Tombstone

Continuity mistake: When Curly Bill is shooting up the town while drunk, he fires about 10 more rounds than his six shooter can hold without reloading (so too many shots even if he had a second gun), and still has a round remaining when he shoots Marshal Fred White. In the 1880 court hearing held after Marshal White's death, Curly Bill still had 5 rounds remaining in his pistol.

Factual error: In the scene just before the fight at the O.K. Corral, Wyatt is talking to his brothers and Doc on the porch of the town marshal's office. There is an American flag flying behind him with 50 stars on it when in fact there were only 38 stars on the flag in 1881.

Other mistake: When the Earp Brothers first arrive at Tombstone Fred White is telling them about the Cowboys and says "there's three of them now," the camera then shows four people wearing the red sash of the Cowboys.

Factual error: During the gunfight in the lot behind the OK Corral, Tom McLaury is firing a six shooter at Doc just before Doc fires his shotgun in the air to scare Tom's horse away. The mistake is that Tom McLaury wasn't armed during the actual gunfight. He was shot by Doc while he was reaching for the rifle he had stored in his saddle. (01:14:58)

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: The events have been intentionally adjusted by the filmmakers to create a coherent and entertaining movie. It is not a documentary. This film is loosely based on true events; it's not a day-to-day account of the events of 1880 through 1882. Artistic license does not constitute a movie mistake.

Brenda Elzin

Changing facts in historical material does constitute factual mistakes, whether anybody wants to call them that or not.

It really depends on the degree to which the film-maker alters the facts, and whether that alteration is glaring or changes the story line. For most, it doesn't. Tom got shot and Doc shot him. There is an implicit duty of the audience to "suspend disbelief" - an acknowledgment that it is impossible to get every small detail correct.

How does changing the facts make it a good movie? I guess it might entertain those who know nothing about the facts. But for those who have studied and read up on things, going way out of the story does little in making a good story. That is why I like "Wyatt Earp" MUCH more than "Tombstone." No, "Wyatt Earp" is not a documentary. It, too, has altered some facts. But, to me, it is much closer to the truth. Even some of the dialog is from the Tombstone Epitaphs reporting of the incident.

Revealing mistake: When Wyatt Earp and the actress, whom he marries later in the movie, meet on horseback, they go on a fast paced ride that concludes after going down a steep hill. If you look at the actress' feet, you will see she is riding side-saddle - a very difficult feat considering the riding they do. If you look closely you can see her real leg, safely on the other side of the horse. The side-saddle leg must be fake.

Continuity mistake: In the beginning, when Doc Holiday is playing poker with Ed Bailey, they tell Doc to drop his cards. He does so, and reveals a poker of queens. In a fury, Ed Bailey stands up pushing the table. When he does this, you see Doc's cup with liquor in it fall and roll off the table. Doc even watches it fall off the table onto the floor. When they show Doc again, the cup is right there where it was before, in perfect stance. Doc even drinks the rest of the liquor inside it, a little bit later on in the scene. (00:11:55)

Continuity mistake: Just prior to the actual gunfight scene as both sides have their hands on their guns waiting for something to happen, Frank McLaury is first shown wearing his hat. A few moments later he is shown by himself, looking to his right, without the hat. Then again, moments later, the hat reappears.

Factual error: Three of the Earp brothers arrived in Tombstone on December 1, 1879. They served as lawmen during 1880/81 and fought the Cowboys in the famous gunfight on October 26, 1881, They left the area in April 1882. In the movie the Earp's arrive in Tombstone in 1881 and ride past Boot Hill Cemetery. The tombstone displaying one of the most famous epitaph ever written is visible: "Her lies Lester Moore, Four slugs from a .44, No Les, No more." The problem is that Lester Moore wasn't killed until 1884. So it's impossible for his tombstone and famous epitaph to be in Boot Hill when the Earps arrived.

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: Fact is nobody knows who Lester Moore is. They believe he was a mail clerk who was shot and killed over a dispute over a package, but they cannot prove it. There is no date on the tombstone, plus the fact that there was never anyone by that name ever killed in the Arizona territory makes this tombstone even more mysterious.

lartaker1975

Continuity mistake: In the first scene when the priest, bride, and groom, etc. come out of the church you can see the priest putting on his hat in two different angles.

Revealing mistake: When Wyatt and the others leave two cowboys hanging in front of the Dragoon Saloon, you can see that neither man actually has a rope on his neck. As the one man swings around, on his vest you can see the outline of the rope going straight down into the harness that's holding him. (01:25:35)

MovieFan612 Premium member

Continuity mistake: During the fight at the O.K Corral Doc empties one of his guns into the man with the blue shirt on, then the man starts shooting through the window and Wyatt shouts "Doc, behind us." Doc Holiday immediately empties both his guns into the building without time to reload one.

Factual error: When the Earps first arrive in Tombstone (in 1880), they go past the Bird Cage Theater, which wasn't built until 1881.

Visible crew/equipment: When Virgil goes outside on the night of the storm after seeing Wyatt and Morgan, the arm of a crane is visible in the background behind the roof of a building. It sticks vertically up in the air, probably for mounting lights.

MovieFan612 Premium member

Revealing mistake: When Morgan dies his eyes are wide open. As Wyatt lays him down rolling his head to the side Morgan's eyes continue to focus at the ceiling instead of turning with the motion of his head as dead eyes would do.

MovieFan612 Premium member

Factual error: In the scene when Virgil returns to the Oriental after being shot, Wyatt and Morgan are sitting at a table eating Chinese noodles with vegetables, among which is broccoli. Broccoli was practically unknown in the United States until it began to be commercially cultivated in California in the 1920s.

MovieFan612 Premium member

Continuity mistake: When Doc and Kate are leaving the saloon after he stabbed Ed Bailey, as they stand in the doorway facing the people In the saloon, the light outside shows bright sun with shadows from the buildings, indicating it is mid to late afternoon. When they step outside, there is no bright sunlight and the entire street is in dusky shadow.

MovieFan612 Premium member

Continuity mistake: In the scene where McMasters is looking through his eyeglass and telling Wyatt how many cowboys there are, there's a shot of Doc coughing with a bloody rag up to his mouth. The camera goes back to Wyatt, and when it goes back to Doc, there is blood dripping out of his mouth and all over his bottom lip and chin. In the very next shot when Doc falls off his horse, about two seconds later, his mouth and chin are completely clean.

Visible crew/equipment: In the opening sequence where Curly Bill and gang are walking toward the church, a microphone with a furry wind sock can be seen in the lower left just before Ike Clanton passes.

Factual error: At the end of the movie, the narrator says that Ike Clanton was shot and killed during an attempted bank robbery. Ike Clanton was actually killed while attempting to flee from Detective Jonas Brighton who was sent to arrest him for the crime of cattle-rustling.

Johnny Tyler: Is something on your mind?
Wyatt Earp: Just want to let you know you're sittin' in my chair.
Johnny Tyler: Is that a fact?
Wyatt Earp: Yeah, it's a fact.
Johnny Tyler: Well, for a man who don't go heeled you run your mouth kind of reckless, don't you?
Wyatt Earp: No need to go heeled to get the bulge on a tub like you.
Johnny Tyler: Is that a fact?
Wyatt Earp: Mm-hmm. That's a fact.
[Johnny Tyler stands up.]
Johnny Tyler: Well, I'm real scared.
Wyatt Earp: Damn right, you're scared. I can see that in your eyes.
[Wyatt walks up to Johnny as Johnny reaches for his gun.]
Johnny Tyler: All right now.
Wyatt Earp: Go ahead. Go ahead, skin it. Skin that smoke wagon and see what happens.
Johnny Tyler: Listen, mister, I-I'm gettin' awful tired of your-
[Wyatt slaps Johnny hard in the face.]
Wyatt Earp: I'm gettin' awful tired of your gas. Now jerk that pistol and go to work.
[Johnny doesn't do anything and Wyatt slaps him in the face again.]
Wyatt Earp: I said throw down, boy.
[Wyatt slaps Johnny harder and when Johnny turns to look at Wyatt his mouth is bleeding.]
Wyatt Earp: You gonna do somethin' or just stand there and bleed?
[Johnny still doesn't do anything.]
Wyatt Earp: No? I didn't think so.

More quotes from Tombstone

Trivia: Val Kilmer is widely believed to be the most historically accurate portrayal of Doc Holliday. He is the same height, same build, and uses phrases used by Doc Holliday (eg "I'm your huckleberry" and "You're a daisy if you do").

Vin15Nets

Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.

Suggested correction: But Hucleberry Finn appeared in Tom Sawyer in 1876 and was a bad influence on, or "made trouble' for Tom.

Not sure what this correction is trying to state, but "I'm you're Huckleberry" was slang in the late 1800's for "I'm your man" and didn't derive from Twain or Huck Finn. Twain uses the earlier slang meaning of huckleberry for Finn, meaning an inconsequential person, to establish Finn is a boy of lower extraction or degree than Tom Sawyer.

Bishop73

More trivia for Tombstone

Chosen answer: A reckoning is like a judgment day, exacting retribution for one's actions. Doc was very well educated and had a very large vocabulary. He was correctly pointing out the subtle difference between revenge (to make Wyatt feel better about losing Morgan and about Virgil's crippling injury) and the fact that Wyatt was bringing about a judgment day (or reckoning) for each of the men who hurt his family.

MovieFan612 Premium member

Answer: I've spent a lot of time thinking about this very question, and here's what I've come up with. I think there are at least two differences between revenge and a reckoning. First, I think it has to do with the scale of the response to an offending action. Revenge, in my mind, is an eye for an eye, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will inflict the same action on your family (or group, gang, whatever). " A reckoning is less a measured response to an offending action and more of a full-scale punishment, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will now slaughter your entire family-including those who were not directly responsible for the offending action." Second, I think there is also a difference in motivation. Revenge tends to be a very personal response to something, whereas a reckoning tends to be more of a response fueled by a need for justice. In Wyatt's case, it was both. He was enraged by what happened to his family, but was also a lawman.

Franklin Vaughn

Thank you for this response! I've only seen Tombstone a million times and asked the same question every time. It's hard to separate the difference between the two but I believe you nailed it. Well done.

I'm thinking the opposite in terms. Revenge is "Reflexive" and is generally any means necessary (out of an abundance of pain or rage) to hurt the other party. "Revenge is a dish best served cold." If one is exacting justice there's no need to be cold hearted. Therefore, Reckoning is (to me) a fair balancing of the "scales" hence "an eye for an eye." Not only consequences of actions as it were but a corrective action to an incorrect circumstance. Just my understanding.

The problem with that theory is there is no difference in the end because the end result was the same...the killing. True reckoning could have only been achieved though the apprehension and punishment by trial and jury, anything other than that is simply revenge.

More questions & answers from Tombstone

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.