Corrected entry: When Phoebe calls Ray from the police station, Ray says the firehouse is now a Starbucks, but during the end credit scenes Winston is standing in the firehouse and Ecto 1 follows him.
TedStixon
26th Feb 2023
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2020)
Correction: This mistake has already been corrected. Starbucks is often used as a shorthand joke about general gentrification, companies going out of business, company over-exposure, etc. (Which is kinda based on reality. Ex. In my hometown there are literally four Starbucks locations over a 5-mile stretch of road, at least one of which I believe took over an old store that closed down. It's utterly insane.) Ray isn't being literal when he says the firehouse is a Starbucks - he's just making a sarcastic joke about how it's closed down.
11th Jun 2003
Scream 3 (2000)
Other mistake: On the back cover of Scream 3 in the Scream trilogy on DVD, the town of the original killings is referred to as Greensboro twice. The correct name of the town is Woodsboro, of course.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I'm not "correcting" this per se, but I'm wondering if there should be either a separate type of mistake for things like DVD/Blu-Ray cases or posters (Ex. "Multimedia and Marketing Mistakes" or something like that), or if these things would be better classified as trivia? Especially since it's not something everyone can necessarily observe watching the movie itself. (Ex. My Blu-Ray and 4K releases don't have this mistake.) If not, feel free to downvote/delete this. I've just seen a few of these mistakes over the years here, and it always seems a little off to me since it's not something wrong with the film itself.
I agree these aren't valid movie mistake if the studio wasn't involved in the mistake. It could be trivia if only certain home releases had them. These mistakes are like when episodes are aired out of order creating continuity issues,, streaming services make changes, or closed captioning (not subtitles) gets something wrong. It can't be considered a mistake of the film or TV series.
It's tricky - largely, if I'm honest, because adding new types to the site is incredibly fiddly. :-) There's also room for endless debate about what's a "mistake", whether it's about assigning specific blame or just looking for interesting stuff. Likewise things that can only be seen in slow motion, which arguably warrant a category to themselves because there are plenty of them, but then the "mistakes" section gets cluttered. Becomes a user interface issue as much as anything! Will think.
I'm not disagreeing with this post, it's the only way I can reply. But yes, for the first run of the VHS and the DVD of Scream 3, there is that typo on the back cover. Now knowing that, is that version worth more money?
While misprints can sometimes add to something's value, I don't think this would necessarily make this release more valuable. Perhaps the VHS version just because there is something of a collector's market for VHS tapes now. But the movies have been released on DVD, Blu-Ray and 4K so many times, I don't see the DVD version being worth significantly more. (Unless you find a really weird collector who would specifically want THAT version.)
Yes, there is that typo. They were the first run of the VHS.
I didn't say there wasn't a typo. I was questioning whether a typo on the cover would technically qualify as a movie mistake, since it's not part of the actual film.
27th Aug 2001
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
Factual error: During the scene when the two guys are fishing, the guy on the right is using a bait casting rod, you can tell by the finger grip where the reel connects to the pole. The problem is, the rod is equipped with a spinning reel. A spinning rod has no finger grip.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I'm watching the movie right now and there's nothing wrong with the rod. The rods just look like they've been lightly modified to add extra grips and whatnot, which is something you can 100% do. (In fact, I'm literally looking at a website right now where you can buy extra grips just like that to add to spinning rods).
23rd Jan 2023
The Menu (2022)
Corrected entry: The "tacos" served by the award-winning, $1200-a-plate restaurant are woefully inadequate. Tacos are accompanied by chopped onion, cilantro, chopped chiles (usually serrano) and lime. Other toppings such as chopped pineapple, tomato, or avocado are optional. These so-called "tacos" are cold, stiff tortillas and meat.
Correction: In no way is this mistake. In fact, this mistake is quite incorrect for two separate reasons. First of all, it's not a "mistake" for a chef to serve a minimalist variation of a pre-existing dish. (Several of the chef's dishes have minimalist ingredients, in fact. He literally served a bread plate without bread.) Just because tacos are usually served a certain way doesn't make it a "mistake" if they're not. Second, beyond that, the fact it's only meat and tortillas actually relates directly to the plot, since the meat is a representation of the story he told about his father, while the tortillas have incriminating photos burned onto them.
10th Dec 2001
The Crow (1994)
Corrected entry: If it has been a year since Eric and Shelley's death, who the hell has been feeding the pedigree house cat, which would be incapable of hunting for itself, for the last year to keep it at its same size?
Correction: Cats though domesticated are still wild animals. I know from experience that a cat can fend for himself when it is needed. Plus there are people who leave food out for stray animals.
Correction: I have an indoor house cat who's never been allowed outside unsupervised or without a leash, and despite the fact she's pampered and doesn't have to fend for herself... she definitely still can. She catches (and eats) mice every time we get any in the house, is a keen hunter and is super cautious and territorial when she needs to be. She still has all of her survival instincts. So yes, house cats can definitely thrive and survive without their owner around. Especially in an apartment building like Eric's where she could easily get in and out.
Correction: The young girl, their friend kept coming back to feed the cat.
She specifically says "I thought you were dead" when she finds the cat, implying she hasn't seen it in quite some time. She also had to break into the building just to get inside. She definitely wasn't coming there to feed it.
Sorry meant the young girl.
28th May 2007
The Monster Squad (1987)
Corrected entry: They make a big scene that a virgin is needed to read the text from Van Helsing's diary in order to get rid of the monsters. After Patrick's sister fails because it turns out she isn't a virgin, everyone freaks out until they realize Phoebe could help them out. Not once is it mentioned the virgin had to be a female. So why couldn't the 12 year old boys read from the diary and get rid of the monsters?
Correction: First: 4 out of 5 definitions listed for "virgin" refer to females. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/virgin Second: In all of mythology and folklore, virgin always refers to females. The gods asked for a virgin to be sacrificed, the women/girls were gathered not the people that have never had sex. When some bit of folklore needs to be read aloud by a virgin, odds are they are asking for a girl.
You would be correct in the correction, however that doesn't explain how Scary German Guy can summons the vortex. And yes I will say that because when Dracula was going after Phoebe, Scary German Guy was still reciting the text yet Phoebe wasn't repeating it, just whimpering. Yet the vortex still showed up.
But Phoebe repeated the exact phrase the peasant girl did in the opening scene, those seem to be the key words that unlock the vortex.
I understand where you're coming from, but I'd disagree. Looked up a couple clips of the scene on YouTube, and they make a point of showing Phoebe repeating most of the words near-perfectly (at least as close to perfectly as a small child under distress could do) between whimpers. And I think you could make a compelling argument that even if she doesn't say them all 100% perfectly - say she's just barely whimpering some of them out between cries - it'd still count for the spell.
I disagree. I've watched this movie hundreds of times. All we hear is her whimpering because she's scared. No indication is given that she's still talking.
I just looked up the scene again. They show her repeating the words perfectly and completing the spell after Frankenstein throws Dracula away from her. There's really only a few seconds in the entire scene when we hear her whimpering instead of saying the words perfectly. I still think it's within reason to argue that she did enough for the spell to work, but we'll just have to agree to disagree.
12th Jan 2023
The Diary of Anne Frank (1959)
Factual error: Anne Frank received her diary on her birthday, and started writing on it 1 month before she went into hiding. In the movie however, she is presented with the diary on the first she arrives at the hiding place.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Since this movie is based on actual events and not considered a documentary, then the film-makers are allowed to change things to their liking.
While I feel like this sort-of correction could apply to certain elements of movies based on true stories like dramatized scenes (since there has to be some condensation of time and some elements boosted for drama, which can be chalked up to filmmakers changing things), I think a film based on a true story contradicting a known hard fact like this should 100% count as a mistake. Otherwise, you could just as easily argue that any factual error in any film is invalid because the filmmakers are "allowed to change it."
18th Jul 2022
Supergirl (1984)
Deliberate mistake: When Supergirl flies out of the lake upon her arrival to Earth she's wet. When she lands on the shore she's suddenly dry.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Incorrect. She's not wet when she comes out of the water. She emerges from the water dry in an (incredibly wonky) effects shot. Why she's dry coming out of the water is unclear, but it presumably has something to do with the teleportation process for how she got to Earth considering her costume also suddenly appears on her as well.
19th Jul 2022
Wonder Woman (2017)
Corrected entry: Ares as the God of War always wanted people fighting as he revelled in this. This change up of him wanting all people dead makes no sense.
Correction: (1) The writers are allowed to alter characters and motivations. They don't have to stick with the rules of the original mythological figure. (2) Ares also explicitly states that he wants to eradicate humanity through war (which is kind of his thing, anyways) because it will help earth return to the "paradise" it was before them, so he has a clear motivation. He hates humans and wants the world to return to what it once was before they arrived, and as the god of war, he wants to use war to destroy them. It makes perfect sense in the context of this story even if it doesn't fit in with the classic mythological figure.
9th Aug 2022
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Corrected entry: Never once in the entire movie do the three villains get called by their comic book names of Sandman, Green Goblin 2, and Venom.
Correction: Sandman is referred to as "Sandman" during the newscast right before the final battle and Spider-Man refers to Harry as "Goblin" while taunting him. (Albeit, something like "Goblin Jr, " but he refers to him as Goblin nonetheless).
12th Jan 2023
Bridesmaids (2011)
Revealing mistake: Despite her claiming to be topless you can see what looks like a tube top on Kristen Wiig during her attempts to get the state cop to notice her.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: No, she's not wearing a tube-top. Looked up the scene on online. She has her hands covering her nipples, and her passenger Helen has her arm up in a gesturing manner partially covering her breasts, but there's absolutely no tube-top in sight. (I think you may be seeing part of Helen or Wiig's arm and think it's part of a tube-top).
26th Aug 2022
Game Night (2018)
Deliberate mistake: When Michelle brings up the photo of "Fake Denzel" on her phone, she says she put it into a hidden folder. Problem? She only presses on her phone once (based on the sound you hear), and has the photo up and filling the screen within about one second. Totally preposterous. Obviously, it was done that way to keep the scene moving quickly... but there's no way a single button press and a timespan of about one second is going to bring up and maximize a photo from a hidden folder on her phone.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The very faint click you hear could be her phone unlocking, so we don't know how often she taps the screen. That said, yes, it's unlikely she'd be able to access the photo that fast.
I don't understand this correction, because it literally just seems to reinforce the original mistake. Unlocking her phone wouldn't instantly bring up a photo in a hidden folder.
11th Aug 2003
Little Nicky (2000)
Revealing mistake: When Nicky shoots goodness at a group of demons, one of them bites off a part of one of the rabbits. In the last shot of that demon, it is extremely obvious that the bunny that he is holding is a stuffed animal. (01:08:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Gonna be honest - I genuinely think the fact the rabbit is replaced by a ludicrously OBVIOUS stuffed animal is kind of an intentional joke in itself. The rest of the effects in the film are very solid for the time, whereas it's laughably blatant that the rabbit is a stuffed toy. The fact that the movie lingers on several shots of it with its button-eyes, unrealistic "cartoon" dimensions, etc. kinda tells me you weren't meant to take it seriously. At best, it could maybe be reclassified as a "deliberate" mistake, but even then, I don't think I'd classify it as such.
22nd Dec 2022
Die Hard (1988)
Factual error: Would pulling the alarm call the fire and police departments if the phone lines were disabled?
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While I'm not sure how the alarms contact the fire department, it's also important to note that when Karl cuts the phone lines, his brother is re-routing some of the lines. I believe the implication is that he was bypassing certain lines so that way emergency services and the phone company wouldn't get alerts that their phones lines were down at the plaza and send people to check it out. So it would makes sense to me that a fire alarm could still get a signal through the phone lines in that case. (I'm also presuming that the way the fire alarm sends its signal is different from how a phone call is made, since one is automated and not call-based).
27th Nov 2018
Darkman (1990)
Revealing mistake: When Peyton's hands are about to be burnt, they are a replaced by a very obvious prop.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I personally see nothing wrong with the effect. While it is indeed a stop-motion effect, it certainly doesn't look cheap, the animation of the skin burning and curling is pretty smooth, and nothing inherently gives it away outside of the fact you know they wouldn't actually burn up the actor's hands.
6th Oct 2008
Gremlins (1984)
Corrected entry: At the very end of the film, just before the credits start rolling, the clouds in the sky can be seen to move behind the moon - this is impossible.
Correction: Actually, the clouds are moving *in front* of the moon (if you look carefully, you can see mostly transparent wisps). The moon is so bright and the cloud layer so thin that the light shines through them.
I believe most people will see it as in front of the clouds if they are even paying attention.
Most people would be wrong, then. You can see faint shadows over the moon as the clouds move past it. They're passing over the front of it while moon illuminates through them as the correction states. It's not the greatest effect in the world (it all appears to be layers of matte paintings), but nothing about it is a mistake per se.
6th Nov 2022
Halloween (1978)
Visible crew/equipment: When Laurie tries to escape Michael from the kitchen, she breaks the glass. You can see a second hand break the glass in front of Laurie's.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You are incorrect, but it's an understandable mistake to make because the scene is very dark. It's hard to see, but Laurie actually uses both hands to break the glass... she puts them together and then slaps them through the window in a quick, fluid motion. (If you go through frame-by-frame or in slow motion, it's much, much easier to see.) That's why you're seeing two hands. It's not a crew member's hand... it's Jamie Lee Curtis' other hand.
7th Jan 2003
Ginger Snaps (2000)
Continuity mistake: When Ginger and Bee are buying tampons, Ginger takes the box from Bee twice without once giving it back.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The problem is, they are offscreen between the two shots and at least a little time has passed given they're walking around a large store. And given Ginger is in a lot of pain and keeps grabbing herself, it's entirely possible she handed the box back to Brigitte offscreen. We also don't know how far they walked or if they did more shopping before they checked out. (Which is when Ginger grabs the box a second time.) It's not like she grabs the box twice back-to-back instantly.
14th May 2006
Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988)
Revealing mistake: When Julia first emerges from the mattress and is scrabbling on the floor, you can see the body double is actually wearing a thong. (00:30:35)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That's actually just groin/buttocks muscle and tissue. If you compare it to medical images, while some features are exaggerated, it matches up reasonably well. The fat/muscle/tissue does almost form a thong-like shape in that area. Furthermore, what purpose would there be to having the actress wear a thong when she's already covered in head-to-toe prosthetics that hide everything? That makes no sense.
14th May 2006
Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988)
Plot hole: The mover shouldn't have been pulled into the mattress because he didn't bleed onto it, which is what was required before, for Julia to come back.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Something entirely else is happening at the end of the film, as evidenced by the fact the Pillar of Souls then rises from it... something which has never happened before. Therefore, the standard rules don't necessarily apply. Additionally, even if you want to argue that they do, the mattress is still totally covered in blood from earlier, when the mentally ill man cut himself on it... so one could argue that there was enough blood on it still for something to cross through.
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.
Correction: Ray was being sarcastic. A common joke in NY is that every time a business closes, the location becomes a Starbucks.