Movies: Underwater, No One Can Hear You Scream

[ORRFForever]

Looks like an Alien rip off.

Kristen Stewart is one of those people who is attractive and unattractive all at the same time.

Hope this is good, but I'm skeptical.

Click to read more...

 

[John Price]

Got to admit I'm looking forward to your movie reviews since the Good Boys incident

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Looks like an Alien rip off.

Underwater Alien rip off, we already had that...





(First trailer even goes "Not all Aliens come from space" )

Still, I'll probably see it for Vincent Cassel.

 

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

Probably won’t see it because it’s not my kind of movie, but the trailer looks decent.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Underwater Alien rip off, we already had that...
.

Don't forget

 

[ORRFForever]

Opens January 10th. That's a BAD sign. They usually roll out junk in January.

When characters walk on the ocean floor, 7 miles below the surface, you know it will be eye rolling.

 

[Osprey]

I'm kind of surprised that Kristen Stewart has gotten starring roles in major studio movies. If this bombs, that'll be two in just a couple of months. You have to think that her career may not recover from that. It reminds me a little of the Taylor Kitsch experiment.

Edit: Woah. This movie has a $65M budget. That's going to be hard to make back. For comparison, even the box office grosses of the two 47 Meters Down movies combined would equal a bomb for this movie. Those movies were both profitable, though, because their budgets were only $5-12M.

 

[ThePhoenixx]

I'm kind of surprised that Kristen Stewart has gotten starring roles in major studio movies. If this bombs, that'll be two in just a couple of months. You have to think that her career may not recover from that. It reminds me a little of the Taylor Kitsch experiment.

Edit: Woah. This movie has a $65M budget. That's going to be hard to make back. For comparison, even the box office grosses of the two 47 Meters Down movies combined would equal a bomb for this movie. Those movies were both profitable, though, because their budgets were only $5-12M.

This one is bombing: $9,220,707
Charlies Angels ouch: $17,803,077

She's a bad bet.

 

[OhCaptainMyCaptain]

I don’t really think it has to do with her, though. Replace her with just about anyone else and the movie would still bomb.

 

[ThePhoenixx]

I don’t really think it has to do with her, though. Replace her with just about anyone else and the movie would still bomb.

I'm not sure of that.

The Meg would disagree with you. $530,243,742

Past Charlies Angels would also disagree.

 

[Mantis]

How the f*** does Kristen Stewart keep getting roles.

 

[member 51464]

It was just fine. Serviceable, not ground breaking, some decent special effects and alright moments of tension. Relatively predictable from start to finish, and a few moments of Kristen Stewart running around in surprisingly skimpy underwear in a couple of scenes.

It shouldn't be anyone's favorite film, but it also won't be close to the worst movie anyone sees this year.