Poll
63%
16%
16%
5%
I agree that Qui Gon is underestimated, I mean he stood up well against Maul, but Luke more than stood up well against Vader. Luke is extremely powerful by ROTJ. He has the force not only to help him, like in ESB, but he has mastered what Yoda and Obi Wan taught him. He probably has the same amount of mastery of the force as Qui Gon, but much more raw power. Now, these are gut feelings, but Luke has learned so much, and has so much potential that he is fulfilling, and has learned from the greats. He has been taught to fight saber to saber well, to stand up against Vader. While I don't think it would be easy for Luke, I'm confident he could withstand, and counter anything Qui Gon throws at him. To say something like the graphics are good now a days so Qui Gon wins is just stupid.
No, Luke is below youngling level by ROTJ. There is no evidence that Luke has mastered jack of what Yoda and Obi-Wan taught him. Logic dictates that because it's such as short amount of time, he's nowhere close to mastering anything.
Your post has provided zero evidence other than your gut feelings; those of a Luke fanboy who uses the typical "zOMG, choreography sucked!" excuse.
Luke stood up to a Vader that didn't want to kill him. Wow. Great job. So if I pretend to fight a five year old and he "stands up to me," does that make him uber powerful? Does that make him more powerful than me?
If I take a dive while the five-year-old pummels at me and knocks me down despite the fact that I've been shown to have the physical strength to lift a man off the ground by the neck with one hand, did the five year old legitimately beat me?
Answer, of course, is no. Luke is an incompetant by the end of ROTJ. He will get tooled, badly. Zett Jukassa would tool him.
Originally posted by IKC
No, Luke is below youngling level by ROTJ. There is no evidence that Luke has mastered jack of what Yoda and Obi-Wan taught him. Logic dictates that because it's such as short amount of time, he's nowhere close to mastering anything.Your post has provided zero evidence other than your gut feelings; those of a Luke fanboy who uses the typical "zOMG, choreography sucked!" excuse.
Luke stood up to a Vader that didn't want to kill him. Wow. Great job. So if I pretend to fight a five year old and he "stands up to me," does that make him uber powerful? Does that make him more powerful than me?
If I take a dive while the five-year-old pummels at me and knocks me down despite the fact that I've been shown to have the physical strength to lift a man off the ground by the neck with one hand, did the five year old legitimately beat me?
Answer, of course, is no. Luke is an incompetant by the end of ROTJ. He will get tooled, badly. Zett Jukassa would tool him.
There is no evidence that he didn't master anything either, if you want to say that.
The choreography was not what is is today. If the PT was remade it would have tons more eyecandy than back in 1980.
Luke took Vader fair and square. You have no evidence against this.
No, but why would you want to get pummeled by a five year old?(why would Vader want to lose to Luke?)
Wow. That right there is an anti-Luke fanboy statement.
There is no evidence that he didn't master anything either, if you want to say that.
Asking the opposition to prove a negative, logical fallacy. Great debating skill! You win the "First to Ask Me to Prove a Negative" award!
The choreography was not what is is today. If the PT was remade it would have tons more eyecandy than back in 1980.
Fanboy Excuse #23: "zOMG CHOREOGRAPHY/TECHNOLOGY SUXXORED!"
Guess what? Movies are the highest level of canon, your opinions aren't. Ergo, Luke fights like an incompetant nitwit. Get over it.
Luke took Vader fair and square. You have no evidence against this.
Is that why he made little to no offensive attacks to speak of during the entire fight? Is that why he got knocked down after one of the most telegraphed attacks of all time, complete with ninja scream, despite the fact that he's shown to have the physical strength to lift men off the ground with one arm?
Face it. Vader wasn't looking to kill Luke. Further proof is in ESB when Vader takes the kid gloves off and promptly dices Luke's hand off after Luke gets a lucky shot on his shoulder.
No, but why would you want to get pummeled by a five year old?(why would Vader want to lose to Luke?)
Perhaps because he didn't want to kill him? Perhaps because he wanted to turn Luke to the Dark Side and destroy Palpatine and "rule the galaxy as father and son?"
There is no logical explanation for Luke's "victory" other than Vader not fighting to his fullest.
Yeah, I'm sure the evil Sith Lord didn't want to hurt a Jedi, his mortal enemy, (despite cutting his hand off and taking many swings that, had they connected, would have been lethal); but the Jedi looking for the good still left in his father and hoping to turn him back to the light side wanted to pound the hell out of Vader. No, Luke had more reason to hold back than Vader.
Actually, I'm glad you've learned to read my previous post.
Face it. Vader wasn't looking to kill Luke. Further proof is in ESB when Vader takes the kid gloves off and promptly dices Luke's hand off after Luke gets a lucky shot on his shoulder.
Dicing one's hand off is pretty different from killing them.
Luke channelled the dark side in that fight, and it was with Vader not trying to kill him. He was taunting him to join the dark side and give in to his anger the entire time. Then he hardly makes an offensive move while making menacing comments about Luke's sister. Yeah, that's a sure way to beat someone, real smart...
The fact of the matter is that the evidence displayed indicates he tanked the fight. Either way, Luke's lightsaber prowess is not shown on the level of PT duelists, and this is reflected in him having FAR LESS time to train.
We're not talking matters of hours, days, weeks, or months, we're talking about decades. Qui-Gon was about 60 in TPM, and he had (presumably) been a Jedi since he was 5. Yes, let's pit over 50 years of experience against 4 months of mostly non-saber combat. And then when the opposition points this out and the fact that Luke can barely handle a lightsaber, the Luke apologists suddenly start with the "zOMG bad choreogrpahy" and "Luke is teh Skywalker" excuses.
Fanboys.
Originally posted by IKC
Asking the opposition to prove a negative, logical fallacy. Great debating skill! You win the "First to Ask Me to Prove a Negative" award!Fanboy Excuse #23: "zOMG CHOREOGRAPHY/TECHNOLOGY SUXXORED!"
Guess what? Movies are the highest level of canon, your opinions aren't. Ergo, Luke fights like an incompetant nitwit. Get over it.Is that why he made little to no offensive attacks to speak of during the entire fight? Is that why he got knocked down after one of the most telegraphed attacks of all time, complete with ninja scream, despite the fact that he's shown to have the physical strength to lift men off the ground with one arm?
Face it. Vader wasn't looking to kill Luke. Further proof is in ESB when Vader takes the kid gloves off and promptly dices Luke's hand off after Luke gets a lucky shot on his shoulder.
Perhaps because he didn't want to kill him? Perhaps because he wanted to turn Luke to the Dark Side and destroy Palpatine and "rule the galaxy as father and son?"
There is no logical explanation for Luke's "victory" other than Vader not fighting to his fullest.
Why thankyou.
So, if the movies were remade, they would use the same moves? And look just as bad even with the new provided technology? I think not.
Little to no? No, he made plenty attacks, all you see Vader do is swing his lightsaber at Luke. I just watched it.
ESB Luke is so much weaker than RotJ Luke. Proof is, Vader, wanted to end the fight so he did. If Vader wanted Luke so bad, he would have done the same in RotJ.
Again, if Vader wanted Luke so bad, and Luke sucked so much, the fight would have been over in a matter of seconds.
Luke didn't fight to his fullest either, he even said he wouldn't fight him.
Originally posted by IKC
You should be certain that a father didn't want to kill his own son, especially since his lifelong fear was losing the ones he loved. I'm glad you're so observant.So Luke held back too, and that's why he cut off his hand? Right.
Vader didn't know Luke(other than in combat). He was willing to kill his best friend and father-figure for the Sith. Why would he care so much for a boy he only met once?
Why thankyou.
I'm glad you realize your incompetance.
So, if the movies were remade, they would use the same moves? And look just as bad even with the new provided technology? I think not.
So you're playing what if? 😆
Sorry, the movies have not yet been remade. Ergo, Luke's an incompetant nitwit still. Sorry, it must hurt your fanboy feelings very much.
Little to no? No, he made plenty attacks, all you see Vader do is swing his lightsaber at Luke. I just watched it.
Yeah, I'm sure you leaped to the DVD player right after I made this statement. 🙄
Here you go, have some Illustriapwnage:
Luke channelled the dark side in that fight, and it was with Vader not trying to kill him. He was taunting him to join the dark side and give in to his anger the entire time. Then he hardly makes an offensive move while making menacing comments about Luke's sister. Yeah, that's a sure way to beat someone, real smart...
ESB Luke is so much weaker than RotJ Luke. Proof is, Vader, wanted to end the fight so he did. If Vader wanted Luke so bad, he would have done the same in RotJ.
So much weaker? Prove up. Not much time passed between the movies.
Your theory holds no water, especially since Luke wouldn't have done Vader much good in overthrowing the Emperor if he didn't have a hand.
Again, if Vader wanted Luke so bad, and Luke sucked so much, the fight would have been over in a matter of seconds.
Yes, if Vader were actually trying to defeat/kill him. He wasn't, though.
Luke didn't fight to his fullest either, he even said he wouldn't fight him.
Then he leaps to his feet, does a ninja scream, and uses the Dark Side while hammering at Vader like he's swinging a baseball bat.