Question: Why did they keep changing female ADA's? I personally think Wolf may have been a bad boy and most of them didn't want to play his game.
Answered 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.
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."
Question: Can anyone explain the airlock that the Queen gets sucked out of at the end? The location for the activation levers seems ridiculous. Ripley gets pulled in by the Queen, then starts climbing out and pulls a lever to open the outer door, then has to climb out to the top to close it. This seems like an insanely dangerous design.
Answer: The airlock was probably designed to drop out cargo in space to be taken to another ship or a space station or for astronauts to go on space walks or make repairs to the outer hull of the ship. Maybe to quickly get rid of something dangerous or deadly, like a bomb or alien monster.
Answer: The simple fact of the matter is she overrides the safety protocol of the airlock by opening the outer door manually whilst the inner door is still open. This of course is highly dangerous but necessary given the circumstances. For dramatic effect though she then climbs out of the airlock to close the inner door instead of closing the outer door first. It's possible though she can't close the outer door anymore because she overrode the system (or the outer door is now damaged) and she closes both doors at the same time after climbing back up.
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.
Question: Why does General Leland use the gun to shoot a fly instead of a flyswatter? Why was he shooting at a guard?
Answer: In universe, it's likely because he's drunk and reckless, as you see him continuing to drink while doing it. Out of universe, it's a reference to the Confucius quote "Don't use a cannon to kill a mosquito."
Question: Why would Schultz and Candie risk their lives, and the lives of everyone around them, over a handshake?
Answer: Schultz finds Candie to be a vile human being and being forced to shake his hand to seal the deal is just too much for him to accept. Candie never had any idea that Schultz would shoot him so he's not really risking anything in his mind. Candie is simply gloating over his opponent.
Question: When John said "I order you not to go", why didn't that work? Doesn't the T-800 have to do what John says?
Answer: The T-800 has been learning since he has been with John and Sarah. John specifically has been teaching him to have compassion for human life. Stopping Skynet from ever coming to be is the ultimate way to protect humanity, even more important than following John's order to stay with him. In short, he has overcome his programming and is making a selfless sacrifice.
Question: Why did Peter never question where the black suit came from and decide to keep it? Obviously as the film progressed, the symbiote started to influence him more, but in the beginning 1) He didn't wear it all the time; 2) He is aware that there is SOMETHING up with the suit (for example, when he looked in the mirror after the "damn door" scene and saw a vision and then quickly put the suit in the suitcase). I also know that the suit never triggered his spidey sense, but surely Peter at some point must have wondered "where did this suit come from and how is it boosting me physically?"
Answer: To be fair, he does take a sample of the suit to Dr. Connors to be analyzed, so he is showing some initiative into trying to find out what it is. But I always took it as a "don't look a gift horse in the mouth" situation for Peter. He knows that it came from somewhere, but given it seems to increase his power and has an intoxicating quality (as he says, it feels good when he's wearing it), he chooses not to question it too much. Remember, the suit becomes an addiction to Peter... and I can also tell you as someone who has had problems with severe addiction to alcohol and pills in the past, at a certain point you do stop questioning things because you're just craving the rush too much.
Question: Do they explain why the T-800 looks older? Or is it just an unavoidable plot hole you have to accept?
Answer: The T-800 is a metal endoskeleton covered in living human tissue. That human tissue still ages the same way a normal human would. This particular T-800 has been living in the current timeline since the early 1990's so he has aged at least 30 years and originally had the appearance of a roughly 40 year old man.
Question: At the time of filming this show, Jared Leto was 21 and Claire Danes was 14. How were they legally allowed to make out? I understand parental consent was undoubtedly required, but where exactly would the line be drawn regarding age, as I doubt they could have had them make out if Danes was only 12 for example.
Chosen answer: For one, these are professional actors on a film set for a major production so some leeway would be given. Additionally, in the United States at least, kissing is not generally considered sexual contact from a legal standpoint. Kissing does not involve any private parts. Even in cases where kissing is considered sexual contact, the intention of the accused party would be taken into account. A sexual violation requires the desire for gratification from the accused. A hired actor kissing another actor because it is in the script does not rise to the level of someone seeking sexual gratification. He's literally doing his job.
Question: As the Cerberus codes have been entered, with the time limit set prior to the missile's destruction, how did Jang expect to leave the country within what I assume was the 5 minute time limit and not feel the fallout from the nuclear missiles, or be killed or at least full of radiation, and also, why take the president then?
Answer: Kang wanted the USA to suffer famine and be a 3rd world country. His plan was to get in, set off all the warheads and plunge the USA into the dark ages. During one of the exchanges between Kang and Mike, Kang says "I just want the USA to experience poverty and famine." So he had no plans to survive his mission. He needed the president to gain the 3rd code incase it couldn't be broken by the hacker. He faked the presidents death to give himself more time with the president.
Answer: My best guess is they went in knowing it was a suicide mission.
That suggested answer doesn't make any sense. Jang idea was to capture the code to start a war presumably between N &S Korea. There is no indication that Jang's computer whiz had the ability crack the code, or was even trying, and that sounds unlikely. I think the whole story line went off the tracks at that point and they were trying to wrap up the shooting. Pretty shaky in my opinion. Just a movie with some good stars and and a lot of stuff got blown-up and the good guys won.
Answer: The Washington monument is destroyed in one scene and in a later scene, it is fully erect.
This isn't an answer, this seems to be a mistake entry.
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.
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.
Question: When Jack is being arrested he tells Rose "I just borrowed it, I was gonna return it." Was he referring to the jacket or the necklace?
Answer: Jack admitting to stealing or borrowing the jacket is a vain attempt to show that it wasn't his and therefore the necklace wasn't his either. He can't explain away the necklace but he can sort of explain the jacket on a way that doesn't make him look as bad. Either way it all comes across as desperation. Rose seems to believe him a little but can't do anything about it, especially when a priceless necklace is involved.
Question: Is the Canyon of the Crescent Moon a real place, or was the shot of the canyon as seen from Donovan's binoculars just a place created for the film?
Chosen answer: The Canyon of the Crescent Moon is fictional, but based on the real entrance to the Treasury (Al Khazna). The Bab as-Sīq is the wide valley leading to the Sīq, the narrow gorge entry.
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: It was an open secret that Jack McCoy slept with his female assistants. It's reasonable to assume that as he tired of them or they moved on in life, he found a new assistant. In the case of Serena, she became a lesbian and was eventually fired for being too emotionally involved with defendants.