StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I know I should be shot for saying so but I think Keira Knightly is more beutiful than Natalie Portman these days. She should have been cast as Amidala in episode 2 and 3. Of course I could be wrong so I am looking for your opinion on the topic.

IIRC she played Amidalas body double or one of her handmaidens.

She was Rabe(the head Padme look- alike.)

Overall she may have better looks but Lucas established who he wanted for Padme...so ah well.

Ghost Rider wrote:She was Rabe(the head Padme look- alike.)

Overall she may have better looks but Lucas established who he wanted for Padme...so ah well.

That's Sabe actually.

evilcat4000 wrote:I know I should be shot for saying so but I think Keira Knightly is more beutiful than Natalie Portman these days. She should have been cast as Amidala in episode 2 and 3. Of course I could be wrong so I am looking for your opinion on the topic.

I think she's better looking as well. I also think that Cindy Crawford is better looking than Madelyn Albright; that doesn't make her the right person for the job.

Durandal wrote:

evilcat4000 wrote:I know I should be shot for saying so but I think Keira Knightly is more beutiful than Natalie Portman these days. She should have been cast as Amidala in episode 2 and 3. Of course I could be wrong so I am looking for your opinion on the topic.

I think she's better looking as well. I also think that Cindy Crawford is better looking than Madelyn Albright; that doesn't make her the right person for the job.

Well, Keira's also a better actress.. good god.. the acting in AOTC and TPM were wretched! To be fair though, Hayden and Natalie both performed much better in other films.. I think the script and directing really made things puke worthy.

I disagree. I thought hayden's portrayal of anakin was overdone...especially the assault on the tusken camp, when he goes back and tells amidala about what he did. the whole time I was like
That's just an opnion, though. that and 4.50 will get you a cup of coffee at starbucks.

I think Natalie Portman is the right one. She looks the most like Princess Leia, even if Keira Knightley is more attractive.

Of course, her performance as Amidala has been just completely dull, so far (in my opinion), so maybe Knightley would have been the right choice.

Personally, I think Portman is better looking (if only slightly), but we could argue over looks till the cows come home and come to no conclusion.

The main reason Knightley isn't right for the part is that Keira is only 18, and Portman is 22. And Amidala is supposed to be like 26 in AOTC. Natalie adds an extra bit of age and maturity to the role that Keira would lack.

Also, it's entirely possible GL thought ahead and check if actresses trying out for the part could be as BAD as he needed Padme to be in places.

Perhaps Knightley was unable to play the part as needed

Durran Korr wrote:I think Natalie Portman is the right one. She looks the most like Princess Leia, even if Keira Knightley is more attractive.

Of course, her performance as Amidala has been just completely dull, so far (in my opinion), so maybe Knightley would have been the right choice.

It's not so much an issue with the actors' performance as it is with Lucas' directing. Both Christensen and Portman have performed very well in other films.

I'm going to agree with the general line that Lucas made the right choice. While Knightely is indeed a very gorgeous and graceful girl that doesn't fit the part. The part is of a young woman confrotning massive events and Portman's real life and acting life are far better preperation for that. The burden of Lucas' blue-screen heavy direction could not have been overcome any better by Knightley. In fact the several scenes from Padme's parents house, where they obviously used minimal blue screen, you can see some real character from oprtman that just seems right.

CmdrWilkens wrote:I'm going to agree with the general line that Lucas made the right choice. While Knightely is indeed a very gorgeous and graceful girl that doesn't fit the part. The part is of a young woman confrotning massive events and Portman's real life and acting life are far better preperation for that. The burden of Lucas' blue-screen heavy direction could not have been overcome any better by Knightley. In fact the several scenes from Padme's parents house, where they obviously used minimal blue screen, you can see some real character from oprtman that just seems right.

The romance part of AotC would have benefited by leaving in more of the scenes at Padme's house. At least the ones with her mom and sister questioning/harassing her about Anakin.

On the subject of Portman/Knightley. I find Portman to be slightly better looking but Knightley gets points for getting naked in movies which is a plus (she's in a remake of Dr. Shivago).

Durandal wrote:
It's not so much an issue with the actors' performance as it is with Lucas' directing. Both Christensen and Portman have performed very well in other films.

Lucas is a lacklustre director when it comes to telling actors what to do- he works best with special effects. Hence someone else should've directed Ep III, but alas alack ...

Lucas is a lacklustre director when it comes to telling actors what to do- he works best with special effects. Hence someone else should've directed Ep III, but alas alack ...

I would have prefered Spielberg in the directors chair with Lucas in command of the special effects crew.

As much as I respect Spielberg as a director, I would rather not consider how a SW film directed by him would be. It's not his kind of film.

Lucas is a much stronger technical director, such as with editing and effects, in my opinion. Those seem to be where most of his abilities excell.

Ghost Rider wrote:She was Rabe(the head Padme look- alike.)

Overall she may have better looks but Lucas established who he wanted for Padme...so ah well.

Too skinny, IMO. I liked the blonde handmaiden myself.

Too skinny, IMO. I liked the blonde handmaiden myself.

I always prefer skinny people. Maybe it has to something to do with the fact that I am skinny myself.

I think the only way to decide would be to get Ms. Knightley dressed up in that tight leather getup Natalie was wearing during the fire scene.

followed by some lesbian strap-on action, with both candidates participating.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:As much as I respect Spielberg as a director, I would rather not consider how a SW film directed by him would be. It's not his kind of film.

Lucas is a much stronger technical director, such as with editing and effects, in my opinion. Those seem to be where most of his abilities excell.

Oh, I don't know. It would be very interesting to see Spielberg direct a Star Wars movie. Spielberg has shown us he has the ability to jump ably from a tear-jerking movie about a short fat alien with a glowing finger to the dark almost vomit-inducing scene of Omaha beach.

Keira Knightley... Good Looking? Yes Better looking than Nat? Hell no!! As for acting I am assuming that Keira can act well, even though I have seem her movies yet. But why do ppl seem to gauge Nat's or Hayden's acting based on their perfomances in AOTC? As Durandal said before they've acted very well in other movies, and I think most ppl overreact on how "bad" they were, it's not their best certainly but it not their worst nor is it the worst I've ever seem in any way.

I am not saying that Natalie or Hayden are bad actors, infact the reverse is true. It is bad writting that caused their acting to look bad in episode 2.