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.
Factual error: Based on the films being shown at the theater, the movie appears to be set in 1981. One of the TV commercials shows the Energizer Bunny, which didn't make its first appearance until 1988.
Other mistake: Clarence tells George that his brother died at the age of 9 because he wasn't there to save him from falling through the ice, but when you see the tomb stone, it shows Harry Bailey was born in 1911 and died in 1919. That would make Harry only 7 or 8 years old.
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.
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)
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.
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)
Visible crew/equipment: At the end when Sidney's dad falls out of the closet, if you look closely you can see the hands of a crewmember who was in there too, pushing items out after him. (01:42:40)
Continuity mistake: When Del comes out of the passenger side of the dairy truck, he is with a black eye, for no reason. The next scene, it is not there. It is there again when he admits to being homeless. (Steve Martin punched Del in a deleted scene.)
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.
Revealing mistake: How on Earth can Selby get those skin tight T-shirts over that huge cast on her arm? They cannot possibly stretch any more than they already are - look at the scene where she and Eileen are checking the mail. There is no way that sleeve would fit over the cast without ripping! It is well beyond the capacity of that tight T-shirt to stretch to that extent! Obviously Christina Ricci had the cast fitted after she was in costume.
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.
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 they are looking at the house and they get out of the car, the one man on the passenger side leaves his door open. When they walk to the side of the house and come back to the front, you can see the car in the background and the door is shut.
Factual error: Eddie specifically tells the gang not to take his mom's "Delicious Deals" snacks because his mom loves them. But Delicious Deals are made by Mrs. Freshley, a company that was not founded until 1994. The boxes used in the movie even include the modern design that can be found today in most Dollar Tree stores. (00:23:00)
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.
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.