Question: Was Paul Giamatti's lazy eye achieved through practical means or CGI? If it was practical, how exactly did they do it?
Question: When Richard accidentally pulls a coin out of his coat pocket, he sees that it's a penny and he is sent back to his own time. After being weakened upon his trip back to the future, why, after what was likely several days to get his full strength back, wasn't he able to return to the past? His mentor told him returning to his own time would leave him weakened but, given enough time to get it back, he could have gone back to the past again.
Answer: He was no longer able to put everything out of his mind, which was a requirement to successfully time-travel. He was distraught and unable to focus enough mentally. He stopped eating, and as time went on he became weaker and weaker.
Question: Why would Henry do so many evil things to his own family?
Answer: Henry apparently has what is called a "conduct disorder" - the term used for kids below the age of 18 engaging in what would be (and most likely will become) a diagnosis of sociopathy/psychopathy (antisocial personality disorder) when he becomes an adult. He is "evil", highly manipulative, self-centered, without remorse or other true feelings, and probably incapable of forming loving or long-term attachments. Many sociopaths are believed to have above average intelligence and make good imposters, capable of fooling others because they come across as "charming."
Answer: Because he's nuts!
Question: (Spoiler warning) I didn't really understand why the wildfire was put into the story. I know that fires happen in California often and that the scene at the end of the movie looks creepy with all of the smoke and fires in the background, but was there supposed to be any other special meaning or symbolism?
Answer: As far as symbolism, from a film student's perspective (mine), it's like destruction or division, two common themes in the film. The two characters are split in values and the fire is raging between them. As the fire gets closer to the houses, it increases in intensity, as does the fighting between neighbors. I think in this film, fire was used not only as a plot device, but a metaphor for the story as well.
Question: The final scene in the car at the red light in front of the Police station. They are discussing escaping to Mexico for the rest of their lives. They hold each other. The car doesn't move. Do they give themselves up to the police? Is that what the writer is implying?
Answer: Although Connie wanted them to go to Mexico and assume new identities, it is implied that Edward, who initially goes along with that idea, will likely turn himself into the police. However, there's no definitive ending given, so the audience is left to interpret the outcome.
An alternative ending was shot in which Edward says goodbye to Connie in the car and walks into the police station. The director discusses this on the commentary track. The alternate ending is on the DVD.
Answer: Connie wants to say she is guilty and asks her husband to forgive her.
Answer: I think that they had already decided that Edward would turn himself in after the school event. That's why the were so sad when they danced and why they engaged in an escape fantasy conversation at the red light. They knew that the police would soon figure it out and it was only a matter of time before Edward would be arrested. Rather than live in fear, they decided that it would be better for Edward to turn himself in. That's my answer but I have two other questions that I can not answer. 1. WHY did she do it? 2. How long did the affair last? I can't figure out the season but m y guess is between fall and the end of November but I can't be sure because the seasons don't seem to be correct. Is it sunny/warm enough to plant a garden in November in NY? I don't think so.
"Why did she do it?" I think that is the question she asked herself once she realised that she had made a terrible choice. Initially, it made her feel alive and young and excited. She had everything, but she began to feel invisible. Ultimately, her son will suffer the impact of her choice, and she will never have peace again.
Question: Is Callahan holding the binoculars upside down when he is peering down on the apartments looking for Scorpio? He is on the rooftop with the Jesus Saves Sign. They look upside down to me. (00:38:39)
Answer: Yes the binoculars are upside down.
Question: Why did the spitfire pilot land on the beach at the end of the movie facing certain internment when he could have ditched and be taken back to Blighty?
Answer: After running out of fuel, he kept his craft aloft as long as he could so he could shoot down the enemy plane. He then landed when and where he safely could, which was on the beach but in enemy territory. Ditching a plane in water is dangerous and would have meant far less chance of survival.
Question: Since Loki is the son of Laufey the Frost Giant, why doesn't he look like one?
Answer: When initially found by Odin, he does. Something then acts on him that causes him to mimic Odin's more human appearance, which he then keeps until his exposure to the frost giants during the events of the film, which tips him off to his true nature. Whether this was caused by some magic inherent in Loki even as a baby or whether Odin did something to disguise the child's true origin is unrevealed.
Question: During jury selection, Kevin decides to have one of the jury dismissed, I believe, because of the shoes the jury member wore. What exactly do the guy's shoes have to do with anything?
Answer: The shoes showed him this man polishes them every day, also his clothes are custom made. That all means the look he has of a black thug is deceiving, instead he's a cautious, proud person they can't use in the jury. Just to add, Kevin knows all this because the devil (his father, spoiler alert) is giving him the talent to do it, not a logical explanation can be given why he dismisses these people.
Question: Was the double cross with the chainsaw scene a set up by F.Murray Abraham? Or was it a genuine deal and did he just suspect it may be dangerous, and sent Tony because he annoyed him?
Answer: It's unlikely a set up. Tony is supplied with money and guns to defend himself. If this was a setup, the toad would've had more details. He would've known Tony had backup with guns and they would've waited to ambush them. Also makes no sense for Omar to put himself at risk without a legitimate opportunity to make cash. Frank knew about the deal as he supplied the buy money. Omar seemed loyal to Frank. Why would he send some low level thugs to be set up losing his boss' money in the process? All he would do is lose trust and be suspected.
Omar was an informant. He wasn't loyal to anyone. Omar's driver is the one that suggested to send Tony to the Colombians. And I think Omar knew the Colombians were shady, and that's why he sent Tony. It was, in a sense, a setup.
Chosen answer: While it is never really mentioned I think it is a safe bet that it was a double cross. F. Murray Abraham was seen later in the film to be an informant and killed because of it.
It wasn't a double cross, as it was the driver of the car that suggested/whispered it to Omar the first time Omar met Tony and Manny outside the restaurant they were working at.
Question: Why didn't the lady who was originally with Mid-Size Sedan decay quicker, and we were able to see her body intact when she hit young Trent in the water?
Answer: Because she was 'freshly' dead when she hit Trent.
Question: At the very end when they show the sun setting over the hill, you can see something/someone moving across the screen, just under the ground. Is this done to symbolize something, or was it a sort of camera problem?
Answer: According to Ted Neeley and Norman Jewison on the DVD commentary, the shepherd walking across the frame in the final shot of the film was never intended to be there, and just happened across the shot as they were filming. Because of the significance of a shepherd in the teachings of Christ, Jewison and the crew were struck profoundly by the timing of this shepherd crossing the field, and kept the shot. They got a perfect sunset, as well as a subtle depiction of the resurrection.
Question: Through most of the film Malcolm is dead. All the other ghosts still have scars from how they died but why doesn't Malcolm have his mark which should be a bullet wound?
Answer: Because as Cole tells us in the middle of the movie, "They only see what they want to see." The movie shows us Malcolm as he perceives himself. He can't actually put on an overcoat, or change clothes. He sees what he expects to see. He goes outside in the cold to visit Cole, so he sees himself wearing an overcoat. He doesn't know he is dead - he doesn't see his wound. To preserve this misdirection throughout the movie, we are shown Malcolm as he sees himself.
Actually, we do see Malcolm and Cole sees him. The entry wound in his abdomen is tiny, and the large, obvious exit wound is on Malcolm's back, which we never see.
Question: What did the term, "tying your shoe" mean?
Chosen answer: It means you need to avoid getting caught in the crossfire. Originally, terms like "tying your shoe" or "pulling your socks up" meant ducking to avoid flying bullets. In a more generic sense though, it needn't be about gun violence per se. Just that you don't want to be on the receiving end of violence meant for someone else. In the movie, this was a way of telling Edward that if he could not defuse the situation, then others would be forced to harm the professor. Here, they weren't actually going to put Edward in harm's way. But if he failed to change the professor, then violence against the professor was forthcoming.
Question: After the robbery and once the dust settled (business was back-to-normal at the bank, etc.) why did the bank president not immediately go to open the safety deposit box and see what happened to its contents? He knew it was the target of the robbery. Reason would dictate that one of the first things he would have done would be to open the box and see what was there... Not leave it to the NYPD to open it and discover a mostly empty box except for the big ring, chewing gum and note.
Answer: The aforementioned answer fails to keep in mind he is the owner of the bank and could've have done this hours before the bank was opened and or hours after the bank was opened. Dalton spent 3 days behind the wall. Mr Case had a special fixer, and she had the mayor in her pocket. It is a reasonable assumption that a billionaire like Aruthur Case would be able to have the contents of his safety deposit box removed with little to no problem. One way is "yes Mr. Mayor I will be giving you a blank check for your reelection campaign." The issue is this was a major plot hole that almost ruined a otherwise great and well thought out movie.
Answer: Arthur Case did not want anyone to know about the safe deposit box or what was in it. In fact, the box's number had been left off the bank records. The police did not immediately know if anything had been stolen during the robbery. Case going to the bank to check on the box, would only have drawn attention to it. The contents, the diamonds, were a link to Case's criminal Nazi past that he wanted kept hidden. It was only by chance that Detective Frazier discovered the box and the clues that had been left inside it by Dalton Russell.
Question: After they search Leary's hotel room, they find a piece of paper that says "SW SKELLUM LA." We learn that the SW stands for Southwest (a bank he was using) and SKELLUM is a phone number. What does the LA mean?
Chosen answer: LA is short for Los Angeles, which refers to the city Leary attempts to assassinate the president in.
Question: Was the ghostwriter murdered? Why? The book had already been published, and he only discovered the truth about Ruth minutes before, so who would have wanted him dead?
Answer: Who would want him dead? Ruth, for one, as well as Professor Emmett (her CIA recruiter) and others involved in the conspiracy. Yes, the book had been published, but the secret message only comes across if one is in possession of all the knowledge that the writer had acquired, which the casual reader would not have. And minutes is plenty of time for Ruth, Emmett, or anyone else to make a phone call and arrange the hit.
The published book was a rewrite and would not have the secret message in the chapter beginnings.
The published book was a rewrite of the original manuscript. He gives her the original manuscript that he was working off, not a final draft.
Makes no sense, he was run down 2 minutes after she read it.
We know the beginning of the book was rewritten as he didn't like it. Almost certainly, the clue is not in the published version of the book. Ruth was shocked to read the note and is delivering her speech so is unlikely to be complicit in the murder of the Ghostwriter. The ending suggests that Ruth, too, is little more than a pawn in the whole conspiracy.
Answer: The best information I read was from an online "People" magazine article. Actor Paul Giamatti says he is sworn to secrecy on how the lazy eye effect was achieved, other than to say it was "movie magic." I hope someone finds additional information and shares it here, as I'd like to know more.
raywest ★
According to a YouTube video from WhatCulture that I watched today, Giamatti recently revealed on the Howard Stern Show that he wore a big soft contact lens, which practically blinded him in that eye.
Phaneron ★