Hey hug46 - long time!

Well... you just hit the nail on the head. Good writing fills in gaps. All they had to do as show one teeny scene of her perfecting that technique to make it credible. An audience will accept nearly anything, so long as you set the rules and are internally consistent. That's the problem with bad writing - it breaks its own rules. David Lynch makes strange films in which the impossible happens - but he sets it up, writes his own rules, then sticks to them.

And yeah, Interstellar had as many holes as there are stars in the sky...

Back to The OA:

It's actually not even clear if she makes the whole thing up or not. She wakes up in a white room after being shot and carted away in an ambulance in the last scene; is the white room a hospital room? The afterlife? The other dimension she was trying to get to? Only if the last scenario is true can we say that the story she tells is true. It's unclear. Further muddying the story is the dream she has that brings her to the school where she gets 'columbined'.

Lack of clarity is definitely problematic. Loose and improbable premises also. But You can forgive all of that if at the very least the thing is internally consistent. And The OA is not - in addition to being starkly unclear and having a weak, unconvincing and unsupported premise, it breaks its own rules...

So, back to an earlier question - how the hell does this get funding!!?? I can wonder that about other shows because they are uninteresting and uninspired, but at least they are (usually) CONSISTENT, and respect the fundamentals of storytelling. there is a very big difference between a boring story and one that just outright doesn't work...

Sorry if I am ranting a bit...

JBArk