Sharknado: The Fourth Awakens Review
The Sharknado series has a somewhat convoluted, if not especially complex, continuing storyline. Fortunately this film does not require you to know that. Rather, it prefers to trade off celebrity cameos, classic film references and pop culture jokes for scenes that require more than guns, sharks, wind and chainsaws.
The story is nonsensical, being a simple and efficient way to string together scenes of action and disaster. The acting is mixed, especially in the case of The Hoff who swings between obviously-the-best-actor-in-the-room to wooden-plank-phoning-it-in-from-the-bathroom, occasionally in the same scene. None of this is important. The film is an excuse to create as many CGI shark action set-pieces as possible, with a few nods to creating stakes for character and audience and pacing so that we are not exhausted by chainsaw-shark interactions before the first ad-break.
If the film has anything to say apart from warning us of the danger of flying sharks, it may have a couple of evergreen messages. Firstly that billionaire scientists and technology can't save us from unexpected threats. Secondly, in their use of the media; as each tornado encounters something new they give it an exciting name boulder-nado, oil-nado, lightning-nado. As these storms travel across the US wrecking cities, towns and national monuments, they seem to cover it with all the urgency of regular news. Is this commentary, or simply a way to deliver the names for all the cool CGI tornadoes to the audience? I don't know.
So what is there to say? I enjoyed it. It did not keep my interest very well. There were a couple of good jokes. 7/10 Game of the Year.
Watch This: If you like stupid action shark stuff.
Don't Watch This: If compelling character dynamics or clever plotting or anything that doesn't involve exploding sharks and D-list celebrities being squashed are important to you.
Learn More About Sharks: I was going to put a link to a BBC documentary series, but it broadcast last year and seems to be unavailable so you'll have to do your own research.
The story is nonsensical, being a simple and efficient way to string together scenes of action and disaster. The acting is mixed, especially in the case of The Hoff who swings between obviously-the-best-actor-in-the-room to wooden-plank-phoning-it-in-from-the-bathroom, occasionally in the same scene. None of this is important. The film is an excuse to create as many CGI shark action set-pieces as possible, with a few nods to creating stakes for character and audience and pacing so that we are not exhausted by chainsaw-shark interactions before the first ad-break.
If the film has anything to say apart from warning us of the danger of flying sharks, it may have a couple of evergreen messages. Firstly that billionaire scientists and technology can't save us from unexpected threats. Secondly, in their use of the media; as each tornado encounters something new they give it an exciting name boulder-nado, oil-nado, lightning-nado. As these storms travel across the US wrecking cities, towns and national monuments, they seem to cover it with all the urgency of regular news. Is this commentary, or simply a way to deliver the names for all the cool CGI tornadoes to the audience? I don't know.
So what is there to say? I enjoyed it. It did not keep my interest very well. There were a couple of good jokes. 7/10 Game of the Year.
Watch This: If you like stupid action shark stuff.
Don't Watch This: If compelling character dynamics or clever plotting or anything that doesn't involve exploding sharks and D-list celebrities being squashed are important to you.
Learn More About Sharks: I was going to put a link to a BBC documentary series, but it broadcast last year and seems to be unavailable so you'll have to do your own research.
Comments