Universal Pictures | Release Date: July 28, 1995
3.3
USER SCORE
Generally unfavorable reviews based on 151 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
41
Mixed:
25
Negative:
85
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
7
[Anonymous]Oct 29, 2005
200 million went down the drain, but not completely, as this film isn't a total disaster. However, it sure doesn't satisfy like 200 million dollar entertainment. Production design is top notch, and combined with some good special 200 million went down the drain, but not completely, as this film isn't a total disaster. However, it sure doesn't satisfy like 200 million dollar entertainment. Production design is top notch, and combined with some good special FX and sets, the money is definetaly on the screen. However, the story's off, and that's probably why the film didn't gross. After a promising battle in the beginning, albeit a little silly, once they're adrift on the mariner's ship, the film drags, and they accomplish little, whinig about who owns what. The characters don't have any depth, they just do what they do. The smokers, you don't even know why they do what they do. Outside of finding dryland, there's little focus in the plot, and ultimately the parts don't quite add up to something a 200 million dollar budget should deliver. Decent entertainment, but people would likely flock to more satisfying movies in the genre. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
5
j30Feb 13, 2012
Before Titanic came out, Waterworld was the most expensive film ever produced. Comparing the two is like night and day. Even though I don't particularly care for Titanic I think if once you have a commander of the screen and someone with aBefore Titanic came out, Waterworld was the most expensive film ever produced. Comparing the two is like night and day. Even though I don't particularly care for Titanic I think if once you have a commander of the screen and someone with a vision like James Cameron you're going to have substantial differences in results. Titanic full of ambition (like Waterworld), took home 11 Oscars while Waterworld was just nominated for 1 Oscar (Best Sound). Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
5
Klaww25Dec 4, 2013
This movie felt like playing uncharted 3 there are so many plot holes that make this movie very good. Lousy acting a poor story so many thing. I think it is a good rental and a good watch. This makes you feel like playing uncharted 3 over andThis movie felt like playing uncharted 3 there are so many plot holes that make this movie very good. Lousy acting a poor story so many thing. I think it is a good rental and a good watch. This makes you feel like playing uncharted 3 over and over again. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
0
MichaelBagameryJan 29, 2015
It is so dull and ugly for its deep-into-nine-figures budget, I can't believe Kevin Costner, or anyone, would want to be associated with this. The story rests on the gaping plot hole of a man with gills, who could conceivably live solelyIt is so dull and ugly for its deep-into-nine-figures budget, I can't believe Kevin Costner, or anyone, would want to be associated with this. The story rests on the gaping plot hole of a man with gills, who could conceivably live solely underwater and eat, say, fish and seaweed would trade with normal humans, who want to kill him the moment they discover he is not one of them. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
1
warrenworldMay 27, 2014
Welcome to Waterworld, where men need to have long haircuts, women need to have short haircuts, and Kevin Costner acts like a total retard for over two hours.
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
8
IntonarumoriMay 24, 2014
I don't really understand the lack of success this movie had. The only real problem this movie suffers from is that it lacks balance. It tries to be a serious movie about the hardships of life on this aquatic world only to shift gears andI don't really understand the lack of success this movie had. The only real problem this movie suffers from is that it lacks balance. It tries to be a serious movie about the hardships of life on this aquatic world only to shift gears and become a childish action flick when the bad guys get their screen time. But, there's so much to like here. The movie looks and sounds great with good attention to details and the sets, especially the atoll, are stunning. The story is interesting enough and at times the movie is emotional and funny, so it engages the viewer. I have watched the film a couple of times and I was never bored. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
8
CalibMcBoltsMay 30, 2016
Waterworld is a decent futuristic action picture with some great sets, some intriguing ideas, and a few images that will stay with me. The script doesn't do a great job with either the spiritual or the physical trek, but the spectacularWaterworld is a decent futuristic action picture with some great sets, some intriguing ideas, and a few images that will stay with me. The script doesn't do a great job with either the spiritual or the physical trek, but the spectacular action sequences occur with enough regularity that strong writing isn't necessary to keep Waterworld afloat.
Waterworld really doesnt deserve all the hate it's getting, it's by no means a great movie because of the over exposition script, some ridiculous scenes, and illogical things happening, but aside from that it is very entertaining with some intriguing ideas, awesome set (pieces), and a ver solid post-apocalyptic movie.
The movie cost a whopping 200 million, which is a massive amount by today's standard and let alone 1995''s standards. 200 million went down the drain, but not completely, as this film isn't a total disaster. However, it sure doesn't satisfy like 200 million dollar entertainment. Production design is top notch, and combined with some good special FX and sets, the money is definetaly on the screen. However, the story's off, and that's probably why the film didn't gross. After a promising battle in the beginning, albeit a little silly, once they're adrift on the mariner's ship, the film drags. The characters don't have any depth, they just do what they do. The smokers, you don't even know why they do what they do. Outside of finding dryland, there's little focus in the plot, and ultimately the parts don't quite add up to something a 200 million dollar budget should deliver.
The only real problem this movie suffers from is that it lacks balance. It tries to be a serious movie about the hardships of life on this aquatic world only to shift gears and become a childish action flick when the bad guys get their screen time. But, there's so much to like here. The movie looks and sounds great with good attention to details and the sets, especially the atoll, are stunning. The story is interesting enough and at times the movie is emotional and funny, so it engages the viewer. I have watched the film a couple of times and I was never bored.

Give Waterworld a second chance people, it really isnt that bad...

EDIT: Waterworld also spawned probably the coolest live show in the world, at Universal Studio's in L.A, the Waterworld show is incredible!
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
BroyaxJan 1, 2017
Mad Max vogue sur les flots avec son bateau de bricolo Intercepteau 100% écolo : il est comme un poisson dans l'eau ! Kevin Costner paraphrase habilement le personnage de Mel Gibson, sa mauvaise humeur, son côté irascible et en rajoute mêmeMad Max vogue sur les flots avec son bateau de bricolo Intercepteau 100% écolo : il est comme un poisson dans l'eau ! Kevin Costner paraphrase habilement le personnage de Mel Gibson, sa mauvaise humeur, son côté irascible et en rajoute même un peu à droite, à gauche... en somme, ce Max junior est le digne fils de son père spirituel, car après le désert... le déluge !

Jeanne Tripplehorn s'avère aussi sexy que rayonnante et n'est certainement pas une simple belle plante pour la décoration, bien au contraire ; telle une lionne elle veille sur sa gamine -qui n'arrête pas de jacter- comme le lait sur le feu. La gamine qui rend fou tout le monde, y compris les méchants dont Dennis Hopper est le chantre taré et cabotineur.

Entre notre anti-héros aigri -presque un sauvage- et le grand méchant à l'humour vache, on rit beaucoup dans cette espèce de reboot aquatique de Max le dingue, car comme Max, tout le monde est dingo du ciboulot dans ce film.

Aussi dingue que peuvent l'être les scènes d'action, nombreuses, improbables mais très spectaculaires. Waterworld ne lève jamais le pied sauf durant son épilogue et ne laisse que quelques miettes à la romance éventuelle. Il lui manque encore sans doute l'ironie mordante des deux premiers Mad Max, un oubli qu'il compense par la mise en scène très efficace de Kevin Reynolds.

Du post-apo vraiment bien ficelé en tout cas et qui vieillit aussi bien que les Max, entre hommage appuyé et pastiche halluciné.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews