Worst Star Wars Actor Ever

[Aenivae_Ikeda]

When a scene in a film makes you cringe, you know there's something very wrong.

 

Or something very right, depending on what it is that makes you cringe.

[MDk]

I dunno who claims the title of worst actor. I'm tempted to say Christensen or Portman, I generally don't consider child actors in this way because most of the time I don't even think of them as 'actors' per se. So many of the characters and sets and things in the second batch of movies were just cartoons, though, that I pity the live actors who starred in those films.

 

Pardon me, why do you consider Portman as one of the worst actors? All right, in Episode 3 she has a very poor part and very few scenes, so she could not impress very much, but in Episode 1 and 2 she did really a convincing performance, I think.

[Jahled]

ghastly moan

 

Me likes a ghastly moan...

[Eko]

Perhaps the 'acting element' can be put down to GL's over use of graphics and what not and young actors inability to get to grips with it, just like proven actors like McGregor have stated it was hell. So don't be to ready to cuss these young actors; they have been thrust onto the greatest movie franchise of all time and given a blue backdrop to 'act' before; so forgive them them if they look a tan wooden from time to time, perhaps they were as bored as f.

 

I don't really think that is all that much of an excuse. If an actor is not experienced enough to deal woth the 'blue screen' effect then maybe they shouldn't be cast in that role. That is of course the perogative of the Director, but in no way can they complain to be as 'bored as f.' as they did take the role, they were not forced to do it. What frustrates me is not so much the fact that it was poorly acted but the fact that the poor acting made the prequals such a waste, they could have been so good and they ended up like this...

 

Me likes a ghastly moan...

 

Me agrees

[Aenivae_Ikeda]

What frustrates me is not so much the fact that it was poorly acted but the fact that the poor acting made the prequals such a waste, they could have been so good and they ended up like this...

 

That wasn't all that ruined the prequels. The movies have so much CGI that they could basically be considered animated in some respects. I wouldn't mind so much if the CGI wasn't only there to make up for lack of interesting dialogue, and what not, but it does. God I hate GL...

[Skynxnex]

I admit the NOOOO scene was a little..off. However, when I look at it from a more realistic perspective, you need to keep in mind he did all of that for Padme. He turned to the darkside to save her etc and in the end he ended up killing her. The shock of it alone was what finally in my view brought Vader over to the darkside and only later on would Luke rekindle any good in him.

 

As for the acting...I think the reason it was 'corny' is that too many people were expecting something that wouldnt happen. For instance I know some people were cringing and shaking their heads when Padme and Anakin kept talking about how much they love one another, keep in mind though that in real life when people love each other or someone is trying to show their feelings for someone else, we dont have Hollywood writers to create perfect lines that you usually hear in a movie. I have heard some of my friends say what was to me some of the lamest stuff I have ever heard, but supposedly girls like that. It show they (the guy) is being honest.

 

Truth of the matter is, most of us cant act. The way we 'act' in real life is very different than if you put it on camera. For instance the way I act people think it was goofy or something, yet no one ever tells me those criticisms. I guess the point I am making is that one shouldnt go to a Star Wars movie or any movie and have expectations way out to the stars about how the acting is going to go.

 

For instance when Anakin got mad at Obi Wan on Mustafar when Padme collapsed...have any of you seen someone get very pissed off before? Many people get mad in different ways. Some people get very explosive and get loud and yell etc. I am one of the kinds of people where when I get mad, the only clue is my facial expression and the tone of my voice. I dont yell and I wont curse. What I will do is talk very slowly and the tone of my voice clearly gives it away. Not to mention my face looks pissed off. The point I am trying to make is that depending on the situation we all act differently. There is no one 'mold' that could have been done to fit everyone's perspective on how Anakin 'should' have acted in a certain way.

[Aenivae_Ikeda]

When we go to a movie we shouldn't have expectations as to the acting? What the hell? No we SHOULD have expectations because actors get paid gobloads of money so they should at least be able to satisfy the mob.

 

As for the anger part... We saw in Episode 2 that Anakin lashes out when he is angry, hence the tuskan massacre, and the throwing of parts in the homestead. Therefore it stands to reason that he would yell, or be spiteful, or lash out verbally when angry, especially since he is a sith lord.

[DarthTex]

Aenivae_Ikeda wrote:

 

Therefore it stands to reason that he would yell, or be spiteful, or lash out verbally when angry, especially since he is a sith lord.

 

In this movie, the title of "Sith Lord" for Anakin is only that, a title. By the time you get to the original movies (Darth Vader is now ~20 years older), you can just tell it isn't "just a title", but ... part of his past/experience. Now he IS a Sith Lord! You can see/hear the evil that is Darth Vader . When Anakin first joined with Palpatine, he was just an "apprentice" Sith Lord (and acting like a spoiled child ).

[Krytos]

Ok, my two cents: The "no" by James Earl Jones was good - powerful and emotional. Haden Christian's arm waving acting was pathetic . . . as with most of his acting in it.

 

I can tolerate his acting throughout E2 and E3 . . . but that arm waving was almost as bad as Episode I's Anakin's acting - lines like: "Rolling's a good trick" and "now that's Pod racing" [shuddder] [/shudder]

[Grand_Admiral_Thrawn]

I agree with Krytos on this one. The visual was what made vaders "No" melodramatic, not the voice-over by Mr. Jones. Had he fallen o his knees or something I think it would have been better.

[Skynxnex]

When we go to a movie we shouldn't have expectations as to the acting? What the hell? No we SHOULD have expectations because actors get paid gobloads of money so they should at least be able to satisfy the mob.

 

As for the anger part... We saw in Episode 2 that Anakin lashes out when he is angry, hence the tuskan massacre, and the throwing of parts in the homestead. Therefore it stands to reason that he would yell, or be spiteful, or lash out verbally when angry, especially since he is a sith lord.

 

Take a second, get a valium.

 

Where did I say we shouldnt have an expectation for acting? Hmm where? And keep in mind what we are talking about here, Star Wars. This isnt Gone With the Wind or a Broadway theatrical production. These movies have more or less always been geared to little kids. The point I am trying to make is that one shouldnt go to a movie with unrealistic expectations when the audience that its geared to is not of your age demographic. For instance, would you take a child, say about 5 yrs old to see an Opera? Probably not, most children at that age are NOT interested in something like an Opera. The opera is geared towards a different audience.

 

Sheesh, I wish people would read my posts all the way through and try to understand the context of what I am talking about instead of looking at just one point and harping on it.

[Skynxnex]

I hate double posting, but this is an entirely different post than my preceding one.

 

Is Hayden a bad actor? Probably so.

 

Can George Lucas direct worth a damn? Probably not.

 

 

However, that does not detract from the fact that a lot of kids who were at the movie, RoTS absolutely loved it. It doesnt take a genius to see what age demographic George was marketing this to. Especially more so in Ep1 and Ep2. What is sad though is that George does not try to make his movies a little more mature and get rid of the cutesy crap that he has been putting in his movies since RoTJ.

 

I just want to highlight that criticizing certain parts of the movie for being 'stupid' depends on perspective. For a 13 yr old kid watching the movie the NOOOO scene was great. For me, 23 yr old, it was bad. I am not disputing the 'bad'ness of the scene but rather the fact that how you and I view the scene differs from how the little kids viewed it. I personally didnt like the parts with Artoo spraying oil and being a bad-ass. I thought it was corny and lame. However, alot of little kids who saw the movie were laughing and thinking it was 'cool'. So it all depends on perspective.

[Eko]

An incredibly good point Sky, but IMO this does not change the fact that Hayden is a poor actor. Even judging the target audience there is no excuse on Gl's part for casting a substandard actor.

[Skynxnex]

An incredibly good point Sky, but IMO this does not change the fact that Hayden is a poor actor. Even judging the target audience there is no excuse on Gl's part for casting a substandard actor.

 

 

And I agree with that, no problem.

 

I just wanted to point out that I think a lot of people went to see the movie with a lot of pre-conceived notions about how it would be and they were disappointed. I admit I was one of those people. I do though see SW for what it is, and thats supposed to be a fantasy sci-fi universe which for the most part has always been geared toward a younger audience. Some of that is generalizing of course.

 

SW is a basic good vs. evil story. It has the 'everyone lives happily ever after' end at RoTJ. Thats really all that George was doing. One of the things some people might not like about the prequels though is that the bad guys win. I know some people were put off by that but to me it was refreshing to see a change in who won and who lost so to speak.

 

Anyway, Hayden didnt act well at all and yes he should have done better. I think though a large part of that is Lucas' fault but thats my opinion.

[Eko]

With reference to the change in who won, I think it is a refreshing change to the plot, however you will notice that even in the moment of Evil's greatest triumph Lucas sweetend the blow. Rather than leave it tailing off, for example with the galaxy firmly under Palpatine's grip. He instead presents this instantly recognisable image of the future victory of good, with the baby Luke and his foster parents on Tatooine. This of course presents an image, even without the benefit of the sequals, of some sort of hope for the future, a 'new hope'.

 

With the existance of the sequels it is of course quite hard to enter the prequals with a completley free frame of mind.

 

What I did think was a pity from the whole experience, realting to your point about the target audience was that Gl failed to make the films attractive to a wider range of people. He did not achieve a kind of layer effect. An example of this wouold be william Golding's Lord of the Flies, which can be viewed on two levels; Either as an adventure story about bys on a desert island or as a complex allegory for Golding's view if we look deeper. I think GL would have been b etter to treat the prequels in this manner. Not as an allegory but to appeal to a wider audience. Keep the space battle and the CGI for the kids, but also leave some thing for other people watching, emotion or a decent plot. I suppose you have to be a pretty good director to do that sort of thing, which on present evidence GL does not appear to be.

[Bill]

I think Natalie Portman was the worst Star Wars actor, she sucked in ep. 1-2-and 3. She should never of got cast for that part, she looked out of place all the time.

[Jahled]

I think Natalie Portman was the worst Star Wars actor, she sucked in ep. 1-2-and 3. She should never of got cast for that part, she looked out of place all the time.

 

Natalie just looked bored throughout the films. She is one shit-hot actor as discovered in Leon, utterly underdeployed by George Lucas.

 

EDIT: Gosh I can write some rubbish sometimes. The above survived my editing-cull....

Edited July 6, 2005 by Jahled

[Aenivae_Ikeda]

I don't know Jahled, too young? Hayden may be young but he has been in 16 other movies, giving him plenty of experience... So I don't know...

[cody]

yes Christian Hayden was by far the 2 worse actor in the movie.......

[Admiral_Sarn]

Why does everyone hate Hayden? I thought he was pretty good, I mean, who would've been better? Actually, don't answer that.

[Aenivae_Ikeda]

I think I will answer that. Leonardo Decaprio would have been a much better Anakin. And it would have been a better move on Lucas' part because he already knew that anyone interested in Star Wars would go see the movies, but with Decaprio he would attract a larger female audience as well.

 

Although he may not have been able to do the fight scenes as well (Lucas' reason for casting Hayden over him.) but the acting element would have been much better.

 

Also if you look, you will find that Portman does a better job when she is acting around other people that AREN'T Hayden, such as Ewan. Which probably means that Christiansen is probably such a crap actor that he rubs off on people.

 

But yeah, Decaprio would have done a much better job.