Guillermo del Toro's "The Shape of Water"

With the ending to Shape of Water being a moralistic and unique ending of not having
Elisa not having her form physically turn into the same race as the aqua Xeno humanoid man but giving new way to breath the water,
i think it's how Avatar by James Cameron should had ended! don't you agree folks? i mean the ending to that movie was so damned racist in undertone as i think Jake should had let his avatar die and had him either genetically inject him with nanites to help him breath the air/atmosphere/digest the water/food on Pandora or have Eynwa or Eyena (whatever) to give him new lungs magically to help him breath/eat the stuff/drink water then Neyitiri would accept him for who he is and not how he looks which would had been a more moralistic ending on "how you look isn't important but by the content of your character" instead of physically changing his form to become the same race as Neyitiri at the end and i hated that ending.

I don't like segreation endings to stories that have human X furry/Xeno /mutant romance stories.

I believe the Xeno man in this movie who is a god is perhaps an alien being from another world who came to earth and adapted to the jungle of South America to be worshipped as a god to protect a part of the rainforest.
 
Last edited:
Just collecting a lot of the behind the scenes interviews with the crew that I've shared into one place.

Interviews with Guillermo del Toro

On DP/30 - Lot of good stuff on his writing process specifically in this one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXcEeh0YRKw&t=1228s

BFI Screen Talk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfbD3OBir64

GDT on the DGA's Directors' Cut podcast, being interviewed by Baz Lurman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scxQol51_qE

Co-writer Vanessa Taylor
https://screenwritingumagazine.com/2017/11/27/shape-water-writer-writing-adult-fairytale/
http://www.indiewire.com/2018/01/the-shape-of-water-screenwriter-vanessa-taylor-1201915351/


FXguide's coverage of the digital effects in the film.
https://www.fxguide.com/featured/shaping-water-at-mr-x-inc/

Make-Up Magazine's Feature on the creation of the creature suit.
http://spankzilla85.tumblr.com/post/169154636150/glamrock-lizardman-the-shape-of-water-in-make-up

The Stan Winston school has an article about the suit creation
revealing-creative-process-behind-the-shape-of-water-creature-legacy-effects


Production Designer Paul Austerberry
http://deadline.com/2018/01/the-sha...roduction-designer-interview-news-1202230180/
http://collider.com/shape-of-water-interview-paul-austerberry/#pacific-rim-2

Interview with composer Alexandre Desplat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGIhpugjwrs

Interview with Cinematographer Dan Lausten
https://www.thecredits.org/2017/11/cinematographer-dan-laustsen-shape-waters-fluid-fable/

An another more in depth video interview with Lausten as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T4bptNeXg8

Interview with editor Sidney Wolinksy
http://collider.com/shape-of-water-sidney-wolinsky-interview/


Interview Sound Designers and Mixers
https://soundcloud.com/soundworkscollection/the-shape-of-water

Interview with Roberto Campanella, Dancing choreographer
http://www.dancemagazine.com/roberto-campanella-shape-of-water-2528604214.html
 
Last edited:
Saw this last night, while I really enjoyed it, it wasn't one of GDT's best for me, and was a good few steps below Pan's Labyrinth.

Acting was great all around, as were the effects and it was an interesting way to tell the story. But I felt it dragged at times and some parts could have cut out.

8/10.
 
Everyone seems gung-ho about suing this movie. What are we on? Lawsuit #4?
 
I mean:

The ending of the movie, did it not imply that Sally Hawkins' character is possibly part fish-person herself? Think about it. She's an orphan and she was born with those scars on her neck. At the end, those scars open up and essentially act as her new underwater gills.

The movie also mentioned that as a child she was found next to a river, I think they were always gills and your theory is right.

Also at the start Raj's character says he is telling the story of a lost princess.
 
The movie also mentioned that as a child she was found next to a river, I think they were always gills and your theory is right.

Also at the start Raj's character says he is telling the story of a lost princess.

I doubt she was ever a fish human person but always human with scratches but do you think the ending is a much better ending than Avatar?
 
Everyone seems gung-ho about suing this movie. What are we on? Lawsuit #4?

That's the price you pay when you make a movie that is popular.
 
I doubt she was ever a fish human person but always human with scratches but do you think the ending is a much better ending than Avatar?

To me it was heavily implied. Once I heard the part where she was found by a river as a baby and the scratches were already there, I was expecting them to be gills by the end, and it's mentioned halfway through the movie. So it was telegraphed for me.

As for comparing the endings, I liked both to be honest.
 
My impression was he transformed them into gills, not that she was a fish-person herself.
 
To me it was heavily implied. Once I heard the part where she was found by a river as a baby and the scratches were already there, I was expecting them to be gills by the end, and it's mentioned halfway through the movie. So it was telegraphed for me.

As for comparing the endings, I liked both to be honest.

My impression was he transformed them into gills, not that she was a fish-person herself.


Well what i mean is
when she got gills her physical being/form wasn't transformed into the same race as the xeno person but she remains the same
which Avatar should had ended with Jake's body fixed by doctors with naninte filters in his body to breath pandora/eat/drink stuff on pandora instead of having to physically change him into a Na'Vi which i hated that blasted ending especially to Shrek of having humans physically become the same race of being like their inhuman looking humanoid lovers to appease the racist/bigot viewers in mainstream but luckily
this movie didn't as i'm glad she had to change her physical appearance/form but remains her race of being
. To me James Cameron's Avatar ending was the same as taking "guess who's coming to dinner" and at the very end magically changing the character played by Sidney Poitier with some random white actor, to "get with" the white woman he loves so the parents of the woman he loves would have their racist notions satisfied and thus make the whole message irrelevant. Same for Shrek for having Fiona who was cursed to become an Ogre every night as she needed true love to free her as she wanted to become a regular human again thus when Shrek and her fell in love the curse was not lifted as i think she should had went back to her old self as he would accept her on "never judge anyone by appearances but who they are as a person who is and looks different and the content of their character" which is a good moral for the end of SOW. But Avatar and Shrek took a wrong kind of message of "How you look is more important than who you are as a person" to physically change the human person into the same person as the other humanoid use for side stepping to appease the racist, and "I'm sorry just look too different from each other as we can't accept each other if we looked the same" to appease the bigot as Shrek was also like Guess Who's coming to dinner where the white woman becomes the same ethnicity as her colored lover magically in the end to appease the notions of the man she loves's parents.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry amigo, but what is your obsession with comparing this movie to Avatar? These films are completely different.
 
I'm sorry amigo, but what is your obsession with comparing this movie to Avatar? These films are completely different.

Just that some people have compared it to the story of Beauty and the Beast or Cameron's film i mentioned since Cameron's film and this deal with xeno people who have a relationship with a human person yet see if some people can be a true monster like say the villains in both that movie and this one. Plus saying this movie has a superior ending than the segration ending of cameron's film.
 
I don't think she was born with those scars. Her vocal chords were cut.
 
My impression was he transformed them into gills, not that she was a fish-person herself.

With her being found by a river, and RJ’s character at the start the story wasn’t about a ‘lost princess,’ makes me think she was half fish person.

I don't think she was born with those scars. Her vocal chords were cut.

They were on her neck when she was found by the river as far as I remember? I think they could have been gills from the start. That’s my theory anyway.
 
With her being found by a river, and RJ’s character at the start the story wasn’t about a ‘lost princess,’ makes me think she was half fish person.



They were on her neck when she was found by the river as far as I remember? I think they could have been gills from the start. That’s my theory anyway.

Do you think JFK was literally "a fair prince" then?

Not really how that narration was operating.
 
Great music this movie had in it's score
 
Last edited:
JFK was a true life character, so no I don’t.

Was he mentioned in the movie at all?

Where the hell does the JFK mention come from? He's not referenced in the movie at all.

Its in the opening narration of the film, the same narration AVEITWITHJAMON referenced..

"In the final days of a fair prince's reign" i.e. 1962.

Its a play on the whole "Camelot" thing the Kennedies had going.

The narration is just kind of a tonal framing device.
 
Last edited:
Its in the opening narration of the film, the same narration AVEITWITHJAMON referenced..

"In the final days of a fair prince's reign" i.e. 1962.

Its a play on the whole "Camelot" thing the Kennedies had going.

The narration is just kind of a tonal framing device.

I thought that was in reference to Elisa’s Father and was why she was a ‘lost princess?’
 
Just come back from it, just 'WOW' in the best way possible. Review to follow. So beautiful and poetically tangible. 10/10 and then some.
 
So del Toro is taking that plagiarism case to court to directly challenge it.

Guillermo del Toro said:
“I really cannot stomach the timing of this accusation,” he said. “It’s pretty transparent what is happening here. To me, it’s actually a relief to take something from the arena of opinion into the arena of fact and law.”

According to del Toro, Fox Searchlight has been dealing with the estate for the past few weeks, and ultimately decided to move ahead with the legal battle. He added that although the play and the film have surface similarities, the film is not “about an animal, it’s about an elemental river god. These ideas are not interchangeable or equivalent; this would be tantamount to saying that E.T. would be the same story if you substituted the alien for a hamster.”

“I have been at this 25 years and have an unimpeachable reputation,” he continued. “I have always made it an element of my career to talk about my influences in every single movie I have made, in the comment track of DVDs, on Twitter, in my museum exhibitions. I have been open about the things I love, and I have had no problem discussing them and how they were transformational in my movies. This 25-year trajectory should come in handy. I have written or co-written about 24 screenplays. I am a writer/director who has generated TV series, books, movies, and an enormous amount of screenplays through the years. Without a single complaint.”

I can't speak for his collaborator Daniel Kraus, but really the crux of the whole thing with all of these plagiarism claims is that Guillermo del Toro would be the first one to tell you if he borrowed from something. He would want you to see it for yourself. He would write it up on a billboard or literally devote a museum to it.
 
Oscar contender 'The Shape of Water' facing copyright infringement lawsuit


Fox Searchlight, Guillermo del Toro and others associated with the Oscar contender "The Shape of Water" are facing a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by the estate of Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright Paul Zindel.



Fox Searchlight Pictures, in a statement to The Times, called the claims baseless and said the suit "seems timed to coincide with the Academy Award voting cycle in order to pressure our studio to quickly settle."



A lawyer for the plaintiffs said the Wednesday filing was based on when David Zindel became aware of alleged similarities between "The Shape of Water" and his father's 1969 play "Let Me Hear You Whisper," and the studio's reaction after Zindel made his concerns known.

Both play and movie tell stories of a lonely female janitor working in a laboratory where an intelligent sea creature is being held and ultimately threatened. The lawsuit alleges more than 60 similarities between the works, including oddball elements such as a decapitated cat and a record player in a science lab.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ry.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Here is also a side by side comparison between the two:

http://hollywoodnerd.com/did-the-sh...the-paul-zindel-play-let-me-hear-you-whisper/
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"