Quote
Originally posted by: Asha
A 'groundless' nitpick? Then riddle me this: why was Kenobi able to defeat Maul when Maul was standing above a dangling Kenobi? Maul had "the high ground." It didn't hold Ben back, so why would Ben have believed that Anakin wasn't able to pull of his jump?
ive stated that as a problem with TPM in a previous post somewhere. Maul with his skill should have cut Obi-Wan in twine when he was on his way up. It is not however a problem with ROTS because Obi-Wan did what anyone that was skilled would have done when someone rushed at them filled with emotion. I could try to explain TPM by saying that Maul was too busy gloating/taunting Ben to be ready for what happened, where as Obi-Wan was ready for Anakin to attack and prepared to counter. But I've had a problem with that aspect of Mauls death from day 1.
Quote
This concept of "high ground" hasn't been an issue in any previous battle ... it was merely a convenient and highly lame way to end this fight. And yeah ... had Ben exploited a weakness in Vader that was rooted in Anakin's fall to the dark side (re: attacking Dooku in a fit of anger and losing his hand) it would be far more acceptable than nonsense about high ground.
"High Ground" is always an issue in any battle, especially one where the skill level is so close. Ben did exploit a weakness in Vader, his anger/lack of judgement in the attack. Other than that they were pretty evenly matched (thats how the battle was designed) A true master would have played that attack just as Ben did, biding his time, waiting for a mistake to be made, or a slight opening he could take advantage of.
Quote
And the attempts at explaining away the construction of the Death star don't work for me AT ALL. Sorry, but it just doesn't add up. Twenty years to construct one Death Star ... and six months to two years to construct a second? Not even Henry Ford could achieve that feat. Lucas was feebly trying to tie-in images from the original film to justify Revenge of the Sith in the face of all logic.
if your refering to my explanations that were dripping with sarcasm, well i guess you missed the sarcasm. if your refering to the other explanations, while i think that could account for some time, i agree that i dont think it would account for 20 years. Yes lucas forced a lot of tie-ins, but that was done more so in the first 2, I think over all the tie-ins in ROTS flowed much better and were much more natural feeling, minus the few that i have mentioned in other threads.
Quote
It seems to me that you're choosing to file plot holes YOU don't like as "nitpicks."
oh damn, you got me there. I admit, Obi-Wan should not have ultimatly shown more mastery over the Jedi arts to defeat Anakin. Everyone knows that according to the OT Vader told Ben 'When last we met I was but the learner, Now I am the master'. Obviously Anakin should have won the fight on Mustafaar by that statement, or at least shown more mastery of the force. I guess that plot hole was just so big i didnt realize i was standing in it.
-Darth Simon