Questions about cinema and rental titles

Black Widow picture

Question: At the end, General Ross' convoy is nearly to Natasha, intent on arresting her...then we cut to two weeks later, and she's about to embark on a prison breakout. Are we just meant to assume she escaped...somehow? Fought off everyone who was in those about 20 SUVs? Ran for it and somehow got away?

Jon Sandys Premium member

Chosen answer: It was done intentionally that way by the director to be left up to the viewer's imagination. Cate Shortland said "that was intentional, because we wanted to leave the question of how she would get away, rather than allow the audience to get exhausted by another fight." Of course, it's also possible that future films or TV shows will discuss/show her escape. Perhaps she negotiated her way out with information on the Red Dust.

Bishop73

I don't see why she didn't just leave with everyone else. There was no reason for her to stand there and wait. She could have flown off, as well. The convoy was cars, not planes.

Natasha activated her tracker which led Ross to her. The plan was to have Ross and his men arrest Dreykov, but basically things went sideways. Natasha stayed behind to hold Ross and his men off from pursuing the Widows. Presumably, had she left with them, Ross would still be able to track her and everyone would be in danger of being captured.

Bishop73

Until it is explained by one of those future shows, it really can be thought of as a plot hole. The interview, after the quoted bit, goes like this; "We wanted to leave you guys on a high with the question of how did she use her ingenuity? Because she did. And it was probably, I would say, she bargained her way out of that situation. But I don't know." So...the director says she does not know how the hell did she -really - escape that situation, just that she must have done something clever. Hilarious.

Sammo Premium member

Leaving the how unanswered isn't a plot hole, even if writers or directors don't know the how. At best, it's an unexplained Deus ex machina. A plot hole is something that contradicts what's been established for the sake of the plot, but here, nothing was established.

Bishop73

I wouldn't say it's a DEM. Wikipedia; "Deus ex machina is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence."There is no occurrence here. Nothing that we (nor the director.) know of intervened between the two scenes.On the other hand,"Plot hole is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot." Natasha's situation is established and then ignored.

Sammo Premium member

Which is why I said it was "unknown." An unknown occurrence happened that resolved the situation that wasn't illogical. However, I wouldn't correct you if you submitted a plot hole mistake, but others might since something not being explained isn't a plot hole.

Bishop73

Yes, sorry, I was splitting hairs as usual; I don't think a DEM can be "unexplained" in the sense of "unknown" because its whole point is that it is the narrative device that gives the story its twist; as absurd as it is (like a literal God appearing out of nowhere fixing things), it must be "something." Here there's nothing; we only have a statement of the director, movie-wise it's not even particularly implied that the resolution was peaceful, since Nat simply says she'll hold them off.

Sammo Premium member

More Black Widow questions

Answer: The movie was completely finished over a year ago. It was the pandemic that delayed it. So it was the finished product that was released.

More Free Guy questions
Ghostbusters: Afterlife picture

Question: When Phoebe is on the phone with Ray, he mentions that the Ghostbusters fire house is now a Starbucks. In the post-credits scene, we see that Winston has purchased the fire house so the Ghostbusters can get back to business, but the fire house looks like it has been abandoned for several years and no other company ever took it over. Did I miss something here?

Phaneron Premium member

Answer: Ray was probably being sarcastic, and was simply making a general comment about gentrification in the area.

Answer: It's been 40 years since the Ghostbusters disbanded, Ray mostly likely passed by the old place and saw a Starbucks there. It has since shut down.

More Ghostbusters: Afterlife questions
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone picture

Question: I get that the DADA role is cursed because of Voldemort being denied the role when he applied for it at Hogwarts, but why does Dumbledore not let Snape take the role like he's wanted to every year? I thought Snape was a double agent (he spies on the Death Eaters and Voldemort for Dumbledore, and he pretends to be on Voldemort's side too), so unless Voldemort decides that he wants to get rid of him for being in the role, he's okay to take it on provided he's given it, and yet every year, Dumbledore turns down his application. Is it because Snape's too involved in Voldemort's side of things or some other reason? I hope I explained it well.

Heather Benton Premium member

Chosen answer: There are several reasons. First, the position is cursed, so there is little reason to give Snape the job when he will not last any longer than all the previous instructors. If Snape did become the DADA instructor, something could happen to him that could result in his being harmed, having to leave Hogwarts, or be otherwise incapacitated in some way; that would render him useless to Dumbledore as a double agent. Also, Dumbledore trusts Snape, but putting him in an environment where he is teaching about dark magic on a daily basis would be too tempting and emotionally compromising to someone who had been so easily seduced by the dark side. He could possibly relapse. It would be like having a recovering alcoholic work as a bartender. Of course, he does eventually become the DADA instructor, and lasted no longer than his predecessors.

raywest Premium member

In the movies it is never mentioned that DADA role was cursed by Voldemort.

More Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone questions
House of Gucci picture

Question: Did the Guccis ever own a Klimt painting, were they not in the Netherlands until 1998? Were they not Nazi plunder?

More House of Gucci questions
Old picture

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?

More Old questions

Answer: No, they are part of the multiverse. The MCU is just one of those universes within the multiverse.

lionhead

More Spider-Man: No Way Home questions
The Suicide Squad picture

Question: In the opening scene, after the bird is hit; did anyone else think the blood on the ball makes a crude Bat signal?

Bishop73

Answer: Yes, it did.

More The Suicide Squad questions
Venom: Let There Be Carnage picture

Question: What exactly happens to a host's body once the symbiote emerges? At the end of Venom, when Venom is threatening the robber, he partially opens his face, and we see Eddie's face. In this movie, when Cletus/Carnage is escaping from prison, guards start shooting at Carnage who then splits open his entire midsection but Cletus is nowhere to be seen.

Answer: The host and symbiote merge fully. So the symbiote can totally disappear into the host and the host can totally disappear into the symbiote. They can also split again, or partially, at will. It just depends on who gets to be the active version at that time.

lionhead

I am not up to speed with recent Marvel canon, but in the comics it's never been that way? The symbiote can surely slink inside the host (especially Carnage in Kasady's blood), but the humans can't turn into shapeless goo. Comics aside, that sequence from the movie is mind-boggling; I can sorta explain it thinking the symbiote just tore Kasady's torso in half and then reattached it instantly (in other parts of the movie Eddie gets basically stabbed with what would be lethal wounds).

Sammo Premium member

Actually, in the comics it's long been established that Carnage's healing factor is Deadpool-levels of broken. There are numerous moments where Carnage is impaled, crushed, decapitated, has his neck twisted, even grenades blowing up in his jaws and straight up nailed by military missiles... AND HE'S JUST FINE AND WALKS IT OFF LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED. He absolutely could casually tear himself open with no drawback whatsoever.

"Could" tear himself open, does he usually?"Can turn into shapeless goo", has he? One thing is to regenerate the torso, another thing is to manipulate your body parting before the bullets reach you.I don't really see that from the example posted, but my curiosity aside, given we're talking about the movie anyway, I really don't see Kasady depicted as a shapeshifter, and him and the symbiote in this movie are entirely separated at the end (pending a sequel of course).

Sammo Premium member

Also, for Carnage specifically, the human absolutely can turn into shapeless goo. Makes sense, actually, given that the symbiote canonically merged into Kasady's own cells and microscopic DNA, something even Venom and its hosts can't replicate https://2.bp.blogspot.com/9DjIg5e1HwLrwx-lhLjXxlUqzici7xajVTQZMhEHW8a0X9BqdRFE4U6eaBuPKXJgb8zSxkTytpvh=s1600 so the "symbiote-opening-up-the-host-body-with-holes" being a Carnage specific thing isn't surprising at all, in fact, given it's the same body.

More Venom: Let There Be Carnage questions

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.