Ain't this a spectacular creature then?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=458282&in_page_id=1811
Under water it's a strong competition with sharks in terms of scaryness I think. Sharks don't show facial expression (as dead as a doll), tigers do.
Another thing that bugged me is that a hairy animal underwater looks like a hairy land-animal from the era where CGI didn't do zilions of hairs. I actually had a hard time believing this was an actual tiger rather than a CGI hoax. (Esp. comparing the eyes with those of that sabertooth from "Ice Age")
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=458282&in_page_id=1811
Under water it's a strong competition with sharks in terms of scaryness I think. Sharks don't show facial expression (as dead as a doll), tigers do.
Another thing that bugged me is that a hairy animal underwater looks like a hairy land-animal from the era where CGI didn't do zilions of hairs. I actually had a hard time believing this was an actual tiger rather than a CGI hoax. (Esp. comparing the eyes with those of that sabertooth from "Ice Age")