The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Seeing Paul Gross,after his role in Due South,is quite a change. This film H2O is a political thriller set in the near future. Water,not oil,is the main subject of this film. Our neighbour to the south,United States,is running out of it,so,they would love to get their hands on ours. In this film,the prime minister dies in a boating accident,which turns out to be murder. Slowly,the solicitor general discovers their is a plot,to merge Canada into the United States. He tries to prevent this happening,with tragic results. I sent a couple of DVD's to a couple of friends in the US of this film. One person did not care for it,the politics was to confusing. The other person did enjoy it,the political background of the film,confusing,so he goes to the library and gets a few books about Canada and it political setup. I am now waiting for the next film,H2O: Trojan horse.

A taut and topical political thriller that, unfortunately, goes off the rails.In its defense, the basic premise is plausible, the writing is tense and dramatic, and the acting and direction are professional. Other posters have complained about implausibilities in the plot, and the wrong names used for things. A political thriller must have some unexpected twists or there would be no story, and we can assume that the "H2O" world has different names for things like the RCMP and War Measures Act.The series, however, goes off the rails in the third hour. We can accept one or two extremely implausible events if the story requires it, but when near-impossible events happen again and again, with a new one each few minutes, credibility crumbles. Worse, earlier crises are left unresolved before the next one hits.I'll give an example. An assassin is killing anyone, no matter how powerful or insignificant, who threatens the conspiracy. One of the major characters is a police detective who is about to unravel the plot. The assassin traps her, spills clues about the conspiracy, and then lets her go. This is an absurd Hollywoodism, like something from an old Flash Gordon serial. There are even bigger howlers in the series, and I know what happens later, but this is the one that made me want to throw something at the TV.The series plays like it was written by a committee, and each member wanted to get their plot twist in whether it made sense or not. The ending is a disappointment too; there is yet another plot twist in the last few minutes and the story just stops. All the viewer is left with is a huge number of unresolved plot twists.

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.

As someone who is very fond of politics- especially Canadian politics- this film deeply troubles me.It is the story of how the country can be bought and sold so easily. It is a warning. While extremely unlikely, this could happen. It uses characters very deliberately based on previous Canadian icons (Trudeau being the big one) to hit close to home. These people have already been in power and we never thought anything overly terrible of what they did while they were in power. This film- in a very Isaac Asimov way (though, obviously Asimov was brilliant and Gross, while a good writer, cannot compare) shows us how close we are to our greatest fears. One day, the prime minister dies in a canoeing incident and after running and winning leadership of the party his father lead, his son takes power and starts pushing through some very aggressive legislations. Later, we find out that his father's death and that of the woman who was with him were suspicious in the extreme and we start to see little by little what's really going on, though the ending is a total shock. It is hard to describe without giving it away, so suffice it to say it uses past Canadian political experiences (the Free Trade agreement, the War Measures Act, Black October) to show how close we are to losing it all. With outstanding direction (actually making Parliament Hill look sexy), great acting from Paul Gross, Guy Nadon and Martha Henry and a shocker ending, this is well worth watching. Especially for Canadian political junkies like me.