StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Link

Just a general interest article, but this was interesting:

Out of all the characters in the saga with lightsaber skills, Smart notes that the Dark Lord of the Sith could hold his own as a competitive fencer. "I think Darth Vader, is the most believable fencer especially when I look at his duel with Obi-Wan Kenobi in A New Hope," Smart says. "His footwork in that duel is quite amazing, which is the easiest way to identify a good fencer. I also like how Darth Vader retains his balance which is critical in modern day fencing -- being able to maintain one's balance for the next move."

Eh. Modern fencing is linear. Vader's helmet would limit his peripheral vision, and his overall side-to-side mobility appears lowered by the suit/armor, so he probably wouldn't do as well on an open battlefield as he does in the much more enclosed confines of the Death Star, Bespin, and the Second Death Star. In fact, DSII was the most "open" of the battlefields, and he had difficulty dealing with a single partially-trained Jedi (albeit with extentuating circumstances).

The Dark wrote:Eh. Modern fencing is linear. Vader's helmet would limit his peripheral vision, and his overall side-to-side mobility appears lowered by the suit/armor, so he probably wouldn't do as well on an open battlefield as he does in the much more enclosed confines of the Death Star, Bespin, and the Second Death Star. In fact, DSII was the most "open" of the battlefields, and he had difficulty dealing with a single partially-trained Jedi (albeit with extentuating circumstances).

I don't see why his side-to-side mobility would be limited any more than his forward and rearward mobility, though I suppose this is arguable.. you may be right.

As for the helmet, though, I don't think it limits his peripheral vision. Those aren't simple windows in his helmet that he looks through (ref. RotS).

The fencer didn't call Vader great, he just said this character has the best footwork. He looks good compared to the others.

The Dark wrote:Eh. Modern fencing is linear. Vader's helmet would limit his peripheral vision, and his overall side-to-side mobility appears lowered by the suit/armor, so he probably wouldn't do as well on an open battlefield as he does in the much more enclosed confines of the Death Star, Bespin, and the Second Death Star. In fact, DSII was the most "open" of the battlefields, and he had difficulty dealing with a single partially-trained Jedi (albeit with extentuating circumstances).

The Force would compensate for the loss of pheripheral vision unless he was facing a foe capable of cloaking their presence in some way, surely.

As a fencer, I expect that this is more of a publicity thing than anything else; I certainly can't see much in the way of comparison between fencing and lightsaber dueling other than the fact that both involve the use of melee weapons. Fencing is, as The Dark said, by its nature linear, as the fencers can move forwards and backwards only. Furthermore, a single handed grip is always used, and the swordplay has nowhere near as much power behind it as lightsaber dueling. In fencing, the target area is the torso, any other blows do not count, and slashes are not counted either. The only way to score is to lunge, which would impale an opponent if using real swords; however, this is not a very practical way of swordfighting in RL, slashing is more effective because once you have lunged, you have committed yourself to a position which it is hard to return from, and obviously your weapon is somewhat entangled.
Lightsaber dueling however is entirely freeform, and I can't remember ever seeing a Jedi or Sith lunge at an opponent and impale them. The only fight where parralels can really be drawn is Vader vs Obi Wan in ANH, and even then two handed grips are used, and slashing attacks are favoured, eg the blow that killed Kenobi.

Wasn't it Dave Prowse doing the fencing in ANH? The same Dave Prowse, who got replaced by Bob Anderson for the fencing-sences in TESB and ROTJ because he had no idea what he was doing?

Lazarus wrote:As a fencer, I expect that this is more of a publicity thing than anything else; I certainly can't see much in the way of comparison between fencing and lightsaber dueling other than the fact that both involve the use of melee weapons. Fencing is, as The Dark said, by its nature linear, as the fencers can move forwards and backwards only. Furthermore, a single handed grip is always used, and the swordplay has nowhere near as much power behind it as lightsaber dueling. In fencing, the target area is the torso, any other blows do not count, and slashes are not counted either. The only way to score is to lunge, which would impale an opponent if using real swords; however, this is not a very practical way of swordfighting in RL, slashing is more effective because once you have lunged, you have committed yourself to a position which it is hard to return from, and obviously your weapon is somewhat entangled.
Lightsaber dueling however is entirely freeform, and I can't remember ever seeing a Jedi or Sith lunge at an opponent and impale them. The only fight where parralels can really be drawn is Vader vs Obi Wan in ANH, and even then two handed grips are used, and slashing attacks are favoured, eg the blow that killed Kenobi.

Um, what you're talking about is only Foil fencing. The title of this thread indicates that the fencer in question is a Sabre fencer, and with a sabre, everything above the waist is target, and slashes count; in fact, they're often what are the scoring blows.

FTeik wrote:Wasn't it Dave Prowse doing the fencing in ANH? The same Dave Prowse, who got replaced by Bob Anderson for the fencing-sences in TESB and ROTJ because he had no idea what he was doing?

You sure it was "no idea what he was doing" as opposed to "didn't look good visually" ?

Because Vader's final series of strikes in that duel were beautiful to watch- I'm referring to his quick series of attacks just before their last position swap.

Considering that Jedi and Sith both use two-handed grips, perhaps it's better to compare lightsaber dueling with kendo (Japanese fencing-- the Japanese sword is designed to be used with both hands) instead of western fencing?

Sidewinder wrote:Considering that Jedi and Sith both use two-handed grips, perhaps it's better to compare lightsaber dueling with kendo (Japanese fencing-- the Japanese sword is designed to be used with both hands) instead of western fencing?

Either kendo or examine medieval fechtbuchs which contain information on longsword fighting (and I'm fairly certain we've discussed this before either in PSW or OT ). I recall discussing most of the guard stances from the OT and finding that except for a handful of Luke's, they were all proper or close-to-proper longsword stances.

I'm not too familiar with sword fighting, but the lightsaber fighting in the movies makes me think of men fighting with medieval broadswords (notice the two handed grip, the arching swings, and the slashing movements that seem to me to be suited for large melee weapons with weighted blades).

I would think that a weapons like the lightsaber (without any weight in the blade) would be better suited for fast paced fighting styles like those used when fighting with rapiers (sp?), like the fighting done between noblemen in 17th, 18th, and 19th century Europe.

If I've got it completely wrong, please let me know.

FTeik wrote:Wasn't it Dave Prowse doing the fencing in ANH? The same Dave Prowse, who got replaced by Bob Anderson for the fencing-sences in TESB and ROTJ because he had no idea what he was doing?

I remember reading that Prowse got replaced because he kept breaking the poles that were used as the lightsaber stand-ins. Not that Lucas couldn't afford more after the shitload of money the first film made.

Lazarus wrote: Lightsaber dueling however is entirely freeform, and I can't remember ever seeing a Jedi or Sith lunge at an opponent and impale them.

Darth Sideous and Darth Maul both use impaling lunge attacks quite effectively onscreen.

Good point about the different types of fencing and different types of scoring in each. It's also worth mentioning that they don't exclusively use two handed grips, that's more something they did in the first movie, because George told everyone the sabers were supposed to be "really heavy" plus they had those wires running up their sleeves, and they wanted to hide them easier (though we still see the wire up Alec Guinness's wrist in at least one shot during his fight with Vader).

There's a lot of one handed work in the later movies, especially in the prequels. There is definatley some foil and epee fencing influences here (Dooku even does a fencing salute to Yoda), but there's also many other influences too like Kendo, samurai sword fighting, broadsword, wood chopping and even tennis moves, plus probably some made up stuff (those spins for example).

The OT came out before the Highlander movies, but I can't help but see influences from the Highlander fights in the Prequels. Of course the original Highlander had help from one of the great fight choreographers who worked on Errol Flynn in the Adventures of Robin Hood, etc. so it wouldn't be surprising if people like Bob Anderson and Nick Gilliard learned from that school and shared influence.

Kurgan wrote:The OT came out before the Highlander movies, but I can't help but see influences from the Highlander fights in the Prequels. Of course the original Highlander had help from one of the great fight choreographers who worked on Errol Flynn in the Adventures of Robin Hood, etc. so it wouldn't be surprising if people like Bob Anderson and Nick Gilliard learned from that school and shared influence.

I wouldn't, though, call Errol Flynn's style in Adventures of Robin Hood realistic. The way he keeps waving his sword like a bloody windmill above his head in some of the fights is rather hilarious.

Darth Cronos the Proud wrote:I would think that a weapons like the lightsaber (without any weight in the blade) would be better suited for fast paced fighting styles like those used when fighting with rapiers (sp?), like the fighting done between noblemen in 17th, 18th, and 19th century Europe.

That's something I've been thinking about for a while: why does lightsabre combat seem to be like broadswordfighting when it could simply use the kiss of the blade to bring death? I reason it's because lightsabres have no edges: they're essentially glowing sticks which burn everything they touch. Hence, the reverse side is a threat to the Jedi who is wielding the 'sabre, and heavy strokes threaten to bludgeon the Jedi's blade back into himself. This would explain why Yoda's flashier style is less common than Anakin or Mace Windu's stolid "beat them into submission" style: Yoda is small, so he can simply move out of the way of the 'sabre's impact much more easily than larger Jedi; hence, he can make use of his size in a monkey-on-crack whirlwind around the opponent.

Surlethe wrote:

Darth Cronos the Proud wrote:I would think that a weapons like the lightsaber (without any weight in the blade) would be better suited for fast paced fighting styles like those used when fighting with rapiers (sp?), like the fighting done between noblemen in 17th, 18th, and 19th century Europe.

That's something I've been thinking about for a while: why does lightsabre combat seem to be like broadswordfighting when it could simply use the kiss of the blade to bring death? I reason it's because lightsabres have no edges: they're essentially glowing sticks which burn everything they touch. Hence, the reverse side is a threat to the Jedi who is wielding the 'sabre, and heavy strokes threaten to bludgeon the Jedi's blade back into himself.

That makes sense, but it still doesn't explain why a Jedi or Sith would swing his/her lightsabre in a heavy arching swing for the slim chance that the blow would deflect his/her opponent's blade back on them so as to leave themselves open to a counter blow (the Force-fueled strength of a Jedi/Sith seems more than enought to stop such a fatal move, and I don't think there is any canon incident where this has happened).

If I remember the Qui-Gon/Darth Maul fight correctly, Qui-Jon did an over the top arching swing at Maul's head, Maul blocked this swing and immediately slipped his blade under the extended arms of Qui-Gon to impale him.

Darth Cronos the Proud wrote:
If I remember the Qui-Gon/Darth Maul fight correctly, Qui-Jon did an over the top arching swing at Maul's head, Maul blocked this swing and immediately slipped his blade under the extended arms of Qui-Gon to impale him.

Actually Maul butted Qui Gon's face with his saber handle stunning Qui Gon long enough for Maul to impale him with the next stroke.

Stravo wrote:Actually Maul butted Qui Gon's face with his saber handle stunning Qui Gon long enough for Maul to impale him with the next stroke.

Wasn't that right after Qui-Gon had tried the aforementioned overhead swing at Maul? I haven't seen Episode I in a while, so when I get home I'll have to watch the Qui-Gon/Maul fight again to see what the exact sequence of blows was.

Darth Cronos the Proud wrote:

Stravo wrote:Actually Maul butted Qui Gon's face with his saber handle stunning Qui Gon long enough for Maul to impale him with the next stroke.

Wasn't that right after Qui-Gon had tried the aforementioned overhead swing at Maul? I haven't seen Episode I in a while, so when I get home I'll have to watch the Qui-Gon/Maul fight again to see what the exact sequence of blows was.

There was indeed a spinning overhead swing on Qui Gon's part that Maul parried then followed up with the face butt thing and the impaling (IIRC)

Tiriol wrote:

Kurgan wrote:The OT came out before the Highlander movies, but I can't help but see influences from the Highlander fights in the Prequels. Of course the original Highlander had help from one of the great fight choreographers who worked on Errol Flynn in the Adventures of Robin Hood, etc. so it wouldn't be surprising if people like Bob Anderson and Nick Gilliard learned from that school and shared influence.

I wouldn't, though, call Errol Flynn's style in Adventures of Robin Hood realistic. The way he keeps waving his sword like a bloody windmill above his head in some of the fights is rather hilarious.

True enough. Though I've heard historians (not fencers that I know of) claim that the "waving your sword around like crazy" was used as an intimidation tactic by macho barbarians for centuries. Not that somebody in Robin Hood's time would have done such a thing as a viable tactic, but the character is often depicted as a bit of a show-off.

My point wasn't that these movies depict realistic fighting, only where they may have gotten their influence (rather than saying "it's all fencing" or "it's all kendo" or "it's all made up"). It's a combination of styles and flare to make something that looks good on camera.

Kurgan wrote:My point wasn't that these movies depict realistic fighting, only where they may have gotten their influence (rather than saying "it's all fencing" or "it's all kendo" or "it's all made up"). It's a combination of styles and flare to make something that looks good on camera.

I recall one fight coreographer complaining about this demand for flashy combat. Tight quarters, actors/stuntmen untrained in show combat and lots of things around that you're not allowed to break. He thought it only a matter of time before some director asks for a three-way axe fight in a phone booth, and please don't break the windows.

As for light sabers, I thought they were a bit hard to control while swinging about. Something to do with the mechanism that produces and focuses the blade also causes a sideways pull that has to be countered by strength or those wide sweeps.

Spetulhu wrote:

Kurgan wrote:My point wasn't that these movies depict realistic fighting, only where they may have gotten their influence (rather than saying "it's all fencing" or "it's all kendo" or "it's all made up"). It's a combination of styles and flare to make something that looks good on camera.

I recall one fight coreographer complaining about this demand for flashy combat. Tight quarters, actors/stuntmen untrained in show combat and lots of things around that you're not allowed to break. He thought it only a matter of time before some director asks for a three-way axe fight in a phone booth, and please don't break the windows.

I've read complaints from some of the guys trying to recreate the European sword forms about how unrealistic the fights are. Basically, any swordfighter you've seen in a movie would be dead in a few seconds against a true swordsman. Movement has to be controlled, or you're just giving your opponent an opening to kill you. Heck, half the time you can see they're attacking each other's weapons instead of attacking each other.

Darth Cronos the Proud wrote:That makes sense, but it still doesn't explain why a Jedi or Sith would swing his/her lightsabre in a heavy arching swing for the slim chance that the blow would deflect his/her opponent's blade back on them so as to leave themselves open to a counter blow (the Force-fueled strength of a Jedi/Sith seems more than enought to stop such a fatal move, and I don't think there is any canon incident where this has happened).

If you bring your blade in a heavy, arching swing, you're giving your arms momentum, and fueling the strength with the Force will only increase that momentum. I'm not talking about simply bouncing the blade back; I'm talking about trying to force the opponent's blade back on himself. If you're some wuss with a lightsabre, and you're up against someone who takes a broad swing, even if you catch the blow on your blade instead of a limb, the momentum of the swing is apt to push your blade back into you.

Incidentally, this would also explain why Jedi tend to use a two-handed grip instead of one: the weakest point is where the Jedi grasps the 'sabre, so to transfer momentum from the arms into the strike, they need to have a strong contact between the arms and the weapon.

Surlethe wrote:If you bring your blade in a heavy, arching swing, you're giving your arms momentum, and fueling the strength with the Force will only increase that momentum. I'm not talking about simply bouncing the blade back; I'm talking about trying to force the opponent's blade back on himself. If you're some wuss with a lightsabre, and you're up against someone who takes a broad swing, even if you catch the blow on your blade instead of a limb, the momentum of the swing is apt to push your blade back into you.

But the point I'm trying to make is that with Force-assisted strength on both sides (a Force user wouldn't even need to resort to something like that, he/she would just kill any outright who couldn't augment their strength with the Force) the likelyhood of pushing the lightsabre blade back onto your opponents face/neck/upper body is slim (As far as I can see it never happened in the movies and I do not remember it ever happening in the EU).

As far as I can tell, your reasoning that using medieval broadsword style fighting with lightsabres can make that happen is the only logical one, but doing so only gives you a small chance of having your opponents blade kill or wound him/her, while leaving youself open for quick moves from your opponent that can kill you, which doesn't seem too smart for people who have been trained in lightsabre combat from an early age (note that in AotC children who looked like they were six or seven were already being introducted to deflecting blaster bolts using the 'sabre).