Deliberate mistake: The baddies somehow manage to place the net under the two humongous ships by simply digging with their shovels in a matter of minutes, when they would need a bulldozer and several hours instead.
Continuity mistake: When Daniel Radcliffe presents a special item he has put on white gloves, then a second later his gloves disappear. He no longer handles the item with gloves throughout the rest of the movie.
Deliberate mistake: During the previous scenes were Maverick is flying the Aurora spy plane his helmet is light it up on the inside, so we can see his face. In reality the light would be reflecting off the plexiglass, and we would not be able to see his face, and he would not be able to see.
Continuity mistake: At the end of the last movie, Tails did not have the yellow small bag that he has in this one.
Character mistake: It's said that Sidney appeared in every "Stab" movie except Stab 8 - but in Scream 4, Jenny says that Sid only appeared in the first three.
Suggested correction: That isn't what Jenny says. Marnie says: "That has nothing to do with Woodsboro. I-I thought you said "Stab" was based on true stories." Jenny Randall: "The first three, The original trilogy is based off Sidney Prescott, but then she threatened to sue them if they used her stories. So they just started making stuff up. Stab 5 has time travel, which is by far the worst." She never said the movies didn't have Sidney in them after the first three, just they aren't based on true stories.
I don't think there is a leap in logic in the original post; she threatened to sue the production if they used her story, I can't see how they would avoid a lawsuit by exploiting her character further by putting her in more movies? If it's not a retcon, it's at best a rather problematic line.
Once a film has put a character name into existence and been released, the studio owns the copyright to that name. Sidney Prescott as a character could still be used in Stab films.
For that matter, you can always argue that a person does not own the story of her own life to begin with, that's not the point. The point is that since it was stated that they were afraid of the legal action Sidney Prescott threatened, and changed course to the saga for that reason, they would -not - put Sidney Prescott in other, even more outrageous and exploitative, material.
I'm not trying to be rude, but I can tell that you do not know anything at all about copyright law. The above user was correct. You don't know in what context Sidney was used in the following Stab films. The only thing we know about those later films is the very brief description of time travel in Stab 5, and the two fake outs from Stab 6&7.
No offense taken at all, it's true! I am no lawyer and I wasn't trying to get in the intricacies of copyright law and rights of publicity. I am just saying that the movie (previous movie, from 10 years before, in an obscure line of dialogue easily retconned or forgotten...) mentions that Sidney threatened them with a lawsuit, there's no reason why they'd stir her putting her even in cameos multiple times in their every third rate following schlocky flicks. It's simple as that. Would they win a lawsuit, on the grounds of what you (or the other poster) mentioned? Sure, but they never said she did sue them, the point was for the studio to avoid that sort of legal trouble entirely.
I think we're looking at the difference between a mistake and a criticism with this one. I agree that in Scream 4 the most reasonable interpretation is that Sidney successfully got (at the least) her name removed from Stab 4 onward (especially since without any further "true" events to draw from they would've had to start making things up anyhow). But the line can be taken other ways, and even if it's a stretch or goes against the spirit the line was written in, it's different from a mistake.
It still leaves a plot hole of why Sidney threatened to sue. If not for likeness / appearance, then for what?
Plot hole: Vulture from the MCU is pulled into the Venomverse due to the spell cast by Doctor Strange in No Way Home. This is absurd. The first spell pulled characters from other universes into the MCU, while the second spell brought the characters back to their proper universes. Neither of these spells involved pulling characters out of the MCU and into the other universes. Vulture of the MCU was already in his proper universe. No explanation is provided for this.
Other mistake: In the end roll, Alan Silvestri is credited in the soundtrack as SilveRstri.
Other mistake: James told Det Vargas he left the bar "2:30, give or take" and Vargas responded, "bar closes at 2:30 [AM]." When Star approached James at the bar, she said, "When I see a guy alone at the bar at three in the morning..." It is questionable if Detective Vargas was correct about the closing time. Traditionally, bars in L.A. closed at 2:00 AM. CA's Business and Professional Code on serving alcoholic beverages apparently now allows serving alcohol until 3:00 (not 2:30) AM - was this in effect? (00:04:33 - 00:11:50)
Factual error: Hatchet, the "most dangerous man in the world" would not be transported (via helicopter or any other) to the facility/base merely wearing handcuffs, especially in the front without also being chained to ankle shackles. He also would not be shackled to a loose chair once inside the interrogation room. (00:28:40)
Factual error: Pettis' calculation of the amount Connor needed to replace his asset was way off. He stated, "[Cornell] brought me about 250 [$250,000] a year. He had at least 20 more years of service. Subtract five years he might have spent in prison, so you owe me, what? Six point two million." Pettis was presented as intelligent, but a quick mental calculation of even the full 20 years at $250,000 would total only $5 million (not $6.2 - an odd sum). For 15 years, the total would be $3,750,000. (00:28:45)
Plot hole: At the end of the film, we see Nick Fowler is now in the job originally held by Larry Marks before he was killed. We know Larry was corrupt and that he admitted in front of numerous agents that he had identified Nick's body. Surely, there is no way the CIA would allow Nick back, let alone in a leadership role, without questioning why Larry would lie about Nick being dead. That alone would raise serious suspicions about them both, but we're expected to believe he walked right back in?
Revealing mistake: This happens in the second ceremony when Wolf didn't press the button to shut off the lights to steal the golden dolphin because of the good comments. Few seconds later, the lights shut off, and you can see that the meteor on the top disappears at the time.
Revealing mistake: The guy with the sunglasses changes from behind and in front of shots. (00:09:46 - 00:10:15)
Continuity mistake: The confetti in Linnet and Simon's hair changes position before and after Jackie makes her entrance at the wedding party.
Factual error: The land was snow-covered, but it was raining during the nighttime "bedroom scene." The exterior view the next morning was not what would be expected IF it had rained on top of the already-accumulated snow. There wasn't even any indication that it had recently rained. At another time, the amount of snow accumulated along the driveway was much higher than previously shown although there had not been any obvious major storms - the weather was clear during their excursions. (00:13:38)
Continuity mistake: Travis rearranged a photo on the desk, setting it partially in front of the box and the two pictures were a few inches apart. The next wide view showed the corner of the picture almost aligned with the box or slightly behind it and the two pictures were now almost touching. The angles and locations of the photos changed more than once. (00:09:40 - 00:10:03)
Factual error: In the subplot on earth, the heroes' family members are trying to outrun the falling moon's gravity that's sucking everything into the air. So, naturally they duck into a barn, because, of course, gravity can't affect you behind a wall. And sure enough, behind the wall, they're suddenly safe.