raywest

Question: Why did Ollivander pause for a moment after getting the third wand for Harry to try?

Answer: Because Ollivander, like everyone, knew about the connection between Harry and Voldemort. He had a sudden thought that the "brother" to Voldemort's wand might be destined to be Harry's wand. The two wands shared the same core material (a phoenix feather supplied by Fawkes). The wand chooses the wizard.

raywest

2nd Sep 2022

Passengers (2016)

Question: Laurence Fishburne is obviously a person who would be familiar with the workings of the entire spacecraft. Wouldn't he have known that the Autodoc had the capability of putting a person back into hibernation? Why wouldn't he have informed Aurora of this after being told that she was purposely awakened?

Answer: I suspect he was too busy with fixing the ship and his own health.

lionhead

He's a technician, not a medical person, and likely had no idea if the autodoc could safely keep someone in suspended animation for long periods. It is also possible he may not have known it even had this particular function.

raywest

You can't call a service rep if equipment on a spacecraft, billions of miles from Earth, has a problem. An onboard technician would have to be highly trained on every system on the ship. He wouldn't necessarily have medical training, but would have to have been trained on all the systems on something as important as the Autodoc. It was the only one on board.

It may be the only Autodoc, but there would be many highly-trained technicians on board to tend to the ship, each specialized to work in particular areas on certain types of equipment.

raywest

28th Aug 2022

Road To Perdition (2002)

Question: What house was Michael going to at the end?

Answer: According to the plot summary on Wikipedia, Michael (narrating) says he returned to the farm because it was where he grew up.

raywest

28th Aug 2022

General questions

When any movies are shown on television, why are non offensive lines dubbed with another line? Ex. In the movie *batteries not included, Carlos says to Frank, "You kill my head, man." When the movie appeared on TV, the line was changed to, You make me sick, man."

Answer: Agree with the other answer, but specifically to your example, phrases like, "You kill my head, man," while inoffensive regarding sex or profanity, could be considered problematic due to constant mass shootings and a concern about inciting violence. In other cases, some dialogue may be changed because it is now recognized as being socially and culturally offensive to women, disabled people, certain ethnic groups, and others.

raywest

Answer: It's often done so the movie can air on television and be presented to younger audiences. Ex. In the 1984 Ghostbusters film, Bill Murray says, "I'll sue your ass for wrongful prosecution," but the first time I saw it on TV (in the 80's) the line was now, "I'll sue your funny face for wrongful prosecution."

And to make the words more easily understood - "You kill my head, man" may have ambiguous meaning, but "You make me sick, man" is more straightforward.

KeyZOid

Answer: To add the answers, generally movie studios provided edited films for TV airing. This not only includes dubbing lines that may be offensive, but deleting inappropriate scenes, editing for time, and formatting. Sometimes studios will add scenes if too many scenes were deleted to add time. The example you gave is from a 1987 film where standards are different from today. But the network or studio isn't going to re-release a newly edited version for today's audience. And it's unlikely the network would be able to play the original film without any edits.

Bishop73

28th Aug 2022

General questions

I don't know what year this movie was made but I only seem to remember the ending of the movie. I remember a family staying at a house in the country, and they are all woken up one night and taken to a room downstairs. I remember a man comes in and some others follow. Then they take out some guns, and they all start shooting at the family members. I remember there was lots of blood in the scene as well especially on the wall behind them. The movie ends after but I want to know what this was from.

Answer: It was from Nicholas and Alexandra I looked it up and was able to watch the scene on YouTube. I remember the father carrying the boy because he had something wrong with one of his legs.

Answer: That is the story of Anastasia. The last Royal family to rule Russia, when the revolution came they ran hoping to reach a friendly country to ask for asylum. They were betrayed and massacred. Years later, a young girl came forward claiming to be the long-lost daughter who survived.

Answer: This is probably the 1971 movie, "Nicholas and Alexandra" about the final days of the royal Romanov family during the Russian Revolution. As pointed out, there's been a number of other films and documentaries about Czar Nicholas II (the last Russian emperor), his wife, Czarina Alexandra, and their five children who were murdered by the Bolsheviks in 1918. If that's not it, this Wikipedia page might help you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_about_the_Romanovs.

raywest

Answer: This is what happened to the Russian Tsar, Nicholas II and his family in real life. There have been several films and series about him with this scene. For example, "The Romanovs: An Imperial Family" (2000) or "The Last Czars" (2019).

Bishop73

28th Aug 2022

General questions

I remember this moment from an '80s or '90s TV show. A woman tells another woman "Early is on time, on time is late, and late is unheard of." Then she walks away. I seem to remember that one or both women were black. Does anyone know what show it was?

Answer: This was a line of dialogue in the TV series, The Blacklist, S5, Ep. 6, titled "The Travel Agency," though that does not quite fit your timeline. The line originates from a phrase in a novel by Eric Jerome Dickey, and it may also have been used in other movies or TV shows.

raywest

Question: In the last scene a neighbor gets Terri settled on the couch and goes to leave. Why was there not a wheelchair or crutches available for Teri's use once the woman left?

Answer: As Terry is paralyzed, crutches would be useless. She would also be unable to get into a wheelchair by herself. The real reason is that this is a rather flimsy plot device. When Cary Grant arrives and sees Terrie on the couch, he is unaware of her condition. The whole point of the scene is that he is resentful and hurt because he mistakenly believed she rejected him six months earlier by not showing up at the Empire State Building. She hid her condition, not wanting his pity or for him to feel obligated to be with her. If a wheelchair was visible, he would have immediately known the truth, and that would have spoiled the way he finds out, his reaction to it, and the overly-sentimental ending.

raywest

Answer: They may have quit because they experienced lingering fear and anxiety after eating the soup, regardless of whether they remembered anything. As everyone was only limited to one bowl of the soup, Vink fired anyone he caught trying to have more. Some employees may have quit out of frustration over the restriction. It also serves the plot to have different characters experiencing the effects of eating the soup.

raywest

23rd Aug 2022

Dirty Dancing (1987)

Question: When Johnny takes Baby up to do the final dance, Baby's dad is obviously pretty angry about it and tries to stop him. However, after the dance all is forgiven? All just from the magic of their beautiful dancing?

Answer: It would be improper to cause a scene, plus Robbie admitted to getting Penny pregnant and insulting her, especially it's what made get an abortion and medical complications.

Answer: While he probably was still angry with Johnny for sleeping with Baby, he can see how hard she must have worked to dance so well. Anger is often hard to release. Being a loving father, he is proud of Baby "in the moment" and was more disappointed with her than mad. He likely also grudgingly admires Johnny for having the courage to stand up for her.

raywest

18th Aug 2022

She-Hulk (2022)

A Normal Amount of Rage - S1-E1

Question: When talking about "geniuses in the family" at the start, Bruce says "there's also Ched", at least according to the subtitles. Is this another Banner cousin with Marvel ties, or just a random throwaway line?

Jon Sandys

Answer: This is answered in the second episode, where we meet Ched who's clearly not a genius. Given this first episode was originally written as the penultimate one of the series, and tweaked as the premiere later, it makes more sense why that line might be a throwaway by Bruce, given if it was episode 8 as intended the audience would already have met Ched and understand how he's not being remotely serious.

Chosen answer: According to Marvel Cinematic Universe, Ched is a relative of Bruce Banner and Jennifer Walters. There is a character profile but with no additional information provided yet, nor is there much info online available elsewhere. This appears to be a new character that has yet to appear.

raywest

Question: Why would the Sorting Hat want to put Harry into Slytherin? Although Harry has a few traits of a Slytherin, he doesn't have the other traits such as pride, ambition and self-preservation.

Answer: Spoiler alert: Harry has a piece of Voldemort's soul in himself which entered through the scar. The sorting hat was aware of that soul part when going through Harry's mind and Voldemort is typical Slytherin material, so the sorting hat put that into his consideration.

lionhead

Answer: I TOTALLY agree with lionhead's excellent answer, but dispute the assertions in the question that Harry lacked ambition, pride, or a sense of self-preservation. He would not otherwise have survived Voldemort and the Death Eaters. Apart from Voldemort's soul shard embedded within him, Harry was also naturally resourceful, determined, clever, achievement-oriented, and had a "certain disregard for rules." These were Slytherin traits which many exploited for Dark purposes, though not all Slytherins were evil.

raywest

Answer: According to Internet sources, Ultimate Spider-Man was cancelled after three seasons to make room for the new series, Marvel's Spider-Man.

raywest

11th Aug 2022

The Shadow (1994)

Answer: In the comics he was a tall, thin man with a large hook nose, sort of like "Sherlock Holmes." When the movie was cast, they thought of altering Alec Baldwin's face for the role, but decided that all those prosthetics would make him unrecognizable, so it was decided he would morph into the original character, when using his "Shadow" power. The same thing was decided when Warren Beatty was cast as "Dick Tracy."

Answer: Unlike most comic book superheroes, the Shadow character evolved from a series of pulp novels, and later a radio program, starting in the 1930s. The Shadow's true identity was initially unknown, and he had multiple aliases and many alter egos. Only later was he permanently known as rich playboy Lamont Cranston. As the Shadow, he used different disguises when combating villains. While in Asia, Lamont learned how to read minds and use hypnosis to cloud peoples' vision. The movie reflected his ability to alter his appearance when transforming into the crime-fighting Shadow.

raywest

5th Aug 2022

Hobbs & Shaw (2019)

Question: Didn't the Snowflake virus also infect other life besides humanity, such as animals and plants?

Trainman

Answer: Many viruses are specific to certain types of species and do not cross over and infect others. The Snowflake virus was a programmable super virus that apparently was genetically engineered for a particular target.

raywest

31st Jul 2022

The Ropers (1979)

Show generally

Question: In the pilot episode, Helen says to Stanley that he's now going to have to get a job (assuming to afford living in this pricey townhome), but throughout the entire two-season series, Stanley is shown never getting a job and sits around at home all the time. How did they never run out of money?

Answer: Assuming they made enough income from rentals fees, Helen may have wanted Stanley to find a job solely to get him out of the house and out of her hair. Many women dislike having their husbands home all the time, and, if they're retired, encourage them to find some work or activity outside of the house.

raywest

That's possible, though a bit doubtful since they lived in their old apartment building (the Three's Company one) for 14 years. That was 14 years of Stanley being at home without Helen wanting him to get a job "away from home."

She also isn't shown telling him to get a job for any reason after the pilot episode. Rather than continually nagging him, Helen apparently accepted that he wasn't going to get one. Also, it's a TV show. Writers continually change character dynamics, plot lines, running gags, etc. as the show progresses, which can create either deliberate or unintentional inconsistencies. It was probably something the writers saw no reason to pursue.

raywest

Answer: He owned the entire apartment complex in "Three's Company." Even the sales prices back in the 1970's were in the millions.

But if that's the case, why would Helen tell Stanley he'd have to get a job when they first moved to their new place? Even Stanley gave a worried look when he was questioned that. If they had all money, that scene would not have taken place and Helen never would have brought that up.

Question: Why did Diana destroy the mall's security cameras, and why did she want the little girl to stay quiet?

Answer: At this point in time, her gig as a superhero is not public knowledge, and she wants it to stay that way.

Phaneron

How would that accomplish anything considering there were many people in the mall who saw what happened?

It really wouldn't, but then again, the writers didn't put much thought into this movie.

Phaneron

As the other answer indicated, Diana/Wonder Woman wasn't yet known publicly as a super-hero. A video recording is different from eye-witness accounts of what people actually saw or believe they saw. Memories are faulty, they fade, and everyone sees and remembers things differently. Regarding the child, I interpreted it as Diana just motioning in a friendly way for the rather precocious girl to stay put, behave, and quietly wait for her mother.

raywest

In my opinion, it wouldn't, and it's just another example of the shoddy writing in this film.

wizard_of_gore

Answer: This was long before the age of superheroes, when everything was normal and meta-humans were just theories in a lab. It was her appearances which stated it all. Remember the tagline, "The Dawn of Justice Begins with Her."

Question: The Missouri Breaks starred Jack Nicholson (as Tom Logan, a rustler) and Marlon Brando (as Robert E Lee Clayton, a "regulator" tasked with eliminating him). Yet they never appear together. Brando is absent from over half the scenes featuring Nicholson, and vice-versa. When they do meet, there is a close up of Nicholson speaking to Brando, followed by a close up of Brando replying to Nicholson, and so on. Why do Nicholson and Brando never appear on screen together?

Rob Halliday

Answer: At this point, Brando used cue cards for his dialogue and liked to improvise lines. Nicholson found this difficult and distracting because Brando continually shifted his gaze to the cue card behind the cameraman and went off script. Although Nicholson said Brando was exceedingly cooperative and "gentle as a lamb" on the set, the two actors took an instant dislike to one another. Each actor was filmed separately while reciting their lines.

raywest

27th Jul 2022

El Mariachi (1992)

Question: Is it true that, out of all actors who appeared in this movie, only Carlos Gallardo had experience in acting before starring in this film?

Answer: He was not the only professional actor in the film. However, the movie was made on a shoe-string budget, and, to save money, most of the cast were non-professional local residents.

raywest

Question: This 1978 comedy take on the Hound Of The Baskervilles featured a stellar cast of British comedy icons: Peter Cook, Dudley Moore, Spike Milligan, Kenneth Williams and Terry Thomas. Yet it was not remotely funny and was a box office bomb. Biographies of cast members say the film was a low point of their careers, their acting lacks conviction, as if they know it isn't funny. So, why did they keep making this film, since, even when it was half completed, everybody knew it would be a total flop?

Rob Halliday

Answer: The actors would have no control over whether a film should continue production, particularly just because they didn't like how it was progressing. They were under contract and paid to act in a movie, regardless of the quality and would be sued if they quit. Movies are financed by studios and investors who expect a monetary return on their investment. Even if the film's quality was considered poor, producers would base their decisions on making a profit or at least recouping the costs. Halting production would be an extreme last resort.

raywest

Thank you for your informative and interesting points. I read a biography of Peter Cook which said that when the film studio executives saw the finished film they realised it just was not funny or entertaining. There was reluctance to give it a cinema release, as it was thought it would not even recoup distribution costs. It was eventually given a limited release and it bombed. I saw the film once on television, even though I am a fan of many members of the cast, I was wholly unimpressed. I think most of the cast, too, were embarrassed by the film.

Rob Halliday

Question: Why didn't Rowan Atkinson reprise his role as Zazu in this movie? Since he voiced Zazu in the first film, why didn't he voice him in this one?

Answer: Atkinson didn't want to do it again because he does not consider himself to be a voice-over actor but rather a visual artist. He said he did not like doing it.

raywest

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.