Review of Deep Blue (2003) by Edith N — 02 Apr 2008

In one, we spend about an hour and a half with Pierce Brosnan and his mellifluous voice and intelligent narration. In the other, we spend about three quarters of an hour with Johnny Depp and Kate Winslet and their gentle voices and really dumb narration. In both, however, we get breathtaking photography--though I am left once again to mourn that these things are never released in 3D on DVD; [i]Deep Sea 3D[/i] would be even more stunning. And, of course, big though my TV is, it's no IMAX.

Both films are brief documentaries about one of the largest subjects on Earth--the life of the oceans. We travel from one pole to the other, from the surface and the birds above it to the black smokers far below. To me, the most memorable scene in all of it is the tornado of fish. A school of small, silver, glistening fish swim around one another, forming what literally looks like a cyclone. I can only guess at how much more impressive it would have been in 3D. There are also grim moments--the deaths of seals and belugas and baby grey whales. The reminder that one of the most dangerous predators, probably [i]the[/i] most dangerous predator, does not live in the ocean at all but goes to the sea in ships to kill seals and belugas and baby grey whales.

I want to slap the person who wrote the [i]Deep Sea 3D[/i] narration. We don't really need two narrators, and it feels largely as though the reason we have them is so that we can have inane conversations between them. The longer film manages with Brosnan alone, telling us in quiet tones about the life of creatures we may never have seen, creatures who live deep under the oceans that we humans have barely explored. Depp and Winslet are forced to comment on an animal's proboscis in tones that imply that one knows what it is and the other doesn't. I'm loath to cry sexism, but it is Depp who knows what it is, and Winslet expresses her unawareness in incredulity.

I'll admit, here, that I cannot remember which moments were in which film with any reliability. I'm fairly sure the penguins heading inland are from [i]Deep Blue[/i]; they are, after all, on the box. The baby whale, the belugas--these I recall as being from that one as well. As you can see, either way, I thought it was the better film. I never considered turning it off; I loved it. It wasn't just the filming; the filming in both were quite good. (IMAX knows what it's doing that way!) It was the fact that it respected the intelligence of its viewers. I know that IMAX movies are intended to be family movies, but just because it's a documentary for the whole family doesn't mean it has to patronize.

Indeed, the photography in both could, in theory, stand alone. It doesn't, because we are not programmed that way--we want the human voice--but the imagery here is breathtaking. The fate of the whales, the, well, [i]march[/i] of the penguins, the eerie deep-sea worlds that few humans will ever encounter face-to-face and cannot be reproduced in aquaria. The way neither film shies away from the nature of predators and prey. These are not the happy images of the sea that most movies intended for the whole family show us. We [i]see[/i] how animals interact, and it's not pretty.

Most people I know aren't really big on documentaries, and I think I know why. I'm currently watching another documentary, and it's largely talking heads and old photographs. It's also not friendly subject matter. To be fair, watching orcas swim into the shallowest water they can the better to eat young seals isn't friendly, either. But it's more . . . . More heartwarming, for all that. And, for pity's sake, even though [i]Deep Sea 3D[/i] is the lesser one, it's under an hour. Especially if you have kids, these documentaries are worth it. Did they like the penguins? Great! Introduce them to more of the animals that populate a majority of our world.