Star Wars Eps II & III

Does anyone else dislike them as much as I do, mainly for the crappy-ass acting of one Hayden Christensen? The scripts for the newest trilogy weren't brilliant and there were directing flaws here and there, but the ensemble cast was great and really helped make the last two movies watchable so in my mind the biggest issue was with how annoyingly bad Christensen's acting was. (Also Natalie Portman was... kinda bland.)

Actually I take that back a little, some of the script was absolutely horrible too. It's a pity though, I really liked the base storyline and the CGI for the second two films was brilliant! Meh.

Sorry, I'm watching the second one right now (Attack of the Clones), and I'm finding myself filled with the strong desire to punch my computer screen every five minutes.

No, you aren't alone. Ewan McGreggor and Ian McDiarmid were the only good actors in my opinion. Hayden was........sorry, I can't find words to describe the sheer torture that is his acting (seriously...have you seen "Jumper"? lol). I've always been off and on about Portman. This was one of those times where I was on the line, but I think she could have been good had there been a script NOT written by monkeys. McGreggor and McDiarmid had pretty bad lines, but they really pushed past that and still somehow came off excellent.

But yeah...Hayden...he's one of those guys that even looking at him I want to punch him........*sigh* I need to meditate now, lol.

Hadi Apollos wrote: but I think she could have been good had there been a script NOT written by monkeys..

lololololol, my feelings exactly.:laugh:

I really enjoyed Samuel L. Jackson as Mace Windu too, but I felt that his part was so poorly written that the character really suffered despite how great an actor he is. Other than him though I totally agree, Ewan and Ian were the two best actors on the set. (In Episode 1 Neeson was pretty awesome too).

I'm totally fast forwarding through all the scenes with Hayden now. I just can't handle his annoying voice. TV actors, bah humbug. :pinch:

Yeah meditation is seriously needed to recover from these films. I can feel the anger welling up... must... not... give in... to the darkside! lol

Could it have been better? Sure! Do I think Star Wars fans just need some catharsis? Absolutely! Episodes 4-6 didn't have all that great of acting either. I'm not really sure what you're expecting from what was supposed to be a children's film?!?!
That being said, I think the Anakin Skywalker in the Clone Wars is a much better Anakin

I think that some of the acting in episode II is horrifically bad. However, I find episode III to be a massive improvement on episode II and so I don't tend to think of them together. The problem with the prequel films, ep II in particular, is the TERRIBLE scriptwriting. The scenes between Anakin and Padme make you feel really uncomfortable just watching them, but I fail to see how the actors could have acted well with the material they were given. You have to remember, Natalie Portman is a highly respected oscar-winning actress, and I've seen a lot of her films and think she's a highly consistent actress. In episode III where the script isn't quite as bad as I and II you start to see that. The choking scene is heart-wrenching, despite the awful lines.

Hayden, though...ok, I'll admit, he's really awful. I watched an interview with George Lucas in which he said that when Hayden did his screen test with Natalie Portman, they instantly knew he was the 'one', because there was so much going on behind his eyes. I do kind of understand that, I think he does quite a good job of showing the inner turmoil and conflicting emotions going on, but he ruins it all with his inability to deliver a line with any kind of expression or inflection whatsoever, which is kind of your job if you're an actor...

I love Ewan McGregor though! Couldn't imagine a more perfect Obi-Wan, or a better person to play the young Alec Guinness, as it were.

So my conclusion - hate ep II (due to the script), quite like ep III (but still not the best script ever written). Hayden terrible, Natalie unfortunate to have such awful lines, Ewan the best part of the prequels!

In complete agreement, Episode II is really the worst one and the writing is certainly the real killer (aside from Hayden). Hayden did manage to capture the angsty teen expression perfectly, but there was nothing else going on there, AT ALL. Like you said - the scenes between him and Natalie in Ep II were utterly cringe-worthy.

I've got to admit that on Ep III when the Jedi were all being killed off, I was literally on the edge of my seat, completely emotionally involved. Not quite to the point of half the people around me (many of who were actually crying).

My favorite Star Wars films go in the following Order - Empire Strikes Back, A New Hope, Revenge of the Sith, Return of the Jedi, the Phantom Menace, and... Attack of the Clones is decidedly last.

well you have to remember George was trying to write it as a young adult would act. If you look closely at it and the way the acting is Ive acted the same way in my young adult life. Being arrogant and cocky to say the least. I just got my black belt was in the army and well you get the picture. I probably wouldve wrote it the same. The trouble is placing your mind in that time frame is hard and how one would act at that age.

Being 41 now, me and a good friend talk bout it alot and thats the best conclusion we came up with. If he had a teenager write it, it would probably been much worse.

PLEASE, PLEASE, ladies and gentlemen, PLEASE. This is Star Wars not Ben Hur! Of course the acting was bad. When you use major actors as supporting and unknowns as leads what do you expect to happen. Besides, it's fantasy and the best thing about Star Wars is the CGI. We need to calm ourselves and meditate on this...

B.S. meditate on this George...

Samual L Jackson is a lousy actor in his best work, Hyden has only one character he knows how to play... whiny guy. Natalie Portman needs acting lessons or a career with a mens magazine. :laugh:

Movie 4-6 are given a by because of the limited computing power during their making. The movies were well done because more effort had to be put into the script and the "complete" movie making process. It was the first time we were taken to a fantasy world away from our lives during a time in the world when we needed hope.

Movies 1-3 are poorly done because the computers were given the task of making up for inferior story and direction. Jar Jar Binks...I MEAN REALLY??? A Jamaican alien frog lizard? COME ON GEORGE!!!!! We are GEEKS not stupid! Give us some storyline.

OK,OK,time now to meditate and watch episode IV. Flashback to 1977 (year I graduated HS)and listen to RUSH.

Aside from good choreography in Episode I, none of them could have had worse writing and execution. Episode II was ALMOST as shockingly disappointing, and episode three came in third.

I think the prequel suffered the "burned out famous rock star syndrome" where the mindset was "this is star wars... EVERYONE loves star wars! don't worry, this will be a huge hit almost no matter how its written!" .... heh...

Every time I see Samuel L. Jackson as Mace Windu I only wish his personality was that of his character Jules Winnfield (from Pulp Fiction)... "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM??? I'M A JEDI MOTHER F*CKUH!"

Even if just that was the ONLY thing that was different... I would watch them over and over and over JUST to see that and lmao!

Proteus Wrote

Every time I see Samuel L. Jackson as Mace Windu I only wish his personality was that of his character Jules Winnfield (from Pulp Fiction)... "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM??? I'M A JEDI MOTHER F*$#%UH!"

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

YEP!!!