Question: Why did they fire Jenilee Harrison?
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.
Answer: The official reason was producers felt Harrison was "too inexperienced and unseasoned" an actress (translated Harrison was probably too immature). After Harrison's first season as Cindy Snow, actress Priscilla Barnes joined the cast as Terri Alden, Jack and Janet's new roommate. Terri was a stronger, more complex character than ditzy, naive Cindy. Harrison's role diminished and Cindy was now living on her college campus. After a handful of episodes, Cindy was written out without explanation.
Question: Was the one-armed man a real person?
Answer: No, the one-armed man is listed as "Mr. Löwenstein" and played by Polish actor Henryk Bista. He is a fictional character.
Answer: According to an internet source, the one-armed man, Itzhak Stern, was real. Stern was a Polish Jew who worked for Oskar Schindler as an accountant and assisted in his rescue activities during the Holocaust. After the war, Stern moved to Israel.
Stern and the one-armed man are not the same person. The one-armed man, hired by Stern himself, dies during the movie, and Stern, as you wrote, survives.
Question: The answer is not given in the film, but does it explain in the early scripts why Jack shot his parents but not Bruce? If not, what was Joe Chill's reason for shooting Thomas Wayne in Batman Begins?
Answer: Actually, it is answered in the film. Jack did want to kill young Bruce because Jack had pointed his gun at him. When Jack's accomplice begged Jack to just leave the area, Jack walked away.
Answer: It's unlikely there was anything specific in the early script development addressing this. In the film, Jack Napier, not Joe Chill, was the killer. He had time to shoot young Bruce, but hesitated before his accomplice called him away. In the Batman universe and the various interpretations, there's never been one definitive explanation. In the original lore, Bruce Wayne's parents were randomly mugged by Joe Chill. For unknown reasons, he murdered the Waynes, probably spontaneously. Bruce was probably spared because he was a child or something scared Chill off. However, this should be seen through the lens of a writer. The plot requires that Bruce survive to become Batman. His parents' murders shaped and motivated everything in his life from that point on. Otherwise, there would be no story to tell.
Answer: With regards to Chill in Batman Begins, Thomas Wayne is shown reaching towards Chill when he grabs Martha to get her jewelry. Chill gets spooked and shoots Thomas. He then shoots Martha and runs off. Joe Chill is shown to be extremely nervous and on edge, and he doesn't appear to regard Bruce in any way at all; all he wants is the jewelry.
Answer: There's a fan theory that Bruce Wayne projects his parents' killer onto all his enemies, so whoever he's fighting at that particular moment killed his parents.
Question: Would it really have been possible for Nygma to modify the security footage to make it look as if Stickley was committing suicide at the time, with Nygma nowhere in sight?
Answer: That's an extremely difficult question to answer because you have to look at it from two perspectives. In real life at the time in the 90s? Probably not, because the technology wasn't really there to convincingly create a convincing computer simulation/fake footage that quickly. (Even the special effects wizards who had months to make the movie did a good job but didn't quite nail the digital Batman in the few shots he's CGI.) But in the context of the movie? Yes. You have to remember, this movie is set in a highly stylized, fictionalized universe. One with superheroes, supervillains, highly advanced technology, doomsday machines, and all that jazz. The movie isn't meant to be realistic. It's meant to be exaggerated and cartoonish. So you can safely assume, in the context of the movie, Nygma had the means to create the fake security footage.
Question: How is Kai still in the Spirit Realm? Didn't he blow up at the end of "Kung Fu Panda 3"?
Question: Why are the deceased bad guys including Tai Lung, Lord Shen, and Kai in the Spirit Realm with the good warriors? Shouldn't the good and the bad be in separate realms like Heaven and Hell?
Answer: There isn't necessarily a separate heaven and hell for kung fu masters. There's just the Spirit Realm.
Question: How, when, and why did Lucas get a black eye?
Question: Holmes says he realised that Inspector McDonald was an impostor because he supposedly knows the 'real' Inspector McDonald of the Edinburgh police. As shown in the other movies and Conan Doyle's original stories, there are several Inspectors working for Scotland Yard in London (another British city), which begs the question: does this resolution Holmes mentioned about two British Inspectors having the same surname make sense and, if so, why?
Answer: If you're comparing the film to Arthur Conan Doyle's original Sherlock Holmes stories, then any discrepancy does not really apply. The Basil Rathbone films were loose adaptions of Doyle's work, often incorporating plot elements from multiple stories or were original screenplays with new characters. There was little regard to details or plot consistencies. "Terror by Night" was an entirely original story. The original Sherlock Holmes stories were set in the late Victorian era while the 12 Universal Studio films mostly took place during World War II, with Holmes often fighting Nazis and enemy spies. The first two Sherlock Holmes films by 20th Cent. Fox studio were generally faithful to the original stories.
Actually, my question is related to the movies themselves and it's not a comparison. There are still several inspectors working for Scotland Yard in the Basil Rathbone saga too (I've made an entry edition to include this).
Thanks for clarifying, though you stated, "as shown in the other movies 'and' Doyle's original stories." Much of my previous answer still applies. The Basil Rathbone movies were not a definitive interpretation of Sherlock Holmes. The first two by 20th Century Fox were mostly faithful to the original stories. The 12 later Universal Studios films were lower-budget, cranked out in rapid succession for profit, and shifted the time period to the mid-20th century for cheaper production costs. The studio's mandate was the films were, "to simply be entertaining B pictures." There was little regard for historical accuracy or plot continuity from film to film. Scripts were simultaneously developed by different writing teams. The 12 films had multiple directors and screenwriters who were focused on their individual projects.
Actually, almost all the movies were directed by Roy William Neill (11 of 14).
That's true, but many different screenwriters were simultaneously working on the various movies. It's also typical in Hollywood for uncredited "script doctors" to revise scripts, further adding to small inconsistencies. Universal Studios had a seven-year contract with the Doyle estate to make the Sherlock Holmes films. They produced them quickly, releasing three movies per year. Under the contract, Universal was allowed to make plot revisions, create some original stories, and modernise the setting (making it more topical and cheaper to produce).
Question: When Rimmer is jailed for killing everyone on Red Dwarf, why did they go down the route of getting Rimmer a retrial? Wouldn't it be faster and easier to simply turn Rimmer off and then reboot him?
Answer: They could do that after they left the planet, sure. But if they tried it while they were there, the Justice Zones would punish them for it. Best to play along until you can get away.
Question: When Jack Stevens was being introduced as the pilot to smuggle the cocaine into the United States, Diego's fiancée was talking in Spanish - does anyone know what she was saying (in English)?
Question: When they finally break the code, Turing reads the decrypted message. Wouldn't it have been in German, which he earlier in the film admitted he did not read?
Answer: It is in German; you can see it as it's being written down. Afterwards, Turing doesn't read it out; Cairncross hands it to Alexander, who reads it aloud (in English).
Question: Was Joel's house also Tommy's house from the original Halloween? And has it been used in anything else, like Will's uncle's house from The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air?
Answer: Regarding "Risky Business" and "Halloween," they are not the same house. "Risky Business" was filmed in the Chicago area, while "Halloween" used California locations. If there's information about it being used in "Fresh Prince," I'll update this.
Question: What happened to the woman talking about Sam's girlfriend's infection? When Dad arrives, she is not shown or in helicopter scenes.
Answer: The woman was the librarian and library receptionist. She lives to die another day. She gets rescued with the other library survivors. The actress just isn't Jake Gyllenhaal or Dennis Quaid. So the focus in the end is not on her, but rather on the big-name stars.
Answer: If you mean Sheila McCarthy, she is on the helicopter. They show her smiling at the man who saved and carried the large Bible.
Question: Atwater is always going undercover as a drug dealer; after all these years, how does he get away with not being recognised?
Radio Days - S6-E4
Question: When Joey and Jesse try the DJ spot, you can see a sign on Julie's desk that says NO CHECKS CASHED. Would people try to get checks cashed at a radio station?
Answer: Larger businesses used to cash personal cheques for their employees as a courtesy, since ATMs weren't nearly as common as they are now, and they may not be able to get to their bank.
Question: Why doesn't anyone from the Afterlife try to stop Lydia from doing her TV series? In the first movie, Juno said that the living must not discover evidence of the Afterlife.
Answer: My guess would be that it's a combination of a few factors. The first is that she's far from the only one doing that sort of program. There are hundreds of paranormal shows, YouTube channels, etc. It would start to look very suspicious if suddenly things started happening to everyone who makes that type of content. Second, a lot of people just flat-out don't believe in things like ghosts and the afterlife. And a lot of those shows are faked, anyway. So while Lydia is earnest and honest, a lot of people won't believe it. Therefore, her show isn't exactly super risky for the afterlife. And finally, the original movie really doesn't dwell on that idea; it's basically given a few brief lines of dialogue in like one scene, and that's it. So you could also make the argument that this movie just sort of ret-conned or is ignoring that idea due to it being such a minor, unimportant element of the original.
Answer: I agree with Ted Stixon - many people have similar shows/online channels, and many people don't believe in the content. So, the afterlife officials are probably not concerned about all of them. There are people in real life who claim to be in contact with the deceased, as well as psychics and people with various religious beliefs.
Question: Why was Oliver so quick to believe Annie's friends when he was told she was in danger?
Answer: Think of the circumstances. A group of obvious orphans shows up at your house at night, saying they are friends of Annie. Warbucks knows how far the orphanage is from his home since he went there earlier. Annie believed her parents were already dead, as so many people showed up claiming to be them but didn't have the locket. Annie was very hesitant and unreceptive toward the ones who showed up to bring her home. Warbucks also caught a bad vibe from the fake parents when it came to giving them the reward check. It's not hard to believe that he would instantly realise that he was scammed and Annie is in trouble.
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: The producers felt that she was too "inexperienced and unseasoned" for her role on the show. Harrison admitted that she "had a lot of naivety."
Well, how else do you get experience in acting? By being on a show, in a movie, or in a play. She was fun and seemed rather sweet.
Rob245
True, but the producers apparently felt an older, more experienced actress would better play off the other characters. Shows also monitor how well viewers react to characters. Of course, there are serious reasons why actors are let go such as drug/alcohol abuse, mental health issues, legal problems, public controversies, etc, that become a liability to the show, though it's often downplayed or covered up. Charlie Sheen and Roseanne Barr are high-profile examples. If there was some other issue with Harrison, a cover story could have been issued to protect her reputation. That doesn't mean there were any, just a possibility.
raywest ★
In addition to what Ray West wrote, I want to add that many actors start out as children and young teenagers. So she could have been inexperienced compared to someone else of the same age. IMDb only lists three TV episodes that she acted in before "Three's Company."