuzna is great at doing that, and managed to pull it off in "Amphibious" nicely enough. And the second part that worked well for the movie was the creature itself. Sure, you have to look past the fact that it is a gargantuan scorpion that lives under the water. But once you get past that stupid flaw, then the creature was actually nicely made, and it looked real enough. So hats off for the special effects team on "Amphibious".

I enjoy horror movies, and "Amphibious" was, sadly enough, below average. And I doubt that it is a movie that I will ever be sitting down with for a second watching. The movie is good enough for a single watching, then it is bagged, tagged and forgotten.

Lots of people are slow to admit to other people,that they love b-budget sci-fi,s .Not me,so i will watch most anything on sy-fi channel.Period. This movie was a good view.Not perfect by any means,however,if your "one of us! ",watch it .Brian Yuzna is behind the wheel,and that man needs no introduction to sci-fi .O.K.,i know i,m late to the table on this one,as it was made in 2010,but ,to tell the truth,i JUST watched it.the acting is what you expect,and sadly,the crew fails to soak up much lens time in what would be a great country to film in(India).They most likely shot it in a lot of different places.I do like the fact that,without giving anything away,they built a cool,full scale monster,from scratch!In a world with WAY too many C.G.I. flix,as an artist,i love to see this these days.There is a good mix of the computer fx,action, a sub-plot, good gore effects and ...evil! ..!...a soon to be sy-fy channel classic.