Vader was outmatched by Maul's clone, managing to beat him with the element of surprise, impaling Maul through his own torso -- yet the comic clearly demonstrates that Maul had him beat in martial prowess and would have killed him under most other circumstances.
TK won't save Vader, Ep. III Anakin was at least superior to the Starkiller that defeated Vader in TFU.
Also; bigger TK=/=higher powerlevelâ„¢.
Anakin's lack of telekinetic capability does not impair him as much as Vader is impaired by the limitations of his cybernetics, his respirator, his over-cumbersome armor. As far as strength in the Force goes, they're equal, both are as far along in unlocking the full potential of the Chosen One (according to fans that's twice Sidious, although I believe potential is more or less how fast power can be developed, not a plateau)...about 80% of Sidious according to fan-speculation, which is a fair assessment.
Originally posted by UltimateAnomalySame could be said for Vader.
Depends if Anakin is on his man period, or is in TEH Z0NE.
Both of their power levels are dependent on their resolve.
In fact Vader could have regenerated his limbs and burned tissue and damaged lungs using midi-chlorian manipulation to the extent that Darth Krayt did.
Originally posted by UltimateAnomaly
Not fan speculation.Lucas said 80%. Full-power: 200% Or something of that nature. Gotta google it, It's been a while.
I still think GL pulls things out of his ass during those interviews. Even his old notes during the OT changed drastically, with Han Solo originally being an alien and Windu's original concept having a different role within ANH, etc. etc. Then there's his "Derp, idk how Anakin cut his eye. I like to think he cut it in a bathtub, which is totally a rounded, non-sharp object in someone's house, because I really thought this through as you can tell. I'm hungry for more cash."
Originally posted by Stealth MooseHe donated over a BILLION dollars to charity...
I still think GL pulls things out of his ass during those interviews. Even his old notes during the OT changed drastically, with Han Solo originally being an alien and Windu's original concept having a different role within ANH, etc. etc. Then there's his "Derp, idk how Anakin cut his eye. I like to think he cut it in a bathtub, which is totally a rounded, non-sharp object in someone's house, because I really thought this through as you can tell. I'm hungry for more cash."
Eh, I can still criticize his relatively inconsistent and lax approach to a sci-fi epic that has made him both rich and a household name. Far less wealthy writers and directors have made complex, wonderful fictional worlds and been far more consistent.
GL's quote on Anakin's scar says a lot about how seriously he takes any of this, and that is not seriously enough to be consistent and reasonable. It's why you have stuff like him not using the professional swordsmen stand-ins for the Sids/Mace fight and instead giving us that embarassing ramba where the two fighters stare intently at each other and wave glowsticks around while twirling like eight-year-old ballerinas.
And that's avoiding the non-epicness of Maul's defeat (Maul stands there like a fool), the arrest of Palpatine prior (two Jedi don't move at all) and the scene where Anakin and Obi-Wan swing sabers like a foot apart and miss each other and their blades eighty times:
Overall, as a director he's horrible and his ham-fisted approach to EU has made any sanity in this sub-forum an uphill struggle.
Giving to charity (which is a huge tax write off and publicity stunt done by many rich people) does not sway me from these valid points.
Criticizing his work is fine. Doing it in such a way as to insult his intelligence is not, nor is accusing him of being greedy.
Saying its a publicity stunt is needlessly cynical and petty. And irrelevant considering the amount of good that money must have done, regardless of its intent. A hell of a lot more than YOU'VE ever done, I'll bet.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Criticizing his work is fine. Doing it in such a way as to insult his intelligence is not, nor is accusing him of being greedy.Saying its a publicity stunt is needlessly cynical and petty. And irrelevant considering the amount of good that money must have done. A hell of a lot more than YOU'VE ever done, I'll bet.
MEOW. Sorry to attack your man, Neph.
I'm free to insult the unintelligent way in which GL handled the interview question because his intent and coherence is key to some debate items.
When he says "IDK I think Anakin cut his eye falling in a bathtub", it tells me that he doesn't care enough to think everything through, sometimes doing shit for "it's cool", and he must think bathtubs are these sharp, dangerous objects. The scar is nearly a perfect line, so unless Anakin layers his bathtub with razor blades, this seems incredibly ridiculous.
If GL is just being silly, then good for him. Context is unclear. I'm allowed to interpret.
GL had made billions on the SW franchise, and LFL has in turn boomed with the merchandising from the film. He's not doing it entirely out of some focused need to tell a story; there's a profit motive involved.
Dedicated creators like Tolkien, George R. R. Martin, etc. are thorough and exercise a level of professional consistency. GL's decisions have, as we can see, been chaotic (Han shot first, decisions to replace professional swordsmen for actual actors which sacrifices quality of the fight) to simply fanfic-ish (Maul staring stupidly as he's struck down, Yoda getting zapped in the face or Sidious being pushed over his chair, the gif I posted above).
If I'm wrong in saying these things happened and I think he's not got his heart in it as much as he should, or that he's kind of become less about atmosphere and substance and more about flashy things and milking the cash cow, well, that's my bloody opinion.
I've never been in a position to generate billions which I could donate and still comfortably take care of my loved ones and maintain my chosen life style, but you betcha if I could I would too.
The act of giving to charity isn't itself indicative of morality; it can be done for pragmatic reasons as well. That was my entire point.