Robert Joyner
The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
halamina89-890-442376
Although I am fond of pretty things and animals, if there were mermaids I'm sure they would have found evidence by now. Right away I was disheartened by how fake the scientists were! Animal Planet for shame 😔 you helped me out when there was nothing else to watch. Clearly the autopsy was all made of sponge and there was no real credible evidence because their animatronics were fairly terrible at that. My only reason to give it such a "high" low rating was because, well let's admit it, their imagination was pretty awesome. It was so obviously, ridiculously fake that I couldn't stop watching for the life of me! I desperately want it to be so real but this is a mockery. Mockumentary indeed...I tip my hat to you good sir! GOOD DAY!
james-m-k
I don't think I'm giving any spoilers, since the title gives away the only possible spoiler, but I do discuss "tells" that point to the movie being a fiction.Shown on the Animal Planet and Discovery channels, this movie is and was presented as fact, not fiction, and so has tricked many people into believing that it's true. Just the fact alone that Animal Planet and Discovery aired it, both supposedly channels rooted in describing fact, not making things up, lends credence to the show. And the fact that the notification that it is in fact fiction is only shown ONCE, AFTER the show has ENDED with the notice, "any resemblance to any persons, real or fictional, is purely coincidental." shows, to me anyway, that it is the intent of the creators and broadcasters to MISLEAD the viewers.They DO give SOME hints that the documentary is a fraud.The narrator says that all theories, even conspiracy theories require proof. First, that's not true. That's why they are called conspiracy theories, because there must be a conspiracy to hide the proof. The only thing required for a conspiracy theory is that the conspiracy be plausible to at least one person. Secondly, it's just an odd thing to say, and it's also strange to admit up-front that you ARE positing a conspiracy theory.In the supposed footage smuggled out of a military base the way the "mysterious" "hand" pushes against the porthole like someone standing or leaning against the wall, NOT like someone FLOATING or SWIMMING. And the green lighting of the room.The hidden "whistleblower" who says he "came forward", but does show his face or ID.The grainy (and 1st generation) cell-phone footage that zooms into clear, non- grainy footage of a merman. Also the kid kneeling next to it showed no reaction when it jumped up and screamed. The apparently decayed hand of the freshly beached merman is inconsistent with the rest of the body and beached whales. Finally, when the "cameraman" ran from the scene, the camera pointed straight down at his feet. First, if the camera was hanging from his neck, it would be bouncing off his chest. Second, who wears a phone around his neck? Thirdly, if it WAS camera-phone footage he'd have been carrying it in his HAND, and the running footage would be swinging and bouncing all over the place, not clear footage of his feet.The last tell that I recall are the pictures of so-called spears found in deep sea fish. Most of them looked obviously photo-shopped to me, especially the sepia colored picture of a great-white-shark looking like a pin cushion. Look at where they penetrate the shark, and tell me that looks natural.Despite these tells, there was no warnings at the beginning or during the movie that you were watching a fiction. And the same goes
pisani_j
The only value to this film is as a teaching aid.It should be shown to beginning documentary film classes, then assign students a two page critical analysis paper. This film is a good example of how conspiracy theories are started. A comparison paper to "Nanook of the North" may prove helping explaining staged scenes may be used as a demonstrative tool depicting real events compared to those designed to support a weak premise.I have discussed "Mermaids" with students fresh out of high school who were convinced the film proved the existence of mermaids. A class discussion would also help students in critical news analysis. Unfortunately, many students cannot separate commentary from hard news.
