Question: In all the Highlander movies and in this show, was there any reason given why immortals can't fight each other on holy ground?
lionhead
22nd Mar 2021
Highlander (1992)
Answer: Not directly. But there is a penalty involved. In Highlander 3 the fighting on holy ground resulted in the destruction of one of the weapons. In End Game several immortals are murdered whilst on holy ground but no repercussions were ever revealed, so it's possible it is specifically about the fighting. Nobody knows what happens when an immortal is killed in a duel on holy ground but it's safe to assume the penalty will be severe because all immortals respect this rule, even the most evil ones (except that one moment in Highlander 3).
16th Mar 2021
Highlander (1986)
Question: How is the "no fighting on holy ground" rule enforced? I really can't see a guy like the Kurgan, who seems to have no sense of honor to speak of, following the rule willfully, unless there was some severe punishment for breaking the rule.
Answer: What the punishment is isn't shown in this movie, but since even the Kurgan follows it, it must be high. In Highlander 3 we see that fighting on holy ground at least destroys the weapons they are fighting with (although only Macleod's for some reason), it's possible the ultimate penalty is given when an immortal kills another immortal on holy ground. A good guess is the penalty is death.
Answer: The "No Fighting on Holy Ground" is considered a sacred rule. Like being quiet in church, a funeral or any religious service. If any immortal would break this rule he was not be honorable and not subject to any of the other rules. Like fighting one on one and using hired thugs to capture an immortal holding him down to take his head.
16th Mar 2021
It (1990)
16th Mar 2021
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Question: Why didn't Harry simply refuse to take part in the Tri-Wizard tournament? Even though his name came out of the goblet, he could have said no.
Answer: No, he had to participate because the goblet of fire forced him into a "magical contract." The goblet itself is probably partially sentient and would punish anyone who didn't participate after being selected by the goblet. How this works exactly is never explained, but the tournament judges were pretty clear that he had no choice but to participate.
What would have happened to Harry if he broke the contract?
Broken magical contracts usually resulted in death; a good deterrent for not breaking them. Keep in mind, however, Harry (in the book at least), like many students, very much wanted to compete in the tournament despite the danger, but initially couldn't because he was underage. He still wanted to compete, despite knowing the selection process was rigged.
It's never explained.
14th Mar 2021
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
Question: Why did the Dementors attack Dudley?
Answer: Dementors are blind and can only sense a human by feeling their emotions. They were sent to attack Harry but couldn't tell the difference between him and Dudley so both were attacked. They don't care about collateral damage and are all too eager to suck up someone's emotions or soul.
4th Mar 2021
Thirteen Ghosts (2001)
3rd Mar 2021
The Big Bang Theory (2007)
Question: Why can't Leonard's mother act like an actual mother? Why did she treat him like a test subject?
Answer: Because she is not the mother-type. She is a very emotionally detached person. She probably got children for the prospect of them being successful and interesting to her work. Not because she likes raising them or take care of them.
3rd Mar 2021
The Devil's Advocate (1997)
2nd Mar 2021
Total Recall (1990)
Question: Dr. Lull says that she will do as Mr. Mclane says and "cover up any memory (Quaid) has of us or Rekall." However, when Dr. Edgemar comes in Quaid's hotel room on Mars, Edgemar reminds him that his experiences on Mars have been exactly what Quaid requested in his secret agent fantasy at Rekall, to which Quaid agrees. So obviously his memory of Rekall wasn't "covered up"?
Answer: Dr Lull was told to cover up any memory he has of them or Rekall. She replies "I'll do what I can it's pretty messy in there." She may not have done a good job. Later Cohaagen told Richter that Quaid couldn't remember anything and Richter said "that's now, in an hour he could have total recall."
Answer: He said, "Erase his memory of ever coming to Rekall," not the idea of going there, and the doctor said she'll do what she can to erase his memory, but it's pretty messy in there.
No he doesn't say that. He said "cover up any memory he has of us or Rekall." But they didn't, because he knows what Edgemar is talking about when he tells him the "demure and sleazy" woman is exactly what Quaid requested at Rekall.
Maybe they tried their best, but didn't succeed. Quite possible if his mind was already that messy.
Well at first the movie implies that they did erase his memory of Rekall, because when Harry told him he went to Rekall he had no idea that he had been there. But later in the movie he remembers that he chose "demure and sleazy" when Edgemar is talking to him. So it's an internal contradiction and plot hole.
27th Feb 2021
Hulk (2003)
Question: Why does Hulk agree to give David his power near the end of the movie?
Answer: Because he knew it would overwhelm him.
Well to be honest, I have no clue why David wanted the Hulk power so badly instead of being satisfied with the being he's become at the end of the movie. The guy can turn into anything he wants.
Because he always wanted more. He is a greedy character. Even though he was that powerful, he felt Hulk was more powerful than him, and he wanted that power.
24th Feb 2021
The Avengers (2012)
Question: I've noticed a few times in the film they mention "Phase 2." For example, when Fury is talking to the council they bring it up and Fury says "Phase 2 isn't ready." Given that the MCU was broken up into phases, with this being the last film in Phase One (with Iron Man 3 released a year later as the first film in Phase Two), was this an inside joke or nod about the MCU phases, or just coincidence and I'm reading too much into it?
Answer: Phase 2 in the movie refers to the plan executed in Captain America: Winter Soldier, Project Insight which is their next phase for total security of Earth (along with Stark's Ultron program). It is coincidental that it is the same term used for the MCU itself.
23rd Feb 2021
The Mummy Returns (2001)
19th Feb 2021
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: Just before Doc shows his plan with the DeLorean and the train Marty checks the walkie-talkies and Doc confirms it that they work. How are they able to get the walkie-talkies to work in 1885? I'm thinking Doc invented something so Doc and Marty can communicate with each other with them.
Answer: Given Doc's scientific ability (and some suspension of disbelief) it would be easy enough to rig up a makeshift battery that would last long enough. Or indeed they've just got lucky and the walkie-talkies' batteries still have enough life in them. They're not mobile phones, they don't need masts or any infrastructure, they just connect directly to each other.
Like you said, walkie-talkies work independently of any infrastructure, which is what I think the question was more about. However, the battery was invented way before 1885 with the first lead acid rechargeable battery being invented in 1859 with pasted electrode batteries being invented in the 1880's. So it's less about Doc rigging up a battery and just using what's already available or charging the batteries it came with (if we are assuming the batteries ran out of power).
The best batteries they had in those days were crude, wet batteries made out of earthenware and filled with sulphuric acid. They were cumbersome, dangerous and didn't have a lot of voltage or low current. Hardly suitable for a walkie-talkie that needs at least 9 volts. But I suppose it's possible Doc had some charged self-made batteries sitting at home to keep them going.
Definitely not "crude", certainly not as advanced as today, but the lead acid battery is the same technology a lot of batteries use today. They even had electric vehicles prior to 1885. My point was Doc didn't have to invent technology that didn't exist (as opposed to what some say he would have to do to get an 80's camcorder to play on a 50's TV). They had rechargeable batteries back then so it wouldn't be a stretch that Doc could recharge the batteries he had.
Answer: 1955 Doc got him some new batteries ("Just in case, fresh batteries for your walkie talkie. Oh what about that floating device?") They only used them on the train so the batteries would still be charged. In regards to how they work, they don't rely on phone masts, satellites, WiFi etc as they send radio waves to each other and not to any sort of base station.
29th Dec 2020
Stargate SG-1 (1997)
Question: On every planet SG-1 travels to, plants are the same color as those on earth. Shouldn't plants have different colors on different planets?
Answer: The Aliens choose planets that were similar to Earth. They possessed human beings, so they needed worlds with vegetation and atmosphere. In the original movie, their race was dying and humans were the only ones who could give them eternal life - they took many inhabitants as slave labor.
Answer: There have been times where plants are different color, but generally speaking, green is evolutionarily better at capturing the best amount of sunlight energy for photosynthesis. Thus, plants evolved to have green chlorophyll on other planets as well.
Answer: Planets with Stargates were chosen because of the similarities to Earth.
That's ridiculous. Stargate command would never choose a planet based on similarities to earth unless it would to make sure it was safe to travel to.
Stargate command had nothing to do with where the Stargates were. The answer is saying those that placed the Stargates throughout the galaxy chose Earth-like planets. More accurately though, inhabitable planets, which tend to be similar to Earth.
The Ancients put the Stargates on planets, and since their physiology was very similar to modern Earth humans, it stands to reason that they only chose to put planets which could support a similar lifeform. Hence, why most planets or moons resembled Earth at some point in their history.
Huh? First of all, you're trying to surmise what a fictional agency would do. Second, SG-1 and other SG teams frequently visited both Earth-like planets and planets with toxic conditions.
Stargates were placed at worlds that were similar to Earth, this mostly due to the ancients establishing themselves on Earth over 50 million years ago and finding planets to colonize from there. Some worlds may have become inhospitable over the millions of years after the stargate was built though. It is quite possible all these planets were seeded with life from Earth and planets close to Earth's appearance, hence the same vegetation and animal life.
17th Jan 2007
The A-Team (1983)
Question: What were the machine guns The A-Team used?
Answer: They never use an M14. The nearly always use a Ruger Mini 14, a totally different weapon.
Answer: The machine guns primarily used were M60's or M60D's. Although there were a lot of sub-machine guns used too, like the Mac-10. For some reason other answers are talking about rifles used in the show.
For the reason is because most people don't know the difference between an automatic rifle, a sub-machine gun, and a machine gun. I.e. Die Hard "Ho-ho-ho now we have a machine gun" - actually a HK MP5K. M60D's are for helicopter door gunners. I suspect you mean an M60E3, with the pistol foregrip.
You suspect wrong. I did mean M60D since they were seen being used as helicopter door guns.
Only in the stock footage in the intro though.
Yes, because the question was asking what machine guns were used, but didn't cite a specific episode or anything, so I was being thorough.
The question is what machine guns were used by the A-team. Not that one.
So you think the question was what machine gun was used by the A-Team but not by the A-Team?
No. The A-Team never used the M60D anywhere in the series, you only see it in the stock footage of the intro. And the question was what machine guns the A-team used.
Answer: Mostly M-14's. Occaisionally M-16's or Ingram Model 10's. http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg00-e.htm.
They are not M-14s, that is a full automatic military rifle used during the early part of the Vietnam War as a replacement for the M1 Garand. It has much the same appearance as the M1 except with a magazine instead of a top-loading en-bloc 8 rd clip. The rifles used by the team are Ruger Mini-14s, chambered for .223. An M-14 is NATO 5.56.
5th Feb 2021
WandaVision (2021)
On a Very Special Episode... - S1-E5
Question: The intro sequence for this episode seems most closely based on Growing Pains, with a dash of Family Ties, but the painting being coloured in really reminds me of something else, I assume another TV show, but can't place it. Any inspiration?
Chosen answer: The living painting is taken straight from the Family Ties intro.
Ah, that makes sense - I first saw this one on Youtube, which at a guess was the first season or an early version? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPRdtO6UKD0. But yeah, this is exactly right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ip1szfz9nZ8.
Answer: I noticed that too and although I can't think of any sitcom starting like that it does remind me strongly of Bob Ross "The Joy of Painting" intro, which was from the 80's as well.
30th Jan 2021
Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015)
11th May 2017
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Question: Did Obi-Wan know Anakin and Padme are married? Since she thinks Obi-Wan could help them with Anakin seeing with the force that Padme would die giving birth after Anakin broke the Jedi code of getting married. Doesn't it seem that Obi-Wan would not help after what Anakin had done, unless he knew about it?
Chosen answer: Obi Wan didn't know they were married. He only realises Anakin is the father of Padme's child after noticing her emotional response when he asks if she knows where Anakin is. Even though Anakin has broken the Jedi code Padme still thinks Obi Wan might help them because he is their best friend. At worst Anakin would be expelled from the Jedi and the controversy would end Padme's political career but she makes it clear she doesn't care about any of that. Anakin, however does and shoots down the idea.
The fact that they keep the relationship secret baffles me a bit. I mean, they live together in a city. They were obviously shown as close in AOTC.
It makes very little sense, to the point of being absurd. It is portrayed as if Obi-Wan and Anakin are best friends, but Obi-Wan never even asks where Anakin lives when he's not on duty.
It's not like Obi-Wan and Anakin carpool or invite each other to dinner. They are Jedi partners, in service of the Republic and Jedi Order. Even if it were all happening on 1 planet Anakin and Padme could easily keep their marriage a secret, let alone from Jedi who travel from system to system and are extremely busy all the time.
20th Jan 2021
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
13th Nov 2018
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Question: They didn't make it out of the cave with the grail because they dawdled... I wonder, would someone be able to make it out running at a dead sprint once they crossed the seal? And if so, does that mean that they're home free? Or would disaster follow them outside of the cave?
Answer: The implication is that disaster would follow them outside of the cave as well. It wouldn't make much sense if you could simply outrun the disaster.
"Followed by disaster" is a kind of curse, a thing not common in Christianity. It doesn't make much sense anyhow. A seal is just a dot - OK, so let's at least grant that the seal represents a circle that the grail has to stay in. Who decided where those borders are? The grail was taken there during the first crusade. That was closer to 1938 than it was to 33 AD. The three knights could move the grail about then. Why not afterwards? The knights could have built the traps. But the borders could only have been set by god, in an unusually late and completely atypical miracle.
There are several examples of curses in the Christian Bible: Lot's wife is turned into a pillar of salt for looking back at Sodom, the plagues visited upon Egypt, Adam and Eve are cursed for eating fruit from the tree of knowledge, etc. The knights did not move the grail around after finding it, they stayed in the temple for 150 years and then two left leaving the third behind. The great seal and it's restriction was already in place when the knights got there.
Where in the movie is that stated? I interpreted the knight's story as them having made that place. Looks like it isn't actually specified. But if God made it, then I submit that he would have used Greek, not Latin, for the stepping stones. (All of those curses are from the old testament. The book where god kills firstborn children as long as they're Egyptian. Grail is by definition new testament where you turn the other cheek. There simply are no curses in the gospel, that's just not how Jesus rolled).
The tests were made by the knights, but the seal had God's power in it. Just like the cup.
It's still a bit dodgy. What if you take a shovel and dig yourself a back door? Basically this film really excels at stuff that makes no sense but helps the storytelling, or to be precise, creates dramatic effects.
Every fictional story is like that in some way. That's why it's called fictional. It's just a story.
Not a particularly convincing argument, "stuff happens for no reason all the time", if I may say so. Why is this website even here then? The fact is that some stories are more coherent than others. (♫ "In olden days, a hole in the plot, would seem to matter, quite a lot. Now heaven knows, anything goes..." ♫);).
It's the difference in what story they want told. Is it a fairy tale or based on actual events? A huge difference in plausibility between the two. The site is there to look at mistakes, not how believable the story is.
It is not set in another universe so plausibility isn't somehow suspended. Maybe take a look at the categories recognised by this website. Plot holes, factual errors, even stupidity. (They? Who are they?).
It is set in a fictional universe because it's not a true story. With "they" I mean the writers/director. Mistakes in a plot (plot holes) have nothing to do with how believable the story is. As long as it's plausible, it's not a mistake.
Pretty sure it's the same universe, just with some added characters/events. What about the total lack of spaceships or orcs or talking animals for example? The seal business is not a mistake YET, but it's very dodgy because no-one knows how it works or why. Like all Indys "trapped" secret places, it's (among other things) unclear who resets the traps for the next visitor. We can't brush it ALL off as "the hand of god" every time.
Huge amounts of stuff in films isn't exhaustively explained. Doesn't mean there isn't an explanation that's perfectly believable. There's zero evidence either way to say how "followed by disaster" would manifest, and just because there's not a thorough explanation doesn't mean that it's "dodgy", and it's not worth bickering about either, because there's no concrete answer either way.
OK but I would like to note that not everyone who offers creative explanations has recently seen the movie; some people just invent their own. E.g. "followed by disaster" is not an actual explanation from the movie, it was just one of the suggestions made here and only here. Or the ones on my own question below. All I'm saying is, it's very hard to tell what the "rules" / "logic" of this place are supposed to be, so I understand what the OP was driving at.
Answer: In the episode "Little Tin God," Joe Dawson mentions a duel between immortals on a temple in Pompeii—just before Vesuvius erupted. Whether the two are supposed To Be connected is up for debate, but still.