Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

    When reading a script, especially action and thriller scripts, I find myself having a really hard time getting past certain logic problems, plot holes, and improbabilities, often to the point where I wonder how in the hell the issue wasn't fixed before the script sold.

    A FEW EXAMPLES (which I should preface with what should be pretty obvious--these are all impressive scripts, by extremely talented writers):

    C.O.D.--A mail bomb is set off in a NYC office building which results in what the script calls a "massive EXPLOSION", an explosion which shakes the ground below, spews fire, sends glass and debris raining down everywhere, and sets off a quasi-9/11-type panic. And yet the floor of the office building where the bomb went off is still there, investigators are able to go up there just fine to look around, and the secretary in that office is still alive to talk about it. What?

    BROKEN CITY--The mayor of NYC in this script is running for what seems to be his 4th term which, Bloomberg's potential circumventing of term limit laws notwithstanding, doesn't make sense in the modern age. (At the very least it begs some explanation, which isn't there.) Also, a key to the plot involves the mayor secretly making hundreds of millions of dollars on a business deal while in office. Is the script asking us to believe he's going to be able to come into a few hundred million when he leaves office and NOT be the target of countless investigations? Or does the mayor just want to accumulate the money in an offshore account and basically never touch it?

    MOTORCADE--The key to the bad guys' plan is setting off a bomb underground in the city's gas/sewer tunnels, below where the President is. Which is a little strange in a script that takes such pains to realistically capture Secret Service planning and protection, because even I as a layperson know that as part of their prep work the real Secret Service...wait for it...always checks out everything underground. THOROUGHLY.

    DUBAI--The main character of this script was so over-the-top well-rounded and great that I found it laughable (Economics Ph.D.? Check! NCAA Wrestling champ? Check! "Humble-as-hell"? Check! A tennis-playing farm-girl wife who's "sexier than Sharapova"? Check!), and the logic of the main conspiracy seems REALLY shaky. But my favorite part is how the wife gets away from her captors. It has to be read to be believed.

    ARMORED--This script lost me on page 17 or 18 when, after considering it for a weekend, Ty agrees to be a part of the armored car heist taking place that day. There are two options here, neither of which is good: Option #1: Our main character is a certifiable idiot for not spending hours and hours with the others going over all the specifics of their fake heist story, getting it straight and in sync for when they are interrogated endlessly by the cops and the insurance company. Option #2: The writer doesn't want us to think Ty is an idiot, meaning the writer hasn't given due diligence to the logic of the heist plan in general.

    FLIGHTPLAN--All of it, really...

    It's important to keep in mind, of course, that a problem or hole or improbability to one reader is not necessarily going to be so for another reader. I get that. Maybe I'm too anal and nit-picky. (That sounds gross, sorry.) But good lord, some scripts like those above just LOSE me at certain points, and it makes me wonder whether I shouldn't be more lenient with myself and the logic and plot in my own writing. In other words, maybe I shouldn't sacrifice what could be good moments or plot turns just because they might not seem entirely plausible, because based on some of the scripts above plausibility and logic sure seem to be extremely relative.

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

    I think a script that's good enough can overcome plot holes at any stage of the game... but of course in a pefect world you'd want to avoid them.

    15 years later, I still love the movie HEAT from beginning to end- but damned if I can explain how or why Waingro was invited on the initial armored car job.

    As for circulating scripts... I think that if there's a fundamentally strong reason to invest in the character, that will go a long way in smoothing over questons about the plot. Flightplan is a good example. I think they did a decent job of getting the lead character into a situation where the flight crew, then the passengers, then the audience, then even the lead character starts to wonder if she's crazy. You want her to be vindicated and you want her to get her daughter back.

    Now, if you sit back and analyze the plan which is ultimately revealed, you can probably think of a less roundabout way for the baddies to have tried what they were trying. But as you sit there rooting for the lead character, it doesn't really matter.



    You could probably say the same thing about Die Hard. You're rooting for McClane to kick some bad guys' asses in loud, explosive fashion. That's your investment. Now, if you really thought about it, is there a way Hans could have pulled off this heist without al the fireworks? I think so.

    I mean seriously... 'cables that can only be cut by the FBI?' Ludicrous. As proven by the movie itself... (when Hans 'uses' the FBI to cut the power, but really the power is shut off by some no-name man in a hardhat in the sewer.)

    Now, did everyone walk out complaning about these holes? Mostly no.





    I think where these issues are risky is where they retard your ability to invest in the characters' mission in the first place. When that happens, you're sunk.
    - - - - - - -
    Script consulting still going strong.

    Details and updates here, as always: http://messageboard.donedealpro.com/...ead.php?t=9901

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

      RESERVOIR DOGS - Nobody is supposed to know anything about anybody, not even their first name. However, at one point, the crew picks up Mr. Orange at his house.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

        It seems that one has to skip the reader stage and immediately get the script into the hands of one that doesn't necessary focus on the craftsmanship of the script but the marketability... but usually to get into the hands of those people, you got to impress the reader, who usually looks for "bullet-proof" scripts from newbies.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

          It's a balance. Sometimes you bend reality or just ignore it for dramatic purpose. Once the house lights go down, we're in some form of fantasy land - nothing is real on that screen, the *people* are 20 feet tall! Every script has it's own level of reality - but even a documentary is not real (it's edited and created to tell a story that probably isn't really there). Movies aren't real.

          You try to make it feel real (even if it's HELLBOY 2) and you try not to anything that comepletely pulls the viewer out of the movie.

          FLIGHTPLAN began as a terrorists-hijack-airplane script, then 9/11 hit and they completely rewrote it... and the rewrite makes no sense.

          COLLATERAL took place in NYC, where it's probably easier to find a cab driver who doesn't give a crap than an available parking spot for your rental car near the target's location. Again, change one element and sometimes the whole script falls apart.

          One of the things that pisses me off is when I get the note (or whatever) on something that *is* real and *was* researched - but the guy giving the notes doesn't believe it and never did any research before they decided it was wrong. Now, sometimes these things are real loophopes - I find those fascinating - and sometimes it's something everyone seems to know about except the person goving the note. A couple of years ago I seemed to find the one person who didn't know what cadaver dogs were - and wondered why cops brought dogs to a potential crime scene. "Unrealistic!"

          I always think it's better to *know* where you made the bends or just ignored reality for purposes of drama. I also like to make sure I get details right in the other scenes if I can - a tip that I did research and the unreal part was on purpose.

          But, it's all fantasy. A completely unrealistic movie that entertains the hell out of me is better than a realistic film that is boring.

          - Bill
          Free Script Tips:
          http://www.scriptsecrets.net

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

            *MAKE BELIEVE*

            That's what movies are. Fiction is by it's very nature NOT real. It's carefully crafted to manipulate an audience into believing something that is flat out untrue.

            IMO, the most talented story tellers can make people believe almost anything.

            I'm not a big DVD extra person, but I have watched the JAWS Anniversary DVD extras. There's a wonderful bit about a prop that appears in the first act.

            Remember when the girl's arm is found on the beach? It's covered in moss, sand, and crabs.

            In the extras is a very interesting little story. Apparently the prop guys went out of there way to create a prop arm that was 100% legit.

            They consulted an expert (forensics or something) to find out what a severed arm would actually look like if it were washed up on the beach and baking in the son.

            Apparently it would be fairly waxy looking. Almost plastic. So the prop guys, with the help of this expert, created a prop arm exactly the way a real dead arm would look.

            Spielberg saw it and said, "No". It looks fake.

            The props guys explained. That's what it would *really* look like.

            Spielberg said, "so what". The audience doesn't know that. The average movie goer will see it and think it's a cheap prop. It'll ruin the effect.

            So, they sanded the arm down. Covered it in sand, moss, and crabs. And as I recall, you barely even see it.

            It's not about being realistic. It's about making people believe.

            The more talented story tellers can make people believe things that are frankly quite ridiculous.

            JAWS is full of things that can't happen. The original arm prop was one of the only things that's not BS, and that had to be covered up because it would seem fake.

            Sharks can't pull big boats. They can't pull barrels down under the water. Scuba tanks don't explode when they're shot.

            But who cares. It's just damn fun. I bought every bit of because Spielberg made me believe.

            IMO, the real key to GREATNESS when it comes to story telling is being able to make people believe.

            Those who are slaves to reality never make good story tellers, IMO.

            The audience wants fantasy. They want to be teased, and they want their perceptions of reality stretched.

            Don't believe me, look at the top grossing films of all time. Most are heavily rooted in fantasy elements.

            Audiences don't want real. They want to be made to believe.

            So, break the rules of reality when needed to amp up the drama. Just pay careful attention to manipulating your audience into buying it.

            As an aside, there's an old saying that the best lies are hidden between two truths. The reason is that the truth distracts the mark.

            If you look at the scene where the shark pulls the boat in Jaws. It's sandwiched between to very quiet, tense beats where the realism of the emotions felt by the three men on the boat are readily apparent. It's carefully timed on both ends to help distract the audience from what happens in between.

            The preceding beat is most important. The barrels pop up and the audience is nervous... because characters are nervous. The shark's obviously right underneath them somewhere. It's going to pop up at any second. We just know it.

            Spielberg takes his time to milk that tension. Which is a very realistic beat. Who wouldn't be scared right there. It gets the audience unhinged a little.

            It's the perfect set up that helps sell what ultimately happens with the shark pulling the boat.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

              Originally posted by Biohazard View Post
              RESERVOIR DOGS - Nobody is supposed to know anything about anybody, not even their first name. However, at one point, the crew picks up Mr. Orange at his house.
              Chris Penn's character picks him up. His dad and him know everyone's real name. It also explains that everyone is from out of town.

              not a plot hole

              ps22,

              I do agree with that, but it's set up that the shark is super powerful. All the teeth mark talks, the part where Dryfuss continues to tell him how it has to be a huge shark, and they get the real bada$$ that can fight it.

              No I don't think prehistoric sharks are around here, or that the LockNess is in scottland
              Last edited by reddery; 01-17-2009, 07:48 PM.
              But this wily god never discloses even to the skillful questioner the whole content of his wisdom.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                Originally posted by marcal View Post
                It's important to keep in mind, of course, that a problem or hole or improbability to one reader is not necessarily going to be so for another reader. I get that. Maybe I'm too anal and nit-picky. (That sounds gross, sorry.) But good lord, some scripts like those above just LOSE me at certain points, and it makes me wonder whether I shouldn't be more lenient with myself and the logic and plot in my own writing. In other words, maybe I shouldn't sacrifice what could be good moments or plot turns just because they might not seem entirely plausible, because based on some of the scripts above plausibility and logic sure seem to be extremely relative.

                Thoughts?
                You start getting into cinematic elements with-in a script and it gets complicated.

                good directors let bad writers get away stuff.

                could look at it like a science experiment; some scientists fudge their results cause they can't solve the problem.
                But this wily god never discloses even to the skillful questioner the whole content of his wisdom.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                  Originally posted by reddery View Post
                  ps22,

                  I do agree with that, but it's set up that the shark is super powerful. All the teeth mark talks, the part where Dryfuss continues to tell him how it has to be a huge shark, and they get the real bada$$ that can fight it.

                  No I don't think prehistoric sharks are around here, or that the LockNess is in scottland
                  That's exactly my point.

                  The movie makes you believe that shark can do all those things even though it defies reality.

                  The set up you refer to is the art of make believe. That's the talent of the story tellers (Spielberg, Benchley, Gottlieb etc) coming through, and selling the audience on some fairly outrageous things when taken out of context.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                    When we walk into a movie, we willingly sit down and suspend belief. That's that deal. So if the writer can sell it, we'll buy it.

                    Most of the time if the film is entertaining I don't notice the plot holes until AFTER the movie. The real issue is if the plot hole seems glaringly obvious while you are watching the movie. That might be a bit of an issue.

                    If the movie is good we'll forgive and keep watching. If the movie is not so good we aren't so forgiving. And it depends how many plot holes there are and what the genre is.

                    Actions and thrillers tend to have more plot holes, while I would be less inclined to forgive plot holes in a drama. And sci-fi and fantasy is all about forgetting reality, as long as there is an internal logic to the story, we'll buy it. Many comic premises are a bit out there as well.

                    It's up to the writer, director, actors and the entire cast and crew to sell the world the audience is visiting during a movie. If they do their job well we forgive the occassional plot hole.
                    826dk

                    ARTicles: Kick Your Creative A** Into Gear

                    DK - Script Revolution

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                      Spanish Prisoner and The Game.

                      Perhaps textbook examples of plot holes???
                      The best way out is always through. - Robert Frost

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                        As far as Jaws, Mythbusters has done an entire show about debunking its tech... both the shark pulling the boat down, and the exploding air tank and other stuff.

                        But funnily enough, even when the hosts proved something was impossible, they had no less love for the original project. Same as when they debunked some of the stunts pulled by their soul-brother MacGyver.

                        It just has to seem true enough.


                        Ext made a really good point about Die Hard that I never even thought of before. In hindsight it doesn't make any sense that there would be some kind of power cables which you can't cut. But since the characters seemed credible when they believed it- that's sort of all that matterred.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                          I think a lot of it depends on how crucial to the plot the flawed portion is, and also what sort of action/thriller piece you're doing.

                          Even if it's a flashy set piece, if the illogical part is not something that the entire premise of the film turns on, your reader/audience is more likely to forgive it. JAWS example, for instance -- the implausible shark stunts are one thing, but then in one of the JAWS sequels, Brody is dead and his widow is vacationing in the Carribean and the shark has followed her there -- into a too-warm climate great whites don't normally inhabit -- because the shark not only has a grudge against Brody, but against his surviving family members. (And it apparently knows people's travel plans.)

                          Okay, yes, the second case is insanely more preposterous, but it's also that the entire movie cannot happen unless this one completely impossible ridiculous thing happens. Whereas the shark pulling the boat in the original is one part of one part of the plot.

                          The other thing is, I think it depends on how you're presenting the world of your film. If you make a big thing about talking about the perfect crime or the most brilliant criminal ever or the most formidable opponent that Interpol has ever faced or whatever, then it's got to be pretty close to drum tight, 'cause you're the one who called attention to the brilliant perfection of it all. If it's just regular smart heroes or baddies doing something, and a few things are cool but ultimately make no sense, I think you can much more easily get away with it.

                          Other than that, I'd agree that if the rest is good enough and we're rooting for the protag enough, we don't much care about logic. But still, you only get a few of those per script, I think. And if, say, every single person you get notes from complains about the same plot holes, then you probably need to address that.

                          Of course, if your movie gets made, you can always just put in the DVD commentary about how there used to be a scene explaining how the hero just happened to find a spare ambulance in the middle of nowhere so he could impersonate an EMT, but the studio made you cut it for length.

                          Blame the man, man!
                          The difference between the almost right word & the right word is really a large matter -- it's the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning. - Mark Twain

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                            I think a distinction should be made between films that stretch logic, and those with illogic embedded in their foundation.

                            I'll accept most stretching of internal logic if the film's entertaining and compelling. It won't bother me unless they really go overboard to where it takes me out of the movie. "Outbreak" is an example of this - the resolution is only possible if a dozen or so miraculous coincidences occur in succession: (a) Hoffman meets lady with coast guard connection, (b) flies Guard helicopter to middle of the ocean in a fog to find right freighter, (c) freighter crew still have picture of tainted monkey, (d) Hoffman walks onto live broadcast of afternoon news to show pic of monkey to world (e) mom across town sees pic, recognizes monkey as one living in her forest, (f) Hoffman shows up at lady's house, waits 5 minutes until it emerges from woods, darts it, (g) etc.

                            It's so silly, it took me out of the movie, but I didn't feel cheated because it was a sound premise with sloppy execution. I could still watch it again and enjoy certain parts (although I'll never understand how Rene Russo could survive the final stages of a disease that "liquifies organs").

                            Movies that have illogic embedded at their core are far worse. I may enjoy the first 70-90%, expecting / hoping that the illogic will be explained away, but once I realize the central premise of the movie is stupid, I can't watch it again.

                            "Flightplan" is like this for me. I really enjoyed the first 2/3 of it, eager to see how the writers explained the cause for such a surreal and intriguing scenario. At the end, when they did, it rendered everything before it silly. I now can't watch and enjoy the early scenes of "Flightplan" knowing what's behind the drama and tension.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Logic problems, plot holes, improbabilities--how damaging to a script?

                              My take is that if the audience starts getting bored, their minds wander and they start looking for plot holes. You've got two ways to prevent this: 1) make sure there aren't any plot holes, or 2) don't let the audience get bored.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X