MovieChat Forums > Colonia (2016) Discussion > Emma Watson almost ruins this film

Emma Watson almost ruins this film

posted 8 years ago by rabbitmoon
8 replies | jump to latest

It could have been a classic, if some of the plot contrivances were reworked a little, and Emma Watson was recast. Her acting is just terrible. She gets away with it alongside the likes of Radcliffe, but in a film like this she looks like a fish out of water, just offering smouldering glances for the fanboys and reading her lines without any depth or actual character. I couldnt engage or empathise with her at all. If it had been (for eg) a younger Cary Mulligan or Rooney Mara it would have been a much better film.

[–] MissFortuneCookie 8 years ago

I completely agree. I love Emma but she wasn't fit for the part.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] erichill22 8 years ago

I couldn't disagree more. What specifically did you dislike a about her performance?

[–] cheftoni55 8 years ago

I must agree...and I like Emma Watson, overall. But something about her performance (I think it was the direction, actually) just fell flat. She's like a new pair of jeans purchased because of the fit, but not until they've been washed and worn a bunch of times do you truly fall in love with them.

I don't think Carey Mulligan would've done a better job. She has this way about her which seems as if she's always slightly smirking. Suited for some films, but not all.

Frankly, I think an actress who is a bit...earthier?? would've been best for this role. And, someone a few years old, or who could play a few years older.

[–] fridaynight-1 8 years ago

Totally agree. Havenn't seen her in anything since Potter, well, she's terrible in Colonia.

Emma is constantly overacting, she just looks like a stubborn moody teenager whose parents don't understand her. We are supposed to believe she tricked those people in the cult - well, I don't think she did. She was staring at them with hate from the very beginning, and they were like OK, there's nothing suspicious about her at all, let's take her in.

PS no, Mara wouldn't do a better job. She's not as good as they say she is.

[–] seans_life 8 years ago

You people couldn't engage with her or empathize? So when she was being whipped you felt no emotion and you felt she gave nothing to that part of the movie? What movie were you watching? Also when she was attacked in that room where all the men abused various women you didn't think she acted properly like a scared woman huddling up in that part of the room after they got off of her? Again what movie were you watching? Finally when the pregnant girl was shot to death you didn't see Emma not want to let go? You felt nothing from her while she was acting? Again what movie were you watching? I think some of you people in this thread and others out there go into movies already ready to judge the actor or actress. You don't go in with an open mind. I am glad I am not all into the hype and I don't follow actors. I don't prejudge. I think many should try it.

Oh and I am glad rabbitmoon said she almost ruins the film because the facts are this movie was riveting from beginning to end ....

and so people ignore anyone that dumps on this film.

In fact the Metacritic rating is hilarious! 33/100? How do these movie critics even have jobs? They have no idea whatsoever in regards to what a really bad movie is. I would love to meet the people that rated it so poorly and laugh right in their face and continue to laugh when I asked them to explain to me their score for it and hear them for the idiots they are.

[–] rabbitmoon 8 years ago

Oh and I am glad rabbitmoon said she almost ruins the film because the facts are this movie was riveting from beginning to end ....

This doesn't really make sense in terms of having a "point" as to why you are glad.

and so people ignore anyone that dumps on this film.

This doesn't really make sense either.

I would love to meet the people that rated it so poorly and laugh right in their face and continue to laugh when I asked them to explain to me their score for it and hear them for the idiots they are.

I'm sure that would make a compelling argument indeed. It would sure show them!

I'm just not sure you're able to distinguish "good acting" from mere "acting". You think someone huddling up in a room after a terrible event equals good acting? In the words of Anton Chigurgh, "you don't know what you're talking about". Although, you are quite lucky in that you can watch literally any film or school pantomime and no doubt burst into tears at all the moving oscar winning performances that you no doubt see.

[–] seans_life 8 years ago

rabbitmoon I know what good acting is. I have seen it in many movies both good and bad. Did you watch Platoon? There was top notch acting in that. Have you checked out my top rated movies list? I think that I know what is and isn't a good movie and what good acting and bad acting is. Also you assumed I burst into tears and you would be wrong. I only felt sadness and when I found out more about the story online it pulled at my heart strings further. I don't know what I am talking about? Whatever. Heck I just saw a movie called The Possession of Michael King and the acting by Shane Johnson in that in his first lead role in a movie ever was outstanding. Go watch that and then tell me again I can't pick out good acting. Not everyone recognizes it but I sure do and not too many are going ape **** over what he did in that film. Oh and the first time director doing that good a job with a horror film? My goodness. Is anyone begging him to do another film? Not that I saw but just because I am not a paid critic doesn't mean I don't know what I am talking about. Also did I say that Emma Watson should win any awards for what she did in this film? No. So don't imply things that were not said.