MovieChat Forums > Felicity Jones Discussion > Her performace in "Rogue One" was unfair...

Her performace in "Rogue One" was unfairly maligned; it was better than Mark Hamill's in the OT anyway


Nostalgia precluding fan boys from conceding this reality.,

reply

Bashing everything about the new movies seems to be a hobby for some of the big SW fanatics. They want to be Red Letter Media of the message boards, it sometimes seems.

She was fine in the part. Better than what we saw from most of the actors in the prequels anyway.

reply

Nostalgia and mofos with their agendas. And, sure, a few out there might have valid reasons to critic her acting in Rogue One.

But you’re so right. She gave a wonderful performance.

reply

I liked Mark Hamill in the new one but he is seriously amateurish sometimes in the OT. People go on and on about how stiff Jones and Christensen were -- and yet Hamill gets a pass. I'm not saying the OT isn't good -- it mostly certainly is -- but to pretend it was absent of issues -- one of those issues being Hamill -- is ridiculous.

reply

I disagree, I think Hammill was spot-on in ANH and TESB. He didn't seem to be an actor playing a gormless kid, he seemed to be a kid who didn't know much about acting but who was so genuinely gormless that he didn't need to act! I'm still not sure if that was a happy accident or really good acting, I suspect the former since he seemed to out of his depth in RotJ.

And I know the haters will disagree, but IMHO Disney has done an excellent job with casting and is hiring very good actors. I absolutely love Ridley and Boyega, and I certainly had my doubts about Jones going into the theater, but they were gone when I came out. She was excellent, this dainty feminine little woman actually made me believe she was a fighter.

reply

Hamill was easily the best of the big three in the OT films.

Jones was fine in R1.

reply

I politely disagree, the older I get the more I appreciate Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia, although I do think that Hammill was also excellent (in two out of three films). And she really WAS a rank amateur, ANH was her second acting job and Lucas gave her no guidance. And of course I've had a crush on Solo ever since that first viewing.

None of the original stars were great actors, but they were perfect nevertheless. So IMHO the original trilogy stands as an example of great casting more than great acting.

reply

Mark Hamill is an icon in the SW universe, at the beginning of Episode IV he was, may be, still a little bit "inmature" if you want, but,after all, he was able to destroy the Death Star....

reply

She was far, far, far better in Rogue One than Daisy Ridley is as Rey. I find Rey to be unbelievably horrible. As for Mark's performance in the original film. sorry he's got it over anyone. That film landed the franchise. Most of the film was on his shoulders. Felicity had far more films under her.

reply

Indeed, she is better that Ridley.

reply

I disagree here, I think both of them did a very good perfomance in the SW movies.

reply

Daisy Ridley is an amateur to Mark Hamill. No contest.

reply

Well... She is a far better actress anyway...

In her other films, such as Like Crazy or more recently the Theory of Everything, she shows the kind of range that Hamil doesn't have... She's a bona fide film actress, wheras Hamill never really played anything of note outside of Star Wars... His career otherwise is that of a voice actor and minor TV appearences..

Can't really compare the two... Hamil is Luke Skywalker and Felicity Jones is a well regarded actress...

reply

Hamill was an excellent Joker ... I'll give him that.

reply

Not even close, Mark Hamill acted circles around her. (Although I do concede that her acting and character were far better than Daisy Ridley)

And FYI the Disney films SUCK.

reply

At least they don't have Ewoks. Nothing in Stars Wars has sucked more than Ewoks ... well, except Jar Jar Binks.

reply

Eh I agree they did kind of suck, whether they are the worst thing in Star Wars I'm not sure, the soft core Wookie Porno in The Holiday Special may very well take that honor. But yes it was beyond obvious that they were trying to appeal to children with the Ewoks.

reply

Oh, and I don't know if this is canon ... but if it is than that band in Jabba's Palace in the Special Edition of ROTJ, along with Jar Jar, probably sucks more than Ewoks.

reply

>>it was better than Mark Hamill's in the OT anyway

Better than Mark Hamill? Loool, thanks for the joke.

reply

Hamill's acting during the scene Vader tells Luke that he's his father is a joke (one of many scenes in the OT that Hamill's acting is a joke).

reply

Uh Mark Hamill acted circles around any of the new characters in TFA/TLJ.

reply

I will give you this: Hamill did a very fine job in TLJ. His acting had improved markedly since ROTJ. The scenes with him were probably my fav scenes in that movie. If the rest of the move had been as good as Hamill a lot less people would be fuming over TLJ.

reply

Oh I agree his acting in TLJ was really good, far better than his acting in ROTJ (I felt all 3 members of the main cast just phoned it in on that one), the problem was how his character was written in TLJ.

reply

Diego Luna's Cassian Andor was my favorite Anyway

reply

Who was maligning her?

Rogue One seemed to be the most well received of the Disney SW movies. Even the hard core Fandom Menace types didn't bash it too hard.

reply