<![CDATA[plot hole]]>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — There's No Business Like Show Business

miriamwebster — 16 years ago(November 14, 2009 12:00 AM)

How the heck was anyone supposed to believe that Ethel Merman would become permanent cast member in Broadway show subbing for her 20-some years younger son? Sort of worked in the sailor number (when she was teamed with daughter Mitzi Gaynor, also playing a man) but sure wouldn't have made any sense in context of the "Lazy" number, seen earlier in rehearsal with Donald O'Connor and Mitzi kissing and so forth. What kind of Broadway show doesn't have understudy for top-billed leading man? Realize this is a musical that doesn't bear much close scrutiny but idea that a male actor who presumably had some sort of male/female numbers with Marilyn Monroe's character could be replaced with middle-aged woman is just plain ludicrous.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/176982/plot-holeRSS for NodeTue, 12 May 2026 23:27:10 GMTMon, 27 Apr 2026 19:26:31 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:41 GMT]]>ranc1 — 1 year ago(May 19, 2024 09:37 PM)

I would say plot hole would be Marilyn Monroe at the train station and doesn't get old when she re-appears 20 years later as Vicky.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486119https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486119Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:41 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:31 GMT]]>dollvalley — 11 years ago(December 28, 2014 02:31 PM)

Why would Merman not have been ok doing DOC's Lazy part? I don't remember if the part called for some quite athletic moves jumping on or off the couch in some weird way, but they could have easily left that out. As for dancing, Merman was very good throughout the movie. And all those people were real pro's, they would have have no problem whinging a change of the kind.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486118https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486118Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:22 GMT]]>miriamwebster — 12 years ago(July 28, 2013 10:49 PM)

"Suspend" disbelief???
How about lynch it???

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486117https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486117Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:12 GMT]]>IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486116https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486116Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:02 GMT]]>riverstyxdriad — 14 years ago(February 14, 2012 06:36 PM)

I believe that the show is vaudeville; different acts strung together. So I doubt there was any continuity between numbers. I'm sure they brought on another man to take over the "love" numbers But wasn't what they were discussing just the Old Salt number anyway?
High summer holds the earth
On this shining night

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486115https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486115Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:27:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:26:53 GMT]]>gribfritz2 — 13 years ago(November 27, 2012 05:27 AM)

Yes. The understudy, the person who has practiced and whose job it was to fill in would not do it justice. But momma will do a great job. Really have to suspend disbelief for that one, but the plot really wasn't the strong suit here anyway.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486114https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486114Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:26:53 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to plot hole on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:26:43 GMT]]>kathleencurley1 — 16 years ago(November 15, 2009 03:49 PM)

There WAS an understudy for Tim but everyone agreed that he couldn't do justice to the "Tatoo" sketch - it was supposed to be Katie's best number. No doubt he was OK for "Lazy" etc.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486113https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1486113Mon, 27 Apr 2026 19:26:43 GMT