Tristan + Isolde

Tristan and Isolde (Widescreen Edition) Okay, so I tried to watch this movie. I know - an epic tale. I have to admit, it's definitely better than Romeo & Juliet, which I truly despise. I got about fifty minutes into it, and realized where the story arc was headed. I hate tragedy. Tragedy mixed with dramatic irony just ties my stomach into horrible knots. I gave up, and now I'm watching Eloise at the Plaza. More about that later.

What I did see of the film struck me in a couple of ways. Firstly - COLOR!!! The thing was certainly shot well enough for the blood to look warm enough, and yet it had no color. I know that those camera things are sort of en vogue at the moment, but it really didn't work for me here. They're in the British Isles (or are supposed to be), and the trees weren't green, the soil wasn't brown, and the people weren't circulating blood. It looked like Hershey's syrup.

I love Sophia Myles, and whatshisname - the guy - is just fine, thanks (although I always think his cheekbones make him either sinister or sarcastic). Rufus Sewell has always been a favorite of mine. Yay. So I'm rooting for them, is my point. They did very well.

Anyway, I give anyone full permission to adore this movie, and watch it every night with a box of kleenex and a tub of ice cream. It's just not my cup of tea. If I wanted to watch inevitable misery, I'd pay more attention to my graduate applications.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lost in Austen

Image
My co-worker warned me about Lost in Austen . She said it was cheesy, and from the few clips forced on me by a very fanatically-inclined little sister, I would have completely agreed. In context, though, I think it all sort of fit, although it's not exactly Emmy material. I really liked what they did to this story, but my reasoning is a bit complex. I have read Pride and Prejudice perhaps seven times. The only books I have read more often are Heart of Darkness (8) and The Book of Mormon (?). That doesn't mean that I like the work, just that my professors did. I admit, I liked the book very well the first three times. The romance was classic and endearing, and the language was fluid and fun. Then came Austenmania, and I jumped ship. Jane Austen wrote some enjoyable stories, but I wouldn't rank her any higher than Georgette Heyer (this coming from the same person who ranks Shakespeare with Steven Spielberg). And at this point, having seen every version of P&P ever fil...
Read more

Salt

Image
This film had all the elements of a classic cold-war spy thriller in much the same way State of Play reprised journalism drama. Both Liev Schreiber and Angelina Jolie played very well, especially off each-other, and although this film must essentially showcase stunts and physical effects, the plot and ending work quite well too, without becoming too belabored or falling into too many cliche traps. Salt is ultimately exciting and fun, but don't try to wrangle a classic out of it.
Read more

The Fountain

Image
This film should only be watched once. As a second-time viewer, I knew approximately how it ended, and how the three epic stories tied together, but it wasn't pleasant to watch. It wasn't pleasant the first time, but at least the images were striking, and felt like some kind of voyage of discovery. Watching this again was a bit like watching The Sixth Sense for the fourth time. The impact had disappeared. For most of the film, the camera moved toward those truly frustrating close-up, poser shots that so irritated me about Master and Commander . I understand that these are pretty people, and they earn the money, and so they get close-ups, but when it doesn't enhance the plot or the artistic composition as a whole - when it doesn't create unity, then it has no place. Actors should understand that, and have a serious heart-to-heart with their directors about it. I usually enjoy watching Rachel Weisz, but in this film she seemed flat, passive, and enervated. To be fa...
Read more