5 WORST Plot Devices in Storytelling (Writing Advice)

[@wizakke5399]

I hate any variation of when a competent character stops being competent because they are not the main hero.

[@cartoonkeeper]

Or when the Mary Sue enters the room

[@samkrerowicz4269]

I especially hate this when a super powerful villain turns good and all of a sudden becomes weaker than the hero.

[@cartoonkeeper]

@@samkrerowicz4269 yeah that also is annoying in video games it's also known as the "when you unlock the villain as a playable character trope"

[@jeepersmcgee3466]

ah yes, the Game of Thrones blunder

[@drdabsmore945]

Or once the main character has overcome the villain through blood, sweat, and tears to become the mighty savior, another DEADLIER threat appears and the main character has the same anxieties as in the beginning and is all of a sudden clueless in battle once again.

[@mattsager914]

You didn't mention the WORST ONE OF ALL TIME: It was all a dream.....

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Haha I've talked about dream endings several times in the past, so I didn't want to repeat myself here, but YES.

[@ClarkBK67]

Or: they were in purgatory, or heaven, or hell, the whole time!

[@eldugar_ichthus]

YIP! Horrible. Akin to it, is "the protagonist is actually mad", as in "Black Swan" and "Shutter Island".

[@DaPhunkPhenomena]

DALLAS !

[@ClarkBK67]

@@DaPhunkPhenomena but Newhart pulled it off.

[@whitedragon1337]

Scott Evil: "You're feeding him? Why don't you just kill him?" Dr Evil: "No Scott I have an even better idea...I'm going to place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly elaborate and exotic death." 🤣🤣🤣

[@d4rthfelix]

Zip it!

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Love that scene from Austin Powers. Hits it on the head

[@aaronleverton4221]

If you are widely regarded as having invented the plot device, then you have a pass. If you are unironically aping it decades later, not so much.

[@Ajay-pz9ms]

Dr Evil is an absolute legend

[@dannycove3155]

I was gonna mention this but you beat me to it! "I'm going to assume it all went to plan. What?"

[@szabolcsjobbagy30]

I loved the ending of TAKEN (1st movie), when the hero finally enters the room where the villain is holding the hero's daughter as a hostage, pointing a dagger to her neck, here everyone would expect a long talk between the hero and the villain, but the hero just simply shoots the villain in the head, saving his daughter. So surprising and satisfying ending, no death trap, no unnecessary talking, no games.

[@AlextheENTP]

"And now, since I am about to kill you anyway, I shall divulge to you in great detail my evil plan!"

[@szabolcsjobbagy30]

@@AlextheENTP Yes, it's there in all James Bond and Mission Impossible movies. :)

[@MatthewAshworth]

Yes, pleasantly unexpected. Another good one was in Watchmen, when the antagonist reveals his plan to the heroes after he's already executed it and there's no way to undo it. Ahah.

[@scorpixel1866]

Even better was that he waited in silence until the bad guy started talking, then immediately shot him as starting a speech took concentration away from being ready to kill the hostage.

[@szabolcsjobbagy30]

@@scorpixel1866 Yes, right!

[@NoxiousRob]

One that is common in horror movies in particular is when a group of people who know that something evil is amongst them, instead of sticking together and going for the 'safety in numbers' approach, there are continually characters going off on their own to check something out, making it easy for the killer to pick them off one by one.

[@MistahJay7]

"Will cover more ground" Is always the excuse I hear and it's the dumbest shit ever. Tf mean Cover more ground lmao how about staying ALIVE!?

[@TheGRBman]

The best criticism of this is from the original "Scream." Love that movie...it just makes fun of horror movie tropes. Great stuff.

[@Ian_Synnott]

This largely only appears in bad slasher movies. And even in the likes of Halloween or the original Friday the 13th it's ok because the characters don't know what's going on. But yes, in the bad films, its just cheap and awful.

[@CLove511]

It's not particularly difficult to do it organically either. The shitty old boat breaks apart and they all get washed down different parts of the river. The sketchy mine shaft with warning signs starts to collapse and they panic and run in different directions. The rickety bridge gives out after half have crossed. Better yet, split them up before the core part of the plot kicks off, so it's not unusual. If you absolutely must do this, it needs to be a sequence of events which need to happen simultaneously in separate locations, and it's do-or-die.

[@musthaf9]

Been listening to some real life scary stories. That behavior is not exactly unrealistic, though

[@shaunaksoni7595]

One of the stupid ones is when the protagonist doesn’t confirm their kills, especially when they have all the time in the world to do so. You just know that the person isn’t REALLY dead and expect a “surprising” revival. This is why I like John wick. Shoots dudes, punctures all vital organs but still shoots them in the head when they’re down

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Even before I finished reading your comment, I thought "This is why I love John Wick," then you said it haha. Always gotta shoot their head to be certain.

[@kellywilliams1332]

One of the rules of zombie land…double tap!

[@krugerstan]

My wife always complains when she sees this: "What, no double tap? Well, you deserve what's about to happen then, don't you?"

[@loriki8766]

UGH! This is so irritating. I find myself yelling at the TV like a man watching a football game.

[@benjaminwatt2436]

@@loriki8766 I felt that way when thor left Loki on the planet after he "died" it was so redicules, like he would just leave his brother's body in a foriegn planet and unburied

[@cyborgmetropolis7652]

I don’t know what the real name is but I call it “the stupidity”. This is when some secondary character goes against their group’s mandate and attacks an enemy, goes on a rescue mission, wanders off, or whatever, forcing everyone to change plans to deal with this new artificially generated conflict. I expect characters to have some level of common sense and when they don’t I lose interest in the story because it tells me the writer isn’t capable of creating better motivations.

[@intergalactic92]

I believe this trope is called "spanner in the works". This is essentially a seemingly ironclad plan being derailed by accident, either by idiocy or through a forgotten character striking out on their own at the most inopportune time.

[@cartoonkeeper]

​@@intergalactic92 interesting I also like to call it the "Leeroy Jenkins" moment if you are familiar with memes you know why

[@eatmorenachos]

"Don't do anything crazy and go off on your own" really means "you're about to do something crazy and go off on your own" --- EVERY time.

[@Yatukih_001]

I keep that away from my fiction. In my fiction the secondary character and other characters slowly build up and they work together to solve a problem which one character cannot solve.

[@RaccoonHenry]

like the kid opening the gates at the start of The Purge? that instantly killed the movie for me

[@jeffreywalther4323]

The one I can think of is the "You're not like this" plot device. Where a protagonist is about to kill a bad guy and the love interest shows up and says, "you're not like this" and then they don't kill the bad guy. Or they grow a conscience at the last moment and decide they shouldn't kill the bad guy. So then the bad guys spends the next two or three seasons doing really terrible things in which the protagonist has to kill the bad guy anyway. I've watched a lot of crap with my wife on CW and that seems to be a thing that pops up with them

[@jackiewolf3903]

I think what bothers me most about this particular trope, is that the hero will kill hordes of mooks and goons to get to the big bad, then have their moment of "I'm not a murderer". Like, a lot of them mooks are just there to get a pay checque, yet the one planning everything has to be spared to show how good the hero is.

[@robkoroluk2992]

This is subverted excellently in Deadpool.

[@CuteKiller313]

@@jackiewolf3903 Spectre had an especially egregious version of this where James Bond, a government assassin with a licence to kill who's spent his franchise shooting literally hundreds of random mercenaries, refuses to kill Blofeld, the most dangerous criminal to ever live, in charge of essentially the illuminati, who's main goal in life is to kill innocent people just to make Bond suffer, because that'd... make Bond like him... as if someone as ruthless as Bond who's been shooting unarmed enemies just to save time tying them up since the 60s would care

[@covagotnextgaming]

Facts I HATE that too

[@thorodinson6625]

At least Batman doesn't try to kill superman again after BVS

[@ericcutler4774]

I think Avatar the Last Airbender has a good example of Death Trap done well. In season 1, Zhao has Aang captured and makes a comment that although killing him would mean the Fire Nation would win the war, the Avatar Cycle would still continue. A new avatar would be born and eventually be a threat to the Fire Nation. Instead, he purposely keeps Aang tied up and alive so that the Fire Nation has total control over the Avatar Cycle too.

[@shotsofpadron]

Agreed! Kingsman also had a good scene where they avoided the Death Trap…until the sequel came out and ruined it lol

[@jaxonwoods8181]

TLA also completely reverted on its stance the next season when Azula kills Aang in Crossroads, showing the different mentalities and motivations of the characters, in this case, Azula and Zhao. The death trap can absolutely be utilized wisely if a part of an overarching narrative. Another good use of it is TESB, where Vader refuses to kill Luke because he wants to turn him to the dark side. (and yes I know Katara revives Aang but for all intents and purposes, he was killed)

[@jemhoare2105]

That isn't a deathtrap then, more like frozen in carbonite.

[@TheRedMan77]

@@jaxonwoods8181 AND Aang was almost killed while IN the Avatar State, meaning the cycle would have ended right then and there if not for Katara. So it had genuine stakes.

[@HeOfTheBeginning]

I'm writing a novel series where the main objective of the antagonist wants to capture my main protagonist in order to corrupt him before he completes his task so in order for the main villain to get what he wants, he targets the comrades of the protagonist to lure him out of hiding.

[@Ben-pd2bx]

The Shrek one works because it's not just a misunderstanding. She hates herself for being ugly in the same way he does. He's looking in a mirror and doesn't realize it because he doesn't realize other people have the same insecurities as him.

[@hunterlawrence3573]

Plus it also leads to her misunderstanding him, when she thinks he knows about her Ogre transformation at night. We never actually see this part get cleared up, but I guess she just figured it out on her own

[@TheGalaxyfighter]

​@@hunterlawrence3573 Plus this "misunderstandings" are totally relevant to the "self image and self worth" overall theme of the story

[@silverhawkscape2677]

True. It's why it works because it makes sense for the character.

[@dragonic22]

I don't think the issue is her having this crisis. I think the issue is Shrek randomly and conveniently hearing about it.

[@hunterlawrence3573]

@@dragonic22 It’s better than what they originally had. In earlier versions of the scene, Shrek hears Donkey screaming and chases Fiona down and attacks her. That’s certainly different from what happens in the movie. Apparently they tried it a bunch of different ways and the multilayered misunderstanding they finally came up with was the only thing that kept the story moving they way they wanted.

[@AllenUry]

My most irritating plot device is the "TV News Exposition Dump ." A character turns on the TV and immediately there is a news story with expository information about the situation he/she is involved with. Even worse is when the character gets a phone call and a friend says, "Quick! Turn on the TV!" The character then turns on the TV and, lo and behold, there's the relevant news story being told FROM THE BEGINNING -- as if just for the character's benefit. Jesus....

[@paulrukavishnikov5171]

There are perfectly normal examples though. In El Camino, for instance, it's only logical that all channels will report on Walter White's story, right after the events of the end of the series happen. So it's just the question of timing and magnitude

[@TheOmegaXicor]

​@@paulrukavishnikov5171 but they all start exactly where they mean to, I can't tell you the number of times I have turned the TV, set to the news channel, and had to rewind 20 seconds to work out what the breaking news is about

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

This one is lazy and done to death. Good call.

[@Yatukih_001]

The most irritating plot device are woke characters and predictable villains. We are not interested in knowing how woke Sinbad is, how woke Luke Skywalker is or how predictable Kylo Wren is. We want to know why Horde Prime is so unpredictable. We want to know why modern Lovecraftian horrors are less unpredictable than their predecessors.

[@TheOmegaXicor]

@@Yatukih_001 I feel like that could be explained without using the word woke, and I wonder if you included it for any particular reason... You don't like 1d main or side characters or cliche'd villains, got it, no one does.

[@JohnBradford14]

The flip-side of the deathtrap is the "sudden sanctimony", where all of a sudden after killing a whole bunch of the villains goons and thugs the hero is all "I won't kill you because then I'd be no better than you hurr durr durr" And it's always the most frustrating thing. It's especially bad in superhero comics. Seriously, Spider-Man, you've been to space, other dimensions, you've time-traveled and hopped into alternate universes and have fought clones of yourself. Is killing off the Kingpin REALLY gonna mess you up that much psychologically?

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

This is a great point. I also love the sound of "Sudden Sanctimony"

[@FriendsWithIssues]

I get it with certain heroes who clearly have a very strong code of not killing, or feel some sort of remorse when people die because of them. But it never makes sense when the killing machine all of a sudden goes "if I kill you, I'll be no better than you." Like bro, you aren't. Finish the job! 😂😂😂

[@IridescentFalcon72]

I hate this, so much. They literally killed a bunch of unnamed goons who, if anything, could have been coerced and blackmailed into this but they won't kill the ONE guy who is a deranged lunatic doing this for fun on purpose. This only kinda works if the hero explicitly refuses to kill anyone imo. Otherwise it's hypocrisy.

[@JohnBradford14]

@@FriendsWithIssues So true. If a villain kills off a bunch of innocent people, then their life is forfeit. Killing them off would be an act of goodness for wider society. How many people have died at the Joker's hands because Batman won't allow the world to bring him to justice?

[@BreadApologist]

Ya I absolutely hate that. Villain has destroyed countless lives had multiple chances, any rational person wouldn’t hesitate to kill them but no hero doesn’t cause asinine moral gymnastics that make no sense.

[@ViiZiiOnZ915]

In Jurassic Park's defense, i like to think that Deus Ex Machina moment is warranted and enhances the theme of the movie. The characters don't make it out due to their own wits because in jurassic park it's them against nature. Cruel and chaotic without regard to logic or rules. They're truly fish out of water, and a t rex coming in to eat the raptors is just another instance of the food chain and circle of life perpetuating itself. It could just as easily been them who gets eaten but they luck out. And i think by the end, they realize that as they make their escape looking on at the total hubris that was jurassic park

[@thedarksiderebel]

Came here to say this. Its literally the whole theme of the film. Life finding a way, chaos theory, etc. And theT-rex doesnt "save the heroes", it just eats something. The other difference between this and the Last Jedi example is that the T-rex *is* set up. The only real issue with the scene is that they dont hear the footsteps (that we already know can make water ripple), but I'll allow that for entertainment value. Honestly, same with the Shrek example. Shrek is too pig headed and unused to human interaction, that he wouldn't stop to listen to the context - and why would he? He doesn't know the truth about Fiona's curse. Bad examples for these

[@c4tubo]

The Deus Ex aspect is really the dramatic timing of it: at the very last second when they are all finally trapped and facing certain death. A more believable version would have the T-Rex attack sometime during the Raptor chase because it was attracted by all the activity, like when it attacks during the Gallimimus stampede.

[@SunnyIntervalsORG]

To me the issue with that scene is that the t-rex is literally just out of frame before it eats the raptor. So we the audience are surprised to see it but so too are the characters, wouldn't they have already seen the t-rex coming?

[@adamjensen5860]

I think you have a point but as others have said I think the real issue is continuity, that the T-Rex's arrival earlier in the movie is very obvious and dramatic but here it sneaks up like a ninja, to the surprise of both the audience and the characters.

[@TheZoltan-42]

The problem is that the T-Rex which had thundering steps until then, jumps out of the hat exectly the split second when all feels lost. The T-Rex eating the raptors? Sure! Doing it exactly the place and few seconds where the main characters are about to die, with a chance of billions or more to one? _That_ is deus ex machina. Deus ex machina is not about things that cannot happen or don't make sense. It's about astronomically improbable things that conveniently happen outside the control of the characters when all else is lost. Too convenient, and weak writing.

[@lukeleslie9648]

The funniest use of amnesia I've seen is in the 2nd Ace Attorney game, where phoenix is given amnesia so that the game could have a tutorial.

[@ThanhTriet600]

There's a lot of dumb and convenient amnesia in that series so that you have to solve the case yourself and then have the person miraculously recover and reveal more information.

[@adalgissarodriguez7026]

Bruuuuuh,thats funny. I remmember that

[@roymarsh8077]

Related to the last one, I hate when the villain is beating the hero to a pulp in the final showdown, and then the hero finds new reserves of strength, despite being half dead, and suddenly the tables are turned. This is NOT the same as when the hero tricks the villain into activating the pre-prepared trap.

[@rsj2877]

Does an example that you like more would be that after the villain or antagonist beat the protagonist completely, that last rush of energy from the latter is used only for getting out of there asap either to safety or to hide.

[@PeanutTechno]

Way I see it is if the heroes have access to that sorta shit, the villains should too. Once per character, and being saved by another character in the middle of it nullifies it. But yeah I hate it when heroes pull that too. You've been shot in the legss, stabbed several times, and slashed across the torso several times while screaming in agony, and you think I'll believe you're just walking that off *in the middle of a battle*. Either get your ass to a hospital or have fun bleeding out to death (at best)

[@noahsmith5304]

What I thought about immediately after reading the last bit was the final Krang fight in the ROTTMNT movie, where Leo gets beaten up by Krang, but had thrown his sword and teleported both him and Krang inside the portal bridging two dimensions. That move is pretty cool because it was established previously that the Krang are this super strong opponents that are hard to take on alone, and ti showcased Leo's brilliant strategy.

[@miriamweller812]

Most annoying is: that monster that instantly crushes everyone else gets the main char and starts throwing him/her around. One of the worst ways to do it. But that's the problem with power levels and not handling them well. If you implement something that just inta kills you at melee range, you have to work with that and not just cancel it as soon as the main char is involved. At the minimum give it a reason, for example the monster got the order to not kill but only capture the main char.

[@miriamweller812]

@@noahsmith5304 Escaping isn't a problem, in contrary, it of course makes absolute sense that someone who realizes they are losing will try to escape that. Problem is, when one character got the clear will and ability to kill and isn't doing it for no reason. Even worse when that character talks about killing that person all the time and every time they could, they don't do it. That's just terrible writing.

[@mrmonkeyman79]

I'm not sure if there's a name for it but there's a plot device that I feel is related to the misunderstanding one where a character is about to impart some important information, confess something or otherwise resolve and important plot point and it plays out like this: "I really need to tell you something, this is super important" "Actually before you do I need to tell you something" -proceeds to tell them the exact thing that would talk them out of telling them the thing - "anyway what did you want to tell me?" "Oh actually it's nothing never mind" I've seen this happen multiple times in the same story to drag it out and it's truly infuriating.

[@KaiHenningsen]

Related, when the main characters just wouldn't talk about the elephant in the room for no good reason, dragging misunderstandings out unnecessarily. If that happened once in a while, it might not be so annoying, but it looks as is that's a standard plot device in any romance story. Why?!

[@immortalfrieza]

The one that's even worse: Characters refusing to tell other characters things that would solve the current problem or prevent the next, often for no good reason. Or do tell them but in a convoluted way that's easy to misinterpret. Especially bad if later the first character decides to rub it in their face that they DID tell them.

[@thevalarauka101]

I would put a like on this except it's on 69 and I don't want to be the one to ruin it Edit: has 90 now, I'll like it

[@sorateal12]

Ahhhh this one is sooooo frustrating!!!!

[@JeremyCoppin]

This thread contains the absolute pit in story telling. All those you mentioned are forgivable in the same way that the Hero's Journey trope is forgivable. This stops me finishing a movie or series it annoys me so much. Plain stupid.

[@mikelewis495]

Related to the first one, we have 1. The pronoun game 2. When a character could clear up a conflict by just explaining themselves or telling everyone what happened but for some reason they don't, and let everyone else proceed with their misapprehension

[@waffler-yz3gw]

2. is awful, i hate that one

[@laprankster3264]

Tbf, Fiona had no idea that Shrek was there at the time, so she wouldn’t have known that Shrek heard anything she said.

[@GrnXnham]

"While You Were Sleeping" a great example of #2

[@knatspray]

You never heard of HIM?

[@PyrrhoVonHyperborea]

I just call that "plot device" the "conveniently stupid" Sometimes entire movies are held together by nothing but said words-defying stupidity and ducttape... Also: the "two people who otherwise like and respect and trust one another, are adament in never ever talking things out, until a full movie is filled with it..."

[@blazebananacrusher5241]

I absolutely HATE when a really attractive person is friends with main character and the main character’s significant other gets extremely jealous and acts out of character. In stories like this the main character is always so oblivious and it’s so annoying.

[@Yatukih_001]

I absolutely hate it when the main character thinks that once he´s in his 80´s that´s it. He´s been there and done it all and nothing unpredictable could happen tomorrow which changes the course of his life and makes it ten times more interesting. Especially if he´s in the public domain.

[@lindendrache8998]

@@Yatukih_001 I really need a hint which character you are talking about

[@Yatukih_001]

@@lindendrache8998 There is one in a comic and this guy grows up like real fast. He is a child but this happens frequently and this makes him feel robbed of his childhood. I think its an MCU one. Another example are writers who move to a haunted hotel and they are in their forties or fifties and they have a writer´s block. This worked flawlessly in the case of Jack Torrance. When other writers try to do this their stories fall off a cliff.

[@keithcarey6312]

It’s also a worn out cliche.

[@teleriferchnyfain]

But it’s a REAL thing. I’ve seen it play out in actual life.

[@michalchik]

Convenient misunderstanding is usually terrible in drama, but can be excellent fuel for comedy. Especially when they are layered on top of one another. In drama, it mostly has value in showing the pettiness of a particular character or their poor judgment

[@jes7119]

The TV show Frasier does this best.

[@beenaplumber8379]

@@jes7119 Nah, Shakespeare did it best, and IMO his best example is in one of his greatest tragedies, not a comedy. In fact, two of his greatest tragedies turn on this device. And of course he uses it masterfully in nearly every comedy of his. I want to die every time I see Othello fall into that trap, thinking Desdemona unchaste! (It's the whole turning point that turns a comedy into one of the greatest tragedies.) No matter how many times I see it, it's still gut-wrenching and painful. The other example that comes to mind is the meaningless, pointless, heartbreaking end of Romeo and Juliet. All a misunderstanding. It's not the devices that are bad, it's the attitude of the writer and the expectation of the viewer.

[@fruzsimih7214]

It's almost always terrible in romcoms.

[@kapanimations]

With the T-Rex showing up at the end, I believe what they were trying to show is that dinosaurs aren't just mindless human-killers only meant to add thriller to movies. They are also animals (that we don't fully understand). And the scene also just sets up one of the most iconic shots in cinema history.

[@erickay123]

Yeah, at least the T-Rex appeared in the film earlier.

[@ShaimingLong]

The main problem is that it literally just appears, there's no foreshadowing or warning it's coming. Earlier in the movie they could hear the booming footsteps while in cars while it's raining. At the end it just spawns in, indoors, without making a sound and never being seen. They could have added to the stakes, a whole "we need to escape from these raptors before the T-Rex arrives or we're never going to be able to escape," only for the prior lesson of the T-Rex going after movement leading to the T-Rex being the saviour, not their absolute doom upon arrival.

[@poeterritory]

Apparently, it was because Spielberg said that everyone would want to see the T-Rex again. Hence, its inclusion.

[@DrThunder88]

Moreover, the film did show the rex ambushing the gallimimus with a sudden attack from the side, just like it did to the raptor. Grant even says that it "doesn't want to be fed; it wants to hunt". The T. rex also does seem to be following Grant and the kids from the main road to the gallimimus chase to its roar being heard when they cross the fence. The fact that it shows up at the visitor center isn't too surprising. Even if we consider that the fences were back on when Tim got zapped, it had hours to "wander in and out of any paddock it likes".

[@theinternetsightseer2935]

​@ShaimingLong Except for the fact that the tyrannosaurus was one of the best ambush hunters of all dinosaurs kinda making your point moot.

[@darylking265]

One of the funny parts of "The Incredibles" is when Frozone and Mr Incredible are sitting in a car. Frozone is talking about how some bad guy has Frozone right in the "deathtrap" but then starts "monologuing". Exactly the plot device you brought up earlier.

[@MorganKing95]

And then it comes back when Syndrome says "You sly dog! You got me monologuing!"

[@marikothecheetah9342]

The Incredibles laugh at many superheros tropes, which I love.

[@jonathanschmitt5762]

Or when Syndrome had the entire family trapped in something similar to a force field, which was easily counterable by Violet's ability to force field.

[@davidlafleche1142]

Yes, but they were making fun of it and treating it like the cliche it is.

[@marikothecheetah9342]

@@davidlafleche1142 indeed :)

[@howardfernald901]

Personally I never minded the opening of the Ark at the end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark." I thought it was more of a matter of evil men meddling with a dangerous artifact and not knowing what they were doing, while Indy saved himself and Marion because he as an archeologist knew what was about to happen ("Don't look at it. Shut your eyes, Marion. Don't look at it no matter what happens.") (Well, OK, maybe the bit at the end where he and Marion get their bonds burned off by the avenging spirits...)

[@DeweyAdema]

The power of the ark was also hinted at early on in the film, and as the film progresses, there is more mystery attributed to what the ark can do.

[@bjornh4664]

It has been pointed out that "Raiders of the Lost Ark" would've ended almost the exact same way if Indy hadn't done anything. OK, the Ark was found sooner, and it ended up in storage, but the Nazis would've taken the Ark to the island and been killed anyway. (The are other plot holes in the movie, like how could the Nazis conduct an archaeological dig with a battalion of soldiers present, when Egypt was more or less under British control.)

[@KayFabeMedia]

Its also not really a deus ex machina as its biblically accurate and Indy is spared because he knew to look away.

Exactly. They talk about the power of the Ark (and that you should not mess with it) from the beginning of the movie. Heck, we SEE IT in that page from the Bible that Indy shows the Feds when they come to recruit him.

[@thetabletopskirmisher]

Yes. This. The power of the ark was already foreshadowed at the beginning of the movie. Plus Indy knew what might happen when the ark was opened thus Indy and Marion closed their eyes to avoid divine wrath.

[@Liusila]

My most hated cop-out is the “I had a solution planned all along” even though it makes no sense for that character to have been following plan A if they had a killer plan B solution already worked out. And because the audience wasn’t told any of this, it feels like making us feel stupid instead of showing up the villain.

[@juanausensi499]

@@vitalysikorskiy5938 I understand why writers use that, the problem is that is extremely predictable. The plan is actually discussed? Then it's going to fail. Someone says 'i have a plan' but they don't tell the audience what it is? Then it's going to work out. 100% ot the time.

[@patkub3214]

"Kick the Dog" moments: When Sympatetic villain whose plan actually makes sense that makes audiences question if he is even bad or just misunderstood... just does some over the top evil shit (kills child, bombs orphanage etc.) for absolutelly no reason.

[@juanausensi499]

@@patkub3214 Yes, that's a horrible one. It's like the writer is afraid of confusing the reader about who is the 'bad guy'. That happens when the writer doesn't really know why his good guy is good an/or why his bad guy is bad.

[@beenaplumber8379]

It feels like you're describing a lot of murder mysteries, particularly Agatha Christie. The sleuth plays it one way while secretly knowing the truth lies in another direction, though if you look back in the story, it's not really plausible. I love Agatha Christie's plays!

[@One.Zero.One101]

The thing that I hate most is 99.9% of plans are just stupid. They introduce an "intelligent" and "tactical" character and you get excited when they say "I have a plan". But 99.9% of the time the plan is just "Walk through the front door". Good plans in movies are very very rare.

[@Uncrushed04]

The Dues Ex Machina thing actually gave me an idea for a show. Write a series where every episode is a Dues Ex Machina. Make it a mystery out of how it keeps happening, which is not revealed until the end of the series. Essentially create a good plot line made out of bad plot lines.

[@DevilMaster]

What about a series where in every episode, the CIA tries to kill Clark Kent? Not because they know he's Superman, but because what he discovers and writes as a journalist is divulging dark secrets about the CIA that they would rather keep away from the public. And in every episode, Clark Kent survives an assassination attempt in a way that, from an outsider, would look like a combination of contrived coincidences (but of course, the audience knows he survives because he's Superman). And the final episode is the final showdown, where finally Superman appears and defeats the corrupted CIA agents.

[@beenaplumber8379]

@@DevilMaster Um, I kinda hate all the comic book movies that have been coming out these past few years, but honestly I like this. You two should collaborate.

[@poeticdavide]

You mean DARK from Netflix? 'Cause that's exactly what happens at every season finale 😂 (even though the series is really great)

[@PotawatomiThunderNew]

@@beenaplumber8379wow, I’m glad to see someone else who doesn’t like those movies either.

[@Nerdrakere]

2:12 I always loved the fairly odd parents meta jokes. Timmy’s parents talking as Timmy overhears: “having a son can be such a drag!” *timmy leaves* “Which is the EXACT opposite of how I really feel!”

[@Galkatokk]

That's hilarious.

[@flingstrike8893]

What Hollywood can learn from Studio Ghibli films is that you don't always need to force drama into things, If your movie has a good enough story, you can usually find ways to let drama unfold without bending over backwards to make certain things that feel dramatic happen

[@devonportfilmclubdvfc3469]

I think the problem is, everyone in Hollywood has read the same screenwriting books, studied the same examples, and lo and behold - create the same three-act structured, very predictable, tried-and-true storylines. And they could try and break out of that, but no studio will take a chance on them. And at the very best, focus test the shit out of what they try until it meets mainstream expectations. There are a few artists still out there, but every day there are fewer and fewer people who can recognise their art.

[@donbrea]

or "you dont need a villain to write a good story"

[@curiousgemini]

In many horror movies there is the "car that doesn't start device" Yep, the car was fine when the first got there, but when they want to get away suddenly it doesn't work at all. Sometimes it because the baddie messed with it, which as least logical.

[@PotawatomiThunderNew]

I think that’s more of a general trope than a plot device. When it’s used in a getaway sequence, it doesn’t really affect the direction, it more so runs concurrently to the direction. It’s a fleeing scene before the “car that doesn’t start” encounter, and is usually still a fleeing scene after the encounter.

[@xavierthomas5835]

​@@PotawatomiThunderNewRight, but of the car had been working, the baddie walking on two legs, unless he has some supernatural ability to fly or run fast, would not have caught up to them and they would no longer be in danger. The immediate threat would be neutralized and the tension destroyed. It would certainly be a plot device then.

[@jesustyronechrist2330]

Funnily enough: These are great places to do some subversion. - Convenient misunderstanding that leads to good things - Amnesia, but with fake memories - Deus ex machina, but it happens in the middle of the story and now the character have to figure out what to do with this sudden win. - Instant trust that leads to obvious problems, manipulation and abuse - Deathtrap, but it is designed for the hero to escape straight into another deathtrap.

[@marklaw5116]

The instant trust one where bad things happen is just as common as the one mentioned in the video, if not more so.

[@emoslayinrage]

I think the convenient misunderstanding is a good plot device for writing comedy, since you can build more and more off of that joke.

[@futurestoryteller]

While the video trashes contrived drama, contrived drama - anything that creates tension really, is inherently more acceptable to audiences than contrived solutions. So if some random tragedy befalls the hero, like a massive flood and he loses all of his money and possessions, that's fine. However if the hero is financially strapped he can't suddenly win the Mega Millions. A convenient misunderstanding that leads to good things is a contrived positive. - Amnesia doesn't create fake memories, having said that this is a plot device in some stories with magical amnesia, such as JRPGs like Final Fantasy VII. Elements of this are also present in Memento, even though it's a different form of amnesia. - Obviously a deus ex machina is already a contrived positive, but you don't really "figure out" what to do with a win. You're a winner. You won. It's done. Wins are not a problem. - Setting aside this is probably the plot of roughly 50% of all lifetime movies, this is, among other things, a plot device in Frozen. - I... don't see the point of a deathtraps "designed to let the hero escape" but into _another_ death trap, that's just twice as pointless.

[@robinrobinhobrown]

I was just thinking that while watching! I like.

[@storygirl33]

A wizard did it! Is how another video describes an illogical way a hero gets out of a problem as if by magic. I dislike this one when it's clear the author is just grasping at straws or rushing an ending. Other times I will give a pass if it is logically plausible if they fill in some small plot hole. Austin powers makes great fun of the evil villain killing machine ploy, so clearly you're not the only one that wonders a villain doesn't just shoot the hero in the head.

[@mrsturtevant1]

I've always hated the "it's not gonna hold us both" plot device. Where two characters are just hanging from a rope and the character holding the other character's hand just decides to die. It's a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

[@ethanmoon3925]

"It's not gonna hold both of us!' It might, how do you know? "I've done tensile strength testing with that specific rope, using weights equivalent to each of us, and it definitely won't hold both of us!" When did you have the time to do that? That's not even your rope, how could you- "Shh shh shh! I've checked out of this story, byyyee" *jumps off cliff*

[@mrsturtevant1]

Hahaha, yeah that's basically it

[@rsj2877]

​@@mrsturtevant1a way that trope can be worked on could be that the one hangingg at the bottom, ie the one who would just die, instead addresses the situation and finds a way he can get himself to safety by dropping while letting the other be able to hold himself.

[@mrsturtevant1]

That could work too. The thing the bugs me the most about that trope is that the character at the bottom kills themselves when the other character might need them later. Like in Gravity, as good of a movie as it was

[@AnotherDuck]

Same goes for the ending of Titanic.

[@ladylynx9891]

I hate the "change character A's personality to accomodate a conflict", like they did in Frozen 2 where Anna keeps switching between "smart protagonist" and "the stupidest paranoid girlfriend" who doesn't give Kristoff an opening to propose, so _trying to say something_ is his entire arc in the movie because of that.

[@bengough6955]

Yes cringeworthy hahaha couple stereotypes to make us all laugh pisses me right off. My 4 year old has watched frozen 1 and 2 a lot and this stood out to me as cheap and boring and, actually, unworthy of how a good couple should be written (be it animated or otherwise) He can be nervous but she never came across as petulant or petty/insecure. It's bad and only written to create shallow humour

[@verysleepywolf]

Harry's amnesia in Spiderman 3!! It stalled the conflict with Peter so that they could focus on the rest of that very busy plot. Then he gets his memories back towards the end after the other dominoes have been set in place. Boy I hated that crap.

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Great example. Forgot about that

[@Lastjustice]

He barely even remains in that state, as he regains his memories with in 15 -20 mins of the movie. He threats MJ into breaking up with Peter, and she does it anyways. Spiderman 3 is such a trainwreck.

[@sgt_lil_monster1835]

​@@Lastjusticebut bully maguire is funny tbf

[@Lastjustice]

@@sgt_lil_monster1835 Oh this movie churned out tons of meme worthy content, but as a movie it fails. If it wasn't part of well liked series of films it fumbling might been more forgiveable, but it even screws up the prime directive of Spiderman..WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSBILITY....in spiderman 3...doesn't matter if you do the right thing, some other bad guy kills your uncle. (They made Sandman Uncle Ben's killer, and Peter got some random thug killed that actually tried help his uncle via retcon.)

[@alessiominervini1175]

I actually think it's good One because you finally get After three movies a Moment of them acting like Friends and they both Remember what they are losing by fighting and the fact that the Movie also never really confirms that Harry has Lost ALL the Memories and in fact keeps messing with Peter keeps you on edge

[@delstanley1349]

There is a Death Trap lesson learned long ago. In the beginning of "The Good, the Bad & the Ugly" Tuco (the Ugly) guns down three tough hombres. This scene lets us know that Tuco may be "ugly" but he is a bad ass also. He thought he had kill all three men, but only two died. The third one has a mangled arm and sets out for revenge and to avenge. He is really going to torture Tuco something awful when he finds him. He waits weeks...months...searching for Tuco. At last he finds Tuco in a compromising position, just the way he wants him, totally defenseless. Tuco is in an abandoned building. Alone. taking a bath, a bubble bath with lots and lots of bubbles! The mangled armed guy approaches Tuco. His gun with extended arm is pointed on Tuco. This grizzled character snarls and reminds Tuco how long and hard he has tracked him down for this very moment, how he will relish in killing him, he keeps walking towards Tuco, a kind of one step by man and a giant leap for mankind and blah, blah. Under all those bubbles, our hygienic desperado Tuco didn't have his rubbie duckie, but a six-shooter! He unloads on this dude shooting his six times, boom...boom...boom! Tuco rises from the bath tub, walks toward the dead man and gives the dead man a belated Death Trap lesson, "If you're going to shoot, SHOOT! Don't talk!"

[@Fantumh]

One of many great scenes in that movie.

[@bobmacgrath6651]

Another reason to respect that movie... A writing lesson right in the movie itself! I wonder if that line was Ad-libed by Eli Wallach or an inside joke from the writers.

[@delstanley1349]

@@bobmacgrath6651 >I suspect Sergio Leone may have added it. In another of his movies, "Once Upon a Time in the West" bad guy Henry Fonda kills an entire family. His land grabbing rail boss told him "I wanted you to scare them, not kill em." Fonda replied, "they scare better dying." In Leone's "For a Few Dollars More" Lee Van Cleef is confronted by Klaus Kinski in a saloon. Van Cleef is seated at his table having dinner. In a prior scene Van Cleef had lit his pipe by striking a match on the calloused hunch back of Kinski (that was so out and out disrespectful it was funny). Klinski remembered the insult in the saloon. They draw, Klinski lies dead on the floor near Van Cleef who dryly says, "Get him out of here, I don't eating around a dead man!" When this movie is played these days that line is almost always cut.

[@Lilitha11]

That is basically a type of lampshading and that can work well in the right situation.

[@rsrt6910]

Marco: "Next time you have a chance to kill someone, don't hesitate!" John McLaine: Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! "Thanks for the advice."

[@sevenswordsofsong9955]

The one that bothered was the “main hero needs x amount of money to pay off a debt and discovers a sports competition that rewards exactly that amount if they win the championship”

[@themadrose4334]

But I love Happy Gilmore D:

[@daximil]

I can see why it bothers you but I find this one rather fun, especially in stupid comedies like Dodgeball.

[@sevenswordsofsong9955]

@@daximil yeah dodgeball leaned into the irony of it

[@sevenswordsofsong9955]

@@themadrose4334 happy Gilmore gets a pass

[@loriki8766]

This was the plot of Here Comes the Boom, only the hero had to overcome his own issues to help someone else. It wasn't at believable but it was a fun movie.

[@aaperry1]

"The Futile Chase" often occurs early in the second act where the villain gets away from the hero after a lengthy and action-filled sequence. There's very little tension because the movie would be over in 40 minutes if the villain were caught.

[@Blaqjaqshellaq]

Not unlike Roger Ebert's Idiot Plot, which requires the characters to be incapable of noticing something that's perfectly obvious to the audience, lest the story's central problem be solved too soon for a feature-length movie! (One example is the Princess Diaries sequel, where Anne Hathaway's mother wants to marry her off because she's concerned about a pretender to the throne, who happens to be single, young and handsome...)

[@poeticdavide]

"Big Hero 6", "Spider-Man", etc. 😂

[@zacmumblethunder7466]

Raiders of the Lost Ark may look like a Deus Ex Machina ending, but its actually an example of Checkov's Gun. When I first saw it I was expecting a flabby ending where either the Ark was lost forever without us seeing the *Wrath of God* as shown in Indy's Big Book of Biblical Doom; or would turn out to be a fake, etc. When the sand trickled through Belloq's fingers, it seemed we were going for the latter. The end we got is actually a really good example of Checkov's gun. He said don't show a gun in the first act if you're not going to have used it by the end. By describing the power of the Ark in the first act, Spielberg was following this principle by showing us that power at the end of the film. God didn't just turn up at the end to rescue the hero and heroine, His power had been there all through the story waiting to be unleashed. I'm not religious but I probably wouldn't have seen Raiders the ludicrous number of times that I have if the ending had simply involved blowing up the Ark with the bazooka and making a heroic and more mundane escape.

[@erickay123]

Maybe the T-Rex example in Jurassic Park is like Checkov's Gun...

[@ShaimingLong]

@@erickay123 The key isn't just simply that these tropes are bad, you can pretty much look at any trend people generally hate and pick out positive examples of it being used. It's that writers keep using these staple tropes without putting in much effort to get them to have a good cohesion with the plot. Raiders was a good use of Checkov's Gun and Deus Ex Machina, while Jurassic Park's T-Rex finale wasn't. The points there to make it a kind of Checkov's Gun were, notably that a T-Rex is apparently a giant cat and will toss out reason to simply chase the moving object, but the T-Rex literally just spawns in to kill the attacking raptor. There was no build up to it coming, no booming footsteps or distant roars getting closer, either of which could have easily been used to add even more tension to the final act, "we need to get away from the raptors before the T-Rex arrives." That would have made for a wonderful twist when the feared doom clock runs out and the T-Rex arrives and doesn't actually try to kill them, but becomes their savior instead.

[@erickay123]

@@ShaimingLong Thank you for that thoughtful post. Yes that ending would have been perfect!

[@ShaimingLong]

@@erickay123 Thanks, while it was a missed opportunity, it's easier to say that in hindsight without the complications of movie production. Oh, and sorry it was a bit awkward to read, I wrote it around 5 AM, I'd been awake for about as long as the video.

[@GregJamesMusic]

It's also consistent with the Old Testament and the Torah, where Israel's enemies keep stealing the Ark and experiencing supernatural punishments. I think there's even one case where the Philistines actually beg Israel to take the Ark back so God will leave them alone.

[@tomarnold7284]

You pretty much named 80% of Hollywood movies today😄

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Haha let's hope some Hollywood writers stumble upon this video

[@tomarnold7284]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty No because their creativity overruled by money sucking managements, so whatever sells, they use it repeatedly until its ruined. BTW I'm an armature writer and I learn so much from your videos.

[@amcclory77]

The writers are on strike. Instead, let's hope ChatGPT adds this video to its model.

[@MrTeff999]

Not just today. It seems like bad writing was less common in the past because bad writing is quickly forgotten, whereas good writing stays with us.

[@superfluityme]

@@MrTeff999 I had thought this too. I recently started reading a variety of books of different time periods from recommendations and the usual well-known ones are recommended. Now something interesting occurred recently. I was in a secondhand bookstore, and it didn't have many of the older well-known titles, so I started picking out some that I had never heard of and two of them were written very well. I think some good writers can be forgotten for we read books where we hear multiple recommendations and repeat what others have said in those recommendations along with our own views. With us occasionally adding to it with, 'oh I like this author too even though he/she is not as popular'.

[@alexeinuville2555]

About Shrek, I think it goes with the character. Shrek is not used to share feelings, is not used to people liking him, and he is very used to people hating him for being an ogre. His whole existence has been escaping from people that wantem him dead for being an ogre, so it is absolutely plausible that the first thing that sounds like someone feels disgusted at him, he will take it as an absolute truth, because that has been his whole life. This moment showcases the extent of his weaknesses and vulnerability. It is very much in Shrek's character

[@theendistheend123]

The fight after is kinda contrived. Both characters conveniently don't say certain things so the misunderstanding keeps going. It isn't terrible, it works for the movie. But it could have derailed the whole story if it was done worse.

[@alexeinuville2555]

@@theendistheend123 but it wasn't done worse, it was done in a way that worked

[@theendistheend123]

@@alexeinuville2555 ya ....that's what I was saying

[@alexeinuville2555]

@@theendistheend123 bro you didn't say that, you said the fight afterwards was contrived 😅 you remind me of that judge at a cooking contest who said to one of the contestants "this is very nice, but if you have left this 20 more secnds, it'll have been burnt" and the contestant said "yeah, that's why I didn't leave it 20 more seconds"🤣

[@Phillip161]

But then it would be better to do for example a monologue of Shrek or a nightmare sequence, where this becomes clear. Here the conflict does not come from the character itself and his own insecurities. The conflict comes from randomly overhearing the exactly wrong part of a conversation.

[@abehambino]

As for the last one, there is at least once when I found the whole “villain monologue” good, because it was directly addressed in the movie. Come on, “when you have to shoot, shoot. Don’t talk!”

[@jimbomba4365]

The Last Action Hero, where Danny saves Jack Slater while John Practice is in the middle of monologuing. Danny holds Practice at gunpoint and starts making fun of him for monologuing instead of just shooting Slater without realizing that he himself is now monologuing, which allows Benedict to then foil him.

[@marikothecheetah9342]

That was also spoofed in The Incredibles.

[@lotharrenz4621]

"Darkwing Duck" turns this trope around, by lettign the hero do the monologue, and then discovering that the villains all have developed the nasty tendency to escape while being monologized...

[@fm_0523]

There's also: "You sly dog! You got me monologuing!"

[@jaxonwoods8181]

@@lotharrenz4621 I forgot about Darkwing Duck 🤣 loved those 80s Disney cartoons

[@arglebargle17]

The "convenient misunderstanding" is the plot of nearly every episode of "The Beverly Hillbillies" and "Three's Company."

[@arrownoir]

It’s not a plot device, but it kinda is. It’s when the character gets interrupted when they’re about to reveal some crucial information, but then the other character will ask “you had something to tell me…” for them to say, it’s nothing. Only for the other character to find out later on and it becomes a problem. I really hate that.

[@IridescentFalcon72]

An amazing variant of the artifical drama of overhearing a character and misunderstanding (which I also hate) comes from Puss in boots actually. Kitty overhears Puss confessing how much he /regrets/ what he did and it is so REFRESHING. It helps Kitty understand Puss better and pushes the plot forward into the next scene of reconciliation. Peak writing.

[@firewall5189]

wouldnt say its a variant so much as a subversion of that trope, which was a breath of fresh air

[@joaoassumpcao3347]

Adding to that, after Kitty overhears that, at the first oportunity she BRINGS IT UP. The worst part of misunderstandings is when one or both characters refuse to talk to one another to sort things out.

[@blueflare3848]

I agree, it’s actually a nice change of pace.

[@xavierthomas5835]

​@@joaoassumpcao3347So, here's the thing, I don't think the misunderstanding would be so bad IF the character who hears it has a history of low self esteem. Kind of like Shrek. It plays into perception really well and can lead to interesting situations. Only problem is that, like you said, character conveniently not being able to talk about the situation or one character not caring about hearing something they've spent the whole movie hoping for is ridiculous.

[@paulrukavishnikov5171]

I don't know if this is a plot device, but generally, the rule "If you haven't seen the character's dead body, the character isn't dead (and optionally, even if you have)". I always try to give the benefit of the doubt to the story in this case, but it always fails. I think there are usually more interesting ways to let the dead character influence the plot, instead of just reviving them.

[@daynerzeszkowski8602]

Absolutely reliable, excellent one here I think.

[@MetisLeigh427]

Oh, I hate that "no body/no death" trope! Not to only does it leave the door open for character revivals instead of committing to the death, but it limits how writers are able to portray death. When you choose to use allusions or subtext to explain that a character is dead, people won't take it seriously and will refuse to believe the character is dead. Good example of this is in a recent episode of Helluva Boss. We see a flashback of one of the main character's childhood and we see his mother wearing very distinct shoes. At the end of the flashback, we see a lake filled with the floating remains of people that were drowned by the mob; hats, watches, cigarette packs, ect. Then we see her shoe float up to the surface. However, because we never see the body or the murder, there are people that keep arguing that she's "100% still alive because no body/no death!". It's so annoying and I hate seeing visual story-telling limited like that.

[@paulrukavishnikov5171]

@@MetisLeigh427 this is how my benefit of the doubt can actually work for me. Now, that you've mentioned such examples in which the death of a character is conveyed through subtle hints, I'm thinking that this principle had actually worked for me many times, I just didn't register it

[@crowdemon_archives]

On the other hand, Zenos was extremely dead for a while and suddenly his corpse was gone. You can blame an Ascian for this!

[@NewPaulActs17]

@@MetisLeigh427 "somehow, palpatine returned" but the second death star blew up! yes, but no body recovered, so somehow he returned.

[@pickleballer1729]

OMG! Great list! The convenient misunderstanding has caused me to stop watching several series. The worst case _ever_ has to be in "Anne with an E", a recent adaptation of "Anne of Green Gables". I lost track of how many times the main love interests, both infatuated with each other, failed to hook up because one or the other (or both) left critical messages in the hands of people who, for various reasons, never delivered the message. In the last episode I watched, I found myself literally yelling at the TV ""DELIVER THE F***ING MESSAGE IN PERSON FOR F*** SAKE!".

[@bengough6955]

Not identical but lumped in with that can we have an end to the oppressively long 'will they-wont they', of basically all tv containing a male/female lead. If they will hurry up and stop dragging your feet for years for more hahaha/love triangle/ shallow conflict (looking at you Lucifer 5 and 6)

[@sterling7]

I *adore* "I can't tell you this important information on the phone; let's meet up so I can tell you in person. I will certainly not be killed/captured before that can happen." And its close cousin, "You haven't told anyone *else* about this huge conspiracy, have you? Keep it that way. Let's meet up somewhere isolated to talk about it."

[@Jason-Alighieri]

I'm only 15 and I'm writing a psychological thriller. I know I'm not qualified to write because of my age but honestly. This channel really improved my writing skills. Thank you Mr. McNulty

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Thanks for watching! And a word of advice… Don’t worry about being qualified. Just do the best you can do with your writing and try to improve every time you write. Best of luck!

[@Jason-Alighieri]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty thank you sir, really you're the best

[@sirbox7850]

Practice makes perfect and even a 15yr old can make something creative and interesting

[@Jason-Alighieri]

@@sirbox7850 thank you too, sir. I do really appreciate all the advice from you fellas.

[@piival]

Even if it's not that good in the end, the experience you'll have gotten in the end will be priceless, so good luck bro

[@Illiteratechimp]

I think the one time a convenient misunderstanding worked, in my mind, was the Wedding Singer. Robbie goes to Julia's house to declare his love the night before her wedding to Glenn; the audience knows that she's having second thoughts about Glenn and is suddenly made happy by thinking about Robbie. Robbie sees her in her wedding dress smiling and laughing, thinking shes happy about Glenn when in reality she's thinking about him. I think it works because its what Robbie or anyone _should_ expect: shes about to get married and she's happy about it. The scene feels truly emotionally impactful because it builds a moment of lost opportunity the audience can relate to, and it reveals things about the characters: Julia would rather be with Robbie now and Robbie is a good chap because he won't try to mess up her happy day. That worked.

[@daynerzeszkowski8602]

Awesome one!

[@Sacrengard]

yeah, also misunderstandings do happen in real life during normal conversations. People sometimes talk and assume things that might be obvious to them but not to the other person. Happened to me this weekend: grandma called and said "tell your mom not to pick me up, I'm calling her but she doesn't pick up the phone". She was taking a shower and took a while until I saw her and asked her if she talked to grandma and she said yes. I assumed she then knew what grandma told me and left the conversation there. Then later I see she is going out and I ask her where she is going and she replies "to pick your grandma". If I wasn't there to see her leaving she would have gone all the way there for nothing. Turns out she did speak with grandma but earlier that day before she called me. Anyway sorry for the long read, just an example of what happens in real life xD

[@oddvoid]

I think a lot of things boil down to how the plot devices are used. You can find good examples and bad ones. It's good to know which are played out, or expected, so a writer could use that information to take care with the device. An example I love of the villain leaving the hero in an escapable scenario, is one where the villain would have to stand trial with people who could read the truth, so he had to leave the hero with his henchman, in a way that he could say he had no idea what happened to the hero, but he also wanted to see the hero in captivity.

[@kempiro]

The worst one for me's gotta be the convenient lack of/mis-communication that could bring the story to a halt in the first five minutes if the right people just talked to each other. Bonus eyeroll for when the main plot resolution is simply the two people talking as they shoulda in the first five minutes. This was every other Seinfeld plot. That said, the Shrek device you mentioned actually works for me, 'cause self-hate is such a core wound of the protagonist, and something he and Fiona share, and what makes them understand each other so well in the end.

[@thomasjeppesen3055]

Batman v Superman

[@Toshineko]

I believe the worst plot device comes when the villain points the gun at a hero, and instead of simply pulling the trigger, gives a monologue or taunts. The scene from one movie I don't remember the title sums it up: ''If you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.''

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Yep. “Selectively Dangerous” villains drive me crazy

[@davidlafleche1142]

I saw a Japanese monster movie in which the cop hits a bad guy with the butt of his gun. The bad guy doesn't get knocked out, but grabs his head and says, "Ow"! You don't see that very often.

[@jeremypnet]

The Good the Bad and the Ugly

[@Totallynotabird90]

The film is the good the bad and the ugly- probably the best western and that’s considering trinity films

[@therealameliabedelia7821]

I feel like the shelter thing for Enchanted would work in a novel but in a film where you have so much less time time to tell your story, it almost feels like it would have been superfluous. They do keep the element of Robert not immediately trusting Giselle though. He has every intention of calling her a can when they arrive and once he decides not to, he has Morgan stay in his room rather than in her own.

[@XWBgaming]

I love when austin powers lampshades of the deathtrap cliche. Still gets me giggling lol

[@billspangler2556]

"I am going to place him in an easily escapable situation involving an overly elaborate and exotic death:" "Lower the unnecessarily slow dipping mechanism!"

[@nightmareTomek]

"I can get my gun! We can shoot him together! It would be a father-son moment!" "You don't get how this works!"

[@MadMalMan]

'You just don't get it, do you Scott.'

[@WilliamReginaldLucas]

These all tend to bother me as well but I thought for fun I’d try and think an example of each being executed well (it was difficult and usually it comes down to a character having a flaw) Convenient Misunderstanding: Voldemort only heard half the prophecy about Harry, but it ends up going full circle because part of the prophecy is “he will have powers the dark lord knows not” Amnesia: In Breaking Bad Walt gets all the cash from under Jesse’s sink when Jesse is on heroin, Jesse doesn’t remember which works because it adds to his drug addiction sub plot Deux Ex Machina: (This one was hard) but I think Luke being rescued by Leia at the end of The Empire Strikes Back might be a good example? As it seems like a Deus Ex Machina at the time but in the next film we find out she’s his sister and force sensitive Instant trust: Can work if the character has been vouched for by another character that the hero trusts, like Donovan in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (from Indie’s perspective he can trust him cause he’s friends with his father) The Death Trap: I HATE this trope, happens a lot in Star Wars where the Jedi are being fired at but as soon as they are cornered they get arrested instead… the only good example I can think of off the top of my head goes hand in hand with the first one, Voldemort believes he has to kill Harry, so despite all the times he has him outnumbered, he won’t let any of his servants kill him

[@futurestoryteller]

Convenient Misunderstanding: I could go into a lot of minutiea about this one; for the sake of brevity I'll avoid it. However the fact there's there's an actual prophecy "explaining" he's going to have incomplete information just makes it all the more contrived. Amnesia: This is technically amnesia in the most charitable sense, not the kind of amnesia that's considered a storytelling cliche though. Deus ex Machina: How is this any better or different than the other example? Because you like it? (Or at least don't hate it) This is literally the exact same explanation for what happens in Last Jedi anyway. I mean, it's even kind of silly to call it "flying" like he does in the video. She's in outer space, the slightest bit of displacement will cause you to drift indefinitely. Probably less impressive from the standpoint of Jedi powers than straight telepathy. Instant Trust: Never saw the movie. Although again this seems to be stretching the definition of instant trust. They aren't instantly trusting that person, they are trusting the judgment of someone else. IMO the best examples of this are when they know the person from somewhere else, but aren't sure how, where, or when. It's not _really_ a plot device but it is implied in "Avengers: Endgame" That Stark's father (from the distant past) trusts him because he somehow senses the familial connection despite the fact that he "looks like a beatnik" The Death Trap: So they *can't* kill him. This is not a death trap, by definition. If there's a "good" example of this it's in a story where sadistically toying with someone is the whole point. Maybe Ramsay Snow in Game of Thrones

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Some good ones here, and though I hate to admit it as an Original Trilogy lover, I believe you're right about Luke benefiting from Deus Ex Machina at the end of Empire

[@ChrisJones-tv7gj]

@@futurestoryteller Deux Ex Machina is one that can work but needs to be set up. Works great with survival-type plots. Hordes are coming, rescue is on its way, hold out until we get there. I always think of The Two Towers and Gandalf bailing out Helm's Deep. That doesn't feel contrived because it's a survival mission. Gandalf tells Aragon to hold out until he gets back. So when they're nearly dead and surrounded and Gandalf arrives, the Deux Ex Machina pays off well. You breathe easy knowing they made it.

[@RobertFBeers]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty ET getting the bikes to fly right when police are blocking their escape, anyone? It works wonderfully because the setup (we have already seen ET getting Elliott's bike to fly across the full moon).

[@unexpectedTrajectory]

I think it's no longer Deus Ex Machina when we know to hope for it. If we the tension is the need to hold out against the seeming impossibility of doing so, then being delivered at the last moment is part of the story ark and makes sense, as opposed to an unexpected (for the audience) deliverance.

[@lynnbowers4722]

Love at first sight. The writer doesn't bother to engage in any relationship development and it lessens the viewers investment in the couple.

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Spot on. Lines up nicely with the Instant Trust one I mentioned

[@TristanCleveland]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty See: Star Wars Episode 2. Not instant, but unjustified.

[@snowangelnc]

@@TristanCleveland Unjustified is another good one. Sure, everyone has their own ideas of what makes another person attractive, but in story telling this is something that the audience needs to be brought on board with. If two characters are supposed to be desperately in love with each other the audience shouldn't be sitting there wondering why. It's weak if the only reason is that they have to be motivated by this overpowering love in order for the plot to move forward.

[@davidlafleche1142]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty Really? I think that's preferable to this one: The man and the woman scream and yell at each other, "I hate your guts!" then have sex. Or worse: the "unrequited crush."

[@kirksealls1912]

In “Jurassic Park” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark”, I would argue that deus ex machina makes sense. In both cases, the whole point is we think we’ve got everything under control, but in reality the characters are dealing with forces beyond their ability to control

[@CodesTheOtaku]

You forget that the Deathtrap plays to the villain’s ego. It’s meant to show that the villain thinks themself so unstoppable at this point, that they can take all the chances they want. In their mind, they’ve already won.

[@Nichfot50]

The Convenient Misunderstanding. It's so absurdly prevalent (or maybe I've just watched way too many romcoms) and it's always incredibly frustrating. It not only cheapens plot but also makes characters so abruptly immature and irrational that it destroys any kind of significant relationship and trust that's been built between them, and never in any good way. It makes me sad because I'm always invested up until that point, then it just becomes a "Well, I'm already this far. Might as well finish the movie, I guess."

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Yep, always pops up in romance stories and romantic subplots. The writers miss an opportunity to explore the characters more and instead drag out the misunderstanding.

[@Nichfot50]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty It's upsetting because as I've grown older, I've found that there are much better and more natural ways to develop drama or plot without cop outs like someone hearing the five seconds of a minutes long conversation and just assuming the worst of a character that the the film or story was just building up and talking about how much they love this person, etc. etc. Also just wanted to say thank you for the videos and content. You've got excellent insights as well as helped me realize maybe I'm not that bad a writer after all, I just need to keep at it.

[@gregslone4874]

It's also a famous comedy plot device. Three's Company relied heavily on it.

[@teleriferchnyfain]

Actually, although maddening because we the audience know they are misunderstanding each other, it’s something that happens a LOT in real life. There are very realistic romcoms that use this properly (cause, decent writers) - mainly in South Korea. I still scream ‘use your words’ lol Mind, in those dramas, there’s tons of character development.

[@revuman]

This usually comes hand in hand with deathtrap machine but, villains exposing their evil plan before it is complete.

[@kellywilliams1332]

Yeah! The hero listening to the villain monologue when he could’ve just shot him!!

[@shrinkingviolet1953]

Your channel is underrated, you give seriously good writing advice. Keep it up!

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Thanks!

[@MatthewLee-fo3me]

Recently I've started working on a story that I've been stewing in my head for several years and I'm watching your videos for help and seeing if I'm on the right track or need to step back or start over. It's good to know I've been doing things right. So far at least.

[@makingthestorybetter]

In defense of Jurassic Park, I believe the Deus Ex Machina was intentional to show that they didn't escape on their own. They just got lucky in a world of "there's always a bigger fish"

[@thegreatchimp]

The second you said "amnesia", that awful 24 sub-plot was the precise thing which came to mind! You can imagine my surprise and delight when that was the example you showed

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Hahah it's a brutal one

[@NewPaulActs17]

@@WriterBrandonMcNulty how about the grace's amnesia in project hail many?

[@dannerhoinowski9520]

@@NewPaulActs17or maybe the whole resident evil fin series. It’s one amnesia after another

[@raydunakin]

I don't know if this would be considered a plot point, but I hate the cliche that movies use whenever flight is involved. The hero's plane/spaceship/whatever is struggling to get into the air, dives over a cliff and out of sight, and then suddenly pops up and soars away. We've all seen it a million times and we all know what's coming.

[@eswnl1]

Goldeneye, at the beginning.

[@retlwiz]

I hadn’t noticed “the misunderstanding” before. That seems to me like one that goes way back! I’m also tired of conspiracy plots where it’s the head of the head or the head of the supposedly trusted institution that turns out to be the villain. It’s been done so often it kinda ruins that story for me.

[@davidlafleche1142]

Yes, but you know he's the villain because he has facial hair, especially a goatee.

[@danielhenderson3753]

Definitely been around for a long time. Romeo and Juliet, to name only one. Seems like all sitcoms exist because of the misunderstanding plot device. My wife can't stand them because she knows there wouldn't be a problem if they were any good at direct communication.

[@Blaqjaqshellaq]

There's the hero who says "Let me explain..." but the other character refuses to listen. The hero ought to just launch into his explanation and not give you a chance to refuse to listen, but the plot requires otherwise!

[@jameswheeler5260]

As far as the deus ex machina in Jurassic Park, I always thought that was an interesting example. It works better than, say Leia flying, because the scene in JP is sort of the climax of the T-Rex's arc as a side character in the story. The big resurgence of the musical theme, etc, gives the Rex, a prior antagonist, a bit of an unexpected hero turn, which felt like a fun subversion in the moment. It also meant that groundwork for the event was laid previously in the story, so it didn't come as completely out of nowhere as some can. None of this detracts from the criticism of the scene as a deus ex machina example, of course. But if your'e going to try to get away with this one, at least make sure you give it another reason to exist in the story, and it probably won't upset your readers so much.

[@zekun4741]

Friendly Fire: When in a horror or thriller movie, the main characters are always on the run and never fight back or even take a swing at their pursuers, but then towards the end of the movie, they see the villain coming from around the corner, the villain doesn't see the protagonist, the hero gets the drop on them and strikes them with a fatal blow, only to discover that it's not the villain but their friend or girlfriend who randomly made their entrance to the movie but appeared to look like the villain through the darkness or hallucination. And now they have suffered a fatal injury. The Autopsy of Jane Doe is an otherwise good movie that does this. It would be an acceptable thing if the characters occasionally attempted to fight their pursuers, and even find some success doing it, but when for the entire movie they not once fought, and now you see them preparing to attack a mysterious approaching figure they suspect to be the villain, you know they're going to kill one of their friends.

[@lotharrenz4621]

there you see why they didn't fight back at first: they can't hit a barn door if their lives depended on it... except when someone stands there they hold dear.

[@BodyTrust]

"The heros escape from a dangerous captivity" was often used mockingly in the "I Spy" series of the 1960s. "Well, Scotty, we're in another impossible-to-escape situation. How shall we escape this time?"

[@jaxxbohol6475]

James Bond and I Spy were trying to cash in the the success of Batman.

[@RobertWF42]

A very tired cliche you often see in romantic comedies is a character being oblivious to her true feelings for another character, or else not recognizing the other character has feelings for her, until the end of the film. "All along it was you I loved, not Bob!"

[@ericbickel5465]

The worst plot device of all time is the talkative villain. The one who would normally shoot the hero between the eyes, but talks too much and ends up losing.

[@andrewmckay3240]

The one I hate the most is when other protagonists say to the main character that you can’t kill the bad guy because that would make you just like him. Forget the fact that you’ve already killed 200 of his henchman and the bad guy is going to kill your family if you don’t stop him.

[@TokyoXtreme]

Three’s Company turned the eavesdropped misunderstanding into an art form.

[@davidq.5488]

"Three's Company," first thing I thought of. [high five]

[@Seriously_Unserious]

Yes, but being a sitcom that's obviously poking fun at it, they get a Get Out of Jail Free card on that.

[@deraykrause4517]

haha "Oh I thought you said banana!" EVERY SINGLE WEEK!

[@LNSmithee]

The weird thing is the way we can now look back at nearly 75 years of stereotypical dumb blondes in entertainment but the only ones we see nowadays are on reality shows. 😂

[@angie504]

I get frustrated with romantic relationships that we don't see develop. I love the musical Les Miserables, but a huge part of the plot is based on Cosette and Marius falling in love. Idk if the book goes into it more, but the musical just shows Cosette as a little girl at the beginning, she disappears from the story for a long time, then later when she's grown up she bumps into Marius and they instantly fall in love for unclear reasons. They sing a song together and her character doesn't really show up again after that. Yet their relationship is the driving force behind some major events that unfold later. As a viewer it makes it hard to know why we should even care that they're together.

[@seragx99]

It's like that on the book, I'm no scholar but the book is one of the hardest I've ever read, the writer keeps digressing through the whole book, I saw the beginning of the movie on a bus but fell asleep (was too tired), it was the scene where Jean Valjean steals from the priest and the priest is like cool man you need it more than me, well in the book the first chapters are dedicated to the priest, they even give you his grocery shopping list, and all the good things he does, Jean Valjean appears until at least 5 chapters and then the scene happens, there's also another chapter telling you all about the battle of Waterloo, who were the chiefs, dates, weather, how each army marched, only until the end someone steals a ring from a dead soldier which is the only thing relevant to the plot.

[@lkruijsw]

Guessing a password. That is so lame.

[@daximil]

Especially when they get the password because they "Know the person so well." Sorry, don't care how much you love and miss your passed away son, you are not going to use his name as the backdoor password for a government super-computer. Anyone who has a password will know the flaw in this idea. lol

[@Pronoc1]

the rope torture scene in Casino Royale is a great example of where they presented the monologue/deathtrap and finished it with a deus ex, but every aspect was qualified in the story telling, as Le Chiffre was desperately trying to get information as he knew his time was up, and Bond's release was bargained for off camera by Vesper. A lesson forgotten in Spectre, where Blofeld just tortures Bond for the sake of it and lets Bond give the grenade watch to Lea Seydoux while in his direct line of sight. edit: also the convenient misunderstanding at the start of No Time to Die 🤮

[@RJGrady]

In Shrek, the misunderstanding plays into his self doubts, and shows his inability to hear something good about himself. It's a *good* plot device.

[@gizel4376]

sometime it can work, like in arcane, where it's just part of the whole package

[@kmbbmj5857]

The one I hate, mostly used in mysteries, is the hidden clue that changes the whole story. There's a great build up. All the obvious clues used by the characters point toward X as the villain. And of course the author has shown us some extra clues that tell the reader the real villain is Y. Then suddenly during the wrapup where X and Y are getting arrested, the hero steps up and says "The real killer is B (whom no one expected since nothing pointed that way) because I saw the bottom of their shoe on Tuesday and it had a tiny spec of dirt on it that is only found in one place on earth and it had rained on Monday and ....." To which the killer tries to run then confesses "I did it; you are such a brilliant detective to figure it out."

[@nemo7542who]

I've seen this in Agatha Christie.

[@AnotherDuck]

It's not a fair play mystery if the reader can't solve it with the evidence given. No evidence shall be hidden. Knox's rule 8.

[@beenaplumber8379]

I think it was Agatha Christie who wrote her mysteries all the way to the end without deciding who the killer was. If she didn't know, her readers would never figure it out. I love her plays. The point is less about guessing the murderer and more about having fun and enjoying the clever dialog among such simplistic people, with the occasional massive burst of high drama during the reveal (e.g., the stage version of Mousetrap! OMG...). I do music for local theater, and whenever there's an Agatha Christie play going on, I'm always bugging the director to get the gig. Her plays and Shakespeare are my favorites. (We're doing Arsenic and Old Lace now. I LOVE the dark farce!)

[@AnotherDuck]

@@beenaplumber8379Favourite of hers is And Then There Were None. And unless I misremember, it is a fair play mystery.

[@beenaplumber8379]

@@AnotherDuck That is an embarrassing gap in my Agatha Christie experience! I know it's immensely popular, and it was even put on at my favorite local theater here in Minnesota (where I most often find work), but since I didn't get the composing gig, it faded from my attention 6 months later when it was shown, and I've never seen it or read the script. (I'll hang my head in shame for the rest of the night...) Thanks for the motivating tip though! 🙂

[@GreenJeep26]

I wrote this elsewhere (on Instagram): Amnesia in stories is often like using quicksand as a sort of McGuffin; it’s not really like that. A friend of my wife’s had a head injury and it was obvious that not all head injuries are the same. It depended on how much time he knew you prior. He remembered my wife but another person he’d hung out with a few times? No recollection. He also reacted differently to my wife versus the other person. He was warmer to my wife but distant and confused when the other person spoke. As a writer, if you avoid the ‘quicksand McGuffin’ version of amnesia, it feels more real. It also adds a very useful complexity.

[@marikothecheetah9342]

That's where the research comes in. If amnesia is a huge part of the story, make sure you research it well. Otherwise it will feel cheap and people who know a thing or two about amnesia will be laughing, instead of enjoying the story.

[@barthvapour]

Related to this is the "knock out" trope. In TV and movies, people are continually whacked over the head to knock them unconscious for convenience. There are two problems with this. Firstly, it's almost impossible to do, because the range of force to produce no effect but mild concussion overlaps with the range of force which can be lethal, i.e. a blow that isn't hard enough to knock Person A unconscious is still hard enough to outright kill Person B, depending on various other factors that can't be accounted for. So it's impossible to gauge the "right" amount of force to knock someone unconscious safely. Secondly they always wake up as soon as someone starts talking to them or shakes their shoulders. In real life, they could remain completely unresponsive for an indefinite period, or if they do wake up, they are likely to be woozy, confused, possibly puking, and not able to start running around as if nothing has happened.

[@marikothecheetah9342]

@@barthvapour amen.

[@curtiselmore727]

time dilation: when something is about to happen, giving the actors a certain amount of time to act, and then the thing that is about to happen just magically stretches out to twice as long.

[@GregJamesMusic]

The first _Goldfinger_ deathtrap is actually handled pretty well. Goldfinger could have just shot Bond, but he admits that he wants to try the laser out, and it does fit with his greedy, sadistic nature. He's also got Bond dead to rights, which is why it's really satisfying when Bond manages to talk his way out of the trap and keep himself alive for most of the movie. The only time Goldfinger gets careless is when he leaves Bond alone with Oddjob and the bomb, but even then, Bond only just manages to stop both of them.

[@WeirdVideoGames]

As soon as I started this video I hoped the convenient misunderstanding was one of them. HATE that one.

[@WeirdVideoGames]

A similar thing I hate: This isn't a plot device, more as just a comedic gag. I hate that gag where one character describes something at length, but conveniently only uses words that can apply to more than one situation, so the person listening completely misinterprets it as something else. Usually sexual, because it's easy to turn anything into innuendo. But you have to go WAY out of your way to make the entire conversation sound like that and most of the time you have to completely step around the most natural way to explain something. An example would be in Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle where Lucy Liu's character explains her job to her father played by John Cleese. She explains that she has a job as a special agent but says it in a way that makes her dad think she's a porn star, and to completely fail to get across even the most basic fundamentals of her job like that is so incredibly contrived.

[@isatche]

The first one in the list infuriates me when I see it. If two characters would just talk for 2 minutes, there wouldn't be a plot to make half the movies. Instead of confronting the character who is obviously love interest or best friend or similar, and clear things in two sentences, they assume the worst and go on their own needles adventure.. ugh

[@lindendrache8998]

Yes, miscommunication. I hate that trope too and always think "just TALK to each other"

[@teleriferchnyfain]

I scream ‘use your words’ a lot in those types of stories.

[@futurestoryteller]

The worst plot device is when the hero tortures people and they always give reliable information

[@R.senals_Arsenal]

THIS! Yes, I forgot about this, this is so unrealistic. Most tortured information has proven to be garbage. People will say anything to make the torture stop.

[@kempiro]

Yeah, I mean, having the protagonist torture ANYBODY is a tough sell for me, not so much 'cause it's cheap - although it absolutely is - but because torture, deliberately harming someone who is helplessly under your control, is about the most evil thing a character can do. I had to stop watching Daredevil 'cause the show seemed to just adore this plot device so much. (Granted, it was terribly true to the original comic, but it's still a crappy device).

[@futurestoryteller]

@@kempiro DON'T YOU DARE TALK BAD ABOUT DAREDEVIL!!! DAREDEVIL IS MY DAD! 😢 No, but seriously, at least in Daredevil his superpower makes him a human lie detector. Something other "heroes" like Batman and Green Arrow don't (realistically) have. While the show's not always that great at showcasing it, duality is at the heart of the character. We're not really meant to cheer everything he does. In fact one of my favorite things about that show is there's almost this little inkling - like if you've never heard of Daredevil and don't watch comicbook stuff that Matt Murdoch and Wilson Fisk are both totally unhinged, and _maybe_ the emotional guy with the disturbed past who wears a white suit will - in the end - be the good guy, and the guy who speaks in a flat affect, tortures people, and dresses like the devil (despite being Catholic) is the bad guy. Like at the end of the first season they really choose who they're going to be in each others' stories, and I just found that really interesting for whatever reason

[@tanizaki]

The worst plot device is when a woman beats up a man twice her size.

[@tanizaki]

@@daddyx1369 “Martial arts” doesn’t make for such a disparity in size and strength. Sorry.

[@Postumeartist]

Similar to the writer offering a solution: is the unexpected time travel twist. I feel like sometimes it’s just the writer thinking about how to make themselves look cool and “deep”. Or worse, an opportunity to retcon a complicated plot and just brush it away as “oh but it was because of the time travel, so it’s ok that I missed a plot hole.”

[@gokux75]

I don't think the ending of Jurassic Park is a Dues Ex Machina because I always interpret it happening from a series of events. Alan pretends to scream when he touches the fence, Rexy roars causing the humans to quickly climb the fence, Ellie turns the fences back on meaning Rexy had to find another path to follow as she tracked the human scent, most likely she picked up the raptors sent to and realized humans and raptors would be in the same direction (the visitor center).

[@themonsterunderyourbed9408]

How about in horror movies when someone is totally okay with being gifted/gifting a really creepy evil looking doll?

[@ssssssstssssssss]

The worst one today is the “resurrection” plot device.

[@Lady_de_Lis]

Agreed. The only time I have ever liked the resurrection plot device is in Song of Ice and Fire (books, not the show). Because it's a rare ability in that universe, but it's something that was set up as being a thing pretty early on with minor characters (so nobody gets surprised later). And there's actual consequences for being brought forcibly back to life. The person isn't the same as they were before, especially depending on how long they were dead.

[@ClarkBK67]

“Somehow Palpatine returned.”

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Yep, if you're going to have a resurrection in your story, it better come at a MAJOR cost

[@daximil]

Agreed. As much as I love StarWars, this device has completely removed any sense of danger or consequences from the franchise.

[@roymarsh8077]

Though Battlestar Galactica (remember that?) did have resurrection of the Cylons built in as a major plot driver.

[@jaketullo317]

One that I can’t stand is simple miscommunications that could be talked out. Instead they drag it out as a cheap way for a conflict to occur. I love the Sam Raimi Spider-Man movies, but this happened wayyyyy too much between Peter and MJ. Every problem they had could’ve been solved by talking it out

[@captainhowlerwilson508]

The Raiders of the Lost Ark one was definitely not a deus ex machina. It was something that was explained in parts of the first and second acts leading up to that moment. The later seasons of Game of Thrones are most guilty of this, and it happens so many times, especially in Seasons 7 & 8.

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

I get what you're saying, and I love that Belloq and everybody get punished for toying with higher power, but it's frustrating to me that Indy spends the finale tied up after kicking ass for the entire movie.

[@khatdubell]

It always felt anticlimactic to me, but i also feel that's sort of the direction the story needed to go. we NEEDED to see the ark opened, and it had to have some sort of power, or the entire movie would have been building up to nothing.

[@trowa9960]

I actually quite like the ending of Raiders of the lost ark for this very reason. Indy is tied up and basically none of his actions made a difference. The nazi's would have eventually found the arc without him, they would have opened it and melted themselves with or without him. Indy did not need to be there but he was and gets to be part of the action and adventure because he inserted himself into the situation and survived it. It's subversive that way and different because we are so use to the hero's actions preventing whatever the bad guys are doing. He just gets to go along for the ride and we as the viewer are right there because of it. Great ending in my opinion.

[@Karajorma]

@@trowa9960 Actually there's a fair argument to be made that without Indy the Nazis would only have opened the ark in front of HItler, thereby wiping out the German leadership.

[@khatdubell]

@@trowa9960 would they have found it though? They had no idea where to find the headpiece. Perhaps they would have found it eventually, but that chick was living in a very remote place. Also, they also seemed to be using the wrong hole in the staff room. That isn't something that is written on the headpiece. I don't remember how indy found the right hole.

[@ZoggFromBetelgeuse]

One plot device I hate is similar to Deus ex Machina; you could call it "Machina ex Machina" The conveniently powerful device (portable teleporter) or tactic (FTL ramming) used only once and then forgotten, although it would be a game changer for the fictional universe.

[@daphneebrisson7449]

I have only seen one time the convenient misunderstanding done right. It was in a romance novel (which are unfortunatly abondant with that plot device and are most of the time done poorly). But it made sense. It wasn't "Oh I'm beautiful, every guys are licking the floor I walk on, but I'm just a plain girl that need a man to suddenly have a self-esteem". The caracter had from the start massive insecurities, and she started therapy early on for her own benefits.

[@Lady_de_Lis]

It's not the plot device I hate the most (that is absolutely Deus Ex Machina, hands down). But another one that wasn't mentioned that is pretty annoying: Rival love interest suddenly appears to make one of the main characters jealous and sow discord between the happy couple. I see this most often in romantic dramas or romantic comedies, and especially when it comes to anime. If you watch a series about a romance, almost guaranteed that, after the main pair finally fall in love and officially get together, there is going to one or more episodes where someone suddenly appears and tries to put to moves on one of the MCs. Usually the main couple get into fights or even temporarily break up over it, only for them to recognize that they made a mistake and eventually get back together.

[@katierasburn9571]

The sole reason i dont bother with romance anymore

[@RM-yw6xe]

Stormtroopers never hitting their target "a thousand shots rang out, a thousand people fell. Patty and the killer miss each other, but they shot that down to hell." Cow Patty. Redshirts. The death of a redshirt always moves the story along. These guys are trained by STARFLEET.

[@ClarkBK67]

God yes. Good guys are master sharpshooters while bad guys can’t hit the broad side if a barn at ten paces. 😂

[@jonstfrancis]

@@ClarkBK67 and the whole the villain is a trained killer but fails to kill the hero who has never used a weapon before but suddenly is better than someone who kills for a living.

[@tabularasa0606]

The Stormtroopers were ordered to miss. So they could follow Luke and Leia to the rebel base.

[@TristanCleveland]

Funny, I also hate Deux Ex Machina, but I loved the T-Rex scene in Jurassic Park and the end of Raiders of the Lost Arc. I think the key question is whether solutions are properly foreshadowed. For Jurassic Park, the T-Rex was an active character in events so it made sense - while also being surprising and funny - for it to intervene. With Raiders, I thought it was a nice "be careful what you wish for," though I can't remember if it was properly foreshadowed, and that would make all the difference for me. Was it a pay-off for something someone mentioned earlier? Or just random. I think a better example is the end of Transformers when the US army arrives suddenly and saves them.

[@Don-ol8ze]

In "Raiders" the film from the beginning foreshadows at least the possibility of the supernatural (i.e. Marcus Brody saying that Tanis was "wiped clean by the wrath of God" or that the Ark is like nothing Indy has gone after before.) The first concrete sign of something supernatural is in the hold of the ship where the symbol of the swastika is burned off of the chest carrying the ark from the inside.

[@LaurieLeighArt]

Agreed.

[@Johnnywilsonforever]

@@Don-ol8ze There are many more, there's wind blowing from out of nowhere whenever God or the Ark is mentioned (like when they visit Sallah's old friend to translate the writing on the medallion and he mentions God), and when Indy with the other guys are digging in the place the Ark is, there's a storm forming behind them.

[@grizzly_manbanimation8436]

I mean the T-rex was technically not a deus ex machina because it had prior set up. We saw it break out of its paddock, chase the car some of our characters were in, and saw it roaming and hunting when it killed a gallimimus. A better example that people overlook is actually that part in monsters vs aliens where Dr cockroach dances the ship into self destruction.

[@eamonnca1]

The death trap works really well in a lot of films. Bond, as you say, gave us a lot of death trap moments, but they’re great. The crop duster in North by Northwest was stunning to watch. The misunderstanding is well established in literature, like in Wuthering Heights.

[@biophilist]

I hate monsters that just can't finish the job. Example, raptors in jurassic park that can't catch children.

[@daynerzeszkowski8602]

Lately, particularly in horror, there's a lot of time spent on getting rid of mobile devices to seal that off as an option for escape/assistance. I get why it exists, but it's pretty constant and chews time, particularly when to lose access to a phone in the setting is a stretch.

[@WriterBrandonMcNulty]

Yeah, cell phones kill Horror in many ways. The usual workarounds are either "Hey, there's bad cell service here" or "Hey, I no longer have my phone (for whatever reason)."

[@Lady_de_Lis]

Yeah, it's especially bad when it's unrealistic. I can't remember the movie now, but I saw one way back where the characters all accidentally left their phones in their hotel room or something before going out, and it just seemed so overly convenient and unbelievable. I think this is probably also why a lot of horror stories are starting to be set in the 80s or other pre-cellphone decades to avoid having to spend time explaining away lack of cellphones entirely.

[@cartoonkeeper]

Another option would of course be to make sure that the threat is of a nature where the act of using your cell phone would actually put you in danger like for example in "a quiet place" the alien creatures are so sensitive to sound that I'm pretty sure they would probably hear the return tone that a cell phone makes if you were to try and place a call or in "don't breathe" the blind veteran probably could hear that as well

[@daynerzeszkowski8602]

@cartoon keeper yep that's an excellent point you've made and an excellent example. That's how to do it. Or as another poster said, retrofy the era to pre mobiles and chomp down on 80s nostalgia at the same time!

[@cartoonkeeper]

@@daynerzeszkowski8602 yeah exactly

[@jons_7402]

I don't think the Shrek one is a good example for this. One of the main conflicts in the movie is that Shrek himself does not see his own worth and is quick to assume external judgement. Him misunderstanding the situation is a product of his own lack of self confidence, and almost makes him lose the love of his life.

[@halneufmille]

The "It was all a dream" twist. Every time this happens, I want my 5 minutes back.

[@angelbear_og]

Or 8 to 10 seasons as the case may be.

[@julietardos5044]

The Princess Bride does it right, though. "Yes, you're very smart, now shut up."

[@adnagapot]

I love the way one piece's handling of instant trust where Luffy trusts everybody immediately, much to the dismay of his crew

[@indigoziona]

I think I might even quite like "convenient misunderstanding" at times! People are silly and we don't get stuff and we don't always wait for the full story. I think for me it's a question of if the misunderstanding serves the story better than actual communication would. In love we're often insecure and I find it interesting that we often look for reasons to assume we don't have a chance because the vulnerability needed is too costly. So there are reasons why we might cling to any hint that things won't work out.

[@superfluityme]

My father once brought a stranger home. I had completely forgotten about it until you talked of the movie Enchanted. I was quite young. I remember the guy not being a threat or engaging he was neutral. I also remember my response being he was a threat. Which I expressed out loud. My father reassuring me that it was ok and at the same time the guy gave a meek smile then kept to himself. The next day he was gone.

[@Superkid33]

Your father or the homeless guy? (If it’s your father, I’m truly sorry ) Also whatever happened to whoever disappeared?