Most disliked plot holes in movies you like?

Dotrel

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I was a big fan of the Raimi Spiderman movies. Unfortunately, the horror that was number 3 sort of tarnished the rest of the trilogy for me. Even before that though, Spiderman 1:

Peter Parker is a struggling student, we see him compete in a wrestling match in a pretty awful homemade costume to earn cash, he struggles with jobs in college to pay rent and bills, in the second one he can't even afford the rent...

...so where did he get the costume from?

I know we had to see him in the iconic spiderman costume, but the fact he just appears in New York city with a very elaborate and expensive looking suit just plain irks me. In the second movie he says he made it himself? Pretty big leap in skills there Pete, going from a crude print on a red jumper to a full silk screen printing, custom boots and intricate webbing detail.

I call plot-hole because it was made clear in the story that Peter's costume was home-made. How on earth does a struggling student make something that clearly took an entire movie costume department to produce. Yes, I would have been happier with something a little more "rough around the edges".

Do you mean how was he able to make it or how was he able to afford the materials?

IIRC they show him drawing the design but I don't think they ever show him actually manufacturing either of the costumes. Rather than being an indication of him having a low level of costuming skill, I think the ski-mask version was just thrown together with a moments thought because he needed to go to the wrestling event soon after. As for the familiar version, well the guy is a genius, I'm sure he could have knocked together a great costume given time.

DirkVoodoo

Dotrel wrote: »

Do you mean how was he able to make it or how was he able to afford the materials?

IIRC they show him drawing the design but I don't think they ever show him actually manufacturing either of the costumes. Rather than being an indication of him having a low level of costuming skill, I think the ski-mask version was just thrown together with a moments thought because he needed to go to the wrestling event soon after. As for the familiar version, well the guy is a genius, I'm sure he could have knocked together a great costume given time.

Make it, buy it...it's all related, they are both beyond what he could possibly do. Yes, I have no doubt Peter Parker the science whiz could have made a very good costume, but it should have looked like the costume made by a teenager and not the high quality movie product it was.

I doubt even an accomplished seamstress could come close to the movie version, I watched the "making of" documentary and each one cost a huge amount of time and money to produce. I think they could have made something that could have both looked like a teenager might have made it given time, but also of decent enough quality for a movie. Not quite "Kick Ass", but not too far removed from it either.

Also, spiderman 2 had a ridiculous plot hole: child helps lift Peter Parker (70-80 Kg man) from falling to his death in burning building.

Mitch Connor

Ellian wrote: »

This may not count as a plot hole but The Usual Suspects

I am convinced that Keaton and not Verbal is Keyser Soze because the whole movie makes no sense otherwise. My argument would be that there was no 93 million dollars of coke - there was only the one guy who could identify what Keyser Soze looked like and the whole coke thing was just a cover so Keyser Soze could whack him. Why would Keyser Soze go to all that trouble and then sit in an interview room with Agent Kujan and tell a bull**** story that Kujan will realise is bull**** the very second he turns around. Because Kujan has been insisting that Keaton is alive, faked his own death before, he is not buying it, UNTIL he turns around and then mentally pictures Keaton getting shot - he believes that Verbal is Keyser and Keaton is dead. So my take is that Verbal was working for Keaton - they faked the whole shooting thing knowing the witness was there and it was all a set up to hide Keaton - or if you like to convince the world that he didn't (no longer) existed.

The picture at the end though is of Verbal - so the fella they were looking to kill ID'd Verbal as Soze.

Tipsy McSwagger

Ellian wrote: »

This may not count as a plot hole but The Usual Suspects

I am convinced that Keaton and not Verbal is Keyser Soze because the whole movie makes no sense otherwise. My argument would be that there was no 93 million dollars of coke - there was only the one guy who could identify what Keyser Soze looked like and the whole coke thing was just a cover so Keyser Soze could whack him. Why would Keyser Soze go to all that trouble and then sit in an interview room with Agent Kujan and tell a bull**** story that Kujan will realise is bull**** the very second he turns around. Because Kujan has been insisting that Keaton is alive, faked his own death before, he is not buying it, UNTIL he turns around and then mentally pictures Keaton getting shot - he believes that Verbal is Keyser and Keaton is dead. So my take is that Verbal was working for Keaton - they faked the whole shooting thing knowing the witness was there and it was all a set up to hide Keaton - or if you like to convince the world that he didn't (no longer) existed.

Is that you Mr Byrne:)

Ellian

Mitch Connor wrote: »

The picture at the end though is of Verbal - so the fella they were looking to kill ID'd Verbal as Soze.

He was the guy who was hiding behind the stuff on the pier - in that slow zoom shot at the start. He witnessed Verbal "killing" Keaton - but as I said above, I think this was staged specifically to have a witness who would descibe Verbal as Keyser

phil1nj

I don't know if this is a plot hole or not but it gives room to ponder:

In Back To The Future III when Marty goes back in time, the fuel tank on the Delorean gets hit with an arrow and all the gas leaks out. When he tells Doc about this, the Doc mentions that there won't be a gas station aorund there for decades (or words to that effect). Cue the elaborate scheme to use the railroad and coloured logs as a means to get the time machine up to 88mph and back to 1985.

Why didn't they just use the fuel from the Doc's Delorean (the one that was struck by lightning at the end of BTTF II and sent back to the Wild West era)? They could have used this fuel to send Marty and the Doc back to 1985, all they had to do was let the 1955 Doc know (via a Western Union letter that was going to be delivered anyway) that the fuel tank was empty and get him fill it before Marty came back to 1885. Lots of gas stations in 1955 in Hill Valley.

(Still 3 great movies but my head hurts after that - as has been said already, don't overthink time travel/displacement movies)

foxyboxer

I love how the 'twist' in the usual suspects needs to be spoiler tagged. In the Films forum.

Dotrel

foxyboxer wrote: »

I love how the 'twist' in the usual suspects needs to be spoiler tagged. In the Films forum.

Also

Bruce Willis is a ghost in The Sixth Sense
Darth Vader is Lukes father
Rosebud was a sled.

Nervous Wreck

Deleted User wrote: »

That right there sums it up, why then didn't the precogs see the person plotting the murder, surely their entire ability is hinged upon the ability to see when someone is plotting a murder.

They see a murder that has been plotted, not a person plotting a murder.

Ellian

foxyboxer wrote: »

I love how the 'twist' in the usual suspects needs to be spoiler tagged. In the Films forum.

I was at a film festival a while back and myself and a couple of producers and actors (you'd recognize at least some of the names but people who make a living from film) were standing around in the bar and conversation turned to movies that you really should have seen but haven't. Couple of examples were Cinema Paradiso, Big Lebowski, Sunset Boulevard and Schindler's List. So I am taking nothing for granted

al28283

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Make it, buy it...it's all related, they are both beyond what he could possibly do. Yes, I have no doubt Peter Parker the science whiz could have made a very good costume, but it should have looked like the costume made by a teenager and not the high quality movie product it was.

I doubt even an accomplished seamstress could come close to the movie version, I watched the "making of" documentary and each one cost a huge amount of time and money to produce. I think they could have made something that could have both looked like a teenager might have made it given time, but also of decent enough quality for a movie. Not quite "Kick Ass", but not too far removed from it either.

Also, spiderman 2 had a ridiculous plot hole: child helps lift Peter Parker (70-80 Kg man) from falling to his death in burning building.

He was also bitten by a radioactive costume designer in a deleted scene

Jimdagym

panevthe3rd wrote: »

Ok, not a film I liked but in Final Destination 3 (I think). The one with the rollercoaster as the big catastrophe that sets up the movie.

In the premonition for the accident, the main cause of the accident was a fella dropping his camera on the tracks during a loop. The camera gets caught and sets off the chain of events that kills everyone.

Problem is that the guy who drops the camera gets off of the rollercoaster after the girl has the premonition and freaks out. Therefore he never drops his camera but somehow the accident still happens.

Again, not really a film thats supposed to be thought about but it ruined a bad film for me.

What always bugged me was in the second one, when they turn onto the interstate, they are driving for about 5 minutes looking at each other before the crash, and the crash goes on for about 2 miles, but when they dodge the crash, it happens about 6 foot from them at the junction.

krudler

Deleted User wrote: »

I recall the deleted scene but it actually creates and even bigger and more illogical plot hole. It's a ridiculous film with so many problems that it's almost mean to take it apart, kinda like poking fun at the fat cousin.

I still think Spielberg didnt actually direct most of it, he probably did the three decent sequences, the dino stampede when the hunters first arrive, the cliffside TRex attack and the raptors in the grass, the rest looks like it was any old hack who did it. and the less said about Jeff Goldblum's daughter killing a raptor via acrobatics the better. I prefer JP3 to the second movie, was just really disappointed that Tea Leoni didnt get her face eaten by a raptor.

Sad Professor

phil1nj wrote: »

I don't know if this is a plot hole or not but it gives room to ponder:

In Back To The Future III when Marty goes back in time, the fuel tank on the Delorean gets hit with an arrow and all the gas leaks out. When he tells Doc about this, the Doc mentions that there won't be a gas station aorund there for decades (or words to that effect). Cue the elaborate scheme to use the railroad and coloured logs as a means to get the time machine up to 88mph and back to 1985.

Why didn't they just use the fuel from the Doc's Delorean (the one that was struck by lightning at the end of BTTF II and sent back to the Wild West era)? They could have used this fuel to send Marty and the Doc back to 1985, all they had to do was let the 1955 Doc know (via a Western Union letter that was going to be delivered anyway) that the fuel tank was empty and get him fill it before Marty came back to 1885. Lots of gas stations in 1955 in Hill Valley.

(Still 3 great movies but my head hurts after that - as has been said already, don't overthink time travel/displacement movies)

They were probably afraid of the consequences of messing with it should something go wrong. Plus, there may not have been any fuel left in it anyway, and even if there was, there's a good chance Doc drained it before he buried it. I'd imagine buring a car with a tank full of fuel for 100 years wouldn't be good. Doc didn't plan to leave remember and his primary concern was making sure Marty could get home, so he probably wouldn't have taken any chances.

rossc007

panevthe3rd wrote: »

Again, not really a film thats supposed to be thought about but it ruined a bad film for me.

I found a plot hole in your post :eek:

phil1nj

Sad Professor wrote: »

They were probably afraid of the consequences of messing with it should something go wrong. Plus, there may not have been any fuel left in it anyway, and even if there was, there's a good chance Doc drained it before he buried it. I'd imagine buring a car with a tank full of fuel for 100 years wouldn't be good. Doc didn't plan to leave remember and his primary concern was making sure Marty could get home, so he probably wouldn't have taken any chances.

It was only buried for 70 years:D. I think the car was buried as it was in 1885 (no time control circuits or tyres due to the lightning strike). The fuel thing is open to speculation although I can't see the Doc draining the fuel tank myself. He left the car for 1955 Doc and Marty to find so that Marty could get back to 1985. When Marty arrived back in 1885, the timeline of events changes from when the Doc wrote his letter (he doesn't get killed by Mad Dog Tannen etc) therefore requesting an extra fuel can of gas in the letter wouldn't really matter at that stage as events would possibly no longer follow the same path (??)

I think the main reason for not following this line of thought is because there would have been no need for any of the movie to take place had they realised the potential of having 2 Deloreans in the same era (one with a working set of time circuits and tyres, one without these but with some unleaded fuel).

Mr Freeze

wobbles wrote: »

One that gets me every time i watch Lord of the Rings is why didnt the eagles just carry Frodo to Mount Doom instead of having to walk through Mordor.

I was just popping in to post this.

Well said.

Of course, we'd have no movies if they did this.

al28283

Mr Freeze wrote: »

I was just popping in to post this.

Well said.

Of course, we'd have no movies if they did this.

Or books, but they explained why and it's also explained in this thread

Mr Freeze

al28283 wrote: »

Or books, but they explained why and it's also explained in this thread

Ya pretty much already debated fully here, I hadn't read that far tho before replying. :pac:

panevthe3rd

rossc007 wrote: »

I found a plot hole in your post :eek:

See how easily it happens!

Zillah

krudler wrote: »

I still think Spielberg didnt actually direct most of it, he probably did the three decent sequences, the dino stampede when the hunters first arrive, the cliffside TRex attack and the raptors in the grass, the rest looks like it was any old hack who did it.

Directors don't direct scenes, they direct movies. The Assistant Director is the one doing all the actual shouting and directing on set. The director signs off on every element of the script and edit and is responsible for everything that goes into the film.

I'm sorry, but Spielberg made a bad movie. He directed Indiana Jones IV too by the way.

Zillah

Zillah wrote: »

Directors don't direct scenes, they direct movies. The Assistant Director is the one doing all the actual shouting and directing on set. The director signs off on every element of the script and edit and is responsible for everything that goes into the film.

I'm sorry, but Spielberg made a bad movie. He directed Indiana Jones IV too by the way.

There are a few directors who direct every scene Soderberg would be the most obvious one as he's also first camera on nearly all his shoots.

a project such as Jurassic Park or any major blockbuster is a completely different undertaking. Look at Peter Jackson and Bryan Singer, King Kong and Superman Returns respectavily nearly killed them. Which is why there are numerous scenes in the Lord of the Rings films which Jackson wasn't even on set for. Still no excuse for how poor The Lost World turned out.

Sad Professor

I think krudler was just making the point that some of the scenes are so bad he can't believe Spielberg directed them. But on the subject of second-unit, Spielberg was frequently dismissed by many critics in the '80s as a glorified second-unit director. Afaik he never used a second-unit prior to Raiders. While I'm sure he does have a second-unit on his films now days, I doubt he trusts it with much except inserts.

Oh and the amount of second and even third-unit work on LOTR was shocking. They were shooting whole scenes and sequences while the main unit was on the other side of the country. I know it just wasn't possible for Jackson to do everything himself, but I firmly believe that some of the sloppiest scenes in the trilogy were directed by others and Jackson just didn't have time to supervise them properly. The Warg attack, for example.

But getting back to The Lost World, Spielberg's comments over the years (repeated again recently) would suggest he was never that bothered about Jurassic Park to begin with. So when it came to The Lost World he probably thought he could just bang out another blockbuster and move on to his next serious project.

krudler

Sad Professor wrote: »

I think krudler was just making the point that some of the scenes are so bad he can't believe Spielberg directed them. But on the subject of second-unit, Spielberg was frequently dismissed by many critics in the '80s as a glorified second-unit director. Afaik he never used a second-unit prior to Raiders. While I'm sure he does have a second-unit on his films now days, I doubt he trusts it with much except inserts.

Oh and the amount of second and even third-unit work on LOTR was shocking. They were shooting whole scenes and sequences while the main unit was on the other side of the country. I know it just wasn't possible for Jackson to do everything himself, but I firmly believe that some of the sloppiest scenes in the trilogy were directed by others and Jackson just didn't have time to supervise them properly. The Warg attack, for example.

But getting back to The Lost World, Spielberg's comments over the years (repeated again recently) would suggest he was never that bothered about Jurassic Park to begin with. So when it came to The Lost World he probably thought he could just bang out another blockbuster and move on to his next serious project.

bingo, ironically one of the best sequences in any Spielberg movie, the truck chase in Raiders was mostly Vic Armstrong and the 2nd unit. I dont think I've seen any pics of Spielberg around that sequence.

wasnt he shooting Schindlers at the same time as the first JP? or finishing one and starting the other so he was probably putting more effort into his big serious oscar contender instead of the popcorn flick about dinos, although JP is still one of the best summer blockbusters ever.

Sad Professor

krudler wrote: »

bingo, ironically one of the best sequences in any Spielberg movie, the truck chase in Raiders was mostly Vic Armstrong and the 2nd unit. I dont think I've seen any pics of Spielberg around that sequence.

My understanding regarding that sequence was:

Everything with Ford = shot by Spielberg.
Everything with stunt man = shot by second-unit closely following Spielberg's storyboards.

Dotrel

krudler wrote: »

wasnt he shooting Schindlers at the same time as the first JP? or finishing one and starting the other so he was probably putting more effort into his big serious oscar contender instead of the popcorn flick about dinos, although JP is still one of the best summer blockbusters ever.

He wasn't shooting them at the same time but he was working on them at the same time. IIRC he shot JP first and then went to Europe to do SL. He'd have the postproduction on JP sent down the telephone lines during the evening and apparently it was a major hassle with the limited telecoms technology of the day.

phil1nj

krudler wrote: »

wasnt he shooting Schindlers at the same time as the first JP? or finishing one and starting the other so he was probably putting more effort into his big serious oscar contender instead of the popcorn flick about dinos, although JP is still one of the best summer blockbusters ever.

I think he was doing post-production work on JP in the evenings whilst shooting Schindler's List during the days.

jpm4

In the film Omen 2 (was on over the weekend):

Bugenhagen's box containing the letter explaining that Damien is the antichrist is buried at Yigael's wall at the start of the film. Later on in the film this box is discovered and delivered to Richard Thorn, where it is revealed that it contains the Seven Daggers of Meggido that can be used to kill the Antichrist. But these are the same daggers from the first Omen film right? The ones Gregory Peck tried to use to kill Damien while in England. So how the hell did these daggers end up in a box in Israel after what appears to be a few days at most after the events of the original film?

meep

harry potter: prisoner of azkeban

1. for much of movie (and book), authorities spend a great deal of time seeking Sirius Black

2. It's established that owls can find any addressee to deliver letters

3. Witches & wizards can fly using broomsticks

Solution: address a letter to sirius, send an owl and follow on broomstick.

Result: Sirius can be easily found thus negating the need for the book or movie

syklops

meep wrote: »

harry potter: prisoner of azkeban

1. for much of movie (and book), authorities spend a great deal of time seeking Sirius Black

2. It's established that owls can find any addressee to deliver letters

3. Witches & wizards can fly using broomsticks

Solution: address a letter to sirius, send an owl and follow on broomstick.

Result: Sirius can be easily found thus negating the need for the book or movie

I think sirius was hanging out in Grimmauld Place much of the time which has defensive charms in place to stop owls 'seeing' it. This is the same reason why you cant dis-apparate into it. Also I'm not sure about the owls being able to find anyone anywhere.

Like in the Chamber of Secrets when Harry gets kidnapped and brought back to the Weasleys, the post arrives, and they go "And they have sent us Harry's(letter) aswell. Dumbledore must know you're here".

I think its more conceivable that the owls can be given more than one address, or be given additional instructions, like "if he isnt at Privot Drive, try at the weaseleys house.