Question: Has there ever been any sort of canonical discussion about the morality of droid treatment in any Star Wars titles? They're intelligent/sentient, are treated well by most people, even like friends/pets by some. And yet they also seem to casually get their minds wiped, or if they're destroyed many people shrug rather than mourn. Tools to some, valued comrades to others, it's just a bit all over the place. Idle thought really.
lionhead
24th Nov 2019
Star Wars (1977)
Answer: Not in the films, but several of the books removed from canon by Disney mentioned a "droids' rights movement" that decried memory wipes and other dismissals of sentience. https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Droid_rights_ (movement).
Solo, which is canon, features a subplot about droid's rights. So not everything has been scrubbed regarding this topic.
Chosen answer: Nobody in the Star Wars universe, except on rare occasions, has shown sympathy towards a droid or any AI. Even though these robots learn, they don't really evolve beyond their programming so they aren't considered "alive" (unlike in other fiction like Wall-E), not even by the most sentimental of people. Organic beings develop attachments to droids, but mostly towards their usefulness, not because they like their personality, not even Luke Skywalker towards R2 or Poe towards BB-8. If they are destroyed, too bad. Memory wiping doesn't remove the droid's original programming either, and their way of talking and manners stay.
In Episode 2, Obi-Wan makes the offhanded comment "Well, if droids could think there'd be none of us here", implying that droids do not actually possess artificial intelligence. R2-D2 seems to be a particularly unusual droid in that he is uncommonly resilient and steadfast, which makes his allies quite fond of him. Poe and BB-8 appear to have a bond that goes beyond simply being attached to the droid's usefulness, but like you say that appears to be a unique case.
Just because he said that doesn't mean they didn't have AI. They think for themselves, so they have AI. Just not as advanced as in other fiction.
The point is raised again later in the film when the cloners state that unlike droids, clones can think for themselves.
12th Nov 2019
The Incredibles (2004)
Question: A few questions about this movie. Firstly, Syndrome's ultimate plan was first testing his prototypes on other supers, using the next had the last been defeated, and all leading up to the final face off with Mr. Incredible. What would Syndrome had done had Mr. Incredible denied the opportunity from Mirage of coming to the island to do the hero work as devised and everything he planned had been spoiled? Secondly, when Mr. Incredible was captured and held hostage in the round electric type of cell, did Syndrome plan for him to just hang there until he died? Thirdly, what made Mirage suddenly have a change of heart after all the working she's done with Syndrome and killing off supers in the past?
Answer: Syndrome's plan worked because even though the superheroes were retired a lot of them missed the old days and wanted to do real superhero work. This opportunity lured a lot of them to the island, including Mr. Incredible. If he hadn't gone there Syndrome would have found others. He kept Mr. Incredible locked up there until his plans of sending the robot were executed. Afterwards he probably would have killed him, perhaps by turning the robot loose on him again but this time in public. Mirage got second doubts when she realised Syndrome didn't care about her or the lives of innocents, I'm guessing a lot of information was kept from her and she simply thought Syndrome was after power and not petty revenge on superheroes.
I'm a little confused about the second and third answers. We saw that Syndrome was trying to destroy the robot while mimicking it (really, using his remote) while he meanwhile had the Incredibles held hostage at his island. How would he have sent Mr. Incredible to the public to be killed by the robot if it were destroyed? Also, if Mirage thought the superhero revenge on Mr. Incredible was minor and the other supers he was killing were innocent, why did she decide to be his assistant and help him in the first place?
I'm sure his first encounter with the robot was just for show, letting the people think he beat it, without actually damaging it. The point was that the robot could not be defeated by any superhero and then everybody would flock to him and he could sell his inventions to make everybody "super" so superheroes will not be necessary anymore. It's somewhere along the lines of that anyway, I've never actually known what his actual plan was. The point was to make an unbeatable robot that only he could defeat by cheating, then sell his inventions to everybody. That I'm sure of. How he was going to take his revenge on supes to the next stage I don't know. Mirage wasn't innocent, she knew supes were being killed by the robot but she thought he did it for power. She also started to like Mr. Incredible I think. Once she realised he didn't care about her or literally anyone else she decided to betray him. Maybe she found out what real power is, and he didn't have it.
13th Nov 2019
Mortal Kombat (1995)
Revealing mistake: When Scorpion explodes, if you pay attention, the explosion doesn't really make "sense." The first "burst" looks fine, but then, midway through the shot, some of the debris in the air suddenly vanishes or fades out a few frames before the second "burst" occurs. Additionally, the way the second "burst" happens gives it away as an added effect, as it doesn't really overlap the background properly. (It looks like an explosion that was filmed on a blue-screen and then just added over top of the footage, as it doesn't interact with the environment properly).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Scorpion is an undead being fighting in another realm of existence. He doesn't necessarily have to explode in a way that "makes sense."
The mistake pertains to issues with the somewhat shoddy execution of the effects, which are a result of the film's production. I don't think him being an undead fighter from another realm of existence is really a valid way to explain this away.
15th Nov 2019
Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019)
Corrected entry: Spider-man and Mysterio fight the first Elemental. On the bridge, the elemental beats Peter Parker and he is wet. This could not be, because the water elemental is a hologram. Spider-man couldn't get wet from a hologram. (00:21:35)
Correction: In addition to holograms, Mysterio uses drones to cause real damage. Otherwise, his con would be figured out very easily. In this case, the hologram obscures drones that blast water from the canal (or possibly even collect water and spray it) which then get Peter wet.
I don't think drones are capable of doing that, as we've seen they're only capable of firing guns.
We saw them traveling underwater toward Tower Bridge and firing causing water to spray up.
I think Spider-Man being wet is sufficient evidence that the drones are capable of more than shooting guns. Why call it a mistake when it's perfectly reasonable for it to be drones even if not explicitly shown?
But their firepower could splash water up and make Peter wet though. So he got wet from splashing water from all the firepower upon the water and bridge.
11th Nov 2019
Ender's Game (2013)
Question: Maybe this is explained better in the book, or maybe I just wasn't paying attention. But at the end, when Ender killed all the Formics, did he kill any innocents, or were they all involved in the first invasion? Because Ender never mentions innocents being killed, that would be a pretty good argument as to why it was wrong. If they were all involved in the first invasion, I don't see anything wrong with killing aliens that murdered millions of humans.
Answer: In the book, Ender had grown disillusioned with military school and was depressed. Destroying the entire Formic homeworld was his attempt to force the school to expel him, by enacting a suicidal plan of action so ruthless his superiors would believe him unfit for leadership. In the film it appears that Ender is simply trying to win the game as best he can. As for the Formics themselves, they operate with a hive mind so in a sense, yes they were all "involved" in the invasion of earth. However, wiping out of the entire civilization in retribution, especially once the audience hears the Formic queen express her dismay over the Formic's actions, is evil. The film somewhat glosses over this fact, but in the books it is clear the Formics did not understand that humans were sentient at all because they could not comprehend an intelligent species lacking a shared consciousness.
Yeah misunderstanding is the constant of the book series.
20th Jan 2019
Mortal Kombat (1995)
Question: When Lui Kang fights Reptile, what was Johnny Cage doing this entire time? (01:12:15 - 01:15:50)
Answer: Since the entire fight is focused on Liu Kang and Reptile, he could have possibly waited to see what the outcome of the fight was.
Answer: Wouldn't Johnny Cage want to go in to help his "mate", rather than stand their and watch? The question here (because Reptile is a secret character in MK1 and Raiden saying "In Outworld, you will find another guy") is that can Johnny Cage interfere with the fight, or is that against the rules in this tournament?
Not only is it against the rules, but Raiden never said they'd find another guy. What he said was, "You'll find another guide." The guide being Kitana.
That is indeed against the rules.
4th Nov 2019
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010)
Question: This question might be more for the book, but Mad Eye said they would have to transport in ways the trace can't detect. But the trace would only detect magic used near an underage person. Harry is the only one who is underage. So they could have used a portkey. I understand that they need to cast a spell to make a portkey but they could have cast the spell before they were near Harry and then transported to the burrow. Or have I made a mistake?
Answer: The trace detects when an underaged wizard casts a magic spell whenever they are away from Hogwarts. It doesn't detect adult wizards using magic near a minor. If a portkey was used to transport Harry, it could have been detected when he touched it because he would be using magic. The safest and least detectable way to move him from point A to B, was to fly him there.
Answer: Two things. 1. You are not allowed to create an unauthorized portkey. The ministry must be aware of it. I think the incantation (portus) is traced. 2. Using a portkey is magical use, so the moment Harry touches it, the ministry would be alerted and possibly know where the portkey transported to.
Then how did Dumbledore get away with it in Order of the Phoenix when he made a portkey to get the children to Grimmauld Place?
Well he is an extremely powerful wizard and the headmaster of Hogwarts. I think he made it at Hogwarts yes? He could have had a trick up his sleeve to do it. Might be a bit more tricky for Mad-Eye and the rest whilst the Ministry is under control of deatheaters. Just too risky.
Also, using magic near an underage wizard isn't traced. Just when it is used by an underage wizard.
No, the trace is meant to detect magic used near an underaged wizard.
The wiki specifically says it's a trace of magic in the vicinity of an underage wizard, not the underage wizard him/herself. It's mentioned working like that by Alastair Moody in the books too.
When Harry used magic to repel the dementors that attacked him and Dudley in Order of the Phoenix, the Ministry of Magic instantly detected that he cast a patronus spell. He was immediately "charged" for using underage magic. What would happen when a young wizard was at home for the summer and holidays and is around adult wizards using magic all the time? The trace would be going off continually for every underaged magic person. It was mentioned in the books that if an underaged wizard did use magic at home, it could be confused with the adults who were casting spells.
Harry once got a warning from the "improper use of magic office" for casting a hover charm, even though it was Dobby who did it. I don't know where you get your information from, but it is wrong. The trace can only detect magic has been used, not who used it. This is explained by Alastair Moody in Deathly Hallows Chapter 4.
3rd Nov 2019
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
Corrected entry: In Transfiguration class when professor McGonagall is explaining the lesson you can see that the instructions are mirrored on the blackboard. (00:54:18)
Correction: There are two chalkboards in Professor McGonagall's classroom, both with the same chalk drawings and instructional writing, though the chalkboard on the right has everything backwards on the board. However, none of the actual shots during this scene are flipped, not the closeups, medium shots, or the long shots. Note the part in McGonagall's hair, etc., stays consistent throughout. For whatever their reasons, the filmmakers decided to have identical chalkboards at both sides of the desk, and one with the reverse writing and images as its twin.
And since it's a class about casting spells it's not unlikely McGonagall wrote it in mirror on purpose. Perhaps they need to learn to read mirror since a lot of spells and spellbooks are written like that, a common myth surrounding spells.
17th Jun 2015
Friends (1994)
The One with Mrs. Bing - S1-E11
Question: When we first see Mrs Bing on TV, Jay Leno mentions that she recently got arrested and asks how it came about. Her response is "occasionally, after being intimate with a man, I just get a craving for Kung Pao chicken" This gets a lot of cheers and laughter from the audience and Chandler shouts "that's too much information!" at the TV. What was happening here? Why does what Mrs Bing said get so much of a reaction from everyone and not answer the question she was asked? Am I missing something?
Answer: This is a story about how Chandler's mom got arrested. So she is saying "after being intimate with a man I get a craving for Kung Pao Chicken." So what she is implying is that she is intimate with whomever, and immediately afterwards when orders Kung Pao Chicken. By this she is saying she got arrested at the place where they sell Kung Poa Chicken, because she was being intimate with the individual there. Conclusion she was openly having sex at a Chinese Restaurant.
Answer: I've seen a few answers that are similar to this. It's really unclear to me what the relation to being arrested is and/or why it's too much information. I feel like I'm missing a connection here.
Chosen answer: Nora Bing's remarks got a huge response by her being funny and making the incident about sex. Audiences tend react to titillating anecdotes. Chandler, of course, is always mortified by his mother for not acting her age and being sexually uninhibited.
This answers nothing really.
Answer: I honestly think part of it has been deleted since the original broadcast. I remember her saying something extra that carried on the joke, but watching it on streaming services, it isn't there.
26th Nov 2002
Hocus Pocus (1993)
Corrected entry: The legend is that the Sandersen sisters will be brought back from the grave if a virgin lights the black flamed candle. In fact, that's what happens 300 years after they are burned at Salem. If the citizens of Salem believed in the witches' curse, then why did they leave the candle intact? Why didn't they have a non-virgin destroy it immediately?
Correction: The witches are magic. They probably made it so only a virgin could light or touch the candle.
But the candle and wick already seemed to be previously lit.
Even if it has been previously lit; it's a pretty moot point unless we know it was another virgin on Halloween night who lit it as this was a very specific thing that had to happen for them to come back from the grave. So if it was somebody who tried lighting it on Christmas, wouldn't have worked for the prophecy. As to why no-one tried to destroy it; I'm sure they did but as we can see from the book the witches know magical protections spells so it's a safe bet there's one on the candle too where the flame might simply go out if someone not prophesied to light it try.
It was probably lit before the witches were burned.
22nd Oct 2019
Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)
Corrected entry: When Indiana Jones is told about the tablet discovery by Donovan, Indiana says the three knights who find the grail during the first Crusade are French. When Indiana meets the last knight at the end of the movie, he speaks perfect English, and with an English accent.
Correction: He's also almost 900 years old and imbued with power by God Himself. I think a simple language would be no big deal at all.
How is he imbued by power from God?
How else do you explain him being almost a thousand years old?
Drinking from the cup. How does that make him speak English?
The Grail is imbued with the power of God because it held the blood of Christ. One would think that since he is essentially the God-appointed guardian of the Grail, he would have any knowledge needed to guard it.
Thats a lot of assumptions. The cup grants immortality, that's it. It doesn't make you a polyglot.
He's the appointed guardian of the Holy Grail, an artifact that grants eternal life and is protected by miraculous and physically impossible traps. The guardian is given whatever power needed to keep the Grail in the chamber.
He doesn't have to do anything to keep the cup in the chamber. The seal does that.
I suppose you can make the case about God giving the knight the ability to speak English, but why in an English accent? I would think he'd speak in a French or American accent.
Why? An American dialect is no more neutral than an English one. People who speak with a French accent do so because they are still using rules and habits learned speaking French when trying to speak another language.
Because languages and the people who speak them change over time, especially that long of a period, by the immigration and emigration of people, influence of other languages, etc... What he would have spoken then would have been Old French, not modern French. While they do share a modicum of similarity, they are not mutually intelligible due to changes in grammar, syntax, and word use. Old French, for instance, contains far more influence from the Germanic Frankish language and Celtic Gaulish than modern French.
A French accent from 900 years ago would sound nothing like a modern French accent. In the same way, what we consider to be a modern proper English accent is actually a fairly modern phenomenon designed to distinguish upper from lower class people.
9th Feb 2004
The Ring (2002)
Question: When does Rachel realise if she shows the film to someone else she won't die? And if she knew, is that why she showed it to Noah, to kill him on purpose?
Answer: At the end of the movie, she is crying about why she wasn't killed and Noah was. She vocalizes "What did I do, that he didn't?" That's when she sees the copy she made. It wasn't that she just showed it to someone else. She made a copy and Aiden watched that copy. Aiden is why it skipped her.
Almost right. It's just the copy. Copying the video makes it skip you. That's why she has Aiden make a copy as well.
You have to show the copy to someone else as well. That's why Aiden asks Rachel at the very end "What about the person we show it to? What happens to them?"
But doesn't he have less than a day left by then? Hardly a time to relax, they need to make a terrible decision, quickly. I always had the idea making a copy was enough because of that.
He watched the tape the morning of either Rachel's 4th or 5th day, so he should have at least 3 days left by this point. Though it appears the film was being inconsistent with the markings that Samara leaves on the tape's viewers, since Rachel noticed Samara's hand print on Aiden's arm and then his nose started bleeding. For Rachel, she got her nosebleed before receiving the mark on her arm.
Actually, you need to do both: make a copy and show it to someone else. This is further explained in The Ring 2. At the beginning, the guy had made a copy but since the girl covered her eyes and didn't watch the whole thing, he was still killed by Samara. So making a copy is not enough in itself to be spared if no-one else watches it. The same goes for Rachel. She made a copy on the 2nd day, but Becca tells her she only has 4 days left when she visits the psych ward indicating she hadn't been spared yet. It's only after Aidan watches the copy she made that death skips her for good.
Answer: No, it's wrong. Just making a copy won't save you; you need to show it to someone else, and then this someone else is cursed instead of you. The Japanese movie explains it well. Plus, in the official second movie, a man dies from Samara after making the copy because nobody watched it. Also, at the end of the 1st movie, Aiden asks from the copy, "What will happen to the one who will watch it?"
23rd Feb 2019
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Question: When Mace reflects the force lightning back at Palpatine, did it reveal his true form, or make him that way as a result?
Answer: It was as a result of the lightning over his face.
I do not believe Lucas has ever stated the cause, but it is most likely a combination of things. Palpatine was using a considerable amount of dark force power to hold Mace, and Mace was redirecting it back at him. He may have also allowed the disfigurement on purpose, to get more sympathy from Anakin. An out of left field idea is that this is how he has looked for a while, and Palpatine has been using the force to project a nicer image until it was no longer necessary.
There is no evidence in any of the Star Wars movies that dark force users change in appearance simply from using the dark side of the force, only scarred from facing hardships. His face got badly burned and scarred from the lightning redirected at him. Yes he did it on purpose to show his suffering to Anakin, but it didn't reveal his "true face" or anything. Darth Maul, Dooku nor Kylo Ren ever show any changes in appearance. Vader, Snoke and Sidious are all simply scarred.
He claims to the Senate that the Jedi attacked him, and he has the scars to prove it.
That's true too.
Why wasn't Mace scarred when he didn't have his lightsaber anymore and Palpatine used even more powerful force lightning?
Before he goes out of the window, you can briefly see he isn't when the lightning isn't in the way.
That's a good question. I'd say it wasn't as intense. Palpatine's exposure was quite intense and close to his face whilst Windu got it all over his body. As you know Luke was hit by lightning as well in ROTJ, but also more on his body and from a distance.
My strongest idea is that Mace's lightsaber had a lot of impact with the force lightning towards Palpatine, being up-close to him. I also think he did do it to be disfigured in appearance and gain more sympathy from Anakin under the impression that he was "weak," along with the the force lightning itself.
I also think the scarring story to the senate was an afterthought at some point, but he intentionally allowed the disfigurement with the force lightning for more sympathy along with the pain of the lightning itself.
3rd May 2004
Sleepy Hollow (1999)
Corrected entry: Ichabod figures out that the headless body thought to be of Lady Van Tassel couldn't be her because the cut on the hand showed "No bloodflow, no clotting, no healing... When this cut was made...this woman was already dead". Yet in Lady Van Tassel's flashback of her decapitating Sarah and cutting her hand there is an unforgettably orangish stream of blood coming out of the dead girl's wound. This image clashes with his observation.
Correction: Of course blood would leave the wound, because the blood was already there in the veins. However, the heart would no longer be beating in the girl, which would stop the bloodflow from continuing, and eventually clotting and partially healing, like the hand of Lady Van Tassel.
When somebody dies, all of the blood in the body quickly coagulates.
Lady Van Tassel cut the hand of the servant girl immediately after death. It would not have had time to coagulate.
Blood does not coagulate in the body after death, it seperates into plasma and bloodcells, gravity then sinks it. Coagulation is an active process. "Dead" blood does not coagulate.
12th Oct 2019
Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth (1992)
Stupidity: When Joey is trying to escape from the Cenobites, she bumps into a man who calls her "Baby" and wonders where she's off to in such a hurry, possibly because he's looking for a booty call. The streets are literally on fire (there's a huge flame right next to the man) and buildings are exploding. Even if he's extremely horny, he should still be able to tell a woman doesn't want to stay around with so much chaos and destruction happening around them.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The dude was probably high on various types of drugs and probably didn't even know where he was. Just a thought.
Too high to recognize buildings exploding and fires bursting from out of nowhere, but not too high to recognize a woman in distress?
He didn't recognize much did he? Well, he saw she was female. But not really what was going on.
He recognized she was off somewhere in a hurry. He also had a pretty instant reaction to seeing the Camerahead Cenobite.
9th Oct 2019
Captain Marvel (2019)
Stupidity: Mar-Vell's laboratory is a spaceship that the captions identify as an imperial cruiser, not exactly the kind of thing that can go missing unnoticed. Since the Kree were so determined in finding Mar-Vell's work and are so attached to it that they keep Carol around, how is it possible that in 1989 or ever since they haven't looked for her cruiser? Carol manages to uncloak it without using any secret code (that she wouldn't know since Mar-Vell told her about the whole alien thing just barely before dying and was not privy to any security measure).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Decloaking the ship still necessitated knowing its location. The Kree didn't know where it was, so couldn't decloak it.
But they don't even look for it. He literally goes "oh, well, the engine is gone, let's go home", without any attempt to look for Mar-Vell's project or, again, the big cruiser thingy. Something so important, and yet the empire does not care about it to probe around for it.
In your other entry you suggest Ronan doesn't even know about Mar-Vell's project. More likely he doesn't care, since he is a fanatic who worships the old ways. Its logical he will ignore it, especially when his interests have been turned towards Carol flying around blasting through his ships. Which he later forgets for whatever reason as well.
No, no, I am referring to Yon-Rogg in the past, and the empire as a whole: they are after whatever work Mar-Vell was doing, to the point of keeping around with a very flawed brainwashing plan an incredibly dangerous being created with that technology, but don't look for her ship or evidence of her work, at all. 6 years with the knowledge that somewhere around (or on) Earth there's the key to unlimited destroying power and/or a hyperfast engine, and everyone is like "Meh, whatever" for no reason.
9th Oct 2019
Captain Marvel (2019)
Stupidity: Carol enters the Imperial Cruiser that doubles as a secret laboratory, uncloaking it. She does not cloak it back, so the villains just find it immediately. But blood-thirsty Ronan, despite having multiple ships, does not target it or acknowledge it, despite fully knowing that Earth has no defenses and is not a threat, while a Kree vessel would necessitate countermeasures.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: The Kree wanted what was on the ship. Destroying it would not achieve their goals. Additionally, since Carol was able to decloak it using her suit, so could any other Kree soldiers.
If to decloak it they need to know the location, it had to be visible to begin with? Going by the movie, Ronan has not even been informed about Mar-Vell's project. If the movie still remembers there is any (no indication is given), he suddenly finds a ship not part of his fleet and does not question it, simply going by what the plot wants him to do. Which, actually, could be fully intentional, since he obviously just cares about blowing stuff up and does not care even if any of his fellow Krees is still on the planet (not that the movie implies it, as movies normally would, but he's such a one-note character that it could be possible).
Earth doesn't have defenses and is not a threat, the Kree cruiser is obviously not part of Earth's defenses but is one of their own. He just didn't realise it is a target instead. Besides, Kree are on board, why would he target it?
That's exactly the point of what I originally said: Earth is not a threat, but he, fresh off his jump, right away gets in bombing mode without checking where the other Krees are (Yon-Rogg is on Earth at that exact moment, right the spot he is dropping the bombs at, even!) or batting an eye at the cruiser that happens to be already there, not target it but ask "what is going on here?", hail them or receive a report about the situation and where he is supposed to blow his load (would have been a single line of dialogue, here it seems an issue entirely ignored because plot moves from A to B): as a member of the military he is supposed to coordinate his attacks (like he did earlier on the first meeting with the Skrulls, where he bombed a specific part of the planet). Here all his instructions have been "Come at once, Earth has been infiltrated!", but he launches the bombs right away, seconds after jumping close to Earth.
9th Oct 2019
Captain Marvel (2019)
Plot hole: Mar-Vell's achievement, what makes her work so coveted by both Kree and Skrull, is the "lightspeed" engine equipped on the jet. This "lightspeed" engine is unable to outrun the Kree fighter sent after it. It's hard to imagine how Carol being the test pilot for this technology has failed to ever realise that this is what was being studied and how she is a test pilot for an engine that is never used at a fraction of its capabilities.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: Clearly the engine was not being run at its full potential at that point. It was experimental and would never fly at FTL speeds in the atmosphere of a planet.
Absolutely! But what sort of "tests" have they been doing on it for all those months or years?
Can't simply start using an FTL to outrun a bogey. You probably could wind up inside a planet or destroy the atmosphere. She probably has her reasons not to use it. Who knows what Mar-vell was really testing, maybe that was just a ruse and all she was doing was buying time to come up with a plan to use the engine to help the Skrulls without the Kree finding them. There is no plothole if you simply can't imagine what the motives are.
The engine had to be important, otherwise the whole ruse of Mar-Vell being Dr. Lawson would have been pointless: she already had the Tesseract itself aboard her ship, where the Earthlings could never find it if she chose to disappear overnight, so it had to be work related to the engine itself and its implications, how to actually handle it. It is implied that the engine works (she instructs Carol before dying to "save them without me" and Talos says that now they can reassemble the "thousands scattered around the galaxy"), so again, it seems absurd that the engine cannot give the slightest extra punch to her ship, which already was headed towards space, the laboratory, and that she can't fly up out of atmosphere - or that she tested something dealing with lightspeed or close to it, for all that time, to the point of making a somewhat working prototype, but never figured it out.
I submitted a text change request and I hope the entry has a chance to be reinstated some time. As I said in the other comments, it makes no sense that Carol is the test pilot of a lightspeed engine, the lightspeed engine is completed and works, but the test pilot herself has no idea the engine works and can't produce any ever significant boost. They are already in 'space' when the scene begins, it's not like they would risk to crash into Earth.
Will wait for the rewording then but right now the entry is rightfully corrected. More reasons could in fact be given. Carol is the test pilot for a spacecraft that happens to have a FTL engine (which I turns out is what it was all about). The FTL isn't active when they are being chased and doesn't provide extra boost to the spacecraft's regular engines. Wouldn't help either as there can be several simple reasons why one can not use it at that time.
The FTL engine then has been developed and finished without Carol having any input on it and she flew with it for no reason. What has Mar-vell been doing all this time and why has she bothered with Carol at all? Does not even need Pegasus project since the Tesseract is aboard her own cloaked ship and not in the research facility downstairs. If the engine is off, why is it on the plane at all? Looks very active later when the plan crashes and Carol makes it explode with a single blast, etc.
6th Oct 2019
Captain Marvel (2019)
Corrected entry: Fury is laughing off the idea of Vers being an alien and asks a normal cop to put her under arrest. But then, it would not make sense SHIELD even bothered to arrive on the scene (assuming Fury was in LA already) if they did not detect also the crash of the escape pod, the huge ship exploding in atmosphere and thus treat the problem as serious. They also arrive simultaneously as the cop, in daylight, when Vers crashed at night.
Correction: Their knowledge of aliens was the same as anybody in those days. Fury just thought she was some crazy person, with perhaps some forbidden weapons and/or communications technology. They arrived after the security guard called it in, since there were multiple incidents at that location they decided to send in SHIELD agents (regular agents) besides a regular cop in case there was a connection. Since they arrived in daylight I'd say they had quite a drive to get there.
Just a note: was not just regular agents, Keller is on the site as well, he's the first to arrive even (I did not notice it the first two times I have watched the movie, partly because the deleted scene in the office made me imagine a different scenario). So it's important enough that the top brass from SHIELD (plus rookie Coulsen and whoever drove Keller) arrive but at the same time they waltz in with the odd normal cop as backup. They can't be there because of some dude said there's a lady in a suit, did they even notice a spaceship blow up (you'd expect so but the movie and MCU ignore it later when larger ships suffer the same fate)? I don't want to repeat myself too much and I agree with what you wrote: to me the dynamic seems quite strange. In such a long time the first respondents (in the middle of a city) arrive only when SHIELD arrives, an hour after they've been called. And no cop or fireman arrived before on the impact zone? The response to this crisis is pure 'movie logic'.
Right, Keller being there is weird already, since he just disappears when they confront Carol. Couldn't be Talos in disguise either or he would attack her. His questions at the autopsy suggests he replaced Keller after the chase. If that's got to do with deleted scenes though, not sure how to handle that. I agree that's weird, but a plot hole? The security guard called in the lady asking wierd questions, probably nothing about the crash. Anyway the response can still be explained by SHIELD taking over and have the regular law enforcement not respond until they arrive as well. Again, even in the 90's SHIELD seems to have a lot of power and control. You can only guess at what they really know or think.
In the deleted scene, Talos in disguises enters Keller's office thanks to the real Coulson kindly opening the door for him and the real Keller is discovered knocked out, bound and gagged there indicating he took his place. But deleted scenes are always tricky and in case of this particular movie they have to be discarded altogether I think, since some contradict the movie (Vers begins the movie meeting Jude Law as he is training some kids and does not visit him in his room; Vers bullies the biker guy into giving her the bike, etc). Anyway yes, we both agree the situation is weird, I understand you being as usual more cautious than me when it comes to call a contrived and scarcely logical behaviour a "plot hole" and I appreciate it, matter of opinion, we both pointed out what's wrong and what sort of explanation, lack thereof (or perhaps no need of) there is.
6th Oct 2019
Captain Marvel (2019)
Plot hole: Fury comments on Vers' lack of weapon and issues radio messages about her, referring to her as a single 'suspect' during the whole chase, ignoring entirely the fact that a sniper shot him with a futuristic weapon as well. In fact, the weapon is a complete non sequitur and random element; we saw the Skrull emerge from the sea, unarmed and no Skrull weapon is shown in the rest of the movie. And the sniper runs away without it, presumably leaving the weapon or remains of it for SHIELD to study (and do nothing with it for the next decade).
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: They haven't even seen the other suspect and can only chase 1 person at a time, he only radios it in once. The weapon is an arm weapon that disappears under the cloak of the human form.
The weapon is a rifle, (he looks like he is using two hands when he uses it, check out at 29:14) that he did not have to begin with, and at no point in the movie Skrulls seem to be able to conceal weapons in their suits - if they were, ironically enough the 'identification' Carol jokingly brings later to Fury blasting the juke-box would be wrong. It's unnacounted before and after the incident. As for the first part, I can't agree on the fact that they haven't seen the other suspect: Fury turns around before the blasts is fired and at least they know they were shot at from an unknown perp, even more reason to instantly radio about it. The whole dynamic of the scene brings instantly the sole focus on Vers (understandably from a movie logic perspective, but I am here to nitpick how unnatural it is), to the point that he asks 'Rook' if he has seen her weapon, as if being shot at with energy blasts from rooftops were normal, and he does not say anything about the other person.
They may not show concealing their weapons that way but they do show the ability to hide various large objects including cattle prods under their disguises without effort (like in the fight against the Kree earlier). Their camouflage ability is highly sophisticated. It won't be difficult to conceal any weapon. As for the part about the sniper never being mentioned, you have a point but I question if it's really a "plot hole" rather than a simple character error. Fury focuses on Carol, he could be doing that for a lot of reasons, the best one I can come up with is that is the suspect they have a face on and fired a powerfull blast without a weapon. Logical they are interested in her, enough to make sure she doesn't get away from them.
Ehh, they were concealing the weapons under big cloaks, not making them appear out of thin air around their hands. When they land on Earth they are with just their normal suits with no camo. I think that if they had the power to do that sort of trick with their guns it would have been set up earlier, fighting against Carol everyone either starts with a weapon or does not, nobody is shown summoning a weapon out of the suit. I agree on the matter of Fury's behaviour being more accurately a character error, considering that other meaningful members of his team are Skrulls at that point. Distinctions can be blurry especially when I don't break down a topic focused on a single event in the movie ("Skrull sniping with unexplained weapon nobody seems to care about") into 2-3 different separate submissions to the website.
The cloaks were part of the camouflage. At one point they are all wearing cloaks, the next they are not and are carrying weapons. If they can do that to conceal weapons, they can do a lot more.
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: Lucas has gone on record as to the treatment of droids in Star Wars being a thought-provoking allegory for the way people treat minorities. I've never heard him specifically talk about how it's almost never commented-upon in-universe, but intentionally or not, I'm of the opinion that it's more compelling this way. Why doesn't anybody do anything about the way droids are treated? Well, go around asking people why they don't do anything about the way other people are treated and you'll quickly find out.
TonyPH