Originally posted by RockydonovangI'm asking because my argument is based on canonical hierarchy, i.e. movie > novel > comic, etc., so if your argument is assuming that all different sources are on equal standing then there's no point in continuing.
If the movie actually featured a contradictory depiction of the fight, then I'd consider the hierarchy.Regardless, as I said, that specific fight isn't needed to argue for Luminara here.
So feel free to dismiss it.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
That's never made clear in the movie. You can launch attacks which you know you opponent can defend against. And you don't necessarily need to want someone alive to toy with them.
@ 1:23
It's clearly a killing blow, and given Anakin's position, there was clearly no guarantee of him blocking that.
The novel sounds like trash tbh.
Originally posted by RockydonovangIf the separate novelization is based on the deleted scene which is non-canon, then the novelization is literally based on something that didn't happen. Thus, we can dismiss it.
Yet again, you're assuming a the logistical plausibility of a deleted scene applies to a separate novelization.
Originally posted by RockydonovangLmao, the "logistical detail" (which is a funny way to phrase it, as if what I'm disputing is just a little, irrelevant tidbit) is a large contradiction to the plot of the film. I'm not disputing some throwaway dialogue from the book that isn't in the movie. The book has an added duel that contradicts the sequence of events in the plot of the film, which is pretty significant. Other fights that are adapted in certain novels at least have the benefit of having actually happened, lmfao. The movie's authority is above the book, thus you can't use the book's material that doesn't coincide with the canon plot of the film. Since when are parts of a novel exempt from being disregarded when the movie contradicts it?
It's also a little laughable that you're trying to use differences in the logistical details present in different sources to try and invalidate source material when differences in details are true of literally every fight which has multiple depictions in source material.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I'll play along though. In season 3, despite Anakin growing at a faster rate, Ventress is a clearly least a match for him and is still able to exploit openings in his defenses or superior power(have your pick) to blast him with the force. TCW Anakin is later then, directly stalemated by Ventress in a telekinetic bout despite Anakin growing at a faster rate.The point being, AOTC Anakin being able to match later incarnations of Ventress is nonsensical when superior versions of Anakin can only match the corresponding versions of Ventress he faces.
Hence, Luminara being able to contend well with season 2 Ventress is a perfectly fair reason to argue she could take AOTC Anakin.
That being said, I do have to point out the glaringly obvious fact that Ventress did not pin Anakin to the wall with the Force in the excerpt you posted, but she "pinned" him by advancing towards him immediately after he fell to the floor, leaving him no room to move because he was up against the wall. She doesn't even pin him in the deleted scene either, lol.
Originally posted by |King Joker|That being said, I do have to point out the glaringly obvious fact that Ventress did not pin Anakin to the wall with the Force in the excerpt you posted, but she "pinned" him by advancing towards him immediately after he fell to the floor, leaving him no room to move because he was up against the wall. She doesn't even pin him in the deleted scene either, lol. [/B]
Regardless, that's still Ventress defeating Anakin with the force. Anyway, we can agree to disagree on my use of that novelization's depiction of the fight, I my argument doesn't hinge on it.