Something interesting is happening here…
I’ve seen in this sub since the show first aired arguments about choices Richard has made in his writing that seems to leave a lot of questions on the table. Or have people say there’s a lack of realism in it that’s unacceptable for a standard of writing.
By this I mean examples like in the hospital with Ruben and Niall, how no nurse seemed to be arsed to go in and check in on all the banging. many missing plot holes in the wedding, such as how Richard even was able to show up in the first place if he’s supposed to be in prison?
I’ve been mulling it over of what this could all be and I’m open to the idea he just was “sloppy”, but I do think it makes sense to at least explore if there’s something deeper in all this, especially considering Richard has himself said he doesn’t know exactly what he wrote in interviews.
First of all, if these plot hole choices are deliberate, How purposefully does Richard know about it? What can we say about a generally agreed upon standard of writing being subverted by leaving out contextualizing plot points. Can it be acknowledged as a legitimate style, or can it only be sloppiness?
Keep in mind the fact that Richard has said how he works intensely at these scripts, and he does have a strong background in writing. Both doing well academically and working as a TV writer.
This substack article from a GQ writer I thought had some good ideas as well:
https://newsletter.aaronbalick.com/p/the-psychology-of-half-man-why-even