lionhead

Corrected entry: How much ammo can one gun hold? It seems that a single clip can hold enough ammo to run fully-automatic fire for a full minute or more. Example: soldiers need hundreds of rounds to kill one bug, and a soldier can kill several without reloading. Even a conservative 100-200 rounds would be about as much as could physically fit in the clips, yet they seem to provide as much as a thousand rounds each.

DavidRTurner

Correction: This is future tech you are talking about here. It is not unlikely they had made guns that can hold several hundreds of rounds of ammunition when fighting an enemy that doesn't go down easily. The bullets are probably not big at all and the force behind them causes the most damage. That way one of those quite large weapons can hold up to a thousand bullets easily.

lionhead

When the Troopers hand out their guns and ammo to a bunch of kids, the rounds are shown and they are large, so I think this is a valid mistake.

Those rounds don't have to be rounds from those guns. They don't appear to be live rounds anyway.

lionhead

Answer: True, though the rats comment was deliberate hyperbole. Kinski suffered from mental illness much of his life. He was often volatile, erratic, disruptive, and sometimes violent on movie sets. Kinski and Herzog had a long professional collaboration but also a friendship pre-dating Herzog's directing career. Otherwise, though Herzog admired Kinski's talent, he probably would never have tolerated working with him; he is the only director who worked with him more than once. Herzog did a documentary about Kinski after his death, which included footage of his on-set rants. Clips are on YouTube.

raywest

Moreover, Herzog was initially reluctant to hire Kinski in Fitzcarraldo movie because he was afraid that Kinski would go "totally bonkers" if trapped in the Amazon for any length of time, and his fears proved to be well-founded.

To correct a slight factual error in the answer: Director Alfred Vohrer worked on more movies with Kinski than Herzog did.

lionhead

Corrected entry: After being transported to the 1980s, the guys have possession of things which they did not take into the hot tub with them. Nick has his cell phone, Jacob has his snowboard, Lou has his backpack, and they are all wearing clothing that they brought with them when they go skiing.

ThatOneGuy

Correction: This isn't a mistake, it's a plot point. They need the Russian energy drink to get back to the present.

Captain Defenestrator

I feel this is more of an excuse than a correction.

lionhead

11th Nov 2023

What If...? (2021)

What If... Captain Carter Were the First Avenger? - S1-E1

Factual error: When Stark starts telling about the Tesseract, the colonel shows surprise that Nazis were in Norway. Peggy answers with "Close. HYDRA." The scene is set in 1943, and Norway had been occupied by Nazi Germany for three years already. Them being in Tønsberg should not come as a great surprise to an Allied commander. (00:07:10)

Twotall

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: I feel like this falls under the "Not a mistake because it's an alternate universe" umbrella. We're in an entirely different universe with a different timeline in this episode.

TedStixon

The show also makes a point that the only difference should be the minor choices or events befalling the MCU characters, and how these minor things have huge consequences for them, basically creating a new alternate timeline. Basic world history before these events is not affected by the new timeline.

Twotall

Basic, unaltered world history does not apply with this because we are talking about an alternate WWII from the beginning. One with Schmitt/Red Skull as propaganda minister of Hitler, Hydra superseding the SS, super soldier serum, Stark tech, the Tesseract, etc. It is not WWII as we know it, even without the "what if."

lionhead

25th Jun 2002

Independence Day (1996)

Corrected entry: When the alien is brought into the containment lab of Area 51, we see all sorts of high-tech monitors set up and doctors running around checking everything works and everything is prepped and ready for the alien. So why is it, after all this work, they forget to administer some form of anaesthetic to the alien knowing that not only is it merely unconscious from a punch to the head but it has a nasty temperament towards mankind?

Correction: Maybe they gave it the anaesthetic, and it didn't work.

Making up Deus ex Machina corrections for mistakes does not invalidate them. The technicians and scientists made no effort to restrain a potentially hostile and dangerous alien, and that belongs under "Stupidity."

There is nothing "deus ex machina" about the correction. The entry asks why they didn't use an anaesthetic, and the correction addresses that issue. There is no talk about restraints, which is a different issue (can restrain the suit but what about the alien within?).

lionhead

Question: What is that gun thing that is pushed into the guy's neck after he says "I thought this was a currency exchange?" Is the guy dead or just knocked out?

Answer: Knocked out. It was a hand held tranquilizer gun like most vets use on animals to put them to sleep.

Rollin Garcia Jr

Answer: I've always wondered this and I don't think you're going to find a good answer. I know everyone is saying it was a tranquilizer. But tranquilizers wear off and if one of those people they gave an injection to regained consciousness it could be a big problem for them. eg. The cops in the subway. That's why I think it was probably a fatal injection of something.

It's not a fatal injection. Remember, Simon says, "I'm a soldier, not a monster." And earlier, one of the henchmen yelled at Otto, "No shooting." Simon doesn't intend to kill anyone (though later he changes his mind when he's ready to blow up the ship). The only people who killed anyone were Otto, Katya, and McClane.

I'm pretty sure the bombing at the beginning of the movie killed people. Plus, the bomb in the subway would have killed a whole bunch of people. Saying Simon doesn't intend to kill anyone is quite naive.

lionhead

Question: When Luke says he can't kill his own father, Obi-Wan tells him, "Then the Emperor has already won." But if Luke actually did kill Darth Vader, he would be left to fight the Emperor by himself, or could even be influenced to switch sides. The Emperor does try this later, suggesting that Luke replace Vader. How would that be a triumph for Obi-Wan and Yoda?

Answer: Obi-Wan didn't think it would be an immediate victory or Luke would rush to then combat the Emperor. His reasoning is that eliminating Vader would weaken the Emperor's power by removing his main enforcer. Once Vader was gone, Obi-Wan and Luke would have to devise a strategy on how to defeat the Emperor. Leaving Vader alive leaves the Emperor's power intact. Obi-Wan trusts that the Emperor will never sway Luke to the Dark side. However, Luke is unable to face destroying his own father.

raywest

So, you think they wanted Luke to fight Vader alone again, defeat him, and they would deal with the Emperor later? Instead of Luke allowing Vader to "capture" him and take him to the Emperor?

Facing his father would be facing his fears. Facing his fears is what will keep Luke away from the dark side. That was the first step in beating the emperor. Luke is understood enough in the end that killing his father is not the answer, but he did manage to beat him. And that was the victory. Because that caused Anakin to turn back to the light side and kill the emperor. Obi-Wan and Yoda can't tell Luke everything he needs to do, some he has to do himself.

lionhead

5th Jan 2024

Demolition Man (1993)

Stupidity: Dr. Cocteau's choice to unleash an enhanced Simon Phoenix without any way to restrain him is incredibly reckless and stupid. Even if Simon were to kill Eager Friendly, in the best case situation, you'd still have a madman with total computer access, martial arts knowledge, etc., that you would have no way to rein in. Sure, he can't kill Dr. Cocteau, but what would stop him from say, holding the city hostage or something? Why not add in a kill code or something to keep him in check?

Mlp1327

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Who says he didn't? Cocteau has put in mental conditioning compelling Phoenix to kill Edgar Friendly and make him unable to kill Cocteau. Who says he hasn't put in something that makes him kill himself after the deed is done? Or perhaps paralyze him so he can be put back on ice. It's just that Cocteau didn't count on the fact that his henchmen could kill him. He doesn't care about how dangerous he is, not until he has done the deed.

lionhead

Dr. Cocteau is a narcissistic egomaniac type that would see himself as a king or a god, even. And Simon is making him very angry. He even tells Simon, "you're beginning to be more trouble than you're worth..." Someone with an ego like Cocteau wouldn't stand for Simon's antics for very long. And would happily enjoy putting Simon back in his place by shocking, paralyzing, etc.

Mlp1327

But he first needs him to kill Friendly. Until he does that, he'll let him play. He still sees no danger to himself.

lionhead

Question: The ending of Back to the Future, Marty says he's not going to the lake as the car is 'wrecked'. All the family react as if he's talking about the BMW. They rush out and see it is fine. But they know Marty has the Toyota truck - why would they not think he meant his car is wrecked'? I know he says car not "truck" but he's talking about going up to the lake - he wouldn't be going in his Dad's BMW. So is this a mistake or bad script writing? (01:49:00 - 01:51:00)

blueslipper@gmail.com

Answer: Why wouldn't he go in the BMW? Going to the lake doesn't mean off-road driving, it might be a nice paved road all the way to a touristy spot. I don't think it's a mistake or bad writing.

Actually, Biff comes up to him with the keys to his truck, saying it is ready for his trip. So he was going with his truck.

lionhead

Answer: It would've simply been down to the pure shock of what Marty was saying. The second he said "The car's wrecked", they dropped what they were doing and went to check. They didn't even care about the first part of Marty's sentence at this point, as all that was going through their heads would've been "Has something happened to the car?"

Answer: Marty didn't know about the truck at that point. He was surprised when Biff handed him the keys, so it's not wrong that the family thought he meant the BMW.

Correct, but the family all knew he had the Toyota.

18th Jun 2023

Bad Boys (1995)

Other mistake: In the film, Lawrence and Smith's characters are Narcotics detectives with Miami Dade Police. There's no way they should be at any homicide investigations. Narc and homicide are totally two different units within law enforcement, so it's unlikely narcotics units would be at a homicide scene. Being the scene where they're investigating Smith's friend getting killed, and then they stumble across the dead body at the mansion.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The captain called Mike and Marcus to the scene to help because it appeared related to the missing drugs. They were there to find leads to the missing heroin.

Bishop73

Yes, that could be correct, but the chances of that happening are slim to none. A captain from Narcotics wouldn't even have authorization to call his detectives to a murder scene to help out homicide detectives working a murder. Any information or clues would be collected and shared with other units or agencies if deemed appropriate.

Then you missed the entire premise of the movie.

Bishop73

We're talking about real-life scenarios here, not the fictional script or scenes in the film.

Implausible is not the same as impossible. The movie scenario is implausible. That doesn't make it a mistake.

lionhead

Question: Had Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan been able to both survive and defeat Maul, would this mean Sidious would not be able to manipulate Anakin anymore? Or would the Sith Lord have simply tried a different plan, besides emotional manipulation, to try to trick an Anakin trained under Qui-Gon into the dark side?

Mlp1327

Answer: I don't think his plans would change. Qui-Gon is just another Jedi Master training Anakin, nothing much different because Obi-Wan was trained by him as well, after all. Plus, Qui-Gon much more believes Anakin is the chosen one, so he would probably allow Anakin a lot more than Obi-Wan would, including his relationships with Palpatine and Padme, which both are more important for Anakin's switch to the dark side.

lionhead

I (not who submitted the question) wonder if Palpatine actually wanted Darth Maul to be killed by Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, or both. It seems like he mostly trained Maul to fight. Maul seemed to know little about the plotting, scheming, and political dealings. Dooku was capable in those areas, and was skilled at fighting. He was probably more useful while Palpatine waited to turn Anakin.

Not sure about that. I think he genuinely thought Darth Maul was properly trained to defeat Jedi. I don't think Palpatine planned ahead in terms of apprentices, except Anakin. But Darth Maul was before he knew Anakin. I don't think Sith are easy to find either, so Palpatine needed Maul for a lot of things more than just kill Jedi. It is too convenient however that every apprentice he had served his plans perfectly. Because I don't see Maul lead the separatists.

lionhead

I was under the impression that Palpatine knew about Anakin ever since Shmi was chosen to be Anakin's mother. I might be wrong. This is an interesting discussion, though - I appreciate your response. Some think that Maul had limited use of the Force and was more of a trained assassin. But, if that were true, why call him a Sith apprentice? As you say, it's hard to imagine him being a Separatist leader.

I do not have any knowledge regarding any books written or other sources that might be considered canon, as have been mentioned in other comments here recently. My knowledge is purely the movies. As per the movies, Palpatine only learned of Anakin after the Battle of Naboo.

lionhead

20th Dec 2023

Aliens (1986)

Question: I have a question regarding some of the slang used in the film. During the briefing just before the marines go down to the planet, Hudson asks, "Is this going to be a stand-up fight or another bug-hunt?" And what does Gorman mean when he says they think xenomorphs are involved? People say xenomorph is a fancy term for the species of aliens in this film series, however, it's made clear that at the beginning of the movie this is an unknown species, so that term couldn't refer specifically to them.

Answer: In addition to the other answers, I'd like to point out that xenomorph simply means strange or alien form.

Answer: It wasn't exactly an "unknown" species. "The Company," the commercial operation funding everything, knew the alien creatures existed and had wanted them as bio-weapons since the first film. It's unclear what Gorman knew but likely little more than his troops. Burke knew about the creatures and his purpose was to collect one, the same as Ash in the original "Alien." The term "xenomorph" is a general term that could be applied to any extraterrestrial non-humanoid species. Hudson is asking if they're hunting a non-sentient being.

raywest

Yeah, Gorman had no clue about the xenomorphs whatsoever. No way. The Company did, Burke is part of the Company, but Gorman isn't. He, like the others, is just cannon fodder. The term is used as you describe it though. You gotta understand that the Company itself probably doesn't know how a full-grown xenomorph actually looks like. Not until Alien 4. They just know there is alien biotech to be claimed.

lionhead

5th Dec 2023

Jurassic Park (1993)

Question: The second Nedry notices the Dilophosaurus in the jeep with him, why didn't he quickly get out and shut the door, trapping it inside? He had a second or two before the Dilophosaurus started growling and attacking him, plenty of time to get out.

Answer: There are some additional factors that would interfere with his ability to move quickly: He was obese (so not very agile) and his vision was impaired (he dropped his glasses and was sprayed with gunk in his eyes).

KeyZOid

Answer: In addition to what RayWest and LionHead wrote, I would like to point out that it's easy to say what a person should have done. You're watching the situation as an outsider. Granted, this is a fantasy situation in a movie about dinosaurs, but the mentality is realistic: people who are actually in a situation don't always think of something that seems obvious.

Answer: Nedry was incompetent and totally out of his element here, and rather than thinking logically, he reacted in an adrenalin-fueled, frantic panic.

raywest

Agreed, next to that, he had no time to get out. As soon as he would touch the doorknob, the thing would be on him.

lionhead

Answer: The fact that Nedry was in a car could've been giving him a false sense of security. Yes, he could've gotten out of the car, but then he'd be out in the open, making it easier for him to get attacked by any other dinos that were lurking about. In the car, he probably (incorrectly) assumed that the Dilophosaurus would have restricted movement due to how small cars are, making it harder for it to attack.

Answer: He tells them to draw out their lightsaber, to not delay, and just start the fight.

lionhead

But he says, "We don't want to make a mess of things in front of the Chancellor," as if he is trying not to fight.

The "mess" I think he is referring to is the pointless debate they will go into if they don't simply start dueling. A few seconds later, he says, "I've been looking forward to this", so he always wanted to fight. You have to understand that Dooku knows Palpatine is his master, and he has been ordered by Palpatine to get Anakin over to the dark side. The only way for him to do that is to best Anakin in dueling, showing him the dark side is stronger. Little did he know.

lionhead

That makes sense. If I remember correctly from a book, Dooku thought that he would kill Obi-Wan, then he and Palpatine would convince Anakin to join them. Although, not all of the books are canon anymore.

Question: Why did Obi-Wan go to Padme's apartment (as she told Anakin later) to discuss being worried about Anakin? He either doesn't know about their marriage, or he pretends to not know because Anakin would be expelled from the Jedi Order. In order to keep up appearances, it should be strange for him to visit her home.

Answer: He is hoping she knows where he is. He hopes to convince her to tell him so he can confront him.

lionhead

The question is not about Obi-wan talking to Padme before the fight on Mustafar. It's about the off-screen visit, when Anakin asked Padme if Obi-wan had been to the apartment. She said yes, Obi-wan came by that morning because he was worried about Anakin. Why would he stop at her apartment if he "isn't supposed to know" that she is Anakin's wife?

Okay, my bad. Wasn't clear to me.

lionhead

Question: Given Kate met Gizmo in the previous movie, how could she mistake Daffy for him? He looks different from Gizmo.

Rob245

Answer: She only saw him briefly, never in full light either. Plus, it was some time ago. I don't think she would suspect there is another one either.

lionhead

At the end of the first movie, after killing the gremlins, everyone is at Billy's house, and Kate puts a thermometer in Gizmo's mouth and looks directly at him while doing it, giving her plenty of time to look at him.

Still, very briefly, still in low light. She has had way less interaction with Gizmo overall.

lionhead

Question: Extended Edition: What is the point of the avalanche of skulls that the Army of the Dead throw down upon Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli? Surely the AOTD would want to keep Aragorn alive; he was the only way that they could break their curse. Or was the avalanche of skulls something that the AOTD were not responsible for? PS: I don't want any answers like "Peter Jackson put it there because it looked cool", I want answers that fit within the context of the film.

Blibbetyblip

Chosen answer: With the last of the line of Isildur dead, there would be no one left to hold them to their oath and they'd be free to 'pass on.'

Phixius

The king would have no reason to believe that killing Aragorn would free him. He thought the line was broken. He was surprised that there was an heir left alive. Therefore, he would have believed that they were never going to pass on because there was nobody to free them. Immediately attempting to kill the last person that could free them seems like an odd conclusion to come to within minutes of meeting Aragorn. A possible reason is that the army was leaving, so the magic holding the skulls stopped.

The avalanche of skulls came after Aragorn revealed himself as the heir of Isildur. It was their way of saying no to his request.

lionhead

10th Oct 2023

Starship Troopers (1997)

Stupidity: When the invasion of planet P begins, we see the Rodger Young get hit. In the explosion sequence, we are treated to people sitting around tables in what can only be described as a mess hall exploding. In a military environment, this would be a time where everyone would be at their "battle stations". Nobody would be having chow or off-time when the ship is expecting combat. In this case, it was a planned troop landing.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Yes, it was stupidity, but it was an intentional depiction that supports the plot. During the landing, the Captain is completely surprised by the bombardment and says something like, "This isn't light uncoordinated resistance." The fleet's lack of preparedness at Planet P is a major plot point that later results in the replacement of the Air Marshal in command.

No, you are talking about a different sequence. When they are unprepared, they are doing an invasion of Klendathu, the Bug's home planet. This is earlier in the movie and the Rodger Young was only slightly damaged in that. The stupidity is about the invasion of Planet P at the end of the movie, where the Rodger Young is cut in half.

lionhead

Corrected entry: Kirsty tells Detective Ronson to destroy the mattress because Julia died on it and could come back. In the first Hellraiser, Julia died on the stairway after being stabbed to death by Frank. (01:16:12 - 01:16:41)

Correction: She ended up on the mattress. When Kristy grabbed the box and Pinhead says his famous line "we have such sights to show you".

No, she didn't. Julie was murdered on the stairwell by Frank in the first movie. If you rewatch the movie, you'll see it. The timestamp that was posted for this mistake is for the first movie, not this one.

After Julia was stabbed and drained at the stairwell, the Cenobites took her and put her on the mattress, peeling off her face with chains. She was probably still alive when they did that. It's there where Kirsty takes the box from her hands. The proper timestamp for that scene in the first movie is 1:23:23.

lionhead

12th Oct 2023

Stargate (1994)

Corrected entry: For both opening the Earth gate (they mention having never gotten beyond six symbols), then opening the Abydos gate after Daniel Jackson knows the first six symbols from that cavern, why can't they simply use trial and error to find the seventh symbol? For 40-odd symbols apiece on both, it would only take approximately that many guesses by process of elimination.

dizzyd

Correction: This mistake has already been corrected, twice. The military in control of the project might not have allowed them to experiment with different symbols simply because they didn't know what it might do. Not fully far fetched since the entire compound starts shaking when entering the 6th symbol. It might explode for all they know.

lionhead

Then the Abydos gate alone. Six symbols down. One to go. 40 odd guesses, easy enough, less than an hour.

dizzyd

You missed the point of the correction. It could have been 4 options and still not worth the risk of entering the wrong symbol.

Bishop73

Well, we don't know if the gate on Abydos makes everything shake. So, I'd say there is a point there. But they only discover the symbols on Abydos till later. By then, they are already at the tribe, I think.

lionhead

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.