Corrected entry: During the kart ride to Cranky Kong's castle, a wide shot of the kingdom is shown, showing only two ramps on either side of the entrance. However, moments later, there is now a third ramp in the middle, leading to the entrance. (00:42:42)
TedStixon
18th May 2023
The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023)
8th Feb 2005
Million Dollar Baby (2004)
Corrected entry: Early on Hilary Swank describes her family to Clint Eastwood and states her mother "weighs 312 pounds". Later we meet the mother (Margo Martindale) and while she is somewhat obese she is nowhere near 300 lbs.
Correction: Just to add to the conversation, while I'm not a woman, I used to weigh about 350 pounds before I started a serious diet plan and lost almost 100 pounds. In my experience, it wasn't until I hit 350 that I started to look super massive. Once I got started on my diet and got back down to 300, I looked substantially smaller and dropped multiple shirt and pant sizes. But going from 300 to around 255 was much subtler - I only went down one shirt size and lost an inch or two around my waist. 300 isn't as huge as you'd think for everyone... it just depends on how your body carries and distributes the weight. She absolutely could weigh around 300 pounds.
Correction: 300 pounds may seem like a lot, but a quick browser search into publicly available photo galleries will show that her mom is very likely to be that and more. Many galleries showing variations of distribution of fat based on height and weight exist for artists and curious folk.
Correction: The keyword is "Later". We see the mother well over a year after she's described, so she's had plenty of time to follow a diet or whatever.
10th Jun 2023
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987)
Corrected entry: Given the subway's crowded, there's no reason Superman couldn't fly the hurt engineer to the hospital.
Correction: There were already paramedics and authorities there to take care of the engineer. It'd be pointless to fly him to a hospital when he's already being helped.
13th Sep 2021
Pokémon Detective Pikachu (2019)
Other mistake: At the beginning, when Tim arrives in Ryme City, a Sneasel is visible with its ears on the wrong sides.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: As an adaptation, the movie is allowed to alter the design of characters and creatures from the games. It doesn't need to stay 100% consistent with the game, and thus, this cannot be considered a mistake. Other Pokémon in the movie similarly have minor cosmetic changes. Furthermore, you could also easily chalk this up to the Pokémon's genetics simply being different. Natural variation or mutations happen sometimes in species, and it's canon in Pokémon that some of them have different forms or look different even if they're the same species. (Ex. I have a number of the same Pokémon that all look completely different in Pokémon Go.)
12th Feb 2021
Pokémon Detective Pikachu (2019)
Other mistake: The Psyduck is technically incapable of defending the group against the Quajutsus. Regardless of which psychic attack Psyduck uses, Quajutsu is immune to it because of its typing (water/dark).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: As an adaptation, the movie is allowed to bend the rules of the game. Furthermore, just because they're strong against psychic-type attacks in the game doesn't mean they'll be completely unaffected or totally immune, especially given how powerful his attack is.
20th May 2023
Halloween Kills (2021)
Trivia: After Karen takes Michael's mask, if you listen closely, Michael says to her, "Give it back."
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is just an out of control fan-theory and has absolutely no confirmation anywhere, and it honestly sounds more like a mixture of Allison crying and the ambient noise of the scene than a male voice speaking or whispering. Unless the director comes right out and confirms that they very quietly looped in Michael speaking (which he hasn't), it's not something that should be listed as confirmed trivia.
19th May 2023
Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981)
Plot hole: While underwater all of those years, Jason didn't seem to age. He seemed to be a child when he grabbed Alice at the end of the first film. How could he grow up to be an adult after only five years, as Paul stated during the campfire story?
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Dialogue in the film hints at what actually happened, which is that the end of the first movie was some sort-of panicked dream/delusion Alice had, while the real Jason has been living out in the woods ever since he "drowned," and thus aged into an adult. (Whether he actually did drown and came back to life, or escaped and fled out into the woods because he was mentally challenged is up for debate.) It's admittedly shaky, but the movie does hint at an explanation, so I don't think this really counts as a mistake.
16th May 2005
Halloween: H20 (1998)
Plot hole: At the end of the film all the police and ambulance vehicles manage to get into the school, but earlier Keri/Laurie smashed the mechanism that opens the gate.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There's been a series of murders tied to an infamous serial killer... more than likely the police broke down the gate to gain access. (Which can be done in any number of ways: sawing through the locks, having the fire department dismantle it, ramming through it with an armored vehicle, etc.) They're not going to not come in just because there's a gate they can't open. Also, a quick Google search indicates that often, police are given access codes or ways to remotely open gates at certain buildings (schools, senior centers, etc.) in the event of an emergency. So it's entirely possible they also had a way to open the gate without breaking it down.
18th Jun 2022
Jurassic World Dominion (2022)
Corrected entry: When Charlotte Lockwood is doing a vlog holding baby Maisie, the needle she uses pokes Maisie's leg twice, which couldn't happen in real life.
Correction: I'm sorry... what? First off, I'm genuinely confused what you mean by saying that poking someone with a needle twice "couldn't happen in real life." Poking someone twice with a needle is absolutely possible. It's literally happened to me when I've gotten blood work done and they can't find my vein. Second, she doesn't actually poke her twice... she just shifted her hand, which made the needle kind of move back and forth for a second. This mistake makes literally no sense.
6th Jul 2004
Ginger Snaps (2000)
Corrected entry: If Bridgette knew that she was going to become a werewolf after she mixed her sister's blood with her own, why didn't she kill herself after she killed her sister?
Correction: She only infected herself to get her sister to come with her, then her plan was to "cure" Ginger, then herself. She didn't originally plan to kill Ginger.
I believe the point of the entry was that even though Ginger's death was accidental, that Bridgette still should have killed herself to insure that she wouldn't become a werewolf and start killing too.
19th Mar 2023
The Whale (2022)
Plot hole: Other than being an on-line college instructor who "works a lot", the status of Charlie's employment was not revealed. There's a big difference between being a full-time tenure-track instructor (with a fringe benefits package that would include health insurance) versus part-time/adjunct faculty (with low pay per course and little or no benefits). Charlie was able to save $120K in 8 years, suggesting he was full-time and should have had health as well as life insurance and a retirement plan.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Not necessarily. My uncle works as a college professor (typically part-time or single-semester gigs) and has been able to set aside pretty good money by controlling his spending. Granted, not $120K... but my uncle also spends more money than Charlie on leisure things. (Also, according to a quick Google search, a part-time college professor often makes as much as $40K+ per year depending on different factors... pretty easy to save money if all you're spending is rent and food).
19th Mar 2023
The Whale (2022)
Plot hole: After sending the offensive message to his students, Charlie got on-line with them (within hours or the same day?) and said, "Well, your complaints have been heard. I've been replaced..." IF an on-line college instructor could be terminated and replaced as quickly as Charlie was, it would follow that he would no longer be able to access the on-line course to communicate with the students like he did. (01:39:55)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I think this is based on too much assumption. Any sort-of ban would likely be entire dependent on whatever system they're using for their online class. And it's entirely plausible he'd still be able to access his account mere hours later, even if the call has already been made to replace him.
I worked for the Defence department in Australia and it was a running gag that eighteen months after I had left my online access to my account was still open, allowing me access to highly classified documentation, including emails. Mistakes happen.
10th Jul 2004
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Trivia: The original theatrical version ended with Slimer eating the camera, just like in the first Ghostbusters film. This has been removed for the video releases.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is a popular rumor, and some people claim to remember it, but there's no supporting evidence or footage to confirm this. In fact, after doing some research, I came across an article where a projectionist screened an original 1989 35mm print of the film to see if it did indeed end with this mythical Slimer scene... and the print contained no such scene, ending the exact same way as the home video releases. Sadly, this appears to simply be another instance of the dreaded "Mandela Effect," where people remember something that didn't really happen/wasn't real. Furthermore, if they actually had spent the time and money creating an effect like that, what purpose would there be to cutting it from home video releases? Effect like the ones in this film were harder and more laborious to make in the 1980's. They wouldn't just cut effects out for no reason.
14th Nov 2002
Spider-Man (2002)
Corrected entry: When Spider-Man is rescuing Mary Jane from falling to her death from the balcony, he catches her and spins his web to the balcony to save her and they bungie to just inches from the ground. As they are preparing to bounce back up the shot rotates 90 degrees and you can see the counter weight that pulls them back up coming down to the ground. It's a weird one, this - there's a sound effect as the weight comes into view, so it's meant to be there (or else the sound's just a cover), but it can't be anything he attached his web to, as it was stuck straight onto the balcony. If it's falling, they should be too - his web's not pivoting around anything. (01:06:50)
Correction: They bounce back because of the elasticity of the web. That falling block is just a falling piece similar to the long one that is already on the ground, it's not a counter weight.
Correction: I genuinely don't understand this mistake. It's just a piece of debris falling. It looks absolutely nothing like a "counterweight," nor is it big enough to be. It's the exact same color, texture and relative size as the larger pieces of debris on the ground below them. (Furthermore, you can see other, smaller pieces of debris falling around them during the two shots as well.) And the reason they spring back up is because the web is somewhat elastic in quality. This is shown multiple times throughout the movies. He stuck the web to the balcony, and they sprang back up as bits of debris continued to fall. There's no mistake here.
19th Jul 2021
Men in Black (1997)
Other mistake: The first time the neuraliser is used it shows hours, weeks and years. But at the end of the film the lead character tells J to remember that it's "days, months, years." (00:08:06 - 01:24:52)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Perhaps there are different models of neuralyzers.
I don't think arguing "perhaps such-and-such" is necessarily strong enough of a reason to correct a mistake. Nothing in the movie indicates they are different models, so it's probably best to assume they're the same.
26th Feb 2023
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2020)
Other mistake: When Phoebe calls Ray from the police station, Ray says the firehouse is now a Starbucks, but during the end credit scenes Winston is standing in the firehouse and Ecto 1 follows him.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Ray was being sarcastic. A common joke in NY is that every time a business closes, the location becomes a Starbucks.
Suggested correction: This mistake has already been corrected. Starbucks is often used as a shorthand joke about general gentrification, companies going out of business, company over-exposure, etc. (Which is kinda based on reality. Ex. In my hometown there are literally four Starbucks locations over a 5-mile stretch of road, at least one of which I believe took over an old store that closed down. It's utterly insane.) Ray isn't being literal when he says the firehouse is a Starbucks - he's just making a sarcastic joke about how it's closed down.
11th Jun 2003
Scream 3 (2000)
Other mistake: On the back cover of Scream 3 in the Scream trilogy on DVD, the town of the original killings is referred to as Greensboro twice. The correct name of the town is Woodsboro, of course.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I'm not "correcting" this per se, but I'm wondering if there should be either a separate type of mistake for things like DVD/Blu-Ray cases or posters (Ex. "Multimedia and Marketing Mistakes" or something like that), or if these things would be better classified as trivia? Especially since it's not something everyone can necessarily observe watching the movie itself. (Ex. My Blu-Ray and 4K releases don't have this mistake.) If not, feel free to downvote/delete this. I've just seen a few of these mistakes over the years here, and it always seems a little off to me since it's not something wrong with the film itself.
I agree these aren't valid movie mistake if the studio wasn't involved in the mistake. It could be trivia if only certain home releases had them. These mistakes are like when episodes are aired out of order creating continuity issues,, streaming services make changes, or closed captioning (not subtitles) gets something wrong. It can't be considered a mistake of the film or TV series.
It's tricky - largely, if I'm honest, because adding new types to the site is incredibly fiddly. :-) There's also room for endless debate about what's a "mistake", whether it's about assigning specific blame or just looking for interesting stuff. Likewise things that can only be seen in slow motion, which arguably warrant a category to themselves because there are plenty of them, but then the "mistakes" section gets cluttered. Becomes a user interface issue as much as anything! Will think.
I'm not disagreeing with this post, it's the only way I can reply. But yes, for the first run of the VHS and the DVD of Scream 3, there is that typo on the back cover. Now knowing that, is that version worth more money?
While misprints can sometimes add to something's value, I don't think this would necessarily make this release more valuable. Perhaps the VHS version just because there is something of a collector's market for VHS tapes now. But the movies have been released on DVD, Blu-Ray and 4K so many times, I don't see the DVD version being worth significantly more. (Unless you find a really weird collector who would specifically want THAT version.)
Yes, there is that typo. They were the first run of the VHS.
I didn't say there wasn't a typo. I was questioning whether a typo on the cover would technically qualify as a movie mistake, since it's not part of the actual film.
27th Aug 2001
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
Factual error: During the scene when the two guys are fishing, the guy on the right is using a bait casting rod, you can tell by the finger grip where the reel connects to the pole. The problem is, the rod is equipped with a spinning reel. A spinning rod has no finger grip.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I'm watching the movie right now and there's nothing wrong with the rod. The rods just look like they've been lightly modified to add extra grips and whatnot, which is something you can 100% do. (In fact, I'm literally looking at a website right now where you can buy extra grips just like that to add to spinning rods).
23rd Jan 2023
The Menu (2022)
Corrected entry: The "tacos" served by the award-winning, $1200-a-plate restaurant are woefully inadequate. Tacos are accompanied by chopped onion, cilantro, chopped chiles (usually serrano) and lime. Other toppings such as chopped pineapple, tomato, or avocado are optional. These so-called "tacos" are cold, stiff tortillas and meat.
Correction: In no way is this mistake. In fact, this mistake is quite incorrect for two separate reasons. First of all, it's not a "mistake" for a chef to serve a minimalist variation of a pre-existing dish. (Several of the chef's dishes have minimalist ingredients, in fact. He literally served a bread plate without bread.) Just because tacos are usually served a certain way doesn't make it a "mistake" if they're not. Second, beyond that, the fact it's only meat and tortillas actually relates directly to the plot, since the meat is a representation of the story he told about his father, while the tortillas have incriminating photos burned onto them.
10th Dec 2001
The Crow (1994)
Corrected entry: If it has been a year since Eric and Shelley's death, who the hell has been feeding the pedigree house cat, which would be incapable of hunting for itself, for the last year to keep it at its same size?
Correction: Cats though domesticated are still wild animals. I know from experience that a cat can fend for himself when it is needed. Plus there are people who leave food out for stray animals.
Correction: I have an indoor house cat who's never been allowed outside unsupervised or without a leash, and despite the fact she's pampered and doesn't have to fend for herself... she definitely still can. She catches (and eats) mice every time we get any in the house, is a keen hunter and is super cautious and territorial when she needs to be. She still has all of her survival instincts. So yes, house cats can definitely thrive and survive without their owner around. Especially in an apartment building like Eric's where she could easily get in and out.
Correction: The young girl, their friend kept coming back to feed the cat.
She specifically says "I thought you were dead" when she finds the cat, implying she hasn't seen it in quite some time. She also had to break into the building just to get inside. She definitely wasn't coming there to feed it.
Sorry meant the young girl.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.
Correction: The third ramp doesn't "appear." It's just harder to see because of the camera angle and the fact the color makes them blend in a bit. But if you look closely, all three ramps are there - one is to the right of the waterfall and two are to the left.
TedStixon