Trivia: The world premiere of "Jurassic Park" in 1993 was organized in Washington, DC (rather than Hollywood), in hopes that newly-elected President Bill Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton would attend. Universal Studios was livid when the Clintons were a no-show at the premiere, so much so that the studio refused to provide a copy of the film when the White House later requested it for private viewing. The feud apparently cooled off within a couple of months.
Charles Austin Miller
31st Mar 2022
Jurassic Park (1993)
3rd Mar 2022
Groundhog Day (1993)
Question: At the end of the film, Phil finally wakes up in bed with Rita on the day after Groundhog Day (meaning he's finally broken out of the time-loop and temporal continuity is restored). Doesn't this necessarily imply that everything he did the day before will have repercussions for him? I mean, as far as everyone knows, Phil Connors just suddenly became a local sensation in one day, flashing a lot of money on the same day as the armored car robbery. Wouldn't Phil naturally fall under suspicion?
23rd Oct 2021
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Question: Why is there is such an absence of love in this film? Two birthdays are observed. Dr. Haywood Floyd calls his little 5-year-old daughter on Earth, wishes her happy birthday, but never once says "I love you," which seems only a natural thing for a father to tell his child. Later, astronaut Frank Poole's parents wish him happy birthday, but never once say "I love you"; rather, his father says, "Give our love to Dave (Bowman). " Nobody ever says "I love you," despite the dire circumstances.
Answer: I love this question, and I think the answer will vary, perhaps wildly, depending on who answers it. Here's mine: one of the themes of the film is that, despite these amazing leaps in technology, colonising the moon, and manned travel to distant planets, humanity has gradually become more and more like the machines we create: cold, emotionless, unfeeling. In other words, we've lost our capacity for human connection. This is why Kubrick shoots these scenes you mention in such a cold, distant way. It asks us to consider the cost that comes with technological advances that outpace our emotional development.
Good reply. Yeah, all the human dialogue in this film seems purely information-driven, if not outright expository. Cold, humorless, oddly devoid of emotion. Especially the dialogue and character of Frank Poole (played by Gary Lockwood); he shows no emotion or affection for his parents, as if only just tolerating their birthday greetings. For me, this made it difficult to feel any sense of loss when Frank Poole was later murdered by HAL. Maybe most oddly, the computer HAL seems to speak with the most emotion (desperation and fear) when Dave Bowman finally disconnects HAL's higher brain functions. I mean, that's the most poignant dialogue in the film, when the computer pleads for its life.
10th Oct 2021
Back to the Future (1985)
Question: In this film, Marty suddenly appears and spends one week in 1955. So, how does Marty freely roam the hallways and cafeteria at Hill Valley High School (even getting into a physical altercation with another student) without challenge from teachers and administrators such as Mr. Strickland? All the kids are talking about Marty, but nobody in authority questions the fact that he's not enrolled, he's completely undocumented, he doesn't attend any classes, and he's apparently a troublemaker.
Answer: High school in the 1950s was different from today, which has tight security and students are more closely scrutinized. Not every teacher, and even Strickland, knows every student, so Marty would not necessarily be immediately suspected as an outsider. And though the students are talking about Marty, that doesn't mean the adults are aware. Teens have their own closed-off society. Being as Marty was only in the past for a week, and he isn't at the school all that much, he could conceivably move about mostly unnoticed. If he was there any longer, the school would eventually wise up about him. Also, it's a movie, and suspension of disbelief is employed here. The audience just accepts the plot's premise.
Thanks. But I also remember (giving away my age) that teachers and administrators back then were very much aware of students "playing hooky" (skipping classes and wandering around the halls and off-campus during school hours). Back then there were even "truant officers" who patrolled the streets looking for school-age kids skipping school. With all of the attention to 1950s detail in this film, I was really kind of surprised that no-one apparently suspected Marty of truancy.
I also remember those days. As I mentioned, since Marty was only briefly at the high school during the one-week period he was in the past, he hadn't yet attracted enough attention to be considered a problem or a truant. It can be seen that Strickland notices Marty, but had not yet considered anything as being amiss.
22nd Sep 2021
Nobody (2021)
Audio problem: When Hutch re-enters the bus, Teddy tries to pull a gun on him. Hutch snatches up a bus grip (a pole made of lightweight, plastic-coated aluminum) and bashes Teddy into submission with it. After Teddy goes down, Hutch tosses the aluminum pole to the rubber-lined floor of the bus, but the sound it makes is that of a heavy iron pipe falling on concrete. Bad sound effects.
17th Aug 2021
Nobody (2021)
Factual error: The film begins and ends with Hutch handcuffed in custody, being interrogated by two police detectives. He was apprehended at the scene of a major violent crime with many fatalities, he has a gunshot wound, and he's a likely murder suspect. In real life, Hutch would be strip searched and treated for injuries under tight security, and he would not be allowed to carry personal effects into the subsequent interrogation. But during the interrogation, Hutch impossibly produces a pack of cigarettes and lighter, a can of cat food, a metal can opener and a live kitten from inside his jacket.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You're missing the concept that he was a special individual. He would not be treated as you suggest, because of the uniqueness of his character.
His "special" status was unknown until the end of the film, when the two detectives simultaneously receive phone calls with orders to release him. Before that, he was still in handcuffs and being interrogated, and his identity was still a mystery to the police.
9th Jul 2021
The Meaning of Life (1983)
Trivia: During the restaurant scene with Mr. Creosote, John Cleese entices Terry Jones to finish his meal with a "wafer-thin mint," and Jones explodes in a shower of gastro-intestinal ejecta. In the chaos that follows, as dining guests flee in revulsion, we see Cleese in the background reach into Mr. Creosote's exploded torso and pluck out a very small object (presumably the wafer-thin mint) and start to place it in his own mouth. Cleese improvised this, adding another layer of disgust to the scene.
18th Apr 2021
My Fair Lady (1964)
Continuity mistake: At the end of the song "Just An Ordinary Man," Rex Harrison races around the room switching on several separate phonograph players (which are all mechanical devices), producing a dissonant, squabbling ruckus. But, a moment later, as he utters the last line of the song, "I shall never let a woman in my life," he switches off the one phonograph nearest to him, and ALL the mechanical phonographs in the room stop playing instantly. (00:44:36)
24th Mar 2021
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
Factual error: In Part Two, as Diana explains to Bruce Wayne the history of the Mother Boxes on Earth, we see an extended flashback of Earthly gods and warriors in an epic battle against Darkseid. When Diana says, "A golden age of heroes fighting together," we see a close-up of an Amazon archer drawing back an arrow right-handed, leaning right, and releasing it. However, the arrow is unsupported on the bow, so she couldn't possibly aim or control the arrow. (01:03:59)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's not even a matter of how good you are. Placing the arrow on the opposite side of your dominant hand is very much a Western style draw, popularized often times in Hollywood movies. Ancient and Eastern methods used a same side draw. It's mostly determined by the grip used and type of archery you're performing.
Nonsense. The physics of the draw demand that the arrow is supported on the riser. Even ancient Roman archers and American Indians supported their arrows on the bow. Again, go try it yourself. You can't hit diddly releasing an unsupported arrow on the wrong side of the bow.
Not that this is the forum for it, but here's just 1 example. Https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9cGSpYLdH8s.
Yes, it's possible to shoot same-side, as long as you're supporting the arrow with the bow. However, in the Justice League shot that I cited, the Amazon archer is holding the bow right-handed hunter style, with the bow tilted to the right, which means the arrow is totally unsupported and uncontrollable. There's this inconvenient force known as GRAVITY that pulls the arrow away from your intended trajectory when the arrow is unsupported.
Suggested correction: Incorrect. You can place the arrow either side of the bow. It depends on how good of an archer you are.
I've been an archer for over 40 years, and you don't load your arrow on the outside of your bow. I don't care "how good an archer" you THINK you are, you can't aim or control an unsupported arrow on the wrong side of the bow. Try it. Make a video of it. You'll be embarrassed to find you can't hit the broad side of a barn with the arrow on the wrong side of the bow.
Firstly, it's clearly possible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n5M2KHVyWI. Secondly, given the multiple "impossible" feats achieved by the Amazons given their super-physiology, "being able to accurately fire an arrow on the 'wrong' side of a bow" obviously falls under suspension of disbelief, and doesn't warrant either a mistake or the level of anger you're showing to people here.
Both videos state explicitly (especially Lars Andersen's) that yes, you CAN shoot from 'the wrong side', IF and only IF you use a particular, Eastern based grip, the thumb one. Watch the movie. She uses (which makes sense, for someone from the Greek mythology, I guess!) the 'Western style' so, left side as stated. I personally love over-analyzing this sort of things that give you so much insight and fun tidbits, rather than "Ah it's magic, who cares."
7th Mar 2021
Die Hard (1988)
Deliberate mistake: For Hans Gruber's iconic death scene, Alan Rickman's fall was filmed at high speed (for slow-motion playback) against a green screen, and the skyscraper perspective footage was added later as background. However, while Rickman falls away from the camera in slow motion, papers are fluttering around him in the background at normal speed. This was done deliberately to make the shot even more surreal.
1st Mar 2021
Back to the Future (1985)
Trivia: During the title sequence, as the camera is panning across all the clocks in Doc Brown's lab, we briefly see a simple electrical timer with its mechanical dial rapidly spinning. Electrical timer dials normally move at the same rate as a clock's minute hand, which is imperceptible. For this sequence, the timer's dial is spinning quickly as an inside tribute to the tabletop clock seen in the 1960 George Pal film, "The Time Machine" (the clock spun rapidly when the Time Machine was activated).
15th Feb 2021
The Void (2016)
Continuity mistake: Throughout the movie, fire axes seem to be the weapons of choice. Only two fire axes are used, but they appear recurrently. In the very first use, the protagonists grab fire axes to butcher the monster called Beverly. Blood and gore go everywhere; yet, the axes emerge from this bloodbath with no blood or gore on the handles - they're virtually pristine moments later. The axes are used again and again, right up to the ending, and blood comes and goes from the axe handles seemingly at random.
8th Jan 2021
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Revealing mistake: Steve Trevor approaches and stands before an oval, wall-mounted mirror, incredulously looking at himself and seeing a stranger's face in close-up. Steve finally smiles approvingly, turns to Diana Prince and says, "He's got it! Y'know, I like him!" The camera immediately cuts to two wide shots from behind Steve standing directly in front of the mirror (only a couple of feet away from it), but there is no reflection of Steve in the mirror at all. This error reveals that the "mirror" is actually a hole in the wall (a low-budget practical effect used in films of decades past for such mirror illusions). They probably filmed a lot more footage of Steve mugging in front of the "mirror" but edited it out, because this old-school effect is notoriously difficult to get exactly right. (00:49:50 - 00:50:20)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: They don't use this trick for the scene, the actor playing "the other guy" is standing in front of the mirror himself when you see him in the reflection, since he has black hair and Chris Pine does not. And Chris Pine can only be seen without the mirror. Later in the wide shots the angle of the mirror simply doesn't show Chris Pine's reflection. Only a tiny second at the start of the wide shot can you see it is actually a real mirror, when you see a piece of Chris Pine's hair in it.
As I said, they probably filmed a lot more footage of Steve mugging in front of the "mirror" but edited it out. When Steve approaches the "mirror" in close-up, you can see that there are two distinct actors (which is the whole purpose of the scene): Chris Pine's hair is a distinctly different color and texture, and the actor in the "reflection" is taller. Plus, their subtle body and head movements are not perfectly synchronized, as would be the case in a true mirror-image. It's the old hole-in-the-wall trick.
But it is a real mirror, as it reflects his hair. So it's not a hole in the wall anyway. The back of the head you see when seeing "the other guy" in the mirror is that same guy's head, not Chris Pine's. No need to use that trick.
No, the hair color and texture of the back-of-the-head shot are distinctly different from the guy in the reflection. The whole purpose of the shot is that Chris Pine in the foreground IS NOT the guy in the reflection in the background. The hair color and texture is different, and the guy in the reflection is taller; plus, the body and head movements are not synchronized. Go back and watch the scene (if you can stand watching the movie again).
12th Dec 2020
The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes (1994)
Continuity mistake: A whimpering housemaid rushes down the stairway, frightened by an intruder on the second floor. Doctor Watson gallantly charges upstairs to investigate, plunging his left hand into the right side of his jacket to retrieve his trusty Webley revolver as he advances on the camera. However, the shot immediately cuts to Watson withdrawing the revolver with his right hand from the left side of his jacket. (00:29:55)
8th Dec 2020
Bullitt (1968)
Trivia: During the protracted 11-minute car chase scene between the Ford Mustang and Dodge Charger, we repeatedly see a number of the same incidental cars in background traffic. For examples: In addition to the green VW Beetle that magically reappears in several nonsequential shots, the same white 1968 Firebird also repeatedly appears (as many times as does the Beetle), and the same lavender Cadillac nearly collides head-on with the Charger at two different points in the chase. This is mainly because many of the shots had up to 8 cameras shooting from different angles, and there was a lot of redundant footage. So, the same cars noticeably kept popping up time and again (and the Charger somehow threw 7 or 8 hubcaps). These were all blatant editing problems; however, strangely enough, Bullitt still won the 1969 Academy Award for Film Editing. Go figure.
4th Dec 2020
Playgirl (1954)
[Fran Davis accidentally collides with a stranger on foot at the airport.]
Fran Davis: Sorry! We almost locked bumpers!
Stranger: [Leering at Fran's hourglass figure] If there's any damage to the chassis, I'll be glad to pay for repairs.
Fran Davis: Buster, you couldn't even pay for the headlights.
20th Nov 2020
The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (1984)
Trivia: Aside from his considerable talent and theatrical qualifications, the reason that Jeremy Brett's portrayal of Sherlock Holmes was so nuanced, meticulous and authentic is because the role was therapeutic to him. In real life, all throughout the various Granada Television series (from 1984 to 1994), Brett was plagued with manic-depression, erratic behavior and heart problems, from which he fatalistically felt he would never recover. Immersing himself in the mentally-disciplined character of Sherlock Holmes gave Brett much-needed focus and clarity in the last ten years of his life.
22nd Oct 2020
The Osbournes (2002)
Trivia: Ozzy and Sharon Osbourne purchased a $6,300,000 mansion in Beverly Hills in 1999, three years before they starred in MTV's hit reality television show, "The Osbournes" (2002-2006). Bizarrely, the Prince of Darkness moved in next door to Pat Boone, the wholesome white bread Christian singing sensation of the 1950s and 1960s...and the two neighbors got on famously. Their neighborly friendship was such that Ozzy wanted to use Pat Boone's godawful 1997 cover of "Crazy Train" as the TV series theme song. MTV thought Boone would never agree to it, so they didn't even ask him; instead, MTV hired a Pat Boone impersonator to re-record the song. Later, MTV was amazed when Pat Boone himself said he would have gladly consented to them using his song, if they had only asked. Pat and Ozzy thought it was hilarious.
25th Sep 2020
The Buddy Holly Story (1978)
Factual error: Although actor Gary Busey was a professional rock and roll musician portraying one of the pioneers of Rock and Roll, Busey almost never plays a rock and roll riff in the entire movie. During his biggest scene in the Apollo Theatre sequence, for example, he holds a steady chord all the way through three songs, even as the music is rocking.
28th Aug 2020
Robocop (1987)
Trivia: Robocop nearly murders Clarence Boddicker at the cocaine factory but delivers the badly-beaten Boddicker to the police station and turns him in at the booking desk. Robocop says, "He's a cop killer," and all eyes in the station turn on Boddicker menacingly. At this point in the production, Director Paul Verhoeven and actor Kurtwood Smith discussed what to do next to show Boddicker's utter contempt for the police, even when he was in custody. The line "Just give me my fuckin' phone call" was added to the end of the scene, but Verhoeven and Smith still didn't think it was forceful enough, and they were at an impasse. So, on the last take, unbeknownst to the rest of the cast, Kurtwood Smith slipped a readily-available blood capsule into his mouth and unexpectedly spat the bloody mess onto the booking desk, right in front of the camera. The startled reaction of everyone on the set was genuine; even actor Robert DoQui, who played the sergeant at the booking desk, involuntarily recoiled in disgust and exclaimed, "Shit!" (which was kept in the movie). Clarence Boddicker thus ended up realistically intimidating the police, and Kurtwood Smith's improvisation made it an iconic scene.
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.
Answer: On that particular previous day, he didn't rob the armored car. All he did was spend the day doing good deeds and the only repercussions will be people thinking highly of him.
Brian Katcher
A huge part of his "good deeds," no doubt, was his flashing a lot of money around town, buying a full insurance package from Ned, paying the piano teacher a significant wad of cash, gifting the newlyweds tickets for their honeymoon, etc. That's a big part of how Phil became so beloved by so many townspeople in one day. Plus, he bought the ice-carving chainsaw and who knows what else. He wasn't just pulling all that cash out of thin air. I think robbing the armored car every morning had become second-nature to Phil.
Charles Austin Miller
Phil seemed to be trying to do everything just right to break the cycle. It's unlikely he would choose to rob the armor truck. And it's unlikely the truck was robbed that day. However, Phil was a professional with a good paying job. Rita herself had almost $400 in cash on her. If Phil didn't have that much cash on him, he could easily get it from the bank and then write checks (or use a credit card) for everything else.
Bishop73