# Your favorite Star Wars villain who dies in the same episode he's introduced



## Kai Lord (Jul 20, 2005)

The Star Wars saga has several iconic villains that are introduced and killed in the same Episode.  Which one is your favorite?


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jul 20, 2005)

Tarkin, without doubt.

Cool, calculating, in control, villainous but with class, poise, and presence.

He had hubris, of course ("In our hour of triumph?!"), and it was his downfall, but Peter Cushing just nailed that character in the few scenes he had.  He even gave Vader an order!

Tarkin.


Warrior Poet


----------



## JimAde (Jul 20, 2005)

Warrior Poet said:
			
		

> Tarkin, without doubt.
> 
> Cool, calculating, in control, villainous but with class, poise, and presence.
> 
> ...



 I have to agree.  What I wouldn't have given to see Tarkin and Dooku on the screen at the same time.

Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee ROCK!


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 20, 2005)

Toss up between Tarkin and Grievous...went with Grievous, but probably only due to the newness factor.

Tarkin definitely the coolness.


----------



## The Serge (Jul 20, 2005)

I can't vote.  I like Tarkin and Grevious equally.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jul 20, 2005)

Tarkin is great, yes, but he can't use four lightsabers simultaneously. I voted Greivous, because thanks to EU screwups, he's had three completely different personalities (Clone Wars' total killing machine, novelization's ruthless war criminal, RoTS' scheming, stalking buffoon) and they've _all_ been cool.

Although it is a close one, because anything Peter Cushing touches turns to gold. Sinister gold, yes, but gold.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jul 20, 2005)

Tarkin easily.


----------



## Wombat (Jul 20, 2005)

Tarkin.

He's a Villain's Villain.

Here is a man, cool and calculated, willing and happy to blow up whole planets.  And this with no backstory to help him along.  He is pure evil, vile to the core, and yet has an aura of respectability and style about him that makes him more than simply a thug.

For quite some time, Grand Moff Tarkin embodied all that was wrong about The Empire.


----------



## The_Universe (Jul 20, 2005)

Great poll! 

This is a tough one for me...I loved Greivous in all of his incarnations (I think the Clone Wars cartoons did him the best, however). Tarkin is obviously the most *evil* of the bunch, so he's high on my list....

But Jabba still wins. He's a symbol of decadence; the lynchpin of the seedy underworld that makes the Star Wars galaxy so amazingly entertaining. He helped give Star Wars a darkness - a depth and dimension that had only been hinted at in lines from the other two films in the original trilogy. 

And he eats live frogs and has hot dancing slave girls.

Jabba wins!


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 20, 2005)

Grievous all the way for me.  I just love the way he says, "Count DOO-ku."    Plus the four lightsabers (which unlike Maul's double-bladed saber, were NOT spoiled in the trailer, yay!), a cool bike, dramatic escapes, he trades insults and threats with the heroes, the most striking visuals and that way cool music as he descends the ramp when arriving on Utapau.

And a death that would bring a tear to Johnny Cab's eye.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jul 20, 2005)

Tarkin.  For one thing, Grievous and Jabba don't really stand on thier own.  A lot of their coolness and mystique comes from other sources.  Grievous' backstory in the EU obviously adds to the character.   And Jabba, while only on-screen in Jedi (Episode IV revised notwithstanding), played a significant role behind the scenes in all three original movies.  Tarkin, however, stands alone.

Plus, he treated Vader like his lapdog, bluffed Princess Leia,  and blew up an entire planet just to make a point.


----------



## Shade (Jul 20, 2005)

I voted for Maul, but it truly is a tie with the Fett for me.

I was terribly disappointed with the Episode 3 version of Grievous.  In Clone Wars, he was this impressive juggernaut of destruction who single-handedly slew the jedi.  In Sith, he was a sick, cowardly robot whose lightsaber prowess lasted all of 20 seconds before he fled on his ridiculous-looking toy tie-in vehicle.


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jul 20, 2005)

Yes, this:


			
				Rodrigo Istalindir said:
			
		

> Plus, he treated Vader like his lapdog, bluffed Princess Leia,  and blew up an entire planet just to make a point.




Excellent observations by the way.  Yeah, I didn't realize just how fearsome Vader was, really, until _Empire_ (and then there was no doubt, for me, that he was the baddest dude in the galaxy), but for _New Hope_, and in the context of this poll, it was Tarkin, for precisely what you said.  That man was truly villainous, and he carried it off with ease.  Awesome!

Warrior Poet


----------



## Crothian (Jul 20, 2005)

jabba was introduced in epsidoe 4.....course they cut that out and had him as a human....

I went with Darth Maul.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 20, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> jabba was introduced in epsidoe 4.....course they cut that out and had him as a human....



The cutting room floor /= the movie.


----------



## Bass Puppet (Jul 20, 2005)

Darth Maul


----------



## Renton (Jul 21, 2005)

Wombat said:
			
		

> For quite some time, Grand Moff Tarkin embodied all that was great about The Empire.




Fixed that right up for you.


----------



## Teflon Billy (Jul 21, 2005)

How come I don't see Greedo on that list?


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 21, 2005)

I went with Maul, but he was very poorly used.  He's got the best potential, though, I think.  One of the few EU pieces I like is the Dark Horse Darth Maul graphic novel, where he single-handedly takes down the Star Wars mafia.

He's kinda like the Terminator, but he's a Sith Lord and looks like the devil--that's bad-ass right there.


----------



## Testament (Jul 21, 2005)

Greivous.  Of course, I'm talking about the nightmarish whirlwind of destruction that he was in Clone Wars, which is how he deserves to be remembered.

He only just beats out Grand Moff Tarkin though.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 21, 2005)

Tarkin. He would have been right at home under certain Roman emperors as well...

The Auld Grump


----------



## LogicsFate (Jul 21, 2005)

Tarkin hands down. (insert everything most other have already said about him, expecially...

For quite some time, Grand Moff Tarkin embodied all that was wrong about The Empire.
-Wombat-


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jul 21, 2005)

I picked Darth Maul, but it was a tough choice between him and Tarkin.  Darth Maul only had limited screen time, but boy did he make the most of it.


----------



## MonsterMash (Jul 21, 2005)

What are these episodes I-III of which speak you?


----------



## Noldor Elf (Jul 21, 2005)

I chose Tarkin, tough call between him and Maul. 

I join to the camp saying that Maul had more potential than what was used in the movie.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Jul 21, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> jabba was introduced in epsidoe 4.....course they cut that out and had him as a human....
> 
> I went with Darth Maul.




Odd my DVDs have Jabba in Ep 4 (and Han doesn't even step on his tail!)

I went with Tarkin but it wasa tie for me between the badassedness of Jango (he goes toe to toe with a Jedi master and lives to tell about it!) and the cool detachment of Tarkin.

I'm surprised at the love for Grevious - even among people I know who loved the movie we agree that Grievious was a terrible 'villian'.


----------



## GlassJaw (Jul 21, 2005)

I voted Tarkin but I was bummer that Maul went down so easily.  He was a lone bright spot in an otherwise lame Ep 1.


----------



## The_Universe (Jul 21, 2005)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> Odd my DVDs have Jabba in Ep 4 (and Han doesn't even step on his tail!)
> 
> I went with Tarkin but it wasa tie for me between the badassedness of Jango (he goes toe to toe with a Jedi master and lives to tell about it!) and the cool detachment of Tarkin.
> 
> I'm surprised at the love for Grevious - even among people I know who loved the movie we agree that Grievious was a terrible 'villian'.



 Jabba belongs in VI - he's a nice addition in IV, but he was *introduced* in Return of the Jedi in 1983.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 21, 2005)

The_Universe said:
			
		

> Jabba belongs in VI - he's a nice addition in IV, but he was *introduced* in Return of the Jedi in 1983.



 I'd say Jabba doesn't count when it comes to this poll. Why?

Because Jabba was _introduced_ in Star Wars in 1977, we just didn't see him then.


----------



## Shade (Jul 21, 2005)

Psychic Warrior said:
			
		

> I'm surprised at the love for Grevious - even among people I know who loved the movie we agree that Grievious was a terrible 'villian'.




I'll bet that most of 'em vote for him based on his Clone Wars appearance (even though that is outside the parameters of the poll), where he was a terrific villain.


----------



## Gentlegamer (Jul 21, 2005)

Grand Moff Tarkin.  Peter Cushing's _gravitas_ as a villain matched that of Alec Guinness as a hero.


----------



## Zulithe (Jul 21, 2005)

Grievous. I can't believe how overrated Tarkin is here. To each is own! Grievous had a lot of style. He was mysterius (what? a droid but he has somekind of flesh underneath that metal face, wowza!) Could fight with the best of em (although it was more impressive in Clone Wars) and had a memorable style of speaking that is only rivaled by that of Jabba.


----------



## The_Universe (Jul 21, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> I'd say Jabba doesn't count when it comes to this poll. Why?
> 
> Because Jabba was _introduced_ in Star Wars in 1977, we just didn't see him then.



 Vote for the poll that *is*, then - not the one as you wish it to be. 

Hutts get no love....

...which is fine, I guess, since they're hermaphroditic and reproduce at will.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 21, 2005)

Let's look at each of 'em:

Darth Maul - He had the potential to rise to Vader-level of iconicness (is that a word?). The look was different from Vader's, but equally dramatic (the Devil to Vader's Death). He had the phisicality, and even his stoic lines were good (in a Terminator kind of way). But alas, he got cut in half two movies too soon, by the wrong padawan.

Jango Fett - This one had none of the mystery of his son Boba, he never utilized his armor for good (what's with the Princess Leia-type blasters?) and went down like a punk, without even a crescendo in the soundtrack.

General Grievous - He had potential (although less than Maul). His potential was used to full effect in Clone Wars, but in Episode III he was so cowardly and incompetent that it was hard to believe he was the military genius people called him. More like a bodyguard.

Grand Moff Tarkin - He didn't have any gimmick, other than being a space Nazi. He was evil to the core, he fully believed in his cause, he would order the death of millions without the tiniest emotion, and he ordered around the most powerful man in the galaxy, who treated him like an equal (even though Tarkin had no powers).

Jabba the Hutt - He was seedier side of Star Wars personified, was immune to Jedi mind tricks and who knows what he did to Leia during her slave-girl days? Still, his death wasn't marked by the ultimate victory of the good guys in the movie (like Tarkin's was).

So Tarkin it is.


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jul 21, 2005)

Pfttp.  Greivous wasn't a villain, he was a pawn, a tool, a dupe.  Played from one end of the galaxy to the other by Palpatine and Dooku.  You can't be a true villain if you're manipulated by the real bad guys.

Same goes for the Fett.  Villains have to be able to plan, which clearly Jango couldn't do.  First sign of trouble and he high-tails it straight to the Geonosis, leading the Jedi right to them.  And he, to borrow a phrase from S.L.J., went down like a b***h.  Villains taunt their prey, not get beheaded without saying a peep.

Maul showed some promise.  He was able to find Qui Gon on Tatooine, and he showed the inclination to toy with his prey on Naboo.  Still, he was just an errand boy, a sidekick, to Palpatine.  Plus, he used a double-bladed lightsaber, which is stupid and gimmicky.  It was the Star Wars equivalent of Odd Jobs bowler.  

Jabba is the only true competition for Tarkin, although good living had turned him into a shadow of the Hutt he used to be by the time of Episode VI.  Jabba was able to plan, wasn't someone else's pawn, and showed definite flair when he had Han turned into a wall hanging.  He had toadies and lackies, too.


----------



## Warrior Poet (Jul 21, 2005)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Claudio's analysis . . . plus: So Tarkin it is.



My man!   



			
				Rodrigo Istalindir said:
			
		

> Rodrigo Istalindir's analysis



Preach it!   

Warrior Poet


----------



## Darthjaye (Jul 21, 2005)

Shade said:
			
		

> I voted for Maul, but it truly is a tie with the Fett for me.
> 
> I was terribly disappointed with the Episode 3 version of Grievous.  In Clone Wars, he was this impressive juggernaut of destruction who single-handedly slew the jedi.  In Sith, he was a sick, cowardly robot whose lightsaber prowess lasted all of 20 seconds before he fled on his ridiculous-looking toy tie-in vehicle.




Are you telling me you missed the part at the end of Clone Wars where Mace Windu jacks up Grievous using the force?   He attempted to destroy Grievous using the force and only got to crush his casing in on his still functioning organs.  Remember, Grievous was a Cyborg not a robot.  I don't think Windu knew that when he hit him the way he did, but that's the reason Grievous was not more bad ass in the movie.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 21, 2005)

The thing is, by that logic Anakin should still be handless in RotS, since he lost his left hand about the same time Grievous had his torso crunched by Mace. Grievous could (and should) have gone through repairs in the meantime.


----------



## Shade (Jul 21, 2005)

It is Gary Oldman's, not Mace Windu's, fault that Grievous was so much weaker in the movie.  According to an Entertainment Weekly interview with George Lucas, Oldman decided to make Grievous frail and sickly.   

Besides, as a cybord, he could have easily been "repaired" before his Episode III appearance.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 21, 2005)

Shade said:
			
		

> It is Gary Oldman's, not Mace Windu's, fault that Grievous was so much weaker in the movie.  According to an Entertainment Weekly interview with George Lucas, Oldman decided to make Grievous frail and sickly.




Except that Gary Oldman didn't do the voice. He was originally rumoured to, but that never happened. Instead, it was a Lucasfilm sound guy who's name is currently eluding me. And it wasn't the voice actor's choice to make Grievous sound as he did, that was part of the script.

EDIT: Just looked him up. It was Matthew Wood



> Besides, as a cybord, he could have easily been "repaired" before his Episode III appearance.




But since the injury happened just as he was getting off of Coruscant with Palpatine, there wasn't exactly _time_ for this to happen.


----------



## devilbat (Jul 21, 2005)

My vote goes to Darth Maul.  He was the only bright spot of Episode 1, and deserved a far better death then was written.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 22, 2005)

Zulithe said:
			
		

> Grievous
> 
> > snip <
> 
> had a memorable style of speaking that is only rivaled by that of Jabba.



You spelled Yoda wrong.    You spelled it J-A-B-B-A.  Tsk tsk.


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 22, 2005)

I voted Tarkin.  He out-cooled and bad-assed Vader in ANH, which ain't easy to do.  Others have already mentioned the planet destroying and Leia bluffing.  He was sooo damn menacing and cavalier.

Maul and Grievous were very cool but they are a different kind of villain.  Anyone can put together a good fight and look bad-ass but not all villains are truly villainous.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jul 22, 2005)

Rodrigo Istalindir said:
			
		

> Plus, he treated Vader like his lapdog



This seemed even more impressive to me after watching the entire trilogy.  In the first movie, it merely seems like Tarkin is ordering around a subordinate.  But after seeing all three movies several things become clear.  Namely the fact that Vader could have _physically_ crushed Tarkin like a bug, _and_ that Vader had more clout with the Emperor than just about anyone.

So basically, Tarkin was either fearless, or crazy, or both.  _And_ ruthless, to boot.

Tarkin all the way.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Jul 22, 2005)

Tarkin may be the thinking man's villain, but I'd much rather come across him in a darkened alley than Darth Maul.  

I liked Tarkin, but I saw exactly enough of him as I needed to see.  Maul, OTOH, left me wanting much more.  Remember the speculation leading up to Episode II that involved some kind of "Return of Darth Maul" (I remember hearing about some fight with multiple Maul-clones)?  That excited a lot of people, and I was quite frankly surprised Lucas didn't bite.

Maul had a kickass weapon we'd never seen before, he had powers to rival a Jedi, he made as sweet an entrance as Vader would make later in Ep. IV, and then he wasted one of the nicest guys ever in the SW universe.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jul 22, 2005)

Tarrasque Wrangler said:
			
		

> Maul had a kickass weapon we'd never seen before...




Actually, back in the Tales of the Jedi comics, Exar Kun was the first with the double bladed lightsaber. And since Lucas is a self stated fan of those comics, its no surprise he lifted the idea. 

Still, Maul was cool. I never liked him enough to want him to come back as so many people did(there were even rumours that Grievous was made from the top half of Maul at one point), but he was great for his part in tPM.


----------



## Orius (Jul 22, 2005)

Maul kicked ass, but had no lines (ok, he had all of 1 line in the entire move).  He was more style than substance really.
Jango was a punk that got wasted by Mace Windu.
Grievous was a silly wheezing droid that never came off as menacing.
Jabba is in more than one movie, so he doesn't count — even if you want to disregard Episode IV SE, he does make a cameo appearance in TPM.

Tarkin, hands down. 

He's a cold, ruthless, classical sort of villain.  His iconic scene of villainy is the scene where he orders the destruction of Alderaan to get Leia to talk, and when she finally does talk, he turns around and orders Alderaan's destruction anyway.  He has the best dialogue of all the villains.  He also is the only character besides Palpatine himself that manages to reign in Vader, which bumps his impressibility up a few notches.  He also has the blind arrogance of a great villain: "Evacuate?  In our moment of triumph?  I think you overestimate their chances."


----------



## Orius (Jul 22, 2005)

Teflon Billy said:
			
		

> How come I don't see Greedo on that list?




Greedo was an even bigger punk than Jango that got wasted in an even worse way.

And his EU treatment makes him into yet an even bigger punk.

Greedo don't belong on that list.


----------



## Orius (Jul 22, 2005)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> Tarkin is great, yes, but he can't use four lightsabers simultaneously..




Bah, who needs multiple lightsabers when you can destroy entire planets?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jul 22, 2005)

Orius said:
			
		

> Bah, who needs multiple lightsabers when you can destroy entire planets?



Well, this poll isn't about power. It's about favorites. And, since Greivous fills me with malicious child-like glee, he wins, even though Tarkin is probably the more dangerous in the long run.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 22, 2005)

Orius said:
			
		

> Tarkin, hands down.
> 
> He's a cold, ruthless, classical sort of villain.  His iconic scene of villainy is the scene where he orders the destruction of Alderaan to get Leia to talk, and when she finally does talk, he turns around and orders Alderaan's destruction anyway.  He has the best dialogue of all the villains.  He also is the only character besides Palpatine himself that manages to reign in Vader, which bumps his impressibility up a few notches.  He also has the blind arrogance of a great villain: "Evacuate?  In our moment of triumph?  I think you overestimate their chances."



I totally agree. Tarkin is the best.. er... worst.. er.. my favourite villain so far. 

But wait: I just figured he might actually not fit into this poll. Didn´t he have an appearence at the end of "Revenge of the Sith"? Okay, it was a different actor, and I am not sure if the name was mentioned, but if we complain about Jabba in IV SE, we can complain about Tarkin in III.


----------



## Welverin (Jul 22, 2005)

Kai Lord said:
			
		

> Plus the four lightsabers (which unlike Maul's double-bladed saber, were NOT spoiled in the trailer, yay!)




That was shown in the Clone Wars shorts, so a fair number of us knew about it ahead of time, personally though I prefer how he fought in the first Clone Wars series where he spun around and was all around more acrobatic, which is how I prefer my villains and is why I voted for Darth Maul.

p.s. Thanks for the recommendation of the Annotated Screenplay a while back, haven't picked it up yet, but I shall.



			
				Orius said:
			
		

> Maul kicked ass, but had no lines (ok, he had all of 1 line in the entire move).




No! He had two maybe three, and I'm not even counting grunts or death noises.



			
				Orius said:
			
		

> Bah, who needs multiple lightsabers when you can destroy entire planets?




Which pales next to the force.


----------



## Shade (Jul 22, 2005)

Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> Except that Gary Oldman didn't do the voice. He was originally rumoured to, but that never happened. Instead, it was a Lucasfilm sound guy who's name is currently eluding me. And it wasn't the voice actor's choice to make Grievous sound as he did, that was part of the script.
> 
> EDIT: Just looked him up. It was Matthew Wood




Well I'll be damned...you learn something new every day!   Thanks for educating me.   

And this being a Lucas film...I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the script dictating the rules.  He's been known to allow actors to ad lib, change dialogue, and make suggested changes to their characters.  I'm not saying that this was the case, but he very well may have changed it based on Gary's suggestion, as the article states, and by the time Gary dropped out he'd already gotten on board with the changes.



			
				Ankh-Morpork Guard said:
			
		

> But since the injury happened just as he was getting off of Coruscant with Palpatine, there wasn't exactly _time_ for this to happen.




That's plausible.  Of course, it still makes him a far less cool villain in Episode III, and for anyone who hasn't seen Clone Wars, he probably comes off as a rather pathetic villain.

Speaking of Clone Wars, were it included in the poll (and treated as one big episode), my vote would be for Durge.


----------



## Desdichado (Jul 22, 2005)

Orius said:
			
		

> Bah, who needs multiple lightsabers when you can destroy entire planets?



"The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 22, 2005)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Maul and Grievous were very cool but they are a different kind of villain.  Anyone can put together a good fight and look bad-ass but not all villains are truly villainous.



So Grand Moff Tarkin, Carrot Top, Don Knotts, and Margaret Cho can all "put together a good fight and look bad-ass"?  Give Margaret Cho some make-up and a double-bladed saber and suddenly she's as bad-ass as Darth Maul?  I mean, if anyone can do it, right?  I don't think so....


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jul 22, 2005)

Kai Lord said:
			
		

> So Grand Moff Tarkin, Carrot Top, Don Knotts, and Margaret Cho can all "put together a good fight and look bad-ass"?  Give Margaret Cho some make-up and a double-bladed saber and suddenly she's as bad-ass as Darth Maul?  I mean, if anyone can do it, right?  I don't think so....



Grand Moff Tarkin certainly could, if that's the way they'd wanted to go with him.  Hand him a lightsaber, and I can't imagine Tarkin couldn't do at least as well as Count Dooku.  Except he's still got that sinister flair about him to boot...

The rest of your choices are comedians, chosen for their absurdity I think.  I don't think they disprove the point any.


----------



## Orius (Jul 22, 2005)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> I totally agree. Tarkin is the best.. er... worst.. er.. my favourite villain so far.
> 
> But wait: I just figured he might actually not fit into this poll. Didn´t he have an appearence at the end of "Revenge of the Sith"? Okay, it was a different actor, and I am not sure if the name was mentioned, but if we complain about Jabba in IV SE, we can complain about Tarkin in III.




Hmm, good point.  I think there was supposed to have been a young Tarkin there at the end.  In which case I'd have to switch my vote to Maul.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 22, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> Grand Moff Tarkin certainly could, if that's the way they'd wanted to go with him.  Hand him a lightsaber, and I can't imagine Tarkin couldn't do at least as well as Count Dooku.  Except he's still got that sinister flair about him to boot...



"At least as well as Dooku" doesn't quite measure up to Maul or Grievous when it comes to fighting styles.  And Christopher Lee doesn't do a sinister flare?  As if.



			
				Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> The rest of your choices are comedians, chosen for their absurdity I think.  I don't think they disprove the point any.



You're right.  His point still stands.  "Anyone" (including absurd looking comedians) could have fight scenes as cool as Darth Maul and General Grievous.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 22, 2005)

Orius said:
			
		

> Hmm, good point.  I think there was supposed to have been a young Tarkin there at the end.  In which case I'd have to switch my vote to Maul.



Why?  Does Tarkin's appearance in ROTS suddenly change the fact that he still died in the Episode in which he was first introduced?


----------



## John Crichton (Jul 22, 2005)

Kai Lord said:
			
		

> So Grand Moff Tarkin, Carrot Top, Don Knotts, and Margaret Cho can all "put together a good fight and look bad-ass"? Give Margaret Cho some make-up and a double-bladed saber and suddenly she's as bad-ass as Darth Maul? I mean, if anyone can do it, right? I don't think so....



The anyone was more referring to the creators rather than any person/actor/shmo off the street.  Just about any decent director can put together a good action sequence where the bad guy looks cool and does lots of bad-ass manuvers(especially with CGI the way it is these days) but it's much, much harder to have a villain REALLY make you love to hate him.  I didn't love to hate Darth Maul, I thought he was cool but he was more like a pit-bull than a character to me.  He was created to be destroyed by a hero.  The same can be said (except the pitt-bull part) about all the characters save Jabba in the poll.

Jabba is the only one on the list to really come close to being a villain as opposed to being a bad-guy or simply an antagonist.  Tarkin was Pure Villain and one of the best in sci-fi cinema history.  No special effects needed to make Tarkin a villain.  Take away Maul's fighting and he's nothing.  At least Jabba and Jango had some story to em.

Now don't get me wrong, I like all 5.  I just like Tarkin far above the rest if we are talking about real villainy.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 23, 2005)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> The anyone was more referring to the creators rather than any person/actor/shmo off the street.  Just about any decent director can put together a good action sequence where the bad guy looks cool and does lots of bad-ass manuvers(especially with CGI the way it is these days) but it's much, much harder to have a villain REALLY make you love to hate him.



I don't think you need to "love to hate" villains for them to work, or work well.  That is definitely a respectable judging criteria, but I think some villains just draw you into their performance whether or not you empathize with them, hate them, or are amused/entertained by them.

I too love all the Star Wars villains and don't want to knock anyone else's pick.  Tarkin is a _great_ villain, and serves the story incredibly well, but I feel he needs the rest of the story more than some of the others on the list.  If you distill ANH to *just* the scenes where Tarkin is onscreen (meaning no footage of Alderaan blowing up, etc.) and do the same for ROTS with regard to General Grievous, I'm going to have *way* more fun watching Grievous.  He's just a fun villain with great character traits whether he's fighting, insulting or threatening heroes, running for his life, etc.  Tarkin is icy, refined, and appears utterly fearless.  But in and of themselves those traits don't translate to as much entertainment for me.  Don't get me wrong, I'm making a specific point to highlight what *I* enjoy in a good Star Wars villain, not suggesting that villains should exist in a vacuum.

I also like it when villains get up close and personal with the heroes.  Save for the back and forth between Princess Leia (which was great) in the middle of the movie, Tarkin is somewhat detached from the principal characters, particularly the primary hero.  I'm not suggesting that Tarkin would have been better off fighting the characters in close quarters combat since that not only wouldn't have served the story but it isn't even necessary for a good villain (Jabba is a good example of having personal issues with the heroes but still letting others do his dirty work), it was just a by-product of his character that makes me appreciate most of the others more.

So Tarkin was great and very necessary to the story, just not the most entertaining for me.  And I still think you're selling Lucas and his cast and crew short for their amazing work at creating memorable villains.  If any decent director could create such villains by making them badass and good fighters, how come the Star Wars baddies are such icons as opposed to merely par for the course?  Why isn't Lurtz, the Uruk-hai captain from FOTR a household name?  He looks cool, had a sweet fighting style, and had about as much screen time as Darth Maul and was in a much better movie that has been watched and rewatched the world over.

But Darth Maul is the one people remember.  Why?  I'd say its just that certain "X" factor that the really top tier villains either have or don't.  Lucas somehow seems to know how to capture that lightning in a bottle whether he's making the great ESB or the much maligned TPM.  The same can't be said for, well, probably any other filmmaker, let alone any "decent" one.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jul 23, 2005)

Kai Lord said:
			
		

> "At least as well as Dooku" doesn't quite measure up to Maul or Grievous when it comes to fighting styles.  And Christopher Lee doesn't do a sinister flare?  As if.



Dooku's got about as much sinister flair as my grandpa.  Which is to say none at all.  And Grievous' fighting style consisted of him getting his rear handed to him by a guy with _one_ lightsaber compared to his four.   Admittedly, I'm not counting the cartoon here, because at the end of the day, it's a cartoon, not one of the movies.

Still, I agree with you that this is all opinion.  Tarkin makes a more entertaining villain for me, moreso than Maul or Grievous (especially Grievous), but I respect that your tastes are different. 

Regarding why Lucas' villains are so well-remembered, I think a large part of the reason is that the Star Wars villains are iconic.  They have bold, symbolic designs, like superheroes (or villains  ) and as a result, they stick in your mind.  Maul, like Vader, has a wonderful design.  Too bad Lucas never gave him the plot to go with it.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jul 23, 2005)

Kai Lord said:
			
		

> I Why isn't Lurtz, the Uruk-hai captain from FOTR a household name?  He looks cool, had a sweet fighting style, and had about as much screen time as Darth Maul and was in a much better movie that has been watched and rewatched the world over.




Well, for one reason, his name isn't actually spoken in the movie.

/tangent
Demiurge out.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Jul 24, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> Dooku's got about as much sinister flair as my grandpa.  Which is to say none at all.




Well, ya gotta admit that it is hard to be menacing when your name's Dooku. (*Slaps Lucas across the face for that one... then continues beating on him for oh so many other reasons... starting with Jar Jar.*)

The Auld Grump - Cushing, on the other hand, could be menacing while wearing fuzzy slippers.


----------



## wingsandsword (Jul 24, 2005)

TheAuldGrump said:
			
		

> Well, ya gotta admit that it is hard to be menacing when your name's Dooku.



His name comes from the Japanese word for "Poison", actually, a reference to the subtle poisoning he spread with his ideas, being the element who fractured the Republic and paved the way for the Clone Wars.  Much like Palpatine is a reference to Palatine, the hill where Roman Emperors built their palaces (and thus the name was supposed to sound Imperial and powerful).


----------



## Welverin (Jul 24, 2005)

wingsandsword said:
			
		

> His name comes from the Japanese word for "Poison", actually, a reference to the subtle poisoning he spread with his ideas, being the element who fractured the Republic and paved the way for the Clone Wars.




Still too close to dookie.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jul 24, 2005)

Welverin said:
			
		

> Still too close to dookie.



Yeah, Dooku is a great name... if you don't speak English. Unfortunately, English is blessed with the word dookie.

Demiurge out.


----------



## S'mon (Jul 24, 2005)

Tarkin is by far the best of this bunch; the only SW villain comparable to Vader in coolness.


----------



## Klaus (Jul 24, 2005)

"Dooku" sounds exactly like "From the Ass" in Portuguese.

So down here he was renamed Dookan.

Same thing with Jedi Master Sypho Dias ("Gets f****d"), who became Zypho Vias.


----------



## glass (Jul 25, 2005)

I voted for Tarkin.

I have always thought of him as the overlooked villain of Star Wars. Then I read the thread...  


glass.


----------



## glass (Jul 25, 2005)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> Yeah, Dooku is a great name... if you don't speak English.




Well, if you don't speak American.  

I think I know what dookie means (it's er, droppings, right  ), but only because of the Green Day album. It certainly isn't the first thing I thought of when I heard Dooku's name.

My disapointment with Dooku was that I heard he was to have a curved light-sabre, and he didn't. Not Lucas's fault, of course.


glass.


----------



## glass (Jul 25, 2005)

Kai Lord said:
			
		

> Why?  Does Tarkin's appearance in ROTS suddenly change the fact that he still died in the Episode in which he was first introduced?




Well, if you watch all the films in order I-VI, you'll see him in III before IV, so you could argue he's introduced there.

(Apparently. I actually missed his appearance in III. Guess I'll have to see it again).


glass.


----------



## glass (Jul 25, 2005)

Lord Pendragon said:
			
		

> This seemed even more impressive to me after watching the entire trilogy.  In the first movie, it merely seems like Tarkin is ordering around a subordinate.  But after seeing all three movies several things become clear.  Namely the fact that Vader could have _physically_ crushed Tarkin like a bug, _and_ that Vader had more clout with the Emperor than just about anyone.




Interesting question. How much did Tarkin know about Vader's relationship with the Emporer? It seemed to be quite strongly implied in the original trilogy that noone (except Vader) new the Emporer was a Sith lord.

Judging by RotS, Yoda and Obi-Wan knew as well, but they were hardly in any position to shoult it from the roof tops, and the emporer and vader between them silenced the other possible witnesses.


glass.


----------



## glass (Jul 25, 2005)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> Tarkin is great, yes, but he can't use four lightsabers simultaneously.





			
				Orius said:
			
		

> Bah, who needs multiple lightsabers when you can destroy entire planets?





			
				Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> "The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."




But Grevous couldn't actually use the force, could he? He may have used four lightsabres, but all he could do with them twirl them around real fast. I know he said that Dooku had trained him in 'your Jedi Arts', but I don't think he would necesarily have understood that there was more to being a jedi than being good with a lightsabre.


glass.


----------



## Kai Lord (Jul 25, 2005)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> Well, for one reason, his name isn't actually spoken in the movie.



That didn't hurt Boba Fett (whose name was never spoken in ESB).


----------



## Rodrigo Istalindir (Jul 25, 2005)

glass said:
			
		

> Judging by RotS, Yoda and Obi-Wan knew as well, but they were hardly in any position to shoult it from the roof tops, and the emporer and vader between them silenced the other possible witnesses.




You know, you think ol' Obi-wan and Yoda might have given poor Luke a heads-up on that, especially the  whole Force lightning thing.


----------



## Henry (Jul 25, 2005)

WHAAAATTTT!!!!!?!?!?

No love for Admiral Ozzel? 

--------------------------------------

My favorite was probably a Toss-up between Tarkin and Maul; Maul because he held such promise (he was played by Ray Park, for God's Sake!!!!) but Tarkin because there was so much gravitas in his performance, as an earlier poster said. Peter Cushing could convey power just in every movement and line, and did it well. Where Ray Park as Darth Maul conveyed catlike reflexes, deadly precision, and skill, he was a mad-dog killer type, silent, deadly, with no real meat to the role.

Grand Moff Tarkin was Hannibal Lecter.
Darth Maul was Hannibal Lecter's Knife.


----------



## glass (Jul 25, 2005)

Rodrigo Istalindir said:
			
		

> You know, you think ol' Obi-wan and Yoda might have given poor Luke a heads-up on that, especially the whole Force lightning thing.




Good point.

Maybe they figured he wasn't ready. After all, they didn't tell him Vader was his father until Vader did. Also, the last thing they wanted was for him to run off and get himself apprenticed to a Sith lord!

Damnit, this thread it making me want to watch the whole lot again, just to see who says what to whom about what...  


glass.


----------



## wingsandsword (Jul 26, 2005)

glass said:
			
		

> Interesting question. How much did Tarkin know about Vader's relationship with the Emporer? It seemed to be quite strongly implied in the original trilogy that noone (except Vader) new the Emporer was a Sith lord.
> 
> Judging by RotS, Yoda and Obi-Wan knew as well, but they were hardly in any position to shoult it from the roof tops, and the emporer and vader between them silenced the other possible witnesses.



Given how both high Imperial brass (General Tagge) and low Fringe scum (Han Solo) disbelieved in the Force, and how only the Rebels who carried the torch from the old Republic seemed to believe in the Jedi, it seems pretty clear that the Emperor wanted to quash all belief in the Force.  The Jedi were to be thought of as crazy old wizards, crackpot mystics, fanatical terrorists who tried to assassinate the beloved leader.  The Sith were just some odd term for something to do with the Jedi, somehow, that apparently the Emperor didn't object to, maybe they were the Jedi who sided with him, but only Vader survived (average galactic citizen's opinion).

It seemed pretty clear that to all but probably the surviving Jedi (Palpatine's true nature was probably announced on that Beacon that Obi-Wan set on Coruscant) and other outcasts and enemies of the state, the Emperor was just a beloved and powerful leader who protected the Republic through his bold leadership in the Clone Wars, survived assassination attempts by the fanatical Jedi, and rebuilt the smoking ashes of the galaxy into a New Order without the impediments of earlier ages, or "throwbacks" like Jedi.

Vader being an open Force user and not hiding his beliefs was seen as quaint ("don't frighten us with your sorcerer's ways, Lord Vader), and tolerated because he apparently was the Emperor's Right Hand Man (after all, he saved the Emperor from the Jedi assassination attempt, making him the only Jedi who was "loyal").  Of course, the highest levels of Imperial command learned to fear him (or else), and probably the grunts were superstitious and there were all kinds of rumors about what he could do (probably mostly true), but to most of the Empire he was just an interesting throwback to an earlier age, kept around because of his absolute loyalty to the Emperor.


----------



## Orius (Jul 28, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> WHAAAATTTT!!!!!?!?!?
> 
> No love for Admiral Ozzel?




Admiral Ozzel was an even more incompetant villain than Greedo.


----------



## glass (Jul 28, 2005)

wingsandsword said:
			
		

> the Emperor was just a beloved and powerful leader who protected the Republic through his bold leadership in the Clone Wars, survived assassination attempts by the fanatical Jedi, and rebuilt the smoking ashes of the galaxy into a New Order without the impediments of earlier ages, or "throwbacks" like Jedi.




Yes, exactly. Palpatine was a very good polititian, he spun everything perfectly. Of course, anyone who crossed him or got in his way saw a different side to him, but they generally didn't live to tell about it.

Of course once he started blowing up planets, his popularity ratings started to go down, but by then most people were too scared to do anything about it. Which is why both his rise in RotS and his fall in RotJ were celebrated...


glass.


----------



## Zweihänder (Jul 29, 2005)

I voted for Grievous, because he was totally sweet in the show.

By the way, Jabba was introduced in episode IV.


----------



## Dark Jezter (Jul 29, 2005)

Zweihänder said:
			
		

> By the way, Jabba was introduced in episode IV.




Or, if you're going by chronological order instead of release order, Jabba was introduced in Episode I.


----------

