MovieChat Forums > Coneheads (1993) Discussion > No Continuity Whatsoever!

No Continuity Whatsoever!

posted 20 years ago by mrmicro10
18 replies | jump to latest

I used to watch this movie as a kid all the time, but when I recently saw this again because it's been a while, I noticed the film had a huge mistake in it's story. In the beginning of the movie, the Coneheads are being hunted by the INS and are expecting a baby, then soon the INS gives up the hunt. Then the story jumps ahead 18 years when their daughter is in high school, and then INS agents Michael McKean and David Spade begin to hunt the Coneheads again, except there's one problem, McKean's and Spade's characters have not aged at all in the course of 18 years! How is it possible that every character could grow older in 18 years except for these two? It is unbelievable how such an asinine mistake could happen. If you don't believe me, watch the whole movie and you won't miss it.

-"Street is Reet!"

[–] dread_chgo 20 years ago

Consider this: if their eating habits, sleeping habits, vocabulary, teeth and most notably their heads are vastly different than humans, why wouldn't you think that their young possibly age faster than humans? Is it possible that Connie said she was 17 but got to be that size in four or five years? (those Coneheads were pretty sneaky and deceptive "French citizens", you know.) Beldar and Primaat didn't look much older either, so that just leaves Connie as the rapid developer.

It was just like in "Mork and Mindy" where their babies were the age of our elderly and their senior citizens were toddlers. Take it as poetic license, since it's all fictional anyway.

-Just a thought...

[–] mrmicro10 20 years ago

You know what , you just may be right on this particular subject. Maybe this one part of the story wasn't a mistake, but the director did screw up on not developing and explaining this occurance. Whenever you direct a film, you have to explain and execute the plot points well enough so that your audience will know what's happening in the plot. This one slip-up was caused by half-assed screenwriting and directing.

"Street is Reet!"

[–] dread_chgo 20 years ago

I agree with you that there are alot of holes in the story; I hope that you can agree that there is a good reason this movie never won an Oscar or showed up at the Cannes festival. Let's face it, this movie is based on a set of characters from a 70's sketch comedy show. They probably pulled most of their concepts about the Coneheads out of their asses on the fly while high and drunk and/or bouncing off the wall from too much coffee, trying to meet the Master's (NBC's) deadlines, so they made stuff up as they went along. There were no Speilbergs or Lucas' or Coppollas on THIS set! As a matter of fact, almost every movie that has come out of the SNL camp has been entertaining, if not only a little annoying in its total lack of filmmaking discipline. I guess that's what people like about them: makes them feel less imperfect.

P.S. If you want to talk about incontinuity from another SNL movie, let's talk about the sacred "Blues Brothers". I am from Chicago and that movie was SOOOOO way off, patchy, improbable and made no sense, yet no one notices...why? One word: Belushi! Gotta give it to SNL, they crank out some lasting characters.

[–] mrmicro10 20 years ago

I agree with you 100%, the films that were adapted from characters on SNL aren't Oscar winners, but they are fun comedies that appeal to a lot of people. My two favorites are Wayne's World and The Blues Brothers.

"Street is Reet!"

[–] dread_chgo 20 years ago

I gotta go with Tommy Boy (anything with Chris Farley, actually) and Billy Madison (old school honorable mention goes to Stripes with Bill Murray, 24hrs: Eddie Murphy's first film and NL Vacation with Chevy Chase). Coneheads is up there, but it wasn't fall down funny like those that I or you mentioned.

Why didn't they make a movie about Matt Foley while Farley was still around? THAT would have been funny as HELL!

[–] TheJLBCrew 18 years ago

For cryin out loud you people! It was a movie. And also, since you didn't obvioudly notice, when Spade and McKeans character go back on the case, they do it, becasue of an indiscrepancy from McKean's past. The comments on it being a long time ago, then is told to finish it up. WATCH IT

[–] dread_chgo 20 years ago

you know what? The more I think about it, SNL: has spawned a WHOLE lot of movie and TV stars, good or bad or otherwise! there has to be over thirty of them, just think about the names: bill murray, dan aykroyd, chevy chase, nora dunn, eddie murphy, rob schneider, david spade, david mckeon (lenny on TV), adam sandler, chris rock, molly shannon, tim meadows, dana carvey, mike myers, chris farley, kevin nealon, will ferrell, jimmy fallon, garrett morris AND tracy morgan were on "Martin" on TV, julia louis dreyfuss on "seinfeld"....and on and on and on....lorne michaels is an evil genius (a rich one too)!!!

[–] twolff13 20 years ago

Don't forget Steve Martin.

[–] NickDWolfwood 20 years ago

Martin was never part of SNL, though it would seem that way due to how many times he hosted it.

And now repeat after me..

I am sofa King re Todd ed

[–] twolff13 19 years ago

Wow, I stand corrected. I've seen so many clips from Steve Martin on SNL I thought for sure he was a cast member.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dread_chgo 17 years ago

Is that a Bahhhstin accent, there, chief?? Wicked awesome!!

[–] g_timoteo 20 years ago

Michael McKean and David Spade are well known metrosexuals who watch Bravo and have (at least temporarily) reversed the aging process.

[–] ijones-9 18 years ago

Well, if you want to get picky about it, you really don't see Beldar and Primat age either in that 18-year gap. Connie is really the only character who ages in the movie, so suspend your disbelief and just go with it.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tdl797 9 years ago

I wondered about the passage of time, too.
Unless I missed it, nothing about the world the characters inhabit change if she grew up at a normal human age.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lexusis 9 years ago

Can't believe I'm posting on a 10 year old thread, but what the hell!

The reason I'm here is because of all the continuity errors...

One I noticed is when it's a flash forward to the "present" and the daughter is grown, the INS guy is talking to the Senator about the case that got away. Then they go to his office in a big huff. There is a President of Reagan and the Vice President Bush on the wall like in most government offices. They have portraits of the current president. Reagan was president from 1980 - 1988.

But, the car Dan Aykroyd drives in a 1992 or later Mercury Sable. The daughter and Chris Farley listen to a Red Hot Chili Peppers song that came out in 1991. So is Reagan still the president in 1992 or what? Lol.

Also, in the beginning they are the "Diccios" and that's how the INS first discovers them. Then, after the 18 years pass, all of a sudden they are just called the Coneheads. So where did they get this identity from? I guess if they stayed the Diccios, that would have made it much easier for the INS to find them in the 18 years inbetween. Just makes no sense.