I really wanted to see this in the theater when it came out, as I thought it looked cool, and I just kind of dig this type of story and setup.  Really bad word of mouth kept me away, yet I jumped on it first chance I got on Blu-Ray.

Well, the critics were pretty much correct, but IMO, it wasn't nearly as big an abomination as it was made out to be.

With James Cameron on board as Executive Producer, using the same technology he created for Avatar, it was released in 3D that was supposedly pretty damn good.  Hard to say when only viewing the Blu-Ray, but I didn't really see many "special" 3 D setup shots.

Anyways, budgeted at $30 Million, with a no star power cast, filmed in Mexico and Australia, the film did manage to pull in $79 Million WW, but was deemed as a huge flop and disappointment.

It's based on a true life event from 1988, in which the writer/producer, Andrew Wight, was actually part of.  It's got all the makings of a thrilling, engaging movie, but it just doesn't succeed...for a number of reasons, IMO.

The characters are very weak and under developed, which makes it hard to root or fear fro them.  IMO, the movie just "starts" at an odd time and doesn't give us the back story or get to know everyone time, it should have.  We also have our usual cast of cliches here, and they're taken to an almost cartoonish level.

The dialogue is also very weak, and I have to blame the script for this.  Not only does it come across as unrealistic, but it also doesn't give us anything to like about the characters.

For some really odd reason, they released this with an R rating, which is basically due to the word "fuck" being used some 50 times.  There is no nudity, no sex, no gore, and little violence.  Huge mistake IMO!

Biggest flaw is the believability of the whole thing.  The logic just doesn't work for me and maybe I missed some things, or more likely, it just wasn't there.  The actual story takes place in 1988, meaning technology isn't near what it is now...and everyone escaped safely, which isn't the case here at all.

There's alot made of the fact that the group is using the latest in diving technology - the "re-breather" SCUBA gear.  I understand the concept, but having this, things shouldn't have gotten so bad, so fast.

I also don't understand the need for decompression in this cave system, as it just doesn't make sense that they're actually diving so far down, as they're already many hundreds of feet below the surface to start.  And this does come into play...maybe I'm missing something...

So, the biggest issue with the logic is the entire premise itself.  A bunch of cavers/divers/climbers are in this giant, deep cave and a cyclone or the like is about to hit up top.  Several make it out in time, but 6 don't.  The idea is that the cave floods and they have to go deeper and deeper to find a way out.  But, if they simply would have stayed where they were, at the entrance, put on their diving "re-breather" gear, waited for the water to start filling up, they'd be perfectly fine, wouldn't they?  It just doesn't make sense that they did what they did, and had no contact with the huge and expensive party on the surface.

As it plays out, many stupid decisions are made, characters act like you know they're going to, and 1 by 1, people die.

There is some beautiful cinematography here on display.  There are numerous intense scenes.  All in all, it just doesn't deliver like it could have and should have.

It's funny. I rented this the other day (along with a flick called Ironclad) for I also missed Sanctum in theatres due to bad word of mouth.

About halfway in, I stopped it, went to the bonus features to see the story behind the story. The real story takes place in 1988, everyone was rescued, and...

Then I went back to the film, because I liked the photography, and maybe knocking off two people was for dramatic effect and maybe there is a character arc where the father has a character arc. To my shock, more characters got killed off. There was no character arc. I wondered if at least three survivors stopped at the tank, maybe between them they could work out differences and find a way to get out that way.

But no.......... The character played by Ioan Gruffud just has to become, out of the wild blue, this last minute villain. I don't know about you, Jeff, but that ticked me off. I begged 'please pleeease don't go there...and those SOBs went there.

I'm willing to bet that the actual story in '88 was far more compelling than this pile of junk. The film's sight and sound tech were great. The dialog was disgusting and most of the characters unlikable. This film was a disappointment.

Yeah, Darren, I agree...no reason at all for his character to all of a sudden, for literally no reason at all, become this complete jackass.  One of the many "character flaws" in terms of the writing.

But, I didn't hate it.  I just definitely didn't like it, either, and I was left thinking what a complete waste of a great story, opportunity, and cool film we all missed out on.

Nothing I'll remember, other than the initial view of the cavern opening, which is also the menu, so there you go...

Could have...SHOULD HAVE been so much better!

James Cameron doesn't slap his name on many movies as a producer.
So, I was a little surprised at how staggeringly mediocre this movie was.
A staggeringly mediocre cast didn't help much either.
TV movie of the week sudsy melodrama with heaps of high tech photography.
I never felt a hint of peril throughout the film, unlike it's horror cousin, "The Descent".

E.D.