Someone help poor Keira Knightley. Because clearly, she cannot help herself. She is addicted to period dramas.
Since Bend it Like Beckham in 2003, the British actress has done 11 movies that, one way or another, qualify as “period films.” (And I’m not even counting The Jacket, which took place during the Gulf War era of the 1990s, and is therefore the past.) Now she has two more in the pipeline: In March, she starts shooting The Beautiful and the Damned, playing F. Scott Fitzgerald’s wife Zelda Sayre. After that, she’s likely to begin production on King Lear. Crimeny corsets, Keira! What are you doing to your young, vibrant, contemporary self?
In less, shall we say, inflammatory terms, at last September’s Toronto film festival, I asked Ms. Knightley why she was so drawn to costume dramas. Here’s what she said: “I like the fact that you can completely dive in to a total fantasy — because it’s total escapism. It’s about escaping from the way you live and getting to walk around in an alien being’s shoes. I find that quite freeing. And I love watching them. I love the sumptuous nature of them and how opulent they can be. I’m not against contemporary, and I haven’t purposefully just done period things. It just so happened that the scripts and the characters were the ones that interested me the most.”
Fair enough. For one thing, as we all know far too well, there simply aren’t that many well-rounded roles for actresses out there. And the truth is, Knightley’s damn good at period. Her patrician beauty and manners lend themselves to ye olden days films brilliantly. Plus, the genre’s been good to her right back: her lovely turn in Pride and Prejudice earned her an Oscar nod. Still, actors are always talking about how they long to do something different or refreshing or revitalizing every time they sign up for a new gig, lest they get bored and start feeling uninspired. And doesn’t every actor fear type-casting almost as much as being unemployed? With just one contemporary flick in the pipeline (this year’s romantic drama Last Night), is Knightley running the risk of pigeonholing herself — or worse, boring herself and us? Is it time to stage an intervention? Shall we impound all her bonnets, corsets, petticoats, flapper frocks, and sky-high wigs? What kind of role would you like to see Knightley do?
Comments (1-30) of 83 Add your comment
Well considering her version of acting is pouting her lips, and gasping a lot (and basically looking petchulant), the less work she gets the better.
Ha ha, nice one Bettie!! Seriously Keira, doing ‘Domino’ does not qualify as branching out. You still are a fine young thang though.
To be honest with you, I quite enjoy her in period films. She lends herself beautifully to every role and she never acts the same role twice. In other words, you can’t compare her portayal of Elizabeth Bennett to her portrayal of Georgiana Cavendish. She makes each character unique, you never say “oh she holds herself the same way here as she does in this scene of Pride and Prejudice, or she just gave him the same look she gave Mr. Darcy.
For comparisons sake take, Diane Lane who has played the same exact character in several films. Halfway through it, you are hit by a feeling of deja vu. This doesnt happen with Keira Knightley’s films.
Also, she has said she doesn’t plan to do films much longer. SHe wants a real life. So the likelihood, of getting bored of her doing period films or pigeon holing herself is unlikely
I think she’s AMAZING in period films – not everyone can do them! And considering there’s how many years of history? Sounds like there are more stories out there that are “period” than there are “contemporary”. And she’s not doing silly romcoms is she? Why don’t you tell Kate Hudson to grow up and do something different?
Where does this notion that all films set in the past are exactly the same come from? In what possible sense does Gladiator belong in the same category as Capote?
None at all. But that’s what you’re saying.
Doesn’t going from an 18. century English Duchess to a 20. century American novelist qualify as “changing”? Why not? And why would a role in some generic modern rom-com be so much better?
Her voice and mannerisms are perfect for period films, and as long as she’s so good at them, why beg her to quit? Then we’ll be stuck with the likes of Anne Hathaway and Nicole Kidman, who, while both good actresses, are fairly unbelievable when they tackle roles of the past. Especially Hathaway. Her british accent in Becoming Jane was scary. Think of what Knightley could have done with the same role. And, for the record, I haven’t really liked any of her contemporary roles, save that of her turn as an emotionally torn newlywed in Love, Actually. Long live the period drama!
not ALL PERIOD movies are the SAME… if you ask me “modern” movies can sometimes all be the same. there is something so deep, in depth in good period movies. she was amazing in the duchess… I like her acting, def one of the best in the younger generation!!!
How about 2003’s Love Actually?!?! Love Keira Knightley. She is the rich man’s version of that annoying Natalie Portman!
Go for it, Keira! I love her in costume dramas (or comedies or whatever). She’s been awesome in most of them…”Pride & Prejudice”, “Atonement”, “The Duchess”, etc.
Keira’s one of my favorite actresses. So she does quite a few period films? So what? Does that not make her good actress? She’s been great in everything I’ve seen her do. If those roles are the most interesting for her, then I say go for it. Besides, she’s got more acting ability in her little finger than some people I could mention. *coughKatieHeiglcough*
I adore Keira, and I think if period films work for her, she shouldn’t have to stop doing them for now. I love those kinds of movies, and I think she makes each character unique and doesn’t come across as Keira doing the same role over and over. I think she’s perfect for the roles she has played, and she makes me want to see the period films she is in. Plenty of actors do “different” roles and play the same character over & over. I think Keira has thus far managed to avoid doing that.
Not really a big fan of Knightley (I honestly don’t think she’s the slightest bit attractive–the underbite is distracting, and she’s WAY too thin for my tastes–and she’s just an OK actress), but doing period films for a while isn’t necessarily the death of a career. Helena Bonham Carter made a nice niche for herself for years, then branched out for “kookier” roles like her part in Fight Club. Keira will be fine as long as she keeps the films interesting.
While she is good at what she does and beautiful, I’m tired of seeing her in all the great period films. I’d like to see somebody else please! She’s the same in every film, so what’s the difference between characters besides her clothes? Hollywood is a vast pool of talent untapped.
she needs to eat a sandwich instead of playing the duchess of sandwich…
I concur agent227.
As long as she doesn’t make Domino 2…
Atonement and Pride & Prejudice are two of my favorite films. Anyone who criticizes Keira for doing too many period films is just grasping at straws to find fault with her brilliant performances, which are superior and flawless (as is confirmed by Sir Oscar), and her highly successful career. If this is the worst thing you can say about her, then I’d say Keira’s a much bigger success than any of you naysayers will ever be. Why should she do a film she doesn’t enjoy doing just because small-minded people like you are whining that she does “too many” period pieces? I applaud Keira for not listening to people like you and doing the films she wants to do. Because obviously she’s quite successful at it, no matter what you people think.
Eh, she probably just likes playing “dress-up”.
She does them well. Saw the Duchess on New Years Day and loved it. That being said love to see her do an Action/adventure…
I wouldn’t mind her repetitive career choices if she wasn’t delivering the performances the exact same way every time. Mix dry, understated and a lot of mumbling with a girl trying to find her place in the world while bucking against the repressed societal conventions of the past and you have EVERY Keira Knightley role. It’s the same shtick every time. I see the talent there. She should branch out and give us something different.
She’s been great in period roles so I don’t mind. But it would be nice to see her in something modern, at least that adds a new actress to that area instead of constantly seeing jennifer aniston or reese witherspoon. And to that person who criticized Anne Hathaway’s performance Becoming Jane…not sure about her accent (Americans don’t do brit accents nearly as well as the other way around) but I thought her performance was pretty fantastic. Layered and subtle.
kingofcities, I couldn’t disagree with you more. Keira’s performances most certainly are different in each of her films. Her mannerisms, even her facial expressions are clearly unique for each of her characters. You can’t honestly say that she’s giving “the same performance” in her roles as Cecelia and Lizzy. And I really don’t know where you get the “mumbling” part. Perhaps you have trouble deciphering the British accent.
Keira: be Catwoman in Batman 3. Love.
not completely true – what about Love Actually, that was a movie in contemporary time.
For all you Keira fans out there, check this out, it’s hysterical:
Miss Sassy, maybe you didn’t watch the same P&P that I did but she most certainly mumbled. I have no problem with English accents whatsoever. As for the rest, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I think her performances in these period pieces are extremely similar to each other. Contrast Atonement against Domino or Love Actually and there’s a huge difference of tone and feel. Against Pirates or P&P? Not so much. And that’s great if you like that one note because it is a good note. I’d just like to see what else she can do as well.
Never cared for Keira Knightley or her acting. Never found her to be very attractive either
kingofcities, I’ve seen P&P about 50 times, so yeah, I can tell the differences in her performances. For example, in P&P her performance is much softer than in Atonement, where she is much angrier, edgier. Perhaps these films are not your favorite type, so they all seem the same to you, but period films are my favorite so I can appreciate their subtleties. I just don’t see why people are making an issue of her making period films. She’s perfect for them, she enjoys them, she gets nominated for Academy Awards for them. Why should she change her career path for other people?
I like KK in period films, as said, not easy to pull off and each role she has done is different. As someone else said, why not pick on Kate Hudson & Jennifer Aniston who ALWAYS plays the same girl over and over in contemporary roles (Rachel in Aniston’s case) and don’t even change their hairstyles from role to role and are blah. When a credible mag like EW puts a mediocre actress like Jennifer A. on their cover, I feared they’re starting to spotlight the mediocre over the true talents *shakes head*.
Guess to get EW’s praise (or on the cover), a gal must take an everyday any-actress-could-play-it part with a dog named Marley (plus pose naked and have a tabloid career)? That is what EW maybe calls branching out acting??? Didn’t that article toot Jennier for heading into a different direction (which is so not true) Or maybe if you need a Mom named Goldie to take the same part over and over without criticism from EW?!! Yet actors who get noms and are excellent in every role like Keira get ragged on and are told by EW to branch out??