MovieChat Forums > Urban Legend (1998) Discussion > Major Plothole? (Major Spoilers)

Major Plothole? (Major Spoilers)

posted 12 years ago by xantny84x
14 replies | jump to latest

Aside from the fact that I can't understand how the hell Brenda managed to get a grown man (Damon) over a tree branch to hang above the car. Especially without Natalie noticing.

But at the end, she mentions that she was going to pin the murders on Dr. Wexler... yet earlier, when they "find" his body, he looks as if he's been stabbed to death.

So you're telling me the guy killed all these people, then stabbed himself to death? I'm not so sure how bright she was in planning that cover up, but, from the way it looked it's not a very good one.

Wouldn't the draino-pop rocks one look more like a suicide?

No Accidents. No Coincidences. No Escapes. You Can't Cheat Death. - FINAL DESTINATION 5

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jason_13 12 years ago

Didn't she plan to be the sole survivor, defending herself from the "killer"? I have honestly forgotten what she said at the end, but urban legend or not, Wexler stabbing himself to death is pretty ridiculous. All the other urban legends based murders were more or less believable.

"We all go a little mad sometimes"
Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates - Psycho (1960)

[–] xantny84x 12 years ago

I agree... though some of it was hard to swallow... like Damon's death... I still can't seem to wrap my head around her being able to get him hanging above the car on a rope... how'd she manage that? But I got passed that one.

However, someone stabbing themselves to death, well... hard to believe anyone could pass that off as suicide lol unless he was only stabbed in the heart, like how Parker explained in the beginning of the film when he talks about the massacre that happened.

I guess I'll have to look again... I don't remember if he had multiple stab wounds or just one.

No Accidents. No Coincidences. No Escapes. You Can't Cheat Death. - FINAL DESTINATION 5

[–] acet18 12 years ago

The movie's full of plot holes!

How did Brenda manage to kill Parker then drag his dead corpse through the party, then across campus to the abandoned dorm rooms. Then run to the Radio station, kill Sasha live on air. Then run back to her room to change out of her party dress... Run in Natalie and Paul. Manage to somehow sneak the professors body into Pauls car (uuum she stole his car keys then replaced them??) Frame Paul so he would chase them giving her a chance to dissapear again, yet to reappear 5 minutes later back in Pauls car wearing that parker coat, somehow knowing where Natalie was and that she was picked up by the janitor.(How the hell did she get Pauls car keys back again???).
Then jetted back to the abandoned dorm rooms again setting it up just in time for Natalie to appear right where she wanted (geee what a coincidence!)

Did I mention how could she possibly drag all of them bloody bodies on her own across the campus without being noticed once??! Oh yeh I think I did.

As for killing Natalies room mate. How convinient was it that she left the room for 5 seconds to put her lipstick on, giving Brenda enough time to sneak in the room to mutilate her. Unless she was already hiding in the room with a computer she snuck in with her!! Seriously WTF?

[–] briand10 11 years ago

Only the rope goes over the branch, not the person.

[–] Dash99 11 years ago

Did anyone not see the last scene? It was all a story someone told, an urban legend. And then Brenda says "this is how it really went". A lot of it was changed or misinterpreted by word of mouth, so there are going to be inconsistencies in the story.

Its such a smart way to end a slasher film, which all of them have plot holes or suspension of disbelief.

[–] Movie_Buff_Brad 11 years ago

Yeah guys, it was all a very poorly told and stupid urban legend a moron was telling, so lay off the movie's suckage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cG79lGWyL4

[–] megameme (370) 3 years ago

slapped didn't read faggot

[–] ADBruns 10 years ago

She was probably intending on Wexler's body never being found, planting evidence, and making it look like he'd run off.

[–] Ponies_in_Jumpers 10 years ago

I assume a lot of it was planned in advance and she gave nudges to the different characters to get them where she needed them to be. She could have been the one to show Damon that spot and set up the rope knowing they'd go there; then all she'd have to do would be to tighten the rope around an unconscious Damon's neck and hoist him up using the rope and tree as a kind of pulley system.

She mentioned her plan was to have people think the Professor had done away with himself 'in the same manner as the course he teaches' so maybe she thought people would actually believe he'd set it up somehow, she didn't seem to be playing with a full set after all.

The timing is really weird and it's hard to believe she was doing it alone. I thought it was pretty stupid to have all of the bodies for Natalie to find, sure Damon being there makes enough sense since she'd taken the body; but it was really ridiculous that she'd managed to get the others there in that time frame.

[–] svalinanikola 10 years ago

The last scene reveals that it was an urban legend someone was saying, therefore some things were exaggerated etc.

Brenda then says it didn't go like that and that she will say how it really went.

[–] johnnycheck12 10 years ago

When she saw Natalie and Paul kissing. She haven't killed Parker and Sasha yet. Maybe she hide Parker's body wait until the party was over. She already killed Wexler before the party. Hours pass in the night Natalie she was still at the party. I'm sure some people left the party earlier. Parker was nowhere to be found well we knew he was dead so people was leaving his party that could've been two hours later. She went to the radio station to kill Sasha's friend and Sasha. Realistically Sasha was running around the radio station for awhile for Natalie to get over there to her.

[–] bradleynath 9 years ago

Maybe the makers intended to make a sequel of there own that was to be a direct continuation of the first film. In the sequel they would reveal that there were two, if not more, killers in the first movie, a bit like Scream 3 or I STILL KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER. The idea of another killer could be used to tie up any loose ends.

[–] camerica1978 8 years ago

Good point! That would be sorta hard to believe.

Reminds me of a scene from The Crow, when the cops find Tin Tin's body with 5-6 large knives sticking straight out of his chest.
The street cop tells the detective, "I think we can rule out accidental death."