DeepStar Six (1989) User Reviews

USO's: Unidentified Swimming Objects

[Coventry · 5/10 · 5 July 2004]

The name Sean S. Cunningham will automatically always be attached to 'Friday the 13th'…his notorious teen-slasher that messed up the genre for good. Yet, Mr. Cunningham did do a few slightly more ambitious projects. This DeepStar Six is a semi-successful undersea-monster mash with surprisingly good acting, decent special effects and a couple of good old-fashioned scary moments. The film deserves a reasonable rating, slightly higher than all other lame and laughable Ridley Scott and James Cameron wannabes. The plot involves an 11-headed crew that is about to finish up a 6-month research at the bottom of the ocean. When exploring the ocean floor, they accidentally stumble upon a hideous and relentless monster. Like it usually is the case in this type of films, it takes a little while before you actually get to see the monster. By that time, human stupidity already exterminated half of the cast…. Granted, the monster itself is one ugly critter and not at all badly put together by the special effects department.

But…let's not praise this film too much, because it simply remains a rather anonymous 80's monster movie like we've seen them so many times before already. Not one action presented here isn't inspired by or similar to the ones featuring in other films and every character is a flawless stereotype. The performances given by the entire cast actually outshine the roles they're playing. Highlight of them all is Miguel Ferrer who portrays the typical, cowardly crewmember. Constantly complaining and arguing at first and when the monster shows up…he flees to and leaves his colleagues to their own device. Every monster flick stars a bastard like that, you know. As well as the super-intelligent and over-ambitious female scientist and the heroic captain who sacrifices himself in order to save his crew. If you ignore these inevitable weaknesses, you'll certainly have fun. You get what you expect, and that doesn't necessarily have to sound like a bad comment.

Better than you might expect it to be

[Rob_Taylor · 6/10 · 28 October 2003]

Yes, this movie isn't that awful. It does have some questionable physics, and a whole bunch of plot holes. It even has some bad actors! But in the end, it keeps going well enough to maintain interest, albeit sometimes only to see what foolishness comes up next.

The main star (I guess) is Greg Evigan, of BJ and the Bear fame. He doesn't have a chimp side-kick here, though. In fact, there are a whole bunch of people who filmgoers will recognise, if not be able to put a name to. But the real star is Miguel Ferrer, who has a kind of Hudson-from-Aliens role. He gets increasingly manic as the film progresses until he finally loses it totally. The movie is worth watching for him alone!

The plot is the usual "science tampering with nature" deal and the ensuing onslaught of nature on science. Nothing remarkable. Nothing that isn't predictable. The creature, however, is refreshingly different and done well enough with the effects of the day to not look pathetic in this age of CGI.

As I mentioned, there are some dodgy plot holes and physics, but the movie entertains enough that you can overlook them (for the most part) and just enjoy it.

All in all a film worth a look in on a quiet day.

lesser underwater adventure

[SnoopyStyle · 4/10 · 5 November 2017]

Some arrive while others leave an American underwater platform. It's a mixed use facility where the military is setting up nuclear missiles and civilians are experimenting on long-term colonization. A cavern under the missile site is found but something more is uncovered.

Director Sean S. Cunningham's claim to fame is making the first Friday the 13th. This isn't breaking any new ground as much as following a temporary trend in underwater adventures. This pales in comparison to some of its competitors. The actors are second tier character actors. They do functional work but the characterizations are mostly nondescript. Other than an annoying coward played by Miguel Ferrer, the characters need better definition. At the very least, the military personnel need to be wearing uniforms and acting in a more strict manner. The special effects are mostly miniature work. The setting design looks like B-movie leftovers. I'm almost certain that I saw this back in the day but it's pretty much forgotten until I watched it again recently. This is a monster movie where the monster is rarely seen. It's an hour before there's a glimpse of the beast. There is a question of logic about launching missiles from the ocean floor. All of it adds to a lesser underwater adventure.

Good cast, so-so script

[Tin Man-5 · 17 March 2000]

"DeepStar Six" is just another "Alien" clone, to be ranked with all "Alien" clones as just another time waster. This might be what it deserves, however, it can be noted as a few notches above other "Alien" clones for its excellent cast, which, even when the story and writing become pretty silly, sticks to it and keeps things running smoothly. The characters are pretty convincing as well, epecially for such low standards as this. And while most of the film is talkly and uneventful, I will proudly state that the last half hour are great and very tension-filled. I was very pleased with the climax, and even the monster was acceptable. If the whole film had been as surprising as gripping as the last half-hour, this might have been the greatest "Alien" clone around. Instead, it's just a pretty good, low-budget flick that's worth watching once or twice if it comes on cable.

**1/2 out of ****

a B movie with underwritten story and characters

[disdressed12 · 5/10 · 13 July 2008]

the first 30 minutes of this movie are fairly boring,with not much happening.the film begins to pick up after that.it's basically Alien underwater,though nowhere near as good as that movie.the characters are not as complex,nor is the storyline.it's a B movie,in every respect.when the creature is finally revealed,it's a disappointment.at least i thought it was.unlike Alien,where you get to know the characters,here you really don't,so there's nothing invested in their fates.when they died,the only reaction i could come up with was a yawn.they're all underwritten.the movie is also predictable from the get go.still,it's not the worst movie of the genre,so i give DeepStar Six a 5/10

A good time-waster

[Phroggy · 7/10 · 22 July 1999]

I don't see why people keep on trashing this movie which has no more shortcomings or implausability than most blockbusters.

Maybe because, as everybody seems to think, everything that has no big stars and isn't the latest multi-billion brainless disaster can't be good ? This one is more disaster movie than monster movie, since the giant crab is only one amongst many problems the survivors has to face. Nothing great, nothing to lose sleep over, just cheesy B fun. So why all this hate when "Leviathan" was a bigger-budgeted but even more stupid and derivative heap of ....

Excruciating tedium punctuated by poor judgment

[ultright · 1/10 · 6 November 2014]

People keep making excuses for this film and how it doesn't have the budget or flash of a James Cameron movie. Actually, what it lacks is a script editor or writer who has any idea what it is like to watch a movie.

The first thirty minutes demonstrate utterly nothing happening. The crew recycle old jokes, complain, and chatter on all without establishing any real personality to the characters. You could cut this down to a five minute montage of one-liners and lose nothing. Then, there's lots of stumbling around while trying to figure out what is happening. Are we supposed to believe the Navy entrusted this crew of people with a $600 toilet lid, much less a submarine? Once the movie gets going, it improves marginally, but not really. Characters cannot identify a reason for any action they take. Instead, they just flail about and burn screen time doing stuff that tells us nothing about the characters, doesn't contribute to the plot, and builds an "atmosphere"...of tedium. It is excruciating to watch the filmmakers stumble again and again without making a point or providing any kind of actual tension. Instead, it's like watching a second-rate imitation of Seinfeld that got filmed underwater by accident.

As others have noted, the short synopsis of this is: incompetents undersea are trying to build a missile base, dynamite a cavern, and unleash a terrible monster. Everything else happens exactly as you would expect past that point. Then at some point, anticlimax happens when the monster turns out to be not as exciting as you might hope, and implausible as the terror of the deep that keeps these people in "suspense." What makes all of this interesting is that aspects of this movie are well done. The sets are beautiful, the cinematography is great, and the soundtrack is well-above average. But it feels like a sitcom, has cardboard characters, and never gets any depth (har-har) to the motivations of anyone in the film, so it ends up being like "Moby-Dick" retold by the town drunk. I got a lot of laughs out of this film mocking it MST3K style but definitely do not recommend it.

There are films with $30,000 budgets that beat this one palms down simply by having edited their scripts for what an audience might find interesting. Did anyone read this script? When they typed it, maybe, or when they started filming, or when they xeroxed it for crew members? It's as if no one could look at this and think, "You know, that's going to be a COLOSSALLY BORING MOVIE, let's drop the shtick and go for the action... or add some personality to these stick figures." But nope. Zero out of four billion stars.

Better than it has any right to be.

[karmicboom · 7/10 · 29 December 2018]

Okay, it's no The Abyss or anything, but for a knock-off of a knock-off, it's pretty damn decent.

The effects, though pretty low budget, are nonetheless well done. The creature design is pretty cool. The characters are likeable and well-written enough to keep me invested in what was happening.

It's no game changer to be sure, but if you're looking for some b-movie monster fun, you could certainly do much worse than this.

Tepid underwater remake of Alien

[ksj870 · 3/10 · 8 December 2014]

Despite a very solid cast and some fairly good production values, DeepStar Six sinks under the weight of it own inertia. This is an extremely uneventful film, and though ostensibly a monster movie there is almost no monster action whatsoever until the final twenty minutes or so, and even then what we get is extremely lackluster thanks to some very poor special effects. The script presumably aims to build tension gradually and spends a lot of time focusing on the ensemble cast (with a little extra emphasis on our heroine, played by Nancy Everhard), but while this may sound like a good idea in theory, in practice it fails utterly, as even a character-driven story needs a certain amount of drama and tension, which DeepStar Six totally lacks. As a result, I zoned out at numerous points in the tedious plot line and found myself strongly considering the stop button more than once...but I persevered in the vain hope that at some point a monster would rear itself from the mysterious depths and serious havoc would ensue. Never happened, as even when the sea monster that is our villain finally awkwardly asserts itself, the resultant action is poorly executed and the creature effects are inferior to similar designs from the 1950s. Some quality performances from a respectable cast that tries hard are unfortunately wasted, and while the aforementioned Everhard does a good job as our likable but underdeveloped heroine, the best performance probably comes from Miguel Ferrer as a burn-out victim whose sanity is slowly slipping away from him after six months of arduous underwater duty. It wouldn't have taken a whole lot for DeepStar Six to have been a solid b-movie, or maybe even a little more than that, if only the script and direction had made action a higher priority and perhaps developed a couple of the key characters a bit better. But as it stands, DeepStar Six is simply monotonous and underwhelming in the extreme.

Liked it for its monster fun.

[OllieSuave-007 · 7/10 · 31 July 2014]

I remembered watching DeepStar Six on TV as a kid, about the same time I first watched "The Abyss." While this movie is not as suspenseful, dramatic and adventurous as "The Abyss," I still found it to be quite entertaining and fun.

The film starts off with a crew in a sub doing some sort of experiment on an underwater nuclear base. However, their presence then disturbs an unidentified giant sea creature, which I thought resembled a large lobster. The creatures attacks the sub and crew and then the rest of the movie is basically a struggle for survival with some intense monster action.

The movie is sort of predictable and the cast of characters weren't as memorable as I recalled, but it has a quick-paced plot with good special effects and intense monster action one might find enjoyable.

Grade B-

Should be "Deep Star STINX"!

[speechdr · 1/10 · 6 May 1999]

This film was terrible. The storyline has an interesting basis involving an underwater nuclear plant in the near future, which could have led to myriad possibilities for disaster that would put a scare into the audience. So which direction does it take? An ancient sea monster attacks, and by the time it does, you wish it would kill every unlikeable character in the film. The special effects in this movie are terrible, and the acting is worse (led by Greg Evigan of "BJ and the Bear" and "My 2 Dads" fame). I angrily walked out on this stinker when I initially paid to see it, but later on television I watched the ending in a moment of terrible boredom. That was a mistake--the only thing worse than the rest of the film was the unpredictably predictable ending where Evigan survives a deep underwater battle with the monster and surfaces alive, totally ignoring scientific principles like a necessity for air or the existence of water pressure. Don't watch this film unless you are a masochist.

Utterly underrated

[sarastro7 · 9/10 · 8 January 2008]

It is my firm conviction that DeepStar Six will one day be regarded as a good movie. The current 3.9 rating at IMDb is, to my mind, ludicrous and flat-out wrong. It may not be an incredible, immortal masterpiece - I do have to admit it is second to The Abyss - but this is definitely a good movie in virtually every way. For the last fifteen years I've owned a VHS tape of it recorded from a laser-disc version, and seen it loads of times. Today I got the Region 2 Widescreen DVD, and I was once again confirmed in my opinion that this is a fine movie. It is underwater sci-fi horror, and one of several such movies from the era, but except that it doesn't have the clout, effects wizardry and budget of a James Cameron attached to it, it manages to be an extremely well-crafted production none the less.

The actors are great. Every one of them have absolutely unique and realistic character traits and the dynamism between the crew is superbly entertaining. Nancy Everhard as a soft-spoken female navy seal is played with humble sincerity and feminine sensitivity, making for a very realistic package. Nia Peeples is the sexiest thing you ever saw, and the one whose intuition foresees the whole thing. Miguel Ferrer is even more obnoxious here than in Twin Peaks, yet also profoundly pitiable. Everybody gives an amazingly human and believable performance, and the action and production values are overall perfectly adequate and effective, succeeding entirely in suspending the viewer's disbelief.

To the day I die, I will maintain that this is a good movie. And posterity will prove me right. One day...

9 out of 10.

The best 5.3 out of 10 movie ever!

[ramair350 · 7/10 · 6 May 2022]

At the time of writing, IMBD users give this film a 5.3. I have generally found that most movies < than a 6 are not worth my time, but this is that rare exception.

The plot is far from perfect. But it is fine for what it is: an undersea adventure gone awry. Special effects still hold up pretty well in modern times, and the movie is just one of those flicks that is fun to watch.

Absolutely worth a watch on some late Saturday night.

Rushed Rip Off Of Another Rushed Rip Off Of A Real Movie

[chow913 · 3/10 · 1 February 2016]

What happens every time a highly anticipated movie is about to be released? The cuckoo effect! A rival studio rushing into production a similarly themed lesser film to cash in on the free publicity of the other film. It's been going on for decades and isn't going to stop.

In 1989 we got TWO cuckoo films trying to cash in on the release of James Cameron's much anticipated 'The Abyss.' One was 'Leviathan' and the other was 'Deep Star Six.'

While it would be impossible for either of the two to even be in the same league as 'The Abyss,' 'Leviathan' was an enjoyable cuckoo film. It had a fantastic A list cast, a scary build up, and quality FX. 'Deep Star Six' had... Miguel Ferrer.

That's the major problem with 'Deep Star Six,' it's doesn't fail because it never even tries on any level. For example, 'Leviathan's limited budget required them to film dry for wet for its underwater shots, which it did surprisingly well. 'Deep Star Six' ONLY HAS ONE 30 SECOND UNDER WATER SHOT! That's right, an under water sci-fi action film which only has one under water scene!

The plot, a deep ocean under water base... well, they never really explain WTF there is a giant under water base. They only mention something about it being a nuclear missile site for the Navy or something.

Unlike 'Leviathan' the characters are extremely forgettable and the cast is totally devoid of any namable stars, save Miguel Ferrer whom is terribly miscast in his role. The only other three actors I recognized were Greg Evigan ('My Two Dads' 'PSI Love You' 'Tek War') Matt McCoy (husband in 'Hand That Rocks The Cradle') and Elya Baskin (token Russian guy in EVERY MOVIE).

I looked up the filmographies of the other actors just in case I missed anyone. Nope. They've barley done any other work.

Their mini subs are attacked by a sea monster or so we're told. Remember, there's only one under water shot in the beginning so we never actually see the monster under water or the destruction its blamed for.

The monster eventually gets inside the base and this is another example of 'Deep Star Six' not even trying as Matt McCoy being cut in half is NEVER SHOWN! In one shot he's alive, in the next he's cut in half. Maybe the monster is innocent? So far we haven't seen it cause any of the deaths. In fact, we haven't even seen the deaths!

When we finally see the monster it's bigger than an elephant which begs the question, how the hell did it get inside and how does it later fit through airlocks the size of manhole covers?

The surviving crew members do the only sensible thing and close the airlock, thus trapping the monster inside the base! While the airlock was leaking water they'd already decided to abandon the base anyway so what would one flooded room matter?

Anyway, five crew members escape the room alive. Alright, so letter lock the door and NEVER go in that room ever again! At this point the film reminds us that they will decompress and evacuate the base in four hours. Good! Just leave the monster alone for four hours and they'll never have to see it ever again!!!

Of course they go back into the room!!! What's the worst that could happen? Thus the monster causes more death and destruction. Maybe it just wants out? Open the airlock and let it out!

As I said, there's nothing to hate about 'Deep Star Six' except how little it tries. It was a cuckoo project to begin with that really comes in a distant third behind 'The Abyss' and 'Leviathan.'

At the Ocean's floor, there are no bras

[BloodTheTelepathicDog · 8 September 2011]

This film plays like the little brother of THE ABYSS with a twist of ALIEN thrown in the mix. Fortunately, it doesn't bog itself down like THE ABYSS by incorporating a tedious, needless social statement in the final 45 minutes like Cameron's vastly overrated film. Be that as it may, this is still a rather weak B-film with poor characterization and a by-the-numbers plot.

When a group of underwater workers disturb the lair of a sea creature the monster gets its revenge by destroying their base and snacking on the crew. The crew are all quite underdeveloped, even the romantic leads of Greg Evigan and Nancy Everhard. (SPOILER) You know when characters are about to die because they'll start start talking about their New Hampshire farm like Cindy Pickett or greasy hamburgers like Matt McCoy.

STORY: $$$ (This isn't a bad story it just offers nothing new. The characterization is weak because it tries to forcefeed clichés. Miguel Ferrer plays the doofus Bill Paxton character of ALIENS and the romantic link between Everhard and Evigan is too weak for my money. None of the other characters are even moderately developed leaving the viewer with little invested in the people on the screen).

ACTING: $$$ (The acting wasn't the problem. Miguel Ferrer clearly gives the best performance in this film with his excellent, slimy portrayal of Snyder, the ever-picked-upon handyman eager to get topside. I thought Nia Peeples and Nancy Everhard should have changed roles because Everhard's character was a tough-as-nails Navy officer and Nancy, although she clearly got into solid shape for the role, looks more like a schoolmarm than a soldier--Peeples on the other hand, has the hard body for a female Navy officer but her line readings were way too fast. I felt like whenever Nia had a line I had accidentally hit the fast forward button. The other actors were fine. Evigan is okay as the male lead and Matt McCoy does a solid job as the goof-off. Ferris Bueller's mom, Cindy Pickett, gives a solid performance as the base's medical officer and Marius Weyers is great as always. His character really needed to be more developed though).

NUDITY: None, but no female cast member wears a bra in this movie. They didn't quite adhere to their packing list before departing on this six-month deployment.

The worst of the undersea trio.

[Aaron1375 · 4/10 · 10 February 2004]

This was the year of the underwater adventure/horror movie. I think both "The Abyss" and "Leviathan" came out this year. This is the one I liked the least of the three. Not that I was all that crazy about the other two. This one had the underwater research facility like the other two, but this one had some strange monster unleashed, unlike them. Leviathan had a sort of mutating beast that came from a sub and "The Abyss" did not have any sort of monster at all. The problem with this one is that it is a very slow mover and the monster which the previews made it seem like it was the main attraction (as does the tagline) at times just does not factor into the equation. Of course this movie has its highlights, like when the dude goes up in the escape pod without being decompressed, but all in all this just was not too good of a movie. The problem with all three of the underwater movies is that they all seemed to be missing something. They should have pulled their talents and made one movie.

Modest at best.

[lost-in-limbo · 6/10 · 2 April 2005]

A secret underwater team are exploring the possibilities of underwater colonisation with the financial backing from the US Navy and in return for that they blow up an underwater carven so they can construct a deep-sea missile silo, though in doing so they release some sort of prehistoric sea monster that picks off the team one by one- but that's only one of their many problems.

This is a very formulaic- but reasonably fun Horror-Sci-Fi film by director Sean. S Cunningham (Friday the 13th), which came out the same time as the overblown- but dull 'The Abyss' and for me the best of the three 'Leviathan'.

Fairly routine stuff, but still it has it's moments of sheer excitement. The setting of the film is good, from the set details of the 'DeepStar six' laboratory base, where most of the action occurs too the alienation of the calm ocean floor.

The characters are your stereotypical types, but the performances are well-delivered with Miguel Ferrer as the very edgy and hysterical Snyder who steals the show and Matt McCoy as the wise cracking Richardson adds some life too. The script had its tedious spots of state the bloody obvious comments- but it's mostly bearable, with some added wit provided by McCoy's character.

The direction by Cunningham is solid, with some nice touches of suspense created and not forgetting a couple of gory moments that truly standout. While the plot is reasonable- it still follows your usual monster on the loose formula, though the idea of the creature's origin was interesting- but it definitely could have been explored in to more. Though other than a sea-monster causing trouble for the underwater crew they also face human foolishness and a leaking laboratory base, with some of the crew falling victims to themselves than the monster.

The pace can be slow at times, though that does help add tension and it definitely picks up in the last 40mins when the monster actually fully appears. While the special effects and the monster itself is fair and it does look a bit like the monsters from 'Tremors' and add a bit of crab too- but it does look more ridiculous and very rubbery when the whole design appears on screen… I was hoping that they would keep it mostly hidden e.g. 'Jaws'- but overall it's not too distracting.

Well, have I gone soft, as this discreet sea-monster film has definitely improved on my second viewing?

Pretty bad rip-off.

[vip_ebriega · 2/10 · 4 May 2007]

Review Summary: Forgettable rehash of THE ABYSS and ALIEN.

During 1989, a certain sub-genre in the sci-fi films struck cinemas, it was the underwater disaster/thriller epic. Three films were released that time. The most popular was "The Abyss", directed by James Cameron. The other was "Leviathan". "Deepstar Six" maybe the weakest of the three. Mostly because of its lack of a famous cast and impressive special-effects. But it's lack of visuals, doesn't always mean it's bad. "Deepstar Six" is not a totally terrible film, but it's lack of special effects, thrills and especially originality totally sinks it. The film promises a B-monster movie, but the alien beast doesn't fully appear until the second half. First, the crew must get past a flooding, a nuclear explosion problem and the lot, all tedious in its attempt to thrill the audience.

If the film gave more interest, it would have been better, even for a rip-off.

Rating: * out of 5.

I'm half the man I used to be...

[Hey_Sweden · 6/10 · 17 April 2012]

Director Sean S. Cunningham of "Friday the 13th" fame brings us this waterlogged creature feature that provides undemanding entertainment provided you are like this viewer and usually eat up stuff like this. It's not really bad at all, it's just not really distinguished. It may have its flaws (such as a standard bunch of characters), but it still sizes up as reasonably fun B level genre fare.

The crew of an ocean floor missile installation and research base buy themselves a whole lot of trouble when they open up a cavern in which a great big hungry, likely prehistoric lobster type animal had been residing. The thing does not take long to express its displeasure at being disturbed by causing all kinds of problems, not the least of which is snacking on our assorted cast members.

"DeepStar Six" has adequate action and suspense scenes, plus some moments that a viewer is likely to remember even if overall they don't care for the movie - such as a character bursting open after deciding not to decompress, and the creature chomping another right in half. The actors do a good job with their roles - Greg Evigan is a likable hero, Nancy Everhard an endearing leading lady. Taurean Blacque, Cindy Pickett, Marius Weyers, Matt McCoy, Elya Baskin, Thom Bray, and Ronn Carroll all amuse with their performances; the presence of super sexy Nia Peeples is another bonus. But Miguel Ferrer is the standout playing the kind of high strung, weaselly bastard we often expect to see in movies of this ilk. Right from his introduction he's at work complaining, and as this story plays out it's not surprising to see what a headache he becomes.

Production design, by John Krenz Reinhart Jr., and cinematography, by genre veteran Mac Ahlberg ("Re- Animator", "House") are well done, and Harry Manfredini, who will go down in history for his ki-ki-ki-ma-ma-ma refrain from the "Friday the 13th" franchise, supplies a score that's really quite good and far removed from his F13 scores. That brings us to the creature itself, which is more effective when it's NOT seen. The obvious phoniness of the thing, flapping mouth and all, however, may put off some viewers and just add to the appeal for others.

The movie gets off to a nice start, with the kind of scrolling opening credits we don't see too often. Genre fans will note the presence of Kane Hodder as the stunt coordinator and Mark Shostrom, Chris Walas, Greg Nicotero, and Robert Kurtzman among the creature effects crew. All things considered, this is worth a look for the monster movie lover who will embrace the sub genre no matter what the budget or level of skill (or lack thereof) may be for any given movie.

Six out of 10.

Groan.

[Grumpypheasant · 1/10 · 17 January 2011]

This is first and foremost, a B movie. It's a hastily made movie trying to ride the coat-tails of Abyss' hype... and it shows.

First, the plot: basically, just an excuse to get a strange hungry creature on board an underwater facility with some terrified humans. From then on, it all unfolds as linearly as you'd expect, with force clichés thrown in; some scenes directly borrowed from other poor movies: the very last scene, for instance, mirrors exactly the groan-inducing end of Jaws 4.

To seal the deal on a terrible script, quite a few events are completely unexplained. Don't worry, you'll easily predict them, not because they logically follow (they don't), but because they're stereotypical horror movie tropes, badly executed.

Next, the creature. The real meat of this kind of movies! Expect disappointment. It looks sillier than scary, moves excruciatingly slowly (on camera; off-camera, it moves extremely fast, maybe it's just shy?) and spends more time posturing (and roaring) in front of the humans than actively attacking them. One never sees it whole, but its head and torso have more screen time than the rest of the cast combined.

Finally, the effects. Strong effects can do a whole lot to redeem an otherwise bad movie, DeepStar Six doesn't have those. DeepStar Six compensate for lack of effects with pure gore, in B-movie tradition. Gratuitous gore.

DeepStar Six isn't enjoyable. The script is just painful; the creature arbitrary and uncharismatic; the intense scenes dull and slow.

Average, worth watching

[wrestlingking · 6/10 · 25 February 2000]

Deep Star Six is not a brilliant film although it is worth watching. It is a classic science-fiction B movie. The special effects and the sea creature are just about acceptable. It is clear though that this film had a pretty small budget.

So-so sci-fi.

[gridoon · 5/10 · 2 November 2002]

There are too many crisis situations (they face a life-threatening problem every other minute; it gets tiresome) and too much technical jargon (good for authenticity, bad for comprehension). But the special effects are pretty good (at least no worse than those of "Anaconda", and that was made eight years later), and there is also a standout performance by an increasingly demented and panicky Miguel Ferrer. (**)

good effects, good cast, good film

[druspatau · 8/10 · 22 April 2003]

Deep in the ocean some foolish marine biologists accidently disturb an ancient prehistoric creature from its slumber. The creature is understandably a little cheesed off and proceeds to cause the death of many of said biologists. With your brain safely checked in with the cloakroom attendant this film is undemanding and fun. The creature is particularly impressive and credit must go to the the special effects guys. The cast is eclectic and low budget with Miguel Ferrer giving the best performance as Snyder, the only member of crew realizing the gravity of their situation and slowly going stir crazy. This film is better than many other watery efforts and this includes bigger budget efforts like Leviathan and Sphere.

An underwater Sci-Fi that breaks the mould of space based science fiction

[Cryonics · 7/10 · 4 October 1999]

Deepstar Six is a unique sci-fi because it breaks the tradition of having sci-fi's set in space. Deepstar Six is about an underwater navy base that comes under attack from a sea monster that threatens the base and the lives of those in it. This movie has influenced the movie "Deep Blue Sea" (1999),with the theme of an underwater base and a creature that threatens them. Deepstar has submarines instead of the standard of spaceships in sci-fi's which is one of the reasons this movie is a refreshing change from other sci-fi's.

Alien Down Under

[thesar-2 · 4/10 · 18 March 2019]

Eh, it was okay. Nothing special. Mostly mumbo jumbo tech talk and eventually a monster from the depths. Even for 1989 standards, it was clichéd and predictable. No recommendation from me.