Revealing mistake: When Luke is being fed to the Rancor, in Jabba the Hutt's dungeon, there are black outlines around the beast's legs, from the composite's blue screen special effect. This was edited out in the special edition rerelease.
raywest
2nd Jun 2005
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This was not a "mistake". The outlines showing around the beast's leg were due to the limited CGI technology at the time the film was made. With advances in special effects in the following decades, the filmmakers were able to enhance the CGI quality in later releases.
But it is a mistake to show that the Rancor is not real, and the outlines show that. It's certainly not intentional.
28th Feb 2016
Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971)
Other mistake: When the boat that Willy Wonka and the passengers are riding on is heading for the tunnel through the river of chocolate, two crewmen are cranking the paddle wheel. The wheel is in an opening in the middle of the deck. As the paddle is rotating, moving the boat through the river, the blades are always clean and dry and never have any chocolate on them whatsoever. Also the paddle is rotating the wrong way. It should be rotating clockwise.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
28th Jan 2024
Masquerade (1988)
Plot hole: At Tim's funeral, Olivia's attorney tells her that Tim had himself removed from Olivia's Last Will and Testament, proving he loved her and didn't want her money. However, an attorney could not legally change a client's Will without that person's knowledge and drafting a revised version.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Not true. Anyone can have themselves removed as a beneficiary of a will. This is done by signing an Affidavit of Disclaimer of Inheritance at such time as someone becomes aware that they have been included in a will as a beneficiary. This is what Tim meant when he said he had removed himself from Olivia's will.
12th May 2009
Twilight (2008)
Corrected entry: When they go on the school trip, Bella, Edward, Alice, and Bella's friends are there. They are all juniors. But Jasper is there and he is a senior. This couldn't even be a mixed trip, because Emmett and Rosalie aren't there.
Correction: In the movies, Jasper is the same grade as Alice. In the books, he is a year ahead of her. So in the movies you see Jasper with them in school. He is on the field trip, he is at school with Alice saying happy birthday in New Moon, he is at the cafeteria table when Alice has her vision in Eclipse as well as being at graduation with Alice. It was just a screen writer/director decision that is different from the book.
Also, in some high schools that do non-mandatory field trips, if a spot opens up a classmate can request to bring a student from another class, so even if he hadn't been bumped back a year for the movies, he would have been able to go on said trip. I don't believe the character of Jasper would spend a day at high school without Alice there.
Correction: In high school, it is possible for classes to be mixed grades. If someone needs a science credit, for example, a senior could be in a class with juniors.
Correction: Agree with the other corrections, but would add that the teacher, Mr. Molina, would likely teach more than one class for different grade levels. He could easily combine the different classes into one field trip. As there are two buses, it seems likely there is more than one class. Emmett and Rosalie may not be in any of Molina's classes. The field trip may also be optional for students to attend.
19th Sep 2019
Sleeping with the Enemy (1991)
Plot hole: Laura rents a nice, large house, furnished with everything she needs, using a fake name, no job, no financial history, has no current bank account or credit cards or any references. She merely hands cash to the agent. She later lands a job without proof of identity, citizenship or residency (legally required), and has no references, no credible work history, or a SSN#. Laura is resourceful, but would lack the means to obtain a convincing fake identity and other false documentation.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You don't have to be a citizen to work.
You do need an ID, but you don't need to be a citizen.
You need to be a U.S. citizen, a "legal" resident, or have a specific type of work visa to be legally employed in this country. You also need an identity for renting a house or apartment and a prospective tenant doesn't just hand over a large sum of cash for the rent/damage deposit without immediately getting a receipt, while standing on the porch, and not first filling out paperwork.
15th Sep 2021
Roseanne (1988)
The Pied Piper of Lanford - S3-E25
Continuity mistake: In Ziggy's first appearance in the series (S2, EP. 16 "Born to Be Wild"), he says he has two kids. He states "I had to make mine. I checked them at birth, they're boys!" However in his second appearance in the series here, he states they were his girlfriend, Jill's, kids and the kids are back living with their father.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
8th Oct 2019
Roseanne (1988)
Continuity mistake: Harris was born in 1997 (in season 9) so in 2018, that makes her 21 years old, but in the 2018 revival and its spinoff "The Conners", she is depicted as 17-18 years old and attending high school.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
2nd Sep 2005
Roseanne (1988)
Lovers Lanes - S1-E6
Continuity mistake: Dan tells Crystal that his shoe size is 11. A few months later during episode 16, "Mall Story", Dan tells a shoe salesman he takes a size 13.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Some people wear different sizes depending on the type of shoe. Not necessarily a mistake.
2nd Jan 2007
Roseanne (1988)
Other mistake: When the opening credits are shown, the door to the basement is in the kitchen. In the beginning of the series the door is still in the kitchen, but in later seasons the basement door is in the laundry room, but in the opening credits it is still in the kitchen.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I had noticed the same thing and thought it was a continuity mistake. However, in Season 3, Dan mentioned building the back service porch where Roseanne does the laundry. There are two basement accesses, the one in the kitchen, and what was probably the outside entrance in the backyard that is now enclosed inside the service porch. The family prefers using that one. Most houses, mine own included, have multiple basement access, one inside the house and one outside. In my state, it's a building code requirement.
18th Dec 2018
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017)
Factual error: Abe hilariously exercises in a ridiculous suit while listening to Robert Preston's "Chicken Fat" recording. But Preston (who starred in The Music Man) didn't release this until 1962, at the behest of President Kennedy, who was big on physical fitness.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's true that this song was not recorded and released until 1962, which is a little after when this scene takes place. However, Abe is not actually "listening" to it (or any other music) while he is exercising on the lake dock. The song is used as part of the series soundtrack and creates a desired mood for the scene. As the storyline is now in the early 1960s, it is appropriate to the era, and is only background music.
27th Dec 2018
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017)
Factual error: When in Harrisburg, Susie mentions the Civil War Museum, but that didn't open until 2001.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
18th Sep 2003
The War of the Worlds (1953)
Corrected entry: Martians die at the end of the film because of the bacteria in our atmosphere. Martians are living organisms (they had anemic blood in the movie), so why weren't humans affected adversely by the Martian bacteria?
Correction: Perhaps the human immune system is better at killing them than the Martian immune system (if there is such a thing) is at dealing with Earth bacteria.
Correction: The Martians hadn't been on Earth long enough to spread any alien germs. The invasion unfolded rather quickly. The aliens were mostly confined to their space ships, and had limited direct contact with humans. If they had survived longer, they might have spread fatal organisms to humans, though the humans probably would have been eradicated by then.
27th Oct 2008
Sex and the City (1998)
Corrected entry: In the last two epsiodes, "An American Girl in Paris, Parts Une and Deux," Carrie has quit her column and is no longer writing Sex and the city, yet she still does her 'narrating the column' bit through these episodes.
Correction: This is due to the fact that Carrie is a writer, and wouldn't stop writing after losing her column in NYC. She may have been keeping a journal in Paris, or writing for her own benefit - perhaps thinking it might be good material for a future book, etc. Just because she was no longer working for the Star, doesn't mean as a person she would stop writing. Also, she may have had doubts inside about her move, and was writing in case things didn't work out and she moved back to NYC and got her column back (which is what happened!).
Correction: This has nothing to do with her writing the column. We are hearing her "inner monologue," some of which would be translated into her column. She is a writer, and she already has one book published, so she would continue writing about her life. Writers don't stop writing, and this may be a daily journal or diary.
30th Jun 2010
Sex and the City (1998)
Corrected entry: At the beginning of this episode, Carrie mentions in voiceover that they had been in LA for over a week. It's obvious in this episode, that they are staying in LA for a second week. But Carrie never showed up at the second meeting for the Production Company, which would have ended her work with them. Since the Production Company was paying for 2 hotel rooms; it isn't likely they would have let the girls stay in those rooms for 2 weeks for free, when Carrie quit the project after only a few days. And it's doubtful the girls would have elected to pay full price for an expensive hotel in LA for almost 2 weeks on their own, when they had expected to stay there for free.
Correction: Agree with the other corrections, but would add that Carrie wasn't working for the production company. She was invited to California to discuss optioning her column for a movie. Regardless of whether or not she attended a second meeting, she was their invited guest and the arrangement included a two-week hotel stay, which would be pre-paid. The remainder of a two-week hotel bill is a small business expense that the production company could write off as a tax deduction. Suddenly ejecting her from the hotel would be unprofessional, cheap, and end possible future collaborations and is something Carrie would likely write about in her column.
23rd Jun 2022
The Lovely Bones (2009)
Factual error: There is a poster of Shaun Cassidy hanging on Susie's bedroom door - not only was Sean Cassidy only 15 years old at the time, but he hadn't even had a hit single yet.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: If you're talking about the poster visible at the 16-minute mark, I'm pretty sure that is Shaun's half-brother David Cassidy who was at the height of his popularity in 1973.
It's definitely David Cassidy.
30th Jun 2020
Fifty Shades Darker (2017)
Other mistake: Both Leila and Ana have the same SS# listed on the cover sheet of the files Christian keeps on all his submissives. 123-45-6789; Also, Ana's info has 2 paragraphs that repeat over and over in her file.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Regarding the SS#: Good catch but this should probably be classified as a "Deliberate" or "Revealing" mistake." The 123-45-6789 is not a real SS# and has never been issued. Using a second different number would expose a real person's SS#. The filmmakers likely opted to avoid that and any potential legal issues that duplicating it could cause. There are additional SS# combinations that are never issued, such as ones starting with "000" or "666", plus a few others, but those would look fake. This is similar to how movie phone numbers often start with the dummy "555" prefix.
28th Sep 2015
Fifty Shades of Grey (2015)
Corrected entry: Christian Grey gives a speech during a Anastasia's university graduation ceremony. During the speech the podium he speaks at reads "Vancouver" on it, rather than Seattle, which is where the movie is based. This reflects the fact that the ceremony hall used in this shot is located at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver BC. Despite this the filmmakers try to hide the real location of the scene elsewhere by placing a Washington State flagpole on the stage.
Correction: The school that Ana goes to is in Vancouver, WA (not Canada). Ana and Kate move to Seattle, WA after the graduation.
No they move before the graduation. I've seen this movie multiple times and I know this is true.
They do so in the movie. In the book, they move after graduation. Doesn't change the fact that they went to Washington State University in Vancouver, Wa.
Pay attention to the interior and the events occurring. During the montage of Ana going over the contract, her and Kate are in the process of moving. After the "was this nice?" scene, Ana and Kate are in their new place before they graduated, and before Ana's first experience in the Red Room.
Correction: Clarifying several points: Ana and Kate are moving to Seattle and their new apartment just after their final class but before the commencement ceremony. Commencements usually occur 1-2 weeks after the academic year ends; Ana and Kate attend the ceremony at the campus, but technically, students are graduates only after their submitted paperwork is approved. Commencement attendance is optional and even students who have not quite completed all degree requirements are allowed to "walk" at the ceremony. Students receive a ceremonial scroll at the commencement and the actual diplomas are mailed later. Ana's school, Washington State University, and the commencement were in Vancouver, Washington, not Vancouver, B.C. Canada. The school, located on Washington's southern border, is one of WSU's four branch campuses. It is about a three-hour, straight drive on I-5 between Seattle and Vancouver, so a fast, easy commute. Ana and Kate either still had access to their old apartment, stayed at a motel or with friends in Vancouver, or they drove back to Seattle the same day. Confusion between the two Vancouvers is understandable for those unfamiliar with the Pacific Northwest.
14th Oct 2021
A Quiet Place Part II (2020)
Revealing mistake: The "baby" looked quite "rubbery" at times and its limited movements (even motionless) and lack of sound are indicative of a "fake" baby (doll) most of the time. The baby was mostly kept covered in some kind of box and did not even cry when the mother was running with it (while in her arms or in the box). (00:14:35 - 00:20:30)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is not really a "revealing mistake." Fake babies are used in movies all the time. Due to the complexities of filmmaking, it is simply impractical and impossible to use real infants for most scenes. Child safety and labor laws strictly limits how long a baby can be on set. A fake baby may or may not look "rubbery" but that is what they had to work with.
Your correction is precisely what makes it a revealing mistake. Explaining why a mistake occurs doesn't invalidate the mistake. You could only argue that it doesn't look fake or a real baby was used, but since that's not the case, the mistake stands.
A "mistake" is an unplanned and/or unwanted circumstance. Obviously using a fake baby was an intentional decision. At best, this should be classified as a "Deliberate Mistake."
This very website defines "revealing" mistakes as: "Anything which gives away filming techniques, such as stunt wires being visible, or glass smashing before anyone goes through it." (And I could be wrong, but I believe the definition used to be even broader.) An obviously fake baby falls under that umbrella, and always has. You simply can't argue that it's not a revealing mistake by the rules of this site just because it was a deliberate choice by the filmmakers. Heck, even under your strict definition of mistake (which is very problematic, because it doesn't really account for plenty of things that 99.9% of people would commonly consider "movie mistakes"), it's still a mistake, since the filmmakers wanted people to think it's real, and we obviously don't - ergo an unplanned circumstance.
8th May 2006
The Great Escape (1963)
Character mistake: The scene in the outdoor Parisian cafe is incredibly daft. First, the cafe owners call James Coburn's bizarrely-accented Australian to the telephone to keep him out of the way as their accomplices assassinate three uniformed German officers seated in the cafe in a drive by shooting. They then toast the killings with cognac, and that is the mistake - not the shootings, not the luring away of Coburn - the mistake is that the cafe proprietors celebrate the assassination of the German officers in broad daylight, in the open, without even stopping to think that such an action would have them shot, because all of this is done in the direct view of passers-by in broad daylight. Do they think those three German officers were the only ones in Paris? How did they know Coburn wasn't an undercover Gestapo agent or a French collaborator? Don't they stop to consider that in an occupied city machine gun fire is going to draw some attention from the authorities, who might just wonder what a couple of bullet riddled corpses are doing lying about the place?
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Regarding the French cafe proprietors making a toast, if questioned, they could simply claim they were celebrating surviving the incident and/or needed a calming drink. Considering any ensuring panic and confusion after the shooting, pedestrians would hardly notice the waiters. Attention would be on the dead Germans. French citizens most likely wouldn't care or cooperate with the authorities. Being indifferent to German officers getting killed is not proof of involvement. Most French hardly be remorseful over their enemies' deaths. Antagonism toward the Germans was normal. It would be more suspicious if the proprietors showed concern. As far as helping James Coburn, it was pretty obvious he was neither French or German, and they took a chance to protect an innocent bystander. Also, it was to inject some subtle levity into the scene.
Rubbish. During the occupation Paris was crawling with collaborators and undercover German agents. The cafe owners are drinking champagne - not much of a nerve stiffener! - and they clink glasses in celebration of the shooting of the German officers. Their actions are beyond obvious to anyone that can see them. They simply would not take the risk and would act as if they were horrified to see their customers shot dead in their cafe.
Nope. Even if collaborators were "crawling" around, no-one would expect any French citizen to care about Nazis being killed. If questioned they can claim it was for the other reasons already stated (and they are not drinking champagne). It does not prove their involvement. Little would come of them being interrogated. As mentioned, this is a movie, and the scene injects subtle humor and is intended to show the audience that they are involved in the coordinated plan.
Again, rubbish. The Nazis occupying Paris arrested anyone suspected of belonging to or assisting the Resistance on the slightest pretext, and the cafe owners who were celebrating the deaths of three German officers would be in a Gestapo prison cell before the bodies of the dead Germans were cold. What they do after the Germans are shot is blatant, irresponsible, dangerous and completely unnecessary. They could have saved their celebrations for later when it was safe.
Once again, NOPE. Clinking glasses is not proof of possibly belonging to or aiding the Resistance. They also were not wildly celebrating. It was a quick, low-key action, and they looked both nervous and relieved. Also, I re-watched the scene on YouTube. When the car pulls up to shoot the Nazis, the street around them is completely empty. No witnesses anywhere. People are only seen far in the background. The phone call just before the shooting is a signal and indicates this was well-coordinated and timed. Secondly, the story needs to move quickly, and insignificant characters would not be seen toasting later. This also showed James Coburn (and us) that the waiters were potential allies.
You think the Nazis needed proof of someone's involvement in the Resistance? They arrested, tortured and shot innocent people on the unsubstantiated word of pro-German informers! No witnesses anywhere? What about Coburn? They didn't know who he was or where he was from. For all they know he could have been a Gestapo agent himself. The scene is absurd. Nobody is so stupid as to do what they did at the risk of dying horribly if caught doing it.
It should also be noted that the cafe owners duck behind their counter before the car carrying the gunmen shows up, and they get Coburn to do the same. They just provided incontrovertible evidence that they knew about the assassinations ahead of time.
Yes, they absolutely were part of it, and the hit was timed and planned in advance for the opportune moment. This was not a random act, and the phone call is the signal that sets the events in motion. When they made the toast, they knew the street was completely empty and obviously felt it was safe to do so. Also, if Coburn was a spy or collaborator, he would have warned the Nazis, not hidden behind the counter. THIS IS A MOVIE, NOT REAL LIFE.
18th Feb 2004
The Great Escape (1963)
Corrected entry: After the men escape they are all standing at the train station because the train was late, or there was a hold up of some kind. Was this possibly a ribbing kind of gesture at the term used in Nazi Germany "The government stinks but at least the trains run on time"?
Correction: That wasn't about Nazi Germany, it was about Fascist Italy. The phrase "He made the trains run on time" was coined by one of Mussolini's propagandists, and became widely believed, although there was little or no truth to it (source: Montagu, A. and Darling, E. (1967) The Prevalence of Nonsense, Dell/Delta, New York. Page 19).
I believe (but I'm not 100%) that Patton once said the Nazis made the trains run on time when, after the war, he was questioned about not removing them from official posts in the Austrian Government. That is from memory and I might be wrong.
Correction: The late trains were directly due to the POW escape. The Germans were scouring the countryside searching for the escapees and knew they'd be trying to board trains and other public transportation. They'd be checking every station and depot in the vicinity as well as boarding buses and train coaches to search them, thus delaying the regular transportation schedules.
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.