Episode I Phantom Menace, why do people hate it?

[Honest Tiefling]

Regarding the Gungans, I feel they're fine because they're missing the key element that makes this character archetype offensive. To wit, they do not depict black people acting like this. Instead they depict space aliens as acting like this. They depict black people as Mace Windu.

Yeah, I kinda get where you are coming from, but I don't know if I agree with this as this is often how racist propaganda begins. Ming the Merciless is from the planet Mongo, not Asia, so not racist?

[factotum]

And where are you seeing a "large box like a tape"? They download it to a floppy disc/card sized thing that is probably the exact thing Leia uploads to R2.

It was in a large box in the super-sized data storage room they stole it from originally--I forgot that data was then transmitted and downloaded aboard the Rebel flagship, mea culpa on that one.

[Bohandas]

Yeah, I kinda get where you are coming from, but I don't know if I agree with this as this is often how racist propaganda begins. Ming the Merciless is from the planet Mongo, not Asia, so not racist?

Yeah, but he was a human (or at least looked exactly like one; I'm not super familiar with that franchise and don't know if he was supposed to be human or not) with asian features, whereas Jar-Jar is clearly and unambiguously a space alien

[Devonix]

Thirded!!!!

This was the original plan. Anakin being younger was part of a rewrite that caused a lot of other changes to the film.

Lucas thought that the audience wouldn't buy an older person being upset by leaving his family behind and so de aged Anakin. However this caused him to have an inexperienced child actor who couldn't elevate the weak directing.

[Honest Tiefling]

Yeah, but he was a human (or at least looked exactly like one; I'm not super familiar with that franchise and don't know if he was supposed to be human or not) with asian features, whereas Jar-Jar is clearly and unambiguously a space alien

So...As long as they put him in a costume, racism averted? Same character, just less human?

[Devonix]

So...As long as they put him in a costume, racism averted? Same character, just less human?

JarJar's personality and mannerisms were based on a character that the actor made up for his daughter so it's not really racist.

[Bohandas]

So...As long as they put him in a costume, racism averted? Same character, just less human?

Doesn't have to be less human, just can't be those mannerisms plus black. Like imagine the same character but it's a white guy; not a white guy in blackface, a regular white guy who looks white.

[Sapphire Guard]

Jar Jar isn't a typical Gungan, he was exiled. He is not meant to be representative of his species.

Do we ever see training in the prequel movies, though?

Well, we see that it takes years to become a Jedi, even for Anakin. They don't go through it lesson by lesson, but many people talk about its importance.

You're right, I phrased that wrong. Let me rephrase. What did the Trade Federation want from Amidala, and why did Amidala not want to give it to them?]

Dispute over taxation of trade routes something something.

They have her in custody before she escapes. They have hostages. Instead of threatening her to sign the treaty, they decide to take her to a camp for processing. What needs to be processed? Will processing make her sign the treaty? The Trade Federation explicitly wants X, yet they choose to do Y. Why?

"In time, your people's suffering will
persuade you to see our point of view."

Chancellor Valorum is the Chancellor of the Senate. They present the case to the Senate, where Chancellor Valorum is presiding. That argument isn't very convincing. And even if you were to take your argument at face value, the Jedi are government-sanctioned body. One would assume that their affirmation of a serious accusation would carry some weight, instead of absolutely none.

Chancellor Valorum takes it seriously, but he exceeded his authority in sending them. But he needs a vote from the floor to declare war. "Two Federal Marshals and the Governor are claiming General Motors invaded California"
"We're going to need more proof than that."

I think, from what best I can tell, (and, granted, take this with a grain of salt,) a lot of the disappointment and hatred towards the prequels (not all of it, by any means, though) is because it just... didn't live up to expectations or promises.
]

A key point, I think.

What was Maul going to do that had to be prevented? Maul appears to be only there to try to kill the Jedi.

He went after the Queen on Tattooine. If he killed the Jedi, he'd go to throne room and snatch Padme (she only has a few guards left) and rescue Gunray.

My issue with the kid-kill scene isn't so much that he kills the kids, it's how readily he kills them. He goes from, "We are Jedi! We cannot assassinate the Chancelor, we need to arrest him so he can stand trial!" to "welp, guess I should murder a kindergarten" in what, two minutes?

He's not happy about it (he's crying), but the logic seems to be 'I am doomed. I just killed a member of the Jedi Council. There's no way back from that.' He wants Palpatine alive because he needs his knowledge to save Padme. He still needs that knowledge. So he needs Palpatine. He can't save himself, but he might still be able to save Padme...if he does what Palpatine wants, and then he can betray and overthrow him later. The logic creaks a bit, but it's there.

[Dr.Samurai]

Palpatine also basically tells him that the *only* way to save Padme is to show no mercy in the Jedi temple. He has to give himself fully to the dark side.

That means child murder.

It didn’t work for me when I first saw it, and it still doesn’t really. But the reasoning is there.

[Bohandas]

My issue with the kid-kill scene isn't so much that he kills the kids, it's how readily he kills them. He goes from, "We are Jedi! We cannot assassinate the Chancelor, we need to arrest him so he can stand trial!" to "welp, guess I should murder a kindergarten" in what, two minutes?

I agree. I mean, it would be one thing if it was clear that Palpatine had done the mind trick on him or perhaps activated some prior brainwashing like he did with the clone troopers, or at the very least offered him something plausible and made a cogent argument. Instead he gives a half-assed paltitudinous supervillain monologue and Anakin's like "wow. you're clearly the good guy, I will gladly murder people on your behalf"

It makes his character seem comically stupid. Like he just accepts Palpatine's claims out of hand. He hasn't been mind tricked, he hasn't been worked over by goons, he hasn't been watching Galactic Fox News for ten years and had his brain turned to mush. He's just that stupid that he'll accept any dubious claim someone makes to him.

[Strigon]

I agree. I mean, it would be one thing if it was clear that Palpatine had done the mind trick on him or perhaps activated some prior brainwashing like he did with the clone troopers, or at the very least offered him something plausible and made a cogent argument. Instead he gives a half-assed paltitudinous supervillain monologue and Anakin's like "wow. you're clearly the good guy, I will gladly murder people on your behalf"

It makes his character seem comically stupid. Like he just accepts Palpatine's claims out of hand. He hasn't been mind tricked, he hasn't been worked over by goons, he hasn't been watching Galactic Fox News for ten years and had his brain turned to mush. He's just that stupid that he'll accept any dubious claim someone makes to him.

There are two things worth considering.
First, he has only ever had two real priorities: his mother and Padme. Maybe Obi-Wan, but he definitely comes second. He lost his mother after a vision, and now he's having visions about Padme dying. He couldn't save his mother on his own, so he's desperate - grasping for straws.
Does it seem incredibly adolescent? Yes. It doesn't necessarily mean he's gullible enough to automatically listen to anything anyone tells him; he has a serious chink in his armour, and that's what Palpatine exploited.

Secondly, the Dark Side clouds clear thinking. I'm not sure, but I got the feeling that even being too near it for too long can affect your judgement, especially if it's a Sith Lord trying to do so. Force Mind Tricks are definitely a thing; it's quite possible Sidious has some sort of Reaper Indoctrination thing where he can affect your mind if you linger near him. This is never explicitly stated, I don't think, but it's definitely his style, and it would fit in well with the insidious and corrupting nature of the Dark Side.

Both of those are excuses, of course, and they don't cover up the fact that it's shoddy writing, but there's something there, deep down.

[veti]

And Luke is a douche though, why is he bothering to try to save his dad's soul when they'res a struggle to defeat a planet destroying tyranny, a cause he enlisted in?

"Personal loyalty" is a very important dimension of morality. If you can't accept your personal obligation to others as individuals, you've already failed the most basic test of humanity. If Luke didn't try to save his own dad, then saving the rest of the world would ring pretty hollow.

"Oh the struggles of common people don't matter, what's important is the interpersonal relationships and psyches of a few with supernatural powers".

Yeah, well, that's pretty much endemic to all stories in which worlds get saved. See also: Harry Potter, and the entire canon of Marvel, to name a couple.

And you know what also grinds my gears?

Lord of the Rings!

That ponce Aragorn.

Thinks he should be King does he?

Setting aside all the "destiny" claptrap for a moment... basic political theory tells us, it's not too important who, specifically, should be king, so long as everybody recognises it's the same person. Talk of "rightful" kings and bloodlines and the rest of it - is all just so much lures cast out to attract people to latch on to a particular candidate.

You know what I'd like, would be a "genre" story without chosen one's.

No Aragorn's, or Skywalker's with snowflake "destinies", just a common people "band of brothers" full of good Sam Gamgee's and Captain John H. Miller's defeating "Dark Lords".

Why isn't that story told?

Because conventional wisdom in storytelling holds that you need a thing called a "hero's journey" and "character development", and it's a lot easier to deliver those things if you focus on a single character. And Hollywood morality holds that when a character is virtuous, they must ultimately be recognised and rewarded. Just lately this has been compounded by the rule that virtuous characters basically aren't allowed any significant flaws at all: their behaviour must be impeccable at all times, and therefore their rewards must be absolute.

The early Guards books by Pratchett seemed to almost be like that, but then Sam Vimes was Marty Stew'd and superpowered up making Snuff a book I just couldn't bare to finish.

Yeah, Snuff is a horrible book. But "snowflake destinies" were there all along. In Guards! Guards! and Men at Arms it was Carrot, in Feet of Clay it was Angua... the watch have never been "just a common people 'band of brothers'". I'd say Lord of the Rings actually comes closer to delivering that, because the most important characters in it are not those who are singled out by Destiny - Aragorn and Gandalf are really just ciphers, the true heroes are the hobbits - all four of them.

If "destiny" and drama among superior beings offends you, then you might want to avoid the fantasy genre entirely.

[Dr.Samurai]

First, he has only ever had two real priorities: his mother and Padme. Maybe Obi-Wan, but he definitely comes second. He lost his mother after a vision, and now he's having visions about Padme dying. He couldn't save his mother on his own, so he's desperate - grasping for straws.
Does it seem incredibly adolescent? Yes. It doesn't necessarily mean he's gullible enough to automatically listen to anything anyone tells him; he has a serious chink in his armour, and that's what Palpatine exploited.

I just watched the scene again. The gist is... Anakin goes all in very quickly. Up until now, he's been disillusioned by the Jedi several times. But after this encounter with Windu and Palpatine, he's convinced the Jedi will come and kill him, Palpatine, and all the Senators, and he agrees that they must be killed first.

So that's one part. Anakin believes the Jedi are evil (as he tells us later in that heavy-handed line, "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!").

Now, the next part we just have to look back on with hindsight. He says to Palpatine: "I will do whatever you ask... Just help me save Padme's life. I can't live without her." Then Palpatine says only one other person has been able to cheat death, but if he and Anakin work together, he is confident they'll discover the secret. And Anakin pledges himself to Palpatine and his "teachings" right there. (I know you've all seen this, but I'm just recapping lol.) When he sends Anakin to the temple Palpatine says "do not hesitate, show no mercy" clarifying that "only then will you be strong enough in the dark side to save Padme".

Again, watching this the first time I thought I knew what I was getting into, and seeing the implication that Anakin kills children was too much for me. But you kind of just have to take what's in that conversation, and sort of think that Anakin is really that desperate and that tied to Padme that he is willing to justify the betrayal of the Jedi and the murder of children in his own mind to gain power in the dark side. If anything, it shows that this child slave is truly a damaged individual that was primed for Palpatine's manipulations.

Still doesn't come across great on screen though. There's so much going on in the PT, I feel like we could get three movies about the political aspect of Palpatine's rise, and three movies detailing Anakin's fall.

[Thrudd]

I just watched the scene again. The gist is... Anakin goes all in very quickly. Up until now, he's been disillusioned by the Jedi several times. But after this encounter with Windu and Palpatine, he's convinced the Jedi will come and kill him, Palpatine, and all the Senators, and he agrees that they must be killed first.

So that's one part. Anakin believes the Jedi are evil (as he tells us later in that heavy-handed line, "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!").

Now, the next part we just have to look back on with hindsight. He says to Palpatine: "I will do whatever you ask... Just help me save Padme's life. I can't live without her." Then Palpatine says only one other person has been able to cheat death, but if he and Anakin work together, he is confident they'll discover the secret. And Anakin pledges himself to Palpatine and his "teachings" right there. (I know you've all seen this, but I'm just recapping lol.) When he sends Anakin to the temple Palpatine says "do not hesitate, show no mercy" clarifying that "only then will you be strong enough in the dark side to save Padme".

Again, watching this the first time I thought I knew what I was getting into, and seeing the implication that Anakin kills children was too much for me. But you kind of just have to take what's in that conversation, and sort of think that Anakin is really that desperate and that tied to Padme that he is willing to justify the betrayal of the Jedi and the murder of children in his own mind to gain power in the dark side. If anything, it shows that this child slave is truly a damaged individual that was primed for Palpatine's manipulations.

Still doesn't come across great on screen though. There's so much going on in the PT, I feel like we could get three movies about the political aspect of Palpatine's rise, and three movies detailing Anakin's fall.

The only problem with claiming it was his obsessive love for Padme that overrides all else, is that the movies don't show us a believable relationship. Just badly written and directed movies. They also definitely tried to cram in too many elements, and they failed to prioritize screen time on the elements that were actually important

[Honest Tiefling]

The only problem with claiming it was his obsessive love for Padme that overrides all else, is that the movies don't show us a believable relationship. Just badly written and directed movies. They also definitely tried to cram in too many elements, and they failed to prioritize screen time on the elements that were actually important

I dunno, maybe Natalie Portman is just that hot that you'd want to kill children to sleep with her as well.

[Mechalich]

The only problem with claiming it was his obsessive love for Padme that overrides all else, is that the movies don't show us a believable relationship. Just badly written and directed movies. They also definitely tried to cram in too many elements, and they failed to prioritize screen time on the elements that were actually important

The PT in general has a whole bunch of 'if X, then Y' issues wherein X doesn't work because of some issue and therefore Y doesn't hold up when it is ultimately asserted. The Anakin and Padme relationship is supposed to be this sort of ultimately Romeo and Juliet tale of great love in space and dries the tragedy that is Anakin's fall. Unfortunately, pretty much every aspect of that relationship is handled poorly, from the bizarre age difference when they meet to the stilted dialogue, to the lack of chemistry between the actors, and so on.

In fairness, this is a hard thing to get right. Conveying a smoldering, passionate forbidden romance on screen that believably drives people to the edge of reason is a hard thing even for romantic comedies - in which the entire film is devoted to that premise - to get right. Witness the disaster that is the Fifty Shades franchise. To believably pull that off within an action film is a heavy lift indeed. Neither Lucas - never anyone's idea of a romance-inclined director - or the actors involved were up to it.

It also really doesn't help that there simply isn't very much time to push the romance at all - the entirety of their relationship is dependent upon a handful of scenes in Attack of the Clones, because the relationship needs to be already established for RotS and because Anakin was too young in TPM. That was a major structural error. They should have just started with teenage Anakin to begin with.

[factotum]

I personally don't believe Anakin killing children for the sake of love actually makes it any better, especially since he rapidly goes from there to pushing Padme away. His entire fall to the Dark Side in the third movie was just rushed, and the utter lack of chemistry between Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman didn't help--you'd think it would be quite easy to pretend you had the hots for Natalie Portman, but Hayden failed to do that on any level.

[Vinyadan]

There is little detail with the killing of kids that isn't considered very often: killing kids isn't just a hamfisted way to show that Anakin's become eeeevil; that's probably secondary. Its first purpose is to give Yoda and especially Obi Wan reason enough to start their "targeted killing" missions, against Palpatine and against Anakin.

[-D-]

Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman didn't help--you'd think it would be quite easy to pretend you had the hots for Natalie Portman, but Hayden failed to do that on any level.

Hayden Christensen is not to blame. Movie had Samuel L Jackson and he played as well as a stunted willow. First - Lucas isn't an actor's director, he is like Do Cool Stuff and Action.
Second - Lucas had no one to creatively challenge him, e.g. Harrison Ford (Kessel run was an off the script addition Harrison Ford made).

I mean, poor Hayden had only a few movies behind him and none as big as SW. I doubt he dared say no to Lucas. And only way to make that script not sound awkward would be to improvise.

[Dr.Samurai]

The only problem with claiming it was his obsessive love for Padme that overrides all else, is that the movies don't show us a believable relationship.

But... but he says "I can't live without her." You're saying that's not enough??

[McStabbington]

Hayden Christensen is not to blame. Movie had Samuel L Jackson and he played as well as a stunted willow. First - Lucas isn't an actor's director, he is like Do Cool Stuff and Action.
Second - Lucas had no one to creatively challenge him, e.g. Harrison Ford (Kessel run was an off the script addition Harrison Ford made).

I mean, poor Hayden had only a few movies behind him and none as big as SW. I doubt he dared say no to Lucas. And only way to make that script not sound awkward would be to improvise.

It was actually worse than that. 90% of the time, Lucas provides next to no direction whatsoever, because he feels that the actors are better at understanding what emotions are present in the scene, and how to convey them, than he does. That's why everyone comes across so stilted in the first film, because Ray Park would ask about emotion, and the only response he'd get back was, and I quote, "Be evil." Usually, Lucas is simply unhelpful.

In poor Hayden Christensen's case, however, Lucas did take a direct hand in directing him. Only his direction was to make it like a romantic epic from the 40's. You know, when you had to be extremely circumspect about how you portrayed your romance because of the Hays Code.

Now, in the 40's you could kind of work around it because of the natural charisma of the actors. Casablanca is a fantastic romance precisely because Ingrid Bergman had not simply off-the-charts beauty, but off-the-charts control of her facial muscles as well. She could sell "in love" with just a quiver of her voice and a tear in her eye. But in this case, not only is expecting Christensen to act as well as Ingrid Bergman asking a bit too much of an extremely new and raw actor, but then you had Lucas constantly telling him to reign it in, pull it back, second-guessing every acting choice he made in favor of being more restrained and circumspect. It's literally one of the only times I can remember Lucas ever taking a personal hand in an acting performance, and everything he's saying is "dial it back". And then, its poor Christensen who gets blamed for looking like a block of wood with a laser sword.

Now we don't have the footage from Christensen's original takes, but given their respective talent sets, I'd put money on Christensen having a better feel for what was "overacting" and what was "just right" than Lucas did.

[GloatingSwine]

That's why everyone comes across so stilted in the first film, because Ray Park would ask about emotion, and the only response he'd get back was, and I quote, "Be evil." Usually, Lucas is simply unhelpful.

P. sure it was Peter Serafinowicz (the voice of Darth Maul) not Ray Park. He certainly tells that story about his recording session.


Actually the lightsabre batttle at the end of Phantom Menace is one of the only times in the prequel trilogy that actions convey any kind of character. The contrast between the restless pacing and jabbing at the forcefield of Maul and quiet meditation of Obi-Wan tells you more about them as characters than basically any other action or mode of action of any other character in the prequels.

Most of the rest of the time it's "add something interesting later with CGI".

[McStabbington]

P. sure it was Peter Serafinowicz (the voice of Darth Maul) not Ray Park. He certainly tells that story about his recording session.


Actually the lightsabre batttle at the end of Phantom Menace is one of the only times in the prequel trilogy that actions convey any kind of character. The contrast between the restless pacing and jabbing at the forcefield of Maul and quiet meditation of Obi-Wan tells you more about them as characters than basically any other action or mode of action of any other character in the prequels.

Most of the rest of the time it's "add something interesting later with CGI".

Pretty sure you're right. Thanks on the correction.

But you're also right about the physical direction and stage acting. When it comes right down to it, the actors that have done best with Lucas are the ones who have immense natural charisma on their own, and can bring that charisma to bear even and in spite of Lucas' direction. Harrison Ford and Sir Alec Guiness in the original trilogy, and Ewen McGregor in the prequels. And in the case of the prequels, that was further hampered by the fact that Lucas, however much he may have been trying to show Jedi at the apex of their ability, nevertheless created dances that drained the ability of the actors to inform the characters through action. Say what you will about the stage blocking of the Bespin lightsaber duel between Luke and Vader, but it's clear at every point that Luke is going all-out, but Vader is toying with Luke, because Luke just isn't a threat. Vader's just gradually stepping up the danger in an attempt to get Luke to lose control, but the instant that Luke actually makes him angry by tagging him, Vader just ends the fight by literally disarming Luke in seconds. Both actors are really informing the characters in the course of the fight, something that the elaborate dances of the prequels didn't allow.

[Bohandas]

It occurs to me... if Maul was so impatiemt to get past the forcefield, why didn't he just cut around or through the forcefield generator in the wall

[factotum]

It occurs to me... if Maul was so impatiemt to get past the forcefield, why didn't he just cut around or through the forcefield generator in the wall

Because that probably wouldn't be any faster. We saw at the beginning that, while lightsabres *can* cut through an enormously thick blast door, it takes a while to do it. Also, it's one of the few moments of genuine tension in the entire movie, why would you *want* to cut it out?

[Aedilred]

I think fundamentally the problem is that George Lucas has no idea how to tell a story.

This applies at almost every level of the prequel films. He squanders an entire film on The Phantom Menace, a movie which adds so little to the overarching plot that its events are probably less important than the title scroll in any of the films. We don't need to see the finding of Anakin, or Anakin as a child, or Anakin and Padme meeting, or Obi-Wan as a padawan, or Palpatine's rise to power which happens off-screen anyway. None of this really matters to Anakin's turn to the Dark Side. There is stuff in The Phantom Menace that could be used well, but none of it is. It's a total waste.

Then ten years of Anakin's career and character development happens off-screen. Attack of the Clones shows us the beginnings of Padme and Anakin's relationship. But it's so ineptly written that it's become a laughing stock. Meanwhile, characters act irrationally or without apparent motivation. Important plot points are rushed through off-screen. The character of Dooku, who initially presents himself as a voice of reason, one who literally tells Obi-Wan the bad guys' plot and presents himself as trying to stop it, could have been interesting: the sort of antihero extremist who provides a bridge between the well-intentioned but complacent Jedi Council and the overt, unashamed evil of the OT's Sidious and Vader. But that promise is lost within the running time of the film itself.

By the time we get to the third film, there is so much ground left to cover that inevitably it's impossible to do the transition justice. It tries, but there's too much material to cram into the movie, so it feels rushed and unconvincing.

The films, especially the second and third (the CGI in the first having dated badly in places), are pretty to look at, and it does feel at times as if the visuals have been prioritised over plot. Lucas has no restraint when it comes to use of CGI, which is not in itself damning, but often artists work better when constrained. Famously, one of the reasons Jaws is so good as a film is that the shark they were using was so bad they had to work around it and limit its time on screen. Similarly, I feel that perhaps the earlier films in some way benefited from the limitations of model-based special effects and tangible sets; that this forced Lucas to apply his mind creatively, perhaps seek outside help, and come up with something that worked. When he can do whatever he wants, he can go straight from A to Z without worrying too much about whether the other letters are in place - and frequently does.

And the screenplay is a shocker. Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Christopher Lee, Terence Stamp, Jimmy Smits - these are not bad actors. Even the much-maligned HC isn't a terrible actor, albeit he does have a limited range. But they're given so little to work with that it's almost impossible to deliver the lines with conviction and sincerity while keeping a straight face. McGregor just about manages it, albeit the mask slips once or twice; Neeson looks bored; Lee and MacDiarmaid compensate with ham. Stamp and Smits are given almost nothing to do. Poor Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen have to struggle through romantic dialogue that's sub-sophomoric. No wonder they have no chemistry. It's not a surprise that the most convincing romantic scene in the trilogy is completely wordless (and moreover has them in separate rooms). Had Lucas given the actors time to breathe rather than fill their scenes with inane waffle, it might have been sold better.

These are all problems common to the trilogy as a whole, which has a dismal reputation. The Phantom Menace wasn't universally panned at the time. We didn't know where it was going, and there was scope for it to be built on. It was the second film that retrospectively doomed the first, because once Episode II was out we could see clearly for the first time how pointless the first film was, and that its apparent mediocrity wasn't because we didn't "get" it or a one-off slump, but part of a wider pattern.

[Strigon]

... The character of Dooku, who initially presents himself as a voice of reason, one who literally tells Obi-Wan the bad guys' plot and presents himself as trying to stop it, could have been interesting: the sort of antihero extremist who provides a bridge between the well-intentioned but complacent Jedi Council and the overt, unashamed evil of the OT's Sidious and Vader. But that promise is lost within the running time of the film itself.

What I find even worse about Dooku is the fact that, in the Clone Wars, it's never ever brought up again.
He's a very significant figure, but he's just a cartoonishly evil overlord. Everything he does is to get more power or to get one over on the Jedi, but not once did I ever see him with a real endgame. I certainly never got the feeling that his motivations were for the greater good, or that the ends justified the means.

[Velaryon]

It's pretty much universally agreed that Hayden Christiansen and Natalie Portman lacked any on-screen chemistry, but can anyone familiar with more of Portman's work tell me whether she's done any convincing on-screen romance at all?

She didn't have much chemistry with Chris Hemsworth in the first two Thor films either. There was little if any romance in V For Vendetta, and I don't remember Your Highness well enough to recall whether there was any actual romance in between all the stoner jokes (I do remember liking her performance in that, though). Those are all the films of hers I can remember seeing, but from that sample it seems entirely possible to me that she's not particularly skilled at romantic roles anyway.

[Psyren]

It's pretty much universally agreed that Hayden Christiansen and Natalie Portman lacked any on-screen chemistry, but can anyone familiar with more of Portman's work tell me whether she's done any convincing on-screen romance at all?

Black Swan, with Mila Kunis

Hey, you never said it had to be healthy!

[Peelee]

It's pretty much universally agreed that Hayden Christiansen and Natalie Portman lacked any on-screen chemistry, but can anyone familiar with more of Portman's work tell me whether she's done any convincing on-screen romance at all?

Léon: The Professional To quote Psyren, hey, you never said it had to be healthy!

For reals, though, that was really creepy. She did a fantastic job.