Comments on: Ten “Plot Holes” and Errors in Wall-E

By: Richard Lawrence

Richard Lawrence — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:14:39 +0000

Because ‘Auto’ is not the ship computer. Auto was a separate wheel. Once the ship’s computer was told about the plant it automatically took the ship home, or allowed the captain to enter the pre-programmed course. Auto is responsible only for controlling the ship when in space. Of course that is for dramatic purposes only. In reality the ships computer would do it all but Auto was needed to be a villain.

The Axiom ship computer was a pre-programmed computer not a robotic one. I think the difference was there was no actual original reactive thought there.

By: Tate Kilpatrick

Tate Kilpatrick — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 08:09:41 +0000

1) I enjoy watching Wall-E on almost a regular basis, the stunning visuals and simple dialogue make it an easy movie to watch again and again. However one hole that I have noticed is at one point in the movie a commercial for the “star liners” shows everyone on board being quite active, parents and their children at the pool with grandma next to them in a hover chair. It then proceeds to say that the purpose of these hover chairs is to make all the amenities aboard accessible to someone with limited mobility such as the elderly grandmother. But when looking at the present time of the film everyone is obviously using these hover chairs as their main source of mobility. So I wonder and put the question to anyone who may have a suggestion, did the designers of the ship put enough hover chairs aboard for the eventuality that everyone would one day be as obese as they are? Thus making them more immobile. I would believe no because there is no way of predicting such an eventuality, even with the BnL ceo’s prediction that they would have such massive bone loss, the plan was to one day bring everyone back to earth. So there would be no reason to include a chair for every person when they weren’t sure just how long the passengers would be out in space. And this goes back to the point of raw materials, how would they build more if necessary?

2) Another point that is a large flaw in the film is that the previously mentioned commercial does show parents playing with their children at the the pool and enjoying a hibachi style dinner with children. Not infants, but children who appear to be about 10-12 years of age. So my next point is where are these children? They have created an extremely large rift between infants and adults. Everyone is either a toddler or a full grown adult, there are no humans on board between the ages of say 3 and 30. And even if there were would said humans need hover chairs from the beginning? The toddlers are shown in their specially modified hover strollers but if say a kid of 7 was present on board, would he or she be in a full sized, adult hover chair? Or are there ones specifically designed for kids of that age and suspected size? Food for thought.

3) Finally another point about the newest human additions aboard the Axiom. Where in God’s name do they come from? Obviously they are not going to show or explain this phenomenon in a children’s movie but I was curious. If when John and Mary touch hands, while watching Wall-E and EVE “dancing” in space, is such a big deal to them how are kids conceived and born? Did they also implement a Matrix style system for birthing and nurturing humans in an artificial womb? I understand that this last point is most likely reading to deep into the movie, and is for obvious reasons not going to be explained in the movie, but it was just something that I wondered about the overall story of the film.

As I said before though I enjoy Wall-E and believe it is definitely one, if not the, greatest Pixar film to date.

By: Gunther Heinrich

Gunther Heinrich — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:25:47 +0000

That’s a cool list with some nice thoughts and explanations. Here are some counter arguments, to make it lively *lol*

1. Relocation might be an idea, yet it wouldn’t solve the problem because the waste is still there. In masses. It would be another thing if it’s being reprocessed or buried, but that isn’t the case. It almost seems that the humans planned to clean up after the Wall-E’s cleaned up.

3. In Star Trek you have tons of intelligent alien life forms. That isn’t the case in this movie. My original argument is still valid.

4. Of course, photosynthesis is the most important thing to look for. But: the easiest way to check whether or not the planet is inhabitable again, is to check the atmosphere. You don’t have to search for a single plant. Check whether or not the Oxygen levels rise. If that’s the case, there has to be life again that’s creating it. And then you know the toxic levels have fallen enough. On the other hand the mission might have been not to check for oxygen levels but to see whether or not life is possible again. But you don’t have to search for a plant to do that. See Star Trek and its sensors.

5. That might be possible. One thing that comes to mind is the hyperspace drive. When it was planned to return some years later anyway, why equip those ships with hyperdrive? And why wasn’t the moon inhabited (or other planets) when they already have such advanced technology?

8. Your point is absolutely possible. But it the moment when the Wall-E’s where activated, the waste problem was the biggest problem ever. I think the Wall-E’s wouldn’t have been equipped with solar panels but with the most modern technology available to clean up as fast as possible.

10. How will they know Earth is clean? When they send a probe to check whether or not the garbage is gone. Or they could have installed a satellite to monitor the progress. Nevertheless, when everyone fled from Earth it was (at first) a temporary measure. The movie clearly showed that the big management was surprised by the toxic levels. Would you waste your money and time for something you think of as unnecessary at first? I wouldn’t. So either this is a script problem – or the management knew from the beginning and pretended to not know. Another thing is that we don’t certainly know whether or not there were plants or animals at the peak of the garbage problem.

By the way: even if we see several Eve’s in the probe ship there’s one thing that nags me. Why don’t they check the sea (if it still exists)? A plant is nice to have, but the sea is way more important for survival. And if there’s no sea anymore (too lazy to check) then there’s one big question: where went the water?

By: A. C.

A. C. — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:48:20 +0000

1. I suspect that walle’s original mission was relocate the garbage form one location to anpther designated location. However, i think walle build the garbage buildings after walle became sentient for amusement.
3. EVE is for an away mission. We have all seen in the star trek. It is a standard procedure for an away team to arm themselves with phaser.

4. Why only plants, that is because EVEs were looking for an evidence for photosynthesis. If i remember science class correctly, roaches does not do that. Do they?

5. why so far. it was a crusing ship. i suspect axiom was circling a same route for 700 years, route which might include great view of an nebula.

8. EVE and walle are two diffrent robots. EVE is to search and procure lifeform. ON the othe hand, walle is just for garbage. We all saw what walle did when it was reactivated. i think walle can be built even with our tech. And one more fact, walles must built on cheap materials since bnl had to make it so many.

10. They left because pf the garbage. How will they know the earth clean? by sending probe to find life forms.

Thqnk you for reading. It is good plot holes you find. it made me think about this great movie again.

By: The Best of madmind 2009 | madmind

The Best of madmind 2009 | madmind — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:49:49 +0000

[...] Ten “Plot Holes” and Errors in Wall-E This post caused quite a stir in a certain Wall-E fan forum but despite that I firmly keep my stand regarding my observations. I still love Wall-E but plot holes, plot errors, mistakes and blunders still remain in it. But let’s be frank, anything perfect is boring. [...]

By: Chris Steele

Chris Steele — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:19:09 +0000

oh and this is just a comment… I bet mo “the cleaning robot” must have had a field day when he got to earth… its just one big foreign contaminant to him.

By: Chris Steele

Chris Steele — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:14:58 +0000

Here is another plot hole I noticed… how did the president of bnl know that they would loose bone mass to the extent they did if it took them 700 years to degrade to that level. he showed the picture of the bone loss scale like half way through the movie and at the point that the captain realizes that auto “the auto pilot” you see that they gradually gained weight through the years. does this mean the president knew they were going to be out that long or was he just showing possibilities?

By: Gunther Heinrich

Gunther Heinrich — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 20:34:10 +0000

Wow. How could I miss that one? This might be one of the biggest errors of the whole movie.

By: Tortuga

Tortuga — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 16:39:51 +0000

Here is my plot hole: why did the Axiom even bother sending the probe back when the computer was told that earth was a loss and was directed to keep the people in space?

By: sig

sig — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 16:57:28 +0000

1. I don’t think this is a plot hole really. To get rid of waste you have to relocate it. You can’t get rid of it unless you use it ie recycle it – they didn’t state this, they stated they would clean up – this means relocate. As a company BnL probably couldn’t be trusted from the start. The whole situation was probably a way for them to make more money. During their feeble attempts at a clean up the earth became unihabitable. They couldn’t clean up, they had to abort the mission.
2. I’m not sure how many people were on that particular ship in the film – it didn’t look like many. Plus how many people could afford to leave on a ship – I expect BnL charged for the journey and only those that could afford it were saved? If 1 ship house a million people thats quite a few ships!
3. I agree with you on this one. In fact this is what brought me here since I searched on google on this very subject. Why oh why does someone in search of life, shoot anything that moves? A little weird – she should surely have a little mercy for a life searching robot.
4. I did think this also. Why did Eve not take back the cockroach? – but a cockroach isn’t a sign that life is sustainable. Only a plant would show this. Cockroaches can survive on rubbish – but humans need to be able to grow food/trees. Another point to make is that if there are only a few plants then the carbon dioxide content of the air would be incredibly high and possibly would not sustain life.
5. True – unless the nebula was some sort of energy supply for the Axiom.
6. Considering how fast the axiom zoomed back to earth, I don’t think it would be a problem for them to assist a ship in trouble.
7. Showing the rubbish going out of the airlock is just silly. How do they produce metals and plastics without the materials? What about ship repairs etc? But lets say they could produce anything they wanted using highly advanced technology? They wouldn’t have to go back home, however they obviously need to since they are living on liquid food and obviously dying from health conditions of their lifestyle
8. I’m not sure about this – Eve is obviously more advanced than Wall-e.
9. I think this is a joke – I took it as such – its not a ship – its a spaceship but for the humour it acts like a ship at this point of the movie, I laughed anyway. lol
10. Was Eve created on the ship – or on earth? I suspect Eve was created on the ship. If this is the case the ‘top secret’ message must have already been seen, to allow them to create the probes. But the top secret message was the very reason why the auto pilot wanted to destroy the plant. So why would they even create probes to send out?

Great post by the way! I do think when watching movies you have to suspend disbelief. However, I have noticed after watching many films that plot holes are often created due to the editing process. Often scenes are removed, switched or changed and this results in plot holes or confusing elements in the films.