Natalie Portman, CANNOT act

Excuse me...but Your forgetting about ep3... There will be a lot of emotions in the script. ep3 is going to be very very dark and sad. There wasn't a lot of emotions in aotc but i can understand that. Lucas is saving the important EMOTIONS for ep3...b/c its gonna be very very sad. and I know that Natalie Can be emotional. and damn-I'll cry!! hmph.

 

I won't lie to you when I say I'm scared about Episode III and whether George can pull it off. If it's my own folly, then oh well.

Episode III is supposed to be even more emotional and intimate, but GL can't direct actors! I don't want more scenes of dry dialogue and awkward acting. Please George, do something to make it work.

 

well...he's already started working on the script...and he is taking his time and effort to make it look good..and all that. Don't worry. we still have 1079 days to go.

 

The problem is: I don't even want him to touch the script. He's gonna turn it into cottage cheese.

You know what...I just saw "Raiders" again two nights ago. I think Spielberg ought to direct it. Spielberg can do "dark", and lately he's been into sci-fi. They worked together on Raiders, and it ROCKED!!!

They make a good team. Lucas has funny effects, and Speilberg knows how to direct "PEOPLE."

 

I feel like traveling back in time, and do the same things, but I am not going to do what I feel... it's too repetitive,

 

Jewlmc, I was just stating opinion. But since you think I was being unfairly general, I'll clarify. First of all, I'm not saying all his other work sucked - I'm stating the unusual opinion that Han Solo is a much more challenging role than most people realize, and he did a great job on it.

I did some directing in college and learned that a lot of roles that appear challenging actually aren't, and vice versa (a lot of very respected actors are clever at choosing roles that look hard but aren't). I think Regarding Henry was a big challenge, and it's too bad critics overlooked it. He did very well with Witness, I agree, but given the strength of the director and the script, I think other actors could have done as well.

The challenge of the Han Solo role is that it's NOT leading man, but it has all the qualities of a leading man's role. So Ford had to engage our concern and affection just as much as the other characters, yet not overshadow them. That had to be tough for someone with as much presence and charisma as Ford, and he pulled it off brilliantly. Not surprisingly, the critics just look at it as "action hero" and dismiss it, and I guess most SW fans do as well.

Another role I think was probably pretty challenging, if for no other reason than that the director was not great - was The Fugitive. He brought a lot of humanity to that character, and the script didn't give him a ton of opportunities.

But overall, I feel Ford has chosen roles that advance his career over roles that might really show his acting potential. And why shouldn't he? He could be a terrible actor (which he's not, by far) and I'd still be grateful he did such a good job on Solo.

 

I must defend GL, at least a little.

1st- Directing is not some easy ass job that anyone off the street can pull off. I don't have any experence in directing movies but it most likley isn't some ride in the park.

2nd- He has to deal with actors, all day long, I feel his pain.

3rd- Like darth_pooh said, mabey GL shouldn't direct the third one, I think the reason that there is such a difference between the OT and the PT is that GL didn't have to direct all of the OT films, in fact most SW fans would eaither put ROTJ or ESB as the beat SW film, and George didn't direct eaither of those, rather he wrote and supervised them, mabey he should stick with the later role.

Sorry if I'm sounding too negative especily towards actors.

 

And by the way, Anna Paquin is like 19. She still plays little girl roles like Rogue and one of the Band Aids in "Almost Famous. A mid-20s independent woman is something she's never portrayed before.

 

Well, looks like we've got about $200 on this thread, so let me add my two cents:
At first I thought that Natalie was really bad in TPM, but the more I watch it, the better I think her portrayal of the role really is. She was supposed to be a "child-leader" and as such was not allowed to express a great deal of emotion. IMO she was supposed to be stoic and reserved. Now, that may be the excuse that I've invented in my head so that I can enjoy the movie more when I watch it, because regardless of Natalie or Jake Lloyd I am a SW fan and I'm going to watch the movies.
As for ATOC, I cannot make any excuse for some of her scenes. She seemed like she was just going through the motions. That scene at the very beginning where her decoy gets blown to kingdom-come really fell flat. Natalie did not come across as being disturbed by the attempt on her life or the loss of her comrade in the least. Think about it; better yet think about how people that were at ground zero reacted to Sept 11th. Did Natalie's performance in any way portray how you would envision someone's response to a terrorist attack that they had just witnessed? The scene by the fireplace where she's talking about how she and Anakin are on two different paths or whatever was also pretty crappy. That being said, I don't think her performance was all bad; some of her other scenes with Hayden were good, IMO, and one of the women I saw the film with really appreciated the love-story aspect which could not have come off without Natalie. Overall, my feeling is that Natalie's performance detracted from my ATOC experience and its a shame because I think she's a good actress and in the end she was really the only bad part about this film.

 

Please continue this discussion here.

And in the future, try not make such antagonizing threads...