What is the name of this possibly Japanese cartoon I saw in the 80s? Futuristic soldiers are converted into cyborgs to work in space. It follows an elite team before and after the conversion. One was an alien from the planet 'Mime' who never spoke. Another were a twin brother and sister who had the code names 'Iron Heart' and 'Iron Will.' During conversion, they realized Iron Heart had a defective heart, so they replaced it with machinery, making his name more appropriate.
Bishop73
5th Jan 2024
General questions
5th Dec 2023
General questions
For a period of time starting in the mid-2000s, it became common for most major DVD releases to have both 1- and 2-disc editions. Typically, the 2-disc edition just had more bonus content and cost a few dollars more, while the 1-disc edition had less content and was cheaper. I never understood this. This was before streaming became huge, so it didn't incentivize buying the DVD, nor did the 2-disc edition cost much more, so it couldn't have had much impact on profit. So why was this even a thing?
Answer: OP here. From everything I've been able to find, it pretty much just looks like it was just a bit of a gimmick. Put some extra bonus content on a second disc, call it a "Special Edition" or "Collector's Edition" or "Limited Edition," and charge an extra $5 for it. People who wanted just the movie could buy the single disc for the standard price, and people who wanted more special features paid a slightly more expensive "premium price." And it would subtly boost profits.
I think you're right - the extra content largely existed already, there was no significant cost to produce it, and mastering a second version of the DVD wouldn't cost much in the grand scheme of things either, so any extra amount would have been pure profit. Showgirls (first example I found) apparently made $37m in cinemas and $100m in DVD sales. A couple of extra dollars per unit would add up. It might also serve as "anchoring" if that's the right term - having a more expensive 2 disc version makes the single disc version look like better value to the casual buyer (while also appealing more to the movie buff). There are certainly some films I splashed out on for the fancier version because I was a fan (and then of course never really watched the extras much!), but going back a while there was literally no other way to see this extra content unless you bought the special edition.
From the perspective of why they were simultaneously released (and with a relatively small difference in price), I'd agree. But this is different from why two-disc versions were released some time after the one-disc version (and with a substantial difference in price). That is, the reasons why this initially happened are different from why it continued to happen.
I was trying to refer to concurrent releases in my question. Unfortunately, the character limit meant I could not give any examples. I was referring to titles like "Spider-Man 3" or "Transformers." I used to go to the store at midnight to buy new DVD releases around the time those movies came out, and there would almost always be a single disc DVD with just the movie and a few features, and a 2-Disc set with more special features released on the same day. (A 2-disc special/anniversary edition being released a few years later for an older title makes sense, and is a different matter entirely. I'm referring to when multiple editions of the same new release were put out at the same time.)
Yes, I finally figured this out! You are asking about a specific time period and looking for a straightforward answer, without putting things in historical perspective (the developing technology and decreasing costs of mass-producing DVD movies). The extras (plus a little more) that used to be included on the standard editions were now on a second disc with the package costing about $5 more. It probably came down to "will customers [be stupid enough to] pay extra money for this two-disc DVD?"
It probably came down to 'will customers [be stupid enough to] pay extra money for this two-disc DVD?' "and unfortunately when I was a teenager, I was, hahahaha. But yeah, the more I look into it, the more it does just seem like a total gimmick. (I feel like a good modern comparison might be steelbooks... cool packaging, but usually sold for a very high markup even though it's the same exact discs.)
My "victimization" came much earlier. I had the standard release versions of movies and, later, when I started to see much more expensive two-disc versions, I thought, "Who would buy these now?" Well, I think I ended up buying 3 versions of "Terminator 2." [Why?]
Answer: From my experience, the 2-disc versions provided two different formats. Typically, the 1-disc version was Fullscreen and, depending on its release, did have additional content like commentaries and deleted scenes. The 2-disc version included a Widescreen version as well as extra materials, extended cuts, remastered versions, or special edition, etc. Later, when Blu-Ray came out, the 2-disc set usually included a standard DVD version. Some DVDs were sold as 2-sided without a lot of extra content but having a Fullscreen and Widescreen version.
This doesn't really answer the question. I'm not referring to those. I'm more so referring to titles like "Spider-Man 3" or "Super 8". Their DVDs only came in widescreen, but had two versions. A single-disc edition with just the movie and a few special features, and a 2-disc edition that had more special features. I'm curious as to WHY many titles had single and two-disc editions with the only difference being the amount of special features. It just seems more logical to release just the 2-disc edition. This answer basically just explains that 2-disc existed.
I apologise for misunderstanding the question, because what you described in my experience was atypical. And in my opinion, it makes sense to release two versions, but I'm afraid to answer why if I turn out to still not understand the question.
No problem. It's a very weird, specific question, hahaha. Wouldn't surprise me if there isn't even really an answer beyond just "they decided to try it for some reason."
Answer: Simply put MONEY.
Profits are almost always, if not always, a factor. The two-disc versions with "extras" might have been enough to get certain movie buffs to buy them, even though they already had the single-disc version - but I doubt very many people actually did so.
25th Nov 2023
General questions
I remember a sitcom episode in which a man got angry if someone mentioned David Letterman. He would shout something like "David Letterman? Slowly I turn around!" I don't think he was a main character, though.
Answer: It's from the TV series "Cosby", s02e17, "Fifteen Minutes of Fame." Hilton and Griffin are in a jail cell and Griffin tells the guard they need to get to the David Letterman show. Gilbert Gottfried (who's credited as playing himself) gets angry hearing David Letterman's name and goes into a rant about how David Letterman ruined his life.
Thank you! That sounds like what I saw.
7th Aug 2023
General questions
What show had a joke about a male character going through a gay phase, and he was shown watching "Caroline in the City" (the joke being that only a gay man would watch)?
Answer: There's a cutaway gag in "Family Guy" (S01E06, "The Son Also Draws") where Peter tells Lois he's tricked people before. Then he says, "Remember that time I pretended to be gay?" and it cuts to him watching TV with the "Caroline in the City" title card showing.
11th Jul 2023
General questions
It seems to me that older shows, for the most part, had more "stand-alone" episodes: you could easily watch them if you missed the previous episode or two. If I am correct, this is why characters often had new love interests for just one episode. Nowadays, a show is often called a "series" and all episodes must be watched, even a "Previously on..." recap doesn't cover everything. Any thoughts on why this is?
Answer: Well, in the old days, people couldn't really watch whenever they wanted or even record what they wanted to see. So trying to follow a continuing show was a lot harder. That's why there were way more shows where every episode was standalone, as you didn't have to bother watching every single one to be able to follow it. You could skip a few without a problem. These days, watching all episodes is a lot easier because of recording and digital releases. You can watch whenever you want, in the right order.
Answer: There's a lot of factors that go into this. I think the biggest one is that seasons in general have gotten shorter, meaning there is less room for stand-alone episodes. It used to be the norm for shows to have 20+ episodes per season, whereas now, seasons with 13 or fewer episodes are more common. (This is for many reasons, including higher production costs, viewership fluctuations, streaming making shorter seasons more in vogue, etc.) And as a result, many shows now just basically feel like one big movie that's split up into chapters/episodes since there's less time for side-stories or stand-alone episodes. There's good and bad to this. On one hand, it means shows need to be more efficient and concise, and there's likely to be fewer dull moments. But on the other hand, it also means that there's slightly less time for side-characters, sub-plots, world-building, etc. So it's a double-edged sword. Also, "show" and "series" have always been used interchangeably. That's nothing new.
I don't remember what year it was, but if I understand correctly, one of the results of one of the writers' strikes a while back was reduced episodes to make a complete season or a half season (with some exceptions, like daily shows).
Yeah, from what I recall, during the 2007 writers' strike, a lot of seasons had to be produced with fewer episodes due to lost time from the several months the strike lasted. And that did help set a certain precedent that many shows could be successful with fewer episodes per season. Although, I think it wasn't really until about five years later that you started to see shorter seasons becoming more widespread.
Answer: I also think another point is, there's just so many more shows being produced today, so we see more examples of these types of series shows. And, if more shows are being produced, there's more competition to get viewers to watch live (as opposed to recording to a DVR or streaming). Companies that buy ad time during a show know if viewers are recording, they can skip their ads (which is why we see more countermeasures to this).
Answer: Adding to the other answers: In TV's earliest days (from the 1950s), shows had more episodes per season, over 30. During the summer hiatus, fewer reruns were shown until the new Fall season. That resulted in self-contained episodes and one-time characters or situations that were rarely mentioned again. Episodes could be shown in any order, without losing continuity. The half-hour sitcoms were like extended skits. Many early TV shows were written by radio-era writers when maintaining a consistent, non-visual storyline was more challenging. It was just a different way of doing things. As TV evolved, plots became extended throughout a season with fewer episodes. Keeping viewers involved and guessing what happens in the next episode helps ratings.
11th Jul 2023
General questions
Can different episodes of a show "belong" to different companies? I ask because streaming services will sometimes have a show, but a few episodes are missing throughout. I know that a streaming service may not have the rights to the newest episodes of a current show, but why are random episodes missing from older shows? (As examples, I have noticed this with "ALF" and "Alfred Hitchcock Presents".)
Answer: In some ways, yes. For example, in "AHP", some of the episodes were stories written by other authors. S0401 was a Roald Dahl story. For whatever reason, the streaming services didn't get the rights to show that episode (too costly, wasn't given permission, or didn't try). Sometimes an episode contains a copyrighted song that they didn't get the rights to stream (sometimes they'll cut that scene or dub over the music with something else). Sometimes episodes are pulled for being too offensive or controversial. For example, Hulu pulled 5 episodes of "Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia" for using black or brown face. For "Alf", I didn't see any missing episodes. But sometimes a 2-part episode will be combined into 1 episode, so IMDB says there's 26 episodes, but only 25 episodes are listed, with 1 episode being about twice as long.
Thank you. I've been watching "Alf" on the Roku Channel. I think there is an episode missing from Season 1. "Border Song" is listed as 1x18, then "Going Out of My Head" is 1x20.
That's strange. It may have something to do with where Roku got the content from, and the content was already missing. Before answering, I looked up the shows you mentioned on Tubi, and all episodes of "Alf" are there, including "Wild Thing" (episode 19). Tubi is a free streaming app I use on my TV.
19th May 2023
General questions
Are there any TV series that were cancelled before a complete first season was even aired? I am mostly curious about sitcoms and dramas/thrillers, not reality shows.
Answer: Honestly, there have been numerous TV shows cancelled before a complete first season was aired. Another great example is cult-favorite sci-fi series "Firefly," which was cancelled before the 14 produced episodes finished airing. "Emily's Reasons Why Not" is another good example. It's a romantic comedy series that was cancelled after only one of the six produced episodes aired. (The remaining five episodes never aired on TV, but were quietly released on a DVD set.) "Viva Laughlin," a musical comedy-drama series produced by Hugh Jackman was cancelled after only two episodes, and none of the remaining episodes have aired or been given a DVD release. "Mockingbird Lane," a re-imagining of "The Munsters," was cancelled after it's pilot was aired as a TV-special, so the remainder of the first season was never produced. There's honestly probably hundreds of shows that were cancelled before a complete first season was aired.
I was wondering if there are contracts that require the entire first season to be shown, before a network can decide not to show another season. I guess not, based on the answers here.
Shows being pulled mid-season isn't indicative of what other shows' contracts consist of. Some shows may have had it in their contracts that the entire season be aired (there are shows that get pulled mid-season beyond season 1). I don't have personal knowledge because that would be a lot of contracts to read to find out. So maybe someone does. But there's plenty of shows that don't produce an entire season prior to being picked up, so it's possible all the episodes produced were aired.
Answer: So, so many. Drive comes to mind - Nathan Fillion thriller about an illegal road race, only had a few episodes before being pulled off air. "Selfie" (2014) with Karen Gillan and John Cho was cancelled by ABC after only 7 episodes. "Do No Harm" (2013) cancelled after 2 episodes. The Dictator (2012) starring Christopher Lloyd only had one episode.
Answer: One of the shortest TV shows ever was the 1997 series "Lawless," starring former NFL player Brian Bosworth. It was cancelled after the first episode. Also, "Cop Rock," a TV show in the 90s, was cancelled after only 11 episodes. "When The Whistle Blows," a TV sitcom in the 80s, also only lasted 11 episodes.
Answer: There was a police drama roughly 10 years ago called Golden Boy. It was about the youngest police Commissioner in NYPD history and kept hinting at a department-wide shootout that led to the man's promotion. It lasted 13 episodes.
Answer: Another show was called "Brimstone" and had actors Peter Horton and John Glover. The show only had 13 episodes.
The 1963 ABC "The Jerry Lewis Show" was originally planned for 40 episodes in the first season. It went off after 13 shows.
Answer: Outlaws 1986, was cancelled after a few episodes. Sitcom In Case of Emergency, with Kelly Hu, was cancelled after only a couple of episodes.
14th May 2023
General questions
My husband watched an episode of a new series in 2021 or 2022. Humans are living on a large, multi-level space ship, maybe more of a "space station." The ship has realistic, Earth-like places, such as a beach room. They have been living there for several years, so the youngest children have never touched real grass, beach sand, etc.
Answer: Answering my own question since I stumbled across a page on IMDB. It's "Ascension", a mini-series from 2014. Only three episodes were made. Stars Tricia Helfer, Gil Bellows, and Brian Van Holt. Humans are living on a ship that was launched in the 1960s. A hundred-year voyage will take them to a new planet, which they are supposed to populate.
Answer: The TV show "The Orville" has an episode similar to this. In s01e04, "If the Stars Should Appear", is about a 2,000 year old bio-generational ship with an Earth like ecosystem and land features. The crew of The Orville find it adrift heading towards a star and after investigating find the inhabitants of the ship thinking they live on a regular planet and don't know they're on a spaceship. This episode was from 2017, but the third and final season was released by Hulu in mid-2022 (and Disney picked up the series later), so maybe it just seemed a new series.
Thank you for responding, but it was not "The Orville." It was definitely an entire new series. The overall tone was more dark and serious. And Seth MacFarlane was not in it. We watch "Family Guy" somewhat often, so we would have remembered him. Also, as my description says, these characters knew that they were living on a ship.
8th Apr 2023
General questions
This 90s movie has a part where the main character talks to a group of kids, then the kids' teacher/counselor says "Children, that brings me to my next point: don't smoke crack." They all nod quickly, as if the main character seemed crazy to them.
Answer: Adam Sandler's "The Waterboy" (1998). After Bobby is done talking to the kids, football star, Lawrence Taylor delivers the line.
30th Mar 2023
General questions
Why do some movies list the cast in order of appearance, or in alphabetical order? Most movies don't - the order seems to depend on top billing - so is there a specific reason?
Answer: Generally when the cast is listed alphabetically it's because there's an ensemble cast or no-one with top billing, despite what any movie poster or cover may show. It's a way to be as fair as possible to all cast members involved. When the cast is listed in order of appearance, it's much the same way, because no-one is getting top billing. But it's also generally done when the order of appearance plays a part in the film or to make it clear which character is which. For example, the 1990 film "Slacker", most of the characters don't have names, just a description.
5th Feb 2023
General questions
How can I get better at spotting movie mistakes on my own? Especially the revealing mistakes and visible camera crew and equipment type ones?
Answer: Honestly, what made me start to notice revealing mistakes/visible crew was just learning about those types of mistakes on this very website and figuring out what to look for. Watching behind-the-scenes materials and learning how movies are made also helps. If I'm specifically going through a movie or show looking for mistakes, which I do sometimes for fun, I usually load up a Blu-Ray copy or the streaming service I'm using, and just scan through every shot, frequently rewinding and looking at all the little details. It can be subtle, so you may have to watch the same few shots 3, 4, 5+ times before you notice things. And even then, I'm sure I miss a lot of them.
Answer: First, it's imperative you watch a film or show with the ability to rewind (DVD, On Demand, Streaming, etc). Second, you should be familiar with the different types of filming techniques and procedures so you can visualize how the scene is being shot and where equipment and crew might be that could accidentally get in the shot. A lot of wide shots are going to expose revealing mistake, often time just briefly. While a continuous shot (where the camera doesn't cut) isn't going to have continuity issues. When the camera angle changes, that's when you can pick up mistakes. Finally, you can't be a passive viewer, if you're texting or looking at your phone, you're going to miss mistakes. And if you're really out to find mistakes, you'll probably miss the show (so it's best to look for mistake on your 2nd or 3rd viewing).
23rd Jan 2023
General questions
Looking for a cabinet game I played in an arcade in the early 1990s. It was a first person shooter, where you used a plastic gun to shoot the screen. The premise is you are in a city that's been taken over by ghosts and demons and you fight possessed items rather than monsters. The final boss on the first level is a movie poster where a actor and actress' face jump out of the poster and attack you. The second level is a restaurant where you fight flying plates and coats.
Answer: Maybe "Laser Ghost" (1990)?
That's it! Thanks.
23rd Jan 2023
General questions
There was a TMNT video game maybe sometime in the 90's. One of the levels takes place in Central Park and is completely covered in snow. The main boss of the level was a giant Arctic Wolf who would throw huge snowballs.
Answer: TMNT 2: The Arcade Game (1987). He was actually supposed to be a giant polar bear from another planet. He's throwing ice blocks that fall from the sky.
That's the game. Thanks.
11th Jan 2023
General questions
Looking for a specific PS4 game. In the game, an abandoned ship is at a dock and a young woman climbs on board to investigate. While on the ship, she travels back in time at different points and even sees shadows of monsters that she has to avoid.
Answer: Maybe "Return of the Obra Dinn"? It's set in the past where a ghost ship appears that you investigate the crew's death. It's 1st person so you're the one who goes onboard. You have a pocket watch that allows to travel back in time to the moment of a crew member's death.
It's not this game. The main protagonist is a woman and she witnesses a man stabbing another man to death.
28th Dec 2022
General questions
I am trying to remember an episode of a show that I watched at my Grandparents house one summer. I want to say it was Stargate but I'm not so sure. I remember a lady takes a baby boy and later discovers that he is sick with something. She is told that all of the baby boys in this specific dimension have something in them that makes them sick and eventually die. I remember she fights to have him saved and I think her father is able to get him the antidote to make him better. What was this from?
Answer: I found it the show was called Sliders.
Was it "Mother and Child", s04e14?
Answer: If you're looking for a Stargate SG-1 episode, maybe s02e20, "Show and Tell." The Reetou are an incest-like race out of phase and thus invisible to the unaided eye. One of the Reetou, referred to as Mother, genetically engineers a human boy and sends him to SG Command to warn them. But because of his rapid growth, he is quickly dying. He develops a bond with Jack and takes the name Charlie, the name of Jack's (now dead) son. By the end off the episode Charlie's organs are shutting down and the Tok'ra agree to take the boy and blend him with a symbiote to heal him. Although we never discover if it works or not.
I checked it out and that isn't it. This is driving me crazy. I remember that people travelled through tunnels or something to get to different dimensions or alternate worlds or something like that. I remember the baby receiving the medicine and I think he lives as well. I remember when he gets the medicine it is through a weird looking syringe that was put flat against the baby's arm and then a man injecting it into him. I want to say it was around 1999 maybe 2000 if that narrows it down.
2nd Jan 2023
General questions
Are there any bloopers available online from VERY serious movies, like Schindler's List or 12 Years a Slave? Actors must slip up when filming them like anything else - is the subject matter just serious enough that they don't laugh about them at the time, making the bloopers nothing worth watching, or are they just never compiled and released because it's felt to be too inappropriate?
Chosen answer: From what I've seen, in serious films, or scenes, when actors mess up their lines, they're more apologetic and what they said wasn't funny or outrageous. I feel like serious films have more rehearsal times as well, where comedy films are often shot quickly with a lot of ad-libbing or improv. So there's less slip ups during the actual shoot. Similar to how a play has a lot of rehearsals, but improv shows won't have as much. There's are some outtakes of "Silence of the Lamb." This is something that I've wondered too though and tried to search for. I had a chance to go to a Q&A session with Cary Elwes and wanted to ask him if he had as much fun making "Saw" as "Princess Bride" and "Men in Tights" and were there "Saw" outtakes, but we ran out of time before my question could get asked and I've always regretted it.
Answer: Youtube has plenty. Simply enter "serious movie bloopers." You'll even find some for "The Silence Of The Lambs."
1st Jan 2023
General questions
In the 90s, I was watching a TV show about a summer camp. This episode involved a new camper who was a "bad girl"/punk type. At one point, she was sitting at a table, lifted the cover/cloth, and used a knife to carve marks into it. A guy - not sure if he was a counselor or another camper - approached her and said "You were carving the table." This might have been on Nickelodeon.
Answer: Sounds like "Hey Dude", s03e12, "The Bad Seed."
Thank you, I think that was it.
25th Dec 2022
General questions
When animated shows are recorded, do all the voice actors record lines together, as the plot happens? Or does each person record all their lines at once? And if a character only says a few words in an episode, is some of their previously-recorded dialogue just re-used (if the script would allow it)? If it matters, I am mostly thinking about half-hour shows like The Simpsons, King of the Hill, South Park, Family Guy, etc.
Answer: To add to Bishop's answer, some shows occasionally do have multiple (or all of the) actors working together, but it's typically pretty rare for that to happen. As for the second part of your question, audio clips and lines do get reused sometimes. It just depends on the circumstance of the episode.
Answer: Generally each character's lines are recorded separately where the voice actor reads all their lines at once. There may be other voice actors in the studio with them to read their lines as a prompt so the actor being recorded has something to play off. Also, in the examples you give, one actor voices multiple characters. It would be very difficult for even a seasoned voice actor to have to switch between characters in a scene if the lines were recorded together. And impossible to do if two characters voiced by one actor were both talking at the same time.
18th Dec 2022
General questions
I'm trying to locate the name of an afterschool special film I haven't seen in over 40 years. The plot as I remember it was a kid in school who liked his teacher, but was way too young for her, somehow became an adult (I forgot how exactly) and finally had a chance to date her. Near the end of the film, he had to become a kid again and now was worried he couldn't date her anymore. Suddenly, she surprised him by entering the classroom now as a kid herself, making him happy. Film name?
Answer: Yes, that was it. I always thought it was a much earlier year than 1988 though, but thanks.
Answer: Sounds like the 1988 made for television film "14 Going on 30."
16th Nov 2022
General questions
What TV show is this an episode of? A woman, one of the show's main characters, is in the women's bathroom at her job. She tells a co-worker that they're the only women in this part of the building, so this bathroom is like their own private one. She is offended when the co-worker still uses one of those paper toilet seat liners. It turns out that the co-worker thinks she is promiscuous, and prefers not to sit directly on the same toilet seat as her. I saw this in the early 2000s or late 90s.
Answer: Seinfeld s09e09, "The Apology." Elaine's co-worker uses the seat liner. Elaine thinks maybe she's just a germaphobe until she sees her co-worker drink from someone else's bottle. It's the episode where George is waiting for an apology from someone in AA on step 9 of the 12-step program. It's also the episode where Kramer installs a garbage disposal in his bathtub and makes his meal in the tub while he showers, the meal he prepared for David, Elaine, and her co-worker.
Thank you.
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: "SilverHawks" (1986). The twins were called "Steelheart" and "Steelwill," who had artificial hearts put in during their transformation. Steelheart was the sister, though; Emily Hart, and her brother was Will Hart.
Bishop73
Thank you! Me confusing iron and steel made it impossible to Google.
Brian Katcher