Fight Scenes

[Garren Jacobsen]

So, after watching the new Star Wars, don't worry I won't spoil it, I learned someting about fight scenes. There are good ways and bad ways to do fight scenes, but then there are memorable ways. The good fight scenes are clean and have a certain wow factor. But the memorable ones mean something. To continue the Star Warsing I would like to compare two different fight scenes. The first is from Empire Strikes Back and the second is from Revenge of the Sith

ESB: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC-4Y4ehgxM

ROTS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSwy412nttI

The ROTS scene is good, but it isn't memorable. The reason why I don't think that it's memorable is that, while flashy, it isn't real. There are so many cool set pieces, but ultimately it doesn't feel like it means much of anything. Part of that is the two fighters don't look like they are trying to hit each other, the other part of it is that the fight just is lacking a certain feeling, a meaning, a purpose. It feels tossed in there just to be tossed in there.

Whereas the ESB scene is just...phenomenal. It means something. It moves the plot forward. It moves the character's forward, and it feels more real. (And in my estimation the new movie's fight scenes are more ESB than they are ROTS.

Anyways, what are your thoughts.

 

[MineOwnKing]

One of the differences is that Darth was genuinely scary. The intensity came from Luke facing his fear, he is no longer in a spaceship destroying an unthinking death star. Instead, he must get close to danger and test his mettle.

We already know that Darth is the superior swordsman and could squash Luke like a fly. We are witness to a transformation from boy to man, that's what makes the scene identifiable in comparison to our own challenges in the real world. The price he pays for initiation, is his hand. We feel sympathy for him and forgive him for abandoning his training.

The second battle you listed, is less about Anakin's transformation into Darth, than it is an allusion to the fate of the galaxy, which hangs in the balance of the outcome.

The battle is bigger than themselves, it is epic in the true sense of the word.

The score reflects that as well. Giant music for giant consequences.

Don't think of it as a duel, think of it as an atomic bomb.

 

[Penpilot]

When I look at the two scenes, ESB the fight is personal. Luke came to cloud city to help his friends, and he gave up his training to do so. In addition, we actually care about Luke and his friends' fates.

When I look at ROS fight scene, I don't feel anything. I really don't even know what the stakes are. Trade routes, treaties, the Galaxy, who gives a frak? And who gives a frak about the characters. I don't. Obi-Wan got high ground. *shrug* No where in the prequel series does it even hint at what the heck that' supposed to even mean? Chekovs gun, maybe put that on the mantel for the audience to see before you use it.

When you write a fight scene, the stakes have to be personal, and the fight in ROS feels anything but.

"Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."

 

[K.S. Crooks]

This week TSN (in Canada) had a special episode called Evolution of the Lightsaber. It goes through how lightsaber fights are taken from the Kendo martial art of the samurai and shows how the actors trained for their fights. I will place on youtube and write another post when it is there. I think the ESB fight is better than ROS because Vader is toying with Luke. In the beginning he uses only one hand because his goal is to turn Luke not kill him. In ROS Obei Wans goal is to bring Anikan back, but their skill and power are too close to each other for him to allow him to go easy. I think its all the different objects and obstacles they fight on that act as distractions and take away from the sword fighting.

For me the best sword fight is still in the Princess Bride, "I know something you do not...I am not left handed." Both men go from using their left hands to using their rights and the terrain of only sand and boulders keeps our focus on them not the surroundings. This fight has little emotion aside from the joy each character has for facing someone with equal skill.

Part of the reason ROS is a poorer fight may be because the first time you see it you already know who is going to win and how badly Anikan must be hurt. When you watched ESB for the first time you don't know the outcome in terms of winning the fight or Darth Vader's revelation.

 

[Codey Amprim]

It's hard to compare the two. Both fights are fought for different reasons, with different motives and outcomes. The thing about Star Wars is that everything that happens has a greater meaning.

I'll go ahead and say it: the ROS battle was probably my favorite of them all.

The second battle you listed, is less about Anakin's transformation into Darth, than it is an allusion to the fate of the galaxy, which hangs in the balance of the outcome. The battle is bigger than themselves, it is epic in the true sense of the word. The score reflects that as well. Giant music for giant consequences. Don't think of it as a duel, think of it as an atomic bomb.

And the explosion rocked the entire galaxy.

The way I see it, the fight isn't about destroying one another. It was a long winded struggle to see who was right. The victor's point of view seemed to be the one that would shape the fate of the future for the Galaxy. Although Obi-Wan was already on the losing side, he was still trying to prove a final point to Anakin, or to give him one last chance, but Anakin was firm in his newfound resolve. Thus, Ben gave him something to remember it by for the rest of his days. You could say that Ben killed Anakin at this point, because by the end of it all Vader was all that was left as he lay there burned and marred... Which also could be a reflection of his heart at this point in time.

It starts out as a lightsaber duel, but in the wake of the fray they began to destroy the world around them. That's the allusion. This fight would tear asunder the lives they had lived, and the universe around them. They get caught up in their own reckless abandon and it nearly kills both of them towards the end of the fight.

The high ground thing. This didn't really need explanation. Sure, it wasn't well pulled off, but that's general knowledge when it comes to multitudes of confrontations. He who holds the higher ground generally has the advantage in battle. Anakin, in his blind rage and drunk off his newfound power, ignored this simple rule, and charged to his downfall - Obi-Wan's final lesson to his Padawan.




While no one really likes to talk much less mention the Phantom Menace, I don't see much conversation about the confrontation of the Jedi and Darth Maul. What I mean to get at is that does anyone else see how Obi-wan, only after empowered by his emotion - a Sith trait - was able to destroy Maul? I'm surprised this never came up again. The movie played it off as a heroic avenging moment, but the irrationality in his state of mind could have easily killed him. As is warned by Yoda numerous times. Was Maul overpowered by this surge, or did they kill him off at this point because he served his purpose to the story? It's one of those things that always had a big questionmark in my mind over it.

 

[MineOwnKing]

Good points Codey.

Luckily it's a space opera large enough that the high speed pacing can get away with ignoring the details.

I found Qui-gon more interesting in general, but that might be a preference in actors.

I never liked the Darth Maul costume and it kind of ruined it for me. I couldn't take him seriously, although he did scowl pretty good.

I think the biggest question I'm left with is this: Why was Darth Vader never able to shoot lighting from his hand?

 

[X Equestris]

I think the biggest question I'm left with is this: Why was Darth Vader never able to shoot lighting from his hand?

Because both of them were cybernetic.

 

[K.S. Crooks]

Here is Star Wars Evolution of the Lightsaber-
[video=youtube_share;MiWuhzXQe1o]https://youtu.be/MiWuhzXQe1o [/video]

 

[MineOwnKing]

Because both of them were cybernetic.

Well,

He could still use normal jedi powers with his hands, seems plausible that he could do the lightning thing too.

I think it was a pretty big goof considering that Count Dooku could do it and he wasn't the product of immaculate conception derived of metachlorians like Anakin was.

 

[X Equestris]

Well,

He could still use normal jedi powers with his hands, seems plausible that he could do the lightning thing too.

I think it was a pretty big goof considering that Count Dooku could do it and he wasn't the product of immaculate conception derived of metachlorians like Anakin was.

The old explanation was that force lightning specifically required one's hands to use. No clue how it lines up in the new canon.

Of course there are out universe factors too, like force lightning not even being conceived yet when Vader first appeared.

 

[MineOwnKing]

The old explanation was that force lightning specifically required one's hands to use. No clue how it lines up in the new canon.

Of course there are out universe factors too, like force lightning not even being conceived yet when Vader first appeared.

Does that make sense though?

Count Dooku appears before Vader emerges, plus the Emperor uses it in the final battle against Yoda.

 

[X Equestris]

Does that make sense though?

Count Dooku appears before Vader emerges, plus the Emperor uses it in the final battle against Yoda.

Except Vader was made first. When Episode 4 came out, as the original Star Wars, Vader wasn't going to be Luke's father, Leia wasn't Luke's sister, and the Emperor was a weak man controlled by his advisors Vader wasn't even going to survive the initial script. Lots of things changed or were created throughout the development of the original trilogy. Again, these are meta reasons Vader doesn't have force lightning, not in-universe ones.

The in-universe explanation is that Dooku and Palpatine have their organic limbs.

 

[Penpilot]

The high ground thing. This didn't really need explanation. Sure, it wasn't well pulled off, but that's general knowledge when it comes to multitudes of confrontations. He who holds the higher ground generally has the advantage in battle. Anakin, in his blind rage and drunk off his newfound power, ignored this simple rule, and charged to his downfall - Obi-Wan's final lesson to his Padawan.

While no one really likes to talk much less mention the Phantom Menace, I don't see much conversation about the confrontation of the Jedi and Darth Maul. What I mean to get at is that does anyone else see how Obi-wan, only after empowered by his emotion - a Sith trait - was able to destroy Maul? I'm surprised this never came up again.

It's funny how those two fights kind of contradict one another. In Phantom, Obi Wan wins by tapping into his emotions and force jumping while Maul has the high ground. In ROS Anikin does the exact same thing and ends up jumping into an airplane propeller.

 

[Garren Jacobsen]

It's hard to compare the two. Both fights are fought for different reasons, with different motives and outcomes. The thing about Star Wars is that everything that happens has a greater meaning.

Be that as it may this fight was still very personal between the two. Those two were still "brothers" but not only that they were master and student. This should have been a fight between two friends for the fate of the galaxy it should have been both personal and epic. You got that in ROTJ as well as ESB. You didn't get that here. Part of it was the busyness of it all. Part of it was that the set up was poor as hinted at before. And most importantly I feel like the prequel trilogy focused on the wrong character. The focus should have been Obi-Wan with Anakin being the side character.

 

[Gryphos]

While I do agree that the RotS fight would have been so much better if they had done a better job building it up and reinforcing the emotional turmoil involved, I do still think that as a fight it served a different purpose to the fights in the original trilogy.

When Luke and Vader fight, it's entirely personal. Nothing else matters other than the two of them, and nothing would be gained if either of them won other than a personal sense of victory. Thus, it makes sense that the fight is comparatively more subdued. There's less music, the choreography is simple, the set pieces aren't as elaborate.

Whereas, when Anakin and Obi-Wan fight, it's about so much more than just the two of them. Yes, they make a deal about how they were once like brothers (and they could have done a much better job with this), but most importantly, the Galaxy is at stake. This isn't about Obi-Wan gaining personal victory over Anakin, it's about saving the Galaxy from Anakin by destroying him. Thus, everything is much grander. The choreography is more flashy (sometimes unrealistically so), the music is epic, the world is literally collapsing around them. You know how in old myths sometimes battles are exaggerated to god-like proportions like 'their fury was so great that they crushed islands as they fought' or 'with every swing of his sword, he cleaved the tip off a mountain'. Think of this like that. When Anakin and Obi-Wan fight, they're leaving a path of epic destruction. It's like a clash of the gods. Could the film have portrayed this while also having some more emotional connection? Probably, and that's where George Lucas failed. However, I think it's still important to consider the difference in tone and focus between the two fights, and by extension the two trilogies themselves.

 

[Addison]

Everyone fights for different reasons, no matter the universe. For survival, to reach a goal, etc. Whether it's with light sabers, automatic guns, battle axes, magic spells, bare hands, whatever's there. But what I've found, and has been made clear in previous posts, is that the fight is memorable to us, and means more to the story, when the fight isn't in the story just for the addition of action. Even if no one dies, the fights should mean something on some level of conflict in the story; an interpersonal conflict rising or being resolved, a character fighting to exert whatever internal problems are in their head, to send or receive a message from the antagonist, or to reach some objective/item/place important for the story to progress.

But the problem, and the reason why some fights aren't memorable, is because those fights give nothing to the story. Just because the body count, amount of lost blood, number of broken bones, expense of property destruction goes up, doesn't mean the stakes and/or tension will. To be honest with my own opinion, the stakes/tension will definitely not go up if the fight gives nothing to the story. It's just clutter and flare. So if you really want a fight in the story make sure the fight is tied into the story itself somehow.
Just friendly advice. Happy Writing.