Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Oh dear, another spotty and overweight teenager with personality issues....

http://www.slashfilm.com/article.php/20051219225025277

BTW Merry Christmas everyone!!!

But seiosuly though. I think Hayden is not a good actor. bashing him is dumb though.


The link isn't working

Originally posted by Demarest
But seiosuly though. I think Hayden is not a good actor. bashing him is dumb though.


The link isn't working

This is some guys film site. THe title of the article is: Roger Ebert vs. Me: Top 10 of 2005

This is the part about Hayden.

thanks


merry Xmas BTW

Hayden is a good actor and AOTC is a great film .... for christs sake will everyone stop being so damn critical it's starting to p*** me off !!!!!

Originally posted by Clone-pilot
Hayden is a good actor and AOTC is a great film .... for christs sake will everyone stop being so damn critical it's starting to p*** me off !!!!!

Seriously, and why is anyone bashing Hayden, all he did is do what George Lucas told him to do.

he isnt that bad because the script makes him look good

Originally posted by Clone-pilot
Hayden is a good actor and AOTC is a great film .... for christs sake will everyone stop being so damn critical it's starting to p*** me off !!!!! Ah.. There's nothing wrong with being a critic.
You don't grow as a person if you think everything is fine that you do for example but this a forum, we aren't here to chat or drool about SW but here to discuss.

I would say that AotC is great movie with some flaws but I wouldn't say Hayden is a great actor. It's that you are all used to him that you have accepted his warped way of acting.
If there had been another instead of him, you would have found that one the bomb.

there is no use caring about this, hayden IS anakin, and thats that. it is forever sealed.

plus i dont think he did a bad job in either eps II or III

there was just a FEW slightly annoying lines (his or GL's fault??) ...but other then that he does a good job i think.

George Lucas is the only reason for Episode II's suckfullness. Even though Hayden is a douche in my opinion, he actually can act (see Shattered Glass or Life As A House), as can Natalie Portman (see anything she's been in apart from Star Wars). GL is just a terrible actor director and has dumb ideas of what he wants from his actors.

Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
suckfullness

Meh.. Fans shouldn't judge acting skills anyway.

i think he did great, who else could've portrayed him better? you? me? no hes pretty good, his part is just very demanding.

Fans would have accepted anyone who would have been in his place.
Leave it at that, or try to have some insight before judging.

Originally posted by overlord
Fans would have accepted anyone who would have been in his place.


Oh really? I don't think I would have liked Di Caprio or Phillippe in his shoes
First of all I agree that any flaw is: a) George Lucas's fault; b) blue screen's fault. I haven't seen a single movie in which blue or green screen have "bettered" the actor's performance. Think about the Matrix trilogy: I thought the acting was really camp and sometimes it made me want to laugh out loud (in the second and third one mostly, the first one was, for the greater part, good). Even in theatre the best rendition of a play is usually given when there is an actual scenary and when there are actual costumes rather than in the so called "minimalist" environment.
Secondly, I loved AOTC and I don't think it was "spoiled" by anyone if not by some dumb lines in the screenplay. It's not perfect, but no film is. In fact, if we look around us we see that compared to many films that have been hailed as masterpieces (ex. "Traffic" AOTC is to be considered a stroke of genius.

bashing? ummm no

criticising haydens acting abilities on a website is not bashing, but rather expressing one's opinion. regardless of how vague and nonsensical his criticism is, and regardless of how i disagree, i really dont think thats bashing.

bashing is when certain idiots on this site refer to him as "gayden" and express their sick want to commit assault on him (you know who you are child)

bashing is when some obsessed fanboy screams "YOU RUINED STAR WARS!!!!" in his face, forcing him to chase his sorry ass down the block.

Originally posted by Eleonora
Oh really? I don't think I would have liked Di Caprio or Phillippe in his shoes
First of all I agree that any flaw is: a) George Lucas's fault; b) blue screen's fault. I haven't seen a single movie in which blue or green screen have "bettered" the actor's performance. Think about the Matrix trilogy: I thought the acting was really camp and sometimes it made me want to laugh out loud (in the second and third one mostly, the first one was, for the greater part, good). Even in theatre the best rendition of a play is usually given when there is an actual scenary and when there are actual costumes rather than in the so called "minimalist" environment.
Secondly, I loved AOTC and I don't think it was "spoiled" by anyone if not by some dumb lines in the screenplay. It's not perfect, but no film is. In fact, if we look around us we see that compared to many films that have been hailed as masterpieces (ex. "Traffic" AOTC is to be considered a stroke of genius. Is all of that message directed towards me?

Anyway, kid fans would have even defended Di Caprio too if it were him now.
Fans just shouldn't try to defend plot writing, acting skills and directing when they are too biased to even judge properly.

I've never found anything wrong about Hayden's acting. I guess it depends on how much you want to analyze something. I more of a simple person. I like to sit back and enjoy the story, regardless of whether the acting is decent or not.

Yeah, it was still decent to a certain level.

Originally posted by overlord
Is all of that message directed towards me?

Anyway, kid fans would have even defended Di Caprio too if it were him now.
Fans just shouldn't try to defend plot writing, acting skills and directing when they are too biased to even judge properly.

You are denying the quintessential element that separates life forms from lifeless objects: the ability to distinguish, form an opinion and, consequently, act. Fans are not born fans, they make a choice that comes directly from the makings of the mind, so I believe this dogmatic approach towards fandom comes very close to dementia. I think that unfortunately (I mean it) we all have a different view of the world, so an objective judgement, fan or non-fan, is impossible.

Originally posted by Eleonora
You are denying the quintessential element that separates life forms from lifeless objects: the ability to distinguish, form an opinion and, consequently, act. Fans are not born fans, they make a choice that comes directly from the makings of the mind, so I believe this dogmatic approach towards fandom comes very close to dementia. I think that unfortunately (I mean it) we all have a different view of the world, so an objective judgement, fan or non-fan, is impossible. That's all very cute but you left out prejudism and that not everybody actually goes through the trouble of judging neutrally.

Fans should just not judge.. Just don't..

Originally posted by overlord
That's all very cute but you left out prejudism and that not everybody actually goes through the trouble of judging neutrally.

Fans should just not judge.. Just don't..

No I didn't, read the last line. I said that everybody's prejudiced, not just fans, and that a neutral judgement is impossible. Why don't people read?

Originally posted by Eleonora
No I didn't, read the last line. I said that everybody's prejudiced, not just fans, and that a neutral judgement is impossible. Why don't people read? You don't get what I'm saying. That over analytical message wasn't appropriate to that subject anyway, what's up with that?

Originally posted by overlord
You don't get what I'm saying.

Oh dear, do I detect panic?



Yep, definitely panic. If you have nothing further to add please avoid useless and not-so-clever answers, it saves us both a lot of time. Just a thought.

Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
George Lucas is the only reason for Episode II's suckfullness. Even though Hayden is a douche in my opinion, he actually can act (see Shattered Glass or Life As A House), as can Natalie Portman (see anything she's been in apart from Star Wars). GL is just a terrible actor director and has dumb ideas of what he wants from his actors.

I thoroughly agree. Hayden's performances in Life as a House and Shattered Glass were awesome and Natalie was fantastic as early on as The Professional, though she was still quite young. Much as I love Star Wars, the dialogue/script has always been less than what it could have been (even in the OT).

Originally posted by Eleonora
Oh dear, do I detect panic?



Yep, definitely panic. If you have nothing further to add please avoid useless and not-so-clever answers, it saves us both a lot of time. Just a thought. Uhm.. I have not-so-clever answers?
It's not important for me and you don't convince me with taking it that serious, sorry.

As for saving time: don't forget that you don't have take me serious.

Originally posted by overlord
As for saving time: don't forget that you don't have take me serious.

How true, but I'm compassionate

Originally posted by McCusto
Seriously, and why is anyone bashing Hayden, all he did is do what George Lucas told him to do.

This is technically incorrect, George Lucas told him to act. He didn't tell him to act terriblly...