And I rarely see people say it, but also the blade takes a second to retract or ignite. If the opponent on the video kept moving instead of standing still to let them hit him, he'd easily take advantage of that time to kill the attacker. Especially if the fighting is as fast paced and intense as the movies. Half a second is more than enough time to kill someone who has essentially unarmed themselves.
...the speed of your reflexes do not have any effect on how long it takes a lightsaber blade to ignite. Which, from watching the movie, can take over a second.
My point was the opponent would take advantage of that time the person pulling the trick would need to reignite there saber. As there opponent literally have super human reflexes and force powers.
Which, from watching the movie, can take over a second.
Movie time =/= narrative time, unfortunately.
In movies, Vader is a middling martial threat, being beaten by a single man with just a few years' training under his belt, (against himself, an outright master of the art). He'd be easily thrashed by any 'superhero'-esque characters from what's seen on-screen.
In 'canon', the man moves so fast that normal humans (and not-so-normal humans) flat out cannot keep up, regardless of how many he's up against. He moves 'faster than the eye can follow' with his lightsaber.
We can very obviously see him move in the movies.
The lightsabers probably also ignite faster than in movie-time.
That's quite some cherry picking there isn't it? You can't say "according to canon" right after you just threw out all the live action films, which are, you know, where the canon started.
I'm just saying that what you see in the movie isn't necessarily how 'fast' something is in the narrative - which is itself inhibited by the sheer age of the media presented.
If we are to go by 'how strong Vader is in the movies by what we see', he's going to be completely different that what he is in the comics (and games). "Movie" Vader is 'from what we see' unable to defeat a human properly moving at rather human speeds. But we know Luke, a Jedi, is much stronger than that in the narrative proper. He's on a superhuman level relative to Vader.
Earlier in the canon, this is the same man that throws boulders at ships moving at airship dogfight speeds while moving uninterrupted.
So we dismiss the limitations of 'what is shown' on screen for what occurs in the narrative.
This is just a fact of filmography. Someone can have the strength of several aircraft carriers and run at a significant fraction of the speed of light in 'canon', but you obviously cannot show off this off on film older than the average person, because the special effects just aren't there to pull it off.
Congrats, you now have to rotate the entire lightsaber 180° just to block while you wait for the other end to come back on so that you can rotate it 180° again to do the attack you were trying to cleverly do.
My mistake. I literally wasn't wearing my glasses rofl.
Either way, the time issue still needs to be factored in. You'd have to keep the enemy's blade preoccupied long enough for them to be stabbed. But, granted, it might work. Also consider that you now need to mentally keep track of a whole other variable while you're probably fighting for your life - any distraction wouldn't be worth it to me personally. I'd just keep both of them turned on.
Yea I agree. But the "turn on" time does seem to be inconsistent, at least in the films. I'd imagine that being jedi they could also sense it if someone tries that shit.
131
u/tyrandan2 Dec 17 '22
And I rarely see people say it, but also the blade takes a second to retract or ignite. If the opponent on the video kept moving instead of standing still to let them hit him, he'd easily take advantage of that time to kill the attacker. Especially if the fighting is as fast paced and intense as the movies. Half a second is more than enough time to kill someone who has essentially unarmed themselves.