Tombstone

Corrected entry: The movie shows Frank McLaury being the last one killed during the gunfight. Actually, Billy Clanton was the last one to die. After Frank was killed, Billy got off his last shot, the one that caught Morgan in the shoulder. (01:16:16)

Correction: Several of the chronological events are compressed or switched around, by the filmmakers, using creative license to tell the story in a dramatic and coherent manner. The movie is "based on true events"; it never represents itself to be the end-all-and-be-all historical account.

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: When the Earps arrive in Tombstone, they are greeted by Sheriff Johnny Behan. The actual date of Wyatt's arrival is December 1, 1879. Johnny Behan didn't move to Tombstone until September of 1880 and wasn't elected Sheriff until the latter part of 1880 or early part of 1881.

Correction: Several of the chronological events are compressed or switched around - including Behan's arrival, Josie's arrival, the attacks on the Earps after the famous 'corral' gunfight (which took place over a several-month period). All of this was obviously done to tell the story in a seamless and coherent manner. The movie is "based on true events"; it never represents itself to be the end-all-and-be-all historical account.

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: Doc has 2 pistols. He alternates rapid firing with standard gunslinging. Although he never reloads, he has one shell for the last guy.

Correction: What point during the movie are you referring to?

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: After the O.K. Corral shootout, the Cowboys get revenge on the Earps by shooting Virgil and Morgan Earp on the same night. In reality, though, Virgil was shot in December of 1881, while Morgan was shot in March of 1882, a span of a few months.

Correction: This isn't a "mistake" - movies are often written in such a way as to move the action along. This is called literary license.

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: At the very beginning of the OK Corral gunfight when the Cowboys are positioning themselves as the Earps and Holliday approach, they show one additional Cowboy to Billy Claiborne's right who is not shown again for the remainder of the gunfight.

Correction: That's because that Cowboy left (like Ike did).

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: At the end of the gunfight, Wyatt and Doc walk away as the only two men not injured during the fight. In reality, Wyatt was the only person not shot during the fight. Doc was shot in the hip by Frank McLaury just before he was killed. (01:18:27)

Correction: Actually Doc was only grazed with a bullet that went across his hip and lower back in the actual fight. It was a minor injury that could easily be written out of the scene and would not have caused any conflict with showing him and Wyatt walking away together after the fight.

Corrected entry: In the scene where Wyatt is dealing Faro, the bettor says "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." This phrase was coined by Harry Truman in the 1940s.(http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/get-out-of-the-kitchen.html).

Correction: Not a mistake. Movies are commonly filmed using the venacular familiar with the climate at that time, using contemporary language over traditional, so the audience can be more involved and follow the movie easier. Using a phrase that is out or pre-dated is not considered a mistake, simply a means to make the movie more palatable to the overall audience.

Corrected entry: When the stagecoach containing Josie pulls away, its door obviously wasn't latched properly. Look closely and you can see the door swing wide open as the stagecoach leaves.

Correction: Not a movie mistake. Believe it or not, this can actually happen in real life.

Twotall

Corrected entry: Early In the movie, the "Cowboys" catch the Mexican Police coming out of a wedding for a gun fight. Ringo stands on a fountain that is bubbling water five feet in the air on a recirculating pump, and is fully sef contained. Not exactly an easy thing to do back in the 1800's with no pumps or electricity.

Correction: It is very possible for the fountain to be there. Fountains have reportedly been around in Rome Italy since 600 B.C.

Corrected entry: When the Cowboys interrupt the after-wedding party at the beginning, Curly Bill is seen walking and beside him, lying on the ground, is a dead man. He's breathing.

Correction: It's entirely possible the man who was shot has not died yet. He may be in fact just mortally wounded and unable to move or speak (i.e. - a paralyzing gun shot wound).

Corrected entry: After the shootout at the Ok Corral (Seems to be within a day or two), Wyatt, Morgan, and Virgil are walking down a street and Virgil says "it's getting warmer, I guess spring is coming". The shootout took place on October 26, 1881. That would mean it was autumn and that winter was coming, not spring.

Correction: The movie makes no indication that scene took place a couple of days after the shooting. In fact, that line is probably in the script just to show that more than just a couple of days has passed since the previous scenes.

Corrected entry: In the scene where Curly Bill is playing Faro at Wyatt's table in the Oriental, there is a musician in the backround playing the piano. The song he is playing is "Marching Through Georgia" which deals with Sherman's army invading Georgia and basically burning it to the ground. To this day that topic is a sore spot for Georgians. During this scene, Doc Holliday is also in the room. He lived in Georgia when he was younger, and given his temper compounded with his state of intoxication during this scene, would have killed the musician without hesitation, reguardless of the fact that the Earps were in the room.

Correction: That might be, provided he was a)paying attention to the music, and b)knew the song. If Doc was paying more attention to the Faro table, he might not even have noticed what the piano player was playing--think Muzak. Also, I personally think if he had taken offence, he probably would have warned the musician first--Doc doesn't really seem to be a cold-blooded killer, drunk or not.

Kaite13

Corrected entry: When Doc Holliday wins at poker and the other player takes offense, he challenges Doc Holliday. Doc places both of his guns on the table along with all the chips and money. After he knifes the other player, Doc's girlfriend Kate starts clearing the table. The camera shows her then Doc and Kate walk away from the table with both guns back in Doc's holsters and the table is absolutely spotless.

Correction: When Kate is clearing the table, she clearly pushes Doc's guns back towards him at one point before continuing to shovel loot into the bag. Doc then, also clearly, picks one gun up and returns it to his holster. We then see successive facial shots of Doc and Kate, and then they both walk away as stated above, with the table clear and both Doc's guns back in his holsters. There is definitely enough time for all of this to take place within the time shown.

Corrected entry: Fred White, the town marshal, is portrayed as an old man with white beard. In reality, he was only 31 years old when Curly Bill shot him.

Twotall

Correction: As noted in several other corrections here, the facts are adjusted in several areas to accommodate the filmmakers' artistic license. In the commentary, we learn that they chose to have an aged Marshall White to accentuate the cowardice of the young Sheriff Behan, who forces White to confront the opium-crazed Curly Bill which leads to his death.

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: In the scene where Ringo (Michael Beihn) and Doc Holliday (Val Kilmer) are insulting each other at the casino. We see a shot of Wyatt's right hand under the card table reaching for a gun conveniently hidden ready to shoot Ringo in the balls. In the next shot we see Wyatt still has his right hand as well as his left on the table holding cards.

Correction: Wyatt reaches under the table with his right hand to position the mounted gun at Ringo. Then he returns his hand to the table top to appear nonchalant. He reaches under the table a second time before the confrontation is over. There is no mistake here - he moves his hands several times during the scene.

Brenda Elzin

Corrected entry: At the fight at the OK Corral, Tom McLaury is standing behind a horse and Doc Holliday fires his shotgun into the air to scare away the horse, but the horse didn't spook all the other times guns were being fired before that.

Correction: Doesn't necessarily make this an error. Who knows what horses will do from one moment to the next.

RLN

Corrected entry: When Morgan dies, Wyatt's hands are clearly covered with blood, but when he lays his hand on Morgan's forehead no blood is shown on it. Then when he is outside in the rain and wipes his hands on his shirt it leaves streaks of red.

Correction: The blood may have been dried. It's raining outside so his shirt becomes soaked, and that makes it easier for him to wipe the dried blood off on his shirt.

If you look at Wyatt's thumb, it is shiny. Dried blood doesn't do that.

vinloc

Correction: The blood on Wyatt's hands are still wet so when he puts his hands on Morgan's head, the blood on Wyatt's hands should also be on Morgan.

Corrected entry: During the OK Corral scene, Doc fires 3 shots from a double barrel shot gun without reloading.

Correction: Actually, the "third" shot is just the second shot from another angle. For the second shot, Doc shoots Tom in the stomach and Tom falls down dead. The third shot is the same as the second shot. The only exception is that Doc fired the "third" shot from his waist. In the second shot, he brought the rifle up and aimed. In both shots, Tom falls down dead.

Factual error: During the gunfight in the lot behind the OK Corral, Tom McLaury is firing a six shooter at Doc just before Doc fires his shotgun in the air to scare Tom's horse away. The mistake is that Tom McLaury wasn't armed during the actual gunfight. He was shot by Doc while he was reaching for the rifle he had stored in his saddle. (01:14:58)

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The events have been intentionally adjusted by the filmmakers to create a coherent and entertaining movie. It is not a documentary. This film is loosely based on true events; it's not a day-to-day account of the events of 1880 through 1882. Artistic license does not constitute a movie mistake.

Brenda Elzin

Changing facts in historical material does constitute factual mistakes, whether anybody wants to call them that or not.

It really depends on the degree to which the film-maker alters the facts, and whether that alteration is glaring or changes the story line. For most, it doesn't. Tom got shot and Doc shot him. There is an implicit duty of the audience to "suspend disbelief" - an acknowledgment that it is impossible to get every small detail correct.

How does changing the facts make it a good movie? I guess it might entertain those who know nothing about the facts. But for those who have studied and read up on things, going way out of the story does little in making a good story. That is why I like "Wyatt Earp" MUCH more than "Tombstone." No, "Wyatt Earp" is not a documentary. It, too, has altered some facts. But, to me, it is much closer to the truth. Even some of the dialog is from the Tombstone Epitaphs reporting of the incident.

More mistakes in Tombstone
More quotes from Tombstone

Trivia: Val Kilmer is widely believed to be the most historically accurate portrayal of Doc Holliday. He is the same height, same build, and uses phrases used by Doc Holliday (eg "I'm your huckleberry" and "You're a daisy if you do").

Vin15Nets

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: But Hucleberry Finn appeared in Tom Sawyer in 1876 and was a bad influence on, or "made trouble' for Tom.

Not sure what this correction is trying to state, but "I'm you're Huckleberry" was slang in the late 1800's for "I'm your man" and didn't derive from Twain or Huck Finn. Twain uses the earlier slang meaning of huckleberry for Finn, meaning an inconsequential person, to establish Finn is a boy of lower extraction or degree than Tom Sawyer.

Bishop73

More trivia for Tombstone

Chosen answer: A reckoning is like a judgment day, exacting retribution for one's actions. Doc was very well educated and had a very large vocabulary. He was correctly pointing out the subtle difference between revenge (to make Wyatt feel better about losing Morgan and about Virgil's crippling injury) and the fact that Wyatt was bringing about a judgment day (or reckoning) for each of the men who hurt his family.

MovieFan612

Answer: I've spent a lot of time thinking about this very question, and here's what I've come up with. I think there are at least two differences between revenge and a reckoning. First, I think it has to do with the scale of the response to an offending action. Revenge, in my mind, is an eye for an eye, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will inflict the same action on your family (or group, gang, whatever). " A reckoning is less a measured response to an offending action and more of a full-scale punishment, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will now slaughter your entire family-including those who were not directly responsible for the offending action." Second, I think there is also a difference in motivation. Revenge tends to be a very personal response to something, whereas a reckoning tends to be more of a response fueled by a need for justice. In Wyatt's case, it was both. He was enraged by what happened to his family, but was also a lawman.

Franklin Vaughn

Thank you for this response! I've only seen Tombstone a million times and asked the same question every time. It's hard to separate the difference between the two but I believe you nailed it. Well done.

I'm thinking the opposite in terms. Revenge is "Reflexive" and is generally any means necessary (out of an abundance of pain or rage) to hurt the other party. "Revenge is a dish best served cold." If one is exacting justice there's no need to be cold hearted. Therefore, Reckoning is (to me) a fair balancing of the "scales" hence "an eye for an eye." Not only consequences of actions as it were but a corrective action to an incorrect circumstance. Just my understanding.

The problem with that theory is there is no difference in the end because the end result was the same...the killing. True reckoning could have only been achieved though the apprehension and punishment by trial and jury, anything other than that is simply revenge.

More questions & answers from Tombstone

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.