@Jacinto Cupboard said:

I thought the movie was poorly paced, overlong, and full of improbabilities and sometimes, flat out impossibilities. Affleck's customary bumbling everyman worked ok, but Pike's OTT psychopath was really too much. And the core premise that the disappearance of an ordinary housewife, even the daughter of authors of childrens' books, would create such a media circus that it would put a man's life at risk on the flimsiest of evidence, and further, oblige him to live with a murderer 'forever after', is frankly absurd. The reality is he could easily have sold his story, walked from the marriage, and lived out his life as a bar owner and freelance writer for the rest of his days.

And what of the grifters who robbed Amy? Clever enough to work out she is on the run and faking her injuries and disguised but not clever enough to cash in by coming forward? That's a huge plot hole. For a movie that runs to nearly 3 hours there would have been plenty of time to dot the i's and cross the t's.

It continues to astound me that 10s of millions of dollars can be spent on films with hundreds of cast and crew and yet blatantly obvious problems with the plot never get spotted or corrected. And these are not problems that only a lawyer or a detective or a doctor would spot. They are obvious problems.

You forgot the biggest plot hole…there’s literally a character named watchful Wally across the street. Yet, his only purpose is to notice a cat outside lol. He is completely forgotten after this. I could maybe forgive this if they didn’t name him watchful Wally, which very heavily implies that he’s always watching his neighbors. There’s no way he didn’t see something. But let’s assume he only happened to see the cat and wasn’t outside watching when Amy would have left or been kidnapped. At the very very least there should have been a scene or some mention of the police questioning him. This could easily have shut the whole “murder” plot down in an instant with him saying that he saw Amy leave the house lmao.