7 Hotly Debated Movie Questions That Totally Have Answers
If the Internet is to be trusted (and we don't see why it shouldn't be), the best way to solve a movie mystery once and for all is to argue about it incessantly in blog posts, message boards and chatrooms. If you don't believe us, do a Google search for " Inception ending" and see what comes up (we dare you). Or, simply wait 10 minutes after this article is posted and scroll down to see what our own comments section is saying.
Some movie and TV mysteries, however, weren't intended to be mysteries at all, and often are just the result of the director getting cute at the last minute. These mysteries are often plainly explained in the script, and while the answers aren't always definite, they are surprising. Like ...

The Mystery:
In case you forgot, the beginning of Pulp Fiction isn't just John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson driving around talking about foot massages and foreign fast food. They're out for a briefcase filled with ... orange light, apparently.

And the perfect British spy novel to read on the toilet
Many, many movie fans have seen the long, drawn-out theories about the film in general, and that's not even touching what's inside the briefcase. A popular theory says it's Marsellus Wallace's soul, while others claim that it's simply whatever you want it to be.

A posthumous L. Ron Hubbard novel? Thetans? Tropicana?
According to Tarantino, it's just a MacGuffin, something to drive the plot along. Meaning that it's not important, so really, we shouldn't even be talking about this.
What the Script Says:
But Tarantino's co-writer, Roger Avary, says that when they wrote the script for Pulp Fiction, it was diamonds.
Not soul-capturing diamonds. Not a giant diamond that shoots lasers. Just plain old diamonds. Why didn't they just show that? Because Tarantino had just used a case of diamonds as a major plot device in Reservoir Dogs, and he and Avary agreed that it was "too boring and predictable" to do that again. So they decided not to show them, thus giving the whole thing an air of mystery.
Getty
"I'm getting tired of my diamond mountain. Bring me a shrunken monkey brain!"
But they had to be hinting at something, right? Because of the orange glow that poured from the interior any time it was opened? Actually, that glow is nowhere in the script. Avary says: "...somebody had the bright idea (which I think was a mistake) of putting an orange lightbulb in there. Suddenly what could have been anything became anything supernatural. Didn't need to push the effect. People would have debated it for years anyway, and it would have been much more subtle."

Because Quentin Tarantino loves subtlety.

The Mystery:
The ending of The Sopranos is either the best or the worst series finale in television history, depending on whether the person you ask likes staring at a blank screen or not. The show ends with Tony Soprano and his family munching on onion rings in a diner, with a suspicious-looking guy in a Members Only jacket sitting nearby, then getting up to go to the bathroom. The last shot is of Tony's face looking up at the door as his daughter enters, and then ... nothing. Blackness.

And no comfort except for the last bars of Don't Stop Believin' echoing through your head
Creator David Chase refuses to reveal what happened after that. So ... does the black screen mean Tony took a bullet to the back of the head? Was the Members Only guy a hit man sent after Tony? A federal agent? Or just a guy with diarrhea who felt self-conscious about going into a restaurant only to use the crapper?
What the Script Says:
To our knowledge, the script for this episode has never been leaked or released. We haven't read a word of it.
But actor Matt Servitto has.
Getty
Along with a whole lot of scripts calling for "angry bald dude who can't take any more of this shit."
Servitto played FBI agent Harris for six seasons of The Sopranos, and after a cast screening of the last episode, he talked to reporters about the script, revealing that the final scene continued after the cut:
So, wait, the guy comes out of the bathroom and walks toward Tony? That would have made the scene like 90 percent less ambiguous, and according to Servitto, that's exactly what was supposed to happen. He told another reporter: "The scene cut as the guy was advancing towards him, as if he was about to shoot Tony. It was, I think, less ambiguous that Tony was going to get shot."

"He was also carrying a huge bazooka, but I have no idea what that means."
Of course, that doesn't mean it's 100 percent certain that the guy did shoot Tony. Maybe he was approaching him for a different reason. Maybe he wanted an onion ring. Either way, it's clear that this man was up to no good -- something the final version of the scene leaves out.
The Mystery:
All through the movie Cast Away, Tom Hanks' character (Chuck Noland, a FedEx worker stranded on a deserted island) holds on to a single unopened package: He resists the temptation to open it for four years, carries it with him when he sets off on a dangerous raft trip across the ocean, and finally delivers it at the end of the movie. And since there's nobody home at the time, we never find out what's inside.

But never mind -- it's the product placement that really matters
But the mystery of the package goes deeper than that -- for starters, there are two evocative angel wings drawn on the surface of the box. At the beginning of the movie, we see a woman in Texas welding giant wings out of metal and sending a similar package to a naked cowboy in Moscow. What the hell was in there?

A cult is in there. A naked winged cowboy cult
Robert Zemeckis has remained coy about it, sometimes joking that the package actually contained a waterproof satellite phone -- which for all we know might be a real possibility, since Chuck never opens it anywhere in the movie ...
What the Script Says:
... except in the deleted scene in the script where he totally does.
The third draftf of Cast Away has a few key differences from the finished movie: Wilson the volleyball is actually a soccer ball, Chuck's relationship with the Helen Hunt character is slightly different, and there's a lot more "insane guy on a raft talking to himself" dialogue.

He also called for Wilson for seven entire pages.
The package, however, is exactly the same as in the finished movie: the same angel wings, the same woman at the beginning, and the same insane resolution to deliver it no matter what. And then, on his 1,000th day on the island, Chuck goes "eh, what the hell" and opens the box. So what's inside? This:
istockphoto
"Oh, this would have made the last three years of crushingly lonely and desperate living somehow more bearable!"
Two bottles of salsa verde. Also, a note from a woman named Bettina begging her husband to come back, apparently hoping some spicy condiments will do the trick. Chuck looks at the bottles, reads the note, then puts everything back into the package and continues carrying it with him. It makes absolutely no difference. This could've perfectly been a deleted scene in the movie itself.
Via William Broyles
The draft clears up another mystery not everyone might have noticed: Why does Chuck drop off the package in a house in Texas if it was going on a plane headed outside the U.S.? Chuck's friends at FedEx actually tried to find the recipient but couldn't locate him, so Chuck decided to return the box to the person who sent it in the first place. At the end of this draft, Chuck talks to Bettina, who tells him that her husband (the naked cowboy from the beginning) was a jerk, and she doesn't mind that he never got the salsa.

On the other hand, the kid who didn't get his volleyball was completely devastated.

The Mystery:
In Lost in Translation Bill Murray plays, essentially, himself as a washed-up actor named Bob Harris on a business trip in Tokyo. (We'd like to point out that this is obviously not true to life, as Bill Murray remains the greatest actor in history.)

Forced to star in wacky Japanese commercials and sit through blisteringly weird interviews, Bill, er, Bob encounters Charlotte, a young, free spirited girl fresh out of college played by Scarlett Johansson. Over the next few days, they form a bond that has to end when Bob heads back to the good old USA. The film throws a lot of hints that Bob is in love with Charlotte, and she him, but, sadly, Charlotte is already married to John, played by the evil businessman from Avatar.

Avatar , like Lost in Translation, also featured culture
shock and alienation in a distant land, but with more blue people and tree-nuking.
In the end, Bob and Charlotte embrace one last time, he whispers something in her ear, and they part, leaving the audience to debate what, if any, future their relationship has.
What the Script Says:
Truth be told, Bob's whisper isn't even in the script. The plan all along was to have Bill Murray ad-lib it. But what is in the script is what's really going through Bob's head in their last few moments together.
Specifically, it says that Bob wants to tell Charlotte he loves her ... but he never does. Bob totally chickens out, they hug, and that's it.
Getty
To be honest, it's kind of amazing he showed that much restraint.
But what about the whisper? Now we know it wasn't anything romantic, but what did he say? Was it some truth about the universe? Some in-joke? "Want to go mess with random college students later?" Turns out, several people with way more time than us have attempted to decode the whisper using audio-processing software -- and some have gotten pretty close.
The first part could be anything, really, but after watching the video it's hard not to hear "... go to that man and tell him the truth, OK?" at the end. And that doesn't sound like something a guy would say to move a relationship forward, unless he's actually proposing a threesome. A threesome with the bad guy from Avatar.

"Scarlett, I'm leaving you. I got a better offer."








According to IMDB page on "Groundhog Day", Harold Ramis mentions the 10,000 years concept from the earlier script on the DVD commentary, but later concedes that in the final film it's probably more like ten years.
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesThe real question is why didn't the character rape more.
The real question is why Murray's character didn't rape more.
The fact that your first comment is currently +2 and your second identical one (except for wording) is -2 makes me giggle.
Yeah man, stop holding out on the rapeage.
The suitcase glow was a tribute to Repo Man, as well.
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesYep, and Kiss Me Deadly.
and Duece Biggalow
And Reading Rainbow.
And Voltron
The book 2001:a space odyssey explains everything very clearly. Where the movie leaves you asking "what the f**k am I watching?", the book leaves you saying "Wow, holy shit, this is amazing". For example, there are 6 chapters explaining the monolith's purpose on earth with the ape-men. The first time I tried to watch the movie I couldn't watch more than 20 minutes of that piece of crap. The book however, I couldn't put down.
Reply Hide All See All 9 RepliesYou couldn't watch the movie because you're clearly a f*****g retard.
Ignore R.Duke. 2001 is one of the most pretentious, overrated movies of all time.
TylerL. Young, 2001 is one of the most celebrated films of all time. It single-handedly dragged Science Fiction movies from the B-Movie trash that had inundated the genre throughout the 50's and early 60's. The fact that neither you nor mlurette can't recognize this fact and the fact that both dismiss one of the greatest films of all time directed by the GREATEST director of ALL time, says more about you than it does about the film.
I'm sorry, but you both FAIL.
r.duke is also pretentious
i agree with jeremy but r.duke does have a point.
I like the new trilogy of starwars better
Movies really need some kind of narration, or subtitles maybe, to let you know what's going on in the movie. TV shows do it, you don't have to remember what happened before the commercial break because they do a recap. I can't be paying attention to every little thing that happens for two hours.
A lesson to all of you: Don't listen o anyone who has President Cheezburger as their picture.
2001 is only watchable if you've read the book. It's really basically an illustration. There are so many things that the movie doesn't mention, you just end up having no idea what was going on.
So, TylerL.Young, it would most certainly seem that way without the book to accompany it. Had it been made without the book, it would be, indeed, incredibly pointless and pretentious as fuck.
I read a literal shot by shot analysis of the final Sopranos scene and after doing so, it seems pretty obvious to me that Tony did, indeed, die. I didn't want to believe it and spent ages before telling people they were wrong for saying so, but it does make sense.
ReplyThe whole scene is a POV from Tony's view. Every shot of someone walking through the door is shown through Tony's eyes among them Carmela, AJ (and the members only guy) and Meadow. After the members only guy leaves to go to the bathroom, Meadow walks through the door a few moments later and Tony looks up. And then nothing. That's because that's what Tony was seeing. Blackness. That was his POV because he'd been shot from behind by the members only guy. It also plays a subtle homage to the conversation he had with Bobby at the lake about not even hearing it when it happens.
Anyway, if you google it, you can find the analysis and it does a much better job (complete with screenshots) of explaining it than me but that's the gist of it.
I recently read a four-year-old interview with David Chase in the Daily News in which he definitely states that Tony did not die. But, of course, no one wants to pay attention to what the show's creator has to say on the subject.
schadenfraulein - I've never watched this show, so I'm a neutral party here. But I did go back and read everything I could find from David Chase in the past few years. He actually hasn't said that much about the Sopranos, and I couldn't find a single quote where he says Tony didn't die. He says that he was offended that people wanted Tony's brains splattered on the wall. That he wasn't trying to trick anyone. I saw a ton of quotes where he kept going back to "Stage 5" (?) and saying you never know, and stuff about Tony's remarks to Bacala, but I don't know what any of that means.
I did find this quote, though: "There are no esoteric clues in there. No Da Vinci Code. Everything that pertains to that episode was in that episode. And it was in the episode before that and the one before that and seasons before this one and so on. There had been indications of what the end is like. Remember when Gerry Torciano was killed? Silvio was not aware that the gun had been fired until after Gerry was on his way down to the floor. That's the way things happen: It's already going on by the time you even notice it."
So could you please provide your source? If it was "David Chase reveals the truth behind 'The Sopranos' ending" from the NY Daily News on Tuesday, October 23 2007, then I strongly suggest you read that article again.
Because no where in it does he actually say that Tony didn't die. In fact, Tony is the only character he doesn't mention when he's talking about what the future holds for everyone.
I always thought the mystery item in the briefcase in "Pulp Fiction" was The Holy Grail. That's why it had the (to my certified not color-blind eyes) golden halo glow.
Reply...But I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition about it, Zoot...
*sighs*
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!
I couldn't resist...
Wanna get stomach-pumpingly wasted? Take a shot every time somebody in "The Matrix" asks "what is it?", or even just "what?", "how?", "who?", etc.
ReplyIt's not so much dialogue as it is punctuation in a series of soliloquies...
Why don't we just take a shot every time someone in any movie says "and", "the", or "but".
Do you even realise how many sentences the words "what", "how", and "who" play into?
Better yet, take a shot whenever you feel like it, and stop right before you've had too much.
I heard decades ago that the computer name for HAL in '2001: A Space Odessy' actually came from alphabetical letters that precede 'IBM' which was the uber popular computer company during the late 1960's: International Business Machines.
Reply Hide All See All 5 RepliesWhich is a an utter falsehood that both Clarke and Kubrick repeatedly denied. In the future, try basing your posts on something with more solid basis than something you "heard decades ago".
O snap!
Of course they denied it. Doesn't mean it isn't true. People lie.
It is awfully coincidental, but I don't see why they'd deny it if it weren't true.
except that we now know IBM branding is present in several scenes, which doesn't prove anything, but still could suggest there is a connection. I don't really know why it would matter if they were connected anyway!
I paid $32.67 for a XBOX 360 and my mom got a 17 inch Toshiba laptop for $94.83 being delivered to our house tomorrow by FedEX. I will never again pay expensive retail prices at stores. I even sold a 46 inch HDTV to my boss for $650 and it only cost me $52.78 to get. Here is the website we using to get all this stuff, FullBids.com
Reply Hide All See All 4 RepliesDearest Diaz304524:
You are so fired.
Sincerely,
Your Boss
Zooid, you made my day.
I ordered a volleyball from that site but it never showed up!
Hello all of you, I'd like to sell you some cheap/overpriced SPYWARE, and if you order now, you get ALL YOUR CREDIT CARDS STOLEN and a FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO GOATSE MAGAZINE.
I still say that the "Matrix" trilogy would have been MUCH better with the simple revelation that NO ONE LEFT THE MATRIX! They just were in a different level of it. Would explain why Neo suddenly can control the Sentinels for one thing. Or how Smith was able to jump into Banes body. Then they could have spent the last movie actually TRYING to get out of the matrix therefore making something MUCH better.
ReplyEh...no, it'd still be lame, just lame in a different way.
Actually, The Matrix trilogy would have been MUCH better if they STOPPED AFTER THE FIRST FILM.
Here's a question: what are the three shells for in demolition man?
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesDamn, can't believe I didn't think of that the first time I read through this, but you're a little off. They're for wiping your ass. The real question is, how are they used?
I agree, they should make an article about that: "how the f**k do you use the shells in Demolition Man".
Since we never see them in the movie, one theory i think is possible is that they are buttons for an advanced bidet. One for water, one for an air dry, and one to give a spray of some perfume or deodorant. In the perfect society no one could have a stank @$$.
Reply*In New Yorker accent*
'Ey! 'Ey Eraserhead! What's up man? Why you go 'n gotta make no sense to me man? Is it 'cause all yo scenes suppose' to symbolize some'in? Maybe some sort uh, I don' know, some sort uh abstract concept that lies within the field of philosophy? Heh? What's up wit' that? Why you leave so much questions fo' me man? Get yo act together, you crazy.
Heh. As the movie played out, the Groundhog Day loop seems to be caused by Bill Murray's character being such a schmuck. There was a similar movie that predates Groundhog Day which had a similar time loop, except that they actuallly tried to explain why the loop was happening. In fact, the whole plot is actually the main character(s) attempts to stop the loop from ocurring. The movie's name? 12:01.
ReplyRelease dates:
Groundhog Day: 02-12-93
12:01: 07-05-93
I reckon you were stuck in a time loop.
12.01 got started as a short film in 1990
I saw the screenwriter of Groundhog Day (Danny Rubin) give a speech at my school. He actually mentioned the part of the script you brought up... and if I remember correctly he actually preferred the idea of there being no reason for the time loops. Also he considered an alternate ending in which Phil finally wakes up with Rita and escapes the loop- only to discover that she's in a loop of her own.
ReplyOkay, that would suck. Because if Phil was supposed to be stuck in the loop for 10,000 years, then does that mean Rita would have been stuck in the loop for 10,000 years as well?
So much of this I was happier not knowing. It's like the name that Bastion gives to the Childlike Empress in "The Neverending Story". I read the book and discovered what name he called out.
ReplyYeah, trust me, nothing is improved by knowing. Let the mystery remain.
"Yeah, trust me, nothing is improved by knowing."
Not always the case...XD
If you read the book first, the only mystery in the movie was where the other half of the story went.
Guys, if a scene gets removed from the final version, that scene IS NOT PART OF THE MOVIE. It doesn't matter what the original script said, the film-makers made a deliberate decision to leave it out. Therefore none of the things here are explanations for these mysteries, and the debates will rage on...as the filmmakers undoubtedly intended.
Reply Hide All See All 5 RepliesGood point . . . sometimes when you read lyrics to songs, they don't always match what you hear . . . just because they wrote a set of "original" lyrics, that doesn't mean that's what they'll record . . . same with deleted scenes to movies . . .
Yes, but it provides a very highly plausible answer to a heavily debated question. It's not really a matter of which scene was in and which was out. It was the fact that the directors thought of it and that means it was very close to being the end. Sure, the debates will continue, they always do. But I think you're missing the point of this article.
He's not missing the point of the article, he's making a good point about the article. Understanding these movies by accepting all the things that were left out of them is completely unsatisfactory. Also all the things mentioned here would have made the movies worse if they'd been left in. A spell-casting scene in Groundhogs Day would've been unbearably cheesy; narration in 2001 would have sucked balls. s**t gets left out for a reason.
Yeah, but sometimes stuff is cut just for time or other superficial purposes; there are some movies I fully count in deleted/unfilmed scenes as part of the universe of the film.
The title states that these are questions that have answers, but it doesn't promise that they are final, definitive answers. The point is that we face them like they are blank slates, believing that no explanation is available. The authors are saying, "well, actually, there are possible explanations after all", but they aren't demanding that you take it as gospel truth.
10,000 years?! Wow even for a movie that's just bats**t insane
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesHe would have gone insane
he would have gone insane but there is clearly enough time for him to come out of it...just to go insane again in another thousand years
That's what I was thinking! Here I was like, 'whoaa...' when Stargate went for 3 months...
#2... Didn't Phil kiss Rita near the start of the film?
Replyoh, never mind, I got confused...
I once took a religion class where we studied Groundhogs Day...I Like it much better without the witchy curse!
ReplyOn TMZ, they asked Tarrantino what was in the briefcase. He smiled and said: whatever you want. It was wise in his decision to skip the diamonds.
ReplyThe Sopranos ending was perfect. For the longest time I thought they got blown up. But after some research and talking with my brother who had seen the series many times I realized he got shot. The writers wanted you to think and it was a great way of doing it.
The Grounds Hog day curse scenario was wisely omitted. To me, it was happening simply because he was an arrogant schnook.
On 2010 they finally said the monoliths were simply forms for entities that didnt have one.
Sometimes I feel movies explain too much. This article is a case in point :)
Yeah, I mean, this article merely says they were hotly debated, not that they vastly improved the quality of the films.
I hate when writers leave stuff up to us. That's just lazy
This make me realise that I don't want to know what does the alien told Jodie Foster in Contact
Reply Hide All See All 5 RepliesProbably "I shot Reagan. Wanna go on a date?"
I tap the ass of a 1997 Jodie Foster, even if she is a hairy lesbian.
Ya know, I want to know but I think it would just ruin the movie for me completely.
"James Woods is a prick."
"I invented the internet."
"My god, it's full of stars."
"There were diamonds in the Pulp Fiction briefcase."
"Adama is a Cylon."
"I AM YOUR FATHER!"
@SeanYamazaki: Be careful; the topglass of a pinball machine is notoriously fragile.