SAZOO1975

29th Jun 2008

Jason X (2001)

Plot hole: When Professor Lowe calls Dieter Perez to tell him about his findings on Earth 1, Perez makes note that one of the viables was named Voorhees and deduced it was Jason Voorhees. How did Lowe know it was named Voorhees? 1) Rowan at the beginning acknowledged she had yet to prep the chamber which means no paperwork. 2) The students found no paperwork when they found the chamber and had no time to look for paperwork once they realized they needed to get Rowan to a lab to save her right away. 3) Rowan did not give him Jason's name when she first woke up. This is obvious in the scene after Lowe talked with Perez he was talking to Rowan and she brought up the story about Jason and he acted like he never heard the name before. So there is no way for Lowe to know Jason's name for his report to Dieter.

SAZOO1975

Plot hole: When Jason is going next door to chase after Trish, he pulls Jimbo's body down from the doorway and begins walking towards Trish's cabin. He is seen walking by himself. However in the next scene, he throws Rob's body through the window. There was no time for him to go back and get the body. (01:17:15)

SAZOO1975

Plot hole: Jason all of a sudden can drive a boat and out of nowhere, seems to know about a cruise ship filled with teenagers ready for him to kill. Yeah, makes sense to me. Especially since there is land with buildings right where Jim and Suzie drop anchor on their boat. Jason gives up killing people in those buildings to drive to a cruise ship that he cannot possibly know about? Also the fact that the survivors get to New York and minutes later Jason just happens to pop out of the water? Are we led to believe that he not only learned how to swim to New York but he managed to not kill everyone while they were in the life raft?

SAZOO1975

22nd Feb 2007

The Monster Squad (1987)

Plot hole: In order to get rid of the monsters, Phoebe needs to read a text from Van Helsing's diary in order to summon the vortex. As Dracula approaches her, she becomes scared and misses on some words (the Scary German Guy is helping her read since she is 5 years old and she doesn't repeat some of the words he says). However the vortex still shows up to get rid of the monsters.

SAZOO1975

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: It is never specified that the incantation must be read verbatim to work.

BaconIsMyBFF

It also never states that reading only part of the incantation would work either. However, the mistake is still valid because the way to get rid of something evil by reading some "spell" you'd have to read the entire thing. Therefore the virgin shouldn't have been able to summon the vortex.

lartaker1975

Since "spells" are entirely made up and magic isn't real, you can't say that in this film every word must be read for it to work when the film itself shows otherwise. Every film gets to make it's own rules with magic, this film establishes that the incantation can be read "in spirit" to work. Other films might have different rules.

BaconIsMyBFF

It's always been implied in movies and books that incantations must be read word for word in order to work. Otherwise, what's the point of having all the words there if you only need to read a word or 2?

lartaker1975

18th Feb 2007

The Monster Squad (1987)

Plot hole: The army showing up at the end of the movie is wrong on numerous levels. 1) Eugene wrote and sent out the letter that day. I find it hard to believe the mailed letter got to the army in just a few hours time. 2) How did the army know to show up at time square? When Eugene wrote the letter, nowhere did it say where to meet. Plus the boys didn't decide to go to time square until the last minute. 3) since when is the army deployed to battle monsters based on a letter that was written by a child?

SAZOO1975

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The army's arrival being unrealistic is a very deliberate joke, like the armadillo-rats from earlier in the movie.

I submitted a category change to "Factual Error" to help cover this. It is indeed too deliberate to be a true plothole, but it is nonetheless amusing to point out all the ridiculous ways this humorous scene defies believability.

TonyPH

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.