Tristian and Isolde
Fri May 05, 2006 8:42 pm
Has anyone seen this?
I went to the cinema a few weeks ago to go and see it with a few friends. I was crying at the end, its a really sad movie!
I love the plot and the actors were great! Though some of the speech didn't seem to reflect the time zone!
I went to the cinema a few weeks ago to go and see it with a few friends. I was crying at the end, its a really sad movie!
I love the plot and the actors were great! Though some of the speech didn't seem to reflect the time zone!
Sat May 06, 2006 2:29 am
OOooh I can't wait to see this, I've been so let down by romantic movies lately (i.e., The Notebook!), and this one looks soooo good!!
Sat May 06, 2006 3:45 am
I really dislike romance in movies or stories (because it's all in Hollywood and fairy tales) and I really dislike movies that have no other point than to make the audience cry. I don't think I will ever see it. Hopefully.
Sat May 06, 2006 1:13 pm
Don't disparage fairy tales. I would quote Tolkien at you, but I can't find Tree and Leaf. (Bruno Bettleheim is no authority I recognize, despite being on my side.) And don't disparage Hollywood, well, when it's released in November and December, anyway.
Tristan and Isolde, however, was released in January, with all that implies.
The score would have been poignant enough if it hadn't been the same five notes over and over again. The attraction between Tristan and Isolde is as inexplicable as Tristan's reputation as a brilliant strategist. Lord Marke is actually the coolest character, which, in this case, is not desirable, and he's still more wont to change than a real person would be in that situation. Why did they bother with Isolde's Irish suitor, as the subplot basically went nowhere? Then there's the guy who gets stabbed through the heart but survives through, I don't know, four more scenes or so. And let's not forget the howlers like Isolde preventing Tristan's hypothermia by stripping herself and her nurse buck-naked when she first meets him (after spontaneously running along the beach for no reason).
I mean, I can't see how anyone took it seriously, and I'm leaving out the historical inaccuracies because they don't get in the way of a good movie, as Braveheart will attest.
Tristan and Isolde, however, was released in January, with all that implies.
The score would have been poignant enough if it hadn't been the same five notes over and over again. The attraction between Tristan and Isolde is as inexplicable as Tristan's reputation as a brilliant strategist. Lord Marke is actually the coolest character, which, in this case, is not desirable, and he's still more wont to change than a real person would be in that situation. Why did they bother with Isolde's Irish suitor, as the subplot basically went nowhere? Then there's the guy who gets stabbed through the heart but survives through, I don't know, four more scenes or so. And let's not forget the howlers like Isolde preventing Tristan's hypothermia by stripping herself and her nurse buck-naked when she first meets him (after spontaneously running along the beach for no reason).
I mean, I can't see how anyone took it seriously, and I'm leaving out the historical inaccuracies because they don't get in the way of a good movie, as Braveheart will attest.
Sat May 06, 2006 4:27 pm
1. Braveheart is not a good movie.
2. It's different anyway. Braveheart isn't a legend, the Tristan and Isolde story is. Yes, with basis in history, but a more accurate comparison would be a film like Troy; a legend with some historical background.
See, the reason I hate Troy with a passion is not because of anything historical (you can't prove any of this wooden horse stuff ever happened etc.) but because it was meant to be a film of the legend and it just got the story SO WRONG. Menelaus dying, for example. *headdesk*
But yeah. I'm ASSUMING that the film, much like King Arthur was supposed to be a film version of the legend/myth/story of Tristan and Isolde. I don't know how good or bad the film is at sticking at the plot, because I haven't seen it.
Marke is 'cool' in the real story too. He is remarkably accepting of the whole affair, considering that Tristan first met Isolde to sort-of-propose on Marke's behalf; and considering that he catches them in bed together, asleep, and doesn't kill Tristan despite having every opportunity- simply replacing Tristan's sword with his own so that they know how merciful he has been. Marke is never meant to be anything other than the noble, most likeable chracter in the whole thing. He even saves Isolde from suicide (though hell, she dies pretty soon afterwards anyway)
Oh, and the other reason he's so cool is because Rufus Sewell is both sexy and cool; and looks great in a dress, incidentally.
Why is the attraction inexplicable? Is it because the actors lack chemistry, or do you mean it in the context of the story?
2. It's different anyway. Braveheart isn't a legend, the Tristan and Isolde story is. Yes, with basis in history, but a more accurate comparison would be a film like Troy; a legend with some historical background.
See, the reason I hate Troy with a passion is not because of anything historical (you can't prove any of this wooden horse stuff ever happened etc.) but because it was meant to be a film of the legend and it just got the story SO WRONG. Menelaus dying, for example. *headdesk*
But yeah. I'm ASSUMING that the film, much like King Arthur was supposed to be a film version of the legend/myth/story of Tristan and Isolde. I don't know how good or bad the film is at sticking at the plot, because I haven't seen it.
Lord Marke is actually the coolest character, which, in this case, is not desirable, and he's still more wont to change than a real person would be in that situation.
Marke is 'cool' in the real story too. He is remarkably accepting of the whole affair, considering that Tristan first met Isolde to sort-of-propose on Marke's behalf; and considering that he catches them in bed together, asleep, and doesn't kill Tristan despite having every opportunity- simply replacing Tristan's sword with his own so that they know how merciful he has been. Marke is never meant to be anything other than the noble, most likeable chracter in the whole thing. He even saves Isolde from suicide (though hell, she dies pretty soon afterwards anyway)
Oh, and the other reason he's so cool is because Rufus Sewell is both sexy and cool; and looks great in a dress, incidentally.
Why is the attraction inexplicable? Is it because the actors lack chemistry, or do you mean it in the context of the story?
Sun May 07, 2006 10:36 pm
It's partly the lifeless actors (well, it's mainly Tristan who's lifeless) and partly the whole oh-the-fate-of-England-and-Ireland-can-go-hang attitude.
Mon May 08, 2006 7:14 am
People tend to be more bothered about themselves than the bigger picture. See Othello.
Last edited by Igg on Tue May 09, 2006 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mon May 08, 2006 2:54 pm
I actually injoyed this movie. I got to see it before it hit the shelves to rent (I work in a movie store, I'm to lazy to go out and spend money on theaters).
Everyone who comes into my work asking about any good movies that I saw recently, I also suggest renting Tristin and Isolde (I'm sure a lot of sure never knew how to pronounce Isolde properly until you watched the movie and heard it).
See, theres a weak love story plot part (BTW, love stories suck) for the women, and then, there is fighting for the guys.
Now, a lot of the guys that come into my work with their GF's, and say they don't want to watch it, because of the love story part, I just look at them and say "Would you rather watch Casanove which is purely a chick flick? At least this one theres good fighting and blood." The men always go for it
My BF is one who likes chick flicks and action movies, so he LOVED this movie, me, I liked it, I will go out and buy it, when I get around to it:)
I suggest watching it....next movie!
Everyone who comes into my work asking about any good movies that I saw recently, I also suggest renting Tristin and Isolde (I'm sure a lot of sure never knew how to pronounce Isolde properly until you watched the movie and heard it).
See, theres a weak love story plot part (BTW, love stories suck) for the women, and then, there is fighting for the guys.
Now, a lot of the guys that come into my work with their GF's, and say they don't want to watch it, because of the love story part, I just look at them and say "Would you rather watch Casanove which is purely a chick flick? At least this one theres good fighting and blood." The men always go for it
My BF is one who likes chick flicks and action movies, so he LOVED this movie, me, I liked it, I will go out and buy it, when I get around to it:)
I suggest watching it....next movie!
Mon May 08, 2006 4:54 pm
People tend to be more bothered about themselves than the bigger picture. See Othello.
My favorite comment ever. ;D
I actually liked the film. The story itself was interesting, even if the actors weren't my favorites. Marke was definitely my favorite part of the movie/story. I think it was mainly because I didn't expect him to be such a forgiving man. In the adverts that aired when it was released in America, they made him seem like a cruel uncle that was simply trying to keep the two lovers apart. It even seemed as if he purposely made Tristan win Isolde for him.
Mon May 08, 2006 6:52 pm
Interesting. I have not seen this movie, and I went on imdb.com to see who the actors were. If anyone had just said the actors' names, I probably could have told you without any other hints that Tristan was a bomb and Marke stole the show.
No point really, just that actors rarely step outside their abilities. If they're good, they're always entertaining. If they're bad, you can't stop yawning when they're onscreen, no matter how good the rest of the movie is.
For those who don't feel like looking it up themselves:
James Franco (aka "I hate Spiderman who is my best friend so I will become my evil father just to spite him") is Tristan.
Rufus Sewell (aka Dark Brooding Bad guy... agamemnon in Troy, naughty count guy in Knights Tale, Snooty Bad Guy in Zorro 2), plays the other guy every one seems to like... Marke.
(9/6)
No point really, just that actors rarely step outside their abilities. If they're good, they're always entertaining. If they're bad, you can't stop yawning when they're onscreen, no matter how good the rest of the movie is.
For those who don't feel like looking it up themselves:
James Franco (aka "I hate Spiderman who is my best friend so I will become my evil father just to spite him") is Tristan.
Rufus Sewell (aka Dark Brooding Bad guy... agamemnon in Troy, naughty count guy in Knights Tale, Snooty Bad Guy in Zorro 2), plays the other guy every one seems to like... Marke.
frankly, my dear, i don't give a smurf
(9/6)
Tue May 09, 2006 5:04 pm
Hey-hey, now, Franco is awesome as Harry Osborne. It's just that he does the exact same thing when he plays the romantic lead, and that doesn't wash.
Sat May 13, 2006 12:22 am
I saw it quite some time ago with a friend. She was bawling at the end; I, for some reason, wasn't. It was pretty good, I thought. I'm into romantic-tragedy-type movies. Though, there was a bit much blood and gore for me. Especially at the end when the guy cuts the other guy's head off (sorry, I am no good at recalling names) and holds it up for everyone to see... ugh. I could have done without that.
Sat May 13, 2006 4:25 am
I don't care about violence in movies. It seems like the directors are trying to make it dramatic and extremely gorey but in the end it's really nothing impressive to me. There's no heart in the fight. It's too much of a farce. There have only been maybe 2 or 3 movies that I enjoyed the fight scene in. A few of the Rocky movies made me root for him and get involved in the fight and and the movie Misery (I highly recomend this movie to everyone) where the guy is trying to escape the woman who broke his legs and was keeping him prisoner. That was an excellent fight. Most fights have no emotional value whatsoever to me and I don't really care about what happens to the character because they aren't well written.
To sum it up: All flash and no substance.
To sum it up: All flash and no substance.
Sat May 13, 2006 4:32 am
Snippy wrote:I don't care about violence in movies. It seems like the directors are trying to make it dramatic and extremely gorey but in the end it's really nothing impressive to me. There's no heart in the fight. It's too much of a farce. There have only been maybe 2 or 3 movies that I enjoyed the fight scene in. A few of the Rocky movies made me root for him and get involved in the fight and and the movie Misery (I highly recomend this movie to everyone) where the guy is trying to escape the woman who broke his legs and was keeping him prisoner. That was an excellent fight. Most fights have no emotional value whatsoever to me and I don't really care about what happens to the character because they aren't well written.
To sum it up: All flash and no substance.
Did you see the movie? You said in your previous post that you had no intention of doing so. So i'm wondering on whether or not your post here is even knowledgeable involving this movie.
Sat May 13, 2006 4:59 am
I wasn't saying that this movie didn't have a good fight scene, I was just saying that in general that I don't like them that much and that just because a movie does have a fight scene it doesn't mean it'll be an interest point for me to want to go see it.