Fifteen Million Merits - S1-E2
Question: Is the phrase "pie ape" British slang, or a mix of slang words? Or is just an insult the writers created that isn't based on anything?
Bishop73
8th Jun 2020
Black Mirror (2011)
8th Jun 2020
The IT Crowd (2006)
Calamity Jen - S1-E2
Question: In this episode, there's a commercial about "999" being changed to a ridiculous long number. While I get why it would be funny, was there some basis for joke itself? Like, was there talk about the UK changing the emergency number or something? Or is it just completely random. And when Roy says "how hard is it to remember 911, I mean 999", is this just a joke for American viewers to understand what 999 is? Or do British people say or use "911" too?
Answer: It's a joke on the "118" numbers in the UK. 118 numbers were used for directory enquiries and adverts for them on TV always tried to give a way to easily remember one for a particular company. The fake ad in the show takes it to the extreme. People in the UK do not use "911", the point of the joke was that Roy had forgotten "999" while saying it was easy to remember.
8th Apr 2020
General questions
There was a kids book I read in the 80's. As I recall, the kid was really into baseball but his father wasn't, he was into numbers and might have been an accountant (but that might not even be how it went). The only thing I swear I remember was the father said he knew when baseball's opening day was because it fell on the same day as tax day, April 15th. For the longest time I thought baseball's opening day was always April 15. I also have a feeling the father and son bonded over baseball when the father realised how much numbers and math was involved in the game.
17th Mar 2020
Zoom (2006)
Question: At the end, during Cindy's play, there's a woman in a cream color coat in the audience that the camera and lighting seem to focus on. She's sitting cross legged and not reacting like the other extras. She seems totally out of place to be just an extra. At first I thought she was suppose to be someone and was going to do something (like reveal her superpowers or something). Is she suppose to be a character, like Ace? Did we see her earlier in the film? Is there a deleted scene with her? Or is it truly just a random extra?
Answer: She could be Cindy's Mom, who is video taping her daughter and not surprised by her powers. If not, she probably a government agent sent to keep tabs on her.
It's not Cindy's mom. The woman is after the boy is pulled up. Later Cindy's mom says "that's my princess" and it's a different lady (though a very similar outfit up top). I tried to see if there were other "out of place" people watching the other kids to see if government agents were watching them, but didn't see anyone.
8th Jan 2020
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987)
Question: I get why counselor Troi would wear what may be considered civilian outfit or non-standard uniform, but why does she never wear her rank insignia for the first 5 or 6 seasons? In s5e5, "Disaster", it's revealed she has the rank of Lieutenant Commander and is in charge as the highest ranking officer on the bridge after the accident. Did I miss something, or was this just something the writers decided to add late into the series? In previous episodes, I never got the impression she was a bridge officer, or even had any Starfleet training, only on the bridge on the behest of Picard who wanted an Empath to help when encountering someone, or something, new. I never saw her take command in any situation (for example, Data whose rank was also Lieutenant Commander, was often seen taking command of the bridge for night duty or other reasons). Was there any previous episodes that mention her rank or training or shows her insignia, etc?
Answer: Troi always carried the rank of Lieutenant Commander, and does wear her rank insignia in the 1st episode of the series, "Encounter at Farpoint" while wearing the "skirt" uniform. She never takes command prior to the episode "Disaster" because at that point, she had not yet taken the Bridge Officer's Test. She passes this test in the Season 7 episode "Thine Own Self", at which point she becomes a line officer and is assigned bridge command during her duty shifts (though we never actually see this).
29th Dec 2019
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987)
The Best of Both Worlds (1) - S3-E26
Question: I can't tell if this was a mistake or if there's an explanation. When the Borg are on the Enterprise's bridge, the first two are covered in the green light indicating they're being transported back to the Borg ship, but the 3rd one (the one successfully shot by Worf) has no lights, he just fades away. Why?
Answer: The Borg use technology to cause the dead to disintegrate, presumably as a security measure to prevent their technology from being captured.
But in s05e23, "I, Borg", Riker says "the Borg collect their dead" when they encounter the injured Borg. Worf says to kill it and leave no evidence they were there so that when the Borg return to collect the dead member. Plus, there were 4 dead Borg and none of them disintegrated.
I believe "collect" refers to the disintegration. We see other Borg remove specific pieces of technology from the dead borg, which causes it to disappear.
Answer: Its possible that the Borg use a special transporter for living beings (which is the one with the green glow) and a different one for non-living things (which might not have a green glow). In Star Trek the federation uses a different type of transporter when moving bulk cargo than it does when moving people.
5th Nov 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Was there an explanation in-film, or perhaps in the comics, why Thanos (and even Hulk and Iron Man) had to physically snap his finger to get rid of half the population? He seemed to be powerful enough to be able to wield the power of the stones with just his mind. I don't remember him having to snap any fingers to instantly change reality, etc. Shouldn't he have just been able to think about wiping out half the population?
Answer: The gems are so powerful together nobody could wield all of them directly, not even Thanos. The glove is especially made that they can be worked in unison. But there are limitations, since they are being operated indirectly. It's like the staff Loki was using with the mind gem inside. He had to physically touch people with the staff to take control of them. Same goes with Ronin using the Power gem to destroy Xandar, he had to physically touch the ground with his hammer to use it. Same goes for the glove, you have to physically use it to use the gems inside it. He has to do this to to use any of the powers of the gems, he closes his hand into a fist to use one of the powers. The snap is for using all of them at once.
Answer: In the comics, the Infinity Stones (where they are known as the Infinity Gems) do not require gestures such as snapping to carry out of the desires of the wielder. They simply respond to that person's will. In the comics, Thanos does indeed snap his fingers in order to wipe out half of all life in the universe, but that was more of a visual gesture for the readers. The Stones in the films are significantly less powerful, as it would no doubt make Thanos virtually unstoppable if all he had to do to use the power of the Stones was think about what he wanted them to do. In the comics, Thanos is defeated by his own notion of being unworthy of omnipotence. The Gems in the comics also do not kill their wielder from an overwhelming amount of power.
7th Oct 2019
Superman Returns (2006)
Question: When Jimmy is giving Clark the cake, Mr. White says "where are the photos of that birthday clown massacre thing?" Is this suppose to be a nod to The Joker? I didn't think any of Joker's origin stories had him as an actual birthday clown that killed people until this recent Joker film.
Answer: I don't believe it is. This is a half reboot sequel to the classic Superman 2 movies and other than being a DC character, has no ties to other properties of the DC comic lore. This is more likely just meant to be something funny they could have Parry White say to get a laugh about him bringing up something random and ridiculous meant to be taken seriously.
19th Aug 2019
Little Monsters (1989)
Question: I'm watching on Netflix. Was this edited somehow from the original? In the Netflix version Brian enlists the help of Todd and Kiersten to rescue his brother. After escaping the dungeon, it shows them rearming themselves at the school. Then there's a cutscene where Maurice is in Ronnie's room and says "oh, Ronnie." Brian, Todd, and Kiersten are see walking into Boy's room a 2nd time, then all of the sudden Ronnie is there with the battery pack, and no-one seems surprised. In the original, was Ronnie recruited the first time around and then cut in the Netflix version? In the Netflix version Boy says the line "why lose 5 lives when you can gain 4?" when there's only 4 kids and not 5. So I feel like he must have been there. If Ronnie was edited out, why? Was it just to save the run time? If Ronnie wasn't edited out, who are the 5 lives Boy is talking about?"
Answer: I'd seen the movie a lot growing up and also just picked up the new Blu-Ray. As I remember seeing it when I was younger, and indeed in the new Blu-Ray, Ronnie is recruited on the group's second attempt to rescue Eric. He was never there the first time around. Admittedly, the line about "why lose five lives when you can gain four" is confusing given there's only four kids. But I always assumed he was referring to the four kids and Maurice, who he also has held captive.
Answer: You see Brian go down with Kiersten and Todd armed with their first set of flashlights. He then says this line because he wants to keep the four kids there and turn them into monsters. But he could kill them and my guess is maybe kill Maurice as well because he didn't succeed in turning Brian into one of them.
Answer: They went back to rescue Brian's younger brother Eric. Ronnie was there after Maurice went and got him to come and help. So the five lives refers to the four kids and the one that he stole which was Eric.
That's why I'm wondering why it was edited on Netflix because Ronnie isn't there when Boy says the line. In the Netflix version, Ronnie is recruited after Boy's line.
3rd Jun 2019
Legends of Tomorrow (2016)
Question: Not sure if there's an answer, just speculation, or a plot hole. As I understand it, the premise of time travel in the show is the Legends can't go back to a time they've already been to because then time would fold in on itself, etc. For example, the 3 get stranded in 1958, picked up in 1960, but the rest of the Legends can't try again by just going back to 1958. But then it's revealed that Chronos was Rory all along, so how is Chronos/Rory able to time travel back to a time Rory has already been to without doing any real damage to time? And if the idea is, well no-one knew Chronos was Rory, so they didn't know they were interacting with a time traveling version of themselves (or what ever the reason), then all the Legends have to do is disguise themselves to interact in the same time.
Answer: My speculation... As Chronos was sent by the Time Masters, the armour he is given may have some sort of 'time folding preventive' system built into it? (A pure assumption on my part).
5th May 2019
Dexter (2006)
Dirty Harry - S4-E5
Question: In some episodes they mention an officer's romantic relationships can be used by attorneys to somehow discredit the officer and get the suspect off. In this episode specifically, Deputy Chief Matthews says the department can't risk a defense attorney turning Lt. LaGuerta and Sgt. Batista's romantic involvement a courtroom sideshow every time they work a case together (and thus Batista needs to be transferred out of Homicide). But why would it matter? Is this just "Hollywood" exaggeration for plot purposes? Wouldn't the prosecution object based on relevance if the defense attorney tried to bring this up, especially since Lt. Guerta disclosed the relationship through the proper channels? Or is Matthews lying for an ulterior motive.
Answer: It could be a combination of both. Defense attorneys will do just about anything they legally can to get their clients acquitted, so it's not unreasonable that they might try to convince a jury that a romantic relationship between two officers in the same precinct could somehow cause problems for a case. Even if it's unlikely to work, the department would want to avoid it altogether. Additionally, Matthews and LaGuerta don't particularly like each other and are shown multiple times throughout the series to be scheming against each other, so it could just as well be a power play by Matthews to put LaGuerta in her place.
5th May 2019
Dexter (2006)
Question: Dexter tests the blood on Miguel's shirt, to see if it's Freebo's. It looks like he's just using a DNA sequencer and the blood result comes back "bovine." Can a DNA sequencer differentiate which species the blood came from like that? Or perhaps he was using a different type of blood analysis machine? Is there an analysis machine that's capable of that? I thought the way to test if blood is human or not, "anti-human serum" is mixed with the blood to see if it will clot. So wouldn't the only way to tell it was bovine blood is to inject it with "anti-bovine serum"?
Answer: The short answer is yes, it could. but, it would have to be set up to analyze results to differentiate species. The sequencer will report the base pairs for any properly prepared sample, but interpreting the results is a software package. The software is available, but I would think it unlikely that an analysis package used in a forensics lab would have the capability to be so specific. More likely it would report "Non Human Sequences Found."
28th Dec 2018
Daredevil (2015)
Blindsided - S3-E4
Question: Matt has the taxi take him to the prison and tells the driver to wait for him. But the taxi is parked right next to the exit gate, so as close to the prison as you can get. During such an intense riot and lockdown, would a corrections officer tell the taxi to move? This is a question for people with prison/correctional work experience in regards to lockdown procedures.
27th Nov 2018
Stargate SG-1 (1997)
Question: When the present/future is altered, what was purpose of Jack, Sam, and Daniel going to recruit Teal'c? Was it just to recreate SG-1 so they could begin going on off-world missions? Did they even have a plan to fix the past/present (prior to Daniel being killed and they jumped back in time)? Then at the end, when the tape said there's no fish in the pond, wouldn't that Jack (Jack #3 if you will) already know there are in fact fish in his pond (since whatever changes to the past that affected the pond would also affect Jack #3)?
3rd Sep 2018
Jurassic Park (1993)
Question: It seems like a minor plot hole, but I can't be certain in case I don't understand or missed something. After Ellie turns the main power back on and activates the individual park systems, the electrified fences turn back on. When she flees the shed, she runs through the gate of a fence that has a "danger: high voltage" warning sign, and she even touches part of the fence that's not the gate. Shouldn't the fence have become electrified?
Chosen answer: The "danger: high Voltage" sign is for the electrical equipment inside the shed, not the fence itself.
3rd Sep 2018
Jurassic Park (1993)
Question: Is there any mention in the films or books about how the extinct plants were grown (or recreated/cloned)? I've already suspended disbelief that their extraction of viable DNA is possible and I know seeds can lay dormant for thousands of years, so I can accept whatever made-up technique they claim. I'm not looking for speculation or "it's just a movie" type responses.
Chosen answer: It is never explained in any of the films or the novels. In the novel The Lost World it is very briefly mentioned that InGen maintains a facility where they house prehistoric plants but that is literally the only time it is brought up. It isn't mentioned in the films at all.
Answer: As the DNA came from fossilized tree sap, Probably an offscreen procedure of removing plant DNA directly from that.
30th Aug 2018
Longmire (2012)
A Thing I'll Never Understand - S6-E4
Question: Who sent Vic the barn toy? Some people on the internet say she bought it online (like eBay or Craig's list), but I don't remember seeing her be online to buy stuff. Plus, it didn't seem like she was doing much to prepare to have the baby, so it would seem odd that buying a used barn toy would be one of the first things she buys.
Answer: Chance.
14th Aug 2018
The Jackal (1997)
Question: At the prison, when Witherspoon tells Declan "that's our deal", the camera is pointing towards Witherspoon and there seems to be something, or an image, behind him (to the left). What is it? It looks like a cardboard cut out of a person (to me I see a face and bare chest), only it's all grey and almost looks like Lobo from DC Comics. But I don't see anything in the wide shots that it could be. (00:25:55)
Answer: If you look at time 24:21, you can see two murals painted on the walls. Presumably by the prisoners. The one with his arms up striking a muscular pose is what you're seeing. The camera focused on Witherspoon in the shot you're talking about makes that image blurry in the background and gives it the effect of having dreadlocks. But it's just the muscle guy painting.
13th Aug 2018
Longmire (2012)
What Happens on the Rez... - S4-E10
Question: When Walt plays the piano, is he playing a real song, or just something he made up (i.e. it was incidental music written for the scene)?
Answer: Something he made up.
31st Jul 2018
Longmire (2012)
Party's Over - S2-E5
Question: Does the pharmacist that Longmire talks to violate any sort of confidentiality laws? Walt doesn't come in with a warrant, but the pharmacist is giving Walt information pertaining to other people still alive, not just the victim. I could see the law allowing him to tell Walt "no" that someone didn't pick up any prescriptions, but to mention she picked up antibiotics or that Gerry had back surgery seems unethical.
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's a derogatory slang term made up for the show.