Originally posted by Beniboybling
The contexts was the OT time period, and Season 2 as a whole, to infer anything else is to read into the text.
Didn't sound like that to me. So unless you personally know Dave, that's just your interpretation.
In any case, Filoni's words are meaningless when he outright showed Maul matching Ahsoka blow for blow. Death of the author applies here. Especially given that same interview made it clear that Filoni doesn't get the final word. The Story Group does.
Originally posted by BeniboyblingAs for whether Maul can match Ahsoka blow for blow on neutral ground, that depends on the extent to which he benefited from the temple.
That's fine if you want to overblow this nexus thing which isn't even confirmed by any official source.
But if you're clinging to Filoni's words, like I said before, he's never once factored in dark side nexus's to any of his Saber fights.
Originally posted by Darth ThorAnd yet the context you claim is apparently fact...
Didn't sound like that to me. So unless you personally know Dave, that's just your interpretation.
Regardless, I actually read the article and it says:
So yes, the contexts are S2 as a whole and the OT time period. Naturally I'm eager to hear whatever else suggests otherwise.
In any case, Filoni's words are meaningless when he outright showed Maul matching Ahsoka blow for blow. Death of the author applies here. Especially given that same interview made it clear that Filoni doesn't get the final word. The Story Group does.I'm not asking you to take Filoni's words as fact, merely pointing out your misinterpretation of his statement. Regardless it's evidently not just Filoni's opinion considering he says:
That's fine if you want to overblow this nexus thing which isn't even confirmed by any official source.It's been indicated by Gilroy, a lead writer. And I'm not clinging to anything dear, but both the suggestion and possibility is there.But if you're clinging to Filoni's words, like I said before, he's never once factored in dark side nexus's to any of his Saber fights.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
And yet the context you claim is apparently fact...Regardless, I actually read the article and it says:
Right firstly, the Context can't be "fact" unless Filoni himself has confirmed that to you.
And LOL at quoting the thread title to confirm Filoni's context.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
And So yes, the contexts are S2 as a whole and the OT time period. Naturally I'm eager to hear whatever else suggests otherwise.
No problem, you merely have to read the entire passage and you'll see the context isn't so clear cut:
"Well, we were actually very careful. Once we brought her back, there was a lot of excitement — more than we had anticipated. The first day back in the writing room everybody was like, “Oh, this is great, we’ll have Ahsoka do this and we’ll have Ahsoka do that,” and as we’re kind of sitting there, it’s really apparent that this could become The Ahsoka Tano Show really quickly. That’s not the direction we wanted to go in for Rebels. This show is primarily about Ezra and Kanan and what they’re doing. If we focus too much on Ahsoka, we’re not showing the importance of our main characters anymore. It was important that if we had Ahsoka in the story it be in service to Ezra and Kanan somehow, that her story crossed with theirs because it was important for them. Those were the ground rules that we had going into it.
We used to have this problem in Clone Wars when we would try to put Yoda in a story and it would be like, “Yeah, if Yoda’s there, this isn’t really a problem is it?” That’s because Yoda’s going to go in there and kick everyone’s butt. We all felt that Ahsoka, the only person that could really match her in this time period, blow for blow, would be Vader or the Emperor. So that was why you didn’t see her as much and when she showed up it was purposeful."
Emphasis mine.
You see how different it looks when you just take a word or a sentence out of an entire passage.
The issue was how to USE Ahsoka throughout the season without bringing Vader or the Emperor into it.
We later learn Maul wasn't really a viable option either as he was a surprise just for the finale. He wasn't really around for S2. He was stuck in a Sith Temple. If Filoni were talking S3, then that would leave a lot less room for interpretation of his words.
But hey if we just IGNORE context and just go by that sentence, then apparently Obi-Wan, Luke or even Yoda can't go blow for blow against Ahsoka.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
I'm not asking you to take Filoni's words as fact, merely pointing out your misinterpretation of his statement.
No you're arguing against people who are not taking Filoni's words that literally and that seriously. People who perhaps still have some hope for Filoni not being that much of a biased fanboy.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
Regardless it's evidently not just Filoni's opinion considering he says:
Yeah, really depends who "WE" is doesn't it, and assuming he's not taking their words out of context as well.
Originally posted by Beniboybling
It's been indicated by Gilroy, a lead writer. And I'm not clinging to anything dear, but both the suggestion and possibility is there.
No Gilroy indicated one single ability being possible due to being at a Sith Temple. And he even says, "I don't know, you should really ask Filoni."
Filoni himself has never indicated or suggested dark side places materially effecting Saber fights at all. So you're really twisting the visual evidence he showed us to try and fit what you're certain he's suggesting in his sentence.
Either way, I admit there's a strong possibility that's what he meant, given he's clearly extremely biased towards Ahsoka. But in any case, it's ultimately not up to him:
"One example is the [Ahsoka/Vader] sword fight. I told [the Lucasfilm Story Group’s] Kiri Hart, “Well, I always pictured this going this way,” and she was like, “Well, let’s do it.”"
1. Which he did by stating the contexts to be the OT time period lmao, it couldn't be any more clear. And you've yet to provide a reason for why Maul is excluded from those contexts.
2. I'm not sure how that proves your point, he's evidently referring to Season 2 as a whole considering how he describes how he wanted to avoid it becoming "the Ahsoka Tano Show", not any one specific set of episodes.
The problem they had with bringing Ahsoka in at any one point being that like Yoda, she is too powerful for any but a select few to face. Those few, being Vader and the Emperor. He is not making the point that they wanted to avoid bringing those two characters in to face off against Ahsoka, but that nobody else besides them would be a match for her.
Maul being otherwise engaged and not present for most of the season being a non-factor, because the Emperor is also both of those things to an even greater degree, and yet he mentions him anyway. It also should be somewhat obvious that Filoni's is referring to antagonists only.
3. Lmao calm down Thor, as I said to Jman I'm open to alternate explanations e.g. Maul is technically not off the OT time period, but the PT time period. But no, these particular contexts are just forced. Sorry.
4. Yes it does, but your presumption that this is just Filoni's opinion is evidently incorrect.
5. And unless the Sith Temple is somehow able to interact with the mechanics of their lightsabers, or just has some really strong wind currents, the most logical explanation for why is that it was a place strong in the dark side, as these spots tend to be.
Regardless you continue to contradict yourself, you argue that its ultimately not up to Filoni, and yet continue to use Filoni's personal viewpoints to counter the notion. So is Filoni an authority of this subject or not?