Question: If there are a couple of scenes where Pascal, the chameleon, changed colors not to blend with objects but only due to his emotions. Is it possible for a real chameleon to do, or is it something only Pascal can do? In other words, is it something a chameleon can do only in a cartoon?
Tailkinker
17th Apr 2011
Tangled (2010)
15th Apr 2011
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Question: When Harry and Hermione are using the time turner, I have two questions about that scene. One: Why can't anyone see them? IS this crucial to their mission? Two: Before they go back in time, we see that they already have (Hermione thinks she saw herself in the tree's.). But this means that there would never be an end to the chain. It's a time paradox.
Chosen answer: They can't be seen to avoid people asking questions. It's generally known where Harry and Hermione were during the course of events, so if somebody later claimed to have spotted them somewhere, people might realise what had really happened, which could cause them problems. As for the paradox, I don't see one - it's a simple course of events. Harry and Hermione live through the chain of events once, including a couple of unknowing interactions with their future selves. They then use the time-turner to travel back and re-experience the events and interactions with themselves again, this time from the alternate perspective. They catch up with the time left departed from and continue onwards. It's pretty straightforward, with no obvious paradox involved.
30th Mar 2011
Paul (2011)
30th Mar 2011
X-Men 2 (2003)
Question: In the ending scene, how come Jean couldn't control the plane, and stop the flood from the inside? Would've been a whole lot easier.
Chosen answer: Because, as we see earlier in the film, Jean's increasing power levels cause problems with electrical equipment. She has to be clear of the plane for it to fly under its own power. From the outside, she can control it without risking it losing power and crashing into the water below.
21st Mar 2011
Spider-Man 3 (2007)
Question: Was Spider-Man's identity ever made public at the end of this movie? He was without his mask several times during the final battle and there were a lot of cameras, so...?
Chosen answer: There's no evidence to suggest that his identity was compromised at any point.
Answer: The fight between Sandman, Venom and Spider-Man was high up on a construction site so nobody watching the action from ground level would be able to see his face.
Question: After Elizabeth is brought to the Pearl, she threatens to drop the medallion overboard. Barbossa feigns disinterest but when Elizabeth pretends to drop it, the pirates gasp in panic. Why? So she drops it, big deal. They can't drown, the gold "calls to them" so what does it matter if she were to drop it?
Chosen answer: Because they'd have to find it. The gold may "call to them", but it obviously doesn't function as a millimetre perfect homing beacon or they'd never have missed the medallion years earlier when they attacked the ship carrying the young Will. Elizabeth drops it into the sea and they're going to have to spend what could be months trying to locate it - currents could take it well away from the dropping point. They've found the final missing piece; they're potentially just hours away from finally being cured. The last thing they want is to see it thrown into the sea.
Well, if the crew was anxious to get the medallion then why did they act like they weren't interested in it before Elizabeth pretended to drop it?
What do you mean by reverse psychology?
By showing they are not interested in the medallion they are hoping Elizabeth will just drop it on the floor or chuck it to them as it's of no real value. However when she releases a bit of chain and the medallion drops, and the pirates lurch forward revealing that they really want the medallion and as such Elizabeth now has the upper hand in negotiations.
I'm guessing Elizabeth wasn't fooled when the pirates showed disinterest in the medallion.
That's not called reverse psychology, which is used to encourage someone to change his or her mind. Doesn't work with a threat. They are feigning indifference to hide the importance of the object.
They didn't want to give her an advantage over them. Pretending to not care about the coin would make Elizabeth think that the coin is worthless and cannot use it to barter a deal.
20th Mar 2011
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Question: Why are there transports in the Battle Of Endor? It doesn't seem sense that transports were to go into to battle without any armament at all. Also, the Death Star II is seen firing on one of these transports. Wouldn't it be more reasonable to fire on Home One?
Answer: According to the novelisation of Return of the Jedi, the transports were loaded with large quantities of explosives, with the intent of using them in a kamikaze role. Given that role, it makes sense to target them as a priority, before they could be used to destroy a major Imperial ship, plus the premature detonation of the explosives could damage or potentially even destroy surrounding Rebel ships, weakening their fleet.
13th Mar 2011
X-Men 3 (2006)
Question: At the end of the movie, we see that the cure eventually wears off, but doesn't this mean that Rogue and Mystique's powers will return, and that she would join Magneto again, and Rogue stays as an X-Men?
Chosen answer: This is just a little tease thrown in at the end of the movie. Magneto's still got some power left. Will he get his full power back? They don't say. Will other individuals also get theirs back? We don't know. If another film in the series is made that follows this one, some of these questions may be answered - without that, speculation about what characters might do based on a tease shot is, for the most part, pointless. Their powers might return. Mystique might rejoin Magneto, although she might well not - she was pretty angry at him for abandoning her. Rogue might stick with the X-Men. That's it. A whole load of "might".
14th Mar 2011
The Dark Knight (2008)
Question: Every time I watch the movie, I can't work out why Batman tells Gordon that he is going to save Rachel (so that Gordon's unit saves Dent), but lies and saves Dent (Gordon unit are at Dent's place but Batman enters from the back door, leaving Rachel to die). Why would he do that to Rachel as she is his oldest friend?
Answer: Hate to say it, but you've got the situation completely wrong. Bruce thinks he's going to save Rachel, but the Joker lied to him, he reversed the addresses where the two were being held. So Bruce shows up, expecting to find Rachel, but finds Harvey instead and rescues him. Meanwhile, Gordon and his men, who think that they're going after Harvey, arrive at the place where Rachel's being held, but the bomb detonates before they can get into the building to save her.
10th Mar 2011
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Question: The sorting hat considered putting Harry in Slytherin. But if your parents or a past generation was put in Gryffindor, then wouldn't he have to be in Gryffindor? If not, then is it by luck that the Weasleys have been in the same house for so long?
Chosen answer: No, there's no specific requirement that any individual has to be in the same house as their paren'ts or siblings. It's not uncommon that that's the case, admittedly, particularly as character plays a major part in the sorting process, so individuals brought up in the same household might end up in the same house simply by virtue of bearing similar character traits, but there are a considerable number of examples of family members being in different houses. Sirius Black, for example, was sorted into Gryffindor, despite his family's traditional presence in Slytherin. The Patil twins, who one might reasonably expect to end up in the same house, ended up being sorted differently, Parvati into Gryffindor and Padma in Ravenclaw (in the book, in the movie they are both in Gryffindor). So while it's quite common that house assignment runs in families, it's by no means a certainty.
3rd Mar 2011
Toy Story 3 (2010)
Question: Why didn't the toys even talk about coming alive and talking to Andy? Seems they were desperate enough for him to play with them that somebody should have considered this option.
Answer: Because they simply don't do that, it's a fundamental rule of their existence. They're played with as toys, not as sentient moving creatures. Plus there's every possibility that Andy would simply freak out - imagine how you'd feel if all your childhood toys suddenly revealed that they'd been intelligent, with lives of their own, all along. Woody revealing himself to Sid in the first film was a unique case to prevent the deaths of more toys, and Sid was a sufficiently disturbed child that nobody would be surprised if he suddenly freaked. With Andy, it's a normal situation that he's simply grown up and doesn't play with them any more - there's no possible grounds for breaking the rules there.
4th Mar 2011
Alien 3 (1992)
Question: Towards the end of the film after Ripley refuses to give herself up and tells "No" to Bishop and closes the gate, Bishop and the men in white go back down the stairs. As we cut to the long shot, we see one of the men in white running up to the metal fence and grabbing hold of it as though he is trying to climb over it carrying what appears to be a shoulder mounted camcorder. He is not part of the production crew because he is wearing the same costume as the other actors, but this is not dwelled upon so it seems like a pointless prop. Was this to add a similar feel to the previous films of recording footage on the planets?
Chosen answer: While no details are given in the film, he's presumably present to document their interactions with Ripley for future reference - this is, after all, a very important moment for the company, where they believe that they may finally get their hands on the specimen that they've been waiting for for years.
4th Mar 2011
Aladdin (1992)
Question: At the end of the film, the Genie asks Aladdin to wish for the Nile. Why? Aladdin can't wish anymore, since his third wish was used to free the Genie.
Answer: The Genie's simply relishing his new-found freedom - he asks Aladdin to wish for something outrageous simply so that he can have the pleasure of saying "no". The fact that Aladdin has no wishes left anyway is purely a technicality. There is also a hidden joke - Genie said "wish for something. The Nile, wish for the Nile" (sounding like 'denial'). So when genie said "no", it was granting Aladdin's wish while denying him his wish at the same time.
4th Mar 2011
Avatar (2009)
Question: Does this movie take place in the same universe as ALIENS?
Answer: No. The Alien franchise, which kicks off in the year 2122, depicts a human civilisation in possession of faster-than-light transport and multiple interstellar colonies. The civilisation seen in Avatar, the majority of which is set in 2154, do not appear to have FTL travel, as they take six years to travel to the Alpha Centauri system, a distance of approximately 4.5 light years.
4th Mar 2011
South Park (1997)
Question: During the trial, why does Johnnie Cochran state that Chewbacca lives on Endor? It's never said in the Star Wars movies that Chewbacca lives there.
Answer: He doesn't. The whole point of the scene is to satirise legal arguments, in that Cochran is basically talking complete nonsense in order to bamboozle the jury into taking his side, distracting them from the real issue with a barrage of red herrings.
30th Sep 2010
Star Wars (1977)
Question: I submitted a mistake where the soldiers hear the blockade runner docking with the star destoyer before they come into contact. Someone corrected me saying that they were hearing the effects of a tractor beam on the ship. Does the book mention a tractor beam being used to capture the ship?
Answer: The blockade runner's not going to be docking willingly with the Star Destroyer that's been shooting at it. Something has to be moving the runner into the docking bay, and use of a tractor beam to capture ships is established elsewhere in the movies. It's a reasonable assumption that the same system is used in this scene.
4th Jan 2011
Scrubs (2001)
Question: In one episode (I think it's My Balancing Act) Dr Kelso is trying to scare the interns, so he pulls his face off and 'becomes' a guy with crazy ginger hair and a very annoying loud voice. I'm a Brit so that's maybe why I don't recognise this guy. Is he supposed to be someone famous?
Answer: This is an American comedian called Scott Thompson, more widely known by his stage name of "Carrot Top".
4th Jan 2011
The Sound of Music (1965)
Question: Why were the Nazis so desperate to get Captain von Trapp into their navy? Austria hadn't had a navy since the end of the first world war, so his skills weren't exactly up to date.
Answer: True, but a decorated and highly respected command officer, particularly one with proven wartime experience, is still a major asset. While he might not be directly familiar with the current equipment, naval tactics wouldn't have altered to any great degree and his ability to lead and inspire those under his command would remain the same.
4th Jan 2011
X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
Question: Given that Logan's body (skin, bone, muscle, etc) is what "regenerates" quickly, and Adamantium is absolutely fixed once it is solidified, Logan would now have two permanent holes in the front of his skull from the bullets fired into his brain to destroy his memories at the end of the film? Unlike the skin, muscle, bone and brain tissue, the Adamantium would not "heal over" or regenerate, so the two vulnerable bits of bone would remain, a bit of a vital vulnerability in a dangerous area of the body.
Answer: That would indeed seem to be the case. Granted, it would have to be an extremely lucky shot to find one of those holes under his flesh, but, yes, it is an apparent vulnerability.
4th Jan 2011
Predators (2010)
Question: Nikolai comes across the colorful plant, which Edwin identifies to be poisonous, and he even knows its scientific name. But if the plant is known for Edwin, then it must be native to Earth, since there is no reason to believe that the doctor has studied extraterrestrial flora. Why is this plant growing in there? Have the predators maybe prepared the planet to be more "interesting", by adding some toxic plants from another worlds in there?
Chosen answer: Indeed, it's an interesting question, and not one to which any answer is given. In the absence of any other information, your speculation that the predators have taken various plant species from other worlds to study and just make their hunting environment more interesting is as good an explanation as any other.
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: The ability of a number of chameleon species to change colours is generally used a form of social signalling - it's a common misconception that they shift colour in order to blend in with their surroundings. Although some species of chameleon have displayed the ability to use their colour changes as a primitive form of camouflage, most only change in response to social situations or changes in their physical or emotional state. So, yes, it's very possible that Pascal could change colour due to his emotions, in fact, it's really the norm.
Tailkinker ★