Wednesday, 22 April 2015

2 films I'd like to watch

This new adaptation of Madame Bovary:

And this reworking of the book:

Why do I have a feeling that the 2nd one would be better?
Of course, no film adaptation can be half as great as Flaubert's masterpiece, and I don't have such expectations, but it may be interesting to see how people adapt it anyway (why do you think I watched 5 Anna Karenina films?). 
Still think Mia Wasikowska looks wrong for the role. Watching the trailer, I keep thinking about her Jane Eyre (and I didn't think highly of that version). As Emma Bovary, Mia Wasikowska looks exactly like her Jane Eyre, in better clothes. Is she going to play every significant female character from classic novels, like Keira Knightley (Elizabeth Bennet, Anna Karenina, Lara Antipova...)? Also, if the film is like the trailer, it's likely that the essence of the novel is not retained- the sentimental, shallow, philistine Emma Bovary now looks like a heroine who lives for love and passion, and challenges conventions. Or maybe I'm just being cynical. 
Ezra Miller is talented though. I watched The Perks of Being a Wallflower quite soon after We Need to Talk About Kevin and saw his astonishing transformation. Now that's great acting. (Why do people talk more about actors who don't have a bit of talent in them, such as Robert Pattinson, than the good ones like Ezra Miller or Paul Dano?) 

What do you think? Are you going to see either of these films? 


  1. Mia Waikowska isn't seductive-looking enough. Her mousy looks are OK for Jane Eyre (though her acting wasn't passionate and she didn't nail the accent) but not Emma Bovary. I think she only really fits the weird girl type. Even Keira Knightley would look more the part - she certainly knows how to look bored. And she looks more femme fatale than Mia. But Keira Knightley seems to be the same person in the movies she acts in - it's Keira Knightley you think of, not Elizabeth Swann or LIzzie Bennet. Or Kate Winslet could be Madame Bovary. She can do the temperamental seductive type. She was obviously miscast as Sue Brideshead. Helena Bonham Carter is a better actress. Even though she's known as a goth queen, her Madame Thenardier and Duchess of York were different enough. Though she's better at villains. And she can do period drama. She was Olivia and Lucy Honeychurch years ago.

    It's looks and charisma people go for, not acting talent nowadays. If you play a character convincingly but you're not so hot, people will diss you (see Jane Eyre 1973). If you play the character wrongly but you smoulder, people will go gaga over you (see Jane Eyre 2006). I notice that actresses are expected to be hotter than actors, whereas if a not so handsome actor acts well he may still get by. But we tend not to emphasise good acting skills so much in women compared to men. They must be hot or likeable in order to be memorable. Sigh.

    1. So you've read Madame Bovary?
      Mia Wasikowska's good in Stoker. But then that character's not supposed to express much emotion.
      When I watched Jane Eyre, I actually laughed right in the cinema when it came to the outburst scene.
      Emma Bovary isn't a kind of femme fatale. She destroys herself mostly. I'm not sure if Keira Knightley has the look of someone so sentimental and fatalistic, someone crazy because of "love".
      Helena Bonham Carter is a talented actress, (sort of) ruined by Tim Burton. She was great as Ophelia.
      That comment on Jane Eyre 2006, what do you mean?