MovieChat Forums > The Terror (1963) Discussion > More Goofs!!

More Goofs!!

posted 19 years ago by rockallnight
11 replies | jump to latest

The many mistakes visible in "The Terror" are part of its charm, and I have no wish to belittle a film that has given me great enjoyment over the years.

Indeed, I was not aware of these goofs until the film became available on DVD which facilitates repeated viewing and clear freeze-framing.

1. In an early scene when Sandra Knight has shown Jack Nicholson the "clear water from the mountain" and he scoops up the water with his hands, a yellow hosepipe is clearly visible in the rock pool behind him. This presumeably provided the small waterfall we saw in the previous shot!

2. In the watery climax, when Boris (or his stand-in), Dick Miller and Sandra Knight are taking turns to duck/strangle each other. As she turns, Sandra has a clearly visible grin on her face.

Perhaps other fans might, in a spirit of fun, like to add to the list of goofs.

[–] joebridge 19 years ago

Other than the floating bricks and the odd painting of the castle that is supposed to be a real castle, I can't think of anything else.

But would her corpse really be that shade of green? I know not.

[–] Guitar_Hurricane83 18 years ago

Maybe someones mentioned this, but in the scene where the old women is hypnotizing Helene, it seems to me that the old womans lips arent going along with the dialogue being spoken.

[–] willoughbyworld 18 years ago

I saw it about an hour ago. It's wierd sometimes the lips of the old woman match other times they're way off. Almost as if they changed her dialogue during dubbing.

I like the coat of arms in the background being that of King Henry V of England.

There are some nice references to Napoleonic and Frecnh Revolutionary history and it gives a time and place to the movie. Nicholson's character says he lost his regiment at the battle of Auerstaedt, which places us in Prussia in mid-October 1806.

As a BTW, a goof for uniform geeks only; Nicholson's character says he is from the 5th Chassuers a unit of light cavalry. His uniform is that of a lieutenant of artillery. Even his sword is correct for an artillery officer.
The fifth Chasseurs wore green coats with yellow collars and piping, his is blue with red collar, cuffs and turnbacks with red piping on the lapels.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TheAtticMan 17 years ago

1.) The rocks slide, but only two rocks come near Jack Nicholson, and afterwards there are no rocks anywhere on the ground.
2.) When Jack Nicholson first leaves his room at the castle, we get a shot of the great hall. We see the dinner table that Jack and the Baron sat at when he first arrived. The shot lingers there for a second. Then we hear the sound of a switch being thrown and the lights in the sound stage come for some reason that God only knows. The screen goes white for a second while the camera adjusts to the new light. Then we see the scene in the light before it cuts away. And I am not joking. I thought I was mistaken, but I even played it frame by frame and froze on the lit set. I don't know if it varies by DVD, but I have "Legacy Entertainment" release of it.

Oh, and the water looked like blue toilet chemicals throughout the entire movie.

Sign upon the bloody line, drop of yours, drop of mine... nothing's free.

[–] Mr_Atoz_61 17 years ago

Did anyone notice the gun(s) Jack N. was using?..They have bullets! Now correct me if I'm wrong but I didn't think guns with bullets were around back in 1806. Wasn't everyone still packing powder and lead balls back then...like Daniel Boon? At the beginning when Jack's in his room at the castle he grabs what looks like a snub-nosed 45...like they used in Dragnet or something. lol

[–] rev_mumbles 17 years ago

Also the date on Ilsa's painting says 1886 yet her tombstone said she died in 1882.

[–] preppy-3 16 years ago

Guys! This film was written overnight and shot in three days--naturally there are going to be tons of mistakes. Actually I think those goofs add to the film.

[–] deepblue501 16 years ago

yep i agree, i read it was actually shot in 2 days...

One other goof is first time when JN sees the woman, we see a medium shot of her from the back with the water and the cave in front of her. Then we change into a medium shot from her left side and she walks towards her right (thus she is in fact walking AWAY from the waves). But then we see the first shot again and she is already in the water, and afterwards disappears.

The movement of the actors is horrible in this movie and I actually don't find the directing to be good. Boris Karloff acting is pretty good, but both JN and the woman are awful.

Besides that it seems they removed almost all the lighting from the set, as we have extremely low key lighting (since it was a very small budget i assume it was more practical reasons than visual concept).

[–] psdhart 15 years ago

good points everyone will have to rewatch the film

[–] Wuchak (8737) 7 years ago

Also the date on Ilsa's painting says 1786 yet her tombstone said she died in 1782

I caught this "mistake" right away, but it was so obvious that I assumed the painting was done posthumously, obviously four years after Ilsa's death. This would make sense since the Baron (actually Eric) was obsessed with Ilsa and would've understandably hired an artist to paint a huge painting (likely based on a small portrait) to decorate the main room of the castle.

Besides, if it were a mistake Corman & Co. would've simply changed the date on her tomb from 1782 to 1786.