main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

CT Plot Holes in the CT

Discussion in 'Classic Trilogy' started by Klingon Padawan, Mar 12, 2013.

  1. Pacified_llama

    Pacified_llama Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Sep 15, 2017
    The point with the Rule of Two is that it has a name, if you acknowledge the Prequels, and it doesn't if you only consider the OT in isolation. Irrespective of the semantics, the concept does indeed exist. If anything, there is greater ambiguity created by the PT than if we are just to consider the concept as finally portrayed in ROTJ.

    I think we can move beyond speculation of 'dead or alive' if we stop generalizing and focus on the specific case of Solo. Fett is running two jobs, one for Vader, one for Jabba. Vader wants Solo alive (he explicitly says so regarding the Falcon and by logical extension her crew). Fett fulfills his mission for Vader. Solo is alive - he takes Solo in carbonite - alive - to Jabba, hence completing his other job. Bounties alive are intrinsically more valuable than those dead - common sense prevails.

    I agree that the 'dead or alive' question is probably stretching the definition of what constitutes a plot hole, in this instance.
     
  2. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    It's actually never referred to by name in the prequels, either. The concept is just explained in dialogue for the first time.
     
    {Quantum/MIDI} and Qui-Riv-Brid like this.
  3. Pacified_llama

    Pacified_llama Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Sep 15, 2017
    OK, granted. Nevertheless, it is a case of explicit discussion of the concept, against merely the reader having to infer as much in the OT. Sort of a 'show don't tell' thing.
     
  4. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    By the Jedi no less.

    Which has created quite a lot of confusion because the assumption is/had been that the Sith were wiped out, went into hiding, then Bane created the Rule of Two so they could survive.

    Which doesn't work because since Yoda knows about it that means the Jedi were aware of the rule and so the last time the Sith "ruled the galaxy" and fought the Jedi that there were only two of them.
     
  5. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Yes, and this is actually quite clear in the passage in the TPM novelization which describes these events. Unfortunately someone somewhere misinterpreted it somehow and as a result we have this deeply-ingrained idea of the institution of the Rule of Two coinciding with the presumed extinction of the Sith, which makes no sense and contradicts statements made by Lucas.

    In reality it seems that the original Sith Order which was composed of many members destroyed itself in a very short period of time, leading to the institution of the Banite Order, which waged war against the Jedi for a thousand years, apparently making use of proxy armies and kyber-powered superweapons before their apparent final defeat a millennium before TPM.
     
  6. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
  7. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    I can see why people tied "secrecy" to "Rule of Two" though:

    In the end, the Sith destroyed themselves. They destroyed their leader first, then each other. What few survived the initial bloodbath were quickly dispatched by watchful Jedi. In a matter of only weeks, all of them died.
    All but one.
    Darth Maul shifted impatiently. The younger Sith had not yet learned his Master's patience; that would come with time and training. It was patience that had saved the Sith order in the end. It was patience that would give them their victory now over the Jedi.
    The Sith who had survived when all of his fellows had died had understood that. He had adopted patience as a virtue when the others had forsaken it. He had adopted cunning, stealth, and subterfuge as the foundation of his way- old Jedi virtues the others had disdained. He stood aside while the Sith tore at each other like kriks and were destroyed. When the carnage was complete, he went into hiding, biding his time, waiting for his chance.
    When it was believed all of the Sith were destroyed, he emerged from his concealment. At first he worked alone, but he was growing old and he was the last of his kind. Eventually, he went out in search of an apprentice. Finding one, he trained him to be a Master in his turn, then to find his own apprentice, and so to carry on their work. But there would only be two at any one time. There would be no repetition of the mistakes of the old order, no struggle between Siths warring for power within the cult. Their common enemy was the Jedi, not each other. It was for their war with the Jedi they must save themselves.
    The Sith who reinvented the order called himself Darth Bane.
    A thousand years had passed since the Sith were believed destroyed, and the time they had waited for had come at last.


    So, they're "saving themselves for the war against the Jedi" and they have been waiting for a specific time - and Bane's whole schtick was stealth and subterfuge. Thus the "Bane's Sith spent the next 1000 years being secret and hidden" theory.


    Having Bane dump secrecy and start 1000 years of open war with the Jedi (always with only 2 Sith as "war leaders") just doesn't gel with how he survived in the first place.

    And it's worth noting, that the Databank goes with the Legends version - that Bane instituted the Rule of Two 1000 years ago, not 2000, and after the decimation of the Sith:

    http://www.starwars.com/databank/darth-bane

    Perhaps in this version, the Jedi found evidence of Bane's early career, but not of the career of his successor, and concluded that, shortly after the death of Bane himself "the Sith have been extinct for a millennium" - then, after Maul proved they weren't, Yoda, having read Bane's writings - concluded "Always two there were" must have been in play from Bane onwards.
     
  8. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    It's not a "theory," it's clearly what's being stated:

    "In the end, the Sith destroyed themselves. They destroyed their leader first, then each other. What few survived the initial bloodbath were quickly dispatched by watchful Jedi. In a matter of only weeks, all of them died.... When it was believed all of the Sith were destroyed, he emerged from his concealment."

    Bane's shtick was indeed stealth and subterfuge, just like Sidious's shtick is stealth and subterfuge, even after he similarly emerges from concealment to reveal himself to the Jedi in TPM and wage open war against them (seemingly) using a proxy army. It makes sense that the Jedi easily fall for this diversion because it fits with the M.O. of the Banite Sith they faced in the past.

    The Databank is similarly confused, simply because this mistaken notion has become so deeply ingrained. The Databank isn't written by George Lucas.

    This is what George Lucas himself has to say:

    "One of the themes throughout the films is that the Sith Lords, when they started out thousands of years ago, embraced the dark side. They were greedy and self-centered and they all wanted to take over, so they killed each other. Eventually there was only one left, and that one took on an apprentice. And for thousands of years, the master would teach the apprentice, the master would die, the apprentice would then teach another apprentice, become the master, and so on. But there could never be any more than two of them, because if there were, they would try to get rid of the leader, which is exactly what Vader was trying to do, and that's exactly what the Emperor was trying to do. The Emperor was trying to get rid of Vader, and Vader was trying to get rid of the Emperor. And that is the antithesis of a symbiotic relationship, in which if you do that, you become cancer, and you eventually kill the host, and everything dies."

    --George Lucas, Bill Moyers Time Magazine Interview; 1999.

    This fits with an intuitive reading of the passage from the TPM novelization, in which a large Sith organization starts out thousands of years ago, eventually turns on its leader, destroys itself in a matter of weeks, and then gives rise to a new Banite Order which exists for thousands of years (about 2,000, given Lucas's timeline of the founding of the Sith) menacing the Jedi from the shadows.

    Nothing about the alternative theory makes any sense. It doesn't fit with an intuitive reading of the passage, it doesn't fit with Lucas's statements, and it doesn't even make logical sense with the movies. Yoda is confident in his assessment that there are two Sith--no more and no less--because the Jedi know from long experience that this is how the Sith operate. Their old enemies, once thought destroyed, have now returned, and Yoda assumes they're up to their old tricks. Anything else requires massive contortions of logic in order to justify within the given narrative.
     
  9. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Yet Yoda is very clear that there are always two. No more, no less. So it must have been successful as a practice and therefore known to the Jedi that it was actually workable.

    If it has no known track record of success then why would it be assumed that it would still be adhered to?

    They don't even know until the end of TPM that the Sith have returned. They presume one is dead and so only one is left.

    The problem is that we don't really know what the highest number of Sith were at one point to the Jedi and how quickly they fell apart.

    I doubt Lucas ever went very deep into figuring the details out. Just the background he have in the TPM novel (This precedes the above passage Iron_lord posted):

    His thoughts were of the Sith and of the history of their order.

    The Sith had come into being almost two thousand years ago. They were a cult given over to the dark
    side of the Force, embracing fully the concept that power denied was power wasted. A rogue Jedi
    Knight had founded the Sith, a singular dissident in an order of harmonious followers, a rebel who
    understood from the beginning that the real power of the Force lay not in the light, but in the dark.

    Failing to gain approval for his beliefs from the Council, he had broken with the order, departing with his knowledge and his skills, swearing in secret that he could bring down those who had dismissed him.

    He was alone at first, but others from the Jedi order who believed as he did and who had followed him in his study of the dark side soon came over. Others were recruited, and soon the ranks of the Sith swelled to than fifty in number. Disdaining the concepts of cooperation and consensus, relying on the belief that acquisition of power in any form lends strength and yields control, the Sith began to build their cult in opposition to the Jedi.

    Theirs was not an order created to serve; theirs was an order created to dominate.
    Their war with the Jedi was vengeful and furious and ultimately doomed. The rogue Jedi who had
    founded the Sith order was its nominal leader, but his ambition excluded any sharing of power. His
    disciples began to conspire against him and each other almost from the beginning, so that the war they instigated was as much with each other as with the Jedi.

    Even going by that the Sith came into being from the Jedi 2000 years before and disappeared 1000 years before. So that is 1000 years of Sith "Rule/Terrorizing"

    What makes more sense to me is that there were a number of Jedi who turned to the Dark Side and became the Sith or maybe even Lords of the Sith (the Sith themselves being an actual group they gained control of) who rather quickly fell apart and then Bane emerged and put together various factions that battled the Jedi and Republic. Then he found an apprentice and they continued on. The Jedi knew of the Rule of Two from Bane and eventually defeated the Sith's factions but exactly how and when and how many iterations of the Sith they faced is another story.

    And since in terms of the new canon it isn't set one can hope that they actually pay attention to the movies and what Lucas notes and outline actually are.

    Lucas' version not only makes sense but is a better story. It still gives leeway to have the Old Republic legions of Sith version but all you need to do is to push back Bane from 1000 years before TPM when the Sith went into hiding to an earlier point in time.

    Strictly by the movies you could even as you note push the creation of the original Sith back thousands of years (not just 2000) then the Bane line a couple of thousand years.
     
  10. CLee

    CLee Jedi Knight star 3

    Registered:
    Jun 18, 2017
    But, despite his prior actions, Vader in Jedi seems both very loyal to the Emperor and, related, very lacking in ambition to raise his status and become the new master.
     
  11. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    That's because it's all beneath the surface. Lucas didn't want Vader outright plotting and planning. We knew from TESB that was his plan so it wasn't highlighted again. Vader was still playing off Luke's sympathy. If Vader was outright then when he did turn the audience would just expect that he did it to destroy the Emperor for himself rather than to save Luke.

    He is also conflicted which we do see. There is no one for Vader to talk to about it so it's all internal. He needs Sidious to turn Luke then get Luke to team with him against the Emperor.
     
  12. Darth Downunder

    Darth Downunder Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Still it's very odd that Vader would be all "You can destroy the Emperor...We can rule the galaxy as father & son!" in TESB yet in RotJ he doesn't mention anything about it. Even when they have several minutes alone on Endor. Luke even mentions the upcoming confrontation with the Emperor, still nothing from Vader about Luke destroying him. In fact Vader says "He is your Master now!". What? That's a compete reversal. Vader is either using some kind of reverse psychology or he's just given up on his plans from a year earlier. I'd like to think the former but it's not even hinted at anywhere else in the movie.

    As for the so called Rule of Two, it's just a theory. Much like the "Chosen One". It's an idea based on a Sith policy from 1000 years earlier. Strictly looking at the movies there's nothing that proves the "rule" even exists. The fact that we only see two Sith at any one time does not establish it. What Yoda says is based on a rule the Sith used to have, a millennia ago. He wasn't speaking with knowledge of their current policy. How much relevance does that hold now? Who knows. Yoda's line is actually quite poor bcs he's speaking about an order that hasn't existed in that long & for all he knows could've changed & evolved in all kinds of ways (as it had done previously), yet he speaks with complete authority. "Only two there are, no more, no less!". He states it as an absolute fact when he's just guessing. Yet he goes around telling people never to assume anything!!

    If you go to outside sources there may be answers, including GL's comments. However there's no definitive answer in the movies themselves. Maybe the rule is now just a preference. Or a guideline. Maybe Palpatine was stickler for it as a rule. Maybe not. Or maybe it's just how things organically work out bcs the Sith are treacherous a-holes. They're just behaving as those types usually behave. Lusting for power. That doesn't make it a rule though.
     
    Sarge and Tosche_Station like this.
  13. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    With the Tarkin novel, the newcanon has pushed back the origins of the Sith - with a 5000-odd year old Sith temple buried under the Jedi Temple - but it hasn't pushed back the origin of Bane.
     
    Jedi Knight Fett likes this.
  14. Pacified_llama

    Pacified_llama Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Sep 15, 2017
    The presentation of Vader in ROTJ has to credibly allow for his redemption. He moves into a more tragic role, in order to close the thematic circle of redemption by Luke. They went for consistency self-contained in ROTJ, rather than OT wide continuity, because to have Vader redeemed, while just earlier he was electing Luke as his apprentice to rule the galaxy would have been implausible and unsatisfying.

    Vader didn't truly have any opportunity to apprentice Luke in ROTJ - he is still actively pursuing him, "And now I sense you wish to continue your search for young Skywalker", but after the Emperor gives him an assignment "You will go to the sanctuary moon..." etc. he is locked in. He has to bring Luke to his master.

    Vader seems like a broken man in ROTJ, and I think that's deliberate. The encounter with Luke on Bespin changed him.
     
  15. Iron_lord

    Iron_lord Chosen One star 10

    Registered:
    Sep 2, 2012
    The James Kahn novelization, at least took the approach that Vader hadn't given up on his ambitions - he'd just concluded that he and Palpatine needed to work together to turn Luke, as Palpatine had pointed out. Once Luke was turned, Vader thought that he and Luke would be able to team up against the Emperor.

    Of course, we all know that Vader's thoughts are wrong. It would probably work like TCW:

    "Remember the first and only reality of the Sith: there can only be two. And you are no longer my apprentice. You have been replaced!"
    (zapping)
     
  16. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    As per Lucas, Vader's subtextual plan is still to eventually overthrow the Emperor with Luke, but whereas in TESB Vader seemed like a shrewd schemer with a viable plan, in ROTJ he seems more like a pathetic sadsack desperately clinging to a delusion. Even his traitorous aspirations have been completely co-opted and subjugated to the Emperor's will. As you say, he really is a broken man, even by Sith standards.
     
  17. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    No one to mention it to really is there? He already made a pitch to Luke and he stepped off into the void.

    Could be either or more likely several combinations all at the same time. Anakin/Vader is a mercurial fellow who does a lot of fluctuations.

    Like the Sith or Jedi themselves.

    Several thousand more likely.

    Except that Yoda says



    Plus we see Sidious and Maul, then Dooku replaces Maul, then Vader replaces Dooku then Vader wants Luke so he can replace Sidious and Luke become his apprentice and Sidious wants Luke to replace Vader as his apprentice.

    What more anyone could want I don't know.

    If that doesn't than what possibly would? There is even less to establish that there are ever more than two at once since there never is.

    Far longer otherwise he wouldn't know about the rule. The whole point is that the Sith having more than two was not workable. The Rule of Two clearly is what worked best and led to their greatest success.

    Yet he knows way more about it than we do.

    Despite it being directly adhered to in said movies and nothing to go against it. This extends to TCW where as above is the most dialogue in your face line:

    "Remember the first and only reality of the Sith: there can only be two. And you are no longer my apprentice. You have been replaced!"

    So I don't know what more can be said. It's directly in the movies in action. Sidious only had Maul, then Dooku, then Anakin, then wanted Luke. In all that time he didn't ever have more than one apprentice.

    The point is that he can't overthrow Sidious without Luke and he can't turn Luke himself so he has to play a dangerous game that is nigh impossible to win. Have Sidious turn Luke then somehow get Luke to team up with him to take out the Emperor. On top of that he is conflicted throughout the movie and only a part of him wants to go through with the plan (that has little chance of working anyway).
     
    {Quantum/MIDI} likes this.
  18. Darth Downunder

    Darth Downunder Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 5, 2001
    I think that's a good explanation. The very fact that Vader had become so conflicted is reason enough for him not to pursue turning Luke. Using his son to seize power would not be in character at that point in his arc. Although he did try to tempt Luke during their later fight. Was this genuine or not? I'll assume that latter. If it were genuine then it's inexplicable for him not to work on Luke when he had that time with him alone on Endor.
    Circumstantial evidence that does not prove that any "rule" exists. Even Yoda does not describe a rule. He could just be describing an established pattern. In any case, like I said Yoda was talking about the Sith from thousands of years ago. What relevance does their policies from that long ago have? Imagine if a pocket of descendants of a long thought extinct civilization were found. Would historians automatically assume that they'd be exactly the same culturally etc as the original people from millennia ago?

    The whole situation in TPM is presented quite poorly. Qui-Gon is attacked by Maul. He says "My only conclusion is that it was a Sith Lord". The Council members doubt this, but by the end of the movie they've accepted it as established fact. Why, bcs he attacked them again? Why was the second attack more revealing to the point that it erased all doubt? Either way, Yoda even assumes that the Sith employment policies are identical to thousands of years earlier. Based on what little they knew in TPM, perhaps Maul wasn't a Sith at all. Maybe he was part of some new Dark Side worshiping sect. Perhaps having drawn inspiration from the long extinct Sith in some way, or maybe not. It wasn't good to see the supposedly wisest characters in the Saga jumping to conclusions & making assumptions with such little evidence. All they had were the accounts of Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan about one of these Dark Side users, who was a mute who didn't utter word about his nature, his goals, his affiliations, or anything at all.
     
    Sarge and Tosche_Station like this.
  19. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    I think that in ROTJ they just wanted to show that Vader was effectively powerless and somewhat pathetic (like George had always wanted) .

    And they did that by showing him do virtually nothing. Instead of thwarted and frustrated, they showed him being somewhat passive and just waiting to see what will happen. He thinks it is a foregone conclusion that Luke will be turned by the Emperor. If Luke want's to live to be victorious, somehow. Like a "can't beat em, join em." type scenario.
     
    Tosche_Station likes this.
  20. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    This is just getting extremely silly.

    Yoda says "Always two there are no more, no less" and that is exactly what happens in the movies.

    What more needs to be said?

    Who had the Rule of Two.

    The Jedi and Sith are very much alike in many ways. The Jedi have rules that have been around for thousands of years they have adhered to because they work. Is there any reason for Yoda to believe that the Sith did away with the Rule of Two which lead to their greatest successes?

    Until proven otherwise he would have no reason to believe that the Rule of Two wasn't still being adhered to.

    Now could he be wrong? Sure he could. Could the Jedi drop their rule of one master having one apprentice? Sure but they never have for thousands of years so why assume something about the Sith that doesn't fit? For thousands of years the Sith have had the Rule of Two. That Yoda is thinking like that makes more sense than wildly thinking there might be many more into thousands of them.

    One of the whole points is that the Jedi did not sense their return. If there were a bunch of Sith the history shows that they would not be able to contain themselves and would start fighting each other.

    Sort of an odd comparison. In this case the parallel is the Jedi themselves who are not hidden.

    Not at all.

    Erm... this is all easily answered in the movie. I don't see how more simply it could be presented outside of a by the numbers overt expository scene.

    They know their ancient enemy when they see them. All the knowledge they have is not something that we are going to know. You seem to want some Jedi tutorial about every exacting point to the nth degree.

    They didn't which was the point. When Qui-Gon said it he was jumping to conclusions that the Jedi didn't accept.

    This makes all kinds of assumptions about what actual "evidence" is. Clearly from what the Jedi learned they were able to piece together that in fact the dark warrior was a Sith.

    This goes again to the entirely odd idea that we know absolutely everything the characters do at all times in every situation and in every detail. We don't. The prophecy of the Chosen One is all but unknown to us because we don't know where or when it's from, who said it, who said it and the like. We don't even get the actual wording. Yet clearly the Jedi know these things but we as the audience are not giving a tutorial and history of it anymore than we were about the Empire in ANH or the origin of the Emperor and Vader.

    The dark warrior was well trained in the Jedi arts, he had a Lightsaber, Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan fought him. Obi-Wan survived and knew Maul was brimming with the Dark Side. The Jedi were targeted. The only logical conclusion is that he was a Sith Lord. Anything else beside that is wild speculation.

    The Sith train, use weapons and fighting styles and the Force from their origination out of the Jedi themselves.
     
    {Quantum/MIDI} likes this.
  21. Tosche_Station

    Tosche_Station Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Feb 9, 2015

    [face_laugh]
     
  22. Dandelo

    Dandelo SW and Film Music Interview Host star 10 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Aug 25, 2014
    wait, people are actually questioning the rule of two now?

    if that isn't clearly stated to be an actual thing in the PT I don't know what is.
     
    darth-sinister likes this.
  23. Pacified_llama

    Pacified_llama Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Sep 15, 2017
    Whether you accept the Rule of Two depends how strictly you want to apply the canon.
    We talk about the "light side" yet it is never explicitly mentioned in the originals. We talk about "the rule of two", the same principle applies.

    The key is that we're discussing plot holes. The concepts exist. If the concepts themselves were inconsistently implemented then this would be a problem - but the only missing piece here is giving it a name.
     
    Qui-Riv-Brid likes this.
  24. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    In this case Lucas' canon from the movies, the scripts, his information and background notes seen in various places like fiction and non-fiction books plus the other major source of Lucas' story which is TCW.

    Star Wars is giant movie mythology not exacting details oriented Sci-Fi.

    Like I said there is never any explanation in the saga movies explaining how Lightsabers work. Therefore should Lightsabers not work because they weren't explained?

    The first actual notation of Kyber crystals powering the Lightsabers isn't until Rogue One.

    So in comparison the Rule of Two is up on Lightsabers because at least there was a mention of the rule but not of the crystals.

    I don't think anyone seriously questions that Lightsabers should not work or are not real because how they work isn't explained.

    No one questions that only Jedi or Sith use Lightsabers at all. Why aren't run of the mill Stormtroopers carrying them around? It's not like they would be totally useless to trained hands even if they were not Force users.
     
  25. Darth Downunder

    Darth Downunder Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 5, 2001
    No I just want characters to act true to their established personalities. Nothing wrong with suspecting they're the Sith in TPM, but one of Yoda's catch-phrases is never to assume anything. The very fact that the Sith have been extinct for countless centuries surely means that other options could be in play. The Jedi were rightly skeptical when it was first reported, even though Qui-Gon could report everything that they would still later know about Maul. He was attacked by Maul, then later they were attacked again by him. So? What changed?
    So why aren't they jumping to conclusions later? This is just a question of writing dialogue to suit each character. A subtle change in language here or there can portray a character as rational & not prone to assumption. Which is exactly how Mace & Yoda should be presented. Either that or mention the evidence that was discovered to now make them so completely sure about this, when earlier they were not. This was Mace's final instruction to Qui-Gon before he left for Naboo:

    "Go with the Queen to Naboo and discover the identity of this dark warrior. This is the clue we need to unravel the mystery of the Sith. May the Force be with you"

    Literally the next dialogue from Mace was this at the end of the movie:

    "There is no doubt the mysterious warrior was a Sith."

    Did I miss something? A deleted scene perhaps? How did Qui-Gon or Obi-Wan fulfill their mission to discover Maul's identity? The guy didn't say a word & then was cut in half & disposed of, before he crawled away & was fitted with robotic spider legs.
    This is just one small example among many of Lucas losing track of his own dialogue & story beats. In isolation they're always small & seemingly insignificant. Added together they paint a picture of very careless & sloppy writing.
     
    DarthCricketer, AndyLGR and Martoto77 like this.