PT Plot Holes and Inconsistencies in the Prequel Trilogy

What about compassion for the millions that are going to be hurt or killed in the war Dooku is being allowed to spread?

 

So when Anakin murdered all those Younglings to prevent a future civil war, he was right to do so? Even if he was wrong about how effective it would be, his heart was in the right place?

 

There's a fundamental moral difference between "letting die, through prioritising" and "murder" though.

 

Why? Yoda can easily save Anakin and Obi-Wan. His choice determines whether they live or whether they die. If he chooses to go after Dooku instead, he's essentially making the choice to kill them, just the same as Anakin makes the choice to kill the Younglings in order to prevent even more deaths down the road.

 

Dooku made the choice to kill them - Yoda would (had he done so) have made the choice not to intervene - because stopping Dooku from escaping is more important.

Yoda keeps telling Luke he should be prepared to "let his friends die" if saving them would result in him Turning To The Dark Side, after all.

 

As long as we are talking about what-if.
Say Sidous had a baby as a hostage and made an announcement to the Jedi.
"All Jedi must commit suicide or I'll kill this baby."
Should the Jedi obey?

If they do not and the baby is killed, are they evil?

Or, if Dooku was not trying to run away but was running towards a button, that if pushed would blow up a planet and kill billions.
Should Yoda still let him?

Except this is wrong as we already saw that Mace was willing to let Anakin die.
So apparently he is not a Jedi worth his salt.

And if the Jedi can not risk Anakin dying. Why is he ever allowed on missions?
He was sent, alone, to protect Padme and they knew that one assassin had failed but that one did escape.
So danger is likely.
Why was Anakin allowed to fly up and try and save Palpatine in RotS, his life was at risk there.

And saying the Force is the Plot, well at least you admit that the events happen because the plot requires them to.
"The Force did it." is not really a good explanation.

Or since the Force created Anakin to destroy the sith and now that he is dead, the Force would get off it's lazy behind and do the job itself.
Like telling all midis in Palpatine's body to stop reproducing. They will eventually all die and Palpatine will then also die.

If he is un-killable then Yoda could focus on Dooku as Anakin won't die and something would happen that would save him.
And if his destiny is this absolute, that he MUST destroy the sith no matter what.
Then it removes choice and free-will from the story.
Anakin is destined to do this and he will, no choice involved.
That makes the story far less interesting to me.

I don't have a problem with it. I think it showed that Yoda was human, that even he could not follow a very rigid code all the time.
The problem is with the people that have argued for years that the PT Jedi should be detached, not letting emotions get in the way of their actions, they they should not be concerned with the suffering of a few individuals but should focus on the greater good.
That part of the reason why the Jedi must not have children/family is that they could be blackmailed by bad guys.
But if the Jedi will react this way even if random people are threatened, then a major reason for a ban on marriage goes away.

I have felt that the PT Jedi at times came across as cold and indifferent and I have questioned why the Jedi don't act in certain cases.
And I have been told that the Jedi are supposed to be this way. They are supposed to not let their emotions cloud their judgement. That a few people suffering here or some dying there is less important to the Jedi than following orders, protocol, procedure. That the Jedi will stand by and let millions die if the senate will go ok them to act.
That the Jedi can not be allowed to run off and save a few people here or there, that they must obey orders and do what the mission tells them above all.

It is this view of the Jedi that I find clashing with what Yoda did in AotC.
And it also clashed with what Mace did earlier and what Obi-Wan said.
And what the RotS novelization said.

One, we don't know that.
The death of Dooku could have ended the war right there. Palpatine would still be there but his plan would have failed and he would have to start over.
Two, if nothing anyone does has any effect on the story, then again we are back to a story where free-will and choice does not exist. Events will happen regardless what anyone does and that makes it far less good to me.

Sorry, the burden of proof is on you.
If you want to claim that Yoda could not bring troops, despite being shown to be able to command the clone forces on Geonosis. Prove it.
If you want to claim that he did but they were all killed, prove it.
If you want to claim this but offer no proof and the film does not show it, now you have created a plot hole.

Yoda not taking any help is not a plot hole, it is just Yoda being stupid.

[/QUOTE]

It is not a plot hole.
It is Yoda acting differently from what Mace and Obi-Wan did earlier.
And if it was a moment of weakness or him not being able to let two of his friends die despite that is what a good Jedi should do given the stakes.
That is no plot hole.
And if Yoda feels bad about it afterwards, and is sad at the end because he knows that a war has begun, a war that he could have stopped. And that this has an impact on him as a character.
No plot hole and even adds to his character.

I just find it inconsistent that some will call Vader an idiot for not blowing up the MF in ESB, just disabling the hyperdrive. And yet won't call Yoda an idiot in AotC for not bringing help to stop Dooku.

Bye.
The Guarding Dark

 

That was done in order to pre-empt the Jedi destroying "us" because of what happened to Mace, according to Palpatine. The civil war without end thing was an excuse. It was already clear that both his and Anakin's motives were purely self serving, in spite of what they say. So, no. Anakin did not murder the younglings in order to spare the rest of the galaxy.

 

That is important, but not at the expense of those who could be saved in the moment. It's like the argument that Samuel Vimes and I had about Spider-Man trying to rescue Mary Jane and the cable car. This is why the Jedi are not selective with the lives of the people who need their help. That is not in their nature. That is not their way. If it was, then Dooku would have been captured and the two Jedi would be dead.

Which is the key difference. Luke is rushing off unprepared to face Vader based on his fear that they will die, versus Yoda who sees that his fellow Jedi will die if he does not act. Just like Anakin reacts to Padme's death when it is not certain she will die, simply because his mother died the last time. The common denominator is that the Skywalker men act emotionally, whereas Yoda does not.

You're being ridiculous. In the first case, if the Jedi can still stop Sidious, they will. Yoda was one Jedi against one Sith. Second, this depends on if he knows that or not. Odds are he would still try to save the two Jedi.

The danger with attachments is that they will follow the path that the Skywalker men followed. They will make irrational choices based on fear of loss, which is different from a Jedi who will opt to save lives whenever possible. If they were truly that cold, they wouldn't be Jedi. They'd be Sith. Anakin made a choice to become Vader because he focused his emotional connections on one person and threw away his Jedi training, as well as his own moral beliefs, in favor of hanging onto his attachment. This is far different from Yoda who makes a choice to save two people who will die, even though Dooku will escape in doing so.

The Senate is the one at fault here, not the Jedi. First for getting rid of the military might that they once wielded, second for becoming so bureaucratic and uncaring towards their own people and third for becoming so corrupt that they allowed themselves to be manipulated as they were. Had the Senate been more trusting towards the Jedi, they could have avoided some of what happened. But in the greater context, the fact is that the people of Naboo were capable of fighting for their own world without the Jedi and the Senate. That's what the lesson was at the end of TPM.

A Jedi can do so, but it always depends on the context of the situation and if said Jedi actually follows orders. If Anakin had contacted Obi-wan, things may have turned out differently.

Grievous was still there and Sidious would just make a few alterations, in order to keep the plan going. He himself could rally the systems together by turning Dooku into a martyr and find someone else who could carry on as his Apprentice until he turned Anakin.

 

The problem is that stopping Dooku was their stated objective. If peril for Anakin and Obi-Wan "in the moment" was a potential obstacle to achieving that then it would have been better if Yoda had told them both beforehand not to get involved at all. And to hide somewhere safe, like Qui Gon did with Anakin on Naboo.

It's academic because there is no evidence of a Jedi policy of helping the person most immediately in need at the expense of their duty to the senate and the Republic. Instead, doing one's republican duty above all else is the constant.

This "in the moment" Jedi policy was unheard of until Yoda allowed Dooku to escape.

 

No, the Jedi cannot behave that way either. The point is that a Jedi must do what they can to stop someone like Dooku and not to run and hide. Not without it being a tactical advantage like with the Skywalker children. Instead, the goal was to stop Dooku and when Dooku fights dirty by threatening others, Yoda does what a Jedi always does. Yoda only gets involved because he senses a disturbance in the Force that requires his involvement. And when it comes to saving others, we've seen repeatedly in the films and in the cartoons that the Jedi will go and save others, even if it means losing the battle like that.

As I've said, the message of what the Jedi do was misrepresented by other members and misunderstood all together.

 

This whole debate simply goes back to the trolley question, to which the only answer is that there is no right answer.

Jedi swear off attachments the way that monks take a vow of poverty, or a vow of chastity. They are serving a higher purpose. That doesn't make them cold or lacking in compassion at all. They are very compassionate. They swear off attachments because of the dangers of possessiveness, jealousy, greed, etc. Anakin had an attachment to Padme, and she became a possession to him. He became jealous. We've all been there, but we are not all powerful space wizards. And the Prequel Jedi do have attachments. It usually causes them failure. Anakin has an attachment. Obi-Wan has an attachment to Anakin. He overlooks his errors, covers for him, etc. Mace has an attachment to the Republic, as do other council members.

The higher calling of the Jedi is to serve the force(Like..."Serve the Lord") It controls their actions and also obeys their commands, As per the above Obi Wan quote. They serve the force, the Republic, and they serve each other.

Free will vs Predestination.
This is another question where the only answer is that there is no answer. The star wars saga is constantly posing this question, but for obvious reasons cannot fully answer it. Nor can we. It also puts the question of Yoda's actions and their implications outside of any attainable conclusion. Was it the will of the force that led Yoda to stop the falling pillar? Was it instinct? Did he forsake the force and do it anyway?

I'm afraid it's not. I did not make any claims. You made the claim that Yoda was stupid for not bringing troops, but we don't have enough information to conclude that. We could assume any reasonable explanation for why he is alone. I posed examples. The ship that dropped Anakin and Obi-Wan at the hangar may also have had a plan to get at Dooku's ship, or block the hangar, but it was blown up immediately, on screen. We just don't know. (And it's a movie...and this kind of thing is normal for a movie. Maybe we should go peruse the Novelization for answers?)

I never said it was a plot hole. Inconsistency in different people's perceptions and arguments that post here is fine, and normal. Yoda and Mace reacting differently to situations is also fine, and normal, since they are two different people, and Vader is yet a third. Vader and especially the Emperor, are always thinking bigger than us mortals. They don't really care if the Millenium Falcon gets away or not. Vader just wanted luke. I'd bet Palpatine loves that there's a rebellion. It gives his navies/armies exercise. It allows him excusing to subjugate new worlds. I can think of a ton of benefits(From the Emperor's perspective)to having uprisings to put down.

 

You're talking about basic human responsiveness to emotions that have evolved over millenia. You don't need to be a trained Jedi to do those things. They just come naturally to most well adjusted adults who have no other responsibilities.

This supposed policy that prevents Yoda from safeguarding peace in the galaxy after the Jedi have repeatedly professed their need to stop Dooku before any other considerations, is a spurious fabrication for which you have provided no material proof in the face of the overwhelming testimony of all Jedi about what their actual duty and mandate is.

 

Is your whole goal here to say "Bad Yoda!"? I mean, if that's the way you feel?

 

The point is that the Jedi, Yoda in particular, don't always do what they profess to do. It doesn't make them bad. But it positively leaves the Jedi order, especially its leadership, open to reproaches.

 

Now, I am not the one who originally noticed this and it might have been discussed here already... But does the political crisis in AOTC make sense? Apperently there is not enough senators to approve clone army, but there is enough senators to give Palpatine emergency powers so he can do it himself.

 

That has been brought up a number of times by several people.
The issue is like you say, the senate will not agree to create the clone army but will agree to hand over most of their power to Palpatine to he can create it instead.

So the Senate is circumventing itself.

What would have made better sense is that in times of war in the past, the chancellor had been granted extra powers to fight the war more effectively. So they give him those powers but over time he makes them give away more and more.

If so, why to people tell me that I am wrong for drawing certain conclusions about the film.
Like that Yoda should have focused on stopping Dooku but ignored his duty to save Obi-Wan and Anakin.
That is wrong according to some here.

Except as I said, people have argued that the other reason for the no family/children thing is that it leaves the Jedi open to blackmail. That bad guys would target the children of Jedi and kidnap them and force the Jedi to do certain things.
But now, the bad guys can kidnap anyone and the Jedi will submit just as quickly.

Yoda not being able to let Obi-Wan and Anakin die, I can see that a regular person would act the same way.
But since people here have been adamant in saying that the Jedi are NOT regular people, that they must never be like regular people or have the same emotions and attachments and all that.

And the Republic will be served with Dooku getting captured or killed. But Yoda ignored that.
And Dooku getting away means the war spreads and the dark side has fallen, according to Yoda.
So Yoda failed the Force as well.

Except the issue is when people try and have their cake and eat it.
That they argue that free-will exists in instance A but then in instance B they argue that everything is predetermined.
The two alternatives are mutually exclusive. If everything is predetermined then free-will does not exist and events will always happen no matter what anyone does.
If free-will exists then events can be changed or prevented.

So if I say that the capture/death of Dooku might have ended the war right there.
If you say that is wrong and the war would happen anyway because events always happen, then you are saying that everything is predetermined and thus, no free-will.

Except you did.
You argued that Yoda could not bring troops as they were all busy or he did bring them but they were all killed.
So you have made claims and now you need to back them up.

My stance is that we see Yoda call for a ship, not a mention of wanting to bring troops but being unable to.
And it makes no sense that he would be unable to as he is in the command post so he can and does order clones around.
Them getting killed, same thing. We heard no explosion from outside right before Yoda came in.
And Padme and her ship gets there just fine and is not shown to be fired upon.
So what the film shows is Yoda going alone for unexplained reasons.

It would be like in ANH, if we see that the rebels have many X-Wings but they only send two to attack the DS and not a word why the other fighters are not used.
That would look very stupid.

Except people are trying to deny that Mace and Yoda did react differently.
That the same Jedi code that made Mace be willing to let 20 people die is the same as the one that made Yoda save two lives.
That there is no difference in their thinking and goal, not really.
That Mace prefers for 20 people to die because them as hostages would not serve the greater good and is therefore right.
But Yoda letting two people die to stop Dooku from leaving and spreading the war, that is somehow not for the greater good and is thus wrong.
This does not add up.

People argue that Jedi will NEVER let people die if they can prevent it.
But Mace shows that they can and so does Yoda in ESB, when he tells Luke that he should let Han and Leia die to honor what they have fought for.
So I think it is clear that the jedi CAN let people die in certain situations.
So the idea that the Jedi code says that a Jedi must never let anyone die is false.

[/QUOTE]

Except Vader DID care as he took steps to prevent it, he told Piett to disable to hyperdrive on the MF.
So he was planing ahead, in the eventuality that Han, Leia and the others escape, they will likely use their own ship but they won't get far as the hyperdrive has been sabotaged.
And if Luke would somehow get away and find the others, he too won't get far.

This is smart as they could take any ship in Cloud city and disabling or destroying all of them is impractical and will get noticed. And if they escape in a ship that you don't know, they could get away. So better to let them take one ship that you know off and that also happens to be sabotaged.

As for Palpatine, he created chaos and war to get power, once he had it he wanted order and control.
Hence the DS, the goal of that was to crush the rebellion and any further opposition.
No one will dare defy the emperor now, is that Tarkin says.
So no, Palpatine did not want uprisings and rebellion.
He tolerated it while the DS was being built as he tolerated the Senate being around.
Once the DS was ready, the senate was disbanded and the rebellion should be crushed as soon as possible and after that, no one would dare speak a word of protest.

Bye.
Blackboard Monitor

 

Not enough senators are willing to cast a vote directly for the creation of a clone army, because they're afraid of being held accountable for the consequences politically. But there are enough who are willing to grant emergency powers to the chancellor to act as he deems fit, because that grants them political cover.

You saw the same thing with the vote for the Iraq war back in 2003. Technically the vote simply granted George W. Bush the power to act as he saw fit to contain the supposed threat from Iraq. Certain politicians (whom I won't name) did indeed take advantage of this fig leaf of a distinction in order to distance themselves from their votes when the war later became politically unpopular--and it sometimes worked.

Rather than being a plot hole, some might call this plot point from 2002 rather...prescient.

 

Palpatine was given emergency powers he sought, by the senate, for the express purpose that you're claiming that senators were afraid of voting for. That's just nonsense. Particularly in light of the face that they continued to give him further powers over and above those.

Politicians don't need excuses to try and distance themselves from what they voted for in the past.

 

LOL then why did they do it in the real world example which I just cited? And why did it work?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...n_told_the_truth_about_her_iraq_war_vote.html

The express purpose of the Emergency Powers Palpatine sought were to give him carte blanche to do whatever he saw fit to combat the Separatist threat. Just as in the case of the Iraq war, everyone in a decision-making position knows that it's essentially a vote for war. But it allows them to dissemble to their constituents and claim they were simply putting their faith in the Chancellor, who truly made the decision.

 

The basic human emotions aren't fueled by a power to choke people with a gesture and shoot lightning bolts out of their fingers. The power can take over easily and corrupt the Force user who attempts to use it without discipline. Being a Jedi is about learning to master yourself so that you can use the Force properly, which was no different from what the Dagoyan Masters did with the Force. Only they chose not to help people with the Force.

Safeguarding the peace does not mean that you can prevent war. War is inevitable. War will happen when people, not just the Jedi, fail to keep the peace and let diplomacy fail. The point of a Jedi is to fight for peace and if they cannot maintain it, they will do their best to help restore it. Yoda never professes that Dooku needs to be stopped above all other considerations. That is why Yoda stops to rescue the Jedi survivors in the arena, instead of concentrating on attacking Dooku or the Droid Foundries. Or let me put it another way.

OBI-WAN: "Master Yoda said to be mindful of the future."

QUI-GON: "But not at the expense of the moment."


YODA: "This one a long time have I watched. All his life has he looked away...to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was doing."


YODA: "Skywalker, still looking to the horizon. Never here, now, hmm? The need in front of your nose."

Qui-gon told Obi-wan this in relation to keep his focus on what was going on, and not focusing on something that may or may not be an issue. Likewise, Yoda wants Luke to focus on the issues at hand, and not focus on things that happened in the past and may happen in the future. Here, Yoda focuses on saving two lives even though it may cost millions more their lives, simply in order to prevent a war. You cannot say that a Jedi needs to be selective with their compassion. That's not what the Jedi are about.

You're missing the point, again. Anakin chooses to surrender to the dark side because he cannot let go of Padme. This is the danger in a Jedi having an attachment to a person, because they will be tempted by the dark side of the Force. It's not blackmail on Palpatine's part to get him to turn. He manipulated Anakin's feelings that are too strong towards a person, that he will ignore his own feelings and beliefs in favor of doing something that he knows is wrong. Dooku holding a person hostage won't force the Jedi into being evil. But it can allow him the chance to escape from the Jedi and avoid capture or death. Dooku attacked the two fallen Jedi because he knows that Yoda as a Jedi, as a good person, will rush to help them.

Yes, Yoda failed. But the Force has already forgiven him.

QUI-GON: "I have been tasked with guiding you forward. There can be many outcomes, but your path is clear, Yoda. You have been chosen, as I was before you."

YODA: "For what chosen am I?"

QUI-GON: "You will learn to preserve your Life Force, and so, manifest a consciousness which will allow you to commune with the living after death."

YODA: "How?"

QUI-GON: "Dark times are ahead, and forces of light must remain. This is the path of only a few Jedi."


SERENITY: "His destiny is already set. It is not for us to decide."

SADNESS: "But why him?"

SERENITY: "He is to teach one that will save the universe from a great imbalance. For this, the great gift will be his."

When the paths are clear, then events will unfold as seen. When the events are difficult to see and clouded, then it comes down to the choices of the one to decide their own fate. Yoda's path was clear because he would not surrender to the darkness and his willingness to change and adapt, would benefit him and the galaxy as a whole. Anakin's path was not clear because he was full of emotional conflict within his life, and thus he could bring balance to the Force if he kept to the Jedi path and not tread the path of the Sith. Han's fate was not clear which is why Luke didn't need to rush off and he could save him later.

Again, you miss the point. Anakin and Luke have to accept that there are times when they can save someone and times when they cannot. They have to accept that at a certain point, there is nothing to be done. Anakin had to accept that people will die in his life, which he has trouble accepting. Anakin could save Padme simply by accepting that she might die or that she might live and instead, help Mace to kill or capture Palpatine. That is the sacrifice that he needed to make. The sacrifice of himself and his needs and desires. Luke has to make that same choice with Han and Leia, because he isn't ready to accept that until he realizes the truth. A Jedi has limits and must accept those limits. The Sith have no limits.

What Mace does with the Jedi survivors is a completely different thing. Same with Yoda rescuing those survivors and letting Dooku go.

 

But it is their expressed duty. And they train themselves to be unafraid of letting go all that you would lose in doing so. There are no qualifiers or caveats about their duty expressed anywhere except by observers unwilling to consider any reproach concerning Yoda or the jedi order.

 

Yoda didn't save Anakin and Obi-Wan because he was attached to them. He saved them because they were two people about to be crushed to death, and he had the power to prevent that. Would you be condemning Yoda for his so-called hypocrisy if it had been two random infants instead?

 

That training isn't exclusively for Jedi who have attachments. It is fundamental to every Jedi in order to fulfill their duty to the Republic and to not be tempted by the dark side.

I know what Yoda's motives were when he rescued Obi-Wan and Anakin. That and the events leading up to it where not sufficiently consistent with the Jedi practicing what they, particularly Yoda, preach in order to fulfil their expressed duty.

 

Is someone arguing that Yoda is infallible? The fallibilty of the Jedi Council is a major theme of the prequels. He seems pretty salty about the whole affair. Last night I went and read the last chapter of the novelization, and a few things occurred to me:

1. As soon as Yoda moves the crane(I for some reason thought it was a stone pillar), he turns around and sees Dooku taking off, and immediately says "A dark frickin day, this is!"(That's Yoda's way of saying "Damn! $@*#! *%&#!")

2. There is a parallel between Yoda's decision and Obi-Wan/Anakin's decision with Padme in the drop ship(I'll get back to this).

3. The here alleged parallel to Mace Windu's decision is forced and/or misconstrued.

-There are 4 different characters here acting differently from each other.

So, Mace Windu and his Jedi are fighting in the arena. They are losing. Once they have lost their advantage, and have been corralled into the center of the arena, surrounded by droids, Dooku calls a halt to the festivities. He praises their gallantry and calls for a surrender.

Mace defiantly says "We won't be hostages to be bartered!" meaning "We will not help you" or "We will not be used as pawns to your advantage."

Mace is negotiating. He might be trying to buy time, or he just might be determined to fight on. Either way, he hasn't given up. He doesn't say "Just shoot us and get it over with." Then Dooku says "Sorry...you die." Then, Yoda immediately comes to the rescue. If Yoda had not come, and Mace & friends fought to the death, their sacrifice would not have helped catch Dooku in any way. Nor would their death help prevent a war. If anything, their sacrifice would enflame the Republic to retaliate.

When Obi-wan was captured, Dooku also offered him a deal, to which he declined. He was sentenced to death, but didn't ever plan on dying. Likewise Anakin & Padme were captured, and offered a deal, which they declined. And even though Padme thought they might not make it, neither she nor Anakin ever planned on dying. They began their fight to survive the moment they were chained to those posts.

When Padme later falls from the ship, Anakin wants to rescue her. He doesn't want to abandon the mission, but he doesn't want to abandon her either. He has personal reasons, and was also sworn to protect her. Obi-Wan objects, because he doesn't think he can't fight Dooku alone(which is true). This means that if you switch out Obi-Wan with Yoda, Yoda could have let them lower the ship, drop Anakin off by Padme in the sand, and continue chasing Dooku alone.

Why does Yoda go to the hangar? To help. Maybe he sensed their peril. When he arrives, he realizes that Dooku didn't necessarily leave the Jedi Order for noble goals, to fight corruption, or a career in politics, or to reclaim his heritage. He now knows that Dooku has fallen to the dark side, and has learned the ways of the dark side. When Dooku is losing, he takes a cheap shot. And Yoda acts to save the helpless Jedi. Dooku knew that Yoda would save them. That is precisely why he did it.

Can you imagine the look on Dooku's face if Yoda just ignored them getting squashed and continued attacking?

 

He knew that Yoda would fail to live up to the ideals that he professes, just as the two younger Jedi had. He knew the Jedi were fallible.