The Stakeout - S1-E1
Visible crew/equipment: Stage lights are reflected on the coffeepot when the waitress serves coffee.
Suggested correction: You can see lights reflected on the coffee pots, but there is nothing to indicate they are stage lights as opposed to the diner's lighting.
Corrected entry: It's just a parody/absurd sequence, but it's odd that with over two dozen bullets shot from barely a dozen feet of distance, just a couple entry wounds appear on the body of the runaway Seinfeld. Of course no blood either, but that's a necessity given the type of show. (00:08:55)
Correction: It's a dream sequence. It doesn't have to follow the rules of reality. I frequently have dreams that logically make no sense.
I know, I know, but never been a big fan of giving a free pass to dream sequences for things like continuity, poor stunts etc. If anything, it'd get a pass because it's a comedy and violence and realism are toned down by default.
The very nature of dreams give them a free pass for just about anything. I will have dreams where I'm talking to a certain person or holding a certain object, and in the next moment the person will be someone else or the object will be something else. I have dreams where I am back in high school and the layout of the building will frequently change, or the class I go into will change subjects. If you put that to film, it would be a change in continuity.
What you say is true for dream sequences played specifically with the purpose to give the viewer a sense of disorientation, experience something obviously 'off', a deliberately disjointed and creative scenario that breaks reality. As I said, I am not a fan of being unable to nitpick scenes or even movies who happen all in someone's head for trivial mistakes that are not something as amazingly obvious as the ones you explained. Your examples are something the viewer would notice and would register as deliberate choice and part of the plot, but Seinfeld wearing earbuds or 2 gunshot wounds instead of a dozen are not really something I can put in the same category. If the dream scene is played 'straight', as that one has been, I don't believe we have to just assume that any take can be edited together since continuity is not an issue, props and tricks can be visible or act weird because who knows what can happen in a dream, etc.
You make a fair point (which is also why I didn't submit a correction for your separate entry of Jerry wearing ear protection). However, the basis of this submission is that Jerry only has a couple entry wounds and no bleeding after being shot numerous times. That can just be chalked up to how his mind dreamed the scenario. I don't think a sense of disorientation or something being off needs to be established (especially when the sequence is played for laughs) for viewers to accept details like that can suddenly change within a dream since we all dream and understand that those things happen.
Not necessarily "established" but "with purpose", which can be seen in hindsight. Anything can happen in a dream, but if he imagined to be shot in such a dramatic fashion so many times and die, the fact that he dies with a cheap effect is hardly serving any narrative purpose. Again, I could see why ultimately the mistake could be seen as stating the obvious since "the scene is played for laughs", which was my first caveat posting the scene, the last being the lack of blood for censorship purposes. They didn't thoroughly cover Jerry Seinfeld with squibs and things like that just for a gag - explanation of the 'mistake' rather than justification, but fair. But as far as the dream goes, the point of that dream scene is to do something more 'violent' and unexpected than you'd see in the 'real life' scenes, not tone it down through a marginal detail that has a clear explanation.
Corrected entry: Izzy Mandelbaum throws his back out in Florida, so why is he taken to a hospital in Manhattan?
Corrected entry: When Kramer picks up The Maestro's baton and starts to shoot, he calls "6 in the corner." He knocks in a solid black ball, obviously the 8. (00:16:30)
Correction: It seems it's just the lighting that makes it look black, but it's dark green. It's the 6-ball. Compare the color to the 14-ball in the far shots.
Correction: This could be considered a character mistake.
Corrected entry: Near the end of Elaine's conversation with Lippmann about The Muffin Tops in The Bookstore, there is a deep male voice that can be heard saying something unintelligible (it might be Kramer's voice), which must have been layered in the background by accident. (00:04:25)
Correction: I just pulled up this episode on Hulu, and while you can hear a voice going on, I don't see how its inclusion is accidental. They are at a book signing with numerous people, so there is bound to be people talking in the background. Kramer has also invaded the signing, so it could very well be him chatting with people at the event or arguing with Peterman.
The Package - S8-E5
Corrected entry: In this episode, George finds out that Sheila, the photo store woman, is checking out his pictures during development. Right after he discovers this, he goes to Jerry's apartment and starts snapping pictures, one of which is of Jerry fiddling with his stereo with a screwdriver. Later on in the episode, Newman passes by the photo place and happens to see that photo being developed, so he confiscates the roll (which also includes George's sexy photos). The problem is, the photo of Jerry could not have been on that roll since George had already been back to the photo place at least once before after snapping the picture of Jerry. Jerry's picture would've been in the roll that had the picture of the scantily-clad model and of George posing with the Mercedes.
Correction: This is an assumption and there's no proof of this. After George noticed Shelia had been looking at his pictures, he took more pictures (next to the Mercedes and wax Burt) and dropped that roll off. He then started on his 3rd roll of film while waiting for his 2nd roll to be developed. Jerry with his stereo (and Jerry with Elaine) was on this 3rd roll. In addition, when we see Kramer about to start taking pictures of George, we never see Kramer or George load a new roll into the camera, and the sexy pics are on the same 3rd roll as Jerry with the stereo.
Corrected entry: When the trio first attempts to go to The Movie, Jerry is wearing a blue shirt and green pants, but a few days later when the man comes to pick up his dog, Jerry is wearing the same outfit.
Correction: If it has been a few days, it shouldn't strike anyone as unusual that he could be wearing the same outfit. It certainly could be that no items were changed during shooting, but it is believable as a real life situation.
Correction: I mostly wear the same outfit for 3 or 4 days.
Correction: This is wrong, but the corrections don't even say why. The blue shirt/green pants Jerry is wearing is NOT from the first attempt to see The Movie. The first time he's wearing a pinkish sweatshirt and blue jeans and he stays home. The second time is when he's wearing the outfit described and Elaine stays at Jerry's. The man with The Dog calls when Elaine is there and she tells him he better pick The Dog up that night. Which is he does and it's why Jerry is wearing the same thing.
The Doorman - S6-E18
Corrected entry: Jerry and Elaine are held liable for The Couch that was stolen from the lobby of Mr. Pitt's apartment building because Jerry, who agreed to cover for the building's doorman while he ran out to get a beer, left his post at Elaine's behest during which time The Couch was stolen. Since Jerry was not actually employed by the building, he was under no obligation to continue covering The Doorman's post and therefore could not legally be held liable for the theft.
Correction: And if he refused to do anything about The Couch and the company tried to sue him or press charges, the courts may rule he had no legal obligations (although they would argue Jerry took a legal obligation to watch the lobby when he signed for The Package). However, that's not what happened. Elaine says they're being held accountable for The Couch and instead of reimbursing them The Money or fighting it, they simply give away a pee-stained couch Jerry had already given to George and that George wanted to get rid of.
Corrected entry: In the scene after "Man Hands" crushes Jerry's hand, Jerry is wearing a bandage around his hand. But in the next scene on the street, the bandage is gone.
Correction: The key phrase is "in the next scene". Plenty of time has passed since we saw Jerry, in his apartment, with the bandage on. He had ample time and opportunity to take it off such that it's not a continuity mistake. George had come from wherever he was to meet them. The scene starts with them on the street, and Jerry is wearing a jacket that he wasn't wearing in his apartment.
Corrected entry: Elaine gives the stationary store salesman her telephone number as KL5-2390. The Seinfeld show was set during the 1990s, and the USA stopped using alphanumeric telephone numbers in the 1950s and 1960s. (00:01:33)
Other mistake: While Jerry is looking out the window, to his right, there is a Yankees baseball cap on top of his mini basketball hoop, above his computer monitor. Jerry in real life is a Mets fan, and he alluded to being a Mets fan on the show as well (taping a Mets game, wearing or showing Mets paraphernalia). In no universe would a Mets fan have a Yankees cap on display and vice versa. This was before George got the job at the Yankees so that can't explain it. Was it just bad set design and props? (00:14:22 - 00:15:30)
Suggested correction: There's a Yankee hat in many previous episodes. It's never mentioned where it came from, but it could be a gift or signed or hold significant value to Jerry as opposed to him buying himself a Yankees hat to put on display. And that's assuming Jerry in the show is such a Mets fan that he wouldn't like the Yankees as well.
Other mistake: The previous episode "The Deal", was supposed to be the season (and possibly series) finale, however it was aired out of order. Therefore in this episode and the next without explanation Jerry and Elaine are not romantically involved anymore, and Kramer pitches cable to Jerry as if he never had it before, mentioning "The naked channel" that was sorta the triggering factor of "The Deal" 's plot.
Suggested correction: As you said, the episodes were aired out of order. That doesn't make it a mistake because if you watch the episode in the order they were produced, there would be no mistake.
Continuity mistake: In this episode, George asks Russell if his last name contains a "y" and Russel answers that it doesn't. However, Russel is credited in this and subsequent episodes as "Russell Dalrymple."
Trivia: In every episode of Seinfeld there is a Superman reference somewhere.
Suggested correction: This is a myth and not true. Even if you count seeing the Superman fridge magnet or Superman statue as a reference, they didn't appear until season 4 and 5.
Season one had a few and one of them is episode 15 The Stock Tip. To quote George: "I never heard him say anything really funny." Jerry: "It's common sense. He's got super strength, super-speed; I'm sure he's got super-humor." "Either you're born with a sense of humor or you're not. It's not going to change. Even if you go from the red sun of Krypton all the way to the yellow sun of the Earth."
That wasn't the point of my correction. The trivia is wrong because not EVERY episode has a reference. I didn't say no episode prior to season 4 or 5 had a Superman reference. I only said the magnet and statue didn't appear until season 4 and 5, so even if you want to count those objects as a Superman reference, it doesn't apply to season 1-3.
