Continuity mistake: In Hangar 51, the size and position of the text in the Ark's box changes between shots.
Suggested correction: Duplicate entry, already listed in 2010: https://www.moviemistakes.com/entry162690.
This is not the same mistake as the one you listed. Yours speaks about the style of the box (that changes from vertical planks to horizontal planks). Mine speaks about the size and position of the text.
Mine is about the box and the text "The 'Top Secret' sign is put on the crate across vertically laid planks. A shot later the sign appears slanted." Yours is a duplicate.
Plot hole: When the sergeant takes control of the truck, Dietrich directs him to approach to crush Indy between the staff car and the truck, which takes time and allows Indy to make his famous scene. However, Dietrich could easily have shot him and arrived in Cairo with the Ark in his possession. (01:27:40)
Suggested correction: Shooting means risking hitting the truck's engine, which means finding new transport for the ark. All of which takes time off their schedule. Bad guys are always on a schedule.
True.
Other mistake: The Angel of Death attacks the altar and Toht and Dietrich scream because of its revelation, but Belloq, for some reason, doesn't seem to see it. Just before the fire column rises, he's still calm. (01:47:10)
Suggested correction: If you don't know the reason, perhaps you should ask a question instead of assuming it is a mistake. Belloq studied the ark and probably better predicted what might come out of the ark. He is also looking directly into the ark and is mesmerized by what he is seeing, until eventually he does scream before his head explodes. The other two are terrified at seeing the apparitions.
Actually, it's pretty impossible that Belloq studied the Ark. If he knew what would come out of it, he literally committed suicide by opening and watching the Ark open, which doesn't make sense. He believed during the whole movie that the Ark contained the Ten Commandments tablets, not some kind of ghastly things.
He didn't know what would come out, but it doesn't mean that he, like Indy, expected just 2 stone tablets. He expected power, for him mostly.
Corrected entry: As Indy gets onto the plane and we see Toth for the first time, Indy sits down with his trilby hat resting level on his head and his collar and tie fastened, but in the next shot the hat is at an angle, and the collar and tie are unfastened. (00:22:35)
Correction: It's a fedora, not a trilby. If you watch, you see Harrison raise his hand to his collar to undo the button and tie. that's how they get like that. And as for the angle of the hat, it's because he has leant back into the seat. I have a fedora, and if I look up, even just slightly, before sitting back against a tall chair, like in a car or plane, it tips itself up.
Adding to this, the German spy in the plane is not Toht.
Corrected entry: In the scene where Marion is having the drinking contest in her bar, look at her opponent's left wrist. There is a visible mark where the actor's watch strap goes.
Corrected entry: How could Indy possibly believe that a double handful of dirt scooped outside the cave could weigh as much as the gold idol (to avoid setting off traps related to lifting the idol)? He even takes some dirt out of the bag to try to match the weight. Indy must have experience with the weight of gold from other artifacts, and he already knows how sophisticated the traps at this site are. From the way Indy tosses it and the sound it makes when his assistant catches it, the idol is definitely solid stone or metal, even if it's only gold plated. If Indy didn't know what the internal material was, there was no way he could possibly judge the weight. In any case, dirt is less dense than any solid rock and wouldn't weigh the same. (00:07:55)
Correction: Indy knew what the arifact was that he was looking for, how big it was, and what it made of. So he brought a pouch of dirt in with his best guess of it's weight. It obviously was a bad guess as it didn't weigh the same or the trap would not have been triggered.
The purported weight mismatch isn't the only issue - Indy takes the idol off before tossing the bag of dirt onto the base/sensor, so there is also a clear, if small, interval of time when there is no weight on the base/sensor at all. I always thought that was what actually triggered it.
Corrected entry: Indiana Jones escapes capture on the England-bound cargo ship by swimming to a nearby German U-Boat. After we see Jones climb aboard the deck of the U-Boat and salute the captain of the cargo ship, there is a sequence of scenes showing the German U-Boat crew preparing to submerge the ship. Even if Jones miraculously managed to get inside the ship undetected, he would not have been able to find a hiding space inside the cramped confines of a German U-Boat.
Correction: The U-boat never does submerge, and we are left to assume Indy rode on top the entire way to the German base. WWII submarines had a much higher surface speed than submerged speed, so only went underwater with good reason.
The original mistake is valid. It is pretty clear the U-boat submerged at one point or another. Right after Indy boards the sub, there are no bridge lookouts on the conning tower and the hatches are closed, which would only happen when the sub prepares to submerge. Later on we see the crew use the periscope which, again, would only be used when submerged.
Corrected entry: U-boats were more than four times as fast on the surface (running on diesel engines) than when submerged (running on batteries). Since Germany was not at war at this time they would have run the boat on the surface almost exclusively. Since the boats were so hard for other surface vessels to see, the Captain would have maintained a constant look out on deck. There is no way Indy could have stayed hidden for the entire voyage.
Correction: While it is true that the German U-boat was 3x-4x faster on the surface, it is equally true that in the treaty or Versailles, Germany was banned from possessing U-boats. (The U.K. was still upset about costs exacted in WWI). A German U-boat approaching any ally or neutral ship would have to submerge, even before the war had started.
The original mistake is valid and the correction's reasoning is wrong. While the Nazis did build U-boats in violation of the Versailles Treaty right away after they took power and tried to hide it initially, this practice was an open secret pretty soon and eventually legitimized by the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 1935, well before the movie takes place. They would not have to hide a U-boat from anyone at that time.
Question: How could Belloq know/believe that the Ark is a powerful artifact, but also be completely oblivious to the Bible specifically mentioning that some Bethshemites were smitten for gazing into it and Uzzah was smitten for touching it?
Answer: There were probably many reasons. Propelled by greed, he may simply have chosen to filter out certain aspects of the biblical text, believing what he wanted to believe. He may have misinterpreted or had not bothered with the details of what was written in the bible.
Add in that he was hired by the Nazis to do the job of finding and utilizing the Ark. He had to make sure it worked so he could present it to Hitler.
Question: The scene where everyone's getting burned and exploding, why didn't the ark burn Marion and Indy too? Is it because they didn't do anything wrong to it?
Answer: They were protected because they did not directly look at the Ark. Indy told Marion to look away. That is what saved them.
Anyone who looks upon what is inside the ark perishes. The ark is used as the wrath of god against anyone who doesn't show respect to it, by not looking at what is inside. Even if what is inside goes outside.
Question: I first saw "Raiders" at the cinema when it was released in Australia and I distinctly remember a scene which has never appeared on video or DVD. After the end credits, there's a cut back to the crate housing the Ark in the warehouse, and the U.S Govt. stamp on the side of the crate is slowly burning off, as if a fire within the crate is scorching it. One other friend (also in Australia) also remembers. Does anyone else remember this, and can anyone shed any light on what happened to this scene?
Answer: I also remember this scene. After the ark is sealed, the camera performs a close up of the side of the crate. The stamp reads "Top Secret Army Intel 9906753 Do Not Open" This stamp is burned off just like the swastika is in the scene on the submarine, because in the eyes of God, no nation is holy or worthy enough to claim ownership of the ark. However, this final scene was cut (the burning of the stamp) from the film for a variety of unclear reasons. While it was in theaters, this scene was not included on the DVD version.
Add me to this. We saw the movie in a "pre release" version in Orlando Florida. No advance warning of the movie. We went to see another flick and at the end were "invited" to see this if we were willing to critique it afterwards. This scene was included. I also always wondered why the change.
I also remember seeing this mysterious 'burning' of the logo, most likely it was on a VHS copy of this movie. Yes, it did exist.
I saw it in former Czechoslovakia in the second half of 80's in cinema (west movies came to the east countries' cinemas years later). And I thought it was a great joke that burning out the swastika wasn't just because the Nazis are bad but because nobody is great enough to own the arc. Then after the Velvet revolution I saw the film again on TV (beginning of 90's) and said everyone around: watch it until the end, wait on the post-credit scene, there will be a surprise.
And there was a surprise. The scene was cut off! I was angry on the TV they didn't show the scene. I cannot be influenced by internet discussion or urban legend. The internet didn't exist yet.
I saw it in Portland, Oregon, and was so impressed with the message it carried, that I told friends and we went several times just to see it. Funny thing was when I mentioned it a few years ago, many people said I was a LIAR that it never happened. I could not convince anyone. It was removed because it wasn't Politically Correct. USA is a force for good, God would not burn off AMERICAN TEXT! BUT WE DID SEE IT. Thanks to our Australian eye witness, we know we did not imagine it.
Answer: I also remember that scene.
Answer: This scene never existed. Plus, the crate never has a US Govt logo stamped on it. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbr.com/movie-legends-revealed-alternate-ending-for-raiders-of-the-lost-ark/amp/.
Answer: I remember the side of the crate being "charred" when it was in the ship's cargo hold, in the scene when the Nazi's arrived in the submarine. It was the Nazi swastika on the side of the crate that was burned off. It also showed a rat keeling over dead from the energy it emitted. (I just watched this again on the Paramount cable channel.)
Corrected entry: The end credits list Alfred Molina's character as "Satipo". Harrison Ford says "Adios Sapito".
Correction: Actually he said "Adios estúpido", meaning "Goodbye, fool."
He definitely doesn't say "estúpido."
Correction: Nope. I do believe Harrison Ford was meant to say "Adios Satipo" but made a mistake and said "Adios Sapito." Judge by yourselves: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwXAIlYlkTo&t=1m12s.
Continuity mistake: When the temple collapses, Satipo is crouching looking at the chaos. Indy starts to run and there's a wide angle of the passage ahead but Satipo is nowhere around. He couldn't have managed to run that distance in half a second.
Suggested correction: He had a couple of seconds to run away from that spot.
Other mistake: In the bar shootout, a man is shot in the head. The bullet hits him in his hat right in the middle of his forehead, and then his hat falls off. But we then see a close-up of his face, and there's no bullet wound in his forehead or anywhere else.
Corrected entry: After Marion supposedly dies in the truck explosion and Indy is drinking outside at the bar, watch to the left of him. You can see a man wearing a modern t-shirt and jeans walking through the crowd. (00:42:20)
Correction: Nobody in that scene isn't wearing traditional Arab dress? What about the man in the dark leather jacket, tan trousers and fedora? What about the man in the pale beige suit, white shirt, white hat and black tie? The one in the pale brown suit and hat, white shirt, black tie? The one in tan trousers, white shirt, patterned tie? The four people indisputably wearing out of place Western clothing in the scene? That's right. Indiana Jones, Belloq and Belloq's bodyguards. Not a mistake.
Correction: This is probably the most famous non-mistake of all time. Denim jeans date from 1871. They were first sold by Jacob Davis and Levi Strauss in 1873 and the design hasn't changed much since then! Plain white cotton T-shirts date from 1898 and were first issued by the US Navy to their sailors in 1913. The design caught on immediately and they flew off the shelves. In short, there is nothing at all unusual about a man wearing jeans and a T-shirt in the late thirties.
He's the only person wearing that outfit in Cairo. Every single other person is wearing "traditional" clothing. He's clearly not meant to be in shot.
If that's true, then what about the two guys standing in the door/archway and the one guy who is sitting in the doorway next to them - all three of them don't match the rest of the extras either? All three are in the background to the left of Indy before the supposed blooper guy appears and walks right in front of them during the scene.
Highly possible. Unless you know the man's backstory who's to say he can't be where he is?
All of Cairo? I count 12 people (not including Indy) aside from him wearing traditional clothing. So one in 13 people has a different style of dress than the other 12. So what? A woman wearing a niqab in New York City might be different from others; it's not a mistake to have a niqab-wearing extra in a NYC crowd shot. This should be easily resolved anyway because there's one other person not wearing traditional clothes-INDY. And no-one gave him grief for it. Jeans aren't illegal in Cairo.
Correction: There is a simpler explanation of the man's presence and the fact that he is not there in error. This scene was shot on a closed set, and security was very tight. No member of the public would have got within a hundred metres of the place, and no crew member would be stationed in front of the cameras during a shot. It just doesn't happen. He is an extra, doing what he has been directed to do.
This site is filled with mistakes where crew-members are on camera. Whether it's an error, this correction is an assumption not supported by any facts.
Question: In the first sequence, there is a trap with Indy's competition's body stuck on it. Although it is sprung by somebody breaking the beam of light (which I find hard to believe, given that it and other traps were done without any kind of more modern technology we're used to, but suspend disbelief for the sake of the movie), how was it reset without human intervention after Forrestal was killed, and prepared for Sapito?
Chosen answer: Likely, it wasn't. The Hovitos are still guarding the temple. Presumably, they maintain and reset the traps.
You'd think in that case that they would've removed the body.
I don't know, I'd be more afraid to rob the place with a dead body stuck there than without.
Why? It's a good warning to other would-be thieves.
What better way to scare away future intruders.
Answer: More than likely, they left Forrestal's body as a warning.
Answer: The character played by Alfred Molina is actually named "Satipo," after a town. "Sapito" would mean "small frog." It's a common typo, but the more you know.
