This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Eakin: I feel like a lot of these examples need to go into So Bad Its Horrible. My interpretation of the Wall Banger trope is that it's a specific scene or element that's really bad.
Willy Four Eyes: Agreed. Speed 2 and Son of the Mask are already listed under Discontinuity: Film, so there's no need to put them here, too.
Lord Seth: The Bruce Almighty example is getting out of hand, somehow turning into a discussion about the Bible. Deleted.
- Anon: Restored everything but the digression about the Bible.
Recurve: Why is Star Trek: The Motion Picture the #1 example of a wall-banger? I concede it's dull or slow, but it's not like the plot has glaring errors or the characters behave stupidly.
Prfnoff: Agreed, and citing entire movies isn't supposed to be done here. Removed these examples (and moved the Armageddon & Deep Impact examples to Hollywood Science):
- The plot of Star Trek: The Motion Picture was basically a mashup of the episode "The Changeling" and the animated episode "One of Our Planets is Missing", with millions of dollars of special effects and long periods of nothing but special effects to transform an hour-long script to a two-hour movie. Fortunately, the next movie made up for it...
- Mind you, Star Trek: The Motion Picture has fewer people calling it a Wall Banger than the fifth movie, The Final Frontier.
- The sheer volume of Contrived Coincidences in Independence Day turned the movie into one great big Wall Banger. This editor actually liked seeing it the first time, got slammed with the Fridge Logic as he left the theater, and could never enjoy it again afterwards.
- The quote "Spread the word! We know how to take those bastards down," has been used in no less than three separate episodes of South Park.
- Really? I got slammed with the Contrived Coincidences ten minutes in, and I still love it.
- The majority of Superman III.
- Can we, however, agree that the Clark Kent/Superman duel was one of the coolest parts of the series?
Caswin: Removing them... again. The Motion Picture was not something you would throw against the wall. Maybe leave the theater from boredom, but not outrage. (There may be something to be said for The Final Frontier, which sounds more like genuine Wall Banger material. I haven't seen it, though, so I can't say for sure.) Seeing more examples I would dearly love to remove, not because I like them (I don't), or even want to defend them (I can't), but because even if they're not good movies, and especially if they can be described as So Bad, It's Good, that doesn't make it a Wall Banger. However, their sheer number forbids me to do so, for a variety of reasons, so everything else stays.
Preserving the comments that have accumulated, gratuitous swearing and all:
(From the Star Trek examples:)
- Even a decent film in the series like The Undiscovered Country stumbled, like an officer seriously discussing "mothballing" Starfleet just because one enemy nation is open to standing down as if the Romulans, Gorn, Tholians, Orions etc. were harmless. What's worse, Starfleet is supposed to be an exploration organisation, with defence as a secondary function (though in fairness, they did bring up this fact in the meeting itself).
- In addition, Nichelle Nichols hated the dumb scene when the Enterprise crew had to go through moldy paper Klingonese dictionaries to bluff past an Klingon outpost when Lt. Uhura should know the Feds' top enemy's language or at least have the computer translate text to read if the universal translator was too dangerous to use.
- Three words: Rule of Funny
- Star Trek 4: Why would anyone want to see starship battles or aliens when saving the whales is so much more exciting? What a fucking stupid plot, this troper hopes those goddamned whales go extinct!
- The whales are just an excuse to get the cast back to 20th century Earth. Its a time travel adventure.
- This troper loved it too but far beyond a Wall Banger lies the scene where someone outruns a nuclear explosion.
- Blast waves propagate at the speed of sound. Alien starfighters are supersonic. Or was the prior troper referring to some scene on the ground that this troper has forgotten?
- Yes: Someone literally runs away from the explosion without a vehicle.
- This troper loved it too but far beyond a Wall Banger lies the scene where someone outruns a nuclear explosion.
(Incidentally, the very use of the phrase "far beyond a Wall Banger", let alone to describe a bad physics gaffe, supports that people are seriously underestimating exactly what "Wall Banger" entails.)
(Superman):
- Superman IV is infamous for adding Rebuild-The-Great-Wall-Of-China Vision to the list of Superman's powers, among other things.
- This troper found the part where "good" Superman made the the Tower of Pisa lean again, after the "bad" Superman straightened it (like, you know, they've been trying to do for years so it becomes a working structure) one of the biggest movie Wall Bangers ever. But, of course, it makes sense in retrospect, since Superman is a dick.
(Granted, that last one might actually count; Superman actively working against human interests is genuine Wall Banger material. Going to try to work it back in.)
Caswin: Okay, one exception. Removing this...
- Superman Returns, where destroying a model city somehow proves that a crystal will violate Thermodynamics and grow by a few orders of magnitude into a continent.
INH: Removed a lot of incorrect stuff in the American Godzilla entry. Godzilla never shook the buildings as he (she, it, whatever) walked, though he did make cars jump around. He crawled into the subway tunnels (actually, more like dug very large tunnels along their path), not the sewer system. The open pharmacy that Matthew Broderick found was in New Jersey, not Manhattan. Saying that he "rivals the skyscrapers in height" is a bit extreme, considering that he's a little over 200 feet tall and Manhattan has a lot of buildings much bigger than that. He is, I believe, between 300 and 400 feet long, so him fitting inside Madison Square Garden isn't that big a stretch. I'm not too sure about the "not catching up with a taxi" bit either, considering that a) he was wounded from the torpedo hit at that point, b) the novelization, at least, describes the heroes making a lot of sharp turns and evasive maneuvers, and c) he did get in front of them a few times. None of this makes the film any less of a wall banger, but it's still a bit disheartening to see an example get so many things wrong.
I've removed this, as it's flat-out wrong; both the shooting script and the commentary explicitly say they knew.
- The Jedi not seeing through Amidala's Paper Thin Disguise. They couldn't even sense something? Not that they had to use direct telepathy, but just something. And when she reveals herself, there are clear looks of disbelief on their faces. I know, since I looked at that shot about half a dozen times just to be sure. They were caught completely by surprise by clown makeup.
Lord TNK: I put it back in with the stipulation that Word of God may say they did, but the looks of subtle shock by the actors say they didn't. And how much does it say that I have to be told outside the movie that they knew, when the clues in the film weren't really clear (the way Qui Gon talked to Amidala on Tatooine could have been a clue, but it could easily have just been him being condescending)?
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this from the Die Hard 2 discussion. It's not a Wall Banger if everyone does it.
- And, of course, the staple of any movie involving planes and explosions, spilled jet fuel burning on the ground. In reality, jet fuel will only burn if it's in an aerosol spray, as demonstrated by the Mythbusters, who put a blowtorch to a line of jet fuel to almost no effect.
- Jet fuel is based on gasoline, a substance that will burn but it requires a concentration of 1.4-7% in the air.
And this from The Core discussion because of the upper trope. It's not a Wall Banger if it's true.
- We are told that the loss of Earth's magnetic field will cause the Sun's energy to strike us without any buffer. Magnets do not affect energy.
- Magnetic fields do, however, affect charged particles.
- We are told that the loss of Earth's magnetic field will cause the Sun's energy to strike us without any buffer. Magnets do not affect energy.
Patsy: Removed-
- Battlefield Earth is freaking made of Wall Bangers, as befitting its source novel.
- Two words: Highlander 2. Some add every single Highlander product after the original movie to the list, but only 2 has everyone agreeing that it goes beyond sub-par and into Wall Banger territory. Wherever there's a list of "The Worst Movies Ever", Highlander 2 usually rides high on it.
- A few?!
Happy Corner: Why was Battlefield Earth removed? I added it because I cannot think of anything I've ever seen or read that fits this trope more. People have been making fun of its idiotic logic and plot holes ever since it came out. Back in the day, I remember describing it to friends who hadn't seen it. You can guess what the result was.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Because, even if it's true that Battlefield Earth is made of WallBangers, you still have to say what at least some of those WallBangers are.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut and placed here. This is more Fridge Logic than Wall Banger.
- This troper cares more about the fact that this Aesop was annoying in the first place because it presumes that Bruce's life was ever anything close to bad enough that God would pick him to bargain with in the first place. Wouldn't it make more sense to try to teach this lesson to someone who actually had a decent reason to hate the way the world worked? (Someone who was actually poverty-stricken, or sick, or maimed, or completely unloved?)
- Don't forget that the only restriction on Bruce's powers was that he couldn't interfere with free will. There was nothing stopping him from, say, curing cancer or feeding Africa. Except that he was too busy giving his live-in girlfriend—who already looked like Jennifer Aniston—larger breasts.
- I've always thought that the above were the points of the movie. On the first count, God gave Bruce his powers mostly because Bruce was whining and bitching so much, and in doing so forced him to realise how good he actually had it; on the second, it's rather a nice illustration about how humans always look out for number one. I could be wrong, and probably am, but I don't think the above are really Wall Bangers.
- Honestly, the whole movie is just a modern day fable, complete with Aesop.
- This troper cares more about the fact that this Aesop was annoying in the first place because it presumes that Bruce's life was ever anything close to bad enough that God would pick him to bargain with in the first place. Wouldn't it make more sense to try to teach this lesson to someone who actually had a decent reason to hate the way the world worked? (Someone who was actually poverty-stricken, or sick, or maimed, or completely unloved?)
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. It's a film based on a property of The DCU, so many of the violations of scientific law should be acceptable—or if they aren't, more explanation is needed. (Divider added by me.) I should probably reinstate the surfing on rocket ship doors, though.
- Not to mention the film's many, MANY violations of several scientific laws, including physics (surfing through the air on rocket ship doors?), thermodynamics (not only is the basic idea of a freeze ray completely ludicrous, but so are its applications) and chemistry (fall into a whole bunch of chemicals and turn into a supervillainess? Sure, Why Not?!).
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here, for now. I'm unsure what to think of cool wallbangers.
Mission: Impossible 3 has agent Hunt (Tom Cruise) repeatedly violating protocol and engaging in ridiculously convoluted and unauthorized schemes to accomplish simple goals. For example, his idea to get into Vatican City by staging a traffic accident, blocking the cameras and climbing over a wall while dressed as a priest. Vatican City sees hordes of tourists every day. He could have just walked through the front gate.
- Yes, but that wouldn't have been nearly as cool.
- The sheer number of disguises he went through for this exercise was amusing, though.
- Yes, but that wouldn't have been nearly as cool.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. Just because Reality Is Unrealistic doesn't mean it's a wallbanger. (Taken from the Evan Almighty listing, which is why it's incomplete.)
- [Evan Almighty] made me leave the room in disgust for the same reason that Bruce did: God is such a dick. Obviously the movies are meant to be comedies, and we can't have comedy without widespread accidental humiliation, pain and death, but the premise of both films necessarily implies that every single thing that goes wrong is at best allowed by and at worst directly caused by God's influence, presumably for the lulz.
- Truth in Television, one might say...
- More specifically,
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this for now, maybe: this is They Changed It, Now It Sucks!. There are reasons why that ending is a Wall Banger, but that isn't it.
- Tim Burton's "reimagining" sort of worked as okay as any film called a "reimagining" could... except for the "twist" meant to replace the original's actual twist. Basically, it makes no sense because the film apparently forgot the whole "planet of the apes" thing was set in the future...
- Actually the twist in the remake was based on the twist in the original novel.
- Tim Burton's "reimagining" sort of worked as okay as any film called a "reimagining" could... except for the "twist" meant to replace the original's actual twist. Basically, it makes no sense because the film apparently forgot the whole "planet of the apes" thing was set in the future...
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. An Idiot Plot is not a Wall Banger in itself; the devil is in the details. And even if there are too many details to list, you do need to list at least one.
- Urban Legend (1998), a tween-slasher movie with Jared Leto. The movie should have been called "Idiot Plot", then it might have at least scored a point for honesty. I could list details, but then we'd be here all day.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here for now. Could you please be more specific? And could you be clearer about the All There in the Manual business?
- Sunshine aims for psychological hard-SF but the director's willingness to engage in surrealism and a MacGuffin buried in unpublished backstory, not to mention a few avoidable standard-issue SF goofs, surely had astronomy and physics students shaking their head.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here for now, as it looks like the original poster may have been Completely Missing The Point. (Remember Bond's idea for a Karmic Death?)
- Quantum of Solace. After waiting 2 years to see the truth of the organization behind Vesper's murder, the organization that infiltrated the world's major governments, we finally find out their sinister plan. To charge small South American governments double the amount for their water bill! MWAHAHAHA! This isn't Spectre, it's the international Plumbing Conspiracy.
- Not that stupid when you think about it. Water is needed for humanity to wrok. And guess what? They're running low on it in those parts of the world. Which basically means that if the goverment doesn't do whatever they want they can stop supplying water. What happens? People die... Thus they get a pretty solid grip on them. Also the film is supposed to take part in 2006, the game confirms it. However Bond needed to use the new Sony Ericsson, because who owns MGM/UA? Sony.
- There's also that Quantum of Solace is itself build-up. Le Chiffre's entire terrorist financing network was one subcomponent of a Quantum operation. Dominic Greene's national extortion schemes (remember that Bolivia is not the only country he's done this to, just the latest one) is likewise merely a fundraising operation for Quantum. Good Lord, out of the several dozen attendants of the Quantum board of director's meeting we see, Bond is able to only identify five and kill one. What on Earth made you think the story is going to end here?
- For God's sake, Mr. White isn't even dead yet. Personally, This Troper is convinced he's the new Blofeld, and our initial glimpses of him and his defeat/escape in 'Casino Royale' and 'Quantum of Solace' are the most subtle build-up to a boss villain reveal in the history of the franchise.
- Quantum of Solace. After waiting 2 years to see the truth of the organization behind Vesper's murder, the organization that infiltrated the world's major governments, we finally find out their sinister plan. To charge small South American governments double the amount for their water bill! MWAHAHAHA! This isn't Spectre, it's the international Plumbing Conspiracy.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. The justification is more than sufficient for a James Bond film.
- As much as For Your Eyes Only is the best Roger Moore Bond film, it suffers from a rather horrible Wallbanger for the sole purpose of allowing the film to have a second half. Bond is sent after a lost piece of British technology, the ATAC. But the British built it. They have who knows how many in operation. They don't need it, per se, they just need to keep it out of the hands of foreign agents. This is highlighted at the beginning when it's pointed out that the ship it was on has sunk. M asks, "How deep?" and is told, "Not deep enough!" So, Bond has to go out and make sure nobody else gets it. So, off he goes, seduces the girl, gets diving equipment, finds the ATAC in the sunken ship, so far, so good. Now, instead of destroying the thing where he finds it, he RESCUES IT. He blows the bad guy up with a bomb, but takes the ATAC with him! Why? He doesn't need it, let the bad guy have it and be blown up, job done, get back to girl seducing! Nope, the other bad guys need to get it and get away with it so the film can go on, so Bond can't be sensible here. So, after letting the device get away, he tracks it down and gets it again. Only now he's caught in front of the Russians who want it, so NOW he destroys it, and offers the line, "You don't have it, and I don't have it". But Bond didn't want it! This isn't detente, it's "British get everything they want, Russians get nothing they want". Gogol should have shot him right there, but I guess he was angling for a role in Octopussy.
- He presumably wanted to destroy it properly, lest he do an incomplete job, leaving the Russians some chunks of ATAC they could reverse engineer.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Okay, I'm not gonna claim that the ending to the remake of Miracle On34th Street is good. But my understanding of the judge's argument is this:
- The US dollar bill, issued by the federal government and with all the power of that government behind it, has "In God We Trust" written on it.
- God has not been and cannot be proven to exist. (Yes, this is explicitly noted.)
- The US dollar bill can legally have "In God We Trust" on it because of the consensus of the American people. Most Americans believe there is a God they can trust, and so God can be legally acknowledged on the money.
- In a similar fashion, there is a consensus among the people of NYC in this film that the fella named Kris Kringle, who had until recently worked as Santa Claus at Cole's, really is Santa Claus.
- Therefore, Kris Kringle is legally Santa Claus despite all the Santa-lore being unprovable to the point of practical refutation (as demonstrated by the prosecutor).
- Still silly, but not as bad as it looks on the main page. Remember, legally, in Real Life in America, corporations are people, too, and must be treated accordingly - even though that means that there are (legally and effectively) Starfish Aliens among us.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: that bullet point under the Signs entry about the spacefaring race that never encountered water: is that also for Signs, or is it another film? I don't want to have to follow the clip to find out. (For all I know, that's a Rick Astley video on the other side.)
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here for now, since it's a horrible mess. Also, I suspect that the initial Wall Banger in the initial posts of this is partly wrong. (I think Dimmesdale was married in the original book - he isn't Catholic!)
- This troper, even without having read the book The Scarlet Letter, instantly knew that the writers just didn't care after they showed ten minutes of sex. WITH A MINISTER. (This troper was Squicked, despite not even being Christian.) Definitely not something that would be in a non-pulp book published in the 19th century.
- Some ministers aren't required to be celibate, and the fact that they did believe her husband dead made their only sin premarital sex, which a lot of people actually engaged in back then. They just planned a wedding if the woman got pregnant. My issues with the film were Mituba and the Native Americans saving the three. I know that slavery was perfectly acceptable at the time, but I still got the feeling, rational or not, that the film was glorifying slavery with the devoted, submissive black woman who literally could not speak. And never mind all the serious crap the Native Americans went through; it seemed their only real purpose was to cause tension and eventually save the three white 'heroes'.
- Even though I hated the book, I still couldn't help but laugh at when the main character of The Scarlet Letter walked out onto the scaffold...with a golden letter stitched to her chest.
- This troper walked out of the theatre when "Mituba" was introduced.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here for now. Miraz intended to drive the Old Narnians extinct again on learning that they still existed; half is better than none, and much of the problem with losing half was dealt with immediately after the castle storming. As for the Telmarines - the Telmarine culture is such that its reaction could probably come down to Values Dissonance.
- In the film version of Prince Caspian, Prince Caspian and co. are making their triumphant return and being greeted with jubilant cheers, everyone seems to have forgotten the fact he only just recently killed half his fucking subjects. What? Did none of the women like their husbands at all?
Grimace: Really? I thought that was a fair entry (and also an unintentionally funny scene, like most of the movie really). I mean, even taking Telmarine's possible different culture, saying it's just Values Dissonance is a bit of a stretch.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: It's been reinstated and clarified (not by me, but I helped clarify after it was reinstated). I forget that Prince Caspian's position is not as straightforward as the book makes it appear, and the movie played up that aspect of grey. Sorry...
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Corrected things further. I finally realized why this was a problem.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this for now, but put it here for future generations to admire.
- ... God, now I'm going to laugh every time I see that scene.
Medical Droid: She's lost the will to live.Obi-Wan: Are you sure? Because a Sith Lord was choking her to death like, ten minutes ago.Medical Droid: Really? Huh. (Looks at her for a few minutes) Nah, it's probably the will to live thing.Obi-Wan: You're not even gonna check her neck or anything?Medical Droid: I would, but it just seems like so much work.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here for now for being a non-sequitor. (You don't have to be faster than a train to run behind it - do you?) At any rate, it needs to be clarified and then returned.
- Under Seige 2. The heroes are on a speeding train, with a stationary helicopter dangling a rope ladder behind them. They run to the ladder; that is, they outrun the train!
Whatever: I'm cutting these two for Final Destination. The guy's not your standard mortician, he's supposed to be some kind of supernatural death-related force, or have a connection to one, and he apparently knows what's happening to the kids. The other one missed an important detail - they have to die in the specific order that they were going to, before they cheated Death. Since the suicidal guy tried to kill himself outside the order, Death stopped him.
- In the first Final Destination movie, the main characters break into the mortuary to see the body of their friend who has just died. After they break in, they run into an old mortician who logically should have called the police or something and had the kids arrested for breaking and entering, or at least kicked them out; instead, he delivers a monologue about death and how You Can't Fight Fate.
- In all of the movies, it's established that if you were saved from death by the main protagonist's vision, then you will die unless you "cheat Death" - usually by injecting yourself with a suicide syringe and having your buddy restart your heart shortly afterward. Okay...but in one of the movies, one of the secondary characters tries to take his own life to avoid Death killing him off; he fails, supposedly because Death himself prevents it. What?! He's going to die anyway, so why does it matter when and how it happens? And if Death can actively prevent someone from committing suicide, why does he seem oblivious to the main protagonist doing it at the end of the movie? Does Death have Attention Deficit Disorder or something?
SynjoDeonecros: The initial problem still remains with the second one: if Death can avert a suicide, then why can't he avert someone cheating death in the manner the protagonist does in each movie? It might have worked in the first movie, but you'd think Death would've learned his lesson after that... Also, reading the Wikipedia article of the second movie reveals that Death reversed the order of the deaths, meaning that the above argument (that the gun-suicide guy was spared by Death because "he wasn't meant to die then") is invalid - Death can alter his schedule at will, apparently.
Whatever: Oh that's right, I was thinking of the first one, sorry. Yeah, in the second one they reversed it. I think there was some sort of vague, short explanation, but I can't for the life of me remember what it was.
Bob: Please do not confuse Wall Banger with They Changed It, Now It Sucks!.
- Beowulf. Oh, God, Beowulf. It starts out seeming perfectly fine and normal, like it's going to be true to the original story...but then it gets quickly cockeyed. For one thing, Beowulf is shown using the door to rip off Grendel's arm, not his own strength (which is then mentioned); while this may be accurate, it's hardly epic. It gets even more confusing with Hrothgar's vague warnings, but the point where it gets completely stupid is the confrontation with Grendel's mother. This troper could buy that she would appear as a sexy sea-demoness, but the actual story shows Grendel struggling with her until he retrieves the magic sword from the wall of her den and runs her through. Instead, here it proves useless and he winds up having the child of Grendel's mother, who becomes the dragon. While this might make a fine story on its own, it is not the message of the actual story, which has a much more satisfying conclusion. In the original epic, after returning home, the mighty lord Beowulf—now aged—sees a dragon appear, just as Hrothgar saw Grendel, but he refuses to delegate the responsibility to a younger hero, and in defeating himself dies the last of his age. It's not quite the same.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. The justification justifies.
- The ending of Slumdog Millionaire. When The Hero gets to the last question, he doesn't know the answer, so he calls The Lancer; The Chick answers, which leads to some pretty cool drama. She tells him she doesn't know the answer; he answers at random and wins. There were easy ways to tell him the answer while still satisfying the Rule of Cool. Or not tell him, have him walk away with half the money, and grab the opportunity to make a rare but sensible Aesop. Or have Fate be part of the whole plot (as opposed to just the "He gets The Chick because it was written" Ass Pull) by hanging a lampshade on Million to One Chance, have him know about it all along, answer at random, and win. Or have him decide he doesn't care about the money, answer deliberately wrong or at random, and lose.
- How do you answer wrong deliberately if you don't know the correct answer? He had made it clear previously that he didn't care about the money, he just wanted Latika to see him. But giving up now seems pretty stupid, doesn't it? So he wings it. He has a 1 in 4 chance of succeeding, and because D) It is written, he wins.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. "A little learning is a dangerous thing"...
- Constantine, the less than loyal adaptation of Hellblazer, makes a big deal about following Catholic dogma. In particular, it's about the title character's inability to go to heaven because of his suicide attempt and his attempts to redeem himself by battling the minions of Hell. Did it never occur to him to go to confession? This one was so obvious that Roger Ebert pointed it out in his review:
"Three Our Fathers, three Hail Marys, and he's outta there."
- As much as it pains me to give it it's due, it did explain that part, Gabriel makes a big deal about the fact that Constantine doesn't 'believe' he 'knows'. That and confession requires you actually mean it, and be sorry, and believe in God as your saviour etc, stuff Constantine isn't exactly known for believing.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Reinstated it after some finessing. I should not have cut it. If Roger Ebert thought it was a Wallbanger, then it probably does belong here.
Joseph Leito: Removed this:
- Anakin being born without a father. Even the explanation about the midichlorians in Episode III doesn't quite justify this to some of us.
- Some EU sources state that Palpatine's former Sith Lord Master/Victim Darth Plagueis wanted to create a perfect life form out of thin air; this is hinted to be Anakin. Since that would mean Palpatine's drop in status from apprentice to Dead Sith ... So Yeah. And calling Anakin a "perfect life form" is implausible - especially since he doesn't come across as especially powerful, smart, or emotionally mature at any point in the prequels.
- Anakin being born without a father. Even the explanation about the midichlorians in Episode III doesn't quite justify this to some of us.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: The example of which you speak seems to be there because there's a glaring contrast between what Word of God says is going on and what made it onto the film. If removing the Word of God factor would remove the dent in the wall, go for it.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut these and put it here. You cannot say an entire opus is a Wallbanger. The justification for the Sith problem appears to justify. And Kevin J. Anderson's books are not films and are already noted briefly in Wallbangers/Literature.
- Star Wars in general. The path of the Dark Side is supposed to be beguiling and attractive, like the idea of being allowed to beat people into pulp just for being stupid. Almost every Sith in Star Wars ever has been fuck ugly and evil for the sake of being EEEEEVVILLLL! because George Lucas needed a villain.
- The Sith we see are Count Dooku (old), Palpatine (battlescarred), Maul (wouldn't give a shit about appearance), Vader (also battlescarred), and Ventress (alien). They all have very good reasons to be crazy (Defector from Decadence, who knows, raised-from-birth assasin, You Should Know This Already, and orphan). We also get normal-looking pragmatist Revan, Luke's brief Becoming the Mask, and many others. In any case, the Dark Side is meant to be the easy path, not the attractive path, and picking the easy way out (particularly one whose existence unbalances the universe) would naturally have some backlash.
- Kevin J. Anderson. He's sort of a pariah for writing the most blatant Possession Sue in history, elevating a character with no lines into an uber-powerful mastermind who could have taken over the galaxy if not for dumb luck. Furthermore, he claimed that building the Executor bankrupted the million-system Empire - the same one that constructed most of the infinitely larger Second Death Star in six months, using the resources of a single shipping company, just a few years later.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this and put it here. We've gotta remember that the American Godzilla was an action film. That justification added to that point equals Natter, and the justification is good enough that I chose to cut the (sub)point as well. There's enough else wrong with that film that we don't need to keep this on the main page.
- Biologically speaking, the American Godzilla would be a Hermaphrodite (that is, both male AND female at the same time). Unfortunately for the film, being a Hermaphrodite does NOT mean you're born pregnant. That only happens to tribbles (in a whole different franchise).
- Not quite - aphids are born pregnant (not the best example, I know...) and various species of lizard, such as Cnemidophorus uniparens, can reproduce parthenogenetically, that is to say, without sex. And besides, didn't it turn out that there were 2 godzillas, anyway?
- The Tambourine Man: Why are so many of these examples cases of factual incorrectness? Don't those have their own pages?
Caswin: Because for a great number of users, Wall Banger has gone from "moment so bad you (and, ideally, many others) want to hurl the metaphorical book against the wall" to "a lapse in story logic, scientific accuracy or other moment that I did not like and have chosen this page to complain on". Meanwhile, the big "SUBJECTIVE" tag and a benefit-of-the-doubt attitude makes superfluous entries hard to get rid of.
