Created By: Spithead on November 2, 2012

Adaptation-Induced Noodle Incident

Backstory or history that was present in the source material is only vaguely aluded to in the adaptation.

Name Space:
Page Type:
In the original source material, there's a scene where Alice asks Bob how he got a noticable scar on his face. Bob then goes into a long, epic tale of a past exploit of his that ultimately resulted in him getting his scar. Then in the film adaptation of said material, we get the same scene of Alice asking the big question. Only this time Bob, for whatever reason, decides not to exposit it's origin, leaving Alice, and the audience, in the dark. Often times, due to time/money constraints, backstory and history from the source material has to be left out for practical reasons. Unlike an Adaptation-Induced Plot Hole, this doesn't necessarily hurt the narrative but does serve to create a Noodle Incident for anyone not familiar with the source material. Often crosses over with Cryptic Background Reference.
Community Feedback Replies: 3
  • November 2, 2012
    This is Adaptation Induced Plot Hole, or so close there'd be about 90% crossover between them. Do you have examples to support a difference?
  • November 4, 2012
    From Let the Right In, [Spoiler] at one point Oskar sees Eli's crotch, and instead of any genitalia, there's just a scar. While this raises some questions about Eli's past, it doesn't create any sort of plot hole. That's the key difference between this and AIPH. In the case of this trope, details being left out does not create a plot hole.
  • November 4, 2012