Isn't the TCW movie like 7 weeks after AotC? Besides if anyone is gona grow faster it's Anakin so that'd make AotC Kenobi even further above AotC Anakin.
__________________
"You presume limits to our double standards. There are none." - Vitidiots
As per the novel, but that's just wrong. Volume 1 of OCW and numerous other comics take place before TCW, which span multiple months. I imagine some sourcebooks correctly list TCW's start-time, thus retconing it anyway.
The film has Ventress and Anakin knowing each other and Dooku remarking how Anakin's skills have "came a long way, further reinforcing the time gap. Plus they look significantly different than in AotC.
__________________ "There is only Revan. Only he can shape this galaxy as it is meant to be shaped."
It is. It was cut around. Not out. The Official Visual Guide and Junior Novel include the fight.
Furthermore, in the movie commentary, Filoni states that the fight was leftover from when the movie was the first 4 episodes but didn't work in the movie. So they cut away from it.
He's actually embarrassed by it. Because there's a random shot in the movie of Ventress walking up and asking for a status while two Droidekas roll up. That's her coming out of the pit. So yeah. Still happened, they just cut away from it for pacing reasons.
In Legends TCW starts 6 months into the war as per the 2012 Readers Companion. With everything up to Dreadnoughts of Rendili being compressed backwards to fit. The TCW Visual Guide for season 1 confirms Ventress had fought Anakin and Obi-Wan multiple times before the movie.
I'm no longer all that familiar with what all this power level stuff is about so I won't comment much on that exactly.
But would it even matter if they were the closest we get to Lucas's ranking, when we in fact don't really need Lucas's ranking in the first place, and either way however close they come they certainly don't come close enough?
And of course I don't think Nick Gillard's pulling all of these ideas out of thin air; his job is to communicate George Lucas's vision after all, and I'd imagine most of his claims are a combination of stuff that has been communicated to him and his attempt at making further sense out of it. Doesn't change the fact that he isn't an authority on canon and can't definitively be recognised as communicating canon facts or as a mouthpiece for GL.
As for whether he's an authority on some of the action we see on screen, obviously he is. But that doesn't really mean anything given that it only makes sense that the stuff we see on screen is merely a depiction of what actually happens in canon, as opposed to what actually happens in canon, exactly as it happens in itself (for various reasons, such as limitations of the medium). Inferences one might draw from the technical aspects of the action that we see on screen are thus not really sound inferences at all, as they don't reflect canon exactly as it happened and don't necessarily reflect the vision of GL or any other canon authority.
So I really don't see why anyone would take Nick Gillard's comments seriously at all.
Last edited by GM_Nebaris on May 12th, 2017 at 04:23 PM
May 12th, 2017 02:54 PM
