Talk:Asajj Ventress

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

Article milestones Date Process Result 12 June 2006 Featured article candidate Success 21 June 2006 Featured article
Current status: Former featured article

[edit] Sources

Did someone mess the sources up? All I see at the bottom of the page is a lot of code, but no sources. Could anyone correct this? --Kneazlegirl 04:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

• Done. Someone forgot to put </ref> at the end of a reference tag. Aqua Unasi 04:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image

If anyone (I'm looking at you JMAS) can get an image of Asajj from The Clone Wars tv show or movie, I think that should be the main image, after all the movie is G-Canon (I think, it might be TV-Canon.) Jacob Nion ^{(Personal Comm)} 23:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please, no. The Clone Wars rendition is a zombie. Drewton ^{(Drewton's Holocron)} 00:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually, Drewton, the dude has a point. This is Asajj's official film picture and we could get a headshot on this one: AsajjVentress TCW.jpg
    • And more importantly, what do you mean she looks like a zombie in this rendition, anyway? She's much more hot that way, man! So how about it, Drewton? *giving puppy eyes* Pretty please, with two lightsabers on top? 131.109.225.3 20:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, let me point something out to you all. The infobox image does not need to be G-canon over C-canon. The image needs to be the best looking/quality image of the subject. And I honestly can't decide which is better here. The current image is a good quality comic image of her. Here are two from TCW film which could work for the infobox. Which is better, I'm not decided yet. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 21:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Per JMAS, the image doesn't need to be G-canon, which we actually don't know TCW is. 131.109.225.3, look at the trailer. She looks like a half-dead zombie in most shots of it, especially the last one. It looks completely unnatural and cartoon-ish. Almost like comparing the comic version and the cartoon. Drewton ^{(Drewton's Holocron)} 01:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • We know TCW isn't G-canon; it's T-canon. Anywho, the first TCW image there is creepy in a bad way, but I could still go for it. -- Ozzel 01:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Wouldn't it be G-canon? Since it is first released as a film on the big screen? - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 04:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
      • I propose we use the first one. Her head's not reddened by the lightsabers next to her, so that makes it more of an appropriate image. 198.7.229.2 14:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
        • You may propose all you like. But do not change the image like that again without discussing it here on this talk page first. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 15:25, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
    • JMAS, see here for the canon status. TCW wasn't meant to be a film, anyway. Drewton ^{(Drewton's Holocron)} 01:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry. Just got excited, that's all. 198.7.229.2 14:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• 3D looks childish. While a drawing looks more (yes, I'm going to say it) realistic. It's the very same reason why we opted for Ching's instead of the much more mainstream Clone Wars cartoon series one. And as said before, Ventress was not some weird, ghost/witch, wild Dark Jedi. She had elegance, style, finesse. Ching portrays the tragic, dark, yet elegant, as per the discussions about her in the various sources we have on her much more closely to that. Add to that, Clone Wars movie is already screwing up articles in terms of canon and appearance. It shall not have this infobox. --Redemption^(Talk) 22:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• The Comic book image is more realistic and looks alot better. just because this image of Asajj appears in a movie theater doesn't mean it has to be the new main image. We should keep it the way it is. JediNTT307 03:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
• I agree. Leave the infobox as is. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 03:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• I love Brian's representation of Asajj and after watching CW trailers I agree that some shots of her in the movie are far from beautiful. And still I vote for the first image (the one on the left) - I think she looks really cool on that poster. Mauser 13:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• As to her looking like a zombie, maybe. More like she was separated at birth. - JMAS ^{Hey, it's me!} 13:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Clone Wars timing

Just wondering, how is it that Asajj is still running around looking just fine if this is after Anakin recieved his scar, thus after she fell into Coruscant's underlevels? Shouldn't she be in a bacta tank on Boz Pity and everybody under the assumption that she's dead?

And we can't say this took place AFTER obssession because the clones are still wearing phase I. I dunno, that just confused me throughout the whole movie. Dark Lord Trayus 18:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• TCW messed up a lot of the continuity, and so a timeline of what "really happened" and in what order needs to be decided on. I'd say to leave mention of Anakin's scar until when he got it in Obsession, since it's a minor detail in TCW. Drewton ^{(Drewton's Holocron)} 20:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Just a thought here: we saw Padme's reaction to Anakin's scar twice: on Naboo in Obsession 1, which clearly takes place about 6 months before ROTS, and on Coruscant in Clone Wars Chapter 22, which takes place soon after Anakin's knighthood ceremony. I wonder, could they retcon it so Anakin would be getting the same scar twice? After Greedo case that would not surprise me. Mauser 14:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

They better not remake her death in the Obsession Comics. Her ending is great and since it's cutting it really close to the Obsession comics, I'm having thoughts. They already made her different then the way she was, i just hope they won't tamper with already established events. JediNTT307 19:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)