Can Kate Winslett reach the heights of greatness

[stuart.uk]

I'd like to thank April and Miora for their recent help.

I for the last 2 yrs have thought Helen Mirren and Julie Walters were the UKs two best actresses. However, having seen Kate Winslett in The Reader I have to say IMO she's right on their heels.

Kate W is only in her mid 30s so I wonder what heights she might reach. I think she could finish up compared to Kate Hepburn and Bette Davis

[rudyfan]

Stuart

I admire Kate Winslett (and have for a good long time). I saw The Reader and I thought it was meh. I love her, she's great, but what was it about this film that garnered so much critical aclaim? I'm asking seriously, not to be a contrarian, I was underwhelmed or expecting something more. I felt she was flat (curvaceous to look at) but performance was flat.

Donna

[stuart.uk]

Kate in The Reader reminded me of Samantha Morton's potrayal of real life 1960s moor murdered Myra Hindlay in the Bafta winning tv movie Longford

[charliechaplinfan]

The Reader looked interesting, haven't seen it yet but probably will do at some point. Kate Winslett seems to be in an awful lot of magazines at the moment telling women how to be women, she grates on me a little to say the least. One thing I'm grateful to her for is her curves, there are too many stick thin women in Hollywood.

[MichiganJ]

I thought Winslet was quite good in The Reader. Throughout her performance she seems to carry a profound sense of guilt, which is relieved only during her romantic "interludes" with the young man, and most particularly when he reads to her. Winslet's face, as she listens to him read, says much more than any words, and is the only time when her character seems to find peace. And Winslet's strength during the trial, especially during the interrogations (I don't want to get too specific in case some haven't seen the film) is fierce and intense, and adds a great deal of shading to her character. Also, I don't know from accents, but Winslet seemed to convey her German accent very realistically (without "Streep-ing" it up, if that makes any sense).

As good as I think she is in The Reader, I think her better performance in 2008 was in Revolutionary Road. Here, Winslet plays a wife and a mother of two living in the suburbs (in New England, if memory serves) sometime in the mid 1950's. She and her husband (Leonardo DiCaprio) have problems, which are amplified by the social restrictions of the era and to rescue their relationship, they plan a move to Paris. Again, Winslet's "accent" seems right, and she and DiCaprio are very believable as a couple struggling to keep themselves together. The plot itself goes to extremes to come to a resolution, which ultimately throws the film a little off balance, but DiCaprio and especially Winslet are so good that one doesn't notice until well after the film is over.

[phil noir]

Kate Winslett is one of those actors, who although I can see that they are very talented, I find their off-screen personality off-putting, and it sometimes spoils their acting for me. When KW was busy at the start of the year, touting herself round the American chat shows, doing that exaggerated English persona that certain English actors seem to feel they have to do when they're in the US, and claiming to have been bullied at school for the sympathy vote and so on, I felt quite embarrassed for her. And when she won the two Golden Globes, and pretended to be so stunned that she could hardly speak coherently ('Gather, gather', she was chanting theatrically to herself - I mean, really, come off it), I thought if that's the level of acting she's capable of, they should ask for those Golden Globes back.

Having said that, I have seen quite a few of her films - Sense and Sensibility, Heavenly Creatures, Jude, The Reader, Revolutionary Road, Enigma, Little Children. I think in the early days, she had a tendency to overact, and it's still a tendency that's bubbling away under the surface of her performances, and something she needs to watch out for. (Stuart's comparison with Bette Davis is very apt here!)

I didn't like The Reader at all. It seemed so deliberately designed to be last year's art house breakout movie. I thought KW's acting was in typical 'Oscar-bait' style, and the central conceit of the film (I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't watched it) implausible to say the least.

[charliechaplinfan]

So many differing opinions about The Reader, I'll see it one day, it was Revolutionary Road that interested me more in trailers. A lot of what you have said Phil is what I was trying to say before but I had a three year old running around and couldn't express myself as well as I'd wanted. Yes, it was those interviews I'd read about them in the press and she went down in my opinion, I don't like being lectured at by today's movie stars.

[Birdy]

She does period very well and I, too, appreciate having an actress on the scene who looks like a woman instead of a 12 year old boy. Her looks send the message that we don't really all have to look alike. I really enjoyed her performance in Titanic and Finding Neverland, but maybe I was just jealous of her getting Leo and Johnny.
B

[MichiganJ]

Kate Winslett is one of those actors, who although I can see that they are very talented, I find their off-screen personality off-putting, and it sometimes spoils their acting for me. When KW was busy at the start of the year, touting herself round the American chat shows, doing that exaggerated English persona that certain English actors seem to feel they have to do when they're in the US, and claiming to have been bullied at school for the sympathy vote and so on, I felt quite embarrassed for her. And when she won the two Golden Globes, and pretended to be so stunned that she could hardly speak coherently ('Gather, gather', she was chanting theatrically to herself - I mean, really, come off it), I thought if that's the level of acting she's capable of, they should ask for those Golden Globes back.

I don't know anything about Winslet's personal life, but if we are going to hold up an actor's speeches at award shows as acting, let us not forget all of the "stellar" performances by the presenters, most of whom are as wooden and uncomfortable as I was in my 2nd grade school play (I played "Adjective"--still remember my lines, too!). Robert DeNiro should never-ever-give out another award. Pacino, either.

I think in the early days, she had a tendency to overact, and it's still a tendency that's bubbling away under the surface of her performances, and something she needs to watch out for.

I've seen nearly all of Winslet's films and don't recall ever thinking she overacted. To me, she's one of the best actors out there. (Love Cate Blanchett, too. Maybe I just like the name Kate, regardless how it's spelled.)

I didn't like The Reader at all. It seemed so deliberately designed to be last year's art house breakout movie. I thought KW's acting was in typical 'Oscar-bait' style, and the central conceit of the film (I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't watched it) implausible to say the least.

These kind of criticisms always baffle me. Exactly how do you design a breakout movie? (Art House or otherwise?) Do the producers sit in a room and say, "Let's make a movie, with a real meaty part (or two), that is also thought-provoking, adult, and that the critics and audience will love."? If so, I say, bring 'em on. Pretty much since the Academy's inception, the studios did what they could to win the coveted awards, usually calling them "Prestige Pictures", many of which are the ones we talk about at length on this very site. Much of Selznick's career seemed to be in pursuit of the awards (and you just know that had Gone With the Wind not won, his head would have exploded.) I actually don't think many of the film makers are that calculating, but again, if their goal is to achieve recognition (and money, of course) for cinematic excellence, more power to 'em.

****Spoilers about The Reader ahead.

These are just some thoughts on the film, for what they are worth.

I'm unsure what the central conceit of The Reader is, but if it's Winslet's illiteracy, I don't see how it's implausible. Even today, I know far too many adults who cannot read or write (I volunteer at our local public radio station and record my reading of newspapers, etc. for people who unable to read). But I don't see that as the central conceit of the film, anyway. In fact, it comes as no real surprise, and I think the film makers do well in not playing the "revelation" up too much. The fact that Winslet cannot read or write, though, is the driving force for all of her choices, including joining the SS in the first place. Remember, at the trail we are told that her previous job she was excelling, but for reasons unknown, she quit and joined the SS. Well, we know the reason, because we witness her doing the same thing earlier when getting the promotion from streetcar ticket-taker. Her new job is to be an office job, which, her face tells us (and here Winslet is wonderful) terrifies her; so much so that she up and leaves her apartment, her city, her Reader.

The other aspect of The Reader that I responded to was the morality questions the film brings up. Obviously Winslet is guilty of horrendous crimes, but she is no more guilty than her "compatriots", all of whom receive a considerably lesser sentence. But Fiennes character also is guilty of withholding his information. I wish that his character were explored more, but I think his guilt is also what drives his personality (what little we know of it; failed marriage, etc.) One of my favorite sequences involved the law students in the classroom. I just wish the Professor wasn't made Jewish, which colors the trial unnecessarily. It would have been intriguing to hear his take on things if he, too, were at least culpable of 'going along'. But that's another movie, I guess. (Frankly, I wonder about Fiennes' parents, too. I mean they were there, too!) The scene where Fiennes and Winslet "reunite" is, for me, witnessing two actors giving some of their best ever performances. Quite understated, and not remotely emotional (There's hardly any real emotion found in The Reader. this is no tear-jerker). Also, just gotta say, I love the way Winslet calls Fiennes "Kid".

By no means am I saying The Reader is a masterpiece, and it's unlikely that I'll ever revisit it. I do, however, think it's quite good and worthy of Oscar consideration. (In the Academy Expands to 10 Best Films thread I list a number of films I thought worthy of the Oscar nod in 2008. I think I forgot In Bruges, which was one of my favorites!)

[stuart.uk]

Spoiler Alert

I think Michael has to take resposibilty for Hannah's suicide. Not only did he not come forward, but for an intelligent man he played with fire sending her tapes, without revealing it was him, even though it was blindingly obvious it was. However, despite this, Hannah was inspired by the tapes and tought herself to read. Then he visited her to tell her he'd made arragements for her release, finding her a place and a job. However, he was distant as if to suggest he didn't want to get involved because of her Nazi war crimes. He was happy enough to send the tapes, but not really prepared to back it up. Even if he'd given her a hug, Hannah might have gained conifidence from it and want to live.

Winslett was both convincing as a young and then aging woman

[JackFavell]

I think that the theme of the movie is that our choices stay with us, and that everyone is a collaborator. Michael is guilty for the reasons Stuart just listed...and it really bothered me that he did not stand up at the trial, but that is the way people are, confused, guilty.... they make choices based on emotion, not what is right. I am sure others would come away with a differing view of the film. I really enjoyed that the filmmaker did not bluntly say what the theme was, but left it for us to decide after watching. Too many pat answers in movies lead to non-thinking audiences.

I really enjoyed The Reader, and I say, if filmmakers are going out of their way to create pictures that are "thought provoking" then I am all for it. It was an interesting and well acted movie. I enjoyed Doubt as well. Maybe you have to live in Great Britain to have seen all these interviews with Winslet putting on a fake accent for American audiences. I have never seen any of them. I think she is a capable actress, and refreshingly down to earth. I don't think she is a heavyweight actress, but she might turn into one if given the chance. I think Cate Blanchett is more substantial and like her as well.

It's a shame that those uppity filmmakers are trying to earn academy awards. What they should stick to is making films like Wanted (which was so bad that I forgot the name of it and had to go look it up, even though i saw it in the theatre), Hellboy, and Get Smart.

The only thing that I didn't like about The Reader was the age makeup at the end of the film. It distracted me.

[Ollie]

I have fears that Winslett will fall victim to some Aging Looks Syndrome. I hope she'll channel Margaret Rutherford instead of Greta Garbo, and then maybe Helen Mirren in another 20-30 years, so her best works are in the decades to come.

[JackFavell]

Ollie, she strikes me as being more character actress than leading lady, and I think her choices have been very good and well balanced, leaving room for her to go any direction. I too hope that she would choose more character roles rather than Titanic-like populist fluff. She is doing a good job so far steering clear of the starlet type roles.

[phil noir]

I don't know anything about Winslet's personal life, but if we are going to hold up an actor's speeches at award shows as acting...

Exactly how do you design a breakout movie? (Art House or otherwise?) Do the producers sit in a room and say, "Let's make a movie, with a real meaty part (or two), that is also thought-provoking, adult, and that the critics and audience will love."? If so, I say, bring 'em on. Pretty much since the Academy's inception, the studios did what they could to win the coveted awards, usually calling them "Prestige Pictures", many of which are the ones we talk about at length on this very site... I actually don't think many of the film makers are that calculating, but again, if their goal is to achieve recognition (and money, of course) for cinematic excellence, more power to 'em...

I'm unsure what the central conceit of The Reader is, but if it's Winslet's illiteracy, I don't see how it's implausible...

In my opinion her reactions at the Golden Globes ceremony were acting - after all there had been a lot of advance talk about how she was likely to win so she must have been prepared for it happening - and my problem was that it wasn't good acting. Her impression of someone being sincere and surprised made me cringe. It therefore made me view her 'on film' performances with a more jaundiced eye. I recognize that show business must look after the business side of the equation. Winslett appearing on chat shows at the start of the year, and trying to appear likeable and charming was all part of the publicity build up for the Academy Awards. Such interviews are all about creating a sense of her as an awards frontrunner, as a popular actor, and someone those watching can identify with. Hence the emphasis on being bullied at school, weight issues, etc., which anyone who has ever watched a reality show will recognize as very familiar ground in the back stories of aspiring contestants. For this reason, I had my doubts about their veracity.

I don't object to studios designing prestige pictures in order to garner themselves awards and money. I tend to think of the 'prestige picture' as almost a genre by itself. Generally they lumber into view in early winter, dealing self-consciously with a big topic, and staffed both in front of and behind the camera by previous Oscar winners or nominees. Such self-conscious striving after significance makes it - to my way of thinking - that bit less likely that they are going to achieve that elusive quality, cinematic excellence.

It's not that I found KW's illiteracy implausible - an ex-concentration camp guard is just as likely or unlikely to be illiterate as anyone else - but I was puzzled by what the film was trying to say by making her illiterate. I thought that it was the development of the relationship between the adult Fiennes and the imprisoned Winslett which was implausible. (And several of the other human relationships as well: the idea that Lena Olin's character, whose mother was sent to her death by Winslett, would reject money left to her by the latter but accept a tin box or some such that Winslett had had in her cell because it was like one her mother had owned was jaw-droppingly unlikely, and really so much so as to be offensive.) Although I'm an avid reader myself, I have a problem with films or books in which characters are sent into raptures by the act of reading - it always strikes me as horribly phony. When this theme emerged, my heart sank, and from then on the film for me became increasingly schematic and unconvincing.

[mrsl]

I've been a fan of Kate since Titanic. At first I thought 'who is this chubby girl?' but as the movie went on, I forgot her looks and just enjoyed her performance. Naturally I prefer her in the light comedies she does like Holiday, and . . . Neverland, but overall, she rarely disappoints.

As for her looks in later years, her chubbiness will probably help her there. Many women (me included), can easily carry a few extra pounds and they help to avoid facial lines, and keep the shoulders and neck supple for a few years longer than our streamlined sisters.

Anne