MovieChat Forums > The Reef (2011) Discussion > well...yeah...but no.

well...yeah...but no.

posted 14 years ago by carlphillips408
21 replies | jump to latest

i really wanted to love this film,i love a well done scary movie set out in the ocean.the idea that something lurks in the vast emptiness,ready to cause a frenzied attack at any moment has a huge appeal factor to any serious horror fan.
so...the film...well,the script could have been read out in about 10 minutes at the most but the film lasts over an hour & a half...but it keeps your attention till the very end.
the camera work at the beginning of the film was nothing short of excellent.when the boat turned over & one of the survivors went down to search for supplies i was just anticipating a large set of sharp teeth to come bursting out of the darkness.
but as the film dragged on,i slowly became frustrated.the shark itself,there was no scale on how big it is.no large shadow was seen passing under the survivors as they bobbed around on the surface.the close encounters with the shark was disappointing.even though the moments only lasted a few seconds you could clearly see the shark was computer generated.
all in all a disappointment i am afraid,worth watching the once.

[–] theshadowrunner 14 years ago

"the close encounters with the shark was disappointing.even though the moments only lasted a few seconds you could clearly see the shark was computer generated."

... not sure we saw the same flick. The shark sequences were extremely well done, actually the best in any shark movies up to this point imho.

[–] Link6321 14 years ago

by - carlphillips408 on Tue Nov 16 2010 03:52:43

the close encounters with the shark was disappointing.even though the moments only lasted a few seconds you could clearly see the shark was computer generated.

How sure are you that it was computer-generated? Come to think of it, we never saw the actors actually "interact" with the shark. All we saw were quick shots; why would they need a CG shark? Also, the shark looked pretty real to me. From the general look of the film, this doesn't look like a "big budget" movie. It's clear they used real footage of a shark (cheaper and more practical), digitally spliced together with the reaction shots of the actors.

[–] halfbeast 14 years ago

only the one attack was CGI (when he takes their board to set it up as bait....), the rest was clearly normal footage of a bored shark.

[–] jhoplos 14 years ago

"when he takes their board to set it up as bait..."

lol

So in your mind the shark stole the board and dragged it with him to trick one of the group to swim after it ?

I think you overestimate a sharks intelligence.

[–] Thornwood 14 years ago

LOL!! Yeah... That's what the shark did!!

Because that 'ol shark wasn't coming near the dude that was staring him down, all wild eyed, with the strange goggles on! So he baited 'em!!

Note to the dude with goggles: "Hey Dude! You can't stare down a shark like a dog man! Their not gonna blink first! Their blind, hungry and ate uglier things than YOU!

My God !! It's full of stars ......

[–] carlphillips408 14 years ago

it annoyed the hell outa me how that guy kept messing with his goggles.
i have seen a lot of documentaries about sharks.when a shark see's a large cluster of people in the water,it is not a large cluster of people it see's but a large object.so,if an individual breaks from the group,the shark would see it as such & attack the single person.
but why use people as bait,i do not know why.
yes,the close encounters of the shark was clearly computer generated.why make something inferior to something made 35 years ago i do not know why.same could be said when comparing evil dead to dead snow.
i could not care how the shark acts or the effects,i would have settled for a large set of sharp teeth appearing out of the deep blue.i wanted to be scared,although the opportunity was there,it never happened.

[–] nightmare111 14 years ago

dude that was real footage of a white shark combined with their shots,and he puts the googles to see where the shark will come, this movie felt pretty real,except the part where they are sleeping adrift.

[–] puirt-a-beul 14 years ago

It was a white pointer shark, which is a different species from the Great White (aka "Bruce" in Jaws).

And though it might have been derived from real footage, there's no doubt shots of the shark underwater were matted in. The unfortunate thing was that it wasn't footage of a shark in "circling its prey" mode -- as someone earlier in the thread said, it's an unstimulated shark just prowling its territory -- and it was fairly easy to spot that it was the same piece of shark footage used several times over.

All in all, though, the attacks were fairly well done, and probably closer to real life than what we usually see. Overall, the movie didn't really excite me, but there were other reasons than the shark itself -- the characters weren't defined, they hardly interacted, and their individual arcs were almost completely flat. And the acting was fairly unremarkable, didn't you think?

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[–] bombstalker 14 years ago

I thought the shark footage was pretty well composited - certainly the most convincing shark-people interactions i've ever seen on film.
I didn't spot a single piece of footage used twice (more than can be said for more infamous shark-themed films), and the behaviour seemed pretty accurate for a shark cruising ever closer to its prey before finally having a go.

Also just to be clear on the species - 'White Pointer' is just an alternate term for the Great White, used more in Australia.

Fair points about the characters... Personally i felt it was a refreshing change not to have the characters go through a traditional arc - less satisying as a film maybe, but felt more like a realistic situation and therefore scarier.

[–] Wildmole 14 years ago

I agree with you.Can't understand what the OP is on about.This is by far the most realistic shark movie sequences I have ever seen.It really looked very real to me. I challenge any of the people criticizing the special effects to name me one shark movie better done effect-wise. I would also ask at what moment they saw the same footage twice during the movie,because I can't recall,and I've watched it twice quite closely.
And even though they could be CGI (which I believe they aren't,only conveniently spliced sets of frames),what did you guys expect,real shark attacks on real people?Honestly,give it a break,and enjoy a very well-done flick.

[–] shoot-hobos 14 years ago

90% of peeps here are right, the shark wasn't CGI, clever editing just gave the impression of it interacting with the actors. And yeh, a white pointer is the same thing as a great white. I loved this film, really pleasently surprised!

[–] Jaymb72 14 years ago

A white pointer is a Great White Shark. It is the exact same species as Bruce in Jaws. Carcharodon carcharias. How can you say that this was footage of an unstimulated shark? You can see shots where it's pectoral fins are pointed downwards and its snout up. This is classic aggressive behaviour and this is an indicator that the shark is ready to rock and roll with you.

I just wish people would do a bit of research and not post lazy statements detracting from this well made movie. This is the greatest shark attack movie made in my opinion. I loved it. Terrifying and brilliantly done.

[–] puirt-a-beul 14 years ago

I just wish people would do a bit of research and not post lazy statements detracting from this well made movie.

I just wish people who want to be taken seriously on the internet would make their points without resorting to lazy slurs and emotive, judgemental phrasing.

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[–] stefanlefevre 14 years ago

Come on dude its clearly real footage and someone wrote it wasnt a great white. not sure if they were jokeing but it was. i liked the film finally a real animal suspence movie and not the whole clever mutant shark ( deep blue sea ) pirahna 3d, anaconda, old jaws and so on. i dont get that they make these expensive movies without any real knowlege about the animals. snakes are def ( anaconda ) they cant hear you. Sharks cant swim backwards ( deep blue sea ) i know its just movies but still, less is more ( jaws 25 meter shark )
my only thing about this is that great white usually attack upwards from the bottom and are not found hunting on reefs and shallow water. otherwise a real refreshment

[–] Wildmole 14 years ago

Agree with you.I just would have liked an overview shot of the shark's shadow roaming under the victims.That would have been terrific and scary as hell.But all in all,it is the best animal movie i have ever seen.

[–] stefanlefevre 14 years ago

your right that shoot would have been crazy. cant believe they didnt do that. the one with the shark appearing out of the blue was okey though. i allways stare into the blue when im diving and thats exactly the vision i dont want to see : )

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] stefanlefevre 14 years ago

ill give you the one with the snakes. okey they have inner ears, but my point was they always have to overdue it. the snake in anaconda is like a milion miles long and it trows itself out in the air an grabs a latter and so on. and you have to wisper otherwise it hears you and eat you. its so far out. about the 25 meters in jaws i was just making a point in one of the jaws movies its totally out of poporsion. and in deep blue sea, yes they are totally amased by it, but im not sure paring a blue shark and a mako makes it go backwards : ) anyway its cool if people like that i just like it a little closer to reality. thinks its scarier.....

hey by the way i have to mension snakes on a plane ha ha thats gotta be the worst. non poisones snakes computer animated into all the rainbows different colours

[–] Wildmole 14 years ago

And if I remember right,the shark in Jaws 3,the biggest of them all,does swim backwards when it hides in the pool in some kind of cage and they goes out.Crazy!!!

[–] jjjcaddick 14 years ago

The worst thing is the story , what kind of knob thinks he can swim 12 miles through shark infested waters using a wristwatch and the sun for navigation whilst amongst the waves ? Seriously , if it was 1 mile and you could see land then you might just have a pop ... they all deserved to be shark bait , just a shame it took the shark an hour and a half to eat them !

[–] netrek 14 years ago

CGI sharks? Sorry but you must have been drunk when you saw this film. The sharks are clearly real.

><> <><