Home > Drama >

H2O

AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

H2O (2004)

October. 31,2004
|
6.1
| Drama Thriller
AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

When Canada's Prime Minister drowns in what appears to be a boating accident, his son takes office and is drawn into a deceptive world of power and corruption.

...

Watch Trailer

Free Trial Channels

AD
Show More

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Sameer Callahan
2004/10/31

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

More
Ricardo Daly
2004/11/01

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

More
Edwin
2004/11/02

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

More
Fulke
2004/11/03

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

More
Roedy Green
2004/11/04

This movie is 3 hours long. It has a cast of tens of thousands (at least it feels that way.) I think Sebastian Spence was about the only Canadian actor _not_ in it. I exaggerate a tad. Much of it appears to have been filmed in the Canadian parliament buildings in Ottawa, 24 Sussex Drive (the PM's residence), military bases and other places that would have required endless bureaucratic pandering to get permission to film. The movie overuses some of this footage. "It cost us a bundle, and you are damn well going to appreciate it."It deals in more substantial way than you would expect with Canadian political themes: separatism, water, bullying by the USA, fear of terrorists, NAFTA, political union with the USA.The dialogue is quite wooden. I think it was all written by one person. It needs to be re-written to be more idiosyncratic for each character. The mother with her drinking is a little too one-dimensional. But I think that was partly deliberate. Everyone LIES, especially to the public. Because they are not good liars, they are unconvincing every time they open their mouths. It is thus quite a cynical look at political intrigue and under the table deals. Every public speech says the exact opposite of what the character said in private earlier.One of the strangest things about the movie, there are no clear good guys and bad guys. Your loyalties shift back and forth. Some people you just can't decide. Others you know are bad, but can't figure out who they are working for or what they are attempting to accomplish with their mayhem.The relationships and true motivations are MURKY, worthy of the machinations in an English murder mystery.I am pretty sure I will watch it again, hoping with foresight to figure more of the movie out. I also wondered just what facts form the framework of this story. It feels like a historical reconstruction (though it takes place in a fictitious 2004). The smug, power-crazy, plump, young Prime Minister played by Paul Gross bears a strong resemblance to the actual P.M. Stephen Harper. He even has the same articulate reverence for lying.

More
Rose
2004/11/05

Pretty good, and equally unlikely and likely, but an interesting and fairly valid idea in any case. Misleading, but captivating throughout.I thought it was most interesting because I live in Canada and that's probably the only Canadian Politics movie I've ever seen in my life.Worth seeing if you're interested in politics and stories like it, but it tends to drag on sometimes, and much concentration is required to keep track of who's who and what's going on.When I first started watching it sort of reminded me of Wag The Dog, which takes place in the United States and has Robert De Niro and Dustin Hoffman in it. It's very well done, perhaps more so than this movie, but it depends on what you like. As the movie progresses, of course, the similarities end, but Wag The Dog is worth seeing too.Otherwise excellent.

More
iang-3
2004/11/06

Having just watched this on tape I have to was both shocked and in awe at the magnitude of this mini-series.We know for a fact that the American water supply is dwindling, and their first port of call for a refill will be north of the border, so why not make a movie about it ?As political junkie, I can tell you yes a candidate can be elected in a by election, have a leadership race, win it and then become defacto PM, unlikely but possible [which is the basic premise for this whole movie].Acting was excellent, sets were above average, some scenarios was jaw droppingly plausible, especially the playing of Quebec and First Nations off each other. The idea of solicitor general as being a national hero was a bit of a stretch. However, once the war measures act was dropped he was about the only person in the country that could have done what he did. The mis-use of absolute power under the act played equally in to the hands of both sides here, the sight of tanks on parliament hill was scary enough.I think this is a plausible future, not much different than the millions of Austrians who were a little shocked when Germany annexed them prior to WW2.The scenario I would like to see played out would have been what next ? The annexation of Canada by the USA would lead to what ? I envisioned WW3 with Europe and the UK coming to the aid of Canada and a conventional WW3 being fought right here in North America.

More
colin1mc
2004/11/07

Paul Gross learned many things while playing a Mountie on US TV, I will grant him that. That is all, however, that I will grant him. This 2-part mini-series looks slick, but that is as deep as it goes. The attempts to portray a kind of unrequited affair with the female lead were pathetic. The portrayal that either the First Nations or Quebec would present a serious threat with actual violence (as seen in this film) is laughable; sorry, but Paul Gross is too much a pretty-boy to be taken seriously in this role. Bottom line: the premise is flawed (you cannot possibly be elected in a by-election, then become Prime Minister within the time-frame presented); and the enactment of such a thing as the War Meaures Act could not possibly occur within the context of this movie. Given what went on within Quebec the last time it was used (I was there), an enactment of it under the circumstances presented in this movie is an incomprehensible thing to anyone who lived there at that time. You want to create the situation for a referendum on sovereignty? That would be it, and sovereignty would win, with my vote helping! Second bottom line:way too slick overall to be taken seriously as any kind of drama/commentary on the world we live in in reality! 2 thumbs DOWN! Not even worth a re-watch.

More