MikeH

Question: Harry told Dean he had enough information on him to have him locked up for life. What information was this?

MikeH

Answer: Details aren't given, but it seems that Dean is involved in local crime along with the gang that hangs around with him. Even if Harry is bluffing, and doesn't have specific proof, it is clear that he is abusive and he has the recording of him threatening Eggsy.

Answer: CCTV surveillance and such like. And a possible kingsman informant embedded in the gang leaking incriminating info. Or police informer who reports to kingsman. Or, y'know, he was lying.

Alan Keddie

27th Jul 2018

House, M.D. (2004)

Answer: Because the part of House was written as an American and the part of Chase wasn't.

Greg Dwyer

31st May 2018

Man on Fire (2004)

Question: Why did they put "A special thanks to Mexico City: A very special place" in the credits? Was that supposed to be a joke? The movie didn't portray it as very special.

MikeH

Answer: This was likely meant as an appreciation to the city and its people for their support and assistance during the film's production, and was not a jokey reference to how Mexico City was portrayed in the movie. It's typical for movies to express gratitude to a city, state, the citizens, etc. for their cooperation.

raywest

Answer: It could also be sarcasm cause I read that the crew was robbed at gunpoint several times during filming.

Answer: They did recognize each other (at one point he goes to her house without asking her address). After the divorce, Howard said that he wished they were strangers again. They literally behaved as if they never met each other before (even though Madeline is gently pushing to move past being strangers - for example, by guessing he's divorced).

22nd Mar 2018

Goodfellas (1990)

Question: Why did Jimmy tell Henry he wasn't going to kill Morrie, only to then have him killed?

MikeH

Answer: Well, for starters, I think Jimmy, despite being a complete sociopath cared a bit about Henry's mental state and well-being and just wanted him to calm down, enjoy his night and we can see it worked. Second, Jimmy might, just might at that moment feel like it wasn't the right night to kill Maurie since he was more of an annoying nuisance than a real threat, he was without being asked given the Chance to just forget the money and let it go, symbolizing Jimmy's murderous greed. Third...WHY should he tell Henry Hill that he will kill him? He benefits nothing, it puts him in a vulnerable position and Jimmy, more than likely has noticed Henry's tics, excessive sweat and bug eyes, pretty sure the guy is hooked on coke, meaning as Tommy jokingly but in nice foreshadow says "You may fold under questioning." Telling Henry he will spare Morrie becomes his Teflon armor at this point cause Henry at this point would never even suspect a good fella like Jimmy to lie to him "of all people" about something like that...That is my take on it anyway.

Answer: It wasn't so much that Jimmy decided to kill Morrie after all. Tommy was annoyed by Morrie and decided on the spot to kill him himself. It was Tommy who wanted Morrie dead at that moment.

Question: How could Ames have received the death penalty if he didn't actually kill Clyde's wife and daughter?

MikeH

Answer: They made a deal with Darby. Darby testified saying Ames was the one who killed the wife and daughter in order to get a reduced sentence. Since Shelton's testimony was inadmissible because he blacked out it was Darby's word again Ames'.

scaryterri

Answer: He was a participant in a felony during which someone died. That means the felony murder rule applies. Felony murder is a capital crime.

Greg Dwyer

Question: What happened to the District 2 members who surrendered?

MikeH

Answer: Held captive by the Capitol until the capitol was liberated. They were then released.

Ssiscool

Answer: Nick also points out that the crime scenes are always contaminated. The evidence was probably contaminated by the cops.

Answer: The reason the DNA was inadmissible was not elaborated on. We're only told it was inadmissible because of the "exclusionary rule." Therefore, the judge in the case must have deemed the way the DNA was collected from the suspects was in violation of their constitutional rights. The why was not explained and anything would be a guess (something like when they were arrested and there was no probable cause to take a DNA sample). But it's seems more of plot convenience to move the story forward quickly. Clyde passing out had nothing to do with the DNA being inadmissible, it only meant his eyewitness testimony may be considered unreliable. Therefore the DA's Office was not willing to try both men using Clyde as a witness, but go with the plea deal.

Bishop73

Answer: Because Clyde passed out.

17th Feb 2018

Holes (2003)

Question: How is Camp Green Lake legal? Aren't there laws against forced child labor? Also, what would happen if Stanley refused to dig holes?

MikeH

Answer: It is illegal. That's why everyone in charge gets arrested at the end. It only lasted as long as it did because they were in the middle of nowhere with little to no oversight and no on knew what was really going on until Stanley's release.

Phixius

Wait then why did the judge know about it? Did he get arrested too?

There are a lot of kids at Green Lake, sentenced by various judges. The court system either was unaware of the conditions at the camp, or didn't care.

Brian Katcher

Answer: Stanley and his fellow prisoners are convicted criminals, and as such, the authorities are allowed to work them. The conditions in the movie are rather extreme, but what recourse do the boys have? The warden and her flunkies are brutal people, and it's likely Stanley would have been in a world of hurt had he refused to dig. All they'd have to say is Stanley attacked them and whatever force they used would have been justified. That's the penal system for you.

Brian Katcher

17th Feb 2018

Nocturnal Animals (2016)

Question: What happened to Andes? Why didn't he join Tony? Why didn't we see him or hear about him again?

MikeH

29th Jan 2018

A Time to Kill (1996)

Question: Why does it matter if the psychiatrist was convicted of statutory rape? How does it affect his ability to determine Carl Lee's sanity?

MikeH

Answer: The conviction, and his subsequent lying about it, bring his credibility seriously in doubt.

BaconIsMyBFF

21st Jan 2018

Breaking Bad (2008)

Show generally

Question: How exactly did Walt poison Brock? It doesn't make sense, the hospital said it was lily of the valley, but Walt and Saul confirmed it was ricin.

MikeH

Answer: Walt does use Lilly of the Valley berries to poison Brock. Vince Gilligan said he and the writers imagined Walt went to Brock's school with a poisoned juice box (there's subtle clues to confirm Walt knew what school Brock went to). But, when Jesse went to Saul's office, Saul's bodyguard, Huell, does a cigarette pack swap on Jesse when he pats Jesse down. Now the cigarette pack Jesse has no longer has the vial of ricin in it and Walt tries to convince Jesse that Gus stole the ricin and used it on Brock.

Bishop73

21st Jan 2018

Breaking Bad (2008)

Say My Name - S5-E7

Question: Did Walt plan on killing Mike? If so, why? It seems like he just did it in a fit of rage, but then why did he take his gun?

MikeH

Answer: As you stated, it was in a fit of rage, he regretted it right afterwards.

Question: Can vampires and werewolves be killed or injured by anything other than vampires and werewolves?

MikeH

Answer: Aro also makes the argument that for the first time in our history humans pose a threat to our kind with their weapons that can destroy us. Theoretically any weapons that can tear apart and/or burn the vampires would work. So, yes, things other than vampires and werewolves can kill the vampires and werewolves.

Answer: Sure. The problem is that these films portray vampires and werewolves as having super-human abilities, so it'd be significantly harder for a regular person to kill one. But nothing about the films seems to indicate it's overtly impossible.

18th Dec 2017

The Sixth Sense (1999)

Answer: The most likely scenario is that a ghost at the school told him.

Answer: Near the end, it is revealed that Cole has seen the ghosts of teachers that died in the fire at the school when "Stuttering Stanley" was a student, so it would make sense that one of them told him.

27th Oct 2017

Lethal Weapon 2 (1989)

Question: In real life, can you really get away with anything if you have diplomatic immunity?

MikeH

Answer: In short, diplomatic immunity would prevent a host country (such as the United States) from charging a diplomatic agent or diplomatic staff member with any crime (if they've been granted immunity). However, the agent's home country may waive immunity if the crime is deemed serious enough or the home country can prosecute the agent themselves. However, the host country can still expel a person with diplomatic immunity from the country and ban them from returning. And while diplomatically immuned people have committed serious crimes in the past, diplomats are usually seasoned and respected civil servants in their countries and can damage their careers if they cause any embarrassment while visiting a host county and tend to comply with local laws and customs out of respect.

Bishop73

The host country can also ask the Diplomat to leave, and the Diplomat's country may also recall them. Https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2018-DipConImm_v5_Web.pdf.

Answer: It's something which some more formal / conservative couples do, possibly just as a byproduct of having kids and using a consistent reference.

Question: When several soldiers surrender, why was the first one shot? I'm not referring to the end, I'm referring to the opening battle, when several surrendered, and only the first was shot.

MikeH

Answer: In the D-Day scene at the beginning of the battle, when the Germans surrender after a brief trench battle, one gets shot. I think this is because one soldier was still very tense and shot the German because he didn't see his hands up in the fight or flight response he was having.

Question: Why did Upham tell the soldiers to drop their weapons instead of shooting them? Why did they surrender instead of shooting him? And why did he then let them go?

MikeH

Answer: Upham was not a hardened war vet like the men in his squad. He seen Steam boat Willie shoot Miller which made him furious because of how desperately he tried to save Willies life at the Radar tower so he felt betrayed and guilty for not listening to his squad so he finished the job he didn't have the heart to do before by killing Willie. He let the others go because he didn't have a problem with them. The surrendering Germans knew the Americans were inbound after tank was destroyed so they gave up immediately.

Chosen answer: He was alone and probably couldn't have shot them all before being shot himself. However, he was in a perfect position to make them surrender as none of them wanted to be the one to get shot for aiming their rifle at him. He didn't let them go, he told them to start walking in one direction as his prisoners.

lionhead

Question: Why didn't they just shoot Steamboat Willie on sight? And once they decided not to kill him, why couldn't they call a chopper to come take him? Also, why were they so intent on committing a war crime by killing him once he'd surrendered? I know he killed Wade, but that's just what happens in war.

MikeH

Chosen answer: Rules of war are when someone surrenders you take him prisoner and are not allowed to kill him, they followed the rules of war. They are all very emotional from the battle and losing a friend and fellow soldier though and they wanted a scapegoat. They were behind enemy lines so nobody could come to pick up the prisoner, as the lieutenant explained, and helicopters weren't really around in WW2.

lionhead

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.