Plot Holes (Spoilers)


I've just finished watching season one, haven't started season two yet. I'm liking the show, but there are a few things that are at least somewhat implausible. And I'm sure there have been numerous threads about them.

In no particular order:

Linc working on a work detail - at the time he's only weeks, or even days from being executed, is it realistic that he's going to be on a work detail? It seems to me those are valued positions, and they wouldn't have a dead man walking doing that.

Digging the tunnel - When Michael is in the psych ward, the one guard is trying to sell his cell space. Don't they tend to move prisoners around fairly frequently exactly for the purpose of messing up escape plans?

Dr. Sara - at one point in Season One she celebrates her 29th birthday. Doesn't that seem to be a little young? Finish college at 22, another 3 years at least for med school, then residency, plus throw in time out for rehab due to her drug addiction (and would she be able to keep her medical license after treatment for drug addiction?). Plus, would she be allowed to work in the prison system, given that she's the daughter of the Governor? You know, hostage situation.




"My girlfriend sucked 37 d*cks!"
"In a row?"

reply

Linc's execution date wouldn't have been set so soon after his verdict. It is also unlikely that he would have had a job. Deathrow inmates are kept away from other inmates and are rarely seen or heard.

Some inmates can stay in the same cell for years. But, they can move from cell to cell without notice. It really depends on what is going on.

It's actually possible that Sara could have been working for a couple of years. I imagine that working in a medical unit of a prison is the bottom of the barrel for a Dr. and it was her dad's influence that allowed her to keep the job at all.

reply

It's a fictional TV series about two brothers breaking out of prison repeatedly. Of course there are going to be things that come into play that isn't really that plausible to most people. None of those things are considered a "plot hole"

That's why it's FICTION.

reply

(3 years later but who cares...)

In the commentaries of various episodes in S1, the writers often admit they willingly sacrificed realism for the sake of furthering the story. The entire premise of the show itself is fairly ridiculous and highly unrealistic when you stop and think about it and practically everyone involved with the show had long since accepted that and embraced it by the end of the first season. To be honest, as a writer you quickly learn that if you want to tell stories that are interesting and move at a certain pace, reality is inevitably sometimes going to have to fall by the wayside. There has never been a story that is 100% realistic because, to put it bluntly, that would be incredibly boring.

Also, none of the things you pointed out (except maybe regarding Sarah) are plot holes. Plot holes are inconsistencies within the logic of the universe in which the story operates - for example, an audience being told that Bob cannot fly when it's raining under any circumstance and then seeing him flying through a monsoon with no trouble is a plot hole; two people being unable to fit on a piece of floating driftwood without tipping it, and the audience being shown that fact, is not. We don't know if in the PB universe Fox River inmates are moved on a regular basis (a practice which is hardly consistent across every single prison in real life anyway) or if it's unusual for a death row inmate to be enrolled in PI work (though the fact that he's even regularly allowed to mix with other prisoners at all suggests that, in the PB universe, it's not unusual at all). Is it realistic? Of course not, but as we've established barely anything about this series is realistic outside of fiction at all anyway.

reply

No one expects it to be 100% realistic but when you make mistakes on very simple things that is what annoys me.

A lot of the writers of these shows always come up with excuses for lazy writing.


reply