***MILD SPOILERS***

Just to get it out of the way, what everyone’s thinking about “The Shape of Water” is, it’s the movie where Sally Hawkins fucks a fish man.

For the record, however, despite the sentient creature in Guillermo del Toro’s film commonly being referred to as a fish person, it’s clearly stated that he is amphibian. So, stop calling him “fish man,” as it would be much more accurate to refer to him as “frog man.” Thus, “The Shape of Water” is the movie where Sally Hawkins fucks a frog man. And don’t say it so flippantly, as if they only did it once, because she and the frog man have a good relationship, OK?

Anyway, “The Shape of Water” stars the aforementioned Sally Hawkins as Elisa, a mute woman who performs janitorial duties at a government science lab in 1950s America, in the city of Baltimore to be precise. There’s never anything good going on in movie government science labs, and that’s true here too.

This lab in particular is run by Richard Strickland (Michael Shannon), who is working on an important find for the U.S. government, an amphibious humanoid they captured after finding him in South America. It’s not totally clear what they intend to use the creature for, but there is talk of trying to gain an advantage over Russia in the Space Race. It’s the 1950s, and the Cold War is in full swing.

One day, an accident happens in the lab, and Elisa is put on cleanup duty, and she discovers this poor creature who is being tormented by his captors, and obviously kept against his will with no regard being given for his well-being. The creature doesn’t speak english, or any human tongue, but being mute, Elisa finds she is able to communicate with him through a universally understandable means: sign language. Being the only person in the facility with knowledge of the creature’s existence who is kind to him, they develop a relationship.

It would be easy to see this as a simple tale of girl-meets-frog man, but not only is the main story emotionally affecting, the side stories are wonderful too. Elisa’s next door neighbor is a mostly unsuccessful advertisement painter named Giles (Richard Jenkins), who has an affection for key-lime pie and for the male attendee behind the counter at the pie shop. There’s also Zelda (Octavia Spencer), Elisa’s coworker who continually covers for Elisa’s lack of timeliness and complains often about her husband. And finally, there’s Dr. Robert Hoffstetler (Michael Stuhlbarg), a medical expert at the lab, who it turns out, is actually a Russian spy named Dimitri, who, as a loyal Russian spy, is trying to steal the creature for the motherland. There is actually quite a bit going on around Elisa and the creature while they put the moves on one another, and all of these characters and stories are pretty interesting. So if the human-frog person love doesn’t do it for you, maybe there’s something else in the movie that will.

Del Toro’s film has the distinction of being the most quirky film in the Oscars’ best picture category. More than anything, it has that whimsical French romance feel and style that is beloved among critics, but rarely garners attention from awards committees. Maybe the fact that this one is in English and set in the U.S. helps it. But, despite the Oscar buzz it began attracting months before its release in late 2017, it seems like an odd choice for a best picture nominee, and an even odder one to win the award. In any other time, say, an era in which Donald Trump wasn’t president, it’s hard to see this movie getting the attention it received, but with its sci-fi bent and its general good nature, it’s refreshing to see a movie like this get so many accolades. It’s great to see del Toro finally recognized too.

Elisa may not be a particularly deep character. She likes to eat hard-boiled eggs, take baths, and take food to Giles, so they can watch TV together, and that’s about all there is to her. But she is so good-natured that it’s easy to root for her. Since she’s mute, she speaks sign language, which is cool because it’s rare for a main character in a movie to only sign. It’s also impressive how strongly Hawkins is able to emote through her body language, since she doesn’t speak, and she’s especially amazing in a scene where she tells the overbearingly evil Richard “thank you” (she doesn’t actually say “thank you,” she says… something else). Elisa also makes a convincing case for why she sees the frog man as a romantic partner rather than just feeling empathy for the poor creature. The gist of her reasoning is, humans — men specifically — are cruel.

Del Toro movies always feature a monster and monstrous humans, and almost always, it always shakes out that the humans are the real monsters. It should come as no surprise that the same is true here, though what sets this one apart is that the monster here is a love interest for the main character and, though not harmless, is well-intentioned.

And the real monster is, of course, the government, the U.S., Russia, but mostly, Richard. Michael Shannon is probably a nice enough fellow, but he just has an evil face, which makes him predisposed to play a character like Richard. You’ve probably seen Richard’s evil act before: a measured, collected, confident professional, who is more focused on the job than even his own well-being, but he truly believes he is really the good guy here. It is easy to write him off as your typical Evil McEvilface: a one-note, obvious bad guy with no redeeming qualities tethering him to anything relatably human. But he’s actually the most fascinating character in the movie.

When he’s not on the job, his life looks like the the lives of those people Elisa and Giles see on TV. It’s the ’50s, and Richard is living large the suburban life. He’s got the house with the white-picket fence with regular visits from the milkman. He has two children and a wife who takes care of the house. Richard makes love to her while he fantasizes about buying a new car. And he’s a God-fearing white man who believes that God probably looks more like himself than say, Zelda, a black woman.

Not only is Richard the vision of the ’50s that the current U.S. president’s supporters have in their minds as they angrily shout “Make America Great Again!” but he’s also the embodiment of American capitalism and the American Dream. Elisa and Giles are the poor deviants living in tiny three-room apartments, as they toil away unfulfilled at their work, while Richard literally destroys other people to maintain his quiet, peaceful, boring lifestyle. But again, in his mind, he knows he is the righteous one.

Del Toro movies generally have a reputation for their wonderfully imaginative imagery and ideas but always falling short of making for a satisfying film. “Pan’s Labyrinth” was previously his greatest achievement. Although del Toro tries to do a lot of things in “Water,” he pulls off everything he wants to do expertly, and this is by far his most coherent film, if not his best. Though maybe in part the lack of coherence in some of his other films comes from them being in another language and their heavy references to the Spanish Civil War, which most American viewers sadly have so little knowledge of. “Water,” in contrast is simply more American and easier to understand for Americans.

Also, despite the movie winning best picture, that might be more hype than the movie and its viewers might be able to stand. With 2017 being somewhat of a down year for movies (and the Academy ignoring some good films in favor of some questionable choices), “The Shape of Water” seems like a fine pick for best picture. But it is not your typical “best picture movie,” and it’s easy to see how viewers might be let down because they were expecting more from a best picture winner. Not everything has to be ridiculously epic or overly dramatic to be a great film, and again, it’s refreshing to see a movie that has such a kind-hearted message.

In the end, the film is an exhortation to people worried about the extremity of the vitriol not only the U.S., but also other countries struggling with the rise of virulent nationalism: Be kind, help those who need help, and fight to save what’s good.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

-This quote can be attributed to many.