CT Plot holes in the OT that weren't plot holes until they made the PT

George's

 

Vader hunting down the Jedi. I assume he does plenty of that in the years that follow the end of EP III so that one doesn't bother me. I always figured that the Order 66/attack on the Jedi temple, was just the opening rounds of the Jedi purge. I imagine there were lots of Jedi all over the place that had yet to be dealt with.

 

Wipe them out. ALL of them. Should have been reserved for Vader and Vader alone pertaining to the remaining Jedi.

 

On the contrary, there's a multitude of opinion with many more than two sides. I certainly don't identify with either of the factions you describe.

I took pains in my (admittedly verbose) posts above to say that any science v mysticism arguments in Star Wars offer a false dichotomy. It's space opera, science fantasy. Yoda speaks of the force in naturalistic terms as well as spiritual, the force is described as part of nature.

Natural things can be described in dry technical detail and in emotional poetry without changing their objective reality. There is no conflict.

 

I also imagine Vader killed quite a few fully fledged Jedi in that temple. I doubt the kids were home alone.

 

They weren't. The holorecording that Obi-Wan watches in ROTS features Anakin duelling with Jedi in the temple itself - the one which ends with Obi-Wan saying "I can't watch any more." Curiously, that recording also does not include footage of Anakin killing younglings, which a scene or two later Obi-Wan says to Padme he has seen ... buuuuut that's probably something for a different thread.

 

Yep...That one is even more embarrassing now. Has Obi-wan just forgotten because he was either not as wise and smart as Yoda, or exhausted ?...

Other big ones to me :

- Leia remembering her real mother (plus the details on mother Skywalker's fate in ROTJ novel and script).

- Ben explaining that Owen didn't agree with Anakin's philosophy, and thought he should have stayed here and not gotten involved...

Minor ones :

- Tarkin's answer to Vader about Obi-Wan Kenobi in ANH "Surely he must be dead by now", with Vader responding "Don't underestimate the Force". Strongly implying that Ben was supposed to be much older than 57 in ANH.

- the word Sith and Sith order, along with the Prophecy of the chosen one completely ignored in the OT. Pretty weird, now that the 6 movies are supposed to be seen as the Tragedy of Darth Vader, and form one continuous tale.

Oh yeah...Had forgotten that one.
Instead Vader only killed younglings in the PT.

I'll put it on the big ones.

 

Midichlorians are a plot hole in the OT that was created by the PT. If there were some sort of microscopic life forms which are the cause of one's ability to use the Force, it probably would have been wise for Ben Kenobi or Yoda to educate Luke of this at one point.


Even they hate this garbage that is midichlorians it seems!

 

I don't understand how anything mentioned so far is a plot hole. We're working with the following definition of a plot hole, correct?

A plot hole, or plothole, is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot, or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the plot. These include such things as unlikely behaviour or actions of characters, illogical or impossible events, events happening for no apparent reason, or statements/events that contradict earlier events in the storyline.

Is this a fair assessment? Because almost everything that's been brought up has a good explanation and does not contradict the storyline.

1. Leia remembering her mother. This isn't a plot hole. This is directly addressed in ESB, when Yoda says, through the Force we can see those long gone. Furthermore, if Anakin can see the future -- things which have not yet come to pass -- there's no reason to believe that Leia couldn't see the past. Likewise, she's remarkably empathetic and able to sense exactly where Luke is even without any training. I hardly think this is a plot hole.

2. Ben's Age. As it's been mentioned, Alec Guinness was only five years off in age from the timeline established by the PT. I don't really see how this is a plot hole. One's impression might be wrong, but there's no contradiction. Additionally, the harshness of living conditions on Tatooine (not to mention the enormous amount of stress) would have greatly aged Obi-Wan. Living conditions can and do affect how quickly we age. It's why Presidents of the US generally age at twice the rate the public does when they are in office -- the demands of the job are high.

3. Owen disapproving of Anakin leaving Tatooine. Again, I don't really see how this is a plot hole. We hear this from Obi-Wan. Is it really that hard to believe that Owen, upon hearing of Anakin's fate and having to take care of Luke in his stead, would think that Anakin was foolish for participating in the war and following Obi-Wan on a crusade that, ultimately, wasn't worth it?

4. Obi-Wan and Anakin being friends. I seriously don't understand this -- would you not consider someone who fought by your side for years and saved your life to be a friend? Of course they had a bumpy relationship (given that Obi-Wan is Anakin's guardian, teacher, disciplinarian, mentor, boss, commander, etc.) and didn't share the easy friendship of Luke and Han, but that doesn't prevent them from being friends.

5. The Force being mystical. I'm not sure how it's less mystical -- if anything, the PT just added to the Force's allegorical and symbolic nature. Midichlorians, for example, are very much symbolic of the nature of the populace and how we communicate with our political leaders. Likewise, the Chosen One prophecy adds a Dark Messiah allegorical element. Which is the very definition of mysticism. Plus, I should point out that the Force was NEVER a supernatural concept. It is created by life and thus, it is naturalistic -- it does not transcend nature and it has direct and measurable effects on the physical world. Obi-Wan himself describes it as an energy field, in much the same way a physics professor might talk about a magnetic field. Life creates the force. To be living, you have to be made of Cells. That midichlorians are a cellular component does not fly in the face of this. Ask any biologist what constitutes life and they will tell you that the cell is the basic structural unit of life.

6. Anakin being a good person -- you mean someone who went and fought in a war for three years to protect his nation when he could have simply stayed in safety with a woman that looks like Natalie Portman. Or someone who considered the "disposable" clones as being worth going back and helping/protecting? That Anakin, right?

7. Why would Obi-Wan recognize C3PO? He never sees him in TPM or AOTC (in the arena they're rather distracted, I would say) and it's not as though he spends an enormous amount of time in Padmé's apartment. The only time he really spends any significant time with C3PO is at the end of ROTS, which doesn't seem to have lasted very long, hardly enough time for him to remember him 20 years later. As for R2D2, droids don't look significantly different. There only seems to be slight variations on color schemes. When the Queens' ship loses its shielding in TPM, for example, we see four droids that look remarkably similar to R2. Plus, Obi-Wan doesn't seem to hold droids in high regard, so why would he remember R2? It's not like he could speak to him the way Anakin could.

8. Obi-Wan being trained by Yoda. Again, we see that Yoda teaches younglings. Plus, I think almost all of us would agree that we have had more than one teacher in our lifetimes. Obi-Wan certainly goes to Mace and Yoda for guidance, I don't think there's anything wrong with saying that Yoda instructed him. It's not a plot hole, especially when we consider that Obi-Wan is relaying information pertinent to Luke.

9. Beru saying that Luke has too much of his father in him likewise isn't a plot hole. She knew Anakin was a Jedi and fought in the war. And Anakin's mother was also her husband's stepmother. She wasn't lacking in information as to why Luke's heritage would make him quite unlikely to be satisfied as a farmer.

10. In regards to Vader and Obi-Wan's duel aboard the Death Star -- this one I also don't particularly like either, but that doesn't make it a plot hole. Don't forget that Anakin is trying to show that he is now the Master, that he is in control. He has also spent the last twenty years learning to harness his rage. In that sense, I wouldn't say it's a plot hole. I would have preferred more anger on his part, but I wouldn't say it's out-of-character at that point to be focused at proving to Obi-Wan that he is superior.

11. "There is another" -- I don't see how the PT causes a plot hole here. Obi-Wan is right not to consider Leia. She's in Vader's clutches. If Luke doesn't go and rescue her, she's hardly an option for training and defeating the Sith. If this is a "plot hole," then it is ROTJ's fault, not the PT's.

12. The movies only ever say that Vader "helped" the Empire hunt down the Jedi. Oh, and that he killed Anakin. But that's it. Any other assumptions made are just that -- assumptions. But they aren't plot holes.

 

I stopped reading after this because I have no idea how someone could have possibly drawn that conclusion from what was presented on screen

 

The PT is a largely political story. What, at its heart, is democracy? The representatives of the people listening to the voice of the populace in order to enact their will. It's when politicians deviate from this purpose that our Republic goes astray. I find it to be a rather poetic metaphor, personally. It certainly doesn't diminish the allegorical significance of midichlorians though.

 

NONE of that was in the trash that was on screen. The Republic in Star Wars goes astray because of a maniacal Sith Lord. This would be the equivalent of the US electing a president who is a Satanist with daemonic powers. No matter what democracy is at it's core, I imagine having a satanist as your leader would inevitably lead our Republic astray.

 

Sigh

I will attempt to explain this to you in simple words.

The argument was that the midichlorians reduced the mystical nature of the Force.

Mystical can be defined as:

1. Of or relating to mystics or religious mysticism.
2. Spiritually allegorical or symbolic; transcending human understanding

Now, allegory is defined as:

1. A story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.
2. The genre to which such works belong.

Hence, the midichlorians do not reduce the mystical nature of the Force. They add to its allegorical nature and add moral and political commentary. Understand?

Things do not have to be explicitly stated to be allegorical. Hence why the definition says "interpreted." You do not have to agree with my interpretation, but that does not delegitimize it.

 

This would really defeat the purpose of a movie, ya know, if humans couldn't understand it. So lets go with definition number one of mystical, which makes my argument correct, and yours incorrect, since you build it off of the second definition. The Force was de-mystified after the inclusions of a biological aspect.

 

Sorry, but you don't get to dictate the meaning of words to suit your purposes.

And the Force always had a biological aspect. Life creates it. Life is composed of cells. Simple deduction. Midichlorians did not introduce a biological aspect. The Force was always tethered to the natural world.

 

I don't dictate the meaning of words to suit my purpose. Transcending Human understanding = humans don't understand it. That would make for a pretty dumb movie if nobody could understand. And when I say mystical, do you really think I mean what you mean? allegorical blah blah blah. Get real. Mystic = Religious. Oddly enough, the Force (Jedi to be more precise) was described as a religion by one Imperial Officer. But that was only in the OT so you better just ignore it.

That biological connection you draw to the force is not comparable to midichlorians at all. zilch. nada.

 

Err...I hate to point this out to you, but even if the films did diminish the "religious" (nice dodge of mystical there!) tone of the films, this doesn't make it a plot hole. Simply because you interpreted the characters' words to have a more religious connotation does not mean that this is set in stone and Lucas is bound to adhere to it. Nothing he presents in the PT contradicts what Yoda says, only your specific interpretation of it. You'll note that with my interpretation, there is no contradiction and thus no plot hole.

Additionally, it is possible to have a religion based on naturalistic principles. You can worship Nature if you so choose. In fact, I would say the Jedi do exactly this as the Force itself is created by life. Biology, interestingly, is the study of life so of course the Force is going to have a biological connection.

Again, not your interpretation, but not a plot hole. You must unlearn what you have learned.

 

I didn't dodge mystical since I stated that mystical = religious. Nice attempt to call me a 'dodger'

Clearly nothing was set in stone for Lucas to be bound to. A real pity that is.
The PT does contradict what Yoda says. If the ability to use the Force is the result of tiny microscopic life forms, then a teacher teaching a student about the Force should probably mention them. Because he didn't mention them = plot hole.

I'm not going to unlearn what Yoda taught me in the OT because of garbage in the PT.

 

Yes, you did. You went to a more specific term "religious" because the definition of mystical encompasses more than just supernatural phenomena and religion. It also includes allegory and symbolism, as I pointed out. If you weren't dodging it, you would have directly addressed my argument. Instead you attempted to redefine the parameters of our discussion -- thus, a dodge.

Why should Yoda mention them? I doubt he has any instrument capable of quantifying them with him and it's not like he or Luke have a microscope to take a look at cells. Don't forget, Yoda is giving Luke a crash course. He's essentially teaching him what he needs to know to stand up to the Sith -- midichlorians are not going to be high on that list. Knowledge of them won't help Luke to resist the Dark Side or aid him in confronting Vader or Palpatine. Their omission is logical and thus not a plot hole.

You don't need to unlearn what Yoda taught in the OT -- you need to unlearn your assumptions about what you interpret it to mean.

 

Billions of people living in our real world believe in their own spiritual connection to reality at large. Do they have midiclorians? Most religious belief is tied to a belief in a spiritual plane, one obviously connected to our own reality through the belief in the soul? Do they believe in midiclorians? The concept of a life force predates Star Wars, is that belief tied to a midiclorian? Simple deduction my arse. You prove nothing.

 

Yes, I imagine he killed quite a few Jedi that day.

 

Things is, the Force has demonstrable and (more importantly) testable effects on the physical world of the Star Wars universe. The Force grants the user the ability to move objects with their mind or enhance their speed, for example. In our world, no matter what people may "believe" about their spiritual connections, it does not give them these quantifiable effects. Religion has about as much dependency on the physical world as Harry Potter does -- that is to say, none.

In Star Wars, though, this is different. By Yoda's own descriptions, the Force is created by life. And we see, again and again, that the Force has effects on the physical world. It doesn't matter if one believes in midichlorians or not, they can still access certain abilities because of the Force, regardless of their "faith"-- this is simply a fact of the world of Star Wars. And thus, the Force has always been biologically tethered.

The Force cannot exist without life, without the natural world. But God could (and did) exist without anything else being in existence. That's the difference.

 

Nonsense, the concepts are the same. You want to claim the movie says something it clearly does not say.

 

You need a better argument than "NO UR WRONG."

Explain why I am wrong and why what I am saying is "nonsense."

Yoda says that "Life creates it. Makes it grow." This is the complete opposite of God -- God created life.

 

Cause that's what a good teacher does. The PTs turned him into an awful teacher. That's all I'm going to quote cause the rest of it is just blah blah blah.

Really? Your trying to argue the difference between mystical and religious? News buddy, IDGAF. To me, with my clearly lacking understanding of garbage films and what's in them, they basically are the same in regards to Star Wars. I could care less about any difference between them. When I say mystical in regards to flippin Star Wars, supernatural and religious is all I'm really talking about. I don't care about the stuff you like to pretend was on screen.

I wasn't dodging it by not addressing your argument; You don't have an argument. There's no argument. You'd like to think this is an argument, but it's not. It's obvious what's on screen and what you say won't change that.