Deliberate mistake: When Tree turns on the magnetic medical equipment, it's somehow strong enough to yank a big, heavy wheelchair up and pin Gregory in only a split-second, but not strong enough to instantly pull the screwdriver out of Tree's hand? Obviously this was done so Tree could have a cool moment where she lets go of the screwdriver and it impales Gregory... but it makes no real sense.
TedStixon
17th Feb 2022
Happy Death Day 2U (2019)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It does make sense. The wheelchair wasn't secured and contained lots of metal, so it was immediately pulled towards the scanner. The screwdriver had a lot less metal, and Trew was holding it very tightly, and she knew what was about to happen, so she should strengthen her grip even more, allowing her to keep hold of it.
Preposterous. Depending on how they're set, MRI magnets can yank entire hospital beds clear across the room, and even once killed a man by setting off a concealed gun he was carrying. There's no way she was holding onto that thing.
31st Aug 2024
Halloween Kills (2021)
Corrected entry: When Lonnie gets scared of Michael, he says he's sorry for tripping Tommy Doyle when it was Richie who tripped Tommy in the original film.
Correction: This is hardly a mistake. He was part of the group that was picking on Tommy and tripped/pushed him, regardless of whether he was specifically the one who physically did it, and was panicking and confessing. Similar to how, if you're with a group of friends and someone steals something, you might say, "I'm sorry we stole something." You're part of the group.
30th Aug 2024
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2020)
Factual error: Trevor was driving ECTO-1 at over 60 mph. Podcast was driving the remote car and it was pulling away from ECTO-1. There is no way that the remote car could be going faster than ECTO-1, unless it was souped up, which it didn't appear to be when looking at it.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There are plenty of RC cars on the market right now that anyone could buy that are capable of going 60+ MPH (the fastest can hit about 100 MPH). And if you take them apart, they don't look "souped up" at all. They just look like regular RC cars inside. Components don't have to look fancy to function fancily. You also have to account for the fact that the movie is highly fantastical, so there's no telling what kind of technology the RC car uses... for all we know, it could be nuclear-powered like the proton packs.
4th Jul 2024
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Corrected entry: While Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, and Darth Maul are fighting, there are three shots of their faces. In the next shot, Maul jumps backwards to the nearest bridge. In these scenes, Qui-Gon is on the left and Obi-Wan on the right (from Maul's view). When the Jedi jump to the same bridge, they have switched places. (01:52:39)
Correction: It's a little difficult to see, but they actually swap places on-camera before the leap. Right after the three close-ups, Obi-Wan does a "fake out" where he starts to charge Maul, before instantly backing away. Simultaneously, Qui-Gon charges Maul diagonally and swaps places with Obi-Wan. So they actually do purposely swap places on camera... it's just very fast and easy to miss.
23rd Jun 2024
Beetlejuice (1988)
Corrected entry: Jane badly wants to sell the Maitland home, so it's not practical that she left all of their furniture, decorations, and other possessions after they died. Any realtor who wanted to make a quick sale would have the place cleaned out, instead of leaving so much stuff for the new owners to deal with.
Correction: Actually, it's not all that uncommon for realtors to sell fully furnished and "staged" homes. And depending on the location and market, they sometimes sell quicker than unfurnished homes, since it means that it's less for the new buyers to purchase. This especially makes sense, since Jane seems to like the idea of selling the house to a larger family who might desire such things. As for their possessions? There was probably no family who wanted them, and Jane probably just hadn't gotten around to getting rid of them yet, since the Deetz family seems to move in rather quickly after the Maitlands died. I feel like at best this is a "stupidity" or "character mistake", but I'd argue it's neither.
Correction: Jane tells Lydia that she "personally decorated that house," so it's not impossible that she was maybe looking to be hired as the new decorator.
I always thought Jane was lying when she said that she decorated the house. The Maitlands were quite offended when the Deetzes began to change everything, as if they decorated the place themselves, and chose/inherited the furniture. I think Jane was nosey and wanted to keep getting attention for herself. But this is just how I interpret it.
18th Jun 2022
Predator (1987)
Plot hole: After Blaine gets killed and the group hose down the forest, Poncho goes and checks for the enemy. He comes back and says he didn't find tracks or blood "We hit NOTHINGGG." Now, while he would be looking for red blood, he certainly should have noticed at least the glowing Predator blood (made from glow stick fluid - widely used by the military and public alike at the time) easily visible on the large leaf, and deduced that came from something - perhaps the enemy soldier had a glow stick.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't a plot hole. The plot of the movie isn't broken because of this. It's an assumption that he "should have noticed" the predator blood but he might not have. And if he had, and had discounted it, it would only be a character error not to have mentioned it.
A plot hole doesn't strictly need to "break" the plot to count as a plot hole. The term most often refers to instances when a film contradicts its own sense of internal logic. For example, something happening that contradicts something else that was already established, vital information being left out, or a character acting way out of character for the benefit of the plot. In this case, this absolutely could count as a plot hole.
4th Apr 2017
Ghostbusters (2016)
Other mistake: After the ghost "possesses" the building and blows out the windows, no shards of glass or debris land on the Ghostbusters as they get up to escape, even though there was plenty of time for the glass and debris to rain down on them.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You can plainly see that the debris is actually flowing upwards in defiance of gravity. Spectral energy is running amok and the laws of physics are all over the place.
27th Aug 2001
Scream (1996)
Trivia: Look closely towards the end of the movie when Randy is explaining the rules look at the videos on top of the TV. One of them is clearly the UK version of the Scream video cover under a different name. (01:10:10)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Sadly, that's actually just a VHS copy of the 1995 film "Smoke" starring William Hurt, a different Miramax-released film. It has a similar font and spine-design as the UK "Scream" VHS... but it's a different movie.
9th May 2023
The Conjuring (2013)
Corrected entry: In the movie, Ed and Lorraine Warren are depicted as a younger middle-aged couple when the real Warrens were retirees who died before this film was made.
Correction: This isn't a documentary. It's a highly fictionalized retelling of their cases, which themselves are just dubious claims. This film also takes place in 1971 when the Warrens would have been in their mid-40s, and Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga weren't far off in age at the time of filming. Also, Lorraine Warren didn't die until 6 years after this film came out.
Documentary or film, makes little difference. The fact is that images of the real Warrens in the 1970s were an older couple as mentioned, while the actors in the films are considerably younger in their late 30s to 40s, where respectively age consideration should have lined up but did not.
Ed and Lorraine Warren were both around 45 in 1971 when the film takes place. Both of the actors were around 40 when the film was made and released. That's not a big difference in age. Just because they look a little bit younger doesn't make it a mistake. You're not going to be able to find actors who look EXACTLY like the real people. Also, how does the date the Warrens died have any impact on the movie? The movie takes place in 1971... not the present day.
Correction: It actually does make a difference when it comes to documentary vs. fiction, because this film isn't intended to be a true-to-life depiction, particularly as the real Warrens were con artists. This falls under artistic license. This film also features unequivocal evidence for the supernatural, including ghosts, demonic possession, and violations of laws of physics, none of which are true to the real world. Given all that, the fact that the Warrens look more youthful here isn't a movie mistake.
2nd Mar 2024
Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story (2004)
Corrected entry: In the finals, when White eliminates Peter but was over the line, wouldn't being over the line cause White to be kicked out of the game and thus giving Average Joe's the win, and not force a sudden death?
Correction: As explained earlier in the film, a double-fault results in Sudden Death. Dwight had already illegally hit Kate with a ball, so stepping over the line was his second offense.
Correction: I feel like this is more of a question than a plot hole. Regardless, the referee called for sudden death... so it went to sudden death.
27th Feb 2024
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Plot hole: When Harry's pumpkin bomb exploded, disfiguring his face, there were also more pumpkin bombs around him. This explosion should have caused them all to explode, which would have killed Harry.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's entirely dependent on how the pumpkin bombs function and how they're built. They're likely built to be able to withstand a certain degree of outside force and heat so they wouldn't just randomly explode during a superhero/villain battle. They also don't seem to function like regular grenades... there seems to be electronic components to them. So it's entirely possible they can't go off until they're activated because certain components inside haven't mixed or been armed. Their rules are just too vaguely defined for this to be a valid mistake.
That's a good point.
20th Feb 2018
The Legend of Tarzan (2016)
Trivia: Early in the movie, when George is speaking to John, he says, "Me Tarzan, you Jane." Even though this line has been synonymous with the character Tarzan, it has actually never been said by Tarzan at all in any movie or any stories written about Tarzan's adventures. This is officially the first time the line is used.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Johnny Weissmuller said it in his Tarzan movies.
This is actually a popular misconception. Johnny Weissmuller never actually said it in any of his Tarzan movies. He said it during an interview where he was describing the character. But he never actually said it onscreen during any of the movies. So the trivia is 100% correct.
28th Mar 2005
Child's Play (1988)
Plot hole: Andy is suspected of having killed Eddie Caputo, because he was at the scene when Eddie's house blew up and Eddie was killed. But there are glaring things that go unquestioned: None of the cops seem to think it's strange that a six-year-old kid would travel by himself so far to some random house in order to blow it up. The South Side neighborhood where Eddie lives is halfway across the city from Andy's apartment. How did Andy know where Eddie lived? How do the cops think he even knew Eddie at all? None of them address this most puzzling problem.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The police believe Andy to be insane (hence why he is sent to a mental institution instead of juvenile hall), and thus do not believe his choice of victims to be in any way rational.
Also, as unlikely as it is that a six-year-old child could (or would) travel halfway across the city to murder a random person, the possibility that a child's doll came to life and carried out the act was considered far too outlandish at that point in the plot.
Suggested correction: We don't see the entire investigation. We just see the cops holding Andy then taking him to a psychiatric clinic. Chances are they were asking those questions and we just didn't see it because it's not important to the plot. Regardless, the cops have every reason to believe Andy either knows about or was partly responsible for the murders considering he keeps showing up at murder scenes. There's only so many conclusions you can draw, even if they don't make sense.
9th Feb 2024
The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Corrected entry: Buffalo Bill covets the skin on the back of Catherine Martin (as revealed when he first knocked her out, he caresses/inspects her back with satisfaction), but he wants her to put lotion on it when she's down in the well. It's a physical impossibility, especially for a larger woman.
Correction: I'm significantly heavier than she is, and I can touch almost my entire back with my hands... there's only a couple of inches I can't reach. I seriously doubt it's "physically impossible" for her not to be able to get lotion over most of her back.
20th Nov 2020
Cult of Chucky (2017)
Visible crew/equipment: When the patient throws Chucky into the hole outside, when he rises up, you can see someone's hand give her the doll.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That's the character Malcolm's hands. He's in the grave. He handed the doll up to her, and then, literally seconds later, the nurses help him out of the grave. I genuinely don't understand how that could be mistaken for a crew member's hand when it's so obviously a character in the film.
25th Mar 2018
Curse of Chucky (2013)
Continuity mistake: When Chucky pushes Nica over the balcony, the camera shows her falling to the floor on her back but when the camera zooms out on her, it shows her lying on her stomach.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You don't see her land, and she's off-screen for a solid 15 seconds. It's entirely possible she hit the ground and rolled onto her stomach.
14th Jul 2014
Curse of Chucky (2013)
Revealing mistake: When the pastor is beheaded you can see a clear tube inside his neck that is squirting blood.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That's actually supposed to be the top of his spinal cord. The blood is noticeably coming from behind it if you look closely.
27th Apr 2006
Seed of Chucky (2004)
Corrected entry: In the scene where the box containing Glen/Glenda is in the SFX room, as Glen/Glenda crawls out of the box, a shadow of the boom mic and the pole is very apparent on the wall behind the box.
Correction: There is no such shadow in the scene, nor would there be - there's no actors in the scene, just the dolls playing pre-recorded dialogue. There's no voices for the mic to pick up. It'd be superfluous.
11th Jun 2005
Seed of Chucky (2004)
Audio problem: Joan is already screaming when Glenda burns her, but the scream effect doesn't kick in until a second afterward.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: She's opened her mouth to scream. Usually, people open their mouths, inhale, and then scream. It's not a mistake.
12th Jul 2013
Seed of Chucky (2004)
Continuity mistake: Joan falls from the banister face up, but when the police see her, she's face down.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: She very obviously falls and lands face down.
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.