Stupidity: Dr. Horniker (MD, PhD) advised Mr. And Mrs. Lisbon that Cecilia could use a kind of "outlet outside the codification of school" and should "interact with males her own age." The Lisbons did arrange a party for Cecilia, but the boys who were invited (or came) were somewhat older. Cecilia, at age 13, would be in Jr. High School. Tim and Parkie were 16-17. Chase looked a little younger than the other boys, but none of the boys were really "males her own age." Had the boys been 12-13 or even 14 and Cecilia's older sisters not present, Cecilia may have a better experience - and not jumped to her death during the party. (00:07:35)
Stupidity: When the Woolworth Building collapses and the gang runs into the convenience store to take cover from the dust, Marlena was last seen behind Hud and with Lily, Rob, and Jason. Switch to everyone running from the dust cloud, Marlena didn't make it into the store. Upon exiting the store, the gang finds Marlena stumbling from nearer to the Woolworth Building meaning she would have had to run toward the dust cloud, through the screaming crowd which was running away from the building.
Stupidity: Stephanie empties Emily's large closet, but when she comes back with the movers, lo and behold, all of the dead person's belongings are back. They are back though exactly as they were with superhuman inch-perfect precision. Since this movie does not have a supernatural element, that appears really silly. (01:00:30)
Stupidity: Anyone with a job in the White House would have to be known to the Secret Service on a daily basis, so the two Secret Service agents that find Cory the janitor should have been aware of his identity without him having to state who he was and that he worked there.
Stupidity: When questioning the heavyset witness after his having seen Costner in the hallway, there is no mention of the most obvious identifiable feature...the pearly white Navy uniform he was wearing. Instead, Costner is described as being a common "everyman."
Stupidity: In the flashback about the way the victim was poisoned, it would seem that the murderer straight out went to a waitress and handed them a single chalice of poisoned champagne, ordering the waitress to give that exact glass to the victim. That's just a little bit absurd; if it's a flashback based on a testimony, the case should have been solved in 0.1 minutes once the waitress says that that very well known person asked them to bring a glass to the victim - it's a request highly unusual and that would be easily remembered. If it's just some wild guess of the detective, that's a mighty strange way to imagine how things went, rather than just the killer slipping venom in the victim's glass when they were not looking. (01:04:00)
Stupidity: In the original novel, the attempt on Mrs. Doyle at the temples was made rolling a boulder off a cliff. In this adaptation, the culprit is said to 'dislodge' a large stone from the temple; you can however see that the stone is already dislodged and sticks out from its place on the pillar, and he had no way to know that the Doyles would be in that particular spot, making this attempt to Linnet's life rather nonsensical (requiring also herculean strength, no pun intended). (00:47:40 - 01:39:30)
Stupidity: Despite being assaulted by an intruder that she managed to temporarily fend off, the female neighbor takes forever to say something when she calls the police, which is just enough time for the villain to regain his senses and attack her with a huge drill.
Stupidity: Judy Hicks, a trained cop and sheriff with over a decade of experience, does not carry a back-up holstered gun on her when she is off-duty, one day after her son's close friend is stabbed seven times near to death. A trained police officer/sheriff would also question why the killer would tell her they are about to kill her son, before they do it, if not to bait them and lure them into a trap. (00:45:58 - 00:46:30)
Stupidity: There is a scene about a null hypothesis proving Cassius is the killer. Nearly everything is wrong in this scene. Statistically, you never prove a null hypothesis true. (01:23:11 - 01:24:22)
Stupidity: Considering the movie takes place in the winter of '75, it seems unlikely that the babysitter would arrive in a halter top and barefeet.
Suggested correction: I agree that this is a "stupidity", but think your use of the words "it seems unlikely" allows for the suggested corrections already given. Perhaps replace "it seems unlikely" to "it isn't rational." Even if the daytime temperature was mild for winter, the temperature would probably drop by around 30° overnight.
Suggested correction: Actually, January of 1975 was very mild, much like the winter in the northeast this year, so it would not be impossible for the babysitter to wear unseasonable clothing.
Suggested correction: Ordinarily I would agree with this observation, however, I believe the girls outfit matches her carefree attitude. She did bong hits in the family bathroom, laid on the boys bed seductively and asked him if he French kissed so dressing comfortably to babysit isn't out of context.
Adding to this, almost every babysitter I had growing up went barefoot or at least shoeless. Even this past new years eve, the young lady who came to watch my kids took her shoes off as soon as she came in the house.
It is a common courtesy to remove shoes when entering someone's home to protect the carpeting (or other flooring) from getting soiled by whatever might be on the bottom of shoes after walking outdoors.
Maybe I'm wrong, but after watching this movie last night, it sounded like the girl was wearing flip-flops when she walked across the bathroom to open the door. Would it be rational for her to have worn sandals too?
Considering she was barefoot for most of the night, yes, she may have worn them for comfort.
Stupidity: When Michael is heading to the hospital and he just learns that the Cloverfield Station is gone, the whole scene of him driving is super unreal. It looks like he's not even driving, like it's a self-driving car or something because the steering wheel doesn't move at all while he's driving, and he isn't looking at the road (staring into space). The whole scene just doesn't feel realistic. (00:43:48 - 00:44:30)
Stupidity: Simi sets the wooden tepee structure on fire with Claudia next to it, and Claudia's clothes get engulfed in flames. Claudia continues to stand next to the fire, flailing her arms instead of following the commonly-known "learn not to burn" procedure that is taught to children: "Stop, drop, and roll" to extinguish the fire on one's clothes - and to stay away from fire. (01:31:00)
Stupidity: Possessed child Nicholas made the cross from a necklace pierce Fr Louis in the neck, causing blood to gush out. Fr Peter yelled, "Fr Louis, Fr Louis" as Fr Louis tried to pull out the cross. No one else present rushed over to try to help stop the bleeding or assist him. Fr Louis' sash could have been used around his neck to apply direct pressure to the wound. (Although it might have been obvious that it was a fatal wound to the neck, someone should have at least tried to help). (00:07:15)
Stupidity: A detective who explicitly frequents morgues not being able to tell the difference between a real slashed throat and fake blood spurted on a neck is one thing. When he returns to the room and finds the body missing, instead of becoming alert, drawing his gun, putting his head on a swivel, and warning his friend outside, he slowly walks over to examine the razor and figure out how the magic trick was performed, allowing the killer to ambush and kill him almost comically easily.
Stupidity: After Jack is found not guilty, you would think the first thing he would do is to get rid of the typewriter he used to send the notes to Teddy to manipulate her into winning the case for him, especially when she is sleeping with him at his home. Not to even mention the fact he hid the typewriter in an unsecure manner in a closet behind a stack of towels, a place where it would very easily be found. This foolish mistake exposed the truth to Teddy and cost him his "freedom."
