When McNulty showed up down the line as a little girl, he said something like "Don't give me any lip. This is the only ancestor I could find. It's humiliating. I had to sneak past the parents and everything." But if she had living parents, how could she be the only ancestor? Aren't her parents ancestors as well? Why didn't McNulty leap into her dad?
sharelol, I just watched this film with my sister today and we noticed the same thing. I go on imdb and I find a thread on the subject! lol. I love the movie...but there are MANY flubs and plot holes
shareIt's a B-movie for Christ's sake! And the main source of its charm is its humor, so this isn't a prime candidate for finding plot holes in.
Despite that, this wasn't a plot hole. L.A. fell into the ocean, remember? So there was a problem with finding records. By the premises of the plot, it is quite reasonable that the only ancestor of McNulty Jack's colleagues could find was the little girl. Since her life was more recent than that of her parents, other things equal, it's more likely that traces of her life would be preserved than those of her parents.
But all of this completely avoids the question of how knowing McNulty's ancestor's identity would allow Jack's colleagues to transport McNulty into his ancestor. The way time travel works in this film is so absurd that it is obviously not meant to be taken seriously. So it's completely to misunderstand the film to try to find plot holes in this area.
I think the time travel device in this movie rocks. Asimov wrote a story with a similar concept.
My only issue is with the time travel continuity. When Jack returns to the future the first time, the first councillor (was it Van Zant?) and all his family "just disappeared as if they never existed".
How is it that the rest of the future is unchanged, when all the acheivements of the family would not have occured?
Apart from that (and I'm a bit of a nerfd when it comes to time travel continuity) I LOVE this movie. A pity the sequels are all so lame (I gave up after #2 and was given #3 as a present so was almost forced to watch it).
Perhaps the timeline is self-repairing about causal loops. Since no one in that family made any of those accomplishments, someone else stepped in to do whatever they were going to do at that point. perhaps a different family in the past had one extra child that ended up doing everything they were going to (all this sans the council seat of course). Who knows, I mean if time travel is actually possible, then there must be some method in nature for sorting these out ;)
shareYes, but the remaining councilor shouldn't have had any knowledge about the disappeared one, not even that he had existed.
share[deleted]
The plotholes are intentional. This is a B-movie. What would be the fun of these kind of movies if weren't for the plot holes?
-------------------------------- Movie critics are mostly crazy!
The real rub of this whole mess is IF they tried to follow logic and use another ancestor outside of the little girl it would have weakened a great scene. Alyson Croft stole the show with her little cameos in this low budgeter action film.
She had me laughing so hard and she did a great Art LaFleur impression...all grumpy and sorta stomping around all embarrassed.
Great fun!
Maybe she was adopted..? As for not leaping into her dad, working backward, she'd have been the first one reached. By "backward", I mean that if someone is born in 2000, they'd be found before someone born in 1980.
But I'll stand by my first statement: Maybe she was adopted.
"What time is Recess?"
I know this is an old thread and no one is likely to see this but...
I seem to remember that transferring back required a capable host mind and that the parents were too dimwitted to be hosts. The girl was the only viable option.
I think he'd need to know their names. An issue of incomplete or vague records of the era, something like that. The girl's name may be in their records, but not her parents' names.
I mean, really, how many times will you look under Jabba's manboobs?