Plot hole: They're in the Clam complaining that they can't drink when they make the revelation that Brian can because he's technically 56. But Quagmire should be able to drink, as in a much earlier episode, he's revealed to be over 60.
ctown28
4th Mar 2016
Family Guy (1999)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Quagmire considers the rest of them to be his best friends. He isn't drinking because they can't drink. He is complaining because since his friends can't drink - he won't drink, so he is still pissed.
It's still a plot hole considering Quagmire's age. I think the writers messed up big time.
You make a good point, but it's awkward to be that one person who is drinking while surrounded by people who can't. So, I understand the correction that was submitted above. Because his friends are not drinking, he now feels that he can't.
19th Oct 2023
Goodfellas (1990)
Other mistake: Even though this is a fictional event of how Billy Batts was murdered, he was a made man in the Gambino Crime Family. So, it doesn't make sense for him to have a party of him coming home from prison at a rival family's establishment, meaning Henry Hill's club, which was a Lucchese Crime family hangout. He would have had the celebration on his own turf, around his own family.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While there is no way to prove how factual it actually is, this is almost exactly the way the real-life Henry Hill told the story in the mafia memoir, Wiseguy. The only differences being that Batts was not killed that night, but a couple of weeks later, and Henry did not own the club, Jimmy did.
Well, that isn't at all the disagreement here. My only concern was, why was a Gambino made man having a party at a rival family's establishment and not on their own turf? That's the blooper here.
23rd Nov 2018
American Horror Story (2011)
Plot hole: It's been established that if you die on the property, you remain as a ghost for all of eternity. However, in Season 8, Moira's bones are retrieved and buried in a cemetery so that her ghost can escape and join her mother. However not all the ghost's bones are buried on the property, we know for sure that the Black Dahlia was not buried on the property and it's not likely Tate, Vivian, Ben or some of the others are buried on the property as well so they should not be tied to the house.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Tate's victims from the school shooting are ghosts who can move between different locations. There's nothing to suggest that the ghost of the Black Dahlia isn't merely choosing to be in the Murder House rather than being tied to it. The same goes for Vivien and Ben, since Violet is going to stay in the house, so might they.
26th Apr 2021
Family Guy (1999)
And Then There Were Fewer - S9-E1
Question: Near the end, Angela, Peter's boss, states that she killed Muriel after she noticed Angela place Priscilla in Tom's room, which still doesn't explain what happen when Muriel disappeared during a blackout. What happened to her? Because before she casually walks by when she notices Angela.
Answer: Because she pretended to be the killer, in order for her and Stewie to find out who the real killer was, who turns out to be Peter's boss, Angela.
This is incorrect. Angela was not even in the episode. The killer was originally thought to be Tom Tucker until Lois discovered it was Diane at the end of the episode.
7th Jan 2023
Married... with Children (1987)
Im-Po-Dent - S2-E19
Corrected entry: Steve is having dinner in bed. He asks Marcy for the salt. She brings it to him, and he puts a tiny pinch on his potatoes. Takes a small bite then puts his napkin over the food. He didn't even eat any of it! Just took a few bites of potatoes.
Correction: Steve deliberately did this to punish Marcy for damaging his car. As seen at the end of the episode, Al had been giving Steve ways to not only fake his impotence but, also ideas on how to torture Marcy. This was most likely one of Al's ideas.
I know he wanted the salt just for a pinch to make Marcy mad. My entry isn't addressing this. Steve had a whole plate of food and didn't eat any of it. Just a bite of potatoes.
21st Jun 2009
Animal House (1978)
Other mistake: When Pinto throws rocks at the mayor's daughter's window, the first two rocks bounce off the window and don't get her attention. The third rock supposedly breaks the window. If you watch closely, you'll see the rock bounce off the window while a glass breaking sound is heard. Likewise, when the mayor's daughter opens the window, it is intact.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
12th May 2022
Speed (1994)
Question: Why did Jack think the only option available with the gap in the freeway was to jump it? Wouldn't it have made more sense for him to at least try to ring Payne and explain what was happening? A simple "We've ran out of road, could you disable the bomb whilst we turn round" - Payne could still detonate it remotely so it's not like they could use that opportunity to unload the passengers.
Answer: I'm curious why you think Payne would do anything to make it easier for Jack? He's set a bomb with the express intention of killing people if his demands aren't met...why would he give Jack even the slightest chance of escaping that? And even if he was willing to, just because Payne can detonate the bomb remotely doesn't mean he can disarm it temporarily, then turn it back on.
Because the odds of the bus making that jump intact were incredibly small - if the bus blows up because of an infrastructure issue, Payne gets nothing.
Answer: Payne is a raging psychopath. As long as he's alive, he can make more bombs.
17th Jun 2020
The Incredible Hulk (1996)
Darkness and Light: Part 1 - S1-E11
Plot hole: When Hulk and Banner have been physically separated by the nutrient bath, they are both wearing tattered pants. Given that Hulk and Banner were previously occupying the same body, this should not be possible. Hulk was the one that went into the nutrient bath, so if Banner's body was separated from Hulk, then Banner should be naked.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It was done deliberately as a form of censorship. They didn't want to show Bruce's genitals.
Explaining why the mistake occurred doesn't invalidate it. Unless you're suggesting the nutrient bath also was able to duplicate the pants.
You realise a character can be drawn naked without actually showing their genitals (and/or breasts in the case of women), right? The Little Mermaid is a good example of this.
25th Feb 2022
The Simpsons (1989)
Question: I, like Marge, don't know much about football. Why is Homer disappointed to own the Denver Broncos team? I know his first choice was owning the Dallas Cowboys, but he seems to especially dislike the Broncos.
Answer: I don't think the writers had anything particular in mind when choosing the Denver Broncos to be the butt of the joke. But I wonder if it's meant to be a clue where Springfield is. But, while this episode did air late 1996 when the Broncos had a winning season, given the amount of time needed to produce the episode, it was written when the Broncos were a mediocre team at best. From '92-'95 they had a 32-32 record and never finished higher than 3rd in their division. And the Cowboys and Broncos are in separate conferences, so they're not particularly rivals. But as Phaneron points out, the Broncos ended up winning back-to-back Super Bowls in the following 2 season after this episode aired, so Homer is a very lucky guy.
Probably also worth mentioning that by the time this episode had aired, the Broncos had an 0-4 record in the Super Bowl, and to this day I believe they hold the record for most Super Bowl losses.
The Buffalo Bills also had an 0-4 record at the time of airing having lost 4 straight years.
The Vikings are also 0-4 in the Super Bowl. The Patriots have 5 losses (although only had 1 at the time this episode aired).
True, and they would have been a funnier pick for Homer to end up owning, given that two consecutive of those four Super Bowl losses were to the Cowboys. Although Homer fantasizing about being John Elway in the episode Cape Feare makes his disdain for the Broncos rather funny.
17th Jun 2014
Family Ties (1982)
Corrected entry: Mr. Tedesco tells Elyse he had Mallory in his class "last year." Considering Mallory is two years younger than Alex and that this was "last year", even if Alex is now a senior, Mallory would have been in the 9th grade at the time she was in Tedesco's class. Most likely she wasn't in high school quite yet, as schools in the 80's were 10th though 12th grade.
Even though nowadays it's more common to find high school as being 9th-12th grade practically everywhere, it probably depends on what area geographically in the 80s you were in. In my town, ALL high schools were 10th-12th all over the city for many years until around the late 90s when it changed. So it is a draw as if this entry was technically right or wrong.
5th Sep 2021
Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982)
Question: Who is the actor sitting with Sean Penn and Eric Stoltz at the diner early on when they take their shirts off?
Answer: Nicolas Cage or as he's credited in the cast, Nicholas Coppola.
This is incorrect. Nicolas Cage plays one of Brad's friends and co-worker. The third stoner buddy was played by Anthony Edwards.
15th Jan 2005
Family Guy (1999)
Corrected entry: In the scene where Peter and the delegates of the UN are in the meeting room, when everyone laughs at Peter, you can see that some of the country names on the labels are spelled wrong. For example, there is "Danmark", "Maxico", and "Morrocco". Also, it looks like three of the seats are not filled. Why would there not be any UN delegates at the meeting?
Correction: The misspelling is certainly intentional.
Why would it be?
8th Dec 2004
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Corrected entry: At the book signing in Berlin, the camera pans from right to left and the guard at the very end of the line of soldiers (to the left) has his left hand raised in military salute to Hitler. All the other soldiers have their right hands extended.
Correction: The person in question could have an injured right arm that he simply can't lift.
Exactly. "If physical disability prevented raising the right arm, it was acceptable to raise the left." Kershaw, Ian (2001). The "Hitler Myth": Image and Reality in the Third Reich. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0192802064.
There's nothing about it in the script though. So between the two options, on the one hand (no pun intended!) that the creators were aware of that fact, and on the other hand, that it was a movie mistake that wasn't noticed, well... There's no possible reason why they'd put that in deliberately. Still, Jon decides, and the rules seem to be that behavioural oddities are not generally considered mistakes.
But not every single bit of background extra behaviour gets detailed in the script. The point is simply that based on what we see there's no way to decree something like this as a "mistake", because it has a perfectly reasonable in-universe explanation, and there's no point having an endless chain of bickering about it.
So just to summarise: the "perfectly reasonable explanation" is, then, that some random bystander has an extremely convincing prosthetic arm (which serves no purpose at all for he story); and NOT that one of the many "extras" simply made a mistake.
20th May 2014
Friends (1994)
The One With The Embryos - S4-E12
Character mistake: After the guys have beaten the girls in the quiz, Rachel refuses to move apartments and Monica says: "If we had lost, we would have made them get rid of the birds." But they did lose. That's why the guys have got their apartment. She should have said if we had won.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
21st Sep 2020
Joker (2019)
Question: Why was this movie so controversial?
Answer: In a nutshell, it's because the film's protagonist is a mentally disturbed killer, and certain groups in America thought the film's violence would lead to copycat behavior.
I never got this aspect of the controversy, if anything, it goes to show what can happen when mental illness goes untreated.
I agree with you on that, but unfortunately, there's so many people, at least in the United States, that have no sense of nuance and are prone to knee-jerk reactions. They would rather condemn and blame different kinds of media for society's ills, rather than stop and look at the message something is trying to tell.
I read about the concern over possible copycat behavior in an on-line article; Phaneron's answer is correct.
Answer: Because the left thought it would encourage violence and mocked liberal run cities.The right thought the same on violence, it seemingly justified a mentally ill guy's actions, that it made white businessmen bad guys. Both sides in general only complained about Joker for attention.
22nd Feb 2017
Psycho II (1983)
Question: Who was doing the killings before Norman finally snapped?
Chosen answer: The murderer is Emma Spool, Norman's biological mother. She was killing people because she didn't want anybody harming Norman.
Emma was not Norman's biological mother. She was the sister of Norma (and Norman's aunt) and jealous that Mr. Bates chose Norma over her and thought Norman should have been the son she and Mr. Bates were suppose to have. Later, while still mentally ill, she believed Norman was her son and told Norman this.
Emma Spool was, in fact, Norman's biological mother. It was revealed at the end of the movie that she is his real mother and Norma Bates is her sister who adopted Norman and raised him While Emma was institutionalized.
Again, that was just Emma being delusional and/or lying. Tracy Venable tells Norman the truth in Psycho III. Emma was never his mother.
I never knew Emma Spool was Norman's biological mother. In fact, I never heard of Emma Spool. Thanks.
11th Jul 2020
The Sopranos (1999)
Question: What was with that series finale ending scene? Did Tony die or not? Did they do this to be open for interpretation?
Answer: The ending is purposely ambiguous and open to interpretation. The series creator once said: "There's more than one way of looking at the ending. That's all I'll say." He's also refused to outright explain what the ending meant.
21st Jun 2017
Home Alone (1990)
Factual error: Kate flies American Airlines to Scranton, but that airline did not serve Scranton in 1990. Also, a DC-10 is too big to be serviced at Scranton.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Air Force One, which is quite a bit larger than a DC-10, has landed at Scranton in the past (https://wnep.com/2013/08/22/air-force-one-lands-in-scranton/). Just because DC-10s don't generally land there doesn't mean they can't.
They are much more likely to make an exception for Air Force One than the are for a single family unless it was for something wrong with the flight or an emergency on the flight, not for a connecting flight to Chicago or a chance at a connecting flight.
The idea is that DC-10s can land there for whatever reason.
Kate landed at Dallas first, then flew to Scranton. This is revealed in Kate's rant at the ticket agent.
Air Force One would park at GA parking, not at the terminal. The DC-10 that lands would have very likely parked at a gate for only 737s and smaller.
10th Aug 2016
Star Wars (1977)
Stupidity: The Death Star comes equipped with a powerful tractor beam capable of capturing a ship the size and agility of the Millennium Falcon. Why don't they use it against the rebel fighters attacking them at the end of the film? Okay, Obi-Wan Kenobi turned it off earlier but I find it hard to believe that someone who has never before visited the largest, most complex space station in the Universe and who was previously unaware of its very existence can disable a fundamental security system but the people who designed, built and run the whole thing can't work out how to switch it back on. They should have no problems with this, considering the fact that Obi-Wan didn't damage it.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Obi Wan disrupted the battle at a critical time causing much confusion. We could chalk this oversight up to "Fog of War" - that in the heat of battle it's normal for commanders to overlook obvious things and seem to act stupidly. It would also be reasonable to assume that the fighters were too close for the tractor beam emitter to target them.
This scenario would require every single person on the Death Star who was involved in the maintenance of vital defence systems not noticing that one of them had been switched off! Not ONE person noticed? Obi Wan did not disable the tractor beam during "the heat of battle." There was a considerable time lapse between his switching off the tractor beam and the climactic final battle, during which time it would have been switched back on. When the Millenium Falcon leavs the Death Star Han Solo remarks that he hopes that "old man" succeeded in disabling the tractor beam, implying that those on the Death Star would be trying to use it. Even then, they didn't notice it had been switched off? Not sabotaged, not disabled, switched off.
Good point. This was definitely stupidity on the part of the Death Star crew, but not stupid as a plot point. It does happen in combat regularly. In 1987 the USS Stark was hit by 2 Iraqi Exocet missiles after challenging a single fighter. The ships' Close-in Weapons System should have easily shot the missiles down, but the investigation showed that no-one had noticed that the system had not been turned on.
They didn't use the tractor beam when the gang was escaping in the Falcon because they WANTED them to get away. The Empire placed a tracking beacon onboard so as to be able to find the hidden Rebel Base. As to how the Falcon was snagged originally: yes, they had just exited hyperspace, but they were not relatively fast; they were preoccupied with the TIE fighter (incapable of light speed) and the small moon right up to the point they were trapped in the tractor beam (and realizing "that's no moon!"
Suggested correction: The Falcon was travelling towards the Death Star when it was caught in the tractor beam. The tractor beam was properly turned back on by the time it travelled to Yavin. The rebel fighters are too small and quick to be held in a tractor beam and there are so many of them so it would be near impossible to trap enough to make a difference.
As I have already pointed out, assigning technical limitations to a wholly fictional piece of technology is absurd. As to "flying towards the Death Star" - the X and Y wing fighters are shown doing just that. As for being too quick, the Millenium Falcon is decelerating from superluminal speeds when it is captured in the tractor beam. That's pretty bloody fast in anyone's books.
It's flat out stated by General Dodonna in the battle briefing that the Death Star's defenses are based around repelling attacks by capital ships, not fighters. The targeting may not be exact enough.
Actually, claiming a fictional piece of equipment can't behave the way you think it should is somewhat silly. The previous explanation that the tractor beam's limitations were the reason for not using it during the battle makes perfect sense.
14th Mar 2019
Captain Marvel (2019)
Corrected entry: In the scenes set in June of 1995, "Vers" uses a Windows 95 computer to search the internet via dial-up. Windows 95 wasn't released until August 24, 1995, two months after those scenes were set.
Correction: A beta version of Windows 95 (probably build 347) was released before June, when this takes place. They could be using that. It included MSN, for internet access.
Good guess. That preview version was available for $19.95 in the U.S.
I think that's a reach - especially back then beta versions were much harder to come by - you couldn't just download it, you'd have to apply and receive a CD or floppies. She's in an internet cafe if memory serves, and why would they go to the hassle of installing a beta OS which most people would never have used before, and which would run the risk of having bugs, etc.?
Windows 95 had one of the most expensive advertisements and launch programs to this date. (Second to Windows 8's.) Microsoft had special personnel known as Evangelists who went to potential customers encouraging them to test Windows 95 and give feedback. They didn't send the 3.5" diskettes with post; the Evangelists delivered them personally. Microsoft didn't become a software giant by sitting on its behind, waiting for customers.
Correction: The month is never specified in the film.
True Lies was released on home video on July 15th - any cardboard standee in a Blockbuster would be for an upcoming or very recent release. By late August something else would have replaced it.
When they're looking at the black box recording, there's a calendar on the wall that reads June.
Correction: The recycle bin icon on the desktop is an oval shape which was first introduced in Windows ME, which wasn't released until 14th September 2000.
The corrected entry mentions a scene searching the internet via dial-up; the computer in that scene has indeed Windows 95 with a square-shaped bin. Since then this entry has kinda been more about the plausibility of Windows 95 in a public internet cafe in June than anything else. There's a separate entry about the scene when they use a totally different computer, the one at her friend's house, which has the bin you mention and is a ME edition.
It's not, it's the rectangular bin.
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.