ST Plot Holes In The ST

AFAIK, that happened six years before TFA, and in a book. It took 24 years for the Senate to learn that Leia is Vader's daughter, but a kid from nowhere knew that Luke saw a conflict within Vader. Yes, it's not believable.

It's perfectly normal for Rey to know about Falcon, Han Solo, the Rebellion or Luke. But for her to know all those details, what Luke saw, believed and that he saved and turned Vader, that's too far fetched.

Because it's not convincing that she knows that and then asks Luke about what happened between him and Kylo. Now, had Leia told Rey about them, that would be more realistic.

 

I'd diagree that it makes it dangerous as if they are one with the force couldn't a force user manipulate them? Hence the reason why Obi Wan says in empire "I can not interfere"

 

Of course there would be stories about how Luke Skywalker the last Jedi confronted the Emperor and Vader in the throne room.

 

Disagree. The Vader/Luke/Emperor scenario occurred 35 years earlier & had all of that time to become famous. It was a key event that caused the Empire to crumble. The Luke & Kylo incident was only 4 or 5 years ago, & it wasn't of such vast significance that it upended the political map of the galaxy. Also the only living witness on the good side left the known galaxy. He clearly didn't broadcast the story of what happened. If Han didn't know the details what chance did Rey have of knowing them?

That was introduced in RotJ, & has been expanded upon in TLJ. Just like all ghost abilities have increased from AotC through all subsequent movies. Pretty much impossible to establish a plot-hole with this. Esp since we can't even say that ghost Jedi would directly intervene even if they could.

It's possible. This line also cuts off any any potential plot-holes. It's at least possible if not likely that Obi-Wan is saying here that Force ghosts can't, or won't intervene beyond providing guidance & motivation.

This is a bit disingenuous since it's been explained over & over, time & time again. So that there should be no confusion. A plot-hole can only stand if no plausible explanation can be offered - by anyone. They're literally examples of something that can't be explained. It's not something that is not explained in the movie. Or that you don't like, or that seems a bit far-fetched, or too much of a coincidence, too convenient, something unlikely to occur etc. If it were there'd be hundreds of plot-holes in every movie & the very term would be pointless. In addition it needs to significantly impact on the plot. Ie disappearing props & minor continuity errors that can barely be noticed don't cut it.

 

Dude, look. I'm not interested in this thing you keep trying to do. Just be cool man. I already suggested that we go by the definition of a plot hole. Nobody seems into the idea, so thats that.

 

The above is a key part of the definition. How can something be a plot-hole and have a plausible explanation? Even the definition you posted, says "a plot hole is a completely implausible occurrence".

 

But there have been examples posted that fit that criteria. They were shut down regardless. Thats why I suggested a standard so that people can leave any sort of notions of cliches and fanclubs at the door, and just debate using only the films.

 

Tonight I ate too much and I can't sleep, so I'll add a suspicious post to the plot hole thread. It'll be surely in good company after all.
I have found a plot hole. Or maybe I should say... The Plot Hole....
Fasten your seatbelt 'cause here it is:

Maz Kanata.
It was established in TFA that she considered the fight against the empire to be "the only fight". Still, in TLJ while our heroes are about to die she's wasting time with her Union dispute.

Booom! Yeah, I know. I'm a genius.

 

You personally modded one of the examples. Also, "plausible" can turn anything subjective. I gave an example of this when I made up an absolutely bat **** explanation as to why daniel was not DQ'd for kicking johnny in the face at the end of the karate kid.

The only explanations i've seen given as to why holdo wouldn't tell poe dameron, at the very least, that there was a plan, was that "she didn't trust him". Is that plausible? That a man being groomed by leia, who led the attack on and destroyed SKB, is someone holdo didn't trust enough to say the words "there is a plan". I could stretch to come around to her not wanting to tell him the exact plan (even that requires a big stretch.), but i'm sorry, she doesn't even do anything to reassure him or anyone standing around that there even is a plan. That is not plausible. As for poe not disarming holdo and her folks and later shutting down power in the hanger, no explanation was offered.

Imagine lando having lobot and some bespin guards ambush the troops who were moving leia and chewie to vader's ship. Imagine lando telling lobot to "put them in the tower", but not disarming the guards like he immediately did.

In a piece of fiction, a plot hole is a completely implausible occurrence or series of events that contradicts logic or previously established events in the story. Includes things such as unlikely behavior or actions of characters, illogical or impossible events, events happening for no apparent reason, or statements/events that contradict earlier events in the storyline.


unlikely behavior or actions of characters
Prometheus and Alien:Covenant are littered with plot holes caused by this one. Its also what i'd place holdo and poe's actions (during and immediately after his mutiny) under.

impossible events, events happening for no apparent reason
This is the last time i'll bring this up. I would absolutely place the disappearing dagger under this one. We know how they edited this. We know why they did this. That doesn't keep the event from being a plot hole. If you have a badly choreographed fight scene where your hero should be killed, the thing to do is reshoot or cut the shot. If you edited a weapon to vanish into thin air, all in the same shot, then what you've done is caused a plot hole in your film. An event happened with no narrative explanation, that defies all logic, because the hero would've been killed otherwise. That example has been modded and shut down with explanations like "it was a movie goof" or "it was a badly choreographed scene". Both of which are true, but none the less, the dagger falls under the definition of what a plot hole is.

If there is a reasonably plausible explanation for holdo or poe's actions, i'm all for it. Give it to me. As i said, you have a guy who was the fleet commander at the beginning of the film, who's actions once again saved the rebellion. I don't see how it's plausible that he's not trusted enough to at least be told that there is a plan. The only reason I see this as a plot hole, is because holdo's actions are what allows the entire plot to occur.

I'd love to comb through and critically examine TFA, but I just need to know that we're all debating using the same standards.

 

Which was a good way of showing what a genuine plot-hole looks like. The only explanations that can be provided are absurd nonsense ones. That's why it's a plot-hole. No plausible way of explaining it.

To be so there needs to be a plausible reason for her not to trust him. It's that simple. Is there one? Of course there is. She didn't know him, except for the fact that she'd just witnessed him disobey direct orders which cost the lives of several Resistance pilots & crew. That's a completely plausible reason not to trust him, therefore her not trusting him with that sensitive information can't be a plot-hole. In addition we can add that she's simply not required to tell him a damned thing. There's a chain of command. I'm sure there would be a great many generals & admirals who'd tell a junior officer to go **** themselves if they walked up & demanded to know what's going on.

She doesn't need to. Of course there's a plan. That's a given. Poe knew she was a renowned & decorated admiral.
As a side note, just bcs this isn't a plot-hole that doesn't mean it's above criticism. Or that's it's not a flaw. I think it could've been written better, & that it's probably a lazy contrivance. There are dozens of these in SW.

So to just to gauge your broader view on these things, would you call any of these plot-holes, & if so which ones? They're also examples of characters not doing something obvious:

- Tarkin not destroying the planet Yavin to get a clear a shot at the Rebel base?
- Imperial forces not arriving after the destruction of the DS to attack the Rebels, who were so comfortable they had time for ceremonies & celebrations, & to repair R2 to mint condition.
- Jedi in the PT not Force throwing Grievous & the magna guards around, like they did with so many other enemy droids.
- Vader not having Imperial agents staking out Jabba's palace given Han had been taken there & Luke had escaped. He should've known Luke would go there, just as he went to Bespin.
- The Imperial fleet not attacking the far smaller Alliance fleet after the 2nd DS was destroyed.

Ridiculous. If that's a plot-hole then so are the disappearing reappearing ropes on R2 during the Ewok scenes. After all why didn't R2 roll away & escape, or attack the Ewoks during those moments where the ropes weren't there? Is this a plot-hole?

Those examples listed above do that, so let's see if you're willing to categorize them. As for Holdo, the only time you can come close to mounting an argument that there's a problem is later in the movie when the situation escalates. Earlier it's perfectly fine for her to tell a junior officer to go away & concentrate on his job. Her not telling him her plan later had virtually no impact on the plot at all. Poe's mutiny lasted all of 1 minute. He was knocked out by Leia immediately after that, & that was the end of it as a story thread. Not a plot-hole no matter which way you look at it.

 

We need to concede a little in this thread, otherwise this will become an endless argument contest.

Even though I personally think I can come up with a plausible explanation, I will agree that there is a very strong point about Kylo knowing about the base being a plot hole.

 

Agreed, by properly working with the offscreen plot an explanation could be made, but there would be the need to add some crucial infos that in the movie are not even remotely mentioned. So yeah, in the lack of better words, we might say that it's a minor plot hole.

 

Let's agree on one thing: technicalities of the events in the movies aren't plot holes. Those (FGs, hyperspace ram, any skill or ability unseen before) can be hand-waved away by any amount of technobabble/metaphysical crap. Getting into technicalities on forums makes no sense for me.

In fact, regarding Force Ghosts, the supplementary material glues them together rather nicely - it's a progression:

1. pre-ROTS, force ghosts were thought to be impossible and non-existent (as per TCW)
2. In TCW, Yoda has this arc of being spoken to by Qui-Gon's voice who explicitly says he can't show himself. The Jedi think he's hallucinating.
3. In ROTS, Yoda tells Obi about the new ability discovered by QGJ (with OB surprised)
3. In the "From a Certain Point of View" short story "Master and Apprentice", written from dead Obi's POV, how he can reminisce old events so accurately he *feels* his young face (opening the door for FG Ewan, even), and talks to Qui-Gon, in his hut who can literally manifest himself super clearly - this shows he progressed in the FG abilities.
4. In ROTJ, Ben can manifest himself (having progressed from just speaking in a faint voice in the biggest of Luke's crises to just converse with him
5. In ROTJ, the dead Jedi are powerful enough to swiftly influence redeemed Anakin's soul in the netherworld of the Force to even show himself to Luke - it may not be Anakin himself doing this on his own. The other FGs could have "pulled him up" to show Luke.
6. In TFA, Obi-Wan and Yoda talk to Rey (most likely a stranger) through a Force related item and influence her mind to have flashbacks. A bit mind-tricky I guess.
7. In TLJ, Yoda is strong enough after endless eternity of Force Ghost training (presumably with the others), is able to conjure a stick to hit Luke, influence the weather on the (Force-rich) planet to burn the tree and prove a point, and it's obvious it ain't Force-Lightning.

Overall it's safe to say there is precisely ZERO threat of Force ghosts getting in and ruining the action.

 

You don't even need to go that far with Holdo not trusting him.

Fact is in our military the Commander doesn't tell everyone the plan. It's a need to know basis.

Poe was just demoted and their entire fighter squadron was destroyed.

Telling him would serve no purpose as he has no part in the plan. She also shouldn't have to tell him to keep him from coming up with his own plan since he shouldn't be doing that.

 

Serious question here. I was just rewatching the Last Jedi, and Would Rey knowing how to swim despite being on Jakku(a planet without water) her entire life count as being a plothole? Unless there are watering holes on Jakku I don't know about.

I ask because in the force awakens she makes it very clear that most if not all that she remembers of her life is of her being on Jakku
"I didn't know there was this much green in the whole galaxy.

 

It is very kind to say that she was "swimming". She fell like a rock, struggled and sputtered to the top and almost drowned.

 

A plot hole that mirrors Padmé's "We've got to get to that hangar" in AOTC.
Like grandmother, like grandson

(Although it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the clone pilot had spotted a hangar on his radar and informed them off camera before Padmé fell out.)

 

Here is why I disagree with the notion that holdo doesn't know poe enough to trust him. Poe Dameron is shown disobeying orders at the start of the film. His actions led to the destruction of the dreadnought, which saved the fleet. Had Poe done what he was told, the min the FO jumped to the rebel's location, they'd have been wiped out. Second point is the fact that poe was being groomed by the leader of the rebels. Poe also led the attack on SKB and personally made the bombing run that destroyed the weapon. Here is the killer for the argument that holdo doesn't know/trust poe. Poe's reputation is so far and widespread that even kylo ren knows him as "the best pilot in the resistance.". I don't think its plausible that holdo wouldn't trust poe enough to tell him there is a plan.

As for the chain of command, she's not obligated to say anything, but any military leader will confirm that part of their job is to keep morale high. "Shut up and follow orders no questions asked" is a culture i'd expect from the imperials, not the rebels. Also, poe isn't just some random officer. Until he was demoted for saving the fleet, he was the fleet commander. Is it plausible that holdo wouldn't at least say that there is a plan? Is it plausible that she'd remain absolutely silent even when he begs her for any amount of hope. Notice that his lines were "we had a fleet, now we have one ship. tell US, we have a plan, that there's HOPE!". Which would imply that either holdo has told nobody, or only people in her tight circle. Is that plausible given their current situation. I'd argue that it isn't.

As for the OT/PT examples you gave, I could see an argument for those being plot holes. I could also see arguments for them not being plot holes. I'd have to examine those films again to give a definitive answer.

Again, R2's disappearing ropes is not something i'm familiar with. If it occurs in the same manner as the dagger, then yes absolutely, its a plot hole.
That said, whataboutisms do not disprove the points i've made thus far. Whataboutisms give me the impression that the goal of your argument is simply to defend the film. You'll see the same thing all over the criticisms thread. Nobody ever said the OT/PT were perfect films. That said, we're discussing plot holes in the ST right now. I could argue that the entire han rescue sequence has a few glaring plot holes. I love the film, but it isn't perfect.





Those examples listed above do that, so let's see if you're willing to categorize them. As for Holdo, the only time you can come close to mounting an argument that there's a problem is later in the movie when the situation escalates. Earlier it's perfectly fine for her to tell a junior officer to go away & concentrate on his job. Her not telling him her plan later had virtually no impact on the plot at all. Poe's mutiny lasted all of 1 minute. He was knocked out by Leia immediately after that, & that was the end of it as a story thread. Not a plot-hole no matter which way you look at it.


Your skepticism regarding my consistency when it comes to identifying plot holes is exactly the sort of thing that an agreed upon standard should eliminate. If we're all going by what the official definition of what a plot hole is, then there would be no reason to think anyone is being disingenuous. Both films have never painted poe as not being a part of the leadership circle. By the end of TLJ, leia calmly tells poe what the plan is. Why was that something holdo was utterly unwilling to do, even as he begged her for hope? Poe even shows that he's perfectly reasonable when leia tells him. Holdo's inexplicable actions only fostered distrust from poe and the audience, which was the narrative point of it. The problem is, the plot is completely reliant on her unreal behavior. This is why I listed it as a plot hole.

Whats your opinion on poe's actions during his mutiny?

I thought about that too. I'd agree if she hadn't fell from such a high height into such a deep body of water. A person who is fascinated by the sight of falling water, would absolutely drown in the scene we're talking about.

 

Wait what is the source for that definition? I just looked at two different internet sources, so granted they’re not necessarily the final say on the matter, but neither says it’s only something that cannot be explained. By that definition, I struggle to think how anything qualifies as a plot hole. Anything can be explained if we want to make up an explanation.

 

I guess it depends on how stretched the explanation feels. It's quite subjective, indeed.
Kylo knowing about the rebel base hasn't, to my knowledge, received any plausible explanation even by the biggest lovers of TLJ. And we discussed about it quite extensively few pages ago.

 

No it’s not subjective at all in the context of this thread (though obviously in the actual common usage of the phrase, you’re right). Disagreement in the form of “refusing to concede” being affectively banned makes that explicitly clear. The definition in this thread is that something is only a plot hole if something cannot possibly be explained at all.

Which Rebel base are you referring to? The one on Crait or the Resistance base? Sorry I missed that discussion but in both cases I think they’re easily explainable. Whichever case you are referring to, including one I can’t think of right now, I can no doubt come up with an explanation for it that occurred off screen if necessary.

Edit - I went back and checked. Kylo knowing where the Rebel base is is easily explained by the FO simply scanning for where the transports landed. The plot hole there that I would normally argue would be the speed with which AT-ATs could land after the FO fleet was shown getting obliterated, but again, I can make up an explanation for that as well. The AT-ATs were already in transit when the Holdo manuever occurred and they were out of range, and they simply followed the transports down.

 

Kylo knew it as soon as he woke up. He didn't talk with anyone. I don't want to restart this discussion though , since I have nothing to add with respect to what has been said starting from here:

I think they just want to avoid pedantic back and forth due to people presenting as plot holes whatever they dislike, and I kind of understand it.