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)
Sammo
24th Mar 2021
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
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."
24th Mar 2021
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
Corrected entry: In this version, Queen Hippolyta whispers "Return to me, Diana" as she shoots the arrow, as opposed to "Listen to me, Diana" in Whedon's version. Whedon's line made sense, since it was a warning, this does not, since Diana never comes back to Themyscira nor she is supposed to, being busy thwarting the invasion in the Land of Men. There's no reason why the Queen would say that line. (00:43:10)
Correction: It wasn't the Queen telling Diana to come home at that moment, but a way of saying "survive the war." This would be like a mother telling her soldier son as he goes to war to return home.
Under normal circumstances yes, but in the WW movie (forgetting comic book canon) the Queen herself bids her farewell on the beach telling her that she can't come back if she leaves, and by every indication she has not in a century even if she was unhappy here. Ironically in the movie itself she "returns home" only when we see her dead! I know it's splitting hairs though, and I am swayed by the fact that in the other version this unnecessary contradiction was changed, for the better.
26th Feb 2021
WandaVision (2021)
Breaking the Fourth Wall - S1-E7
Corrected entry: A trunk of a car opens while everything is supposed to be frozen. In the first shot it is closed, but in the second shot, it is fully open. (00:24:27 - 00:25:10)
Correction: The trunk of the grey car is open in both shots.
The mistake is correct. There were 3 shots of the car and you're referring to the last 2 shots where they were both open. The first shot of the car is after we see Anges watching through the window and the trunk is cracked open, but still down. The 2nd shot is after Anges says "run along dear", but everything else is still suppose to be frozen.
Okay, but they are not "frozen", they are watching. You can even see the woman move, so she is in the process of opening the trunk. So not a mistake regardless.
I submitted a mistake of her moving because they are meant to be frozen.
Who says they are supposed to be frozen?
I guess that would be a matter of debate. You do see the wind blowing the skirt of a woman, but other than that (and the slight moment of another girl), no-one is moving. It's one thing to say they're watching, but if they're not frozen, they're playing a great game of statue, and then they all start moving again at the same time.
Everyone else in the city of mind-controlled slaves is obviously characterized as being a little more than simply engrossed in their own curiosity; the hand movement of that woman is out of place and kinda the 'real' mistake IMHO, more like the extra adjusting her position than anything. If she opened the trunk deliberately while on camera, it would have undermined completely the tension of the scene.
Please let's just stick to the facts. No endless debates, perhaps use the discord server for that. The fact of the matter is as soon as they come out of the house everybody around them stops what they are doing and starts watching, nobody "freezes" in the middle of an action. Their roles have probably temporarily been suspended because Wanda is otherwise occupied, but that doesn't mean they stop moving altogether.
24th Mar 2021
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
Corrected entry: Dr. Stone manages to miss the parademon in his apartment (or the broken window, for that matter) when it should have been in plain sight literally as he opened the door. (01:40:40)
Correction: It was hiding behind the table. Also, he thought Victor caused all the damage, including the broken window.
I can certainly see how he could assume that Victor did the damage, ties in nicely with the broken tape player, good thought. However I still don't see where the beast could hide, if you look at the room as it is shown for instance around 46:50, there's no way not to see someone in that corner while you approach the closet - it comes from the right of the window, not the left where the table is.
He is focussed on the mess at the closet, and the missing box. He is not looking in that corner. As he approaches the corner he doesn't see the creature because it's hunched behind the table. It is also quite dark in the room.
Again, you can't help but look into that part of the house, and the table is on the left of the broken window, the creature comes from the right, where there's just a computer station too small for the winged demon to hide under, and at the same time preventing anything to just duck into the corner unnoticed (there's no corner, in that sense). That's my perception anyway.
24th Mar 2021
Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021)
Plot hole: WW mentions that "As Darkseid waged war on Earth, he found a secret there", that being the Anti-life equation. But later on it turns out that after being defeated, planet Earth is so "anonymous among a trillion worlds" that he never manages to find it again and destroys another 100,000 worlds (his words!) to look for it again. That would mean that they lack any sort of navigation, and it's hardly possible anyway that the planet would be "anonymous" when it contains what Darkseid wants the most.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is in the form of a question and should be uploaded as such. There are several reasons to think why Darkseid couldn't find Earth.
The questions were rhetorical, but thanks to your comment I edited rephrasing it without any questioning ambiguity, since my interest is not much in hearing fan theories filling the gaps in the narration, but rather in pointing out the obvious contradiction where Darkseid is fully aware right from the start that the most important thing in the universe is on Earth, but can't find it again and conquers another thousands of worlds instead "still looking" for it.
Earth was a random planet they attacked and on that random planet Darkseid found a secret, he didn't go there for the secret, he found it whilst there. I don't expect him to go into his ship and put a pin on a map to remember where the planet was in case they were defeated. They expected to win. In their retreat, their way to navigate back to Earth got lost. Perfectly reasonable. You don't know anything about Darkseid's way of conquering and also no idea on how they navigate from world to world.
You know he was not alone, he had an army with a whole slew of ships and subordinates, it takes a lot of suspension of disbelief to swallow the idea that they are conquering worlds going in totally blind and "conquer" worlds they can't ever visit again lacking any charting.They refer the Earth by name and know who their opponents are. An explanation would be also less stringent if Darkseid didn't learn about Anti-life at all and simply "moved on", but it's not the case.
15th Oct 2018
Justice League (2017)
Corrected entry: If the parademons react to fear, they should attack the Russian family but they don't.
Correction: Either they were ordered not to attack the family by Steppenwolf because retrieving the Motherboxes is the number one priority, or they sensed that the father wasn't afraid of them since he had a rifle and was willing to fight them.
Absolutely wrong, was not priority for the parademons either to attack Steppenwolf but they did cause they react to their instinct.
27th Dec 2017
Justice League (2017)
Corrected entry: In the fight after reviving Superman, Flash and Superman go full speed, while everybody else moves in super slow-motion. But Wonder Woman should not appear as slow as Cyborg or Aquaman. In the beginning of the film, she was fast enough to easily catch bullets.
Correction: Wonder Woman, like Superman and The Flash, is only that fast when absolutely necessary, not all the time.
That correction doesn't make sense. There was no reason why Superman went full speed, while Wonder Woman flew through the air in slow motion.
If I remember correctly, she wasn't flying through the air, she was falling toward her sword. Super-speed or not, gravity will only pull you down so fast.
23rd Apr 2018
Justice League (2017)
Corrected entry: When Steppenwolf takes the mother box from Atlantis he arrives alone, but after the struggle there is a body of a parademon in the water.
16th Apr 2018
Justice League (2017)
Corrected entry: Before Arthur dives into the sea while he speaks with Bruce nobody is behind him, but in the next shot there is a crowd.
Correction: Two different shots. The first shot is tighter on Bruce and you can't see the crowd. You instead see the empty space above their heads. The next is wider and you see them.
16th Apr 2018
Justice League (2017)
Plot hole: If the the parademons can smell the fear and react, they would do so when Flash is having a panic attack.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The parademons are in a separate room with several hostages who are far more afraid than The Flash is, so their attention is focused elsewhere.
Flash and the others are in the very next room without any door or wall beside the parademons, not too far, and there are 10 or 12 around the space. Anyone can smell Barry's fear or at least hear them, and the hostages show less fear than Barry - he is almost paralyzed.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Plot hole: Weeks if not months have passed since Mando has been on Nevarro, with the power shift and the Empire taking control. The Mandalorian community was small, but he finds the Armorer in the old lair that says that she will leave only when she will have salvaged what remains. Since 'what remains' is a pile of armor pieces, and she is carrying already a cart full of those, it appears absurd that she'd still not finished with that task, especially considering that we see how the smelting process is pretty swift (she melts an armor piece and shapes it into the signet in the space of a brief conversation!) and even if every single one of the Mandalorians left their armor behind, it'd be just a couple of carts' worth of metal.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This entry presumes that the armorer has done nothing but collect armor pieces, and plans to continue doing nothing but collect armor pieces until she is finished. She never says that. She merely says that she won't leave until she is done collecting everything. She could be doing any number of other tasks she never says anything about because it isn't important. It is also never said when she started collecting armor pieces, it could have been just before we see her.
We can make all sorts of assumptions; she was grieving for a time, she had to go into hiding, she had to collect the armor pieces from various places? Fascinating, but if we do not presume anything, what we get is the Armorer (known as and for just that) salvaging armor (saying "I will not abandon this place until I have salvaged what remains") at a place established as raided a long time ago. What she had to salvage was meager (just a handful of Mandos) and does it fast.
In order to be a plot hole it would have to be impossible for the armorer to take this long to collect armor pieces. Since we don't know everything she has been doing off-screen, this doesn't count as a plot hole. You have to ignore all logical and reasonable possibilities to get to the point where this is a plot hole, and you list more than one in your reply.
I listed them because they are the kind of things we can assume to justify "Events or character decisions which only exist to benefit the plot, rather than making sense.", definition of plot hole in the website. We can make up all sort of background story, but nothing changes the fact that a character is at a place raided weeks prior and in the middle of performing a task that the way shown here is not going to take more than a few hours.
It's the "rather than making sense" part that this entry lacks. There are several reasons that make sense why this could take long, chief among them the fact that we don't know how long she has actually been collecting armor pieces. If, for example she said "I've been doing this since the attack", that would be one thing. She doesn't say that. She just says she won't leave until this particular task is done, not that it was her only task. She could have just started.
Collecting armor as specific task is something I find as such for the first time in your first comment. The attack happened shortly after Mando left, and the planet has been under a tight Imperial control since. Nothing leads to believe that the pile of amor is not salvaged but was brought back through some quest that stretched out for weeks until she finally decided exactly that day to start carting them to the furnace, which is what she's in the middle of when they arrive.
29th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Chapter 15: The Believer - S2-E7
Stupidity: We are thrilled to see Bill Burr's face, and he does some impressive acting in this episode, however Mando and him are going inside a base without any intel or cover, trying to be low-profile and avoid risk, but he chose to ditch his helmet for a petty reason (makes driving - in a straight line - harder) and he does not pick it back up even if he easily could, when the drive is over. And of course, nobody in the base realises that they have never seen that guy before, and the original drivers must had no comrades/friends who were awaiting their return ,nor officer to report to.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: All highly speculative. Both of them take their helmets off and nobody knows who they are. Not unlikely since there is no reason given why they should be known to the people at the base. Unless you can give a good reason why they should, this is not a stupidity.
Can you give me a good reason why nobody should be waiting for the drivers' arrival or know what they look like? Which is what I said in the entry; not that people do not know who Bill Burr is (which is incidentally also what happens since he knows the officer, and he does know of the base at least), but that nobody knows they are not the people driving the trucks. He's totally unconcerned.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Stupidity: Ahsoka gives the magistrate a day to surrender for no real reason - she has no advantage doing so nor it is any more honorable or humane; she is in fact giving Morgan time to organize herself with hostages as she explicitly threatens to. Had she finished her assault without this senseless ultimatum, barely anyone would have been in any danger or tortured for a full day like it happened.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Tano doesn't know the strength of the Magistrate's forces. Djarin tells her that there are ex-military, hired mercenaries inside armed to the teeth and that he doesn't believe that even with the force she would survive. Tano agrees with this assessment and also asks if Djarin saw any hostages inside, so until then she didn't even know for sure whether or not there were. It is implied that had Tano continued her assault she would have been killed. There is indeed no stated reason why Tano gives a single day as an ultimatum, but it seems reasonable to assume that prior to meeting Djarin and The Child she would have used this time to plan her 2nd assault.
I think we disagree on the idea that it is implied that if she continued her assault she would have been killed; she killed 25% of their troops in their first assault, and then in the second one, which was in the open and broad daylight, she killed or disarmed everyone else including the main villain and the henchman, who was then killed by Mando, together with 2 guards. Mando was only instrumental in saving the hostages Morgan took after her threat - which, by the way, was expressed in a way that did not even imply necessarily that she was just taking the people hostages and not kill them right away as punishment. The evil henchman says it correctly "We'll be ready when she returns"; waiting only weakens her position in every way, since the stakes and/or disparity in forces is not shown adequately.
You seem to be ignoring the part where Djarin tells her that even with her skills she would be killed and she agrees. Whether or not that is actually true based on what we see doesn't really matter, it's their opinion based on what they know at the time. It seems fairly clear that she withdraws because she doesn't know what she's up against behind those walls.
She literally laughs behind his back when he says that line, and it is contradicted in every way from what we see, so it seems to be ignored by the writers first and foremost. They say the rule of writing is "Show, don't tell", I'd be fine with "Don't show the opposite of what you are telling." You can argue that it's more alike a plot hole than a simple stupidity, but I think you can agree that for what it is shown, Ahsoka had no other reason to wait for (more than) a day other than give the main character a chance to show up, and an ultimatum considerably worsens her position. It's not even clear why she took so long to make a move on the city, Bo-Katan (who does not have a direct path of communication on her) knew where she was, but the first time we see her it is also the first time she has a contact with the Magistrate.
No, I do not believe the writers included a laugh as an indication that Ahsoka believes the exact opposite of what Djarin states and that she agrees with his assessment that she is outmatched just to keep him happy. Yes, they do portray her as very powerful inside the city, but there are two people in there fighting at the same time which splits the enemies forces. Yes, giving yourself time to prepare also gives your enemy time to prepare. Sometimes there's no way to avoid that. This is neither a Stupidity nor a plot hole.
"Splits" is an overstatement; she takes the whole force down herself. We both agree that "she regroups after a preliminary assault and then prevails through teamwork" is the general idea of what it should happen, but it's not what it is shown. Remove Mando from the episode and you would only have (assuming she adopts the same effortlessy successful strategy to attack head-on a prepared enemy: she gets inside with no problem whatsoever!) a couple prisoners as casualties, which is something that Ahsoka herself brought upon her. There's not even an indication that she was preparing any strategy, since she asks about the presence of any prisoner while she is already going back to face the Magistrate.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Stupidity: In a throwaway comedy line, the Mythrol says that he still does not have vision in his left eye. For unexplained reasons that is the one guy that they take along for the dangerous base assault mission; a wimpy, obese, half-blind accountant. And for the whole mission he is quite a good shot, even (left-handed one at that, even). Cara is the Marshall and Greef the de facto 'ruler' of the town, who appears to be the biggest if not the only one of the planet; are we to believe the whole planet is so small that its whole defence is composed by these two people and there's not a single other able-bodied person on it? (00:11:30)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The base was supposed to be practically empty, run by a skeleton crew. It was meant to be a simple, in and out mission and the Mythrol was just supposed to be their driver. He goes with the group inside, against his better judgment, because the lava tide will be coming in soon. It is never stated that the four members of the team are the only able-bodied people, they simply believed that the four they bring would be enough. Which as it turns out was completely accurate, given the fact the team succeeds even with the base being full of stormtroopers. Also, you don't have to be a stereotypical tough guy to be a good shot. There's plenty of people that aren't soldiers and are far from in good shape that are perfectly capable with a gun.
And that are also blind in one eye? I figured that the lava tide was just an excuse to bring him in - no such tide is shown to affect the area, even if the mission takes them longer than they anticipated.
You say in your mistake that the blind in one eye comment was meant to be humorous. No reason to believe he was being completely honest. But yes, it is not unheard of for people with limited or even no vision in one eye to still be a good shot. It only limits your depth perception and peripheral vision. No reason you can't hit a target right in front of you with only one good eye. Regardless of whether or not the lava tide coming in was a true statement or just an excuse to get him to come in, it isn't a stupidity mistake that the group brings him in. These mistakes are not for actions by characters you would not agree with were you in their shoes. This category of mistake is for an action so daft it defies logic, such as running back into the building with the killer you just escaped.
"I'll bring my pudgy accountant to my base infiltration mission, he has a speeder bike" doesn't sound exactly logical, no (other than the fact that he's a funny character and helps making the episode entertaining). If he was supposed to just be their driver and then an extraordinary circumstance such as their speeder bike being destroyed forced him to abandon a "Keep the speeder running" (as Mando says en route - in a typical trope, they are discussing their roles and basic mission objectives only when they are already well on the way and have zero scouting or tools) plan, it would have followed some kind of logic, but that is not what happens, they drag him in. When do you ever see in a robbery/heist movie the characters tell their getaway guy "come on in, we could use one more guy with a gun actually, forget our only escape mean"? By any logic he'd just slow them down, he even just showed them that he's not any good at picking a lock.
It doesn't rise to the level of a Stupidity mistake. Bringing him isn't an action that is so stupid it seems unbelievable. He doesn't even appear to be as much of a hindrance to the mission as you suggest, they seem to operate just fine with him there.
Of course they are the good guys and it all works out in the end and it made for a fine episode, but for all we know and they know, they dragged a non-combat trained and physically unfit accountant to their commando mission, the fighting part. It's already a big stretch that the magistrate and the marshall of a whole planet have to resort on that guy of all people for a getaway driver role (he's not even portrayed as being a great pilot, since Cara drives the vehicle they will escape with: he's literally there because he's got a bike and he's an indentured servant), but it sure seems unbelievable they brought him - inside the base - all of a sudden with no story justification about it (which would have been really simple) and contradicting the original plan.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Chapter 15: The Believer - S2-E7
Stupidity: The Empire has plenty troops and TIE Fighters, and the locals are armed with sticks, but the convoys of highly volatile explosives have no armed escort whatsoever, despite the fact that they keep losing those huge trucks full of precious chemicals to those troglodytes with no body armor or special skills.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The empire doesn't have plenty of anything, this is after the fall of the empire, this is what is left and they are hanging by a thread. It probably costs too much to have escorts, or escorts like TIE fighters are too expensive to risk, even against "troglodytes." They'd rather accept the losses they take, apparently that is more cost efficient.
Plenty more than what the opponents have, in that very base. They have TIE fighters in the base, who provide air support at the very end. They have troops. The opponents show having no offensive weapon at all other than detonators, that they fling like stones. Losing transport convoys because you provide literally zero escort to them is no strategy in times of abundance, even less in times of scarcity. And that chemical is a strategic resource that helps their war, and the only reason the base exists.
27th Dec 2008
Bangkok Dangerous (2008)
Corrected entry: In the beginning scenes in Prague, just after Joe shoots the witness, there are several shots of witness's papers. One of them shows witness's head shot and the name spelled "JINDOICH EIPERA" (with a stroke-through O and accented E) which is wrong. This kind of erroneous spelling happens when Central European texts are printed with a Western/US character set. The correct spelling should be "JINDRICH CIPERA" (with R and C with caron).
Correction: So those papers were printed with a Western/US character set. Where's the movie mistake in that? We don't know who hired Joe to do the job in Prague, there's no reason the paperwork he was given could not have come from America.
I don't agree with the correction itself (a faulty transliteration is a mistake regardless), but this correction was probably made without seeing the scene. Those papers are not in Joe's possession, but the papers of the Prague police that arrested the witness he is killing before an interrogation. There's no reason for them to have papers that are written in the wrong character set.
20th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Chapter 5: The Gunslinger - S1-E5
Stupidity: Mando's ally breaks the fob saying he's got it memorized. Memorize a tracking device, that's new.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He means he memorized the chain code, the biometric data stored on the tracking fob. Calican already knows Fennec is headed towards the dune sea so they don't need the fob to track her location.
Beyond the dune sea, is what he says, yes, which is an enormous desert on the vaste planet. Memorizing the biometric data does not help at all without the tracking device. I took it that he memorized the positional data, but if I know someone's last known location, and that they are headed "beyond the Sahara desert" it is not really helping me find them, is it? You can make a guess, of course.
The chain code is what is used to identify the target, when they are turned in to collect the bounty. You don't need the tracking fob if you already know all the numbers in the chain code. That's the part that he memorized. It doesn't appear that the tracking fob gives you precise location data, so "In the Sahara dessert" is all you get. If the tracking fob did give more precise location data then every idiot in the galaxy would be a bounty hunter.
To identify the target he has the puck already. My point is that "Got it all memorized" is a plot device that works when your target is stationary (like The Child in the first episode), not a moving target. He smashed a -tracking - device (which took it where he is now) and then says he's "got it all memorized." You can't memorize tracking, and the chain code simply includes data like the age that are of no use for a target already well known like Fennec. What he memorized was her last known location at most... which if the fobs are as vague as you mention (one hopes that they are not just beeping dowsing rods) would make even less sense, because he wouldn't have a clue about her position and course and could be off by hundreds of miles.
The chain code contains identifying information that proves what target you've brought in. In another episode a character worries that if his chain code is scanned he will go to prison because he's a wanted man. Yes, the tracking fob is used to hunt down your target but that's not why Mando wants it and why the other bounty hunter destroys it. Without the fob, even if Mando catches Fennec he won't be able to collect the bounty because he doesn't know the chain code.
If we go with this theory, it sounds like Mando wants the money (and recognition) to bring Fennec in, but he does not care about that nor he was asking for it; the fob has a different use, and the chain code is memorized separately from that anyway (he was given in the first episode tracking The Child a fob without a chain code). The chain code is simply a code with the essential information about the subject, like a personal document. If that what he memorized, it's as if he said "Don't worry, we'll find her in the desert, I got her social security number." And if he captured Fennec, which was needed alive, he would have gotten the recognition no matter what.
I tend to agree with the mistake that the tracking fob is receiving updated biometric coordinate data, so there's no way memorize updated data, at most it would be memorizing last known coordinates. However, I would advise using terms like "Baby Yoda" if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise it looks like you haven't watched the show. There's no need to use incorrect terms just because you think people won't know who "The Child" or "Grogu" is.
11th Jan 2021
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Stupidity: Diana and Steve are both characterized as heroes and highly moral individuals, but they both are perfectly fine, without giving any shadow of a second thought, with the fact that Steve is inhabiting the body of a real person, with a real job and friends, completely innocent and whose life has been taken. We don't ask for a movie to cover every possible nuance, but they make reference to his job, use his stuff, endanger the innocent body and use it 'for pleasure' too. They make a big deal of Cheetah losing her humanity, but what the heroes do is arguably worse.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While this is bad writing that makes them unsympathetic, it is not objectively a mistake. They endanger the man through Steve because the entire world is at stake. They have sex using his body because they, like the writers most likely, do not consider it rape because there's no indication that the man is conscious in Steve's body or that he'll ever find out (So closer to date-rape), and ultimately, Diana wanting Steve to stay in the man's body forever, while arguably out of character, is a character flaw they both realise she needs to overcome by the end of the movie.
Not objectively a mistake? Actually I agree! Stupidity entries are in a tab separate from the proper "mistakes" tab for a reason; all those behaviors that are not full plot holes but happen against logic and character, just because they are being a tool for the plot. The movie does not make them unsympathetic by design; that would be good writing, that wouldn't be stupid, it would be human. But no, their love antics are never characterized as problematic or inherently creepy. The choices they make and that are outlined in your comment are glossed over; the movie hides the face of the guy but they both see it when they 'rape' him and when they risk his wellbeing, When she gives up on him she does it to get her powers back, she is not overcoming a character flaw, since the presence of the "other guy" is not addressed even at that moment, even if they see him. (if Steve were in a new body, the scene would have played exactly the same). Nobody could act this blasè.
Everything you've said in the stupidity entry and comment is your opinion (well, probably the opinion of the one YouTube video we've all seen where the guy bashes the film and then others repeat his opinion). Wonder Woman sees Steve, not the man whose body Steve is in. Not to mention we don't hear all their conversations about the situation because it would become clunky dialog. And before she starts losing her powers, the two really had no idea what had happened to the man. But nothing in the film regarding this situation is out of character of the "good guys" because we've never seen them in this situation (nor has anyone actually been in this situation to claim "nobody would act this blasé).
I invite you to rewatch the actual movie and not any youtube video; she sees the guy, they both do; he's never Chris Pine, who is 'canonically' never in the movie as himself. Chris Pine is what we, the audience, see. Look back at the scene of the mirror. They explain it. She says "He's great, but all I see is you." Not meaning that she LITERALLY sees Steve, but that she knows it's Steve and so she thinks of him. He even says, about himself, when he tells her to look for other men, "What about this guy" and she says "I don't want this guy." What's in the movie is out of character for any human being who is not delusional to the point of actually seeing the face of someone else. Which is what the movie needs to turn us viewers into to make the plot work.
Nothing in the film suggested to me she sees the other man after Steve comes back. I was basing my comments on watching the film (the YouTube comment was because this mistake is the same rehashed comment found there). When the camera pans around and the audience sees Steve, I took it to mean Diana sees Steve. When she says "all I see is you", I took that to mean she literally sees Steve. The mirror scene was to show the world still sees the man, but not Diana. But I can understand if others' take away was Diana sees the other man but just knows inside her heart it's Steve.
She sees that guy at the party, and only through Steve's words she then realises it's him, which the movie portrays from then on by showing Steve to us. The earlier part of the mirror scene is even more clear. He says; "Look at you. It's like not one day has passed." And she replies jokingly "I can't say the same thing about you." He does not look the same! And he in fact then goes to the mirror saying, "Right, right, right." and comments on the look of "He." So yes, I do firmly believe that it's what the movie says. If I may; the fact that some people on Youtube posted a video saying some things does not mean that anyone else supporting a specific idea - which does have a foundation in what the movie said, as I hope I clarified - did not reach the same conclusion and should be dismissed because they are lazily rehashing hersay. Glad you at least see where I come from, even if you may have not read the movie facts the same way I did.
18th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Plot hole: Seeing The Child in episode 2-1 minute 10, Amy Sedaris' character shouts "Thank the Force." Up to that point nobody seemed to have the faintest idea of what sort of mysterious energy Grogu was using. It gets worse in episode 2-3 when Mando uses as greeting for the New Republic "May the Force be with you", which is used later other times. With the concept of Force being this ingrained in people's culture, it's inconceivable that *everyone* is completely clueless about Jedi, especially considering that Order 66 with the Jedi purge happens barely 30 years before the events of the Mandalorian, and several characters such as Kuiil or Greef Karga were alive and active during the time when Jedis were powerful and part of the administration.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There's a difference between seeing the Force used and knowing what it is and the common phrase "thank the Force" or "may the Force be with you." Plus, the Child is not a Jedi.
Not technically a Jedi, but he has been trained by Jedi and does those magical Force things that people would associate with Jedi, and would be perceived as such, if only people had any memories about them. Mando and Greef do not have the faintest idea of such 'magic' having ever existed, and Kuil has heard 'rumors' of it. Less than 30 years. Really, it's a common problem for all the Star Wars saga to some extent and it has been already debated to death. In this series nobody even seems to know the concept of Force in season 1, then in season 2 it pops up with random mentions.
The sayings are just customary more than knowledge of the Force. The Galaxy is big, with 3B habitable worlds, each having up to hundreds of millions if not billions of inhabitants each. The Jedi, at their peak and fall, were around 10,000. Many never heard of the Jedi, even less seen one. Find a remote village somewhere, and ask them if they remember the Atari.
16th Jan 2021
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Other mistake: Flying the jet plane, Steve is surprised by the lights in the sky and needs Diana to explain to him that it's fireworks and it's the 4th of July. Fireworks are something that has existed for centuries, and Steve himself was the one who found the plane ticket for the 4th commenting "If this date is right." (01:11:30)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He didn't realise it was the 4th of July, he's just surprised to see fireworks, not that he doesn't know what they are. The date on the plane ticket he just forgot.
He asks "What's that?" when the fireworks are visible and can't really be mistaken as anything else, and he himself was fully aware of the date before they headed to the hangar, but Diana says "The 4th" and he asks "The 4th of July?" like it's the first time he even thinks which month is it. If you listen to it, the emphasis is on the question in the delivery of the line as in "It's the 4th of July?", not as in "Oh, the 4th of July, right!"
She says it's the fourth and he instantly realises it's fireworks for the fourth of July. There is no indication whatsoever that Steve doesn't know what fireworks are and your movie mistake suggests the makers intended Steve not to know what fireworks are, which is ridiculous. Your interpretation of the scene is just wrong.
He does not instantly realise it's fireworks for the fourth of July. She has to reassure him that "oh it's OK, it's just fireworks", then she says "The 4th, of course" and he replies, as I said "The 4th of July?" with huge emphasis on the surprise. Sorry if you find my interpretation of the scene 'just wrong', but if they did not have his character call attention on the date literally 5 minutes earlier in the movie (it is a fact), I would have not reported it just for the fireworks part alone (which is more subjective, we read differently, and I respect your position).
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.