Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

ThiefHott Too much of everything

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Murphy Howard I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Mike Boyd I really think the voting system ought to allow negative scores, just to counter some of the positives given by people clearly connected with the film - either on the production side or acting side.I guess I'm referring to Mr. "joemorph from United States" who wrote a ridiculously long and praising review that was clearly aimed at him getting some of his investment back.Hard luck Mr. joemorph from USA. This film is appalling.Even worse than the film was the acting of the lead actor. Apart from the ridiculous "crab" scene where he had a little tantrum, his face rarely broke into a smile, a frown, or gave any other indication of what he was feeling other than a look that said "I don't believe I'm in such a pathetic film".

ladybug2535 I have to say that I raised my rating when I found out what the budget had been on this film. I'm amazed that they were able to pull together what they did on that kind of money. And that kind of time. The problem is: This isn't porn people; you actually need a coherent film for an audience to appreciate the effort.I disagree with some reviewers' points and agree with others: I actually viewed this film twice; the first time I was sleepy and thought I'd just dozed off for parts of the film, but I was wrong. It really was as disjointed as I remembered. I think the biggest problems in this movie are due to bad editing which affects the continuity, the flow of the story, and the viewer's understanding of the film. This certainly could have been a result of having such a short budget. One bad shot could throw everything off if they don't have the budget to shoot it again. Then you have to choose: keep in the bad shots? Or have holes in the story? Both? Budgeting issues explains a lot of the problems with this movie. Equipment and professional film is expensive. And you're making a film that needs a lot of special affects which will shoot huge holes in any movie budget, plus you're shooting outside meaning you have to deal with the weather, let's give them an "A" for effort. It was a good idea. A "D" for editing. How about extra credit for finishing the film at all? Caution Spoilers: I think the biggest problem with the film was lack of continuity and coherence between scenes. This is the reason there is so much confusion about the story and leads to many of the complaints. For example, Sinbad's female sidekick is apparently murdered--it's only implied, and only vaguely so, but there doesn't seem to be any mention of what actually happened to her, and no real reaction to her loss (or disappearance). There is one mention of her dying later on, but they never say what happened to her. When did they even find her? Did they go back to that spot?? What happened filmmakers? Did you run out of film? Audiences like coherent reasonably linear story lines. You can't just have characters--especially someone that was supposed to mean a lot to the Hero, just disappear without any coherent reaction or reason.I thought the script was actually pretty good and they did try to fit in Sinbad's 7 traditional tasks in a modern setting which showed imagination. Criticisms in this regard are misguided. Again, I think the holes were due more to bad editing than the script. Or someone wasn't paying any attention to the continuity of the story. You can tell the story visually; audiences still need to be shown one way or the other. Verbally or visually. They were very bad about explaining the setup, which confused viewers.Even watching it twice I was confused about his tasks and what the heck they had to do with the ship on the bottom of the ocean. Yes, I got that it was threatening to leak and the sea monster was mad about that--but the sea monster sank the boat! They never explain that, or even offer a theory. And I never got just what his business partner had to do with the pirates. Why did he set the ship up? Holes.But this part bugs me, and this is an issue with the storyline. Maybe with the script. Why the heck would they need special alien rocks to fire up the hot air balloon? There was plenty of fuel on that island. Yet that was supposedly the only way to get off the island. These aspects of the story simply made no sense. In this aspect, the script fell down--or are we simply missing scenes that filled us in? But there was some well-done dialog, and many parts of the film that worked well. It was just very uneven.The special effects certainly showed the restraints of their budget, but I thought the sea creature--a giant squid-like thing (not a crab), was pretty good. As was the crab on land. The sirens looked more like Zombies--and their makeup was unevenly applied, again pointing up a lack of continuity and consistency, and I don't even remember the Cyclops! I liked the lava demon; I thought that was one of the best effects. The water spout type things were interesting, but they left me confused. Was that from the squid? Was he a god or something? And I still don't get why HE sank the boat and then freaked out about the oil.I think the best part of the film was the relationships, that's where the film was strongest. Of particular note was the explanation of the girl being on the island, and her sad relationship (or lack of) with her crazy father. I thought that part was interesting as was the way he controlled the men on the island. As cultic and nuts as that seems it unfortunately has some precedence in real life. Though it seems that the Somalian pirates succumbed way too quickly---just what was in that water? Or did the sirens do that? I'm not dumb, and I saw this film twice. So if I can't figure this out you know there's a problem. Or did I just doze off--again? Where did that scene go?

Masticina Akicta I can't get much of this it is what is said in the other reviews. It tries to be a big budget title with a big story with a rather limited budget and hence rather meh special effects.They try to make it work but you can see it right ahead. When the "lost girl" meets the hero for the first time you know they are going to kiss and end up together. The monsters well I mean I dunno why make this movie. The monsters are meh, it is not believable in the least.I know it is an Asylum Movie but they made pretty fun movies to watch. This one just is not good nor so terrible it is bad.. it really doesn't gets anywhere.The acting well they do their best with what they have so yeah acting is decent but since the plot is so weak and the situations they end up in are so lousy planned. Well they just had to work with bad stuff! So no no this is one of Asylums that will be forgotten, I already forgotten the main plot end. It is that nothing of a movie. No not entertaining skip this one and go for some of their others.

Ecto Loki First of all, I'd like to say that I enjoy the particular genre of films that the Sinbad movies generally fall into the category of. This film, however is not one of them. If you go into this expecting to see your classic Sinbad action then I'm afraid you'll be disappointed.It's not necessarily a bad decision to attempt to convert the themes of Sinbad onto a present day setting, but it wasn't pulled off well here and I, for one, would have preferred to have seen a new rendition set in the traditional era, or at least sometime in the not-too-recent past. There are no seven adventures to be seen here anyway, that's for sure.The main character is a descendant of Sinbad apparently - his name is John Sinbad or some such rubbish. Apart from that, this bears no real relation to any of it's name-sakes except for one scene involving a tribe of alluring female demons who attempt to enslave Sinbad and his crew, via hypnosis, which was taken from an earlier and better Sinbad movie. This made me wonder if this is some kind of remake but I soon realised that it is not. There were a few computer generated monsters to 'behold' - or try to at least - among them, a computer generated cyclops and giant octopus, both of which failed to evoke any of the the glory and wonder of the more organic effects of older films of the kind. Ray Harryhausen, for example, is still the king after all this time.Overall, pathetic storyline, boring progression of plot, Underwhelming acting and uninspiring character performances, cheesy one-liners which don't work, sad visual effects and void of any real tension or ability to provoke any kind of emotional response at all. From me, at least.