Originally posted by WindDancer
I think that because of the magnitude in difference between the two characters. One is an agressive alter ego of a rich man who wants to have justice in his beloved city. While mainting (sp?) his identity secret from others.Which throws me back to Bale's performance in American Psycho which was also a challenging role of two very different characters. Funny, but in that film he also plays a rich millionare with a double indentity. Hmmm.......
Originally posted by yerssot
but then I have to return to Austin Powers or as you jokingly said to The Nutty Professor: so the more characters you play in a movie, the better actor you are?
I fully disagree with this! So he shows he can do a veriaty of characters from an agressive one to one that's held back.... good, so what now?
Hayden is playing very held back too while in his sabrefights he is very aggressive, why doesn't THAT count?
I don't know if you misunderstood or just not reading things here. What I said is this:
"Which throws me back to Bale's performance in American Psycho which was also a challenging role of two very different characters. Funny, but in that film he also plays a rich millionare with a double indentity."
Notice I said TWO (2) not Three, nor Multi characters. You're the one bringing the examples of Austin Powers to which I responded in a jestering manner with the Nutty Professor comment. Maybe you're too caught up in defending Hayden's acting skills or something that you missed my little gesture. But to the original comment I made earlier. Hayden, for me didn't do a great performance in ROTS. He may have done better roles in other movies. In AOTC and ROTS he just wasn't convincing enough. At least for me.
For an actor to play multiple roles is indeed a great task. But by no means that should be consider as great acting. If you want to take the fact that Hayden can swing around a stick behind a big green screen and looked agressive. Then by that same token Keanu did a great acting job in Revolutions. All he had to do is look agressive and kick things around. Great acting!
Originally posted by WindDancer
I don't know if you misunderstood or just not reading things here. What I said is this:"Which throws me back to Bale's performance in American Psycho which was also a challenging role of two very different characters. Funny, but in that film he also plays a rich millionare with a double indentity."
Notice I said TWO (2) not Three, nor Multi characters. You're the one bringing the examples of Austin Powers to which I responded in a jestering manner with the Nutty Professor comment. Maybe you're too caught up in defending Hayden's acting skills or something that you missed my little gesture. But to the original comment I made earlier. Hayden, for me didn't do a great performance in ROTS. He may have done better roles in other movies. In AOTC and ROTS he just wasn't convincing enough. At least for me.
For an actor to play multiple roles is indeed a great task. But by no means that should be consider as great acting. If you want to take the fact that Hayden can swing around a stick behind a big green screen and looked agressive. Then by that same token Keanu did a great acting job in Revolutions. All he had to do is look agressive and kick things around. Great acting!
well, after you mentioned the Nutty Professor I thought it would emphasise it better than Austin Powers; so I kept using that. I know you used it as a joke yeah, but I of course have to defend him seeing I'm a SW fan. 😉 I agree that in AOTC he wasn't always that great but I think for ROTS he did a lot better and did it most excellent (though the script was sometimes faulty)
Is Revolutions the second or the third one?
There's more to sabrefighting than swinging a stick around, if you would look at the AOTC DVD when they talk about the fighting (and it'll probably get lots of talk in the ROTS DVD too) you'll see that it's very tight coreographed and that as Hayden says on the AOTC DVD "a lot of anger is shown through the fighting style". That's my point: he shows his two sides but not through two characters.
Anyway, we can discuss this to death, we won't change our ideas or something.
Originally posted by yerssot
Not at all WD... not at all 😑
It's Star Wars, Christensen does what he has to do: play with restraint emotions, trying not to show any since Jedi can't show them. So it is very clear that he has to act differently than Nolan (the guy that played Batman, no?)
Originally posted by yerssot
from what they tell you in ROTS, he was the hero of the clone wars. So if you pay attention to the dialogue you know he is one.
Actually no, we heard that he was a great fighter...a great Soldier....in no wayx a "True Hero" .....Anakins fall was not very deep.....he never was a Hero of the light side, and the only thing that brought any greatness to his fal was Ewan Mc Gregors outstanding acting......
Very Sad, that one of the greatest villains ever has now such a crappy story.....