Deep Blue Sea

here's an interesting coincidence in the movies right now. It's not one of those two-volcano-two asteroid-movies-at-once congruencies. Rather it is a synchronicity of attitude, the kind of social signifier that the sociologists love to sink their claws into, one of those cultural studies tropes that make otherwise bad movies interesting to talk about. This new trend is one in which intellectuals and scientists are found to be morally wanting and the response is hanging them out to dry.

In The Haunting Liam Neeson plays a college psychology professor who wants to examine the human response to fear. It's a rather vague study, but nevertheless, he invites three insomniacs to a haunted house under the pretense that he is studying sleep disorders. In Deep Blue Sea Saffron Burrows plays a research scientist trying to end the scourge of Alzheimer's by extracting some regenerative substance from the brains of sharks. Only the hidden fact is that she had to genetically mutate the sharks to get their brains big enough to find something to extract. This is in violation of the something referred to as the Harvard Compact, which may or may not be real (it's difficult to trust screenplays these days on such matters), and the protocols of the corporation financing her labors.

In both cases, the scientists are exposed as manipulative, careless bastards and subjected to harsh ridicule, and in one case a noble sacrificial death. The audience is meant to sympathize with the harsh assessment of their actions, and is invited to dread the ethical horror of science out of control.

In both cases, the supposed lack of ethical behavior is a lot of crap.

In many psychological experiments keeping the real purpose of the exercise from the subjects is routine. Before a study, the psychologist fills out a subject treatment form indicating whether or not there is going to be deception, and if there is, he must inform or debrief the subjects after the study is over. In medical experiments, keeping the fact that half the subjects are taking a placebo is essential. If the participants knew what the scientist was looking for, the research could be tainted by inappropriate or eager-to-please responses. It's unlikely that Neeson would obtain authorization to continue with his cockamamie study, and in the film he is rebuked by his department head, but assuming that he could, many required elements are missing from Neeson's experiment, among them authorization from that department head, a full complement of subjects, and a control group, a necessity if his research is to have any scientific validity. These lapses provide further evidence that the screenwriters didn't know what they were talking about. What's finally absurd about Neeson's experiment is that it is performed in such a wildly out of control environment. But then anti-intellectualism has had a long tradition in movies, as in American life. In these two films, the humbling of the two brainiacs is tantamount to their being picked on again by the school bullies.

In the case of Deep Blue Sea, it's less clear just what law or code of ethics Burrows is breaking. If you strip away the horror and suspense elements of the story, she is a scientist driven to aid mankind in a significant manner, and it's not as if the sharks are in danger, or even the heroes of the film. In fact, they are suppose to be the villains. And further, they are improved by the genetic experimentation, rendered smarter, for which all they have to suffer is a probe place briefly in their brains. Maybe they're not so smart. It's true that these mako sharks are confined in cages, but it's not as if they are Keikos confined to miniature Mexican tanks.

ut then the screenwriters of Deep Blue Sea seem unaware of a lot of things. Credited to Duncan Kennedy and Wayne Powers, the film tells of a business executive (Samuel L. Jackson) who visits a sea-based lab called Aquatica to give a research team led by Burrows one last chance to prove that its efforts are viable. But the sharks, being smart, start to tear the place apart, all in an effort to escape. Only the wits of a shark wrangler named Carter Blake (Thomas Jane) and a few others thwart their rampage while saving themselves.

One of the main problems with contemporary screenplays is that they seem to be written by people who have never done anything, never been anywhere. This film is filled with little inconsistencies. Such as: why do all the hatches in Aquatica open with the water, rather than against it, i.e., perform the primary function of a sea hatch? Well, it is a siege movie, and in that genre the escapees need to have things to do. But in my experience, siege movies rarely make the layout of the place under siege totally clear. There are three levels here, seemingly three vertical towers to climb up, and a lot of confusingly similar rooms. Kurosawa would never let the viewer be confused for a moment as to where they are in the geography. And why does one shark have its eye poked out in one shot, only to have it back in the next (well, the sharks are regenerative geniuses)? And the character who stabs it has a bump on his head that seems to change sides as often as Marty Feldman's hump.

To be fair, these last two instances are really the faults of director Renny Harlin, whose masterpieces remain Die Hard 2 and The Long Kiss Goodnight. But surely the screenwriters are at fault for the various "hommages " that give Deep Blue Sea the feel of a retread, from the Louisiana license plate found in the teeth of one shark borrowed from Jaws, to the screen- style self-reflexive genre acknowledgments voiced by L. L. Cool J, to the obligatory pop culture reference (there's only one, spoken by Tarantino-regular Samuel L. Jackson), to Burrows's monster Burrow's monster-killing that requires that she strip down to her undies. Burrows is a tall, buxom type who has done a lot of movies with Mike Figgis and Dennis Potter so she is used to disrobing for dirty old men, and she looks great in her Victoria's Secret briefs and flashy sports watch standing wet and glistening, but the reference to Alien is a tad too distracting for full appreciating of her almost genetically perfect bod.

Not only that but she doesn't seem to be a very happy person. She is glum and frowning throughout the film, perhaps burdened by the dirty secret that she is violating all manner of vague scientific codes. In fact, no one in the film is particularly happy, except for Aida Turturo as the classic happy-go-lucky fat mama (though this one can't dance). These are not pleasant people and a key element of the siege movie is that you have people you can get behind. It doesn't pay to have a movie in Hollywood's most commercial and commercialized genre in which the audience roots for the monsters.

Post screening conversations with Gregg Morris and Dr Charles Ransom Schwenk bore fruit when it came time to write this review.

More information about Deep Blue Sea can be found on the official website for the film.

Return to Archive Index

Return to Top

Print-Friendly Review for Output