Character mistake: When Jimmy explains to the kids of the town where the aliens took their parents, he mentions the origin of the aliens being somewhere in the Orion Star System, 3 million light years away. The Orion system is way closer than that. It is actually less than 1400 light years away from Earth. 3 million light years away would place them further than the Andromeda Galaxy.
Bishop73
22nd Jan 2018
Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (2001)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This shouldn't be a character mistake. A genius like Jimmy would know something like this. It's basic astronomy.
That's exactly why it's a character mistake. A character mistake is when a character does or says something that they shouldn't based on who/what they are suppose to be, or something a character wrongly states as fact when they should know better.
31st Oct 2020
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)
Plot hole: Einhorn's plan had a flaw. No starting quarterback ever holds the ball in any game for the kicker, it's always the back up.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is straight up false. Tony Romo was the starting quarterback for the Dallas Cowboys in a playoff game against the Seattle Seahawks in 2006. He held the ball for a potential game winning field goal, but he bobbled it, and it ended up costing the Cowboys the game. This was already corrected, so I'm not sure why you felt the need to submit it again.
It should be noted that Tony Romo was not starting QB that year. He was the backup QB, until week 7, and his duties as backup was holding the snap. He just kept doing that job to keep the rhythm. Marino was never a backup. Of course, the premises is Ray Finkle (a non existent player) missed a game winning kick in Super Bowl XVII when in fact the Dolphins lost by 10 and Dolphins only attempted 1 FG in the game (and made it, despite Marino not holding the kick), so there's room for a lot a leeway in what the film can have Marino do since they already made up so much to start with.
Sorry I just forgot I'd submitted before, I apologize for this blunder.
23rd Nov 2019
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)
Corrected entry: In the beginning of the movie when Ace is going to go inside the building to send a package, you can see the cameraman reflected in the glass door. (00:00:40)
22nd Jun 2018
iZombie (2015)
Blue Bloody - S4-E2
Character mistake: Vampire Steve says the safe has over a trillion possible combinations, but it's only a 6-digit code, which is only 1 million possible combinations. Even if letters could be used in the combination, that would only be a little over 2 billion possible combinations.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: If there were a passcode consisting of numbers and/or letters, there'd be 36 possible character choices (26 letters, 10 numbers) - Even if you were forced to discount passcodes between 1-5 characters long, there's still a possible 10,314,424,798,490,536,936,184,856,096 (10 octillion) possible 6 digit passwords.
You mixed up your numbers. To figure out the number of combination you simply multiple the number of options for each spot in the password. While there was nothing to suggest it was a alphanumeric code, we'll assume it was. The first character has 36 options. Adding a second character gives 1,296 combinations (36*36). Since there's 6 characters that's 36*36*36*36*36*36. Which is the same a 36^6 (36 to the 6th power). You're saying it's 6^36 meaning there's only 6 options, but 36 spots (a 36-character password instead of a 6-character password).
5th Feb 2003
Beetlejuice (1988)
Corrected entry: All the dead are still in the condition they were when they died, e.g. The scuba diver and the shark, the burned man, the 'run-over' man, etc. The Maitlands drown and, when first seen, are dripping wet, yet they are dry in the next scene and remain dry throughout the movie.
Correction: Since the burned guy isn't smoking, the scuba diver is dry, and no one with a gaping wound is still bleeding, it's reasonable that the Maitlands' clothes would have dried. Their actual bodies are still in the condition in they were in when they died.
Don't bodies "inflate" when they drown? So wouldn't they look puffed up?
But that's not the condition they're in when they died. That's just what their physical bodies might look like later.
18th Apr 2019
RV (2006)
Question: How did they get the RV out of the lake?
Answer: In the world of "make believe", they used "movie magic" to zap the RV out of the water and on to dry land - with no mechanical issues resulting from being submerged. In the real world, someone called a tow truck - perhaps AAA - and the RV was pulled out of the water and it suffered water damage and needed some repairs. This movie was presented as being "real life." Bob left on a bicycle to "try to find help." Near the end of the movie, Carl said that the RV "spent two days under water and they had to fish it out." He didn't say who "they" were. A fishing pole would not be strong enough to reel in a large RV, so I think it is safe to conclude that a tow truck was used to pull the RV out of the lake.
It should be noted that "fish it out" is a common phrase to mean pull or take out, especially after searching. When people use the term, they're never taking about using a fishing pole. But often when people post questions like this, they're asking for an in-film explanation in case they missed (or didn't understand) something. If no in-film explanation was given, a reasonable speculation can be given. You don't need to remind people the movie is a movie. If the in/film explanation is uncharacteristic to real life, then one can point out that in real life it wouldn't happen that way.
22nd Apr 2002
Mrs. Doubtfire (1993)
Continuity mistake: In the scene where the social worker is at Mr. Hillard's house and his so-called "sister" (Mrs. Doubtfire) is trying to find a face in the kitchen, one moment the wig is all messed up from being caught on the door. In the next scene, where she is looking in the fridge to find the face, her wig is perfectly in place.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It was in place because at one point, Daniel even moved his wig and fixed it.
You must be confusing which part of the scene the mistake is talking about. Right before Daniel opens the fridge door, when he has the towel over his face, his wig is messed up, there's even a strand of hair hanging down. When we see from inside the fridge, the wig is perfect without Daniel touching his wig.
5th Jan 2004
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989)
Corrected entry: When they "pick up" Beethoven, he is performing Für Elise in front of an audience, a work which was never publicly performed.
Correction: This looked more like a private party than a public performance.
Playing for a private party is playing the piece publicly (i.e. for others to hear).
21st Oct 2020
Quantum Leap (1989)
Star-Crossed - June 15, 1972 - S1-E3
Question: Al tells Sam that he's there to prevent the professor and his undergraduate student from having a shotgun wedding and ruining both their lives. That implies she got pregnant. Sam succeeds in keeping them apart. Um, does that mean he prevented someone from being born?
Answer: He means he's there to prevent there ever being the need for a shotgun wedding-that is, to stop the affair before there is a possibility of the girl getting pregnant.
Which would erase the child from history. That's my point.
Answer: Not necessarily; it could also mean that someone such as Jamie Lee's (the student) father discovered that the professor was having a sexual relationship with her and coerced the two into getting married.
This doesn't answer the question. You just described what a shotgun wedding is.
I think their point is that the "shotgun" aspect might not be due to a pregnancy, simply a forced attempt to legitimise an otherwise scandalous relationship.
My point was that a "shotgun wedding" doesn't always happen because an unmarried girl becomes pregnant; it can also happen because someone "stole her virtue", i.e had sex with her without being married or at least engaged to her. There's no reason to believe that Jamie Lee was, or would become, pregnant as a result of the affair or subsequent marriage.
The term "shotgun wedding" means a forced marriage due to unexpected pregnancy. It's sometimes even used when the woman is pregnant but it's planned or the wedding isn't "forced." In common colloquialism (especially in the 80's when the script was written), it doesn't refer to a force marriage just because of premarital sex (which the term "make an honest woman" is used for).
No, in the 1926 Sinclair Lewis novel 'Elmer Gantry', they talk about shotgun weddings, when a groom is forced to marry a woman because he took her virginity. Obviously, the term usually refers to a pregnant bride, but I see zendaddys point.
17th Dec 2019
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)
Plot hole: Luke deliberately says he does not want to be found and came to Ach-To to die in The Last Jedi, but The Force Awakens is all about finding a map to Luke Skywalker. Why would Luke leave a map when he never wanted to be found?
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is a question, not a plot hole. Luke went to find the first Jedi temple. The location of the temple is what they were ultimately needing to try and locate Luke. The map that has the temple was already created before Luke went to the temple, he did not create a map where to find him and then secretly hide it away.
It is a plot hole statement in the form of a question. It ultimately is a continuity error between Episodes 7 and 8. TFA never mentioned it as a map to a Jedi temple Luke might be at. The audience is told in that movie that it is a map to Luke Skywalker. It is believed by the end of TFA that Luke wants to be found if they needed him. It is only after Rian Johnson goes against what JJ Abrams planned for Luke that this error becomes prominent. If this is simply a map to the first Jedi Temple, then the Resistance is betting a lot on the chance Luke went there and still there after all these years.
In The Force Awakens, Kylo Ren refers to the map as a navigational chart recovered from the archives of the Empire. According to the spin-off books, the Empire were using it to find the first Jedi Temple and destroy it. So the map was not in fact left by Luke. Since Luke is believed to have gone looking for the first Jedi Temple, my guess is that whoever discovered the map realised where it led to, and knew that was where Luke was believed to have gone, and thus referred to it as a map to Luke.
What other choice do they have? The know where he wanted to go. If the do not find him there then the have someplace to look abound for clues as to where he went to afterwards. Also it is not like if he is not there they are stuck and cannot return to the resistance fleet.
A map to the first Jedi Temple is a perfectly fine explanation for what the map actually is and if the Resistance thought Luke was there, it was worth the risk to go there and look for him. However, the very identity of the map seems to change between movies and it is introduce in TFA as a map to Luke, not to a Jedi Temple. So in TFA it is a map to Luke and in TLJ it is now a map to a Jedi Temple Luke might be at. That is the problem, a discontinuity of the map's identity between the two films in the trilogy. This stems from the two directors' view of Luke in this trilogy also being completely different.
They think it's a map to Luke, or believe it, or someone else thought it was. It's not a discontinuity, just a semantic difference or miscommunication.
This movie or TFA should have explained this miscommunication as it comes across as a miscommunication to the audience and not to the Resistance. There is nothing in either film to show it is a map to a Jedi Temple Luke might be at. A miscommunication to the audience is poor writing, but since this occurs between two movies, it is a continuity mistake. This mistake is obviously due to the character of Luke changing when it moved on from JJ to Rian. This change makes the plot of TFA more confusing, but ultimately a continuity mistake is a much more just denotation for this than plot hole.
Since the Jedi Temple and Luke are in the same place the map is both a map to Luke and to the Jedi Temple. Someone looking for Luke will see it as a map to Luke, someone that is force sensitive may see it a a map to the temple.
This statement does not answer anything. The map was either designed to be a map to where Luke said he was or as map to a Jedi Temple where Luke may be. Not both. Both places can be the same, but the identity of what the map is remains as one or the other. Otherwise we are again back to a bad miscommunication in the Resistance and bad miscommunication to the audience that is just bad writing. Since it is stated in TFA that is is a map to Luke, the audience should believe it as such. It is never described as a map to a Jedi Temple Luke might be at. The continuity error and plot confusion comes from the fact that in TFA it is a map to Luke for when he was needed and in TLJ it is a map to a Jedi Temple that the Resistance hoped Luke would be at. Since TFA came first, it takes precedent and all of Luke's lines of not wanting to be found do not make sense.
While initially the audience is told it's a map to Luke, we find out later that the map leads to the first Jedi temple. This is nothing more than building suspense, which doesn't constitute a plot hole. While one could argue it was only after changes to the script or a director's choice that changed what the map was designed to be, the original mistake is still not valid because Luke never created a map to where he was going and then hide it as suggested.
30th May 2013
Family Guy: Stewie Griffin The Untold Story (2005)
Question: When this came out on DVD, the box said it was uncut and uncensored. So why was all of the swearing censored?
Answer: There are two versions on the disc. From the main menu you can go to a sub menu that allows you to choose which one you watch.
How do I find it? I've been looking and can't see it anywhere.
The only thing it lets me choose is subtitles and different languages.
Have you looked in the Languages menu? It should let you select the uncensored English audio track.
19th Jan 2014
Star Trek (1966)
Factual error: In the opening scene on the bridge, when Spock states the planet's properties, the circumference is given in US miles; the mass is given in metric tons; the density is given in metric grams per cubic centimeter; and the atmosphere is given as oxygen/nitrogen. No scientist of Spock’s standing would mix US and metric unit systems. The atmosphere composition should also be stated reversed as “nitrogen/oxygen” with the most abundant gas first. (00:42:00 - 00:59:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That might only true in today's standards. But we have no idea what future generations will choose to make standard.
This is such a trivial criticism that it should be removed to be fair. Whatever measurement standard is used in the future, it will be uniform without mixing of different unit systems.
But that's an assumption based on what you think the future would be like. The British and Americans currently use a mix of different unit systems. While many US students use miles and pounds, they still calculate density as g/cm3.
9th Jun 2008
Kung Fu Panda (2008)
Continuity mistake: When Shifu performs the Wuxi finger hold on Po, in one shot, we see all of Po's fingers, except the one Shifu is holding, are closed to his palm. In the next shot, all his fingers are open. (00:22:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: If you slow down before the part where the camera pans onto Po when he's surprised, his fingers open.
30th Jan 2017
Final Destination (2000)
Factual error: The flight attendants didn't do the safety briefing properly. None of the flight attendants show the demonstrations. Also, the safety briefing should be given during taxiing to the runway. But in the movie, the flight attendant had finished the safety briefing before the door of the plane closed. During the safety briefing, the flight attendant said that the aircraft has 6 emergency exits. How come a 747 has only 6 exits? A 747 in fact has 5 main deck exits on each side, which means on the main deck there are 10 exits. Judging by the picture of the plane on the DVD inner cover (New Line Platinum Series), the 747 used in the movie most likely is the 747-200 series, which means the upper deck has one emergency exits. All in makes the plane has 11 exits, almost double the number said by the flight attendant. And during the take off, when Alex looks outside the plane to the wing, he sees that the flaps are just being deployed. When a plane is taking off, the pilot needs to make sure that the flaps are deployed BEFORE they are actually on the runway. (00:10:05 - 00:17:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: No safety briefing is depicted in the film.
I guess you watched a different film than everyone else. The safety briefing can be heard, but you don't see it, which is the point of the mistake.
6th Oct 2020
Back to the Future (1985)
Trivia: The town hall building is also seen in the Voyagers TV show.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The Town Hall building is in over 100 movies and TV shows since it is a building in Courthouse Square at Universal Studios. It has also appeared in Gremlins, The Twilight Zone, To Kill a Mockingbird, Knight Rider, Leave It To Beaver, Parenthood, Saving Mr. Banks, and Psycho II, to name some of a few of the more commonly known. I don't think its common appearance makes this trivia relevant.
I'd say it makes it more relevant. Just add the multiple appearances of the building.
1st Oct 2020
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Corrected entry: When Marty was standing outside the giant TV and the announcement was made about the Chicago Cubs winning over Miami, Marty said he put his money on Miami. He had only been in 2015 for a short time, and before that he was in 1985. There is no way he could have bet on anything in 2015.
Correction: Marty says "I just meant Miami." He never says anything about putting money on Miami. Marty was surprised that Miami had a baseball team and the old man thought Marty was surprised Cubs won. (Point of trivia, Miami didn't have an MLB team in 1985).
The Cubs are from Chicago, not Cincinnati.
Further extension of same joke. A) The Cubs have moved and B) they can now win games.
Correction: You misheard. Marty's lines on seeing the sports flash are "Wait-a-minit... Cubs win world series." (then disbelieving) "Against Miami?" The other guy comments on it and plants the idea of betting in the past. Marty, continuing his original thought, starts to explain "But I just meant, Miami..." and abruptly stops, considering what the guy said and asks "What did you just say?"
2nd Oct 2020
The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976)
Question: Roughly 12 minutes in during the sidewalk gunfight a person is whacked with a gun after the fight. There is white text that flashes on screen shortly after. What does the text say?
Answer: I think the scene you're referring to happens about and hour and nine minutes in. An Indian is knocked off the horse by a union soldier. I couldn't see any text flash on the screen. There are white signs with black letters in the background that belong to the general stores. Maybe you saw the flash of a horse or saddle?
You're right on the time mark. My mistake. I watched an HD version and it wasn't there. Is the one that TCM aired maybe different than the hd version? I wasn't the only one watching who saw it. There were others.
You probably just saw the name of the station airing the film. The sidewalk scene with 4 soldiers takes place in the middle of the movie. When you rewind a non-recorded show on a DVR, the minute mark is often how many minutes past the hour it is or how long you've been on that channel. 12 minutes into the movie is when they're turning themselves over to the Union before being slaughtered, a little prior to that is the opening credits and fighting montage scene, but no sidewalks around. Most DVR remotes allow frame by frame and slow motion playback (pause then use the fast forward or rewind button).
It wasn't the name of the station. The text was several lines long from top to bottom in the middle of the screen. You're time mark is right. No text on screen in the HD version I watched. TCM aired the one with the text, don't know if it's different in some way.
I screen captured it! Could not get it all. Reads at bottom LEFT RIGHT CH 7,8 - English. (?) LBY EDIT 342. 1/23/ (?) TMC.
14th Aug 2013
Red (2010)
Factual error: In the very first shot of the movie, a clock is shown ticking. The time on the clock reads 05:59:56. It is obviously AM because a few seconds later at 06:00:00, Frank wakes up as if it was morning. As Frank sits up, clear daylight is visible outside of the window. This scene is supposed to be set during winter. We know this because there are many Christmas decorations. Since this is meant to be winter, it should still be dark at that time of day. (00:00:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: At the beginning of the movie it's September or early October if latest in the year. At Cleveland's latitude there's enough sunlight at 6am to experience such lighting through a window facing south.
First, what in the film places the opening scene in Sept or Oct? There's too much snow on the ground for it to be either of those months (it doesn't snow in September and rarely in October, but only late October). Second, even if it was set in October, the sun doesn't rise until around 7:30AM or 8:00AM.
I disagree. I think what Bishop73 wrote above is correct. The opening scene at 6:00 AM showed daylight, which would be too early for October, November, and December in Ohio. The movie apparently begins in December based on the amount of Christmas decorations in the neighborhood. Sunrise might be between 7:30 - 8:00 AM and twilight is about 30 minutes prior to sunrise. It simply would not be that light out at 6:00 AM.
28th Sep 2020
Shooter (2007)
Question: What was that stuff that Swagger used to treat gunshot wounds?
Answer: QuikClot dressing, which has blood thickening agent (coagulant) in it. I've treated more than a few wounds with them.
Answer: It's a bit complicated, so here's some online info on how the gunshot wound in the movie was treated. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME! https://screenagekicks.wordpress.com/category/screen-surgery-film-first-aid/.
I'm not asking how he treated his gunshot wounds, I'm asking what he used to treat his gunshot wounds?
I've looked at the sources. He used quick clot to treat his wounds. I have a problem with that because he opens the quick clot bag with his mouth. Wouldn't he risk getting cotton mouth if he opened the bag with his mouth since he was risk quick clot getting in his mouth?
That's why someone put this in as a mistake (listed as factual but should be a character mistake). Some say the way he handles the quick clot is wrong and/or dangerous.
6th Sep 2004
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
Continuity mistake: Every shot of Jesus in this film shows him with brown eyes, except one. A shot of Jesus looking up to the sky before he dies, you can see one eye (the one half-shut and bruised) is Jim Caviezel's natural blue.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Jim Caviezel's eyes are brown.
This is not correct. His eyes are blue and they were digitally altered to brown in the film.
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.