The Empire Strikes Back is often regarded as the best Star Wars movie, but its placement in the Star Wars timeline has created continuity problems. This isn’t enough to stop The Empire Strikes Back from being my favorite among the Star Wars movies, as it still has perfect structure, masterful direction, and a compelling story that expanded the foundation laid by A New Hope. Even so, there’s always been one aspect of The Empire Strikes Back that bugs me.

In the original Star Wars Expanded Universe (now known as “Legends”) and the current Disney canon, The Empire Strikes Back is set three years after A New Hope. While this may not seem like a problem, since The Empire Strikes Back was released three years after A New Hope, it doesn’t make sense when analyzing the movie. The stories set during the time gap worsen the problem, and a simple change could have fixed the timeline decades ago.

Why Would Obi-Wan Wait Three Years To Send Luke To Yoda?

His Jedi training should have taken priority

Because The Empire Strikes Back takes place three years after A New Hope, it seems strange that Obi-Wan Kenobi waited that long to send Luke Skywalker to Yoda. A New Hope confirmed that Luke was already strong enough in the Force to hear the voice of Obi-Wan’s spirit, so not having a connection isn’t an excuse. By Jedi standards, Luke was already too old for training, so you’d think Obi-Wan wouldn’t want to wait any longer.

Staying with the Rebellion for three years allowed Luke’s attachment to Han Solo and Leia Organa to grow, the very thing his masters wanted him to let go of during his training. Obi-Wan also believed that Luke was the galaxy’s last hope, even more so than Yoda, so why would he deny Luke three additional years to prepare against the dark side? I’m unsure if I can come up with a logical explanation no matter how hard I try.

Han Should Be More Hesitant To Leave His Friends

He’s already chosen to stay for three years

While Luke’s three years with the Rebellion made him too attached to his friends, it apparently didn’t do the same for Han. The heart of the conflict between the main characters is Han’s decision to leave the Rebellion and the emotional turmoil it causes between friends. Leia feels betrayed by Han’s decision, Han feels hurt that Leia doesn’t reciprocate his feelings, and Luke is caught in the middle.

As well-written and entertaining as the conflict is, the fact that these characters have been together for three years makes Han’s leaving more confusing. If Han still hasn’t paid his debt to Jabba (for some reason), why has he only now run into a bounty hunter? Why would Han not try harder to stay with the Rebellion or at least promise to return, and why would Luke and Leia not try harder to make him stay?

The Books & Comics Add More Confusion

Three years of adventures to create contradictions

A three-year gap between movies means there’s no shortage of stories in canon and Legends, but some tales don’t align with dialogue from The Empire Strikes Back. Han tells Leia he’s decided to leave the Rebellion because of “the bounty hunter we ran into in Ord Mantell,” but the books and comics show that this is hardly the first time Han has faced Jabba’s bounty hunters. Why has it finally affected him now after three years?

Another example comes after Han rescues Luke and tells him “That’s two you owe me, junior,” a reference to Han saving Luke during the trench run at the Death Star. However, Han and Luke saved each other several times in the books and comics, so unless they were keeping a really close tally, this line no longer makes sense. Finally, the Emperor tells Darth Vader “We have a new enemy,” which can hardly describe Luke after three years.

Did George Lucas Have A Shorter Time Gap In Mind?

Some hints suggest this may have been the case

George Lucas always made sure to differentiate between his personal canon and the rest of the Expanded Universe, so that made me wonder if he originally intended a shorter time gap. In the DVD commentary for The Empire Strikes Back, Lucas only says “some time has pᴀssed,” not specifying three years. The back cover of The Empire Strikes Back novelization by Donald F. Glut also says “Several months have pᴀssed” since A New Hope.

BUY THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK NOVELIZATION ON AMAZON

However, these details don’t hold up on closer examination. The novelization of A New Hope, credited to Lucas and ghostwritten by Alan Dean Foster, says that Luke is around 20. The Empire Strikes Back novelization says that Luke is now 23, meaning there has to be close to three years between movies. Of course, none of this is mentioned onscreen, so The Empire Strikes Back‘s timeline would only be a problem for those who read the books.

The Empire Strikes Back Is Still The Best Star Wars Movie

Timeline placement can never ruin a great story

As much as I love consistent continuity between Star Wars projects, I will always love The Empire Strikes Back even more. George Lucas’ brilliant story, Irvin Kerhner’s expert direction, the cast’s wonderful performances, and the groundbreaking special effects all hold up incredibly well 45 years later. It may be the standard answer for the franchise’s best film, but there’s a reason why so many fans place it at the top of their Star Wars movie ranking.

In all honesty, several problems with the three-year time gap are really the fault of external media, not the film itself. Even then, I can still forgive many of these stories if they’re well-written and add something meaningful to the Star Wars universe. Star Wars should always strive to have a consistent and believable timeline, but nothing can ever diminish my enjoyment of The Empire Strikes Back.