There are a few things I can think of from the movie. I don’t want to come off like I’m bashing Empire. I love Empire. I just think Star Wars is marginally better in terms of writing.
When Han is planning to leave to pay off his debt to Jabba, everyone (including Han himself) acts like this has to be a permanent departure. When really, there’s no reason why, in the 3-year gap between movies, Han couldn’t have just stopped by to pay off his debt then come back to the Alliance. He really only needed to make a quick trip and come back, but everyone acts like he’s abandoning the cause forever.
The whole Mynock/Space Slug sequence felt a little unnecessary, since the heroes find themselves in the exact same situation of being chased by a Star Destroyer as they were before.
Han’s trick of camouflaging the Falcon on the back of a Star Destroyer probably shouldn’t have worked since there were so many other Destroyers nearby facing different directions, so one of them was bound to spot it.
It’s odd that Han or Leia never noticed Slave I flying behind them during their sublight journey to Bespin.
Luke was able to go straight to Bespin, despite having no way of knowing what planet he saw in his vision or where that planet was located.
I agree with most of this but I think the Space Slug sequence allows time for character development between Han and Leia.
I kind of hate that movies are judged based on how tight/holey their plots are.
Like I’m not about to argue that plot holes (and whatever you want to call your criticism of the space slug sequence) are secretly a good thing or even that they’re neutral, I don’t agree with the people who do actually say that. A haphazard plot can really take you out of a movie and can often demonstrate larger problems within a movie.That said though, I feel like more and more in movie discourse people focus a lot on the tightness of the plot at the expense of, like, everything else. People judge movies like a high school teacher grades a paper, movies start at 100 points and then points get knocked off whenever there’s a ““problem””. And it’s just such a shallow way to look at movies.
Not necessarily accusing Servii of doing this, and this isn’t even just an anti-confrontational disclaimer or anything. Clearly this is not what they believe. But I kinda thought it was a good jumping off point.
I agree. Logical consistency is important but cinema is a visual medium and should always be judged, more then anything else, for its ability to tell the story (or get the point across or whatever) artfully, using the language of film.