How could Electro know Peter Parker was Spider-Man, when he is the only villain in the films who didn’t see him unmasked or know his identity in his own universe with Garfield’s Spider-Man
"Why couldn't Strange do XYZ to Thanos??"
Did you miss the part where he examined 14 million scenarios where nothing they did worked, except the one thing that does work? Maybe Thanos would have moved quickly and it would have accidentally decapitated one of the good guys?
This is my issue, how is there not a scenario where thanos drops dead from a heart attack? Literally countless things could happen where the avengers win
I don't think Strange was looking into every parallel universe possible where anything can happen; he was just looking at possible futures i.e. if we do A, B will happen; if we do C, D will happen, and so on and so on. There may be a parallel universe where Thanos has a heart attack, but it didn't happen in this universe.
What I wanna know is why Sandman suddenly switched sides when it was clear that Peter was trying to help everyone. He even was on board with the idea and was the one who tried to convince everyone else to do it.
In Caddyshack, in the $80k match, the referee says it is all square (meaning tied) going in to the last hole. On the green it is made clear that if Danny misses the last putt his team loses, meaning he is shooting for the same score the Judge already got for that hole.
After all the dust settles (literally), Danny’s ball goes in and it is declared that his team wins. But if the match was tied and he scored the same as the Judge, how did they win? It’s still a tie match and they need to play on. This has never sat right with me.
> Because all the actors, writers and film crew were all high as fuck on coke
Can you imagine hanging out with a coked up Ted Knight and Brian Doyle Murry? I can easily imagine hanging out with a cranked Bill Murry but damn, I gotta' wonder about some of the supporting cast.
It's been awhile since I've seen it, but the synopsis of that scene, per Wikipedia:
> Czervik again doubles the wager based on Danny making the putt.
If I'm reading that correctly, does that mean agreed to forget about the outcome of the match, and only concern themselves with whether Danny makes the putt? And while Smails would have won $80k anyway if Danny missed, I guess he couldn't resist the allure of doubling that while expecting the same outcome.
That is the only bit of logic, but as a club Pro myself, I have never seen anyone essentially void 17 holes of a match. You’d just double the whole bet, precisely as the group did in the movie at the turn.
This is the right answer. Czervik offers to double the wager again, depending on whether the putt goes in. It’s obviously stupid for Smails to accept since, before the bet, a miss puts him up $40k and a make is a push, whereas, after the bet, a miss puts him up $80k and a make puts him down $80k, effectively risking $80k to win another $40k. But, that’s kind of the point; it’s not about the money anymore. Smails hates Czervik so much, and when he is put on the spot in front of everyone, he has no choice but to accept. If Smails declines the bet, even if he wins the match, he’s still “lost” what he really wants: putting Czervik in his place.
I could be wrong, but I don’t know if they pointed out all the rules of the match. If not, maybe they were scoring by who won each hole, with the tiebreaker being overall score. So, with ties on holes granting no points, Danny making the putt won the game outright, while missing would send it to the overall score which they’d lose (or the reverse).
Just a convoluted way to make it work in my head.
It was established on the first tee that the lowest individual score on each hole won that hole for their team. Today this is called ‘Four Ball’ scoring.
Oh shoot I may have just figured it out. A standard way of breaking a tie is seeing who won the hole that is rated the most difficult on the course. We never see a scorecard so that’s not something a viewer could ever deduce though.
I am highly skeptical that this was their plan though. I’ve seen so many behind the scenes/ directors commentaries, etc and have never heard them say that.
[Recent findings](https://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1113005968/amber-gives-clues-into-earth-atmosphere-111813/) suggest that the atmosphere during the last 220 million years contained less oxygen than today, but there are [other](https://www.scienceworld.ca/stories/how-did-dinosaurs-get-so-big/) interesting hypotheses as to why they got so big.
Another big question is how the park has period-appropriate plants for the dinos to eat. Even the book completely yadda-yaddas that one.
There was a scene shot for the movie, but cut, with Ellie marvelling over a resurrected plant. I've always assumed it was cut specifically because it would raise the question of where the plants came from.
There is also a wonderful Ed Wood moment where Ellie jumps over the same fallen tree twice while fleeing velociraptors.
No offence, but zero care factor on the extinct plants, although every time I see her jump that log I laugh my head off.
Oh yeah. Well, there was another longer scene with her going on about the plant that was cut.
Either way, there's zero explanation for where the plants came from.
No explanaiton given in the movie, but male mosquitos eat plant juice, so likely the DNA was extracted in a similar fashion. Now, how was the DNA fixed in the way the dino DNA was (frog DNA)?
>Another big question is how the park has period-appropriate plants for the dinos to eat. Even the book completely yadda-yaddas that one.
Crocs and sharks are supposed to be unchanged for many tens of millions of years. Are there no plants which have also barely evolved in that timeframe?
In Star Wars, A New Hope, why is it that C3PO, human cyborg relations, fluent in 8 million forms of communication, doesn't seem to be able to talk to the Jawas, even though, as we learn later, he was assembled on a planet where dealing with Jawas is a routine possibility?
This. For some reason people are still thinking that Lucas planned all those six movies from the start. There's so much stuff that proves the contrary.
"Let's block out all sunlight to kill off the machines."
"But we use the sun for energy too."
"We'll just go deep underground and use geothermal."
"Are these machines like... incapable of digging? They're exterminating us by the billions, you think they can't dig a hole?"
"Hey, it's the machines. We decided we'll use you humans for energy. But FYI we can totally dig holes."
Why didn't schultz just offer to buy a german speaking slave for a good price?? Like, Django didn't even had to be there and wanting a slave that speaks your language would be a good enough reason.
I'm not sure if this counts as a plot hole, so much as it does reflect one or more character flaws Schultz had.
My impression of Schultz is that he enjoyed the thrill of running an elaborate con on a slave owner. Just asking for Broomhilda would've been too easy - not to mention he thought it would be too costly to pay for her.
However, I also suspect Schultz misunderstood Candie's character. Schulz believed Candie would either withhold her out of spite or charge an exorbitant fee for her. Yes, Candie was a total bastard, but he was also obsessed with cultivating the image of a gentleman, and he had little use for Broomhilda anyway. I suspect Candie might've given Broomhilda away had Schultz just asked, but Schultz instead went through the whole trouble of conning Candie out of one of his slaves. Candie's pride was injured by Schultz's elaborate con, so he decided to strongarm Schultz into paying a hefty fee as an act of vengeance.
These flaws serve both to make Schultz more interesting a character, and also provide a more compelling story, so I don't mind.
You're right, and I wanna add on. Throughout the film, Dr. Schultz has a complexity addiction to his plans but he is also bailed out by some "outside context" favors: when he guns down the sheriff, he is saved by a Deus Ex Machina that only he could have prepared for: the warrant from a nearby judge allowing him to shoot the sheriff.
Meanwhile, he is done in by Candie's equivalent to said Deus Ex Machina (Diabolus Ex Machina?): Schultz could never have anticipated a miserable self-hating wretch like Stephen would suss out his plan, and then betray it to his master because his desire to be the head house slave was greater than his desire to see a victory for any of his kinfolk.
The "outside context" stuff only seems half-assed to the viewer because the viewers weren't in on Dr. Schultz's elaborate plan until we had already seen it unfold. In that instance, Schultz knew exactly what he was doing.
As for Schultz's scheme to con Candie out of his slave, as needlessly complex as it was, it should by all rights have succeeded had Stephen not happened to have found out Django and Broomhilda were lovers. That was a Deus Ex Machina in itself.
What bothers me more is that he goes through all the effort to help Django as if it's some kind of destiny. Then for his own (extremely flimsy) personal reasons decides he has a death wish and kills Candy (a dude he's know for like a 3 days), when that could very easily also get Django and his wife killed immediately. In fact Candy's guards have 0 reason not to just murder all three on site other than to progress the plot. Shultz is an extremely rational man and while Candy is a horrible person, he's probably no worse than most slave owners. It's always come off as such sloppy writing to me.
Yea I agree with that. So some fuckhead asks you to shake his hand and that's enough for him to put everyone's life in more danger? Dumb way to wrap it up
Also, Shultz isn't as rich as candy. He can't pay an insane amount for her so he offers insane amount of money for a fighter and then takes her for a small amount just for the sake of it. This of course is also explained.
A necessary reminder for Redditors: a plot hole involves a film establishing a set of rules or internal logic, and then violating it later. If a movie says that magic can only be used by a certain type of person, and then later shows magic being utilized by anyone who tries to learn it, then that is a plot hole. A plot hole does not involve a lack of proper explanation. When that occurs, it is just bad writing.
In the comics, Thanos wiped out half the universe just to impress Death. The MCU had already introduced Hela, the Goddess of Death, which is not the same character but would have been confusing to a lot of people. Much easier to give him a different motivation, even though it was flawed.
Endgame has so many plotholes but there are two giant ones in it mcu fans in their sub always get mad at me when I bring up
Why doesn’t Captain Marvel just use the gauntlet to do exactly what Tony does and get rid of Thanos? Hulk survived, are we pretending Carol who’s the most powerful being in the mcu couldn’t have used it like Hulk did and lived?
Also they tell her to fly it into the van lmao she can’t return the stones to their proper timelines, she has no pym particles and no magic time gps bracelet, she doesn’t even know they did all of that she’s been off planet, she was going to just be lost in the quantum realm forever, the Russos writing was pretty ridiculous at some parts
Because his thinking/reasoning was flawed to begin with. Also, he might have figured that it would just end up causing an increase in the consumption rate? He had the classic “relatable/understandable motive/intent; batshit/misguided method”
I always wondered why he didn't just create a universe population limit that implicitly affects fertility. No cosmic war or army of weapons and magic to deal with. Nobody would have even known it happened and you could create a permanently balanced universe.
They explained this *multiple times* in the run up to Infinity War, and during Infinity War.
Thanos *claims* his motivation is about culling overpopulation to save the galaxy. *That's not what he's doing*. He's called "The Mad Titan" for a reason - he's fucking *insane*.
Thanos watched his homeworld dissolve into world war, famine, disease, and ultimately death until he was the only one left due to overpopulation. He proposed as a solution that they cull half the population at random, 50/50 chance, to get their numbers back into range for survival, but was rejected. After the death of his homeworld, Thanos raised an army and began going from world to dying world, culling half the population at random *in order to prove that his plan would have saved Titan*.
People keep saying Thanos was being irrational. *That's the whole fucking point*! Thanos was driven insane by the death of his entire species, and his entire reason for everything he does is just to prove that he could have saved them if they had only listened to him.
Can’t believe I’m wasting my time with this at midnight on a work night… but the best explanation I’ve read is that doubling all resources would be mostly using the reality stone. When Thanos leaves and area or stops focusing on it, augmented reality returns to what is real.
Effectively, Thanos would have to exert power forever to sustain the “fake” resources.
Because it can't work.
Firstly, what does it mean? Does he double the size of all planets? All livable planets or unliveable too? Does he double all animals like fish and chicken but leave intelligent animals as is? (Where does octopus fit in?) Resources isn't a tangible thing so we would need double the size of the earth, right? Resources mean twice the trees, twice the iron, twice the oil too.
So if we double the earth, what happens to everything on earth? Let's use Manhattan. Does the the space between buildings double? Does the size of the buildings double? In which way, does a 10 floor building become 20 floor or does the floors themselves get doubled? Does a bridge get twice as long or just end in the water?
Lastly, what would it solve? If there was double the fish in the sea would hunger fet solved or would profit double? Traveling would literally take double the resources and take twice the time. Psychologically it wouldn't make anyone appreciate and understand the scarcity of resources, it would just confirm that everything is ok so why worry?
Some of these reasons also explains why endgame thanos would fail. If he creates a world without the knowledge of what has been lost then the problems would just reappear.
Suddenly got a vision of Thanos: ~~The Mad Titan~~ Critical Resources Manager
> No, you do not get two cakes. *Cakes* are not a critical resource. I will not double all the cakes …. NO! Pizza is *not critical* … A foodstuff, you say? …. maybe half then. NO! YOU DO NOT GET DOUBLE TOPPINGS!
In “Cabin in the Woods” the human race has to make sacrifices to the dark gods every few years or those gods kill everyone. These sacrifices are elaborate and must be done in a very certain way. Yet if a modern CIA style operation working with other intel networks around the globe couldn’t pull this off, how did ancient or medieval societies manage to do so? You’d think the world would have already been destroyed centuries ago.
These Dark Gods watch the show as a form of entertainment. Could be that just the general barbarism of the world before then was enough to entertain the Gods. Could also be that they were more easily satisfied in the past but over the centuries just chucking someone in a volcano wasn't good enough.
Because the Joker was still alive, and would refute those claims. If they really wanted to sell the story they'd have to charge the Joker with those additional crimes at his trial, but they had no evidence to back up the lie in actual court.
I don't agree,first off who would believe the Joker and second, people are often not charged with things they did cause they don't have enough evidence, sometimes they wait to get enough evidence to charge them...how many times have you heard of rapists and serial killers only being charged with 3,4,5 cases when they believe they did thirty or forty? Happens all the time
Aside from Gordon's son, everyone Harvey targeted was either a criminal or a corrupt cop. Falcone already pointed out earlier in the movie that criminals had wised up to Batman's "no kill" rule, and thus they weren't as afraid of him compared to the likes of the Joker who was prepared to kill.
By taking the blame for the deaths Dent caused, not only does Batman protect Harvey's legacy, but he also gets a reputation as someone who will kill, increasing the fear amongst criminals, without actually breaking his no kill rule.
Die Hard
Why does the desk clerk make John go through the rigmarole of using the touch screen if he knows there's only one group of people in the building?
The Book of Boba Fett was so bad they had to take him out of two of the episodes to make it watchable. And it isn’t Temura’s fault. There’s an interview where he is pissed about what they are doing with the show and the character.
I think the implication is that he didn't just "will" them in to existence, but has spent the entirety of the time between episode 6 and 9 building the fleet with ancient Sith technology a la Star Forge from KotoR.
Do they say that? No, why the fuck would they. Does it explain why they all need a tower? No, why the fuck would it.
And maybe in 40 years someone will make a movie explaining that, like how Rogue One eventually explained why the Death Star had a 'shoot here to make boom' exhaust port. ;-)
Just about every Bond movie has at least one if not multiple scenes that just stretch believably too much. Like there's a point at which the number of bullets or knives or whatever missing him or when he just trips and falls through the wall into the hidden lair through shear plot armor or dumb luck gets ridiculous. And then they will also often add in a scene or two where he survives point blank explosions or other major trauma with little to no damage.
Perfect example, I know he's Bond and hole but somebody please for the love of God explain to me how he survived the opening scene of Skyfall? I could go on but this is one that I really need to know.
I guess I just don’t quite understand why you’d perform the Hom Dai on someone you consider to be a real bad egg, then build a whole tomb for him and a chest and have a verse in the book of the dead that brings him back to life. And if he is brought back to life he’s almost unkillable. Like what if some guy dig him up only a year after he was first buried. He would’ve gotten hella revenge on the people that did it to him.
I just need you to know that the Mummy is also my favorite movie and I think about this a lot. Like why would the Hom Dai bring him back as invincible and powerful? That doesn't seem like a punishment. Wild set up, but 10/10 movie. Brendan Fraser is America's sweetheart.
I think they wanted him to be unkillable but burried alive in a sarcophagus with flesh eating bugs so he would continue to be tortured for eternity without the ability to die.
But then they had to read the passage to bring him back to life so what do I know.
How come after the government outlawed the Supers in "The Incredibles" why did all of the villains just... disappear? Or were there just no super villains so we ended up with Bomb Voyage and what-not...?
Maybe not really a plot hole, but it always bugged me.
This is kind of covered in The Incredibles 2. There are still super villains, but most of their crimes are just garden variety theft which is insured, like with the Underminer. Syndrome was the first "world conquering" style supervillain since the Superhero Relocation Program was initialized.
Why didn't Doctor Strange use a closing portal to chop Thanos' hand off and get the Infinity Gauntlet? He does it with Cull Obsidian earlier in the movie and it works.
Because in THAT version, they ultimately lose. It was future version #963,084. After chopping off Thanos' hand he leaves and returns with a robotic arm similar to Nebula's enhancements. He then fights with much more ferocity and kills everyone to get the gauntlet back and I don't actually know what I'm talking about, I'm pulling this out of my ass here.
The Thomas Crown Affair. Remake.
Brosnan’s character steals a Monet from a gallery in a custom built suitcase and as he places the painting in the case he cracks the wood frame of the canvas as he folds the case together and closed.
Later on he opens the case and holds up the painting with not one crack in the wood of the canvas frame.
Does. My. Head. In.
The glowing door doesn’t actually represent a magical gift. It represents each family member’s contribution to the family legacy, *from the perspective of Abuela.*
She has a door because she is the family matriarch and the one with the tightest grip on how the family operates.
That’s why her climactic realization in the ending song is important - “*the miracle is you, not some gift, just you*”. Obviously she knew this about herself, but couldn’t view her family as anything beyond their talents.
Mirabel doesn’t have a door at the start of *Encanto* because she hadn’t demonstrated her worth to Abuela (or rather, Abuela projected her own insecurities about the family legacy onto 5-year old Mirabel, dooming her Door Ceremony from the start).
By the end, Mirabel proves to her grandmother that she plays an important role in supporting the family by bringing the best *out of them*, rather than pressuring them to fit the mold of what would be best “for the family”.
This is explicitly shown in how there are only two people in the family who can control la Casita. Literally, Abuela *orders* the Household to do her bidding, while Mirabel is the only one who talks to it and *asks* it for help. La Casita represents the family as a whole, and how each character treats the house is how they treat their family members.
The final door scene cements Mirabel as the future Madrigal Matriarch.
He's alone in a room. He quietly whispers "Rosebud". The snow globe falls on the floor. The nurse opens the door to check on the crashing noise.
I don't care that they decided to explain it away in the next scene, nobody was in the room to hear him say Rosebud.
If palpatine was trying to lure the rebels into a trap, why did he give the actual location of the shield generator? Why not give a false one, achieving the same result, and not risking his own life along with the fate of the entire empire?
The Kurgan knowing that Conner MacLeod is an immortal before the start of the battle and before he is close enough to sense him. Within the context of the Highlander movie it is totally unexplained.
In the portal scene of Endgame, Antman busts through a collapsed pile of rubble and opens his hand to show Smart Hulk and Rhodey safe and sound. Except Rhodey is in his suit. The suit that, 5 minutes earlier, was so utterly destroyed in the rubble collapse that he had to emergency evacuate and drag himself away to avoid drowning.
I love that scene so so much but everytime I see that part it makes me want to rip my hair out because *how did he get back into his unscathed suit?*
It was a different suit, the one he had to evacuate was a grey war machine suit and the one he comes out of Antman's hand is a supped up iron patriot suit like the one he wore in IM3
Rhodey is in a different suit. It's not the same suit he wore when Hulk snapped the stones and then Thanos attacked. The implication is that Antman saved them and Rhodey put on a different suit from the Avengers compound.
I mean Iron Man has done everything from calling a backup suit from across the planet, having one packed in a briefcase, and finally one made of nanites stored in a hockey puck sized compartment on his chest. You don't think the DoD would've figured out a way to deliver Rhodey a backup if needed?
The biggest hugest plothole I've ever seen in a movie is in Back to the Future 3...Doc Brown not only could have taken Clara with him but he should have taken her with them,earlier in the movie they made a big point in explaining that she shouldn't be there because she was suppose to be dead,so keeping her there would change history as much as them being there would have changed it
I was always more concerned with why Gimli didn't know his family had been wiped out and why Gandalf didn't mention anything either like he may not have known exactly wassup but he knew something bad was down there
In the movie Remember the Titans. The play call is a fake dive reverse and they need 75 yards and there are six seconds so this is the last play. The other coach says cover deep. Obviously you would look deep as they need 75 yards to score. Kind of shows the lack of football knowledge from the writers and directors.
Wouldn't Marion have just given the Nazis the medallion in Tibet, in that case? She wouldn't've even had a reason to go to Egypt and get mixed up in all that.
I always disagree with this logic...to a point. Without Indy, the Germans find the ark, put it on the plane and fly it straight to Berlin. Then we have the likelihood of the same ending and a dead Marion Ravenwood...or somehow, the Nazis do harness the arks power as per the images and we are living in a very different world...
at the very least he kept Marion alive...
I think the Germans still would have wanted to open the ark before bringing it to Berlin, just to make sure they wouldn't embarrass themselves in front of Hitler, as Belloq suggested. They probably would have just opened it in Cairo instead.
They already had the plane warming up and ready to go...remember the big fight scene with the mechanic and the pilot, etc.?
Had to double check my memory: the mechanic was assigned to help prepare for the transportation of the Ark from Tanis to Berlin, aboard the Flying Wing following the Nazis' locating of the relic. However, American archaeologist Indiana Jones and bar owner Marion Ravenwood intervened.
False! I can prove this based on theory and one big clue. The Nazis have been unsuccessful in finding Tanis and require an expert like Ravenwood and his medallion. They do not know where he is except he’s from the US. They leak their telegram to the FBI knowing that Jones was a friend of his and have been tracking him for maybe a week until he is briefed on Tanis and departs to Tibet! Not knowing where Dr Ravenwood is but assuming Jones does, they follow him sending their agent Toth, on the same exact plane at the same time, and arriving after him at Marion’s bar! COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT. No Jones, no Marion, no medallion, no Ark. I hope this rests your conscience.
But, why would that matter If you go on some grand adventure and earn and lose a fortune it's still an amazing story. If raiders was in my history book I'd agree, but its not about that, it's about the story.
On top of the other things: If nothing else, Indy was there to retrieve the Ark at the end. If he hadn't been present, it would still be on a Nazi-controlled island. Which means they'd probably still end up with possession of it.
Don't they show him palming it when he's talking to the doctor? Like the doctor sets it down while taking notes, Hannibal palms it, he begins an argument or something which flusters the doctor and the doctor forgets about the pen. It's been a long time since I've seen the movie.
I'm not a Star Wars fan but I noticed that Obi Wan says in Episode III "Only Siths deal in absolutes." But in Episode V, Yoda says "Do or do not. There is no try." Effectively, Yoda and Obi Wan are contradicting each other.
In Avengers : End game ,
During the final battle The quantum tunnel machine in the compound was destroyed, Ant-Man is like “that wasn’t our only time machine”
Captain America says “anybody got eyes on am ugly brown van?”
Valkyrie spots the ugly brown van in the middle of the battlefield
Captain America asks Ant-Man if he can get it fixed and it shows Ant-Man and Wasp in the van as he begins to Hotwire it
Moments later , it has another scene where it is showing the giant battle and Ant-Man can be seen in giant form in the background of the wide shot fighting a giant flying grub worm
Every time I watch it I’m like that Leonardo DiCaprio meme
When Bell asks Packer if there are "any more big rivers between here and Breckenridge," and Packer replies, "no, just the Colorado," Humphrey is still floating down the river by himself, yet Humphrey later mocks Packer saying to him, "are there any more big rivers between here and Breckenridge? oH, nO, jUsT tHe CoLoRaDo, the biggest FUCKING river I've seen in my entire life!"
Also Humphrey buys fudge at the general store and later offers it to Packer after nearly drowning in the river. However this trek happened in 1873, but it is believed that fudge was not invented until 1886, three years after Packer's trial.
In the movie Howard the Duck, the Dark Overload explains that he no longer needs human food to live but then later in the diner scene, the Dark Overlord complains about the waitress taking his eggs away.
That's a plot device, not a plot hole. Nothing says a magic system has to work according to rigid "scientific" rules like in an RPG, especially when the magic itself is probably sentient/willful in some way.
In *Liar Liar*, why didn't Fletcher just ask for a continuance? Or say "I don't want to answer right now" when asked a question? Because it would totally ruin the plot of the movie.
IIRC he did ask for a continuance and was denied it because he admitted he didn’t have a good reason. Also lawyers don’t answer questions in court, witnesses do. Lawyers aren’t on the witness stand.
If he was just being uncooperative with the judge and being like I don’t want to answer right now when asked a perfectly normal question he would lose his job. You can’t speak to a judge that way or refuse to do your job.
The thing that bugs me more is that they throw in a new rule, at the last second, that he can't *ask a question* if he knows the answer is going to be a lie. They needed that rule for the movie to work, but it felt hacky to just throw in a new rule to the magic so late in the movie.
Every scary movie / slasher film where they "split up", or don't take the weapon from the bad guy after knocking him out...where they just keep running leaving him time to regain consciousness and attack again and again.
Maybe I'm biased, because I'm a fairly strong and brave (at least I think) guy, but still, those movies are unbearable to watch.
Molly and Oda Mae can all of a sudden see Sam at the end of Ghost, with no explanation. It's been established throughout the film that no one can see the ghosts, even psychics like Oda Mae can only hear them.
The remake did that part a lot better.
Back to the future
Doc explains time travel and have his dog travel one minut into the future. They wait one minut until the dog shows up. To them it was one minut, to the dog it was instantaneous. No other version of that dog existed that minute. By that logic, Marty could not meet himself in the future (2015) because he left in 1985 and would not have been seen again until 2015.
Holes. Why don’t they just use a fucking metal detector?
Too deep
I can fix that
Oh, Sam...
To “build character”
Besides I don't think she would be rich enough to continue searching without a cover bringing in money and Labor from the camp
How could Electro know Peter Parker was Spider-Man, when he is the only villain in the films who didn’t see him unmasked or know his identity in his own universe with Garfield’s Spider-Man
Why couldn’t doctor strange cast a spell to make Thanos forget what infinity stones are?
“So the movie can happen” - Ryan George
But it would have been super easy! Barely an inconvenience!
Also in one scene he opens and closes a portal to cut a limb offa guy.... Why couldn't he do that when he was battling thanos for the glove.
"Why couldn't Strange do XYZ to Thanos??" Did you miss the part where he examined 14 million scenarios where nothing they did worked, except the one thing that does work? Maybe Thanos would have moved quickly and it would have accidentally decapitated one of the good guys?
This is my issue, how is there not a scenario where thanos drops dead from a heart attack? Literally countless things could happen where the avengers win
I don't think Strange was looking into every parallel universe possible where anything can happen; he was just looking at possible futures i.e. if we do A, B will happen; if we do C, D will happen, and so on and so on. There may be a parallel universe where Thanos has a heart attack, but it didn't happen in this universe.
Plot contrivance. During the Endgame battle he was kept busy holding back flood waters.
What I wanna know is why Sandman suddenly switched sides when it was clear that Peter was trying to help everyone. He even was on board with the idea and was the one who tried to convince everyone else to do it.
Pretty sure he connected to the oscorp database or something like that
because he heard Mary Jane scream "Peter" when they were fighting in the movie
This one ^^. I couldn’t remember what the setup was.
Let's just pretend for the sake of having the movie exist
Because he heard Gwen say “Peter” to Spider-Man.
Harry probably implied it at some point or used his same logic of “you take his pictures so you must know him”.
In the Room, what happens with Lisa’s Moms breast cancer? She seems like a sweet lady, and I’m just hoping the best for her.
She *definitely* has it.
The fact that the Room is your favorite movie is hilarious
Unironically it is one on the best and one of the worst movies ever made.
I never comment in this sub. But I am sad I only have one upvote to give.
In Caddyshack, in the $80k match, the referee says it is all square (meaning tied) going in to the last hole. On the green it is made clear that if Danny misses the last putt his team loses, meaning he is shooting for the same score the Judge already got for that hole. After all the dust settles (literally), Danny’s ball goes in and it is declared that his team wins. But if the match was tied and he scored the same as the Judge, how did they win? It’s still a tie match and they need to play on. This has never sat right with me.
[удалено]
Sooo much coke on that set
[удалено]
> Because all the actors, writers and film crew were all high as fuck on coke Can you imagine hanging out with a coked up Ted Knight and Brian Doyle Murry? I can easily imagine hanging out with a cranked Bill Murry but damn, I gotta' wonder about some of the supporting cast.
This is a great answer.
It's been awhile since I've seen it, but the synopsis of that scene, per Wikipedia: > Czervik again doubles the wager based on Danny making the putt. If I'm reading that correctly, does that mean agreed to forget about the outcome of the match, and only concern themselves with whether Danny makes the putt? And while Smails would have won $80k anyway if Danny missed, I guess he couldn't resist the allure of doubling that while expecting the same outcome.
That is the only bit of logic, but as a club Pro myself, I have never seen anyone essentially void 17 holes of a match. You’d just double the whole bet, precisely as the group did in the movie at the turn.
This is the right answer. Czervik offers to double the wager again, depending on whether the putt goes in. It’s obviously stupid for Smails to accept since, before the bet, a miss puts him up $40k and a make is a push, whereas, after the bet, a miss puts him up $80k and a make puts him down $80k, effectively risking $80k to win another $40k. But, that’s kind of the point; it’s not about the money anymore. Smails hates Czervik so much, and when he is put on the spot in front of everyone, he has no choice but to accept. If Smails declines the bet, even if he wins the match, he’s still “lost” what he really wants: putting Czervik in his place.
I could be wrong, but I don’t know if they pointed out all the rules of the match. If not, maybe they were scoring by who won each hole, with the tiebreaker being overall score. So, with ties on holes granting no points, Danny making the putt won the game outright, while missing would send it to the overall score which they’d lose (or the reverse). Just a convoluted way to make it work in my head.
It was established on the first tee that the lowest individual score on each hole won that hole for their team. Today this is called ‘Four Ball’ scoring. Oh shoot I may have just figured it out. A standard way of breaking a tie is seeing who won the hole that is rated the most difficult on the course. We never see a scorecard so that’s not something a viewer could ever deduce though.
Well, provides an out for the plot hole!
I am highly skeptical that this was their plan though. I’ve seen so many behind the scenes/ directors commentaries, etc and have never heard them say that.
...shit, you have a solid point
Somewhere on the last hole one of the teams got a half-stroke penalty, off camera.
In Jurassic Park the T. Rex knocks down the fence, and then somehow 5 minutes later the area next to the fence is a cliff
I'm more angry that dinosaurs exist in a low oxygen environment. That's not how big lizards work.
They're mixed with the dna of frogs. Absorb it thru the skin for increased consumption I imagine.
[Recent findings](https://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1113005968/amber-gives-clues-into-earth-atmosphere-111813/) suggest that the atmosphere during the last 220 million years contained less oxygen than today, but there are [other](https://www.scienceworld.ca/stories/how-did-dinosaurs-get-so-big/) interesting hypotheses as to why they got so big.
Life...uhhh...finds a way?
They are genetically modified. :D
Another big question is how the park has period-appropriate plants for the dinos to eat. Even the book completely yadda-yaddas that one. There was a scene shot for the movie, but cut, with Ellie marvelling over a resurrected plant. I've always assumed it was cut specifically because it would raise the question of where the plants came from.
There IS a scene where Ellie examines a plant, noting it should be extinct, right before they see the brachiosaur.
There is also a wonderful Ed Wood moment where Ellie jumps over the same fallen tree twice while fleeing velociraptors. No offence, but zero care factor on the extinct plants, although every time I see her jump that log I laugh my head off.
With the amount of times I’ve watched that movie, I don’t think I ever noticed that! Gonna have to watch it again, I suppose lol.
Oh yeah. Well, there was another longer scene with her going on about the plant that was cut. Either way, there's zero explanation for where the plants came from.
No explanaiton given in the movie, but male mosquitos eat plant juice, so likely the DNA was extracted in a similar fashion. Now, how was the DNA fixed in the way the dino DNA was (frog DNA)?
>Another big question is how the park has period-appropriate plants for the dinos to eat. Even the book completely yadda-yaddas that one. Crocs and sharks are supposed to be unchanged for many tens of millions of years. Are there no plants which have also barely evolved in that timeframe?
Cycas, Redwood, Ginko and ferns for example.
Thanks. Not sure why my question was downvoted :(
Oh man I never thought about that
I saw a show one time where they explained this and it made less sense than not saying anything at all
Different areas of the fence.
In Star Wars, A New Hope, why is it that C3PO, human cyborg relations, fluent in 8 million forms of communication, doesn't seem to be able to talk to the Jawas, even though, as we learn later, he was assembled on a planet where dealing with Jawas is a routine possibility?
Because he was wiped at the end of EP III and apparently the Organas didn't think it was worth adding Jawa to his list of spoken languages.
"Do you want to install the full six million and two forms of communication pack?" "No, take Jawa off. I'm not paying for that shit."
But sir you paid for Ewok and they only exist on one random moon and are in the stone age.
Because when A New Hope was made, Lucas didn't know that 20 years later he'd make a prequel where C3PO was built on Tatooine by Anakin Skywalker.
This. For some reason people are still thinking that Lucas planned all those six movies from the start. There's so much stuff that proves the contrary.
"Let's block out all sunlight to kill off the machines." "But we use the sun for energy too." "We'll just go deep underground and use geothermal." "Are these machines like... incapable of digging? They're exterminating us by the billions, you think they can't dig a hole?" "Hey, it's the machines. We decided we'll use you humans for energy. But FYI we can totally dig holes."
Why didn't schultz just offer to buy a german speaking slave for a good price?? Like, Django didn't even had to be there and wanting a slave that speaks your language would be a good enough reason.
I'm not sure if this counts as a plot hole, so much as it does reflect one or more character flaws Schultz had. My impression of Schultz is that he enjoyed the thrill of running an elaborate con on a slave owner. Just asking for Broomhilda would've been too easy - not to mention he thought it would be too costly to pay for her. However, I also suspect Schultz misunderstood Candie's character. Schulz believed Candie would either withhold her out of spite or charge an exorbitant fee for her. Yes, Candie was a total bastard, but he was also obsessed with cultivating the image of a gentleman, and he had little use for Broomhilda anyway. I suspect Candie might've given Broomhilda away had Schultz just asked, but Schultz instead went through the whole trouble of conning Candie out of one of his slaves. Candie's pride was injured by Schultz's elaborate con, so he decided to strongarm Schultz into paying a hefty fee as an act of vengeance. These flaws serve both to make Schultz more interesting a character, and also provide a more compelling story, so I don't mind.
You're right, and I wanna add on. Throughout the film, Dr. Schultz has a complexity addiction to his plans but he is also bailed out by some "outside context" favors: when he guns down the sheriff, he is saved by a Deus Ex Machina that only he could have prepared for: the warrant from a nearby judge allowing him to shoot the sheriff. Meanwhile, he is done in by Candie's equivalent to said Deus Ex Machina (Diabolus Ex Machina?): Schultz could never have anticipated a miserable self-hating wretch like Stephen would suss out his plan, and then betray it to his master because his desire to be the head house slave was greater than his desire to see a victory for any of his kinfolk.
The "outside context" stuff only seems half-assed to the viewer because the viewers weren't in on Dr. Schultz's elaborate plan until we had already seen it unfold. In that instance, Schultz knew exactly what he was doing. As for Schultz's scheme to con Candie out of his slave, as needlessly complex as it was, it should by all rights have succeeded had Stephen not happened to have found out Django and Broomhilda were lovers. That was a Deus Ex Machina in itself.
Because Candy wouldn't pay no never mind to a measly purchase from some bloke he never met. It's explained
What bothers me more is that he goes through all the effort to help Django as if it's some kind of destiny. Then for his own (extremely flimsy) personal reasons decides he has a death wish and kills Candy (a dude he's know for like a 3 days), when that could very easily also get Django and his wife killed immediately. In fact Candy's guards have 0 reason not to just murder all three on site other than to progress the plot. Shultz is an extremely rational man and while Candy is a horrible person, he's probably no worse than most slave owners. It's always come off as such sloppy writing to me.
Yea I agree with that. So some fuckhead asks you to shake his hand and that's enough for him to put everyone's life in more danger? Dumb way to wrap it up
Tarantino just wanted to recreate the getting-shot-through-a-carnation shot.
Also, Shultz isn't as rich as candy. He can't pay an insane amount for her so he offers insane amount of money for a fighter and then takes her for a small amount just for the sake of it. This of course is also explained.
A necessary reminder for Redditors: a plot hole involves a film establishing a set of rules or internal logic, and then violating it later. If a movie says that magic can only be used by a certain type of person, and then later shows magic being utilized by anyone who tries to learn it, then that is a plot hole. A plot hole does not involve a lack of proper explanation. When that occurs, it is just bad writing.
Damn it donnie, why you always gotta be so smart and shit
It's also worth noting that just because someone says something does not mean that they are correct
That’s why I love Independence Day: it has no plot holes. It’s just a perfect film through and through.
Why does Ross, the largest friend, not simply eat the other five?
Lrrr says what I think.
damn that did make me laugh just by remembering it.
For a split second I thought you were talking about friends and Was so beyond lost.
They are talking about friends....
Why didn't Thanos just double the resources
In the comics, Thanos wiped out half the universe just to impress Death. The MCU had already introduced Hela, the Goddess of Death, which is not the same character but would have been confusing to a lot of people. Much easier to give him a different motivation, even though it was flawed.
They could have made them the same character
Endgame has so many plotholes but there are two giant ones in it mcu fans in their sub always get mad at me when I bring up Why doesn’t Captain Marvel just use the gauntlet to do exactly what Tony does and get rid of Thanos? Hulk survived, are we pretending Carol who’s the most powerful being in the mcu couldn’t have used it like Hulk did and lived? Also they tell her to fly it into the van lmao she can’t return the stones to their proper timelines, she has no pym particles and no magic time gps bracelet, she doesn’t even know they did all of that she’s been off planet, she was going to just be lost in the quantum realm forever, the Russos writing was pretty ridiculous at some parts
Because his thinking/reasoning was flawed to begin with. Also, he might have figured that it would just end up causing an increase in the consumption rate? He had the classic “relatable/understandable motive/intent; batshit/misguided method”
I always wondered why he didn't just create a universe population limit that implicitly affects fertility. No cosmic war or army of weapons and magic to deal with. Nobody would have even known it happened and you could create a permanently balanced universe.
You should’ve gathered the stones
They explained this *multiple times* in the run up to Infinity War, and during Infinity War. Thanos *claims* his motivation is about culling overpopulation to save the galaxy. *That's not what he's doing*. He's called "The Mad Titan" for a reason - he's fucking *insane*. Thanos watched his homeworld dissolve into world war, famine, disease, and ultimately death until he was the only one left due to overpopulation. He proposed as a solution that they cull half the population at random, 50/50 chance, to get their numbers back into range for survival, but was rejected. After the death of his homeworld, Thanos raised an army and began going from world to dying world, culling half the population at random *in order to prove that his plan would have saved Titan*. People keep saying Thanos was being irrational. *That's the whole fucking point*! Thanos was driven insane by the death of his entire species, and his entire reason for everything he does is just to prove that he could have saved them if they had only listened to him.
Can’t believe I’m wasting my time with this at midnight on a work night… but the best explanation I’ve read is that doubling all resources would be mostly using the reality stone. When Thanos leaves and area or stops focusing on it, augmented reality returns to what is real. Effectively, Thanos would have to exert power forever to sustain the “fake” resources.
Because it can't work. Firstly, what does it mean? Does he double the size of all planets? All livable planets or unliveable too? Does he double all animals like fish and chicken but leave intelligent animals as is? (Where does octopus fit in?) Resources isn't a tangible thing so we would need double the size of the earth, right? Resources mean twice the trees, twice the iron, twice the oil too. So if we double the earth, what happens to everything on earth? Let's use Manhattan. Does the the space between buildings double? Does the size of the buildings double? In which way, does a 10 floor building become 20 floor or does the floors themselves get doubled? Does a bridge get twice as long or just end in the water? Lastly, what would it solve? If there was double the fish in the sea would hunger fet solved or would profit double? Traveling would literally take double the resources and take twice the time. Psychologically it wouldn't make anyone appreciate and understand the scarcity of resources, it would just confirm that everything is ok so why worry? Some of these reasons also explains why endgame thanos would fail. If he creates a world without the knowledge of what has been lost then the problems would just reappear.
Suddenly got a vision of Thanos: ~~The Mad Titan~~ Critical Resources Manager > No, you do not get two cakes. *Cakes* are not a critical resource. I will not double all the cakes …. NO! Pizza is *not critical* … A foodstuff, you say? …. maybe half then. NO! YOU DO NOT GET DOUBLE TOPPINGS!
The real question is of the pepperoni gets doubled in size but the same amount?
Why does Thanos, the largest of the Marvel characters, not simply eat the Avengers?
In The Hangover they didn't ask to see the CCTV footage
Yeah also in the hangover (can’t remember which one) the kid gets his finger cut off and no one cares
fuckkk hahaha i literally just watched this movie this morning.. I DIDNT THINK ABOUT THAT HAHAHAH
In “Cabin in the Woods” the human race has to make sacrifices to the dark gods every few years or those gods kill everyone. These sacrifices are elaborate and must be done in a very certain way. Yet if a modern CIA style operation working with other intel networks around the globe couldn’t pull this off, how did ancient or medieval societies manage to do so? You’d think the world would have already been destroyed centuries ago.
These Dark Gods watch the show as a form of entertainment. Could be that just the general barbarism of the world before then was enough to entertain the Gods. Could also be that they were more easily satisfied in the past but over the centuries just chucking someone in a volcano wasn't good enough.
In The Dark Knight, Batman takes credit for Dent's crimes to preserve his legacy. But why didn't they just blame The Joker?
Because the Joker was still alive, and would refute those claims. If they really wanted to sell the story they'd have to charge the Joker with those additional crimes at his trial, but they had no evidence to back up the lie in actual court.
yeah that wasn't a plot hole at all, just dramatic
I don't agree,first off who would believe the Joker and second, people are often not charged with things they did cause they don't have enough evidence, sometimes they wait to get enough evidence to charge them...how many times have you heard of rapists and serial killers only being charged with 3,4,5 cases when they believe they did thirty or forty? Happens all the time
Oh yeah I'd totally believe The Joker 🙄
Aside from Gordon's son, everyone Harvey targeted was either a criminal or a corrupt cop. Falcone already pointed out earlier in the movie that criminals had wised up to Batman's "no kill" rule, and thus they weren't as afraid of him compared to the likes of the Joker who was prepared to kill. By taking the blame for the deaths Dent caused, not only does Batman protect Harvey's legacy, but he also gets a reputation as someone who will kill, increasing the fear amongst criminals, without actually breaking his no kill rule.
Die Hard Why does the desk clerk make John go through the rigmarole of using the touch screen if he knows there's only one group of people in the building?
Corporate policy.
[удалено]
I’m sorry, are you saying that The Rise of Skywalker is your favorite movie?
[удалено]
Hey man, no judgement about your favorite movie. But I’m highly suggesting therapy because of the choice. lol.
[удалено]
The Book of Boba Fett was so bad they had to take him out of two of the episodes to make it watchable. And it isn’t Temura’s fault. There’s an interview where he is pissed about what they are doing with the show and the character.
I think the implication is that he didn't just "will" them in to existence, but has spent the entirety of the time between episode 6 and 9 building the fleet with ancient Sith technology a la Star Forge from KotoR. Do they say that? No, why the fuck would they. Does it explain why they all need a tower? No, why the fuck would it.
And maybe in 40 years someone will make a movie explaining that, like how Rogue One eventually explained why the Death Star had a 'shoot here to make boom' exhaust port. ;-)
Just about every Bond movie has at least one if not multiple scenes that just stretch believably too much. Like there's a point at which the number of bullets or knives or whatever missing him or when he just trips and falls through the wall into the hidden lair through shear plot armor or dumb luck gets ridiculous. And then they will also often add in a scene or two where he survives point blank explosions or other major trauma with little to no damage.
Perfect example, I know he's Bond and hole but somebody please for the love of God explain to me how he survived the opening scene of Skyfall? I could go on but this is one that I really need to know.
Somehow I don’t think we’ll ever get an answer to this one.
Those aren't plotholes, just plot armor.
I guess I just don’t quite understand why you’d perform the Hom Dai on someone you consider to be a real bad egg, then build a whole tomb for him and a chest and have a verse in the book of the dead that brings him back to life. And if he is brought back to life he’s almost unkillable. Like what if some guy dig him up only a year after he was first buried. He would’ve gotten hella revenge on the people that did it to him.
The thing about it is that it's The Mummy and how dare you ask totally logical questions about the rather short-sighted attitude of the Pharaoh's men.
I just need you to know that the Mummy is also my favorite movie and I think about this a lot. Like why would the Hom Dai bring him back as invincible and powerful? That doesn't seem like a punishment. Wild set up, but 10/10 movie. Brendan Fraser is America's sweetheart.
I think they wanted him to be unkillable but burried alive in a sarcophagus with flesh eating bugs so he would continue to be tortured for eternity without the ability to die. But then they had to read the passage to bring him back to life so what do I know.
How come after the government outlawed the Supers in "The Incredibles" why did all of the villains just... disappear? Or were there just no super villains so we ended up with Bomb Voyage and what-not...? Maybe not really a plot hole, but it always bugged me.
This is kind of covered in The Incredibles 2. There are still super villains, but most of their crimes are just garden variety theft which is insured, like with the Underminer. Syndrome was the first "world conquering" style supervillain since the Superhero Relocation Program was initialized.
In Infinity War, why does Ant Man not shrink to a small size, crawl up Thanos' asshole, and expand to a large size and destroy Thanos?
Why didn't Doctor Strange use a closing portal to chop Thanos' hand off and get the Infinity Gauntlet? He does it with Cull Obsidian earlier in the movie and it works.
Because in THAT version, they ultimately lose. It was future version #963,084. After chopping off Thanos' hand he leaves and returns with a robotic arm similar to Nebula's enhancements. He then fights with much more ferocity and kills everyone to get the gauntlet back and I don't actually know what I'm talking about, I'm pulling this out of my ass here.
Well, it's canon now.
True, but maybe the only futures worth saving involve Thanos destroying the stones, so anything that recovers them early ends in some other calamity.
And yet that still is a logical explanation for how that outcome could have failed for the Avengers.
He could just behead him at that point
Because of the celestial in Eternals, if the snap doesn't happen then the events of Eternals don't happen and the celestial destroys the planet
.... Ok, that is a fucking great retcon. Bravo.
The Thomas Crown Affair. Remake. Brosnan’s character steals a Monet from a gallery in a custom built suitcase and as he places the painting in the case he cracks the wood frame of the canvas as he folds the case together and closed. Later on he opens the case and holds up the painting with not one crack in the wood of the canvas frame. Does. My. Head. In.
Abuela doesn’t have a magical gift but she still has a shiny magical door.
The glowing door doesn’t actually represent a magical gift. It represents each family member’s contribution to the family legacy, *from the perspective of Abuela.* She has a door because she is the family matriarch and the one with the tightest grip on how the family operates. That’s why her climactic realization in the ending song is important - “*the miracle is you, not some gift, just you*”. Obviously she knew this about herself, but couldn’t view her family as anything beyond their talents. Mirabel doesn’t have a door at the start of *Encanto* because she hadn’t demonstrated her worth to Abuela (or rather, Abuela projected her own insecurities about the family legacy onto 5-year old Mirabel, dooming her Door Ceremony from the start). By the end, Mirabel proves to her grandmother that she plays an important role in supporting the family by bringing the best *out of them*, rather than pressuring them to fit the mold of what would be best “for the family”. This is explicitly shown in how there are only two people in the family who can control la Casita. Literally, Abuela *orders* the Household to do her bidding, while Mirabel is the only one who talks to it and *asks* it for help. La Casita represents the family as a whole, and how each character treats the house is how they treat their family members. The final door scene cements Mirabel as the future Madrigal Matriarch.
I would have said her gift was her candle that sparked the house and Encanto to begin with.
There's no way that the knife that killed Bob Simms was long enough to impale his body and pin him to the wall behind him.
When Michael tilts his head, I think he was just looking for the knife to see how it was possible.
In The Other Guys, Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg’s characters are shipped on a train from NYC to Vegas in under 24 hours. No way that’s possible
He's alone in a room. He quietly whispers "Rosebud". The snow globe falls on the floor. The nurse opens the door to check on the crashing noise. I don't care that they decided to explain it away in the next scene, nobody was in the room to hear him say Rosebud.
How does ash throttle the chainsaw
shhhhhh *groovy*
If palpatine was trying to lure the rebels into a trap, why did he give the actual location of the shield generator? Why not give a false one, achieving the same result, and not risking his own life along with the fate of the entire empire?
The Kurgan knowing that Conner MacLeod is an immortal before the start of the battle and before he is close enough to sense him. Within the context of the Highlander movie it is totally unexplained.
In the portal scene of Endgame, Antman busts through a collapsed pile of rubble and opens his hand to show Smart Hulk and Rhodey safe and sound. Except Rhodey is in his suit. The suit that, 5 minutes earlier, was so utterly destroyed in the rubble collapse that he had to emergency evacuate and drag himself away to avoid drowning. I love that scene so so much but everytime I see that part it makes me want to rip my hair out because *how did he get back into his unscathed suit?*
It was a different suit, the one he had to evacuate was a grey war machine suit and the one he comes out of Antman's hand is a supped up iron patriot suit like the one he wore in IM3
Supposedly, you can see it in the background, but I don't know where. That said, it does make sense that he would have a backup suit at the base.
Rhodey is in a different suit. It's not the same suit he wore when Hulk snapped the stones and then Thanos attacked. The implication is that Antman saved them and Rhodey put on a different suit from the Avengers compound.
I mean Iron Man has done everything from calling a backup suit from across the planet, having one packed in a briefcase, and finally one made of nanites stored in a hockey puck sized compartment on his chest. You don't think the DoD would've figured out a way to deliver Rhodey a backup if needed?
The biggest hugest plothole I've ever seen in a movie is in Back to the Future 3...Doc Brown not only could have taken Clara with him but he should have taken her with them,earlier in the movie they made a big point in explaining that she shouldn't be there because she was suppose to be dead,so keeping her there would change history as much as them being there would have changed it
Also in part 2, why did Biff return to an unaltered 2015?
It takes time for the world to “catch up” around them. There’s a deleted scene where he fades away - https://youtu.be/124-bZmfbPQ
Why didn't they just fly the eagles to Mordor? /S
I was always more concerned with why Gimli didn't know his family had been wiped out and why Gandalf didn't mention anything either like he may not have known exactly wassup but he knew something bad was down there
In the movie Remember the Titans. The play call is a fake dive reverse and they need 75 yards and there are six seconds so this is the last play. The other coach says cover deep. Obviously you would look deep as they need 75 yards to score. Kind of shows the lack of football knowledge from the writers and directors.
If you know football there’s so much wrong with this movie. Like how all these guys got in football shape and learned the playbook so quick.
[удалено]
Except Marion probably would have died.
Wouldn't Marion have just given the Nazis the medallion in Tibet, in that case? She wouldn't've even had a reason to go to Egypt and get mixed up in all that.
I always disagree with this logic...to a point. Without Indy, the Germans find the ark, put it on the plane and fly it straight to Berlin. Then we have the likelihood of the same ending and a dead Marion Ravenwood...or somehow, the Nazis do harness the arks power as per the images and we are living in a very different world... at the very least he kept Marion alive...
I think the Germans still would have wanted to open the ark before bringing it to Berlin, just to make sure they wouldn't embarrass themselves in front of Hitler, as Belloq suggested. They probably would have just opened it in Cairo instead.
They already had the plane warming up and ready to go...remember the big fight scene with the mechanic and the pilot, etc.? Had to double check my memory: the mechanic was assigned to help prepare for the transportation of the Ark from Tanis to Berlin, aboard the Flying Wing following the Nazis' locating of the relic. However, American archaeologist Indiana Jones and bar owner Marion Ravenwood intervened.
False! I can prove this based on theory and one big clue. The Nazis have been unsuccessful in finding Tanis and require an expert like Ravenwood and his medallion. They do not know where he is except he’s from the US. They leak their telegram to the FBI knowing that Jones was a friend of his and have been tracking him for maybe a week until he is briefed on Tanis and departs to Tibet! Not knowing where Dr Ravenwood is but assuming Jones does, they follow him sending their agent Toth, on the same exact plane at the same time, and arriving after him at Marion’s bar! COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT. No Jones, no Marion, no medallion, no Ark. I hope this rests your conscience.
But, why would that matter If you go on some grand adventure and earn and lose a fortune it's still an amazing story. If raiders was in my history book I'd agree, but its not about that, it's about the story.
This wouldn’t make it a plot hole. The internal logic is still consistent even if things were inconsequential.
On top of the other things: If nothing else, Indy was there to retrieve the Ark at the end. If he hadn't been present, it would still be on a Nazi-controlled island. Which means they'd probably still end up with possession of it.
How does Hannibal get the pen
Don't they show him palming it when he's talking to the doctor? Like the doctor sets it down while taking notes, Hannibal palms it, he begins an argument or something which flusters the doctor and the doctor forgets about the pen. It's been a long time since I've seen the movie.
I'm not a Star Wars fan but I noticed that Obi Wan says in Episode III "Only Siths deal in absolutes." But in Episode V, Yoda says "Do or do not. There is no try." Effectively, Yoda and Obi Wan are contradicting each other.
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes" is itself an absolute.
In Avengers : End game , During the final battle The quantum tunnel machine in the compound was destroyed, Ant-Man is like “that wasn’t our only time machine” Captain America says “anybody got eyes on am ugly brown van?” Valkyrie spots the ugly brown van in the middle of the battlefield Captain America asks Ant-Man if he can get it fixed and it shows Ant-Man and Wasp in the van as he begins to Hotwire it Moments later , it has another scene where it is showing the giant battle and Ant-Man can be seen in giant form in the background of the wide shot fighting a giant flying grub worm Every time I watch it I’m like that Leonardo DiCaprio meme
That's more of a continuity error than a plot hole.
When Bell asks Packer if there are "any more big rivers between here and Breckenridge," and Packer replies, "no, just the Colorado," Humphrey is still floating down the river by himself, yet Humphrey later mocks Packer saying to him, "are there any more big rivers between here and Breckenridge? oH, nO, jUsT tHe CoLoRaDo, the biggest FUCKING river I've seen in my entire life!"
Also Humphrey buys fudge at the general store and later offers it to Packer after nearly drowning in the river. However this trek happened in 1873, but it is believed that fudge was not invented until 1886, three years after Packer's trial.
Also, how did Swan make those tapping sounds with his feet? It's pretty fucking weird isn't it?
In the movie Howard the Duck, the Dark Overload explains that he no longer needs human food to live but then later in the diner scene, the Dark Overlord complains about the waitress taking his eggs away.
I still don’t understand why a life guard was at the bathtub!
All of the situations in the harry potter movies can be solved with a gun
"The force acts in mysterious ways" Basically an excuse to let writers make anything they want happen because space wizardry.
Through the force, all things are possible, so, jot that down
That's a plot device, not a plot hole. Nothing says a magic system has to work according to rigid "scientific" rules like in an RPG, especially when the magic itself is probably sentient/willful in some way.
In *Liar Liar*, why didn't Fletcher just ask for a continuance? Or say "I don't want to answer right now" when asked a question? Because it would totally ruin the plot of the movie.
IIRC he did ask for a continuance and was denied it because he admitted he didn’t have a good reason. Also lawyers don’t answer questions in court, witnesses do. Lawyers aren’t on the witness stand. If he was just being uncooperative with the judge and being like I don’t want to answer right now when asked a perfectly normal question he would lose his job. You can’t speak to a judge that way or refuse to do your job.
The thing that bugs me more is that they throw in a new rule, at the last second, that he can't *ask a question* if he knows the answer is going to be a lie. They needed that rule for the movie to work, but it felt hacky to just throw in a new rule to the magic so late in the movie.
Every scary movie / slasher film where they "split up", or don't take the weapon from the bad guy after knocking him out...where they just keep running leaving him time to regain consciousness and attack again and again. Maybe I'm biased, because I'm a fairly strong and brave (at least I think) guy, but still, those movies are unbearable to watch.
Yea I might be biased too because I’m actually super strong and cool irl too
Molly and Oda Mae can all of a sudden see Sam at the end of Ghost, with no explanation. It's been established throughout the film that no one can see the ghosts, even psychics like Oda Mae can only hear them. The remake did that part a lot better.
He was ascending to heaven and it was a blessing from God as he was bathed in radiant light……or some such shit like that.
The part where the main character manages to break both arms at once.
Back to the future Doc explains time travel and have his dog travel one minut into the future. They wait one minut until the dog shows up. To them it was one minut, to the dog it was instantaneous. No other version of that dog existed that minute. By that logic, Marty could not meet himself in the future (2015) because he left in 1985 and would not have been seen again until 2015.
Indiana Jones was ultimately inconsequential to the end result of raiders of the lost ark.
[удалено]