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: The armoured vehicle that gets sent in when the SWAT team are struggling to get in, before they're even attacked...what's that meant to actually achieve? If it's just meant to smash the doors, the men with guns could do that. And if not...will it just sit there?
Answer: I believe it is supposed to be that it was a precautionary measure and probably standard operating procedure to have it on site when dealing with a terrorist situation. To have it at the ready for if they needed it. Not only this, but a large armored vehicle like that could serve as physiological warfare to make the terrorist more fearful merely by it just being there. A show of strength. As for using it on the door, yes, guys with guns can smash those doors. But guys with guns are still targets to be shot at especially though glass doors. The armored vehicle can smash through it and get the men inside without exposing them to small arms fire.
But why send the armoured car into the lobby before being attacked? And why send it in in the first place? Once it's in the lobby it becomes a sitting duck. Easy pickings for when the occupants decide to disembark.
In some cases, maybe. But the vehicle itself still provides cover for the men in it. They usually would exit from the back or the top, and have that as something to hide against or shoot from. Also, most armored SWAT vehicles like that usually have a very high powered water cannon on the top that has the pressure of a fire truck. This can quickly subdue any hostile forces and knock their defenses down, giving the SWAT ample time to make their move while the enemy is still recovering. Not only this, but the vehicle can have inside more equipment the SWAT members can use, like throwing out smoke and flash bang grenades, or have riot shields as the exit. But this at least gets them inside and up where they can do good. If they tried to walk up to the door without cover, they would be easy pickings from small arms fire and snipers.
Good answer. I would add that presumably, the SWAT vehicle could be put in reverse, and once the front entrance was breached, it would back up. Also, this being a movie, it's shown that the overall police and F.B.I. response is supposed to be somewhat bungled, with different egotistical characters vying for control. Plot wise, it shows how well armed the "terrorists" are supposed to be by blowing up the SWAT vehicle with a missile, and how they anticipate and outsmart the police's every move. This is not reality.
Question: They say the wires for the electromagnetic seal "can't be cut locally" - how is that possible? I mean at some point the electricity for them has to come into the building, surely?
Chosen answer: I took this to mean that cutting the lines themselves wouldn't open the safe. The safe is designed such that the physical locks could be destroyed but the electromagnetic lock wouldn't open unless the power to the entire building was shut off.
But my point is they've got control of the building, including the basement/anywhere else. General power has to enter the building from the street somewhere, and I don't see how they wouldn't be able to just cut through a main power cable and achieve exactly the same result as a switch being flipped by a city engineer.
The city engineer shuts down an entire city grid. I think that has something to do with it. It's not as simple as cutting a power line or flipping a switch.
I get that's the argument, I just don't see how. Because eventually it has to come down to the building being connected to the city grid via...something, and I don't see why the bad guys couldn't just interfere with that "something" themselves. There's either a technical reason or it's a plot hole, but I'm not really bothered about the mistake aspect, it's more just a query my brain can't let go of and I want the answer. :-).
Answer: There's no mention as to where the cables actually enter the building. They could come in via the basement, there could be a separate utility room that can only be accessed from outside or the cables could simply be inside a wall somewhere. They'd probably need to find the building blueprints to find out where the cables come into the building.
Question: Did coach Boone really treat his players the way he does in the movie?
Answer: There were some scenes in the movie that were exaggerated, but the real Coach Boone was a tough man, but treated all his players as equals.
Question: Did coach Haskins treat his players the way he does in the movie?
Answer: Yes. He really did integrate them to teach them to work as a team and give them guidance to help them off the field (such as with school work). His coaching method shown in the film is also accurate. Coaches screaming at the players, mocking them, and being what we would say is "harsh" with them was common coaching practice in the 70s that no-one would have batted an eye to. Especially in the south. Coach Boone would have especially been under pressure to show his players he meant business due to the concern that some of them might not take him seriously as a new black coach. If he had been seen as "easy", the team may not have been motivated to do as well as they did.
Question: In the flashbacks of Ransom storming out, it's different each time. The first time his Grandma speaks, the second time she's silent, and the third time she's holding cake, when she wasn't the other times. The flashbacks we see don't contradict each other, they're not really portrayed as coming from unreliable narrators, they're generally an honest portrayal of what happens, even when what they're telling the police isn't what we see happen. So why these minor, certainly deliberate, differences? Far as I'm aware it's the only time it happens too, not like there are lots of moments like this.
Chosen answer: She is holding cake all 3 times, actually, so the only difference is that the first time she speaks. It can be a case of unreliable narrator, but I'd write it down as a mistake (deliberate, probably, as the phrase is important for the plot and they didn't want to hammer it in), since as you said, the other times even when they tell things to the police in a different way from what happened, the details tend to stay consistent, except for parts that are obviously made up, such as who is putting down the birthday cake for Harlan Thrombey therefore appearing subservient and not as close (when Richard tells the story, it's Walt and his wife, when Walt tells the story it is Richard and his wife).
Answer: Each time, it is being described by a different person. Maybe not all heard her speak.
Question: How does Ivy get Nora's snowflake necklace without getting her costume soaked in the cyro fluid or whatever it is?
Answer: Maybe she drained the cryo-tube first? Maybe she did get wet but had dried off by the time we see her again? Maybe Bane did it for her? Pick whatever answer works best for you. It's a really small, insignificant detail in the film with plenty of potential answers.
Answer: She most likely used her mind control potion on someone and had them do it for her.
Question: Why doesn't Amy even once wear pants?
Answer: Amy does not wear pants because Mayim Bialik does not wear them in her personal life. She is Jewish and observes the Judaic custom of modesty and only wears skirts. The Big Bang producers allowed her to incorporate this practice into her Amy character.
Question: When Bond gets out of the Aston Martin for the big game, he retrieves the pistol with silencer from the glove box, and puts it in his jacket. One of the breaks from the poker game, they go to the front desk and are handed an envelope with another pistol with silencer... Did he lose the first pistol in fight with the Ugandans?
Answer: It's the same gun. The gun was stored in the Aston Martin, which Bond first retrieves when he gets the envelope from the front desk with the dossier and key fob for the car. He puts the gun in the envelope and has the front desk hold it for him (off screen) since weapons aren't allowed in the poker room (the players are searched). He retrieves the gun from the front desk when he goes to Le Chiffre's room. It does appear that he leaves the gun in the stairwell after the fight but Mathis would have retrieved it and likely disposed of it.
Question: When Jar Jar is used as a patsy to suggest granting Palpatine emergency powers, why does Palpatine immediately accept the proposal and order the creation of the army? Isn't the Senate supposed to vote on the proposition first? It's not much of a democracy if one Senator's proxy can just unilaterally grant the Supreme Chancellor emergency powers.
Answer: They did have an immediate vote, the means of which we don't see. It would seem that the floating platforms in which each delegation sits has a device that allows for voting. Even if that isn't the case, Palpatine could read the room and recognized that nearly everyone was cheering after the motion, so it was clear the motion would pass.
Answer: From what I understand, but I could be wrong, the Senate as a whole was already pretty much willing to grant Palpatine these powers as it was. But as was so eloquently put in front of Binks, "But what senator would have the courage to propose such a radical amendment?" Followed up by "If only Senator Amidala were here." Given the context of this, I gather that, like I said, the Senate was already poised to grant these powers to him, but nobody was brave enough to be the one to risk their career to speak up and officially suggest, or request this. Thus, when Binks was manipulated into doing so, everybody was set to just go with it and be relieved they didn't have to suggest it. I could be completely wrong on this, but this is how I interpret it.
Question: If Billy's mom hated him and her husband then why not leave? That and why not kill Billy instead of imprisoning him?
Answer: Billy's mom is insane and does not possess a fully rational mind.
Question: They show a large mountain range in the beginning scene. How far away did they drive to get that tree?
Answer: It's never stated in the film, but the assumption is it was a long trip. The kids' annoyed/bored attitude and the fact that Audry refers to them driving "all the way out here" indicate it was at least several hours.
Answer: I believe this movie is supposed to be similar to A Christmas Story, in that the events are being recounted by Clark at a later time. This would explain some of the more fantastical things that happen, such as the Christmas tree excursion events, the truck driver, driving under the truck, jumping off the snowbank, the blonde...etc. I remember someone saying that this justified why the kids seem to jump around in ages between films too...bad memory.
Question: Why does Darth Maul just stand there and watch Obi-Wan flip over him and then bisect him? As a Sith, Maul had plenty of time to react to what Obi-Wan was doing, and his training means he shouldn't have been surprised by it either.
Answer: It was meant to be very fast. It couldn't be so fast that the audience would have no idea what was happening, so we wind up with an awkward scene where Darth Maul literally watches Obi-Wan flip over his head. He never even notices that Obi-Wan has Qui-Gonn's lightsaber. He seems quite shocked that Obi-Wan was even able to get above him at all.
Answer: In the book, The Life and Legacy of Obi-wan Kenobi, it actually talks about this a little bit. Darth Maul wasn't expecting this move, and it caught him by surprise. Obi-wan was hanging on for life down below, and to Maul's mind there wasn't a way he could really get back up, much less armed. One thing to consider is the fact that Darth Maul is actually pretty weak in using the Force compared to most other notable Force users. He's mostly a martial artists, and a damn good one to, having extraordinary combat ability to the point he can fend off a Jedi Knight and a Padawan at at the same time. But his actual strength in the force is weak, where he's only able to lift/push small objects or do a Force jump. He didn't predict, or "foresee" Obi-wan's move. Nor could he sense that Obi-wan was moving the light saber on the ground next to him, and would never have guessed that not only Obi-wan would Force jump out like that so suddenly, but also grab a saber at the same time and go for a swing.
I remember at least two books - which may not be canon now - describing Maul as prideful. It seems like he was quite skilled in fighting, as you say, but he underestimated opponents.
Answer: I always saw it as Maul didn't realise Kenobi was going for the lightsaber at the same time and the whole move was suicidal from Maul's point of view. His lack of reaction is him being stunned by what he sees as Obi-Wan just jumping in front of him to be attacked.
Question: Out of the numerous (and mostly unnecessary) changes George Lucas has made to this film over the years, has he ever given any reason as to why he has never fixed the appearance of the lightsabers in the film, or updated the awful CGI Jabba the Hutt? Those have always stood out to me as the two most glaring weaknesses in the visual department.
Answer: He has not. He has only ever generally commented on the updates to the 90's Special Edition re-releases having scenes updated to fit what he always envisioned but was limited by budget and technology. The additional changes that have been made since the films were released on Blu-Ray and now Disney Plus have gone without comment. To your point about the lightsabers, they have been improved on the Disney Plus version of the film. The colors are more vibrant, and they now have a more noticeable sparking effect with clashes in the Obi-Wan/Vader duel.
Question: Why is it that the gang never got eaten by the IT but every other child who encountered it did? I'm just looking for an in-depth answer like what where they doing right?
Answer: Well, for starters, fear evidently makes the children taste better. So screwing with them and holding off is almost like adding seasoning to meat. The way I took it as he eats the other children simply because he needs to eat, whereas he toys with the Losers' Club to have something better than just regular "food." They're like a dessert in a way. And I also kinda got the impression that Pennywise knew these kids were stronger, especially together, so he was also trying to wear them down more and weaken them.
Answer: It's because the kids were each together, were friends, and weren't scared of IT that they could defeat IT.
Question: When Jules and Vincent are in the diner at the end of the movie Jules says he never eats meat, but earlier we see him take a few bites out of Brett's burger and Jules said he likes it. I don't understand the context of the conversation with Vincent and Jules about eating meat?
Answer: At the diner he didn't say that he doesn't eat meat, only that he doesn't eat pork because he considers swine a "filthy" animal. He tells Brett that he rarely gets to eat cheeseburgers because his girlfriend is a vegetarian, but that he himself loves the taste of a good cheeseburger.
Question: When Mr. Turner brings home the club girl in the green Volkswagen Beetle, he attacks and chases her around the house which is witnessed by Kale. Soon after, Kale witnesses the redhead calmly leave Mr. Turner's house and walk back to her car and slowly pull away. Later on in the movie, Kale already in Mr. Turner's basement, finds the redhead's ID, keys, and even her scalp (or wig?) intact on the table and says, "The redhead from the club - she never left." Who did Kale see leave Mr. Turner's home calmly?
Answer: Along with the wig seen at the end in Turner's secret basement are a pair of high heels. Turner dressed in both of those along with the redhead's clothing to make it seem like she was safely leaving.
Question: This has always been a question between my friend and I. Why does the T-800 take the sunglasses in the movie?In the first movie it made sense, to hide the glowing eye. Here it appears to serve no purpose beyond appearance. Is there any other reason beyond this?
Answer: The real life answer is because the sunglasses are part of the Terminator's signature look. The in universe answer is because they are a clothing item that will augment his appearance. He also takes a leather jacket he doesn't need. He would look perfectly normal with just the gray T-shirt but since the biker was also wearing the jacket, he took that as well.
Answer: By best guess, I believe it is because of the glow in the eyes. The mechanical eyes, as seen when the skin is gone, are glowing red lights and they aren't exactly dim. This could potentially shine through skin, or eye tissue, like when you hold a flashlight against your hand. In a dim lighting, like at night, it could be possible to see the glow of these mechanical parts behind the already thin tissue of the organic parts of the eye, and thus give him away.
That would make them very poor infiltration units, wouldn't it?
Question: This has always baffled me. When Ryan is talking to Jeffrey Pelt and Pelt asks him what he's supposed to do if Ramius is in fact trying to defect, Ryan responds that that they should grab the sub and Pelt responds that it is a billion dollar sub and the Russians are "gonna want it back." But Greer when first telling Ryan the news of the Red October's theft said that the Russians wanted the US's help to sink her. In other words the Russians wanted the Red October destroyed, not returned. And Pelt's counter argument made little sense (as grabbing the sub was indeed an option). Was this just poor writing or what?
Answer: Actually it makes perfect sense. The Russians do not want the sub falling into the American's hands, period. They want to retrieve it themselves or sink it. While it would be a great financial loss to destroy it, it would be much more damaging to have the Americans capture it, because they would then be able to reverse engineer the new design.
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: According to Ms. Hannigan, they died in a fire.
Brian Katcher