Given scene/plot descriptions from movies or TV shows, and given a specific question about the scene, summarize the question into a title

Ex Input:
Yesterday I watched The Huntsman: Winter's War (2016).   In this movie there is one particular scene in which the snow queen asked Sara to kill Eric. So Sara shot an arrow that hit Eric; he fainted and looked like he is dead and then Sara and the snow queen left with the army of the snow queen leaving 2 dwarfs and Eric's body.  The dwarfs pull the arrow from Eric's body with difficulty and they do Eric woke up and the dwarfs are stunned by that. Eric looks to his locket suggesting that the locket took most of the force of the hit.  I have several questions about this particular scene.   How can Eric survive such an attack? You can see Eric dodge backwards by the impact of the arrow in that scene and immediately faint on the ground. Even if Sara hit the locket intentionally to take most of force of the arrow, how can she manage to hit it in a way that the arrow hit the locket without breaking it into two (or several parts) and also it hit Eric's chest? And in such a way that doesn't kill him. (You can say that arrow hit Eric also as it is still intact to body and the dwarfs use quite a strength to remove it from the body and there is also blood on his chest). Did Sara hit some special spot of his body that makes Eric faint and removing it wakes him up? And in the immediate next scene he looks normal with blood on his chest, smiling and planning with the dwarfs about how to enter the castle like nothing has happened.   Sara never misses but how is she able to execute such a hard task?   Is there something that I am missing or am I thinking too much and should just watch and enjoy?

Ex Output:
Hard to kill with an Arrow


Ex Input:
    In the episode The Raiders Minimization of The Big Bang Theory Amy ruins Raiders of the Lost Ark for Sheldon by making the following claim:   Indiana Jones plays no role in the outcome of the story. If he weren't in the film it would turn out exactly the same.    [...]    If he weren't in the movie the Nazis would have still found the Ark, taken it to the island, opened it up and all died... just like they did.   Well, the Ark ending up in the warehouse (probably) wouldn't have happened without Indy, but aside from that, would Belloq and the Nazis have met the same fate even without Indy's meddling?  My question:  Is Amy's assertion correct, did Indiana Jones play no role in the outcome of the story?

Ex Output:
Is Amy right about Indiana Jones being irrelevant to the outcome?


Ex Input:
This movie left me incredibly confused at the end. I don't know if I missed something or if they just legitimately never explained it. The entire movie felt like just some random action movie that hinted at this great idea backing it but never actually made it around to that idea. It does a great job at making you feel like everyone fears the Divergents, but never goes into the why part of it.  What is so bad about being a divergent and why are the Erudites so keen on eliminating them all? What real threat do they pose to civilization that makes them so dangerous? Was it just that they can't be mind-controlled or was there more to it than that?

Ex Output:

So what is so bad about being a Divergent?


