Question: Why is Colonel Sharp so intent on following the President's order to remote detonate the nuke? He knows the mission won't be successful unless they drill the hole first. Does he really think being court martialed for defying an executive order will be worse than an extinction-level event?
Answered questions about specific movies, TV shows and more
These are questions relating to specific titles. General questions for movies and TV shows are here. Members get e-mailed when any of their questions are answered.
Question: How is it possible that the foreign ministers of Russia and China who live and work in Moscow and Beijing are always in Washington to meet with Secretary McCord?
Answer: Most likely, in real life, this would not happen. However, for the purposes of the show, the ministers are shown as being frequently in D.C. This would be classified as a "suspension of disbelief." It is a plot device where the audience knows something is untrue or realistic, but are willing to accept the premise in order for the story to be told.
Question: Over the course of the film we learn all the middle portion of Rose's life, but how did she get through life without any paperwork such as a birth certificate? Getting married, driving/flying, all need documentation the "renamed" version of herself wouldn't have.
Answer: Record keeping at the turn of the 20th century was still incomplete and inaccurate. Many people were born without a birth certificate being issued. Tens of thousands of immigrants entering the country often lacked those types of papers, and many had their surnames changed when they arrived. It was also much easier to get alternate documentation to prove one's identity or, in certain situations, may not have required proof, as it does now.
Question: Why was it necessary for Michael to kill Sollozzo and McClusky? Sonny knew where the meeting would take place. He could have sent in a team of assassins any time during the meal.
Answer: The plan was to make the murders look as if the Corleones were not involved and that Michael was falsely accused and forced to disappear to protect himself. If Sonny's men went in and just started blazing away, deliberately killing a police captain, the Corleones would have lost Mafia allies and political power. Michael was also the only person who could get close enough to kill Solozzo because he was not considered a threat. It was a tactical element of surprise. Sonny and Hagen also wanted to avoid a bloody gunfight that would have killed innocent bystanders, something all the Mafia families disdained. After enough time had passed, the Corleones bribed a condemned prisoner to "confess" to murdering Sollozzo and McClusky, offering him a large sum of money ensuring his family would be taken care of. Michael was then exonerated and returned to the USA.
Answer: Michael was used as bait to set up a meeting with Sollozzo and McClusky so that they could be set up for assassination. Michael was picked up in a neutral spot and driven to the cafe; if Michael wasn't there Sollozzo would have remained in hiding under protection.
Question: Why does this film reuse almost none of the musical themes from the first two movies, given that John Williams is credited with writing all three scores?
Answer: A variety of reasons. The core melody written by John Williams is always there, but the score has evolved over the course of the different films to reflect the changes in the plot and mood as it became darker, more complex, and more tragc. It also avoids boring repetition. Also, different composers have written their own original music.
Question: Was The Truman Show actually on the air since he was a baby? If so, what kind of entertainment would the audience at home be getting out of watching a baby every day for years? It seems like it would be a pretty boring show until Truman grew up and reached at least the age of 6 or 7.
Answer: They seem to imply the show was always on the air. However, they may have just shown 'best of' clips until he was walking and talking, or perhaps the show never took off in popularity until he developed a personality.
Question: Could Truman file a lawsuit against the people who turned his life into a TV show?
Answer: Anyone can file a lawsuit if they choose. The question is whether he would win. That would be questionable, given he was legally adopted by the studio. He was well cared for, so it would come down to the question of whether hiding the truth from someone and manipulating their entire life constitutes abuse.
Answer: I'm 100% sure he could sue and get financial compensation for his time, face, and name being used. They make a ton of money off him, he would be rich.
Answer: Yes.
Question: Wouldn't Dr. Kimball lose his medical license for changing the boy's orders in the hospital and signing the form, forging someone else's identity?
Answer: He's a convicted murderer, he's already lost his license. If you mean after he's been exonerated, the other doctor admitted he saved the boy's life. I doubt the AMA would prosecute him for doing that.
Also, as he was wrongly convicted of murder, he was wrongly deprived of his medical license.
Assuming he gets exonerated for the murder charge (I'm not a lawyer but I assume, in the messed up US legal system, this still takes evidence even though the actual murderer is in custody), he would still technically be guilty of breaking out of prison and fleeing police. It would be very interesting to hear the end of the story - everyone assumes they just let him go but in reality, it wouldn't be that simple and again, even if you are wrongly convicted, it's against the law to escape prison.
Question: Is there an alternate ending? Did Ving Rhames ever wear a sweater in the last scene?
Answer: I have repeatedly told people he wore a sweater. There has to be one, more original, that has him in a sweater. I remember almost like a Easter yellow.
It should be noted Rhames does wear what looks like a yellow sweater in "Pulp Fiction." Although I wouldn't call it Easter Yellow.
I saw Ving Rhames in a navy crewneck sweater in the closing shots of this film.
I also can swear I saw an ending with Ving Rhames wearing a sweater. This would be in keeping with Klein asking him earlier in the film if he ever wears sweaters.
Answer: My wife and I also believe that Agent Duane Stevenson wore a sweater at the end of the movie on the VHS version. The DVD version switched Duane with suit, white shirt and tie - no sweater.
Answer: I saw Ving Rhames in a navy crewneck sweater at the end of movie shot.
Question: After Peter yells at Kevin "You spent $967 on room service?!", where does Kevin run off to? It's not clear from what's onscreen.
Answer: He's heading back to the hotel most likely to apologize for spending such a huge amount.
Answer: It's Kevin's dad who screams out. You can tell because Buzz looks at the bill, smirks, and says, "Oh, Dad." I've always interpreted it as Kevin running away. The joke is that Kevin's dad screams so loud from the hotel room that Kevin can hear him from the park. So Kevin wouldn't want to face his dad.
Question: Where does all the money come from? These people earn some serious cash from completing dares, but they never tell us where the money came from.
Question: Why did Fridge explode when he got killed by his weakness, cake, but not Martha when she gets killed by her weakness, venom?
Answer: Allergic reaction.
Answer: The simple answer? It was just a funnier visual to see Fridge literally explode from eating cake instead of just dying. It's just a very minor inconsistency in the film for comedic purposes.
Question: What is the significance of the bar scene they keep cutting to during the live aid performance? It does not appear to be the same door that Freddie first played with Smile so I'm not sure the significance. Also, who is the blonde guy with glasses sitting next to Bob Geldof when Bob is asking for money? That's supposed to be someone famous?
Answer: It's not any specific bar, it's just a very common trope in this kind of movie to show everyday people in a bar/pub watching/responding to a massive televised event (cf. V for Vendetta). The guy sitting next to Bob Geldof is David Hepworth, who's not super famous; he's a British music journalist and was a co-presenter of Live Aid.
Question: When the men are at the statehouse, what are they arguing about?
Answer: They are debating whether or not to pass a levy (tax) to fund an army the American Revolution.
Question: In the timeline where Evan and Kayleigh were in college having a good life, where was Lenny? Why wasn't he there?
Answer: Lenny was probably not their friend anymore when they became part of the college fraternity and he didn't. He would probably respond to them like Thumper did.
True. Plus when I think about it, in the original timeline Lenny didn't grow up and was still living with his mom so thought that's where he was.
Question: If the Maitlands aren't dead at the end and the Deetzes agreed to share the house, then how did Lydia fly while dancing?
Answer: The Maitlands are still dead. They are still ghosts.
Answer: The Maitlands are definitely still dead. Absolutely nothing in the movie indicates they came back to life. Lydia flying and all the things happening around the house at the end are the Maitland's doing - they're having fun with Lydia using their otherworldly abilities because Lydia's doing good in school.
Question: P.L. Travers hated Disney's film adaptation of Mary Poppins so much that she refused to have Disney make any more adaptations of Mary Poppins. How could a sequel be made without the consent of Travers, especially since she died in 1996?
Answer: Travers was never entirely opposed to having a sequel made. She initially refused Disney's sequel ideas, and attempted to impose her own demands and concept on what any additional film would be. In the 1980s, Travers and a friend wrote their own screenplay. The Disney company, now with different management, considered it but eventually dropped the project amid casting problems and other issues and conflicts that emerged. After Travers' death, Disney could then negotiate directly with Travers' estate.
Answer: The short answer is *because* she died. Control then passed to her beneficiaries/estate. She didn't forbid Disney from making a sequel, and she couldn't legally prevent it either. The deal she had with Disney just meant that they had to agree on it as she had creative control, and despite their (and apparently her) best efforts, they could never find a sequel idea everyone was happy with, especially given her dislike of the original film. Her will stated: "Any payments received by my Trustees in respect of or any future commercial production or exploitation in any form whatsoever of any books I have written (including any sequel to the film "Mary Poppins") shall be held by my Trustees upon trust to distribute..." On her death creative control passed to her trustees, in terms of sequels and the stage show, and they managed to agree on a sequel idea.
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: Given his choices, what he views as certain failure of the drilling or trying to detonate the bomb on the surface, he decides to follow orders rather than wait for the drilling to fail.