Contains spoilers!

I saw a few of David’s promotional interviews. I understand that his English is far from polished. But I have to say as much as I enjoyed his superb (Oscar nomination worthy) performance in “the Reader”, he never came across to have the emotional depth he so skillfully demonstrated in the film. When asked why Michael Berg chose to do nothing after realizing Hanna’s secret, he gave a long sigh and couldn’t come up with anything? How did he act the part without some kind of understanding of how Michael felt at the moment?

There are numerous interviews when he struggled to come up with answers to how his character FEELS. I find that very interesting. Kate, on the other hand, could articulate precisely how she emoted and adopted her Hanna’s emotion and feelings. I know David is very young (and I gather that there are many his generation fans in this forum). He came across much younger in interviews than the character he portrayed in the film.

I hope he attends the Oscar Award in LA a couple days before the Berlin premiere. Perhaps his agent would prepare him better for more interviews!

This is one of the best films of 2008! I hope it wins all 5 Oscars it is nominated in. And I still can not get over the fact that David did not get a nomination for such superb performance (at such tender age!)

wow,a long post.first of all,it's great that we've an english area now


for your question:i think it's mostly the problem of the foreign language.but,as i said in a few german posts,i can't understand that problem really.he said,before he's done the reader,he just could speak his school english.i don't want to be arrogant or something,but sorry my "schoolenglish"isn't that bad i could have answered the charlie rose question.ok,maybe he was really really nervous,but he gave another red carpet interviews and there his english was much better.

Hi Elli61,
First of all, welcome to the English forum. I've been running solo for some time now.

I agree that David must possess the emotional depth in order to portray Michael's complex emotions so vividly on screen. I also agree that language must have been a major factor. But after watching a few other interviews he gave right around the time of the Charlie Rose one, I think as a young actor, he was not very familiar withe the Hollywood style rapid fire promotional activities and it was quite some time ago when he shot thsee scenes so he actually did not remember much details. I persaonlly was amazed when he talked about how long ago all these took place and that his heart was in Cambodia where at the time he was shooting another film (Same Same but Different). I suppose for an actor, you "disappear" behind each of the characters you portray, then you move on to the next..

Very interesting life indeed.. He was amazing in the Reader..

yeah,i suppose you're right with the dissapearing-thing.
i think maybe he just isn't so eloquent(nice word ),but what i found really strange in the charlie rose interview was ,that he didn't even understand the question!

yes,you're absoluteyl right here too.it was really a embarrasing moment for me,even if that's sounds pathetic!