| First and foremost, we need to have a definition in place for the sake of reference; If you disagree with what I’m about to say, then please feel free to correct me by providing a definition of your own. A plot hole is an inconsistency or unexplained component in a story that contradicts its own flow of logic. This includes, but is not limited to: The story contradicting itself, Impossible occurrences, highly unlikely events etc. Now, to my question: How do you differentiate between something being a plot hole or not? Providing a few examples to help clarify and strengthen your stance would be greatly appreciated. Are there any major misconceptions on the matter? Could you provide an example of something that a large portion of people think is a plot hole, but you think otherwise? Why is that? |
| To judge others by your own standard is the height of folly. |
deg said: I don't find it to be a plot hole.Even I was confused when I read the manga.zerotitan said: My point being something can not be equated to plot hole because viewers lack understanding of it. err no the story should explain it well enough, there is a difference in explaining the logic of the plot and outright saying the viewers did not understand the plot logic behind it, Attack on Titan is not even a hard science fiction anyway and even hard science fiction stuff at least explains How's that possible???? |
sonofbatmanrp13Jan 31, 2020 5:16 AM
| Guess your IQ is just too low. Not Isayamas fault. |
 |
| Ok I'm gonna give an example from my favourite anime. |
| SAO PROGRESSIVE ANIME HYPE |
| A plothole is a major inconsistency in a show, something that contradicts itself. Like when in Naruto they're using radio then they forget about it and use Ino's father for communication. Beating an op villain when the main character didn't stand a chance is not a plothole. |
    |
| tfw, a plothole discussion turns into a Shingeki no Kyojin Discussion, lmao. |
| "We could make the world better, but it's easier to just shut our eyes." ~Blackwall |
-Frost- said: First and foremost, we need to have a definition in place for the sake of reference; If you disagree with what I’m about to say, then please feel free to correct me by providing a definition of your own. A plot hole is an inconsistency or unexplained component in a story that contradicts its own flow of logic. This includes, but is not limited to: The story contradicting itself, Impossible occurrences, highly unlikely events etc. Now, to my question: How do you differentiate between something being a plot hole or not? Providing a few examples to help clarify and strengthen your stance would be greatly appreciated. Are there any major misconceptions on the matter? Could you provide an example of something that a large portion of people think is a plot hole, but you think otherwise? Why is that? I fully agree with the definition but the example though the "highly unlikely to happen/impossible occurrences" example might just be deux ex machina depending on how well the anime explains it. Though most of the time it probably is a plot hole. A plot hole can also include if there are events that happen in the story that only happen due to pure contrivances without any reasonable explanation. From Code Geass R2 (famous for its Swiss cheese plot) Or from Aldnoah Zero season 1; in which it is entirely just one massive plot hoe with no cheese. And don't even get me started on the second season. |
 Latest reviews: Summer Pockets and Train to the the End of the World |
| I agree with your definition of a plot hole. Also you know what? I feel like not able to notice plot holes is a blessing in disguise(I dont remember noticing one). Afterall I watch anime for enjoyment , not to increase my intelligence or observation skills |
 |
| The relevancy of a plot hole to the story is what you should be really asking. Like who cares where the coyote gets the money to buy his traps to get the road runner, guarantee you some ningnong will be bothered. I think a lot of discussion about plot holes beyond "i didn't get why that happened, can it be explained" is just pointless nitpicking. But some people like to do that i guess. |
| It refers to the fact that in hentai any hole can be relevant to the plot. |
| I probably regret this post by now. |
| when you dig a hole in a plot of land = plot hole |
| https://combosmooth.itch.io/ - I make free-to-play browser games for PC and I sell pixel art animation here |
| Plot hole is something that happens, but should not have happened because it contradicts what was previously established in the story and we're never given a reason as to why it ended up happening. The biggest misconception I see out there is people thinking unexplained details and/or plot conveniences are plot holes, thus they proceed to call stuff like the Eva Unit-00's soul not being clearly explained a plot hole, even though it's not, they just left it open to interpretation and there are clues for the viewer to pick up on and reach their own conclusions. Also, there are minor plot holes and major plot holes. For example, in Fullmetal Alchemist 2003, Frank Archer got turned into a cyborg with half of his body turned automail and in a few days he's out there rampaging and shooting stuff up. However, according to in-series lore the automails take at least 2 to 3 years for limb rehabilitation before the automail can be moved, so Archer should not have been able to even move, let alone walk around shooting his enemies like it's no big deal. Does it ruin the series' plot? Not really, Archer was just a minor antagonist and automails were never the main focus of the plot, they're just used as Ed's substitute limbs. Sure, the series would be better off without that plot hole and the writers should have been more careful with their story, but it's largely unrelated to the central aspects and themes of FMA 2003's plot. Now for a major plot hole... Erased has tons of them, but I'll take the most simple one: At the beginning of the series, we're told Satoru's revival ability only rewinds time a few seconds or minutes back, so he must act quickly in order to fix whatever went wrong, plus he has no control over it. Except after his mother's death, the Revival suddenly sends him 18 years back in the past, then after a few episodes he's back in the present again... And after getting caught by the police he apparently has control of the Revival now, since he's able to send himself 18 years in the past again. There's no explanation or consistency with how Revival works, whatever little information we get about it in the beginning is quickly cast aside by the fact that apparently it can go many years in the past, which also goes unexplained. That kind of stuff and some characters making straight-up illogical decisions are the reasons why I hated this series so much. |
| Who are you and why do you show your hostility towards a complete stranger whom you've not once spoken with before. Are you seriously asking to get blocked? Well, if that's what your intent is; to tempt me into throwing hands with someone as lowly and insignificant as you, then i may grant your wish provided you articulate yourself a bit better when trying to spite a person of my wavelength. |
| There is no need to get philosophical here. Plot holes are subjective and contingent on individual sensibilities and experiences. Basically, it is when the in-anime physics or character actions are deemed inconsistent according to the experience of the watcher. The inconsistency could be an inconsistency across events in-world, or it could be inconsistency with real life. The latter is probably controversial so let me explain. In real life, we know that high school students, for example, act in a certain range of acceptable ways, or that geniuses aren't also simultaneously good at every sport, or that a certain puzzle that could easily be interpreted in a number of ways won't likely get interpreted the right way miraculously as the plot needs it. Granted, certain shows exaggerate to a comedic effect, or exist in a world that is unrealistic to begin with, but if the show presents itself as existing in a realistic world, then we should expect it to act realistically. And if we build up assumptions about a world, then the assumptions get contradicted, then we have to revisit everything we know about the world that factored into our enjoyment. This betrayal might get us to revisit our assumptions and decide whether we were warranted to believing what we did. If yes, then we call it a plot hole. If no, then either the narrative is lazy or the audience is lazy -- there was a miscommunication. For example, for those of us who know a thing or two about computer science, hacking isn't about entering some 3D virtual reality game and fighting off spaceship viruses, or gaining access to all of the security cameras in a city, even in places where they should not exist. Saiki Kusuo might be able to pass this off because it's a comedy. But in some show that pretends it's some drama in a world resembling ours, this would be a cop out or a plot hole. However, if you know nothing about computers, you might be convinced by this reality, and it would not be a plot hole to you. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
DeadWeeaboo said: These are actually equivalent. If you imagine a string across a pegboard of different levels, say, 1-5. The string starts out at 1. If someone covers some middle section of the string, you'd call it a "hole". However, if the string starts out at 1, and ends at 1, and someone covers up some middle portion of the string, you wouldn't be able to notice from the outside looking in. After all, no narrative covers every single chronological event that has anything to do with anything. Since the string ends on the same level it started, there is apparent continuity.A plot hole is where two events occur without a bridge, giving the impression that an event linking the two is missing I.e. a vital scene was edited out, hence plot hole. Whereas what your describing is a continuity error. Whilst all plot holes are continuity errors, not all continuity errors are plot holes. If something contradicts itself or merely goes unexplained, is left open, or the logic becomes jumbled that's just continuity errors, simply bad or inconsistent writing. However, if the string started at 1, and ended up at 5, and there was a hole in the middle, you might question what the hell had happened that caused it to change. There is discontinuity. But what happens if there was no hole, but the string was just cut up in the middle, with the latter half tied to 5? All the relevant factors here are still the same. The input is 1. The output is 5. You still don't know how it got from 1 to 5. There is discontinuity. In fact, if the plot represents the string, then we know that there must be some cause and effect between A -> B. A discontinuous string must mean there was a "hole" (even in the mathematical sense, if you've ever learned about open intervals or limits). If you accept that inconsistent writing doesn't confer a hole, then you would have to accept that the narrative world allows for that perceived inconsistency, or that such a jump in events makes perfect sense within the anime world. After all, if I was walking in Las Vegas, and all of a sudden I ended up in Tibet for no reason, this perceived discontinuity means: 1) There must be an unexplained sequence of events in between. 2) I can teleport, or the anime world is one such that Tibet is somehow connected to Las Vegas, and there is nothing weird about the jump. If you're willing to accept #2, then it's not bad or inconsistent writing at all, and the logic isn't jumbled. If you're not willing to accept #2, then you must think that there is some potential intermediate event that makes the writing not inconsistent or bad. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| A plot hole is a contradiction to the established reality of the story with no explanation given. For example in Angel Beats |
 |
-Ryu said: Now for a major plot hole... Erased has tons of them, but I'll take the most simple one: At the beginning of the series, we're told Satoru's revival ability only rewinds time a few seconds or minutes back, so he must act quickly in order to fix whatever went wrong, plus he has no control over it. Except after his mother's death, the Revival suddenly sends him 18 years back in the past, then after a few episodes he's back in the present again... And after getting caught by the police he apparently has control of the Revival now, since he's able to send himself 18 years in the past again. There's no explanation or consistency with how Revival works, whatever little information we get about it in the beginning is quickly cast aside by the fact that apparently it can go many years in the past, which also goes unexplained. That kind of stuff and some characters making straight-up illogical decisions are the reasons why I hated this series so much. Just for kicks |
Oh God it's the "Ash is in a coma" theory all over again |
| Who are you and why do you show your hostility towards a complete stranger whom you've not once spoken with before. Are you seriously asking to get blocked? Well, if that's what your intent is; to tempt me into throwing hands with someone as lowly and insignificant as you, then i may grant your wish provided you articulate yourself a bit better when trying to spite a person of my wavelength. |
| I've seen people criticise NieR: Automata for having plot holes because it does things with AI that don't really make sense if you know anything about how AIs would work, but really it's because it's a story about humanity and what it means to be human. It wasn't trying to tell a story about the nature of AI. It just used robots to explore themes to do with the human condition and identity. I think that is probably the case a lot of the time when people look for holes in things. Ex Machina is a movie about AI and it does a great job with it. NieR Automata's story about what it means to be human. I'm aware my answer is more about what a plot hole isn't but still. |
-Ryu said: Now for a major plot hole... Erased has tons of them, but I'll take the most simple one: At the beginning of the series, we're told Satoru's revival ability only rewinds time a few seconds or minutes back, so he must act quickly in order to fix whatever went wrong, plus he has no control over it. Except after his mother's death, the Revival suddenly sends him 18 years back in the past, then after a few episodes he's back in the present again... And after getting caught by the police he apparently has control of the Revival now, since he's able to send himself 18 years in the past again. There's no explanation or consistency with how Revival works, whatever little information we get about it in the beginning is quickly cast aside by the fact that apparently it can go many years in the past, which also goes unexplained. That kind of stuff and some characters making straight-up illogical decisions are the reasons why I hated this series so much. (slight spoilers for Persona 4/5 and ERASED) |
More topics from this board
» Real People and Live Action scenes in animeTheBlockernator - 7 minutes ago |
3 |
by TheBlockernator
»»
1 minute ago |
|
» Things you've learned about Japan from anime. ( 1 2 )TheBlockernator - Oct 7 |
52 |
by RainyEvenings
»»
5 minutes ago |
|
» What percentage of your waifu's body is kissable?Catalano - 1 hour ago |
9 |
by SgtBateMan
»»
7 minutes ago |
|
» Outdated anime tropes and slang you don't really see much anymoreTheBlockernator - Yesterday |
9 |
by logopolis
»»
13 minutes ago |
|
» Different views of certain anime caused by generational gap?thewiru - Yesterday |
12 |
by RainyEvenings
»»
15 minutes ago |