niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
CONTEXT: I just did a bit of digging on your behalf regarding this line, and there seems to be no concrete definition of it from any official source. That said, I found several interpretations along the way, including: 1) "You cannot wash away your sins."; 2) The blood is worn as a badge of merit on the blade; 3) The blood remains on the blade and not on your hands (meaning you are relatively guilt-free). Personally, considering the overtly religious themes within the film, I would side with option 1, especially since Priest Vallon is saying the line.  <sep>  Q: What's the meaning behind the phrase "The blood stays on the blade"? A: there seems to be no concrete definition of it from any official source  Q: In Gangs of New York, a character is told not to wipe blood off a razor when he cuts himself cause the blood stays on the blade. What could that mean? A: The blood remains on the blade and not on your hands (meaning you are relatively guilt-free  Q: What about another meaning? A: You cannot wash away your sins  Q: Are there any others? A: The blood is worn as a badge of merit on the blade 
Output: Wait, in what way would there be merit?
CONTEXT: The balance of power had shifted considerably since the first set of quotes. King Joffrey is dead, and his younger brother Tommen is now king. Unlike his wild card of an elder brother, Tommen is gentler and more prone to manipulation by his new bride. The Lannisters impeccable image has also been shattered. They failed to prevent the assassination of their king in the midst of his own wedding day, and the suspected assassin is the king's Lannister uncle. Not only do they look incompetent, they are divided among themselves. On the other hand, the Tyrells' situation is much stronger now. Tommen is already wrapped around Margaery's pretty little finger, and she knows that the assassination was orchestrated in part by her own family. In Margaery's eyes, the Lannisters look disoriented and lost. Putting on a show trial for one of their own, whom she knows is innocent of any wrongdoing. Whatever power Cersei held over Margaery has now been diminished.  <sep>  Q: What was Margaery's motivation to call Cersei 'sister' again? A: Whatever power Cersei held over Margaery has now been diminished 
Output: Why has it been diminished?
CONTEXT: The plot by MI 6 and the CIA is to give Le Chiffre no choice but to turn himself in. They had no legal right to arrest him, lack of evidence and all. Once he lost the money, both organizations hoped the pressure by the real criminal contacts would force Chiffre to turn evidence over, instead of being killed. Both organizations are playing a long game in this. There was no expected immediate payout in the plan. If they arrest him, they would reveal their hand in the events and blow the operation. Additionally, Leiter was playing this by ear. The only reason the CIA could arrange this was because MI-6 decided it got too expensive and Bond was willing to work with them. It was a field decision that wasn't part of the actual CIA plan (Leiter was expected to win).  <sep>  Q: Why didn't Felix Leiter catch Le Chiffre after the game was done? A: Leiter was playing this by ear 
Output: What happened at the end of the game?
CONTEXT: In the books it is yet to be discovered if he is brought back to life for what greater purpose. But one thing is for sure, it isn't just one thing he did, but many. Probably in the books he is the one who kills the Night King, because it was clear from David Benioff's interview that they wanted to subvert expectations, they wanted someone who was not Jon to kill the Night King. So I think in the books he came back to life for also killing the NK. He was brought back to do a lot of things if you start to see it that way, a chain of events that led to a lot of things. Defeated Ramsay, showed the World that the dead are coming, prepared for the Long Night and battle of Winterfell. Successfully defeating NK would not have been possible without him. What the Lord of Light could have wanted? Well, we don't even know what LoL was, didn't know what his intentions were, who were his enemy but one thing we know for sure, all victories inevitably came at a cost. To bring a new World, Jon Snow had to stab his love in the belly. So there we have the Azor Ahai theory jumping in, not totally similar but was a good deal.  <sep>  Q: What was the purpose of bringing back Jon? A: He was brought back to do a lot of things if you start to see it that way, a chain of events that led to a lot of things 
Output: Do you think it was to kill Daenerys?
CONTEXT: A Song of Ice and Fire really sounds quite fantasy-ish, whereas Game of Thrones sounds medieval and more suitable for a show. Also, the name 'Game of Thrones' gives more information about what will happen in the TV series (politics and fight for the throne) than the name A song of ice and fire does. Game of Thrones is still a very suitable title, yes it is the title of the first book but the entire span of the series covers the game being played for the Iron Throne. A Song of Ice and Fire is sophisticated and poetic, but Game of Thrones is direct and exciting and very easily remembered. And that's what counts for the average person. Note also that the phrase is used in the other books and is perhaps even better than the series title at describing in one phrase the whole point of the books.  <sep>  Q: Why is the TV show titled "Game of Thrones" and not "A Song of Ice and Fire?" A: A Song of Ice and Fire really sounds quite fantasy-ish, whereas Game of Thrones sounds medieval and more suitable for a show  Q: True, but the book series is called "A Song of Ice and Fire" don't you think that would attract more people who were fans of the book? A: he phrase is used in the other books 
Output: "Game of Thrones" is just the name of the first book, won't fans think show is about only that book instead of the whole series?
CONTEXT: Well, what we know is that Bill was a former student of Hattori Hanzo. What actually happened between Bill and Hanzo is not clear from the movie. There is also no mention of it on Kill Bill Wikia. However we can assume that Bill learnt the art of swordsmanship from Hanzo and used it for evil. This must have infuriated Hanzo. This kind of stuff is a recurring theme in many movies where a disciple learns a skill from a master and turns again humanity to use those skills, hence infuriating the master. So to me, this seems the possible reason for Hanzo's anger.  <sep>  Q: What did Bill do to make Hanzo mad? A: Bill learnt the art of swordsmanship from Hanzo and used it for evil. This must have infuriated Hanzo 
Output: How did the black mambo meet Hanzo?
CONTEXT: The Avengers is an Initiative: a sanctioned team brought together to defend the world against threats beyond the scope of SHIELD and the world's governments. Captain America is the first Avenger not only because he was the first to be recruited (Thor doesn't even know about the Avengers until partway through the movie: even Stark was aware of their existence before then), but because the super-soldier program of the 1940's was a wartime pre-cursor to the Avengers program, albeit one that was stalled by espionage. Captain America was quite clearly the first member of the team to sign up to a government initiative to defend innocent life. Ruben Studdard was 25 when he won American Idol in the 2nd Series, and Kelly Clarkson was only 20 when she won the first series. We don't refer to Studdard as the first American Idol winner, do we?  <sep>  Q: Why do we say that Captain America is the first avenger? A: because he was the first to be recruited 
Output: So, Thor was recruited after him even though he is older?
CONTEXT: As we see in Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (during the climactic fight between Darth Maul, Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi) and Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (when dozens of Jedi storm the arena where Obi-Wan Kenobi, Anakin Skywalker and Padmé Amidala have been sentenced to death), Jedi have no qualms about killing those that are trying to kill them. In fact, we see that Obi-Wan Kenobi is referred to as General Kenobi in Star Wars films set after the events of the Clone Wars, so we can be reasonably sure that there is nothing prohibiting Jedi killing people in battle. However, at the point you are asking about in Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith, Count Dooku is an unarmed opponent and poses little to no further threat. The Jedi way would have been to arrest him, not murder him, as Anakin himself correctly says in the quote in the question.  <sep>  Q: In Star Wars, can a Jedi kill? A: Jedi have no qualms about killing those that are trying to kill them 
Output: Do jedis often kill their opponent?
CONTEXT: She doesn't want to torture Sherlock, she wants to play with him. Specifically, she wants him to play with her. At least, that's what the childhood version of herself wants and it manifests in modern day as the torturous puzzling she sets up for Sherlock. Eurus lacks human emotion and, thus, doesn't see what she does as torturing her brother.  <sep>  Q: What is Eurus's motive in the final problem A: She doesn't want to torture Sherlock, she wants to play with him. Specifically, she wants him to play with her  Q: Were they friends as children? A: that's what the childhood version of herself wants and it manifests in modern day as the torturous puzzling she sets up for Sherlock 
Output: Does she kill redbeard?
CONTEXT: Spider-Man: Homecoming is following the Captain America: Civil War. I've seen the same trailer - and the clip with Spidey holding Cap's shield seems to be lifted straight from the CA:CW movie during the airport fight. Later in the trailer (or in another trailer), Peter is boasting to his friend about meeting Iron Man and the Avengers, and how he stole Captain America's shield from him.  <sep>  Q: Why did I see Spider-Man with Captain America's shield in his hand? A: he stole Captain America's shield from him 
Output: When did he do that?
CONTEXT: Yes, multiple dogs can talk. Another one that has in multiple episodes is Brian's gay cousin Jasper in L.A., whom has a full time job and even gay married a human. Most animals have a variation in how much they can talk and who can understand them, because Family Guy runs on the rule of funny.  <sep>  Q: How many dogs can talk in Family Guy A: multiple dogs can talk. Another one that has in multiple episodes is Brian's gay cousin Jasper in L.A., whom has a full time job and even gay married a human 
Output: Who is Vinny
CONTEXT: I'm afraid you completely misunderstood a lot of the movie. At the start of the movie, Hal is already dead (killed himself in prison). Those scenes with Hal (mostly in New York) were all flashbacks. The present is with sister in San Francisco. Jasmine meets Dwight at a party in San Francisco. This is long after Hal killed himself. But to your question: "Why did Jasmine arrest Hal?" It was purely a spur of the moment, revenge thing. Hal had just told Jasmine that he was in love with this French girl and was going to leave her. And almost immediately, Jasmine calls the FBI (or rather calls someone to get the FBI's number).  <sep>  Q: Why did Jasmine arrest Hal? A: It was purely a spur of the moment, revenge thing 
Output: Who did Jasmine sleep with?
CONTEXT: I'm afraid you completely misunderstood a lot of the movie. At the start of the movie, Hal is already dead (killed himself in prison). Those scenes with Hal (mostly in New York) were all flashbacks. The present is with sister in San Francisco. Jasmine meets Dwight at a party in San Francisco. This is long after Hal killed himself. But to your question: "Why did Jasmine arrest Hal?" It was purely a spur of the moment, revenge thing. Hal had just told Jasmine that he was in love with this French girl and was going to leave her. And almost immediately, Jasmine calls the FBI (or rather calls someone to get the FBI's number).  <sep>  Q: Why did Jasmine arrest Hal? A: Hal had just told Jasmine that he was in love with this French girl and was going to leave her  Q: Who did Jasmine sleep with? A: Dwight  Q: Who did Jasmine call about Hal? A: Jasmine calls the FBI  Q: Who did she accuse Hal of sleeping with? A: this French girl 
Output: Who starred in this movie?
CONTEXT: The money belonged to Barr so it had his fingerprints on it. The gun was also Barr's as was the van. The whole point of Charlie's actions were to frame Barr for the killing. He had befriended Barr to get close to him and was close enough to be able to drug him and take the various pieces of property away from Barr's house and to return them with incriminating evidence without Barr realising he'd been set up. If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk. Presumably Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence in the multi-story car park.  <sep>  Q: How did Charlie get Barr Finger prints? A: Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence 
Output: What did Charlie take one of?
CONTEXT: The money belonged to Barr so it had his fingerprints on it. The gun was also Barr's as was the van. The whole point of Charlie's actions were to frame Barr for the killing. He had befriended Barr to get close to him and was close enough to be able to drug him and take the various pieces of property away from Barr's house and to return them with incriminating evidence without Barr realising he'd been set up. If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk. Presumably Charlie just took one of these to leave that final piece of incriminating evidence in the multi-story car park.  <sep>  Q: How did Charlie get Barr Finger prints? A: The money belonged to Barr so it had his fingerprints on it  Q: How does that explain the scene with the coin? A: If I remember correctly the movie shows a jar filled with coins on Barr's desk 
Output: Did he use the coin to get the prints?
CONTEXT: Maybe it's because with origami you can go from a simple non living material such as a simple sheet of paper and mold it into something that is a representation of a living thing. Although this might never get a true answer I like to think it has something to do with the artificial creation of something representing life or dreams. When thinking further along these lines it strikes me that indeed the origami are all artificial representations of something living, yet a unicorn can never be really alive which can then be some sort of an origami analogy for Deckard = Replicant.  <sep>  Q: What does the origami represent in Blade Runner? A: the origami are all artificial representations of something living 
Output: What types of origami does he make?
CONTEXT: For the same reason that Jeff doesn't immediately call the police with his suspicions: fear that if Thorwald realizes he has been made by an outside observer, he will dispose of all the evidence and escape without prosecution... Lisa is buying more time by being taken under arrest, and the event was intended to appease Thorwald to some extent. He was already making mistakes (retaining his wife's wedding ring due to sentimentality), and Lisa was clinging onto the thought that their plan was not yet foiled. The arrest itself was actually a means of getting Lisa safely out of the apartment, and of getting the wedding ring (as evidence) into the hands of the police.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't Lisa tell the truth about Thorwald to the police? A: fear that if Thorwald realizes he has been made by an outside observer, he will dispose of all the evidence and escape without prosecution 
Output: Why did she get herself arrested?
CONTEXT: For the same reason that Jeff doesn't immediately call the police with his suspicions: fear that if Thorwald realizes he has been made by an outside observer, he will dispose of all the evidence and escape without prosecution... Lisa is buying more time by being taken under arrest, and the event was intended to appease Thorwald to some extent. He was already making mistakes (retaining his wife's wedding ring due to sentimentality), and Lisa was clinging onto the thought that their plan was not yet foiled. The arrest itself was actually a means of getting Lisa safely out of the apartment, and of getting the wedding ring (as evidence) into the hands of the police.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't Lisa tell the truth about Thorwald to the police? A: For the same reason that Jeff doesn't immediately call the police with his suspicions  Q: Why does she get herself arrested? A: Lisa is buying more time by being taken under arrest 
Output: Did Thornwald run away?
CONTEXT: Police Academy is a series of parody and satire comedies set at a Police Academy. It would be highly unlikely that a real police Academy would place a shower room in that location without appropriate blocking of the windows. They would get sued quickly. This is just a joke or visual gag.  <sep>  Q: Have you seen Police Academy? A: Police Academy is a series of parody and satire comedies set at a Police Academy 
Output: What year was it released?
CONTEXT: Because Sam was their top earner and with the change in casinos after their trial, they kept him around to keep earning. He had already proven himself during his previous trials about his license and not only that, he survived the bombing. This had two implications, first is that he wasn't like Nicky and the second, he had far too much press after he survived the bombing as he was the center of attention with the gaming board. They really couldn't kill him without proving they (the bosses) were involved.  <sep>  Q: Why was Sam "Ace" Rothstein spared by the bosses? A: Because Sam was their top earner and with the change in casinos after their trial, they kept him around to keep earning 
Output: The bosses decide to eliminate anyone involved or with knowledge of the skim
CONTEXT: It's not a case of Hank possibly watching Walt, it's more that the launderette was on his radar and known to him as a potential target. If he'd been watching it over any space of time, he'd start to notice who goes there regularly. If that person was someone he knew to have links to drugs, and also was a completely different race from the other employees there, then that's going to set further alarm bells of in Hank's head and confirm his suspicions that something illicit is going on (rightly or wrongly). By having Walt and Jesse come in the back of a laundry truck, it looks like a regular drop off and doesn't raise any flags with anyone.  <sep>  Q: Why do Walter and Jesse no longer come in cars to the laundry A: It's not a case of Hank possibly watching Walt, it's more that the launderette was on his radar and known to him as a potential target 
Output: At some point Walter and Jesse have to come in laundry trucks leaving their cars away. I understand Hank may watch Walter, but why Jesse?
CONTEXT: YES. SHE'S LYING. Francesca knows that news in the small Iowa town that she lives in travels fast and gossip travels faster. She is well aware that if she admits to anyone that she knows all about Robert and that she spent the afternoon with him earlier...and that he is in her house at the moment, that the gossip would be unforgiving. Francesca knows how people, especially women are treated in that town if adultery is whispered about. The film shows how Lucy Delaney is treated by the people in town over gossip about her committing adultery with a married man. Francesca's husband is well respected in that town. She loves her husband and children too much to ruin them in that town with gossip. That's why she acts as if she doesn't really know or care about Robert.  <sep>  Q: Is she lying on the phone? A: YES. SHE'S LYING  Q: What actions prove that she is lying? A: She is well aware that if she admits to anyone that she knows all about Robert and that she spent the afternoon with him earlier 
Output: Does she know the National Geographic photographer well?
CONTEXT: I state few reasons why Judge might have felt sympathy for Jackie DiNorscio 1 - Jackie gets beaten up so badly in the prison by some guys and the next day when the Judge ask him what happened, he says he fell. 2 - Tony shoots him thrice even though Jackie's saying "coz, what are you doing? I love you." 3 - Jackie pays for Tony's mother's funeral.(normally what good guys do.) 4 - Jackie shows a old picture of his gang to the citizens in the court and says about how they're conspiring to buy an ice cream in front of the parlour. 5 - In the end, citizens in the court gives verdict and says that they find all the defendants are not guilty despite all the evidence and witnesses. Jackie is very clever and he knows the only way he is gonna win is by gaining public's and judge's sympathy that's why he keeps mentioning about gang members' families and their children and repeatedly asks the public not to separate the gang members from their family by sending them jail and in the end he tells to his gang to bring fake families to the court on final verdict to gain more sympathy. The scenes I've explained above may not be exact 'cause I've seen this long ago but I thoroughly enjoyed the movie.  <sep>  Q: What changed the Judge's sympathy in Find Me Guilty? A: 1 - Jackie gets beaten up so badly in the prison by some guys and the next day when the Judge ask him what happened, he says he fell 
Output: How do we know that the Judge had low empahty in the beginning?
CONTEXT: It's a nice scene just when the song Ecstasy of Gold starts. Actually the dog was not part of the original script. It was Leone's dog and it ran and escaped when the scene was shot. Elli's reaction is a natural instinct on being startled. Leone (perfectionist as he may be) liked the result so much that he decided to keep it  <sep>  Q: What is the meaning of the apearance of dogs in the good the bad the ugly? A: Actually the dog was not part of the original script 
Output: Did the dog just walk on set and they kept the footage?
CONTEXT: There was no movie rating system in place back in the 1940's, and movies were greatly censored by the US government. In the 1920's the Supreme Court ruled that free speech did not apply to movies, and a control board was arranged where by all film studios had to submit their scripts for censorship. Movie studios were given guide lines by which they had to follow. So it's not so much that profanity is now widespread, as much as it was strictly forbidden back in the 1940's. This system of governed film making slowly started to collapse over the years and gave birth to the Motion Picture film rating system. Where the film ratings and censorship is controlled by the film industry and not by a single controlling person or government. Now that we have the rating system, films can be classified by their rating. Today's ratings are, at least by idea, implemented by our peers. So as society changes so do those who review and rate films. That is why we see more profanity in PG rated films, as parents who rate the films accept the fact that children in this age group use these profane words or acknowledge that the film works the way the script was written. New ratings were introduced including PG-13. To address the need for films that target a segment of the population that are pre-adult but seek adult style films. Still, I have to wonder who these people are that rate these films.  <sep>  Q: Era of profanity in movie scripts? A: There was no movie rating system in place back in the 1940's, and movies were greatly censored by the US government 
Output: How did that start?
CONTEXT: For a perfect clone, down to the quantum level, both would be the real Angier. That is the essence of his fear. The real Angier will be killed every time. When you download a movie what you are doing is actually making a perfect copy of the movie. Which is the real movie? They all are. This is very different from making copies of film reels where only the original have the quality of the original (each copy adds a little imperfection). Now, the question The Prestige asks is what if you can make a perfect clone of a person the way you can perfectly copy digital data? In one sense, if we don't want to get too uncomfortable we can always say the remaining copy is now the real data and the deleted copy is not real anymore. But if you really think about it and get out of your comfort zone you will realize that both people are real and what you have done is murdered yourself. In The Prestige this point is much more clearly made as the old copied Angier becomes the one who is killed. Not the newly created clone. Every time the clone will have only the memory of the surviving Angier. But every time Angier experiences death, only the Angier that experienced death has no way of passing that memory to the surviving Angier so the survivor can never know what dying feels like.  <sep>  Q: How does it work that the clones are sentient paradox? A: For a perfect clone, down to the quantum level, both would be the real Angier 
Output: Is the consciousness split among the various clones?
CONTEXT: Because when Kai was trying to Destroy the Pandas & the panda village, Oogway took the side of Pandas to protect them. Oogway took the right side. So, while kai was like a Brother to Oogway, the latter chose to fight Against Kai even he Helps Oogway So much. That's why kai said to betray you betrayed me.  <sep>  Q: Why did Kai believe that Oogway betrayed him in Kung Fu Panda 3? A: Because when Kai was trying to Destroy the Pandas & the panda village, Oogway took the side of Pandas to protect them  Q: How did he take Pandas side? A: Oogway took the right side  Q: We're the two close friends? A: the right side. So, while kai was like a Brother to Oogwa 
Output: Why did the friendship dissolve?
CONTEXT: Tyrion did give the necklace to Ros, but we never actually see him do it. We know about it from another scene. When Ros and Theon Greyjoy are together she's wearing the necklace and tells him that it was a gift from Tyrion. As for why, Tyrion is usually very generous to the whores he beds, and he is extremely wealthy. A necklace of that sort wouldn't have meant much to him.  <sep>  Q: Why did Tyrion give the Lannister pendant to Ros? A: Tyrion is usually very generous to the whores he beds, and he is extremely wealthy 
Output: Do you know when he gave Ros the pendant?
CONTEXT: Mostly, Ron works in the department because of the Rule of Funny. Having a dour anti-government personality is great for Leslie to play off of. However, Ron also keeps his job because he wants to make the government as inefficient as possible. He doesn't just see high spending as bad but everything the government actually gets done. He keeps his position so he can slow things down and so he can hire inefficient people. This is especially highlighted in his episodes with Tom and April, who he hired because they were inefficient and unmotivated.  <sep>  Q: Why does Ron Swanson work at the Parks Department? A: Mostly, Ron works in the department because of the Rule of Funny 
Output: what is the rule of funny excactly?
CONTEXT: I think it was worded that way for pragmatic reasons. Peter Jackson didn't want to tell the story of Sméagol until after the character Gollum was established. In The Fellowship of the Ring, the viewer is intended to see Gollum as a sort of beast. In The Two Towers, he has a much larger role and seems sort of halfway between beast and person, but a viewer who has not read the books is still unlikely to guess that he is a corrupted hobbit. The Return of the King opens with the story of Sméagol and Déagol to shed new light on who Gollum is, where he came from, why the Ring means so much to him, and what kind of influence the Ring wields over him. It is a bit of a shocking scene; the shock would not be nearly as strong if the viewer already knew Gollum's origin. So, in the opening of The Fellowship of the Ring, that Gollum was once a hobbit named Sméagol is an extraneous detail. While "the Ring came to Gollum" is an oversimplification, it was a necessary one; it told the viewer what he needed to know at that point in the story and no more.  <sep>  Q: Why does the narrator say 'The ring came to the creature Gollum'? A: In The Fellowship of the Ring, the viewer is intended to see Gollum as a sort of beast 
Output: What wass the reason for making him appear as the beast?
CONTEXT: Michael hated Toby because he worked in Human Resources. He's essentially a corporate employee that's permanently based at the Scranton branch. He's definitely not (at least from Michael's point of view) an employee of the Scranton branch, so Michael sort of views him as a combination of invader, traitor and spy. Toby's role as a HR employee would primarily be protecting Dunder Mifflin from Michael's stupidity. Michael Scott is, by design, an absolute idiot of a character. He's totally incompetent as a manager and also has absolutely no understanding of what is and isn't appropriate for the workplace, especially when occupying a managerial position. Toby would be the one who calls him up on his inappropriate conduct, reports that conduct back to corporate, and who would be responsible for telling Michael "no" before he does things that he shouldn't. Children will occasionally tell their parents that they hate them (or at least don't love them) when they've been denied something they want or have been told off for doing something they shouldn't. Michael's essentially having a childish - and ongoing - reaction against the authority figure who denies him the things he wants. The impression I got was that the other employees didn't have any particularly strong feelings about Toby either way. They didn't exactly dislike him but they didn't consider him a friend either.  <sep>  Q: Can you talk to me about the US version of the Office? A: Michael hated Toby because he worked in Human Resources. He's essentially a corporate employee that's permanently based at the Scranton branch 
Output: Do you think Michael was jealous that he had a corporate position or just upset that he had authority over him in some small way?
CONTEXT: It seems to be mostly due to the convenience of the channel or network airing a series with a number of pre-recorded episodes or at least a batch of them. For example, when a network buys or syndicates a series that has, let's say, 10 episodes and start airing the episodes in december, if they air episodes 1 and 2 but the christmas episode of the series is the number 10, they will air the 10th episode as the 3rd one to coincide wih the holidays. Other scenario is when something happens in the real world and the series has an episode that deals with a similar theme. Take as an example the shootings that happened in France recently. Some networks will alter the airing order of episodes in a series to avoid a similar subject to avoid the sensationalism, other may try to cash on it and air sooner an episode that dealed with something similar. Also, a network can try to get people into watching their series and getting high ratings, airing the "best" episodes of a series first (i.e. the ones with the more action, or drama, or sex, etc.). Then, when the series go to DVD the numbering order is usually the scripted order and not the airing one, that's why both differ.  <sep>  Q: What is the reason that the air order and the DVD order of a tv show is different? A: It seems to be mostly due to the convenience 
Output: I don't see the reason for it, does this mean one way is out of sequence?
CONTEXT: Keeping in mind what we now know (that the monster is The Man In Black), we can only speculate at what John actually saw. Each person who saw the smoke monster presumably saw more than just a large cloud of smoke - they saw some kind of vision in the monster (if memory serves, this is what happened with Mr. Eko for example). What John saw probably affected him in a way that he wanted to keep whatever vision he saw to himself.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't Locke say he saw the monster? A: What John saw probably affected him in a way that he wanted to keep whatever vision he saw to himself 
Output: Why do you think John wanted to do this?
CONTEXT: Travellers is about saving people in the future not in the present by altering the course of history. The people from the future can only do this safely and without unpredictable side-effects on the timeline if they don't "save" lives in the past. Their future technology actually does allow them to replace people who were not about to die, but they regard this as a moral problem and it is forbidden. But they can take over those lives if they were about to be eliminated from the timeline, hence the apparent paradox of "saving" McClaren. But they haven't actually saved McClaren at all, they have replaced him with a traveller. Early in the series only people about to die get replaced. Obviously the whole point is to alter the timeline but the travellers are aiming not for minor alterations like saving a single, random life, but for big alterations that radically change the course of history. One of their protocols actually forbids them from saving other lives as well even when they know someone is about to die (but not be replaced). This [minor spoiler alert] becomes a source of some dramatic tension in later episodes.  <sep>  Q: Why does MacLaren die in the first episode of Travelers? A: Travellers is about saving people in the future not in the present by altering the course of history  Q: what does this mean, How can people do this? A: people from the future can only do this safely and without unpredictable side-effects on the timeline if they don't "save" lives in the past  Q: Does this then mean that Mclaren is not dead? A: they haven't actually saved McClaren at all, they have replaced him with a traveller  Q: Have they saved lots of people from dying? A: One of their protocols actually forbids them from saving other lives as well even when they know someone is about to die (but not be replaced 
Output: They saved him from falling down an elevator shaft, is this typical in other episodes?
CONTEXT: I think the similarities are coincidental. The Johnny B. Goode scene ties directly back to the start of the film, where Marty is auditioning for the school program, and his band is rejected for being "too loud." In talking about the filming of the scene, Michael J. Fox says, "My favorite part of the original Back to the Future, filmed in 1985, was the Johnny B. Goode sequence during the “Enchantment Under the Sea” dance. As a frustrated musician, I was in my glory, learning the guitar chords and lead solo arrangements, as well as working with a choreographer to mimic and incorporate into the production number the signature styles and stage moves of my rock and roll heroes.” (Lucky Man: A Memoir, p, 144) Top Secret was actually a parody of Elvis films (imdb, Wikipedia, Rotten Tomatoes), so it had a different inspiration.  <sep>  Q: Was the Johnny B. Goode scene from Back to The Future inspired from Top Secret? A: I think the similarities are coincidental 
Output: What are the similarities between the two films?
CONTEXT: Yes, there is a reason for it. As I remember while watching the movie, Esther is a woman so she has well developed breasts, which she hides by wearing body wrappings. And normal child clothes will show the body wrappings easily because they have thin fabrics compared to the thick fabric dresses that she wears.  <sep>  Q: Is there any particular reason for Esther to wear the dress instead of casual dress? A: there is a reason for it  Q: What do you suppose the reason to be? A: Esther is a woman so she has well developed breasts, which she hides by wearing body wrappings 
Output: How much do her scars bother her?
CONTEXT: The source material is essentially a recollection of a life lived by an individual on his death bed. We are seeing these things through the lens of memory, so it is meant to be an almost first person account. There are other moments in the film where things move around for no apparent reason and the stage itself does not move in accordance with objective reality. That particular scene is from "Swann In Love" by Proust and it was an attempt at capturing visually some measure of Swann's emotive memory of a musical experience from that story. I won't comment on whether it was successful. The closest thing I can think at this moment that has this sort of movement might be in Wes Anderson movies where suddenly the naturalistic feel is broken in favor of a staged play: the Zissou movie and "Moonrise Kingdom" both take similar but more obvious breaks from naturalism.  <sep>  Q: Why is the audience sliding around in this scene from Le Temps retrouvé? A: We are seeing these things through the lens of memory, so it is meant to be an almost first person account 
Output: A first person account of what exactly?
CONTEXT: Because appearing dead is not the same as being dead. Firstly, we do not know the extent of the shape-shifting abilities of the Faceless Men but these appear to be based on appearing as something other than what you are. The Dead are targeting the living and there is no indication that the abilities of the Faceless Men can make you be sensed as "unliving" to the Dead. Essentially, if Arya is alive, she's targeted by the Dead, regardless of what she looks like.  <sep>  Q: Why didn't Arya use the powers of The Faceless Men to get past the dead in the library? A: Because appearing dead is not the same as being dead 
Output: So the dead have sentience?
CONTEXT: It's a comedy. The cakes were blatantly shaped as escape tools, but due to the guards respect of M. Gustave and the high quality of'Mendel's' cakes he so often received, the guards stupidly decide not to cut into them so as not to spoil the presentation, despite the fact that they clearly contain contraband.  <sep>  Q: Why does the guard not check the pastries? A: due to the guards respect of M. Gustave and the high quality of'Mendel's' cakes 
Output: Why are the cakes high quality and what makes them so special?
CONTEXT: Tom Dougherty: He was a douchebag and doesn't seems to have many friends in the department. Miss Kringle found the note about him leaving Gotham which Nygma forged. Gotham is a city where crime is at its peak, and a police officer running away like that doesn't seem surprising. Kristen Kringle: Nygma was trustworthy until then and was dating Kringle, so when he told Leslie Thompkins that Kringle had reconciled her relationship with Dougherty and left Gotham, she trusted him. People just trusted what Nygma told them, because they thought he was trustworthy. And we don't know about their families; they might have had no-one of their own, it's possible in a city where people die so frequently. Plus, they work in a police station which is always too busy to care about them.  <sep>  Q: Why doesn't anyone care about the whereabouts of Miss Kringle and Tom Dougherty? A: He was a douchebag and doesn't seems to have many friends in the department 
Output: In what respect was he a douchebag?
CONTEXT: He was the stand-in photographer, implying that, having discovered that his target was to attend the wedding he put things in motion to ensure that he would be there. The women were all employees of his target. By dating the women, he was trying to find some information about his target that would enable him to carry out an attack. Tessa saw the target's invitation, not the photographer's. She evidently let some details slip to the Mayfly Man. Perhaps some ill-considered pillow-talk.  <sep>  Q: What is the connection between the cases in "The Sign of Three" A: The women were all employees of his target  Q: What do you know about the Mayfly man? A: He was the stand-in photographer  Q: Why was Tessa not invited to the wedding? A: Tessa saw the target's invitation, not the photographer's. She evidently let some details slip to the Mayfly Man  Q: What else can you tell me? A: By dating the women, he was trying to find some information about his target that would enable him to carry out an attack 
Output: Thank you - is there anything else I should know about the film?
CONTEXT: Peter Ward was accused of murdering his family, but thought to be insane. He was sent to Greenhaven. He was eventually released. As Will Atenton he creates the family and story he needs to exist in his old house, while only seeing it as it used to be... thus making his way back to his home. There, he eventually uncovers who he is and who actually did kill his family. The audience learns why his wife shot him at this time. When was Peter in Greenhaven? After his family was killed. Why was he considered nuts? He insisted that he was innocent despite the evidence and lack of other suspects. The death of his family fractured his personality and drove him temporarily insane, to the point where he created his alter-ego of Will Atenton.  <sep>  Q: When did Peter/Will go to Greenhaven? A: Peter Ward was accused of murdering his family, but thought to be insane. He was sent to Greenhaven  Q: Why was he thought to be insane, other than the murder? Why not just a killer? A: The death of his family fractured his personality and drove him temporarily insane  Q: Did he ever recover from his insanity? A: he eventually uncovers who he is and who actually did kill his family 
Output: Was he innocent all along then?
CONTEXT: No. The 1994 version was based off of Norse mythology, as the wearer of the mask became a reincarnation of Loki (yes, the same Loki from Thor/The Avengers fame, and a bonafide prankster) whereas the 1961 Mask was a psychological thriller/horror movie where the wearer of the mask was slowly driven insane. There is a fine line between becoming a prankster and committing murder, but the line exists, nonetheless. However, in a larger context, the 1994 movie was based on the Dark Horse comic of the same name, which shared a closer storyline with the 1961 movie. The 1994 version was also intended to be a horror series, but the story was changed along the way. So, in some cases they are, in fact, related.  <sep>  Q: Was the The Mask 1994 (and subsequent cartoon) inspired by The Mask 1961 A: No. The 1994 version was based off of Norse mythology  Q: Norse mythology, how did this shape the film? A: the wearer of the mask became a reincarnation of Loki (yes, the same Loki from Thor/The Avengers fame, and a bonafide prankste  Q: What else can you tell me about the inspiration for The Mask? A: the 1994 movie was based on the Dark Horse comic of the same name  Q: What is the Dark Horse comic about? A: The 1994 version was also intended to be a horror series, but the story was changed along the way. So, in some cases they are, in fact, related 
Output: What was changed about the story?
CONTEXT: Bran is believed to be dead. When Robb marches to war, Theon Greyjoy betrays the Starks and takes Winterfell. Bran and Rickon escape. Theon eventually has two boys slain at a farm and says that they were Bran and Rickon. As far as the greater world knows, all the Stark men are dead, which leaves Sansa (the oldest girl) as the heir to Winterfell. Whoever marries her will become Lord of that region.  <sep>  Q: Why is Sansa Stark so important? A: As far as the greater world knows, all the Stark men are dead, which leaves Sansa (the oldest girl) as the heir to Winterfell 
Output: What does she do after all the Stark men die?
CONTEXT: The comic states that the Radioactive spider was created by experimenting on Peter Parker's blood (by Oscorp). However, there is no mention of this in the movie whatsoever. There are two possibilities: 1) That the spider in the film was also part of some lab experiments based on the blood of Peter Parker of that universe (the one who dies). 2) That the spider came from another universe. The question then is "how did the spider get to the universe before the portal was opened?". The answer to that would be "The spider came from another universe and traveled back in time just like Gwen did". However, to keep things simple, we can assume that Oscorp was up to no good and were experimenting with Peter's blood and Miles got bit by it. We already know that happened in the comics.  <sep>  Q: Which dimension did the radioactive spider which bit Miles come from? A: The comic states that the Radioactive spider was created by experimenting on Peter Parker's blood 
Output: What happened after the experiments took place?
CONTEXT: George 'Babyface' Nelson is Achilles. You can read about it in Achilles and Baby Face Nelson: Modernization of Character in O Brother, Where Art Thou? by Carrie A. Alhelm-Sizelove. Nelson, like Achilles, is a person who fights for his ego and to gain fame. As Achilles fought in the Trojan war for fame, George is robbing banks during the Great Depression not to help the poor people but to get known. There is no deeper motive behind their doing. And George's Achilles' heel is his baby face.  <sep>  Q: Does Babyface Nelson represent anyone from The Odyssey? A: George 'Babyface' Nelson is Achilles  Q: What else can you tell me about this character or achilles? A: elson, like Achilles, is a person who fights for his ego and to gain fame  Q: What does Achilles go on to do in the film? A: Achilles fought in the Trojan war for fame 
Output: What happened in the Trojan war?
CONTEXT: The ending is sort of symbolic and up for interpretation. My interpretation of it was after Queen Anne had her stroke and dealing with the effects of it she is now living in misery. She is sort of alone having only Abigail left who the Queen is somewhat realizing is frivolous and cruel. She had banished Sarah (Rachel Weisz's character) whom she clearly felt a bond with so her mood is further dampened cause of that. And to add suffering a stroke on top of all that it has only left her feeling alone and miserable. The montage of rabbits consumes the screen, each rabbit a reminder of each of the Queen's deceased children she lost in childbirth. The misery consumes the screen and the life of the queen and those that try to curry her favor. Abigail's face is pained and sad as she has to bow and bend to the Queen's whims. I think that is what the montage of rabbits is supposed to represent but that is up to interpretation I think.  <sep>  Q: What does the ending of "The Favourite" mean? A: The ending is sort of symbolic and up for interpretation  Q: What do you mean by symbolic, what does it symbolize? A: My interpretation of it was after Queen Anne had her stroke and dealing with the effects of it she is now living in misery  Q: What does the montage of Rabbits mean then in this context? A: each rabbit a reminder of each of the Queen's deceased children she lost in childbirth  Q: So the rabbits are supposed to be the queens dead children? A: The misery consumes the screen and the life of the queen and those that try to curry her favor 
Output: How many children did the queen lose in childbirth?
CONTEXT: Given he's both a playboy billionaire, and previous movies have shown he manufactured his suits himself, I'd say it's safe to assume he fabricated them using his own resources. He came out to the public as Iron Man at the end of the first film, so he doesn't really need to be completely covert when it comes to building these things, and can easily afford his own facilities to handle the job. Given he's also a genius at robotics, it shouldn't be hard for him to build a facility to fabricate his suits using next to no human interaction as well. I believe during the first movie you see him issuing commands to Jarvis about how to paint the updated suit, after he asks Jarvis how close it is to being fully built.  <sep>  Q: How did Tony Stark get his new suits? A: previous movies have shown he manufactured his suits himself, I'd say it's safe to assume he fabricated them using his own resources 
Output: Didn't he blow them all up in Iron Man 3?
CONTEXT: I think that with her last words, she is trying to say that she wants Oskar to be in her shoes. In the conversation, Oscar says that he does not kill people like Eli as she is a vampire, and Eli is trying to say that he should try to be in her position, understand that she needs to kill people to survive and live. Eli is saying that she is like Oskar because they're nature is alike, Oskar wanting to kill for revenge and Eli killing to survival.  <sep>  Q: What does Eli mean with the words "Be me, for a little while"? A: I think that with her last words, she is trying to say that she wants Oskar to be in her shoes 
Output: Is she feeling sorry for herself?