Plotholes and other things that annoy you (Spoilers)

[Azazel]

Just wondering what are some of movies biggest plotholes or other small details that annoy you. Please feel free to point out if you think some of these are not plotholes and actually make some sort of sense that I am missing.

For me.

1) Batman Begins

- Liam Neeson turns Bruce Wayne into super ninja and destroyer of Gotham, but Bruce refuses to do the final test of killing someone. The whole point of his training was to kill an entire city, shoudln't he have checked to make sure Bruce was okay with doing this first?

2) The Mummy

Why in the hell did the preists decide to "curse" Imotep with the ability to be ressurected, bring back his dead girlfriend and destroy the world? That's literally like being "Hitler was terrible, lets bring him back as a 20 foot killbot as punishment!"

3) Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark

Take Indy out of the movie and The Nazi's still find the Arc, open it, and die. He literally has no impact on the story.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Azazel

[Your Mom]

Indian Jones

[King Ellis]

Indian Jones

"So, what do you make of what they did to you in Crystal Skull?"

""

[Azazel]

Indian Jones

"So, what do you make of what they did to you in Crystal Skull?"

""

Yay typos...althoght it brings up a good plothole. Why did they cast an Italian to play the famous crying Indian? Could they not get an actual one?

I also forgot

The Dark Knight

Gordon fakes his death, then sets up a trap for the Joker that consists of driving Harvey Dent into an ambush. Batman arrives and fights off everyone, Joker get the upperhand and Gordon reveals he is not dead by holding a gun to the Joker. Why did he have to be dead for this? Literally anybody other cop could have taken his place and pointed a gun at him.

[TKz]

R'as Al Ghul was never clear on his intentions and had no reason to believe someone with so much rage over his parents death wouldn't want to destroy Gotham. Not to mention you could argue the whole point was to try and convince him to, rather than just assuming he would.

And Indiana Jones had no way of knowing that the Ark would do that before hand. It could have been anything and at that point in time, it was probably just best the Nazi's didn't have any potential weapons.

I'll give you The Mummy, but I think the point was that he's supposed to be cursed to live as this undead creature for all of time... but that kind of got lost somewhere down the road, because Stephen Sommers.

[Benjamin]

Yeah, these all aren't really the biggest plotholes or something. The actual plothole is The Mummy (and come on, it's the fucking Mummy).

[Azazel]

Well the point of this is to discuss such things.

I still think Ra's Al Ghul needed to conduct some sort of interview first.

And yes, Indy didn't know. But it remains that the outcome of the movie would have been the same with or without his involvement.

[METALMAN]

See in Toy Story, when Buzz didn't think he was a toy? How come he froze when Andy came into the room like all the other toys?

[Walker]

Indian Jones

Injun Jones, Super Chief!

[Azazel]

Jurassic Park: The Lost World - How did the entire crew on the ship back to San Fransico die, even leaving hands clutching the steering wheel, if the T-Rex was still locked in the cargo Hold? Did he get out and somehow trap himself again? Were there raptors on board that jumped ship after they ate everyone?

[livid]

Well the point of this is to discuss such things.

I still think Ra's Al Ghul needed to conduct some sort of interview first.

And yes, Indy didn't know. But it remains that the outcome of the movie would have been the same with or without his involvement.

You have to keep in mind that before Ra's Al Ghul started teaching Bruce, he was ready to murder. It was only after Ra's talked about becoming a symbol, etc. that he realized killing wasn't the answer. If he had tested him right away, he probably would have just killed the dude.

[gunnar hendershow]

A big thing with Indiana Jones is that wouldn't the Nazis had taken the Ark to Hitler and then, by effect, killed Hitler? Indiana Jones basically started WWII.

Also, Star Wars doesn't happen if they shoot down the escape pod at the start of the movie. Like, you know, you'd consider doing when an escape pod strangely starts hurtling towards Tatooine. Not really a "plot hole" as much as a "silly Imperials" though.

AND I ALMOST FORGOT!!! THE USUAL SUSPECTS!

Why the fuck does Keyser Soze show his face to everyone? I love this movie, but his entire plan is contingent on luck. I don't know where to start, but I'll finish with the fact that if he stays in the police office for another minute everything goes to shit and he's busted. It makes for an entertaining movie but holy shit his motivation makes zero sense.

And it's been an eternity since I saw it, but who heard Charles Foster Kane say "rosebud"? Isn't it established that he died alone?

[Azazel]

Well the point of this is to discuss such things.

I still think Ra's Al Ghul needed to conduct some sort of interview first.

And yes, Indy didn't know. But it remains that the outcome of the movie would have been the same with or without his involvement.

You have to keep in mind that before Ra's Al Ghul started teaching Bruce, he was ready to murder. It was only after Ra's talked about becoming a symbol, etc. that he realized killing wasn't the answer. If he had tested him right away, he probably would have just killed the dude.

I never caught on to that, and it makes way more sense than Ra's Al Ghul being the worst recruiter ever.

As for The Usual Suspects...

Verbal Kint as a known person, so people seeing him didn't matter, since nobody knew he was Keyser Soze. I'm pretty sure he didn't know someone was alive and giving a description either (could be wrong). But the main thing to me was whe the cop said "I'm smarter than you", Kint decided he had to show him up and gave him that bullshit story. It was more of an ego thing than a bad plan.

[Walker]

In all seriousness, the Indiana Jones one has been around for a while. I'd say it is pretty accurate.

Back to the Future

In Back to the Future, Doc sends Einstein into the future by one minute. The Delorean disappears for that entire minute. We can then conclude that in this universe if you travel forward in time you cease to exist until you re-emerge.

In Back to the Future 2, Old Biff gives Young Biff the sports magazine. When Marty and Doc returns to the future, Biff is now super rich and controls everything. From this we conclude that in this universe time travel occurs on one timeline and anything you do in the past automatically changes the future you are travelling to.

So, when Marty and Jennifer get into the Delorean and travel to the future with Doc in Back to the Future 2, they CEASE TO EXIST on the timeline until the re-emerge in the future. Yet, not only has nothing changed, they actually run into themselves! By the logic already put forward, they would re-emerge in the future with no record of themselves since they disappeared. And definitely no kids.

And one more thing. If the past changes the future, there is no reason to go into the future to stop bad things from happening. Either the stop it from happening, go back in time and live their life as usual were the kid still gets himself in trouble, or if Marty simply knowing this was going to happen is enough to stop it from happening again, simply tell him and return to the future to find that it doesn't happen!

[Azazel]

In all seriousness, the Indiana Jones one has been around for a while. I'd say it is pretty accurate.

Back to the Future

In Back to the Future, Doc sends Einstein into the future by one minute. The Delorean disappears for that entire minute. We can then conclude that in this universe if you travel forward in time you cease to exist until you re-emerge.

In Back to the Future 2, Old Biff gives Young Biff the sports magazine. When Marty and Doc returns to the future, Biff is now super rich and controls everything. From this we conclude that in this universe time travel occurs on one timeline and anything you do in the past automatically changes the future you are travelling to.

So, when Marty and Jennifer get into the Delorean and travel to the future with Doc in Back to the Future 2, they CEASE TO EXIST on the timeline until the re-emerge in the future. Yet, not only has nothing changed, they actually run into themselves! By the logic already put forward, they would re-emerge in the future with no record of themselves since they disappeared. And definitely no kids.

And one more thing. If the past changes the future, there is no reason to go into the future to stop bad things from happening. Either the stop it from happening, go back in time and live their life as usual were the kid still gets himself in trouble, or if Marty simply knowing this was going to happen is enough to stop it from happening again, simply tell him and return to the future to find that it doesn't happen!

Time Travel is just a very difficult concept to work around I think. I honestly think Harry Potter is the one of the only movie/story to get it right. Since in the "current" time their future selves are interfering, so they have no chance of altering the timeline since what they do when they travel is already set in stone. Of course it brings up the question as to why they only do it once in the entire story. Time Spillters: Future Perfect treats time travel the same way and that game is great.

[TCO]

See in Toy Story, when Buzz didn't think he was a toy? How come he froze when Andy came into the room like all the other toys?

It's in his toy nature, just because he wasn't self aware at being a toy doesn't mean that his abilities as toy didn't work. The toy's deepest reaction is to not be discovered by a child. Buzz as a toy, would act on instinct and freeze. Just like if a human weren't aware they were human, they would still maintain primitive human instincts.

Obviously. :/

[Maxx]

In Batman Begins, Bruce refuses to kill the prisoner because he doesn't believe in killing, and then he proceeds to blow up the entire building that several hundred people are inside of.

[ChrisSteeleAteMyHamster]

In Anchorman Brick Tamland appears to suddenly take ownership of a trident from absolutely nowhere. He also kills a man in front of numerous witnesses and yet doesn't go to prison.

[Mick]

In Ghostbusters II, how seemingly everyone has declared the Ghostbusters to be frauds, in spite of the events of the first one, especially considering how many people saw Mr Stay-Puft.

And in Wall Street, the film states that it takes place in 1985; one of Charlie Sheen's coworkers mentions that almost right after the Challenger exploded, Gecko was selling NASA short.

...Challenger blew up in 1986 :\ .

[Colly]

This is like a terrible whatculture article. Only Hammy wins.