View Full Version : Should Hayden C. have been in TPM?
I think it would have been better for the entire series. My point in asking this question is NOT to slam Jake Lloyd, because as JediTricks just stated in a post, Lloyd himself is not to blame for a subpar result.
I see why Lucas wanted Ani as a child, and I believe he sought to show the young character as a true innocent - thus making his fall all the more tragic. Instead, I feel Anakin should have been a teenager for the sake of continuity.
The prequels do not have a real trilogy feel to me. I believe that when completed, Episodes II and II will go hand in hand, while TPM will be . . . . . . . . . distant. I think that if the same actor played Anakin in all three, we could better follow the character. Hayden (or someone else) could have played a 15 year old Anakin at age 17, and a few years later I'm sure a 25 year old Anakin would be very believable. It wouldn't change the storyline, in fact I think it would enhance Yoda's ESB claim that Luke is too old.
08-18-2001, 07:04 PM
The same way Padme ages ten years between films? It's amazing how clothing, make-up and hairstyle can add or subtract years.
You present an intriguing point. I personally had no problems with Jake Loyd or a younger Anakin, but to have Anakin and Padme be closer in years would make their actual relationship seem less creepy. As if Luke and Leia's wasn't creepy enough.
However, with only one movie down and two to go I'm still undecided. Just wait right there, I'll get back to you after I've watched Episode 3.:D
the master jedi
08-18-2001, 10:01 PM
Hayden in TPM? Thoe would have been great make-up artists to make a person in his late teena look like a 9 year old boy unless Lucas had actually thought this out and made Anakin and Padme closer in age.
08-19-2001, 06:24 AM
I agree he should have been older and the two closer to the same age.
08-19-2001, 09:31 AM
After reading the Ep I Illustrated Screenplay and looking at many of the Anakin drawings in it, I really am convinced that Lucas intially had a young teenager in mind for the part of Anakin Skywalker, then played it down to 9. Now, if Lucas had cast a 9-year-old or shot all Anakin's scenes with Jake Lloyd when he was actually 9 instead of 7 (take a look at my post in this thread: "Who's better Maul or Vader?" (http://www.sirstevesguide.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53) to see more on this), I could have accepted Lloyd as Anakin in Ep 1. However, I still believe a 12 to 14 year old should have been playing the Anakin part, it would have felt more natural than the 7 year old.
I don't know what Hayden looked like back in '97, but I bet he could have pulled off the Anakin character in a much more belivable way without changing one other thing about Ep 1 (except for the "kiddie" dialogue like yippee and such) based on his age at the time, the character's situations in that film, and his role as padawan Anakin in Eps 2 and 3.
08-19-2001, 09:56 AM
Lucas said a 9 year old leaving his mother is more of an emotional upheaval than a 12 year old doing so...
08-19-2001, 05:52 PM
Eternal Padawan's point is well-put. But let Lucas decide if he wants to "Greedo-shoots-first-Luke-screams-Fett-just-walks-by-and-nods" Hayden into TPM:SE. No, Anakin needed to be younger, as Master Lloyd was, in TPM.
08-20-2001, 10:22 AM
I agree... Anakin would have started soing through his "rebellious" teen years and probably would have been happy to leave mom behind. The fact that Ani was under the age of ten and still felt a closeness to his mom.
Plus, they wouldn't want to make him TOO old for the council to allow training after Qui-Gon's death. They already had issues about his age. Imagine the issues they would have had if he had been even 4 years older.
08-20-2001, 10:35 AM
I like that he had Anakin as an innocent child. This makes his fall from grace so much more dark. On the other hand, I hate when different actors play the same character in a movie. That's life i guess.
08-20-2001, 02:10 PM
I makes more sense to have a different actor play Anakin in the next 2 movies 'cause ep.2 takes place 10 years after TPM. It would be really hard to make a 10 year old Jake Lloyd play a 20 year old Anakin in ep.2. It's easy for Portmans character to look older cause she didn't really need to grow any taller. All they need to do to her is to add some make-up.
Buy yeah, I agree with you. I hate it when they get different actore to play the same person in movie sequels. Except for the 007 movies.
08-20-2001, 07:48 PM
The biggest problem with Jake is that he couldn't act worth a ...darn. Even if he could, most of the dialogue he had to utter was just plain bad writing. (see: Yippee! and Nice to meet you) There were probably better young actor choices that could have pulled the character off. Lucas made a bad choice, but that was a running theme throughout the film. Kid casting, especially at that age, is very tough. That's why when a Haley Joel Osmond or Eric Lloyd show up, people notice. If you still have doubts, check out Jake Lloyd's credit list since TPM. I have it right here, ... oh, um , hmm, where'd it go. hmm...
08-20-2001, 07:54 PM
I find it kind of low to criticize the acting of a nine-year-old kid. Jake Loyd probably doesn't act anymore because he lost all confidence in himself after all the unnecessary criticism he recieved. And someone who takes delight in a little kid's shattered dreams is especially despicable. Grow up and think about what you're saying!
08-20-2001, 08:13 PM
Hmm. You assumed a lot before crafting a response. I'm positive that no one took particular joy at criticizing Jake's work. In fact, the world would be a happier place if everyone performed, well, perfectly at everything they did.
Criticism, good and bad, of art is part of the process and every actor (and artist) should know that if he/she doesn't already. Nine year old's are not exempt. When just one or two people shout out, then their opinions could be dismissed. But when an entire population essentially shuns a work (be it an entire film or just a single performance) then the brunt of responsibility can't help but fall back on the artist(s). Regardless of how "true" fans feel about the infallibility of anything Star Wars, including the TPM and everybody in it, the majority of the audience just plain didn't like it for many reasons...and Jake was a part of it.
Was it his fault? Well, yes and no. Yes for putting himself out there as a qualified professional. No, because, well, he's nine and can't be expected to know any better. No, also because of the low quality of the material he was asked to perform.
Should he keep acting? Sure! It's the only way to get better. Maybe his next role will be better suited to his "gee golly" personality. Most actors that we consider to be "great" are very careful to choose roles which suit them best. Take a look at the careers of Robert DeNiro, Tom Cruise, Marlon Brando, Kevin Spacey, and other acclaimed actors. Criticism resulting from TPM should help Jake make better choices when choosing roles and when performing them.
The artist's worst enemy is himself when he takes criticism personally. The situation is even worse when fans do the same.
08-20-2001, 08:38 PM
I apologize if I was hasty in my assumptions, but that just kind of set me off. The way I see it is this, if a five-year-old kid enters his drawing in a school art contest should people not liking the work tell the kid "You're horrible you'll never be a good artist?" Most definitely not. I believe the same rule applies to Jake Loyd's performance, just because he is in a movie doesn't mean it's open season on him. Look at all the child actors whose lives have been ruined by fame and the unforgiving nature of stardom. If you're reply is "that's just the way life goes" then you're contributing to the predatory attitude of Hollywood, where people are seen as disposable, which is not the way life should work.
My comments weren't specifically directed at you, stillakid, though they might have seemed that way. I was reminded of the cruel and relentless bashing his performance underwent during the summer of '99, and I let my anger get control. Cut the kid a break, if any blame for the 'failure' of the part is to be cast, then it should all go to Lucas. I for one didn't see how it was so bad, I've seen much worse out of adult actors.
As for the entire population shunning his work, I've seen no evidence of this at all in the reactions of the people leaving the theatre. From my personal experience I'd say 99% of the people I've talked to about the film liked it. I've made a point to ask many different types of people about the film during my travels in the last two years. I've only met two people, in person, who disliked the film.
08-20-2001, 10:07 PM
>>If you're reply is "that's just the way life goes" then you're contributing to the predatory attitude of Hollywood, where people are seen as disposable, which is not the way life should work. <<
Unfortunately the only answer is that that's the way life goes. Because it should? No, of course not. Because it is? Yeah. That's the long and short of it. The disposable factor isn't limited to Hollywood. Any worker anywhere is only as good as long as he contributes to the bank account of the company owners. Actors of course are no exception, just a whole lot more public. Believe me, as a crew member myself, actors are the least disposable commodity on a movie set.
Does all this release Jake from responsibility for his work? No and it shouldn't. He's decided to work in the adult world, get adult attention and make adult money. The bad comes with the good. That's the way it is and the way it should be.
To quote a famous line: What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger.
08-20-2001, 10:29 PM
I'd have to agree, as much as I hate it. Being in the Army I know that you're only as great as your last good deed. If you get sick or injured in any way you're seen as useless.
I have no problem with constructive criticism of Loyd's acting, it's the insulting and blatant name-dropping that sometimes takes place.
My reason for asking this question has nothing to do with Lloyd himself, or Christensen either. Rather, I just question whether or not it's a good idea to take a trilogy format and have part 1 featuring a character at age 9 when in the next 2 he's 20 something.
Regardless of Lloyd's performance in TPM, when we head into the theater next year to see AotC, we have to assume alot, including a decade's worth of training and friendship with Obi-Wan. Compare this to Luke's story. Over three films we see Mark Hamill's portrayal and how the character develops. It's over a length of time that lets the audience believe that they really know the character. With the prequels, we get the lil' fella in part 1, but then there is just too big a gap in the storyline.
Now, concerning the specific name in my question - Hayden C. I'm not asking this from a revisionist stance, I just used his name because he's the new Anakin. I'm not basing my opinion on the actors involved, but instead on the storytelling technique. I completely agree that it's more tragic for the youngest possible Anakin to leave to become a Jedi. I just don't think there's enough time within a 6 hour trilogy to span enough of his life.
If Anakin were to leave at such a young age, it would be better fitted for it's own line of stories. That being said, I wonder if Episode II wouldn't work better as part 1 of its own trilogy. Hence, Anakin and Padme fall in love, and then over parts 2 and 3 their love is severely tested and ultimately defeated.
I don't want to seem like I'm reading too much into it, it's just that when the saga is completed I think I will have a hard time seeing TPM as a part of a true trilogy. I'll watch part 1, then skip ahead for 2/3, and then go into 4/5/6.
What do you think? Am I being too critical of the timeline?
08-21-2001, 05:16 AM
Jake Lloyd is a fine actor when given dramatic roles, I saw him on the IFC about a month before Ep 1 was released where he was playing an emotionally wounded kid, and he did it just right, he didn't over-furrow his brow and he still had reactions like kids do, but he seemed like a kid with a lot of range of talent. I don't think this talent was tapped for Ep 1 though, just as I don't think Ewan McGregor's talent was tapped for that film, or Samuel L. Jackson, or Hugh Quarshie, etc..
I think having a 9 year old slave boy being able to pilot starships, starfighters and podracers, as well as BUILD droids and podracers, as well as being brave about leaving his mom, is unbelievable, especially an immature, far-from-puberty 9-year-old. Look at 18-year-old Luke in ANH, he was rebellious and alive and full of hope and did stuff similar to Anakin's life on Tatooine, but when you saw his hopes and dreams dashed to bits and he's just standing there looking at the twin sunset, it's a powerful scene. Yet when he fears that his aunt and uncle, who just told him his life was going nowhere, may be in trouble, his fear of losing them is quite apparent and his discovery of their death is moving. There's no reason to think a younger teenager who was raised by only one parent in total poverty wouldn't be loyal to his mother. I know I would have believed Anakin's story in TPM a lot more if he were older, no question at all in my mind.
08-21-2001, 10:20 AM
I have heard alot of people talking about how bad jake's acting was. Taking in the acount of his age and the really bad lines he had to work with I don't think he did a bad job. Lets face it, Lucas is the best or one of the best story tellers and movie makers around but hes not too great when it comes to directing.I still believe that he should have had the same director who did ep.5 and 6. Some of the best child actors needed alot of work and someone to work with them ot get them at thier best, and I do think Jake will be a good actor as he gets older and gets some more movies under his belt.
The director of Episode 6 (Richard Marquand) passed away several years ago. Wasn't it in the late '80s?
08-21-2001, 01:46 PM
Yes, Marquand passed away but I'm not really sure when. However Irvin Kershner (ESB director) has stated in a SWI interview that he would jump at the chance to direct another SW film, but he feels Lucas would never ask him because he's too old. I think Kershner's work on ESB would make him perfect for EP3. It's still not too late Mr. Lucas.
08-21-2001, 02:52 PM
Okay Caesar, here's the deal...
As I understand it, you have a problem with the time frame in which the movies progress. Well... twelve hours is a pretty good allottment of time to chronical a person's life. For example, we see Whoopi Goldberg as a young girl at the beginning of "The Color Purple" and 15 minutes after the movie starts she is already a young woman. I think there was at least a ten year gap in time... and we're only speaking of a 2.5 hour film. The last scene shows Miss Celie as an old woman sitting on her porch. Again... a passage of probably 40 years in a little over two hours. "The Color Purple", whether it is in your taste of films or not, is regarded as a brilliant masterpiece. So, why not let Lucas jump ahead 10 years after the first two hours of his story.
Anyhow... that's what I think and, I suppose, it's one of the best examples I could find at the drop of a hat.
08-21-2001, 11:59 PM
The question of where to start watching Anakin's life has a lot to do with when Palatine begins his nefarious plans for a hostile takeover. Quite frankly, the answer to that could have been anytime at all. I have to agree that the jump in age from Ep 1 to Ep 2 is pretty huge when compared with how the rest of the saga will play out. There are a lot of problems with having Anakin as young as he is especially in relation to Amidala and Obi Wan as stated so well by Jeditricks. The story would unfold a whole lot better if Anakin were older in Ep 1.
And those damn midichlorians...
08-22-2001, 12:11 AM
If you'll notice, the Jedi Council was unimpressed with Anakin's midichlorian count. I think this is because the whole midichlorian thing is just an untested theory, one which Qui-Gonn believes in wholeheartedly and the Council is sort of unsure about. This could explain why Yoda never mentions them in the OT.
As for the ten year gap, I don't really think it will be as much of a problem as most people think, Anakin's journey isn't supposed to be a mirror image of Luke's, and I don't think we're supposed to relate to Anakin in the same way (given his inevitable turn to the Dark Side) as we are to Luke.
When all is said and done after Ep3, I don't expect kids to go "I want to be just like Anakin!" the same way we said "I want to be just like Luke!" at the end of ROTJ.
I think people make the mistake of believing that these prequels are supposed to replace the OT, when in actuality there are just supposed to supplement them.
JEDIpartnr, I agree The Color Purple is great - and I'm not saying that there's no room in cinema for time gaps. Rather, I only question it as a component of a 3 act trilogy. Whoopi was the main portrayal of that character, and the other ages in her life served more as bookends, unlike Jake Lloyd's portrayal of Anakin for 1/3 of his screen time in the trilogy. I just feel that Anakin's character should flow smoothly into the next two. And then we should get the single gap. The gap between Episodes 3 and 4 will serve as a nice buffer zone.
I'm a big fan of the Godfather Trilogy, and while I love Part 3, it feels too . . . disjointed . . . from the other two. I think the prequels might be the same way in reverse.
Stillakid, your point about Palpatine's maneuvers is excellent. By Episode II, he's had a period of ten years to manipulate the senate, but I think the same cinematic effect could be achieved over a couple of years.
I hate to say it, but the only profound moments I can think of from Episode I are Anakin's departure for his training and Palpatine's election to Supreme Chancellorhood. IF Episode II was actually the first film in the prequel trilogy, those aspects could easily be introduced through many ways, and therefore there would be three movies to explore the romance between Anakin and Padme as well as the relationship between Obi-Wan and Anakin.
08-22-2001, 10:33 AM
>>I hate to say it, but the only profound moments I can think of from Episode I are Anakin's departure for his training and Palpatine's election to Supreme Chancellorhood. IF Episode II was actually the first film in the prequel trilogy, those aspects could easily be introduced through many ways, and therefore there would be three movies to explore the romance between Anakin and Padme as well as the relationship between Obi-Wan and Anakin.<<
Don't hate to say it. You hit the nail on the head. The point of any story and every single one of its parts is to advance the overall tale through every character, location, movement, and word. For the most part, Episode I is a waste of time. Like you said, the significant moments could easily be introduced, explored, and expanded within a better Ep I story. The rest of the current TPM is nothing more than superficial eye-candy.
08-22-2001, 01:41 PM
Ep I to Ep 2's timespan is very long when you look at the trilogy, EITHER trilogy really, and I too don't think it's neccessary to have a 10 year gap just because. Have any of you read my post in the "How would you do Ep 1 Differently" thread? Take a look, it's my 2nd post in that thread that I'm specifically talking about:
BTW, Marquand died only 4 years after ROTJ of a heart attack.
08-23-2001, 01:40 PM
I would assume it would take around ten years to train a Jedi, chosen one or not. But of course if you use ESB as a guide then it only takes about twenty minutes.:D
08-23-2001, 02:10 PM
Well, from the looks of things, to complete the training, you have to face your worst nightmare. If it's conveniently around the corner then "poof" you're a Jedi.
08-23-2001, 05:29 PM
Lucas has said that when you watch the entire 6-film saga, it will be the story of Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader, not Luke, as the Classic Trilogy made it seem. Then it stands to reason that we should see some of his childhood. In the same vein as The Color Purple, there are many fairy tales, Snow White or Sleeping Beauty come to mind, where we briefly find out some info of the characters when young, then jump to when they're older. If we only saw Anakin as a young man, we'd have no way (or at least less so) to feel pathos and sympathy for his fall to the Dark Side. Anakin HAD to be young. Whether he should have been 9, 12, 15, 3, whatever, is up for debate. But to have him start out at 18 or older would be counterproductive to the overall tale.
08-23-2001, 11:38 PM
Again, using the original trilogy as the basis for comparison (why? I'll answer that below) it stands to reason that each episode should contain one continuous story from opening crawl to the end credits. With that in mind, the way Lucas is playing this out with Anakin's age seems like the right thing to do. What I mean is that if we have to see him as a young boy, then he should stay young throughout the film, as it was done in TPM. If he is to age, as he will, it should take place in the next film. No age leaping in the middle of any one particular Episode, as The Color Purple did it.
However, I don't believe I ever heard anyone state that Anakin's story should mirror Luke's, but in that vein we should get a sense of a continuity throughout the entire saga. Somebody made the point already that there is already a built in gap between Episodes 3 and 4. With TPM, Lucas tossed another in all willy-nilly. I suspect that Hayden will play Anakin in 2 and 3. That means that Ep 1 will be hanging out there all by its lonesome. Is that a problem? Yes! Should we lose sleep over it? No. Could the saga have been planned out better? Yes. As already widely discussed, there are serious continuity problems within TPM itself -- and the movie as a whole introduces problems with the structure of all 6 parts.
I'll answer the comparison to the original trilogy only because someone won't get it. It's pretty simple really. Each movie is a work unto itself, but when building a continuous series like this, each film could be considered a chapter in a long book. The action in each chapter drives us to the next one and so on. With that in mind, when Lucas chose to essentially start writing the book in the middle, he committed himself to a certain style that applies to the writing, the dialogue, the production design, and the overall "feel" of the story. To change all of that just because the technology got better or because he woke up one morning with a great idea (see: Midichlorians) doesn't excuse him from the responsibility of maintaining continuity that he himself established years ago. That is why every discussion is and should be compared with the original trilogy. It's the basis of good storytelling.
08-24-2001, 02:21 PM
Lucas also said that these were serials, and with the "AOTC" title, he's enforced this, but NO serial leaves the audience hanging for that long.
08-24-2001, 09:14 PM
I'm sure that this belongs to its own thread, but your "serial" comment got me thinking that a Star Wars television serial done sort of like the Young Indiana series could be cool. It'll never happen, but the technology exists to make it look almost as good as a feature and not as terrible as, say, Babylon 5. This way, Lucas could play around and produce "tv" the way it used to be done ala Lone Ranger and Flash Gordon, yet concentrate on good storytelling in the features.
08-24-2001, 09:24 PM
That would be awesome, stillakid, I just wonder what time frame it would take place in. Pre-Ep1 or Post-Ep6?
08-24-2001, 09:33 PM
Well, GL kinda screwed things up with TPM, but doing a Pre Ep 1 would lend the opportunity to more fully explore the Republic in its "more civilized age" that Obi Wan talked about in Ep IV. When he spoke those words, I kinda pictured a lot less blasters and something more akin to our armor, sword, and shield medieval age. Only later, much later, after the seeds of the Empire begin to grow, do we start to see "outlaws" going against the forms of civilized society and shoot up the town (ie those Boba Fett guys).
The series wouldn't necessarily have to involve any of the principle players from the features though they would get mentioned of course every now and then. No boring Star Trek talking crap...lots of cliffhangers and damsels in distress -- much like Ep IV. That's the one that is universally loved and a worthy model.
08-25-2001, 01:30 PM
They have the technology to make it look good, but what about the willingness to use the technology to make it actually be good, i.e. locking Rick McCallum in a sanitarium and getting a deprogrammer for Lucas? ;)
B5 may not look as fantastic in the sets and stuff, but it's probably the best Sci-Fi show ever, and I can guarantee you that any SW show made would NEVER come close! As for a SW show, if it were treated right and not made all cruddy, I would watch a once-a-month thing, but not every week.
Oh, and as to "No boring Star Trek talking crap...", I have one word for rebuttal: Midi-Chlorians
08-25-2001, 05:54 PM
I'm with you on the Midichlorian thing. TPM is one of the best examples of how to NOT write a movie. Moving pictures are for SEEING things happen. TPM made it a habit to just TELL us what has happened.
08-25-2001, 06:26 PM
"show don't tell" the basic principle behind good filmmaking.
ROTJ had a similar flaw with the whole "let me tell ya a story" Ben and Luke scene on Dagobah. The first time I watched the movie I was so bored by this scene I used it as an opportunity to go to the bathroom.
I'll always call this and the Midichlorian explanation scene the "bathroom break" scenes.;)
08-25-2001, 07:56 PM
Funny you say that because I've always considered everything up to the Pod Racing sequence an ample opportunity to make and eat some lunch. Yawn.
08-25-2001, 08:32 PM
I will admit, the first time I saw TPM, once Nute Gunray opened his mouth and we all saw just how bad those masks were at lip-syncing, I was like "I have a bad feeling about this."
After the first twenty minutes, I was thinking "My god, what went wrong? This is really bad." It was the intro of Anakin that pulled the movie out of the gutter for me. I really had no problems with his acting at all, well okay I could've done without the "yipee's." But aside from that he did a great job with the part as it was written.
08-26-2001, 11:24 AM
I think if the dialogue ENHANCES a scene by setting up the action (like the way we see the A-wing destroy the Super Star Destroyer), then it's not so bad (I mean, without the dialogue, we wouldn't get a good sense that the shields on the SSD's bridge were knocked out just prior to being rammed, Ep 1 kinda fails here in the final battle IMO, the setups don't pay off, the action doesn't seem linear, and it's confusing in far too many places), but mostly it doesn't work when it's heavy handed and sloppy.
Originally posted by bigbarada
ROTJ had a similar flaw with the whole "let me tell ya a story" Ben and Luke scene on Dagobah.
I like this scene. It's a nice answer to their first talk about Vader in ANH. For me it bookends their relationship because while Luke was once "incapable" of handling the truth, he has now matured to the level of Obi-Wan's equal.
08-26-2001, 05:16 PM
Yeah, I didn't mind the ROTJ let's-sit-down-and-talk-about-it scene so much. When the world first saw Star Wars in 1977, it felt like the place really could exist out there somewhere. It was a very real place, with gritty locations and very real people with real emotions, dreams, and desires. Empire started to drift from that a bit, but we got a real taste of just how far it might depart in Jedi with its comic book feel and neatly tied-up resolutions. TPM is nearly 180 degrees apart from the universe that everyone fell in love with in 1977. The characters are barely "human," they have little depth, and the story is so superficial and hokey that it hardly seems believable, much less something that the audience can relate to. The number one thing that still manages to attract any audience at all is the superior production design.
Interesting thread to read again after 4+ years. Since then we've gotten TPM on DVD and another 2 prequels. Let's discuss how we feel the same or differently since this one was fired up back in August '01:
1) While I still enjoy much of TPM (the film continued to grow on me with AOTC and ROTS added on as sequels), I'm still not big on the 10 year gap. I think 5 years would have been enough. Hey, if the Kaminoans can accelerate growth by the double, they could have been written to quadruple the growth time. lol
2) I started this thread with an abstract idea of having Anakin played by the same guy in the whole trilogy. I still think they should have had one person to do all 3 flicks.
3) As stated, I mentioned Hayden in the title but didn't mean him literally since I hadn't even seen Clones yet, or any of his other work for that matter, so I couldn't say whether that guy in particular should have been in TPM. Looking back now, I feel that absolutely yes, Hayden would have been a boost for TPM. Too bad George didn't let Anakin be a bit older and find Hayden 3 years sooner because he could have done it wonderfully:
I don't know what Hayden looked like back in '97, but I bet he could have pulled off the Anakin character in a much more belivable way without changing one other thing about Ep 1
Have you ever seen The Virgin Suicides ? Hayden isn't in it too much, only a handful of scenes but that movie came out in 1999 so if it was shot in 98/99 that would make him 17-18 when they shot it. Compared with SW and his recent films, he looks YOUNG in Suicides, I mean younger than 17 . . . and as far as TPM goes, he was 16 when they shot Episode 1, and based on how young he looks in Suicides, then I'm pretty sure that a few years earlier at age 16 he could have EASILY passed for 13 or 14 and he still would have been younger than Luke in ESB when he was too old to start the training. :)
4) I said a few pages back that much of TPM could have been left aside and a handful of scenes/content rolled into Episode 2 and actually have that be Episode 1. I don't think I feel quite as strongly on that. Overall I think it would have been better to do that but in light of AOTC and ROTS, there is more that I appreciate about TPM. I like Qui-Gon more now than ever and I like going back to TPM to see him. The podrace looked cool to me but I could probably do without it, or at least with not as much of it . . . the added stuff for the DVD was way overboard. I like Nute Gunray more than ever, his death in ROTS is very satisfying in light of TPM. Killed by the husband of the young queen he f***ed with 15 years ago. Awesome. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.