Corrected entry: When Kimble is being interviewed by the police, a cop says "book him." We later learn the police were still trying to find out if a one armed man could've done it. The police can't arrest someone if the investigation is still ongoing. An arrest is supposed to mark the end of an investigation, the trial is the next stage.
MikeH
15th Apr 2018
The Fugitive (1993)
20th Feb 2018
Holes (2003)
Corrected entry: Stanley's parents say they can't afford a lawyer, and go to court without one. A lawyer should've been provided for them free of charge, as it's one of your rights, which he would've been read when he was arrested.
Correction: After Stanley's grandfather says that they cannot afford a lawyer, Stanley's mother says, "we don't need a lawyer, Stanley will just tell the truth." Although Stanley does have the right to counsel, you can represent yourself in court, (or in this case if you are a minor, your parents can represent you in court) this is called "pro se."
Abraham Lincoln said something to the effect, "He who acts as his own attorney has a fool for a client." Yes, one can act as his/her own attorney, but the court/judge will generally strongly advise against doing so.
Yeah, it's never advisable and the court and judge will advise against it, but won't force it. Clearly, they did not want a lawyer, as they did not believe it was necessary, that's why there isn't one.
6th Sep 2021
Ghost (1990)
Corrected entry: After Sam learned how to move objects, he could've either killed Carl and Willie, or gone to a police station and written down what was happening.
Correction: First: He didn't necessarily want to kill them. He wanted Molly and Oda Mae safe. Second: I highly doubt any police officer is going to go to a judge or superior officer and get a warrant based on saying "A ghost wrote this down." They would be fired or committed.
3rd Apr 2018
Olympus Has Fallen (2013)
Corrected entry: When a woman is shot in the head, the bullet hole is in the left side of her hat. But then when her hat falls off, the bullet hole is in the right side of her head. No, the bullet didn't pass through both sides. She was shot from the front, so there should only be one bullet hole in the same place. (00:30:00)
20th Aug 2020
Heat (1995)
Corrected entry: In the opening robbery, killing the third guard made no sense. Even if they didn't kill anyone, they'd still already committed a serious crime, that would result in lengthy prison time if caught. It makes no sense that they have no problem leaving witnesses when they're guilty of armed robbery, but don't want to when they're guilty of murder. If they didn't kill the third guard, their chances of getting caught would've been the same as if they didn't kill anyone.
Correction: Leaving an eyewitness for an armored car heist is certainly risky, but leaving an eyewitness for an execution style double homicide is totally different. California had the death penalty at the time this film was set.
4th Nov 2019
Liar Liar (1997)
Corrected entry: The power of the wish is very inconsistent. Sometimes Fletcher has to be 100% honest, but sometimes he just can't tell a blatant lie. For example, when Miranda asks Fletcher if he enjoyed their sex, he says he's had better. When the judge asks Fletcher who beat him, he describes his own physical characteristics, deliberately fooling the judge into thinking he's talking about another person. Although it's not technically a lie, it's completely dishonest. If the power was consistent, in the former scene, Fletcher could've just said he enjoyed the sex. I'm sure he did enjoy it, even if he'd had better. So he would've been able to answer without lying, but without telling the full truth, like he did in the latter scene. Or alternatively, if the power was consistent, in the latter scene, Fletcher would've had to admit he beat himself.
Correction: He accurately answers the questions 100% honest each time. He has somewhat control of it, he can't lie but he can be clever about it. The after sex scene is an exception as he wasn't prepared for it, just like in the elevator and arriving at work. It was on his mind that he had better sex so it just came out at that point, honestly. But later he figures out he can't lie so he has to be clever about it. The judge asked him who did this to him, so instead of saying it was him he describes himself. This doesn't change the rules of the curse.
1st Jun 2016
U.S. Marshals (1998)
Corrected entry: It's perfectly legal for cops to hold suspects at gunpoint when making an arrest. So when Newman caught Royce holding Sheridan at gunpoint, he could've just taken him into custody and killed him later. Instead he does the stupidest thing possible, he shoots Newman, which also lets Sheridan escape.
Correction: Taking Sheridan into custody and killing him later would have looked incredibly suspicious. Royce is trying to stage the scene so it looks like he was forced to shoot Sheridan in self-defense. Shooting Newman isn't stupid at all, if anything it helps Royce's story as he can pin the shooting on Sheridan. He can't let Newman live at this point, he's planning on executing Sheridan and the second Newman walks into that room that plan would go awry unless Newman dies as well. The fact that Sheridan gets away is credited to his reflexes and skill, not to Royce's stupidity.
29th Mar 2019
Gran Torino (2008)
Corrected entry: The gang members would've walked. Walt deliberately made it look like he pointed a gun at them. Any reasonable person would've thought he did. What were they supposed to, let him shoot them? And they wouldn't have even been charged with murder, they would've been charged with manslaughter.
Correction: That is pure speculation. The neighbors would obviously have supported what Walt did, and he created the situation so they could testify the gang members killed an unarmed man. Who is a jury more likely to believe? gang-bangers, or a group of frightened innocent people?
9th Jan 2019
Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971)
Corrected entry: Willy Wonka says the reason he sent out the tickets was because he needed a child to run the factory. However, there were many adults trying to find a ticket. All five ticket winners could've easily been adults. So his plan could've very likely failed, and he could've easily been forced to give the factory to an adult, even though he said he wouldn't trust one.
Correction: Given that Slugworth/Wilkinson was at every location when the ticket was found, Wonka obviously didn't simply put them in random bars.
14th Dec 2018
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Corrected entry: There's no way anyone could cut off their hand with a knife the way Wormtail did. The only way they could do it is if they slowly sawed it off. Even if he raised the knife and swung it hard, there's no way it would work, the bone is way too strong. But Wormtail didn't even do that, he just placed the knife on his hand and moved it down. You couldn't even cut hair like that.
Correction: Wormtail is not just "anyone" though. He understood the importance of each of the ritual's steps and getting the potion done just right. He is following Voldemort's orders and instructions. Wormtail's dagger may have been magical, or a charm could have been placed on its finely edged blade to be swift in its tasks. Also, Wormtail was in a highly charged state of mind, which only intensified the force he used to "willingly" sacrifice his hand.
Correction: He didn't cut through bone, he cut his wrist and the knife moved past the bones. If the force is strong enough and the knife sharp enough it's definitely possible to do this.
11th Feb 2015
American History X (1998)
Corrected entry: When the man puts his teeth on the curb, you can tell they put powder on the curb so his teeth weren't really touching it.
Correction: At no time can you see any powder on the curb.
17th Sep 2018
X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
Corrected entry: When Hank says "There's no professor here, I told you that", when he says "you that", we can see his lips aren't moving.
Correction: After Wolverine enters Xavier's house Hank stops him, and in a shot facing Hank's back he repeats "There's no professor here, I told..." then it cuts to a shot facing Hank as he finishes saying "you that," and we can indeed see Hank's mouth moving as he says those two words. There is no audio mistake here (timecode 00:30:20).
2nd Nov 2017
Frozen (2013)
Corrected entry: As long as Elsa had the gloves, there was no need to keep her away from Anna. I know her powers were still noticeable with them, but she couldn't harm Anna with them. The point of keeping her away from Anna was to protect her.
Correction: The gloves did nothing besides calming (sort of) Elsa with their presence. They were completely placebo, they merely helped her think her powers couldn't seep through so she never got scared enough to set her powers off while wearing her gloves. Remember, she froze the water with a tap of her foot, so her shoes didn't hold her powers back either.
1st Jul 2018
Fracture (2007)
Corrected entry: In real life, Crawford could not have been retried for murder at the end. Double jeopardy means you can't be retried for the same event under a different charge. If you could, then whenever someone is acquitted of first degree murder, prosecutors would just retry them for second degree murder, then third degree murder, then voluntary manslaughter, etc.
Correction: Double Jeopardy does not apply because Crawford was tried on two different crimes (not different degrees of the same crime). He was never charged with murder during the first trial because Jennifer, his wife, was still alive (although on life support). He was tried on attempted murder. After the plug was pulled and she died, Crawford was then charged with murder because her death was a direct result of being shot. Someone can be charged with a different crime involving the same event, even after being acquitted of one of them. If Jennifer survived, was put on life support, made a recovery, but then died of an infection later, it's unlikely the D.A.'s office would charge Crawford with murder in that scenario (or if they did it's unlikely he would be convicted).
10th Jun 2018
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)
Corrected entry: When Ace ripped Einhorn's clothes off, there were several cops standing behind her. They should've seen her penis long before Ace revealed it.
Correction: Einhorn is wearing pretty tight underwear, and standing behind her would only make it *more* difficult to tell if they were a man or not.
26th Feb 2018
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
Corrected entry: Will could've easily seen Elizabeth more than once every ten years, by walking with his feet in buckets, which Davy Jones did.
Correction: Technically, yes, he could have, but doing so would have been extremely dangerous. Jones isn't merely incapable of setting foot on dry land, it's fatal for him to do so. Will would risk death attempting this if he should lose his balance while trying to walk thus encumbered.
Correction: Would be kinda stupid to be walking across a beach in buckets, just to see your wife. Davey Jones was pretty much imprisoned when he was standing in that bucket. However they made it work it was only for the negotiations and wouldn't be exactly practical to do when visiting, standing there on the beach in a bucket, even going from bucket to bucket. Will wanted to see his wife, but at the same time wanted to do his job, he wasn't desperate.
22nd Dec 2017
Spider-Man (2002)
Corrected entry: Several students saw Peter dragging the food tray with his web, but nobody connected it to Spider-Man.
Correction: This assumes the students knew then and there that it was webbing that the tray was attached to and not some other substance. They know Flash bullies Peter and they might have just thought Peter rigged something together to throw the food at Flash in retaliation. We never see any students inspecting the webbing afterwards, so it can't be definitively said that they would be able to connect it to Spider-Man when he emerges months later.
27th Oct 2017
Con Air (1997)
Corrected entry: When Billy is impaled on a pipe and we see the pipe sticking out his chest, there's another hole in his shirt above the pipe, even though he was only impaled once, and the hole wasn't there before.
Correction: There is blood coming through the shirt above the pipe, there is no hole in the shirt.
16th Aug 2016
Bruce Almighty (2003)
Corrected entry: God tells Bruce he can't mess with free will. However, he does when he makes Evan say lots of crazy stuff on TV.
Correction: He doesn't change Evan's mind such to make him want to say the gargled messages, he's merely controlling Evan's mouth as opposed to changing his thoughts. His will remains unchanged. On the other hand, forcing Grace to love him would be different than simply forcing her to utter the phrase "I love you" without her meaning it.
Except that Bruce is making Evan say gibberish against his own free will.
Free will is based in the mind. Bruce is only controlling Evan's body.
I think it could be argued either way. Bruce was controlling Evan physically (in addition to the gibberish he makes his voice higher), but Evan may still have had the free will to not open his mouth. We don't see the extent of Bruce's power though. Could he have forced Evan say something against his will? (i.e. something he would never say or believe). Since we don't see that, the correction seems more valid than the mistake.
7th Aug 2017
Psycho (1960)
Corrected entry: When Arbogast is stabbed, in one shot there's no blood on his face, but in the very next shot there is.
Correction: There's only two shots where we see him as he is killed, and in both shots, blood is visible on his face.
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 police never took the 'one-armed man' story seriously, and certainly never looked into it with any real interest. As was shown later, the police believe that Kimble killed his wife for the money and charged him on that basis. Fred Sykes is shown claiming to have been interviewed and to have a (false) alibi for the murder; which indicates that the police at best did a cursory check of any local 'one armed men' in order to discredit Kimble's defence.