Inconsistencies and plot holes.

[Reaver]

Anyone else sick to death of glaring inconsistencies and plot holes in books, movies and t.v. that die hard fans blatantly choose to ignore?

When writing, do you do your best to eliminate these things or do you just let them slide?

 

[Ireth]

In a word: Yes.

About the pic... does that really count as a plothole, since Obi-wan was basically lying by omission the whole time he spoke about Anakin/Vader to Luke until the big reveal?

 

[Feo Takahari]

One thing about posting chapter by chapter is that people will point out the holes as you write. I had a magical effect targeting descendants of monsters, which was less powerful as it got farther away, but then had a character get affected by it who should have been too far away. This could have set up a twist that her mother was a monster, but that meant I had to change some stuff about the monsters' weaknesses. I wound up marking the story as "Early Access."

 

[WooHooMan]

It seems to me like fans are more eager to talk about plot-holes and inconsistencies now than ever. I think it's an internet thing.

Me personally: usually I try to fix them, sometimes I let them slide and sometimes I intentionally put in plot-holes and inconsistencies. Whatever makes for a better story.

 

[Miskatonic]

Keeping track of continuity is important.

 

[Penpilot]

Yeah, I think part of it is if you point out a flaw in something they love, they take it as you pointing out a flaw in them, which isn't true. If you love something, love it warts and all.

As for myself, most of the time I try to address every plot hole I can, but in the end it's impossible to plug every hole. There will always be someone more clever than you and they'll find those holes. Other times, the rule of cool wins out. If I find a significant plot hole that can't be fixed without destroying the whole story, I leave it be if it's not glaringly obvious and/or stupid.

The way I look at in those instances is nobody is perfect, author, reader, or character, so there's always a chance that an obvious solution will slip through the cracks. I mean how many times have any of us done an arduous task only to have someone afterwards point out an obviously easier way of doing it or avoid doing it all together. Those are the forehead smack times.

 

[Mythopoet]

The way I see it is this: as an author, you are promising me a unique experience through your story. I am giving you my money and my time to provide me that experience. The more inconsistencies and plot holes there are in your story, the more the experience falls flat and feels fake. Likewise the more mysteries and questions you leave unsolved and unanswered the more incomplete the experience feels. As a reader, I don't find this acceptable. I want a full and believable experience. Anything that lessens that is at best an annoyance.

As a writer I do my best to eliminate such things. It helps that my first reader (my husband) is the world's worst pedant and nit picker. He's constantly pointing out things I never noticed and asking questions I never thought of before. He's honestly my best resource since he's a grammar and spelling nazi as well so he makes a great copy editor.

 

[Miskatonic]

Continuity also ensures that your twist ending doesn't come across as forced. If the reader can go back and connect the dots and say "Why didn't I think of that?!" and show true surprise then you've done a pretty good job.

 

[BWFoster78]

My issue with "inconsistencies and plot holes" is that, though they may exist from the reader's perspective, maybe they aren't real. If Star Wars were a book and we had a chapter from Ben's POV, maybe it's made clear that he's lying. However, as the author, I may choose not to include that chapter because it's unnecessary to the greater story. I can't tell the reader everything behind every character's actions or the book would be so bloated as to be unreadable.

As a reader, I just don't stress over these type of things. Nor as a writer.

If it makes sense to me, then the reader's just going to trust that I'm staying true to the story. I will not overexplain for the purposes of making sure no one perceives an inconsistency.

 

[Reaver]

In a word: Yes.

About the pic... does that really count as a plothole, since Obi-wan was basically lying by omission the whole time he spoke about Anakin/Vader to Luke until the big reveal?

The pic is not meant to show any plot holes but rather is a demonstration of glaring inconsistencies between the scripts of Episode IV and the prequels.

In my opinion, ALL of the prequels were sloppily and lazily written piles of incoherent pig vomit.

I challenge any fan of the prequels to tell me who the main character of The Phantom Menace is.

If it's Anakin, why do we not meet him until 45 minutes into the movie?

Also, why would an entity called The Trade Federation want to disrupt trade? Is their name an ironic one?

Why do Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan take separate ships down to Naboo and run the risk of landing hundreds if not thousands of miles apart?

Oh wait... I forgot that Lucas said that the prequels were made for kids to enjoy. After all, what kid doesn't just LOOOOOVE intergalactic politics?


But I digress...

 

[CupofJoe]

Also, why would an entity called The Trade Federation want to disrupt trade? Is their name an ironic one?

There is the old adage... "every country with 'Democratic' in its name, isn't..." - They aren't called "The Free and Fair Trade for All and Everyone Federation" or TFFTAEF for short...

As for the larger original point, I'd rather have a few minor loose ends and unanswered questions in my tales that a string of remarkable and unlikely events and coincidences so that I can neatly sow up every last plot element. Life is ragged and random to some extent, so a bit of unfinished story telling is okay for me...

 

[X Equestris]

Also, why would an entity called The Trade Federation want to disrupt trade? Is their name an ironic one?

As I recall, it was a protest of the Republic's wiping away of the free trade zones in the Mid and Outer Rim, where the Trade Federation hadn't been required to pay taxes. Trade with one planet is microscopic compared to the profits lost from the elimination of the free trade zones.

As far as the topic at hand, there will typically be some degree of inconsistencies. Things change over time, and as a work expands, old ideas may be incompatible with new ones. The trick, I think, is to make sure those inconsistencies are as small as possible.

 

[BWFoster78]

Reaver,

I'm definitely no fan of the prequels. I only watched them once and am not looking forward to the day when I have to see them again with my son.

Back to your original question, though: If I'm getting you right, you're more annoyed that fans refuse to admit that inconsistencies exist than you are that the inconsistencies are there in the first place?

 

[Svrtnsse]

For me, there are two things to consider when it comes to plot holes and inconsistencies:
1. Did I notice it the first time I consumed the story?
2. Did it have any significant negative impact on my enjoyment of the story?

If a plot hole is such that it doesn't appear to me until after I'm done with the story, then to me it really isn't worth getting upset over. I guess the exception would be if it's a plot-hole that has the potential to have a serious negative impact on future installments in a series.

The example in the original post is such that I probably wouldn't have thought about it until after the movie was over, and as such, it wouldn't have bothered me.

 

[Incanus]

I agree that plugging every single plot-hole/inconsistency would be difficult, if not impossible. And yet the storyteller should certainly try to patch up as many as they can find. There's a bit of a trade-off.

It's funny this was brought up at this exact moment. I just watched the movie Snowpiercer last weekend. I was flabbergasted. The story was wall-to-wall plot holes and inconsistencies. From the premise to the smallest detail, not a lick of it made the least bit of sense. One of the top ten worst movies I've ever seen; maybe top five. I stuck it out to see if someone was going to wake up from a dream, or if there was some other explanation for the non-stop nonsense, but it never came to pass. And I have no problem with the thematic material--I largely agree with the message. And then, for reasons unknown (or at least dubious), the critics were all falling over themselves to heap praise on this movie. I can't make heads or tails of it.

 

[Reaver]

Reaver,

Back to your original question, though: If I'm getting you right, you're more annoyed that fans refuse to admit that inconsistencies exist than you are that the inconsistencies are there in the first place?

I would say that my problem lies more with sloppy and lazy writing than the inconsistencies themselves. I get that die hard fans will never change. I'm guilty of it myself with the Avengers and other superhero movies.

 

[WooHooMan]

I challenge any fan of the prequels to tell me who the main character of The Phantom Menace is.

In theory, it's Qui Gon Jinn: top-billed actor with the most amount of screen time and highest barring on the plot.

Also, why would an entity called The Trade Federation want to disrupt trade? Is their name an ironic one?

In theory, they disrupted trade on Naboo as a means of furthering Palpatine's agenda. Presumably, they would benefit from his schemes - probably after he became chancellor.

Why do Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan take separate ships down to Naboo and run the risk of landing hundreds if not thousands of miles apart?

In theory, it didn't matter how far apart they separated since they had planned to meet at the Naboo capital. It was just moderately lucky that they were able to meet-up before either of them started heading to the capital.

Keywords being "in theory". There can be excuses for plot-holes or inconsistencies but that doesn't "fix" them or make the story better.
People don't complain about the inconsistencies of the prequels because they feel they're what ruin prequels. They complain about plot-holes because they don't like the prequels and plot-holes are easier to identify and talk about than the greater issues like the terrible dialogue, awful acting, poor plotting, horrible direction, over-reliance on CGI and so forth.

There are a ton of people who complain about the eagles in Lord of the Rings being a plot-hole (there's an excuse but the average movie goer doesn't seem to care) but I've never heard anyone use the eagles as a reason why Lord of the Rings was bad.

So, yeah, I'll stick with my argument that "inconsistencies and plot holes" are as big a problem as you make them and they, on their own, shouldn't break a story.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

After all, what kid doesn't just LOOOOOVE intergalactic politics?

Honestly, that's what I thought was missing when Empire Strikes Back came out. I was kicked out of the movie theater for asking very loudly, "Why do these puke-brains keep re-electing the Emperor?" When I saw Return of the Jedi, it was supposed to be a birthday party for my friend and also a celebration of us finishing elementary school. But of course we most enjoyed the intellectual speculations about the many factions among the Ewoks, a complex yet cute warrior race.

I hope Episode VII links Galactical Warming to the rise in violence. Then, after the movie, I'll take my daughters to Starbucks so we can discuss, debate, and maybe learn a little more about ourselves. Star Wars at Starbucks. That's gonna be a thing. A thing that involves politics, coffee, and light sabers.

 

[Penpilot]

In my opinion, ALL of the prequels were sloppily and lazily written piles of incoherent pig vomit.

Whoa-Whoa-Whoa stop the horses here. Let's not be so hard on pig vomit. At least pig vomit was the outcome of a completely logical set of processes and circumstances. The ending actually makes sense.

I challenge any fan of the prequels to tell me who the main character of The Phantom Menace is.

Oh this reminds me of the prequel reviews done by RedLetterMedia. In some very long videos they pick apart why the prequels failed. One of the reasons is no one knows who the main character is.

For those interested here's a playlist. The videos aren't just straight reviews they throw in some wacky and sometimes disturbing humor based on the character of the narrator who is presenting the reviews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI&list=PL9A12F8F947849C30

 

[BWFoster78]

I would say that my problem lies more with sloppy and lazy writing than the inconsistencies themselves. I get that die hard fans will never change. I'm guilty of it myself with the Avengers and other superhero movies.

Like I said, I can't defend the prequels.

Let's take something a lot better like Finding Nemo.

End of the movie, Nemo's father (Marlon?) and Dory are swimming around Sidney harbor. Now, I've never been there, but I'd guess that Sidney's shoreline is freaking huge. What are the odds that they'd be so near where Nemo comes out of the drainage pipe?

Honestly, though, that part of the story makes an emotional connection with the audience.

Would the story have been better in any way if they'd either made that scene different or tried to shoehorn in a rationale?

I don't think so, but opinions may vary.