6 Funny Mistakes In Shah Rukh Khan Starrer ‘Raees’

Shah Rukh Khan starrer ‘Raees’ has been released in cinemas and is receiving a good response from the audience. Many people have seen the film as yet. But their are some silly mistakes which we bet you didn’t notice. Here we are going to show you some silly mistakes in the movie.

1. Royal Stag Bottles

In the film, police inspector Jaideep (Nawazuddin) was seen crushing the liquor bottles through road rollers. If you zoom it than these are Royal Stag bottles and the movie is based on 80s and ‘Royal Stag’ was launched in 1995.

2. Nitex underwear brand

The movie is based on 80s but in a scene ‘Nitex underwear aur baniyan’s ad’ is seen behind SRK where he gets involved in a fierce fighting scene. But, Nitex was established in the year 1995.

3. Two people shot with a single bullet

In one scene of the movie, SRK is seen shot two people with a gun. In a single bullet, two people fly in the air. How is it possible?

4. Mahira’s Dupatta

In a song sequence, you can see Mahira do not wear any dupatta, but in the subsequent scene, she is seen wearing dupatta. From where this dupatta came?
[ads2]

5. Distance between Raees and bushes

In the first scene, the distance between Raees and bushes is too less. But in the next scene, the distance between the two gets increased. How?

6. Tear gas won’t affect Raees

In a scene Raees took a rally in front of a politician house. To stop this rally, police leaves ‘lachrymator’ by which everyone runs away. But amid the smoke of tear gas Raees is seen to walk comfortably like it do not affect him anymore.

---

A King’s Goofs: 6 Funny Mistakes In Shah Rukh Khan Starrer ‘Raees’

The year 2017 saw the release of one of Shah Rukh Khan’s most compelling, dark, and gritty performances in recent memory: the action-crime drama, Raees. Set against the backdrop of the dry state of Gujarat in the 1980s, the film captivated audiences with its sharp dialogues, intense cat-and-mouse chase between the bootlegger Raees Alam (Khan) and the upright ACP Jaideep Ambalal Majmudar (Nawazuddin Siddiqui), and a powerful narrative inspired, though denied by the filmmakers, by the life of criminal Abdul Latif. The film successfully merged commercial appeal with a more serious, dramatic tone, becoming a significant box-office success and cementing its place as a memorable film in Shah Rukh Khan’s filmography.

Raees is a film that demands attention with its period setting, elaborate action sequences, and a powerhouse cast that also included Mahira Khan and Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub. However, even the most meticulous and grandly produced films are not immune to the occasional oversight or amusing slip-up. While viewers are typically swept away by the narrative and the star power, a closer inspection reveals a handful of unintentional errors—or “goofs”—that have now become fun talking points among dedicated film enthusiasts and critics. These aren’t criticisms of the film’s quality, but rather humorous moments where continuity, physics, or historical accuracy took a brief, comical vacation. They add a light-hearted footnote to an otherwise intense cinematic experience.

Here, we dive into six of the most notable and funny mistakes in Shah Rukh Khan’s Raees, proving that even the biggest film productions can have a few charmingly human errors.

---

1. The Anachronistic Appearance of the Royal Stag Whisky

One of the central themes of Raees is the illegal liquor trade in Gujarat, which is a ‘dry state.’ Shah Rukh Khan’s character, Raees Alam, builds his empire on smuggling and distributing alcohol, making the various liquor bottles featured in the film a critical part of the set design and plot.

The Goof: In a specific sequence of the film, a bottle of Indian whisky is clearly visible. The problem? It is identified as the brand ‘Royal Stag.’ The film is explicitly set in the 1980s, beginning in the 1960s, to chronicle Raees’s rise and fall in that era. However, the popular Indian whisky brand ‘Royal Stag’ was launched much later. Independent searches and critics point out that the brand was actually introduced to the market in 1995.

Why It’s Funny: The inadvertent placement of a product that wouldn’t exist for another decade or more in the film’s timeline is a classic example of an anachronism—a detail that is chronologically out of place. For a film so dedicated to capturing the gritty, period feel of the 1980s, the bottle acts like a comedic time traveler, accidentally finding its way onto a set two decades too early. It’s a small detail that breaks the historical immersion, prompting a chuckle for viewers who catch the historical discrepancy. The attention to detail required for a period film is immense, and a single liquor bottle was the one that slipped through the cracks.

---

2. The Mysterious Undergarment Ad from the Future

In a similar vein to the liquor bottle, another error involving an anachronistic background detail further highlights the challenges of period filmmaking. The setting of 1980s Gujarat required meticulous set dressing to ensure that every poster, sign, and advertisement was era-appropriate.

The Goof: Another scene, likely set on a busy street or market area, features a prominent background advertisement. Eagle-eyed movie buffs and critics spotted an advertisement for ‘Nitex undergarments.’ Similar to the ‘Royal Stag’ error, the time frame is the issue. The film is set in the 1980s, but the ‘Nitex Company’ was reportedly established in the year 1995.

Why It’s Funny: This mistake is another humorous lapse in historical research. The production team successfully recreated the clothing, cars, and general ambiance of the 80s, only to have a background advertisement for undergarments from the mid-90s completely ruin the period illusion for a brief moment. The idea that Raees’s 1980s world was unknowingly being advertised by a company that hadn’t even started business yet is a subtle, funny irony. It’s a minute detail that most audiences would miss, but its presence serves as a light-hearted reminder of how tricky continuity can be across hundreds of background props.

---

3. The Self-Healing Spectacles of Raees Alam

Shah Rukh Khan’s character, Raees Alam, is visually defined by his distinctive glasses, making them more than just an accessory—they are a character element.

The Goof: There is a pivotal, intense action sequence in the film where Raees Alam uses his intelligence and ferocity to defeat an opponent. During the fight, Raees uses his spectacles as a weapon in a moment of desperation, resulting in the glasses being visibly broken and damaged. This destruction is a dramatic turning point in the scene, signaling his commitment to the fight. However, in the very next sequence where Raees appears, he is seen wearing the exact same pair of spectacles, completely intact, with no signs of the previous damage.

Why It’s Funny: This is a classic and very common continuity error. It suggests that the spectacles either had a magical, rapid self-repair function, or more likely, that the scene of the fight was shot with one prop (the broken one), and the subsequent scene was shot with a different, undamaged prop, and the editing team missed the inconsistency. The speed at which Raees gets his glasses flawlessly fixed is comically implausible, leading viewers to joke about an off-screen repairman who works at lightning speed or that the actor simply grabbed the wrong pair of glasses for the next shot.

---

4. The Tear-Gas-Proof Gangster with ‘Full-On Swag’

The film features an intense confrontation between Raees and his followers, and ACP Majmudar and the police force. The police employ crowd control tactics, including the use of tear gas, to disperse the crowd and suppress the movement led by Raees.

The Goof: During a sequence where the police use tear gas on Raees and his rally participants, the reaction of the crowd is entirely realistic—people panic, cover their faces, and run away from the stinging fumes. However, Shah Rukh Khan’s character, Raees, walks through the tear gas with remarkable, almost supernatural, composure. He is shown walking very casually through the dense cloud of gas, seemingly completely unaffected by the chemical irritant that is incapacitating everyone else around him.

Why It’s Funny: This moment stretches cinematic reality for dramatic effect, placing it squarely in the realm of a funny “superpower” goof. Tear gas is a powerful irritant, yet Raees strolls through it with a deliberate “full-on swag,” as one source described it, essentially making him appear immune to its effects. While it’s intended to demonstrate his fearlessness and magnetic personality, the complete disregard for the scientific reality of tear gas is a humorous detail. It’s an example of where a director chose dramatic heroism over logic, making Raees appear less like a gangster and more like an untouchable, tear-gas-proof superhero.

---

5. The Bullet Victim Who Defies Gravity and Physics

Action sequences are a staple of Bollywood cinema, and Raees is no exception. However, staging a believable fight can often lead to tricky logistical problems that sometimes result in physics-defying goofs.

The Goof: In one action scene, Raees shoots an adversary who is positioned clearly in the background, standing directly in front of a glass window or door. Based on the shot’s trajectory and the victim’s initial placement, the character would logically be expected to fall forward, backward (through the glass), or at the very least, drop in the immediate vicinity of where he was standing. Instead, after the shot is fired, the person is shown collapsing in a completely different location, far from the window, and seemingly ‘misplaced’ from the spot where the shooting occurred.

Why It’s Funny: This is a classic staging error often called a “misplaced victim” or a continuity error relating to movement. The switch between the close-up shot of the action and the wide shot of the consequence seems to skip a whole beat of physics and spatial reality. The victim seems to have completed a short, unscripted, and invisible sprint before collapsing, “defying all the physics we have learnt so far,” as noted by one observer. It’s a quick, blink-and-you-miss-it moment, but it showcases the comical difficulty of maintaining spatial continuity across fast-paced fight choreography.

---

6. The Magical, Appearing-and-Disappearing Dupatta in a Romantic Song

The film also includes its share of iconic song-and-dance numbers, most notably the romantic track ‘Udi Udi Jaye,’ featuring Shah Rukh Khan and Mahira Khan. These songs are often where continuity errors are most likely to occur due to the multiple takes, costume changes, and elaborate choreography.

The Goof: At the very beginning of the song, which features Raees and Aasiya (Mahira Khan) enjoying a romantic moment, Aasiya is shown without a dupatta (a traditional long scarf). However, in subsequent shots, a dupatta suddenly appears—it is seen being used in the choreography, is draped around her neck, or is held by Raees. Then, it might disappear again only to reappear as needed by the choreography. One source even notes a point where a dupatta inexplicably appears, and as Raees holds it, the TV sound automatically cuts off, adding to the magical nature of the scarf.

Why It’s Funny: The sudden and magical appearance and disappearance of the dupatta is a clear continuity error, but one that is often taken in good stride by fans, given the nature of Bollywood songs where costumes and props can be very fluid. The fabric acts as a mysterious, sentient prop, materializing and dematerializing based on the needs of the dance step or the romance of the moment. It’s a fun, visible mistake that reminds the audience of the artifice of a staged song sequence, where narrative realism is happily sacrificed for aesthetic charm.

---

The Charming Imperfection of Raees

Despite these handful of funny goofs—the premature liquor and underwear ads, the self-repairing glasses, the bullet-dodging victim, the tear-gas immunity, and the mystical dupatta—Raees remains a highly entertaining and commercially successful film.

What these mistakes ultimately prove is that filmmaking is an incredibly complex, fast-moving process, and the occasional slip-up is inevitable, even with a massive budget and the backing of major production houses like Red Chillies Entertainment and Excel Entertainment. These little errors don’t detract from the powerful performances delivered by Shah Rukh Khan and Nawazuddin Siddiqui or the gripping plot created by director Rahul Dholakia. Instead, they become part of the movie’s charm—small, humorous treasures for dedicated fans to spot on repeated viewings.

So, the next time you watch Raees, enjoy the intense drama and unforgettable dialogues, but also keep an eye out for that 1995 whisky and the tear-gas-immune gangster. You might find a new source of laughter in one of Shah Rukh Khan’s most serious roles.