Waterworld went from being the laughingstock of 1995 to something I actually rewatch every few years - what flipped the switch on that one for everyone else?

I saw it in theaters as a kid and thought it was a boring mess, but catching it on cable around 2008 made me appreciate the insane practical sets and Costner's weird underwater world-building, so did the passage of time just make us all softer on big budget flops or is there something genuinely cool in there that critics missed the first time?

2 comments

2 Comments

the_jamie17h ago

That atoll set is honestly the thing I keep coming back to too, @campbell.tara - no CGI can replicate the weight of an actual 50-foot steel structure sinking into a lagoon. Like, even Costner's weird marine adaptations (the gills, the webbed feet) feel less goofy now when you realize they committed to a fully fleshed-out ecology. I guess the shift happened because the ambition finally outweighs the weirdness once you get past the initial "this is insane" reaction.

campbell.tara1d ago

Honestly I had this buddy back in like 2010 who swore Waterworld was secretly a masterpiece. He'd get drunk and make us all watch it at parties. One time he rented out a whole theater for his birthday and screened it. We all laughed at him but after like the third watch I started noticing how wild the atoll set was and how the whole thing just felt like a real world. The guy had a point but we never admitted it to his face.