She always shines in the right roles, and this was one. I loved her in both her serious and tender moments in this film. I bought her as Nia. She owned the film, IMO.
And this film is criminally underrated. It's a modern day Romeo & Juliet, with a futuristic setting, and a feast for the eyes. While I didn't find it to be a masterpiece, I do find it brilliant in several ways. The minimalism of the film, mixed with the boldness of the cinematography really had me invested into this romance.
I keep reading statements like this, that Kristen Stewart is incapable of expressing emotions and that is why is perfect to play Nia. Personally, I find it amusing. In her interviews she is all about emotions, she is pretty honest, raw, alive and there is so much to read from her facial expressions and eyes. You just need to look. Emotions like irritation, anger, shame, intimidation, attraction etc., which people often try to hide from the media are all over her face and body language. I think she is perfect for acting, because it is easy to see what she feels. On top of this quality, her principal is to be natural, truthful, which i think is fundamental for acting.
What concerns her performance in Equals, Kristen Stewart showed in my opinion so many emotions. The culmination for me was the nock on the door. At this moment and what followed Kristen's face showed so many escalated emotions - pain, desperation, love, craziness, anger, strength and weakness, all at the same time. I can not even imagine how many feelings she had to recall from her own experience and relieve in this very moment to be able to show all of them on her face in one second. That is what i call performance and good acting, being natural and being able to feel and show so much. The impact of this scene on me was tremendous. I definitely had goosebumps going through my whole body. And about the other moments in Equals, I think it is a challenge to play somebody who is supposed to feel so much and yet not be allowed to show. It is a state where you conceal, are afraid, are stressed, but yet so in love. There are feelings to show, it is more complex, and I think that playing such moments goes way beyond staying still and not showing any feelings. For me she and Nicholas Hoult did a superb job portraying these feelings. I could totally observe that they feel a lot and at the same time feel their struggle in hiding it.
I keep reading statements like this, that Kristen Stewart is incapable of expressing emotions and that is why is perfect to play Nia. Personally, I find it amusing.
It is amusing. Saying Kristen Stewart shows no emotions is a kind of automatic cliché. I think it comes, originally, from the complaints that came out while she was making Twilight, that (a) her character was too emotionally flat, and (b) that she herself wouldn't smile or gush on cue at public appearances. Film critics, directors, and fellow actors have all spoken highly of her ability to express emotion without histrionics, and it's clear enough to the objective viewer.
If you had seen the film you'd know that she, as opposed to other characters in that universe, does feel and express emotions. Her performance was beautiful and deeply moving, not a lot of actors can portray those intense emotions the character felt in this film.
Umm no. She's an actress. It's her job to show emotions like joy, fear, sadness, jealousy, etc. I don't care what she does with her face outside of her movies but when she says a line like, "I'm so happy right now" and the expression on her face looks like someone who's been standing in line at the DMV for 4 hours then that means she sucks at her job.
Out of curiosity, which films of hers have you seen?
I take you haven't seen this one? She is VERY emotional in this role and I'm not certain why people say it is supposed to be an emotionless one. reply share
The role seemed very well suited for her because it matches the impression I get from her when I see her doing interviews. It always seems like she's got a thousand thoughts and feelings racing through her head and she's not quite sure how or when to express them in the sort of collected, measured way that most people do. For a character like Nia that's perfect, because she's someone who is struggling to bury emotions she doesn't really understand and can't really articulate, but when she finds an outlet for them in the form of Silas, the need to express what she's feeling wins out over the need to control it and it just sort of tumbles out of her like a stream of consciousness.
Stream of consciousness is an apt way of describing it. What Steart doesn't do is 'act". Watch interviews with her and she'll tell you that. Read any decent review of her work and they'll agree. She doesn't pretend to be something that she can't find inside herself. What Stewart does is more natural which is lost on those who choose to tune out of anything that isn't rippling with overt expression. She portrays reactions and responses that are what would actually happen in real life...not something that is staged and forced. This can sometimes be a little too subtle but I think she's learning to expose more of herself with each role she takes on. So many articles about her films describe her latest performance as her best yet. This is a sign of someone who is constantly developing and fine tuning her Art into which she puts her whole body and soul. I think what weakens her standing at times is her choice of film. .. she can give a great performance but the film itself is received with little enthusiasm.
Her name is being linked with Academy Awards quite regularly since last year's gems os Clouds ans Still Alice. It's undeniable that she received nearly every critics award for her performance in Clouds which definitely did outshine thst of her French co-stars. I reckon that she is going in thst direction , I'm just not sure when the combination of an excellent performance linked with the right project is going to land her poll position
She seems to be getting better of late. I do find her to be a one-trick pony...put her in something that requires playing an actual character and she stumbles, as she did in her cringe worthy attempt at playing Chekhov's Masha in in the playhouse scene of "Still Alice" (although I thought she was quite good in the rest of the movie...playing herself).
This movie is okay...certainly not particularly memorable. The most exciting part was realizing that the familiar face was Nickolas Hoult, who I loved in "About a Boy".
Just to clarify on your comment about Stewart's performance in the Marshall segment of the film...she was in character as Lydia Howland, the aspiring actress who struggles to find work. Stewart didn't suddenly come out of character and not do a very good job of being a stage actress, she was portraying the fact that Lydia Howland is not the best stage actress...other all operates within the narrative of the film as a whole. The fact that the character of Alice sees depth to Lydia 's performance is a comment on the character's state of mind, not an indicator that the viewer of the film should take that the performance Lydia gives is supposed to be great. I thought this was obvious? ?
I completely agree. She emotes a great deal with her facial expressions, contrary to to the KS haters. I have always likes her from the first time i saw her in "Into the Wild". There is something really watchable about her. And I enjoyed the film. It's slow but beautiful.