Corrected entry: The Pharaoh accuses Anck Su Namun of cheating on him as soon as he sees the smudged body paint on her arm - but she could have just smudged the paint herself by scratching. As a system of checking whether she had cheated on the Pharaoh, perfect body paint would constantly fail, whenever she bumped into or leaned on anything or scratched.
lionhead
20th Dec 2018
The Mummy (1999)
Correction: It wasn't that the paint was just smudged; as another correction points out that could happen in any one of a number of ways. It was that it was smudged with fingermarks. Nobody was allowed to touch Anck Su Namun, and someone had.
14th Dec 2018
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Corrected entry: There's no way anyone could cut off their hand with a knife the way Wormtail did. The only way they could do it is if they slowly sawed it off. Even if he raised the knife and swung it hard, there's no way it would work, the bone is way too strong. But Wormtail didn't even do that, he just placed the knife on his hand and moved it down. You couldn't even cut hair like that.
Correction: Wormtail is not just "anyone" though. He understood the importance of each of the ritual's steps and getting the potion done just right. He is following Voldemort's orders and instructions. Wormtail's dagger may have been magical, or a charm could have been placed on its finely edged blade to be swift in its tasks. Also, Wormtail was in a highly charged state of mind, which only intensified the force he used to "willingly" sacrifice his hand.
Correction: He didn't cut through bone, he cut his wrist and the knife moved past the bones. If the force is strong enough and the knife sharp enough it's definitely possible to do this.
18th Jul 2004
The Butterfly Effect (2004)
Plot hole: When Evan is in jail with the religious prisoner trying to get him to help him get his journals back he goes to the scene where he is drawing that homicidal picture in kindergarten, but he gets up and puts the spikes that holds documents through his hands, creating a stigmata-style scar. The religious guy in the cell with him is so amazed because of this he thinks Evan is a prophet and he decides to help him. If Evan had gone back in time and got those scars on his hands, he would have changed the original timeline and would have arrived in jail with those scars the whole time. Some people try to correct this using the "If I can create scars, then can I fix them?" statement Evan made to defend the mistake and suggest he can create instant scars but he was using the word "scars" to refer to the negative events; not literal scars on his body. The scar he got when he burned himself in the past didn’t magically appear on him the moment he returned from the past; it became part of a new, slightly altered timeline (just like the scars on his hands should have been) and it let him know he can change history.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't necessarily a correction so much as a possible explanation. It's possible that the religious inmate (I think his name was Carlos) just simply didn't see the scars on Evan's hands when he first came to the prison in the timeline where he got the scars or Evan knew to hide them in the scar timeline (due to the fact that it was the sole purpose of him going back) and due to his fanaticism he didn't question him a second time.
Nope, after jamming those things in his hands Evan simply came into the prison with the scars already on his hands and would have never thought of showing the religious guy his powers using that particular moment in the past to convince him, or doing what he did a second time as he already had done it. It doesn't matter if the religious guy didn't see them before, they won't be the object of Evan convincing him. He would have had to try it some other way, each and ever time. That how this time travel works and its definitely a plot hole that it worked as it did, whilst it shouldn't have. Of course, it's a time travel movie and they never make sense.
13th Dec 2018
Common mistakes
Other mistake: The hero can usually knock out henchmen with one or two punches, but the main villain (as well as the hero themselves) can take much more punishment. This is practically akin to enemies in video games. In fact, heroes are so confident of their abilities that they can knock an opponent down and know that they are down for the count without even having to verify.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: How is this a mistake? Of course the main villain, the boss, is hardest to knock out. If his henchmen were just as strong or stronger, why are they just henchmen? See it like a race, the champion is hardest to beat, that's why he is champion.
Just to give an example, at the beginning of the movie "Goldeneye," James Bond knocks out a henchman sitting on a toilet with one punch. But at the end of the movie, Bond and Trevelyan are beating the crap out of each other and neither is knocked unconscious. It's certainly reasonable for someone to be a more formidable fighter than their underlings, but it wouldn't make them magically impervious to blows to the head.
The mistake is that the hero of the movie very rarely checks to see if a disabled opponent got back up. They are supremely confident that they are out, even if the hero literally just rolled them on to the floor. Makes for good movie magic, but is totally unrealistic.
This mistake has four aspects. (1) The hero knocks someone unconscious for good with just one hit. (2) The hero does this to several enemies in succession, with the same results. (3) The hero shows no signs of fatigue. (4) The hero takes on the tougher villains and takes them down too. Doing all of these requires immense superhuman strength. In films about superhumans, this is not a mistake. But there are films that deliver this and are cheeky enough to give the appearance of there being a modicum of reality in it.
It's not necessarily a measure of strength, technique has got a lot to do with it. When one goes for the throat for example or the jaw a knockout is almost always certain, if you know what you are doing. You have to if you got no time to hit someone twice because the next opponent is not waiting.
You are right. But we don't see proper technique either. I really have issues with people getting unconscious for good from a punch between their eyes, especially when John Reese does it.
I agree with you that some movies take it too easy. But is it really common? The first knock out of Goldeneye example isn't all that unlikely, he may even have hit that guy twice, but a blow to the head, a surprise blow to the head can definitely knock someone out, happens in boxing all the time. Even between the eyes, as long as the head is knocked around.
13th Dec 2018
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Corrected entry: When Gamora stabs Thanos on Knowhere and he reveals he is using the reality stone her knife disappears, still in the chest of the fake Thanos, but on Vormir she tries to kill herself with that same knife.
8th Dec 2018
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Corrected entry: When Black Widow, Captain America and Black Panther approach Proxima Midnight at the Wakanda barrier, Black Widow asks: "Where is the other friend?" and Proxima answers: "You will pay for his life with yours." We assume Corvus Glaive died. However, a few minutes later he appears trying to steal Vision's stone. Even if he didn't die, it doesn't make sense because he was seriously injured by Black Widow a few hours before.
Correction: She was bluffing about him being dead so that they wouldn't suspect he was already in the same room as Vision, lying in wait for Wanda to join the battle.
Next to that he is an alien, probably a dark elf and we have no idea how badly injured he actually was, and also could have been healed.
The staff he holds grants him the power of immortality. Once he dies or is injured while he holds that staff he can come back from anything. He was fatally stabbed while the staff was in his hand in the station, but the last scene where he was stabbed by Vision, he obviously didn't have the staff in his hand because he was stabbed by it. The power the staff holds is the difference.
Correction: Proxima Midnight implied that Corvus Glaive had died so that he could successfully infiltrate Wakanda and get Vision's stone. He also has the ability to survive almost any injury as long as his glaive is undamaged, so his earlier injury is irrelevant to his ability to show up in Wakanda.
Correction: Misdirection. Black Widow thought he was dead, therefore she wouldn't be expecting him to show up again. Proxima just lied, no mistake.
19th May 2014
I, Robot (2004)
Plot hole: Sonny hides among the 1000 robots in the big store room. They are all placed in very straight rows. Sonny would not be able to take over another robot's place in the grid (when he starts running we see a large robot-sized gap) without getting another robot to move. And while Will Smith is running around the rows, he would have noticed if the others moved to make room.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Sonny was already at the factory before Spooner and Calvin showed up. It's possible he moved in a robot's space, and either the robots to his sides or the ones behind him moved back a space (we never see the rows in their entirety), hence no need for any of them to move while Spooner and Calvin are in the storage room.
Suggested correction: Will Smith shot one of them, it's possible this hole in the front of the row caused that line of robots to move forward one spot, to complete the row again. As they did Sonny could have slipped in. When he spotted Sonny the first time Sonny was simply standing between 2, as Will Smith only saw them from the front at that point, when he started running it's impossible to notice a simple step forward of 1 row of robots and Sonny slipping in.
23rd Oct 2018
Venom (2018)
Corrected entry: After Eddie is being chased by Drake's henchmen he rides his bike but he never uses the key or the pedal to turn it on.
Correction: There is a cutscene between him getting on the bike and driving away with it, he turned it on in between shots. It's a real bike, they aren't using sound effects to pretend the bike is working or anything.
23rd Oct 2018
Venom (2018)
Corrected entry: When the newly formed 'Venom' breaks out of the Life Faculty (which looks like a hi-tech research faculty) they don't know who stole the organism. They could just check the security cam feed, instead of wasting time interrogating the doctor.
Correction: The facility is secret and doing some pretty unethical stuff. It's possible they intentionally don't have cameras hanging around recording all the illegal activity they are doing. Especially in the location they are testing humans. Or else Dr. Skirth wouldn't have needed Eddie to take photos and film for evidence either, just take the security camera footage.
9th Oct 2018
Venom (2018)
Plot hole: The Riot symbiote inhabits the body of the paramedic immediately after the crash at the beginning, then goes into the body of an old woman who goes to the airport and proceeds to take control of a little girl who's going on a flight to San Fransisco. Riot then takes over Carlton Drake's body. The entirety of these events would need to have taken six months, for it to be consistent with the timeline of the rest of the film.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Riot only arrives at the airport as the old woman after 6 months. There is no reason given why Riot decides to stay in the body of the woman for so long, but not giving a reason doesn't make it a plot hole. It stayed in the old woman for 6 months maybe because it needed to gather strength or devise a plan.
The director has even admitted it's a plot hole. Regardless, the film does nothing to suggest it was doing anything other than traveling towards its destination, so this does constitute a plot hole.
Why does it constitute as a plot hole if it's traveling towards its destination? Why does one thing imply the other?
It's a plot hole because it's absolutely ridiculous that it would take six full months to do that. That's a few days worth of activity... maybe a week. As I said, the director even admitted it was a plot-hole.
22nd Nov 2018
The Lion King (1994)
Corrected entry: Pumba can't live on bugs as warthogs are herbivores, not insectivores.
Correction: This would be better under trivia given everything else animals do in "The Lion King" that animals don't actually do, not including talking. For example, Meerkats don't walk on their hind legs.
Correction: Warthogs are omnivores, known to eat insects. Besides, nobody says Pumba isn't eating roots and grass as well.
30th Oct 2018
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Corrected entry: There's no reason whatsoever the trio needed to risk telling Hagrid at nighttime that they knew about the Philosopher's Stone, as it ends up in them getting in trouble. They could have told him immediately after Hermione found out about the Philosopher's Stone in the library. Or if they couldn't find time between classes, they could have waited until tomorrow.
Correction: They are kids, they got excited. It's not a stupidity for a movie to have kids do stupid things. Kids do stupid things, that's why they are kids.
I don't necessarily agree with that. In the book, they had a legitimate reason to sneak out during nighttime as they were trying to smuggle Hagrid's dragon out of Hogwarts without it being seen, which isn't in the film, so there is no reason for them to wait until nighttime to talk to Hagrid about what they know, nor does it explain why Malfoy is there suddenly.
29th Oct 2018
Common mistakes
Factual error: Often a person on the run will scale a fence quickly and get over it with little problem. And usually this fence has coils of razor wire or barbed wire at the top, and yet they show no sign of injury. This razor wire would cut you and your clothes to shreds. That's the whole point of it.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I don't agree it's common to see people jump barbed wire fences without injuries. Its more common to actually show cuts and torn clothes, as that adds drama.
The problem with "common" mistakes is that they are supposed to be easy to recall. From the top of my head I can't think of a movie scene where someone jumped over a barbed wire fence and got off without injuries. How common is it really?
Have the same problem with the nuclear explosion one, can't think of any movie where people looked at a nuclear explosion without properly guarding their eyes.
I can see what you mean about the barbed wire fence then. I know I've seen it in several films and even CinemaSins has pointed it out a few times... but I can't recall specific titles. As far as the atomic explosions one... The Wolverine, Dark Night Rises, Sum of all Fears, Godzilla 2014 (There's even a dumbass watching the explosion through binoculars), The Crazies, and The Divide to name a few.
Alright for the nuclear explosion, although in some of the movies you gave an example it's simply not true (Dark Knight Rises, Sum of All Fears and Godzilla nobody is watching the flash, Godzilla is even historical footage), it does happen often. So I'll thumb it up.
In Dark Knight Rises, Joseph Gordon-Levitt's is standing on the bridge watching Batman fly away. He's staring out at the ocean and watches as the explosion goes off.
No, in the next scene you see he actually fully turned his head to cover his eyes. A group of people are seen ducking too but you don't know they can see the flash directly.
29th Oct 2018
Common mistakes
Factual error: People often jump from great heights into bodies of water and avoid fall damage. But the surface tension of water is great enough it would be no different than hitting concrete if you're high enough up.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: If you jump in feet first you can survive a jump into water from a very great height without injuries.
About the max distance you can fall into water without injury is 65 feet, even at feet first. Professional high divers even struggle to control themselves from that height without doing actions they can control like flips. An untrained individual leaping from a bridge down into water would most certainly kill them in real life.
To dive for up to 90 feet is an official sport, while daredevils dive from up 120 feet. And "dive" means head first. Normal people can and do jump feet first without injury, although is a coin toss. Certainly fatal bridge jumps are from very high ones (The Golden Gate is something like 250 feet).
29th Oct 2018
Common mistakes
Factual error: Wild animals are depicted to be much more violent and vicious than in reality. Truth be told, most wild animals will avoid and run from humans. Even wolf packs, snakes, and jungle cats will avoid humans out of fear.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is only a common mistake if this always happens in a situation where there is absolutely no way the animal can be aggressive. It can happen, especially with a wolf or snake, so in that movie it just happened. Not a common mistake then.
4th Aug 2010
Pearl Harbor (2001)
Factual error: As the Japanese fleet steams toward its launch point, there is a close up of the nose of a B5N1 Kate torpedo bomber with its distinctive two-bladed propeller. Trouble is, the Kates used against Pearl Harbor were B5N2's, with a two row radial and 3-bladed prop.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The B5N1 also used a three-bladed prop. The two-bladed prop aircraft in the movie is a Kate replica (a modified AT-6 Texan). All Kates used at Pearl Harbor were B5N2's.
I think the point is that the B5N2 also came with 2 bladed propellers. Whether or not they were used during the attack on pearl harbor is something for a real expert to say.
21st Oct 2018
Common mistakes
Corrected entry: Despite being a lawyer, architect or whatever, the male character will have a garage filled with high end, spotlessly clean tools.
Correction: Several issues with this entry being a mistake: - first, how often do we actually see this? If this has happened in some shows, perhaps it would be better expressed as a mistake in those specific shows, instead of 'common'. - second, why a male character? Can't female characters have tools in a garage? - third, the writers may have given the character shiny tools for a reason: the character is wealthy but still handy; they feel they needed to buy the tools to project an image even if they don't use them; they like buying shiny toys (the character does the same with the kitchen or home cinema); somebody else in the family uses them; the character has a hobby or a long term DIY project, etc.
To me, it's a mistake because it almost always feels out of place for the character, their life, lifestyle etc.
Again, do you have an example?
A garage full of top of the range, specific, expensive and spotlessly clean tools? How many lawyers, office executives etc do you know who perform sophisticated diy projects on a regular basis to need a whole garage full of tools like that?
My brother is a CFO and he built a treehouse for his kids by himself. He has a garage full of nice tools which are kept clean. Clean tools are long lasting tools.
Can you give an example?
21st Oct 2018
Venom (2018)
Plot hole: At the angle of descent and the speed it was traveling (still burning from reentry even), when the space shuttle crashed in the opening of the film, it would not have left much of anything behind. The kinetic explosion that would have resulted would have downed the forest around it for a good distance leaving a crater, and the clean up crews would have been lucky to find any piece of the ship itself still intact bigger than a football. Much less been able to find any discernible remains of the crew. Yet bodies were being taken out in still relatively good condition. And probably most unbelievable is that the glass containers holding the Symbiotes were not even broken.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Since this is in the Marvel universe the capsule could have at least partially been made of Vibranium or Adamantium.
Adamantium is exclusive to the X-Men films which for the time being are under Fox, and Vibranium is exclusive to films within the Marvel Cinematic Universe. This film is part of neither. There were rumors and speculation prior to this film's release that it would be adjunct to the MCU, but there are things within the film that contradict it. Particularly Eddie Brock being dismissive of the symbiote being an alien life form. An alien invasion was one of the major plot points of the first Avengers film, so an alien being wouldn't be something people would be skeptical of going forward.
Like Phan said. But also, i'm referring to the glass of the container staying in tact. Those two super metals don't make glass.
I just thought that although there can't be a mention of Vibranium, it doesn't mean it's not there. What I mean is if Vibranium softens the bow of the impact the glass containers would stay intact. But I suppose if it's not allowed to exist for the films, then I guess it doesn't exist. The glass can be nanotechnology though.
I see what you're saying, but that wouldn't mater with an impact like that. Space Shuttles are even made of Titanium, and would still be smashed to millions of little pieces from a reentry impact like that. The momentum and resulting kinetic explosion would devastate everything around it and level the forest for a good distance, leaving a massive creator, possibly as big or bigger than a football field. We are talking a few megatons of force.
This movie is not set in the Marvel Universe. It has been confirmed by the film crew that Venom is a standalone movie so it doesn't take place in the MCU at all.
I didn't say MCU, I said Marvel Universe. Some Marvel Universe anyway.
There's only the MCU and since this movie doesn't take place in it, the ship is probably only made from the materials that most rocket ships are constructed from.
21st Oct 2018
Ready Player One (2018)
Corrected entry: How come people using the OASIS have their haptics on full effect for battle? Couldn't they just disable, or literally cut out the haptics during battle to avoid feeling pain? When fighting in the OASIS, the "pain" is really your own suit hitting you, so why hasn't anyone just disabled them?
Correction: The players don't all already feel the pain in the first place. Most of them just have on gloves and some gestural sensors on them to track their body movement and have the goggles on. It's only those with the enhanced special suits like the Boot Suit, who feel the extra sensations like pain and pleasure. It's not that these people don't turn off their pain, it's that they chose to feel it in the first place. It's an expensive luxury.
Correction: Additional Info: Pain is also a way to let you know you are being hit. Since most avatars have armor/shields, it is a love tap to reply to immediately. Pain is also a great teacher. The next time a person is in a similar situation, you can bet they are going to be more aware of their surroundings.
Correction: Because the suits give a better control of your avatar in the game, you movements are much more accurately copied into the game and thus you are able to do better. I suppose they can't turn off the pain alone, or nobody would have it.
15th Oct 2018
Venom (2018)
Corrected entry: When the Malaysian ambulance carrying the infected female EMT is overturned on the road, the number "911" is visible on the ambulance. The Malaysian EMS number is "999", not 911 which is used in the USA.
Correction: Actually it reads "119" which is probably just the number for the ambulance itself, not the EMS number.
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: She would have been trained not to smudge the paint, because smudging it would mean the death penalty. The Pharaoh is a very unreasonable man, making his wife wear body paint to make sure she isn't cheating. I don't think he cares why the paint would be smudged, he won't believe any other explanation.
lionhead