Raf

She played... Amanda Wingfiel Eleanor of Aquitaine Christina Drayton Ethel Thayer

"I don't mind you coming here and wasting all my time." Red, I think the goal of this thread is to post easy clues, not to stump us. Name That Tune is for tougher clues

The lead actress is, in real life, a rape crisis counselor. She keeps a picture of her mother on her desk on set. Soldiers used to keep a picture of her mom in their lockers.

Featuring the song "Far From Over" by Frank Stallone

I mentioned this is a sequel. The original had a bestselling soundtrack. The signature, best known song on the soundtrack is the title of the sequel. The sequel's soundtrack was not as successful. Its best known track was a song performed by the brother of the sequel's director.

I mean guess a long running show

Including guest stars, the cast list on IMDB is over 6,000 actors.

Kelsey Grammer once tied the record for continuously playing the same character in a scripted weekly live action series. Took him two series to accomplish this feat portraying Frasier Crane. The lead actress on this series broke Grammer's record. Another actor who tied for Grammer's record was also a regular on this show, which is quite a feat because he originated the character on another show entirely [the second series is not considered a spinoff of the first, though they obviously take place in the same universe]. Incidentally, he has played the same character on numerous series, as a guest. They include 30 Rock, The Wire, The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt and Arrested Development.

sorry

Alan Arkin?

I'm gonna guess that these are easy guesses. Redd Foxx's father was Fred Sanford. And he died of a heart attack in front of people whe were annoying him so naturally they thought he was faking it. "Hang on Elizabeth! I'm coming to join you!"

The plot featured a Broadway show with elements most of us would find disturbingly familiar.

I figured ypu didn't really need to know each character once you saw how stereotypically Mexican the names were. Tommy Chong, by the way, was in That 70s Show and Zootopia. George is up

it was a genuine guess... from WW

The director of this sequel usually starred in the movies he directed. In this one he only had a brief, uncredited cameo with no lines. He's still alive but no longer directing. The name of this sequel was considered for the title of the original movie, but producers went in a different direction. By the time the sequel went into production, its title was already inextricably linked to the original movie anyway.

Pancho Rodriguez El Charro Negro Ramone Manuel Padre

Ok, I'm up...

And now Carlin's voice is in my head saying goodbye to 20 people in a row at a party

Which version is that? Not the one that made it to Broadway. An earlier draft? One of my favorite musicals.

1. I already raised that point, but appreciate the refresher. 2. My comment, that I would drop the digression, was regarding the topic of the reliability of the gospel of John, not Ralph D's dubious SIT confirmation story. 3. I think, assuming Ralph D told the truth, that his father was clearly the least inquisitive linguist in the history of linguistics. I would be embarrassed to relay a story that so betrayed my own father's professiomal incompetence. Still, there are clues in the account that establish its kinship with solid bovine waste produçt. Like how the speaker produced Portuguese with a slight Castillian accent. People don't speak in accents that are foreign to their native tongue. If he spoke with a Castillian accent it's because he was Castillian. And if he was Castillian, the likelihood of his exposure to Portuguese is as slim as me finding a Spanish speaker in Miami. Dude spoke a language he knew, in other words. Wierwille himself told a story of how he faked tongues by speaking in a language he knew. It's not far fetched. IF the world's least competent linguist did indeed recognize these two languages, I would bet a year's salary that the people who produced those languages were already quite familiar with them. Of course, we'll never know that, because they conveniently [as always] vanish from the tale, depriving anyone and everyone of the opportunity to inquire. In 100 percent of these stories, either the speaker or the person who understands the language conveniently vanishes, never to be seen or heard from again. I call them the West Bubbatanians, after their country of origin, West Bubbatania, which is itself the GSC-safe translation of West Bubbafudge.

Seeing as this is doctrinal, I'll step away from this tangent on this thread, with apologies. Thanks to all for entertaining my digression.

To this I would add two things: 1. Jesus gives "most religious leaders" the justification for the traditional lesson they propagate when he says "You believe because you see. Blessed are those who do not see but believe." I would, of course, put a statement like that in a category similar to the "vaccine against the reason virus" that some religions have, discussed at length in another thread. When you think asking for evidence is an affront to Jesus, you are forced to conclude that believing without asking for evidence is somehow a virtue. It's not. But whatever. More importantly, 2. This is actually another example of a story that defies credibility. Thomas doubts despite the testimony of his closest friends. Makes a spectacular demand of Jesus: I'm not gonna believe until he beats me at Tic-Tac-Toe. Jesus comes, lays down three x's and wins. And Matthew finds none of this worth mentioning. And Mark finds none of this worth mentioning. And Luke finds none of this worth mentioning. Only John, 60-some-odd years after the fact, thinks this might be a story worth preserving. Yeah, no. I mean, yeah, it's what the Bible says. But credible? No.

It's worse than "you can't put it under a microscope." He was presented with evidence that would have knocked a professional linguis on his a$$, and his response was "no, sorry, the interpretation was only a paraphrase and not a translation." Like, the fact that an actual language was produced by someone who didn't know the language was a phenomenon that didn't impress A LINGUIST! That would be like me not reporting on a play because the performance was interrupted by the shooting of a President in the balcony. What-what-WHAT? Now, I am no longer on speaking terms with the teller of this tale because of chiropteral expulsion distortions of reality, but it seems to me we can start fact checking this story by verifying the occupation of the one person, aside from the teller of the tale, whose identity we do have: The linguist. Unfortunately, we don't have a full account. Just a likely last name. Oh, and his profession. Oh, and where he worked, along with an estimate of when. Fluent in 13 languages! That's bloody impressive. A linguist actually verified a firsthand example of glossolalia producing a language and failed to recognize the significance of the event in his professional field. Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

I've spoken to Mike on the phone. For what it's worth, he only had one voice. :) Hey, back on the topic of Ralph Dubofsky's horses hit story about SIT, anyone have his father's name or the years he taught at CCNY? I tried googling "least competent linguists imaginable," but nothing came back. Ditto for "linguists who wouldn't recognize a Nobel Prize winning paper falling into his lap." Zero results.

Understood. Thank you.