Factual error: Mrs. Harrison travels to a random, remote country mansion (kilometers away from any civilization), meets a woman who is not her pupil, forcibly takes her measurements, insults her, and slaps her! Nobody in the right mind would do that because they know they would be murdered, harmed, or handed over to the police for trespassing, assault, and battery. (Such outcomes are recurrently portrayed in Sherlock Holmes stories.) Schoolmistresses did use corporal punishment but only on their pupils and within the bounds of school, where they have relative safety. To make matter worse, Mycroft warns Mrs. Harrison in advance. He describes Enola as "unbroken", "a wild and dangerous woman", "a wild child." (Indeed she is; she beats people during the rest of the film. How did Mrs. Harrison escape unscathed?). (00:11:43 - 00:13:46)
Brian Katcher
26th Oct 2020
Enola Holmes (2020)
Suggested correction: How was she trespassing or going to a 'random' mansion? Mycroft, who owns the mansion and is Enola's guardian, specifically invited her there and enrolled Enola as Mrs. Harrison's pupil. Slapping Enola was out of line (Mrs. Harrison seems to immediately regret it), but not unheard of. And Enola still holds out hope that Mycroft will change his mind. Fighting Mrs. Harrison would just prove to him that she needs discipline. She'd rather play it safe and escape before being sent to school.
The slap wasn't just out of line; in the real-world 19th-century England, it was defensible by death. Enola could kill all three, call the police, and allege killing trespassers. The worst verdict an inquest could return was "death due to misadventure." Or Enola could just kill all three and nobody would be the wiser. Read the original Sherlock Holmes books to find out why. Things didn't happen as they they'd happen in real-life... because the director said so.
Except it would be incredibly easy to prove that they'd been there at Mycroft's (the homeowner's) invitation, and Sherlock and the housekeeper also knew they were guests. It would also seem rather out of character for Enola to kill a teacher, let alone a couple of innocent dressmakers, don't you think?
Proof of Mycroft's invitation merely changes the inquest's verdict from "lawful killing" to "death by misadventure." It is out of character for a real-world Ms. Harrison, the epitome of decorum, to slap someone outside the school without fear of reprisal. (Does she have no self-preservation instinct?) It is out of character for a real-world Mycroft, an upper-class mansion owner, not to kill Ms. Harrison in defense of his honor. The Mycroft of this film is a 21st-century American redneck.
He's a redneck because his first response wasn't to kill a woman? It's a moot point. Enola never told anyone she'd been slapped.
Mycroft Holmes, the smartest man in the world, must have deduced something was wrong at point 13:53 when he saw the distressed Enola. After all, his inferior brother Sherlock has made more impressive deductions. And yes, the Englanders of that era could be deadly when somebody stepped out of bounds. Most importantly, you've stopped defending the original mistake and are now content to attack me for whatever reason. I think we're done here.
12th Mar 2024
The Simpsons (1989)
Question: When Frank Grimes is shown on the news, where is he receiving his degree? He appears to be outside of a house, but he says later that he lives between two bowling alleys.
Answer: The news crew might have wanted to film him outside, on a nearby street, instead of going to his apartment. It looks more cheerful.
Answer: There's no telling. Possibly his parents' house. Possibly a house he sold when he moved to Springfield and he had to downgrade when his promised high-paying job went to a dog.
His parents abandoned him.
Good point. Then his own house, wherever he lived before Springfield.
23rd Feb 2024
Ronin (1998)
Question: What is the most likely explanation for what was in the case?
Answer: Sorry for posting an off-topic comment, but why are so few questions and mistakes posted anymore?
In large part it's reduced traffic, sadly - I'm always running a bit of a backlog of submissions (about 200 currently), because life gets in the way, but some get auto-approved so there's often a trickle of new content regardless. Mainly though it's just that thanks to search algorithm updates the site's now getting half to a third of the traffic it was about a year ago. I think also there are just fewer mistakes being made! Going back a while a DVD would come out and people would spot a lot of relatively obvious things. Now so many get fixed with CGI before release, and with streaming being wholly digital, lots of things are fixed even after release.
Thanks for all your hard work.
You're welcome! I've got no intentions of abandoning it, whatever the traffic. Still enough regular and irregular visitors to keep it trundling along!
Thanks! I've got no intentions of abandoning it, whatever the traffic. Still enough regular and irregular visitors to keep it trundling along!
I have to assume it's just down to 1) maybe less people are submitting, and 2) the site primarily being run by one guy (Jon), and I have to imagine that he probably doesn't have the time to constantly check the site and do updates. I've noticed that sometimes it can take a while for things I submit to be posted, but they usually are within a week or two. To be fair, there's also been in excess of 600 mistakes posted within the last month, and I have around 60 mistakes waiting to be approved (going through the "Chucky" movies and shows looking for mistakes), so it's still happening... just a bit slower than it used to be back in the day.
I don't think it's a problem with fewer submissions. I've submitted several questions that have not made it onto the site yet, and mistakes were that were finally posted after an unusually long time.
Answer: Regarding the movie question, there's no way of knowing what was in the case. It is a plot device called a "MacGuffin," a term coined by director Alfred Hitchcock. It doesn't actually matter what the object is but is just something that drives the story. It can be any type of object or device such as a "secret formula," "enemy war plans," a "nuclear weapon," a "treasure map," and so on that the characters are either searching for or protecting. There was never any intention to reveal what it was. Its purpose is to motivate the characters' actions and tell the story. Most likely it was intended to be a McGuffin just to keep the audience guessing and thinking about the movie long after it ends.
2nd Sep 2010
Forrest Gump (1994)
Corrected entry: When Young Forrest and Mrs. Gump walks by the Appliance Store and sees Elvis Presley perform "Hound Dog," that performance originally aired on June 5, 1956 on the Milton Berle Show while Forrest had yet started Elementary School, but when Governor George Wallace gives his infamous "Stand at the Schoolhouse Door" speech, the date that event occurred was June 11, 1963. So, there's no way that Forrest Started Kindergarten in 1956 and be in College already by 1963, especially with a below average IQ. Now, if I go off of the Jenny's date of birth off of her grave which was sometime in 1942 or '43 (I don't have the exact date), we can assume that Forrest would be the correct age when in college in 1963; that would mean also that Elvis Presley performed "Hound Dog" earlier than 1956 (more like 1949 or 1950, while Elvis would've been still relatively unknown at that point in history.).
Correction: It is a major plot point that Forest is slower than alot of people so begining school around 13 or 14 makes sense. it is also never stated that he was in kindergarden for his first day of school.
That kid was a lot younger than 13 when he started school.
27th Aug 2001
Forrest Gump (1994)
Corrected entry: In the scene where Forrest is carrying Bubba out of the jungle away from the airstrike, look carefully when Forrest starts down the trail into the open and the napalm starts hitting the ground. Several rounds land very close to him, and one even lands in a bush that he has just passed. In actuality Forrest and Bubba would have been crispy to the bone before they realised what hit them. (00:53:00)
Correction: The movie is a memory play so Forrest is telling someone all of this. The explosions may have sounded closer than they actually were. This would then be reflected in his recap of the story.
There's nothing in the movie to imply his memories are inaccurate. I call it a movie error.
Question: Why did one of the Nazgûl stab Frodo at weathertop?
Answer: Because they were trying to kill him and take the One Ring for Sauron.
Why didn't the nazgûl simply take ring from Frodo?
How was one of the nazgûl able to stab Frodo when he put the ring on at weathertop? Considering that people who put the ring on are usually invisible.
To mortal people, yes. But the Nazgûl can sense when someone is using it. Note how they immediately changed directions when Frodo put it on at the Prancing Pony.
5th Jan 2024
General questions
What is the name of this possibly Japanese cartoon I saw in the 80s? Futuristic soldiers are converted into cyborgs to work in space. It follows an elite team before and after the conversion. One was an alien from the planet 'Mime' who never spoke. Another were a twin brother and sister who had the code names 'Iron Heart' and 'Iron Will.' During conversion, they realized Iron Heart had a defective heart, so they replaced it with machinery, making his name more appropriate.
Answer: "SilverHawks" (1986). The twins were called "Steelheart" and "Steelwill," who had artificial hearts put in during their transformation. Steelheart was the sister, though; Emily Hart, and her brother was Will Hart.
Thank you! Me confusing iron and steel made it impossible to Google.
25th Nov 2023
Signs (2002)
Question: How come Ray Reddy wasn't charged for killing Graham's wife? Since it was an accident, he most likely would've got sentenced for manslaughter. If so, wouldn't he have been sitting in a jail cell during the movie's storyline events?
Answer: According to a Google search and a few law websites, it actually appears that legitimately falling asleep at the wheel could potentially help someone avoid vehicular manslaughter charges. It would depend on if them falling asleep was the result of them behaving negligently. For example, if you took medicine that makes you drowsy or stayed up for 24 hours straight, you would likely get manslaughter charges, since you were behaving negligently. However, if it was legitimately just a freak accident (ex. You were more tired from a day at work than you realised and passed out at the wheel), you have a decent chance of avoiding manslaughter charges. (Or at least avoid a guilty verdict or harsh sentence if it went to court.)
Answer: Agree with the other answers, but would add that the accident was only six months earlier. The investigation, charges, a trial, etc. may be ongoing. Reddy could be awaiting sentencing or was sentenced to probation, community service, counseling, credit for time served, a suspended sentence, or restitution. Reddy could be out on bail or on his own recognizance while awaiting sentencing. It's unlikely he would be considered a flight risk.
Answer: It's never addressed in the film, so it's safe to say it's simply a plot contrivance. In the real world, he definitely would have been charged; the film chooses to ignore this for the sake of the story it wants to tell.
Who's to say he wasn't charged? Guilty people get off all the time, and if the judge thought it was just a case of an upstanding citizen making a freak mistake, he could have gotten probation and a suspended sentence.
You're right, I hadn't considered that, or the other answer, when I posted.
14th Sep 2004
The People Under the Stairs (1991)
Corrected entry: When the police and child protective services people are in the house after Fool escapes and calls them to report abuse, he somehow winds up hiding in a kitchen cabinet while they're there. Why doesn't he just show the cops where the basement prison is?
Correction: Not to sound racist or anything but think about it. Even if Fool did do that who would the cops believe? The white couple that owns the house or an african american boy who knows about the secret only because he broke into the house?
The police probably would, at least, check out Fool's story, but it's likely he'd assume the police wouldn't believe him.
26th Aug 2023
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
Question: How is it possible that Harry has no problems with trusting Alastor Moody in this movie? At the end of the previous movie, he discovered that "Moody" was an evil imposter who conspired against him. He only saw the real Moody briefly when he was trapped inside his trunk and didn't even interact with him. So how come he isn't distrustful/suspicious towards him if he barely knows him?
Answer: How can Harry trust anyone, knowing they could be a Polyjuice imposter? The rest of The Order of the Phoenix trust Moody, and that has to be enough for Harry.
But in the book, he remembers that "Moody" was fake.
And was caught and replaced with the real Moody.
Still, it would have made much more sense if Harry said, "Professor Moody? Is that really you?" and Moody replied, "Yes, it's really me, the real Alastor Moody, not this cheap imposter."
Answer: Agree with the other answer, but would add that any evil wizard attempting to gain proximity to Harry by using Polyjuice potion would be unlikely to impersonate "Mad-Eye" Moody, as the real one would now be closely scrutinized and vetted by the Order.
But there is another issue. Harry acts as if he knew Moody very well, despite never interacting with him before.
As mentioned, Harry was present when the real Moody was rescued at the end of "Goblet of Fire." He likely had interaction with him immediately following that event and then later, even though it's not shown on screen. He also knows Moody by his colourful reputation and that Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix fully trust him.
He didn't interact with Moody in the previous movie because Moody was in a bad mental state due to being trapped for a whole year. It took Moody some time to recover from this trauma.
12th Sep 2008
Three Amigos (1986)
Corrected entry: The three amigos think the letter they receive is signed by El Guapo himself, yet when the typist is shortening the letter for Carmen, he has typed her name at the bottom, which he doesn't cross out.
Correction: They never think the message is from El Guapo. El Guapo is simply the last thing they read from the message. They don't say Carmen's name.
They do think the message is from El Guapo (they mistake 'stop' for the telegraph code meaning 'end of sentence'). The typist is also the one who sends the telegram, and he left off Carmen's name to save her money, even if he didn't strike it out.
11th Jan 2010
The Golden Girls (1985)
Question: The question "How do the girls' husbands, other than Dorothy's, die?" was answered that in theory, Blanche's husband could have had a car wreck, fallen into a coma, and died while she was getting a pedicure. This is not true. Blanche stated that when George came back to her in a dream, she remembered tripping over his shoe on her way to answer the phone, thus finding out that George had died in a car wreck. Doesn't this prove that the "he had a wreck, fell into a coma, and then died during Blanche's pedicure", theory is out?
Chosen answer: Yes, you are correct, as stated, In one episode Blanche said he had been in a coma for days, in the episode where she's in her dream, she said "The day you died ... The police told me you had been in an accident." Thus the original answers theory is wrong. If he had been in the accident the day he died he could not have been in a coma for days.
Yeah, in another episode she relates how a thoughtless state trooper phoned her and told her that her husband was dead with his mouth full.
20th May 2023
The Golden Girls (1985)
Wham, Bam, Thank You, Mammy - S6-E5
Question: According to this episode, Mammy Watkins and Blanche's father were in love for 50 years. And they would have been married "in another time and place." However, Blanche's father married a different woman in Season Two ("Big Daddy's Little Lady"). Why would he not have married Mammy Watkins after Blanche's mother died?
Answer: Because a lot of people, especially in the southern US, simply would not have accepted an interracial marriage. Depending when Blanche's mother died, it might not have even been legal at the time; the last anti-miscegenation laws in their home state of Georgia were struck down in 1967.
The episode "Mother's Day" shows Blanche visiting her mother, who is age 89, and Blanche does not look any younger than she does in the present. Apparently her mother died in the late 70s or the 80s. However, I live in the southern US. Even now, in 2023, there are still many people who would object to an interracial marriage. Another factor could be guilt; maybe Blanche's father felt too guilty to marry Mammy Watkins after betraying Blanche's mother for so long.
That is a good point. Marrying someone he's known for years...tongues would wag. 'How long was THAT going on?'.
8th Jul 2016
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989)
Question: When the historical figures are arrested for causing chaos at the mall, it's clear what most of them did; i.e. Billy the Kid fired his gun, Genghis Khan wrecked the sporting goods store, etc. So what exactly did Sigmund Freud and Socrates do to get arrested?
Chosen answer: It was critical to the storyline to keep all of the historical figures together, which is the primary reason they were all arrested at once. We might speculate that mall security received a number of reports of "odd" characters wandering around the mall. In addition to the shenanigans of Billy and Genghis, Beethoven was pounding out a raucous keyboard performance, Joan of Arc essentially hijacked a dancercize session, and Abraham Lincoln was accused of theft and fled from a vintage photography studio. Importantly, Socrates and Freud made rather strange advances on a couple of (probably underage) teenage girls in the food court, which would surely be enough to get two elderly men arrested in this day and age.
Also, Socrates with Billy when he was shooting up the mall.
29th Mar 2009
Beetlejuice (1988)
Corrected entry: When the Maitlands' car crashes, there are no side or back windows (so that the car would sink faster).
Correction: Or perhaps they had all the windows down on that lovely warm day?
If their windows were open, wouldn't they have had an easier time to get out of the car and live?
Not if they were injured in the crash, or even stunned.
The front windows were, in fact, open and, generally speaking, yes, that would've helped them get out faster. But there are other factors, like if they couldn't get the seatbelts undone or possibly received a concussion when they hit the water.
20th Nov 2022
Beetlejuice (1988)
Question: What did Jane say to Barbara that upset her? The only thing I could make out was, "This place" and "family."
Answer: Jane says "the house is meant for a couple with a family" and is therefore too big for them. Meaning that Adam and Barbara have no children and thus aren't a family yet. It upset her to be reminded that they don't have any children.
Adam even suggests 'trying again on vacation,' implying they'd tried to have a child before. It's why they bonded with Lydia so well; they'd been hoping to be parents.
4th Mar 2016
Beetlejuice (1988)
Question: When the Maitlands return to their home after it's been altered by the new owners, Juno tells the Maitlands that they should be thankful that they didn't die in Italy. What did she mean by that?
Answer: Italy is the center of the Roman Catholic Church, which includes exorcisms as a real-life ritual. Presumably, ghosts in Italy are at greater risk of encountering trouble in Italy because of this reason.
Answer: It's in reference / added on to her previous statement about being quiet/peaceful: Italy, presumably, has a louder, more raucous group of the living.
Answer: Italy, is a trendsetter. There would be constant art-deco changes that conflict with the Maitland's personal taste. In comparison, the Deets' are pretty tamed.
Chosen answer: When the Maitlands first meet their case worker, Juno, they tell her how miffed they are with the new family that has moved into their home. Juno glances around the peaceful house and remarks, "Things seem quiet here. You should thank God you didn't die in Italy." The case worker's name, "Juno," is a traditional Italian girl's name; and we see (when she smokes a cigarette) that Juno's throat has been slashed open from side to side, implying that she died a very violent and grisly death. Based on her personal experience (probably being murdered in Italy), Juno is commenting that the Maitlands could have died a far worse death under far more horrific circumstances, and that they really have little reason to complain.
I'm Italian: there's literally not a single female being, girl or woman, who has (had or have) this name in this country. Let alone being "traditional." "J" is not even in our original alphabet, go figure. I also think it's about us Italians being noisy and the place being quiet, that's all.
You may be Italian, but you're not informed. While the formal Italian alphabet (derived of Latin) does not have a "J" character, the letter "J' is used in modern Italian writing every day. "Juno," in your limited world, would be spelled "Diuno," who was a Roman goddess (queen of the heavens). As this pertains to Beetlejuice, she is a Roman goddess in charge of organizing.
Juno slashed her own throat. It says earlier in the movie that people who commit suicide become civil servants, which is what Juno is as their case worker. The beauty queen at the desk implies the same when she talks about what happens to people when they die. She says "if I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't have had my little accident" holding up her slit wrists, implying that she wouldn't have committed suicide if she knew she'd become a civil servant (as a desk girl).
It's never stated or established that Juno committed suicide.
I really think she was supposed to have had a tracheotomy due to her smoking.
29th Jul 2020
General questions
Anyone recognize this horror movie/TV show from 1990 or earlier? A surly preteen is walking down a street, when he's accosted by a strange man who says the boy is upset because it's his birthday and his parents forgot. The boy runs off, but obviously the comment hit home. He walks into an abandoned building to find a party with cake and presents all set up for him. He keeps calling for his family to come out, but instead, strange toy robots come clanking out of the darkness. When the boy opens the cake box, there's a severed human head inside which smiles and says 'hi', causing the boy to scream and run off. I was babysitting when I watched this and it was upsetting my charge so I turned it off, and I never got to see the ending, and it always bothered me.
Answer: The movie is called Spookies.
Thank you.
18th Mar 2023
Night Court (1984)
Question: In nearly every episode there are two bailiffs standing in the back of the courtroom, a blonde white guy and a black man with glasses. They also appear hanging out in the cafeteria, walking in the halls, etc. However, I don't think they ever had a single line during the entire series run, even in episodes that prominently featured the building's entire bailiff staff. Any reason they made an effort to keep these two extras for the entire run, but never had them say anything?
Answer: Most likely, they were stand-ins for members of the main cast. When lighting sets, rather than have the main actors stand around while they adjust the lights, they will get someone with similar physical characteristics to fill in. Since they are already on the set and have nothing to do during the actual shooting, it is more convenient, and probably cheaper, to also use them as extras.
Answer: Most likely it was about money. Actors who have speaking parts, even if it's only one word, are paid more than "extras", who do not have any dialogue. As the two characters played no part in any of the plots, there was no reason to have them speak lines. Therefore, they were paid less money.
So why hire an extra to play a messenger or bailiff from another courtroom when that pair was already on the set and could have easily said the lines?
What lines? Your question specified that they never spoke any lines and you wanted to know why.
Lines that other extras playing bailiffs said.
If an actor speaks any dialogue, they are billed as "co-stars" and paid at a higher rate than "extras" (also known as Background Actors), who are uncredited. The two you mentioned were regulars who were merely silent background characters used to "dress the set", making the courthouse look more realistically populated. Extras often have no acting ability and are unsuitable for speaking lines. Some people work exclusively as extras in various TV shows and movies and do not actually act or have dialogue.
26th Feb 2023
General questions
What is the name of this point and click video game I played in 1986 or 87? You follow your dog through a portal in your uncle's (?) lab and wind up in a world where everyone (including the dog) is super cool. It being the 80s, that meant they dressed like martians. I could never get very far, because after a couple of minutes of game time, the bad guy would feed you to a carnivorous zoo animal.
Answer: Some of this description sounds a lot like "Pepper's Adventures in Time" but that came out in the early 90s. Also the game didn't have any Martians in it.
If it came out in the 90s, I didn't play it in the 80s.
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.