krocheav I doubt that any movie made today could look much better than "Water for Elephants'" Cinematography, direction, sets, performances, editing - all combine to tell a surprisingly powerful and ultimately humane tale of hardship, loss and of finding oneself - amid the wreckage of humanity at its worst and best. While not so sure I'm comfortable with the Elephants crucial contribution toward the finale (no dispersions towards Rosie she was superb!) just the timing of it all. (that's personal of course) The idea of the old man telling his compelling life story to the young Circus manager is inspired and well worthy of several viewings. An excellent drama with an accent on human adventure and endeavour - easily recommended to a wide ranging audience, covering all ages.

jb_campo Water for Elephants is the screen adaptation of the best-selling book by Sara Gruen. What a wonderful surprise of a movie.Hal Holbrook, grisly veteran actor, appears at a circus seemingly lost, looking for his son. He apparently was part of an old home group and got lost. This is a beautiful opening scene set in the rain and darkness that invokes immediate sadness for this poor old lost man. This excellent opening clears the path to a hugely emotional movie that brings out all the highs and lows of life.Jacob talks with the circus manager and you learn that when Jacob was young, he worked with the 1931 Benzini Circus. When the you circus manager learns Jacob was right there when the Benzini's collapsed, he asks Jacob to tell him about it. This storytelling mode made me think of Peter Falk's narration throughout The Princess Bride.Robert Pattinson from the Twilight series is excellent as the young Jacob. He delivers an emotional portrayal that leaves me wondering why he didn't get an Academy nomination, though he did win a Teen Choice award.Reese Witherspoon delivers a fine performance as Marlena, wife of the Circus owner August, brilliantly portrayed by Christoper Waltz. August is clearly mentally unbalanced, and prone to huge emotional outbursts that hurt people and animals.Jacob, Marlena, and August form a complex relationship that eventually leads to a violent outcome. Involved in this is also Rosey, the elephant, with Jacob as the veterinarian/trainer who must protect Rosey and Marlena.There are many beautifully choreographed scenes with close-up circus scenes, sprawling vistas of trains, and gritty reality views of what life was like living on a circus train traveling from town to town.This movie is not for the squeamish because there is a lot of violence, but only a bit of blood shown. You will experience a huge range of emotions as the Director, Francis Lawrence, does an excellent job of storytelling that keeps it easy to understand what's happening. Water for Elephants is a wonderful movie that is well worth your time. Enjoy.

Nikita Wannenburgh First of all, I read the book first, which I thought was a good idea. It was, and so I felt a lot more ready to watch the film once I'd done that. Second, I loved both. The film was obviously shorter and didn't have the depth of the book, but otherwise it hardly felt altered at all. And I loved it - with or without the cuts. Visually it was gorgeous. The cinematography was lovely, and the film showcased the shine and sweat, the grit and glamour, of the circus life with enchanting ease and realism. I was, quite honestly, swept away in the world of Water for Elephants, and I thoroughly enjoyed absorbing myself in it :)It was beautifully entertaining and fun. A little rushed at times; the climax was altered a bit from the book, and the animal stampede sort of came out of nowhere. The climax was the second of only two faults that I noticed in the film. The backbone of it was just too random. In addition, I thought there were too few scenes between Marlena and Jacob and Rosie; especially lacking was the connection the book so vividly portrays between Marlena and her elephant, Rosie. I missed that. The love triangle (of sorts) wasn't original, but the setting and story were original enough in themselves to avoid the cheesiness and clichés and still give the whole film a very fresh feeling. It was, to be honest, a very refreshing take on the usual 'cruel-husband- hot-headed-boy-beautiful-wife' set-up. The acting was brilliant all round. Robert Pattinson gave a strong, intense performance even next to acting talents like Christoph Waltz, and Reese Witherspoon was equally delightful. Pattinson's performance was so intense and thoughtful, and I thought he was the perfect casting choice for the role of Jacob. For all the critics out there who cannot get past Twilight, I say "NO, he DID NOT ruin the film. He was excellent." Christoph Waltz was in an clichéd role for him, but he was inevitably excellent. Reese Witherspoon was enchanting; though she lacked Pattinson's connection with the animals. The biggest of only two cons I found in the film was the lack of chemistry between Pattinson and Witherspoon. It was almost painful. While their relationship could just pass as a slow burning romance, the real chemistry was between Pattinson and the adorable elephant Rosie (her real name's Ty; FYI, I prefer Rosie). Oh, Pattinson was just brilliant with the animals. He connected so well with them, and every scene with him and Rosie gloriously brightened up the screen. The emotion of certain scenes, like when Rosie gets beaten with the hook, were achingly portrayed, and together Pattinson and Rosie really touched my heart. Yes, I loved Jacob & Marlena, but it was Jacob & Rosie who truly stole my heart in the end :)

Byrdz I thought that this was going to be a film about a circus. I like films that actually show circus and circus life. Instead I got a soppy adulterous "romance" and a sadistic husband and cruelty to animals. If you enjoy any of these... go for it. For me ... give me what is now thought of as corny "The Greatest Show on Earth" or even "Trapeze". The non-English Speaking elephant was one of the most interesting characters .. the actors tried but they were not appealing at all. It's not that the actors gave poor performances, it was that the characters were just not for me. Will not watch this one again and I am a big re-viewer !