Since the transcript is incoherent

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Another interview with Brendan Muldowney. I’m trying to figure out how a thirteenth-century monk is supposed not to believe in G-d? Or why Tom Holland was supposed to play it as if he didn’t believe? But I wonder if he read his own script. The monks never claimed that they saw the angel; one monk related the story of the angel. There’s a bit of a difference there.

~ by Servetus on August 9, 2017.

6 Responses to “Since the transcript is incoherent”

  1. Jesus. It’s amazing this film turned out as successfully as it seems to have.

    • or Jaysus, as I believe one says as an Irish person. Yeah. OK, maybe some of this was garbled but most of the time I have no idea what he’s saying and I’ve read a lot of unclear prose over the years.

  2. Maybe they (and we!) have to thank the editor for turning the filmed scenes into something more coherent than what recent interviews suggested (in terms of story ideas, thought processes, history etc.)

  3. Hoping the film is less garbled than this interview. Talk about feeling out of it.or segmented.

    • The film always makes narrative sense, even if it’s not entirely plausible to me. This interview, on the other hand, made me wonder whether I speak English. Or whether Muldowney does.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: