- Joined
- Jul 22, 2011
- Messages
- 1,399
- Reaction score
- 150
Let me take one of your examples: Sakura made the antidote because Sasori was too proud of his poison to kill Kankuro. Chiyo ended up going cuz she hadnt seen her grandson in over 20 years. Sasori didnt have some random change of heart because of "plot", its statements like that take credibility away from the manga and Kishis ability to write it. The story flows perfectly explaining every detail along the way, and yet people dont think its fair cuz thier fanboys.
I want to explain Sasori's "random" change of heart.......You just met your grandmother after 20 years. Can you imagine the amount of nostalgia generating from the meeting, let alone the fight. Especially if that person taught you everthing you know.
Plot didnt make Sasori give up, in a way Sasori did the same thing Nagato did, he acknowledged Sakuras strength, and deemed them both(chiyo n sakura) as opponents worthy enough to get killed by.
Why didnt Sasori move? The answer is comprehensive only if you forego this element of plot. As a child he would make his Father and Mothers puppets hug him everyday. When Chiyo made that last attack, all Sasori saw were his Father and Mother coming at him for an embrace, and that is why he COULDNT move, he froze!
I am old enough to understand these sentiments and they play a big part in a fight if it is Grandmother vs Grandson, as they should. That is how I watch Naruto.
You do understand that in HYPOTHETICAL BATTLES BETWEEN CHARACTERS...
NONE of that matters.
In a HYPOTHETICAL BATTLE, Sakura does not have an antidote.
Sasori is fighting 1 vs 1, not 2 vs 1.
And Sasori didn't move so the plot could continue. If he had, he would have killed Sakura and Chiyo. The situation does have reason, but it forms part of the plot. No matter what, he had to lose. There was no way he wouldn't, otherwise, the story wouldn't progress. In a true battle to kill, he moves, and wins. He had the power too move. He had the ability. And that is what we are trying to gauge.
Here's an example. The way you portray this, if a professional basketball player goes easy on some high schoolers, and "loses", that means that the high schoolers are better basketball players. It's the exact line of logic that you are using, and you can see that it is ridiculous. The sentiment is pity, or maybe modesty. I'm sure that you would argue that no matter what, he would play with that pity, and so no matter what, he would lose. And maybe he would! But does that make those high school players better? No.