Great acting, great photo, really bad executive direction

Rating: 3/10 (2 November 2005)

I am a part of the East Coast Film community here in the United States... I don't make 'films', When people ask what I do I say: "I point cameras" and "great, that got out in six hours!" but: I do crank out more watchable hours per week than an average unemployed film maker snob cranks out in 15 years. I'm a really bad film maker. I know it. It takes one to know one so here goes: I don't think Oliver Stone actually watched the entire movie after the edits were made.
Here's the scoop: Script is brainy, camera work is great, lighting horrible, music good and bad at the same time, overall executive management of film was present like it should have been.
Everything about this film is great except for three people: One: THe lighting designer (who thinks that relentless day-glow pink is a great substitute for bonfire lights in bacchanalian revel shots)Two: The director- someone who did 'shots for hire', saw the dailies, took the 15 minutes of great photography and slowed it 5fps so it would stretch out to 25 minutes of an otherwise horribly executively-directed movie then didn't actually watch the entire movie (EVER), and three: the hair stylist, who... uh... who? All the actors did an incredible job... All of them, so the casting was fine.
Oliver Stone's hubris really shone through on this. It shone through so much that the 'editor's cut' edition of the movie had some of the most pathetic editing ever... and as an audience member, I was actually wondering: "Did Stone and the producers really think I didn't notice that Angelina's lips weren't moving while she delivered that line in a close up face shot?" Don't believe me? Watch the director's cut. You will actually see a 25 second scene, halfway through, where you hear Angelina talking, see her head-shot on screen, but her lips are actually not moving.
She's talking... but the lips aren't moving.
OK... double check Yes... Major Hollywood director's cut and a main high Cost actor's words are clearly and audibly spoken, but the lips on the head shot ain't moving.
Oliver Stone did not actually watch the entire movie through after the edits were made.
If he did, and let all the slip-ups through that happened, he needs intervention.
Was that some 'Art-haus' thing? Strange that it only happened once in the movie. I don't have to go on about this. Not worth it. My NYU film student intern editors won't even let that garbage happen.
This is poor production management through and through, and the investors in this film should find a lawyer as soon as possible.
This movie has a great script and great actors: But the writers and actors are made to look like fools by slack producers, executives and directors.
My advice to the talent who put their heart and soul into this film.... well... I have too much class to say it.
You know what I think.
As for the investors in this film; I would seriously examine your options on recouping.