ST Episode VII Apologetics: addressing the criticisms one by one

How is anyone viewing Maz having the saber as a plothole? As she said, that is a story for another day. Was Obi-Wan having the saber in ANH without any explanation other than "your father wanted you to have this when you were old enough" a plothole. Then when that story WAS told, it wasn't even Anakin saying "Obi-Wan give this to my son", it was "oh hey Anakin I just dismembered you, let me snatch that from the ground as a trophy".

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

What I liked most about the movie: the characters, the dialogue, the humor, the action, and the drama, far outweighs the annoyance of having another planet killer to fight.

 

Not a plot hole. But perhaps bad/rushed writing. It seemed rather transparent.

 

But having another planet killer meant we knew what was going to happen - thus there was no drama/tension (for a sizeable portion of the film)

 

I need more time to get into "critique" or "praise" for this movie (impression: loved it, totally entertained, a lot like ANH in structure), but this idea that you need to refute anyone's honest criticism/nitpick seems wrong. No movie is perfect; some will see no ills however, and some will.

Wouldn't this thread be better to discuss what works/doesn't rather than spend all your energy essentially saying "you're wrong"? To clarify misimpressions of there are some? (example: "Finn and/or Rey was overpowered" - "no, Kylo was badly wounded by Chewie, was losing a lot of blood, wasn't at 100%" type back and forths?)

 

I really feel like the only one who liked the fact that The Force Awakens paralleled A New Hope.

Star Wars is supposed to follow a formula. The Phantom Menace did too.

I know people like to crap all over George Lucas for saying, "It's like poetry, it rhymes" but I really feel like it is supposed to rhyme.

 

I'm not crazy about TFA, but as a PT fan in a minority I don't like the term "apologetics"

 

I suppose, but Starkiller was secondary (or tertiary, even) to the other things that were going on, for example Han (where there was tension), and Rey.

 

TFA apologia is still far less humiliating than PT apologia. I love the butthurt though. It's fun seeing people on the wrong side of history desperately trip over themselves.

 

Maz's line about a "question for another time" isn't a plot hole as such. It didn't bother me in terms of this film, but is part of a wider trend within franchise film making to hand wave away plot points that would benefit from being explained at that point; we don't NEED to know where she got the lightsaber from, but I think the film would have benefited from a short stop for breath, where Maz explained it.
I don't quite buy the idea that spoken exposition is always a big no-no, and to me, it was more jarring to suspect that that line was a rewrite to keep up pace.
Reminded me of the bit in terminator Genisys where Schwarzenegger does a similar thing about a pertinent plot point

 

Starkiller base was not intended to be some epic plot device we had never seen. Its whole purpose was to raise tension and move the story along. It did that.

 

95% critical rating. Lock thread.

 

No one needs to be apologetic for TFA because it's actually good.

 

Are you serious? Or is this a light-hearted joke?

 

That number is a fact. You can look it up.

 

I don't think the "rehashing" was anywhere near as bad as has been accused. Even Han kind of made fun of the fact that there was another death star. So while beats were very similar, the overall movie was different enough and familiar enough to not be a total rehash-for me at least.

 

Hi guys, long time SW fan first time I can recall having input into a SW forum, so be gentle...

Yep it's pretty clear that TFA, follows a tried and true formula but I am extremely happy to put up with this situation because what JJ gave is this last week was dead set Awsome.

Thanks JJ, for giving us Characters that you could relate to, actors that could act, plot twists that weren't completely spoilt before the first release, humour (thank god) interwoven into the tension, credible villains, and credible heroes.

There were heaps of tips of the hat to the old franchise, yet he bought us heaps of new stuff to. Like the awsome moves in the millienum falcon. That scene on jakku being chased by tie fighters was just awsome, the ship skipping off the dirt, the tie fighter pilots actually not just crashing into the first thing that gets in their way, rather that had to be shot down by some great flying tactics and stalling the motor. it was just so visceral compared to the wooden flying of the OT, or the silky smooth battles in the prequels.

The other thing that was new, was the "rebels/resistance"coming to the rescue. That squadron in formation flying low across the water to come and save the day. That sent goose bumps up my spine, like WOW JJ. I was so enthralled with the storm troopers battling with fin, chewi, and Han. Plus Kylo chasing rely into the forest. That I completely forgot the rebels had been warned, and just when you thought the heroes were going to be captured, along comes the Calvary. In the words of the young boy of the "incredibles" THAT WAS AWESOME.

Look I could waffle on for hours on this. I've seen TFA twice and would happily go see it again. That movie took me back 30 years.

If anyone cares to comment I had no problem with, and liked the following:
The way r2 had the rest of the map
The light sabre battle between the storm trooper and Finn
The sabre battle with Kylo, Finn, and Rey.

I thought all three of these things worked well within lore, and supported the plot.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I agree. It's not at all relatable to Obi-Wan having Anakin's lightsaber because he offers a simple and plausible explanation. Here, we are informed that there is an explanation, but we don't get it.

But seriously, since last we saw was the lightsaber falling into the depths of Cloud City, it's not unreasonable for fans to wonder how the lightsaber was actually re-acquired.

 

Of course it's not unreasonable, but still, be prepared for a rebuttal that "you don't need to know, it would only drag the plot down, what's important is that it was there to propel the plot forward..." or the "you're just nitpicking unimportant things to bash a great movie that the majority loves which makes you wrong..."

/above meant as a sarcastic type joke about the excessive reactions bound to pop up amongst a few

 

I agree with hippie1kenobi - those examples are not 'plot holes', per se... the origin of this thread has more to do with the lack of originality of the plot...

so, let's talk PLOT HOLES in the story that J J Abrams came up with...
- if Rey is a scavenger for food to survive, how did she become a pilot ?
- how did Rey learn how to fight against Jedi-trained guy 10 minutes after she realized that she had Jedi powers ?
- if Finn is a clone ( remember what Hux said of his men - I'm sure that they're still using clones after 50 years ) then why does he have the humanity of a normal person who wasn't bred to kill ? and who would teach him of the exploits of Han Solo ?
- why is the 'First Order' using Imperial Stormtrooper armor ? when the war ended, was there a new Republic military surplus sale to raise money to fix up the galaxy after the Empire fell & nobody paid attention when someone was buying millions of white plastic uniforms ? ( this is obviously Disney being cheap on a $200 million dollar movie )
- if Finn was a garbage man on the station, how did he know about the technical aspects of it's operation & how to blow it up ?
- just having a light saber in your hands doesn't mean you know how wield it - he held his own for several minutes with Kylo Ren, when he should have been cut in half in the first 2 seconds of that duel scene, having no experience whatsoever.
- why is Kylo wearing a mask ? he doesn't have respiratory trauma, like Darth Vader ( clearly this is a plot hole AND a copy of the OT formula )
- in 30 years, neither the New Republic nor the new 'bad guys' could come up with more advanced fighters ( this is obviously Disney being cheap, again, and putting a coat of black paint on old movie prop X-wings & TIE fighters )
- the Starkiller Base is a hollow space station - so why was there enough gravity to hold the band of infiltrators onto the surface - this is not how gravity works !
- and if it's a brand new station, where did the atmosphere come from so that the infiltrators didn't need pressure suits ?
- also the forest in which they fought - they installed an entire forest on the surface of the hollow space station ? that some awesome landscaper they have..

unlike dolphin, I do not say "so what ?"

I have a problem with waiting 36 years to see the most anticipated movie in human history and spending 2+ hours watching unrealistic characters, and a work of science fiction which ignores the elements of science which we DO understand - and this isn't as simple as the 38 year old nerd issue of 'you can't hear sound through outer space'

please, in a continuity of this thread's title, like, or discuss if you disagree...

 

Starkiller base was a planet. It had an atmosphere before they constructed it. And I'm fairly certain it's not completely hollow.

 

@maddmatt36 almost everything you have stated is NOT a plothole, some people just don't get the meaning

 

I'm not sure people understand what a plot hole is.... Just because you didn't like something doesn't make it a plot hole.

 

I'm not sure people understand what a plot hole is.... Just because you don't like or understand something doesn't make it a plot hole.