Open Water Review
by Jon Popick (jpopick AT sick-boy DOT com)August 21st, 2004
PLANET SICK-BOY: http://www.sick-boy.com
"We Put the SIN in Cinema"
© Copyright 2004 Planet Sick-Boy. All Rights Reserved.
Open Water, a film made for around $200,000 which looks like a film made for around $210,000. Its running time is shorter than a super-sized episode of ER, and its premise is swiped from the episode of The Simpsons where Bart and Lisa get left behind during a school field trip to Capital City ("If I can't rely on the buddy system, I don't know what to believe in anymore"). In Water, two big city workaholics take some time off to relax down in the Caribbean. Susan (Blanchard Ryan) and Daniel (Daniel Travis) sign up for one of those deep sea scuba dive things and have the time of their lives checking out underwater life. When they surface, their boat is gone and they're in the middle of nowhere, miles from land even they were able to tell which direction terra firma might be. And then the sharks come.
Water's setup takes about 25 minutes, and we never really see Susan and Daniel in any danger until the 60 minute mark. That's a long time for something over less than 20 minutes later. And don't be sold by that whole Jaws meets The Blair Witch Project line, either. Water just isn't that scary, unless maybe you're the kind of tool who actually partakes in the aforementioned underwater shenanigans (in which case, you deserve to be terrified and then eaten by sharks). I guess the BWP comparison makes sense because both films were produced for very little money, but beyond that, it' s just silly.
The acting is beyond stilted, and the direction amateurish (you get what you pay for, I guess), but the idea that a film this close to becoming a Samuel Beckett play (particularly Happy Days) is finding its way to the multiplexes makes me laugh. Out loud. Oh, and by the way, Water is rated R for Ryan's nude scene - not coma-inducing psychological terror, or anything. It's also supposed to be based on a true story, or "inspired by real events," or some such nonsense. If that were true, then 90% of the film would be total conjecture. And that's even more than Monster.
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
