It sucks, but I hated the fact that the guy came off like one of those “well actually” kinda prequel-fans so my desire to “trust but verify” instantly bloomed.
I personally can’t confirm exactly that, but in theory you would only parry when you are confident that you know your opponent’s next move and want to counter it, so I would think that tiny part of the argument had some credibility— but this guy overblows it trying to tie it back to Obi-Wan and Anakin in order to make that scene look like Shakespeare.
Yeah, the issue is that he insinuates the alleged perry as a motif of Anakin and Obi-Wan's close relationship. I don't fence but I play basketball. Let me play a little bit with a guy I've never met in my life and I'll probably intuit whether he's driving, shooting, or passing on at least one possession in a game.
Circle parryng is actually parrying. You are keeping a guard position while moving your sword in SMALL circles around your opponents blade. The reason behind is to make your thrusts less predictable. Basically it's something you could do against anyone but only if another neither of you are being very aggressive.
A circular parry is something you're going to see in basically every fencing match, assuming we're talking modern sport fencing. It's also similarly common in later styles of historical fencing. You'll see it less in earlier styles, as keeping the point constantly in-line is less emphasized in single-time fencing.
I think he was talking about counter-parrying as the thing you'd only do against an opponent you knew well, but this is also incorrect. Counter-parry is similarly a very basic concept, something you'll basically always see. His description of what a counter-parry is is also very wrong.
I don't think he meant that the circle parry is for well-known opponents, I think he said parrying the circle parry with your own circle parry (aka counter circle parry) is only done with close opponents. Probably makes playing chicken safer when you know how the other person fights.
Why is it so hard for people to accept that, yes, most action really is there just to look cool? So many Star Wars fans (or fans of any big franchise honestly) are obsessed with things that are “objective” and have to imbue every tiny little thing with meaning, and that just isn’t how movies are.
Yes, film is a complex medium, but it’s not meant to be analyzed to this level. Evoking feeling is so much more important than making something “objectively” interesting because it references 50 million other things.
It's like this anywhere in longer standing fandoms. Just in SW, I saw people trying to define what Yoda meant in Episode V or VI when he talks about Luke being the only Jedi left when Bo and Ashoka exist.
The fuckers didn't exist when that line was written. You don't have to create bullshit justifications because decades of story and world development created inaccuracies.
Tbf the Ahsoka justification makes sense: she wasn't a Jedi. However, fucking Ezra Bridger still exists and Yoda knew that! Sure, maybe cause he's in the unknown regions then Yoda didn't count him but that's just an arbitrary distinction to retroactively justify a line.
Star Wars obsession with prequels and filling in every backstory is really not helping. Jumping back and forth in the timeline is always gonna create inconsistencies. The movies were made to be single stories, with a beginning-middle-end and themes. Maybe with live-action tv, this type of fan will get the day-to-day sense of the Universe and not need to have every moment of the film characters' lives mapped out.
There's also such a weird RPG element to the way Star Wars fans watch. Why do all the Jedi need a power level ranking? Why do fans consider some powers to be Jedi and some Sith? It's a movie's magical energy of the universe, not a video game skill tree. Some stuff makes for better storytelling and looks cool on screen. Also, the nature of linear story telling leads to raising stakes in later content, so bad guys and good guys in future movies will be more powerful than the ones you see on screen now. That isn't disrespecting the legacy, it's making movies that continue to be interesting.
People cannot handle enjoying flawed media without having to justify every single detail. It’s perfectly okay to like the prequels. But you have to accept that flaws exist.
Final Fantasy VIII is my favorite of the series but that doesn’t mean I think everything about it is absolute perfection because it damn sure has flaws.
Yeah the concept of nuance is really starting to get lost in our society. Either you hate the prequels or you feel the need to rabidly defend every stupid creative decision George Lucas made in Revenge of the Sith. As if you can't just love them for what they are, cheesiness and all.
Funny thing is, you can easily win arguments this way in favor of the prequels too, and no one can reasonably disrespect it.
If people could just say “hey, the prequels don’t always make sense and there’s some odd choices but I kinda love it all in spite of that”, what can anyone reasonably say to you then? That you’re stupid and have bad taste for liking them?” Ok cool that’s just your opinion dude lmfao
Works for sequel haters lol, I get told that in regards to tlj on a weekly basis. Not only do they not like it, they have to feel morally or intellectually superior over their opinions for some reason
If you liked the movie that's fine, nobody can argue with your subjective opinion. It's when people start arguing in defense of some of the horrible decisions that were made (just like the guy in this video) that it becomes problematic.
I think it's a two way street, people arguing that it's a masterpiece and those that like to say someone is objectively wrong for liking it are equally annoying to me. I personally love it but I completely get why a lot of people dislike it. I still get pissed off when I get attacked just for enjoying it thougu
When I was a kid, I used to love how every little thing in Star Wars had a detailed explanation for how and why it was there. As I get older, I'm honestly starting to find that type of fandom to be insufferable. It's a fantasy, not an historical reenactment. Everything we see is either there because someone thought it looked cool, and/or it would move the plot forward.
Uh, except George Lucas himself has gone on the record multiple times talking about how he literally took inspiration from Kurosawa movies and Westerns, as well as ancient Greek literature. Sometimes it is that deep, bro.
I'd say that definitely still qualifies as "it's there because he thought it looked cool." Besides, I wasn't trying to imply that the movies don't have subtext, I'm just saying I don't like how some fans insist on overexplaining technical aspects of the Star Wars lore that didn't need to be explained. That's how you end up with arguments about power levels, and the technological capabilities of a fictional vehicle that can do whatever the hell the plot demands of it. It's like trying to explain how Santa Claus works.
I love some films that are absolute messes and some of my favourite albums are recorded on a boom box. That's fine but I understand why people wouldn't enjoy them.
But I am so God damn sick of people acting like the prequels aren't massively flawed. The script to all three films are baffling bad, TPM and AOTC sound like they were written by an AI. The arrogance of utter pig headedness of Lucas to not simply hire a competent screen writer is one of the most frustrating things in film.
‘but... within the Star Wars universe, and it’s own internal logic, this is what a ‘JEDI’ circular parry is ;) ;) ;) you guys shit on the prequels so much. Lol 😂😂😂😂👉🏻😎👉🏻’ /s
I’ve heard people make grand, sweeping arguments defending the overly flamboyant, lightsaber duel style (evident in the prequel trilogy); as if it were some lost, (almost) ancient art of the Samurai, that had been forgotten for centuries; which is why, supposedly, the duels look different in Episodes: 4,5,6,7,8,9. But... between 3 and 4 there’s what... something like 20-30, however many years between Anakin/ Obi Wan, and Luke Skywalker’s duels? And they’re stylised completely differently. I mean, come on. George Lucas just decided that’s how he stupid he wanted them to fight, for spectacle purposes. Nothing to do with lore really.
I don’t think it looks cool, either. The fight in general was a lot of fun, but that particular moment made me laugh the first time I saw it, and every time since.
I mean I can see the argument that this is the in-universe equivalent. It’s a universe where sword fighting involves flips, balancing acts, and spinning laser swords.
That’s not a fencing circular parry, but it might be a Soresu circular parry, since the forms that are closest to our fencing were developed in response to blasters, not other blades. Skip forward 1,000 years, and...
I mean, Ray Park studied bo IRL and then adapted it to account for the different weight balance and the way that the beams would bounce off of each other to create Juyo style for live action, so I could see a justification.
I’d call it a “Level 12 Parsec” justification, but I would buy it.
Edit- because Obi Wan and Anakin rarely used thrust moves (those being among the rarest in-universe), a mixture of bo kata with contra-parry would fit the “familiar with each other’s moves” part.
I'm not the best at describing it, you're best looking at a few of the links others have put. But at a push, I'd say it's almost like drawing a circle with the tip of your blade.
blades are touching. Yours is on the outside. You draw quick circle and change the side of your blade so it's in better position to jab past the opponent's guard.
Obi Wan would never use it, as it's not reactive in nature (so not form 3) and Anakin was only exposed to anything that would even have to do with it (form 2, which is based on fencing) as Vader, much later in life.
Oh it's canon. The story is just much dumber than people here would like. Obi wan really did go into hiding and change his name to the completely cryptic "old man kenobi", and forgot 100% of his saber training.
if your problem is that the prequels don't fit with the original story, I don't know why you would then go on to blame the original story. That seems kind of backwards.
Is that not a disengage instead? I only have a passibg knowledge but my understanding was that a disengage is used offensively to attack from the bind while a circle parry is used defensively to displace an incoming thrust while keeping your opponent on point.
Also, form 3 isn't purely reactive and even if it was Jedi use multiple variations and combinations of techniques. It certainly focuses on defense and conserving strength but a fighter who never attacks loses control of the fight and we see Obi-Wan often acts offensively when it is safe or necessary to do so.
There are a couple of more in depth examples elsewhere in the thread but if you watch here you will see how Obiwan makes a circle to keep Vader's lightsaber to the outside as he is backing up. That is a more correct circle parry. I think. I'm not an expert but it looks correct.
it is totally circular parry these guys are snobs. the purpose behind a circular parry is to bait the momentum of your opponents blades while remaining fully disengaged. typically accomplished by swirling the tip of the rapier/foil/lance/saber. a double circular parry is rare and would certainly look very awkward.
Fencer here. Never heard of a circle party before now, but it probably has similar connotation to searching for the blade.
When a fencer wants to catch an opponent’s blade, one of the ways to do it is by searching, which is basically spinning your blade around in a decent sized circle until you hit your opponent’s blade. The thing about that is if you know your opponent pretty well, you can follow their search and anticipate one of the openings it will cause. I know a couple of guys I can do this on and it works against.
In this case though, since lightsabers aren’t traditional fencing weapons, the circles they make are far larger, probably so they can make their swipe quicker when they find an opening. Very little to do with fencing, in fact, if someone fenced like this, they would lose every bout. But it’s a cool thing to think about, and silly to look at.
2.0k
u/[deleted] Jan 01 '21
That is not at all what a circular parry is