Plot holes? The final chapter.

Some folks still insists on plot holes in TPM. Before AotC comes out, let's put a rest to it and point out the plot holes in TPM that I might have missed.

 

There are no plot holes in TPM. At least not until we've seen all the films.

 

Well, according to TrueJedi, everything is a plot hole, yet there is barely any proof, so what are we to do?




ST

 

After lurking around some basher/gusher clashes, it seems to me the term "plot-hole" has sometimes been used for any part of the movie that wasn't exactly spelled out for the viewer. A plot-hole isn't a plot device. Not even a contrived plot device.

However, there are in my opinion two cases where I feel "plot-hole" is applicable.
1. The phantom trace. ObiWan tells the queen, very strongly, that no reply should be sent. Nothing at all hints to how Maul traced them to Tatooine.

2. The phantom treaty. It just isn't clear as to what Sidious wanted from the treaty, or if he needed it signed after Amidala came back from Coruscant. This one I would not call a plot-hole, just a case of showing the viewer to little of what is happening off-screen. I dig this part of TPM a lot, and I am sure it's designed really well, it's just that I feel it's a bit too much left up to our speculation. But if AOTC sheds some light on this, I will be even happier.

Don't think I am a basher, I love TPM a lot. How do I then reconcile myself with the "plot-hole"? Sometimes, you just have to switch off your targeting computer and let the "Star-Warsy" feeling flow through your body...

And you can quote me one that.

 

Perhaps I can answer those:

(1) I think the sit have special devices which allow them to trace anyone through communication, wether someone is on the opposite end or not. Its something that the sith use that is more technologically advanced than things the TF use.

(2) The point of getting Amidala to sign the treaty was to allow the invasion of Naboo to be legal and not spark any unwanted notice from the Republic. I think Palpatine's initial plan was to have Naboo to himself and be the foundings of his empire. His other initial plan was becoming Chancellor, which is what he got, so in the end, he plan worked out anyway. After it was guranteed he would become Chancellor, the treaty signing no longer mattered because he could create a way using his power to make it legal without the treaty getting signed. However that failed since he became Chancellor after the TF lost the battle.



ST

 

I have to agree with Bjorn75 These things should be cleared up a lot more in the movie.

1)How can one legalize an "invasion"? When the Soviet Union invaded Afganastan-they said that the Afgan government asked them to do it...yet no-one believed them.

2)What was the Taxation about, and why did Naboo suffer the invasion if the Republic were the ones taxing them? That would be equivilant of Texas invading Oklahoma because of the federal gas tax. It makes no sense.

3)Yes the trace bothers me...greatly. But could an answer be forthcoming?

4)Why were Anakin and Qui Gon running in after the farewell scene? It was a major shift in the movie-yet there was no build up. Place the probe droid scene back in the archival cut.

I'm not a basher either-but these things should have been adressed.

 

1)How can one legalize an "invasion"? When the Soviet Union invaded Afganastan-they said that the Afgan government asked them to do it...yet no-one believed them.

2)What was the Taxation about, and why did Naboo suffer the invasion if the Republic were the ones taxing them? That would be equivilant of Texas invading Oklahoma because of the federal gas tax. It makes no sense.

3)Yes the trace bothers me...greatly. But could an answer be forthcoming?

4)Why were Anakin and Qui Gon running in after the farewell scene? It was a major shift in the movie-yet there was no build up. Place the probe droid scene back in the archival cut.

1) You just answered your question.

2) Outer systems were being taxed, so the Trade Federation stopped all traffic in and out of the Naboo system in protest. Actually, your analogy was accurate, but you fail to remember, the blockade didn't START as an invasion, that came in later.

3) Doesn't bother me. I saw the Queen listening to that Sio Bibble and then there was Maul. I didn't really cross my mind how he did it. Aren't Sith supposed to be good. ?

4) Agreed. I thought that they were running because they were being chased, Maul was right behind them, but I think the probe droid scene should be put back in.

 

the way Jar-Jar forgets about honoring his life debt at the end of the movie. I mean, shouldn't he be with Qui-Gon then?

 

>>>>1)How can one legalize an "invasion"? When the Soviet Union invaded Afganastan-they said that the Afgan government asked them to do it...yet no-one believed them.<<<

Bingo! Great analogy. If the treaty had been signed, the occupation would have been legal despite not being just. Palpy would have used this "outrage" to show that the republic needed new, stronger leadership so no such injustice would happen again.

>>>>2)What was the Taxation about, and why did Naboo suffer the invasion if the Republic were the ones taxing them? That would be equivilant of Texas invading Oklahoma because of the federal gas tax. It makes no sense.<<<<

This is a good question. I believe that there would be a tax if the TF would pass trough the Naboo system. With the occupation, they would avoid paying taxes since they inhabit that system.

>>>3)Yes the trace bothers me...greatly. But could an answer be forthcoming?<<

I always thought that the Sith had tracing devices that enabled them to get a fix around the general area of it's target. If they had sent a response, they would have pinpointed the exact location and there would be no need for the probe droids.

>>>>4)Why were Anakin and Qui Gon running in after the farewell scene? It was a major shift in the movie-yet there was no build up. Place the probe droid scene back in the archival cut.<<<

Yeah, I want the probe scene added. Until then we take Qui's "We haven't much time." and his feeling of danger to explain the running.

>>>the way Jar-Jar forgets about honoring his life debt at the end of the movie. I mean, shouldn't he be with Qui-Gon then? <<<

How do you serve someone who doesn't want to be served? Besides, didn't Jar-Jar do enough? He took the Jedi to the Gungan city, He took the Queen to the sacred place. What else do you want?

 

Though it perhaps omits the large number of plot holes witnessed in the classics, it is an outright lie to claim that there are no plot holes in the film.

The connection trace
This *is* a plot hole. Don't try to explain it with, "but Maul has special equipment" or "the Sith have special abilities", because nowhere in the film does the story suggest any reason Maul should be able to locate them on Tatooine.


Planetary locations
While Naboo belongs to the Republic, Tatooine is a far-away world in the Outer Rim, undisturbed by Republic officials or Jedi. But the Naboo cruiser managed to go there without a working hyperdrive.
This one can be explained too - the hyperdrive was leaking, so they managed to move quite a bit, but still...............


Qui-Gon Jinn
Say no more.

 

By that Qui-Gon comment, Ree Yees, I assume that you are referring to the fact that Qui-Gon was never mentioned in the OT, despite apparently playing a fairly prominent role. This argument cheeses me off more than a little. It's true that Qui-Gon is never mentioned (it's also true that Georgie didn't have the character in his head yet when ANH was made). However, I must ask you this. WHY would Obi-Wan even mention his old master, who had been dead for a good 40 years, to Luke at all? It would have been needlessly complicated for Luke's vision on Hoth to go something like:

Luke: Ben?

Ben: Yeah, Luke, it's me. Listen, I want you to go to the Dagobah system, and find Yoda, the Jedi Master who trained me. Well, to be precise, there was this other guy, Qui-Gon Jinn, who was around for a while. He died, though, it was very sad. Did I ever tell you about the time I fought this dude named Darth Maul? Oh, man, I kicked his ass.

Luke: Why didn't you tell me this before? Hey... you've been lying to me this whole time, haven't you?

Ben: Hang on, Luke, you're getting ahead of yourself. This conversation doesn't happen until the next movie.

Luke: Right, right. Sorry. I'll just lay here now, in the hopes that my buddy Han comes to save me. Later, Ben.

Ben: Peace out.

So you see, it makes perfect sense that Qui-Gon was never mentioned in the OT. And as for explaining away plotholes, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that the whole point of being a Star Wars buff?

 

Um.. the afghan communist government at the time did ask for soviet troops to fight the mujhadeen rebels.

 

Of course I don't mind explaining away plot holes (as I'm a Star Wars buff), but in the interest of defining a plot hole, you would have to agree that a plot hole is an error in the continuity or story in the film which isn't explained. So while we can explain how Darth Maul used his Sith powers to find Qui-Gon Jinn, the film does not show it.

My theory on this hole, by the way:

While Maul and Sidious used the Force to reach out for the Jedi, they discovered that their path went straight to a large vergence in the Force on Tatooine: Anakin made it easier for Maul to track down the Jedi.

Qui-Gon Jinn is, in my opinion, a severe plot hole. Yes, it is possible to explain him away with regards to Ben's comments in the holy trilogy but it's really not with Ben the problem lies - rather with Yoda, and how Yoda is presented in the prequels as this great warrior (!!) who teaches small children the Force. It doesn't work. Lucas is trying hard to explain why Ben said Yoda instructed him, but it does NOT work. It falls bang flat on its face.Obi-Wan was the Padawan Learner of Qui-Gon Jinn, not Yoda. Like Anakin was the learner of Kenobi, as Vader states in "ANH". If Yoda learned the basics to the children, shouldn't he teach the basics to Anakin as well, as he did Luke?

It's a tangled web he weaves. Or something.

 

Obi Wan: "You will stay here and die, then in the afterlife you will find Qui Gon Jinn, the Jedi Master who expanded on Yoda's basic instructions."
Luke: "Couldn't I skip the dying bit?"
Obi Wan: "OK. I guess you could do with Yoda's elementary classes, seeing as all I told you was how to deflect laser bolts with a lightsaber and he's the only Jedi still alive. Where did you pick that telekenesis trick up from, by the way?"

Maybe a line for the Extra-Special editions...

 

Regarding the trace connection, isn't it possible to trace a mobile phone by sending a message to it now? If so, why couldn't the Sith have done the equivilent?

 

... RRR ... LUKE ... HELP ME LUKE ...

 

Hoth-Ghost-whatever-you-are... SHUUUUUTTT UUUUP!!

lol! You're posting everywhere with that "Luuuke, help me" gibberish.

To address this thread, I think there are very few "bashers" who will truly rail against TPM for its plot holes. Perhaps you're confusing plot holes with plot devices? Just checking. Because plot holes are problems -- loose ends left undone, things left unexplained, story conflicts, etc. Plot devices, on the other hand, are the methods (tools) by which the plot is carried out. Two very different things. A good point was made here by Adali-Kiri:

There are no plot holes in TPM. At least not until we've seen all the films.

I totally agree with this. Well, mostly. Funny, huh? I think TPM has the potential to have as many plot holes as were in the OT, which means that as far as plot holes go, it's a forgivable amount. Plot-wise, the only difference between us (gushers/bashers) as fans is how we interpretted the plot devices that were used, generally speaking. Plot devices are the mainstay of the debates between the fan "factions."

Example: many fans dislike the introduction of midichlorians, others don't mind, but others like it... this is a plot device Lucas used to explain and advance the plot.

I am not going to derail this thread by going into detail about which plot devices I like/dislike and why, but just wanted to make you aware that the "plot hole" battle is not your big battle. It's plot devices. IMO, that is.

 

"Qui-Gon Jinn is, in my opinion, a severe plot hole. Yes, it is possible to explain him away with regards to Ben's comments in the holy trilogy but it's really not with Ben the problem lies - rather with Yoda, and how Yoda is presented in the prequels as this great warrior (!!) who teaches small children the Force. It doesn't work. Lucas is trying hard to explain why Ben said Yoda instructed him, but it does NOT work. It falls bang flat on its face.Obi-Wan was the Padawan Learner of Qui-Gon Jinn, not Yoda. Like Anakin was the learner of Kenobi, as Vader states in "ANH". If Yoda learned the basics to the children, shouldn't he teach the basics to Anakin as well, as he did Luke?"

Well since Yoda teaches young children (and overall every young child that came to the Jedi for training) it works that Yod taught Obi-Wan because it shows that Yoda taught Obi-Wan when he first came to the Jedi. Oi-Wan didn't need to be Yoda's padawan.
Anakin was too old. As Lucas explained himself, Anakin should in theory have been taught by Yoda until he was 7 or 8. But since He was 9 when Qui-Gon took him that whole stage had to bypassed. Thats why Obi-Wan was given Anakin as his padawan straight away.

Really some of you need to look beyond the obvious.

 

I concur with the "plot-hole" versus "cheap plot device" distinction.

And Malthus I think you should read the snowghosts signature, because I wondered the same question.

 

I've got to agree with Ree Yees on this one. A Plot Hole (IMHO) is an integral story element that does not make coherent sense, unto the movie itself.

Plot Holes that I see in the film:

The aforementioned connection trace, ill-defined nature of the Trade Federation vs. Naboo conflict, and Yoda/Qui-Gon training Obi-Wan are just a few. Also, what the heck is this Jedi prophecy and what is the significance of the chosen one, why would anyone knowingly expose a child to danger (i.e. Qui-Gon bringing Annakin with them into the final battle), dubious Jedi morality, and so fourth.

Yes, I'm sure everyone will come back and "explain" to me how misguided I am, and why these are not plot holes. But that's precisely my point. If a story element depends on a secondary source to be explained (EU, cut scenes, Fan Boy theories, etc) than it is indeed a PLOT HOLE. Yes, I believe there are answers to these questions, answers that can be found in official sources, such as the TPM novel. Nonetheless, that doesn't change the fact that one should not have to go to such secondary sources for explanations about such basic story elements.

DarthTerrios: Obvious? I think one might consider the fact that no matter how old you are, the fundamental basics of Jedi training remain important is obvious. Can Obi-Wan provide those fundamentals that Yoda apparently teaches? Who knows? There's nothing in the movie that indicates an answer either way. And the movie does not show that Yoda taught Obi-Wan as a young Jedi. The one line that could possibly indicate this, "But Master Yoda told me to be mindful of the future," can be interpreted in multiple ways.

 

And Malthus I think you should read the snowghosts signature, because I wondered the same question

A-hah! I see it now:

Why only one battleship when the jedi returned

Gooooood question!

 

>>>>The aforementioned connection trace, ill-defined nature of the Trade Federation vs. Naboo conflict, and Yoda/Qui-Gon training Obi-Wan are just a few.

1) Connection trace is as yet unexplained- it IS a plot hole unless something in II or III explain it (eg. it reveals that all intergalactic messages are CC'd to Palpatine's office.
2) "ill-defined nature of the TF- Naboo conflict"- again, not a plot hole. It's clearly explained that the Trade Federation are blockading Naboo in protest against taxation of trade routes.
3) Yoda/Obi Wan- already been addressed.

>>>>Also, what the heck is this Jedi prophecy and what is the significance of the chosen one, why would anyone knowingly expose a child to danger (i.e. Qui-Gon bringing Annakin with them into the final battle), dubious Jedi morality, and so fourth.

What are power convertors, where is Dantooine and what's the Dark Side of the Force are all plot holes in Episode IV, by that line of reasoning.

>>>>If a story element depends on a secondary source to be explained (EU, cut scenes, Fan Boy theories, etc) than it is indeed a PLOT HOLE.

Indeed, but considering that you haven't yet seen all of the primary source, like (hypothetically) Yoda telling Anakin what Obi Wan was like when he taught him in Episode II, then it's a bit early to be screaming about why parts of TPM are left open to question.

Episode I does not answer every question posed in every film. If it answered every question posed in Episode I, then there would be no point in making Episode II.

 

Why Dosen't Qui Gon take his 30,000 Republic credits and hire someone to fly him and the queen in disguise to Coruscant. It's only a 9-13 hour trip. Oh I know Republic money is no good out there. No problem *Waves his hands, Republic Credits will do fine* Unfortunatly the Captain of the ship is Watto's brother and so is the next captain and the next and the next. Toydarions seem to be all over Tatooine.

Or why dosen't Qui Gon take his 30, 000 Republic credits and pay someone to use their Hyperspace Communicator and contact someone for a lift. The only people who know who Qui Gon Jin is are the Jedi and valorum. "This is Qui Gon Jin here. My son, daughter and I are ready for that transport to pick us up." Oh I know that would never work because the TF who are monitoring every single transmission in the galaxy would hear it and then realize that Qui Gon Jin has no children and he must be lieing which means that the Queen is with him on the planet tatooine. Which just happens to be in the opposite direction of Coruscant and the Republic. Which would then lead the TF to believe that their Hyperdrive was damaged and the Queen is there.

-----signature-----
"Rabid Balding Ewok, you make me sick.
If there was an enemies list, you'd be on mine."


:::*::(^^) :(^^) :::::::
::::::/::::^^:::::\ ::*::
:::::/###-^^-##I :::::
: *:.l##/(*)# (*)\\:::::
:::/##(###.00#)#I ::::
::(___/#*#(XXX)/__) ::
::/000{{{{www}}}}\:: Ewoks Will Eat You!

 

2) "ill-defined nature of the TF- Naboo conflict"- again, not a plot hole. It's clearly explained that the Trade Federation are blockading Naboo in protest against taxation of trade routes. What does Naboo have to do with the taxation? What does blockading them acomplish? The little information provided by the film does not serve to sufficently create what is the primary narrative frame.

>>>>Also, what the heck is this Jedi prophecy and what is the significance of the chosen one, why would anyone knowingly expose a child to danger (i.e. Qui-Gon bringing Annakin with them into the final battle), dubious Jedi morality, and so fourth.
What are power convertors, where is Dantooine and what's the Dark Side of the Force are all plot holes in Episode IV, by that line of reasoning.
Power convertors and Dantooine are background details, not main elements of the story. The narrative is not driven by them, whereas the elements I indicated are important elements of the plot, aspects of the story that much of the film hinges upon. This holds true with the Dark Side as well, in term of ANH. None of the action of that film is driven by the Dark Side, whereas elements such as the "Choosen One" are important elements of the plot in TPM.

>>>>If a story element depends on a secondary source to be explained (EU, cut scenes, Fan Boy theories, etc) than it is indeed a PLOT HOLE.
Indeed, but considering that you haven't yet seen all of the primary source, like (hypothetically) Yoda telling Anakin what Obi Wan was like when he taught him in Episode II, then it's a bit early to be screaming about why parts of TPM are left open to question.
Episode I does not answer every question posed in every film. If it answered every question posed in Episode I, then there would be no point in making Episode II.
TPM doesn't need to answer every question posed in the film, but it should have answered the ones that the main story is dependent on, so that the film works unto itself. Example: ANH doesn't answer every question, but it answer the ones necessary for it to be a coherent and functional narrative on its own.

 

There may be an easy counter to this argument... but this topic still begs me to comment about it. But why, In "Empire Strikes Back", does Obi-Wan tell Luke, "Go to the Degobah system...etc. etc. The Jedi Master who taught me." When in reality, it was Qui-Gon. This could easily be countered with an argument that after Qui-Gons death Yoda picked up where he left off... but such an idea could only be developed to make one feel better. When, truth be told, it was a mere mistake that wasn't thought twice about.