All Activity

Matt Dillon The Outsiders Ralph Macchio George

Diane Keaton George

I can hear it but am blanking on the title. George

Sabrina the (teen-age) witch? George

You might enjoy the 2011 film of Coriolanus, starring Ralph Fiennes and Brian Cox (among others). George

And after Matt Dillon....,

Oh, right. Got it.

Hey, Human! Who invented the seed drill? In other news, I don't think George is even registering the name, so he can't be nudged to it. It's "LOCOMOTIVE BREATH", by Jethro Tull.

And So it Goes... Morning Glory Mad Money Love the Coopers The Big Wedding Something's Got to Give..... The Little Drummer Girl Mrs. Soffel Crimes of the Heart

Oh !! I see what I did. George, when you posted; I figured you were playing around with the answer. Half of it, anyway. Then, WordWolf posted; and, I assumed he was in agreement that you had the answer, (half of it anyway) and maybe you were going to reveal some hidden meaning or something, and so, I asked for the initials of the band, assuming that you knew the complete title to the song. (Or, the other half of it). I'm not completely sure what WordWolf suggests when he posted; but it's something to do with planting a seed for you, George, I think, so that you could cultivate the answer. Spoon-feeding. I don't know, though, maybe that isn't what he meant? Anyway, NO. "Hold Your Breath" is not the song title here. And here I thought, George didn't know he knew three Jethro Tull songs. Guess I was wrong.

Dodger lose tonight to the Toronto Blues Jay in Game 1. Score was 11-4. Game 2 tomorrow. (10/25/25)

"Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends. We're so glad you could attend, come inside, come inside. There behind the glass stands a real blade of grass, be careful as you pass, move along, move along."

Another teen visited Riverdale. A famous one with her own series'. Airing before and after Riverdale. Her aunts were in one of her series, but I doubt they visited Riverdale. Perhaps the right question is not "who", nor "what". We're not looking for the Shield, the Web, the Jaguar, the Fly or Fly Girl, Black Jack, nor Steel Sterling.

Of course he's correct. It contains all the original dialogue, but with a modern setting. The opening narration is delivered on an evening newscast, with modern images. "Two houses, both alike in dignity, in fair Verona, where we lay our scene..." We see two conglomerates, rival companies, Montague and Capulet, both based in Verona Beach, California. John Leguizamo was cast as the hot-blooded Tybalt, Juliet's cousin and starter of fights. All the lines are understood due to visuals. As the young turks draw their pistols on each other, the camera zooms in to the side of one pistol- "SWORD 9 MM". Then the line "Put up your swords!" has an obvious meaning. In the riot early in the story, Old Montague (Dennehy) is in an armored limo, with a rifle holstered to the roof. "Hand me my Long Sword." The news handles the opening and closing of the story, as does the narration. High school students should have no trouble understanding the scenes, even if the Elizabethan dialogue gives them trouble. The brand names explain terms and expressions- pistols by "Sword", the FedEx-like mailing service called "Post-Haste" for "I shall send it Post-Haste", and so on. The original play is defined as a tragedy. I would like to see some other Shakespearean plays get a similar treatment. David Tennant's run of Hamlet with the RSC resembled that, with Hamlet in a castle that included security cameras. (I hear the Hawke version was moreso.) But there's lots of other plays waiting for modern audiences who would appreciate them re-visualized in modern settings. So, it's WordHusky's turn.

Thank you for using these "" with accuracy and precision.

Obviously the newer version. I've only seen the 1968 film. But a quick IMDb search shows that WordHusky is correct. George

That's definitely Romeo + Juliet. Original by William Shakespeare. Also, hi, I'm still here.

Well, not incorrect. She was the only other Archie character I can think of. YMMV. Obviously, there were Betty and Veronica. Both were in cartoons and live action (Riverdale) but meet none of your other qualities. I'm pretty sure Midge, Big Ethel, and Miss Grundy are out, too. Archie Comics also had some super-heroes (The Jaguar, The Fly, and another (Black Hand?)) but no females. I'm stumped. George

Alas, it was only after having been tricked by Victor Wierwille's "ministry" for more than a dozen years did I learn to recognize this very salient point.

"We ruled out Josie McCoy." Correct. "The only other Archie character I can think of with her own show was Katy Keene, but she certainly didn't have more shows than Supergirl." INcorrect. Think some more. You missed somebody famous. "Indies like Dark Horse weren't around in the 60s." We agree. "Was this a Gold Key character?" This was not. BTW, this character appeared, for a short time, on a cartoon around 1970 that had NOTHING to do with the Archies, and was the only established character who would have been apt to do so. Despite being in a different setting of cartoon, it borrowed from Laugh-In and the Archies- it had the wall with the one-off jokes, and a musical number every episode. Out of all her early appearances, that was the only cartoon I watched. And I had to get up really early Saturday mornings to see it. Her live-action shows are a lot more famous, and at least one may be in syndication right now (I suspect 2 are watchable on demand if you know where to look and live in the US.

I should say that Brent Niedergall’s work on the idiom ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν was not a direct response to Bullinger. He was responding to a simple question by an antagonist in denial: why doesn’t the expression distribute the two crucified, two here and two there? So, Brent doesn’t seem to have an agenda to advance. He is simply taking an honest academic approach to the text and grammar. He answered the question sufficiently. The explanation of the grammar is so clear that I wonder if Bullinger shouldn’t have known better, and if he didn’t, how much salt should be taken with anything he wrote? Further down the thread on this message board, someone mentioned that when an interloper is continuously dissatisfied with satisfactory answers, an agenda is often involved. Then a link to Bullinger’s appendix was posted.

Look out, Cuba! George

We ruled out Josie McCoy. The only other Archie character I can think of with her own show was Katy Keene, but she certainly didn't have more shows than Supergirl. Indies like Dark Horse weren't around in the 60s. Was this a Gold Key character? George

Although it is true that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" (just because we haven't found evidence doesn't mean there is none,) but that is falsely taken to mean that one can just SUPPOSE there's evidence SOMEWHERE even if no evidence is found. vpw did that a number of times. He took a position, and SUPPOSED that SOMEWHERE, there was text to support the position. Nothing works that way. You find the evidence, and study the evidence, and THEN you form the position based on the evidence at hand. Until there's evidence of something, it's premature to say it is so. All textual evidence so far says TWO others crucified, total. The verses in John, at most, could be taken either way- and, as we just saw, seem to support two others crucified, total. NOTHING so far says FOUR others total. To insert an idea where the evidence does not go is not sound research, is not sound work, is not sound reasoning. It places one firmly in the camp of "conspiracy theorists." I'm open to discussing another text- if one ever appears. Until then, the "four crucified" have not presented a CREDIBLE case. "Bullinger said so". Yes, and Bullinger is human and can make stuff up just like anyone else. He presented nothing substantial, only suppositions.

................... Keep going.........