Corrected entry: Clark is supposed to hide his powers from everyone. When the other swimmer in the final race starts to drown Clark uses his super speed to get him off of the bottom of the pool. Everyone who was in the pool area had their eyes on the drowning kid so somebody should have seen Clark just appear at his side.
Bishop73
4th Sep 2007
Smallville (2001)
19th Nov 2004
Judge Dredd (1995)
Corrected entry: When Rico is making the clones, he says "these are your brothers and sisters." If the clones were clones of him and his DNA, they'd all turn out male, i.e. just brothers.
Correction: Men have an X and Y chromosome, where women have two X chromosomes. Surely with the technology to create new clones in 24 hours, they could alter the chromosomes at a precise point to make some of the subjects female.
Not only would that cause a high rate of "birth" defects, but if you're altering their chromosomes they're not clones anymore.
I think the correction may have misled you. You wouldn't be "altering" the chromosomes or causing birth defects. One would just need to replace the Y-chromosome with an exact copy of the X-chromosome. All the females would still share the same DNA with him. Then it comes down to semantics if you want to call that a clone or not. For simplicity sake, they choose to.
25th Nov 2017
The English Patient (1996)
Factual error: Prochnow is addressed as "Major," in English, but he wears the collar tabs of an SS lieutenant colonel. He should've been addressed as "Obersturmbannfuhrer," or, in English, as "Colonel," because lieutenant colonels are acceptably addressed as "Colonel," as are full colonels.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Obersturmbannfuher is also incorrect. The single oak leaf on each lapel of the uniform is the insignia for a full Colonel or Standartenführer. Therefore it would be acceptable to address him as Colonel because that is his rank.
This isn't a valid correction because you're agreeing he was called by the wrong rank. If you disagree with the word and want to make the entry more clear, do a word change.
27th Nov 2022
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation (1989)
Continuity mistake: In the department store as Clark is talking with Mary, the lingerie sales lady, his left arm is supporting him on the glass counter as he is standing. The next shot when Rusty approaches, Clark is now bent down with his left arm resting on the counter.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You actually see Clark go from sitting on the counter to bending down as the saleslady is modelling the undergarment.
That's not the part the mistake is talking about. The mistake is valid. Clark is sitting in the counter but is off screen when he changes position (so you don't actually see it). When Rusty enters the shot, Clark's hand is in the counter. In the next shot, his elbow is on the counter, with no time elapsing.
24th Nov 2022
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Corrected entry: When Andy and Red are discussing the cost of the rock hammer, Andy says between $6-7, and Red closes the deal at $10. In reality, $10 in 1947 would be the equivalent of $130 in today's money (2022).
Correction: Andy was a successful accountant. He could have access to his money, which was likely substantial.
I'm suggesting that Andy (Robbins) and Red (Freeman) got the pricing and value wrong. The value of the American dollar was different compared to the year of the film's production and the present year. Example: one American Dollar ($1) in 1947, the year of the scene, would equal to $6.65 in 1994, the year of the film. All due to inflation.
The price for the rock hammer is deliberately "inflated" because it costs "extra" to acquire contraband in a prison. The person agreeing to "sneak" a prohibited item into prison is taking a risk of getting caught and therefore is the one who gets to set the price - take it or leave it! Realizing he was seeking contraband and would have "to pay" to get it, Andy suggested $6-7; Red wanted - and got - more. The relative value of $1 in 1947 versus the equivalent value in 1994 is not relevant. Hypothetically, Red - realizing that Andy had the means to pay even more - could have requested much more than $10.
Using a different example, today's price for a pack of cigarettes might be $8.00. Cigarettes may no longer be permitted in a prison, thereby classifying cigarettes as "contraband." Inmate A might be seeking to buy a pack of cigarettes and offers $10 to anyone providing the same. Inmate B tells Inmate A that he can get him a pack of cigarettes, but it will cost him $20. If Inmate A says $20 is too much, he simply will not be able to buy the cigarettes.
You're misunderstanding inflation. The value of the dollar can be different then the value of a product. For example, a McDonald's hamburger cost $0.15 in 1947, which is $2.00 in today's money, even though a McDonald's hamburger today is only $1.49 (which is to say your "$130" is only "$96.85"). Plus, you can find cheap rock hammers or rock hammers that go for $100 or more.
I agree that the price of a particular product may not be related to (or proportionate with) inflation rates, but I think "Matdan97" made a decent analogy. What "Matdan97" failed to realise is that the rock hammer was contraband, which changes (greatly increases) the "asking price."
27th Aug 2003
Ronin (1998)
Corrected entry: De Niro pronounces 'Hereford' incorrectly when interrogating Sean Bean's character. He say 'Here ford', as in two different words. It should be pronounced 'Herryford'. I am surprised Sean Bean didn't correct this.
Correction: De Niro's character is American and he wouldn't know the correct pronunciation. As for Sean Bean's character, he doesn't correct De Niro because he is a fraud, as evidenced by the fact that he doesn't know what color the Hereford boathouse is. His accent and background are faked.
There is zero indication that Sean Bean is not British and why would he fake being British on top of everything else? Every Brit knows how to pronounce Hereford and De Niro uses the mistake that is only made by Americans indicating he messed it up and nobody dared to correct him.
The correction is still valid. It's not a mistake for an American character to pronounce a word in an American way. The mistake seems to indicate Bean in real life didn't correct Pacino (which the comment also indicates), not that the character Spence should have corrected Sam. Pronouncing words in an American or British (or any other country) way is only a mistake if it goes against how the established character would say the word (e.g Dr. House saying a word Laurie's natural British way).
2nd Dec 2009
The Dark Knight (2008)
Trivia: This is the first Batman film in which Bruce Wayne does not appear in a tuxedo.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He does; he is wearing one during the restaurant scene.
No, he's wearing a regular suit in the restaurant scene, if you're talking about the one where he and his ballerina date sit down with Harvey and Rachel.
I don't know what you think the definition of a tuxedo is, but it's equivalent to a dress suit or dinner suit (or even black tie). So basically, dress shirt, dress shoes, trousers and a jacket.
There's a distinction between a tuxedo and a suit, and what Bruce is wearing isn't a tuxedo. There's also a difference between a dress suit and a dinner suit, also known as a black tie, so dress suits and dinner suits are not equivalent. What British refer to as a dinner suit is what Americans refer to as a tuxedo. Wearing a suit at dinner or a black tie doesn't make it a tuxedo.
So what makes a tuxedo?
The type of jacket and pants (or trousers), and often the shirt, shoes and accessories. Satin on the jacket lapel and side of the pants and pants without belt loops. Usually a tux comes with a pleated shirt with studs instead of buttons. Often you wear a bow tie and cummerbund, but it's not necessary. A casual or dress suit is made out of all the same material with acrylic and uncovered buttons.
6th Nov 2022
The Twin (2017)
Plot hole: Derek, who escaped the mental hospital by pretending to be his twin brother Tyler, was able to locate Tyler's vehicle by using the keys to beep its horn. Once inside the SUV, he apparently found Tyler's cell phone, which is odd because most people carry their cell phones with them. But Derek did not ask Tyler for his cell phone's password before rendering him unconscious - so how did he gain access to the cell phone without the password? (It isn't likely that Tyler previously gave it to him). (00:20:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Tyler never left his cell phone in the car. He had with him when visiting Derek. We see him pull out his cell phone to show Derek a picture, so the phone was already unlocked, assuming he locks it with a password in the first place.
I haven't had time to finish posting the rest of the mistakes I have, but I just uploaded two that should show up under "pending submissions." They probably should have been posted before the one above. I suppose the real question is where the cell phone came from each time.
8th Sep 2004
Duel (1971)
Continuity mistake: When David Mann is at the cafe, the waitress brings over his sandwich and water. He immediately drinks all of the water, yet when the shot changes to above the table, of him looking at his sandwich, the glass of water is completely full again.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There is an empty glass next to the full glass.
The mistake is valid. David drank all his water before getting his food and asked the waitress for another glass of water and aspirin. She then brought him the food, aspirin, and 2nd glass of water. He drinks all the water after taking the aspirin and sets the empty glass down. In the next shot he's holding a glass with water. There should be two empty glasses.
18th Oct 2022
Wayne's World (1992)
Question: It seems like there's some stuff cut out of the scene where Wayne and Garth meet the cop outside the donut shop. He stops them for some unsaid reason, then flips a coin at the end. What does any of this mean? Does he just get charmed and distracted by them?
Answer: It was just establishing that Wayne and his crew were friendly with Officer Koharski. They cut their conversation short because they were afraid Phil was about to throw up and needed to get him a cup of coffee.
Before Phil gets sick, they're just having a conversation. After it cuts from Phil, Koharski is suddenly holding a quarter in between his fingers. There seems to be a scene cut before they see Phil get sick to explain where the quarter came from. (Like if I had to guess, does Koharski pull out the quarter to show what he found in the cavity search?) That's what the question is asking, not is there a scene cut after Phil gets sick to explain why Koharski just walks away.
7th Oct 2022
An American Tail: Fievel Goes West (1991)
Factual error: Sometime when Chula the spider is chasing Fievel, he sings a version of "Itsy bitsy spider." However the film takes place in the 1890's and the song "Itsy bitsy spider" was not written until 1910.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It had been around for much longer than that, that's just the oldest book we have a record of which listed it.
Except the 1910 version was the "Spider Song" since it didn't use the words "itsy bitsy" and those lyrics didn't come until later in the 40's.
24th Jul 2010
Casper (1995)
Corrected entry: It is said that ghosts don't crossover as long as they have unfinished business. This means Casper, Stretch, Fatso and Stinky should have unfinished business, but why they are present is never explained.
Correction: I don't see how this could be considered a plot hole. It's just an element that they decided to ignore. The story is about the misadventures of a friendly ghost and some annoying ghosts. Why they're there really doesn't play a part in the theme of the movie.
That still doesn't answer the question as to what their unfinished business is which they have seen as how they haven't crossed over.
27th Aug 2001
What about Bob? (1991)
Continuity mistake: Leo Marvin is at the window watching Bob 'leave' and he is holding the newspaper in his left hand. Then he waves and it is still in his left hand. When he walks towards his family it is in his right. He could have switched, but that is some pretty fast switching.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He could have switched. It, for me, wasn't that fast.
I agree. It wasn't a continuous shot, and he's off camera for 3-4 seconds before we see the paper switch hands.
25th Jul 2005
Over The Top (1987)
Corrected entry: To make the movie seem as authentic as possible, Stallone told the guy playing Bull not to take it easy on him when it was time for them to shoot the final scene of their match together. The guy laughed about the idea but still agreed to do so even though he warned Stallone that he may hurt him. Stallone, made him eat those words when he beat him for real. Everything in that scene is authentic except for close-up shots of their face that were done later due to injuries that both men suffered while the scene was being filmed. Stallone suffered a strained forearm while Bull Hurley's character suffered a dislocated shoulder. The cry from him that you can hear when Stallone is pulling his arm down at the end is the real thing. That's when it happened.
Correction: I don't know where you came up with Stallone beating Zumwalt for real. Not on his best day and with two Arms. Rick Zumwalt was a real arm wrestler. By the time they filmed the finals Stallone could barely pull. He did way too much, thinking because he trained all the time. It would be easy. Arm wrestling is an entirely different sport, and everyone in the beginning deals with unimaginable pain.
I tried to look up stories of Stallone actually beating Zumwalt. In all the stories from the people and wrestlers at the tournament, nothing is mentioned about it. Only that the punch from Zumwalt was real. There's only one source I found "10 things you didn't know about 'Over the Top'" by Tom Foster. The trivia entry is almost word for word copy of some the "facts" listed. However, Foster doesn't site any sources, quote anyone, or mention at all where he got this information.
11th Oct 2017
Halloween (2007)
Character mistake: When Sheriff Brackett is talking to Loomis at the food stand, he calls him Don. His name is Sam. Even says it in the subtitles. (01:19:35)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He could possibly be saying "Doc".
No, he's definitely saying "Don." It's never been addressed, but I think it's an honest mistake with two people who have never met before and maybe an homage to Donald Pleasance, who played Loomis before.
It's hard to say, but it does sound like "Don." The sheriff says "doc" two times later in the same scene and those two times definitely sounds different than the first time. But I don't think it's meant to be a homage to anyone. I think it's just an actor who flubbed the word.
21st Jan 2018
John Carter (2012)
Factual error: Carter's war record says he won the Southern Cross of Honor during the American Civil War. While this medal was authorised, it was never actually awarded.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: John Carter isn't a real person either. This is science fiction, not a historical documentary.
It's still a valid point that he has a decoration that was never awarded. It's mostly science fiction, but the parts that take place in the real world are supposed to take place in the real world.
I think you're missing the point. The medal could have been awarded during that time, but no real person actually was awarded it. There's nothing preventing someone from being awarded it, and John Carter, as a fictional character, was awarded the medal. It would only be a mistake if they showed a real person who actually existed be awarded the medal or if the medal was never commissioned at that time.
3rd Jun 2003
The Italian Job (2003)
Factual error: During the escape at the end of the movie, when the Minis come out of the pipe and drop down into the basin of the LA River they fall nose first into the pavement. However, with approximately 9 million dollars worth of gold in the trunks of the cars, they would be back heavy, not front heavy, and fall more evenly or even back first. It's been suggested that Wrench could have put a ton of weight up front to balance the cars properly, but the amount of gold carried in those special boxes loaded into the back end of the very short wheelbase Minis could not be balanced even by the legendary Wrench without severely re-engineering the vehicle. If that was possible, the handling of the unladen Mini would be woeful, and the chase scene BEFORE the subway gold heist would be impossible. The Minis would have fallen like bricks nose-first onto the subway track when jumping from the platform.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I have spoken with an expert in vehicle dynamics and physics, and he said that the falling of the vehicles is absolutely correct. He has seen the movie and finds nothing wrong with the scene. The front of the car starts falling first, and therefore will land first. The cars would have to fall a much greater distance for the weight to take over and cause the back of the car to drop and hit first - it would have to have fallen perhaps as much as 25-30 feet. I know it seems counter-intuitive, but in reality it was real as presented.
Sorry, your expert must have been a friend of the stunt coordinator. It was the worst car stunt mistake of all time and why they never balanced the cars and reshot the scene is anybody's guess.
Of course the front end starts to fall first, that's the point of the mistake, it should be backend heavy. If you watch the scene, it's clear there's a ramp at the end of the tube (whether intentionally done by the characters or for stunt purposes). When the cars hit the ramp, they fly up so that the front end is up in the air above the back end. Then the cars fall front end first, fairly quickly, that if even if they fell from higher up, the back end would never fall faster than the front.
2nd Nov 2017
The Martian (2015)
Other mistake: Rich Purnell explains his plan to redirect the Hermes to Mars in order to rescue Watney, positioning people to represent planets and using a stapler to show the trajectory of the vessel. He is talking to experienced, qualified engineers and technologists working at a very high level on the space programme. They don't need drama school play acting to be understand things like this. He could have explained his plan in the most complex and abstruse terms and they would have been way ahead of him.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't really a mistake. Yes, the character oversimplified the explanation but, as is shown when the character is introduced, he doesn't exhibit typical social behaviour. To him it's probably normal to explain things that way to strangers (which is basically what the people he's talking to are).
I think this is one of those borderline mistakes. Movies and TV shows often have a character over-simplify things, especially when involving science, for the audiences' sake and not for any of the characters. This type of mistake is similar to when characters start a conversation, but the show skips time by having characters arrive at a new location in the next scene without showing them traveling, but then the characters continue their conversation for the audiences' sake.
27th Aug 2022
The Black Phone (2021)
Character mistake: In the very beginning at the baseball game the runner is running to second base and the fielder doesn't even try to tag him out. Just runs right by him and gets the ball to the pitcher. (00:00:53)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The center fielder missed the ball and the right fielder got it. The second baseman was at the border of the infield and outfield and the right fielder may not have noticed that the short stop moved to cover second base. By this time, the players might have been more concerned over the opposing team scoring a run because a player had advanced to third base. It was a "revealing" mistake or overall "stupidity" by the team as each player was playing "musical positions" more so than good baseball.
With regard to "revealing", the players may have been instructed to be active on the field and cover bases for each other as needed and this was the "mess" they produced.
Suggested correction: Baseball players make mental errors all the time, even major leaguers.
I've watched the scene a few times and can't agree or disagree with the mistake, but it certainly doesn't look like a mental error one would see in a game, even a little league game. It just looked like two kids were given directions what to do and the timing might have been off and the director on set didn't bother changing it. (I'm not disagreeing or agreeing with the correction either, just making a statement to help others decide).
8th Nov 2010
An Officer and a Gentleman (1982)
Corrected entry: This is just plain weird. I have seen the movie at least 10 times. At the very end Gere walks up behind Debra Winger. She takes out her ear plugs and her hands are in camera view all the time. She reaches up to his mouth and it appears that she pops the ear plugs into his mouth and then kisses him. Call me crazy but look for yourself.
Correction: It does look like it doesn't it!? But, her ear plugs are on a cord, she just leaves them hanging around her neck. She lets them trail out of her hands, which does make it look like she grabbed them.
Then what does she put in his mouth?
It's definitely an awkward move she does, but it doesn't look like she puts anything in his mouth. She just reaches to touch his cheeks, but then she moves arms around him.
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: People would care more about him getting saved than who was saving him, so, no, they wouldn't have noticed Clark. He likely went slow enough as to not draw too much attention, yet of course still fast enough to save the one drowning.
Knever
The mistake is valid. Chrissy brings everyone's attention to Troy struggling in the water so people are stand at the edge of the pool looking into it before Clark reacts. Clark then uses his super speed to get to Troy on the bottom in an instant. People watching would have seen Clark move like a blur and then appear at Troy's side. When he brings him up, he moves at normal human speed.
Bishop73