Review - Tristan & Isolde
TRISTAN & ISOLDE
Movie Review
What? It’s that guy, Harry Osborne from Spider Man. You know, Peter Parker’s 
friend.
C’mon, movie people. He was the worst actor in Spider Man. And now you’re going to give him a leading role? And make him deal with a European accent whilst simultaneously trying to act? Did you see Spider Man? What, did he have some sort of blackmail on you?
And that kid from Love, Actually as Little Baby Tristan. He was very cute in Love, Actually. Playing his drums and whatnought. But did you see him in that and go, ohhhh he’s so cuuuuute!!! He’d be perfect as a natural-born warrior in a movie where his parents are horribly killed before his eyes and then he grows up to be a “tough guy” (tough guy in quotes out of necessity)?
If you did, you shouldn’t have. It should have clued you in when his parents were horribly killed before his eyes, and his reaction was to wander around the room with a vacant look. Okay, maybe with a little hint of “I have been inconvenienced” thrown in. But obviously you did catch onto that on your own; I could tell from the obviously dubbed-in crying and whimpering sounds you had playing whilst
Little Baby Tristan was gazing at his parents’ corpses clearly not crying or whimpering.
I never understand when movie people add in dialogue when it’s blatantly obvious that the character on-screen is not talking at all. Do you think we won’t notice? Come on, a movie theater screen is like 80′ across; we’re gonna notice. Or is the movie really intended for those people who don’t foolishly go to movie theaters, but instead wait long months for movies to be released on videotape, then crowd around their 13″ black-and-white Philco sets to watch them? Because these are the only people who might not notice an actor speaking eloquently whilst he has his mouth clamped firmly shut, or is spitting or gargling or having a root canal or something.
No no no. If you want to add in some dialogue you have to reshoot. Sorry, there’s no way around it. Sometimes they’re a little less obvious, they wait until the character’s back is turned to the camera before they try to insert additional dialogue. But that doesn’t work either, you can tell by the lack of head or jaw movement that they’re not talking. To make it more believeable, why not try CGIing in jaw and head movements in post-production? Or, or…why not reshoot?????
If you insist on adding in dialogue which occurs whilst a character’s mouth is shut, you could at least have the dialogue be muffled and distorted, as if the character is actually trying to talk without opening his mouth. That would be terribly stupid, but at least you would still have my respect.
The first half of this movie sucked and was terribly boring. The second half of this movie was calm and soothing, and comforted me as I slept the sleep of angels.
pingback: