Darth Vader (Empire Strikes Back) VS Anakin Skywalker (Revenge Of The Sith)

I could give you a few good reasons why Darth Vader would destroy Anakin;

#1: By the time of Episode IV, Anakin has fully mastered his new cyborg body, he knows how to fully use his new advantages in combat, and not only has he learned to except the disadvantages, but he has learned not to let his physical weaknesses exploit him in combat, something Anakin never truly learned to do. In his fight with Luke in Episode V, Darth Vader demonstrates his full abilities. He stands back and uses the force to bludgeon Luke half to death with near by objects, and then performs a rage fueled assault on his weakened son, he amputates his son's hand and spares his life.

#2: After his fall on Mustafar, Darth Sidious taught Anakin the ways of the dark side, and Darth Vader is not limited to using just the light side or the dark side of the force, he can use any technique he pleases.

#3: Anakin is not sheathed in durasteel, Darth Vader has shown the ability to bounce back after being hit in the face with a lightsaber.

#4: When becoming a Cyborg Anakin did not lose any of his former super-human reflexes, nor did he lose any of his Jedi senses.

 

Good idea for a thread. I've wondered this many times before myself. On Battlefront II I can take ROTS Anakin with cyborg Vader, heheh. As far as the actual characters from the saga goes, I will vote for ESB Vader. Anakin from ROTS would become overly cocky because he'd think he was fighting just an old, rusty, stiff droid pretty much. ESB Vader had a lot of strategies up his sleeve, though, and would probably take his opponent out pretty quickly. ROTS Anakin was less about strategizing and more about arrogantly going in for the kill, a flaw that would cost him his life if he was ever pitted against his future self.

 

yeah .... but Vader's fight with Kenobi on D. Star does not inspire confidence with me.

The guy was slow, tight, etc.

Throwing stuff and choking people takes some time - a "dialed in" fighter like Maul, Windu, or young Anakin would have given Vader fits.

Or a gifted duelist like Dooku or Yoda would have pushed Vader around I'm afraid.

 

I don't think you can use the Vader Ben duel as proof can you? The film making limits of the day,was filmed before the PT and lightsabres where supposted to be heavy when they did that fight.


Vader should be quick with his sabre like empire and the PT and should still have his quick reflexes and speed from the PT to.The guys a force powered cyborg,he should be pretty deadly.


After the PT theres no reason for Vader and Ben to not be fighting like this,http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqMuMtmPDhk&feature=related

 

We're quite clearly talking about Vader as we see him in ESB as clarified by the thread title and original post, so taking ANH into account is unnecessary. Judging by his techniques in ESB, cyborg Vader is more than capable of taking down ROTS Anakin.

He's far more experienced, a strategist, his reflexes probably augmented by the cybernetics, and the guy can take some major damage and continue fighting; an inhuman endurance.

 

The saber duel in episode 5 is my all time favorite. the duel in phantom menace comes in 2nd for me. (YES, a prequel duel is my 2nd favorite)

Especially the last scene when luke is walking down the hall way and vader comes out of no where swinging wildley. Vader shows there that he sees that luke is someone to be reckoned with and has to take him out or disarm him or risk being killed himself. you can really sense the anger in vader as he chases luke back on the walk away swinging wildly. that entire 2 mins scene is very intense and breath taking.

As far as the new hope duel. it is sad one must keep blaming the prequels for things but the truth is lucas went to a completly different style of saber dueling for the prequels and the truth of why is ebcause once again it came down to him appealing to little kids and bringing in new fans. in 1999 this was the era of power rangers, teen age mutant ninja turtles etc..etc lucas went with the kung fu/ninja film sword duel style which you see in any kung fu or ninja film. watch a prequel and then a ninja film and BAM the sword play looks exactly the same. compared to watching the OT duels and then watching braveheart, gladiator, LOTR's, TROY. etc etc where lucas sued old europeon style sword play. This was back when lucas said the jedi were based on the knights of the round table and merlin the wizard. So before the prequels you could watch a new hope duel and say ben is really old so vader is fighting him accordingly. Think about it. if you were sparring in a boxing ring with a 70 yr old mAN YOU WOULD not have to go all out on him and look real impressive to beat him you could/would toy with him and take him out easy. but you cant use the OLD MAN reasoning anymore because lucas shows us in the prequels that age doesnt matter as far as saber dueling goes..look at count dooku, palpatine,yoda and others on the council.

that is really ANOTHER LIE lucas has been busted in (TAKE NOTE GO-MER). Lucas says the reason why the saber duels are not as stylish in the OT compared to the PT is because ben is OLD and vader is mehcanical and luke hasent been formally trained. ANyone can see this is another lie and a BS excuse. Like I just said AGE didn't bother any of the guys in the prequels. vader being mechnaial is a poor excuse. that sure didnt bother general grivious. luke not being trained. Yoda tells luke in jedi 'no more training do you need" I have praticed sword techniques when I was younger. yoda coud have trained luke to use a saber the PT way very easily on dagobah. but he didnt because at the time empire was made lucas was using eurepeon style word fighting and NOT EASTERN BASED MARTIAL ARTS.

Now the argument I just made makes perfect sense and is very true but yet some of the prequel fans will come in and say "you are trying to bash the prequels" or say "you're trying to ruin star wars for younger fans" NO I AM NOT. I am pointing out truths as to why some things no longer make sense and pointing OUT LIES by lucas.

I take vader in episode 5 over big baby anakin in episode 3 anyday. Vader is well trained, he's evil with the dark side and when he sees he can no longer take luke lightly he takes luke out.

 

The "two old men" excuse no longer makes any sense. There's Grievous as you mentioned, and there's also Dooku who was older than Obi-Wan was in ANH and still doing quick, flashy moves.

The reason that makes sense is not that Obi-Wan and Vader were "old", but that they hadn't dueled anyone in so long that they had become pretty rusty.

That's why Vader almost had to of trained really hard with lightsaber combat droids in between ANH and ESB.

 

yes, I can go along with the "they were rusty from lack of combat". I would just like to think that vader trained with driods on a regular basis to stay up to par with his saber skills.

but really it is also kind of hard to accept that with a straight face also when you consider the fact that NONE of the jedi on the council on the prequels hardly ever got any pratice against a skilled lightsaber opponet either since there were no sith around for a 1000 yrs and none of the jedi on the council ever fought saber wielding opponents on a regular basis. it leaves one to ask what were they fighting for the past 1000 yrs? blaster wielding bank robbers? the nightmare never ends for the poor prequels and their pathetic writing and plot line.


but yes at this point in time it is prob bes tto chalk up old obi-wan as being rusty and out of practice.

 

You know, right after I made that last post that occured to me. The PT Jedi hadn't fought anyone. Then again, maybe they did have some run-ins with dark or rogue Jedi from time to time, or alternatively their fighting prowess displayed against Darth Maul could have been owed to sparring sessions with other Jedi over the years. The latter makes the least amount of assumptions and opens up the least amount of questions, so that's the answer I'm going with.

 

did anyone else ever stop to think thgat the sith have been extinct for a 1000 yrs and all of the sudden palpatine pops up out of no where.

hmm so how old does this make palpatine? a 1000 yrs old or close to? lol

does it ever end?

 

I think Sith teachings were passed down over that 1,000 years, and the Sith resolved to keep off the radar for that time period. Sidious was the guy that took it upon himself to take back the original Sith dream of "galactic domination" because he was confident that he had the intelligence, resourcefulness, cleverness, and raw power to do so. As we can see, he did.

 

"two there are no more no less"

palpatine was trained by plagius the wise shwoing there were two sith around at the same time. according to the way the prequels were writen if indeed the sith have been extinct for a 1000 yrs then that makes palpatine a 1000 yrs old or there abouts.

just more poorly thought out ploting in the prequels.

 

As soon as the master dies, the old apprentice becomes the new master and installs a new apprentice. You're interpreting Yoda's little verse very literally in black-and-white. I think what he meant is that when you run into a Sith, the Sith is pretty much gauranteed to be a Master or Apprentice, not some lone ranger.

 

oh, I agree with you. I have never liked the IDEA of only two sith at a time.

if you go back 1500 yrs or so what did you have? thousands of jedi and only two sith? that's nonsense. the sith wouldn't have stood a chance. also why can there by an unlimited amount of jedi but only 2 sith at a time. more nonsense/poor ploting.

 

Good point. But remember that two Sith ruled the galaxy (with Jedi still in it) from the end of ROTS to ROTJ. That tells me it's very possible.

I think you're actively looking for bad writing instead of connecting some dots for yourself, superpowers. Some of the casual dialogue between characters in the PT may be very poor, but the plot itself is very intricate and sophisticated.

 

the only jedi left by the end of revenge was yoda and obi-wan with the exception of the few remnaining that got hunted down. which just adds more of a poor plot and writing. why didnlt yoda and obi-wan gather these remaning jedi and go after palpatine and vader instead of waiting 20 yrs and allowing the empire to grow in strength and build the death star? instead they hide like cowards while the empire grew and the remaining jedi were hunted down and killed and waiting on an untrained luke to go and destroy the emperor. that makes no sense.

at the end of revenge of the sith obi-wan had just defeated anakin and yoda tied palpatine. they could have regrouped and went after palpatine and ended it all right there or died trying. I dont just look for bad. these plot errors and poor scripting is as plane as the nose on my face.

 

You're assuming there were just as many Jedi back then as there were in the PT.

 

hmm why wouldn't there be?


"for over a thousand generations the jedi knights were the guardins of peace and justice in the old republic"

 

Agreed. It's a great scene - so intense I couldn't watch it as a child, I found it that scary.

"that one must" or that you like to? sad and often without justification, yes.

Studied, written and chosen by Stunt Co-Ordinator Nick Gillard.

Yeah! Because ALL ninja and kung-fu films are aimed at little kiddies. Nobody could ever look at the fighting styles in those movies and say they were anything other than silly(!)

So it's all a rip-off with no logic applied? Nothing to do with the fact that, as Nick Gillard states "the Jedi chose a short range weapon in the time of laser bolts and ray guns, so they would have to be bloody good with it!"? That not make sense to you?

No, but you can use the reasoning that Obi-Wan has been living as a hermit, with no combat for 20 years and Vader, without any real foes to battle since a short period thereafter. I think their battle looks fine on the whole - if you do a couple of quick edits (which I have) and take out that clumsy spin Kenobi does, its actually quite an intense duel for the most part.

Its not a lie. Its the truth. They are old, mechanical and untrained. Whether its valid excuse for the reason the duels are a different style is debatable of course. But that doesn't make it a lie (illogical perhaps, yes). Its more likely that Lucas either hasn't considered the contradiction that is now clear with the abilities of those warriors in episodes 2 or 3, or indeed that the quote you refer to actually comes from the Episode 1 period. I know the original one does (though I'm not ruling out that he may have done since). But does this matter? As long as the story makes sense why do you fret so much over what the writer said? (and it does make sense for the reasons above). You would rather have the same style of sword-fighting in the prequel trilogy? really??

 

What does that have to do with anything?

 

"So it's all a rip-off with no logic applied? Nothing to do with the fact that, as Nick Gillard states "the Jedi chose a short range weapon in the time of laser bolts and ray guns, so they would have to be bloody good with it!"? That not make sense to you?"

why is it that prequel fans can't or refuse to accept that the saber duels in the OT are the way they are because that is how the designed them to be. He had a fencing expert choerygraph the duels even. "FENCING" and again the saber fights were geared by europeon sword styles.

did you find the sword fighting in gladiator, braveheart, 300 and troy, lord of the rings boring? I am guessing not. Lucas based them off of that style because at the time he always stated the jedi were the equivlent of the knights of the round table and merlin the wizard.


The OT saber duels were not boring. they were just based off a different style of sword fighting

your argument of them being old or mechanial holds NO WATER. yoda was how many hundreds of yrs old in the PT? dooku was how old? others on the councile were OLD. general grivious was mechnial. sorry but these excuses lucas gives do not add up.

 

you said I was assuming that there wer ejust as many jedi around back then as there were in the prequel days.

I said why wouldnt there be just as many/ if the jedi were the guardians of peace and justice for over a 1000 generations don;t you think there would be that many? how many are you guessing there would be and why would you assume there would be any less than there were in the prequels?

 

"Whats Anakin being a "baby" got to do with it?! THEY ARE THE SAME CHARACTER!!! But for argument's sake, in a duel, someone with Anakin's ability would take a Vader out within seconds."

what ability would that be? ohhhh you must be refering to the anakin that got his azz kicked BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE THE HIGH GROUND lol

 

I refused to make either assumption. If I were to choose either way, I'd say the galaxy was less populated back then, making it easier for two Sith to rule.

You have to be careful when using Obi-Wan's revelations to Luke in ANH. Take into account he could be using hyperbole, and even if he wasn't, his comments on it are pretty ambiguous. He never went into very much detail, so it was open to interpretation all along.

So how the Sith and Jedi's history being alluded to the way it is in the PT is "bad plotting" is beyond me.