Question: What did Doc mean when he said "It's not revenge he's after. It's the reckoning"?
Chosen answer: A reckoning is like a judgment day, exacting retribution for one's actions. Doc was very well educated and had a very large vocabulary. He was correctly pointing out the subtle difference between revenge (to make Wyatt feel better about losing Morgan and about Virgil's crippling injury) and the fact that Wyatt was bringing about a judgment day (or reckoning) for each of the men who hurt his family.
Answer: I've spent a lot of time thinking about this very question, and here's what I've come up with. I think there are at least two differences between revenge and a reckoning. First, I think it has to do with the scale of the response to an offending action. Revenge, in my mind, is an eye for an eye, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will inflict the same action on your family (or group, gang, whatever). " A reckoning is less a measured response to an offending action and more of a full-scale punishment, i.e, "You killed my brother and wounded another, so I will now slaughter your entire family-including those who were not directly responsible for the offending action." Second, I think there is also a difference in motivation. Revenge tends to be a very personal response to something, whereas a reckoning tends to be more of a response fueled by a need for justice. In Wyatt's case, it was both. He was enraged by what happened to his family, but was also a lawman.
Thank you for this response! I've only seen Tombstone a million times and asked the same question every time. It's hard to separate the difference between the two but I believe you nailed it. Well done.
I'm thinking the opposite in terms. Revenge is "Reflexive" and is generally any means necessary (out of an abundance of pain or rage) to hurt the other party. "Revenge is a dish best served cold." If one is exacting justice there's no need to be cold hearted. Therefore, Reckoning is (to me) a fair balancing of the "scales" hence "an eye for an eye." Not only consequences of actions as it were but a corrective action to an incorrect circumstance. Just my understanding.
The problem with that theory is there is no difference in the end because the end result was the same...the killing. True reckoning could have only been achieved though the apprehension and punishment by trial and jury, anything other than that is simply revenge.
Question: Was there supposed to be some more of the scene between Carter and Susan after she had killed the third shark?
Answer: I assume you are referring to the scene after Susan killed the second shark (she was killed before the third shark was killed). The comments LL makes to finish that scene do seem a little out of place with what they were talking about but the film does have a number of scenes cut out. Most of the deleted scenes on the DVD deal with character development and dialogue but there is no evidence the scene was cut as the DVD's deleted scenes dont have any extra footage on that scene or alternate dialogue.
Answer: Yes, Susan and Carter actually share a kiss in the original ending. They grew smitten with one another in unreleased deleted scenes leading up to it. The kiss is interrupted by Sherman "Preacher" Dudley clearing his throat, who's still recovering from his wounds. This, of course, was part of the unreleased original ending that was changed at the last minute due to test audiences wanting Susan to die. The footage was never released but there are stills from said kiss and this was how it was scripted to end. Fans started a petition on the Change site asking Warner to release the original ending and even Thomas Jane is promoting it on his Instagram account. But as of now, the ending has yet to be released.
Question: Maybe I missed some dialogue, but why exactly did Voller think the fissure they were flying towards would take him to his desired date in 1939? I get that the dial detects fissures in time, but why would he think that particular fissure was the one he needed to travel through?
Answer: There is a bit of dialogue en route to the airport when Voller sets the instrument that says, "the first hand sets the destination," as in the time you want to travel back to. This would make the device completely absurd in principle if true (that's why I wanted to mark it as a plot hole/stupidity). Since it's supposed not to open portals but just detect them, it can't be that there are infinite portals for every moment in time you can choose to go back to (and they even close). The sky, while vast, is not infinite. We then find out that it is a trick since it is set to actually bring you to just one destination, but they don't know it yet.
Answer: We're supposed to accept that the dials are pointing to the rift in the sky, which is what makes this plot decision so ridiculous. There's no common reference point (magnetism wouldn't be discovered until and used in compasses for another 2,000 years), and the dial is 2-dimensional. Thus, you could turn your body 90 degrees and aim it down, and there's no indication from the movie that the dial would in any way turn to face the previous rift.
I think, technically, the fact that there's no common reference point is addressed when Voller mentions that the coordinates given are 'Alexandrine coordinates'... which I think might be another anachronism since all I can think it means is the ones used by Ptolemy in his Geography, which was hundreds of years after Archimedes' time. The dial is 2-dimensional, but there are 3 hands. It can be argued that when all 3 align, it does show that the direction you are headed is definitely correct, including the height you are pointing at. I definitely think it's entirely implausible, but the way the unknown mechanism works, attuned to something that does not exist such as time rifts, is kind of a lesser problem. Even if it is supposed to work by some mathematical principle, and then acts as some dowser rod.
Not true. The Chinese were using compasses around 200 BC, and Vikings are believed to have had them as well.
Answer: As they approach the rift, all three of the dial's hands are suddenly pointing towards it. If that is no clear indicator, then what is?
The dial pointing towards it only indicates that they are heading towards the fissure. How does that give Voller any certainty that this is the exact fissure he needs to travel through in order to reach his desired destination, especially considering it ended up not being the one he needed? Were there coordinates in Basil's diary that indicated where the exact fissure would open? I only recall the date of August 20 (?), 1939 being written down.
Only the time is written in the diary (the date you mention is next to August 20, 1969, which would be then supposedly when the finale of the movie takes place). For the coordinates, you need to have the device, which, apparently, allows you also to input with firsthand your desired destination. Voller couldn't know that to concoct his plan, though, since he did not have the diaries at the beginning of the movie.
Question: After Anakin becomes Darth Vader, he seems ruthless, actually evil. "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!" Is just one quote. That being the case, this movie makes it seem like Anakin knows that he's evil and wishes he wasn't. Basically, my question is, why didn't Anakin turn on Palpatine sooner? Or simply leave the Sith?
Answer: Darth: "Obi-Wan once thought as you do. You don't know the power of the dark side. I must obey my master." It's implied that the dark side is intoxicating, once you totally give in to the dark side it has a hold on you, and appeals to morality and rationalization are useless against your lust for its power. (On a symbolic level, the dark side is a metaphor for vice. Darth Vader is an addict and abusive parent. It's actually funny how many scenes still make sense if you replace "the dark side" with "the bottle" or similar).
If we bring the prequels into it, it's one of the criticisms of those films that they only make the question of how much Anakin is a "true believer" more confusing. But it stands to reason that at first Anakin may feel vindicated in his resentment toward the Jedi. Later on, Vader may not feel that as strongly, but by then his anger has turned toward himself for failing to save Padme. He may feel that a man as terrible as he does not deserve to be "rescued" from the dark side, leading to a feedback loop where he only gets further enamored with its power and does more evil things which causes him to hate himself even more, and so it goes.
Answer: Anakin was seduced by the emperor to think that the Jedi were evil. This was partly fueled by anger &fear, thinking Padme would die if Palpatine didn't help save her. After he turned to Darth Vader & joined the dark side, he eventually realised the true nature of the Emperor, but he was to weak to do anything about it. Darth Vader still wanted to rule the galaxy, but didn't want the emperor controlling everything. He just wanted to use Luke to help overthrow the emperor and take over the galaxy. It wasn't until he found out he had a daughter also, and saw Luke about to die by the hands of the emperor, that he realised that Luke was right & he needed to switch sides.
Vader was not just using Luke to kill the Emperor. He actually did want to rule the galaxy as father and son - if Luke would turn to the Dark Side, that is.
Question: What does the sequence with the fake Brill have to do with anything? I've watched this scene several times and can't find its significance in the film.
Chosen answer: The fake Brill is an undercover federal agent trying to find out what Will Smith knows about the video tape.
Poor writing though as that character is never spoke of again.
Question: If the Wolf, the Ape, and the Croc were all exposed to the chemical around the same time, then why is it that the Croc grew to almost triple the size of the other two by the time they hit the city? The ape is bigger than the croc at normal sizes and the wolf is more or less the same size. So why did the croc get that much bigger than the other two?
Answer: Perhaps the chemical has different effects on the animals that it is being exposed to, and the crocodile was mutated into a much bigger size than the gorilla and wolf. I don't think the movie is really expecting anyone to question this, but is really just done to give the protagonists an opponent to face.
Question: In the scene right before the big bank heist, a detective comes into the situation room informing the team that a CI Hugh Benny had a tip about Neil McCauley looking at Far East National Bank. How the heck did Waingro (working for Benny and VanZandt) even know about this score? McCauley hadn't even discussed it with Kelso when Waingro took down the armored car.
Answer: Waingro helped Van Zandt track down Trejo. Waingro then tortured Trejo and threatened his family if he didn't give up McCauley. With his back to the wall, Trejo gave Waingro and Hugh Benny the details of the bank heist, but Waingro killed Trejo's family anyway and beat Trejo almost to death. Benny then gives the tip to the police on Van Zandt's order.
I wonder how Trejo was tracked, I don't remember his name being revealed during Waingro's time with the crew, or any other information.
Well, we never see the crew prior to their first heist. Trejo could have given Waingro his name during the planning of that heist.
Waingro met this crew only once. How would he know who Trejo is or where he lives? Right before the heist, Trejo is asked to mislead police away from the heist.
Question: Does Vader sleep in his suit?
Answer: Darth Vader has a special chamber in which parts of the suit can be removed for comfort. When he is not in the chamber he must wear it at all times in order to survive.
Answer: Darth Vader does have his own personal chamber made to assist him with the equipment /suit he wears as well as, I'm sure, for resting/meditation purposes. Also keep in mind that Jedi/Sith, especially those trained to use the force (particularly those having mastered it), don't need the same sleep requirements regular folks need. They can "sleep" sitting straight up, on top of much harder elements and they can even "draw" energy from the force to help them stay awake. The expanded universe, via the books, gives more examples of Jedi/Sith sleeping or measures they take.
Question: Could someone please explain the goat in Xerxes' 'sex room' (for lack of a better word). The scene before Xerxes offers the hunchback Ephialtes everything, this scene begins with a shot of a goat with human hands playing an instrument and (I believe) smoking something. Does Xerxes have a goat fetish or something? Could someone kindly explain this for me.
Answer: The scene is meant to show that Xerxes has exotic creatures/slaves from every corner of the world. In the reality of the film, a goat-headed musician would certainly qualify.
Question: Why did John's house suddenly alter so drastically when Jack's hand was blown off in the past? Did this one event somehow turn John into a better interior decorator?
Answer: Because the house is no longer John's. In this universe, his parents still live there.
Or he lives there and his wife redecorated.
I always took the scene at the end with Julia and Frank getting in a packed car with an older looking Elvis as them moving and leaving the house for John. And as I said above John's wife must have moved in and decorated.
Answer: The house changed because John's life changed, with both his parents alive to nurture and guide him, he became a different person. Different lifestyle and attitudes.
Question: In the second Terminator movie, the Terminator says that he can't self-terminate. When the Terminator is trying to defeat T-X, he manages to destroy himself and her in the process. If the Terminator couldn't self-terminate in the second movie, how come the new one could?
Answer: The difference there would be suicide vs sacrifice. In T2, basically what he meant is he could not commit suicide as it was against his programming. They had beat the T-1000 and had won, but it was too dangerous for Terminator to stick around and knew he had to be destroyed. But he could not purposely do it to himself as it was an act of suicide. However in T3, it was a sacrificial move. The goal of his actions was not to destroy himself, it was to take out the TX and prevent her from reaching John. He had to do this by any means necessary and made a sacrifice play by shoving his core into her mouth and blowing them both up. It wasn't suicide this way, it wasn't self termination. He was taking her out but caused himself to be collateral damage.
Also, after watching that scene again, I'm adding this little tidbit. The Terminator didn't actually die from the thing he did to the TX in that move. If you notice towards the end after the nuclear bombs go off, the fall out ash is falling down around its head and its eyes are still on, slowly fading away. It was badly damaged by its move, but the bombs in the end finished him off.
Answer: For me, T2 was a lot about machines being able to learn so in T3 when he managed to shut himself down it was because he had learned compassion and not to be just a machine following orders as well as understanding how vital it was that John survived.
Answer: If you listen in the second film, I don't remember if it was cut out of the theatrical film and put back in the extended version or not, John and Terminator are in the desert looking at the guns Terminator says "I have to stay functional until the missions is complete." Once the T1000 is dead Terminator had no other reason to function and thus sacrificed himself. In this film he knows the fuel cell would destroy the TX once that happened his mission was completed and no longer had any real reason to function anyone.
That can't be the case, because by the end of T2 his mission was complete, and he still couldn't self terminate.
Question: When Danny presses the button, the red spaceship moves onto a white space. Later in the movie, after accepting the astronauts' help, all three discover that the red spaceship is now on a blue space. How could it have gotten there? Neither Danny or Walter kicked the board and Danny never actually moved it from its original position since they had to deal with getting rid of the Zorgons.
Answer: If you are talking about the part where Walter says that Danny cheated and Danny says "someone must have kicked the board", you're right, no one did kick the board. After again being asked if he moved the piece, Danny says "maybe I moved the piece by accident." I think this implies that Danny cheated and moved the piece himself, which is why it was on a different coloured space.
Except, it never showed Danny moving the piece at all. When Walter moved Danny's piece back to the space it was originally on, the game shot out a card accusing Walter of cheating and tried ejecting him out of the house. If Danny had moved the piece by accident and therefore technically cheated, it kind of raises the question as to why he never received a card accusing him of cheating and ejecting him from the house as well.
I think the answer to this is in the card's text - "Caught cheating" I believe this implies that since Walter was observed physically moving a piece by the other player, that is what triggered the cheating detection. Nobody saw Danny move his piece, so he was technically not caught cheating in the moment. So, ostensibly, one may be able to cheat as long as they are not caught by the other player.
Question: Why is Frank Castle's hideout in the sewers?
Answer: With how many criminals Frank has killed, many of them would definitely want revenge. By hiding in the sewers, there's less chance of him or his hideout being discovered. If Frank lived anywhere above ground, his enemies would be able to find him more quickly and kill him.
Chosen answer: Because of the stink and water, it would be impossible for police dogs to track him. The sewers are also good for quick retreat and hiding.
Question: When Chozen, while bullying Daniel, takes the latter's handheld drum (which Chozen mockingly called a "baby rattle") and calls the latter a baby, Kumiko, sticking up for Daniel, fiercely says a phrase in Japanese (or Ryukyuan) to Chozen. What exactly does Kumiko say, and what does it mean? (00:57:50)
Answer: "You are crazy."
Question: When Joker goes to Vicky's apartment, how did he know where she lived?
Answer: He could have looked up her address in the phone book. Just before Bruce arrives at Vikki's apartment, Joker asks Bob the Goon for - a phone book. Also he could have been tailing Bruce and found her apartment that way, after all he does show up not long after Bruce does.
Chosen answer: She's a semi-famous reporter/photographer. It would be fairly easy (especially for a criminal) to find her home.
Question: Did Ethan actually know it was a mole hunt to trap Jim, or was he oblivious until he worked it out at the train station?
Answer: Ethan never thought it was a mole hunt to trap Jim. He found out from Kittridge at the restaurant that it was a mole hunt, but Kittridge believes that Ethan is the mole (the money his parents mysteriously receive). At the station Ethan realises that Jim must be the mole since it is too convenient both he and his wife survived. However, the hunt to catch the mole was never directed at Jim - Kittridge never suspected him until at the end when he sees Jim alive.
Actually had suspicions before Jim showed up. Ethan found the Bible that was stamped from the Drake Hotel. Where Jim had literally just come back from before the mission. It made no sense otherwise why that would be in Jim's possession.
Question: What are the little clear beads that Agent 47 puts down before his hotel room door after he rejects the blonde girl at the bar? They seem to release some kind of gas when the FSB raids his room but I thought they were only put down so he would hear them be crushed when stepped on (which would be impossible to hear if he were doing anything else other than listening for them).
Answer: The reason for the beads being put down was so he could hear if someone stepped on them. Notice how he heard them after Diana said his location was compromised. The beads never released any gas. The smoke filling the room could have either been caused by the explosive device he attached to the door which set most of the room on fire or, they could have been smoke grenades throw into the room by the FSB in an attempt to apprehend 47 although they were unaware he had already escaped.
Question: In the scene where Cheyenne visits Jill at the McBain's residence for the first time, he asks her whether she knows something about a man with a harmonica, although the three of them (Cheyenne, Harmonica and Jill) met earlier in the movie when Cheyenne tells Harmonica to "watch those false notes." Why doesn't Cheyenne just ask her for the man whom she probably still remembers from this event?
Answer: The movie was filmed at multiple locations in Spain and Italy, and also in Utah. Chances are they filmed out of sequence and made minor changes to the script later in the movie. There are many things left unclear in the movie, for example the same scene at the cantina/store, just after Cheyenne's crew shows up, he refers to Harmonica by his name when no-one said his name up until that point.
Answer: He meant what does she know about him personally. What's his real name, where does he come from and why is he so interested in everything.
Then he should have asked "do you know something about THE man with THE harmonica?" instead of "do you know something about A man going around playing A harmonica?" (time stamp 01:05:25 for the restored version) or am I missing something? He already knows that she has seen him because he was there so he could just ask "do you know something about the guy with the harmonica we met at the bar earlier?" I just don't understand why Cheyenne is using an indefinite article because he and Jill both know who he is referring to.
Chosen answer: "It doesn't have to be a snowman."
Phixius ★