I feel like ESB did more harm than good for Vader. I came across an article in an old issue of Famous Monsters of Filmland (around 1978) and it had a really interesting point about the code of honor which Vader seems to exhibit in the original Star Wars, and it read quite a bit of character into him that is easy to imagine being a reason for the spike of popularity he achieved between 1977 and 1980. I’ll try and post it if I can find it again. It made some interesting points.
Anyway, in Empire Strikes Back I feel like the nuance of Vader’s characterization was almost entirely lost. The constant killing of his subordinates (to a degree it almost becomes a running gag), the comparatively angry delivery of his lines versus the more soft-spoken delivery of the original, and the fact that his dialogue becomes considerably more blunt. He has his moments of greatness, certainly, but I feel like from the outset of development they were too far gone into making him over-the-top evil rather than the comparatively mysterious and intimidating figure he was in the original film.
I’m actually curious, does anyone else think this?
I like the transition from ANH to TESB because it sets Vader up as a creature of pure rage. He’s kind of out of his element in ANH - being on the Death Star with Tarkin and everything - but in TESB he’s running his own show. And yes, the strangulations become something of a running joke but it’s a pretty sick joke - and not something you can really come back from. This guy kills people who piss him off! Which for me really fuels the horror of the revelation at the film’s climax. Had Vader been more sympathetic, we might not have been so floored by that iconic reveal. The fact that Vader is not a good guy lends weight to Luke’s (and our own) shock IMO.
Unfortunately, it runs counter to the notion that this is a man who “still has good in him.”
Not at the time. The ‘still has good in him’ thing was a ROTJ addition.