Timecop

Timecop (1994)

7 corrected entries

(3 votes)

Corrected entry: When Max Walker (1994) and his wife Melissa are hanging on the edge of roof, one of McComb's thugs is crushing Walker's hand with his shoe. Then Walker from 2004 shoots the thug. You can see his dead body falling from the roof. He should hit the ground with his back, and his legs should be opposite the door. But, when Melissa goes down and walks near that body, it's lying on its stomach with its head opposite the door.

Correction: First, Melissa shoots the thug, not 2004 Walker. And second, when we see the thug's body, it's on the ground correctly. On his back, with his head nearest the house and feet away from the house.

Bishop73

Corrected entry: When 2004 Walker is in 1929 giving Atwood's companions a beating he beats the second one with the lamp stand but the guy falls down twice. Strangely both falls have audio.

Correction: The second guy doesn't fall on the ground twice. The crotch hit makes him fall to knees first, which we hear. Then he falls to the ground, from his knees though, which we hear plus the sound of Walker dropping the lamp stand.

Bishop73

Corrected entry: Near the end of the movie, when 2004 Walker returns to the present, he sees that the sign 'Parker Datalink Systems' is restored and the one stating 'McComb Datalink Systems' is gone. Hard to believe, since the 2004 McComb had killed his old partner, 1994 Parker, the day before the sequence of events took place that restored the timeline of Walker and his wife. Unless the business miraculously stayed in the Parker family after the death of the patriarch. (01:29:35)

Correction: David Dunbar Buick founded the Buick line of automobiles, but he was with the company for a relatively short time before losing control of the business, yet it remained "Buick." Same thing here. A company isn't necessarily named after the person currently running it; it was just McComb's arrogance that had it changed in the first place.

Phixius Premium member

Corrected entry: At the beginning, the black guy stands in front of the panel and states that time travel has been invented and must now be policed. Instead of spending money setting up the TEC, training recruits etc, surely it would have been quicker and easier to seize the prototype of the time machine from the inventor. Assuming he only made one, this would then prevent any other time travel occurring.

Correction: You cannot 'un-invent' something. Once someone has created it, and the cat is out of the bag, others will follow in their footsteps. Look how many countries have nuclear weapons. The US didn't sell their plans to other countries. They knew it was possible and built their own devices. On top of that you do not know that in 1000 years in the future, someone else will not invent Time Travel after the world is a very different place. I thought the plot of the film was that all Time Travel WAS made illegal, so their job is to police any future inventions that may be made. The device used by the enemy in this film was a hidden prototype. As it was hidden it would have made no difference what they had done.

Soylent Purple

Corrected entry: Unfortunately McComb hadn't grasped the concept of timeloops. The 2004 McComb says that even if he dies the 1994 version will still become president, however, based on the theories used in time travel films the 2004 McComb would always be destined to die in that house therefore never becoming president. That sequence was played out twice in the film anyway which adds weight to the theory.

Correction: Time travel films are not under any obligation to use a common set of theories, so each individual film can handle things in its own way. Yes, that particular McComb, from the timeline where Walker interferes with his actions, will die in the house. However, by eliminating Walker before he can interfere, time has been diverted onto another course, effectively creating an alternate McComb who, with no Walker to get in the way, will successfully complete his plot to rise to the Presidency.

Tailkinker Premium member

Corrected entry: When Jean-Claude is explaining the dangers of time travel to the rookie, he points out to red stains on the back wall made by a previous time-car crashing against it. Why on earth would they have a wall there at all if there was any risk of people crashing into it? Why not have an equally long runway after the travel point for people to slow down on?

Correction: It could be a lack of space in the building (the time machine needs to be protected from anyone trying to change the past) or a possible joke meant to scare the rookies who don't know much about the machine.

Corrected entry: In the beginning of the movie, while showing Walker's partner Atwood comparing the October 30, 1929 paper with the October 30, 2004 USA Today, Atwood circles Mid States Oil. The problem with this is the fact that October 30, 2004 falls on a Saturday, and USA Today does not print a Saturday paper. Instead, on Friday, it publishes a paper for the entire weekend, and it states Friday, Saturday, and Sunday on it.

Correction: While in 1994 when the movie was made USA Today did not publish on Saturdays, it is entirely reasonable that in their future timeline, by 2004 USA Today would begin publishing a Saturday edition, so could have become possible. As such this isn't a mistake, just creative license with a possible future that we now know didn't come to be.

jimba

Other mistake: When the man is in front of the Senate committee asking for appropriations for the Time Enforcement Commission, he states that you can not go into the future as it has not happened yet. During the scene with Atwood scanning the USA Today, the date on the paper is October 30, 2004. So, one could assume that this is the current date. Later on in the movie, there is a news report on the television with the woman stating that McComb's campaign might be denied federal campaign matching funds, and that McComb might have to withdraw from the race. Now, being that the election is only three days away on November 2, 2004, it would be a little too late to withdraw from the race, not to mention the lateness in the determination if he is eligible for federal campaign matching funds.

More mistakes in Timecop
More quotes from Timecop

Question: How can their house still be standing in 2004 when it was destroyed in 1994? Even if they rebuilt it it wouldn't look s old, it would only be a few years old.

Answer: My understanding was the timeline had been reset in such a way that the explosion had never happened.

raywest Premium member

Except that the explosion did happen. When Max carries Melissa out of the house to prevent her death again, their house is exploding in the background. This is because McComb had placed a bomb in the house to ensure that the explosion would kill Max which of course had ultimately failed.

The explosion happened, but it was before Max returned to his own time in the future. Once he went back through the time portal, everything somehow reset itself to before the bomb being detonated. The previous events in the past were erased in favor of an alternate timeline. The movie does not attempt to give a logical explanation, and it makes no sense, as most time-travel stories never do, but a "suspension of disbelief" is employed here. We're supposed to accept that it happened. Max is the only character who knows what the previous timeline was like, but he now has no idea of current events (like his wife and son being alive) in his alternate life during the intervening time from when he was in the past and returns to the "new" present.

raywest Premium member

More questions & answers from Timecop

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.