That's not a plot hole!
- Thread starter chiggerwood
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Most of the time I just notice bad writing. Time travel, whenever it is used, always opens up massive plot holes if you thin about it too much, which is something I do.
Hm...perhaps my biggest plot hole, if it could be called that (and I don't think so) is the fact that the Jedi suck in Revenge of the Sith. These are supposed to be amazingly skilled warriors who can sense danger coming, and yet when it's time to step up, they get floored. Yes, I know that it's hard to win against an entire unit of tanks, or dozens of Clone Troopers, but come on. The steps leading up to the Jedi Temple, and the Temple itself, should have been littered with dead Clone Troopers. Obi and Yoda should have had to watch where they step based on how awesome we've been told they Jedi are. Okay, so the top ones were out fighting the war ( by the way, good job Ki-Adi, at least you managed to take two of them with you. Unlike everyone else). That doesn't mean that the Temple was left in the care of little kids. There were fully trained Jedi there, and it still turned into a massacre, but only on the Jedi side.
The battle of the Temple should have been like it was in Star Wars Battlefront 2: Desperate, with the Jedi cutting down swathes of Clones before finally being taken down.
Then again, I have tons of problems with Revenge of the Sith. Easily my least favorite Star Wars movie.
Oh, what about in Assassin's Creed III, when Desmond goes in to the Abstergo office? He murders dozens of people, and then pulls out the Apple and he can literally walk out without harming a soul. Why didn't he do that coming in?!
Hm...perhaps my biggest plot hole, if it could be called that (and I don't think so) is the fact that the Jedi suck in Revenge of the Sith. These are supposed to be amazingly skilled warriors who can sense danger coming, and yet when it's time to step up, they get floored. Yes, I know that it's hard to win against an entire unit of tanks, or dozens of Clone Troopers, but come on. The steps leading up to the Jedi Temple, and the Temple itself, should have been littered with dead Clone Troopers. Obi and Yoda should have had to watch where they step based on how awesome we've been told they Jedi are. Okay, so the top ones were out fighting the war ( by the way, good job Ki-Adi, at least you managed to take two of them with you. Unlike everyone else). That doesn't mean that the Temple was left in the care of little kids. There were fully trained Jedi there, and it still turned into a massacre, but only on the Jedi side.
The battle of the Temple should have been like it was in Star Wars Battlefront 2: Desperate, with the Jedi cutting down swathes of Clones before finally being taken down.
Then again, I have tons of problems with Revenge of the Sith. Easily my least favorite Star Wars movie.
Oh, what about in Assassin's Creed III, when Desmond goes in to the Abstergo office? He murders dozens of people, and then pulls out the Apple and he can literally walk out without harming a soul. Why didn't he do that coming in?!
NEVER! BURN THEM ALL! PURGE THE UNCLEAN!bafrali said:
Okay I do see your point perhaps its more just I know one to many people who take absolute delight in exposing every little flaw in a movie and then treating it like trash. This is what I get for sharing some lectures with media course snobs, directly quoting those videos (making the same list) to explain why a movie someone may like is in fact terrible.
I hate them bafrali and I can't get away from them as they are loud and it's a small room... I am trapped hearing them spout shite for 6 hours every week...
I need to go find someone to hug...
The thing that actually annoys me the most about LOTR isn't even the eagles.
I'm not sure whether it's the same in the books (clarification?) but in the film, you have the entrance to Mount Doom, the ONE thing that can kill Sauron, and he doesn't have any guards there permanently?
I mean, I understand the whole distraction thing and the orcs moving away...but why the fuck wouldn't he have just 2-4 permanent guards sitting there? Hell, why not just put some traps there at least or even just, you know, block up the entrance to the mountain entirely?
I actually caught grief when I saw it in the cinema because I laughed out loud when they finally reached it and it's just sitting there empty.
As for other plot holes, this one also always confused me:
The Hulk going nuts on the airship in The Avengers and losing his shit, where as when he magically rocks up for the final fight and hulks out, he's totally in control?
My assumption was that it was supposed to be something to do Loki's device in the airship that made him lose control completely? *shrug*
I'm not sure whether it's the same in the books (clarification?) but in the film, you have the entrance to Mount Doom, the ONE thing that can kill Sauron, and he doesn't have any guards there permanently?
I mean, I understand the whole distraction thing and the orcs moving away...but why the fuck wouldn't he have just 2-4 permanent guards sitting there? Hell, why not just put some traps there at least or even just, you know, block up the entrance to the mountain entirely?
I actually caught grief when I saw it in the cinema because I laughed out loud when they finally reached it and it's just sitting there empty.
As for other plot holes, this one also always confused me:
The Hulk going nuts on the airship in The Avengers and losing his shit, where as when he magically rocks up for the final fight and hulks out, he's totally in control?
My assumption was that it was supposed to be something to do Loki's device in the airship that made him lose control completely? *shrug*
The Hulk is sort of it's own entity. When it took over Banner in the Helicarrier, it was involuntary and so the Hulk had full control. In the city, Banner made the decision to transform and so was able to somewhat direct the Hulk. In the comics, there are some moments where Bruce is shown negotiating with the Hulk to get him to save people.ron1n said:
Who's tying all these hobbits to eagles out of interest? Because just so we're clear, the only major threat to sauron, if you can even call it a threat, is Gondor, the Steward of which (head honcho, even with Aragorns arrival could have descended into civil war) is absolutely desperate to get the ring for himself. Even if your plan is sound, you don't have the people to execute it. About 80% of the people would want to attempt to USE it's power. Boromir fell under it's power, and the more people you expose to it the more of a chance it will have to find somebody and break free effectively. Ultimately a small scale plan is therefore the best option.wulf3n said:
You ninja'd the hell out of me, but I think this one actually does make me mad when people use it to dismiss the film, as it requires the person to effectively ignore half of the damn movie.chiggerwood said:
Seriously, the end/middle reveal of the film was that Leonard had been describing himself when talking about Sammy Jenkins. That includes that massive speil about conditioning. Leonard conditioned himself to remember a his situation by habitually altering a memory that he had before his injury.
I don't mind people calling the movie overrated or disliking it. I can totally respect someone for calling the film needlessly obtuse, and I don't think you need a full understanding of a work to discuss it, but this like complaining about a book because you had a beef with the spark notes.
Guh, Now I feel bad for letting something like this actually get to me...
How many people do you really need to tie up a bunch of hobbits. The harder part would be convincing the birds to go on a suicide mission. And it doesn't necessarily have to be at the time of the first book. Let a bit of time pass, have Sauron push out a bit, you'll find, despite what most fictional narrative would have us believe, that people will often put aside differences in the face of total annihilation.Daveman said:
99.99999999% of them wouldn't need to be exposed to the ring. Hell they don't even need to know about the ring.Daveman said:
Besides this is going into the realm of who would win Batman or Superman. Like I said before there are no rules to this world, anything is technically possible, and nothing is provable.
For example, you mentioned 80% of people would be tempted by the power. Why 80%. Where's the evidence for that number? What's the corrupting power of the ring? does it have a radius? Are certain people completely Immune? Why are hobbits less tempted than others?
It's not exactly a plot hole. Yet. You could have a stable time loop and/or "fate"[footnote]using it rather loosely but I'm talking about the situation - if Connor hadn't sent the other guy back, his mother would have found...another father. The guy just happened to replace the "real" father so it all goes as was meant to be. Sort of like that.[/footnote] mixed into it, however, it's just not explained how it works. However, it does fall apart in the second and third movies as each goes against the previous one - in T2, we find out that there is no predetermined fate, so pretty much any explanation for T1 is invalidated. In T3, we find out that, no - there is no way to escape fate - exactly the opposite of T2's motif.Navarone9942 said:
If you start looking into it closer, though, everything is a mess. Why, the hell, did the terminators had to be sent more than a decade apart? It's a friggin time machine - you can send them at any point in the past - just keep bringing in more and more terminators to help the initial T800, or heck, even the T1000. Why send three robots in total? OK, maybe there is some resource/logistics problems, but then just send them to the same date from different starting points. Then again, the whole plan blows to begin with - kill the leader of the opposition in the past using time travel? Well, how about, I dunno, just nuking the city. There you go - no leader, not much of an opposition either. Or start Skynet earlier, feed it info for the future and there you go - you get victory. Or thousands of other things that could be done with time travel. Or, heck, just go back a week or something ago and kill John Connor when you know he was vulnerable.
I kind of nothing him to be honest. While I originally joined the site because of his videos I eventually found them tiresome, like he was trying too hard to be negative but more importantly what he said stopped being particularly funny either, just ramblings about why everything is rubbish. The difference between that and what I was talking about is that Yahtzee is trying to be funny but those people (the people quoting those videos we mentioned earlier, not the videos themselves though they still annoy me) where not, they were just trying to shit on everyones parade.bafrali said:
So to answer your question, I don't hate Yathzee I'm just bored with his videos. His writing column on the other hand is quite good.
I know right? I noticed that too. There is a very flimsy explanation though:Woodsey said:
The kid turns evil no matter if he killed the mother or not but the presence of the looper affected the way the mother was going to raise his son (knowing now that he was going to turn evil) and now she could try to avoid it.
The big problem here is that the movie makes a big deal out of "I am evil because someone killed my mother", even in the first timeline, wich makes no sense.
So yeah, once again time travel "forgets" its own rules for the sake of the plot
The big problem here is that the movie makes a big deal out of "I am evil because someone killed my mother", even in the first timeline, wich makes no sense.
So yeah, once again time travel "forgets" its own rules for the sake of the plot
1) Eagle are rather noticeable, and due to the ash cloud they can't reach a high enough altitude to be mistaken for normal birds.Navarone9942 said:
2) Remember these guys?
The ones the eagles only attack after the most powerful of the group is killed?
The eagles are flashy and OP, Tolkien himself stated that they were to be used sparingly if at all. If the Hobbit hadn't been written before the LOTR isuspect the Eagles would have never have made an appearance.
More specifically...josemlopes said:
... the way the whole thing is put together, emphasised and executed seems to purposefully suggest that it is the result of Bruce Willis' actions specifically. Besides which, there's also the inherent irony involved that they were surely going for, by inadvertently killing his girlfriend whilst trying to save her.
When I explained it to a friend he did bring that up, but then we both figured the above as well. The worst part is that the film has a character who literally says, "don't worry about this time travel stuff, it'll give you a headache", when the film does actually explain its rules of time travel very clearly, so you can't just brush it off either.
An enjoyable film but that stuck out like a sore thumb.
Just adding here, about the LotR thing with eagles... People mention the Eye, but seem to forget the... you know, tens of thousands of archers. Sometimes I can understand people forgetting about archers, since it's hard to glorify archery as much as sword-fighting, but the LotR movies actually show a lot of archery being effective and deadly.
So, yeah, when you have a enough archers to blot out the sun, even aiming would be a non-issue.
So, yeah, when you have a enough archers to blot out the sun, even aiming would be a non-issue.
I'm not a big fan of RotS either, but I'll give defending it a go.Sniper Team 4 said:
-> The Jedi left behind were not warriors. Sure there were full Jedi, but they may not have been battle-capable. I recently read the book On Killing, which talks about how soldiers throughout history have been unable to kill another person on the battlefield, even if it cost them their life (you can read an exerpt here: http://www.citizen-soldier.org/On-Killing.html) They might not have been able to bring themselves to cut down swathes of people.
-> They were surprised. A lot of them were probably unarmed (you see a few with lightsabers, but not all), and they didn't have the times to go get their weapons. Sure, they had the Force, but I imagine it's difficult for the average Jedi to smash a squad of troopers with blunt force while simultaneously not getting blasted. As well, plenty of them probably panicked and either ran to see what was going on (and got shot), ran to the exits (and got shot) or ran to go find/protect someone or something (conveniently grouping them to get shot).
-> How did they get surprised? I dunno. The Jedi danger sense is inconsistently applied, to say the least. In the original trilogy, their Spidey-Senses are pretty limited: Vader doesn't sense Han Solo swooping in during the trench run, and the Emperor doesn't sense Vader's betrayal coming.
OT: I don't see the plothole of the Time Turners in Harry Potter. As far as I can tell, they create a closed loop. From the Prisoner of Azkaban (with regular-timeline Harry and time-traveled Harry henceforth referred to as Original Recipe and Extra-Crispy, after Cracked's time travel rules)
-Original Recipe Harry hears the axe hitting the stump, and assumes Buckbeak dies. Extra-Crispy rescues Buckbeak, causing the executioner to slash at the stump in rage.
-OR Harry sees a figure cast a Patronus Charm to save him. EC sees OR getting attacked, and casts the Patronus Charm.
They don't use the Time Turner to kill Voldemort or do other such shenanigans because they can't: There was no EC assassin in the past, or that person failed to kill him.
Just watched Looper last night, funny enough.Woodsey said:
Anyway, that's not really a plot hole, it's a 'time paradox', which is inevitable in any story about time travel.
For example, the technology used to build Skynet in Terminator 2 is based off the remains of a terminator from the future, so how did Skynet originally get built? Also, if the terminators ever succeeded in killing John Connor, then there would be no need to build terminators in the first place, and then there would be nothing to go back in time to kill him.
Or in Back to the Future, how come Marty's parents never realise their kid looks exactly like their old friend who helped them out so much about 20 years ago?
But again, it's only a plot hole if it directly contradicts the internal logic of the story's world. Since none of these films (including Looper) explicitly state how time works, it's about as much of a plot hole as saying "knocking someone out with a blow to the head would lead to serious brain damage, if not death. You can't just walk it off! If that character doesn't slip into a coma, it's a plot hole."