JoeB131 Recipe on how to make a "Sci-Fi Channel (Un)Original production".1) Get one or two out of work Star Trek actors. There are plenty of them nowadays. 2) Add low grade CGI special effects 3) a half-dozen no-name actors to be monster chow. 4) 3 Gallons of Catsup. (For the fake blood) 5) 1 Crappy illogical script. Mix in movie for 2 hours (including commercial breaks). The movie begins with some clips of Iraqis looting art treasures, and a squad of American soldiers lead by Robert Beltran, playing the kind of new-age castrati he played on Voyager for seven years. A reporter, played by Deep Space Nine's Chase Masterson, (who actually bothered to breath some life into a character) is trapped in a town menaced by the resurrected CGI Manticore. Beltran's squad is sent to rescue her. Now, I often hate most military movies because they get so many things wrong, and this one is no exception. They have a Master Sergeant (E-8) leading a squad. They have a woman with an infantry team. They only send one vehicle on the rescue mission which they've deemed to be "important". The Sergeant is addressed as "Sir" by his squad. They use relaxed tactics in a hostile situation, allowing them to be picked off. Other than that, what you see is a predictable mess, like you've seen in every other Sci-Fi production with a CGI monster.

Eventuallyequalsalways The makers of original movies for the Sci-Fi channel must feel like red-headed stepchildren if they ever bother to read the reviews of some of their viewers and posters on IMDb. If I had relied on their advice, I would have passed this movie by, and as a result would have missed a fine piece of movie-making. So it may have been low-budget, so what? They did a lot with the budget available to them. Who really judges a movie's worth by how realistically a helicopter blows up? Small minds reared on a steady diet of cartoons and sit-com TV, that's who! The makers of this fine film took a good "what-if" premise and explored the idea that Weapons of Mass Destruction really exist in Iraq in the form of the "Manticore", a monstrous creature with the body of a lion and a fearsome head of human/tiger/Satan blend. The winged creature has a scorpion-like tail which ends in a ball filled with poisonous darts. The creature is capable of firing the darts at victims or simply devouring them. It's appetite is ravenous and legend tells how victims are devoured completely, even the bones and clothing, so that the victim simply vanishes. In this respect, the movie-makers chose to stray from the actual legend of the Manticore because obviously they wouldn't have as much gore and blood to film whenever a body is left behind after an attack. Of course, we all know it's make-believe, but the scenes involving the soldiers as they pursue an evil enemy through the sandy streets and adobe huts are thoroughly believable. Just ask some of the guys and gals serving in Iraq today what it is like to go house-to-house in search of an enemy hell-bent on destroying them, and then ask them if this movie captures some of the tension and fear, and I think their answer would be positive. Overall, this movie was made seriously by the cast and crew, the acting was certainly plausible, the effects should have been good enough for the audience if they were willing to suspend their criticism so that the budget didn't have to run into the millions. The movie follows a well-written script with a dose of mystery and suspense thrown into the mix. Two hot chicks ought to tempt the teens away from their video games long enough to see what it might be like if they decide to go over to Iraq and spread a little freedom and democracy into a desert country which detests their invasion. Let's give the Sci-Fi producers some respect; if they keep making movies as good as this one, I'll be the first to give them a standing ovation.

Phillemos Don't let those flaming, bleeding-heart liberals fool you. It's a good thing we went in to liberate Iraq, because Saddam Hussein might have unleashed the Manticore on the peaceful shores of New England if we hadn't. The last thing this country to deal with in the War on Terror is some acne-faced, flying lion with a scorpion's tail. Luckily, the CNN embed who was covering the war in this movie was skeptical enough to uncover this major scoop and report back to the homeland. Of course, by investing five minutes into research we could discover that this thing turns to stone if he sees his reflection inn the mirror. There are enough mirrors in the United States that I think we can make this country safe for democracy again. Just try to mess with us, al-Qaeda! Maybe we should send the Manticore to Afghanistan to go after bin Laden. Anyway, this is your standard, formulaic monster movie. If you like monster movies, you'll enjoy it; if not, you'll slash your wrists in agony.

johnsamo-1 After watching crap like Raptor Island from the scifi channel, I had shall we say, LOW expectations but was pleasantly surprised. Despite a no name cast with the exception of Jeff Fahey, the acting was solid. In terms of plot, it was REAL DIREVITAVE of James Cameron's Aliens, and a had a few moments from other classic action movies like Predator. But as a low- budget knockoff, it was done quite well. I know a lot about the limitations directors have on low budget action movies. WIth little money or time, its hard to make an action movie that is as slickly made as this movie is... The FX weren't that good however but that's largely the problem of the budget, not the director.