Water for Elephants

 

Gillipedia Official Rating: Robert Pattinson can’t escape love triangles

          In the midst of Team Edward vs. Team Jacob fever, Robert Pattinson decided to bat for both teams by playing Jacob Jankowski in the circus film Water for Elephants. There’s elements of the farm work from films like Days of Heaven and Of Mice and Men early on, but the film takes a more fantastical approach about halfway through once the animals become the stars of the show. There’s some impressive filmmaking shots and even good acting on display, but the driving force becomes the complicated nature of the relationship among Pattinson, sweetheart Reese Witherspoon, and Christoph Waltz who only knows how to switch gears between kind-hearted and intense.

          After his humble parents die in a car crash, Pattinson abandons veterinary law and wanders along without a goal or purpose in sight. He boards a passing train in the dead of the night only to realize that it’s the train carrying all the workers for Waltz’s Benzini Bros. travelling circus company. Instead of being thrown off, old-timer Camel sees Pattinson’s potential and finds work for him. It doesn’t take long before he locks eyes with Witherspoon before being warned about crossing Waltz and his wife. Pattinson takes a liking to the whole show, but he notices that one of the current star horses has a disease in its hoof and will have to be put down. In need of a new starring act to drive ticket sales, Waltz buys an elephant and puts Pattinson in charge of its caretaking.

          In the circus are some side acts like the heaviest woman and tattooed lady, but there’s animals like lions that make an appearance. Anytime the movie has the introverted Pattinson interacting with these animals is when the film is at its best. The film also has the benefit of likable side characters to support the main three stars. What the film tends to lack is compelling drama or real stakes. Pattinson’s rise through the circus ranks is quick, and it has to balance developing a love story around turning Waltz into a formidable antagonist. And as he has shown multiple times in his career, Waltz knows how to turn on the evil. But the circus and the Waltz and the pleasant 30s setting all sit in the nosebleeds for Pattinson and Witherspoon.

          As far as love triangles go, this isn’t terrible. I mean, it’s not what I was rooting for in this movie, but it’s well-crafted for what it is. And there’s plenty of smirk and jaw line from Pattinson to keep the motors running.

          Water for Elephants will most likely leave my mind in under a week, but it’s also one of those films after watching where you shrug and remark, “Yeah that was good.” I wouldn’t gawk at anyone for watching this movie, but I might give a side eye if someone suggests that this is Pattinson’s best work—especially with how busy he’s been taking challenging and left field roles in a desperate plea to put his shiny vampire days behind him. He’s exchanging his fangs for a cowl in the upcoming The Batman next year, and I have cautiously high hopes for that film. Now to go watch him in Tenet as soon as that is available to me in a theater nearby.

          Oh, and if you’re wanting a film with Waltz as the villain, please watch either Inglorious Basterds or Django Unchained.

 

In Brief:

• Wakanda Forever.