Question: When Venkman is on the phone with Egon, he says that he shot Dana/Zuul up with 300 cc of Thorazine. Since Thorazine is a powerful anti-psychotic drug, it's unlikely that Dana had some in her medicine cabinet. If she didn't already have some on hand, then where did Venkman get it? He said that he has a PhD in psychology, so is he able to prescribe medications for anyone?
lionhead
11th Feb 2010
Ghostbusters (1984)
19th Dec 2010
Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Question: Why does Hugo Stiglitz kill the German officers in the first place? The film mentions his enlistment, but how is this related to his killings?
Answer: Based on his willingness to join the Basterds, we can assume he killed them because he didn't believe in what the Nazis were doing.
There is a cut of him being whipped during the bar scene. I think he was taking revenge for harsh and perhaps undeserved punishment.
No, the whipping is how it feels in his mind sitting next to that SS officer and having to pretend to like him and be a Nazi. He's ready to snap.
5th Nov 2021
Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021)
Question: What exactly happens to a host's body once the symbiote emerges? At the end of Venom, when Venom is threatening the robber, he partially opens his face, and we see Eddie's face. In this movie, when Cletus/Carnage is escaping from prison, guards start shooting at Carnage who then splits open his entire midsection but Cletus is nowhere to be seen.
Answer: The host and symbiote merge fully. So the symbiote can totally disappear into the host and the host can totally disappear into the symbiote. They can also split again, or partially, at will. It just depends on who gets to be the active version at that time.
I am not up to speed with recent Marvel canon, but in the comics it's never been that way? The symbiote can surely slink inside the host (especially Carnage in Kasady's blood), but the humans can't turn into shapeless goo. Comics aside, that sequence from the movie is mind-boggling; I can sorta explain it thinking the symbiote just tore Kasady's torso in half and then reattached it instantly (in other parts of the movie Eddie gets basically stabbed with what would be lethal wounds).
Actually, in the comics it's long been established that Carnage's healing factor is Deadpool-levels of broken. There are numerous moments where Carnage is impaled, crushed, decapitated, has his neck twisted, even grenades blowing up in his jaws and straight up nailed by military missiles... AND HE'S JUST FINE AND WALKS IT OFF LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED. He absolutely could casually tear himself open with no drawback whatsoever.
"Could" tear himself open, does he usually?"Can turn into shapeless goo", has he? One thing is to regenerate the torso, another thing is to manipulate your body parting before the bullets reach you.I don't really see that from the example posted, but my curiosity aside, given we're talking about the movie anyway, I really don't see Kasady depicted as a shapeshifter, and him and the symbiote in this movie are entirely separated at the end (pending a sequel of course).
Also, for Carnage specifically, the human absolutely can turn into shapeless goo. Makes sense, actually, given that the symbiote canonically merged into Kasady's own cells and microscopic DNA, something even Venom and its hosts can't replicate https://2.bp.blogspot.com/9DjIg5e1HwLrwx-lhLjXxlUqzici7xajVTQZMhEHW8a0X9BqdRFE4U6eaBuPKXJgb8zSxkTytpvh=s1600 so the "symbiote-opening-up-the-host-body-with-holes" being a Carnage specific thing isn't surprising at all, in fact, given it's the same body.
25th Oct 2021
Groundhog Day (1993)
Question: Phil asks the landlady at the hotel if there is any hot water, and she laughs and says there wouldn't be any today. Why wouldn't there be any hot water? Wouldn't the hotel have boilers?
Answer: In a lot of old hotels those days used water heaters instead of boilers. A water heater has a limited amount of water heated, stored in a tank. So at the end of the week and every guest showering and using hot water during that week, the hot water will be gone before they refill the water heater at a specific day.
That's not how hot water heaters work. The water temperature is maintained by a thermostat. Once empty, it would take time to heat the refilled tank-but it's not heated on a specific day. The other answer is more correct.
Answer: Her laughter seems to imply that the rooms never have hot water when it's as cold as it was that day; maybe the pipes freeze, or her boiler just isn't very good. This isn't a five-star hotel, it's a small B&B run, it seems, solely by Mrs. Lancaster. Maybe she hasn't gotten around to fixing/arranging to fix whatever is wrong with the hot water, or it's just not something she sees as a big problem.
22nd Oct 2021
Jumanji (1995)
Question: Why is Peter smiling when Sarah was crying and frightening after Alan tricked her to roll the dice?
Answer: He found the trick amusing. It caused her to continue playing the game and that means finishing the game so their problems would go away. Or so he thought at that time.
Answer: Earlier in the film Peter uses "reserve psychology" to trick Alan into continuing the game. He then finds it funny when Alan pulls a similar trick on Sarah to force her to play.
22nd Oct 2021
Addams Family Values (1993)
Question: I'm just curious but is it possible to actually kill a member of the Addams family? Fester survives both the bathtub electrocution and the bomb explosion, Pubert can stop the guillotine blade with his bare hand, and in the first film Pugsley willingly lets Wednesday electrocute him with no apparent ill-effects.
Answer: They can be killed. In the first movie, Morticia talks about several relatives who were murdered, and the whole family seems pretty scared when they're strapped in the electric chairs. They're hard core and lucky, but not immortal.
Answer: They originate as a cartoon (1938). So they are basically immortal cartoon characters like the Looney Tunes.
21st Oct 2021
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
8th Oct 2021
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
Question: Is this true that line "I didn't know you could read" was improvised by Tom Felton, who forgot his original line?
Answer: Yes. It's a common occurrence in a lot of movies for actors to forget their original lines so they improvise something to help move the scene along and not break character. Tom did this because he forgot what his original line was.
Answer: Yes in the same way Daniel Radcliffe improvised his line about always being around when talking to Lucius at the end.
Actually, Jason Isaacs said that, and he and Daniel didn't forget their lines but did it intentionally.
4th Jan 2019
The Terminator (1984)
Question: How exactly do both the Terminator and Kyle find addresses? We are led to believe that is the reason for the phone books, but none of the addresses in the phone books match up to the addresses where either the first Sarah is killed, nor the apartment of our Sarah.
Answer: Gonna be totally honest... that might just be nothing more than a simple continuity error. They accidentally made a phonebook prop that didn't match up with the locations where they shot, and assumed most people wouldn't notice or care. (And to be even more honest, I never noticed it until I saw this question today.)
Answer: My two cents: The T-800 Terminator does indeed, rip out the page of a phonebook for the address, but remember, he was looking for any and all Sarah Connors, not a specific address. He did not know which Sarah would give birth to John Connor, so by process of elimination he began terminating any woman with the name Sarah Connor. He did plug the first Sarah Connor (a housewife), then went to kill the other Sarah Connors in the phone book.
I already gave that answer, but apparently that's not what the question is asking.
Answer: Both the T-800 and Kyle look up Sarah's address in the phonebook and it's Kyle who rips out a page. Neither uses a police computer; that's the T-1000 in Terminator 2.
But that doesn't answer the question (and it's already been mentioned) since the information in the phonebook appears wrong.
Answer: Kyle, as we are shown, uses a police computer to find the addresses. The T800 just uses the phonebook as you mentioned. He rips the page out and takes it with him.
Except 2 of the addresses in the phone book don't match. So how does the Terminator find them using the phonebook?
The Terminator is just blindly killing everyone in the phone book whose name is Sarah Connor (apparently a common name). Process of elimination. So, the day he arrives, unrelated women named Sarah Connor start dropping like flies, and the police believe it's the work of a serial killer. Our heroine Sarah Connor barely escapes this sweeping extermination by sheer luck and Kyle's intervention.
You just described the plot. Were you trying to answer the question? Because the question still stands. (As it is, it's either a mistake or plot hole in the film).
Perhaps I'm not getting the question. What is meant by "none of the addresses in the phone books match up"? Match up to what, the murder scene addresses? I wasn't aware that the murder scene addresses were prominently displayed.
Exactly. The addresses seen don't match. Specifically the first Sarah Connor's house number is "14239", but in the phonebook it is listed as "1823." And the real Sarah Connor lives in an apartment but the phonebook doesn't list an apartment number.
Perhaps though this all doesn't matter because phone books can quickly become outdated, the phone book he found could be over a year old. Someone moves but can still be listed in the phone book with their old address. He could have gone to the addresses but found someone else living there and then asked where the previous owner might be, and he was told (or he forced them). This might be how he found all the Sarah Connors.
Are any of the Sarah's listed as living at 1823? I've not got access to the film right now to check.
The first is listed as "1823." The second is "2816." The 3rd is "309." Although after reviewing the scene and thinking about it, for "309" (which is supposedly our Sarah J Connor), the full address isn't actually seen and the apartment number could have been listed.
Reese never uses a police computer; that's the T-1000 in Terminator 2. He rips out the page from the phonebook. The T800 also uses the phonebook but is never shown ripping out a page.
27th Sep 2021
Total Recall (1990)
Question: Why is there air in and around the reactor? Humans have extensively researched the reactor, so they obviously needed air to do it, but doesn't Cohaagen control all the air on Mars, and the reactor? So if he doesn't want anyone to turn the reactor on why not simply drain the air from the reactor so nobody could go there?
Answer: The entire chamber is full of the alien graphite that converts into a breathable atmosphere for the entire planet.
But it's not activated.
Answer: They are on a planet with very little atmosphere; therefore, there must be a supply of environmental suits readily available for exploration of the planet's surface and for going outside to repair problems with the outside of the dome. If there are a number of suits available, the absence of air around the reactor would not be a deterrent. People could simply "borrow" one of the many suits and walk on in regardless of the lack of air.
27th Sep 2021
The Terminator (1984)
Question: In various online posts, I often see the Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) referred to as a T-800. However, I never heard that model used in either of the first two films, unless I missed something. I do remember in part two the terminator refers to himself as a Cyberdyne Systems model 101. So where did the T-800 name come from?
Answer: In a Terminator 2 deleted scene the term is on the HUD of the terminator. The terminator itself is a series 800, an upgrade to the 600 series mentioned by Kyle Reese in Terminator 1, which only had rubber skin. The Arnold Schwarzenegger type of skin is the Model 101. In flashforwards in Terminator 1 you see a T-800 Model 102 infiltrate a rebel base, which looks different. Several types of terminator can wear the same skin Model. So there can also be a T-850 Model 101 (as seen in Terminator 3).
16th Jan 2017
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Question: Two questions: something I have never understood about Marty traveling into the future to stop his kid from going to jail. In the first movie when Doc. puts his dog into the time machine and sends him 1 min into the future the car disappears for 1 min and arrives back with the dog in the car. Doc explains that as far as the dog is concerned the trip was instantaneous but to Marty and Doc the dog disappears for 1 min. The question is when Marty travels into the future shouldn't he have "disappeared" for 30 years and not had an older self. The second question is, why is it so important for them to travel 30 years into the future to stop his kid from getting arrested, couldn't he have just as easily told Marty "hey on this day and year, don't let your kid leave the house. You have 30 years to figure out a reason or break his leg."
Answer: In the film, that one event sets off a chain reaction that destroys Marty's family, so it's paramount that they stop it from ever happening. Too many things could go wrong just trying to prevent it. Since Marty Jr. looks like 1985 Marty, the plan is to have Marty Sr. Take his place, rather than try to get 2015 Marty Sr. To ground his son or something. Plus, Doc says it's important they don't know too much about their future, so that's why he can't just tell them what to do in 30 years because he could reveal too much. Of course, if you overthink it too much, you can make it all fall apart, or come up with different ways to accomplish the same thing.
Chosen answer: To answer the first question, it's because Marty ultimately returns to the past and therefore does live his normal life for the next 30 years. Had Einstein traveled back that one minute, he would be there as well. As to the second question, Doc needs to be sure Marty's son doesn't go and can't leave it to chance that Marty will take take care of it after 30 years.
17th Sep 2021
Constantine (2005)
Question: Are we to assume Gabriel lives on as a human on Earth after Father takes his wings? Can there be another reason Gabriel submerged into the water after his wings are burned off? Suicide maybe?
Answer: Gabriel would never commit suicide. That is a mortal sin and would put him in Hell. Yes, he lives his life as a mortal from now on, and like Constantine did, he has to prove himself to God again to be brought back into His good graces. Or wind up in Hell otherwise.
13th Sep 2021
The Sixth Sense (1999)
Question: When the video of the dead girl is played at her funeral it shows her mom adding something to her soup. What was she adding to the girl's soup?
Answer: She was adding some type of poisonous household substance over an extended period of time. It appears the mother suffered from Munchausen By Proxy syndrome, a psychological disorder where a parent knowingly makes and keeps their child (or some other relative) sick. The parent usually does not intend to kill the child, but they have become addicted to the attention and drama of interacting with doctors, other medical personnel and being at the hospital. In this case, the daughter died.
To add, she was feeding her daughter an industrial disinfectant and detergent called Nu-Pine (for wooden floors). She gave small doses which slowly poison the body, causing organ failure over time.
That is just an assumption. It's just as plausible that the mother intended to kill the girl, but was doing it slowly so as not to attract attention. That's how I've always interpreted it.
31st Aug 2021
Beetlejuice (1988)
Answer: Lydia is being possessed, like during the "Tally Me Banana" scene earlier in the movie.
Let me clarify: like the others at the dinner party during the "Tally Me Banana" scene.
4th Sep 2021
Spider-Man (2002)
Question: How did the Green Goblin find out Peter was Spider-Man?
Answer: Like Norman, Peter came in late to the thanksgiving dinner and Peter had a wound at the same spot Norman wounded Spiderman.
Answer: When Green Goblin and Spider-Man are fighting during the apartment fire, Goblin is able to cut Spider-Man on the arm. Later, after the fight, when meeting for Thanksgiving dinner, Norman sees Peter has a cut on his arm in the same spot as Spider-Man.
31st Aug 2021
The Terminator (1984)
Question: Why didn't Terminator scan the punks clothes before ordering to hand them over?
Answer: He probably did but we just didn't get to see it like we did in Terminator 2.
Question: Why did Jack cut himself before throwing the coin to Will? I thought the curse only needed Will's blood?
Answer: The curse needs the blood of everybody who took a coin from the chest. All the other pirates have already contributed so, as the movie opens, the only blood needed is Will's, substituting for his father. During the finale of the movie, Jack takes a coin from the chest, adding himself to the curse, so his blood is now required as well as Will's.
But I didn't see any blood on the coins, and none of the pirates cut themselves, even before Will became part of the mix.
Yes, the other pirates did cut themselves before Will came into it, off-screen. The lack of blood on the coins can simply be explained as most of it dripping to the bottom of the chest, it being washed away by storms blown into the cave, or by the fact that they didn't drop that much blood on it in the first place.
When they had Elizabeth they believed she was Bill Turner's daughter, but they all thought the curse had failed, none of them had cut themselves so it makes zero sense.
They had been collecting back the coins for years. During that time they repaid their own blood. All they needed was the last coin and the blood of Bill Turner to break the spell.
Question: Why did one of the Nazgûl stab Frodo at weathertop?
Answer: Because they were trying to kill him and take the One Ring for Sauron.
Why didn't the nazgûl simply take ring from Frodo?
How was one of the nazgûl able to stab Frodo when he put the ring on at weathertop? Considering that people who put the ring on are usually invisible.
To mortal people, yes. But the Nazgûl can sense when someone is using it. Note how they immediately changed directions when Frodo put it on at the Prancing Pony.
12th Aug 2021
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: Doc seemed hell-bent on destroying the DeLorean. So why did he go to the future and get a hover conversion done on the train? Why didn't he just build the train, return to his own time and then destroy the train?
Answer: He didn't return to the Old West, both of them had a desire to go to the final frontier. Their favorite author is Jules Verne, who wrote "From Earth to the Moon."
Answer: Doc was happy living in the Old West but returned to the future to collect his dog, Einstein, and he didn't want Marty to worry about him. He probably also wanted to make sure that Marty had made it safely back to his own time, to properly say goodbye, and make sure the DeLorean was never used again. He never indicated he would destroy the train, only the DeLorean. The hover conversion on the train would have been done in the Old West, not in the future.
I doubt he was able to make the train hover in the old west, whilst he could easily go to the future with it and do it there, like he did with the DeLorean. He did say he has been to the future with it, so it's logical to assume that's where he upgraded it.
Doc never says he went further into the future with the train or did the hover conversion there. If he could build a time-traveling locomotive in the 1880s, then he could create a hovering one, as he had the knowledge. Marty asks if he's going back to the future, and Doc says no because he's already been there. That could be interpreted a number of ways. It's a sci-fi movie, and there is a lot of suspension of disbelief employed here.
While the movie isn't explicit about when or where the Time Train was built, other sources do indicate its hoverconversion was done in the future. While Doc could invent a machine that was capable of time travel (the mechanics of which aren't really discussed), he had to travel to the future to convert the DeLorean and couldn't even fix the DeLorean in the past.
What 'other sources' indicate Doc travelled to the future for the hover conversion? Any fan speculation is invalid. I also don't get the argument. While Doc was unable to fix the DeLorean when Marty was in the Old West, he could, and did, in later years, build the time-travel train in the past. He could not otherwise have gone anywhere into the future to do anything. Time-travelling without the hover ability would be extremely difficult as a locomotive would be noticeable and require taking off and landing on empty train tracks. Doc would have to hide the locomotive while converting it. He would also have to know before time-travelling that the railroad tracks he took off on still existed in the future, as he could possibly arrive smashing into what became an urban development. This should be considered as both a deliberate plot hole and a plot device using "suspension of disbelief" solely intended to give the series a spectacular finale.
The comics reveal that Doc Brown traveled to 2017 in a prototype time machine and purchased materials which he brought back with him to the 1890s to use on the Time Train.
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: They're all three doctors in that field, so it's not unlikely at all that they could acquire the medication. The question then becomes: why did he have it on him at the time?
Phixius ★
Indeed, it's hilarious when you ask yourself that question, and the movie does not have any of the characters question that! Which would have been comedy gold. As the original poster said though; Venkman has a PhD in Psychology, so he can't prescribe the drug, and the other 2 are physicists, so no, I wouldn't say they are doctors in the field?
Sammo ★
A Psychologist could have studied medicine. If you have a medical licence you can prescribe medicine to a patient. This doesn't automatically make a Venkman a psychiatrist, but he is more likely more trained in the actual clinical practise. Doesn't make it less unethical though and if anyone finds out he would have his license revoked immediately.
lionhead