It was only attached at the top. You can see by the way the Warden tears it down.
I see your point.
And at least Fonda’s character was immune to peer pressure…
That was, IMHO, the whole point of the film. John Stuart Mill once said, “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.” Fonda’s character was trying to prove that point. He was also showing us how hard it was to be that “one person.”
Brilliant movie, BTW.
I have one. What was the glowing substance in the briefcase in Pulp Fiction?
And, what was in the trunk of the Nova in Repo Man?
I think a harder question is: you’ve got Grace Kelly in the room. Why on earth are you looking out the window?
Marcellus Wallace’s soul. I think Tarantino even admitted this himself.
So, this is the part of Miracle on 34th Street that you find hard to swallow?
There’s a broad spectrum of injury between “perfectly fine” and “cold-cocked”. It’s tricky to knock somebody out; people have received skull fractures without losing consciousness.
Then why did the chess piece the warden threw rip into it like it was tightly connected to the wall?
I figured he used chewing gum or an adhesive to connect it at the bottom…
Maguffins.
He has? I understood that what was in the briefcase was a “McGuffin” – something that only for reasons of the movie’s plot is desirable and valuable. In the real world, it’s meaningless. The falcon in The Maltese Falcon supposedly is the same thing. Why do they want it? We don’t know. They just do, and that’s all we need to know. (I have not seen The Maltese Falcon; this is just what I’ve read.)
:smack:
Tarantino has denied saying that. His standard answer to the question has been literal: a baby brute.
According to Snopes, Tarantino never admitted the thing about Marcellus’ soul (although it makes a lot of sense thinking about it, regarding the 666 code to the briefcase locks) but he admitted that, originally, the briefcase had been supposed to contain diamonds. Then, according to a co-author, he found this idea boring, and the question of what was inside remained unsanswered, with the clear purpose of having people wonder about that.
The one movie question I’ve been pondering for years:
In practically every James Bond film, the villain’s army of nameless mercenaries, sooner or later, capture Bond and anaesthetize him. Instead of simply killing Bond while he’s asleep, the villain waits for him to wake up so he ca explain the details of his vicious plot, and then decides to get rid of Bond by some unnecessarily complicated means. Bond, of course, survives, escapes, saves the world and reunites with his Bond girl.
I understand it’s because having Bond die in the first half of the picture would make it kind of boring, but it’s always the same, and never really satisfying.
BEcause it’s a movie cliche and a way to create (artifical) tension. It’s also bad writing. But you’re right. Even when they have no reason to keep him alive, they always do and pay for it in the end.
Yes - and also, if it were only attached at the bottom, wouldn’t any little pressure difference cause the poster to float away from the wall, blowing Andy’s cover (no pun intended)?
That was my point - how would he attach the poster to the wall after he climbed through the hole?
Yes - and also, if it were only attached at the bottom, wouldn’t any little pressure difference cause the poster to float away from the wall, blowing Andy’s cover (no pun intended)?
That was my point - how would he attach the poster to the wall after he climbed through the hole?
It all depends on how much the poster weighs. It was pretty big, and while I don’t know anything about the quality of paper used for posters back in the mid-60’s, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was significantly heavier than what you see today. If the poster was heavy enough, its own weight would hold it tight against the wall even if it was only connected at the top.
Carrie, from the movie “Carrie”, wasn’t able to fly either.
I agree. It seemed as if it were attached.
The only thing I could think of was that he tacked the top and thenplaced gum or adhesive on the bottom. When he got in, the poster settled and the adhesive caught the wall.
It would be a light bond (due to lack of pressure), but it might be enough to keep it from blowing up.
Or…a wizard did it! 
How about “the Incredibles”? What happened to Mirage? Sure, she helped the family escape the island, but shouldn’t she have been charged with at least being an accomplice to the murders of scores of superheroes? (all the files of “Terminated” heroes that Mr. Incredible finds.)