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.

Season 1 generally

Question: In one episode (I think it's My Balancing Act) Dr Kelso is trying to scare the interns, so he pulls his face off and 'becomes' a guy with crazy ginger hair and a very annoying loud voice. I'm a Brit so that's maybe why I don't recognise this guy. Is he supposed to be someone famous?

Answer: This is an American comedian called Scott Thompson, more widely known by his stage name of "Carrot Top".

Tailkinker

Question: If the character's nicknames (Columbus, Tallahassee, etc) come from their destinations, how come Witchita & Little Rock have different names, when they're sisters and are coming from - and heading to - the same place?

Answer: The names come from their hometowns, not their destinations. Witchita is much older than Little Rock; she could have spent the majority of her childhood in Witchita before her family moved to Little Rock where her sister was born. She still considers Witchita to be her "hometown".

Phixius

Question: How can Riley be missing for a year as well as be a 1 year old vampire if he was made and last seen in May 21 2010 (according to the flyer Charles has)? The opening of the movie, where Riley is attacked, make it seem as though it all "just happened." And with the timing of Bella's journey (she arrives in Forks in March, prom is in late May or early June (most proms are end of the school year), her birthday is in Sept, she begins her time with Jacob in Feb, Edward comes home in April (guessing), she graduates in June 2010. So James was killed in May (before prom). I get Victoria could have made Riley in May just after James was killed BUT then the "last seen" date on the flyer shouldn't be so recent. Did I miss something?

rmargaux

Chosen answer: The date on it is a mistake. Some claim he could've been seen after he officially went missing, so the mistake is not allowed on this site. However, the description of his "last seen" appearance is clearing the opening sequence, which would've happened a year prior to the current events. By the movie's timeline, Victoria would've created him in May 2009 after James was killed, and this is now a year later.

White Lock

Question: What does the mineral the RDA is after do? It's probably a superconductor, but it could also be a catalyst for hydrogen production (explains the floating mountains), or elements from the Island of Stability*, which are super-nuclear-fission fuel. Is it added to other materials to make them stronger and better, like platinum? Does this mineral make practical fusion possible, or even antimatter reactions? Is it an actual anti-gravity mineral? What is it? *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilithium_(Star_Trek)Fictional_elements_and_materials.

Answer: It's described as a room-temperature superconductor. That's all we get. Its primary purpose is to drive the plot.

Tailkinker

Question: When Jack and Rose go to dinner, Rose is pointing out many first class people. Then she explains that the richest man on the ship's wife is Rose's age. Isn't she a little young to be married to him?

277872670

Answer: Some people may have the opinion that she is too young, and you may have that opinion yourself. However, the technical answer to your question is yes, she is much younger than her husband. If two people are consenting adults, they are legally allowed to be together if they wish. Madeleine Astor was eighteen years old and her husband was forty-seven. A large age gap is not what many people prefer, but this couple wanted to be together anyway.

Chosen answer: Well of course she is too young. Men, regardless of their age, typically prefer young attractive women. Wealthy and powerful men like John Jacob Astor (who Rose is pointing out) are able to attract beautiful young girls who want a rich husband, regardless of how old, unattractive, or physically infimed they might be.

raywest

Question: I have three unrelated questions: 1. My comments are in parentheses. John Anderton: Why'd you catch that? Danny Witwer: Because it was going to fall. (No, it wasn't) John Anderton: You're certain? Danny Witwer: Yeah. John Anderton: But it didn't fall. You caught it. The fact that you prevented it from happening doesn't change the fact that it was *going* to happen. (Yes, it does, doesn't it?) That was my first question - I hope that you didn't mind the format. Also, don't hold back on the philosophy - I'm well-versed in it. 2. Since Crowe didn't kill John's boy, who did? If we didn't find out, are there even any theories? 3. This one's about the adulterers and the fact that they weren't arrested. Isn't it more likely that, in the future (esp. one like this, which, in my opinion, was at least semi-totalitarian) there would be more laws (specifically about adultery) rather than less, especially considering that even now there are some laws that apply to adultery?

Answer: 1. By the laws of physics, the ball would have fallen to the ground had Witwer not caught it. 2. We don't know who kidnapped John's child. 3. Obviously not.

LorgSkyegon

Question: There's a quote that I don't understand: "The fact that you prevented it from happening doesn't change the fact that it was going to happen." I immediately thought, "Yes, it does change the fact that it was going to happen." If Witwer hadn't put his hand there, it would have happened. However, he did, thus "changing the fact that it was going to happen," right? Isn't this the point of the whole movie: determinism is foolish and that different actions produce different consequences?

Answer: No, he didn't change the fact that it was going to happen. He prevented it from happening. But until he stopped it, it was going to happen. And no matter how many times you look back at that sequence, it was going to happen. Up until a point, it was going to happen. It was just prevented.

Garlonuss

Answer: The statement involves the idea of arresting people who did not commit the crime yet but are going to. Until the precogs tell someone to change things, the idea is that it will happen. If Anderton had rolled the ball and the other guy was not watching, it was going to fall. The only way to change it would have been for Anderton to say something. Things will happen unless the future is changed. Ultimately the idea is proven sketchy at the end at best.

oldbaldyone

Question: In the scene where Robert Muldon is about to engage the raptor in the jungle, he puts down his hat and sets up the shotgun. Then a second raptor appears over his left shoulder. He spins to attack but is too slow and the raptor jumps on him and begins to eat him. My question is: In the theater version of this movie, this kill scene with Muldon in the jungle is different. In the theater version, Muldon spins towards the raptor. After being jumped on and attacked, Muldon is able to hold the raptor back with his shotgun. Then he kicks the raptor back and begins to run down a field. Moments later the raptor jumps on his back and kills him. Why did they change this scene? I only remember this from when I was younger and after seeing it only in theaters. But after looking all over the internet and YouTube for someone else to agree with me that this scene did happen, I came across someone saying that in the book this scene took place, so why film it and remove it later on DVD? Also, does anyone have any idea where this scene can be viewed again? I looked on Jurassic Park DVD Special Features, and still nothing. It's like it was never filmed, but I remember that it was! Please help.

Oker

Chosen answer: I watched this movie 8 times in 6 weeks when it was released at the cinema. The cinematic version of the scene you just described never happened. IMO you have remembered the scene wrong. You may be thinking of the scene from The Lost World, where the Ingen group is being chased by Raptors, one jumps on a character's back.

GameBlade

Question: If The Fallen can only be killed by a prime, and Megatron killed Optimus prime in the forest, doesn't that make Megatron stronger than the Fallen?

Answer: No. We don't know exactly what limitation means that only a Prime can kill the Fallen, only that such a limitation exists. Given the demonstrated ability possessed by the Fallen, it certainly seems unlikely to be a question of raw power, so is more probably a question of the nature of that power, some aspect of being a Prime that's unique to them. It certainly doesn't follow that if somebody can defeat a Prime in combat, that automatically makes them stronger than the Fallen is.

Tailkinker

Question: Is that man with the pirate code Jack's father? He sure looks like it and Jack asks "How's mum?" but it's a very hard tell/guess.

wolf8265

Chosen answer: Yes, he is. This is Captain Teague, Jack's father, played by Keith Richards of The Rolling Stones, who was one of the primary inspirations for Depp's performance as Sparrow.

Tailkinker

Question: When Lawrence is going crazy, he tries to reach the ringing phone using the box he found it in. When this fails, it motivates him to saw through his foot. Since the box was just out of reach, why didn't he pull the phone towards him using the saw (just like Adam tried at the beginning of the movie, with the cassette player)? This couldn't possibly have failed, though. If he had, he could have answered the phone and probably gotten help that way. It would have saved him a lot of trouble and pain. Someone please enlighten me.

Eyexpress333

Chosen answer: First, it's because he was very distraught. Simply reaching the phone wasn't going to help him help his wife. Second, because it was the major plot point the entire movie has been building up to.

LorgSkyegon

Answer: You said it yourself: he's going crazy. He had been sitting in that room for 8 hours, being mentally tortured. If finally comes to a point where he hears his wife and child in torment, along with gunshots. At this point he was simply not thinking and in his state, sawing off his foot was the quickest way to either get to the phone, or get to the gun to kill Adam.

jshy7979

Question: I know different vampire movies have different rules, but one that is always true about vampire folklore is that sunlight kills them. How is it that sunlight doesn't kill them in this movie, yet only makes them sparkle?

Carl Missouri

Chosen answer: Actually, you're wrong about the whole sunlight thing. While it is commonly believed to be a fundamental constant in the vampire mythos, in Bram Stoker's original Dracula book, which can be seen as a primary progenitor for much of the modern vampire stories, the character of Dracula is not harmed by sunlight, although it reduces his powers. Likewise the character of Carmilla in the 1872 novella of the same name (which influenced Stoker's work), who can be seen as the prototypical female vampire, is merely weakened by sunlight. So there is considerable precedent for vampires who are able to move about freely in sunlight. Meyer decided to make them sparkle because the idea for Twilight came to her in a dream, I believe the concept of vampires sparkling was part of said dream.

Tailkinker

Question: In the scene where Tony takes strawberries to the office, there is a cool 'thing' on the desk that doesn't stop turning. It looks like it's a holder with a metal stick on top, balanced by a loose stick on each end. Does anyone know what that thing is called? I can't find it on Google (but I'm probably using the wrong search strings).

Answer: It's a Swinging Sticks Kinetic Energy Sculpture.

Garlonuss

Question: In the scene after the engagement party disaster, Viola is in her bed and Ruby comes and says "Are we getting out of bed today, Camille?" I assume Ruby is using a TV show/character reference. What is it from?

Answer: It's from a film called Camille: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0028683/.

White Lock

Question: Daniel gets his driver's license on his birthday the night before the tournament in part I. In part II, six months later, he went to his senior prom. Did he really start his senior year when he was 15?

Answer: If he skipped a grade in elementary school, sure. I graduated at 17, beginning my senior year at 16, and never skipped a grade.

rswarrior

Answer: Daniel is 17. There are lots of reasons he might have delayed getting his license. The biggest part (though not stated) is that he recently moved from NJ at the start of the movie. He might not have been able to learn to drive and take his test in NJ prior to moving. There should be no presumption that he spent time in an overseas school.

Answer: What I think is more likely is that Ali was a year older, and he escorted her to her senior prom.

LorgSkyegon

Answer: I suspect that for a year or more, Daniel maybe lived in India, South Korea, Japan, or any other country with a higher education system, than America's education system... So Daniel, despite being younger, may be a few grade levels ahead of other students his age.

Answer: Well also when you're a senior you're usually 18 and that's when you get your driver's license or even earlier, at age 16.

Question: Three or four people in the movie claimed to know doctors who can help Edward. Why didn't he ever go see any of these doctors while he stayed with the family?

Answer: First of all, the film only takes place over the course of a few weeks. He's still adapting to the real world. Second, to do so would be to accept that Edward was, in fact, "crippled". One of the film's recurring messages was that Edward was special but not handicapped. Not to mention the financial incentive in having Edward stay the way he is.

JC Fernandez

Answer: In addition to JC Fernandez's explanation: People often say such "nice" things, but never follow through. It's similar to when someone tells you "We should get together sometime." Other than Peg, the people who said it probably got busy and/or lost interest in Edward. They were briefly intrigued by him, but did not truly care about him long-term.

Question: Why does Hugo Stiglitz kill the German officers in the first place? The film mentions his enlistment, but how is this related to his killings?

Answer: Based on his willingness to join the Basterds, we can assume he killed them because he didn't believe in what the Nazis were doing.

There is a cut of him being whipped during the bar scene. I think he was taking revenge for harsh and perhaps undeserved punishment.

No, the whipping is how it feels in his mind sitting next to that SS officer and having to pretend to like him and be a Nazi. He's ready to snap.

lionhead

Question: Where are Dave and Linda McFly in the alternate 1985? They don't seem to live with Biff and Lorraine, and they are too old to be packed off to boarding school (like Marty), so where exactly are they? Biff mentions them when threatening Lorraine into staying so its not like they've been rubbed out like George was.

Answer: If you have the Blu-ray or DVD, watch the movie using either trivia track or watch the deleted scene where Marty meets his brother Dave and turn the commentary on. Dave is a homeless drunk and Bob Gale states that Linda ended up becoming a hooker. However, since Wendie Jo Sperber was pregnant at the time and couldn't appear in this film, it was decided to cut both of them out.

Answer: It's never stated in the film where they are. Biff makes a reference to having Dave's probation revoked if Lorraine leaves him, so Dave has apparently run into trouble with the law. He does appear in a deleted scene, where he has become an alcoholic and appears to be homeless with little contact with his family, likely because of his dislike of Biff, as he appears pleased to see Marty. No scenes with Linda were filmed, as Wendy Jo Sperber was pregnant at the time of filming, although scriptwriter and producer Bob Gale has stated that, had they included Linda in the alternate 1985 scenes, she would likely have become a prostitute, which would tie into Biff's threat to have her thrown in jail.

Tailkinker

Question: There is a scene where Sarah Connor is pulling out bullets from the back of the T800. My question is how did they achieve this effect? Rubber pliers was my first thought, but you cannot see any bending at all as they are forced in and twisted, plus as the pliers go in, you can see quite a depression in the skin of the T800, it looks rather rubbery and flexible. So the body looks like a fake, but it's Arnie's head on top, but it's difficult to tell. I would love an answer or opinion on this as it has got me stumped.

kazara1001

Chosen answer: They've artificially built out Arnold's back. This allows them to press the pliers into holes the prosthetic and have plenty of room before hitting his back. If you look carefully at the base of his neck and around his shoulders, you can see where they've blended the prosthetic into his normal skin. A good job, but not 100% perfect.

Garlonuss

Question: Can someone please explain how each and every totem works? We understand that Cobb's will not stop spinning if it is a dream, but how does Arthur's and Ariadne's work?

Answer: No details are given within the film. However, Arthur's totem is a loaded dice, so it seems logical to assume that it will always come down on a specific side, one that only he knows. As for Ariadne's chess-piece, we only see her working on it, never using it. Probably it has some specific and unusual weighting built into it, allowing her to determine, in some unspecified manner, maybe by tipping it to a certain angle, or simply by feel, that it's the genuine article.

Tailkinker

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.