MovieChat Forums > Dark Places (2015) Discussion > GET OVER IT PEOPLE! Theron is a perfect ...

GET OVER IT PEOPLE! Theron is a perfect choice.


Physical appearance is the LEAST important aspect of a book-to-film adaptation. Stop complaining that Charlize Theron isn't 31 or doesn't have huge boobs or red hair. ENOUGH. Theron is an incredibly talented actress who can EASILY pull of the role and persona of Libby Day. Just watch "Young Adult" or "Monster" as proof. Libby is a mix of those two Theron performances.
Same goes for Nicholas Hoult and Chloe Grace Moretz. I really see all of the casting choices pulling of their roles. Clearly casting chose people who can match the personalities of the characters, and they WISELY didn't give a damn about physical appearance. THANK GOD book fans who know nothing about movies don't cast them. THANK GOD.

reply

Actually, physical appearance was important in the book, though not necessarily for Libby. More so for Ben, since they make a big deal of him dyeing his hair.

reply

Ummm... Physical appearance DOES matter! Theron, while a great actor, is tall and thin. Libby is not.

The casting for this movie is terrible. The only one I can see being good is Christina Hendricks. She would have made a better Libby than Patty.

What about young Trey? He's played by someone who of Asian descent! I think Drea de Matteo would have made a better older Diondra, not old Krissy.

reply

If Theron could pull off the lead in Monster, she can probably this off too.

reply

She really isn't but at least according to reviews her performance is good

http://cinematiccorner.blogspot.com/
http://littlesati.tumblr.com/

reply

Theron is a pretty damn good actress. I thought she was, once again, great in this film.

I didn't read the book, though - so I'm not all hung up on how well it did or didn't translate.

reply

I don't think the book has much relevance to a movie adaptation. Lots of things get changed. Charlize Theron is a good actress and she's very attractive. If anything, I would have chosen an actress who was more plain than Charlize, but then again, if it had been someone else, I probably wouldn't have seen the movie.

---
I'm just expressing my opinion.

You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas.

reply

I did not read the book. Did not know anything about it.

All through the movie, as much as I adore Charlize Theron, I kept saying to myself: "She is miscast."

The character should have been more fragile and vulnerable and yes, in a physical way, too.

Once I read here that in the novel she was 4'10," I said of course. The tragedy stunted her growth in every way.

I can't let my feelings for certain movie stars color my response to them. If you are wrong for a role, then you are wrong. And I am a fan of Theron's.

At the end, when she crawled through that space, I said, boy Charlize is kind of big for that. Also, I couldn't imagine Charlize for her size being intimidated.

Physical size has advantage in this world. Just ask anyone who is really big or really small. And people understand this as they move through life from the time they are young. And even if you are not a rough and ready type, but are big, you know you can intimidate people and will use it if you have to.

I did not like the movie. I found it muddled and unfocused and filled with usual movie cliches. I realize that in this celebrity obsessed culture, audiences build personal relationships in their heads with certain movie stars and they could recite the phone book and fans would be alright with it.

For me, an actor is supposed to bring it, but if for some reason they are not right for a particular role, no matter how hard they try, it comes through that they were the wrong choice. There were scenes where I could see Theron groping to make the scene work.

BTW, this movie has only earned $3.5 million so far. Haven't been able to find out the film's cost, but I know it was way more than 3 plus million. Charlize Theron does not work for peanuts.

Clearly, a lot of people felt something was wrong with this film and stayed away.

But being a devoted fan must be nice.

reply

Charlize Theron is talented. However she was utterly terrible as Libby Day. Never mind her height and glamorous beauty-she was not convincing as a woman trapped in misery.

Send lawyers,guns and money/The *beep* has hit the fan

reply

Physical appearance is the LEAST important aspect of a book-to-film adaptation.


In many cases this is true, but in Dark Places it was very important. Yes, Theron is one of the best actresses out there, she kicked ass in Mad Max. But although she tried hard in this she just did not convey the necessary fragility. She came across as a hot woman with a chip on her shoulder rather than the damaged girl terrified of connecting with the world. And this aspect was crucial for her character arc as she slowly starts to let the world in.

Okay, this wouldn't have mattered quite as much if there was a great story, but alas, the story was not the books strong point. It's a predictable who-dunnit with a big reveal that relies on us swallowing a ridiculous coincidence. What made the book enjoyable was the well written characters, particularly Libby. And this is why in this particular instance, Theron's casting is causing so many complaints.

reply