Amphibious 3D
Amphibious 3D
| 01 November 2011 (USA)
Amphibious 3D Trailers

Marine biologist Skylar Shane hires an expat charter boat captain, Jack Bowman, to help her find prehistoric life form samples in the north Sumatran Sea. During the expedition, they run into some of Jack's 'friends', a gang of smugglers headquartered on a fishing platform in the middle of the sea. Tamal, an orphan sold into servitude on the fishing platform by his uncle, a 'Dukun' (sorcerer and master of black magic) shaman, begs Skylar to take him away. She empathizes with the boy, who reminds her of her lost daughter, Rebecca, and is determined to help him, not knowing what lurks beneath the dark inky water, waiting to surface. Ever since Tamal arrived, mysterious things begin to happen, until one by one the smugglers will be killed by the terrifying creature from the deep. In the middle of an eerie, violent storm, the animus inside Tamal grows stronger, calling for the ancient creature of his nightmares...

Reviews
Interesteg What makes it different from others?
Steineded How sad is this?
Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Abegail Noëlle While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.
Aulia_Rachman first, sorry if my English language is bad.. so yeah, after i watch this film, i've big disappoint to this film.. about script the story, sorry to say, nothing interested.. the scene, so flat..and the actor, well..i can't agree anymore.. so, maybe this film, going to B/C class film's.. i think maybe, this film has minim badget to make it, maybe the director just put in the ladies to make up this movie bad, still nothing change.. To be honest, unless this movie is aired on some late night TV creature feature program there is really no need to sit through this at all. It's a rambling, plodding movie that never really kicks into gear and despite the exotic location, it's all in vain as 90 percent of the film is shot in and around the fishing platform. 86 minutes of pure tedium is the price I paid for this steaming pile. What more to say, dialogue are pretty funny and they are meant to be that way, so one point here! The place where the action takes place, again, nice, not bad at all, you probably seen it before but still, brings a nice touch to it all. Characters, one point once again, i found them OK, they blend in great. But these are the only good things, therefore that is why i rated this movie 3 out of 10! I just can't get pass the creature, come on, XXI century, the ability to make whatever effects you want, even if a little cash short still, horrible sea-creature. And not sure if that is a SEA-monster, seriously!maybe, you just better option to watch another movie some like this.. rate from me, 5/10. just it.
By-TorX-1 Amphibious is a mess of a movie, but has some decent points, most notably a not-too-bad creature. However, little of the plot makes sense. The Tamal character seems to be a sorceress and apparently (it's never quite clear) summons the sea-based fiend to exact revenge on her tormentors, but she then kills the creature, only to have its babies. I didn't quite get it (could anyone?). The plot also meanders, with the Skylar character concocting bogus reasons to return to the fishing platform (that has no boat - not a very smart enterprise) to push the narrative along and she is not terribly convincing as a scientist, either. For example, the film opens with a couple's self-recorded video antics but who fall victim to the creature only for the video then is revealed as a YouTube-type 'Fact or Fake' feature, but given that the characters say their names and are missing US tourists, I doubt it would be hard to verify that they are indeed missing. For that matter, Skylar's actual research is fairly nebulous, too. Anyway, it's worth a Friday night viewing if there is nothing else on, but the Brian Yuzna label promises much more than it delivers.
Paul Magne Haakonsen I watched this movie in lack of having better to watch. And my interest was heightened when I saw that Brian Yuzna was behind this movie.And now that I have seen it, I sit here with somewhat of a feeling of having just sat through a late 80's - early 90's horror movie. It didn't seem like it was from 2010 at all. The storyline was pretty much what you've seen in movies back then.The story is pretty vague. Some researcher is doing work in the ocean somewhere in Asia, and she comes upon some awakened monster that preys upon a local fishing platform. There is some sub-plots about Tamal, about children being held against their will as work slaves and such, but there never really was a greater red line throughout the movie. And you are left wondering, where did this monster come from, how could it have survived for that long, and most importantly of all, just a big why, why, why at most things in the movie."Amphibious" was dragged down by a tedious storyline that would have worked better back in the 80's or 90's, but even more so was weighed down by horrible dialogue and pretty bad acting. Sure there were moments of clarity, but in overall, the acting done by the native Indonesians cast for the movie was less than halfhearted. And also one thing comes to mind, why would they be speaking English and not Bahasa Indonesia at a remote location like that? It just didn't make sense.Now, one of the two things the movie did have working in its favor, was that it worked well at building up suspense. Brian Yuzna is great at doing that, and managed to pull it off in "Amphibious" nicely enough. And the second part that worked well for the movie was the creature itself. Sure, you have to look past the fact that it is a gargantuan scorpion that lives under the water. But once you get past that stupid flaw, then the creature was actually nicely made, and it looked real enough. So hats off for the special effects team on "Amphibious".I enjoy horror movies, and "Amphibious" was, sadly enough, below average. And I doubt that it is a movie that I will ever be sitting down with for a second watching. The movie is good enough for a single watching, then it is bagged, tagged and forgotten.
dadatuuexx Lots of people are slow to admit to other people,that they love b-budget sci-fi,s .Not me,so i will watch most anything on sy-fi channel.Period. This movie was a good view.Not perfect by any means,however,if your "one of us! ",watch it .Brian Yuzna is behind the wheel,and that man needs no introduction to sci-fi .O.K.,i know i,m late to the table on this one,as it was made in 2010,but ,to tell the truth,i JUST watched it.the acting is what you expect,and sadly,the crew fails to soak up much lens time in what would be a great country to film in(India).They most likely shot it in a lot of different places.I do like the fact that,without giving anything away,they built a cool,full scale monster,from scratch!In a world with WAY too many C.G.I. flix,as an artist,i love to see this these days.There is a good mix of the computer fx,action, a sub-plot, good gore effects and ...evil! ..!...a soon to be sy-fy channel classic.