En las profundidades del Sena

To each his own, I think people are taking this way too seriously forgetting it's just a shark movie.

Me, I love a good stupid movie, I really do and when you couple that with some over the top shark shenanigans, you're usually in for a good time. For the most part I enjoyed Under Paris but I think the movie's biggest problem is it doesn't know whether it wants to be a serious study as to how negatively humanity has affected nature (the Siene river is one of the most polluted rivers in the world) or just a fun action movie a la The Meg. The first half of the movie wants so badly to be Jaws, you can almost hear the theme music playing every time Sophia has a flashback, but once they go into the catacombs and discover Lilith's nest, things veer into the realm of the ridiculous, admittedly the best aspects of the film.

You know how there's a whole set of films that's based on stupid people making stupid decisions?

Person 1: DON'T DO IT!

Person 2: *proceeds to do it anyway and gets killed* Audience: SHE TOLD YOU NOT TO DO IT! How dumb are you!?

Those types movies. However, if they're done well, you don't mind the stupidity in it and play along.

I kept reading "If you liked Jaws, you'll enjoy Under Paris." "One of the best Shark films since Jaws" - High praise. So, I had to watch it, despite low scores.

The dumb people in this film don't listen, do dumb things, and get killed. But it's been filmed well; it's intense, the sound design and cinematography keep you engaged. Shark graphics - decent enough. It's got enough going on to keep you engaged, the plot is not boring at all. The ending may have you scratching your head though.

Here's a perspective that I don't think anybody is considering - I don't know the first thing about Shark Biology or marine evolution, but I looked at the 'Sharks' as a metaphor for 'Climate Change' and the plot AND the ending suddenly made so much more sense. That made me feel like the movie was actually better than people are making it out to be.

Either that, or I'm just trying to convince myself that I didn't waste 2 hours watching stupid people make stupid decisions.

A movie is not good when you are rooting for the villian. In this case, the shark was my superhero.

First of all, with 50 years of advanced technology, robotics, cgi and advancement in film....that sharks today look less realistic than Jaws? It is insane how fake today's sharks look.

To the story...it follows every cliche, nothing is original here, with scenes and dialogues almost straight out of Jaws or Deep Blue Sea.

Acting is way over-the-top, dialogue consists of screaming or incesseantly yelling someone's name. Sharks are fake looking, about the same level as a Sharknado And you cannot find one person making smart decisions. This is a complete miss.

Under Paris was certainly a film. Although I don't particularly know how to describe it, but this film did have some good things, and also some not so good things. The Film also did start out interestingly, and kind of develops the story along. The main focus in this scenario is Sophia. And they have never seemed to get the effects right for a shark, apart from the Meg. Not even Jaws. So, digest the shenanigans of Under Paris with me.

So, Sophia. Where does the film start? It is about her husband, and I presume they are both marine biologists, so apologies if I'm wrong, but her husband died due to a shark attack. And now 3 years later, the Shark has come back, to seek revenge. The Shark appears and should put a hold on the race, but it doesn't. The mayor is quite happy to keep it going, kind of dumb. Especially when they are now going to be attacked by a Shark.

"Don't go in the Water", proceeds to go in the water. And it was that type of film throughout, hilariously dumb decisions that made absolutely no sense. Jade as a result gets eaten by the Shark, as she tries to tough the baby shark, which is stupid in itself. So then after that, she's chomped by the shark.

The scene I described about Jade getting eaten, has some intense scenes and a very deadly scenario leads to some people getting eaten by the Shark. The mother, but it doesn't end there, as the big swim is still on. I like this part of the film, it was very action-packed. And had edge of your seat action, that went faster and faster as the Shark moved along.

What sets this film apart from other movies, It's dumb, yes. It's ridiculous, yes. It has, oh never mind it does A shallows and has explosions in the water, and collapses the bridge. Yes, that is all the same. However, the Shark is different, could be. And I love the commentary about the ecosystem and the pollution in the water, that's the difference. It also has interesting ideas about adaptation and weather the Shark can survive or not. But If it's near you, your body is twisting and tuning, and then we'll your eaten.

The End race commences, should it? Probably not. But hear we go!, and that's when everything gets exciting, intense. And people are being eaten by the Sharks. The explosions go off, the FBI fire at will, and it ends in chaos, it was certainly and action-packed 15 Minutes. Full of scenes that were ridiculous and non-sensical, and some entertainment through this part.

After all of that chaos, we then end with a flooded Paris, so now it's On Top of Paris. With Sharks all around the perimeter, now the police are stuck. And the end shows a beutiful view of Paris, and a flying bird. That ends the film In style. Now I will end my review, right after the Verdict.

Would I recommend this film? Honestly, you'll be entertained, and if your a fan of Shark movies then I would, but keep away if brain dead movies aren't for you. This film had everything though, Under Paris gets an average score of 5 out of 10.

Starting with the fact that the main premise of the film, sharks in fresh water, is nonsense, the script itself was very empty of content. Like any horror films premises don't make sense and I guess that's okay with the genre? I don't know because I am not a fan of horror movies but I do enjoy suspense and that is what made me watch it in the first place but there was little to no suspense. No plot depth. Not much good to it actually. There are no good dialogues, no good character development and you don't really feel any attachment whatsoever to any of the characters so you don't care what happens to them. If that is not a sample of bad scriptwriting, I don't know what is. The cinematography is also plain and quite insipid... But hey, I enjoyed the lovely views of Paris a lot and that's why I gave it a 4 and not a 1.