Friends TV Show Blooper

Movies | TV | Books | Quotes

Easter Eggs | Drink Recipes

The Slip-Up Archive_TM
SLIPUPS.COM

Home > TV > E - H > Friends Bloopers

Add a Slip-Up | Help | Discussion

Where To Next?

More Friends Bloopers

Top 25 Bloopers in E - H

Friends - Umbilical-Less Babies?

OK, when the doctor shows Phoebe's babies around to everyone straight after they come out, the babies have no umbilical cord. They don't even have stumps left which would be there on newly born babies with the cords removed. How the heck did they survive those nine months with no method of nutrition?

Special Requirements:

Friends series 5 episode 3 (the one hundredth)

Avg. Rating:	4.7 of 10 - (103 votes cast)
Your Rating:

Contributed By:

Anonymous on 04-27-2001

Email this Slip-Up to a Friend!

Reviewed By:

Webmaster

Correct this Slip-Up

Pictures Click on the thumbnails for a full-size image, or send in your own

Be the first to send us your picture of this Slip-Up!

Comments:

FrizzKid writes:: Yes I know that they wouldn't use REAL babies that had JUST been born. But they went to the trouble of smothering the babies in red stuff, to look like they had just been born, so they should have made some effort with the umbilical cords too. It's called visual effects.; 19 of 26 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

PrettyFlower4U writes:: In practically every show (other than reality shows)..most of the babies are shown without umbillical cords!; 4 of 5 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

Allison writes:: Almost all babies that are "born" on TV don't have umbilical cords.; 2 of 2 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

Heather1990 writes:: If you listen to the commentary, they talk about how that red stuff on the babies is jam. And why would they go through all that trouble to make the babies look newborn? What you guys need to realize, is that it's just TV. They aren't here to make every little thing real!; 2 of 2 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

Lucy writes:: You're right. It was incredibly unfair of Lisa Kudrow not to have three children so she could be attached to them by a fatty coil of tissue for five seconds worth of film. She's obviously never heard of Stanislavsky. (Or what ever it is, I'm sure they'll be messages telling me the concise make up of an umbilical cord).; 4 of 7 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

CastAway writes:: Ok...um, first of all, I don't think they would actually show that on TV. Second, they can't have the babies on the show RIGHT after they're born anyway.; 11 of 22 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

littlemissmadness writes:: If you look real close at Frank junior junior I think you can see an imitation umbilical cord, but the doctor does hold his hand to support the baby where the umbilical cord would be hidden anyway.; 1 of 2 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

KTLou writes:: Actually, when they show the 1st and 3rd baby, if you look close you can see the cord under the doctor's hand.; 0 of 0 people found this comment helpful. Did you?

Jeremy writes:: I think that no umbilical cords are symbolic. No umbilical cords mean not real babies. Hence, they are not really Phoebe's babies.; 0 of 0 people found this comment helpful. Did you?