Corrected entry: Doc could not have the copy of the pic of him and Marty at the clock of the tower, because Marty has it in the DeLorean when he comes back to 1985.
25th Jul 2018
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Correction: It's certainly possible that they got more than one photograph taken.
Correction: There are several instances of duplicate (doppelganger) items and characters in the same timeline throughout the BTTF trilogy. For example, the DeLorean itself exists two and even three times within the same timeline. Doc and Marty and Jennifer and Biff all exist as doppelgangers within the same timeline. So, a duplicate photograph should be no problem in a storyline riddled with such inconsistencies.
This is incorrect... there is only 1 Marty, 1 Biff, 1 Doc, 1 Jennifer and 1 DeLorean. Yes, multiple versions may exist at the same time but in no instance is there a copy of the original person or car. For example, in BTTF II in 1955 there are 2 Marty's at the dance at the same time but the 2nd newer Marty is the same Marty from BTTF I. There should only be 1 copy of the picture, on the other hand, because it has not (to the best of our knowledge) been time traveling. The only explanations (for it to not be a mistake and these are still guesses) could be that they had a second picture taken even though it might be an expensive and time consuming process or Doc Brown could have gone into the future and taken it from Marty and, therefore, the picture could exist twice in 1 time period.
The photo time-travels at least twice in BTTF3: Once with Marty in the DeLorean on the explosive return trip, and again a few moments later when Doc arrives in the steam-powered locomotive time machine. We can reasonably assume that there was another, time-erased meeting between Marty and Doc (possibly in the future) wherein Marty explained how the photo was destroyed, prompting Doc to go back to the Old West and procure the photo again. Same exact photo X2, same scene, just as there were multiple characters and vehicles in the same timelines.
8th Jul 2018
Corrected entry: Some more errors about Princess Isabella: at the height of William Wallace's rebellion Edward I sends her as an ambassador to negotiate with Wallace (and spy on the Scots) instead she falls in love with Wallace. Princess Isabella was born in 1292: Wallace's rebellion was at its height during 1297-8, so she could have been no more than 6 at the time. (Somebody else has already observed that she was only 13 at the time of Wallace's execution.) Isabella's first language would (obviously) have been French, a 13th century Scotsman would speak either a heavily accented Scottish version of English, or Scots Gaelic, but Isabella has no communication difficulties in Scotland. The Wallace-Isabella affair is also absurd, since it is implausible that, at the height of a war, an unaccompanied young woman, let alone a princess engaged to the heir to the throne of England, would be sent into the heart of a war zone as an envoy and a spy.
Correction: Her age has already been marked as an error. As someone well travelled, Wallace knew several languages and as an educated princess, Isabella would have likely known several (and this could all simply be a translation convention). And the king admits that he knew of the danger, and hoped that if Wallace or his men killed her, her father the King of France would help him defeat the Scottish rebellion.
I concede most of your points, and, as you observe, if Isabella and Wallace can converse, this is 'translation convention'. Another error in the film that has already been marked: while the historical Wallace was a minor nobleman, Braveheart shows him as a common man, with no aristocratic or upper class traits, so the Isabella-Wallace romance forms a stock element of many romantic stories, a princess or prince defying social convention to fall in love with a lower class man or woman, entertaining as a story, but implausible in reality. And I think we agree that Isabella was only 6 at the time of Wallace's rebellion, so, in reality, she would have been far too young to have been involved in events.
First, both historical inaccuracies and things that you consider unlikely are not mistakes. Second, history is riddled with accounts of nobles having affairs with commoners and slaves.
3rd Jul 2018
Ocean's Twelve (2004)
Corrected entry: At the end, they take the train from Gare du Nord to get the egg. But in Paris, if you want to go to Rome you have to take the train from Gare de Lyon. Trains from Gare du Nord only take you North (London, Brussels).
Correction: The guy carrying the egg is probably taking a circuitous route to avoid detection.
6th Jul 2018
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)
Corrected entry: The lagoon where the amphibian dinosaur is living is not connected to a river or to the sea, so it was impossible that he reached the open sea.
Correction: It's not a lagoon. It's a very large enclosed area of the ocean.
Correction: There's a canal connecting from the Lagoon, flowing through a part of the island leading to the ocean.
5th Jul 2018
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)
Other mistake: When Zola's algorithm is deployed and begins it shows the radius which barely reaches Staten Island, however it finds Tony Stark in NYC.
Suggested correction: The initial targeting radius shown at 1:53:27 is as you say. But the radius keeps growing. At 1:53:50, it is still growing and has almost reached Lake Ontario.
30th Jun 2018
Other mistake: Bender wears a magnetic bow tie. However in series 1 episode 2 it's shown magnets screw up his circuits and make him sing songs. It's mentioned in a previous entries correction that it's only when the magnet is near his head. This isn't true as it's shown in others episodes that it happens when a magnet is attached anywhere on him.
Suggested correction: It's strong magnets near his head that mess up his inhibition unit. The bow tie is a very weak magnet.
As stated in the mistake, It happens when ANY magnet is attached to him.
18th Jun 2018
The Karate Kid (1984)
Corrected entry: When Daniel enters Mr. Miyagi's house for the first time, the door knocks into wind chimes hanging from the ceiling. When Daniel's mother finds Daniel at Mr. Miyagi's house and enters, the chimes are gone.
Correction: Given the time that passes, he easily could have taken them down.
Nothing confirms that he was removing them.
Nothing confirms that they ate every day during the film's time frame either. Does that mean they didn't eat other than what we saw?
Nothing confirms he didn't remove them either.
Nothing confirms he wasn't either.
There are at least 3 scenes where the chimes are present. 1. When Daniel first goes to Myagi's room-he opens the door and hits the chimes. 2. When he goes to Myagi's room to say thank you for fixing his bike-the chimes seem a little further away from the door and he seems to have to exaggerate the door opening to actually hit them. 3. When Daniels mother enters Myagi's room the chimes are there (possibly slightly repositioned) but she doesn't open the door wide enough to make contact with them.
Correction: No they aren't. She just opens the door enough to not bump it.
17th Jun 2018
Corrected entry: At the end in the desert, John Doe doesn't seem to hear or see the police helicopter hovering at their location.
15th Jun 2018
Wreck-It Ralph (2012)
Corrected entry: When the racers are paying to compete in the race to decide who will be the next day's avatars/racers, the King mentions that they pay using a gold coin they've collected by winning previous races. This doesn't make sense however as they all would have started with none. Even if they all started with one, only the winner would have any to play with the next day. How did they pay to compete before they collected these coins? And what happens if an avatar loses all their races and run out of coins? They'd never been able to compete in the race again, meaning the pool of racers would be whittled down over time.
Correction: Since we see so little of the actual gameplay, we don't know how it functions. It's possible they get a certain number of coins per day, or per player who selects their character.
10th Jun 2018
Flight of the Phoenix (2004)
Corrected entry: At the end of the film we learn that all of the survivors lived happily ever after and went on to enjoy hugely successful careers in their chosen fields. Haven't they forgotten something? Elliot committed a cold blooded murder, shooting dead a wounded nomad because he would have interfered with their construction plans. Self defence is one thing but shooting an injured man in the head in order to conserve water is an entirely different matter. Obviously the Chinese authorities are going to visit the site as soon as the story breaks and they are going to want to know who shot one of the citizens dead, and why. Elliot is going to face a range of serious charges and will be extradited to China to face trial.
Correction: There is no indication that any of the survivors would have told about the man Elliot killed. The nomads wouldn't have told either, as they committed several murders before that and tried to kill them after as well. Elliot also basically put him out of his misery. He was dead anyway.
The Chinese would not have allowed the murder of one of their citizens to go unpunished. We are dealing with a legal system that executes people for crimes that would incur a suspended jail sentence anywhere else. They would not accept euthanasia as a defence, either. Elliot would be on a plane back to China whether he liked it or not.
The USA and China don't have an extradition treaty. China could ask, the US would most likely tell them tough luck, and Elliot would still get to live a happy and successful life. Couldn't ever return to China, but I'm sure he'd cope.
Wrong. If an American citizen commits a crime such as murder or assault or other violent crimes, the American citizen is going to be charged regardless of where the crimes were committed. Even if the crime was committed in a country with which the US doesn't have an extradition treaty, They have have other ways to you charge for your crimes. They don't have to extradite you for you to be charged.
Citation? Because with zero evidence the US isn't going to take China's word for it and charge him themselves. And China can charge him with a crime without him present, and...then what? The charge may technically exist, but it won't affect his life in any meaningful way. And as the original correction notes, officials may want to know what happened, but that doesn't mean they'll find out. This entry is massive conjecture at best.
If evidence to US, like a picture of the body, or a video of the person murdering someone, and you are an American then US will charge you, and sentence you to prison. The only way court would truly decide that you cannot be charged because the crime was committed outside of the US is if you are non-American. We don't know if Elliot is an American citizen.
Again... Citation? A photo of a body isn't evidence. Without evidence you can't be charged. And given the lack of info and detail in the film this is all hypothetical conjecture which still doesn't constitute a mistake.
What about a video of you murdering someone? Would that not prove your guilty?
If you want to have a detailed debate about extradition treaties and what evidence would or wouldn't exist and justify someone being charged with a crime, great, but here isn't the place. The above mistake claims Elliot would face charges and be extradited to China. There's no evidence of his crimes and no extradition treaty with China. People get away with crimes every day. The sole opportunity for evidence is eyewitness testimony, as the correction above points out, and no-one would say anything, plus it would be questionable at best. As such the "mistake" is invalid, end of story.
The Chinese government would first have to know about the murder before they could do anything about it. Given how the sand shifts during the storm after he is killed, enough to at least cover the Phoenix, there is little chance they would ever find the body.
10th Jun 2018
Corrected entry: When Val and Earl meet Rhonda for the first time she asks if there is any drilling, explosions etc. and they say no. She explains the graph's readings are strange and thought it could be because of possible works going on. A bit later as Val and Earl are leaving Perfection they come across 2 workmen drilling the road.
Correction: The small jackhammers the road workers are using are highly unlikely to be able to affect a distant seismograph. She meant things like oil or deep core drilling. In addition, it's quite possible Val and Earl didn't even know about the road workers.
6th Jun 2018
Factual error: In surgery Trapper John is singing Frank Sinatra's version of "I got you under my skin". Although it was written in 1936, Sinatra did not release it until 1956, after the Korean War ended. The 1936 version sung by Al Bowlly sounds nothing like the version Trapper John was singing, which was mimicking Sinatra's version.
Suggested correction: While it hadn't been released on vinyl until 1956, Sinatra had sung the song as early as 1946 on his radio show and during live shows.
The version Frank Sinatra sang on his radio show was similar to the original version used in the movie "Born to Dance" (a movie he references before singing his two songs). He didn't change it to the big band version that Trapper imitates until 1956.
6th Jun 2018
Pitch Black (2000)
Corrected entry: Riddick seals them in the cave and goes to the ship. They fill bottles with the glow worms while he starts preparing the ship. Caroline magically appears outside the cave and climbing over the ridge that is overlooking the "town." She runs to the ship and tells him that she promised "them" she would return with more light. 1. How did she get out? If it was a second hole then the creatures would have gotten in 2. She never said she'd be back with more light to them.
Correction: 1. The three of them could have moved the rock together. 2. Just because we didn't see her say that doesn't mean she didn't say it.
But, how did the rock get back in place when two of them were still INSIDE the cave? No handholds on the cave-facing part of that rock to pull on; and Carolyn was certainly not strong enough to push it back up, on her own.
17th Jan 2005
Tin Cup (1996)
Corrected entry: In the final round Roy hits an errant second shot and his ball lands near a portaloo. He then hits the ball and purposely ricochets the ball off it. The rules states that if an object is not a permanent fixture on the course you can get relief, such as grandstands and camera towers. It's highly implausible that a professional golfer would not take advantage of that rule.
Correction: Roy is a professional golfer. It is his profession. He is not a 'Tour Professional'. He runs a driving range, giving out lessons and thus gets paid. There are many references to him being a 'pro' during the film. Professional golfers don't always play on golf tours. There are club professionals, coaching professionals etc etc. All have professional status and registered with the applicable governing body such as the uspga or the PGA. And, if they qualify for (in this case) the U.S. Open, they would play as professionals against the 'Tour Professionals' and anyone else who has qualified such as Amateurs, other qualifiers, wild cards and invitees etc.
Correction: Roy is NOT a professional golfer. That is his problem, he is reckless and takes absurd risks which often get him into trouble.
It's possible the port a potty is a permanent structure, being on the course at all times for golfers to use.
Correction: Either way, the port-a-potty isn't in his way. Roy's ball is stuck right behind a tree and he is using the port-a-potty to ricochet the ball. If he had it moved and went that way, he'd just be deeper into the woods.
24th May 2018
Corrected entry: Frida's costume was in custody in the security office, so Hector couldn't use it to get in to the de la Cruz party.
Correction: Given that Frida likes Miguel for helping her, she could have been convinced to give Hector the costume to help him.
26th Apr 2018
Apollo 13 (1995)
Corrected entry: When the astronauts are too shallow for re-entry because they are too light, it is mentioned they should have been carrying 200lbs of moon rock. Yet the lander portion of the lunar module, which is supposed to be left on the moon, is still attached to the ship all the way to jettison before re-entry, weighing far more than 200lb.
Correction: Mission control likely took what would have been the normal reentry weight and added in the weight of the lander and things inside it. But they forgot to subtract the weight of the moon rocks.
Correction: The weight of the LEM (Lunar Excursion Module) would never play a part in NASA's calculations of reentry weight. NASA was only concerned with the exact weight of the Command Module as it entered Earth's upper atmosphere. The LEM was jettisoned long before the Command Module approached the reentry window and was never a weight consideration (they were only using the LEM and its oxygen supply as a "lifeboat"). And, besides, in micro-gravity the LEM and Command Modules were essentially weightless. As the Command Module reentered Earth's atmosphere, it was 200 lbs too light because it wasn't carrying the expected Moon rock samples. This lack of mass threatened to bounce the Command Module off the Earth's upper atmosphere, which would have been disastrous for the crew. If they had thought about it in advance, the crew should have cannibalized 200 lbs of equipment from the LEM before they jettisoned it, adding the necessary weight to the Command Module for reentry.
23rd Apr 2018
Wonder Woman (2017)
Corrected entry: Diana was sculpted from clay by her mother, and Hades, her former lover. Aphrodite then breathed life into the statue. She was not born in the usual sense. Ignoring above and assuming she is in fact the daughter of Zeus (or Hades), this would make Ares her uncle. Not her brother as she says in the film.
Correction: This entry is doubly wrong - first off, the film states that Diana's origin story is different than it was in the original comics, so here, Hippolyta told her she was made from clay and all that, when in reality, she was made the old fashioned way by Zeus and Hippolyta. Basically, the movie radically streamlines her comic book origin story, just like the first Thor movie did. Second, what is true in mythology would not necessarily translate one on one to the movie, and the movie mentions during the storytelling scene at the beginning that Ares is Zeus' son.
Well I do think she was made from clay and turned to life by Zeus, that still makes her Zeus' daughter. A demigod. Technically Ares is her half-brother.
Correction: The comic book origins don't necessarily apply to the films.
9th Apr 2018
Corrected entry: Clive called the condo to ask for Daphne. Later, when he is under the impression that Daphne is married to Niles, he says that Daphne is still listed in the phone book as Daphne Moon. Why is Daphne listed under Frasier's home number? The episode "Dial M For Martin" establishes that she feels a need to move on when a patient no longer needs her. At this point, she does not consider herself a permanent part of the household.
Correction: She's listed under Frasier's home number because that is also her home number.
10th Apr 2018
Corrected entry: In the very first fight, Gibson had a flail and antlers. After he hits the 1st guy, he falls from his horse with flail in hand. When attacked by the 2nd guy, a sword is now in his hand and he blocks an attack with it.
Correction: Wallace drops the flail after he falls off the horse and picks up the sword of the first guard he killed.
7th Apr 2018
The Green Mile (1999)
Corrected entry: When Percy and Wild Bill are both being placed into the strait-jacket, the jacket has buckles. Strait-jackets back in the 1930's had to be laced up through eyelets. Buckled strait-jackets didn't appear until the 1980's.
Correction: That's incorrect. Look online and you can find plenty of antique straight jackets with straps and buckles.
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: The technology existed in 1885 to produce duplicate copies of the same photograph. The photographer who took it would certainly be able to do so there and then. Even if that wasn't the case it's not a stretch that someone of Doc's abilities could manage it so that he and Marty could each have their own copy.