Question: How did Riddle know that the people the Basilisk was petrifying were muggle born? It sounds to me like Ginny was his best shot at knowing, but how could she know?
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: Harry having the resurrection stone makes the ending make sense if that is the way that he survives/comes back from death when Voldemort kills him. But he drops the stone after talking to his dead loved ones. How does Harry survive if, as Dumbledore says, he HAS to die to kill Voldemort? Pretending to be dead shouldn't work, so he must actually die, right? (02:13:00)
Answer: The Resurrection Stone never had nothing to do with Harry surviving Voldemort's curse at the end. He survived because he carried one of Voldemort's horcruxes inside him, and that is what protected him. Dumbledore's prediction was wrong because he did not know until much later that Harry was one of Voldemort's horcruxes. Voldemort also did not know this, having accidentally creating it when he attempted to kill Harry when he was an infant.
That's not right either. Harry survived because Voldemort made the mistake of using Harry's blood in the potion he used to resurrect himself in Goblet of Fire, believing it would make him stronger, failing to realise that he was preserving the protection of Harry's mother's sacrifice within his own body, thus tethering Harry to life. It has nothing to do with the Resurrection Stone or the Horcrux within Harry.
Question: When Jason's mom arrived what did the sign say?
Answer: If you're talking about the sign the driver was holding, it's just says "Mrs. Taylor", which is her last name.
Erika Tiffany Smith to the Rescue - S2-E15
Question: I'm very confused about the ending. During an interview, the interviewer says that the Navy are unable to find the castaways because Erika's log book is written in English translated from Hungarian. If her log book was translated from Hungarian to English, then how could the Navy be unable to use it to find the island and rescue everybody? She left out latitude and longitude but, there must have been something in the log book to give an idea of where the island was.
Answer: Hungarian-to-English translation aside, Erika's log-book entries were utterly meaningless. When the radio interviewer expresses confusion, Erika even reads entries from the log: "You take a left at a big, beautiful, pink tropical flower, then pull over and park," and "After the storm, we backed up and made a U-turn," etc. Her directions were scatterbrained, to put it nicely. Additionally, Erika's yacht was forced to leave the island during a tropical storm, and they lost their bearings for several days before the Navy found them. Given that Erika was such a scatterbrain, we might also assume that she didn't hire the most competent yacht crew, either.
Question: Is Mace Windu more powerful than Yoda, considering he did defeat emperor Palpatine, which Yoda couldn't do?
Answer: Mace didn't actually defeat Palpatine. Palpatine was putting on a show for Anakin to gain sympathy and try to force Anakin's hand into turning on Mace to further propel him down the path of the Dark Side with no hope of return. At any point, Palpatine could have easily turned the tables on Mace and took him out, but he knew Anakin was coming. That's why he dispatched the other 3 Jedi so quickly so that they wouldn't be in the way, and knew that Mace would have the most impact on Anakin having the Jedi turn on the Master.
But Mace defeats Sidious fair and square.
Palpatine made it look that way. Because he knew Anakin was coming and wanted to see him in that predicament to gain more sympathy from him to act against Mace. Palpatine threw the fight, took a dive.
Regardless, What I'm asking is Mace stronger than Yoda consdiering that he defeats the Emperor regardless when Anakin intervened.
No, he is not stronger. Yoda's highly force sensitive blood is even mentioned in Episode 1 when they discover Anakin's blood. That "No Jedi has a count that high, not even master Yoda." Yoda is over 800 years old and a long time student of the Force, and of his species. Not to mention he even has such a high count in his blood in such a small body. Mace is basically just human.
Pretty much similar as to if Anakin is stronger than Yoda considering he beats Darth Tyranus. But in reality, Yoda is stronger than Anakin or Mace Windu.
I wouldn't say Yoda is stronger than Anakin... just far more experienced. Again, he's had 800 years to study and master the Force and expand upon himself. Anakin is still learning and only in his 20's. Also after his limbs are cut off and replaced by the mechanical parts when he becomes Vader, he's actually a lot weaker than he was since he lost so much of his precious blood.
I think Mace was closer to winning and had a great chance had Palpatine not devised his being weak plan as an afterthought after Anakin shows up while he doesn't have his lightsaber anymore.
It wasn't an afterthought. He was manipulating the situation from the get go, having the entire thing planned out and staged ready for the perfect timing of Anakin to walk in.
Sidious didn't plan on Anakin walking in right before he was killed. That would have been too close. He planned on beating the Jedi Masters and use their bodies as proof that the Jedi are traitors. That would have been enough for the council and Anakin. You have to understand that Mace Windu is the most skilled lightsaber duelist of all Jedi, far superior to Yoda. There is no way Sidious could have beaten him. Yoda on the other hand is the best force user of all Jedi, superior to even Luke. All in all Yoda is the most powerful Jedi that ever lived. Anakin Skywalker, especially after joining the dark side, the second most powerful. The fact his body was broken didn't weaken him, it only made him stronger. The reason Yoda didn't beat Tyranus or Sidious is because he is too compassionate, and getting older. Tyranus used that against him and Sidious, well, he just got lucky I think and Yoda gave up too quick. No sith besides Vader has surpassed Windu, Yoda or Obi-Wan.
Question: Why did C-3PO go with them to Geonosis? I always figured protocol droids stayed with their masters unless they were sold?
Question: If Voldemort is now controlling the Ministry of Magic, why does Dolores Umbridge have a position there? In Order of the Phoenix, she refused to believe that he had returned. I wonder why he didn't kill her for opposing him.
Answer: Umbridge was an opportunistic collaborator, and once Voldemort took power, she became complicit in order to advance her own career. She never opposed Voldemort, she, like many others, simply believed he had been killed years before.
She never opposed Voldemort because she was allied with him.
Answer: She refused to acknowledge it openly, that doesn't mean she didn't believe it, or hope for it.
She knew that he returned, but was allied with him all along.
Question: When Obi-Wan tells Luke about Darth Vader murdering his father, Luke doesn't seem to have heard of Vader before. But he knows about the rebellion and wants to go to the Imperial Academy (so he can defect later). Shouldn't he know who Vader is?
Answer: For most of his early life, Luke lived a simple, rustic life. His aunt and uncle knew his parentage and no doubt suppressed information about the Empire from him. Luke is naive and still has a limited and generalized knowledge of the rebellion, most of which was gleaned from talking to friends. He has little awareness of who the key players are.
Answer: Remember that Luke was hidden on Tatooine as a baby, and Obiwan also went into hiding there, presumably as a protector to keep Luke's very existence a secret from Darth Vader. It could be that Obiwan remotely exercised Jedi mind-tricks on Luke throughout his young life to block any curiosity about Vader.
Question: Though Vanellope did say to Ralph that glitches can't leave their game, what is the explanation behind it? Why can't glitches ever leave their game? She never explained it.
Answer: It is never explained, but the most likely answer is that glitches aren't written into the game intentionally, and only characters intentionally written can be transferred in and out of games.
Question: The end of the movie had me all confused. What happened? Is it implying that the Angels came down from Heaven and began killing all the new believers? What were we led to believe at the end?
Answer: At the end locusts descend on earth from heaven to wipe out the human race. This is taken directly from the bible. Basically, everyone who was not taken during the rapture would be left on earth to be tormented and eventually all of humanity would be wiped out by a massive swarm of locusts.
Question: Is MACC inspired or copied from Johnny 5 from Short Circuit?
Answer: Although the series creators have never confirmed this, it seems fairly obvious that MACC is inspired by Johnny 5.
Question: Why didn't the NCAA let freshmen play football before 1971? What were their reasons for not wanting freshmen to play?
Answer: The original idea was to force Freshmen players to gradually adapt to both a tougher form of football and the tougher academic requirements of college.
Question: Even though Hades is now mortal and powerless, why wouldn't Perseus kill him to avenge Spyros and his adopted family?
Answer: The easiest explanation is that would make Perseus a murderer. He's a good, just, heroic man and killing a defenseless person for revenge would be completely out of character for him.
Question: After Peter is possessed by Charlie and he clicks his tongue for the first time after standing up, he starts to walk towards the tree house and heads off screen. The camera lingers though, and focuses in on something lying on the ground in the background. What is that on the ground? It almost looks like a dead dog or possibly the dead dear from earlier, but the shape isn't quite right. It does appear to be some sort of animal but I can't make it out. What is that the camera lingered on right then? And why? It's not shown again. (01:57:45)
Answer: Earlier in the film, Peter swerves the car to avoid hitting a dead animal in the road, resulting in Charlie's decapitation. That animal appears to be a goat (a ram) with slightly curled horns. Within the context of this movie, this is probably a Sabbatic Goat, alluding to Occult symbolism associated with the Mystic Pentagram and the Satanic deity Baphomet. The implication is that Satanic forces caused Peter to swerve off the road, killing Charlie in preparation for migrating her soul into Peter. The dead animal seen in the background at the end appears to be the Sabbatic Goat again, marking completion of Charlie's soul migration into Peter.
Question: How is it possible that Kelly got shot in the head two separate times and is still a private eye?
Answer: She had the kind of incredibly fortunate recoveries that only television writers can provide.
Question: Why was Beetlejuice stuck inside the little town? Why couldn't he leave?
Answer: He'd gone outside the normal system for the afterlife and offered himself as a freelancer. His punishment was to be restricted to the model until someone said his name three times.
Question: When Patton arrives at corps headquarters, a lieutenant says they have a new commander due. What is he talking about? Was their previous commanding general fired?
Answer: Due to his poor performance at Kasserine, General Eisenhower sacked Major General Lloyd Fredendal (Patton's predecessor), and he was sent back home in disgrace, never to command combat troops ever again.
Answer: Patton was put in charge of the American II Corps in North Africa after the Americans were badly defeated at the 1943 Battle of the Kasserine Pass. The lieutenant apparently does not realise that Patton has been sent to replace the previous commander and will begin enforcing strict discipline into the troops.
OK, but what about the other part of the question? Was their previous commanding general fired?
The previous commanding general was not "fired" he was replaced. It was Major General Lloyd Fredendall who was in command of the II Corps, at the Battle of Kasserine Pass. He was reassigned stateside, then about three months later was promoted to lieutenant general. For the rest of the war he was in command of training assignments in the US.
He was effectively "fired", as in removed, from his commanding position, due to his weak leadership, but that did not mean to say he was fired from the U.S. Army. The term "fired" is relative here.
I feel the need to clarify the point that my original reply was to the person who asked this question: "OK, but what about the other part of the question? Was their previous commanding general fired? " Please know that my reply was not meant to come off as butting heads with your answer, raywest, I was merely answering the submitter's question and acknowledging their use of the word "fired" within their question. But since you responded directly to my original reply, I'll respond. You state in your reply to me, "He was effectively "fired", as in removed, from his commanding position, due to his weak leadership, but that did not mean to say he was fired from the U.S. Army. The term "fired" is relative here." Okay, well I really don't agree with that, because I can't see the term "fired" as being relative here, IMO. In civilian life, when a civvie is "fired" from their job it means getting laid-off, being unemployed. To say a servicemember is "fired" from the military, it would basically mean being dishonorably discharged. The OP's question was regarding Lloyd Fredendall. After his reassignment, Major General Fredendall even received a promotion and became Lieutenant General Fredendall within a few months. Anyway, those are my personal thoughts on the matter. :) Be well, raywest. With warm regards, Rikki.
Not fired, just relieved of command and transferred elsewhere.
Question: Why would they make Anne Australian? Her nationality isn't even mentioned, so why would they let Abbie Cornish use her natural accent? What purpose does it serve? It seems like an incredibly random choice. Abbie Cornish has used an American accent in most of her roles, so of all the ones to use her natural accent, why would she use it in the one where it makes the least sense? Why would an Australian go to a small Ozarks Missouri town? I assume she stayed there because she met Bill and fell in love with him, but why would she have gone there in the first place, before she met Bill?
Answer: Since the movie doesn't tell us how she and Bill met, any answer about how and why she was there would be mere speculation. Letting an actress speak in her native accent is not exactly "random"; random would be if she was an American and the writer/director decided to make her character Australian. However, the situation of an Australian marrying someone from, and then living in, a small Missouri town is not as outlandish or nonsensical as one might think; I used to date someone from a tiny town in Kansas, whose mother was an upper-class British woman who happened to meet and marry someone from that town.
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: It's easy to tell which students are Muggle-born. They have little knowledge of the wizarding world and need special training, their parents are not wizards, and Hogwarts, being a small community, makes it easy to know everyone's background. Ginny would have little problem identifying which students Riddle should target.
raywest ★