5 Gaping Plot Holes Hollywood Knows You Won't Notice
There are certain types of bullshit we're less likely to call a movie on, and Hollywood has been using these logical blind spots to trick us, surprise us and generally make their jobs a whole lot easier. We're not sure which is worse: the fact that Hollywood thinks we're stupid, or the fact that these tricks so often work.

To pull off a truly shocking ending, a filmmaker has to know exactly what his audience is thinking at all times, and stay two steps ahead of them. But there's a far lazier way to shock us, that only requires the filmmaker to assume his audience is as intelligent as a new born child.
Notable Offenders
Up until the shocking ending, the Cloverfield monster wants everyone within a two mile radius to know how terrifying it is. It rips the head off the statue of Liberty and bowls it up Park Avenue to announce its arrival. It's so big that when it wants to demolish the Brooklyn Bridge, it only needs to flick its tail out of the water. Also, if it sneezes within a block of you, the face-suckers from Alien rain from the sky.

In other words, if all five of your senses are in working order, a sneak attack is just about the only thing you don't have to worry about. So at the end of the film, with the three surviving protagonists standing in the middle of Central Park (the one place in Manhattan that lacks giant monster-hiding buildings) it's certainly shocking when the monster suddenly appears and (spoiler alert) eats the wacky sidekick, but it also raises some questions. Namely: When did the monster stop making a big explodey scene everywhere it went and start tip-toeing up behind people like a 100-foot-tall ninja? And how did Hollywood know you wouldn't ask that question while watching the film?

We're calling it Peekaboo Ending because it relies on the same ass-backwards logic that makes infants squeal with delight when someone hides and unhides their face. When we're born, we believe that things stop existing if we can't see them. To an infant's mushy, half formed brain, peekaboo looks like their mom is blinking in and out of existence with a stupid look on her face. Roughly translated, those squeals mean, "Holy shit, mom's a wizard."

Or occasionally, "Gaaahhhhh! Kill it, kill it, oh my God somebody kill it."
We grow out of that phase pretty quickly, but Hollywood's made a lot of money gambling that audiences will fall for the same trick. For some reason, if it's not physically up there on the screen, we have a difficult time thinking rationally about it. It's why we didn't care that Jason Vorhees walked like a less athletic zombie whenever he was on screen during the first dozen Friday the 13th movies, but somehow became the Indian Shaman from Punch Out whenever we couldn't see him.

Of course now he can run, which somehow seems even more retarded.
Would you believe us if we told you the two most iconic scenes from one of the most successful films of all time make no sense being in the same movie together? Jurassic Park's two most memorable moments are probably 1) The T-Rex causing miniature earthquakes that make various puddles and glasses of water tremble 2) The same T-Rex sneaking up and saving our heroes from the raptors like he's Mr. Miyagi. We don't know the T-Rex is there until it's snapping raptors in half, and by then everything's way too awesome to wonder where all the goddamn earth quaking disappeared to.

Chance encounters happen all the time in the real world. The phenomenon is referred to as Synchronicity in the writings of Carl Jung, and "Oh my God, soooo weird" by the high school friend you just ran into at Starbucks. In Hollywood, they're known as a convenient way to make the ridiculous plot of this movie possible.
Notable Offenders
Go to Google Maps, pick a random state, then a random city and street name. We'll wait. Back? OK, did you end up on the street that we randomly selected (Oak Street in Starke, Florida)? Of fucking course you didn't. But if you were written by JJ Abrams you would have.

How can that random girl be my sister?
Midway through JJ Abrams's lauded Star Trek reboot, Kirk gets kicked off the Enterprise for being an irritating dick, and is sent down to a barely habitable ice planet. After a giant CGI ice monster chases him into a cave, he finds himself face to face with Spock from the future!

Kirk's "Bullshit" reaction is well founded.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that the two (totally different) people who sent them there (totally independently of one another) both decided this was the best of the many habitable planets for punishing people. Fine, that puts them on the same planet. But what are the chances that the Enterprise crew drops Kirk just a CGI filled foot race away from the cave that Spock's in? Hell, even if the entire planet is the size of Rhode Island, the chances against that happening are vanishingly small.
Instead of, screaming "Oh my God" over and over again while repeatedly shitting himself, Hippy-Spock calmly explains how it is that he's here from the future.

"It must have been the science! You know how that shit's always making stuff happen, right?"
This is a version of the appeal to probability, the logical fallacy that tricks us into thinking that because something can happen it will (as we've explained before, this is the same reason non-retarded people buy lottery tickets). We're so impressed with Spock's science-y explanation of the theoretical possibility of time travel, that we take it for granted that they both ended up in the same cave. This actually isn't all that uncommon in Science Fiction. We're so busy swallowing all the flying cars and teleportation devices that we don't notice the wildly implausible plot holes they've mixed into the feedbag.
In The Fifth Element, when humanity's sexy savior panics and jumps off a building into a busy city, she conveniently crashes into a taxi driven by Bruce Willis's former military officer, who will later be assigned to be her body guard. Of course in the real world, if you get hit by a taxi you'll be lucky if they bother to stop and call an ambulance.

To be fair, we're willing to put up with quite a lot of crap to see Milla Jovovich dress like this.

You only need to give your protagonist the flimsiest excuse to get involved in the exact same plot over and over again. Dan Brown knew that. In fact, he knew it so hard that when he realized no academic field focused on the crackpot conspiracy theories, strike force commanding, word puzzles and Double Dare that his plot commanded, he gave his character a Ph.D. in symbology, a field he made up.

Another word puzzle! Shoot it!
James Bond is a Special Agent, so it makes sense that he's constantly shooting people and getting laid. Rocky slurs his words, and can take a punch because he's from Philadelphia. The point is you don't have to work very hard, or even be particularly talented, to justify making your hero the center of any number of formulaic plots.
Notable Offenders
The Star Wars universe encompasses hundreds of planets, spreading thousands of diverse species and cultures across billions of galactic citizens. And yet, everything important that's ever occurred happens to a few dozen people. At least George Lucas was smart enough (it took us an hour before our hands would stop refusing to type those five words) to base the series around a quasi-mystical Force, thus making the franchise the easiest thing to retcon into coherence since The Old Testament.

The same can't be said for the Jaws franchise, in which completely different, giant man-eating sharks repeatedly show up off the coast of the small island of Amity. When you stop to consider how rare giant serial killer sharks are, it's not surprising that the entire B plot of Jaws 2 revolves around Brody trying to convince the Mayor that he's not crazy. In fact, by the fourth film, when a shark eats Sean Brody in Amity Harbor and then follows Sheriff Brody's wife to the Bahamas, the series actually makes more sense as the delusions of a family with a very specific type of schizophrenia.

But in the category of "same shit, same guy, no explanation" nobody can hold a lighter to John McClane. Over the course of the four Die Hard films, we're asked to believe that McClane stumbles into the middle of four separate heists that are retarded for exactly the same reason. Each time, a team of armed bad guys try to steal large sums of money while pretending to commit the far worse crime of terrorism. In the real world, thieves generally don't like attracting attention. It's why bank robbers threaten to shoot the first teller to push the alarm, and why subway pickpockets subtly bump into the guy who's wallet they're trying to swipe, rather than raping him.

Only lap dances qualify as successful "hump-robbery."
But McClane's life is like a parade of explosion-themed heists. With each movie, the "fake terrorism distractions" escalate from an office Christmas party, an international airport, New York City, and finally the entire goddamn country. By the third film, when Samuel L. Jackson suggests that the guys who just blew up a good portion of New York City might be terrorists, McClane quickly assures him, "I know the man, I know the family. The only thing better than blowing up 100-billion dollars worth of gold is making people think you did." The villain, you see, is Hans Gruber's brother, and in John McClane's universe, the idea of attracting attention in order to commit robbery is not only logical, it's also hereditary.








Regarding #5, I just assumed that the protagonists were too preoccupied to notice the pitter-patter of approaching T-Rex feet.
ReplyAs for #2, I've always been irritated by the notion that a good poker player is good because he gets good hands. If one player gets four of a kind, the better player will have a straight flush. It's just poor writing in my opinion.
and Scotty also happened to be stationed on not-Hoth
ReplyUsual Suspects- criminals were paying all that money for more than just his description. The snitch was a guy who had intimate knowledge of all of Soze's business affairs. He was Soze's Tom Hagen. Once that guy's dead, it doesn't matter who knows what Soze might look like, because they can barely prove that Soze even exists.
ReplyOkay, Attack of the Clones has issues (primarily concerning why the Jedi weren't overly suspicious of an army cloned from the guy who seems to be the personal body guard of the Sepratist leader), but that wasn't one of them. They were discussing the merits of what they already knew; negotiating and renegotiating a topic they had been discussing for probably years. Remember that everyone at that table was either a politician or a businessman. (I think Nute Gunray was both.) Re-establishing deals is what people like that do all day.
ReplyTo be fair to Die Hard, they did explain the whole terrorist thing pretty well in at least the first 3 movies. In order to get through the last lock, they needed the power to be shut down to the entire building in order for it to disengage, they needed the cops to do that...it was part of their plan. They probably could have found a way to shut it down themselves, but that would have also been act of terrorism. But the plan was to also make it look like botched terrorist attack where they think the terrorists blew themselves. I'm sure I'm paraphrasing when, but Hans says something to the extent of "when steal a million dollars, you can disappear...but when you steal a billion dollars, they WILL find you, unless they think you're dead." So the terrorism was to cover their robbery AND to fake their own deaths.
ReplyIt was also a convenient cover in With a Vengeance. McClane didn't just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was a part of the entire plan, it was made to look like the whole thing was to make his life a living hell. But like in the first movie, the terrorist plot was made to cover up a robbery and was completely necessary to get people away from the true crime scene. What better way to do that than to make the cops think you're gonna blow up 2000 kids? And in the process shut down the communications of the police department (granted, making a bomb that responds to police frequencies is unrealistic, but what isn't unrealistic is that terrorist could just be listening in on police frequencies at that he'd blow the bomb if you use them.)
My only problem with the whole blowing up the gold was that it's ridiculous to think that would really do anything constructive. Goldfinger had a similar plot...setting of a nuclear bomb at Fort Knox. The theory being that it will make the rest of the gold in the world more valuable. The difference is that the gold in Fort Knox was gonna irradiated and therefor unusable. The gold at the bottom of Long Island Sound would still be usable, pretty expensive and a pain in the ass to retrieve, but ti wouldn't lose it's value. Which makes it all the more easy to figure out that it's just a ruse. So, the "I know the man, I know the family" excuse isn't as bad when you translate to say that this guy isn't that stupid. It's so much that the behavior is hereditary, it's that it's a smart plan that, as was Hans' but John has seen a ruse like that before so you can sniff it out.
alternate title: "5 Things That You Can Point Out That Will Suck the Fun Out of Every Movie"
Reply"In fact, by the fourth film, when a shark eats Sean Brody in Amity Harbor and then follows Sheriff Brody's wife to the Bahamas" - Actually.. if you watch the movie, the shark gets there before her, its swimming in the water when her plane lands. How the f**k does it know where shes going??
ReplyIn other news, in the original Scooby-doo series, the culprit was always the first person they met.
ReplyBut noone's gonna read that comment in April 2012. My secret is safe.
Sorry, im a darn kid. You wont get away with it.
"And if he and his friends are attacked by a monster, you can be sure they learned its weaknesses in class last week."
ReplyI don't know how many times I learned about something just to be faced with a situation that required that knowledge shortly thereafter.
Wait a minute... I'm in a f*****g movie! It's the only logical explanation!
The book Casino Royale makes more sense, as they're playing Baccarat, rather than Texas Hold 'Em, because...well...they're not in Texas, and the book was released the same year Texas Hold 'Em was introduced to Las Vegas, where Bond also wasn't. I guess they changed the game for the movie because many people would be sitting there scratching their heads saying "what's this Baccarat stuff?"
ReplyOf course, the movie takes place in a time where you can watch people from many different countries playing Texas Hold 'Em on several (US) national cable channels so maybe it's not so far-fetched that there would be a villain who is skilled at the game and a good variety of operatives with a fair amount of skill as well.
I'm sure nobody cares but Jason can be seen running in Friday the 13th parts 2-4.
ReplyI was mildly interested ;)
If you enjoy these articles, try tvtropes.org... I have opened a record of 30 tabs at once. It's a very good site that explains all the various shortcuts and story-telling techniques writers use, the good and bad.
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesWell, the users of the site explain it, or try to anyway. Though, for a wiki, it has some of its worst edit wars, but not as many I would imagine.
As soon as I read "If you enjoy" my brain creates a sentence that structures itself something like "then go 2 bestwive DOT com 4 da best wive".
Sorry for the harsh judgement, you came on strong.
Oh man...TV Tropes...don't go there if you aren't prepared to lose several days to that site, haha. Love it, but damn. I always end up with so many tabs open when I go there too, almost as bad as Cracked!
Good article, but I don't know why audiences are so obsessed with "plot". It's just how characters move from A to B. My 11th grade English teacher taught us that "A novice reader cares about plot; a sophisticated reader cares about character development" and i think that is true.
Reply Hide All See All 5 RepliesNo, a sophisticated reader cares about multiple sides and elements of the story, and doesn't use nice characters to justify a s****y plot, or a good plot to justify flat characters.
And may I just say, you 11th grade English teacher sounds like one condescending ass.
A sophisticated reader enjoys the book for what good ideas it has to offer (moral/theme), appreciates (or hates) the author's attempt at story-telling (plot), and lives the story for the sake of the experience (characters).
A sophisticated reader is someone who pays attention to all the parts of a story, plot, character development, cliches, setting, idea, theme, foreshadowing. Basically, everything about the story.
I don't know how you get "condescending ass" from throwaway advice just about decent HS English teacher tells his/her students, but the OP has a point nonetheless.
I think that particular 11th grade English teacher may have been an idiot. Try college.
a*****e teachers like that are why we're becoming an illiterate society. If you can derive enjoyment out of reading something, then f**k the rest.
Haha peekaboo ending made me laugh like a retard
ReplyYeah, I totally lost it at the picture of the clown for some reason. Couldn't stop laughing.
I don't think the author knows what a plot hole is. This article is about plot devices. There is a huge difference.
ReplyThey're highly implausible devices, that are really just not-quite-holes placed there solely for the advancement of the plot.
Nah, they're still plotholes. One leads right into the other.
The objective in Die Hard was to get the FBI to turn off the power grid, so the locks on the vault would open. Knowing that in a terror attack the FBI would go by the book, they were able to tailor their escape perfectly. They never got to the escape part.
ReplyThe appeal to probability is extremely powerful. After all, it's the same reason incredibly intelligent people believe that all life on the planet comes from a proto-proto bacteria.
ReplyThis statement is more offensive than when Ron Burgandy swore on national television.
Please never breed. You should be ashamed of this comment, joejmz.
Let's not forget, in "Star Trek", future!Spock knew his past self gets into a fight with Kirk, thus abandoning him on the frozen planet. Regardless of what his future self does in any dimension, he KNOWS what his past self does, because um.. hello? He already did it. So he went back to that precise location knowing that's where Kirk was. It's not a coincidence, it's called: prior knowledge. He changed the outcome of his past self's abandonment of Kirk.
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesNo he didn't. In Future Spocks timeline, George Kirk wasn't killed by Nero and therefore James Kirk was never abandoned on Delta Vega by Present Spock.
That's why people are always calling it a plot hole, because it's a HUUUGE coincidence that they met.
Actually...Nero wanted to give Awesome Spock a good view of his planets destruction. It was only luck that Okay Spock chose to kick Kirk off the ship rather then throw him in the brig. Plot hole? I think not
yeah seriously the ice planet was right next door to Vulcan. Nero put old Spock there so he'd have an up close view of Vulcan being destroyed, and young Spock threw Kirk there because the Enterprise was leaving destroyed Vulcan and probably passing right by the ice planet. It's not a plot hole, they were both put there because of it's proximity to Vulcan.
The problem is still that Kirk landed close enough on the planet to Spock that he found him so quickly. Do you know how big a planet is? It's still a plot hole. Of course, this isn't even bothering with the fact that there's no way this planet could be as close as it is to Vulcan without the two of them either crashing into each other or destroying each other with tidal forces.
The "Goblet of Fire" example doesn't really work, as it's explained at the end of the movie that Barty Crouch Jr. was deliberately feeding him information relevant to the tasks at hand throughout the movie/book as part of Voldemort's plan to meet him in the graveyard at the end.
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesOf course, this only serves to illustrate the larger problem of why Voldemort himself would bother to hatch such a needlessly complex plot when all he wanted to do was kill Harry.
I don't know if my reply went through, so I apologize if double-posted:
It's further explained in the book. Before Voldemort killed Harry, he needed Harry's blood as part of the resurrection ritual. My understanding was that any enemy's blood would suffice, but, because Harry's touch was lethal to Voldemort's body, he used the blood to defeat that vulnerability. Even after going through that, Voldemort couldn't even use his own wand!
Of course, this only serves to illustrate that the article was right and should have use the Harry Potter series as a whole :/
The Goblet of Fire doesn't work because the entire Harry Potter series is GAY.
I'm not sure a series of books necessarily has a sexual preference
sweet book on book lovin
I've thought about #3 in about every movie I've seen. I don't like the way even the small actors have so little abitlities its like they don't really exist. When those crappy films try to make it look like they've enslaved an entire society by the means of some high-tech security guards, I go flipping insane.
Reply