http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SqTR0DorSw
It's only 11 seconds and they both manage to act horribly.
It's only 11 seconds and they both manage to act horribly.
I'm not sure how Hayden Christensen being worse in his movies negates my belief that Hamill was the worst in A New Hope?
Hamill was the reason anyone cared and bought into the fantasy situation. It was his journey, and people wanted to see where he was going in that first film based on how the role was played
Christensen's acting was so bad, that it went back in time and reached into the earlier films.so, I'm not sure how Hayden Christensen being worse in his movies negates my belief that Hamill was the worst in A New Hope? If you want to challenge that belief, you should stick to the Movie that was asked about (A New Hope) and point at someone worse than Hamill.
You guys are crazy. Anything Hamill lacks is from "Youcanwritethisshitgeorgebutyoucan'tsayititis". The irony being that Ford sold his lines perfectly.
Doesn't that undercut your point? If Harrison Ford was able to sell his lines, that means it's possible to give the lines effectively.
Seriously though, I've gotta agree with Mark Hamill, he wasn't very good in the first film
I disagree. Hamill was the reason anyone cared and bought into the fantasy situation. It was his journey, and people wanted to see where he was going in that first film based on how the role was played.
Contrast that with Hayden Christensen--who had two films as the character making the pivotal journey, but he was awful in every frame, without any sort of growth in either movie.
No, you are being defensive. He was awful in every frame.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.