Quantcast
Connect with us

Reviews

‘Chum’ Review – Get Your A.I. Trash Machine Out of Our Animal Attack Films!

Published

on

Chum review

It’s a rare but understood truth that the peak entry in the shark attack subgenre came at the very beginning with Steven Spielberg’s 1975 summer blockbuster, Jaws. That’s not the way it usually works, but while Spielberg’s film was immediately chased by copycats and knockoffs – some of which are a lot of fun – it’s continued to hold the title of best killer shark movie for over half a century.

Until now.

Ha, sorry, that was cruel, but sometimes you have to make your own entertainment when the movie you’re watching and writing about offers none of its own. Chum is the kind of bottom-of-the-barrel shark flick that we’ve seen a lot of in recent years, with interchangeable titles like Great White, Shark Bait, and Maneater. A sunny setting (usually the best thing about the movie), obnoxious characters, poor writing, and horrible effects – that’s the recipe for far too many shark attack movies over the past decade, and Chum ticks off each of those boxes in quick order.

It stands apart from those other bad films, though, with the addition of two simple letters. One is an A, and the other is an I, and together they spell shitty, job-killing digital effects. More on that in a minute, but for now, let’s dive into the guts of Chum.

We open on a fishing trawler moving through the water off Malta while a man provides voiceover. Roy (Jim Klock) talks solemnly about the endless ocean, his lovely wife, and the painful collision between the two that came when a Great White shark bit her in half. “I am not the sea,” he says, “I’m a man, and a man does not forget.”

A quick smash to the title card is followed by the introduction of Tina (Alice Eve) and Tom (Eric Michael Cole) at their wedding reception in Malta. There’s already trouble in paradise, but a last minute wedding gift sees them heading out to sea for a three-hour tour the next afternoon with three friends and Tina’s sister, Sadie (Elle Haymond). A couple of very contrived beats later, and the yacht is sinking and in flames, forcing them to be rescued by a conveniently nearby Roy.

He’s not their savior, though, and instead drugs and binds the gang with the intention of using them for a very particular purpose. It’s vengeance he’s after, and he intends to use them as bait in an effort to attract and then kill the shark that ate half of his wife five years ago. Roy apparently got a tracker on the beast at some point, and over the years, he’s tried luring it in with fish entrails, seals, cats, and dogs – but it only responds to live human chum. Uh oh!

A shark attack movie doesn’t need to be entirely original in its concept or execution for it to work, so I’m not put off that the filmmakers obviously watched Sean Byrne’s Dangerous Animals before concocting the story for Chum. The human antagonist is the only thing they lifted, though, as they apparently decided they just didn’t need any of that film’s fun, suspense, or onscreen/offscreen talent. Director/co-writer Jonathan Zuck and co-writer Joe Leone – this is Leone’s thirteenth produced script since 2017, a feat that grows less impressive if you actually watch those other movies – try to pair character drama with the twin terrors of a madman and a hungry shark, but everything here just falls flat.

What could have been an engaging piece of sunlit terror instead stumbles and falls beneath clunky dialogue and even worse delivery. The cast, Eve surprisingly included, are as unconvincing at saying “good morning” as they are at exclaiming “Jesus! Are you okay?” after pulling a spear from their friend and watching the blood gush out. Did I laugh when someone tells Roy, “You know, for a shark hunter, you’re not very good at this,” or when someone else refers to the aquatic threat as “some aggro incel shark”? Yes, but that says more about my desperate need for entertainment than it does the quality of the movie.

There’s a genuine litany of dumb things worth criticizing, questioning, and calling out with Chum  – one friend confronts Roy because they haven’t seen the shore for hours, but not only has the shore been visible throughout the film, it’s literally in the background of the scene when he says it. Slow motion and repeated, unnecessary flashbacks are frequently used to bolster the eighty-three-minute (pre-credits) running time. The red color tinting whenever there’s blood in the water is horrendous. We’re in Malta, but everyone, including the police, is American? A certain character is given an insulting, post-death voiceover. Climate change is lazily tacked on as a motivation for the shark’s behavior.

There’s also an argument to be made that the film’s serious tone is part of the problem. The issue isn’t that neither the writing nor the performances can deliver on that seriousness, which they can’t, but instead, deadly serious shark attack movies just rarely seem to work. There are examples of great ones like Open Water and The Reef, but in recent years, the overwhelming majority of the shark movies that deliver the goods all seem to have a sense of humor and a genuine personality. They’re not comedies, but from The Shallows and Deep Blue Sea 3 (shut up, it’s a really good time) to Under Paris and Thrash, the shark films that are having fun are the shark films that are fun.

But yes, better scripts, direction, performances, and visual effects would also help.

Which brings us, finally, to the ugly ass elephant in the room – Chum’s use of A.I. to create what looks like all of its shark carnage. The modern ideal will almost always be some combination of practical effects and traditionally created digital effects to breathe life into your film’s sharks, and even then, the end results can still be a mixed bag. Most recent films tend to rely almost exclusively on the digital, with plenty of the sharks looking laughable as a result, but there’s still at least the solace of knowing that hey, real digital FX animators were paid real money to create those ugly visuals, so kudos to them on their journey towards becoming better.

Chum doesn’t list a single digital effects artist in their end credits. Not one. There are a few supervisors and producers, but not a single VFX artist, compositor, or animator.

The charitable explanation is that the filmmakers just decided not to credit the individual artists for some reason. There’s no listing for the end credits song (called “Crimson Tide,” maybe?) either, so it’s entirely possible. The more likely explanation, though, is found in the film’s only credited digital intermediate house, Tunnel Post, which states on their site that their “Artificial Intelligence division augments all of Tunnel’s business disciplines.” A.I. has its place, obviously, and Tunnel’s use of it in other areas might be understandable, but replacing human artists with a garbage machine is just poor form.

Some of you might not care about that aspect, and I can hear you insensitive jerks now yelling, “Get off your soapbox, Hunter, and just tell us how the effects look!” Fair enough. The shark attack sequences in Chum look pretty darn good if you watch from fifty feet away while squinting through a fog bank and some partially closed Venetian blinds.

The A.I. sequences blend real shark and human footage with digital sharks and people to make it look like characters are not just beside the shark in the water, but actually being chomped and eaten. The quickest of glances might seem convincing, partly because we’re just not used to seeing “real” sharks biting down on “real” people, but watch for more than a half second or so, and it’s clearly a cartoon.

The shark looks too smooth, the people sometimes fluctuate weirdly – one character jumps onto the back of the shark and seems to temporarily grow three pant sizes while in the air – and it just never feels like a tangible situation or threat. Try chumming some of this shit, indeed.

Look, if you’re anything like me – well, first off, congratulations – but more relevant to the point at hand, you’re going to watch this movie regardless of what I say. I get it. Animal attack films are an addiction that I am unable and unwilling to quit. (I’m the same way with Bigfoot movies, and hoo boy, let me tell you, the decline rate on those is even steeper.) There are fun, effective shark films with shoddy effects, movies that entertain despite their visuals, but Chum is not one of them.

No thrills, no suspense, no entertainment value, no real effort, no digital effects artists, and no reason to watch. But you will, so I hope you enjoy it more than I do.

Chum releases in theaters on June 5, 2026.

1 skull out of 5

Click to comment

Reviews

‘Above & Below’ Review: Antonio Banderas Steals the Show in This Bloody Shark Thriller

Published

on

Above & Below Review

Killer shark movies seem to be riding high this year, more in quantity than quality, but still – they’re one of the most ubiquitous subgenres in horror right now. The latest entry comes from Jesse V. Johnson, an established action director dipping his toe into the realm of animal attack cinema for the first time (despite what the titles of his films Savage Dog and White Elephant might suggest). Above & Below features some very hungry sharks alongside a substantial body count, but it’s some very bad men who rack up most of the kills.

A group of friends is enjoying a fun vacation in Mexico when the screw-up of the bunch, Kyle (Diego Llinas), brings them an offer they can’t refuse. They’re being treated to an exclusive cage diving trip on a big, beautiful, luxury power catamaran with a guarantee of seeing some sharks up close. Kyle’s sister, Tatiana (Laura Marano), is hesitant, but she’s overruled by her boyfriend TJ (Donncha Tynan), and their couple friends, Kayle (Christina Ochoa) and Danny (Ryan Bertroche).

Should be fun, why not, what could go wrong, and so on, but then a pair of quiet heavies (Louis Mandylor, Jess Liaudin) with matching Louis Vuitton bags join the passenger list. And then another boat joins them at sea, and three armed men (including a terrifically entertaining Antonio Banderas) climb aboard. And then those hungry sharks aren’t hungry for long.

Like the recent Dangerous Animals and The Bay, Johnson’s Above & Below takes the wise tact of casting its sharks as an underlying threat instead of the main obstacle. They’re both dangerous and deadly when encountered, but the film blends its genre conventions to zero in on mad, greedy, and murderous humans as the true antagonists. It’s a good thing, too, as the actors bringing those villains to life give the film’s best, most engaging performances.

Writer Anthony Steven Giordano doesn’t give this group of friends much to work with – Kyle is a troublemaker, and Tatiana is planning to break up with TJ, but there’s otherwise very little at play between them in regard to drama or depth. The performances, while mostly competent, match that level of detail, and it’s instead the bad guys who find the most to play with as both characters and performers.

Mandylor carries the familiar but fun bulldog persona he’s mastered through a few earlier films with Johnson (including The Debt Collector and its sequel), and his Martin is the villainous loose cannon equivalent of Kyle’s less harmful but more obnoxious pain in the ass. It’s Kyle’s mistake that lands his friends on this boat, but it’s Martin’s error in judgment that signs nearly everyone’s death warrant. Liaudin has the less showier role of the pair as Garrison, but there’s a charismatic gentility about him running in interesting contrast to his muscular frame and cauliflower ears.

It’s Banderas’ Carlos, though, who steals the show in Above & Below and makes it clear why it’s often worth bringing a name talent into the mix for these direct-to-video genre pictures. (That said, they probably should have bumped his paycheck a little bit higher so they didn’t have to use painfully obvious stand-ins when his character is filmed from behind.) He plays the film’s big bad with a joyous sense of life that he can turn on a dime into abject cruelty. It’s fun to watch, and it adds an entertaining bit of craziness into some otherwise serious and occasionally meandering beats.

Less successful, and the film’s biggest issue on the performance front, is Marano’s efforts, particularly when Tatiana’s talking underwater. The SCUBA helmets are wired so divers can talk to each other, and while the scenes are actually shot underwater (and look good as a result), the dialogue performances were clearly recorded later. Nothing wrong with that in theory, but Marano’s recording booth performance never matches or even approaches the intensity of the underwater scenes she’s voicing – bodies are falling around her, sharks are taking bites, and she sounds like she’s lounging in the bathtub on a lazy Sunday afternoon. It doesn’t get much more convincing once she’s back topside, but the script is equally to blame on that count.

Still, flat performance aside, Johnson knows how to craft thrills and suspense infused with character and even the smallest of action beats. Part of the film sees criminal threats on board the boat and shark dangers below, and he cuts between them while rarely losing their sense of tension. The script also succeeds at keeping viewers guessing as to who will survive the excursion, and that’s no small feat for these kinds of films.

While stunts and squibs keep things somewhat lively above the water, Johnson and friends find some solid set pieces below the surface too. The sharks are CG creations, but they look pretty good – it’s really only the CG blood that screams “fake!” every time it appears – and deliver minor thrills as they glide out of the shadows to take a bite or do a quick drive-by. Characters are in a shark cage that’s been dropped to the ocean floor, and as their air tanks run low, they’re forced to exit the cage and retrieve air from the dead, leading to some fun interactions with chewed-upon dummy corpses. One encounter involving Tatiana, Martin, and a Great White shark is a real high point of creativity and execution.

The film is set in Mexico but filmed in Bulgaria and the Canary Islands. Land sequences are limited enough that you probably won’t even notice, and the bulk of the film is convincing with its offshore setting. Similarly, the underwater filming – presumably in a tank – adds an additional layer to the illusion so that you feel the dangerous isolation of it all.

At the end of the day, it’s Johnson’s direction and the performances by Banderas, Mandylor, and Liaudin that might make Above & Below worth your time. The script teases a recurrent theme about the dangerous outcome of keeping secrets, but as with the characters and anything resembling logic, it ultimately does nothing with it. Johnson and his bad guys fight to keep it all afloat, but a better script could have given them even more to work with. Of course, no one comes to these movies for the script anyway, but you’ll still wish there was far more meat on its bones.

Above & Below swims into select theaters today, July 29.

2.5 out of 5 skulls

Continue Reading