Continuity mistake: In the library scene Indy discovers the "X" high up on the balcony. The X is green with a grey background. When he breaks the tile to find the tomb the X has become a faint outline on the floor. (00:27:40 - 00:28:45)
kaevanoff
6th Aug 2009
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You still can see one "leg" of the X on the floor, it's only darker than viewed from above because the camera angle and illumination set used.
I think it is meant to be an optical illusion.
The "X" is first shown as a dark green "X" on a beige background. Next, we are shown the same dark green "X" that is barely visible over a green background. I think we are meant to understand that the beige square tiles were lifted away in a cut scene.
I see no reason why they would replace the floor just for the higher shot, it's the same floor throughout the scene. When they enter it's the same floor we see later as they are going into the hole. It's probably not a real marble floor, so they can use a styrofoam or plywood tile that Harrison can lift, one that matches the surrounding tiles. They don't shine as much as the rest of the floor. In the shot up high there is different lighting, so that could explain it. It just appears to be different. Of course, sudden different light can be seen as a revealing mistake.
Suggested correction: Not a mistake, just a different viewing angle.
It's not just the viewing angle. The "X" is gilt-colored and bright but becomes extremely muted, almost a shadow when viewed at the lower angle. Another possible reason for the different appearance is the patterned perimeter. It too appears to be a very different color and muted. It's possible that in post-production, the scene processing done by the cinematography team adjusted the lower angle scene for a change in light levels due to close-ups, the time of day, or some other factor.
21st Jan 2015
The Godfather: Part II (1974)
Factual error: When Michael meets with Hyman Roth at his home in Florida the television is on and you can hear the announcer calling a USC/Notre Dame game. The meeting takes place in the late 1950's, but the announcer is Tom Kelly, a long time USC announcer who didn't start calling their games until the 1960's.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The announcer calls out Don Buford and Luther Hayes. These players were on USC's roster together only in 1958. Therefore, the game must be the 1958 matchup that Notre Dame won 20-13. This is not a factual error.
The announcer has the voice of Tom Kelly, who did not announce USC games until the early '60's.
The point is that given the announcer heard is calling a real game from 1958, it's almost certainly the actual announcer from that game. There'd be no point in hiring Tom Kelly to call a fake game. The announcer must just sound like him, but be someone else. Tom Kelly isn't in the credits, which he would be if he was specifically cast in that role.
31st Aug 2020
The Great Escape (1963)
Stupidity: When the Hilts discover they're 20' short of the trees, why wouldn't he "dirty up" his white/light tan pants so the tower lights wouldn't expose him so easily?
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Because he would look scruffy and dirty once he got out. He was the Cooler King and knew his way around after all.
I would suggest in the reality of the escape, light colored clothing would not have been worn so as to blend in to the night and the surrounding environment better. The light slacks were strictly for artistic reasons.
30th Nov 2020
The Hunt for Red October (1990)
Corrected entry: This could be an error done on purpose to simplify the audience understanding. When the Russian Alpha fires on the Red October towards the movie's end, the torpedo's course is stated as 315. Ramius then tells Ryan to steer the sub to a course of 315 to head into the torpedo. That's wrong. If the torpedo were on a bearing of 315, the sub would need to be on a bearing of 135 to be heading directly into it.
Correction: The torpedo fired at Red October is reported at bearing 315. Then Red October seers a course of 315. That is accurate to set a collision course with the torpedo.
How? Both objects would then be on a heading of 315 thereby going in the same direction, not heading into each other. If the torpedo was traveling on a bearing of 315, the reciprocal heading would be 180° opposite, or 135.
When they detect the torpedo the Russian says there is a torpedo in the water bearing 315, meaning the torpedo is 315° from them, not that its course is 315. Ramius then orders the sub to head in the direction of 315 which is the direction they detected the torpedo as coming from.
The torpedo's bearing is 315 from the sub's position, but has a COURSE of 135, towards the sub.
16th Sep 2002
Cast Away (2000)
Corrected entry: As the plane hits the water, Chuck falls backward, toward the rear of the plane. This violates the concept of inertia. He actually would have continued traveling forward toward the incoming water.
Correction: Actually he gets thrown back by the force of the water.
15th Mar 2019
The Patriot (2000)
Corrected entry: When Benjamin Martin meets with Cornwallis about the prisoner exchange and brings the dogs in (Great Danes or otherwise), Cornwallis refers to them as "boys." The black dog is female.
Correction: "Boy" for dogs is gender neutral. A lot of owners of female dogs call it a boy. Certainly with 2 dogs you'd never say "come boy and girl."
I have 3 dogs, 1 male, 2 female. No one in the family calls them boys. Sorry but I don't buy that explanation. I think it was just a miss.
1 example, an example where the females are the majority. Not really a good example I'd say. Again, "boys" is gender neutral. Also, he says it once, just once. Are you saying it is not possible for someone to call a male and female dog "boys"? It's not a movie mistake.
It is entirely possible that the film-makers chose to have a female dog play a male dog. For example, in the TV show Lassie, Lassie is played by a male collie even though it is well-established that Lassie is a female. A more recent example is the reverse, where on the CBS show Seal Team, there is a dog on there named Cerberus who is male, but is in fact played by a female named Dita.
It should be noted that people have submitted mistakes for the wrong sexed animal being used (i.e. a male dog playing a female). But really to be considered a character mistake, it would have to be out of character for the person calling a female (or male) animal "boy" (or "girl"). Calling a male and female dog "boys" doesn't seem out of character enough to be a mistake.
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.