Factual error: When Demi arrives at the base she is wearing working blues and a beret. Navy personnel don't wear berets.
BaconIsMyBFF
8th Apr 2022
G.I. Jane (1997)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Up until 2016 women in the US Navy had the option to wear a beret.
23rd Mar 2022
The Batman (2022)
Corrected entry: The famous shot of the question mark in the coffee makes no sense in the film. When the Riddler is caught in the diner, he's made a mark out of froth - but he's made the mark face to the right of himself. He's in front of it, the dining staff behind the cup, and the cops and Batman are to his left. Who did he make the mark for? Likely it was made to the right so the camera would have room to pan over it in the empty bar. So Riddler made it for...the audience?
Correction: How is this a mistake? He can orient a question mark any way he wants, it doesn't have to be specially lined up for anyone to "see." It is perfectly in character for him to draw a question mark in the coffee askew from his own perspective. There are literally thousands of question marks the Riddler has drawn throughout the character's history and many of them are not lined up with anything in particular, and would be askew from where he must have been standing to draw.
Correction: The fact is, it has nothing to do with the Riddler making the "?" at any angle he wants. When we first see him, he's facing the mug and the handle is to his left, parallel with the counter's edge. During the scene, the mug moves because they slam him to the counter so that the handle is now perpendicular almost to the counter's edge. When the "?" is revealed, you see the handle to the left meaning he actually made the mark in front of him, not to the right of him. So the mistake is simply wrong.
Correction: This is not a mistake or "stupidity" in any way, shape or form. He's allowed to make a question mark any darned way he wants.
26th Nov 2021
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Corrected entry: Cloning was neither "Dark Science" nor "Secrets only the Sith knew." It was a massively common practice used for decades before this movie, by both sides.
Correction: Presumably the "dark science" that is referenced has to do with cloning someone without having any of their biological matter to duplicate. Palpatine's body is entirely destroyed in Return of the Jedi, and as Poe (in an unfathomably stupid line) states "Somehow, Palpatine has returned." Cloning was obviously well known but the means to bring back Palpatine, though never explained, were secrets only the Sith knew. Somehow. It's contrived and terrible writing but that's what the lines mean.
In addition, other clones (like the clone army from 50 years earlier) were individuals who were individually taught and trained. Palpatine managed to clone himself and keep all his memories intact.
2nd Aug 2021
Common mistakes
Corrected entry: When somebody gets shot and dies, they don't grunt out in pain. Their brain shuts down, along with the central nervous system, and they drop like a sack of potatoes. In pretty much every movie when a bad guy gets shot they exhale an "ahhhh", or an "uhhhh." That can happen when one is injured and in pain, not when they're shot dead. Plus when somebody is shot at a distance it's impossible to hear sound especially through deafening gunfire. Even the sound of suppressed weapons are louder than a grunt.
Correction: This is incorrect. Even when the brain is severely damaged it often takes a few seconds for someone to actually expire. The "dying breath" or "death rattle" is a very real phenomenon and even happens when people have been shot in the head. A fatal brain injury doesn't shut down the entire body as quickly as flipping a light switch makes the room dark.
4th Sep 2021
Speed (1994)
Stupidity: Howard has the opportunity to shoot Jack at the end, but doesn't for no discernable reason; he's already committed multiple felonies, and shooting Jack would help cover his tracks all the better. In fact, he could even have just taken the cash onto the subway and left Annie behind while staying in full disguise as a cop.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Howard Payne's taunting dialogue in the subway station suggests that he wants Jack to live a long life, tormented by the fact Payne was able to beat him. He doesn't become intent on murdering Jack until the dye pack goes off, ruining the money. After that, he tries to shoot Jack but runs out of bullets, then decides to beat him to death with the detonator but fails.
8th Dec 2020
No Country For Old Men (2007)
Audio problem: When, at the end of the movie, Chigurh leaves the accident site after he said to one of the boys: "You didn't see me, I was already gone", the boy answers saying: "Yessir", but his lips don't move.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The boy's mouth is open. You can say "Yessir" with your mouth open without moving your lips. Try it.
I can't.
12th Sep 2019
The Running Man (1987)
Plot hole: There is no reason for the prison guards to use portable computers in full view of the inmates to input the sonic deadline code. The guards can walk outside of the deadline whenever they need to input the code, or radio the guard on the outside to lower and raise the deadline like they do when bringing the workers out. In fact, this plot hole is compounded by the presence of the guards stationed outside of the deadline with their own computer, which makes the guard inside the deadline completely unnecessary. The interior guard is only there so Weiss has a way to get both the code and a computer, but this prison set-up makes absolutely no sense.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The point of having a portable on the outside and inside is in the case of an attempted prison break, if one of the computers is taken by the prisoners, the other can be used to prevent the deadline from shutting down. This was actually shown in the prison break scene where Weiss was unable to shut off the deadline with the inside computer was because the guards on the outside one were countering any attempts to close it.
That only explains why there is a guard outside with a computer. There is no reason to have a guard on the inside of the deadline with a computer. There can't be a prison break if there are no guards with a computer on the inside, the inmate's heads will explode if they cross the deadline.
19th Mar 2021
Coming 2 America (2021)
Continuity mistake: The movie indicates Akeem had a one night stand on his first visit the night he and Semmi goes to the night club. However, in the first movie, on the way home from the club he finds out about the fundraising event from Mr. Clarence and goes there instead.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The nightclub scenes in the original film were meant to be at least 2 different nights. Akeem and Semmi are wearing patterned sweaters when they meet the woman who worships the devil. For the remainder of the scene they are wearing button down shirts and blazers.
12th Feb 2021
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987)
Corrected entry: Data mimics the rest of the crew when Captain Sunad of the Zalkonians makes all the crew unable to breathe. Data is on his knees close to floor and is rising when "John Doe" heals the crew. Data is an android and should have just remained seated at his post.
Correction: Data is kneeling near Captain Picard and it is clear that Data is checking on Picard's well-being, because his captain has fallen to the floor and is gasping for air. Data is not struggling to breathe in any way, he's just looking at Picard so it is clear that he wasn't affected.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Plot hole: Weeks if not months have passed since Mando has been on Nevarro, with the power shift and the Empire taking control. The Mandalorian community was small, but he finds the Armorer in the old lair that says that she will leave only when she will have salvaged what remains. Since 'what remains' is a pile of armor pieces, and she is carrying already a cart full of those, it appears absurd that she'd still not finished with that task, especially considering that we see how the smelting process is pretty swift (she melts an armor piece and shapes it into the signet in the space of a brief conversation!) and even if every single one of the Mandalorians left their armor behind, it'd be just a couple of carts' worth of metal.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This entry presumes that the armorer has done nothing but collect armor pieces, and plans to continue doing nothing but collect armor pieces until she is finished. She never says that. She merely says that she won't leave until she is done collecting everything. She could be doing any number of other tasks she never says anything about because it isn't important. It is also never said when she started collecting armor pieces, it could have been just before we see her.
We can make all sorts of assumptions; she was grieving for a time, she had to go into hiding, she had to collect the armor pieces from various places? Fascinating, but if we do not presume anything, what we get is the Armorer (known as and for just that) salvaging armor (saying "I will not abandon this place until I have salvaged what remains") at a place established as raided a long time ago. What she had to salvage was meager (just a handful of Mandos) and does it fast.
In order to be a plot hole it would have to be impossible for the armorer to take this long to collect armor pieces. Since we don't know everything she has been doing off-screen, this doesn't count as a plot hole. You have to ignore all logical and reasonable possibilities to get to the point where this is a plot hole, and you list more than one in your reply.
I listed them because they are the kind of things we can assume to justify "Events or character decisions which only exist to benefit the plot, rather than making sense.", definition of plot hole in the website. We can make up all sort of background story, but nothing changes the fact that a character is at a place raided weeks prior and in the middle of performing a task that the way shown here is not going to take more than a few hours.
It's the "rather than making sense" part that this entry lacks. There are several reasons that make sense why this could take long, chief among them the fact that we don't know how long she has actually been collecting armor pieces. If, for example she said "I've been doing this since the attack", that would be one thing. She doesn't say that. She just says she won't leave until this particular task is done, not that it was her only task. She could have just started.
Collecting armor as specific task is something I find as such for the first time in your first comment. The attack happened shortly after Mando left, and the planet has been under a tight Imperial control since. Nothing leads to believe that the pile of amor is not salvaged but was brought back through some quest that stretched out for weeks until she finally decided exactly that day to start carting them to the furnace, which is what she's in the middle of when they arrive.
31st Jan 2021
The Incredibles (2004)
Corrected entry: This is the first Pixar film where the villain dies.
Correction: That is incorrect. Hopper, the villain from A Bug's Life, is killed by being fed alive to baby birds. A Bug's Life was released 6 years prior to The Incredibles.
27th Jan 2021
Lethal Weapon 2 (1989)
Factual error: Diplomatic immunity does not give a foreign diplomat carte blanche to openly and brazenly commit extreme crimes in their host country. Arjen Rudd and his men are known money launderers. Once Riggs begins harassing Rudd at the consulate, Rudd launches a violent campaign against the Los Angeles Police Department, assassinating half a dozen police officers. At the very least, the United States would be well within their rights to expel Rudd from the country and bar his re-entry. There is no way the South African government would oppose prosecution of Rudd given these circumstances, doing so would fracture all diplomatic relations with the United States. It is absurd for Rudd to shoot a cop and smugly proclaim "Diplomatic immunity!" after he has done so because it is not a "get out of jail free" card. If Rudd were expelled, he could face prosecution in his home country.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Before the federal government would declare a diplomat persona non grata, which would be a serious degradation of the diplomatic relations between two countries), they would first have to do an investigation. The entire movie seems to take place in less than a week. There was probably not enough time, especially since Riggs and Murtaugh are playing things close to the vest and not letting people know what they are doing. As for the "Diplomatic immunity" line, he's just being insulting towards Murtaugh.
While it is true that it's difficult to actually expel a diplomat, the mistake is that Rudd acts as if it is impossible. The movie operates as if diplomatic immunity makes it impossible to arrest a diplomat. And Rudd is doing more than just taunting Roger, he believes right up until the end that he can't be held accountable for his actions, up to and including murdering a cop.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Stupidity: In a throwaway comedy line, the Mythrol says that he still does not have vision in his left eye. For unexplained reasons that is the one guy that they take along for the dangerous base assault mission; a wimpy, obese, half-blind accountant. And for the whole mission he is quite a good shot, even (left-handed one at that, even). Cara is the Marshall and Greef the de facto 'ruler' of the town, who appears to be the biggest if not the only one of the planet; are we to believe the whole planet is so small that its whole defence is composed by these two people and there's not a single other able-bodied person on it? (00:11:30)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The base was supposed to be practically empty, run by a skeleton crew. It was meant to be a simple, in and out mission and the Mythrol was just supposed to be their driver. He goes with the group inside, against his better judgment, because the lava tide will be coming in soon. It is never stated that the four members of the team are the only able-bodied people, they simply believed that the four they bring would be enough. Which as it turns out was completely accurate, given the fact the team succeeds even with the base being full of stormtroopers. Also, you don't have to be a stereotypical tough guy to be a good shot. There's plenty of people that aren't soldiers and are far from in good shape that are perfectly capable with a gun.
And that are also blind in one eye? I figured that the lava tide was just an excuse to bring him in - no such tide is shown to affect the area, even if the mission takes them longer than they anticipated.
You say in your mistake that the blind in one eye comment was meant to be humorous. No reason to believe he was being completely honest. But yes, it is not unheard of for people with limited or even no vision in one eye to still be a good shot. It only limits your depth perception and peripheral vision. No reason you can't hit a target right in front of you with only one good eye. Regardless of whether or not the lava tide coming in was a true statement or just an excuse to get him to come in, it isn't a stupidity mistake that the group brings him in. These mistakes are not for actions by characters you would not agree with were you in their shoes. This category of mistake is for an action so daft it defies logic, such as running back into the building with the killer you just escaped.
"I'll bring my pudgy accountant to my base infiltration mission, he has a speeder bike" doesn't sound exactly logical, no (other than the fact that he's a funny character and helps making the episode entertaining). If he was supposed to just be their driver and then an extraordinary circumstance such as their speeder bike being destroyed forced him to abandon a "Keep the speeder running" (as Mando says en route - in a typical trope, they are discussing their roles and basic mission objectives only when they are already well on the way and have zero scouting or tools) plan, it would have followed some kind of logic, but that is not what happens, they drag him in. When do you ever see in a robbery/heist movie the characters tell their getaway guy "come on in, we could use one more guy with a gun actually, forget our only escape mean"? By any logic he'd just slow them down, he even just showed them that he's not any good at picking a lock.
It doesn't rise to the level of a Stupidity mistake. Bringing him isn't an action that is so stupid it seems unbelievable. He doesn't even appear to be as much of a hindrance to the mission as you suggest, they seem to operate just fine with him there.
Of course they are the good guys and it all works out in the end and it made for a fine episode, but for all we know and they know, they dragged a non-combat trained and physically unfit accountant to their commando mission, the fighting part. It's already a big stretch that the magistrate and the marshall of a whole planet have to resort on that guy of all people for a getaway driver role (he's not even portrayed as being a great pilot, since Cara drives the vehicle they will escape with: he's literally there because he's got a bike and he's an indentured servant), but it sure seems unbelievable they brought him - inside the base - all of a sudden with no story justification about it (which would have been really simple) and contradicting the original plan.
26th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Stupidity: Ahsoka gives the magistrate a day to surrender for no real reason - she has no advantage doing so nor it is any more honorable or humane; she is in fact giving Morgan time to organize herself with hostages as she explicitly threatens to. Had she finished her assault without this senseless ultimatum, barely anyone would have been in any danger or tortured for a full day like it happened.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Tano doesn't know the strength of the Magistrate's forces. Djarin tells her that there are ex-military, hired mercenaries inside armed to the teeth and that he doesn't believe that even with the force she would survive. Tano agrees with this assessment and also asks if Djarin saw any hostages inside, so until then she didn't even know for sure whether or not there were. It is implied that had Tano continued her assault she would have been killed. There is indeed no stated reason why Tano gives a single day as an ultimatum, but it seems reasonable to assume that prior to meeting Djarin and The Child she would have used this time to plan her 2nd assault.
I think we disagree on the idea that it is implied that if she continued her assault she would have been killed; she killed 25% of their troops in their first assault, and then in the second one, which was in the open and broad daylight, she killed or disarmed everyone else including the main villain and the henchman, who was then killed by Mando, together with 2 guards. Mando was only instrumental in saving the hostages Morgan took after her threat - which, by the way, was expressed in a way that did not even imply necessarily that she was just taking the people hostages and not kill them right away as punishment. The evil henchman says it correctly "We'll be ready when she returns"; waiting only weakens her position in every way, since the stakes and/or disparity in forces is not shown adequately.
You seem to be ignoring the part where Djarin tells her that even with her skills she would be killed and she agrees. Whether or not that is actually true based on what we see doesn't really matter, it's their opinion based on what they know at the time. It seems fairly clear that she withdraws because she doesn't know what she's up against behind those walls.
She literally laughs behind his back when he says that line, and it is contradicted in every way from what we see, so it seems to be ignored by the writers first and foremost. They say the rule of writing is "Show, don't tell", I'd be fine with "Don't show the opposite of what you are telling." You can argue that it's more alike a plot hole than a simple stupidity, but I think you can agree that for what it is shown, Ahsoka had no other reason to wait for (more than) a day other than give the main character a chance to show up, and an ultimatum considerably worsens her position. It's not even clear why she took so long to make a move on the city, Bo-Katan (who does not have a direct path of communication on her) knew where she was, but the first time we see her it is also the first time she has a contact with the Magistrate.
No, I do not believe the writers included a laugh as an indication that Ahsoka believes the exact opposite of what Djarin states and that she agrees with his assessment that she is outmatched just to keep him happy. Yes, they do portray her as very powerful inside the city, but there are two people in there fighting at the same time which splits the enemies forces. Yes, giving yourself time to prepare also gives your enemy time to prepare. Sometimes there's no way to avoid that. This is neither a Stupidity nor a plot hole.
"Splits" is an overstatement; she takes the whole force down herself. We both agree that "she regroups after a preliminary assault and then prevails through teamwork" is the general idea of what it should happen, but it's not what it is shown. Remove Mando from the episode and you would only have (assuming she adopts the same effortlessy successful strategy to attack head-on a prepared enemy: she gets inside with no problem whatsoever!) a couple prisoners as casualties, which is something that Ahsoka herself brought upon her. There's not even an indication that she was preparing any strategy, since she asks about the presence of any prisoner while she is already going back to face the Magistrate.
20th Jan 2021
The Mandalorian (2019)
Chapter 5: The Gunslinger - S1-E5
Stupidity: Mando's ally breaks the fob saying he's got it memorized. Memorize a tracking device, that's new.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He means he memorized the chain code, the biometric data stored on the tracking fob. Calican already knows Fennec is headed towards the dune sea so they don't need the fob to track her location.
Beyond the dune sea, is what he says, yes, which is an enormous desert on the vaste planet. Memorizing the biometric data does not help at all without the tracking device. I took it that he memorized the positional data, but if I know someone's last known location, and that they are headed "beyond the Sahara desert" it is not really helping me find them, is it? You can make a guess, of course.
The chain code is what is used to identify the target, when they are turned in to collect the bounty. You don't need the tracking fob if you already know all the numbers in the chain code. That's the part that he memorized. It doesn't appear that the tracking fob gives you precise location data, so "In the Sahara dessert" is all you get. If the tracking fob did give more precise location data then every idiot in the galaxy would be a bounty hunter.
To identify the target he has the puck already. My point is that "Got it all memorized" is a plot device that works when your target is stationary (like The Child in the first episode), not a moving target. He smashed a -tracking - device (which took it where he is now) and then says he's "got it all memorized." You can't memorize tracking, and the chain code simply includes data like the age that are of no use for a target already well known like Fennec. What he memorized was her last known location at most... which if the fobs are as vague as you mention (one hopes that they are not just beeping dowsing rods) would make even less sense, because he wouldn't have a clue about her position and course and could be off by hundreds of miles.
The chain code contains identifying information that proves what target you've brought in. In another episode a character worries that if his chain code is scanned he will go to prison because he's a wanted man. Yes, the tracking fob is used to hunt down your target but that's not why Mando wants it and why the other bounty hunter destroys it. Without the fob, even if Mando catches Fennec he won't be able to collect the bounty because he doesn't know the chain code.
If we go with this theory, it sounds like Mando wants the money (and recognition) to bring Fennec in, but he does not care about that nor he was asking for it; the fob has a different use, and the chain code is memorized separately from that anyway (he was given in the first episode tracking The Child a fob without a chain code). The chain code is simply a code with the essential information about the subject, like a personal document. If that what he memorized, it's as if he said "Don't worry, we'll find her in the desert, I got her social security number." And if he captured Fennec, which was needed alive, he would have gotten the recognition no matter what.
I tend to agree with the mistake that the tracking fob is receiving updated biometric coordinate data, so there's no way memorize updated data, at most it would be memorizing last known coordinates. However, I would advise using terms like "Baby Yoda" if you want to be taken seriously, otherwise it looks like you haven't watched the show. There's no need to use incorrect terms just because you think people won't know who "The Child" or "Grogu" is.
15th Dec 2020
Alien (1979)
Corrected entry: When the Alien appears behind Brett, we first see its tail lowering before the rest of its body, even though the tail is presumably how the creature was being suspended in the air. Immediately after chomping Brett's head, he and the creature are lifted upwards, again presumably by its tail, though it's not long enough to carry them the implied distance and it's unclear what it has latched onto in the first place. This scene starts a tradition of sorts, as both 'Aliens' and 'Alien 3' feature their own scenes in which an Alien grabs a victim and both are subsequently lifted upwards by a great height, presumably by the creature's tail, and the mechanics by which this is possible and even where exactly they're going off to are always obscured to the point where the creature may as well be wearing a jet pack.
Correction: The alien is suspended from the chains above Brett by its feet and hands. In the Director's cut this is more shown. There are also extended versions of the scene which make it more obvious what happens before and after Brett is bitten. The creature uses the chains to escape to the ducts and those are certainly well within reach of the ground. The scene you refer to in Aliens, in which Dietrich is grabbed, shows the alien using its legs to walk backwards up the wall as it carries her, the tail is not involved. These creatures are shown in all the films to possess an ability to grip walls and other surfaces similar to insects, and they are shown with remarkable flexibility, agility, and strength.
4th Aug 2006
My Cousin Vinny (1992)
Corrected entry: Why is Joe Pesci referred to as "Mr. Gambini" continuously by the judge, if he is supposedly "Jerry Gallo" and later "Jerry Callo"? Why doesn't the judge call him "Mr. Gallo" if that's who he thinks he is?
Correction: Early in the movie, Joe Pesci explains to the judge that Gambini is his "working name" and the name he is registered under is "Gallo" and later, "Callo." The judge buys it. Why? Who knows? But because they explained it that way, the judge is not making mistakes by calling him Gambini.
In addition, Vinny directly tells Judge Haller to continue calling him "Gambini" when the Judge first questions him about the two names.
21st Sep 2020
The Karate Kid (1984)
Corrected entry: In the dojo, one student is instructed to give 60 pushups on his knuckles. He goes to the side of the ring and starts them slowly while the small match starts between two other students. By the time Kreese talks to Miyagi only seconds later after the short match, the kid doing pushups on the side is completely gone although not enough time went by for that many pushups.
Correction: After Kreese and Johnny talk, Kreese says "Class, we have visitors. Fall in behind me." This includes the kid who was ordered to do the pushups. It's just as well, the kid was struggling to do 10 pushups, there's no way he would have been able to do 60.
11th Sep 2020
Boy Meets World (1993)
Stupidity: When Eric, dressed in drag, tearfully sits down next to Topanga, she asks him if they know each other because she doesn't realise it is him. Topanga's known Eric practically her entire life, and she is one of the smarter characters on the show. Given that Mr. Feeny instantly recognized that Eric and Jack were dressed up as women, Topanga should have recognized it immediately as well. (00:10:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is a comedy show and this scene is played for laughs. A character not recognizing another character in drag when it is obvious to the audience has been a joke for centuries. Also, on a realistic level, recognizing faces has nothing to do with intelligence.
There's a difference between not recognizing someone you might barely know and being fooled by an obvious disguise worn by someone you've known for 20 years. I fully acknowledge that this scene is played for laughs and that this is a common trope used in movies and television, but the fact that the show went out of its way to show that Mr. Feeny instantly saw through their disguises demonstrates that show itself acknowledged how ridiculous his disguise was, and it was foolish on Topanga's part for not seeing through it.
3rd Apr 2017
Aliens (1986)
Corrected entry: The ‘knife trick' scene was not in the original script. Lance Henriksen, who portrays Bishop, decided to add it in at the last moment. Henriksen did not tell Bill Paxton what he was going to do to him, so his terrified screams are real.
Correction: This is mostly incorrect. The knife trick was not in the original draft but was in the shooting script. However, in the shooting script Bishop does the knife trick with just his own hand, Hudson is not involved at all. It is doubtful that Bill Paxton would genuinely scream during the knife trick because he was in little danger. The trick only looks dangerous because James Cameron sped the video up to make it seem quick and dangerous (in the process creating an obvious error when you look at Apone's rapidly bobbing head). In the close up of Hudson screaming, Bishop is stabbing the table off screen so he was likely nowhere near actually hurting anyone.
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.