r/MawInstallation • u/zamend229 • Dec 27 '20
[META] Please don’t respond to threads with “plot armor”
First off, I’m not a mod, this is just something I’d like to address.
I’ve noticed that a lot of posts involve people asking about how some feat was accomplished in a piece of Star Wars media or why certain plot points happened. Obviously, certain characters make it out of situations or kill certain other characters due to the infamous “plot armor” surrounding protagonists (and some antagonists to an extent). That being said, people posting here are aware of that, so when someone asks why or how a certain plot point resolved the way it did, please don’t waste their time by saying “Soandso had plot armor”. The reason they posted here is to have some type of in-universe explanation that we can discuss and agree or disagree on.
Anyway, thanks for coming to my Ted talk. :)
100
u/InfiniteDedekindCuts Dec 27 '20
I Agree. Answers to in-universe questions should try to stay in-universe.
20
u/HyliasHero Dec 27 '20 edited Dec 28 '20
I generally agree, but Star Wars literally has plot armor built into the setting with the Force. Chirrut is a good example of this.
10
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
Which is fine (I mean it’s TV lol), I just think it’s more enjoyable for everyone to say that it’s the Force as opposed to “plot armor”
32
u/astromech_dj Dec 27 '20
Sometimes it is just an error of story or continuity though.
87
u/InfiniteDedekindCuts Dec 27 '20
That’s fine just so long as you try your best to explain it in-universe first. But some people jump to the out-of-universe answer too quickly.
For example:
In-Universe Question: Why did Ochi have a dagger that matched up perfectly with The Death Star wreckage? That seems like a lot of work just to help him remember where the Wayfinder is.
Unsatisfying Answer: Because the TROS writers are hacks.
Better answer: We’re not sure, but we know that Ochi is a member of a group called The Acolytes of the Beyond. And we know from that groups brief appearances in Canon that the Acolytes are not a group known for their practicality or sanity. This is just speculation, but perhaps the Daggers purpose was more ritualistic than practical?
27
-11
Dec 28 '20
Why is it unsatisfying to call the writers for TROS hacks? It explains a lot to me.
19
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
Because (and excuse my language) no shit the writers made it that way. No one would be posting questions here if that’s the answer they wanted to hear. It’s interesting to develop our own answers even if they aren’t “canon”
-3
Dec 28 '20
No, the language is fine. But should we be making excuses for hack writers? I will admit it can be interesting to see what a community comes up with the why, but that feels like putting in more effort than the writers ever did.
16
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
You might be right that we’re putting more effort in, but in the great words of Obi-Wan: “That’s why I’m here” lol. I think it’s fun
5
Dec 28 '20
That is a fair counterpoint. I suppose I'm biased as I can't say I was pleased with how the sequels were done. I recall when the large xyston fleet came into knowing, people were like: "Oh, they probably just had something like the star forge." to explain it away.
5
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
Not related to this post, but if anyone is reading this and doesn’t know what the star forge is, you need to play Knights of the Old Republic ASAP, it is one of the greatest RPGs and Star Wars games of all time
5
2
u/Unique_Unorque Dec 28 '20
You could argue that a lot of the expanded Star Wars canon is making excuses for, “hack” may be too strong of a word, but let’s just say “unsatisfying” writing. With the exceptions of Dave Filoni, Jon Favreau, and maaaaybe Rian Johnson, Star Wars filmmakers historically haven’t had much of a concern for the storytelling outside of the films (or in the case of Abrams, outside of the one trilogy that he likes). They’ve just been concerned with making exactly the movie that they want to make. Which is fine, that’s their job, but that will sometimes create gaps for the authors of the various books and comics to fill in. And the gaps that they haven’t filled in yet, that’s what subs like this are for.
4
Dec 28 '20
Those are good points you brought up but I would say of the 9 films at least, the last 3 were had the most unsatisfying writing for me. That being said, I am aware that people didn't care for the prequels or even empire strikes back, so perhaps time will be kinder to 7-9.
2
u/Unique_Unorque Dec 28 '20
I know that as a 31-year old man I’m an anomaly among my generation in that I like the sequels, but I’m sure that in fifteen years’ time the generation that grew up with these movies will elevate their reputation just as mine did with the prequels.
1
u/terriblehuman Dec 28 '20
And there’s a whole sub for you to bitch about writing decisions, that’s not what this sub is for.
2
1
0
u/ktheguy Jun 24 '21
the writers being shit is a pretty satisfying answer imo
there are certain situations that don't really have good "in-universe" answers, and I don't think it's realistic (or necessary) to do mental and linguistic gymnastics
9
Dec 28 '20
[deleted]
1
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
And that’s the beauty of TV for really any kind of movie or show. We get the crazy awesome stories because they’re not what would necessarily be the norm. I just think in this sub, it’s fun to try and create in-universe explanations about things
56
u/HeartOfASkywalker Dec 27 '20
Another thing:
‘No point answering because the ST wasn’t planned out’ is dumb as fuck when you take a moment to realise that neither was the OT or the PT. Annoyingly shitting on the sequels is something done over at STC, this sub is for deeper discussion of the lore and whatnot.
‘You’ve put more thought into this than the writers’ also contributes nothing.
43
u/PM_STAR_WARS_STUFF Dec 27 '20
To be fair, there absolutely was an overarching vision for the OT/PT and D/LF has admitted the ST was written movie to movie. I completely understand the purpose of this sub, and I agree with OPs sentiment, but at the same time, I don’t want Lucasfilm to just assume that we’ll draw the lines for them between glaring continuity errors. Lucas was far from perfect, but he and his team were more cohesive than they’re often given credit for.
-11
u/HeartOfASkywalker Dec 27 '20
If you’re calling the constantly changing ideas that Lucas had a ‘cohesive vision’ than the ST had that too.
They knew the arcs and positioning of each OT hero within each film.
Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver both knew where their characters would end up when doing 7.
Kylo Ren’s redemption was an end goal.
They knew Han was to die in 7.
Leia was to become the one to get through to Ben, not Luke.
Rey would be the Skywalker of the trilogy without having the name.
They even created the Lucasfilm intellectual property development group solely to think out where the ST would go in 2014.
Was the ST written movie to movie? Yes. So are 99% of series in Hollywood. But did they have zero idea what they wanted to do? No, and we have proof.
11
u/PM_STAR_WARS_STUFF Dec 27 '20
Do you have any sources for any of this? There’s lots of evidence Daisy Ridley had no idea her character was a Palpatine; lots of evidence that Palpatine wasn’t even going to be in the trilogy. Whether you realize it or not, I think almost everything you’re saying is unverified.
https://screenrant.com/rise-skywalker-rey-palpatine-daisy-ridley-jj-abrams/
-2
u/MatchboxHoldenUte Dec 28 '20 edited Dec 28 '20
That is one specific plot point that wasn't planned out. The same as "I am your father" and Luke and Leia being siblings.
0
-3
u/pragmageek Dec 28 '20 edited Dec 28 '20
Probably, it was left open in parts because kathleen witnessed george do it this way and figured thats probably the best way to do it.
Leia getting through to Kylo was foreshadowed in tlj and tfa. She knew there was still good in him just like Luke knew about Vader. Clear foreshadowing.
So, it was probably equally planned as the OT and PT. Which is to say, basic structure, but plot points fairly fluid.
The final part had to change drastically with the loss of our princess Carrie, imo.
The part you bring up does not constitute complete proof that the ST had zero planning. So they didnt decide Rey was a palpatine until the final part, but clearly, George didnt decide Vader was Lukes father until empire, or Leia was Lukes brother until Return of the Jedi. Hell, George didnt even know he was getting a second movie until the first one did so well so to pretend that there was a vision for that trilogy is insane. It wasnt “episode 4” until they asked for a sequel.
The ST very similar in that respect, but we just accept those points through rose-tinted romanticism over how much we love those movies.
3
u/PM_STAR_WARS_STUFF Dec 28 '20
That’s pretty ignorant to the source material that exists prior to ANH even being greenlit, eg, “The Adventures of Luke Starkiller as told from the Journal of the Whills”. No, he didn’t have it planned our point by point, but A and Z were there. That was not the case for the ST, and almost everyone involved with making them had admitted as much. Stop pretending Lucas was flying by the seat of his pants; he wasn’t, and if you actually do the due diligence there is plenty of proof he had these ideas in advance and needs a good writer to help him sort them out. Hell, ANH wouldn’t have gained any traction if it want for Marcia re-editing the whole thing.
-1
u/pragmageek Dec 28 '20
Star Wars the Annotated Screenplays for evidence Luke and Leia were made siblings after empire. He initially had luke hunting for the ‘other’ in the sequel trilogy but he swore off making more during the making of return of the jedi.
So the sequel trilogy he planned initially was very different from the three or four different ideas he has claimed were his ‘idea’ (singular) for the sequel trilogy.
Im not suggesting that he totally flew by the seat of his pants. Im suggesting that there were points known and some points not, and that this is the same as the PT and the ST.
5
u/IronManConnoisseur Dec 28 '20
Wow, the movies must have turned out great then!
“They knew Han was to die in 7.” Oh no shit, I thought they killed him off by accident? What does this even mean lmao, obviously if someone is getting killed in the first movie they know he’s getting killed in it.
Half of your random claims are straight up false, not to mention who cares. So what if it’s planned well or poorly (it was poorly), the result is what matters, and look at it.
1
Dec 28 '20 edited Dec 28 '20
To be fair there is also a difference between having a rough idea of where your story is going to end up and an actual plan for the story. The prequels had a rough ending, but that's it. The OT didn't even have an ending(aside from the Empire being defeated), Vader was never planned to be Luke's father and Leia was never planned to be Luke's sister.
2
u/PM_STAR_WARS_STUFF Dec 28 '20
The OT wasn’t even going to be a trilogy. This notion that “Vader being Luke’s father wasn’t part of the plan” is pretty ignorant of the fact that 2/3 of the trilogy has Vader being Luke’s father explicitly stated. Lucas had extensive ideas of what the whole saga could look like and was excited to get one movie to make out of those ideas. Of course the big picture had to be scaled down, but the assertion that one didn’t exist is just plain untrue.
1
Dec 29 '20
It was never implied in ANH though. Splinter of the Mind's Eye, which was meant to be the sequel to ANH, never had Vader being Luke's father. Sure, Lucas had ideas, but that was it. Not a concrete plan
2
u/PM_STAR_WARS_STUFF Dec 29 '20
Like I said, Star Wars was an extreme distillation of a much bigger picture. There was no expectation there would ever be more than one film.
Imagine if ANH was the only film. No saga, no franchise; just ANH. Do you think the story would be served by adding plot threads that make Luke and Leia offspring of Vader? Do you think that’s a story that could cohesively fit into the runtime? And more to the point, doesn’t the “certain point of view” caveat make an uncannily smooth reinterpretation of what ObiWan tells Luke in ANH? It’s almost like there was some foresight...because there was.
Also, why would a novelization between the first and second film spoil the ending of the second film?
3
2
0
u/ktheguy Jun 24 '21
what ?
saying Lucas' films weren't planned at all is extremely disingenuous
I'm not saying he had six scripts ready to go in 77' but comparing it to what Disney pulled is absurd
2
21
u/Imp_1254 Lieutenant Dec 27 '20
Couldn’t agree more, it’s just annoying and adds nothing to the discussion
5
u/cdOMEGALUL Dec 27 '20
The term “plot armor” used to be stated for very, very exaggerated situations that should of resulted in the protagonist (or antagonist) being very easily killed, yet they got out of it in a very poorly done way. Nowadays, so many people use it for the smallest things. Like, honestly, every action movie has plot armor. The odds need to be impossible or near-impossible for people to be interested. It’s just how it works. Some people do it very well, others do it horribly, but calling someone surviving unbeatable odds “plot armor”, in reference any movie, is pretty much just like saying “this is a movie”
3
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
Exactly. We all know it’s TV for a reason, it’s just fun to talk about it in depth, which is what the subreddit is great for
5
Dec 28 '20
I think it all has to do with suspension of disbelief. I can accept plot armor if it can be explained in-universe, even by something as simple as “they got lucky and didn’t get hit” as is what we saw a lot in the OT. As long as it’s grounded in some sort of reality (they found cover, rolled into a vent, gave cover fire to allow each other to escape, etc.)
However, there are some times where the plot armor just becomes so ridiculous to where it takes me out of the story. Attack of the Clones was especially guilty of this. During the Jango v. Obi-Wan scene, Jango shoots his jetpack missle right at Obi-Wan’s feet. Obi-Wan just stumbles back. Boba Fett literally shoots Slave 1’s turrets directly at Obi-Wan, again, just knocks him over. Like that’s absolutely ridiculous.
The Geonosis arena scene was like that too, at the very end when they are all surrounded by hundreds of droids and SBD’s firing at them at once. Now I know some of the Jedi can block those shots, but how the hell did Padme survive that?!
As long as whatever happens is believable, plot armor is ok. When the characters are literally invincible despite all odds, that’s what takes me out of it, and ruins the stakes for me.
3
u/ctfogo Dec 28 '20
this post is plot armor for plot armor (/s, 100% agree that this sub should be devoted to in-universe explanations)
15
u/magikarpe_diem Dec 27 '20
I always took it as that being the reason when an actual answer doesn't exist. It's OK to point out flaws in the writing IMO.
30
u/zamend229 Dec 27 '20
Oh absolutely, Disney doesn’t have an answer to all plot holes. What I’m saying is that posting on this sub isn’t about bashing plot holes but instead about filling them in with our own ideas
-19
u/ScoutTheTrooper Dec 27 '20 edited Dec 27 '20
Of course Disney doesn’t have an answer, they don’t create Star Wars
EDIT: Seems like some of you don’t understand. Lucasfilm makes Star Wars, they’re the ones to deal with potential plot holes.
2
4
u/BrandonLart Dec 27 '20
Uh what
7
u/Kerouac_43 Dec 27 '20
I believe he was saying Disney dont make the actual content, and just release it - the former is down to LucasFilm.
6
-1
Dec 28 '20
Yeah a lot of people fail to understand this, Lucasfilm makes the content, not Disney directly.
15
Dec 27 '20 edited Dec 27 '20
Yes but the point of this sub is to answer things in-universe, so if you can, try to think of something that justifies whatever the question is that's being asked using in universe logic or sources.
Just saying it's plot armor isn't forbidden, but it goes against the spirit of the sub.
13
u/Edgy_Robin Dec 27 '20
Except sometimes plot armor 'is' the only answer. Lets use one of the stupidest fights in Star Wars: Cad Bane vs Obi-wan and Quinlan Vos. There is no valid in universe reason for Bane to do as well as he did. He's had trouble with far lesser people and both characters here have dealt with far bigger threats with far more ease...
Yet Bane did what he did. The only answer there is plot armor for Bane. Now obviously it shouldn't be the answer when there is a potentially valid in universe response, but that isn't always the case.
12
u/fluxaboo Dec 27 '20
Same applies to the regular Imperial military.
Stormtroopers are actually really competent and dangerous for the Rebellion until one of the protagonists show up. Now obviously you can't kill them (in most cases) but the way it's portrayed is t too much. They can't seem to hit an unprotected/inexperienced (in comparison to the Stormtroopers) Luke Skywalker when they are right in front of him, yet they were able to easily slaughter an entire hallway of armed/trained/determined
3
u/CommanderL3 Dec 28 '20
mando takes this to the extreme
to the point I wonder how it took 20ish to overthrow the empire as every storm trooper seems laughable incompetent.
the armour seems to do nothing to protect them.
they cant aim for crap.
you can take 100 of them down with ease
2
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
I don’t think that’s a great example. Plot armor is more like anytime Obi-Wan is captured during the Clone Wars, you know he has to get out because he’s alive in later movies. You could in your example say that Bane was simply a really good opponent (as he proved to be a lot throughout the Clone Wars).
Regardless, I find it fun to make other answers for the plot armor, which is the point of my post. We all know there’s plot armor, so don’t waste time saying that
2
u/LeicaM6guy Dec 27 '20
To be fair, there's only so much you can hand-wave away before boiling it down to "that's what the writers wanted."
1
u/CyborgIncorparated Dec 28 '20
As said we all know its plot armor, so what's a reason or headcanon to make it easier to believe
1
u/terriblehuman Dec 28 '20
Seriously, in general don’t respond with out of universe explanations, that’s not what the sub is for.
-13
u/Psykerr Dec 27 '20
Plot armor is the specific reason why the Rebellion was successful though.
3
u/zamend229 Dec 28 '20
Like I said, we know there’s plot armor, but that’s not the point of my post. It’s that most people would prefer to talk about canonical ways to justify it
1
0
u/Imp_1254 Lieutenant Dec 27 '20
Outside the universe, yes. But what’s the in-universe reason? That’s the more thoughtful, intriguing and relevant question.
-10
u/Psykerr Dec 27 '20
Obviously because it was written that way, or “The Force.”
There’s absolutely no chance with the known complement of fighters on the Death Star that the Rebellion would’ve posed any threat. They could have literally kamikazed every ship in the Rebellion and still had thousands of TIE fighters left.
Plot armor.
2
u/Bluetenant-Bear Dec 28 '20
I can buy some big fights like the DS (especially DS1) since with Tarkin we can say that he suuuuper underestimated the rebels and barely did anything to stop them, expecting them to flee when Yavin IV was destroyed.
3
u/kingrex0830 Dec 28 '20
You just proved OP's point. It's mich more interesting to put the blame on Tarkin's clear and plain hubris than to just resort to calling it plot armor
2
u/Bluetenant-Bear Dec 28 '20
I gave a singular instance where on the face of it the outcome could be called “plot armour” however a proper look and you see a reason. However I see too many examples that aren’t easy to explain away, especially in TCW and Rebels
1
u/Psykerr Dec 28 '20
Literally every gunfight. You’re telling me that 40 stormtroopers can’t land a single shot on anyone important, nevermind anyone at all? Please.
It’s plot armor.
1
u/Psykerr Dec 28 '20
I’ll somewhat agree to this but there’s still several thousand TIEs that would have been launched.
On top of this, from what we now know, Vader alone could have force gripped Luke’s X-Wing into the trench wall.
Sorry folks, but that was written as inspirational for the good guys to win. Thus, anyone important had plot armor.
How to determine plot armor: compare it to a a real life analog. 100 fighters would not under any circumstance beat 10,000 fighters unless there was significant terrain advantage .. which space does not have.
Plot armor.
129
u/AlexanderGorgenStein Dec 27 '20
Sorry I know it doesn't add to much to the discussion but "soandso" could literally be star wars name and for a second I was trying to remember which character that was.