I watched Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith last night on cable. It's only the second time I've seen it, the first since seeing it in the theater. On second viewing, it wasn't really as bad as I remembered. I really think that if Lucas had picked a better Anakin, the prequel trilogy would have gotten a better fanboy/critical rap than it has. Haydn Christensen just doesn't cut it. He can do petulant and entitled, but not the angst and internal conflict.
If a better Anakin had been chosen, the dialogue (never Lucas' strong suit) might not have been as laughable as it was. I mean, Ewan McGregor didn't get anything Shakespearean to work with, but he managed to sell it. Christensen just didn't have the chops. And I think a different Anakin, one with more chemistry with Natalie Portman -- 'cause her and Hayden Christensen had noooooooooo chemistry whatsoever -- would have elicited a better performance from her. Let's face it, she just gave up by the third movie. It also may have made the "romantic" dialogue a bit more palatable. ("Hold me, Anakin! Hold like you did by the lake on Naboo!" Doesn't send your heart fluttering, does it? More like sends your eyes rolling...)
In the end, then, I think if George Lucas had been a bit better of a casting director, he wouldn't have left such a bad and bitter taste in everyone's mouth.
2 comments:
Queen Amidala's character got totally trashed by the third movie. She was the only redeeming thing about the first one, but by the third she just sat around and cried. No wonder Portman gave up.
I wanted to slap her for being interested in such a drip. Anakin was an utterly unattractive character and one couldn't even enjoy disliking him either. When he finally got all burnt up in the third movie I could only giggle.
Post a Comment