Question: Toward the end of the movie, one of the gang members visits a barber shop and picks up a small bag of cut hair swept from the floor. I cannot remember any follow-up to this scene showing how or where this cut hair was used. I have asked several people who have seen the movie and no one seems to know what happened to this hair. Was there any follow-up to this scene or did I blink and miss the part that shows what they did with it?
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: What was the meaning of Larry meeting a woman that looked just like Amelia Earheart? The woman says that she isn't related to Amelia, so I'm confused about why it was done.
Answer: Larry was smitten with the wax figure of Amelia Earhart and when he sees the woman in the museum who looks like Amelia (and who was played by the same actress who portrayed Amelia), his infatuation and attraction were understandable.
Question: In the virtual reality bar, a man comes up to the operator with a request. On television I've seen this line as, "I want to kill my boss." But I remember the line being much less family friendly in the theater. Was this line changed since the move left theaters, or am I mistaken?
Answer: You are not mistaken. Movie scenes are filmed multiple times, often with small changes to the dialogue, actors reacting differently, and so on, to see which one works best. However, some more adult scenes that are appropriate for a movie theater or certain cable channels are also filmed with a more family-friendly version that can be edited into the film for later TV viewings. This eliminates having to "bleep" out offensive words, dubbing in non-offensive words, which sounds unnatural, or otherwise chopping up or cutting scenes entirely due to nudity. This method is less distracting and makes for better viewing. A good example is the TV series, "Sex and the City." The show actually filmed many racier scenes in two versions, one for the very adult-oriented HBO, and also tamer scenes that eliminated all nudity and offensive dialogue for later syndication to general cable channels while keeping the overall content intact.
Question: How did Will not recognise Viloa in her boy disguise? Even in disguise, you can clearly see it's her, and she didn't sound like a boy.
Answer: In real life, Viola, of course, would be recognized as a female in disguise. However, in literature, film, opera, etc, it often is necessary to employ what is known as a "suspension of disbelief." That is, the author expects the reader or audience to know something is impossible, unlikely, or completely unreal, but they have to accept a certain premise in order to allow the plot to unfold. We go along with the idea that no one realizes Viola is actually a woman, so that we can enjoy the overall story.
Question: What's up with Percy (the midget)? He was with Dr. Parnassus decades ago, when he won a bet with the devil to win the heart of a woman he craved, but he hasn't aged a day since. Or was that another midget and Dr. Parnassus has a tendency to pick midgets up to live in poverty by his side, and these two just happen to look identical? Both were obviously played by the same actor (Verne Troyer) and some make-up would easily disguise this, so I'm guessing this is intentional.
Answer: Percy's backstory is never touched upon, but he certainly appears to have been with Parnassus for a substantial period of time, longer than his visual age would suggest. Possibly he himself has done his own deal with the Devil, or some other power, to extend his life, but, if so, the film never elaborates on it.
Question: Instead of going under water and trying to poison Jaws in the shark cage, couldn't he have been harpooned with the poison from the boat just as easy?
Chosen answer: As mentioned in the movie, the posion was in the needle and the shark's hide was too tough for the needle to penetrate. Hooper had to go in the water so that he could get the needle into the shark's mouth, where the flesh was less tough.
Question: I know most movies have a disclaimer at the end of the credits saying that no animals were hurt during this movie, etc., so I have to ask this: did Percy stomp on a real mouse? I'm only asking because the after-death twitching that the mouse did was VERY realistic. (I've trapped many mice in my home so I know what I'm talking about - only I don't stomp on them.)
Answer: When we first see Mr. Jingles get stomped, that is an effects shot done by ILM. In the next shot when Percy removes his foot and you see the mouse twitch a little, that is a puppet. Director Frank Darabont confirms the effects shot on the commentary, and there's a feature on the Blu Ray that shows it in detail.
Question: First question: Who would win, theoretically, Superman or Hulk, in a fight? Second: When Eric Bana changes into the Hulk, you don't see the emphasis on the eyes changing first as you saw in the TV series The Incredible Hulk. Why was this?
Answer: 1. Theoretically, the Hulk would be able to win. Superman draws his power from the sun and the more energy he expends from things such as using heat vision or fighting, will weaken him. The Hulk's power comes from his own rage. Even though the Hulk can lift 100 tons, the angrier he becomes the stronger he gets making him powerful enough to eventually lift anything heavier than 100 tons. If Superman were to fight the Hulk, he would slowly wear himself out but the Hulk would keep on fighting. 2. The only time Bruce's eyes are seen changing are at the end of the movie when some South American militia are stealing medical supplies. After Bruce tells the leader of the group that he just made Bruce angry, Bruce's eyes turn green.
Chosen answer: 1.) Superman, especially if he decided to use tactics like stranding the Hulk in space. 2.) Artistic licence.
Question: Why are Justin Hammer's hands dirty when he is sitting with Vanko in the hangar, after he busted him out of prison?
Chosen answer: It is stated in the commentary that Sam Rockwell wanted his character to have a spray tan, making his hands an orange color.
Question: When Clint gets inside the firefox in the hangar and starts it up, the guards don't think to shoot out the tires while it's in the hangar?
Chosen answer: There was just an explosion in the hangar and in the resulting confusion none of them were sure why it was moving. To get it away from the fire is not unreasonable. Also, the Soviet military is not big on showing initiative. Unless told to disable it, none of the guards would risk severe punishment for damaging a valuable aircraft.
Question: Didn't Gordon Gekko only have a son in Wall Street, not a daughter, as he does here in Wall Street Never Sleeps?
Answer: Gordon did talk about his son (who was then about 3-years-old) to Bud Fox in Wall Street, but that does not mean he only had one kid. He may have had another child that wasn't mentioned. It's also possible that Gekko's wife was pregnant at the time he was indicted.
Question: Was Beetlejuice attracted to Lydia?
Answer: Beetlejuice wanted to marry Lydia because that would allow him freedom from the ghost world. Any physical attraction would be secondary to that.
Question: When Harry and Hermione are rescuing Sirius, Hermione blasts open the door using a different spell than the one she used in The Philosopher's Stone to open the door to where Fluffy was. I can understand that the reason the spell would be stronger on Sirius's cell is so he can't escape and it's more secure. But the Philosopher's Stone had to be secured well, so why was the lock so easy to unlock?
Answer: It's never stated that one spell is stronger than the other. There may be different spells that achieve similar results, and Hermione simply chose one over the other. Therefore, it should not be assumed that one lock was easier to open than the other. Also, the "bombarda" spell was never mentioned in the books. It was invented by the filmmakers for the movie, probably because it sounded stronger and was more descriptive (as in to bombard).
Question: Anne tried to get her brother to impregnate her so Henry wouldn't know about her miscarriage, but wouldn't this have obviously not worked? She mentioned that Henry already seemed to notice that her pregnancy wasn't showing. Even if she and George did sleep together and she became pregnant, she wouldn't start showing for another four months or so. By then, wouldn't Henry and everyone else expect her to look eight or nine months pregnant?
Answer: Of course they probably would have noticed, but Anne was desperate, thinking irrationally, and she would have done anything to regain Henry's favor and remain queen. She probably believed that if she became pregnant, it would be assumed that it must be the king's child. And if she could entice the king back into her bed, she could claim her earlier condition was a false pregnancy, but that she was now carrying the king's child.
Question: When Vesper is kidnapped by Le Chiffre, Bond suspects Mathis betrayed him, and Le Chiffre even confirms it. But then it is revealed the traitor is actually Vesper. So why would Le Chiffre tell Bond Mathis was his "friend"? Or for that matter, why did Vesper get out of the casino (only to get kidnapped), if Mathis apparently never text messaged her saying he "needed her"?
Answer: Le Chiffre needs Bond to believe that Vesper is innocent, so that he can use her as leverage during the torture scene. If Bond knew that she was actually a traitor, that leverage would be gone, so he tells him that Mathis sold him out instead. Having failed to win the poker tournament, Le Chiffre's only remaining option to get the money back is to take it from Bond, so he sent the text telling Vesper to leave the casino so that he can stage her kidnapping, putting his plan into motion.
Answer: I thought she was getting the money for ransom for her old boyfriend which it spoke about in the next movie.
Question: It's been stated that Elsa and Donovan knew how to get through the path to the Grail because Henry was talking about the way as he lay dying. But I'm still confused about when they get across the cliff. Indy threw some sand and stones across the path he 'believed' was there, but would they still be sitting there, basically in mid air for the bad guys to get across? Did they truly believe in the Grail as much as Indy and Henry did and so could walk across the non-existant path?
Answer: The bridge was actually camouflaged into rock looking as if it was invisible (you can see this in movie).
Of course, any "camouflage" would only work from one perspective (from the doorway at one end of the bridge). As soon as Indy took a step out onto the bridge, the "camouflage" would be revealed, as it would no longer be aligned to the background from his new perspective. Viewed from the opposite end of the bridge, the "camouflage" wouldn't work at all and the bridge would be perfectly visible.
Not necessarily. They could have fashioned the stonework so it rendered the bridge invisible from both directions.
Chosen answer: The way I see it, the bridge is there, but is invisible. The true test is to step out into mid-air when you don't know there's a bridge there, trusting in God to rescue you. Indy passed this test, then threw the stones to see whether it really was a bridge there all along, or if it was a matter of faith in the moment you step out (or just to mark his way back). The pebbles stayed, proving the bridge was physical and real, only invisible. When Ilsa and Donovan came along, they could see the pebbles in mid-air, and figured out this as well. Originally, you would have to believe and trust in God to step on to the bridge, but Indy effectively "disarms" this trap by proving that there is a way to cross safely for anyone.
As stated previously, the bridge is not invisible. It is simply camouflaged so that it's not visible from the position Indy had to stand. This is demonstrated in the film when the camera angle changes and shows that the reason Indy can't see it is the marbling of the stone lines up perfectly from one angle. He throws the pebbles onto it once he's across to make it easier for him to see when he returns.
But the camouflage is only going to work from one direction (the approach). Going in the opposite direction (the retreat), the bridge would stand out like a sore thumb, pebbles or not.
However, in the film, Indy turns around and throws the pebbles on the bridge, which is not visible until the pebbles are there.
Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps the original builders altered the vertical stone walls in the "coming back" direction so that the bridge blended from this reverse perspective as well.
Okay, he didn't actually mean invisible, more like "invisible from a certain perspective"
Question: Is there any technology featured in Star Trek Voyager, or other Star Trek series for that part, that seemed futuristic in the late 20th century, but are now reality?
Answer: If you include the original Star Trek series (1966) then there are several. The communicators used in the original series were before (and said to inspire) mobile phones. We currently do have teleportation technology but it currently only works on things the size of a few molecules. A "Cloaking device" also exists; it's a fabric that bends light through it, though it currently only works in infra-red. The Hypospray is real and was patented in 1960 - six years before the original series aired - it's actually called the Jet Injector. Faster Than Light travel is still a few decades off, but there are several real-world theories that look promising, including one that is remarkably similar to the method used in the Star Trek Universe called the Alcubeierre Drive that involves manipulating spacetime ahead and behind the ship and the ship "riding" it. Medical techniques and technologies have also advanced considerably; prosthetics particularity and we routinely have robots performing surgeries where absolute precision is needed. The "Shield" used in the series have a few primitive versions around. The Phasers used in the series are used but are not very powerful (nor will they ever be as powerful as the Star Trek version the laws of physics gets in the way) but rail-guns (using magnets to spin then propel a projectile) and particle accelerators like the Large Hadron Collider have been around for a while. The Replicator would require a nuclear fusion reactor and a nuclear fission reactor in something the size of a large oven and the Holo-deck wouldn't work at all based on our current understanding of physics so those are both still science fiction at the moment, but who knows!
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: The bag of hair from the barbershop was used to throw off the police when they search the getaway car later. In other words they will find all the scattered hair and have the wrong DNA. This is what they do after the second heist. They never used one at the end since the cops already knew who they were.
Gavin Jackson