Continuity mistake: When Curly Bill is shooting up the town while drunk, he fires about 10 more rounds than his six shooter can hold without reloading (so too many shots even if he had a second gun), and still has a round remaining when he shoots Marshal Fred White. In the 1880 court hearing held after Marshal White's death, Curly Bill still had 5 rounds remaining in his pistol.
Tombstone (1993)
Directed by: George P. Cosmatos
Starring: Kurt Russell, Val Kilmer, Bill Paxton, Charlton Heston, Sam Elliott, Michael Biehn, Powers Boothe, Dana Delany, Jason Priestley
Factual error: In the scene just before the fight at the O.K. Corral, Wyatt is talking to his brothers and Doc on the porch of the town marshal's office. There is an American flag flying behind him with 50 stars on it when in fact there were only 38 stars on the flag in 1881.
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.
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.
Trivia: Val Kilmer has been quoted as saying that screenwriter Kevin Jarre insisted the actors wear real wool costumes, in accordance with the time period. During the scene in the Birdcage Theater, Val Kilmer says, a thermometer was placed on the set, and it read 134 degrees Fahrenheit. Kilmer suggested jokingly that this was the reason Doc Holliday killed so many people: "It's just, like, he wore wool in the summer, in the Arizona territory, and that made him mad."
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").
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.
Trivia: The expression "I'm your huckleberry" spoken by Doc means "I'm the perfect man for the job." It is not a reference to Mark Twain's Huck Finn, as that book was published in 1885 and this movie takes place in 1881. And it's not a reference to carrying caskets by the huckle bearers. Kilmer's autobiography is entitled "I'm Your Huckleberry." End of discussion.
Doc Holliday: Oh. Johnny, I apologize; I forgot you were there. You may go now.
Johnny Tyler: Is something on your mind?
Wyatt Earp: Just want to let you know you're sittin' in my chair.
Johnny Tyler: Is that a fact?
Wyatt Earp: Yeah, it's a fact.
Johnny Tyler: Well, for a man who don't go heeled you run your mouth kind of reckless, don't you?
Wyatt Earp: No need to go heeled to get the bulge on a tub like you.
Johnny Tyler: Is that a fact?
Wyatt Earp: Mm-hmm. That's a fact.
[Johnny Tyler stands up.]
Johnny Tyler: Well, I'm real scared.
Wyatt Earp: Damn right, you're scared. I can see that in your eyes.
[Wyatt walks up to Johnny as Johnny reaches for his gun.]
Johnny Tyler: All right now.
Wyatt Earp: Go ahead. Go ahead, skin it. Skin that smoke wagon and see what happens.
Johnny Tyler: Listen, mister, I-I'm gettin' awful tired of your-
[Wyatt slaps Johnny hard in the face.]
Wyatt Earp: I'm gettin' awful tired of your gas. Now jerk that pistol and go to work.
[Johnny doesn't do anything and Wyatt slaps him in the face again.]
Wyatt Earp: I said throw down, boy.
[Wyatt slaps Johnny harder and when Johnny turns to look at Wyatt his mouth is bleeding.]
Wyatt Earp: You gonna do somethin' or just stand there and bleed?
[Johnny still doesn't do anything.]
Wyatt Earp: No? I didn't think so.
Johnny Ringo: My fight's not with you, Holliday.
Doc Holliday: I beg to differ, sir. We started a game we never got to finish. "Play for Blood," remember?
Johnny Ringo: Oh that. I was just foolin' about.
Doc Holliday: I wasn't.
Question: What did Doc mean when he said "It's not revenge he's after. It's the reckoning"?
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.
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.
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.
Question: What is the name of the theatrical song in the Faust play, and who is the original composer and symphony?
Answer: Danse macabre by Camille Saint-Saëns.
Question: Whatever happened to Morgan's wife and Kate? They are never mentioned by the narrator at the end of the movie.
Answer: Morgan's wife, Louisa "Lou" Earp accompanied Morgan to be buried in California. She remarried Gustav Peters in December of 1885 and died in 1894, at the age of 36, in Los Angeles. Kate "Big Nose Kate" Haroney is thought to have spent time with Doc Holliday during his time in Colorado until his death in 1887. Afterwards, she married a man and moved to a town near Tombstone until she left him for another man. She lived with the other man until his death in 1930 doing odd jobs in hotels and for the railroad. She died in the Pioneer's Home in Arizona in 1940 just a few days before her 90th birthday.
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.