Factual error: Although it's a commonly used movie trope, cutting the brake lines on a bus would not produce the effect seen in the movie. Buses use air brakes, which by design, can operate even with substantial loss of pressure and often engage automatically if there is too much pressure loss.
wizard_of_gore
13th Oct 2021
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (2021)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: I don't know what air brakes you have used but the very nature of air brakes means that low pressure means they can't work. If you have no pressure in them, how are you supposed to press the brakes? I have personally driven hundreds of vehicles with air brakes (I am a truck driver by trade) and can tell you this is a fact. All that happens when air brakes lose pressure is a warning light on the dash and an alarm sounding in the cab, one must manually slow down the vehicle at that point.
I respect the fact that you drive a truck, but my dad has been a master mechanic for more than 50 years and he is the one who pointed this out to me. Depending on the system, there are various fail-safe systems that will engage the brakes during an emergency loss of pressure. Plus, a simple Google search led me to several examples of these systems.
21st May 2013
Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)
Continuity mistake: When Admiral Marcus' ship appears in front of the Enterprise after coming out of warp, a set of panels begins to close over the main deflector dish. In the next shot, when looking out of the Enterprise's viewscreen, the deflector dish is fully visible again. (01:13:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This detail was intentional. As a purely military-minded ship, the Vengeance was built with many different defense mechanisms, including the ability to protect its deflector dish by opening and closing a pair of panels. It simply closed them for protection, then opened them again when the deflector dish was needed or the Enterprise was no longer deemed a threat.
The problem is that the doors are shown closing, and then in a split second, when seen from the perspective of the Enterprise, they are still open.
8th Nov 2007
The Santa Clause 2 (2002)
Question: At the meeting, what did Mother Nature mean when she said "Don't mess with me Santa. I'm pre-el niño." or something like that. What does pre-el niño mean and why did she think Santa was messing with her?
Answer: By "pre-El Niño", she meant what to a mortal woman would be pre-menstrual. El Niño is "an oscillation of the ocean-atmosphere system in the tropical Pacific having important consequences for weather around the globe. Among these consequences are increased rainfall across the southern tier of the US and in Peru, which has caused destructive flooding, and drought in the West Pacific, sometimes associated with devastating brush fires in Australia."
So she was saying she's PMSing?
Yep, that's exactly what she's saying.
25th May 2010
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
Corrected entry: I have to post this to refute the comment that denied the existence of an alternate ending. I was overjoyed to find a comment here from someone else who remembered seeing a different ending just one time in the 1960s. I've spent my whole life trying to find someone else who remembered this. In the 1960s the annual broadcast of the film had hosts. I, and two of my friends, ever since childhood always remembered that one year the movie had a different ending. I've always sensed it was the year that the hosts were Liza Minnelli and Lorna and Joey Luft. We never could remember what the different ending was, but we recalled that it was black and white and that our reaction was: It wasn't just a dream that time. Now that I've read this other person's memory of the camera's panning to the ruby slippers under the bed, in black and white, I remember that's what I saw. Another commenter says that there's no evidence that the scene ever existed. I am here to verify that someone else has never stopped wondering for over 40 years about a vague memory of a different ending from one airing in the 1960s.
Correction: https://criticsrant.com/mythbusters-dorothys-ruby-slippers/ This website gives some confirmation, it's one of those myths that get mixed up in people's memories to being convinced they have seen it. The WoZ original footage has been carefully preserved, it's not lost, if this footage made it to the final film for view; somebody would have posted it by now as the footage would still exist somewhere. It's possible you saw a skit or parody though that you mistook for the actual film. That would make sense.
Correction: This is called the "Mandela Effect" (aka 'collective false memory').
It's not a false memory, when I have never forgotten that night, only to find that someone else also remembered it. We may all be connected by our subconscious, but that's going a bit too far. Just because you don't remember it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
But the nature of a collective false memory means just because two people remember something happening, doesn't mean it did! :-).
It's also possible you saw a parody or a different adaption of WoZ one time and it mixed up in your memory as being a part of the 1939 movie. There is no evidence of this ending ever being in the 1939 version. It's not in the script, there is no surviving imagery of it, and no other record of it whether through cast/crew memories or having been noted as a cut scene. Since we do have records of cut/altered scenes from WoZ, more than likely there would be record of this ending somewhere.
That's the exact definition of The Mandela Effect...multiple people having the same memory of something, even though it never happened. There are people who swear that the line in "Snow White" is "Mirror, mirror on the wall," when in fact it is, "Magic mirror on the wall." Just as there are people who are absolutely convinced that Sinbad was in a movie called "Shazaam."
I also remember this ending and it has driven me crazy over the years! I would stake my life on seeing the slippers under her bed. You are not alone, and I am glad I am not either.
Correction: I do remember seeing a different ending where the camera pans down and slippers are under the bed after Dorothy says, "there's no place like home." I saw it in the 80's at a classmates house, we were watching a rented VHS of the film at her birthday party. I even remember her mother saying she had never seen that part before.
Hi everyone, I would also like to include that I too, in the '60s, saw The Wizard of Oz with the ruby slippers under the bed. I told people for years about this, and no one else could remember the ending. So, I decided since we have the internet today, I would see if anyone else saw this alternative ending and am pleased to see that you have.
Correction: Have you ever watched the 1925 "Wizard of Oz" film? I haven't watched it and I don't know its history of being aired on TV. But it was shot in B&W and perhaps that's the version you watched (I'm not claiming it is or isn't though).
I'd say it can't be, if you peek at it (it's available on Youtube), the ending is completely different and wouldn't fit. Fascinating discussion, anyway! To the original poster; nobody means to disparage your memory, in fact we're trying to come up with possible explanations; it's pretty certain though that it can't be an official alternate ending, because we're talking about one of the most iconic and analyzed movies ever. Now it's all about figuring out what sort of clip did they play during that TV broadcast you seem to remember. And there's a gigantic wikipedia page just about the telecast alone. Perhaps it was a wraparound credits sequence?
It's not a pseudo memory at all. I remembered the same thing from the late sixties and have tried to find out for decades why it was just the one year as well and I saw it and remembered it before I ever saw others were trying to find out about it. Very strange but I have to agree that there should be a lot more people that remember it. I'm watching the movie again now and the memory came back again. When I searched I just now saw that others DO remember that different ending.
Thank you. I appreciate your saying that you're not trying to disparage my memory, but that is exactly what the responders are doing. Instead of trying to come up with explanations, maybe people should accept that they cannot prove a negative, and that just because they don't recall it and can't find a record doesn't mean I'm wrong. I don't want to keep repeating myself, I know what I saw, and my best friend (whom I did not meet until several years after) remembers it too.
No. I've never seen it.
1st Aug 2022
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Question: Why did Diana destroy the mall's security cameras, and why did she want the little girl to stay quiet?
Answer: At this point in time, her gig as a superhero is not public knowledge, and she wants it to stay that way.
How would that accomplish anything considering there were many people in the mall who saw what happened?
As the other answer indicated, Diana/Wonder Woman wasn't yet known publicly as a super-hero. A video recording is different from eye-witness accounts of what people actually saw or believe they saw. Memories are faulty, they fade, and everyone sees and remembers things differently. Regarding the child, I interpreted it as Diana just motioning in a friendly way for the rather precocious girl to stay put, behave, and quietly wait for her mother.
In my opinion, it wouldn't, and it's just another example of the shoddy writing in this film.
Answer: This was long before the age of superheroes, when everything was normal and meta-humans were just theories in a lab. It was her appearances which stated it all. Remember the tagline, "The Dawn of Justice Begins with Her."
14th Feb 2022
Wonder Woman (2017)
Plot hole: How is it possible that Diana is unaware of the concept of marriage? She has a grasp of multiple languages and cultures and can recite Socrates. Socrates often spoke of marriage, so even if her people do not marry, it makes no sense that she is completely unfamiliar with this human custom.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: She has never seen a man either. She read about them, but never actually saw one. One might question why she doesn't understand a man if she read about them, and yet she doesn't. Same thing with marriage.
She had never seen a man, but she knew that they existed. She speaks multiple languages, despite never having met someone from any of those cultures. My point is, if she's so well versed in world cultures, how has she never heard of the concept of marriage?
27th Dec 2021
The Santa Clause 2 (2002)
Question: One of the plot points is that Charlie is acting out due to his dad not being around and him not being able to tell people who his dad really is. If Scott doesn't have to be up at the north pole all year round, why can't he live at home with Charlie most of the year and then go up to the pole closer to the fall/winter? In the first movie he didn't have to report back until Thanksgiving. Can't he do the same the other years as well?
Answer: Bernard said, Scott has a year to get his affairs in order and be back by next Thankisgiving, to forgo his old life and adjust to his new one. By Thanksgiving, the Naughty or Nice list would have been compiled, the toys ready for packing and the reindeer prepared for flight.
Answer: Being Santa Claus is a full time job, keeping updates on the children who are naughty or nice year round. Plus, kids change their mind constantly about what they want for Christmas. One minute it's Star Wars, the next it's Marvel. Technology is also changing, the latest computer game becomes obsolete in 6 months.
This answer doesn't address the fact that in the first film, it's made clear that Santa doesn't report to the North Pole until Thanksgiving. Plus, the naughty/nice list is sent to his house, by FedEx of all things.
13th Dec 2021
A Christmas Story (1983)
Question: When Miss Shields is discussing the incident with Flick with the whole class, she looks accusingly at Ralphie as it's clear she's blaming him. Why would Miss Shields blame Ralphie considering he never made Flick stick his tongue to the pole, none of the other students said anything and even Flick refused to talk about who really made him do it?
Answer: Miss Shields is not blaming Ralphie. She has probably seen him and Flick together around the school grounds, so she knows that they are friends. Therefore, she suspects that he knows what happened.
When Miss Shields looks at Ralphie, she says, "Those who did it know they're blame." She then says" Now don't you feel terrible? Don't you feel remorse for what you have done?"
I agree. From the way she looks at Ralphie and what she says when looking at him, she's blaming him.
15th Sep 2021
Batman (1989)
Question: At Bruce Wayne's party, why does Knox (the reporter for the Gotham newspaper) seem to not know who Bruce Wayne is? Knox flat out asks him in the room with the life-size figures "Who are you?" Seems like Knox would know who such a prominent citizen of Gotham is. I understand Vicki Vale not knowing as she is a freelancer in from out-of-town, but Knox not knowing?
Answer: He considers himself a tough hard edge reporter, like Woodard and Bernstein, walking the gritty streets, going down dark alleys and coming face to face with the underworld's rogue's gallery. He regards the entertainment, gossip and high society pages as puff pieces worthy of Catherine "Cat" Grant of the Daily Planet. So he wouldn't recognize the wealthy blue blood types.
Respectfully, that's pure speculation. Bruce Wayne is the most well-known person in Gotham City and surely his name and photo would have been in the newspaper, on magazine covers and on the news many, many times. It makes no sense that Knox wouldn't know who he was. You might not care about Kim Kardashian, but most people would recognize a picture of her.
Answer: In the original comic book lore, young Bruce Wayne travelled the world for years seeking the expertise of the greatest cops, criminals, athletes and martial artists to become Batman. In the movie, "Batman'" had been active for a few months and was considered a urban legend, which means he may well have only recently returned from those travels. Also, at the party celebrating newly appointed Harvey Dent, Bruce Wayne's seat was empty, was means he missed several other ceremonies. He was avoiding the spotlight. Forget "Batman Begins."
27th Sep 2008
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Trivia: The scene in which the Fellowship mourns Gandalf in Moria was filmed, ironically, before the group had even met Ian McKellen.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Not true.
This isn't a valid correction. Anyone can say "Not true" to any submission if they want to. You need to have actual data to back up your claim.
Agreed, but by the same token, anyone can post anything as trivia. How do we know the original post is true? The OP offers no source.
This entry doesn't look nor sound credible.
That may be so, but since the webmaster approved it, anyone who wishes to correct it needs to have information proving it to be wrong.
It's always a bit case by case - the member who submitted it is generally reliable, not prone to making stuff up, etc. But I'm open to corrections!
19th Jul 2021
The Tomorrow War (2021)
Corrected entry: The aircraft launched to destroy the city of Miami are F-22 air superiority fighters, which are entirely incapable of saturation or carpet bombing. Even the way they carry out the operation in the movie demonstrates this. They blow up a few streets and that's it. What was the point?
Correction: The air strike was not launched to destroy the city, just the research facility and the area around it. The F-22s would be WAY old by the time of this attack and it's perfectly reasonable to assume from this that the military was using anything it had left in its last stand battle to kill the creatures.
It's stated in the film that the city had been lost/overrun and would be destroyed, ostensibly to destroy as many white spikes as possible.
16th Jan 2009
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987)
Stupidity: When Riker and Worf are searching for Geordi on the holodeck, why don't they just terminate the program, instead of looking for him in the simulated jungle? Would have made it a heck of a lot easier to find him in the relatively small empty holodeck, invisible or not.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Geordi had already mutated and since one of the abilities of the mutation is invisibility, shutting off the holodeck wouldn't have helped as, without being able to see Geordi, it would be impossible to know where or if he was still in the holodeck.
The original stupidity still holds though. As the original poster said, it would be easier to find Geordi in the smaller holodeck, without the simulated jungle, "invisible or not."
No, it wouldn't. Before going to the holodeck, the computer was asked where Geordi was with the response he was no longer on board. This would indicate that any type of scanner would not be able to find him. Plus, how would shutting off the holodeck help? Geordi was now invisible, being invisible would have no shadow and shortly after Worf and Riker had even got to the holodeck, a partially mutated Geordi had already got to the transporter room and beamed himself down to the planet.
I have to agree. How would shutting down the holodeck be useful in finding Geordi since he was now invisible and the scanners on the Enterprise couldn't detect him?
Because of how the Holodeck works, turning off the program would leave him in a small room and standing on the floor, so they could at least try to physically sweep the room. Leaving the program running, he's still invisible, but now a physical sweep would be nearly impossible since he could be in trees above them or hiding below them and not on the same ground level.
29th Dec 2020
Stargate SG-1 (1997)
Question: On every planet SG-1 travels to, plants are the same color as those on earth. Shouldn't plants have different colors on different planets?
Answer: The Aliens choose planets that were similar to Earth. They possessed human beings, so they needed worlds with vegetation and atmosphere. In the original movie, their race was dying and humans were the only ones who could give them eternal life - they took many inhabitants as slave labor.
Answer: There have been times where plants are different color, but generally speaking, green is evolutionarily better at capturing the best amount of sunlight energy for photosynthesis. Thus, plants evolved to have green chlorophyll on other planets as well.
Answer: Planets with Stargates were chosen because of the similarities to Earth.
That's ridiculous. Stargate command would never choose a planet based on similarities to earth unless it would to make sure it was safe to travel to.
Stargate command had nothing to do with where the Stargates were. The answer is saying those that placed the Stargates throughout the galaxy chose Earth-like planets. More accurately though, inhabitable planets, which tend to be similar to Earth.
The Ancients put the Stargates on planets, and since their physiology was very similar to modern Earth humans, it stands to reason that they only chose to put planets which could support a similar lifeform. Hence, why most planets or moons resembled Earth at some point in their history.
Huh? First of all, you're trying to surmise what a fictional agency would do. Second, SG-1 and other SG teams frequently visited both Earth-like planets and planets with toxic conditions.
Stargates were placed at worlds that were similar to Earth, this mostly due to the ancients establishing themselves on Earth over 50 million years ago and finding planets to colonize from there. Some worlds may have become inhospitable over the millions of years after the stargate was built though. It is quite possible all these planets were seeded with life from Earth and planets close to Earth's appearance, hence the same vegetation and animal life.
16th Mar 2006
Apollo 13 (1995)
Factual error: On several occasions the astronauts address the Capcom as "Andy." None of the Apollo 13 Capcoms were named Andy. Their names were Jack Lousma, Joe Kerwin, John Young and Vance Brand.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While that is technically correct, many characters were condensed or changed to suit the movie. It's not a documentary, after all, it's a movie based on true events.
No, it's not a documentary, but all of the other characters have their "real life" names. Why change this one?
"Andy" was used to avoid viewer confusion between Jack Swigert and CAPCOM Jack Lousma.
They changed and condensed many items in the movie. "I vunder where Gunther Vent" quote was from Apollo 7, not 13. The EECOM John Aaron was given another name, and the "steely eyed missile man" quote was from Apollo 12. Marilyn Lovell didn't lose her wedding ring in the shower, she found it.
No, they used John Aaron's real first name, which did clash with John Young (played by Ben Marley) when they were in the simulator scene together.
28th Dec 2018
Elf (2003)
Plot hole: Throughout the film we see several characters talk about how there's no Christmas spirit and how nobody believes in Santa anymore. If, in this universe at least, Santa does exist, it's almost impossible for people to think this. If the parents deliver the presents then how do they explain the excess gifts that Santa brings? We know that Michael is on the nice list because Santa shows him towards the end, so Michael must get presents from Santa. There is no way that Walter can't believe in Santa then because Michael gets gifts from him every year.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Emily and Walter probably just thought each present Michael got from Santa was from the other parent. I'm not sure if Walter got him presents or not but you can see that Emily did as she's seen walking home with presents when she's on the phone with Walter.
That is highly unlikely. When my daughter was "believing in Santa" age, my wife and I always talked about what we were getting her, so we didn't duplicate. Plus that theory wouldn't work for single parents.
It is very likely because it's obvious Walter is not in the Christmas spirit like his wife and Michael are. Plus it's obvious Walter is not focused on his family at the beginning of the movie so it's safe to assume the original submission is correct.
8th Jul 2020
Ford v Ferrari (2019)
Question: At various points in the film the car brakes are glowing red hot, would this happen in real life or is it for show?
Answer: Watch any NASCAR short track night race where heavy braking is required, the brake rotors glow at every turn.
Answer: I watched this movie with my father, who actually participated in Autocross races in the past. He says from first hand experience that this is indeed real. The breaks get so heated from use in the race during the rapid slowing and going that they glow hot. This is why there are racing grade breaks and it's unwise to try and race without them.
Agreed. My dad is a former race car mechanic and he said that this absolutely happens all the time.
1st Dec 2020
Django Unchained (2012)
Stupidity: So he can rescue his wife from slavery, Django comes up with a plan to buy Candie's most expensive fighter and then get him to throw her in for free. Why doesn't Django just offer to buy her directly? Surely there was some amount that Candie would agree to. Even racists like money.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: You missed the point of the plan. They knew if they went in asking to buy Broomhilda directly, Candie would set the price too high. They feigned interested in his best fighter and would get him to throw in Django's wife at a nominal price. They would then just pay the nominal price for Broomhilda and back out of buying the fighter. It's only when Candie is told Django and Broomhilda know each other did he raise the price for her.
Yes, Candie, not Candle. Stupid typo on my part. I disagree with the correction though in the sense of why would Candie raise the price before knowing that Broomhilda was Django's wife? You yourself said in your correction that he only did so when he found this out. They could still have offered to buy her initially.
Because if they didn't feign interest in buying a fighter, Candie wouldn't have even invited them to his place. So the plan was to get him to throw her in for free, rather than risk him setting the price too high (or not even negotiating at all). Candie even figured out what their plan was.
29th Jun 2020
Jurassic Park (1993)
Question: Why does Alan Grant struggle with his seatbelt in the helicopter ride to Isla Nublar? It looks like a fairly standard airline seatbelt to me.
Answer: This is a foreshadowing of the events to come. He has 2 female parts of the belt. He then over comes this problem by simply tying the two bits together in the same way all the dinosaurs on Isla Nubar are female to stop them breeding and over running the island. However, they over come this as shown when Dr. Grant finds the eggs after spending the night in the tree.
Answer: In addition to the foreshadowing of the female dinosaurs on the island learning how to breed, I think also works to establish Grant as an unconventional but creative problem-solver, someone who can make the best of an unideal situation. This leads credence to him being able to survive with the children in the park with all the dinos running around. So in that belt buckle scene you have three things going on at once: humor, foreshadowing, and character development. Great writing.
Answer: Alan is not a modern man. Being a paleontologist, he mostly relates to the past and shuns modern technology, as evidenced by his resistance to using the ground-penetrating radar to find buried fossils. He is uncomfortable and out-of-place in today's world and has difficulty using things as simple as a seatbelt.
So Grant has never been in a car? My dad can barely figure out this iPhone, but knows how to use a seatbelt. It could be as simply as he grabbed two female ends, which has happened to me on an airplane.
4th Jul 2020
The Hangover (2009)
Question: How did they have enough time to do everything they did on the first night? I believe everyone is ready by 7pm, then they go to the rooftop, then dinner, then they play blackjack and other games, they also find the time to kidnap Chow, go to the strippers, get married, steal a cop car, go to Mike Tyson and steal a tiger, come back to the hotel, fill a hot tub, playing bowling with champagne bottles, drink at least 40-50 beers, energy drinks and champagne, use all the inflatables, wait for Doug to fall asleep and get him on the roof, come back and pass out, then wake up by about 9am It seems like the casino games and strippers would take you until about 2am anyway, but they managed to fit everything else in with about 5 hours.
Answer: They didn't have time. This is a movie. Time is deliberately compressed to an unrealistic level in order to make the plot work, to make it funny, and fit it all within a 100-minute running time. Audiences are expected to employ a "suspension of disbelief" in order for the movie to be made.
True, but the movie still takes place in the real world, and physics should still prevail. It also doesn't help that they mention the time at several points throughout the film.
15th Jan 2019
Jurassic World (2015)
Stupidity: When the Pteradons are loose and flying over the crowds, people run from inside buildings out into the open where the birds are attacking people. (01:22:00)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: A person is smart, people are stupid. A crowd in a panic would do exactly that sort of thing. Like trampling over each other running in panic from a shooting or a fire when not needed. It's the nature of panic in humans as a group to act stupid. It's not a movie mistake. It's actually one of the more realistic parts of the film.
Suggested correction: The dinosaurs were also breaking into/attacking people inside, so they weren't safe no matter what.
True, but one option is certainly safer than the other.
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.