TedStixon

Question: Couldn't Nigel have attempted to return the jewel himself instead of sending Dr. Bravestone and his associates to do it?

Answer: Nigel, being an NPC, doesn't have the skills necessary to get to the shrine. He knows the group does, and that's why he sends them.

LorgSkyegon

Answer: No, he couldn't. As the other answer indicated, Nigel is not a person, he's a character created by Jumanji, and his entire purpose in the world of Jumanji is simply to deliver instructions to the players and welcome them into the world. It would undermine the entire game for him to try to return the jewel himself.

TedStixon

It would be pretty pointless to send Dr. Bravestone and his associates to return the jewel, if Nigel attempted to the jewel himself.

Answer: Nigel might actually be being selfish "Van Pelt will kill anyone who has the jewel, so instead of sacrificing myself, since it's my fault he found it, I'll give it to you guys and put you in danger. Cheerio."

Question: Is it just me or does Poe seem a bit more strict and tense in this movie? I understand it was a war but I just wanted to check?

THE GAMER NEXT DOOR

Answer: He seems a little more tense than the last two movies, but I think it's in keeping with the story. A lot was happening - Palpatine was back, there was an invasion in the planning, etc. It'd make sense for him to be tenser than usual.

TedStixon

28th Apr 2020

Halloween (2018)

Question: What happened to Allyson's boyfriend after she left the dance following their fight?

dewinela

Answer: It's never shown in the movie what happens. But there was a deleted scene where he got arrested for underage drinking after mouthing off to a police officer. Either way, he's safe for the time being, and the actor is currently slated to appear in the next sequel, "Halloween Kills."

TedStixon

17th Mar 2007

Silent Hill (2006)

Question: When the town first turns into "Dark Silent Hill", you can briefly see some sort of monster behind rose that shoots skyward. What monster is this? Is it Red Pyramid?

Answer: I thought it was just big pieces of the ground shooting upward. I didn't see pyramid head there at that time. Just pieces of silent hill shooting upward.

Michele Hedges

Answer: I would like to point out that Michele is very much correct. I submitted this question years and years ago, and it was based on my foggy memory of seeing the film for the first time in theaters. I've since watched the film a number of times on DVD and Blu-Ray, and it definitely is just pieces of the ground floating upwards through the air.

TedStixon

16th Jan 2018

Silent Hill (2006)

Question: How does the cop end up in the alternate Silent Hill? Alissa doesn't need her, and she shows up after Rose has already explored a little. I wouldn't expect Alissa to leave the opening to The dark Silent Hill open (not how you trap someone). Furthermore when it shifts from them and the spitting monster to the father and police, the police are already there, how did they not end up in the dark hill?

Answer: It's never explained in the film, but in all likelihood, it's feasible that Alessa brought her into the "fog world" in order to help Rose with her goal. Especially as she likely senses that Cybill is protective of children, and thus would want to help find Sharon. Or she simply was pulled in somehow when she was pursuing Rose. It's difficult to say, since the "rules" for how the town works in the film adaptation are not as clear as the rules from the original video-game, and there are plenty of changes.

Answer: All three died in the wreck. This is how they were able to enter the purgatory version of Silent Hill and why Alessa and Rose returned to their own home to find it similarly deserted.

Phixius

Nobody died in the car-wreck. This is a fan-theory that got out of control and contradicts not only the sequel (where it's blatantly shown they are alive), but this film's internal logic (which operates on the idea of there being multiple realities/dimensions) and the logic of the video-game source material. (Which similarly operates on the idea of there being multiple realities).

Any word on why Alessa and Rose returned to a home that was shrouded in fog just like Silent Hill, and why they and Christopher could not see one another? They left Silent Hill but remained in the alternate dimension? I'm genuinely curious because this is the first I've heard that their deaths were just a fan theory. I know Alessa was in the sequel, but I just chalked that up to the sequel being a really, really bad film.

Phixius

The implication at the end of the movie seems to be that Sharon and Dark Alessa merged back together into one person, and she is purposely keeping herself and Rose in the fog-world. While the movie itself isn't clear about why, a common interpretation is that Alessa wants to be together with Rose forever, perhaps to have a mother figure. (Which is definitely keeping with the film's themes of motherhood and the repeated mantra about mother being god in the eyes of a child.) The sequel is admittedly really bad and ret-cons this. But neither film indicates that they died.

TedStixon

17th Mar 2020

Die Hard (1988)

Question: While running away from the bad guys, John McClane severely wounds feet by stepping on broken glass. Wouldn't his feet be at risk of infections if they were as severely wounded as shown in the movie? He's feet don't appear to have any infections.

Answer: Infections take time to set in. The whole events of this film take place over 1 evening. Not long enough for an infection to set in. Especially since he receives medical attention at the end.

Ssiscool

How long would John have to go without getting medical for his feet to get infected?

Per a google search: "An infection can develop any time between two or three days after the cut occurred until it's healed."

TedStixon

Answer: Infections take a while to develop - the events of Die Hard are borderline real time, and given the injuries happen towards the end of the film, that's way too soon for any significant side effects.

Answer: As mentioned, it would take time for an infection to set in. Also, even though John had some nasty cuts, it doesn't necessarily mean they will become infected and could heal without any complications as long as the feet are cleaned and bandaged.

raywest

17th Mar 2020

Candyman (1992)

Question: There is a major issue that I've never seen addressed. Candyman kidnaps baby Anthony the day Helen is in Anne Marie's apartment. She is then arrested and bailed out later that day. Then the following day Candyman kills Bernadette and Helen is hospitalized. A month later she meets with Dr Burke. So at minimum we have a month and a day that Candyman has the newborn. Who cares for the baby who an entire month? Candyman?

Answer: I don't see how it's a major issue. It's pretty obvious we are to presume that Candyman takes care of the baby in the meantime so he can use it for his plan.

TedStixon

Answer: There is a scene where Candyman feeds the infant some honey. There isn't a need to stretch one's imagination to determine that he is the one that takes care of the infant during the entire period in question.

dewinela

15th Mar 2020

Galaxy Quest (1999)

Question: When the Proctector leaves spacedock, there are Thermians inside the spaceport watching it leave. Later on Mathesar says the Thermians on the Protector are the last ones left. What happened to the Thermians left behind at the spacedock?

Answer: I believe Mathesar was referring to both the Thermians on the Protector and at the base as being all that was left. Not just the ones on the Protector.

TedStixon

Mathesar meant only the Thermians on the Protector were the ones that were still left. The Protector does not go back to the base to pick up the Thermians that were left behind.

We do not know if the Protector went back to pick up the surviving Thermians at the spaceport, as the last act of the Thermians on the Protector was to separate the ship and send the GQ cast back to Earth. Maybe the Thermians did head back to the spaceport to reunite with the Thermians there.

Scott215

Answer: At 01:01:09, Jason says, "You can drop us off, and you guys can be back to your home planet before supper." Teb answers, "Oh, no, sir. We have no reason to go back." Jason then mentions family and friends. Then, Teb says, "We are all that is left." Based on the shocked silence that follows, it's apparent that Sarris has completed his plan to slaughter all other Thermians, as Mathesar had told Jason earlier.

Answer: Why, certainly they all were transported back to the ship after watching the great moment of the first undocking. After all they have the technology, right?

6th Mar 2020

General questions

I remember seeing a killer scarecrow movie about 20 years ago, but I can't seen to track down which one it was. It definitely wasn't the Asylum "Scarecrow" from 2002. All I remember is that there were human remains (or something else) in a box or casket that needed to be destroyed in order to kill the scarecrow. And I think they were destroyed by having a machine drop a large weight on them, which made the scarecrow explode. I also remember a scene where a character tries to burn the scarecrow and delivers the line "How about a little fire, scarecrow?!" from "Wizard of Oz." I remember the movie being quite bad... but in a fun B-movie kinda way. Anyone know what killer scarecrow movie it was?

TedStixon

Answer: I'll answer my own question. I did some digging and finally found out it was the 1995 movie "Night of the Scarecrow," directed by Jeff Burr.

TedStixon

4th Jun 2004

The Mummy (1999)

Question: The answer for another question made me wonder. If Imothep was alive when put in his sarcophagus, how can there be jars with his internal organs elsewhere? Wouldn't they still be in his body in order for him to be alive?

Answer: If you're referring to the only jars that are used in the movie, those are Anck Su Namun's organs. Not his. Near as I can tell, his organs were not taken, hence him being alive.

Nikki

They are his body parts; remember that he had to get the body parts from each of the adventurers to complete his resurrection (he left one guy without eyes or a tongue and sucked the life out of him).

No, they are Anck Su Namun's. The mummy steals the man's eyes and tongue because he's been decomposing and his own have rotted off. It's part of his regeneration process. He simply didn't have time to fully "suck him dry," as the movie puts it before Evie stumbles onto him.

TedStixon

Answer: He was buried alive as part of his punishment so they can't be his. They are Anck su Namun's. He needs them for when he resurrects her. He gets organs when he fulfills the curse by taking them from the men that opened the chest.

His organs were probably eaten by the bugs, if they weren't they probably decayed, hence why he needs to replace them with the organs of others.

The priests cut off his tongue as he was being linen wrapped, but I doubt it was placed in a canopic jar. But it kept him from doing invocations or screaming even though a wordless scream is possible with no tongue.

4th Jan 2020

Movie 43 (2013)

Answer: There have been several conflicting reasons given as to why this movie is called "Movie 43." Some people claim it's a reference to "rule 43 of the internet." (Although there are also several different conflicting versions of the 43rd rule of the internet, so this explanation is pretty shaky.) Some claim it's an inside joke between the main producer and his kids about a fictional "banned film" they heard about called "Movie 43" that didn't really exist. And some people claim it's just a random title they attached to the film with no actual meaning.

TedStixon

29th Dec 2019

Logan (2017)

Answer: It's just a continuity mistake. The blade rips a hole in the shoe, but the hole disappears later on... that's a continuity mistake. It's definitely not a plot hole. A plot hole is more a gap or contradiction in a film's internal logic, or when a film leaves out vital information. (Ex. If a character is established as having a deadly nut allergy, but is eating nuts later on with no ill effect... that would be a plot-hole).

TedStixon

Answer: I would classify that as a plot hole.

raywest

It would only be a plot hole if somehow the lack of holes in the shoes was written into the plot that some effect on the plot. Of course, someone would probably correct the entry by saying she could have had a 2nd pair or they bought a new pair if it was integral to the plot.

Bishop73

Question: Why doesn't the Interceptor fight back against the Dutchman and the Pearl?

Answer: I'm assuming you're actually referring to Beckett's ship the Endeavour in the third film "At World's End." (The Interceptor was destroyed in the first film.) If that's the case, the ship is simply outgunned and the captain Beckett freezes and doesn't make any commands. He doesn't know what to do because there's no way he could win. The call is then made to abandon ship. Hence, they don't fight back.

TedStixon

And without an order to attack, they were simply not able to. Beckett had hoped the Dutchman would be on his side. And was simply gobsmacked at the turn of events.

Ssiscool

11th Dec 2019

It (2017)

Question: Why is it that the gang never got eaten by the IT but every other child who encountered it did? I'm just looking for an in-depth answer like what where they doing right?

Answer: Well, for starters, fear evidently makes the children taste better. So screwing with them and holding off is almost like adding seasoning to meat. The way I took it as he eats the other children simply because he needs to eat, whereas he toys with the Losers' Club to have something better than just regular "food." They're like a dessert in a way. And I also kinda got the impression that Pennywise knew these kids were stronger, especially together, so he was also trying to wear them down more and weaken them.

TedStixon

Answer: It's because the kids were each together, were friends, and weren't scared of IT that they could defeat IT.

11th Dec 2019

It Chapter Two (2019)

Question: When Eddie takes a face full of projectile sludge from the leper, is there any significance to the song "Angel of the Morning" playing, or was it just a random attempt at a joke?

Phaneron

Answer: I think it's more of an attempt at a silly joke, juxtaposing the insane imagery with a tender song. But I've also seen the suggestion that it was an Easter Egg/reference to the book "The Langoliers," in which the song is mentioned. (And given the "It" films have some general Stephen King Easter Eggs referencing things from his other books, that makes sense).

TedStixon

11th Dec 2019

Batman and Robin (1997)

Question: How does Ivy get Nora's snowflake necklace without getting her costume soaked in the cyro fluid or whatever it is?

Rob245

Answer: Maybe she drained the cryo-tube first? Maybe she did get wet but had dried off by the time we see her again? Maybe Bane did it for her? Pick whatever answer works best for you. It's a really small, insignificant detail in the film with plenty of potential answers.

TedStixon

Thanks though keep in mind she wouldn't have a clue as to how it works since she's a botanist not a scientist in cyro genetics.

Rob245

She pulled the plug on the thing so Nora died and the tank drained (either automatically or Ivy did it). She just took the necklace off the body.

lionhead

Answer: She most likely used her mind control potion on someone and had them do it for her.

15th Nov 2019

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

Question: I don't get it. When Peter and Aunt May are at the bank discussing savings with the teller, Aunt May suddenly kicks the teller. What was the point of that?

Answer: May says she's giving piano lessons again to try and convince the bank teller she's making enough money to refinance her home. Peter absent-mindedly says "You are?", which reveals that May may have been telling a fib. She was trying to kick Pete to signal him to not say anything, but accidentally kicked the teller instead.

TedStixon

14th Nov 2019

Incredibles 2 (2018)

Question: Where does the family live now? Did Winston let them stay in his house forever because he isn't using it?

THE GAMER NEXT DOOR

Answer: The movie doesn't give an answer, since it doesn't really matter in the context of the story. But in all likelihood, the family will continue to reside in the mansion, at least for the time being. Winston loves the Supers, so he'd probably be more than happy to let them stay there.

TedStixon

12th Nov 2019

The Fifth Element (1997)

Question: Corben and Leeloo fly to Fhloston Paradise planet in spaceship at hyper-speed (around speed of light). And the flight takes long enough for the spaceship crew to put passengers asleep. Let's say the flight at hyper-speed takes 2 hours. That means it would take 2 hours for radio signal originated from Fhloston to reach Earth. But 1) After Corben enters his hotel room on Fhloston he gets call from his mother who is on Earth. And they are talking over the phone in real time with no signal delay! 2) President and his cabinet - who are on Earth - are observing events on Fhloston via radio with no signal delay! How that might be? I realise that movie events take place in the future where new advanced communication technologies might be invented. But the speed of light is a universal constant that can't be changed or exceeded. So it would still take 2 hours (in our example) for the signal to be exchanged between planets. How come Earth and Fhloston communicate each other with no signal delay?

grrench

Answer: I think the issue here is that you are trying to apply real-world logic to an overly fantastical film. There's not necessarily a feasible or realistic explanation... but that's okay, because the film doesn't need one. It's just not that type of movie. And that's part of the fun of this film. It's a wacky, crazy movie. (Not to mention, instantaneous communication when there should be a delay is a pretty common trope in all of sci-fi.) You just gotta go with it. The best possible explanation I could give you is "futuristic sci-fi technology somehow makes it possible." But again, it's just not that type of film where it really matters.

TedStixon

11th Nov 2019

Scream (1996)

Question: Why does Stu go along with Billy's plan? He's got nothing to gain. That and why kill Sidney? She can't help what her mother did with Billy's father.

Rob245

Answer: Stu is simply crazy. Probably brought down by Billy, sucked into his psychosis, sometimes that can happen if Stu is mentally unstable and easily manipulated. We don't know where his instability comes from, but its positive Billy has had a bad influence on him and brought him down this path of killing.

lionhead

Answer: To add to the other answer, Stu briefly mentions "peer pressure" as his reason for going along with Billy's plan. Sure, he's being slightly sarcastic when he says it... but I think that it's a hint to his motivation. He's already somewhat unstable (his hyperactive personality throughout the film backs this up), and I think the implication is that Billy gave him the final "push" that put him over the edge into full-on violent insanity.

TedStixon

Answer: Some people are influenced by a "leader" friend. They don't make many decisions for themselves. Stu apparently latched onto Billy at some point, and is willing to join him in the murders. There are real-life cases in which murderers had associates who obeyed them.

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.