I think it's just confused word use. The author seems to treat 'would' as a "past tense operator". In programming terms, the author appears to be under the impression that past_tense("action") -> "would action". The correct function is past_tense("action") -> "actioned". (Or whatever weird conjugation "action" has.)
The tense this article's passages (mostly) use is "future-in-the-past" tense, where the verb 'will' becomes 'would'. It is used when one transports the reader to a specific moment in time, looking omnisciently into the future. For example, these sentences (in present/present/future, respectively):
"It is 1845. John Johnson wakes up. His wife will bake a cake in celebration."
become (in past/past/future-in-the-past, respectively):
"It was 1845. John Johnson woke up. His wife would bake a cake in celebration."
If we transport the sentences you quoted from past->present and future-in-the-past->future, they become: "Chaplin asks what happened. Ken will say his father has been assassinated. He will travel with [...]". The second sentence becomes: "Chaplin doesn't understand Japanese, but he knows he is in danger. He will immediately put his acting skills into play." These are grammatically correct, but I believe there are a few cases where the author gets it wrong. In general, there are so many tense changes (and changes in the 'specific moment' as described earlier) that it is probably unreasonable to consider the whole document grammatically correct even if one could break the document into isolated pieces of correctness.
The tense this article's passages (mostly) use is "future-in-the-past" tense, where the verb 'will' becomes 'would'. It is used when one transports the reader to a specific moment in time, looking omnisciently into the future. For example, these sentences (in present/present/future, respectively):
"It is 1845. John Johnson wakes up. His wife will bake a cake in celebration."
become (in past/past/future-in-the-past, respectively):
"It was 1845. John Johnson woke up. His wife would bake a cake in celebration."
If we transport the sentences you quoted from past->present and future-in-the-past->future, they become: "Chaplin asks what happened. Ken will say his father has been assassinated. He will travel with [...]". The second sentence becomes: "Chaplin doesn't understand Japanese, but he knows he is in danger. He will immediately put his acting skills into play." These are grammatically correct, but I believe there are a few cases where the author gets it wrong. In general, there are so many tense changes (and changes in the 'specific moment' as described earlier) that it is probably unreasonable to consider the whole document grammatically correct even if one could break the document into isolated pieces of correctness.