Which Star Trek movie has got the most plot holes? And the least?

[CorporalCaptain]

The eel randomly deciding to leave Chekovs ear is a little bit of one. It needs to happen for plot reasons, because Chekov needs to stop trying to kill Kirk in that scene, his function as Khan's mole had been completed, they'd set up a situation where it couldn't be removed medically, and convention demands he can't be killed by it. But it really didn't make sense with how the little buggers hsd been established as working.

The script calls for McCoy to stab Chekov with a hypo when he collapses and it's THAT which causes the eel to skeedaddle. Either they chose not to film it or it ended up on the cutting room floor.

Such a straightforward and believable way to get the critter out, were it properly executed.

 

[eyeresist]

I watched INS a couple of weeks ago, and that definitely has some major holes, specifically to do with the Ba'ku:

The Ba'ku settled on the planet 309 years ago. They have a death rate of zero, and seem to have no qualms about having children, but the population is only 600. If they started with only two people, and each couple had two children every 33.3 years, the population would be 1024. Maybe there is a periodic cull they neglected to inform Picard of?

Despite the Ba'ku's rejection of technology, they would have needed technology to exile the So'na. Either using a ship to take them to another planet, or using a communication device to convince a ship to venture into the Briar Batch and pick up the exiles.
(Also, despite the rejection of technology, they identified Data as a positronic device and attempted to repair him.)

SOJEF: A century ago, a group of our young people wanted to follow the ways of the offlanders. They tried to take over the colony and when they failed...
RU'AFO: And when we failed, you exiled us to die slowly.

Ru'afo makes a fair point. They tried to take over the colony (no suggestion this attempt was violent), and in response were given a literal death sentence. To exile them off-world when there are no more than 600 humanoids on the entire planet seems unreasonable. Why didn't Picard point this out?

Why do the So'na need the Federation at all? The Briar Patch is a no-go zone that no reasonable person would enter. The Fed are new to the area (note Dougherty's line about not having fully identified the anomalies yet). There was nothing stopping the So'na carrying out their operation on their own - except that the plot required the Federation to be there.

And again, it's a big planet with a population of 600. What's stopping the So'na from setting up their own colony elsewhere on the planet, and enjoying that sweet sweet immortality with the Ba'ku none the wiser? Unless the space hippies have advanced satellites in orbit to warn them of such an incursion...

Finally: another inconsistency in the Ba'ku's rejection of technology - the massive hydro works that enables Data to lower the level of a large natural-looking lake by turning a metal wheel which is presumably attached to a massive concrete dam.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Also what's with the Ba'ku time stopping abilities?

BTW Anij was rather nice I wouldn't mind kirking her

 

[eyeresist]

Also what's with the Ba'ku time stopping abilities?

Yes, all that "perfect moment" stuff was ridiculous pseudo-philosophical waffle.

 

[TheSubCommander]

I'm not sure if this is a plot hole. It's just a thing that bothered me when I watched Nemesis. When Picard is looking at a picture of himself as a young man (in the academy I think). It's showing the actor that played Shinzon (still with a bald head) in a Starfleet uniform. So Picard had no hair whatsoever when he was young man? We already know that's not true from the episode Tapestry. Even older he had a fringe of hair.

This one bothers me to. Obviously, it is meant to convince us that Hardy is a young Picard and Shinzon is his duplicate, despite the fact (IMHO) the two look nothing alike when standing side by side (may major problem with the clone story line, in fact).

However, in my own "personal canon," I just chalk up the bald picture to maybe being his "basic training" picture, and Tapestry was towards the end of Picard's academy days...even though starfleet never required a buzz cut.

Another plot hole is that of B-4. Why didn't we ever hear about him? Why didn't Dr. Soong mention him to Data OR Lore? I always thought it would have been better if instead of B-4, that it was Lore. Lore was disassembled, and presumably secured in an unknown (to us) location, otherwise Data would have just set the phaser to kill and disintegrate him. I am not a writer so I am not sure how Lore could have ended up in Romulan or Reman hands, but since the Romulans went to the trouble of cloning Picard to replace him, and we do have examples of the Romulans infiltrating Starfleet, it's not that much of a stretch to see them stealing Lore, and reassembling and reprogramming him.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Didn't the Romulans get Picard's DNA in that episode where he was strung up by his hands?

 

[Tallguy]

I'm not sure if this is a plot hole. It's just a thing that bothered me when I watched Nemesis. When Picard is looking at a picture of himself as a young man (in the academy I think). It's showing the actor that played Shinzon (still with a bald head) in a Starfleet uniform. So Picard had no hair whatsoever when he was young man? We already know that's not true from the episode Tapestry. Even older he had a fringe of hair.

They tried to have it both ways. "I don't look like you because of all the Romulan pain and strife I've suffered."

"No wait, I look EXACTLY like you. And here's a picture."

Ummmm....

 

[ManOnTheWave]

Another plot hole is that of B-4. Why didn't we ever hear about him? Why didn't Dr. Soong mention him to Data OR Lore?

In "Inheritance," Data's "mother" informed him that prior to Lore, there were three prototypes that were "childlike."

The question is, where are the other two? (Or, why was one of three named "B4?")

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I'm not sure if this is a plot hole. It's just a thing that bothered me when I watched Nemesis. When Picard is looking at a picture of himself as a young man (in the academy I think). It's showing the actor that played Shinzon (still with a bald head) in a Starfleet uniform. So Picard had no hair whatsoever when he was young man? We already know that's not true from the episode Tapestry. Even older he had a fringe of hair.

Red Letter Media's review of Nemesis zeroed in on that ridiculous "bald Picard" photo. Check out this clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2Q0KzEUw2w

 

[Lance]

Picard without hair is one of those things where the studio thinks the casual audience is too stupid not to realise that the guy in the photo is meant to be young Picard unless they're both bald. Because movie studio people routinely assume the audience is made up of idiots, as if the dialogue alone doesn't make it clear enough that they're the same person (in fact, there's a ''deleted scene'' version of that scene on the DVD where the close-up of the photo isn't even seen, and if anything I think it works better without the close-up). Personally if they absolutely *had* to have a close-up of the photo, I think they'd have been fine to have had hair on him. People would've figured it out.

The other thing is that the script for Nemesis and the director of Nemesis were pulling in different directions. John Logan's script is quite faithful to the spirit of TNG (Argo aside), and contains dozens of references to the past -- including name checking Lore, referencing Troi and Worf's relationship, a scene containing the emotion chip, Spot 'adopting' Worf at the end of the movie, etc -- but Stuart Baird didn't like being in charge of something that had an established 'history', and a lot of it ended up being cut from the finished movie. Which explains most of the things people kvetch about as being plot holes.