Corrected entry: One of the big sources of tension in the heist is the fact that they supposedly have a limited number of Pym particles, as stated by Scott Lang. So after the test run they only have enough for everyone to take one round trip through time. Cap and Tony use their return supply to go to 1970, which is why they needed to steal more particles to get back. However, Ant-Man's shrinking tech is also based on the Pym particles, and his shrinking suit seems to work without restriction in 2012. They also have enough to both shrink the Benetar in 2023 and re-grow it in 2014. So either Scott is mistaken about how many Pym particles he has, or he is lying about them. And before someone says they calculated the number of particles it would take for the shrinking during the mission before assigning them to the team members, Scott discusses the limited supply before they had any plan of what they were going to do in the past.
lionhead
5th Aug 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
2nd Aug 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: If Captain America had to go back to return the infinity stones to balance the timeline, would he not have to go back to before Black Widow died to return the Soul Stone?
Answer: No before Black Widow died the soul stone was still there, he had to get it back after it was taken, so after Black Widow died.
I think the poster meant he would go back to the time he knew Black Widow and Hawkeye were aiming for, or a bit before for safety, then go there and wait until Black Widow died and Hawkeye got the stone, and then return it. It would be hard for him to watch, but then he would know when the right time was.
Right. But you also have to think that, having witnessed the events, and then seeing that the Red Skull is the guardian, that would have been a damn interesting scene to watch. Does Cap try bargaining with the Red Skull to return Black Widow to life after giving the stone back? On the other hand, the Ancient One's explanation was that the flow of time occurs simply because the stones are in the universe. I don't think it mattered where they are. She only wanted the time stone back because of how it was tied to the Sanctum. So really, Cap probably could have just thrown the stone in a ditch somewhere and been done with it. It also raises a question about the nature of Vormir as the home of the stone. We see the other stones were more or less fashioned into artifacts and out and about. This implies that they too were in some sort of temple in their raw stone form before being found, seized and manipulated into a real-world application. So does Vormir even have a mechanism for receiving the stone back once it's been claimed? And what is the soul stone's solo power, anyway? Reading people's fates like a crystal ball?
I don't think the red skull is really the red skull anymore, just some kind of ghost of whats left of him. However the stone gets returned is irrelevant, yes he could even just leave it in a ditch somewhere. He didn't return other stones in their original form either, except the time stone. These timelines don't continue on as the original one. According to the comics the soul stone is sentient and everyone sacrificed to obtain is has their soul trapped inside the gem. Cap and the others of course don't know that (although Hulk must theoretically know having used it) or in the MCU this does not apply. When possessing it you can control any life and read their souls (their feelings and desires). One can also revert living things back their original state (like Nebula for example).
12th Aug 2019
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)
Stupidity: This film reveals that the theme park was built upon a dormant volcano. This means that John Hammond either neglected to do a geological survey when picking a location for his park, or simply ignored it and foolishly gambled that the volcano would never erupt.
Suggested correction: Lots of people live right next to dormant volcanos. It can be thousands of years before a dormant volcano erupts. Might be a risk, but not as much as lets say living on a tectonic boundary or in tornado alley.
There's a difference between assuming the risk of living in an area prone to a natural disaster versus building a theme park that's completely reliant on tourism revenue in an area prone to a natural disaster. If a person's home is destroyed by a volcano, they can eventually get a new home, even if it takes a year or two. If a multi-billion dollar theme park is destroyed by a volcano, it's not something that can be replaced so easily, especially since no insurance company in their right mind would cover any of it. Additionally, the island in this film is fictional, which means the writers deliberately chose for a volcanic eruption to be the reason for the evacuation, when they could have just as easily made it so that the military decides to carpet-bomb the island or send in ground troops to gun down all the dinosaurs.
A dormant volcano is a dormant volcano, no reason to think it will erupt only years after you build a theme park on it. The area is not "prone" to a natural disaster. The eruption is a total surprise. Vesuvius erupts once every 2 decades or something and a lot more than a simple theme park is inside its destruction zone (red zone), including 800,000 people. And that is an active volcano. Take a look at Carney Park, a military recreational facility on top of a dormant volcano. Stupid?
Also, the examples you gave are areas with civilian populations that rely on those types of attractions to help stimulate the local economy. Isla Nublar is a privately owned island with no civilian population to speak of, other than park employees, meaning it is 100% reliant on tourism for its revenue.
How many theme parks are built in California, which is severely prone to earthquakes?
That's not an apples to apples comparison. California has a heavy civilian population and theme parks help contribute to their economy. Jurassic World is located on an isolated island with no civilian population and has to rely completely on tourism to stay in business.
12th Aug 2019
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Question: Why would the Trade Federation need the queen to sign a treaty to make their invasion legal if they've already invaded the place and taken over anyway?
21st Jun 2010
Minority Report (2002)
Plot hole: In the scene where Anderton is talking with Hineman, she says to him that "You will bring down the [Precrime] system yourself if you manage to kill your victim. That would be the most spectacular public display of how Precrime didn't work." Shouldn't she be saying "If you manage to not kill your victim"? (01:01:30)
Suggested correction: Well, if Crow did die, then Precrime wouldn't have worked because the whole point is to stop murder from occurring at all.
Ether way it is a hit against precrime. If he does not kill Crow then it shows that the vision may not come true so you do not know if someone would really have killed someone else, outside situation like with the cheating wife at the start where they interrupted the murder. If Crow is murdered then it shows the system is flawed, which would not be as bad as the first as you would still be stopping a lot of the murders.
I can't tell if this reply is suggesting the correction is wrong or stating the line should be "not kill", making the mistake valid. By not killing the victim, that shows how Precrime is actually working and that knowing the future means you can alter it. If the murder occurs, it would weaken Precrime's stance and support that it can prevent crime.
No if he chooses not to kill Crowe then that means that the visions are just a version of the future, and thus not the actual future. So all the people with the halo on them are locked up wrongfully, as they may have decided not to do it like Anderton did, so the system collapses. That was the point, and it did. Hineman's remark is about the idea that precrime stops all murders, unless Andrton does manage to kill Crowe. The system then is flawed but like the previous commentor says, they still prevent most murders instead of all of them, which would count for something.
3rd Sep 2004
Minority Report (2002)
Corrected entry: When Lamar shoots Colin Farrell, where was a pre-cog ball?
Correction: It's explained quite clearly in the film - unless the three precogs are together, it doesn't work. As Agatha is away from the twins, off with Anderton, there's no precognition, so Lamar can kill Witwer without being picked up.
The question still remains though: why was there no pre-cog ball of Witwer's murder rolling, before Agatha was kidnapped by Anderton? Witwer's murder happened a few hours after Crowe's death, hence the pre-vision of Witwer's murder could have easily occurred a few hours after the pre-vision of Crowe's death.
The decision to murder Wither was not made until after Agatha was taken. As stated at the beginning of the film premeditated murder gives them more time to look at the visions and decode the information, crimes of passion only give them minutes.
Well yeah but they aren't attained only after the decision is made by the perpetrator. Anderton got his ball well before he even knew he would do anything. His ball came hours before the intended murder, so should Lamar's. I like this question.
But with Anderton there were events that lead to the murder that happened before he knew anything, like Burgess hiring Crow to be the victim. So somehow the Precogs pickup on that and created a ball. With Wither there was nothing before hand that would trigger the Precogs.
The PreCrime system works by the PreCogs scanning for people with the intent to kill and then determining details. Burgess' intent to murder Witwer came well after Agatha was disconnected, when he discovered that Witwer knew about the framing of Anderton. Therefore, there couldn't have been a ball, as the system was offline.
Correction: It's because Burgess' murder of Witwer would count as a red ball since he doesn't have any reason to murder Witwer until Witwer reveals he's getting too close to uncovering the truth. By the time the precogs would normally have foreseen such a murder (remembering the movie states red ball killings only have a few minutes worth of warning) Agatha has long since been removed from the equation so yes, it makes sense Witwer's death isn't picked up ahead of time.
2nd Aug 2019
True Lies (1994)
Corrected entry: After Bill Paxton pisses himself at the bridge, you see Arnold and Tom walking back towards the van. If you look, it's not Tom Arnold, but some other guy with the same build. The face is obviously different.
Correction: No it's not. That's definitely Tom Arnold. It begs the question as to why they would have a stand-in just for that one scene.
Re stand-ins, as various Friends mistakes demonstrate, stand-ins are often used when the star isn't really needed, due to the shot being from far away, or them being mostly offscreen, etc. Might be the star is done for the day and leaves set, then they suddenly want a pickup shot or a change of scheduling and they work with what they've got.
I agree it is definitely Tom Arnold, but there are many possible reasons for using a stand-in for just one scene, so it begs the questions why you think it begs the question.
But since Tom Arnold was available for the shot it begs the question of why you begged the question about begging the question. I'll get me coat.
I agree with LordSkyegon. There is no reason to use a stand-in in that scene.
13th May 2004
Van Helsing (2004)
Corrected entry: Van Helsing's plan was to kill Dracula and have the antidote injected by midnight, within the time that it takes for the clock to chime 12 times. The fight scene took much longer than that, but the antidote still worked later.
Correction: The antidote cures the curse of the werewolf, no matter how long one has been a werewolf. If it only worked until the final stroke of midnight during the first full-moon, there would be no reason of keeping it, as it would be useless after a certain period of time. And at that time, no werewolves were working for Dracula (Both of the others were killed)
Carl says that they have until the stroke of midnight to get the antidote into Van Helsing before he's stuck with lycanthropy forever.
I assume Carl was mistaken, as it would be quite useless for Dracula to have the antidote if it worked only for a short time from first transformation to the last stroke of midnight. Dracula had the antidote to cure werewolves who opposed him before getting bitten, so obviously the antidote could be used any time. And it indeed worked even after the last stroke of midnight.
I'd gotten the idea that the curse is permanent after the 12th stroke of midnight specifically during a full moon and they become Dracula's slave and a permanent wolf and then the cure is useless. Dracula keeps the cure in case there is a werewolf that can resist his dominance, but after the 12th stroke of midnight they are his slave forever and he doesn't need the cure anymore (except maybe a new werewolf). This is what would happen to Van Helsing as well. Carl and Anna only say they have to kill Van Helsing after midnight, certainly if he didn't manage to kill Dracula, or he becomes his most powerful slave. They say it probably because he would loose control and becomes Dracula's slave and become too dangerous to approach. They can't have the werewolf loose onto the world even if he does kill Dracula, as he would still lose his control and be a permanent Werewolf.
4th Aug 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Continuity mistake: When the camera is panning over the entire army on the Avengers' side for the first time, Captain America is standing in front of everyone, and his shield is intact and round again, while Thanos broke it earlier. The next time we see it, it's back to being broken.
Suggested correction: The top half of his shield was broken off. When he is standing in front of Thanos' army, you can only see the bottom, intact half.
No no, the mistake is about the wide shot where you only see Captain America really small. He has a full shield there (as he is just CGI).
3rd Aug 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Corrected entry: When Rocket pets Scott Lang's hair, one can see an artifact of the motion-capture performer's actual human-sized hand moving Paul Rudd's hair. As a result, Rocket's small hand moves far more hair without actually touching it. (01:04:15)
Correction: This entry is ridiculous. A full sized hand could move all the hair on his head simultaneously. Only the front bit of his hair moves, almost exactly the spot Rocket is supposed to touch. It might not be perfect but it looks quite genuine.
The front bit moves exactly where Rocket touched it... and then a little bit more. It is especially telling where Rocket's fingers end and yet the hair inexplicably moves as if his fingers were longer than they actually were.
3rd Aug 2019
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Question: In the droid factory, when the smasher crushes what Anakin's arm is trapped in, his lightsaber shoots out, but how is it when his arm is released from it, it's now back in his hand as if it never shot out? It seems too noticeable to be a mistake.
Answer: I watched the clip on YouTube. It's hard to see, but Anakin's light saber is always in his hand. Just after the light blade is switched off, the sword's hilt can still be seen in his palm as his arm is trapped. When his arm is freed, he's still holding the light saber, but it has been damaged.
Yeah the top part of the lightsaber is cut off by the machine and bounces off. I think that what the question asker is referring to, mistaking it for the entire saber.
31st Jul 2019
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Question: Since it was possible to create a clone army, why were cybernetic parts given to Anakin, instead of cloning the limbs he lost and attaching them to his body?
Answer: To add to the above it is not just that he is missing arms and legs but his internal organs like lungs are incapable of working properly. So one would have to do more then just replace the arms and legs. In addition Palpatine make the suit vulnerable to force lighting making it harder for Vader to overthrow him as is the way of the Sith.
Answer: Adding to what Phaneron, also note how long it would take to grow said limbs for a full adult. The clones themselves have growth acceleration so that they take half the time a normal person to reach full maturity and growth. But this still takes 10-15 years for the to get to physical adulthood. And their growth acceleration doesn't stop at that point. The reason why none of the Storm Troopers are Clones in the original trilogy, by the time New Hope rolls around, is because they age twice as fast. Most died of old age or were very old by that point as in that 17 year time gap between Episode 3 and 4, they aged 34 years physically, without the growth acceleration being stopped as it's likely not able to be stopped. So it would take a very long time to grow cloned limbs for Anakin and be physically a match for him. And if they did accelerate the growth for said limbs, it would only take a few years before he'd be a younger guy walking around with very old man legs and arms. Not to mention, the arms and legs wouldn't have his muscle mass grown by default without being used.
27th Aug 2001
Jurassic Park (1993)
Corrected entry: When the doctor is showing off the piece of amber that they have gotten the DNA from, there is a problem. The mosquito in the amber is a male, as one can tell by the antennae. Because it is only the female mosquito that feeds on blood, the male should only have nectar in its stomach. To make it worse, in that species of mosquito, Toxirhynchites, both the males AND females are flower feeders, and would therefore have no blood, or dinosaur DNA in their stomachs. (00:25:00)
Correction: Can we not just assume that the mosquito in Amber in the cane is just symbolic and doesn't necessarily have to be the exact species and gender of the mosquitoes that yielded the dino blood and DNA?
Using the actual mosquito will have more meaning to Hammond than a random one. John is also shown to want only the best.
I don't know. I would think that a mosquito preserved in Amber containing dinosaur blood would be exceptionally rare and probably not the kind of thing you'd waste on a cane.
Correction: Hammond's company, InGen, did not deal exclusively with dinosaurs. Dr. Ellie Sattler, the paleo-botanist, observed and mentioned that Jurassic Park was also full of ancient and extinct plant life. InGen used the same process to procure vegetable DNA from ancient insects (such as the Toxirhynchites mosquitoes) that fed on vegetable matter. It's the same process.
Plant sap is composed mostly of water and dissolved sugars, hormones and carbohydrates. It does not contain any DNA.
Incorrect. Plant genomics research shows that plant fluids do, indeed, contain plant DNA. Moreover, a single mosquito could yield the DNA of several different plants, as well as the mosquito's own DNA and the DNA of microbes consumed along with the plant fluids.
Correction: The mosquito in the amber is not one that supplied the DNA for the dinosaurs. We know this because there is no drill hole for the extraction. When the extraction process is shown, a hole several millimetres across is drilled into the amber.
Correction: Plant sap consists of water, some simple sugars, more complex carbohydrates and plant hormones. It does not contain any DNA at all.
It's about the mosquito inside the amber, not the amber itself. Anyway, plant sap most definitely contains DNA, just plant DNA. All living organisms have DNA.
Plant sap does not contain DNA. Phloem sap consists primarily of sugars, hormones, and mineral elements dissolved in water. DNA is polar due to its highly charged phosphate groups and dissolves easily in water. Transporting dissolved DNA would be utterly pointless.
Fine, the amber doesn't contain DNA (it's fossilized anyway). It's still a bad correction.
13th Jul 2019
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Question: In Biff's casino Marty is escaping Biff and his goons - he goes into the stairwell and jumps from one stair to another. What I don't understand is how this stairwell works as it seems to be double, with 2 sets of stairs ending up on the same floor parallel to each other, one on one end and one at another but on the same floor. Does this even make sense? Can anyone tell me why a big building would have 2 sets of stairs in 1 stairwell going parallel and end up on the same floors? Any special name for this type of stairwell perhaps? I can't find anything on it.
Chosen answer: Your assumption is pretty much correct. There are 2 staircases spiralling around each other like a double helix. It is a fairly common way of constructing fire evacuation staircases as it allows a greater number of people to use them at the same time.
I see, so it's purely for fire escape reasons or more to handle overflow capacity in general?
13th Jul 2019
Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015)
Stupidity: Immediately after Unkar Plutt makes Rey a generous offer for BB-8 and she refuses, he tells someone over his communicator to follow her and bring back the droid. He should have at least waited until she was out of earshot before he said that, especially if he was trying to be covert about it.
Suggested correction: But he was out of earshot of her.
I posted this immediately after watching the scene in question, and it looked as though Plutt spoke into his communicator right after Rey turned around and went on her way; certainly too soon for her to have gotten more than a few steps away. Also, he spoke at a normal, conversational volume rather than anything that sounded like a whisper or "sotto voce", so unless he was relying on the ambient noise of other nearby activity, I still believe this "stupidity" is valid.
That depends on how sneaky you think Plutt is. Rey walks away in quick paces, so she is out of earshot. Also I don't think it bothers him that much if she heard, she is just a scavenger, what can she do about it?
Rey was definitely out of earshot. Rey walks completely out of the shot, which appears to be about 10 feet away. Unkar Plutt then angrily swipes the portions off the counter and picks up his communicator. At the pace Rey was walking she would have been a considerable distance away from him when he spoke. In addition, Unkar Plutt lowered his voice when he spoke because he was being sneaky. She might have been able to hear him speak, but it is totally reasonable that she wouldn't be close enough to make out exactly what he was saying.
30th Jun 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did Rocket deliberately hide the fact that he knew where Thanos was? Cap told Tony they couldn't find him but Rocket detected him two days ago.
Answer: They detected an energy surge that they suspect to be Thanos 2 days ago. Tony and Nebula had only just returned and Nebula confirms to them that's where Thanos is. Rocket didn't hide anything, they just hesitated to act on it.
Cap told Tony that they had done various forms of searches and scans and they didn't know where he was. So they didn't know. So it wasn't a matter of "hesitating to act." "Hesitating to act" is also out of character of all the heroes and makes no sense that if they did all that searching only to hesitate when they found him?
No no no. I mispronounced. Nebula tells them where he is, probably told Rocket on the spot where the planet was located and Rocket explains that an identical energy surge that occurred on Earth occurred there as well. They didn't know that was Thanos, they didn't look for it, it may have happened 2 days ago but they didn't notice it. Not until Nebula told them he is there, the energy surge simply confirms he is there and that he used the stones again. I do still think they hesitate, they got no plan, no confidence. They all feel defeated and unable to beat him. They just do all they know, react.
That's not what happened in the movie. Rocket announced the surge and what planet it was and Nebula confirmed it. Not "probably" the other way around. How could they not notice a power that strong? They aren't incompetent. Especially when half of the universe is destroyed. Who else is going to create that? No plan, no confidence? They have Stormbreaker and it stood up to the power of the stones. To the point Thanos had to run and hide. Cap America has never been one to simply "react" when he has time to create a plan. Even if, as you said, all they know is react...You just said they hesitated. Which one is it? They had almost a month. Lastly, again why are they searching for Thanos, if they are defeated and without a plan? what were the expecting to happen when they found him? Send him a postcard?
They wanted revenge, they are the Avengers after all. The plan was to take the stones, but they aren't sure if they could since they failed the last time and Thanos is pretty much unstoppable with all stones, so they are hesitant. Thanos didn't run and hide from Stormbreaker, he just retired and prepared to destroy the stones, he could have turned Stormbreaker into bubbles. Nebula first said she knew where Thanos was, in the next scene Rocket tells about the planet and the power surge there. He talks about it because Nebula told him that's the right planet. Captain Marvel convinces them to just act right now, so they go there. They don't have anything else anymore.
Thanos took an axe to the chest. He isn't unstoppable. "The plan was to take the stones, but they aren't sure if they could..." that's not a plan. Thor had the ability to kill Thanos in his hands. They just needed to find him and take his head off. Thanos couldn't turn Stormbreaker into bubbles. He didn't do it when it was coming at him the first time. Nebula said he had a plan for retirement. Not where exactly. All of this is pointless. I figured it out. Two days is how long it took for that energy surge to reach Earth and be detected. Much like any other interstellar event. When we finally see it, it happened in the past.
I said this before on this website, Thor caught him by surprise, probably the last time anyone could. Thanos had only just gotten the stones and was distracted. We don't know how much power he really has when he had all 6 of them (not as much as in the comics) but I'm pretty sure that if you can eradicate half of all life in the universe you can destroy a simple little axe with them as well. Nebula said she knew exactly where he is, even named the planet. Rocket said there was another power surge 2 days ago, not that it took 2 days to detect the surge.
14th Jun 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did 2014 Thanos bother to come to the future? As we are already aware, changing one time doesn't affect the other, and whether he knows that or not is sort of irrelevant. He could have stayed in 2014 and completed his mission, in fact he could have done it even more easily with the Pym particles he obtained without anyone ever knowing. He really had no reason to need to come forward in time. Knowing that Thor kills him in the future just means he could take steps to prevent that if/when it happens, he didn't need to act right then.
Answer: As an alternative to the above answer, another thing to keep in mind is that Thanos believes that his vision of a better world shouldn't be fought against. Finding out that an alternate universe version of himself wins the battle and then ends up having his plans ruined makes him believe that the heroes of that universe are ungrateful, and that he should help the alternate universe version of himself that died to stay the winner. He's evil. He doesn't just want to win in this universe. He wants to win in all universes.
Answer: He probably also realises that if the Avengers can get all 6 stones, stealing them all at once would be easier than trying to collect them himself.
19th Jun 2019
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Question: When Mola Ram is smiling, what is he looking at? Is he looking at the Maharajah or is he looking up at Willie, Indy and Short Round? (01:01:45)
Answer: It doesn't look as if Mola Ram is smiling at the trio, because they're standing to Mola Ram's upper right. The Little Maharaja is seated in front of the Thuggee high priest, but I don't think he's specifically looking downward, directly at the boy either. To me, it seems as if Mola Ram is smiling because while he's confident in his control of the Little Maharaja, it's the fact that he knows another human sacrifice is being brought out for the Kali sacrificial dark ritual.
The question gives the exact second.
Great, but I don't currently have a DVD player or have a copy or access to every movie someone asks a question about. If someone is asking a question, they shouldn't expect anyone to actually take the time to set up and watch the film in order to answer a question for them. Just give a brief description of the scene.
That's what the time stamp feature is used for. The question is asking what exactly Mola Ram is looking at in a specific second of time in the movie. Explaining the scene wouldn't help anyone answer the question. To answer, you will have to look at the movie and pay specific attention to that time stamp. If you can't do that then you can't answer the question and should just ignore.
I get what you're saying, but I've been able to answer many questions without having to re-watch a movie because the question contained enough specific information so that I knew which scene they were referring to. Based on the information given in the question, I can check movie clips on YouTube or get the answer by reading online movie synopsis. Every little bit of info helps.
Tough luck I guess?
14th Jun 2019
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
Question: Why did time not end when Thanos destroyed the stones, and what happens in now there aren't any? The Ancient One stated that the stones control the flow of time, and removing even one of these opens up the world to unimaginable horror. Well why did nothing happen after Thanos destroyed them all? And now that our timeline has no stones, how would Dr. Strange be able to stop Dormammu from coming back?
Answer: The way I understood it, removing the stones from one timeline into another timeline is what The Ancient One was talking about. The "new branched reality" is what would be overrun by the forces of darkness. But, even if she meant this reality, the reality where Thanos destroyed the stones, The Ancient One said it was their chief weapon, not their only weapon. Bruce then tells her Doctor Strange gave the time stone to Thanos and The Ancient One says maybe she made a mistake. However, since Thanos eliminates half the population of the universe, including the forces of darkness, whatever forces she was talking about may not have been around to try and attack Earth. Or in the 5 years that we don't see, there was an attempt and other weapons were sufficient.
Answer: In the comics the stones will be replaced by something else equally powerful to compensate for their loss. I suppose the same applies to the MCU. These powers need to have a physical presence in the universe, in one way or another.
The only problem is the films never insinuate this at all. The Ancient One flat out states that not having the stones would be bad for the universe, and yet Thanos destroys the stones with absolutely no adverse affects to the universe whatsoever. This movie played very fast and loose with the rules they established regarding the stones and time travel and I feel like things like this were massive flaws.
The universe is a pretty big place, though. There could very well be bad things in another part of the universe that have yet to affect our galaxy. Additionally, the forces of darkness that could potentially threaten the universe may be curbed by a cosmic entity such as the Living Tribunal, whose existence in the MCU was acknowledged in "Doctor Strange" and could very well appear in "The Eternals" or "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3."
I just believe the ancient one didn't even know. The ancient one isn't always correct, as Bruce proved. And the bad thing was taking the stones away from their timeline, creating timelines where they are not supposed to be, it says nothing about destroying them.
That to me is still bad writing. You have a character whose entire purpose in the movie is to give exposition, and the exposition she gives is apparently incorrect. That's all well and good but that still needs to be addressed at some point. Some character should have brought up the fact that the stones were destroyed (and incidentally, remain destroyed in the main timeline) and the Ancient One should have addressed that fact. Otherwise, like the original question points out, it leaves a bit of a gap in the film's logic.
Answer: I believe the filmmakers have said that the energy of the stones was dissipated into the universe when their crystal vessels were destroyed. So that while they didn't have a physical form anymore, their essence remained and continued to regulate the flow of existence of the Universe. Presumably the energy can't then be reconstituted into the stones without some sort of profoundly intricate magic/science, the kind of power only possessed by gods and/or ancient elemental beings. Also, the Ancient One says that Hulk taking the time stone would be good for his timeline, but would leave hers without their weapon, which I presume means they wouldn't have the time stone to help the Sanctum's usual efforts in holding dark magic at bay. The actual effect of removing the essence of a stone from its timeline is still open to speculation.
If the ancient one was only talking about the time stone then Cap wouldn't have to bother bringing all stones back. No, she was talking about all infinity gems. Remove a stone and that universe is doomed.
Answer: The sorcerers may have other ways to stop Dormmamu from returning (even if those ways are currently unbeknownst to them). This could be addressed in the sequel. Additionally, since Dormmamu would have to know that the Time Stone was destroyed in the first place, he may well just stay away rather than falsely believing that he can be trapped in a time loop again.
Answer: She said the world not the universe. She said "without our chief weapon against the forces of darkness our world will be overrun." Theory: since Thanos used the stones to destroy the stones and Hulk heard what the Ancient One said, he could have used the stones to bring back their stones along with everyone else. He couldn't have know who all died in the universe, he could have just undid everything from 5 years ago.
10th Jun 2019
Avengers: Infinity War (2018)
Question: Instead of telling Stark to turn the donut around why doesn't he use a sling ring?
Answer: The range of the sling rings hasn't been defined. They were in deep space at this point, so they may have been too far away for Strange to open up a portal on Earth for them to step through.
In Endgame, Strange opens at least one portal from across the galaxy. For example, we see the one opened from Titan that he, Spiderman, and the Gaurdians all come through. Unless his sling powers suddenly increased after the great purge, he should have been able to open a portal from deep space on the ship.
Answer: The Q Ship was travelling in some form of hyperspace. It would be reasonable to assume that the slingring could not work under those circumstances. When he does use it later, it is from the surface of the planet Titan.
And when they arrive on Titan his idea to protect the time stone changes. He instead looks at different time-lines.
Why would it be different in hyperspace? The ship has its own gravity.
By definition, hyperspace exists outside normal time and space. Depending on how the sling ring works, it may not be able access normal space.
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.
Correction: Shrinking for those more common actions would not eat up as many Pym particles as say, shrinking enough to go sub atomic, as well as controlling where you're going and doing time travel.
Quantom X ★
This was addressed in the post. Scott calculated all the Pym particles he had on hand and said there was enough for 1 round trip each and 2 tests. Not '1 round trip, 2 tests and an indeterminate amount of shrinking during the mission which we haven't planned yet.' Plus, he uses a whole vial in mistakenly shrinking before the test, after which he says there's enough for 1 test, not 2. So, maybe there are enough extra Pym particles to do some shrinking after they plan the mission, but this is never brought up and would seem to contradict what Scott has already said about it and what we see onscreen about how many Pym particles it takes just to shrink (though the shrinking tech has never really been consistently portrayed in any of the films featuring it). So, a justification for one perceived mistake just raises a question somewhere else. There's just something off about how the film conveys the circumstances of using the Pym particles, however it is parsed.
Vader47000
Thanos has access to technology centuries beyond Earth. It's definitely possible his crew of henchmen were able to replicate the particles.
To add to Quantom X's correction: Thanos' men reverse engineered the Pym particles to allow evil Nebula to return with the others and pull the ship through the timestream. Remember it can take as long as they want to reverse engineer it before sending evil Nebula back, nobody would notice. There were never any more particles used than what Scott had available. Either more were obtained (from Pym himself in 1970's), or more made (by Thanos' men). I agree with the original correction that the small size shrinking obviously doesn't use up as much particles as the subatomic shrinking does and that's why he could do it.
lionhead
The shrinking tech for Scott and the shrinking tech for objects are two different things, remember he has those red and blue discs that shrink and grow things and he uses the vial in the suit.