logo Sign In

"explanations" about Vader

Author
Time
 (Edited)

There are various things said about Vader these days that are probably a product of recent times but claim to explain various things about him. The aim of this thread is to ask about those things. Those things are:

Firstly, that he can't use force lightning because of his bionics. Now in the old days I didn't wonder why Vader couldn't use force lightning, because I thought it was just somebody like the emperor who could use it. I don't know whether that was Lucas's intention back in the time the old films were made. Other characters started using force lightning in the EU starting probably with Cbaoth in Heir to the Empire in 1991. Quite a few characters used it in the EU before Dooku used it in AOTC and became the first film character to use it other than Palpatine. I don't know what the use of it in the EU might say (if anything) about when Lucas first decided it was more widely usable or whether he always considered it usable by all sith and always considered Vader special in not being able to use it. Does anybody know anything about that?

Next, there's Vader's bionics being bad quality and his suit being heavy, with the result that he was slowed down in fighting. Was this just invented to help explain why the OT fights were less flashy? Does anybody know if there was any sign of this piece of story before modern times?

Finally, there's Vader being crippled in force power by his bionic state, leading to him falling far short of his potential. Any sign of this piece of story appearing before modern times?

Author
Time

Can't say I've ever given any of that any thought, ever.

The OT lightsabre duels seem more about mind-play than showing off acrobatics, and I never thought they seemed particularly "stiff" until it was mentioned and compared to the action orientated PT duels (which are visually more impressive). To me it was more a battle of minds, like gentlemen fencing physically but more importantly verbally.

I've never really understood the relationship between Tarkin and Vader. Why is Tarkin able to command Vader and disrespect the force and belittle as a religion he obviously has no belief in? Compared to the Moff of the second death star in ROTJ who nervously receives Vader. 

Author
Time

Really?  In 1977 I thought, "Well the lightsabre is fine and all... BUT WHERE'S THE TWIRLING!!??!?!??"

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

miker71 said:

I've never really understood the relationship between Tarkin and Vader. Why is Tarkin able to command Vader and disrespect the force and belittle as a religion he obviously has no belief in? Compared to the Moff of the second death star in ROTJ who nervously receives Vader. 

This bugs me a lot.  Mainly because it's something that could have been very easily explained in the prequels, but guess what?  IT WASN'T, in favor of overexplaining a lot of things that didn't need to be explained.  Tarkin was in, what, a single, 3-second long shot in the PT?  HUGE wasted opportunity there.

Author
Time

The reason he was in such a short cameo was because, what with Peter Cushing being dead and all, he was completely CG, which would have looked weird having him make more of an appearance than he did. Sure, they could have got another actor to play his role, but you have to admit, the man had a very distinguished face that would not have easily been substituted.

Ultimately, the whole Tarkan issue is another problem that was created thanks to the amazing changing story line of the Star Wars Saga. Originally Vader role in the grand picture of the Galactic Empire was quite different from where it wound up. Yeah, the prequels absolutely could have and probably should have retconned a reason for the second most powerful man in the galaxy being ordered around and talked down to by someone the same rank as the guys Vader uses as whipping boys in later films.

But after seeing the Phantom Menace, did you really think there was even the slightest chance this would have been explained? The prequels followed a strict rule of explaining crap that didn't need explained and not even coming close to approaching things that people have been curious about for nearly 30 years. Remember 3PO's mismatched leg? That is one me and my friends always talked and wondered about when we were kids, not sure why it fascinated us so much, but we knew there had to be some story behind his silver leg. Before 1999, I was pretty sure this would be explained in the PT, after 1999 I was pretty sure it wouldn't be touched on at all. PT did a brilliant job of showing us all sorts of crap we really didn't want to see, and not showing us anything we really did want to see.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

Actually, it was an actual body double for Tarkin in Sith, not CG.

As for the others, yeah, it's crap.  When watching the trilogy, I always considered Yoda and Palpatine avatars of their own sides of the force.  They weren't knights like Luke, Ben, and Vader.  Palpatine and Yoda used their minds, and the force lightning was a trait that showed that Palpatine was a bigger badass than anyone seen thus far.  So, no, I never thought about Vader having or not having the capacity to lightning fry someone.  But then the prequels came along and gave both Yoda and Palpatine lightsabers, so... yeah....  But to answer your question more directly, I never even heard before that there was a reason why Vader couldn't use lightning or that it had even come up.  But I guess it is a question that would come up with Dooku having used it.  Since Vader was supposed to be better than Dooku, it suddenly becomes relevant.  I'm sure it was just made up to explain the continuity flaw.

Next... the lightsaber fights.  Not only do I find the whole "old men vs. robots" argument to be utter rubbish and ridiculous-sounding... it exists to justify the fights in the prequels, but it is contradicted by the fights in the prequels, as we have old men (Dooku) and robots (Grievous) fighting in the prequel style.  That should be evidence enough to dispel the thought that that idea was actually in George's mind while filming the originals.

As for Vader's physical state, again, I never thought of it before George made that claim.  And if it's true, then it greatly diminishes what Vader is supposed to be.  Even in the first film, where he's just the "dragon" rather than an overarching villain he is still shown to be an incredible and fearsome warrior not to mention a formidable pilot.  He's menacing and powerful.  While in ROTJ, it's an ironic shock that underneath is a broken old man, if he were to be physically broken-down and pathetic, then he wouldn't be Darth Vader.  Furthermore, it always confused me in terms of the prequels.  The whole time Palpatine is trying to upgrade his apprentices with Anakin being the ultimate in that.  If Vader is so horribly debilitated in his suit and his midichlorian count so diminished with his missing limbs, then you'd think Palpatine would just dump him as a "necessary loss" and grab up the next best force-user he could manipulate.  Obviously Vader has to have a lot going for him.

And, finally, as for Tarkin and Vader, that's simply explained.  In the context of the first movie, the Sith were a warrior tribe who allied themselves with the Empire.  The Empire itself was not ruled by a Sith.  The Emperor was a politician, and Vader, a Sith, was working for the Empire.  The Empire obviously respected (to a certain degree) the powers of the Sith, but, again, Vader was considered a "dragon."  The true Empire was built on military strength, not the force.  Obviously that gets a bit more difficult to swallow when the Emperor is retconned to be a Sith.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time

Gaffer Tape said:

And, finally, as for Tarkin and Vader, that's simply explained.  In the context of the first movie, the Sith were a warrior tribe who allied themselves with the Empire.  The Empire itself was not ruled by a Sith.  The Emperor was a politician, and Vader, a Sith, was working for the Empire.  The Empire obviously respected (to a certain degree) the powers of the Sith, but, again, Vader was considered a "dragon."  The true Empire was built on military strength, not the force.  Obviously that gets a bit more difficult to swallow when the Emperor is retconned to be a Sith.

 Good points, but you could only know any of that if you read the Annotated Screenplays.

In the context of what's actually on the screen, I always assumed a much simpler explanation.

In Star Wars, Tarkin was the boss, Vader was some kind of an enforcer, apparently specifically tasked with getting the rebellion. After Tarkin went boom, Vader got promoted (hence his awesome new ship and no one to tell him to stop with all the choking).

Author
Time

Gaffer Tape said:

But then the prequels came along and gave both Yoda and Palpatine lightsabers, so... yeah.... 

 Some of you are aware of my continued quest to shield my kids from the Prequels.  So it probably doesn't surprise you that we have a Galactic Heroes Yoda floating around the house that has had its lightsabre dremel'd off.

But I agree with you Gaff, (it's so great having a female Star Wars fan that shares my innermost thoughts on the subject (PM sent!)) I was shocked and dismayed to see Yoda and the Emperor with lightsabres.  It seems that they were certainly above or beyond this in the OT.  I thought it was kind of amusing that the Force Unleashed took it upon itself to show Palpatine losing his sabre before you fight him.  They seemed to want an OT style fight between you and the Emperor, but they felt they had to explain why he wasn't using a lightsabre.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

Gaffer Tape said:

But then the prequels came along and gave both Yoda and Palpatine lightsabers, so... yeah.... 

 Some of you are aware of my continued quest to shield my kids from the Prequels.  So it probably doesn't surprise you that we have a Galactic Heroes Yoda floating around the house that has had its lightsabre dremel'd off.

 That shows dedication. I've been thinking of letting my kid watch the OT and the Clone Wars cartoon, as that show seems to keep more in line with how

Maybe later in life he'll want to watch the PT, and I'll watch it with him if he'd like, but like drinking voting and religion, it's somethign that shouldn't be forced onto a developing mind.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Me said : ...other people were tested in better makeup, here is Christopher Eccleston (yes, that Christopher Eccleston):

Eccelston Tarkin

Uncanny as that looks (and why they didn't go with it is beyond me) they could have saved the effort by casting the greatest Doctor Who we've never had, Bill Nighy.

Not only would he not need the make-up, I'm sure he could do the voice as well.

The current Doctor is starting to look rather Cushingish.

Lets do the PT again but do it right this time aye?

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

Gaffer Tape said:

But then the prequels came along and gave both Yoda and Palpatine lightsabers, so... yeah.... 

 Some of you are aware of my continued quest to shield my kids from the Prequels.  So it probably doesn't surprise you that we have a Galactic Heroes Yoda floating around the house that has had its lightsabre dremel'd off.

But I agree with you Gaff, (it's so great having a female Star Wars fan that shares my innermost thoughts on the subject (PM sent!)) I was shocked and dismayed to see Yoda and the Emperor with lightsabres.  It seems that they were certainly above or beyond this in the OT.  I thought it was kind of amusing that the Force Unleashed took it upon itself to show Palpatine losing his sabre before you fight him.  They seemed to want an OT style fight between you and the Emperor, but they felt they had to explain why he wasn't using a lightsabre.

LOL, Gaffer needs a new avatar.  Unless he likes this attention.  You should check out his video reviews.

Star Wars Revisited Wordpress

Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

But I agree with you Gaff, (it's so great having a female Star Wars fan that shares my innermost thoughts on the subject (PM sent!))

 I'm beginning to think I should start prefacing all my posts with "Tee-hee" or something similar from now on...

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

 Some of you are aware of my continued quest to shield my kids from the Prequels.  So it probably doesn't surprise you that we have a Galactic Heroes Yoda floating around the house that has had its lightsabre dremel'd off.

 

Xhonzi, I applaud you! You are a very good man.

 

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

Ditto to what C3PX said.

Also, Mr. Gaff, might I suggest an avatar of Son Goku or something?

A Goon in a Gaggle of 'em

Author
Time
Tarkin was all CG for his brief cameo in "9". ;)
Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

Tarkin was Wayne Pygram in a halloween mask : 

Pygram Tarkin

other people were tested in better makeup, here is Christopher Eccleston (yes, that Christopher Eccleston):

Eccelston Tarkin

Uncanny as that looks (and why they didn't go with it is beyond me) they could have saved the effort by casting the greatest Doctor Who we've never had, Bill Nighy.

Not only would he not need the make-up, I'm sure he could do the voice as well.

 

Christopher Eccleston is definitely better there but i still have a problem with both of them looking nearly as gaunt and old as Tarkin is in ANH except only with brown hair. 20 years span between ROTS and ANH i mean come on...

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Yeah, they should have been aiming for a younger version of Peter Cushing, not Peter Cushing from ANH.

 

 

I had no idea it was a guy in makeup. Something just looked really off about Tarkin's appearance in ROTS, and I chalked it up to typical bad CG, when in reality it is was bad makeup job.

Though I must say, I am impressed with that second photo, though I'd have a hard time believing it would work in motion, but as a still image it looks great. So ultimately, not that it matters with how awful the movie was in general, it is probably still a good idea they limited his appearance to that brief distance shot.

I wonder if his family got money for his likeness being used in the film?

 

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time

C3PX said:

...I chalked it up to typical bad CG, when in reality it is was bad makeup job.

I personally don't have any problem with Tarkin's appearance in RotS.  I felt like they successfully managed to portray him as younger, and even more built.

Yeah, that portrait shot of Wayne Pygram in his Tarkin make-up is pretty messy, but in RotS, since he's only in a wide shot, all I see is a Tarkin that's 20 years younger with broad shoulders and a chiseled jaw.

-Rhikter

www.facebook.com/rhikter

Author
Time

Putting Tarkin in ROTS was dumb. It was more of this thing of makng the end of ROTS match up perfectly with ANH, as if nothing changed in 20 years. Another version of the small universe problem.

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Tarkin was all CG for his brief cameo in "9". ;)

 What's 9?

Author
Time

bkev said:

Ditto to what C3PX said.

Also, Mr. Gaff, might I suggest an avatar of Son Goku or something?

 In many places on the net, a poster is generally the opposite gender from whatever gender their avatar is. I notice nobody giving Davnes this trouble.

Author
Time

Vaderisnothayden said:

SilverWook said:

Tarkin was all CG for his brief cameo in "9". ;)

 What's 9?

 It's a CGI animated post apocalyptic movie currently in theaters. The "dictator" who appears in a newsreel flashback looks a lot like Cushing in his Star Wars costume. I'd be amazed if the resemblance wasn't intentional.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Vaderisnothayden said:

SilverWook said:

Tarkin was all CG for his brief cameo in "9". ;)

 What's 9?

That's the '10' prequel, isn't it? ;)

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time

Vaderisnothayden said:

Putting Tarkin in ROTS was dumb.

I never viewed it as dumb nor smart. It's more along the lines of an Easter egg, like the ETs in TPM or the X-Wing and TIEs in AotC.  Sure, it doesn't really add anything to the overall quality of the film, but it doesn't detract either.  It's just an appreciative nod to what's come before.

-Rhikter

www.facebook.com/rhikter

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It most definitely does detract. It increases the ridiculous end of ROTS = start of ANH factor, making the universe yet smaller. So nothing changes in 20 years. Tarkin goes with the Death Star, which should never have been in the prequels.

Nor is Tarkin's appearance merely an easter egg like those things you mentioned, because it's an awful lot more conspicuous and part of the central story.