Corrected entry: Many times throughout this show, some zombies have been depicted as being burnt to a crisp with barely anything left, but still moving, or having been crushed or have their chests completely destroyed. Some even being that the head is the only thing left. Yet these zombies still growl, hiss and grunt. This is not possible without lungs attached to flow air through the throat and mouth.
Bishop73
10th Aug 2021
The Walking Dead (2010)
18th Dec 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Stupidity: In the first part of the movie, Peter has to deal with the various 'visitors' and bring them too Strange. But the device Strange will use is just going to send them home no matter where they are (conveniently at the push of a button that even complete ignoramus can push) and there are visitors he does not know about, so everything up to that point has been meaningless. Then it becomes a matter of 'curing' every one of those visitors, but if -as it seems - they have been fetched moments before their deaths, 'curing' them is not going to fix anything. They are still going to die or end up in prison for life due to the horrors they committed.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Part of the problem we have is that instead of just dealing with the Multiverse, they're also creating parallel or alternate realities in those universes since everyone is pulled from a different point in time in their realities, so any changes besides their death is going to create a new timeline. And I think part of the plan to send them back cured was that from their they could change their course of action or be able to reason with their Spider-Man, which would mean it's better than nothing.
Yes, that's the idea, with all the problems we underlined and the movie ignores entirely. Much like when in Avengers Endgame they don't show you how Cap brings back the stones with the precision required, they elegantly skipped showing us if and how each of them avoids being impaled, drowned, dissolved, or how does it even work for those fetched by the 'same' timeline. We'll see if they deal with these messy timelines at any point in the future.
Suggested correction: With the exception of Doc Ock - who learned Spidey's identity shortly before he died - there's nothing to suggest the other villains were fetched from their realities moments before their deaths, or that they will die upon returning to their realities. Whether or not they end up in prison after returning is irrelevant to the fact that Peter wants to help them. If he doesn't cure them, then they are free to continue causing mayhem regardless of what reality they are occupying.
It's stated in the film that BOTH Otto and Norman died while fighting Spider-Man and that both were pulled from their reality shortly before dying. Max then recounts his fight before being pulled and says "I was about to die." Then Curt asks Max if he died too, but they get interrupted before we find out.
"Shortly" is a relative term. Goblin discovered Spider-Man's identity at Thanksgiving dinner and then died a day or two later. Electro's fate was rather ambiguous, but Jamie Foxx himself implied prior to The Amazing Spider-Man 2's release that he would be appearing in more films, likely including the Sinister Six movie that never came to fruition. We know from The Amazing Spider-Man that Lizard didn't die.
"Shortly before dying" as in pulled during the fight that they died during, not a few days before. It wasn't about being pulled when they found out who Spider-Man was.
Even so, if Green Goblin is pulled from his reality 5 minutes before his death, that would be considered shortly, but it certainly wouldn't be mere moments before he died as the original entry was suggesting. The movie never explicitly states how soon before their deaths they were pulled, therefore we as viewers can reasonably assume that there could have been just enough time for them to alter their course of actions and prevent their deaths.
Also, the reason why Peter wants to 'cure' them is not because they are causing mayhem, but as he explicitly says, because he's not comfortable sending them back when 'some' of them will die - thing is, he can't know that curing their conditions will save them, the whole idea kinda comes out of nowhere. I submitted it as Stupidity because I was sure someone would object it's not a plot hole since it's just stuff the characters 'believe' and there's no proof it's true, however it's funny that 90% of the stuff Peter does in this movie is probably completely pointless.
Saying that he can't know that curing their conditions won't save them is like a doctor saying they won't give a cancer patient chemotherapy because they don't know if it will save them. Their chances of being saved are certainly better if they are cured and cease fighting Spider-Man. If Osborn is returned cured before he attempts to impale Spider-Man with his glider, then that would certainly prevent him from dying in that situation.
I absolutely respect the fact that they want Spidey to be heroic and that the moment he knows that they are going to die he wants to do something about it, that's why I say that it's just funny that there's no indication at all that it would work (by all logic it would not) but it's elegantly glossed over. Let me remind you though that he's not a doctor that wants to cure his sick patient, he's a doctor that wants to cure someone who died 1-2 decades earlier in accidents he doesn't really get into the details of.
There not being an indication that it would work does not make it a stupidity. He can't let the villains remain in his reality, or else it will cause a major multiversal catastrophe. He doesn't want to send them back to their realities and die fighting other Spider-Men, so he does what he thinks is his best option. For this to be a stupidity, there would have to be a rather obvious alternate solution that he overlooked (such as asking Strange to make everyone forget Mysterio's broadcast instead of making everyone forget Peter Parker is Spider-Man).
I don't want to make my own movie in my head, the one we got is more than enjoyable, and I don't want to say that the character is stupid (any movie would be easily solved with afterthought or cynicism, such as "let Strange do his thing"); I merely pointed out that the plot takes you for a ride forcing you to buy premises that are taken as 100% fact and logical (they never ever even imply the fact that what Peter does could be pointless or problematic - in most movies, saving dead people is not a good idea) when they are anything but that. If I know that a crazy person died driving a car into a tree, curing his craziness is one step and not even the most important (would a crazy Norman not survive, if he goes back in time at the right moment and knows what is going to happen? again, the bigger flaw being that if he remembers dying, how can I undo that?) but the movie is surely not going for the "It's most certainly useless, but aww, at least he tried" angle.
29th Jan 2022
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: The Ghostbusters can get inside the museum when the Statue of Liberty breaks the museum's ceiling light. Good, but the whole museum was surrounded by a shell of slime that extended above it too. The Ghostbusters do nothing to open a hole in the slime, nor they could know it would open, and the Statue has nothing to do with it. (01:31:45)
Correction: I think you somehow completely missed the point of them bringing in the statue in the first place. They animate the statue and walk it through the streets to act as a symbol to bring out the positive emotions/good vibes of the people. The positivity weakens the negatively-fueled slime shell enough for them to get inside. They quite literally show people cheering in the streets and the slime "retreating" from the ceiling windows as a result. Watch this clip, it explains their plan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2wtteHUGjg.
Correction: The positive slime caused the negative slime to retreat. You can see this happening when the statue bends over the museum.
As I said, they do nothing to open a hole, it just happens; the Statue is close to a whole side of the museum that is covered in goop, but does not distance itself from it. Does it react to the music speakers? To the torch's warmth? It's just random stuff that happens. Which is totally fine in a movie like this, but does not prevent from noting it. However, since the whole idea of using the statue comes to them because they need to 'crack' the barrier, I'd say you are right there; they didn't know how and if it would work perhaps, but the idea IS set up. I still think the visual representation of it is inconsistent, since I don't get why the hole would open in that area of all areas.
I didn't think it had anything to do with touching the negative slime first. The negative slime was weakened by the positive emotions of the crowd, and their positive emotions came from seeing the Statue and Ghostbusters coming down the street, and the statue came to life with the positive slime and music. In the weakened state, the negative slime started to retract without the Ghostbusters needing to do anything else. They would have seen the ceiling being uncovered and then broke in that way.
Yup, Bishop73 got it 100% correct. They state in the movie that they need a symbol to bring out the positivity to get through the slime, and the movie shows the slime retreating after the crowds outside cheer for them in the statue. (Not sure where lionhead got the idea that it was the positive slime that did it, since the movie does not indicate that at all).
Positive feedback here. It shows the positive slime is more powerful than the negative slime. That's why they hose Janosz, Ray and Vigo in the end with the positive slime. It thinks all together the positive energy of the crowd caused the positive slime to grow and become even more powerful and the negative slime to retreat. That's how I always interpreted it at least. But you can go several ways here. In any case, it's not random.
Ah I see! You see sufficient visual correlation between the crowd cheering and the slime retracting, I don't see that, so the fact that the slime opens up freeing the skylight doesn't feel visually correlated with the 'mobilization of positive energy' thingy. Later it 'weakens' reacting in a different manner.
19th Mar 2016
Star Trek (1966)
Revealing mistake: A straight and level seam connecting the top and bottom halves of the tunnel Spock is crawling through is visible.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Views of the tunnels made before the creature was wounded by Kirk and Spock appear almost perfectly smooth. It is explained that the creature exudes a powerful acid to dissolve the rock. This tunnel was made after the creature was wounded, so it is logical that the wounded portion of the creature would secrete less acid thus leaving an imperfection as the creature tunnels. This could be a case of incredible attention to detail by the set designer rather than an error revealed.
This correction is too much of a stretch to explain a perfect seam by the wounded Horta. Plus, if the Horta was secreting less corrosive substance, then that area would be less eroded, not more. If attention to detail was paid, then the area would have an outward seam, not an inward one.
26th Jan 2022
Under the Dome (2013)
Other mistake: At the beginning when the plane is flying, it appears to crash into the dome from the outside. The curve of the Dome goes from the top right to bottom left and the plane crashes from the left so it is on the outside. But the wreckage falls down inside the Dome.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The plane was always inside the dome. When we see Barbie and Joe at the dome wall, the camera angle changes to the opposite side. We see Barbie looking up at the plane as it crashes into the inside wall, which he wouldn't have been able to do if the plane was outside and in front of him.
14th Jun 2004
Scream (1996)
Continuity mistake: When Casey puts the two videos on top of the TV, she puts them on top of each other so they are placed neatly. Then when she picks up the letter opener off the TV later, the videos are no longer stacked neatly. (00:08:10)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: To be fair, we don't see (at least in the DVD version I am looking at?) the VHS boxes for the entirety of the time her hand is on it, and she does bump against the TV set at least twice while talking to the killer, once with the top of the set entirely off-camera.
I would say it's a valid mistake because we do see a shot of the tapes later, and they're still neatly placed (for example, when she says her boyfriend will be there any second), so we know she didn't do anything to them when her hand was off camera. And I never saw any bump hard enough after her boyfriend is killed that would move the top case into the new position it's in.
20th Jan 2022
Chicago Med (2015)
What a Tangled Web We Weave - S6-E13
Character mistake: Dr Choi addresses April as Maggie. (00:22:51)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He never uses either name. He says "hey" in a hushed voice.
Factual error: During the baseball game in the beginning if you look in the background you can see several palm trees in the background. The movie takes place in Ohio where there are no palm trees. (00:09:15 - 00:10:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Ohio is never specified as the state where the Nightmare movies take place until later in the series. As long as the state is unspecified as it is in Nightmare 2 and 1, visible palm trees are not a mistake.
All the films are supposed to take place in the same city. So if part 6 takes place in Springwood, Ohio, than so does this one.
While it would be true that the location in all previous films are now Ohio, it's hard to say if it's a mistake for the first 5 films, especially if there's no evidence for it being set in Ohio and evidence points to California. It would be more appropriate to make an entry in the 6th film saying the Ohio location contradicts what has been already seen. Otherwise, you would have to make a mistake entry every time the first 5 films reveal it's not set in Ohio, but filmed in California.
Suggested correction: Per the screenplays, the first two movies take place in Los Angeles.
I believe it was Wes Craven's intention to mention it's set in Los Angeles, but the actual script and film never state where Elm Street is located. It was an un-named suburb.
15th Nov 2021
Eternals (2021)
Corrected entry: Spoiler; Ajak and 'the true villain' are the only ones who know the true nature of the mission and the fact that the Earth will cease to exist in 7 days. None of her fellow Eternals would know where to find her or suspect that she's dead or that anything is wrong, but the villain makes them find her body on purpose to provide a distraction to keep them busy investigating her death. Provide a 'distraction' to someone who is completely unsuspecting (and actively lead them) is pure nonsense.
Correction: He explains this plainly. He knows that when the earth is being destroyed they would go to Ajak for help, Since she is dead however they will know something is wrong and will investigate the emergence. But if it was a Deviant, they will be distracted killing them to not know about the emergence before it is too late. At least, that is what he had hoped.
"When the others realise something is happening to the Earth, they'll come to you. When they find your body, they'll know the Deviants are back. It'll keep them busy during the Emergence." It makes absolutely no sense. During the movie, none of them cares about what is happening to the planet. There's no such sense of urgency. He does all that to "keep busy" people who never met in centuries and never interfered to any world-threatening phenomenon.None of them knows about the Emergence.If they didn't find her at home, they wouldn't even know she was dead and that would have only delayed them further. He needs to stall them just for a couple days, not years.
He also said he suspected that Ajak would change her mind and betray Arishem. If he hasn't killed her, she would have tried to recruit the others to stop the Emergence. The Deviants had already escaped the ice, he just lured them together to kill Ajak. His plan kind of went sideways since the group was to find her dead and seek out the Deviants, but the Deviants already attacked them. Plus, had Sersi not learned their true mission, they would be too busy to stop the Emergence.
Killing Ajak is the logical part. Hauling her body across the continent so the others will find it is the absurd part. Why having killed the only person who was a threat to his plan would he build a murder mystery about it? He had already won. If they didn't find Ajak at home, assuming they'd bother to go there to begin with, they would have waited for her, at most looked for her presumably in vain, and wasted time. Why stir anything?
He stirs to keep them distracted, hoping they would not investigate the earthquakes for one thing, and then the sudden giant volcano for another. He knows they are attached to the Earth and it's people, would try to safe them. He tried to convince them it were the Deviants, not something else. Unfortunately for him, Sersi became their leader, whilst he expected it to be him.
Even if they would figure out on their own that 'something was happening' (and they didn't), they didn't have the faintest idea about the dormant Celestial business. Deviants are literally the only thing that would bring them together and back to action (not even that, Gil just butchers one and does not give a damn). Ikaris states matter-of-factly that he needed to do things and certain stuff would happen only because he needs to make the movie happen. They were all 'busy' already, leading their boring lives, and they had completely insufficient data to react, especially if he didn't spoon-feed them that it was something connected to them to begin with.
The Deviants did come back, after dormant in the ice. That's what brings them together, that's why Ikarus killed Ajak, that's why he needed to distract them from her death. It's not that difficult to understand. You're just not seeing the connection.
I am simply not seeing connections that don't exist. The Deviants are not "why" he killed Ajak at all; he kills her because she wants to stop the Emergence. The Deviants are just a distraction (which is a misleading term, for the reasons I underlined in the original post, but let's go with that). They are a weak colony stranded in Alaska and unable to do any substantial damage that got free a week before; It will be Ajak's power that causes them to be able to be on the radar again and changes their target from humans to Eternals (which is something they never did before and he couldn't have anticipated).
I didn't say he killed Ajak because of the deviants. He killed Ajak because the deviants would cause the Eternals to come together again, they will come to Ajak (or she to them) and she will tell them about the emergence. So, he kills Ajak but once they encounter the Deviants again and Ajak is missing, they will start to investigate and perhaps find out about the emergence. So, he puts her body to be found, so they will focus on the deviants. Alright?
No, the others wouldn't come to Ajak (or vice versa, she didn't even know about them) because of the Deviants. The Deviants aren't back, there's just half a dozen harmless leftovers that got thawed out and that he 'feeds' (it's never said or implied that he knew that they'd become stronger and Eternal-murders, too). The others may go ask Ajak for an opinion because of the strange earthquake - and you never see a sense of urgency in this movie. This guy goes out of his way to ring a giant alarm bell, so he can tell a fake story to people who haven't been in touch in ages and may have some mild curiosity about something that does not involve them as far as they know, since they don't know about Emergence or any of that stuff.
27th Jun 2010
Bloodsport (1988)
Factual error: Chong Li's South Korean emblem on his headband is upside down before breaking the ice blocks. And you can see his trainer has the emblem on sideways on his arm.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Someone wearing a headband, that they can't even see since its on their head, upside down doesn't qualify as a mistake and happens all the time.
While it's possible to happen, generally speaking, upside down flags or flag symbols are considered valid mistakes. Just like the patch wouldn't be sewn on sideways.
12th Jan 2022
Iron Man 2 (2010)
Trivia: Not sure if it was done on purpose, but when Tony and Happy are sparring and "Natalie" (Natasha) walks in, the song playing is "Magnificent Seven" by The Clash. It just so happens the Avengers (or the Avengers Initiative) are made up of Iron Man, Black Widow, Hulk, Thor, Captain America,, Hawkeye, and Black Panther.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I don't really think this constitutes trivia. I don't see the connection. Is there some significance to the lyrics I'm not realizing? Or are you suggesting that there are only seven Avengers in the MCU? Because if so, that's not really true at all. (It's not even true in the Avengers comics, which frequently shifts characters around.) Especially as when this film came out, Black Panther wouldn't be introduced for another six years. Plus that completely ignores characters like Ant-Man, Wasp, Doctor Strange, the Guardians of the Galaxy, Scarlet Witch, War Machine, Falcon, Vision, Captain Marvel and Spider-Man, who join the team at various points during the franchise. I think this trivia is stretching at best, and trying to create significance where there is none.
Which is why I wasn't sure if it was done one purpose, or if it seems significant. However, when Fury and Tony are talking at the end and you see markers on the map, there's one in Africa where Wakanda is, suggesting Black Panther was part of the Avengers Initiative, whereas the others weren't.
10th Jan 2022
The Cockleshell Heroes (1955)
Factual error: The German soldiers arrive at the dockside in what are American Jeeps.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: 64,000 vehicles were abandoned by the Allies during the Dunkirk evacuation. Of these, 2000 were put into service by the Germans. Doubtless there were a few jeeps in there somewhere.
America wasn't involve in the Dunkirk evacuation and the jeep wasn't produced until 1941, so where would they have come from?
The raid depicted in the film took place in December 1942. By that stage over 5,000 jeeps had been supplied to the Soviet Army, hundreds of which were captured by the invading Germans during Operation Barbarossa, which commenced in June 1941.
16th May 2010
Iron Man 2 (2010)
Corrected entry: In the scene where Tony is watching his fathers film and reading through his notebook, he picks up a plastic bottle and drinks from it. In the following shot, the bottle has changed to a glass of alcohol.
Correction: Maybe he had both on the table.
Correction: He never picks up a plastic bottle. It's always the glass that was sitting next to him. And it seems to be Dr. Pepper and not alcohol. In the shot before he picks up the glass he's holding his PDA and stylus up to his mouth and maybe that's what you thought was the bottle.
7th May 2010
Iron Man 2 (2010)
Corrected entry: During the scene when Hammer is about to lock Whiplash in the white room before going to the expo, in some shot Whiplash has his jacket unzipped showing his white vest underneath but in two shots his jacket is zipped up to his neck.
Correction: In between shots he had plenty of time to zip up his jacket.
In the scene the jacket goes from slightly unzipped to more unzipped to fully zipped up and back to unzipped and then back to zipped up. While he could have been zipping it up and unzipping it and zipping back up off-screen, it's unreasonable to think he was doing that and not a valid correction given he stays in the same position, isn't seen fiddling with the zipper when on screen, and we don't hear anything. In the context of the film and the spirit of the site, it's a valid mistake.
The mistake is about 1 shot. You can add a new mistake talking about the whole sequence if you want. I would be careful though, the jacket itself could simply be moving as well, without the zipper moving. At one point showing a lot of white shirt, in the next a lot less, simply by movement of the jacket. Only in the very last shot is the zipper actually up, which is the shot the mistake was about.
7th Jan 2022
Jingle All the Way (1996)
Stupidity: After hearing the question on the radio station to win the Turbo Man doll and a failed attempt at the pay phone to answer it, Howard and Myron end up running two blocks to the station to answer the question. This is really stupid because the prize was going to the first caller with the answer and in the few min it would take to run to the station two blocks away and finally reach the DJ, many calls would have come in and most likely someone would have won already, way before the men arrived there.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This isn't a stupidity or a mistake. What else did you expect them to do? Plus, the DJ even later asks if they expected him to actually have a Turbo Doll in the studio, and they both said "yes."
Not only that but, Myron had ripped the phone receiver out so Howard couldn't give the answer to the DJ. Howard and Myron running to the radio station was the only other option they had. At that point, it would only be a matter of if they got to the station in time before somebody could call in with the right answer.
It was a very easy question naming santa's reindeer. Although some people may not quite know them all... most people do. Now if it was a relatively hard question, our two guys probably had a better chance. But all good points made here in all these comments.
7th Jan 2022
The Big Bang Theory (2007)
The Confirmation Polarization - S12-E13
Corrected entry: Sheldon meets two new fellow scientists, one of which is Sean Astin, who played Sam Gee wise in the Lord of the Rings. Surely, Sheldon would know who he is.
Correction: Suspension of disbelief has to play a part here. Actors are allowed to play other roles, and being many years later, Sean Astin looks quite different, so even if there was a meta element of "this person looks like the actor who played Sam", Sheldon wouldn't necessarily even notice the similarity.
Correction: I'm not sure if this is meant to be a troll entry or a joke. Sean Astin doesn't play himself in this episode, he plays Dr. Pemberton.
4th Jan 2022
Everybody Loves Raymond (1996)
Continuity mistake: In the last scene in The Car, there were 5 of them driving to the event, then 6 driving back home.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There were always 8 driving to the event and then 8 driving back.
3rd Jan 2022
NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service (2003)
Other mistake: McGee says that Jancy got into her cab at 12:37am and arrived at her destination at 12:55. That's 18 minutes for the taxi to drive "over 20 miles away" Hardly likely given traffic. (00:29:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You missed the point of what he said. The cab ride ends at Gilroy's address, which is 20 miles from Travis Wooten's home. But the ride didn't start at Wooten's home, it started at Feeney's Billiard Club. They don't make any mention how many miles the ride was.
2nd Jan 2022
Bewitched (1964)
Samantha for the Defense - S3-E14
Corrected entry: When the prosecutor calls Darrin as a witness, Samantha says "If only he was ready to rest his." The response is inconsistent. I imagine the prosecutor was scripted to say something like "The prosecution calls Darrin Stevens to the case" seems that there should have been a reference to the "case" for Samantha's line to make sense.
Correction: The line is consistent and makes sense. Darrin jokes that if the jury decided now, they'd convict the DA, to which Samantha says "I'm ready to rest my case" (to those at the table). Then the prosecutor calls Darrin, to which Samantha utters "if only he was ready to rest his."
31st Dec 2021
Law & Order (1990)
Executioner - S18-E9
Factual error: Yost attacks and kills an innocent man, believing him to be Dr. Horace Garrison, a physician who administered a faulty lethal injection to a condemned prisoner, reducing him to a vegetative state rather than killing him. The problem is, medical doctors never, ever participate in an execution except to certify death, a legal requirement. They do not, ever, take an active role in killing the condemned person.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but medical doctors are involved in lethal injections more than just certifying death. This is why so many groups were actively trying to stop the practice of medical profession involvement. In 2007, 17 states required physician involvement, which included doctors at times having to administer the injection.
The botched execution took place in South Carolina, which absolutely forbids medical practitioners to take an active role in killing a condemned prisoner. In fact, they are considering switching executing prisoners by firing squad instead of lethal injection, at least partly to distance medical professionals from the actual procedure leading to a person's death.
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: This is typical in most zombie-lore and shouldn't be considered a mistake given every other aspect of what zombies are shown to do that would otherwise be impossible in real life.
Bishop73