James Franco ruined it for me

I disagree with the OP. This was the first Franco performance I saw, and I adored it. I think he's an immensely talented actor who really gives a crap about his roles, and puts great thought and emotion into his performances. But I suppose all this is really just a matter of opinion.

In response to worldsbiggestshowoff, I don't doubt that he wasn't the directors choice, but I'm wondering why the studio would pick him to attach a name. When this movie was released, the only thing he was really known for was his role in "Freaks & Geeks". Some might mention his Spiderman role, but his was minor and I didn't know of one person who knew him by name.
I think Henry Cavill is also a great actor, but I can't picture him in the role.

To the OP: How can someone physically "look" American? I thought he was physically great for the role. Of all the different adapatations I've read, I think (minus the long hair), he was a good description.

------------
It was a joke! Do you not get the concept of a joke, or sarcasm possibly?

@worlsbiggest: I also think that Cavill may have been a good choice. He played Brandon to a tee in Tudors and was good in Monte Cristo. Also, let's not forget that he's Superman and Franco's what, the Green Goblin's son?

What's this week's obsession? Provided that it doesn't involve green ears or ra*e? Who cares?

He didn't actually ruin it for but he bring it down a lot. Not sure it's entirely his fault though, I've seen him in another film and he did quite well. Once he settled into that permanent scowl he reminded me of Hayden Christensen in the Star Wars prequels. Dreadful.

The first half of the movie was quite strong, right up until the king marries Isolde. From then on the situations were very contrived and we get pretty much just one facial expression from James. You'd think he'd lighten up around Isolde.
He looks so troubled their secret relationship is transparently obvious in every scene. That I consider to be bad acting.

Okay first of all I'd like to say that this was not a marketing effort. The makers of this movie worked very hard on it. They NEEDED a big name unless no one was going to see it.
Second, no matter what the movie NEVER does justice to the book because everyone imagines the book differently. When you read a book its like your own story you come up with how the characters look, the setting they are in, etc., etc.
And last I think he's a good actor but not so good in this film. While everyone in this film had like an Irish accent I didn't really hear it from him and it got quite annoying through the whole movie.


And I would have liked to have known you
But I was just a kid~R.I.P. MJ

I recently saw this because I'm a fan of Franco's, and I have to say I think he was miscast. He's so American and has a modern look and sensibility about him that just doesn't suit a British period piece. Also I think a classical acting style would have suited the material better. I think Franco is very talented and I've been impressed with his work in other things...just not this.

On the other hand, I didn't get the feeling that Kevin Reynolds is the kind of director who can motivate and pull a performance out of an actor. It sounded like they spent a lot of time on the action sequences maybe at the expense of some other elements of the story. I thought many of the other principals were very good-- Sophia Myles, Rufus Sewell, Mark Strong--but they're dependable Brit actors.

Too bad they didn't wait a couple years to make the film...there are so many young Brit actors now that the studio might have found acceptable.

I watched this film for the first time today - having wanting to see it from the first poster I saw advertising the film. But I have had other distractions!

I have not read the books, but I got the gist that Tristian was a capable warrior - or Knight.

Having watched the first five minutes - I decided to put all of my chores on hold and did not move until the end.

I loved this film! I also thought that Franco fitted the role very well. He fascinated me. I found him very watchable. My daughter pointed out that he was one of the actors from the Spidey films - he had me hooked.

I prefer to read the books before I watch the film - but I did not know of this story. It has intrigued me enough to look for the books.

james franco's performance was excellent in this movie. its rubbish to say he lacked emotional range, its completely false!

Unfortunately, the movie failed to convey his performance on the big screen. I did not feel that special connection that tristan and isolde had, but i dont blame it on james franco. he is an extremely talented actor and gave 100% in this movie, as well as all of his other movies. He practiced horseback riding stunts for crying out loud. I blame the director of all people responsible for the quality of the movie.

It was a shame that the movie did not turn out as good as it could have- perhaps because of their extremely low budget (which i cannot not find on the internet...).

Why, oh why wasn't Tristan Henry Cavill!!?

franco was fish out of water he looked like an american football player, his death scene was hoopeless, being associated with the ridley scot production company it was originally fashioned for orlando bloom who to the annoyance of everyone concrened elected to do more pirates ion gruffyd was next some how it was franco and poor boxofficein the end