Question: When they go back in time, you can see Hermione was tended to first in the hospital wing, but why did Hermione need to be tended to?
raywest
3rd Mar 2022
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
18th Jun 2018
The Great Escape (1963)
Factual error: A convoy of open trucks arrive at the camp bringing the latest batch of prisoners, many of whom are carrying rucksacks and tote bags of clothing and other possessions. Where did they come from? Combat servicemen in World War Two did not carry overnight bags with them - a change of clothes or a handy supply of toiletries was the least of their concerns. A prisoner of war arrived in the camp with the clothes he stood up in and nothing else.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: These prisoners were being transferred from other camps to this camp. As Big X said, "they are putting all their eggs in one basket." It's likely they are carrying possessions they've acquired during their time in captivity.
What "possessions"? Do you think they had Oxfam shops in POW camps during World War 2? They would be dressed in their combat fatigues and nothing else.
They would have possessions as they would receive parcels from home and Red Cross parcels.
Prisoners of war would receive Red Cross parcels, and may have also scrounged, made or been issued a few other bits and pieces. In particular, they'd probably have a change or two of underwear, some toiletries and a few books or games at the very least.
POWs acquired possessions by hand-making, scrounging, care packages, 'selling' watches and rings to guards or local civilians.
They were universally known for their trading and scrounging abilities. Remember these were the "worst of the worst" in offending.
Just to clarify. They weren't exactly the "worst of the worst" for bad or incorrigible behavior. They were the best at attempting to escape POW camps or otherwise subverting their German captors. The fed-up Germans decided to contain them all in one prison to stop the constant breakouts. They only succeeded in creating a POW "think tank" by pooling together the most talented escape artists who combined their skills and knowledge.
In international conflicts, in addition to prisoners regularly receiving Red Cross care packages, the Geneva Convention requires captors to treat all POWs humanely, and provide food, clothing, housing, medical treatment, and hygiene. As mentioned, these prisoners brought their belongings with them from other camps. International Red Cross inspectors monitor POW camps for compliance. Failure to comply with the rules constitutes war crimes, which are adjudicated after a conflict. Germany was generally compliant. POW camps were to detain captured soldiers and prevent them rejoining the war. They did not punish detainees as "criminals" but disciplined them when they were non-compliant or for other misbehavior. Once the war was over, POWs were repatriated.
The Great Escape was from a POW camp specifically set up to hold trouble makers from other camps. Also, sometimes people expect to be captured and prepare to for it! Today, during funeral of John Lewis, speakers repeatedly mentioned that he was carrying a backpack with 2 books, an apple, an orange and a tooth brush. Which haven't been seen since his head was beat in. A least one German Fortress commander, sworn to defend his fort until he and all those under his command were dead, surrendered with multiple suit cases to make his incarceration more comfortable. Like the character Yossarian in Catch-22. [Spoiler alert: he makes elaborate preparations to the paddle in a life raft from Italy to Sweden.].
18th Feb 2022
Jurassic Park (1993)
Question: Why was Dr. Grant so dismissive of Tim when they first met? I can understand Grant being annoyed with the bratty kid at the dig site but Tim showed a genuine interest in dinosaurs and even mentioned he'd read Grant's book.
Answer: Dr. Grant doesn't like kids. Any kids.
That was an issue between him and Ellie Sattler, who wanted to have a family, while he did not. She eventually married someone else and had kids.
Answer: Grant just has a low opinion of kids in general. He probably thinks Tim is too young to really understand or appreciate the research that Grant has dedicated most of his life to. Also, Tim can come across as a little "too much" at times; he talks really fast and barely gives Grant a chance to get a word in edgewise.
12th Sep 2021
The Honeymooners (1955)
Question: When Ralph promises he'll fix Norton's pipes tomorrow morning, Norton says, "This is the last night I take a bath in Fred's Gasoline Station." Why wouldn't he have been taking his baths in his best friend Ralph's tub? He had already used their water to "Stretch the Soup." Why not to bathe?
Answer: It is because Fred's gasoline station was a real place that really existed in the town of Tuckahoe New York. This was where Norton, Art Carney, was living at the time. It was a plug for his friend.
Answer: Art Carney lived in Tuckahoe NY at this time and Fred's gasoline station really did exist. It was a plug for his friend at home.
Answer: Because going to the gas station for a bath is funnier. This is comedy, funnier trumps making sense.
It's still a mistake.
Answer: There's no answer. He was probably joking or exaggerating, and, unlike getting water for the soup, bathing in someone else's bathroom is an inconvenience, and it might make Norton self-conscious and it would annoy Ralph. Going to a gas station does sound like something Norton would do.
Norton self-conscious? No way.
10th Jan 2022
Peter Pan (1953)
Question: What kind of medicine was Nana bringing into the nursery to give to the children?
10th Jan 2022
The Woman in Red (1984)
31st Dec 2021
Home Alone (1990)
Question: How come Kevin never told his parents or his family about the Wet Bandits? He also never told them in the sequel either.
Answer: If your kid came to you and said he single handedly captured to two robbers, you'd believe him.
Answer: He never tells them onscreen, nor does the movie give any indication that they know, but realistically, Kevin was a witness to their crimes, and he would be called in to give statements and testimonies in order to put them away. So his parents would have to know about his encounters with them, otherwise it would be a major plot hole. Perhaps the film-makers thought it would be funnier and more in line with his character for Kevin to be secretive about it.
Not necessarily. The police caught them red-handed and one of the cops said their habit of flooding houses was proof as to which houses they hit. It's possible no-one knew Kevin's connection.
Answer: Adding to a previous answer, the cops arrested them at the site of a previous break-in. Even though Marley rescued Kevin, it's possible he didn't tell anyone about them either, so them breaking into the McCallister's house didn't matter. Not to mention, Marv blabbing about them having the calling card to the police didn't help their case either.
Answer: Why would he need to? The idea is that he outsmarted them alone, and his parents were none the wiser.
27th Dec 2021
Home Alone (1990)
Question: After Harry and Marv are taken away, how would Kevin have been able to get the tar off the steps in the basement? The other traps are quite easy but to remove tar would be nearly impossible.
Answer: Remember his neighbour takes him home so maybe he helped with the cleaning. He may have also helped with the tar on the steps as well, but they just didn't show it.
Answer: There's no reason that Kevin would be the one removing this, not could he. At some point, his family would know about him protecting the house. His parents would have the steps professionally cleaned or replaced.
There is no evidence to suggest that Kevin ever told his family about the wet bandits.
Considering the police were involved at the end, as well as the next-door-neighbor, and the two burglars were arrested in the house across the street, it's highly unlikely the parents would not, at some point, know what happened and Kevin's involvement. Kevin is a witness to the criminal activity. Also, the parents would also question why the steps were covered in tar.
14th Jul 2018
White Christmas (1954)
Question: What is the white drink the bartender makes on the train?
Answer: Orders a Malt just after Mary orders a lemonade.
Answer: Vanilla-rum malted milkshake.
Answer: Definitely not a daiquiri. This looks like a shaken drink. Blended daiquiris were not a thing in the 50s.
The frozen daiquiri was invented sometime between the late 1920s and early 1930s by a Cuban bartender in Havana, using shaved ice and an electric blender. It was a favorite of Ernest Hemingway and became popular in the United States in the 1940s and 1950s, along with other tropical cocktails. Cuba and Cuban culture were fashionable during this era, at least until the Communist takeover. To clarify: the foursome have various beverages on their table (coffee, lemonade, a malted milkshake, and two other drinks). In the foreground, the bartender is pouring the slushy white drink mixture into four cocktail glasses sitting on the bar. That is when they sing, "Snow," and is what looks like frozen daiquiris. The scene is on YouTube.
20th Nov 2021
13 Ghosts (1960)
Question: Is the lawyer who brought the will to the apartment in the beginning the same guy who died in the cube when they were capturing the 12th spirit?
Answer: No. The lawyer was played by actor JR Bourne. The victim in the box was played by actor Charles Andre.
There is confusion about this movie, made in 1960, and the later 2001 version, "Thirteen Ghosts." In the 1960 version, Martin Milner played Benjamin Rush, the lawyer who was killed by the bed. JR Bourne was in the 2001 film. He played lawyer Ben Moss, who was killed by the sliding glass panels. Charles Andrew played a team member who was also killed.
26th Nov 2021
Titanic (1997)
Question: Pardon me for asking a "what if" question, but this confuses me: what did Rose intend to do *before* the ship sunk? She had changed her mind about Jack, choosing him instead of Cal. However, she and her mother needed the security from Cal. They were in debt. Jack was poor. If Rose married Jack, Cal and his family would be offended by the broken engagement. They would not help Rose's mother. Would Rose just marry Jack and abandon her financially-burdened mother in New York?
Answer: Rose was strong-minded and determined but was thinking "in the moment" and had no real plan or idea about what to do if she'd left with Jack, had he survived. It's unknown if they would have stayed together and married. Rose had only told Jack she was going with him. At some point she might reconnect with her mother. Cal Hoxley probably would be so humiliated by Rose deserting him for a penniless artist, that he would have hushed it up and invented some story about the broken engagement. He likely had already paid off the DeWitt Bukater debts to clean-up any lingering complications or embarrassments before marrying Rose. He probably would also have made some minimal financial arrangement for Ruth, not from compassion but for appearances sake. As we saw, Rose faired quite well on her own once she did escape Cal and her mother.
Answer: Due to historical times, the "love birds" may have lucked out (had they survived). They would not have known WWI would start in 1914 (two years after the Titanic sank), but they would have hoped that their financial situation improved. Women were needed in the labor force.
Answer: That was her plan, assuming she would have been able to follow through with it. This would have left her mother high and dry, but that didn't seem to be a very big concern for her. However, in reality, between Cal, Lovejoy, and Ruth, Rose would find it very hard to even see Jack, much less marry him, if the Titanic had made it to New York in one piece. Women had very few legal rights in 1912, so once the marriage was performed, Cal could pretty much keep her imprisoned, for all intents and purposes, and Jack could do nothing about it, even if he wasn't a penniless vagrant...which he was.
Your last statement about Cal pretty much being able to keep Rose imprisoned has no factual basis. Women still had many legal rights, and while some states had more liberal divorce laws, by 1915, 1 in 7 marriages ended in divorce. By the 1920's, it had risen to 15%. Not to mention that in 1917, New York had given women full suffrage.
"Imprisonment" might be too strong of a word to use, but cultural norms at the time (such as those regarding marriage, the role of the wife/ homemaker, and divorce - taboo) didn't give women much freedom. Divorce statistics are notoriously inaccurate and, depending on the method used to calculate the number, percent, or rate, different figures are derived. Instead of 15%, the RATE of divorce (per 1000 PEOPLE) was 1.7 in the 1920s. Women's suffrage is hardly an indication of freedom, rights, or equality. [Just think how "effective" the 14th Amendment (1868) was in granting equal legal and civil rights.].
Regardless of any restrictions on "married" women, Rose was not yet wed to Cal. They were only engaged, and he had no legal right to impose anything on her at that point. If Rose wanted to walk off the ship with Jack, there was nothing Cal or her mother could legally do to stop her. If they tried to interfere, Rose could have the ship's officers or the White Star Line's personnel intervene.
21st Mar 2012
The Jackal (1997)
Question: Why does Major Koslova seem relaxed after the jackal presses her hand in the wound?
25th Oct 2021
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)
Question: At the end after the dinosaurs had escaped it was stated that it would become a 'Jurassic world'. There were no more dinosaurs than the US military could handle. So why so dramatic?
Answer: The dinosaurs were scattering all over the country and could nest a dozen eggs at a time. They're not dumb they know how to fight, hide and protect themselves. "Life finds a way."
The relatively small number of escaped dinosaurs could not scatter all over the country quickly, if at all. Dinosaurs have small brains and are incapable of understanding the modern world. Their size makes it impossible to hide while roaming. The military could easily find and destroy them. They are also females, and many are only one individual of their own species, and unable to breed. Although in 'Jurassic Park' it showed one species had supposedly changed sex and laid fertile eggs, that was an exception, was spurious science, would be rare, and it would take time to produce any significant numbers. There is also the lysine contingency plan. In Jurassic Park it was explained the dinos were genetically engineered to lack the enzyme lysine. If not added to their diet, they die. Actually, the dinos left on the other island should all be dead.
20th Aug 2020
Sweet Home Alabama (2002)
Question: Why is Carmichael on her divorce papers when her name is Smooter or Perry?
Answer: After moving to New York to start her fashion career, Melanie changed her maiden surname from Smooter to Carmichael, and that became her legal name. She initiated divorce proceedings without any intention of resuming her old life, which embarrassed her and she tried to hide. Like many women, she did not use her married name (Perry) after ending her marriage and may never have used it. Also, using "Smooter" on her divorce papers would have exposed her lie.
It did not embarrass her, Melanie never wanted to return to Pigeon Creek if her and Jake were over, she kept hoping they would get back together. That's what annoying, people assumed she was ashamed but as the meaning of the film is 'Home is where the heart is'. That feeling of where she longs to be never left even when she was in New York and obviously that was to be with Jake.
28th Sep 2019
Sweet Home Alabama (2002)
Question: Given how organized she's supposed to be why didn't she sign those papers prior to going home for Jake's signature? That and why not tell her boyfriend the truth? He looked like he'd understand.
Answer: Melanie didn't sign the papers because, deep down, she still loved Jake, and probably, subconsciously, hoped they'd get back together. She didn't tell her fiance' because she mostly was in denial about the state of her feelings and her marriage. She'd fooled herself into believing she had signed the papers.
Answer: If Melanie was happy, why did she take her engagement ring off when she stopped by Jakes and it's obvious he was still her everything seeing as she went there first before her parents.
Answer: Also the director made a point it was never about rediscovering herself or Jake, it was choosing between what she had planned and what she truly wanted. The director also talked about how she did not pack enough clothes, so she wore her old clothes, she was supposed to be there for a long weekend but she wanted to be there, so it was obvious she wanted to stay.
Answer: She didn't sign the divorce papers on purpose. That is why Jake never signed them because then he might have to face the fact that it was over. That is why Melanie never went home, she might have to accept that it was over and Jake might have moved on, that is why she said yes to Andrew's proposal. Also when Melanie did not sign the papers at the wedding, when she dumped Andrew, that was the first time that Melanie was honest to herself and the people around her about how she felt and what she had longed for, for the last seven years.
The only reason Melanie said yes to Andrew's proposal is because she did not know that Jake felt the same way. The reason that Melanie did not sign the papers at the wedding because she had to be honest with herself and the people around her about how she felt and what she had longed for since she left.
12th Oct 2021
Predator (1987)
Question: In the scene before Billy finds the bodies, he cuts open a tree and starts drinking from it - what is he actually drinking because it doesn't look like water.
Answer: According to the script, it is water: it says Billy uses his knife to cut a thick vine and drinks the stream of water that pours out. The drops on his clothes look a bit cloudy so it could have been mixed with sap or some other organic substance.
18th Oct 2021
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
Question: What did Harry and his friends come across when they were trying to escape from Filch?
Answer: Presumably you are referring to when the trio come upon "Fluffy," the three-headed dog, that is kept in the restricted area of the castle. Inside the room there is a magical self-playing harp that keeps "Fluffy" asleep when it's playing. Hermione also noticed Fluffy was lying atop a floor hatch, which leads to where the Philosopher's Stone is hidden.
Answer: In addition to raywest I will add that at this point in the book, the Harp isn't playing and Fluffy is awake. It is also not known at this point that music puts Fluffy to sleep.
True, although the question only relates to what the trio came across while evading Filch, not about knowing what any particular object is or does. (I just added an explanation as an aside.) However, I'm not sure now the harp had been installed yet when they first found Fluffy, so it was probably about the floor hatch.
10th Oct 2021
Back to the Future (1985)
Question: In this film, Marty suddenly appears and spends one week in 1955. So, how does Marty freely roam the hallways and cafeteria at Hill Valley High School (even getting into a physical altercation with another student) without challenge from teachers and administrators such as Mr. Strickland? All the kids are talking about Marty, but nobody in authority questions the fact that he's not enrolled, he's completely undocumented, he doesn't attend any classes, and he's apparently a troublemaker.
Answer: High school in the 1950s was different from today, which has tight security and students are more closely scrutinized. Not every teacher, and even Strickland, knows every student, so Marty would not necessarily be immediately suspected as an outsider. And though the students are talking about Marty, that doesn't mean the adults are aware. Teens have their own closed-off society. Being as Marty was only in the past for a week, and he isn't at the school all that much, he could conceivably move about mostly unnoticed. If he was there any longer, the school would eventually wise up about him. Also, it's a movie, and suspension of disbelief is employed here. The audience just accepts the plot's premise.
Thanks. But I also remember (giving away my age) that teachers and administrators back then were very much aware of students "playing hooky" (skipping classes and wandering around the halls and off-campus during school hours). Back then there were even "truant officers" who patrolled the streets looking for school-age kids skipping school. With all of the attention to 1950s detail in this film, I was really kind of surprised that no-one apparently suspected Marty of truancy.
I also remember those days. As I mentioned, since Marty was only briefly at the high school during the one-week period he was in the past, he hadn't yet attracted enough attention to be considered a problem or a truant. It can be seen that Strickland notices Marty, but had not yet considered anything as being amiss.
26th Sep 2021
Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974)
Question: I could swear when I saw it it had a different ending. The one I saw at the end Jeff Bridges dies in the car. And Clint Eastwood pushes him out of the car and leaves him on the side of the road, then drives away. But I can't find anything on that. Has anyone else seen that version?
Answer: You must be thinking of another movie, because as far as I know there is no different ending.
I totally agree with your answer. Sometimes movies do film alternate endings that may be used in different markets (i.e. Europe or Asia). Also, alternate endings are sometimes filmed after a test audience reacts negatively to the original one and they may show up in the DVD or director's cut. I didn't find any indication that another version was ever filmed for this movie.
I concur - I can't find any evidence of this alternate ending existing beyond some people claiming it does. Like other examples (Wizard of Oz ending with a shot of the shoes under Dorothy's bed, etc.) I suspect this is just a false memory, although no doubt some will argue that, trouble is there's no way to prove a negative.
You are absolutely correct. Just watched this film again for the first time since the 70's. Thunderbolt leaves Lightfoot sitting (respectfully) by the roadside before driving off! Hope you come across this comment one day.
Answer: I remember the scene of pushing Jeff Bridges out of the car as well. I recently watched the movie on Cable, and Eastwood just kept on driving with Bridges (dead) slumped in his seat. I could have sworn he pushed him out in some alternate version.
Answer: I saw the film on VHS tape 30 years ago and the ending on the tape had Clint Eastwood throwing Jeff Bridge off the cliff.
Answer: Mandela effect.
Answer: The one thrown out of the car was red pushing his friend out of the trunk of the car after he was shot Clint saw his friend die, and he drove off with him still in the car.
20th Sep 2021
Field of Dreams (1989)
Question: Maybe someone with agricultural expertise can answer this. Ray's entire cornfield is large and obviously worth a lot of money. How much would the small section of corn that he plowed under for the baseball field have been worth in comparison to the rest of the crop once sold?
Chosen answer: In modern times (say, over the last 10 years) corn crops yield about $240 in profit per acre. In the mid-to-late 1980s (when this movie was made) the profit yield was far less, maybe only $150 or less profit per acre. Today, most farms produce about 1100 acres of corn per season; but, back then, most farms produced around 600 acres per season. Of course, these are all just average figures. So, let's say Ray had an average Iowa farm of 600 cultivated acres in 1989, expecting to profit $150 per acre. Optimistically, Ray would profit about $90,000 on his total crop. Meanwhile, the acreage of a large baseball field (with 90-foot baselines) is only about 5 acres. Which means Ray plowed under only about $750 worth of his crop profits to open up land area for the baseball field. It doesn't sound like much of a sacrifice at all, in terms of corn. Ray could still potentially profit $89,250 on his remaining crop (assuming he had the farm hands and heavy equipment to harvest it).
Thanks! The plot seemed a bit far-fetched by implying that he would go completely bankrupt because he sacrificed five acres to build a baseball field. And it appeared that not all of those five acres near the house were previously being used for growing corn. Factoring in the other incidental building costs would be a different consideration, however.
Yeah, the 5 acres of corn was not a bank-breaker. My impression was that Ray probably cut down the corn himself at no great loss; but he then mortgaged his farm to have that one small piece of the cornfield leveled and professionally developed with ballpark-quality turf, baselines, stadium lighting and fencing, et cetera, not to mention the bleachers and professional-grade field equipment...all of which would total, what, a half-million bucks (or more) in the 1980s? Ray's brother-in-law rightly thought it was an insane risk that would result in bank foreclosure.
I just watched it again. It's mentioned they paid for building the field using all their savings, so presumably nothing more is owed. Another year passes and there is another crop of corn to be harvested, but the bank is threatening to foreclose.
Maybe it's a plot hole or a deleted scene; because, if the bank was threatening foreclosure, then a mortgage of some kind existed somewhere.
He did spend a lot to build the field, and those profit margin numbers are best-case, no?
Yeah, all the figures I provided were just averages for the year 1989; but the figures do demonstrate that cutting down 5 acres of corn didn't significantly impact Ray's profit on the whole crop. It wasn't cutting down the corn that cost him money (as the original question inquired); rather, it was developing the cleared 5 acres into a level, professional-standard baseball field that cost him a ton of money.
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.
Answer: It was probably to check that she was all right before tending to Ron. She had been slung around quite a bit by the Whomping Willow before being tossed into the tunnel. She likely had some cuts and scrapes. She is wearing a bandage on her hand.
raywest ★
Should they not have tended to Ron first though? His injury was more severe.
From what I can see through the jumbled, flashing images, it looks like Hermione is in the infirmary before Ron. He is probably being assisted off-screen, then later is transferred to the bed, where we see him with his bandaged leg. Also, as he could not walk, transporting him from the Whomping Willow back to the castle would take longer. Hermione probably went on ahead and was seen first. There may also be a different treatment room he was first taken to.
raywest ★