MovieChat Forums > The Time Traveler's Wife (2009) Discussion > Casting Eric Bana was a bad idea

Casting Eric Bana was a bad idea


Zero charisma. Close to no talent. Not a likeable character (at least not when he portrays him) and not convincing for the most part.

I could also rant about the writing/directing, but the acting was dull, mostly by Bana.

0/10

reply

I read the book and thought that Bana was very good as Henry!

reply

Bana has a good voice for an actor, deep and masculine, but doesn't bring much else to the screen.

Tout homme a deux pays, le sien et puis la France.

reply

I'm assuming you've never seen Troy because he's everything you've just mentioned he's not

reply

I thought he was amazing as Henry!

reply

But I'm not talking about Troy. I'm talking about his performance in THIS movie.

reply

I totally disagree . . . he played Henry perfectly


MERRY CHRISTMAS ~ Happy Holidays

reply

I remember thinking the same thing the first time I saw the movie... he just come off as very condescending and patronizing, making his early scenes with the much younger looking Rachel McAdams look, well, awkward and kind of creepy. But rewatching it the other day, I came to appreciate his more subtle acting towards the end, when the director stops jumping all over the place and really focuses on his inner struggle and fear of dying.

I still think someone like, say, Ryan Gosling (who looks more vulnerable in general and can play broken like nobody), would have killed it, but Eric Bana did a decent job with the material he was given.

reply

In an interview with the author Audrey Niffenegger, she said the she wrote the part of Henry with Adrien Brody in mind, so I'd said they got in bargin with Eric Bana instead of big nose Brody.

reply

yeah i picture Adrien Brody as Hanry and how great it might have being because of his other film The Jacket but i actually liked Eric Bana very much. someone like Ryan Goslin who looks broken enough without any additional drama wouldnt have been suitable as Hanry because he wouldnt have had enough presence and depth which Bana delivered perfectly. maybe little restrained at times but still nothing major in my eyes

reply

Respectfully disagree. I thought Bana was fabulous in this role, and very convincing as the afflicted Henry. I'm not sure why you would find him unlikable.

reply

I can't comment on whether Bana was right or wrong for the part since I haven't read the book, but I gotta disagree on your assessment of his acting talents. He's a very good actor and I often find his performances to be the best part of whichever movie he's in. He comes through best when he's intense, like in Black Hawk Down, Star Trek, or Munich. There's a subtlety to his acting, so that may be why you didn't like his performance in this particular movie.

reply

Agreed. The script is bland and completely lacking charm of any kind but Bana's blank stare and commercial smile does nothing to improve upon it.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

reply

[deleted]

He's Australian.

reply