JohnAU1965 Below is firmly ensconced in the B category of movies. It's a mix of well acted / shot work along with 80s Horror Schlock. The number of rave reviews is, however, beyond comprehension. The plot becomes more fanciful with each second and the 'twists' more pretzel-like in equal measure. Plenty could have been made of the psychological tension regarding the various issues the crew faced during the piece, but the 'ghost' element is just additional dreck that spoils an otherwise good movie.As one reviewer noticed "U-571 meets Poltergeist". Well, U-571 was utter dross of the first order, whilst the original Poltergeist was well made horror fare considering its vintage. It seems an apt choice. If this had been made in the 80s or 90s, I expect we would have thought it was 'edgy' or 'new'. Unfortunately for this movie, this amateur horror plotline torpedoes the movie more effectively than any German could.5 Stars are for the sets, the cast and the half of the story that is normal. The remaining lack of any stars is for the laughable second act.

bomopu-54573 NO SPOILERS IN THIS FIRST PARAGRAPH... This film had a good story, the CGI was pretty good for a B movie and the acting wasn't bad either (mostly). On top of that the horror aspect was done well too. Unfortunately it was so full of clichés and unnecessary plot holes it was just ridiculous - even for a B movie! You should only watch this if you've moved all objects away from you because you WILL want to throw them at the TV!SPOILERS ALL THE WAY FROM HERE... The English woman was incredibly annoying throughout the whole thing. She walks around the boat after being confined to her cabin; gets caught rummaging through the captain's cabin; then tries ordering the crew around and demanding things from the XO and yet nobody seems to do anything about it. And do Americans think all English people speak like the Queen? I mean, really, why does Hollywood always have to give female English characters a silver spoon up their arse? So annoying was she that I was constantly rooting for someone to throw her off the boat or lock her in the torpedo tubes. In fact I think if she hadn't been in it I would have given this 6 stars instead of 3.When she took her mask off in the smoke filled compartment I thought 'Yay! She's going to suffocate now!' Alas, the smoke seemed to have suddenly disappeared and the air was breathable again - quite a thing to happen in an airtight submarine!Apart from that (and if you don't mind that the crew are standing on the deck of a sinking submarine in the middle of a storm yet they aren't having any trouble staying upright) there were only a few other plot holes so if you like ghost films and have exhausted every other option then it's worth a watch.

Nitzan Havoc Well, to be honest, I was going to qualify this film as a combination of U-571 and Ghost Ship. Then I saw the cover picture bearing a review stating "U-571 meets Poltergeist" and realized that wouldn't be too original...It's WWII, and the US Sub is lively and excited due to 3 survivors picked up for a shipwreck, one of whom is a female British doctor. Some of the crew is thrilled and edgy about seeing a woman for the first time in weeks, maybe months. Others are aware of sea folklore and believe a woman on a boat is bad luck.The story was absolutely brilliant in my opinion, the thrill and suspense were of the highest level, and the twist was surprising and well presented. The acting was persuasive and honest, and during the entire film I found myself at the edge of my seat, fearing for the lives of the Sub's crew as mechanical problems stacked up.And then they had to destroy what might have been a great film by forcibly, bluntly and stupidly shoving a ghost into it. I mean... why? Honestly, why? In order for DVD libraries to be able to tag this film as horror? What was so important about that?! This could have been an excellent war/psychological thriller film, with an excellent story, a surprising twist, and good acting. Adding the whole ghost part was like taking that kids' puzzle with the shapes, putting the square peg in the triangle hole, and hammering it till the entire thing broke. That simply ruined the film for me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.In summary - an excellent war thriller. Forcing it into the horror genre ruined it. I'd still recommend it, if you could be forgiving. I wouldn't blame you if you weren't.

Andrew Sterne The setting is the Second World, aboard a US submarine. But this is no war film, rather a clever, tension-filled horror story. Its claustrophobic atmosphere is a perfect setting for this haunted house themed horror. There are elements of "Alien" in that the interior is slightly grimy and the crew are tetchy, uncouth and sometimes unkind to each other – being as they are, at such close quarters. Most of the actors are lesser known stars, adding to the tension – you're not really sure who the good guys are.The periscope, the crews only view of the sea above, ads to the eerie atmosphere – A battleship looms into regular, horrifying view, seemingly remorseless in its pursuit. Additional creepiness is never seeing the battleship's crew. It appears a living entity, the submarine its prey. Its horrid arsenal of depth charges and hooks never seemed so terrifyingly awful in its usage before.I will not give away the plot or plots – there are many interweaving elements, seemingly unconnected, and it does get complicated at times. But it does make sense if you watch it more than once - as I had to. Anyway, I think it is a cracking good film and thoroughly recommend it.