Plot hole: The two kidnappers are pulled over by the cop they eventually murder because they are not displaying temporary tags on their car. However, when Marge Gunderson shows up to investigate the crime scene the next morning, she figures out from the cop's citation book that the car had dealer plates (DLR.) If the car had dealer plates, they wouldn't need to display temporary tags, as tags are to be used when a license plate is not yet available for a car. There was no need to pull the kidnappers over, which makes the turning point of the story completely pointless.
Kyle G.
17th Sep 2004
Fargo (1996)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Temporary tags have a non-unique number and the designation of the dealer on them, the cop put down DLR and was then going to put the dealer's number when they produced the temporary tag which they said they had forgotten to place in the window. On a temporary tag, the "tag number" is either the date the temporary tag expires or one of a limited number assigned to that dealer so it is not unusual to see duplicate temporary tags on different cars on the same day - you would need the dealer's number which is rather small at the bottom of the paper to actually identify the car.
But the point is that the police officer said he pulled them over because they were displaying no tag. If there had been a dealer tag on the car, then why would the officer have pulled them over? That's what a dealer tag is for: so a car can be driven displaying it. Yet everything that happens after that is predicated on the officer having begun to write out the number *on their tag*.
Suggested correction: They probably just had the generic plastic dealership logo plate on. Not an actual dealer plate with a number, but something with a logo and "Gustafson Motors" on it (or whatever the name of the car lot was).
That means they have no tags and the cop wouldn't write DLR. A logo with the dealer's name isn't a dealer tag.
16th Aug 2023
The Stand (1994)
Other mistake: Part 3 - The Betrayal: Fran tells Stu that she's pregnant on July 19th, and the way she tells him implies Stu is the father, and she's due in January. It's impossible. They didn't even meet until early July. Counting backwards from January, nine months lands in April. Way before the super flu even escaped. Way before the movie is set. (00:05:45 - 00:06:08)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The father is her ex-boyfriend, who we never meet. This is made clear in the book, which I know doesn't necessarily count as a correction here, but we do see at the end the baby is given Fran's last name. Surely, if she thought Stu was the father, the baby would have taken his last name.
29th Mar 2019
Heat (1995)
Continuity mistake: When Cheritto leaves the bank, he walks up to a Lincoln Town Car, which is a 4-door car. A very brief shot shows him opening the front door. The camera cuts to a side view and suddenly the back door is open. The camera cut too quickly for him to change his mind, shut the front door and get in the back seat. (01:46:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He opens the front door first, then gets in the back, just making it easier for the next guy to get in with his large duffel bag.
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.