MY 6TH FAVORITE DISNEY VILLAIN

THE COACHMAN



FROM "PINOCCHIO"

WARNING: THERE WILL BE SPOILERS!

"Pinocchio" certainly has quite a gallery of baddies. There's the comical conning duo Gideon and Honest John (and yet so many people refer to him as Foulfellow despite that he's never called that once in the film); the jolly and plump and yet greedy and abusive Stromboli; the dastardly Coachman who takes away children to a magical land where they’ll be cursed for life; and the giant whale that would rival the great White Whale Moby Dick himself, Monstro! Despite each of them having little screen-time, they all pose as a threat to Pinocchio for many different reasons. But the one who has always stood out to me as the most manipulative, the most fascinating, and the most frightening one of them all is the Coachman! This to me is a Disney villain who gets criminally overlooked. Many people talk about all the other villains and even put them on their lists, and though people talk about the "Pleasure Island" sequence and the disturbing transformation scene, not many people talk about the guy who runs the place.

When he first enters film, much like the villains that we saw earlier, he seems normal as he sits at the end of the table silently smoking his pipe when he listens to Honest John sing and tell him about what he did to poor little Pinocchio earlier. But red flags begin to raise when we see him give an unfriendly smile, indicating that he's got the two hoodlums figured out, for being smart but goofy enough for him to control and intimidate. And when he sees a tiny bag of money with one or two gold coins inside it from the crooks' latest crime, realizing that these two aren't even getting paid real money, he smiles again knowing how to reel the two criminals into his little operation. As soon as he's asked by Honest John what his proposition is, he smokes his pipe once more calmly asking if they want to "make some real money" by throwing a huge bag of big and bright shiny gold coins that clash loudly when he tosses them on the table. Honest John thinks that he'll be doing something as low as murdering a man for that kind of money, but it is revealed to be much worse. So worse, that he has to stop and look to see if anybody at the Inn is listening before whispering to them what his racket is. He tells them he collects "Stupid little boys", the ones that play hooky from School to do low-life things, revealing that he takes them to "Pleasure Island". This causes Honest John to double take realizing the dangers and forbidden nature of the Island by the law, until the Coachman assures them that there is no risk since the boys who come to the Island "never come back as BOYS!!!"

And he makes the scariest face in the whole entire film!

Ooohhh my heart just stopped just by looking at this picture! This moment always had me jumping as a kid, and it still does now from how he goes from normal and relaxed to demonic and insane when his face and tone changes, supported by chilling music, a wicked laugh, and the two crooks cowering, fearing, and sweating when they look at him and learn about his operation!

And instead of the Coachman asking them if the two are still willing to aid him, he just forcefully pulls the two forward to tell them to bring any boy they find on the street to him at the crossroads, and angrily makes it clear to not double-cross him by telling the authorities of where they're meeting. This action seems more like that he's forcing the two to work for him due to his intimidation and what he might do to them if they turn him down after knowing too much. But to be sure that they keep their mouths shut if they bring a boy to him, he keeps his side of the bargain by paying them with gold willingly since he was more than enough of it, indicating that he's been running this racket for a long period of time! This leads me to the first reason of why I love the Coachman so much as a villain because despite being intimidating to the point to make others do his bidding whether he'll pay them or not, he's a very calculating and persuasive villain who can quickly understand people's desires and weakness' and use them to draw them in. And no way is that exploited much better than for what he has in-store at "Pleasure Island" for the kids he lures there.

Before we had the Child Catcher from "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" to provide a great example to children about stranger danger, we had this guy. Think about it. He's a creepy old man with a pedo smile who lures little boys to get inside his coach to take them to a place that has every child’s desire, when he in reality has a dark purpose. Those are pretty much the signs of a pervert. But unlike how many pedos in real-life don't give what the children expect to get, this guy on the other hand does. Once he lures them in his coach, he takes them on a ferry with many other children already on board (indicating that he has either collected them earlier from other villages, or has more people working for him) and drives them to "Pleasure Island" that seems like the perfect place for any kid, whether you're a trouble maker or not. The place is a bright and colorful carnival full of rides, balloons, all you can eat candy and food, a place for kids to rough house, a model home that kids can trash filled with beautiful artwork, a pool hall inside a giant 8 ball, tobacco and beer for the under-aged youngsters, and everything is ALL FREE! But as wonderful as the place and the sequence pulling the viewer in is (despite already knowing that something bad will eventually happen), there are a few things that seem unsettling about this place. When the kids are let loose on the Island, the Coachman welcomes them all inside with a smile that's supposed to come across as friendly, but instead comes off as perverted from the way he smiles at them weirdly and rubs his hands together. And as nice as the place may seem the only things that look as scary and unfriendly as the Coachman are the talking robots of clowns, tough guys, and Indians that motivate the kids to be bad and give them free stuff.

Everything goes back to being as grim as we first met the Coachman for when he cracks his whip ordering his men to lock the gates so that no one can get out, and to get the crates ready! At first glance when we see his minions close the gate they seem like guys in black outfits and masks in the distance. But when we see them assisting him up-close later on, they don't look human at all, but instead look like some kind of Gorilla monsters with black fur and glowing lifeless green eyes that never ever say a word but obey what their master tells them to do! Who are these creatures, where did they come from, were they possibly men that worked for him to bring boys to the Island that have turned into these hideous things by either trying to screw him over, or not being much use to him when they were getting paid? Will never know! You know the more I think about it, I don't think the Coachman is human either. I mean he's designed to look like one, but why does he have four fingers instead of five like all the other humans? How can he go from having a normal face, to suddenly changing it to look unholy? Again, where did he find these demonic henchmen? And how does the transformation of kids turning into Donkey's exactly work on this Island? Could it be that he's some kind of monster disguised as a human and has been running this soul stealing amusement park for centuries? There are so many tiny hints and clues that prove that he's more than just a twisted old man, and yet we never get the answers which in the end make him such an ambiguous villain with plenty of mystery and back-story. He could be just an ordinary man that just simply has access to all this, but there's still that possibility that he's not who he appears to be.

 

After the Coachman orders his minions to get things ready, the scene fades out for bit until the next frame of animation reveals the amusement park looking destroyed and abandon where all the color and life that we saw earlier is reduced to a black and grey gloomy environment with the once colorful rides that we just saw, now being muted. We (along with Jiminy Cricket) wonder where all the boys have disappeared too, until a scene later when we see the boat dock full of donkey's in crates being loaded on to a boat. It turns out that all the boys on the Island have been turned into donkey's from their bad behavior who are being torn from their clothes, and kicked into crates to be sold to the "Salt Mines" and "The Circus", or are being forced to pull the Coachman's coach (as shown earlier) for the rest of their lives, never to see their family or friends ever again! And if a donkey could still speak in a child's voice, they get thrown into the pen with the others that can still talk, and we can only guess that whatever’s going to happen to them will not be pleasant. It's likely that they'll either remain in there until they are turned into regular donkey's, OR will lose their hide so the Coachman can still make a quick buck. The more I watch this sequence the more disturbing it gets for how depressing and scary it is! Especially in the scene that follows when Pinocchio's delinquent friend Lampwick transforms into a donkey. He may be a bad influence on Pinocchio, but his punishment is unjustified considering that he's only a kid. We hate him for what he does to Pinocchio and even poor Jiminy, but at the same time we sympathize with him for when he turns into a jackass. Not to mention that he's the first person that Pinocchio has ever encountered outside of his home who sees him as a normal boy, unlike the others who see him as an object. The scene itself is also very intense, for how he slowly becomes a donkey without even noticing as the music starts out as eerie, to everything becoming dramatic and insane for when he sees himself as a donkey and cries for help. The most traumatizing moments that stand out during this scene are when we see his hands turn into hooves, and hearing him cry "Mamma" as it changes to a He-Haw where we see him now fully transformed into a wild Donkey destroying the hall, ripping off his clothes, and running out of sight, leaving poor Pinocchio behind as he nearly turns into one himself.

The worst thing of all this is, we never see poor Lampwick, the boys, or the Coachman ever again! The last time we ever see him is him casting a shadow over the speaking donkeys (the one being thrown back is ironically the same kid who voices Pinocchio), cracking a whip to silence them and coldly telling them that that they've had their fun, and that they now must pay for it! How often do you see a Disney villain getaway with their crime, it's very rare! Usually they would get some kind of downfall, and have the person/person's that have been captured be saved in the end, BUT NOT HERE! And for all we know this guy is still probably running this racket and turning millions of boys into donkeys!

 

Out of all the awful qualities that Coachman has, his most devious one is his sadistic nature. He enjoys watching once little boys now Hee-Hawng in pain and misery. He loves to brutally whip his minions and the donkeys that pull his carriage. He likes challenging the kids to try to speak as donkeys, before tossing them in a crate or the pen. He gets a kick out of intimidating others! He's simply an all-around psycho, where his only pleasure is by tormenting and abusing others and making money off of it! He's not trying to teach them a lesson, or personally believing that he's doing justice by ridding society of juvenile kids, he just sees these little boys as profit and nothing more! Adding to the insane and creep factor of the character is Charles Judels voice work, who also voices Stromboli as well. Unlike how Stromboli is always comical, even when threatening Pinocchio, this performance isn't. He never brings anything fun to the character at all, thus making him straight out scary with his evil laugh and demanding voice through his soft and thick Cockney accent that still manages to sound creepy when he's talking like a normal person.

If there are three important things that kids can learn from this sadistic pervert is to never trust strangers; nothing in life is free; and be a good boy, because this man or hinted demon does a perfect job of scaring the young viewers straight. He shows no mercy for what he does, and enjoys torturing and harassing the poor little boys to make himself rich! The Child Catcher is a good example of all those lessons too, but for me I hated him more than I feared him as a kid. I always wanted to bite off his nose or give him a good crack in the teeth, despite still finding him a bit creepy. But with this guy on the other hand, I don’t even want to make eye contact with him for how horrifying and heartless he is! And the fact that he gets away with it all makes the message stick to kids for life! 

"Give a bad boy enough rope, and he'll soon make a jackass of himself. Mmhahaha."

-The Coachman

JAWS 3-D

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.

And then came the third installment to the series in 1983 directed by the production designer for the first two films Joe Alves, where Universal Studios decided to show this film in three Dimension, simply titled as...

 

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!

A few years after the events in "JAWS 2", a grown-up Mike Brody (Dennis Quaid) works at Sea World in Orlando Florida that's about to open a special underwater tunnel attraction. However, a great white shark enters through the gates that separates the ocean from the lagoon, and people are missing as the Dolphin's cry and are afraid to leave their pens. Eventually the shark is discovered, and then gets captured to be kept in captivity for publicity.  But the greedy park manager played by Louis Gossett, Jr., has the shark moved to another tank to be exhibited to the tourists and dies for being put into the wrong one. Things get worse when they soon realize that there's another shark in the park who happens to be the shark's Mother taking revenge for what they did to her son.

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.

RATING 2/5