Corrected entry: In the scene where James Earl Jones walks into McDowell's restraunt in search of Akeem, he asks Cleo Mcdowell where he is, after doing so he instructs his "assistant" Oha to give Cleo something for his trouble. Oha leaves a note on the counter and Cleo picks it up and looks at it and in the next scene, the note remains on the counter untouched.
Bishop73
22nd Sep 2003
Coming to America (1988)
12th Sep 2019
The Facts of Life (1979)
Question: Tootie takes her driving test. The instructor tells Tootie to make a U-Turn and as she's halfway into it, the car stops. I think it was because the car ran out of gas. Because of this, Tootie fails the driving test. Why would the instructor fail Tootie? It wasn't her fault the car ran out of gas.
Answer: I didn't see that episode. When you take your driving test, you have to provide the car for the test, and the car has to be in good working condition. They check for that (blinkers working, etc.) So if the car runs out of gas, yes, it is your fault for not making sure the car had enough gas before the test.
Just saw the episode, and the car wasn't Tootie's. It belonged to the driving school.
You should watch the episode again because it didn't belong to a driving school. (She wasn't even in one). It was a hearse from Natalie's job at the funeral home.
Answer: Tootie didn't say she failed, just that she had to take the test twice because the instructor "wanted to make sure [she] belonged on the streets." It was even brought up that they maybe they should get gas and he said to go. So it wasn't about running out of gas, but all the distractions and antics that had occurred. Although it seems like an exaggerated line as a joke. Earlier she said you only get two chances (meaning to pass). If she had in fact failed this second time, it doesn't seem like the instructor would retest her right away. And if he did, why wouldn't she have been retested right away The First Time instead of having to schedule a 2nd test?
10th Sep 2007
Rush Hour (1998)
Question: When Sang calls the Consul for the second time and says, "You have 29 minutes left", he says something in Chinese and hangs up. What exactly did he say in Chinese?
Answer: He is saying, "You must go there alone".
Google Translator says something else for "You must go there alone." I don't think this is correct. Does anyone know the real answer?
He says "go by yourself." The original answer seemed to explain what he was saying, not the direct translation.
22nd Jul 2023
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990)
Question: What does Shredder say to Leonardo when we first see them fighting on the roof?
Answer: Which part are you talking about? After they mention Splinter's name? Shredder says he had a name, implying Splinter is dead. Leo says "you lie" to which Shredder says "do I?" When Shredder pins Leo down, he looks at the other Turtles and says to them "he dies. Weapons." Meaning he'll kill Leo if the others don't disarm themselves.
Not from that part, I mean from the first time they face off. As Leo does his double sword slash at Shredder, you can hear Shredder say something, but it's unintelligible and not on the closed captions.
When it's just Shredder and Leo fighting, neither are saying anything. They're just grunting.
Answer: Shredder says, "How did you get this strong?". If you find the clip on YouTube, it's captioned.
Yes! I hear it now! Thank you.
14th Jul 2023
Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)
Question: At the start, she was to drive the truck to get gas. She never got there, and yet was able to drive all over. How?
Answer: Furiosa was not getting gas for the war rig; it is presumably fully fuelled. Furiosa was to fill the tank with gas to bring it back to be used for other vehicles.
If you're going to get gas, why have a full tank in the war rig? Put enough in it to be able to get to Gas town, pulling the attached round tank. Fill the round tank and fill up the war rig. Return with lots of gas in a full round tank and a full war rig.
I believe there is some confusion here with how the gas tank system works on the war rig. The truck itself has its own gas tank; the tank that is being towed is completely separate. It's exactly the same as real-life gas trucks.
Why does that question even need to be answered? You're going to use gas going there and coming back. It doesn't matter if the war rig was full or not when it left. Assuming they're going to be gassing the war rig up once they get there to collect the gas, it's going to come back with the exact same amount of gas no matter what. So it really makes no difference whatsoever. Also, what happens if they get delayed along the way? If they only have enough gas to get to Gas Town, but something happens, they'll just get stuck.
I agree, it's not very smart to fill the war rig with just enough gas to get to town. But it sounds like they're saying take whatever you can out of the war rig, and you'd have that much extra gas when they get back. For example, if the rig held 25 gallons and only needed 5 gallons to get to town, you can take out 20 gallons. The rig then arrives in town empty, fills up, and comes back with 20 gallons in the tank. So now you have 40 gallons instead of just 20 (plus whatever the tank holds).
I think the big point is what Furiosa was planning. She filled the gas tank of the truck up to be able to go further with it; she wasn't planning on getting the gas anyway.
Ok, I can understand that... but I still don't see why it's a question that needs to be answered, hahaha. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see why every tiny detail needs an explanation or answer, especially when it doesn't really matter for the story.
Answer: What she did most likely took months of planning. Who she could trust to help her. How exactly she could smuggle the girls out, and most importantly, gaining the trust of the boss to the point where he believed she was his obedient slave who could never betray him.
Answer: Nobody knew the war rig was full of gas. They thought she was going to fill the tanker and come back, not smuggle out the girls.
Sorry, can't believe that. The boss guy controlled everything. He would know where and how much gas there was. Also, lowering the truck empty would be a lot different than lowering it fully loaded.
The truck was supposed to be empty when it left. She was taking an empty tank to be filled, but smuggled the wives inside. It weighed probably 300 pounds more than it was supposed to, but that would be imperceptible to the people operating the elevator. The war rig likely weighs several tons.
It's not empty, it is filled with water. The wives were hiding in the tractor.
11th Jul 2023
General questions
It seems to me that older shows, for the most part, had more "stand-alone" episodes: you could easily watch them if you missed the previous episode or two. If I am correct, this is why characters often had new love interests for just one episode. Nowadays, a show is often called a "series" and all episodes must be watched, even a "Previously on..." recap doesn't cover everything. Any thoughts on why this is?
Answer: Well, in the old days, people couldn't really watch whenever they wanted or even record what they wanted to see. So trying to follow a continuing show was a lot harder. That's why there were way more shows where every episode was standalone, as you didn't have to bother watching every single one to be able to follow it. You could skip a few without a problem. These days, watching all episodes is a lot easier because of recording and digital releases. You can watch whenever you want, in the right order.
Answer: There's a lot of factors that go into this. I think the biggest one is that seasons in general have gotten shorter, meaning there is less room for stand-alone episodes. It used to be the norm for shows to have 20+ episodes per season, whereas now, seasons with 13 or fewer episodes are more common. (This is for many reasons, including higher production costs, viewership fluctuations, streaming making shorter seasons more in vogue, etc.) And as a result, many shows now just basically feel like one big movie that's split up into chapters/episodes since there's less time for side-stories or stand-alone episodes. There's good and bad to this. On one hand, it means shows need to be more efficient and concise, and there's likely to be fewer dull moments. But on the other hand, it also means that there's slightly less time for side-characters, sub-plots, world-building, etc. So it's a double-edged sword. Also, "show" and "series" have always been used interchangeably. That's nothing new.
I don't remember what year it was, but if I understand correctly, one of the results of one of the writers' strikes a while back was reduced episodes to make a complete season or a half season (with some exceptions, like daily shows).
Yeah, from what I recall, during the 2007 writers' strike, a lot of seasons had to be produced with fewer episodes due to lost time from the several months the strike lasted. And that did help set a certain precedent that many shows could be successful with fewer episodes per season. Although, I think it wasn't really until about five years later that you started to see shorter seasons becoming more widespread.
Answer: I also think another point is, there's just so many more shows being produced today, so we see more examples of these types of series shows. And, if more shows are being produced, there's more competition to get viewers to watch live (as opposed to recording to a DVR or streaming). Companies that buy ad time during a show know if viewers are recording, they can skip their ads (which is why we see more countermeasures to this).
Answer: Adding to the other answers: In TV's earliest days (from the 1950s), shows had more episodes per season, over 30. During the summer hiatus, fewer reruns were shown until the new Fall season. That resulted in self-contained episodes and one-time characters or situations that were rarely mentioned again. Episodes could be shown in any order, without losing continuity. The half-hour sitcoms were like extended skits. Many early TV shows were written by radio-era writers when maintaining a consistent, non-visual storyline was more challenging. It was just a different way of doing things. As TV evolved, plots became extended throughout a season with fewer episodes. Keeping viewers involved and guessing what happens in the next episode helps ratings.
11th Jul 2023
General questions
Can different episodes of a show "belong" to different companies? I ask because streaming services will sometimes have a show, but a few episodes are missing throughout. I know that a streaming service may not have the rights to the newest episodes of a current show, but why are random episodes missing from older shows? (As examples, I have noticed this with "ALF" and "Alfred Hitchcock Presents".)
Answer: In some ways, yes. For example, in "AHP", some of the episodes were stories written by other authors. S0401 was a Roald Dahl story. For whatever reason, the streaming services didn't get the rights to show that episode (too costly, wasn't given permission, or didn't try). Sometimes an episode contains a copyrighted song that they didn't get the rights to stream (sometimes they'll cut that scene or dub over the music with something else). Sometimes episodes are pulled for being too offensive or controversial. For example, Hulu pulled 5 episodes of "Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia" for using black or brown face. For "Alf", I didn't see any missing episodes. But sometimes a 2-part episode will be combined into 1 episode, so IMDB says there's 26 episodes, but only 25 episodes are listed, with 1 episode being about twice as long.
Thank you. I've been watching "Alf" on the Roku Channel. I think there is an episode missing from Season 1. "Border Song" is listed as 1x18, then "Going Out of My Head" is 1x20.
That's strange. It may have something to do with where Roku got the content from, and the content was already missing. Before answering, I looked up the shows you mentioned on Tubi, and all episodes of "Alf" are there, including "Wild Thing" (episode 19). Tubi is a free streaming app I use on my TV.
30th Sep 2015
M*A*S*H (1972)
Continuity mistake: When the two soldiers get into a brawl in Post-Op, it's daytime. When Potter talks to Mulcahy, it's night. Then Klinger tells Mulcahy he's needed to break up the fight, it's daytime again.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: In scene 1, set in the day, the Greek soldier is wearing a dark blue jacket and a light blue shirt. In scene 2, set at night, Father Mulcahy is wearing a black shirt and a brown robe, and resting before bed. In scene 3, set during the day, Father Mulcahy is wearing a black shirt, a sweatshirt, and a baseball cap. He is punching a speed bag. Klinger says there has been another fight between the Greek and the Turk. The Greek is not wearing a jacket. Scene 3 is from a different day than Scene 1.
28th Jun 2023
Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman (1993)
Character mistake: Loren mistakenly calls each pitch at the batter's mound a strike, when that is when a pitch is out of batting mounds, or the batter misses. A ball is when the batter ignores the pitch or doesn't make a swing.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: A player doesn't have to swing for a pitch to be a strike. He called them correctly.
Well unless I've missed something over the years in baseball... and Loren's obvious confusion on what to call... when a batter remains stationary during a pitch, that is a standard all-out ball. When the batter moves or swings and misses the pitch, it is a strike.
His initial hesitation had nothing to do with it being a bad call. And yes, you've missed a lot over the years. A batter can move or even check swing and still the pitch could be called a ball. When a batter remains stationary, that doesn't change a strike into a ball just because he didn't swing or attempt to swing. The poem "Casey at the Bat" is all about him not swinging on the first two pitches, and they were both called strikes.
17th Mar 2020
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Question: During the chase scene, Marty jumps into the water at one end to avoid getting hit by Griff. A few seconds later Marty is out of the water at the other end and climbing up stairs. How did he get to the other end so quickly? Why is he climbing up the stairs after being in the water at the other end of the pond?
Answer: While a few seconds of screen time passed, it was just a cut so we don't know how much time actually passed, but enough time for a crowd to gather and the police to show up. Some of the mall shops were located underground and there may have been an entrance/exit tunnel near the courthouse that Marty ran down after getting out of the pond. The movie doesn't explain it though. If there were stairs going underground near the courthouse, it would make sense Marty runs down them to avoid the crowd coming towards him and the courthouse.
No, that would mean we have to assume certain things. And the fact that Marty appeared coming up the steps, well, it just doesn't make sense because A) we did not see him go to the steps and B) there could NOT be any way to get to the steps from the water.
We didn't see him go to the steps because the scene wasn't continuous, but to say he couldn't get to the steps from the water also means you have to assume certain things. My statement that there would be two sets of steps leading underground on either side of the shops isn't an illogical assumption like your assumption.
Answer: After Griff and gang crashed into the courthouse, Marty grabbed the hoverboard and swam to the other side of the pond so he could get out faster.
3rd Jun 2023
The Magicians (2015)
Plot hole: Josh is worried about the Quickening, where he has to have traditional sex with an uninfected person. Then, he realizes that he already had sex with someone while he was under the identity spell, which would logically mean that he already met the obligations for the Quickening and it should no longer be a problem. However, it persists as a problem until he has sex with Margo later on in the season.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The quickening is tied to the lunar cycle and only happens every 30 years or so. And it's only in the 48 hours before the moon reaches its aphelion when the quickening happens, when the urge must be fulfilled. It doesn't matter what the infected person did before the quickening, the urge still occurs.
It was never mentioned that a lycanthrope had to pass on the curse within the 48 hours. It was explained that in the 48 hours leading up to the Quickening, all lycanthropes develop urges that begin with nightmares or waking dreams. Their condition is technically a curse that is driving them to have sex with an uninfected person or kill them, which would directly imply that so long as the curse is passed on, the needs are met, and the Quickening need not occur.
That's not what was implied at all. The Quickening is an event that happens at regular intervals that gives Lycans an urge that has to be fulfilled, regardless if they passed on the curse sometime in the past. Helen already passed the curse on to Josh, but she also experienced the urge from the Quickening and fulfilled her urge in the timeframe of the Quickening.
15th Jan 2004
The Terminator (1984)
Revealing mistake: In the scene were Kyle and Sarah are speeding away from Arnold in the truck, Arnold starts shooting the truck with Kyle driving. When Sarah and Kyle decide to switch (passenger, driver), the camera shows them switching but there is a stuntman in place of Kyle. If not he has gained some weight in the cheeks and grown a big mustache during the course of 2 seconds. (01:24:30)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This scene don't have cuts. In this moment, a shadow covers the face of Reese, causing confusion, but still be Michael.
No, it isn't. It is too obvious that he is a stunt double.
This is a continuous shot. Where and how would they have made the switch?
After Biehn says "trade places", there's a cut. The mistake seems to be saying from that moment it's Biehn's double. And before the two switch seats, there's another cut of the Terminator shooting at them. But I don't think it's a stunt double because typically scenes filmed from the perspective of the hood are done with the camera rigged to the vehicle and the vehicle is being towed, so the actors aren't actually driving, so there would be no need for a stuntman to do the seat switching.
2nd May 2005
The Hot Chick (2002)
Corrected entry: In the last scene, right after the switch, Rob Schneider stops the car with the gay bartender in it. When the gay guy turns around and smiles, Rob Schneider (as himself) recognizes the guy and screams. How could he have known the guy if he wasn't in the club, Jessica (as Rob) was.
Correction: You're an older man dressed in a pink bra and skirt and heels, you jump into the back of a car and a man turns around and grins at you in a predatory manner. Wouldn't you scream too?
It should also be pointed out that Clive doesn't scream until AFTER the guy locks the doors and starts to speed away.
18th Jun 2023
Bad Boys (1995)
Other mistake: In the film, Lawrence and Smith's characters are Narcotics detectives with Miami Dade Police. There's no way they should be at any homicide investigations. Narc and homicide are totally two different units within law enforcement, so it's unlikely narcotics units would be at a homicide scene. Being the scene where they're investigating Smith's friend getting killed, and then they stumble across the dead body at the mansion.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The captain called Mike and Marcus to the scene to help because it appeared related to the missing drugs. They were there to find leads to the missing heroin.
Yes, that could be correct, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. A captain from Narcotics wouldn't even have authorization to call his detectives to a murder scene to help out homicide detectives working a murder. Any information or clues would be collected and shared with other units or agencies if deemed appropriate.
10th Jun 2023
Girl, Interrupted (1999)
Question: Why did Daisy tell Georgina she had two tubs in the apartment but we only saw one, and only heard of one? (00:53:00 - 01:24:10)
Answer: She tells Georgiana, "One bedroom, two baths." In the USA, we typically say "bathroom" even if the room only has a toilet (odd, I know). When talking about buying/renting property, people often shorten the word to "bath," as Daisy does. When talking to Georgiana, she referred to both of the bathrooms/toilets in general - regardless of one not actually having a bathtub in it.
In the US, a bathroom without a tub/shower is called a half-bath. I think it's meant to show she gets things mixed up. She was talking to Susanna when she mentioned one bedroom, two baths, and an eat-in chicken. It's more likely her dad got her a two-bedroom, one-bath apartment (or a "one and a half bathroom") and she switched them around.
Good point. I think she badly wanted to feel superior to the other women, thinking she was different than them and could "get better." She was probably so eager to rave about the apartment and her new chapter in life that she did get the details confused.
27th Mar 2008
UHF (1989)
Plot hole: Throughout the telethon we see volunteers taking pledges over the telephone. As with all telethons the vast majority of pledges will be paid by cheque. Instant bank transfers were unknown in the days the film was set and the telethon ends at midnight, at which time American banks are most certainly shut! How does George manage to have $75,000 in CASH for Big Louie on site that very night? Not every single pledge would (or could) go out to the remote site to pay in cash - not at that time of the night, anyway - and he couldn't raise more than the required sum as this was a share offer and an oversell would reduce the value of individual shareholder's equity.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: They were selling stock at the telethon to those in the crowd. At $10 a share, they only needed to sell 7500 shares, and who is to say people didn't buy multiple?
Because they had $75,000 in CASH that night, if they sold 7500 $10 shares to the crowd at the station in order to raise that cash, then the people who pledged their money over the phone and who could not or did not go to the site at the end of the telethon have been cheated out of their money. Lawsuits are coming up.
Not necessarily. Nowhere does it say that they were selling ONLY 7500 shares. That was what they needed to raise the $75,000, but it doesn't mean that was the hard limit. Those pledging over the phone would still get their shares.
If they didn't give anyone any money, they couldn't be cheated out of their money.
Suggested correction: There's nothing to suggest the people on the phone were paying by cheque over the phone. They made their pledge over the phone but came in person to pay in cash and to pick up the stock. That's why there was such a big crowd of people in attendance with cash in hand.
18th Nov 2006
Gremlins (1984)
Question: According to imdb.com Jerry Goldsmith composed the music for the film. But I ran across a copy of the soundtrack which names Danny Elfman as the composer. I have also seen him credited for the music in both "Gremlins" films on several occasions, both on TV and online. Why is Elfman getting credit if Goldsmith composed the music?
Answer: It's hard to get a definite answer to this, as I've found conflicting answers online. However, by 1984 Danny Elfman hadn't done much composing, with his musical work largely restricted to songs as part of his band. As such I'd think it was unlikely he composed the Gremlins score. No music from the Gremlins films are on either of his compilation CDs either. The closest thing to a reason I can find for the mis-crediting is that on the Gremlins 2 DVD one of the deleted scenes apparently has some music from "Beetljuice" (which Elfman scored) used over it, which may have led to the confusion.
Goldsmith also had a cameo in the film (as did Steven Spielberg) as the man at the phone, while Spielberg rolls around on some sort of bicycle-type vehicle.
Answer: I purchased the Gremlins theme on my iPhone, listed under Danny Elfman, and it's the original theme. I'm guessing Danny bought the rights.
Any Gremlin theme song you bought with Elfman's name attached was mislabeled. He didn't buy the rights to any of the songs Goldsmith created.
30th May 2023
Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (2023)
Stupidity: There is no reason why any person as intelligent as Janet would keep the knowledge of Kang secret from her family. The extended Pym family are the only people in possession of the one thing Kang needs to escape. The brief explanation she gives is that she wanted to protect her family, but this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and she makes no attempt to explain how this secret keeps anyone safe.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: She is obviously scared out of her mind concerning Kang. She, through her fear, had hoped that him being trapped in the Quantum Realm would stay permanent as long as nobody knew about it in the normal universe. In that way, she tried to protect not only her family but the entire universe.
Not only does she not say that she is "scared out of her mind", she also doesn't act like it either. There is no indication that she is so frightened by Kang that she has lost her senses - quite the opposite, actually. She appears to function rationally and intelligently in every other area concerning Kang, except of course for simply telling anyone how dangerous the Quantum Realm is because the movie wouldn't have a plot otherwise. It's pretty egregious and wildly ridiculous.
Of course, she doesn't say that or act like that. But what she saw of him, when she touched his ship, scared her enough to go to all that trouble to keep him in the quantum realm at all costs. She thought it would be safe to leave, that he was trapped forever. Her judgment was wrong, probably caused by her fear. She is only human.
"Fear" is not enough to get past this level of stupidity. My point is that she doesn't act so frightened; she isn't irrational in any other way. It's just a flat-out, stupidly written element of the film that is impossible to believe. There is no way on God's green earth she should keep this secret, even after her family has made it to the quantum realm. I get that the movie is trying to say she is frightened, but this goes well beyond making any kind of sense at all; it's ridiculous.
Part of the stupidity also involves Janet's action in the mid-credit scenes of "Ant-Man and the Wasp," where she actively helped send Scott into the Quantum Realm to get quantum energy. If she was so afraid of a signal being sent to the QR, she wouldn't have let Scott go without explaining the dangers of going. This film seems to ignore that and instead seems to focus on Janet simply not wanting to discuss her involvement with Kang and her guilt, thinking no one would go back to the QR.
29th May 2023
Friends (1994)
Factual error: When Bonnie shaves her head, Rachel is supposed to have given her the razors (according to Bonnie.) Nope - the kind of razors needed to do that kind of close shave are a very particular kind, and Rachel isn't going to have them unless she also shaves her own head. It also wouldn't make any sense for Bonnie to have used her own razors; she's not going to carry them around with her unless she's planning to use them.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Considering Bonnie always used to shave her head, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that she just kept a razor on her in case she wanted to do it again. She's an impulsive type of person, after all.
7th Mar 2005
Men in Black II (2002)
Question: I may have just missed it, but what happened to J's female partner, the lady who worked in the morgue, from the end of the first film?
Answer: In "Men in Black: The Series" the 1997 animated series that takes place after the second movie, L is Zed's assistant and chief scientific officer.
It should be pointed out that the series had so many various changes, it shouldn't be considered part of the film's continuity or timeline. While there are some references to events in the first film, most of the characters have slightly altered appearances and Agent K was never neuralized in the series. In the series, Agent L is also a senior staff member while J seems to remain a rookie.
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 assistant throws 2 notes onto the bench. Cleo picks up one and looks at it, leaving one note on the bench.
He only gives him one note.
Bishop73