Star Wars - Han Solo was Married

I agree with you on Hayden. The problem is that Lucas never was a great director to begin with, he just had awesome people he worked with, like his ex-wife and Gary Kurtz. When he got total control after ESB is when the slide began. It's not uncommon. Really creative people usually need someone to guide them and hem them in

blatantninja said:

I agree with you on Hayden. The problem is that Lucas never was a great director to begin with, he just had awesome people he worked with, like his ex-wife and Gary Kurtz. When he got total control after ESB is when the slide began. It's not uncommon. Really creative people usually need someone to guide them and hem them in

Click to expand...

I agree.

Clearly, George is good with technical stuff and has a vivid imagination - but when it comes to writing and creating plausible characters, he leaves quite a bit to be desired.

Well, I stopped caring about Han and the OT after TCW became my favorite part of the SW franchise, so frankly ... I don't give a beep about his marital status.

My biggest worry with the new trilogy is the OTish vibe it's supposed to have, and the visual McQuarrieism. I didn't like his design (the sketches) very much when compared to the finished product, while I absolutely adored McCaig's PT sketches. That may be the fault of City of Thieves: I loved McCaig's illustrations so much that I copied them manually - I didn't have access to a Xerox back in '83.

Portman is terrible in action movies — it's just as bad in Thor.

She doesn't seem to really be trying, and gives the impression that she's just there for the paycheck. You're not supposed to take roles in hokey stuff for cash until you're an old ham!

(Although to be fair there were a lot of good actors acting badly in the prequels. The green screen process didn't seem to foster dramatic commitment.)

The prequels reminded me of some of the terrible Star Wars knockoffs from the 70s. Ever see Starcrash, with Hasslehoff, a playboy model, and Christopher Plummer giving maximum ham?

DArtagnan said:

That said, I must be the only person who didn't mind Hayden Christensen in the role of Anakin. I thought he did a pretty good job with a terrible script and a room full of imaginary scenery.

Click to expand...

You're not alone. I agree with that . I also thought that Hayden did a pretty good job. He had to portray a young man with very fluctuating mood swings, insecurities and a constant inner conflict. I thought he really managed that very well to be a normal, sympathetic, gentle, shy young man the one minute and a mass murderer the next minute when he slaughtered those sand people for example.

As for George Lucas, it's always been my impression that making the prequel trilogy became too personal for him. He obviously (and even stated as much AFAIK) wanted to make a very family friendly movie for his grandkids.
Of course no one expected Star Wars to turn into a M-rated movie series with the prequel trilogy but... Jar-Jar Binx? Seriously???
In my opinion, the biggest mistake was to start with young Ani as a kid for the entire Episode I. There's only so much you can do with a kid so Lucas massively squandered the chance to flesh out Anakin's personality and conflict more in the three movies.
There should have maybe been a short flashback to Ani's childhood years in Episode I but most of the movie should have revolved around Anakin in his teens or late teens (age of Episode II). That would have allowed a much more interesting development of the character of Anakin Skywalker across all three episodes.

Moriendor said:

In my opinion, the biggest mistake was to start with young Ani as a kid for the entire Episode I. There's only so much you can do with a kid so Lucas massively squandered the chance to flesh out Anakin's personality and conflict more in the three movies.

Click to expand...

If you watch the original New Hope today with clear eyes, you'll see that Luke, though an adult, is directed to play the character not as young but as a child.

There's an amazing moment on the Millenium Falcon where he picks up this model spaceship and is playing with it like a five-year-old with a model airplane.

Everyone grumped at the time about the ewoks being for kiddies — but really that was a return to the tone of the first movie. It was only Empire Strikes Back with its different director that was the anomaly in not pitching the movie at the elementary-school set.

Well I for one am grateful the new movies lost the childish charm, and Lucas wont be directing them. Seems the new movies will be PG-13, and targeting teenagers.

Luke (in his late teens) vs. Ani (little kid in Episode I) or Jar-Jar Binx (for three year olds) vs. Ewoks (for eight to twelve year olds) are still different ballparks IMHO .

Also, Luke basically became an adult at, what?, thirty minutes into Episode IV when he had to leave Tatooine. Ani was a small child for the entire Episode I.
The scene depicting Luke playing with that starfighter toy was supposed to portray his dreams of joining the alliance by the way. Luke could not wait to get off Tatooine and he was angry at uncle Owen for holding him back.
The sentimental scene with the starfighter toy showed the conflict: His dream of leaving Tatooine for a more adventurous life became true but at the expense of the life of his uncle and aunt.
I don't think it was supposed to portray him as a child still playing with toys. He was more than obviously beyond that age.

Well, as I said, no one expected an M rating for the PT, but the audience from the late 70s, early 80s, even if they were very young back in the day, had grown up to be adults by the time of the PT so it would have made sense to aim at least for a slightly more mature level.
And again, as I said, from a creative point of view, it would have made sense to start with a more grown up version of Anakin and not "Ani".
The PT movies were supposed to be all about him. If you want to properly develop the character then it makes very little sense to have him be a little kid for the duration of an entire movie.

Moriendor said:

You're not alone. I agree with that . I also thought that Hayden did a pretty good job. He had to portray a young man with very fluctuating mood swings, insecurities and a constant inner conflict. I thought he really managed that very well to be a normal, sympathetic, gentle, shy young man the one minute and a mass murderer the next minute when he slaughtered those sand people for example.

Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more. I thought he was terrible in those movies.

What should have been key moments were ruined by how bad his acting was. In fact, your example of when he killed those sand people was one of those moments for me. The scene where he was telling Padme about it was like a bad soap opera.

His final transformation into Vader was even worse. It reminded of one of those Frankenstein movies from the 60s. Although Lucas is probably just as much to blame there.

That said, I don't think he's a terrible actor, I just think he was terrible in that role.

Ah, found it! Starcrash - the movie Lucas wishes he made.

JDR13 said:

I couldn't disagree more. I thought he was terrible in those movies.

What should have been key moments were ruined by how bad his acting was. In fact, your example of when he killed those sand people was one of those moments for me. The scene where he was telling Padme about it was like a bad soap opera.

His final transformation into Vader was even worse. It reminded of one of those Frankenstein movies from the 60s. Although Lucas is probably just as much to blame there.

That said, I don't think he's a terrible actor, I just think he was terrible in that role.

Click to expand...

You're talking about script issues, imo.

The script is the heart of what makes a transformation like that plausible. You can't act your way out of completely in-human behavior.

In the real world, people aren't good or evil - and they don't just switch between the two. They can have a breakdown, but they don't switch personality from one second to the next, and that's what Lucas either missed or don't care about.

There's a reason so many great actors sucked so badly in the prequels. Not an acting issue, in my opinion. Look at Portman in Black Swan, Neeson in Schindler's List, Hayden in Life as a House. Good actors are good, but they can't magically turn a terrible script into a great one - unless the director is willing to work with them to change it, which Lucas famously isn't.

It was different with the OT, where he had his wife writing much of the script - and other people directing. It was possible to work with it - but you can tell from interviews that people like Harrison Ford argued with Lucas because of his absolutely inane writing. The famous quote which approximately goes: "You can write this shit, George, but you can't say it!"

Anakin's transformation is similar to that of Harvey Dent in Dark Knight. But real people don't switch from "good" to "evil" based on a single traumatic event. Fundamentally changing your personality is a long process - and it's never black and white.

Essentially, they're comic book villains - and they should either be treated as such - or have writers who understand psychology.

Regardless of how you want to look at it, he sucked.

Like I said though, I don't think he's a bad actor, he was just terrible in that role. You might very well be right about anyone looking bad because of Lucas.

It's certainly nothing personal, as I really liked him in Jumper.

JDR13 said:

Regardless of how you want to look at it, he sucked.

Click to expand...

That's certainly an opinion

Like I said though, I don't think he's a bad actor, he was just terrible in that role. You might very well be right about anyone looking bad because of Lucas.

It's certainly nothing personal, as I really liked him in Jumper.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's personal, I just don't agree it's an acting issue.

But that's fine, we'll just agree to disagree

DArtagnan said:

That's certainly an opinion

Click to expand...

Indeed, and it seems to be quite popular. Not that that makes it any more valid.

As for the reason, I've already admitted that it might very well have been because of Lucas.

Portman also seemed below her usual ability, as were some of the other actors as well. I thought McGregor was decent though.

JDR13 said:

Indeed, and it seems to be quite popular. Not that that makes it any more valid.

As for the reason, I've already admitted that it might very well have been because of Lucas.

Click to expand...

This:

What should have been key moments were ruined by how bad his acting was.

Tells me you think it's an acting issue.

I think it's a script issue made worse by a Lucas in complete control who was inflexible about his story and writing.

Personally, I thought he was doing quite well given the material. Considering the aburdly implausible path from edgy teenager to supreme evil - his acting was some of the best in those movies.

I do agree that Obi-Wan had some of the best moments in the film - and I'm a fan of Ewan, so….

Yes, that was in my original post. Very good

Hopefully Abrams can bring something better out of his cast, although I won't be holding my breath or anything.

JDR13 said:

Yes, that was in my original post. Very good

Click to expand...

It's not like JDR changes his mind every day, is it. Let me get used to it

Hopefully Abrams can bring something better out of his cast, although I won't be holding my breath or anything.

Click to expand...

I think it will help to have less green screen stuff - and I think Lucas is a rare creature in terms of how bad he is with human behavior.

But I despise pure profit-driven movies - and Abrams is all about that.

I expect a ton of fan-service crap in the script with no heart and soul, and I expect absolutely nothing original or truly moving.

That said, I can't deny that I retain a tiny, tiny measure of irrational hope that I'm somehow wrong about this project - even if everything about how it's Disney+Abrams tells me there's no way I could be wrong.

What bothers me most is I know how easy the mainstream audience is. The new Star Trek movies are beyond terrible and completely disrespectful of the material, and people just love it anyway.

I can't wait to hear how Abrams turned everything around and made an old-fashioned Star Wars movie.

*Vomits*

I wouldn't say I changed my mind as much as I'm simply considering what you said. He was still terrible regardless if it was more due to his acting or more due to the script.

He was awarded a Golden Raspberry for both of those movies, and there's usually at least a little fire when there's that much smoke.

I mostly agree with what you say about Abrams, and I *despise* Disney. That said, at least they shot down the idea of having a mostly teen cast. That alone gives me some hope.

JDR13 said:

I wouldn't say I changed my mind as much as I'm simply considering what you said. He was still terrible regardless if it was more due to his acting or more due to the script.

He was awarded a Golden Raspberry for both of those movies, and there's usually at least a little fire when there's that much smoke.

Click to expand...

Oh, I know lots of people think he's terrible. I think that's the most common opinion.

But I also know that a lot of people don't really care to distinguish between a bad role and bad acting. In that same way, some people think a great role means the actor is also great.

I don't think much of the mainstream opinion as you probably know. Sometimes I agree with the masses - and often I don't.

People can bitch and moan about Risen 3 being crappy and "popular" reviewers like Angry Joe can call it terrible all he wants. I still think it was a very good - if not great RPG.

So, I can't agree he's terrible at all. The role was terrible because of the script - and the job must have been extremely hard, because of the dominance of green-screen and a director who couldn't care less about getting a human performance.

I think that's why the other actors also gave wooden and stilted performances.

If they're terrible in their roles - then everyone would have been terrible in those roles and the concept has no meaning.

If you want to talk about actors who did truly terrible jobs, I'd point to that fat little kid playing young Anakin and the person who voiced Jar-Jar Binks.

I mostly agree with what you say about Abrams, and I *despise* Disney. That said, at least they shot down the idea of having a mostly teen cast. That alone gives me some hope.

Click to expand...

A New Hope