Rogue One - Why was Vader seem so much more impressive than Prequel-era fighters?

[Zontar]

As far I'm concerned, Knights of the Old Republic is a fan story. It's too ridiculous to be true.

You know the only reason one can't say the same for TFA stems from the fact that 1) it's not well written enough to be compared to the Old Republic games, and 2) it's too much of an unabashed ripoff of ANH for a fan to have ever conceived of it.

 

[RJ 17]

And yet, here was Vader, fighting in a manner that was far more restrained and basic than those of the Prequel-era, yet he, for whatever reason, seemed to come across as not only more intimidating, but also like an overall better fighter than those who came before. This is what struck me as odd because those who fought and duelled in the Prequels were clearly made to appear as though they had skill that far outmatched those of the OT, and in a lot of ways, they did. But even so, there was just something about the more simple way Vader fought in Rogue One that just seemed to overshadow those more choreographed fights.

I'm sure some of the things below have been mentioned, but I'm too tired to read through all the responses thus far. So apologies if these things have already been brought up.

Reasons why "The Hallway Scene" shows off what a badass Vader is/why it was a scene that so many people say was one of the best parts of Rogue One.

Quite simply: it shows off why Vader is considered an absolute terror to the common rank'n'file of the Rebellion.

Just as a quick aside, the atmosphere of the scene is perfect. A bunch of rebel soldiers fleeing for their lives in a corridor that has lost power. Then they all hear that iconic breath. They turn to the darkness of the end of the corridor...only to see it suddenly lit up in a dim, red glow as Vader ignites his crimson lightsaber. The darkness still surrounds him, but that dim red light makes him all the more menacing.

From there we see what a badass he is, the kind of badass that was hyped up in the original trilogy. What follows is an absolute slaughter. Despite the fact that there's only one target being focus-fired on in a tight space by numerous blasters, he doesn't take a scratch. He massacres them all with the greatest of ease, proving that to normal people he is truly untouchable.

One of the reasons this is such a great display is because he pretty much uses his entire "kit". In his Vader body, he's not as agile as he was when he was in his fully human form, so he can't really do all the ninja flips and what-not. But he shows off his deflection capabilities with a few twirls of his lightsaber, he shows of his "fuck you I'm Darth Fuckin' Vader, Son!" ability by stopping a couple blasts just by sticking up his hand (as seen when Han first sees him in Cloud City and tries to blast him). He flings people around with the Force and even employs Force Choke. In the original trilogy, people talk about Vader like he's this unstoppable juggernaut of death, but we never really get to see it. This is the first time we've gotten to see Vader just wipe out a group of cannon fodder to earn that badass reputation.

The reason he accomplishes this without all the ninja flips and what-not from the prequel is because he really doesn't need those things anymore. I don't care what anyone says, I think the Vader vs Obi fight at the end of Revenge of the Sith is one of the best fights in the franchise (yes, I've seen the gif that shows that they were literally swinging at air...still, I really enjoy that fight in the context of the actual movie). But post Episode III, there aren't any Jedi left that are as skilled as Obi in his prime. That is, there aren't any Jedi capable of the ninja flips/etc that we saw in the prequels which were filled with youthful and athletic Jedi. As such, Vader no longer needs such agile movements to wipe out a squad of common soldiers.

But yeah, in the end, the reason that scene works so well is mostly because of the first two reasons I mentioned.
1: The atmosphere of the scene strongly supports his presence as The Big Bad of the franchise.
2: This is the first time we get to see him unleash his full kit of power against common rank'n'file Rebellion soldiers, fully proving why he is considered an absolute terror amongst them.

 

[Tanis]

Because prequel movies he was a kid.
A spoiled brat because of his 'status as the chosen one'.

Rouge One he was an old man who had been though hell, matured, and was at that point...basically pure.
No conflict on if he was Jedi or Sith.

When one is pure, even if it's evil, their actions can be FAR...far more impressive due to that focus.

 

[Kyrian007]

Mostly because Vader felt more like a Star Wars villain than a Star Wars prequel villain. Or hero. Meaning that he's just more impressive. Like everything was than the prequel series... including lightsaber duels. The prequel lightsaber fighting looked neat, sure... but did it complement the movie? No it did not. They flipped and they spun and they jumped and it was all really pretty... and utterly stupid. There's a 4 or 5 second bit in the Obi-Ani fight in ep 3 where they are waving and spinning their lightsabers (again for 4 or 5 whole seconds) and obviously are doing so outside of each other's range because they make contact with absolutely NOTHING. 99% of the movement in the prequel lightsaber fights is absolutely wasted movement with no purpose than "we have to make it at least look cool."

Vader on the other hand in Rogue One... wasted very little movement. With almost everything focused upon either advancing or killing. Not twirling his lightsaber like a rhythmic gymnast. Its an action sequence that compliments the movie very well by comparison.

My personal theory is this. The technology of the time made it easier to animate the lightsabers in a more grand, sweeping, broadsword stagefighting style in the original movies. But that kind of slower, more deliberate movement actually makes sense even though by its nature a lightsaber would be nearly weightless. Because they actually weigh more than a broadsword. And that weight is responsibility. A blade that instantly cuts through anything, has to be wielded with the utmost care and absolute precision to avoid killing or injuring bystanders or even yourself. Even Sith have to avoid damaging the terrain to their detriment (cutting the floor out from under themselves) or lopping their own arms or head off. The wirefu flipping bugouts of the prequels totally undercut that visual theme. I was really glad to see the classic style return in ep 7.

 

[EbonBehelit]

The scientific explanation where it didn't belong... namely in a space opera... right.
You know, I don't see people complaining about genetics and all that jazz being constantly mentioned in The Witcher and stuff, but people can't stop complaining about how having a pseudo-scientific explanation for something in Star Wars "ruined it", as if the Force being absolutely unexplained was the only thing that ever mattered in the damn story.
Woulda been a fair point... if the simple matter of being or not being "strong in the Force" and thus the very same power level didn't already exist in the originals.

Scientifically explaining everything is fine in a work of science fiction.... except the Original Trilogy was much closer to fantasy than sci-fi. The Force is a combination of magic and faith - both of which only work effectively when not explained in detail.

Anakin: a hero who manages to destroy a droid mothership at the age of eight, overpowered and killed a Sith lord whose combat experience is nothing to be laughed at and whose fear of loss became his downfall. And yeah, since Padme DID die through childbirth...

He destroyed the mothership in TPM because Lucas wanted a throwback to what Obi-Wan said in ANH - 'he was the greatest starfighter pilot in the galaxy'. I mean, c'mon, the kid barely knew what the fuck was even happening, and somehow destroyed the mothership accidentally. Y'know, like Jar Jar would've done.

Beating Dooku says nothing of Anakin's character. Killing him on the spot does, though.

Padme only died due to her grief at losing Anakin. Which is still ridiculous.

Blinding everyone with his Dark Side abilities was all but stated outright as one of Palpatine's powers.

When? Everyone?

I know Yoda and Windu converse about their minds being clouded, but the idea that practically the entire galaxy has been rendered blind/stupid by Palpatine is far too much to swallow. Why even bother writing the Senate into the film at all? The film would've panned out the same way even without it.

That's... some interesting logic on display. 'cause it seems to me that in the end of the day, size matters not, as long as you work on compensating for your disadvantages. His size and him "compensating" didn't make him any less of a fearsome duelist.

What Yoda was getting at in TESB was that the Force completely transcended the physical. The problem with the prequels is that every single Jedi/Sith uses a lightsaber in combat, even when their physical structure would give them a serious handicap when swordfighting. Handicaps which have to be compensated for. Which means that the physical does matter after all.

The beef I have is that Lucas was basically coming up with excuses to bring out the lightsabers. Ancient masters like Yoda should be so powerful in the force that they basically transcend even needing a melee weapon. Palpatine in RoTJ portrayed this well: he looked at Luke's lightsaber as a novice's tool that he himself had long since outgrown.

I'm probably going to get a groan from you for saying this, but I get the impression that you either haven't seen the Plinkett 'reviews' or disdain them. Not that I needed to have seen them to rip the prequels to shreds, but they are kinda useful in picking out the more pedantic inconsistencies.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

He seems significantly more terrifying because he's killing human rebel fighters and not easily defeated robots or clones with masks that effectively make them robots. Even when Anakin went full dark side, he slaughtered the children off-screen and only murdered the Separatist leaders in wide angle shots featuring alien victims who we had no empathy for.

Rogue One had close ups of people clearly shitting themselves with fear, who are defenseless and mercilessly mowed down as Vader makes his way to his objective. He's just as unstoppable as he was in that Mustafar scene but the closed hallway nature of the fight and the empathy we have for his victims makes all the difference.

 

[Laughing Man]

When? Everyone?

I know Yoda and Windu converse about their minds being clouded, but the idea that practically the entire galaxy has been rendered blind/stupid by Palpatine is far too much to swallow. Why even bother writing the Senate into the film at all? The film would've panned out the same way even without it.

No the stupidest part of the entire prequel set up was the continued use by the Jedi's 'bringing balance to the force'. Now correct me if I am wrong but a balance of something means equal weighting on both sides, in this case the force having a dark and light side, if the Universe has hundreds of Jedis, (the light side) then surely the only way to bring balance to the force would be to either bring in a whole bunch of Sith Lords to make up the difference or kill off a huge number of the Jedi and well that's kinda what happened, leaving essentially Obi wan and Yoda on the good side and Vader and Palpatine on the other, i.e balanced.

Your talking about a Universe that has a group of light saber handling, mind reading, object manipulating space wizards who are the go to guys when the shit hits the fan but they are so dumb they don't understand what 'balance' means?

 

[Zontar]

Legitimately surprised no one posted the scene in question yet.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Rogue One had close ups of people clearly shitting themselves with fear, who are defenseless and mercilessly mowed down as Vader makes his way to his objective. He's just as unstoppable as he was in that Mustafar scene but the closed hallway nature of the fight and the empathy we have for his victims makes all the difference.

This basically. That fight, unlike so many in the prequels, mattered. That doomed hallway of schmucks was trying to buy time for the information that the principal cast had already fought and died for to get away. And, frankly, they only way they could buy that time was having Darth Vader kill them slowly. And I think they knew it.

And Vader did. With extra helpings of brutality.

 

[RealRT]

Scientifically explaining everything is fine in a work of science fiction.... except the Original Trilogy was much closer to fantasy than sci-fi. The Force is a combination of magic and faith - both of which only work effectively when not explained in detail.

Replace "faith" with willpower. Which can work effectively without being explained.

He destroyed the mothership in TPM because Lucas wanted a throwback to what Obi-Wan said in ANH - 'he was the greatest starfighter pilot in the galaxy'. I mean, c'mon, the kid barely knew what the fuck was even happening, and somehow destroyed the mothership accidentally. Y'know, like Jar Jar would've done.

Beating Dooku says nothing of Anakin's character. Killing him on the spot does, though.

Padme only died due to her grief at losing Anakin. Which is still ridiculous.

Yeah, well I think the start of RotS was a quite effective display of Anakin's actual prowess as a pilot. Which wasn't anything to sneeze at.

Being quite a formidable duelist counts as a trait. And yeah, I agree, killing him on the spot was a character moment.

I'll give you that one. I'm still having difficulty of wrapping my mind about the concept of any human being thinking this is possible.
(I mean, come on, have her die of throat damage due to being Force choked. Bam! You got your drama and it doesn't look stupid.
That's actually what they did in the novel version)

When? Everyone?

I know Yoda and Windu converse about their minds being clouded, but the idea that practically the entire galaxy has been rendered blind/stupid by Palpatine is far too much to swallow. Why even bother writing the Senate into the film at all? The film would've panned out the same way even without it.

If he managed to cloud the most powerful of the Jedi masters - which Windu and Yoda are - what is a bunch of feeble-minded politicians to him?

What Yoda was getting at in TESB was that the Force completely transcended the physical. The problem with the prequels is that every single Jedi/Sith uses a lightsaber in combat, even when their physical structure would give them a serious handicap when swordfighting. Handicaps which have to be compensated for. Which means that the physical does matter after all.

The beef I have is that Lucas was basically coming up with excuses to bring out the lightsabers. Ancient masters like Yoda should be so powerful in the force that they basically transcend even needing a melee weapon. Palpatine in RoTJ portrayed this well: he looked at Luke's lightsaber as a novice's tool that he himself had long since outgrown.

Well, blame pop culture for turning lightsabers into such an icon that any Star Wars movie without them would look incomplete. That's pretty much Star Wars' signature feature, differentiating it from other sci-fi and space operas.

I'm probably going to get a groan from you for saying this, but I get the impression that you either haven't seen the Plinkett 'reviews' or disdain them. Not that I needed to have seen them to rip the prequels to shreds, but they are kinda useful in picking out the more pedantic inconsistencies.

Yes, you are. Yes I haven't. Yes, I kind of do.
Y'see... I don't want to waste hours of my life on having a nerd tell me that I shouldn't enjoy the silly space fantasy movies I like. I can bring out my nerd glasses (figuratively speaking) and take apart the original trilogy as well, if we're going to go full pedantic. But I don't want to. I'll just turn my brain off and have some dumb fun. The prequels have their flaws (namely, acting; the first time I heard them with the original English voices I couldn't believe my ears, they were bleeding so damn hard; it was also the last time I watched them undubbed). But the combat scenes are engaging, the effects are good, the fight scenes are well done and lightsaber duels are just awesome in more ways than one, from elaborate choreography to the way they are filmed (unlike most modern action movies, you can clearly see what the flying dutchman is going on). And the groan you're getting from me is well-deserved, because everyone and their dog and their dog's fleas go to "watch Mr. Plinkett's reviews" argument.

 

[happyninja42]

Yes, you are. Yes I haven't. Yes, I kind of do.
Y'see... I don't want to waste hours of my life on having a nerd tell me that I shouldn't enjoy the silly space fantasy movies I like. I can bring out my nerd glasses (figuratively speaking) and take apart the original trilogy as well, if we're going to go full pedantic. But I don't want to. I'll just turn my brain off and have some dumb fun. The prequels have their flaws (namely, acting; the first time I heard them with the original English voices I couldn't believe my ears, they were bleeding so damn hard; it was also the last time I watched them undubbed). But the combat scenes are engaging, the effects are good, the fight scenes are well done and lightsaber duels are just awesome in more ways than one, from elaborate choreography to the way they are filmed (unlike most modern action movies, you can clearly see what the flying dutchman is going on). And the groan you're getting from me is well-deserved, because everyone and their dog and their dog's fleas go to "watch Mr. Plinkett's reviews" argument.

I think the thing about the Plinkett reviews is simply that they break down, in a cinematic structure way, the flaws in the movie. It says nothing about whether you enjoyed the movies or not, it just analyses how the story was told, what story was being told, the common methods in storytelling to convey that information to the audience in a way that is entertaining and engaging, etc etc, and how the prequels didn't do this very well. He does point out in some of the episodes that it does get some things right now and then, but enjoying a movie, and acknowledging it to be a bad film from a critical standpoint, aren't mutually exclusive.

I personally don't have a lot of hate for the prequels. I remember being annoyed and angry at times, when I saw them in the theater, but it wasn't like some frothing nerd rage that had me tearing up all my toys or anything, because it "ruined my childhood". And as time has gone by, I've come to be more forgiving of the films, and don't consider them to be too terrible. I put them on par with Rogue One, in that they had a preset ending that we all knew, and had to come up with some story to end up there, and didn't do it very well. But they had their good bits here and there. I've seen far worse films before and since.

But that doesn't mean I can't acknowledge that they are "bad" films, from a technical standpoint.

Of course, a lot of this is opinion, and it's basically pointless to argue opinion, as neither opinion is right or wrong. You seem to think the combat was engaging (I didn't), the saber duels were awesome (I didn't), and several other points that we likely disagree on. That's fine. I seem to be the only person in the world that doesn't have a problem with the "I hate sand" line, but I don't really care what others think, so it's all good.

But I do think that the reviews of Mr. Plinkett are a pretty good, close look at where the movies fell apart, and are worth a look, though I could do without the basement torture skits between review clips, but that's just me.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

I'll give you that one. I'm still having difficulty of wrapping my mind about the concept of any human being thinking this is possible.

Having worked in health care for almost a decade at this point, I feel that the will to live is almost as important as the ability to survive. I've seen way too many people that had lost their reason to live (work, spouse, home, pet etc.) and died of illness that should not have been lethal. My reading of the scene has always been that Padm? dies from the wounds of Anakin's abuse but she does so because she's given up on life, which is why SPACE!medicine couldn't save her.

 

[happyninja42]

I'll give you that one. I'm still having difficulty of wrapping my mind about the concept of any human being thinking this is possible.

Having worked in health care for almost a decade at this point, I feel that the will to live is almost as important as the ability to survive. I've seen way too many people that had lost their reason to live (work, spouse, home, pet etc.) and died of illness that should not have been lethal. My reading of the scene has always been that Padm? dies from the wounds of Anakin's abuse but she does so because she's given up on life, which is why SPACE!medicine couldn't save her.

Which makes no sense to me, as she just gave birth to TWO reasons to live. If it really was just a case of her giving up, it kind of implies that she just didn't care about her children very much, if "living for them" wasn't enough motivation to keep her from dying from a "broken heart". I mean, you say that loved ones dying is a common reason they give up, you'd think giving birth to new loved ones would have the opposite effect. If the usual reaction to motherhood is common, in that they become stupidly affectionate and happy, due to endorphins and seeing their child.

 

[maninahat]

I seem to be the only person who hated that scene. Rogue One reminds me a lot of Episode II, both in the amount of pandering fan-service and bad story telling in it. Everyone went on about how cool it was to finally see a proper fight between Fett and a Jedi, and everyone said it was cool to finally see an army of Jedi fight a battle. It took a year or two for people to realise that, actually, that isn't enough to carry a shitty movie.

So that's my answer to the OP: people think its great because it has Darth Vader fighting in it. To an outsider, it wouldn't be much, but to someone raised on Star Wars mythos, there is a lot of weight put on any scene with Vader in. Every other Star Wars scene that doesn't have Vader fighting in it doesn't get that weight.

 

[happyninja42]

I seem to be the only person who hated that scene. Rogue One reminds me a lot of Episode II, both in the amount of pandering fan-service and bad story telling in it. Everyone went on about how cool it was to finally see a proper fight between Fett and a Jedi, and everyone said it was cool to finally see an army of Jedi fight a battle. It took a year or two for people to realise that, actually, that isn't enough to carry a shitty movie.

So that's my answer to the OP: people think its great because it has Darth Vader fighting in it. To an outsider, it wouldn't be much, but to someone raised on Star Wars mythos, there is a lot of weight put on any scene with Vader in. Every other Star Wars scene that doesn't have Vader fighting in it doesn't get that weight.

Eh, I disagree a bit on the "every scene with Vader has weight" comment. The bit with him and the Death Star administrator, on Mustafar was pretty stupid IMO. It was totally neutered of it's awesomeness with the "be careful not to choke on your aspirations" line. If Vader had just paced back and forth, and then started choking him, without turning back to look at him, and said something like "Be careful not to overstep your position, you are not as important as you hope to be" something like that. Then it would've been ok. But as is, it's terrible. The Vader fight scene is better, I think, because he doesn't say anything. They just show him being the ruthless killer that he is. No stupid quips and terrible puns, just brutality, efficiency, and no mercy.

As to the rest of the movie being shit. Yeah, it was shit. At no point in that movie did I give a crap about any of the characters, or anything happening to them. The only guy that I actually felt empathy for, was that nameless Rebel trooper at the door, desperately trying to get someone to open the door. And then, when he realizes that's not going to happen, desperately trying to get someone to take the plans, knowing he's going to die. THAT guy, got more emotional investment from me, in his 1 minute of screen time, than 2 hours of pouty Jan Erso, The Pilot, The Heavy Weapons Guy, The Blind Kung Fu Guy, and the Comic Relief. I use their archetypes, because I couldn't be bothered to learn their names, and the movie never gave me reason to care either. I only remember Jan, or Jen, or whatever, because it's been said a bajillion times in media, discussing the film.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

It was a very fan-servicey scene in a pretty fan-servicey film that had to work overtime to justify its reason for even existing. So they amped up the "Rule of Cool" to 11, which...when you stop to be honest with yourself...is all Star Wars ever really was to begin with.

It's better than similar scenes in the prequels because the prequels were loathsome garbage that featured staggering ineptitude in virtually every facet of their construction.

It was totally neutered of it's awesomeness with the "be careful not to choke on your aspirations" line.

Oh god yeah, that was terrible. It was a drum sting away from being something off a 3rd tier 90's laugh track comedy.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

Spoilers below.

So, at the end of the latest Star Wars movie, Rogue One, we get a truly memorable moment that has, perhaps gone down as audience's favourite scene of the entire film; Darth Vader, strolling down a hallway while slaughtering every Rebel in his path. It's a gripping and thoroughly enjoyable moment, reminding everybody watching why this guy has gone down as one of the truly great villains of cinema. He says nothing, yet we know just from looking that he's an unstoppable force of destruction, with the good guys unable to do anything to halt his advance.

And yet, as I watched it, I couldn't help but feel something odd. The Prequels, while certainly flawed, nevertheless had spectacular fight scenes and choreography, creating fighters that appeared to be of a calibre that simply could not be matched. The fluidity of their movements, the style of their lightsaber duels, the way they flipped and kicked and jumped, just made the fights of the original trilogy looks like childsplay by comparison.

And yet, here was Vader, fighting in a manner that was far more restrained and basic than those of the Prequel-era, yet he, for whatever reason, seemed to come across as not only more intimidating, but also like an overall better fighter than those who came before. This is what struck me as odd because those who fought and duelled in the Prequels were clearly made to appear as though they had skill that far outmatched those of the OT, and in a lot of ways, they did. But even so, there was just something about the more simple way Vader fought in Rogue One that just seemed to overshadow those more choreographed fights.

Do you agree? Disagree? Or perhaps share some other viewpoint I had not considered?

I know this scene was extremely popular with folks, but to me it came across as an extremely showy, over-the-top piece of superfan service that made absolutely no sense, and here's why: If the original trilogy already established that Vader can choke and kill people without lifting a finger, and we've seen him snatch a blaster out of Han Solo's hand, then...why didn't Vader just use the Force to retrieve the disc from the rebel soldier? And if he does that in Rogue One, then why at the beginning of A New Hope does he just stroll through the hallway AFTER the storm troopers blast their onto Leia's ship and take out the rebel soldiers? It just doesn't seem to fit at all.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

I seem to be the only person who hated that scene. Rogue One reminds me a lot of Episode II, both in the amount of pandering fan-service and bad story telling in it. Everyone went on about how cool it was to finally see a proper fight between Fett and a Jedi, and everyone said it was cool to finally see an army of Jedi fight a battle. It took a year or two for people to realise that, actually, that isn't enough to carry a shitty movie.

So that's my answer to the OP: people think its great because it has Darth Vader fighting in it. To an outsider, it wouldn't be much, but to someone raised on Star Wars mythos, there is a lot of weight put on any scene with Vader in. Every other Star Wars scene that doesn't have Vader fighting in it doesn't get that weight.

I'm with you [see above post]. I actually don't care for Rogue One at all, and the Vader as Jason Vorhees scene pretty much encapsulates why I don't like the movie -- too much reliance on fan service gimmicks and not enough interest in the the new characters and their stories. And I totally agree with your Fett comparison. I don't know if Rogue One is ass bad as that -- after all, there was a legit reason for Vader being around in Rogue One, where as Episode II shoe-horned Fett into the story -- but it's pretty similar.

 

[PrinceOfShapeir]

While it's always possible TFA will turn out to be that really bad one (Rogue One was objectively better after all

Hell no. Rogue One was a mess. TFA had at least one good screenwriter, Lawrence Kasdan. Rogue One was written by two confused incompetents and directed by someone with no knack for flow or characters. It was then further ruined in editing. TFA was at least decent.

If I were Disney, I would have ignored the expanded universe too. Their goal should be to make a good story, not to incorporate the stories that have been written over the decades into a work that's made redundant by the source materials. I know little of the Thrawn trilogy, but I dislike the idea of Leia having twins, as if all Skywalkers have to have twins, and of Luke's story continuing. He had his character arc. His friends too. Let someone else be the hero. Thrawn also seems overpowered, controlling an entire army with the Force.

'

What?

Thrawn isn't Force Sensitive. What the hell are you talking about?