I don’t know if it’s the beer, I purchased my first six pack of Yuengling Traditional Lager (not bad, though a little bland for my tastes.  It would make a great beer on a hot day, though) today, but  “Creature” isn’t nearly as bad as all the negative reviews would lead you to believe.  The cinematography is beautiful–it’s a very attractive film–filled with, for the most part, lots of attractive looking (relatively) young people.

Sure, the story isn’t its greatest strength, though considering it makes little in the way of sense, and doesn’t even follow the rules that it establishes, it’s not that bad.  Besides, if  I wanted “Remains Of The Day,” or “Downton Abbey,” that’s what I would be watching.

You never know exactly how the creature came into being, but even if it follows the outline of the legend that’s revealed in the film, is that really any more silly that a guy who gets his special abilities by the bite of a radioactive spider, or a guy from another planet that somehow manages to fly, has heat vision, and is virtually indestructible?

In other words, “Creature” is no worse than any other genre film when it comes to logic.

Though what does irritate me a bit is the lopsidedness of the nakedness, which there’s plenty of.  Literally five minutes into the movie viewers are treated to some full-frontal nudity of the female variety, yet the males in the film somehow manage to end up with their clothing on.

And while I have nothing against the mountaineers portrayed in the film (Sid Haig played their leader, though I have no idea what made that so other than his general creepiness) nudity is a state that I wouldn’t want to see any of them in.

What I didn’t expect was how beautifully the film was shot.  I am not familiar with the director of photography, Christopher Faloona, who not only has a great eye, but is much more accomplished that this film would make one think.