Was Hayden's lack of charisma the reason for AOTC's downfall?

Don't get me wrong, I loved AOTC and I thought Hayden was ok. But it seems clear that the general public didn't take to him as a lead actor the same way they did Tobey Maguire in Spider-Man or even Viggo Mortensen in TTT (both of these films will end up beating Star Wars at the box office, which would have been unthinkable before this year).

AOTC had a great story, great action and was a visual delight. So what went wrong? I think the fact that Anakin wasn't likeable was the reason AOTC performed so disappointingly. People like Ewan as Obi-Wan, but Anakin didn't have enough charisma to carry the film when Obi-Wan was off-screen. And I'm not saying his character is unlikeable because he's going to the dark side. A more experienced actor than Hayden would have made us love Anakin even as he was slowly turning evil and obsessing over Padme. Think of Russel Crowe in Gladiator. He commits horrifically violent acts but women still loved him because of his natural charisma. Hell, even Eminem might have made a better Anakin, based on his performance in 8 Mile.

If an actor with natural charisma had played Anakin, then it would also have helped the love story. Some people blame Natalie Portman for the flat love scenes, but all she had to do was look astonishingly beautiful, which she did. But female viewers want more than looks, and Hayden was just no Leonardo DiCaprio (not that I think he should have been cast in the role - too famous).
If Anakin had been more charismatic, and the love story had worked, I honestly believe AOTC would have beat TPM at the box office and seriously challenged Titanic!

What say you?

 

Do not know he was suppose to be likable. He was a whiney bratt that slaughtered a bunch of Tuskens and is going to turn to Darth Vader. But Ilike the character becuase of those things. He portrayed Anakin perfectly.

 

Well, I dont think Hayden was responcible for AOTC's "dissapointing" BO results. And, as for Anakins unlikeability, Hayden was actually opposed to playing him in this fashion and wanted to tone down his whininess, but Lucas was adamant: Anakin's a whiny brat!

 

Is it Hayden's fault? - no
Is it Portman's fault? - no
Is it fault by (anyone's) acting? - no
Is it then a fault of ILM or the effects? - no
Is it the fault of the script? - no (not necessarily)

The reason AOTC didn't beat all records etc. is because it's too advanced for the common schmoe. It requires too much thinking and memory of the other film(s) for the masses.

To understand AOTC and the pivotal role it is to the story, the viewer has to remember the story. The average schmoe in the average audience only knows/remembers the last hour or so of their life and keeps wondering where is the "Black Dude with the mask" (Darth Vader) and/or the "Dude who played Indiana Jones" (Han Solo)?

Fans like you and I know the whole story. We already understand this is episode II of 6, and that 4, 5, and 6 have already been filmed in real time, but not in story time.

Am I being cynical? Maybe. But this is based on personal observation. Watch AOTC with a (non-fan) parent or non-fan friend. Not remembering details from TPM let alone the OT, and you lose layers of meaning.




This is my personal observation, so take it as fact . . .




.

 

The reason AOTC is the first Star Wars movie to not be the number one movie of the year is because it is the worst Star Wars movie ever made.

 

Out of the three main actors in Attack of the Clones, the one completely lacking in any charisma at all is Natalie Portman. I thought Hayden and Ewan were fine, but the reason for me why the scenes between Padme and Anakin felt so flat is that Natalie Portman didn't seem to be terribly bothered about the dialogue she was saying, and what she was doing. I think that's one of the main problems with Attack of the Clones, for me, at least.

 

As usual, it all comes down to personal taste.
You thought Hayden lacked charisma? You thought Natalie was flat? You thought Ewan should´ve had a different beard?
Too bad for you! I enjoyed every second of this film and that´s all that matters.

EDIT: I don´t blame anyone for having these opinions, I just find it absurd to blame the BO records on them.

 

Yep $310 million sure is disappointing. Also it's the #3 Star Wars movie in terms of box office. Just because it wasn't the highest grossing movie in it's year of release doesn't means it's the worst Star Wars movie, it just means there were other popular movies released as well.

Also watch the confession scene again and say that Hayden lacked charisma...

 

I kind of agree that the film would've worked out better if the Anakin was more charismatic and appealing, but I think it gets by okay anyway. I definitely agree that Portman is about ten times worse then Hayden, though - I think she might well turn out to be the single biggest problem with the PT as a whole.

Padme had the potential to be one of the most complex and interesting characters in the series, but Portman's performance turns her into one of the dullest. She can play 'bored official' okay, but that's about it; she's too cold and deadpan to make a truely appealing 'human' character, and she's not charismatic enough to make a convincing leader.

 

And what "downfall" would that be? Or are you talking about the perfectly understandable yet slight decline in box office performance of a 20 year old film franchise? Or did you really expect Star Wars to stay number one forever?

And if the originals are really as popular as critics seem to think then why didn't the Special Editions make hundreds of millions of dollars when they were released in the late 90's?

I think a good way to describe Star Wars is "well known but not necessarily popular", if you take my meaning. In other words, there are a lot of people that know of Star Wars--this what is referred to as pop culture impact--but it is only really popular with relatively small group of fans (small when compared to the population at large). And while the new films have arguably not had the same pop culture impact as the originals, I think pop culture is overrated any way and not a good way to judge the success of anything (for instance, Britney Spears has had undeniable pop culture impact, but that doesn't make her music any good).

Frankly, the decline of Star Wars is still extraordinary when compared it to other franchises that have gone 5 films or more. For example, while Rocky V came and went with hardly any notice the fifth Star Wars film made over $310 million which is hardly chump change, and this is even more amazing when you consider that it is keeping pace with brand new franchises like The Lord Of The Rings and the much hyped Spider-man.

Frankly, the only thing I see declining around here are the attitudes of a small but vocal minority. Give it up, guys: Star Wars continues to be popular and successful and all your complaining in the world isn't going to change that.

 

I wish people would stop pretending that the box office total for AOTC was a huge success. It wasn't and you all know it. Some observations:

- the previous 4 SW films didn't just win their respective years at the BO, they actually OBLITERATED any other films in terms of money. Distributors were afraid of placing any movie within 4 months of a Star Wars film. AOTC however is just another blockbuster.
- illustrated also by the fact that since November 2001 4 other films grossed more than AOTC in North America (one of them will be TTT). A far cry from previous glory.
- in other countries it looks even worse. In the UK during the past 14 months both Harry Potter films, both LOTR films, Ica Age and Monsters Inc. all grossed more than SW. HP1 and FOTR grossed 140% more than AOTC!!!!!
- In late 2001 HP fans and LOTR fans that talked about the success of their films were laughed at by SW fans who claimed that box office totals like 317 Million were ridiculously low and couldn't compete with a SW film. The same people now proclaim 300 for AOTC a "great success".
- Before AOTC came out verybody on this board speculated about the box office for it and 99% here expected it to rival Titanic. Now the same guys proclaim 300 a great success.

Yes, 300 Million is a big intake for most other films. But SW used to be more than "most other films". SW was a phenomenon that spanned generations. Where is all this today? It's just another Harry Potter, Scooby Doo or Mummy returns. A popular blockbuster. Great.
-

 

Well said,Mech-E_Jedi and Lars_Muul.

I don't think AOTC would've been better if Anakin or Padme was more charismatic.

Hayden and Natalie are charismatic enough.I can't imagine anyone else to play their roles.Not to mention the great chemistry between the two,really magic.

They're one of the important reasons why I love AOTC.

BTW,box office means nothing to me.Like Durwood said:Britney Spears has had undeniable pop culture impact, but that doesn't make her music any good.

 

The reason AOTC is the first Star Wars movie to not be the number one movie of the year is because it is the worst Star Wars movie ever made.

That is your opinion. $310 shows it was well liked whether you think so or not. Yahoo and E! entertainment described AOTC as one the big hits of 2002.

 

I wish people would stop pretending that the box office total for AOTC was a huge success. It wasn't and you all know it.

Excuse me but AOTC was a success! Stop telling us we are pretending. How about you stop pretending it was a fialure. $310 shows it is still going strong. And article on Yahoo on Friday. Link was called Spiderman takes tops for 2002. Something like that. Went on to list the hits of 2002. AOTC came in as #2. Yahoo also stated that as the SW franchise keeps rolling, the Star Trek fronchise got rolled. So SW is still going strong.

 

Tukafo, you seem to believe that box office success is proof of quality. I just can't understand this being the only stamp of approval. Look at a film like Aliens - one of the best films of the 80s, one of the best sci-fi flicks peroid, but it made about $89m at the box office. Would that then be a failure? Care to name be another 5th film in a series that has made $310m?

The fact is that, mathematically, there is no reason to consider AOTC a disappointment. When it comes to people's personal feelings, that's different, and depends on the viewer.

As for SW fans predicting AOTC to beat Titanic, come on - they're FANS. They're gonna get carried away. If you could care to take a look at any LOTR messageboard, say TheOneRing for a start, you'll see them doing the exact same thing for TTT.

 

look at it this way - if Canada win Silver at the Olympic Ice hockey then it's a failure for them. If Luxembourg win Bronze it's a monumental success.

 

The thing is, the SW movies are closer to Star Trek or Bond films then regular sequels - they've got a fairly consistent audience and so the films tend to make fairly consistent amounts of money (adjusted for inflation, ESB, ROTJ and TPM are all in the same area). Because of this, when a film in the franchise makes more or less then usual it usually means something - just as the flop of Nemesis suggests that both fans and public are losing interest in modern Star Trek, the SW francise's sudden move from 'worldwide sensation' into 'everyday blockbuster' territory surely suggests that people are losing interest in the prequels, even if it's only a little bit.

 

There is nothing wrong with any of the actors in AOTC, I wish some poeple would stop complaining about it, if you don;t like the acting in a film, don't watch it, it's as simple as that.

 

" Tukafo, you seem to believe that box office success is proof of quality."

I don't and I never said such a thing. As a matter of fact I rarely watch blockbusters and my favourite movies are smaller movies.


"if you don;t like the acting in a film, don't watch it, it's as simple as that."

that's an argument designed to question the very principle of debate. I'd like to think that an intelligent person does more than just "watch a film". For me watching a film without discussing it (good or bad) is pointless.

 

Excuse me but AOTC was a success! Stop telling us we are pretending. How about you stop pretending it was a fialure. $310 shows it is still going strong.

$310 isn't all that much money. You can't even buy a 1981 Datsun 210 for that.

 

Hayden wasn't the only one that lacked charima. Portman's portray was nothing to write home about.
But this has more to do with Lucas' direction than the talent of either of these actors.
Hayden and Portman have both been praised for their performances in other movies and stage so it must be something about this series of movies that is making their work seem less than memorable.
That lays on the shoulders of Lucas, the director and writer.

Cheers

 

More Hayden bashing?
Hayden's the "James Dean" of our generation!
Hayden is the PT's equivalent to Harrison Ford!!

In the end, all of this will be irrelevant.
You'll see!!! Any of these "flaws" you people go out of your way to find, will be resolved in Ep.3!!!!

Episode 3 will make the PT outshine the LOTR, Matrix and HP movies!!!!!


BLEECCH!!!!!!

Jeez!!!!!!! I was going to add even more, but I can't even get half of the way through without vomiting!!!!!!!!

How do some of you do it?

 

I wish people would stop pretending that the box office total for AOTC was a huge success. It wasn't and you all know it.

Who gives a stuff about the Box-Office? That is not the deciding factor for most people when it comes to liking a movie or not.

Anyway, $310 MILLION is a huge taking no matter which film is involved. And yes, Episode I's takings were immense, but I bet half of those earnings were due to 16 years worth of hype.

And why not compare this to the Original Trilogy: Star Wars made over $700 MILLION Dollars, and Empire, which is generally thought to be ten times better than Star Wars made about $200-$300 million less simply because sequels seldom, if ever, surpass the original's takings. The same looks to be happening with LOTR.

Oh, and just to give this message a semblence of being on-topic, I thought Hayden Christensen has truckloads of charisma and talent. It is Lucas who doesn't have charisma, and that comes out in his direction. Look at Ewan McGregor: he has TONS of charisma that were leached out of his performances by Lucas's stodgy sensibilities. Now, I don't think that actually kills the film, as Star Wars has always had fairly one dimensional characters, so it's really only a minor drawback for me.

-JDR.

 

$310 isn't all that much money. You can't even buy a 1981 Datsun 210 for that.

Ooops! I am laughing histerically at your quote TokyoXtreme. I needed a big laugh like that on this horrible Monday. Thanks!

 

actually, LOTR is a bad example as TTT will beat FOTR. You know why? My guess is it's because most people liked the first film, that's why they're coming back.