Question: Why did Hermione stop Harry from going after Pettigrew while Lupin was transforming?
raywest
20th Aug 2020
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
20th Aug 2020
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Question: Why does Hermione look angry when Dumbledore is subtly suggesting they use the time turner?
Answer: She's not angry. She realises how serious the situation is, and is considering the difficult task Dumbledore has suggested he wants her and Harry to do.
Not to mention that what Dumbledore is suggesting is illegal under wizarding law and highly dangerous. She knows what could happen legally and physically if problems arise.
14th Aug 2020
Predator 2 (1990)
Question: What was a Predator doing in L.A.? Why not stick with the jungle?
Answer: There's really no reason for it not to. Predators are hunters that hunt for both sport and for honor. It likely saw hunting humans in an urban setting (especially one as chaotic as LA is portrayed in the film) as a potential greater challenge, and thus a greater reward.
Note: Cities are sometimes compared to jungles. So for the predator there is hardly a difference.
Answer: The Predator kills humans for sport and wants to kill as many as possible (for fun and status). There is "critical mass" in cities (urban areas are heavily/densely populated) but relatively few people live in or are found in jungles. The Predator went where he was most likely to encounter MANY people and thereby maximize his head count. (Why spend all day waiting to see if you can find a human in the jungle when you know there are hundreds of thousands - even millions - of people in major cities/urban areas?).
Answer: I believe the reason was, it was looking for the ultimate challenge. In the first movie, it was the first time they had ever been defeated. They considered humans nothing more than animals to be hunted for sport. Now humans had evolved to the point, where they learn to fight back. So the Predators went to the city looking for someone who was smart, tough and shows no fear. He was studying Danny Glover, following him and taunting him.
14th Aug 2020
Robinson Crusoe On Mars (1964)
Question: Was Robinson Crusoe On Mars scientifically plausible when it was made in 1964? Aged eight, I watched this movie on release. Even then I knew it was a movie, not a scientific documentary. Nevertheless, I understand that it was once seriously believed there were canals on the surface of Mars. (I even had a children's pictorial encyclopaedia which showed Mars criss-crossed by canals.) After crash-landing on Mars astronaut Kit Draper (Paul Mantee) discovers that the Martian canals were made by intelligent, technologically advanced beings millennia ago. Could anybody in the scientific community have believed this in 1964? Kit Draper discovers ways of creating oxygen, so he does not suffocate; he then finds water sources, vegetation he can eat and a coal like rock that burns to make fires. He witnesses extra-terrestrial aliens visiting Mars in space ships. Was this, by any stretch of the imagination, regarded as even remotely credible in 1964? Or was it pure Hollywood hokum?
Answer: This is pure Hollywood fiction, never meant to be science-based fact, and was typical of sci-fi films of that era such as: War of the Worlds, Invaders From Mars, The Martian Chronicles, and others. Many were based on early-to-mid-20th century science-fiction novels when little was scientifically known about any of the planets. Authors imagined what Mars was like purely to entertain readers. After the 1960s, as more was scientifically known about Mars, films became more realistic, although the 2012 Disney film, "John Carter," was a deliberate throwback to that earlier genre. Also, scientists never believed that there were canals on Mars. In the 1870s, Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli was mapping Mars through a telescope. He described the long, trench-like geographical features as "canali," (Italian for channels). American astronomer Percival Lowell misinterpreted this as "canals" and believed they were of intelligent origin, though other scientists debunked that. Sci-fi writers of the time (H.G. Wells, Edgar Rice Boroughs, et al) incorporated Lowell's published theories into their stories.
It should be noted "John Carter" is based on the 1912 novel "A Princess of Mars."
3rd Aug 2007
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Question: Are Indiana Jones and his father immortal at the end of the movie or does the grail's power become null and void when it crosses the seal? The knight said something like "The grail cannot cross the seal, that is the price of immortality." That makes it sound like they are not immortal at the end but I still want to check.
Chosen answer: They're not, no. An individual doesn't become immortal after one drink - it requires them to drink regularly in order to remain alive. So neither Jones has been rendered immortal, merely healed of any wounds that they might have. But your surmise is basically correct - as the Grail cannot leave the shrine, any individual wishing to use it to prolong their life must stay there if they wish to enjoy its effects.
Also, in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skull, Henry Jones, Sr has passed away before the start of the story and therefore was not immortal.
9th Aug 2020
Double Jeopardy (1999)
Question: Why did the ex husband kill his former mistress turned wife?
Answer: Nick used Angie to help fake his death, frame Libby, and collect the insurance money which would have gone to their son, Matty. It's unclear if Nick married Angie, who became Matty's legal guardian, but he needed her to gain access to the money. He certainly didn't love her, and once he fully controlled the money, he eliminated her, as she was a liability who could have exposed him. I agree with the other answer that it also simplifies the plot by killing off a secondary character. It also shows how devious, ruthless, and sociopathic Nick is.
Answer: I don't think they explained it, but most likely for her insurance money which is the same reason Nick faked his death in the first place. But it's also possible her death was faked as well. Looking at it from the prospective of the writer, it seemed it was easier to kill her off or get rid of her somehow instead of her showing up at the end with Nick and there wouldn't be a way for Libby to kill her without facing jail time for it and it wouldn't make sense for Libby to just forgive her and let her go.
Angie's death wasn't faked. It was established and verified by the next-door-neighbor lady that she was killed in the house explosion while Nick and Maddy were conveniently away. Libby also researched old newspaper articles about the accident and the ensuing investigation. The articles also showed photos of the now-dead Angie.
9th Aug 2020
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Question: In the last shot of the knight waving goodbye to the Joneses, is it just me or has the actor been swapped out with a dummy?
Answer: It is the real actor and not a robotic dummy. He moves a bit slowly and deliberately, apparently for effect, but it's a real person.
Just to be clear, I'm not referring to when we see the knight raise his hand to wave goodbye to them, but rather right after Indy says "Please Dad," and he and Henry begin to flee the collapsing temple, you can see the knight in the background with his arm raised and he looks rather stiff. You can see it at around 2:22 of this clip: https://youtu.be/PAfZ7V2VyD8.
I took a closer look. There is the shot where the knight raises his hand and you can see him moving. It then cuts to Indy and Henry, then a cut back to the knight where it briefly looks like it could be a mannequin, then there is another cut and back to the knight again and this time it's definitely the live actor. So yes, for that brief long shot, I think it could be a dummy. This may have been for the purpose of efficiency in the filming, it being easier to use a stationary prop for doing multiple takes, rather than the live actor just standing there. Sometimes they do what is called "pick up" shots, where, post-production, a part of a scene or close-ups are re-shot or added weeks or months later, and it would just be easier to use mannequin rather than recall the actor.
But he does move, so most likely a real person.
9th Aug 2020
Double Jeopardy (1999)
Question: Given she leaves the state while on parole, possessing a firearm, holding her ex at gunpoint, how does Libby avoid prosecution for these offenses?
Answer: Because there were exceptional and extenuating circumstances and, technically, Libby was never guilty of the crime she was convicted of and had to resort to extreme measures to prove her innocence. She may have had a gun, but it could never be proved that she held Nick at gunpoint, only that she shot him in self defense. Also, it's a movie, which often are unrealistic regarding details like that.
7th Aug 2020
12 Years a Slave (2013)
4th Aug 2020
Downton Abbey (2010)
Episode #2.7 - S2-E7
Question: Mary states that Sybil is 21 in 1919, but says he's born in 1895. Also she dies in 1920, so that makes her 24-25, was that an age mistake?
Answer: According to various Downton Abbey online sources, Sybil Crawley was born between May - June 1895 and died between April - August 1920, (exact months were not listed). She would have been 24 years old when she died. Mary's comment can be attributed as a character mistake or, more likely, the screenwriters were careless.
14th Sep 2017
Flags of Our Fathers (2006)
Question: Did the scene where Ira Hayes rages against police after a bartender refuses to serve him really happen?
Answer: Following WWII, Ira Hayes hated the fame and sensational publicity associated the flag-raising at Iwo Jima. Deeply depressed, Hayes descended into alcoholism over the next few years, and it eventually killed him. Director Clint Eastwood actually underplayed the true extent of Hayes' sad decline, and the scene you mention was no doubt dramatized for the screen. In real life, Hayes was arrested 52 times for public intoxication and disorderly conduct at various places across the country before his death.
Answer: Definitely yes :). The poor guy was a raging alcoholic who literally drank himself to death.
3rd Aug 2020
Planet of the Apes (1968)
Question: Why do the humans in "Planet Of The Apes" all wear clothes? I am fully aware that the film was made in 1968, for a general release, permitting it to be shown in cinemas or on television, and 20th Century Fox would never have been allowed to make a movie in which humans all ran around naked. But, since the film is supposed to be set in a post-apocalyptic world, where humans have regressed back to being wild creatures, without language, lacking the skills to make or create anything, where do they get their clothes from? (And their clothes fit, too.) Did anybody ever come up with an answer to this, apart from the obvious reply that they wanted to get the film past the censor?
Answer: Unlike other primates, humans walk upright which exposes their genitals. They would instinctively cover them for protection. Humans also have very little body hair, so would cover themselves against the elements. Finally (spoiler alert) as these humans devolved from actual humans, it's likely something they did because their ancestors did it and it's been continued through the generations.
Answer: The humans have become mute, but not regressed to being "wild animals." The apes are the superior species but humans still have a high-level of intelligence, live in a complex, interactive social group, communicate non-verbally, and would have the ability to make simple tools and protective clothing. At the very least they would be equal to Neanderthals, but seem more advanced. The real answer is, of course, it's a 1968 movie when there were more stringent rules regarding nudity in films. If there was any, it likely would have been "X" rated, therefore limiting its audience and in which theaters it could have been shown in.
3rd Aug 2020
General questions
I saw this movie trailer in the late 1990s or early 2000s. A man has become, or can choose to be, invisible. At one point in the trailer, he asks a woman if she has ever made love to an invisible man before. I am certain that she had long brown or black hair.
Answer: There's another film, The Man Who Wasn't There, (1983), Steve Guttenberg (Police Academy) plays a man who becomes the target of American and enemy agents after stumbling upon an invisibility serum. After using it to escape, he hides out at a girlfriend's apartment. I don't remember the exact dialogue, but they do have a love scene. It's funny seeing her going through sex motions with no-one there.
Answer: I believe you are referring to Hollow Man, with Kevin Bacon and Elizabeth Shue.
Thank you.
Answer: This could also be the 1992 film, "Memoirs Of An Invisible Man," starring Chevy Chase and Darryl Hannah.
Thank you.
3rd Aug 2020
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Question: How could Belloq know/believe that the Ark is a powerful artifact, but also be completely oblivious to the Bible specifically mentioning that some Bethshemites were smitten for gazing into it and Uzzah was smitten for touching it?
Answer: There were probably many reasons. Propelled by greed, he may simply have chosen to filter out certain aspects of the biblical text, believing what he wanted to believe. He may have misinterpreted or had not bothered with the details of what was written in the bible.
Add in that he was hired by the Nazis to do the job of finding and utilizing the Ark. He had to make sure it worked so he could present it to Hitler.
3rd Aug 2020
The Sixth Sense (1999)
Question: How come Malcolm could realise he was dead, but none of the other ghosts could?
Answer: Ghosts can't move on until they've completed some unfinished business. Malcolm felt guilty for not helping the kid who shot him. By helping Cole control his powers, he was finally at peace and realised the true state of things.
To add: the little girl Cole helped uncover her murder definitely knew she was dead.
Why do you say she knew? I didn't see any evidence. Cole says ghosts don't know they're dead. The girl wasn't after revenge, but to protect her younger sister, who the mother had started poisoning.
She is one of the few ghosts aware that she can use Cole to help her out. Leading him to the evidence of her murder shows to me she knew she was too late for herself. At the end of the movie it is even revealed that these ghosts probably unconsciously approach Cole for help, so they can move on. They can't do that unless they are aware, or if Cole makes them aware of it. For Malcolm it was even necessary for him to know he was dead before he could say his goodbye. Cole just needs to tell them.
Answer: On top of it, Malcolm only realised he was dead when we saw his wedding ring drop from his wife's hand (he would have had it on him except if he were gone) and he saw her cold breath; these two things together helped him put all the pieces together (that we are shown in the movie) to show that she was grieving and mourning from his death and not that they were growing apart because he was wrapped up in a case (or to put it differently, he was so wrapped up in Cole that he did not notice that he hadn't had a conversation with his wife or even another human being for goodness knows how long - dead people see what they want to see).
Answer: Malcolm didn't realise he was dead until much later in the movie. By then he had a strong relationship with Cole, and being a psychiatrist, wanted to help him understand and cope with his ability and no longer fear it. Being a psychiatrist helped Malcolm analyse his own situation and work out that he had died. Once Cole was comfortable with his ability, Malcolm was able to move on. Also, as Cole noted, ghosts only saw what they wanted to see. Some were unable to come to terms with their deaths and therefore remained among the living.
1st Mar 2005
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Question: Why on earth does Marion take her bra off before putting on the white dress given to her by Belloc?
Answer: She takes off her bra because the dress has a very low back.
Answer: She was trying to "seduce" Belloc and get him drunk so she could escape. What better way to take a man's attention off your real plans, than to wear a white dress with no bra on.
28th Jul 2020
Blues Brothers 2000 (1998)
Question: What does Buster mean that he'll be put in a foster home with people who don't love him? What's gonna happen to him if he lives with them?
Answer: He was just saying it pessimistically. Although, depending on which reports you read, 1 in 3 children are abused by their foster parents. In addition, many children in the system also get placed into several different homes during their childhood (since fostering children is not the same as adopting them), leaving the children to feel unloved by their foster parents.
29th Jul 2020
Live Free or Die Hard (2007)
Question: Completely ignoring the fact that the road assist thing in the car wouldn't work due to the networks being down, why did Matt go through all that trouble? Wouldn't it have been much faster for John to speak to them and say something like "This is officer John McClane, badge number ***** I need to use this vehicle for a police emergency" or something like that?
Answer: There was no guarantee the operator would believe John was really a cop, even if he gave his badge number. Also, for the purpose of the movie, Justin Long's bit as a scared little boy, is just funnier, and meant to inject humor into the plot.
29th Jul 2020
Dick Tracy (1990)
Question: Is "Dick" Tracy's first name, or his occupational designation?
Answer: His full name was Richard Tracy, but it was used seldomly.
Chosen answer: It's a bit ambiguous. Tracy's creator, Chester Gould, originally named his character, "Plainclothes Tracy," until an editor suggested changing it to Dick Tracy. A "dick" is a dated slang term for a cop or a private detective. Dick appears to be Tracy's first name, but it is also descriptive of his profession. This is called a "double entendre." It's typical for authors to contrive a name that reflects their characters.
29th Jul 2020
Panic Room (2002)
Question: Why did they keep holding signs up to the camera? Burnham's company builds the rooms and security systems, wouldn't he have known he can speak to them using one of the security panels like Meg does later in the film?
Answer: Meg was using the P.A. from inside the panic room and it only works one way; everywhere else would have a room-to-room intercom system. If there was another P.A. system working the other way, it would have been too loud, as the cop mentioned when he spoke to Meg at the front door. The neighbors heard Meg broadcasting on it. Burnham would know that it would draw unwanted attention and, if heard, could be incriminating.
Cop didn't say anything to Meg about neighbors hearing her on the PA. They were only there cause the husband called the cops after she was disconnected from him.
There are two possible reasons that I can think of 1) Burnham probably simply forgot that he could do it, the same as none of them thought to smash the cameras until Raoul saw Meg doing it. They were under a lot of pressure as the plan had changed so it probably just slipped his mind. 2) Burnham knew he could do it but didn't want the other two to know. The other two seemed like loose cannons and Burnham seemed to be the only one who didn't want to hurt anyone. He might have been worried that they'd use the intercom to send threats or something.
It was a one-way PA system, as mentioned by the original answer.
No, it's not. After the burglars get into the room with Meg's daughter, Meg uses the intercom in the bedroom to talk to Burnham who is inside the room. This indicates that it is very much an intercom and not a one-way PA system.
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: For one thing, they're kids, and Hermione knows Harry is ill-equipped to handle this and he will just run off in a blind rage with no thought about what ti do. Hermione is methodical and always thinks before she acts and follows the rules. She wants Harry, who is impetuous, to do the same, and for them to work together.
raywest ★