It’s one of those movies that everyone saw the trailer for but almost nobody actually finished. Honestly, if you mention Miss Julie to most film buffs today, you’ll probably get a blank stare or a "Wait, the one with the eyebrows?" Yeah, that one. Released in 2014, directed by the legendary Liv Ullmann, and starring Colin Farrell alongside Jessica Chastain, this film was supposed to be a massive awards-season heavyweight. Instead, it kinda just... vanished.
But here’s the thing: people get this movie wrong. They think it’s just another stuffy period drama where people in corsets talk about their feelings. It’s not. It’s actually a brutal, claustrophobic, and genuinely uncomfortable psychodrama that’s more "Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" than "Downton Abbey."
The Setup You Think You Know
Based on August Strindberg’s 1888 play, the story is pretty simple on paper. It’s Midsummer’s Eve in 1890, Northern Ireland. Miss Julie (Chastain), the daughter of a wealthy Anglo-Irish baron, decides to skip the fancy parties and hang out in the kitchen. There, she starts a dangerous game of cat-and-mouse with her father’s valet, John (Farrell).
John is engaged to the cook, Kathleen (Samantha Morton), but that doesn’t stop the sparks—or the insults—from flying. What starts as a "will-they-won't-they" quickly turns into a "why-are-they-doing-this-to-each-other."
Colin Farrell Wasn't Playing a Hero
In most of his career, even when he’s playing a bad guy, Colin Farrell has this inherent charm. You want to like him. But in Miss Julie, he’s playing John as a man who is deeply, fundamentally resentful. John isn't just a servant; he’s a social climber with a chip on his shoulder the size of a castle.
💡 You might also like: Kiss My Eyes and Lay Me to Sleep: The Dark Folklore of a Viral Lullaby
Farrell’s performance is actually one of the most underrated things he’s ever done. He has to flip-flop between being this servile, boot-polishing employee and a dominant, cruel manipulator. One minute he’s literally kissing Julie’s shoes, and the next, he’s calling her names that would make a sailor blush.
Critics at the time, like Peter Bradshaw from The Guardian, noted that Farrell and Chastain "turn the dials up to 11." Some people found it hammy. I’d argue it’s just theatrical. The movie doesn't try to hide its stage-play roots. It embraces them. You’re trapped in that kitchen with them, and the air is thick with "sustained cruelty and trauma," as Farrell himself later described the role.
Why the "Age Gap" Debate Missed the Point
When the film came out, a lot of people complained about the casting. In the original play, Julie is about 25. Jessica Chastain and Colin Farrell were both in their late 30s when they filmed this.
Mick LaSalle of the SFGATE argued that things people do spontaneously in their 20s—like, say, ruining your life over a one-night stand—just seem "neurotic" when you're 35.
📖 Related: Kate Moss Family Guy: What Most People Get Wrong About That Cutaway
But doesn't that make it more interesting?
When a 25-year-old acts out, it’s youthful rebellion. When a 35-year-old woman in 1890 risks her entire social standing for a valet, it feels like a final, desperate act of self-destruction. The stakes aren't just higher; they're terminal. Farrell’s John isn't just a young man with dreams; he's a middle-aged man who realizes this might be his only chance to ever be more than a servant. That desperation makes the cruelty that follows much sharper.
The Brutality Nobody Warns You About
If you’re expecting a romance, stop. Just stop.
The turning point of the movie is essentially a "dance of death." After they finally sleep together, the power dynamic doesn't just shift; it shatters. John stops pretending to be a gentleman. He reveals he never loved her. He treats her like a "whore" (his words, not mine) and starts planning how to steal her father's money to open a hotel in Switzerland.
👉 See also: Blink-182 Mark Hoppus: What Most People Get Wrong About His 2026 Comeback
The scene with the canary is where most people check out. John literally beheads Julie’s pet bird with a meat cleaver right in front of her. It’s a moment of pure, unadulterated malice designed to show that Julie has no power left. It’s hard to watch. It’s supposed to be.
Why You Should Actually Give It a Chance
So, why watch something so miserable?
- The Cinematography: Mikhail Krichman (the guy who shot Leviathan) makes the manor look like a haunted house. The lighting is gorgeous, using natural-looking light that makes everyone look like a painting by Rembrandt.
- The Acting Masterclass: Regardless of whether you like the characters, watching Farrell and Chastain go toe-to-toe for two hours is a trip. They filmed it in chronological order, which helped them lean into the escalating madness.
- Liv Ullmann's Direction: She doesn't pull punches. She captures the "animalistic fervor" of the original text without trying to modernize it or make the characters "likable."
What to Keep in Mind Before Watching
If you decide to track this down—and it's currently floating around on various streaming VOD platforms—keep these things in mind:
- It's Long: At 133 minutes, it’s a commitment. It moves at the pace of a slow-burn thriller, not a period piece.
- It’s a Trio: Aside from a few extras at the beginning, it is just Farrell, Chastain, and Morton. If you don't like character-driven dialogue, you'll be bored.
- The Ending is Dark: There is no "happily ever after." It ends exactly how a 19th-century tragedy should: with a razor and a walk to the brook.
Actionable Next Steps
If you want to dive deeper into this specific era of Colin Farrell’s career or this style of filmmaking, here is what you should do:
- Watch "The Lobster" (2015): Released shortly after Miss Julie, this shows Farrell’s range in a completely different, weirdly clinical setting. It’s a great companion piece for seeing how he handles "trapped" characters.
- Read the Original Play: August Strindberg’s Miss Julie is short—you can read it in an hour. It’ll give you a lot of context for why Farrell chose to play John as such a "rakish Dublin wideboy" (as The Irish Post called him).
- Compare with the 1951 Version: If you can find the Swedish film by Alf Sjöberg, watch it. It’s the "gold standard" for this story and shows how different the 2014 version really is.
Ultimately, Miss Julie isn't a movie for everyone. It’s toxic, it’s hypnotic, and it’s a reminder that Colin Farrell is at his best when he’s playing someone who is absolutely falling apart.