Question: I missed something. What was it that Clint Eastwood noticed that made him realize his friend was the killer?
lartaker1975
20th Mar 2014
Blood Work (2002)
26th Dec 2013
2012: Doomsday (2008)
Continuity mistake: In the scene where the large hail falls and the car is trying to dodge around it, when they show scenes from inside the car, if you look behind them you can see no hail falling, nor any hail on the ground.
26th Dec 2013
2012: Doomsday (2008)
Visible crew/equipment: In the scene when the car breaks down right before the girl's mother disappears, as the camera moves up to the car, you can easily see the cameraman's reflection on the side of the car.
23rd Oct 2013
Friday the 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989)
Question: Do the sewers of New York really fill up with toxic waste every night as stated in the movie, or was this just for the purpose of the plot?
12th Aug 2013
And the Band Played On (1993)
Question: I have a question about the first patient Don and his boss go to see (the one trying to solve the Rubik's cube). I can find no information about him. However he seems like he plays an AIDS patient in a couple of other movies, with the same lesions, same gay act, etc. Is he really like this or do they seem to cast him in the part because he plays it so well? Or am I mistaken about him? Any info would help. It is driving me crazy.
Chosen answer: The actor's name is Stephen Spinella. He is listed in the credits for "And the Band Played On" as "Brandy Alexander." Though neither his given name nor his drag name is mentioned during the cameo, he does show a book with pictures of his female impersonation to the doctors. The "trivia" portion of his IMDb profile states: "Vaulted from obscurity with his frighteningly realistic portrayal of AIDS-ravaged Prior Walter in Tony Kushner's two-part stage epic "Angels in America." An openly gay actor, he has since played in a number of gay-related themes on stage, film and TV."
11th Jun 2013
General questions
When people point out a movie mistake, a lot of the time it is answered as a "character mistake" and not a "movie mistake?" What difference does it make? The scene was written for the movie and filmed. The mistake was not noticed during filming or when editing, the mistake was not noticed and they could have used another footage without the mistake. So how can the producer/director/editor leaving a mistake in post production considered a "character mistake" and not a movie mistake?" This question was answered earlier but the answer still makes no sense to me.
Chosen answer: It's a slight matter of judgment, but broadly speaking "character mistakes" are the sort of mistakes people make in real life - getting a historical date or other factual information wrong, or a mis-spelling on a sign, things like that. As such they could be a sign of bad filmmaking, or just a believable slip that someone could easily make in real life. So it makes sense to have a section for these sort of "behavioural mistakes" different to "factual errors" which are definitely filmmaking/research mistakes, such as wreckage burning in space, or it apparently being daylight everywhere in the world at the same time (both from Armageddon).
7th Jun 2013
The Karate Kid III (1989)
Question: While doing the kata, the only time Daniel moves his feet is when he turns during the kata. He never moves towards Barnes. At one point, Barnes tries to moves towards Daniel but stops when Daniel starts the kata. It is finally Barnes who moves towards Daniel, not the other way around. Would it be legal for Daniel to distract Barnes with kata in the middle of a tournament, as he's not moving towards Barnes at any time?
Chosen answer: Yes, it is legal. As long as a competitor is in motion the match continues. Had Daniel stayed in his upright "ready stance", he would have been dq'd for match delay.
5th Jun 2013
The Karate Kid (1984)
Question: Why was Ali mad at Daniel at the mini golf course? The last time we saw them together was at the club where Daniel got embarrassed. But they were already planning to meet there. I have seen no explanation as to why she was mad at him.
Chosen answer: Ali was upset with Daniel because he didn't allow her to explain why when he came to pick her up, he found her not only dancing with her ex-boyfriend but kissing him. He ran off after running into a waiter and everyone (Johnny included) laughed at him as he sat on the ground in a mostly white outfit covered in spaghetti sauce.
Answer: I never understood that either. Of course he ran off without letting her explain! That was humiliating and she should have been the one to apologize.
Yes, but teenage girls don't work that way.
3rd Jun 2013
The Karate Kid (1984)
Question: Why wasn't Johnny disqualified for his own "illegal contact to the knee" like Bobby was? We know the ref saw it happen because he gave Johnny a warning. Never made sense to me.
Answer: The answer makes no sense since Johnny caught the leg and purposely rams the elbow into the back of the knee. There was no accident about it. Even the ref acknowledged this.
Chosen answer: Johnny attacked an illegal area which the rules accept may happen accidentally and so they have provisions for warnings and such in light of that possibility, whereas Bobby performed an illegal technique which cannot happen accidentally, and therefore the rules call for immediate disqualification.
That wasn't an accident; Johnny deliberately elbowed the back of the knee. But having him disqualified would be a terrible ending to a great film. The warning was for plot reasons.
Answer: The movie never explains this and it always seemed like an error to me. I've always reconciled it by saying that a flying kick to an opponents knee is considered so egregious it warrants an instant disqualification, while an elbow to the knee only draws a warning. Once again, the movie never actually says this so it's only speculation but it does make some sort of sense if you think about it.
Answer: I always took it to mean that the kick Bobby did actually put Daniel in a position where he was unable to continue, and that it was a definite attempt at maliciousness (at least in the referee's eyes), whereas Johnny's attack might have simply been an accident. Look when Bobby kicked Daniel's knee-the fight just started, and it wasn't an accident. When Johnny connected (Up to this point Johnny fought fairly and within the rules) they were in the middle of a match, and Johnny simply hit him illegally without intending to. When I used to train and fight in tournaments, I once got punched across the jaw by an opponent who got a warning. When he did it a second time a few seconds later, he was disqualified. It wasn't something that appeared malicious, it was just in the heat of the moment of the fight. Bobby's act wasn't, which is why he got disqualified. Johnny could have been in the heat of the moment, which is why he only got a warning. If he hit the knee again, he would have been disqualified.
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.
Chosen answer: When looking for clues to the identity of the killer, he comes across a code with the numbers, 903 472 568. He quickly realizes that Noone is the killer because in the code there is "No one".