ST ST lightsaber battles. Mirror PT or OT?

I'm not the one who brought it up or even thought about it in the way some people want to label this ridiculous PT way or OT way.

Then again some of the people you are talking about pretend to themselves that Vader-Kenobi was lacking because it had no emotion whatsoever which is simply self deceit. The emotion was there fully in front of them. If they didn't feel involvement then fine but we are talking about people who deny it's even there in the first place.

Now I would also say that is a pretty narrow definition of emotion. Emotion is all over these battles but not just the narrow band of acceptable ones. Maul is full of hate. That is an emotion.

 

The problem with the PT duels was the lack of talking during the fight. Wouldnt Obi Wan and Qui Gon want to ask Maul some questions? Like who are you? What do you want? And Anakin Obi Wan would have been epic if while they were dueling they were shouting at each other! Dooku was the coolest, in complete control and taunting Anakin and Obi Wan, until Yoda made him run away.

 

What?

 

Why not?

 

Dunno - forgot where I was going with that one

 

Im saying the OT duels were slower but had more to them because of the back and forth between the duelists. The PT was different because they usually said a line before the fight, then went at it. I know Anakin and Obi Wan had a few lines but Anakin really should have been going nuts at Obi Wan.

And in TPM duel of the fates Qui Gon and Maul said nothing. I lo ed that fight, but that's what it lacked compared to the OT

 

Maul didn't say anything because he was told to end them.

Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan didn't ask questions because they knew all they needed to know - that the other guy was going to kill them if they stood there playing 20 questions.

They could try take him alive and if not they still had the Trade Federation people to question.

What did you want Anakin and Kenobi to be shouting at each other? "Yo Mama" jokes?

Anakin had turned evil. Kenobi tried to make him see sense (which at that point was far more than he deserved).

They had said all they need to say.

 

Exactly this. What I've always felt is lacking from the PT duels (despite Duel of the Fates being a brilliant fight) is that they are very Shakespearean. The characters use up all their dialogue and then (they fight). Nothing is ever developed during these fights, we learn nothing more about the characters. Contrast this with the OT, where the dialogue between Vader and Luke in both ESB and ROTJ, and indeed their actions during the fight, develop their characters and tell us more about their relationships. The reason that lightsaber duels are more epic and interesting than harvesting Stormies or droids with your lightsaber is that it's fundamentally about the relationship between the two characters fighting.

For example, the Dooku vs. Yoda duel in AOTC; this is a former master-padawan pairing, and this is Yoda's former student who's fallen to the darkside. Surely there should be some more dialogue which illuminates this relationship? Some hatred from Dooku towards his old master? Some reflection by Yoda on how he let Dooku fall to the dark side, or on the failure of his teachings? Or even and arrogant Yoda on how Dooku never learnt? Instead, it's as if they had never met and knew each other only by reputation.

The Anakin vs. Obi-Wan duel in ROTS suffers from the same problems. Anakin has fallen to the Dark Side, slaughtered children and nearly killed Padmé in front of Obi-Wan, but Obi-Wan hardly makes any attempt to connect with Anakin, to find out what happened, or to bring him back to the Light. Anakin has just blamed Obi-Wan for everything that's happened, but he's the one making the morally ambiguous arguments ("From my point of view the Jedi are evil!") and rather than bursting out in hatred at his old master, it's the Jedi who attacks first. Surely if the fight had been presented as Anakins rage at Obi-Wan, to which Kenobi defends himself over and over, all the while attempting to bring Anakin back, and only then does he decide that Anakin can't be saved and is forced to cut him down.

If the ST can bring the emotional intensity back to the duels, alongside a real sense of danger and the bum-whooping moves of the PT, then I'll be happy.

Hogsquattle: Just saw your post, and re Anakin and Obi-Wan see above. As for EpI, I agree that having Maul speak is redundant, but that doesn't preclude the fight telling us more about Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon's relationship, but they don't even speak or even glance at each other, which I feel is another missed opportunity. Like I said I love that fight, and I feel it probably transmits character information non-verbally better than any other fight in SW (Qui-Gon's meditation contrasted with Maul's menacing pacing), but I still feel more could have been made of it.

 

Actually if you think about it, the dooku duels had the most dialogue of all the pt duels probably.

 

Actually, the fight does tell us more about about Kenobi and Jinn's relationship and builds on everything we see up to that point - because they don't have to speak or look at each other, they don't need to...

They fight almost as one person - each knowing the others moves before they happen.

In turn, it tells us more about Maul - because he can handle both of them.

If they had to look at and speak to each other even once, Maul would have cut them down in seconds.

As you can see from my post, I have shown how how I disagree that "nothing is developed" during their fights, e.g.. above, that we see Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan don't need to speak, etc.

Their dialogue is not "used up" before the fight - things are presented differently than the OT.

As someone pointed out earlier, in the TESB (and RotJ) Vader is trying to capture or turn Luke, not kill him, and Luke is no match or trying to turn him back - that is why dialogue is needed. In the PT, the it is Jedi and Sith trying to kill each other, just kill.

It does illuminate their relationship - that they were master and padawan.

In what way is Dooku going to the Dark Side on Yoda's shoulders? Dooku was 70 years old or something when he turned - he is long passed the point at which Yoda can be blamed for anything - if a master ever can be blamed for such a thing.



The Anakin vs. Obi-Wan duel in ROTS suffers from the same problems. Anakin has fallen to the Dark Side, slaughtered children and nearly killed Padmé in front of Obi-Wan, but Obi-Wan hardly makes any attempt to connect with Anakin, to find out what happened, or to bring him back to the Light. Anakin has just blamed Obi-Wan for everything that's happened, but he's the one making the morally ambiguous arguments ("From my point of view the Jedi are evil!") and rather than bursting out in hatred at his old master, it's the Jedi who attacks first. Surely if the fight had been presented as Anakins rage at Obi-Wan, to which Kenobi defends himself over and over, all the while attempting to bring Anakin back, and only then does he decide that Anakin can't be saved and is forced to cut him down.[/quote]

As you said, Anakin has "slaughtered children and nearly killed Padmé" - why is it so difficult to believe he is just willing to kill Kenobi too without making a whoopty-do about it.

Kenobi does attempt to make a "connection" (and he already knows as much about the "what happened" as he needs to at this point) and does try to reason with Skywalker, which is far more than Anakin deserves - he has butchered little children. Obi-Wan has come to Mustafar to end him - that he tries anything at all tells us a good deal about the relationship and his feelings for Anakin.[/quote]

The Prequels had the "emotional intensity" - it lacked nothing of what the OT dues had, but it built on them and presented them in a different manner.

Abrams will present any light sabre duels, and any hand-to-hand combat, as the story calls for it to be presented.

Take for example, (because it is Abrams) the final fight in Star Trek Into Darkness -

Spoiler

do Spock and Kahn wax lyrical about their relationship and motivations up to that point, no - we we know everything before the chase and fight.

Or High Noon.

Spoiler

Does Kane yap to the villains about his feelings and doubts? Do they tell him of the terrible youth that lead to their murderous careers? No. We know all we need to know, so the fight is the pay off.

Or Raiders.

Spoiler

Does Indy get to know the mechanic during the airfield fight or does the truck driver ask him what are his motivations for risking death climbing onto a speeding vehicle? No.

In cinema, fights and action is presented in numerous different ways. Sometimes dialogue is required during the fight or action and sometimes it isn't.


PS The spoiler tag thingy has gone a bit wrong - I don't know how to fix it

 

Hogsquattle: I'll take this fight by fight.

Jinn and Kenobi vs. Maul: I agree with your points, on the whole. As I said this fight is very effective at getting information across to the viewers without dialogue and is, I feel, the PT duel which handled this best. It's a great thing to watch on film and, while I feel that there may have been scope for more interaction between the Jedi, I don't think it needs it. It does fine.

Yoda vs. Dooku: You're right, it does tell us they were master and padawan - but nothing else. They display no emotion towards one another. All of the other master-padawan relationships we have seen in SW, and even the Sith master-apprentice relationships to an extent, have been deeper and more complex than Yoda and Dooku. Even if Yoda had nothing to do with Dooku's fall, it still makes sense for him to be affected by his betrayal. Compare the relationships between Kenobi and Anakin or Jinn. There should be more than a few cursory words to indicate the extent of the relationship.

Anakin vs. Obi-Wan: I don't have trouble believing Anakin would have any reluctance at this point to kill Obi-Wan without "Whoopty-do", but that's not what happens. It's Anakin who does most of the talking and it's Obi-Wan who draws first, who doesn't make a "whoopty-doo" about killing Anakin. Here all of the conflict between the two is condensed into the dialogues before and after the fight, rather than allowing us to see the development of the relationship during the fight. In my mind, rather than Obi-Wan realising that Anakin was too far gone at the beginning, it would have been much more effective dramatically to have him realise this during the fight, his resolve gradually hardening until he cuts down his former friend and pupil. Anakin's inability to simply batter Obi-Wan into oblivion could give us a further insight into his fall to the dark side, as he doubts his new powers, falters or summons even more hate and evil in an attempt to defeat Obi-Wan. This wouldn't necessarily require much dialogue (or any even, if done well), but give greater depth to the transformation of Obi-Wan and Anakin's relationship.

The contrast between the OT, where Vader is trying to capture or turn Luke, and the PT, where they just want to kill each other, doesn't sit with me. The problem with the PT is that they just want to kill each other, with no other aspect explored. This is despite the fact that in most cases, in particular the latter two discussed above, the characters have preexisting relationships which have disintegrated to the point where they are forced to try to kill each other, or at least to defend themselves against each other. This is why I have less of a problem with Duel of the Fates - in this case it was only a case of trying to kill each other.

I'm not saying the Prequels had no emotional intensity, but the duels certainly lack the drama of the OT. I have no problem with the presentation in a different manner, it's the lack of focus on the characters' relationships that I dislike.

As for what Abrams will do, I certainly hope he presents it as the story calls for. In the examples you give (though I havn't seen High Noon) the story didn't call for any emotional engagement with those fights - the motivation was clear and there was no need to explore it further. In the PT however, there was a call from the story to engage with why the characters were fighting and the best way to portray that is through their actions in the fight. No dialogue is (necessarily) required, but if a fight is about more than just trying to kill the bad guy, then that should be visible during the fight too, not just in the pre- and post-fight dialogue.

 

I don't see the need for more interaction between Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan either - they are working on a deeper level

All relationships are different - I'd imagine not every master and padawan get as close as Obi-Wan and Anakin, Jinn and Kenobi, etc.
Yoda has had many Padawans - they can't all have been "Hallmark Moments".
What we do see is that Yoda is the quintessential Jedi - emotions rarely get the best of him - he wasn't going to falter when he needed to step up - he'd had the time from receiving Kenobi's intel that Dooku was behind the Separatist conspiracy to that moment (Coruscant to Kamino to Geonosis) to dwell on the matter - plenty of time for a guy like Yoda to clear his head
As to Dooku, supremely confident and boastful going up against Kenobi and Skywalker, but watch him as Yoda approaches - he loses his composure, a little, but enough to tell us there is s touch of fear - but he returns to the arrogant attitude.
This tells us everything we need.

As I said, Kenobi is there to kill him - he has helped a Sith Lord take control of the Republic and pledged allegiance to him, lead a massacre at the Temple and murdered little children - that he tries to communicate with him at all is a testament to his feelings for the man
Anakin is standing in front of him - overflowing with hate and anger, ranting about conquering the galaxy AND as a Jedi he can sense things on another level - we don't Kenobi to have that revelation halfway through the fight, he already knew it was too late - he knew it was too late when he saw the dead Younglings

Only one of them was walking away - literally

The "wanting to kill each other in the PT" is an over simplification on my part - I was trying to highlight that they are about something different.
In a fantasy adventure and in mythology and in cinema, the good guy fights the bad guy - the good guy wins and the bad guy dies.
This is what is supposed to happen.
The duels in TESB and RotJ are the exception to the rule - the are not really the norm in the reason for the confrontation - TESB the villain intends to capture the hero and corrupt his soul and in RotJ the hero wants to help the villain be a good man again and redeem his soul
I'm sure there is something similar is mythology, but it is certainly not a common occurrence.
And we won't see their like in the ST - because the Vader/Luke duels are are supposed to stand out - they aren't hero vs. villain, friend vs. friend - they are father vs. son
That is never going to happen again - no sister vs. brother, etc. - it can't because it would just be a copy and start a trend that would dilute the whole franchise

Emotional engagement is very much a personal thing - list 10 movies we both love and probably at most we only enjoy two for the same reasons.
I don't understand though that you say the motivation, etc. was made clear in my examples but it it isn't in the Prequels - the motivations for all the fights in the PT are as clear as crystal.
I don't see how adding dialogue or knowing looks between the heroes to Duel of the Fates* or shifting Obi-Wan's realisation that Anakin is beyond hope to after they start fighting on Mustafar makes it any clearer - and if you don't think the "interaction" needs to be dialogue I don't know what else it could be?
* I know your views on Fates but I'm just using the example to make the point


PS Why did you not include the Dooku duel on the Invisible Hand, Sidious vs. the Jedi Council and Yoda vs. Sidious? I notice a lot of people don't mention these.


PPS High Noon is awesome, you are missing out

 

The Qui Gonn and Maul encounter on Tattooine was the only sabre fight from the PT I liked. But then Qui Gonn ruins the impact of it by treating and reacting to it with Anakin like he'd just had an argument with someone on a bus. You've NEVER encountered someone dark like this in your life Qui Gonn. You should be super pumped after the fight! But no.

 

Well, as you say below, it's probably a matter of perception, but I certainly don't feel like I've been told everything I need to know when I watch those fights - just about everything I need to know in terms of who everyone is, but not in terms of character.

Kenobi is there to kill him - fair enough, but only if we see how and why. One minute we see Obi-Wan cradling his head in his hands after the youngling massacre, the next he's more than determined, he's aggressively attacking and attempting to kill the man who 20 minutes ago was his best friend. There's a sudden leap of emotions that as an audience we just have to infer. I'd much rather see it happening, and I think during the fight would be the perfect way to show it.

I have no problem with that, but if your protagonist and antagonist have a prior relationship, you need to show how that relationship has broken down to the point of conflict, either by showing it in the drama beforehand, or during the fight itself. If it's just implied, then it's difficult for the audience to engage.

Agreed, but it doesn't mean that the ST should ignore the emotional aspect of a fight when, story-wise, it makes sense to engage with it.

On Obi-wan's realisation, which somehow takes place off-screen, see above. I don't agree that the motivations are all that clear, in particular when the characters are considered more deeply. I think the Geonosis duel and Mustafar ones are the worst however, along with Yoda vs. Sidious.
Interaction can be created in much more than dialogue - in the choreography, the music, the editing etc. etc. In ESB, when Vader pummels Luke with the various bits of piping etc., there's no dialogue, but it shows us lots about how weak Luke is and how much Vader is toying with him. Again, fates is a great example of this.

Brevity In short, I like the Invisible hand duel, it does a good job of showing us Anakin's power and dark side potential (although I think better direction might have improved it); with Sidious vs. the Jedi, the problem isn't the fight but the resolution, where Anakin's turn is just so poorly written, but that's a larger issue . I think Yoda vs. Sidious is just silly: there's no set up, no proper resolution, no story-reason to have it there - it just seems like it was put there because they wanted more lightsabers and more CGI action sequences in an effort to make it as ***EPIC*** as possible.

And I'll add High Noon to my 'to-watch' list

Agreed. Qui-Gonn didn't really seem to take it very seriously, which is another problem of PT characters not action rationally to situations. It's a larger character and story-writing problem though - there's nothing wrong with the fight itself.

 

It's all laid out before a the fights - and the duels themselves give us more details.

I really don't understand what you believe is missing or can be added?

Can you give me an example?

You just said the how and the why - dead children.

Yes, Kenobi had his "head in hands" and a few minutes is going to kill his best friend - because among other things he is a child killer.

Can you really blame him for not putting more effort into trying to understand a child murderers feelings?

And it isn't as though Kenobi doesn't waiver in his determination - that he isn't conflicted - he really doesn't want Anakin to make that leap but he knows he will.

Why does he not make the killing blow?

Sometimes I think Kenobi hasn't got it in him to do it, sometimes maybe he thinks Anakin deserves to suffer before the end.

Not for everyone, though. Example, Kenobi and Skywalker have no prior relationship with Dooku - they have never met. They are the good guys and he is the villain.

Are the details of Yoda and Dooku's relationship (from maybe 40 years ago) all that important?

The Prequels are the story of Anakin, Obi-Wan, Padmè and Qui-Gon (to an extent) - Yoda and Palpatine and the others are supporting players - there really isn't the time or the need to tell us everything - Lucas wants us to use our own imaginations too.

It is just little added details to make the Star Wars galaxy seem bigger - like the bounty hunters in TESB - only Fett needed to be on the Star Destroyer but the other characters were added to make it the universe seem larger.

I never said it should - but you see, you feel the Prequels did "ignore the emotions" whereas see them right on the screen.

You know, come December 2015, you and I could be back online here in tears at how much we both loved the duels, in tears at how we both found them lifeless or feeling just as we do now

As I asked above, can you give me some examples of what you think is missing so I can try to understand your view?

Obi-Wan's realisation of Anakin being beyond his help is not "shown off screen".

It is right there in front of us.

Clones killing Jedi, a Sith Lord on the throne, Anakin killing Jedi and children, the power mad rant and the attempted strangulation of his wife and mother of his child/children

I honestly don't see what more Lucas needs to tell us.

What is wrong with the music, choreography and the rest?

They are awesome.

These things happen in all the fights.

I disagree with all these - but that is the way of things - (although the Sidious vs. Council fight itself is bit disappointing I do like Anakin's betrayal of Mace) - but my mind is boggled by the fact you think there is "no set up, no proper resolution, no story-reason to have it there" for the Yoda vs. Sidious fight?

The set up is Order 66, the Temple massacre, the Council being killed, etc. - the reason is Palpatine needs to be taken out and Yoda is the only one who has a chance - the resolution is ROtJ (going into the fight we know both fighters are walking away and we know the resolution is in training Luke to face him)[/quote]

It is awesome

 

Then when it comes to the PT duels you are lost.

I don't know what you want really. I find it very confusing. I don't see this sudden leap. The story is right their in front of you. Obi-Wan goes to the temple, sees the wounds of the Lightsaber, finds out it's Anakin and he and Yoda have a mission to destroy the Sith. He doesn't want to do it but has to and when they meet he has to make sure to himself that there is nothing else to be done. Anakin's actions make it quite clear.

My question though is why don't you ask the exact same thing for Vader in ESB in regards to Luke? Vader is all over the place from wanting to capture Luke then trys to kill him then wants him to turn and join him. He's constantly changing his attitude to Luke. As as audience there is so much less information to go on.

I think it's quite clear. He's turned to the Dark Side. He's a killer and evil. How much clearer can it be?

Exactly. Which is what happens.

That is exactly what is there.

Why you don't see it I don't know. Why the text of all these great duels in the PT which I and so many others see so clearly you don't is something that you'll have to look into if you wish.

 

Has anyone read the Darth Plagueis novel? its probably not canon anyway, but Qui Gon is in it with Dooku and Sifo Dyas. As we know, both Dooku and Sifo Dyas turned so perhaps Qui Gon was slightly aware of a dark presence or was onto the sith before TPM. Qui Gon just happened to be sent to negotiate with the trade federation and Sidious told them to kill him. Then when he was attacked by Maul he didnt think much of it, because he was aware the sith had returned and he knew they were trying to kill him. He obviously knew of the prophesy and straight away realised Anakin was the chosen one. Qui Gon then was selected by the Whills to come back as a force ghost to help Yoda and Obi Wan. Qui Gon knew more than the movies told us I think. Dooku was his Master after all.

So all in all, I think that gives deeper meaning to why Qui Gon didnt need to ask Maul anything during there fights. If you look at it from a certain point of view it makes sense.

 

The way I see it is that the duel should add to the characters, tell us more about them and move them on within their story arcs. I don't agree with you that the duels themselves give more details - in some they do (Fates and Invisible Hand do this well, and Sidious vs. Jedi had the right idea but executed awfully) but often they don't. I wish that they did, and in some cases it's just that I feel they're trying to, but not really succeeding. For example, if Obi-Wan had hopped up immediately onto Padmé's shuttle and then made his "higher ground" speech, would the film have been significantly poorer for it? Visually yes, but story-wise? I don't think so. [For the purpose of this hypothetical imagine Anakin then falls off the platform to get burnt up in the lava.] That's the kinda thing I want to see more of in the PT and hope they show in the OT. A nuance about the character or about their relationships. To bring up good examples, which nicely mirror each other, from the PT and OT, Luke's blisteringly angry attack on Vader after he threatened Leia in ROTJ and Anakin's similar attack on Dooku on the Invisible hand after Dooku crushed Obi-Wan.

I understand why, I'm not claiming that it doesn't make sense in story terms, but I don't think we're shown it properly. I don't blame him at all, but it doesn't feel logical or human to have "Obi-Wan cradles his head in his hands and sighs. He couldn't believe that Anakin would do such a thing. He decided then that he would have to find him and kill him." It's straightforward sure, but it doesn't make sense on an emotional level in a movie. Noone can be that detached about finding out their best friend is a cold-blooded killer. I think stretching out Obi-Wan's decision-making into the fight and only making the final decision to cut Anakin down at the very end would have been much more dramatically effective. I agree that Obi-Wan is depicted as being somewhat conflicted, but it's once at the beginning and once at the end. During the fight he shows no conflict. IMO, it would have been better to show it throughout.

I agree about Kenobi and Skywalker's fight with Dooku - I have no qualms with that fight to be honest.

The details of Yoda and Dooku's relationship may not be that important, but if they aren't then why have them fight? What's the point? Couldn't they just have a battalion of Clone Troopers arriving to scare Dooku off instead? The writer suddenly introduces that prior relationship, invited the audience to consider what this fight might mean for them, but then just as suddenly drops it again, never to have any consequences or even to be mentioned ever again. If we don't need to know everything, then why tell us in the first place?

As for the bounty hunters on the Star Destroyer, I have no problem with them in the background to add colour, but that's because we weren't expected to watch an action sequence involving any of them or actually care what happened to them.

I agree, I wasn't criticizing them What i was trying to get across was that there's not necessarily any need for more dialogue in any of the fights I feel didn't live up to their potential, but that the emotional involvement from the audience can be enhanced via these methods - so they can be awesome and add to the story. You may feel like they happen in all the fights, but they're certainly much better realised in some more than others, IMO.

I can't believe you disagree about the Invisible Hand! It's the best executed fight in ROTS if you as me! The problem with the Palps vs. Jedi is the larger one of Anakin's characterisation and the writing of his fall to the Dark Side - killing Mace was a cool way to do it, but the build up was all wrong. Like I said, the problems with Anakin's characterisation are a whole other problem, and completely off-topic, so that's the last I'll say about them.

As Yoda vs. Palps, there is no story reason to have it - the movie would have ended exactly the same if Yoda had just up and left for Degobah (I hope I've spelt that right, it's been a long day!). We learn nothing new about Yoda or Palpaltine, it isn't resolved and Luke's victory in ROTJ can only be interpreted as its resolution in the broadest sense. I agree about the motivation (take down the evil mastermind who orchestrated all of this), but then why didn't Obi-Wan and Yoda do it together and make it their number one priority? Anakin was hardly a pressing concern at this point and certainly no more than the Emperor. If we were supposed to see the Jedi's last, glorious attempt to stop the unstoppable, then why not make a bigger deal of it. Instead, Yoda just walks right into Palpatine's office and say's, essentially, "Let's fight". Palpatine talks about Yoda's arrogance, but we don't see that Yoda realises his own arrogance or learns anything at all from the fight. In fact, the fight ends in a weird draw: both using their force powers against one another, cancelling each other out and blasting both across the Senate chamber. And then Yoda just crawls away, for some reason. I'm not saying it couldn't be done well, and it's certainly cool to watch, but it doesn't make sense or fit story-wise.

I really hope, and I think we all do, that it's the first one!


Qui-Riv-Brid I've addressed most of your points above, but regarding Vader' attitude in ESB, I don't think there's inconsistency at all; first he tries to capture Luke, so that he and the Emperor can turn him, and then when Luke foils that plan (by escaping from the chamber and cutting the carbon pipes), Vader tries to turn Luke on his own. I never got the impression that Vader genuinely wanted to kill Luke unless he absolutely had to - he just wanted him to submit.

 

Starryganpost

Hi,

I'll read your post on Monday. I have to banish my self from the forum weekends to or I'd spend the whole two days online

Laters

 

I agree with Starryganpost - Rots duel should have seen Kenobi more defensive, trying not to fight/ strike, trying to connect with the good man that was his friend. Only at the end of the duel, when all other avenues were closed off should he have taken Anakin out.

 

Not to worry - I understand completely! I'm actually away on business from Monday to Wednesday and am unlikely to get much chance to check up on things here, so this particular intellectual/nerd-tastic duel will have to be postponed temporarily

 

Yep. Thats what would have made the fight better. Having Anakin attack Obi Wan defend trying to bring him back to the lightside. I think Anakin was terrible in these movies, he made Vader look like a loser. Clone Wars cartoon Anakin is actually likeable, alot better and displayed some darkside tendencies. I like to view Anakin from TCW perspective, and also Mace Windu. But im getting off point. Sorry.

 

Reason for lacking battles in OT.

Vader vs. Obi-wan - a conversational duel, they haven't seen eachother for 20 years. They wouldn't be able to talk to each other if they were concentrating on fighting. (ROTS Final Battle for example.)
Luke vs. Vader 1 - Luke had barely any Jedi training and Vader knew this. So he didn't fight to his full potential.
Luke vs. Vader 2 - Vader holding back again, trying to persuade Luke to join the Dark Side rather than killing him.

 

Why does any of these reasons make them lacking? I'm not saying they're perfect, but I don't see why the reasons you give should stop them from being great. They still feature interesting characters, about whom we care, in conflict and two-thirds of them are well choreographed, filled with tension and excitement.