Question: Why doesn't Howie try to escape when being carried up to the wicker man?
Question: This was produced by the Walt Disney Production Company. Unlike other Disney films that were family friendly, this one had a dark tone to it and even terrifying moments. Why would the Disney Production company help produce this film considering how scary it is? It seems unusual considering that a lot of the movies they made were more light-hearted.
Answer: Disney at the time was trying to break the stereotype of only producing family-oriented animation films. So they were interested in making more mature films, especially ones targeted to the teen audience. At the time they had already produced "The Watcher in the Woods" and "Dragonslayer". "Something Wicked This Way Comes" was toned down though and some things deemed too dark were removed. It should be noted, this was also the last film under the Walt Disney Production label.
Question: At the end of the movie, survivors of the group that entered the maze reach the lab, barely making it through alive and having used a code that only an experienced maze runner would know. How did Gally arrive only moments after them, when he had elected to stay behind in the Glade at the time the group entered the maze?
Chosen answer: As it turns out, Gally was being mind-controlled by the people who operated the maze. This would explain why he was highly against any form of escape plan. When the others escaped, the operators gave him some form of safe passage straight to the control room.so he could kill the others. Best guess is, they re-activated the elevator for him and he took that route...but that's left ambiguous.
Question: How could Damien's mother be a jackal? That has always thrown me for a loop and I could never understand why they'd do that unless it was for entertainment purposes. I mean, I know it's Hollywood and all but that's just too far-fetched.
Chosen answer: The idea wasn't entirely Hollywood's. The antichrist is sometimes said to be "born of a jackal. " Jackals are mentioned in the Bible, and some interpretations consider them a symbol of something that is "not of God." In the movie, it means that the kid was scary as hell, literally.
Answer: It's Satan's twisted and macabre mockery of Jesus' virgin mother.
Question: In the scene where the main characters are talking about their peculiar behaviours i.e.- "Stokely, since when did you start liking boys" and "What, Delilah, you haven't gone without hairspray and contacts since birth". Can anyone please tell me what Delilah means when she says to Casey- "And Casey, since when did you become Sigourney Weaver?" I have never understood what it means but I think it might have some reference to the movie "Alien".
Answer: That's exactly right. Weaver fought aliens in all the "Alien" movies.
Question: On the DVD (UK, not sure about anywhere else) there is a feature called 'the secret of esrever', which tells you to look for very subliminal hidden images in the film - I have looked so many times and there is still one I can't find - does anyone know where the 'water' one is? The only thing I can see is what looks like an owl's head made out of the trees in the scene where the woman is drowning a baby in the lake. If this is it how does it relate to the film? Also is there a message in the images? There are a few words but I can't make a sentence out of them.
Answer: In the scene where the baby is submerged in the water, watch the lower right-hand side of the screen. You'll see the shadow of a stickman emerge and come higher into the frame.
Question: What car is Gina driving at the end of the movie?
Answer: A 1966 Ford Galaxie-500 XL. There's a website that lists the vehicles used in the movie.
Question: Why did Louis kill Church at the end? He only planned on killing Gage if he came back like Timmy Baterman did, and he could have just walked in after distracting Church with the meat.
Chosen answer: Church's behavior had changed after being buried. He was now violent (and working with Gage) and needed to be put down before killing anyone.
Question: This might be subjective, but why does the Enterprise take so much damage, especially interior damage, long before the shields actually collapse?
Chosen answer: There's a limit as to how much the shields can protect the ship. Depending on the force of the explosions, the ship still suffers some damage from any weapon blasts. Also, the shield only holds for so long and gradually loses it protectiveness with successive attacks, causing increasing damage to the ship.
Answer: The depiction of the shields in this movie is actually interesting because it seems they deliberately tried to show how the ship could plausibly take damage while the shields are up. Here the shields seem to be "on" the hull (or perhaps emanate from the hull itself) and their function seems specific to preventing hull breaches. In TNG and onwards the shields appear as a kind of energy bubble wrapped around the ship, and accordingly they seem to absorb much more impact.
Question: In the original novel, it was Shogo (not Shuya) who hacked the system to discover how to disable the collars; at the same time he found out that the class would be doing the Battle Royale and transferred into that class to try and use his knowledge to mess it up. In the film, the person who found out how to disable the collars and the person who found out about the Battle Royale and transferred into it are different people. Does anyone know why this change was made?
Chosen answer: Kawada hacked the system, learned about the collars, and transferred voluntarily to the class he knew would be participtaing in both versions. The only difference is when he transferred: in the book, it was right after his win, and in the film it was just for the battle. Shuya never hacked anything in either the book or the film. As to why the change was made, I can only assume that, given the shortening of novels involved in film making, it's easier to make Kawada a complete stranger than a loner that the kids recognize.
Question: In the original film, the Discovery's onboard computer states: "I am a HAL 9000 Computer, Production Number 3. I became operational at the HAL plant in Urbana, Illinois, on the 12th of January, 1992." So, "HAL" was a manufacturer identification prefix (standing for Heuristically-programmed ALgorithmic Computers), "9000" was its model number, and "No.3" was its production lineage. In this sequel, however, Dr. Chandra is chatting with one of HAL's earth-based twin computers which has a feminine voice and is called "SAL"; but how can they arbitrarily change its manufacturer identification prefix? Being produced by the HAL plant in Urbana, Illinois, and being identical to the computer aboard the Discovery, the twin's name should have a different production number, but it should still be called "HAL," should it not?
Answer: The most likely reason the name was changed was probably a literary one. It makes it easier for the audience to differentiate SAL from HAL, showing how they are two distinct computers playing different roles in the film. It may also just be a feminine nickname being that SAL has a female voice.
I thought perhaps "SAL" was a nickname, also, until I saw that the computer's maker nameplate reads "SAL 9000" (visible in close-ups of SAL's glowing eye).
Question: I was really confused by the ending, who were the three figures we kept seeing, and what were they trying to do?
Answer: The figures are spirits who figured out how to contact the living, like Michael Keaton's wife. But where his wife wants him to help others, the three spirits are evil and want to only do bad things.
Question: How does Eddie get away with the apparent murder of the blonde woman in the apartment? I gather that even he doesn't know whether it was him or not but surely the Police would want to at least call him in for questioning at some point? And if it was him, surely, in that situation, it would be difficult to get away without leaving any evidence?
Answer: Although there is no definitive proof, I believe the killer to be Atwood's henchman. During the trip scene we see him following Eddie and the Blonde to their room and although it comes off as an illusion there's no reason it cannot be real. This alone is not enough to say for certain but the main reason I point to the henchman is because of how the story plays out following the murder. Eddie is by an eyewitness (probably someone working for Atwood if not the actual killer) who tells the police about him and as a result he is called into questioning. Because of the inquiry Eddie hires "the best lawyer in the city" who as we know is under Atwood's thumb. It is during this line of questioning the lawyer is able to go into Eddie's jacket and steal his NZT. None of these things would have happened had the Blonde never been killed.
Answer: There was no mention of physical evidence like hairs or fibres, the only evidence the police had was an eye-witness placing Eddie at the scene at the time the murder occurred; the eye-witness failed to I.D. Eddie in the line-up he was called to at the police station so Eddie was released, as the police had no case.
Answer: It was mentioned that the room was wiped clean after the murder. It was probably Atwood who set it all up because he was on NZT and needed some more.
Answer: Did you watch the movie? Lol... Eddie was called in and questioned about the murder. He was able to beat the case because the eyewitness couldn't pick him out of a line-up. Remember, his lawyer arranged to have a line-up full of men that looked just like Eddie.
The point of a line-up is to make everyone look similar to the actual suspect. So, the lawyer didn't do anything shady, and it would have been the police's job to have similar-looking people. A line-up of a mix of people is kind of a movie/TV trope, and the film implying the lawyer rigged the lineup fits into that trope.
Question: Ben Affleck first met Uma Thurman at a party just before he was offered and accepted the three year job. Surely he would have recognized her after having his memory wiped even if he could not remember any of the time they spent together.
Answer: He does recognize Rachel from the party as well as when he when he saw her at Allcom. The only things he doesn't remember are the last three years of his life since starting the project. So, while he does remember her, the three years they spent together while at Allcom are a total blank. This recognition is shown when he meets with Porter who helps him escape.
But later, when he is going through her stuff, he says he doesn't remember her. Also, if he did remember her, he would have known it wasn't her when the imposter was in the restaurant (also no need to have the imposter try to dress like her either).
Answer: Do you remember every person you've ever talked to at a party? Didn't think so. His memory isn't restored back to perfect condition - he's still had three years to forget about details at the party. He remembers things like the origins of the deal because it was important.
Question: Why can Liv McKenzie not go to see Tara Carpenter, her co-worker/close friend after her near-murder attack? Her absence is done to draw suspicion on her, but as she is later revealed to not be the killer, the question is left unanswered in the film. (00:15:45)
Answer: To try to throw them off the scent and add suspicion to make us think maybe possibly they're the killer(s).
This answer is literally part of the question. The question mentions that this was done to make the character seem suspicious. The question was asking why, in the context of the film, can't Liv go to see Tara. Not why in a behind-the-scenes sense.
Answer: It's never explained in the film, so any answer would be pure speculation. As you said, it was obviously done to draw suspicion onto her by the filmmakers, but there's any number of reasons she might not be able to, so really it's a case of picking your poison. (Perhaps she had a previous appointment she couldn't miss, perhaps she has a family matter to attend to, etc).
Question: Given she leaves the state while on parole, possessing a firearm, holding her ex at gunpoint, how does Libby avoid prosecution for these offenses?
Answer: Because there were exceptional and extenuating circumstances and, technically, Libby was never guilty of the crime she was convicted of and had to resort to extreme measures to prove her innocence. She may have had a gun, but it could never be proved that she held Nick at gunpoint, only that she shot him in self defense. Also, it's a movie, which often are unrealistic regarding details like that.
Question: I don't get it. What was the purpose of the aliens coming to Earth? And what exactly happened to them? Where did they go?
Answer: It's left unclear, though the film proposes several possible theories, and there are other possible explanations as well. One major theory brought up in the film is that the aliens were there to acquire Earth's resources after using up their own. Another theory proposed at the end of the movie is that the aliens wanted humans for whatever reason, as a radio DJ mentions seeing his friend's family being dragged away. There is also a very popular fan theory that the aliens are supposed to represent demons that are merely there to create chaos and test the moral strength of humanity, as the film is ultimately about Graham losing and then regaining his faith, although this is more subtext than anything and may not be literally true.
Answer: Near the end of the movie... The morning after in the basement... The guy on the radio says the aliens were there not for the planet, but to harvest humans. For what purpose is unknown, maybe as an energy source, Matrix-style.
Chosen answer: According to the theory in the movie they were there to take the planet for their own because they used up all the resources their own planet. They left the planet when it became apparent to them that the water on Earth was too dangerous.
Answer: What's the use? He's surrounded, he can't fight everyone and there's nowhere for him to run.
BaconIsMyBFF
He is also a fundametally religious man and he believes that he is going to die and go to heaven.