Corrected entry: Karen knows the reaction between the vampire blood and EDTA is going to be energetic, in fact so much that she feels the need to advise Blade to take a step back. As such, why on earth does she demonstrate it under a microscope, gratuitously blowing up expensive equipment? Hardly a prudent move for an underground resistance movement.
lionhead
1st May 2018
Blade (1998)
27th Apr 2018
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
Corrected entry: When Caparzo is shot by the sniper in the church the shot hits him in the front of his chest/lung, indicating the church is in front of them, but when Jackson sees the church the sniper is stationed in, it's behind them.
Correction: No, the shot hits him in his back and goes through his body, you see it exiting out his chest. He had his back to the church, facing the rest of the squad, when he is hit. There is no error in this scene.
23rd Apr 2018
Wonder Woman (2017)
Corrected entry: Diana was sculpted from clay by her mother, and Hades, her former lover. Aphrodite then breathed life into the statue. She was not born in the usual sense. Ignoring above and assuming she is in fact the daughter of Zeus (or Hades), this would make Ares her uncle. Not her brother as she says in the film.
Correction: This entry is doubly wrong - first off, the film states that Diana's origin story is different than it was in the original comics, so here, Hippolyta told her she was made from clay and all that, when in reality, she was made the old fashioned way by Zeus and Hippolyta. Basically, the movie radically streamlines her comic book origin story, just like the first Thor movie did. Second, what is true in mythology would not necessarily translate one on one to the movie, and the movie mentions during the storytelling scene at the beginning that Ares is Zeus' son.
Well I do think she was made from clay and turned to life by Zeus, that still makes her Zeus' daughter. A demigod. Technically Ares is her half-brother.
Correction: The comic book origins don't necessarily apply to the films.
15th Apr 2018
Captain America: Civil War (2016)
Corrected entry: Okay, giving the movie a huge benefit of the doubt and say that it is in fact possible for Black Widow to survive a hand grenade exploding three feet away by hiding behind a mercenary, it's inside of an armored car. The sound of the blast alone would be concentrated by the metal walls, and leave her very deaf.
Correction: She could be wearing earplugs, 1 for a radio the other to protect her ears from explosions.
27th Aug 2001
Titanic (1997)
Corrected entry: In the scene where Rose is looking at Jack on the bow of the ship, you can see a tiny bit of desert behind him. (01:19:25)
Correction: What you are seeing is cloud formations tinted gold from the setting sun. Not a desert.
Indeed. So funny to post a "mistake" like that. They shot it all inside a studio, nowhere near any desert. Why would there be a desert?
They quite famously built a full-scale replica of the Titanic at the Fox Baja Studios in Rosarito, Mexico, and a lot of shots were on that replica. Rosarito isn't exactly a desert but it's not lush and verdant either. The cloud formations were real clouds, outside.
26th Mar 2018
Tremors 2 (1996)
Corrected entry: Kate finds a Graboid fossil and explains that the rock is from the Precambrian era (which ran from about 4.5 billion years ago through about 500 million years ago), thus making them literally the oldest complex life-forms in the history of Earth. Cool idea, but it makes no sense. Life in the Precambrian era was mostly bacterial or simplistic organisms such as sea-sponges and jellyfish late in the era. Something like the Graboids just couldn't have existed, both because they're too complex to have existed in that time-frame and also (and more importantly) because there wouldn't be an adequate food source for them to thrive. Sure, maybe they could have existed during the time of dinosaurs, but that only started about 250 million years ago, way after the end of the Precambrian era.
Correction: They retconned this in the TV series, saying that Kate had misdated the fossil, which was actually from the Devonian Period.
I don't think a retcon validates a movie mistake.
Correction: The oldest known life forms. Graboids existed, therefore other life forms existed too, which they ate, we've just not discovered them yet.
Correction: The graboids might not have originated from earth. Like suggested they could be aliens and their species landed on Earth 5 billion years ago.
The movie states that they are from Earth. The suggestion that they're aliens is invalidated in the film itself, as it is proven wrong by the scene in question. Ergo, this correction is invalid. Also, this correction fails to address one of the key issues brought up in the mistake - they wouldn't have a viable food source and would have died out, even if the preposterous notion that they were aliens were true.
Correction: This is speculation at best regarding creatures that don't exist in real life. There's no way to say they wouldn't have adequate food source without knowing what they needed to survive, or how they evolved.
26th Mar 2018
Batman and Robin (1997)
Stupidity: Batman blows up a rocket to avoid it crashing back to Gotham. You would've thought he would have more sense to detonate it whilst it was out of the earth's atmosphere So, basically, he has turned 1 falling object into hundred of falling objects. (01:11:15 - 01:11:50)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Batman's bomb probably has a set time to go off, couldn't have it go off until it was higher. So he slapped it on immediately and went after Freeze. The rocket disintegrated in the explosion, making it harmless.
Completely ridiculous correction that contradicts what the movie itself shows. You literally see it explode right after Batman exits. There's no "set timer" outside of a couple-second delay.
26th Mar 2018
Alien Resurrection (1997)
Corrected entry: If the mission is to capture and use xenomorphs, why on Earth aren't the areas of the ship meant for them acid-proof?
Correction: Perhaps there is no material strong enough to resist the acid. It's extremely volatile. Also, the station isn't built for the containment of xenomorphs, and since it is a secret operation they couldn't get any materials without drawing suspicion.
Yep, not even the Predators have armor that can stand the xenomorps' acid, and they have been technologically advanced for thousands of years.
Even 400 years in the future!? My entire point is that why aren't they better prepared for confining the xenomorphs?! By any means and at all levels?! Weyland Yutoni is powerful enough to get what they need secrectly.
It may well be 400 years in the future, but that doesn't mean they have developed a very specific material to resist the acidic effects of the alien blood.
30th Oct 2017
The Book of Eli (2010)
Corrected entry: The protected copy of the Bible is placed at the end next to a copy of the Artscroll Tanach which includes the Hebrew/English version of the original bible as well as the other 39 holy books, so they had it all the time.
Correction: The Tanakh, as much as it is the "Hebrew bible", does not include the entirety of the new testament, which, as well as there being numerous changes between the Tanakh and the KJV, means that no, they did not "already have" what Eli was bringing to them.
Yeah he specifically said he had a King James bible, meaning the English translation of the old testament. Though it just a translation the old testament of the King James bible is still of important historical value. And of course the inclusion of the new testament and apocrypha like Maccabees.
22nd Mar 2018
Jurassic Park (1993)
Corrected entry: Why aren't there subwayesque service tunnels all round the island to permit the staff to travel hidden from the dinosaurs/sundry other emergencies/all the other incidental occurrences that make every other undertaking on our planet use similar tunnels? Expensive and laborious, but if you have the resources to make dinosaurs, everything else is a breeze.
Correction: Despite Hammond's catchphrase of "We spared no expense", that would have been a huge expense, as underground tunnels suitable for travel are extremely costly. Also remember that Isla Nublar is a volcanic island. The ground may simply not be suitable for that kind of construction.
Correction: Given that "Jurassic Park" was author Michael Crichton's re-imagining of his own film "Westworld" (in which a high-tech amusement park goes haywire and the guests must run for their lives), the whole point of the movie was to place humans and dinosaurs on the same deadly-dangerous playing field. Like "Westworld," this movie was a purely visual film (a graphic novel, basically) that smoothed-over lapses of logic in favor of frantic spectacle. If John Hammond had the foresight to make his Jurassic Park a hermetically-sealed, perfectly-safe environment for humans to observe and maintain dinosaurs, it would have eliminated the thrill of the movie, turning it into a National Geographic documentary.
But the point is the park was safe, without Nedry's sabotage things would have worked perfectly. Hammond spared no expense and it shows with the fancy security. Because of this Nedry's sabotage was put in.
The fact that Jurassic Park could be sabotaged by a computer geek is proof that it was not perfectly safe. A perfectly-safe facility would be foolproof and sabotage-proof.
Any place can be sabotaged, the point is that it was safe enough to receive visitors, without the sabotage the inspection would have gone smoothly. Adding tunnels or even more security wouldn't change a thing. You are just making stuff up.
Correction: They didn't think about it. They didn't need to because they felt they had the place pretty well secured. Besides it wouldn't have helped them much anyway, once the fences were down the predators could get anywhere and a lot of the predators are small enough to get inside the tunnels, the velociraptors could even open doors. Most personnel was already gone so there is no lacking in their infrastructure that would require tunnels. This could have helped Dennis Nedry escape as well. He shut the park down to create chaos and move unseen.
15th Mar 2018
Speaker for the Dead
Plot hole: It took Ender only a few hours to unravel a mystery that 3 generations of highly educated and skilled xenologists and xenobiologists were unable to do. Pipo, of the first generation, was restricted by the rules imposed on him by the congress and he found out the truth but died because of it. After that Libo should have simply asked the piggies what happened and should have digged into the piggies' reproduction system, like he should have done in the first place as that is his job. Both Libo and Miro and Ouanda broke the rules so they shouldn't have had a problem with asking the right questions. They weren't afraid of the piggies either, loved them even. Libo would have had the answer to the reason for the death of his father and understood the piggies in a week, even though Novinha had hid the original data. If not him Miro and Ouanda would have had plenty of time to figure it out as well, just by asking questions. They would have learned a lot more about the descolada virus decades sooner as well, giving them more chance to combat it successfully.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This entry first claims that it took three generations to find the solution, then states that individual in the first generation found it. If one xenologist can arrive at the solution from scratch, a literal genius like Ender can certainly rapidly come to the same conclusion using the data the next two generations compiled in the meantime.
They were all geniuses. The other 2 generations should have found out just a quickly or even quicker if they would have just simply done their jobs. It doesn't make sense.
But in Xenocide Miro's siblings like Ela, Olhado, Quarra and Grego are in the same league as Ender in intelligence, solving impossible questions without either Ender or Valentine even grasping it well enough to understand. Surely Miro isn't the only one lacking. They got that genius from their parents, the second generation xenologists Libo and Novinha who are both geniuses as well. At least the third generation should have figured it out long before Ender showed up. Mostly my point is they haven't actually done their job in all this time instead of them not being as smart as Ender to figure it out. Just ask the right questions like Ender did and voila. Its their job to ask questions but they didn't do it and their attitude towards the piggies is all wrong.
20th Jun 2016
Game of Thrones (2011)
Battle of the Bastards - S6-E9
Corrected entry: SPOILER: Rickon Stark gets set loose by Ramsay Bolton and told to run to his brother. He knows that arrows are being fired at him, but he still runs in a dead straight line, so of course he gets struck down. If he'd just zig-zagged a bit he'd have been near-impossible to hit.
Correction: Rickon is a young child and scared. It would be perfectly normal for him not to realise that zig-zagging would help him be more elusive. Also, zig-zagging is no guarantee that he still would not be hit by a random arrow.
Next to that it would slow him down and he might trip and fall.
18th Nov 2003
The Time Machine (2002)
Corrected entry: In 2020 they talk about the first 20-megaton explosion to create the lunar colony. Then we find out that these blasts have knocked the moon off its orbit causing it to break up. However even a single moderately sized crater on the moon would have been created by a blast an order of magnitude greater then this. How could such small blasts knock the moon out of its orbit while countless meteor impacts have had no effect?
Correction: For the moon to be knocked out of orbit, an object the same size and density would have to strike the moon and at relatively the same speed in the opposite direction. Even if the largest asteroid in our solar system struck the moon (Ceres which is almost 600 miles wide), the moon wouldn't be knocked out of orbit or even destroyed. As to all the comments about mining the moon to reduce its mass, even with unknown future technology, it's a ridiculous assumption. To reduce the mass of the moon by 100th of 1% (0.01%) you would have to remove about 7.35 quadrillion tons, so not trillions. A 1% reduction in mass would require 7.35 sextillion tons removed (not that a 1% reduction in mass would result in the moon being knocked out of orbit), which is over a quintillion tons a day for 7 years straight (1,000 mining facilities each mining out 30 billion tons a second, and currently we don't even mine 16 billion tons on Earth in one year). And a lighter moon would cause the moon to be pulled closer to Earth, not further away. Certainly a movie set in the future can have moon be out of orbit without creating a mistake. But to claim it was from blasting from 20-megaton explosions and mining isn't plausible due to the sheer size of the moon. Remember, the moon is bigger than Pluto.
Correction: All we hear is that the FIRST blast was a 20-megaton explosion, and then later, that the attempts to colonize the moon had knocked it out of orbit. We have NO idea what went on between the year 2030 and 2037, and to say that the moon's orbit was disrupted by 20-megaton blasts is an assumption, nothing more.
Its impossible. A bomb 10,000 times the strength wouldn't do a damn thing to the moon. Not even hundreds of them.
Correction: The mention of "blasting" was associated with lunar mining. Presumably, much of the mined lunar material was being freighted away from the Moon (perhaps and probably back to Earth, but also to other destinations), thereby depleting the Moon's mass over time. We know today that the Moon is gradually moving away from the Earth already under its current mass. Removing the Moon's mass gradually would affect its gravitational relationship to the Earth, eventually leading to the Moon's breakup due to gravitational tidal forces. The "blasting" would have only been the beginning of the calamity.
Sounds ridiculous. Got any idea how much mass they would need to remove from the moon before it would actually affect its orbit? trillions of tons. You need such a big operation of constant removal of huge amounts of material from the moon, for centuries. Not likely. Also, the craters on the moon are caused by meteorites that slammed into it with the power of hundreds if not thousands of megatons of TNT, for billions of years.
Why ridiculous? You have no idea how much material was removed, nor do you have any idea what a future civilization is capable of removing.
They would have to be removing trillions of tons of material from the moon for decades. In 7 years you can't remove enough mass from the moon to affect its orbit causing it to break up, not unless you have Superman doing the work.
Again, you have no idea of a future civilization's mining capabilities.
26th Feb 2018
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
Corrected entry: Will could've easily seen Elizabeth more than once every ten years, by walking with his feet in buckets, which Davy Jones did.
Correction: Technically, yes, he could have, but doing so would have been extremely dangerous. Jones isn't merely incapable of setting foot on dry land, it's fatal for him to do so. Will would risk death attempting this if he should lose his balance while trying to walk thus encumbered.
Correction: Would be kinda stupid to be walking across a beach in buckets, just to see your wife. Davey Jones was pretty much imprisoned when he was standing in that bucket. However they made it work it was only for the negotiations and wouldn't be exactly practical to do when visiting, standing there on the beach in a bucket, even going from bucket to bucket. Will wanted to see his wife, but at the same time wanted to do his job, he wasn't desperate.
13th May 2016
The Avengers (2012)
Corrected entry: Right after the second engine goes down on the shield Helicarrier, the altitude reading on Iron Man's HUD shows just over 15,000 feet for the altitude. A short time later, even though the helicarrier has been falling since the engine went down, the altitude on the helicarrier's bridge shows the helicarrier falling through 18,000 feet.
Correction: 2 independent systems showing different values for altitude is not a continuity mistake, it merely shows that the systems are not calibrated for the same ground level or, more likely, that both systems don't operate under the same physical conditions. E.g. Helicarrier in "normal" air vs Iron Man inside an engine that produces heat and pressure changes while moving, thereby falsifying his readings.
Suggesting Iron Man's suit is giving falsified readings because of pressure and heat is ridiculous. Iron Man's suit is controlled by an advanced AI, you really think it wouldn't notice strange readings?
Just because you notice a strange reading does not mean that you can correct it on the fly. Or, as suggested, Iron Man has simply calibrated his altimeter for a wrong/virtual ground level as a signal for him to get out of there in case his plan fails. The main point of my suggested correction is that the Helicarrier and the suit are two independent systems that do not necessarily need to show the same values and the views of Suit's HUD in them self are consistent insofar as that the altitude drops from 15000+ to 13000+.
You're right. 2 independent altitude meters can give separate altitudes. The correction is solid.
20th Feb 2018
The Thing (1982)
Corrected entry: The big burly guy with the sweater has a heart attack. When his chest is opened it is soon discovered that he has been assimilated, meaning he was no longer human at that point and would not have had a heart attack.
Correction: The alien entity imitating Vance Norris is faking a heart attack. Vance Norris was replaced by the alien a long time ago.
He definitely isn't faking. He winces from chest pains while he is in a room all by himself, just after he looks out the window and yells "Hey you guys! Come here!" The implication is, like Blair said, when the thing takes over someone it copies them perfectly and also copied Norris' bad heart. It also wouldn't make any sense for him to fake a heart attack at that moment because it caused him to reveal himself to everyone all at once and be killed.
It doesn't take over their bad traits, no need to do that, every single cell of the organism has its own sense of survival, a heart attack wouldn't threaten it. It did fake a heart attack, it's not human, it doesn't use a heart. MacReady was becoming a threat to its survival with the dynamite - the thing wanted to create chaos, and in that way kill them all and eliminate the threat. It lured people close, like the doctor, so he could attack. Besides, it had already copied itself, it was also Palmer.
The chest pains started before Macready came into the building. He definitely wasn't faking a heart attack, he was actually having one. The creature makes a perfect copy of the organism it takes over and because Norris had a bad heart, it also had a bad heart. The creature only reveals itself when it's alone or it has to defend itself. Because the doctor was hurting it with the defibrillator, it was forced to reveal itself.
So you are saying that if the creature had a heart attack alone in a room it would actually die? Why would an actual heart attack threaten a thing that is made up of individual cells that have their own survival instincts? This fact was only revealed after the incident. No, the heart attack wasn't real, it isn't human.
No, I'm not saying the creature would or even could die of a heart attack. I'm saying that the heart attack wasn't faked because the creature made a perfect copy of Norris, including his bad heart. This is all explained after the dog-thing is examined. It has internal organs that look and work just like the creatures it copies. It wouldn't need to fake a heart attack to get people to come closer to it anyway. It can just walk up to anybody it wants to attack. For the entire movie, the creature lies in wait, attacking one person at a time unless it absolutely has no other choice but to defend itself.
I know it's the official explanation given, but I just don't buy it the creature would fail its hidden state so utterly by going into cardiac arrest and drawing attention to itself like that even though every single cell has it own survival instincts. I still say it was the threat of the dynamite, to create confusion. They do think individually or else the dynamite would have worked in it's favor even. It just panicked and did it on purpose.
I think what the movie is saying is that even though each individual cell wants to protect itself, it's still beholden to what particular type of cell it is. So if it's a copy of an eye cell of someone who has bad eyesight, the thing will still have bad eyesight. It didn't know anything about the dynamite when it started having chest pains, that was before Macready even came in.
6th Feb 2018
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)
Corrected entry: The entire scene with the rebel bombers is ridiculous. First, they are incredibly slow, ponderous craft that are impractical in the extreme. Their slowness also makes no sense, as there are far larger, more massive ships that move at relatively high velocities, so their size/mass isn't enough. Second, the idea of "dropping bombs" on a ship in space violates the laws of physics. They are not near enough a gravity well to exert the force needed to pull the bombs downward. The ships themselves cannot exert such a field, no matter how big they are. If they did, ALL craft flying by them would be pulled toward or into them, and the people on board would not be able to move due to the crushing gravity field. The bombs are not shown to be pushed out in any way, and in fact Poe keeps yelling to drop the bombs. But instead they open the bomb-bay doors as if in a WWII plane, and when the bombs are released they fall to the ship as they would above a planet.
Correction: The bombers move slowly to be able to accurately drop the bombs without disrupting the drop, much like real-life bombers do, after which the writers adapted these ships, it doesn't mean they work like real life bombers, but the idea is taken and thus the limitations are similar but for different reasons that go unexplained. Unless you have schematics of the bombers you have no actual argument about how they should operate. Also, ships that size do have a gravitational field. Ships close-by would be pulled closer but they have engines that prevent them from doing that. Future technology allows for the people inside the ships to move around freely because of inertial dampers and artificial gravity. There is no point in using real-life physics to contradict actions in a science fiction movie involving huge spaceships, FTL drives, lightsabers and death stars. The laws of physics work differently in this universe.
20th Dec 2017
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)
Corrected entry: During the bombardment of the republic ships by the first order, the shots have a flight pattern that looks very much like a balistic curve. There is no gravity source strong enough anywhere nearby to account for this curve.
Correction: This is a fictional technology set in a fictional universe. We do not know the type of energy the weapon uses, therefore we can't say how it should or should not behave. Also, the ships are enormous, and therefore have their own gravitational effect due to their mass, which could account for this.
Correction: While the first is a possibility, that in some way they are able to have some kind of guided laser-torpedo something or other, but the gravity explanation is impossible. If it's guided energy, it would take gravitational fields on the order of massive planets and above to even start to bend the light. These ships are not that massive. If you want to use the "but they have artificial gravity" argument, if it were that powerful a field to affect light and quasi-light objects as is proposed, especially at those distances, then it would absolutely impossible for anyone to move within the ship - they would be either squashed completely flat or rendered immobile due to the sheer power of the field. The best explanation is that the film makers simply wanted to be able to show the guns hitting in a way that wasn't simply straight-line lasers, and hoped that people would just think it was cool.
It's established in the Star Wars universe that the weapons are not light, but rather charged gas and plasma.
Starships so large have something called "inertia dampers" which counter the massive gravitational forces the ship endures for anyone inside it.
26th Jan 2018
The Island (2005)
Corrected entry: McGregor's Scottish character says he paid $5 million for his insurance policy. The doctor tells his investors that he will have to destroy $200 million worth of product to be safe. That converts to a mere 40 clones. Obviously there were far more than that slated to be destroyed.
Correction: It's a certainty that the insurance policies are not being sold "at cost." The customer may have paid the company $5,000,000, but that doesn't mean it costs the company $5,000,000 to produce a clone. The doctor is talking about the cost to replace that inventory, not how much those policies are worth.
Exactly, it's probably closer to 200 clones.
21st Jan 2018
Stargate (1994)
Factual error: When they first power-up the Stargate in the military facility (using Jackson's decryption), the thing surges to life, and electrical sparks spray out of overloaded connections all around the control room. This could only happen if there were no fuses or electrical breakers in the military's control system, which is a ridiculous notion for such advanced military technology. In real life, a powerful overload situation would instantly burn out fuses and trip breakers and the whole system would simply go dead (there would be no sparks). Showers of sparks are a common error in many science fiction and space fantasy films dating back many decades.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: If there would be breakers and fuses then yes, the system would simply go dead and then they would have nothing. They intentionally let the system nearly overload because without power they wouldn't be able to finish the sequence.
No, that's not the way sophisticated (and expensive) electronic technology works. If you have sparks spraying out of electrical connectors, that means you're melting down millions and millions of dollars of hardware. No technician or electrician or even a first-year auto mechanic would intentionally design and hardwire an electrical system without fuses and/or breakers.
They're dealing with Ancient technology. It's quiet possible that such an advanced piece of technology as a Stargate could cause powerful arcs of electricity along lines separated even by tripped breakers.
Ancient technology does not override electrical physics. Modern electrical equipment is protected with fuses and breakers for a reason. If the Stargate technology overrode the parameters of the modern equipment, it would melt down the modern components being protected by the fuses and breakers. Either way, the whole system would shut down.
Correction: She wants Blade to see the effect under the microscope before the reaction destroys it. She doesn't care it destroys a microscope, she's out of there pretty soon anyway. Whistler can get a new one, no problem, they do enough funding for security measures, lab equipment, weapons, fuel, etc. They don't seem to be on such a tight budget, considering how carelessly both Blade and Whistler operate.
lionhead