Character mistake: Narrating, the Virtuoso said, "You leave your vehicle in long-term parking and rent a nondescript sedan. Dark colors are best." After the first murder, the Virtuoso drives away in a light-colored car (white or gray). (00:23:35 - 00:26:17)
KeyZOid
17th Jul 2021
The Virtuoso (2021)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Regarding rentals, he said " Dark colors are best, then gray."
18th Oct 2004
Fargo (1996)
Factual error: This film takes place in 1987, but when Norm Gunderson is talking to Marge about his paintings, he mentions a 29 cent stamp. 29 cent stamps weren't introduced until 1991.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He mentions "who got" the 29-cents stamp, meaning a person's painting was selected to be on the UPCOMING 29-cents stamp. I don't know if it would take four years to actually manufacture a new stamp with a particular picture (painting), but this "planning" stage would more than likely mean that the 29-cents stamp was not yet (and would not be) available in 1987. Perhaps your entry could be more accurately classified as "other error" instead of "factual"?
17th Jan 2006
Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd (2003)
Continuity mistake: When Ms. Heller is talking to the tour guide at the museum, she offers her a $5 bill to take the tour twice. How the bill is folded and held changes. When Ms. Heller says do the tour twice it's pinched between her fingers, then it's folded in half. It keeps switching between folds. (00:35:19)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I didn't see it folded at all. The "other half" or part of the $5 bill that you can't see is actually squished/crumbled in the palm of Heller's hand.
The mistake is partially valid, its position changes. You seem to be talking about when she has the $5 and camera in her hand. When she says do the tour twice, it's pinched between her fingers, then in the next shot, it's folded in half, then she's pinching the end and the other end is unfolded, then back to folded in half.
Regarding the "folded in half" - the $5 bill is folded, but VERTICALLY. The differences that are shown appear to be deliberate SLEIGHT OF HAND. Heller is flashing the whole $5 bill at first, then crumbles it (symbolizing it "going away"). By having the $5 folded vertically, Heller was able to quickly fan out the left side (part equivalent to a flat $5 bill), then hold the $5 to resemble a bow tie. Folded vertically, the $5 bill could be manipulated to look different and more or less appealing.
She never crumbles the $5 bill during the part the mistake occurs. The way she's holding the bill changes between shots, meaning no time elapses, so there can be no deliberate sleight of hand.
Or would that be HORIZONTALLY? The $5 bill is folded to be long, not short, if this clarifies what I'm trying to say.
27th Aug 2003
Dumb and Dumberer: When Harry Met Lloyd (2003)
Other mistake: If Harry was born in 1969 and is 18 when he attends school (based on "8 years later" then "10 years later"), then the year should be 1987, not 1986 as the movie states. (00:01:25 - 00:01:52)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't necessarily true. The +8 and +10 years don't have to literally be to the day. Maybe Lloyd hasn't had his 18th birthday yet - it could be days away, making 1987 valid. Lloyd was born in 1969, but I don't think that was indicated for Harry. Harry was "held back 3 years", so may have been born in 1968 in order to be in the same grade as Lloyd, who was held back two years. Otherwise, Lloyd would be a sophomore and Harry a freshman, which questions how they're in classes with jrs/srs?
First off, the mistake isn't focused on anyone's age, just the date. Second, we know Harry was born in 1969 since the film starts with his, so your comments don't make sense. It says 1969 and the 8 years later followed by 10 more years later, which would put it at 1987.
15th Jun 2021
Vivarium (2019)
Other mistake: Aerial views of Yonder gave the impression that a basic grid pattern was used - parallel horizontal and parallel vertical lines that form right angles; yards were of equal area, either a square or rectangular lot. [However, some of the views from the couple's car as they were trying to find the exit showed some slightly curved roads that didn't fit the grid.] Following the sun as a way out, the couple was jumping over fence after fence - but they could've simply walked along perpendicular roads.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: But they tried getting out using the road by car, and they felt that the roads were causing them to go into a loop. So instead they take a route they know for sure is straight. Btw, Yonder isn't real so the way the roads bend and how the grids are made up is purely an optical illusion.
Walking (not driving) along the perpendicular fences would be the same difference only easier and less exerting. If/when they encountered a fence that looked different, that's when they could jump over it to see if it made a difference. How could they "know for sure" that the fences they were jumping over took them in a straight line? Also, they realised the clouds weren't real, so following something in the sky (the sun) was not necessarily a good idea. [This will be my only response here.].
9th Jul 2014
The Dangerous Lives of Altar Boys (2002)
Continuity mistake: In the animated sequence, just before the kids destroy Sister Assumpta's office, Skeleton Boy's cast remnants switches from left arm to right arm and back to left arm. The left arm is the correct side as Tim (who is Skeleton Boy) had his cast on his left arm. (01:20:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Your observation is correct, but this isn't necessarily a "continuity" error. The nature of comics or cartoons lends itself to imagination, creativity, humor, etc. Drawing comics is less tedious these days, thanks to computer programs and "cut and paste" techniques; the chances of a cast accidentally placed on the wrong arm are slim to none. Skeleton Man's "drawing" has many inconsistencies - number of ribs, teeth, finger bones, EYEBALLS or dark holes - with comics, it doesn't really matter.
14th Jan 2021
Spontaneous (2020)
Continuity mistake: Mara is wearing a white long sleeve jersey when in the Dalton twins' car accident and when Dylan finds her in the water washing off blood. Dylan offers her the gray sweat suit he has in his backpack, but Mara says she isn't wearing it (because they wore those clothes at the police station). When Mara stands up, she has on a dark green T-shirt with a lighter green large circular design on the front. Mara is wearing the green top when she gets to quarantine, as well as later in the movie. This is obviously Mara's top, so where did it come from after she refused to wear the gray sweat suit from Dylan's backpack? (00:33:42 - 00:35:02)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: After rewatching the movie, I noticed that Dylan was POSSIBLY wearing this T-shirt under his jean jacket on his first day of school; the shirts look similar, but little can be seen because it is under the jean jacket. At the same time, Dylan's backpack at the accident scene did not look full enough to contain both parts of the sweatsuit, so it is a stretch to believe the T-shirt was also inside. Moreover, Dylan told Mara that he had a crush on her for two years, so the "old" T-shirt would have just happened to be in this backpack under the sweatsuit worn at the police station. Dylan is thinner than Mara, so it is unlikely that his T-shirt would fit her. When I rewatched the movie, I noticed that the T-shirt in question looked navy blue when Dylan had it on but green when Mara was wearing it.
8th Jan 2021
After We Collided (2020)
Trivia: This is the sequel to "After" (2019).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't trivia, especially since it stars the main cast of characters and is based on the sequel to the book.
Arguably, EVERYTHING is trivia.
No, anything obvious, common knowledge, or easily seen by viewers is NOT trivia. Also, things unrelated to the film or those involved is not trivia.
The "easily seen by viewers" is a bit of a grey area, because people (well, I) do read trivia listings before seeing a movie just for background info. But I agree that not everything can be trivia - it needs to be broadly of note, although granted that's highly subjective!
12th Jan 2021
Think Like a Dog (2020)
Corrected entry: The entire plot is fantasy... I think it is safe to say those things (e.g, amplifying electrical disturbances in someone's brain and using a transmitter to hear that person's thoughts) could not happen.
Correction: Which is why it's listed as a "science fiction comedy", it's not meant to be real or currently possible.
Whose listing is that? What I find most interesting is that before I submitted my view that it is "fantasy", I looked on-line to find what genre this movie fell under. Most websites listed family and kids, kids and comedy, drama, and combinations. I could not find Lionsgate's official "classification." But NOT ONE website listed "fantasy" until AFTER my submission. This makes me believe it was ADDED by someone. Some websites allow anyone to edit... and make someone else's view no longer accurate. [At least there are ex-post facto laws... and I've committed no crime... or ethical violation - although I'm sure at least someone might disagree.].
Which is why I never said it's a fantasy genre. You can see it listed as sci-fi on IMDb and Box Office Mojo. Wikipedia, while it can be edited by anyone, lists it as sci-fi but not fantasy. Lionsgate's website doesn't list genres for most of their films. Although "a science experiment gone awry" tell most people it might be a sci-fi film.
I specifically noted to myself that you did not directly state fantasy. I will not reply, so write whatever makes you happy.
6th Jan 2021
Billy Elliot (2000)
Continuity mistake: When Billy crosses the road and says goodbye to Mrs. Wilkinson's daughter, she is standing in front of a giant advert poster. A police van drives past, and when it leaves the scene again, the girl isn't there any more. With the van covering her for not even one second, she could never walk away in this short time.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I'm not sure if this can (or should) be classified as a "continuity error" in that the sudden "vanishing" is meant to be movie magic or part of the entertainment (as opposed to trying to give the impression that the girl was actually physically able to board the bus or walk away that quickly). I've seen this same type of "disappearance" in several movies and believe it is part of the "comedy" (and "Billy Elliot is classified as a comedy, although it is hardly the "LOL" type).
26th Nov 2020
Boyhood (2014)
Stupidity: Liv was a graduate psychology student when she met Bill and, after marriage and being physically abused, knew that the leaving Bill put her in a (potentially) very dangerous situation. It is best if the abuser does not know where the victim is "hiding" after separation, but Liv brought along Carol to pick up the kids - and they were going to be staying at Carol's house.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: She brought Carol along as a chaperone/protection when she picked up her kids. She didn't announce to Bill that that would be where she was going to be staying, she only told her kids that when they had already driven away from the house. Bill didn't seem to know who Carol was anyway. Even if he did manage to find out where she went, she could have easily got a restraining order against him.
It is more likely that she brought Carol along for emotional support and to act as a witness. If she were looking for protection, she would have used a police escort. It was implied they were going to be staying at Carol's, but, even if not, Carol's presence offered Bill a hint of where to start looking for Liv, and there should not be any leads. Liv unwittingly put Carol in a potentially dangerous situation - if Bill went to Carol's looking for Liv, and Carol truly did not know where she went, Bill would insist that she did and threaten or do worse if Carol didn't tell him. Remember how Bill drilled all the kids about where Liv went, checked their phones, accused Sam of knowing more, then got them into the car and drove like a maniac? Bill has a temper and propensity toward violence (at least when drinking, which he did everyday). Court orders take time to get, but are not very effective. Numerous women who had restraining orders against abusers ended up six feet under.
16th Dec 2020
Countdown (2019)
Stupidity: Dr. Sullivan not only put unwelcome moves on Quinn, he mentioned the good or lush letter of recommendation he wrote for her - implying he deserved or was entitled to a sexual favor in return. For "Doctor" Sullivan to do and say what he did in this day and age isn't merely a "character mistake", it is outright stupidity. (00:25:50)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Stupidity entries are not for when characters do something stupid, otherwise everything in "Dumb and Dumber" would be mistakes. Stupidities are minor plot holes that extend beyond character mistakes. The fact that in real life people in power behave this way means it's something the character of Dr. Sullivan could do.
Dumb and Dumber is supposed to be stupid; a medical doctor is not.
You missed the point entirely. It's not a stupidity that a man in power thinks he can get away with sexual harassment, despite being a doctor.
I didn't assert that he thought he could get away with it - he was being stupid for even saying such a thing.
Regardless of if you asserted it or not, unless someone thinks it's not wrong, people do questionable or illegal things because they think they can get away with it. But characters are allowed to do stupid things without it always being a minor plot hole (i.e. a stupidity). A quick news search of doctors accused of sexual harassment will show half a dozen stories this year alone, showing that doctors in real life act this way, therefore, it's not a mistake for a character to do it.
It is still stupidity... and the doctors in your search were also stupid.
I'm not sure how you're not getting this, or if you're being pedantic on purpose. There was no plot hole for his actions. Therefore, no mistake exist and the correction is valid. Being stupid isn't a valid stupidity entry. Being stupid to serve the plot is though (e.g. writing a drug name on the arm instead of telling someone your plan). People submit mistakes incorrectly and as long as it's not wildly inappropriate or nonsensical, it will be posted. Which is why there is the option to submit a correction. To clarify, being stupid, not a mistake. A character doing something they wouldn't (possibly because of the writer's lack of knowledge), character mistake. A character doing something that doesn't make sense that mildly serves the plot, stupidity. Something done that contradicts the plot or what's been established in-film, plot hole.
I'm willing to modify "stupidity" to "utter stupidity." [I'm too ignorant to be insulted.].
Then you're on the wrong site and you should create your own site.
I'd like a second opinion.
I'll give my opinion and I agree with Bishop73. This sounds more like a character exerting hubris than stupidity. If he sexually harassed an underling in front an attorney or a judge, or even other employees, then I think it would rise to the level of being a stupidity. The current President of the United States has openly admitted to sexually assaulting women, and he did so out of hubris because as he claims, his celebrity status gives him carte blanche to do so.
Sorry to say I concur with Bishop73, in that people do stupid things all the time in films, and we can't list them all! The stupidity section is just for plot-related issues - sort of "movie logic" things, like running upstairs in a horror film when they should run out the door. Yes people might do that in reality, which would be stupid, but they do it in a movie solely because it helps the plot / narrative. It's not strictly a plot hole, and it's arguably even a "mistake", which is why they're listed separately. In this case yes what he does is stupid, but it's a stupid thing which people in authority in reality do often, it's not solely an unreasonable or unlikely stupid action for the sake of the plot, if that makes sense. I've also realised that's not made clear when submitting a "stupidity", which is an oversight on my part - I'll amend that.
11th Nov 2002
Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (1992)
Corrected entry: When the Wet Bandits are stealing the charity money from Duncan's Toy Chest, Kevin takes their picture twice, but only one of these pictures comes out of the camera.
Correction: At least some of the Polaroid instant photo cameras had a photo-sized piece of cardboard before the film and it had to be removed before taking the first photo. If the cardboard was pulled out manually, taking the first "shot" can just be the sound of the cardboard coming out of the camera (which is the same sound as a photo coming out).
15th Mar 2020
Countdown (2019)
Character mistake: When they're making the protection circle they make a star of David and not a pentagram, 6 points in a star vs 5 points.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I don't think there was anything in the movie that dictated a pentagram had to be used. In the book of protection rituals they were using, the particular ritual showed a picture of the star of David they needed to create, so that's what they used (plus salt).
To add to the correction, what the mistake refers to as "Star of David" is a hexagram and the use of hexagrams in the occult are not uncommon. You can find salt protection circles that use the hexagram.
11th May 2017
What's Eating Gilbert Grape (1993)
Factual error: In the grocery store where Gilbert works, loaves of Mrs. Baird's bread are seen on the shelves; Mrs. Baird's is a Texas-based bakery whose products would not be available as far away as Iowa.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You are right - the product should not be on the shelves of a store in a state that does not receive the product. I was just questioning your assertion that distance from Texas is a determining factor - states further away (e.g, Oregon, California. Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania) do sell Mrs. Baird's bread. I wasn't familiar with this brand, but I found out it is sold locally in Pennsylvania. When I was on-line, I also found out that Allen Baird, 97, recently died of COVID-19.
I'm curious what cities/stores sell Mrs. Baird's breads in PA (or OR, CA, MA).
You can go on-line, like I did. I just did a search for Mrs. Baird's bread, and that website is set up to enable you to look for locations where it is sold - by state and/or zip code.
Sorry... I didn't want to reveal the city I'm in... but I can at least tell you the bread is sold at a Walmart store.
I specifically looked on their website and no PA stores popped up, not even Walmart. Of course, the mistake is still valid since this was 27 years ago and in Iowa.
My point exactly; this mistake merely gave away the fact that this film was made in Texas rather than Iowa where it was set. Since "Errors In Geography" is not a separate category here as it is on IMDb, I submitted it as a factual error; while I'm unaware whether Mrs. Baird's products are available now in Iowa, I know that wasn't the case in the early 90s when this film was made and released.
If it's not incorporated into the plot, generally these mistakes should be considered "revealing" mistakes, it's revealing it's not really filmed where it's set.
I just searched again, and Mrs. Baird's bread is also sold at Target and Sam's Club. I was surprised to see there is a "Bimbo Bakery" less than 12 miles away. I wasn't familiar with this brand, and now I suspect the products were recently made available; I surely would have noticed the products or the bakery before now. If I Google "Where can I buy Mrs. Baird's bread?" a map showing local stores comes up. But if I go to mrsbairds.com and put my zip code under "store locater", "no stores available in this zip code" shows up.
In California, it can be found at any grocery store that sells Bimbo products. Specifically, Ralph's, Albertson's, Von's, Walmart, Smart and Final, Aldi, Superior Grocers and Jon's.
It should be noted that Bimbo Bakeries didn't buy Mrs. Baird's until 1998. But is this because you've bought it in CA or because you used google and have no personal knowledge? My aunt and Grandparents have never heard of Mrs Baird's and they've lived in CA their whole lives.
15th Nov 2020
War of the Worlds (2005)
Continuity mistake: When the asphalt in front of the church starts to crack and move and Ray gets on the sidewalk, his legs are positioned in different ways in two different shots. (00:22:36)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: With the way Ray moves his feet (hopping/dancing quickly from one foot to the other), I don't see a discrepancy.
If you look closely in the first shot he keeps one foot on the asphalt and the other one on the sidewalk, in the other shot he has both of them on the sidewalk, so the discrepancy is very evident.
28th Aug 2014
Boyhood (2014)
Continuity mistake: In the scene where the mother introduces Mason to her college professor, the class ends at 1:35 according to the clock on the wall. In the span of a few seconds as Mason and her mother walk to the front of the classroom the clock shows 1:55.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The class was not over yet. After the clock showed 1:35 PM, the lecture continued about Pavlov's dogs, (un) conditional response, salivation, and the professor asking the class for another example, etc. The class emptying the room would also take a few minutes. Film time might not have been 20 minutes, but the clock showing 1:55 PM indicated that the class was over at this point. Liv and Mason then went to the front of the room.
I saw 1:38 PM, then class might have been over. It would not take 17 minutes for the classroom to empty (maybe 5 minutes or so). Change your wording to reflect this, and your mistake will be valid.
11th Jun 2012
Super 8 (2011)
Plot hole: The alien digs an extensive underground network of tunnels beneath the cemetery without leaving huge piles of dirt above ground. (01:29:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There appears to be a large pile of dirt between the building and road [@ 00:54:31] when Joe went to the cemetery to "visit" his mother. Perhaps there is more behind the building. Or, based on how far the creature could toss large appliances, the "monster" might have flung some of the dirt far away (to the next county?).
12th Sep 2019
Super 8 (2011)
Continuity mistake: After the train crash and Joe is back home, his dad wakes him up and he is facing off to the side as he opens his eyes and starts to lift his head. It cuts to a different angle showing the white cube in the foreground and suddenly Joe is looking up fully at his dad. (00:26:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I watched a few times and saw a rather good, smooth series of movements - they did not look awkward at all. I did not see what you saw, which leads me to suspect corrections were made or your DVD player "skipped."
Maybe one more person will check his/her copy.
A small hiccup in the stream might be an even better explanation for the discrepancy - in which case "I saw what you didn't see" would be more accurate than "I didn't see what you saw."
19th Mar 2020
The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Character mistake: Dissecting the chrysalis, Dr. Roden says that "Somebody grew this guy. Fed him honey and nightshade." Nightshade is indeed one of the typical plants eaten by the Death's head moth, but since "he" is only a pupa, would have not eaten honey, which is something only the adult specimen eats. (00:48:50)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I don't see this so much as a mistake, but rather a shortcut so there would be no need to explain the entire metamorphosis process. Feeding "it" would refer to the larva stage, necessary to reach (grow to) the pupa stage. "It" may have transformed, but "it" is still the same "it." The men working there are experts and would know what he means, not interrupt and say, "Pupae don't eat, dumb @$$." Likewise, having to specifically say that someone fed the larva "honey and Nightshade" so that it would become that pupa doesn't seem to be necessary given the nature of the film. [And the larva - not just "adults" - might eat honey.].
Sorry, I don't really understand the point of the first part (like, 90%) of the correction; at no point I was disputing the concept of 'feeding a pupa', but just what it could have eaten to be raised to that stage. The only relevant part of your correction is that last phrase; "And the larva might eat honey." Which is not how it works from what I understand. If you want to correct this entry, please dispute that aspect; I never bred bugs (...on purpose!) and surely not of that kind, but the larvae of that species are strictly herbivores, and the honey plays into their diet only later in life - to the best of my knowledge they can't even process it at that stage. Assuming it can (which I have no particular reason to believe), it would be an exception and not what an entomologist would say to describe a well raised specimen. For what it is worth, also, Harris' novel never mentions honey, but specifically leaves, although it's a different plant.
Sorry if I misconstrued what you were trying to say. By writing that the pupa would not eat something only the adults eat, you left the impression that the pupa eats other things (just not the honey). I think I understand now. Your answer is specific to the honey and my response addressed how much information the experts needed to present about metamorphosis and food/no food to the audience. I hope this helps you understand at least some of that 90%.
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.