Corrected entry: Right after curfew is in effect, when Tatum and Sydney are sitting on Sydney's front porch, you see the killer in the bushes in the background. The very next scene is of the video store where both killers, Stu and Billy, are speaking to Randy. The next scene that follows directly is Sydney and Tatum in the grocery store where you see the killer's reflection on the cooler glass. How can the killer(s) be in more than one place if this is all going on at the same time?
Sammo
16th Dec 2004
Scream (1996)
10th Oct 2017
Scream (1996)
Continuity mistake: When Skeet is first shot by Gale he crawls backward, but if you look at the ghost face behind him there is no knife there. The next shot there is a knife on top of the ghost face.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
27th Aug 2001
Scream (1996)
Continuity mistake: At the end of the movie when Stu and Sidney begin tumbling (right before he gets killed) there is a bench in the background with a bag of ruffle potato chips facing upwards, in the next shot it is lying down. (01:40:30)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: There are three bags of potato chips; rewatching the scene, does not seem to me any of them changes position or orientation except maybe the leftmost smallest one that turns flat on the back instead of showing the green strip. The change though happens as the camera is away for two cuts on Neve Campbell first, then on Matthew Lillard as they're struggling, which would reasonably affect the flimsy foil bag.
27th Aug 2001
Scream (1996)
Continuity mistake: After Sidney has been attacked and is in her room. Billy climbs through the open window. It is completely open. After he drops his mobile phone, the window is only half open. (00:28:35)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
8th Jun 2005
Scream (1996)
Deliberate mistake: When Sidney is typing the message to the police, you can see that there are red lights flashing, which must mean the police are there, 5 seconds after she types. Obviously deliberately done for the humor. (00:29:30 - 00:30:25)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Contrary to what the entry says, I don't see police lights flashing as she types, nor when she talks to Billy. I do agree that still it's barely a minute before the police arrive in full force on the scene and it's pretty ridiculous (although I am not sure it's deliberate humour).
There's a time skip between Sidney encountering Dewey at the front door and Billy being arrested. It's plausible Tatum had sent Dewey to check on Sidney knowing she was going to be late, and so he arrived before the rest of the authorities. Billy did not chase after Sidney and likely reacted calmly to Dewey to look as innocent as he could, he wouldn't necessarily have been arrested right away.
14th Jun 2004
Scream (1996)
Continuity mistake: When Stu & Billy are in the kitchen after Sydney has escaped them, she calls Stu's house phone. Billy gets pissed and throws the receiver at Stu. It bounces off him and lands on the floor, yet when Stu picks up the receiver to talk to Sydney, it's on the table. (01:39:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: To be fair, Stu is shown having a grip on the phone's cord, and he had all the time to jerk it up on the desk overshooting his resting arm while he was off-camera during Billy's temper tantrum. Of course, it's also a known fact that Stu being hit and Matthew Lillard's reaction was an ad-lib kept in the final movie, so they were going to keep that take in the movie regardless - it might be a mistake, after all.
2nd Mar 2018
Scream (1996)
Trivia: After the release of this film, Caller ID sales shot up by over 300% for a period of time. This was a pretty big deal, too, as it was the mid-90's and Caller ID was not a standard feature on phones as it is now. The spike in sales is sometimes attributed to young adults seeing this film and becoming frightened by the idea of receiving a phonecall and not knowing who was on the other side, although it's never been 100% confirmed that this was the case. Either way, it's an interesting correlation.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: It's one of those rumors I'd really love to be able to get a quotable, reliable source for. The figure "300% up" is referred to the US market, from what I understand, but again, color me surprised if it's an actual, legitimate figure and not just one random number.
Submitted a word change saying that's it's never been 100% confirmed because it is indeed hard to verify. But given it's also one of those "cool factoids" that people have thrown around for decades, I do think this rumor has a place in the trivia.
26th Sep 2003
Scream (1996)
Corrected entry: In the space of 15 seconds (between the time Casey's mom hears her daughter on the phone and the time when she walks out her front door and sees Casey) how did the killer manage to tie Casey onto the swing? It would have taken quite a while to lift her body and twist the ropes around her tightly enough that they held. Stu couldn't have helped as he was with Tatum that night.
Correction: Stu was most likely helping Billy that night, which would cut down the time needed to tie Casey to the swing. Tatum's defense that Stu was at her house on the night of the murder was challenged by Randy, who said that Stu could have been at her house before or after the murder. In fact, Billy shows up at Sidney's house after the murder.
The correction disputes the part that says that one of the killers wouldn't be on the scene of the crime, but the main objection of the entry still stands. Even assuming the second killer was there (but they never cooperate that way and if they were seen doing that right in front of the door their gimmick would have been exposed) the timeframe from the last time we see her dragged (by one person) and still alive to the time when she is hanged by the neck and gutted is too short.
15 seconds to gut, taker her liver, spleen and pancreas and put it in the mailbox, tie and hang her? No way.
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.
16th Nov 2021
Eternals (2021)
Corrected entry: Thena and some Eternals go to the Amazon. The opening scene shows the Amazon River lowlands. In the Amazon they speak Portuguese. But the Eternals speak Spanish to the natives. A part of the Amazon is in Peru where Spanish is spoken, but this is not the area where llamas (shown) typically live. Llamas are highland animals and are in southern Peru, not northern. (01:06:10)
Correction: That's not true that in Amazon forest they speak Portuguese, because actually the Amazon is a forest, not a state with an official language, which one contemplates a few of Latin American countries, including Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and most of them speak in Spanish. I found an article who studied languages in Amazon forest, there are around 240 languages around all the extension of the Amazon forest. Https://www.comciencia.br/dossies-1-72/reportagens/amazonia/amaz6.htm.
The explanation for the language spoken is that they are the descendants of the Spanish conquistadores that Druig controlled mentally in Tenochtitlan. I have no idea about the llamas part though.
Well, it's just a movie. A few slips here and there are inconsequential. Thanks.
OK. Noted. Thanks.
10th Jan 2022
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: Dana is really worried about her baby throughout the whole movie. She was literally almost eaten by a bathtub of slime less than 24 hours before. So naturally, when the guys show up to investigate, she blows them off to go on a date. (00:58:30)
Correction: Dana asked Janine if she could babysit Oscar for her while she was on her date and Janine said yes.
That's not the point; they are going to check the "slime stuff" (as Peter says) that happens to be the same slime that nearly ate her baby and the reason why she's there and needs a babysitter to begin with, but to her the date with Peter is more important. Like, way more important, she does not even think about it a second.
Peter sees that Dana is stressed out, so he offers to take her to dinner to help ease her. She's reluctant at first until Peter mentions having Janine as a babysitter. After that Dana agrees to use Janine as a babysitter for Oscar as she works for the Ghostbusters and Dana knows how reliable Janine is.
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.
16th Nov 2021
Eternals (2021)
Plot hole: Deviants were created to get rid of dangerous local predators allowing intelligent life to thrive on the planets Arishem 'seeded'. He then created the Eternals to get rid of the Deviants once he realised they eat the species they should have protected. Problem is, it is stated that the Eternals go through their extermination routine multiple times. But the 'mistake' can't be happening all over again in a cycle, and Deviants would ruin a planet if left unattended.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Arisham made them both part of the cycle to get the planet to be filled with intelligent life. So he always introduces Deviants before Eternals. It's a good way for him to tell the Eternals they are there to protect the intelligent life against the Deviants without knowing their true purpose. To keep them busy.
He refers to the introduction of Eternals as something he did "to correct my mistake." By that definition, he keeps making the same mistake over and over. If he just told them that they have to protect humanity and help their progress, he would obtain the same purpose. After all, for 500 years without Deviants the Eternals stayed put and passive as instructed and didn't create any particular trouble -if they did, they are a limited number he can easily pluck them out of the planet much more easily than a non-specified amount of ever-evolving beasts that he admits are out of his control and can grow much more powerful if they manage to kill Eternals.
He is lying. They are not a mistake, and they are not beyond his control. That's one of the main reasons why they go against Arishem in the first place, because everything is a lie, even after learning their true purpose. The Deviants are there to give the Eternals purpose, helping the intelligent life on the planet flourish, in the most natural way, for reasons we can only guess. The Deviant is upset too, learning the truth that they are only put on the planet for the Eternals to kill.
22nd Dec 2017
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Other mistake: After Electro gets the two cables on his chest, his clothes do not burn and have no marks. (00:58:05)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Actually they do burn, since they emit smoke very noticeably. They don't show marks, true. One could argue that Electro does pretty weird things with his clothes in general in this movie, since he has underpants resistant to anything and his clothes of choice stay with him even when he switches from pure energy to solid form, but make of that argument what you will.
19th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Corrected entry: Richard Parker tries to connect the Ethernet cable to his laptop at the beginning of the movie to upload a file. There was no in-plane internet 15-20 years ago.
Correction: Richard Parker worked for Oscorp, so, we can assume that they had all kinds of advanced technology 15 years ago.
19th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Continuity mistake: During the battle with Green Goblin, when Gwen Stacy is falling through the clock tower, there are dozens of gears and other pieces of various sizes falling with her. However, when she lands, only a few small gears and pieces land alongside her - all the other debris that were falling have seemingly vanished. (02:01:20)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: That part of the scene is SO dark that it's really hard to tell; they do show some gears and pieces land after she does and there are some gears and pieces next to her when he walks to her. I wouldn't say there's none, but I'd say it does seem a disproportionately low amount considering how many giant gears were falling.
Given that even you admit in your correction that the number of gears seems disproportionately low (which it is - we only see a few small pieces landing when there were dozens and dozens of pieces in different sizes falling), I think amending the wording through a word-change is a better option than trying to correct the mistake itself. Because there is still a mistake here. Going to go ahead and do that after I post this response. (Might take a few days to change, though).
5th May 2014
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
Corrected entry: The laptop Richard Parker is using looks too modern for a 20 year old video. Models like that were only released pretty recently. We could've assumed that Oscorp is a brilliant industry and they invented such laptops, but it says "Sony Vaio" on it.
Correction: If the first film took place around the year of its release (2012), based on Peter's age when he is left by his parents (he appears to be at least 4 or 5 years old, if not slightly older), it would mean the scenes with his parents took place in the very late 90's/early 2000's. Not quite "20 years ago." And the computers/laptops his father used all appear to resemble late 90's/early 2000's computers. (Obviously the more expensive ones, but they appear to be more-or-less correct to the timeframe.) Sony Vaio was also around at that time.
Correction: As the previous correction said, I concur that the timeframe appears to be correct; the newspaper and internet stories Peter looks up set the events regarding Peter's parents and their disappearance in 2002, the FBI file is dated 2/22/2002. I can't identify precisely the model of Vaio used, it does have the aesthetics of their 700 series (the PCG-745 is nearly identical, for instance) and they were available before the turn of the century.
22nd Dec 2021
What If...? (2021)
Other mistake: Supposedly the one difference between this universe and the movie canon is that Janet was infected by a zombie virus before she was saved by Hank and Scott. However, in the original movie Janet actively led them to her by 'possessing' Scott and while intelligent, these Marvel zombies can't communicate. Also, Vision is settled in Camp Leigh, which appears to be in perfect shape despite being hit by a missile powerful enough to penetrate in the bunker in Winter Soldier.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: As I said in my other correction, differences between the MCU movies and this show cannot count as mistakes, since they are showing us different universes with different outcomes. Just because Janet lead Scott to them in the movie doesn't mean that's what happened in the show's universe. Same with the "Winter Soldier" discrepancy.
Without Janet leading them, they wouldn't have even learned about her existence based on what was shown in Antman and The Wasp, and they show the laboratory scene pan out as it did in the movie. Althought technically she could have been infected by the zombie virus in the minutes it took them to get to her inside the Quantum Realm. You realise that it's flimsy and it relies on people essentially not remembering the movie, though.
16th Dec 2021
Marvel Super Heroes in War of the Gems
Factual error: The Infinity Gems are the main plot point used in this game, and yet their color is incorrect (for the Marvel canon of the time); the Power gem here is colored magenta, and the Time gem is cherry red. They should be red and orange (and the Reality gem should be a less warm yellow, it practically is orange here).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: This is a discrepancy between the game and the comics they are based on, which is by site policy, not a mistake. By the same token, Thanos is the final boss of the game, whereas if the game was following the comics storyline, he would have been an earlier boss and then an ally, and the Magus would have been the final boss.
Technically there is not a "War of the Gems" saga in the comics? It IS obvious that the game is an adaptation of Infinty War taking plenty liberties but it's what adaptations do.At the time of the release of the game, the color of the gems was canon and I think a minute difference like this hardly falls under an artistic license like your example; they simply picked poor matches with the original colors making everything confusing. However yes, ultimately it IS a discrepancy, so.
23rd Dec 2021
Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)
Plot hole: Strange says he can't turn back time any more since he does not have the Time stone, so he'll resort to "a standard spell of forgetting." The statement is already quite odd since even with the stone he never showed anything close to the ability to revert time on a global scale for the WEEKS it would take to get back to that moment. But no worries; the "standard spell" is in fact more powerful than the Time stone; for it to work, it can't just make the people forget, or else people would learn back about Peter from the gigabytes of pictures and stories published, the Daily Bugle's archives, Flash's published book, T-shirts etc.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: He didn't understand the workings of the time stone as well as he did other spells. The time stone is definitely more powerful, able to trap an omnipotent cosmic being in a time loop. The spell focusses on 1 person's secret identity being forgotten from memory, hardly more powerful than what the time stone can do. In any case, the difference in power is not important to the plot.
The Time Stone in movies always focuses around limited areas, including Dormammu, with Strange concentrating during the activation. It's also a unique artifact and the most powerful in the universe. This is a "forgetfulness spell", but it needs to alter reality (physical evidence) to work, or it's useless, and it's a "standard spell" according to Strange. Was he downplaying it? Let's say he was; it's still a 'fire and forget' sort of deal that alters reality years back.
Suggested correction: I wouldn't say that a spell making everyone in the world forget about Peter is more powerful than the time stone. Memory loss is something that happens regularly (and pretty easily, T.B.H.) to people as a result of anything from illness to a bad bonk on the head. Therefore, it doesn't seem like it'd be something that'd be hard for a wizard to do. He's just applying that to a global scale, which doesn't seem like it'd be impossible if it is indeed a basic spell. As for evidence of Peter, it's really not hard to use conjecture to assume he also made evidence of Peter vanish from existence as part of the spell... making things disappear is a very basic wizardry/magician trick. Heck, it's basically a cliche.
I don't get the logic, sorry. It is easy to do it with a person, therefore it's also doable on a global scale? It's easy for a wizard to move a rock, then by that logic it'd be not that hard to move every rock? Instantly? And since it does that but also makes every physical evidence of it vanish, it is not a spell of forgetting. It has to restructure time and space on a massive scale in a very precise way, and here it is trivalized because the movie does not address the consequences (you will see proposed corrections of this entry that assume it changed nothing physical and it's just no biggie). For instance in the latest Strange movie, there's a magic item that is more powerful than any Infinity stone, but it's not something any wizard can access. The fact that a clichè exists (it's not like I haven't read One More Day, for instance) doesn't mean it fits every context (it's not quite the same doing it in the Tooth Fairy movie and here).
I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that making people forget about something and making some stuff disappear restructures time and space. The film explicitly states that it doesn't - Strange says the spell "won't turn back time." It just makes people forget. (And presumably makes evidence disappear.) There's even a joke in the movie where Strange implies he uses the spell regularly, including an instance where he used it to make Wong forget about a party. Doesn't mean the party didn't happen. Just means Wong doesn't remember it. It seems like you're really over-reading and over-complicating the spell in your head. Forgetting about something (or making some books and computer files vanish) does not necessitate the rewriting of space and time... it just means people forgot and things disappeared. If I forgot about something, and the only piece of evidence vanished, to me, it basically never happened. Doesn't mean history was necessarily re-written.
The boundaries of what constitutes "over-reading" and "over-complicating" are subjective; to me saying "it's a basic spell of forgetting", castable on a whim, for something that necessarily has also to act globally if not universally (Nick Fury is not on this planet and he would forget, most likely) and does not 'merely' affect minds but a plurality of records and physical items dating back over a decade (remember we talk about the whole life of Peter Parker here, not just his association with Spider-man), is over-simplifying on top of misrepresenting. One of the writers answered on the subject by saying they have an answer to that they are not at liberty to reveal currently. We'll see if that is true, (or will just be ignored and dumped on the Sony writers who already spectacularly got it wrong in Morbius); the MCU is not just one movie, and Strange in the previous movies never showed the ability to change the universe deleting selectively parts of it with a 'standard spell'.
I think I can get where you're coming from with this. I just personally didn't see it as that big an issue. I think it's probably just an agree to disagree situation. Sorry if I came across as rude.
Suggested correction: Even if we assume the video footage of people saying that Peter is Spidey still exist, this wouldn't matter much. If anybody saw a video of themselves recorded a week ago saying something that they never remembered saying, they would laugh it off and assume it was some "Deepfake" or something.
Besides the fact that I would sue whatever media outlet published my deepfake and most certainly not laugh it off, if there's no magical alteration of reality/space/time to make that spell work, it would be entirely useless. Anyone could just type "Who is Spider-Man" on google and find out from a million sources.
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: We see two students at the school dressed up as the killer. It is plausible that other students do it too and follow Sidney around as a joke.
One thing is prancing around at school screaming in the corridors in an obvious joke (that got both students suspended, by the way), another thing entirely is stalking someone to their home or in the streets with the police looking out for the suspect. Both scenes don't make sense other than to give cheap scares and throw red herrings.
Sammo ★
These moments come off silly (the one in the supermarket especially), but it's no mistake. These costumed figures being imposters wanting to harass Sidney for kicks is really the only plausible explanation, and the jaded cynicism and callousness of 90s youth culture is a major recurring theme of the film, so it fits.
TonyPH
I agree that it's the only explanation you have to give to make sense of it, but in this movie and in the next movies in the saga, when they wanna show imposters, they show prancing idiots who do want to harass and be goofs (such as the guy in the hallway in this movie). Sidney never notices those people who do absolutely nothing to be noticed, so they are there to harass the audience, not her.
Sammo ★