One Line Review: Don’t take the critics by their words. Waterworld has eyeball-grabbing cinematography and a convincing story.
On this day Waterworld was released in Hollywood. This film was so good but still got slaughtered by the critics. Here we tried to be rational and compiled the ins and outs of the movie.
Iconic dialogues from this movie
Enola: He doesn’t have a home or people to care for. He’s not afraid of anything, men least of all. He’s fast and strong like a big wind. He can hear a hundred miles and see a hundred miles underwater. He can hide in the shadow of a noon sun. He can be right behind you and you won’t even know it until you’re dead!”
Mariner: Two drifters meet. Something needs to be exchanged.
Drifter: I know the code. But I’ll give this one to you for free.
Mariner: Nothing’s free in Waterworld.
“Waterworld is a pretty damn good summer movie. There, I’ve said it…it’s a breezy, clever entertainment with stirring effects.”Newsweek
When the polar ice melted, the whole globe drowned. The majority of the living beings died, but few of them developed their habitat and survived. Mariner, Helen, and Tina were one of the survivors. They escaped from the place. But, a group of pirates called Smokers (one of the survivors) who were in search of mythical dryland followed them and tried to catch them because they (smokers) thought they (Mariner, Helen, and Tina) have the key to that island. Watch the movie to find out who won the fight.
Eyeball grabbing cinematography
Water world is one of those films that take you with them in the world they are presenting. It is a very essential element if you are planning to create an old age movie. Let me explain myself clearly. I recently watched Hrithik Roshan’s Mohenjo Daro. The film is a medieval history Epic.
The story is very simple and entertaining, kind of a mix between a love story and a fight for the throne. Everything was excellent in this movie except for one thing: the sets were not very convincing. In simple words, it was very hard to believe that this film is in the old Era. The sets were dull, artificial, and unconvincing. Despite everything being so perfect and having just one flaw, the movie turned out to be a flop right in the first week of its release. Because the very essential element of the old age movie was missing from it. Now let me cite some examples of good movies that leveraged the same concept to their advantage. Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Bajirao Mastani and Padmavat (originally Padmavati).
These films are so great at setting the environment that, even for a single second, you won’t be able to get out of that time frame. It’s like the first second of the film grabs you by your eyeballs and takes you in the timeline. The opening scenes of both films are the biggest assets for them. They are the sole reason why these films managed to create an extra chunk of fandom and money. Waterworld mastered this concept. This film takes you with it into its world. You can not resist the temptation to watch the full movie. Kevin Reynolds (the director) did way before what Sanjay Leela Bhansali is doing nowadays in his films. That also pours the light on the massive quality of production.
Unreasonable slaughtering by critics
I have told you the good bits of this movie. Now comes the sad part. This movie was so irrationally bashed by the critics that it ended up being under-capitalized. Heartbroken? Mine too. I cannot find any reason why the critics (not all of them but some stubborn ones) bashed this film. It had every essential feature of a good film present in it.
Be it the cinematography, screenplay, emotional character arc, attention-grabbing scenes, excellent story, and classic climax. Still, it got hatred. It made $264.2 Million but if those stubborn critics did not slaughter it unnecessarily this film would have crossed the $600 million mark for sure.
Do you see how rumors and hatred can change the destiny of a good film? Now imagine the amount of loss the production house incurred and the negative impact on the career of the cast. Maybe we should start questioning the critics’ credibility as well. Right?