Manga News: Check out this week's new manga (4/6/15 - 4/12/15).
New Forums: Visit the new forums for Boku no Hero Academia!
Forum News: Check out the results for the Anime Awards 2014
So, here you guy. I've read this post multiple times and everything in this post is not a plothole. All of it can be explained and I did this in the original post.
A plot hole, or plothole, is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot - So what exactly goes against the flow of logic? All of it seems pretty logical to me, considering I was able to explain it all.
or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the plot - We already know about all the major events in the plot. What we don't know is Obito's background. Is this really relevant to the plot and is it inconsistent with the logic? Not really and no.
These include such things as unlikely behavior or actions of characters, illogical or impossible events, events happening for no apparent reason, or statements/events that contradict earlier events in the storyline. - None of the sort have happened. I guess these examples prove that there is no plotholes with Tobi's identity.
You missed my big point with databooks. The fact is that many people will read and watch Naruto not even knowing they exist. The real story is the major, official, and recognized medium it is presented in. So are you saying that the databooks are a bible as far as the story is concerned, even though the author completely contradicts it? It's irrelevant.
Last edited by SlayerKisame; September 10, 2012 at 02:37 AM.
In the end they are no different to anyone elses theories, people are referring to these "inconsistencies" as plot holes because they at the present time in the manga, do not make sense, it is a hole in the story with no canon explanation, can we make up explanations? sure.
On the subject of the wikipedia definition, people use the term loosely, so what? It's not always accurate but it's the easiest way for most people to label what they are trying to say, most people do after all, in most sections.
For the record, I would consider Madara awakening multiple Rinnegan while only ever showing and implying to have one set as rather illogical, why are we suppose to think he was just sitting there spam awakening his eyes before dying? It's silly, however that is my opinion on it, just as the theory it's self is your opinion.
Your thoughts regarding the Databooks are exactly that, thoughts, your thoughts, maybe most fans would never get to read it, are you sure? do you know about what fans read in Japan? Would they not be arguing every aspect of the plot of the series just as we all do? I said nothing regarding bibles, I said if they are canon then they are canon, if Kishi contradicts himself, then that's his problem.
people have their theories
just like them , OP you have your own theoris
that doesnt mean they are wrong and you are right ... everyone believes in what seems most logical to him . and to a lot of us here , we just see plotholes everywhere , and not only plot holes ...but poor story telling aswell (things that can be explained by logic but seem far too unlikely to happen , like the edo tensei war and so on...)
lets just say im a mangaka , and here is my plot : kabuto uses edo tensei , then teachs his edo tenseis how to use edo tenseis and so on ... at the end we have ressurected every single ninja that ever lived
that is logical ,but it's still a very poor and cheap story plot
make it clear. who is your target actually? who are questioning this development? or those "future" audience who will have no question? if it is the second group, then good luck; you are doing just fine.
but if it is the first group, you will have to do better. if it indeed is your target group, then make another thing clear. what are you saying? that Tobi always was Obito, and never was Madara or any other person?
Anyways, I'm not really gonna try any harder than this. I've already explained to you why your "plotholes" don't exist. It's up to you to dissect my explanations or leave it alone. So I guess I'll ask you a few questions, especially since you seemed confused about who Tobi actually was. Are you implying that if you believe in the databooks, you abide by a completely different rubric when debating? Are you implying that Tobi was at one point not Obito after everything I've said? With that last question, let me ask you this; why exactly did Tobi keep his mask on after revealing himself to me Madara? Maybe because he was someone else? Anyways, that's a different argument I'd rather not get into but we can settle that here and now if you want. There's so many clues that he was Obito the entire time I could make a documentary about it.
Going back to databooks...once again the databooks should not be used, just give up on them. The point is that if Kishimoto isn't going to abide by them, it's much easier on yourself to just give up believing the databooks are canon. Same thing with fans who don't even know such a thing exists. You have the choice of listening and staying true to some supplementary material which has been contradicted multiple times in the past by the author himself or just staying true to the manga alone.
You're gonna have to either carry that pointless weight (databooks) or let it go.
So basically the whole Tobito mess can be explained with:
-Madara happened, the guy transformed an untalented half-deformed monstruosity in a guy with comparable skills to his own in a year.
Wonder why Madara didn't train the whole Uchiha clan then, imagine 100 Madaras roaming around the world
-Databooks, canon timeline and other shit are useless.
Kishi doesn't care, since despite stating in the manga that Kakashi was 6 when he became chunin in recent chapters he made him look like a twelve years old.
But it isn't a plot hole since its not relevant
Its Madara we are talking about, the guy probably has a magical hat called "Epic Shit" where he pulls off magical tricks out of nowhere.
A pair of Rin'negans? Pft legendary doujutsu my ass, he can bake them like cookies.
-Kisame mistaking Obito for Madara?
Obviously Henge no Jutsu I mean Kisame is a dumb half-fish, I'm surprised he can breath out of water, how can he recognize a jutsu like that?
Ah of course genjutsu, its not like Shisui's Kotoamatsukami, canonically the strongest genjutsu of the Uchiha clan is the only one that can influence the other's thoughts without the enemy having a clue.
Hell its so common a power that both Tobi and Kabuto had a hard-on everytime that eye was mentioned
Of course high level ninjas can't tell when they are under a genjutsu, and its not like Kisame had any experience of how Sharingan genjutsu works.
Itachi was clearly a Hyuuga in disguise
Last edited by Uchiha_Blood; September 10, 2012 at 09:54 AM.
you are constantly saying to not count databook. well, i have been a reader of this manga for more than few years; and always knew databook as an absolute reference, even Kishi himself said that these are the manga facts. you will always find numerous old debate using reference from databook. and now suddenly, because you said so, we should stop counting databook as reference? if Kishi fails to maintain his own explanations, we should not argue about it, right?
and even then, you are even refusing to admit things from manga. giving explanation like:
and you are ignoring manga facts because anime showed otherwise? you can't ignore databook if it conflicts with some manga events, you cannot ignore manga facts when it messes up few other things. that's why there are many people hating the idea of Tobi being Obito. it's not because they hate Obito, but it's because it conflicts with so many other things of old revelations.
Databooks should not be used in fights, actually. Even if Minato has higher stats than Itachi, he can still lose to Itachi in one shot. Kurenai and Itachi having the same level of genjutsu doesn't contradict the manga, as it could mean that without Sharingan, Itachi and Kurenai are on the same level. People honestly don't think about stuff and are quick to blame plothole over anything they don't understand. "Sasuke got EMS?! zomg plothole! Madara is strong? PLOTHOLE!!!11"
And as much as I'm against Tobi being Obito, it wouldn't necessarily be a plothole either. As mentioned, we should wait for explanation that'll most likely sound like absolute bullcrap either way just to please the theorists. I can justify Tobi's identity, though it's easier to call bull on that.
There's just more reasons that work against Tobito than it does for it. Timeline for one thing, sudden improvement, and so much more. The only thing I can come up with is that Obito was secretly a gifted ninja and evil who either had Sharingan or Mangekyo and could unlock Mangekyo with less than three tomoe (where was it ever said that three tomoe is needed to unlock Mangekyo?). Which begs the question though, how did he unlock Mangekyo? Was it when Rin died before he fought Minato and Obito couldn't do anything about it?
Even if it is Obito, I doubt Rin is his main reason for being a douche. He's probably citing that as the only reason to mess with Kakashi's mind.
dude had super op MS , yet he didnt use it against itachi's father to cancel the coup d'etat
nono , this isnt plothole or poor story telling .. this all makes sense ....................................................... in a parallel universe
In the end it's a shonen manga, meant for teens, so whatever. Trying to make deep sense out of Naruto forever isn't gonna do you good.
Feel free to discuss, but I'm saying, sooner or later you have to realize it's just a shonen manga.
What is this? Is this thread seriously all about semantics? The idea that people are calling them "plot holes" instead of something else is what you're taking issue with?
I dislike these kinds of threads, particularly the combative atmosphere that tends to be set in them by overzealous defenders of artistic license and free thinking in the context of an established piece of fiction. Not only are you already and obnoxiously perpetuating a theme throughout this thread that users here lack critical thinking and deep learning simply because they do not agree with your -- let's be honest, less-than-pointed responses -- but also because you and the people you are addressing are both coming at this subject from two different angles. You suggest that because you can explain it in some way, "it's not a plot hole" and the story works. Others suggest that because it conflicts with details, implications, or even modes of thought established in the past (note that "conflicts" does not need to equate to "overwrites", but can) that they can be and / or are "plot holes". Now, I'm not going to insult you by posting one of the various definitions of the term "plot hole", because frankly, terms like this adapt to the contexts in which they are used and in certain situations the severity of which constitutes what a mass population may consider a "plot hole" can vastly differ from another context, however, I can tell you right now that they lean in favor of your opposition, here.
Having an explanation for a "plot hole" doesn't make it any less of a "plot hole". The term is not some retrospective analysis of concrete details in relation to every logical possibility, ever. If that were the case, there would never be any plot discrepancies at all, because we could all turn ourselves from the audience into the author and write in some previously-hidden set of circumstances that makes all of the ridiculousness fit. The problem with that, and the main reason why a lot of people take issue with subjects like this, is that this kind of retconning makes the long-standing journey of the audience through the plot less significant. There is a glaring difference between a big reveal that brings all of the pieces together in a big, "OH!" moment, versus a big reveal that leaves you wondering why you're being told one thing in the present, versus one thing in the past. Trying to chalk this up to misdirection, "acting", or whatever else is ridiculously silly. Breaking the fourth wall of the narrative to intentionally mislead the audience works in few mediums, and the manga medium is absolutely not one of them. Whether the details are big or small, there are naturally going to be some that wind up coming back to bite an author in the ass; having every detail of every plot device planned out from the beginning for long-term projects like this one are, one could argue, almost fatedly impossible -- almost. The thing is, this does not have that sudden or even smooth and drawn-out revelation of clarity and that downward regression in which everything makes much more sense. Do some things make sense? Yes. A lot of things do. Do some things not make sense? Also, yes, a lot of things are now questionable, and many of them are, arguably, a "plot hole" in relation to how the story was written and what was written.
It is ridiculously off-putting and pretentious of you to come to a place (or, according to you, multiple places in which you have read / listened to "hundreds" of reviews and other interactions) that fosters in-depth discussion, consideration, theory, and even criticism with varying levels of severity, and start shooting people down or purposely trying to "back them into a corner", as you put it, in order to put an end to a concept that has caused people to label these happenstances "plot holes". Backing someone into a corner regarding their literary analysis shouldn't be your goal, here. Trying to argue over whether the label is correct shouldn't be your goal, here. Why is that so important to you? It's not constructive in the slightest. You should be discussing the themes and plot devices and why or why they are not fitting for each other, both with and without the possible explanations you can personally provide. This provides breadth to the topic and will, hopefully, leave everyone walking away with a better understanding of the opposing ideas and perspectives with which they do not agree with and are interested in persuading.
It's a little meta-hypocritical of me to try and stifle the ideas you choose to put forth here, however I tend to see them, for the sole purpose of being annoyed that you are trying to stifle the concepts that people have here about an artist's work and how they choose to label it (well within the confines of any definition of the word-of-the-day in this thread), but the mood of this thread and every thread that tends to pop up like this one never sits well with me at all because of the down-the-nose demeanor and air of logical self-righteousness being behind that passion.
Last edited by Jspot; September 10, 2012 at 07:28 PM.
Usually, any story can be solved by using many different approaches, with varying levels of likelihood for every possible turn of the plot. The whole Tobi=Obito thing at the beginning was perfect, hence the number of people becoming fans of the idea. However, it turned bad when the plot suggested many things to mislead the readers, not only making other options more likely and appealing, but also making the first and most obvious choice less probable and complicated. Now that we know the truth, the idea of Obito being behind the whole thing may make sense, but it just doesn't feel right.
Regarding the definition of 'plothole', I think that many people have expressed in many different ways that this is a very relative term. Since we're discussing fiction, there will always be a way to explain whatever the author comes up with. I'm no fiction writer (and I read very little of it too) but I've noticed that all authors keep pieces of information for themselves to engage the readers into wondering details (pretty much what people come to these forums to do). If you ask me why people keep complaining about plotholes is because in this case Kishi couldn't handle what information had to be disclosed and what didn't. By this time, the only way for our beloved mangaka to explain about all those inconsistencies is to admit that there was too much information held from us, which is colloquially known as an 'ass-pull'.
It doesn't really engage to us readers to endlessly discuss characters and the plotline and then Kishimoto comes and tells us "SORRY GUISE, HAD YOU KNOWN HALF THE LIFE STORY OF THIS CHARACTER, MAYBE YOU WOULD'VE GUESSED RIGHT". That's usually regarded as bad storytelling. Regarding what the OP is discussing, the likelihood of Obito being Tobi making sense, he is right: it can be explained. Then again, the rest of the naysayers are correct too when they respond that it just sounds sucky. It doesn't give you any "Aaaah" moments, just a bunch of "Yeah, right"s.