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?
Phaneron
26th Mar 2009
Watchmen (2009)
25th May 2015
Watchmen (2009)
Question: Why do Rorschach and Night Owl go searching at Veidt Enterprises for further clues about Pyramid Deliveries? They go there after interrogating the guy at Happy Harry's about Roy Victor Chess. He tells them that Janey Slater had him give the sealed envelope (with the assasination orders) to Chess. So is this the link, that they know Slater is also working for Veidt Enterprises? Furthermore: Can it be assumed that Slater was in on the staged assassination on Adrian Veidt, as she was delivering the envelope? Or did she also not know what was in it?
Answer: They go to Veidt's place because they think he will have business contacts that will help them uncover more about what is going on at Pyramid Transnational. It's only once they look through Veidt's office that they learn that Pyramid Transnational is a subsidiary of Veidt's corporation. The man at the bar mentioned that Janey's job at Pyramid was to give work to ex-cons, so it's unlikely she was in on the red herring assassination attempt on Veidt. She would have just been doing her job to give assignments to people under her.
7th Jan 2016
The Dark Knight (2008)
Question: Why doesn't the movie acknowledge the actress change for Rachel? I mean everyone who watched Batman Begins will be clueless if they didn't know that Katie Holmes chose not to reprise her role. But the movie never explains this and are people just supposed to go along with it?
Chosen answer: Actors are often changed between movies, occasionally with acknowledgment, more often not. James Bond immediately comes to mind, Jennifer in Back to the Future, Bruce Banner and Rhodey in the Marvel films, Clarice Starling in the Silence of the Lambs/Hannibal...the list goes on. The recasting of Evelyn in The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor got a passing nod to the audience (actually, as did the first recasting of Bond), but most of the time audiences are just expected to accept the change and move on.
Answer: I'm really not sure how you think a movie can address an actor being replaced. Unless it's something like Deadpool or Wayne's World, where characters speak directly to the audience, there's no real practical way for a movie to openly acknowledge that one of its characters is being played by someone new.
26th Mar 2021
The Falcon and the Winter Soldier (2021)
Question: Why does Bucky rip his jacket sleeve off before jumping out of the plane? Just for the sake of an audience reveal to demonstrate his artificial arm?
Chosen answer: The sleeve probably would have been ripped to shreds in battle anyway. He was just saving time by ripping it himself. Also, gunfighters would take off their coats in a duel or an arm wrestler rolling up his sleeve.
Answer: Aside from visual aesthetics and it being nice to see the metal arm. In world/practically I think (and I believe this is the reason why he tends to not have a left sleeve in most action we've seen him in prior films) it's also to assist with mobility during fights. The metal arm likely behaves a little differently than a human/bone and flesh arm does - and restricting that in a sleeve during a fight (especially in a thicker jacket sleeve) might mess with his reflexes. So removing the sleeve probably assists with the mobility of that arm.
22nd Mar 2021
The Incredible Hulk (1996)
Question: Why does General Ross keep trying to kill Hulk?
Answer: The Hulk is a giant brute who smashes everything in his path when he is angry. In Ang Lee's "Hulk," General Ross, played by Sam Elliot, explains it to his daughter.
Answer: Because he feels the Hulk is a threat to all life on Earth, and particularly his daughter's close relationship with Bruce Banner puts her at risk when Hulk enters the equation.
Why does Ross think the hulk is a threat?
Because the Hulk is nearly mindless and goes on destructive rampages with high risk of collateral damage.
If that's the case, what's the problem with the way general Ross judges the hulk?
3rd Mar 2021
Game of Thrones (2011)
Question: Some of the Free Folk are reluctant to join Jon's fight against Boltons in Winterfell. Jon tries to convince them. And suddenly, Wun, the sole giant stands up and says "Snow." then leaves. What does he mean?
Answer: Giants only really speak the Old Tongue (in the book one of the Night's Watch, Leathers translates for Wun). So he just grunts out "Snow" as his pledge.
21st Jan 2021
Watchmen (2009)
Question: During Jon's backstory into becoming Dr. Manhattan, why did Janey leave Jon in the chamber instead of letting him out? There was plenty of time for Janey to get Jon out of there, but she simply walked away.
Answer: Wally says "we can't override the time lock." Janey sees that he's locked in there and leaves because she can't bear to watch him die. That's why she bursts into tears as soon as she leaves the room. If it was possible to open the door, Wally would have done so.
20th Jan 2021
X-Men 2 (2003)
13th Oct 2020
3rd Rock from the Sun (1996)
Question: I'm watching this show on an app called "Tubi TV" and none of the 1st season episodes have the opening narration from James Earl Jones. I remember watching this on TV, but it would have been reruns and I can't remember hearing the narration then either (granted, I may have forgotten hearing it, but it's so distinct and unique that I don't think I would have forgotten it). When the show was in rerun syndication, was the narration removed? Why? Just to ad 30-seconds of ad time? Why would the narration be removed on streaming services where ad time isn't an issue? Do they not have access to the originals? Has anyone seen the narration removed anywhere else?
Answer: I have the entire series on DVD, and season 1 doesn't have the narration on it either. Perhaps the studio cut it to avoid having to pay residuals to James Earl Jones. Some episodes on my DVDs also seem to be missing scenes or parts of scenes that appeared in original airings, but were removed in syndication, so it seems just as likely that all episodes that were supplied for DVD replication or for streaming services received versions that were the edited for syndication.
Thank you for this insight. Interesting the DVDs don't have it.
29th Dec 2020
The Simpsons Movie (2007)
Question: Why did Grandpa join the angry mob? It would make much more sense if he was either on his family's side or simply remained completely neutral.
16th Dec 2020
Beethoven (1992)
8th Dec 2020
Insidious (2010)
Question: I've heard rumors there's an Unrated version of this film - possibly released on BluRay in Germany? I've hunted for more info on this, but not having a lot of luck. Any chance the rumors are true?
6th Aug 2018
Breaking Bad (2008)
Question: When Saul buys Jesse's house from his parents, he said that he showed their lawyer, Mr. Gardner, "all the pertinent financials", meaning $875,000 in cash available to buy the house. Jesse only had $450,000 and that money was not in any account. How did Saul show Mr. Gardner that he had $875,000 in cash?
Answer: Saul is a criminal himself. It's not past his capabilities to forge some documents to show the 857k is available.
Forged documents by Saul is most likely the correct answer.
Answer: In all likelihood, he sold some more meth.
1st Dec 2020
The Punisher (2004)
Question: Why didn't they have Jigsaw as the villain since he's one of The Punisher's better known enemies?
Answer: They were actually planning on using Jigsaw as the villain in the sequel until Thomas Jane and director Jonathan Hensleigh exited the project and the studio rebooted the character with Punisher: War Zone. They probably just wanted to show the Punisher's origin first, which would allow him to be fully established by the time a sequel came around, and they would have more to screen time to establish Jigsaw.
1st Dec 2020
The Punisher (2004)
4th Apr 2006
From Hell (2001)
Question: Why is it a "known fact" that Mary Kelley was killed by Jack the Ripper? Her murder differs in many ways from the others. She was killed indoors, she wasn't wearing any clothes, her body was so savaged that she was unrecognisable. The other murders took place outdoors with victims fully dressed and only partly savaged. Considering the number of violent deaths that took place in London at this time (most of them by slashing the throat) she could have been murdered by anybody. I know Abberline was called to the scene of the crime but that doesn't prove the Ripper actually did it and Abberline was called to more murder scenes than just the five official Ripper ones. What makes people so sure that Jack the Ripper killed Mary Kelley?
Answer: As the Ripper was never caught and interrogated, it can never be said with absolute certainty that Kelly was one of his victims. Her death does, however, fit the pattern of Ripper murders quite well with regard to time, general location, methodology and class of victim. There was also a noted trend of increasing levels of mutilation as the murders went on, so, while the damage was considerably more extensive that the previous killings, that also fits with a noted trend of the Ripper murder - it's also worth considering that, as Kelly was apparently his final kill, he may well have wanted to sign off with a particularly grand statement, hence the extreme level of mutilation to the body. This would also explain why the attack uncharacteristically took place indoors - what Jack had in mind for Kelly would take a considerable period of undisturbed time, more than could be guaranteed in an on-street attack. It's also believed that Jack had been interrupted during the murder of Elizabeth Stride on his previous night of violence some weeks earlier - this could also have led him to alter his modus operandi to ensure that this would not be repeated. So, no, it cannot be stated categorically that Kelly was a victim of Jack the Ripper, however the evidence suggests a high probability that this was the case, enough so that many people consider this to be a fact.
It wasn't Mary Jane Kelly.
The question pertained to the real-life Ripper murders, not what we see in this film. It was indeed Mary Kelly in real life.
18th Nov 2020
The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear (1991)
Question: During the scene when Frank and Jane are making a clay pot, what caused the potter's wheel to go berserk and splatter them with clay? (00:50:18)
Answer: The foot pedal controls the speed of the wheel. Frank puts his foot on top of Jane's foot and pushes the pedal down all the way. The rapid acceleration and the fact they took their hands off the clay caused it to go everywhere.
Wouldn't that hurt Jane as Frank's foot is applying pressure to hers while pressing down on the pedal?
Not really, you can see his foot gently presses on top of hers, and both their feet cause the pedal to slope towards the floor, which would decrease the amount of pressure Frank's foot applies to Jane's. On top of that, different people have different pain thresholds.
This is not exactly related to the question asked, but part of the scene that I could never really figure out. It showed that Jane made something in the shape of a square out of a piece of clay. What did she make and how could she have made it in only seconds with her eyes closed? I also don't quite understand how the clay could've possibly gotten to where she obtained it to begin with (asking in a way of abiding by the guidelines).
The scene cuts to them shaping clay without showing any of the set up. So we don't see how it got to that point, so she didn't do it in a second with her eyes closed. It's just a parody of the scene from "Ghost." In real life, using a clay wheel makes shaping clay faster, although it takes practice. If you put your hand, or a tool, on top and press down, you create a hole (which we aren't shown). It looks like Jane is just making a vase.
I really apologize, but I was referring to after the vase was inadvertently destroyed. It was after Frank apparently had a bodybuilder's physique (which was an obvious body double joke). Then it showed Jane making something out of clay in such a short time with her eyes closed. So sorry about that. Thank you for the reply.
The fact she made it so quickly was a gag, but she makes an ashtray. I would say the joke about that is people will often smoke after sex (or there's a perceived joke they do). It seems the clay comes off Frank's body, like it was there when the clay went everywhere.
Thank you very much. Yes, I never could get that part of the joke no matter how many times I have watched it. Thanks again for the help.
Answer: It wouldn't take a lot of pressure to operate the pedal, probably less than a car's accelerator.
9th Nov 2020
The Sandlot (1993)
28th Oct 2020
The Sandlot (1993)
Question: I know the pool was a busy one when filmmakers shot the pool scene, but how were they able to get permission to get in and get all those extras in the film?
Answer: The filmmakers would have rented out the entire pool and closed it off to the public. This movie was filmed in Utah, and many businesses in Utah, at least at the time the film was made, were closed on Sundays, so it's possible they rented out the pool on a day that there was no business being conducted anyway. I believe this was all done in one day, because I attended a panel with Patrick Renna at a convention in 2019, and he mentioned the day they filmed at the pool wasn't particularly warm.
10th Sep 2007
Saw II (2005)
Question: After Xavier threw Amanda in the syringe pit, and Amanda finds the key for the next door, WHICH CAME WITH AN ANTIDOTE. Even though, they couldn't open the door. why didn't ANYONE USED THE ANTIDOTE?
Answer: I think it said the antidote was behind the door, not an exit.
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: 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.
Garlonuss ★
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.
Phaneron ★