[deleted]
[deleted]
She's a shit actor... tachnically speaking... Very limited range...
It's not that she's an understated actor, or subtle... She's just mediocre in terms of performance... There is no nuance, even in quieter scenes... Just the same acting whether she's eating an orange, being swept away by wolfpeople or nursing her ageing mother... there is simply nothing there...
Compare her to January Jones in Mad Men for example... an incredibly nuanced, complex, subtle performance, while being understated and controlled... layers of meaning and restrained emotions... masterfull
Stewart would make a decent extra with her skillset, but has become incredibly successfull... good for her, would never begrudge her that... but she's still and always be a wooden actor...
Its spelled "technically". Learn to spell . Maybe Kristen Stewart can still spell better than you. January Jones? Seriously? Jones is and was only good for Mad Men. Anything beyond that like X-Men: First Class or Unknown, nobody cared how " nuanced " she was. You are probably not that great at whatever it is you do for a living either. Yet you want to criticize Stewart. Stewart is well aware of her her own limitations and has admit to them, and that's what her fans like most about her. She is not like other Millennial generation actresses who are so pretentious about themselves. If you don't like Stewart, that's your problem. She probably would want you to keep your ten dollars for your McDonald's meal instead. And that's what also great about Stewart, she does a better job handling haters than our current American president handles his haters. I will say if you can disdain Kristen Stewart despite her success, then you will be just as disdainful to someone who is not as fortunate as she is. Perhaps you already are. Because prejudice is a social ailment that will never go away. Stewart is a typecast, no doubt. But there are so many people out there who are OVER IT! Learn to live in peace, my friend.
shareAd hominems... is that all you could contribute?
So one cannot have a critical opinion of your beloved stewart? Only positivity is allowed?
Why? Are you really suggesting that she is beyond reproach because not only is she a severly limited actress, as it seems from your post even she admits to, but also because she lacks ambition?!
With fans like you, she doesn't need critics...
"Very limited range?" Perhaps you haven't seen her guest host appearance on Saturday Night Live: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2uqwbrxxs
Can you still say with a straight face that Kristen is a "wooden actor"?
And why is it that in 2015, Kristen received more critical acclaim, via critics group awards from the most prestigious film critics groups in the world (i.e., New York Film Critics Circle, National Society of Film Critics, Boston Society of Film Critics, Los Angeles Film Critics Association), more prestigious critical acclaim than any actress that year including 2016 Best Actress Oscar winner Brie Larson and 2016 Best Supporting Actress Oscar winner Alicia Vikander? Of course you can't answer that without having a negative bias towards Kristen.
So in response to you as well as her haters such as Renovatio who claim she's a "s**t actor", the critics love her and continue to shower her with high praise in her performances in films such as Clouds of Sils Maria, Cafe Society and Personal Shopper.
Hate her or love her she was quite good in stuff like "The Cake Eaters."
shareHate her or love her she was quite good in stuff like "The Cake Eaters."
Whenever someone accuses Kristen of playing the same character in all of her films--in other words merely playing herself--two of her roles debunk this misconception:
The Cake Eaters as you mentioned, where she realistically and believably portrays a teenager suffering from the highly debilitating and degenerative nueromuscular disease know as Friedreich's ataxia and The Runaways, where Kristen becomes the rock 'n roll icon Joan Jett.
In my opinion, Kristen was the spitting image of J.J.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yNt5_nOKOk
share
"Hate her or love her she was quite good in stuff like "The Cake Eaters."
Agreed, and she's been very good, received good praise, for many of her other roles where she played a challenging role. Such as Sils Maria, Personal Shopper, Speak, The Runaways to name a few roles she's been in since a teen up to present day
"Whenever someone accuses Kristen of playing the same character in all of her films--in other words merely playing herself--two of her roles debunk this misconception:
The Cake Eaters as you mentioned, where she realistically and believably portrays a teenager suffering from the highly debilitating and degenerative nueromuscular disease know as Friedreich's ataxia and The Runaways, where Kristen becomes the rock 'n roll icon Joan Jett. "
Yes, she's played many diverse roles and done well by the critics. The "wooden" stereotype was created probably for Twilight or something and those who hated that movie series or disliked her latch onto some of these phrases.
I think also she's quite realistic in her roles as to how real people act and react in real life, and doesn't go overboard in showing emotions and reactions except when it fits the scene.
But of course that doesn't mean that everyone should accept these things and like her. Just like any actor she'll have people who like and those who dislike her style and how she does her work.
Yes, she's played many diverse roles and done well by the critics. The "wooden" stereotype was created probably for Twilight or something and those who hated that movie series or disliked her latch onto some of these phrases.
I think also she's quite realistic in her roles as to how real people act and react in real life, and doesn't go overboard in showing emotions and reactions except when it fits the scene.
Besides her work in the Twilight Saga film franchise, one must also consider that many of Kristen's roles were small supporting roles in films such as Anesthesia, Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk, Certain Women, Undertow, Into the Wild, Fierce People, In the Land of Women, and The Safety of Objects. In films where she had a more substantial role in films such as The Runaways, Adventureland, Equals, Panic Room, Welcome to the Rileys, American Ultra, Still Alice and Cafe Society, she does quite well.
Besides Twilight, the three roles where she is indisputably the lead actor/protagonist--I'm talking about Personal Shopper, The Cake Eaters and Speak--are arguably some of her best work to date. In her most critically acclaimed role thus far in her career, Clouds of Sils Maria, she was virtually a co-lead, well at least as far as the most important scenes in this film goes. So one could also argue that the more substantive role she has in a film--with the exception of Twilight--the better her performance.
The point I'm trying to make is when it comes to cast design, bit parts are intended to be deliberately flat, intentionally scaled down in order not to outshine the lead actor who is usually the protagonist. So in my opinion, her "weaker" performances are due to the limits her roles place on her as an actor not because she lacks acting talent.
share
But of course that doesn't mean that everyone should accept these things and like her. Just like any actor she'll have people who like and those who dislike her style and how she does her work.
I'm guessing a considerable amount of moviegoers dislike her performances because she often portrays unlikeable characters with whom they have difficulty empathizing with--pretty much the antithesis of what an American sweetheart type of actress would choose to portray. Most of her films can be considered dialogue driven talking heads movies, as in not much in the way of subtext for the actor to feed off of and capitalize on, which is a turnoff for many regardless of who stars in such films as time and time again, film critics speak of how Kristen churned out an admirable performance despite the limits of the screenplay. Another potentially off-putting aspect of the characters she often portrays in films include the failure of her character to change in a major way for the better or for worse. It also doesn't help when most of her films have down endings--not happily-ever-after types of ending many moviegoers are in search of since she stars in mostly indie/European art house style films.
Again, the limits the story, plot and the characters she portrays in many of her films put restrictive limits on how she acts out such roles. share
Yes. She's the same, only the costumes change and tv laugh track added (re:SNL)...
Anyway, i go by the movies. Very limited range, if she wasn't so young i would have thought she was botoxed and thus couldnt emote.. i have older friends like this. Microexpressions gone... but even they dont sound monotone, even though they are as expressionless...
It's fine. She's very successful, has fans and such... You guys like her, I think she's passable in roles where she plays a slightly withdrawn/stunted type (albeit one-note), or as a minor side character like in Still Alice... but mediocre otherwise... I dont mind seeing her in movies...
But yeah, i do think she's a stiff actor... very stiff... perhaps she could get training in this regard, but maybe this stiffness appeals to her audience... the lack of sensuality and such that is common to the millennial aesthetic
Do you think she could pull of any of the three lead female roles in even a trashy genre movie like Girl On A Train with Blunt, Ferguson and Bennett? I doubt it.
Yes. She's the same, only the costumes change and tv laugh track added (re:SNL)...
So how do you explain why NBC submitted Kristen for Emmy consideration for her guest host appearance on SNL if she merely acted the same in all of her various sketches as you implied: http://www.goldderby.com/article/2017/emmy-submissions-universal-television-nbc-category-placements-master-of-none-snl-kimmy-schmidt-news-975318642/
And what's impressive about her being nominated in the "Comedy Guest Actress" category is Kristen's going up against some of the best actresses not just in terms of being recognized comedic actresses such as Oscar winning actress Octavia Spencer, Oscar nominated actress Melissa McCarthy, Oscar nominated actress Kristen Wiig and 4-time Golden Globe nominated actress Scarlett Johansson, but also because of all the critical acclaim and major awards accolades they have received. Even as a fan of Kristen, I would be the first to admit that comedy is not her forte--and yet NBC seems to think she has comedic chops to rival the best that Hollywood has to offer.
"Anyway, i go by the movies."
Here are brief snippets from all of her performances in films which have already been released in theaters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNIEHHEZF3U
As far as you saying she lacks sensuality, I believe sensuality is one of her fortes especially when it comes to her being sensual with her onscreen love interest in films such as Into the Wild: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THchtDr_7SI
Do you still believe that she acts exactly the same in all of her films? If you still insist she's monotone, can you name one actress from her generation that does exhibit the kind of range you believe an ideal A-list actress should be exhibiting and provide proof of such range via video clips from said actress' performances? I doubt it.
share
Never heard of cake eaters... I'll check it out...
The NBC nomination is probably for them to seem relevant with her sought after fanbase... also its TV. I dont watch much tv. You mention her competitors are comics SNL types like mccarthy, wiig, a caricature like spenser and the equally wooden johanson, so SNL self congratulation, a caricature or an equally comotose actress; i dont find that agruement compelling...
Of her generation, i think the best actress is Saorise Ronan, but thats an unfair comparison as Ronan is actually very good. Arguably the best of her generation so far, by far...
A more relevant comparison would be to an actress like shailene woodley, a good but not amazing actress, who is not wooden at all... much more emotive and has far more range... with lessons Kirsten could be as decent...
As for sensuality, I was thinking more along the lines of Haley Bennett or such.. only a couple of years older than kirsten, but so much woman! A bit of an unfair comparison though, as she's so beautiful... but still could give you an idea of what i'm talking about.
Sorry, but i dont do youtube. For Ronan, watch her in anything from the past 5 years, Woodley has a couple of dramas, Bennett nearly stole The Girl On The Train... Really makes you feel it...
Good discussion...