Question: Hermione couldn't understand why Ron wouldn't wear what his mother made him for Christmas but I am curious, was Hermione wearing what Mrs Weasley made for her when they were walking down the stairs?
raywest
11th Mar 2020
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
7th Feb 2020
Batman and Robin (1997)
Question: How was Pamela Isley aka Poison Ivy able to fight Batgirl with martial arts-like skills towards the end of the movie? Pamela was a doctor and I highly doubt given her obsession with her research she had the time to take martial arts lessons in her spare time, if she had any during her stay in South America. Even after she transformed into Poison Ivy, her transformation could not have given her martial arts skills since her powers are based on plant abilities.
Answer: There's no way of knowing whether or not she "had the time" to study martial arts. Regardless of her studies, she could have made time to pursue this as an extra-curricular activity. Universities can have classes, clubs, competitions, and student groups for martial arts on campus that anyone can participate in. She may also have been studying it since childhood. She was also a botanist, so even with a rigorous academic schedule, she would likely have more free time than a medical student.
Answer: That and they had to have the women fight in here. I mean they couldn't have the guys hit her now could they? So it was necessary for her to fight competently at least.
2nd Feb 2020
Time After Time (1979)
Question: When Amy goes back in time to live with H.G. Wells, why did she choose to change her name to Susan B. Anthony?
Answer: She was joking, but it seems to imply that she intends to influence his political views regarding socialism, global war, women's rights, etc. which the real H.G. Wells wrote about.
Also, H.G. Wells' second wife was named Amy Robbins, the same name as the Amy in the film, which would further indicate she did not change her name to Susan B. Anthony.
3rd Jan 2014
Angels & Demons (2009)
Question: When Langdon and the Italian cop are trapped inside the sealed room of the Vatican archive and the air is shut off, how long could they actually survive in a space that size? In the movie, they start to suffocate almost immediately. (There is no long time lapse because the movie's plot depends on defusing the bomb within a few hours).
Chosen answer: In reality, they would have perished from CO2 poisoning long before the room ran out of breathable oxygen causing them to simply suffocate. Without knowing the exact dimensions of the room it is impossible to give any time more specific than "several hours" for this to happen in a room as big as that one appeared to be.
I just re-watched the movie, and as Langdon and Vittoria enter the room, it's mentioned to them that the oxygen levels are always kept at a bare minimum to protect the ancient tomes and documents stored there. That helps to answer my own question about why Langdon and the cop were so quickly affected when the power was shut off.
13th Jan 2020
Dark Phoenix (2019)
Question: Some valid reason Mystique dies early? Did Jennifer Lawrence get tired of playing her and wanted out?
Answer: Your guess is correct. Lawrence stated she was done with the franchise after "X-Men: Apocalypse." She jokingly told Simon Kinberg she would return for this film if he directed it, and to her surprise, he was serious about it and held her to it. Fans weren't very keen on her appearances either, because she was definitely phoning it in for the third film, so that may have factored into killing her off early as well.
More than one actress had played Mystique. Just because Jennifer Lawrence did not want to continue playing that role is not a reason the character would be killed off. They could easily recast another notable actress in the part. I would not be surprised if Mystique is miraculously "resurrected" in a future X-Men film with a new actress.
Aside from Deadpool, any new X-Men film would be a complete overhaul of the franchise since the characters will be part of the MCU now. You're not wrong about an actor wanting out to not really be a reason to kill off a character, but it doesn't preclude them from doing so either. They might have decided it wouldn't be worth the hassle of recasting the role with all the negative baggage that would come with it.
Here are some candidates I think could do it: Amanda Seyfried, Shailene Woodley, Chloe Grace Moretz. Heck maybe even Milla Jovovich-Anderson should be given an audition, what say you guys?
8th Jan 2020
Tales from the Darkside: The Movie (1990)
Question: Why does the gargoyle in A Lover's Vow stick around Preston disguised as the lovely Rae Dawn Chong?
Answer: The gargoyle had been watching Preston through his window for a long while and, falling in love with him, assumed a human form so she could be with him.
Answer: She most likely wanted to keep an eye on him, to make sure he would never break the vow.
23rd Mar 2013
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011)
Question: Is this is a mistake in the book or just a blooper in the film? In the movie Deathly Hallows Part 1 Harry doesn't ever disarm Malfoy he simply snatches the wand. Does that mean Harry is still the owner of the elder wand? Another thing I noticed is in Deathly Hallow Part 2, Hermione disarms Malfoy in the room of requirement after which Harry saves Malfoy and never disarms him again! So doesn't that mean that the Elder wand belongs to Hermione now? I haven't read the books so I'm a bit confused. This might be a stupid question for a few of you'll but I really want to understand this, as every time I see the movie I research on it and never get an answer that really explains or satisfies me, especially about when Hermione disarms Malfoy in the Room of Requirement!
Chosen answer: The Elder Wand responds to power, thus, should a wizard defeat its owner (by killing them, capturing them, disarming them or whatever other method), it will transfer its loyalty to them. During the first of the two Deathly Hallows movies, Harry takes Draco's wand away from him, thus defeating him to the satisfaction of the Elder Wand, which transfers its loyalty to him from that point on. Hermione defeating Malfoy in the second movie makes no difference to the Wand, as it has already moved on to a new master.
Answer: When Hermione disarms Malfoy in the room of requirement, Malfoy was using his mother's wand at that time. So Hermione disarming Malfoy makes no difference to the ownership of the elder wand.
To clarify, if Draco had (unknowingly) still been the Elder Wand's master when Hermione disarmed him, even though he was using his mother's wand, the Elder Wand could have transferred its loyalty to her. That is what happened with Harry. He grabbed Draco's own wand from him, even though Voldemort physically possessed the Elder Wand. Also, Draco's wand appears to have switched its allegiance to Harry, as he found it responded quite well to his commands. Draco never knew he commanded the Elder Wand, and he never physically possessed it.
30th Dec 2019
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Question: If Harry's relatives hate him, then why are they against him going to Hogwarts to study magic? Why wouldn't they be excited to be rid of him most of the time?
Answer: Because they know of his wizard heritage and they hate it. They think he and his parents were freaks.
Good answer, but I'd add they also knew it was something Harry would very much want, and they would always deny him simply to be as mean-spirited as possible.
Not to mention one of Vernon and Petunia's overriding motivations is to appear normal to their neighbors, and the more magic Harry knows, the less likely they are to achieve that. It could presumably also be dangerous for them, as future books/movies confirm.
1. They were constantly being barraged with letters from Hogwarts in an increasingly disruptive manner. Eventually, this would be noticed as something weird by their neighbors, which is something they REALLY don't want: anyone to know about Petunia's magical relations. 2. They were flat out threatened by Hagrid and terrified on both him and Dumbledore Better to let him go there then have to spend their entire lives on the run without it even working.
They were against it long before the barrage of letters or Hagrid showing up. They knew about the school, Petunia's sister went there and she told Vernon. They don't want to seem weird to the neighbors in general, they aren't afraid people around them will think they have a wizard in their family because nobody believes in wizards.
14th Sep 2017
Home Alone (1990)
Question: Why was Kevin's family so mean to him?
Answer: I think it was a way to make leaving him "home alone" more realistic and understandable as opposed to absurd. Being perceived as a brat/pest and annoying to be around, it is (somewhat) conceivable that none of the family members would be eager to have Kevin by their side. This "frees" all of them from noticing that Kevin isn't with them. Everyone would just assume that Kevin is somewhere among them and each be glad they didn't have to sit next to him on the way to the airport or during the long flight.
In addition to this, the movie is partially about Kevin learning to have more respect for others. He appreciates his family more as he spends more time without them.
Answer: The ones who were mean just saw Kevin as a brat. However, it's not uncommon in situations of being in an overcrowded house to easily lose one's patience and temper and become frustrated with small, but irritating things; which seems to happen to his mother. Buzz just has that general big brother contempt for his kid brother, but obviously still loves him, along with everyone else in the family, at the end when he finds out Kevin is safe.
Nuts to that. They all could've tried a little harder, that's one lame excuse for treating someone like garbage and I come from a good sized bunch who've done the same to me. You also forget his uncle didn't care about him regardless of the situation.
Like it or not the answer is perfectly valid. Families have different dynamics. Kevin is something of a brat (he calls his mother "dummy" and openly wishes he didn't have a family), as are his brothers and sisters, especially Buzz. I for one have TWO uncles in my family who behave just like the uncle in the movie. We don't invite them over, but we've had similar situations to what's depicted in the film.
Hey I've had three uncles, father's older brothers, he hated all three of them, cared only when they started dying. Yeah the dynamics and all, my mother has stated "You ruined this family" though this bunch didn't need my help in being messed up. My sympathies to you Mr Hoffman, your uncles Dustin and Philip Seymour must be/been terrible, just kidding only on the famous names there, no offense meant.
It's just a movie! The characters are fictional and were given contrived, exaggerated, over-the-top personalities to fit the comedic plot. It's pointless to compare them to real-life family dynamics.
Also, it's a movie from a child's point of view. Kevin is supposed to be the "victim." As a 35-year-old, I have more sympathy for the adults and older kids. The movie is about Kevin learning to miss his family and be more considerate of others.
Question: Why did Elizabeth lie to the pirates about her last name?
Answer: Elizabeth lied because she knows that being the governor's daughter makes her a valuable hostage who would either be ransomed or used for leverage. A commoner girl is far less useful.
What would the pirates ransom Elizabeth for? Gold silver and jewels?
Possibly for gold but she was more valuable for obtaining her father's cooperation to give them whatever they wanted (i.e. a safe escape, finding the coin, etc.) in exchange for not harming her.
"Safe escape" they can't die. "Finding the coin" the coin was already on board their ship.
She doesn't know that.
7th Oct 2019
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Question: When Harry is brought into Malfoy Manor, Draco is told to confirm that it's really him. Even though Harry's face is jinxed, Draco knows that it's him, so why did he lie and say it wasn't?
Answer: Because at his core and despite being an unpleasant person, Draco was a decent and humane person who never could step over the line into being evil. He could not bring himself to betray Harry, knowing he and the others would be killed, and he could not have lived with that guilt. Dumbledore and Snape understood this about Draco, and worked to help him keep his humanity.
That is the moment when Draco is now a good person.
18th Dec 2019
The Fugitive (1993)
Question: When Kimble is in the hospital with the boy he changes the diagnosis to what? I have tried to look but it cuts away as he's writing it down on the boy's file.
Answer: When Richard changes the diagnosis, the first thing he writes down is "AO" which is medical shorthand for aorta. Many people who have medical degrees and saw the movie speculate that Joel had an aortic tear. This would cause blood to flow into the chest cavity making it difficult to breathe and with the impact from the crash it could have caused the fatal injury. An aortic tear requires immediate surgery and by changing Joel's diagnosis, Kimble was able to save his life.
Answer: Kimble is watching as the doctor, Al, looks at the chest film and states "possible fractured sternum, he's stable," and we can see Kimble's bothered by that. Then Kimble is told to take the boy to observation room 2. When Kimble questions the boy and looks at the chest film, Kimble ignores what he was told, and instead heads directly for the surgical OR. In the elevator he draws a line over the incorrect essential diagnosis: "depress chest w/ poss fr" (possible fracture), and begins to write "Ao," then he scribbles a signature on the Patient of Dr line. The essential diagnosis Kimble writes is presumably an Aortic trauma, which is a life-threatening critical injury and requires immediate attention. So when Kimble brings the boy to the OR (instead of observation room 2) for the emergency medical procedure, he tells the doctor the boy was sent up from downstairs. The child is then taken to operating room 4, STAT, saving the child's life.
Its a pneumothorax, is air trapped between the lung and the ribcage and it's very common.
Answer: The presumption is the boy was misdiagnosed and he changed the chart to the correct diagnosis. The doctor says later that he saved the boy's life. Most likely he changed the charge to order specific tests.
Answer: It's never specified what he changed the orders to, nor is it important to know. This was done only add to the plot where the other doctor noticed him looking at the X-ray, arousing her suspicion, then creating suspense as Kimble barely escapes from the hospital.
We know it isn't important know, it's just a point of curiosity.
True and if you notice that's the always reliable Julianne Moore as the other doctor. This was the first movie that she did that was lampooned in Mad magazine, the next would be Mocking Jay Part 1.
"The Lost World: Jurassic Park" and "Hannibal" were both lampooned by Mad before "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1."
I totally get that you're curious about it. Just saying that filmmakers usually aren't concerned with showing small details like that. They use broader strokes to tell the story.
A lot of film makers do put in small details into their work. Yes, some are lazy, for example, repeating 1 or 2 paragraphs in a news article too look like they whole page is filled. Others take time to have the whole thing filled out, even adding funny things for the viewer who paused the video to read. This is why there's a lot of trivia entries and questions about what something small was or meant. A casual viewer wouldn't know if what they saw meant something or was the film makers being lazy.
13th Dec 2019
Die Hard (1988)
Question: The armoured vehicle that gets sent in when the SWAT team are struggling to get in, before they're even attacked...what's that meant to actually achieve? If it's just meant to smash the doors, the men with guns could do that. And if not...will it just sit there?
Answer: I believe it is supposed to be that it was a precautionary measure and probably standard operating procedure to have it on site when dealing with a terrorist situation. To have it at the ready for if they needed it. Not only this, but a large armored vehicle like that could serve as physiological warfare to make the terrorist more fearful merely by it just being there. A show of strength. As for using it on the door, yes, guys with guns can smash those doors. But guys with guns are still targets to be shot at especially though glass doors. The armored vehicle can smash through it and get the men inside without exposing them to small arms fire.
But why send the armoured car into the lobby before being attacked? And why send it in in the first place? Once it's in the lobby it becomes a sitting duck. Easy pickings for when the occupants decide to disembark.
In some cases, maybe. But the vehicle itself still provides cover for the men in it. They usually would exit from the back or the top, and have that as something to hide against or shoot from. Also, most armored SWAT vehicles like that usually have a very high powered water cannon on the top that has the pressure of a fire truck. This can quickly subdue any hostile forces and knock their defenses down, giving the SWAT ample time to make their move while the enemy is still recovering. Not only this, but the vehicle can have inside more equipment the SWAT members can use, like throwing out smoke and flash bang grenades, or have riot shields as the exit. But this at least gets them inside and up where they can do good. If they tried to walk up to the door without cover, they would be easy pickings from small arms fire and snipers.
Good answer. I would add that presumably, the SWAT vehicle could be put in reverse, and once the front entrance was breached, it would back up. Also, this being a movie, it's shown that the overall police and F.B.I. response is supposed to be somewhat bungled, with different egotistical characters vying for control. Plot wise, it shows how well armed the "terrorists" are supposed to be by blowing up the SWAT vehicle with a missile, and how they anticipate and outsmart the police's every move. This is not reality.
11th Dec 2019
The Big Bang Theory (2007)
Question: Why doesn't Amy even once wear pants?
Answer: Amy does not wear pants because Mayim Bialik does not wear them in her personal life. She is Jewish and observes the Judaic custom of modesty and only wears skirts. The Big Bang producers allowed her to incorporate this practice into her Amy character.
21st Nov 2019
Home Alone 3 (1997)
Question: If they're spies then why are the four shown being booked in regular jail? Why aren't they in a federal prison?
Answer: Because it's just a movie, it's a comedy, and the filmmakers are not concerned with exact, realistic details. They expect the audience to just enjoy the silliness and not be overly concerned about reality. The two other Home Alone films employed similar "suspension of disbelief" in the plots.
Exactly like what happened to the guy that gave them the chip. Wouldn't he be arrested too, but we don't hear anything about what happened to him. I'm assuming since he had a plan to catch he was going somewhere he can't be extradited.
The guy who hired Beaupre and his team was in China the whole time, so he couldn't be extradited to America since China has no extradition treaty with America.
Answer: There are two possible explanations: 1) Because there is far less space available in federal prisons, compared to state and local facilities, federal prisoners and arrestees are often kept in local facilities. 2) Because the federal charges or providing support for terrorism and industrial espionage are harder to prove compared to the state-level charges of breaking and entering, assault and battery, and attempted murder.
It's doubtful the writers had all that in mind when writing a comedy holiday script. The plot simply calls for the spies to be caught and thrown into jail at the end of the story. There is also a difference between prison and jail. Prison is for those convicted of a crime. Jail is a temporary holding place after an arrest is made. With police being involved in the arrest, the spies would initially be booked and held in the local jail. The spies would later be transferred to federal custody to await trial.
4th Dec 2019
Casino (1995)
Question: What did Nicky mean when he said some of the diamonds he was fencing had "n*****s in them"?
Answer: He wasn't referring to the diamonds. He was talking about sending the gems to Las Vegas. He says he has several "sand n*****s" out there, meaning fencers, and clarifies that they are Arabs.
But BEFORE that he did say "some of these stones have a lot of n*****s in them", look it up on youtube.
He's referring to "dark inclusions" or imperfections, which, of course, reduce their value.
28th Nov 2019
Charlie's Angels (1976)
Question: Did they ever give a reason why Shelley Hack left?
Answer: Hack, who was best known as the "Charlie" perfume model, was brought in after Kate Jackson was let go following numerous disputes she'd had with producers over script quality. At the same time, ratings for the show had been falling. Hack, Tiffany Welles, was supposed to add more glamour and a mystique intrigue to the show. While there was an initial spike in the ratings, they soon declined again. Hack was let go after one season and replaced by Tanya Roberts, who also failed to improve ratings, leading to the show's cancellation.
Thanks. Still let's face, the novelty had worn off and it was just a T and A show. I mean, anyone hear of anything worth watching starring any of them outside of this say a few things like Sheena?
Farrah Fawcett probably had the more notable post-Charlie career. She left a silly hit show to pursue more serious work. She received good reviews for such movies as The Burning Bed, Extremities, etc.
20th Nov 2019
NCIS: New Orleans (2014)
Question: How does Bakula afford that bar he owns? Do Feds really make enough to make such purchases?
Answer: It should also be noted, just because someone owns a small business (in this case a bar) doesn't mean they're rich, or they had to be rich or make enough money from another job in order to afford it. Banks provide small business loans and having steady employment, good credit history, solid business plan, etc would allow someone to get a loan. Most business owners even say they "own" whatever bar, restaurant, store, or business they run even if it's leased or mortgaged.
20th Nov 2019
Twilight (2008)
Question: How come the vampires don't die during the day and are awake? How can the werewolves transform at will instead of by a full moon?
Answer: Because they are fictional characters, and Stephanie Meyer made up new rules for them to suit her narrative.
She should've still respected the lore as most do. This series is her as Bella and the two guys are based on guys she lusted for in high school who ignored her. Read between the lines people.
Answer: The moon has no effect on the Quileutes because they are not werewolves. In the books, they are shape-shifters that can change at will. Rather than being created by a werewolf's bite, some Quileutes are born with a gene that becomes active and transforms them into wolves when vampires are near. They cannot turn other people into wolves. The movie series glossed over this fact, apparently to avoid confusion about the differences. Even though they are called "werewolves" in the movies, that is not what they are.
In addition, actual werewolves do exist in the Twilight universe. They are called "Children of the Moon." They follow most of the standard werewolf myths: changing only during the night of a full moon, feral behavior, infecting others by biting them, etc... They are also immune to vampire venom. The Volturi hunted them nearly to extinction after one nearly killed Caius.
Answer: It seems like you already decided your own answer, but like a lot of mythology and lore, hundreds of variations occur. Most often werewolves can change at will once they've gone through their first transformation. In a lot of lore, the full moon only forces them to change, even if it's against their will. It does not mean it's the only way to change. Meyer did add a twist to vampires in the sun, but in many stories, sunlight is not fatal, they can be safe in the shadows, or the sunlight only weakens, not kills, them, and/or they are strengthened by the moonlight (which is why they came out at night).
Didn't decide, only observed what I'd seen with the like of Chaney's Wolfman and Lugosi's Dracula, that's all.
The horror movies of that era, like Dracula, Frankenstein, The Wolfman, etc. freely adapted their own interpretation of traditional folklore.
10th Nov 2019
Scooby-Doo (2002)
Question: If the airport and a plane don't allow dogs, then why is a cat is allowed on a plane?
Answer: Maybe because cats are smaller than dogs and all felines are relatively the same size and fit into a small pet carrier. Dogs range in size from a few pounds to over a hundred, making crating them more difficult.
Answer: Well before boarding Shaggy said they wouldn't allow large dogs on board. Implying smaller dogs would be OK.
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: No, she's wearing her own sweater when going down the stairs.
raywest ★
Then why would she not get why Ron isn't wearing it when she isn't wearing her own gift from Mrs Weasley?
Ron has a long history of being embarrassed by his mother's rather odd homemade gifts. Unlike Hermione, because his family was poor, he had few options on what else he could wear. Hermione, being a guest, would not be expected to wear her gift at any particular time. She also thinks Ron is over-reacting.
raywest ★