Corrected entry: Throughout the movie the cars and building are shrunk down to size and carried by people. Though the size has changed, their mass hasn't. In this and the original film it is specified that the Pym Particle works by reducing the distance between atoms. That's absurd, but in the context of the film that is what happens. This means that a human reduced to the size of an ant would have an unimaginable density, and thus his mass and weight would stay the same. There's no way the characters could carry those things with little or no effort, they would weigh as much as they did before they were shrunk.
Correction: This isn't a mistake so to speak. The abilities of Ant-Man and the whole shrinking and growing thing is very much a comic book thing. And the only way these movies even work at all is through the suspension of disbelief.
Maybe, but in the first film they explicitly state that even though the shrinking technology makes objects sizes' smaller, it doesn't change their mass.
Corrected entry: When Stan and Ollie are about to do the "At the Ball, That's All" dance outside Mickey Finn's at the start, they are facing the camera with Mickey Finn's behind them and they start doing the dance whilst the camera is rolling. When the audience are watching them do the dance in the movie at the cinema, they are now facing Mickey Finn's with a projection screen behind them, just like in the actual movie.
Correction: I'm correcting my own mistake after looking at videos again of the scene in question - I was wrong in my recollection. Stan and Ollie are actually in front of the projection screen when the camera starts rolling and not Mickey Finn's.
Corrected entry: Possible spoiler! At one point, Father Flynn tells Darlene Sweet that he likely has Alzheimer's Disease. The film is set in 1968, and the term "Alzheimer's" as a specific diagnosis was not commonly used until after a 1977 medical conference.
Correction: The term "Alzheimer's" did exist prior to 1977 and was a valid diagnosis. The medical conference mentioned only set to change the use of the term as they began to understand the pathology of the disease and now understood elderly patients could develop Alzheimer's as well, which differs than senile dementia. Prior to 1977, the disease was only diagnosed in patients under 65.
Corrected entry: How did the daughter's laptop get in the house kitchen when she had it at study group the previous night when talking to her dad and had not come home?
Correction: She used her phone. Same way she would have when she facetimed her dad from a car when Vick's son was attacking her in a ravine where wifi would not have been available.
Correction: She was using her phone to Facetime him, no mention of her laptop.
Corrected entry: When Faith and Hope meet at the summer camp, they are supposed to be identical twins. Even though they look very similar (possible fraternal twins) you can tell the actresses who play them are not identical twins. Hope has an obvious cleft in her chin but Faith does not.
Correction: Hope and Faith, at age 16, are in fact played by identical twin sisters (Nicole and Lauren Peters). The phenotypical expression of a cleft chin can depend on environmental factors.
I guess I should have been more specific as to when they meet at the summer camp. I am not referring to when they were 16, but when they met at the summer camp as adults when Faith killed her sister by drowning her and ditching her car. The actresses who played the adult twins were obviously not identical twins.
According to IMDB, Blake Lively played both adult twins, so the above makes no sense.
Unless I missed something, Blake Lively plays both Faith and Hope in the scene. There are not two actresses, just the one. Feel free to reply with the name of the actress who played Faith so I can see what I missed.
Corrected entry: When Roger gets angry with John and Brian at breakfast, the counter is covered with crockery and food until Roger grabs the coffee pot and turns to smash it, at which point the counter is clear.
Correction: This is incorrect. After Roger throws food at Brian, Freddie walks out and the camera follows him to the field behind the house. You can hear, in the background, the boys yelling, fighting and throwing pans and breakables including cups and plates. And the camera cuts back to the boys, when Brian and John tell Roger not to throw the "coffee machine" - the counter is free of plates and cups but it's covered with spilled coffee and bits of food... everything was thrown around the kitchen during their fight.
I don't think that's right (but I don't have the movie to hand). As I recall it, the time between the two points I'm discussing (Roger turns round to get the coffee pot and then goes to smash it) is only a couple of seconds. But human memory is fallible. If you have a link to the scene as shown in theatres, I'd be interested.
You can see it if you go to YouTube - spilled coffee, bits of food and in the upper left you can see remnants of the stems from the flowers that were in the vase. Here's the YouTube link. https://youtu.be/17CluXgNMmQ.
Video blocked on content grounds, sadly, but I'll take your word for it.
Correction: While it's easy to miss, there actually is some brief dialogue in the first film when Scott is learning about the suit that establishes the rules. In addition to shrinking and growing, things like mass, energy and weight are also affected by the Pym-Particles. Sure, perhaps it's not 100% realistic, but the films do address these issues and offer explanation. Hence people can carry around shrunken buildings, tanks, cars, etc.
TedStixon
In this, and the previous film, it is specified that the Pym particles work by reducing the distance between atoms. That is utterly impossible, of course, but in the context of the film that is what happens. This means that shrunken or expanded articles or people retain their mass and weight. This is an inescapable mistake for both films, and the original posting is correct.
The shrinking works differently on inanimate objects. It's the suits that let the person being shrunk to maintain its mass, anything else being shrunk loses its mass. Blowing stuff up works differently though, the technology to do that is just different. The way Pym particles work is one thing, but how all of the technology involved works is a totally different thing.
lionhead
Here's the problem with this reply - the first film specifically states that it's not just the distance between particles that's being altered - other properties change along with them as a result of the Pym particle. The fact of the matter is yes, you can try to apply real-world logic to it and pick it apart, but the films do an adequate job explaining why it's possible to do things like carry buildings or tanks around so long as they are shrunken down, or for a plastic children's toy to become a destructive object when enlarged, as they are effected by the mysterious properties of the Pym particle. Hence, it shouldn't be considered a mistake unless a specific scene contradicts something else shown earlier in the film.
TedStixon