IMDb > Octopus (2000) (V) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Octopus
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Octopus (V) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 6:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]
Index 59 reviews in total 

19 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

May leave unprepared viewers dumbfounded and speechless

1/10
Author: Jack from Minnesota, USA
22 August 2005

Okay, this is just as bad as it gets. Let me hit the high points:

1) The main character. This guy has all the courage and charisma of Pee Wee Herman (no offense to Pee Wee). He's a CIA agent, and after seeing a terrorist blow up the embassy he works at, killing all his co-workers, and then killing his best friend, this guy still can't bring himself to shoot the terrorist. He does stand there pointing his gun forever though. Finally he saves the terrorist.

2) The first scene on the submarine. This is a nuclear attack submarine, yet we find the crew, on the bridge, playing strip poker while rap music blares in the background. The captain walks in and - this is what will leave a person speechless - doesn't seem to find this to be out of the ordinary. This also serves to introduce us to the main female character, and makes her seem like a bar whore. Someone addresses her as "Doctor", while at the same time her panties are on a guy's head. A Hooters Girl doing a beer bong would be more convincing as a Ph.D. than this woman. And a lot classier too. I mean, is there actually anyone out there who thinks that nuclear attack subs are run like college frat houses? And is it possible that this same person is allowed to write screenplays? And let's not even get into the fact that the captain of this boat previously had captained another sub, which he ran aground. To penalize him for this, the military gives him the job of...captaining a nuclear attack sub.

3) The idea that terrorists could hijack a cruise ship and then somehow use it to chase a submarine. Are the film makers aware that submarines travel UNDER the water, and can't be detected by any equipment available on a cruise ship? I mean, it's just impossible to fathom the level of stupidity these people have put into this movie.

Overall, I love cheesy B movies, and a few major plot holes don't bother me much. But this thing...what can one even say? You've got an unbelievably, unwatchably horrible male lead, a scummy whore female lead, a bunch of action sequences that are so incomprehensible in their stupidity that it makes a person become nauseous and disoriented, and finally a giant octopus that does all the work of killing the terrorists that the CIA agent was too much of a cowardly putz to accomplish. Hooray for the octopus. Pity the audience.

How in the world do screenplays like this actually get made into movies? I would think this stuff would be passed around from studio to studio and laughed at until the writers left the state in shame, or maybe even left the country. I mean, there are movies made for $100, 000 in Bulgaria that put this thing utterly to shame.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

The Worst Monster Picture I have Ever Seen!

Author: teuthis (Teuthis@knology.net) from Columbus, Georgia
17 February 2003

"Octopus" is utterly boring; and patently ridiculous. What a pathetic waste of a perfectly good Cephalopod. So much time is spent setting up the plot that the octopus gets lost. Sure, the little heroine is totally cute. She can act too; but she can't save this mess on her own. The title "Octopus" is almost a non sequitur! During the interminable espionage conundrums, I kept thinking, "Who cares?" and "Where's the octopus?" And since when do octopi have insect mouthparts? Wouldn't a six foot long cephalopod beak suffice to scare us? The director forgot the monster, and was seemingly trying to remake "Executive Decision" in a submarine; badly. The dialogue, the action and the resolution of this muddle all violated the one axiom of monster pictures. They were boring. The entire film is boring, from start to finish. I am a dedicated monster picture fan and I won't bother to watch this catastrophe again.

I am frequently amazed that none of the directors of modern monster pictures never consider the "Old Man and the Sea" concept; the idea that nature itself is frightening and challenging. This entire film could have been made with six or seven people in a sailboat, trying to fend off a large cephalopod, or two. After all, we need some octopus fodder.

Don't bother with this one. Really. If you're a monster fan it will just make you mad.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Uneven, jumbled, with an occasional visit by the title creature

3/10
Author: MartianOctocretr5 from Redondo Beach, CA
24 September 2006

Starts off with a Soviet sub being lost in 1962 while on its way to Cuba. Cut to four decades later.

There's confusing hi-jinks, political intrigue, and traitors aboard an American sub that find the old sub. There's also a giant Octopus wandering around that makes periodic (and oddly timely) attacks, whenever it serves to thicken the plot. A spy is aboard the sub, and endeavors to uhhh, umm, do something bad I guess. The script doesn't make it clear, and the novice acting by the cast doesn't help, either.

Then the sub meets up with a cruise ship (!) What? Oh, and more spies show up too. The script darts around so much you'll get dizzy trying to follow it.

The final scene is about the only part that has anything of interest happen, as the Octopus makes his finest appearance. He's pretty nasty looking, as the director loves to take CGI shots into his mouth, as he attacks. Most of what you see is sloppy CGI, but at least you get to see something happen after waiting through the entire movie.

A goofy, bargain basement movie, good for sporadic moments of chaos and comedy.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

A mildly entertaining 'bad monster movie'.

4/10
Author: BA_Harrison from Hampshire, England
25 October 2008

After a reasonably well executed pre-credits sequence, set during the Cuban missile crisis, in which a Russian submarine carrying a toxic cargo is torpedoed by the US, Octopus takes a steep nose dive into the deep waters of ridiculousness from which it never surfaces.

Jay Harrington plays Roy Turner, an inexperienced CIA agent sent on a mission to escort dangerous international terrorist Casper (Ravil Isyanov) to America via nuclear powered submarine. Of course, the trip doesn't exactly go as planned: Casper frequently slips from his bonds, hoping to somehow escape the sub and rendezvous with his evil pals (who have infiltrated the staff of a nearby ocean liner); and a massive tentacled sea monster, the result of the toxic spill 32 years earlier, seems intent on making a meal out of the sub's crew!

From the moment crazy killer Casper (unconvincingly dressed as an old woman selling pastries) carries out his daring attack on an embassy that has a 'come-and-go-as-you-like' approach to security, this daft film becomes the epitome of clichéd B-movie garbage, offering a raft of stereotypical characters, endless predictable action, and totally nonsensical plot development which will have most sane viewers reaching for the off switch, but which should prove to be reasonably enjoyable fare for fans of low-budget, bottom-shelf, STV dreck!

Bolstered by brilliantly unrestrained performances from a dedicated cast seemingly unfazed by the sheer awfulness of the script, and digital special effects scraped from the very bottom of the barrel, Octopus manages to entertain by being unbelievably dumb: before the inevitable climactic showdown between Roy and the sea creature, viewers are treated to several unconvincing punch-ups, an outstanding(ly bad) display of emotional range from Ricco Ross as brave second-in-command Brickman, sexy Caroline Lowery as a feisty female oceanographer (who looks fab in her scanties!), and the unforgettable sight of a giant octopus tentacle piercing the bad guy and pulling his helicopter into the sea!

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

an absolute disaster

Author: nufcdasbeast2 from bournemouth, england
21 March 2003

I'm sorry everyone but when i saw the trailer,i thought the potential was there - even the effects looked good, but to my amusement the movie was another straight to video disaster.The story was bearable,the cast were there for the free parking and the script i think was written by the tea boy on his tea break.On swiftly to the effects which would have given a teenage harryhausen nightmares,judging by the companys cv they have found there market in unintended hilarious monster flicks - but speaking as one chump who bought the dvd before viewing,BEWARE

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A grave insult to monster movie fanatics

7/10
Author: Ismaninb from Suriname
14 September 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As I am certainly not a monster movie fanatics I greatly enjoyed Octopus. What to do if the budget is too low for all the necessary special effects? Simple, make deliberately a goofy B-movie. The acting is pretty good and the characters are as stereotypal as they should be, without the exaggeration so typical for Hot Shots etcetera. The dialogues are funny and what's more, all placed at exactly the wrong moments. The plot holes are as big as the crater of a volcano. And, greatest joke of all, the hero does not get the heroin! Actually that very last scene convinced me Octopus is a nice little spoof and quite a subtle one indeed, regarding the negative reviews here. So our afraid-to-shoot Not-So-Special-Agent Roy Turner kills the beast and what does our heroin do? Passionately kissing Captain Jack Shaw. The last shot is of a helpless jealous lover swimming in the sea trying to protest. This is a stroke of genius, really. Believe me, there is much more. The chase scene where security agent Henry runs after our terrorist - mad evil completely over the top - after telling Turner to stay behind him, in slow motion, is also great. Really, they did it by purpose, or at least the director did after having read the script. Look at it as a spoof and you will have fun. Also watch out for octopussy tearing the chopper down! Trust me, after 30 years or so this one is a cult classic among movie addicts with a certain sense of humour.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

An alright monster flick

10/10
Author: Rautus from United Kingdom
12 January 2008

I like creature features, I'm a fan of movies like Alligator, Piranha, Jaws, Godzilla, King Kong, etc. I bought Octopus for £1, the DVD also had Octopus II, Spiders and Spiders 2 so it was a bargain to get four films for £1. Octopus wasn't that bad, sure it's not going to win any Oscars but it was a fun B-movie. The acting wasn't has bad as some B-movies I've seen, the effects were okay and the Octopus looked effective enough. In parts you could tell they used CGI but it's a low budget creature feature of course the effects are going to be like that.

Octopus is a good and fun B-movie monster flick that should be seen. Check this out.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

drag me down again

3/10
Author: alistairc_2000 from The Sahrar desert
9 October 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Do you remember the time in the 1970s when they first started showing Ray Harryhusen's monster movies on the 3 channels of terrestrial TV? Those wonderful days when stop animation was the very pinnacle special effects. That is when I cut my teeth with classics like Gorgo, 20,000,000 miles to earth, Godzilla etc. Alright only one of them was stop animation and the other two were guys in rubber suits but hell they were fun!! So I went to the post office the other day and found 6 nu image movies containing all the classic schlock horror movies. So I thought this is the perfect time to have a horror monster retrospective. I looked and thought what will be the best of them Crocodile by Tobe Hooper can back the thought. I watched that a couple of months back so I thought Octopus. Why not it was fun in 200000 leagues under the see, okay that was squid but it is basically it is the same creature.

This is a feeble excuse for a monster movie. The movie starts with the prologue about the Cuban missile crisis, a Russian sub that looks extremely modern gets sunk by an American sub. The Russian sub is carrying chemical nasties to use against the American. They are spilt out into the sea and we know what toxic chemicals make…..Monsters! So we know where it came from, just do not put any in your coffee as you might turn into a monster. At least that would be a novel plot.

Then it is the present day and two CIA agents are on the trail of a nasty bomber, in Bulgaria, why Bulgaria I wondered and then it I settled on an idea because it is cheap. So our intrepid band are on the trail of the bomber and after one of them dies in very predicable circumstances. The second one captures the bomber and he is a hero for a nano-second before being asked to baby sit the bomber back to the USA. So the sub goes through the Bermuda triangle (or some other cursed area) and the octopus attacks.

They authors of the screenplay obviously wanted to make more than just a monster movie and this is the films undoing. If they had called it from Russia with Octopus love it might have been nearer to the plot ideas. There is a really silly cold war drama with a monster movie plot mixed in and it just does not work. There are loads of holes in the plot. They can talk under water and hear people scream. The integrity of the sub is compromised and it is 1000 metres down and it does not implode, now that is just plain daft. Also they manage to survive a nuclear explosion from a 100 metres away. The monster is great and sticks it tentacles in wherever they are not wanted. Unfortunately you just do not see it enough of it. The acting for the most part is awful, with people over reacting so much as to make their performances laughable.

Thankfully it has quite a fun ending as the naughty huge octopus decides it wants to have some more lunch and attacks a cruise liner. I recommend this movie for masochists and insomniacs everywhere. Well what do you expect for 50p? The movie is presented in bog standard 4:3 with a trailer as its extras. With a movie this bad you take it as a blessing that there is no audio commentary.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Bad movie but I liked the ending!

3/10
Author: atinder from United Kingdom
24 June 2009

I guest most of you have never heard of this and keep it that way (lol). This has to be one of the most silly movies I have seen.

The Plot of the movie During the Cuban Missle Crisis, a Russian sub is sunk while en route to Havana. As the sub goes down, the hold is breached and barrels full of some mysterious substance tumble out. Years later, an American nuclear submarine is transporting a captured terrorist to the States. The terrorist's henchmen, however, are planning to hijack the sub and rescue their leader. Meanwhile, a large, unidentified creature is approaching the sub at high speed.

The whole movie is about unknown creature, I Wonder what that could be?Well the TITLE is a big give away,! and the worst of all beside the horrible acting is and we Only see Ginat Octopous once near the end, who ends up killing the terrorist the only part I really liked

if you are thinking seeing this movie just fast forward to the best part of movie that is the last 10-15 minutes of movie.

3/10 just for ending

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

A cheesy good time

Author: slayrrr666 (slayrrr666@yahoo.com) from Los Angeles, Ca
30 May 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"Octopus" is a really nice, enjoyable creature feature with some cheesy moments.

**SPOILERS**

Following a US Embassy terrorist attack, CIA agent Roy Turner, (Jay Harrington) manages to capture terrorist Casper, (Ravil Issyanov) the instigator of the attack. Deported back to the US, the two are brought back on-board a submarine, with Captain Jack Shaw, (David Beecroft) and other guest Dr. Lisa Finch, (Carolyn Lowery) taking special notice of the situation. When they run into an area of water known for deep trouble, they themselves find themselves in a similar situation when a giant octopus attacks the sub and forces it down into the depths of the sea. As they prepare to get away, the creature attacks again, forcing them to find a way to combat it. Realizing that the creature is a mutation from the contents of a nuclear submarine accident years earlier, and that Casper has a small group on a nearby cruise-liner that's attempting to rescue him, they try to deal with those problems and the creature as well before they're all swallowed.

The Good News: There's a lot here that's really good. One of the best ideas is that the giant title creature forms a relatively minor threat compared to the main action. The film consists of three conflicts to keep things interesting, the terrorist's accomplices with the liner crew, the escaped-on-the-sub terrorist's cat-and-mouse dealings, and the sub's crew with the octopus, and so the octopus is only occasionally seen attacking the submarine. While there is a single scene where a giant tentacle bursts into the sub, that constitutes the entirety of it's physical attack on the submarine crew in the film. Though it is a very intense scene that really steals the show, the fact that it's so good is a point that is made about there no other attacks. The big one making up for the lack of others. More importantly, the giant octopus never attains a particular threat in the way that simply not having it's present menace constantly on the verge of unexpectedly erupting out of the corner of the frame that sea threat needs. Even though it's not the center of the action, it's threat is enough to keep it off balance for uncertainty as to when the creature will return. That is a rather brilliant idea. The amount of action in the film isn't that bad, as the creature's attack on the ocean liner is a qualified success that is just all sort of fun to watch, and there's plenty of great moments inside the sub when the creature is attacking. Some of them are a lot of fun and contain a lot of action, making them all the better. The opening assault on the embassy does lend itself into a rather nice chase afterward, and these are simply perfect. They all add up into a cheesy, fast-paced and enjoyable creature feature.

The Bad News: There isn't a whole lot here that doesn't work. The film's biggest problem is that the octopus is rarely in the film. The majority of the film is taken up by the submarine-board drama. Here the film manages to get to the creature when it remembers that it's also a creature feature rather than a spy-drama. Granted, there is some really great moments derived from this, but the fact that it's still off-screen for most of the film is a noticeable one. It's also extremely clichéd, as the token woman on board the sub, who also happens to conveniently be a marine biologist and able to explain the nature of the menace, falls into the habit of only speaking when it affects how to handle the creature scientifically. Then there's the romance that occurs, which isn't likely at all and seems to be there just because. The last really big flaw is the completely implausible moments. The villain's escape plan is particularly notable for its ludicrous implausibilities. It shows that his cohorts infiltrate and take over a cruise liner on the apparent belief that he will somehow be able to escape just at the point when they happen to be above the submarine, despite their having no tracking equipment or he any means to communicate with them on his person. The film's most ludicrous improbabilities is surely the creature itself. Nothing is given as to what else this thing could be eating. It must weigh tens of tons. What does it live on besides the occasional sunken ship, especially given it's constant need to eat? And why hasn't it been systematically ripping into various sections of the boat looking for bodies? You'd think after sinking dozens of ships in the last couple years, as we were informed earlier in the movie, it'd be better at this. Despite these, there really isn't that much wrong with this one.

The Final Verdict: There wasn't a whole lot here that didn't really work, but what's there was pretty important enough that this does drop slightly. This is still only a cheesy creature feature, so only the most hardcore viewers should concern themselves too greatly with this, while those who like the cheese will as well. The rest need not apply.

Rated PG-13: Language and Violence

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 6:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history