At the center is Anna, an artificial intelligence researcher played by Kim Da-mi, whose performance emphasizes maternal devotion.
Early underwater sequences and CGI won broad praise, but the film's later turns divided critics and audiences.
After debuting at number one worldwide, the movie sparked debates about acting, production practices, and on-set safety.
Why is 'Great Deluge' at the center of debate now?
Overview
Disaster has arrived.
The film follows a tense story that moves between a flooded apartment complex and an underwater research facility.
Anna (Kim Da-mi) is an AI researcher fighting to save her son Jain; the plot layers maternal love over technical and ethical questions.
Director Kim Byung-woo brings his dense, kinetic style, and the physical demands on actors are front and center—production required extensive scuba and freediving training.
The film asks viewers to weigh visual spectacle against personal moral choices.
The opening underwater scenes pull the audience in immediately.
However, the way that immersion is resolved in the final act is what separates admirers from detractors.
Netflix released the film globally, and it quickly rose to number one on the platform.
Commercially, it succeeded in attracting viewers, but critical and audience reactions are layered and contradictory.
This essay examines the film's production background, acting choices, technical achievements and risks, and the polarized responses they produced.
Production and preparation
Kim Byung-woo expands the genre by combining underwater cinematography with high-end CGI.
Actors underwent mandatory scuba and freediving training to prepare for the physically demanding shoots.
The production invested heavily in safety education and repetitive drills, increasing the cast and crew's physical and mental readiness.
On set, a hybrid approach blended real water tanks, large practical sets, and sophisticated CGI.
The studio accepted high upfront financial risk to prioritize visual realization, a pattern common in modern blockbusters.
Training and safety systems were central tools for managing the shoot's difficulty.
Acting and maternal instinct
She acted from instinct.
Kim Da-mi's portrayal of Anna feels different from her previous roles.
She said she cannot fully claim to know a mother's heart, and so chose to express maternal love as an acting decision grounded in instinct.
Trust between director and actor made the shoots possible.
High-intensity takes while soaked in water increased the physical toll, and actors had to turn that strain into emotional truth.
Staff repeatedly monitored health and enforced safety procedures; those systems were prerequisites for completing the film.
Maternal love anchors the film emotionally.
However, when emotional layering clashes with plot mechanics, audience interpretations widen.
At that point, performances can either be empathy machines or feel overwrought and disrupt immersion.
Arguments in favor
The film achieves a high level of visual polish.
Supporters argue that it meets the visual demands of a disaster picture.
Early underwater sequences and the flooded apartment scenes maximize realism and draw viewers into the world.
Kim Da-mi's performance has been widely praised.
She commits physically and emotionally, making Anna's maternal decisions feel immediate; many see this as an important addition to her filmography.
Some viewers reported a strong emotional resonance with the film's human questions through her performance.
From a narrative angle, proponents say the film attempts to intersect love, sacrifice, technological failure, and hope.
The AI lab setting pushes the disaster beyond raw physical threat to a meditation on human-technology relations.
These elements elevate the movie from a simple blockbuster to a story that raises philosophical questions.
Marketing and platform strategy also worked in the film's favor.
Debuting at number one worldwide on Netflix maximized viewership regardless of critical split, and the controversy itself drove additional interest.
In that sense, the film followed a successful streaming-era playbook.
Finally, the visible effort by crew and cast—especially the physical preparation for water scenes—earned recognition.
Taken together, defenders see 'Great Deluge' as a work notable for its visual ambition and the actors' dedication.
Arguments against
The narrative wobbles.
Detractors point to structural weaknesses in the final act.
What begins with tension and verisimilitude drifts into a too-abstract direction, losing the genre's momentum and cathartic drive.
The philosophical and emotional turn in the latter half expands empathy for some viewers, but for others it feels like the story has lost its center.
Audiences who expected a straightforward disaster thriller say the conflict resolutions and messaging become overly abstract.
Technical complaints also appear.
While early CGI and underwater work drew praise, some viewers feel that visual continuity and editing rhythm falter in places, breaking immersion.
Repeated criticism targets camera choices and sound design during emotional climaxes for failing to fully support dramatic impact.
There are ethical questions about high-intensity actor work.
Some worry whether physically demanding shoots that push actors to their limits can be morally justified by artistic ends, and how rigorously safety protocols were enforced remains a public question.
For some audience members, the production's ethics eclipse its aesthetic aims.
Finally, critics say the film fails to achieve broad, universal empathy.
A maternal-centered story lands powerfully for some but raises the bar for connection among others.
Thus opponents conclude that the film wins only a narrow emotional following because of its imbalanced affective choices.
Technology, safety, and social implications
In contemporary filmmaking, technology largely shapes the audience experience.
'Great Deluge' shows technical ambition through its demanding underwater shoots and CGI.
At the same time, how the production protected cast and crew is disputed in public reports and eyewitness accounts.
Reports say safety training and checks were repeated, but intense conditions always introduce unforeseen hazards.
That raises a policy question: should national safety standards for shoots be strengthened?
From an industry perspective, investment in large projects is rising, and safety and ethics cannot be overlooked as costs are counted.
Actors' professional responsibility and producers' duty of care sometimes clash.
Actors may risk their bodies for a role, but producers must judge limits and provide protection.
If that balance fails, artistic freedom faces civic and ethical scrutiny.
Ultimately, the film sits at the intersection of artistic risk, industrial practice, and ethical responsibility.
Public debate praises technical achievement while probing the human price behind it.
That discussion can lead to calls for systemic reforms across the film industry.
The visceral power of images and scenes fuels the controversy.
Audiences consume thrills and fear while confronting the human cost of making those moments.
That awareness broadens the criteria used to judge a film, beyond simple like-or-dislike to industry- and ethics-based standards.
Conclusion and questions
In short, 'Great Deluge' is a film of visual and performative achievement that also exposes narrative limits.
Kim Da-mi's maternal performance anchors the emotional core, but the later turns do not convince all viewers.
On the production side, the film reveals both technical capacity for difficult shoots and a clear need for improved safety and institutional standards.
The film will likely continue to generate discussion.
When we assess its merits, we should weigh visual accomplishment, ethical responsibility, and audience expectations together.
That debate can push the film industry to advance technical skill, safety practices, and artistic ambition in a more balanced way.
We leave the reader with a question: if you watched 'Great Deluge,' which would matter more to you—visual spectacle or ethical cost?
