Movie - Open Water - let me save you the trouble

Obviously, open spoilers below. The quick and dirty spoiler-free review: don’t waste your time.

Okay, so the movie Open Water is a few years old - I recall it playing in theaters and I was somewhat interested in the idea but didn’t go see it then. So Discovery Channel is running shark week, and my cable On Demand put up some shark movies, with this one being one. Since I had some time and I saw it and it was only $3, I figured I would check it out.

The premise: two people SCUBA diving get abandoned in open water (i.e. ocean) and spend the night in shark infested waters. Okay, scary and all that, one of those “harrowing tales of survival” like on that TV show “I Shouldn’t Be Alive”. Right?

First thing that jumps out is the movie production quality. The image quality is something like a local PBS station. It’s not even widescreen, but old TV proportions. This is definitely not a major movie studio production. I was thinking, “What? Is this the right movie?” Okay.

The director has some strange ideas about framing the scene. There are lots of ultra closeups of set pieces and props, strange scenes of the city and/or surrounding wilderness. The acting is wooden, especially at the beginning. And for me to notice, it has to be dreadful. The pacing is slow and cumbersome.

But at least there’s an interesting true story in there, right?

Now time for the plot. It starts with the couple in America, getting ready for their vacation trip, talking on cell phones and loading up in the car. The acting in this part is dreadful. Daniel, the boyfriend/husband (I was never certain, they had different last names), even comments on her packing her laptop and if they will have internet connection. So they fly to wherever they went (I don’t think I caught where they went, maybe someplace in the Caribbean?). Theh it shows them in their hotel room the night before, discussing their home life and jobs, and suddenly there’s a gratuitous booby shot. Not sure what it’s doing in there, Susan is sitting on the bed reading with some stuff on her face (beauty product of some type), and she’s buck naked. Daniel comes over (wearing boxers), they turn out the lights, kiss, she comments he now has stuff on his face, then they decide not to have sex and go to sleep.

The next day they load up on the boat. Apparently this was a last minute trip for them, they worked out their plans in a hurry and got on this boat. As the boat drives out to sea, the dive captain goes over the rules, talks about the buddy system and how long they’ll be down. One guy takes a head count by looking around and counting heads himself while people are milling about and prepping and whatnot, and writes the number on the clipboard - 20.

This is a horribly sloppy protocol for taking a headcount. If you actually want to ensure you get everybody, you should, at a minimum, make everyone sit down and pay attention so you ensure you don’t miss anyone or get confused while people move about. More preferrable is to have them count off (1, 2, etc), so everyone actually participates in the count. The strictest protocol would be to itemize the list by name and have everyone physically check in. Their boat isn’t that big and with 20 people, that’s fairly crowded, and with people moving about, stowing their gear, checking their tanks, etc, that’s a busy deck with a lot of moving bodies and no room to really see everything.

Okay, as they get to the dive site, one guy apparently forgot his mask, and so he has to wait in the boat. As the people hit the water, Daniel and Susan wander off from the group to do their own thing. Daniel is pretty experienced and so it shouldn’t be a problem, they know how long the dive captain said they’d be down. Oh, someone in the boat asked about sharks, and the dive captain said “If you see a shark and don’t want to see sharks, close your eyes. The sharks around here are not very aggressive.”

So we see some undersea shots, some look at morays and fish and a small sand shark that Susan pets as it swims by. And then we see at the boat, a couple surface early, the lady is having trouble getting her ears to equalize and they climb out of the water. So jr boat boy puts tally marks on the clipboard for the people who came out of the water - 3 (one for the guy with no mask, then this couple). Next, the guy without the mask is eager to get dive time and asks to borrow the girl’s mask, and gets the guy to go into the water with him (since he is required to have a buddy), so he gets to have dive time after all. Great. Only tally-boy doesn’t bother to record that people went back into the water. Stupid, sloppy.

So the dive time starts winding down, all the people come back to the boat and load up, and tally-boy marks down a tallymark every time someone comes out of the water. So of course he gets 20, but Susan and Daniel, who are off doing their own thing, are still in the water. The boat loads up and leaves. Did I mention how stupid this is? Marking when people come out of the water? Not doing a second count off?

Daniel and Susan come back, and they’re confused because the boats gone and nobody is there. Susan is complaining that Daniel got them lost and kept them late, they look around. There are a few boats in the distance, but it’s a long way away, so they try to stay put and hope their boat comes back. Only they realize they’re drifting with the current. They try signaling boats but can’t get any attention- it’s too far, they’re too low in the water. So they stay together and float along.

Now we’re subjected to many interesting little events. They go through some jellyfish and get stung up a bit. There’s a joke about peeing and getting warmed up. They’re worried about sharks. A shark splashes up nearby, and bumps into them, but then leaves. We’re shown a clock counter to let us know how long it’s been.

Eventually they get upset, Daniel yells. They have an argument, make up. They accidentally fall asleep and get separated, but wake up close enough and find each other again. Susan’s leg is sore, Daniel checks it, she’s actually got some teeth marks on her leg. Apparently something checked her out while she was asleep.

Occassionally we are subjected to seeing sharks come near them, then leave. Meanwhile, we get interesting shots of the night life in the port, random people partying and carrying on, life going on as normal.

Eventually the day drags out, more sharks show up, one of them bites Daniel on the leg and he’s bleeding, Susan ties it with her dive belt. They’re clinging together, and we get nighttime. It’s dark, with a storm in the distance, so we’re subjected to pitch black screen with flashes of lightning to see. This part is pretty intense, so I’m glad it didn’t go on for long.

Finally, the next morning, someone goes back to the boat and notices their stuff still there, and starts raising the alarm. Boats and planes scramble to go looking for the lost couple.

Meanwhile, Daniel and Susan are still floating at sea. Daniel dies, and Susan kicks his body free, so the sharks take it. And she’s floating alone. And then she takes off her SCUBA tank, and then goes under water.

Epilogue: fishermen pull a shark and start cutting it open, and find their dive camera inside. Whee, sharks will eat anything.

Wait, they both died? Then how did we get this harrowing tale? What, the whole thing is fiction? GAH!!! I sat through all that, the horrid film quality, the bad cinematography, the wooden acting, the scary sharks, and all of it was just made up? WHAT a Rip Off!

So the part where they’re in the hotel and she has schmutz on her face and he gets it on his? Made up. The part where they’re in the water and pet the sand shark, and then later Daniel says “Earlier you were petting a shark, now you’re scared?” and Susan says, “Please, that was just an overgrown catfish”? Totally made up. The part where they get separated and then have to swim back together - fiction. It’s all what the writer decided would be a good story about how these two people might have spent their time before they died. All we know is they were abandoned at sea, disappeared, and are presumed dead and eaten by sharks. Maybe the parts on the boat have some basis in fact - there were people to interview about that, but everthing else is just a made up story.

DAMMIT, I feel lied to. I was expected a survival story. I was expecting someone telling the tale of what happened and how they made it through. I was not expecting the Perfect Storm ending, where everybody dies. :mad:

So, in summary, don’t waste your time, your money, your sanity on this piece of dreck. If you want a true story, this isn’t it, it’s only inspired by something that happened. If you want a good movie, this isn’t it. The director sucks and the budget was low and the production quality was amateur.

And if you’re looking for a good shark attack movie, this isn’t one of those, either. There’s relatively little actual shark attack. There are some “boo” surprise moments with the sharks, and some tense parts, but no Jaws moments.

So, take my advice, skip it.

It came out in 2003 in 1.85:1 ratio - I’d guess your cable station cut it down. It had a half-million dollar budget - it didn’t aspire to be a huge hit. It did a decent job at what it wanted, IMO.

It is based on a true story - Tom and Eileen Lonergan were diving in Australia, got left behind by the dive boat, and were never found. There are some conspiracy theories that they were doing some kind of drop-out-of-sight scam, but that’s up there with 9/11 conspiracy theories.

I’m a little confused by your complaint that it’s not a true story - if the people involved died, and didn’t leave behind video or a diary or something, then the writer & director pretty much have to make up what happened in the time since they were last seen. As long as they weren’t rescued by aliens or eaten by mermaids in the movie, why shouldn’t that mean that it’s based on a true story?

I didn’t know if it was suppose to be true or not, never really matters to me, I just quit watching because I just didn’t care for the characters. If I had known that they both died in the end I might have kept watching.

I almost hate to point out that there is also an Open Water 2.

Does the shark barf them up?

Regards,
Shodan

Speaking as a (I’m guessing) rare person who has actually seen both, I can tell you that no, that doesn’t happen.

It does, however, have 6 people stuck in the water instead of just 2 this time, simply because they all dived off a boat to go skinny dipping without anyone thinking to lower a ladder or rope to get back onto the boat first.

No, really.

Didn’t this also really happen? Not the getting eaten by sharks part, but several people jumping off a boat in the ocean without first lowering a ladder.

Talk about a “doh” moment (if true)! I’d be surprised if this hasn’t happened a number of times.

People do some pretty dumb stuff, even people who’ve had training on not being stupid (like sport divers). I remember a story, I think it was late 70’s or early 80’s, where a couple young guys took a chainsaw out on a frozen river (the Saginaw, IIRC), cut a hole, suited up, and dived in (with SCUBA).

No rope.

The river isn’t terribly fast, but it’s faster than you can swim. I wonder how long it took them to realize (a) they couldn’t swim upstream and (b) even if they could, they couldn’t see the hole any more. I don’t remember how long it took to find their bodies.

I used to be out on the water a lot, sailing, windsurfing, etc. I occasionally worried that maybe my last thoughts would be “Oh damn, and I came out here for the fun of it …”

Another person chiming in to say that it’s actually a pretty decent movie.

I liked that they died. You don’t see bummer endings much in movies.

And I liked seeing the methods they used to amp up tension without a huge special effects budget.

I didn’t see this one but did see Frozen which had a similar premise. 3 people stuck and forgotten about on a ski lift. It was pretty dumb. Freezing to death and accidentally dropping their gloves and none of them have the common sense to pull their hands up into their sleeves:rolleyes:.

I found Open Water surprisingly effective. It does look somewhat cheap because it was filmed for peanuts but I felt they made what they had go a long way. Knowing all the sharks on film were real heightened the tension for me.

I thought the sequel was not as good but also was entertaining.

Open Water II: The Smorgasbord.

Regards,
Shodan

I thought “Open Water” (which I saw in the theater) hit its marks extremely well; the cheaper digital presentation added to the “you are there” element. It’s not a “gotta see it on the big screen movie,” I don’t think, but I do wonder if it was more effective because of the big-screen presentation.

Neither of the two lead characters were particularly likable, but I still ended up being emotionally invested in their fates. Their relationship, and reactions to their situation, seemed entirely plausible and realistic.

I’m nearly certain that “Open Water 2,” of which I’ve only seen the first half hour or so, is a sequel in name only; in addition to their being no characters from the first movie (obviously), none of the other talent (director and writer, who happened to be the same person, or producers) involved in “Open Water” is listed in the credits for the second movie.

The Reef is a similar film, that I liked better than Open Water (never saw Open Water 2). In The Reef, some friends are on a boat that capsizes and they have to decide whether to stay near the boat or swim for a small island several miles away. A Great White stalks them in the water.

I forget where I read the comment, but someone opined that some guy on the boat would have surely noticed that a hot blonde chick was not back on board.

I liked Open Water, I see it as an efficient, nasty (in a good way), little movie. I appreciated the unlikeable couple, they seemed more realistic, not some Hollywood-perfect-couple-in-danger. I also felt that it made the situation in the water more intense, it didn’t have the clean “at least i will die with the love of my life” wrapper. When they died, i also had the “wait, how could this be based on a true story” moment, but then thought about it and realized it was still a good movie. Sloppy counting on the boats was necessary for them to be in the water, and that part is based on the real couple. If there was a fool proof counting process, then no one gets left behind. And no i don’t have trouble believing that someone would be that half-assed (there by disrupting my suspension of disbelief).

No, I estimated on the screen ratio. It was letterboxed as a big square shape rather than fitting widescreen, i.e. it did not fit normal movie screen dimensions.

Looking at the wiki entryon the movie, it was what it appeared to be, a small private production by the writer/director and his wife, that cost $130,000 to make. Um, yeah, low budget, non-studio. It was shown at Sundance Film Festival, bought by a studio for $2.5 Million, and then distributed. I never said it aspired to be a huge hit, I said that the visual quality was poor, the cinematography was weird and distracting, the acting was stiff (especially at the beginning), and I felt like they mislead me about the premise of the story.

I never said it wasn’t “based on a true story”. They state right at the beginning it is “inspired by true events”. Noting that the character names are different and that the setting doesn’t appear to be clearly stated are clues that the story was adapted. In fact, the story was relocated from the Great Barrier Reef to the Atlantic Ocean. Also, the fact that the two people involved died, so nobody knows what actually happened. That is my complaint.

I was expecting a survivor’s story, with some pretense that the story we see bears a resemblance to things that actually occurred. Kinda like Apollo 13 is inspired by true events, but gets a few of the details wrong for dramatic purposes. Instead, I get a story where some guy said “This couple was lost at sea because of poor head-count practices, let’s tell a story about what their experience might have been like”.

If I had known it was the tragic tale of a couple that died, I would have known it was fiction. Sure, fiction inspired by a true event, but still pure fiction. Made up. Not what anyone actually witnessed or experienced, just somebody’s made up story about what might happen to a couple abandoned at sea.

Instead, I feel manipulated. There was the touching moment in the hotel - fiction. Made up. Nobody knows what happened or was said in the hotel. There was the harrowing moment when Susan awakens floating in the ocean and her husband is nowhere around and there are sharks around her. She yells and sees him and has to swim to him. He fell asleep, but they get back together. Guess what, that’s totally made up.

I can read fiction. I can watch fiction. I don’t mind fiction, when I know it’s fiction. Being told this is based on a true story, then finding out there was no one around to know any of it, that is what I object to.

Hey, I mentioned The Perfect Storm above. I actually didn’t mind it so much in that movie, because I knew going in that everybody died. I feel cheated in this movie because, other than maybe the stuff on the boat and the process of how the head count was bungled, nothing in this movie is real, not even the character names.

The wikipedia page points out they used real sharks, not mechanical sharks, and they tried to emulate real shark behavior rather than the extremism of shark “monster movies”. I can appreciate that. I can also appreciate the true tension that builds in the climactic scene at night in darkness with the storm flashes. That part is intense. But I still feel cheated. I feel lied to about the premise, I feel manipulated by the presentation of the movie, and I feel the quality of the actual movie-making was sub-par.

I can understand a couple of the director’s creative choices. During times after they’ve been stranded for hours and are huddling and starving and dehydrating et al, he throws in random scenes of people back at the resort, partying. Scenes of random wildlife on land. Life going on like normal, everyone oblivious. I see the point of those scenes. I also feel they are poorly executed and instead of providing an emotional counterpoint, they just confuse and clutter the movie.

I do not understand the director’s choice to zoom in on the props, like in the hotel room and zooming in on the lamp on the table. Zooming in on the cell phone. Those elements of the movie-making do not improve the story, do not aid keeping the audience’s attention. They are weird and off-putting.

Perhaps I would have felt better about that part if it were my only criticism.

Everything about their relationship, their reactions, their non-likeability? All fiction.

So the director imagined a more realistic couple than a Hollywood presentation. Good for him.

I never disputed that some boat crew did a poor head count. I was criticizing the boat crew for the ridiculous approach and how could they be so stupid, not criticizing the writer/director for that choice. Because that part was real - or at least somewhat real.

Think about taking a busload of elementary school kids on a field trip. Do you count them once while they’re milling about before they get on the bus, and count them once more by the number of footsteps getting on the bus at the end, but without watching closely who comes and goes? Or do you make them line up, have them count off? Take roll. There are lots of sensible techniques for head counts, the crew of that boat was incredibly sloppy in real life, thus the error.

Tell me more about the gratuitous boobie shot.

My wife and I actually went diving on the GBR 8 months after the Lonergans disappeared, so you can imagine it was quite a topic of conversation on the boat. The divemaster did a roll call by name before and after each dive, and had to look at your face before he’d check you off. He’d then do a count of tanks on board before allowing the boat to move. Every boat I’ve been on since then has had some form of name roll call, never just a count.