MovieChat Forums > MAGolding > Replies
MAGolding's Replies
Jay Silverheels had a lot of other roles during the years when the Lone Ranger was in production.
<url>https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0798855/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1</url>
The epilogue to <i>Fort Apache</i> (1948) happens several years after the main action, since Lt. O'Rourke and Philadelphia Thursday have married and have at least one child, Michael Thursday York O'Rourke, who looks like he is a few years old. And York has been promoted at least one step.
If there are any shots of York in the epilogue clear enough to show his shoulder strap insignia, two leaves on each shoulder strap would make him a major or a lieutenant colonel, while one eagle on each shoulder strap would make him a colonel. York is addressed as "colonel" in the epilogue, so viewers should look for two items or one item in a shoulder strap to tell his rank. Anyway, years must have passed between the main action in <i>Fort Apache</i> and the epilogue.
So if York and Yorke are the same character, Lieutenant Colonel Yorke in <i>Rio Grande</i> (1950) should look older than Captain York in <i>Fort Apache</i> (1948). But then the question would be whether York in the epilogue to <i>Fort Apache</i> (1948) looks older than Yorke in <i>Rio Grande</i> (1950) and what their ranks are. We can hope that the one who looks older will have same rank or higher rank than the one who looks younger.
The ranks and apparent ages of York in the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> and Yorke in <i>Rio Grande</i> should determine which comes first, the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> or <i>Rio Grande</i>. Since <i>Rio Grande</i> should happen in 1879 or 1880, if the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> could happen a few years later that would put it in the 1880s, and the main action of <i>Fort Apache</i> could be in the early or middle 1870s. But if the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> happens before <i>Rio Grande</i> it could happen in the mid 1870s and the main action could happen in the early 1870s or late 1860s.
But if York and Yorke are two different characters comparing their apparent ages gives no clue to the fictional date of <i>Fort Apache</i>.
The epilogue to <i>Fort Apache</i> (1948) happens several years after the main action, since Lt. O'Rourke and Philadelphia Thursday have married and have at least one child, Michael Thursday York O'Rourke, who looks like he is a few years old. And York has been promoted at least one step.
If there are any shots of York in the epilogue clear enough to show his shoulder strap insignia, two leaves on each shoulder strap would make him a major or a lieutenant colonel, while one eagle on each shoulder strap would make him a colonel. York is addressed as "colonel" in the epilogue, so viewers should look for two items or one item in a shoulder strap to tell his rank. Anyway, years must have passed between the main action in <i>Fort Apache</i> and the epilogue.
So if York and Yorke are the same character, Lieutenant Colonel Yorke in <i>Rio Grande</i> (1950) should look older than Captain York in <i>Fort Apache</i> (1948). But then the question would be whether York in the epilogue to <i>Fort Apache</i> (1948) looks older than Yorke in <i>Rio Grande</i> (1950) and what their ranks are. We can hope that the one who looks older will have same rank or higher rank than the one who looks younger.
The ranks and apparent ages of York in the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> and Yorke in <i>Rio Grande</i> should determine which comes first, the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> or <i>Rio Grande</i>. Since <i>Rio Grande</i> should happen in 1879 or 1880, if the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> could happen a few years later that would put it in the 1880s, and the main action of <i>Fort Apache</i> could be in the early or middle 1870s. But if the epilogue of <i>Fort Apache</i> happens before <i>Rio Grande</i> it could happen in the mid 1870s and the main action could happen in the early 1870s or late 1860s.
But if York and Yorke are two different characters comparing their apparent ages gives no clue to the fictional date of <i>Fort Apache</i>.
Another word for a cliff is a bluff. So that cliff might later become known as "Blind Man's Bluff".
Here is a link to a discussion, including a image of Selenites:
<url>https://alchetron.com/A-Trip-to-the-Moon</url>
And here is a like to a still showing Selenites, including the Grand Lunar, from <i>The First Men in the Moon </i>J (1919):
<url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_First_Men_in_the_Moon_(1919_film)#/media/File:The_First_Men_in_the_Moon_(1919).jpg</url>
I myself am descended from a marriage in 1822 between a women born in 1801 and a man born in 1779 who was twice her age. My ancestor was born in 1830 when his father was 51 and his mother 29. And the youngest child was born in 1840.
Actually cheating in the basketball game was just the beginning of decades of cheating by Medford College in various movies.
Medford even started cheating in academic quizzes in the 1995 television movie <i>The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes</i>.
Yes he did have evil henchmen do the crime for him.
But a witness said they saw someone as fat as Dale walking around and committing the crime. When there is a paradox and contradiction between two alleged facts one has to examine both alleged facts to see if one of them is not accurate and correct.
The two possible facts that might not be correct are that Dale was the only possible murderer and that Dale could not possibly have left his room to commit the murder.
So the police should have suspected:
1. That some other very fat but more mobile man committed the murder, perhaps for his own motives or perhaps at Dale's instigation.
2. That someone wore a fat suit to impersonate Dale while murdering the judge.
3. That Dale was more mobile than he claimed to be and thus could have been moved to the murder scene and been active enough to commit the murder and then be brought back to his apartment.
The police don't have a fact checking department that checks out every single fact that is reported about every single resident of the city. They don't know for certain that Dale was bedridden. For all that they knew Dale could have been bedridden for years and then dieted and exercised for years to get back into shape so he could walk enough to murder the judge.
So the police shouldn't have just accepted the claim that Dale was bedridden, especially not if he lied to them by saying he was five and half feet wide and thus couldn't fit through the doors of his apartment.
The important dimension when trying to get an object through doors is its thinnest dimension. And there is no possible way that a man weighing "only" 804 pounds could have a thinnest dimension that was 4.5 or 5.5 feet thick.
Possibly more in the Wild West than in real geography.
The scenery looks rather arid, so they should be in the arid regions of the American Southwest, and thus in the dry arid parts of the Southwestern states and territories.
So every scene should happen in California (state) Nevada (territory, then state) Utah (territory), Colorado (territory), Kansas (state), Arizona (part of New Mexico Territory) New Mexico (territory), Texas (state in rebellion), or The Indian Territory (ruled by Indian Nations, now Oklahoma).
<url>https://www.worldmapsonline.com/unitedstates1861.htm</url>
In some scenes lists of Tuco's crimes are read. Whenever those crimes are described as crimes against territorial law, the setting must be in Nevada, if before it became a state, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, or New Mexico
And whenever Tuco's crimes are crimes against state law, they must be in a Southwestern state, California, Texas, or possibly Kansas.
The Indian Territory was ruled by the various Indian tribes and nations there, so it had neither territorial or state laws, and very few white inhabitants.
Rebel soldiers are seen as Angel Eyes seeks out the girlfriend of Bill Carson, and she tells him that Bill recently left with Sibley's expedition to New Mexico. So they should be in the arid parts of Texas, and the year should be 1862 if happening in real history.
The events with General Sibley's expedition to New Mexico naturally happen in New Mexico, and in 1862 if in real history.
You could say there's actually blonde and then there's blonde by contrast.
David Hollander (born 1969) is an actor, etc., who got stated as a child and was quite active as a child actor. He had brown hair then and maybe it is still brown.
<url>https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0390873/</url>
I remember once when I looked up his credits as a child actor I was a little surprised that he had one or two roles that I remembered seeing but didn't know the name of the actor. One of those roles was "Little Earl" Barnett in the second season of <i>What's Happening!!</i> (1976-1979). And strangely, I sort of remembered Little Earl as being blonde. So I guess I remembered Little Earl as being blonde when his actor was actually brown haired simply because of the contrast with all the other cast members who were African Americans and thus looked much darker.
Blondes are a minority even among Northern Europeans and are more rare among southern Europeans, like Italians and Spanish, and most of the extras and actors in small roles in <i>The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly</i> were Italians and Spanish. So Clint Eastwood was a bit lighter than most of the actors, extras, and crew on the set, and probably most of the other American actors who might have been considered for the role would also have been.
So why not describe the Man With No Name as "Blondie" in the script? It is slightly contemptuous to describe someone by their difference from oneself, so Tuco using "Blondie"as a nickname for the Man With No Name would fit in with their familiar but not trusting relationship.
As I remember the first chapter of the serial <i>Flash Gordon's Trip To Mars </i> (1938) begins as Flash Gordon & Co. return to Earth to a hero's welcome and everything seems fine.
Then a teleportation beam strikes Earth and two nonhuman humanoid aliens materialize on Earth. They insert a device in the ground, activate it, and die. Watching from Mars, Azura Queen of magic says they have just seen the deaths of two of her most loyal subjects, and with his usual degree of empathy Ming the Merciless says that is a small price to pay for the destruction of Earth.
You can watch the chapter online to decide if those two aliens are non human enough to qualify. And Queen Azura also transforms human-looking Martians who displease her into clay people who look a lot less human.
So maybe the first movie with nonhuman humanoid aliens is <i>Flash Gordon's Trip To Mars </i> (1938), if it has any aliens nonhuman enough, and if a movie serial counts as a movie.
I wonder if any of the creators of <i> Sleeping Beauty</i> (1959) ever read <i>The Lord of the Rings</i> (published 1954,1955), because Malevolent, I mean Maleficient, does have a Dark Lord feeling to her, and her castle seems like a scaled down version of The Barad-dur or Isengard, and her evil hordes seem a bit Orcish.
Continued.
The most common inheritance custom for European kingdoms and fiefs was male preference primogeniture, in which the crown would preferably descend from father to oldest son to grandson to great grandson, etc. But if a king or noble died without sons but had surviving daughters, the oldest daughter would become the next ruler in preference to her uncles or male cousins.
The next most common inheritance custom for European kingdoms and fiefs was agnatic primogeniture, in which the crown would preferably descend from father to son to grandson, but would always be restricted to agnatic (male only) descendants of the founder. The crown could only pass to men, and only to men descended from father to son, etc. from the founder of the dynasty. If the ruler died without sons but with one or more daughters, his closest agnatic relative would become the next ruler, now matter how distant a cousin he might be, and no matter how many daughters the old monarch might have.
So every Disney Prince who is said in the film to be his father's heir is certainly his father's heir, while those Disney Princes who are not said to be their fathers' heirs might or might not be their fathers' heirs depending on whether they have older brothers. In the case of Disney Princesses sometimes we don't know if they have older sisters, and we are almost never told anything about the inheritance laws of their kingdoms. Every Disney Princess who the film says is her father's heir is her father's heir. But if that is not specifically said in the film we can only guess which Disney Princesses might be their father's heirs. Possibly a smaller percentage of princesses than princes were heirs.
When a girl or woman inherited her father's kingdom and became Queen Regnant, her husband often became King Consort <i>jure uxoris </i> "by right of wife". Which spouse made most of the decisions would vary depending on their individual personalities more than on law.
continued.
Another thing that can happen is that two kingdoms can totally merge and form a new state.
The Kingdom of Burgundy was founded in 879 and the other Kingdom of Burgundy was founded in 887. In 933 Hugh of Arles, King of Burgundy, and Rudolph III, King of Burgundy, both wanted to conquer Italy. So Hugh traded his Kingdom of Burgundy to Rudolph in return for Rudolph giving up his claim to Italy, and the Kingdom of Burgundy and the Kingdom of Burgundy united to form the Kingdom of Arles or Burgundy.
About 1282, the kingdom of Sicily split into two rival kingdoms of Sicily. Many persons became monarch of both kingdoms of Sicily and ruled them in personal unions. In 1816 King Ferdinand III & IV united Sicily and Sicily to form the Kingdom of Two Sicilies, which was conquered in 1860 and became part of the Kingdom of Italy.
In about 1543 King Henry VIII of England made his Lordship of Ireland a kingdom in personal union or in real union with his Kingdom of England.
IN 1603 King James VI of Scotland inherited England and Ireland, and a person union between Scotland on one side and England and Ireland on the other side began, interrupted only the the civil wars and Commonwealth. In 1707 the kingdoms of England and Scotland merged to form the new Kingdom of Great Britain, and the Kingdom of Ireland remained in person union or real union with Great Britain.
In 1800 it was decided to merge Ireland and Great Britain, and on January 1, 1801, King George III of Great Britain, Ireland, and France became King George III of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
Continued.
I should point out when when the monarchs of two kingdoms marry, or when someone inherits two kingdoms from their ancestors, the relationships of the two kingdoms can vary.
A personal union is when the same person is the rulers of two or more kingdoms or fiefs but they are otherwise totally independent of each other.
<blockquote>A personal union is the combination of two or more states that have the same monarch while their boundaries, laws, and interests remain distinct.[1] A real union, by contrast, would involve the constituent states being to some extent interlinked, such as by sharing some limited governmental institutions. In a federation and a unitary state, a central (federal) government spanning all member states exists, with the degree of self-governance distinguishing the two. The ruler in a personal union does not need to be a hereditary monarch.[2]
The term was coined by German jurist Johann Stephan Pütter, introducing it into Elementa iuris publici germanici (Elements of German Public Law) of 1760.[3]</blockquote>
<url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_union </url>
<blockquote> Real union is a union of two or more states, which share some state institutions as in contrast to personal unions; however they are not as unified as states in a political union. It is a development from personal union and was usually limited to monarchies.
Unlike personal unions, real unions almost exclusively led to a reduction of sovereignty for the politically weaker constituent. That was the case with Lithuania, Scotland and Norway which came under the influence of stronger neighbors, Poland, England and Denmark respectively, with whom each of them had shared a personal union previously. The most notable example of such a move is the Kingdom of Hungary (Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen), which achieved equal status to Austria (which exercised control over the "Cisleithanian" crown lands) in in Austria-Hungary following the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867. Sometimes, however, a real union came about after a period of political union.</blockquote>
<url>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_union </url>
Continued
Well, lets see.
One) Why is Audrey so happy at the end that the barrier is coming down?
Of all the natives of Auradon, Audrey should be the happiest. She was a very dangerous villain for about a day or so, and where did Auradonian villains get sent to? The island. So she should be happy that the Island is no longer a prison for villains.
Two) Why did Audrey's grandmother say that Ben proposing to Mal instead of Audrey was the end of their family's status? As far as I know Audrey is a child of Sleeping Beauty and Prince Philip from <i>Sleeping Beauty</i> (1959), who were the heirs to the crowns of their fathers. So Audrey or a hypothetical sibling should rule two kingdoms. Audrey & her grandmother's family's status shouldn't depend much on whether Audrey marries the King of Auradon.
2a) So maybe the Nazis conquered Stefan and Hubert's kingdoms.
2b) Or maybe Genghis Khan and the Mongol hordes came and massacred everyone in those kingdoms and Audrey and her grandmother were the only ones who escaped.
2c) Or maybe those two kingdoms were overthrown in a revolution and the royal family was massacred except for Audrey and her grandmother, who perhaps escaped with the aide of the <i>Princess Protection Program</i> (2009).
2d) Or maybe Audrey's brother or older sister now rules those two kingdoms and can't stand Audrey and her grandmother and so exiled them.
2e) Or maybe one of the villains, or a league of villains, conquered and/or destroyed those two kingdoms and others and attacked Auradon, and Beast, the former King of Auradon, defeated that villain or villains and exiled them to the Island of the Lost, and the survivors (if any) of the kingdoms of Stefan and Hubert abandoned their former royal family and became subjects of the Kingdom of Auradon.
Those are all the reasons I can think of why Audrey might not be a member of a reigning royal family or even already a queen regnant, and they all seem rather dark for Disney.
But having such a tragic backstory could explain why everyone in Auradon is so quick to forgive Audrey for being a little mean and then turning into a villain who almost kills everybody.
And how many of them would be alive after having been vaporized and/or smashed by the blast?
Continued
Walter Hudson's diameter should have been about 37.878 inches, or 3.1565 feet, and Dale's should have been somewhat less.
But fat is very flexible and rearranges itself when someone changes position.
If Dale had an elliptical body when lying down, with a horizontal width of 4.5 feet (54 inches) and a circumference between 80 and 130 inches (6.666666 to 10.83333 feet) his possible vertical dimension when lying down would be 80 to 130 inches, minus 54 inches times 2, and then divided by 2. It would be 80 to 130 inches, minus 108 inches, divided by two. That would give Dale a vertical dimension when lying down of about minus 14 inches to plus 11 inches.
Having a vertical dimension of 11 inches when lying down would be possible for a man. But combining that with Dale being 4.5 feet wide when lying down that would require him to have a total waist size of 130 inches, 11 inches more than the largest waist ever recorded, belonging to a man weighing 393 pounds more than Dale. That seems a little implausible.
I forget whether Dale said he was 4.5 feet wide or 5.5 feet wide, which would be even more implausible for a man weighing "only" 804 pounds.
Anyway, Dale could not possibly have a round cross section through his widest part and be either 4.5 or 5.5 feet in diameter. That would give him a circumference of 14.137 to 17.278 feet and he would probably weigh two or three times as much as the heaviest man ever. Dale should have been lying to conceal that he could move or be moved through the doors.
The police should have no problem getting Dale out of the apartment. Simply strap him to the bed with many straps, and have a bunch of strong men turn the bed vertical, and push and pull it out the door. And Dale's evil henchmen could have done the same to get him out of his room and into a truck which could have transported him close enough to the victim's house for him to enter it if he was not totally bedridden.
How do the protagonists know that "Dale the Whale" actually is bedridden?
They believe he is a scumbag who certainly could lie. They also believe he is super rich and could bribe people to lie for him.
Furthermore, the character does lie to them; or maybe the creators lie to the audience. I believe Dale said he was five and a half feet wide.
Assume that a normal man Dale's height weighs 180 pounds and is 1.25 feet, or 15 inches wide at the waist. If Dale weighs 804 pounds, he should weigh 4.466666 times as much as the normal man his height. So a horizontal section through Dale's waist or whatever his widest part is, should have 4.466666 times the area of such a section through a normal man. The square root of 4.46666666 is 2.1134489, so Dale should be about 2.1134489 times as wide in the waist as a normal man his height, or about 31.701733 inches wide, or about 2.641811 feet. Assuming Dale's waist is perfectly round, it should have a circumference of about 99.59 inches or 8.299 feet.
Assuming that Dale is the same height as I am, calculations based on my own height and weight indicate Dale should be about 31.003967 inches, or 2.5836555 feet thick. So if his waist is perfectly round, he should have a waist circumference of about 97.40 inches, or 8.1168 feet, close to what the other calculation indicates.
Of course a normal weight man Dale's height might be a little narrower or wider than 1.25 feet. And fat is less dense than bone or muscle. So Dale should be a bit wider than calculated.
<blockquote> Walter Hudson (c. 1944 in Brooklyn, NY – Dec 24, 1991) of Hempstead, New York was the fourth most obese human in medical history. He also holds the Guinness World Record for the largest waist.[1] It measured 119 inches (300 cm) in 1987 when he was at his peak weight of 1,197 pounds (85.5 st; 543 kg). </blockquote>
https://guinness-world-records.fandom.com/wiki/Largest_Waist_(2004)
Continued.
The entire story of the Franklin Expedition is something of a great historical mystery, and every new discovery sheds more light upon it even after 168 years in the case of finding HMS <i>Terror</i>. For example, two ships were seen on an iceberg in the Atlantic, and it was speculated that they could have been <i>Erebus</i> and <i>Terror</i>, which is now disproved.
PS I added some details to my first post.