Corrected entry: When the "scarers" arrive for work in the "Right Stuff" scene, Pauley has no eyes. He is to Sully's left (the right of the screen as you look at it). His assistant then puts his eyeballs in to prepare him for scaring. Later, after work, even after the monsters have left the locker room and are heading out of the Monsters Inc. factory for the evening, Pauley has all of his eyeballs left in. (00:13:30 - 00:20:15)
lionhead
4th Nov 2013
Monsters, Inc. (2001)
29th Nov 2003
Finding Nemo (2003)
Corrected entry: Dory's flashback sequence after she meets Nemo includes a shot of Nemo being captured by the scuba diver. But Dory wasn't there to see it and wouldn't have had any memory of it (even if she could remember).
You can't tell someone something and that person remember it as you do. She would've had to be there to see it the way Marlin did, but she wasn't.
It's just there for the visual.
20th Nov 2020
Grease (1978)
Question: Any idea what the reference to "banging erasers" is all about? I always thought she said "banging your races" or "banging your braces" but never understood what it meant?
Answer: Banging erasers is what kids had to do as punishment. Erasers are used to clear the chalkboards, eventually they will get full of chalk and not work properly anymore so you bang them together to get the chalk out.
Answer: It was a reference to detention. She suggests that he will be banging erasers after school.
16th Dec 2020
Constantine (2005)
Corrected entry: Constantine threatens demon Balthazar with the last Rites, so Balthazar goes to heaven where he for sure doesn't want to end. However, if it is so easy and possible even for a demon to go to heaven, why is occult expert Constantine still searching so desperately for the big way out of hell? He only needs to find a catholic priest who gives Constantine the last Rites.
Correction: Constantine mentions to Balthasar afterwards you have to ask to be forgiven before you are accepted into heaven. He needs to believe, it only a bluff. Constantine himself is too stubborn to ask to be forgiven and instead feels the need to buy his way into heaven, he does not believe in the grace of God (who he feels is a hypocrite). The demon can not be sent to heaven just because he was read his last rites, he doesn't believe in the grace of God either.
Constantine himself is too stubborn to ask to be forgiven and would rather go to hell where the devil would so love to meet him? To be honest, that's even a bigger plot hole. The whole story is about Constantine being too selfish and now him being more stubborn than being selfish is the problem? I don't think so.
The problem is he doesn't believe in the grace of God. Thats bigger than his stubbornness. He knows he is going to hell, but he doesn't think that's fair and should be admitted to heaven regardless of his believes. He won't submit to the hypocrisy of God. He doesn't like God, almost as much as he doesn't like the devil. But naturally he doesn't want to go to hell so he tries to buy his way into heaven by fighting the devil's spawns. But he would never bow to God to get to heaven. At the end of the movie he does find a way though, by sacrifice, but an opportunity like that needs to present itself, he can't create one, unlike being forgiven. It's not a plot hole, it's the plot.
I am really upset with "corrections" like this. With stubbornness people could "correct" any movie mistake caused by any protagonists. And it also makes no sense. I think the entry is valid and should be published without any "corrections"! Constantine for sure would believe in the grace of god if he would get some AND he would for sure get some, if he would call a priest which gives him his last Rites. Problem solved. You are creating a problem where no problem is, just pure assumption. And for sure he would bow to god cause he doesn't want to bow to devil even less.
The correction is valid if you ask me. Constantine specifically refers to God as being a kid with an ant farm, and doesn't really believe God cares that much for humanity. At the end of the film, he acknowledges that God does indeed have a plan for everyone and that he had to die twice to finally understand that. That's Constantine's arc. As lionhead said, that is literally the film's plot.
Problem with the correction is, that he escapes hell not because he has lost his stubbornness or because his relationship to god has changed (which has not). He indirectly escapes hell cause he commited suicide to save Angela from being killed by Gabriel. Which wasn't even awarded by god, only the devil was so nice (!) and asked him unnecessarily for a quid-pro-quo wish. And that's not even suicide, it is martyrdom and that alone should buy him a ticket out of hell, plus he saves a woman he loves, plus he keeps the balance in balance. 3 tickets in once, he doesn't even has to trade his soul for the soul of Isabel, he has already done more than enough. There are many plot holes.
You assume those 3 tickets are enough, but they aren't. All of them are him still trying to buy his way into heaven. It's about love for god, not love for another person nor fighting the devil. Plus he was dying anyway. But the self-sacrifice, not his life saved by the devil but the twin sister send to heaven, is the one thing he could do to be admitted.
He already sacrificed himself for one sister, second sister is unnecessary. The devil's him granting a wish is just a feelgood moment for the audience to save the second sister. That's unnecessary and therefore a plot hole.
He didn't sacrifice himself for the first sister. He did it to stop Mammon, not for the love of Angela.
"Stubbornness" is a valid correction when people submit mistakes, especially plot holes, because they think a character should act in a different way than they would. Nothing about Constantine's behave or believe goes against his already established character (which is based on the comics). Having him act the way you want him to could also be seen by some as a plot device and thus a plot hole.
However him committing suicide a second time, is an act of love, maybe not for god but for Angela (so she doesn't gets stabbed by Gabriel). This is martyrdom cause he also prevents Mammon to conquer earth and shows the love for an other human being. The one or the other way he has got the ticket out of hell already. Saving Isabel which he also does, isn't even that much compared what he has already done. So why should god forgive him after saving Isabel but not before (after saving Angela). The devil offering him a wish like a jinn is silly and unnecessary for sure.
He commited suicide the second time to stop Mammon because he knows Satan will show up and wouldn't like it when he finds out his son is trying to take power on Earth. He doesn't do it for love of Angela, nor would God see that as good enough to admit him into heaven (as he would still be buying his way into it). God and Satan are bound to certain rules (according to the "game" they play as mentioned by Constantine) so in exchange for helping Satan, Satan grants him a wish, not realising it is a wish that will admit Constantine into heaven. He is admitted into heaven not because he is forgiven, but because of his self-sacrifice (as Gabriel mentions, and the bible). I think you really need to rewatch both the conversation between Gabriel and Constantine at the church as well as the conversation between Constantine and Satan to understand the reasoning behind it all.
He already self-sacrificed himself for one sister, second sister is unnecessary. The devil's him granting a wish is just a feelgood moment for the audience to save the second sister. That's a plot hole.
Correction: Constantine was bluffing when he threatened Balthazar with the Last Rites. "True contrition" is required as well. This is different than just asking for forgiveness, something Constantine shows not to have. Of course, the Devil heals him in hopes that Constantine will once again damn himself to hell.
13th Jul 2017
Breaking Bad (2008)
Factual error: The final scene of the episode, the cousins are hiding with other migrants amid a farm truck's bales of straw. One of the migrants claims they are in Texas. However, the mountains in the distance are the Manzano Mountains which are just several miles southeast of Albuquerque, more than 200 miles away from the border with Texas and Mexico. The migrant claims he has gone through this route 3 times, so it is unlikely this would simply be a character mistake.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He could have just been boasting, whilst not actually knowing where he is. He is just a kid after all.
Worse than all of that, is the fact that you can't get directly from Mexico into Texas without traversing a river. There are no land routes.
There are no bridges?
11th Dec 2020
Beetlejuice (1988)
Corrected entry: When Adam and Barbara first arrive in the waiting room with all the dead people, one of them looks like Edward Scissorhands. Seems like Tim Burton was giving a little hint on his future project.
Correction: I just loaded up the scene and cannot find this person no matter where I look. The closest I could find is that someone is sitting in a dark suit and another person with kind of a pale face, but they don't really resemble Edward. Where exactly should we be looking?
After the secretary talked to Adam and Barbara and she named the next number and next scene shown the victims and the one I think looks like Edward Scissorhands is the last on the left.
The one in the sleeping bag with a rattlesnake does have the spiky black hair and black around the eyes. I get what you mean but I think it's just a coincidence. Has to be confirmed.
I said it looks like Edward Scissorhands. If Tim Burton was giving a little hint, he certainly wouldn't have the person have scissors for hands, would he? It would have been giving too much info right there for his next project.
I honestly think it's just a coincidence, too. Tim Burton has a very specific style, and a lot of his characters look similar with wild hair, dark circles around the eyes, etc.
11th Dec 2020
The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992)
Audio problem: The ghost of Christmas past says "these are but shadows... they are what they are - do not blame me." Her mouth keeps moving after she stops speaking.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: No, it doesn't. When she finishes this speech at 45:16, there is an immediate cut to Scrooge. We can only see the back of the ghost. Her mouth is not visible.
Suggested correction: A mouth can move without speaking, not an audio problem but a puppeteering problem that is not a mistake.
A puppeteer problem would still be a mistake.
Maybe for the puppeteer, but in the movie it is no problem because a mouth can move without sound coming out. So what exactly went wrong?
But practically speaking people (or puppets) don't just flap their mouth open and closed with no reason. The overwhelming probability is simply that there was a dubbing error or a line was cut and the dialogue didn't fit with the mouth movement.
The mouth opens 1 extra time. That's all.
But it's glaring enough to be noticeable. Regardless of how or why it happened, it's a mistake.
In the version on Disney+, there is an immediate cut to Scrooge as the spirit finishes her speech. We only see the back of the spirit's head. Are you seeing something different on other versions?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBDqCFyugW0. I got the scene right here, it's at 1:50. Judge for yourself. I can repeat that part over and over again, but to be honest, sometimes it looks like there is an extra movement. Sometimes I can't see it. Even if it was, muppets move their mouths without speaking all the time.
29th Apr 2020
Minority Report (2002)
Plot hole: Lamar makes his crime look like a glitch. But the pre-cogs must show these two as two separate murders. And they should give two sets of wooden balls.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: A ball is created when the precogs identifies the killer and victim. However they get their visions randomly and seperately, Agatha being the most powerful one but they have to work together to identify a victim and killer. They put visions together and eventually balls with names will appear. The pre-crime team, led by Anderton, then pieces the visions together to find the location and then go after it, that's all they do, technicians are the ones that bring the visions together for processing by the pre-crime team. The visions they got were seen as "echos" and disregarded before the precogs were able to identify the killer. If they had it would put Burgess as the perpetrator. But since it looked exactly the same as the previous one they didn't allow the precogs go futher into the visions and not put them together. Agatha did have the vision of Burgess but Burgess removed those vision from the system.
But the previous "one" was not a murder so it should not justify a vision (it was only a staging). The real murder is committed by Burgess and it was premeditated, so a brown ball with Burgess' name should have popped out.
The first murder is not a "staging." Quoted from the film: "all you'd have to do is hire someone to kill Ann Lively, someone like a drifter...someone with nothing to lose." Burgess hired someone to kill her so they do have the intention to commit murder, hence the vision. He knew it would be stopped the first time and then the second time would be seen as an "echo" of the vision of the murder that was stopped and erased before a ball is produced.
Staged may have indeed not been the right word. A blame murder or false flag murder may be a better term. Planned in order to point the finger at the wrong person for the murder in any case.
Even staged murders are put in visions, same with the one Burgess tried to set up Anderton with. If someone is killed, the precogs get visions, but they don't know the context (the biggest flaw with the system of course). The visions come before the balls and if the engineers think it is a echo they will discard those visions and prevent the precogs from identifying the victim and killer. If they had the time, indeed a brown ball would be formed. Remember that premeditated murders come much earlier to the precogs in vision than emotional ones, so that was the reason why those visions showed up so soon after the staged one, adding to the idea it was an echo, perfectly calculated by Burgess.
10th Sep 2007
Demolition Man (1993)
Question: Why was Simon allowed a damn at the joy joy feeling machine thingy while John was fined for one while talking to his friend?
Answer: I'm assuming you're referring to when Simon says "Damn, I'm possessed!" He was hacking the machine when he said it, perhaps he'd corrupted the program or shut off the microphone as a side effect?
Answer: Note that when Spartan is fined for swearing, the machine uses his full name. When Phoenix is fined, the machine only refers to him as "You" ("You are fined 1 credit...") as he isn't recognised because he doesn't have a chip. Presumably he's expected to take the ticket and pay the fine even if the machine didn't automatically know it was him.
Also notable is that when Lenina swore she was fined only one half a credit instead of a full credit. Probably because she is a cop.
No, I think she got fined only a half credit because it was a *sotto voce* violation (under her breath).
Strange, I can swear somebody already mentioned that once before.
Wait a minute, is that trivia?
Answer: Phoenix has no sub-dermal microchip in his hand. Per Huxley, all transactions are done with this chip. That would mean fines are also generated per person based on this chip too.
Except when Simon is trying to get a gun, he keeps swearing at the booth which constantly fines him.
18th Nov 2020
Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Question: What happened to Luke's hand after Vader cut it off?
Answer: It fell into the reactor shaft alongside his lightsaber, unrecoverable. It probably fell outside like Luke did and dropped into the clouds of the gas giant Bespin.
Well, what about the thing that fell after Luke landed on the satellite dish outside? Was that Luke's hand?
No, nothing as macabre as that. Probably a piece of cloth or something that fell out of his pocket. Or, possibly, his lightsaber. But I doubt they would have him watch his own hand fall.
I always assumed that was his blaster, falling out of the holster.
In the Legends continuity someone found Luke's severed hand and used it to create Luke's evil clone, known as Luuke.
Answer: In the books before Disney, the hand was recovered by an Ugnaught (the pig-like people in Cloud City) and was taken with his lightsaber to the Emperor's secret storehouse on the planet Wayland. It was later used (in the Thrawn trilogy) to create a clone of Luke.
15th Nov 2020
The Incredibles (2004)
Question: How didn't Syndrome already know that Bob or Mr. incredible married Elastigirl? There is a computer with all the information about superheroes, so he would surely know this. I know that her location was unknown, but they were married before supers were made illegal and Incrediboy (his alias 15 years prior) was his biggest fan.
Answer: They got married as their secret identities, only their fellow superheroes knew it was Mr. Incredible and Elastigirl that got married, no fans. Syndrome also already wasn't a fan of him anymore and stopped following him.
What about the message that Mirage sent to Bob Parr? In it, she calls him Mr. Incredible and then says that his secret is safe. Since Mirage knows that Bob is Mr. Incredible and works for Syndrome, wouldn't that mean he knows Bob and Mr. Incredible are the same guy too?
Sure, Mirage personally recognized Mr. Incredible in the car with Frozone, who they were tracking. But they didn't make the connection yet that his wife is a super as well. In time they might have, but the focus was on Mr. Incredible right away, since that was Syndrome's number 1 super to find and test the robot on.
27th Aug 2001
Titanic (1997)
Corrected entry: When trying to steer around the iceberg, they put the propellers in reverse. If they wanted the bow to turn left, they would have turned better and faster had they left the propellers in forward to push the stern to the right to force the bow to the left.
Correction: This mistake was actually made by the crew - the Officer of the deck in charge of the bridge that night directly contradicted everything that was taught to shipmasters when in peril of collision. He ordered the turn rather than just hitting the berg head on, he ordered the engines reversed as well, which they had been specifically taught would make the ship turn more poorly than normal. He should have steered straight for the berg and ordered "All Stop" on the engines. Titanic could have easily survived for many hours with her bow crushed because only one compartment, the bow, would have flooded, as opposed to the six..
That's not true. The bow would've been damaged so badly that the ship would've sunken even faster and probably everyone would've died. Titanic's sister ship Lusitania was hit by a torpedo in the war and suffered damage very much like hitting the iceberg directly would've made. The way the bow dented after hitting the bottom is similar to that.
Getting hit by a torpedo is nothing like hitting an iceberg. When Lusitania got hit an enormous explosion followed caused by a boiler or coal stack exploding, that's what caused her to sink so fast (in only 18 minutes). Got nothing to do with compartments, the entire interior of the hull was probably torn apart from the explosion.
The Lusitania was Titanic's rival, not her sister ship. Plus, the bow would not have crumbled to badly if the engines were stopped, and she hit head on. In fact, the 1912 inquiry stated it was likely she could've limped on to New York.
This is extremely inaccurate. Lusitania was hit by the torpedo on her starboard side just aft of the bridge, nearly 200 feet astern of the bow point of the ship. A stem on collision with the berg would have resulted in Titanic not sinking at all, and at the inquiry in 1912 this was actually discussed and found to be the case. Among other evidence they looked at ships that had hit ice bergs stem-on in the past and found that the majority stayed afloat and stable afterwards.
The Lusitania was owned by Cunard, not the White Star Line. You may be thinking of the Britannic, who was hit by a mine.
Question: Why did Elizabeth lie to the pirates about her last name?
Answer: Elizabeth lied because she knows that being the governor's daughter makes her a valuable hostage who would either be ransomed or used for leverage. A commoner girl is far less useful.
What would the pirates ransom Elizabeth for? Gold silver and jewels?
Possibly for gold but she was more valuable for obtaining her father's cooperation to give them whatever they wanted (i.e. a safe escape, finding the coin, etc.) in exchange for not harming her.
"Safe escape" they can't die. "Finding the coin" the coin was already on board their ship.
She doesn't know that.
23rd Sep 2017
Independence Day (1996)
Question: Who is the actor with a beard who plays one of the volunteer pilots in Independence Day?
Answer: I believe you are referring to the tall, hippie looking pilot that shook his head when Cass told his son to get him more coffee during the "crash course" scene. His character or name is not listed in the credits nor on IMDB.
That's the guy who looks like the same guy in Tremors 7 - Shrieker Island, who runs the hunting tours. His name is listed nowhere in the ID4 universe. Any confirmation that this is the same guy?
It is definitely not Richard Brake, who was only 32 when Independence Day came out and the actor in question was at least 50.
He definitely wasn't referring to Russell Cassee because he didn't have a beard. The other correction perfectly matches what the question describes.
Answer: If you mean Russell Casse (you are too vague for it to be anyone else) the actor's name is Randy Quaid, brother of actor Dennis Quaid. He also appears in Brokeback Mountain.
He definitely wasn't referring to Russell Cassee because he didn't have a beard. The other correction perfectly matches what the question describes.
7th May 2009
Heroes (2006)
Question: Towards the end of the episode but before the climatic battle between Sylar and Peter, Sylar, disguised as Nathan through the power of illusion, walks calmly towards Peter and then reverts back to his own form/image. To my knowledge there are four people who are there to witness this: Peter, Matt Parkman and two unnamed SWAT officers with a battering ram. It is understandable if the two SWAT officers didn't see this transformation, but Matt? Surely he must have seen? He was a few feet from him, yet he didn't even bat an eyelid? Why is this? His superior transformed into a well-known killer.
Chosen answer: Simple, he changes the illusion for peter, but keeps the others thinking he is still Nathan, he can make different illusions at once.
Yeah, but surely when the cameras were on him, and the whole world was watching, what happened? He cast the same illusion to 7 billion people?
Yes. He could drop the illusion for Peter alone whilst everybody else would still see him in his disguise.
12th Nov 2004
It (1990)
1st Sep 2020
Dune (2000)
Question: Is there any reason they can't introduce sand worms to other planets in the Duniverse, there to proliferate and produce a greater, more widely distributed quantity of the spice? The newborn worms are called sandtrout, by virtue of being more or less the size of such. Should be easy enough therefore to capture some, surround them with sand in the spaceship to imitate their homeworld, and take them to some other planet the Empire is willing to give up for any other use, then let them grow and produce spice? Much greater abundance, much surer supply (the proverbial eggs in one basket), much closer at hand for any other world in the Universe?
Answer: There could be a number of reasons: introducing non-native species can be devastating to an environment; the sandworms may only be able to survive in certain conditions that other planets lack; they may be unable to reproduce once introduced to a different environment; moving the number of worms needed to produce an adequate supply may be cost-prohibitive; it may be decades before the worms are old enough to produce the spice, the new environment might change the quality and chemical composition of the spice that is produced; political conflicts, and so on.
Answer: If Spice is even half as useful as the novel says, those are all trivial inconveniences compared to the payoff that would make it worth a try.
Next to the fact the unique conditions of Arrakis is what makes the spice melange (not just the worms, but also the planetary conditions) you have to also understand that having the spice production on one planet makes it much easier to control. Whoever controls the spice controls the universe. It wasn't until much later (hundreds of years after the death of the god emperor) they were able to replicate the spice, but before that they didn't even know how the spice was even made. A large reason for this is they had no AI (forbidden) to help analyze the spice melange.
Fine, I accept the monopoly theory.
1st Dec 2007
Contact (1997)
Corrected entry: Ellie tells Palmer, "There are 400 billion stars out there, just in our galaxy alone. If only one out of a million of those had planets, alright, and if just one in a million of those had life, and if just out of a million of those had intelligent life, there would be literally millions of civilizations out there." Such a brilliant MIT grad, should be more convincing using mathematical arguments: 4.00E+11 x 1/1.00E+6 x 1/1.00E+6 x 1/1.00E+6 = 4.00E-7 (that's 0.0000004 planets in our galaxy with life!) Not a very persuasive argument for vast quantities of life in the universe. (00:17:15 - 00:17:45)
Correction: Yeah, well, with the current estimate being that there are over a hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe, many of which are deemed to be considerably larger than our own, I think you'll find that Ellie's statement is, in fact, perfectly correct.
Nope. There would need to be 2.5 Trillion galaxies, considerably more than "over a hundred billion" for Ellie's math to be correct.
Actually 2.5 Trillion bears out 1,000,000 planets with life. So... technically, there would need to be 5 Trillion to bear out 2,000,000 planets with life, thus meeting the requirements for use of the word millions, with an "s" as in plural of.
You're working on the idea of galaxies rather than stars. if each galaxy held 400 billion stars than the original corrections claim is easily in the right.
There are galaxies that are far bigger than Milky Way, even hosting a trillion or more stars.
But she's not talking about other galaxies. She is talking about planets and stars in our galaxy. The entry is correct, she's talking about an extremely low percentage.
10th Oct 2020
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: Marty shows Doc in 1885 the image of the tombstone, and he says that he wished he'd paid Buford off. Why can't he just round up 80 dollars to give to Buford and apologise for not doing that in the first place?
Answer: Adjusting for inflation, $80 back in 1885 is equivalent to about $2,143.65 today. Not something you can just conjure up easily, least of all back then. And Marty couldn't just take 1985 money back to 1885 and expect people to accept it.
Except that Doc was in 1885 and could have just gone to the bank and withdrew the $80's.
How? He arrives in 1885 and magically has the equivalent of $2,100 already in a bank account? He presumably borrowed it from Buford in the first place precisely because he didn't have that much cash available.
Doc didn't borrow money from Buford. He time-traveled with a briefcase filled with currencies from different time periods, including the 1800s. Doc had shoed Buford's horse for $5, for which Buford never paid him. When one shoe later came off later, causing Buford to be thrown, Buford shot the horse and demanded Doc pay him $75 for it and $5 for a broken bottle of whiskey.
Where would have get the $80 from? You're assuming he had the $80 available to him. The bank wouldn't just give out the money for free.
You can't take out $80 in 1985 money, and give it to someone in 1885. It would look like play money to them. U.S. currency looked a lot different back then.
Well he could technically get that amount worth in gold or silver.
And, as stated, since Doc was in 1885, more specifically, eight months in 1885, he could have just taken the money out of the bank considering he had a job as a blacksmith.
In Back to the Future 2, Doc shows Marty a briefcase full of money from different time periods, including various mid-1800 currencies, that he carried with him in the DeLorean. (There are online screen shots of the contents.) Doc refused to pay Tannen the $80 because he never owed it to him. Tannen was extorting him.
Answer: Buford was a crazed gunfighter, even if they paid off the $80 that wouldn't have satisfied him. He loved to shoot and kill. He wanted a showdown to show people he is to be feared and not messed with.
3rd Jun 2015
Beauty and the Beast (1991)
Question: Why does everyone love Gaston? I can kinda see why from his looks/biceps but is there another reason why they love him so much?
Answer: I would say he was admired rather than loved and for very superficial reasons. He is young, handsome, manly, and extroverted. People often admire and wish for those traits. They project other non-existent qualities onto such a person while blind to their flaws. In Gaston's case, he is arrogant and self-absorbed. It is very typical of our society to celebrate people for their physical attributes, even though they may lack integrity in other areas of their lives.
I'd have to disagree. The film takes place in the 1790s to early 1800s if you ignore the Eiffel tower in Be Our Guest. So not long after the revolution at all. The peasantry was suffering quite a bit of food insecurity, which we see reflected in the opening song, (the eggs are too expensive, the bread is stale, etc.) Gaston is a hunter, and he's able to provide for his village which might otherwise have suffered a bit. I'd argue that his super-inflated ego may be a result of the praise he rightly earned.
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: And how is this a mistake? He would still need eyes to live out his everyday life. For all we know he has a work set of eyes and a everyday set of eyes.
MasterOfAll
If this was the case then he would be using a set of eyes during the walk-in scene.
Perhaps he has nowhere to store his eyes on the work floor (or isn't allowed), so he can't swap them on the spot.
lionhead