the_only_warrior This movie has nothing going for it all. It is another jaws rip-off involving a squid instead of a shark, and what is worse is that it has already been done before. If it wasn't $2, I wouldn't have bought it.That said, I enjoyed it. The most interesting parts were not involving the squid at all - it is more about the treasure hunts and the race to find the opal. If only the characters' motivations were a bit more convincing - especially the villains.The Squid itself? Pretty average CGI, but what could you really do without a huge budget for this sort of thing. However, there is some surprisingly convincingly violent scenes in there.Anyway, if you are in the mood for monster flicks, this does the job.

gavin6942 Thirty years ago, Ray Reiter (Charlie O'Connell) witnessed the death of his parents by the kraken. Determined to avenge their murders, he joins a perilous high seas expedition that brings him face to face with the kraken, the guardian of the Greek Opal. Oh, and there is a crime lord involved in here somewhere, too.This film is pretty awful. It looks like it was made for the SyFy network (and probably was), and its star power is Charlie O'Connell, the cheap version of Jerry O'Connell with a nastier voice. There is a part where they are looking for a Trojan mask. I have no idea how it got underwater, or how they had photos of it before it was surfaced (although two others exist).Product placement from Diet Pepsi. How Pepsi felt this in any way helped their image is beyond me.The soft pop rock totally not necessary... takes away from the film, which would have been better with a non-vocal score.Christa Campbell appears, but this does not save the film.

Theo Robertson I've never read JAWS by Peter Benchley but have of course seen the movie andJAWS is considered to be one of the few films that improves greatly onthe book . Much of this I'm told is to do with a large number of subplots being jettisoned in the adaptation , leaving only the main plot of a man eating shark and of the protagonists mission to kill it . One can't help thinking the producers of this movie should have done something similar The major problem is that much of the running time is taken up with a bunch of bad guys wanting to get their hands on a very expensive Greek opal . In many ways the story resembles another Benchley story THE DEEP which might not be a problem as such but when you've got a film called KRAKEN:TENTACLES OF THE DEEP then a prospective audience is expecting a giant squid to be the focus of the story rather than humans . The producers seem aware of this shoehorning a squid attack just to remind the audience there's a squid central to the plot when in fact it's the producers themselves who obviously need reminding As it's produced by Nu Image Films the production values are rather poor with the squid being a rather obvious CGI creation . Like nearly every film featuring a giant squid it makes a roaring sound ( Squids are mute ) and can grab people off the decks of ships ( Considered impossible by leading scientists ) and of course when someone gets devoured underwater there's a big bubble of blood rising to the surface . Not only that but biologists are all in their early twenties , have blonde hair and walk around in bikini tops thereby exposing their admirable mammary glands . One can't help thinking Nu Image Films and The Sci-Fi channel are in cahoots to get more guys to sign up to university science classes . I doubt however if anyone who worked on this film would be able to spell the word science

sonofeeg0 I have to say that the script actually saves this creature feature. Aside from the lousy CGI, the character development and witty banter actually make me empathize with the characters. The draft writers should really be moving on to more emotionally engrossing projects. Maybe give them a run on Stargate or Battlestar Galactica? We all should understand how SciFi movies work. They really hamper the creative talent. I know from inside sources that Larva, written by an Emmy nominated scribe, had its budget slashed 3,000%. What the dilly yo SciFi? If we genre fans are willing to shell out $500 for the latest Superman bust (well worth it, teehee), then surely you can spend the big bucks on our flicks. At the very least, you can take a chance on some fine young writing talent.Just my two cents. Live long and proser,Jim