Corrected entry: Admiral Yamamoto and Nagumo are in the back of the car about 30 minutes into the movie. As the camera pans outside, you can see the car is driving on the right side of the road. Japan drives on the left. (00:28:00)
lionhead
27th Feb 2020
Midway (2019)
27th Feb 2020
Joker (2019)
Factual error: It is established that Penny Fleck adopted Arthur and that he's been abused. In her file, when Arthur reads it, you can see that she was admitted the first time to the psychiatric hospital at 15 years of age, had multiple episodes with drug abuse, and the file mentions she is 25 and single on the date of the report, 11-2-1952. A single parent already had rather slim chances to adopt in the 50s, but a known mental patient and drug abuser, not a chance. (01:13:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: She could have bribed her way into adopting a child. Someone who is desperate for attention could find ways to get what they want.
Suggested correction: It is not firmly established that Penny actually adopted Arthur - in fact, it's strongly hinted at that Thomas Wayne forced her into signing adoption papers in order to cover up Arthur's true parentage.
The established, as in recognized, backed up by documents, 'official' version the main character finds out and acts by, is the one contained in the report, newspaper clippings and flashback; son abused by the boyfriend of an adopted mother. Such story is impossible the way it is presented the moment we see details in a document that overblows it painting this 'adoptive' mother as single and with a history of drug abuse since 15 years old. Penny is not eligible to be an adoptive parent, and yet nobody seemed to have raised an eyebrow about that. If you want to assume that rather than being a mistake with overzealous details in a prop (check out of the original script of the movie, which has none of this ambiguity) whoever arranged the fake adoption documents kinda forgot to also make quietly disappear the mental and medical record invalidating their own fabrication, sure, do that! It's not exactly a small oversight - and really one would wonder why Wayne kept his bastard son with her at all.
Arthur is not Thomas Wayne's son. That was all in Penny's head.
5th Nov 2003
Enemy at the Gates (2001)
Corrected entry: One of the well known reasons the Germans were defeated in Stalingrad was - snow. But in this movie there is just mud on the ground, but no snow.
Correction: Most of the battle was fought in late summer and autumn. Historical photographs look just like the movie set.
The Battle of Stalingrad lasted from August 1942 to February 1943. There most certainly would have been snow during the winter months. But in any case, the events depicted in the film occurred before the snow came in, the duel supposedly took place before the Soviet Counterattack (Operation Uranus).
However the problem here is that this film follows a fictionalised version of Vasily Zaytsev. The sniper with a total confirmed kill count of over 220 during the battle of Stalingrad. Vasily didn't join the battle until November 10th 1942. Meaning that the snow would already be on the ground when he joined making your point that the events took place prior to the snow coming in is null and void. Sorry.
Vasily Zaitsev was in Stalingrad since September 1942. Also there is no indication there was snow untill the end of November, which is when Operation Uranus started. So he events probably took place in September or October. No snow has to be there.
24th Mar 2016
The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Plot hole: When Clarice visits Lecter in his new makeshift cell, she brings his drawings, which were left behind in Baltimore. She tells him how she saw the lambs being killed and heard them screaming, taking one lamb with her when she ran away. As the guards approached his cell after she leaves, the camera pans across the cell, taking in the drawings Clarice had brought, and the top one is a very detailed drawing of Clarice holding a spring lamb. She only told just told Lecter about the lamb, not enough time for him to have done that drawing.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: First; I do agree and support the mistake. But playing devil's advocate for a moment; she told him back in Baltimore about the ranch and how they had sheep and horses, so in theory he could have already started drawing back then and figure that a memory about the place was linked to those animals, adding the exact detail afterwards. Should also be noted that the guards approach the cell 'after she leaves', yes, but it's an 'after' that happens after she already flew back all the way from Memphis, so a few hours later.
Your last sentence corrects the mistake, the top drawing is new and wasn't brought by Clarice. You can see chalk on top of the drawing indicating he had just made it. Several hours passed between her delivering her story and him receiving his dinner.
6th Apr 2017
The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Continuity mistake: Lecter asks for a lamb chop dinner, rare, and when they arrive, they are rare. When we see them later, they look well done. (01:15:50)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: They don't look different in any of the shots. It's the same lambchops, same temperature. They are cooked as is, so they have a dark outside but inside they are probably rare. They do look darker in the last scene but that's probably because they have gone cold and dried out.
Suggested correction: How would a mistake like that come to be? Someone cooked them in between shots? Too much time elapsed and the substance oxidized? The potato and everything else on the plate look the same, and so do the chops, shape-wise. They might be of a slightly darker color in the very last shot with Boyle on the floor, but the plate has also been sprayed with blood, so that could account for this - mostly perceived - change.
A mistake like this would come to be if they're using real food and not props and had to do a cut, change camera position, do a reshoot, etc and had to set the scene again and redo the cooking of the food, or remake the props for some reason, but now the food looks different. What we see as a continuous scene in a movie or TV show is not always done in one take, which is why the site is filled with countless continuity mistakes.
15th Nov 2002
Blade II (2002)
Corrected entry: In the scene where Nyssa and Reinhardt are fighting the Reapers after Blade has detonated the UV bomb; Nyssa takes a deep breath before diving under the water, yet vampires don't breathe. (01:18:29)
Correction: The Blade movies deal with vampires being a scientific phenomena, not mythical. It is never stipulated that vampires don't breath in the Blade movies.
Vampires as depicted in the film are immortal and it is stated that only a few specific things (sunlight, silver garlic) can kill them. It could be argued that, being immortal, they therefore do not "need" to breathe. That said, you could also argue that since they feel pain (albeit it with a very high pain tolerance outside of the above things), it could be very uncomfortable for them to be held underwater and not be able to breath, so they create the same habit as regular humans (taking a breath before diving).
Then again, on the other hand, Nyssa like many vampires was born as one and should never have developed human traits.
Since the movie never states that vampires don't breathe at all, this really can not be considered a mistake.
It's also quite possible that pureblood vampires learn to breathe in order to attempt to seem human in order to fit in.
Correction: It sounded more like a gasp-out of shock-rather than her holding her breath; just look at Dylan in Charlie's Angels when she got shot. Plus, it could be possible that her mouth is closed when she goes underwater.
15th Nov 2002
Blade II (2002)
Corrected entry: During the sewer scene, Whistler says "well some of us can't see in the dark, nipplehead". Fair enough, humans can't see in the dark, vampires can. So why do they have the lights on the guns? As a UV weapon, constantly on but filtered for quick access? That's just about OK. But that doesn't explain why Nyssa uses a flashlight in the house of pain as she searches the rooms/corridor/loft. (00:42:01)
Correction: There wasn't a scene I saw of Nyssa using the light, her guns were holstered when walking around the house of pain. There is a scene when Verlaine is searching with the light on. When she and Lighthammer first enter together, you see the filter on and then the next time we see her, the filter is off. But this makes perfect sense in the movie, she kept the light on, but filtered when walking through a room full of "friendly" vampires. When they were out of the way, she removed the filter to be ready to use the UV light as a weapon.
You can see her walking up a ladder and turning on a light to check the room.
Turning on the lights and using a flashlight are 2 different things.
1st Feb 2020
1917 (2019)
Factual error: The strong current of the river the main character falls into carries him to a considerable waterfall. There is not, nor has there ever been, a river of that kind in the Ecoust front line area, let alone a waterfall. Anyone who has any insight into the geography of the region will tell you it is flat as can be. The largest body of water, the Yzer, gently meanders and flows into the Channel, even during really rainy times.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I do not believe that either Ecoust or Croisilles Wood is in Flanders. Both are behind the old German lines at the Somme. That said, there are no bodies of water in that area.
Ecoust and Croissilles are in department Pas-De-Calais in the French Flanders, together with the Belgian flanders they are called Flanders Fields. It is indeed a flat area.
Also, the message in ink delivered is legible, despite having been submerged in water. And don't get me started about the attack from ridiculous trenches and not a barbed wire in sight.
It's not. Even French Flanders is further north. But, even though there are some high points in the area, like Vimy Ridge that rises to about 500 feet above the surrounding plains, the slopes are quite gentle. And, as you say, wouldn't allow for the kind of drop seen in the movie.
There is a watercourse that goes through Croisilles... But it's basically a ditch.
7th Feb 2020
King Kong (2005)
Plot hole: The opening debut of Kong in NYC is sold out if we are to believe what it says on the entrance doors. Yet Driscoll was watching a play then changes his mind and shows up at the debut. How did he get a ticket?
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He was there when Kong was captured, one of the survivors even. Even though he wasn't given any credit it's possible he got VIP access, as a thank you.
10th Oct 2013
Elysium (2013)
Factual error: When the shuttles are approaching the station, their engines are firing from the rear, meaning they are in constant acceleration toward the station. When arriving at a station, you would need to slow down as you approach, meaning the engines should be firing forward (or the shuttle should reverse direction). This happens in all scenes where shuttles are approaching the station.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: But the station spins to create artificial gravity for the outer rim where the ships are headed. The ships approaching are just matching speed and don't need to fully brake.
Not when accelerating toward the structure. They would have to slow their approach, then match the radial velocity of the ring, which would still mean decelerating to match the structure's relative position in orbit.
20th Jan 2020
Joker (2019)
Corrected entry: When Arthur receives a phone call from Murray's office in the morning, he is running to the phone out of his bedroom without a cigarette. He is not seen smoking or lighting a cigarette while on the phone. At the end of the phone conversation a half-finished cigarette appears in his hand.
Correction: He was holding a cigarette the whole time. You can see it in his right hand when he gets off the bed.
3rd Jan 2020
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Plot hole: While the pair are duelling on Kajimi, Kylo Ren only realises Rey is onboard his ship when the mask of Darth Vader is force-teleported between them. However in this same fight Rey is wielding the dagger, which Kylo must have known was also inside Ren's chambers before the fight. So he should've been able to determine Rey's location earlier.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While he should have had some idea, it doesn't prove she is in his quarters, only that she has been there. It's also a small item that he may not have noticed in her hand, focusing more on her lightsaber.
Hogwash. He could have easily noticed it, even if he was focused on her lightsaber. Maybe it is small but rather easily noticeable.
I think the biggest point is the mask proves her location whilst the dagger in her hand doesn't.
It's also a weapon. In a combat situation a trained fighter like Kylo would have checked her other hand for a weapon as it is a common tactic to check a swipe with the main blade and stab with an off hand short weapon.
5th Sep 2011
Batman and Robin (1997)
Corrected entry: Batman couldn't possibly have his own credit card. Obtaining a credit card requires proof of identification and a billing address, neither of which Batman would submit for obvious reasons. Nor would it be a credit card that he issued himself through Wayne Enterprises because the credit card company would see that a Wayne Enterprises Corporate credit card was used at a charity event that was attended by Batman and would subsequently reveal his secret identity (not to mention that Batman intends on using the card for a $7 million purchase, which is not a price anyone is going to turn a blind eye to), which is not something Batman would risk. And although the Bat-credit card may be a jokey reference to the 60s TV series, Batman still demonstrates his intent on using the card to secure his bid for a date with Poison Ivy, which means that in the context of the film, the credit card is functional.
Correction: Granted that the movie takes place in the real-time calendar year 1997; keep in mind that major federal banking laws were not enforced too seriously at the time, plus this was the time way before the USA Patriot Act was created and strictly enforced after the September 11 terrorist attacks. I can understand that even if Bruce Wayne did manage to have his own bank and provided a line of credit to Batman still like everyone else he had to submit to US federal banking laws (FCRA, ECOA and the like.) Let alone the general public will find it too suspicious why a private citizen would give a line of credit to a superhero in the first place. Either way, it's all within the DC World fantasy.
I would be too young to remember, but prior to online shopping, weren't people usually required to present their ID when making a credit card purchase? When I had my first job, if someone was making a purchase with the credit card, our boss required us to check their ID. I mean, if I was holding a fundraiser and someone pledged $1 million, I would want them to provide valid ID in case they decided to welch on the payment.
17th Jan 2020
The Witcher (2019)
Corrected entry: When Geralt meets the queen lioness in the castle, stringing along the wizard, she mentions that she thought she banished him. He replies he's been away for 12 years. How would this be possible if he met the princess at the ball in earlier episodes? (00:11:00 - 00:13:40)
Correction: The earlier episodes happened in a different timeline so it's 100% correct that he had not returned.
Correction: At the ball he met the daughter of the queen, who was of course also a princess. The ball was 12 years before and Geralt came back 12 years later to claim the grandchild of the queen, who was promised to him.
Correction: The princess he met was the daughter of Queen Calanthe (Pavetta). He accidentally staked a claim on her granddaughter (Ciri, one of the main characters and thee daughter of Pavetta) by invoking the Law of Surprise. 12 years later he returned to the kingdom to claim Ciri and take her away, which Queen Calanthe does not approve of. It seems you are getting confused between Ciri and Pavetta, but they are 2 different characters.
17th Jan 2020
U-571 (2000)
Factual error: At the beginning of the movie, the German commander wants to send an emergency message with coordinates to the BdU, the German Submarine Command, to send help. The scene is subtitled in English with "To Berlin: Location 85-32." However, the command post at the time was based in Lorient, France and not in Berlin. (00:08:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He didn't send the message to the BdU, his message was send to the OKM (OberKommando der Marine), which had its headquarters in Berlin, because it involved the enigma code (although the movie is only loosely based on historic events). These kinds of messages were always send to Berlin. This is because the OKM answered to the OKH, which in turn answered to Hitler who was of course also in Berlin. This is their concern, not that of the BdU.
Of course he does, the commander literally says to the radioman "Ruf an BdU absetzen: Position AL 85-32. Alle Maschinen ausgefallen, manövrierunfähig, erwarten Hilfe" or "Send transmission to BdU: Position AL 85-32. All engines out of service, unable to manoeuvre, we expect help." This was correct procedure, proper chain of command would always be to contact the BdU, not the OKM. Also the integrity of the enigma was probably not a concern at that time, the crew would have ample time to destroy all sensitive materials if they were in danger. The German commander's main concern was to get his sub back up and running.
Right, I couldn't understand that part before. But you are right.
10th Jan 2020
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Other mistake: The Millennium Falcon crash lands on Kef Bir, leaving a long trail of destruction, supposedly because the landing gear is malfunctioning. However, the Falcon has always had vertical takeoff capability, so even if the landing struts were damaged, there would be no reason for this type of crash landing.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Since so many things always break down on the ship it's possible the vertical landing capabilities were malfunctioning at that time.
However, the characters specifically mention the malfunctioning landing gear as the reason for the crash landing.
Exactly, they needed the landing gear to land but it malfunctioned, resulting in a crash.
If the vertical landing capabilities were malfunctioning then they wouldn't be able to take off, as they are the same things that help keep the Falcon level in atmosphere and control its yaw and wake in space and also what gives it vertical lift at the point of liftoff. Also, before you suggest it, how would they repair it when they can't even reach them because the ship is sitting on them and buried in sand. Also, the exit to the ship is a ramp underneath the ship, how did they get out?
I never said they had to repair it after crashing. I just said it malfunctioned at that time. Perhaps it was a software issue. As for the specifics on the Falcon's capabilities and exits, same guesswork. I'm sure you can exit the Falcon at other places than just the belly.
A plausible explanation but highly unlikely as it would be a one way trip. The damage caused by a high speed landing and a hard one at that would make the falcon unusable for space flight, the underbelly gun would be ripped off for starters and possible damage to the gunner's window as well and damage to the Hull. Same situation in the force awakens on Starkiller base and in solo. These problems are never addressed or explained but I guess this is the magic of the movies.
14th Jan 2020
Men in Black 3 (2012)
Factual error: When Boris jumps out of Lunar-Max, you can see a complete Apollo Lunar-Module (LM). The LM consists of a Descent Stage and an Ascent Stage. We can see both, obviously the Ascent Stage was never used. That doesn't make any sense, because the Apollo Astronauts need to use/"consume" (climb in and "fly" away) the Ascent Stage to leave the moon.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It could just be a copy of the original. For all we know the lunar landing was staged in this world.
This is far too much of a stretch to be a valid correction. What reason would there be to put a copy there? Also, the Apollo 11 mission to the moon absolutely having to happen is literally a plot point.
The men in black have shown to use alien technology for many of the things they do. This could include the Lunar-Max prison. I agree the lunar landing is a plot point and thus probably true, but why not make a replica in front of the prison as a monument? It doesn't have to be built right next to the site of the first lunar landing. Seems a bit silly to me.
Remember, one of the site's rules is "don't just try to think of an excuse" when correcting entries. Nothing in the film suggests it's a monument, therefore suggesting it's one to try and correct the entry is not valid.
I look at if it's plausible. I guessed since in this universe humans have access to advanced technology the moon landing seems to be more of a coverup for something secret or simply a staged thing. I think this because in MIB 1 they show the world expo observatory towers were in fact real spaceships and they had been there since 1964, so they already had spaceships before ever going to the moon. Again, though, its not relevant to the mistake. It's also obvious with the prison on the moon that they have been there multiple times and thus changed a lot. Building the prison in front of the landing site is again a bit strange so therefor I think it's just a replica, to show visitors. It's not impossible so it can hardly be called a mistake, just something that isn't explained. I'm not making excuses, there may not be actual evidence that it is a replica, but there is no evidence it is the real landing module either.
I don't understand how the Men in Black using alien technology has anything to do with this entry. Regardless, nothing in the film suggests that the capsule is a monument. It's even roped off, much like museums often rope off actual artifacts.
5th Jan 2020
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
Factual error: When Eddie is pulled from the car, it zooms forward and goes over the cliff. In reality this wouldn't happen. Right up until his death, Eddie had the car floored in reverse. Once he took his foot off the pedal the engine would have stalled. If a car is in gear and the clutch isn't depressed then the wheels won't turn (especially on wet mud!) The trailer would have had to drag the car but the wheels are shown turning freely.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: One of the T-Rexes has his (or her) foot on the car when Eddie is pulled out. The car could have been in neutral for a long time (accidentally), then when the Rex lets go the car is dragged.
Whilst what the guy above said is a possibility, he'd pulled the trailer up aways so there was no reason why the trailer just fell in a matter of seconds. It should have just started sliding again like before the car was even attached to it. So even ignoring the car the trailers shouldn't have fallen that quickly.
The jeep was able to hold the trailer in place without reversing for a short while. But eventually Eddie had to reverse to keep it from going over and even manages to pull it back a bit. When the car went into neutral and the T-Rex lifted his (or her) foot off it all the pressure and weight holding the trailer is gone so there is nothing to stop it from falling over. It had already slid quite a bit and the reversing was the only thing holding it, until the foot came along. With that gone the trailer just plummeted, not sliding anymore since there was nothing holding it anymore.
I think you've missed what the OP is saying. Before Eddie attached the winch to the Fleetwood (trailer) it was just sliding slowly and was doing for about a minute before he even attached the car. Once the car was attached it started dragging the car as it slid further off the cliff. The problem here is like the OP has stated, Eddie had pulled the FW back up a fair way. We see a tire go back up onto the cliff and get punctured in the process, it then cuts to an inside view from the FW and we can see it creeping forward slowly. When Eddie is pulled from the car, the FW drags the car off instantly, but in reality that wouldn't happen. Completely ignoring whether the car was in gear or not, the FW had been pulled back up a few meters. It would have slowly started sliding again and would have dragged the car like it did before Eddie got in and started reversing. Once the weight over the cliff became too much, only then would it drag the car off at the speed shown in the film.
5th Jan 2020
Men in Black (1997)
Corrected entry: When the Arquillian battle cruiser appears above Earth, all of the other aliens on Earth leave. Later, K tells J that "there's always an alien battle cruiser or a Corellian death ray or an intergalactic plague that's about to wipe out life on this miserable little planet." If that's the case, shouldn't the aliens always be leaving, or just never come back at all?
Correction: This was K's way of telling J that there's always something going on. In this case, the Arquillian's gave a clear warning that the planet was going to be destroyed. The aliens on Earth reacted to that with fear. They aren't going to know about every little job the Men in Black deal with.
Correction: They are refugees mostly, they got nowhere else to go, nobody would accept them. Plus there is a good chance any other place in the galaxy experiences the same things, but worse.
4th Jan 2020
Die Hard (1988)
Stupidity: Hans keeps a major part of his plan secret from his own team: that the electromagnetic lock will be disabled if the FBI shuts down power to the building. The mercenaries hired as muscle don't need to know the minutiae of the plan, but it seems ludicrous that Theo wasn't told. Theo states on more than one occasion that he can't proceed past a certain point and that he hopes Hans has a plan for the final lock. Evidently, Hans was keeping this information secret simply to amuse himself, which makes little sense considering how much planning went into the heist.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Or because he simply doesn't trust anyone with that kind of knowledge. He neither trusts them or cares about them, it's all him.
So he trusts that Theo would be on board with all the murder and mayhem, open all the other locks, be in a tactical lookout position when the police try to breach, and drive the getaway vehicle. But he doesn't trust Theo enough to tell him the last lock will open when the power goes out?
It's not about trust; Hans needs Theo to do what he is there for and that is all you mention up to the final lock. He has a plan for the final lock and so there's no need to discuss it with the team, since it won't be any of them responsible.
The more people that know the plan the more chances of someone talking. Especially when they are hired mercenaries.
Theo was already on board with taking hostages and committing murder. Him knowing that the power needed to be shut off to open the last lock doesn't appear to be particularly important information you would need to keep from someone to keep them from talking.
If he's the only one that knows the final step to get the money, then at least up until that moment he is absolutely indispensable to the plan and ensures no-one would double-cross him. In any case I'm not sure being more cautious than necessary really qualifies as "stupidity."
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: You only see the car park on the right side of the road, it came from the left side of the road. A car behind this one is driving on the left.
lionhead