Plotholes: are you in denial or not?

[SBaby 660]

that is a presumption that can be proven to be wrong with many examples.

 

comic book heroes to be one example. they are based on an archetype and they always remain in that archetype.

 

Two things. First:

 

And My Little Pony isn't?

 

Second:

 

One More Day is considered by most fans to be the worst thing Marvel ever did to Spider-Man (to me, no true Spider-Man fan reads the post-One More Day comics). It violated the core principle of the franchise, 'With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility' in the most offensive and insulting way possible. And the reason they made it was to keep him in the 'archetype' you just described. Not very heroic for a character that is supposed to be the 'heroic' archetype. My point here, some of the ways superheroes have acted unheroic have been a million times worse than all the cases where the mane 6 acted out of character or against their Elements combined.

 

 

As for the Mary-Sue thing, a Mary-Sue is a character with no inherent flaws. That comes directly from Serebii.

 

If the mane 6 acted within their Elements of Harmony 100 percent of the time, they would have no flaws, and would thus be Mary-Sues.

Edited September 20, 2012 by SBaby

[ceresbane 61]

Two things. First:

 

And My Little Pony isn't?

 

Second:

 

One More Day is considered by most fans to be the worst thing Marvel ever did to Spider-Man (to me, no true Spider-Man fan reads the post-One More Day comics). It violated the core principle of the franchise, 'With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility' in the most offensive and insulting way possible. And the reason they made it was to keep him in the 'archetype' you just described. Not very heroic for a character that is supposed to be the 'heroic' archetype. My point here, some of the ways superheroes have acted unheroic have been a million times worse than all the cases where the mane 6 acted out of character or against their Elements combined.

 

 

As for the Mary-Sue thing, a Mary-Sue is a character with no inherent flaws. That comes directly from Serebii.

 

If the mane 6 acted within their Elements of Harmony 100 percent of the time, they would have no flaws, and would thus be Mary-Sues.

 

*sigh... what is it with this really shallow point of the mane 6 being utterly perfect characters if they are loyal to their element?

 

New posters just always seem to spout that single, and rather rapidly developing to be, asinine point.

 

That is utterly wrong. And I've repeated the point why about 6 times already. So get reading.

[SBaby 660]

*sigh... what is it with this really shallow point of the mane 6 being utterly perfect characters if they are loyal to their element?

 

New posters just always seem to spout that single, and rather rapidly developing to be, asinine point.

 

That is utterly wrong. And I've repeated the point why about 6 times already. So get reading.

 

You mean the whole thing with RD? Well, lying is a form of betrayal, which is not very 'loyal'. So it could still be argued that she was going against her Element if she lied.

 

And I know you didn't mention this directly to me, but you did bring it up earlier (or it was in a video), so I feel I should address it. The reason I haven't mentioned the Season 2 finale or my criticisms of it, is because it was originally going to be three parts instead of two, and the script underwent major revisions to accomodate the altered time slot. So alot of the character development that was going to be in the episode was cut from the final version as a result. For instance, there was supposed to be a scene where Twilight and Shining Armor talked in private about Cadance.

 

Anyway, I've read enough of the previous posts. Based on what I've read, I think you might be over-analyzing what is supposed to be a cartoon marketed for kids with a little bit of adult humor in it. Really, alot of the out of character moments you illustrated in your arguments were intentionally done to be humorous, not to be added to some cosmic continuity. And we make fun of these issues all the time. I make fun of them.

Edited September 21, 2012 by SBaby

[Arcanel 3,041]

completely disagree. It really is not hard to stick to a canon and stay entertaining. The bazzillion pages of fanfiction proves that completely.

 

As mentioned before those situation could have easily been pasted on to another pony of a differing element to create a completely different non-plotholey dynamic to which many fanfic writer adhere to for fear of internet brony raging circle jerks.

 

If the actual writers posted fanfic anonymously you can bet your ass they'll get their asses whooped just as much if they do what they do on the show,

 

 

 

minor point. I would disagree on basis that Rarity on scales of few outright cruel actions (intermixing with her minor arrogant acts) as opposed RD's numerous numerous acts of petty pranks and down talking.

 

They're roughly equal in the douche-o-meter. in a cumulative sense. on averages, yeah I get your point.

 

 

 

point made... until you mentioned the shoehorned characters.

 

in many instances they have shown a great HEALTHY diversity in character depth but then... as you mentioned you get bits like the shoehorning of characters and character behaviours that contradict (I'm holdin my ground on that) the canon. And when you have to use conjecture (yeah I'm going there) to explain it. that shows some pretty poor story telling practices.

 

Instead of a big brother.

 

How about a childhood rival?

instantly you have an even more interesting (and easily canon) plot point to the canterlot wedding, Suddenly shining armour is a big brother at heart... and you suddenly WANT him in more episodes because the rivalry they have makes the readers curious to how that plays out.

 

lesson to princess celestia?

dear princess,

 

shining armour was for many years the bane of my existance. he would belittle me with his knowledge and tease me about my flaws. But... now I realised that all these years, he's actually been a very good friend to me, maybe something more than that, even. Maybe the big brother I never had.

 

Without him I wouldn't be where I am. Without him driving me to greater lengths and determination, I honestly don't see how I could have achieved what I have.

 

I thought of him as my greatest rival. But in reality, he has been one of my closest friends even when I myself didn't realise it. Someday... when he stops being such a jerk. I might congratulate him on his marriage and thank him for saving all of canterlot when I and my best friends could not.

 

your faithful student

 

twilight sparkle.

 

BAM WHOLESOME LESSON OVERLOAD!

 

 

 

that is a presumption that can be proven to be wrong with many examples.

 

comic book heroes to be one example. they are based on an archetype and they always remain in that archetype and guess what? they're popular for nearly 70 years!

 

you misinterpret a mary sue.

 

 

 

if that were the case, the elements of harmony should have been removed.

 

if they were just capable ponies. or merely chosen (like the avatar). then they wouldn't have this problem.

 

but the fact remains, they idiotically established this mythos in the story. so now as writers. they have to stick to the canon they made.

 

but yes otherwise, your point is valid in ANY OTHER story including an mlp:fim that doesn't include elements of harmony.

 

Okay, maybe it's not that hard to stay in canon and be entertaining, that's for sure, I'll give you that. But, we do hve to imagine the kind of things the writers have to go through whenever making this. That's another point we obviated. The writers' POV WHEN making all of this. After all, imagine what they are doing. Friendship is Magic is a reboot of the original MLP back in the 80's. With Lauren Faust in command, she made enough ideas for it that she now created a show that went from kid girls only, to family show. But the writers STILL have to abide by that. There isn't a need for more plot, if the target in question would probably not analyse this further. Thus, the margin grows bigger. Does this mean they are ALLOWED to go off the plot? No, of course not. But it does give leverage to ideas that end up with fun, and MAY override the plot. It's how the a writer's mind works. The moment you get imagination struck BOOM! you go wild with the pen/pencil, etc. The fanfiction point is...well..in my opinion kind of not going here. The fanfiction/art that is created based on the plot and canon established by the story stays in OUR minds. It is in OUR mind to see what is the plothole or not. Some of them DO show logical plotholes, and decide to make fun of it, or make a story with it. We still don't exactly know the writers true intention unless you were to ask them (yes, while using that point MAY seem repetitive, it DOES appply, in my opinion). Hell, I'm writing a Ponies on Earth fic where I intend to explain just HOW exaclt there have been several generations of MLP, and how one came to pass into the other, and how different G4 is from the others. And, while I'm not saying it is foolproof (to be honest, which of these things normally is?), the theory sounds mostly correct (if you wish, PM about this and I'll tell you. Otherwise it would be WAY too off-topic XD)

 

On to the second, might be. I think that these kind of things DOES have a litle of bias, whether we admit it or not. And turst me, I'm only saying the bad things ONLY because I'm analysing the characters. When enjoying the show, analysis goes off. IF the moment to analyze comes, it's stupid to ignore EITHER of the good or bad traits.

 

What SBaby said about about Canterlot Wedding being originally three parted, then was cut down, and that I just found out about, MIGHT have some explanation for the sudden brother. However, while the idea you used is really good, and actually sounds great, we kind of can't use it with Twilight. Think about it. If there was anything BEFORE Twilight went to Celestia's academy, (which would be very unprobable since she was WAY too little), we can't know because nothingn has been said about it. When she went under the care of Celestia, she was too things, mainly, nice enough to know on her own, and two, very very, VERY studious. And as such began her semi anti-social way of thinking. "Why make friends when you can study?" became her motto. As such, the moment study finished, BOOM! off to her room or the library to study more. And I'm thinking that the only one who had real connection to her aside from Celestia, was Cadance, but I'm not that sure that she made much more social connections other than that. A childhood rival would need a person that would be competitive enough, or that made her/his life impossible. In this case, Twilight would have probably gone straight to her room and be done with anything else. If someone arose to try to, say, take her position from Celestia's protege, I think it would be WAY too daring to even try, considering she is one of the rulers of Equestria. An obnoxious little colt/filly could have been, but the moment Celestia had seen something wrong...well...she would have dealt with both Twilight and him/her in the most pacific way possible, and Twilight would forget all about it. She was taught to be nice after all. Again, the brother suddenly appearing IS, well, sudden, but is it really that much compared to other things seen in other shows? Also, your idea, again, was great, but I think with the way and enviroment Twilight grew up, it would be very difficult for her to actually make one, or even that somepony, dare I say, dared to be a sort of rival.

Edited September 21, 2012 by Arcanel

[AnonBrony 1,467]

@@AnonBrony,

 

I got three statements for ya.

 

Bad guys are like that because they hold themselves no limit, so it's okay for protagonist to be amoral?

 

Good guys are good guys because they give themselves limits, like say, loyalty limits them to prioritise friends over the goal.

 

Proven your point? nay. You proved mine. You just proved that you lack an understanding of how a child learns and thinks. A kid can always at least understand what it means to be sincere. To be a bitch like Rarity like she was in sonic rainboom. It was not a subtle pragmatic thing. It was screaming in your face!

 

(funny, this didn't show up in my inbox. I would of answered earlier.)

 

Hmmmm....

 

You are very... unreasonble.

 

*sigh*

Get it through your head. It aint amoral... (is that even a word?) ... immoral, for the chracters to act like that. I know its a childrens show. But every God damn Childrens show has characters like that. Who act a bit... amoral. Even some of the protagonists.

 

But like i've stated, the characters act like that for the purpose of the story. And maybe for a bit of humor. Its all good writing. Cuz in that end what matters is the ending moral.

Rarity acted like that in the episode of sonic rainboom for characterzation, to push the plot along, to also... something to do with rainbow dash, (its late my memory aint clear). And also for a bit of humor. they didn't freaken put it in to give kids a bad idea or whatever. Like i said its all for the purpose of characterization and for the story. They arn't flaws. They are their for a reason. If none of these things happened, the plot would be boring, their personalitys would be bland. These episodes are Slice of life. There not much action. So the charaters need to push the plot, maybe with a bit of drama or humor.

 

Ur making it seems that since the characters act a bit odd that they are flaws, giving children bad morals, and that we are in denial.

You are taking it the wrong way. Being over critical.

 

Plus there are continuty errors and stuff like that cuz different writers and stuff. No ones perfect. Also Animation errors aint flaws. Again no ones perfect.

Character flaws can be intentional for the purpose of characterzation and for the story. If they are no intentional they are just continuity errors.

[Arcanel 3,041]

(funny, this didn't show up in my inbox. I would of answered earlier.)

 

Hmmmm....

 

You are very... unreasonble.

 

*sigh*

Get it through your head. It aint amoral... (is that even a word?) ... immoral, for the chracters to act like that. I know its a childrens show. But every God damn Childrens show has characters like that. Who act a bit... amoral. Even some of the protagonists.

 

But like i've stated, the characters act like that for the purpose of the story. And maybe for a bit of humor. Its all good writing. Cuz in that end what matters is the ending moral.

Rarity acted like that in the episode of sonic rainboom for characterzation, to push the plot along, to also... something to do with rainbow dash, (its late my memory aint clear). And also for a bit of humor. they didn't freaken put it in to give kids a bad idea or whatever. Like i said its all for the purpose of characterization and for the story. They arn't flaws. They are their for a reason. If none of these things happened, the plot would be boring, their personalitys would be bland. These episodes are Slice of life. There not much action. So the charaters need to push the plot, maybe with a bit of drama or humor.

 

Ur making it seems that since the characters act a bit odd that they are flaws, giving children bad morals, and that we are in denial.

You are taking it the wrong way. Being over critical.

 

Plus there are continuty errors and stuff like that cuz different writers and stuff. No ones perfect. Also Animation errors aint flaws. Again no ones perfect.

Character flaws can be intentional for the purpose of characterzation and for the story. If they are no intentional they are just continuity errors.

 

AHA! That what I was looking for Ceresbane! The ending moral! Exactly what you just said! A character flaw can be somewhat invalidated if the ending moral of the chapter where the flaw was shown ends in a good thing! The ending normally, unlesss intended NOT to, puts sense together, ESPECIALLY when dealing with the ending moral for a kids show. If that applies, there's a lot of, you couls say, forgiveness out there. Or at least that's how I think it goes.

[AnonBrony 1,467]

AHA! That what I was looking for Ceresbane! The ending moral! Exactly what you just said! A character flaw can be somewhat invalidated if the ending moral of the chapter where the flaw was shown ends in a good thing! The ending normally, unlesss intended NOT to, puts sense together, ESPECIALLY when dealing with the ending moral for a kids show. If that applies, there's a lot of, you couls say, forgiveness out there. Or at least that's how I think it goes.

 

Agreed. The ending moral is what matters the most. (and the story ofcourse) And the Characters lead us to that ending. Whether it is a flaw or not, the characters help drive the story and bring about a moral.

[Lostwanderer 366]

I can't say i've ever been bothered by these errors, the show is currently at a state where people enjoy watching it, the lack of consistancy really dosent need to be taken into account, each episode starts fresh and the lessons taught still ahve the same meaning, the show is still doing what it set out to do.

[Arcanel 3,041]

I can't say i've ever been bothered by these errors, the show is currently at a state where people enjoy watching it, the lack of consistancy really dosent need to be taken into account, each episode starts fresh and the lessons taught still ahve the same meaning, the show is still doing what it set out to do.

 

Amen to that bro. in the name of Celestia...of Luna...and of Chrysalis and Discord...amen (somepony is going to kill me for that...but when that happens, be it so ). Anyway, yeah, exactly what you said. I may have been one of the biggest commenters here, but eh, it's only because if can analyze to try to put ease at minds, and if I'm in he mood to, I'll do it. But I don't the errors at all. Otherwise, watching a cartoon or any show at all would be MUCH MUCH boring .

[Xanderal 23]

character development = plothole?

 

Most of things you have listed aren't "plotholes" at all.

 

I apologize if this comes off as rude, but you need to take a chill pill, man.

[BetaWolf 97]

I agree with the topic creator that there are flaws. Sometimes, they're plotholes, sometimes they're inconsistency, and sometimes they're story lines that don't have the effect the writers think they do. It's good that there are whistleblowers to point out such things. However, if you use such scrutiny for any show ever made, and even movies, you're going to find similar flaws.

 

Take other shows that were similarly popular in their time, like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Arthur, and Pokemon season 1, you'll find similar errors. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles has characters with such static, stagnant personalities, that you'll find it hard to believe that they're as competent as they are when it comes to martial arts. In Pokemon, other than Ash being naive, Brock being a playboy, and Misty being naggy, their personalities change whenever it's convenient for the plot. Neither of those shows have aged well in my honest opinion, despite me being more addicted to them back in the day than I ever was to Friendship is Magic. (If you want to see a children's show similar to My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic that HAS aged well, check out The Busy World of Richard Scarry.)

 

The draw we have to Friendship is Magic, however, isn't that it's perfect. It's that it's still a notch above the majority of cartoons out there. It really does pull off characterization better than almost anything I've ever seen from that age group, from any generation. Subtle things such as facial expressions in critical plot moments reinforce this. While it does have issues that the topic creator pointed out, those aren't things that similar shows lack.