During Fan Expo Boston, Hayden Christensen teased his desire to keep donning the black suit as both Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader, beyond his alredy confirmed return in Ahsoka season 2. But that leaves us with the burning question: should Vader really get his own solo project? And if so, would it work better as a Disney+ series or as a full-blown cinematic experience?
Why a Movie Makes More Sense Than a Series?
Let's get one thing out of the way, when I say "a Darth Vader project", I'm picturing a movie, not a series. Why? Because if you're going to center an entire story around the galaxy's most iconic villain, you don't stuff him into a streaming slot. You put him on the biggest, loudest screen possible.
And frankly, Disney seems to agree. After years of frantically pumping out series to feed the Disney+ vs Netflix streaming wars, the House of Mouse has clearly shifted gears. Sure, we got gems like Andor, the first seasons of The Mandalorian, and even Loki (to bring an example from the neighboring house). But we also got...well, Willow. And let's not even start on The Acolyte.
The current strategy? Fewer shows, more big-budget, big-character films. And to add to this argument, the very success of the Revenge of the Sith re-release may have triggered a warning sign at Disney.
Hayden's Dream: The Clone Wars on the Big Screen
Hayden has said he'd love to revisit the Clone Wars era with Ewan McGregor back at his side. Sounds amazing, right? Lightsabers, brotherhood, Natalie Portman. The whole nostalgic buffet.
The problem? Narratively, that era is alredy saturated thanks to The Clone Wars series. Every emotional beat, every battle, every tragic foreshadowing has been dissected frame by frame. Could Disney find gaps to fill? Sure. But would it be strong enough to carry a two-hour cinematic epic? Doubtful.
And let's be real: time hasn't exactly stood still. The prequels hit theaters 20 years ago. If you set a movie during the Clone Wars, suddenly you're stuck de-aging Hayden, Ewan and Natalie for an entire runtime.
Yes, The Irishman pulled off wall-to-wall de-aging (and let's be honest, that was the only good example among Gemini Man and The Dial of Destiny). But even then, the uncanny valley was still alive and well. Imagine two solid hours of a CGI Hayden trying to look 23 again. No thanks.
That's why a Vader movie set post-Revenge of the Sith, where Hayden's mostly hidden behind the armor makes so much more sense. The scars, the mask, and the voice modulation? Perfect cover for age. The few moments where we so see his face, the makeup only makes it more hauntingly believable.
The Case for Darh Vader as a Protagonist
Now, here's the elephant in the room: does Vader even work as a lead character?
Some argue he's scarier in small doses a force of nature, not a man to empathize with. That giving him center stage risks overexposure.
Fair pont. But look at Joker (2019). A character once considered inseparable from Batman carried his own movie and won a Oscar in the process. Vader, like Joker, has enough psychological depth, pain, and internal conflict to fuel something equally compelling if done right.
Would I trust Disney to deliver this kind of movie? Normally I would say no, but they delivered Andor, so there is hope.
What a Vader Movie Could Explore
Picture this: a story set between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope. Vader isn't yet the universally feared boogeyman. He's still forging his legend.
We see him mercilessly crushing insurgents, instilling fear across the galaxy. While in private, he's a shell of a man, haunted by Padmé's death, suffocated by grief, and barely holding onto what's left of Anakin. His mechanical breathing becomes a mantra, a prison, a soundtrack to his own torment.
The emotional core? Grief, depression, and addiction. The Dark Side as a metaphor for destructive coping mechanisms, booze, drugs, rage, that never actually fill the void. At its heart, the story would be a tragedy: a man too broken to climb out the darkness, doomed to drown in it until the day Luke finally reaches him.
It would be raw. It would be brutal. And yes, it would be utterly unforgettable.
The James Earl Jones AI Controversy
But here's where things get messy. Vader's cinematic presence has always been inseparable from one man: James Earl Jones. His voice is Vader
Before his passing, Jones signed over rights for his voice to be recreated via AI. On paper, it's perfectly legal. In practice, it's...uncomfortable. On one hand, no fan wants a Vader without that iconic bass. On the other, can a synthetic voice trully carry same weight or does it cross a line into the uncanny and exploitative?
It's a debate the fandom (and Hollywood) hasn't settled yet. For some, it's a respectful way to keep Jones' legacy alive. For others, it's a soulless shortcut.
Should Disney Do It?
So, will we ever see a Darth Vader solo film? The signs are there. Hayden's interest is real, Disney's strategy aligns, and the character's legacy is too valuable to ignore.
The question is whether the studio has the guts to dive deep into Vader's psyche instead of just giving us two hours of lightsaber fan service. Done right, it could be a dark, tragic masterpiece. Done wrong, it'll be another hollow cash gra with a cool poster.
But let's be honest. If a Darth Vader movie ever gets announced, we're all buying tickets anyway