Plot devices that ruin any movie

[joshuaayt]

OMG! She betrayed him! How will they ever get their American Dream love interest ending now?
Oh, wait. That was just a devious ploy by uninteresting villain-man, to generate a few minutes of angst and a Hugh Jackman looking sad scene.
So, put simply, when movies make bland characters do something interesting, but then, in the end, revert back to boring again.
EDIT: Oh, and every chick-flick that doesn't have Meg Ryan in it.

 

[warprincenataku]

Protagonist A has to Defeat Antagonist A. Yes, that is the bulk of most movies out there, but sometimes it's just as simple as hero is dicovered, hero trains (often with a montage), final face off, hero wins.

If you go to any movie that are along those lines, you can guarantee exactly what will happen.

 

[Scobie]

DELETED

 

[Cameron Baxter]

"he was already dead" pisses me off it worked in the 6th sense but it just bores me nowerdays

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

The main thing that annoys me in film, is the way that stories that really don't require a love interest...always have one crowbarred in anyway. Romance in films is fine, but it's obvious when it has been tacked on because it's underdeveloped and only serves to ruin the focus of the story.

I'll put it this way, if I was in mortal danger or I was trying to save the world from certain destruction...love would most likely not be on my mind.

THIS! Goddamn, I hate this aspect so much. There are so many movies where the romantic subplot is absolutely nonessential, and yet it's thrown in there anyway! Unless there's impending boobs, get your soppy romance out of this brutal, gory action film or psychological thriller, or what-have-you.

I don't tend to watch many films these days because I know there's almost always going to be something facepalm-worthy in them.

Also; "The Chosen One". Terrible plot device. Piss off.

I think unnecessary romantic aspects are about widening appeal. It probably makes perfect sense from a business standpoint, but it does rather water down the experience.

 

[b3nn3tt]

I don't particularly like it when an original film is released, does really well, and then a second is released that only serves to set up the third film. The biggest culprit of this I can think of is Pirates of the Caribbean. I really enjoyed the first film, and it is able to stand alone as a good film. But the second film only really works as a precursor to the third. The second and third films cannot work as standalone films. I can understand why film-makers do it, because they obviously don't know if the first film will be a success, but I don't think that should prohibit them from making another couple of standalone films

Also, the majority of chick flicks annoy me, mostly because they try for the whole film to set ip up as 'look how different these two people are, bet you they won't end up together' and you know from the word go that they will end up together. It negates the point of watching the film

 

[ReckzB]

I think unnecessary romantic aspects are about widening appeal. It probably makes perfect sense from a business standpoint, but it does rather water down the experience.

Well it's nice to know there's an explanation for it, I guess.

Let's just say we have a world-renowned contract killer. He's brutal, ruthless, and utterly devoid of emotion. And a cold, heartless, emotionless killer can't be cold, heartless, and emotionless if he's smitten by some broad.

I'm trying to think of another trite plot device to add to the list now...

 

[oktalist]

I'm trying to think up bad movies I've seen lately and all I can think of are M. Night Shyamalan movies, so I'm going to say "plot twists you see coming from about the first ten minutes in but dismiss because they're too stupid, only then it turns out you were right all along and you realise you just wasted 90 minutes of your life". For references, see The Village and The Happening. Sixth Sense and Unbreakable get a pass because most people didn't see Sixth Sense coming and Unbreakable was enjoyable to watch with a genuinely interesting idea behind it.

In SAW when

Spoiler

the killer was the "corpse" all along, pretending to be dead, lying on the floor right next to the two guys he's locked away in his dungeon.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Horror movies where the thing killing them is a fucking plant...

 

[Ronnor56]

The British guy is... *gasp* EVIL!?

 

[Enemy Of The State]

Matt Damon. Urg...

 

[Glamorgan]

Time Travel.

Spoiler: I am going to put a spoilers thing here, so unless you've seen Donnie Darko, DO NOT LOOK.

You looked -.-
Look. I'm sorry. I loved Donnie Darko. It was a brilliant film. But the ending was just confusing. Yes, I did eventually understand it, but even a few weeks later, I am trying to figure out if there would be another parallel timeline, because none of the events would have happened. On that note, why didn't Frank just make him not let that character killed? It would have solved everything. I think.
I don't think I gave anything away there. Just go watch the film, and don't look it up on Wikipedia. Just trust me on this one

But still, after all of that, I loved that film. But I swear, if the next Indiana Jones film has some sort of time travel....
*sigh*
You are the bane of my existence, new George Lucas.

Spoiler

The entirely of the Donnie Darko film was a glimpse of an alternate reality that would have been spawned had Donnie lived. Frank haunted Donnie because by living, Donnie became responsible for Frank's death. Now there are two ways to look at this:

1) Donnie lived, had a lot of time to reflect on the nature of predestination and destiny, and was haunted by his own future - that is, the death of Frank - and ultimately time was rewound to allow Donnie to accept his fate and spare the life of another; or,
2) None of it ever happened - Donnie didn't sleepwalk, he got splattered in his bed by a falling jet engine, and everything from that point on in the movie was a glimpse of an alternate reality that would never actually unfold that Donnie's mind conjured up in his dying moments. He was haunted by Frank because in his mind Donnie's death results in Frank living and his subconscious holds Frank responsible for his death, hence why Frank only ever turns up to rub in how much time Donnie has left until "the end".

Sorry if that's a little rusty, I haven't watched Donnie Darko for about five years.

Wehw. I understand it now. Thanks for that.
Still... *Glares at Mr. Lucus* Don't get any ideas.

 

[JLML]

Stereotype situations. Good vs Evil siblings, and...ugh there's so many. I mean if done right they're ok, but if they slip up even slightly then boom, it's like very other movie of that type. x.x

Haven't I told you to stop reading my mind??? =.="

OT: Yea, pretty much the same. I HATE stereotypes in movies/games/books. Unless they're really well made that is. If they're not, it's just boring because no one would act like that. EVER. Destroying the world to get revenge on one/a few persons? Not even a delusional madman would do that. I think. At least he wouldn't be able to... I hope... Oh shit. =P

 

[Julianking93]

religion. i know, i know, but i loved "knowing"... up until the end

I'm gonna have to agree 100% on that one.

Knowing was good until that stupid ending.

And really, anything that becomes a stupid religious message just ends up sucking.

Nothing against religion itself, mind you, it's just a horrid plot device.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I think unnecessary romantic aspects are about widening appeal. It probably makes perfect sense from a business standpoint, but it does rather water down the experience.

Well it's nice to know there's an explanation for it, I guess.

Let's just say we have a world-renowned contract killer. He's brutal, ruthless, and utterly devoid of emotion. And a cold, heartless, emotionless killer can't be cold, heartless, and emotionless if he's smitten by some broad.

I'm trying to think of another trite plot device to add to the list now...

Heh, there are so many.

Amnesia.
Long lost sibling.
No phone reception.
Breaking away from the group(to pee in the woods, for example), meaning certain death.
Idiot-savant protagonist.
Bomb disarmed with seconds to spare.
Stories that heavily rely on all of the characters being stupid or illogical, irk me.

I'm sure there are more, my head is so congested it's hard to think.

 

[tharglet]

Once someone starts to use a computer in a film, it's usually a sign I'm about to cringe or facepalm. Really does break the immersion for me.

You mean the fast-paced, "the computer is running at super-efficiency you'd never see in reality" thing? They get what they need far too quickly? Or they just keep typing continuously and from what you can see technically the cursor is being used rather than anything remotely needing a keyboard?

If a computer runs fast, then fine. Nobody would want to sit there watching a render, search or whatnot. It's when they start pulling things out of their backsides, especially if a minor plot edit could be easily introduced.
Examples also include progress bars for transferring money, call tracking with a progress bar, crazy UIs, the infernal beeping/clicking system, the random login terminals.

 

[ultimateownage]

Time travel. Okay, it doesn't ruin a movie but it does guarantee plot holes that are hard to plug even in the context of the movie. Take Terminator, for instance. Without the whole time travel ordeal John Connor wouldn't even exist!
Then there's the paradox of time travel: if you go back in time to fix something and succeed, you no longer have a motivation for going back in time and thus never did.
Ah, I'm just being too serious with this one.

Well with the terminator I think the idea was that he was sent back to stop Arnold, who was also sent back, from killing his mum. So that one didn't really have any plot holes. He didn't go back to fix it, he went back to stop it from being broken.

O.T. Any movie with two or more large or common cliché's ruin it for me. Just look at most rom coms. It also ruined Madagascar 2.