Hayden "wins" Razzie

Hayden Christensen "won" the Razzie for Worst Supporting Actor in a movie.

"Darth Vader portrayed as a Backstreet Boy gone bad just doesn't cut it as a villain," Wilson said. "Though it was fun to see his arms and legs cut off."

 

Course you realize, any bad reaction is exactly what they're hoping for
Tyranus will come in here soon enough for a logical, mature list of why it's all so banal, and he'll do it better than I could, so, we'll wait for him

 

Well it's all about agenda this year with film awards anway, so what do you expect?

 

At least with Star Wars coming to its conclussion (in a movie sense) this kind of crazziness ends with it. This is the reason I'm most pleased that George Lucas has said there will not, under no circumstances, be any more movies. Its time to let all of this peripheral(s?) stuff like Razzies and Oscars and media reviews, fade into the back-ground and just wait to see how these movies are thought of in 25 years time.

 

I actually agree that Hayden was the worst supporting actor. I mean, a supporting actor is not supposed to take the lead role! Shame on you, Mr Christensen!

And don't even get me started on McDiarmid and McGregor. Extras are supposed to stay in the background!




Backstreet Boy? I don't think he can dance well enough!
/LM

 

Yes, because there is no other way that movies about homosexuals could be any good.



Mace Windy,
windy, windier, windiest!

 

This is ridiculous. The Razzies are just doing this for publicity. At the expense of another actor.

 

Well, you can't get much higher profile that Star Wars, which is exactly what they're after.

But seriously, who has the last laugh? We do, because Hayden is in the film, we're the fans, and we love him.

 

I think people just can not get their head around the fact that its's Star Wars. Hayden in my mind did not act badly, but his lines were perhaps not always what you would expect from a movie. I dont know really how to say it, but there are things you would say and ways you would act in Star Wars that fit the mood and character, but I think a lot of people are looking for something else.

And also, he was whiny at times and immature and childish, but I always thought that Anakin would have been, and I assume it was intentional. I think it makes his transition more interesting, by the time you see Vader, he is much more hardened. That is why I actully very much enjoyed when Vader asks about Padme in 3. It is oddly humanizing, similar perhaps to when he later stares at Luke being shocked, you can feel the emotion.

So I give Hayden a thumbs up, plus, he is easy on the eyes and that is always good ; )

 

As Han Solo would say, "Hey, I don't get it." Is Hayden Christensen really considered a "supporting actor" in SW3? I mean, Anakin is pretty much the lead character, right? So if they're going to "raz" him, shouldn't it be for worst LEAD actor?

 

This "award" is totally insulting. ROTS was the most popular film of the year, Hayden got no bad marks for it, he's one of the leads, not a supporting actor. They just had to pick on SW for publicity. Look at the other stuff they picked on and nobody saw most of it. He's no backstreet boy either. People associated with the razzies probably love the oscars this year.

 

Just how idiotic can you get, Darth Vader is the leading character in this movie, which Hayden becomes before he dones the suit, those idiots don't know anything.

It's pathetic that a movie that hasn't even broken $100 million will win all the awards for 2005.

 

Their gripe seems to be more with Lucas' portrayal than Hayden's performance. Big difference.

The more acknowledgement you give something like this, the more the people behind it are vindicated. They want reactions. They want publicity. I guess it should all be taken in the spirit of fun. But this is my first and final post on the matter.

 

You either get Star Wars or you don't. You believe it or you don't. And if you don't you call people who are fans "geeks." And you call the actors "bad." And you call George "stupid." Notice the vocabulary, the worst sort of kind...which is expected from a person who has no real reason to hate a particular movie.

 

Hayden isn't a supportive actor in this film but that's life. Razzies are full of envious people and give the award to the most popular films. If the original trilogy were made today, Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher would win the Razzies and therefore it should be looked upon as a compliment. We fans remember what was being said about them back in 1980's. Fisher and Hamill were never considered "good" in their roles until the PT came around. Then suddenly they became great (don't get me wrong. I never personally thouht anything else than that they were very good). I pity those envious people. They have nothing better to do with their lives. They must lead very sad lives. Glad I'm not one of them.

 

The Razzies are a joke that's gotten way too much attention over the years. They give their "awards" to the highest profile person possible in an effort to make sure they get some hype for themselves.

 

This is ridiculous. While I understand that there are parts of Hayden's performance that may be criticized, he most definitely isn't "the worst actor", much less "the worst supporting actor". I think this is a mere sick, but regrettably successful attempt to exploit Star Wars popularity.

 

I posted this in the Entertainment Weekly thread that points out them adding TPM to the all time worst sequel list. Somehow, it applies here just the same:

 

In my opinion much of it is just an attempt to gain publicity but I think part of all of this goes back to the fact that these movies were looked forward to for almost 20 years in one way or another and they then were upset because it wasn't what they were expecting but for the Razzies it's certainly that they just want to insult whichever is the highest profile movie they can.

 

I think the Razzies tend to pick on him a bit too much but he's not very good of an actor, if you ask me. I think the main reason why he's blasted so much is because of the importance of his role as Anakin. Great job Hayden!

 

To put this in perspective the woman who won the worst supporting actress award was Paris Hilton. Anyone who would compare her talent to Hayden's probably needs institutional care.

 

Bravo! I agree w/ you 100%! Plus, the lines weren't the greatest cuz Lucas wrote the script. What do you really expect? The Razzies are also just doing this for publicity so who really cares. The Oscars are nothing this year, too.

Rachel Rose

 

"Well it's all about agenda this year with film awards anway, so what do you expect?"

Yes, because there is no other way that movies about homosexuals could be any good.

We're not even going to have that discussion in this thread. You can go to Senate to argue real world matters.

Back on topic, I think Hayden did an OK job. Could have been better, could have been worse. Wasn't the worst performance this year, certainly. However, love Hayden or not, this "award " isn't anything to get worked up about. It will be forgotten by most with time.

 

That's pretty sad. Surely the Razzies are so desperate for publicity that it had to take one last swipe at Star Wars. To think they had to nominate Hayden as a supporting actor is very telling... if he wasn't a lead then who was in RotS?!

 

First of all Hayden is leading actor in ROTS not supporting cast! Razzie obviously know nothing about movies at all! Secondly Hayden's performance was overall very good and at times exceptionally good!