Dangerous Animals review – serial killer meets shark movie in this formulaic fizzer

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Dangerous Animals Blends Serial Killer and Shark Genres but Lacks Originality"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.9
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

In the film "Dangerous Animals," director Sean Byrne attempts to merge the genres of serial killer and shark movies, creating a narrative that aims to deliver a unique experience. The story centers around Tucker, played by Jai Courtney, who runs a business on the Gold Coast that takes thrill-seekers into shark-infested waters for a close encounter with the apex predators. However, the plot takes a dark turn as Tucker reveals his true nature: after luring tourists into the underwater cage, he murders them and records their deaths for his collection of snuff films. While the film initially presents an intriguing premise, it quickly falls into a predictable formula that lacks the freshness and excitement needed to captivate audiences. The protagonist, Zephyr, portrayed by Hassie Harrison, is introduced as a strong-willed surfer who avoids confrontation with the local population but finds herself in dire straits when kidnapped by Tucker. Despite her initial characterization as a solo operator, her captivity reduces her agency significantly, leaving her chained and immobile for much of the film, which hampers the tension and stakes of her struggle against her captor.

Although "Dangerous Animals" is crafted with a degree of skill, the adherence to genre conventions leads to a lack of originality that detracts from the viewing experience. The film's predictability is evident from early on, particularly with the character Moses, who is destined to notice Zephyr's disappearance and play a pivotal role in her rescue. The dialogue often feels contrived, lacking the spontaneity that could elevate the film's more humorous moments. A scene where Tucker encourages tourists to sing "Baby Shark" could have been a memorable highlight but instead falls flat. The film does feature some engaging moments, particularly when Tucker reveals his backstory and philosophical musings about sharks, yet these instances are not enough to elevate the overall narrative. Ultimately, while the performances, especially by Courtney, are commendable, the film's reliance on formulaic tropes and missed opportunities for bold storytelling leave it feeling like a missed chance at a truly unique thriller.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The review of "Dangerous Animals" presents a mixed perspective on the film, blending elements of horror and thriller genres. The critique suggests that while the film attempts to merge the serial killer narrative with a shark movie, it ultimately falls flat due to its lack of originality and depth.

Purpose and Audience Perception

The review likely aims to inform potential viewers about the film's shortcomings, especially for those who appreciate innovative storytelling in horror. By emphasizing the film's formulaic approach, the reviewer seeks to shape a negative perception, encouraging audiences to reconsider their interest in the film. This could be part of a broader trend in film criticism where reviewers hold filmmakers accountable for not pushing creative boundaries, particularly in genres that have established tropes.

Hidden Aspects and Trustworthiness

There does not appear to be anything overtly hidden in the review; it seems to articulate a straightforward critique. However, the review could be seen as part of a larger discourse that critiques mainstream cinema for lacking originality. In terms of trustworthiness, the review reflects a subjective opinion shaped by the reviewer’s previous experiences and expectations from the director, Sean Byrne. The film's negative portrayal suggests that the reviewer has a low threshold for formulaic storytelling.

Social and Economic Implications

In the broader context, this critique might influence audience turnout and box office performance, particularly for horror films that depend heavily on word-of-mouth and critical reception. If "Dangerous Animals" does poorly, it could signal to producers that audiences desire more innovative narratives in horror, potentially affecting funding and production decisions in the genre.

Target Communities

The film and its subsequent reviews may resonate more with horror enthusiasts who appreciate films that challenge norms. Conversely, those who favor traditional horror narratives might find it appealing despite the critique. The review’s tone suggests an audience that values originality and depth in storytelling.

Market Influence

While the review itself may not directly impact stock markets, the performance of films like "Dangerous Animals" can have implications for film studios' stock prices, particularly for those involved in the production and distribution of horror content. A poor reception could affect investor confidence in future projects from the same studio.

Geopolitical Context

There is no immediate geopolitical relevance in the review. However, the film's setting and narrative could be reflective of broader themes in Australian cinema, which often explores the darker sides of its culture and landscape. This can resonate with global audiences interested in international film storytelling.

AI Involvement

It’s unlikely that AI played a significant role in the writing of this review, as it features a personal and subjective voice typical of human critics. However, if AI were employed, it might have influenced the structure or language to enhance engagement or clarity, but the nuanced critique reflects a human perspective.

The review contains elements of manipulation through its critical language, which might sway readers' opinions before they have the chance to form their own. The use of descriptors like "foul fishy stew" and "stinky waft" serves to evoke a visceral reaction.

In conclusion, the review offers a critical lens on "Dangerous Animals," communicating a sense of disappointment in the film's execution. The review’s reliability stems from its clear articulation of the reviewer’s personal experience and expectations, even if it reflects a subjective viewpoint.

Unanalyzed Article Content

For a long time, serial killer and shark movies were separate forms of cinema; never the twain did meet. In Dangerous Animals they’ve been blended into one foul fishy stew, theoretically delivering the best of both worlds: a Wolf Creekian adventure with a creature feature twist. But, sadly, this collision of genres hasn’t resulted in any real freshness or flair, playing out with a stinky waft of the familiar.

Jai Courtney gets the meatiest and most entertaining role as Tucker, the owner of a Gold Coast business that ferries thrill-seekers out into shark-infested waters, where they observe the great beasts from inside an underwater cage. After they’re hauled back on to the boat, Tucker kills them and feeds them to the sharks, while filming their grisly deaths on a camcorder for his personal collection of VHS snuff films.

The director, Sean Byrne (who previously helmed two more impressive horror movies: The Devil’s Candy and The Loved Ones), doesn’t follow the Jaws approach of making us wait to see the villain. Tucker appears in the first scene, even before the person who’ll challenge and perhaps even defeat him: the free-spirited US surfer and vagabond Zephyr (Hassie Harrison). Her strategy of dealing with locals seems to be avoiding them – and who could blame her? Perhaps she’s seenWake in Fright,Welcome to Woop Woop,Wolf Creek,The Surferor any of the zillion other Aussie films in which foreigners get flayed by life down under.

Sign up for the fun stuff with our rundown of must-reads, pop culture and tips for the weekend, every Saturday morning

“There was nothing for me on land,” Zephyr tells a young man, Moses (Josh Heuston), when he asks why she got into surfing. The point is stressed that she’s a solo operator and no pushover – but, once kidnapped by Tucker, Zephyr doesn’t have a lot to work with, being chained and immobile for much of the movie.

Dangerous Animals is quite sharply made, and for a while I was with it, enjoying the midnight-movie vibes. But its adherence to formula and sheer predictability stifle the fun. From early on Moses’s trajectory is obvious: he’ll be the only person who notices that Zephyr is missing, goes searching for her and plays a role in the final act. It’s also clear that if Zephyr defeats the villain (partly a question of whether the producers envision sequels) it’ll only be after a few failed escape attempts.

Sometimes the dialogue feels prefabricated: after Tucker tells Zephyr she’s “hard as nails, like me”, you just know the protagonist will issue a curt rejection (she fires back: “I’m nothing like you!”). And moments that shouldpop don’t quite land. A scene in which Tucker coaxes a couple of tourists into a rendition of Baby Shark could have been legendarily strange and meme-able, comparable perhaps to a sledgehammer-wielding Nicolas Cage singing the Hokey Pokey inMom and Dad; instead it falls flat.

Moments with the villain monologising fare a little better. The first occurs when Tucker recounts how, as a child, being bitten by a great white resulted in a quasi-religious experience: “I’ve been wide awake ever since,” he says, like a crew member onthe Nebuchadnezzar. Later he argues that sea predators protect the fabric of the universe: “The shark brings order and, without this, chaos reigns.” This dude really likes sharks.

It’s a funny thing to want a villain to be morehammy, especially when the performance is as good as Courtney’s (as his foil, Harrison is also strong, albeit in a blander role). But I did crave more scenery-chewing, more flamboyance, more chutzpah – anything to free Dangerous Animals from the straitjacket of formula.

Dangerous Animals is in cinemas now

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian