Continuity mistake: In the beginning he mentions Teddy's left ear being burnt by his father on a stove. Notice how his ear goes from looking severely burnt, to not burnt at all, through the movie. Especially the water dunking scene.
Stand By Me (1986)
Plot summary
Directed by: Rob Reiner
Starring: Kiefer Sutherland, Richard Dreyfuss, Jerry O'Connell, River Phoenix, Corey Feldman, Wil Wheaton, Gary Riley
After his best friend Chris is murdered, a writer named Gordie retells a boyhood journey where he, Chris, and their best friends, Teddy, and Vern go on a quest to find the body of a missing boy. Hot on their tail, is a gang of older kids, who also want to find the body. Along the way, the four boys are thrust into a series of events, that shows them how hard adulthood is.
Anonymous
More mistakes in Stand By Me
Ace: All right Chambers, you little faggot. This is your last chance. What do ya say, kid?
Chris Chambers: Why don't you go home and fuck your mother some more?
Trivia: During the production of Stand By Me, director Rob Reiner did not want the film to be called The Body (the same name of the short story by Stephen King). He believed that if he did, people would confuse it with a documentary on body building, a porno film or another Stephen King horror novel. It was changed to Stand By Me because while thinking of a title, it was considered to be the least unpopular name.
Question: In the train dodging scene, why didn't the loco crew brake at all? They definitely saw the boys in front. I know that trains have very long stopping distances compared to road vehicles, but still. And why didn't the boys try to signal the driver to stop? I get it that they panicked, but still wouldn't that be the first thing coming to one's mind in such a situation?
Answer: To add to the other fine answers, and as mentioned, any attempt to make a sudden stop could have resulted in derailment. The conductor knew the train was about to go over an elevated track, and if it derailed, it would have plunged into the deep ravine, killing the boys anyway, as well as those on aboard. The best he could do was blow the whistle, gradually slow the train, and hope the boys survived.
Can't agree with the arguments about derailment. If trains derailed so easily, they would derail all the time. The train had only 4 or 5 cars. It would not have needed miles to stop. Simply reducing the throttle would have resulted in significant slowing. Plus, they did not stop to determine if anyone was hurt. That is criminal behavior.
Answer: Throwing on brakes that heavily gives the train a chance of derailing and the train still wouldn't stop in time.
Answer: A train that size would have needed miles to stop, and rapid braking could have caused derailment. The engineer was blowing his whistle so he saw the boys; there was no need for them to signal. The engineer and the boys knew their only chance was to get off the bridge.
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.
Answer: No, it wasn't that big of a train. He didn't even attempt to get off the throttle. That's all it would have taken for the boys to make it fairly easy. It was a straight-away track, no chance of it derailing by hitting the brakes. Like the man said above, if trains derailed that easily, we wouldn't be using them.