oldbaldyone

Question: When Gandalf said to Aragorn "Sauron fears you, Aragorn. He fears what you have become." Why does he say that? Why is Sauron afraid of Aragorn considering he's a Maia?

DFirst1

Answer: He means Sauron realises that Aragorn has become a powerful leader who puts his peoples' welfare above his own, and whose followers trust in, are loyal to, and will fight for him. Sauron rules through fear and intimidation and cares nothing about those he governs.

raywest

But why is Sauron afraid of Aragorn? That's the point of the question.

DFirst1

Answer: Sauron does not have the ring, and therefore is reliant on other (weaker) forces to fight for him. The forces he is fighting are scattered and weakened by various things, enough so that he is willing to proceed with his war without the ring. Aragorn becoming a leader of men would present a significant challenge to Sauron's plan to conquer Middle Earth. If Aragorn can unit the people of Middle Earth, they could stand against him as they had before (when he was defeated). In the end, his fears are justified, as Aragorn is largely responsible for there being anything left of Middle Earth to defend by the time Frodo finishes his journey.

oldbaldyone

Answer: Although many fans speculated it was because the Hulk fears Thanos after Thanos easily defeated him at the beginning of the film, the Russo brothers have since come out and said that it's because the Hulk feels that Banner only wants the Hulk around for helping him in fights, so his refusal to transform is a protest of sorts.

Phaneron

I think it's both.

Well it's not both. The Russo Brothers, who directed the film, have openly stated that the Hulk is not afraid of Thanos.

Phaneron

Answer: Because he doesn't like being used as a tool and he also is summoned in two places he's already destroyed: New York and Africa. Those are two places he's shown regret for the damage he's caused, which caused him to leave in the first place.

DetectiveGadget85

Answer: Cause Hulk is afraid of Thanos.

This is directly contradicted by the directors of the film, who have stated it's because he doesn't like that Banner only wants to use him for his strength.

While I understand that this is what the directors said, what we have in the finished product would never lead one to this conclusion. We first see Hulk fight Thanos and get completely over-matched. From then on, we only get glimpses of Hulk inside Banner, refusing to come out, and seemingly scared to do so. If they wished to convey inner strife between Banner and Hulk or anything else, that did a very poor job doing so.

oldbaldyone

Question: When the Jedi Padawan saves Bail Organa from Commander Appo, why did one of the clones say "Don't worry about him, let him go"?

DFirst1

Answer: The clones are basically brainwashed at this point, with their sole purpose being Order 66. Since Bail is not a Jedi and is not a direct threat to their mission at hand, they decided to let him go. If there had been a commander with them (more trained in tactics than these expendable soldiers), perhaps a better decision would have been made.

oldbaldyone

Answer: Because they are currently at work and can't abandon their mission to go after him.

My point is when they let the Senator lives, the clones will think that the senator will tell his allies such as the Jedi.

DFirst1

Well the vast majority of the senators are controlled by Palpatine anyways. The Clones don't really know who is or isn't under his influence. And it still would not be a wise move on even Palpatine's part to have his troops start killing Jedi and Senators as well. This would create too much going agtainst him in the public eye when he already has to sell that the Jedi, renown protectors of peace, and seen as super heroe, that are now the enemy and were attempting to over throw the government.

Quantom X

Question: When Mace reflects the force lightning back at Palpatine, did it reveal his true form, or make him that way as a result?

Answer: It was as a result of the lightning over his face.

lionhead

I do not believe Lucas has ever stated the cause, but it is most likely a combination of things. Palpatine was using a considerable amount of dark force power to hold Mace, and Mace was redirecting it back at him. He may have also allowed the disfigurement on purpose, to get more sympathy from Anakin. An out of left field idea is that this is how he has looked for a while, and Palpatine has been using the force to project a nicer image until it was no longer necessary.

oldbaldyone

There is no evidence in any of the Star Wars movies that dark force users change in appearance simply from using the dark side of the force, only scarred from facing hardships. His face got badly burned and scarred from the lightning redirected at him. Yes he did it on purpose to show his suffering to Anakin, but it didn't reveal his "true face" or anything. Darth Maul, Dooku nor Kylo Ren ever show any changes in appearance. Vader, Snoke and Sidious are all simply scarred.

lionhead

He claims to the Senate that the Jedi attacked him, and he has the scars to prove it.

That's true too.

lionhead

Why wasn't Mace scarred when he didn't have his lightsaber anymore and Palpatine used even more powerful force lightning?

Before he goes out of the window, you can briefly see he isn't when the lightning isn't in the way.

That's a good question. I'd say it wasn't as intense. Palpatine's exposure was quite intense and close to his face whilst Windu got it all over his body. As you know Luke was hit by lightning as well in ROTJ, but also more on his body and from a distance.

lionhead

My strongest idea is that Mace's lightsaber had a lot of impact with the force lightning towards Palpatine, being up-close to him. I also think he did do it to be disfigured in appearance and gain more sympathy from Anakin under the impression that he was "weak," along with the the force lightning itself.

I also think the scarring story to the senate was an afterthought at some point, but he intentionally allowed the disfigurement with the force lightning for more sympathy along with the pain of the lightning itself.

6th Feb 2019

Inception (2010)

Question: Just because Cobb knows how Mal's totem works, how does this mean her totem no longer works for her? Is it because Mal doesn't trust Cobb not to manipulate the spinning of her totem when they're in the same dream together? Or is it because somebody could manipulate somebody else's totem in a dream by accident just because they know how it works?

Answer: Cobb placed a thought in her head that her world isn't real. He intended for this thought to be applied to the limbo world they created, but instead it was applied to the real world. She simply cannot get the idea out of her head that she is still dreaming when in reality, she is awake. Nothing Cobb can say or do can convince her she is wrong, because the one safeguard they have (totems) has been broken because Cobb knows how it works. She simply thinks Cobb is the one with the problem, can't or refuses to wake up, and thinks Cobb is manipulating her totem to make her think she is awake when she is not. We never actually find out if she was wrong or right either :).

oldbaldyone

Answer: In order for a totem to work a person has to be 100% sure it wasn't manipulated by anyone else. If someone else knew what made the totem special you could never be completely sure someone else wasn't manipulating it. The spinning top itself is a bad choice for a totem anyway, since anyone who sees it being used should instantly tell what makes it special. Think about it like this: if you had to keep valuable information locked away in a safe and had to be sure that nobody could ever sneak into the safe, even someone you know and love, you would want a secure combination for that safe that nobody else could guess. If your combination was your birthday, how could you ever be 100% sure that nobody would ever guess the combination? Could you ever be 100% certain that nobody has looked in the safe?

BaconIsMyBFF

Question: What is the name of the Christmas Tree farm they went to to get their tree?

Answer: They didn't go to a Christmas tree farm. He took them to a huge forest to get one most likely because it would be easier to get one free then to pay for one.

They went to a tree farm. After running off the road and jumping the snowbank the wagon crashes through a sign that says "Trees." Clark then says, "We're here...and we made good time too." The humor is Clark forgoes a normal "farmed" tree for the "wild" monster he takes home.

False. They may have run over the tree farm sign, but they absolutely did not harvest a tree from the tree farm.

Answer: They never went to a tree farm. Even though there is a sign that says "Trees", there is no employee there to greet them or even discuss how much the tress cost. Plus, trees on a tree farm are usually smaller and are always lined up in a row. The trees seen by the Griswold's are extremely large and are scattered about like what would be seen in a regular forest which is where they went.

They are never shown in the "store" area of the tree farm, so you can't say that there is nobody working there. They jump the snowbank, it shows them gathering themselves in the car, and the next scene is in the wilderness. It's a small, rundown tree farm, but it is a tree farm business, with a plowed parking lot, garbage cans, lights, other customers, etc. These tree farms usually had pre-cut trees for purchase, but you could also walk out and cut down your own for the "experience" if you wanted to. As someone who has walked a couple miles to get a Christmas tree in December in Minnesota, I can say with absolute certainty that this is accurate.

oldbaldyone

Answer: It was a tree farm (the car literally flies through a sign that says "Christmas Trees"). There's a deleted scene after they crash and walk to find a tree. Realizing that they didn't have a saw to cut the tree, the family walks to the lot attendant (an odd man, reclining in a lawn chair, wearing a Santa jacket and hat) to ask to borrow a saw. There is a conversation between them where Clark is told that they don't supply saws, but he gave him a shovel. THIS explains how the tree got dug out of the ground. You can actually see a picture of this scene on an old DVD cover.

29th Jun 2018

Margin Call (2011)

Question: Emerson sells off his toxic assets in time, destroying his career. Why is he the only one that ruins his career?

Answer: He is just the only one shown doing so. Everyone in the "Fire Sale" room, is basically done for and they know it. the company will keep the best of the best (or those critical to the company's ability to function) and lay off the rest.

oldbaldyone

23rd Jul 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: Why does Batman say he is going after Rachel when Gordon asks him, then go to rescue Harvey Dent? Did the Joker switch the addresses on purpose? But then why didn't Batman show any surprise when he's expecting to find Rachel and finds Dent instead?

Answer: Yes, the Joker switched the addresses on purpose. Batman arguably shows brief surprised when finding Dent, but his expression's hard to read as we're mainly shown Dent's reaction. I'd argue it's intentionally left a bit vague as to whether Batman knew the Joker would lie and intentionally went to the "Rachel" address in order to rescue Dent, or else intented to rescue Rachel but by the time he realised the deception what else could he do?

Paul Brannon

Batman is running on pure emotion at that point, when he learns the locations. There is no way he is going to purposely let Rachel die, no matter what the consequences. This is essentially the love of his life, his soul mate. He is not going to just let her die to save Dent. Joker knew that by the time he gave up the addresses, he would have Batman not thinking. He won't stop and think "Maybe he switched the addresses."

oldbaldyone

15th Jan 2009

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: When the Joker burns his half of the money, why didn't any of his own henchmen stop/subdue him and/or pillage the money for themselves? Piles of cash that high (even if it only consists of $1.00 Bills) shows that the cash amount would be substantially high (a few hundred million to say the least).

Answer: Given the Joker's tendency towards extreme and somewhat random violence, killing abruptly and on a whim, it would be a brave henchman who tried to interfere with his plans. It's also established that many of the Joker's henchmen are recruited from among the mentally unstable inmates of Arkham Asylum, so money may well be not as great a priority to them as it would be to your average mob henchman. Finally, as you mention in your submission, the Joker specifically states that he's only burning half of the money that he took from Lau. That still leaves plenty of money to go around among his crew - if the boss wants to burn his half share, that's his business.

Tailkinker

Someone stated on another question, and I believe it to be accurate - Joker is burning his half of the money...which is the bottom half of the money stack. The top half is the Mobs money, but that is obviously going to burn too and that is why the other mob leader objects. Joker says he doesn't need money, cause the things he likes are cheap. Still, I don't think any of the joker's henchmen are going to be brave enough to try and stop him.

oldbaldyone

31st Jul 2012

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: How did the Joker convince Harvey in the hospital to become bad? I know he talked him into the whole creating chaos in the world thing but that scene confused me. Also, when did we find out that some of the cops were corrupt? Did they help tie up Rachel or something along those lines? Sorry I just got confused with those plot lines.

Answer: Harvey's basically lost it already, driven insane by the death of Rachel and his own injuries. The Joker basically just tells him that order, having rules, hasn't brought him anything but pain, that maybe he should let things get a bit more chaotic, go with random chance rather than regimented rules. In his deranged state, Harvey goes along with it. As for the cops, Harvey knows that both he and Rachel were being escorted home by members of Gordon's team, only to both wake up surrounded by bombs. Fairly obvious from that that there are some bad apples in the bunch.

Tailkinker

Harvey also worked for Internal Affairs. He states earlier in the film (and Gordon confirms) that he had investigated many people on Gordon's team. He knows many people on Gordon's team are dirty, but as the DA, he can't do much about it without proof.

oldbaldyone

Chosen answer: Q brought the Borg ship to the Alpha Quadrant. He used his powers to alert the Borg of the human existance. Once alerted it is the nature of the borg to persue assimilating other cultures.

Boobra

Q moved the ship to the delta quadrant, near a cube that was likely exploring for targets. The Borg ship never left the delta quadrant until Q gave the borg a reason to do so.

oldbaldyone

Answer: He brought the Borg to the Alpha Quadrant and showed them that it was full of worlds waiting to be assimilated. Guinan's homeworld was their first stop, and they assimilated everyone and took over the planet, leaving The Survivors of her race without a home. Q is ultimately responsible for that.

Captain Defenestrator

By the time Q takes the Enterprise to meet the Borg, Guinan already knew who they were and they had already destroyed her world. Therefore the above answer can not be right. I believe Guinan is much more than she appears, and her people have had encounters with the Q in the past. It is these interactions, that obviously were not pleasant, that fuels her distrust.

oldbaldyone

That's what the above answer is saying. Q brought the Borg to the Alpha Quadrant (not Earth) and the Borg destroyed Guinan's home world in the late 2200's, which is why she hates Q. Although she met Q in 2160 and they both saw each other as enemies right away.

Bishop73

26th Nov 2018

Wreck-It Ralph (2012)

Question: Though Vanellope did say to Ralph that glitches can't leave their game, what is the explanation behind it? Why can't glitches ever leave their game? She never explained it.

Answer: It is never explained, but the most likely answer is that glitches aren't written into the game intentionally, and only characters intentionally written can be transferred in and out of games.

oldbaldyone

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.