History Headscratchers / OneHundredAndOneDalmatians

25th Aug '15 11:10:38 AM arcada188
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Black dogs, dark night...it's plausible that no one would notice them if they kept to the shadows. Plus there is the implication that it is Christmas Eve. There probably wouldn't be too many people out and about, and if anyone had been and said, "I just saw a giant pack of black dogs! I think the [[Literature/HarryPotter grims]] are out to get us all," it would probably be dismissed as someone hitting the eggnog a bit too hard.

to:

** Black dogs, dark night...it's plausible that no one would notice them if they kept to the shadows. Plus there is the implication that it is Christmas Eve. There probably wouldn't be too many people many out and about, and if anyone had been and said, "I just saw a giant pack of black dogs! I think the [[Literature/HarryPotter grims]] are out to get us all," it would probably be dismissed as someone hitting the eggnog a bit too hard.



* Why do Lucky, Cadpig and Rolly refer to Roger and Anita ''by their names'' instead of calling them their masters or something? The fact that they refer to their masters by their names seems to be just... rude.

to:

* Why do Lucky, Cadpig and Rolly refer to Roger and Anita ''by their names'' instead of calling them their masters or something? The fact that they refer to their masters by their names seems to be just... rude.rude.
* The Bark Brigade. If the TV Series is anything to go by, ninety dalmatians are soldiers in the Bark Brigade. Including women, sure, that's the norm in Israel Defense Forces, but what's about the fact that the aforementioned ninety soldiers are ''[[UnfortunateImplications children]]''?
13th Jun '15 9:00:31 AM arcada188
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Why do Lucky, Cadpig and Rolly refer to Roger and Anita ''by their names'' instead of calling them their masters or something. The fact that they refer to their masters by their names seems to be just... rude.

to:

* Why do Lucky, Cadpig and Rolly refer to Roger and Anita ''by their names'' instead of calling them their masters or something. something? The fact that they refer to their masters by their names seems to be just... rude.
13th Jun '15 8:59:50 AM arcada188
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Well they'd be ruined. Or would possibly have to do more research to find out a way to stop that side effect. Or they could just make it a rule that their subjects can't live within a so-many mile radius of Big Ben.

to:

** Well they'd be ruined. Or would possibly have to do more research to find out a way to stop that side effect. Or they could just make it a rule that their subjects can't live within a so-many mile radius of Big Ben.Ben.

!!The TV Series
* Why do Lucky, Cadpig and Rolly refer to Roger and Anita ''by their names'' instead of calling them their masters or something. The fact that they refer to their masters by their names seems to be just... rude.
11th Jun '15 1:47:13 PM ScroogeMacDuck
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

** Or yet another thing: Anita was wrong when she said that Cruella would be upset of the song. You know, there's a plenty of Disney villains that know they're evil, and love to be the bad guys ! Alright, it's not really shown that Cruella is like that, but they aren't either evidences against it. So perhaps she took the song as a compliment. Of course, she could have insincerely sued them so she could kidnap the puppies more easily, but she did not need to, did she ?
30th Apr '15 4:20:25 PM fearlessnikki
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Well maybe from Cruella's perspective, they are. She's a high society Londoner who's able to afford fur and a rolls royce - as well as having a second home in the countryside (it's falling apart but still). She sees Anita and Roger living in a small house and assumes they're poor.



** And even if you don't take the sequel as canon, she mentions that "the police are everywhere". That's why she's so keen to get the puppies killed and skinned quickly. Evidence would point towards her, due to the argument after the puppies are born. Horace and Jasper don't seem particularly bright, they could probably snitch on Cruella too.



** If she's trying to avoid suspicion, a lawsuit might put the police on her trail. They'd investigate Roger and learn that he recently had his dogs kidnapped - not long after he refused to sell them to Cruella. It'd look like she kidnapped the puppies as revenge for his song.
** Or if she's found out and thrown in prison, she doesn't have much case to sue for defamation.



* Also, about those psychologists - what would be the consequences if the courts discovered that their hypnotherapy could be reversed with the noise of Big Ben?

to:

** Exactly. Why would Chloe's dog be any of her bosses' business?
* Also, about those psychologists - what would be the consequences if the courts discovered that their hypnotherapy could be reversed with the noise of Big Ben?Ben?
** Well they'd be ruined. Or would possibly have to do more research to find out a way to stop that side effect. Or they could just make it a rule that their subjects can't live within a so-many mile radius of Big Ben.
10th Apr '15 5:09:11 AM td1989
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** I find it extremely doubtful that your pet's history is a usual criteria for determining conflict of interest.
23rd Dec '14 5:24:13 AM res20stupid
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** For the first point, perhaps she had become a probation officer with the belief in second chances? And then years of having to deal with rotten clients made her cynical and believe that it's impossible for criminals to reform. As for believing Kevin is guilty, the situation looked very much like he had taken her out to dinner in order to secure an alibi for himself. She was probably very offended and hurt that she had possibly been duped and lied to.

to:

** For the first point, perhaps she had become a probation officer with the belief in second chances? And then years of having to deal with rotten clients made her cynical and believe that it's impossible for criminals to reform. As for believing Kevin is guilty, the situation looked very much like he had taken her out to dinner in order to secure an alibi for himself. She was probably very offended and hurt that she had possibly been duped and lied to.to.
* So, Chloe is aware of Cruella before taking her probation case and that her dog Dipstick was one of the 101 from the first movie - why was she given the case?
* Also, about those psychologists - what would be the consequences if the courts discovered that their hypnotherapy could be reversed with the noise of Big Ben?
3rd Aug '14 1:03:19 PM Historian1912
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** She wasn't thinking, probably. Also, Roger can truthfully say he never met her before or really even knew she existed before he wrote that song. Her name is so odd, practically comic bookish, that most would assume he made up the name having no clue that an actual person had that name.
2nd Jun '14 11:52:24 AM JamesHunter
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*Why didn't Cruella sue? Sure Rogers song is very close to the mark but she hasn't actually done anything when he wrote it. You'd think she'd have sued for libel and defamation of character, since it is incredibly insulting to her. Sure she might have been worried about her dog coat plan being exposed but if she's sued Roger for every penny he's got, he'll probably have to sell her the dogs just to get out from under it...
10th Apr '14 12:15:24 PM HankMorgan
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*** Pretty sure that gets mentioned in the animated movie, too - in the scene where she first shows up at their flat.
This list shows the last 10 events of 29. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Headscratchers.OneHundredAndOneDalmatians