change of actors
How come the older Michael Berg could be played by a different actor, but Kate Winslet stayed the same? Her make-up look sort of fake.
shareI never get why they do this. Basically, once you are well into adulthood you don't physically change much in a 10-15 year period if you take care of yourself, so a 30-year gap is quite easy to convey. Hanna is supposed to be in her mid 30s when we meet her, so you cast an actress in her late-40s and just style her younger, and then grey up for the mid-60s scenes. Instead they took a 32-year-old actress and got her to play 35, then 43 and ultimately 65. It just didn't convince in the end. Also, with Michael they took an 18-year-old kid and got him to play 15 and then 23. He just didn't convince as a university student at all: if they had cast someone 20/21 that would have been better, since a 20-year-old playing 15 is more believable than an 18-year-old playing 23. The other alternative would have been to have an early 30s actor playing the early 20s/mid 40s Michael. The films was miscast.
shareGenerally, I agree. The charitable view might be that the visual narrative is garbled in the same way the story narrative is, and that both aspects reflect the uncertainty of memory and history.
I don't actually think that is the case here fwiw. Sometimes ham-fisted is just that.