The Shape of Water - Guillermo del Toro

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Deuce66, Jul 21, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. benjaminhuf

    benjaminhuf Forum Resident

    I liked The Shape of Water a lot. Hope it picks up Oscars for music (Alexandre Desplat) and production design (Paul Austerberry).

    My favorite movie of 2017 for pure entertainment value was still The Last Jedi.
     
  2. chacha

    chacha Forum Resident In Memoriam

    Location:
    mill valley CA USA
    Haven’t seen yet but interesting how people I know are really split on this film.
     
  3. Ghostworld

    Ghostworld Senior Member

    Location:
    US

    I think Veech Had it right when you said sometimes “a film can be too in love with itself.” The minute the dance sequence showed up on the screen I knew Del Toro had lost it. I don’t know what the critics or producers guild are seeing in this other than they’re hip to the fact that fan boys see del toro as new Kubrick or Hitchcock and they want to a piece of the action ($). With the lineup of projects that Del toro has slated (which somebody posted here - like 20 studio films) you don’t think the greedy sleazy types at the producers Guild are going to bend over backwards to polish El Toro’s scepter? (Not my first choice of words). Or should they throw their vote behind some no-name director who poured his heart in
    “The sun that drank the flower”. (Hehe a fictional film from Ghostworld) or back the money ticket de jour. I see a lot of critical superlatives tossed around like “superb” “magical” If I had to pick one word to describe the feeling I took away (and I’ve thought about this) it would be “Queasy.”
     
    Spitfire and Veech like this.
  4. Aggie87

    Aggie87 Gig 'Em!

    Location:
    Carefree, AZ
    It finally opened this past Thursday in my city. Still not sure why it took so long, looking forward to seeing it.
     
  5. tman53

    tman53 Vinyl is an Addiction

    Location:
    FLA
    Saw it, loved it. This is a fantasy, so there is no "this isn't true to life" as some people seem to think. It is what del Toro wanted it to be. If you go in with that expectation, you will enjoy it.
     
  6. Dillydipper

    Dillydipper Space-Age luddite

    Location:
    Central PA
    I found this was a nice, gripping fantasy...which could have worked with or without it being about a giant tadpole in a world of green. Because it wasn't about green, or fish, or getting your job back, or any of the other filigrees they hung the plot points on. It was about innocence reaching out to The Other, and embracing it because, well, BECAUSE. You could have placed this story inside the world of Beetle Baily, and still come away with a touching tale about courage and understanding...and tolerance.

    Cynically standing this film up to Splash or Creature of the Black Lagoon, is like saying Stranger Things is sort of an update of The Goonies.

    And, how nice to see the film poster presented like that. Kinda gives you just a little bit more of Richard Jenkins' character; I suspect there was quite a lot more that got left on the cutting room floor once the stopwatches came out.
     
    mrjinks and Mazzy like this.
  7. Ghostworld

    Ghostworld Senior Member

    Location:
    US
    This critic must have written his review just for me. Every point that made him cringe made me cringe. And I haven’t mentioned it until now but I think Richard Jenkins is one of the great supporting actors of our time, and he was just lousy in “The Shape of Water” floundering around like he was lost or caught in some Euro B-picture he didn’t really understand.


    'The Shape Of Water' Is A Perversely Adult Fairy Tale Without Heart
     
    Spitfire likes this.
  8. Some of us just enjoyed the film, the experience and I’m not a Del Toro fanboy.
     
    MoonPool, mrjinks and Vidiot like this.
  9. R. Cat Conrad

    R. Cat Conrad Almost Famous

    Location:
    D/FW Metroplex
    "True to life" isn't a requirement for fantasy films. In fact, maintaining that level of accuracy would be a high bar for many historical dramas given the need for filming what's important in a story regardless of the setting and premise. OTOH, believeability ...or rather, the suspension of disbelief... is only achieved by characters behaving in a manner that is believable within the context of the film's setting, regardless of whether the film is reality based or total fiction.

    If the characters aren't believable (i.e., over-the-top & stereotypically maniacal government agent with untreated gangrenous fingers) then it doesn't matter whether the film is a fantasy or based on real life. If the film breaks with the plausibility of what is believable (i.e., unsealable bathroom room completely fills with water from bath), then it's better suited to a Warner Bros. cartoon. If Guillermo is trying to sell the idea of a paranoid Cold War government agency controlling access to the this Creature, then how can the audience be expected to overlook how easily a speech-challenged clean-up lady gets through security and pulls off a "complex" break-in and rescue that would've been a knee-slapper in a Keystone Cops comedy.

    Just for comparisons-sake a believable fantasy is Game of Thrones, or the first Lord of The Rings series (as opposed to the Hobbit series). My point is that most any film or series of films can get an audience on board with a fantasy tale as long as the real world connection ...maintained through character behavior... isn't severed or driven into absurdity.

    :cheers:
    Cat
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2018
    Spitfire and Ghostworld like this.
  10. Ghostworld

    Ghostworld Senior Member

    Location:
    US
    I'm not even bothered by the plausibility. It was just the slapdash story. And did I miss something or did the creature and the girl gradually develop a relationship (usually first a "scare" comes in these sorts of tales. Now I forget it there was), or did they just start happily sucking down eggs together? (what a subtle symbol! "Dear Salmon, .....") I would have liked to have seen a lot more scenes, ala "E.T.," of the waif and the creature getting to know each other, before getting it on (and a lot less about the contours of Michael Shannon's heaving buttocks).
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2018
    DHamilton likes this.
  11. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    Stormrider77 likes this.
  12. Claus

    Claus Senior Member

    Location:
    Germany
    I have seen a preview..... awesome!!!
     
  13. Steve Hoffman

    Steve Hoffman Your host Your Host

    Vidiot likes this.
  14. lbangs

    lbangs Senior Member

    I’m realizing I’m one of the few who didn’t like this one, and I usually love the director’s work.

    This, to my eyes, played too much like a typical bad 80s rip of E.T./Starman with enough borrowed from Amelie to make me wish I was watching that film instead.

    I wish there was one surprise or unexpected element here...

    Shalom, y’all!

    L. Bangs
     
  15. Paper Wizard

    Paper Wizard Forum Resident

    Location:
    U.S.A.
    I am with you on this one. Just didn't like it that much. Director has done some fabulous work, too.
     
    Spitfire and lbangs like this.
  16. Encuentro

    Encuentro Forum Resident

    I saw it recently and wasn’t blown away by it. The performances were excellent! Sally Hawkins was amazing and deserves her Oscar nomination! But there just wasn’t much in terms of story, in my opinion. It was a paint by numbers story. It was E.T. for adults right down to the creature investigating the apartment when Elisa steps out. I’ll give the film a B for the performances, but in my humble opinion, the film does not deserve its Best Picture nomination.
     
    lbangs likes this.
  17. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    How about the other 12 nominations?
     
    mrjinks and Mazzy like this.
  18. Gary

    Gary Nauga Gort! Staff

    Location:
    Toronto
  19. Encuentro

    Encuentro Forum Resident

    I didn’t pay much attention to the nominations, as I long ago stopped watching the Oscars. I’m aware of the Best Picture, Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress nods. Sally Hawkins was phenomenal and deserves her nomination.

    I just looked up the nominations. All of the performances were very good. The film was visually stunning and well-directed, so del Toro deserves his nomination, and the film deserves its nominations for the various technical and artistic awards. The music was beautiful, so the film deserves the nomination for Best Original Score.

    But Best Picture? In my opinion, no.

    Edit: To be perfectly fair, I haven’t seen many of the Best Picture nominees.
     
  20. R. Cat Conrad

    R. Cat Conrad Almost Famous

    Location:
    D/FW Metroplex
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2018
  21. Vidiot

    Vidiot Now in 4K HDR!

    Location:
    Hollywood, USA
    And yet Jenkins got nominated for Best Supporting Actor.
     
  22. Ethan B

    Ethan B Forum Resident

    Location:
    san diego
    Not quite sure why you are still posting about this. We get it you don't like the movie.
     
  23. lbangs

    lbangs Senior Member

    This seems to be a thread for discussing the movie. @Ghostworld is discussing it.

    Shalom, y'all!

    L. Bangs
     
    R. Cat Conrad likes this.
  24. R. Cat Conrad

    R. Cat Conrad Almost Famous

    Location:
    D/FW Metroplex
    This isn't just a praise-the-film-and-be-done-with-it thread. Folks who've seen the film and for whatever reason have mixed or critical opinions of it shouldn't be shut down for politely sharing their informed opinions.

    It's doubtful that anyone's mind will be changed by persuasive reasoning given the tribal nature of life these days, but in respect to differences of opinion, why should a negative viewpoint on this film be held in less esteem than a positive one?

    Do 13 Oscar nominations make a film great or is it more akin to the timing of it's release and support of peers? Is the Academy's position that the acting deserves this level of recognition across the board? Really? Something looks fishy. Does the Academy really consider The Shape of Water that good or are they paying homage to pseudo-intellectual escapist fodder in the guise of social relevance via overtures to women surviving abuse?

    In a year when sex abuse is under a microscope is The Shape of Water's tale of sadistic torture and conflicted stereotypes ...culminating in a "healing" inter-species relationship between a woman and the non-human creature she rescues... more palatable to sympathetic viewers than a film like ...let's say... The Post where a strong female newspaper publisher takes a principled stand and risks everything in a real world situation without the romanticized sexual element?

    These are simply observations that seem to me worthy of discussion. Of course, others mileage may vary.

    :cheers:
    Cat
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2018
    DHamilton and Rufus McDufus like this.
  25. I think Sally Hawkins had the best female acting performance of the year. Love Frances but Sally’s was special; more subtle and complicated.
     
    MoonPool likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine