Anyone who knows me knows I’m a sucker for animals. People can be manipulative, deceitful, selfish, greedy, and a host of other unattractive things, but animals (for the most part) are the most honest, loving creatures on the planet. You’ll easily see me giving anything and everything I have to help abused animals – people, not so much.

It boggles my mind how little punishment there is for people in our society who abuse and torture animals. Often times you’ll be punished far more harshly for stealing a car than you would for killing a dog; which is beyond ridiculous. But as bad as things are now for animal rights, during the great depression things were far worse.

I wasn’t familiar with the award winning, highly successful book of the same name before going into see Water for Elephants, so I really had no idea what to expect. And to be honest, my expectations were set quite low. I’m happy to say though that I couldn’t have been more wrong about this film. Although some of it was difficult to watch, I really loved this movie.

For those unfamiliar with the basic story it tells the tale of a young, recently orphaned veterinary student during the great depression. After losing his parents and being left totally alone in the world, Jacob Jankowski (Robert Pattinson) decides that continuing his education would serve no purpose so he instead decides to leave his home town by jumping on a passing train late at night. To his surprise the train that he illegally boards is part of the Benzini Brothers traveling circus and Jacob quickly finds a place with the company as their own private vet.

Tensions rise between Jacob and the literal ‘Ring Leader’ of the group August (expertly played by the creepiest man alive, Christoph Waltz) as he mistreats the animals and also his wife and star attraction, Marlena (Reese Witherspoon). Jacob has to choose between following August’s reign of cruelty or risking everything to stand up to him to protect the animals and profess his love for Marlena.

I know it may sound like a typical story, and perhaps it is, but the performances are so moving and the writing so lovely that experiencing this story set in this time is well worth it. When movies are done well, you don’t need massive unexpected twists and turns to earn the audiences respect and interest. Sometimes a simple story, simply told is far more powerful. That having been said, the ending really did surprise me in a wonderful way.

There is also a complexity to the characters and the situations that is refreshing to see. Often times period pieces will, despite being set in a completely different time frame, be played with a very modern feel and sentiment. (The Conspirator for example was 1865 by way of cast members from

the CW Network playing dress up) Water for Elephants, on the other hand, is incredibly successful in recreating not only the look of the 1930’s but also the feeling of it as well.

The Twilight movie series, which basically gave Robert Pattinson his career is also ironically the thing that keeps people from taking him seriously as an actor. The character of Edward Cullen as shown on screen is so one dimensional and annoying that people tend to think of him in that way as well but nothing could be further from the truth. Having interviewed him several times, I can honestly say he’s nothing like that. He’s charming, charismatic, down to Earth and really fun to be around. And oh yeah, talented too!

His performance in Remember Me was his first step toward being taken more seriously in the business and I feel like Water for Elephants will be another important step toward reaching that goal. Take away the tween nonsense and the Twilight movies and what you have is a very promising, very fine young actor who delivers a stand out performance here.

As I mentioned earlier Christoph Waltz is one of the creepiest men working today. The way he plays August, masking his inherently evil nature with smiles and jokes, is chilling to watch. I can usually separate actor and part pretty easily but after seeing what August does to Rosie (the elephant in this film) I’d find it hard to not judge him for it too! You can be convincing in a role and then you can be so convincing it’s terrifying. He’s accomplished the latter over and over again.

Sadly the weak link here performance wise is Reese Witherspoon. From what I’ve heard of the character in the book, Marlena is supposed to be incredibly deep and complex but sadly, I feel like Reese took a very one note approach to the role. Sometimes when I watch movies I feel like I can hear the director saying ‘action’ at the beginning of a scene and then ‘cut’ at the end. I was feeling the ‘scene’ nature of things which is never a good thing.

Overall this film is a wonderful achievement for all involved. Is it better than the book? Chance are everyone will tell you, ‘no way’ and I’d agree that’s a distinct possibility because let’s face it, the book is always better. But that doesn’t detract from the creative and emotional success that is the movie. I’d recommend it to just about everyone, but particularly to anyone who feels strongly about the proper treatment of animals.

See this movie for the amazing time period that it depicts, the stellar performances turned in by the majority of the cast and most especially for that warm fuzzy feeling you get when you see that unbreakable bond formed between man and

animal that defies explanation.

Synopsis:

Set during the Great Depression, veterinary student Jacob Jankowski (Pattinson) abandons his studies after his parents are killed in a car accident. Taking up with a third-rate traveling circus, his bond with a difficult animal begins to turn the show around, though his feelings for the star performer (Witherspoon) prove dangerous since she’s the wife of the sadistic ringmaster (Waltz).