CT Why does Sidious TELL Vader that Luke is his son?

Here's my dumb down version of the conversation between Sidious and Vader in ESB:
Siddy: Hey guess what, Luke is your son! Now go kill him.
Vader: But but he's just a boy, I don't think he's much of a threat... (Yeah right he blew up the death star and he's causing a disturbance in the force that Sidious can feel across the galaxy, he's soooo not a threat. Nice try Vader.)
Siddy: Kill him.
Vader: Can we convert him to our side instead?
Siddy: Hmmm……
Vader: If he won't convert then I'll kill him I promise!
So basically Vader is desperately trying to save his son from an execution order, and Sidious is just being a bully.

What I don't get is, if Sidious was initially trying to get Vader to kill Luke, why would he bother telling him that Luke is his son? It just causes unnecessary trouble.
Could it be a test of some sort? Before watching the prequels, I was thinking he was testing Vader's loyalty (in which case Vader totally failed the test). But after watching the prequels, I don't think he needs to test that; he KNOWS that Vader hates him. Maybe he was testing Vader's feelings towards Luke then?
If Vader responded differently (i.e. perfectly fine with killing Luke), how would Sidious act? Would he just wait for him to kill off Luke? Or would he "change his mind" and tell him to convert Luke instead? If the latter, would he still try to get Luke to replace Vader, or would he want both of them?

Or maybe I'm just overthinking things.... maybe it wasn't a test at all... he was just being chatty....

 

Because George Lucas apparently didn't remember that Vader already knew this when he made the 2004 Special Editions.

 

Sidious knows what Vader really trying to do. As the Rule of Two decrees, there can only be two and Vader clearly has ambition to overthrow the Emperor and have a new apprentice. Vader has been doing this for quite some time behind his master's back. By telling Vader directly of what he knows, Sidious can fish out a response from Vader to see if he is genuinely surprised or feigning surprise to hide this revelation from him. It would also ensure that they are on the same page (namely that nothing Vader can do that old Sidious cannot see).

I also believe that Sidious is being reactive to anything that may pose a threat to him that he doesn't have control over now that he has an Empire and Darth Vader. Luke Skywalker is out of his reach, and thus his initial reaction is to kill him before he can become powerful enough to destroy him. It wasn't until Vader suggests turning Luke to the Dark Side that Sidious reconsiders what he had. Trading a crippled, old Skywalker for a younger, healthier one is worth the risk in the Master's eyes.

This also puts pressure on Vader. Now his master will surely replace him with Luke, so the best chance for survival is for Vader to get to Luke first and then corrupt him to be on Vader's side before he confronts the Emperor. If he fails and now needs the Emperor's help to turn Luke, he might as well resign himself to death.

 

^ Which helpfully explains Vader’s mood throughout Return of the Jedi. He knows it’s the end for him. Watch after Palpatine says, “...and when he does, you must bring him before me!” Vader pauses for a few seconds before he responds with, “As you wish, my master.”

He knows now that he is trapped, once again dancing to Palpatine’s tunes. There are only two ways this will go down:

- Vader dies by Luke’s hand.

- Vader kills his own son and continues being Sidious’ apprentice.

 

Exactly. It’s a mental battle. Luke sensed his conflict because Vader didn’t really know what to do. He was forced to make a decision in a moment, ala with Mace Windu.

 

What I don't get about the original scene is that The Emperor tells him that they have a new enemy in Luke Skywalker, yet Vader is already searching for him and mentions him by name earlier in the film to Ozzel (if my memory serves me correctly).

Also watching the original version makes me think that the rule of 2 wasn't even thought of them.

Such a small scene in the original Empire is glossed over now the universe is massively expanded upon, but to get to see the Emperor briefly and see that Vader was subservient to him just added another layer to the world building going on in this film.

 

Wait, does Palpatine actually tell Vader to kill Luke? All I remember is him saying Luke was an enemy and could destroy them, and "must not become a Jedi". I don't remember him saying Luke had to be killed at any point in the ESB scene, in the original or SE. That actually came from Vader, the "he'll be turned or die" thing, IIRC.

 

Yes it was Vader who said he would join them or die.

 

No, nothing was forgotten. Vader knows it in both versions. The dialogue was changed because now Vader is confronting Sidious with the lie he told him in ROTS.

 

It's basically Sidious threatening Vader by saying that he knows everything and Vader shouldn't think that he can plot against the Emperor. He already said ''search your feelings Lord Vader, you will know it to be true'' Vader already knew.

 

Not an answer but something I have used to account for why the Emperor comes in exactly at this time. Luke has just landed on Dagobah and made acquaintance with Yoda. There is not a lot to point to in terms of Force use, in something that might propagate at such frequency or amplitude that the Emperor detects it far away, but one can point to Luke's premonitions or remembrances. "It's like... something out of a dream" and "Still... there's something familiar about this place." Of course this is tempered with modern stridence that Luke is ""whigning"". The Emperor would not necessarily have detected or assigned that the son of Skywalker would be a threat to anyone if the state of play remained only at Luke pulling a lightsaber out of the snow in a wampa cave. That Luke is what Vader was chasing. The Luke that the Emperor brings to Vader's attention is in a far stronger position.

 

So it might be rationalized, but there's nothing in the revised dialogue or the acting in that scene to indicate that such a double meaning was at all intended. Is it so hard to accept a continuity error in a revised scene that was inserted nearly 25 years later, and whose primary rationale was anyway to insert Ian McDiarmid as the Emperor?

 

You are the one making false accusations, that the fact that Vader was aware of Luke was forgotten. It wasn't. Is it so hard to accept that the scene was revised not only to insert Ian McDiarmid but to be consistent with the events planned for ROTS, which was being produced at the time? It's not a rationalization or interpretation, but the very purpose of the dialogue revision.

Vader was interested in Luke. Vader knew Luke was his son, hence why he was pursuing him. Vader planned to turn Luke and betray the Emperor. These facts are present in both versions.

What the new version does different is that it takes into account the way the Sith work as established in the PT (there can only be two), the events of ROTS, the fact that Vader was told that his wife was killed before giving birth. Sidious is confronting Vader with what he already knew and was doing behind his back (to turn Luke, which inherently means to betray Sidious), and Vader (faking surprise) is confronting Sidious with the lie that he was told many years ago.

 

How is it consistent? What was changed is that the Emperor mentions who Luke's father is, and Vader expresses incredulity about the idea of Anakin having a son. Nothing in the rewritten 2004 scene suggests Vader's surprise is faked.

On the other hand, Vader not knowing previously that any children of his are alive would be consistent with his ignorance of the matter in ROTS (filmed in 2003, the previous year), rather than him already knowing who Luke Skywalker is via some unnamed source (as in the rest of ESB from 1979/80).

 

I appreciate version control for this kind of thing. The association Anakin Skywalker of course occurs in ROTJ. So as of 1980 no one could know as a fact that Vader's former name was Skywalker. And no one could know as of *first viewing May 1980 that Vader was Luke's father. So the I am your father in May 1980 reveals that Vader's name was, in fact, not merely by inference, Skywalker. As of Vader kneeling before a hologram of the Emperor May 1980, the audience is under the impression that Vader is not related to "Skywalker" or "son of Skywalker".

Of course, no one can insist in June 1980 that Vader did not know that Luke Skywalker was his son until the Emperor informed him of it. That would contradict all common sense of the intensity of the I am your father reveal. Vader has been building up to this moment, and his build up did not start within this movie time frame. Of course he knew, and has known, for some time. That scene allows that the Emperor has known about Luke for some time, obviously dating back to at least the destruction of the Death Star from a military heroics standpoint, but Luke has never gotten onto the Emperor's radar in a peculiar way that only he and Vader can comprehend. Luke became existential only during events of this film, for, this scene would have occurred before events of this film, if it were Not the case that Luke had become existential during events of this film.

 

I don' think there's any version of the movie where Vader finds out that Luke Skywalker is his son at that exact moment. Both Legends and canon have had Vader know before the events of the film. And Vader obsessed with finding young Skywalker doesn't make much sense if before the movie starts Vader doesn't know that Luke is his son (well to first time audiences his obsession may be with the young rebel who destroyed the Death Star but since we've seen the movie it makes more sense that Vader already knows. It's improbable Vader wouldn't devote this much time and resources to finding Skywalker if the dang kid just blew up the DS - even with being strong in the Force - but would if he knows that Luke is his son). The 2004 addition "How is that possible?" "Search your feelings, Lord Vader. In time you will know it to be true." is a callback to the Revenge of the Sith lie that Sidious tells him that he killed Padme (and therefore the kids). Or foreshadowing since the 2004 version was released before ROTS. Eh, whatever. Anyway, Sidious plays it off his lie as being one of those mysterious Force things telling him to "search your feelings". Vader ain't buying it either at that point, I'd wager. He was already planning to destroy the Emperor anyway. him not knowing until that moment makes Vader seem a bit dim.

What I wanna know is where does the "How is that possible" line come from because Vader's voice, still James Earl Jones, sounds differently mixed than it did in the original ESB version (you'll notice the vocal FX changes on Vader's next line which is from ESB). Is it an old ROTJ line they had lying around or something Jones recorded new for the ESB 04 SE?

 

I believe it's implied that he wants Luke dead when he identifies Luke as their new enemy. In ROTS when he says that every single Jedi is now an enemy of the republic, that meant wipe out the Jedi.

This is the original dialogue:
Vader: What is thy bidding, my master?
Sidious: There is a great disturbance
in the Force.
Vader: I have felt it.
We have a new enemy -- the young rebel who destroyed the Death Star. I have no doubt this boy is the offspring of Anakin Skywalker.
Vader: How is that possible?
Sidious: Search your feelings, Lord Vader. You will know it to be true. He could destroy us.
Vader: He's just a boy. Obi-Wan can no longer help him.
Sidious: The Force is strong with him. The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi.
Vader: If he could be turned, he would become a powerful ally.
Sidious: Yes. He would be a great asset. Can it be done?
Vader: He will join us or die, master.

In saying "He's just a boy. Obi-Wan can no longer help him," Vader is protesting, claiming that Luke is too weak to be their enemy. It's quite a pathetic argument. Like, really? He blew up the death star and you're saying he's JUST a boy?
As expected, Sidious doesn't buy that. "The Force is strong with him, " i.e. he as great potential. "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi," i.e. kill him before he finishes training.
Vader then suggests the alternative to killing him, which is converting him.
Sidious's tone of voice when he says "Yes. He would be a great asset" sounds like he is considering that for the first time (though I suspect he could be acting).
Sidious likes the idea, but is still doubtful about whether it could work. So he questions Vader, "Can it be done?"
Vader gives Sidious the assurance he wants: If the alternative I suggested doesn't work, I will kill him as you wanted.

 

From the movies themselves, I feel like it wasn’t clearly explained what exactly was meant by the rule of 2. The only reference to it I believe is in TPM when Yoda says, “Always two there are. No more, no less. A master and an apprentice.” When I watched this, I took it to mean they work in twos, as opposed to only two Sith are allowed to be alive in the entire galaxy. I thought it might be similar to how one Jedi master isn’t supposed to train two padawans simultaneously, but just a little more. Maybe a Sith apprentice who is finished training and ready to take their own apprentice should be physically separated from their original master, in order to become more independent or something. And the original master can either retire or take another apprentice. Something like that.
Also worth noting is that Vader is the one that suggests converting Luke. If the rule of 2 was so extreme, I don't think Vader would dare say that to the Sidious. That's basically telling him that he plans on overthrowing him...

But regardless of what exactly the rule of two is, I don’t think Sidious would tie himself to a tradition if it doesn’t seem to help him. If he believes that having both Vader and Luke is beneficial to him, then he will break the rule.

 

Hmm... I never got the impression that Vader already knew Luke was his son. He seemed surprised and in disbelief (but yea I guess he could be acting too). Then Sidious insists, saying, "Search your feelings, Lord Vader. You will know it to be true." Vader originally thought that he had choked Padme to death, so it seems normal to me if he never considered the possibility of his child being alive somewhere.

Btw, I didn't know before reading these comments that the dialogue was also changed between the two versions. This is all news to me. Looks like I have lots to learn lol.

 

When I watched that part, I hadn't read about the rule of two yet. I assumed Vader's pause was sadness for Luke, because there's no chance of escape. Either Luke becomes enslaved to Sidious just like himself, or he dies.

I was very shocked when Sidious told Luke to kill Vader to replace him.

 

My impression from the fight in Bespin is that Vader wasn't expecting Luke to be very powerful yet. So his only hope for overthrowing Sidious is if Luke first joins them and gets training in the dark side, and when he becomes powerful enough, the two of them can look for an opportunity to assassinate Sidious.

 

That is one interpretation.
Another is that Vader is genuinely surprised at this info.
Another still is Vader faking surprise.

But if Vader was confronting Sidious about what he said in RotS, why this roundabout way?
Why not simply say "You told me I killed Padme but she obviously lived."
Also if this is Vader's question, Sidous answer makes no sense.
He says "search your feelings.." how does that answer what Vader's question was?
And once Vader finds out about Luke and determines that he is his son.
Then he knows that Sidious lied about what happened to Padme so if he wanted to confront Sidious about it he could do so right away.
And Vader knows how Sidous works, that he lies or twists truth is hardly news to him.
So did he really expect to get anything out of this?

So is Vader really surprised?
If he is, then Sidious answer makes sense, "search your feelings.." etc.
But this makes Vader rather dumb as he has been searching for a Skywalker for some time and yet never once considered that this was his son.

Or Vader is faking surprise and Sidious falls for it and gives is answer.
This is a rather weak lie and Vader tries to act like he is stupid to Sidious, who knows him quite well.
So the lie has little chance to actually work.

In short, having Ian there makes sense, the changed dialogue less so.

And if this was changed to account for RotS, then the new scene is designed to be for people that saw the PT.
So why the roundabout wording of "..the offspring of Anakin Skywalker.."?
Why not say "Your son". In RotJ they are more direct when talking about Luke.
In the original, that Vader is Luke's father is kept hidden to maintain the surprise at the end.
To anyone that has seen the PT that is not needed.
So to people that haven't seen the PT?
Then you have the problem that Luke's fathers first name was not been established in ANH.

As for the rule of two, that makes things worse.
Now Vader is in effect declaring war on Sidious and if Luke turns then either Vader or Sidious must die.
And what about the whole freezing this on Bespin?
If Luke is frozen and delivered to Sidious, Vader has signed his own death warrant. If Sidious turns Luke then he will pit him against Vader and either Luke kills Vader or Vader kills Luke. Vader has nothing to gain from either option.
So was that just a ruse, that he never planned to freeze Luke?

Why he says this is not because Luke is news to either but the great disturbance in the Force that Luke is now creating.
That is what has changed.
Luke is now growing much stronger and as far as either Vader or Sidious knows, he has no one that can train him. So he is doing this all on his own. This makes him a threat.
Also and this is juts my theory, Luke the rebel was a danger to the Empire, Luke the Jedi was a danger to the Sith, ie Vader and Sidious.
Luke the rebel, they already knew about and he was being hunted.
But Luke the Jedi raises the threat to a new level and thus Sidious contacts Vader. The situation has changed.

@lord_sidious_

There are different things that are open to interpretation.
Vader apparently plans to freeze Luke and deliver him to Sidious.
But as I said above, that will be bad for him. If Sidious turns Luke then it will be either Vader or Luke who dies.
But when Vader pushes Luke down and starts the freezing process, he comments "All too easy. Perhaps you are not as powerful as the Emperor thought."
So Vader seemed disappointed that Luke was not strong enough.
Possibly because if he is to take on Sidious and become the Master, he needs a strong Luke at his side.
A weak Luke will do him no good.
I think, based on the original version, that Vader was testing Luke through the whole fight.
If Luke could be taken easily and frozen, then he could give him to Sidious with little worry as Luke would not be strong enough to be a threat to either of them and he could be a servant but not really one of them.
But Luke proves stronger and so Vader turns up the heat, he pushes Luke harder and harder.
He has Luke beat but Luke still fight back and manages to hurt Vader and now he steps it up even more and quickly ends the fight.
Now he knows that Luke is strong enough to be of use to him against Sidious and now he makes the offer.
"Join me and we'll take down the Emperor and rule together."
And he drops the bombshell that he is Luke's father.
This was designed quite well by Vader, Luke was beaten physically and now he beats him mentally and emotionally. Plus he causes a rift between Luke and Obi-Wan, implying that Obi-Wan kept the truth from Luke.
One can question how Vader could have known that Obi-Wan did not tell Luke the truth.

But the offer is very tempting, Luke faces certain death, he can not beat Vader.
Vader offers power, to rule at his fathers side and that they could end this conflict and bring order back to the galaxy. That their rule would be better than the Emperor's.
But Luke still refuses.

This shakes Vader, he can not understand why and he begins to doubt his choices.
So at the end of ESB, he does not kill Piett after the MF gets away, and Piett looked like he was expecting it. Instead Vader just leaves.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface.

 

1980 version:

"What is thy bidding, my master?"
"There is a great disturbance in the Force."
"I have felt it."
"We have a new enemy - Luke Skywalker."
"Yes, my master."
"He could destroy us."
"He's just a boy. Obi-Wan can no longer help him."
"The Force is strong with him. The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi."
"If he could be turned, he would become a powerful ally."
"Yes. Yes. He would be a great asset. Can it be done?"
"He will join us or die, my master."

2004 version:

"What is thy bidding, my master?"
"There is a great disturbance in the Force."
"I have felt it."
"We have a new enemy - the young rebel who destroyed the Death Star. I have no doubt this boy is the offspring of Anakin Skywalker."
"How is that possible?"
"Search your feelings, Lord Vader. You will know it to be true. He could destroy us."
"He's just a boy. Obi-Wan can no longer help him."
"The Force is strong with him. The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi."
"If he could be turned, he would become a powerful ally."
"Yes... He would be a great asset. Can it be done?"
"He will join us or die, my master."

The new dialogue was revised to be consistent with what happened in ROTS. Vader is faking surprise because the person that is confirming to him that Luke is Anakin's son had said something completely different decades before. Something that would make Luke's existence impossible.

Vader is already aware of his connection to Luke as made evident by his interest in him and constant pursuit since before the beginning of the movie.

Because Vader serves Sidious and that would not only be completely innapropriate but also not how Vader would address his master. The new dialogue works, it's apropos, and doesn't spoil anything needlessly.

 

How did Vader find out Luke's name?
He obviously knew it before ESB started.
And he used in front of other imperial officers so it was not a secret.

Imperial spies is a likely answer or perhaps the rebels used Luke's name as the Hero of the rebellion.

Either way, Vader must have gotten permission from Sidious to use those ships.
Was the info about Luke known then?
If it was, did Vader not talk to Sidious? Once Vader knows about Luke and then talks to Sidious, then he would bring this up.
Was Luke's name known but they had not figured out the connection to Anakin?
That makes them both seem dim.

Vader knows Sidious yes so why would he think that he could get anything about asking him about this?
Vader knows that Sidous lied, bringing it up is pointless.
And if that is Vader's question, as I said, Sidious answer makes no sense.

So no, the new dialogue does not work, is sounds awkward and roundabout. And paints either Vader as clueless as he could not figure out the obvious, or he tries a very weak lie to cover up the obvious.
Plus it creates issues about how long Luke's name has been known to the empire, did only Vader know, how? If he did, why did he talk about it openly? If both he and Sidious knew before Vader left, why didn't they talk about it then?
And did he really think that he could hide this from Sidious? Again he talks about Luke openly.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

How? Why would Vader need permission to use military resources from Sidious? He's already leading the military. His interest in Luke is personal. Being after the Rebellion is a military goal. And why would Vader talk to Sidious about his personal plans and interest? Specially when the end goal is to overthrow Sidious? That makes no sense either.

In both versions, Sidious is making Vader aware that he's onto him.

Vader is merely confronting Sidious with the lie in a servile manner (as he should, as opposed to be completely silent and left the audience guessing why nobody adressed what he was told in ROTS) and Sidious is deflecting the question by stating the obvious: that both of them know the truth and there's no point in questioning him.

Opinion noted. I obviously disagree as I've explained above, since the dialogue does work, is not awkward but appropriate, and is consistent with the overall story.