The movie Naomi Watts couldn’t believe everyone hated: “It’s painful”
Naomi Watts claims that she often has a sixth sense when it comes to shooting a film, knowing if it’ll be a success or a failure, but very once in a while, though, the actor is left shocked by the response to one of her movies, and clearly her sixth sense sometimes fails her.
Despite the fact that Watts has appeared in some genuinely incredible movies, like David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive – playing a dual role that should’ve landed her an Oscar nomination, Alejandro González Iñárritu’s 21 Grams, and Michael Haneke’s own English-language remake of Funny Games, she has appeared in a decent number of flops, too. Just look at that awful Princess Diana biopic.
Watts even appeared in the critically reviled Movie 43, while her recent turn in the erotic thriller Emmanuelle gave us one of the most boring movies of 2024.
But what about The Book of Henry? She really thought that was going to be good, not getting her usual sinking feeling that she gets when she knows that a movie is doomed for failure. “You know when it’s going to be bad. For sure. Usually, I can tell pretty quickly if it’s going to be bad,” she told the Guardian.
In this case, she really didn’t expect the movie to be received so negatively. Watts thought it had all the components to make it a standout tale – this was a story of a dying boy who plans to save his neighbour from her abusive stepfather, resulting in a murder plot. It wasn’t the strongest of screenplays, but it had a strong emotional pull – that wasn’t enough for critics, though.
The 2017 film featured the likes of Jacob Tremblay, Maddie Zeigler, Dean Norris, and Sarah Silverman, but audiences just weren’t impressed. A tonal mess with far-fetched ideas and overwrought attempts to leave viewers in tears, The Book of Henry didn’t hit the mark despite Watts’ hopes, and she was left rather surprised.
It was “kind of a shock,” she explained, adding, “I don’t read reviews, but I heard about them. And it’s painful. It’s painful.” It must be hard to really feel good about a movie, only for it to completely fall flat and land on its head. She just thinks that people failed to appreciate what was there, ignoring the fact that the movie just wasn’t that well-made.
“There are other times when you’re certain that a film’s got all the elements. And that film can actually be really good. But it can be about audiences not being open to receive an idea at that point in time,” she suggested. Was The Book of Henry ahead of its time? I don’t think so – some movies just don’t have long-lasting appeal, and it’s clearly difficult for some actors to realise this when they’ve been so wrapped up in actually filming it.
It can be hard to detach from a project and look at it objectively, yet it seems like Watts needs to tune into her supposed sixth sense a little more, because then she could avoid appearing in movies as poorly received as The Book of Henry.
