Originally posted by Darth Thor
1) Wow, this has got completely retarded:What? There's hardly a scene in the Novel with THE EXACT SAME DIALOGUE. The novel is based on Lucas's Original script and notes. That's why it gives you deeper insight into the scenes.
But saying THAT WHOLE SCENE WAS A CONTRADICTION, is as Retarded as saying the Whole Novel is A Contradiction.
Wow. Just wow. The lack of understanding is Outstanding.
2. You've just Posted RIGHT THERE how for Star Trek the television feats count because the characters have appeared in both mediums and because Both those mediums are Canon to each other. Because it's a SHARED UNIVERSE.
Star Wars has for the last 10 years had Shared Universe with the Movies and Animation, and now also with the Movies and Comics and Novels.
3) And the movie novelizations Only give greater insight and understanding into whats happening in the movies. As do the Movie commentary's (Obviously).
4) Again, I don't see what's so difficult to understand. KT was arguing a scene in the novel that doesn't happen in the film.
5) I was arguing a scene that does that in the film, where the novel gives us insight into what's going on in the characters minds. In Mace's case, he knew Sidious's Power was Beyond him.
6) I'm sure I do to people with little common sense.
7) Yeah, except your interpretation doesn't count. The Movie novel's extended insight and Movie commentary's however do count, where it's already confirmed for us that:
a) Sidious Lightning was Beyond Mace,
b) Mace's combat abilities are SECOND to Yoda's (you know, the guy who was exactly equal to Yoda in pretty much every way)
c) Sidious was FAKING being weak with his Ligtning
LOL Yeah because Screaming is usually a sign of being FINE.
That is my Evidence piled upon massive load of other evidences.
Let me put them out to you again:
1) Windu was Screaming during the Lightning Barrage
2) Sidious ONLY stopped the Lightning barrage because he was pretending to be Weak, AS PER LUCAS
3) The Novel confirms Sidious's Lightning was Beyond Mace.
8) You see where I'm bringing evidences, you're just arguing for the sake of it, and you don't seem to Get what's Canon to the Movies. If you don't get it, that's fine, but you should not be arrogant about it, and ask someone who knows what's Canon and what's not TO THE MOVIES. Because there is a whole load of SW literature that isn't canon to the movies, which is why I haven't brought any of that up.
9) LOL The whole next 10 seconds has Sidious backing Mace away down the corridor. If you added another 10 seconds to that of Sidious concentrating everything on Mace in those first crucial moments of the fight anything could have happened.
Their mere presence is Proof enough the fight could have gone differently.
10) Tell me if a Boxer brought in help from 3 amateurs for the first few seconds of Round 1, would he be disqualified or not?
You know he would, and there's a reason for that. It can completely change how that fight plays out.
11) LMAO
12) LMAO
13) It's called putting all the evidences together. A concept you clearly struggle with.
Well then I don't see WHY You're even Arguin with me, as I already agreed Mace WON the Saber fight. Yes scrolling back is useful! Try it!
I did however admit Sidious Throwing the fight was a Legitimate THEORY, seen as The Official Site itself suggests it as a Possibility.
But I personally wouldn't bring in that Possibility as Fact in a Versus debate.
1) Let me get this straight:
You (by your own words) ADMIT that the novel contradicts what happens in the movies on the most BASIC and EASILY comparable metric (dialogue).
This is on TOP of things like timing of scenes (Anakin came after the Sids was disarmed in the movie while he came before in the novelization),
To scene descriptions (lightning did NOT strike the clouds in the movie unlike description in the novelization)
As well as level of threat/urgency in situations (the saber bending towards Windu never happened).
To freakin flow of the whole fight (speed too fast too follow with eyes never happened in the movie).
And your ONLY response is: Nuh uh! Yes it is. It was (and by the looks of it, loosely) BASED on the original script and notezsss!
You have offered no rebuttal. No argument except for pure denial. You have failed.
You need to understand that this is not just about what is canon (as there are several levels of canon to SW these days) to Star Wars but what actually happened in the MOVIE. This is the MOVIE VS after all. And even in SW canon, for as long as the movie contradicts what is written on novelizations, then the movie takes precedence.
2) Do you even know what conditional exemptions are? Television "feats" were given special exemption via the rules but there was never a mention of novelization "feats" or sourcebooks or commentaries or the like. What is so hard to understand here?
3) You are not given extra insight if such events never happened on screen. And the movie commentary is vague (and explainable by my evidence above. And many director/producer intentions never make it to the actual movies at all. What is important is (when talking about what happens in a movie) what actually happens in the movie. This overules everything. It overrules commentary, it overrules sourcebooks, it overrules novelizations.
4) And yet here you are trying to pull the same thing (as you have failed to corroborate via timestamped proof that any of what you say is happening actually happened). Congrats hypocrite.
5) At no time in the movie via script or actual movie depiction was that ever implied. All you have is Windu struggling to keep Sid's power in check and redirecting it to his face, ultimately cooking Sids and suffering no discernible damage himself.
Now you can use your confirmation bias to try and pull excerpts and dialogue from the novelization that never happened on film, but I'll just slap back movie > you back to your face.
6) A hypocrite very rarely ever willingly sees his own hypocrisy but despises those that point it out.
7) I pointed out timestamps and described the scene as it happens (less likely to make mistakes that way). You're the only one here grasping at straws and bringing "interpretations" on your end.
Nope. My explanation clearly explains what the commentary was talking about. The only thing you have for you is your interpretation of the novelization. Which never happened in the movie. Not Windu saying that Sids too was much for him, not the saber bending too close to his face, not him asking Anakin for help. You're literally using material that was contradicted by the film.
As for your little tidbits of (mis)information.
a. Sure didn't look like it when he deflected the lightning back to his face.
b. Didn't look like that to me, but hey, I'm not really arguing that Windu is better than Yoda. What I AM arguing is that Sids lost his fight.
c. He was faking about having no more power. What he did not fake was the fact that the lighting cooked him and disfigured him while doing zero damage to Windu.
8) And the second batch of (mis)information:
1. Ppl scream at the gym too when they're struggling. Him screaming proves that he was struggling. That is all. He suffered zero damage while Sids was smoking and disfigured after the barrage. This is literally the stupidest thing you've ever said so far. And that is quite an accomplishment.
2. Him stopping DOES NOT PROVE that he could have overwhelmed Windu. The only thing it proves is he stopped. Allow me to break it down: [Sids stopped his lightning and feigned weakness] <-- can be corroborated by commentary (maybe, as I'm just taking your word for it. I really shouldn't tho, you tend to twist things a lot). [Sids could have overwhelmed Windu with his lightning] <--- conjecture and never happened.
Especially since:
3. Windu was NOT being overwhelmed. People who are being overwhelmed DO NOT MOVE/BEND FORWARD. (2:40-2:42)
8) You're not providing any proof at all. You refuse to provide timestamps of anything you are saying. Which is what direct movie evidence is. You're bringing conjecture and inadmissible evidence, breaking (not even bending, but BREAKING) the rules to make the scene fit the narrative even though detaisl of the scene in the movies contradict what you say and just act like a complete donkey.
9) You sound like you've never been in a fight in your whole life. I mean, what are you arguing here? The very short presence of opponents that made no visible impact on the fight would have made the fight very different had they been absent?
10) Funny, is that I actually used to box 😆 (2 years, and could have started going amateur if I didn't break my wrist while sparring). If a bunch of 10 year olds took me on and I KOd them after 10 seconds, while my main opponent fights mostly defensively then they will have no impact on the fight, no. What's your point again? 😂
11) This is what you typed: "No, because he was forced into close up Saber combat right from the get go. There was no other way to take out 3 Jedi that quickly." <--- This is entirely made up and has no evidence proving it. The fact that you go "LMAO" with no counter proves that you have no rebuttal.
12) Again, another thng you made up. You get called on it. And all you do is go "LMAO".
13) No, it's called "scripting a fight to try and prove a narrative". SMH.
14) Actually, yes I do know you said that (or to be more exact, you agreed that Mace knocked Sids on his ass). And notice at that point I was not arguing that point? What I DO take issue with is the use of contradictory, inadmissible evidence to support arguments.
And thus, here we are.