thread to discuss Guillermo del Toro's THE SHAPE OF WATER

damn ok wait
how/why was she in a human suit

what

idk about that part but the rest seemed clear or at the least heavily implied?

This disappointed me.

haha yeah i mean that's a huge leap to make but you have some convincing points

xp to Alfred

why? legit position imo, this was kinda like an X-files movie but I liked the performances and a lot of the shots.

What I wrote last week.

thanks, good points there esp. about the overkill of Shannon's character

and I still liked it enough!

pretty sure Creature from the Black Lagoon was a well-documented explicit inspiration for this

― weird woman in a bar (La Lechera), Sunday, December 24, 2017 10:03 PM (one week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I know I've read that del Toro wanted to remake CFtBL with an explicit erotic angle, but was shot down.

sleeve makes some good points about the conservation of elements/breathing -- it hadn't occurred to me that they were the same species but in spite of the human suit issue, it does make sense. also her name was Elisa -- everyone pronounced it Eliza and I wasn't ever sure what that was all about but if it was a My Fair Lady thing, that would make sense (I don't particularly like that parallel between the two stories but that's irrelevant)

This doesn't screen in UK until second week of febuary.

in spite of the human suit issue

this is a pretty big issue tho

Was anybody else weirded out by the nudity in the first five minutes? Just seemed kind of arbitrary as opposed to the mermaid sexin later.

I also recoiled when Michael Shannon said "pussy finger"

this is a pretty big issue tho
true, and it's why i don't buy this theory entirely -- it also changes the nature of their relationship dramatically and i prefer an interpretation of her as an ordinary woman than than a rescued orphaned special secretly magical mer-person.

as for this Was anybody else weirded out by the nudity in the first five minutes? Just seemed kind of arbitrary
no way, i like nudity that's natural and isn't intended to titillate -- incidental/natural nudity is nudity as it happens regularly in life. when nudity is confined to sexual scenes only, it makes nudity more sexual than it really is. it's actually kind of ordinary.

i think all the things about Strickland that made people recoil (the above comment, the disgusting scene with his wife) were intended to disgust. mission accomplished i guess.

otm re: the nudity- felt very naturalistic, not salacious at all. masturbating in the tub was as much a part of her daily routine as brushing her teeth or pulling a page off of her paper calendar. i really appreciated that detail.

I tend to agree with Alfred though. Shannon felt like a composite of every character he's ever played

I agree, I loved it, but can absolutely understand loathing it and his performance taking you out of the move if he's one of your problem actors, ymmv

Like personally idaf if he plays that same guy in 5 movies a year for the rest of his career, I love it, I love him doing it. Check out The Night Before to see him as a benevolent hobo drug ghost

Like personally idaf if he plays that same guy in 5 movies a year for the rest of his career, I love it, I love him doing it.

cosine

I like Michael Shannon a lot and have seen most of his movies, even 99 Homes. wasn't really his performance that bothered me, but I felt like his character was a warmed-over version of older Shannon roles.

I kept thinking, "Here we go again" every time he came onscreen.

the signing "fuck you" scene was great though. I love Sally Hawkins

Saw this last night somewhat by chance. A friend invited me to go, the theater is a short walk from home, I was around and at loose ends.

I didn't know much about the movie! All I'd really heard was "creature from the black lagoon" and "quirky romance between loner and monster." I enjoyed it well enough but I also agree to an extent with both Dr. Casino and latebloomer upthread -- There was a lack of focus that I thought was detrimental to the love story between the creature and Eliza. We weren't given many scenes between the two that made their romance believable. We get some eggs and then some Glenn Miller, and then it's all sexy. I think if we'd been given more Eliza/Monster scenes it would have made more sense. As it was, their love story seemed like a whole lot of projection on her part and a probable lack of understanding on his? Kind of a weird dynamic imo but.. whatever, I guess.

Just saw this on a whim. I also didn't know much about it going in and live close to the theater! All the themes of toxic masculinity got a little heavy-handed, but this director likes to be heavy-handed and make the monster take the form of a hypermasculine family dude so I wasn't too mad at that. The love story didn't bother me either, actually I quite liked it, but after reading this thread I agree it could've improved with more exposition. This movie was a gorgeous thing visually, though, and fun to see the super-team of the mute person, the scientist, the homosexual guy and the black woman come together against all odds. GdT does some pretty great stuff when he swings for the fences.

Also reminds me of the punchline from this Mr. Show sketch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpWuJxuD5xM

Saw it last night. It was fine. Beautiful colors and set design reminiscent of Amelie. A lot of extra bullshit that didn't need to be in there when a huge chunk of the lead up to the romance seemed to be missing. For the nudity it also seemed to be extra. I just said "there better be some sea creature dong hanging out in this movie".

The NY'er in me was super annoyed by her flooding her bathroom without a care for her neighbors.

"See? See, honey? *This* is why we're not getting an aquarium!"

Amelie

Yep. Terrible.

strangely enough i saw this last night too. the opening underwater dream sequence is top shelf

ILXors ruin all movies for me but I appreciate them anyway

Like usual, I feel like I saw a different (and much better) movie from the rest of you.

I am not that familiar with Michael Shannon, but I thought he was marvelous. His scenes were phenomenal — he’s a hero in a different movie.

There are weird and enjoyable connections between this movie and the Paddington movie(s) and I like to believe they are in the same universe. There are weird and enjoyable connections with Swamp Thing, and Ratcatcher, and Pushing Daisies, and Free Willy and I would like to believe they are all related but they are not.

The musical number was unexpected and well-executed. It confirms my pet theory that most film is the subjective experience of one of its characters.

Also the green Jello / lettuce water thing was funny.

I thought musical bit was clever too, and beautifully executed

Thread reminds me not to google “shape of water dong”, like, ever

that's an Adrenaline Mob song iirc

hahaha

The musical was beautiful but it was completely antithetical to the whole premise of the movie: that this mute woman can be a person without speech. That the climax of her love has to be/can only be expressed in an imagined vocal performance undermines her humanity as a mute person. We can only understand her/relate to her in an imagined/impossible scenario that is the exact opposite of what she actually is. As ridiculous as an interracial love story ending with a fantasy number of one party turning white or that swamp thing turning human. It was a cop out for me.

Much too saccharine and corny a love story for me and the obvious identity politics of all the disenfranchised characters rallying together against the evil straight white cis male military guy (the most interesting character of them all despite his flatness) was a bit much for me. But beautifully shot (the overflowing tub/underwater sex) and the production was super stylish.

It would've been better if Michael Shannon just used his Kim Fowley character in the movie.

favorite thing about the movie: its fascination and disgust with the color green

But I couldn't get past a lot of violence in the movie. I never got over the dead cat, and Shannon is so unnecessarily sadistic he seemed pumped in from a different film (or Boardwalk Empire, since he was playing almost the exact same character, and his character was the worst thing about that show)

The sadism, yes, was revolting and unnecessary.

dead cat bummed me out :\

I didn't realize there were two cats so was super confused when the cat was suddenly alive.

I was also confused about what aquadong did with the eggs.

things that would have caused the MPAA to require a harsher rating

Just read this film as "Amelie on PCP" and you'll have more fun

The sadism, yes, was revolting and unnecessary.

― morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, January 29, 2018 10:38 AM (four hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The nudity and bean-flicking and fish-fucking was unnecessary too, tbh. You could have 100% told this story in a PG movie

no way, i thought the way they portrayed masturbation and female sexuality as everyday / part of her daily routine was refreshing. also by the time that she has sex with the monster you totally buy into it, it's not ridiculous at all, at least imo. it was still a very sweet and moving love story that included sexuality and wasn't 'obscene' or particularly graphic. i thought that was really important and cool.

Cosign. Why does nudity terrify people? Hollywood could do with some more sex positivity like this.

At least in this case it was used for character exposition, so not gratuitous imo