Question of the Day, October 26, 2010

[Doog0AD]

Highlander 2 - The Quickening.

...Does it even need elaboration?

 

[AvsJoe]

O.O

Which do I choose?

Do I re-write Zombie Wars so that it wouldn't be so diputs? Do I remove the annoying Rob Schneider character from Demolition Man? How about I add a third woman to Habitacion en Roma?

...

I choose Habitacion en Roma

 

[BabySinclair]

The Original Trilogy needs to be put back to what it was and the Prequals need an overhaul, removal of Jar-Jar, Doku needs tweaking, Anakin's lines would need to be mostly rewritten, and the role of Anakin would have to be recast.

 

[twm1709]

Spider-man 3. Totally

 

[Matt-the-twat]

I hope everyone who voted star wars was thinking of the new trilogy because there's no way anyone's going to improve the old one.

Also those (at this time) 14 people who voted fight club what would you change about it?

Fight club was a good movie but to me it didn't have the effect of leaving anything with you after watching it like most great films do. You watch it, and you're done. Apart from anything the end scene where he shoots himself in the head but still lives is enough to annoy me to want to change it.

I respect the fact that you didn't like the ending, but I would like to know how you would change it?

Also when you said you didn't take anything away from it like most great films, what would be an example of a film you took something away from?

To be honest I would probably have made both Tyler's die when he shot himself as that would clear up that niggle right at the end (for me anyway) and it would probably mean that I wouldn't get taken out of the immersion of the story. That's probably also partly why it didn't leave anything with me after the film ended, it seemed like a cool/interesting concept and all but that's it. I mean in reality we would probably change or add all sorts of things to most films just because we might think it was a good idea, but generally, short of watching the film purely to critique it afterwards it would be hard to judge what you'd change.

As for films that I've taken something away from: One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Seven Pounds (most people won't consider it a great film, but I loved it) and Momento I'll give as examples for that. There are other films that would have resonated with me as more than just entertainment, but off the top of my head I can't think of them.

 

[Abanic]

Can someone please explain this Hayden Christensen hate to me?

Hayden gets a lot of the abuse meant for George, but he did one thing very wrong.

He ruined one of the best bad guys ever.

The scene where Darth steps through the smoke in Star Wars is an iconic entry, followed by him choking the life out of someone with the neck grab.

That scene alone dominates anything in the prequels.

And then you realise that this is the guy who built C3PO, left his mother to die, had a tantrum because his wife died...and all the ominous fear drops out of that scene.

Anakin Skywalker is not only badly written but badly acted, and placed in scenes so dreadful that it looks like his entire life is set out to make him gain power purely through directorial mandate.

Now, a good actor would have taken that role and said "Well, if it's going to be that hammed up - let's start chewing scenery!" but Hayden doesn't. He plays it as a "real" boy - and that's not what's called for.

Basically Hayden killed Vader by making him human, and that's what a lot of people can't forgive.

While I understand your points, and even agree with many, I still think actor hate is misguided.
Was it dumb for him to build C3PO? Yes. Was it lame for him to get all "mama's boy"? Yep. Was the story an unmitigated bowl of spoiled porpoise semen? Oh yeah. But these are all writing issues.

You say that a good actor, when placed into a script like this, would ham it up. But I think you're forgetting the micro-managing nature of the director. Remember, Harrison Ford resented the fact that he was forced to play it straight for "Return of the Jedi". Does anyone blame Harrison Ford for the ridiculousness of Han Solo hanging out at the pygmy teddy-bear picnic? Of course not; we, the fans, understand that the actor doesn't really have the ability to do whatever they want, they have to do what the director wants. A sign of a great director is the ability to let the actor add their own take to a character; George Lucas is not a great director, he's a control freak. At least Ford was allowed to play a badass, whereas Christiansen was forced to portray a little cry-baby.

I completely get the hate for Lucas, that makes sense. He created a storyline that turned Vader into a wuss. But to hate the actor just seems to be like 'shooting the messenger', and I don't understand that.

The opening scene of "A New Hope" was pretty kickass...

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

While I understand your points, and even agree with many, I still think actor hate is misguided.

Perhaps/perhaps not. I'm saying it's very relevant though.

You say that a good actor, when placed into a script like this, would ham it up. But I think you're forgetting the micro-managing nature of the director. Remember, Harrison Ford resented the fact that he was forced to play it straight for "Return of the Jedi". Does anyone blame Harrison Ford for the ridiculousness of Han Solo hanging out at the pygmy teddy-bear picnic?

There's a twist with Harrison Ford though. Look at Indiana Jones, Han Solo, Richard Kimble and Decker. They're ordinary men in extraordinary circumstances. Ford's acting is of the Keanu schtick where wooden is good.
In that situation, it would be traumatic to put the wrong face on. Imagine Gary Oldman's style of acting as any of those - it would just break the film.

Equally with Hayden Christiansen. He simply doesn't have the gravitas to play Vader, even as a young man. Keanu couldn't do it, and I think even deCaprio would be pushed (though he's really coming into it in Shutter Island/Inception)

If you're playing Vader, you have to "go for the throat" immediately, and you can see parts of that - given he put the moves on Amidala when they first met. He needed to play a total breakdown of character, bit by bit... but he played it as a total flip. Natalie Portman was equally as bad, but she was only portraying Leia's Mum.

Look at how many people were scared about Ewan McGregor taking Alec Guinness's role. Despite the fecking atrocious script/liberties - he brought a sense of belonging to it.

TL;DR - Portman : Script atrocious, Acting atrocious, bit player - Let off.
McGregor : Script atrocious, Acting good, major player - Let off.
Christiansen : Script atrocious, Acting tolerable, major player, let down by JEJ ("Noooo") and Jake Lloyd - Vilified.

The one you might not be aware of is the hate for young Yoda. Turning him from a wise counsel into a hip youngster was equally as crushing - especially when he was CGI instead of muppet.

The opening scene of "A New Hope" was pretty kickass...

And that's the only part of the 3D-athon I want to see. Maybe the Death Star boom.