Continuity mistake: Jodie Foster has very blue eyes. When they flashback to her childhood, when she is crossing the lawn to greet her father, the girl playing the young Clarice has dark eyes. (00:20:10)
Continuity mistake: At the graduation ceremony, a woman cuts a slice of cake and passes it to someone and then, without slicing the cake again, she somehow has another slice to pass to someone else.
Suggested correction: She actually hands the person an empty clear glass dish (the kind used to serve the first piece of cake); the person must have wanted the dish to get something else, not cake.
Continuity mistake: When Clarice is searching the basement, the first door she approaches is hinged on the left and opens towards her. She opens it, and it turns into a door that has the hinges on the right and opens away from her. (01:43:50)
Suggested correction: There are two doors in that part of the basement. The one she enters is hinged on the left and opens inward. But the other door - the one she exited through to look for Jame Gumb - is hinged on the right and swings outward.
Character mistake: Dissecting the chrysalis, Dr. Roden says that "Somebody grew this guy. Fed him honey and nightshade." Nightshade is indeed one of the typical plants eaten by the Death's head moth, but since "he" is only a pupa, would have not eaten honey, which is something only the adult specimen eats. (00:48:50)
Suggested correction: I don't see this so much as a mistake, but rather a shortcut so there would be no need to explain the entire metamorphosis process. Feeding "it" would refer to the larva stage, necessary to reach (grow to) the pupa stage. "It" may have transformed, but "it" is still the same "it." The men working there are experts and would know what he means, not interrupt and say, "Pupae don't eat, dumb @$$." Likewise, having to specifically say that someone fed the larva "honey and Nightshade" so that it would become that pupa doesn't seem to be necessary given the nature of the film. [And the larva - not just "adults" - might eat honey.].
Sorry, I don't really understand the point of the first part (like, 90%) of the correction; at no point I was disputing the concept of 'feeding a pupa', but just what it could have eaten to be raised to that stage. The only relevant part of your correction is that last phrase; "And the larva might eat honey." Which is not how it works from what I understand. If you want to correct this entry, please dispute that aspect; I never bred bugs (...on purpose!) and surely not of that kind, but the larvae of that species are strictly herbivores, and the honey plays into their diet only later in life - to the best of my knowledge they can't even process it at that stage. Assuming it can (which I have no particular reason to believe), it would be an exception and not what an entomologist would say to describe a well raised specimen. For what it is worth, also, Harris' novel never mentions honey, but specifically leaves, although it's a different plant.
Sorry if I misconstrued what you were trying to say. By writing that the pupa would not eat something only the adults eat, you left the impression that the pupa eats other things (just not the honey). I think I understand now. Your answer is specific to the honey and my response addressed how much information the experts needed to present about metamorphosis and food/no food to the audience. I hope this helps you understand at least some of that 90%.
Continuity mistake: Lecter asks for a lamb chop dinner, rare, and when they arrive, they are rare. When we see them later, they look well done. (01:15:50)
Suggested correction: They don't look different in any of the shots. It's the same lambchops, same temperature. They are cooked as is, so they have a dark outside but inside they are probably rare. They do look darker in the last scene but that's probably because they have gone cold and dried out.
Suggested correction: How would a mistake like that come to be? Someone cooked them in between shots? Too much time elapsed and the substance oxidized? The potato and everything else on the plate look the same, and so do the chops, shape-wise. They might be of a slightly darker color in the very last shot with Boyle on the floor, but the plate has also been sprayed with blood, so that could account for this - mostly perceived - change.
A mistake like this would come to be if they're using real food and not props and had to do a cut, change camera position, do a reshoot, etc and had to set the scene again and redo the cooking of the food, or remake the props for some reason, but now the food looks different. What we see as a continuous scene in a movie or TV show is not always done in one take, which is why the site is filled with countless continuity mistakes.
Plot hole: When Clarice visits Lecter in his new makeshift cell, she brings his drawings, which were left behind in Baltimore. She tells him how she saw the lambs being killed and heard them screaming, taking one lamb with her when she ran away. As the guards approached his cell after she leaves, the camera pans across the cell, taking in the drawings Clarice had brought, and the top one is a very detailed drawing of Clarice holding a spring lamb. She only told just told Lecter about the lamb, not enough time for him to have done that drawing.
Suggested correction: First; I do agree and support the mistake. But playing devil's advocate for a moment; she told him back in Baltimore about the ranch and how they had sheep and horses, so in theory he could have already started drawing back then and figure that a memory about the place was linked to those animals, adding the exact detail afterwards. Should also be noted that the guards approach the cell 'after she leaves', yes, but it's an 'after' that happens after she already flew back all the way from Memphis, so a few hours later.
Your last sentence corrects the mistake, the top drawing is new and wasn't brought by Clarice. You can see chalk on top of the drawing indicating he had just made it. Several hours passed between her delivering her story and him receiving his dinner.
Factual error: Jack Crawford lists Clarice Starling's accomplishments saying that she has a double major in Psych (ology) and Criminology and graduated "magna." Clarice talking with the creepy Dr. Chilton establishes further that she graduated from UVA, where she also followed Crawford's seminar. Problem is, the University of Virginia did not offer a Criminology major in the 90s (does now, but began only in the 00s) and to this day it does not have Latin honors. (00:06:30)
Suggested correction: Some colleges/universities allow "self-designed" majors. If UVA offered enough Criminology courses at the time, it would be possible for Clarice to have this double major.
Suggested correction: Eye color also can change with age. This happens in 10 to 15 percent of the Caucasian population (people who generally have lighter eye colors).
Babies born with blue eyes can develop brown or darker eyes as melanin is produced. And while eye color can get lighter with age (older than Clarice usually), a child her age with brown eyes won't develop blue eyes. They could turn green maybe, but not the blue color seen.
Bishop73
I just rewatched the scene you were talking about and they're not blue eyes they're actually hazel and the adult Clarice could be wearing contact lenses.
Joey221995