I remember watching part of a movie on TV when I was about five or six years old I was old enough to read because the movie had subtitles. All I remember is a mom and two kids get off a train somewhere, and she speaks in a different language to an officer. It had subtitles and I remember the man tells the lady that she can keep only one of her children and the other one has to go. She keeps saying that she can't choose and to not make her choose. I remember some men come and threaten to take away both of her kids but at the last minute she tells them to take her daughter. A soldier then takes her little girl away screaming and crying. I remember the scene was pretty scary and I didn't watch anymore of the movie after this. So does anyone know what this movie was called?
Bishop73
8th Jan 2021
General questions
8th Jan 2021
Die Hard: With a Vengeance (1995)
Question: When Zeus is on the phone with Simon in the subway, Zeus says that McClane was on his way. Simon responds that they weren't playing by the rules, hangs up and a few moments later the bomb goes off. McClane states that Simon wanted the subway bomb to go off. Why would McClane think it was Simon's intention to have the bomb go off whether they both show up or not?
Answer: Because Simon basically gave them an impossible task. Given NYC traffic, getting 90 blocks in 30 minutes is a Sisyphean task.
5th Jan 2021
Broken English (2007)
Question: When Nora drinks with Nick Gable at the bar, she says "You know what Hugh Hefner says about ____? That 3 are too many and one is not enough." What's the word she said in the blank? What is she talking about? The subtitle was left out there. And from what I searched, this "Hugh Hefner" is a real person. The Wikipedia says he is an American magazine publisher. Is there a remark that became known to the public he has ever said? (00:14:10)
Answer: She appears to actually be paraphrasing author James Thurber: "One martini is all right. Two are too many, and three are not enough." Hugh Hefner was the publisher of Playboy Magazine, but he doesn't seem to be the one who made this quote.
Chosen answer: The word she says is "breasts." I've never found it attributed to Hugh Hefner though. The quote seems to have originated from the film "The Parallax View" where Gail says "They say a martini is like a woman's breast: one ain't enough and three is too many." It's been re-quoted in several different places and has nothing to do with James Thurber. She's just saying it as a joke and I think they used Hefner's name since it sounds like something he might say since he founded Playboy, but also so Nick could say "he's one to talk, he has 19 girlfriends."
There are Internet sources showing that the original quote being paraphrased is by James Thurber: "One martini is all right. Two are too many, and three are not enough."
Yes, but that's not the joke and has nothing to do with the scene. They're two different quotes and the latter one has nothing to do with Thurber's quote. His quote is not being paraphrased at all.
Yes, but the way your response is worded makes it sound as if the quote never had anything to do all with James Thurber. Brian Katcher was citing it in his response to give context to the joke's origin and how it is being paraphrased, not the joke itself.
Yes, the quote in the movie, despite not being credited to Hefner, IS NOT Thurber's quote. Brian just brought up a random quote that had nothing to do with the scene or the question.
5th Jan 2021
Jack Frost (1998)
18th Dec 2019
The Fugitive (1993)
Question: When Kimble is in the hospital with the boy he changes the diagnosis to what? I have tried to look but it cuts away as he's writing it down on the boy's file.
Answer: When Richard changes the diagnosis, the first thing he writes down is "AO" which is medical shorthand for aorta. Many people who have medical degrees and saw the movie speculate that Joel had an aortic tear. This would cause blood to flow into the chest cavity making it difficult to breathe and with the impact from the crash it could have caused the fatal injury. An aortic tear requires immediate surgery and by changing Joel's diagnosis, Kimble was able to save his life.
Answer: Kimble is watching as the doctor, Al, looks at the chest film and states "possible fractured sternum, he's stable," and we can see Kimble's bothered by that. Then Kimble is told to take the boy to observation room 2. When Kimble questions the boy and looks at the chest film, Kimble ignores what he was told, and instead heads directly for the surgical OR. In the elevator he draws a line over the incorrect essential diagnosis: "depress chest w/ poss fr" (possible fracture), and begins to write "Ao," then he scribbles a signature on the Patient of Dr line. The essential diagnosis Kimble writes is presumably an Aortic trauma, which is a life-threatening critical injury and requires immediate attention. So when Kimble brings the boy to the OR (instead of observation room 2) for the emergency medical procedure, he tells the doctor the boy was sent up from downstairs. The child is then taken to operating room 4, STAT, thus saving the child's life.
Its a pneumothorax, is air trapped between the lung and the ribcage and it's very common.
Answer: The presumption is the boy was misdiagnosed and he changed the chart to the correct diagnosis. The doctor says later that he saved the boy's life. Most likely he changed the charge to order specific tests.
Answer: It's never specified what he changed the orders to, nor is it important to know. This was done only add to the plot where the other doctor noticed him looking at the X-ray, arousing her suspicion, then creating suspense as Kimble barely escapes from the hospital.
We know it isn't important know, it's just a point of curiosity.
True and if you notice that's the always reliable Julianne Moore as the other doctor. This was the first movie that she did that was lampooned in Mad magazine, the next would be Mocking Jay Part 1.
"The Lost World: Jurassic Park" and "Hannibal" were both lampooned by Mad before "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1."
I totally get that you're curious about it. Just saying that filmmakers usually aren't concerned with showing small details like that. They use broader strokes to tell the story.
A lot of film makers do put in small details into their work. Yes, some are lazy, for example, repeating 1 or 2 paragraphs in a news article too look like they whole page is filled. Others take time to have the whole thing filled out, even adding funny things for the viewer who paused the video to read. This is why there's a lot of trivia entries and questions about what something small was or meant. A casual viewer wouldn't know if what they saw meant something or was the film makers being lazy.
3rd Jan 2021
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation (1989)
15th May 2013
Superman (1978)
Question: When Superman went back in time to save Lois, doesn't that mean that the people that he had originally saved are now doomed to die?
Chosen answer: No. Because the version of him *before* he time-traveled is still out doing those things. The REAL question is, what happens to that Superman, seeing as Lois no longer dies and he has no reason to travel back in time.
Answer: There are generally two methods of time travel. Skip vs Slide. When you slide through time, you are in essence rewinding or fast forwarding a tape. Time will accelerate to the desired moment. This method, the traveler will witness the rewind and will only allow one of them to exist. When skipping, you are plucking yourself from the time stream and placing yourself in the desired moment. This method, travel is instantaneous and can allow for multiples of the traveler to exist at once. Superman rewound time. He used the slide method and went directly to Lois after doing so. This means those he previously saved...died after his reversal.
Or he could have used the skip method. Like you said, it enables a traveler to pluck themself from the time stream and placing them at the desired moment allowing for two Supermen to be able to prevent both missiles from reaching their destinations.
He couldn't have used the skip method if he rewound time.
29th Dec 2020
It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown (1966)
Question: There is something I don't understand about Linus in this special. He is flattered when Sally flirts with him by saying he says the cutest things, and that he's so intelligent. Linus usually rejects Sally's feelings whenever she flirts him. Why should this be any different?
Answer: From what I've seen, usually Sally is often annoying Linus with her flirting when he has nothing in common with her, or he's just trying to do something to help her and she tries to make it into more. Here, Sally's comments make Linus think she believes in the Great Pumpkin too, or is at least interested in hearing more about it. It's more that he's excited she likes the same thing as he does. Later in the pumpkin patch, he's happy she's there because he wants to share the experience with someone, not because he has any feeling towards Sally.
29th Dec 2020
General questions
Trying to think of a movie that I saw many years ago. Mid 90s maybe, I can't remember anything about it aside from a scene where the villains possibly hijacked a school bus full of school kids, and they stop and at one point the villain tells one of the kids to take his glasses off and the kid replies "but I need my glasses to see." Very vague I know, sorry I don't have any more.
Answer: It's from a movie called They've Taken Our Children: The Chowchilla Kidnapping. The movie is also called Vanished Without a Trace. Https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105576/.
Answer: There is a TV movie from 1996 called "Sudden Terror: The Hijacking of School Bus #17." One man hijacks a bus full of special needs students and there are a few students who wear glasses. I tried to skim through it to see if I could find a scene about taking off the glasses, I didn't find it but I might have missed it.
8th Jul 2020
Ford v Ferrari (2019)
Question: During La Mans, it shows Shelby taking a stopwatch from Ferrari's pit and dropping a nut on the floor. Is there any indication Shelby ever cheated during a race like this (whether at Le Mans or somewhere else)? Like, was he ever caught or accused of cheating? I get there's a lot of artistic licensing taking place in this film, so I understand if it was made up, just curious if it was based on anything from Shelby's life.
Answer: Technically, neither of these incidents would be considered cheating in the classic sense. Stealing the stopwatches would be just that, stealing. It's likely that some other members of a team like Ferrari had back up stopwatches. Dropping the lug nut in the Ferrari pit would just be a mind game to put doubt in the minds of the pit crew as to whether they got all the lug nuts on the wheels. Neither of these incidents would affect the performance of the race car. It was mischief, not cheating.
This doesn't answer the question at all (and seems like someone's trying to correct this thinking it's a mistake entry). I said "cheating like this" for the 2 examples I gave, because it's cheating (by definition) but not necessarily breaking La Mans rules. Plus I also asked about actual accusations of cheating.
It's called gamesmanship, how is dropping a lug nut to make the Italians think they had forgotten one cheating? Now if he had taken the lug nut so it delayed their pit stop or so it wasn't put on at all that's a different story. You seem like you never competed if you think those things are cheating.
And stealing a stopwatch is gamesmanship too? The question is was this based on anything. I've never competed in LeMans, but in a majority of sports there are rules against deceiving the other team (for example a balk). Seems like you've never played sports.
23rd Dec 2020
National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation (1989)
Question: What is surrounding the famous Jell-O mold? Is it shredded carrots?
2nd Jan 2017
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Question: I have never understood why Luke and Leia needed to be hidden with two different families. As a princess, Leia is actually in the public eye. It would have been much safer to let Owen and Beru raise her along with Luke. Why keep them apart?
Answer: The reason they are split is so if one is discovered they still have the other. Leia certainly lives a much more public life but she could easily be passed off as the daughter of Bail Organa since she takes his last name and lives as his daughter. The real question is why on earth would Obi Wan give Luke to family that Vader is aware of and let him keep the Skywalker name?
Adding to this, Tatooine wouldn't be somewhere where Vader would want to go. He doesn't have fond memories there e.g. death of his mother, slaying all those Tuscan raiders.
Also, if I remember correctly, no-one knew she was having twins. Everyone knew she was pregnant, so when Luke showed up it wasn't necessarily questioned. Leia was given to another family so no-one would put it together that she was also Vader's child and therefore hiding her from existence.
Answer: Nobody knew Luke and Leia were alive, most did not know they existed, others thought they were dead. If someone with the name of Skywalker were around, it could be anyone. Aunt Uncle, Cousin, not necessarily the Skywalker. Besides, the Empire was busy fighting and maintaining control of an entire Galaxy.
It certainly could be a popular name, but it is still tempting fate since this particular Skywalker is being raised by Anakin's step-brother. A step-brother that Anakin is not only aware of but has personally met. Also, once Vader finds out that the pilot who blew up the Death Star was named Skywalker, he knows that young man must be his son.
Answer: Obi-Wan said they needed to be taken somewhere where the Sith could not sense their presence and then Yoda said they needed to be separated, which one could assume was to increase the chance the Sith won't sense them. They also made it seem like Padme was still pregnant when she died, meaning everyone would think her child (ren) died before being born. Leia being in the public eye wasn't really a factor or concern. Bail and his wife had always talked about adopting a girl, so when they took Leia, no-one would question where she came from, especially if the Organas appeared loyal to the Emperor. In "There is Another" (from "From a Certain Point of View", considered canon), it's suggested Yoda's plan was to train Leia and not Luke. So sending Luke to live with his family would hopefully limit his development of the force, limit his involvement with the Empire, and if discovered, draw attention away from Leia.
17th Dec 2020
Maximum Overdrive (1986)
Question: Why is it that the machines they used to fight back didn't try to attack the humans? The military vehicle had a .50 cal machine gun that shot AT them, but their guns seemed to work just fine.
Answer: It should be noted, the ending title cards seems to set it up so there are no plot holes and answers any "why" questions (which, intentional or not by King, can be debated). While the opening premise is the comet's close pass by Earth caused all machines to turn on people, at the end, the Russians blew up a UFO 2 days later, suggesting that it was the aliens controlling the machines. Bill suggests aliens are trying to wipe out humanity (although at that point he's just guessing and had no evidence of an alien or UFO present), but it can be debated the actual premise was that aliens were just testing or experimenting on people.
Answer: The movie is infamous for its plot holes, among them this one, and "How come cars didn't start attacking people"? From the story point of view we can surmise that the M60 is part of the vehicle's structure, while hand-held weaponry stay inert.
18th Dec 2020
Teen Wolf (1985)
Question: Why did Thorne ask Scott if he had a marker after Scott reluctantly let Thorne see his hands?
Answer: It seems that Mr. Thorne thought Scott's behavior was suspicious. He was in a bathroom he shouldn't have been in (i.e. he should be using one closer to his classroom) and that it appeared he was washing his hands for a long time. Mr. Thorne thought maybe Scott was writing on the walls with a marker and was trying to wash off "evidence." Since Scott's hands were clean, he just wanted to make sure Scott wasn't writing on the walls or planning to.
16th Dec 2020
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: I have a question, I don't know if it's true or not but I have heard about this for years after Part III was released. Had Crispin Glover decided to do the sequels, would he have had the role of Shamus McFly in Part III, or once Glover turned down the sequels, then it was decided that Michael J. Fox would play the part of Sheamus once Part III was greenlit? Or was it always going to be Fox playing the role of Sheamus regardless if Glover came back for the sequels or not?
Answer: In an interview, actor Jeffrey Weissman (the actor who replaced Glover as George McFly) mentioned Glover was slated to play Shamus since Lea Thompson, who played Lorraine (Marty's mom) also played Maggie (Shamus' wife). So it made sense the Mom and Dad would play the great-Grandparents. However, without the heavy makeup and prosthetics to look like Glover, the film makers thought having Weissman playing the role would look too unrecognizable that the audience wouldn't know who he was. In a side note, the scene of elderly George hanging upside down in BTTF 2 was written with Crispin Glover in mind as payback.
6th Dec 2020
The Twilight Zone (1959)
Question: At one point, we see a man getting his shoes shined. He is holding a magazine or newspaper close to his face and it seems to have a cut out in it so the man can hide his face but still see through the page. What's going on here? (00:14:00)
Answer: From everything I can tell, what you're seeing is part of an advertisement on the page that just appears as a dark box. While there isn't enough contrast, because of the show being in black and white, for me to tell what the ad says, if it was a hole, the man's head doesn't line with what you see and you should be able to see the window behind him, which I couldn't see.
He is holding it much too close to his face to read it, isn't he? You can see some detail in that rectangle. The story is how Charley is looking through the window of a miniature house. And here is a character that appears to me to be looking at Charlie through a "window", so to speak. I believe in the first frames after they cut from his mother eating, I believe you can see his shirt collar in the lower left of the cutout. Curious.
6th Dec 2020
Constantine (2005)
Question: Why was Constantine denied entry to heaven?
Answer: Because he committed suicide as a teenager. He didn't just attempt, he was dead for several minutes. Suicide is a cardinal sin in Catholicism. He also doesn't have true faith, just knowledge.
Answer: Constantine committed suicide when he was younger (although he was revived by paramedics). Suicide is considered a mortal sin.
1st Dec 2020
Quantum Leap (1989)
Mirror Image - August 8, 1953 - S5-E22
Question: Why would Sam need to warn Beth that Al would return and that he was an MIA? During the Vietnam episode the Pulitzer prize journalist took a picture of Al as a prisoner, so she already knew he was a prisoner.
Answer: In the finale, Sam leaps back to the episode "M.I.A." which is set in 1969. Originally, he failed to stop Beth from remarrying. However, the episode you're talking about, "The Leap Home", takes place in 1970. At the end of that episode, Al tells Sam that Maggie, the woman who took the picture of Al, finally got her Pulitzer Prize posthumously. But there's no indication when the picture of Al becomes public, or if Beth even saw the picture. However, if Beth did see the picture, or is aware Al is a POW, she's already moved on.
28th Nov 2020
Bridget Jones's Diary (2001)
Question: I never understood the joke about the scene where Bridget was wearing the black dress and white undies. Everything looked fine to me, but she looked all embarrassed in front of the guy she was with when the two were fooling around. What joke did I miss?
Answer: The knickers are almost like spanx or the ones that try to hold everything in and appear skinny. Never particularly sexy! I think that's the joke is she wasn't in anything lacy as she didn't think anyone would be seeing them.
Answer: The type of underwear she was wearing was larger than he expected a young woman to wear. They appeared to be what one might call "granny panties."
26th Nov 2020
Stargate SG-1 (1997)
Question: Sam says a stargate's range is roughly 300,000 light years, yet, in the movie, Earth connects to Abydos "on The Other Side of the known universe." Why the discrepancy?
Answer: For an out-of-universe explanation (that is to say in real life), when the TV series was created, the idea was there were thousands of other Stargates out there that the original film didn't account for, so they just wanted to have everything happen in the Milky Way galaxy. In s01e01, Daniel finds the star charts on Abydos and they (the writers) had to explain why the Stargate on Earth didn't connect to any other Stargate except for the one on Abydos. In-universe, this is because of stellar drift but Abydos was so close that there wasn't enough stellar drift to affect the connection (meaning it is in fact located in the Milky Way). In the film "Abydos" was said to be located in the Kaliam galaxy and an in-universe explanation (though never stated outright) is they initially got their calculation wrong when determining where the planet was. Later in the series, Vala makes a reference to the Kaliam galaxy as a nod to the original film.
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: You're describing "Sophie's Choice" (1982) where Meryl Streep, Sophie, is sent to Auschwitz with her children and has to choose which child will be sent to the children's camp and which one will die. She chooses her daughter to die and the soldiers take her away.
Bishop73