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?
raywest
18th Sep 2003
The War of the Worlds (1953)
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 Carrie's "inner monologue," some of which would be translated into her column. She is a writer and already has one book published, so she would continue writing about her life. Writers don't stop writing just because their circumstances or location changes, 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 a well-known writer 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 move 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. Commencements are strictly ceremonial and attendance is optional. 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. Ana's school, Washington State University, and the commencement ceremony were in Vancouver, Washington, not Vancouver, B.C. Canada. The school, located on Washington's southern border, is a WSU branch campus. 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, rented a motel room, stayed with friends in Vancouver, or 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.
It is a revealing mistake. They could have used CGI, shot some baby sequences separately and edited them in, etc. There are many ways they could have done things differently; they would just have been more complicated and cost more. The option they went with wasn't all they had to work with; it's just what they chose to work with.
8th May 2006
The Great Escape (1963)
Stupidity: 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.
2nd Feb 2008
The Great Escape (1963)
Corrected entry: The 'Australian' has no Australian accent whatsoever.
Correction: So? Coming from another country doesn't automatically mean a deep accent.
Correction: He definitely has an Australian accent. American actor James Coburn wasn't perfect, but one can definitely tell it is supposed to be Australian.
18th Jun 2018
The Great Escape (1963)
Factual error: A convoy of open trucks arrive at the camp bringing the latest batch of prisoners, many of whom are carrying rucksacks and tote bags of clothing and other possessions. Where did they come from? Combat servicemen in World War Two did not carry overnight bags with them - a change of clothes or a handy supply of toiletries was the least of their concerns. A prisoner of war arrived in the camp with the clothes he stood up in and nothing else.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: These prisoners were being transferred from other camps to this camp. As Big X said, "They are putting all their rotten eggs in one basket." It's likely they are carrying possessions they've acquired during their time in captivity.
What "possessions"? Do you think they had Oxfam shops in POW camps during World War 2? They would be dressed in their combat fatigues and nothing else.
They would have possessions as they would receive parcels from home and Red Cross parcels.
Prisoners of war would receive Red Cross parcels, and may have also scrounged, made or been issued a few other bits and pieces. In particular, they'd probably have a change or two of underwear, some toiletries and a few books or games at the very least.
POWs acquired possessions by hand-making, scrounging, care packages, 'selling' watches and rings to guards or local civilians.
They were universally known for their trading and scrounging abilities. Remember these were the "worst of the worst" in offending.
Just to clarify. They weren't exactly the "worst of the worst" for bad or incorrigible behavior. They were the best at attempting to escape POW camps or otherwise subverting their German captors. The fed-up Germans decided to contain them all in one prison to stop the constant breakouts. They only succeeded in creating a POW "think tank" by pooling together the most talented escape artists who combined their skills and knowledge.
In international conflicts, in addition to prisoners regularly receiving Red Cross care packages, the Geneva Convention requires captors to treat all POWs humanely, and provide food, clothing, housing, medical treatment, and hygiene. As mentioned, these prisoners brought their belongings with them from other camps. International Red Cross inspectors monitor POW camps for compliance. Failure to comply with the rules constitutes war crimes, which are adjudicated after a conflict. Germany was generally compliant. POW camps were to detain captured soldiers and prevent them rejoining the war. They did not punish detainees as "criminals" but disciplined them when they were non-compliant or for other misbehavior. Once the war was over, POWs were repatriated.
The Great Escape was from a POW camp specifically set up to hold trouble makers from other camps. Also, sometimes people expect to be captured and prepare to for it! Today, during funeral of John Lewis, speakers repeatedly mentioned that he was carrying a backpack with 2 books, an apple, an orange and a tooth brush. Which haven't been seen since his head was beat in. A least one German Fortress commander, sworn to defend his fort until he and all those under his command were dead, surrendered with multiple suit cases to make his incarceration more comfortable. Like the character Yossarian in Catch-22. [Spoiler alert: he makes elaborate preparations to the paddle in a life raft from Italy to Sweden.].
15th Apr 2019
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017)
Factual error: The word "floaties "was not used to refer to pool toys in the 1950's.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
1st May 2020
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017)
Corrected entry: When Midge is doing her skit for the soldiers she is pretending to read articles off a magazine. Yet instead of flipping the magazine, she is swiping as if reading off a smartphone.
Correction: "Swiping" is not specific to smartphones or computer tablets. People often do this to speed through books, magazines, or documents, often by slightly moistening the index fingertip, rather than individually turning pages. Midge is pantomiming this her act, so her action is naturally a bit exaggerated for effect.
6th May 2020
The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel (2017)
Factual error: Midge talks about a 2 for 1 pantyhose sale but pantyhose weren't introduced until 1959.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
26th Aug 2005
White Christmas (1954)
Trivia: In the scene where Bing Crosby and Danny Kaye are escaping the club where the sisters are performing, you see Bing Crosby hail a cab. Notwithstanding that there happens to be a cab in the alley, but moreover, when Bing "whistles" you can hear that he wasn't able to do it. It comes out as a "flub" sound. Not really a mistake, but kinda funny.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Regarding the cab, it didn't just show up. When Danny Kaye is telling Bing Crosby about the girls' predicament with the sheriff, he tells Crosby to get a cab. Being that this is a busy nightclub, there would be cabs hanging around, waiting for fares. There is then a fair amount of time while the sheriff is being stalled and before all four exit out the back of the club to the waiting taxi. Crosby, probably with the friendly club owner's help, had the cab pull around to the back alley.
10th Jan 2003
White Christmas (1954)
Corrected entry: Wallace and Davis escape from the sister's show room, out of the window and get a cab. As they are in a rush they don't take anything with them. However, then at the station when catching the train they have all their luggage. How did they have time to get their luggage in such a rush?
Correction: The guys were at the nightclub where the girls are performing. Their luggage is most likely wherever they were staying.
Correction: Wallace and Davis are huge stars. Their plans were to leave by train that night, but first went to the nightclub to see the Hanes sisters' act. The stage employee who had gotten Wallace and Davis their train tickets and arranged their itinerary would also have had their luggage delivered to the train station. Once the luggage arrived, the porters would deliver it to their rooms.
15th Dec 2007
White Christmas (1954)
Corrected entry: Ever wonder why Vera-Ellen is always shown in the movie wearing a high collar dress/shirt/pajama top/etc.? She was suffering from premature aging effects (she was only 33 at the time) from what is believed to have been anorexia. It showed predominantly in her chest and neck - hence, the desire for her to have her neck covered.
Correction: At the Academy Awards for the 1954 movies Vera-Ellen is in a evening dress which is completely opened in the front showing her neck no signs of anorexia. That was nothing more than a myth. It was her trademark to wear scarfs or high neck shirts or collars several necklaces around her neck.
Correction: Vera Ellen was a tall, willowy woman with a long, slender neck. Edith Head, the costume designer, likely designed the high collars to make Ellen's neck appear a bit shorter and fuller. In contrast, Rosemary Clooney had a curvier figure, a shorter, fuller neck, and mostly wore costumes with a v-shaped neckline, elongating her neck and torso and making her appear more proportional to Vera Ellen, who is playing her sister. These are common fashion techniques used to enhance or minimize women's physical traits.
Vera Ellen, at her tallest, was only 5'4." She was petite her whole life and was said to have only an 18" waist.
5th Mar 2021
White Christmas (1954)
Other mistake: In the Christmas party scene all the soldiers are in uniform wearing military boots. Except Bing Crosby, who is in his uniform wearing brown dress shoes, in a war zone. (00:03:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Crosby is wearing dress shoes because he is on stage, entertaining the troops with dancing and singing. It would be hard to do a "soft shoe" tap dance in combat boots. Danny Kaye is wearing boots, but he only does a few simpler dance steps. Crosby is the main entertainer and he would change back into his combat boots once the show was over.
Bombs dropping around them. So shiny brogues were out of the question... and you can't call what Bing does was a dance.
4th Apr 2019
Passengers (2016)
Corrected entry: Aurora said she was on a return voyage, but we learn the ship is incapable of putting passengers into hypersleep, as this can only be done with advanced equipment on Earth. How was she supposed to get back?
Correction: Jim talks about the facility and prep they went though before going into the pod. The Homestead II could easily have the same equipment. The equipment is not on the ship since there should be no reason for anyone to be put back into hypersleep.
Correction: There would be facilities at the destination point that would perform the procedure to put people back into hyper-sleep. The ship's crew, once awakened towards the end of the journey, would then have to be put back to sleep for the return journey to Earth. Jim and Aurora could not simply hop back into the pods and be put to sleep, which is what Jim was referring to.
Correction: They could have a ship that has prepped pods to put people back into hyper sleep for the return trip. Not this ship obviously as nobody was supposed to go back straight away, but the second ship to arrive. Once a pod has been used though, it can't be used again.
21st Jun 2021
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Continuity mistake: When the letters start flying through the letterbox they are coming in with the address facing down and the red seal facing up. When Vernon says they are going away, the letters are now addressed side up and red seal down. (00:12:15)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
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.
jle