Corrected entry: When the trio destroys all the horcruxes, Voldemort's face is seen in its current form. As with the diary when it is in use in the Chamber of Secrets, you are given Voldemort's soul as it was when the horcrux was created (as a teenager). Yet when every other horcrux is destroyed, the spirit's demon/noseless form is seen.
raywest
27th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
27th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: Harry collects two tears from Snape as he dies however when he pours the tears into the pensieve he pours a larger amount of liquid than the two tears collected by harry.
26th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: When Harry is viewing Snape's memories in the pensive, there's a scene where Snape is talking to Dumbledore and Snape casts Lily's patronus. Dumbledore was already supposed to be dead during that scene, because the patronus went to Harry's aide at the frozen lake from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1. Dumbledore had died in the previous movie before that.
Correction: You are confusing two different events. This scene definitely took place before Dumbledore's death, but it is not the same time as when Snape sent the patronus to Harry. Snape is merely showing Dumbledore that his patronus' shape is still a doe, the same as Lily Potter's was. It is Snape's way of telling Dumbledore that he still deeply loves Lily, even many years after her death. When Snape sent the patronus to Harry, it is much later and after Dumbledore had died. There is a brief "flashback" scene inter-cut within this showing when Harry saw the doe patronus in the woods that led him to the Sword of Gryffindor. This was not Snape's memory, but it is Harry's, and it is meant to tie the two incidents together and reveal that it was Snape who had sent the patronus and the sword to Harry in part 1.
28th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: After the confrontation between McGonagall and Snape in the Great Hall, Snape gives up and flies off, taking the two Carrow siblings with him. But in the next two scenes, they are still lying unconscious on the floor.
27th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: Harry Potter disarms Draco Malfoy and gains full power of Malfoy's wand and the Elder Wand. However, in the first year, all wizards are taught to disarm each other, yet the possession of their wands never change.
Correction: It is only under specific circumstances that a wand "may" change its allegiance to a new owner. It does not automatically happen every time a wizard is disarmed. Also, because the students are only learning how to perform the spell, it is not a true combat situation - they are only practising. The wands, being somewhat sentient, are able to detect the difference. New information on "Pottermore" also reveals that the more powerful wands tend to have stronger loyalty to their masters, making them more difficult to "capture."
27th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: When Professor McGonagall uses a spell to animate the knights, they are in minority than when you see them on the bridge. On the bridge they are at least twice, maybe triple as many. (00:40:45 - 00:53:50)
18th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: The film never explains why Harry survives the Killing Curse cast by Voldemort. While the book explains that Harry survives because Voldemort took his mother's blood, the movie never does. As such, there's no reason that a curse that guarantees death would suddenly fail.
Correction: Spoiler Alert: The movie does not explain this well and it's complicated, but the curse did not "fail." Voldemort had overcome Lily Potter's protection after he added Harry's blood to his own during his "resurrection." Harry also explains to Ron and Hermione at the end of DH2 that the Elder Wand was never commanded by Voldemort, though after killing Snape, he mistakenly believed he did, and that is why Voldemort was certain the killing curse was now fatal to Harry. But unknown to Voldemort, it was actually Draco who had won the wand's allegiance when he disarmed Dumbledore on the Astronomy Tower in "Half-blood Prince." When Harry later disarmed Draco at Malfoy Manor, the wand shifted its allegiance to Harry. Recognizing Harry as its master, the wand would never harm him, even when it was wielded by Voldemort, causing his killing curse to rebound off Harry and instead strike him. In the Forbidden Forest, the first time Voldemort casts the curse at Harry, it rebounds, knocking Harry unconscious (and also destroying Voldemort's soul shard within Harry). It then hit Voldemort, who is also knocked out but survives because he has one Horcrux left. During their final confrontation, Voldemort's curse again rebounds off Harry and strikes Voldemort, fatally this time, because Neville has just killed Nagini, the last Horcrux. Voldemort unintentionally kills himself.
15th Jul 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Corrected entry: Cho Chang is the one who tells Harry about Rowena's tiara. However, we've previously been told that Cho is a year older than Harry, and Harry is now in year 7, which would make Cho year 8, which doesn't exist.
14th Jun 2011
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)
Corrected entry: The silver chalices have glass cups set in a silver goblet, and these cups break when the chalices are damaged by the Spaniard. When Cruz's character "drinks" from the chalice, you can see that the glass is broken before the silver rim, so when she tilted it to drink, the contents would have poured out of the hole, not into her mouth.
13th Jun 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Corrected entry: When Xenophilius Lovegood draws the Deathly Hallows, his resurrection stone is a misshapen circle, but when the camera cuts away and comes back, it is perfect.
17th Jun 2011
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Corrected entry: In the ending credits, when they show the names of the students going to Hogwarts on the train, there are two names that should not be there: Cho Chang and Katie Bell. Both of them graduated the previous year. The first time code is for the train and the second is for the credits. (00:46:00 - 02:19:10)
Correction: While that is true in the books, the films never state that either Cho or Katie were a year ahead of Harry. There have been many instances where facts in the movies differ from the books. For example, the Patil twins are identical and were sorted into different houses in the books, while in the films, they are either fraternal twins or merely sisters, and both are in Gryffindor.
Besides, Cho Chang was in HPATDH. She comments on Luna's statement about the Diadem.
19th May 2011
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)
Corrected entry: This film takes place during the reign of King George II, who was crowned as King in 1727, almost nine years after Blackbeard was killed in North Carolina.
Correction: This fact was mentioned by Jack Sparrow in the storyline. The premise is that Blackbeard somehow escaped or survived the battle where he was supposedly "killed." Just how he did so is never explained, though in the film, he possesses some supernatural power that may have made this possible.
21st Feb 2011
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)
Corrected entry: Jeannie kicks the principal in the face three times and doesn't recognize him. It's clear from an earlier scene that she is a regular complainer at his office.
31st Dec 2010
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Corrected entry: When Indy is in the castle and the butler says ". I am Mickey Mouse" - you can see someone walk past the crack on the right hand side of the front door, most likely someone from the crew.
18th Dec 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Corrected entry: When Fred arrives at the Weasley's home after battle with Voldemort at the beginning of the movie, you can see him put his glasses on right before taking them off.
Correction: Being as Fred was using polyjuice potion to impersonate Harry, who is very near-sighted, Fred's eyes may not have completely returned to normal yet, and he could have momentarily needed to put them back on to see properly, then took them off again as the potion's effect wore off. Hermione, also a Harry decoy, was earlier heard commenting about how bad Harry's eyesight is as she was putting on the glasses.
29th Nov 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Corrected entry: In the scene after Ron destroys the locket, he tells Harry "Only three Horcruxes left". There are seven horcruxes and only three have been destroyed, so there would really be four left.
Correction: Spoiler alert: This is a bit confusing. Yes, there are seven Horcruxes, but Voldemort only meant to create six: Tom Riddle's diary, the Peverell ring, Slytherin's locket, Hufflepuff's cup, Ravenclaw's diadem (tiara), and Voldemort's snake, Nagini. Voldemort always intended to have seven soul pieces (seven being the most magical number), the six Horcruxes mentioned above, and the one remaining in his body. When Voldemort cast the killing curse at baby Harry, a piece of Voldemort's soul was unintentionally sheared off and embedded into Harry (possibly in his scar), and leaving him with certain abilities, such as speaking Parseltongue. The curse then rebounded, destroying Voldemort's body. Technically, Harry is the seventh (and accidental) Horcrux, though only Dumbledore and Snape realized this, and Harry will learn this later when he views Snape's memory in the penseive. From everyone else's perspective (including Voldemort), there are only six Horcruxes, three have been destroyed (diary, ring, and locket), and three more (cup, diadem, and Nagini) must be found. In total, there are eight soul pieces. If the soul shard within Harry is not destroyed, then Voldemort cannot be killed.
However, in The half blood Prince, Tom Riddle asks Slughorn, could someone split their souls 7 times, meaning he was planning on making 7 Horcruxes all along, not 6.
No, he said "can you split your soul only once? For instance into 7?", the memory is not fully whole I'd say but Slughorn does confirm it, he was considering to split it into 7 pieces, not 7 times.
Exactly as you said, Tom Riddle told about parting the soul into seven pieces, not making 7 Horcruxes! That being said, Voldermort split his soul into 7 pieces, one inside his own and the rests (6) into Horcruxes, which implies having 3 other Horcruxes left to be destroyed (Cup, Diadem, Nagini).
22nd Nov 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Corrected entry: When Harry is looking through the files in Umbridge's office, he pauses at Dumbledore's profile. The file claims that Dumbledore's blood status is "Half-Blood," but he is in fact a "Pure Blood", because his father was a wizard and his mother was a witch.
Correction: That does not make him a "pure-blood." If you recall, Harry's father was a wizard and his mother a witch, but Harry is considered a "half-blood" because Lily Potter's parents were non-magical. The same may be true about Dumbledore's lineage. If either his witch mother or wizard father was muggle-born, or they had a parent who was, then he would indeed be a "half-blood." A wizard has to have a long (and in-bred) history of only magical ancestors to be considered "pure-blood."
24th Feb 2010
The Lovely Bones (2009)
Corrected entry: When Abigail, Susie's mother, returns from her long absence, her hair is short. After this, there is a shot of her when the father leaves for work, and she has long hair. Then when she's making Suzie's bed, her hair is short again.
Correction: This is not a mistake and is meant to show that time has passed. Abigail was unable to enter Susie's bedroom for a very long time. It is only after she has sufficiently healed emotionally, that she can go into the room again. Her hair changes somewhat during the intervening years (from the time she returns home, to where she's sitting on the porch as Jack, who is now healed from his injuries, leaves for work, and finally, much later, when she's in Susie's bedroom). You'll also notice that younger daughter, Lindsey, has since graduated from high school, has married, and is now pregnant. Approximately seven years have passed since Susie's murder.
12th Jul 2010
Sex and the City (1998)
Corrected entry: When Aleksandr and Carrie are having their late dinner, he asks her if she would like some fruit. Carrie replies: "I'm not really a fruit person". Yet this is contradictory to her character, as we have seen her eating fruit throughout the series, eg. cherries while watching SNL during the afternoon, and an apple while working on her computer. (00:30:25)
Correction: That's being a little too literal. Even if she didn't particularly like fruit, it doesn't mean she hates it and never eats it (it's good for you, afterall). Some people are that way about eating vegetables. Carrie may also just not have wanted a whole piece of fruit in addition to dinner. In fact, the entire Russian meal was a bit much for her taste.
12th Jul 2010
Sex and the City (1998)
Pick-a-little, talk-a-little - S6-E4
Corrected entry: After Miranda and Paul have a successful dinner date, he abruptly ends the night and tells her he has to get home. Miranda finally gets Paul to admit the truth, and he informs her that he has diarrhea and goes running off in a hurry along the sidewalk towards home. But if Paul was in that much gastrointestinal distress that he has to end a date and rush home, why wouldn't he just go back inside the restaurant and use their bathroom? They are standing right outside the restaurant, and it would have been much faster and more convenient than having to wait until he got home. (00:19:25)
Correction: Paul was obviously embarrassed by having to answer "nature's call," no matter how urgent. It was an awkward situation, and this being their first date, he likely did not want Miranda to know about his sudden need for a bathroom. Considering his predicament, he may have wanted to avoid using the restaurant's facilities under those circumstances.
This makes no sense. If the need was that bad, it's more important to find a nearbye restroom than worry about how your 'date' feels. There is no shame, guilt, or embarrassment in having to use a bathroom on a date. Many people do, and mention it out loud. It is irrational to risk extreme discomfort having to wait an extended period of time in those circumstances, rather than just go back inside the restaurant. He could have waited until his date left to do so, if necessary. But it's not a big deal to just go back inside.
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.
Correction: The diary horcrux was destroyed before Voldemort had been resurrected into his current snake-like form in "Goblet of Fire." Therefore, it is reasonable that the image seen in the diary would show the younger Tom Riddle.
raywest ★