Commonly considered "plot holes" that aren't.

Not at all, their actions can vary significantly. At one point, Joe's Warboys are trying to protect Furiosa's rig. At another, they're trying to attack it. What changed? The situation! Their goal was the same: retrieve the cargo (Joe's wives) from the rig. At first they were protecting it, because they didn't want the other scavengers to get it. Then they started attacking it, because they wanted to stop it and get the wives back. Same goal driven by the same motives, but different actions as the situation demands it. Whereas Zod & Co seem to completely forget what their goal is and how to go about getting it when necessary for a cool moment.

Heck, a character's goal can even change to the exact opposite, as long as it supports and builds off deeper motives. Furiosa, the wives, and Max are all trying to get away from Joe's stronghold. Then suddenly they're trying to get back to it. What changed? The situation! They have scenes where they go through emotional shifts, realizing that oppression can't be escaped, but must be fought head on, if one is to ever be free. Han Solo undergoes a similar journey, realizing that saving his friends matters more to him than saving his own skin. That's growth. Drama. Conflicting emotions changing prominence based on a character's experience and development.

But you have to see the change happen, to relate to what about the character's desires change and why. If they just act one way in one scene, then suddenly act in a completely unrelated way in the next scene, it's confusing at best, and undermines the central themes of the story at worst.

There are films that can keep their characters mostly inscrutable while still telling a compelling tale, but it takes a lot of careful thought and set up, plus a healthy dose of symbolic subtext, to pull that off. Man of Steel simply doesn't put in the work. It throws a vague assortment of antagonistic behavior at a wall and very little of it sticks.

/r/movies Thread Parent