TheBoost said:I would agree with the bad writing argument if there were not interally consistent reasonable explanations for these so-called 'inconsistencies' that don't violate the reality of the films. However it seems to me that these explanations exist, have large ammounts of evidence to support them, and are not hard to come up with.
Very well, explain Leia talking about her memories of her mother? I have yet to hear the contrived excuse for that one, but I have no doubt that it exists. You can explain away anything in this manner, it has been done for years by people trying to fix bad writing or inconsistencies.
The pink Klingon blood in Star Trek VI is a good example of this. Anywhere else in Trek continuity we see that Klingons bleed red, but there is a scene in ST VI that has a bunch of Klingons being murdered in a zero gravity environment. With the lack of gravity, their blood floats around in bubbles, the scene is extremely violent for a Star Trek film, but the blood plays an important role in the film. Since it was such a violent scene containing such an incredible amount of blood, they made the blood pink, like Pepto-Bismol, in order to keep the content rating of the film down. Had it been red, as would be canonically accurate, the film would have earned an R rating. In the film they made no effort to explain this inconsistency other than by pretending Klingon's had pink blood all along. Since then, I think a video game or two may have portrayed Klingon blood as pink, but all TV shows and movies since have clearly shown it to be red.
Since ST VI came out, fans have tried to explain this inconsistency by claiming that some chemical floating around in the room mixed with the blood made it pink, or lack of gravity somehow made it pink, or lack of oxygen. The point is, they have tried to explain it with silly explanation, sure those explanations may help smooth over the inconsistencies, but the fact is that they didn't want an R rating, so the blood was made pink.
When making ROTS, they mentioned that they had to go back and film Obi-Wan picking up Anakin's lightsaber after the fact, because they "kind of forgot" that Obi-Wan gives it to Luke later on. If they "kind of forgot" about that, then why is it so unreasonable to believe there are other things they "kind of forgot" about? It seems to me that they "kind of forgot" about Leia remembering her mother. Fortunately for them, they have fans who will come up with the craziest far out excuses to explain these plot holes away and try to claim that everything fits together perfectly and consistently.