FreakyFilmFan4ever wrote:In this case, the two dude becoming perfectly drift compatible
is a plot hole because the plot in Pacific Rim used the drift compatibility as the main emotional thrust of the movie, AKA, to highlight the important parts of the drama. The writer did everything he could to explain it away, mainly be reducing the characters down to basic archetypes. (It's not wrong, I guess, in that sense.) But because it detracts from the highlighted drama of the film, it can be considered a plot-hole in Pacific Rim. (I'm not sure why you seem to be hung up on proving everything else is a plot hole when you have this bomb-shell right here to drop on me and end discussion.)
Because Gendo's Papa already nailed it and you already acknowledged it, so there's nothing left for me to do with it. We're just fussing about details at this point.
The wall? The Rift? The use of the cargo ship?
The cargo ship isn't a plot hole, it's just stupid. It wasn't on my initial list. The sword
is a plot hole, albeit a minor one, because there was no reason not to use it from the outset -- it's an inconsistency deliberately placed for dramatic effect. I wouldn't even care about it if not for the fact that I have such a strong supers background; I learned how ships and buildings and such would react to people with super strength long ago, and giant robots are in a similar boat. Also, the fact that EoE did such a marvelous job of getting it (mostly) right plays against the scene in question. But again, not a plot hole.
The wall is a plot hole, since it's fundamental for establishing why the setting is the way it is. It shows us why no governments are directly involved with the program, why it's out of cash, basically why everything is the way it is. But it's absurd on its face; it strongly challenges the audience's SoD due to the "what if the climb/fly/go around?" question, and that's without taking the already established category progression into account. If the kaiju keep getting stronger, and they keep coming, how long can any wall really last?
(cost doesn't work as an argument, either; I don't know how much it costs to maintain a jaeger, but I do know we pour a huge chunk of money into our basic transportation needs. If we blow $70 billion at the federal level and quite a bit more at the state level just to maintain our roads how much more do you think it would cost to build, let alone maintain, a kaiju-proof wall around a continent (and that's assuming it could even be done; I have serious doubts about that, even if we devoted literally everything we have to making it happen)? I mean, just think about the scale of what we're talking about here. I can't be the only one who went "wait, what?" when that came onscreen in the theater. Of course that's not an inconsistency in the flow of the story, but since the story rests on the existence and presumed effectiveness of that wall I think it's fair to call it a plot hole.)
As for the rift, there are two problematic elements: why didn't anyone bother to test whether or not kaiju could go through both ways, and the story's ending. The first is obvious. The second can be summed up like so: if the aliens didn't have shields on their side of the rift it follows that there's nothing protecting our hero's escape pod when the Gipsy goes nuclear. Moreover, we actually see the rift collapse
before the escape pod has had a chance to make it through the rift! This could have been addressed by sequencing the shots differently, but of course that would remove the (utterly predictable) tension about whether or not our hero survives. As is I found myself going "hey, wait a minute . . . " as soon as the second escape pod launched.
Actually I was saying that as soon as the notion of escaping from Gipsy was put on the table, since that's a fucking lameass ending, but that's neither here nor there. The whole thing basically operated on Independence Day logic: great if you're willing to stretch your SoD that far, but if you're not . . .