Corrected entry: In a show about zombies, dragons and magic, Littlefinger's survival is the least believable thing. He fell into the hands of the likes of Catelyn, Renly and even Cersei, but they always spared him because of paltry reasons. By season 6 he's practically daring anyone to kill him, but they never do. Sansa, Brienne and Jon Snow were all itching to kill him, but they always stopped for no reason. This is a poor and artificial way of prolonging drama.
Phaneron
1st Sep 2020
Game of Thrones (2011)
Correction: Littlefinger is extremely wealthy and resourceful and has spent the entirety of the show (and even before the start of it) orchestrating events behind the scenes that make him more and more powerful, including the murders of Jon Arryn and Joffrey. Characters aren't in a position to straight up kill him because he controls the Vale army and has influence over Robyn Arryn. It isn't until his betrayal of Ned and Catelyn is finally revealed that the Vale army and the Lords of the Eyrie no longer have his back, which gives Sansa and Arya a reason to execute him without fear of reprisal.
Littlefinger only told Sansa about the Knights of the Vale after she had faltered again in her promise to kill him. That's just terrible negotiation. He's not allowed to die until the writers say so.
He told her his army would aid her. That doesn't mean only she knows he has the army. It's undoubtedly known by the Lords and Ladies across Westeros that Littlefinger married Lysa Arryn and became the de facto Lord Regent and Protector of the Vale after Lysa's death. And saying he's not allowed to die until the writers say so isn't even a valid argument. Every fictional character that dies does so when the writers say so.
Correction: Just because the powers that be don't like or trust Littlefinger doesn't mean they don't think he is useful for their own goals. They try and include him in their own schemes, but he played the game of thrones better than they did.
31st Aug 2020
Jurassic Park (1993)
Character mistake: When Genarro is explaining to Hammond that he is at the park to report Hammond's progress to the investors, he says "In 48 hours if they're not impressed, I'm not impressed. We'll shut you down, John." He should have said "If I'm not impressed, they're not impressed" since the investors would be shutting down the park on his advice, not the other way around.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He'll be the one to shut it down, not the investors. They gave him the ability to do that. So once he hears they are not impressed, he'll be shutting it down.
That still makes the statement backwards, since he is representing the investors interests, not his own. The way he words it suggests even if they weren't impressed but he was, he could keep the park open of his own accord. The buck stops with the investors.
There's actually already a submission just like this one in the Corrections section, with the correction - provided by JC Fernandez - noting that Genarro is referring to the scientists that have to be convinced that the park is ready to open, and that if the scientists aren't convinced, then Genarro will not be convinced either, and he will notify the investors of it.
Didn't see that correction before. When reviewing the scene in question Genarro does ever so slightly gesture behind himself when he says "they", which I had not noticed before.
9th Aug 2020
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Question: In the last shot of the knight waving goodbye to the Joneses, is it just me or has the actor been swapped out with a dummy?
Answer: It is the real actor and not a robotic dummy. He moves a bit slowly and deliberately, apparently for effect, but it's a real person.
Just to be clear, I'm not referring to when we see the knight raise his hand to wave goodbye to them, but rather right after Indy says "Please Dad," and he and Henry begin to flee the collapsing temple, you can see the knight in the background with his arm raised and he looks rather stiff. You can see it at around 2:22 of this clip: https://youtu.be/PAfZ7V2VyD8.
I took a closer look. There is the shot where the knight raises his hand and you can see him moving. It then cuts to Indy and Henry, then a cut back to the knight where it briefly looks like it could be a mannequin, then there is another cut and back to the knight again and this time it's definitely the live actor. So yes, for that brief long shot, I think it could be a dummy. This may have been for the purpose of efficiency in the filming, it being easier to use a stationary prop for doing multiple takes, rather than the live actor just standing there. Sometimes they do what is called "pick up" shots, where, post-production, a part of a scene or close-ups are re-shot or added weeks or months later, and it would just be easier to use mannequin rather than recall the actor.
But he does move, so most likely a real person.
2nd Sep 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Corrected entry: While Howard Stark is leaving the military base, in the background there is a white guy with black hair who resembles Loki.
Correction: And? Just because someone resembles Loki doesn't mean that it is or was ever intended to be a reference to Loki.
Correction: Think about it, probably Loki traveled in time exactly at the same point Tony retrieves the Teserract but we don't know yet, maybe will be explained in Loki's T.V. series and also it's very unlikely that a single guy with long hair and hippie look is on a military base in the 70's.
15th Jul 2004
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Question: After the massive battle on Endor the Rebels try to make it look like the stormtroopers have won so the ones inside the shield generator will come out. What I don't understand is who's the Imperial guy that appears on the monitor telling them it's over and they need reinforcements? Aren't all the Imperials outside meant to be dead at this point?
Answer: Look close, it's Han Solo with his hand covering his mouth with the radio so as to not give away his identity. You can even recognize his voice. Apparently, he got inside the walker that Chewie highjacked, took an imperial officers uniform from somewhere, then radioed to the base to get them to come out so he could ambush them.
And a few seconds later, he had the time to go out of the AT-ST, remove his uniform and be on the ground for the ambush?
It's only a few seconds of screen time. Within the film itself, several troops gathered to meet them at the door, which could have taken a couple minutes. That's plenty of time for Han to have removed the helmet and gloves (only his head and hand are visible, so he likely didn't put the full uniform on) and the climbed back down to the ground.
You only see his head. It doesn't take long to remove a helmet.
It wasn't an entire uniform, just the jacket helmet and glove. And more than a few seconds had passed as the troops inside needed to be assembled and then exit the bunker.
If you look closely, you can see it's about a half-second of footage on a loop. Where they got it is another question.
24th Jun 2020
The Avengers (2012)
Stupidity: At the beginning after Loki steals the tesseract he could easily uses his magic to make a portal in order to disappear from there.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Loki has never been shown to have the ability to form portals.
Never? He used the Tesseract in Endgame to disappear.
The original entry is saying that Loki could have used his own magic to create a portal. He has never been shown to have that power. If he did, he would have been able to escape the portal Doctor Strange trapped him in in Thor: Ragnarok.
Suggested correction: Loki is a trickster and only has the ability of creating illusions making anyone see what he wants them to see.
Suggested correction: Loki does not possess the ability to create portals with his magic. He could potentially use the Tesseract to do so, but it's possible he believes it needs to be connected to a machine or in some other kind of housing to be safely utilized, since that is how the portal opened that allowed him to come to Earth, and then later allowed him to open the portal above Stark Tower to allow the Chitauri to invade.
23rd Jun 2020
Boy Meets World (1993)
The Eskimo - S5-E13
Character mistake: In the opening scene, Cory remarks that they have been in high school for 4 years and there's nothing left for them to be taught. They began high school in 7th grade and are now midway through their senior year, so they have actually been in high school for 5 and a half years.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There's a difference between being at the same school and being in high school. For most students, high school is 4-years long (9th-12th grade). When I was in kindergarten, I went to a K-12 school. If I graduated from that school, I wouldn't have said I was in high school for 13 years.
It's openly stated numerous times beginning with season 2 when they are in 7th grade that they are now in high school. The school is even called John Adams High School, and not something like John Adams K-12 or anything like that. I remember being baffled by this growing up, because high school for me did not begin until 9th grade, and even then, we didn't attend an actual high school until 10th grade. It may be unconventional compared to real life, but the show firmly established that they were in high school starting with 7th grade.
22nd Jun 2020
The X-Files (1993)
Corrected entry: At The End of the episode Scully handcuffs Tooms to the bathtub and Mulder says "he's not gonna get his quota this year" and Tooms seemingly accepts his capture. Given that he can stretch his whole body (and as specifically shown in the episode, his hands/fingers) couldn't Tooms have escaped from the handcuffs?
Correction: He probably could have, but it's not something he can do instantly, and he also has a gun drawn on him. He likely decided it would be better to bide his time and escape later, which he eventually does.
I doubt that's what the filmmakers intended you to think though. It's a slip in the writing.
And how do you know what the filmmakers were thinking? They obviously intended to use the character again since he appears later in the season. If you could slip out of handcuffs, but a federal agent was pointing their gun at you, would you risk death or try to escape at a later time?
Yeh, I'm not gonna pretend that this mistake was solid. Fair enough.
8th Mar 2017
The Sixth Sense (1999)
Question: Could Anna see ghosts? Why was she shivering in the closet and then ran out of it in fear? Also in the end why was she shivering and answering Malcolm? Was she ignoring him all the time?
Chosen answer: No, she can't see ghosts...no one but Cole can. But it is established that everyone can feel the "chilling" effect of the ghosts, and feel an inexplicable coldness in their presence. Naturally, this freaks them out, so it's natural Anna (and everyone else) would run from it. At the end, she wasn't answering Malcolm, just as throughout the film what appears to be her ignoring him is simply her not being aware of his presence. She's merely talking in her sleep, and Malcolm, as he does every other time, mistakes this for a direct interaction...until he realises the truth.
Actually I do believe she was answering him. Cole told him to go talk to her while she slept. After finding out ghosts come to him for help, this is Cole helping Malcolm. It's possible Cole knew it is possible for ghosts to communicate with other people this way.
Actually I believe the cellar is just cold in the first scene. Instead, I think she is spooked and thinks something is odd since Vincent was actually in the cellar hiding when she was down there. At some point afterwards he snuck up to the bathroom before being confronted by Malcolm. Any other interaction between Anna and the cold is likely the sensation of being near a ghost though.
Animals could sense them too, or at least the ones in paranormal activity can.
Paranormal Activity has nothing to do with this movie.
21st Jun 2020
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Question: How did the inmates on rooftops manage to get their hands on beer?
Answer: It was given to them by the guards.
But isn't beer banned in prisons?
Andy gives Hadley (the head guard) financial advice on how to keep a large sum of money, which he (Hadley) received as an inheritance. Andy, being an accountant, offers to do all the necessary tax work, in exchange for three beers apiece for his fellow inmates. Hadley agrees, and arranges for the beer to be delivered and given to them. (All of this is shown in the scene immediately prior to that in which the inmates are drinking beer).
Answer: Under all but rare circumstances, alcoholic beverages are not allowed in US prisons, which was also the case in 1949, when this scene takes place; the significance of this scene is to establish that Andy began to enjoy special privileges while incarcerated, which is also how he eventually got the warden to allow him to establish the prison library.
3rd Nov 2003
The Simpsons (1989)
Corrected entry: When Lisa mocks Bart in French, she sings, "Vous êtes Baby Stinkbreath." However, "Vous êtes" is the formal construction. A person would not use this when speaking to his or her brother, especially when deliberately being disrespectful towards him. "Tu es," the informal form, would be more appropriate.
Correction: Lisa may still be learning, and it's an easy mistake to make.
28th Oct 2014
Saw 3D (2010)
Question: What happens to Bobby Dagen after he fails to save his wife from being incinerated?
Answer: We are never told or shown, but it could be speculated that he was trapped in the building or died from his injuries.
19th May 2020
Boy Meets World (1993)
Janitor Dad - S4-E6
Deliberate mistake: Chet comes home from his first day as school janitor brandishing a paycheck, which impresses his wife and in turn changes Shawn's mind about Chet working at the school. Being that it was Chet's first day on the job, there's no way he would already have received a paycheck. Even if it was payday, his employment would have begun on the first day of the next pay period.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's possible it was pay for training or orientation days that were before his official start date.
5th Feb 2005
Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
Question: Who is the woman on the bike that rides up and meets Uncle Rico toward the end of the movie? Is she Tammy, his previously mentioned girlfriend? If so, what is the significance of this scene and why is this her only part?
Answer: It is his girlfriend. He doesn't mention ever having been married and instead said that he broke up with his girlfriend.
Answer: I believe it was his estranged wife coming back to him. The only significance is that 'in the end, everything will be ok.'
21st Oct 2018
Common mistakes
Factual error: When the police are on the phone with a suspect who is using a landline and they try to keep them on the line long enough to trace the number and location. If the film takes place after the advent of Caller ID, then this information would be available instantly.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
8th Apr 2020
Common mistakes
Factual error: In almost every movie from the introduction of sound on to present day, lightning and thunder happen simultaneously, while in reality there's always a delay between the former and the latter.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Hardly always, if the lightning hits right in front of you you hear the thunder immediately. I'd say from about 100 meters you perceive it as instantly, as it's only 0.3 seconds between flash and thunder.
This is a mistake about in almost all movies, not in all thunderstorms. The common mistake in the movies is when lightning isn't hitting 100m away from the character, but the sound is still instantaneous.
I assume it's about thunderstorms in movies. Name an example.
Instant thunder (even at a considerable distance of miles from the lightning or explosion source) is, indeed, a common and probably deliberate error in most films. The reasoning for it is simple: a prolonged and realistic delay between lightning and thunder could change a 1-second shot into a 6-second shot, for example, compromising the director's intended pace and mood for the scene. Steven Spielberg films have utilized both instant and delayed thunder. In "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," for example, when the UFOs zoom out into the distant background (certainly miles away) in a wide landscape shot, they produce a lightning effect in the clouds that is simultaneously heard as thunder. But in "Poltergeist" (a Spielberg film directed by Tobe Hooper), there is a very deliberate scene of characters realistically counting the seconds between distant lightning and resulting thunder. Choosing to obey physics or not is a matter of the director's artistic license.
I posted this while I was watching Death in Paradise, episode 7 of the third season, but really, you have never seen in pretty much any horror or cheap slasher movie whenever there's a storm, the flash of a lightning coming at the *same* time as a thunder jumpscare sound? It's vastly spoofed, even, when some ugly/creepy/terrifying character makes its appearance. One example randomly picked? Dracula by Coppola, in the first 10 minutes, carriage, lightning in the distance, not even a split second after, rumble. In RL it would reach you a couple seconds later. But really, it's such a movie archetype, I am sure you can find it in any Dracula movie.
The Dracula example doesn't really show how far away the lightning is, it could right above them. It's fake as hell, I agree with that, but the fact there is lightning and thunder at the same time without actually seeing the distance is not a mistake to me. It's also highly unnatural lightning as it only happens twice and then nothing, it's not even raining. It's obviously meant to be caused by the evil surrounding the place. The idea is there is constant lightning right on top of them.
There's a scene in Judge Dredd where every few seconds, there is a flash of lightning instantly accompanied by the sound of thunder. It happens frequently in Sleepy Hollow as well.
I know the scenes you are referring to. In both those instances you have no idea about the distance of this lightning. It could be (and probably is) right on top of them. You can hear that from the typical high sharpness of the sound, only heard when the flash is very close. Thunderclouds are never very high in the air so even the rumbling within the cloud itself can be heard, sometimes you don't even see lightning when it rumbles (yet there is). It's a bit far fetched but you could hear a rumbling or the thunder from a previous flash and mistake it for the flash you see at the same time. Can happen when there are continuous flashes.
26th Apr 2020
The Simpsons (1989)
Oh, Brother, Where Are Thou? - S2-E15
Question: How exactly did the production of Homer's car bankrupt Herb? If Herb, as a highly successful car manufacturer, was spending so much money spoiling Marge and the kids that an $82,000 price tag for making a car was enough of a straw to break the camel's back, wouldn't he have gone bankrupt sooner than later anyway?
Answer: It wasn't the cost of one car, but that they'd produced thousands of Homer's ridiculous vehicles, which they'd marketed as a family car, but cost five times as much as a new car at the time. No one would buy them and the company went under.
Wasn't the car just a demo though? How would they have been able to produce thousands of cars in such a short amount of time?
Big difference between a "demo" or prototype car compared to a launch car. The dealers must have stock available of the launch car so people can actually buy them straight away.
14th Oct 2019
Toy Story 4 (2019)
Other mistake: When Jessie pops the tire on the RV, Bonnie's dad gets upset and says "I just bought it." Throughout the rest of the film however, he says the RV is a rental.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Not exactly a mistake considering he bought a rental.
Suggested correction: At best it's a character mistake. As he was exasperated as Bonnie's mother says to her "Daddy's going to use some words" apparently meaning he was going to swear.
If it's a character mistake, it's still a mistake, so no correction is needed. I think it's a valid other mistake because it's the screen writers flipping back between owning and renting, but not an actual plot hole. I've been exasperated with a rental before and never in my anger or frustration said I bought the rented item.
25th Aug 2008
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
Character mistake: Sarah is a trained expert with predatory animals. But when her jacket is covered with blood (and not just any blood, the blood of the infant T-rex), and they're in a forest surrounded with carnivorous dinosaurs, and she knows that they need to pass through Velociraptor territory, and she thinks that the T-rex might follow them, she doesn't think to take the jacket off. And the others, who also happen to be hunters who would surely know that the blood would attract predators, don't say anything about it.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While you are right, it's still not that much of a mistake because not only does it tie into the Butterfly Effect from the first movie, but also maybe Roland used it to his advantage, meaning an opportunity to shoot the Buck Rex since using its baby didn't work.
You're really grasping at straws on this one. The top priority for everyone at this point is to find safe shelter. A bunch of dinosaur experts aren't going to jeopardize that by allowing someone in their group to walk through dangerous territory with blood-soaked clothing, and Roland isn't going to risk the lives of other people to hunt the T-rex. This is just bad writing by the filmmakers, plain and simple.
What butterfly effect?
He's talking about when Ian Malcolm was explaining chaos theory and used the term "butterfly effect." But like Phaneron said, the person was really grasping as straws and this scene has nothing to do with what Malcom was talking about.
Suggested correction: I don't think this is actually a mistake. Yes Sarah's jacket is covered in blood from the baby T-Rex, but as you say they've got to pass through Velociraptor territory. In JP3 it was noted that the T-Rex pee keeps smaller dinosaurs away but actually attracts the Spinosaurus. The scent of the T-Rex blood could actually also have the same effect as the pee at keeping the smaller dinosaurs away.
8th Apr 2020
The Incredible Hulk (1996)
The Return of the Beast: Part 2 - S1-E2
Factual error: When Betty's humvee breaks down in the middle of the desert, she gets out and steps over a scorpion. The scorpion is shown to have 10 legs (4 standard legs and 2 pincers). Scorpions have 8 legs.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: A scorpion's pedipalps (their pincers) are not legs. Scorpions and other arachnids have 8 legs and 2 pedipalps.
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: That's just your opinion, not a stupidity in the show.
lionhead