Best movie of this year hands down!

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Highlighted by superb performances by Niall Matter and Brian Krause, this is a film depicting the classic struggle between civilized man and an aroused and vengeful nature. Stunning special effects bring to life nature as represented metaphorically by Loch Ness monsters who have made their way through chains of caverns from their original habitat to Lake Superior. The challenge to man's existence is profound, yet the monsters own existence is a natural phenomenon, the incursion of modern man a threat to them. The existential question is all too obvious and the choices made by man as he struggles to coexist with nature are well depicted here as a literal battle between species. At times, this film confronts the viewer with these issues quite powerfully and a thoughtful script uses excitement, dark humor, and pathos to force one to seriously consider whether man has a right to destroy that which he does not understand. Because of that blinding existential fear, a native species becomes simply a predator and, as in this film, we endeavor to find a way for accommodation rather than extermination. The anthropomorphism so typical to human reactions to animals is cleverly handled and there are some quite tense scenes. One should be warned that there is also some graphic violence and bloodshed but neither is gratuitous. Rarely do motion pictures with limited budgets successfully and intelligently bring the philosophical questions discussed here to the screen. That this film attempts to do so and does not avoid the complexities of the fundamental struggle of man vs. nature is a credit to a fine script and a gifted director.

"See now, that's why, in general, a mad scientist is less desirable than your garden-variety scientist." although this one is a vengeful scientist rather than, strictly speaking, a typical "mad scientist".Playing now on the Syfy channel. Amusing, but awful.What you need to know: 1. the hero (smoking Eastwood/Man With No Name cigarillo and wearing Indiana Jones hat ) is a cryptozoologist 2. the monster eats people the way my dog eats dog-snacks 3. probably way too graphic for small kids, although I am finding it very entertaining while eating breakfast 4. special effects work on the theory that they will REMIND you of "Jaws" and you will know when you should be scared 5. hero smoking his cigarillo in guided, chartered, small (10 ft) open-engine fishing boat and while donning air-tank for scuba diving (well, I guess it's just air, not oxygen, so no danger) 6. dialog(while watching on-board radar screen) "40 ft! There's nothing that big on this lake; must be a school of bass... " "We'll see, kid."

Ah, the Loch Ness Monster. One of the hardy perennials of cryptozoology, yet figures in a tiny quantity of movies compared with Bigfoot or any other mystery beast. It was inevitable that the Sci-Fi Channel would use ol' Nessie in one of their original films, what is surprising about this one is that its actually quite fun and handled with a measure of skill. It's a standard tale of a lake plagued by attacks from a mysterious beast, which turns out to be a plesiosaur that has managed to relocate from Scotland to Canada, causing bait shop owner Josh, his mother Karen and vengeful cryptozoologist James Murphy to team up to save the day. The film moves at a good clip, we have an arresting flashback to the death of James' parents to set the scene, then the feed of attacks is pretty regular until a tense final showdown on an uninhabited island. The design of the creature is quite good, it bears little resemblance to fossil records but is a good sized lumbering toothy malfeasant complete with cool head crest and even a semblance of musculature and effort put into its skin colouring. Make no mistake, its still quite obviously CGI, but a colossal advance from the likes of Cerberus or Sabretooth. As well as the effective (well, much more than usual for this sort of film) creature, an unexpected verve is put into the action and the creatures general antics, with the climax especially notable in this regard. Its not that exciting, but the fact that it achieves any measure of excitement at all is rather pleasing. There's even a modicum of OK gore, with little in the way of CGI to it. Regrettably the acting and writing fail to stick to the same level of the direction and effects, everybody here talks and acts exactly the way characters in Sci-Fi originals are expected too. Niall Matter is a vapid younger lead, Carrie Genzel conveys barely a jot of authority as his sheriff mother, most of the rest are just there. Brian Krause appears to be the "name" star here (well he was in Charmed) and does a Clint Eastwood impression, he seems to be having fun but is a bit laughable. The writing is as stolid as can be imagined, po faced, unintentionally amusing, unneeded exposition, all that sort of thing. Still, this is much, much better than expected, probably the best Sci-Fi Channel release I've come across and recommended if you dig their output in general. Never "good" exactly then, and not memorable or all that worthwhile, but I could bear it, which is more than can be said for stuff like the aforementioned Cerberus or the space bear "epic" Savage Planet. Heck, its even better than the hysterical Sabretooth! A semi satisfied 5/10 from me then.

This film is not good. I've seen worse. Fair is fair. But I certainly have seen better. The acting is quite wooden (although not utterly so) and the premises for the plot are, at best, very silly.Nevertheless, the characters act reasonably intelligently in several scenes, which is a first for movies of this kind and there are several shots of beautiful natural scenery.As for the special effects and the CGI... No. Bloody awful. I don't expect anything along the lines of Jurassic Park but surely they could have done just a little better?There are some scene inconsistencies that lowers the effect too.Still, I give it a 3 for fairly bearable characters, nice scenery and the occasional spasm of decent acting.If you don't have to pay for it, have lots of popcorn and soda and nothing better to do, I guess it might actually be enjoyable as a pass-time.