Change Your Image
kenwuest
Feel free to see the comments I made on the different message boards on imdb.org.
Reviews
Disturbed (1990)
Bad
What can you say about a film in which you can hear the director call "Cut"? This should give one a taste for how the film is put together. The editing is off. The sound is off (notice the foley work that does not match the actions on screen). The work is like a working print, rather than a polished film.
Jaws: The Revenge (1987)
Not as bad
Why people dislike this film is a mystery. In view of the four "Jaws" films this film ranks number 3. "Jaws 3-D" is the worst of the four. The reason for this is due to "Jaws 3-D" being removed from the series (Mike and Sean Brody in Florida), whereas "Jaws the Revenge" begins where the first two were placed; Amity. As such, the story is a continuation of the first two films; in the "Jaws" universe. There is a bold move in the begining of the film (which must be seen in context of the other films to get its impact) involving an attack. The acting during this attack is very well done. It would be the actions and words of one in real life.
Perhaps the reason people dispise this film as much as they do is due to the same reason they call the shark "Jaws". The shark is not named Jaws; the title refers to a part of the shark.
Another factor that places this film above "Jaws 3-D" is the music. John Williams' score is used rather than mangled as it was in the third film. "Jaws 3-D" used an altered version, while "Jaws the Revenge" used Williams' music combined with Michael Small's score.
Now, the film is not a strong film, yet it is a studio release and far better than many similar direct-to-video releases. It is also better than the many similar plotted shark films released after the first film.
The director of "Jaws the Revenge" stated on Entertianment Tonight, "Jaws 3 was not that good." The errors here are due to the fact that the screenplay was written in such a short time. The first film had many drafts by Peter Benchley. This is what makes the difference. Something that is worked on over a period of time will be greater than something done as a first (or close to first) draft.
"Jaws the Revenge" was a return to the series. It is not as bad as it is made out to be.
Gerry (2002)
style over skill
Style is a medium for a message. Those who complain about fast cuts as being empty of meaning or "style over substance" praise films that are just as "guilty"--------films which go in the opposite direction (slow scenes, long takes).
Although at the time I wrote this I had not viewed it... my comment was more on the nature of the film--sorry I implied I had viewed it.
Films which do this are using a stylistic device and are praised for that in itself (rather that determining if the message is good or bad). Why praise such? Because that is the content of the film---little content, much style (leaving the viewer with the director's film tricks, and little else to evaluate).
Such films are, in a general sense, empty. Since there is nothing on the inside, the shell is what is viewed. If the decoration looks nice, people praise it.
Sloppy, lazy work. This is the type of work students try to pass off as a completed assignment (since they don't want to finish, they turn it in half done). The wise teacher recognizes this and grades accordingly---------"F" or "D". Apparently, half completed work is praised by those in the minority who do not understand what makes a work good or poor. They cry out against the "Hollywood establishment". Which is what the poor student does when he sees an "F" on his homework------he blames the teacher and studious students, praising fellow classmates for not finishing their homework as well (the fellowship of the sloth).
With this framework, understand the work. Call it what it is---------bloated, and visually wordy.............
To show pain in the characters is drama. To place it upon the audience is sadism. We should feel for the characters' suffering; not feel their suffering.
Directors comment that one of their most difficult tasks is to cut down (or out) scenes they love. Sometimes directors keep scenes that do not assist the story---they are so attached to their work.
The solution----------DVD. Place the extra material in DVD, and the focused cut in the cinema.