There are no plot holes in the Saga

Just to add something to the twins' training discussion:

Yoda and Obi Wan had no chance but to watch, learn, and wait until it was the right time. They watched and learned for almost two decades, and time came 19 years later after the events of Revenge of the Sith.

Yoda and Obi Wan received training also in the mean time. Therefore, Obi Wan was taught that the only way to defeat the Sith was not giving into anger, nor hate. The Sith knew why the Jedi failed. They knew about their weakness.

On the other hand, Yoda saw that Luke had much of his own man. Just check out the dialogue between Yoda and Luke and decide for yourself:

LUKE: Oh, come on. How could you know my father? You
don't even know who I am. Oh, I don't even know what I'm
doing here. We're wasting our time.

Yoda: I cannot teach him. The boy has no patience.

BEN'S VOICE: He will learn patience.

YODA: Hmmm. Much anger in him, like his father.

BEN'S VOICE: Was I any different when you taught me?

YODA: Hah. He is not ready.

LUKE: Yoda? I am ready. I...Ben! I can be a Jedi. Ben, tell him I'm
ready.

YODA: Ready, are you? What know you of ready? For eight hundred years
have I trained Jedi. My own counsel will I keep on who is to be
trained! A Jedi must have the deepest commitment, the most serious
mind. (to the invisible Ben, indicating Luke) This one a long time
have I watched. Never his mind on where he was. Hmm? What he was
doing. Hmph. Adventure. Heh! Excitement. Heh! A Jedi craves not these
things. (turning to Luke) You are reckless!

BEN'S VOICE: So was I, if you'll remember.

YODA: He is too old. Yes, too old to begin the training.

LUKE: But I've learned so much.

YODA: (sighs) Will he finished what he begins?

LUKE: I won't fail you -- I'm not afraid.

YODA: Oh, you will be. You will be.

Really, Yoda had his own conflict deciding if training Luke was the right thing at that moment (I can see that he wasn't going to teach him, but he changed his mind). After all, they had no chance but to do it, and risk it all. If they would have started training Luke and Leia at a younger age, like it is being suggested here, then things would get more complicated and the Emperor would have gone wild for hunting heads, including Anakin's twins.

The Jedi were supposed to be extinct by that time, and the Emperor, nor Vader, didn't know that Obi Wan Kenobi and Yoda survived ... So, why would they have started training a younger boy and a girl if the Jedi Order was supposed to be finished???

The best and smart thing to do was hidding the twins, and waiting until it was the right time, like they did.

Finally, Luke learned from Yoda, and his own mistakes either ... Yes, he remembered the failure at the cave, and he knew that the only way to destroy the Emperor and Vader was by not giving to hate, just like Yoda taught him.

This was the new lesson from the Jedi ... Before, things were not like that, and we all witnessed the casualties of the war, so it has nothing to do with the age.

I really don't see this as a plot hole, or an unresolved matter ...

 

Why do you think they are going to talk about someone called Skywalker in particular? It is not just a name, and it really means something. Now, don't you think it is obvious to imply that this person must not become a Jedi if he could destroy them? Don't you think logical that the father was going to do anything before his own son gets killed? If the Emperor saw him as a threat, and think of killing him, don't you think that the father would react by saying that he could be a great asset and turned to the dark side?

On the other hand, why would you think that the father revealed the truth to the son and told him that he was going to finish the training and that only together they can rule the galaxy and end to the destructive conflict created by the Sith?

This was the kind of conflict that had Darth Vader ...

 

Go-Mer-Tonic, you're welcome. I appreciate the ease in which you enjoy and get these movies and what George Lucas is doing.

It's absolutely amazing just how well these movies are made and how entertaining they are.

 

Yes they are well and more than entertaining ... And it will go from generation to generation ... Like folk tales from a galaxy far, far away ...

 

I think criticism is valid but all of the "issues" brought up in this thread with regards to "plot holes" have all been misunderstandings on the viewers part

Misunderstanding? I don't think anyone misunderstands anything here. That's not the problem. What is, then? Let me explore that answer with you (by you, I mean everybody here in this thread, not you in particular, Go-Mer).

For a lot of people, the issue of 'plot holes or not plot holes' is not a problem, while for many others, it is. Why is that? Well, after much time in the fanbase, much time on the JC and much time having to defuse these arguments when they fall into flame wars, I think I have come to understand.

It isn't because there isn't anything to notice. If there weren't, these debates would not go and on. My findings are that the average person (and I speak firstly of the non-fan, here) doesn't notice them, because they don't care. No, that's not a bash. I find many people enjoy SW (as obvious by the money they make). They like the effects, the aliens, the action and are entertained by the story, but they aren't fans. It's not that things like Leia's memory does or doesn't make sense to them, they just don't think anything about it. They just have fun with the movies, nothing more, nothing less.

I can relate to this, personally. To give a personal example, I would compare it to my enjoyment of the Star Trek movies. I am not a fan (or rather, I am a mild fan). There are tons of plot holes in the ST movies. When people point them out and ask me to explain them, I can't. I never noticed the plot holes until they were pointed out to me because when watching it, it all made sense. Yet I cannot tell you why this or that, I just know I don't care. I generally concede it is a plot hole and go on enjoying the movies. But if I were a die hard fan, that would not be so easy, which gets to the second point, the fans.

The fans care, so you run into two kinds: Those who don't see answers to these questions on screen and get mad or frustrated, and those who find or deduce an explanation from an off-screen source* and are satisfied. Sometimes the off-screen source is in junction to an on-screen source, but it is not soley an on-screen explaination. The later of these groups finds these explanation perfectly acceptable and are content, but the former of the two looks solely what is on screen and remains frustrated.

(*which could be EU, quotes by GL, and/or personal theory, for a few examples)

Or I could put it this way: to group one, a plot hole is something that needs an explaination on screen and only on-screen. To group two, a plot hole is something that cannot be explained at all. Since group two finds explanations, they are content that there are no plot holes. They look where group one isn't willing to.

Now, I realize some of you in the later catagory get frustrated with us in the former when we say it wasn't on screen, but allow me to explain. Take Leia's memory. Leia, ROTJ, says she has vague memories which were mostly emotions and images, and she had these when she was very young. ROTS shows Leia being born then Padme dying. The problem the former group has is hinged on two elements, the words "very young", and (in light of ROTS) Luke's inablity to remember.

In the interest of being brief, I will just address the later of the two: Why Leia and not Luke? Actually, I'm side stepping another problem which is not addressed on screen and that is how can anyone remember something from their birth? Whatever the reason is, Leia can remember. That much is clear from on-screen material. But why not Luke? I honestly don't know the answer to this. I've heard lots of good explainations, but I honestly don't know the answer. Why, because the movie doesn't tell us, so how do I know fan x's explanation is the right one, and not fan y? People in the first group aren't content with this.

Other explains: 1,000 years vs. 1,000 generations. Both Palpatine and Kenobi should know how long the Republic was around,

 

I hear what you are saying, and I think you are right about the 2 groups points of view.

To me a plot hole is a contradiction, while to others a plot hole is when a question they come up with isn't directly adressed in the film.

I am not saying people shouldn't question these things, but if they want to understand how they aren't plot holes, then they have to dig a little deeper. If they don't want to dig any deeper, they should just roll along with the stuff and assume it must make sense.

Take this for example:

PALPATINE: I will not let this Republic that has stood for a thousand years be split in two. My negotiations will not fail!

Obi-Wan: For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic.

I can see why people would assume this is a blatant contradiction, but Obi-Wan is talking about how long the Jedi had served the old Republic, and Palpatine is talking about how long the galaxy at large had all come together as one big happy galaxy. It wasn't always that way, the Republic grew from the central system, and there were problems with other worlds in the galaxy. At a certain point the worlds of the galaxy came together to form one big happy government.

I know this isn't in the film, but why should it be? What bearing does any of that have on the story being told? Just so the people who stand up and shout CONTRADICTION! will sit back down?

You have to want to suspend your disbeleif. Lucas can't possibly adress every misunderstanding someone might have. Certain things like why Luke didn't remember when Leia did are left mysterious just as life leaves those things mysterious. There are people who actually beleive they remember their birth. Why them and not others? Did the Good Lord create a plot hole? Or is it just that there are some things we have yet to figure out?

 

where is there anything in the films that says the 2nd death star wasnt started til after the 1st was destroyed?

 

Traditionally, the opening scroll of each SW film fills the viewer in on the events between the movies. The opening scroll of ROTJ says that "the GALACTIC EMPIRE has begun construction on a new armored space station even more powerful than the first dreaded Death Star".

The implication is that the construction started between ESB and ROTJ.

 

Still the idea that the first one took a lot longer isn't a plot hole.

They had supply problems, labor dispuutes and design issues they needed to work out, and that delayed the contruction of the first one.

 

Well, it is a probability. The first Death Star may have been finished years before ANH, although it wasn't tested before.

The Empire could have had a few problems since it was the first one in the process, but, as soon as they get to build a second one, even more powerful than the first Death Star, then things changed for them.

They knew how to solve the problems, or inconveniences, that came out while building the first one ... And it is possible that the second one may have been started some time between Episodes V and VI, as somebody said it before. In a shorter time period.

 

Let's not also forget that the Senate was around that whole time, probably causing problems for them along the way. It was only after the Emperor had dissolved the Senate that they tested the weapon.

 

Honestly, I don't think that none of this facts are considered to be plot holes. They are facts of the story that are not revealed in the movies, since the film is based on the life of the main characters that had a major impact in the story.

If you would like to know about the construction of the Death Star, the formation of the rebellion, or even how was it that Han Solo and Chewbacca became partners, then you'll need some extra information that is only revealed in the novels, which explain a series of events that occurred over these periods.

Star Wars is not a film like Lord of the Rings, where the start of the second or third film of the trilogy goes from the point where the previous film ended. In Star Wars there are many years between each film, and many things have occurred since the end of each film ... That's for sure!

What I do like about the Star Wars saga is that many things are connected through dialogues between the characters, and lots of images that explain how things came to be that way ...

 

So why does one say 1000 years and the other say a 1000 generations?

 

I already adressed this in the post just below Darth-Stryphe's.

---

Take this for example:[blockquote][b]PALPATINE:[/b] I will not let this Republic that has stood for a thousand years be split in two. My negotiations will not fail!

[b]Obi-Wan:[/b] For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic.[/blockquote]I can see why people would assume this is a blatant contradiction, but Obi-Wan is talking about how long the Jedi had served the old Republic, and Palpatine is talking about how long the galaxy at large had all come together as one big happy galaxy. It wasn't always that way, the Republic grew from the central system, and there were problems with other worlds in the galaxy. At a certain point the worlds of the galaxy came together to form one big happy government.

I know this isn't in the film, but why should it be? What bearing does any of that have on the story being told? Just so the people who stand up and shout CONTRADICTION! will sit back down?[hr][/blockquote]

 

Owen Lars owning C3PO. There is no way around it.


You can't argue there are a million other droids in the Galaxy, Owen in the remotest corner of Tatooine would have never have seen them. There aren't a million droids there. His exposure to any civilization is limited.

Two, only someone who lives in a city could rationalize that kind of nonsense. Anyone who has lived in the country around people like Owen KNOW that farmers forget noone. They remember their own cattle and livestock for 40+ years. They remember the stranger that had a flat tire that one rainy day in 1963 who stopped to chat for a minute.

And three, C3PO introduces himsself "Hi, I'm C3PO, human cyborg relations" over and over and over and over and over. Even a mentally challenged person would remember it.

If you dismiss all three of those reasons, you are willing to RATIONALIZE ANYTHING and no plot hole no matter how great would matter to you. Debating about anything else becomes as mute as debating with an Al Qaeda terrorist the benefits of Westernism and Christianity. They just won't ever see it.

Or a better example, it's like telling a man who smokes that smoking is bad for you. No matter how accurate you are, the smoking man will deny it and continue to smoke. Ihe reality is that smoking is bad for you, just like there are plot holes in the Saga you can drive a truck through --- but some people you just can't reach and are perfectly right to live believing what ever they want to.

 

Still, personally unsatisfied with the age of training of the twins issue.
Most people rely on the idea that they would somehow be detected just by training, no matter where or how they trained. But I haven't seen a good basis for that idea. And Luke carrying through quietly with his training in the OT is some evidence against this idea.

And the fact that thousands of good Jedi were successfully trained in the traditional way from extremely young age, and then you have Anakin come in at a late age (not trained in the traditional way) and he turns..... how then do you (you, meaning Yoda/Obi-Wan) become convinced that the traditional way should not be followed with his offspring? The young ones will come to them when the time is right? Remember Anakin himself, he presented himself to the Jedi in TPM.... his training wasn't thrust upon him. Fate brought him into Qui-Gon's sight, and Anakin's own will brought him to help them out on Tatooine, and leave his mother for Jedi training.



But, I don't really wanna be stuck on this. Instead, I have another plot hole to bring up. Just wondering how others process this:
In TESB, Luke wants to leave Dagobah to save Han and Leia while Yoda and Ben want him not to go. If Yoda could strongly assure Luke that he could feel Leia would not die, it would have gone a long way (maybe not ALL the way, but it definitely would've helped Yoda's case) in getting Luke to stay... but apparently Yoda couldn't do this, because Leia's fate is so uncertain. Then, while Luke is taking off, Yoda mentions the "other" hope to Ben, as if he KNEW Leia would survive to be trained if need be. We of course (at the time of TESB) don't know he's talking about Leia. But in light of the revelation in ROTJ, he IS talking about Leia, and so it doesn't really add up. Seems like a plot hole within the OT.

 

---

[b]Hudnall :[/b] Owen Lars owning C3PO. There is no way around it.[hr][/blockquote]Oh really?[blockquote][hr][b]Hudnall:[/b] You can't argue there are a million other droids in the Galaxy,[hr][/blockquote]But there are...

 

---

[b]Hudnall:[/b] Owen in the remotest corner of Tatooine would have never have seen them. There aren't a million droids there. His exposure to any civilization is limited.[hr][/blockquote]Watto had parts for protocol droids in his shop, it seems that 3-PO wasn't the only one to set foot on Tatooine.

 

---

[b]Hudnall:[/b] Two, only someone who lives in a city could rationalize that kind of nonsense. Anyone who has lived in the country around people like Owen KNOW that farmers forget no-one. They remember their own cattle and livestock for 40+ years. They remember the stranger that had a flat tire that one rainy day in 1963 who stopped to chat for a minute.[hr][/blockquote]Even if that stranger had his entire appearance altered? When 3-PO was in the possession of the Larrs, he had rusty coverings, when he sees him again in ANH, he has golden coverings. As for recognizing 3-PO by his voice, I direct you to the part in ESB where 3-PO runs into a silver version of his model. He didn't have the same disposition as 3-PO but he did have the exact same voice.

 

Hudnall, you're comparing the way people rationalize reality to the way they rationlize fantasy. You're comparing the relationship between 3P0 and Owen to a conversation with Bin Ladin. That's just going overboard. I like Star Wars and I would probably be considered a gusher by many, but the truth is I think that all six of the Star Wars movies would be incredibly boring to anyone that wasn't a fan, and some of the crap in the PT is just plane stupid but I'm a fan and this it what fans do. They like something even when it should be better.

I work with a guy that is a huge Rush fan. You know the old rock band that started out in the 70s. He's pretty much about the only guy in the world that still likes Rush, and I understand why he likes them. Because he's a fan and sticks with them.

My biggest problem is not the plot holes, it's that Star Wars is so stupid and I don't know why I still like it.
I mean that scene when Anakin is chasing Zam and Obi-Wan says, "How many times have I told you to stay away from energy binders." Right then and there I was ready to denounce Star Wars forever.

 

---

[b]Hudnall:[/b] And three, C3PO introduces himsself "Hi, I'm C3PO, human cyborg relations" over and over and over and over and over. Even a mentally challenged person would remember it.[hr][/blockquote]Sure, but never to Owen. Owen didn't realize it was actually 3-PO until Luke told him he was talking about Obi-Wan. Then as you suggested, he remembered 3-PO from before.

 

---

[b]Hudnall:[/b] If you dismiss all three of those reasons, you are willing to RATIONALIZE ANYTHING and no plot hole no matter how great would matter to you.[hr][/blockquote]I say if you stand by your reasons for calling this a contradiction or plot hole, you are willing to make up complete nonsense to back up your claims.

 

---

[b]Hudnall:[/b] Debating about anything else becomes as mute as debating with an Al Qaeda terrorist the benefits of Westernism and Christianity. They just won't ever see it.[hr][/blockquote]Way to go, you have compared a fellow Star Wars fan to an Al Qaeda terrorist. If I were to get judgmental, I would call this a borderline flame.

 

---

[b]Hudnall:[/b] Or a better example, it's like telling a man who smokes that smoking is bad for you. No matter how accurate you are, the smoking man will deny it and continue to smoke. Ihe reality is that smoking is bad for you, just like there are plot holes in the Saga you can drive a truck through --- but some people you just can't reach and are perfectly right to live believing what ever they want to.[hr][/blockquote]Then provide me with some actual plot holes so your analogy is more accurate.

 

I'll get back to replying to points here in a bit, but Go-Mer, you have to use the edit button. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but posting that many posts in a row is against any forum's rules.