Question: Does the pharmacist that Longmire talks to violate any sort of confidentiality laws? Walt doesn't come in with a warrant, but the pharmacist is giving Walt information pertaining to other people still alive, not just the victim. I could see the law allowing him to tell Walt "no" that someone didn't pick up any prescriptions, but to mention she picked up antibiotics or that Gerry had back surgery seems unethical.
Answer:This appears to be movie fiction. In real life, a pharmacist could not legally give out confidential patient information without there being a search warrant. Not abiding by confidentiality laws could result in a pharmacist facing legal issues and losing his or her license.
Answer:Logan likely assumed that they were in the clear. The mercenaries were able to keep finding them because they were forcing Caliban to track them, but Logan thought that they had killed him. He had no idea that Caliban was still alive and was tracking them, so he guessed that they were out of their reach.
How would that account for the Reavers finding them earlier at the casino hotel, though? Wouldn't Logan have been under the assumption at that time as well that Caliban was dead?
Logan may have questioned how the Reavers found them in the casino hotel, but probably not too much to think of which methods specifically were used to find them, since he was mainly focused on getting out of the Reavers' reach. As the casino hotel was a more populated location, he likely took a gamble and guessed that the Munson household was a far safer place to lay low since the house was in a secluded location.
Answer:He thought that she was getting back together with her ex, and Daniel's chief tormentor, Johnny. (I could be wrong it's been a long time since I've seen the film).
Answer:Remember the scene where they had an argument about Ali saying Daniel can't always run away from his problems (meaning the Cobra Kai). Daniel didn't appreciate the lecture, so snapped back at her and then avoided her until the Halloween party, when Miyagi convinced him to make up with her (young bee needs young flower, not old prune).
Answer:She was with her friends and her friends don't like him. So he probably just wasn't in the mood to deal with that. He also had some battle wounds from getting "pushed" down a hill on his bike and wasn't ready to face her yet.
Question: I loaded the film up on Netflix, and it seems that the dialogue in one scene was edited. In the standard cut of the film, Jeebs says "You insensitive prick!" to K, but in the version I saw on Netflix, Jeebs says "You insensitive jerk!" What's the deal with the Netflix version changing this one single line? The original "prick" line appears to be on both the VHS and Blu-Ray edition I own.
Answer:After a little research, I discovered that the line was changed in the UK release from "prick" to "jerk." So the most likely explanation I can find is that the Netflix version is taken from a UK master of the film. As mentioned in other comments, Netflix doesn't censor their films, so the other answer regarding the film being edited like movies shown on airplanes isn't accurate. (Not to mention, it'd make no sense for Netflix to edit this one profanity while leaving all the others intact if they were editing it for content).
I agree it's the UK version. I don't know if it's a licensing thing or cheaper, but I've notice Netflix will use the UK release version on a number of films. I'm not familiar with "prick" as a UK slang but I believe it's more graphic than US slang, similar to the word "fanny", and edited for the UK release.
Answer:In fact, it's done twice. When talking about Frank the pug, the standard edit has K saying "I just hope the little prick hasn't skipped town." The streaming version doesn't. I say streaming version because I just discovered that the Amazon version of this film edited out the word "prick," and I didn't realise the Netflix version had too. I'm in the US, so what's going on here?
Generally the changes people notice in films when watching Netflix or other services come from the fact that they're airing the UK release version (for whatever reason). I remember the first time people really noticed this was when Scooby-Doo 2 changed the product placement from Burger King to KFC (which I commented on).
Answer:As more films become available online and are accessible to a wider audience, the studios edit mature content that is unacceptable to under-aged viewers. It's the same as movies that are shown on airplanes where the adult content is edited or removed altogether.
Netflix doesn't censor their movies, though... So this explanation makes no sense.
It just seems odd, as Netflix basically never censors content in other films they host (since they're supposed to be hosting the officially released versions anyways), and the rest of the profanity/violence in this particular film is unedited.
Question: I know that nowadays, the F.B.I. does have operations abroad. However when this film was made 20 years ago showing the F.B.I. operating in Moscow... did the F.B.I. conduct operations outside of the country as depicted? I was under the impression that was the CIA's job.
Answer:It is stated that the FBI is working with their Russian equivalent, the MVD on a joint operation. The FBI primarily focuses on domestic issues but does on occasion engage in operations outside of the United States with the assistance and in the aid of foreign governments. The CIA would not be the appropriate government agency to handle the operation in the movie because that mission is a law enforcement operation. The CIA is strictly an intelligence gathering organization with no law enforcement authority.
Answer:It is the C.I.A's job to conduct foreign investigations. You're right in that respect. Why the FBI is involved is either unexplained or not mentioned.
Question: When Major Koslova confronts Ghazzi in the club, he speaks first with a joke or line of some sort. "What, no kick back this week?" What is that supposed to mean? A google search revealed nothing to me.(00:05:55)
Answer:A "kickback" (one word) could be considered a type of bribe, but more commonly it is an arranged pay-off for some type of business transaction. Someone does something to make money, either legally or illegally, and someone who aids or is in someway useful to them is paid a percentage of the profits.
Question: Was the spinosaurus following the group, if so how? Or were they merely bumping into each other?
Answer:Being a predator, it would probably have a defined territory that it roamed looking for prey. The group is always traveling on foot and in the time frame they have been on the island, they likely were always in close proximity to where the spinosaurus hunted. It could possibly have detected them by sight, sound, or smell, or a combination of those factors.
Question: Mr. Monk, given all his quirks, is apprehensive to enter the voting booth and even comes back out due to his anxiety. My question is; do you have to be in the booth to vote? He had a paper ballot and there was no voting machine inside the booth. I saw a table and chairs in the background, so if Monk chose to, could he (or anyone) fill out the ballot at the table, in the open?
Question: When VEGA starts giving Doomguy the report on the facility casualties after Dr Hayden tells him to, I picked up on a couple number references in what he says. His lines are thus... "61,337 UAC members deceased, 81% of the facility is on lockdown, demonic presence through the Mars installation is critical. According to the records, Dr. Hayden, the invasion originated in the Lazarus Facility. It seems that a Hellwave was activated transforming 64% of all UAC employees into the creatures you see roaming through the facility. The rest were killed by the demons released from cells by Olivia Pierce." 61,1337 seems to be a reference/joke to the number 1337 being Leet, or elite with the 6 as a demonic figure. Demon Elite. And then the 64% seems to be a reference to doom 64. So what's the significance of the 81% number then? Or are these numbers all just a coincidence?
Answer:Another thing I've noticed is that if you add up all the individual numbers in 61,337 and then reverse the two letters you get 20 and 16. Both together is 2016, the year the film was released. Could be a coincidence but I doubt it.
Answer:The original "Castle Wolfenstein" was released in 1981. The popular "Wolfenstein 3D" was released in 1992 by Id Software, and gained them significant credibility.
Answer:Jamming the gate by blocking the sensor delayed Joe Bang's brothers long enough for Mellie to come and collect some bags full of cash. Jimmy specifically did not trust them to know his entire plan. This part of the ruse allowed them to steal a separate stash of money so they could pretend to return the stolen money, whilst secretly keeping some to distribute later.
Question: What blew the door to Mike's workshop off its hinges?
Answer:That was the initial gas blow-out, prior to the explosion. Pressurized gas was coming out of the drill pipe with sufficient force to tear the place apart, even before it ignited.
Gas blowouts are notorious for igniting themselves. The vast quantity of gas and particulates, expelled under high pressure, create an electrostatic charge in the gas cloud that arcs to the nearest grounding point. It's like shuffling across a carpet and then touching a metal doorknob: a tiny electrostatic spark is created. Such a tiny spark is all that is necessary to ignite a cloud of petroleum gas.
Question: When the soldiers were skydiving into the city why did they have red flares attached to their boots?
Answer:Due to the storm, it became difficult for the soldiers to see one another. The flares were used to help them keep track of their positions during the skydive.
Question: How come all news networks refused to show Apollo 13's live TV broadcast?
Answer:The US had been to the moon twice before. America had already become jaded with NASA's successes and weren't interested in minute by minute coverage before they'd even reached the lunar surface.
Question: At the start of each episode of Mission Impossible Briggs or Phelps received details of the mission from a tape recording that was 'hidden in plain sight', say a telephone booth displaying a poster saying 'Telephone Out Of Order. Do Not Use'. So, what would happen if somebody went into the kiosk before Briggs or Phelps, picked up the telephone and got the secret message ahead of the Mission Impossible team?
Answer:We don't know what would happen because the show never addressed this issue. Any answer would be speculation. This is a TV show, and the plot is structured so that only IMF team will retrieve the secret message.
Answer:This is not really a serious question. When I posted this question I was fully aware that Mission Impossible is only a television programme. Like many espionage thrillers (Man From Uncle, The Avengers, James Bond) it is meant to entertain, it is never meant to be taken literally seriously. It was essential to the story that Briggs or Phelps received a secret message, which would give them a mission to accomplish. If they did not receive the message you would not have had the story. When I used to watch Mission Impossible it just used to amuse me to wonder what might have happened had somebody picked up the phone containing the secret message ahead of Briggs or Phelps. I even considered writing to a comedian and suggesting that they devise a comedy sketch in which this happened. My question was only meant to be a joke, that I posted to amuse people.
Question: Listen closely to this audio. Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLkotrb1O5o The subtitles in the game show that he says; "All UAC employees are subject to regular Med-Checks to ensure their production capabilities are not degraded." However when listening to it... to me it sounds like he's saying "That" instead of "Their." I've listened to it over and over trying to decipher if the word he uses is "That" or "Their." I think there is a mistake here in the game with the subtitle using the wrong word... However I can't be certain. Is this guy saying "That" or "Their"? What do you think?
Answer:Sounds like "their" to me. The accent and rolling into the "production" means I can see it could go either way, but it's certainly not definitively "that" enough to be a mistake, I'd say.
Question: Why did Vidrine not think there was anything wrong with the drill pipe, even though the drill pipe test showed a lot of pressure? Second, why did the test on the kill line show no pressure?
Answer:Vidrine didn't think there was anything wrong with the the drill pipe because there was nothing wrong with it. The problem was the cement cap they tried installing to seal the well. The thing to keep in mind is that British Petroleum didn't intend to immediately tap that well. Managers and crew of the floating platform rig planned to just cap the well and let another rig come along to handle actual production later. The crew was thus a little anxious to cement the well closed and abandon it. Some think it was this anxiousness to move on that produced the blowout. Of many procedures performed prior to abandonment was the "negative test" (whereby drilling mud was pulled out of the well to determine whether the cement cap could withstand the pressure). The negative test was bad, showing pressure in the drill line, an indication that gas had entered the well because they were applying suction to it, and the integrity of the cement cap was compromised. That's when Vidrine ordered the second test, this time on the kill line, and got a reading of no pressure (which was good, but was probably a false reading). Obviously, something wasn't right; but Vidrine, anxious to wrap the operation, decided to trust the kill line reading and basically ignore the drill line reading. This was a major mistake. As they continued pulling the drilling mud out, highly-pressurized gas shot straight up the drill pipe to the rig, and that was the end of Deepwater Horizon.
In the movie, the reason the kill line got no pressure is because the pipe got clogged. (if you listen to the audio description, you'll hear the audio describer the mud clogs the pipe during the kill line pressure test scene).
I thought it was mud that shot straight up from the drill pipe to the rig.
They were sucking the drilling mud up the pipe, but there was high-pressure petroleum gas behind it. They only realised too late that they had failed to cap the well; and then hell, as they say, broke loose.
Then what was that fluid flying upward through derrick?
You can liken a gas blow-out to somebody popping the top on a pressurized can of soda; gas and fluid alike come spewing out of what was, a moment before, a fairly stable fluid. Under tremendous pressure, all you need to do is give natural gas an escape route and all kinds of stuff comes up with it, including crude oil, asphalt, drilling mud, water, etc. The gas is blasting out of the earth and carrying anything and everything with it.
The mud contained a certain methane gas proportion, which ignited and caused the explosions.
Authorities don't think Vidrine was ultimately responsible though. They believe the an employee who died in the disaster was, because he was responsible for the bladder effect hypothesis. I think what the film is actually trying to say is that the person who made the mistake of trusting the kill line was ultimately responsible.
In real life, it was Vidrine who chose to trust the kill line reading and ignore the drill line reading.
By blaming someone who isn't around to defend themselves as they died in the disaster is considered cowardly. That's why in my opinion, money exchanged hands between BP and the Authorities to ensure no charges were brought against Vidrine. Again that's my own opinion. Here's a link to where the manslaughter charges against Kaluza and Vidrine are dropped https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/manslaughter-charges-dropped-bp-employees-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill.
Personally I think the idea that the actual villain was the guy who was responsible for the bladder effect hypothesis, and not the guy who chose to trust the kill line reading, and not the drill line reading is absurd.
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.
Answer: This appears to be movie fiction. In real life, a pharmacist could not legally give out confidential patient information without there being a search warrant. Not abiding by confidentiality laws could result in a pharmacist facing legal issues and losing his or her license.
raywest ★