Question: Do we know the human casualties by the end of the war?
lionhead
7th May 2018
War of the Worlds (2005)
Answer: The ending dialog states a death of 1 billion.
The billion deaths spoken of don't refer to those that died in the alien attack but the billion deaths from the microorganisms that killed the aliens. "By a billion deaths man earned his immunity."
I feel that he meant that the organisms that killed the aliens killed a billion humans first before we got our immunity from them.
They are saying that.
Exactly.
29th Feb 2020
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Question: How did Luke and Leia know that Rey was Palpatine's granddaughter?
Answer: They felt it through the force. It's kinda like a signature. They feel each other's powers and recognize it. Both have met the Emperor and they felt similar powers inside Rey.
When did Leia meet the Emperor?
She was a senator and her father (Bail Organa) introduced her to him when she was younger.
Answer: Off screen between Episode 3 and Rogue One.
26th Apr 2020
Resident Evil (2002)
Factual error: When Red Queen is explaining about the T-Virus they say that fingernails and hair continue to grow after death. This is not correct, While it appears that they grow, its actually down to the tissue drying out and retracting. An article on the topic can be found here: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20130526-do-your-nails-grow-after-death A super computer that is knowle. (00:56:40)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The T-virus causes the hair and nails to keep growing. The nails cause scratches that can increase infection, so it benefits the T-virus.
That is not what was said at all. In the film it states that even in death, the body remains active and that hair and fingernails continue to grow, news cells are produced, and the brain holds a small electrical charge that takes months to dissipate (all of which are false). Then the T-virus provides a massive jolt to growing cells and the brain to reanimate the dead.
She says those things after they ask her what those things are. She then starts to explain how the T-virus works. She doesn't say a dead body always keeps active, she says a dead body infected with the T-virus is still active, regenerating cells, hair and fingernails continue to grow. In short, it reanimates the dead (to a degree). That's how I read it anyway.
3rd Sep 2018
Resident Evil (2002)
Question: Spence reveals at the end that he stole the T-virus and got onto the train where he was knocked unconscious due to the red queen's defences. How did the train return to the mansion by itself without a loco pilot - its power and plugs go off automatically. Was there any other train from mansion to the hive? How did Spence reach the mansion anyway without driving, as he was unconscious at the hive when the red queen released halon gas?
Answer: It's possible the USS unit brought the train up to the mansion even before they entered it or shortly after. They needed it to get down to the hive.
I don't know if the USS team brought the train back because they break through to enter the mansion once they got the news of the red queen going homicidal. Even if the train reaches the mansion automatically, there is no explanation why the power goes off or the train switches get unplugged. It shows that the train was in the mansion from the beginning. When Rain (Michelle Rodriguez) gets down to start the engine's power, she hears some weird noises as she flashes her torch light to some broken grid. That is left unexplained.
But that doesn't explain the sockets being undone under the carriage, Or how Spence ended up in essentially, a closet.
It's possible he got on the train and got up to the mansion but then the security system kicked in, locking him inside the train and he tried to open the doors by disconnecting the power. Then the gas hit and he tried to hide from it by climbing in a closet, then succumbed.
30th Apr 2004
Anaconda (1997)
Corrected entry: When the anaconda eats Jon Voight whole, there is a movement over the other side of the room, and it slides over at incredible speed. Snakes take hours to eat their prey (especially the size of a man) and weeks to digest. During this period, they can barely move at all. Also, after it spits him out (again, not possible), he winks.
Correction: Maybe it goes for regular sized anacondas but not giant huge anacondas that they have to take hours. Also it is possible to spit out their food. On Google theres a REAL video of an anaconda spitting out an entire baby hippo.
Hippos are native to Africa, and anacondas to South America. Also, snakes regurgitate their prey only in an emergency, like being threatened by a predator. Even gigantic anacondas like the ones in the movie would still take several weeks to digest a person, and remain immobile throughout.
They don't move intentionally, to help digesting their prey. That doesn't mean they can't actually move though, they can if they have to. This big one is faster than any real snake anyway. In the footage of an anaconda regurgitating its prey, the prey is a tapir.
Hippos can be found in the wild in South America. They were the pets of Pablo Escobar. A group of hippos originally imported by Escobar to his private zoo decades ago has multiplied and, according to scientists, is now spreading through one of the country's main waterways - the River Magdalena.
5th Apr 2020
Common mistakes
Corrected entry: It's very common for shows, games, or movies that take place after the end of the world to still show people using fossil fuels like gasoline and diesel in vehicles. However, with the production of gas having ended, this could not last very long. Even when properly stored, civilian gas supplies would go bad and be unusable after about a year, diesel a little longer but not by much. Private stashes of gas, like in cans, would only last about 5 months. And the military supplies of gas would, at best, last for 5 years.
Correction: Stored gasoline is typically treated with fuel stabilizer (about 2 ounces of stabilizer will treat 5 gallons of gasoline and prolong its shelf-life by years). All of my stored gasoline is treated with stabilizer, and I've used cans that are 5 years old and older. Even untreated gasoline can have a remarkably long shelf-life: Some years ago, I sold an old Volvo that had been sitting in my garage with a dead battery for 11 years; the buyer brought a fresh battery and installed it just to test the starter, to see if the engine was frozen. To everyone's amazement, the old car immediately started, revved and purred like a kitten, burning the gasoline in its tank from over a decade earlier.
Correction: This all highly depends on the quality of the gasoline and the amount of ethanol and its exposure to oxygen. I've heard about jerrycans of gasoline 25 years old still usable. It's also possible to purify the gasoline again so it's usable by filtering it. Don't need a huge refinery for small amounts.
8th Apr 2015
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Question: Voldemort asks Snape if the elder wand truly listens to him. Voldemort thinks that it listens to Snape because he killed its last owner, Dumbledore. Voldemort has his snake kill Snape. If Voldemort's theory was correct, that the wand listens to Snape and killing him would be the answer, wouldn't the wand belong to the snake? This is probably a stupid question but it would make sense to me. The snake is a living thing, Voldemort himself doesn't kill Snape so it would go to the snake, right?
Chosen answer: Voldemort was not correct. He mistakenly believed that Snape was the wand's master, but it was actually Draco Malfoy who commanded it, though neither he nor anyone else knew that. When Draco disarmed Dumbledore when they were atop the Astronomy Tower, the wand, sensing Dumbledore was defeated, changed its allegiance to Draco. It was after that event occurred that Snape killed Dumbledore. Even though Draco never physically possessed it, the wand remained under his control until Harry disarmed him. It is not necessary to kill the Elder's wand's master in order to win control of it. Also, if an animal killed the Elder Wand's master, it is unlikely the wand would respond to it. It would have to be a human or a humanoid-being.
Your last sentence, of course, becomes far more complicated in light of the Fantastic Beasts series' revelation that Nagini WAS once a human being. Given that this is the case, if Snape really had been the master of the Elder Wand, could Nagini have become its next master upon killing him? Hopefully, J. K. Rowling will answer this question someday.
Well either way it won't worked for Snape because he wasn't the master of the Elder wand at that point. He didn't even know that the Elder wand belong to Draco and then to Harry. He wasn't interested in the Elder wand as a matter of fact.
I think it's more important that regardless whether Nagini was a human once or not, at that point Nagini was a Horcrux and a vessel of Voldemort's soul without having a soul herself (if she ever did), unlike Harry. So Nagini killing Snape is the same as Voldemort himself killing him.
8th Apr 2020
Common mistakes
Factual error: In almost every movie from the introduction of sound on to present day, lightning and thunder happen simultaneously, while in reality there's always a delay between the former and the latter.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Hardly always, if the lightning hits right in front of you you hear the thunder immediately. I'd say from about 100 meters you perceive it as instantly, as it's only 0.3 seconds between flash and thunder.
This is a mistake about in almost all movies, not in all thunderstorms. The common mistake in the movies is when lightning isn't hitting 100m away from the character, but the sound is still instantaneous.
I assume it's about thunderstorms in movies. Name an example.
Instant thunder (even at a considerable distance of miles from the lightning or explosion source) is, indeed, a common and probably deliberate error in most films. The reasoning for it is simple: a prolonged and realistic delay between lightning and thunder could change a 1-second shot into a 6-second shot, for example, compromising the director's intended pace and mood for the scene. Steven Spielberg films have utilized both instant and delayed thunder. In "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," for example, when the UFOs zoom out into the distant background (certainly miles away) in a wide landscape shot, they produce a lightning effect in the clouds that is simultaneously heard as thunder. But in "Poltergeist" (a Spielberg film directed by Tobe Hooper), there is a very deliberate scene of characters realistically counting the seconds between distant lightning and resulting thunder. Choosing to obey physics or not is a matter of the director's artistic license.
I posted this while I was watching Death in Paradise, episode 7 of the third season, but really, you have never seen in pretty much any horror or cheap slasher movie whenever there's a storm, the flash of a lightning coming at the *same* time as a thunder jumpscare sound? It's vastly spoofed, even, when some ugly/creepy/terrifying character makes its appearance. One example randomly picked? Dracula by Coppola, in the first 10 minutes, carriage, lightning in the distance, not even a split second after, rumble. In RL it would reach you a couple seconds later. But really, it's such a movie archetype, I am sure you can find it in any Dracula movie.
The Dracula example doesn't really show how far away the lightning is, it could right above them. It's fake as hell, I agree with that, but the fact there is lightning and thunder at the same time without actually seeing the distance is not a mistake to me. It's also highly unnatural lightning as it only happens twice and then nothing, it's not even raining. It's obviously meant to be caused by the evil surrounding the place. The idea is there is constant lightning right on top of them.
There's a scene in Judge Dredd where every few seconds, there is a flash of lightning instantly accompanied by the sound of thunder. It happens frequently in Sleepy Hollow as well.
I know the scenes you are referring to. In both those instances you have no idea about the distance of this lightning. It could be (and probably is) right on top of them. You can hear that from the typical high sharpness of the sound, only heard when the flash is very close. Thunderclouds are never very high in the air so even the rumbling within the cloud itself can be heard, sometimes you don't even see lightning when it rumbles (yet there is). It's a bit far fetched but you could hear a rumbling or the thunder from a previous flash and mistake it for the flash you see at the same time. Can happen when there are continuous flashes.
27th Aug 2001
Gladiator (2000)
Corrected entry: Although many like to quote it, few have apparently read "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by British historian Edward Gibbons. For it clearly describes a Roman general named Maximus Quintillian. He may or may not be the person portrayed in the movie, but there was a Roman general named Maximus who defeated the Germanians and was a favourite of Marcus Aurelius. He was killed by Commodus.
Correction: Actually, if you watch the documentary on the VHS called 'Blood, Sand and Celuloid', it clearly states that Maximus was the only fictitious character in the film. If you read 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' and other related texts properly, it is quite clear that Maximus Quintillian was a favourite of Marcus Antonius Aurelius, not Marcus Aurelius. It is true that Quintillian was killed by Marcus Antonius Aurelius' son, but he was called Antonius Commodus. As such, this was an entirely different father and son, though the names are similar. There is no record of a general called Maximus at the time of the early Aurelians, the time of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.
Do you mean Marcus Aurelius Antoninus? The Gibbons reference about Maximus Quintilian doesn't say anything about him being a general.
There are about 14 Emperors named Marcus Aurelius. Including Commodus, being of that line.The First Marcus Aurelius full title was Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus. Commonly refered to as Marcus Aurelius. There is only one the first and that was the one portrayed in the movie. Commodus became Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Commodus Antoninus Augustus. Also portrayed in the movie.
11th May 2006
Scream (1996)
Question: Why did Billy and Stu want to kill Tatum? I've read that she said Stu was bad in bed, but when does she say this in the movie?
Answer: They didn't have anything against Tatum specifically, her death was just necessary for their scary movie plan against Sidney. They also said that anyone who isn't a virgin dies in a scary movie, and we know Tatum wasn't a virgin.
Did they say "anyone who isn't a virgin"? I thought it was anyone who has sex *during* the horror movie events - not including people who were *already* not virgins.
Typically, the cliche is "sex or promiscuity = death." I don't think it necessarily has to be during the events of the movie. Debating the minutiae is probably just gonna make us run in circles.
Answer: I don't understand why people are getting hung up on the virgin thing. Sure, there are some movies where someone who isn't a virgin survives. But the common cliche in horror that everyone knows is that sex typically equals death. Doesn't matter if some movies don't follow the cliche... it's still the cliche, and Stu and Billy are operating by the cliches.
In addition to this, Stu and Billy were planning to be the two survivors and make "the sequel." They probably viewed themselves as the main characters. Tatum was one of the "side characters" who would typically be killed.
Except even in this movie, Sidney should be dead by that logic. While Randy is explaining that rule, Sid is upstairs breaking said rule with Billy.
Answer: But Amy Steel's Ginny in Friday the 13th Part 2 wasn't a virgin and she survived. Yet these guys claim to know horror movies.
It's just a TV trope used in the movie.
2nd Apr 2004
Resident Evil (2002)
Corrected entry: Surely in rooms where lethal viruses are handled and stored, even in outer rooms, you wouldn't have a ventilation system connected to the rest of the facility? (00:02:45)
Correction: The entire facility is under the control of the "Red Queen" computer program, who is the one responsible for killing everyone to prevent the infection from leaving. It's very likely she was able to shut down/manipulate the ventilation system to send the air flow to other parts of the Hive.
No, the original submitter is saying that a room handling that kind of stuff wouldn't have a vent full stop. It's actually pointed out when one of the scientists says its a sealed room.
The point is that Spence released the virus outside of that chamber, in a chamber that had vents whilst he was walking towards the exit. It's not specifically seen where he releases it. Even so, a secured chamber can still have a vent system, but one that has special filters and a closed circuit. Probably wouldn't have mattered to the Queen though.
27th Aug 2001
Pearl Harbor (2001)
Corrected entry: In the scene where there is a camera on the bomb falling on the ship, it is clearly visible that the bomb in falling down vertically. It is well known that when bombs are released from bombers, they have a horizontal speed, which is the same of the bomber. Thus the trajectory is, as every high school student should know, a parabola.
Correction: A *dive bomber* released this bomb. As the name suggests, they dive towards their target before they release the bomb, therefore the bomb falls towards the target vertically.
Correction: When the bomb is released, it drops straight down relative to the aircraft. This has nothing to do with dive bombing.
The bomb that blew apart the Arizona was historically a bomb from a dive-bomber and they dropped down vertically. So there is nothing wrong with the angle of the bomb. That the bomber doesn't dive is a different matter.
That may be true, but the aircraft that dropped it in the film was not diving. Dive bombers release the bomb from an almost vertical dive then pull out of the dive. The bomb continues towards the target.
I mentioned that. I say that's a different problem.
25th Aug 2008
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
Character mistake: Sarah is a trained expert with predatory animals. But when her jacket is covered with blood (and not just any blood, the blood of the infant T-rex), and they're in a forest surrounded with carnivorous dinosaurs, and she knows that they need to pass through Velociraptor territory, and she thinks that the T-rex might follow them, she doesn't think to take the jacket off. And the others, who also happen to be hunters who would surely know that the blood would attract predators, don't say anything about it.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: While you are right, it's still not that much of a mistake because not only does it tie into the Butterfly Effect from the first movie, but also maybe Roland used it to his advantage, meaning an opportunity to shoot the Buck Rex since using its baby didn't work.
You're really grasping at straws on this one. The top priority for everyone at this point is to find safe shelter. A bunch of dinosaur experts aren't going to jeopardize that by allowing someone in their group to walk through dangerous territory with blood-soaked clothing, and Roland isn't going to risk the lives of other people to hunt the T-rex. This is just bad writing by the filmmakers, plain and simple.
What butterfly effect?
He's talking about when Ian Malcolm was explaining chaos theory and used the term "butterfly effect." But like Phaneron said, the person was really grasping as straws and this scene has nothing to do with what Malcom was talking about.
Suggested correction: I don't think this is actually a mistake. Yes Sarah's jacket is covered in blood from the baby T-Rex, but as you say they've got to pass through Velociraptor territory. In JP3 it was noted that the T-Rex pee keeps smaller dinosaurs away but actually attracts the Spinosaurus. The scent of the T-Rex blood could actually also have the same effect as the pee at keeping the smaller dinosaurs away.
12th May 2010
Iron Man 2 (2010)
Corrected entry: At the end of the movie, Tony stark sits at a desk with the Initiative preliminary report before him. Before he picks up the report in the foreground for a few moments you can see a news report with an Asian female reporter. However, this report has been looped as you see the same people walk past the reporter twice and her making the same facial expressions.
Correction: Of course it's looped. This isn't live - it would be a bit too much of a coincidence for the Hulk's battle at Culver University to be being reported live at that very moment. This is an earlier report on that battle that SHIELD have recorded; as such, hardly unreasonable for it to be displayed in a looped format.
It's an extremely short loop, is my point. Like, 3 seconds.
14th Jan 2005
Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985)
Continuity mistake: In the POW camp, Co Bao is discovered by a guard who points a handgun at her. Rambo shoots an arrow into the guard's forehead, who then falls back against a tree with his cap down low over his eyes. In the next shot his cap is much higher on his head, and the arrow is pointing at a different angle. How could his cap have moved up that far with the arrow holding it to his forehead? For that matter, how could the arrow have moved when it was firmly embedded in the guard's skull? (00:33:25)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The arrow was able to move because upon piercing the skull, the arrow penetrated the brain, a soft matter that would not hold the arrow in place. The brain matter is much softer than flesh. Imagine shooting an arrow into a watermelon. It is not fixed, but moveable.
But the point of the arrow is sticking in the tree. If it wasn't the guard would have fallen to the ground. So it shouldn't have moved.
8th Apr 2020
Twelve Monkeys (1995)
Corrected entry: Why do the scientists, whom are older than Cole, not remember that the army of 12 monkeys let out the animals? It was on the radio the same morning when Cole and Reilly were in the taxi on their way to the airport. It must have been a pretty significant thing in your memory especially if the death of the human race starts almost immediately after this event. They do not realise this until Cole calls the voicemail and explain the situation 5 minutes before hell brakes loose in the airport. Where were these scientists during this quite spectacular incident? Even Cole must have remembered something about this since he just went home with his parents after the shooting in the airport. The story about the fleeing animals must have been on most of the news networks that day, so why would the grown up Cole not remember this rather important piece of information from his childhood?
Correction: Who's to say that the scientists don't remember it? Why couldn't they have released the animals from the zoo as well as releasing a devastating virus? They sent Cole back to investigate and find out more specific details.
To add to that: Cole doesn't remember these events himself nor anybody else does because right after the animals were released and the incident at the airport the virus starts to spread, taking up all the time on the news and media several days later and starting a really desperate time for all people, trying to survive it all. It's not unlikely people will not remember the time before the virus.
6th Apr 2020
Hancock (2008)
Corrected entry: Hancock stops the train ramming John's car, but he's a superhero with super-strength and the ability to fly. Why not just lift the car off the tracks and out of danger?
16th Sep 2017
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Question: How does Sauron know Frodo has the ring? He doesn't even know who Frodo is.
Answer: He doesn't. He only knows that someone named "Baggins" from the Shire has the ring. He learns this from torturing Gollum. He sends the ringwraiths to the Shire to search for it, and they sense it enough to figure out who has it.
25th Jun 2010
The Book of Eli (2010)
Question: If he is blind how do you explain the accurate shots with the arrow?
Answer: A large study was done after the atomic blasts in Japan in WW2 after the surrender on the effects to victims' eyesight. Over 70% of the people that indirectly looked at the light were not completely blind. They suffered from cataracts, and out of those studied over 50% could see during the day - mostly shades of black and shadows / silhouettes of people and objects. Those that survived became very keen to see movement as long as they were in bright light, also heightened since of smell and feeling vibrations. This would explain why Eli never traveled at night and was not totally blinded by a nuclear flash, if he was completely blind - night would give him a much larger advantage. You notice he always travels when the sun comes up so he can see silhouettes of people and objects moving. Also when Solara interred his room at Carnegie's hall she said "it's bright in here" Eli had all the lights on so he could see anyone entering the room / cell. Also he wears sunglasses because obviously he does not want his cataracts to get worse. If you watch the movie again there are many tells to support that he is only partially blind and had mild to moderate cataracts. You can also see his eyes on the boat to Alcatraz, showing his cataracts.
He was born blind, at the start he smells the hijackers and moves into the dark to level the playing field.
How would he know where the dark is?
He was not born blind. He was blinded during armageddon, but after finding the Bible was given his sight back in order to complete the task given to him by God. Once his task was completed he once again lost his sight.
Nope! He was given his sight back by God in order to complete the task he was given, only to lose it once again after it was completed.
Answer: Believe he is partially blind. You don't need to be completely blind to need to learn braille.
He is not blind. He sees cars coming runs into the house and immediately checks the windows.
Answer: He was blind before the flash. That's how he could read braille, and had a braille bible. Remember, he asked Solaris' mother when she lost her sight - she said before the flash. That's why she also could read braille. He was totally blind. God gave him the ability to do what he did.
Answer: I think everyone missed something that is completely obvious. He is absolutely 100% blind. He always reacts. He never starts at first. During the gunfight he never once fired upon someone unless he was shot at first. During the bridge fight, he did not attack anyone until they screamed or were close enough to where he was feeling them. When he found the body hanging in the closet and he felt it with his hands from head to foot and felt the boots. Same thing with the car with the skeleton. He felt all the way down and realised it did not have boots. Every fight scene and everything he did in this movie was a reaction to somebody else doing something first.
Answer: He is 100% blind and if you pay close attention to the movie, it is proven and shown. He only reacts to his senses, the scene where the man is hanging, Eli smells him; he does not see him. The scene with the hijackers, he goes under the bridge, soo he can hear their movement using echolocation. The shootout scene if you listen very closely when Carnegie is speaking to him, Eli clicks his tongue using echolocation again. The scene with the couple as he is walking up to their home, he makes the clicking noises again and bangs of the door with the gun to listen to the sound. In the shootout scene, Eli only shoots at those who were firing at him; which was in the direction of the gunshot sounds. The scene where he gives up the book and is shot, he stands up and looks around with confusion because he does not know who else is there, and he blindly swings his knife around to try to fight back. He was able to do what he did due to God's protection and guidance.Hence "Walk by Faith not by Sight".
Answer: It's clear from examining his eyes in various shots throughout the film that he is not blind for most of it. He was almost certainly blind before his journey began, then is sight was restored so he could complete the task. There are several scenes where his eyes can be seen. They are brown and when he talks to people, he looks them in the eye. At the end of the film, his eyes go gray, showing he is blind again.
Um...no...sorry good theory, but he just has heightened senses, and I believe isn't 100% blind but is mostly like 80-90%.
If you disagree, then please present evidence to refute my theory, rather than simply stating an opinion. Do you disagree that his eyes are brown throughout the film, then go gray at the end? Do you disagree that he looks people directly in the eye? Do you disagree that he is able to aim and shoot at distances a blind person wouldn't be able to?
The idea is that he was blind to begin with. The fact they didn't show his eyes grey is that it would reveal that fact and make the movie look stupid. The way they approach it is the surprise at the end that it turns out he is blind, not that he had gone blind again. If wasn't blind during the movie there would have been no point in showing him blind at the end, nor would it be logical he has a braille bible that he knows by heart.
We'll just have to disagree. My take was that he was blind previously (hence his ability to read braille and his use of his other senses) but was given sight to complete his task, then lost his sight just before death.
Answer: He can hear their wings flapping, and he is guided from above. His other senses are extraordinarily sensitive and honed.
17th Feb 2004
Minority Report (2002)
Question: OK, let's see: Lamar Burgess set Anderton up; he Hired Leo Crow and sent him to be killed in a hotel. But How did exactly Burgess plan the meeting of Anderton with Crow? Anderton arrived at the crime scene by a chain of events that began with the pre-vision of his destiny. It was clear that Lamar did not fake the pre-vision, because this became true just like it was predicted; besides, when Anderton was being chased, he arrived to crime scene by a coincidence; so what did Burguess have to do to make sure the existence of the pre-vision and this possible future? I don't see a simple solution.
Answer: Well, there isn't really a simple solution, but here goes. For a pre-vision to form, there have be two things present within the range of the precog ability (which appears to be limited to the Washington area - regardless of the stated plan to take the programme countrywide, there's never any indication that the precogs can sense beyond that range). Firstly, someone with the intent to kill. Secondly, there has to be a target for that intent within the range of the precogs. Anderton is present, and has the intent within him to kill the man who took his son, but has no target - the real kidnapper is presumably either dead or beyond the precog ability. Burgess, by bribing Crow to pretend to be that man, has provided a viable target for Anderton's intent within the range of the precog ability, thus triggering the prevision, and beginning the chain of events.
The above answers the question, but there do appear to be some time travel issues with this plot point in the movie. Burgess set things up for Crow to fake being the kidnapper and thus triggering Jon's desire to kill that person, everything starts by the pre-cogs seeing the future. If the pre-cogs did not exist or did not have the vision, Jon would have never known that Leo Crow existed and would have continued on without having killed anyone. This is unique within the movie, as the other murders would have been commited regardless of whether or not the pre-cogs saw it. In this case, the ONLY reason this murder occurred is because the pre-cogs saw it.
Thinking about this a little more, it could be conceivable that Burgess had planned a different option for Jon finding Crow. We just never saw that on screen, because the precogs changed everything to an alternative future timeline once they saw the original murder. Originally, Jon could have been triggered by Burgess himself, stating that they got a lead on his son's murder and pointing him to Crow.
No I think Burgess set it up so that Anderton would find Crow because of the precogs, not have a different plan set up before or else it could be possible Burgess himself would be visible in the prevision. He manipulated the system perfectly, he has done it before after all. He knows exactly how the precogs work so he is able to set it up so that it's untraceable. Except, except for the fact there is always a choice. Only then did it go wrong for him. This proves both true for Anderton and Burgess in the end.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.
Answer: No such numbers are ever discussed in the novel or in the subsequent radio and movie treatments. What we may surmise, however, is that the human casualties were comparatively minor. Once the Martians were exposed to earthly microbes, they were wiped out pretty quickly.
Charles Austin Miller
Voiceover by Morgan Freeman at the end of the movie: by the toll of a billion lives.
Morgan Freeman says "By the toll of a billion deaths, man had earned his immunity, his right to survive among this planet's infinite organisms." He is saying that Mankind evolved with microorganisms for countless generations on Earth, making Mankind immune to most of those microorganisms. Perhaps a billion humans or more died of bacterial and viral plagues throughout human history; but, as a species, we gained immunity. Freeman's quote has nothing to do with the number of Martians that died because they had no immunity.
Charles Austin Miller