Often a belief or interpretation about a film will take hold in the public and grip it like a dog with a bone…and it makes you feel like you’re taking crazy pills.
Here’s a lighter example. It doesn’t make me feel like I’m taking crazy pills like example two will. Signs. “How come they came to a planet covered in waterrrr!”. It’s not water that burns them. They bleed. They have eyes that look a lot like our eyes. They very likely have water in them. It’s not water. It’s IMPURITIES in the water. The girl even says the water is funny. But like I said…i’m not TERRIBLY invested in fighting on a Signs hill
Besides…it’s an homage to Day of the Triffids
A League of Their Own…“Dottie dropped the ball on purpose!!”…Oh my God, I’m going to have a stroke.
First of all, I think 98% of the people who say that have never played baseball. You mean to tell me…that Dottie, set up in front of the plate, fully invested in tagging her sister out. Both hands on the ball, while getting blasted into orbit by Lori Singer, had the presence of mind to think…“Enh. I’ll just drop the ball and hand the World Series to the other team” ??
You mean to tell me…Dottie turned around after driving halfway across the country. Rejoined the team. On the verge of winning the game. She GAVE HER PITCHER INFO TO STRIKE HER SISTER OUT. “High ball, she can’t hit them, she can’t lay off them.” Her sister does hit it. Her sister has tied the game up already when she rounds third. She’s ALREADY a hero.
You mean to tell me that Dottie drops the ball on purpose, breaking the hearts of her entire team and the entire fanbase? I mean…it only goes against everything we’ve seen in the film so far, but sure. It steals Dotties sister’s accomplishment. Thematically and realistically. It doesn’t give her an accomplishment. “I’ll let the dumb shit have a W…she’s too stupid to get one on her own.”
I have to go take my blood pressure medicine.
Short one…not a film unless we count animated.
Good God, Batman does NOT kill Joker at the end of The Killing Joke.
You mean other than the very first scene in the movie, where she tells her grandson that he should be letting his younger sibling win? The entire movie is foreshadowing that Dottie drops the ball.
In Casablanca, people think it a flaw in the film that the letters of transit were signed by General Degaulle. Even Roger Ebert made that mistake.
The actual line is that they were signed by General Weygand. The name is pronounced [vɛɡɑ̃], stress on the second syllable. The final n is the French nasal n. Weygand was commander of French forces in North Africa until late 1941, so it made sense he could sign this. He had been relieved of duty by the time the film was made, but it’s likely they used the name in the original play and didn’t think to change it.
Weygand could sound like DeGaulle if you’re unfamiliar with the name, but Lorre definitely says "Weygand "
A lot of people mistakenly believe that Daniel-san was the Karate Kid. Johnny was the real Karate Kid and he would have won the tournament if Daniel hadn’t cheated by using an illegal kick.
In Signs it is clear that water (not any “contaminants”. Like…what?) kills the aliens.
If anything, Faith kills the aliens. Especially if you take the movie as a parable about God and faith. It’s a Christian movie, not a sci fi movie.
As for Casablanca, Ugarte clearly says “de Gaulle”. It doesn’t matter if it makes no sense that de Gaulle is the signatory. There’s a term for that in Hollywood. it’s called a “mistake”. But Lorre says de Gaulle. The closed captions say “de Gaulle”. I hear de Gaulle. Who should I believe: you, or my lyin’ ears?
Well if were going that far then you mean GOD killed the aliens like in War of the Worlds. Which i think bolsters my argument. As he created germs to kill any invaders in WotW*, he placed impurities in our water to defeat the Signs aliens.
If you watch Lorre’s mouth, it’s clear he’s saying “Weygand.” There’s no way he could pronounce “deGaulle” with his lips and teeth moving the way they do.
For many years, I thought it was a blooper too, but after watching the clip carefully three times in a row, I could see I was wrong. As for the subtitles, I’ve seen enough foreign films to know they’re often not reliable, especially if they’re based on a commonly accepted error.
A lot of misinformation becomes “fact” in this way. The other most obvious example I can think of is the one where “cat girl” Isis on Star Trek was supposedly played by Playboy Playmate Victoria Vetri. I never bought that, because I could see the resemblance between the two was superficial at best. I also knew there would be a record of her being paid somewhere in Desilu/Paramount archives, if only someone would look there.
Someone finally did, and I was right all along. Human Isis was played by April Tatro, a professional contortionist.
The whole “Indiana Jones did nothing in Raiders, the plot would have been the same regardless of Indys interference” which is split off into two answers.
Indy does in fact play a major role in the plot, he saves Marion from certain death from the Gestapo, and he blows up the Nazi flying wing and steals the ark via ship forcing the Nazis to steal it back via U-boat which is then taken to a Greek island where it does it’s magic and Indy is able to easily steal it back and bring it to the United States.
The counter to above is “Well then if Indy didn’t steal it the Nazis would have just opened it, Hitler gets killed and World War 2 ends early”. The problem with this answer is that it makes a million assumptions that are impossible to fully answer. The Nazis most likely would have tested the ark before presenting it to Hitler, as the last thing you want to tell Hitler is that the millions of dollars he spent in the Egyptian desert all came to naught, so Hitler dying seems like a far reach. Just the Ark in German hands can lead to all sorts of very bad scenarios, let alone if WW2 ends like it normally does and now the Soviets have access to it. Simply put the world of Indiana Jones is in a much better place with a known outcome (Ark is sitting somewhere in Area 51 undisturbed) than an unknown outcome (Ark is enemy hands)
I was watching a clip from the musical version of Matilda today and a bunch of the comments were about how people didn’t like it because it wasn’t enough like the REAL Matilda- the 1996 movie and it wasn’t a proper remake.
Because it wasn’t a remake of that movie. Any more than Gnomeo and Juliet is a remake of West Side Story. They’re two movies with the same source material, which is a book*. They’re both great in their own way, but they’re not supposed to be exactly the same and one is not meant to replace the other.
To further muddy the waters, the French closed captions supposedly say “Weygand”. Trying to suss it out through Lorre’s accent is futile. I’m inclined to side with the Weygand bloc since both men were front page news in 1942, and such a glaring error would have been caught by someone.
And I hear “Weygand” very clearly (if you look at Lorre’s mouth, he’s clearly forming an initial “v”). I doubt you ever heard the name before, so you substitute one you do know. The subtitles make the same mistake as Roger Ebert: they never heard of Weygand and did a mondegren.
Look, everyone makes the point that “DeGaulle” makes no sense, right? Why would the leader of the free French have any authority to issue anything like the letters of transit? But there’s a clear reason why the head of Vichy French forces in northern Africa could have that authority. The writers would need to choose a Vichy or German leader, and Weygand was that person until late 1941.
The same thing bugs me when people say the John Carpenter The Thing is a remake of the Howard Hawks The Thing. The title is the only “thing” borrowed from the 1950s. version of the John Campbell story.
If you watch the clip carefully, you’ll see that Lorre bites his upper lip with his lower teeth because he’s pronouncing the “W” like a “V.” This was natural for him, since his native language was German.