Plot hole or no plot hole?
![[Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/60c6bceb7da3abf31de6c482d1657962.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 566 Forum Member
✭✭
According the SFX teasers:
I was on the lookout for this throughout the whole episode and I still haven't been able to identify it, so maybe I'm just a bit dense.
The only thing I can think of on a metaphorical level is the idea of the monster being a manifestation of Van Gogh's mental illness. I can easily understand that on the metaphorical level, but I don't see how that could be a massive plot hole. So what did I miss?
Also, at some point, the doctor says that there's something he's missing but we don't find out what. I think it was shortly before the monster was killed, although I'm not entirely sure. What did he miss?
10 There’s a major story element that some will decry as a massive plot hole and others will embrace on a metaphorical level
I was on the lookout for this throughout the whole episode and I still haven't been able to identify it, so maybe I'm just a bit dense.
The only thing I can think of on a metaphorical level is the idea of the monster being a manifestation of Van Gogh's mental illness. I can easily understand that on the metaphorical level, but I don't see how that could be a massive plot hole. So what did I miss?
Also, at some point, the doctor says that there's something he's missing but we don't find out what. I think it was shortly before the monster was killed, although I'm not entirely sure. What did he miss?
0
Comments
The thing I think he missed was that the monster was blind. He 'could' have known that seeing the results of the monster pulverizing the arch in the village, and falling over the stuff he had thrown on the ground.
Although there is strange bit of continuity. Doctor does back to the tardis at night, and comes out quite soon in the morning.
I wondered about that...
So did I. Also that Amy came up behind him when he had told her to stay at Vincent's house.
But perhaps it's just that it was never fully explained why only Van Gogh could see the alien, which could be a plot hole or on a metaphysical level we can understand that Van Gogh sees more than everyone else.
Having read the episode thread I think it's the Monster.
I thought it was a really nice moment, however, some could ask why she would cry if he simply never existed. And how would Vincent assume she'd lost someone?
The hole is that if it is his 'monster from the id' then how come the Dr not only sees it but actually ID's it?
Though, when was the last time he had to look a monster up?
Remember the scene where Vincent says he can hear colours? That's a recognised condition called Synesthesia, in which the senses become mixed up. It's possible this was why Vincent could 'see' the invisible creature.
Was that ever explained? If so I missed it.
That's nothing unusual! She not only doesn't do what she's told, she deliberately doesn't do it. I know most companions have done that now and again but not so blatantly.
Yes, I thought there was a whole metaphor of vision and blindness in relation to art, which carried over into the literal way that nature somehow revealed more of its secrets to Vincent's sight than to other people's.
Never, ever, any plotholes in Dr Who.;)
Its true there is no overt explanation, but Vincent is portrayed as being able to see more and deeper than anyone else in the world around him.
Like Amy's sadness.
I really think the plot hole referred to in SFX is how the monster seemed to follow Van Gogh around despite being blind
Did it? I thought it was just in the same town. At one point it was following the Doctor. And the Doc, Amy and Vincent followed it to the church.
Nah, I'm lost as to what it could be
I'm not sure there's anything metaphorical about that. Even if he never existed, she would have been able to hold onto Rory's memory had it not been for the TARDIS landing, so I suppose somewhere in her subconscious, she realises that she's sad but doesn't know why.
Vincent knowing that she is sad when she doesn't even recognise it is simple enough. He can see sadness because it is always around him or something else.
I don't think it was ever explained. Although I think there was a mention of increased hearing but I'm not sure. I'll need to rewatch it.
See above.
But she did follow him/
Actually you might have a point, not on a metaphorical level but as a continuity into the finale.
Eventually, but not straight away as she intimated to Vincent