Water for the box office
Tue, 03/05/2011 - 14:31 by Harry Bow

Starring two Oscar winners, one professional female knicker wetter and three of the most prominent chins in Hollywood, Water for Elephant is the massive budget film adaptation of the The New York Times bestselling novel by Sara Gruen. 

A bit like with Titantic and that old lady who dropped the priceless necklace in the Atlantic, Water for Elephants opens with an aged-version of the main character - Jacob Jankowski (Team Jacob!) - shuffling along with a wise glint. Twilight fans will be disappointed to know that despite the fact that Robert Pattinson has previously played an immortal vampire, he's not really that fit as an old man. However, since old Jacob is played by a different actor rather than with prosthetics, the character is actually more convincing in the few minutes we get of him before the monologue takes us back to 1931…

 

Here we find RPattz's young Jacob about to graduate from veterinary school. It's all lovely and he's even about to have sex with a classmate for the first time that very evening, yay. Unfortunately, however, just as he picks up the paper for his final exam, his parents both die leaving him a skint orphan… So, off he goes to the railway track where he hops on a train that ends up being a travelling circus. Phew!

 

Despite being a stowaway with little charisma, everyone loves him just because he looks like RPattz - even the ring master August, played by Christoph Walz, who Jacob starts hanging out with on the train despite the fact that there's a whole carriage of pissed-up burlesque dancers trying to shag him (slightly unusual behaviour for a college leaver)... Anyhow, you get the idea this August character isn't the sort of dude you'd mess with - especially after he beats up an elephant (you'd have to be a real cunt to do that, wouldn't you?), but Jacob's soon flirting with his wife, Marlena, played by Reese Witherspoon. Still, August is fairly decent to Jacob, giving him a job, a tuxedo and loads of booze (seriously, the film should be called 'Champagne for RPattz'), so it does seem a bit like the youngster has it coming when inevitably things start to go a bit tits-up...

 

We don't want to give too much away - Pattinson and Witherspoon have done enough of that during the promo tour (apparently the actor had a cold during the sex scene and snotted all over his co-star, nice). However, here are some reasons why you might enjoy it...

 

  • If you'd like to see Robert Pattinson get punched
  • if you love Reese Witherspoon unconditionally after her brilliant roles in Election, Legally Blonde and Friends
  • If you're a member of PETA
  • If you're a member of the Twilight fanclub
  • If you're impressed by stunning visuals (the director, Francis Lawrence, has previously directed everything from Destiny's Child Independent Women and Timberlaker's Cry Me A River to Britney's Slave 4 U and Lady Gaga's Bad Romance, so seriously seriously knows his way around a storyboard)
  • If you're okay with ignoring the fact that Robert Pattinson is out of his depth and that Andrew Garfield (who was rumoured to have also been up for the role) should've probably been given the part instead.

 

Anyway, here's the trailer - and it's released tomorrow (4 May).

  • Hmmmm, this or fast 5?

    liquidspanner Thu, 05/05/2011 - 11:53
  • sevencritters doesn't seem to quite grasp the concept of subjectivity. If you and your husband loved it so much, why do you care if someone else doesn't?

    retrovertigo Wed, 04/05/2011 - 02:19
  • you liked the film, we didn't really. that's all there is to it.

    Mr. HM Tue, 03/05/2011 - 21:21
  • I see that you are an idiot!

    sevencritters Tue, 03/05/2011 - 20:31
  • Your comment is just picky for the sake of trying to be opinionated, which, sadly, it does not even achieve( that). We saw Water For Elephants and thought it wasn't all that; so did our friend. I wonder if you viewed it to jump on the: Let's love Robert Pattinson bandwagon, which is not exactly professional or objective. We can only hope others who read this will disregard your biased opinions and go see for themselves. It's a film and I am certain they will make their own minds up whether to be disappointed or not.

    (Do you see what I've done there?)

    Mr. HM Tue, 03/05/2011 - 17:35
  • This review is just nasty for the sake of trying to be clever, which, sadly, it does not even achieve that. I saw Water For Elephants and thought it was a wonderful film; so did my husband. I wonder if you viewed it to jump on the: Let's hate Robert Pattinson bandwagon, which is not exactly professional or objective. I can only hope others who read this will disregard your biased opinions and go see for themselves. It's a great film and I am certain they will not be disappointed.
    Michele

    sevencritters Tue, 03/05/2011 - 17:24
  • Unless he can prove otherwise, he's the new Keanu. Lovely to look at but no Brando. And what's with the title? Water for Elephants??? They couldn't have thought of anything better? Even Wet Trunk would have been better. Oh well. The film won't be troubling my wallet that's for sure.

    PuddyTwat Tue, 03/05/2011 - 15:09
  • Unless he can prove otherwise, he's the new Keanu. Lovely to look at but no Brando. And what's with the title? Water for Elephants??? They couldn't have thought of anything better? Even Wet Trunk would have been better. Oh well. The film won't be troubling my wallet that's for sure.

    PuddyTwat Tue, 03/05/2011 - 15:09
  • This review is just nasty for the sake of trying to be clever, which, sadly, it does not even achieve that. I saw Water For Elephants and thought it was a wonderful film; so did my husband. I wonder if you viewed it to jump on the: Let's hate Robert Pattinson bandwagon, which is not exactly professional or objective. I can only hope others who read this will disregard your biased opinions and go see for themselves. It's a great film and I am certain they will not be disappointed.
    Michele

    sevencritters Tue, 03/05/2011 - 17:24
  • Your comment is just picky for the sake of trying to be opinionated, which, sadly, it does not even achieve( that). We saw Water For Elephants and thought it wasn't all that; so did our friend. I wonder if you viewed it to jump on the: Let's love Robert Pattinson bandwagon, which is not exactly professional or objective. We can only hope others who read this will disregard your biased opinions and go see for themselves. It's a film and I am certain they will make their own minds up whether to be disappointed or not.

    (Do you see what I've done there?)

    Mr. HM Tue, 03/05/2011 - 17:35
  • I see that you are an idiot!

    sevencritters Tue, 03/05/2011 - 20:31
  • you liked the film, we didn't really. that's all there is to it.

    Mr. HM Tue, 03/05/2011 - 21:21
  • sevencritters doesn't seem to quite grasp the concept of subjectivity. If you and your husband loved it so much, why do you care if someone else doesn't?

    retrovertigo Wed, 04/05/2011 - 02:19
  • Hmmmm, this or fast 5?

    liquidspanner Thu, 05/05/2011 - 11:53

Article Timeline