Question: Was Niko Zoe's long lost father who wasn't actually dead?
Bishop73
15th Jul 2020
A Cat in Paris (2010)
15th Jul 2020
Psycho II (1983)
Question: Spoiler alert: this question gives away much of the first "Psycho" movie. In the original Alfred Hitchcock "Psycho" we witness Norman Bates murdering Janet Leigh/Marion Crane and Martin Balsam/Milton Arbogast, and very narrowly missing killing Vera Miles/Lila Crane. At the end of the movie we discover that Norman Bates had murdered his mother and her lover ten years previously. We are also told that he had killed two female guests at Bates Motel. Norman Bates is therefore guilty of six murders and one attempted murder. In Psycho II we find out that, after his crimes were discovered, Norman Bates was placed in a secure psychiatric institution for the criminally insane. This does seem plausible. But with such a criminal record, would he ever be released from incarceration?
Answer: Norman was found "not guilty" by reason of insanity. Therefore, once he is deemed to be no longer a danger to himself, or to others, and is released from the mental institution, there is no crime he can be sent to jail for (i.e. he has no criminal record for the murders). I haven't done enough research to tell you if a serial killer in recent times has ever been found not guilty by reason of insanity and subsequently been released, but there are numerous accounts of people being released from mental institutions after committing murder that are then considered free.
10th Jul 2020
Back to the Future (1985)
Question: What is George's working status with Biff at the end of the film? George mentions in the beginning that Biff is his supervisor so I assume Biff is George's boss but at the end of the film it is implied that Biff seems to be working for George or is George still working for Biff, but Biff is no longer bullying George?
Answer: At the end of the film, Biff owns his own auto detailing company (probably a nod to the fact his car kept getting filled with manure and needed cleaning) and George is his customer. Although it seems Biff will still try to con people, but George stood up for himself to make sure Biff did the job correctly. Before the present changed, Biff was his supervisor that still bullied George into doing his work for him for an unspecified company.
10th Jul 2020
Angels in the Outfield (1994)
15th Jun 2010
Back to the Future Part II (1989)
Question: Can anyone explain why Crispin Glover was almost completely edited out of this film? True, his character wasn't that important, but even in 2015 (when he was hanging upside down after throwing out his back), his character was played by another actor.
Answer: Crispin Glover is not in the BTTF sequels (except where footage from the first film was recycled). There are some contradictions as to the whys depending on who you talk to (salary dispute, Glover uninterested in reprising the role, Zemeckis uninterested in working with Glover again, etc.).
Answer: To be honest Glover didn't like the end of part I because the McFlys were rich and love was a better reward, however he complained about not getting as much money as Christopher Lloyd and the others, even Fox. He then sued Universal for using unlicensed footage of him.
His lawsuit was for violating his right of publicity, not for using footage of him. Prosthetics were applied to Jeffery Weissman using an old mold of Crispin Glover to make Weissman look like Glover.
3rd Jul 2020
Missing Link (2019)
5th Feb 2020
The Flash (2014)
Question: Why do Cisco and everyone else think the multiverse is destroyed? At the end of Crisis we explicitly saw a "tour" of various recreated earths, like Earth-12 with the Green Lantern Corps, Titans, Doom Patrol, Swamp thing all getting their own, Brandon Routh's Superman being back on Earth-96 in his old suit, etc. Is it just that people assume all the earths were combined because the new Earth Prime is a bit of a mish-mash?
Chosen answer: Earth Prime is a combination of Earth-1, Earth-38, and Black Lighting's Earth. However, the Earths in the new multiverse are separated by something other than vibrational frequencies, so Cisco can't vibe them, nor can they travel to other Earths as before. So the Paragons think it's still destroyed and don't know (at this point) that Queen/Spectre recreated some of the other Earth's (and new ones).
Answer: Exactly, the new series, Stargirl, shows a universe where the JSA existed, but to soon to tell if it's situated on Earth Prime.
29th Jun 2020
The Good Place (2016)
Question: Why is it they never use the words "Heaven" and "Hell"?
Answer: While the show does explore life after death, the show creators intentionally avoided using many religious terms and beliefs, such as heaven, hell, or God. While one could draw parallels of the Good Place and the Bad Place to heaven and hell, in the show that's not what they're meant to be.
Thank you. It just means, to me, they're atheists.
Well you couldn't really call them atheist because atheists don't believe in any type of afterlife or any deities. The "good place" and "bad place" are merely broader terms that could include most belief systems.
Answer: They actually do use those terms, in one episode, when Eleanor starts crying Chidi states he broke God and, there is another episode where someone, I believe Chidi says, we're in heaven. Though not saying those words does not make them atheist, it is stated in the first episode that every religion specifically Christians were a little bit right... So when they got to the good place after learning it is really called the good place it makes no sense to call it something else.
29th Jun 2020
Hotel Transylvania (2012)
Question: Is Griffin always naked? Because his clothes (glasses) are visible but he is not.
Answer: There's a scene where he's wearing swim trunks which are visible, but he gets embarrassed when they're pulled down and he runs away. Obviously just meant to be a gag, but if the thought of people "seeing" him naked embarrassed him, one would think he must normally be dressed in clothes that can't be seen.
25th Jun 2020
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (1999)
Question: In a mistrial, most DA's have to decide if it is a do over. But in this show they have some dismissals in the mist of a trial and they can't be retried because of double jeopardy. Is this really a fact?
Answer: It would best to cite a specific episode; however, a dismissal is not the same thing as a mistrial by legal definitions. A case may be dismissed with or without prejudice. A case dismissed with prejudice would prevent a retrial on the grounds of double jeopardy. When this happens, the judge is basically saying he or she has heard enough to make a final decision and the case is over. Dismissals without prejudice and mistrials that the defendant consents to can be retried (generally it's the defendant's lawyer that will move for a mistrial for one reason or another).
Answer: Yes, once a jury is sworn in and impaneled, jeopardy attaches. So if a trial is ended for any reason, the accused cannot be tried again. Downum v. United States (1963), Crist v. Bretz (1978), Martinez v. Ilinois (2014).
A mistrial can allow the defendant to be re-tried in many cases.
A mistrial is not a dismissal. Since the jury has not reached a verdict, the trial has not ended.
Which is literally what I already said. But you stated if the trial is ended for any reason. A mistrial does end the trial, but not necessarily end jeopardy.
25th Jun 2020
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (1999)
Question: Has anybody noticed that many of the perps or victims at some point become policemen, DAs or detectives? They also rotate actors if you notice in season 15 episode 1 Surrender Benson, the serial rapist William Lewis is also the stepfather in season 8 episode 15 Haystack. Throughout the 21 seasons you can see the same actors taking on different roles acting in a child as one and then when they grow up seeing them as a grown up in another season and many becoming detectives or some sort of law enforcement.
Answer: Was there a specific question other than have we noticed? This is very common in the Law and Order franchise, as well as many other long running dramas that use multiple actors. The late, great Jerry Orbach from the original series started out as a defense attorney.
22nd Jun 2020
Boyz n the Hood (1991)
Question: In the 1984 part of the movie the older boys who stole young Ricky's football who was the boy with the bandana that the camera focused on. It seemed that he would be important in the story later the way the camera stopped and slowly revealed his face when he caught the ball.
Answer: It symbolizes that he used to be a football player just like Rick wanted to be at that age. But probably due to the cards he was dealt he gave up on that dream. When they emphasize the man in the feel its like showing empathy to the kids because he sees himself in Ricky, thus giving the ball back.
Answer: The character is Mad Dog, played by Lexie Bigham. He was the one that gave the ball back to the boys. I haven't seen the film in a long time and don't recall if he hangs out with Doughboy in the present.
15th Jun 2020
We Are Marshall (2006)
Question: After Jack hits his shoulder Nate starts crying, and says they left it in his hands. What is he talking about?
Answer: As I understood it, Nate is feeling the burden of making sure the team won and feels his injury prevented that. "They" are the coaches and players that died in the plane crash. Nate is saying when they died, they left the responsibility of the program in his hands. Jack (his new head coach) replies that they "just left", meaning even though the died, they didn't leave the responsibilities on Nate.
15th Jun 2020
General questions
What's the movie where Don Knotts appears at the end, his wife has him locked up and is ready to feed him to the lions. He has 3 daughters called Faith Hope and Charity.
Answer: "I Love a Mystery" (1973 TV Movie). Although the man she has "locked up" and ready to feed to the lions isn't her husband. Her husband (Don Knotts) was the "observer", although he was tied up and wearing a hood.
12th Jun 2020
We Are Marshall (2006)
Question: Is it true that Marshall lost more football games in the 70s than any other program in the nation?
Answer: Not quite, at least for Division 1 schools. Marshall had a record of 22-84 from '70-'79. UTEP (University of Texas at El Paso) had a record of 23-87 during the same time. So, while UTEP did lose more games, they had a slightly higher win percentage.
Well, the narration says that Marshall lost more football games in the 70s than any other program in the nation.
I was only giving both perspectives to answer the question. The statement made is not quite true since UTEP did lose more. When comparing teams win-loss records, you generally take into account the number of games played.
12th Jun 2020
The Sound of Music (1965)
12th Jun 2020
The Devil's Advocate (1997)
Question: At the end of the movie, how did Kevin's decision to not represent Getty's make him lose his case and how could he possibly be disbarred for making such a decision?
Answer: In short, a lawyer may not withdraw from a case if doing so will adversely affect the interest of client. At this point in the trial, if he withdrew, it could prejudice Getty in the eyes of the jury (i.e. they might think he's guilty because his lawyer doesn't want to defend him anymore). Source: Florida RPC 4-1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation.
But, could his refusal to represent Getty any longer allow Getty to get him disbarred?
The State Bar Association would be the entity that would determine if Kevin will be disbarred. All Getty could do is bring grievances to the Association, but it would be a matter of public record that Kevin withdrew in the middle of trial that and it would be more likely that the Judge reports Kevin to the Bar. Getty's recourse of action would be to sue Kevin, but that wouldn't result in disbarment.
12th Mar 2020
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: Doc is quite a resourceful and clever guy. Why didn't he set to work on repairing the flying circuits which would have enabled them to use Mr Fusion to reach 88mph, instead of the engine?
Answer: Mr fusion only powers the flux capacitor. The engine is needed to get the car up to 88mph whether flying or not and the only way to get the car any power is by the use of petrol, which didn't exist in 1885.
At the beginning of the movie, when 1955 Doc reads the letter that 1985 Doc sent to Marty, he reads that the lightning bolt activated the time circuits and at the same time destroyed the flying circuits. Because of this, the Delorean will never fly again.
These answers are correct. Plus, to the original question: as clever as Doc is, keep in mind he got the flying conversion done in 2015. Definitely no way he would have been able to repair something so futuristic with 1885 tools at his disposal. He couldn't even get gas.
Yet just a few years later he had built from scratch a flying time-traveling locomotive, all with 1885 tools and parts.
There's no indication he built the flying train in 1885. It's suggested he had been time traveling with his wife and kids and says he's already been to the future. Whether this is in the DeLorean or the train it's not clear, but the dialogue suggests he's been to the future in his train with the family and could have modified his train to fly with future technology.
19th Aug 2019
Back to the Future Part III (1990)
Question: Back in 1885 why doesn't Doc change the letter he sent to Marty, asking him to bring a can of gas?
Answer: When Marty received the letter from Doc in 1955, as seen in the second movie, Doc wrote down that he didn't want Marty to go to 1885 to rescue him because he was happy living in the past. Instead, he wanted Marty to take the Delorean straight back to 1985 and then destroy it so it could never be used for personal gain again.
But once Marty appears in the past Doc could easily change the letter, changing things such that Marty would bring gas with him.
Answer: This would create a different timeline, not the timeline they are in.
Answer: That would not be possible as in 1885, Doc sent the letter on September 1st, and 1955 Doc sent Marty to 1885 on September 2nd so it was a day later and on the 1st, Doc was not expecting Marty to turn up. However, one CAN ask why Marty and Doc didn't go to the local Western Union office and change it (or write a new one) there since it was in their possession per the gentleman in part 2.
Changing the letter while Marty is in 1885 with Doc would accomplish nothing, because it doesn't it instantly travel to the future. Marty at the end of Part II, for his part, may receive the letter almost immediately, but the letter itself had to wait 70 years to be delivered to him.
I mean, there's no solid rules to time traveling, but just for argument's sake it seems like the letter idea could work... in the franchise, when something is set in motion, the effects usually take place immediately. Take for instance when George and Lorraine kissed at the dance in Part 1. The picture of Marty and his siblings went right back to normal, even though the kids had not been born yet. Doc and Marty changing the Western Union letter "could" have had an immediate effect and a gas can could have materialized in the Delorean, much like we've seen newspaper headlines change before our very eyes, disappearing gravestones, etc.
In your examples, the changes occur to future events. The items that changes, like the picture and newspaper, are from the future themselves. They can't change the past by changing events in the future (like they do in Bill and Ted's). This is why Doc and Marty couldn't go back to 2015 to stop old Biff from taking the DeLorean.
8th Jun 2020
Home Alone (1990)
Question: Why did Kevin's mother take him to the third floor instead of his own room?
Answer: Possibly because with so many family members staying in the same house, in order to all fly to France together, one or more of his relatives were sleeping in his room and he was relegated to the attic; it's likely a sacrifice forced on him rather than one offered to him. As is common with young children, they often get the short end of the stick compared to their older, more mature siblings and are given a lesser degree of latitude and independence.
Answer: Earlier in the film it's mentioned that Kevin is sleeping in the hide-a-bed with Fuller. So it was pre-arranged where everyone was going to be sleeping. The hide-a-bed was on the 3rd floor. I don't think they mentioned who was sleeping in Kevin's room. I've been in similar situations (where several families are staying in one house) and kids' rooms are either given to an adult couple, or girls in one room, boys in another, etc.
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: No. Zoé's father was murdered by Victor. Nico was just a thief who was there to help her.
Bishop73