Can we all just agree....


That it's loads better than Jaws 3D ?

Trust no one.

reply

Yes, JAWS 3-D was a boring piece of *beep* Jaws: The Revenge is a somewhat entertaining piece of *beep*

reply

Funny, I'm at complete opposite ends of this spectrum. Jaws: The Revenge was a real chore to sit through and really drags despite being only being 85 minutes long (easily the shortest entry in the franchise), and the shark only has what feels like 15 minutes of screen time.
Jaws 3-D has it's share of pointless filler too but not nearly as much as the latter, plus it's frequent shots of water-skiers and Lea Thompson in a bikini were far more interesting than the gloomy and pretentious melodrama that plagued Jaws: The Revenge.

reply

Absolutely not! Both are bad films but Jaws 3-D at least has a certain degree of self-awareness to it, like it knows it's a B-movie and doesn't try to be anything more. Plus, it still had a decent concept and boasted some interesting ideas and even though they weren't executed well.
Jaws: The Revenge, despite being built on one of the most ridiculous concepts ever conceived for a film like this (at least Jaws 3-D doesn't abandon the high-concept theme in favor of supernatural elements) takes itself way too seriously and the way it consistently plays homage to the original film via flashbacks, references, returning characters and recreated scenes, suggests that it's somehow trying to be on-par with Jaws. But if anything, these aspects only serve as a reminder of how inferior this film is to it! It astounds me to think that anybody would rate this drivel above Jaws 3-D, let alone The Dark Knight, Transformers, Pacific Rim and The Babadook, all which you've rated lower.

reply

The awful AWFUL 3-D effects ruin any tension in the film, there are a few good sequences but everything that else is terrible.

Jaws The Revenge might have some bad executive meddling in it but at least it's not one of those atrocious 3-D gimmick movies.

And saying that bikini girls are worth watching a movie WHEN YOU HAVE THE INTERNET is not a very convincing answer.

Trust no one.

reply

Jaws The Revenge might have some bad executive meddling in it but at least it's not one of those atrocious 3-D gimmick movies.


Honestly, I'd take the 5 second scene of the 3-D shark hitting the glass over the bouyant paper-mache shark that roars, comes so far out of the water to the point of being amphibious, and has it's propelling mechanisms visible in every scene it's in, any day.

And saying that bikini girls are worth watching a movie WHEN YOU HAVE THE INTERNET is not a very convincing answer.


I never said it made it good, just more watchable than Jaws: The Revenge's filler.

reply

Sharks can leap completely out of the water.

Trust no one.

reply

Leaping clear out of the water is one thing, floating on the surface and standing on the tip of it's tail for 10+ seconds is another.

reply

I think it was meant to be in slow motion. Terribly done and ridiculous either way.

reply

[deleted]

Agreed. I would much prefer to watch The Revenge over 3-D any day.

Granted Revenge has the liability of a weak and implausible script and characters that are not all that interesting (the wrong Brody son got eaten, in my opinion and Mrs. Brody looks like a cross between Lady Gaga's grandmother and Mrs. Pickles from Rugrats); but it has the benefit of some gorgeous cinematography, a rousing score by Michael Small and some reasonably impressive special effects.

Jaws 3-D suffers -and suffers badly- from the shoddiest effects work I've ever seen in a major studio picture, to say nothing of the laughable 3-D effects themselves. But the number one reason why I can't stand to even look at Jaws 3-D is because it is just so damned GRAINY.

I don't know what the excuse or explanation is, but the film is so awash in grain that it looks like they filmed the whole thing from a mile away and then enlarged and cropped the sections of the film frame they wanted. I swear, Jaws 3-D is the grainiest film I've ever seen outside of Star Trek - The Motion Picture (although the blu-ray release of ST-TMP corrected that issue by completely remastering the film from the original elements).

I'm willing to watch bad films as long as they look good - and Revenge looks stunning - but when they are as grainy and cheap as Jaws 3-D, they I switch channels and look for Plan 9.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

reply

When I re-watched the film a week or two ago I really rather enjoyed the human characters and the stuff they were doing. I mean it wasn't Oscar material but it was head and shoulders better than most monster film filler.

Trust no one.

reply

some reasonably impressive special effects.


You have to be joking, right?

reply

As compared to Jaws 3-D, you bet I'm serious.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

reply

Oh give me a break! The 3-D sequences (what very few there were) only lasted several seconds, the scenes featuring puppet sharks were on par with Jaws 2, minus the burnt face (in other words, OK but not great), it also made good use of stock footage of real sharks like in the first film. In Jaws: The Revenge, the shark looked cringe worthy in every scene it was in, a badly designed model made worse with incompetent direction, not helped by it's propelling mechanisms being visible most of the time in the clear blue Caribbean water.
Here's one (out of many) glaring examples.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VvRkguk5CA

reply

I will agree to disagree.

Mechanical limitations aside, I still rate the shark in Revenge far above that in 3-D; at the very least my suspension of disbelief didn't have to compete with an unacceptable amount of image graininess, visual effects which were both gratuitous and simply didn't work, coupled with piss-poor 3-D effects straight out of a ViewMaster reel.

For my money, Revenge is the easier film to watch - whatever its liabilities and weaknesses - and remains a very guilty pleasure.

"If you don't know the answer -change the question."

reply

Revenge is miles better than 3D. Not to say it's a great film, but a guilty pleasure and it at least has the credit of trying to put forth a semblance of story in line with original.

3D feels so disconnected and TV-movie like when compared to the original film, and to a lesser degree Jaws 2.

reply

it at least has the credit of trying to put forth a semblance of story in line with original.


All that does is serve as a reminder of how inferior it is to the original. Jaws 3-D at least has the advantage of being viewed as a standalone film, and while its concept may have not been executed well, at least it doesn't directly insult the viewers intelligence.

reply

Doesn't matter. Jaws 2 was a decent sequel but when compared to the original, it certainly pales. Revenge never had a chance of matching the original nor 2 for that matter. But what it does do is tell a story (no matter how far fetched) that feels like an off-shoot of the original. I get what you're saying, but 3D would have been better off had it stayed a parody - the original title being Jaws 3: People O. The last minute addition of the "Brody's" (terribly miscast) and loosely connecting it to the original story just felt tacked on and unnecessary, and only highlights now disconnected it is from the rest of the films.

Revenge, as it stands, is a guilty pleasure sequel to the Amity story and its characters. Had the production been given more time, and a few things tightened up, it may have even been a decent sequel. The story was there, it just wasn't fine tuned. The cast was good, I will argue that. The cinematography was gorgeous, I'll argue that. And nobody has ever questioned Michael Small's rendition of William's original soundtrack. Truly one of the highlights of the film. And on that note, the score in 3D was severely lacking,

Again, I understand your point, but I disagree. To each their own.

reply

Agreed.

reply

Oh Yes!!

reply