Corrected entry: In the space of 15 seconds (between the time Casey's mom hears her daughter on the phone and the time when she walks out her front door and sees Casey) how did the killer manage to tie Casey onto the swing? It would have taken quite a while to lift her body and twist the ropes around her tightly enough that they held. Stu couldn't have helped as he was with Tatum that night.
Sammo
26th Sep 2003
Scream (1996)
16th Nov 2021
Eternals (2021)
Corrected entry: Thena and some Eternals go to the Amazon. The opening scene shows the Amazon River lowlands. In the Amazon they speak Portuguese. But the Eternals speak Spanish to the natives. A part of the Amazon is in Peru where Spanish is spoken, but this is not the area where llamas (shown) typically live. Llamas are highland animals and are in southern Peru, not northern. (01:06:10)
Correction: That's not true that in Amazon forest they speak Portuguese, because actually the Amazon is a forest, not a state with an official language, which one contemplates a few of Latin American countries, including Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and most of them speak in Spanish. I found an article who studied languages in Amazon forest, there are around 240 languages around all the extension of the Amazon forest. Https://www.comciencia.br/dossies-1-72/reportagens/amazonia/amaz6.htm.
The explanation for the language spoken is that they are the descendants of the Spanish conquistadores that Druig controlled mentally in Tenochtitlan. I have no idea about the llamas part though.
Well, it's just a movie. A few slips here and there are inconsequential. Thanks.
OK. Noted. Thanks.
10th Jan 2022
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: Dana is really worried about her baby throughout the whole movie. She was literally almost eaten by a bathtub of slime less than 24 hours before. So naturally, when the guys show up to investigate, she blows them off to go on a date. (00:58:30)
Correction: Dana asked Janine if she could babysit Oscar for her while she was on her date and Janine said yes.
That's not the point; they are going to check the "slime stuff" (as Peter says) that happens to be the same slime that nearly ate her baby and the reason why she's there and needs a babysitter to begin with, but to her the date with Peter is more important. Like, way more important, she does not even think about it a second.
Peter sees that Dana is stressed out, so he offers to take her to dinner to help ease her. She's reluctant at first until Peter mentions having Janine as a babysitter. After that Dana agrees to use Janine as a babysitter for Oscar as she works for the Ghostbusters and Dana knows how reliable Janine is.
15th Nov 2021
Eternals (2021)
Corrected entry: Spoiler; Ajak and 'the true villain' are the only ones who know the true nature of the mission and the fact that the Earth will cease to exist in 7 days. None of her fellow Eternals would know where to find her or suspect that she's dead or that anything is wrong, but the villain makes them find her body on purpose to provide a distraction to keep them busy investigating her death. Provide a 'distraction' to someone who is completely unsuspecting (and actively lead them) is pure nonsense.
Correction: He explains this plainly. He knows that when the earth is being destroyed they would go to Ajak for help, Since she is dead however they will know something is wrong and will investigate the emergence. But if it was a Deviant, they will be distracted killing them to not know about the emergence before it is too late. At least, that is what he had hoped.
"When the others realise something is happening to the Earth, they'll come to you. When they find your body, they'll know the Deviants are back. It'll keep them busy during the Emergence." It makes absolutely no sense. During the movie, none of them cares about what is happening to the planet. There's no such sense of urgency. He does all that to "keep busy" people who never met in centuries and never interfered to any world-threatening phenomenon.None of them knows about the Emergence.If they didn't find her at home, they wouldn't even know she was dead and that would have only delayed them further. He needs to stall them just for a couple days, not years.
He also said he suspected that Ajak would change her mind and betray Arishem. If he hasn't killed her, she would have tried to recruit the others to stop the Emergence. The Deviants had already escaped the ice, he just lured them together to kill Ajak. His plan kind of went sideways since the group was to find her dead and seek out the Deviants, but the Deviants already attacked them. Plus, had Sersi not learned their true mission, they would be too busy to stop the Emergence.
Killing Ajak is the logical part. Hauling her body across the continent so the others will find it is the absurd part. Why having killed the only person who was a threat to his plan would he build a murder mystery about it? He had already won. If they didn't find Ajak at home, assuming they'd bother to go there to begin with, they would have waited for her, at most looked for her presumably in vain, and wasted time. Why stir anything?
He stirs to keep them distracted, hoping they would not investigate the earthquakes for one thing, and then the sudden giant volcano for another. He knows they are attached to the Earth and it's people, would try to safe them. He tried to convince them it were the Deviants, not something else. Unfortunately for him, Sersi became their leader, whilst he expected it to be him.
Even if they would figure out on their own that 'something was happening' (and they didn't), they didn't have the faintest idea about the dormant Celestial business. Deviants are literally the only thing that would bring them together and back to action (not even that, Gil just butchers one and does not give a damn). Ikaris states matter-of-factly that he needed to do things and certain stuff would happen only because he needs to make the movie happen. They were all 'busy' already, leading their boring lives, and they had completely insufficient data to react, especially if he didn't spoon-feed them that it was something connected to them to begin with.
The Deviants did come back, after dormant in the ice. That's what brings them together, that's why Ikarus killed Ajak, that's why he needed to distract them from her death. It's not that difficult to understand. You're just not seeing the connection.
I am simply not seeing connections that don't exist. The Deviants are not "why" he killed Ajak at all; he kills her because she wants to stop the Emergence. The Deviants are just a distraction (which is a misleading term, for the reasons I underlined in the original post, but let's go with that). They are a weak colony stranded in Alaska and unable to do any substantial damage that got free a week before; It will be Ajak's power that causes them to be able to be on the radar again and changes their target from humans to Eternals (which is something they never did before and he couldn't have anticipated).
I didn't say he killed Ajak because of the deviants. He killed Ajak because the deviants would cause the Eternals to come together again, they will come to Ajak (or she to them) and she will tell them about the emergence. So, he kills Ajak but once they encounter the Deviants again and Ajak is missing, they will start to investigate and perhaps find out about the emergence. So, he puts her body to be found, so they will focus on the deviants. Alright?
No, the others wouldn't come to Ajak (or vice versa, she didn't even know about them) because of the Deviants. The Deviants aren't back, there's just half a dozen harmless leftovers that got thawed out and that he 'feeds' (it's never said or implied that he knew that they'd become stronger and Eternal-murders, too). The others may go ask Ajak for an opinion because of the strange earthquake - and you never see a sense of urgency in this movie. This guy goes out of his way to ring a giant alarm bell, so he can tell a fake story to people who haven't been in touch in ages and may have some mild curiosity about something that does not involve them as far as they know, since they don't know about Emergence or any of that stuff.
16th Nov 2021
Eternals (2021)
Plot hole: Deviants were created to get rid of dangerous local predators allowing intelligent life to thrive on the planets Arishem 'seeded'. He then created the Eternals to get rid of the Deviants once he realised they eat the species they should have protected. Problem is, it is stated that the Eternals go through their extermination routine multiple times. But the 'mistake' can't be happening all over again in a cycle, and Deviants would ruin a planet if left unattended.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Arisham made them both part of the cycle to get the planet to be filled with intelligent life. So he always introduces Deviants before Eternals. It's a good way for him to tell the Eternals they are there to protect the intelligent life against the Deviants without knowing their true purpose. To keep them busy.
He refers to the introduction of Eternals as something he did "to correct my mistake." By that definition, he keeps making the same mistake over and over. If he just told them that they have to protect humanity and help their progress, he would obtain the same purpose. After all, for 500 years without Deviants the Eternals stayed put and passive as instructed and didn't create any particular trouble -if they did, they are a limited number he can easily pluck them out of the planet much more easily than a non-specified amount of ever-evolving beasts that he admits are out of his control and can grow much more powerful if they manage to kill Eternals.
He is lying. They are not a mistake, and they are not beyond his control. That's one of the main reasons why they go against Arishem in the first place, because everything is a lie, even after learning their true purpose. The Deviants are there to give the Eternals purpose, helping the intelligent life on the planet flourish, in the most natural way, for reasons we can only guess. The Deviant is upset too, learning the truth that they are only put on the planet for the Eternals to kill.
19th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Corrected entry: Richard Parker tries to connect the Ethernet cable to his laptop at the beginning of the movie to upload a file. There was no in-plane internet 15-20 years ago.
Correction: Richard Parker worked for Oscorp, so, we can assume that they had all kinds of advanced technology 15 years ago.
19th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Continuity mistake: During the battle with Green Goblin, when Gwen Stacy is falling through the clock tower, there are dozens of gears and other pieces of various sizes falling with her. However, when she lands, only a few small gears and pieces land alongside her - all the other debris that were falling have seemingly vanished. (02:01:20)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That part of the scene is SO dark that it's really hard to tell; they do show some gears and pieces land after she does and there are some gears and pieces next to her when he walks to her. I wouldn't say there's none, but I'd say it does seem a disproportionately low amount considering how many giant gears were falling.
Given that even you admit in your correction that the number of gears seems disproportionately low (which it is - we only see a few small pieces landing when there were dozens and dozens of pieces in different sizes falling), I think amending the wording through a word-change is a better option than trying to correct the mistake itself. Because there is still a mistake here. Going to go ahead and do that after I post this response. (Might take a few days to change, though).
22nd Dec 2021
What If...? (2021)
Other mistake: Supposedly the one difference between this universe and the movie canon is that Janet was infected by a zombie virus before she was saved by Hank and Scott. However, in the original movie Janet actively led them to her by 'possessing' Scott and while intelligent, these Marvel zombies can't communicate. Also, Vision is settled in Camp Leigh, which appears to be in perfect shape despite being hit by a missile powerful enough to penetrate in the bunker in Winter Soldier.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: As I said in my other correction, differences between the MCU movies and this show cannot count as mistakes, since they are showing us different universes with different outcomes. Just because Janet lead Scott to them in the movie doesn't mean that's what happened in the show's universe. Same with the "Winter Soldier" discrepancy.
Without Janet leading them, they wouldn't have even learned about her existence based on what was shown in Antman and The Wasp, and they show the laboratory scene pan out as it did in the movie. Althought technically she could have been infected by the zombie virus in the minutes it took them to get to her inside the Quantum Realm. You realise that it's flimsy and it relies on people essentially not remembering the movie, though.
16th Dec 2021
Marvel Super Heroes in War of the Gems
Factual error: The Infinity Gems are the main plot point used in this game, and yet their color is incorrect (for the Marvel canon of the time); the Power gem here is colored magenta, and the Time gem is cherry red. They should be red and orange (and the Reality gem should be a less warm yellow, it practically is orange here).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is a discrepancy between the game and the comics they are based on, which is by site policy, not a mistake. By the same token, Thanos is the final boss of the game, whereas if the game was following the comics storyline, he would have been an earlier boss and then an ally, and the Magus would have been the final boss.
Technically there is not a "War of the Gems" saga in the comics? It IS obvious that the game is an adaptation of Infinty War taking plenty liberties but it's what adaptations do.At the time of the release of the game, the color of the gems was canon and I think a minute difference like this hardly falls under an artistic license like your example; they simply picked poor matches with the original colors making everything confusing. However yes, ultimately it IS a discrepancy, so.
23rd Dec 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Plot hole: Strange says he can't turn back time any more since he does not have the Time stone, so he'll resort to "a standard spell of forgetting." The statement is already quite odd since even with the stone he never showed anything close to the ability to revert time on a global scale for the WEEKS it would take to get back to that moment. But no worries; the "standard spell" is in fact more powerful than the Time stone; for it to work, it can't just make the people forget, or else people would learn back about Peter from the gigabytes of pictures and stories published, the Daily Bugle's archives, Flash's published book, T-shirts etc.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He didn't understand the workings of the time stone as well as he did other spells. The time stone is definitely more powerful, able to trap an omnipotent cosmic being in a time loop. The spell focusses on 1 person's secret identity being forgotten from memory, hardly more powerful than what the time stone can do. In any case, the difference in power is not important to the plot.
The Time Stone in movies always focuses around limited areas, including Dormammu, with Strange concentrating during the activation. It's also a unique artifact and the most powerful in the universe. This is a "forgetfulness spell", but it needs to alter reality (physical evidence) to work, or it's useless, and it's a "standard spell" according to Strange. Was he downplaying it? Let's say he was; it's still a 'fire and forget' sort of deal that alters reality years back.
Suggested correction: I wouldn't say that a spell making everyone in the world forget about Peter is more powerful than the time stone. Memory loss is something that happens regularly (and pretty easily, T.B.H.) to people as a result of anything from illness to a bad bonk on the head. Therefore, it doesn't seem like it'd be something that'd be hard for a wizard to do. He's just applying that to a global scale, which doesn't seem like it'd be impossible if it is indeed a basic spell. As for evidence of Peter, it's really not hard to use conjecture to assume he also made evidence of Peter vanish from existence as part of the spell... making things disappear is a very basic wizardry/magician trick. Heck, it's basically a cliche.
I don't get the logic, sorry. It is easy to do it with a person, therefore it's also doable on a global scale? It's easy for a wizard to move a rock, then by that logic it'd be not that hard to move every rock? Instantly? And since it does that but also makes every physical evidence of it vanish, it is not a spell of forgetting. It has to restructure time and space on a massive scale in a very precise way, and here it is trivalized because the movie does not address the consequences (you will see proposed corrections of this entry that assume it changed nothing physical and it's just no biggie). For instance in the latest Strange movie, there's a magic item that is more powerful than any Infinity stone, but it's not something any wizard can access. The fact that a clichè exists (it's not like I haven't read One More Day, for instance) doesn't mean it fits every context (it's not quite the same doing it in the Tooth Fairy movie and here).
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that making people forget about something and making some stuff disappear restructures time and space. The film explicitly states that it doesn't - Strange says the spell "won't turn back time." It just makes people forget. (And presumably makes evidence disappear.) There's even a joke in the movie where Strange implies he uses the spell regularly, including an instance where he used it to make Wong forget about a party. Doesn't mean the party didn't happen. Just means Wong doesn't remember it. It seems like you're really over-reading and over-complicating the spell in your head. Forgetting about something (or making some books and computer files vanish) does not necessitate the rewriting of space and time... it just means people forgot and things disappeared. If I forgot about something, and the only piece of evidence vanished, to me, it basically never happened. Doesn't mean history was necessarily re-written.
The boundaries of what constitutes "over-reading" and "over-complicating" are subjective; to me saying "it's a basic spell of forgetting", castable on a whim, for something that necessarily has also to act globally if not universally (Nick Fury is not on this planet and he would forget, most likely) and does not 'merely' affect minds but a plurality of records and physical items dating back over a decade (remember we talk about the whole life of Peter Parker here, not just his association with Spider-man), is over-simplifying on top of misrepresenting. One of the writers answered on the subject by saying they have an answer to that they are not at liberty to reveal currently. We'll see if that is true, (or will just be ignored and dumped on the Sony writers who already spectacularly got it wrong in Morbius); the MCU is not just one movie, and Strange in the previous movies never showed the ability to change the universe deleting selectively parts of it with a 'standard spell'.
I think I can get where you're coming from with this. I just personally didn't see it as that big an issue. I think it's probably just an agree to disagree situation. Sorry if I came across as rude.
Suggested correction: Even if we assume the video footage of people saying that Peter is Spidey still exist, this wouldn't matter much. If anybody saw a video of themselves recorded a week ago saying something that they never remembered saying, they would laugh it off and assume it was some "Deepfake" or something.
Besides the fact that I would sue whatever media outlet published my deepfake and most certainly not laugh it off, if there's no magical alteration of reality/space/time to make that spell work, it would be entirely useless. Anyone could just type "Who is Spider-Man" on google and find out from a million sources.
18th Dec 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Plot hole: Sandman's only wish is, as he repeats, to go back and see his daughter again. He helps Spider-man a few times, but at the same time he does not trust him entirely, so he does not act as full time ally. In the final battle though, at one point he explicitly sides with the Sinister Five, making for cool visuals in the battle but no sense; Electro and the others want to destroy the device that will send him home. He has no reasons to support them and every reason to prevent this from happening.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He doesn't side with the Sinister Five. He demands for Spider-Man to hand him the box during the final battle. It's clear that his intention is to hit the button and be taken back to his universe. He is fighting for himself in the final battle.
As I said, cool visuals in the battle at the price of not making sense. At one point he's doing coordinate attacks on them with Electro and Lizard, he fights without chasing the box, and again, he's visually and in actions on the side of those whose victory will spell the end of his only wish, just because he wants those who wanna help him to do it faster? At no point in the battle it would make sense to do what he does.
You are incorrect.
21st Dec 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Plot hole: The original "Make everyone forget that Spider-man is Peter Parker except..." spell went horribly wrong and Strange at the end of the movie is struggling to prevent a complete collapse of reality because people from the whole multiverse who fit the exception shoehorned by Peter have been drawn to this reality. Strange then does a new spell that supersedes the other by making everyone forget Peter Parker, period. The problem is, by that logic everyone would forget who Peter is also in all those universes involved and so Maguire and Garfield's life are likewise ruined and one wonders if they are even allowed to remember their own name (after all, the initial spell did affect them, so the radical undoing of it should too).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There is no indication that Strange's spell works on the multiverse. I'd say that is a bit of a stretch. The spell was focussed on MCU's spiderman, and him being forgotten fixed the multiverse (temporarily probably). The initial spell was flawed and broke down the multiverse barriers, causing other universes to spill in. The new spell fixed that, not change those universes.
I came here because I had realised the exact same thing Sammo had. The villains are not there because they know who MCU-Peter is, they are there because they know that Peter is Spider-Man in their universe. The first spell is still active, the second spell adjusts the consequences of it, because why else would the second spell send them back? The only way the villains can vanish is if they forget who Peter is in their universe as well, which means the other two Spideys are in the same situation.
The spilled over Spider-Men and villains can vanish because the second spell restores the flaws of the first spell, which caused the barriers of reality to come down. With the flaw restored, everything that spilled over is returned automatically. Not because they too don't know who Spider-Man is now, but because reality is restored.
That's not really the way they presented it in the movie. The second spell is "Make everyone forget who Peter Parker is." If it works the way you say, wouldn't they have been able to accomplish the same with a spell with less severe consequences, like "make everyone forget my middle name"?
MCU's Peter Parker, because MCU's Spider-Man is not forgotten. My point was that since the spell failure DID affect people from the whole multiverse, "everyone who know that Peter Parker is Spider-man" even when it's not THEIR Peter Parker, why would the fix (which happens when the beings have already broken in) be a selective one on a specific Peter? Happy if they address it in one of the next movies.
The first spell was also focussed on the MCU's Peter Parker but the failure caused tears in the multiverse and caused people to spill in, the spell didn't directly affect them. The fix was again specifically aimed at the MCU's Peter Parker, to supersede the failed spell and cause the tears to heal and the spilled over people to return. This one did work and thus only the MCU was affected whilst the others were returned (still with memories from changes by MCU's Peter).
As I said, hard to say it "didn't directly affect" those people when they were sucked into a different universe against their will, and they were because they had one peculiar trait the movie keeps hammering in; knowing that Peter Parker, any Peter, is Spider-man. It's the characters that use it in the exposition and then in the resolution, with two different meanings that don't match.
It was stated near the beginning that the spell went out of hand because it was changed six times mid-spell. Changing a spell while it's in the middle of being cast causes the spell to go berserk. The spell cast at the end is not changed mid-cast, so it was more controlled than the old spell.
If he just needed to cast properly, he could have casted it again in a more controlled way, but he cannot since "they're here." So it is a different spell, but if the condition "being Peter Parker" was not sufficiently clear the first time around (and Peter even interrupted the spell saying "everyone who knew that *I* was Spider-man before", not "everyone who knows Peter Parker is Spider-man"), there's no reason why it should be now.As I said, I'm pointing out that the meaning keeps shifting.
18th Dec 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Plot hole: The whole premise of the movie is that due to a botched spell, people who happen to know that "Peter Parker is Spider-Man" are pulled inside this universe. It's a bit of a stretch already that amongst those people is...Peter Parker himself, twice over, but let's say it makes sense. The problem is that Jamie Foxx's Electro does not meet this condition; he never found out. You could say it's a retcon or it's a different universe from the original movie's, but even this cop-out explanation is negated by the movie itself when Max Dillon makes a joke that shows that he didn't know Spidey's identity or even race.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Although Max didn't discover Peter's identity on film, an explanation of why Max knows his name IS offered. When the villains are talking about what happened before they found themselves in the MCU, Max indicated that once he tapped fully into the power grid and information systems, there was nothing he didn't know at that point. Since we know there is a clandestine organization tracking Peter from the end of ASM1, it's possible Max gained the info from their database.
In the interest of clarity, you refer to the one line that goes "I was stuck in the grid, absorbing data."? Nothing about tapping fully, and becoming omniscient as the correction presents. So we have to give it that specific meaning and make a connection to the obscure postcredit scene by Fiers in the unfinished trilogy that asks Connors if he said anything to the boy imagining that it produced data that was 'on the grid' somehow, and Electro never processed this information in the movie. Not sure if it's quite an"explanation offered", since the movie offers none. It's a 'possible' explanation like the other one people use, about hearing Gwen say Peter's name (I like this one better because at least it would give a special meaning to a throwaway line and I do I love attention to details).
Suggested correction: I don't find it such a stretch that he knew Peter's name but didn't know what he looked like.
When Spider-Man is explaining his plan to defeat Electro to Gwen, Gwen addresses him as "Peter." Electro was laying on the ground nearby and likely would have heard this. Presumably, knowing that Spidey's real name was Peter was enough to pull him in.
There are almost 10,000 "Peter" in New York alone in our world. Knowing just the super-common first name wouldn't cut it and the movie does nothing to support this theory, in fact does everything to undermine it (Strange's explanation, Electro's joke, complete lack of addressing it, etc). Also if he overheard that bit in the original movie, he would have also learned their plans to defeat him.
Suggested correction: I guess we're all going to ignore the fact that this Electro has a completely different look than the Max we saw previously. It's quite possible he's from a different universe.
He's not from a different universe than the Electro from The Amazing Spider-Man 2. The Lizard and the Andrew Garfield version of Spider-Man both know who he is, and he talks about events from the aforementioned film. His different appearance is also explained in the film.
All that means is he went through similar experiences and has a similar appearance as the Max they knew. Ala J. Jonah Jameson.
Suggested correction: It's not people who know who is Spider-Man that are spilling in, it's people who are connected to him in any way.
No, no. Strange says it explicitly "That little spell you botched, when you wanted everyone to forget that Peter Parker is Spider-man? It started pulling in everyone who knows that Peter Parker is Spider-man" and so on. That's why in the end they fix it by making everyone forget who Peter Parker is, not who Spider-man is.
5th Nov 2021
Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021)
Question: What exactly happens to a host's body once the symbiote emerges? At the end of Venom, when Venom is threatening the robber, he partially opens his face, and we see Eddie's face. In this movie, when Cletus/Carnage is escaping from prison, guards start shooting at Carnage who then splits open his entire midsection but Cletus is nowhere to be seen.
Answer: The host and symbiote merge fully. So the symbiote can totally disappear into the host and the host can totally disappear into the symbiote. They can also split again, or partially, at will. It just depends on who gets to be the active version at that time.
I am not up to speed with recent Marvel canon, but in the comics it's never been that way? The symbiote can surely slink inside the host (especially Carnage in Kasady's blood), but the humans can't turn into shapeless goo. Comics aside, that sequence from the movie is mind-boggling; I can sorta explain it thinking the symbiote just tore Kasady's torso in half and then reattached it instantly (in other parts of the movie Eddie gets basically stabbed with what would be lethal wounds).
Actually, in the comics it's long been established that Carnage's healing factor is Deadpool-levels of broken. There are numerous moments where Carnage is impaled, crushed, decapitated, has his neck twisted, even grenades blowing up in his jaws and straight up nailed by military missiles... AND HE'S JUST FINE AND WALKS IT OFF LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED. He absolutely could casually tear himself open with no drawback whatsoever.
"Could" tear himself open, does he usually?"Can turn into shapeless goo", has he? One thing is to regenerate the torso, another thing is to manipulate your body parting before the bullets reach you.I don't really see that from the example posted, but my curiosity aside, given we're talking about the movie anyway, I really don't see Kasady depicted as a shapeshifter, and him and the symbiote in this movie are entirely separated at the end (pending a sequel of course).
Also, for Carnage specifically, the human absolutely can turn into shapeless goo. Makes sense, actually, given that the symbiote canonically merged into Kasady's own cells and microscopic DNA, something even Venom and its hosts can't replicate https://2.bp.blogspot.com/9DjIg5e1HwLrwx-lhLjXxlUqzici7xajVTQZMhEHW8a0X9BqdRFE4U6eaBuPKXJgb8zSxkTytpvh=s1600 so the "symbiote-opening-up-the-host-body-with-holes" being a Carnage specific thing isn't surprising at all, in fact, given it's the same body.
15th Dec 2021
Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021)
Plot hole: A core plot point (lifted by the comics) is that Venom needs phenethylamine, and the only way to get it is from brains and from chocolate. Let's just go with it and forget the fact that phenethylamine can be legally purchased as dietary supplement, which would solve every problem. So, Venom gets incredibly angry because Mrs. Chen's shop ran out of chocolates, and *therefore* they need to go raid a chicken plant to eat some chicken brain. Uh, Venom lives in San Francisco. Chocolate is sold everywhere. If Mrs. Chen ran out of it, there are hundreds of stores and vending machines that have it in abundance. The escalation does not make sense.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The point is he needs to steal it. At Mrs. Chen's shop he gets it for free because he protects her from robbers. Eddie doesn't have the money to buy all the chocolate Venom needs all the time. Stealing some chickens as an alternative is better than trying to shoplift at a different store.
In the rest of the movie Eddie lives in his old apartment constantly in need of repairs, but shows zero serious money problems. He has lavish breakfasts, and he replaces the $2,000 TV the same day. Raiding the chicken place appears riskier than slipping his symbiote in a vending machine or shoplift, especially if it's just temporary - again assuming he's so poor that he literally has no money to eat, which is something the movie should have let us know, instead of pointing to the contrary and making him talk angrily about the need for them to not draw attention.
Not only are the original mistake and Sammo 100% correct, but chocolate isn't exactly expensive. You can get 5 pound bulk orders of melting chocolate on Amazon for like... $25. And that's just a quick 2-second Amazon search. You could probably get it even cheaper elsewhere online. Even if Eddie hypothetically has little money (which doesn't seem to be the case - he has a nicely sized apartment in a major city, new TV, etc.), it's still ridiculous that he couldn't get his hands on chocolate. This is definitely a case of the movie ignoring practicality and reason to manufacture a funny situation.
I agree. There are many other stores that sell candy so all Eddie had to do was to go to one of those instead. Plus, at the end of the first movie, Eddie told Ann that he was going to become an investigative journalist, so he has a new job.
Suggested correction: Which would you rather have phenethylamine, chicken, or chocolate for dinner? That's like saying just because we need food to survive...we should just eat anything or buy our base vitamins and minerals over the counter and from the store.
Sure. How does that have anything to do with the entry? Venom wanted chocolate for dinner and not chicken, supplements to a diet don't mean that you can't eat actual food and the main point was and is that if a store in a metropolis is sold out of chocolate of any kind, there are a dozen other stores in a few blocks' radius who sell it without you having to resort to crime to eat it.
3rd Dec 2021
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2020)
Corrected entry: Spoiler: Everything goes well in the end and all the ghosts (and returning demigod Gozer) are sucked into a giant ghost trap. In fact everything goes so well that the trap selectively spares one specific ghost so it can have a lengthy farewell scene, hug and smooch every single character at leisure and leave on its own terms.
Correction: The other ghosts were above the traps. The one specific ghost was not. Every time a ghost has been trapped they have been above the trap. In the first movie they even have to move Slimer to position him to be trapped.
This trap cluster was designed to cover an area, If Gozer could get away simply because he/she was standing one foot to the right or left of the nearest trap, the plan was flawed to begin with.
Even if Gozer stepped away from the traps, the Ghostbusters could simply wrangle her into the traps with their proton packs.
Correction: That particular ghost was not standing near the traps. Granted, the traps pull in the ghosts floating over the farm, but those spirits were in direct line with the trap laser beams, that ghost you reference was standing safely away.
26th Mar 2002
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: The film takes a large liberty when portraying the Titanic. The Titanic we see is complete with a huge hole in one side. The real sinking was nothing like this with small gashes made along the front of the ship, which eventually split in two. There was no large gaping hole like that made when she hit the iceberg. The Titanic was found four years before the film was made, so it was known at that time what condition the Titanic was in. (01:20:35)
Correction: It's a ghost ship, so I think we can forgive them for this, just like the ghost train in the subway scene, because it was a steam engine, which never would be in a subway tunnel like that.
This isn't a valid correction. The ghost train appearing on the subway tracks is different and had nothing to do with the way the Titanic ghost ship looked.
They are both ghost vessels, not the actual machines, it is understandable that they will look different on the etheric plane.
They aren't the actual machines sure, but there isn't any reason why a ghost ship would pick a physical appearance with severe damage that is in a different spot from the original. The explanation is not in 'the etheric plane' but in poor research (not that in a movie like this matters) or the fact that it simply is more impactful visually to show that sort of gaping hole. It is a factual error even if we understand very well why it was made - call it Deliberate Mistake if you will.
The people are the ghosts, not the ship. The ship never picked the appearance. One can assume the ghosts made the Titanic alongside themselves, from memory. Since the victims never actually saw the damage, this is what they thought it looked like.
We don't know who picked the appearance of the Titanic or the ghost train and how any of the 'supernatural' works, other than the end result is factually inaccurate. There's no reason to try to find metaphysical justifications for a clear creative liberty the art department took without giving it a second thought. Which is exactly what the original poster said; "The film takes a large liberty when portraying the Titanic."
It's just a matter of opinion whether they are allowed to take that liberty or not. If they did it intentionally, it's not a mistake.
The thing is, 99% of Factual Errors in movies are very likely to be liberties taken for convenience of the plot or better visual impact (like I said, Titanic=big hole in the hull from iceberg, the audience instantly makes that mental association and feels more real than reality). That's why as long as the observation is accurate and not strikingly obvious (such as "ghosts don't exist") I wouldn't try to read the intent in it too much.
27th Aug 2003
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: In the final scene where the Ghostbusters are coming out of the Museum, where did their proton packs and slime blowers go?
Correction: As noted by Tully as he proudly put on a proton pack, then ran about 20 feet and had to stop to catch his breath, and saying "this equipment sure is heavy" one can assume the other ghostbusters definitely needed some relief after having them on for so long.
9th Apr 2007
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: When the Statue of Liberty makes its entrance in the streets of New York, close observation shows that the statue actually steps on a bunch of people.
Correction: How is this a mistake? The guys cannot see exactly where the statue is going, and she is stepping on cars and other objects, so why not a few accidental people?
Oh so it's not a poorly placed optical effect; the movie wants to tell us that the Ghostbusters are actual mass murderers. Just great.
10th Jun 2014
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: Two of the Ghostbusters are examining their evidence, and one of them puts a picture of the man in the huge painting into a device similar to a photocopier. Problem is, the picture comes out the other end of the device before it has entirely finished going in.
Correction: It's a spectral analyzer. Eagon also turns up the roentgens, a unit of measurement for radiation, which presumably makes the device more sensitive. It analyzed the spectral presence within the photograph and printed out a visual representation of that presence. The printout that discharged from the device has nothing to do with the original image that was actually photographed and fed into it, therefore the spectral analyzer does not need to scan the entire photographed image to create this facsimile of the spirit possessing the photographs. In other words, the machine was able to "see" the ghost and print out a picture of it before the entire photo had been scanned. Not out of the question at all, especially for completely fictional technology.
It's a fascinating explanation that proves that you'd be great at writing sci-fi tech for a series or movie (I say it unironically, legit love the write-up), but I don't see any visual or conceptual hint in the movie that supports it? It looks like they feed a picture to a copier and the output comes out before the original picture has gone through the apparatus. Visually the photo rolling in is such a minor detail it's almost unnoticeable.
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: Stu was most likely helping Billy that night, which would cut down the time needed to tie Casey to the swing. Tatum's defense that Stu was at her house on the night of the murder was challenged by Randy, who said that Stu could have been at her house before or after the murder. In fact, Billy shows up at Sidney's house after the murder.
The correction disputes the part that says that one of the killers wouldn't be on the scene of the crime, but the main objection of the entry still stands. Even assuming the second killer was there (but they never cooperate that way and if they were seen doing that right in front of the door their gimmick would have been exposed) the timeframe from the last time we see her dragged (by one person) and still alive to the time when she is hanged by the neck and gutted is too short.
Sammo ★
15 seconds to gut, taker her liver, spleen and pancreas and put it in the mailbox, tie and hang her? No way.