Granted, I wasn't expecting much from this 1971 movie when I sat down to watch in here in 2020. But hey, I hadn't seen it before - nor even heard about it - and so I thought I would sit down to watch it, as it might actually be a good movie.
Well, turns out that the storyline in "Zaat" was rather generic and mundane, offering very little of great entertainment to the audience. The plot was fairly straight forward, for sure, but it just wasn't a particularly compelling or interesting storyline all together. It just amazes me that with four writers, that they couldn't come up with something more wholehearted than what this movie turned out to be.
The acting in the movie was adequate for most parts, aside from the dubious acting in the first part of the movie before the guy turned into the amphibious creature.
For a movie from 1971, then I will say that the special effects weren't all that impressive. Perhaps back in the day they were passable on the screen, but they have not withstood the test of time with grace. The creature design was fairly shoddy, and it was blatantly obvious that it was just a guy in a rubber suit walking and swimming about. And the design of the head for the amphibious creature was just abysmal, it looked horrible and distorted.
No wonder I had never heard about "Zaat" before I got the chance to sit down to watch it, and I hadn't been missing out on a particularly great or outstanding moment in cinema history.
I am rating "Zaat" a mere three out of ten stars, as the movie was watchable, albeit not entertaining. And "Zaat" is not a movie that warrants more than a single viewing, especially since just getting through the first viewing was something of an ordeal in itself.
Well, turns out that the storyline in "Zaat" was rather generic and mundane, offering very little of great entertainment to the audience. The plot was fairly straight forward, for sure, but it just wasn't a particularly compelling or interesting storyline all together. It just amazes me that with four writers, that they couldn't come up with something more wholehearted than what this movie turned out to be.
The acting in the movie was adequate for most parts, aside from the dubious acting in the first part of the movie before the guy turned into the amphibious creature.
For a movie from 1971, then I will say that the special effects weren't all that impressive. Perhaps back in the day they were passable on the screen, but they have not withstood the test of time with grace. The creature design was fairly shoddy, and it was blatantly obvious that it was just a guy in a rubber suit walking and swimming about. And the design of the head for the amphibious creature was just abysmal, it looked horrible and distorted.
No wonder I had never heard about "Zaat" before I got the chance to sit down to watch it, and I hadn't been missing out on a particularly great or outstanding moment in cinema history.
I am rating "Zaat" a mere three out of ten stars, as the movie was watchable, albeit not entertaining. And "Zaat" is not a movie that warrants more than a single viewing, especially since just getting through the first viewing was something of an ordeal in itself.