Review Detail

What to say? Waterworld is considered a very expensive "flop" that almost bankrupted a major studio.

The first thing that struck me after the credits rolled was, "How was this so expensive?" There are very few special effects. Most of scenes consist of the cast riding a sail boat. There are some scenes where the studio made some "cities" in the ocean, but they don't scream, "Wow, that must have been hard to do." They look like they're thrown together with weathered plywood and 2x4's.

Secondly, the story just didn't make me care about what happened to the cast. Costner is far from lovable, he is actually barely likable. The woman and the girl that are on his boat really don't add much and I really never got very invested in their story either.

I watched this edit for pretty much the same reason I watched TM2YC's edit of Ghostbusters 3. Could the edit make what was considered a bad movie in to something that is watchable?

Short answer, YES. It is mystifying how much was cut from the theatrical release. I don't want to give spoilers but I will say there is a VERY BIG BOAT in this edit which I don't remember from the original cut. I think I just found out where all that budget went and it's a crime it wasn't utilized in the original cut of the film. Additionally the story around Costner's character is so much better in this version. In the end I get why he is the way he is and I actually feel empathy for him.

I really liked this movie. I honestly can't say I loved it, even after this treatment, but this edit does make a bad movie good. If you like Costner, or late 80's style over-the-top action/adventure films, give it a shot.