Is SeeFood Worth Watching?
Answer: Maybe not, SeeFood is likely a skip if you enjoy Animation movies.
It features a runtime of 93 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:SeeFood is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 4.9/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Animation, Comedy, Family, Adventure genre.
Answer: Maybe not, SeeFood is likely a skip if you enjoy Animation movies.
It features a runtime of 93 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 2011, SeeFood emerges as a significant entry in the Animation, Comedy, Family, Adventure domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of Pup, a bamboo shark, discovers egg sacs while playing around the ocean with his friends. Unlike standard genre fare, SeeFood attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Animation is often anchored by its ensemble, and SeeFood features a noteworthy lineup led by Steven Bone . Supported by the likes of Colin Chong and Choong Chi Ren , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of SeeFood (2011) is negative. With an audience rating of 4.9/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: SeeFood is a Animation, Comedy, Family, Adventure film that combines stunning visual artistry with storytelling that appeals to all ages. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: SeeFood attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to animation resolution.
The conclusion addresses the core thematic questions, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of SeeFood reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Consider Watching If:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $2.2M |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
The estimated production budget for SeeFood is $2.2M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.
Amazon Prime Video
Starz Apple TV Channel
Amazon Prime Video with Ads
Amazon Video
Apple TV
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At Home
Amazon Video
Apple TV
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At HomeAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 4.9/10, and global collection metrics, SeeFood stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 2011 cinematic year.
SeeFood is considered a flop based on audience ratings of 4.9/10 and lower collections.
Based on the low rating of 4.9/10, SeeFood may not be worth watching unless you are a die-hard fan.
SeeFood is currently available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video. You can also check for it on platforms like Amazon Prime Video, Starz Apple TV Channel, Amazon Prime Video with Ads depending on your region.
Crikey! 'SeaFood' is utterly dire. I'm not going to slaughter this film (too much!), as always I have respect for anyone who creates a production as it isn't easy. With that said, this is a serious waste of 93 minutes. Awful animation, poor voice cast and an absolutely terrible premise. It may, minorly, allude to real life issues such as poaching, ocean pollution and even bullying, but it doesn't take it any further than the baseline of those things being bad. The dialogue is dreadful, not helped by the numerous awkward silent chunks created by the animation. It also doesn't know what it wants to be called either, "SeaFood" on the DVD cover but "SeeFood" on the onscreen menu. At the end it says "See" before changing to "Sea", so I guess it's intentional? Odd either way. Up there for the worst film I've seen. Not even sure the supposed target audience would enjoy this. The only (extremely) slight praise I can give is that it isn't a full-on 'Finding Nemo' rip-off, as seems the case in the opening minutes.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.