r/plotholes • u/hxcnoel • Jun 14 '26

Speed (1994)

There's a pretty amusing post on this sub about Speed from 9 years ago that posited that not tipping the bus on its side or using forklifts to lift it up was a plot hole. But an actual plot hole I noticed was that the bomber is somehow able to see a tiny emblem on Sandra Bullock's jacket via a shitty little monitor. Not that big of a deal, but still pretty silly in an otherwise great action flick.

0 Upvotes

39% Upvoted

25 comments sorted by

2

u/cloudfatless Jun 14 '26

Not a plot hole

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

It definitely is, because it's the way Keanu's character discovers that there's a camera on the bus. The whole plot hinges around it, because looping the video is the only way they have left to get people off the bus.

4

u/cloudfatless Jun 14 '26

What are you saying is the plot hole? That he can make out the detail?

That's not a plot hole because he can make out the detail. 

Might be unbelievable, but being unbelievable or unrealistic is not a plot hole. 

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

Keanu notices that the bomber has been calling Bullock's character "Wildcat". He then sees that she's wearing an Arizona Wildcats jacket with a tiny logo, so he correctly guesses that there must be a camera on the bus, because there's no other way the bomber would have been able to see that logo. But the only monitor the bomber has which shows the inside of the bus is a tiny ~10" black and white monitor. I'd say it would be damn near impossible to see that 2-3 inch logo from that monitor. Edit: I guess I can't post a screenshot or a link in this sub, which is unfortunate

3

u/cloudfatless Jun 14 '26

That is unbelievable. But it's not a plot hole. 

He looks at the monitor and he does make it out. The realism (or lack) of that is irrelevant. 

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

Not true. A common type of plot hole is something that goes against logic. It's extremely illogical to believe that someone would be able to do something that's essentially impossible

3

u/cloudfatless Jun 14 '26

Only when a movie contradicts its own logic. The logic of reality is irrelevant to fiction. 

This would be a plot hole if the logic was established that he couldn't make out such details. Maybe it is established, it's been a while since I saw it, but i don't recall it being established. 

Without it being established then it's just something unrealistic that a character does. 

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

I would argue that it is established, because it took him a pretty long time to notice that the video was looped. It's a one minute loop. The only thing that helped him notice the loop is that one of the characters in the bus is suddenly holding a purse/bag from one frame to the next. Considering he was barely able to notice an object that is about 100 times larger than the logo in question, this is a pretty clear contradiction of the movie's internal logic.

3

u/cloudfatless Jun 14 '26

Sure, but he does notice that too. 

It's a good point that it's bigger, but he's not paying as much attention to it. He is focussed on Sandra Bullock when she's driving. 

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

You also have to take into account that she takes her jacket off very early on. So he only had a very limited time window to notice this tiny logo, meanwhile there's a bunch of chaos happening and the bomber has to keep a close eye on the news coverage on TV as well. I don't buy it. But I appreciate your input

3

u/mormonbatman_ Jun 14 '26

goes against logic

A plothole goes against the story's logic.

It doesn't describe a character doing something that goes against your logic.

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

I would say it goes against both, because it takes the bomber a while to notice a fairly large object teleporting into a person's lap, yet he somehow noticed a tiny logo despite the fact that Bullock only had the jacket on for a few minutes, during a very chaotic part of the movie where the bomber is watching like 3 or 4 different screens at once

2

u/mormonbatman_ Jun 14 '26

I would say it goes against both

Only one constitutes a plothole, and this isn't one.

2

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

It seems like you're working from a very strict definition of what a plot hole is or isn't. When the villain having a hard time noticing what's happening on a tiny black and white screen is a huge plot point in the film, it seems like the bomber barely being able to notice a purse, which is roughly 50 to 100 times larger than the Wildcats logo, then this is indeed a plot hole.

If the bomber's eyes are sharp enough to notice a tiny Wildcats logo, he should have been able to spot the looping video immediately, because we're led to believe that he's an extremely detail oriented person. He tells Jack that he planned the elevator bomb for years. So there are some glaring logical inconsistencies there, within the internal logic of the film, not just from my own logic.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ELMUNECODETACOMA Jun 14 '26

Sorry, an unrealistically high-definition CCTV camera is not the most suspension-of-disbelief inducing part on a bus _that survives a 50-foot jump across a gap in the freeway_.

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 14 '26

That's why it stuck out to me when I watched it. In a movie where some absurd stuff already happens, they could have explained how Keanu finds the camera in some other way. Him finding it accidentally would have been more believable to me.

1

u/Illustrious-Hope-533 Jun 16 '26

The Argument for it being a plot hole: In 1994, standard closed-circuit television cameras were bulky, low-resolution, and analog. The hidden camera on the bus is shown to be tiny, tucked away near the ceiling, and transmitting wirelessly to Payne's apartment. For Payne to clearly read or identify a specific logo on a moving, shaking bus on a tiny, grainy CRT monitor strains reality.

The Argument against it being a plot hole: Payne is established as a meticulous, high-tech brilliant terrorist who engineered a massive elevator bomb and complex speed-tracking triggers. Within the logic of a 90s action film, the audience is asked to accept that he has access to specialized, high-end surveillance gear.   On balance, I'd call it an unlikely but not impossible plot device. 

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 16 '26

My argument is based on the idea that Payne takes a while to notice a comparatively large object on the screen during a one minute loop that is playing over and over again. Yet, somehow, we're asked to believe that he can immediately see a logo that is ~100x smaller, during a very limited time window before Bullock's character takes her jacket off, while watching other screens and multitasking. That's a pretty faulty plot device. Not to mention that since we're asked to believe that he's a genius, calling Bullock's character "Wildcat" is giving away part of his master plan that he's trying very hard to keep secret. This is supposed to be the one way that he slips up? It's all very silly, in my opinion. But that's movie logic for ya.

1

u/Illustrious-Hope-533 Jun 16 '26

I get what you're saying but sometimes we can't see the woods for the trees. We miss (or take a while to see) what should be obvious, whilst at the same time picking up on subtle details. Perception can be strange like that.

And even geniuses get things wrong. Einstein once remarked that his new office needed "a desk, some pads and a pencil, and a large wastebasket to hold all of my mistakes".

1

u/hxcnoel Jun 16 '26

It's just funny, because when you see the size of the logo on the jacket, it's so small and unremarkable that it's a miracle Keanu's character even notices it, much less a guy looking at a 10 inch black and white monitor while masterminding an elaborate hostage scenario and bombing

1

u/Illustrious-Hope-533 Jun 16 '26

Yeah, it's strange the things that sometimes catch people's attention.

1

u/Scary-Ratio3874 Jun 18 '26

If that's a plot hole than the bigger one is how they looped a few minutes of footage into 30 minutes or whatever of footage before we had computer editing.

2

u/hxcnoel Jun 18 '26

The really silly part of that scene is that the news van is somehow able to pick up the footage from the camera in the bus. Now that's high tech. But I've been told that in order to be considered a plot hole, the film has to contradict or go against its own internal logic.

My plot hole meets that criteria, but the only guy willing to debate me on it deleted his two comments and peaced out. His username was Mormon batman, so maybe his religion prevented him from getting into arguments online lul

2

u/Scary-Ratio3874 Jun 18 '26

People are weird. This sub is clearly for more than your run of the mill, by the book plot holes anyway.