Best thriller movie questions of all time
Question: How does he fold the Monet in half to fit into the briefcase? Originally I thought he'd separated it from the wooden frame (ie. just a canvas), but when he takes it out back at his house he holds it up, and the wooden frame's still in one piece. Also, surely folding it in half would crack the paint, but despite the painting being twice the width of the briefcase (it fits snugly when the case is open), he then shuts the case down to a "normal" size. Any ideas?
Question: Is there a reason why when they're in the past they can't catch up with the present, but when they land a little into the future, the present can catch up with them? Are they not moving along on their own timeline? And if not, why are they not left in that moment and stand there to see the present come and go without taking them?
Question: Are the people present at the digging site when they're discussing new approaches to analyzing skeletons supposed to be paleontologists in dr. Grant's group? If so, why would they laugh at his musings of "how dinos learned how to fly"? And why would he have to explain it to them? Seemed to me like he is explaining very basic stuff to the people that would already know this (and of course, to the movie audience).
Question: In Angier's final performance Borden watches Angier's duplicate drown in the tank. Does the other Angier still reappear for the audience, and take a bow? They never explain this in the film. If he does take the bow, Borden would never have been accused of murder. If he doesn't take the bow, how does the duplicate know not to do so? The duplicate would have no idea that Borden was below stage.
Question: In the beginning of the film, where Dracula is talking to Viktor vonFrankenstein, he slams the chest shut and begins yelling at him. Before this, Viktor was looking over his shoulder and his attention immediately snaps back to Dracula, but he then turns once more to look behind him before staring at Dracula again, can someone explain why he looks over his shoulder a second time?
Question: When Bourne interrogates Nikki (under duress) in the underground station, Nikki insists that Bourne had never worked in Berlin, much less completed his first mission there. But it is established that Bourne had killed the Neskis in Berlin on what is described by Conklin as his first mission. Assuming Nikki has no reason to lie and that she would have accurate information about Bourne's activities, what might explain that issue?Dusibello
Join the mailing list
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.