Star Wars -- ONE thread for all Star Wars - ALL Star Wars here

Which is your favorite?

  • Episode IV: A New Hope

  • Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back

  • Episode VI: Return of the Jedi

  • Episode I: The Phantom Menace

  • Episode II: Attack of the Clones

  • Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

  • Clone Wars Animated

  • Episode VII: The Force Awakens

  • Episode VIII: The Last Jedi

  • Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker

Results are only viewable after voting.
Aravis is right. Hayden is not a good actor at all. He will always be known as Anakin. I used to like him the most in ROTS but mainly because he looked so cute. But now I don't care anymore. Ewan is a great actor. He has proven himself to be very good
 
I'm afraid Hayden will never become a great actor. I agree with you. I have seen some parts of Jumper as well but he just doesn't act well So it's not we don't like him but it's simply true.
 
Hyden was positively the worst pick for Anakin. I was hoping Anakin would be an engaging, likeable person.. but instead we get a whinny power hungry child trapped in twenty year old body. :rolleyes:
 
I never understood why people hated his acting so much. In honesty,I felt he no worse or better than Mark Hamill in the original Trilogy, I mean c'mon, the "but I was going to Toschi Station to pick up some power convertors" lien any one? The way he whinned to Obi-Wan when he made excuses for why he didn't want to go with him to Alderaan. Granted he did an amazing job in Empire opposite Yoda, and all he had with him was a Muppet so I can give him that. ( plus has any one scene Hamill's episode of the Muppet show.)

But in terms of character development, Luke had a much hardere conflict to deal with in terms of the Galactic Civil War versus the clone Wars, as the whole point of the Jedi Order was to help stop conflictc before they started, and there was no such thing in Luke's time. Plus Luke always had Han knocking his ego down to size. It's hard to be egotistical when you got Han Solo in the room.

I think the thing to remember about Luke versus Anakin is this, that Luke is basically everying Anakin should have been able to become had he not fallen.
Actually when I watch all six movies now, I can't help but stand up and cheer when Luke refuses to kill Vader and says to Palpatine, " You are wrong your highness, I am a Jedi, like my father before me" and tosses his lightsaber aside
becasue he was able to do the very thing his father couldn't. It also makes vader's sacrifice in the end more meaningful when you see Vader looking from the son who loves him to the master who manipulated him and choosing his son over his master. It's actually one of the many thigns I do love about the prequals is the levels of layers and depth it adds to the original trilogy, especailly with characters like Vader, Obi-Wan and Yoda.

Also keep in mind Anakin had Palpatine behind the scenes manipulatign him and telling him all the lies he could to decive him, and he chose to willingly listn to him as opposed to Obi-Wan, Yoda or even his wife Padme. Honestly when Padme told him to speak to Palpatine and he said, "you are asking me to betray some one who has been my friend and mentor and looked out for me since ever since I first came here," my first thought was , " and what is Obi-Wan, chopped bantha podoo?".

I realized, he just prefered listening to Palpy as Palpy told him what he wanted to hear, not what he needed to hear, like Obi-Wan, Padme or Yoda did. That of coruse is the mark of a true friend, they tell you things you need to hear even if you don't necissarily want it, but it is only because they love you. Obi-Wan, Yoda and Padme honestly loved Anakin, not just as a friend but as his little brother, and wanted ony what was in his best interest so he would fullfill his destiny as the Chosen One, so he had to hold him back. Palpy just wanted Anakin for himself as he wanted him for his apprentice to help rule the galaxy. Actally in some ways the Palpatine/ Anakin story is not that dissimilar from that of Iago and Othello, (who ironically James Earl Jones played on stage more than once.)
 
Yes well, the older trilogy can be forgiven because it came across more naturally than in the new trilogy. Everyone, espcially Hayden and Natalie, acted so woodenly (but I don't think Natalie is that great of an actress either), except for Christopher Lee, Ray Park, and Ewan McGregor. Just the sickening storylines...it's hard to describe what makes the NT different, but there's no classiness to it. The OT will live on longer than the NT will. Besides, Mark Hamill only whined in A New Hope. The only thing similar ot whining he might have done was in 5, but that was out of reluctance to leave Han and Leia alone with no help.
 
It also must be remembered that when the original trilogy came out, there was nothing like it in terms of sci-fi movies. The only big sci-fi moveis before then were Planet of the Apes and 2001: a Space Odyssey, but even those were more of a cult following then a pop-culture phenomena. in tersm of films, Star Wars, liek Star TRek with teelvision, was teh first phenomenon. It was alsoone of the first sci-fi films to have a "used" future where everything wasn't all clean and pristine ( like Star Trek), no one had seen lightsabers, or characters like Vader.

After Jedi came out look what came after it. We saw dinosarus return in Jurassic Park, unlocked the Matrix, wondered if Deker wasn't a replicant in Balde Runner,saw that Star Trek didn't have to be cheesy, freaked at the aliens in Alien, and beleived a man could fly in Superman. Star Wars was ahead of it's time, but like many things time passed it by, while Lucas kept to the story he alwasy had in mind. Audiences really couldn't easily return to a galazy far, far away after all of that. Star Wars in the end was revealed to be only what it's creator intended, which was a acomic book story or a Saturday Mantinee serial from the 1930's.

I also tend to think that probably what affected the overall reception to the prequls is that n the years between Jedi and Phantom Menace is that fans had plenty of time to "dream" as it were just how Anakin became Vader and how the Old Republic fell. No movie in a series can ever live up to the expectations of it's fans. Just look at how many of here on NarniaFans are dissapointed with the films. It's not just about faithfullens sto the books, but it's also because the moveis can't live up to the Narnia movies they already made in there minds each time they read the books.

Me however, I have no problem with the prequels for the sole virtue that I was that I was more preoccupied with writting my own sci-fi story set in my own universe and couldn't really be bothered with trying to wodner how the SW unvierse should go. I found any time I'd write my own Star Wars stories I'd quickly leave them and return to my own universe as to me it was far more pressing. I had not expctations for the prequel moveis and ended up being greatly surprised and pleased with them.

However if I did make it big as a sci-fi writer and got asked to write a Star Wars novel, would I turn it down? No. I would love to write a Star Wars novel or comic book and get paid for it. Yes, I'm a Christian, but hey, Kathy Tyers is a Christian writer, who wrote Christian sci-fi novels ( the Firebird Tirology), but she also has two Star Wars novels under her belt.
 
To me the original trilogy, 4-6, had a breathless wonder about them, and they had a coherent theme of good vs. evil and a really sort of Christian lesson about sacrifice, and redemption.

The prequels lost all pretense of good vs. evil when Anakin simply threw away all his training and betrayed all his friends and mentors to save Padme by destroying all the Jedi, even the children -- even if that were somehow to save her (which the movie did not make it seem realistic at all even that she was in any danger!), she would not have wanted him to do it.

The prequels made it appear that good and evil really do need to "balance" and that Anakin's move from good to evil was really quite simply accomplished -- almost as if there were no difference between good and evil. A very different and much more dangerous message than the original trilogy.

Not that I didn't like the prequels, I do. I love Grieveous and Darth Maul, excellent baddies, and while I dislike Jar Jar, I really loved Ewan's and Liam's performances, and I loved watching Yoda dueling. They were exciting films. Just not up to the thematic substance that the original trilogy had.
 
Not that it makes any difference to me, but if any of you receive SpikeTV Channel, they're showing Star Wars all this week. Force of July week is what they're calling it.
 
inkspot, Lucas stated that Anakin brings Balance in RotJ, not RotS. However, I believe that the old Jedi order have become too dogmatic and vile, banishing even love. They were wooden and foolish and had to go, for a new Jedi to arrive. But what I love in Star Wars is that it presents different points if view of different characters and mages, who believe in different things, especially in the EU, but in movies as well. So I like that Star Wars allows the viewer to decides from himself what happened. It is one of the reasons I love the saga so much.
 
Darth Sparhawk said:
inkspot, Lucas stated that Anakin brings Balance in RotJ, not RotS. However, I believe that the old Jedi order have become too dogmatic and vile, banishing even love. They were wooden and foolish and had to go, for a new Jedi to arrive. But what I love in Star Wars is that it presents different points if view of different characters and mages, who believe in different things, especially in the EU, but in movies as well. So I like that Star Wars allows the viewer to decides from himself what happened. It is one of the reasons I love the saga so much.
Click to expand...

I don't believe inkspot was technically referring to the "chosen One brings balance to the Force" idea. What I think she was meaning, is that good and evil more or less became balanced in RotS through Anakin's turning into Vader, then later on balancing the light side by turning back. Besides, Obi-Wan and Siri kinda/sorta had a relationship and it didn't hurt either of them. I don't think Padme was the cause of Anakin's fall; rather, it was his selfishness and immaturity. If Anakin had been a little more mature, and a little less selfish, I don't believe his marriage to Padme would have caused him harm. This is seen in Obi-Wan and SIri's relationship. When she was dying, she gave Obi-WAn her warming stone. When she actually died, Obi-WAn came very close to giving into the dark side, but he didn't. He instead let go of Siri and had loved her with an open heart, something I believe that Qui-Gon taught him and something Obi did with everyone, including Anakin.

Anakin never quite learned that lesson. Knowing the character of Anakin, he would take the easy road over the hard one. Learnin to let people go that you love isn't easy, and if you don't want to do it, then it causes trouble when someone tries to make you.
 
In my opinion the fall of Anakin was caused by several reasons.
First, as you mentioned, is his character. I believe that he, however, needed help and understanding to save himself and I am pretty sure that he didn't receive them from the Jedi.
Second, the Jedi. They were too dogmatic and themselves leaned toward eventual theocracy. They have become a threat themselves. Yoda and Mace Windu discussed "enforcing" honest senators in the Senate.
Third reason.
The main one.
Palpatine.
The Dark Lord has managed to cloud the Force, everything was working for him, everything was falling for him. He used the smugness of the Jedi to fill the void of Anakin and made them traitors and spies. Obi-Wan told Anakin that they are at war and he must on spy on the Supreme Chancellor.
That was, methinks, Palpatine's ultimate victory. He forced the Jedi to work like him.
They were destined to fall. I believe that the Sith Lord was too strong, too smart for them. Read the RotS novel - Yoda admits it. The Jedi were preparing to fight the wars in the past, the Sith have evolved. Darth Bane's plan was almost perfect. The dark side fell like a thick cloud on the galaxy and Anakin choked. In my opinion it was inevitable that the Chancellor will win his war of destruction.
But when he tried to create, everything turned against him... creation is not the Way of the Dark, as Cronal said in "Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor". I might add, Darkness can not create. But it can destroy and did it in a perfect way. Anakin was doomed. He might have been saved - but not from these Jedi.
Not in this Old, Old Republic...
 
I don't think the Dark LORD is the one responsible for clouding the Force; the dark SIDE clouds it. But you have to wonder how the Jedi couldn't see that something was wrong with Palpatine...good grief, had it been me, and the guy was in office for ten years, I'd be ready to tell the Senate, "this guy needs to go; get somebody who really wants peace." It's also why I htink the prequels needed another 2 or 3 films to flesh out the stories much more. I don't know of any hard rule that says there had to be 2 trilogies. If there had been a film in-between 1 and 2, then aother between 2 and 3, how much better would the series have turned out? I think the fans would've appreciated it, rather than havin to read it.
 
Back
Top