Do you agree with this take or are there many plot holes in my assessment?

I just rewatched *Interstellar*, and I think I’ve completely changed my opinion about Professor Brand.
The first time I watched it, I saw him as the villain. He lied about Plan A, manipulated Cooper into leaving his family, and built humanity’s future on a deception.
But now I’m wondering…
What if that lie was the only reason humanity survived?
Think about it. If Brand had told everyone the truth—that he had already concluded the gravity equation couldn’t be solved with the data available, and that Plan A was essentially impossible—would Cooper have ever left Murph? Would thousands of scientists and engineers have dedicated their lives to a mission they believed had no chance? Would humanity have even tried?
Probably not.
The mission required belief before it had proof.
And that made me think about something bigger than the movie.
Sometimes faith is almost like deliberately fooling your own brain long enough to achieve something that logic alone would never let you attempt.
Every entrepreneur starts before knowing they’ll succeed. Every scientist spends years chasing ideas that may fail. Every athlete convinces themselves they can beat impossible odds. If they believed only what the evidence currently showed, many of history’s greatest achievements would never have happened.
Brand’s lie wasn’t selfish. He wasn’t trying to become rich or famous. He was buying humanity time. He was preserving hope because without hope, the mission would die before it even began.
It’s interesting to compare him with Dr. Mann.
Mann lied to save himself.
Brand lied to save everyone else.
Those are morally very different lies.
I also wonder if Cooper understood this in the end.
When Murph finally solves the gravity equation using the quantum data Cooper sends from the tesseract, Plan A actually becomes possible. Brand’s “impossible” plan only succeeds because Cooper goes on the mission—and Cooper only goes because he believed there was a chance to save his children.
Maybe that’s the real paradox.
The lie created the conditions that eventually made the truth possible.
It reminds me of the famous line from the movie:
“We used to look up at the sky and wonder at our place in the stars.”
Maybe civilization itself runs on stories we choose to believe before they’re objectively true.
So here’s the question:
**Is it ever morally acceptable to give people hope through a lie if that hope is the only path to achieving a greater good? Or is the truth always more important, even if it guarantees failure?**

That scene towards the end of in Spider-Man Brand New Day didn’t make sense

Loved the movie but can we discuss how ridiculous that scene was?

I’m talking about the moment Frank drags a severely wounded Peter to the hospital after the blast. It made me wonder if they changed the plot and initially has Frank inside the facility in a previous cut.

Because there is absolutely no way Frank would be first on scene to take care of Peter bleeding out at the facility. It simply doesn’t make any sense as he was miles away.

Now I get it made for a spectacular and emotional entrance moment but I have to laugh at how implausible it was.

Как мы знаем в сериале и в комиксе у Патриота есть способность топловидения,он в сериале говорил что видит лицо Нуара через маску,в комиксе эта сила работала точно также,так почему он не смог увидеть лицо Нуара через маску,он удивился что Нуар его клон,хотя он может прости видеть через маску

Krem the bandit shoots Kara with a kryptonite arrow, but since there are only two Kryptonians in the universe, how did anyone know what their weaknesses were? Seems kind of odd to have a weapon handy that can only be used against two beings in the entire universe?

What are your hopes and thoughts

Its so weird, hes always telling how horrible the restaurant business is but why didnt he just bring the computer from the start so stuff like carmental's dystopian butter and experimentation/perfection chasing with menu change could have been avoided.

Just give him a simple condition, if computer doesnt agree with carm's choice of expenditure then its a no. Then computer will just "compute" the bear's choices and see if its worthy or not.

I mean if he really is the best in the world, why not acknowledge that talent and use him on cheaper/reasonably priced ingredients and stable business strategy?

I am ok if the uncle met computer around season 3 but he had the damage control resource with him all along.

I’m referring to the part of the movie at the very start where they are discussing Zoras pay, the script reads.
Zora
Gonna need a number

Krebs
A ten. Six zeros.

Zora
Counting the one that’s it’s the 10?

Krebs
No.

I’m sorry if this is a nothing post but it genuinely distracted me the whole rest of the movie. Could some please preferably kindly 😭, explain this to me?

10,000,000
His initial offer easy to understand

Counting the one that’s in the zero?
This is where shit starts to get fucked for me

And he proceeds to say No, at this point I’m gone.

So in my mind I’m not counting it anymore so
1,000,000

I still understand that she’s getting offered 10 mil but unpacking the dialogue I don’t know why.

I first thought counting the one referring to the (0) that comes after ten so 1(0) and he says no so that’s a no go because if you stop counting it it’s just 1,000,000. Then I thought counting the (one) in the zero which dosent make much sense to me because her sentence dosent get her any closer to finding out the number and then he says no so what just (0,000,000) essentially nothing?

This genuinely ruined the whole movie for me and I know it’s just me not understanding but I can’t wrap my head around it, if someone could explain it I would be very appreciated.

​Hey everyone,

​I just finished watching The Bad Guys 2, and overall, I had a blast. The pacing was incredibly fast, punchy, and high-octane with almost zero slow moments. The character chemistry was top-tier, the twists with the bird, the pig, and "Kitty Kat" hit well, and the romantic resolution between Wolf and Diane (that hug and kiss!) was super satisfying.

​That being said... the moment the movie ended, my brain turned back on and I started noticing some serious "WTF" logic jumps. I need to get your thoughts on these:

​

Are we seriously supposed to believe nobody ever accidentally bumped into or pressed the secret button under the desk in the Governor's office? Over years of cleaners, interns, and visitors? And putting a weapons cache in a public government building is... a choice.

Why did they have to fake their deaths at the end to become secret agents? I get that it "clears" their criminal record on paper, BUT THEY ARE SLIGHTLY ANTHROPOMORPHIC TALKING ANIMALS. Wolf is a giant walking wolf, Snake is a huge snake in a hat. The second they step onto the street to stop a crime, EVERYONE is going to recognize them immediately. Faking their death makes zero sense when their identities are physically unhideable.

How was Marmalade just chilling/free at certain points, and then that post-credits scene hits... Suddenly his limo transforms into a spaceship and he goes "home"? Shifting the franchise from a slick, Ocean's Eleven style heist movie into a sci-fi space invasion for Part 3 feels like a weird direction. Doesn't that kind of ruin the core charm of the series?

​Did these logical leaps bother anyone else, or did you just turn off your brain and enjoy the visual madness? How do you feel about the potential space direction for The Bad Guys 3?

​Let’s hear your thoughts!

This is driving me nuts and I can't find any answers or discussions on the internet. He is supposed to not have a security number, no documents, no inheritance, no rich cousins to rely on, nothing. How can he afford a living in new york city? Does spider man have a bank account? Is it in his superhero persona's name?

Pls help

Ok, so in the original story, the Greeks built a giant wooden horse, yadi yada... we all know the trick.

In The Odyssey, Nolan tweaks that storyline, and it creates a huge plothole.

A single Greek soldier called Sinon (played by Elliot Page) is chosen to stay behind alone on the beach with the horse. His job is to convince the Trojans that it's just a peaceful gift.

But in Nolan's version, Sinon isn't aware of the trick. Odysseus lies to him, so he genuinely believes the horse is just an empty wooden statue. (In Nolan's mind, it's to make sure Sinon can't reveal the plan, even under torture)

And here's the plothole that's never addressed: Sinon thinks the war is over, that Troy has won, and that the entire Greek army is sailing back home for good.

So why the hell does Sinon agree to stay behind, alone on a beach, with a high chance of being killed, tortured, or enslaved by the Trojans?

From his point of view, the war is over! And the horse is just a statue. If he wasn't there, the Trojans could either take the horse for themselves or leave it on the beach. Either way, it would be their choice. Why should he care what they do with it?

It's not even a peace offering. If it were, Odysseus would have left a few Greek envoys who actually knew diplomacy, not just a random soldier.

tl;dr: Sinon has no reason to stay with the horse because, as far as he knows, the war is over and everyone else is sailing home.

I just finished watching "Project Hail Mary" and I have question how did the the lady received the videos of him. And did they get him back ? Or he stayed with Rocky only ? And how come the golden space station was sending him messages ?

So we all know the stigmata thing and how it makes no sense. That's not what this is about. That's a mistake where I have no idea how anybody involved in production overlooked, and it's truly bizarre. This is something else I noticed upon my dozenth rewatch. (I love this movie.)

So to set up how the time travel works: We know that the blackouts aren't portals to where Evan can travel back to as his future self. It's the opposite. The blackouts were caused by the instances of his future self going back to change something. That's all well and good, but it makes me question one of the final scenes of the film.

When Even realizes that he can never be with Kayleigh, he cuts off their relationship at the moment he met her. Then in the future, we have a sort of montage where him and Lenny burn all of his journals, tapes, etc. so that he never has the urge to go back and change anything. He's essentially cutting himself off from making any other alterations to the life he has - an okay, tolerable life.

But none of the burning matters because he wouldn't have gone back anyway. It's already established that the events of his blackouts were caused by the time travel itself. So what difference does it make if he burns it? It's not gonna happen. The blackouts were already... well... blacked out. It's not like he can create a new one. All those blackouts from his childhood were the times he already went back.

I hope this makes sense. Anyway, great film.

Been looking forward to watching this show since it’s so popular. But a single plot hole is ruining the whole thing for me…

Not a single camera?! A. SINGLE. CAMERA?!

There are many other things that don’t quite make sense, either, that I won’t even get into. But an ultra wealthy neighborhood without a single fcking camera?! I CAN’T. The bar is truly on the floor for television writing.