Question: What kind of bird is Nigel? He looks a lot like an Albatross to me.
Chosen answer: Nigel is a pelican - he appears to be modelled on a Brown pelican (although that particular species is not actually native to Australia).
Question: When Jack asks for Tia Dalma's help, she asks him what he brought for her. Jack then lifts the cage containing the monkey and shoots it. Jack then says, "An undead monkey". How is it possible for the monkey to be undead, wasn't the curse on the Black Pearl lifted?
Answer: There is a scene after the credits of "The Curse of the Black Pearl": the monkey got back to the cave and took a coin. That way he turned undead again.
Question: Why did the Warden slap Mr. Sir in the face with her rattle snake venom?
Question: At the fort they cover their cannons with sheepskin. Why?
Answer: During inclement weather, dry sheepskins were used to keep rain from entering the barrel. During battle, wet sheepskins were used to cool down the barrel to decrease the likelihood of the powder exploding prematurely.
Question: Why is it necessary for Draco to confirm that the real Harry has been captured by the bounty hunters? Lucius and Bellatrix have each dealt with Harry before.
Answer: Lucius and Bellatrix were unable to confirm Harry's identity because Hermione had jinxed his face to disguise him just before the snatchers captured them. They are fairly certain it is Harry, but as Bellatrix says, if they summon Lord Voldemort, and they are wrong, he will kill them all. Of all the Death Eaters at Malfoy Hall, no one knows Harry better than Draco, having spent more time with him because they were schoolmates. Lucius and Bellatrix have to be absolutely sure that this is Harry Potter.
Question: If imprinting is possible for werewolves then why didn't Jacob do it to Bella? Mad Magazine pointed this out as he does this to her daughter, kind of creepy it was.
Answer: Imprinting is an involuntary mechanism. The shape-shifter can't voluntarily imprint on anybody. Jacob tried to imprint on Bella but was unable to do so and began going around looking for other girls to imprint on but, is unable to do it of his own free will.
Question: Why did Queen Bavmorda need a ritual to get rid of the child? Why didn't she simply kill the baby on the spot?
Question: After the dog and Prince Wendell have been switched, why does the Queen even care about having the dog (who is really Prince)? She doesn't know that Tony can talk to him, so as far as she knows, no one can understand the dog at all. Why would she be concerned?
Answer: Because if Wendell and the switched dog somehow came in contact with each other then they would switch back. She does not want to risk this happening.
Question: What does Columbus say in another language throughout the film? I know when they're taking down the night guards he says "You are finished", but what else does he say?
Answer: Columbus is speaking Italian. The first night, when Larry asks him about the lions, he says "Go find the lion somewhere else" and then "tourist!" The second night, when they're chased by the animals, he says "Young man, do your job well, take care of the beasts" and when he sees that the window's open, "Kid, what do you say, shall we close the windows?" The last night, when Columbus is guiding the Neanderthals, he says "Fellow Neanderthals, with me!" and to the night guard "It's over!"
Question: When Alan has reached Jumanji, why were the bullet and rifle pulled into the game? They weren't from the game, but purchased by Van Pelt from a gun store.
Answer: The game is essentially "resetting reality" back to the point Alan was first sucked into the game. So it is undoing everything that has been done - including taking away the gun and bullets Van Pelt had purchased.
Answer: The gun and bullets may have been from the real world but they were Van Pelt's property. He purchased them at the gun store. Apparently the game pulls in Van Pelt and anything of his he was using to hunt Alan. It makes sense that the game would do this because Alan defeats Van Pelt by following the rules of the game. Having Van Pelt be able to simply purchase a gun in the real world and kill a player with it even after they've completed the game would be a huge cheat.
Question: I get that the DADA role is cursed because of Voldemort being denied the role when he applied for it at Hogwarts, but why does Dumbledore not let Snape take the role like he's wanted to every year? I thought Snape was a double agent (he spies on the Death Eaters and Voldemort for Dumbledore, and he pretends to be on Voldemort's side too), so unless Voldemort decides that he wants to get rid of him for being in the role, he's okay to take it on provided he's given it, and yet every year, Dumbledore turns down his application. Is it because Snape's too involved in Voldemort's side of things or some other reason? I hope I explained it well.
Chosen answer: There are several reasons. First, the position is cursed, so there is little reason to give Snape the job when he will not last any longer than all the previous instructors. If Snape did become the DADA instructor, something could happen to him that could result in his being harmed, having to leave Hogwarts, or be otherwise incapacitated in some way; that would render him useless to Dumbledore as a double agent. Also, Dumbledore trusts Snape, but putting him in an environment where he is teaching about dark magic on a daily basis would be too tempting and emotionally compromising to someone who had been so easily seduced by the dark side. He could possibly relapse. It would be like having a recovering alcoholic work as a bartender. Of course, he does eventually become the DADA instructor, and lasted no longer than his predecessors.
In the movies it is never mentioned that DADA role was cursed by Voldemort.
This is true; though it doesn't say it's not either. With trying to fit 7 long books and years worth of pages of HP information in 2 and a half hours; as long as the movie doesn't say it's not cursed, with our knowledge, there is no problem with reporting that it is. Even directors of non-book movies do this all the time; leave background information out that helps explain things they just didn't have time so they explained it behind the scenes.
Question: In the scene when the Mad Hatter is "fixing" the rabbit's watch, the Hatter exclaims "It was!" before the rabbit states that the watch was an unbirthday present. Is this on purpose? Or an editing mistake?
Answer: Actually, the White Rabbit sees his damaged watch, says "Oh! My watch". THEN the Mad Hatter says "It was!", then the White Rabbit says that it was an unbirthday gift. So the exchange of dialogue makes sense.
Answer: I think it is an editing mistake. The Mad Hatter is way too excited as if he had just heard it was an unbirthday present.
Question: The only way that the valley could be flooded by rampaging water is that a dam was broken up river. Otherwise the water rises very slowly. Does the movie explain this? If so I missed it. In which way was that river flooded?
Answer: Probably they have dismantled the coffer dam that was used while constructing the main dam. Hence, the flooding.
Good and reasonable last resort explanation - have the Coens ever addressed it?
Question: At the end of the "We Are One" song, Simba and Kiara have returned to pride rock around sunset. Fine, fine, but the thing that's been bugging me for years is: Kiara stares intently at something, causing Simba to frown and look up to see what she sees. He seems to chuckle, then turns back to her. What is it that they were looking at before he says "You'll understand some day" and why is it there?
Answer: Kiara is staring at the tip of Pride Rock and thinking of the that she will be a leader one day, due to the fact that shown in the first movie that this is where the new kings/queens roar to show that they are the new rulers. Simba notices her looking and chuckles at the irony of him having wanting to be leader so badly at her age and Kiara not wanting to be a leader at all.
Question: When Liz uses her fire, it incinerates everything around her. How does it not burn off her own clothing?
Chosen answer: Her jewelry does not melt either because the fire wraps around her and shoots outward enveloping her and her clothes and jewelry in a safe environment that allows her to breathe without burning the air going into her lungs. Plus if it burned her clothes it would get an R rating.
Question: How did Palpatine come back? Cloned? Or somehow survived the Death Star explosion, which seems unlikely.
Chosen answer: According to the novelization, Palpatine sensed Vader's internal conflict and created a clone as a backup in the event that Vader betrayed him. When Vader threw him down the shaft, Palpatine transferred his consciousness into the clone's body.
Answer: It is not said exactly how he came back. He says that he had died before which presumably is him dying in ROTJ. The most we get is the reference to Sith ability that some consider unnatural.
It is not said how he came back, but I get the idea that he was using the Force to keep himself alive. At least that's the message I was getting when I saw that Palpatine's fingers were wilted away. And I thought that the power he was using was urging his life to go on, but his physical appearence was being dragged behind.
Answer: The line "The dark side is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural" is a direct reference to Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, in which Palpatine says the same line verbatim to Anakin. Recall that a major plot point to that prequel is that the Sith have long been rumored to have found a method to cheat death. This film strongly suggests that Palpatine had indeed discovered this method. The film doesn't go into specifics. My understanding is the novelization says his body is a clone. Going by his appearance in the film (blank eyes; body manipulated by machine), it suggests to me that he is a reanimated corpse.
Question: Several times in the movie one character is able to ascertain in which hotel room another character is staying simply by asking the front desk for the room number. Was this realistic at the time the movie was made? Today, a hotel would never divulge a guest's room number to a stranger, since such information could potentially be used by burglars and/or predators to gain access to hotel rooms. Was security really that lax in the 1950s?
Answer: Not really. You could (and at some hotels are still able to) keep your room number private or you could not - i.e. you could ask the hotel staff to keep your number secret from strangers, or you could ask them to tell anyone who might ask. Not having seen this movie, I don't know how likely it would be in the situations you speak of that the hotel guest would choose the latter option- it might be a mistake.
Answer: Yes, security was that lax in the 1950s and beyond. People could acquire all kinds of information about individuals from various types of businesses. Not all were so careless, but many were or they naively didn't see a concern. In the late 1980s, I was a student at a university where a non-university person obtained his ex-girlfriend's class schedule simply by requesting it in-person from the registrar's office. Using that information, he was able to locate and fatally shoot her on campus.
Chosen answer: Nope. It was deliberately left vague.
Brad ★