gerald-676-783504 When The Meg was annouced in the cinema release, I thought: I know this one!It was Megalodon for the year 2002Good entertainment, if you are shark fan.

Wite Stik This movie was released the same year as Spider-man 2, Shrek 2, Shark Tale, The Incredibles, and The Day After Tomorrow, you would expect some descent graphics. 2004 was a year of amazing CG achievements. This movie just kills that reputation. It looks like they hired a relative of the producers who knew how to work a PC. Everything is computer animated. Everything looks like crap. They try to blur the images by putting tons of light around it, but it doesn't hide the disgrace. I am a pacific islander, I grew up with fish right in my backyard. The fish in this movie don't look like fish and especially don't move like them.This is not worth your time, rent it and let your grandparents watch it, it should please them.

Cedric Sagne If you were tempted to buy this on DVD, or pay for your seat, tough luck. Borrowed it from my local library and obviously this does not go anywhere near the now-cheesy-but-still-a-classic JAWS or the ABYSS from which it borrows.Why did I give 1 to "Narnia" and 2 to this? For the skill in making something terrible in both cases with: 1- loads of money and a worldwide manipulation campaign 2- no money and no marketing gurus behind.This is still something that does not deserve to be watched twice, maybe not even once. CGI is still something you would be proud of if you got it out of your own computer. If anything, this film illustrates the concept of George Lucas who claims that CGI and digital cinema will bring filming within the reach of new talents. These were not the ones he referred to, as the script, the actors, the special effects remain terrible (by today's standards... check King Kong 1933 and enjoy), but some classics were made on a shoestring and we saw worse stuff done by great actors and directors.It is no wonder this is as cheesy as it gets, but the Academy of Cinema also has its bad students.

chrisjan I just saw this movie last night. I bought it for 3 euros on DVD so you can't go wrong there. The reason I bought it is simple: I like movies about sharks and there are only a few about the Meg(alodon). Too few, but I heard that Jan de Bont wants to film the book Meg (great book) so lets hope that will happen. About this film: You get what you expect: A cheap-looking, low-budget (horror?)film. It takes about 45 minutes before we get to see the shark, so until then the viewer is bored with mediocre acting, simple character- and story building and cheap SE. The thing that bothered me the most were the computer generated effects. I hate that sooooo much and this whole movie comes from the computer: The snow, the helicopter, the oil rig and the shark. I understand that the budget was low but a computer isn't the solution. The other thing was that there were only a few actors in the movie: Should I believe that a handful of people operate a huge oil platform? Yeah right! The movie is about a shark, but the shark isn't convincing either. It looks good standing stil, but the way it moves, swims attacks etc etc isn't very good. And the climax...You almost have to see it to believe: It left me with unbelief...so dumb and simple.It's a short movie (1 hr 12) minutes, the sound was horrible (DTS!), full screen, but what killed the movie were the computer effects....so not worth your time or money.