Answered questions about specific movies, TV shows and more

These are questions relating to specific titles. General questions for movies and TV shows are here. Members get e-mailed when any of their questions are answered.

Question: When Tina enters the bank, with the camera in her purse, why does she walk away from Charlie and ask Stanley to help her? She came there to film the inside, and she doesn't know Stanley. Why does she care if Charlie or Stanley helps?

Answer: She was there to film the safe and Stanley's desk was right across from it, giving her the best view of the safe.

Bishop73

Show generally

Question: Just rewatched the series and in the episode where they are operating on President Kirkman to remove the bullet fragments I noticed what I think was a secret service agent in the background of the OR. Is this normal practice for when a president is under anaesthetic or a medical procedure, or was this just because it was after an attempted assassination?

The_Iceman

Answer: Yes, it's normal. When President Reagan was shot, they were in the OR with him.

Answer: It would be normal procedure, yes. The Secret Service accompanies the president everywhere, except in very limited circumstances (for example, they don't go into the bathroom with him, or stand in his room while he sleeps). When Bill Clinton had an operation to fix a torn tendon, there was an agent in the operating room throughout the procedure.

Question: Why was this filmed in Canada and not in Salt Lake City like the first movie was?

Answer: Likely for a variety of reasons but probably mostly for cost reasons. It is cheaper to film movies in Canada due to the currency exchange rate.

raywest

Question: Regarding the scene with the highly offended customer, is the actor deliberately hamming it up, or is he just a bad actor?

Phaneron

Answer: I think it's a combination of both of those. He's played by Walt Flanagan, who also plays three other characters in the movie. Flanagan was a friend of Kevin Smith who filled in for several roles. He's definitely playing the part a little hammy... but I also think some of his reactions are a little off because it was (obviously) his first film, and he was inexperienced. (Though to be fair, he appeared in similar small roles in several other Smith films, and his acting improved over time).

TedStixon

Show generally

Question: Given how long it ran and its popularity, was there ever talk of a crossover with Dynasty regardless of different networks?

Rob245

Answer: No, back then such things were unheard of. Too much politics, contract disputes and what would the characters do if they met.

Show generally

Question: Does anyone know why Gambit was featured less and less in episodes as the show went on? He was one of the most popular characters in not just X-Men, but all of Marvel Comics around the time this series first aired, so unless it had something to do with his voice actor's contract, it seems odd they wouldn't have utilized him more.

Phaneron

Answer: Chris Potter, the original Gambit voice actor, did indeed quit the role in the 4th season. His last episode was The Phalanx Covenant Part 1 so it seems reasonable that Fox would limit the use of the character even though it was recast. It doesn't appear that Potter left the role due to animosity, he stated in an interview that he wished to play Gambit in the first live action X-Men film.

BaconIsMyBFF

Question: In the hardware store when Scott hears the dog whistle, why doesn't his Dad, who is also a werewolf, hear it or react?

Answer: His dad is either not currently in the room or further away in the same room so most likely not as loud for him. Also, the dad is used to being a werewolf, so he is more used to the sound than Scott (to whom this sound is brand-new).

Answer: And, for wolves and humans, as they get older their high frequency hearing is diminished.

Question: Does the Red October not have a signal light on the periscope like the Dallas? It's a little ridiculous that they have to ping them to acknowledge them.

Answer: Red October would certainly have a signal light. If Dallas thought they were talking to the ready to defect Captain, I can't think of a more dangerous way to ask him to reply. Ordering the sonar signal certainly alerted the entire crew that something very unusual was going on. Plot error for sure.

No plot hole. Ramius explains the first and second ping to his crew as "(re)-confirming range to target." If they had seen him toggling a bunch of morse code via the signal light, they would either have recognized the morse code themselves or at a minimum wondered whom he was talking to and what about.

Question: Why does Tom Cruise constantly flash his doctor's ID card like he thinks he works for the FBI?

Answer: To convince others that he is going about legitimate business and to demonstrate that he is trustworthy because of his professional status. At a deeper level, he does it to reassure himself as he finds himself in progressively more bizarre circumstances.

Question: I've noticed a few times in the film they mention "Phase 2." For example, when Fury is talking to the council they bring it up and Fury says "Phase 2 isn't ready." Given that the MCU was broken up into phases, with this being the last film in Phase One (with Iron Man 3 released a year later as the first film in Phase Two), was this an inside joke or nod about the MCU phases, or just coincidence and I'm reading too much into it?

Bishop73

Answer: Phase 2 in the movie refers to the plan executed in Captain America: Winter Soldier, Project Insight which is their next phase for total security of Earth (along with Stark's Ultron program). It is coincidental that it is the same term used for the MCU itself.

lionhead

Question: Before Paxton escapes he sees guards talking to the police outside the building. I'm confused to why he says "oh shit" - is it because they pay the police to keep it quiet and that is why he doesn't shout for help to the police?

Answer: Exactly, yes. This interaction tells him that the police are in on the operation, and will not help him.

Question: For any military pilots out there: Is it even realistic that Maverick's accident would've been investigated, concluded, and Mav would have been cleared and put back to flight status within the time-frame of the TOPGUN class? Wikipedia says TOPGUN in the 80's was only 5 weeks and today it's 9 weeks. I don't remember how far along they were when Mav and Goose crashed but I'm guessing 1/2 way through at most, so that gives 2-3 weeks to investigate and clear Maverick.

Answer: Totally unrealistic, especially since it was a fatal incident. These can take weeks and months to be investigated and the pilot returned to flight status.

stiiggy

Question: Before I claim this as a continuity or factual mistake - a question: When the Arab raiding party shows up over the dune, they camp by a collection of scrub that was not all dead, some was green. There were also a number of plants in that low-lying area around the camp. Wouldn't the survivors had a better chance of surviving more days by digging for underground water in that area? Perhaps deep, but there. If they took 12 days to build the plane, it seems 2 days digging for water would have given them more time.

kaevanoff

Answer: In the desert, the only place you can find water as at an oasis or maybe digging in a dry river bed. Those bushes would be extremely salty, and any meaningful water would be far too deep under the sand.

stiiggy

Question: Why is Pappas ridiculed by the other agents for his theory that the ex-presidents surf when they're not robbing banks? Is it really that outlandish?

Answer: Because he's regarded as a burned out hippie.

stiiggy

Question: When Nick talks to Deja Vu and Chocolate Mousse there is a strange drawing behind them on the wall consisting of four arrows and other symbols, it looks meaningless but very deliberate at the same time, is it supposed to mean something? (00:58:07 - 00:58:38)

one5zero

Answer: It looks like an attack plan with the symbols representing buildings, trees and a church or graveyard in the village, the arrows representing troops and the Resistance, and the dotted line some kind of battle line.

Sierra1

Question: There is a major plot point which doesn't make sense to me. When Selene killed Viktor, who turned her into a vampire, why didn't it kill her too? I thought that when one vampire dies, all the vampires that were turned by them died too. That's why Viktor never killed Marcus. Is there something I'm missing?

Underworld_fan

Answer: Marcus told Viktor that if either of the Corvinus brothers were to die, it would also kill the whole Immortal bloodline (Vampires and Lycans), but this was a lie to prevent Viktor from killing his brother William.

Sierra1

Question: It was stated that Anubis took the Scorpion King's soul until he would be needed again. But, is there any explanation as to why he turned into the giant scorpion mutant that showed up towards the end?

Answer: He made a deal with Anubis to defeat his enemies in exchange for his soul. After Anubis fulfilled his end of the bargain he claimed the Scorpion King as his slave and transformed him into the scorpion hybrid, taking away his humanity.

lionhead

Question: The opening scene shows a military base with an equestrian event taking pace, which Bond infiltrates and places a bomb in an aircraft before getting caught, then escapes with the aid of his assistant and a small jet aircraft. How was this related to the rest of the plot?

Answer: It wasn't meant to be related at all. It was just an action sequence to start off the film as Bond completes a previous assignment before a segue into the familiar 007 opening theme and a new song. I recall there were some other earlier Bond films that also used this formula. After the opening bit, the story starts as Bond meets with "M" for a new mission, then a briefing with "Q" about the latest spy gadgets. There was also the obligatory flirtatious banter between Bond and Miss Moneypenny.

raywest

I see what you mean. I'm thinking of those films where the opening scene has some link to the main plot (e.g. The Spy Who Loved Me), but Moonraker is like this one, it starts off (spectacularly) with Bond at the end of a previous assignment.

Question: Why was the original trilogy always titled episodes 4, 5 and 6, when the prequel trilogy wasn't even planned?

MikeH

Answer: The original wasn't. It was just "Star Wars" when I saw it in the theater. In fact Lucas wasn't planning on any sequels when he made the first. After the first made it as a big success and drafts of a sequel were started, the second was first numbered as 2, but Lucas decided on a series with prequels, so the first became number 4, and so on. For a long time after 4-6 came out, people doubted if 7-9, let alone 1-3 would every be made. It was 16 years between the release of #6 and #1.

jimba

Answer: It is true "Star Wars" was not originally called episode IV, but Lucas always had the idea of doing a sequels. His original script became too big for one film, so he took the first third of the script (Act 1) and turned it into "Star Wars." However, since the film gave no context or background information to the audience (we're basically just thrown into the action), Lucas took the opportunity when "Star Wars" was a success to plan on creating prequels.

Bishop73

Https://drbeat.li/album/Bücher/The_Secret_History_of_Star_Wars.pdf (pdf of "The Secret History of Star Wars"). And here is a quote from Lucas "The Star Wars series started out as a movie that ended up being so big that I took each act and cut it into its own movie...It was like a big script. It was way too big to make into a movie. So I took the first third of it, which is basically the first act, and I turned that into what was the original Star Wars."

Bishop73

Question: Considering that Chuck had been on the island for four years, would he actually still have all of his teeth or would he have lost them all? From all the things that he saw in the packages that he opened, not one of them had anything to keep his teeth clean.

Answer: Even without dental care for four years, it would take far longer for a generally healthy person to lose their teeth if they had previously maintained proper oral hygiene. Chuck's diet was a factor (little or no sugar) and he could also fashion a primitive toothbrush or toothpick from materials on the island. Ancient humans had relatively little tooth decay. It was after sugar was introduced into the European (and later American) diet in the 11th century, that dental problems started becoming more prevalent.

raywest

Answer: It's possible that he could keep his teeth, provided he doesn't eat too many sugars. Just think of all the cultures throughout history and today that do not brush their teeth. They certainly have dental issues compared to those who regularly brush and see a dentist, but it's not like none of them have teeth.

BaconIsMyBFF

Answer: Toothpaste and toothbrushes (+ floss) are not the only things that can be used to clean teeth! (What did people use before toothpaste and toothbrushes were manufactured?) A CLEAN finger can be used or a wet piece of cloth - and some fruits (e.g, apple) and vegetables (e.g, carrot) can help remove gunk from teeth. He had access to sea salt, which could help. If he "wiped" his teeth (after every meal and snack), he would be able to avoid plaque and tartar buildup. Toothpaste in and of itself is NOT necessary - it is added flavor to supposedly make brushing teeth taste better (e.g, bubblegum flavor for kids), be more pleasant (and thereby encourage people to brush longer), and/or add fluoride. Few, if any, people make it through adult life without a cavity, but there's no significant factor during his four years that would make him lose all of his teeth! The information given in the previous answers is also relevant.

KeyZOid

Answer: I wasn't told as a kid I had to brush my teeth every day. I brushed them only before going to the dentist or a special occasion, would sometimes go months without brushing. I only started brushing properly after puberty and I still have each and every single one of my teeth. They're a bit yellower than average, but not that bad. Even with smoking all my life and practically living of sugar, most people actually think I have pretty decent teeth and I never get comments about having bad teeth. They do tell me that if this had gone on for much longer, I would regret it and my gums have retracted a bit from all the tartar, but this makes me assume that, being healthy, you can probably go at least 10 years with poor mouth hygiene before your teeth actually start rotting.

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.