Question: After John asks Muldoon to take one of the Jeeps to bring back his grandchildren, Ellie says she's going with him. They didn't at that point know the T-Rex had escaped, so why does Ellie insist on going with him? Considering the Jeep has four seats and there's five people spread across the two tour cars, how did Ellie expect to squeeze everybody in?
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: Why would Dracula need to put Wilbur's brain in the body of Frankenstein's Monster? I understand the Count wanted a Monster who would be much more obedient and easier to control, however it seemed like the Monster was that way already; he would follow Dracula's commands with "Yes, Master." So what did Count Dracula need Wilbur for again?
Answer: The monster may have seemed obedient, but its overall behavior is unknown to us. It's possible that it was at times defiant, obstinate, or just didn't follow instructions completely or competently. It's also just a plot device for a silly movie. There has to be some reason, however flimsy, why Dracula wants Wilbur's brain.
Question: What happened to the man who shot himself at the beginning of the movie? Was his body devoured by titular anaconda?
Answer: The reason he shot himself was because he was being chased by the anaconda. Since the anaconda doesn't care if its prey is alive or dead, yes, he was devoured.
Question: When does Poison Ivy make her escape? Before Batman comes back to her house or during his and Robin's battle with her plant creatures?
Question: Why did Mort/Shooter kill Chico the dog? I don't think he wanted to upset Amy, because she never finds out that Chico is dead. She calls his name when she takes the divorce papers to the lake house, where Mort/Shooter kills her.
Answer: "Shooter" (actually Mort), killed the dog as a threat and a warning to Mort, implying this will happen to him if he doesn't cooperate. Mort, as himself, has no recollection of doing this and believed "Shooter" was threatening his life. Mort then reports it to the sheriff, which only fed into his delusion that Shooter was real and shows he's losing his grip on reality. It wasn't about Amy.
Question: Han says, "Crazy thing is, it's all true. The Force, the Jedi, all of it." Why does he consider this a "crazy" thing? He met Luke and Leia only nineteen years after the Jedi were killed, and he is about ten years older than them. The Jedi were still around during his childhood. And anyone older than him could still be talking about the Jedi, also. Why would he ever doubt that they were real?
Question: Why didn't the prisoners unhook several cars at the rear of the train, to roll down the tracks and crash/block the troop train coming up behind them towards the end?
Question: Originally Christian says that when his biological mother overdosed he was taken to the hospital which is where Grace, his adoptive mother finds him. Then near the end of Fifty Shades Freed, they see the picture of the foster family where he and Jack were in the same foster home in Michigan. How was he in a foster home in Michigan, if Grace took him and adopted him when he was at the hospital?
Answer: Christian mentions he was in and out of foster homes for various periods of time before his mother overdosed and died. She had likely cleaned up enough to where Christian was returned to her custody, but she then reverted to her old ways and became involved with an abusive man before overdosing. Christian then met Grace at the hospital.
Question: I know that, after Richard Harris died, Ian McKellen was considered to play Dumbledore, but he refused. Why did he reject this role?
Answer: McKellen said he turned it down for two reasons: first, he had already played a famous wizard (Gandalf) and didn't want to do it again; and second, he didn't want to take over a role from Richard Harris after Harris had called him a "dreadful actor."
To clarify, Harris never said that McKellen was "dreadful." He was quoted in an article as describing McKellen as a, "technically brilliant, but passionless" actor. He was also including Kenneth Branagh and Derek Jacobi in that assessment and referred to them all as "nice actors" who were "careful." It was just his opinion about an acting style different from his own, which was more emotive.
Question: How was that trap that Arnold set up in the trench supposed to work? I don't think that the log falling onto the victim was part of it; Arnold improvised that when the Predator wised up and decided to go around it.
Answer: The net on the floor of the trap was tied to the log, which was used as a counterweight. When the tripwire is triggered, the log will fall pulling the net up into the spikes rigged on the ceiling. The predator actually bumped his head on the spike which gave away the trap but when he went around he stood in the exact spot the log would fall. Dutch then tripped the wire himself to drop the log.
Question: After defeating Hook and flying back home, it shows Peter wearing his green garb. When he wakes up, why is he outside and wearing the clothes he wore the night he was taken to Neverland?
Answer: It's the magic of Neverland. Peter was dressed as a pirate when he remembered his happy thought and ascended in the tree-house but when he exited through the top, he was in his green garb. I guess the best explanation is that when he left Neverland, his green garb reverted to his original clothing he had on when his adventure began.
I always took it that when he remembered his happy thought, he became Peter Pan again and when the adventure was over, he went back to being Peter Banning.
Question: If you break the silence of Kingsman, how come Charlie and his family didn't end up in the body bag?
Question: Does the trilogy stick to a coherent time-travel-logic or is it "mix-and-match"? While it purports to adhere to the "one universe, many detours" theory (which is why Jennifer is save in bad 1985), it also delivers proof for the multiverse theory, unless it's "explained away" such as: Doc was never killed. He already wore a vest (and brought a gun to the meeting with a teenager) because he was a bit paranoid. Since he never really died, there's no parallel timeline required for him to stay dead.
Answer: It's fairly consistent. Changes to the past affect the future, although the time travellers themselves are afforded a bit of convenient wriggle room, like time changing around them, changes not immediately taking effect, etc, so as ever some suspension of disbelief is needed. The timeline changes - originally Doc was killed, Marty went back, gave him a letter, Doc took precautions. That's not the multiverse, that's just the future being changed by actions in the past.
Answer: Why wouldn't they exist? This is a serious question (maybe I am missing something). In BttF, Marty was disappearing because his parents weren't going to get together for him to even exist. In BttF II, his parents got together (Biff says so - he calls George Marty's father) and he was born, so it is very consistent between both movies. So even with an erased timeline, Biff did not erase Marty and his siblings being born. As for the linear time or multi universal, I think the movie is consistent - only the time traveler remembers things that happened before the time traveling began.
Answer: It's completely mix-and-match IMHO. The movies constantly switch between linear and parallel timelines, either making changes affect the time traveller or not, depending on plot convenience. For example, in the first movie Marty is in danger of disappearing unless he gets his parents back together, and fixes it before undoing all he had done himself, which causes a paradox. But then, when he gets back, his parents and siblings are completely different, but Marty is the same person that supposed lived that new life, unreplaced. That simply doesn't make sense in a linear timeline. In the second movie it is even worse, with Marty and Doc still existing in a timeline erased by Old Biff with the sports almanac, for plot convenience.
Question: When the three men decide to try to stop Sylvia from boarding the plane to London they go to the airport and are able to go through security right up to the gate to try to locate Sylvia and Mary. Was this actually possible for an international flight in 1987 when this movie was made? Could you go past airport security without a ticket and passport in 1987 for an international flight?
Answer: Yes. Before 9-11-2001, non-passengers were allowed to go into airports and go to any of the gates. A lot of times, people would accompany friends or family members to their gate or be there for their arrival. And you wouldn't need a passport just to go to a gate with an international flight. In fact, one time I went to pick up a friend (pre cell phone days) and didn't see her come out and was afraid I missed her or didn't see her. So I asked one of the airline employees if she could check the manifest list to see if my friend was even on the flight, which she did to help me out. Things were much "simpler" back then.
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: He was sent to bring back the grandchildren, not everyone. If anyone else wanted to leave they could be picked up later when Muldoon was finished bringing the children to safety. Hammond was just concerned about them and wanted them to be with him. Ellie went with him to be with Grant, to make sure he is safe as well. So she would stay with him anyway.
lionhead