The question that hangs over the opening scenes of THE WEIGHT OF WATER raises a puzzle in the viewer's mind: What has the past murder of two women got to do with the present occupants of a boating party who are revisiting the scene of the crime? Events keep shifting back and forth between past and present, as a photojournalist tells her husband that she wants to do further investigating on a murder that took place in 1873. The other guests on the boat include a poet (SEAN PENN) and his wife, his brother and his girlfriend ELIZABETH HURLEY. Penn seems to have his eye on his brother's flirtatious girl. The handsome, more carefree brother is played by JOSH LUCAS.
Each time the events switch back to the 1870s, we learn more and more about the inhabitants of the small cottage where the murders took place. SARAH POLLEY is a hard-working housewife whose husband takes in a boarder (CIARIN HINDS) who immediately lusts after her, telling her that his rheumatism needs massaging from her. But as the plot thickens, the link between past and present never becomes clear. After a savage murder has taken place in the cottage, she blames him for the crime and is responsible for his hanging when she testifies against him.
A storm at sea threatens to take the lives of those aboard the boating party--but even though the surf is rough, they manage to survive the storm after a brave attempt to save the life of ELIZABETH HURLEY results in the death of SEAN PENN, whose wife has been jealous of the attention he pays to his brother's girlfriend. But still, the weak link with the past events of murder fails to connect to the present except that jealousy is somehow implied.
It's a curious film--with perhaps some deep meaning lurking beneath the story's surface, but the characters in the present aren't really fleshed out as well as those inhabiting the past. In the past, we learn what really is supposed to have happened that night in the small cottage by the sea. But then a disclaimer at the end of the film tells us that the murders were never actually solved and there is still doubt remaining as to what did really happen.
Impressive performances by SARAH POLLEY, CIARIN HINDS and SEAN PENN stand out in the memory when the film is over. But it's a curious piece of film-making, disjointed in its use of flashbacks to cover the past and failing, ultimately, to make sense of what happens in the present.
Summing up: An interesting failure without plausible explanations.
Each time the events switch back to the 1870s, we learn more and more about the inhabitants of the small cottage where the murders took place. SARAH POLLEY is a hard-working housewife whose husband takes in a boarder (CIARIN HINDS) who immediately lusts after her, telling her that his rheumatism needs massaging from her. But as the plot thickens, the link between past and present never becomes clear. After a savage murder has taken place in the cottage, she blames him for the crime and is responsible for his hanging when she testifies against him.
A storm at sea threatens to take the lives of those aboard the boating party--but even though the surf is rough, they manage to survive the storm after a brave attempt to save the life of ELIZABETH HURLEY results in the death of SEAN PENN, whose wife has been jealous of the attention he pays to his brother's girlfriend. But still, the weak link with the past events of murder fails to connect to the present except that jealousy is somehow implied.
It's a curious film--with perhaps some deep meaning lurking beneath the story's surface, but the characters in the present aren't really fleshed out as well as those inhabiting the past. In the past, we learn what really is supposed to have happened that night in the small cottage by the sea. But then a disclaimer at the end of the film tells us that the murders were never actually solved and there is still doubt remaining as to what did really happen.
Impressive performances by SARAH POLLEY, CIARIN HINDS and SEAN PENN stand out in the memory when the film is over. But it's a curious piece of film-making, disjointed in its use of flashbacks to cover the past and failing, ultimately, to make sense of what happens in the present.
Summing up: An interesting failure without plausible explanations.