Question: When Bruce escaped the pit, did he throw the rope down so the rest of the prisoners could escape? I know they helped him, but isn't letting them go free a bad thing (they're prisoners for a reason, some of them could've been rapists like the ones that killed that little girl's mother)? And how did Bruce get to Gotham so fast? Do we know what country the pit is in?
lionhead
16th Dec 2015
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Answer: As far as the country the Pit is in, it's never stated in the film, only that it's in the ancient part of the world. In the comics, Bane was born and lived in the prison Peña Duro, although it doesn't share much with the Pit other than being where Bane was in prison. Peña Duro Is located in the fictional country of Santa Prisca, which is located in the northern part of the Caribbean.
Answer: It should be noted that the Pit was now Bane's. While it's a prison in the sense that the people can't escape, it wasn't specifically filled with criminals convicted of a crime in a legal setting. They were Bane's enemies who had been put there to be tortured. While it's likely some of Bane's enemies were criminals, they were probably free before Bane put them there. Remember, before Bane bought or took over the Pit, Ra's al Ghul had killed the prisoners as revenge for the murder of his wife. Although they also might not have been criminals convicted legally and would have been the Warlord's enemies.
Answer: While the actual pit was a set and Hollywood magic, the exterior of the prison [once Batman escaped] is Mehrangarh Fort in Jodhpur, India. A set of circular stones mark the supposed "entrance" to the pit. However, the interior of the prison, which had all of the wall/stairs, have a real life inspiration. Chand Baori, was built in the ninth century, and has 3,500 steps across 13 stories. Apparently, the priests who lived there also liked to chant as they descended the steps to reach water, which sent vibrations through the stairs. (Per Cracked. Com, "5 Mind-Blowing True Stories Behind Famous Movie Locations).
Although this is interesting, this not an answer to the question. I'd recommend to post this again as trivia.
I originally wrote it to answer the second part of the question, as I also wondered where it was set in, but I went overboard with the details. I submitted it to trivia.
7th Dec 2002
Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
Corrected entry: The whole premise for this film is blown if you consider that the Borg are after technology. Why would they want to go back in time to assimilate a race that has almost no 'technological distinctiveness' to add to their own. Earth has a tremendous amount to offer during Picard's time and very little during Cochran's time. The hassle of time traveling to assimilate a pre-warp capable world seems like a waste of effort. Sending a few more cubes to finish the job in Picard's time seems much more advantageous.
Correction: Not really, since Starfleet has proven to be a direct threat to the Borg (and they were right to think so, since the Voyager crew destroyed one of the six trans-warp hubs a few years later), they went back in time with the intent of preventing the Federation from existing.
Okay, there needs to be a consensus here. One person has asked why the Borg didn't travel to an earlier time in order to stop First Contact more easily. The answer given was "they want technology." Another person asked: "why choose the 21st Century? There's no tech to incorporate" And the answer was: "because they want an easy way to stop First Contact." Honestly some of the answers on this page sound like they're bending over backwards to accommodate simple continuity errors but these two are literally the inverted opposites of each other and form a total contradiction. Which is it?
They went back in time to assimilate Earth and cripple the Federation. That is all.
Speaking of stopping first contact, wouldn't the Borg risk erasing their knowledge of earth if they did stop first contact, since they didn't know about earth until the first earthlings were assimilated sometime after first contact?
An entire Borg Sphere went back, including a queen. They were planning to stay, use their advanced technology in the past to conquer the future. Starting with Earth.
22nd Mar 2004
Alien (1979)
Question: What exactly is the space jockey and why haven't we seen it in the other films except its fossilized self sitting in the what I call the laser gun?
Answer: It's another race of space alien that is also subject to infection by the Aliens. This particular one was infected and moved as far as it could from its race's known space and broadcast a warning before it died. The presence of eggs in the hold may indicate that it was a research ship. The race was never used in other Alien movies because it adds a new dynamic to the plotlines: two alien species, locked in mortal combat and neither particularly friendly with humans. In the Alien pseudo-prequel Prometheus we learn these beings are known as the Engineers and have interesting ties with both the aliens and humans as well.
Answer: Other theories, mostly developed in the comics derived from the original franchise, assume the xenomorphs were biological weapons conceived by the Space Jockeys for some interstellar war of theirs. Hence, the crescent-shape derelict was just a bomber, full of eggs and operated by a single pilot to minimize risks of accident with this mostly dangerous cargo. - what just happened though.
AKA, the plot of Prometheus.
26th Mar 2002
Ghostbusters 2 (1989)
Corrected entry: The film takes a large liberty when portraying the Titanic. The Titanic we see is complete with a huge hole in one side. The real sinking was nothing like this with small gashes made along the front of the ship, which eventually split in two. There was no large gaping hole like that made when she hit the iceberg. The Titanic was found four years before the film was made, so it was known at that time what condition the Titanic was in. (01:20:35)
Correction: It's a ghost ship, so I think we can forgive them for this, just like the ghost train in the subway scene, because it was a steam engine, which never would be in a subway tunnel like that.
This isn't a valid correction. The ghost train appearing on the subway tracks is different and had nothing to do with the way the Titanic ghost ship looked.
They are both ghost vessels, not the actual machines, it is understandable that they will look different on the etheric plane.
They aren't the actual machines sure, but there isn't any reason why a ghost ship would pick a physical appearance with severe damage that is in a different spot from the original. The explanation is not in 'the etheric plane' but in poor research (not that in a movie like this matters) or the fact that it simply is more impactful visually to show that sort of gaping hole. It is a factual error even if we understand very well why it was made - call it Deliberate Mistake if you will.
The people are the ghosts, not the ship. The ship never picked the appearance. One can assume the ghosts made the Titanic alongside themselves, from memory. Since the victims never actually saw the damage, this is what they thought it looked like.
We don't know who picked the appearance of the Titanic or the ghost train and how any of the 'supernatural' works, other than the end result is factually inaccurate. There's no reason to try to find metaphysical justifications for a clear creative liberty the art department took without giving it a second thought. Which is exactly what the original poster said; "The film takes a large liberty when portraying the Titanic."
It's just a matter of opinion whether they are allowed to take that liberty or not. If they did it intentionally, it's not a mistake.
The thing is, 99% of Factual Errors in movies are very likely to be liberties taken for convenience of the plot or better visual impact (like I said, Titanic=big hole in the hull from iceberg, the audience instantly makes that mental association and feels more real than reality). That's why as long as the observation is accurate and not strikingly obvious (such as "ghosts don't exist") I wouldn't try to read the intent in it too much.
11th Feb 2010
Ghostbusters (1984)
Question: When Venkman is on the phone with Egon, he says that he shot Dana/Zuul up with 300 cc of Thorazine. Since Thorazine is a powerful anti-psychotic drug, it's unlikely that Dana had some in her medicine cabinet. If she didn't already have some on hand, then where did Venkman get it? He said that he has a PhD in psychology, so is he able to prescribe medications for anyone?
Answer: They're all three doctors in that field, so it's not unlikely at all that they could acquire the medication. The question then becomes: why did he have it on him at the time?
Indeed, it's hilarious when you ask yourself that question, and the movie does not have any of the characters question that! Which would have been comedy gold. As the original poster said though; Venkman has a PhD in Psychology, so he can't prescribe the drug, and the other 2 are physicists, so no, I wouldn't say they are doctors in the field?
A Psychologist could have studied medicine. If you have a medical licence you can prescribe medicine to a patient. This doesn't automatically make a Venkman a psychiatrist, but he is more likely more trained in the actual clinical practise. Doesn't make it less unethical though and if anyone finds out he would have his license revoked immediately.
14th Jun 2011
X-Men: First Class (2011)
Other mistake: Near the end of the film, Magneto finally kills Shaw by pushing a coin through his brain. The blood on the coin is already dry when it hits the ground, even though only seconds have passed, and since we're shown blood leaking from the entry wound later, we know that it wasn't dry to begin with.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Xavier has frozen Shaw in place with telepathy. Thus, the reason why the blood appears dry on the coin, is because it is still Shaw's essence, and is still technically frozen in place.
Telepathy doesn't physically freeze a body. He is forcing his mind to stand still.
19th Dec 2010
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Question: Why does Hugo Stiglitz kill the German officers in the first place? The film mentions his enlistment, but how is this related to his killings?
Answer: Based on his willingness to join the Basterds, we can assume he killed them because he didn't believe in what the Nazis were doing.
There is a cut of him being whipped during the bar scene. I think he was taking revenge for harsh and perhaps undeserved punishment.
No, the whipping is how it feels in his mind sitting next to that SS officer and having to pretend to like him and be a Nazi. He's ready to snap.
9th Sep 2016
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Question: When Harry first meets Dobby in his bedroom, in Chapter Two, he asks Dobby if the danger at Hogwarts has something to do with Voldemort. Dobby shakes his head no. But it is later revealed that Lucius Malfoy's plot did involve Voldemort after all. Why did Dobby lie to Harry?
Answer: Lucius Malfoy didn't know the diary was a horcrux and had part of Voldemort's soul in it. It was unintentional and nobody could know beforehand Voldemort was involved in all of it. Including Dobby.
Lucius most certainly knew that "Tom Riddle" was Voldemort. The entire plot centers on that Lucius was up to no good.
I didn't say he didn't know it was Voldemort's diary. I said he didn't know it was a horcrux. He just knew the diary was bad news and tried to pass it on to the Weasleys.
Answer: Dobby is not lying. But he is not able to reveal the name Voldemort, due to his bond to his master, and instead tries to give a - quite unintelligible - hint about who is behind the plot: "I've got just one question, Dobby, " said Harry, as Dobby pulled on Harry's sock with shaking hands. ' You told me all this had nothing to do with He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, remember? well-" "it was a clue, sir." said Dobby, his eyes widening, as though this was obvious, "was giving you a clue. The Dark Lord, before he changed his name, could be freely named, you see?" (at the very end of book 2, about third to last page).
18th Jan 2021
Jurassic Park (1993)
Corrected entry: In order to open a park like that to the public (and obviously it's close to the opening date) Hammond would have to convince more people than just his investors. In reality, the park would have to pass a security review, and those auditors would definitely ask questions like "What happens in case of a catastrophic computer failure?" Something tells me the answer "All the fences turn off and you have to run across the compound to turn them back on manually" wouldn't sit too well with them.
Correction: We don't know that Hammond is not going to do that. Having to convince the investors is just the first step. Without financing, nothing else matters because the park will never open.
The park is all but finished. You convince investors at the beginning, inspectors at the end. Convincing investors after the fact is just not how it works. Thinking about what the security inspectors will ask at the end is equally bad practice, although I have seen it done that way, if not quite at that scale.
The whole manual reboot had to be done because Dennis Nedry locked them out of the system, so they had to do a hard reboot. Dennis Nedry's virus and meddling also shut the fences down intentionally. In practice the reboot would be done with more time on their hands and someone at the compound ready to reboot quickly enough that all fences go back online in time. In this situation however, they didn't have those luxuries. No system can be fully made failsafe from industrial sabotage or hacking.
8th Oct 2021
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
Question: Is this true that line "I didn't know you could read" was improvised by Tom Felton, who forgot his original line?
Answer: Yes. It's a common occurrence in a lot of movies for actors to forget their original lines so they improvise something to help move the scene along and not break character. Tom did this because he forgot what his original line was.
Answer: Yes in the same way Daniel Radcliffe improvised his line about always being around when talking to Lucius at the end.
Actually, Jason Isaacs said that, and he and Daniel didn't forget their lines but did it intentionally.
4th Jan 2019
The Terminator (1984)
Question: How exactly do both the Terminator and Kyle find addresses? We are led to believe that is the reason for the phone books, but none of the addresses in the phone books match up to the addresses where either the first Sarah is killed, nor the apartment of our Sarah.
Answer: Gonna be totally honest... that might just be nothing more than a simple continuity error. They accidentally made a phonebook prop that didn't match up with the locations where they shot, and assumed most people wouldn't notice or care. (And to be even more honest, I never noticed it until I saw this question today.)
Answer: My two cents: The T-800 Terminator does indeed, rip out the page of a phonebook for the address, but remember, he was looking for any and all Sarah Connors, not a specific address. He did not know which Sarah would give birth to John Connor, so by process of elimination he began terminating any woman with the name Sarah Connor. He did plug the first Sarah Connor (a housewife), then went to kill the other Sarah Connors in the phone book.
I already gave that answer, but apparently that's not what the question is asking.
Answer: Kyle, as we are shown, uses a police computer to find the addresses. The T800 just uses the phonebook as you mentioned. He rips the page out and takes it with him.
Except 2 of the addresses in the phone book don't match. So how does the Terminator find them using the phonebook?
The Terminator is just blindly killing everyone in the phone book whose name is Sarah Connor (apparently a common name). Process of elimination. So, the day he arrives, unrelated women named Sarah Connor start dropping like flies, and the police believe it's the work of a serial killer. Our heroine Sarah Connor barely escapes this sweeping extermination by sheer luck and Kyle's intervention.
You just described the plot. Were you trying to answer the question? Because the question still stands. (As it is, it's either a mistake or plot hole in the film).
Perhaps I'm not getting the question. What is meant by "none of the addresses in the phone books match up"? Match up to what, the murder scene addresses? I wasn't aware that the murder scene addresses were prominently displayed.
Exactly. The addresses seen don't match. Specifically the first Sarah Connor's house number is "14239", but in the phonebook it is listed as "1823." And the real Sarah Connor lives in an apartment but the phonebook doesn't list an apartment number.
Perhaps though this all doesn't matter because phone books can quickly become outdated, the phone book he found could be over a year old. Someone moves but can still be listed in the phone book with their old address. He could have gone to the addresses but found someone else living there and then asked where the previous owner might be, and he was told (or he forced them). This might be how he found all the Sarah Connors.
Are any of the Sarahs listed as living at 1823? I've not got access to the film right now to check.
The first is listed as "1823." The second is "2816." The 3rd is "309." Although after reviewing the scene and thinking about it, for "309" (which is supposedly our Sarah J Connor), the full address isn't actually seen and the apartment number could have been listed.
Reese never uses a police computer; that's the T-1000 in Terminator 2. He rips out the page from the phonebook. The T800 also uses the phonebook but is never shown ripping out a page.
No! Kyle and the T800 both use the phone book. The Terminator even pulls away a guy who was on the phone ("Hey man! You got a serious attitude problem!") Kyle rips out a page, not the T800. It's the T-1000 in T2 that uses a police computer.
27th Sep 2021
Total Recall (1990)
Question: Why is there air in and around the reactor? Humans have extensively researched the reactor, so they obviously needed air to do it, but doesn't Cohaagen control all the air on Mars, and the reactor? So if he doesn't want anyone to turn the reactor on why not simply drain the air from the reactor so nobody could go there?
Answer: The entire chamber is full of the alien graphite that converts into a breathable atmosphere for the entire planet.
But it's not activated.
Answer: They are on a planet with very little atmosphere; therefore, there must be a supply of environmental suits readily available for exploration of the planet's surface and for going outside to repair problems with the outside of the dome. If there are a number of suits available, the absence of air around the reactor would not be a deterrent. People could simply "borrow" one of the many suits and walk on in regardless of the lack of air.
5th May 2015
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Trivia: The voice of Biff's grandmother was provided by Thomas F. Wilson.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: According to The IMDB website, Charles Fleischer who played Terry the Tow Truck Driver and the old man taking donations in 2015, provided the voice of Gertrude Tannen.
And other sites list Wilson as the voice of Gertrude. Neither men are credited for the role and I have yet to see any site list a source for the information.
Https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0281486/otherworks.
IMDB is not considered a good source. Plus, on that site the information is given as trivia without a source, any crackpot could have claimed that.
Well until you can show me a confirmed source stating it was anyone else, my correction stands.
But IMDB isn't a confirmed source. Here's a site that lists Wilson as the voice actor, so by your logic the trivia entry stands. https://backtothefuture.fandom.com/wiki/Gertrude_Tannen.
On the audio commentary it is stated that the voice of Grandma Tannen is Fleischer. This is stated right after we hear "her" voice when the outside of her house is being shown.
13th Sep 2021
The Sixth Sense (1999)
Question: When the video of the dead girl is played at her funeral it shows her mom adding something to her soup. What was she adding to the girl's soup?
Answer: She was adding some type of poisonous household substance over an extended period of time. It appears the mother suffered from Munchausen By Proxy syndrome, a psychological disorder where a parent knowingly makes and keeps their child (or some other relative) sick. The parent usually does not intend to kill the child, but they have become addicted to the attention and drama of interacting with doctors, other medical personnel and being at the hospital. In this case, the daughter died.
To add, she was feeding her daughter an industrial disinfectant and detergent called Nu-Pine (for wooden floors). She gave small doses which slowly poison the body, causing organ failure over time.
That is just an assumption. It's just as plausible that the mother intended to kill the girl, but was doing it slowly so as not to attract attention. That's how I've always interpreted it.
31st Aug 2021
Beetlejuice (1988)
4th Sep 2021
What If...? (2021)
What If... Captain Carter Were the First Avenger? - S1-E1
Other mistake: The premise of the first episode is flawed; "a single choice" should make the difference, the choice being identified as Ms. Carter not leaving the room to get in the observation booth. But in the normal timeline the booth is exactly where all the other characters were. In this reality everyone else is downstairs, with the German spy that inexplicably sets the bomb early. If anything, it's his bizarre, suicidal choice that matters.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Except it was her decision to not leave the room that delayed the procedure and gave Heinz Kruger the chance to attack. And with her in the room, she is now given the chance to volunteer to take the serum.
How did her staying delay the procedure? Besides, in OTL the spy only triggered the bomb after he saw the procedure succeed, to know it works before stealing it.
Question: Why did Jack cut himself before throwing the coin to Will? I thought the curse only needed Will's blood?
Answer: The curse needs the blood of everybody who took a coin from the chest. All the other pirates have already contributed so, as the movie opens, the only blood needed is Will's, substituting for his father. During the finale of the movie, Jack takes a coin from the chest, adding himself to the curse, so his blood is now required as well as Will's.
But I didn't see any blood on the coins, and none of the pirates cut themselves, even before Will became part of the mix.
Yes, the other pirates did cut themselves before Will came into it, off-screen. The lack of blood on the coins can simply be explained as most of it dripping to the bottom of the chest, it being washed away by storms blown into the cave, or by the fact that they didn't drop that much blood on it in the first place.
When they had Elizabeth they believed she was Bill Turner's daughter, but they all thought the curse had failed, none of them had cut themselves so it makes zero sense.
They had been collecting back the coins for years. During that time they repaid their own blood. All they needed was the last coin and the blood of Bill Turner to break the spell.
Question: Why did one of the Nazgûl stab Frodo at weathertop?
Answer: Because they were trying to kill him and take the One Ring for Sauron.
Why didn't the nazgûl simply take ring from Frodo?
How was one of the nazgûl able to stab Frodo when he put the ring on at weathertop? Considering that people who put the ring on are usually invisible.
To mortal people, yes. But the Nazgûl can sense when someone is using it. Note how they immediately changed directions when Frodo put it on at the Prancing Pony.
12th Aug 2021
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: Doc seemed hell-bent on destroying the DeLorean. So why did he go to the future and get a hover conversion done on the train? Why didn't he just build the train, return to his own time and then destroy the train?
Answer: He didn't return to the Old West, both of them had a desire to go to the final frontier. Their favorite author is Jules Verne, who wrote "From Earth to the Moon."
This is pure speculation, as there is nothing in the movie to support this.
Answer: Doc was happy living in the Old West but returned to the future to collect his dog, Einstein, and he didn't want Marty to worry about him. He probably also wanted to make sure that Marty had made it safely back to his own time, to properly say goodbye, and make sure the DeLorean was never used again. He never indicated he would destroy the train, only the DeLorean. The hover conversion on the train would have been done in the Old West, not in the future.
I doubt he was able to make the train hover in the old west, whilst he could easily go to the future with it and do it there, like he did with the DeLorean. He did say he has been to the future with it, so it's logical to assume that's where he upgraded it.
Doc never says he went further into the future with the train or did the hover conversion there. If he could build a time-traveling locomotive in the 1880s, then he could create a hovering one, as he had the knowledge. Marty asks if he's going back to the future, and Doc says no because he's already been there. That could be interpreted a number of ways. It's a sci-fi movie, and there is a lot of suspension of disbelief employed here.
While the movie isn't explicit about when or where the Time Train was built, other sources do indicate its hoverconversion was done in the future. While Doc could invent a machine that was capable of time travel (the mechanics of which aren't really discussed), he had to travel to the future to convert the DeLorean and couldn't even fix the DeLorean in the past.
What 'other sources' indicate Doc travelled to the future for the hover conversion? Any fan speculation is invalid. I also don't get the argument. While Doc was unable to fix the DeLorean when Marty was in the Old West, he could, and did, in later years, build the time-travel train in the past. He could not otherwise have gone anywhere into the future to do anything. Time-travelling without the hover ability would be extremely difficult as a locomotive would be noticeable and require taking off and landing on empty train tracks. Doc would have to hide the locomotive while converting it. He would also have to know before time-travelling that the railroad tracks he took off on still existed in the future, as he could possibly arrive smashing into what became an urban development. This should be considered as both a deliberate plot hole and a plot device using "suspension of disbelief" solely intended to give the series a spectacular finale.
The comics reveal that Doc Brown traveled to 2017 in a prototype time machine and purchased materials which he brought back with him to the 1890s to use on the Time Train.
30th Jul 2013
Minority Report (2002)
Question: There is a huge question for me. Is the vision of Leo Crow vs. Anderton the vision of what effectively happens (Leo Crow pushes the gun into the hand of Anderton who doesn't want to kill him) or the vision of the homicide WANTED by Anderton (that in the reality changes his idea)? My opinion is that the first answer is correct, because in the vision we see Crow that says to Anderton "Wait!" because he wants to be killed by him. So, if my opinion is correct, Anderton does NOT change the vision?
Chosen answer: Correct, Anderton does not change the vision. The movie is named after what you've just described: the minority report. Agatha always sees the true future, the other two precogs usually see the same as her but sometimes they only see a possible future instead. When Agatha's predictions conflict with theirs, her vision is termed a "minority report" and is disregarded. Anderton was never actually going to kill Crow, it was only ever merely a possibility.
I don't think there is ever a "true future", as in Agatha's own words to John - "You can still choose! You have a choice!" Even the final red ball, Lamar chose to go against the precogs' prevision, which was something that the 3 precogs agreed on. Therefore, a "true future" can be broken and does not exist.
Adding to that, the precog vision of Anderton killing Crow I totally different from what actually happened. In the vision Anderton says to Crow "Goodbye Crow" and shoots him from a distance, which he didn't do at the actual event. So the precog knowledge Anderton has definitely changed the future. He already decided not to kill Crow, but Crow died anyway.
I might disagree with the idea that Anderton was never going to kill Crow. He hacks into Agatha searching for his minority report, and even asks her straight out if he has one, which she tells him he does not. When he is in the hotel room, he confirms that he indeed intends to kill Crow, but Agatha begs him to choose otherwise. Which he eventually does, as does Lamar, proving that precrime is not a perfect system and leads to it being shut down.
Answer: Yes, he threw the rope to let the prisoners out. It may have been a dumb move on his part, although there is the potential that numerous prisoners there were also wrongfully imprisoned by Bane, and Bruce is intimately familiar with the criminal world and mindset - he may have simply judged that the remaining prisoners in the pit were worth freeing. Bruce has connections all over the planet, any company, or one could have dropped off billionaire Bruce Wayne back off at the states. It is never mentioned where the prison is located.
MasterOfAll