It's July 4th, and usually I do a review on a sequel or one
of the films from Spielberg's Monster Trilogy, and since I'm still busy with my
Disney villain's list and won't have time to review another shark movie, I'm
going to review one of the sequels to "JAWS".
In my first year of critiquing when I was just reviewing
films on my Facebook page, I reviewed "JAWS" (one of the shortest
reviews that I ever wrote since I was just starting out). A classic film in so
many ways, from its intense direction, great acting, characters who we feel
close too, a thrilling score, violent deaths, a strong sense of adventure and
suspense, and a giant monstrous shark. It helped put director Steven Spielberg
on the map, it scared people from going into the ocean, and is still hailed today
as the greatest shark movie of all time by audiences and critics. I myself
truly love the film, and consider it to be one of my favorite movies of all-
time, as well as putting the shark as my number 1 favorite villain of all-time.
In my second year of critiquing, I reviewed its sequel, and
despite being nowhere near as good or intense as its predecessor, it was still
a fairly decent film. Half of the cast (including Roy Scheider) came back and
did a good job; most of the crew that helped out in the first film returned as
well; there were some creative ideas and shots, that weren't scary or done well
but still interesting to look at; and as far as forced cash-grab sequels go, you
can at least sense that they were trying a make this film as good as the first
one, despite failing from its dump plot, lack of good suspense, dull and
annoying acting from the supporting cast, boring climax, and the shark looking
faker than the original shark looked.
It's been considered to be one of the worst sequels of all
time by critics and audiences, especially when coming off the heels of an iconic staple in suspense. I remember watching the film twice when I
was in Middle School, once on TV and once from my own DVD copy, and being a big
fan of the first movie, I wasn't that amused or entertained by it. And while I don't
expect to enjoy it as an adult either, is there at least some fun to be had
with this movie for its cheesiness like what many bad horror sequels have, especially
when using a 3-D gimmick? ON WITH THE REVIEW!
I will admit that as pointless of a sequel that this film is
(not implying that the other sequel wasn't pointless either), I do like the
setting and idea of it being set in Sea World with the shark attacking different water themed attractions. It's still
a silly concept considering that "Sea World" is perfectly fine with
making a film with a killer shark in their park, but it’s still an interesting
and imaginative one. In fact as I was watching the film, I couldn't help but draw a
few comparisons to the future novel by Michael Crichton, and the 90s summer
blockbuster directed by Steven Spielberg "Jurassic Park". There's an
animal loose inside the park eating people, as our main
characters are in the control room trying to figure out what should be done. We
even have two guys trying to steal something from the park, only to find
themselves being killed by the shark. I'd honestly be surprised if Crichton or
Spielberg took a little inspiration from this movie and brought some of these
elements to "Jurassic Park". Hell, I'd be even more surprised if the
4th "Jurassic Park" sequel "Jurassic World" got the entire
concept from this movie. It's a fun and creative set-up. Maybe not for a
"JAWS" sequel, but definitely for a campy B movie. And truth be told
that was the original intention. The Producers of the first two films
originally wanted this film to be a spoof film titled "National Lampoon's
JAWS 3, People 0" directed by Joe Dante (who would later direct
"Gremlins"). It wouldn't take place at Sea World, but instead be
about a movie studio trying to direct a second sequel to "JAWS" with
cameos from the author of "JAWS" Peter Benchley, and actress Bo Derek
being eaten by the shark, but was rejected by Spielberg who threatened to leave
Universal, which consequently caused the two producers to quit the studio.
And this leads me to my first big problem with the movie
because despite being the third "JAWS" movie, it doesn't feel like a
sequel to the previous two movies. It doesn't take place on "Amity Island.
Not one of the original cast members from any of the two movies return at all. And I
did not believe for a second that I'm watching Chief Brody's kids as adults.
They're named after the kids, and once or twice mention about their previous
encounter with the shark from the first two movies, but really, if you changed
their names, and took away all references to the previous movie, nothing would
be missed, except for the fact that it's pointless to call this movie
"JAWS 3". When they talk about their encounters with the shark as
kids, it never feels warranted. It just feels there as if the characters are directly
saying to the audience "What, you don't believe that we're Brody's sons?
How about we talk about our encounter with the shark a little bit to help
make you believe"? And the worst part about this shoehorned dialogue that only
lasts for a minute or two is they never get emotional, or look traumatized by
their previous encounters. They just talk casually about it, and eventually
just laugh or shrug it off as if what they were talking about was nothing. The
film doesn't so much as give them a story-arc of overcoming their fears of
sharks for how little the film cares about how they're supposed to resemble
Chief Brody's children. They try to give Sean one by making him afraid to go into
the water, but that feels very downplayed to the film where he doesn't even
conquer his fear in the end, thus making his overall presence seem 100%
pointless and wasted. Furthermore, the
film never makes it clear if we're in the future, or if this is taking place
directly in the year that film was made like the second one, which makes it
even harder to believe that these two characters are from the other
"JAWS" films. For crying out loud, the 4th and arguably worst one in
the franchise feels more like a sequel when compared to this film!
So the film is absolutely pointless as a sequel to
"JAWS", well are the characters at least interesting, or
entertaining? Well they did hire good actors to be in the film such as Dennis
Quaid, Simon MacCorkindale, Lea Thompson in her first film debut, and Louis
Gossett, Jr who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for "An Officer
and a Gentleman" from the previous year that this film came out to
ironically be nominated for a Razzie for Worst Supporting Actor for this film.
But unfortunately their performances and characters are boring and disposable.
Dennis Quaid and John Putch as the "Brody Brothers" are forgettable.
Michael's girlfriend and the park's senior marine biologist played by Bess
Armstrong is annoying in the shallowest way possible as the two have little to
no chemistry. Lea Thompson as Sean's love interest barley gets anything to do,
aside from looking pretty and acting flirty. And Louis Gossett, Jr. as the manager
just feels there and probably embarrassed to sign on for a "JAWS"
sequel after winning an Oscar. The only character who comes close to
entertaining is Simon MacCorkindale as the snobby shark hunter, but sadly he
can't overcome the boredom for when we have to spend time with the human
characters. The majority of scenes when we have to spend time with them is just
dull, for how weak and uninteresting the dialogue is, and how annoying that
these characters get with their terrible line delivery through their loud southern
accents. Sometimes it’s laughable for how stupid these scenes are, like when
they're playing some kind of stand-off game in a bar, or when Sean and Michael
are talking about beepers. But on the whole, there's nothing that these scenes
have to offer to get you emotionally invested, or having you laugh at how cheap these scenes are.
The corniest thing to come out of the whole entire movie are
the Dolphins Cindy and Sandy. I'm not at all saying that I hate Dolphins. Far
from it! I think that they are some of nature’s most beautiful mammals to ever
swim the ocean. But how they're handled in this movie in such full blown and over the top corn that they just seem completely out of place for a film about a
killer shark. I mean the whimsical music, the character's interacting with them
in such pretentious cutesy fashion, and how they're being played up as heroes
by rescuing the characters and trying to fight against the shark, I felt like that I'm watching some kind of cheap "Flipper" knock-off, instead of a
"JAWS" film. And as I was watching this film I was hoping for the
shark to devour them in hardcore "JAWS" fashion, and see their guts
and lifeless heads spill all over the screen in 3-D. But instead, we get one of
the most sappiest endings in film history, where the survivors somehow know
that the others in the film survived the shark attack, and are more worried
about the Dolphins (that only did one productive thing in the movie), that
causes them to leap out of the water, with a 3-D image of them that feels
copied and pasted into the scene of the characters cheering for their survival where
the image freezes as the corny triumphant music ends. This does not feel like how a "JAWS" movie would
end! I do find it funny for how cheesy and out of place that these Dolphins are,
and I do admire the stunts that they can pull-off. But when you stop and
realize that they're supposed to be part of the franchise, you feel a bit
insulted wishing that there was some kind of grim pay-off involving them with the shark.
Now let's finally get to our real stars of the movie, the
sharks! In the original, the shark looked fake from time to time, but still managed to look scary and monstrous from Spielberg's excellent direction. In the second
film, the shark got faker from showing it a little more than they did in the
first film, and giving it a cheap looking scar on its face that only made the
shark look worse. Here, they show the shark even more, and in 3-D so you can
really see how fake it is. There's barely ever a moment where I find myself
believing that the characters are encountering a real shark, for how lifeless
and rubbery the sharks look. The only times when it'll ever look realistic is
when they use live shark, but unlike how the first film
mashed that footage together so beautifully; it feels like the film just
changed the channel briefly to a documentary about sharks from the
"Discovery Channel". And sometimes the film will recycle its own
footage of the shark swimming, or the divers swimming away from the shark in a
few scenes of the movie. The music supporting the shark isn't intense either,
it just feels there as noise to cheaply build-up the creature that doesn't come
close to using the same musical strategy that John Williams used when conducting
the score for the first film. The second film for crying out loud had better
music than this. It wasn't as scary, but it was still John Williams, and it did have a
strange and weird "Twilight Zone" like feel with the harp being
played in the opening, that was probably the sound that Spielberg was expecting
to hear John Williams play when he was writing the original score.
But the worst and far from scary effects in the whole entire
movie are its 3-D effects. Before 3-D nowadays could transport you to another
world without feeling the need to poke you in the eye, and even before theme
parks could improve upon those effects by giving you a 4-D experience to help
make the experience feel real; this was made when 3-D was seen as a cheap
gimmick, where we would occasionally have these effects shoved in your face.
You'll sometimes have awkward shots of live actors pointing a weapon at your face
before using them, or animatronics from a cheap underwater Haunted House
attraction popping out at you. Other times the camera would be shot up close to
something like a gory dead body, or a skeleton hand to make it feel like that
you're witnessing it up close. And most of the time when the film resorts to
using its 3-D gimmick, you'll get optical effects of a separate arm, a fish
head, or guts heading right towards you that don't look real at all for how
animated they look, and how long they focus on these crappy effects for almost a
good solid minute. And the matting and green-screen effects for the underwater
backgrounds don't help the lame 3-D effects either. When you see people in an
underwater tunnel, or look at the background for when they use an optical 3-D
effect, they look just as cartoony as the effects are. They never look
believable. Just know by the way that I'm reviewing the NON-3D VERSION that you could view on TV
or rent nearly anywhere, and judging by these effects, I don't think the actual
gimmick will make these effects look real either. The worst 3-D effects that
the film has to offer is the yellow submarine that looks added into the
scenery, and the most infamous scene in the whole entire movie, when the shark
comes at you just by hovering instead of actually swimming in over the top slow
motion that breaks the animated 3-D glass as it freezes in place. These are
some of the most laughable 3-D effects that has been brought to big screen, and
if you want to know the truth, I do find the cheesiness of them to be so amusing for
how fake, colorful, and in your face they are, that for me just helps making watching a
crappy sequel to an awesome horror film fun to watch. I can see someone being
annoyed by it and I don't blame them for it either, but personally I never found them to be annoying.
Now, I talked about how fake the shark looks, how bland the music
is, and how cheesy the 3-D effects and shots are. How about the attacks
themselves, are any of them cool, scary, or laughably fake, or are they just as
boring and standard as your typical boring and obnoxious shark movie. Well the
first victim that the shark eats is (I kid you not) a fish! Now in the first
film it was a woman swimming naked, in the second film it was two scuba divers
finding a sunken Orca, in the third film it's a freaking fish! Oh my, what a
step backwards. The first human the shark kills is a guy who fixes a gate underwater
during sunset (a cool shot, but makes no sense why he would fix the gate when
having little to no lighting at all) and the surprise isn't shocking, nor does the
scene bring any kind of tension, and in the middle of the film when we see his
head pop-up that's supposed to catch you catch you off guard like the head in
the sunken boat in the first film, it overall comes off as a weak duplicate of
that scene with no surprise, shocking sound effect, or atmosphere surrounding
it. Though when we see them examine the body in the following scene it does look gruesome...well at first glance. Another scene that's similar to a scene in the
first "JAWS" movie is when two guys sneak out on a row boat to do
something illegal only to find themselves being foiled by the shark. In the
original, while some may argue is a pointless scene, it was funny for how
idiotic the two guys were, had a dark and shadowy atmosphere, and ended with a
thrilling chase that made many of us forgive how pointless it was to the
overall plot. In this film, we nearly get some of that, the atmosphere looks almost
as dark as the scene that it's duplicating, and when the guy first disappears as his flashlight goes out, it was
quiet and a bit eerie. But their motivation of stealing coral reef is stupid
and doesn't tie into the film's plot at all, when the guys in the first film
were trying to catch the shark because of the 300 dollar reward. The atmosphere
wasn't all that visually interesting. We knew that the shark is going to eat
these guys since we just met them, and know very little about them. And the acting
when the second guy gets killed is hysterical, where the scene ends with the shark just
sucking down the raft in the most over the top way imaginable supported by a
cartoon sound effect.
When the shark finally starts attacking Sea World as they
open up their new attractions for the tourists, as cool as these set-ups are,
there's no pay-off! For example, there are showgirls who are always shown to be
water-skiing, and in the opening scene as they fall into the water while
rehearsing, the shark somehow doesn't eat any of them for how slowly it moves.
Well ok, maybe they're saving their deaths for later when they open the park to
the public. But no, despite that they fall in the water a second time as the
shark is now able to chase after them at the same speed that the speed boat is
going, it still someone doesn't devour any of them. And it doesn't stop there.
Any human who has been munched by the jaws of the sharks in these movies are
always dead. But yet when Lea Thompson gets attacked by the shark, the shark
only takes a little nibble at her leg. She doesn't lose her leg, or die, she
just gets mildly injured! But the most disappointing attack that the shark
makes at Sea World is when it breaks the underwater tunnels full of innocent
people. I love the concept of being trapped underwater in a small room with
little air as the cold water breathing below your waist (I get chills just
thinking about it), but these scenes only go on for a short amount of time, and
the shark never attacks these people again, despite that it has an all you can
eat buffet waiting to be snacked on.
Most of the battles with the shark (including the climax)
take place underwater, and while the underwater shots are fair at best, they
just feel slow and tedious. I was never on the edge of my seat when watching
these scenes, or cared about what was going to happen, unlike say the cage
scene from the first movie. But with that said, the last two deaths that we get
are in my opinion close to being scary. When one of the main characters gets
eaten by the shark, we see him alive inside the shark's throat as he watches
the jaws close-in in front of him. It’s stupid how he somehow gets crushed the
same way how the shark's teeth would munch on him, and still be inside the
shark's throat the whole entire time, and not be swallowed or choke the shark
to death, but the image alone was still pretty terrifying. The last death we
get to witness is a guy getting munched in half by the shark. It's not as
grotesque or as disturbing as say Quint's death, but in terms of all the
fakeness that the film keeps throwing at us, this one was the closest to
looking graphic and realistic.
The film overall is crap, and one of the most pointless sequels to
have been ever made since it has little to do with the previous films, but as
far as crappy shark movies go, I'd be lying if I said that I didn't find it
amusing. The setting of it taking place in "Sea World" and it's ideas
regarding where the shark attacks is an inventive one, despite having little to
no pay-off. The 3-D effects are fake and cheesy, but unlike most shark films
these days where it's the same crappy CGI used over and over just with a
different design, it's kind of fun to see a crappy shark film done with this kind of gimmick that makes the film visually interesting for how silly they look.
The last two deaths that we get in the film nearly look as scary as the deaths
in the first film were. And the technical aspects of the film like the underwater
shots, the art direction, and stunts performed by actual animals do look nice.
But with that said, while entertaining and fun to look at in parts, there's
still plenty of boredom surrounding the film such as the scenes with the
characters, the slow moving underwater sequences that are shot nice but don't
feel suspenseful, and the majority of deaths coming off as dull instead of
scary and disturbing. It's not something that I would recommend for how terrible of
a sequel it is and how boring it gets at times, but there is some fun to be had
with the film for how bad and yet inventive it is half of the time, especially
when being shot for 3-D, which is more than what I can say for the other
shark films that I reviewed in the past.
No comments:
Post a Comment