Any one else thought that Charlie Cox is ugly for the role?
i think Ben Barnes would have been much better for the principal role. He is far more good looking and charismatic
shareI agree Ben Barnes is much better looking. I thought for a second maybe Ben Barnes should have been Tristan. I'm sure he auditioned for the role and it came down to those two. I think the reason Charlie Cox works better is he is supposed to be a bit gawky, quirky, shy, someone you would never expect to turn into someone so brave and become king. He is adorable, and him and Claire Danes looked really good together. I do wish Ben Barnes could have been in the movie more......I mean he's so hot lol. But I can see why they chose Charlie. The only casting issue I had was the woman who plays Una. She looked so much older than Ben Barnes, and is not very attractive. She kind of has manly features. I know she is supposed to look older at the end to be more believable as Tristan's mother and to be with the guy who played Dunston as a man, but they could have chosen someone much prettier, and maybe just a tad younger looking. She wasnt supposed to age anyway because she was under the spell of being a bird/slave.
shareBen Barnes is too pretty to play Tristan. I think Charlie Cox has much more character in his face and when he was transformed by Captain Shakespeare, he looked great!
share