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? | Bad Movie Defense - Talk Freely
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?
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.
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.