WordWolf

Kill Bill Volume ONE, but you're close enough. Volume 1 was a martial arts-feel movie, Volume 2 was a Western-feel movie. BTW, I stuck to lines delivered in English and not captioned into English. I thought it was more fair, even if it excluded a lot of good lines.

I think a jury would see it the same way, and a judge would as well. I know I do.

"Working Girl, Interrupted."

"If you had to guess where she was headed next, what would be your best guess?" "Guessing won't be necessary. She informed me. She said that I could keep my wicked life for two reasons..." "As I said before, I've allowed you to keep your wicked life for two reasons. And the second reason is so you can tell him in person everything that happened here tonight. I want him to witness the extent of my mercy by witnessing your deformed body. I want you to tell him all the information you just told me. I want him to know what I know. I want him to know I want him to know." "As your leader, I encourage you from time to time, and always in a respectful manner, to question my logic. If you're unconvinced that a particular plan of action I've decided is the wisest, tell me so, but allow me to convince you and I promise you right here and now, no subject will ever be taboo. Except, of course, the subject that was just under discussion. The price you pay for bringing up either my Chinese or American heritage as a negative is... I collect your f*ing head." "You have every right to want to get even." "No, no, no, no, no. No, to get even, even-Steven... I would have to kill you... go up to Nikki's room, kill her... then wait for your husband, the good Dr. Bell, to come home and kill him. That would be even, Vernita. That'd be about square." "It was not my intention to do this in front of you. For that I'm sorry. But you can take my word for it, your mother had it comin'. When you grow up, if you still feel raw about it, I'll be waiting."

Even if you read that, IIRC, that poster was caught lying about a bunch of stuff. I wouldn't count on anything you heard being true.

"If you had to guess where she was headed next, what would be your best guess?" "Guessing won't be necessary. She informed me. She said that I could keep my wicked life for two reasons..." "As I said before, I've allowed you to keep your wicked life for two reasons. And the second reason is so you can tell him in person everything that happened here tonight. I want him to witness the extent of my mercy by witnessing your deformed body. I want you to tell him all the information you just told me. I want him to know what I know. I want him to know I want him to know." "As your leader, I encourage you from time to time, and always in a respectful manner, to question my logic. If you're unconvinced that a particular plan of action I've decided is the wisest, tell me so, but allow me to convince you and I promise you right here and now, no subject will ever be taboo. Except, of course, the subject that was just under discussion. The price you pay for bringing up either my Chinese or American heritage as a negative is... I collect your f*ing head."

It doesn't have to be, but I can't think of many shows that had so many guests. Come to think of it, maybe it DOES have to be The Muppet Show. In any event, it IS the Muppet Show. The Brady thing wasn't around the yearS it would take to have so many guests. The Muppet Show sequel was "Muppets Tonight." (1996-1998 plus syndication.) There were many Muppet movies, and there's one in the theaters or getting ready for them now.

These crackpots always have a special exception for celebrities. They don't have to do the gruntwork, they get awards but skip the earning of them, etc. Remember that Tony Collins (New England Patriots) was awarded a WOW pin despite never having gone WOW or even signing up? According to lcm's OWN ACCOUNT (vp and me), all the local leadership in New England were AGAINST lcm showing up and giving him a WOW pin (1984), and told him it was being a "RESPECTER OF PERSONS." lcm decided to do it after consulting with vpw, and was convinced it would further the ministry.

No.

And when there were rapes in the LEAD program, it should have been halted immediately. vpw insisted the program continued, and belittled the risk of rape, saying that one could potentially be raped anywhere. Which, in and of itself, isn't a lie, but is truth phrased to be deceptive. Although it is technically true someone could perform a rape at a church's altar or on the duty sergeant's desk in a police station, the odds are incredibly small in comparison to, say, the specifics required in the LEAD program. That's why, despite there being many church altars in the US, and many duty sergeants' desks in the US, we don't hear about rapes at them but we've heard of rapes during LEAD. IMHO, once the first rape was reported, vpw was complicit in any succeeding ones, since he had a fiduciary responsibility to remove obvious risks from the program, and chose not to do so-rather vocally.

"If you had to guess where she was headed next, what would be your best guess?" "Guessing won't be necessary. She informed me. She said that I could keep my wicked life for two reasons..." "As I said before, I've allowed you to keep your wicked life for two reasons. And the second reason is so you can tell him in person everything that happened here tonight. I want him to witness the extent of my mercy by witnessing your deformed body. I want you to tell him all the information you just told me. I want him to know what I know. I want him to know I want him to know."

Really, do what we do and look up the movie on Wikipedia and IMdB (especially IMdB) and you may have pages and pages of stuff to draw from. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page http://www.imdb.com/ I've found that what I THOUGHT I knew-or read elsewhere and thought was correct- was incorrect and corrected myself with IMdB in particular. It's really perception. I don't know that many movies. I remember trivia, but much of it is for movies I've never SEEN. That's why I sometimes flounder trying to name actors, recognize quotes, etc. I stay in there and keep trying. You've probably seen more movies than me. (I tend to re-watch movies I like more than reach for a new movie, when left to my own devices.) But, of course, I can only ask you to stay in, I can't make you play. Please hang in anyway.

This "variety" show had many, many guests, including: Candace Bergen, Ben Vereen, Rita Moreno, Florence Henderson, Phyllis Diller, Ruth Buzzi, Julie Andrews, Milton Berle, George Burns, John Cleese, Dom DeLuise, Madeline Kahn, Rich Little, Steve Martin, Ethel Merman, Zero Mostel, Bernadette Peters, Vincent Price, Lou Rawls, Connie Stevens, Pearl Bailey, Petula Clark, Roy Clarkm James Coco, Alice Cooper, Bob Hope, Elton John, Danny Kaye, Cloris Leachman, Liberace, Loretta Lynn, Gilda Radner, Helen Reddy, Roy Rogers, Peter Sellers, Raquel Welch, Harry Belafonte, Spike Milligan, and Victor Borge. (Yes, I could have kept going.) This show spawned a sequel, eventually, and there were a number of theatrical-release movies.

Now you know why I sometimes respond to bluster with "You can't scare me-I've seen Bea Arthur sing."

It may have been a typo. Then again, I don't know if vpw had a venereal disease. Knowing him, it was possible.

Incredible how twi hemorrhaged followers until they were something like 1/7 of their previous size, and yet that handful managed something twi couldn't do when there were tens of thousands in rather than just thousands- "get the Word over the world." He announced it had happened THEN and not before. And his explanation of how it was "over the world" was that there were (now) Bible meetings in locations where the entire planet could potentially attend. Yes, that's hysterical. He was only counting official twi stuff and NOT any offshoots. He said the "remnant" of twi (his term, and he redefined that and said the remnant was the best part of the cloth) which was far smaller than a few years before, NOW had fellowships fricking EVERYWHERE (but previously it did not when there were a LOT more people involved.)

They aired the show in syndication at lots of different times when I wasn't at work. I do have some interest in modern-day magic stories (I read "the Dresden Files" and recommend them for any other fan of the genre.) Also, I was single and the show starred these 3 cute chicks. That's enough for me to have watched the show when I was able. Admittedly, later it was hard for me to follow time-wise, so I missed the later seasons and what looked like interesting stories about the school. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_Star_Wars_Holiday_Special 1978 was between Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back. At the time, I was a kid. Naturally, I was really into Star Wars (there were toys, comic books, etc.) In 1978, Lucasfilm greenlit a project to appear on TV to maintain hype for the fans while Lucas worked on TESB. It was aimed at small children, and was 2 hours long. (It worked as a small children's special, but would have made a successful 1 hour special.) There were many problems with the thing, and Lucas has said, off the record, that he wished he could destroy all the bootleg copies of the thing from the sole airing. There were some neat things about it, and it DID feature most of actual SW cast. There were a number of actors who played bit parts, with varying levels of success. A high point was Art Carney as Saun Dann, a low point was Harvey Korman stuck playing a defective droid (he was much better as the alien Julia Childs analog). Towards the end, there was a scene set in the Cantina on Tatooine. Now, I get the grizzled bartender (Wuher) has to have someone else tending bar and he might not be there at any particular moment. All they needed was another grizzled-looking actor to play a hardened Tatooine worker. So, out of all of Hollywood, they chose BEA ARTHUR. Even as a kid, it made no sense to me... and worse, since this was a MUSICAL, they had her show up, bartend, and then SING! TWICE! And then Harvey Korman tried to pick her up. My subconscious actually suppressed the memory of the show until I saw a bootleg airing for fans decades later. Then it all came back to me. However, it explains why I went out of my way to avoid Bea Arthur shows from 1979 onwards. (Now it's just a habit, not a rule.)

I knew some of the trivia, but remember I get to use the Wikipedia page and the IMdB page (and other resources) when composing the clues. I have ONE kid. He just SEEMS like he's plural because he's a lot of work. :) At the time of the airing, I noticed the change from "day" to "week" but had forgotten it over the decades. It came back to me last night when I was reading.

I actually thought of this show first, but figured "Golden Girls" was a LOT more likely. You're referring to Shannon Doherty and "Charmed." I thought of it first because I've watched this show and I generally don't watch Bea Arthur because of an incident November 17, 1978. (The sole airing of the Star Wars Holiday Special.)

"Scarface"?

I have 3 answers, each for a different type of show. "The Golden Girls?"

Yes, he did. And it led to the Land of Make-Believe. The current cartoon "Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood" follows Daniel Tiger onto the trolley as he goes to school and learns life lessons, complete with variations on the opening and closing songs used by Fred Rogers. My favorite legend of Mr Rogers is that someone stole his car, and that, when the thief saw the announcement on the news, he returned the car and apologized. Nice story. I was shocked to see Ming-Wa Nen was on his show playing a role. She's on "Marvels Agents of SHIELD" as Agent May. Bob Keeshan, of course, was playing Captain Kangaroo and not himself when he visited. I like that his closing song (that replaced "Tomorrow" changed the line "I'll be back when the day is new" to "I'll be back when the week is new" for Friday episodes. Some kids DO notice those things. (Mrs Wolf has watched Daniel Tiger's show, and recognized the trolley and the reference to "snappy" in the song confirmed for her that this was the original show I was mentioning.) So, your turn.

I can see that, although assigning even indirect responsibility for that to God Almighty is something I wouldn't do other than to say the alternative was that He could (or should) have made humans with stunted free will so sin wasn't an option. Technically, He bears that indirect responsibility. Of course it's not necessary. It's also nothing like what I said. (Strawman.) A) "Because of one or two incorrect scriptures." I know of one just from the little snippet you posted. If I had a lot more time, I'm sure I'd find a LOT more, if only because, statistically, to have just hit the ONE place with ONE error in an entire Bible with only ONE sample to draw from is like winning the Powerball lottery after ever only buying one ticket. B) Who said anything about throwing out an entire version of the Bible? I said I don't use paraphrases, and why I don't. (And frankly, you demonstrated my point about their inherent weakness in the one snippet you quoted.) (Strawman.) When I'm reading a commentary, I like to know when I'm reading a commentary. When I'm reading what's supposed to be unadorned verses, I like to know that. They are good for different things and should be read with different approaches. I recommended E-Sword on this thread and mentioned it had commentaries for it that could be integrated for free, so it's obvious I don't have problems with commentaries or with using them. I have problems with mislabeling a commentary as something else. It leads people to conclusions they would not have if they were told the truth. The book "Roots" by Alex Haley was a work of fiction with no real research nor historical accuracy to it. Yet, people were told it was accurate historically, as in "things happened like this." So, a lot of people finished the book and thought they knew HISTORICALLY how things happened that didn't happen that way. I object to that. If they'd been told "this is historical fiction and is not based on research" (like, say, the movie "A Knight's Tale", inspired by Chaucer's fictional "Knight's Tale), then I have no problem with people reading it because they should expect- fairly- entertainment but not historical education. So, a commentary should be labeled exactly that, so it can be used for its proper purposes and for nothing else. What's so objectionable about that? That makes them commentaries. In many cases, that makes them laudable and noteworthy commentaries, and quite useful. How would you feel if a friend offered to drive you to the airport in his "car", and when he showed up, he was riding a bicycle, and said he considered that his "car" since it's how he got around, and he considered it superior to using the "other type of car" because it's environmentally friendly? I don't know, Mark. I'm not feeling like this is the same "Mark" I've corresponded with here over the years. I feel like "he" would have gotten my points immediately and not objected to things I didn't say and then blame me for saying them. I find this peculiar.

This long-running show had guests appear occasionally. They included Lou Ferrigno, Yo-Yo Ma, Bill Nye, Bob Keeshan, Margaret Hamilton, Michael Keaton, Bill Bixby, Ming-Na Wen, Wynton Marsalis, Marcel Marceau, Tony Bennett, Rita Moreno, Branford Marsalis, Itzhak Perlman, David Copperfield, LeVar Burton. (In fairness, Bob Keeshan, Michael Keaton, Margaret Hamilton and Ming-Na Wen didn't play themselves.) This show featured a trolley. "Tomorrow, tomorrow We'll start the day tomorrow with a song or two. Tomorrow, tomorrow We'll start the day tomorrow with a smile for you. Til then I hope you're feeling happy, Til then I hope your day is snappy. Tomorrow, tomorrow It soon will be tomorrow and be our day We will say a very happy tomorrow to you." This show has inspired a current show, which can be seen as a spin-off or successor, complete with a similar name. "I'll be back, when the week is new. And I'll have more ideas for you. And you'll have things you'll want to talk about. I will too." (Having never seen this show, Mrs Wolf figured it out from the previous clues, so you know it's not something obscure and unknown.)

I only speak for myself, which is why I made it clear that I only mentioned things I would or would not recognize. I know I am familiar with different media than the other posters here, but I can mention what would or would not work for me. It's not like I gave any actual clues for the movie, and I can see why it's tricky to identify this one by using or not using actor names of the cast. I absolutely had to post something because we were completely stalled trying to name a movie about a female character based on a real woman when this movie didn't have one. Since there wasn't one, the clue was incorrect and pointing us away from the correct answer and toward other movies. (That's how I thought it had to be some sort of historical drama.) If all the clues were correct, I would have just noted I disqualified myself and left it at that (so others would know I was unable to finish the round.) And yes, I like to play also, so I hate to disqualify myself. I'd rather lose than disqualify myself or cheat, but this time I was too confused...and it was a good thing I did look it up because now we can move on.