On this blog, now and again, I like to look at an often talked about plot hole and see if I can cover it. I do have rules when it comes to covering plot holes. I can only use info that is in the film, I can’t make up my own logic and apply it. I can’t say “but in the book…”, etc. The book isn’t the film and the film isn’t the book. Deleted scenes are a bit of a wild card, depending on why the scene was deleted. As an example, if the director was forced to remove a scene due to the higher ups, I can use it as it was not their choice to remove the scene. If a director cut a scene of their own free will, that’s a bit different because if the director felt that the scene was not important, then neither should I.

Anyway, today, I’m looking at an often mentioned plot hole with The Shawshank Redemption. SPOILERS ahead if you have not seen the film. So The Shawshank Redemption tells the story of Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) who is sent to prison in 1947 for murdering his wife. Turns out he never did it, and he escapes after 28 years by very slowly chipping away at a wall behind a poster in his cell. The plot hole that people do love to bring up is, how did Andy replace the poster on the wall if he had to crawl through the tight tunnel he had dug out. Admittedly, yeah, this does seem quite impossible. If he crawled out forwards, he couldn’t turn around to put the poster back up. The film even shows Andy crawling forward when it covers how he escaped. Even if he did crawl out backwards, he couldn’t have stuck the poster back on the wall from inside the tight tunnel he had dug out. The only way to put the poster back up would be from inside the cell… which Andy was not, as he had escaped.

Honestly, I don’t really need to cover this plot hole because it has already been covered many times over. Andy had the poster stuck to the wall at the top, lifted it up, crawled into his tunnel and gravity did the rest and the poster just fell back into place. There’s even a scene in the film at the end that shows how Andy did it via flashbacks. You see him chipping away at the wall by lifting the poster up, still attached at the top. There is another plot hole that people like to bring up when they question how the poster was so taught to have warden Norton (Bob Gunton) throw the rock through it, that ends up revealing the tunnel behind the poster. If Andy did just have the poster stuck to the wall at the top and released it so it fell into place, the bottom would not have been stuck to the wall and not been taut to have a rock thrown through it.

I disagree. It was a poster made of paper, and Norton threw a rock at it. Despite what the game Rock, paper, scissors tells you, a bit of paper is not going to beat a rock… especially one being thrown at speed via anger, as Warden Norton does. Then there is the fact that the poster is up against the wall and not just hanging freely, so there would be some resistance coming from the back. The poster would not necessarily need to be held taut for the rock to tear it. Especially Andy’s rocks, which he carved and could’ve had sharp-ish edges/points. Plus, it could be believed that Andy stuck three corners of the poster down, lifted the fourth and squeezed into his tunnel. Three of the four corners in place would definitely hold the poster tight enough for a rock to be thrown through it. Andy could’ve used looped scotch/sticky tape, one side attached to the poster, the other would’ve contacted the wall when he let it go. So for me, both of these plot holes could be explained using the in-movie logic. But, I have a far bigger issue with the whole thing anyway, and this is something that I find quite surprising that nobody ever seems to bring up.

Andy replacing the poster or the poster not being taut enough for a rock to be thrown through it is not even a plot hole at all. This stems from the fact that a great many people don’t seem to know what a plot hole is, which I find strange as the term “plot hole” describes exactly what one is… a hole in the plot/narrative. Somewhat reputable sites have both brought up and covered this “plot hole”… but it’s not a plot hole. Andy has already escaped, it doesn’t matter what happened to the poster….he’s long gone. Even if the poster was left on the floor, Andy still escapes, and he is not discovered to be missing until the morning. The only thing that would’ve changed is that Andy’s escape tunnel would’ve been discovered 3 minutes earlier. The guard raised the alarm as soon as he realised that Andy was not in his cell, the poster not being on the wall would’ve made zero difference. He’s still gone. So the poster does not have any negative effect on the plot – it’s not a plot hole. Andy could have left written a big “fuck you” on the back of the poster. He could have left a detailed plan on just how he escaped, none of this matters, he’s already escaped. This is not a plot hole and as such, there is no hole to cover. So stop bringing this up as a plot hole, it’s not. Andy still escapes no matter what happens to the poster.