Tailkinker

Question: On the Star Wars website is a picture of Mara Jade. It's supposed to be her dancing in Jabba's palace. I've looked and can't spot her. Can anyone tell me what shot she is in or near?

Answer: In a nutshell, she's not in there, so you can stop looking. When Mara became a pivotal character in the book series that cover the time after the films, a number of images were created for, among other things, the Star Wars collectable card game, using a model named Shannon McRandle (a.k.a. Shannon Baksa) to portray her. There were rumours that Shannon would cameo in the revamped Special Edition of Jedi using newly shot footage, but this did not occur.

Tailkinker

19th Apr 2006

V for Vendetta (2005)

Question: Why didn't V rescue the woman in the cell after rescuing Evey?

Answer: It's made extremely clear in the film that Evey's 'interrogation' is entirely set up by V. V doesn't rescue Evey; he simply brings things to a close once he's achieved the result he was aiming for. Nobody there is real; the interrogator, guards and the woman in the next cell are all fake.

Tailkinker

19th Apr 2006

The Island (2005)

Question: I've been trying to figure out the sequence where Jordan is captured. First question is whether it was intentional for her to use the credit/debit card? She has a reaction when she scans it, but the shot seemed more for the audience's benefit, then she waits nearby and doesn't put up much resistance. The thing is how does she know that card can be traced? It's a given she's undeveloped mentally (and we don't know the real Jordan's intellectual ability), can she make that connection? On the other hand, she's been very keen at improvising for her survival. The next is how she got the gun into the facility? Laurent's group has a female agent, so the group (or the agent) would know where to look for it. However, Laurent develops a connection with Jordan and I wondered whether he allowed it/concealed it himself. This is all speculation, and I wanted to know if there's a more definite answer?

Answer: Without reading the minds of the scriptwriters, there can't be any more definitive answers than what's given in the film. I think it's a mistake, however, to consider Jordan to be undeveloped mentally - she lacks experience, true, but shouldn't be considered stupid by any means. It seemed to me that this was a carefully considered plan to get herself inside the facility. McCord tells them earlier that they can only use the card for 24 hours and use cash after that; she knows from that that using the card will attract some sort of attention. Then she simply waits passively until she's captured. As far as the gun goes, it may simply never have crossed their minds to search her - previously she and Lincoln have gone to great lengths to avoid capture, so they may well assume that had she had a gun, she would have used it to try to escape; after all, from their point of view, why would she want to go back?

Tailkinker

4th Apr 2006

From Hell (2001)

Question: Why is it a "known fact" that Mary Kelley was killed by Jack the Ripper? Her murder differs in many ways from the others. She was killed indoors, she wasn't wearing any clothes, her body was so savaged that she was unrecognisable. The other murders took place outdoors with victims fully dressed and only partly savaged. Considering the number of violent deaths that took place in London at this time (most of them by slashing the throat) she could have been murdered by anybody. I know Abberline was called to the scene of the crime but that doesn't prove the Ripper actually did it and Abberline was called to more murder scenes than just the five official Ripper ones. What makes people so sure that Jack the Ripper killed Mary Kelley?

Answer: As the Ripper was never caught and interrogated, it can never be said with absolute certainty that Kelly was one of his victims. Her death does, however, fit the pattern of Ripper murders quite well with regard to time, general location, methodology and class of victim. There was also a noted trend of increasing levels of mutilation as the murders went on, so, while the damage was considerably more extensive that the previous killings, that also fits with a noted trend of the Ripper murder - it's also worth considering that, as Kelly was apparently his final kill, he may well have wanted to sign off with a particularly grand statement, hence the extreme level of mutilation to the body. This would also explain why the attack uncharacteristically took place indoors - what Jack had in mind for Kelly would take a considerable period of undisturbed time, more than could be guaranteed in an on-street attack. It's also believed that Jack had been interrupted during the murder of Elizabeth Stride on his previous night of violence some weeks earlier - this could also have led him to alter his modus operandi to ensure that this would not be repeated. So, no, it cannot be stated categorically that Kelly was a victim of Jack the Ripper, however the evidence suggests a high probability that this was the case, enough so that many people consider this to be a fact.

Tailkinker

It wasn't Mary Jane Kelly.

The question pertained to the real-life Ripper murders, not what we see in this film. It was indeed Mary Kelly in real life.

Phaneron

4th Apr 2006

What Women Want (2000)

Answer: Presumably she chose not to be credited. This isn't that uncommon when a major star takes on a relatively minor role in a film.

Tailkinker

4th Apr 2006

Spooks (2002)

Show generally

Question: "Spooks" is called "MI-5" in the US. I'm aware that Five operates something like the FBI and Six like the CIA, however, what are One through Four?

Answer: They no longer exist. The Military Intelligence groups first appeared at around the time of the First World War. MI-1 was the original directorate, MI-2 dealt with the Soviet Union and Scandinavia, MI-3 with Germany and Eastern Europe, MI-4 handled aerial intelligence gathering, MI-7 dealt with propaganda, MI-8 with communication intercepts, MI-9 with covert operations, MI-10 were the technical experts, MI-11 dealt with security issues out in the field and so on and so forth. All these departments have either been shut down or subsumed into the Security Service, informally referred to by its original designation of MI-5, the Secret Intelligence Service, referred to as MI-6, or GCHQ, the Government Communications Headquarters.

Tailkinker

Question: From the way it is portrayed in the movie, it looks like Bond & Wai Lin just head straight for the stealth boat once they spot it. They come at it from the front. I don't see why they would do that. Even if the surveillance guy wasn't paying attention (there's no way Bond could've known that), shouldn't someone on the bridge be able to see the dingy approaching straight at it? It would've made more sense to me if Bond waited for the ship to pass and then come from behind or the sides.

Answer: It's getting dark by this point - Bond and Wai Lin are dressed in black in a dark coloured boat. Anyone looking out of the window would be looking down towards them - they wouldn't be able to pick them out against the sea.

Tailkinker

4th Apr 2006

V for Vendetta (2005)

Question: What is the point of blowing up Parliament if Sutler has been overthrown and killed? It doesn't achieve anything but huge rebuilding costs.

Answer: Parliament is seen as being a corrupt institution. Sutler may be gone, but if the institution remains intact, then all that's likely to happen is that somebody similar to Sutler will claw his or her way to the top and nothing will change. By destroying of the ceremonial Parliament building associated with the corrupt government, V's intent is to shake up that institution to a point where it can no longer survive.

Tailkinker

Question: I was wondering if the flower Romalia, suggested to be native to California, really exists.

Answer: Yep. Romneya, also known as the Matilija Poppy, is indeed native to California and northern Mexico.

Tailkinker

Answer: Only the flowers in the movie are red, while the real flower is white with a yellow core, which makes it look like an egg, fried, sunny side up.

4th Apr 2006

The Incredibles (2004)

Question: Pixar has only two rules for what to put in their film: The Pizza Planet truck must appear, and John Ratzenberger must have a part of some kind. Though I have found both in Pixar's other five films, I have not spotted either in this one. Where are they?

Answer: The Pizza Planet truck can be seen on the road when the family arrive in the van towards the end of the film. Ratzenburger shows up right at the very end, voicing the Underminer. Pixar actually have a third thing that shows up in each film - the code A113, which refers to a classroom used by animation students at the California Institute of the Arts.

Tailkinker

There is actually a 4th thing as well. The luxo ball, which has been in every pixar film since its debut in 1986's Luxo Jr, a short about two lamps. One of these appears in the Pixar logo (the one that jumps on the "I").

20th Mar 2006

Flightplan (2005)

Question: In one of the last scenes, when Kyle and her daughter hide in a little compartment and survive the explosion, somebody who answered another question in this page said it was the hold of the plane, but I thought it was the black box when I saw it. So which one was it? And is it possible for a person to fit in the black box of a plane?

Answer: No, it's not possible. The 'black box' (which actually isn't black, but is instead brightly coloured to make it easier to find) is a data recorder, packed with all the attendant electronics required for that task; it's far too small for anybody to fit into.

Tailkinker

20th Mar 2006

Quantum Leap (1989)

Show generally

Question: Has it ever been stated in an episode how long it takes Sam to leap from one person to another? It seems instantaneous from the viewer's point of view, but Al is nearly always present at the point where Sam leaps out, and appears quite early in the following episode wearing completely different clothes.

Answer: It's suggested that it can be a substantial period of time, as much as several weeks, although it varies dramatically.

Tailkinker

Answer: Spoiler alert: this gives some important plot twists away. Sometimes a bit of unresolved mystery improves a story, and I think this is the case here. But the book partly answers your questions. At the end of the last chapter it is shown that Mrs MacReady thinks the wardrobe is just a piece of furniture. She knows nothing about Narnia. But Professor Kirke amazes Peter, Edmund, Susan and Lucy by expressing familiarity with Narnia and explaining that a wardrobe might well be a portal into Narnia. If C S Lewis had not written any more books after completing "The Lion The Witch And The Wardrobe" Professor Kirke's knowledge of Narnia would probably have been an unresolved mystery. But C S Lewis later wrote "The Magician's Nephew" which tells how Professor Kirke visited Narnia as a boy. The final chapter of this book says he took an apple back with him, which he planted in his garden. It grew into a tree, was cut down and made into the wardrobe. So Professor Kirke was not consciously aware of what the wardrobe could do, but with hindsight, he realised that he had set up a chain of events that caused the children to discover Narnia.

Answer: While Professor Kirke is aware of the existence of Narnia, as he was there when it was created, he doesn't appear to be aware that the wardrobe can act as a portal (although he may suspect that it has unusual properties, as the tree from which the wood came to create it grew from a Narnian apple). Mrs MacReady doesn't know.

Tailkinker

24th Feb 2006

Lost (2004)

Show generally

Question: Why is Sun on the cover of Disc 6 in the Lost DVD Box Set? She doesn't have as many episodes as anyone else, and it would have made more sense to use Locke.

Answer: It was a marketing decision - they're not under any obligation to make sense.

Tailkinker

13th Jun 2005

Cinderella Man (2005)

Question: I realize how much the wedding ring must have meant to Mae Braddock, but I don't see why she would not have pawned it, rather than send her children away or become sicker because they could not pay for the heat?

Answer: In that case, you apparently don't realise how much the ring means to her.

Tailkinker

24th Feb 2006

Corpse Bride (2005)

Question: In one of the extras, Tim Burton says that he got the idea for Corpse Bride from a story. He said just that it was just a few paragraphs, but what is the story that he is talking about?

Answer: It's a 19th century Russian Jewish folk-tale - the story starts quite similarly, with the lead character saying his vows while putting the ring on what he believes to be a stick. The tale generally finishes with the rabbis annulling the marriage and the living bride vowing to honour the memory of the corpse bride throughout her marriage - which ties into the Jewish tradition of honouring the dead through the lives of the living.

Tailkinker

Question: Why does everyone say that using parts of the DeLorean that Doc had buried in the abandoned mine could create a time paradox? Firstly, that is never stated in the actual movie. Secondly, if say Marty and Doc use the part on the buried DeLorean to fix the DeLorean that broke due to the explosion caused by the extremely strong alcohol and then again try to run the DeLorean using alcohol that's not so strong, the 1955 Doc would be able to obtain the missing piece of the buried DeLorean. So, technically, there's a plot hole. Why then does everyone say that that's not possible?

Answer: If they dug up the buried DeLorean and stripped it for parts to repair the other one, then it would become non-functional. As such, with no replacement parts being available in 1955, Marty would not then be able to use it to come back in time to rescue Doc - which he's already done. There's your paradox.

Tailkinker

Answer: But it's not a paradox is it. They blew the fuel injection manifold which Doc says would take him a month to rebuild, that's using 1885 technology and parts. Simply swap out the manifold off the buried car, put the broken one on the seat, and 1955 Doc would inspect it and figure out that it needs repairing (which would take far less time using 1955 technology and parts). They could also go to Western Union and change the letter to read that the fuel injection manifold needs a repair as well. If they stole the DeLorean' engine then yes they'd be a paradox as the very earliest replacement wouldn't be available until 1974. But stealing parts that would be available in 1955 would not cause any paradox as they could simply replace them.

24th Feb 2006

The Shining (1980)

Question: One of the corrected entries here says that the film was shot entirely at Elstree Studios in England. Why? I mean with all the possible locations in the US especially Hollywood and all the facilities they have there, why was the entire film shot in England?

pierpp

Chosen answer: Many major US-financed films have been shot in England. Parts of the original Star Wars trilogy, the Indiana Jones opening sequence, the first three Alien films and a great many others were all shot in the UK. The rationale is often financial - it can simply be cheaper to make films outside the US, with Australia being another common choice. In Kubrick's case, part of the rationale may well have been financial, but he also had a fear of flying, so made all his films from 1962's Lolita onwards in the UK, where he lived. Exterior shots in the film were shot at Mount Hood in Oregon and Lake Louise in Alberta.

Tailkinker

Chosen answer: Gandalf told him - a scene seen in the Extended Edition of the Fellowship of the Ring.

Tailkinker

Question: When Marty came back to 1985 in the first movie, some things had changed. The name of the mall for example went from Twin Pines Mall to Lone Pine Mall. How come then when Biff comes back to 2015 after stealing the DeLorean, everything seems the same? Wouldn't they notice everything was different when they were flying over Hill Valley to go back, like Biff's casino perhaps?

Answer: When Marty returns to 1985, he leaves 1955 after those changes have been made, so he's now in a timeline where the effects of those changes exist. When old Biff went back, he simply gave his younger self the almanac, then returned to 2015 before the younger Biff did anything with it, i.e. before any changes had been made. Old Biff therefore returned to his original unchanged timeline - the timeline split caused by young Biff using the almanac came after his departure, so he didn't enter the altered timestream.

Tailkinker

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.