Question: Where any charges ever brought up against the White Star line after so many people died?
lionhead
29th Jun 2019
Titanic (1997)
26th Jun 2019
Men in Black 3 (2012)
Question: When Agent J travels into the past, he is being put into a neuralizer because he wouldn't tell young Agent K anything. When the neuralizer was being charged up, why didn't J simply close his eyes?
Answer: This neuralizer works more thoroughly and is more powerful than the simple hand held version. This one goes directly for the brain whilst the hand held goes through the eyes.
Answer: MIB agents wear their sunglasses for a reason whenever they neuralyse people, or else they wouldn't have been needing them if all they needed to do was to close their eyes.
19th Jun 2019
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Question: When Mola Ram is smiling, what is he looking at? Is he looking at the Maharajah or is he looking up at Willie, Indy and Short Round? (01:01:45)
Answer: It doesn't look as if Mola Ram is smiling at the trio, because they're standing to Mola Ram's upper right. The Little Maharaja is seated in front of the Thuggee high priest, but I don't think he's specifically looking downward, directly at the boy either. To me, it seems as if Mola Ram is smiling because while he's confident in his control of the Little Maharaja, it's the fact that he knows another human sacrifice is being brought out for the Kali sacrificial dark ritual.
The question gives the exact second.
Great, but I don't currently have a DVD player or have a copy or access to every movie someone asks a question about. If someone is asking a question, they shouldn't expect anyone to actually take the time to set up and watch the film in order to answer a question for them. Just give a brief description of the scene.
That's what the time stamp feature is used for. The question is asking what exactly Mola Ram is looking at in a specific second of time in the movie. Explaining the scene wouldn't help anyone answer the question. To answer, you will have to look at the movie and pay specific attention to that time stamp. If you can't do that then you can't answer the question and should just ignore.
I get what you're saying, but I've been able to answer many questions without having to re-watch a movie because the question contained enough specific information so that I knew which scene they were referring to. Based on the information given in the question, I can check movie clips on YouTube or get the answer by reading online movie synopsis. Every little bit of info helps.
Tough luck I guess?
18th Jun 2019
Men in Black II (2002)
Question: I don't understand the timing in the third act. When the launch pad says "four minutes to launch" in the scene with Jarra, J comes to Laura's rescue in what feels like longer than four minutes. Also, even though J and K bring Laura to her ship so she can leave, how much time was there left before Earth and Zartha would've been destroyed?
Answer: The fight lasted for about 3 minutes, of course there are cuts towards the worms so the fighting isn't fully shown on camera, but since the countdown did say 4 minutes when the fight starts, that's how long it took. As for how much time was left for Laura to enter the pod; The pod came down and would lift up again with or without a cargo, so when the pod went up the time was up.
14th Jun 2019
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Question: How did Landa know that Shoshanna's family were hiding under the floor in the beginning?
Answer: Several thing need to be taken into account. He explains he can think like people who are desperate and would do anything to avoid capture, it is logical for him they would resort to hiding under the floor. He is looking for this family specifically, meaning he knows they are hiding, probably the last Jewish family in the region. Thirdly, this is probably the last farm he checks, having looked underneath the floors of any other farm in the region, he knew this was the only place they could be. It's also possible he noticed small things that told him that this farmer was hiding people, having experience with this sort of situation.
14th Jun 2019
Men in Black (1997)
14th Jun 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did time not end when Thanos destroyed the stones, and what happens in now there aren't any? The Ancient One stated that the stones control the flow of time, and removing even one of these opens up the world to unimaginable horror. Well why did nothing happen after Thanos destroyed them all? And now that our timeline has no stones, how would Dr. Strange be able to stop Dormammu from coming back?
Answer: The way I understood it, removing the stones from one timeline into another timeline is what The Ancient One was talking about. The "new branched reality" is what would be overrun by the forces of darkness. But, even if she meant this reality, the reality where Thanos destroyed the stones, The Ancient One said it was their chief weapon, not their only weapon. Bruce then tells her Doctor Strange gave the time stone to Thanos and The Ancient One says maybe she made a mistake. However, since Thanos eliminates half the population of the universe, including the forces of darkness, whatever forces she was talking about may not have been around to try and attack Earth. Or in the 5 years that we don't see, there was an attempt and other weapons were sufficient.
Answer: In the comics the stones will be replaced by something else equally powerful to compensate for their loss. I suppose the same applies to the MCU. These powers need to have a physical presence in the universe, in one way or another.
The only problem is the films never insinuate this at all. The Ancient One flat out states that not having the stones would be bad for the universe, and yet Thanos destroys the stones with absolutely no adverse affects to the universe whatsoever. This movie played very fast and loose with the rules they established regarding the stones and time travel and I feel like things like this were massive flaws.
The universe is a pretty big place, though. There could very well be bad things in another part of the universe that have yet to affect our galaxy. Additionally, the forces of darkness that could potentially threaten the universe may be curbed by a cosmic entity such as the Living Tribunal, whose existence in the MCU was acknowledged in "Doctor Strange" and could very well appear in "The Eternals" or "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3."
I just believe the ancient one didn't even know. The ancient one isn't always correct, as Bruce proved. And the bad thing was taking the stones away from their timeline, creating timelines where they are not supposed to be, it says nothing about destroying them.
That to me is still bad writing. You have a character whose entire purpose in the movie is to give exposition, and the exposition she gives is apparently incorrect. That's all well and good but that still needs to be addressed at some point. Some character should have brought up the fact that the stones were destroyed (and incidentally, remain destroyed in the main timeline) and the Ancient One should have addressed that fact. Otherwise, like the original question points out, it leaves a bit of a gap in the film's logic.
Answer: I believe the filmmakers have said that the energy of the stones was dissipated into the universe when their crystal vessels were destroyed. So that while they didn't have a physical form anymore, their essence remained and continued to regulate the flow of existence of the Universe. Presumably the energy can't then be reconstituted into the stones without some sort of profoundly intricate magic/science, the kind of power only possessed by gods and/or ancient elemental beings. Also, the Ancient One says that Hulk taking the time stone would be good for his timeline, but would leave hers without their weapon, which I presume means they wouldn't have the time stone to help the Sanctum's usual efforts in holding dark magic at bay. The actual effect of removing the essence of a stone from its timeline is still open to speculation.
If the ancient one was only talking about the time stone then Cap wouldn't have to bother bringing all stones back. No, she was talking about all infinity gems. Remove a stone and that universe is doomed.
Answer: The sorcerers may have other ways to stop Dormmamu from returning (even if those ways are currently unbeknownst to them). This could be addressed in the sequel. Additionally, since Dormmamu would have to know that the Time Stone was destroyed in the first place, he may well just stay away rather than falsely believing that he can be trapped in a time loop again.
Answer: She said the world not the universe. She said "without our chief weapon against the forces of darkness our world will be overrun." Theory: since Thanos used the stones to destroy the stones and Hulk heard what the Ancient One said, he could have used the stones to bring back their stones along with everyone else. He couldn't have know who all died in the universe, he could have just undid everything from 5 years ago.
14th Jun 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did 2014 Thanos bother to come to the future? As we are already aware, changing one time doesn't affect the other, and whether he knows that or not is sort of irrelevant. He could have stayed in 2014 and completed his mission, in fact he could have done it even more easily with the Pym particles he obtained without anyone ever knowing. He really had no reason to need to come forward in time. Knowing that Thor kills him in the future just means he could take steps to prevent that if/when it happens, he didn't need to act right then.
Answer: As an alternative to the above answer, another thing to keep in mind is that Thanos believes that his vision of a better world shouldn't be fought against. Finding out that an alternate universe version of himself wins the battle and then ends up having his plans ruined makes him believe that the heroes of that universe are ungrateful, and that he should help the alternate universe version of himself that died to stay the winner. He's evil. He doesn't just want to win in this universe. He wants to win in all universes.
Answer: He probably also realises that if the Avengers can get all 6 stones, stealing them all at once would be easier than trying to collect them himself.
10th Jun 2019
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Question: Instead of telling Stark to turn the donut around why doesn't he use a sling ring?
Answer: The range of the sling rings hasn't been defined. They were in deep space at this point, so they may have been too far away for Strange to open up a portal on Earth for them to step through.
In Endgame, Strange opens at least one portal from across the galaxy. For example, we see the one opened from Titan that he, Spiderman, and the Gaurdians all come through. Unless his sling powers suddenly increased after the great purge, he should have been able to open a portal from deep space on the ship.
Answer: The Q Ship was travelling in some form of hyperspace. It would be reasonable to assume that the slingring could not work under those circumstances. When he does use it later, it is from the surface of the planet Titan.
And when they arrive on Titan his idea to protect the time stone changes. He instead looks at different time-lines.
Why would it be different in hyperspace? The ship has its own gravity.
By definition, hyperspace exists outside normal time and space. Depending on how the sling ring works, it may not be able access normal space.
2nd Jun 2019
Beetlejuice (1988)
Question: When Adam and Barbara start to age and die near the end of the movie, I don't get how they didn't "die" again. How did they end up completely fine at the end?
Answer: Otho is attempting to exorcise them (remember how the afterlife janitor said exorcism was death for the dead), but Beetlejuice interrupted the ceremony, restoring them.
Answer: It's not completely clear what was happening to them but it's somewhere along the lines of the ritual making them corporeal or even partially resurrecting them but the ritual wasn't done properly so their bodies started to decay. Beetlejuice reversed that process and turned them back into ghosts.
28th May 2019
Office Space (1999)
Question: While recognizing that this film is entirely fictitious, how likely is it that an IT firm in 1999 would have allowed a former employee access to the premises after being laid off, never mind continue to send him a paycheck as with Milton Waddams? I myself was fired the following year and got the walk of shame treatment ("you have 5 minutes to clear your desk - the taxi's waiting outside") which at the time already seemed pretty standard.
Answer: Simply because he is basically invisible to them. Anyone can walk into that place, no guard outside, no key-card required. Nobody cared. At least you got a taxi.
Exactly. These things can happen. It depends on the place and how they operate. As recently as January 2024, I read about one young woman who went into a Kroger grocery store and worked for six hours, as an experiment. She has also done this at Target and Walmart. She wears clothes that look like a real employee's.
Answer: They never told Milton he was fired, they just cruelly cut off his paycheck, figuring he'd eventually get fed up and leave (he'd actually been laid off years ago, but a payroll glitch kept him getting a paycheck). The management is hoping if they're cruel enough, he'll stop showing up.
This is actually the reverse of what happened. The glitch caused him to continue to receive a paycheck, even though he'd been laid off. The "Bobs" corrected the glitch, so he would no longer receive a paycheck. In an effort to avoid confrontation, they chose not to say anything to him, hoping he'd realise it and leave on his own.
26th May 2019
Groundhog Day (1993)
25th May 2019
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
21st May 2019
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
19th May 2019
Aladdin (1992)
Question: Two questions. 1) Why does the Sultan pick on Iago all the time - force feeding him stale crackers and when he's on the magic carpet, chasing after him? 2) Why is the Sultan so rough with the magic carpet? When he goes for a ride on it after Aladdin shows up at the palace as Prince Ali, he rides it around the palace in such a reckless manner that when he's finished, the carpet can barely walk.
Answer: Iago to him is just a parrot, not a sentient being like we know. He genuinely thinks Iago likes the cookies. The magic carpet is the one being rough, being in control since he is just giving the Sultan a thrill ride. It's trying to make a good impression for Aladdin by giving the Sultan a great time.
Answer: The Sultan is a goofy, clumsy guy who doesn't realise he's being rough.
15th May 2019
Back to the Future (1985)
Question: Given that the entire McFly family's circumstances have changed at the end of the movie due to Marty altering the past, shouldn't Marty's whole life have gone down a completely different path from childhood on? What are the odds that he even still knows Doc and Jennifer in the revised 1985 (let alone has the exact same date planned with Jennifer for the very same evening), given that everything else has changed?
Answer: The suggestion is given that he was the only "normal" person in the family and when he changed the past his parents and siblings became more "normal" people as well whilst he stayed as he was, despitegrowingup with different parents and siblings, since he was "normal" anyway. This totally ignores the linear timeline idea given during the entire movie, but it's obvious that was the idea.
You're absolutely right about Marty being the only "normal" one in the family, but that doesn't ignore the linear timeline idea. There are two different Marty McFly's by the end of this movie. There's the one we follow, who grew up with unhappy parents, and then there's the other Marty McFly who grew up with cool parents. We see the 2nd Marty go back to 1955 when Marty gets back to the Twin Pines mall. The idea isn't to ignore the linear timeline idea, but rather to imply that unhappy parents or not Marty will still always be Marty.
Except for the fact Marty kept being in danger of disappearing if his parents wouldn't get together. If his old self would disappear from his parents not getting together then so he should if his entire life is different and he would be a different Marty just like his siblings. Even if it's only memories rather than an entire personality.
Answer: It's definitely a paradox. Marty actually goes back to the life of 2nd Marty, but if that's the case then original Marty should have still faded away since he created a new timeline when he gave George confidence. Original Marty shouldn't exist anymore at all, he should have faded completely away on the stage. I've said it before and I'll say it again: time travel movies are a mess.
The new Marty isn't a different person entirely; he's just the same guy who was raised in a slightly different environment to the original timeline. Marty's actions in 1955 have ensured that his parents will have three children, and he will be one of them. His existence is completely secured in the timeline.
6th May 2019
Free Willy (1993)
Question: In reality, do orcas actually understand English? Willy seems to understand Jesse when Jesse teaches him tricks.
Answer: While sounds and words can be used to alert orcas and dolphins, they recognize the hand signals and movements as to what to do.
Answer: Dogs can learn words up to the level of a 3 yr old, and whales are smarter than dogs, so definitely.
Dogs don't learn words, they start to recognize the sound that comes with a certain word like "stay" or "fetch", it's got more to do with the intonation than the actual word. They don't know what the word actually means. They can't imitate it nor can they recognize it in a sentence.
6th May 2019
Band of Brothers (2001)
Replacements - S1-E4
Question: When Sgt. Martin is at the airfield before the jump into Holland, a lieutenant tells him him to tap him on the leg, but I can't figure out why and nothing else is explained about it any further. What's this about?
Answer: Because he was colorblind and couldn't tell if the light had jumped from red to green.
6th May 2019
Edge of Tomorrow (2014)
30th Apr 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Spoiler! Given Gamora is brought to 2019 from 2014 with no ill effects, presumably just spinning off a new timeline with no Gamora in it (or Thanos for that matter, making that new timeline pretty peaceful), why can't the Avengers just go and "retrieve" alternate-timeline versions of the other people they've lost? They don't seem too worried about the timelines that have branched off due to their actions, eg. Cap going back in time (a whole other issue), Loki stealing the Tesseract, etc. They could hop back to a day earlier and basically get their friends back.
Answer: They actually do have some concern for the alternate/branched off timelines - that's the whole reason Hulk proposes returning the stones (after they're done with them) to the point they were stolen from, so that those branched off timelines won't be royally screwed with a stone (or 2) missing from their timeline (i.e. The Ancient One telling Hulk that the sorcerers need the stone in order to combat the forces of darkness). Granted, some of the changes they've made they can't do much about - not without spending more time and further interfering (Loki escaping with the Tesseract in the alternate 2012 timeline, or the alternate 2014 timeline's Thanos and co. Traveling to main-timeline 2023 - leaving alt-2014 without a Thanos, which as you say, may not be too bad). With all that in mind, I think they would be hesitant to 'steal' their friends from the past because think about what they were doing just a few days ago... trying to figure out how to unsnap the 50% of the universe that Thanos dusted. If they take their friends, who were pretty integral to figuring out how to/and carrying out the undoing of that, they would be dooming that new alternate 2023 timeline to failure in their endeavors.
Since Thanos coming from the past didn't change 2023, I don't think taking their friends from the past would change anything either. They are constantly creating new time lines/universes. However, the only people they lost were Black Widow and Vision, and Hulk tried to bring Black Widow back and failed with the stones whilst Vision lived on the mind stone, which is gone (brought back to it's own timeline). So bringing those 2 back isn't going to be happening. Who else did they lose?
Chosen answer: There's really no reason that they couldn't. Probably an oversight by the writers. I think an easy fix could maybe have been the Ancient One or Doctor Strange warning the heroes that continually altering the space-time continuum could potentially lead to paradoxes that threaten the existence of the multiverse and it's better to just let sleeping dogs lie. It would have been somewhat of a cop-out, but it would have at least addressed it.
Answer: That would be kidnapping. Also, you would be killing someone else who would need to take their spot. Either way someone dies. Are you going to keep going back and saving a fallen comrade?
Not kidnapping if they agree to it.
You assume they would agree to it. Why would they agree to it?
Because of their imminent death in their own timeline. If they get told they're going to die if they stay, but hop over to our timeline where they can still do some good, that may well persuade people. And yes it makes their timeline more uncertain, it's not guaranteed they'd choose to leave, but they may well be willing to. Regardless, "kidnapping" is a stretch.
Gamora - she's not going to die in her own timeline. Her timeline's Thanos is dead. He's not going to be there to throw her off the cliff. Black Widow - you have to explain to her that her being alive can kill countless others. If you remove her from anytime line she doesn't do the good that she has in the last Avengers movies and as a Shield agent or Hawkeye (or another Avenger) has to take her place for the soul stone. That's counter to her sacrifice. Vision - You remove him, you remove the mind stone from that timeline. Which isn't good. If you remove them from their timeline without telling them all of this, yes that would amount to kidnapping.
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: From Wikipedia: In the United States and Britain, more than 60 survivors combined to sue the White Star Line for damages connected to loss of life and baggage. The claims totalled $16,804,112 (appr. $419 million in 2018 USD), which was far in excess of what White Star argued it was responsible for as a Limited liability company under American law. Because the bulk of the litigants were in the United States, White Star petitioned the United States Supreme Court in 1914, which ruled in it's favour that it qualified as an LLC and found that the causes of the ship's sinking were largely unforeseeable, rather than due to negligence. This sharply limited the scope of damages survivors and family members were entitled to, prompting them to reduce their claims to some $2.5 million. White Star only settled for $664,000 (appr. $16.56 million in 2018), about 27% of the original total sought by survivors. The settlement was agreed to by 44 of the claimants in December 1915, with $500,000 set aside for the American claimants, $50,000 for the British, and $114,000 to go towards interest and legal expenses.
lionhead