When John invites his friends into the house, he tells them the electricity is on and the gas is off.
Later, the fireplace can be clearly seen to be a gas fire (the flame is coming from the bottom of the fireplace, not from the logs).
Early on, Dr.
Gruber professes to be a psychiatrist, a profession that is an M.
However, toward the end of the movie, John Oldman refers to him as a psychologist, a Ph.
At the beginning of the movie when they drink whiskey you can see the bottle half empty and a few seconds later the bottle is 3/4 full again.
When discussing Columbus' journey John implies that there was still widespread belief that the earth was flat.
In fact, since the time of the Greeks it had been relatively common (educated) knowledge that the earth was round.
(Columbus' error was in underestimating the diameter of the earth and thus the distance to Asia by a westerly route.
Luckily, he bumped into the Americas where he'd roughly calculated Asia was supposed to be, otherwise they'd have been lost at sea.
) It the very beginning of the movie, Edith (Ellen Crawford) notices a painting on the ground by the truck and asks about the artist.
The dialogue makes it clear she saw the painted surface of the canvas but she wouldn't have been able to see it from it's angle and from where she was standing.
When Linda first arrives to the house, her shoulder bag switches shoulders a few times.
After Dan questions Dr.
Oldman about keeping relics, Dr.
Oldman walks out of the house carrying a box, and Sandy follows him also carrying a box.
When the camera angle switches to an outside shot, they've changed positionsSandy comes out first followed by Dr.
Oldman.
When Dr.
Grubber first arrives at the house he sits on the couch and begins asking John questions.
Grubber's arm position alternates with the different camera shots from resting on the couch's arm being tucked in at his side (off the arm of the couch).
Edith's position can be observed to be different between these shots as well.
In the final scene the character Dan's coat collar switches back and forth from being "popped".
After reading many of the other reviews, I can understand that, having a one set 'talking' script, it surely could have been done on stage or even as a radio play. Some reviewers seemed disappointed with the level of thought as though it was one of those late night sophomoric, stoned discussions at 3AM in the dorm room.
Never given a 10 before but this simply had to be a 10. The story was captivating, I literally felt I should go on and ask a question myself as if I was a character.
Well, I am not going to write a long, detailed criticism of the acting, directing or screenplay.What is significant about this movie is that it addresses to a wide audience and it basically achieves what it wants to tell in an orderly fashion.
If you are dying, and have 2-4 hrs left with you.. I recommend to watch it.
I saw a reviewer saying this was a well written script. Well, apart from the fact of boredom it gave me and the biggest violation of the major rule of story it was...
Intriguing premise for a hoax, squarely aimed at a very gullible group of intellectuals. A hoax can only be successful if people want to believe in it.
When I first heard of this movie, I thought: "this is the kind of movie I want to see". The idea that a prehistorical man could live to present day, is mind-blowing enough to make this an amazing movie.
I am amazed at the rating this movie gets on here, and the number of people who give it positive reviews who I assume are avid film lovers. This is simply not a good movie, and you should all be ashamed of yourselves for confusing it with one.
The movie is quite nicely scripted. However, I have a feeling that the movie is highly over-rated.
.png)