Flashback Friday: Goofs

Last night I started watching A River Runs Through It, a film directed by Robert Redford based on a novella by Norman Maclean, who also co-wrote the screenplay. I've read the book several times, and seen the film a few times as well, albeit perhaps 10 or 20 years ago. 

Last night, though, I found myself questioning a couple details as they came up. For example, Norman, the storyteller, says he saw the great boxer John L. Sullivan fight while he was out East. For some reason I thought Sullivan fought around 1900, not 1920. A little after there was a reference Burma Shave, which I had thought took place much later. 

So I decided to check this out, and sure enough I was right and the film got it wrong. Sullivan died in 1918. And when Paul does a Bogart imitation at the speakeasy, well that is too much. I am watching a Bogart film tonight (In a Lonely Place) and though it was shot in 1950 I remember when I was in college we saw Bogart's first big screen film. (I just did a fact check, and yes he was in a small short film in 1928) but this scene in River Runs Through It was 1925, so I doubt he knew yer what Bogie sounded like since it was the silent film era..

All this is lead in to a blog post I wrote 10 years ago this month called Goofs. In that instance I detailed the goof in Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds. Most films have them but I was surprised by the quantity of errata in this early Redford film. Here is a page itemizing what people have observed.

And here's my original blog post from Thanksgiving weekend 2010. 

Goofs

While watching movies I often like to read about the films in greater detail at imdb.com. Internet Movie Data Base is a great resource for getting background information about a film, or other viewers' opinion before you check out a flick. In addition to reviews, you can select actors or actresses and review the span of their entire careers, including future projects they have signed on to. 

 

One section that is fun is the trivia about each film. Another page highlights good lines and dialogue fragments. And in the event you are not a regular user of the site, there is still another section which I find interesting, titled Goofs. 

While I was talking on the phone with my brother yesterday he said they were being attacked by a flock of birds while on the way to the theater. He was jesting, but said it felt like a scene from the movie by Alfred Hitchcock. Based on that trigger, I chose to use The Birds to give an example of the kinds of goofs for this film. 

Revealing mistakes: When Melanie is climbing upstairs we see her shadow on the wall, even though the only light source is the flashlight she is using. 

Continuity: Just before the gas station explosion, gas is shown running into the left rear tire of a red car. The next shot of that car, taken from a little farther back, shows gas running near the tail of the car but the area around the tire itself is completely dry. 

Revealing mistakes: When the children are running from the school while being attacked, the birds attacking them cast no shadows. 

Continuity: After the seagull attacks Melanie on the boat, her hair appears disarranged. The next shot shows her hair neatly arranged again. 

Crew or equipment visible: When Melanie was driving her car to deliver the lovebirds, there's a shot of the front of the car and the camera is reflected in the window.

These are just a few of the dozens of observations people have noted about this film.

If you go through the Hitchcock catalog you will see that the films are rife with goofs. But this is hardly a Hitchcock characteristic. Directors know that they must operate with seemingly countless variables while simultaneously making the story "work" and all within a fixed budget.

What prompted me to write about goofs today was, in part, seeing the quantity of goofs in Cameron Crowe's films. As I investigated further, I discovered his films have neither more nor fewer errors of continuity than his peers. And as numerous as they were, I never noticed one of them in the three films I watched last week. Viewers only care that whatever happens makes sense in the context of the dream. It's when characters themselves act out of character that we have real problems.

For what it's worth.

Thoughts About Reality... What If It Were All Just A Mind Game?

Over the course of a lifetime we hear all kinds of strange ideas. One of them goes like this. What if I am really a butterfly and what I am experiencing as a human is just a figment of my butterfly dream? Of course it is a silly idea, but people debate the matter, and sometimes I think seriously.

A more common question is this: Does reality actually exist? That is, what if everything we experience -- see, feel, smell, hear, etc. -- is simply a projection of our minds? What if the only thing really happening is neurons firing in our brains?

Well, let's think this through a bit. When I drop my car keys, for some reason they always fall downward. When I drop my book onto the table, it likewise proceeds in a direction that corresponds with the laws of gravity. When I fall off a ladder, I somehow fail to float up or sideways and in point of fact fall directly earthward. And so does Bill when he falls. And Lucy's keys also fall earthward as does Mike's book.

Now if the whole thing going on with every single person in the world were similar in all these particulars, how could what my mind conceives be identical to 7 billion other peoples' experiences? I would suggest that it's pretty good evidence that there is a reality outside of our imaginations and inner selves. Our perceptions feed us the same information about the world we live in because that is how the world really is.

If it's all in our individual heads, then why do we all invent clouds or stars or a globe with seven continents? If our external world is imaginary, why don't we live in different worlds? Mike could live in a world that is all earth with little springs of water quenching thirst, and Doreen could live in a world that is all water and she has gills, so she lives swimmingly. And Marta lives in a world where no one ages past 30 and no one ever gets hurt and everyone is happy.

But that's not what we're seeing and experiencing. I talk about a blue sky and everyone who can read this knows what I am talking about. Blue skies are something we've seen and experienced because the outside world we share will be there for our grandkids as much as it is here for you and me. If the world were all but a projection of my mind, the Browns would win the Super Bowl every year and the weather in Duluth would serve up a longer growing season with shorter winters. What I perceive is the same as what you perceive because, drumroll please, ...... it really exists.

Why is it that only extremely educated people seem to stumble over what is obvious even to children? While it's true that things are not always what they appear to be -- take for example the experience of vertigo where pilots feel like they are sideways or upside down -- for the most part, the way things seem to be is the way they really are. (See my 2013 blog post about Strength from the Void for a little diversion on counter-intuitiveness.) And whether we're here to experience it or not, here to see it and write about it or not, the real world we live in would still exist.

Here in the U.S. today is Friday. For all of us, whether it feels like a Friday or not. Enjoy your weekend and make the most of it.

* * * *
EdNote: Painting at the top of page is titled "Kentucky" by Ed Newman. Acrylic on Rand-McNally map of Kentucky, approx. 11"x 15". Drawing, ink on paper, is titled "21st Century Schizoid Man."