Revealing mistake: During the bedroom scene with Felicity and Fat Bastard you can clearly see the air hose that fills his suit when he rolls over in the bed. (00:49:10)
Plot hole: There is a barely credible explanation for the fact that a guest cannot be injured or killed by being shot in Westworld, but what about the vicious fistfight we see in the bar? People are injured or killed in bar brawls all the time, and this one was incredibly violent. How do they prevent guests from being injured or killed by the cutting and stabbing weapons we see in Medieval and Roman World? Guests are supposed to fight each other, not just robots - they cannot be 'programmed' to lose! Delos is going be sued into bankruptcy within a week of the first guest arriving. Quite apart from the legal position, think about the bad publicity! Who is going to pay the huge fees demanded by the parks owners when the media is constantly reporting on the guests who wound up dead or with life changing injuries?
Continuity mistake: On Utapau, when Obi-Wan faces off with Grievous, Grievous sends 4 MagnaGuards against Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan Force-pulls something from the ceiling to crush the droids. But in the ensuing fight between Obi-Wan and Grievous, the ceiling thing and crushed droids are gone.
Revealing mistake: When Lara Croft goes into the water near the end to try to save her male rival, Alex West, after he is stabbed and ground between the gears, when Lara stands up, you can see the make-up coming off her arm that covers Angelina Jolie's "Billy Bob" tattoo.
Plot hole: Why on earth would the military be interested in a soldier (sailor, aviator, whatever) who has to go into combat naked and unarmed, and who is detectable by an enemy equipped with a pair of cheap, mass-produced goggles? How would you treat them if they were injured? They would be utterly useless in any form of military operation, even espionage.
Suggested correction: Presumably the military are interested because Sebastian's research could lead to advanced forms of invisibility technology, such as the ability to turn materials and weapons invisible for use in combat.
You cannot second guess the film like that. Sebastian is making no effort to make non-living items invisible and throughout the film we see that is not possible (why else would Sebastian have to walk about naked?). His research is on animals (and later humans) not "materials and weapons" and is based on their physiology, anatomy and metabolism. How would you inject a rifle or a tank with a serum? They don't have a bloodstream. The military wouldn't see any value at all in this research - maybe they would be interested in invisibility, but not if it was restricted to living creatures as we see here.
You know how easy it would be for an invisible person to infiltrate an enemy's compound undetected and take out powerful leaders or dictators? Especially if no-one knew the technology existed.
Easy? Impossible. First, they would be naked and unarmed. Too bad if you are trying to knock off Vladimir Putin - a taekwondo black belt - with your bare hands during a Moscow winter! Being invisible doesn't mean you can avoid making a sound or triggering a pressure plate or an infrared detector and so on and so on. Final answer - a naked, unarmed combatant would be about as useful as a chocolate teapot in any form of operation, covert or otherwise.
Factual error: The hat that Brad Pitt wears in the 1985 scenes is a Padres hat with navy, orange and white as the colours. In 1985, the Padres' colors were brown and yellow. The color change didn't come until late 80's or early 90's.
Visible crew/equipment: When Neo is going to open the door to enter the Oracle's house, you can clearly see a camera on the doorknob. There's a sheet over it painted to look like the wall behind it, with a representation of Morpheus' tie too, because he's blocked by the camera. (01:07:40)
Revealing mistake: There are supposed to be two dead young Asian males sitting in the back of the car, but in this shot, it is so obvious that there are two dead 'dummies' riding in the back. Also, in the crash, a few seconds later, very blatant dummy heads are flying everywhere. (00:40:40)
Plot hole: The huge guns are set high up on a cliff face facing out to sea and it is obvious that they cannot be depressed to fire at a downward angle - the massive gun carriages set on rails would prevent that happening. They cannot be elevated to fire at an upward angle, too, because they fit pretty snugly in the hole cut into the cliff face to accommodate them. This means that their maximum and minimum ranges would be quite close together, covering a strip of maybe a few hundred metres either side. Given that the sea is completely open on the side of the island they are protecting, why don't the ships targeted by the guns while passing the island simply sail inside or outside of the narrow stretch of sea the guns can hit?
Suggested correction: The guns are firing across a strait. A strait is a "narrow passage." Since the targets must appear at a limited range, the guns only need a limited elevation angle.
Watch the film again. The guns are facing the open sea. There is no land visible anywhere behind the ships. If that's a strait, it's a very, very wide one.
Other summaries explain that the strait is only deep enough for the ships at the place which matches the guns' range. So ships could not take advantage of further away or closer in.
Suggested correction: That the gun carriages are supposedly set on rails is not correct. In the novel template, as well as in the film, it is shown that the guns were installed on turntables. And as for their variable angles of fire - it could be due to (fictional) modifications.
Other mistake: In the slaughterhouse scene, after Harrigan has injured the Predator with his shotgun and Keyes reappears, the Predator throws its disc, and severs Keyes in half at the waist. We see his legs flop to the ground, and blood pour from above, but his upper half (torso, backpack and weaponry) mysteriously remain hovering out of sight. (According to the director, the MPAA made him cut the footage of the top half of his body hitting the ground because it was too gory, creating this odd error). (01:21:50)
Suggested correction: We don't actually know if the disc completely cuts Keyes in half (or just passes through him and leaves a gaping hole). You see the blood, but the movie is edited so that it cuts back to Harrigan looking on in horror for a split-second, then back to Keyes' body on the floor (mostly obscured by a cement pillar).
They blatantly show his legs hitting the ground without the top half! I can only assume you watched an edited-for-TV version or something. It's VERY clear in the movie that he was cut in half. (In actuality, the scene was the victim of the MPAA according to the director... they had to cut the bit where the top half of his body hit the ground because it was too gory... creating this odd movie mistake).
Continuity mistake: When Indy tries to grab the antidote vial from the table, in the closeup just as the vial falls off the table the camera follows the vial as it lands in the empty area to the left of Lao Che's chair where Kao Kan's chair should be, but it's not, and the rug's edge with wood floor beside Lao Che's chair though it shouldn't be. Then Indy hits Kao Kan who is again seated closely to Lao Che's left, as he should be, and when Kao Kan falls backward we see the rug edge is nowhere near Lao Che's chair, also as it should be. (00:08:20)
Suggested correction: Actually it appears the vial falls to the left of Kao Ken's chair, not Lao Che's. It appears after Indy pierces the other guy with the shishkebab, Kao Ken, off camera, takes the vial and puts on his left side. Indy jumps on the table and after missing the vial he slides further and then elbows Kao Ken who is on the right side now. The vial is still on the left side of Kao Ken's chair when it's kicked onto the wooden floor.
You're very much mistaken. Lao Che is wearing an embroidered dinner jacket and has a pinky ring on his left pinky, and Kao Kan's left hand is bandaged in gauze. After Indy skewers Chen, in the closeup of Indy's hand just as it knocks the vial off the table, it's Lao Che's hand (note the pinky ring, etc) that we see on the table next to Nurhachi's urn, the stack of money, and the vial. That is not Kao Kan's hand/arm, remember his left hand is bandaged. And as this closeup continues to pan down it follows the vial as it lands on the floor in the empty space where Kao Kan's chair should be, but it isn't.
Yep, you're right I see it. There are 2 shots of Indy trying to grab the vial off the table and the second one is followed through with the vial falling off it and that one is wrong. Alright.
Factual error: Towards the end of the film, Solomon is trapped in a small Plexiglas box and fires his gun into the bulletproof sides numerous times, but the bullets don't ricochet or get embedded in the glass.
Continuity mistake: In the scene where the witch gives Mika the dagger to kill herself with, the witch stabs it into the floor. When the witch leaves the dagger is lying on the floor. When Mika goes to grab the dagger it is stuck in the floor again. (01:15:20)
Factual error: When the bus is shown entering Washington, DC for the competition, the shot shows the bus traveling over the Arlington Memorial Bridge with the Lincoln Memorial in the background. That bridge is on the southwest side of the city. Since NYC is to the northeast of DC, this means that to get to that bridge and enter DC that way, the bus had to drive all the way around the city and then come back in from the opposite direction. Even if the bus driver made a mistake and missed the most direct route into the city from the north, there are dozens of other ways to get to the heart of the city without adding a good 45 minutes to an hour to the trip.
Revealing mistake: When The Mask is dancing with Tina and he turns her into a human tornado while spinning her around, none of the onlookers in the crowd show the slightest bit of amazement at the impossible feat that just occurred in front of them, indicating that the extras were not directed to react to the special effects.
Factual error: When Clark speaks to Jor-El for the first time in the Fortress, Jor-El says "I will have been dead for many thousands of your years..." Fine in theory - Baby Kal-El travelled to Earth at above light speed so time passed differently for him. However, as such, wouldn't Jor-El have seen Earth as it was thousands of years ago? Which also makes there a problem with all the things Kal-El was taught during his voyage to Earth, as Jor-El references Einstein by name, for instance, and he would not have existed at the point when Jor-El sent him to Earth.
Audio problem: When Commander Taggert (Tim Allen) and Lt. Madison (Sigourney Weaver) first see the hallway with the chompers, she says, "Oh, screw that!" but if you watch her lips she clearly uses the 'f' word instead of 'screw'.
Continuity mistake: When Tim and Lex first arrive, Lex is wearing a purple tank top with a colorful design, and in the following scenes or even between consecutive shots her tank top changes to completely different designs, though it's the same style of tank top.
Continuity mistake: On the ferry, Rachel wears the purple/pink camouflage hoodie over her orange knit sweater with the colorful stripe sleeves, as usual. Now this is where things become strange. In the first shot as the trio come ashore, she is only wearing her orange sweater, she is not wearing the purple/pink hoodie - note the clear lack of fur hood. In the very next shot as they climb a bit more and then rest, Rachel is wearing the purple/pink hoodie - note the hood, but now it's on under her orange sweater. In the underwater shots she is also wearing it under the orange sweater. (This odd mistake has absolutely nothing to do with the very long wool cloak that Rachel wears in the next scene). (01:02:20 - 01:04:40)
Plot hole: This film is set in 2004. The thought that no search and rescue operations would be put in place after an aircraft disappeared from radar during a routine flight is absurd. The Chinese are paranoid about intrusion on their territory and the downed aircraft would have been located by a simple satellite search within hours of it crashing. Chinese military satellites crisscross the Gobi and they are equipped with optical cameras, microwave and infrared detectors and radar, so spotting a metal aircraft on the ground would be simple even if it was hundreds of kilometres off course. The crew would have been visited by Chinese military helicopters (and probably arrested!) as soon as the storm had died down.
Suggested correction: The Chinese government, for whatever reason, may have denied there was any crash at all if it suited their purposes, and the oil company that owned the plane would have little recourse. The Chinese have done this before. For the purpose of the plot, the survivors decided that they had to save themselves rather than wait for rescue and that was completely plausible.
Suggested correction: It's now 2021, and we still can't find Malaysian Airlines MH370. So this suggestion of planes always being found is laughable.
MH370 crashed into the ocean, and in fact some wreckage has been found. The Chinese military does not have the south Indian Ocean under satellite surveillance 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, unlike the Gobi desert where a crashed plane would be spotted within hours of it going missing.
Suggested correction: The explanation given in the TV show would seem to easily apply to the original film as well: guests can be injured, but not to the point that it would leave a lasting mark. The park has access to futuristic medical techniques, so they can heal most non-life-threatening injuries easily. Also the guests almost certainly sign waivers, so in the event of serious injury the park isn't liable.
Suggested correction: It's easy to nitpick the factual details of "Westworld," the screenplay of which was written on-the-fly on a fairly limited budget, even by early 1970s' standards. Author Michael Crichton (who also wrote "The Andromeda Strain," "The Terminal Man," "Congo," "Sphere," "Jurassic Park" and several other technological thrillers) himself acknowledged that Westworld was more a visual story (like a comic book) than a cerebral piece of science fiction, and he learned on this movie that suspension of disbelief outweighed technical or even factual details, if he wanted to expedite the story in an hour-and-a-half. Crichton said he was having more fun and devoting more time to shooting the film than actually writing it, comparing the experience to playing cowboys and indians as a child. So, yes, Westworld is not much more than an adult fantasy with a number of plot holes that we are supposed to gleefully overlook, rather than analyze.
Charles Austin Miller
Except for blatant continuity mistakes you just invalidated every single entry on this site.
Suggested correction: Westworld ensure that any interactions with the robots are entirely safe for the patrons of the park. They cannot prevent humans fighting amongst themselves, just as Disneyland can't prevent people fighting there. People are also injured or die all the time in horse-riding accidents, but that won't lead to people suing Westworld. Due to the nature of the park, all the guests likely sign a waiver stating that any injuries are not the fault of the park.
Utter rubbish. Guests who were completely innocent bystanders could be killed or injured by the actions of other guests, notably in the bar brawl or by the explosion used in the jailbreak. We see one guest smash a barstool against the back of another guest - not a robot - which could easily have broken his spine. There is no question whatever that the owners and managers of the park would be held liable in this and many other cases, just as amusement park owners and managers nowadays are held liable when roller coasters or other rides go awry, injuring or killing guests.
The most plausible explanation would be a waiver that visitors to the park have to sign. The waiver would explain that while the robots cannot harm humans, other humans can, and the park is not held responsible. In the event of death or serious injury, the guest who caused it would face criminal charges and possibly a civil lawsuit. But a waiver would protect the park. Also, the rules of the park may be similar to those in the HBO Westworld series, where the robots cannot cause a "permanent mark", meaning they can injure guests as long as the injury is repairable.