The poster for Shark in Venice reads Sharks in Venice which is funny. Everything about this sub-genre of shark films is funny, which should go without saying. In my highly treasured shark film collection, I noticed that the shark on the cover of Shark in Veniceis the same shark as pictured on the cover of Sharktopus. What’s funnier is that Shark in Veniceis a Nu Image release whilst Sharktopus is a SyFy production. This means that two different companies both probably searched online for images of ‘shark’ and ended up with the same one. That’s f***ing hilarious.
Films I refer to/potentially spoil in this article:
– Shark in Venice (dir. Danny Lerner, 2008)
– Sharktopus (dir. Declan O’Brien, 2010)
– The Irishman (dir. Martin Scorsese, 2019)
Like the Sharktopus itself, the sub-genre of shark movies never fails to create new breeds of insane viewing material. They tend to boast creativity which is genuinely almost credit-worthy, it’s just the execution of these ideas which is terrible. Undoubtedly though, this terrible execution is where the enjoyment lies; it’s comedy, intentional or not. Shark in Veniceis loaded with awful filmmaking, ranging from poor pacing to empty performances, from its awkward editing to its disconnected soundtrack. However, we keep watching, addicted, ready for our next dose of s**t shark CGI.
Less of a shark movie and more an adventure movie that occasionally has sharks in it, Shark in Venice (which actually features multiple sharks, unlike its title but alternative poster suggests) follows David and fiancé Laura as they travel to Venice. The reason for their travels? To track down David’s father who went missing whilst on a dive looking for the ancient treasure of Medici. David soon finds the treasure with relative ease and quickly becomes entangled in a Mafia plot that involves him trading his late father’s fortune for his kidnapped fiancé. The treasure, however, is only accessible through a labyrinth of claustrophobic underwater tunnels, where a shark(s) patrols the canals with bloodlust.
Image Credit: Yidio
Alongside pure enjoyment from noticeably bad filmmaking, the shark attacks themselves are the other main reason why we watch these films, and Shark in Venicefeatures some of the most baffling and innovative. If you thought these films were cheap, Shark in Venicetakes it to a whole new level. The main shark attack scenes that actually involve David and co. just use stock footage of sharks. It cuts between footage of sharks which is blatantly from some nature documentary and shots of the actors flailing about in the water. These mash-up sequences are dream-like and almost ethereal as they create such a disconnect from the action as you’re watching two films at once and trying to figure out the story that both are telling. Half the time, my girlfriend and I would watch a guy get mauled by a shark only to see them in the next scene, so we’d rewind and attempt to decipher these painfully confusing edited fights that don’t even feature the fighters on screen together. It’s like bad fights in films where it’s obvious nobody is being hit but turned all the way up to the point where you don’t know who’s winning. Remember that fight scene in The Irishmanwhere 76-year old Robert De Niro beats up a shop owner, except De Niro’s been de-aged so he looks like an extremely cranky man who’s supposed to be in his prime but instead stumbles around the frame throwing devastatingly unrealistic kicks and stomps? Imagine that but the shop owner is the diver, De Niro is the shark and the camera only films one of them at a time so neither are on screen at the same time. It’s like that.
On the other hand, a different scene shows how the shark attacks could’ve been. A porn-level actor playing a very promiscuous and drunk man tries to get with a porn-level actress playing a seemingly sober lady, although her stunted line delivery doesn’t make this that easy to tell. As their characters arc and their minute-long subplot reaches its conclusion, the man falls into the water and is devoured not only by a shark but a massive CGI shark that leaps out of the water towards the camera which is now in the sky, the first crane cam shot of the film. It’s a monumental shift in visual style (albeit still looking awful), and one of two scenes in the film that actually utilises a ridiculously over-the-top CGI shark attack. The lady in the scene disappears too, by the way, she either ran away or died, in case you were wondering. Despite the whole film being entertaining, a few more of these OTT shark fatalities would’ve been more than welcome.
This is the first shark film where upon finishing the film, I immediately watched the making of, and to my surprise, it was somewhat wholesome. Director David Lerner seemed to garner genuine respect and managed to reciprocate the enthusiasm that he shared with his cast and crew, whilst also, Stephen Baldwin earns himself a great deal of praise as he basks in the limelight of the set and production as a whole. To say Stephen steals scenes would be both an under and overstatement as firstly, he doesn’t, but secondly, because there’s nobody to steal it from. His performance is the most entertaining by far, as not only is his expression non-existent in almost every scene, but it seems like he is as well, his piercing eyes just gazing elsewhere in each scene. Baldwin reaches grandmaster Tommy Wiseau levels of anti-expressionism where half the time you’re wondering if they’re actually thinking about something completely different, let alone if they’re focusing on the performance at all. But, despite his objectively poor performances in certain scenes, it feels harsh critiquing him too much, as in his ‘making of’ interview segments, he seems to bear a genuinely happy and excitable persona on set, making the most of making a movie with (some) hard-working, talented and committed filmmakers. Also, as we’ve learnt from similar films which will have reviews in the future, you really can’t criticise a film that is self-admittedly part of the shark-trash-horror-disaster-comedy canon. On a side-note, we joked that Stephen Baldwin’s face gradually awakens and starts to move throughout the film, and by the end of the film, his face truly does display a noticeable amount of motion in comparison to the beginning of the film.
Shark in Veniceis of course loaded with stupidity and plentiful issues regarding almost everything, from technical to practical, but for these exact reasons, it is also incredibly watchable. As I continue on my pilgrimage which will see me pass through many more shark-horror-trash-disaster-comedy-based adventures, I’m sure I’ll be able to articulate a more precise and moving reason as to why I’m so infatuated with this s**t.
Loved:
– Stephen Baldwin
– Innovative shark attack filmmaking
– The making-of was wholesome
Didn’t Love So Much:
– Could do with more shark action, given the title of the film
– That’s’ it
filmmish 