In an age when so much of our movie-going ticket money goes to line the pockets of Hollywood's fat cats and A-list players, it's hard to recommend against paying to see a flick where a portion of the proceeds go to preserve the world's coral reefs. That's what Disneynature is promising to do this first week of release for the Mouse House's new documentary, "Oceans." Unfortunately, the film -- from directors Jacques Perrin and Jacques Cluzaud - has something of a been-there, seen-it-before aura that prevents it from feeling as special as it might have otherwise been.
This is not a knock against the film's purpose or nobility. And some of the undersea camerawork by the courageous crew and intrepid team of researchers is undeniably eye-popping and fascinating. I just was looking to see something special a la "Winged Migration" or "March of the Penguins" -- something that was worth forking over cash-money to see as opposed to just turning on the Discovery Channel or National Geographic and watching one of their fine undersea documentaries at home.
Narrated by Pierce Brosnan, the two Jacqueses follow a whole host of sea creatures - from dolphins, sharks, and whales to crabs, eels, and (most adorably) sea lions - as they go about their daily rituals of swimming and feeding. Therein lies the problem. These are beautiful creatures worthy of protecting. But like watching a giant aquarium or fish bowl for 90 minutes...uh, they don't really do all that much. Interest wanes. Sure, if you are interested in oceanography and marine biology, this film will certainly prove to be enthralling. But if you aren't or have only a passing interest, the filmmakers just don't do a good enough job making you care.
Part of the problem is structure. The film doesn't settle on three or four specific creatures to follow throughout a la "Earth" while imparting its larger teachings. It also opts not to break the film down by the individual major oceans and what makes each different. It actually would have been interesting to hear the differences between survival in the Atlantic as opposed to the Pacific, the Indian, and the Arctic.
Even worse, narrator Pierce Brosnan falls into the same trap Jim Carrey did with last year's "Under the Sea" of making his voiceover work a little too slow and ponderous. The film is pretty much 80 percent cameras following fish as they glide and swim through the water, and the former James Bond narrates it all like he's trying to read a child to sleep. "Look at this w-o-o-r-r-rld of fish and mammals and b-i-r-r-r-r-ds..."
Now, of course, the film isn't a total wash. Far from it. Individual sequences prove to be quite captivating regardless of one's connection to the oceans. One of the more effective passages is the footage the two Jacqueses capture of the ocean's power. Waves crash near a seemingly defenseless seaside village. Boats and ships of varying sizes rock violently up and down and from side to side amid storm waves crashing across their bows.
In terms of aquatic life, there is a really cool sequence showing life at the very bottom of the sea, as all sorts of exotic fish and oddball crabs scurry the moonlit ocean floor. Earlier in the film, dolphins and predatory birds are joined by sharks and a whale in a sardine-feeding frenzy that skirts the G-rated edge of being true to nature without being overly graphic for the young audiences the filmmakers hope to be playing to here. The birds, in particular, dive-bomb from above, raining down across the waves like torpedoes to snatch the fish from under the water and carry them back to the sky.
In other parts, though, "Oceans" is maddeningly vague. For instance, the film captures an undersea convergence of seemingly hundreds and hundreds of spider crabs. It's photographed like a "Braveheart"-style battle royale as these myriad of crabs meet head on. But the film never makes it clear if this is indeed some kind of massive turf war or an enormous mating ritual or just a seasonal convergence where all the crabbies meet on their way to other destinations. I truly would like to have learned more about this amazing phenomenon.
I guess that's what has left me such a "cold fish" on "Oceans." The educational value here isn't as great as it could have been. OK, maybe to a 5-year-old, there is a lot to learn. But not to anyone who has seen even a handful of documentaries on the sea and its inhabitants. Some great photography, some noble science, and a fine social message, however, earn this a 5.5 out of 10. (T. Durgin)
![[Screen It]](/images/underground_header.jpg)