Beneath (I) (2013) User Reviews

The Monster Fish is the good guy in this movie

[Durmey · 3/10 · 4 April 2021]

The worst thing about this movie isn't the acting or the special effects. I think most people will be ok with this. I'd give the acting a 5/10 and the special effects even a 7/10. The creature looks plastic as hell, but that's all good. I can work with that.

No, the worst thing about this movie is the storyline. I'd give this a 1/10. The story's very lame. What are the odds of 5 psychopats ending up together on a boat in the middle of a lake? And not one of them has the brilliant idea of working together and actually doing something to fight off the creature? Yeah, I get it.. I would throw my friends and brother overboard aswell in a situation like this (roll eyes). This is the main problem of the movie: it doesn't connect to its audience. No one watching this movie would make these decisions. It makes the whole experience... empty. As a viewer you start cheering for the monster fish. Never a good sign.

One of those movies you root for the killer

[coflorida · 3/10 · 26 March 2020]

There was not a single person I cared about dying in this flick.

"I don't think the lake is done with you yet, son."

[Hey_Sweden · 4/10 · 25 June 2015]

A gaggle of teenagers who've just graduated high school go on a rural excursion together before they all head their separate ways. They end up on a boat, on a lake, and at least one of their number, Johnny (Daniel Zovatto), seems to know the score. He's heard "legends" regarding the place. As it turns out, this dumb bunch ends up stranded on the boat - which develops leaks - and franticly trying to make it to shore when a goofy monster fish shows up and, every so often, gobbles up one of them.

It's a shame, really. You expect more from writer / director / editor Larry Fessenden ("Habit", "Wendigo") than this kind of cheese ball entertainment. It seems as if he's trying to rise it above most of the efforts in this genre by ruminating on the idea of the depths to which people will sink when it comes to saving their own worthless lives. How much does friendship and family count for in such a situation?

Negating whatever honest intentions Fessenden may have had is the fact that this is one truly despicable bunch of jerks. This is the kind of movie where you root for the monster, by default, to eat everybody because there's not one human character on hand that's tolerable. Zeke (Griffin Newman) is one of the worst because he's a walking cliché: the kind of film geek / aspiring filmmaker who stubbornly insists on filming everything, the kind of guy who drives this viewer right up the wall.

The acting is pretty bad from most everybody concerned, which doesn't help matters. The young cast is amateurish, with just one old pro present: veteran character actor Mark Margolis ("Pi", 'Breaking Bad'), who has just two scenes.

The design for the monster fish is, as was said, rather goofy, but the visual effects are better than one might expect; the fish actually feels like a physical presence in the movie. And there is a smattering of amusing gore throughout.

This isn't one that this viewer would really recommend, unless you have a high tolerance for bad writing and bad acting.

Four out of 10.

90 minutes of my life wasted.

[svartamoln · 1/10 · 1 January 2015]

There's no word to describe this movie because it was awful from beginning to end. I usually check on IMDb to see if a movie is worth watching but I checked on the wrong movie (there are two movies called Beneath on IMDb).

At first I thought it would be a good movie to see, I didn't expect any masterpiece but from the very first moment I saw that ancient fish I realized this was gonna be a waste of time, I needed to watch the end of the movie though just to warrant my first impression, but the bad acting, the poor effects and the lack of budget made me write my very first comment on IMDb just to prevent you from watching this movie, plus the storyline was unclear, I didn't even know why they decided to use the rowboat, knowing (one of them) it would be very likely to be attacked by the fish or that one of the boys decides to take a swim.

Do yourself a favor and skip this movie, it's a waste of time.

I give it a 10 for being the worst movie I've seen in a while

[egneedham · 1/10 · 25 May 2015]

This movie was absolutely awful. I just don't know what to say, but I'll try to list a few of the reasons to not watch this movie. 1. The entire movie, they are the same distance from shore and do not get closer. 2. At one point, they "realize" that they were paddling in circles (in a 200 yard wide lake). 3. They decide to throw people overboard to buy time. After throwing one body and two "friends" overboard, they realize they can make oars out of the seats of the boat. What the hell? 4. Two of the three friends thrown overboard somehow survive only to be later killed in a irritating, nonsensical manner. 5. One of the "friends" gets rapped up by a slow moving rope that is powered by a tiny trolling motor. He falls over and struggles helplessly like in Austin Powers, where the guys yells stop and gets killed by a steam roller. Comedy? 6. How did they even get to the middle of the lake? It doesn't make sense that a monster hungry for human flesh would ignore the large group of loud people until they made it to the center of the lake. 7. The creature eats and eats without needing more than a few minutes to digest the bodies of a person half it's size. How many people does it take to fill that monster's belly? 8. The acting wasn't bad, but the reasoning behind each character's thought process didn't make sense.

I feel bad for the actors involved since they actually weren't bad...

I wish I didn't spend 90 minutes of my time watching this

[D-Gal · 3/10 · 13 August 2015]

This movie started off as a 7/10 and I thought "oh yeah, I'm in for an interesting movie", then it gradually degraded as the minutes passed.

To me, this movie is in no aspect a horror movie. There were no scenes that left me on edge, intimidated me or made me jump; it is a thriller, at most, and even that's pushing it. I honestly don't know what genre this movie should be... It was extremely sloppy, poorly written, very predictable and in no way alluring; the characters were also extremely mild, and I've forgotten most of their names already...

There was only one character I wanted to survive because I liked her and that was Deb, yet she was killed off first. I'm the type of person that likes to see at least one survivor in a movie, so they can tell people the ordeal they have been through and maybe even skip forward a few weeks or months to see how they're holding up, yet every character on the boat dies, and nobody but the old man knows what happened. It then cuts to credits...

There was also no solid plot with both loose endings and unanswered questions, such as: Why were they at the lake to party in the first place? Why did Johnny take his friends to the lake without telling them about the suspected creature that lurks within? If this group of people were "friends", why did they show little to no remorse when their friends were sacrificed for the benefit of the remaining survivors, or just died in general? To me, this movie was not at all believable, or enjoyable.

I regret watching this movie, and shake my head that it is characterized as a "horror" because it is in no way scary.

The only reason I'm rating it a 3/10 instead of a 1/10 is because it started as a reasonable movie; other than that, it was unbelievably dreadful, not worth the watch in my opinion and I wish I could get my 90 minutes back.

Rent-a-Fake-Fish - on a Stick!

[kdmode · 1/10 · 21 May 2016]

Mortifiyingly bad!

It was like a cheap home movie a few 12 year old's could make in their back yard:

• The entire movie is 6 (supposedly) 18 year old's afraid of a fake rubber fish with Nosferatu teeth while "stranded" in the middle of a lake.

• The fish is so cheap looking that it's laughable! Except, this isn't supposed to be a comedy. They impale the fish with a broken oar and for the rest of the movie it looks like a diver is swimming underneath said fish holding into the stick to maneuver it around the lake.

• From this point on I was expecting the "teenagers" (yeah, right - they looked more like 29 year old's!) to grab the stick, capture the rent-a-fish, swim to shore and toss it on the grill and have a party. But while that was wishful thinking, it would have made a better story line than what was to follow in this failure of a film.

• Oh, and Nosferatu Fish is afraid of a charm necklace - with a tooth on it. (groan).

• Bad camera angles, bad lighting, water droplets on the camera lens. In some scenes you couldn't see the actors faces properly so any emotion they were trying to convey was lost.

• The worst acting I've seen in years. Don't be surprised if you never see most of these actors ever again.

• The dialog is so bad that during one "emotional" scene it looked as if one of the actors was so embarrassed he was laughing when he was supposed to be crying.

• Everyone is in danger so you expect people to die. But the characters are so annoying you can't wait for them to die!

• There was not one redeeming factor in this train wreck. Not a single scary moment. No real suspense. No real fear. No likable characters. No relatable characters. No terrifying monsters.

You can't even say it was so bad it was entertaining or campy. It's just so bad it's bad.

too dumb to be fun

[Sorpse · 3/10 · 18 April 2014]

kind of the opposite of the other movie I watched today, I liked this one a lot less than I expected. Its gotten mixed reviews mostly on the good side Id say. Unfortunately it does not deserve the praise. What I did respect about the movie was the way the creature looked. It looked like they mostly used practical effects mixed with a little bit of cgi. This in my opinion was a great move on part of the directors. Using practical effects is almost a must for me. There has been a flood of cgi filled creature features and most of the time as soon as the crappy digitally animated creature shows up it pulls me right out of the movie. The creature in this movie looked great, Unfortunately the movie has nothing else going for it, The whole movie takes place around a group of teenagers stranded on a small boat. They make incredibly bad and unbelievable decisions that just make you mad and just over half way through I couldn't wait for this movie to end. It would have been nice to see them do something special with this cool creature and when it finds its first victim I thought things were looking up but they definitely went down from there.

hhhhmmmm

[jamiegates-28471 · 2/10 · 17 July 2020]

Story was initially ok for a rubbery horror. Acting was bloody awful, overacted and underacted and everything in between, location was a joke, lake only seemed about 50ft wide in most shots. the only reason this doesn't get a zero is because the fish was actually pretty well done. Shame because the rest was not woth my hour and a half

unreal

[Jumpa1967 · 1/10 · 18 July 2013]

This really was an awful movie while the acting was Okay they storyline was just awful.. OK so you know here is a 10 foot overgrown killer Perch in the lake, yet you still reach out 4' over the water to grab the oar in the water instead of using the other oar to pull it in. Stupid stuff like that makes you want them to get eaten by the K.P.,

Now the K.P. chews the oar in half & they still have one oar left but the give up and just sit there voting people off the boat to their deaths so they can get a few minutes to rethinking they can not row themselves to shore with just one oar idiots !!!Then the guy shows back up to tow them in and they kill the guy how dumb was that don't waste your time the only thing worth watching in this movie are the daisy duke shorts on the blonde Just my 2.¢

Thisbis the best movie i. Have ever seen

[simonbeetodd · 10/10 · 24 April 2020]

I love this fush so much please respect her, shes doing her best and i feel like whil the men as always are too many but the main caharcter js not a man so its gery valid and the fush is amaxing truly great monstrosity i want nothing more than for her to kill me and then preform my eulogy, one guy has agressive vibes but the fish takes care of it, i stan, she is an icon, they out her thru a lot tho

No Annoying CGI

[nybor79 · 6/10 · 2 January 2014]

Finally! A cheesy horror movie where the aquatic predator is NOT brought to you by the "magic" of CGI. Yes, this movie is cliché and predictable in close to every single way, but unlike every other made for ScyFi movie wherein the beast is some computer generated three-headed shark or swarm of piranhas, the creature in THIS movie actually appears to be in the water rather than edited into it after filming was complete. It may lack the kitsch of Sharknado but it deserves some credit for the old school mechanical creature effects factor. There's just something much creepier about knowing that there's really something there in the water. I have to be honest, I do not regret a single moment spent watching it.

Abysmal - on every level

[pyx · 1/10 · 3 July 2014]

With a movie like this, where the monster AND plot are revealed in the movie poster, there can be only two things that make it worth watching: the quality of the effects, or the quality of the story leading to the monster parts.

Let's start with the first: if you thought that the rubber creature in the old 1960s swamp creature was a low that was 50 years in the past, think again - the fish in this movie is as unrealistic as it's possible to be. Not even animatronic. Just a crappy crappy crappy lump of rubber with a mouth that opens and shuts - and none of the nuances that might give it life: flexible skin, realistic eyes, variable swimming motion, a sense of aggression - no. Instead, just this big dumb lump of rubber that floats around the lake like a submarine with all the menace of an inflatable lilo.

And now the story. There's no level on which this crappy waste of 90 minutes is plausible. Clearly all of the major characters hate each other except slut and native American style flower child, so why the hell would any of them choose to spend the day together?

And then there's the fact that they ARE all just painfully uninspired stereotypes:

Spoiled jock Irritating nerd Treacherous slut Evil ruthless brother Beautiful silent type flower child Mysterious brooding old guy who lives by lake

But just put the uninspired characterisation to one side, if you can do so, and try to work out the logic of the movie.

Big dangerous fish in lake and we have no oars because we dumb nyuck nyuck. we sacrifice someone create distraction. Then take no advantage of distraction, once, twice, three, four times, repeating the same pathetically unbelievable little melodrama until the entire party is in the water getting eaten by super slow rubberfish, until finally, forced to swim, dumb jock makes a break for it.

If I had written this pile of crap, I'd be ashamed to be credited. From start to predictably feeble finish, there is not a single saving grace.

Acting -nope Plot - nope Originality - nope B movie schlocky entertainment - nope Creature effects - definitely nope

Do yourself a massive favour - swim on by this piece of garbage.

The Fish was the best actor!!

[paul_rowell_uk · 1/10 · 5 April 2021]

What can I say but In a nutshell this was a terrible movie with horrendous acting and no logic whatsoever.... the amount of paddling they do they could have crossed the Atlantic but the boat never moves....definitely one to miss!

Snaws

[RaveyDaveyGravy · 3/10 · 5 April 2021]

Bad, not in a good way.

If you're going to make a low budget shark/croc/piranha knock off you need talent. No talent? You need good actors. No talent and no good actors available? You need really inventive kills. None of the above = weekend hobby film making. Dumb, illogical, boring boring boring. And, why did they always paddle towards the furthest shore???

Kiosk <1

[westsideschl · 1/10 · 5 April 2014]

Signs of bad: 1. Cover is more scary than the what's in the movie. Called false advertising. 2. Usual no-name studio, "Chiller Films". Usual no-name $100/day actors (OK, a few TV spots and similar cheap-to-make movies for their credits.) 3. Usual dumbed down stereotypic plot hooks: Teens in car going to a remote site to party, with lots of boring scenes of van driving on road. 4. Usual teen mix of hot chicks, jock, nerd/geek, cool quiet type guy. 5. Usual stranded setup with no cell reception (so overused there are actual web sites that list all the no-cell-reception movies). 6. Usual alcohol, usual dumb decisions, usual tension amongst are doomed group. 7. So they get boat stranded on some small lake/reservoir. Only stranded in the sense that they can't figure out how to paddle a hundred yards to shore. 8. Monster is one, and only one (reproduction is not in the cards) large catfish (they actually do get that big) with eyes on the top of it's head (why during their many chances our dummies didn't poke them out is beyond me). Eyes should have been on the side for a scavenging bottom feeder. Anyway, it's scary attribute are some teeth that are functionally pointless except for snagging on sunken trees. 9. No scary or gory scenes except for a minimal amount of prosthetic blood tossed around.

It's pretty crap... in fact it's not even that good!

[karlsenior369 · 3/10 · 20 July 2014]

Dreadful teen horror story set up - teens, love triangle, lake, boat, beer, party, monster, death blah blah blah

It seemed like everyone -silent one, jock, jock's bro, t'other lass, everyone except the geek that is, had shagged the slut, even the other lass.

I liked the way the sides of the fish looked as it moved through the water, it did indeed look fish-like.

I hated all the characters, which in my book means they played their parts well because they were all indeed pretty despicable.

And I didn't understand how they never seemed to get any closer to the shore when they were in a lake.!

All in all it was pretty dire.

Terrible movie

[rootsinwv · 2/10 · 18 July 2013]

This filmmaker needs to get someone with writing talent to write the scripts for his films. The biggest weakness of this movie is the pathetic script itself. You can forgive the low budget special effects, because it is in fact a low budget film. But the poorly written script makes it impossible to even care about the characters. I found myself disliking every character. There wasn't a single character in the movie that I felt was worth saving, so when death approached, I was thinking, oh please, just get it over with. These teens, who are supposed to be good friends, barely react when the first one of them dies. And it never gets past that. Their lack of real terror or emotion means that the audience lacks terror and emotion. It's not cheesy enough to be a cult favorite where it's so bad it's good. This movie just leaves you shaking your head. I didn't give it a 1, because I gave credit for some decent cinematography.

Disgustingly bad

[jakewilkinson12 · 1/10 · 4 April 2021]

Anyone involved in the production of this film should be banned from making any further films.

Don't watch it. Awful acting. Awful storyline. Glad they died not one character was likeable.

I agree with every negative review.

[michaelt281702085 · 1/10 · 5 September 2014]

Frankly I don't know how these young actors could keep straight faces while making this stupid movie, yes I said stupid. Also I don't understand how anybody and everybody involved just did not refuse to make this movie.?????

This movie could have been a bit better if the giant fish in the river had not looked so false. It looked like a huge wind up toy.

It looked like it come from the puppet TV series Stingray.

Also I've seen many rubbish movies, and so I cant understand why they are made ??????. Why would a director, direct a rubbish film in general.???.

In the movie world today there are so many unanswered questions.

Part of the story line in this film is about several young people suddenly without oars to get their boat to back to land, so what do they do with their time ?????. Argue amongst themselves. I felt like telling them all to shut bloody, up!

This movie was frustratingly stupid. End of story.

I'm Surprised I Liked it!

[politehere · 9/10 · 2 May 2015]

I had this movie before, fast forwarded it and decided it wasn't visually interesting, so I put it in the trash can. I got the movie for a second time by accident when I was looking for another movie with a similar title released the same year, so I decided to watch it to the end. Man did I enjoy this movie. I was really surprised that I even liked it! I have watched many high budget horror movies and most of them bore me to death, but with this little gem I realized what makes a movie watchable is how real it seems.I felt as if I was in the boat with them. With most other movies I feel detached from the characters, so I don't really care about who lives and who dies.

I have come to the realization that I prefer movies where the story unfolds in one single setting (in this case a boat in a lake) to most other movies that cut from one setting to another before you even begin to feel you are there with the characters. The actors in this movie were a bunch of nobodys, but their acting was so good that at times I felt I was watching a high-budget movie with A list actors. The only problem was with the camera work, which seemed a little amateurish, specially when zooming in on characters' faces rather than focusing on their faces one at a time, but besides awesome acting, this very amateurish camera work made the movie look seamless and natural, and that's exactly what absorbed me into the movie.

The constant rush of bad luck was really interesting as well as the way each character was trying to convince others how they deserved to survive and not be fed to the fish to create a distraction. The characters seemed like innocent kids, but as the movie goes on you start to vote for the fish. That was unexpected. I never saw the ending coming and it came as a big surprise. The mysterious fish in the movie acted in the way a real "mysterious" fish would; i.e. low-profile, rather than a CGI fish jumping ten feet high into the air just to create special effects!

I'm not sure if this is one of those "so bad it's good" movies. Maybe it is. What I do know is if this movie managed to entertain me so much, it would have probably been a blockbuster had it had a few famous actors and a higher budget. I can't even believe I'm writing such a long review for a movie that got a 3.8 on IMDb. For the joy it gave me I'm going to give it a 9/10 and I hope people begin to realize that CGI is not everything. What you need is a movie that will make you feel you are in the movie. Only then will you start caring about the characters and enjoy the movie.

Beware of goofy-looking, friendship-eating FISH!

[Coventry · 7/10 · 16 May 2018]

Well yes, I spotted the incredibly low rating, read the large amount of negative reviews and took into consideration all the undoubtedly sincere & well-intended warnings of people insisting not to waste my precious time on this horrible dud of a film. But, being a tremendous fan of cheap and trashy B-horror movies, do you honestly expect me to voluntarily skip a film about a giant FISH that eats teenagers?!? I simply must watch junk like "Beneath"; - it's like an uncontrollable stubbornness I developed over a course of 25 years of watching bad movies. One thing I didn't see coming, however, is that I would actually end up liking Larry Fessenden's "Beneath" and, frankly, I also don't understand that it has such a bad reputation. I'm really not the type of person to blame other viewers that they missed the point, but in this specific case I honestly do feel that "Beneath" is misunderstood and painfully underrated. I reckon that most people expect a bad film with a giant fake fish, and then they subsequently complain because it's a bad film with a giant fake fish. I, on the other hand, was all set to watch a bad film with a giant fake fish, but what I watched was an uncomfortably tense and compelling thriller about the fragility of friendship and the destructive impact of survival instincts. And, as a bonus, there's a giant fake fish that eats teenagers!

Admittedly there are loads of shortcomings, but the rudimentary idea of "Beneath" is terrific and the behavior that practically all lead characters demonstrate is realistic and plausible, and therefore also utterly disturbing. The monstrously oversized fish only eats people, whereas these so-called friends are the ones killing each other. The ambiguous tagline is utmost correct and clever, in fact, as it states: "They are only friends on the surface". When these six people's lives are in mortal danger, and they should collaborate to survive their ordeal together, all they do is increasing their own chances by trying to get rid of the others. And the giant fake fish? He just waits.

I don't have a specific affinity for writer/director Larry Fessenden, but firmly do believe that he made a much better film with "Beneath" than he gets credited for. It starts out as a routine slasher pastiche, with the introduction of six stereotypical teenagers (the cute girl, the jock, the nerd, ...) and even the clichéd old guy (Mark Margolis) warning them about the dangers of the lake, but it gradually turns into a tense survivalist thriller with dark and unpleasant character portrayals. There are some stupid aspects in the script, like the significance of the necklace for instance, but these are compensated by a few ingenious and unexpected deaths and slick plot twists. And, what can I say, I loved the fish! I'll prefer goofy, amateurish-looking monster designs over computer-engineered effects for the rest of my life. The fish-creature in "Beneath" reminded me of the aquatic or alien monsters in charming B-movies from the fifties and sixties; cheap and cheesy, but created with a lot of passion! Ignore all the bad omens and please give "Beneath" a fair chance.

Such a disappointment -CAUTION- SPOILERS IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED

[jamaicazstarr · 1/10 · 19 July 2013]

I can't believe the mess I just watched! I only watched it to the end to see everyone get killed off because I was that disappointing. Usually, I root for characters to get themselves out of situations, but I literally wanted them all to die. Surprisingly, it was not the acting; they're no A list actors, but they worked with what they had. I think if there was better scripting, the good side of their acting skills would have shone a bit more, for the better. The music sucked, and like one reviewer said, the cinematography killed me. I think an eighth grader in AV class could have managed doing a better job than this armature. The basis of the movie had such potential, but it was destroyed, due to everything from the script, the plot of the movie, and everything in-between!

It reminded me of Prison Break: 1st season started out good, then it went down hill from there. Same as this movie, the beginning was okay, and everything began going downhill after they took the boat out to the lake. I know it wouldn't have been a movie if they asked, but if it were me in that situation, and my overly nervous friend said, "Don't go in the water!",then you would think the plausible question from one out of the other five people there would be, "Why?". Moments when they were sitting there, was when they should have been paddling. What really upset me, was when they used all of the fireworks at one time! Like seriously?! You have got to be kidding me! Use ONE to scare it away, and then when he starts getting closer, use another! What a bunch of dummies. Then, the part where the nerd kept filming instead of helping; I would have thrown that stupid camera in the water a long time ago. The part where they killed off their only way out was a dumb move as well. And then they stupidly left the only undamaged boat! If they wanted to "Vote" people off, they should have voted for someone to go into the water and to flip it over so they could be on a non-sinking boat! There are too many other things to type about, so I'll just leave it at these situations.

They seriously should have taken notes from Open Water. The writers to that movie really knew how to build up anticipation, when to make the serious stuff happen, and when to break in-between incidences.

Hopefully in another 20 years, there's a remake of this movie that I can give a great review for. Until then, I wish I had 2 more hands so I could give Beneath four thumbs down! That is all...

Absolutely disastrous killer fish effort

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 3/10 · 21 October 2013]

Gathering together for one last trip following high school graduation, a group of friends' trip to a small nearby lake forces them to come face-to-face with the lake's monstrous fish creature living there and try to find a way to get out alive.

This one here had just a never-ending series of problems against it that there's not a whole lot of good points for it. The biggest issue with the film is that the film thinks these kinds of callous, vile humans are worthy of being the center-stage for the actions in here, yet none of them are ever worthy of doing anything more than being cannon fodder for the creature as other, smarter characters fought it off. Relying on bullying, cheating, blackmail and deciding that others where more worthy of living and dumping their friends overboard to die with the creature in the lake with them is perhaps the biggest death-knell to each of these characters, especially since all the while there's more than enough tactics on hand to actually fight it off with a gallant effort without resorting to dumping your friends in with the creature that even thinking of resorting to that tactic is really hard to forgive. Of course, the fact that there's one who knows the truth about it but decides against telling the others so that he can win the heart of the group's resident slut doesn't do much to favor this either, and the fact that this one tends to focus solely on the group sitting in the canoe arguing with each other tends to make for wholly uneventful programming with nothing interesting happening. That said, the gore isn't half-bad for the mangled bodies really look like they've been munched on and the creature does have some realistic looks to it since it's kept to a more reasonable size without being too gigantic to live there undetected, and frankly some of the sequences in the later half with the rapidly- drowning boat do get somewhat suspenseful. Overall, though, there's not too much to like here.

Rated Unrated/R: Graphic Language and Graphic Violence.

Beneath - horrible, horrible, horrible movie

[ghchamp96 · 1/10 · 23 July 2013]

I don't think I can convey in words just how bad this movie is. I went into the theater with high hopes. I tend to enjoy independent movies. Not the case here. The premise of the movie was good. A group of teenagers decide to go across a lake to a place to have a party to celebrate graduating from high school. They get trapped on the lake by a killer fish and have to figure out how to get back to shore alive. Unfortunately, this movie was just bad. The acting...bad. The killer fish effects...bad. The ending...bad. I'm just glad that my husband won the tickets to see the movie. So, we didn't waste any money on this horrible movie. We just wasted our time. If it was possible to give this movie negative stars, I would. It's that bad.