Question: At the start of the film when the facehugger tries to get into Newt's cryotube, why does it use brute force instead of acid to gain entry?
lionhead
24th Nov 2019
Alien 3 (1992)
24th Nov 2019
Star Wars (1977)
Question: Has there ever been any sort of canonical discussion about the morality of droid treatment in any Star Wars titles? They're intelligent/sentient, are treated well by most people, even like friends/pets by some. And yet they also seem to casually get their minds wiped, or if they're destroyed many people shrug rather than mourn. Tools to some, valued comrades to others, it's just a bit all over the place. Idle thought really.
Answer: Lucas has gone on record as to the treatment of droids in Star Wars being a thought-provoking allegory for the way people treat minorities. I've never heard him specifically talk about how it's almost never commented-upon in-universe, but intentionally or not, I'm of the opinion that it's more compelling this way. Why doesn't anybody do anything about the way droids are treated? Well, go around asking people why they don't do anything about the way other people are treated and you'll quickly find out.
Answer: Not in the films, but several of the books removed from canon by Disney mentioned a "droids' rights movement" that decried memory wipes and other dismissals of sentience. https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Droid_rights_ (movement).
Solo, which is canon, features a subplot about droid's rights. So not everything has been scrubbed regarding this topic.
Chosen answer: Nobody in the Star Wars universe, except on rare occasions, has shown sympathy towards a droid or any AI. Even though these robots learn, they don't really evolve beyond their programming so they aren't considered "alive" (unlike in other fiction like Wall-E), not even by the most sentimental of people. Organic beings develop attachments to droids, but mostly towards their usefulness, not because they like their personality, not even Luke Skywalker towards R2 or Poe towards BB-8. If they are destroyed, too bad. Memory wiping doesn't remove the droid's original programming either, and their way of talking and manners stay.
In Episode 2, Obi-Wan makes the offhanded comment "Well, if droids could think there'd be none of us here", implying that droids do not actually possess artificial intelligence. R2-D2 seems to be a particularly unusual droid in that he is uncommonly resilient and steadfast, which makes his allies quite fond of him. Poe and BB-8 appear to have a bond that goes beyond simply being attached to the droid's usefulness, but like you say that appears to be a unique case.
Just because he said that doesn't mean they didn't have AI. They think for themselves, so they have AI. Just not as advanced as in other fiction.
The point is raised again later in the film when the cloners state that unlike droids, clones can think for themselves.
20th Nov 2019
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Question: What was Ron's joke when he said "Next time I see Crookshanks I'll let him know"? I knew he was making some sort of joke or being sarcastic. Can someone please explain it to me?
I don't understand why Ron would joke about that. He owed Hermione an apology. And why didn't he just say sorry?
They are just kids. He just doesn't feel like he should apologize to her for accusing her cat of killing his rat. There have probably been incidents of Crookshanks chasing Scabbers, it is a cat after all.
20th Nov 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did it take Thanos 3 weeks to destroy the stones?
Answer: He was probably contemplating what to do with himself and the stones now he had fulfilled his purpose.
Also, he was nursing his wounds from the first snap. He knew that he should be healed before letting a 2nd snap damage his body badly again.
20th Nov 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did Thanos destroy the stones?
Answer: He does it for three reasons: 1) They served their purpose. His goal was to wipe out half of the universe and he succeeded. 2) To avoid the temptation to use them ("they served no purpose, other than temptation.") and 3) So that the destruction (his "work") will always be, that is to say it can't be undone.
Answer: He said "they had served their purpose" So he is arrogant enough to believe that once the stones had done what he wanted them to do he destroyed them as they were no longer useful. But its also possible he didn't want anyone to reverse what he did.
19th Nov 2019
Mortal Kombat (1995)
Question: One mistake mentions a car visible in the background of the Scorpion VS Johnny Cage fight. But for the life of me, I can't find it. In what particular shot is it visible? (Or if nothing else, does anyone have the timecode for it?).
Answer: Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dz0YU0jJr4 Time stamp is 0:57 I'd say. You can briefly see a car moving behind the trees in 1 shot, it's less than a second long. Its left of the middle of the screen.
12th Nov 2019
The Incredibles (2004)
Question: A few questions about this movie. Firstly, Syndrome's ultimate plan was first testing his prototypes on other supers, using the next had the last been defeated, and all leading up to the final face off with Mr. Incredible. What would Syndrome had done had Mr. Incredible denied the opportunity from Mirage of coming to the island to do the hero work as devised and everything he planned had been spoiled? Secondly, when Mr. Incredible was captured and held hostage in the round electric type of cell, did Syndrome plan for him to just hang there until he died? Thirdly, what made Mirage suddenly have a change of heart after all the working she's done with Syndrome and killing off supers in the past?
Answer: Syndrome's plan worked because even though the superheroes were retired a lot of them missed the old days and wanted to do real superhero work. This opportunity lured a lot of them to the island, including Mr. Incredible. If he hadn't gone there Syndrome would have found others. He kept Mr. Incredible locked up there until his plans of sending the robot were executed. Afterwards he probably would have killed him, perhaps by turning the robot loose on him again but this time in public. Mirage got second doubts when she realised Syndrome didn't care about her or the lives of innocents, I'm guessing a lot of information was kept from her and she simply thought Syndrome was after power and not petty revenge on superheroes.
I'm a little confused about the second and third answers. We saw that Syndrome was trying to destroy the robot while mimicking it (really, using his remote) while he meanwhile had the Incredibles held hostage at his island. How would he have sent Mr. Incredible to the public to be killed by the robot if it were destroyed? Also, if Mirage thought the superhero revenge on Mr. Incredible was minor and the other supers he was killing were innocent, why did she decide to be his assistant and help him in the first place?
I'm sure his first encounter with the robot was just for show, letting the people think he beat it, without actually damaging it. The point was that the robot could not be defeated by any superhero and then everybody would flock to him and he could sell his inventions to make everybody "super" so superheroes will not be necessary anymore. It's somewhere along the lines of that anyway, I've never actually known what his actual plan was. The point was to make an unbeatable robot that only he could defeat by cheating, then sell his inventions to everybody. That I'm sure of. How he was going to take his revenge on supes to the next stage I don't know. Mirage wasn't innocent, she knew supes were being killed by the robot but she thought he did it for power. She also started to like Mr. Incredible I think. Once she realised he didn't care about her or literally anyone else she decided to betray him. Maybe she found out what real power is, and he didn't have it.
29th Jan 2015
The Ring (2002)
Question: Why can't the video just be passed to inmates on death row?
Answer: Who says it can't?
Answer: There was a deleted subplot from the film involving Chris Cooper as a child murderer. Originally Rachel would show the copy of the tape that she had Aiden make to this character, in order to end the cycle started by her on someone deserving of death.
Answer: Maybe because we have something called a "humane death" which caused all the death sentences that involved pain to be banned, leaving only the lethal injection to be a humane death. I think being assaulted by a child ghost who will literally scare you to death isn't considerd a "humane death."
This presents a paradox. Whether or not it is "cruel and unusual" to force a condemned inmate would be a matter for the Supreme Court. but in order for them to rule, they themselves would all have to view the tape (and perhaps the lawyer for the condemned and the Solicitor General as well), so at least 11+ "death surrogates" would have to be found just for a decision to ever be rendered. But, if it's true that the person has to watch the entirety of the tape for it to be lethal, perhaps they could divvy it up, so that every part of the tape could be watched by at least one justice.
11th Nov 2019
Ender's Game (2013)
Question: Maybe this is explained better in the book, or maybe I just wasn't paying attention. But at the end, when Ender killed all the Formics, did he kill any innocents, or were they all involved in the first invasion? Because Ender never mentions innocents being killed, that would be a pretty good argument as to why it was wrong. If they were all involved in the first invasion, I don't see anything wrong with killing aliens that murdered millions of humans.
Answer: In the book, Ender had grown disillusioned with military school and was depressed. Destroying the entire Formic homeworld was his attempt to force the school to expel him, by enacting a suicidal plan of action so ruthless his superiors would believe him unfit for leadership. In the film it appears that Ender is simply trying to win the game as best he can. As for the Formics themselves, they operate with a hive mind so in a sense, yes they were all "involved" in the invasion of earth. However, wiping out of the entire civilization in retribution, especially once the audience hears the Formic queen express her dismay over the Formic's actions, is evil. The film somewhat glosses over this fact, but in the books it is clear the Formics did not understand that humans were sentient at all because they could not comprehend an intelligent species lacking a shared consciousness.
Yeah misunderstanding is the constant of the book series.
11th Nov 2019
Scream (1996)
Question: Why does Stu go along with Billy's plan? He's got nothing to gain. That and why kill Sidney? She can't help what her mother did with Billy's father.
Answer: Stu is simply crazy. Probably brought down by Billy, sucked into his psychosis, sometimes that can happen if Stu is mentally unstable and easily manipulated. We don't know where his instability comes from, but its positive Billy has had a bad influence on him and brought him down this path of killing.
Answer: Some people are influenced by a "leader" friend. They don't make many decisions for themselves. Stu apparently latched onto Billy at some point, and is willing to join him in the murders. There are real-life cases in which murderers had associates who obeyed them.
Answer: To add to the other answer, Stu briefly mentions "peer pressure" as his reason for going along with Billy's plan. Sure, he's being slightly sarcastic when he says it... but I think that it's a hint to his motivation. He's already somewhat unstable (his hyperactive personality throughout the film backs this up), and I think the implication is that Billy gave him the final "push" that put him over the edge into full-on violent insanity.
29th Apr 2005
Shrek (2001)
Question: I've seen the French version of the film, and the opening credits have been taken out. Can someone please tell me why this might be?
Answer: Because none of the English-speaking cast 'appear' in the film, as all of the voices were redone by French-speaking actors. As such, the original credit sequence is pointless, and it would have been a lot of work to redo the credit sequence for every single different language that the film had to be redubbed into. Hence the choice not to have one.
Answer: The French dub of the movie has all the songs translated into French. I suppose that with the song "All Star" by Smash Mouth in the opening they weren't allowed to do it so as a result they removed it instead, resulting in the removal of the entire opening. This is sort of a French thing, to translate the songs.
20th Jan 2019
Mortal Kombat (1995)
Question: When Lui Kang fights Reptile, what was Johnny Cage doing this entire time? (01:12:15 - 01:15:50)
Answer: Since the entire fight is focused on Liu Kang and Reptile, he could have possibly waited to see what the outcome of the fight was.
Answer: Wouldn't Johnny Cage want to go in to help his "mate", rather than stand their and watch? The question here (because Reptile is a secret character in MK1 and Raiden saying "In Outworld, you will find another guy") is that can Johnny Cage interfere with the fight, or is that against the rules in this tournament?
Not only is it against the rules, but Raiden never said they'd find another guy. What he said was, "You'll find another guide." The guide being Kitana.
That is indeed against the rules.
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.
4th Nov 2019
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Question: This question might be more for the book, but Mad Eye said they would have to transport in ways the trace can't detect. But the trace would only detect magic used near an underage person. Harry is the only one who is underage. So they could have used a portkey. I understand that they need to cast a spell to make a portkey but they could have cast the spell before they were near Harry and then transported to the burrow. Or have I made a mistake?
Answer: The trace detects when an underaged wizard casts a magic spell whenever they are away from Hogwarts. It doesn't detect adult wizards using magic near a minor. If a portkey was used to transport Harry, it could have been detected when he touched it because he would be using magic. The safest and least detectable way to move him from point A to B, was to fly him there.
Answer: Two things. 1. You are not allowed to create an unauthorized portkey. The ministry must be aware of it. I think the incantation (portus) is traced. 2. Using a portkey is magical use, so the moment Harry touches it, the ministry would be alerted and possibly know where the portkey transported to.
Then how did Dumbledore get away with it in Order of the Phoenix when he made a portkey to get the children to Grimmauld Place?
Well he is an extremely powerful wizard and the headmaster of Hogwarts. I think he made it at Hogwarts yes? He could have had a trick up his sleeve to do it. Might be a bit more tricky for Mad-Eye and the rest whilst the Ministry is under control of deatheaters. Just too risky.
Also, using magic near an underage wizard isn't traced. Just when it is used by an underage wizard.
No, the trace is meant to detect magic used near an underaged wizard.
The wiki specifically says it's a trace of magic in the vicinity of an underage wizard, not the underage wizard him/herself. It's mentioned working like that by Alastair Moody in the books too.
When Harry used magic to repel the dementors that attacked him and Dudley in Order of the Phoenix, the Ministry of Magic instantly detected that he cast a patronus spell. He was immediately "charged" for using underage magic. What would happen when a young wizard was at home for the summer and holidays and is around adult wizards using magic all the time? The trace would be going off continually for every underaged magic person. It was mentioned in the books that if an underaged wizard did use magic at home, it could be confused with the adults who were casting spells.
Harry once got a warning from the "improper use of magic office" for casting a hover charm, even though it was Dobby who did it. I don't know where you get your information from, but it is wrong. The trace can only detect magic has been used, not who used it. This is explained by Alastair Moody in Deathly Hallows Chapter 4.
3rd Nov 2019
Twelve Monkeys (1995)
Question: What does the French soldier scream at Cole before he shoots him?
Answer: Cole is screaming "Stop!" so you can't hear what the soldier is saying. If you mean all of it, it's in the line of asking what he is doing there, calling the captain to have a look, ask him where his clothes are, and telling him to speak French.
17th Jun 2015
Friends (1994)
The One with Mrs. Bing - S1-E11
Question: When we first see Mrs Bing on TV, Jay Leno mentions that she recently got arrested and asks how it came about. Her response is "occasionally, after being intimate with a man, I just get a craving for Kung Pao chicken" This gets a lot of cheers and laughter from the audience and Chandler shouts "that's too much information!" at the TV. What was happening here? Why does what Mrs Bing said get so much of a reaction from everyone and not answer the question she was asked? Am I missing something?
Answer: This is a story about how Chandler's mom got arrested. So she is saying "after being intimate with a man I get a craving for Kung Pao Chicken." So what she is implying is that she is intimate with whomever, and immediately afterwards when orders Kung Pao Chicken. By this she is saying she got arrested at the place where they sell Kung Poa Chicken, because she was being intimate with the individual there. Conclusion she was openly having sex at a Chinese Restaurant.
Answer: I've seen a few answers that are similar to this. It's really unclear to me what the relation to being arrested is and/or why it's too much information. I feel like I'm missing a connection here.
Chosen answer: Nora Bing's remarks got a huge response by her being funny and making the incident about sex. Audiences tend react to titillating anecdotes. Chandler, of course, is always mortified by his mother for not acting her age and being sexually uninhibited.
This answers nothing really.
Answer: I honestly think part of it has been deleted since the original broadcast. I remember her saying something extra that carried on the joke, but watching it on streaming services, it isn't there.
28th Oct 2019
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
26th Oct 2019
American Psycho (2000)
26th Oct 2019
The Terminator (1984)
Question: Why would a gun store have ammo on display? Would it make more sense to have it behind the counter or a hidden place so customers can't take some when the clerk's not looking?
Answer: Things that are sold are on dispay or people wouldn't know you got it for sale now would they? The clerk is alert for shoplifters, its his risk. No difference from a gas station.
I think the question is referring to why would they have the ammo on the counter and not on a shelf behind the counter or in a display counter? Having live ammunition on the counter is, as you say the clerks risk. But it does seem rather foolish.
I think inexpensive things are common to be put on counters to sell. Like cigarette lighters, candy and lottery tickets. Bullets seem a bit dubious as this scene shows someone can load their gun on the spot, but I don't think in reality anyone would do that.
Answer: It does use acid, but it has acid for blood so it needs to harm itself first to produce the acid.
lionhead
In the first Alien, didn't the facehugger use acid to get into Kane's helmet? It wasn't bleeding acid.
It actually isn't shown exactly how the acid was used to get into Kane's helmet. The creature jumps on his helmet and Kane falls over with the creature on the outside and next we see, the creature has melted its way into the helmet. So it could be it cut itself, just as the creature does in Alien 3.
BaconIsMyBFF