Other mistake: Prior to the fight, it showed the champ at 33-0 with 30 KOs, but they stated pre-fight that he has never been the distance in any of his fights.
Bishop73
30th May 2020
Rocky Balboa (2006)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Only the ref can stop a fight. If a cornerman throws in the towel, that won't stop the fight unless the ref decides it does indeed need to be stop. When the ref stops a fight early, that's recorded as a KO for the winner's ring record.
25th Nov 2002
The Rookie (2002)
Corrected entry: In the game at the end, there is a shot of the scoreboard. If you look closely, you will see that the numbers on the scoreboard don't add up right.
Correction: The numbers on the scoreboard don't add up right, showing the Rangers scoring two runs in the first, two in the second, and one in the fifth, for a total of eight runs. But the bottom of the sixth, which was still active at the time of the shot of the scoreboard, (it's also the inning Jim Morris gets into the game) yielded three runs, which was included in the eight totals runs column but not yet in the inning-by-inning columns.
Correction: When I paused the movie on the scoreboard, Tampa Bay scored once in the 2nd and four in the 3rd. The Rangers scored once in the 1st and three in the 3rd. The announcer says "Rangers 3, Devil Rays 1 here in the bottom of the sixth." The scoreboard also shows its only the 3rd inning when the announcer says it's the 6th.
Correction: The Rangers were actually up 6-1 with two outs in the seventh. They won game by the same score.
The problem is the scoreboard shows Rangers up 8-1 at the bottom of the 8th, even though the runs only add up to 5-1. And when we're told it's the 6th inning, long shots of the field, the scoreboard shows its still the 3rd inning.
18th Aug 2013
The Natural (1984)
Other mistake: In Roy Hobbs' last at bat of the movie he takes the 1st pitch for a called strike (confirmed by closed captioning). The 2nd pitch is called a ball. The Pittsburgh manager then decides to change pitchers with the count at 1-1. The relief pitcher's 1st pitch is fouled into the press box making the count 1 ball and 2 strikes. The 2nd pitch from the relief pitcher is swung on and missed, and should be strike 3. Hobbs stays in the box and hits a long fly ball foul and hits a HR on the next pitch. Roy Hobbs should have struck out. (02:06:20 - 02:12:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Like most umpire calls, the ump's wording of "Ball" on the first pitch isn't obvious until you hear the difference in the first "Strike" call. The count was not 1 and 1 when they brought in the new pitcher, it was 2 and 0.
If the umpire called the first pitch a ball then why does the closed captioning say strike?
Mistake in captioning and also by the announcer. If you look at the ball as it passes Roy, it is head high and the catcher has to reach to his left to catch the ball. Clearly, Levinson called for the pitch to be a ball. Ball one.
It's not a mistake in captioning because after the Umpire calls it a Strike, you can hear the announcer say "Strike One", it's low because of the crowd noise but he says it. It's even in the Director's Cut, then magically on the next pitch the count changes and the announcer says "Ball Two"
You can also hear the radio announcer say strike.
The man calling the game over the radio said it was a strike. However, the pitch was up at eye level and a ball. The ump sounds like he's saying "ball" and the Pirates' coach looks upset at the pitcher, which seems fitting for a pitched ball.
The "Strike!" closed captioning is wrong, and later the announcer's audio (although not shown on closed captioning) says "Ball two," which is why the manager calls for a pitching change.
The closed captioning always gets words wrong! Always! Gotta watch that. That being said I'm here bc I thought he had 4 as well.
The mistake seems valid. It does look like the ump says strike on the first pitch. The announcer even says "strike one" and then goes on to talk about how Hobbs has already struck out twice, so this has nothing to do with subtitles. Watching this on Netflix you can tell the word "ball" has been dubbed over the word strike on the first pitch. In the book, Hobbs strikes out on his final at-bat. It seems like the film makers were going to have him strike out, which a strike on a 1-2 count after the foul would have done, but decided to change it (maybe the ending tested poorly with audiences). Rather than reshoot the whole thing, they just dubbed over the ump to make it a 2-1 count.
Makes more sense that the manager would pull the pitcher on 2-0 count vs 1-1.
The announcer also said it was a strike.
Closed captioning gets it wrong sometimes. I notice it a lot.
The closed caption not only has the umpire calling a strike, but also has the commentary saying "strike one."
Suggested correction: When the pitcher is changed, the count is 2-0.
That is not correct. It's 1-1.
28th May 2020
Crush Crush
Character mistake: In the phone call from Nova, there is one branch of the conversation that starts with the protagonist asking "Shouldn't you have used this call to contact a lawyer or something?" But the protagonist IS a lawyer (amongst many other things).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Even lawyers will almost always hire another lawyer to do criminal defense.
This correction doesn't make sense. Nova is not a lawyer, the player (whom Nova is calling) IS a lawyer. The player isn't saying something like "why are you calling a lawyer", or "shouldn't you have called a criminal defense lawyer." Nova called a lawyer and the lawyer's response was "why didn't you call a lawyer."
20th May 2020
M*A*S*H (1972)
Baby, It's Cold Outside - S7-E9
Factual error: As Hawkeye performs CPR on the hypothermic soldier, he pumps his arms from his ellbows. CPR is done by keeping the arms stiff and pumping with the whole upper body. Hawkeye as a surgeon would know that. Fun Fact: You can perform CPR one-handed in a pinch, but only as long as you keep your arms stiff.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: True, but doing CPR the real way is going to likely seriously injure the actor it is being performed upon.
Explaining why mistakes occur does not invalidate them.
Chest compressions can definitely be performed by pumping from the elbow, one or two handed. The first documented use was in 1891, so Hawkeye would be aware of it. However, modern CPR standards, including straight arm procedures, were not developed until at least 1960 by the American Heart Association. Using straight arms and bending at the hips uses the larger muscle groups of the core and legs, which provides more control, as well as stamina. This is not an error for the Korean War era.
Additionally, what Lorg said - you don't want to hurt the actor, you can see his shoulders rise as his arms straighten, giving the illusion of compressions. There is another episode where Hawkeye is performing chest compressions similarly, and yells at the unconscious patient that his arms are getting tired, which is what would happen with bent elbow compressions, and one of the reasons modern technique uses straight arms.
15th May 2020
Top Gun (1986)
Corrected entry: The call of "going ballistic" is totally wrong. Calling "we're going ballistic" is a warning call to all other aircraft that you have no control of your airplane and it's only being controlled by the laws of physics (diving, turning etc) and not the pilot.
Correction: While you are correct technically, I don't believe Goose was referring to the technical use of the phrase/term. He was using it as a indication of excitement. "My daughter went ballistic when she saw the new puppy."
The fact that you point out the mistake is correct isn't a good way to open a correction. Plus, there's no indication he's expressing "sudden excitement." On top of that, even if he did intend to say "we're excited", it would still be a character mistake to use a specific phrase that has a specific meaning out of context like you're suggesting.
I did not point out of the "mistake" is correct at all. I pointed out that what the poster stated is true (to my knowledge) about what going ballistic means in the technical flying a plane sense. However, this is not how Goose is using it. He was absolutely expressing excitement. Maverick states that they are going vertical. Goose replies "We're going ballistic Mav, go get'em." He is not saying it to alert other craft (thus the call out specifically to Mav). This was a phrase used a lot in the 80's, but not much anymore. "Dad is going to go ballistic when he finds out", or "She is going to go ballistic when we get to Disney." It expresses anger, excitement, craziness. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/go%20ballistic.
The NATO Brevity Code manual (google it), specifically mentions "going ballistic" as a the term to be used once you have lost control of your aircraft, a warning to others. It's a term that was adopted *after* the movie for expressing excitement.
When the couples are all together at the restaurant/bar (01:01:45), Carole tells Maverick, "He told me all about the time you went ballistic with Penny Benjamin" (the Admiral's daughter). So considering his wife, Carole, uses this specific slang expression it's believable that Goose also uses the slang in this way despite its "technical" use. During the earlier training mission (00:31:55), when Goose reacted to Maverick going vertical after Jester goes vertical, Goose, perhaps inappropriately, casually used the term only while speaking directly to Maverick, so if this is to be listed as any kind of mistake it would be a character mistake. This movie was released mid 1986, and excitedly "going ballistic" (just like "going bananas") was indeed a term used prior to this movie's release.
Yet, they are not losing control of the aircraft in that scene, and he is not warning other aircraft since it's not happening AMD he is only talking to Maverick (the pilot who would be well aware if they were ballistic). I don't know exactly when the term hit the main stream as a term of excitement but it's pretty clear to me that he is saying it that way. Classifying this as an error would be like saying the lines "a walk in the park Kazinsky" or "the defense department regrets to inform you that your sons are dead because they were stupid" are errors because neither is true. He wasn't reporting to anyone that they were ballistic. He was encouraging his pilot and just happened to use an aeronautical statement in his excitement.
From The Dictionary of Clichés by Christine Ammer: "It began to be used to describe human anger in the 1980s and quickly caught on." No exact date, but was used in magazine articles in the late 1980's, so probably by around 1986 it was a popular expression.
29th Jun 2018
Red Dwarf (1988)
Other mistake: When Lister inadvertently sets off the Auto Destruct sequence, the computer voice says the ship will detonate in 15 minutes. The computer then says "the ship will detonate" every five seconds followed by how much time until detonation, but the time in which the computer says this is inconsistent. Two seconds after the computer says 15 minutes, the computer says the ship will detonate in 14 minutes 55 seconds. Ten seconds after saying that, the computer says the ship will detonate in 14 minutes 50 seconds. (00:01:50)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
1st May 2020
Columbo (1971)
Character mistake: In the grocery store scene Robert Culp sits on a display of pumpkins but there are 2 signs that say watermelons.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: As a retail worker of 18 years, I know that POS (signage) mistakes happen in supermarkets, for example a product is moved and the correct POS is not replaced. This scene seems to be filmed in a real supermarket meaning this is not a mistake made by the show's producers, however if this was filmed in a studio, "Character Mistake" would be the wrong category as the mistake would have been made by the set designers.
While I've never seen mislabeled items I know mistakes can happen. But since the characters aren't real, every mistake they make is the fault of someone on the crew, whether it's the actor, writer, or set designer. For example, misspellings are considered character mistakes (unless intentional), even though it would have been made by the person who created it.
18th Aug 2018
Star Trek (1966)
Continuity mistake: When the "evil" Kirk appears, the Enterprise emblem is missing from his shirt. Then later, when he gets the brandy, the insignia is there. (00:04:45 - 00:06:20)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: When Kirk and Sulu are on the planet, they're shown not wearing the insignia. When "good" Kirk beams up, he too doesn't have the insignia. We just don't know where it came from, it could have been in their pocket.
The insignia is not removable, it's permanently attached. They wouldn't be able to remove it. The idea of a removable insignia wasn't introduced until STTNG.
While it might have been sewn on for production purposes, I saw this episode as indicating it was removable given the fact that they weren't wearing one on the planet. Plus, there have been other officers whose insignia is not sewn on in TOS.
6th May 2020
Inside Llewyn Davis (2013)
Factual error: When Llewyn is driving back to NYC from Chicago, he passes a couple signs stating that Akron, OH, is at the next exit off the highway, on US Route 80. US 80 passes exclusively through the South, from Dallas to the Atlantic Ocean in Georgia, and doesn't even come remotely close to Ohio. (01:13:58)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's Interstate 80, which does pass through Ohio, not Route 80.
The mistake is correct. It's the US Route 80 sign which has black letters on the white shield. An I-80 sign would have white letters on a red and blue shield.
28th Apr 2020
The Great Outdoors (1988)
Stupidity: John Candy was being dragged by the speedboat because he was holding the bar when the boat took off. It simply never occurred to him that letting go off the bar would have solved the problem (Of course then you wouldn't have had the speedboat scene at all but it's still pretty dumb).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Characters doing stupid things doesn't constitute a stupidity entry. That was part of the joke, that Chet spent all the time telling his son to remember to let go of the rope if something goes wrong, but then forgets his own advice in the heat of the moment. People do stupid things in real life all the time.
Well how does this not count as a Stupidity then? You just said it was and there was no need for him to stay holding onto the rope.
Stupidity is basically a minor plot hole, something small that doesn't rise to the level of an plot hole entry. Characters are still allowed to do stupid things though if it's not a plot hole (otherwise everything Lloyd and Harry do in all the Dumb and Dumber movies would be stupidity entries).
30th Oct 2017
Family Guy (1999)
Halloween on Spooner Street - S9-E4
Corrected entry: Meg goes to the party wearing a mask without her glasses on. When she's in the closet, her mask is off and she has her glasses on, even though she didn't wear them to the party. (00:06:50)
Correction: When Meg tells her mother she's dressed as a slutty cat, Meg is wearing her eyeglasses and pulls the cat mask down over her glasses, then she leaves the house. We see Meg is still wearing her glasses under her mask when Joe drives past her and her friends, right before they all enter the party.
Correction: Is it not possible that she may have had them in a pocket or somewhere and then put them on when she took the mask off?
Her costume had no pockets. It showed her leaving the house without her glasses.
But it did show her leaving with her glasses on.
Some people wear regular clothes under a costume in the event that it might have been cold. Rhode Island might be a bit cold at that time of year (I live in southern Canada and it can be very cold on Halloween) Maybe her glasses were in a pocket under the costume.
It seems like you didn't watch the scene before commenting and you're just guessing. She wasn't wearing normal clothes underneath and there were no pockets. The reason the mistake is incorrect is because, as stated, she is wearing them before she pulls her mask down and so she's wearing them under her mask when she leaves.
6th Mar 2002
The Usual Suspects (1995)
Continuity mistake: Right before they rob the police car, a Boeing 747 (four engines) is seen in shots of the plane coming into land. When the plane is shown from behind, it is a Boeing 767, with only two engines and fewer main landing gears. (00:30:10)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's for effect to show they were hanging out around the airport for more than a bit.
There's no evidence this was meant to be a montage scene of various planes. The cuts they did have in the first angle were of the same plane getting closer to build suspense. Same for the other angle. Plus, there's no scenes or shots of "them" waiting.
23rd Jan 2017
Cars (2006)
Question: At the beginning, what caused McQueen's rear tires to burst?
Chosen answer: Blown tires are common in NASCAR and usually the result of exactly what McQueen did, run too long, too fast, on old tires. They show him not taking new tires during the yellow caution, and then all the green pit stops, he only took gas. Excess heat from high speed driving can increase a tire's pressure, and with "old" tires, it couldn't handle the stress.
Absolutely incorrect. Tyres bursting in NASCAR is an absolute rarity, and it is usually caused by vehicle to vehicle contact. You cannot get a race tyre so hot that it bursts unless you start at ridiculously high pressures, which would make car impossible to drive anyway. The tyre probably had a puncture from running over debris.
That's why I used the word blown and not bursts. Obviously the film exaggerated a blown tire, but I thought that would be obvious to the viewer where everything is exaggerated.
26th Apr 2020
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Continuity mistake: When Indy is pouring the water from the Grail onto his father's wound, we see him pour all the water out. When his father takes the Grail, there's now water left inside.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Automatic refilling seems to be the least of the miracles the Grail has performed.
There was no evidence of this, plus we never see it refill before or after. How would it be empty when they first find it if it miraculously refilled itself? This is a poor correction just to make a correction.
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
Resident Evil (2002)
Factual error: When Red Queen is explaining about the T-Virus they say that fingernails and hair continue to grow after death. This is not correct, While it appears that they grow, its actually down to the tissue drying out and retracting. An article on the topic can be found here: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20130526-do-your-nails-grow-after-death A super computer that is knowle. (00:56:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The T-virus causes the hair and nails to keep growing. The nails cause scratches that can increase infection, so it benefits the T-virus.
That is not what was said at all. In the film it states that even in death, the body remains active and that hair and fingernails continue to grow, news cells are produced, and the brain holds a small electrical charge that takes months to dissipate (all of which are false). Then the T-virus provides a massive jolt to growing cells and the brain to reanimate the dead.
She says those things after they ask her what those things are. She then starts to explain how the T-virus works. She doesn't say a dead body always keeps active, she says a dead body infected with the T-virus is still active, regenerating cells, hair and fingernails continue to grow. In short, it reanimates the dead (to a degree). That's how I read it anyway.
22nd Feb 2005
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
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.
23rd Jan 2011
The Green Hornet (2011)
Corrected entry: SPOILER: In the flashback of Scanlon killing Britt's father, it is nighttime when he kills him. But Britt's father died the same day as when Britt woke up with the hot girl after the party. When Britt sees the news report about his father's death, it's daytime the same day. There was no time for Scanlon to wait till nighttime to kill him.
Correction: The flashback was shot in black and white with an angle from the top. With ample light in the scene there is not enough clues to imply that he killed his father at night. Your confusion is understandable.
You must have watched a different movie. The scene wasn't shot in black and white or from an angle from the top. The car in the background at James Reid's house has its lights on to indicate it's night.
10th Apr 2020
King of the Hill (1997)
Death of a Propane Salesman (2) - S3-E1
Question: The inspector/official Dale talks to wears a jacket with the initials RRC on it - what do they stand for?
Answer: Texas Railroad Commission. They're the agency that regulate the oil and natural gas industry, natural gas utilities, pipeline safety, and safety of the liquefied petroleum gas industry.
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.