episode 2 is on tv rightnow. why the fuck does queen amidala have 10 million different hairstyles in one movie? Is there a point to it?? Princess Leia didn't have that many!! GEESH! Am i the onlyone who thinks natalie portman was so miscast for this role???


I love you ewan!! *take the vibartor out*

.
.
.


Dude, Padme is so sexy I'd swim a Pacific ocean sized pool of raw sewage just for a kiss!

:swoon:

INSATIABLE said:

Ditto!!!

INSATIABLE said:

Hey!

Not before I get to her.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on that one.
Natalie Portman was the BEST thing to come out of the new Star Wars movies. Her acting is tight and her performances are convincing. Considering how much over-acting was performed by the previous 2 incarnations of Anakin Skywalker, she really was outstanding in the role.

SHE DOES NOT CONTROL HER LOOK!!! That's what costume designers are for...and they are guided by George Lucas' desire to have a fashionable character worthy of the cover of Vogue.

Personally, I think her outfits and hair were the best parts of AOTC and TPM.

purplegypsy said:

i hated both of the new star wars films. other than ewan, there was nothing good about it. all the actors were awful!

PurpleJedi said:

purplegypsy said:

YES. OH GOD YES. I want to drown slowly in her

How I wish dogs could climb. Then we could have a fucking good time!

http://www.natalieportman.com

I BET SHE COULD SUCK A GOLF BALL THROUGH A HOSE PIPE!
[This message was edited Tue Jul 1 3:31:00 PDT 2003 by CAMILLE4U]

oh my god--she is too soft to play a woman who gives birth to the kick ass mofo bitch of the galaxy, princess leia!!

purplegypsy said:

I agree with you on that point.

I'd fuck her

CAMILLE4U said:

absolut pussy?

righteous1 said:

so would I...

INSATIABLE said:

ewww. we're talking about the f'n movie here-


but i thought i would add that natalie was in my office yesterday-she is best friends with one the the execs. here-the went to camp together when they were younger. she looks like she's 14!!!

purplegypsy said:

Totally disagree. First off, Amidala is a former planetary leader, diplomat and (when necessary) fighter. I think Portman brings just the right mix to the character.

As for the comparison to Princess Leia, its not really a fair balance. Amidala is living in a time when the galaxy appears to have order and control, and her job is to play diplomat. She is required to attend state functions and the like, where appearences are vital. Leia,on the other hand, is living during the midst of a Galactic civil war, in which she is a major leader. Would it make sense for her to be changing hairstyles frequently? The two different women dress accordingly to their different roles.

Amidala was never meant to be exactly like Princess Leia. The two women are different characters, and in two very different situations. If Amidala had been exactly like Leia, then it would have made no sense whatsoever.

purplegypsy said:

She's "too soft"? That makes no sense. So people have to have parents that are tough for them to be tough as well? Being a bad-ass is genetic? (Oh, and I might remind you that Darth Vader is her father, and he's a bit of a bad ass himself. Or do you think that women have to take after their mothers and men after their fathers?)

I think that Leia actually has more of her father in her, while Luke tends to take after Amidala. Both Luke and Leia were not raised by their biological parents, so there really is little room for them to have learned behavior from Anakin or Amidala. I think you are basing your opinion of the Amidala character soley on how she compares to Leia, and I believe this is a mistake. Leia was never suppossed to be Amidala jr. In this regard, I don't think Portman is miscast for the role whatsoever. She plays Amidala with a much more diplomatic angle than Leia, which makes total sense for the character.

DAAAVVVEEE!!!

YOU'RE BACK!!!

And she's originally from Israel

We've got beautiful (but deadly) women here.