Question: How is it that Andy is able to frame the warden for money laundering without incriminating himself in the process?
Captain Defenestrator
17th Feb 2014
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
27th Feb 2016
King of the Hill (1997)
Peggy Hill: the Decline and Fall (2) - S4-E1
Corrected entry: Hank states that DiDi is three years older than Peggy. However, in the episode "Shins of the Father", he said that he went to kindergarten with Didi, which would make him three years older than Peggy as well. This is not possible, though, because he says in "Luanne Virgin 2.0" that he and Peggy were married when they were eighteen. (If he is three years older than Peggy and he was married to her at age eighteen, he would have married a fifteen-year-old).
Correction: She could have gone to school late. Kindergarten isn't mandatory in the US.
I don't think Didi could have gone to school three years late, though. That would make her twenty-one years old when she graduated from high school, even if she didn't fail a year.
It's quite possible that she only started kindergarten one year late. Then she failed other grades and had to repeat them. The repeated grades would cause her to graduate at age twenty-one. The rules for each school are different, but at my high school, a student could keep attending until age twenty-one.
People have graduated at age 21 or higher in the past. There's no law stating that one can only be in school until the age of 18. Just because YOU doubt it doesn't mean it couldn't have happened.
16th Sep 2011
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Question: When the Ghostbusters went on trial, did they CHOOSE to waive their right to trial by jury and be tried by the judge? Given the obvious bias of this judge against them, if I were them, I would certainly not have waived my right to a jury trial.
Answer: Violating a restraining order is regarded as Contempt of Court, and thus is not subject to trial by jury.
But what about the other charges, willful destruction of public property, fraud, and malicious mischief? (Also, it should be noted that no-one goes to trial a day or two after they're arrested, so it seemed it was written as a bench trial just so the judge could later reverse his decision).
Louis is a tax attorney and since he got his degree in night school, it's implied that he has very little experience even being a tax attorney, let alone a criminal defense lawyer. I took it as the underlying humor in this scene being that everything went wrong, yet they still managed to save the day.
The charge that the prosecution really wants to stick them on is Ghostbusting and therefore, violating a restraining order. So that's what they're pushing for.
15th Nov 2009
Law & Order: UK (2009)
Question: The defendant in this episode has prior convictions for GBH and HBH. I can deduce that GBH means "Grievous Bodily Harm," however, have never heard of HBH and can't seem to find a definition of it online. Anyone know it?
Chosen answer: You misheard ABH - Assault occasioning Actual Bodily Harm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_bodily_harm.
Ah, thanks.
24th Jan 2011
Superman (1978)
Question: What caused Krypton to explode?
Answer: That's the updated comic book version. In the movie and the original origin story their red sun was going super nova and caused Krypton's orbit to shift.
Jor-El's conversation with the Science Council in the movie is all about the planet's core.
You must be thinking of a different movie. There wasn't any mention of the core and when Jor-El says the planet will explode, the reply is the planet is just shifting orbit. Later, Jor-El tells 18 year old Clark they will enter the realm of the red Krypton sun, the cause of their destruction. The answer about Krypton's sun is correct.
I went and looked up the script and it DOES say orbit. OK, you're right.
Chosen answer: An atomic chain-reaction in the planet's core. The explosion also irradiated the fragments of the planet, which is why kryptonite is deadly to Superman.
7th Jan 2013
The Simpsons (1989)
Question: Why did Sideshow Bob want to kill Selma? I don't ever recall her doing anything to upset him.
13th Jan 2016
General questions
I'm looking for the title of a movie about a man who murdered his wife, and seemingly got away with it, but a woman is pretending to be his living wife and all of their friends and family say the impostor really is his wife. Not sure if it was made for TV or not.
Answer: There are a couple of films that use this story. "One of My Wives is Missing" from 1976, starring Jack Klugman and Elizabeth Ashley could be it. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075015/) It was later remade in 1986 as "Vanishing Act, " starring Mike Farrell and Margot Kidder. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092148/). (SPOILERS) In both versions, everyone knows that he did it and made it look like an accident, but they didn't have enough proof to arrest him. The "wife" is a police detective who happened to be a dead ringer for his wife, and the friends and family are cooperating with the police to gaslight him into confessing.
Answer: Thank you! I've been wanting to ask this question for years. I remember watching this as a kid. I remember the ending where the husband went back to the car where he left his wife dead. Finally have the answer. Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWEwR6Yj8Zc.
Quite happy to help.
17th Feb 2022
The Walking Dead (2010)
Question: Maybe I missed a full explanation or it's a plot hole for the show, but how do Michonne's armless, jawless walkers on a leash help mask her scent or let her walk among the walkers?
Answer: The other walkers see the two already upon her, figure that she's already taken, and move on.
What do you mean "upon her" if they're in front of her and walking forward?
A satisfactory answer hasn't really been given. The general consensus on Reddit is that having the two tame rotting zombies close by overpowers her own smell and the zombies can't detect her. In my previous answer, I was thinking that it was a psychological tactic. The other zombies see that they're about to eat her and about to attack, figure "that one's taken," and move on. This time, I'll go with the internet's answer.
I broke this question up into 2 because I ran out of room. But, yeah, I thought the idea was either mask her smell or make other Walkers think she's "taken." But in the show, those options don't seem to work for other characters.
"Upon" as in "They are about to descend down on their prey."
Yes, but I was asking about times when they're in front of her and she's following, not that ever showed any signs of descending down on her.
Well, zombies don't look that carefully to distinguish "Oh, those guys are walking in front of her instead of about to throw her on the ground and eat her. Let's get really hung up on the word "upon" now, shall we?"
It was my polite way of letting you admit you didn't know what you were talking about and were guessing with a total BS answer.
Ah. Well, I DID admit that earlier.
20th Feb 2022
Scream (1996)
Corrected entry: When Ghostface stabs Mr. Himbry, the man screams at full lungs; it's 10 minutes to 5 PM and there's a janitor two rooms away, but nobody finds his body until much later in the night - and that is critical to the plan, because he's the designated diversion.
Correction: Actually, I can correct myself here because there is the fact that everyone was leaving the school at that time, and the janitor is hard of hearing. It does not make much sense that we see the two culprits hanging out at the video store after the killing, but I suppose there are several scenarios one can paint where the body was hidden safely until it was time to display it later in the night, and so they had time to show up somewhere else later, not knowing the exact timeline there.
I was just watching a video where they talk about how it's now a trope in movies that janitors are completely oblivious to their surroundings. Big action sequences happen behind them while they listen to headphones and go about their jobs. You said the janitor was hard of hearing, but it could also be this trope at play.
24th Jun 2020
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993)
Plot hole: Thomas Riker is able to steal the Defiant partially because he's a genetic double for and not a clone of Will Riker. Thomas Riker's existence is not a secret. Star Fleet is aware that the first officer of their flagship has a genetic duplicate who resigned and is out there somewhere. There should be something in place to verify Will's location before giving Thomas access. But then, of course, we wouldn't have an episode.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: At this point Thomas Riker is still a Starfleet officer. There is no need to lock him out of accessing the Defiant's systems as he is considered just as trustworthy as Will.
It's said that he resigned over suspected Maquis sympathies. They were right.
They say that he had expressed political opinions that supported the Maquis, not that he had resigned from Starfleet. A large number of Starfleet officers supported the Maquis' intentions, but still stayed loyal to Starfleet.
No, Thomas Riker accessed the Defiant under the guise of being Will Riker, and Major Kira released the lockouts being under that impression.
Exactly. NOBODY in Star Fleet has thought "Well, what if one of them claims to be the other? How do we tell them apart?"
25th Jun 2009
A Clockwork Orange (1971)
Question: How exactly were the doctors able to reverse the effects and undo the Ludovico technique that Alex was subjected to?
Chosen answer: We're never given details. Possibly electroshock therapy or somehow purging his system of the Ludovico formula.
Answer: When Alex jumped out of the window, the shock of the fall snapped him out of the Ludovico technique.
He mentions later that he's been having dreams of someone picking through his brain. This is the government undoing the treatment.
2nd Mar 2014
The Brittas Empire (1991)
Safety First - S2-E6
Factual error: When Helen tells Laura she's trying to quit all the pills that she takes to deal with Gordon, she starts listing them off. "The Valium, the Diazepam, the Librium..." Valium and Diazepam are the same thing. (Valium's the brand, Diazepam's the generic). (00:08:20)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Anyone on those pills knows exactly what they are.
Usually true in real life but this show exaggerates things for comedy. The writers probably genuinely made the mistake but it is still plausible that Helen is that messed up.
If you're on these meds, you know this stuff. Like how people on Percocet know that its generic is Oxycodone.
29th May 2009
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Question: When Luke asked Leia if she remembers her real mother she said she does but she died when she was very young. Her mother died during child birth. How can Leia remember what her mother looked like?
Answer: Leia most likely knew she was adopted as she had no reaction to Luke asking about her "real mother." I believe the correct answer here is George Lucas hadn't planned on Leia's mother dying during childbirth when this scene was written and at that time Leia genuinely had faint memories of her real mother. This was later shown to be impossible when the prequels were made.
Answer: She is referring to Padme. I believe she actually replies 'not really' when asked what her mother looked like. Also, Leia was a senator at some point, like Padme. It is likely she would have seen a painting or senator entry.
She most likely didn't know Padme the senator was her mother, because that would mean Anakin/Darth Vader would therefore have the same knowledge. She most definitely knew she was adopted. The "not really, just feelings" (paraphrased) line was "ret-conned" to fit when the newborn twins were shown in Episode III. Luke's eyes were shut, while Leia's eyes were open-she "saw" her mother. Perhaps the Force gave her a more mature feeling/insight into her mother from the brief time between pregnancy and when she was spirited away to Alderaan and her adoptive family.
Chosen answer: The mother Leia refers to would be Queen Breha Organa of Alderaan. At this point, Leia has no idea that she was adopted.
Negative. Luke specifically says "your real mother." Nowhere is it said Leia didn't know she was adopted. It's also highly unlikely she didn't know, since her adoptive father was a high-profile governmental figure and no way would the press keep a tight lip on the Bail and his wife suddenly having a baby without any signs of pregnancy.
Bail Organa says "We've always wanted a daughter." It wouldn't make sense to tell the daughter they've adopted in order to hide her from Vader "Oh yeah, you're adopted but don't tell anybody because the Emperor would send Vader to hunt you down." Better to just let her think you're her real parents.
Just because Leia knows she's adopted doesn't mean she has any idea who exactly her birth mother was, aside from her apparent memories. The Organas may well have concocted a whole cover story about her birth parents for another layer of protection over her identity. In fact, the way both Luke and Leia casually use/accept the "real mother" term suggests that not only does Leia know she's adopted, it's actually fairly common knowledge.
Answer: The short answer is that we don't know and it's left a mystery for the viewer. But on the flip side the lack of concrete information does leave room for numerous possibilities: One is that Leia might simply be mistaken: she had dreams of an idealized mother figure that she mistook for memories. Another is that the Organas could've lied to Leia about who her birth mother was for her own protection, and she is recalling this decoy mother (I quite like the theory that they told Leia her birth mother was one of Padme's loyal bodyguards chosen for their resemblance to her). And of course there's always the possibility there's something supernatural going on: Leia is strong with the Force and doesn't know it, and Padme's fate was so inexplicable you could theorize she didn't even really "die" so much as her spirit simply left her body.
14th Sep 2014
Doctor Who (2005)
The Day of the Doctor - S7-E16
Continuity mistake: In this episode, I. M. Foreman's scrapyard is at the end of the alley next to Coal Hill School. In "An Unearthly Child", the scrapyard was far enough away from the school that Barbara and Ian take Ian's car to get there. Barbara also describes it to Ian as "there's a big wall on one side, houses on the other." If it was right next to the school, she would have mentioned "that scrapyard next to the school." (00:00:15)
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The evidence to this is merely a sign directing people to the scrapyard. This does not indicate whether or not the scrapyard in question is actually at the end of that road.
That still seems to be a point to bring up. Or better yet, "Her address is the same as the scrapyard on that sign outside the school."
23rd Aug 2009
Back to the Future (1985)
Question: How is Marty able to play a 1980s videotape on a 1950s television set? Is this just another example of Doc's ahead-of-his-time inventiveness?
Answer: The video camera was in the DeLorean. With the right kind of adapter, which was common enough in the 80s that Doc might've had it on the camera or been able to jury-rig something in the 50s, it would have been possible to connect it into the antenna screws in the back of the TV like an old Atari and play it directly from the camera.
TVs in the 50s had a two prong antennae connection (two screws in the back that you put a prong antennae into) TVs in the mid 80s also had this. The coax connection (the one wire that screws in) was starting to become common, but, the two prong connection would have been more likely on any given TV at the time, so, whatever wire they used to preview recordings probably had that. very convenient that Marty brought those cords with him.
An old Atari 2600 RF Adapter would be how one would link a video camera to an old-fashioned television. A simple-enough part that Doc could probably make one with 1950s technology.
Answer: Video tape system back then could output an NTSC video signal, just like broadcast at the time, and up to HD in the 2000s. Usually there was a switch on the video device to change the output frequency between channels 3 or 4. Depending on what was an open channel in your area.
20th Feb 2017
M*A*S*H (1972)
Corrected entry: Between season 2 and season 3, the interior decoration of the officers' club changes radically. Up to season 2, it's furnished with wicker chairs and tables and has a picture of General MacArthur at the wall, from season 3 on, it has the familiar look with the tables made from tires and the unit insignia on the wall.
Correction: As you say, it happens in-between seasons. Given the 4077th's successful track record, the higher-ups may reward them with better equipment for the Officers' Club. (At one point, they save the life of an officer's son, and he gives them an upgrade to the club as well. Who's to say that hasn't happened more than once?).
Actually, it isn't so much an UPgrade as a DOWNgrade. In the 2nd season, it had nice wicker chairs and tables and even local bartenders. In the 3rd season and on, both the decoration and the furniture have a much more home-brew/scrounged air to them. I think it's more likely the producers or production designers noticed the officers' club was out of whack with the rest of the production design and adjusted it.
Again, the officer gave them the upgrade, he'd get to pick the decor and they'd just have to learn to like it. What you call an upgrade and what he calls an upgrade might be two separate things.
The basic problem with what you say is always the same however: There is exactly nothing in the dialog to support any of your theories.
There's also nothing but your own personal flair for design to say that the officer's idea of "That's what I call an upgrade" was, in fact, a downgrade. The taste of the officer who's giving them the upgrade is what decides if it is or isn't, and if his "upgrade" sucks, there's not a lot that the 4077th can do but say "Gee... thanks... sir..." and learn to like it.
"In reward for your dedicated service, I decided to replace your barkeeper with no barkeeper. You also won't have to look at the ugly mug of MacArthur any more, I've found you some nice random unit insignia instead! What's not to love, eh?"
Yeah, it sucks. I hear it's this thing called The Army.
22nd Mar 2016
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Question: In the first sequence, there is a trap with Indy's competition's body stuck on it. Although it is sprung by somebody breaking the beam of light (which I find hard to believe, given that it and other traps were done without any kind of more modern technology we're used to, but suspend disbelief for the sake of the movie), how was it reset without human intervention after Forrestal was killed, and prepared for Sapito?
Chosen answer: Likely, it wasn't. The Hovitos are still guarding the temple. Presumably, they maintain and reset the traps.
You'd think in that case that they would've removed the body.
I don't know, I'd be more afraid to rob the place with a dead body stuck there than without.
Why? It's a good warning to other would-be thieves.
Answer: More than likely, they left Forrestal's body as a warning.
Answer: The character played by Alfred Molina is actually named "Satipo," after a town. "Sapito" would mean "small frog." It's a common typo, but the more you know.
9th May 2009
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Question: We see Biff groan in pain as he returns to 2015 with the stolen DeLorean. In a deleted scene we actually see Biff fade away as he is erased from existence by his actions. I assume this is because an alternate Biff now exists (or could have been killed) and so he is erased from time. If this happens to Biff, why doesn't this happen to Marty, Doc, and Jennifer? They too are replaced by alternate versions of themselves when they return and even before they return to 1985a. 1985a Biff even says in the film that Marty was in school in Switzerland, and Doc has been committed, so they too should fade away as Biff did, shouldn't they? I would say "time" was giving them time enough to correct things like in the 1st movie, but Biff faded away almost a soon as he arrived back in 2015a.
Answer: I read somewhere the reason Biff faded away was Lorraine shot him in the alternate timeline for murdering her husband, George.
I hadn't heard that one, could be in a novelization or something. This is entirely my own speculation with nothing official to support it; however, it could be that because Doc and Marty are trying to correct the timeline, he and his siblings' removal from history happens gradually, as they get closer or further from the act of their trying to set things right. Biff doesn't know or care and is actively trying to change history, so the moment he returns to 2015, he vanishes all at once.
If you have the DVD or Blu-ray, watch the deleted scene of Biff vanishing and turn on the commentary. It will confirm that Biff was murdered, which is why he was erased from existence.
Chosen answer: Biff faded away because he completely changed his own past. When Marty, Doc, and Jennifer return to 1985, they're returning to the alternate timeline that Biff created. They still exist and remember their own history because without it, Biff's timeline couldn't exist and a paradox would be created.
Answer: The comics answer this question. In 1986 in the alternate timeline, Biff forced the committed Doc Brown to send him forward in time to get more sports results, but Doc tricked him and sent him back to 1884 instead, where he was shot by his own great-grandfather Buford. When he reappeared in his current time (that's how the time machine worked in this timeline), he was dead. Old Biff faded from existence because Biff never grew up to become Old Biff (because he was dead), so Old Biff no longer existed.
22nd Feb 2017
King of the Hill (1997)
Corrected entry: Hank asks Peggy if she has her bridesmaid's dress from "one of Luanne's mama's weddings." In the episode "Leanne's Saga", Luanne's mother is just now getting out of jail for attacking Luanne's father, while they were married. She could not have left jail and had any other weddings.
Correction: We don't know if or how many times Leanne was married before she met Peggy's brother. It would be a safe bet to say she's gotten married more than once.
Why would Peggy be attending any of Leanne's weddings before Leanne met Peggy's brother? Leanne doesn't seem like the type of person Peggy would be friends with.
I don't have the ability to go back and re-watch the episode currently, so don't recall if Leanne is from Texas too or Montana like Peggy. If they went back as far as Montana, it might've been a case of being a small-enough town that she didn't have a lot of choices in friends. If after, they could've met young enough for Leanne to have had a couple weddings before setting her eye on Peggy's brother. Peggy's a bold, friendly person by nature; she probably has a number of friends whom you wouldn't expect. After all, she considers Minh one.
Leanne was married to Peggy's brother. Peggy probably feels enough family connection left that she lets herself get dragged to Leanne's weddings.
28th Jan 2016
The Dark Knight (2008)
Question: My question is regarding the first shot of the film. You see the back of a henchman holding a clown mask with a suitcase. Later you realize that this is the Joker, however he is in full make up. So does this mean he was standing out in broad daylight without a disguise on at the very beginning?
Answer: Yes. No reason not to. Nothing's happened yet and people in a big city like Gotham would just walk past the guy with the weird makeup and not think anything of it. (And since they wear masks in the holdup, nobody's going to think that the guy in the mask is in weird makeup under it).
Batman was shown a joker card in an evidence bag at the end of Batman Begins so would not at least some of the police be looking for him?
This doesn't mean that the general public is on the lookout for a guy in makeup.
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.
Chosen answer: Andy created the books so that everything was in the name of the Randall Stevens alias he created. The real books pointed to Warden Norton AND Randall Stevens, but didn't have Andy's name on them. As far as the law knows, Norton's accomplice was a guy named Randall Stevens who skipped town with the money before ratting him out.
Captain Defenestrator
If the laundered funds case was thoroughly investigated on an immediate basis (within a couple of days after the Bugle's writer got the material), the alias of Randall Stevens would have come out almost immediately, and of course his description would match that of someone who just escaped from prison, and even Barney Fife could have put two and two together.
Valid. However, by the time that would happen, Andy would be over the border and the warden would still get taken down, so his bigger goals would still be accomplished. They'll update Andy Dufresne's wanted poster to read "Alias Randall Stevens," but that's the biggest consequence for Andy.
Captain Defenestrator