Board 8 > Rate the Character Day 3: Darth Vader

(+) Yeah! (+)

LeonhartFour posted...

Sith trying to kill each other is a known thing. This is not new information to Vader. He wanted to recruit Luke to kill Palpatine, too.

and again Vader would've had to know that trying to kill Palpatine in the middle of force lightning would kill him too so again if his goal is just not to die he did a poor job

There's a difference between knowing that Palpatine will get rid of you eventually and knowing that Palpatine has decided that "eventually" is "a minute ago". That difference is magnified when you are badly wounded and he isn't, and magnified even more when he is distracted. Given his condition Vader will literally never have a better chance of killing Palpatine than that moment, and praying he can survive doing it is his best hope of living. Like you can dispute the whole self-preservation over family concern thing but I really don't think there's an argument that Vader has reason to believe he'll survive if Palpatine wins. There's certainly less supporting that than "Vader knows how force lightning will interact with his interruption of it"
---

But again, he's killing the guy he wanted to kill you as we speak, and he has to find another guy to take your place in a world where Jedi practically don't exist anymore, so it'll take a while. Best chance of living longer is just letting Luke die. Palpatine doesn't want to just kill Vader for the heck of it. He'd only do it to replace him with another apprentice.

I don't think those camera shots of Vader looking back and forth between Luke and Palpatine are just him measuring up his odds of survival. That makes zero sense in terms of drama and cinematic presentation. I don't know why you're arguing about "supporting evidence" when you really don't have any based on anything that actually happens in the movies. Is Vader just faking repentance as he dies to fool Luke into thinking he killed Palpatine to save him? I guess he faked it well enough to fool the Force, too...!

Also, Vader is mostly machinery at this point, so messing with lightning is bad news.
---

LeonhartFour posted...

But again, he's killing the guy he wanted to kill you as we speak, and he has to find another guy to take your place in a world where Jedi practically don't exist anymore, so it'll take a while. Best chance of living longer is just letting Luke die. Palpatine doesn't want to just kill Vader for the heck of it. He'd only do it to replace him with another apprentice.

What use does Vader have at that point? Palpatine doesn't benefit from keeping a mangled apprentice who knows his days are numbered around. Their back stabbing contest has pretty much come to its resolution one way or another, because there's no way Vader just goes back to serving the guy after what happened, and Palpatine knows it, and Vader knows he knows it.

LeonhartFour posted...

I don't think those camera shots of Vader looking back and forth between Luke and Palpatine are just him measuring up his odds of survival. That makes zero sense in terms of drama and cinematic presentation. I don't know why you're arguing about "supporting evidence" when you really don't have any based on anything that actually happens in the movies. Is Vader just faking repentance as he dies to fool Luke into thinking he killed Palpatine to save him? I guess he faked it well enough to fool the Force, too...!

I'm not sure how many times I have to re-iterate that I know what the intended story was before it actually registers with anyone. Have you seriously never heard of someone thinking that a fictional story was written in a way that didn't do a good job of conveying what it was trying to?

I'm arguing about supporting evidence for a specific statement and directly pointing out that the self-preservation thing isn't something I'm claiming is a built in part of the story. Of the following two claims

1. Darth Vader knows that Palpatine has picked this to be the moment where he dies, and thus has every reason to know he's doomed if Palpatine wins since he (Vader) can no longer be seen as a useful follower

2. Darth Vader knows how how magic lightning will work in a scenario he's never seen before, including that when interrupting the focus of a force lightning user it doesn't disrupt the lightning but rather re-directs it to the interrupter

I believe 1 has more supporting it than 2. 1 makes sense based on what we know of the characters (Palpatine disposes of apprentices this way, knows Anakin will betray him if given the chance and keeps him alive because he's useful, Anakin know all of this and is clearly not in a position to be useful), 2 is hit and miss (lightning being bad for Vader's suit adds up, but using the force requires concentration so a surprise interruption seems liable to turn the power off). I don't think the scene as intended even requires Vader to be sure that he'll die, he just needs to know he's doing something risky and not care about the risk to himself.
---

9
---

Panthera posted...

Have you seriously never heard of someone thinking that a fictional story was written in a way that didn't do a good job of conveying what it was trying to?

I've seen you post on the FFVIII boards, man. I've seen it.

You're just not doing a good job arguing it here.
---

LeonhartFour posted...

Panthera posted...

Have you seriously never heard of someone thinking that a fictional story was written in a way that didn't do a good job of conveying what it was trying to?

I've seen you post on the FFVIII boards, man. I've seen it.

You're just not doing a good job arguing it here.

So what specifically makes Darth Vader seem like a sympathetic character who has genuine compassion for his children to you? Or if that's not your view of him, then what is and why? What specifically makes you not think the whole accessory to blowing up planets/kindergarten massacre/force choking his wife/etc business doesn't make simply killing an even bigger bastard than him qualify as redemption?
---

I mean, I don't think of him as sympathetic, but the deathbed repentance angle doesn't bother me clearly as much as it does you. I don't even really think of that at all when I think about Vader. Being able to turn Vader back to the light side at the very end, even for a moment, gives me a heck of a lot more respect for Luke than it does Vader. I was glad he got to prove Obi-Wan wrong for lying to him and being a jerk about the whole Vader/Anakin thing.
---

Panthera posted...

Dude my entire problem is literally that that light/dark mindset thing not accounting for actions is idiotic and makes Vader's character really lame to me because he's the symbol of how much I hate it, because in my mind a guy who has done so many evil things cannot be taken seriously as a candidate for redemption. I know what the intended story is, I just think it sucks and doesn't add up because the way the character is presented reads as "evil jackass who only does things for his own benefit" to me regardless of how much Lucas wants it to seem otherwise. Like have you really never heard of someone criticizing a story by saying it didn't come across as intended

I don't have a problem with criticizing the story. What you're doing here is more taking Vader as your personal platform to vent issues with the philosophy of the Force rather than anything Vader in particular did wrong.

It'd be like me giving Qui Gon Jinn a 1/10 because he was the first character to mention midichlorians.
---

Hmm... tough call.

If I go by epIV-VI (I'll even toss in the end of Rogue One here) or by just the concept of Vader, I'd give him a 10. But if I were to include his time as Anakin... I'll be generous and say 8. Again, mostly because of the concept -- the prequels just did a poor job of detailing Vader's rise and corruption, and I think others have gone into that detail well enough.

On a tangential note, thinking of Rogue One again really makes me want to see Vader riding a TRex into battle.
---

8 out of 10
---

This is the first one I've felt like rating because it's interesting to me. If we're taking Anakin Skywalker alone I feel like he deserves a 10. Leaving Hayden Christiansen aside I feel like Anakin is a very compelling and well developed character with flaws that aren't totally incomprehensible making him relatable. Darth Vader alone I feel quite the opposite. If we're only rating the entity that Anakin became then that would merit an 8 for me. While he's a very intimidating force and, let's face it an awesomely designed character, he's completely unrelateble in terms of characterization. I feel his development right before he meets his end is rushed and not very fitting to what his character had become by that point and I honestly would have preferred if he stuck to his guns and went out like a villain instead of an antihero or whatever he went out like.

Taking both together of course averages out to a 9, so take this vote as you will.
---

Also for the record I tend to agree with Leonhart on what impact Vader's redemption has on his character to me. I just doesn't really matter to me and I can't honestly say Vader becomes a terribly sympathetic character at the end.

It does come off as consistent and believable which is all I really ask. Whether ' he's light side now guyz' should be the result of what he does is another thing but having an issue or not with that does not indicate any particular issue with Vader either way
---

Lopen posted...

I don't have a problem with criticizing the story. What you're doing here is more taking Vader as your personal platform to vent issues with the philosophy of the Force rather than anything Vader in particular did wrong.

It'd be like me giving Qui Gon Jinn a 1/10 because he was the first character to mention midichlorians.

The problem is that Qui Gon mentioning midichlorians isn't a huge part of his character. Vader's role in reflecting the philosophy of the Force on redemption is his entire character arc and the culmination of 3 or 6 movies worth of build up for one of our main villains (and certainly the one we have the most personal investment in). I can ignore a dumb scene a lot more easily when it isn't the climax of the story. Vader's character is how the philosophy in question is expressed to us, I think that makes it fair game to take it into full account when judging how much I like him.
---

Oh, if you want to take it into account when you judge Vader, feel free to do so. Nobody's saying you can't.

I just can't work up the same passion about it.
---

Yeah that's fine.

That's a much better way of expressing your distaste for him than ' Vader could have been helping Luke out of self interest ' which just feels like really bad reaching to try and convince people of something that isn't really there.

I don't have any particular issue with thinking a particular aspect of the Force philosophy is super stupid and disliking Vader disproportionately because of that. But then say that.
---

Lopen posted...

That's a much better way of expressing your distaste for him than ' Vader could have been helping Luke out of self interest ' which just feels like really bad reaching to try and convince people of something that isn't really there.

I'm not saying I think that was the intent or anything bro <_<

I thought this kind of thing was a lot more common than it apparently is. I've seen this style of criticism - pointing out that the thing you dislike is flawed because it looks like something other than what it was supposed to be - a lot. My point is essentially that with what we're shown of Vader's character, I would believe self-interest a lot more readily than love, so the fact that love is the real explanation makes the scene not work for me
---

Eh, I don't think Vader acting out of self-interest actually improves that scene in any notable way. That's why the argument feels weak.
---

That style of criticism only works if it actually looks like what you're claiming it does.

No one on earth thinks Vader's redemption looks like that. Literally no one. Like there are two possible things here to take issue with.

1. Vader having a change of heart shouldn't undo all the bad stuff he's done, and the movie supports that narrative. I hate Vader because he supports that theme.
2. Vader can't possibly have a change of heart because he's done so much bad. It's forced and unrealistic. I hate Vader because it would never happen.

I accept 1. You heavily imply 2 when you make that dumb statement which I do not accept, because it wasn't some sudden out of nowhere thing there that Vader's characterization didn't support as a possibility, nor did the situation imply that was the reason in any way.
---

LeonhartFour posted...

Eh, I don't think Vader acting out of self-interest actually improves that scene in any notable way. That's why the argument feels weak.

It has nothing to do with improving the scene.
---

Okay, fine.

I don't buy it as a more plausible explanation either.
---

Lopen - you're mistaking "it isn't demonstrated well enough to be plausible" for "it is entirely out of nowhere". I know that the movies try to build up to that moment; I have a hard time buying into a change of heart for a guy like Vader without a lot more (as in, I don't think three movies have enough time, total, to display this kind of change without it feeling forced to me).
---

Darth Vader is dick. He was born a dick, he grew up a dick, and when the going got tough, he courageously remained a dick who emotionally manipulated Matilda while changing his voice to Mufasa's.
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Darth Vader is dick.

Truly the most penetrating insight of all
---

Okay

We go back to you doing what I feel is overjustifying disliking the character or scene, then.

I simply feel that saying it was not built up well enough to be plausible is incorrect. Implausible is just a stronger word than you should be using here, I think. If it was not built up to the point where it was plausible, RotJ would've been panned.

Anakin and Padme's romance. That might be something you could say relating to Vader's character arc that is not plausible. Stuff like this? Just too strong a word.
---

Is any Anakin prequel dialogue plausible? Focus in on Episode II specifically.
---

Probably not.

God I hate Episode II
---

Lopen posted...

I simply feel that saying it was not built up well enough to be plausible is incorrect. Implausible is just a stronger word than you should be using here, I think. If it was not built up to the point where it was plausible, RotJ would've been panned.

Right, because well received things are beyond reproach, clearly.

What word should I be using? Unbelievable? Incoherent? Absurd? Suggesting that it's hard for me to buy into it isn't exactly the most scathing critique imaginable.
---

Things can be well received in spite of flaws. But if something central to the story has a flaw is as glaring as you're making it out to be, it would not be. It just wouldn't. You're basically making it sound like something out of The Room. Or Episode 2.

"It's hard for me to buy into it" works well for what you're saying in any case. You've already made far too many concessions to your core point for a more forceful way of putting it to really be something you believe.
---

Lopen posted...

"It's hard for me to buy into it" works well for what you're saying in any case. You've already made far too many concessions to your core point for a more forceful way of putting it to really be something you believe.

That's literally what implausible means <_< It is not plausible enough for me to really feel it

I haven't made any concessions, I just had to spend an inordinate amount of time explaining to you what my point was while you called me stupid for thinking Lucas deliberately intended it to be the way I was describing

:)
---

gonna have to go with like 8

iconic as fuck
---

I called you stupid for thinking anyone would think that situation you were describing was a plausible way to interpret the scene, actually.
---

I'm not going to think back to distant times like yesterday just for a guy like you
---

I'm just saying, with a final thought, that I agree with you in the general case that writer's intent doesn't matter. I was never arguing writer's intent to make that clear.

I was arguing what's shown and that it was sufficiently effective at conveying the writer's intent in this instance. Plenty of times in Star Wars, the prequel trilogy in particular, where I can see the writer's intent and it is comically off the mark, but this is not the case in this instance. And it's not because it wasn't panned by the masses, but the fact that it wasn't might be a symptom that you're the one who simply has a fundamental disconnect, for whatever reason (and that's not necessarily a bad thing!), and it's not some sorta objective flaw with the writing.
---

I've definitely heard RotJ criticized before for letting Vader's last minute face turn bring him back to the light side.


I've never heard anyone criticize Vader's face turn itself as some inherently unbelievable thing.
---

10 out of 10
---

my Donkey Kong rating of 1 out of 10 was missed
---

I'd rate Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader as two separate characters, personally (after all, "Darth Vader" was the name he was given by the Sith lords, and you can see how drastically different was Anakin compared to Vader [I still really liked Anakin in Episode 3 where you could see his transition to a fully evil leader, but that's another story]).

That being said, 8.5/10. (Kind of ruined by his face reveal in Episode 6, but completely redeemed by his astonishing performance in Rogue One.)
---

Please post this in the current day; this no longer counts.
---