zendaddy621

Character mistake: In the movie they grab Genghis Khan in 1209 which would have been correct, he ruled Mongolia from 1206 to 1227. In the presentation at the end they say in 1269 he did this and that, that would have been Kublai Khan's reighn of terror in Mongolia.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Bill and Ted have proven not to be that smart. Easy for them to get those things confused.

lartaker1975

It was also an excuse for a callback to the "69, dude!" joke from earlier in the film; whether Bill and Ted intentionally got that detail wrong just for the sake of a joke is anyone's guess.

zendaddy621

30th Mar 2016

Beetlejuice (1988)

Question: What's up with the afterlife? After they die, they somehow walk back to their own home and when they walk out, they're on some desert planet with giant sandworms. Now, their case worker Juno says they have to stay in the house for 125 years. Why do they have to stay in the house for 125 years and for what? Is there a Heaven or Hell in this movie?

Answer: The version of the afterlife depicted in this film is a complex bureaucracy involving caseworkers, vouchers, and the like; the Maitlands' case requires that they spend 125 years in the house. When Adam attempted to leave, he found himself on Saturn for reasons that are never really explained within the film. As for the last part of your question, Adam remarked that he saw nothing about Heaven or Hell in the Handbook For the Recently Deceased, so it's possible that neither Heaven or Hell exists within this version of the afterlife.

zendaddy621

Well I know this is from the musical, not the movie, but in the song "Say my Name", Beetlegeuse says "I'm a demon straight from Hell." So maybe there is just a lot more, where not everyone is guaranteed to go to Heaven or Hell, and they have to prove themselves.

Answer: Yes there is a Heaven and Hell in Beetlejuice. Juno says the 125 years is like a purgatory, they have to stay there until their time is up, and then they can "move on."

"Move on" doesn't necessarily mean that the Maitlands will go to either Heaven or Hell at the end of the 125 years they will be stuck in the house; it also doesn't mean that they are in some sort of purgatory. It most likely means that they will be able to leave the house after that time is up.

zendaddy621

Question: When Marty arrives back in the alternate 1985, he's attacked by a black man when he unknowingly breaks into what he thought to be his home. Could this man be former mayor Goldie Wilson?

Answer: No, it's a different character and a different actor. Goldie Wilson is played by Donald Fullilove. The dad with the bat who chases Marty out of the house is played by Al White.

Sierra1 Premium member

That doesn't necessarily mean that it's two different characters; George McFly, for example, was portrayed by both Crispin Glover using archived footage from the first film and Jeffrey Weissman in newly filmed footage. While the character played by Al White is credited simply as "Dad", there's no confirmation either way whether this was an alternate version of Goldie Wilson.

zendaddy621

The answer is correct, the Dad is not meant to be Goldie Wilson. In the novelization of the film, he's given the name "Lewis." And while some characters were recast, Donald Fullilove (the actor that played Goldie) himself already appears in "Back to the Future Part II", so it's not like they recast him.

Bishop73

Unless there's any indication it's the same charector, or at least a clue to point in that direction, then there's no reason at all to assume it "might" be.

The_Iceman

While there was no clear-cut answer on whether this was Goldie, I think it is safe to assume it is not him. This franchise has shown to make recurring characters very noticeable, even minor ones, such as the homeless man that Marty recognizes in 2 different timelines. Yes, sometimes actors get recast, as they did with George McFly and Jennifer Parker, but they made it quite clear they were playing the same character. I see absolutely nothing that would even suggest this was Goldie Wilson.

jshy7979

Jeffrey Weissman is credited as "George McFly", Crispin Glover is credited as "George McFly (archive footage) ", Donald Fullilove is uncredited but listed as "Goldie Wilson II" (on imdb). Al White being credited as "Dad" actually confirms to a T that he is not "Goldie Wilson" and nothing in that scene even remotely suggests that the family father portrayed by Al White might be Goldie Wilson from 1985-A (other than a viewer seeing a person of color and drawing conclusions). There also is no cause to question whether or not the "Dad" was supposed to be any other person of color seen in any of the 1985 timelines. (Not that another POC in that timeline would come to mind).

Glover is not credited the same way as Fullilove is since he's credited only as "archive footage" and Fullilove is uncredited. Glover doesn't physically appear in part 2 as Fullilove did.

Bishop73

I stand corrected and have edited my post. Thank you.

Answer: Also, the 1985 Goldie Wilson's picture was shown on a moving vehicle in part 1, and he looked very different from the father with the bat in part 2.

Answer: It could not be Goldie Wilson. In 1955, Goldie Wilson looks to be around in his early 20s in the cafe. This would put him to be early 50s in 1985. The father only looks to be in his 30s.

Corrected entry: This movie takes place in L.A. You must be at least 21 to have a motorcycle licence in California. I'm pretty sure John isn't 21.

Jack Kaltenbach

Correction: A kid that steals money from ATMs is not likely to care whether he has a license or not.

Sacha Premium member

I agree he doesn't care. Not to mention John is supposed to be 10 at the time of the movie and the actor himself (Furlong) is only 13, so he didn't have any sort of license.

Bishop73

Also, John was riding a dirt bike, which is illegal to ride on public roadways regardless of the age of the rider, rather than a street-legal motorcycle. And, as Sacha said, John is hardly a law-abiding 10-year-old, as evidenced when the T-1000 uses the police car's computer and finds John's extensive police record.

zendaddy621

Answer: The breathing apparatus (similar to a respirator) built into Vader's suit was shorted out by an errant bolt of Force lightning when Vader picked up Emperor Palpatine and threw him down the shaft; watch closely during this scene and you'll see electricity arcing on Vader's torso. Removing Vader's mask had no effect since he was already dying; when Vader asked Luke to help remove the mask, Luke said, "But you'll die." to which Vader replied, "Nothing can stop that now." Vader simply wanted to look upon Luke with his own eyes rather than through the mask for once.

zendaddy621

While Vader is dying Luke said that he won't leave him he's got to save him. Vader said "you already have Luke". What did Vader mean by that?

By rising up against Palpatine and saving Luke's life, Vader finally broke free from the dark side of the Force; though it cost him his life, Vader meant that Luke had ultimately helped him find redemption.

zendaddy621

Answer: Vader's entire suit is a life support system. As he was pretty much invincible for most of his appearances he has never been in danger. The Emperor is the first person on screen to actually damage the life support system itself, so Vader is dying as soon as he is zapped. Luke tells him he will die if the helmet is removed, but Vader says he is already dead, as we can see his cranial injuries and pale skin, plus he cannot even move his arms and legs which are cybernetic. He's pretty much a goner.

Answer: During the duel, the injuries Vader sustained from Palpatine's electrical bolts as he was being thrown into the shaft were a factor. Once Luke removed Vader's helmet as he requested, it sealed his fate as he could not survive without the life support system built into his damaged suit that kept him breathing and his body functioning.

raywest Premium member

22nd Jan 2018

The Goldbergs (2013)

A Chorus Lie - S3-E2

Factual error: A key plot point of this episode is the revelation of the Milli Vanilli lip-syncing scandal and that they didn't sing on their album, which happened in the fall of 1990, outside the 1980s setting of the series.

zendaddy621

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The first public sign that the group was lip-syncing came on 21 July 1989, during a live performance on MTV at the Lake Compounce theme park in Bristol, Connecticut. As they performed, a hard drive issue caused the recording of the song "Girl You Know It's True" to jam and skip, repeatedly playing the partial line "Girl, you know it's..." through the speakers. "I knew right then and there, it was the beginning of the end for Milli Vanilli," recalled Pilatus of the incident.

The mistake didn't point it out, although the episode did, but the issue wasn't the fact that they lip-sync'd but the fact that they didn't actually do any singing. The minor incident you mentioned wasn't news that "shook the country." The news that it wasn't Milli Vanilli singing on their own album didn't come out until 1990.

Bishop73

My point exactly; while Milli Vanilli were revealed to be lip-syncing during a single live performance in the summer of 1989, it wasn't confirmed that they didn't sing at all on their debut album until November 1990.

zendaddy621

25th Feb 2021

The Twilight Zone (1985)

Examination Day - S1-E14

Question: At the end of the episode, Dicky's parents are called and informed that the government has killed him? Why did they do this?

Answer: They live in a totalitarian state where people who are deemed too smart (and therefore a threat to the authorities) are done away with. That's the point of the test, to eliminate potential troublemakers.

Brian Katcher

Answer: It's the opposite - not smart but dumb. The voice said he failed to get a perfect score, less than one hundred percent.

Quote: "We regret to inform you that your son's intelligence quotient has EXCEEDED the government standard, according to section blah blah blah of the New Code." As in the original short story, they were eliminating intelligent people.

Brian Katcher

Where can I find the short story?

It's in the compilation "100 Great Science Fiction Short Stories" edited by Isaac Asimov.

Brian Katcher

It's by Henry Slesar and a quick Google search will show you some online copies. It's only two pages.

Brian Katcher

According to Wikipedia, it was first published in the February 1958 issue of Playboy magazine; it may have been reprinted elsewhere since then.

zendaddy621

Factual error: In the grocery store where Gilbert works, loaves of Mrs. Baird's bread are seen on the shelves; Mrs. Baird's is a Texas-based bakery whose products would not be available as far away as Iowa.

zendaddy621

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: You are right - the product should not be on the shelves of a store in a state that does not receive the product. I was just questioning your assertion that distance from Texas is a determining factor - states further away (e.g, Oregon, California. Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania) do sell Mrs. Baird's bread. I wasn't familiar with this brand, but I found out it is sold locally in Pennsylvania. When I was on-line, I also found out that Allen Baird, 97, recently died of COVID-19.

KeyZOid

I'm curious what cities/stores sell Mrs. Baird's breads in PA (or OR, CA, MA).

Bishop73

You can go on-line, like I did. I just did a search for Mrs. Baird's bread, and that website is set up to enable you to look for locations where it is sold - by state and/or zip code.

KeyZOid

Sorry... I didn't want to reveal the city I'm in... but I can at least tell you the bread is sold at a Walmart store.

KeyZOid

I specifically looked on their website and no PA stores popped up, not even Walmart. Of course, the mistake is still valid since this was 27 years ago and in Iowa.

Bishop73

My point exactly; this mistake merely gave away the fact that this film was made in Texas rather than Iowa where it was set. Since "Errors In Geography" is not a separate category here as it is on IMDb, I submitted it as a factual error; while I'm unaware whether Mrs. Baird's products are available now in Iowa, I know that wasn't the case in the early 90s when this film was made and released.

zendaddy621

If it's not incorporated into the plot, generally these mistakes should be considered "revealing" mistakes, it's revealing it's not really filmed where it's set.

Bishop73

I just searched again, and Mrs. Baird's bread is also sold at Target and Sam's Club. I was surprised to see there is a "Bimbo Bakery" less than 12 miles away. I wasn't familiar with this brand, and now I suspect the products were recently made available; I surely would have noticed the products or the bakery before now. If I Google "Where can I buy Mrs. Baird's bread?" a map showing local stores comes up. But if I go to mrsbairds.com and put my zip code under "store locater", "no stores available in this zip code" shows up.

KeyZOid

In California, it can be found at any grocery store that sells Bimbo products. Specifically, Ralph's, Albertson's, Von's, Walmart, Smart and Final, Aldi, Superior Grocers and Jon's.

It should be noted that Bimbo Bakeries didn't buy Mrs. Baird's until 1998. But is this because you've bought it in CA or because you used google and have no personal knowledge? My aunt and Grandparents have never heard of Mrs Baird's and they've lived in CA their whole lives.

Bishop73

27th Aug 2005

Hard Day's Night (1964)

Continuity mistake: Watch the clock on a wall. Six minutes of the movie go by but that clock hasn't moved one minute. (00:39:50 - 00:46:25)

????

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The clock could be broken.

This is pure speculation, not a valid correction.

zendaddy621

While it's possible the correction was done without viewing the scene/movie, a clock not moving (or showing the wrong time) isn't a valid mistake unless the same clock is shown working in the scene. The original mistake does not indicate the clock is working or that the time changes.

Bishop73

21st Oct 2020

Quantum Leap (1989)

Star-Crossed - June 15, 1972 - S1-E3

Question: Al tells Sam that he's there to prevent the professor and his undergraduate student from having a shotgun wedding and ruining both their lives. That implies she got pregnant. Sam succeeds in keeping them apart. Um, does that mean he prevented someone from being born?

Brian Katcher

Answer: He means he's there to prevent there ever being the need for a shotgun wedding-that is, to stop the affair before there is a possibility of the girl getting pregnant.

raywest Premium member

Which would erase the child from history. That's my point.

Brian Katcher

Not if there was never any pregnancy to begin with. There was only the chance of one.

raywest Premium member

Answer: Not necessarily; it could also mean that someone such as Jamie Lee's (the student) father discovered that the professor was having a sexual relationship with her and coerced the two into getting married.

zendaddy621

This doesn't answer the question. You just described what a shotgun wedding is.

Bishop73

I think their point is that the "shotgun" aspect might not be due to a pregnancy, simply a forced attempt to legitimise an otherwise scandalous relationship.

My point was that a "shotgun wedding" doesn't always happen because an unmarried girl becomes pregnant; it can also happen because someone "stole her virtue", i.e had sex with her without being married or at least engaged to her. There's no reason to believe that Jamie Lee was, or would become, pregnant as a result of the affair or subsequent marriage.

zendaddy621

The term "shotgun wedding" means a forced marriage due to unexpected pregnancy. It's sometimes even used when the woman is pregnant but it's planned or the wedding isn't "forced." In common colloquialism (especially in the 80's when the script was written), it doesn't refer to a force marriage just because of premarital sex (which the term "make an honest woman" is used for).

Bishop73

No, in the 1926 Sinclair Lewis novel 'Elmer Gantry', they talk about shotgun weddings, when a groom is forced to marry a woman because he took her virginity. Obviously, the term usually refers to a pregnant bride, but I see zendaddys point.

Brian Katcher

Other mistake: Maz Kanata's message is somehow not intercepted by the First Order. It is also projected from various angles and follows her around during her shootout, making one question who is filming the call in the first place?

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Since this particular technology is not fully understood (and is fictional, to boot), this "mistake" is based upon pure speculation and should be disregarded.

zendaddy621

Disrupting transmissions has existed in the Star Wars universe chronologically as early as Episode 1. The First Order had the means to do this but did not. If they were at all competent, they would have disrupted all Resistance transmissions.

Given the training remote seen in the first move it would be rather easy to say how Maz was able to "film" the call.

True, However, those droids were not subjected to a battle when they are shown in Episode 1. So filming the call is plausible. However, there is no way the call should have gotten to the Resistance without it being disrupted or intercepted by the First Order.

Again, fictional technology, and no firmly established rules as to how it works; the same could be said of pretty much all the tech depicted within the SW films (lightsabers, droids, hyperdrive, etc). Probably best just to go with "suspension of disbelief" here.

zendaddy621

But you are wrong. There are established rules on how certain technologies operate in Star Wars through examples in the previous movies, TV shows, etc. Even if we do not know how they work, we know what they do. Disrupting communications and transmissions is a big plot line used in Episode 1, chronologically the earliest Star Wars film. In Return of the Jedi, the Empire jams the Rebels sensors so they do not know if the shield is up or down. The technology exist and the First Order should have used it on the Resistance.

The technology existed forty years ago. Finding a way to thwart the jamming would be a high priority of the rebels' scientists and engineers.

That's an assumption. If that is the case, because of the previous films it needs to be explained in the movie. Otherwise, it goes against established canon, which is a continuity error. You could also just as easily say the First Order developed an unstoppable way to intercept transmissions in those 40 years. It is also an assumption that thwarting transmission jamming would be the Resistance's highest priority. If anything, technology has not progressed very far in this trilogy as the FO is still fighting with TIE Fighters and the Resistance still uses X-Wings.

4th Dec 2019

Spider-Man (1994)

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Not entirely true; although they are rare and may no longer exist now, I've seen traffic lights that followed the red, yellow, green pattern as recently as the mid-1990s.

zendaddy621

Interesting. What state (s) did you see this in? I'm assuming going from red to yellow was to encourage cars to cautiously enter the intersection in case someone was running a red light?

Phaneron Premium member

Traffic lights in the UK do this - it's more to give you a second to get ready, in gear, etc., then as soon as the lights turn green you can go. Otherwise you get no warning of when the lights are about to change.

In Illinois; as I said, such traffic lights are rare, but they did exist at least as recently as the time this episode of the series aired, and they may still possibly exist in larger cities such as New York City.

zendaddy621

This traffic light set-up (red to yellow to green) still exists today in the UK. From what I understand, it is to alert the driver that the light will be turning green imminently and to prepare themselves to put their car in gear, as manual cars are still pretty common in Europe. I'd wager this light cycle was phased out of North America due to the abundance of automatic cars today. Could have been different in 1994 though.

critterbonus

It should be noted that traffic lights that go from red to yellow before going green keep the red light illuminated so that both red and yellow are lit up. However, that's not what happens in the scene. I've never seen a traffic light operate the way it's shown. And Massachusetts still has traffic lights that go from red to yellow, however, when red and yellow are lit up together, this allows for pedestrian crossing.

Bishop73

19th Jul 2019

The Simpsons (1989)

Bart vs. Australia - S6-E16

Character mistake: Burkina Faso is listed as being among the Southern Hemisphere locations Bart called when Homer is looking over the phone bill; since Burkina Faso is completely within the Northern Hemisphere, it would have made no sense for Bart to call there.

zendaddy621

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: It may not make sense, but Bart isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. In this same episode, he looked at his globe and thought Rand McNally was a country and was convinced by Lisa that the citizens there wear hats on their feet and that hamburgers eat people. Additionally, he could have just decided to prank call someone there if for no other reason than he thought the name of the country was funny.

Phaneron Premium member

Entirely possible, but since Bart had a globe right there to refer to, even someone with his limited geographical knowledge would have been able to tell that Burkina Faso is in the Northern hemisphere, unlike the other locations he did call as depicted in the montage (Antarctica, Argentina, unspecified South American nation, etc).

zendaddy621

Using his globe to determine which countries to call does not negate the possibility of him also calling a number in Burkina Faso for whatever reason suited him. It's ultimately a character decision and not a mistake.

Phaneron Premium member

Stupidity: Immediately after Unkar Plutt makes Rey a generous offer for BB-8 and she refuses, he tells someone over his communicator to follow her and bring back the droid. He should have at least waited until she was out of earshot before he said that, especially if he was trying to be covert about it.

zendaddy621

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: But he was out of earshot of her.

lionhead

I posted this immediately after watching the scene in question, and it looked as though Plutt spoke into his communicator right after Rey turned around and went on her way; certainly too soon for her to have gotten more than a few steps away. Also, he spoke at a normal, conversational volume rather than anything that sounded like a whisper or "sotto voce", so unless he was relying on the ambient noise of other nearby activity, I still believe this "stupidity" is valid.

zendaddy621

That depends on how sneaky you think Plutt is. Rey walks away in quick paces, so she is out of earshot. Also I don't think it bothers him that much if she heard, she is just a scavenger, what can she do about it?

lionhead

Rey was definitely out of earshot. Rey walks completely out of the shot, which appears to be about 10 feet away. Unkar Plutt then angrily swipes the portions off the counter and picks up his communicator. At the pace Rey was walking she would have been a considerable distance away from him when he spoke. In addition, Unkar Plutt lowered his voice when he spoke because he was being sneaky. She might have been able to hear him speak, but it is totally reasonable that she wouldn't be close enough to make out exactly what he was saying.

BaconIsMyBFF

15th Mar 2004

Family Guy (1999)

Correction: This is because the series starts in 1999, when Family Guy is was just standard definition TV. The animators didn't bother to draw the pictures, as they're only a part of the background, and is not really that important, as the video quality is in SD. When the series began to look a lot more clearer (and closer to HD), the animators decided to draw the pictures a lot more clearer and recognizable.

Agreed. This is like comparing the Simpsons' opening from '92 to '18. As technology progresses so does animation.

Ssiscool Premium member

Also, an animated series is typically not given much of a budget until it has proven itself to be a hit and thus worthy of a bigger budget from the network upon which it airs; this is also evident when you compare early episodes of other series such as South Park, American Dad, King Of The Hill, etc. to those from later seasons.

zendaddy621

Precisely. A network isn't going to funnel money into something that could sink in the ratings. That's why many shows are contracted for a couple of episodes before a full season is commissioned.

Ssiscool Premium member

Trivia: When Marty discovers that he is in an alternate Hill Valley, there was going to be a scene with him discovering that his sister Linda was a prostitute and his brother Dave a homeless drunk living on the streets. These scenes were scrapped as Wendie Jo Sperber, who played Linda, was pregnant at the time.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Very unlikely for a family film, and needs to be supported by some evidence such as a published interview with a film principal. This is a ridiculous entry and should be removed.

There was, in fact, a deleted scene in which Marty comes across Dave, who has since become an alcoholic, in the town square. While it is true that Wendie Jo Sperber was pregnant and thus unavailable at the time the film was made, I've never heard of anything scripted about Linda having turned to prostitution.

zendaddy621

If you have the DVD or the Blu-Ray, watch the movie with the Trivia Track on. It will confirm that Wendie was originally supposed to appear as her character Linda who had become a prostitute.

15th Apr 2019

Bumblebee (2018)

Answer: I couldn't find any other information, but honestly... Soundwave is barely in the movie. Probably just wasn't worth it for the production to pay Welker to come in just to record a few throwaway lines.

TedStixon

I considered that possibility as well, but since Peter Cullen reprised his role as the voice of Optimus Prime yet again for this film despite Prime's minimal involvement, it doesn't quite wash. Also, given Frank Welker's highly prolific voice acting career, it's unlikely he would have declined on the basis of pay or importance of his involvement.

zendaddy621

Soundwave was barely in the movie (he's literally only in a few shots) and only had one or two lines. As the other answer suggested, it probably just wasn't worth it for the studio to pay Welker to come in, or they just didn't feel it was necessary given that Soundwave was essentially just a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo. Optimus has a much larger presence, and Peter Cullen's voice is pretty synonymous with the character in the film series. Hence, it was worth it to have him return.

TedStixon

Corrected entry: The star on Sheriff Justice's car indicates that he is the Sheriff of Montague County Texas. Texarkana is in Bowie County Texas, which is approximately 245 miles east of Montague County.

Correction: Sally Field fled the wedding, and her car was broken down on the side of the road. Sheriff Justice was after her before the Bandit showed up, so the fact that she got 245 miles away before the car either broke down or ran out of gas is not difficult to believe.

The sheriff was also not particularly concerned about jurisdiction throughout the film when it came to apprehending his quarry.

zendaddy621

5th Oct 2018

Young Sheldon (2017)

Correction: Not necessarily; since the second season has begun, they could have progressed to 1990 by this point. It also hasn't been established whether he's had his tenth birthday yet at this point in the series.

zendaddy621

Sheldon's birthday is Feb 26, 1980.

Bishop73

I knew his birth year had been established already on BBT; I just didn't know for sure if the date he had a birthday within the parent series corresponded to the "real" world because BBT time only roughly coincides with real-world time in most cases.

zendaddy621

While a BBT season may not be a full year or the next episode isn't set one week later (like many sitcoms), because the show relies on pop culture so heavily, like releases of films, etc, I do think BBT is set in the real life timeline, even if a holiday special is set in the "future" (e.g. a Halloween episode is aired 2 weeks before Halloween.) However, with YS being set in the past it can be hard to tell what the exact date is, unless specifically said, and you have to rely on context clues (like a lot of shows set in the real life timeline past). I only replied with his birthday so others could make a decision if the correction is valid. I do not know enough about the episode to know when it's suppose to be set or how long it's been since his birthday (as I did think he was suppose to be 10 in the episode).

Bishop73

28th Mar 2005

Child's Play (1988)

Plot hole: Andy is suspected of having killed Eddie Caputo, because he was at the scene when Eddie's house blew up and Eddie was killed. But there are glaring things that go unquestioned: None of the cops seem to think it's strange that a six-year-old kid would travel by himself so far to some random house in order to blow it up. The South Side neighborhood where Eddie lives is halfway across the city from Andy's apartment. How did Andy know where Eddie lived? How do the cops think he even knew Eddie at all? None of them address this most puzzling problem.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The police believe Andy to be insane (hence why he is sent to a mental institution instead of juvenile hall), and thus do not believe his choice of victims to be in any way rational.

Also, as unlikely as it is that a six-year-old child could (or would) travel halfway across the city to murder a random person, the possibility that a child's doll came to life and carried out the act was considered far too outlandish at that point in the plot.

zendaddy621

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.