Has anyone noticed any plot holes or things that don,t make sense in movies that are regarded as top quality i have noticed a few.

In Godfather Part 2 when the rizzoto brothers attempt to kill Frank Pentangeli the guy that strangles him say something like 'Michael Corleone says hello'. Why would he say this since Michael didn't sanction the hit? and unless he knew that the policman was going to walk in at that exact moment and wanted him to almost kill him and then flip on michael it makes no sense. Always left me confused that scene

I bitched about this in the original movie discussion thread, but in The Wolf of Wall Street a major plot event hinges on the hero having to be in Switzerland in 24 hours or else - which results in them sinking his yacht in a huge storm. Apparently, using THE ****ING HELICOPTER on the yacht wasn't an option. Bugged the **** out of me.

MM MD

Wizard of Oz... There were not any young munchkins... How did the species repopulate?

uhhhh

An Inconvenient Truth. The hole in the Ozone yo!

Pick any michael moore film.... pick and scene... pick any offer of proof he touts as gospel.

Man, I can't stand that Michael Moore, what a buffoon.

As a non American i think Michael more is great Bowling for Columbine is one of my favorite documentaries and Sicko was good too.

Why the hate for him?

Another gripe i have with GF2 is the Michael attempted Murder scene in his compound.

What was fredo's part considering its supposed to be where he betrayed Michael, did he let in the assassins? who opened the curtains in there bedroom?

Then after the hit attempt did these assassins not have a plan of escape was it a suicide mission? Michael says he wants them alive but they end up dead somehow

Regarding Moore, I like his books/films overall even though he famously uses a couple of techniques in his documentaries that his critics hate him for.

One of his movies that I disliked however was Bowling for Columbine (which won an Oscar). Early in the movie he spends time making a reasonable point that presence of guns don’t necessarily correlate with increased violence. (BTW, I am not a gun owner/”gun nut”). Later on, as if he was ignoring his own argument, there’s a segment where he leads a group - including a school shooting victim - into a K-mart (?) store to protest the store’s selling of bullets.

That isn’t a “plot hole” per se, but it really bothered me. What bothered me even more was Moore focused almost entirely on the guns-violence issue, but spent hardly any time on the killers or the chief problems (imo) leading to the titular Columbine tragedy - school bullying, alienation, etc.

Because he undermines his own movies with manipulative and dishonest appeals to emotion. His stories are strong enough to be played straight, but he heaps on a pile of propaganda anyways. It's irritating.

Just watched it yesterday and looked into this issue. According to original script, Fredo thought it was going to be a kidnapping not a hit, so I believe that he did open the blinds to help out.

Regarding them being killed I think the implication is that they were killed by their own men. Likely someone had a car or boat waiting to help them getaway, but killed them instead to be safe so they could not talk (could have been Fredo, but that seems like a stretch).

Regarding the Pantangelli hit, I think you're right that it was to get him to turn on Michael and the cop walking in was planned by Roth (I'm sure he had plenty of cops on his payroll). Killing Pantangelli doesn't really help Roth with Michael, but having him caught does (even if he doesn't rat on Michael, it still hurts Michael's standing in NYC if people think he turned on his own family to help Roth).

You should re-watch the movie.

He pretends to be a documentarian while contorting footage/images/audio out of context to goad you into way of thought. For example, there's a scene in Bowling For Columbine where he uses a case of a bank offering a free rifle with a new account as a microcosm of America's "gun problem". Ignoring the fact that there's nothing ****ing wrong with giving a free rifle as a marketing tool, he structured the scene to make it seem like you could walk into a bank, sign up for an account, and walk out with a gun (and go do evil with your tool of destruction, i guess?). But the bank first does a background check, so he came back days later and shot footage of him walking down the bank steps with a rifle in hand and spliced it against him signing the account registration. The bank didn't even keep the rifles at their office, so the dude literally took the rifle back to the bank and pretended like he walked out with the ****ing thing, conveniently leaving out the part where they ran a background check. These types of creative editing choices are rampant in all his movies.

Dude is a dis-ingenuous twit. I say this as somebody who absolutely loved Bowling for Columbine, and Fahrenheit 9/11 when I first watched them.

Interesting stuff.

Another thing is that the Pantangelli hit seems to happen at a important period. Roth wants him dead to take all suspicion away from himself for the hit, Michael confides in roth that Pantangelli tried to have him killed and roth jumps at the oportunity to kill him and take all suspicion away from himself.
You have to remember also michael is in a deal with roth at the time and having Pantangelli kept alive by the rissoto brothers who are backed by roth in a messed up a hit on purpose is not going to be benificial for that deal.

I must of seen it 20 times it still feels like the parts im talking about are very muddled and not clear in what there tring to say

Yea i understand what you are saying im guessing his editing process uses his footage to tread the line between fact and fiction for the benifit of the movie

One Gripe i had with sicko is the way he made the NHS look like a healthcare dream when in reality it is free yess but it is a million miles away from perfect

This can't be emphasized enough.

Rewatched 12 Angry Men for the umpteenth time yesterday. The knife? They said he claimed the he had lost his knife through a hole in his pocket. They said the wound was made with a knife "similar" to this knife. Where in the hell did they get the knife in evidence?

And yeah, Moore is the biggest douchebag ever to draw a breath.

Re-watched Star Wars recently. Ya know that bit where Luke uses a grappling hook to swing across that chasm? Where did he get that from? Is it common for farmers on Tattooine to carry grappling hooks around in their pants?

^ perfect...

Though I think calling Michael Moore Disingenuous is being kind in my humble O. Some of his... speculations... boarder on being criminally irresponsible, even though nothing he does in a free society is illegal.

Dunno how we're picking "Great" movies, but a guilty pleasure of mine is Gross Point Blank. Lots of fun.

But at the end, there's been a huge shoot out, probably a dozen dead agents/hired killers scattered around his girlfriends estate, and they drive out of town with the radio on to a happy ending. They must have VERY understanding cops in the burbs of Detroit. It felt like the writer couldn't come up with an ending that could work out, said "**** it, I'm done, cashed the check", and tacked on the above.

MM MD

- During their meeting at Roth's house, Michael asks for permission to kill Pentangeli.

- Roth agrees. "He's small potatoes."

- Michael has no intention of killing Pentangeli, but Roth doesn't know this.

- Roth decides to fake the hit, in order to discredit Michael.

Is that it?

Hmmmmmmmmmmm