Question: Does anyone know the story behind the "Creepy Thin Man?" Like why he likes to pull hair and smell it? Anything that helps me understand his character is appreciated.
Question: How does Ben Hildebrand die? Only his skeleton is shown in while Billie removes the parasail. He would not have been killed and eaten by a dinosaur because his skeletal remains are still there, and he wouldn't have been strangulated as he was talking to Eric as per the video.
Answer: While the movie doesn't explain this, it most certainly wasn't a dinosaur (since a carnivorous dinosaur would eat him). However, in Jurassic Park Adventures: Survivor, he dies from internal injuries due to the rough "landing".
Answer: Raptors.
Answer: Compisigthus or compies would have done the trick.
Question: If all of the base DNA for the dinosaurs in the park was obtained from dino-blood inside mosquitoes, where did they get the DNA for the Mosasaurus from? A flying blood-sucking insect would not come into contact with a sea dwelling dinosaur, and there are no amber-equivalents in the ocean to trap any sea based blood suckers.
Answer: And what about just digging for bones for the Mosasaurus? I think this was said somewhere-although I can't remember where so apologies if I'm wrong-but I think Dr. Wu mentioned something about it, so I'm sure they could've gotten DNA WITHOUT getting the blood from a mosquito. It sounds possible in my opinion.
Chosen answer: The scientific inaccuracy of the mosquitoes/DNA notwithstanding, at the end of the film the Mosasaurus surfaces at the edge of its pool in order to drag in the Indominus Rex. Assuming the Mosasaurus did the same thing to catch prey in its own time period, it's feasible a mosquito could have landed on its body and extracted some blood in that short amount of time, especially if the prey was putting up resistance.
And a mosquito would always be in that area and be keen on getting blood from that particular dinosaur? Plus, it didn't take much for the Indominus to be taken down since the Mosasaurus is kind of a big creature, so how hard would it be for other animals to be taken down as well? Added, the Mosasaurus was being fed a shark when we first meet it; it's not like it was hunting on its own in an enclosed area.
Mosquitoes are everywhere, so it's not a matter of convenience that one would be in the same area and being keen on going after that particular animal. Plus, I just pulled up the scene on YouTube and it takes close to 10 seconds for the Mosasaurus to drag the Indominous Rex to its doom, which is plenty of time for a mosquito to land on it and extract blood. And as I stated in the answer, the explanation of DNA being harvested from preserved mosquitoes is scientifically inaccurate anyway, so even a tenuous explanation of how a mosquito would get that animal's blood is no more tenuous than dinosaurs being brought back to life in the first place.
Question: When Judy starts her mission to find Mr. Otterton and finds Nick with his partner, Finnick, she manages to hustle the fox, get him to confess his crimes on a voice recorder, and forces him to assist her on her mission before she decides to arrest him. Finnick laughs at Nick's humiliation and walks away. Why does Judy let Finnick off the hook despite the fact he was involved in Nick's scams?
Chosen answer: Finnick didn't say anything that could be used against him and she had no proof that he was delinquent on his taxes, as he said, "She hustled you good!"
Finnick was involved in all of Nick's scams so shouldn't he have been charged as an accessory and therefore also forced to help Judy?
Nick's crime was not paying taxes. Judy had no evidence that Finnick was guilty in any tax evasion or that he even participated in earlier scams.
Question: I remember seeing this movie multiple times years back, and i distinctly remember the restaurant being Taco Bell, why the sudden badly dubbed pizza hut in the new television version?
Answer: A number of the European releases of the film replaced Taco Bell with Pizza Hut, as Pizza Hut has a significant international presence, whereas Taco Bell is relatively unknown outside the US, with very few restaurants. While most versions around these days keep the US original dialogue, the altered versions do occasionally crop up, particularly on television.
Answer: In South Africa we also had a version that called the restaurant Burger King. I just always assumed that they changed the name when a franchise offered them more money for product placement.
Question: I could swear when I saw it it had a different ending. The one I saw at the end Jeff Bridges dies in the car. And Clint Eastwood pushes him out of the car and leaves him on the side of the road, then drives away. But I can't find anything on that. Has anyone else seen that version?
Answer: You must be thinking of another movie, because as far as I know there is no different ending.
I totally agree with your answer. Sometimes movies do film alternate endings that may be used in different markets (i.e. Europe or Asia). Also, alternate endings are sometimes filmed after a test audience reacts negatively to the original one and they may show up in the DVD or director's cut. I didn't find any indication that another version was ever filmed for this movie.
I concur - I can't find any evidence of this alternate ending existing beyond some people claiming it does. Like other examples (Wizard of Oz ending with a shot of the shoes under Dorothy's bed, etc.) I suspect this is just a false memory, although no doubt some will argue that, trouble is there's no way to prove a negative.
You are absolutely correct. Just watched this film again for the first time since the 70's. Thunderbolt leaves Lightfoot sitting (respectfully) by the roadside before driving off! Hope you come across this comment one day.
Answer: I remember the scene of pushing Jeff Bridges out of the car as well. I recently watched the movie on Cable, and Eastwood just kept on driving with Bridges (dead) slumped in his seat. I could have sworn he pushed him out in some alternate version.
Answer: I saw the film on VHS tape 30 years ago and the ending on the tape had Clint Eastwood throwing Jeff Bridge off the cliff.
Answer: Mandela effect.
Answer: The one thrown out of the car was red pushing his friend out of the trunk of the car after he was shot Clint saw his friend die, and he drove off with him still in the car.
Question: If Bruce had backed Edward's invention, would Edward have still done what he did in the movie (using the device to grow smarter, try to outdo Bruce etc)? Or did Bruce spurning him cause him to do that?
Answer: It's hard to say for certain. If Bruce had approved of the project, there would have been a lot more volunteers and oversight of its production, which would have alerted Bruce of the device's side effects, at which point he or one of his underlings would order its production to cease. Edward would still feel spurned and motivated to continue his work, but without the resources of Wayne Industries at his disposal, he may have a more difficult time seeing his plan through.
Question: When Elliot Spenser is being transformed into Pinhead, who was cutting lines into his face and head and driving nails into him?
Answer: All we can see (in abstract closeup) is serpent-like tendrils cutting him and driving the pins into his head. As someone else said, it's likely another cenobite, although alternately it could also be the same "contraption" that turns Channard into a cenobite late in the film, given the tendrils are similar to the ones he sprouts.
Answer: Presumably another cenobite/cenobites. The choice not to show them makes for a better scene, as that moment is all about him, becoming the iconic Pinhead; the cenobites who made him that way are of no consequence to the story, and their own grotesque appearance would have distracted from his transformation.
Question: Is the mouse supposed to be the re-incarnation of the dead man that left the mansion to the brothers?
Answer: No, it's just an intelligent and precocious mouse.
Question: One of the early posters of this film shows a bearded guy (who is not in the film) coming through a wall crack and holding puppet strings with one hand. Who is this guy supposed to be and what does he represent?
Chosen answer: He does bear a striking resemblance to Stephen King. King was both the writer and director of this movie, and as such, was certainly the guy in charge of all the character's fates and pulling all the strings.
Answer: It is Stephen King.
Question: How is Ben able to enter his brother's old apartment, now occupied by a single young woman, and still be able to shave off his beard and find a change of clothes?
Answer: When Ben is walking to the apartment door, he has a huge case with him which is big enough to hold clothes and even shaving equipment. Ben entered the door code into the keypad which unlocked the door so the code was never changed.
Question: I'm aware that there is debate on whether or not Deckard was a replicant, but as I was watching the movie, I couldn't see any clues as to why anybody would think this. Did I miss something obvious? Why do people think this?
Answer: The two most notable hints are as follows. The first (which is only in the Director's Cut) is that after Deckard dreams of a unicorn, Graf makes an origami unicorn and leaves it at Deckard's apartment. Some people interpret this as suggesting that they're aware of the memories that have been given to Deckard to prevent him realising his true nature. The second hint is that replicant eyes glow in certain lights - at one point in the film, Deckard's eyes can be seen glowing in the same fashion. Ridley Scott has stated on several occasions that, as far as he's concerned, Deckard is a replicant, but he does concede that they deliberately left it as somewhat ambiguous - the viewer should decide for themselves.
Answer: Rachel asks Decker at one point if he had ever taken the replicant test himself, and he doesn't answer. Even though the movie itself doesn't seem to stress the point, in the book on which the movie is based "Do androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", the question of whether the protagonist detective is an android is the main theme.
Question: I don't quite understand why Dr. Manhattan had to kill Rorschach. That is, I don't quite get why that was the only solution. Rorschach was a valuable member of the Watchmen, and in the type of world they were in (chaos, corruption, murder, etc) one would think that they would want to keep as many of themselves banded together as possible. Couldn't some sort of negotiation or compromise have been reached/agreed to by Rorschach instead of him being killed?
Answer: He has spent years as a costumed vigilante despite the fact that it was illegal. He has a very strict idea of what is right ("never compromise") and has proven himself incapable of doing otherwise. So no, there was no real chance of negotiating with him - Rorschach himself made it clear he'd have to die if they wanted his silence.
Death was not the only choice. Doc M could easily have teleported/banished Rorschach to Mars/anywhere secluded in an oxygen bubble. He could have spared his life and just made him mute or manipulate his brain chemistry/atoms to remove the memory of what happened. The point is Doc M is all powerful and could manipulate matter at his whim; death was just a plot device creating a chance of an emotive martyrdom/sacrificial ending.
Ethically speaking, exiling him to Mars or erasing his memory of the event can be considered just as cruel as killing him, because then his agency is being taken away from him. Rorshach's malcontent with the situation poses a problem for the other heroes, and since Dr. Manhattan isn't willing to let him tell the truth of what happened, he obliges Rorschach's demand that he kill him instead.
Question: What was the mixture that Mississippi gave to JP Harra?
Answer: The prime ingredient was Ipecac, a nausea-inducing compound (still used today) which so inflames the stomach lining that it's impossible for the patient to hold anything down. Hot mustard in large doses has a similar effect. The other ingredients (croton oil, cayenne pepper, etc) acted as powerful laxatives, so the entire gastrointestinal tract is evacuated in short order. The gunpowder was a fantasy ingredient, no doubt, as gunpowder is known to cause gangrene of internal tissues.
Answer: It was an old folk remedy for a hangover. It was supposed to make someone unable to drink liquor for a short period of time. The fictional potion's ingredients were not specified.
The ingredients of Mississippi's hangover concoction are very surely in the scripted dialogue. Mississippi: "Johnny Diamond had a recipe. Let's see. Cayenne pepper, mustard-the hot kind, ipecac, asafetida, and oil of cloves or was it? No, it was croton oil." Bull: "Croton oil?! I'll be a suck-egg mule. You know what that mixture'll do to a fella?" Mississippi: "Guaranteed kill or cure." The final ingredient is gunpowder.
Answer: Croaking oil, gunpowder, hot mustard, ipecac, asafetida.
Question: If Callaghan knew that his daughter was dead because of project silent sparrow, how did he attended the SFIT students showcase happily? And after the fire at SFIT, everyone presumed that Callaghan was dead. So when did Callaghan visit the project silent sparrow to know that his daughter was dead, before or after the fire?
Chosen answer: The Silent Sparrow incident took place long before the events of the film. He had been plotting his revenge for some time, part of which was using the fire to steal the microbots.
Answer: I think the fire was his original revenge plot but the microbots provided a chance for an even more satisfying end to Krei. Likely Abigail disappeared a year or two before (judging by how the men hardly aged) and Krei had to rebuild his company's image therefore creating the event. The comeback would have been hard on Callaghan and may have caused him to plan the fire and his death in the explosion assuming KreiTech couldn't recover from both, perhaps even would have taken Krei with him. But then he the microbots changed everything.
Question: On the some versions (TV), when Al walks in the lobby to check it out, right before he gets to the elevators and then leaves, the camera pans to the left and you see a terrorist with a machine gun waiting for him. On other versions (VHS) you don't see this terrorist. Why? NOTE: I've seen both on the same TV set.
Answer: The most likely reason is that the two versions have been "panned and scanned" differently. In the original theater version, both things are on screen at the same time at opposite sides of the screen. In one version, the person who did the TV P&S (not someone associated with the making of the film) chose to move the view from one side of the original picture to the other, showing the terrorist, while the person who did the VHS P&S stayed focused on one side of the frame, only showing Al.
Question: When Jackson and O'Neill send the nuclear bomb up to Ra's spaceship, why didn't he simply send it down again? Sure it wouldn't have made it back to ground before detonation, but at least his ship may have been spared.
Chosen answer: When Ra saw the bomb, he realised that it was a few seconds away from detonation. There wouldn't have been enough time to send it back.
Answer: This character gets a backstory in the sequel (Charlie's Angels Full Throttle). Supposedly he was a runaway from a circus, who found refuge at an orphanage. He didn't much like haircuts when he was little.
marfbody