Merged Yet Again: Star Wars discussion thread

[Mr. Predictable]

Originally Posted by jmk

I don't think Portman and Christensen can be grouped. While Portman is attractive, Christensen is not. While both had to deal with some bad dialogue, it seemed like all of the lines written for Portman were horrible, whereas all of the lines Christensen delivered were horrible because he was the one delivering them. He's just really really bad at everything.

Christensen improved from the whiny brat he was in episode 2, but I agree his overall acting was laughable at times. Portman couldn't even do a good job crying... she did a much better job acting as a queen than a desperate housewife. At times it was bad enough to make me feel uncomfortable... I mean this is supposed to be a frikin epic!

[Minstrel]

******* POSSIBLE SPOILER *******

Christiansen was a terrible actor, but I actually liked his look because he resembled Mark Hamill a bit, in my opinion. Obviously, not like a twin...but his features had a vaguely similar cast, which was visually great. Added a lot of versimiltude, as though Anakin really were related to Luke.

Also, I thought the final scene was awesome. One of the things Lucas really got right. Luke's uncle and aunt, holding baby Luke, and staring off into the same Tatooine sunset that Luke stared into, and was sillohouetted against, in the original Star Wars movie. When Luke did it, it was a very powerful image of yearning for more meaning out of life. I thought it was one of the seminal images of Star Wars and it was evocative to play off that moment to "conclude" the saga.

[speedythief]

*spoliers*

Some of the worst acting in the film was delivered by Ian McDiarmid during the transformation scene with Mace. A few of the oh-so-over-the-top lines he threw out in constantly fluxuating and dramatic vocal tones during that sequence caused the entire audience in the theatre I was in to laugh aloud.

I don't really mind Christianson's acting in the two films. It's a difficult role. I think the problem lies in the transition between episode one and two. Either Anakin should've been a little darker in the first one or a little more relaxed in the second. I understand the idea that he got increasingly arrogant as he grew into manhood but if you line up the personalities of Vader in episodes one and two they don't really mesh well.

[Dez24]

Just my two cents worth of opinion:
I saw this Thursday and absolutely loved it. It lived up to what expectations I had and answered all my questions I've had since seeing the first Star Wars (IV). I don't mind any of the actors in it, as I wasn't watching it to pick apart their performances and didn't notice anything glaringly bad about them. I actually think Hayden did a decent job. And the way Lucas told the story of how Anakin turned into Darth Vader, I thought, was excellent. And it left me wanting more, which is how a movie should be. It, in my opinion, is well worth waiting in line for and seeing again, which is what I intend to do. I do agree that it is better than I and II though.

[SeaNet]

At least it didn't suck for the same reasons that the other ones did. But, I've got to say watching this movie was like reading the Cliff's Notes about what happened to get us from the point in the story we were to the point where Star Wars starts. It kept my attention most of the time, because there were things happening on the screen and I was way into the first ones and I wanted to see how they would tie things together. But it has to be among the worst written movies of all time.

[SeaNet]

Originally Posted by speedythief

*spoliers*

I don't really mind Christianson's acting in the two films. It's a difficult role. I think the problem lies in the transition between episode one and two. Either Anakin should've been a little darker in the first one or a little more relaxed in the second. I understand the idea that he got increasingly arrogant as he grew into manhood but if you line up the personalities of Vader in episodes one and two they don't really mesh well.

The Annakin to Darth Vader transformation had the potential to be one of the most fascinating character transformations of moviedom. But, essentially they chose to spend about 15 minutes of poorly acted screen time dealing w/ it, where Annakin really wants to save whatever her name was, (did Natalie Portman even show up, or did they just have a billboard of her to film the scenes w/?), so he can't let the emporer die, even though his entire life has been devoted to rooting out and destroying the Sith. Whatever.

I wanted to see it happen over the course of 3 movies where we watch him slowly turn evil. Instead, in the first one, he was so young there couldn't be any development at all. In the second one, all we got was the god awful love story between him and Portman, and in the third we got about 15 minutes. Thanks George.

[SeaNet]

Originally Posted by jmk

In a recent interview with AOL, Lucas said there will be no more Star Wars movies.

Thank God.

[MarioChalmers]

Originally Posted by SeaNet

Thank God.

Posting something like that in the brooding grounds of Star Wars geeks (the internet :biggrin?!?! You're a brave man SeaNet.

I liked the movie though. Yes, it was poorly written, but we're talking about George Lucas here, George Lucas! C'mon, as if the first three weren't poorly written.

[Cap]

I was very happy to see Lucas pull through with a great movie in ROTS. I'd rank him like so:

1) Empire Strikes Back
2) Return of the Jedi
3) Revenge of the Sith
4) New Hope
5) Who cares
6) Who cares

[PDB]

Originally Posted by sloth

I think people overrate the first trilogy because of the nostalgia factor.

agreed.

seen sith twice now and i'm a pretty big fan. It's up there with a new hope and empire, better than return of the jedi and the first two prequels, imo.

i do agree that anakins transformation could've used a bit more juice or whatever you want to call it. it felt a little forced. like the way he did it.. it was just like a "do or die" choice and he jumped into the pool that is the darkside even though he didn't necesarily want to.. which could've worked... it didn't need to be super gradual.. but it just felt a little forced.

good movie tho.

[Tom]

i will say the people who don't like something are sure harsh and like to take up alot of space :biggrin:

I see some things pointed out i expected. If it were a movie with another name i suspect reaction to the acting would be different. It's become a cult phenomena. I don't mean that to insult anyone.

As far as a non-fiction movie this was as powerful as it gets. People who don't even like Star Wars are moved by its emotional content.

I think...if it were a movie of another name Ewan would gets some critical recognition. I didn't say he would win anything, but he was incredible.

[Cinco de Mayo]

Originally Posted by Tom

As far as a non-fiction movie this was as powerful as it gets.

[Tom]

Somehow, i think if i hated it...you would like it.

[futuristxen]

Originally Posted by sloth

I think people overrate the first trilogy because of the nostalgia factor. If all of these 6 were released in a string in chronological order, just like they are now, I think Revenge of the Sith is the best in everyones opinion. This one is the best imo.

Also the videogames for this movie on DS/PS2 are great.

two things: 1) No. 2) No.

explanation 1: Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Larger role for Chewbacca, C3P0 and R2D2. The Cantina Scene.
Watch the original trilogy again. The pacing and the story telling of the first two are magnificent. Of course it was helped by the fact that Lucas was just remaking Kurosawa films. I don't know why he didn't stick with that for the prequels.
The trilogy was a real coming together of a lot of diffrent elements, in apparently a once in a life time setting.

The first two movies are classics for good reason. Return of the Jedi is still decent, but it was the begining of the end. Up until Revenge of the Sith, every Star Wars after Empire was a step down.

Explanation 2:
Kotor, man. Kotor. **** that garbage you're playing. Kotor.

[futuristxen]

Originally Posted by Tom

I see some things pointed out i expected. If it were a movie with another name i suspect reaction to the acting would be different. It's become a cult phenomena. I don't mean that to insult anyone.

Actually the name and the history has gotten this series a TON of breaks. If these prequels weren't called "Star Wars" and had no attatchment to those previous movies, then they would have bombed and we wouldn't have made it far enough for Lucas to make a decent product.