MovieChat Forums > Water for Elephants (2011) Discussion > Sorry but the movie isn't that good

Sorry but the movie isn't that good


This is one of those situations where the book is better. I understand when a book is translated into film things need to be changed, but there were too many unnecessary changes and condensed material. I suggest people see the movie before the read the book to avoid disappointment. Even if I had viewed the film only, It was lacking. Everything seemed rushed and the romance wasn't realistic.

reply

I thought it was okay.

The best things are last

reply

Watched this yesterday. It seemed to be completely hamstrung by the PG rating. The romance wasn't romantic, the violence wasn't violent. It was about as edgy as a Harry Potter film. For a film that was supposed to be about passion it seemed desperately flat.

reply

Someone who read the book told me that it originally starts in a nursing home... It seemed like the movie axed most of the 'depressing' material, but in the process neutered any balls the movie could potentially have had.

~ There is nothing more pathetic than an aging hipster.

reply

I thought it was a lovely movie. I like it a lot!

I will say that there was almost zero chemistry between Pattinson and Witherspoon, but that aside, I thought it had a beautiful, magical atmosphere with some really tender moments.

Maybe I'm just a softie when it comes to animal movies :)

reply

I read the book. It wasn't that good, either. Not bad. Just not that great.

reply

I would have to agree. I've read the book a number of times and I absolutely adore it. But this film was so lacking, I not only was disappointed by the transition from paper to film, but I was actually upset that I bought this movie (and I bought it on sale for just $5). I understand that when you bring a movie to the big screen, you have to cut out a lot of details or smaller scenes that are meaningful to the readers. But was it asking too much to have more "elderly Jacob" scenes or, god forbid, the character of Uncle Al (who, by the way, brought a lot to the table- specifically Jacob's character development and the solidification of various themes- simply through his personality and reasoning)? Tack on the fact that Reese Witherspoon was cast as Marlena and this movie was essentially a complete flop. The only redeeming qualities, in my opinion, were Rob and Waltz's acting and, of course, the lovable Rosie. Other than that, watch the movie first (if you're adamant about seeing it) and then read the book, so as not to be disappointed.

reply