Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » goof-ups in major films that should of been fixed! (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
Author Topic: goof-ups in major films that should of been fixed!
Steve Matz
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 672
From: Billings, Montana, USA
Registered: Sep 2003


 - posted 12-03-2013 12:39 PM      Profile for Steve Matz   Email Steve Matz   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I always like to spot goof-ups in major motion pictures and wonder why they weren't caught in dailys,post production editing,etc. One that comes to mind and I even caught it the 1st time I saw it at a Theater;was Alfred Hitchcock's 1963 Classic "THE BIRDS"...

At Cathy's birthday party, when Mitch and Melanie climb the small hilltop to chat;you can see the Brenner Dock without any water around it and dry ground a good 100yds or more away from the dock. How in one day could that much water disappear when the day before Melanie brings the rented rowboat right up to the dock to deliver Cathy's love birds and the water level is close to the height of the Dock.

Unless a major sink hole opened up during the night and swallowed probably mega tons of water its highly unlikely you would have that much water disappear.I'm surprised that a perfectionist like Hitchcock wouldn't of caught that and did some background reshooting...Still a great movie though!

Would be interested to hear from others on the Forum of a major goof-up they spotted that should have been caught/fixed before release to the Movie Houses.

 |  IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 12-03-2013 12:52 PM      Profile for Manny Knowles   Email Manny Knowles   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Would this be more appropriate in "Film-Yak" ?

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 12-03-2013 01:59 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It would, but I can't help posting my three favorites anyway.

Jagged Edge - the climatic courtroom scene. Glenn Close interrogating witness. MCU of her, wearing a white blouse. Cut to witness squirming on the stand. Cut back to her, looking very pleased with herself ... and wearing a red blouse! No wonder the witness was wrong-footed if she suddenly took her blouse off while waiting for him to answer.

There was an Arnie shootemup from the '80s - wish I could remember which one - which includes a car chase scene. The car flips over onto its side and negotiates a tight bend on a mountain road in this condition, before falling back over onto its four wheels again. When we see the side of the car that has been scraping along the ground at 50mph plus, the paint job is immaculate - not so much as a scratch or a ding on it.

The Merchant-Ivory Howard's End - Helena Bonham-Carter running through a rainy street in Edwardian London - reflection of a VW Beetle clearly visible in the window of a house in the background of the long tracking shot. The character is supposed to be a bit of a hippie type, but she was about 50 years ahead of her time if she had one of those.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 12-03-2013 02:27 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
THere are goofs like that in literally any movie, even cartoons. Look up the movie of your choice on imdb.com, click on "Goofs" and be amazed at how many mistakes there are.

What amazes me is that people can spot this stuff. I've seen "The Birds" several times and have never seen the error mentioned. I'm always too caught-up in the story to keep track of what's going on in the background, I guess.

I did spot the famous "Pacific Bell" phone used by Bruce Willis in Die Hard 2 (when he was supposed to be in D.C.).

 |  IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004


 - posted 12-03-2013 03:47 PM      Profile for Justin Hamaker   Author's Homepage   Email Justin Hamaker   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I usually don't notice goofs unless they are very obvious. I guess I'm more wrapped up in the story than the elements of the picture. Still, the most obvious one that comes to mind is the reflection of the helicopter in the side of the truck in Twister.

There's also the shadow of the helicopter in the opening scene of Stanley Kubrick's The Shining, but I think that is only visible when the movie is out of frame or on full frame video.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-03-2013 05:03 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I tend to notice a lot of geographical goofs in movies, like if a car chase is taking place in the middle of Washington, D.C. near the monuments, Smithsonian Institution, etc. and then it winds up in a fictitious toll tunnel that doesn't exist and that toll tunnel is really Lower Grand Avenue in downtown fucking Los Angeles.
[fu]

That kind of crap happens all the time in the movies. The "filmmakers" and producers pretend none of us notice any of that shit. But guess what? We do. And the tools at the fingertips of today's movie-goer are incredible. You can spot all kinds of recycled movie locations using the Street View feature in Google Earth. Using that and skimming a scene in a Blu-ray frame by frame will get a lot of movies plain busted.

By the way, here's an image of Lower Grand Avenue:

 -

Look familiar? The location has only been used in about 138,839 movies. That's kind of a rounded, conservative estimate. It could be closer to 150,000 movies. A chase scene in The Terminator or Jamie Foxx playing a street musician in The Soloist are two examples where the location was plausible.

But I guess it was kind of cool to see that location double as Osaka, Japan in Black Rain where it set the stage for Andy Garcia to get decapitated by sword wielding bikers.

 |  IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 12-03-2013 05:15 PM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Leo Enticknap
There was an Arnie shootemup from the '80s - wish I could remember which one - which includes a car chase scene. The car flips over onto its side and negotiates a tight bend on a mountain road in this condition, before falling back over onto its four wheels again. When we see the side of the car that has been scraping along the ground at 50mph plus, the paint job is immaculate - not so much as a scratch or a ding on it.
That I believe was Commando.

 |  IP: Logged

Connor Wilson
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 190
From: Sterling, VA, USA
Registered: Jan 2011


 - posted 12-03-2013 05:55 PM      Profile for Connor Wilson   Email Connor Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The Dark Knight Rises. The Wall Street chase starts in daytime, and the chase goes through a tunnel. At the end of the tunnel, it's night time.

 |  IP: Logged

Matthew McBride
Film Handler

Posts: 97
From: Tupelo, MS USA
Registered: Oct 2011


 - posted 12-03-2013 07:10 PM      Profile for Matthew McBride   Email Matthew McBride   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think Lower Grand Avenue also appeared in The Dark Knight, the transportation scene where the Joker tries to abduct Dent.

Also in Eagle Eye, the main characters drive to Indianapolis and they show W 56th street, which wasn't remotely close to what W 56th was. I actually use to live there. That one I noticed right away as I lived there at the time I saw it.

I always like to find those types of goofs in movies, it makes it some fun kind of trivia.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 12-03-2013 07:14 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bobby Henderson
The "filmmakers" and producers pretend none of us notice any of that shit. But guess what? We do.
If by "we" you mean super-anal micro-detail-oriented people who watch movies over and over and over and over, you may be right, but I think most likely 99.9% of people wouldn't have a clue unless they happen to live in the location being shown, OR the one supposedly being depicted.

That picture you posted? I may have seen it in 138,000+ movies like you said but I still don't recognize it.

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Matz
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 672
From: Billings, Montana, USA
Registered: Sep 2003


 - posted 12-03-2013 07:52 PM      Profile for Steve Matz   Email Steve Matz   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
one invention that has brought out more attention to goofs is the DVD Player. Unless you had an analyst projector where you could jog a frame or two at a time.When film is being projected at 24 or even 30 fps the human eye unless your Superman won't detect certain things in the one second it takes for those frames to go by.

Case in point;in the movie "FARGO" there is a scene where the native indian "Shep Proudfoot" confronts the Steve Buchemi character in bed with a Prostitute.He literally picks up Bushemi out of the bed and tosses him across the room. When you shuttle jog that scene on your DVD player you will come upon a couple frames that show its a Stuntman that doesn't resemble Bushemi facially in the least.

It's a good thing Features are never shown in super slo-mo at Movie theaters because you would probably see a lot of things that the normal eye will never catch.The Director and Film Editors are probably aware of this but what you don't see as intended won't have them trying to explain why they didn't try and correct the mistake down the line. [beer]

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 12-04-2013 01:23 AM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
 -

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-04-2013 11:37 AM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Mike Blakesley
If by "we" you mean super-anal micro-detail-oriented people who watch movies over and over and over and over, you may be right, but I think most likely 99.9% of people wouldn't have a clue unless they happen to live in the location being shown, OR the one supposedly being depicted.
The problem is many movie locations are set in places where a lot of people live. Chicago has over 3 million residents within its city limits alone, not counting additional millions in the suburbs. Over a million people live on the island of Manhattan, but a lot more than that work in Manhattan every day. There's no shortage of movies featuring geographically illogical car chases in Manhattan.

By the way Live Free, Die Hard was the movie of reference when I was talking about a fictious toll tunnel in downtown Washington D.C. The movie also featured a fake high rise bridge with circular approach ramps -nothing like that exists anywhere near D.C.; I think you can find bridges like that in the Far East. I laughed at an aerial shot that was clearly Los Angeles, complete with the jagged San Gabriel Mountains in the background.

In X Files: Fight the Future the opening action set piece is set in Dallas (featuring a building implosion similar to the Alfred P. Murrah Bldg bombing in Oklahoma City). The two lead actors are walking around on a rooftop. Visual effects people tried to work in some Dallas skyline elements into a few shots. But they let the Fox's "Die Hard" building come into clear view, giving away the fact they shot the scene in L.A.

quote: Steve Matz
When you shuttle jog that scene on your DVD player you will come upon a couple frames that show its a Stuntman that doesn't resemble Bushemi facially in the least.
How about True Lies? There's a couple scenes in that movie where the stunt double for Arnold Swarzenegger has his face clearly visible in the shot. The snowmobile chase in beginning has a stuntman wearing what looks like a bad blond wig. You see the stuntman's face when one of the snowmobiles explode. I noticed this the very first time I watched the movie. There's another scene where Arnold's double, on horseback, comes riding into the frame behind the motorcycle riding bad guy in the foreground. Those errors are clearly visible on the non-anamorphic DVD. I imagine they would stick out big time on Blu-ray, which could be one reason why True Lies still hasn't made it to Blu-ray.

The Untouchables has one of the most famous gaffes: Sean Connery's shirt collar going from buttoned, to unbuttoned to buttoned again while he's talking to Kevin Costner.

The Usual Suspects had a funny one where Gabriel Byrne's cigarette went from being lit, unlit and lit again in a scene. I hadn't noticed that one until Bryan Singer pointed out the gaffe in his director's commentary track.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 12-04-2013 01:36 PM      Profile for Mike Blakesley   Author's Homepage   Email Mike Blakesley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Bobby Henderson
There's no shortage of movies featuring geographically illogical car chases in Manhattan.
Right, but there are probably a hundred reasons why an action scene is shot where it is shot. In a lot of cases it's probable they would have LIKED to use a certain area but couldn't get permission -- or the street in question won't work for practical reasons, such as not enough room to fit equipment in place, or lighting issues, weather issues, or the buildings look "wrong" for the theme or time-frame of the movie... all manner of possibilities.

The bottom line is that it would make no sense for a production to spend millions of extra dollars to make sure all the scenes are geographically logical when only a fraction of moviegoers will ever notice the "error," and of those people most of them won't care one way or the other.

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-04-2013 02:40 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It all comes down to maintaining suspension of disbelief.

I understand production limitations, but some of what I'm seeing is just downright stupid. I suppose I could be a little more sympathetic to older movie productions, but the big budget projects of today don't have much excuse. They have so many "digital backlot" tools that can solve some of the problems I'm noticing.

Other problems just come down to dumb-ass screenwriting and forced choices by the director. Like the toll tunnel and bridge scenes in Live Free or Die Hard. They might as well put the Empire State Building and Gateway Arch in downtown L.A. for the next Die Hard installment. While they're at it, make Mount Rushmore visible in Florida and a 10,000' tall jagged mountain range visible in Arkansas (oh wait, Thelma & Louise actually did that last one).
[Roll Eyes]

It turns out there are websites dedicated to showing the real life locations of movie locations. One is I Am Not A Stalker and another is Movie Locations.com.

Movie Mistakes web site lists lots of errors from many movies.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.