• Welcome to the RTS HQ Community Hub. Join us to discuss your favourite real-time strategy games! Enjoy exclusive insights from indie devs, participate in tournaments, and explore discussion forums - all focused on real-time strategy. Register now and become part of a welcoming community built by RTS gamers, for RTS gamers.

Continuity Errors or Inconsistencies - Disturbances in the Force

D

Dismal_Bliss

All warfare is based on deception
Joined
Nov 10, 2023
Messages
50
Points
9
Location
The Sol System
Website
carnivoretalk.com
Usually, every TV show or movie franchise with several sequels has at least some. But I struggle to think of any in Star Wars. Either the writers have done a fantastic job of keeping everything noted and organized, or I just suffer from being a fan that just likes to sit back, watch, and enjot the ride.

One thing that comes to mind that came across as a little forced was how in the prequel trilogy, there was no talking to the dead. But then at the end of Episode 3, Yoda makes a brief comment about how Qui-Gon Jinn figured out a way to communicate with the living. They don't actually show it though.

This seemed shoved in ther last minute, because in the original trilogy we hear the voice of the deceased Ben, you see the force ghosts at the end, etc, which were elements missing from the prequels.
 
Well, it depends where you look. I find the originals and prequels to be fairly coherent, and usually the shows come off as okay though I don't consume much of them anyway. My only scruple with Rogue One was a single line that can be dismissed and I'm not bothered to try and poke more holes though I've seen odd complaints here and there. The sequels are another story and seriously mess with things, that would be a tangent of its own.

The issues are there, it's just most can be glossed over, explained away or are forgiven if the core experience sells. Star Wars has never been a series aiming towards perfect consistency or bulletproof against nitpicks, the experience is key.

I wanted to look up plot holes to bring something to the table but most of them I could pretty much justify one way or another unless they were from the sequels. But I'll mention some things:
  • R2 remembers nobody in the OT despite having been involved with all the key people and there being no mention of a memory wipe for him. Obi Wan doesn't seem to remember him either. In the former case I suppose he could have gotten wiped too without mention.
  • Now that I think of it, the third episode fight with Dooku doesn't appear to have been written assuming dooku, anakin and kenobi had "partied" countless times in The Clone Wars show. Again, I didn't consume it regularly but on top of this Grievous seemed highly underwhelming. Ashoka also got an awful lot of screen credit to the point her going totally unmentioned in ep3 and the ot stands out for someone following in-setting chronology. Although given how the time periods and writers have bounced around that would be kinda jarring anyway. I'm sure there are other oddities in how TCW handles things paired with the films. But it's all coherent enough that I guess it works out anyway.
  • The Prequels covered the force ghost business well enough, I guess, but the implication it takes dedicated lessons means either Darth Vader was planning his afterlife retirement besides being a dark lord or another hole was introduced. Beyond this the concept was never well explained and it would take digging into EU material to find more clear boundaries for how it all works. The Sequels one-upping it with force ghosts manipulating the physical world and other force power oddities though... eugh. That wasn't necessary.
  • Han Solo's skeptecism of the jedi and force hoodoo presented in the OT didn't mesh well with the PT having an intergalactic order of space wizards who were figureheads of the largest war in over a thousand years. Merging with this: the explanation of the jedi offered by obi wan and yoda are, a little off. In both cases I think how George Lucas envisioned the jedi changed behind the scenes as he went along. Look no further than his compulsion to revise the OT with various 'oh that would have been nice' changes...
There are channels on youtube dedicated to shredding holes especially in later star wars writing, but the prequels as well; they're entertaining to dive into on occasion but I haven't retained a whole lot (and watching someone like MauLer is daunting) nor am I generally too bothered about it. With distinct exceptions, I'm usually sold by the sum of a given media's parts.
 
Both, in context. One is phrasing used to describe views of it from the outside, and also the essentially religious nature of adhering to it in a jedi or sithly way. The other is a drab mechanical explanation for what the force is under the hood, but its adherence and use can still be separate. But that explanation was clunky, and it's clear to me that what was meant in the OT changed a bit to the thoughts expressed in the PT. It's not the first area where explanation of the jedi is overly mystical. I try to rationalize yoda's 'never for attack' commentary as ptsd from the clone wars and a kneejerk reaction to how bad things ended for example.
 
Another continuity error is the prophecy of the chosen one.

Star Wars 1-6 is about the rise and fall and last-minute redemption of Anakin Skywalker. Qui-Gon was correct in that Akakin was the chosen one who would destroy the sith and restore balance to the force. Although he did turn to the dark side and live as a sith lord himself for a long time, he eventually killed the emporer and after his death that was the end of the remaining sith.

The Disney comes along and poo poos on all that by magically bringing back Palpatine.
 
Back
Top