Print Page | Close Window

Hayden Christensen: Bad Enuff 2 Win??

Printed From: Official RAZZIE® Forum
Category: 2005/26th RAZZIE® Awards Discussions & Forums
Forum Name: STAR WARS: EPISODE III: THE SITH HITZ the FANZ
Forum Discription: Darth Vader...Back Street Boy Gone Bad?!?!?!
URL: http://www.razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=645
Printed Date: October 24 2014 at 6:46am


Topic: Hayden Christensen: Bad Enuff 2 Win??
Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Subject: Hayden Christensen: Bad Enuff 2 Win??
Date Posted: March 03 2006 at 6:16am
Here ya go -- All you people who loved, hated or felt ripped off by Hayden Christensen's performance as "Annakin the Mannequin" in STAR WARS III: NO SITH, HE'S SUPPOSED TO BE DARTH VADER can now VOTE, then post to your heart's content. Defend him, defile him, defrock him -- WHAT-EVER -- So go ahead, start expressing yourselves NOW...

-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry



Replies:
Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 03 2006 at 11:21am
I still prefer to call him "Anakin Snerd"...

He was truly the ONLY thing dragging the anchor to this movie...Natalie Portman might have lowered it over the rail a few inches...but Christensen really made that sucker go deep... I believe Jimmy Hoffa had more life than that performance...


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 03 2006 at 6:55pm

I know Hayden's performance isn't Oscar material, but there are tons of worse performances this year, it's only because it's such a high-profile movie that he got the nomination, nobody would care if you only nominated unknown or little-known actors from really small movies that not many people saw.    For God's sake, Laurence Olivier won a Razzie, so I wish Hayden is getting it, too!!!  

Response from Head RAZZberry: Actually, Olivier "won" TWO RAZZIES, as Worst Supporting Actor our Berry First Year (for playing Niel Diamond's Yiddish Dad with a British Accent in the 1980 remake of THE JAZZ SINGER) and Worst Actor for 1982 (for playing General Douglas MacArthur in the Reverend Moon production of INCHON - Quite possibly the Berry WORST Male Performance EVER Captured on Film!)...



-------------


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 6:50am
He'll bring balance to the RAZZIE...

He won for EP II...he should be a shoo in for this year...


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 7:40am

What kind of razzie ballance are u talking about?!? Let's also bring Hayden here and beat him..  it will bring  balance to the universe      



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 3:39pm
I will admit that Hayden was very wooden in this movie. (I mean he didn't not have all of the passion you would expect from the man who is to become the most evil and feared person in the galaxy!) The gem of this movie is the Emperor (Ian McDiarmid). He made this movie watchable.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:01pm
I didn't think he was THAT bad. some of his wooden performances where actually SUPPOSED to be wooden, like the scene when he embraced poamde, I always felt that was wooden mostly cause he wasn't really "putting his heart into the hug"


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:10pm
His performance was fine.  But then, the Razzies always love to pick on Star Wars.  Isn't this the same foundation that nominated Sophia Coppola -- a background actress with no lines -- for Worst Supporting Actress in 2000?

Uh-huh.  No bias there.


Posted By: razziessuck
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:11pm

I can't believe you people! This reeks of it being personal or a vendetta against the guy or something! I remember when Sith first came out I had gone to a site and read a round-up of critics reviewing the movie, he received an over 80% positive review for his performance. The critics disagree with you.

If you dislike the choices made for the character ie: type of actor, dialogue, writing etc.. this should be taken out on George Lucas, the writer/director, and not the actor.



Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:23pm
He wasn't bad at all   He was good as  it's possible to be good in the movie which would be good without actors performance at all. He was the one who really PLAYED in SW so he got Razzie - that's all )))


Posted By: spider
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:30pm

Well I guess the fanboys just don't get the character. Hayden did not deserve this, but everyone knew months ago that "voting" would see him receive it.

Even your own poll here disagrees with him receiving the award-should have gone to Bert(please stay retired)Reynolds.



Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 5:40pm

Seriously: Hayden's performance in SW 3 made much people of younger generation go to the movie and love SW (and bring money). I am an example... I was touched by his transforming from Anakin into Vader, I adore his playing in ROTS, though I didn't like him in AOTS (it's about cutie..) Besides I saw Life as a House and Shattered glass and know he is perfect actor.  And I just don't like he was left alone here when Star Wars 3 has hundred peoples of crew... You guys made me and many others to b puzzled...



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 6:35pm
He is the hottest thing ever and an awesome actor too so stop being jellous because all of the chicks adore him!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 7:22pm

I hate to defend him since his performance really was terrible, but I think a lot of the blame has to fall on George Lucas, who is probably the worst writer of dialogue in cinematic history.  I'm a big Star Wars fan, but the dialogue sucks! 

Harrison Ford (Han Solo in episodes 4-6) once told Lucas, "you can write this stuff, George, but you can't say it!"  While I agree that Christopher was an exceptionally poor Anakin, I don't know if anyone could have done a good job with this role.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 7:51pm

Supporting category doesn't count, because they f**ked it up. Hayden Christesen was the star of the movie, not a supporting actor. So therefore the Razzie's Razzie is null and void.  So this whole thread is null and void.  Way to nullify your own category, geniuses. 

Also, you're dropping a Backstreet Boys reference on the front page linking to this article.  Think about that for a moment.  A BACKSTREET BOYS reference.  The Razzies should be edgy and current -- but using a Backstreet Boys reference, a boy band that wore out its welcome about 7 years ago, is horribly, horribly dated.

Anyone and everyone involved in this category, and epically the mental midget who put the link up on the front page using the Backstreet Boys as a mention should be ashamed of themselves.

Backstreet Boys.  Sheesh. 



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 7:55pm

Also, "No Sith, He's Supposed to be Darth Vader"? 

How come every other movie gets its name mentioned in full and you guys have to go and make up a horribly,horribly unfunny title for Ep. 3?

Way to not show any preconcived bais.  Really.  Honest and true. 



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 10:11pm
I'm sorry, Haydn Christenson had some moments.  I have to agree, it was the dialog that sucked.

However, that remark requires qualification.  In the EMpire Strikes Back, when Han is about to be frozen for all eternity, Leia says "I love you."  What does Han say?  More importantly, who wrote that line, the one that Han says?

Yep, you guessed it.  It was ad-libbed.

Here's a short list of actors who could have taken that trash and turned it into a convincing show of Annakin being a nice guy and turning into a bad guy:

Val Kilmer
Gary Oldman
Bruce Willis
Leonardo DiCrappio (I hate to say it, but I think he could have done it)

Lest we forget Gary Oldman's most famous line ever:  You must have thought it was white boy day.  It ain't white boy day, is it?

(Followed up by a performance in the Fifth element that just plain rocked)


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 10:54pm
The Razzies just have a thing for Star Wars films. They just don't appreciate them. All of the new trilogy has gotten nominations. Granted, the 1st and 2nd were not that great; but Revenge of the Sith was really good. Hayden Christensen doesn't deserve this award. Jamie Foxx for Stealth or Adam Sandler for The Longest Yard would be more credible choices. I must say that I'm disappointed with the Razzie choices this year. To the Razzies, I say, "go pound sand, you scumbags."


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 04 2006 at 10:56pm
The people behind the Razzie award  "nominated" and "awarded" Hayden Christensen with the Worst Supporting Actor RAZZIE. Here's the problem: in their quest to put down the new Star Wars movies in general and Hayden Christensen in particular, they missed that he was the leading actor, and not a supporting actor.
It seems as if the people behind the Razzie awards are projecting their own failures and jealousy onto the Star Wars franchise.


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 12:51am
Could someone please tell me if there is any point in this current poll? It was said million times that Hayden does not deserve Razzie and Razzie people know it perfectly. Who it was made for? I am sorry maybe I just don't get... Are you guys going to take your Ruzzie back and sorry?


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:01am
Hayden doesn't deserve this. His performance was fine most of the time. I'm not a fan of him or his movies but my boyfriend dragged me down to the theatre to watch this. I didn't want to because I hated episode 2 but he positively surprised me in episode 3. Episode 2, hands down it was not good performance and story-wise. But again hands down, episode 3 was amazing, the performances were pretty good and none of the performances even deserved a nomination, let alone a "win". This only shows your neediness for a big name movie to attract viewers to come to your site. It's a shame that when someone proves themselves to be better when given the second chance as Hayden Christiensen did from episode 2 to 3, you won't admit that he got better. Only shows the quality and how much this "award" is really worth: nothing.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:51am

Yeah Stealth, and The Island. Where were the noms for those?

You guys should give yourselves a razzie for the ugliest website. What are all of you old over there?



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 6:50am
f**k everybody who hate Hayden... sh*t Awards!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 9:55am
I can't believe the endless defence of Hayden Christensens woeful performance.  I completely agree with previous comments that a lot of the responsibility lies with Lucas, who can make the best actors in the world look like the cast of Neighbours, but our Hayden transcends even that.  The poor kid's more wooden than a Norway Spruce.  He's entirely unconvinicing in everything he did in both movies, and it's stretching the boundaries of belief to accept his transformation into the Vader of IV, V and VI.  A well deserved Razzie.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 10:53am
Yeah, I agree with Sithilis.

The dialogue might have sucked but the actor sucked worse.

I watched ROTS (Ironic that the Acronym for the title is "Star wars rots") and I hated the fact that I spent 8 bucks on watching the movie.  At the end, I was thinking "If I were Vader, I'd kill the Emperor because he lied! The Emperor promised me that Paddleme would live.  But now she's dead and it's because I sided with the Emperor. DIE EMPEROR ********!!!!!!"   AND THE ACTING DID NOTHING TO MAKE ME BELIEVE THE CHARACTER WOULD ACTUALLY DO WHAT HE DID!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's face it, most of the support for Hayden Christensen came from girls who had the hots for him and idiots who don't know good acting from bad.  (The makeup showed more emotion that Hayden did.)


Posted By: lauryb
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 1:15pm

Hayden may not be the greatest actor out there, but he shouldn't be judged based on his good looks (yeah, I admit it : I think he's a real hottie). I think that when the dialogues suck as bad as they do in SW3 (especially in the scenes that involve Anakin and Padmé), there's only so much an actor can do. Perhaps he was miscast, perhaps he wasn't cut out for the role of Darth Vader. But that doesn't mean that he's hopeless and that he can't do a better job in another movie. I think the guy deserves to be given a second chance. And I'm not saying that just because I want to see more of his gorgeous face...



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 1:16pm

The people at the "Razzies" spelt "Anakin" wrong. Just goes to show you exactly how PREFESSIONAL they are.

they probably didn't even watch the movie and based their Biased opinion on his performance in Episode II.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 2:22pm

I guess the people who voted for hayden can't accept the fact that Anakin Skywalker is not like DAMIEN but a bratty guy just like SITHILIS and HARIMAN. and it's common sense Hariman that Vader can't kill the emperor because he's not powerful anymore now that he's a cyborg and has to live with the consequence of his irresponsible actions.

oh i almost forgot to all the razzie voters STAR WARS III won 2 PEOPLE'S CHOICE AWARDS beat that!



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 4:42pm

he's got razzie!?

It can't be!!

i thought hayden's act was good...i can't agree with this!mask2 was more 'worthy' to get razzie,wasn't it?this was really something...f**kin.

maybe who vote him can't agree whoever played anakin.they are too much dreamin trilogy's vader.but this movie is movie of george,by gorge, for george.george choose hayden,so hayden is a chosen one.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 4:47pm
Wow, Star Wars won a people's choice award? My god! This changes everything!

Oh, wait, no, no, it doesn't. It just proves that people are morons.

I say "Kudos!" to the Razzies, for their fearless defiance of the legions of semi-literate permanent children who now froth with rage on account of the fact that it's been pointed out that the emperor has no clothes. Sorry kids! Star Wars was a bad movie, lobsters feel pain when you boil them, true love rarely is, and nobody liked that "fanfic" you wrote.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 4:53pm
Originally posted by Hariman

Let's face it, most of the support for Hayden Christensen came from girls who had the hots for him and idiots who don't know good acting from bad. 


You are very wrong. Stop critizicing if you base your comments in preconceived subjectivities: if you happen to know who Roger Ebert is, you should also know that he gave SITH 3.5 out of 4 possible stars. If you didn't like the performances, at the worst it was Lucas' fault with the script (not production): " The dialogue throughout the movie is once again its weakest point" -Ebert said. And I agree.

The reason for this Star Wars flaming is pure misconception: just like people who hate Star Trek. I happen to be fan of none, but fair is fair. Let Hayden have a rest and let him try to perform a (perhaps) prebuilt wooden character.

But he was fine.

FYI: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050519/REVIEWS/50503002/1023 - Check his comments here


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 4:56pm

Hey, razzie people, it is spelled Anakin, not Annakin.  No, he doesn't deserve the award, or whatever you call it.  It is such a waste of everyone's time, the "winners" don't even accept it.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:03pm
Hayden's definitely the right choice, as is the category. In other words: "Two thumbs up!" ;)


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:09pm
I thought that some of the lines in the film were cheesy, yes, but I am an avid StarWars fan. What really carried this film was Ewan McGregor's portrayal of Obi-Wan Kenobi and the heartwrenching anguish that this character portrayed at the demise of Anakin Skywalker. I saw this film in the theater twice and each time I wept like a baby.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:14pm

The razzies are cynical, spiteful, ridiculously not funny, and un-professional.  All the negativity creates a frenzy of people looking for more of nothing.  People are so lazy and un-inspired, and they look to the creation of cynical, quirky comments as an accomplishment.  

Does it make you feel better?  Do you get your kicks?  Do you like to join in and repeat little one liners?  Well, it indeed shows how un-imaginitve you are, great job at accomplishing absolutely nothing.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 5:24pm

Ok I admit I had nothing but shallow lust for Hayden-as-Anakin, and yes his line readings made me twitch, but his performances had two redeeming qualities; 1)The way he yelled "It's not fair!!!" in Ep II made me laugh my ass off so hard I kept rewinding that scene over and over when it came out on dvd. 2)When he flashed that chest of his after he had the nightmare, that's one of those moments I just smile happily as that image engraves itself in my brain.

Besides,  God only knows how many actresses have been in movies, especially sci-fi movies, who can't act worth a damn but are just there to look sexy.

Not that I can't see why he won the Razzie, but I thought it should have gone to Keanu Reeves of Constantine. I know he wasn't nominated but good god he was just unbearable in that.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 6:30pm

He is the worst actor I have seen in a long long time.

Nothing ruined the movies more then he did.



Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 7:24pm
Originally posted by Bob


Nothing ruined the movies more then he did.



Well...perhaps Uwe Boll...Johnny Knoxville...Jenny McCarthy...and Paris Hilton may make you think twice about that statement...   

Could you say there should equal billing for all five???


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 7:26pm
Razzies unprofessional?  Please.  The very hubris of this remark justifies the Razzie's place as reality check for the ego inflation of Hollywood.
I have to agree with Philo to split the blame between Hayden and George.  The Star Wars original trilogy brought us a shining example of the hero's journey, and this prequel had the potential to carry the myth of how a good man turns to evil.  So much weighed on Anakin's believability in this turn to evil yet the writing and performance was a joke.  A movie like this is a cultural event, a chance for something pretty powerful to be worked through.  To drop the ball on such a golden opportunity deserves all the razzies it can get.  I see your unprofessional and raise you a blasphemy for deflating the power of a symbol. 


Posted By: kikosan2006
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 7:59pm
Hayden sucks


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 8:10pm
To the person who was confused about the Backstreet Boys comment...I think that is prbably a reference to hayden's sexuality....I think he pretty much did the best he could with the material, and I don't think he was that bad. But I can't see him winning any oscars in the near future, either!


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 8:16pm
I'm still glad that Burt Reynolds didn't win the award for worst supporting actor... I don't know about his performance in The Longest Yard...as if he deserved the monination for that one or not...but he saved the Dukes Of Hazzard from total obscurity... He did a good performance despite a bad script...unlike some people...***COUGH***HAYDEN CHRISTENSEN***COUGH***...did with a fairly good script...





Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 9:13pm

Hayden is the best actor of Star Wars and especially it has many class



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 05 2006 at 9:16pm
I believe that all the people who think that Hayden is bad have certainly sh*t in the eyes!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 12:50am
Originally posted by sithilis

I can't believe the endless defence of Hayden Christensens woeful performance.


Agreed. Although there might have been worse acting in 2005 by others, he did everything to make the awful dialogue appear even more ridiculous, completely ruining the scenes that Star Wars fans have waited years for to see. He well deserved the Razzie for that! (and it doesn't matter whether he is main or supporting actor, just that he got one)


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:08am
Yup, Hayden was bad.  But, so were Portman, Jackson, McGreggor, et al.  It's difficult to finally admit it, being a Star Wars fan, but unfortunately it's true.  Yup, Hayden was bad.  Did he deserve a Razzie?  NO FREAKIN WAY!  If anyone deserves a Razzie for Star Wars, it's definately director George Lucas.  He has the uncanny ability to bring out the worst robotic performances of even the best actors.  He's too focused on pushing the limits of Computer Generated art and effects that he misses the point.  You need a great storyline and great acting BEFORE the great effects.  Maybe if he let a few people in on the storywriting process instead of keeping everything hush-hush-top-secret-don't-peek, It would have made for better prequels?  Last time he let another director take the helm, we got Empire.  Arguably the best in the series.  Surprise.  Surprise.  I'd rather let Star Wars rest in peace before I'd agree to George giving in another go.  ...but now I'm ranting.  Sorry.  Hayden will have other opportunities to prove if he is razzie worthy.  This should NOT be one of them.  


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:15am

Everyone, saying Hayden is a bad actor,

Have you seen "Life as a house" or "Shattered Glass"? Not seeing his performance in one of them you can't say Hayden is bad, because you just don't know how GOOD he can be!

Razzies need cheap fame - so that's the only reason Hayden won..



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:20am

Originally posted by MadMax3D

Yup, Hayden was bad.  But, so were Portman, Jackson, McGreggor, et al.  It's difficult to finally admit it, being a Star Wars fan, but unfortunately it's true.  Yup, Hayden was bad.  Did he deserve a Razzie?  NO FREAKIN WAY!  If anyone deserves a Razzie for Star Wars, it's definately director George Lucas.  He has the uncanny ability to bring out the worst robotic performances of even the best actors.  He's too focused on pushing the limits of Computer Generated art and effects that he misses the point.  You need a great storyline and great acting BEFORE the great effects.  Maybe if he let a few people in on the storywriting process instead of keeping everything hush-hush-top-secret-don't-peek, It would have made for better prequels?  Last time he let another director take the helm, we got Empire.  Arguably the best in the series.  Surprise.  Surprise.  I'd rather let Star Wars rest in peace before I'd agree to George giving in another go.  ...but now I'm ranting.  Sorry.  Hayden will have other opportunities to prove if he is razzie worthy.  This should NOT be one of them.  

 

 

well.. its YOUR oppinion.. dont go calling stuff bad.. its your oppinion not a general one.. keep that in mind.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:41am
Originally posted by f**kyouuptheass

 

well.. its YOUR oppinion.. dont go calling stuff bad.. its your oppinion not a general one.. keep that in mind.



Yup, it is MY opinion.  As is every opinion here, the opinion of it's author.  Isn't that the point?  Star Wars bashing aside (the prequels only, I loved the originals), I just wanted to point out that Hayden shouldn't get a Razzie for this movie.  The performances were sub-par across the board.  And from what I've heard from friends who've seen the movies and what people have written,  I think laughing at dialogue is a bad sign.  Or was it supposed to be "StarWars, the Space Comedy"?


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:42am
Originally posted by Maike

Everyone, saying Hayden is a bad actor,



Who has said that? We're just saying his performance in ROTS was bad. That's what he got the Razzie for, and it's the topic of this thread, and nothing else.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 1:44am
Originally posted by f**kyouuptheass

well.. its YOUR oppinion.. dont go calling stuff bad.. its your oppinion not a general one.. keep that in mind.



Stating one's opinion is the whole point of any discussion. Keep that in mind.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 2:11am

If the director can't direct, and the writer can't write, it only makes sense that the actors can't act - right? The answer comes in two parts. 1) A writer/director like George Lucas is clearly interested in hardware and not in actors. His approach to the material coupled with new filmmaking techniques has had the unfortunate effect of making his cast appear vacant and lifeless. Actors with a stage background such as Christopher Lee and Ian Mcdiarmid have the ability to 'see' and the gravitas to carry this sort of material. So they don't have a problem. 2) Actors today are trained in the 'slice of life' approach to things. The one in the oven and another two on the way scenario. That is fine except when you are required to swing a lightsabre or such like. Noboby seems to know how to act in fantasy films anymore and it shows. Gone are the greats. A canvas this big needs a big personality to go with it. Whatever the reason for his faults (and there were many) Hayden needed to burn with fire and music and not look as though he was ordering extra pickles on his happy burger.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 2:22am

If nothing else, he deserves a special acheivment award for destroying a generations vernation for the most evil charachter to grace the screen by making him into a snivling puppy. 



Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 3:20am

*Who has said that? We're just saying his performance in ROTS was bad. That's what he got the Razzie for, and it's the topic of this thread, and nothing else.*

The topic of this thread is if Hayden worthy of Razzie, and most of comers I see here say he is not... For examle I don't think he is worthy, I think he is way better than others in nom list. But I mentioned someone said Hayden sucked bcoz he's a bad actor so I said what I said ))



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 3:42am
Hayden can vindicate himself this year. he has 5 film which will be realeased in 2006. I think he is better than what many people are saying.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 3:56am
Hayden should not have received the Razzie.  His lightsaber duels were awesome enough to overlook some wooden lines.  I agree with others, George Lucas deserves to be spanked for his crappy dialogue.  Also, Natalie Portman really sucked.  Her and HC have no chemistry together.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 4:09am

Originally posted by Mythmaker

Razzies unprofessional?  Please.  The very hubris of this remark justifies the Razzie's place as reality check for the ego inflation of Hollywood.
I have to agree with Philo to split the blame between Hayden and George.  The Star Wars original trilogy brought us a shining example of the hero's journey, and this prequel had the potential to carry the myth of how a good man turns to evil.  So much weighed on Anakin's believability in this turn to evil yet the writing and performance was a joke.  A movie like this is a cultural event, a chance for something pretty powerful to be worked through.  To drop the ball on such a golden opportunity deserves all the razzies it can get.  I see your unprofessional and raise you a blasphemy for deflating the power of a symbol. 

 

The story has more powerful mythic qualities than anything released in the past 16 years.  It holds the attention of many people, including myself for over 10 years.   You go ahead and tell everyone how IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE.  It's so easy for you to say "dropped the ball, it was a joke", yes, go ahead and join the over cynical crowd. 

What is so great about the razzies?  What does it promote?  A place were people tear each other down for the sake of fun.  Well, that's just great.  So, what do you like?  I want to rip it down for fun too.  I want to join in on the bashing. 

You don't have to tell me how pompous Hollywood is.  It is full of vain people, who hold grudges on account of political views.  It is a community self promoters, who view their small works as God's gift to man.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 4:26am
Was Hayden Christensen really that bad? I didn't think so. In fact, I didn't think he was the least bit bad. I'm not saying his performance in that film was the best, but Star Wars is not the kind of film in which you focus on the acting performances. It's a science-fiction action thrill ride filled with dazzling visual and sound effects. So, who cares whether the acting performances were good or bad?


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 5:43am
I think that there are a lot of people that watch movies and rely only on entertainment value.  Haven't people learned from the previous two episodes that this is the type of movie george Lucas was trying to create.  He wrote the character that way for a reason.  Those of us that are Star Wars fans realize that no matter what happened in the movie there was no way to satisfy everyone.  This story has been 25plus years in the making.  How many movies have you seen that have that much pressure to live up to a story that we hope it can be.  There were some cheesy parts but as far as the role of the character and actng ability to portray what George had in mind, for the most part, he nailed it.  If there were parts where his acting was different than what George wanted, he would have reshot the scene.  Being that he is a perfectionist and is extremely picky. Both good qualities of a director.  From day one George said he is making the movie that he wants to make.  The story that he wants to tell.  To me Samuel Jackson, Natalie Portman, and the Clones were pretty tough on the eyes in the acting department as well (But God forbid if some one thinks that Samual Jackson did a bad job, I mean he is great so i guess that makes up for a subpar performance)


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 8:26am
Personnaly, i liked the movie, made me want to watch the previous ones .And i agree with Maco, george did what he wanted to do, it`s exactly what he wanted it to be. you liked, great, you didn`t that`s too bad. that`s what you come to expect from an independent director, right? about hayden, i  guess he was in the same boat as the audience plus a contract!! i have to say that i haven`t seen more of him in movies, but you can tell there`s something about the boy.  (Imean besides good looks)I feel like it`s almost pedophelia to see something like that in anakin, he should had been left sparkly "clean"( ilove the look of doubt in Padmé`s eyes at the wedding), he really looked  and acted like someone of a virginal birth. Darth Vader never was more than a bully to my eyes, but after this movie, i thought he was one of the most fascinating caracters i`d seen in movies...


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 8:29am
What!? Annakin won a razzie?

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Lucas should be shot for most of his casting decisions in the new trio, his awful direction of actors and what he's done to the franchise. But Hayden was downright awful in both SW movies he was in and has been subject to redicule everywhere. http://vaderfortune.ytmnd.com/

80% approval rating a Staw Wars website? Please... SW nerds don't count for unbiased votes. They also gave approval ratings to Jar-Jar Binks when he first appreared while the rest of us wanted to see his planet as a target for the Death Star.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 8:38am
 f**k all u on this site Revenge of the Sith was f**king awesome compared to the two other new ones. Hayden sucked in Ep.2 but in Ep.3 he did a hell of a lot better. Plus he was supposed to act like a winy bitch in Ep.2 and confused and unsure in Ep.3. The Razzies are bullsh*t and the Academy Awards are to. King Kong, Narnia and War of the Worlds got nominated for visual effects but not Revenge of the Sith, what the f**k!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 8:41am
 hey Larry not all SWFans are biased Jar Jar was the worst character ever for SW ever. Just cause chewbacca wasnt in Ep.1 doesnt mean we need another alien.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 10:43am
The journey of Anakin isthe story of a boy who was taken from everything he knew and loved, and forced to believe that attachment was the root of all evil. In the Star Wars universe young jedi hopefuls were taken from their parents not long after infancy. Anakin was exposed to many "human" experiences that other jedi never knew. Keeping that in mind, Hayden's portrayal of Anakin in episodes 2 and 3 is spot on. Whiny, confused, passionate, yet infinitely powerful, he reacted to situations in the manner you would expect of someone in his position. Don't blame Hayden for bad acting, he epitomized the inward struggle of Vader, and dont blame Lucas for ruining Star Wars when there is no Star Wars without George Lucas. BTW for all the haters just remember that the ewoks and Jar Jar were characters for kids in movies originally written for kids.


Posted By: Razzilla
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 2:56pm
If you thought that Hayden Christensen was so great...consider that his performance made Jake Lloyd and Jar Jar Binks (put together) seem like the greatest of Shakespearean thespians...



-------------
Comparing Uwe Boll's movies to a sack of horse manure will only get you sued by every fertilizer company in existence...


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 3:13pm
Don't mind the razzie, its common knowledge that
Razzie voters are comproised drooling douchebag
population.

We're talking about guys who actually think this is
funny:

<img src =
"http://cdn-channels.netscape.com/fotosrch/3/20060
305MAX03.jpg">

Yeah, real big laugh there. HA!

Idiots.


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 9:06pm
I just don't see any reason to deal with Hayden Christensen. I had no idea which face to associate with that name until I came to this page. He is not even handsome. He's just another clone of those  blondback boys or new kids from the blond or whatever their names. Who could tell them apart anyway? 
I think Lucas casted him because he is a blond streetboy, a perfect example of a blond and tanned (fabric) softener. So he could get as many pubescent girls -like some forum members- as possible to buy the DVD. In a couple of years he will be forgotten and be replaced by another backstreet blond. 

-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 9:40pm
Christensen looked like a Backstreet Boy on crack.  Too bad his acting skills couldn't match.


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 11:21pm

Originally posted by Felix T Cat

Christensen looked like a Backstreet Boy on crack.  

I don't think so. He is too colourless to look like on crack. He is even too colourless to look like himself. That's another reason he was picked for that role: He is empty, he is blank. Therefore you can project everything on him. He is like a garbage can you bring your mental garbage to (if you get my meaning).



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 06 2006 at 11:48pm

Queen_of_Toad

Think before talk, dear. Don't make people reading your post laugh.. Hayden is empty and blank? Are we talking about same guy? Real Hayden is very gifted young man who was unlucky with his SW director and who got Golden globe nom and Oscar Buzz when he was 19. Real Hayden perfectly played in Life as a house and Shattered Glass - you will be surprise how GOOD he can act if you see those films... And your Hayden is blank... HAHAHA  Undoubtedly we are talking about diffrent persons.



Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 12:05am
Never heard of a talented Hayden Christensen. We must be talking about two different persons.
The Hayden C. I am talking about is not only a bad actor but he is also an actor who doesn't know how to read a script. How else do I explain "life as a house"?


-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 12:54am

Appariantly Golden Globe nominations, Screen actors guild Nominations and the Oscar Buzz means your a bad actor.  I thought we were talking about a Razz.  You do realize who votes on Golden Globes and Who discusses the Oscars.  Appariantly those whom are talented actors beleive he can act.  Which is an art that i quess few people realize.  Again you have to follow a script.  Take a look at really good actors that recieved bad reviews for some movies.  Where to start

Hillary Swank - Karate Kid 3 - Oscar Winner

Tom Cruise - Minority Report

Julia Roberts - Runaway Bride

George Clooney - The Peacemaker

Tom Hanks - Joe verses the Volcano

Charlize Theron - Reindeer Games

I could go on and on and on.  Point- All either Oscar winners or nominess, all brilliant actors.  Bad roles- because of their talent-No, Because of the script. 

Again He was nominated for a Golden Golbe, the screen actors guild and was talked about for an Oscar run. 



Posted By: HeadRAZZBerry
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 2:00am

Here's a little tid-bit of information for all you post-ers out there who keep insisting that winning a Golden Globe means something: The entire voting membership of the HFPA (Hollywood Foreign Press Association) which gives out the Globes is...less than 90 people. And most of them are only part-time journalists, who have as few as two showbiz-related articles published in any given year. To give this some perspective: The GRAF (Golden Raspberry Award Foundation) bestowers of The RAZZIES (and hosts of this very Forum) now have over 725 eligible voting members.

People in the industry secretly regard the Globes as a joke, and publicly use them as a device to bring Academy members' attention to actors, actresses and films that would otherwise go overlooked by Oscar voters. My favorite cutting remark about the HFPA, and how easily swayed they are by swag: "These are people who would cross the Alps for a free hot-dog!"



-------------
Ye Olde Head RAZZberry


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 2:20am

HeadRAZZBerry, thank you.

To be honest I'm not really that sure if winning an Oscar means too much either. Of course, it is the most prestigious and highest regarded award of the industry. But I believe there is something that goes beyond winning an Oscar, which is the viewers' memory. For instance: Hillary Swank may have won an Oscar for "Boys Don't Cry" but I believe it will be Anette Benning in "American Beauty" who will be remembered. Or the other way round: How many performances from Jack Nicholson or Robert de Niro were Oscar-worthy? And how many times have they really won? Or how about Martin Scorcese? He is one of the best directors (the Dostojewskij of film, if you ask me) yet he has never been rewarded. Therefore HC's nominations (yet, he never won, did he?!) cannot be considered as a serious argument against his performance in Star Wars.
Please forgive my bad English. It's not my native language...



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 3:29am

According to all has been said above - Razzie is the only real award on this planet and HC is the worst actor ever. Sorry I can't believe it. I agree his performans in SW was not so great and his character is significant enough to win Razzie. But let's face it - his performance was not the worst of last year. He could get nom but not award. You can say anything you want about his "colourless", but you must be blind if not seeing how great he was in other movies. I mean - he is too good to have two awards as worst actor when he is not even 25...



Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 4:07am
Originally posted by Maike

two awards as worst actor when he is not even 25...

...which in my eyes is a great honour and great publicity for somebody as colourless as he is. Do you realise this is the only reason why the people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean know who he is?  He belongs into a milk commercial or into a commercial for a medication against pimples but not into the most expensive movie production ever!  



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: luvtherazzies
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 4:32am
If people don't like the Razzies then they shouldn't bother to watch them, or vote in the polls, or post replies. I think they are the perfect balance to the swollen, overblown, overpaid egos in Hollywood. George Lucas is famous for picking unknowns to star in his movies and sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't. Hayden may be talented in other movies but in this one he wasn't. It could be the fault of the director or the script but the bottom line was that THIS performance deserved a Razzie. He just did not have the ability to bring life to the second most evil character in the Star Wars universe and it was a huge disappointment. His looks and popularity have nothing to do with that.

-------------


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 5:26am

luvtherazzies

Do you mind if am an angry Ruzzie comer? I think we have a discussion here and if you mentioned they just don't mind - they need it!  

*second most evil character in the Star Wars universe*

Have you ever seen the original episodes? Who distroyed the Empire? Besides, Darth Vader as well as Anakin is a fantasy character. He's not even a human mostly (as well as Anakin), he belongs to another worls... Worls of G Lukas, which has diffrent taste for each person. Lukas is creator so who we are to blame his creations? Vader is too enigmatic to call him with one word "evil" and he's not only bad... So I think Hayden cought this line. He knows about Vader a lot more than anyone of us because he was close to it, inside if Lukas fantasy.

*...which in my eyes is a great honour and great publicity for somebody as colourless as he is. Do you realise this is the only reason why the people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean know who he is?*

*kind of bullsh*t * Sorry..

 

 



Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 6:04am

Worls of G Lukas, which has diffrent taste for each person. Lukas is creator so who we are to blame his creations?

/QUOTE]

Well, I'm not sure I understand what you mean. This time I will blame my bad English.  As far as Star Wars characters are concerned: Yes, Star Wars is a picturisation of a comic. Yes, it is hard to animate a comic character (a problem known from the James Bond films). But in this case we are talking about basic acting techniques your sweetheart (obviously) couldn't handle. For instance the scene, where he kills Mace and then kneels down in front of the emperor. He is ridiculous. I have seen this film both in English and German, and everybody trust me: it doesn't work in either language... Do you want to hear more???



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 6:15am
Deserve it?
Oh please, since when has this award ever been about deserving it?
There always have to be some big names on the list to make sure that you guys get enough coverage. Thats the Hollywood thing to do. Revenge of the Sith is the film that did best in 2005, so you could be sure to get some press and the attention of both camps of Star Wars fans, so your decission makes sense.
Just, putting him in the supporting actor categorie made it way too obvious that you also wanted to get the coverage for Tom Cruise and that ruined things for some of those who thought this award is really about on screen performances and films.


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 6:23am
Originally posted by Queen_of_Toad

[QUOTE=Maike]

two awards as worst actor when he is not even 25...

...which in my eyes is a great honour and great publicity for somebody as colourless as he is. Do you realise this is the only reason why the people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean know who he is?   /QUOTE]

 



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 6:25am

Lets be real.  Could anyone have lived up to our expectations.  I don't think so.  If it was a better actor, we would be saying "well it was to dramatic for Star Wars,"  Or " Darth Vader has no right to show those types of emotions"  I think people are being hard on him.  I agree that he didn't pull it off (especially the first scene in the suit) But, as far as his talent as an actor-- I think you r being tough.  I'm not syaing he is the best (far from it) I'm just saying there are worse. 

 

For quenn_of_toad.

Not sure where you were trying to go with your info on the Golden globes and Oscars.   The voters-professionals, thats there job.  I wonder why you think that winning an oscar "not really that sure if winning an Oscar means too much either."  From the perspective of an actor, i bet they would strongly disagree.  However, I agree that his other -well reviewed performances- no way reflect what he did or didn't do for Star Wars.

 

My last thought.  He really sucked in Episode II



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:06am
i think that Hayden is not that bad of an actor. He could be better, but i think that there are other actors that deserve this award more then he does. I think he was alright in both episodes. I mean, now that you have seen the movies, who do u think would fit the part better?


Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:12am
Originally posted by MacoDen

For quenn_of_toad.

Not sure where you were trying to go with your info on the Golden globes and Oscars.   The voters-professionals, thats there job.  I wonder why you think that winning an oscar "not really that sure if winning an Oscar means too much either."  From the perspective of an actor, i bet they would strongly disagree. 

What I mean is that if somebody receives an Oscar it doesn't make him any better in my opinion. I think "Aviator" was a far better picture than "Million Dollar Baby". I don't really care if it got any Oscars or not. Another example: "Taxi Driver" didn't get any Oscar either (did de Niro get an Oscar? I don't know), but I will never forget the film nor de Niro's performance in that movie. There are films or performances that stick to your mind and never leave it. And this is something that goes beyond an Oscar or anything else. That's what I meant.

 



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:16am

*Well, I'm not sure I understand what you mean. This time I will blame my bad English.  As far as Star Wars characters are concerned: Yes, Star Wars is a picturisation of a comic. Yes, it is hard to animate a comic character (a problem known from the James Bond films). But in this case we are talking about basic acting techniques your sweetheart (obviously) couldn't handle. *

Do you know much about basic acting techniques to judge Hayden's acting? Hm?

*the scene, where he kills Mace and then kneels down in front of the emperor. He is ridiculous.*

No, he is not. He did exacly what was expected from him - watch special features stuff on dvd.

*Do you want to hear more???*

A feel like I know what you're going to say. However, go ahead! ))



Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:22am

scrrrchica

*I mean, now that you have seen the movies, who do u think would fit the part better?*

That's quite a question)) I would say - nobody. Hayden brought so much to Anakin, he is Anakin after all.



Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:37am

*I had no idea which face to associate with that name until I came to this page.*

Interesting.. After all you have said of him being ridicolous speaking both german and english. And you didn't even mention his face?



Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:42am
Originally posted by Maike

*I had no idea which face to associate with that name until I came to this page.*

Interesting.. After all you have said of him being ridicolous speaking both german and english. And you didn't even mention his face?

You're relentless. I meant I had no idea this face and this name went together. In fact I'm afraid to tell neither English nor German looked too good in Star Wars...
You people out there - won't anybody help me or am I the only defender of good taste in this universe?!



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: Maike
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 7:52am

*You people out there - won't anybody help me or am I the only defender of good taste in this universe?!*

Maybe your taste is not so good in this case? Have you thought about it?...



Posted By: Queen_of_Toad
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 8:53am
Originally posted by Maike

*I mean, now that you have seen the movies, who do u think would fit the part better?*

Now, let's see who would make a better Annaquin: How about Annaquin the hand puppet ( wouldn't be as wooden) or Paris Hilton or another seedy blonde. Just cut their hair and give them a suntan. They have the same face as HC (that's what I call "attack of the clones") and yet they couldn't be as boring. 



-------------
Please, forgive my poor English. It's not my native language.


Posted By: ihatemark
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 9:00am
He sucked !


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 9:31am

Originally posted by ihatemark

He sucked !

Well, that settles it, you certainly know it.  Great use of cynical quotes.  I can't believe I missed that bit of info, great use of thinking skills.



Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 11:55am
Hayden is the worst actor in the world. He is ugly. 


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 11:55am
Hayden deservers the award.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 11:57am
Hayden sucks. He is so horrible. All he can do is shout.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 11:58am
He is worthy of the Razzie.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 12:01pm
It's a great honour for him.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 12:03pm
Vader is a horrible character. Hayden can't act. The no scene was so funny. I enjoyed seeing Obi-Wan chop his legs. The best part was when he was on fire.


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 12:07pm
He acts like a mannequin. 


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: March 07 2006 at 12:08pm
He ruined Star Wars.



Print Page | Close Window