“A federal judge ruled in favor of Robert Mueller on Wednesday that Paul Manafort intentionally violated the terms of his guilty plea by lying to federal prosecutors and a grand jury.”
Paul Manafort did something untoward? I’m shocked. He seems like such an honest man.
I wonder how that wheelchair gig is workin’ out for him. You know – for respect.
Stella Stevens in Slaughter (1972)
We so rarely see large natural breasts these days that it’s easy to forget what they look like.
Has any human contributed more to grade-B entertainment than Stella? 1 In addition to all the abysmal movies she appeared in, she gave birth to Andrew Stevens, and therefore gave us another complete generation of “other crap.”
By the way, Stella is still with us. She turned 80 in October.
(1) I deliberately excluded William Shatner from that question with the word “human.” He is more than a mere mortal in the grade-B universe. He is a god.
Looks so familiar. Who does she look like? Isabelle Adjani? Kathleen Beller? Amy Irving?
Trump’s claim about Beto’s rally: “He has 200 people, 300 people.”
The facts: “Estimates from O’Rourke’s anti-border wall protest show that 7,000 to 8,000 people attended his rally. Some other reports put attendance as high as 10,000 to 15,000.”
Trump’s claim about his own rally: “The arena holds 8,000. And thank you, Fire Department. They got in about 10,000. Thank you, Fire Department. Appreciate it.”
The Fire Department: “Fire Department spokesman Enrique Aguilar told the El Paso Times on Monday that Trump did not receive permission to exceed the limit and that there were 6,500 people inside the building during the president’s rally.”
In some degree to fairness to Trump, he’s probably not much worse at numbers than most other politicians. I have to say that I never once saw any of our campus activists, right or left, YAF or SDS, in a non-required math class. They were not big on classes where you couldn’t assert your superior solution by shouting down the opposition.
And it’s not just a right-wing phenomenon. Remember that Elizabeth Warren claimed that the number of Americans incarcerated for low-level marijuana offenses was greater than the number locked up for all violent crimes! That claim was even more ridiculous than Trump’s boasts about his crowd sizes. The numbers are not even vaguely comparable.
* In the federal prisons, of the approximately 180,000 prisoners, only about 250 are there for drug possession, and only about 12% of those involve marijuana. That means about 30 people in the entire vast expanse of the United States. Of course that is 30 too many, but those 30 are a drop in the bucket compared to the inmates who were convicted of violent crimes.
* In the state prisons, about 3.4% of all prisoners are in for drug possession – of any kind of drug, not just reefer. Assuming the same ratio as the Feds (marijuana possession offenders as a percentage of all of possession offenders), that means about 5000 people are incarcerated for marijuana possession in a total prison population of more than a million. It is regrettable that we have imprisoned more than five thousand people for possession of some doobie. If I were the president, I’d pardon them all. But again – that is an insignificant group beside the violent offenders (some 700,000).
“For the record, I was not peeing in the bushes. I was adjusting a knee brace.”
Yeah, a knee brace. That’s the ticket.
Candice Swanepoel’s butt in a thong (Feb 12 Instagram)
I think we’ve already seen this, but I’m not sure, so here it is.
Bebe Rexha in some Last Hurrah promo shots (Feb 13 Instagram)
I was hoping maybe the walls of the Twin Towers were made out of Chuck E Cheese crusts, or the animatronic mouse was used by the Illuminati to exchange messages, or Hillary Clinton was running a pedophile ring through the franchise.
Yes, and sometimes it screws up the entire movie. Bad Times at the El Royale was a pretty good movie until it introduced a third act villain (the Mighty Thor) who was completely irrelevant to the main mystery, therefore suddenly becoming a completely different movie. Unfortunately that new movie wasn’t nearly as good as the one that got interrupted.
The one time when the phrase “cheese it, the cops” might have made sense. Where are Leo Gorcey and Huntz Hall now that we need them?
Isabel Lucas in The Loft (2014)
“Toni Braxton wore a revealing and semi-sheer dress on the red carpet for the 61st Annual Grammy Awards last night!”
Jemima Kirke in Untogether (2019)
This has the potential to be very good …
with an equal probability of being very bad.
One fan tweeted, “It turns out that Will Smith’s Aladdin Genie will haunt my nightmares.”
“Sloan” is always tanned, rested and ready. She’s as sexy at 43 as she ever was.
Woods tweeted: “Please join me in using proper grammar, syntax, and spelling. The correct pronoun usage in the English language is “he” for a singular male and “she” for a singular female. “They” is used for the plural of either males, females, or both. Don’t be bullied by hare-brained liberals.”
Dictionary.com tweeted: “They has been in use as a singular pronoun since the 1300s. Among its best known users in history: Chaucer, Shakespeare, and Jane Austen.”
Woods is just being a prick, and dictionary.com’s post, while factually correct and vaguely amusing, is totally irrelevant to Woods’ point.
1. Dictionaries and grammar books serve separate purposes. A dictionary is descriptive, and a grammar book or style manual is prescriptive. The fact that a usage exists does not mean that it is proper, even if Shakespeare himself used it. For example, Shakespeare used terms like “more corrupter” and “most poorest.” Does that mean it is correct to use those constructions today?
2. The editors at dictionary.com must have used up too many credits on library science to fit any logic classes into their academic schedules. Ever if we were to assume that ol’ Billy Shakespeare and his hifalutin literary pals always used words correctly, a usage of any kind that was correct for them is not necessarily correct today, nor should it be, because languages are fluid. There is simply no logical connection between dictionary.com’s point and Woods’. If we adopt Chaucer’s usage as our standard, then we will only use “gay” to mean “lighthearted and carefree” and we should correctly refer to male homosexuals as “geldings” or “mares.” (NOTE: Chaucer did not distinguish between homosexuals and eunuchs, for reasons he is too dead to explain.)
3. I can also be a prick. There is a grammatical error in dictionary.com’s tweet. The word “they” should be in quote marks to indicate referring to a word as that word, just as I did earlier in this sentence. Without the quote marks, the sentence begins “They was,” as in “They wuz just about to filch the roscoe when the coppers showed their ugly mugs and told ’em to scram.” (Caveat: It is possible that dictionary.com did this on purpose to demonstrate a whimsical singular use of they, as kind of a literary joke consistent with their point. Maybe. But like Lou Grant, I hate whimsy.)
Having noted that dictionary.com is full of manure, let me point out that Woods is as well. No matter what the grammar books say, using the singular “they” is sometimes the only way to avoid either confusing declarations or the dreaded “his or her” construction.
A teacher addresses the co-ed class, “Everyone should create his own solution.” Yup. That’s perfect grammar, and perfectly confusing, since it binds the boys, but implies that the girls in the class may use another student’s solution. To get around the problem, the teacher must change the directive to “his or her,” or “their.” While “their” is, in theory, grammatically incorrect, it is the solution I prefer.
I would certainly support the use of the singular “they,” and there is no reason not to accept it because, as noted earlier in bold, languages are fluid.
Here is Maud Adams in Tattoo (1981), which was filmed when she was 35.
Maud was in two Bond films about a decade apart, Octopussy and The Man With The Golden Gun. I’m assuming you are willing to call then Bond films even if they starred Roger Moore, which they both did. That guy was Bond for a very long time, 1973-1985.
This was among the top ten in our Best Nude Scenes of 2017.
Christina has been the most consistent performer in our annual polls. She is the only actress to finish in the top ten four times, and she is one of only three women to win twice. (Anne Hathaway and Heather Graham are the other two-time winners, but Christina is the only one to win twice outright in the live polling era. One of Heather’s wins was a retro poll two decades after the fact, and one of Hathaway’s was a tie for first.)
Her other top finishes:
First for Prozac Nation in the Top Nude Scenes of 2003
First for Black Snake Moan in the Top Nude Scenes of 2007
Ninth for After Life in the Top Nude Scenes of 2010
Her first winner, Prozac Nation, was actually filmed in in the summer of 2000, when Ricci was only 20. Her most recent winner was the TV production Z, in which her nudity was filmed when she was in her mid 30s.
So long ago, the original B&W version was the only picture that appeared in the very first edition of the Fun House in 1995. I’ll bet even you long-timers don’t remember that one. Here’s the colorized version.
It’s not a very flattering picture. She’s a little flabbier than I remembered.
UPDATED with a .gif
Nearly six years after it was filmed, London Fields has now been released in a home video format.
I have not watched it, and don’t intend to, but the general response has been terrible, which goes a long way to explain why it has been bottled up for more than five years. It’s rated 4.6 at IMDb and scores a perfect ZERO on Rotten Tomatoes.
“Tommy shows us that Big Shark will deliver even more of his patented weird portrayals of male friendship unfolding in close proximity to strikingly generic buildings.”