ComicBoy

Corrected entry: Sorry to spoil all the fun of the nail-biting finish - but let us remember that the "bomb" was actually a decaying neutron reactor. There is no forecasting, months from the moment, exactly when it will decay enough to explode - that will rely on catalysts such as heat (Gotham's climate) and oscillation (how much it is shaken about when moved around). Also Neutron bombs are big on radiation and low on blast compared to traditional nukes so getting the bomb 6 miles off the beach before it blew (whichever way the wind was blowing) would leave much of the East Coast of America a no-go for decades.

ComicBoy

Correction: The bomb is a decaying fusion reactor, described in the film as being an experimental prototype of a clean energy system. This is not technology that exists in the real world, about which we only have very generalised statements are made. As such, no "factual" claims can be made regarding how it might behave in its weaponised form.

Tailkinker

3rd Nov 2010

Saw 3D (2010)

Corrected entry: SPOILER ALERT - In the scene where the guy has to lift himself up with the chains he could have put the hooks through the pockets on his jeans rather than push them through his flesh.

ComicBoy

Correction: Saying what a character could have done doesn't make it a mistake, not to mention the material of his pants wouldn't have been strong enough to support the hooks.

S. Ha

14th Oct 2010

Gran Torino (2008)

Corrected entry: The final credits roll over a background of an empty road. All of a sudden a very relentless stream of traffic appears. This is doubtless because there was only so long that the film crew were allowed to hold up the "real" traffic after shooting their closing scene. (01:50:00)

ComicBoy

Correction: How is this a mistake? If the filmmakers wanted an empty roadway, they would've done it somehow (continuous loop of the footage they had, C.G. effects, etc.). If you understood the movie, it would be clear that this is a metaphor for the Walt's character development during the course of the movie.

MovieFan612

11th Sep 2010

Red Dragon (2002)

Corrected entry: True to the novel Hannibal persists in asking Graham, on his asylum visits, how he managed to catch him. However, the film's departure from the novel, i.e. the opening scene in Venice (presumably added in order to increase the role of Hannibal in this prequel to the hugely successful Silence of The Lambs), makes that a silly question. He was getting closer but Graham had no idea who was responsible for Hannibal's series of murders until he "confessed" it for himself with his knife attack on Graham. (00:34:00)

ComicBoy

Correction: That's totally untrue. Graham was figuring it out looking at the diagrams and photos in Lecter's office and Lecter realized it, so he attacked him, hoping to murder him and keep him quiet. He just didn't know exactly what had tipped him off, so he persists in asking what mistake of his made Graham figure it out.

White Lock

2nd Jan 2010

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

Corrected entry: It is 3 miles from the Houses of Parliament to Tower Bridge, so not the quick jog along a sewer pipe that the film would have you believe for the climax of the movie.

ComicBoy

Correction: Compressing events, such as a three-mile run, for the sake of the film's pace/running time is a common and understandable movie convention.

27th Oct 2009

FlashForward (2009)

Show generally

Corrected entry: If the World really had a flash forward to a specific date and time in the future, then that moment would become a worldwide countdown just like the millennium countdown was. Everyone would be eagerly waiting to see what will happen once the world "catches up" to the point that had already been glimpsed - would it flash forward again (perhaps to the end of Season 2's finale?!) etc. The result being that no-one will actually be doing what they saw themselves doing - for example is the chief still going to pop to the loo, or will he hang on 5 minutes next time?

ComicBoy

Correction: Why is this a plot hole? One of the key issues of the show is whether or not the future can actually be changed. You're right in that there will be people who will intentionally choose to try to avoid the situation as seen in their flashforward - most of the main characters are in this position. What remains to be seen, and what forms a key plotline, is whether they can actually do that, or whether circumstances will conspire to put them in that position anyway. Your "plot hole" is the premise of the entire show, not a mistake.

Tailkinker

Revelations - S4-E10

Corrected entry: Season 4 Episode 10 - Revelations. When the fleet is just one jump from Earth, Apollo suggests that he and Starbuck go ahead alone on a recon. His father rules this out, but a Commander of his experience would have agreed to the plan to ensure that they did not jump into the solar system and meet a Cylon ambush or a self defence system that attacked them.

ComicBoy

Correction: The Admiral has frequently made decisions based on his emotional connections, especially where Apollo and Starbuck are concerned. You can't classify this as a plot hole, just because you don't agree with the decision.

pinkwafer

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.