Do people not have imaginations anymore? Do we really need every little minute detail explained with a couple of lines of dialogue or explanation? Can we not work these things out by ourselves?

So the doctor, Amy and Avery arrive on the other ship and are not in beds as everyone else is? - are we not able to work out why ourselves - do we really need the Siren or someone else to say - oh haven't got a bed for you yet; I need to check you in first and check over your injuries?

The same as the pirate who disappeared and then appeared in a bed- we know everyone else who was injured disappeared - did we really need to see it again - are we not switched on enough to realise what happened?

Have we got too used to being spoon fed that we need this in every programme?


Love this - it sums it up in a nutshell

There seem to be three types of people when it comes to 'plot holes'.

1) Those who think: "It's a story - it doesn't need analysing"
2) Those who are annoyed by plot holes
3) Those who cannot accept that plot holes exist in their favourite film/programme and will fight to the death to show how they should be filled.

Most people are probably type 1 until the holes become too overpowering when they become type 2 for a while.

The type 3's are the strangest. I remembering once making the mistake of getting into a discussion with a hard-core trekkie and casually (or so I thought) mentioning a few of the plot holes in Star Trek.

Big Mistake!

Those people have detailed explanations of every plot hole you can think of an doubtless many, many, more that you can't. And they can be very aggressive (non physically) in defending their rationales.

So how come they were able to escape when no-one else did? They didn't really do anything extra clever when they arrived.

Interesting analysis, I quite agree with you.

You missed out type 1a though, "People who are too slow to notice the plotholes" (that'll be me!) .

I love you story about Trekkies, do you think Gene R is up there saying "WTF", I remember a comedy sketch on Saturday Night Live about Trekkies, with William Shatner being questioned by fans about how his character felt when in a certain situation, his response..."Don't any of you guys have a life, or a girlfriend".

hmm lets see. Why couldn't 17th century pirates escape a futuristic spaceship, when the experienced heroic alien did.

You know what you are right. That is a gaping plot hole

4) Those who recognise that plot holes exist because no-one is perfect and writers sometimes slip up, but can live with that as long as it's not a glaring hole that screws up previous major events. These people also tend to be smart enough to recognise that what might initially appear to be a plot hole may turn out to be a clever and deliberate setup for future events, and would rather see how things pan out rather than over-analyse them.

At least, thats what best describes me and, I'd like to hope, the majority of sane fans!

That's type 1 to me.

Another reason is that the whole thing would become too fiddly if you had to explain every possible plot hole.

there's also Type 5, which can be really irritating, "People who look for plotholes", some members of my family do it when watching films or sometimes things on TV, and will bring it up while watching it, which at times my usual reply would be "does it really matter?", which I know it does in their eyes or stupid threads like this wouldn't be made, lol.
Last edited by Octopus_Prime : 09-05-2011 at 11:56

Right, but the Dr didn't actually DO anything heroic or alien to escape her. The three of them just woke on the floor, and the siren was nowhere about for a bit so they got to wander around. And then she did turn up but for some reason just kind of ignored them for a bit, and still made no attempt to get them onto a stretcher.

How did she ignore them? They hid until Avery saw his son. then she got all angry.

The Doctor didn't need to do anything heroic, but the fact that they have been in similar situations put them at a HUGE advantage to the pirates who would have spent the first few minutes thinking WTF?

She got angry when he pointed a gun at her. She didn't seem that bothered before then.

But thats because they were hiding and she hadn't seen them.

Which prompts the question of why she was able to find them when they were on the pirate ship, even when they were hiding?

The real plot hole was the Captain's Mate disappearing from the gunpowder room, and no one mentioning that he was gone.

(but those self same 17th century pirates could fly the futuristic spaceship...)

I don't see a problem.

I am sure if they had not distracted the Nurse they would have ended up asleep in beds as well.

The driving the space ship at the end did seem to be a bit of a plot hole but if you pay attention they did say that it was the same sort of principle or aluded to that - a bit of a stretch maybe but there you are. I'm pretty sure the first mate was explained - pretty sure that there was a green glow from the gaps in the door or something.



To be honest I fit in the I watch the program/film and then if I see a possible plot hole will see if the rules/laws governing that universe explain it. If they do - great if the don't- oh well if it was a good program and it wasn't a massive gapping hole then I'm fine category type 4/5/6 whatever number we're on.

Typ e 4/5/6 are all really type 1. People who normally take a pragmatic approach to plot holes.

I'm sure most people will take exception to a really massive hole, though.

The ones I find most interesting are the type 3's who will never admit any plot hole in something of which they are a fan.

Plus they also had the scene where Captain Avery was able to identify various Tardis controls.

"A ship's a ship"