9th Nov 2013
The Wiggly Finger Catalyst - S5-E4
Corrected entry: Five minutes into the show, Sheldon has written down what a dice roll will tell him what to do. He rolls the dice, pauses and looks at the list to see what he has to do for that dice roll. The problem is he has an Eidetic memory and wouldn't take the time to look at the list when he can already see it in his head.
18th Feb 2018
Corrected entry: The Armitage family transplants the brains of white people into the bodies of black people. But why is it then, that the black people sometimes try to "break through" their imprisonment? If their brains are fully transplanted then their whole personality should be completely "white" or destroyed. Where does this inner fighting come from?
Correction: They explained this in the film. "Transplantation. Well, partially. The piece of your brain connected to your nervous system needs to stay put, keeping those intricate connections intact. So you won't be gone. At least not completely. A sliver of you will still be in there somewhere. Limited consciousness. You'll be able to see and hear what your body is doing, but your existence will be as a passenger. An audience. You will live in... the Sunken Place."
Then it is a factual error, cause from the neurological point of view this is nonsense. The nervous system has nothing to do with the consciousness.
The film (or the correction) never said the nervous system controls consciousness. It's part of the brain attached to the nervous system that controls consciousness, such as the the cerebral cortex, or even the basal ganglia. However, there's never been a human brain transplant, or even a partial human brain transplant, so there's no way to claim factual errors as it's all speculation.
16th Sep 2004
Corrected entry: During the scene on Christmas day right before Rocky's son, Robert, storms out the door- Rocky is explaining to him how important it is to be with one's family during the holidays. Rocky asks Robert if he remembers last year and all the fun they had. This film occurs immediately after "Rocky IV" (1986) and Rocky's bout with Drago. Therefore, "last year" Rocky was in Russia training to fight Drago for their Christmas Day boxing match. He spent most of the winter in Russia for training, so when did all this fun holiday activity happen that Robert is supposed to remember from "last year"?
Correction: In the press conference, the kid looks exactly the same as he does throughout the whole movie. He has not aged at all from the press conference, to the end of the movie. where did you get this info that there was the gap, it doesn't say that in the movie at all.
Correction: Not quite true. There is a five year gap between the beginning of Rocky V (the aftermath of Rocky IV) and when Rocky hits finiancial peril. Remember, his son was 7 in Rocky IV and is now 12 in Rocky V. Therefore, "last year" must have been a great time in the mansion, when his son was 11.
There is only a 5 year gap between the release of the films. Rocky V is set shortly after Rocky IV and this is a valid mistake. Shortly after the fight with Ivan, Rocky returns home. Upon returning home, Duke wants Rocky to fight Cane. They didn't spend 5 years in Russia, nor does Duke wait 5 years to capitalize on Rocky's victory over Ivan. In regards to Rocky's financial perils; before Rocky left for Russia, his power of attorney was signed over to his accountant. While Rocky was away, his accountant squandered his money on bad investments. On top of that, the accountant had failed to pay taxes the previous six years (i.e. the 6 years before the fight with Ivan, not 6 years after the fight). So shortly after returning home, Rocky basically finds out he's broke and owes money and that's the motivation to fight. The following Christmas would be a year after the Christmas in Rocky IV.
21st Jul 2018
Stupidity: After the Slick devours Laverne, Randy jumps into the water and swims for shore with the Slick following. Even though Randy made it to shore, he stops and turns to confront the Slick, screaming that he beat it. When Randy turns around, the Slick immediately envelopes him. If Randy had just got up and started running instead of facing the Slick, he would have lived.
Suggested correction: This is a deliberate movie making technique to make the audience think the character has escaped but at the last second a surprise is thrown in. It's the same as hanging over the body of the killer. It doesn't come under stupidity.
Yes, it does. In any movie where someone comes face to face with either a supernatural enemy or even a regular one, confronting it is extremely stupid because the character could have simply walked away and made it to safety. The character confronting the killer is stupid because they'll always be killed. Better to do the smart thing and run as far and as fast as possible.
A example of a valid stupidity entry is an astronaut taking his helmet off when in space because he's an expert and knows better. A stupid person doing something stupid is considered a stupidity entry (which is essentially a plot hole writers use to move the story in a particular direction it wouldn't have gone otherwise). A character making the wrong choice because they underestimate the situation isn't a minor plot hole, in real life people underestimate opponents all the time, and movies exploit that all the time in their plot development (i.e. Apollo underestimating Rocky).
Suggested correction: Randy's decision isn't what constitutes a "stupidity" mistake. Stupidity mistakes are minor plot holes, which means characters can act stupid. Plus, when Randy gets to shore he's worn out so he tries to catch his breath. He then says he's won because he under estimated the Slick's ability to get him (which would fall under the category of "celebrating too early").
Put yourself in Randy's place. If you're friends were eaten by a huge slick like monster and you were swimming to shore with it chasing you, after making it safely to shore, would you want to turn around to confront it. No. That would be stupid because confronting it will certainly get you killed the moment your back is turned. The smart thing to do would be to keep running. Randy facing it was very stupid. Had he done the smart thing and kept going after he made it to shore, he would have survived. Stupidity killed him. Pure and simple.
First off, you said it would certainly kill you once your back is turned, which means if you're running away, your back is turned and if you confront it, your back isn't turned. But, he never tried to confront it. He just celebrates beating it. However, Randy thought he was safe once on land because he thought the creature couldn't attack him or reach him, so in Randy's mind he wasn't doing anything stupid. He thought he was safe, he thought he won. He was tired and sat to rest. But that's part of his character and his character traits. But, acting stupid isn't a "stupidity" mistake. Otherwise movies like "Dumb and Dumber" would just be thousands of stupidity mistakes because stupid characters are acting stupid. Now, if Randy knew the creature could kill him in water and he turns to celebrate his victory, or stops to rest, in the water, that could be a "stupidity" mistake since his character was already shown to know he can't stop in the water and the writers ignored what was already established as his character. Stupidity mistakes just are minor plot holes that go against already establish character traits or established facts/statements in the film.
Not only that, but, Randy was acting stupid since he chose to face it rather then run.
If you re choosing to say its a stupidity because they choose to fight rather than run then that's a moot point because you wouldn't have a movie in the first place! Movies get a degree of latitude when it comes to reality (people can be shot 7 times and still walk away as the credits roll) so rather than stupidity, this is under slightly suspended reality of how an actual person would behave. In this segment, we're talking about an oil slick with a mind of its own. 100% reality has to take a back seat where plot forwarding is concerned.
11th Oct 2016
Visible crew/equipment: When Arthur goes to Dragoon to ask for help, when Dragoon runs out of the hut to turn back into Merlin, on the left hand side of the screen you can see a camera crew in modern clothes. [Fixed in Netflix version]. (00:23:00)
Suggested correction: I don't see any crew. I'm watching it on Netflix. Perhaps they fixed or perhaps they edited it out after realizing the mistake. But they aren't there anymore.
Even if Netflix corrected the mistake doesn't mean the mistake is now invalid if the mistake existed in the original BBC One airing. Netflix is known to change or edit programs they stream (such as replacing soundtrack songs).
7th May 2018
Question: Do we know the human casualties by the end of the war?
Answer: No such numbers are ever discussed in the novel or in the subsequent radio and movie treatments. What we may surmise, however, is that the human casualties were comparatively minor. Once the Martians were exposed to earthly microbes, they were wiped out pretty quickly.
Voiceover by Morgan Freeman at the end of the movie: by the toll of a billion lives.
Morgan Freeman says "By the toll of a billion deaths, man had earned his immunity, his right to survive among this planet's infinite organisms." He is saying that Mankind evolved with microorganisms for countless generations on Earth, making Mankind immune to most of those microorganisms. Perhaps a billion humans or more died of bacterial and viral plagues throughout human history; but, as a species, we gained immunity. Freeman's quote has nothing to do with the number of Martians that died because they had no immunity.
Answer: The ending dialog states a death of 1 billion.
The billion deaths spoken of don't refer to those that died in the alien attack but the billion deaths from the microorganisms that killed the aliens. "By a billion deaths man earned his immunity."
I feel that he meant that the organisms that killed the aliens killed a billion humans first before we got our immunity from them.
They are saying that.
Exactly.
4th Feb 2008
Revealing mistake: In the scene towards the end, where Declan has chased the Jackal back onto the subway platform, and has just followed on himself, behind him you see a man (possibly a cop) running to get out of the way of the guns, but just before going out of shot, he stops running and just casually 'strolls' to the edge of the set (some kind of small booth or shop on the platform). (01:50:55)
Suggested correction: This doesn't really reveal any mistake. I see the guy he runs into it and then slows down as he looks back. There's not really much else place to go and he just saw that Declan wasn't shooting any of them, that the previous guy, The Jackal, was the one shooting the cop. There doesn't appear to be anything wrong with how this man acted as he went into that booth.
I watched the scene and he's running out of fear along with everyone else and the just stops running, as if he thinks he's off camera, and the starts to walk, but he never turns around. Everyone else is ducking if they're not running. It would not be a natural reaction in that situation, especially since people were still screaming.
2nd Aug 2018
Question: I'm asking this as a question, cause I'm unable to determine if this is actually a mistake with the weird writing... or if I'm just missing something. Right after The Jackal kills Lemont, it cuts to the FBI in a room trying to piece things together. Witherspoon walks in and says "Here we go, sir. Eleven days ago, Charles C. Murdock bought himself a brand new Dodge mini van. Now, that was a big surprise to Mr. Murdock, whose passport and wallet were stolen 16 days ago at the Helsinki Airport." He says this to Preston and the rest as if this is brand new news, a new lead they have to go on and a break they've needed. But then Preston just looks at him contemplating this and immediately responds. "Anything from the border? We sent a description of the van to every crossing from here to Manitoba." Him saying this as if they had this information long ago and already had people searching for it. To me this doesn't make any sense with how either of those characters said their lines. Witherspoon has been with Preston and the others almost this entire time in on the investigation and would have known if they already knew about the van. And if the van was actually a new lead Witherspoon just found and was telling them. Then what Preston said makes no sense. So where is the error in this or am I just missing something? (01:01:35)
Answer: It seemed to me that they had a description of the van, but had not yet identified the owner. Witherspoon is saying the van was purchased with a stolen identity and therefore they still don't know who really bought the van.
But how did they even have a description of the van then? Up to that point it seemed they didn't know anything about a van. This is why i'm confused.
The film makers may have cut out some scenes that would explain it in better detail, but as it is, there's no mention when the FBI knew about the van. However, they did know the Jackal was using James' passport and flew into Montreal so they have been able to follow him, although they're always a step behind. I don't think it's a plot hole or bad writing though, but it certainly up for debate.
In the movie the Jackal (Willis) often changed the colour of the van, white, blue, red etc. So for a proper BOLO of a van especially in 1997 there are many (including currently) many colours of a minivan (family van) so the color it was sold as was changed and it showed him practising washing away one color over another and the last being red.
27th Apr 2003
Corrected entry: During the scene where Blondie and Tuco are wiring the bridge with explosives, Tuco suggests they tell each other their part of the secret. As Blondie is replying, you can see a car drive by in the background. The movie takes place in the 1860s.
Correction: Yeah I see it now too. In the forest.
Correction: I have watched this scene several times and what you say never happens, there is NO car driving by in the background.
When Tuco says "you go first", there's a car in the far background driving down a road. At first the trees are kind of blocking it, but then there's a clearing and the car is more visible. Look to the right of Clint Eastwood's hat.
4th Jan 2007
Question: I don't fully understand how Le Chiffre lost all his money when the bomb failed to blow up the prototype aircraft at Miami airport. If the bomb had exploded, the shares in the airliner would have crumbled, but because it didn't, wouldn't think mean that Le Chiffre missed out on the opportunity to make a load of money, but would still be left with the money he had in the first place?
Answer: Le Chiffre was essentially betting that airline stock would fall, so he bought futures contracts assuming the price would fall, when the bomb did not go off, airline stock did not fall, so he lost his money, as the contract he'd bought still had to be fulfilled.
Answer: Lachiffre had bought Puts on the Airline stock which have a definite drop dead date, expiration date, usually the 3rd Friday of any month. So the bomb is a dud, the Airline rollout is a success, stock goes up, puts expire worthless.
Answer: Its not realistic IMO, but a successful roll-out of the new airliner would have led to an increase in the stock's price which would have cost anyone shorting it. Just not 100% of their investment.
Shorting stocks can cost an investor more than 100% of their investment. For example if you borrowed 1 stock for $50 hoping the stocks drop to $20, you make $30. But it the stocks jump to $150, you lose $100 (twice your investment).
3rd Sep 2013
Factual error: Then, as now, every recruit reporting to boot camp would be tested for illegal drugs, first by a urine test and then by a broad spectrum blood test in the case of a positive result. There is no reason for Elmo to try to hide his stash when the recruits are told they are to be tested - he is going to come up positive anyway. He may as well just say he has changed his mind and walk away. He is entitled to do that any time up to ten days after he signed on, and it happened a lot in real life!
Suggested correction: Those drug tests didn't exist in 81.
Did you watch the film? The recruits are told they are about to take a broad spectrum drug test - not they are going to be searched for drugs, they are going to tested for the presence of illegal drugs in their systems. As has been pointed out such drug tests were mandatory at the time the film is set but that is not important - in the context of the film Elmo's action make no sense as he is going to be tested for drugs. Hiding his stash makes no sense at all as it will not solve his immediate problem. The posting is correct and the correction is nonsensical.
What specific drug tests didn't exist? Nixon directed a military drug urinalysis program in 1971 and the DoD started random drug testing in 1974 (not that testing deterred drug use).
I enlisted in 1982. I got a single drug test at the meps and didn't get tested again during an entire 3 year enlistment. In fact, I didn't receive a drug test until 2 years into my second enlistment. The military just wasn't as strict on drug testing.
Drug testing of recruits commenced in the United States on a trial basis in 1975 and became compulsory in 1977. In 1981 every single volunteer would have to take a broad spectrum drug test before being allowed to start boot camp.
13th Dec 2012
Other mistake: Mace's reflection can still be seen on the pond after he disappears. (00:53:30)
Suggested correction: This isn't a mistake. That's him, under the water in the same pose he was in before he touched the water.
After watching the scene, the mistake is valid. When he's underwater, he's not in the same "pose." That would require him to be upside down and squatting. But that's not the pose we see him in.
We see Mace semi-kneeling and reaching out to touch the water when he vanishes, but his upside-down reflection is still in the exact same calm position even when he's gone, and in the next shot we see Mace under the water right-side up, with his arms reaching up to the surface. This is a valid mistake, the suggested correction is not right.
26th Aug 2003
Corrected entry: Throughout the movie, McConaughey wears a wedding band on his ring finger. He is not married in the movie.
Correction: It should also be noted that McConaughey wasn't married at the time of filming, so he certainly wasn't wearing a wedding ring.
A gold band is visible on his right ring finger in the scene in the bathroom at his family's house.
That is to say a ring on the ring finger, even on the left hand, doesn't constitute a wedding ring. It's just a ring. There have been instances when married actors don't take off their wedding rings for a film (or scene) which means the ring it's possibly not a character choice, but this wasn't the case for McConaughey.
Correction: Not a mistake to wear a ring wherever you like - quite a few people wear a ring on the ring finger of their left hand despite not being married. No law against it.
Correction: No he doesn't. He always wears a ring on his right hand, not his left, where you would wear a wedding ring. Lots of guys wear a ring on their right hands.
Could be a family heirloom and have sentimental value. I wear my grandmother's ring on either ring finger, if it's not fitting on my middle! Darn knuckles... So, that's a logical possibility too.
18th Jul 2018
The Rat Race - S1-E4
Question: I don't see her listed on the credits in beginning or any other website inquiries, but is that Tyne Daly playing the character Peter's secretary?
Answer: I'm the same person who asked this question. I discovered it was Molly Price whom I recognized from Third Watch.
It should be noted Donna was Jim Fowkes‘ secretary. Donna killed Peter.
17th Aug 2008
Corrected entry: Lightening McQueen is portrayed as the first rookie to possibly win the Piston Cup. When he discovers the Piston Cup trophies in Doc Hudson's garage, we see that Doc won the Piston Cup in 1951, 1952 and 1953. Doc Hudson is a 1951 Hudson Hornet, as confirmed by his license plate is 51HHMD. By winning the Piston Cup in 1951 the year he was made, Doc Hudson is actually the first rookie to win the Piston Cup.
Correction: Doc Hudson would still be considered a rookie even if he raced before. Like other sports if he came from a lower racing league he would be considered a rookie when he got to the professional league.
Correction: "Rookie" would mean someone who's never raced before. McQueen's first races were in the Piston Cup Series. Doc Hudson must have raced prior to racing in the Piston Cup Series; meaning he won the Cup his first year racing, but had racing experience prior to competing for it.
Correction: If the year convention follows how it is in the real world, the 1951 Hornet would have come out in 1950, making that his rookie year if he began racing right away.
The ‘51 Hudson Hornet was a new model car introduced in 1951.
The first 1951 Hudson Hornet was produced in September 1950 (18 built), with main production beginning in October 1950 (2977 built).
Being produced and introduced are two separate things. Even if Doc was built in Sept 1950) he wouldn't have run a full season of the Piston Cup. Doc was meant to represent the Hudson driving team of NASCAR, especially Herb Thomas who won the Grand National Championship in 1951, with their ‘51 Hudson Hornet (1951 being the first year they drove the Hornet). Yes, ultimately it's just a cartoon movie with talking cars so there's nothing to say Doc didn't run a full season in 1950 or wasn't a rookie in 1951. But in keeping line with some semblance of the real world, by all accounts, Doc should have been a rookie in 1951.
15th Jul 2018
Continuity mistake: During the final trading scene, both Dan and Eddie (along with most of the other traders) have green badges. As the medics are wheeling out one of the Dukes after his heart attack, Dan and Eddie's name badges change to grey. And in no way is that due to lighting or camera angle.
Suggested correction: It's not a continuity mistake since everyone else's badges have also taken on a grey appearance. At best it is a film processing error since it probably is a result of color correction in post-production.
Wouldn't this still qualify as a mistake since it's still an error? Cartoon mistakes, and movies/shows that use CGI, are constantly submitted when the color changes for a few frames. I know there use to be a feature to "change mistake type" if you think it's a revealing mistake, etc.
Yep, still a mistake - the type is a bit debatable, but I'd stick with continuity, because regardless of the reason behind it, fundamentally it's still a change between shots.
27th Aug 2001
Corrected entry: The movie supposedly takes place in April, however based on Chicago's climate, it is quite clear that the actual filming was conducted well into the summer months based on how full and leafy all the trees are, not to mention the ivy on the outfield wall at Wrigley Field which does not become fully developed with leaves until late May at the earliest.
Correction: Given the baseball game they went to, the movie took place on June 5.
The baseball game was obviously staged for the film.
The baseball game was definitely not staged for the film. The baseball scenes were filmed during a real Cubs game in September (when filming took place). John Hughes added footage from the earlier June game during editing to make it appear they attended the June game.
23rd Dec 2009
Factual error: In every version of the story, including the book, in the scene where Augustus Gloop is sucked into the chocolate pipe, there's no pressure below him (it's an open river, with the pipe sticking into it) so the pressure must come from a vacuum at the top of the pipe. Augustus would have had his lungs and innards sucked out until he was thin enough to pass through the pipe. He would not have survived.
Suggested correction: In the book Charlie ask Mr. Wonka if all the other kids would be all right and he tells him yes they will.
This isn't a valid correction because the point of the mistake is that he wouldn't survive, as shown. At best you're saying Wonka lied to Charlie.
10th Jul 2018
Character mistake: When Dex is rescuing the three baby kittens from the Fat Cat Burglar, he says to the burglar "I'm giving you one last chance to hand him over before I cash in your coupons for you." The Fat Cat Burglar is holding three kittens hostage, so in this context, Dex should have said "hand them over" and not "hand him over." (00:02:55)
Suggested correction: He says "hand ‘em over" (meaning "them"), not "him."
He says "hand him over", not "hand ‘em over." This is evident by the fact that there is a distinct H heard, plus there is also a distinct I heard after the H, showing that he says "hand him over" and not "hand ‘em over." It is possible the line "hand ‘em over" was written in the script, but that is not what is heard onscreen.
I watched the scene several times to verify prior to making the correction and I heard ‘em every time.
21st Jun 2018
Plot hole: When Katty is first discussing the dead girl from the plane crash who had brains in her stomach, she says the girl's flesh indicated she died months before she ever got on the plane. But then later in the episode, Katty says the plane crash girl was at the boat party (massacre) the day before she got on the plane. Everyone at the boat party was alive before dying and turning into a zombie, so the girl's flesh would not indicate she was dead for months since she only died the day before.
Suggested correction: Not everyone at the boat party was "alive", there were some zombies there as well, Blaine included, it is entirely possible that she was a zombie before the boat party happened.
Which episode(s) mention Blaine and others were zombies before the boat party massacre? Everything in the show makes it seem like it was the combination of tainted Utopium and Max Ranger energy drink that night which caused the zombie outbreak, including Blaine's transformation. And the Fillmore-Graves outbreak was a separate incident that Blaine wasn't a part of.
Yeah, the boat party was ground zero for the outbreak, Blaine and everyone else was human when they got on the boat. Nothing suggests otherwise.
When get turned in to a zombie your flesh is dying so her flesh could be dead.
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: This is not at all accurate. The list he his looking at is the Cheesecake Factory menu, not one he created himself. Given the nature of the menu page Sheldon looks at, it's unlikely he's ever looked at that page before.
Bishop73
They ate there almost every episode.
terry s
They ate there every Tuesday and Sheldon always got the same thing (except when following the dice), the barbecue bacon cheeseburger with the barbecue sauce, bacon and cheese on the side.
Bishop73