Hayden Christensen's Anakin

Why does this-

(Courtesy of Wildy.)

-feel more terrifying than this?

(Courtesy of Empire Fan Productions.)

There are many answers you can give, but focus on the line delivery specifically. The context of both scenes is similar-a Dark Side-tempted Anakin Skywalker fights a former friend-but you feel more from Anakin confronting Ahsoka than Obi-Wan. Why is that? Why does the former give me chills, while the latter…doesn’t? I think it has to do with who’s behind the camera and how they direct a limited actor like Hayden Christensen.

What’s “limited acting”? It’s when an actor has limited range. There are many limited actors in Hollywood-Arnold Schwarzenegger, Keanu Reeves, Matthew McConaughey, to name a few-but none are more notorious than Hayden Christensen. Brought on for Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars Ep. II: Attack of the Clones, he had had minor TV roles prior, but it was this that launched him into superstardom. It makes sense, but while many of his fellow cast members were criticized for the same stilted line reads, Christensen never got to prove his range elsewhere (save Shattered Glass). And that’s unfortunate, as limited actors can give great performances with the right directors.

It's not even fair within the context of the Star Wars franchise. Christensen was wooden, even if he got better over time, but so was everyone else in The Prequels. Even ignoring that, Star Wars is notorious for hammy line reads, such that while the acting has gotten better under Disney, the dialogue remains hit-or-miss. Additionally, as far as “Movie Brats” go, The Prequels hold up better as movies than Hook and Jack. And I’m not saying that because I was always hit-or-miss on the late-Robin Williams.

It didn’t matter for the longest time anyway. Christensen’s costars got the flex their acting chops in other movies, and some earned Oscar nominations/wins, but he remained the butt of jokes for a while. It got to the point where he even stepped away from acting in the 2010’s. So what happened? And why did he return?

The former question has an obvious answer: he was being improperly utilized by Hollywood. While Shattered Glass demonstrated he could give a good performance, most of his movies didn’t properly showcase thats. Even Jumper, directed by Doug Liman, boxed him in. In the minds of audiences and Hollywood-alike, Christensen was Anakin Skywalker. He was the whiney, angsty teenager George Lucas had poorly-directed, all to his detriment. Twice. So it’s no wonder he decided to step down from the spotlight.

Okay, what about his return? There are numerous factors here, but the most-obvious involve a changing of the guard, and time. Remember that Disney purchased Star Wars in 2012, and ever since have made it a priority to take full advantage. Glut of content aside, Disney felt they had gold, and they weren’t shy about capitalizing on it. I don’t blame them, as, with a handful of exceptions, Star Wars is in better shape critically now than when Lucas had control in his later years.

The other factor, like I said, was time, often described as the healer of all wounds. Keep in mind that Star Wars is generational. The Prequels were scoffed at during release, mostly by longtime fans, but it was the younger audience members who began appreciating Christensen’s performance as they got older. So when Christensen announced he was returning as Anakin in Obi-Wan Kenobi, it was fans of The Prequels who were excited. Because time had validated their feelings on the franchise.

It also helped soften the feelings people had about their actors. Ahmed Best, who played Jar Jar Binks, got a second wind as a Jedi who saved Grogu during Order 66. Considering Best had once contemplated ending his life over Binks, returning to the franchise with praise was validating. And Christensen was no different. His time away only helped him, not harmed him.

Which leads me back to my initial question. Christensen’s return might’ve been a “redemption” of Anakin, but it also speaks to the talent behind the camera. Dave Filoni, longtime Star Wars fan and show-runner, understood that Christensen was a limited actor. And he knew how to utilize that, taking care to get an authentic and terrifying performance from him. Filoni might struggle with being too lore-heavy, but he knows how to direct actors. He knows how to match the cast with his own vision, something Lucas failed at.

It's unfortunate that Lucas’s ambition wasn’t actualized. The Star Wars Prequels, for all their flaws, had a real story to tell, and you could see glimpses of brilliance in moments where the characters were forced to emote with body language. Even Christensen was no exception, giving his infamously-menacing stare when he wasn’t whining or shouting. He had potential, but it wasn’t being properly actualized.

George Lucas has many strengths and weaknesses. Among his strengths is his ideas, as well as being an innovator. Among his weaknesses is his creative prowess not being as refined as his visionary brilliance. His casting of Hayden Christensen, however, is a mixed-bag, taking decades to bear fruit. All it took was the right person and experience to make a brat into a force of fear. And I appreciate Christensen returning to his greatest source of shame for another chance at proving himself.