2005 Razzie Nominations

that is not about Hayden, anybody who takes a shot at Hayden in ROTS, knows nothing about acting and is an idiot.

 

I can't believe Serenity was passed over for the Razzies. Easily the most over indulgent film I've seen this year.

 

I think Hayden Christensen is the best young actor working today -- he's completely unique. I wouldn't have had any other performer portray Anakin Skywalker.
I shouldn't care, but it's not fair for him to be mentioned in such a capacity. What's worse is that Hollywood is run by a bunch of coorporate executives who base their decisions on stuff like this, so we may not see Hayden in any high-profile projects in the near future.
But he still has a lot of fans, so I'm sure he'll get work (and judging by his IMDB filmography, he is) -- probably on much smaller, challenging projects anyway.

 

I don't think Ian had any bad moments in the film. He was magnificent throughout the entire movie. No one plays an evil, satanic character better than McDiarmid.

 

Hayden's best moment in ROTS was at the end when he stood by Palpatine and looked out over the construction of the Death Star.

 

I watched this this weekend. I'd have to agree.

And Night_Sky... Or Blando Bloom...

 

I mean it's funny..when you look at all the people who have been nominated for the Razzie before and that is a lot of crap actors but that is what it's known for; picking on people who suck and mostly they're justified..but to have Hayden in there? it just doesn't make sense. He is not that bad an actor and he certaintly was not the worst part of "SITH". Jimmy smits was ok, Sam Jackson played a so so roll. He's almost too stoic as a Jedi Master; but he was good in the role..just didn't do enough with it.

 

The problem with star wars is that it creates two kind of audience in general. One side we have the people who really love the movies and on the other people who just hate them. Sadly, the people who hate them will always try to bring the films down to fell superior, by either saying that star wars is for geeks or putting it in the nazzie award ...I mean razzie award

 

The competition this year is pretty intense. I hope Hayden has room on his mantle for another one of these puppies. He's not out of it yet.

 

Whatever dude, your just trying to start ****!!

 

Worst supporting actor? Hayden was the lead. If you're going to trash on him, at least do it properly.

 

I think his DIRECTION was horrible, but all those who have seen My Life As A House would know that he has an acting ability that is largely untapped in Episode 2. I feel this is more a fault of Lucas for having not drawn out a more serious and less impetuous role for Christensen, but again that is my opinion alone. He role in Episode 3 is just brought down by his romance and ending dialogue, and since he plays the main character the first thing people who hate Star Wars go after is 'Wooden Acting Hayden'. I think the Razzies are flawed entirely and that bad acting/directing/anything else movie related one could complain about should be chastised through word of mouth instead. It brings up the more sordid truths in people...

 

It's funny and cool to hate Star Wars. Honestly even the worst bashers can't possibly think Hayden is the WORST film actor of the year. If so they just aren't seeing many movies. It's sad but life goes on. He'll probably win.

 

Was Fantastic Four passed over too? And Into the Blue? Stealth?

 

Couple questions for those who think Hayden was badly directed.

What did Lucas do differently with the direction of the performances of Hayden (& Natalie and others), than he did with Harrison, Mark, & Carrie in the first Star Wars? If you've seen interviews with the Carrie and Harrison, more current and older, they all talk about how George pretty much said "faster more intense." And these same people always said "you can type this @#$* but you can't say it about the dialogue.


Have you even seen the snippits of the direction he gives Hayden on the EP3 DVD documentaries? Also have any of you read the making of books, especially the ROTS one where it sometimes has documentation of what Lucas said to the actors. I wish for once someone would directly comment on what is wrong with what Lucas is saying to them?


I hate the bluescreens=bad acting argument, because people complain about the scenes where no blue screen was used. Like the fireplace scene in AOTC.

 

Well Orlando Bloom or not, Hayden is the fall guy for the crap scripts that he was given for both AOTC and ROTS. Can't blame Hayden for it, and you know what, Bloom is a decent actor and he has nothing to do with the Razzies nominating Hayden for one of those awards. Heck, didn't the TPM win 7 of those? Or have we forgotten them already? Sorry, but the prequels have very very lame lines, more so than the OT.

 

Dialogue is the key word here people

It is not Hayden Christensens fault that he has to say some of the most god awful dialogue that will make Pearl Harbor look like Citizen Kane

He is not to blame. George Lucas is for the horrid cheesy dialogue that he gave his actors in all 3 prequels.

Not even Tom Stoppard who is a 2 time Oscar nominated screenwriter can get rid of the dialogue during the love scenes.

How about that fireplace scene from AOTC. Geez

He never was and never will be a good writer. He can come up with stories, but he can't write dialogue to save his life.

Hayden doesn't deserve that award. If they really wanted to give Sith an award so bad, then just give it worst screenplay, but Hayden is a fantastic actor

Life as a House, Shattered Glass, and Revenge of the Sith all show that this kid got some acting skills.

Sith shouldn't even be nominated for a razzie. They could've put Alone in the dark there.

Christian Slater was more deserving of the nomination than anyone else.

I still can't believe Sith got only 1 Oscar nomination. What a crime

 

^ you make me laugh

 

No, I Laugh at GL and how horrible he is at ruining peoples career. , what a horrible writer the man is. You guys better not hope to have him write a script for the new tv series or ..... there goes star wars in tv.

 

The main thing I disagree with and its been said here before is him getting it for supporting actor. If your gpoing trash him trash him right. But hayden was better in ROTS than AOTC.

 

And speaking of how bad a writer Lucas is,
isn't it amazing how the screenplays he wrote for AMERICAN GRAFFITI
and STAR WARS A NEW HOPE were both nominated for Oscars?

The guy's a visual artist (and that's what film is, a visual medium)
and he has never claimed to be a great writer. You don't need to be a
great writer when you're a visionary. It's funny how his writing
on the dutifully worshipped OT (he's got screenplay credit on two of 'em
and story credit on all 3) gets a pass because it's what people grew up
with and have enshrined in their heads as magical.

No little kid ever walked out of Star Wars commenting on "the writing." But I'll
bet they remember all the cool stuff Lucas put on screen...like Star Destroyers,
and the Death Star, and bickering robots, and the dive toward the trench run,
and the jump to light speed and light sabers. Lucas knows how to entertain people and how
to create stunning images. (There are quite a few in ROTS). If you're a filmmaker,
you better have your priorities straight. And it's darn sure not the writing. It's the overall experience...blending everything...performances, the script, the visuals, the music, and the editing into an overall experience. That's what a great filmmaker does.

Is the speeder bike chase through the forest Moon of Endor in ROTJ "great writing"?
No, but it's an awesome part of the film. One of many. Lucas has storytelling talent where it counts.

A little perspective.

David Mamet is a great writer so they say. But I can barely get through his films
because they are so boring and talky. It's like he completely forgets to entertain the audience. Nothing ever HAPPENS. You can have David Mamet. I want a Lucas film.
(Mamet did provide Brian DePalma with a solid script as a basis for THE UNTOUCHABLES though.)

There are plenty of people who can write crisp, scintillating dialogue
who aren't one one hundredth of the filmmaker Lucas is. Good dialogue
is nice, but I'll take great images, characters and a John Williams soundtrack anyday.

 

I'm sorry but the LOTR films have some terrible dialog in them but no one complains about it. I mean, everytime Legolas speaks, the quality of the film goes way down. And Treebard and Merry and Pippin kill any seriousness TTT had.

Kong has virtually NO good dialog in the last 2 and half hours or so of that movie. But does anyone complain about it? No.

 

for John's post.

 

Too bad Hayden got nominated... I loved him in Life as a House, so it's not the acting. I'm not sure it's the directing either, but perhaps the lines he was given.

 

I think it is very unfair, not only because Hayden did a decent job, but what about his preparation for the role: bulking up, intense hours of swordfighting practice? It is ironic that if it were Tom Hanks (eg for "Cast Away" when he gained weight, then lost it for the role) he gets applause for method acting, but Hayden just gets a slap in the face.