Register  |  Sign In
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Jul 10, 2025 3:58 am



Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
 Water for Elephants 

What grade would you give this film?
A 43%  43%  [ 3 ]
B 29%  29%  [ 2 ]
C 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
D 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
F 29%  29%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 7

 Water for Elephants 
Author Message
loyalfromlondon
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm
Posts: 19697
Location: ville-marie
Post Water for Elephants
Water for Elephants

Image

Quote:
Water for Elephants is a 2011 American romantic drama film based on Sara Gruen's novel of the same name, directed by Francis Lawrence, from a screenplay by Richard LaGravenese. It stars Reese Witherspoon, Robert Pattinson and Christoph Waltz.

The film was released in the United States and Canada on April 22, 2011, and received mixed to positive reviews from film critics; it garnered a "Fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes based upon aggregated reviews, and a rating of "mixed or average reviews" at Metacritic.

_________________
Magic Mike wrote:
zwackerm wrote:
If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes.


Same.


Algren wrote:
I don't think. I predict. ;)


Fri Apr 22, 2011 12:34 am
Profile
Rachel McAdams Fan

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am
Posts: 14624
Location: LA / NYC
Post Re: Water for Elephants
A refreshingly old-fashioned romance that is gorgeously filmed and very faithful to the source material for the most part. Performances are strong across the board, with Christoph Waltz in particular standing out and stealing every scene he is in. B+/A-


Sat Apr 23, 2011 1:28 am
Profile YIM
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Water for Elephants
An outright stinker.

Outside of it's colorful sepia-toned setting, Water For Elephants offers nothing to the rubes hustled through the turnstiles.

The usually ebullient Reese Witherspoon is on full autopilot here, perhaps she's just fulfilling some childhood wish to be in the circus, but she shows little interest in the proceedings.

Edward in the role of Jacob? Huh! What?! But seriously, I have nothing against Robert Pattinson, he was probably the best thing about this sorry mess, though he has zip all to work with.

...and apparently they were writing Christoph Waltz's part on the fly as they filmed, because little forethought appeared to be given to his character arc.

Yep, this cheese is rancid.


1 out of 5.


Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:45 pm
Profile
Superman: The Movie
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 21230
Location: Massachusetts
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Maybe it's because of this week and a half long head and chest cold I've had, but I liked this a lot more than I ever thought I would. Pattinson and Witherspoon are never quite sold together as a could-be couple as their "chemistry" is almost non-existent (nor does the film give them enough "bonding" scenes), but their individual performances made it work just enough for me to have liked it. Christoph Waltz too delivers despite not being given enough. I think the story could've benefited if he had a firm psychological grasp over Pattinson and Witherspoon. There's one good scene towards the end of the film where he engages them in psychological warfare after he basically figures out they're in love. I think it would've been better if he had found out sooner and we could've had more scenes with him messing with the two, thus in return making him even more evil. Animal abuser? Sure that's fine, but it was too easy a route in making his character evil.

But despite the complaints I have, I was pleasantly surprised. It's old-fashioned, it works, and it's nice to know that Robert Pattinson can actually act. It makes my hate for the success those Twilight films have had just a little less.

*** (B)

_________________
My DVD Collection
Marty McGee (1989-2005)

If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.


Tue Apr 26, 2011 7:40 pm
Profile WWW
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 35248
Location: Minnesota
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Did you not see Remember Me? He was great in that.


Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:08 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Mike wrote:
Did you not see Remember Me? He was great in that.

I agree - - an underrated performance and an underrated movie.


Thu Apr 28, 2011 7:07 am
Profile
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48678
Location: Arlington, VA
Post Re: Water for Elephants
I loved this. Lush, grand and romantic in all the right places, and a faithful adaptation of the novel. Robert Pattinson and Reese Witherspoon don't have red-hot chemistry but it's believable enough to add to the film. Pattinson finally displays some recognizable, non-brooding talent, while Witherspoon sparkles a more than she has in recent films. The scene stealer is, of course, the terrific Christoph Waltz. A-


Last edited by Libs on Sun May 01, 2011 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:31 pm
Profile
Extraordinary

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Libs wrote:
I loved this. Lush, grand and romantic in all the right places, and a faithful adaptation of the novel. Robert Pattinson and Reese Witherspoon don't have red-hot chemistry but it's believable enough to add to the film. Pattinson finally displays some recognizable, non-brooding talent, while Witherspoon sparkles a more than she has in recent films. The scene stealer is, of course, the terrific Christoph Waltz. B+

QFT

I want to still laugh at this review unedited in 20 years.

:funny:

___________________________________________

Libs wrote:
You really are an asshole.

Stay classy, Libs.


Last edited by Bradley Witherberry on Sat May 07, 2011 6:28 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sun May 01, 2011 6:24 am
Profile
Sbil

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48678
Location: Arlington, VA
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Bradley Witherberry wrote:
Libs wrote:
I loved this. Lush, grand and romantic in all the right places, and a faithful adaptation of the novel. Robert Pattinson and Reese Witherspoon don't have red-hot chemistry but it's believable enough to add to the film. Pattinson finally displays some recognizable, non-brooding talent, while Witherspoon sparkles a more than she has in recent films. The scene stealer is, of course, the terrific Christoph Waltz. B+

QFT

I want to still laugh at this review unedited in 20 years.

:funny:


You really are an asshole.


Sun May 01, 2011 11:30 am
Profile
Wallflower
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am
Posts: 35248
Location: Minnesota
Post Re: Water for Elephants
I enjoyed this film a lot. It's not a masterpiece, but it's a well-made and entertaining old-fashioned romance. Robert Pattinson and Reese Witherspoon were very good. It has been said by some that together they don't have the best of chemistry, and while they didn't quite make me swoon I did find them to work fairly well. Both give solid performances in their own right, especially the ever-charismatic Robert Pattinson. I can't say it enough. He has a solid acting career ahead of him. He gets a lot of crap for the "Twilight" films but he certainly has that something that will take him farther when those films are done, and it's not just his dreamy good looks. Those certainly won't hurt though.

This is a really nice, romantic film.

B+/A-


Sat May 07, 2011 3:02 am
Profile
Forum General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm
Posts: 8627
Location: Syracuse, NY
Post Re: Water for Elephants
It was a very enjoyable movie but unspectacular. Acting was fine across the board, as was the direction. It was a nice flick to look at. I really don't have anything to say about it other than it was a nice movie.

7/10

_________________
Top 10 Films of 2016

1. La La Land
2. Other People
3. Nocturnal Animals
4. Swiss Army Man
5. Manchester by the Sea
6. The Edge of Seventeen
7. Sing Street
8. Indignation
9. The Lobster
10. Hell or High Water


Sat May 14, 2011 8:20 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Pure Phase
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am
Posts: 34865
Location: Maryland
Post Re: Water for Elephants
A decent, old-fashioned romantic melodrama. It's definitely beautiful to behold. Jack Fisk, Terrence Malick's longtime production designer, and twice Oscar nominated costume designer Jacqueline West (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) deliver per usual. The period cities, the crowded circus trains, etc. Wall-to-wall visual splendor. Reese Witherspoon and Robert Pattinson don't have much chemistry, which is unfortunate, but they are both fine by themselves. Pattinson is a born movie star (the smolder!), and he is quickly growing as an actor. Better than both, however, is Christoph Waltz. It could be argued he's repeating his iconic villainous turn in Inglourious Basterds, but even so, the returns are hardly diminished. He's compelling throughout, expertly transitioning between larger-than-life charisma and primal fury.

The major misstep here is how streamlined the entire enterprise is. The inherent grittiness and sexuality of the '30s circus life, and the sense of community between the misfits and rebels, is hinted at, but director Francis Lawrence keeps it in the corner of the frame, out of mind and nearly out of sight. By focusing so intently on only the Titanic-esque love triangle and its predictable, though still poignant, trajectory, Lawrence has missed a great opportunity to create a grander, more memorable experience.

B

_________________
ImageImageImage

1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game


Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:46 pm
Profile
Let's Call It A Bromance
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 7:22 pm
Posts: 12333
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Water for Elephants shows that, once again, Robert Pattinson can handle a film on his own, outside of Twilight, and play quite a good role. Reese Witherspoon does a good job beside Pattinson but I don’t believe she got as much of a time to shine here as she could of. Christoph Waltz is ok though I think part of his weakness came from how his character was written. The film goes by pretty simply and looks beautiful in the process. **1/2


Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:43 am
Profile WWW
You must have big rats
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 92093
Location: Bonn, Germany
Post Re: Water for Elephants
Hans Landa was very good in this.

_________________
The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!

Image


Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:09 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 14 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.