Tailkinker

12th Sep 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: In the bank robbery at the beginning of the movie, the Joker and his henchman are being shot at by the Bank Manager. They decide to return fire and the henchman says something to the Joker. He jumps up and starts shooting but the Joker delays a few seconds before jumping up and shooting the Bank Manager. The Henchman then says to the Joker, "Where did you learn to count?" My question is, what was said before they decide to return fire?

Answer: He says "He's out, right?", basically asking if the bank manager has any ammunition left, based on how many shells a gun of that type should carry. The Joker thinks for a moment, then nods, so the henchman stands up to fire, thinking that he's safe, that the manager is out of bullets. Unfortunately, the Joker having lied, he's wrong and ends up getting shot. The Joker then stands up and shoots the manager, having maneuvered his henchman into taking the last bullet.

Tailkinker

11th Sep 2008

Wall-E (2008)

Question: How could Auto act against his directive? He's playing the top-secret order he got (never to come back to Earth) in front of the captain, yet isn't able to act against it again because things might have changed in the 700 years since the order was received. And in the face of the new evidence (the plant), doesn't that contradict the order?

Answer: One of the key points of the movie is that programming can evolve - WALL-E being the most obvious case in point. After all this time, Auto's entitled to be somewhat erratic in how he deals with things. Besides, he's still very firm on his primary directive, to prevent the return to humanity to Earth - keeping the existence of that directive a secret is rather less critical. As for the plant, that does very little to invalidate the directive. It may show that the principles underlying that directive are flawed, but Auto's not got the leeway to deal with that. The directive still stands.

Tailkinker

9th Sep 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: Why doesn't Wayne Enterprises conduct business in the same building as in Batman Begins? The building is seen in the background during the scene with the Joker firing the machine gun at Batman whilst he's on the Batpod. It was damaged at the end of Batman Begins, but the next day Fox is holding a meeting there when Earle walks in, and after 6/8 months when this film takes place I would have thought it would have been repaired.

Answer: A company the size of Wayne Enterprises would have multiple buildings. As much of Bruce's interest revolves around the applied sciences and research and development divisions, he presumably decided to use the building that contained those areas as the company's main base of operations.

Tailkinker

9th Sep 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: Still can't quite get this to make sense: why would the citizens of Gotham buy the story that Batman killed the five people, as planned by Gordon and Batman in the effort to maintain Dent's status as a hero, so as to keep hope alive? Last word from Harvey was to the reporter: "Batman saved my ass." Other reasons the fake story might not be believed are that Batman has never killed anybody before. As well, what would his motivation be? Are they planning to cover up the kidnapping of the Gordons, saying that Batman was there alone with Harvey Dent and killed Harvey? Why would any of that happen? And asking the Gordon family who underwent trauma to lie about how it happened is taking a big chance, especially since there are kids involved, who might slip. Thematically, the ruse makes sense, and it makes sense that Batman would be willing to be hunted. But I don't see why the citizens wouldn't question why he killed the people.

Answer: Harvey's never killed anybody before either, and what would his motivation be? In the absence of direct evidence, people will generally believe what they find it most comforting. The citizens of Gotham will not want to believe that the decent, trust-worthy, law-abiding man that they elected as their protector could have been torn down and turned into a monster, dispensing life or death at the flip of a coin. Batman, on the other hand, is entirely self-appointed, hides his identity and uses tactics that are often very similar to those of the criminals themselves - people would find it far easier to believe that he could somehow snap and descend to killing. Yes, there will always be questions, rumours about what really happened, but the vast majority of people will accept the fake story that they're presented with, simply because it's easier for them to do so than to consider the alternatives.

Tailkinker

Question: If Star Wars: Clone Wars happens between Episode II and Episode III, how can Anakin be a Jedi Master? In Episode II he is a Padawan. In Episode III he has the rank of Jedi Knight. But also in Episode III he says that it is an outrage how he is put on the council but not given the rank of master? So how could he have trained Ahsoka if he is only a Jedi Knight? Isn't that against the Jedi Code?

Answer: Both Jedi Knights and Jedi Masters can have Padawans apprenticed to them; the rank of Master is generally awarded once their first Padawan has successfully passed the trials and become a Knight themselves. While Ahsoka calls Anakin Master in formal circumstances, that's merely an indication of her status as his apprentice; Ahsoka being only his first Padawan, Anakin is still only a Jedi Knight.

Tailkinker

5th Sep 2008

Wanted (2008)

Question: Why would the filmmakers cast an English actor who tried to do an American accent badly when they could have just cast an American actor instead?

Answer: There's rather more to acting that getting the accent spot-on accurate. The filmmakers would have looked at many possible actors and picked the person that they thought was best. A better question would be "Why would the filmmakers cast an American actor when they knew that there was a Scottish actor out there who would be better in the role?" Has a simple answer - they wouldn't.

Tailkinker

28th Aug 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: Why did everyone have to leave the city? Two boats, one for citizens, one for criminals. Was the entire city rigged to explode?

Answer: No, of course the entire city's not wired up. But the Joker's said that he's going to start killing people - would you stick around for that? Pretty much everybody wants out.

Tailkinker

Question: Do the Jedi know that Count Dooku is called Darth Tyranus? They continue calling him Dooku, but in the later movies, Obi-wan and Yoda considered Anakin to be "dead" and wouldn't think of Darth Vader as being the same person as Anakin.

Answer: No, they don't. At the beginning of this film they don't even realise that he's a Sith - they shoot down the idea of Dooku instigating the assassination attempt on Senator Amidala, describing him as a political idealist. While Obi-wan hears the name Tyranus from Jango Fett, he has no way to connect that name to Dooku. While they become aware of his connections to the Sith, there's no indication that they ever learn his Sith title, so they continue to use his normal name.

Tailkinker

24th Aug 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: After the Joker cuts a man's face for the first time, he brings some kind of stick out and breaks it into thirds. Then he throws it at the ground and states something about "tryouts". I didn't really understand that scene, can someone please explain it?

Answer: He tells Gambol's three henchmen that there's an opening in his organisation. However, there's only one opening, so he's giving them the opportunity to prove themselves. Whichever one is left alive gets to join - he breaks the pool cue to give them a weapon to use against each other.

Tailkinker

23rd Aug 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: When the joker is caught by the police he does not talk to any of his henchmen regarding a revision of plans. Then how can the Joker have planned all along that Dent and Rachel get kidnapped and rigged to explosives - before unsuccessfully trying to kill Dent with a bazooka? Had Batman's tumbler not hindered the missile's trajectory it would have hit the side of the van, killing Dent - ruining the plan involving Dent and Rachel and the explosives. Furthermore the Joker thought Dent was Batman so he could not have anticipated the tumbler would take the hit from the bazooka and allow his master-plan to live on. And the Joker's plan to get caught also came down to Gordon, whom the Joker's plan could not have taken into account because he was believed dead. Everything in Joker's plan seems meticulously planned (i.e. knowing that police will call in a helicopter and that it will fly by exactly where henchmen are posted with wire-guns etc.) - but how can his plan be so flawless that it takes every implausible twist of events into account? Had these implausible twists not happened (so that everything is as it seems and Gordon is really dead, Dent is the Batman; Joker fires the bazooka into van killing Dent alias Batman) then isn't Joker's further plan completely ruined?

Answer: He's anticipating, covering his options ahead of time. He knows that the police have access to helicopters, so he positions his henchmen along the route to take one down. He knows that he could get captured, so he arranges things to ensure his escape in that eventuality; kidnapping Dent and Rachel to distract the cops and sneaking the bomb in to allow him to break out. He doesn't need to contact his people to say that there's a change of plan, because his henchmen already have orders how to proceed in particular situations. None of this is implausible, none of this somehow relies on impossible foreknowledge. It's purely and simply the Joker anticipating possible outcomes (of which there are few variations - largely just success or failure) and planning ahead what to do if they occur.

Tailkinker

The joker wanted Dent dead, plain and simple. He organized several scenarios to make that happen.

19th Aug 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: Batman is able to deduce the fingerprint from the the bullet hole in the wall. How is it that the Joker knows that Batman has this ability? As soon as the fingerprint is identified, (which ends up not being Joker's real identity; random thug?) he is able to set up a window shade to go off like clockwork? Designed to get police snipers to shoot at the window. Was it set up by the Joker? If so, was it an intended trap for Batman? How did he expect Batman to find the room with the tied up cops without prior knowledge of Batman's abilities?

Answer: The whole thing's a distraction, not for Batman, but for the Gotham City Police Department. Something to get the attention of all the snipers, while the Joker's standing right there, directly in front of the mayor with his henchmen and a load of rifles. Point the attention of the authorities elsewhere for a moment and it gives him the chance to kill the mayor and escape cleanly (which he does). There's nothing to suggest that he expected Batman to locate it. If he had, he undoubtedly would have set up something more interesting for Batman to find rather than just a bunch of tied-up cops, who, as we see, are able to tell Bruce exactly what the Joker's up to. Given his plan to assassinate the mayor, the Joker wouldn't have left people who could spoil his plan anywhere that he expected them to be found.

Tailkinker

15th Aug 2008

Jumper (2008)

Question: Before the movie came out, I read that it is going to be a trilogy. Is that true?

Answer: A lot of the time when a film of this nature is released, there will be ideas how the story could be continued - studios are always looking for the next successful franchise. Both Doug Liman and Hayden Christensen have commented that the film only covers about the opening third of an eventual storyline, suggesting that, provided that the studios are satisfied with the box office returns from the first film, that we can certainly expect sequels to appear. The book of the same name that the film was based on already has a sequel, entitled Reflex. Liman has already mentioned that some plot-strands from that novel will be factored into any cinematic sequel.

Tailkinker

Answer: Although she initially expressed an interest in returning, she reportedly disliked the script and ultimately chose not to reappear. While the producers initially considered writing the character out, with the story rationale that she had been killed in an air-raid on London during World War Two, it was ultimately decided that this would require too much rewriting and thus the character was recast.

Tailkinker

Answer: I read the reason she didn't want to do it was she had just given birth to her first child and didn't want to leave and do location shooting.

Question: Just need to check on this. I just saw the new X-Files movie last week and believe that I saw a funny mistake in the movie. At a certaian part in the movie Mulder goes to call Scully on his cell phone and when he gets to her name it in fact says Gillian not Scully. Anyone else see this?

Answer: Sadly, it's not true - already been submitted and corrected. When we see the screen, it reads "Scully" correctly. All the other names on the screen are surnames of crew members who worked on the TV show, including, immediately underneath Scully's name, Gilligan, for Vince Gilligan, a writer on the show. Understandably, given the brevity of the shot, this is easily misreadable as Gillian.

Tailkinker

Question: Are the events in this movie going to be considered canon for the time between Episodes II and III, or will the events in the Clone Wars TV show be considered canon, or both (if the events in the movie possibly take place after those in the show)?

Answer: Canon in the Star Wars universe is a somewhat complex term as it has several levels ordered in a hierarchy of precedence. Facts stated at a certain level are considered as canon, unless contradicted by something at a higher level of canonicity. The uppermost level of canonicity are the six live-action films. Lucas has stated that the television episodes (which include the Clone Wars movie, which can be considered as the first episodes of the TV series) are to be considered as the next level down in canonicity, so below the films, but above any other releases (books, comics and so forth). So, basically, yes, they're to be considered canon, except in any case where they contradict something established in the live-action films.

Tailkinker

Answer: Her date of birth is unrevealed. What little is known is that she was found as a child (precise age unknown) by a Jedi who crashlanded on her homeworld of Rattatak somewhere around 40BBY (precise year unknown). Realising her Force potential, he took her as his Padawan and trained her for some years, only to be cut down by a local warlord before he could finish, leaving her to seek vengeance on the warlords who had conspired against him, precipitating her fall to the Dark Side. It's difficult to determine her precise age from all this, but if we assume that she was ten when she was found, and that was in 40BBY, then Asajj would be 28 at the outbreak of the Clone Wars. So figure on anywhere in a range a few years either side of that.

Tailkinker

10th Aug 2008

Doctor Who (2005)

Blink - S3-E10

Question: The main premise of 'Blink' is that the Doctor and Martha are stranded in the 1960s. The Doctor is immortal, so wouldn't he have caught up with the present day eventually, to sort out the problem with the Angels?

Answer: Well, technically the 60's are recent enough that both Martha and the Doctor would live through to the present day, but that's hardly an ideal solution, particularly for Martha, who probably wouldn't relish the idea of explaining to her family and friends why she's suddenly in her eighties. So, yes, technically speaking, the Doctor could just sit around and wait, but that's not really the Doctor's style, is it?

Tailkinker

9th Aug 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Question: When Dent first meets Alfred at the fundraiser, he says, "You've known Rachel her whole life?" Alfred replies, "Not yet." Was this an intentional attempt to foreshadow Rachel's death?

Answer: Principally it's intended as Alfred making a small joke, but it's certainly an ironic one given subsequent events. As for the precise intent, the only ones who could confirm that are the scriptwriters.

Tailkinker

8th Aug 2008

Hellboy (2004)

Question: In the trivia section, there is this entry: At the beginning of the film, the Nazi who gets thrown into the portal lets out a Wilhelm scream as he disintegrates. Can someone please tell me what a Wilhelm scream is?

Answer: The Wilhelm scream is a distinctive scream with relatively high pitch that was originally used in a film called Distant Drums back in 1951. Since then, it has become a frequently used stock sound effect used in movies and TV shows.The Wilhelm scream was popularised in modern film by Star Wars sound designer Ben Burtt, who has made a point of using it frequently in the films that he works on - he dubbed it the "Wilhelm scream" after a character called "Pvt Wilhelm", who emits one of the screams in a 1953 film called The Charge At Feather River. Other sound designers have also started to use it as well, leading to the scream now being one of the most recognised stock sound effects in cinema. A more detailed history of the scream can be found here.

Tailkinker

8th Aug 2008

The Dark Knight (2008)

Answer: It all depends on how you land. Maroni landed on his legs, which would break them, but wouldn't necessarily be life-threatening. We don't know how Dent landed - he could easily have just broken his neck on impact or something.

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.