MovieChat Forums > Jane Eyre (2011) Discussion > Was Mia Wasikowska any good in your opin...

Was Mia Wasikowska any good in your opinion?

posted 13 years ago by maharani78
193 replies | jump to latest

I think I'm going to need to watch this version again at some point to reassess, but I disliked it when I saw it yesterday at the movies.

I just watched a clip on youtube with scenes of some of the different Rochesters and Janes (not including 2011) set to music so you couldn't hear the dialogue and I thought they all pretty much did a good job of expressing emotion in their faces. Then I watched one of Mia and Fassbender and actually, he was good, but she was so flat and sullen looking (for the most part). I don't think she captured the essence of the character at all except for looking suitably plain and youthful.

I know other people have said the same but I'd be interested to know if you did like her performance, why?

[–] maryscribe 10 years ago

It's hard for me to get past the fact that Jane Eyre is the story of a man and woman considered unattractive by most people and that they cast a beautiful girl to play Jane and a man one step away from handsome to play Rochester. Mia's performance was all right but she came off to me as too wordly and self-assured in the beginning (that's something she should grow into, not where she should be when she arrives at Thornfield). I think a lot of people don't realize that in the context of the book, "plain" does not mean "pretty with a bland hairstyle." It means "not pretty." I don't think it's an accident that most of the many references to Jane's looks in the book are omitted from this movie.

As for Michael Fassbender's performance, he did not come off as a man suffering from self-loathing and a hint of madness. Timothy Dalton was also way too good looking for the role but at least in the version he starred in, he portrayed these qualities. Fassbender came off to me as a man who was quite self assured. I didn't get that the director understood the book or the characters at all.

[–] LifeVsArt 10 years ago

they cast a beautiful girl to play Jane and a man one step away from handsome to play Rochester.

Mia Wasikowska plays all ranges of roles, she can appear beautiful or plain, it depends on what is called for - she's a highly respected actor (ask Meryl Streep) and currently is receiving critical raves for her practically solo performance in "Tracks", where she is far from glamorous. Most women I don't think would consider Michael Fassbender as a step away from handsome, at least from what I can tell. But, as with Mia, he is one of the finest screen actors of our day. I found their pairing in this film to work brilliantly - doesn't mean it's for everyone, of course.

http://www.lahiguera.net/cinemania/actores/mia_wasikowska/fotos/15383/ mia_wasikowska.jpg Mia as Jane

http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/fp/Mia+Wasikowska+Arriving+Flight+Toro nto+5480UPuqYIYl.jpg Mia in the Toronto airport

http://content5.video.news.com.au/NDM_-_news.com.au/262/387/2421557611 _promo210206791_648x365_2421557341-hero.jpg in "Tracks", crossing the Outback.

[–] nightwishouge 10 years ago

This adaptation was my first exposure to the story of Jane Eyre. I wasn't crazy about it--just not my thing. But Mia Wasikowska is, for me, one of the best actors working today. She really shines in roles where there is a lot going on under the surface. There are very few actors I consider a "draw," in the sense that I will seek out their movies just to see their performances, but she is definitely one of them.

I must admit I don't understand those who criticize her performing style as "bland" or wooden. It is true that this version of Jane Eyre was rather subdued (and maybe that is what some take issue with, more than the performance itself?), but Mia always has so much going on behind the eyes that she manages to convey with subtlety and an electricity of spirit. Never when watching In Treatment or Stoker did I feel like I was watching an actor affect an emotion for the cameras; I only saw her living the part. Not to sound too pretentious.

[–] LifeVsArt 10 years ago

Mia always has so much going on behind the eyes that she manages to convey with subtlety and an electricity of spirit. Never when watching In Treatment or Stoker did I feel like I was watching an actor affect an emotion for the cameras; I only saw her living the part.

That's very well put. I've never detected a false not in any of her performances. What's that old saying that actors use, "never get caught acting" - in other words, make it look and feel real as opposed to fabricated expressions and gestures that are obviously seen as "acting". This gets into the realm of subtlety in art. Of course, some people have a taste for the theatrical in acting (in film, not just on stage), and that's perfectly valid, too - there are plenty of films that use that approach, for those who want to see everything spelled-out. I'm american, and I would say that over the last decade or so the taste in acting has become increasingly, almost cartoon-like, it's so broad. As an american myself, I hope you don't mind me saying that to me this is part of our culture's essentially juvenile vision of the world. I haven't lived anywhere else, but I believe this vision seems to be spreading. The LOUDER things get noticed, after a while it seems like everyone is yelling in order to be heard. Of course, if you have seen Mia in "Only Lovers Left Alive", opposite Tilda Swinton and Tom Hiddelston, you can see her play the part of an impulsive young vampire in a theatrical manner (it's much broader), but still, the voice, the body language, everything, comes off natural and real - you're seeing the character, not the acting.

[–] SwingBatta 10 years ago

nightwishouge: did you ever read Sheila O'Malley's piece about Mia's Jane Eyre?

You four-eyed psycho.

[–] Prismark10 10 years ago

I think she was rather too timid in this film until near the end of the film where she had more spark and spirit.

Its that man again!!

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]