Hard to believe that the makers don't appear to know just how bad a product is, about this film, or indeed anything else submitted for consumption. Or is it a case of "You should be grateful for anything we dish up, plebs". I'm increasingly thinking it's the latter.
So, given the director's track record, I think it's safe to assume that many might have expected this to turn into a watchable effort in
post-production.
The reality is that his first film definitely worked out that way (he spent weeks getting real crocodile footage in advance, then spliced that in), but this one just appears to have been thrown together from dailies with little structure, editing or finesse. Without all of those elements, I'm sure even Crawl would have ended up feeling like watching a character crawl around the same basement area for an hour worried about what would come out of the shadows; it's the work done in post-production that can turn that kind of a simple shoot into something that at least looks like a whole not more.
So, in a way, I can see why - based on his track record - they greenlit this, hoping he put something watchable together in the editing suite rather than got drunk and pressed a few buttons.
Where I'd have raised an eyebrow is with the casting. You need somebody you're going to get behind, and these were just z-list nobodies who made the even worse error of not being in the least bit invested in the production. So if they're acting like they're swimming around a pool repeatedly, nobody is ever going to be able to transform that into feeling like they are trapped in a cave with crocodiles in the water.
Of course, when they looked at the finished product and went 'let's send that to theatres' they were almost entirely banking on the fact that there was literally nothing else to watch, so
somebody was going to chump up and see it.