Solo Lack of Plotholes in Solo

I'm struck by how I've not heard or seen the usual deluge of videos and assassination pieces to this effect for this movie.
And nothing jumped out at me either, it was pretty tight !

I'm sure you could find things to nitpick about here and there but I've become so used to expecting massive glaring plotholes in big summer movies it's nice for once not to - for the moment at least - be bombarded with posts pointing them out.

Stuff made more or less sense.

Especially impressive given a film with a by all accounts troubled shoot and change of directors.

 

Why does everyone keep putting Solo stuff under the Rogue One tag?

 

Nest not just telling them she's a 'good guy' seemed very odd to me.

Han leaving the yacht to get money for a ship when they could have just stolen the yacht together was also weird.

 

Telling who? And when?

 

]

I think Qi-ra needed that to communicate and square up with Maul.

 

I was one of the most active users in the TLJ plot hole thread, where we did not find a single one. (oh this is going to be interesting ... )

I want to be active here as well, so you better start finding those plot holes so we can prove they are not plot holes.



Hey, I think I got one: If Lando is so bothered by L3-37 and only keeps her active because of the navigation database she had... then why did not Lando just shutdown her, download the database on the Falcon like he did, and then wipe out her memory, and then upload ONLY the navigation database back into her memory again?

See, I am trying.

 

The title and direction of this thread seems at least more straightforward than the No Plot Holes in TLJ, I'll give you that.

 

Lack of socks.

 

Or why does Han have a scope on his blaster, if he never uses it? At least for Beckett, it made sense as the gun was attached to a proper stock and extended barrel.

Plot hole number 2! I am getting good at it !

Back then Nest did not know that Han was a good guy either. I understand she assumed everybody working for Beckett is bad as him.

See, I cannot avoid doing this. I must let go.

 

Lower stakes probably helps.

I suspect that there are some plotholes (Some of the risks taken in the Kessel run, for example, come to mind for reasons that I'm not sure are made clear and I probably have to see it again to work through some of the reasoning behind the final twists that occur related to the liquids and Enfys Nest and how Beckett and crew were able to so easily appear as high ranking soldiers and be treated as such by other high ranking officials who'd never seen them around, and who might have actually known the people whose uniforms were taken, wasn't immediately clear to me, and I'm still not exactly sure why Chewie was there alone on that planet) but this is also the power of not pissing off close to half of the hardcore fandom for different reasons. Hardcore fans are committed and passionate and will revel in what they love about a work when they're generally pleased. However, that same passion can become a weapon aimed at taking apart each and every detail or lack of explanation provided in a work that they are in fact angered by. Collectively, this can lead to videos, rants, and entire threads devoted to finding as many potential issues as can be spotted. Something that I have never wanted to really do with some of my favorite movies (for what I think are obvious reasons) and something that I'm sure many others would also rather not do if their first impression of a work is generally strong. I haven't thought about any of those things until right now because of this thread's focus but more so because I enjoyed Solo. And it's entirely possible that some of my "questions" aren't plot holes at all but rather just conveniences that weren't incredibly well explained that I can just as easily accept.

What Solo reminds is that there is real merit in appealing to the hardcore fandom and putting their wants front and center in a lot of areas. It's something DC tries to do with the Snyderverse films and they come to the aid of Snyder, wanting his Snyder cut and supporting the films on RT well above the critics and general audience. Having the hardcore fandom on your side by appealing to their wants first and foremost can really help. Just not at the box office consistently. You have to consider the needs of the general audience more for that.

 

I don't love sending a branded Qi'ra on a mission where you've previously established that it is of paramount importance that the mission not be traced back to your organization.

 

It's helped by the fact that the character has been utterly ignored by the films and TV shows since RotJ. Only the comics have given Han his due, so glad they are putting some attention on him.

 

There's of course the same complaint that was applied to the master code breaker in that it's obviously convenient knowing that Lando will be at certain gambling locales at the times they arrive. Why his ship was compounded and behind a gate while there wasn't immediately clear either to me. When did that happen and how did he and L337 get there if it wasn't recently?

It might have been helped slightly if they'd said, "I know a place where we can get a ship" and Lando just so happened to be there and she then elaborated on him and his ship specifically but the wording choice of "knowing a guy" and then arriving at the gambling location and him being there is eerily reminiscent of some people's complaints about how the Master code breaker always gambles on Canto Bight and sets up his deals from there.

 

I just want to point out, as I did in the TLJ plot hole thread, that honest to goodness legitimate plot holes are going to be pretty rare in professionally crafted stories. Criticisms of the story are not plot holes. Poor decisions made by characters are not plot holes. Continuity errors that don't directly affect the plot (character's hat was oriented one way in one shot and another in another shot) are not plot holes.

This is generalizing a little, but the kinds of things that are often misconstrued as plot holes are those kinds of things and often amount more to nitpicking than any real issue with the movie. This happens, I believe, when someone dislikes a movie for whatever reason and then goes back and tries to justify their opinion. They view things they might otherwise overlook more critically due to their dislike of the film. The term "plot hole" implies some kind of objective fault with the movie and people really like spinning their opinion as objective truth, so that term gets thrown around to shore up their opinion as fact.

Solo, I think, has been generally received positively by the people who have seen it, more so than TLJ certainly. This is, I believe, a significant contribution to how much smaller the plot hole conversation is on this movie so far.

 

I feel like that's more of a case of the villain being an idiot than an actual plot hole.

 

However the tattoo could easily have been hidden by long fitted sleeves. It wasn't on her forehead or some other highly visible spot..

 

There was a little plothole how Chewbacca seemed to be getting things off-screen- who supplied him with bandoliers and bowcaster for example? Not a huge one but interesting how someone pointed that out and I didn't even notice it before that...
Another plot hole is the fact that Lando who they needed, happened to be on Vandor as well. Like how probable that is- they were on the middle of nowhere and the guy they needed was also there in the same city even?

Also it's funny how name of this thread somehow makes it sound like the lack of plot holes would be a problem in itself.

 

I think that's fair. Incompetence is always an option. It's just odd because we aren't talking scenes of separation here (where most plot holes usually live). It's in that very scene where they argue about whether they can be identified. Then he says "here take this branded lieutenant of mine". It's at the very least odd.

Oh, I don't see it as a "they'll notice from afar" type plot hole. More like, if you fail and they are sifting through the bodies they'll see it's Crimson Dawn. The sequence doesn't make much sense based on its own internal logic (we can't be identified), at least not to me.

 

Lando's falcon was already impounded. He's pretending the whole time. He tells them a BS story about "keeping it locked up for safe keeping" but he's full of it. They break into an impound lot. It's also why Lando's circumstances "changed".

In addition, both Qi'ra and Lando were already in the same place. Dryden's yacht was docked right alongside the gambling area on Vandor. It stands to reason Qi'ra knew he was there before hand.

People can certainly dislike or feel "meh" about Solo, but it's not going to be the same as TLJ.

 

If mission would've gone south Dryden could easily claim Qi'ra escaped him or something

 

People have different definitions for plotholes. Tons of people think that the way the Death Star was destroyed in ANH was a plot hole when it wasn't at all. It was completely covered in the movie. They just want more explanation for some that was explained already.

That seems to be what most are. Things explained that they want more explanation of regardless of them being explained. Either that or asking questions that would never be asked in a movie and therefore won't be answered in a movie.

It's like asking how do Han and Chewbacca get off Savarin (is that how it's spelled?) at the end. Well obviously they hire some pilot or get transport. It's not in the movie though. How do they find Lando in all the galaxy? Well they did. It's not a big deal. How do they show up at exactly the time he is playing again? Again it's the movies and that's what happens. How come there weren't Stormtroopers on the other side of the glass who would grab Han right away when he was just standing there banging on the glass? Again not important.

Some people wondered by Galen Erso didn't have a gun handy to pick off Krennic and his Deathtroopers or have an escape ship ready to take off at a moment's notice.

I mean really!



It's fantasy space opera adventure.

 

Neither of those are a plot hole. Beckett and company clearly supplied Chewbacca with equipment they had.

While it did seem unlikely to me that all of these things would conveniently be on the same planet at the same time it doesn't break the plot. It isn't impossible.

 

I'll give this one a go - The Falcon being impounded is a story for another time, and just adds to the idea of Lando being a dodgy character, probably didn't bribe the right person to keep it safe or one of his many enemies is working to undermine him or he didn't pay the parking fee.

As for how they knew they would find him there, Dryden probably has many spies and contacts in the underworld and in gambling circles, he would keep tabs on a hustler like Lando and his movements.

Oh and as for -

He is in love with her. It works.

 

What was Beckett’s plan at the end? He takes Chewie by gunpoint and just walks away and walks...nowhere. Where is he trying to go? Why didn’t he kill Solo and Dyden and Qira? He knew Nest was still out there and the Crimson Dawn thugs. What was he thinking?

 

Beckett just happened to have wookiee-made weapon right there? I didn't claim they were breaking the plot- or ruining the film, they were minor things, but they can be easily considered at least a bit implausible plot points and maybe even minor plot holes.