Question: Why did Elizabeth lie to the pirates about her last name?
Ssiscool
17th Dec 2019
Everybody Loves Raymond (1996)
Question: Does Ray ever stand up for Debra when his mother insults her?
13th Dec 2019
Die Hard (1988)
Question: The armoured vehicle that gets sent in when the SWAT team are struggling to get in, before they're even attacked...what's that meant to actually achieve? If it's just meant to smash the doors, the men with guns could do that. And if not...will it just sit there?
Answer: I believe it is supposed to be that it was a precautionary measure and probably standard operating procedure to have it on site when dealing with a terrorist situation. To have it at the ready for if they needed it. Not only this, but a large armored vehicle like that could serve as physiological warfare to make the terrorist more fearful merely by it just being there. A show of strength. As for using it on the door, yes, guys with guns can smash those doors. But guys with guns are still targets to be shot at especially though glass doors. The armored vehicle can smash through it and get the men inside without exposing them to small arms fire.
But why send the armoured car into the lobby before being attacked? And why send it in in the first place? Once it's in the lobby it becomes a sitting duck. Easy pickings for when the occupants decide to disembark.
In some cases, maybe. But the vehicle itself still provides cover for the men in it. They usually would exit from the back or the top, and have that as something to hide against or shoot from. Also, most armored SWAT vehicles like that usually have a very high powered water cannon on the top that has the pressure of a fire truck. This can quickly subdue any hostile forces and knock their defenses down, giving the SWAT ample time to make their move while the enemy is still recovering. Not only this, but the vehicle can have inside more equipment the SWAT members can use, like throwing out smoke and flash bang grenades, or have riot shields as the exit. But this at least gets them inside and up where they can do good. If they tried to walk up to the door without cover, they would be easy pickings from small arms fire and snipers.
Good answer. I would add that presumably, the SWAT vehicle could be put in reverse, and once the front entrance was breached, it would back up. Also, this being a movie, it's shown that the overall police and F.B.I. response is supposed to be somewhat bungled, with different egotistical characters vying for control. Plot wise, it shows how well armed the "terrorists" are supposed to be by blowing up the SWAT vehicle with a missile, and how they anticipate and outsmart the police's every move. This is not reality.
11th Dec 2019
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017)
8th Nov 2007
Matilda (1996)
Question: Is that a tissue stuck in Miss Honey's watch band? And if it is, why is it there?
11th Dec 2019
The Big Bang Theory (2007)
Question: Why doesn't Amy even once wear pants?
Answer: Amy does not wear pants because Mayim Bialik does not wear them in her personal life. She is Jewish and observes the Judaic custom of modesty and only wears skirts. The Big Bang producers allowed her to incorporate this practice into her Amy character.
28th Nov 2019
Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (1992)
Question: Are there any deleted scenes?
Answer: While I can't find any definitive scenes that have been deleted prior to theatrical release, there was supposed to be a scene involving Kevin having a similar experience with the aftershave as in the first film. Although I can't find a definitive reason to why. There is also an edited version for TV where the scene from the World Trade Centre is removed following the infamous terrorist attacks on September 11th 2001.
21st Oct 2009
Home Alone (1990)
Question: Maybe I missed it, but did the McAllisters even bother to call home? I don't remember them calling the house at all. Why wouldn't that be the first thing they do? Kevin seems to be pretty independent for his age. He might have not answered the door, but I'm sure he would have answered the phone.
Chosen answer: They did but the power and phone lines were down due to a tree branch that had fallen on them the night before the family left. A flight attendant on their plane mentions that attempts had been made to call the McAllisters' home but "the phones are still out of order".
But how did he call the police at the end if the phone lines were down.
That was several days later. Clearly the phone lines were repaired over the course of the film.
It's ridiculous though that the phones are apparently working by the time they land (Kate's SIL calls everyone on their street). Yet none of them try the house again.
Answer: That is also how Kevin was able to order his cheese pizza from Little Nero's.
Answer: The phone lines were fixed by the end of the movie. Remember, this takes place over the course of several days.
Answer: It's also possible they don't think he's at the house still since the cops did attempt to stop by and see if he was home, but received no answer after ringing the bell. Or they did try to call and left a message, but Kevin may not have thought to check the phone messages if he was out of the house and didn't expect anyone to call. He also didn't want anyone to return until the day prior to Christmas, by which point the mom was already en route and the dad and remaining kids had a plan to come home on Christmas morning.
Answer: The next day, after the cop shows up to check the house, while the Wet Bandits are in the house next door, the phone rings and the answering machine picks up, allowing Peter to leave a message. If the next-door neighbor's phone is working, wouldn't it only make sense for Peter to immediately call his own house? Even if Kevin hasn't returned home from shoplifting a toothbrush and doesn't answer the phone, Peter should still be able to leave a message on an answering machine and most likely keep calling over and over until Kevin answers the phone.
4th Dec 2019
Pokemon (1998)
Pokemon, I Choose You! - S1-E1
Question: Why did Pikachu dislike Ash during the episode?
Answer: Well he had just caught him in the wild. Didn't even catch him with a traditional poke ball but like tied him up with a rope. So I would imagine so, yes.
You would imagine yes what? What are you talking about).
Sorry, I misread the question. I thought you were asking "DOES" he dislike Ash, not Why. It's been a while since I've seen the full episode. But from what I recall, Pikachu was wild, and Ash caught him through unconventional means without a pokeball. Tying him up with rope and stuff. So that's a good reason for any animal to not like someone when forced into a captive state in such a way.
That doesn't answer my question.
21st Nov 2019
Pokemon (1998)
Question: Why hasn't Ash's pikachu evolved into raichu?
Answer: I don't think so. Pikachu needs a thunderstone to evolve and I think in that episode Pikachu said it was happy the way it was.
Answer: He refused to! He is also not the only Pokemon in the series to have done that, the first time in episode 14 fighting a Raichu, and then other times in the series (episode 540 comes to mind). Pokemon have their own free will (for being a bunch of critters locked in tiny balls...) and some are so happy with themselves that they prefer not to turn into their evolved version. Which usually is way less cute, incidentally.
Unlike most Pokemon which evolve as they gain levels, Pikachu can't evolve into Raichu unless it uses a Thunder Stone. In Indigo League episode "Electric Shock Showdown", Pikachu explicitly refuses to evolve, wanting to win its rematch with Lt. Surge's Raichu itself. Pikachu again refused to evolve in the Diamond and Pearl episode "Pika and Goliath!", simply resolving to train harder.
What I heard is that pikachu is the mascot of the franchise, and evolving it into raichu the anime would enrage a lot of pokemon fans.
Even if Pikachu had evolved into raichu, wouldn't there be a risk that it would decrease the number of the show's viewers?
17th Oct 2019
The Hunger Games (2012)
Question: How do they know when someone in the arena is dead?
Answer: The tracking chip that is inserted into their arm tracks their vital signs. From this, the control centre is able to monitor all the tributes heart rates. As such, they can see when their heart has stopped and declare them dead and fire the cannon. Plus they have got the ability to bring a camera up at any location to help visually confirm the death of a tribute.
Answer: They are tracking and watching everyone. They have a whole control room to run the games.
Answer: As mentioned, the tracking devices would indicate if a person was dead. However, even if a fallen tribute was still alive when removed from the arena, the evil and inhumane capital would execute them. Up until Katniss and Peta were declared dual victors, there was always only one survivor/winner of the Hunger Games.
Would the Capitol just simply not remove the tribute if they're still alive? At least in film 1 the bodies aren't removed straight away. Take Rue for example - she was killed and Katniss had plenty of time to arrange her body.
It really depended on the circumstances. If a tribute was barely alive with no hope of recovery, then the game keeper could decide when to remove them, dead or not. Other bodies may have been removed at a time that was simply convenient to do so. It did take time to remove Rue, but basically, because of Katniss arranging the flowers around Rue's body the way she did, singing, mourning her, saluting Rue's district, etc. Seneca Crane, the gamekeeper, knew it made a good show for the television viewers. He was wringing out all the drama and emotion that he could because the viewers loved seeing that. That was the way the games were operated.
16th Oct 2019
Bones (2005)
Question: Pickering is interviewing the team from the Jeffersonian. When she gets to Bones, she mentions someone's name and Bones rings a phone number and Pickering is told not to move and all her notes are to be destroyed. What is Bones' relationship to the person Pickering mentioned?
Chosen answer: Pickering states the name "Juan Guzman" and during the run of the show we are never told who he is, or why Brennan had been in Cuba and met with this Juan Guzman. We don't know if there is any kind of "relationship" between Brennan and Guzman. A bit frustrating, but I like how this short scene shuts down Agent Pickering's entire review, and it hints at Brennan's career history and her level of security clearance.
Do you remember when Bones was telling Angela about the time she was on one of her out of the country trips, and she was thrown in a dark cell for what she later found out was 3 days? She was crying and looked terrified as she remembered this. She had that same look as someone who was remembering past trauma when Pickering said this name. I kind of always thought that "Juan Guzman" was the one who did that.
12th Sep 2019
Bean (1997)
9th May 2004
Titanic (1997)
Question: After Rose has said about Dr Freud, she goes outside to the edge of the deck. Later, Cal comes outside and says something to Rose that you can just hear. What does Cal say to Rose?
Answer: When Cal grabs Rose's arm she says, "Do you mind?" Cal responds with, "I hope you're proud of this."
What does that mean "hope you're proud of this"?
I think that means that Rose has embarrassed Cal and Ruth in front of Ismay and Andrews. The fact that Rose knows who Freud is and Ismay doesn't shows that as a woman in those times Rose seems to know more than she's "allowed" to know. Hence why Cal says to Molly something like "I might have to start minding what Rose reads from now on."
2nd Nov 2018
Hunter Killer (2018)
Question: During the final scene, Gerard Butler gets a Russian warship to fire two missiles upon Russian defense headquarters, blowing up the bad guys and ending the saga and movie. How did he do this? (02:02:15)
20th Aug 2019
House, M.D. (2004)
16th Jul 2019
Fast & Furious (2009)
Question: Why was the money wrapped up in aluminium foil?
Answer: When criminals transport large amounts of money, it is often wrapped in foil and plastic to protect it from accidental damage from liquids and fire. There is also an urban legend that wrapping it in foil will keep it from being detected by scanning equipment.
21st May 2019
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
27th Jul 2019
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Question: Why did Sirius slash the Fat Lady entrance? and if it wasn't him, presumably it was Lupin, but again, why?
Answer: Sirius was attempting to break into the Gryffindor common room to find and kill Peter Pettigrew (Wormtail), who had been disguised as Ron's pet rat, Scabbers for the past twelve years.
Following on from this answer, when the Fat Lady would not give him access to the tower because he didn't have the password, Sirius (not Lupin) became angry and slashed the painting in an attempt to get her to open and allow him access. However, she still refused him access and then left the portrait, essentially sealing off the common room.
27th Jul 2019
Furious 7 (2015)
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: Elizabeth lied because she knows that being the governor's daughter makes her a valuable hostage who would either be ransomed or used for leverage. A commoner girl is far less useful.
raywest ★
What would the pirates ransom Elizabeth for? Gold silver and jewels?
Possibly for gold but she was more valuable for obtaining her father's cooperation to give them whatever they wanted (i.e. a safe escape, finding the coin, etc.) in exchange for not harming her.
raywest ★
"Safe escape" they can't die. "Finding the coin" the coin was already on board their ship.
She doesn't know that.
lionhead