Switch Theme:

What movies have you seen with plotholes/technical/strategic issues?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

Backfire wrote:
Alas, JP the movie leaves out a major plot point of the book, that dinosaurs reproduce on their own despite management attempts to make them sterile (it is mentioned in the film, but not extrapolated in any way).

the Park was attempting to manage dinosaurs with 'standard' procedures and it wasn't going to work because dinosaurs were 'unstandard',


The movie *showed* the offspring from "all female" (parthenogenesis actually happens in RL, btw), which was just fine by me, as it was obvious that there would be more dinos than planned.

Have you been to the SD Zoo? They have tiger and elephant enclosures, and the basic design is far more sensible than what JP did. The elephant enclosures are reinforced with double-door entry traps. The Jurassic enclosures are far worse in design.

   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






The Terminator.

Why hang around?

Why not GTFO as soon as you can? Do what John Connor does between T2 and T3 and live completely off the grid - assumed names, move countries etc etc.

   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Backfire wrote:
Alas, JP the movie leaves out a major plot point of the book, that dinosaurs reproduce on their own despite management attempts to make them sterile (it is mentioned in the film, but not extrapolated in any way).

the Park was attempting to manage dinosaurs with 'standard' procedures and it wasn't going to work because dinosaurs were 'unstandard',


The movie *showed* the offspring from "all female" (parthenogenesis actually happens in RL, btw), which was just fine by me, as it was obvious that there would be more dinos than planned.

Have you been to the SD Zoo? They have tiger and elephant enclosures, and the basic design is far more sensible than what JP did. The elephant enclosures are reinforced with double-door entry traps. The Jurassic enclosures are far worse in design.


It wasn't Parthenogenesis. It was Sequential Hermaphroditism. A process where an individual of one sex changes into the opposite sex through a normal biological process for that species. So some of the Raptors changed sex from female to male and reproduced sexually, not a female undergoing Parthenogenesis to cause her eggs to generate a new female without the input of male Gametes.

In most species that undergo this process it is a fixed process. All individuals are born one sex, and under some environmental trigger they will change into the other sex. The trigger can be age or simply lack of the opposite sex. It is usually not a reversible process, though there are a few where it is.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/17 19:07:18


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Legendary Master of the Chapter





SoCal

But Raptor parthogenesis would have virgin-birthed so many memes!

Huge missed opportunity.

   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

An interesting side note. Parthenogenesis, as we know it today, only ever results in the same sex as the mother individual. However, this is because of how Chromosomes in most species works, including humans. The Male Chromosomes are XY, and the Female ones are XX.

So if a female undergoes Parthenogenesis, her chromosomes can only result in a female offspring.

However, in some species the Chromosomes are reversed. The Female chromosomes are XY and the Males are XX. This is true of birds.

In a species like this where it is the female gamete that determines the sex of the offspring, Parthenogenesis could result in either sex being born. So if the Dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were like birds and all had female members of their species as the individuals carrying the XY chromosomes, then a single incident of Parthenogenesis could result in suddenly a bunch of male offspring allowing for normal reproduction from that point. It would also result in some offspring with YY chromosomes, which would probably never hatch/make it to full term pregnancy due to deformity. This isn't what happened in the movie, but it is another route they could have taken.


If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/17 19:18:27


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





West Michigan, deep in Whitebread, USA

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 Vulcan wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I only thought of this after watching it on TV this weekend.

Battle L.A., my favorite comedy.


Actually, the very first plothole is that the aliens came to earth for water...


A plot hole shared by the original '80s V*. But not quite as bad as Signs, in which a species of aliens fatally allergic to water land on Earth and walk about unprotected. That's like us going skinny-dipping in a vat of sulphuric acid. Never mind being killed by whatever mechanism the protagonist uses to cover them in water, they should have burnt up simply by walking around in the open air.

*And Independence day, for that matter - or just about any alien invasion movie. I doubt there's anything on Earth the aliens couldn't have got elsewhere in the solar system without us even noticing.


But, but....established in Resurgence, the ID4 aliens are here for our metallic core! It's not like any other planets have those! Especially not ones that require absolutely no expenditure of resources to exterminate the natives first, lol.



"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."  
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




Kamloops, BC

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
People are missing the Citizen Kane of plot holes here. How does anybody know what Kane's last words were? Leave it to Citizen Kane to have the Citizen Kane of all plot holes. Interestingly, from looking at the above films, I've noticed that plot holes have nothing at all to do with whether one likes a movie or not. Or whether one considers it "good". One could extend the idea to suggest that plot isn't really all that important when it comes to move tastes. That, I view as a good thing.


The butler was in the room and heard the words, did you even watch the movie?
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grey Templar wrote:

If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.


This is what they did in the book, they radiated all produced dinosaurs' reproductive organs, however it was noted that "it is not 100% reliable method".

Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker! 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






 AegisGrimm wrote:
 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 Vulcan wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I only thought of this after watching it on TV this weekend.

Battle L.A., my favorite comedy.


Actually, the very first plothole is that the aliens came to earth for water...


A plot hole shared by the original '80s V*. But not quite as bad as Signs, in which a species of aliens fatally allergic to water land on Earth and walk about unprotected. That's like us going skinny-dipping in a vat of sulphuric acid. Never mind being killed by whatever mechanism the protagonist uses to cover them in water, they should have burnt up simply by walking around in the open air.

*And Independence day, for that matter - or just about any alien invasion movie. I doubt there's anything on Earth the aliens couldn't have got elsewhere in the solar system without us even noticing.


But, but....established in Resurgence, the ID4 aliens are here for our metallic core! It's not like any other planets have those! Especially not ones that require absolutely no expenditure of resources to exterminate the natives first, lol.


Is that more or less stupid than the plot of The Dalek Invasion of Earth, where the titular rolling psychopaths intend to hollow out the Earth's core with a huge bomb, fit engines in the hole and fly the planet around as a spaceship?
   
Made in us
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta




 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 AegisGrimm wrote:
 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 Vulcan wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I only thought of this after watching it on TV this weekend.

Battle L.A., my favorite comedy.


Actually, the very first plothole is that the aliens came to earth for water...


A plot hole shared by the original '80s V*. But not quite as bad as Signs, in which a species of aliens fatally allergic to water land on Earth and walk about unprotected. That's like us going skinny-dipping in a vat of sulphuric acid. Never mind being killed by whatever mechanism the protagonist uses to cover them in water, they should have burnt up simply by walking around in the open air.

*And Independence day, for that matter - or just about any alien invasion movie. I doubt there's anything on Earth the aliens couldn't have got elsewhere in the solar system without us even noticing.


But, but....established in Resurgence, the ID4 aliens are here for our metallic core! It's not like any other planets have those! Especially not ones that require absolutely no expenditure of resources to exterminate the natives first, lol.


Is that more or less stupid than the plot of The Dalek Invasion of Earth, where the titular rolling psychopaths intend to hollow out the Earth's core with a huge bomb, fit engines in the hole and fly the planet around as a spaceship?


FYI, they're phallic rolling psychopaths.

It's pretty brilliant though, instead of taking the earths resources bit by bit, just take the whole planet in one go and deliver it to the factories

 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






 Grey Templar wrote:
If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.


The only research purpose Hammond was interested in was "how much money can I charge for people to look at these?"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
FYI, they're phallic rolling psychopaths.


"titular", as in, they're in the title of the serial.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/18 16:15:31


 
   
Made in us
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta




 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.


The only research purpose Hammond was interested in was "how much money can I charge for people to look at these?"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
FYI, they're phallic rolling psychopaths.


"titular", as in, they're in the title of the serial.


I know what it means, I went for a pun.

You can't bring in doctor who in a discussion about plot holes and inconsistencies. it's like bringing a nuke to a knife fight

 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Dr Who is basically one huge plot hole. Its full of timey-wimiy gobbldy [see forum posting rules]. Its not supposed to make sense.

Edit: how is g o o k is a bad word?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/18 18:02:21


Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

 Grey Templar wrote:
Dr Who is basically one huge plot hole. Its full of timey-wimiy gobbldy [see forum posting rules]. Its not supposed to make sense.

Edit: how is g o o k is a bad word?


Because one of its definitions is a racial slur.

The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch





 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The Terminator.

Why hang around?

Why not GTFO as soon as you can? Do what John Connor does between T2 and T3 and live completely off the grid - assumed names, move countries etc etc.


But isn't that more or less what Sarah does at the end ? The film happens over at most three days and whilst Kyle's mission is to protect Sarah removing the Arnuld-800 first seems sensible (I've always suspected Kyle had at least an inkling regarding John's parentage)

"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED." 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






 A Town Called Malus wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
Dr Who is basically one huge plot hole. Its full of timey-wimiy gobbldy [see forum posting rules]. Its not supposed to make sense.

Edit: how is g o o k is a bad word?


Because one of its definitions is a racial slur.


It should be one word - Gobbledygook. Which has nothing, IIRC, to do with the Vietnamese.
   
Made in au
Anti-Armour Swiss Guard






Newcastle, OZ

 Grey Templar wrote:



If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.


If they were serious about "no unauthorised breeding" then they wouldn't have used rana to fill the dna gaps in. It was a "quick fix" that bit them on the arse.

ALL the dinos in the park were CREATED as females, which they thought meant they couldn't breed.
One of the geneticists obviously forgot that certain frog species WILL change sex with given environmental triggers (coincidentally, the frog species they used the rana from). One of those triggers being "not enough males" - this also happens with some fish (Barramundi do it).
They also bred them to be deficient in a specific amino acid, without which, they would die (and was only provided in their food at the park). In the book, the dinos were already on the mainland (The compy attack from the second movie is the beginning of the first book) and had begun to find sources of that amino acid themselves by raiding crops.

I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.

That is not dead which can eternal lie ...

... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
 
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut




 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.


The only research purpose Hammond was interested in was "how much money can I charge for people to look at these?"


Actually Hammond is somewhat as a dinosaur purist and especially aims to bring them out for the kids. In the book, head scientist proposes to Hammond that they should replace their dinosaurs with genetically modified ones; because the "real" dinosaurs they created don't conform to dinosaur stereotypes people have. They look different and are too fast and too active. He wants to create slow and cumbersome dinosaurs as pure showpieces. Hammond refuses because he is sure that people will love his "real" dinosaurs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Backfire wrote:
Alas, JP the movie leaves out a major plot point of the book, that dinosaurs reproduce on their own despite management attempts to make them sterile (it is mentioned in the film, but not extrapolated in any way).

the Park was attempting to manage dinosaurs with 'standard' procedures and it wasn't going to work because dinosaurs were 'unstandard',


The movie *showed* the offspring from "all female" (parthenogenesis actually happens in RL, btw), which was just fine by me, as it was obvious that there would be more dinos than planned.

Have you been to the SD Zoo? They have tiger and elephant enclosures, and the basic design is far more sensible than what JP did. The elephant enclosures are reinforced with double-door entry traps. The Jurassic enclosures are far worse in design.


Movie showed them, but only as a side note: it bore little meaning in regards of the plot and why things were going wrong.
Parthenogenesis happens, though usually with fishes and lizards. I don't remember whether there are many examples of Archosaur parthenogenesis. It is thought nearly impossible for mammals.

I haven't been in SD Zoo* (or any proper zoo for that matter), but no disagreement the enclosures on JP were super bad. I was only making the argument from Malcolm's viewpoint - that the Park was trying to contain large number of animals with very little known about them, and that added too many 'unknown unknowns' to the system which was already very complicated. Although I found the logic "if something goes wrong, then it draws everything to hell" somewhat stretched and not very well connected to real world where the human agents would actively work to contain the problems.

*maybe the enclosures there were improved, post-JP catastrophe model?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/18 22:43:08


Mr Vetock, give back my Multi-tracker! 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

OK, sure, but that's kinda like a zookeeper about to take receipt of a new animal that's broadly similar in size and lethality to a tiger, and deciding that no, they'll use a cow pen instead of a tiger enclosure.

   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 chromedog wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:



If the researchers in Jurassic Park had really cared about "No unauthorized breeding!" they would have simply spayed/neutered all the dinosaurs instead of the long convoluted process of simply have a single sex. Besides, it seems for research purposes they would have wanted examples of both sexes in the park.


If they were serious about "no unauthorised breeding" then they wouldn't have used rana to fill the dna gaps in. It was a "quick fix" that bit them on the arse.

ALL the dinos in the park were CREATED as females, which they thought meant they couldn't breed.
One of the geneticists obviously forgot that certain frog species WILL change sex with given environmental triggers (coincidentally, the frog species they used the rana from). One of those triggers being "not enough males" - this also happens with some fish (Barramundi do it).
They also bred them to be deficient in a specific amino acid, without which, they would die (and was only provided in their food at the park). In the book, the dinos were already on the mainland (The compy attack from the second movie is the beginning of the first book) and had begun to find sources of that amino acid themselves by raiding crops.


The amino acid deficiency is another issue that falls apart since IIRC the one they mentioned is actually pretty easily obtained. Especially for the carnivores.

Really, all of Jurassic Park had tons of really convoluted "security" measures that were way more complex than necessary.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






The book was written just after someone had told Michael Crichton about chaos theory, and he went "ooh, that's cool!". The whole point there is that small changes in input can lead to massive changes* in the endpoint, and that's what we see in the book. All the "plot holes" are there to drive that theme.

* but not unpredictable ones - "chaos" theory is entirely deterministic, and if you know the starting conditions, you can plot exactly the evolution of the system. The problems arise when you can't know the starting conditions exactly. Again, that's what happens in the book. Most of the problems and the consequences are easily understood by the protagonists once they know of them - the lysine deficiency, the use of amphibian DNA and the velociraptors. The one thing that no-one really grasps is Hammond ripping off Dennis Nedry.

One thing I missed from the book was the scene near the end in the 'raptor nest, where they demonstrate how intelligent they are. Something of it was shown in the third film, but not, IMO, to the same extent.
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

Yeah, that showed up in the third movie with the stolen Raptor eggs and the Raptors letting the humans go after they got their eggs back.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Colonel





This Is Where the Fish Lives

 LordofHats wrote:
Raiders of the Lost Ark takes place in 1936. Egypt being under British control didn't stop lots of people from not Britain going there and doing stuff and the Ahenerbe project did go outside Germany to explore the "history" of the Aryan race. They never went to Egypt but I don't think that really had anything to do with who was running the place at the time so much as there was nothing there of interest to them. Really the part that doesn't make sense is that they have soldiers with them and are clearly a military outfit who never would have gotten permission to dig for anything.
Not to mention that despite being set in 1936, all of the Nazi gear in Egypt has the Afrika Korps logo painted on it, but the DAK wasn't organized until early 1941. Also, the soldiers use MP 40 submachine guns throughout the movie, despite it being set two years before it was designed and four years before it was put into production.

 d-usa wrote:
"When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





 AegisGrimm wrote:
 AndrewGPaul wrote:
 Vulcan wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
I only thought of this after watching it on TV this weekend.

Battle L.A., my favorite comedy.


Actually, the very first plothole is that the aliens came to earth for water...


A plot hole shared by the original '80s V*. But not quite as bad as Signs, in which a species of aliens fatally allergic to water land on Earth and walk about unprotected. That's like us going skinny-dipping in a vat of sulphuric acid. Never mind being killed by whatever mechanism the protagonist uses to cover them in water, they should have burnt up simply by walking around in the open air.

*And Independence day, for that matter - or just about any alien invasion movie. I doubt there's anything on Earth the aliens couldn't have got elsewhere in the solar system without us even noticing.


But, but....established in Resurgence, the ID4 aliens are here for our metallic core! It's not like any other planets have those! Especially not ones that require absolutely no expenditure of resources to exterminate the natives first, lol.


That... doesn't help. There's plenty of metal floating around in the asteroid belt...

CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done. 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
 LordofHats wrote:
Raiders of the Lost Ark takes place in 1936. Egypt being under British control didn't stop lots of people from not Britain going there and doing stuff and the Ahenerbe project did go outside Germany to explore the "history" of the Aryan race. They never went to Egypt but I don't think that really had anything to do with who was running the place at the time so much as there was nothing there of interest to them. Really the part that doesn't make sense is that they have soldiers with them and are clearly a military outfit who never would have gotten permission to dig for anything.
Not to mention that despite being set in 1936, all of the Nazi gear in Egypt has the Afrika Korps logo painted on it, but the DAK wasn't organized until early 1941. Also, the soldiers use MP 40 submachine guns throughout the movie, despite it being set two years before it was designed and four years before it was put into production.


Since we're nitpicking: most of the "snakes" in the snake scene weren't snakes at all, but legless lizards.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Mekboy on Kustom Deth Kopta




 dogma wrote:
 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
 LordofHats wrote:
Raiders of the Lost Ark takes place in 1936. Egypt being under British control didn't stop lots of people from not Britain going there and doing stuff and the Ahenerbe project did go outside Germany to explore the "history" of the Aryan race. They never went to Egypt but I don't think that really had anything to do with who was running the place at the time so much as there was nothing there of interest to them. Really the part that doesn't make sense is that they have soldiers with them and are clearly a military outfit who never would have gotten permission to dig for anything.
Not to mention that despite being set in 1936, all of the Nazi gear in Egypt has the Afrika Korps logo painted on it, but the DAK wasn't organized until early 1941. Also, the soldiers use MP 40 submachine guns throughout the movie, despite it being set two years before it was designed and four years before it was put into production.


Since we're nitpicking: most of the "snakes" in the snake scene weren't snakes at all, but legless lizards.


and you could see the reflection of the cobra in the glass they put between the snake and Indy

 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
Also, the soldiers use MP 40 submachine guns throughout the movie, despite it being set two years before it was designed and four years before it was put into production.


It would be hard to justify the production of MP 36 and MP 38 props when you're already sitting on a ton of WWII equivalents.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/01/20 01:17:55


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Devious Space Marine dedicated to Tzeentch




 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
 LordofHats wrote:
Raiders of the Lost Ark takes place in 1936. Egypt being under British control didn't stop lots of people from not Britain going there and doing stuff and the Ahenerbe project did go outside Germany to explore the "history" of the Aryan race. They never went to Egypt but I don't think that really had anything to do with who was running the place at the time so much as there was nothing there of interest to them. Really the part that doesn't make sense is that they have soldiers with them and are clearly a military outfit who never would have gotten permission to dig for anything.
Not to mention that despite being set in 1936, all of the Nazi gear in Egypt has the Afrika Korps logo painted on it, but the DAK wasn't organized until early 1941. Also, the soldiers use MP 40 submachine guns throughout the movie, despite it being set two years before it was designed and four years before it was put into production.


I don't really care about fictional anachronisms because it's an alternate universe anyway. If it was our universe, it wouldn't have Indiana Jones or the magical Lost Ark in it.
   
Made in ca
Huge Hierodule






Outflanking

Backfire wrote:


Parthenogenesis happens, though usually with fishes and lizards. I don't remember whether there are many examples of Archosaur parthenogenesis. It is thought nearly impossible for mammals.


Parthenogenesis is known in birds, and if I recall correctly is actually not uncommon in species like turkey. Thing here is because birds use ZW chromosomes (meaning the females have different sex chromosomes), then females can produce male offspring (ZZ), potentially giving them an advantage in a low-male environment. Fish/Reptiles use other methods of sex determination, so can also produce males using only females genetic data. Mammals, in contrast, have females with a single type of sex chromosome, meaning that they would only ever produce female offspring. This doesn't confer any type of advantage, so is selected against to avoid wasting resources for no benefit.

Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?

A: A Maniraptor 
   
Made in us
Mutated Chosen Chaos Marine






 Cheesecat wrote:
 Gordon Shumway wrote:
People are missing the Citizen Kane of plot holes here. How does anybody know what Kane's last words were? Leave it to Citizen Kane to have the Citizen Kane of all plot holes. Interestingly, from looking at the above films, I've noticed that plot holes have nothing at all to do with whether one likes a movie or not. Or whether one considers it "good". One could extend the idea to suggest that plot isn't really all that important when it comes to move tastes. That, I view as a good thing.


The butler was in the room and heard the words, did you even watch the movie?


There was no butler. A nurse came in after he died. A cool reverse angle deep focus wide angle shot reflecting the nurse coming in. She might have heard it. Chances are she heard the globe crashing down. Did you watch it? He says the word, and dies. She comes in. She lays his hands across his chest. Fade to black. "News on the March" begins. No butler. It's been the lol #plothole of cinema for the past 60 years. Where have you been? Want a refresher? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-r0b_XeRkG4

Edit: I should probably follow up on my earlier point about why plot doesn't matter to me and why I view people not caring about holes as a good thing. I am a formalist. Other art forms (the novel) have better techniques of conveying plot. It's not that I don't think plot is unimportant in a movie, it's just one of the least interesting aspects of a movie to me. Plop any kid down in front of pretty much any movie, they will get the plot. Will they see why the camera angles, or the costume design or the editing tempo or sound design plays a role or how it affects them? Probably not. That is what I find interesting. I'm weird though.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/01/20 06:10:31


Help me, Rhonda. HA! 
   
 
Forum Index » Geek Media
Go to: