r/plotholes

While everyone blaming Bear, in all actuality it was Ian.

​

If Ian would have told Bear he was smashing Nicki instead of egging on his infatuation, that info would've freed Bear to look elsewhere and perhaps notice Sarah crashing on him. Furthermore, Bear wouldn't have made the wish if he knew his friend was picking her. The whole situation could've been avoided if Ian hadn't been a selfish azzhole and played in Bears face

​

Bear is the real victim bc everyone but him already knew that Ian and Nicki were fwb.🤷🏾‍♀️

I just watched the movie and was wondering if there are some answers to these plot questions.

When they discovered the Petrova line and then discovered that it was a flow of astrophages from the Sun to Venus. And then Grace discovers that the astrophages are traveling to the CO2-rich atmosphere of Venus (bypassing Mercury) to breed and then return.

I would have liked some scenes discussing some alternatives to the plan that they eventually settled on. The Petrova line starts off thin and then arcs towards Venus where it spreads out. Once Grace killed one astrophage and then figured out its composition. Why was it not simpler to figure out an infrared-invisible filter to kill astrophages before they reached Venus or before they returned to the sun? They could have dismissed it by saying they couldn't filter them fast enough or the filter would get saturated too quickly or anything. But the movie didn't attempt to convince us that discovering a new organism, figuring out how it breeds, it being able to breed quick enough to fuel a starship with new engines invented and manufactured to take advantage of its high energy-density, and then make a 12 year trip to a distant star was a more feasible plan.

Why was it planned as a suicide mission due to the engines not having enough macrophages to return to Earth? Was it not possible to plot a course that included refilling astrophages as fuel when they showed the galaxy was littered with Petrova lines? They knew that the destination star had its own Petrova Line? Why wasn't it incorporated into the plan to refuel from those astrophages before returning home?

Did they need to collect a large sample of the amoebas that kill the astrophages and send them back? It was never going to be enough to replicate the population of amoebas required on Venus, so why wouldn't they just sequence the organism and transmit that data back to scientists on Earth instead? Or just use the amoebas to understand how to metabolize the astrophages and then send that mechanism back to Earth. They already had to evolve a strain that could survive the Nitrogen content of Venus' atmosphere, but what about it's gravity or radiation? The solution is going to end up highly-customized anyway. When the amoebas arrive on Earth, it's said that they will start growing more of them anyway. Wouldn't the data be enough (kind of like in another show where the instructions for a virus are sent to earth and then scientists on the ground create them). This felt like a contrivance to make that dangerous amoeba-collection mission happen.

Been marathoning the whole series again and I can't stop thinking about how many holes are in Death's "design." Someone please explain these to me because I'm losing it.

The one that bugs me most across every movie: why is it always the same person who gets the vision, survives the disaster, and then just has to sit there watching their friends drop one by one? Like at what point does Death just decide "nah you're last, enjoy the show"?

Anyway here's my breakdown by movie:

>!FD1 — if saving people off that plane throws off the whole order, why does it mess with the fate of people who weren't even ON the flight? And the timeline makes zero sense, some people get picked off in days, others get YEARS.!<

>!FD2 — the survivors from part 1 get years of peace before Death circles back? And Clear survives TWO entire movies without being next. Girl has main character plot armor at that point, not "design."!<

>!FD3 — the photo clues thing is so dumb when you think about it. They never actually help anyone avoid dying, they only make sense after the fact. What's even the point of showing them?? Also the coaster "reset" saves some people permanently but not others? Inconsistent.!<

>!The Final Destination (the 4th one) — supposedly the kill order follows who'd have died in the original crash, but it 100% just feels like whoever gets the coolest death scene goes next. And why does the random theater manager get pulled into a death chain he was never part of?!<

>!FD5 — this is a PREQUEL but somehow it invents the "kill someone to steal their remaining lifespan" trick, which is never mentioned again in any other movie. If that actually works, why doesn't every single character in the franchise just try it immediately?!<

>!Bloodlines — if Death can hunt an entire family line decades later, why not just kill the original survivor right away instead of waiting for grandkids? And breaking the chain just... erases people who already existed? How does that even work??!<

Curious if anyone has in-universe explanations for these or if it's just "the movies need kills so logic goes out the window." Drop your own plot holes below too.

I was rewatching Ella Enchanted after a long time, and I realized that her mother, Mandy, or anyone who knew about the curse and wanted it lifted could have told her not to follow it, which would have spared Ella from a lot of problems. I don't remember Lucinda stating anything against this, so what was stopping them from doing so?

&#x200B;

I used to think Coherence was one of those films where every strange detail could be explained by carefully tracking the different houses and versions of the characters.

After rewatching it and looking more closely at the dialogue, however, I think the film’s central logic is flawed.

The movie appears to establish the following rule:

Everyone has one shared history until the comet event, after which reality branches into different possibilities.

Mike effectively confirms this when he talks about sleeping with Beth. Because the affair happened before the comet, he concludes that every version of Mike must have done it.

That reasoning makes sense. If the realities only split during the dinner party, then every version of each character should have the same memories and history before that point.

However, the film then includes apparent differences that existed before the comet.

Laurie and yoga

Near the beginning, Mike asks Laurie about teaching some kind of Spanish yoga. Laurie denies it and says that she did not do yoga.

Later, Laurie tells Kevin that after their previous sexual encounter, she had to do yoga for a week.

Some people explain this by saying that the later Laurie came from another reality where she had a different history.

But that does not solve the problem.

The encounter with Kevin and her experience with yoga happened before the comet. If the realities shared the same history until that evening, then either every Laurie did yoga or none of them did.

A different Laurie could make different decisions during the party, but she should not suddenly possess a different past.

Laurie not recognising Mike from Roswell

Laurie claims to be a fan of Roswell, while Mike says he appeared regularly in the series. Yet she apparently does not recognise him.

This is sometimes treated as evidence that Laurie came from another universe.

Again, that explanation only works if the universes already had significantly different histories before the comet. Perhaps Mike appeared in Roswell in one reality but not another.

But that directly conflicts with Mike’s claim that the pre-comet affair occurred in every reality.

You cannot use both explanations simultaneously:

1. All realities share the same history until the comet.

2. The realities had different histories long before the comet.

Those are different multiverse models.

Kevin and Laurie’s history should also be universal

Kevin and Laurie had a previous encounter before the dinner party.

Therefore, every Kevin and Laurie should remember the same event, unless the film is suggesting that realities had already diverged before the comet.

Their behaviour during the dinner could vary. One Laurie might flirt with Kevin, while another might not. One Kevin might respond, while another rejects her.

But the event that happened before the party should remain the same in every reality.

The film wants two incompatible systems

The movie seems to switch between two models depending on what a scene requires.

Model A: The realities split during the comet event

This supports Mike’s argument about the affair. Everyone shares the same past, but different choices during the evening create different branches.

Model B: The realities had different histories before the comet

This is the explanation usually offered for Laurie’s yoga comments, her failure to recognise Mike, and possibly differences between versions of Kevin and Emily.

Both models are individually possible, but the film does not clearly establish that both are operating.

If countless realities already existed with different histories, Mike could not confidently say that every version of him had the affair. There should be realities where he did not do it.

If all realities originated from the same shared timeline that evening, Laurie cannot come from a branch where her pre-comet history was different.

“Quantum mechanics is confusing” is not a complete explanation

A film does not need to portray real quantum physics accurately. Fiction can invent its own rules.

The problem is not scientific inaccuracy. The problem is internal consistency.

Once a story establishes a fictional rule, its later events should follow that rule. Saying “there are infinite realities” cannot automatically explain every contradiction.

Infinite realities would actually make Mike’s statement about the affair less reliable, not more reliable.

The most likely explanation

Coherence was made using a heavily improvised production method. The actors were given information and motivations rather than a conventional complete screenplay.

That method created natural performances and genuine uncertainty, which is one of the film’s greatest strengths.

But it also means that not every line was necessarily constructed as a precise clue in a mathematically consistent multiverse puzzle.

The yoga dialogue may simply be an improvisational inconsistency. Laurie may also have meant that she never taught yoga, rather than that she had literally never done it, although her wording makes that explanation feel slightly forced.

This does not make the movie bad

I still think Coherence works extremely well as a psychological thriller.

The glow sticks, numbered photographs, boxes, duplicate groups and characters becoming lost between houses create a brilliant atmosphere of paranoia.

The emotional idea is also effective: once someone enters the darkness, they may never know whether they returned to their original reality.

But I no longer think the movie is the perfectly airtight logic puzzle it is sometimes presented as.

Its large-scale structure is clever. Its dialogue-level continuity is much less reliable.

The movie works better if you treat it as a paranoid relationship drama built around a multiverse concept, rather than a puzzle where every strange line has one logically correct explanation.

TL;DR: The film says events before the comet happened in every reality, but fans also explain pre-comet memory differences by claiming characters came from realities with different pasts. Those explanations contradict each other. Coherence is still a very effective thriller, but its multiverse rules are not completely coherent.

I was watching I Will Find You Episode 5 and around 6:54 minutes left, during the high-speed chase scene. A bird is on the grass and then flies upward as the truck approaches. It looks like the vehicle may pass directly through or possibly hit the bird, but I’m not sure if it is just camera angle, timing, or editing.

Has anyone else noticed this moment in the episode? I’m trying to figure out if it was an actual collision or just an illusion created by perspective and editing. It happens very quickly so it’s hard to tell on first viewing.

Having Harry and Lloyd having no idea what $ex actually is is actually kinda dumb (pun intended). Several times throughout the movie (and the 1st 1) it hints at Harry and Lloyd having an idea of what $ex is so why would they do that? It's like they (the writers) forgot about all the subtle hints that they dropped... Lloyd's fantasies for example.

I loved this show as a kid and have been rewatching it from the beginning all the way through. I’m about halfway done with season 5 now and have noticed some inconsistencies while watching.
I still love this show and at the end of the day, it’s just a sitcom and I know it’s really not that serious. I just have fun catching stuff like this and would like to share with the class. Without further ado, here is what I have so far:

In high school, Sabrina gets an F in season 1 episode 12 and then gets a C in season 3 episode 18. Then while in college in season 5 episode 9 when she gets a bad grade, she tells Roxie & Miles that it’s her first C she’s ever gotten.

In season 4 episode 15 Sabrina’s aunts say they’re going to get Cupid’s help and Sabrina says “Cupid? Who gives a second opinion, the Easter bunny?” insinuating she hasn’t already met him- Even though she has already met Cupid in episodes season 2 episode 3, season 2 episode 17, and season 3 episode 16.

In season 5 episode 2 Roxie specifically states she set her class schedule so that nothing starts before 3 pm, but in season 5 episode 13 she tells Sabrina & Miles she has to go to bed because she has a psych test at 8:30 am the next day.

In season 4 episode 2 Sabrina is told she has to mentor a young witch despite her never having a mentor during her witch studies (only the quizmaster which they explicitly say is not the same thing)
They also never develop this character and there is no follow up for how Dreama is doing with witchy things (at least not so far as I have seen by season 5). So far the last I saw her was season 4 episode 18 where she was turned into a mouse but then saved, nothing that tied up that storyline.

In season 1 episode 8 actor Donald Faison plays the character Justin in Sabrina’s high school. In season 2 episode 25 he plays the character Dashiell, a witch in the other realm.

So overall I thought the series was ok. It wasn't as good as the other series but I'm wondering if I don't notice the issues when its set in UK as they become very obvious set in US especially Boston area where I live.

Before getting into it Harlan Coben and producers should try to spend an hour or so before releasing a book and then a series to try and flesh out a stories minor and major plot holes. I**t seems trivial but minor mistakes do matter and are easily solvable with either a 10 second Google search or even a few interns actually checking this stuff.**

SPOILERS

* >!David would not be in prison in Maine. He was convicted of a state crime in Massachusetts and would not be in a Maine state prison. He would be in a MCI prison. There is literally zero reason to have him in prison in Maine and this issue would be true no matter where in the US its set and adds nothing to story so dumb mistake to make.!<
* >!Revere MA is not in Boston. While it is in Suffolk County and near Boston it isn't Boston. This is important. They have their own police department etc. !<
* >!David would have had access to literally all the homicide files and everything that the police had at the time. Failure to provide key investigatory material would be a massive Brady Violation. While Brady violations do happen all the time failure to turn over all investigation files is very basic and would be ground for a retrial. Hell its common for prisoners to get access to their files in prison as they are the ones that often work on their appeals with their lawyers etc. The doing it as a favor was really not needed!<
* >!The police investigation into the homicide would not have been a Boston Police case. In Mass all homicide investigations are handled by State Police with local PD assistance aside from a few cities that have homicide units Revere is not one of those towns though. This is a major error and literally zero reason to just make them state cops rather then BPD. BPD would have no say or investigation in the kid's death.!<
* >!The initial DNA testing at court doesn't make sense. For major forensic testing like what was done in the show the defense is invited to both witness it and do their own swabs etc to get their own independent testing done. David was a law professor he would be well aware etc. !<
* >!The FBI would not be the fed agency to get involved. Again zero reason to have it be them just have it be US Marshals no reason to have the feds be FBI. !<
* >!Federal agencies never allow family members to work together. No favors ever just no. Make it friend of family or something not father/daughter thats lame and adds nothing to plot!<
* >!The Cowboy move by exhuming the body is literally dumbest move. Without an official action by courts doing it anything found or not found is not useable in court. Also no single person is digging 6 feet under by themselves in the middle of the night etc. Just not happening. !<
* >!Going to NYC when Bolo issued and not swapping license plates is beyond dumb. Its most camera area in the country. !<
* >!Feds not using like 100+ NYPD to help apprehend an escapee makes zero sense you'd have them at all points of egress/ingress and on roof. David being able to escape like that would be beyond incompetence !<
* >!Rachel would have likely had an ankle monitor also bail cannot be set until she saw a judge. !<
* >!Boston Police Department doesn't do precincts. They have districts. Also If Rachel lives in Revere it would be Revere police or State outside her place not BPD!<
* >!The FBI chase to the airstrip wouldn't just be FBI. Like once again they would call in local and state to get ahead and stop them. Not doing that makes zero sense. Rather then a chase maybe make it a tip that lucks out the chase is bad writing though!<
* >!Julie cancelling the DNA test makes zero sense. The lead might be a stretch but a DNA is relatively cheap. Federal agencies routinely get leads/tips etc and with the photo it would typically be worth the few thousand to rule out the lead rather then risk it leaking as that would create a DOJ PR nightmare if its leaked she blocked a DNA test with a photo and leads!<
* >!Boston General is not a hospital. There is Mass General called MGH. There is also Boston Medical Center. !<
* >!Adam calling the transit agency the MTA. For fuck's sake its called the MBTA but if he was a Boston cop he would have said THE T!!<

This has bugged me all my life so now I'm calling it out.

Philosophers Stone, Chess game on the route to quirrell. Ron goes down and Harry shouts 'Don't move! We're still playing'. Then Harry, a bishop, walks diagonally (correct as again, Bishop), stands right in front of the king and says 'Checkmate'.

How?

Directly in front? So not in check from Harry then?

Reveals a different piece to put long in check? Nope.

He comes from the whole other side of the board.

A rook would have had to already be in a straight line which would have been check the previous move and the king would have had to move meaning the queen couldn't attack Ron.

A knight isn't blocked by a bishop so there's no way moving a bishop reveals a knight to check the king.

Obviously pawns can't be checking the king or they would have been on the previous move, or, if they were one square back, the king wouldn't be in check and wouldn't have to take the bishop putting him in check from the pawns.

The other bishop is on a different colour so taking Harry would not put him in check.

And finally revealing a queen that was behind Harry diagonally would mean the king couldn't take Harry, but he'd still not be in check from Harry's move so he doesn't need to.

I've run this again and again and again and there is literally not one single way Harry as a bishop moving across the board diagonally and standing directly in front of the king could result in checkmate.

It's the least believable thing in a movie with 3 headed dogs Chocolate that comes to life.

I'm seeing so many posts about why this wasn't a good movie, but I just wanna highlight all the plot holes that I had. Feel free to add your own.

1. When Daniel was at the farmhouse and the security was surrounding the house, he managed to run through a very clear fence, get to a car, and none of the security, not one, and it looked like there were close to 20–30 people, turned around to look for him?

2. He thought of all these things, like removing the names of the motels. So clearly he knew about the whole eye thing, but why didn't he think to cover Jane's eyes?

3. He gives Jane one of the most precious artifacts knowing that she can easily become possessed.

4. Of all the things they could have chosen to do, they made the aliens look exactly like the same aliens we've been seeing in every sci-fi movie since the '90s. They didn't think once to make them look a little different?broooooo

5. Why are these aliens coming to Earth? Like, why are they coming here all the time just to be harassed, killed and experimented on? If they are beings of higher intelligence, surely they'd have some sort of mayday signal, communication system, or even telepathy to tell the others, "Maybe don't keep coming to this awful planet where we getting abused!."

6. Are you seriously telling me that no one saw these sightings for so long? Where were they? Or did they conveniently only ever happen around naval bases where everything could be covered up?

7. The security company was so awful. Where was the military? If the military was involved in all of this, surely they could've done something to stop what was happening like maybe.. bombing the news centre ?

8. We know Hugo is somehow involved in all of this, but where is he getting all this money from to build this entire operation? What was his relationship with the aliens? There was just no context. I get they're probably setting up a second movie, but there was just no meat given. Maybe some billionaire in the backround?

9. Why couldn't Margaret use her empath abilities on that one villain ? She used them on literally everyone else, and at one point she didn't even make direct eye contact with some of the people she affected. But this one guy was suddenly immune?

10. When they attacked the motel, why didn't anyone think to surround the building before going in? If they had, they probably would've caught Jane.

11. If they always seemed to be ten steps ahead, why didn't they tap the nun's phone? They knew Jane had gone there, and they went to all the effort of tracking the location of the farm, but somehow nobody thought to monitor the nun's phone?

12. What else do those artifacts actually do? We only got tiny glimpses of what they were capable of and somehow they conveniently work EXACTLY the way you want them to.

13. They never explained who the "Experienced People" were or how they even came to be known by that term and are there other people around the world with these psychic abilities who can handle alien artifacts, or is it just this group? That whole concept was never explained.

14. The aliens had apparently been coming to Earth for around 70 years. What were they actually trying to achieve? They never explained their intentions again, I’m sure they were building for a second movie but cummon. I’m not watching number 2.

15. Hugo was clearly far more knowledgeable than Daniel. I get that he couldn't tell him everything, but he could've guided him a lot better. Daniel kept making terrible decisions, and Hugo just seemed to drip feed him information instead of actually helping.

16. And my favourite one... wheelchair alien finally comes out. this alien speaks so long to Daniel... and after all that buildup, all Margaret says is... "Listen." 😂 I genuinely burst out laughing.

Maybe there's a deeper meaning that I'm missing. Maybe the aliens knew humanity was broken and misguided, but still kept coming because they were actually trying to help us. If that's what they were going for, fair enough. But I just don't think the movie did a good job of communicating that.

For the first time ever, I actually replied to messages while sitting in the cinema because I kept checking the time wondering when the movie was finally going to get good.

I read through the discussion threads on here but couldn't find anyone talking about this exact theory.
During the scene where the guns misfire and the ammo cartridge falls out right when they're about to execute them, everyone keeps saying it's bad writing or lucky plot armor. To me it seemed totally obvious that Mr Le Bail was intervening.
Think about it—evil powerful beings love to nudge things in the direction they want, even with signed deals. He didn't break his own rules, but he messed with the physics of the guns just enough to get his own outcome.
It seems like Mr Le Bail would want these people with wealth and power to loose. The High Council got too concentrated and it was probably just boring for him to watch. Saving the sisters felt like a total reset of his entire system because the monopoly got stale. By letting the old guard get wiped out at dawn, he shatters the whole system and forces a completely new, desperate generation to come make deals with him.
Am I crazy or does this make way more sense than just "panicked cultists forgot how guns work"? Let me know what you think.

So in the original it seems to be made clear that toys are alive and sentient only if they depict a person or creature of some type (like the piggy bank or Mr. Potato Head or the aliens in the claw grab machine.)

But then it becomes clear that even a plastic spork can become sentient if a kid turns it into a toy, by gluing on googly eyes and wires to make a face and arms....well at least what point does that become sentient? What if they just glue the eyes on? It's clear not all sorts of playthings are, like alphabet blocks or legos don't seem to be alive. And now in the latest it looks like that even tablets are alive and sentient and can interact with toys....that opens up loads of questions! Are phones also? They aren't seen as such in any previous ones. What about TVs, radios, and even things like microwaves and refrigerators? They aren't portrayed as being alive but they're tech just like tablets.

It seems to be pretty inconsistent and not logical over which items are actually alive.

Only posting here since r/MalayalamMovies would not allow me to post there due to want of karma.🤷

*SPOILER ALERT* Only intended for people who have watched the movie.

So I watched the movie a few days back and really enjoyed the first half and so I was expecting a killer second half. But I felt the second half was kind of a let down compared to the first half. I thought the Tovino portion was kind of laggy but what agitated me the most about the movie was, at least in my opinion, a major plot hole in the story.

I'm referring to the part where the mom escapes the crime scene after framing the innocent lady as the culprit. I just cannot wrap my head around the reason for the mom not going to Balan then itself to pick him and just escape with him.

Since we know that she escaped the crime scene without anyone finding out it's her who did it and she slipped out the back of the house, she could have just taken her normal every day route to Balan's bus stop and could have just picked him up and left. I don't know what prevented her. It's obvious that the other lady was framed and obviously people don't expect her to be culprit, so why didn't she just pick Balan that day itself? Why the hell did we have to go through the years of waiting? I just cannot wrap my head around it. I thought this was very sloppy writing, and I would have really liked the movie if they had thought of a better way to handle this situation.

I donno if others also felt the same way, but I'm really hoping for someone to give me a clarification/explanation to this issue I just pointed out here.