Rant: Renee Zellweger Ruins History

By Katey Rich: 2008-09-19 15:36:49

First, let's give Renee Zellweger credit where it is due. She's turned in some great comedic performances in the Bridget Jones movies-- even when the movies were no good--and actually made us believe it when Tom Cruise told her that she completed him in Jerry Maguire. But her roles this decade have mostly been set in the past, and whether the movie took place in the Old West or the screwball 1930s, Zellweger has been the worst part of it. Filmmakers, take note: Renee Zellweger will ruin your period piece, and only you can prevent this from happening.

Ed Harris is the latest to fall victim to her curse, completely miscasting her as a seductress of the Wild West in Appaloosa. But George Clooney made the exact same mistake six months ago, casting Zellweger in Leatherheads as a sassy 30s spitfire, like Rosalind Russell in His Girl Friday? George Clooney made a lot of mistakes with his period football comedy-- among them telling a really, really boring story-- but Zellweger? Really? Didn't he see Down With Love, the 60s sex farce in which she and Ewan McGregor competed to see which of them could be the most awkward?

Really, Harris and Clooney both have no excuse. Down With Love was only the beginning of Zellweger taking roles in period movies that no one saw. She started with Chicago, which was actually a good role for her and maybe should have earned her an Oscar. But after the forgettable Down With Love she actually win an Oscar for Cold Mountain, an Oscar baity movie that no one actually wanted to see, or like. And for everyone who thought Zellweger was great as the coarse servant type, there were plenty of others who thought she went way over the top.

Never afraid to do too much of a good thing, Zellweger followed up Cold Mountain with two more period pieces, each less popular than the one before it-- Cinderella Man, as Russell Crowe's wife, and Miss Potter, as the children's author Beatrix Potter. Pundits fell all over themselves when both of these films were released, explaining why they failed, but did it ever occur to them that Zellweger + the past = just plain annoying?

I don't think it's mean girl snark to suggest that Zellweger has done something unnatural to her face in the intervening years between Empire Records and Appaloosa. Her frozen forehead and shiny cheeks may be a part of of why she sticks out so much in the period pieces, like a plastic doll of this decade rather than an actual person of the time. But mostly I think you can just see her strain, imitating other actresses she's seen pull off similar roles and figuring, "Hey, I've got an Oscar; how hard can this be?

Appaloosa is plenty good even with Zellweger in it, and Leatherheads probably would have been bad no matter who they cast in the role. But when there are so few good roles for women in movies, why in God's name are so many of them going to Zellweger? Think of how good Mary Louise Parker was in the four minutes of screen time she had in The Assassination of Jesse James; it's almost a crime she wasn't offered Zellweger's role in Appaloosa after that.

Renee: Hop out of your time machine. Stay put, relax your face, stop trying to hard, and find a role that might make us like you again. And directors, leave the girl alone. We've seen her in 60's suitdresses, corsets, cloche hats and flapper dresses-- let her put on a pair of jeans and maybe, just maybe, get back to the actress she was when we didn't automatically dread her presence.

RELATED: renee zellweger, rant

Latest Headlines:

Mila Kunis Saves Us From The Apocalypse

Arrested Development Movie About To Happen

Twilight Stars Reuniting... As Men

Universal Owns Jason Bourne

Wolfman Delayed Until Next Fall

Twilight Actress Hits The Big Time

Poster And Trailer For Disneynature's earth

Will Smith's Oldboy Is Not A Remake

Captain Marvel Gets Smart

Oscar Eye: Which Hopeful Will The Audiences Love?

Comment on “Rant: Renee Zellweger Ruins History”

Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.

Rhodie Says:
September 20th, 2008 at 15:18
I completely disagree with you and cannot fathom why you are spouting such venom about such a wonderful actress. Renee is amazing an amazing actress. My husband's vavorite movie is Cinderella Man and we both think Renee and Russell both did an amazing job in that movie. The only reason it did so poorly in the US was Russell's unfortunate timing with his temper tantrum. That really turned movie goers off and affected the box office here. Very unfortunate because many people missed out on a wonderful movie!
There is a reason that Renee is consistently one of the top ten money making actresses in the US.........she is spectacular. I really don't know what your problem is!!!

Cal Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:54
I agree with EVERYTHING Katey Rich said. There are just some actresses who should never appear in a period piece and Renee "Squinty" Zellweger is one of them. She is one of the most undeserving Oscar winners in history. Please stop casting this woman!

And Rhodie: I'm not sure what country you live in, but where I am from it is perfectly legal for people to have their own opinions.

Kris Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 10:54
I think Renee deserves a lot more credit than you are giving her. In Cold Mountain I totally saw her channeling Molly Brown, in a good way. Stron, no nonsense, someone whos been through too much in her life to take crap. I mean, since when did we complain that a person should make MORE romantic comedies?
I'd like to see her do Sci-Fi.

Richard Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 16:03
Zellweger gets a lovely, caressing close-up when she enters "Appaloosa" and I jumped in my seat. The poor woman looks like hell. If this were a movie about Western homeless, I'd understand her look as a character choice. But this is shocking. Is she well? Should she be asking Kirsten Dunst for something affordable in rehab?

Jackie Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 16:03
I so agree with Kris! Renee was great as Molly Brown. If you read the book, you realize that Renee truly understood the character. She didn't overact the part at all........that is exactly how Molly was characterized.
Renee is a wonderful character actress who totally embraces her roles. I think she is fantastic and love that she she isn't caught up in the whole "hollywood" hype and is willing to take on different types of roles instead of getting caught in the rom/com rutt which happens to many actresses.

Randolph Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 18:20
I actually admire Renee for her lack of vanity where her roles are concerned and her willingness to look the part. She refused to wear much make-up in Miss Potter because Beatrice didn't wear make-up. Likewise the make-up is at a minimal in Appaloosa because women in the early West wore no make-up, unless they were prostitutes. I think she looked very natural and normal. We have been conditioned by Hollywood to expect actresses to look all made up and airbrushed, etc. in movies, magazines, etc. I say "thumbs up" to Renee for portraying her characters with total honesty! I for one, would rather see someone look 'natural" if the role calls for it!

Lana Says:
September 22nd, 2008 at 22:12
George did NOT miscast Renee as Lexie in Leatherheads. He wrote the part in the screenplay with her in mind.(his words) She was great as Lexie.........great chemistry between her and George. Her comedic timing was phenomenal! The low box office numbers were because of the genre, not the actors. My entire family loved the movie and thought Renee was fantastic!

Susan Says:
October 11th, 2008 at 12:18
I agreed with Richard. When we first get a look at Renee from far away, she looks perfectly fine but as soon as they showed a close up of her face there was actually laughter heard throughout the theatre. No matter what emotion she was trying to show her face didn't move. And to cast her as a promiscuous woman? Ha. People would actually have to find her attractive. Both my boyfriend and I thought the woman playing Viggo's actually whore was ten times better and should have been given the lead. Yah, ok, women in the time period didn't wear a lot of make up, but they also didn't get botox and have swollen faces either. Plus her acting was very unconvincing. Basically she ruined a perfectly good movie for me.

Tanya Says:
November 10th, 2008 at 19:14
I, too, could not get past the strangeness of Renee's face in this movie. It wasn't so much that she was homely, she just looks unnatural and frozen. To me, it's like watching an actor in a mask. She was supposed to be a femme fatal and she just seemed more like a whiny brittle woman with a perpetual grimace. I could see so many other actresses being so much better in this role. It required subtleties of expression that she seems unable to express, for whatever reason.

Back to Rant: Renee Zellweger Ruins History

Rant: Renee Zellweger Ruins History

Comment on “Rant: Renee Zellweger Ruins History”

Leave a Reply