Is it just me or does this movie have the worst special effects ever? I love bad movies but as soon as the horrible paper mache monster attacked the boat at the beginning I let out a groan and gave up the film as lost.
shareI made it to the end and was surprised to see that this 4 hour movie was actually only 80m long. Any movie that can do that to you deserves a space on your collectible shelf (where you will never think of seeing it again).
Some bad movies like The Unearthly are laugably entertaining. This dud couldn't raise a chuckle from me if my life depended on it.
How many replies now?
just for the sake of resurecting this lovely topic :)
REPLY N.15
#16 reporting in.
I think the movie's biggest flaw wasn't the paper-mache monster, but the fact that it got so little screen time. I wasn't interested in the slightest in any of those flat characters and their boring problems and conflicts, yet they just kept hogging the spotlight, endlessly talking and talking, without ever making way for some slightly more entertaining monster action. I really don't mind if cheap monster flicks have crap effects, or incompetent actors, but this sort of boring filler dialogue that only serves as padding is always a deal breaker for me.
Too bad, though. It could have been an amusing little b-movie.
Yet another reply.
"Put a warm rug in the car. It's cold outside when you have to go about naked." - The Invisible Man
I must agree with the previous poster about the monster´s lack of on-screen time. Had that hokey beast popped up more often and harrassed more people, this movie would´ve been really cool, but nooooo... it´s appearance is limited to handful of short scenes. The rest of the movie is mostly dull.
Still, i can´t say this is the worst film I´ve watched. The Monster With 1,000,000 Eyes (The movie on the flipside of the MGM DVD), despite being quite bad itself, is a more enjoyable experience anyway (And no, that movie´s monster doesn´t really have 1,000,000 eyes, unfortunately).
"Cain and Abel will go to Heaven... if they can make it through Hell!"
-Los Hijos Del Topo
"And no, that movie´s monster doesn´t really have 1,000,000 eyes, unfortunately"
Unfortunately?! I can't think of many things more creepy than large amounts of eyes!
"Put a warm rug in the car. It's cold outside when you have to go about naked." - The Invisible Man
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Anyone who thought the monster in this movie was the "worst ever" has never seen 'Creature From the Haunted Sea.' That's the problem with making those all encompassing statements. They eventually become irrelevant along with your credibility.
KS
I guess you've never seen "The Creeping Terror"...???
"Creature From The Haunted Sea" wasn't meant to be a 100% serious flick but actually sort of a spoof or satire of the monster/creature genre.
The "worst ever" monster is the titular creature in "The Creeping Terror", which consists of a very large rug placed on the backs of several people huddled together underneath while walking VERY SLOWLY towards it's victims.
I'M A TRAVELING SALESPERSON. I SELL BANJOS.
No, I have seen that movie but then I didn't say any movie's monster was the worse ever. That's why I said that one shouldn't proclaim anything the worse ever as there will always be something to come along that can be worse. I doubt if anyone has seen every monster movie made. I know I haven't.
KS
OK, although you didn't say it explicitly, you are certainly implying The Creature IS the worst by stating that "Anyone who thought the monster in this movie (TPFTTL) was the "worst ever" has never seen TCFTHS." ;-)
I'M A TRAVELING SALESPERSON. I SELL BANJOS.
First we would have to agree that something was actually the worst before we could state that there was something even worse when it came along (and thus becoming the worst). Any confusion to my previous post was probably due to my failure to write the correct tenses of the word worse. The OP wrote that the creature in TPFTTL was the worst, meaning there is nothing worse. I stated in so many words that the OP might want to consider that there could be others that are worse and used TCFTHS as an example. Whether or not a creature is created for comic effect or not or the movie wasn't to be taken seriously, IMHO, isn't an issue. Lastly my statement that since we haven't seen every movie there is, we really can't make a blanket statement that one movie monster is the worst as we have no way of knowing. I will go on record and state that I will never say that any movie or movie monster is the worst for that very reason.
KS
You must be an aspiring attorney, or politician, perhaps? Don't quit your day job. You undeniably stated in so many words, that if someone thinks that TPFTTL is the worst, than they haven't seen CFTHS, which clearly implies that you do (or did) think that CFTHS was the worst.
I don't think the issue here is about monsters, instead it is about your integrity, you need to accept ownership of that specific statement and be accountable for it instead of backpedaling and trying to cover your tracks. ;-)
"That man's nuts!!! Grab 'em!"
You are correct that my original post was worded as you state. I corrected my statement but you seem to indicate that I must stick with my original post even if that's not what I had intended. If all you want to do is win an argument, on the internet of all places, fine. I assure you that I won't lose any sleep over it.
KS
[deleted]
I just looked at your original post, and as far as I can tell, your post regarding the worst monster hasn't been corrected or edited in any way.
So, reiterating what I said in my last post, our dialogue has become much more a question of your lack of integrity rather than cheesy monsters. Oh, well....
"That mans' nuts!!! Grab 'em!"
I didn't say I corrected the original post. Maybe I should have. What I did was I corrected my tenses of the words "worse/worst" and added even more detail in my second post - the one you took issue with. That you are having a hard time reading or comprehending what I write is not a knock on my integrity. Maybe on my proofreading but not my integrity. Do reply if you're still confused!
KS
Uh yeah, well, gosh...! I guess I was confusing your original post with your second post and had not realized that you actually corrected your tenses.
"That mans' nuts!!! Grab 'em!"
Sherlock-37… I paid $4.99 for the same three pack! Oh well, everything is more expensive in Vancouver…
Dying Flutchman… don’t knock an Ed Wood film… we all love Ed Wood or we wouldn’t be watching these movies…
This movie was far from ‘worst’. I have certainly seen worse like Sorority House Vampires from Hell 1998… now THAT stunk!
After due consideration to The Phantom From 10,000 Leagues, I concluded that the monster was not a real monster per say, but rather a symbol of Professor King’s conscince... his anguish and remorse for creating the atomic undersea weapon which killed innocent people and destroyed a battleship!!!
Professor King should have asked Ethel out on a date instead… that would have been a happier story. Their relationship was so distant for two people who worked so close.
..oh that makes me number 30 who replied here...
Smoke me a kipper. I’ll be back for breakfast
Is it just me, or did Dr. King's secretary look exactly like a female version of Paul Birch?
Also, I'm not sure I get the title since this "phantom" barely hung around in two or three leagues, much less 10,000.
hkfilmnews.blogspot.com
porfle.blogspot.com
I really didn't notice it,, but then I wasn't looking for it either,, I enjoyed the movie very much.
are you going to bark all day little doggie,, or are you going to bite
Yes it does, but was a good movie if you ignore that part.
share