Question: Was the doctor (the owner of the sailboat in the beginning) in on Laura's planned disappearance? Or was the bad weather just a coincidence and gave her the chance to escape? Just though it was weird because her husband commented that she only gets on a boat like once a year, so I don't know how she could have planned her escape so perfectly.
Chosen answer: No, the doctor was not in on her plan. She had her escape planned for a long time, but was waiting for the right time. The stormy weather on the boat provided the "perfect" time for her to put her plan into action.
Question: Is there a reason why when they're in the past they can't catch up with the present, but when they land a little into the future, the present can catch up with them? Are they not moving along on their own timeline? And if not, why are they not left in that moment and stand there to see the present come and go without taking them?
Answer: Think of time as a gear with only one tooth, and think of them as a gear with only one notch. In the past, the one tooth has forever passed their notch and they'll never be carried along in the flow of time again. In the future, the tooth comes along, snags their notch, and they're back in the flow of time.
Question: What did Doc mean when he said "It's not revenge he's after. It's the reckoning"?
Chosen answer: A reckoning is like a judgment day, exacting retribution for one's actions. Doc was very well educated and had a very large vocabulary. He was correctly pointing out the subtle difference between revenge (to make Wyatt feel better about losing Morgan and about Virgil's crippling injury) and the fact that Wyatt was bringing about a judgment day (or reckoning) for each of the men who hurt his family.
Answer: I've spent a lot of time thinking about this very question, and here's what I've come up with. I think there are at least two differences between revenge and a reckoning. First, I think it has to do with the scale of the response to an offending action. Revenge, in my mind, is an eye for an eye, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will inflict the same action on your family (or group, gang, whatever). " A reckoning is less a measured response to an offending action and more of a full-scale punishment, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will now slaughter your entire family-including those who were not directly responsible for the offending action." Second, I think there is also a difference in motivation. Revenge tends to be a very personal response to something, whereas a reckoning tends to be more of a response fueled by a need for justice. In Wyatt's case, it was both. He was enraged by what happened to his family, but was also a lawman.
Thank you for this response! I've only seen Tombstone a million times and asked the same question every time. It's hard to separate the difference between the two but I believe you nailed it. Well done.
I'm thinking the opposite in terms. Revenge is "Reflexive" and is generally any means necessary (out of an abundance of pain or rage) to hurt the other party. "Revenge is a dish best served cold." If one is exacting justice there's no need to be cold hearted. Therefore, Reckoning is (to me) a fair balancing of the "scales" hence "an eye for an eye." Not only consequences of actions as it were but a corrective action to an incorrect circumstance. Just my understanding.
The problem with that theory is there is no difference in the end because the end result was the same...the killing. True reckoning could have only been achieved though the apprehension and punishment by trial and jury, anything other than that is simply revenge.
Question: What was in the hat box in the garden?
Question: Julia Roberts refers to the term "snow blowing" and states that she heard it described in a movie. Is this really a reference to a movie?
Answer: You can see the reference in Kevin Smith's first movie Clerks. Whether or not she's referencing that particular movie or not is debatable.
Question: What does the Saxon who rallies the troops actually yell? He yells it twice: once, after Cerdic meets with Arthur in front of the wall and gives the order to "prepare the men for battle", and then a second time when Cerdic gives the signal after the only survivor of the first "wave" comes back through the wall. (And I don't mean his cry of "battle formation.").
Answer: I don't think it's supposed to be German. Probably Old Saxon. Could be something like "slahten fiand" - slaughter enemy.
Answer: He yells 'Schlachtet den feind!' (In very, very bad "German") - 'slaughter the enemy!'. And his army seems to yell: "Schlachtung! Schlachtung! Schlachtung..." - "Slaughter! Slaughter! Slaughter..."
Question: Why does Ray freak out when Charlie turns on the hot water in the bathtub?
Answer: When they were children, Ray witnessed Charlie being burned by hot bath water. I think Ray says something about how he was left to look after Charlie while Charlie was in the bath, and Charlie got burned by the hot water. That memory must be very strong for Ray, and not comprehending the passing of time, Ray did not want to see Charlie hurt again.
Question: Every time Florence would perform before a live audience, people would respond by either laughing at her or booing at her. With these kinds of reactions, how could Florence not realise that it was because nobody liked her singing and that they considered her a terrible singer?
Answer: People believe what they want to believe and can have an uncanny ability to filter out anything negative or unwanted. Eventually, she realised the truth.
Question: When Uncle Buck is going to the party to get Bug, he is stopped at a red light and there are two parents in the car next to him. The father says, "don't go in there with that hat on, they'll kill you". Why would someone be killed for wearing a hat?
Chosen answer: He's being sarcastic, as Buck says in the beginning some of his hats anger a lot of people, which probably connects to when his hat gets taken by one of the teenagers at the party.
Buck is actually referring to his aviator style hat in the earlier scene about people being angered by it. He's wearing the fedora style hat in the scene en route to the party. But I agree the guy was being sarcastic about teenagers.
The black purse bedside to the possible 'pile of bunched-up blankets' looks like Chanice's from later scenes; suggesting the writers or Hughes changed the script after the bedroom scene was shot to Buck's simpler but delightfully funny half-conversation with her on the phone.
Answer: The Uncle Buck movie was made in the late 80s, near the end of the Cold War. And Because the hat resembles the Russian ushanka worn by Russian soldiers in that time, it can be said that wearing it might anger some, especially young Americans opposed to world events at the time.
Question: I still don't understand why Leonard switches clothes with Jimmy and steals his car after he kills him. "I'd rather be mistaken for a dead guy than a killer." That makes absolutely no sense. Driving around in Jimmy's car and wearing his suit would make him the prime suspect in the investigation. He was much safer when he was just an anonymous guy driving around in a pickup truck.
Answer: It is never explicitly given. The most Leonard says on the subject is: "I'd rather be mistaken for a dead guy than a killer." Speculations include (you can make up your own motives as well) : (1) The clothes and car are so much nicer than his. If you are willing to kill someone: stealing is not really a "crime." Why not take the nicer objects? (2) It could be part of his "routine": Kill a man, take his clothes and car. The clothes he had on and the truck may be from the man he killed a year ago. (3) It could be that he wants to make the killer of his wife suffer even more, and takes his clothes as a way of humiliating him. Leonard takes the man's life-his clothes and car, which are wrapped up in his identity-just as the man took his. This idea seems to work with a theme in Memento about "Identity" (especially mistaken identity). Natalie thinks Leonard is Jimmy, then thinks he is Teddy, then learns he is Leonard. Teddy is "mistaken" for the second killer, Jimmy is "mistaken" for the 2nd killer. Sammy's story as a part of Leonard's story, etc. (4) It could "simply" be explained as a "plot device": Leonard has to do it, otherwise he won't find the note in "his pocket" and meet Natalie. (5) Leonard doesn't want to admit he's a murderer. He's lying to himself. If he's the victim, then he cannot be the murderer. (6) Leonard takes Jimmy's clothing as part of his routine of killing J.G.'s he becomes another person, he's the victim not the killer, thus "I'd rather be mistaken for a dead guy than a killer." and that's why he also takes his car, so he has to, once again, find his wife's killer and kill him.
Question: Who did the demonic voice that told the priest blessing the house to get out?
Answer: George Lutz.
How was it accomplished?
Question: Why does Vivica Fox start crying when she sees fried chicken on the table?
Answer: In a storyline that was not shown but discussed vaguely, Vivica's character lost her first child one day while her husband (LL Cool J) was at work. The only thing she had to put the child in was an empty bucket of chicken. So the bucket of chicken on the table brought back horrible memories for her.
Question: What exactly did Darrin and Chris steal and how did they get caught? Also, why was their sentence seven years and how did Chris end up in a wheelchair?
Answer: It was never said what they stole, just that they were going to go to the store (probably a corner store or convenience store) and they probably stole food. They got caught because they were just kids and not good at stealing or being sneaky. However, they didn't get a 7-year sentence for the theft. It's just that the film jumps to 7 years later and Darrin is now a gang member who has been in and out of jail the whole time. He's just celebrating his release from prison for a different, unknown crime. Chris is in a wheelchair due to a gun shot wound, though it's not stated how or who shot him.
I wouldn't be surprised if Chris shot himself with the gun he alludes to having earlier on in the film when they are still children.
Question: What is the name of the actor who plays Notre Dame player 75, last name Mateus? I can't find him in the credits. He's the guy who starts chanting "Rudy" during the Georgia Tech game. I know Al Snow aka Allen Sarven plays an uncredited Notre Dame player in the movie, but it is not him - I have seen pics of Al Snow, and he is NOT the guy. There is more than one uncredited Notre Dame player in the film. (I have posted this question before, and the reply was Al Snow, so please don't answer this unless you actually know who the actor is. Thank you.)
Answer: According to the Trivia section (as well as some web searching) it seems to be Peter Rausch, an ex-Notre Dame football player.
Answer: Peter Rausch had already completed his NCAA eligibility by the time the movie started filming. He can be seen wearing the number 75, starting the "Rudy" chant from the field. His character's name is "Steve."
Answer: His real last name is Mateus. He and several Western Michigan University football players were cast in the film. I know this for fact because I worked at Scott's iron Campus in Kalamazoo, Michigan. He and several of his friends were close friends with the owner and were in the restaurant almost daily. They also built a loft bed for me in the dorms.
Question: Could someone please explain the goat in Xerxes' 'sex room' (for lack of a better word). The scene before Xerxes offers the hunchback Ephialtes everything, this scene begins with a shot of a goat with human hands playing an instrument and (I believe) smoking something. Does Xerxes have a goat fetish or something? Could someone kindly explain this for me.
Answer: The scene is meant to show that Xerxes has exotic creatures/slaves from every corner of the world. In the reality of the film, a goat-headed musician would certainly qualify.
Question: When Travis goes into his fitness phase, it shows him hovering his fist over the stove fire. Why is he doing this? What does that achieve?
Answer: It helps him create a tolerance for pain. As we see, he certainly gets a lot of that dished out to him.
Question: We see Harold playing the guitar and singing in Anna's house. What is the name of the song which he is singing?
Chosen answer: It's called "Whole Wide World" by Wreckless Eric.
Question: In the scene where Tommy believes he is being made, right after he walks into the room you hear him say "Oh no!" right before he is shot. Tommy obviously realizes that he was set up. However, what is it that he sees in the room that tips him off?
Answer: He was expecting a crowded room full of friends congratulating him. Also it was common knowledge among the mafia that being walked into an empty room when you were due to be made meant you were about to be executed, so Tommy likely knew he'd met his end just moments before the shot.
Answer: A man being 'made' is an event shrouded in ceremony. The top people in the family are there, among others to congratulate the new soldier. Tommy walked into an empty room.
Just as others have pointed out, the film implies Tommy realised something was wrong the moment he walked in and saw the place was empty...no other "made men" there for the ceremony. However, I always wondered why he hadn't caught on to what was happening when he saw there were only a couple vehicles parked out in the driveway.
Answer: Either the fact that the room was empty (being made is a big ceremonial event with many people) or he felt the gun pressed against the back of his head right before they shot him.
Answer: There should have been more people waiting for him.
Answer: Wasn't the floor covered with a plastic sheet? That would have given it away.
Or it was a floor with no carpet (tiled, I believe)...easier to mop up.
Question: Maybe I missed something, but how was Esther able to fool everyone practically all her life and hide the fact that she's a 33-year old sociopath? When Kate finally learns the truth by getting the phone call, they show a photo of the "real" Esther, so at least those records of her exist somewhere. How could the boarding school not have known her true identity?
Answer: The boarding school was going by the falsified records that Esther had with her. They did not suspect anything, so they had no reason to dig any further at the time.
Answer: High quality makeup was an important part of her disguise as the alternative ending make apparent. Her fake freckles were the master's touch.
Chosen answer: In the original novella it is revealed that Andy smuggled $500 into the prison inside of his rectum. During an interview in 2004 Robbins incorrectly quoted the amount as being $100. The narration up until Red's release is provided as Red writes his account of the events while still in prison, and employs the same method to smuggle the story out. But since the issue of Andy smuggling in $500 into the prison isn't addressed in the movie, we should assume that he smuggled it in. In addition to this, the wardens scams are described as "near slave labor." From this we can assume that it is possible the inmates are getting paid (an incredibly small) wage. Perhaps Andy, with his financial knowledge, knows how to haggle, barter and stretch a dollar. One last (but not as likely) scenario is that Red allows some sort of lay by system to inmates.