Jilly's Reviews > The Shape of Water

Great review! I watched the movie last weekend and enjoyed it.

I guess when you read about swamp creatures you prefer Gil Man's Girl and those sort of books of love....hahahaha. Great review & I agree with everything you said. Weird thinkers unite!

Trisha wrote: "Great review! I watched the movie last weekend and enjoyed it."

Thanks, Trisha! I have to see the movie now. Well, I think. Maybe. ;)

Monty Cupcake ☠ Queen of Bloodshed ☠ wrote: "I guess when you read about swamp creatures you prefer Gil Man's Girl and those sort of books of love....hahahaha. Great review & I agree with everything you said. Weird thinkers unite!"

Oh no, don't group me in with all of our pervy friends who love the monster porn. It gives me full-body shudders to think of that. (NOT the good kind of full-body shudders!) lol!
But, yay weird thinkers!

I'm laughing out loud! Fantastic review, Jilly (but if those icky images prevent me from sleeping, I'm going to blame you!) :P

haha...my head would have went to some of that weird shit too.

Katerina wrote: "I'm laughing out loud! Fantastic review, Jilly (but if those icky images prevent me from sleeping, I'm going to blame you!) :P"

Thank you, Kat! I will apologize for your swampy dreams in advance. :)

Robin wrote: "haha...my head would have went to some of that weird shit too."

Yeah, you are one of us... :D

A man makes a movie about a fish-like alien having sex with a human, and he gets an oscar. I have sex with our family goat, and people call me pervert.

Igor

Igor wrote: "A man makes a movie about a fish-like alien having sex with a human, and he gets an oscar. I have sex with our family goat, and people call me pervert."

LMAO! Best comment ever, Igor! :D

Glad to be of service :)
Igor

bahaha

Igor you are a trip

*lol* Great review. I actually decided against reading the book because I was afraid they'd make the Amphibian Man sound dumb. And after watching the wonderful movie, I didn't want that to happen.

This one was such a fun and entertaining review :)

Trish wrote: "*lol* Great review. I actually decided against reading the book because I was afraid they'd make the Amphibian Man sound dumb. And after watching the wonderful movie, I didn't want that to happen."

Okay, I need to know. Is he smart in the movie?
Of course, I'm joking around in my review- big surprise - so I would say he's not actually dumb, but his thoughts are simple. He is a different species and is not exactly sure what the hell is going on. To me that signals that you shouldn't fuck him. *shrug*
;D

Tamara wrote: "This one was such a fun and entertaining review :)"

Thank you, Tamara! :)

Jilly wrote: "Okay, I need to know. Is he smart in the movie?"

Nah, don't worry, I know what you mean. But there is a difference between human smart and what people usually reserve for "smart animals". In the movie, he's at least as smart as humans although he has a vicious side to him. He could be an alien (that's the best way to describe the difference). So he needs to learn our language and of course he doesn't like being chained up but it is heavily implied that he can keep up with any human thought, just not our speech pattern.

Fabulous review!!

Trish wrote: " there is a difference between human smart and what people usually reserve for "smart animals"...."

Yes, that is what I felt. But, "alien" is another good word for him. :)

Kat wrote: "Fabulous review!!"

Thank you, Kat! :)

This was one of the funniest reviews I've ever read. It almost makes me want to read the book....but I find "Swampy Sexy Times" icky as well!

Stephanie wrote: "This was one of the funniest reviews I've ever read. It almost makes me want to read the book....but I find "Swampy Sexy Times" icky as well!"

Thanks, Stephanie! Luckily, there is only one tiny scene where it happens. It isn't described graphically or anything. The book is still worth it. ;)

(view spoiler)[ The thing is that it's implied at the end that she was also a creature similar to him and had felt different her entire life as a result of that, the scars on her neck being gills etc, which doesn't make it real interspecies sex. (hide spoiler)]
Also I don't think he was depicted as dumb in the book as he reads complex emotions and expresses them himself even when he can't use spoken language. He understands remorse and shows forgiveness and compassion, concern and worry, he enjoys music and art and is extremely self aware. None of those are animal traits

Yes, I see what you are saying, Abi. I tend to joke around and exaggerate in my reviews. It's just my style.
I think the person who said he was more like an alien than an animal made a better comparison. He definitely wasn't human, but a different species. Of course, your spoiler helps it be less icky. ;D

Actually, that's not really true. Or at least not the way I (along with a bunch of others) perceived it. (view spoiler)[She was scarred from what happened in her childhood, making her a double-freak. It was just damned convenient where those scars were and that she wouldn't miss pseech but what actually made her adapt to underwater life was his "magic" - it was talked about that the Amphibian Man has god-like powers. (hide spoiler)]
It's just a story / fairy tale about all kinds of misfits and love winning out, in a way. (view spoiler)[The alternative interpretation being that she died and imagined herself in the water with her last breath or that her friend can't imagine her dead and gone so he invented the fairy tale to cope with what happened. (hide spoiler)] It's a bit open to interpretation, much like the ending of Pan's Labyrinth.

@Trish:
I guess I interpreted it differently because of this:
(view spoiler)[
"The lines on her neck, the lines she thought were scars but are not scars. It is a good sight to see those lines split open for the gills to open, for the gills to spread wide. It is a happy sight and now she knows who she is, who she has always been."

The scars were not scars and she is now who she has always been; a creature like him. This interpretation would also explain the dreams she had before even meeting him of being able to breathe underwater. It would explain being found on the banks of a river as a baby, as though she had been left there when the rest of the creature's race was being hunted and persecuted.
If the creature has god like powers, they must all have done and could have changed her to be able to live on land as a child as a way to save her. (hide spoiler)]

But yes, as you say, it is open to individual interpretation and that is the beauty of books like these. The story is different according to the reader. :)

I haven't read the book. I was talking about the movie - but it's another great point illustrating why I've chosen NOT to read the book because I (apparently rightfully) feared it would destroy the movie magic.

Love the review! I feel like the movie's reality is fragile at best. And like Trish I wouldn't think it could survive prose too well. Every Pixar movie is like that, too. Toy Story? Cars? You start thinking about these things and...*shudder*

Funny I run across this review now...I was just at a conference where someone presented a paper that referenced the MOVIE...without ever mentioning there was a book.

Lizzy: the book came after the movie.

It's funny because I had barely been aware of the movie because I don't go to them very often, and I don't watch any of those award shows. Talk about mind-numbingly long! If I wanted to watch a bunch of egomaniacs pat themselves on the back over their amazing accomplishments, I would have visited my parents more often. After all, they were the only ones who were justified. *takes bow*
I kid.
I don't actually want to see the movie now. I think putting the swamp thing on film will ruin it for me. I will only be able to see him as .. well, the swamp thing. Also, some of those things with the psycho-army dude? ?Ew, gross. Not into seeing that.

>>After all, they were the only ones who were justified. *takes bow*

lol, nice...

It's a very beautiful movie with some jarringly crude moments. (It also isn't really plausible as a story about the times. He basically took the Spanish Civil War story from Pan's Labyrinth and imposed it on to America in the '60s.)

Well, maybe when it shows up on Netflix. lol! :)

I only found out about the movie because the one reason I still have a Twitter account is Neil Gaiman and he tweeted about it so I got curious (I had seen and loved other delToro movies before).

LMFAOOOOO. You are awesome. I literally died laughing reading your comments. I’m a “weird shit thinker too” 🤣👏🏽. Thank u for your awesome input!!

Stacy wrote: "LMFAOOOOO. You are awesome. I literally died laughing reading your comments. I’m a “weird shit thinker too” 🤣👏🏽. Thank u for your awesome input!!"

Thank you, Stacy! I'm realizing that there are a lot of us out there . ;)

To be honest I think if they've cut the sex out the book would have been better. Then it would have been just the goodness and empathy we should show to another living being. In a way this tainted it.

You are sooo right, Maria!
I don't know about the movie, but in the book, it was enough just to be a beautiful friendship between two species. It felt so wrong when she had sex with him. That's exactly how I felt.

hot monkey sex? Oh gosh, I'm dying. This has been the funniest review I've read in a while! 😂

Hetal wrote: "hot monkey sex? Oh gosh, I'm dying. This has been the funniest review I've read in a while! 😂"

Thank you, Hetal! :)

It is quite a fine book and after seeing Shape of Water again on blu-ray, i enjoyed the movie for it's acting, settings, visuals, practical effects and style but the supposed romance of the asset with the mute seeing it again rubs me the wrong way as he is humanoid but has more of a gorilla/child level intelligence as it never spoke a language or come from a different culture/race of beings and is less Abe Sapien and more like the Ferringo Hulk in terms of an animalistic/child mind as i can see why there are beastality complaints.

I mean language, intelligence and culture is what separates us from lower animals and he seemed animalistic in mind and all that as the asset didn't act like a person as he acted like a feral lower animal as it even talked like a goat. I mean furries, xenos, mutants and cyborgs are all races of people who are not always the "inferior" beings mainstream media shows sometimes but i believe they people who are and look different and i see nothing wrong with humans having affairs/marriage/love with xenos, furries, mutants and cyborgs.

I think the xeno in this movie could had spoke a weird tribal kind language to prove he is an intelligent being who isn’t a pet or animal as no one can understand what he is saying as Elsie has telepathy and can read/translate what he is saying. Even with her doing telepathic communication with the xeno man to talk to each other in brains even when he is reading her lips of mouthwording then show he is very intelligent humanoid being with similar intellect with no just roaring/growling or talking like a goat, him telling his history of being an alien being who came to earth years ago to become a god of a tribe he saw their culture on earth in the jungle even seeing them make art and music, him having a girlfriend before she died in his history, appreciating pets without eating them but treat them kind like he does with the animals in the jungle he lived in as his diet would be plants/vegetables/fruits/fish/eggs, wanting to learn how to cook as he saw some people of the tribe who worship him cooked but is curious to wanting to dance since he learned from tribal people but wants to learn like civilized people in cities do even for consent to want to have love if he truly loves her even she can help Giles what xeno is saying as she can do sign language to Giles even write down on paper what xeno is saying in his weird language even learn english. Those would had made the situation avoid the beastiality stigma. It would had been the Guess Who's Coming to Dinner of our time but with a xeno replacing a black man yet the film feels badly executed despite a promising idea.

I see nothing wrong with outside human race of human/furry, human/xeno, xeno/xeno (like an elf person and fish-person), human/cyborg and human/mutant romance of two different intelligent beings who can communication with languages and all in fiction as i support that as it's meant to be an allegory to real life inter-ethnic romance despite there are some humans in stories who are of different skin colors/ethicities/religions/different cultures having affairs with xenos or furries or mutants or cyborgs since they are races outside humans since humans are not alone in stories just like real life xenos do exist in the galaxy as we are not alone.

I mean like Hatton Slayden’s amazing artworks, Bojack Horseman (Even Kyle and Charolette a human male who romanced a deer furry woman as they produced 2 kids and got married), Wolf Children (the parents of the kids being a wolf man and a human woman), Beast aka Hank Henry McCoy and Carly on the X-men animated series episode “Beauty and the Beast”, Catherine and Vincent in the 80s Ron Perlman/Linda Hamilton starring Beauty and the Beast TV show (remember that show?), Cathy and Matt on Alien Nation, Lilandra and Xavier (xeno bird woman and mutant earth man), Hepzibah and Corsair in Marvel comics, Mass Effect, Skyrim, Hellboy and Liz, Swamp Thing and Abigale Arcane, Vinnie and Charlene on Biker Mice from Mars, Vastra and Jenny on Doctor Who, Regular Show (Skips with Mona plus Margaret's parents), Star Wars, Star Trek, Cheetah and Batman on Justice League the series, An orc woman and a human man who fell in love/married/conceived a hybrid child to a half-ogre/half human woman romancing a human male in Warcraft the movie, Rachel and Deckar in Blade Runner (Biorganic android and human), Eliza and Goliath on Gargoyles especially Demona with Macbeth etc. all have consenting intelligent adults. Even the recent Voltron reboot show has two different races of beings one a xeno reptilian girl named Shay and a human boy named Hunk in love as they are two teens who love each other for who they are.

I don’t consider human/xeno, xeno/furry, human /furry, human/cyborg and human/mutant romance as “beastailty” (which is almost like they said in the slavery being legal times and colonial times of mixing ethnicity) as me and one of my favorite artists Hatton Slayden believe in stories that cyborgs, xenos, furries and mutants aren’t always the “inferior” beings mainstream media would portray as but to me and him they are “people who are and look different” metaphorically. It’s xenophilia actually and there’s nothing wrong with two consenting adults who are different beings from other worlds, can speak different languages, have similar DNA, same parts like us, body structure even breasts to all that, high intelligence and all that even capable to have children. To me beastality if it’s someone who a person whether they are human, furry, xeno or mutant is hurting an ordinary regular pet store or zoo animal in a sexual way as it’s a thing that cannot consent as humanoids have pheromones in their bodies to make different looking humanoids attracted to them like regular human, furry, xeno or mutant people. Earth humans, xenos, furries, cyborgs and mutants can all consent to each other as they all belong in the word “humanoid” and share intellect, similar DNA and all that.

I’m saying all those examples i mentioned like are much better than presented in this movie on the relationship which hardly felt like a relationship as i enjoyed this movie but the huge problem felt the relationship is crass/hardly worked as the xeno should had been more human level intelligent.

The problem i have with the creature is he still is very animalistic and simple in intelligence, it had a child-like mind and didn’t act like a human adult with human level intelligence even speech. i mean if he an Abe Sapien type, Bojack Horseman type or even Mass Effect xeno male type of xeno, I’d be totally down. In this, it felt to me like she was somehow either doing something akin to bestiality, or taking advantage of a man-like creature with a child’s mind or with a pet store animal or a mentally handicapped man. There definitely are and should be universal standards when it comes to sentience and intelligence. If one takes the attitude of "who am I to judge, I'm an outsider and don't understand their culture, everything is relative" then words don't mean anything and the world's a free for all. How can you then criticize anyone for doing anything?

We have to judge people by their words and actions. Sure, multiple characters in the film kept referencing the fact that the creature was a "god," but aside from his rapid healing abilities I saw no evidence of that. He wasn't all-knowing or all-powerful. I suppose one could make the case that he was more like the old pagan gods, but that doesn't change the fact that his level of consciousness seemed to be more ape-like/Ferringo Hulk-like than human-like. It never seemed like he was truly aware of what was happening to and around him, and therefore did not have the capability to give consent.

Abe Sapien and his elf lover is done better as both are highly intelligent mature consenting adult beings as Abe feels more human in intellect than the asset in this movie. Same goes for Vastra on Doctor Who as she is much more intelligent. Or even Goliath on Gargoyles or Vincent in the 80s Beauty and the Beast show with Ron Perlman or the Bojack Horseman animal-humanoid people or Demona with Macbeth on Gargoyles or in Skyrim or Hana with her wolf-man husband in Wolf Children plus Cheetah with Batman from Justice League even in fanfiction that ships them both as a couple even them having a family in one of the stories. The Asset seem to be less of a sea-man and more of a sea-monkey even when learning sign language like gorillas/monkeys/chimps/orangutans do.

Perhaps if he was given a proper education and time to acclimate around humans he'd be able to properly grow and mature to the point that he'd be able to have adult relationships, but he never got to that point in the film. It also would've been impossible given the situation and environment of 1962, and he was clearly meant to return to his former way of life and not interact so directly with humans. Felt like Shape of Water kind of didn't really work as a creature-romance because the monster in question was never shown to be any more intelligent than a clever pet. It never speaks, is never shown to sign anything more complex than a request for food, and never behaves in any particular way that led me to believe it was sapient. As a result, the whole romance aspect took on a very one-sided, creepy aspect, wherein a woman steals an animal, keeps in locked in her apartment for a few days, and does dirty things to it.

My issue is that the movie doesn't do enough to sell the idea that the fish-man is more than just an animal. Like i said language/culture/high intellgience is part of what separates us from animals. I mention the show 'BoJack Horseman.' In that show, the animal-humanoids aka furries use language that's equal to how the regular humans use language, enough to have complex conversations especially having a culture of their own plus being a race of beings equals to humans. Asset here doesn't have complex conversations. I compare the fish-man here to a pet store dog (Not the Mr Peanbutter kind because he is humanoid and can give consent to any other adult being of any race whether they are furry or human). A dog can learn certain words like "fetch" or "sit." A dog will also attach itself to you if you feed it and it can even be protective of you like the fish-man is at the end of the film, but you wouldn't have sex with the dog. It would also be like if Clint Eastwood in those movies was sexually messing around with that orangutan, It's bestiality if you don't have that parity.

I enjoyed the movie for what it was but i wish the supposed romance could had been handled better if Del Toro did research on how to make audiences trust romance between a xeno and regular human is not beastality like say Mass Effect games or watch an episode of the 80s Beauty and the Beast show or Gargoyles or read an issue of Swamp Thing having an affair with Abigale Arcane or see Hatton Slayden's artworks of human men having romance with cyborgs/mutants/xenos/furry women to understand. Filmmakers who plan on doing similar movies to Shape need to learn from those examples i all mentioned to avoid the huge mistake.

Interesting thoughts, Jonathon!
I agree with what you are saying. She was not communicating with the fish guy through her head in the book. She would put on music and he would light up the water around him. So, maybe more like a magic dolphin in intellect? And, no matter how awesome a magic dolphin would be, we probably shouldn't fuck it.
Just sayin'
It really would have been nice if the author had made him just a little more humanish to get rid of the ick factor.
Still, it was a fantasy, and fantasy books are given a lot of leeway when it comes to this stuff. And, it was definitely an entertaining read.
:)

Great Review...Loved The Simpson references :D

Sumit wrote: "Great Review...Loved The Simpson references :D"

Thanks, Sumit! :)

I am reading this right now, and I thought exactly the same thing. Like exactly, down to similarity to Koko the gorilla. I'm enjoying the story and all, but yeah. No. The mind boggles.

Tina wrote: "I am reading this right now, and I thought exactly the same thing. Like exactly, down to similarity to Koko the gorilla. I'm enjoying the story and all, but yeah. No. The mind boggles."

It sounds like our great minds think alike, Tina! ;)

OMG! 😂I love this review. I was thinking about this book and looking up some reviews, yours got my attention. Great review, Jilly.

Grace wrote: "OMG! 😂I love this review. I was thinking about this book and looking up some reviews, yours got my attention. Great review, Jilly."

Thanks, Grace!
I hope I didn't ruin the mystery and romance of the book for you. lol!!