MovieChat Forums > Ratatouille (2007) Discussion > 3 gaping plot holes with the ending

3 gaping plot holes with the ending

posted 13 years ago by killermike2178
35 replies | jump to latest

1. With the amount of time Linguini spent in the kitchen with Remy controlling his movements, watching what Remy was having him make, you would think by the end of the movie that Linguini would have learned how to cook some of those things and he wouldn't have been hopelessly lost without Remy, unless he was a complete idiot.

2. The health inspector says to Skinner over the phone it would take him 3 months to go to Gusteau's to conduct his inspection, unless "somebody cancels their appointment." However, he shows up pretty much the next day, meaning, unless he was just speaking figuratively to Skinner, that every single person who he had an appointment with for the the course of those 3 months cancelled within a day, which has snowball's chance in Hell of happening. And since when do restaurants schedule appointments for the health inspector to conduct their inspections? Don't health inspectors usually show up unannounced, to catch those in violation with their pants down? That's pretty much what he does at Gusteau's, which leads me to...

3. The health inspector has Gusteau's shut down, upon discovering that rats have been in the kitchen. So, Linguini, Collette, Ego, and the rats start their own new restaurant, that has its kitchen run by rats. But if the health inspector comes in unannounced to catch them with their pants down, like he did with Gusteau's, the place will only stay open a year, if not a month, before it gets shut down, too. What a depressing ending.

[–] A-zone 12 years ago

1. Linguini wasn't the brightest of chaps (to put it mildly!). So for him to learn how to cook French cuisine was like a frog learning to tap dance! Once Remy started controlling Linguini's movements, I don't think Linguini even bothered to pay attention to what was going on or what ingredients were used. He was more focused on trying to act normal and not get caught.

2. The health inspector said that it would take him 3 months to go to Gusteau's unless there is a cancellation. So perhaps somebody cancelled their appointment and so the inspector took that time to go to Gusteau's? That is what I always assumed.

3. I wondered the same thing as you. So I can only guess that perhaps it was a small restaurant and not as high profile as "Gusteau's", that is why the health inspector didn't bother too much about it.

"I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!"

[–] thethmike 12 years ago

Just a quick note on the first one - we don't really know how much time he spent in the kitchen, only that the will expires in less than a month. And second, it is quite hard to learn something when someone else is doing all the work for you, unless you seriously concentrate. I think i'm not the only one to notice that when you drive with a sat nav telling you where to go, the first time you go to the same place without it, you seriously have to think. Also, Linguini is an idiot and literally says he can't cook.

[–] A-zone 12 years ago

Yes, you are right. The more I think about what you said, the more I agree with you.

1. The rat wasn't really "teaching" Linguini how to cook. He (the rat) was just doing his thing. It's not like he was explaining to Linguini why he added a certain ingredient etc. besides, having a mute rat for a teacher doesn't help much either.

2. Linguini didn't know how to cook to begin with, wasn't really smart and wasn't concentrating on the actual cooking process. He was more focused on not getting his cover blown.

3. Any person learning to cook for the first time, naturally has to start with simple recipes. French cuisine is anything but simple and for anyone without any cooking experience to be thrust into cooking complicated French cooking is just a "recipe" for disaster. (excuse the pun!)

"I'm the dude playin' the dude, disguised as another dude!"

[–] lastsonofearth 12 years ago

I guess the movie is more of an allegory. Ego's speech towards the end pretty much sums that up.

[–] og_deadpool 12 years ago

I really wish I had enough free time to sit down and analyze the ending of a children's movie in such detail, FTW!

Why do people always take movies so seriously?

[–] ChuckFinnley 11 years ago

LOL! Who cares about your "gaping holes". They don't matter. You may be simply unable to the the forest behind the trees.

[–] jajceboy 11 years ago

None of those issues are actually plot holes. Plot holes are scenes or things that makes absolutely no sense.
These things makes sense in their own way.

1: It's been stated and made a point of throughout the whole film that Linguni isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, He couldn't cook and that's the whole point. And despite Remy's assistance he couldn't learn either. Makes sense

2: Never ever noticed it until you brought it up! But he probably was jut being figurative!
Also, it's one of those times when you have to suspend your thoughts about logic.

3: Um, OK? This is a issue because?
Either the people accepted the food was cooked by rats as long as it was clean, which would make sense by the plot. Or Colette, Linguni and Ego kept it a secret from the people.
And why is it even important? It's not important to the plot so why mention it?

None of these issues matter and they probably won't distract us from watching. I would never reflect upon it until I came here.
So as long as they don't distract from the viewing experience it's O.K

[–] mark-1589 11 years ago

To the OP: the only gaping hole seems to be in your head. What about "children's cartoon" do you not understand?

[–] ralph_2ndedition 11 years ago

I know that your original post was almost two years ago now, but seeing as no one picked up on this - regarding Skinners call to the Health Inspector;
Skinner didn't call him as a representative of Gusteau's to "make an appointment", he made an anonymous phone call - as a 'concerned citizen' - and was simply told that he (the Health inspector) was backed up and wouldn't be able to follow up on his tip right away.

[–] OldSamVimes 11 years ago

1. Linguini wasn't the smartest guy.

2. Health inspector says 3 months, but does surprise inspection based on intuition.

3. Waiver forms. Sign a waiver, eat the food.

[–] benpugsley 11 years ago

Number 1;

Not necessarily, in fact Igor's speech even says (and I might be paraphrasing) - "Not everyone can become a great chef, but a great chef can come from anywhere" - some people are particularly naturally untalented at certain activities and no amount of practice will help.

Number 2;

You have appointments booked for 3 months; someone makes an urgent inquiry one day but that person doesn't book an appointment. Then, someone cancels the next day.

Do you phone every person you have booked an appointment with and ask them if they mind moving their appointment forward a day, or do you just fill the gap in your diary with the new inquiry?

I assume no-one in this thread has to manage many appointments!

And, in the UK at least, food inspectors both make appointments and do random spot checks.

Number 3;

Hardly impossible to devise an early warning system; rats can hide pretty damn quickly.