Continuity mistake: When Hank is sitting on the couch, waiting for his clothes to dry, Nora comes in with lemonade. Tom and Kate start talking to Hank about his acting career and we see that Nora is holding her lemonade glass, but in the very next shot, the glass is on the table in front of her. (00:35:30)
Emily
27th Jul 2004
Cheaper by the Dozen (2003)
23rd Jul 2004
Grease (1978)
Other mistake: On the first day of school, when Patty is starting to sit down next to Sandy, her reaction to sitting on the apple is way too early.
22nd Jul 2004
Cheaper by the Dozen (2003)
Other mistake: When Jessica and Kim come down the stairs and Jessica is explaining what happened to Kim with Nigel and the dart, Kim looks at the camera.
22nd Jul 2004
Cheaper by the Dozen (2003)
Continuity mistake: When the kids are about to put Hank's underwear in the meat bucket, Henry and Jake insert cotton-ball type things in their noses. After they do this, we see that there is still a good amount of white sticking out, but in the very next shot, there is barely any white showing.
22nd Jul 2004
The Haunted Mansion (2003)
21st Jul 2004
Hook (1991)
Continuity mistake: When the phone is thrown outside & later dug up it is clearly a dummy (fake) phone.
12th Jul 2004
Cheaper by the Dozen (2003)
Audio problem: When Dylan is over at the Baker's new house, Jake says "You're gonna wanna stop now dude" but when he says this, the movement of his mouth isn't matching the words he's saying. (00:23:40)
3rd Jul 2004
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Other mistake: During the Quidditch match, when Hermione and Ron are talking, they mouth each other's lines. (01:20:45)
30th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Trivia: Jeremy Sumpter (Peter Pan) had to go through 6-7 months of flying practice before he could start "flying" in the film.
29th Jun 2004
Frailty (2001)
Question: The dad says Fenton is a demon, but demons were only people who have killed other people in their past, and Fenton hasn't killed anyone yet. It is later in the movie he kills his dad, so how did his dad know he was a demon?
Chosen answer: Paxton is obviously mentally deranged so he can call anyone a demon and find a way to justify it.
This answer is entirely incorrect. If you watch the film, you realise that it is only Fenton's belief that his father is insane. In the reality of the film, everything his father has told him is true. He is in fact a "demon killer." Since there is no explanation in the film as to what actually makes someone a demon, it's safe to assume the angel knew Fenton would grow up to become a serial killer. The father refused to believe his own son would be a demon, and so tried to force him to "see" the truth.
It really isn't "in the reality of the movie" - it is in the dad's psychotic mind (his warped sense of reality). What sane father, for example, would subject his children (preadolescents at that) to chopping people up with an ax, have them help dig graves and bury those killed, lock his 12-year-old son in a "dungeon" with no food and only one cup of water a day, check on his son after a week but nail the door closed again for another (apparently long) period of time? And I don't think Fenton became a serial killer - Adam was the serial killer (maybe of demons in his warped mind). The father seemed to assert that Fenton was a demon because he was not supporting him in killing people ("destroying demons"). Why didn't the father view Adam - who could be viewed as killing his own mother during childbirth - as a demon? Adam, being younger and more impressionable, agreed with the father but was also told they were like "superheroes" - what young kid could rationally discern the difference?
The cartoon shown on TV ("Davy and Goliath") offers additional evidence that the father was not destroying demons. "Davy" asks his father about God, and his father tells him that "God doesn't make you do anything" and wants you to decide. Even IF God or the angel sent someone a list of demons to destroy, it would be up to the person to decide whether or not to destroy the people. I know that the purported acts of the people that were killed were revealed when the dad (or Adam) put his hand (s) on them, and that viewers were then supposed to believe that they really were destroying demons, but the view that they were just hallucinating is still valid.
I think the movie allows the viewer to make his/her own conclusion - is the father really destroying demons or is he a cold-blooded murderer? There is sufficient reason to believe the father had a psychotic breakdown or something similar and, instead of destroying demons, was a serial killer. There was no evidence of any others being chosen by God to destroy demons, no indication that the world was coming to an end, and no reason to murder the sheriff who was leaving and said he didn't believe one bit of what Fenton told him about the killings. Besides, wouldn't God protect the father from the sheriff if He protected Adam from being detected by the FBI agents and cameras? For what it is worth, I disagree with the comment by Jason below and think your view is more accurate.
There are several important factors that show the father (and son) are actually fighting demons: The "help" they frequently receive, like ALL of the surveillance tapes not showing Adam's face when he's hunting a demon (This can hardly be dismissed as coincidence, as they all look fine except wherever Adam's face would be visible), the FBI agent at the end who inexplicably can't describe Adam and doesn't recognize him when they meet again, the fact that the victims are stunned after the father or Adam touches them with a bare hand to reveal their sins, etc.
I'm aware of all of those things, but videotapes used to do that - maybe if the FBI agents tried fixing the alignment his face would show. Adam looked different to me, too - his hair looked redder than when he was at the FBI office. Of course victims would be stunned and scared when a lunatic grabbed them. I do understand what you are saying, but I still don't think it is enough. Surely there were far more "demons" out there; the number of killings was relatively small. And, again, Davy said that God doesn't make anyone do anything - He wants the person to decide.
The point with the video tapes is that they say ALL of them are like the one, with the image only messed up across his face, and only when his face is visible. I suppose this is just an agree to disagree issue. You don't see these things as enough, while I see them all combined as more than enough. Interesting discussion of a good movie either way.
I was thinking of writing something like that to you! And now I can agree with something you wrote!
27th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Question: Is there some kind of time difference between Neverland and London or something? Because the children leave London at night but when they get to Neverland, it's around 2:20 (indicated when Smee tells Hook that spring isn't due until 3pm.).
Chosen answer: The whole point of Neverland is that time is different. The lost boys never age.
26th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Continuity mistake: Near the beginning of the film we see a tree outside the window, but when Tinkerbell flies in towards Peter (who's at the window) there is no tree. (00:02:00)
26th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Other mistake: When John and Michael are explaining Hook to Aunt Millicent, Michael mouths some of John's lines. (00:03:45)
26th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Continuity mistake: Throughout the whole scene in the nursery when Wendy and Peter are talking, Peter's hair is constantly changing. ie: position of bangs on forehead. (00:15:00 - 00:22:55)
26th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Continuity mistake: In the beginning when John and Michael are explaining Hook to Aunt Millicent, Michael's hair is at first neatly parted, but then it becomes messy and then back to neatly parted. (00:03:45)
9th Jun 2004
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
9th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Other mistake: At the very end of the movie, Peter says "to hear stories about me" and we see Wendy and her eyes are moving as if watching him fly away, but when it cuts back to Peter he then starts to fly away.
8th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Continuity mistake: In the battle scene on the ship, Hook throws Peter's sword into the air and Peter catches it with his left hand, but in the next shot a second later it is in his right. (01:25:00)
8th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Continuity mistake: When the Lost Boys see that they have shot down Wendy, they turn around and say "Tootles has killed her" and they are spread out, but when Peter comes in a second later, they are grouped together. (00:34:15)
4th Jun 2004
Peter Pan (2003)
Other mistake: In the scene where Wendy admits to being Red-Handed Jill, Tootles says "Mother and Father are fighting again" and Curly is mouthing his lines.
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.
Chosen answer: Considering Ramsley's intelligence, he would have been able to make "couterfeit" handwriting.