Question: There may not be an explanation to this, but did Exley know what the DA and Chief were talking about in the end when he is being interrogated and they ask him why he is smiling. When he answers and says "A Hero?", I presumed he was simply thinking like they did and that when those that were interrogating left the room, he overheard a bit of their conversation and just put two and two together. The reason I ask, was there any evidence he was able to hear them (like the door was slightly open or somehow he knew how to hear them even in the interrogation room).
Lummie
22nd Jun 2020
La Confidential (1997)
3rd Jun 2008
Law & Order (1990)
Question: In one of the court scenes it states the date as the 26th of December. Upon a bit of searching it doesn't seem to fall as a holiday in the New York Supreme Court holidays calendar. While the day is generally observed as a holiday in many countries I am not sure about whether it is observed in any states of the United States?
Chosen answer: December 25 is observed and some places close on the 24 (or just close early). The 26th is a normal work day.
24th Feb 2006
House of Sand and Fog (2003)
Question: I read on a website that one difference in the ending from the book is that Kathy is arrested. Can someone tell me if the ending in the book is much different from the film and what exactly is Kathy arrested for?
Chosen answer: In the book, when Behrani learns that his son has died at the hospital, his grief turns into rage at Lester and Kathy. He returns to the house. He finds Kathy there and strangles her. Believing she is dead, he puts on his uniform, then suffocates his wife, who is sleeping in the bedroom. Then he suffocates himself. Kathy revives and finds their bodies. Both she and Lester are arrested. As they await trial, Kathy, who is in jail, has been pretending that she is unable to speak since Behrani attempted to strangle her. She mimes a request for a cigarette.
3rd Aug 2005
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Question: Why does Andy go to Norton (warden) about the information that Tommy provides him rather than see his lawyer? While he may not think Norton would go to the lengths he did to keep him there, what advantage would seeing the warden before a lawyer do?
Chosen answer: You're right--it's a character mistake, but an explainable one. Andy probably figured that because he was doing so much work for the Warden (accounting for dirty money, kickbacks, tax compliance, etc.), that the Warden would use his power to get Andy a new trial. Sounds like a fair trade--Andy makes sure there's no way for anyone to disover the illegality of the laundering, and the Warden gets Andy pardoned. What Andy didn't realize, however, was that the Warden didn't want to risk having Andy, after his pardon & release, reveal the details of the illegal schemes that were going on. So to make sure Andy got the message that he was going nowhere and would reveal nothing, he was give the two months in solitary confinement (as you know from the movie, of course).
Answer: It was the 1940's to 1960's. Prisoners did not have the same rights and access to the legal system as they do today. Look what happened when a new prisoner cried...In those days all they had to say was "he got out of line and we had to beat him and he died." Prisons were not scrutinized - they were there to hold "bad" people and no one really cared what went on in them.
27th Jul 2005
Monk (2002)
Question: I have been trying to figure out how the death in the episode was linked to the suspect. Now I understand that being she was the housekeeper and that identifying the body would identify who she was and make him an likely suspect (he knew her, the secret bank accounts etc.) but how would that be enough to arrest him or even prosecute him for that matter? The body was not located on his property, there was no physical evidence that he killed her, he never made any incriminating statements and so on. The case seems far too circumstantial to be able to arrest him.
Chosen answer: He'd also murdered the wig shop owner, though, and the implication was that SFPD was gathering more evidence there. Monk puts together a pretty impressive batch of circumstantial evidence for both murders, and that's enough for Stottlemeyer to arrest Harley. Many murder cases go to trial with less, and successfully convict despite a lack of absolute proof, which is, sadly, far less abundant in real life than it is on TV. Lacking concrete proof, guilt must then be established "beyond a reasonable doubt."
13th Jun 2005
Donnie Darko (2001)
Question: Two questions I had about the cellar at the end. What was the point of Donnie and his friends going to the cellar towards the end? Was he looking for something in particular? And the second thing was why were those bullies from school there at the same time? Did it have something to do with the story told in the film about how kids would try to steal stuff from Sparrow's house?
Chosen answer: By going to the cellar, Donnie has continued to set in motion the events that will return the engine to his proper time. He burns down Jim Cunningham's house, which causes Kitty to be at his trial, which causes Donnie's Mom to take the kids to California, which causes her to take the earlier flight causing the engine to fall back through the portal to the normal universe. In much the same way, his Mom had to leave so they could have a party, which is where Donnie and Gretchen make/fall in love. He takes her to that house to talk to Roberta Sparrow, and it is when he notices the cellar door that the events unfold to motivate him. If Donnie lives, Gretchen dies. He must sacrifice himself to return time to normal so that Gretchen will live. The boys were taking stuff from Roberta's house as referenced earlier in the movie, but played a key role in the events unfolding correctly.
13th Jun 2005
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Question: Something I never quite figured out when watching the film was what the shields in the corridor were for? The shields that separate Darth Maul from Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan during the fight. There are dozens of them and all they seem to do is benefit the fight in the film without having any real purpose.
Chosen answer: According to "Inside the Worlds of Star Wars: Episode I" by Kristin Lund, they are "laser doors which lock into position in response to potentially lethal power outputs that occur intermittently during plasma activation process" (the fight takes place in a plasma energy processing plant). There are six laser doors in deference to an ancient Naboo legend in which Chaos is held back by six inpentrable gates. As you say though, they're really just a plot device to add dramatic tension to the duel!
12th Jun 2005
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Question: Something I wasn't quite sure of was about Padme's death. Now I know throughout the film Anakin senses that she will die and must rescue her, but was her death a certainty or more a result of Anakin's turn to the dark side? I ask because I know the Jedi can sense the future, and was wondering if it was meant to be a vision of what was going to happen with his descent to the dark side.
Chosen answer: The future is not always set in place, according to Yoda, especially when clouded by the Dark Side. As Anakin's fears for Padme increase the more dependent he becomes on the Dark Side to try and stop the events of Padme's death in his dreams. What he didn't see was that he was indirectly responsible for causing her own death by turning to the Dark Side. Although Padme could have survived injuries caused by Anakin's force grip, her will to die rather than live without him is what caused her death.
29th Apr 2005
General questions
Could someone explain how they achieve shots in which two points of objects are at different positions from each other but are both in focus. I have noticed it in a few films and most recently Million Dollar Baby. In one shot I recall Clint Eastwood is standing in his office and Hilary Swank is training in the gym below him. Eastwood is in the right of frame and the left part of the frame shows Hilary Swank and both are in focus despite the large distance between each other. Is it some special camera filter they use? I noticed a little out of focus blur around the middle of the frame. If not how exactly do they achieve the effect?
Chosen answer: Orson Wells first acheived this in "Citizen Kane." It's a combination of position between the lens and actors and the lens focus. There is no exact formula on how to acheive it; mostly trail and error. For example, have the lens tighten in on one actor and have the other move around until they come into focus.
29th Apr 2005
General questions
Why exactly are film ratings in the US voluntary instead of legally required like in many other countries. I know that in countries like England, Australia and NZ they are legally required for any film/video that will be shown, sold or rented in that country. Also why do studios submit their films for ratings if they are voluntary? I find it peculiar especially for controversial films like Showgirls for example, as the NC-17 rating kills any chance the film has at the box office when they could just leave it unrated and avoid all the stigma it attaches to itself?
Chosen answer: For one thing, the US is a place in which the sociopolitical climate has always favored liberty over governmental control. Certain issues - drivers' licensing, for instance - obviously require intervention; movie rating is not seen as one of them. This is probably also compounded by the fact that the MPAA and similar bodies are hugely wealthy and powerful, and can afford a lot of lobbying to prevent any such legislative requirement from coming to pass. As far as actually getting the voluntary ratings - it's nearly suicide to NOT get one. The number of films that have generated any significant financial success without being MPAA rated is effectively zero. It seems as though the bulk of the movie-watching public WANTS to be protected from certain levels of 'indecency.'
29th Apr 2005
The Simpsons (1989)
Question: Can someone explain why Marge frowns when the art teacher is explaining The Lombardo theory, the one where he says "And here we have an adorable little bunny rabbit. It's just that easy." Why Marge seeming upset with what he just said? The reaction shot is a couple of seconds so I am assuming there is something that I must have missed.
Chosen answer: I think it's because the art teacher is making it seem so easy when in fact it is really quite difficult. I think the line he says is something like "Yes, even a rhombus can create an adorible little bunny rabbit" - it's obviously much harder than just putting shapes together. It could also be an inside joke by the animators maybe - Marge could be frowning because it's not 'that easy' to create an animation (which she is, obviously) and could just be a joke. Knowing the Simpsons, this wouldn't be too far-fetched.
22nd Mar 2005
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
Question: I know that the infamous third arm shot in the helicopter can be explained by being able to morph another arm, but has James Cameron or any of the actors from the film ever commented on the extra arm?
Chosen answer: A member of the production team mentions on the Ultimate Edition DVD commentary that this was indeed an intentional effect.
21st Mar 2005
General questions
Is there any reason why actors/actresses don't have credits in some films when they generally have a small role or cameo. I have seen this seems to especially apply to animated film where top stars are left uncredited. An example is Beavis & Butthead do America in which Bruce Willis, Demi Moore and Greg Kinnear were all uncredited despite having large roles. Has this got anything to do with the SAG? I know SAG has tight rules about actors who receive credits are also supposed to be given certain benefits under union rules.
Chosen answer: Sometimes previous commitments make them unable to have their name attached to something. Examples include Michael Jackson and Dustin Hoffman, who both appeared uncredited in The Simpsons (or rather, credited under false names), for the simple reason that they were unable, due to contract obligations, to have their name appear in conjuction with it.
15th Mar 2005
General questions
Can someone explain why special effects (namely digital ones) are so expensive in many movies? It seems many films have monstrous budgets due to their large number of special effects.
Chosen answer: Digital special effects are expensive for a number of reasons; to get good believeable CG (computer graphics) they need to use a very good, fast, computer and a fair amount of software - each computer could cost about $10k or more. Multiply that by the 40-50 odd computers that a SFX company may have and that's a LOT of money, so the SFX company needs to make that investment back, plus there are the 50 odd staff needed to actually use the computers, and they tend to be highly trained in a particular area or program, and so they tend to charge a fair amount of money per hour. Plus you would probably find that big movie studios pay the SFX companies incentives to work on their next big budget film as opposed to a smaller film.
1st Mar 2005
Meet the Fockers (2004)
Question: I'm not sure if this is a mistake or not, but shouldn't Greg be wearing a yarmulke during his wedding? He and his family are Jewish so why would he not be wearing one?
Chosen answer: Wearing a yarmulke is a custom, not a religious law. There are orthodox jews who don't wear them, as well, since it's a cultural thing.
Not so. Many Jews don't wear yarmulkes, but Orthodox male Jews do-as a religious law, not a custom.
17th Jan 2005
Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)
Question: In the UK (Region 2) version of the film, the scene in which Ace pretends to be Hans the dolphin trainer was removed. Can anyone tell me the specific reason why it was removed? Also do any other versions around the world (notably US and Australian versions) remove the scene?
Chosen answer: That scene was cut originally by the director Tom Shadyack because the scene did not support the story and thought it slowed the film down. (And the scene was cut from the US version as well.) It was added back later in TV versions of the film. Fan enjoyed the scene so much they asked it be put back in the film version. I know the DVD has it because I own it. It's hilarious!
17th Jan 2005
The Simpsons (1989)
Question: When the Simpsons go on the TV show to try and explain themselves, what show was this a send up of where the guy speaks really loud? I believe it's a show from Fox News.
Chosen answer: I believe the character is a parody of the "Hardball" host, Chris Matthews, who is seen by some as a loud host who gives guests no time to answer poltical questions.
17th Jan 2005
Batman Forever (1995)
Question: What is the point of the Riddler stopping Harvey (Two-Face) from killing Bruce Wayne when they are in his mansion? They now know that Bruce Wayne is Batman and their goal all along was to kill Batman. Essentially I can understand they want to torture Bruce by kidnapping Chase, but it seems like a huge risk that they don't really need to take as Batman is very elusive and this was a prime opportunity to take him out.
Chosen answer: They are both nuts and extremely arrogant. They are also suffering from "Supervillain Syndrome" wherin the villain will toy with and never kill his nemesis even though it will get him caught/defeated in the end. It's just how comic book villains are.
Also, they specifically say they want him awake, aware and capable of suffering humiliation and shame when they destroy him. Also, since they have a hostage he values very highly, they can be reasonably sure he'll come to them afterwards, Riddler out-and-out says so.
27th Nov 2004
Law & Order (1990)
Question: In regards to the judge's rules for the case at the end with the gun manufacturers, can someone explain what he McCoy had to prove? It was something about that he had to prove that the gun manufacturer designed the gun to made as was the use. Does this mean they had to prove it was going to be used for deadly force because of the fault in the guns? It just sounded strange because they were gun manufacturers so I wasn't too sure why they had to prove that.
Chosen answer: McCoy had to prove that the gun manufacturers knew that they gun was being used illegally and that all it took was a simply adjustment. He had to prove that they knew that they (the gun manufacturers) would sell more guns because of the faulty design.
27th Nov 2004
SpongeBob SquarePants (1999)
Question: In regards to two of the characters, Plankton and Sandy Cheeks. I have seen all the episodes but cannot figure out a few things on them. Sandy - Can someone tell me why Sandy lives under the ocean? I know she is very smart and is a keen scientist but what exactly made her move to the bottom of the sea? She seems to miss Texas a lot and it seems strange she decided to move to the bottom of the ocean. I know it's a cartoon but what's her motive? Plankton - I understand Plankton is always trying to steal the Krabby patty secret formula but has there been a reason exactly for stealing it? Was it to try and run Krabs out of business or use it for his own restaurant?
Chosen answer: Plankton has his own restaurant that is a flop. He wants the secret formula so he can be successful and beat Mr. Krabs in business. No reasons have been given for why Sandy moved underwater. Though she is an extreme daredevil personality, so maybe she did it to be different.
In the season 4 episode "Chimps Ahoy" there's a reason given about why Sandy lives at the bottom of the sea. Sandy's three bosses from Treedome Enterprises are coming to evaluate her inventions while she's been living under water, at the bottom of the sea. If she passes she will continue to receive their funding and can stay in Bikini Bottom, but if she fails she has to go back to Texas.
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 was always thinking ahead, after the shootout, he predicated what the fallout would be and how to cover it up. Saying, "A Hero" was his way of answering the question of what knew what they needed to do it.