Answered questions about specific movies, TV and more

This page is for questions relating to a specific title. If you have a more general question, please check out the general movie questions section. Click the button below a question to answer it or click "edit" to correct a spelling mistake. Ask your questions here, and hopefully someone will answer soon. Members get e-mailed when any of their questions are answered.

Question: One thing I never understood in the movie. At the end right before the final punch, the principal sits up and says "don't fuck this up Mitchell." Was he referring to not losing the fight? Was he referring to his school career? It is hard to tell especially since he saved Mitchell from the police, then smiled and nodded at him before walking away.

lartaker1975

Answer: He's telling him to win the fight. The principal knows if the bully isn't defeated, he'll continue to harass him and the students. He believes if the bully loses the fight, he'll no longer be a problem at the school.

Jason Hoffman

Question: Why didn't Rocky have a speaking part in the movie?

Answer: There are a number of possibilities: perhaps the studio did it to cut down on cost, as speaking parts require higher pay. Or perhaps they simply had nothing funny for the character to say. Or it could be intentional that they chose to have him remain mute.

Jason Hoffman

Question: Would the interference from the plutonium keep the RC car from working?

Answer: Radiation wouldn't necessarily affect a remote control car. It would contaminate it, but beyond that the car would continue to work.

Jason Hoffman

Question: I got the movie on iTunes and there's a deleted scene where he goes to the Vatican. He gives Gianna's name, and a papal figure comes out. He tells him fortune favors the bold and sticks his hand out for John to kiss his ring. What's the significance of this scene?

Answer: It shows that high up members of the church are fully aware of the secret society of assassins, and even use them.

Jason Hoffman

Question: When Dalton and Doc are leaving the bar, you can see the Bigfoot monster truck with Jimmy in it. As there are only 2 other cars in the car park, why wouldn't Dalton have confronted them?

Answer: As we see throughout the film, Dalton is not confrontational, and always takes the path of least violence. He wouldn't confront them, he would wait for them to attack him.

Jason Hoffman

Show generally

Question: Why why does Danny always yell, "hey!" When he's is a half a block from the perpetrators which gives the perpetrators 1/2 block head start running from Danny. Why doesn't he wait until he's close to him and he wouldn't have to chase him so far?

Answer: It's a common cop show plot device. If the police on the show always acted in the most logical way (i.e. not alerting a suspect to their presence) the show wouldn't have the opportunity for an exciting foot chase.

Jason Hoffman

Question: One of the crew members tells Worf the Borg control 26 to 11, when they reached deck 11 they stopped. Picard says "we can't get to deflector control or a shuttle craft. I did some research, the main shuttle bay is on deck 6. So why can't they get to a shuttlecraft? Would this be a plot hole?

Answer: The borg took control of specific areas of the ship as part of their plan. This included deflector control and the shuttle bay.

Jason Hoffman

Show generally

Question: Why do the ship's weapons and hand weapons have different colour effects?

Dan23

Answer: It most likely represents varying power levels. Think of fire; as its temperature rises, its color changes. Energy weapons are likely similar.

Jason Hoffman

Question: If Roald Dahl hated the way the movie was being made, why in the DVD special features, does it show him on set with cast and crew looking like he's having a good time with everyone?

Answer: Disagreeing with a studio's choices about your story wouldn't preclude enjoying an on-set visit.

Jason Hoffman

Question: The main character of the game is Griffin. You play as him in campaign mode. Yet he is not a playable character in multiplayer. His brother is, but not Griffin. Anybody know why?

Quantom X

Answer: Donnie Griffin was going to be the protagonist of the un-released sequel. Presumably making him the player character in the multiplayer to this game was a set-up for the sequel.

BaconIsMyBFF

Question: Towards the end of the movie, when the parents are looking at the wine bottles, they hear Martin and Chessy arrive home. Nick tells Elizabeth "she has a key" - why does Elizabeth back up right away as he said that?

Answer: I think she was scared of falling in love with Nick again, and maybe because she thought they were better off not together, considering they became successful and achieved each other's dreams when they were apart.

Question: When they promote the fight, why do they say January 1st is America's birthday?

John K

Answer: They mean the entire year, 1976, is America's birth "day," being the bicentennial of the Declaration of Independence. So the fight, taking place on January 1, is the "first sporting event on our two hundredth birthday."

Question: When Malankov is lying at the stairs and Bryan aims a gun at him, Bryan said "You killed my ex-wife. But you're not gonna kill my daughter." and then Malankov said "Your daughter?" then he muttered something. What exactly did he say?

Bunch Son

Answer: He says "S***! We are f***** by the same man."

Bishop73

I'm asking about what he exactly said before saying "We are f*** by the same man." And he definitely didn't say "S-h-i-t"

Bunch Son

Question: When Obadiah Price's son talks to J about how he was "there" and you'll tell him all about it what did he mean?

Answer: J asked why he remembers K when no one else does and Price says J remembers K because J was in 1969. One of the things with time travel is that effect can precede cause, meaning J was in 1969 before J travelled to 1969. Then Price says he wants J to tell him all about it when he gets back to the present.

Bishop73

Possibly but when talking time travel, theories expound endlessly. Your explanation generally fits the events, or how they're authored to occur, but it's almost too simplistic. I believe that it is impossible for effect to precede cause... At least not without a break. To me, for time travel to exist and be possible, it would require endless loops or time-lines. Essentially that the moment you go back in time and make any change, which could be almost impossible not to, you break the original timeline thus creating a new one. Only then, could effect precede cause imho. It's the butterfly 'effect' :) or the ripples in the pond theory. Even then, I'm not sure that effect could ever precede causation. Your thoughts?

I purposely kept the answer simple since most movies with time travel don't go into much details about how time travel is possible and all the consequences, etc., especially in comedies. Plus there tend to be plot holes left when only partially explained. There was a saying I heard in passing in regards to writing science-fiction (so I don't know who said it or the exact quote), "it's better to have unexplained science than faulty science." One example of effect preceding cause is "tachyons", a hypothetical particle that travels faster than light. As such, a tachyon fired from point A to point B would reach point B before it was fired, due to special relativity. I personally don't subscribe to this theory and say if it was to occur, the tachyon would simple arrive before a particle of light would. I don't believe time travel into the past is possible, so as long as a movie is consistent, I don't think there's anything wrong with picking a closed time loop over an alternate time loop.

Bishop73

Question: I'm having troubles reconciling few things. In no particular order, here are my questions: a) The shotgun scene didn't make any sense. I guess the "surprise" is that it fires when you release not when you pull it, but it just seems like one of those things where you duck and tell the other guy to duck and then unscrew it while ducking. b) So, John is given one last bullet and asked if he'd like to kill one more time. So, lets say Amanda actually does what she's told and doesn't kill Lynn. Isn't John going to kill her anyway since that was his intent? c) Likewise, how would Lynn have not told John about her collar? You'd think that it'd be the first thing she'd mention to him or you'd think it'd be something he might want to ask about. This, of course, then becomes a bigger deal because if he knows he can't kill Jigsaw without killing his wife, then he probably doesn't and everything has a happy ending. To me, it would've been cool if she had no way to tell him but was trying really hard to and he just ignored her and killed him anyway. d) Was it considered Amanda's choice then to have timers so short to make things "unwinnable"? The characters seemed to basically "win" every time but just couldn't within the time allotted. Presuming that is the case, how could an obsessive guy like Jigsaw not see and evaluate everything? How could he not be the ones watching videos of everything? I get that it was a test for Amanda, but since he objected to "murder" so much, then how could he knowingly allow her to murder?

Answer: A) The judge was preoccupied with Timothy's predicament and Jeff was preoccupied with the rifle, so he may not have noticed the judge was in the line of fire. B) Jeff didn't know Lynn was also being held captive until he witnessed Amanda shoot her. Him shooting Amanda in retaliation was a knee-jerk reaction. Had he walked into the room and seen Lynn alive and well, it may have caused him to let his guard down long enough for Jigsaw to explain everything. Then again, like you said, he just may have killed Amanda anyway. C) Lynn actually was trying to tell Jeff about her predicament, but she could barely speak after being shot and bleeding out, plus Jeff was mainly focused on Jigsaw. D) Jigsaw was extremely ill and weak at this point. He probably didn't have much oversight on Amanda's work. In all likelihood, he learned about her transgressions from Hoffman.

Phaneron Premium member

Question: Why did the Tsarnaev brothers have Dun Meng go with them when they take his car? Why didn't they just take it and leave Dun Meng behind?

Answer: As an insurance policy to escape. Since they had just confessed to him that they were the marathon bombers, they had no reason to believe that he wouldn't go the police the moment they were out of sight.

Cubs Fan Premium member

Question: Why didn't the aunts just tell Miguel that Ernesto De La Cruz wasn't his grandfather when Miguel was rambling about it when he entered the Land of the Dead?

Answer: The aunts may not actually know. Because his ancestor hated him so much, she may have talked about him very little in both the real world and the afterlife.

Greg Dwyer

Answer: Because Miguel didn't unambiguously talk about his wrong assumption. In other words, he never said, "my grand-grandfather and Imelda's husband, Ernesto de la Cruz" (which is wrong). He only called him grand-grandfather and Imelda simply referred to him as a good-for-nothing musician. The aunts, uncles and the grandfather Julio all knew about Hector, as can be inferred from the reunion scene.

FleetCommand

Question: Why is Beverly accused by the whole town of being promiscuous?

Cody Fairless-Lee

Answer: Kids are vicious and make up rumors about eachother. Given she obviously has some hangups and acts awkwardly around others due to her sexually abusive father, rumors simply spun out of control and it became popular for bullies to claim they had fooled around with her.

Question: Does Bill know that Elle poisoned Pei Mai? Pei Mai was Bill's master, and I highly doubt he would have approved of him being murdered in such a disrespectful way, but Elle was still on good terms with Bill which is evident from their phone conversation.

Answer: Since the film itself does not answer this question, any answer would be speculation at best. It is highly unlikely that Elle would tell Bill about it-she also murdered his brother, and lied about that, too-and since she was the only witness, he couldn't have heard it from anyone else.

Question: When Iris is driving to Amanda's house from the airport, they are driving southeast along the shore. But LAX is east of Santa Monica, which is where the cab turns to head inland. Am I the only person thinking this is wrong?

Answer: This is typical in many movies where a commute to a specific location is deliberately inaccurate. I live in Seattle and have seen movies that were filmed here showing someone driving to a real location in a direction that in no way would get them there. There are logistical considerations in filming, such as what locations are more scenic, physical barriers for film crews, obtaining permits, traffic considerations, and so on.

raywest Premium member

Join the mailing list

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.