GurlyIamBeach Instant Favorite.

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

DubyaHan The movie is wildly uneven but lively and timely - in its own surreal way

Panamint A 1950s creature movie can be awful and that's OK if its so bad its good- some are hilarious or have a fun goofy monster ("The Giant Claw"). Unfortunately The Phantom from 10,000 Leagues has none of the awful plus factors going for it. Its slow, boring and directed by someone who lacked the ability to either reach up to make good film or to reach down to the lowest Ed Wood levels of schlock. And the monster here is not campy or anything.Cathy Downs was capable of giving good performances, as was perennial leading man Kent Taylor. Downs looks fine as she wears various sporty outfits, swimsuits etc. but unfortunately that is all her role requires, no acting is even remotely required. Taylor seems rather bemused as he knows this movie is not redeemable even as camp.I watch this movie because I like the cast, but the silly monster that bobs around the surface in shallow water has no impact at all.A 1950's monster film completist will need this in their collection but other than such enthusiasts I doubt that anyone else would be interested.

SimonJack A more realistic title for this so-called monster movie might be, "The Plastic Model from 10,000 centimeters." Even that would be a stretch in how far down in the "deep" we see this monster. The ancient distance of a league at sea was three miles. The diameter of the earth is 7,917.5 miles. So, something 10,000 leagues below the earth's or ocean's surface, would actually be more than 22,000 miles beyond the opposite side of the earth – in space. Even the centimeters are a stretch, because that would be 328 feet down. And in this film, the scuba divers hardly seem to go beyond 50 feet. In the scenes with the monster on their heels, the swimmers rise a few feet above the fronds and bottom sea growth to be at the water's surface. I belabor this point only to point out how bad everything is about this film. I give it one star above the worst possible only because the plot has just enough suspense to make it interesting enough to watch to the conclusion. Although one can easily guess what the ending will be. Otherwise the script is quite bad. It's a good example of the cheap run of films made during the 1950s. Unheard of sources tried to make a buck from the public's revived interest in monster films. There is hardly any script at all in this film. And where there is, is punctuated (indeed) with long periods of silence. It wouldn't be so bad if the camera had turned more on the surf or interesting scenery. Then, this very boring and lackluster plot was worsened by downright amateurish acting. This may be the worst job of making a monster. It must have been a plastic doll. It clearly was lifeless, however much the filmmakers tried to give us the impression that it was moving or alive. These folks could have learned something from the Japanese filmmakers of "Godzilla" the year before. To give this film even two stars is charitable, indeed.

GL84 After a strange series of deaths around the water, a team's investigation reveals a strange radioactive deposit has grown a vicious radioactive sea creature and must find a way of curtailing both.This is a fairly enjoyable if somewhat problematic creature feature. One of the better elements here is the fact that the relatively simple plot manages to keep things on line to the point of extremely efficient storytelling where there's no real extraneous side-plots or unnecessary ventures. Whether they're enjoyable pieces is another matter, but the fact that it's so streamlined and straightforward keeps this from really going off into pointless territories like it easily could've gone. The whole film really centers on the discovery of the strange radioactive substance in the cove and how the discovery is tied to the institute nearby, and the drive to find it out makes this move along quite well as the mystery slowly comes into focus. After that, there isn't a whole lot here that really works all that well. Despite staying on focus for the duration of time in regards to the investigation, this doesn't really produce a lot of interesting facets due to enlarged amount of time spent on the extraneous facets of the investigation and the different red herrings throughout the story that go nowhere, seeming only to provide enough time to turn this into a feature-length affair while compensating for the atrocious special effects. Those really are that bad with a laughable monster, utterly ridiculous make-up effects on the victims and a rather clumsy nature to the attack scenes that really make for a confusing time with the stiff, immovable costume never making it seem like there's something to fear in the creature which really takes a lot out of the movie when the few times it's on-screen there's not much worth to it. These elements all conspire to keep this down somewhat.Today's Rating-PG: Violence.

hung_fao_tweeze Is it just me or is there something grating with a movie that has a title that has nothing to do with the movie?? There is no phantom. It's a creature that sits just offshore at the bottom of the ocean protecting a glowing radioactive substance for some reason. And the creature is not from 10,000 leagues. People are able to dive down to the creature without being crushed by the water pressure, after all. Taking this into account and the length of time to get from the creature back into that leaking generic rowboat that absolutely everybody is using, I would place the creature at about 30-40 feet. Of course, the movie would have probably not fanned interest with a title like 'The Thing From 5 or 6 Fathoms'. Oh, well. Yes, it's a low budget capsule of a movie - not particularly well-acted and motivations are not consistent. For example, knowing that a creature you created is killing people in a body of water your lovely daughter may decide to swim in doesn't motivate you to want to eliminate the creature, I don't know what will? But when confronted with these facts, the 'scientist' is unable to decide. Yes, let's let the creature live so it can kill even more people. Good idea! And then there is this 'secret agent' woman that has somehow convinced this young hot-head that he must break into the scientist's lab to discover the secret that is being worked on because there is a lot of money involved. One assumes that the hot-head's life is in peril and yet he cannot figure out a way to break down a single wooden door (despite the locks) to get at the secret. This was before 'big-brother, folks. Wait until after-hours and ax that baby down. Even the so-called fisherman casting his net at the beginning of the movie obviously doesn't have a clue how to actually cast a net properly. Somehow, nearly all of the men in this flick have nothing else to wear on the beach except dress shoes, suits and ties. Formal business attire on a beach is somehow disturbing. Keep an eye out for the '3 Stooges-like' stunt where hot-head gets a fist in the face from behind the beach umbrella he expects to find the lovely 'secret agent'. Okay, okay. It is a low budget release with almost 4 sets, 1 boat, a creature that sincerely tries to be threatening. Oh, yes, and there is radiation involved - so that should be a cause of some trepidation for the 1950s crowd living in the dread fear of the time. And the script was based on a story someone had actually written!!But I like bad movies. This one isn't entirely terrible and does have some entertainment value despite the gaps in logic and credibility. Good for a rainy day, young kids who aren't dismissive of movies without color and special effects, and popcorn.