sebastian shaw vs hayden christensen

[LordCrumb]

Who would you prefer to see in Return of the Jedi if it were to come to Blu-Ray?

Sebastian Shaw

Hayden Christensen

[Elvis]

There is only one correct answer here and its the original unaltered films! If not then why not just replace Sir Alec Guinness with Ewan Mcgregor.

[Batman1980]

Hayden Christensen, I don't associate that other actor with the part of Anakin's life where he was a good man.

[Mumps]

It's an absolute insult to Sebastian Shaw that they removed him and placed hayden in there! Not only does he look out of place, but... BAH! Thats always pissed me off...

I liked the prequel movies. Not as much as the original trilogy, but I enjoyed watching them. But Why change it? Why? They might as well have used the Anakin from the new Animated Clone Wars series! Would have looked just as out of place...

[PS3-Playb3yond]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Hayden Christensen, I don't associate that other actor with the part of Anakin's life where he was a good man.

I agree. I think replacing him with Hayden Christensen fits.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Hayden Christensen, I don't associate that other actor with the part of Anakin's life where he was a good man.

And that was Lucas' reason for replacing him...showing him before he turned to the dark side.

Anyway, I really don't care. A person's a person and they're the same person whoever you use. I'm not so in love with the movies that it bothers me either way (I'm also someone that isn't bothered by the whole han shot first argument...which I still don't even understand to begin with).

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

And that was Lucas' reason for replacing him...showing him before he turned to the dark side.

Anyway, I really don't care. A person's a person and they're the same person whoever you use. I'm not so in love with the movies that it bothers me either way (I'm also someone that isn't bothered by the whole han shot first argument...which I still don't even understand to begin with).

I don't understand it either because he still wins the gun fight and he's still a hero that kicks butt. Guess I'm too "young" or something. 30 tomorrow, by the way.

[mikejet]

I'm still waiting for the version that has James Earl Jones there.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by mikejet

I'm still waiting for the version that has James Earl Jones there.

I don't think that version was ever shot!

[Briscogun]

Originally Posted by Elvis

There is only one correct answer here and its the original unaltered films! If not then why not just replace Sir Alec Guinness with Ewan Mcgregor.

EXACTLY! If you replace one, than you have to replace them both. Otherwise it's totally out of place.

[Sussudio]

Originally Posted by Briscogun

EXACTLY! If you replace one, than you have to replace them both. Otherwise it's totally out of place.

No, because Obi-Wan never turned to the dark side....that's the point of the replacement........

Again, I don't care either way, just trying to explain Lucas' reasoning behind the decision.

Originally Posted by mikejet

I'm still waiting for the version that has James Earl Jones there.

Yes!

[JRS03]

+1 count me as one that agrees with the King on this one.

[J6P]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

And that was Lucas' reason for replacing him...showing him before he turned to the dark side.

Anyway, I really don't care. A person's a person and they're the same person whoever you use. I'm not so in love with the movies that it bothers me either way (I'm also someone that isn't bothered by the whole han shot first argument...which I still don't even understand to begin with).

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

I don't understand it either because he still wins the gun fight and he's still a hero that kicks butt. Guess I'm too "young" or something. 30 tomorrow, by the way.

It's the difference between justifiable manslaughter and BADASSERY.

The difference really defines his character as he is introduced. The old Han was a rogue, a gunslinger. The new Han is firing in self defense.

I think these sorts of changes stemmed from Lucas being a dad when he revisited the movies, and not wanting to portray his heroes with shades of gray that would teach bad lessons to the kiddies; his and others.

I prefer the rogue that shot first. It made a big impact when I saw it for the first time as a 12-year old. Han seemed dangerous, which I liked.

[mikejet]

Imagine how badass and shock and awe there would be with James Earl Jones then!!! Especially with Leia and Luke both being white?!?!

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by J6P

It's the difference between justifiable manslaughter and BADASSERY.

The difference really defines his character as he is introduced. The old Han was a rogue, a gunslinger. The new Han is firing in self defense.

I think these sorts of changes stemmed from Lucas being a dad when he revisited the movies, and not wanting to portray his heroes with shades of gray that would teach bad lessons to the kiddies; his and others.

I prefer the rogue that shot first. It made a big impact when I saw it for the first time as a 12-year old. Han seemed dangerous, which I liked.

Han is dangerous but meeting Luke and Leia Skywalker changed him for the better. You can't be a smuggler of his success and repute without being dangerous, you'd get killed pretty quickly.

[J6P]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Han is dangerous but meeting Luke and Leia Skywalker changed him for the better. You can't be a smuggler of his success and repute without being dangerous, you'd get killed pretty quickly.

They changed him, but not until later.

In the beginning, seeing the movie fresh, we didn't know what to think of Han until the very end of the movie. The fact that he would slaughter a guy with a cheap shot under the table was awesome. It added tension to the role. Plus, it's just way funnier to have Greedo slump onto the table without firing a shot.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by Elvis

There is only one correct answer here and its the original unaltered films! If not then why not just replace Sir Alec Guinness with Ewan Mcgregor.

Because Obi Wan died as an old man. Annakin "died" when he became Vader.

[Beast]

The Sebastian Shaw ghost doesn't even make sense. Glad it's been replaced by Hayden's Anakin.

[GLaDOS]

I think Hayden's Anakin fits a better picture than Shaw's, but that's just my two cents.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Hayden Christensen, I don't associate that other actor with the part of Anakin's life where he was a good man.

Yep.

Hayden portrayed that turn from angst ridden teenager to Sith perfectly.