Raf

Nicholas of Turkey

Ok. Let's parse this. "Stubborn and rebellious." That could be very serious. Depending on what the kid is stubborn and rebellious about, I suppose you might have a case for the death penalty. So, let's see. Won't respond to discipline. Ok. Let's get some examples though. He's a... glutton and a drunkard?!?!?! That's IT? That's what gets the death penalty? By STONING? Ever stop to think what a horrible form of execution this is? This... is... torture. And Yahweh prescribed this penalty for stubborn and rebellious children. And what is an example of stubborn rebelliousness? Drunken gluttony. This is the only example cited in the context. What do apologists say about this verse? To save our link-posters some time, I'll share a couple. https://carm.org/bible-difficulties/genesis-deuteronomy/stone-rebellious-son Now, I don't know about you, but I do not threaten my children with execution if they don't obey me. And I don't need to. Neither do you, I'll bet. How, in anyone's name, is this savagery "necessary"? It's not. http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.php?com=mhc&b=5&c=21 So KILL THEM! Right? Now, you might argue (as the first link does) that there's no record of anyone actually being sentenced to die under this law. And we all know why. It's because there were no disobedient children throughout the history of Israel. What? You think there were? Well, then, why wasn't anyone ever put to death under this law? Because even THEY knew this was not a just punishment for the "crime"! But this was Yahweh's law! Now, it is true that Yahweh commanded his people to honor their mothers and fathers. And it is true that this is, generally speaking, a good law. But disobedience to that law does not merit the death penalty, and you are not a moral person if you think it does. You are a threat to your children if you think this is the case. Why would a moral god institute a law that, if enforced and carried out, makes the enforcers sociopaths?

Yes Yes

Hey, ..., is it cold in your little corner of the world?

"This place reminds me of Santa's workshop. Except it smells like mushrooms and everyone looks like they want to hurt me."

The Hunger Games

Take the Long Way Home Supertramp Oh ... is the other side of any given line in time Counting ten tin soldiers in a row Oh no, ... you'll never know

Supergirl's "winter finale" was pretty damn good. The show, overall, is as silly as a Supergirl show must be. But it really does seem like the writers/showrunners finally decided to be, well, good. To trust their audience to grow a little. This was, finally, good storytelling. Not just passable. Not just ok. Actively good. Arrow was born with its footing, and the storyline in the first season was terrific. The show had to change to accommodate the fantastical elements the became necessary when Flash was introduced as part of the same universe. Flash didn't find its footing until a few episodes in, but it was clearly and obviously planned from the start. I honestly think episode 8 is a turning point in the Supergirl series, though. It's the episode where the writers say "Thanks for sticking with us. Now let's have some real fun." Kudos. '

We're at Ned Beatty.

We did. I used it. And shockingly, it took a while for them to get it.

No

I just checked it: This movie came out nine months before Wall Street, so it would allegedly be the first to feature a cell phone. However, Wall Street used it a bit more extensively. Also, I hear Magnum Force used a cell phone too. I have my doubts, but not worth it. But you're not going to remember that either way. What you will remember is the age of the non-title character being raised as an issue, by that character, repeatedly. Humorously. Punctuated with an expletive.

What do I mean by that? Well, for example (not this movie), Tom Hanks played the title character in The Man With One Red Shoe, but that wasn't his name. Arnold Schwarzenegger played The Running Man, but that wasn't his name. This movie is similar. The title refers to a specific character, but that character's name is not the title of the movie. This movie spawned three sequels.

Yes. Have at it

Ignore the cell phone trivia. Someone posted the same trivia item for Wall Street and this movie. Both released the same year. Not worth the quibble

I have to check dates. Pretty sure this one came out before either of those. By the way, the title character has a name. However, his name is not the title of the movie.

I was NOT expecting that.

Iris. Goo-Goo Dolls I knew Pass the Dutchie, but couldn't remember the artist

This action movie is believed to be the first major motion picture to feature a cell phone. The title character is eight years older than the actor who played him. His co-star was 10 years younger than the character he played. The age of the latter character is a famously repeated plot point.

That would have to be Paper Moon

You can have it, WW. I have a tendency to wander off...

The only one that did not feature Luthor?

The Monkees ?

Captains Courageous and Boys Town

Henry Fonda won his Oscar. He wore Spencer Tracy's hat in the movie. He lost in 1940 to Jimmy Stewart. Katherine Hepburn, who gave Tracy's hat to Fonda, won Best Actress. Jane Fonda lost the Best Supporting Actress Oscar but accepted the Best Actor award for her dad, who died a month or so after the ceremony. Chariots of Fire won Best Picture that year. You're up, George.