LoginWater for Elephants Reviews
For Elephant
Posted : 6 years, 11 months ago on 5 May 2017 04:57
My Point 5/10 is for Elephant and Circus, the movie is boring and the two lead have no chemistry,good story but bad storytelling- bad directing
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Old Champaign In A New Bottle
Posted : 11 years, 7 months ago on 24 September 2012 03:29
For centuries Circus has been an attractive subject for film makers. Some really great films have been made on Circus over the years. The complex and demanding circus atmosphere presents a compelling script of human struggle. Behind every laugh there may be lots of tears behind the make up. Add that to the 1931 depression hit atmosphere and we are up against a brilliant set up. Water For Elephants builds up it's story based on this moving premise before throwing it up for the sake of a forced love story.
Water For Elephants starts on a mature note through the recollection of an old gentleman and slowly the flashback takes us to 1931 when a young Polish American Lad Jacob loses his parents and ends up in a Circus Company as a Vet. Very quickly he becomes popular with his inmates and in particular his insane boss August brilliantly played by the awesome Christoph Waltz. Then joins the real attraction of the film Rosie, the giant Elephant. Jacob becomes her Bull man and in a way becomes close to the star of the Circus - Marlena, wife of August. All of a sudden love blossoms and the story takes a predictable turn.
The story had so much potential but neither it chooses to follow the human angle under stress nor the tension between August & Jacob instead the focus turned on to the love story between Jacob & Marlena, but lack of any chemistry between the lead pair fails to put life into the love affair. The second half of the film clearly lacks vision and conviction.
The acting department has a mix bag of performances. Where the supporting cast is lively and believable the lead lacks the punch. Robert Pattinson proves himself once again and surely he should confine himself only to the Twilight Series and leave acting to others. He proves with every scene that acting is not his cup of tea. He seems in total pain while emoting any scene what so ever. I used to be a big fan of Reese Witherspoon but She too is disappointing as Marlena. But Christoph Waltz has been a revelation once again. It felt like he just changed the costume but retained the skin of Col. Hans Landa.
All in all Water for Elephants is a mix bag experience for me. I loved the set up but hated the turn of the story to an romantic end.
I am going with 6 out of 10 for Water for Elephants. It's a combination of two stories. Whereas one of it fascinates me the other half completely disappoints me. Watch it if you like soppy love stories.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Water for Elephants review
Posted : 12 years, 1 month ago on 24 March 2012 10:58
I was hesitant about seeing this movie as i am not eatly a robert pattinson fan. But as soon as it started i loved it. It has earned a place on my favorite movies list, for sure.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
A heart-warming and delightful surprise.
Posted : 12 years, 8 months ago on 7 August 2011 01:44
Let's face it, over the past 10 years, how many times have we seen a film with a romantic story that has a visually colourful background to it? Having said that, Water For Elephants really looked just that, but the fact that it involves a person I can't stand: Robert Pattinson, and a person who I am really idolizing as of late: Christoph Waltz, it really was going to either be really rubbish or be a surprisingly enjoyable film.Water For Elephants really surprised me and it was actually a really pleasurable and heart-warming story. It is a personal story that did bring back memories of Tim Burton's Big Fish that mixes us with the modern world and meeting different kinds of people and taking us on different adventures.
Water For Elephants is a really delightful film to watch as well if you are an animal lover! Sure, there are some hard to watch moments but the elephant within the film, has a mind of its own and its own character, so you can easily fall in love with the elephant. Although, it doesn't fit for all families, it is perhaps suitable more for adults who have strong stomachs and like seeing films that features a lot of beauty and love. A key quality that Water For Elephants has which not many recent films have that are set in the early days of the world (especially around the war), is the reality of going back to history and making it a thought-provoking film. The production was just splendid (especially the settings and costumes) and from one's perspective, Water For Elephants deserves the Academy Award nominations for Best Art Direction and Best Costume Design.
After his parents' death, Jacob Jankoski is left penniless and homeless. Events lead him to joining the circus as their vet, working under their unstable boss August whose violent tendencies give everyone reason to be cautious around him, including his beautiful and quiet wife Marlena, whom August is very possessive of and who Jacob finds himself soon falling in love with.
Guilt was running through my veins watching this seeing as I'm one of those people who cannot stand Robert Pattinson, but all levities aside, I took a step back and simply tried to enjoy it. However, despite that Pattinson still isn't a top-notch actor, he actually wasn't that bad at all in Water For Elephants, so credit goes to him for the leading role and making it sublime enough to enjoy. He portrays the young Jacob, who in many ways has similarities with Edward Bloom in Big Fish (even young Jacob looks and dresses like young Edward did). Just to make Water For Elephants an even more pleasurable film to watch, there was the beautiful and talented Reese Witherspoon who took the role of the romantic interest of the protagonist (but also the wife of the antagonist). Witherspoon fitted the role really well and looked great. As for the romance between her and Jacob, it had similarities with Baz Luhrmann's Australia and perhaps even James Cameron's Titanic, so it did have its passionate and heart melting moments, but had its heartbreaking segments at the same time.
Despite being in his 50s now, Christoph Waltz really is becoming a Hollywood star after his Oscar winning role in Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds and out of his most recent roles since then, he has portrayed the villain, but all three are totally different kids of characters. It is a shame that he wasn't as recognised then like he is now. He provides a side that we hadn't seen from him before, and that isn't like the villainous murderer like we've seen previously, but a rather romantic side in the scenes with Reese Witherspoon. So, I think Waltz could perhaps pull off a strong hero as well as a strong villain in the near future.
Back in 2007, director Francis Lawrence gave us I Am Legend but this time, he gives us something totally different. The direction was a bit like in Big Fish and Australia by mixing a lot of beauty and artistic design with a very deep, personal and affectionate story. He manages to make it perhaps easy enough for young people to watch, but it is definitely an adult's story as well. At times, it even felt like it really was a film made in the 1930s seeing as the background design was fantastic, and there was strong character development so, the producers and the crew members behind the camera deserve credit.
Overall, Water For Elephants is a surprisingly beautiful and genuinely heartfelt story that will perhaps be the most surprising film of 2011 that I will see. It has what a romantic tale should: the charm, the drama and strong background stories within that could lead to tears. The film in a nutshell is basically Big Fish mixed with Australia/Titanic film. So, if you're looking for a heart warmer in 2011, Water For Elephants is the film for you.
Water For Elephants is a really delightful film to watch as well if you are an animal lover! Sure, there are some hard to watch moments but the elephant within the film, has a mind of its own and its own character, so you can easily fall in love with the elephant. Although, it doesn't fit for all families, it is perhaps suitable more for adults who have strong stomachs and like seeing films that features a lot of beauty and love. A key quality that Water For Elephants has which not many recent films have that are set in the early days of the world (especially around the war), is the reality of going back to history and making it a thought-provoking film. The production was just splendid (especially the settings and costumes) and from one's perspective, Water For Elephants deserves the Academy Award nominations for Best Art Direction and Best Costume Design.
After his parents' death, Jacob Jankoski is left penniless and homeless. Events lead him to joining the circus as their vet, working under their unstable boss August whose violent tendencies give everyone reason to be cautious around him, including his beautiful and quiet wife Marlena, whom August is very possessive of and who Jacob finds himself soon falling in love with.
Guilt was running through my veins watching this seeing as I'm one of those people who cannot stand Robert Pattinson, but all levities aside, I took a step back and simply tried to enjoy it. However, despite that Pattinson still isn't a top-notch actor, he actually wasn't that bad at all in Water For Elephants, so credit goes to him for the leading role and making it sublime enough to enjoy. He portrays the young Jacob, who in many ways has similarities with Edward Bloom in Big Fish (even young Jacob looks and dresses like young Edward did). Just to make Water For Elephants an even more pleasurable film to watch, there was the beautiful and talented Reese Witherspoon who took the role of the romantic interest of the protagonist (but also the wife of the antagonist). Witherspoon fitted the role really well and looked great. As for the romance between her and Jacob, it had similarities with Baz Luhrmann's Australia and perhaps even James Cameron's Titanic, so it did have its passionate and heart melting moments, but had its heartbreaking segments at the same time.
Despite being in his 50s now, Christoph Waltz really is becoming a Hollywood star after his Oscar winning role in Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds and out of his most recent roles since then, he has portrayed the villain, but all three are totally different kids of characters. It is a shame that he wasn't as recognised then like he is now. He provides a side that we hadn't seen from him before, and that isn't like the villainous murderer like we've seen previously, but a rather romantic side in the scenes with Reese Witherspoon. So, I think Waltz could perhaps pull off a strong hero as well as a strong villain in the near future.
Back in 2007, director Francis Lawrence gave us I Am Legend but this time, he gives us something totally different. The direction was a bit like in Big Fish and Australia by mixing a lot of beauty and artistic design with a very deep, personal and affectionate story. He manages to make it perhaps easy enough for young people to watch, but it is definitely an adult's story as well. At times, it even felt like it really was a film made in the 1930s seeing as the background design was fantastic, and there was strong character development so, the producers and the crew members behind the camera deserve credit.
Overall, Water For Elephants is a surprisingly beautiful and genuinely heartfelt story that will perhaps be the most surprising film of 2011 that I will see. It has what a romantic tale should: the charm, the drama and strong background stories within that could lead to tears. The film in a nutshell is basically Big Fish mixed with Australia/Titanic film. So, if you're looking for a heart warmer in 2011, Water For Elephants is the film for you.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
An average movie
Posted : 12 years, 10 months ago on 28 June 2011 07:38
To be honest, I wasn’t expecting much from this flick but someone gave me an illegal copy of the damned thing so I thought I might as well check it out. Indeed, ever since Robert Pattinson showed up in the ‘Twilight’ franchise, the guy got a terrible reputation and everything he touched was automatically labelled as ‘garbage’ which was probably not really fair. Anyway, coming back to our main feature, even though I had some rather low expectations, I thought it was not so bad after all. Indeed, first of all, the whole thing looked really neat and the three leads (Robert Pattinson, Reese Witherspoon, Christoph Waltz) all gave some convincing perfomances. It was actually quite refreshing to see Pattinson in something else than 'Twilight'. Unfortunately, the story was rather weak and it would have been more interesting if the characters would have been more nuanced. Indeed, the character played by Pattinson was just way too nice and the character portrayed by Waltz was just way too despicable. To conclude, some amazing movies have been made in the past about the circus ('The Circus' by Chaplin, 'La Strada' by Fellini) but even though this flick was not one of them, it was rather well done and entertaining enough so I think it is still worth a look.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Water for Elephants review
Posted : 12 years, 11 months ago on 10 May 2011 06:20
i loved this movie when i went to see it, was funny, sad, romantic and just amazing, robert played a good role in this, finding it hard to admit but better than twilight. I love jacob in this, suck a nice caring guy, best movie ive seen rob in, maybe the best movie ive seen this year.Hopefully rob get the true respect for this movie he desrves instead of being remembered for edward cullen
0 comments, Reply to this entry