I watched two movies today (days off rock!) and both of them featured amazing plotholes. These were not the everyday, minor “How did he get to the shops and back in the time she said that…”, I was amazed they weren’t noticed in production. Anyways.
The Tru(e?)man Show
The show was billed as being ‘the most expensive ever’
What if Carrey’s character had died young? Massive loss of revenue.
What if someone breaks character and tells him (this did happen, but there were no precautions taken against it happening)
Does everyone live in character the whole time?
How do you afford to pay several hundred actors for working constantly?
Do people go off the island when they aren’t on the show?
How do you explain the concept of the show to a child?
Enemy of the State
Basically, Will Smith receives an object the Government are after. Instead of arresting him until he co-operates, they go to bizarre lengths to track him, in the hope he will lead them to what they want.
Why not just do things the easy way (“Because then there’d be no movie.”) Well, the writers are being paid a lot to write the movie, so they need to do a good job.
I haven’t seen Enemy of the State, but regarding The Truman Show:
They would probably have restarted with a new character. Besides, for that kind of investment I bet they had all kinds of medical care available to ensure he doesn’t due of anything.
They did have precautions to prevent him being told. Only two people ever say anything; the actress who’s unceremoniously dumped ASAP, and the intruder to the studio who gets chucked out pretty damn quick. Besides, all they’d need to do is sign up all of the actors on tight contracts and that’s a disincentive in itself. Besides, after living that long without suspicion, why would he believe half of the actors?
Uh, it was a movie. There’s no way of knowing. But why would they stay in character when not needed?
Because the show is enormously popular, and no doubt a vast hit with advertisers (remember the product placement scene?)
See 3.
Why would a child need to understand it? I guess it was made for an adult audience, really.
I’d just like to comment that I thought the movie Deep Impact was one big gaping plot hole. The annoying part was watch all the human characters sidestep the solutions; by the end of the movie, I was rooting for the asteroid to wipe out the Planet of the Morons.
And in keeping with the OP, how about the fundamental plot hole behind Jurassic Park? “We’re going to open a tropical theme park filled with cloned dinosaurs, and the only way to get here is by helicopter. Oh, and if there’s a storm, we’ll have to shut down and evacuate the whole park…!” With an islandful of people and helicopter-only access? I don’t think so…
First off, I gotta disagree with you on the Truman show. I don’t think any of the things you mention qualify as a plothole. Check it out:
The show didn’t start out as the most expensive ever. Remember, they showed the beginnings of the show, with the single camera. Over time, with the addition of more equipment and, as you mention, the continued survival of the star, the Truman show BECAME the most expensive ever.
Answered your own question here.
No, but judging from the fact that someone did break character in the movie, it would seem that this is part of the plot.
Dunno. If they do, how does it make for a plothole? If they do not, how does it make for a plothole?
Perhaps with the revenue generated by several hundred thousand people watching constantly…
Dunno. If they do, how does it make for a plothole? If they do not, how does it make for a plothole?
Dunno. However, there are plenty of concepts that are tough to explain to a child. Many of them would make excellent movies, probably for the same reason that a child might find them confusing.
I’m right there with ya on Enemy of the State tho - I don’t know what they were thinking.
Here’s a plothole that always bugged me. It’s in the Matrix - I enjoyed the movie thoroughly, but this one part always nagged at me (If you ain’t seen the movie yet, be warned that there be spoilers ahead).
Anyways, the idea is that the machines are using humans as batteries. They grow them in these pod thingies, keeping them unconscious but alive as a constant power source.
Ok, that’s all fine and good. My problem is this… why do the machines go to the trouble of creating this whole virtual universe that each human, while unconscious is plugged into? What does it do for them? Fool the humans? They’re unconscious already, what are they gonna do?
Here’s another issue that pops up in two sets of movies (probably more actually) - time travel, as seen in the Back To The Futures and the Terminators.
The basis of both of these is that someone travels back in time and does something to change events back in the present time. The problem is that the thing then never happened to cause the string of events that led up to them travelling back in time, so it should be safe to assume that in the updated present, they never travelled back to change events. I dunno if I’m saying this in a way that makes any sense to anyone, so let me give this example:
On day 1, I sell my car.
On day 5, I am so tired of walking, I travel back in time to undo the selling of my car.
Assuming I am successful, this means that I never sold my car.
So I never got tired of walking.
So I never went back in time.
So I never undid the selling of my car.
So I still got tired of walking, and on day 5, I went back in time to undo the selling of my car. (go to #3, repeat until eyes cross)
I don’t really see the plothole in Enemy of the State:
The bad guy wanted what Will Smith had. Not the gov’t. If the gov’t got it, then the bad guy would be in jail rather quickly. The bad guy used his position in the gov’t to track Will Smith with the gov’t equipment. He could do so because he was the one in charge of that equipment and responsible for approving it’s use. If he wanted to have Will Smith arrested, then he would have to get a warrant and then the police would get the tape and bad guy is in big trouble. He didn’t send the police after him (if I remember correctly) just his cronies who were in cahoots with him. If he did eventually send the police, it was already after Will Smith was framed for a crime and/or they recovered the disk.
I haven’t seen the movie in a while, but that’s how I remember it.
As an aside, I’ve always liked the idea that this paradox also means you don’t actually have to invent a time machine- once you do, hand yourself the keys:
Present You: Gee, I should invent a time machine.
CRACK!! [sound of timeline discontinuity]
Future You: Here you go!
Present You: Thanks, but how does it work?
Future You: Oh, here’s the manual. See you in a few years!
Course, you’d then be gallavanting across the centuries while your future self is stuck in the present…
Double Jeopardy. The entire premise of the movie, as stated in the title, is flawed. A crime doesn’t consist just of the act, it also includes a circumstance. Otherwise, Joe Crackhead can be convicted of robbing the 7-11 at 123 Anywhere Street, do his time, and continue to rob the same store for the rest of his life untouched by the police. She wasn’t convicted just of killing her husband, she was convicted of killing him “on date X on the boat with weapon Y”. Legal dumbass writers…
I don’t think the alledged plot hole in the matrix really is one. While questioning Morpheous, Agent Smith says that at one point the human rejected the world created and began trying to wake up. My point is although they are unconcious it’s only maintained that way because the human mind is occupied. I don’t think they could keep people unconcious as a power source if there was nothing to keep us occupied. The bigger question that I think was addressed in another thread is why didn’t they just use cows or some equally as unharmful creature. Who knows maybe this will all be explained in one of the sequals
I had the misfortune of seeing Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey the other day (hehe, speaking of gaping plotholes…). They use this idea extensively to conjure up basically any damn thing they happen to need.
I also have a theory that I already tried this ploy. The future me came back to give me the keys, took one look at me, laughed and said “Ha! Not bloody likely”, and headed off to the horse races.
I have another theory that the future me was headed straight back my way with full intent to hand over they keys. He decided to make a brief stop to experience the Summer of Love, passed out on someone’s couch, and just hasn’t woken up yet. It’s only a matter of time… that little burnout should be showing up any minute now.
OK, so we find out that some “bad” guys (although we don’t know why they’re bad) think this girl knows something “bad” about a golf course (we never find out what the bad golf course secret is), turns out she doesn’t know. “Bad” guys go looking for her, they find her, one of Jim Carrey’s personalities saves her.
We never find out what she’s being chased for, why these guys are bad (I guess we’re just supposed to know that since they want her for some unknown reason they’re automatically bad, and because they have guns and look mean). In between this we are treated to three large black geniuses with filthy mouths (from years of watching Richard Pryor) and bathroom humor (dildo, chicken in the ass, others that I’m forgetting). I left this movie thinking, “OK, I’m guessing the Farrely brothers had a bunch of jokes, and couldn’t really think of a plot, so they decided to get Jim Carrey and have the “jokes” come fast and furious, and hopefully no one will notice that they never find out what the hell is going on.” Movie wasn’t entirely bad, Anna Kournikova’s movie debut, I believe :D.
Red Dawn comes to mind. A few teenagers against the entire Russian military (which did manage to defeat the U.S. military lickety split). OK movie other than that.
I have to agree with LifeWillFall about the Matrix. The robots had to keep our minds occupied or our bodies would die. The thing that always fucked with me about the Matrix though was the phones. What the hell was up with the phones? The way the system worked it doesn’t seem like you would need anything to get out.
Max Torque, in the movie, the whole “double jeopardy” theory is told by a convict. It sounds like typical criminal logic. In the movie itself, it is pretty clear that everyone else thinks she’ll go to jail again if she really kills her ex.
Yes, it’s bizaare, but it appears the matrix has this problem with union of mind and body. Your mind can actually wander around in the matrix, leaving your logon point, and be separated from the body.
Then you need to find a logoff point to get the mind out, or your body dies. But does your mind live on as a disembodied program or something? shrugs
The purpose of the Matrix has been discussed before. The most common solution is that since thermodynamic laws are obviously being violated, that the matrix is not merely recreational software for human batteries, it is the world the ai live in. They live off the human brain wetware. They have to keep the humans appeased to survive. This weakness of theirs is why they don’t want the rebels to know about the true purpose of the Matrix.
Another one about Matrix… you know how they had a first person who was able to manipulate and eventually escape the matrix. Well, from what I remember seeing, anyone being in the matrix for that long had atrophyed (sp?) muscles and poor organ development. So how did “the one” make it if there were no other humans around outside of the matrix?
Even then, you would have to feed the cows. How are you going to grow crops to feed the cows (or the humans, for that matter) if you don’t have any sunlight? Plants need sunlight to survive and grow.
I suppose they could grow the plants indoors with artificial lighting, and power these indoor lights with, say, coal-fired electric generators. But then you have to ask: Why not just use the coal-fired electric generators to power the Matrix?
I think what is meant there is that Zion was the city the humans were driven back to, and that the guy who escaped the matrix simply joined up with the other humans to found the Resistance.
This could be due to my misunderstanding of the movie, though.
This is so dumb, but one thing about that terrible movie "Keeping the Faith bugged me. Or maybe I’m just missing something. When Ed Norton can’t sleep, he calls Dharma, and you see her and Ben Stiller in bed, and they don’t hear the answering machine. So Ed didn’t call her cell phone (clearly, because she says on the message "Only three people know this number. . . " and a lot of people know her cell phone number). But then, the next morning, Dharma is leaving Ben’s apartment! What the hell!? I was under the impression Ed called her house. Why would he call Ben’s house, when he was unaware of his relationship with Dharma?
I’d agree with you, were it not for that final scene (used extensively to promote the movie) where she confronts her husband at gunpoint and “law professor” Tommy Lee Jones agrees with her analysis of double jeopardy…