Kraken: Tentacles of the Deep

2006
Kraken: Tentacles of the Deep
3.6| 1h28m| en| More Info
Released: 23 September 2006 Released
Producted By: Sci Fi Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Thirty years ago, Ray Reiter witnessed the brutal death of his parents at sea by a strange, octopus-like creature. Now determined to exact revenge, he joins archaeologist Nicole on a perilous high-seas expedition to find a legendary Greek Opal - said to be guarded by the very beast that murdered his family. As they come face to face with the killer Kraken, they must also battle a ruthless crime lord, who will stop at nothing to seize the coveted treasure for himself.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Sci Fi Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

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.
Coventry At one point, still very early in the film, the male lead character can be seen reading a copy of Jules Verne's legendary novel "20,000 Leagues Under The Sea" and even later in the film the book is mentioned several times more. This wasn't a coincidental choice, as the novel (and even more so the classic 50's film starring Kirk Douglas) largely introduced and immediately popularized the notorious Kraken-monster. The Kraken, these days primarily known as the thing that swallowed Johnny Depp in "Pirates of the Caribbean", is a gigantic type of squid that can reach a size of nearly 46 feet and reigns over the darkest depths of the sea. Normally the Kraken only lives in the Northern regions, like the cold seas of Norway and Iceland, but according to the script of this low-keyed and forgettable made-for-TV creature feature, the monster can easily also dwell American ocean stretches and it suddenly even got promoted to being the guardian of ancient Greek artifacts! For you see, the Kraken's territory in "Deadly Waters" encompasses Desolation Passage because that's where the valuable opal rests in a shipwreck, and the monster attacks everyone who sails in this passage, whether their intentions are bad (like multiple treasure hunters) or harmless (like Ray's parents). This may sound like a very interesting concept for a monstrous horror movie, but "Deadly Waters" is dreadfully boring and poorly made. I anticipated the giant squid monster to be entirely computer engineered, but it's even worse that anyone could fear, as it looks like a cute and big-eyed underwater puppy. The Kraken never looks menacing, not even when its tentacles embrace a medium-sized ship. The underwater cinematography is unclear and the monster's attacks are never properly shown, for obvious reasons. At best, we see people getting thrown into the water and pulled down to the depths. With a slight bit of luck, the water even colors a bit red. The acting performances are weak and the characters totally implausible. Nicole and Jenny hardly look like brilliant archaeologists in their tiny bikinis and Jack Scalia is probably the least convincing mafia lord ever. Why did I watch this junk, I do not know. They should make a law against the spreading of TV-movies in video stores, especially when they do not indicate anywhere it's a TV movie! Director Tibor Takács might consider a late career change, as he hasn't accomplished anything special since the late 80's, when he made "The Gate" and "I, Madman".
MartianOctocretr5 Not a bad story, but the low budget rears its ugly head at times to undermine the effectiveness of the movie. A lot of the plot is predictable, but the film moves quickly and takes some time to introduce characters so you at least have some involvement and know what's going on. An illustration of the low budget is when a motor boat is "destroyed," you only see this as a CGI image from a distance. (No boats were harmed during the filming of this movie.) I also love the "metal mask," that looks like a pie-tin mold.It's another big-sea-creature-on-the-loose story, but this one actually has an unusual motive for its vicious brutality (not simply hunger), a plot twist often absent in these made-for-TV flicks. The human characters are two teams of scientific artifacts treasure hunters (sort of an aquatic version of Raiders of the Lost Ark), and they're both after the same artifact. The bad guys all wear black so you know they're the bad guys; the baddest of the baddies (and the leader) always wears black suits, even though all the action is at a beach or on the water. Every line of dialog this guy has is a threat to somebody; they could have put a sign up saying "Generic Theat in Progress" whenever he shows up. The good guys wear other colors, even in their scuba gear so you know who's who during underwater fight scenes. The creature's inevitable attacks predictably interrupt these fights, and provide for other common monster movie clichés.Certainly not a landmark film, but OK for a watch if you like these sea monster movies, or if you have nothing better to do.
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