Would you sit through a film, countless times in slow motion, in order to discover its "goofs"?

No. I am very observant and catch all sorts of goofs, but…to watch something over and over again, forget it.

Is that a real thing, though? I always kind of assumed that the goofs were discovered organically, over time, by different people. And then just compiled into a list. I could be totally wrong about that, of course.

Now, if it is a real thing… I’d never do it for fun. Maybe for profit, though!

Nope. I can barely force myself to sit through a film in one sitting to discover it’s story. (Major attention span problem).

No, I wouldn’t. I agree with @augustlan, though, that I thought they were caught by accident. To take a 2 hour movie and watch it in slow-mo would take the whole day, and I don’t think any film company is paying someone to watch one movie per day in slow mo.

No

I am not sure that anyone does what you suggest. I think perhaps they notice them on a first or second viewing.

I certainly would not do what you suggest.

Like other people have said, I think they just watch the movie for verification of reports by others. They just watch at certain parts, then rewind once or twice to check.

I’ve always wondered how people catch that stuff, how distracted they are while watching a movie to see most of those mistakes. One of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies has a stage hand in a cowboy hat mixed in with all the pirates in one scene on the ship’s deck. I never notice while watching the movie.

No, I have the attention span of a gnat.

I think there is a certain kind of person who does this, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they fell within or near the autism spectrum.

Nah. Goofs are a lot more fun to catch on your own without any kind of immediate assistance meant to make it easier to spot them. Like this movie I saw, The Last Kung Fu Monk, in one part you see a close up of the protagonist’s head, and you can see a big white bulging zit on the back of his neck. So either nobody caught that, or they just weren’t bothered to edit it out. Lol. I’m also pretty good at noticing errors like pieces of clothing all brand new after a person had them torn or soaked with blood, or wounds that constantly appear and disappear. It’s funny, but it doesn’t fulfill me more than that to notice, so I can’t say I’d sit through a whole movie in slow motion in order to purposely catch such things. Anyways, being a horror fan, you start getting used to goods. XD
But if it did have to mean something for me, I’d be much more proud of my nerd factor in noticing them on my own.
Like in Jaws at the end, the shark has a propane tank stuck on the left side of its mouth, and then the guy shoots the tank, essentially mortally wounding, perhaps killing the shark…

In the second movie, it’s indicated that the killing shark is the same one as before by the nasty scar it has on its face from the explosion…except the scar is on the right side of its face, and not the left, where the tank blew up in the first movie…I thought that was hilarious. So while I wouldn’t do it myself, I do find some type of appreciation for people who would go that extra mile in order to spot errors and goofs in a movie.

I just assumed they were caught by alert viewers, who then might have reviewed the scenes in question on DVD for verification but not combed the video searching for them. I also supposed that some of them might have been reported by people who were actually involved in the production and knew what they were looking for.

My all-time favorite continuity goof occurred on one of the old TV detective shows. The bad guys are outside a solid-looking wooden door and firing a spray of bullets through the door. Cut to the other side of the door, where the bullets have just missed the good guys, and the door has a window in it.

For what it’s worth, I’ve sometimes found similar errors in published novels. I wasn’t hunting for them; I just remembered what I read before, and checking was easy. The lion clawed her on her side, and now the scar is on her thigh.

@Symbeline You mean the shark is still out there???

@glacial According to number two, it’s the same one. And number three doesn’t say if it’s the same shark or not, but we’re led to believe it’s female. And number four…head explosion.

No, I rewatch films to enjoy them again, not to enumerate faults or errors. I usually note them right away but overlook them and suspend criticism in favour of enjoying it.