It was shielded against attack made with lasers, the only way was to fly through heavy defended trench under enemy fire and make impossible feat. Only one weak spot for entire superweapon, that otherwise is impossible to defeat? Rebel pilots were massacrated during that fight, only like two or three ships survived. It was truly suicide to try that and Empire knew that, Luke survived not even because of the force sensitivity, he would be dead if not for the Han.
THANK YOU!! I spent decades railing against this point. A project so massive as the Death Star would HAVE to have design flaws. Specially since it was built by a dictatorship, famoulsy bad at doing things right. I doubt that the exhaust port was the only fatal flaw in that dawn station. It was just the most obvious/ exploitable one the rebels found in the limited time they had to study the blueprints. A much bigger plot hole is, if Leia knew the Falcon was being tracked, why did go straight to Yavin instead of ditching the ship on the way?
@@trent1 And Rogue One misunderstands A New Hope in a spectacular manner; the hope refers to Luke Skywalker, not the Death Star plan as Leia says at the end.
@@Toschez 100% about Luke being the new hope. Disney shows a profound misunderstanding of Star Wars (among other things). I'm working on a video detailing that. Coming up in a few weeks!
Finally. In general, people think a plot hole is something that “why didn’t they just” or “maybe if they just-“ they didn’t. This is how the story is progressing you’re not a genius thinking you found an over site your a moron for thinking so
What I want to know is . . . why didn't Red Group provide any cover at all and protect Gold Group during their ill fated trench run???? And . . . why didn't Luke use his X-Wing to blast the sh*t out of the AT-AT Walkers on Hoth??? I NEED to know!!!!!
Yes, I agree not seeing the other fighters try and protect each group is kind of weird. That's the one thing in this battle I believe deserved to be explained but I think it all comes down to budget limitations. It's easy to forget but the original Star Wars was a low budget film so I'm guessing Lucas had to simplify some stuff.
Ok, but why does the exhaust port even matter when all republic fighters have hyperspace drives? Just send a few with droids barreling through and be done.
@@chadleach6009 no, that would go against all the logic and rules of the SW universe. Otherwise you would be able to easily destroy everything and kill everyone by just using couple of capable engines... a frightening thought.
You're right, they did it in Episode 8. And it was a terrible, terrible idea from Disney because it makes every other space battle in other movies useless. Something else I should talk about in a future video...
Slight plot hole in your analysis. Rogue One is fine, a single engineer, the designer/project lead/lead engineer, could easily incorporate a weakness and have it pass through various iterations of design and scrutiny. As you said yourself, arrogance can blind, and he could easily have used this to openly discuss the flaw as insignificant. "What's the chances of a small fighter getting close, firing off a missile or two, hitting a 2m wide port, and escaping from OUR SuperMassive Death Star....... pah.... they won't even get close"
Thanks for your comment. :) I see what you're saying and that's a totally fair point. I have two problems with it though: 1. it's adding details where there wasn't a need to do so (hence my conclusion in the video), 2. it implies that if it wasn't for a traitor, the issue wouldn't have existed at all, which opens up plenty more questions about the ethic of the people working on it than it can possibly answer. So all and all, even though I agree that technically speaking the two ideas (arrogance and a traitor) aren't mutually exclusive, I still think it's a useless addition at best. Now in my opinion there are plenty of other problems with Rogue One. From the fact that the plans were ready before the Empire even existed (as seen in Episode 2) to the fact that it would be really dumb of the Empire to pick a lead engineer who openly opposes them and whose wife they killed. We leave the field of arrogance to wander straight into stupidity and incompetence with this one. A good summary of Disney these days though so I guess I shouldn't be surprised that's what they came up with 😂
@misterwhyte how do you know the deisgns were complete? If an engineer was hired to engineer something then it hasn't been engineered yet. Just because the look of a car has been thought up doesnt mean its engine has been designed. Imagine what a car that hasnt been invented looks like in your head. Now tell me every dimension, every material, every item, the exact engineering process, ect. But you can't. Why? Becasue you arent an engineer and even if you were you've just thought of this car so you havent had time to consider the mechanics yet.
@@crackingpenny3186 We're not talking about a car here. We're talking of a groundbreaking new weapon. You wouldn't start thinking of the design unless you already figured out how the weapon will work. By the way, early cars were bare bones, because they were trying to make the engine work first (believe it or not, I actually live next to the museum of one of the first car manufacturers in the world, it's fascinating to see the early models). Once it worked, that's when they worried about making it look good. If you want to go a step further, I could point out that they started building the Death Star as soon as Palpatine became emperor (Episode 3), meaning all these questions you're mentioning had already been answered. Now sure, if you really, really want to, you can always find reasons for Erso's presence in Rogue One, but it'll always be kind of grasping at straws.
@@misterwhyte The bit I liked about Jynn Erso, is that in 1995 they finally released Dark Forces. You play as a mercenary Kyle Katarn, and the first mission sees him not very sneak into a small Imperial base to steal the plans to the Death Star, and that goes off without a hitch, since there are like 30 people guarding the whole facility, and only the most rudimentary security systems... It just doesn't seem to make any kind of sense, that they would ever need to store the blueprints to their super-weapon anywhere, that could be so easily assaulted. But after that mission (quite a while later), his condition for joining the Rebel Alliance, is that he gets to have "Jan Orrs" as his mission commander, like he has a crush on her. All seems a little propagandistic, or like a VR training simulator.
The plot hole in Rogue One is - how in hell would Erzo think that this small, inaccessible, port was an exploitable weakness, even if he could pass it along to the rebels. As many people already commented, it was nearly impossible for anybody to do what Luke did, and he only did it with a lot of help, specially from Han. A normal rebel pilot would have no chance of pulling it off.
But it does have a Death Star hole. Rogue One is the best Star Wars movie since 1983 (really, the only good one since 1983). It had to be a purposeful flaw, because otherwise the Rebel Alliance would have been destroyed while technicians powered over the Death Star plans with no idea where to look. No time. They had to have something specific to look at that was meant to be found. 5:33 - Also, one cannot say the "talent of a good storyteller is to know when something needs an explanation and when something doesn't," and follow it up by ignoring that Lucas ruined Darth Vader and the Force lore with his silly Prequels. Vader went from being a power-hungry dictator, bent on Order, to just a kid who accidentally fumbled into the Dark Side for love. In the meantime, Anakin/Vader murdering children completely ruins the idea of redemption in Return of the Jedi. There is no "saving" Anakin Skywalker after that. Oh, and Luke's Mom died of a broken heart?! So, bad. Like you said, a good storyteller knows when not to explain something (or at least explain it better).
Vader wasn't a power hungry dictator, you're describing the Emperor. Vader was a conflicted character with a broken moral compass, something only his son saw in him. That's the whole point of the OT. When Vader turns on the Emperor at the end, it's to protect his son. Him joining the Emperor to protect his wife is therefore perfectly in line with his personality. The mom didn't just die of a broken heart, she saw the Republic she fought so hard to defend fall in front of her eyes before seeing her lover becoming a murderous Sith. She had lost everything at this point, including her will to live. The irony is that Anakin killed her by trying to protect her. That's powerful stuff if you ask me and far more interesting that if she had just been killed randomly. As for killing the young lings, even before prequels we knew Vader was a mass murderer. If you were okay with him having a redemption arc it back in the days of the OT, the revelation that he also murdered kids shouldn't change anything. A life's a life.
@@misterwhyte Nonsense. Vader was not conflicted at all until he had to choose between the Emperor and Luke in the very end. Before this, he wanted Luke as an ally against the Emperor so that they could rule (dictator). In fact, even before he chose to save Luke from the Emperor's lightning, Vader quickly abandoned the idea of having Luke as an ally and began considering "sister" (still a dictator). Then came the Prequel. As a little boy he accidentally won the Battle of Naboo. Despite being raised by Obi-Wan, he easily assumes that Obi-Wan wants to steal Padme, despite the fact that it was only himself who was breaking the Jedi code. Then, he fumbles into the Dark Side accidentally, introducing the idea that he is conflicted, which does not jive with what we saw in the early 1980s. This is hardly the same guy who cuts his own son's hand off and asks him to join him to rule the galaxy as "Father and Son." Lucas spent too much effort trying to make you like Darth Vader as a decent guy deep down.
@@MSgt_0699 Vader never saw himself as a potential dictator. He's the perfect representation of a tragic figure with good intentions who followed the wrong path. Where everyone saw him as a lost cause (Obi-Wan: "Anakin's dead" / Yoda: "once on the dark side, always on the dark side"), Luke saw something different ("there's good in him, I can feel the conflict"). Vader saving him at the end is proof Luke was right. Seriously mate, I understand if you didn't like the prequels, to each their own, but you seriously misunderstood Vader's entire arc in the original trilogy. Rewatch them with that in mind and you'll see.
@@misterwhyte I think younger fans read into Vader's story arc in the OT, because the Prequels altered what he was. Us older fans, had our story arc. Vader saving his son in the end was proof that he could draw a line where the Emperor went too far even for him. In the moment, it was about saving his son and nothing else. It meant that he did not have to be a tyrant and that Luke could soften his heart. The redemption arc in the OT worked until the Prequels made a mass of the character and turned him into a whiney accidental villain that made little sense. There is no redeemable aspect to the character now. Like Boba Fett, Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and others, Vader was ruined because Lucas and then Disney can not leave them alone. Perhaps when you are fifty-five the idiots will have gotten smart and started creating new characters set in the Old Republic. Of course, that's when you will find out that Yoda was a serial child molester before the Force saved him. Another character ruined.
It was shielded against attack made with lasers, the only way was to fly through heavy defended trench under enemy fire and make impossible feat. Only one weak spot for entire superweapon, that otherwise is impossible to defeat? Rebel pilots were massacrated during that fight, only like two or three ships survived. It was truly suicide to try that and Empire knew that, Luke survived not even because of the force sensitivity, he would be dead if not for the Han.
THANK YOU!!
I spent decades railing against this point. A project so massive as the Death Star would HAVE to have design flaws. Specially since it was built by a dictatorship, famoulsy bad at doing things right.
I doubt that the exhaust port was the only fatal flaw in that dawn station. It was just the most obvious/ exploitable one the rebels found in the limited time they had to study the blueprints.
A much bigger plot hole is, if Leia knew the Falcon was being tracked, why did go straight to Yavin instead of ditching the ship on the way?
If the one-in-a-million golf hole in Death Star is a plot hole, Mount Doom in LotR is also a plot hole.
@@trent1 And the story doesn’t improve if the said “hole” is removed. Those nitpicks are worse than pointless.
@@trent1 And Rogue One misunderstands A New Hope in a spectacular manner; the hope refers to Luke Skywalker, not the Death Star plan as Leia says at the end.
@@Toschez 100% about Luke being the new hope. Disney shows a profound misunderstanding of Star Wars (among other things). I'm working on a video detailing that. Coming up in a few weeks!
Finally. In general, people think a plot hole is something that “why didn’t they just” or “maybe if they just-“ they didn’t. This is how the story is progressing you’re not a genius thinking you found an over site your a moron for thinking so
What I want to know is . . . why didn't Red Group provide any cover at all and protect Gold Group during their ill fated trench run????
And . . . why didn't Luke use his X-Wing to blast the sh*t out of the AT-AT Walkers on Hoth???
I NEED to know!!!!!
Yes, I agree not seeing the other fighters try and protect each group is kind of weird. That's the one thing in this battle I believe deserved to be explained but I think it all comes down to budget limitations. It's easy to forget but the original Star Wars was a low budget film so I'm guessing Lucas had to simplify some stuff.
I don’t think that they messed anything up in Rogue One. Rogue One is the only good Star Wars movie Disney made.
I respectfully disagree (in my opinion they were all terrible, Rogue One being just barely tolerable) but I'm glad you enjoyed it regardless. ☺
great!
Ok, but why does the exhaust port even matter when all republic fighters have hyperspace drives?
Just send a few with droids barreling through and be done.
thats not how hyperspace jumps work
@@sejadlulic8377 pretty sure it happened in star wars.
@@chadleach6009 no, that would go against all the logic and rules of the SW universe. Otherwise you would be able to easily destroy everything and kill everyone by just using couple of capable engines... a frightening thought.
@@sejadlulic8377 just saying that they did in one of the recent movies.
You're right, they did it in Episode 8. And it was a terrible, terrible idea from Disney because it makes every other space battle in other movies useless. Something else I should talk about in a future video...
Slight plot hole in your analysis. Rogue One is fine, a single engineer, the designer/project lead/lead engineer, could easily incorporate a weakness and have it pass through various iterations of design and scrutiny. As you said yourself, arrogance can blind, and he could easily have used this to openly discuss the flaw as insignificant. "What's the chances of a small fighter getting close, firing off a missile or two, hitting a 2m wide port, and escaping from OUR SuperMassive Death Star....... pah.... they won't even get close"
Thanks for your comment. :)
I see what you're saying and that's a totally fair point. I have two problems with it though:
1. it's adding details where there wasn't a need to do so (hence my conclusion in the video),
2. it implies that if it wasn't for a traitor, the issue wouldn't have existed at all, which opens up plenty more questions about the ethic of the people working on it than it can possibly answer.
So all and all, even though I agree that technically speaking the two ideas (arrogance and a traitor) aren't mutually exclusive, I still think it's a useless addition at best.
Now in my opinion there are plenty of other problems with Rogue One. From the fact that the plans were ready before the Empire even existed (as seen in Episode 2) to the fact that it would be really dumb of the Empire to pick a lead engineer who openly opposes them and whose wife they killed. We leave the field of arrogance to wander straight into stupidity and incompetence with this one. A good summary of Disney these days though so I guess I shouldn't be surprised that's what they came up with 😂
@misterwhyte how do you know the deisgns were complete? If an engineer was hired to engineer something then it hasn't been engineered yet. Just because the look of a car has been thought up doesnt mean its engine has been designed. Imagine what a car that hasnt been invented looks like in your head. Now tell me every dimension, every material, every item, the exact engineering process, ect. But you can't. Why? Becasue you arent an engineer and even if you were you've just thought of this car so you havent had time to consider the mechanics yet.
@@crackingpenny3186 We're not talking about a car here. We're talking of a groundbreaking new weapon. You wouldn't start thinking of the design unless you already figured out how the weapon will work. By the way, early cars were bare bones, because they were trying to make the engine work first (believe it or not, I actually live next to the museum of one of the first car manufacturers in the world, it's fascinating to see the early models). Once it worked, that's when they worried about making it look good.
If you want to go a step further, I could point out that they started building the Death Star as soon as Palpatine became emperor (Episode 3), meaning all these questions you're mentioning had already been answered.
Now sure, if you really, really want to, you can always find reasons for Erso's presence in Rogue One, but it'll always be kind of grasping at straws.
@@misterwhyte The bit I liked about Jynn Erso, is that in 1995 they finally released Dark Forces. You play as a mercenary Kyle Katarn, and the first mission sees him not very sneak into a small Imperial base to steal the plans to the Death Star, and that goes off without a hitch, since there are like 30 people guarding the whole facility, and only the most rudimentary security systems... It just doesn't seem to make any kind of sense, that they would ever need to store the blueprints to their super-weapon anywhere, that could be so easily assaulted. But after that mission (quite a while later), his condition for joining the Rebel Alliance, is that he gets to have "Jan Orrs" as his mission commander, like he has a crush on her. All seems a little propagandistic, or like a VR training simulator.
The plot hole in Rogue One is - how in hell would Erzo think that this small, inaccessible, port was an exploitable weakness, even if he could pass it along to the rebels. As many people already commented, it was nearly impossible for anybody to do what Luke did, and he only did it with a lot of help, specially from Han. A normal rebel pilot would have no chance of pulling it off.
But it does have a Death Star hole. Rogue One is the best Star Wars movie since 1983 (really, the only good one since 1983). It had to be a purposeful flaw, because otherwise the Rebel Alliance would have been destroyed while technicians powered over the Death Star plans with no idea where to look. No time. They had to have something specific to look at that was meant to be found.
5:33 - Also, one cannot say the "talent of a good storyteller is to know when something needs an explanation and when something doesn't," and follow it up by ignoring that Lucas ruined Darth Vader and the Force lore with his silly Prequels. Vader went from being a power-hungry dictator, bent on Order, to just a kid who accidentally fumbled into the Dark Side for love. In the meantime, Anakin/Vader murdering children completely ruins the idea of redemption in Return of the Jedi. There is no "saving" Anakin Skywalker after that. Oh, and Luke's Mom died of a broken heart?! So, bad. Like you said, a good storyteller knows when not to explain something (or at least explain it better).
Vader wasn't a power hungry dictator, you're describing the Emperor. Vader was a conflicted character with a broken moral compass, something only his son saw in him. That's the whole point of the OT. When Vader turns on the Emperor at the end, it's to protect his son. Him joining the Emperor to protect his wife is therefore perfectly in line with his personality. The mom didn't just die of a broken heart, she saw the Republic she fought so hard to defend fall in front of her eyes before seeing her lover becoming a murderous Sith. She had lost everything at this point, including her will to live. The irony is that Anakin killed her by trying to protect her. That's powerful stuff if you ask me and far more interesting that if she had just been killed randomly.
As for killing the young lings, even before prequels we knew Vader was a mass murderer. If you were okay with him having a redemption arc it back in the days of the OT, the revelation that he also murdered kids shouldn't change anything. A life's a life.
@@misterwhyte Nonsense. Vader was not conflicted at all until he had to choose between the Emperor and Luke in the very end. Before this, he wanted Luke as an ally against the Emperor so that they could rule (dictator). In fact, even before he chose to save Luke from the Emperor's lightning, Vader quickly abandoned the idea of having Luke as an ally and began considering "sister" (still a dictator).
Then came the Prequel. As a little boy he accidentally won the Battle of Naboo. Despite being raised by Obi-Wan, he easily assumes that Obi-Wan wants to steal Padme, despite the fact that it was only himself who was breaking the Jedi code. Then, he fumbles into the Dark Side accidentally, introducing the idea that he is conflicted, which does not jive with what we saw in the early 1980s.
This is hardly the same guy who cuts his own son's hand off and asks him to join him to rule the galaxy as "Father and Son." Lucas spent too much effort trying to make you like Darth Vader as a decent guy deep down.
@@MSgt_0699 Vader never saw himself as a potential dictator. He's the perfect representation of a tragic figure with good intentions who followed the wrong path. Where everyone saw him as a lost cause (Obi-Wan: "Anakin's dead" / Yoda: "once on the dark side, always on the dark side"), Luke saw something different ("there's good in him, I can feel the conflict"). Vader saving him at the end is proof Luke was right. Seriously mate, I understand if you didn't like the prequels, to each their own, but you seriously misunderstood Vader's entire arc in the original trilogy. Rewatch them with that in mind and you'll see.
@@misterwhyte I think younger fans read into Vader's story arc in the OT, because the Prequels altered what he was. Us older fans, had our story arc. Vader saving his son in the end was proof that he could draw a line where the Emperor went too far even for him. In the moment, it was about saving his son and nothing else. It meant that he did not have to be a tyrant and that Luke could soften his heart.
The redemption arc in the OT worked until the Prequels made a mass of the character and turned him into a whiney accidental villain that made little sense. There is no redeemable aspect to the character now. Like Boba Fett, Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and others, Vader was ruined because Lucas and then Disney can not leave them alone.
Perhaps when you are fifty-five the idiots will have gotten smart and started creating new characters set in the Old Republic. Of course, that's when you will find out that Yoda was a serial child molester before the Force saved him. Another character ruined.