Review of Waterworld

Waterworld (1995)
7/10
Dancing with the waves
4 April 2019
Or is it the Tsunami? Well actually the only "Tsunami" would be the one the movie created by not earning enough money. This famously is one of the biggest disasters of a film company. This very short foray into "film history" aside, should it really matter? No, what should matter though is what someone like Joss Whedon said, when he declared this ... well let's just say even he thought that it was nigh impossible to save this from tanking (and there it is the pun everyone here is contractually obligated to use).

This aside, does the movie show the big budget? Of course it does. Should you feel sorry for the movie? Probably not, though that depends on personal feelings and how much you want to swim against ... well come on, how else am I going to write that? All puns aside (even though another one might float up), the movie is not as bad as some have made it.

Now hear me out: I've seen the TV cut, which is around 40 minutes longer than the cut most have seen in cinemas. So I reckon some things are more rounded up. For an even better understanding, it is better to watch the Ulysseus cut though. And mnd you there is a reason they call it that. It is not much longer than the TV cut, though it does contain the cuts to the violence and some nudity. So if you want epic, you will get epic. Try to watch as big as possible.

While I didn't feel this has masterpiece written all over it, I know people who do. So while you may be contemplating that I rated it too high, they might be on my case for not rating it high enough. Whatever point of view you have, I will not let that water down my opinion ...
13 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed