Every film has plot holes. A
gripe of internet folk is to complain to no end about them, making claims that
they undermine the whole film. This is not true. It is wholly possible to have
a film loaded with plot holes, that’s still a good film.
What’s crucial about whether a
plot-hole can destroy a film is how it’s executed. For example in Star Trek:
Generations, there’s a bit where basically everyone’s dead, but Picard, has the
ability (god knows how) to go back in time, to any point he wants, in order to
stop the bad guy killing everyone. He chooses to go back to the point a few
minutes before the bad guy kills everyone. This is an example of very poor
execution, as the entire outcome of the story pivots on Picard’s decision. There
is no explanation for why Picard doesn’t choose to go back to a point several
days, or weeks before the bad guy killed everyone and stopped the whole
situation from happening.
The key to a plot hole not
destroying a film, is it resulting from a more minor part of the film.
During this year, I have seen
two films that contain significant plot holes, but that do just this.
The first is the Dark Knight
Rises, which has some really big gaps in common sense. The biggest of these is
the fact that Miranda Tate, is in fact Talia (one of the baddies) who becomes
aware of Bruce Wayne’s return to Gotham before Bane does and (despite tricking
Gordon into attacking the wrong bomb truck and informing Bane of the special
forces team that got sneaked into the city) doesn’t tell Bane that his nemesis
is back.
This significant hole is
covered, by the fact that the story remains full enough, for us not to notice
it right away. The important issues of the film remain forefront in the
audiences’ mind and therefore, Talia suddenly forgetting to tell her friend
that his about to get is arse kicked by someone dressed as a bat, gets pushed
aside, so that we can enjoy the action and Anne Hatheway in a catsuit.
The second film I’ve seen that
has a truly huge plot hole, is Looper. Time travel stories especially have the
major problems with plot holes, as the only way to really do much with them is
to construct paradoxes, which (in the majority of cases) don't ever fully make
sense.
To this effect, the first time
that the nasty plot hole in this film shows it’s head, is when we get our first
example of what happens when you “let your loop run.”
This is shown through Seth,
when is older self starts to lose body parts as a result of Abe cutting bits of
his younger self off. This doesn’t work. If we are to assume that the injuries
of younger Seth can affect older Seth, then we have to assume that cause and
effect is the driving force behind it. We are saying here, that younger Seth is
the beginning of the line and that older Seth is the end. Changes made to the
beginning affect the end. But they don't just affect the end. Every part of the
line would have been changed, by any changes to the beginning, therefore older
Seth wouldn’t just lose body parts, he never would have had them; his younger
self would have lived the rest of the line, without them. Given the amount of
damage that is done younger Seth, older Seth would probably never even have
been there, given that he would have been in no condition to have been sent
back.
This same plot hole exists at
the end of the film, as when young Joe figures out that he’s responsible for creating
the Rainmaker, his older self’s entire perception of the events should have
changed. As a HISHE parody as already said, the very knowledge should have been
enough to alter the time lines, without him having to kill himself.
In a similar way to the TDKR,
this film remains interesting enough for us to really be bothered, by this
gaping inconsistency in the time travel rules. The differences in the priorities
of the two Joes’ is the primary focus, making the holes in logic a secondary
concern.
Err…so that’s how to make plot
holes work.
Merry Christmas!!!
