In “Mr. Monk and Little Monk”…
There is a series of flashbacks to 1972.
In one of them, a $5 bill turns out to be a key piece to the plot. It is prominently displayed on screen for a moment… and it’s a new-style $5 bill.
I’m shocked.
Hey, don’t blame Monk. It was the continuity guy who @#$%'d up. Monk is never wrong.
I’ll bet they had the position of the stars in the night sky wrong, too.
I bet noticing stuff like that is both a gift and a curse.
I thought the actor playing the young Monk did a good job.
To nitpick your nitpick, it would actually be the Prop Master’s mistake, not the continuity person’s.
Isn’t it possible that it’s the responsibility of the research person? The prop master would get the list of props needed and see “one $5 bill in US currency” but with no date specified. The continuity person would key onto ensuring it was the same bill used if the scene had to be shot more than once. The research person should have specified any specific requirements.
FWIW: For many years, I wanted to work as the continuity person somewhere. Sounded like a lot of fun and then I discovered that it’s an incredible workload.
Once upon a time, I think it did work this way. But these days, the prop master is entirely responsible for the acquisition of all the props, and that includes any research necessary to ensure the props are accurate to the time and setting. The prop master is the one who breaks down the script and creates the list of props you mention; no one gives it to him, he makes it. A prop buyer is the one who takes that list and goes shopping. But it’s still the p.m.'s responsibility to ensure everything is accurate.
By the way (and I realize I’m seriously entering Hijackland here; sorry Bricker), the overall “Research Person” is a pretty rare position these days. I’ve never actually worked on a film that had a person called the research person. There’s sometimes a specialist, ie., if the film is about hurricanes, picking something totally at random that has nothing at all to do with what’s on the news right now, they’ll probably hire someone to ensure the accuracy of all things in the film related to that; but a general ‘research person’, who goes through the script, making sure everything is accurate (and making sure things like the five dollar bill in question is the right one)? You don’t really see these anymore.
Rather than open up a new thread about Monk, I’ll ask it here:
Is $20,000 a month a plausible amount of alimony? I know it’s expensive to live in San Francisco, but that kind of alimony seems ridiculously generous.
And what kind of jail time do you think the ex-husband is looking at? He hired a couple thugs to commit minor vandalism, and the thugs killed somebody while committing the crime. I’m thinking he won’t be in jail for very long. Heck, with his kind of money possibly no jail time at all.
He’s a principal in the first degree. He is just as guilty of the predicate felony – burglary – as they are. And during the commission of that felony, they killed a woman. That’s felony murder.
That’s precisely why we have the felony murder rule… to prevent people from arguing that they never intended to have anyone get hurt, and therefore are not guilty of murder.
As to the alimony… I’m no expert, but I think alimony is calculated at least in part on the basis of the lifestyle the couple had when married. In other words, if they were living a 40,000-per-month lifestyle, she’s entitled to live a $20,000-per-month lifestyle after the divorce.
I think you should email this tidbit to the producers…maybe they will have Bill Gates send you $100!
Seriously, this was an error on the part of the props master, or whatever they are called now. They should have noticed that this was $ in the 50’s.
I know that when scripts are finished, for films or television, generally they are sent to the legal department to make sure “Acme Motors” doesn’t really exist, or that there isn’t a Marjorie Plujunksi who really does have a limp and really does live on Main Street in Skudnik, Ohio. They look scripts over very carefully to make sure there are no lawsuits on the horizon. But these people are not responsible for props and such, unless it is product placement and specifically mentioned in the script.
But prop errors, well…probably due to some $6/hr summer intern who was born in 1985 and not even aware there was different money back in the 50’s, or at least didn’t think anyone would notice.
The 70’s.
Cali is a community property state. Bricker is correct is correct in this case (not that he is normally incorrect) that, in general, the spouse is entitled to a standard of living they were accostomed to while married. In Cali, the default position is to divide everything in half. It is very difficult (if not nigh impossible) to move from this position, especially without a prenuptial agreement (and they have strict standards with that, too.)
I notice little errors in Monk all the time, but they’re mostly b/c I live in SF. Streetsigns not the right look and feel; roads and parks obviously in SoCal; streets obviously not on location.
A good example would be in the episode with the guy that dumps out the VW Bug from the back of his truck to make it look like a car accident.
Earlier, when Monk gets cut off by a different trucker he calls to report it. He says “We’re on the 101 just past <can’t remember which city>.”
Bzzt. Nobody in Northern California adds a “the” to the beginning of highway names. That’s strictly a SoCal thing - “the 405”, etc. We wouldn’t call it “The 101” - it’s just 101, 280, 92, 85, etc.
Precisely why I never got the job of prop master. How could I have forgotten, especially with that music at the dance.
BTW, was that cafeteria lady giving Monk the cookie with exactly 10 chocolate chips Susan Ruttan (Roxanne on LA Law)? She seems to have put on a pound or two.
It was and she has.
If you were a real insider’s insider like me, you’d know we always refer to this position as “the continuity guy.” The surest sign of a wannabe is somebody who calls him a “Prop Master.” It’s funny, I was just discussing this with Brad and Angelina today.
I haven’t bothered to look him up, but I think he also played the part one of Ben Stillers’ kids in The Royal Tennenbaums.
And yes, he absolutely nailed the part of young Monk. He had the mannerisms and voice down pat.
I thought I recognized him from “Oliver Beene.” We’re both right.
As an aside, I had just finished watching Silence of the Lambs and then switched to Monk. I hadn’t seen SOTL since I had begun watching Monk, and while I new Capt. Stottlemeyer (Ted Levine) was the killer from SOTL, I hadn’t recalled his voice being so distinctive. Now every time I hear Capt. Stottlemeyer, I’ll be shouting “PUT THE FUCKING LOTION IN THE BASKET!!”
"Damn it, Randy! Do you want the hose again?
My line every time Stottlemeyer first appears on screen in an episode is “Was she a great big fat person?”