Saturday, April 30, 2011

Water for Elephants

Moment of truth here Robert Pattison, can you act or not? Obviously the Twilight star must have some ability because he’s been able to land such massive roles. But after a pretty decent performance in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, he seems to have deteriorated. Now he stars in the adaption of the best-selling book Water for Elephants. Pattinson plays a young veterinary school student who runs away after the death of his parents. He then comes across a travelling circus while attempting to stow away on a passing train. He ends up joining them and working with the animals. But the movie is less about the circus and more about the character’s compassion towards all living things, even undesirable humans.

Christoph Waltz’s performance as August, the circus owner, is reminiscent of his Oscar winning turn in Inglourious Basterds. However, this time the character is less black and white, as he does have remorse and isn’t necessarily an evil person. The Austrian steals the show from Pattinson and Resse Witherspoon, who plays his wife. That isn’t to say those two don’t hold their own. There isn’t much asked for from Witherspoon, whose character becomes a static damsel in distress. But she does do well in making something out of nothing. And (drum roll please) Pattinson is able to carry the film in the lead role. He isn’t the best actor, but he layers the performance better than he has ever done in the past.

Water for Elephants is a very attractive film, and I mean more so than the actors. The period dress and set decoration, as well as intriguing lighting makes the scenes stand out compared to other emotional dramas. Taking place half on a freight train and half in circus tents, not many other movies look like this. And you can’t help but be interested in old-time circuses after watching. But what could I do if I joined the circus? I could be the world’s hottest man and walk around flexing all day. Yeah, that fits. (8.6 out of 10)

No comments:

Post a Comment