Waterland

Jeremy Irons, everybody's favorite morose Englishman, plays a high school teacher who basically has a nervous breakdown (more like a meltdown) in class; and over the course of several class sessions, tells his pupils his own life story, growing up in rural England in the post-war years. This includes his high school sweetheart, to whom he is married, and his mentally retarded older brother.

The movie consistently takes turns for the weird. The teacher's wife has a habit of snatching unattended babies and bringing them home; we learn that she is unable to have children, but the reason for this is not revealed until a climactic scene that some viewers may find very difficult and painful to watch.

The teacher actually brings his students, physically, into the setting of the story at one point ... there they are, walking around, looking at things... a class field trip into the teacher's past. A very young Ethan Hawke plays a troublesome student who connects with Jereme's character by the end of the story.

Most of the surrealistic elements work well, others are just ... odd. For example, at one point, Jeremy Irons' character pauses in the middle of his narrative, because one of his female students who is sitting at a desk in the classroom is completely naked. Okay ... maybe there was supposed to be some kind of symbolism behind this image, but it seemed a little gratuitous.

Overall, I'd have to give it **** of *****.

On second viewing, "Waterland" is even darker than when we watched it when it was first released. The tragedy of Tom and Mary suffered during their youth comes back to haunt them in later years, as it's always the case in matters such as these. Of course, we don't know the mystery until it's revealed at the end, but there are indications that point out what looms ahead for these lovers.

Stephen Gyllenhaal, the director, has worked out the difficulty posed by a narrative that expands many years into blending history, as it happened, with today's reality as Tom, who is an older man now, recounts his youth to the history class he teaches in Pittsburgh.

The film has some lovely flashbacks shot in that part of England that doesn't seem to change. The early part of the story is marked by two tragedies, first the drowning of Dick, and by what fate has in store for Mary. We also learn about the secret story of Tom's unhappy family, as it enfolds when he tells it to the students. It all comes about because of Matthew Price challenges Mr. Crick when he asks the teacher about the practicality of learning history.

Jeremy Irons is perfect as the man who carries a burden he cannot get rid of. Sinead Cusack has a small but pivotal part in the story, as the grown Mary. Actually, the ones that fare best in the film are Grant Warnock and Lena Headey, who portray the younger Tom and Mary and give good performances. A young Ethan Hawke plays the inquisitive Matthew Price. David Morrissey, who is seen as Dick Crick, has some good moments. Pete Postlethwaite is wasted. There is a glimpse of Maggie Gyllenhaal at the beginning of the film, but alas, that is all one sees of her.

The haunting musical score by Carter Burwell and the dark cinematography of Robert Elswit contribute to give the film the right look that Mr. Gillenhaal wanted for the finished product, no doubt. "Waterland" should have been seen by more people.

And this movie excels in bringing this to life in a believable way. Jeremy and his wife Sinead excel as the older couple in this as do their younger selves portrayed by different actors. There is a wonderful love story threading through the whole movie and you are not too sure where it is heading. Jeremy plays a history teacher in the US, I understand that the book had him teaching in England where the first half of the movie takes place. Waterland refers to land that has been reclaimed from the ocean and is extremely flat with streams and water running through it. He is married to his childhood sweetheart and they have both been traumatized by an event that took place while they were in their teens. There is an aura of sadness around them 20 years later as they arrive at the doorway to middle age and the long held pain within the wife starts to manifest itself in strange ways. I see the waterland of their youth as allegorical in this, the reclaiming of their lives from their childhood tragedy. Some of the history lessons were a little awkwardly done, I found them forced and a key plot twist I could see from a mile away, but on the whole this movie captured my attention and I gave it an 8 out of 10. It would not be to everybody's taste.

This film is a complex intricate look at sexuality, history, Freud, and superstition all based in the living metaphor of England's fen land, or marshes. It is no coincidence Swift chose to set this incredible story about navigating the labyrinths of jealousy and history- personal and local, using a landscape riddled with secret channels and muddy hidden waters.

The acting is superb, and like Ian McEwan's Atonement, looks unflinchingly at the depths of personal tragedy, and history, and their long lasting effects on us as humans, all in the context of historical events.

The Fenland is an area deeply steeped in history, going back before the Romans.The film touches literally the taboo of early sexual longing ( male and female)and leaves us to look at the costs of opening Pandora's's box.

Swift is a gifted and beautiful writer and I have read this book several times. The film is a credit to the book, which is an unusual statement for films. The film complements the book much in the same way the film of Unbearable Lightness of Being complemented that book.

This is a masterful work.

Wanted to see 'Waterland' for a number of reasons. My main reasons were the superb source material by Graham Swift, a haunting and poignant book with a point, and due to being a fan of Jeremy Irons (in a quest to see more of his work other than what has been seen already). Also hold his real life wife Sinead Cusack in very high regard and have always wished she was in more films. Very interesting subject too.

Found 'Waterland' to be a good and interesting film, but could have been even better than it was. It showcased very well Irons, Cusack, Lena Headey and Ethan Hawke in early appearances and composer Carter Burwell. As an adaptation, it is very well intended and doesn't disgrace the source material. But part of me felt like there could have been more depth to the characters and the story, both richer than what is seen in the film. On its own terms and judging it as a standalone, 'Waterland' does have a good deal to recommend.

Starting with what could have been done better in 'Waterland', although it is one of those stories where a deliberate pace is necessary there are times when the story is not as eventful where the pace felt too deliberate. Mentioned above about aspects of 'Waterland' that could have gone into more depth, a prime example would be the ending which did come over as rather vague.

The film is at its least interesting in the classroom scenes, not Tom's dialogue and certainly not how Irons delivers it. It was the dialogue of the students and how they reacted to some of what they were being taught, those moments were very awkwardly written and even unintentionally funny. The waste of the great Pete Postlethwaite, given far too little to do, is criminal.

However, 'Waterland' is held together beautifully by the acting. Irons is understated yet very sincere in the lead role and even little things like how he uses those melancholic eyes tell so much, back when he was in roles that played to his strengths and showed how great an actor he actually is. He shares an intensely touching chemistry with a very heartfelt Cusack, making one feel why they haven't done more projects together and it should be strongly considered in the future. Hawke, Headey and Grant Warnock are particularly good of the rest of the cast, a good thing too as other than Irons and Cusack they have the most to do.

It's filmed in a hauntingly beautiful way too, complementing the picturesque yet sometimes foreboding scenery perfectly. Burwell's score is perfectly hypnotic and Stephen Gyllenhaal directs sensitively enough. The past and present scenes have a good amount of affecting drama, air of mystery and haunting emotions, especially the past scenes and the latter scenes with Cusack. The back and forth between timelines is at least coherent and doesn't come over as jerky or disjointed, dangers with back and forths in films and have been fallen into. The dialogue is generally thoughtful, Irons delivers his final speech with a lot of poignancy and truth.

Overall, had its faults but still a well done film. 7/10