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: Why wasn't Bud, the police detective who was shot but not killed, treated as a hero but instead is shown leaving town with the Veronica Lake look-alike played by Kim Bassinger? It doesn't make and sense.

Answer: To cover up the corruption and protect the department's image, the LAPD hid Smith's crimes by claiming that he died as a hero in the shootout. Exley also bargained to be hailed a hero and received a medal for bravery.

raywest Premium member

Question: Why didn't Carlos turn into a zombie when he got bitten on the leg like Sgt. Peyton?

Roman Curiel

Answer: As shown in the first film, the virus doesn't necessarily hit at a consistent rate. It depends on the individual subject and the severity of the wound. Carlos managed to survive just long enough to get the anti-virus. Also, Peyton was shot and killed by Nemesis, thus he re-animated at a quicker rate, as his body shut down.

TedStixon

Question: When Tyranus incapacitates Skywalker and Kenobi, why didn't Dooku kill Anakin and Obi-Wan when he had the chance?

DFirst1

Answer: Well in the case of Anakin it's simple, since Dooku was under orders from Darth Sidious not to kill him, as Sidious saw him as a potential Sith apprentice. Obi-Wan, could be several reasons. It could simply be that Dooku held them alive as hostages because he knew Yoda was coming. It's also possible Obi-Wan is part of the Sidious' plan to keep Anakin's training stable and on schedule so he can be turned. If Anakin got a new master or went rogue he might be harder to turn. It's also possible Dooku didn't want to waste time with Obi-Wan, as he didn't see him as a threat.

lionhead

Do you have any evidence of this?

DFirst1

Of Dooku not being allowed to kill Anakin? Of course. Darth Sidious has had his eye on Anakin since Naboo when he met him as a young child, feeling the power he has. Since then he has been training him, teaching him, influencing him to go to the dark side. Obviously he doesn't want any harm to come to him. So, Dooku was not allowed to kill Anakin. Either Dooku himself saw Anakin as a potential Sith (considering his dialogue with Anakin during their final duel) and apprentice or Dooku was told by Sidious not to kill Anakin but try to persuade him to switch sides. As for Obi-wan its like I said, just speculations. Perhaps someone else can elaborate better, perhaps take it to the Forum? I can open a book or 2 about this, but better in the Forum than as a reply here.

lionhead

What's the source of this? Is it from the Novel?

DFirst1

No I got this information from watching the movies. It's just logical conclusions to the events that lead up to the final Dooku vs Anakin duel. Dooku didn't expect to kill Anakin, but turn him. This is the reason he incapacitates Obi-Wan and starts talking to Anakin. But again, maybe a conversation for the Forum.

lionhead

But how did Sidious know that Anakin and Obi wan would fight Tyranus?

DFirst1

When? On Geonosis? He didn't know, Palpatine didn't know all Dooku was doing on that planet whilst he secured the start of the war, but he knew Obi-Wan and Anakin would go after him, knowing he is a Sith. The events at Geonosis with the Jedi and the clone troops came a bit early for Palpatine I suspect, but proved to be working for his plans rather than against it. He wanted Dooku to reveal himself as a Sith to Obi-Wan and Anakin of course. Obi-Wan had some experience fighting Sith and Anakin was eager to prove himself, knowing that, Palpatine took the necessary measures to make sure Anakin wasn't killed, and probably didn't care much for Obi-wan's fate come to think of it. It's likely Dooku didn't see Anakin's potential until he fought him either, immediately understanding (but not fully) why his master wanted him to live.

lionhead

Question: Who is Luke talking about when he covers up his hand and says that he has a promise to keep to an old friend? Who is the old friend?

Tyler R

Answer: Yoda. When he was departing for Cloud City to save his friends in the previous film, he promised Yoda that he would return to Dagobah to complete his training.

Phaneron Premium member

OK. But I thought he was talking about the holeish thing in his hand since he covered it up when he said it. I must have misunderstood it.

Question: Are we to assume Tito dies from his gunshot wound?

Question: Why does Hermione think Crouch is very lucky no one knows about him firing Winky (which she defines as being mean to elves)? A smart person like Hermione should know they'd care more about the dark mark than Winky being fired. I know how Hermione is with elves and I know it's weird to just fire her to Hermione (who did not know the whole story), But why does she think Winky being fired not getting out is lucky for Crouch when Voldemort's sign has just been shown for the first time in 13 years?

THE GAMER NEXT DOOR

Answer: Hermione is saying that Crouch is a bad person for treating his house elf like that and that people would think the same if they knew it. She's not saying that the Dark Mark doesn't matter.

Greg Dwyer

Question: At the beginning, M and agents representing the USA, Soviet Union and France try to convince James Bond to come out of retirement. Bond steadfastly refuses; whereupon, M lights his cigar as a signal for British troops in the distance to destroy Bond's estate with mortar fire (M is accidentally killed in the mortar attack). But what was the purpose of destroying Bond's estate? Wouldn't that action only drive Bond further away from rejoining the spy corps? Why would the British government go to such lengths to punish Bond? And then why did Bond return to the secret service, anyway, after such treachery?

Charles Austin Miller

The Juror - S7-E7

Question: Did anyone know who killed the husband's wife? It never shows or mentions who murdered her in this episode.

adamtrainman@aol.com

New this week Answer: It's never known who was responsible.

Question: At the end of the movie George Knox adopts PJ, and Roger. Wouldn't George have had to meet with a social worker before adopting them?

Answer: Maybe he did offscreen?

dizzyd

Question: When McClane and his boss are in the van with the FBI agents and Gruber guesses who of the FBI is in the van there is a man sitting in the back. Who is he and why doesn't Gruber guess he is in the car as well?

lionhead

Answer: He is actor Richard Russell Ramos and he's credited as FBI Chief. Simon does allude he's there because he uses the plural "FBI agents" and Jarvis is not from the FBI. However, it seems Simon's point is made that he knows who is in the van because he's watching them. There was just no need to identify everyone in the van.

Bishop73

Question: Why does Hermione not care about Crookshanks trying to eat Scabbers?

THE GAMER NEXT DOOR

Answer: There's a few reasons. Hermione thinks Ron is over-reacting about it and that he is only trying to blame her for something. She's also being a bit insensitive to the situation, ignoring any real concerns Ron has. It's part of their simmering personality conflict, which they eventually overcome.

raywest Premium member

Question: How come Hermione never receives a Weasley jumper? She'd earn one to cancel a trip with her parents after never seeing them to stay with the Weasleys and make sure Arthur was OK, surely?

THE GAMER NEXT DOOR

Answer: Molly wasn't ignoring Hermione. She knew Hermione's parents always gave her nice gifts for her birthday, Christmas, etc. Molly gave Harry a sweater because she knew his Aunt and Uncle never gave him any gifts. She simply didn't want Harry to be left out when everyone else got something. Also, Molly knitted the sweaters herself, taking some time to make them. She did not anticipate Hermione being there.

raywest Premium member

Question: Jerry turned Evil into a vampire but he was actually a werewolf when he attacked Peter? So how did that work?

Answer: Traditionally, vampires could turn into wolves. Dracula uses a wolf form throughout the original novel by Bram Stoker, so it isn't completely unheard of. Ed is definitely a vampire but he is one who can also turn into a wolf. Whether or not he can also turn into a bat like Jerry is unknown. Whether or not Jerry can also turn into a wolf is unknown.

BaconIsMyBFF

Question: Before the sequel went into production, the writer of the first film (Roger Avery) was supposed to return to write it, and even worked out a plan to write it from prison after he was jailed for vehicular manslaughter. But he ended up getting dropped. I'm just curious... did he actually ever write a draft for the sequel? And if so, is it available online? The second movie wasn't very good (in fact it pretty much sucked), so I'd be interested to see what he originally had planned before being dropped from the project.

TedStixon

Answer: In an interview Roger Avary said he only started working on a basic outline of the 2nd film which he did not complete. He did not comment on the content of the outline and it is not available online anywhere.

BaconIsMyBFF

Question: Trioxin is supposed to make living things indestructible. Yet these trioxin zombies just like the ones in the fourth film die with just one bullet. Why is that?

21collaw

Question: Every time the otherworld comes, a siren blares in the distance. If Alessa wants revenge why would a siren be on the church and why would it go off? Unless Alessa wanted something to warn Rose when danger is near.

21collaw

Answer: The implication in the film is that the Church blares the siren or has it rigged to blare when the "darkness" is coming. Basically to warn anyone outside to seek shelter. In the original game (on which the movie is very loosely based), the siren is more abstract, and seems to be a sort-of supernatural warning of the impending transition between the "fog" and "dark" worlds. There is no 100% agreed upon reason for the sirens in the games, only fan-theories.

Question: Why is it illegal to enter Silent Hill?

21collaw

Answer: In the context of the movie, the air around the area is toxic due to the coal-mine fires underground. Therefore, it's a prohibited area. Additionally, there had been illegal activity in the past (like Cybil says, a child-abductor once used the area to store the boy he kidnapped), which is also likely a factor as to why it's completely fenced in.

TedStixon

Question: At the end, during the battle with Lotto, Rabbit tells him to "Pay attention. You're saying the same shit he said" while pointing to Lyckety-Splyt. Lotto's insults were all racist, while Lyckety (whose only racial comment was calling Rabbit a Nazi), focused his insults towards beating Rabbit and insulting his friends. Therefore how was Lotto repeating Lickety's insults?

lartaker1975

Answer: Lyckety made several racial insults in addition to calling Rabbit a Nazi: "You the New Kid on the Block about to get smacked back to the boondocks", "form a squad with Vanilla Ice", "this guy's a hillbilly, this ain't Willie Nelson music", "you'll get dropped so hard that Elvis will start turnin' in his grave", "need to take your white a** back across 8 Mile to the trailer park." Cleverly, all of Lyckety's racial insults refer specifically to white recording artists besides his final insult. Lotto does essentially the same thing, saying generic things about Rabbit's race. This is why Rabbit says "you see how far the white jokes get you" when he battles Lotto.

BaconIsMyBFF

Question: When Harry became the champion, why did Dumbledore get mad? I know in the book, he doesn't get mad, he asks Harry calmly. Why did the screenwriters change this?

DFirst1

Answer: It's typical for scenes taken from a book to be depicted a bit differently in a film adaptation. Movies are visual and in this instance, the filmmakers were going for a more dramatic, ramped-up effect. Dumbledore was never mad at Harry, but upset by the turn of events and he had to be certain Harry was not in any way involved.

raywest Premium member

Answer: He's not mad per se, he is concerned that Harry did it himself and that he put himself in danger. He felt it was careless of him to do that, that's why he asked so furiously.

lionhead

Question: Why does the grudge seem to torture the elderly lady in the beginning and keep her alive but kill everyone else immediately?

Answer: It's not entirely accurate to say that the ghosts kill all their other victims immediately. They torment the other victims in various ways and definitely seem to drag things out with pretty much every victim. There are several opportunities where the ghosts could easily kill someone but choose to simply frighten them instead, killing them when they are at the height of their terror.

BaconIsMyBFF

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.