I am rewatching "Star Wars Episode II Attack of the Clones" on Disney+ after many years and I have more questions than answers

They noticed it, they just didn't care. Good acting is not something people go see these movies for (or at least didn't back then), and it's in keeping with tradition of the original trilogy that way as well.

He can act, but he can not act without directorial help. Lucas is not an actor's director. Also the script was weak.

He sucked dick real good and was willing to be fucked by anyone who questioned his talent.

Attack of the Clones is truly a horrible mess of a movie, complete with the worst attempt at a love story committed to film.

Oscar winner Portman is just as bad as Hayden, and she can supposedly act.

George Lucas. He's never been an actors' director. Even Ewan and Natalie are terrible.

Lucas doesn't care about actors, or acting. He's known as "The worst actors' director alive". If any good performances get into his movies, it's because some actors are so good that they can work without any help from the director!

Which is why Ian McDiarmuid blew the leading actor off the screen in this film and "RotS". Ian is an old pro who knew what he had to do, and went ahead and did it while George Lucas was tinkering with the digital film camera, and ignoring the actors. Inexperienced young people like Christiansen just can't do that.

Woody Allen is known as a distant, noncommunicative director but he gets fantastic performances from actors. If an actor isn't good, he simply fires them.

Hayden Christiansen is a far cry from the actors in Woody Allen films. Also Allen actually gives his actors substantial material to work with.

The latter half of Attack of the Clones isn’t bad. There are some excellent set pieces (Anakin, Padmé and Obi Wan’s “execution” being the best) that it almost makes you forget the first half, which contains some of the worst dialogue I’ve ever encountered in a film.

What’s perplexing to me is how Revenge of the Sith somehow got positive reviews. To me it’s the worst of the prequel trilogy by a long way.

R10 How can a film featuring a woman literally dying of a broken heart possibly be the worst in the series!

Revenge is way better than Clones from a simple dramatic standpoint. It's also a better made film. The fact that we also don't have to sit through an excruciatingly inert and embarrassing romance helps immensely. You've also got a pretty great performance from Ian McDiarmid. None of the prequels are masterworks, but Attack of the Clones has contributed some of the worst shit to the Star Wars franchise.

Well I don't like sand either. Gets in your crack.

"Attack of the Clones" is my favorite of the prequels, precisely because it's ludicrous cheesy fun with a ridiculous romance. The other two films make the mistake of trying to take themselves seriously, but "AotC" is just a goofy romp from beginning to end.

Of course all the prequel films are terrible, but there's a bit of good stuff in the last two, enough to make me feel sort of fond of them. I mean, a film with Ian McDiarmuid camping it up and down and sideways and upside-down is always worth watching.

Lucas thought you'd be all blinded by the new fangled cgi effects, which sucked too.

I had a dream about Hayden Christensen last night. He and Natalie Portman were doing ads for McDonalds in character as Luke and Leia (weird...) and making fun of the MCU.

Hold me like you did by the lake on Naboo.

Portman had quite the sizable ass on her in this movie...

[quote] He and Natalie Portman were doing ads for McDonalds in character as Luke and Leia (weird...) and making fun of the MCU.

Portman's butt looked like it was getting a McDonald's diet. So much for eating vegan, babe.

Christensen was in great shape though. Doubt he dined with Portman on the Big Mac's...that went straight to her ass and thighs.

I tend to disagree about Sith being a terrible film. I think it's the closest to a great film that any of the Star Wars movies have come, actually. It's postmodern framing and deconstruction are a sophisticated payoff to the prequels, and a great subversion of the Hamil movies. The original trilogy is pretty similar to the prequels: the first film is best remembered for its effects, the second is actually a great film, and the third is a mediocrity-bordering-on-awful that is saved by Anakin's narrative conclusion.

AOTC also has some really charming homages to classic films.

Hot daddy Jango Fett brought out my inner daddy issues as a teen . The love scenes was indeed insufferable but the clone vs droid battle in the end looks cool just as the clone facility in Kamino.

They're many things to be said about the prequels but for me they still offered interesting and original plots, characters and locations compared to the new trilogy.

Portman was worse in this than Christensen. The search for his mother (and homage to The Searchers) that devolves into the sand people slaughter, and its aftermath, is actually well-acted by Christensen. There is nothing from Portman in the film that is beyond passable.

But Sam Jackson is worse than both of them.

Fuck all of you. Sam Jackson walking out to the arena was the bad-assiest moment of the entire prequel trilogy. And Yoda the Hedgehog was a special treat.

I watched it yesterday and honestly the romance isn't the WORST part. The last 40 min to an hour takes place almost entirely on green screen. I have issues with the Disney movies, but at least they dialed down the reluctance on CGI.

I will always have a fondness for this movie; I was 17 when it came out and got a hard-on during the scene where Hayden Christensen wakes up from a nightmare and struts around their apartment half-naked.

R27 girl, he's hot but he's shirtless for about 12 seconds!

Yes, R28, and that's literally all that I remember from seeing this movie in theaters. And that Ewan McGregor goes to some planet where it's raining.