One of the most intersesting things about this movie is
Even though it was made on an extremely low budget, u would never think so in a million years by looking at it!
shareYes, the film is visually quite stunning.
However, where the film's low budget stands out in my mind is in the dialogue editing. It's typical for the actors to re-record their dialogue after shooting the scene, for clarity. This was not done here.
Now, I understand that the director WANTS to take advantage of muffled dialogue in at least one scene -- the one where we peep through the cottage windows -- and it is effective. But in EVERY scene, the dialogue is buried. I was constantly straining to hear the words, and it got annoying. It was so bad that my wife got through the whole film without realizing that the teenage boy and girl in the film were the same Nic and Susan that we see in the cottage scene.
I notticed that mike figgis's other film "One Night Stand" contained muffled dialogue as well
shareI just watched this and enjoyed it, but the dialogue mix was terrible and the overall volume levels were so extreme that I had to turn the subtitles on and keep turning the volume up and down. It was especially ironic when the producer was talking to the sound guy about his new Sennheiser microphone and telling him he hoped his sound recording was as good as the pasta he made and I could barely hear the dialogue over what would have ordinarily been background music. The director must have wanted the mix this way but I can't understand what he was trying to achieve by having so much of the dialogue buried.
share