Water for Elephants is a circus romance set in the Great Depression, and it wants to be a sweeping, heartbreaking epic. Mostly, it settles for a serviceable, occasionally moving soap opera. Francis Lawrence directs from a screenplay by Richard LaGravenese, adapting Sara Gruen’s novel, and the film leans hard on its stars — Robert Pattinson as Jacob Jankowski and Reese Witherspoon as Marlena Rosenbluth — to carry the emotional weight. It mostly works, but the script’s structural problems keep it from greatness.
The setup is simple and effective. Jacob, a veterinary student whose parents die in a car crash, jumps aboard a passing circus train in 1931. He ends up working as an animal caretaker for the Benzini Bros., a traveling show led by the cruel ringmaster August Rosenbluth, played with oily menace by Christoph Waltz. Jacob falls for August’s wife, Marlena, a performer who is trapped in a loveless marriage. The film follows their slow-burn romance, the rise of the circus, and the arrival of a new elephant named Rosie.
Trailer, via 20th Century Studios India.
Pattinson and Witherspoon Carry the Weight
Pattinson plays Jacob as a wide-eyed outsider, earnest and clumsy in a world of hardened performers. His performance is the film’s strongest asset. He brings a quiet intensity to Jacob’s growing affection for Marlena, and his physical presence — wiry, nervous, often stumbling — fits the period and the character perfectly. He’s the reason the film’s quieter moments land.
Witherspoon plays Marlena with a delicate, fragile energy that suits the role. She’s a woman trapped in a bad situation, and Witherspoon sells the terror and the tenderness without ever tipping into melodrama. Their chemistry is genuine, and the scenes where they dance together or sit in silence are the film’s best. The problem is that the story around them is thinner than it needs to be.
Waltz as the Cruel Ringmaster
Waltz is the engine of the film’s tension. As August, he’s a man who treats animals with kindness and people with cruelty. He’s charismatic, charming, and terrifying all at once. The film spends a lot of time establishing his control over the circus, and Waltz commits fully to the role. But the script gives him too much leeway. His cruelty is presented as a force of nature, almost inevitable, rather than a choice made by a human being.
That’s a missed opportunity. A more grounded August could have made the film’s central conflict feel more urgent. Instead, the film treats him as a cartoon villain, which drains the emotional stakes from the central romance.
The Circus World Around Them
The circus itself is the film’s most vivid element. The sets are elaborate, the costumes are colorful, and the performances are energetic. There’s a sense of wonder in the way the film captures the spectacle of the show. The crowds, the lights, the music — all of it feels alive. This is a world that the film clearly loves, and that affection shines through the screen.
But the world-building is inconsistent. Some scenes feel rich and detailed, while others feel rushed and shallow. The film skips over long stretches of time, showing Jacob moving from one town to another without much context. We see the Great Depression, but we don’t really feel it. We see the circus’s financial struggles, but we don’t understand them. The film is so focused on Jacob and Marlena’s romance that it forgets to ground them in a larger world.
The Elephant and Its Problems
Rosie, the elephant, is supposed to be the film’s centerpiece. She arrives at the circus, and Jacob is assigned to train her. But the training scenes are where the film stumbles. They’re meant to be tense, but they feel mechanical. The film shows Jacob failing to connect with Rosie, and August beating her with a bullhook, but these scenes feel staged rather than earned. The elephant becomes a prop for the story’s themes rather than a character in her own right.
The film also struggles with its pacing. At 122 minutes, it’s a modest runtime, but the middle section drags. The film spends too much time on Jacob’s failed attempts to train Rosie, and the tension dissipates. By the time the climax arrives, it feels like a relief rather than a payoff.
The Romance That Never Takes Flight
The romance between Jacob and Marlena is the film’s core, and it’s where the film’s strengths and weaknesses collide. The film does a good job of establishing the power dynamic between the two leads. August controls everything, and Marlena is trapped. Jacob’s affection for her is pure, and the film captures that purity well. But the film never quite finds a way to resolve the triangle between Jacob, Marlena, and August.
The film’s ending tries to tie everything together, but it feels rushed. The resolution doesn’t feel earned, and the film’s final images feel like a concession rather than a triumph. It’s a shame, because the film has the pieces for a great ending. It just doesn’t put them together.
The Numbers Behind the Film
| Detail | Figure |
|---|---|
| Runtime | 122 minutes |
| Budget | $38 million |
| Worldwide Gross | $117 million |
| Release Date | April 22, 2011 |
Comparing the Leads
| Character | Actor | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jacob Jankowski | Robert Pattinson | Veterinary student turned circus worker |
| Marlena Rosenbluth | Reese Witherspoon | Performer and August’s wife |
| August Rosenbluth | Christoph Waltz | Ringmaster and circus owner |
The Verdict
“Water for Elephants” is a film with a strong heart and a weak script. Pattinson and Witherspoon give performances that are worth seeing, and the circus world is rendered with real care. But the story is too thin, the pacing is uneven, and the villains are too cartoonish. The film never quite reaches the heights it aims for.
It’s a solid, occasionally excellent movie. But it’s not a great one.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.
