WordWolf

One Hollywood tough guy has gone on record about his role in this film (films). He said that now he actually has gotten fans that are small children. They've come up to him and wanted him to come to their houses and act out his movie role there, trying to sneak in while they booby-trap the whole place. (What movie is this? Which, for this thread, is the question..)

We had a discussion about "vp and me" in the thread "vp and me in wonderland."

It's neither an Arnie nor a Mark. If you figure out exactly what the kids want him to do, and why they want him at that specific location to do it, then you'll have the movie in an instant. And of course, who qualifies as a movie tough guy can really be a matter of opinion...

No need, I've been hearing Michael Cembello's "Maniac" on and off in my head all day. Flash Dances With Wolves

Trading Places Denholm Elliot Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

Ok, here's what I have in mind. Clues are posted for a movie. They can be quotes, lists of some of the actors in it, trivia about it, goofs from filming, and so on- just so long as they're things people might remember about the movie one way or another. Try not to pick movies that are very obscure, and try not to pick clues that are too obscure. I'll start off. ============================== One Hollywood tough guy has gone on record about his role in this film (films). He said that now he actually has gotten fans that are small children. They've come up to him and wanted him to come to their houses and act out his movie role there.

"We are the Knights who say Ni!"

It's not a mathematical formula. Some of them are too far gone to get it, some are not. I swear, there are some twi'ers and ex-twi'ers who would have interrupted vpw forcing himself sexually on their wives/girlfriends/mothers, and would have put a positive spin on it and congratulated the numb, confused woman afterwards for the special service she provided within the one body. Everyone, no matter what, has a "snapping point." If someone just keeps piling stuff on, and on, and on, the person will suddenly EXPLODE without warning- with unpredictable results. One story told here was about a kid whose father forced him to be non-violent to an extreme, punishing him heavily for the slightest hint of violence. Eventually, some other kids figured out he would NEVER, EVER respond with violence. So, naturally, some bully decided to do anything and everything since there would be no consequences. I'm sure the bully was quite surprised the moment the kid flattened him. Yes, the kid needed years of therapy later. On the other hand, we have people like poor T0m M1tch3ll. lcm was bedding his wife while lcm was twi's grand poobah. T*m tried to just internalize the party line that it was a privilege, but he couldn't do it. One day, he was heard arguing with his wife, and yelled that he was unable to compete with Craig. Then T*m walked off, found his gun, and blew his brains out. Me, I wish he'd blown lcm's brains out FIRST if he was going to commit suicide. Not that I wished T*m would die. He was a crude boor, but that's hardly enough to earn a death sentence. Of course, there were also women who committed suicide after vpw (and others?) used them as merchandise (raped, molested, etc), and savaged their reputations so nobody would listen to them if they came forward and told what happened. ---------------------- Getting back to the original question... I think they're so used to being told stuff they never think about that anything new won't produce a "wait a minute" moment. Something would have to happen to suddenly GET THEIR ATTENTION and get them to actually look at things. Nowadays, whether in twi or out of it, it's pretty rare for people to look at their preconceived notions and evaluate them. With twi, it's a LOT rarer because twi makes it a punishable offense to do so. So, if something can stop them completely and get their attention and get them to ask the hard questions, THEN they can wake up and see what's been done to them.

*blink blink* I have GOT to sit down and watch the original again. (Since I have the DVD, that's not too hard.)

Reminds me.... In "vp and me", lcm documented how vpw went into another one of his senseless rants, this time over free labor. The corps was taking time off of their jobs, and traveling at their own expense to the ROA site for Corps Week, and set up the entire site for the ROA, then returning home after Corps Week-probably because they had no time left off of work. vpw, naturally thanked them for all the free labor and sent them off blessed tore into them for not remaining the following week and continuing to work for free for an additional week at their own expense. Some people can't think of others as people. Small children, I think, really only see others in relation to THEM- how they affect the child, and their lives really revolve around that to the child. Some adults, however, never seem to actually view others as people and grow past being a small child. We see it more in 18-24 year olds, who sometimes grow up eventually. However, some adults don't WANT to go past that. So it was with vpw. In effect, he complained: "You didn't work for free ENOUGH. One week of free labor isn't enough, you have to double that at your own expense." Naturally, neither he nor lcm- neither of whom ever held down a normal job- could get why people were UNABLE to get more time off. Their entire adult lives went from school to ministry, with no time in-between to live like the people they took for granted. Some people will just take and take and take forever if you let them- then loot your belongings and hope they're in your will when you drop dead.

If I have the opportunity, I'd like to put him in a "full nelson" so she has his undivided attention while she tells him. I probably WON'T have the opportunity.

I'll explain what skyrider was talking about. If you keep chairs in one area, you will get grooves in carpeting where the legs move (back and forth, in the same areas.) But if you keep chairs each in EXACTLY one spot, the carpet will get a tiny groove in the shape of each leg, in the spot where each leg normally rests. So, a 4-legged chair will leave 4 little indentations in the spots where the chair legs rest. What skyrider did was turn off all the direct lights and use angled, indirect light to highlight the indentations. (A slower method might have been to use a flashlight, but skyrider's method was both available and fast.) Then what the crew did was take each chair, line up the 4 legs with the 4 indentations, then put the chair down. (It's as if the floor was marked with 4 little x's where the feet of the chair were supposed to be.) That went a LOT faster than the entire "and we studied the rows of chairs, then adjusted them, then we took out the string..." production would have taken. By the time someone else would have finished a few rows, they were done with ALL the chairs, then probably changed the light levels so the indentations would become invisible again. :)

Ok, now it's becoming a lot clearer....

This is the remake of "the Producers." Mrs Wolf really likes this version. Me, I prefer the original, but we both find both versions entertaining. (I called her over, and she had the movie before reaching "Step Two."I knew it was the remake because of the reference to Rio-I'm unsure if Step 3 was in the original.)

Revelation 21:23-27 (KJV) 23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. 24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. 25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. 26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it. 27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life. =================================== Lots of things "are said", but I don't see WRITTEN that there is no sun. I see it written that the Holy City does not NEED the sun. That means the sun is a non-issue, but only in the Holy City. As for anything outside it, that's another story. They'd have the sun and moon, but not The Lamb, and may feel that's not enough...

If word had gotten out, I'm sure the innovators would have been punished for being clever and finding a new, better way to do things than the ponderous, ritualized, slower thinkers in charge....

Wild swing here... "Ten Speed and Brown Shoe"? Only show I can think of that had Goldblum...

We may have not, but he can't be used in this manner. Michael Keaton was not in a movie called "Jack Nicholson." First link to a movie, THEN the actor, when linking from an actor....

Certainly, the frustrations felt in twi would lead to hostility, which could erupt at any time. To have it ENCOURAGED would only reinforce it was good to blow up periodically.

vpw never actually FELT the emotions the same way normal people feel them. Sociopaths don't. vpw, more often, found emotions as TOOLS to be used to get people to feel and think the way he wanted them to. That's why he learned to FAKE them and to deliver a PERFORMANCE. Think about it-we've seen accounts of people having a casual chat with him, him turning, screaming at someone for a moment, then INSTANTLY chatting casually as if the screaming didn't happen. Even an actor who does that needs a moment to come back to the calm self- since the actor feels the emotions to a degree when faking them. Only someone not feeling the emotions could switch between displays of them like channels on a television. vpw saw that as a useful skill to cultivate- so he did. It didn't fool the people closest to him, but young, naive hippies, they were fooled when he didn't let them see the man behind the curtain. vpw didn't feel healthy emotions- but, like any bully, he felt frustration when things didn't go his way, and, like any bully, he lashed out. LOTS of people saw him do that for little or no reason. lcm DOCUMENTED it in his book PRAISING vpw. lcm learned to do all of that FROM vpw. As someone from a jock subculture, lcm was perfect for grooming to be heartless that way- don't feel any pain or compassion- there's no crying in baseball and no compassion on the field. You can be loud and boisterous all you want, and be a two-fisted partier and a jock-type guy. That's it. So lcm buried everything except that. Between lcm and vpw, twi all learned to do that as well- with some leaders imitating them, and some local leaders NOT- and being punished for it... The rank-and-file were taught it as well, with some swallowing it and some not. The handful who ALWAYS swallowed it seem to still be twi'ers, or ex-twi'ers who still teach that the vpw way was THE path.

No, it depends on how one reads I Cor 3:10-15 AND the verses I cited. If the Bible is not consistent, it doesn't really matter what we believe, and we're largely wasting our time. For those of us who believe the Bible is consistent and reading it is profitable for learning things, then ALL of it has to jibe. If what we read in one section makes perfect sense with our beliefs, but then we have to ignore another section because we can't make heads nor tails of it but it MIGHT contradict what we thought about what we read in the first section, might the problem be our beliefs are either incomplete or incorrect? If there is no real punishment for evil deeds done to the brethren, then some people will be very disappointed. If there are real punitive measures sentenced for the very guilty, then some other people will be very disappointed. But our disappointment in something does not determine whether it is true or not, popularity of a belief does not determine whether it is true or not. That's one reason we have to read the whole thing and try to understand it. Jesus promised something in the Gospels, and the last book speaks of the future and seems to show how the promise will be carried out. If you disagree fundamentally-and say it CAN'T be carried out that way- then I ask you, what did Jesus mean, and what does the account in the last book mean? Go through the events of the End Times. Subtract everyone who's destroyed/obliterated before Revelation 21 begins. Then go over the accounts of who is outside the Holy City. At first glance, it looks like the same kinds of people who were already destroyed...which means it's time for more than a first glance. If all Christians survive obliteration, but there is a just distinction between "did his best to live piously and help others and love them as God does" and "became a Christian, then raped the brethren and stole their lives, souls and money", then it seems there will be a punishment short of obliteration. If so, then it makes perfect sense that they'd be excluded from the holy city and FINALLY sorry for what they did. If there IS no punishment, then we have lots of people alluded to in the gospels, and mentioned outright in Revelation, and we have no information whatsoever as to who they COULD be. (Can't be bad non-Christians, can't be bad Christians.) Whether or not we're displeased about them facing punishment is a distant consideration compared to "Well, if that's not vpw and his peers, who CAN it be?" (Edit, another thing, where in the Bible does it say we'll be in HEAVEN? We shall be "ever with the Lord." The Lord shall be in New Jerusalem on the new Earth- Revelation 21 and 22 are very clear about that. Why would we then be separated eternally from him by being in the new Heaven if he is on the new Earth? What actual verses say this- or is this a supposition?) We're going far afield off this topic, and perhaps we should go to pm's on this.

Mark!!!! Was just thinking about you the other morning when I was posting. Yes, you pronounced it correctly. :) I agree doctrinally with what you posted, but I'm still curious to see where he's going with this. I'm well aware that there are truly beautiful theories and concepts that are completely error-ridden, but are beautiful and people can WISH they were true since they're so picturesque and poetic. It's quite frustrating when you have one, then have to discard it because reality rudely intruded. (I've felt that one before, too.) Can I get some info- by pm unless others want it too- of that study you got your hands on? I'm curious about it.

Even fictional characters nowadays know this "believing" isn't any sort of "law". (Nor is it "magickal.") http://imgur.com/apSst6C

John 11:35 Jesus wept. Gotta ignore those Gospels, you know. Bad example Jesus was showing. The man was said to have "compassion" on strangers, and wept with grief and/or similar emotions- which he was allowed to feel. In twi, the only thing allowed to BE felt was ANGER. vpw and lcm exemplified anger to face-to-face audiences, with vpw teaching lcm how to do it, and lcm codifying it by coining the phrase "spiritual anger" to justify yelling at others rather than controlling his mind and feeling the anger but not letting it control him.