Movie Reaction: The Shape of Water

Formula: Creature from the Black Lagoon + Romeo& Juliet

I have a problem a lot of other people don't have. It has to do with the fact that I see a lot of movies in theaters. I see a lot of trailers. I like trailers. I always have. I know some people think they spoil the plot too much. That rarely bothers me. My problem is that inevitably, there are trailers that I see a lot and get tired of. That inspired what I call my "Lone Ranger Rule". If I've seen the trailer for a movie enough times combined that it equals the length of the film in question, then I'll see the movie. That's how I decided to see The Lone Ranger and more recently Valerian. I figure that if they are pushing it that hard, I might as well see why. I build up a lot of weird rules like that. The Shape of Water is certainly a "Long Ranger Rule" movie. The unfortunate part is that because I increase the number of movies I see even more in the last couple months, I grew very tired of that trailer. The song and Richard Jenkins' narration started to grate on me after the dozenth time. They did update it eventually, so I got a little variation. I appreciated that, but it wasn't enough. This all goes to say that I went into The Shape of Water movie a bit more combative than I do with most films*.

*On that note, I'm outright militant about Phantom Thread at this point. I'm hostile when I see the MPAA screen saying the following film is Rated R for Language followed by the Focus Features logo then that shot of the car pulling up. That movie needs to come out soon so I can be rid of that trailer.

It doesn't help that I'm still looking for my "in" with Guillermo del Toro. That was Pan's Labyrinth for most people. It didn't make a huge impression on me beyond the visuals. Crimson Peak was more style than substance. His Hellboy and Blade movies were OK comic movies. Pacific Rim was a lot of fun in the moment, but I haven't had the need to revisit it. I'm told I need to see some of his early movies. Maybe those will do it. I don't dislike his work, but I wouldn't call him a visionary, as I've heard often. With The Shape of Water, I'm still on the outside looking in when it comes to del Toro.

I'm not sure what constitutes as a spoiler for The Shape of Water, because the trailer is more cryptic than the plot demands. It's set in Baltimore in the early 1960s. Elisa (Sally Hawkins) is a mute woman who works for the cleaning crew at a secret government facility with her friend Zelda (Octavia Spencer). Elisa lives above an movie theater and the free time she doesn't spend alone she spends with her neighbor, Giles (Richard Jenkins), who lives a similarly quiet existence. One day, an amphibious creature who stands like a man is brought into the compound Elisa works in. This creature was caught by a ruthless government agent (Michael Shannon) who treats it very poorly. Elisa bonds with the creature over time and decides to break him out of the facility when she finds out that the government plans to kill it. Michael Shannon is not about to let that happen.

The pseudo-spoiler is that The Shape of Water is a love story between Elisa and the fish man. That's the reason the film exists. Unfortunately, that's also where all my problems with the movie come from. I get the commentary about non-traditional relationships and fear of the "other" it's trying to make. It's really feels misplaced though. You know when someone is arguing against gay marriage and they pull out the old "what's to stop someone from trying to marry their dog" false equivalency? The Shape of Water uses an extreme to make its point, but it gets a little to close too the dog argument, which in turn, undermines the point a little. That's really a small gripe though. The bigger gripe is that I don't buy the relationship between Elisa and the fish man. It's not developed enough early on for me to believe that Elisa would risk herself to help him. I have no idea how she even communicated the escape plan to him. Once she has him back at her apartment, the only apparent connection is his [I'm sorry] animal magnetism. He's mostly a non-character. I didn't buy any stage of their relationship. That's a problem, because everything hinges on that. If I bought into the relationship, really everything else in the more works.

I did otherwise like a lot about the movie. The creature costume is pretty incredible. It's mostly accomplished through visual effects and looks terrific. It's common to run into a movie that is mainly a vehicle for its star (Still Alice immediately comes to mind). You could argue that The Shape of Water is a vehicle for that costume. I wouldn't say that though, because there are other performances that hold their own. Sally Hawkins is pretty great. Despite almost never speaking, she gives a full and expressive performance. Michael Shannon has a lot of fun sinking his teeth in a very foul character. No one plays a sad sack better than Richard Jenkins and he adds another layer to his character I wasn't expecting. The production design recreates the look of the idealized late 50s but gives it an odor. The visuals at the beginning and end in particular are quite striking.

My first impulse was to say that The Shape of Water is like a pretty person with no personality: all style, no substance. That's not accurate. It's more like it's a beautiful person who you share some interests with but you just don't connect with. I liked it on a technical level. I wasn't moved by the story, even as I appreciated what it was doing.

Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend