Scene 18, cast commentary: the cast refers to David Gale feeling “‘spiritually bereft’” and being apologetic and conflicted over what he’d be doing to Barbara in that scene, and that Gale’s wife “‘split on him,’” walking out and “not going home that night” after the screening.
Scene 18, director’s commentary: Stuart Gordon says that she turned to him and said, “‘David, how could you?’ and stood up, and walked out of the theater…”.
Not quite the verification I’m looking for, but I’m patient… maybe further elaboration is elsewhere in the commentary tracks, or maybe I read it on IMDB or something.
BTW, one of the most recent “user’s comments” on that site’s Re-Animator page also notes the Gale/Kerry similarity.
At this rate, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone writes this up for a campaign “color” feature on how some movie afficionados have been noticing (with some snickering) over Kerry’s being a dead-ringer for a, ahem, dead leerer – if only because we’re still a long, long way from Election Day, and this could prove to be an interesting (if very irrelevant, and irreverent) human-interest angle.
This from the poster who informed another to “lay off the crack” in this discussion? Sheesh, it IS all about the density of lead, that’s what makes it so useful.
Yes, our site is removing lead. However, the forgien sites aren’t. And I’m always being exposed to gamma radiation at work, it’s just that lead attenuates it. I want OSHA to realize that there are applications for lead and grant exemptions in their 5 year plan to reduce lead. http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=NEWS_RELEASES&p_id=166
While Tungsten is often more effective at shielding, it’s much more difficult to find and not nearly as easy to work with as lead. With Stainless Steel in vogue, everyone wants to use that as well, but it’s not nearly ass effective. Bismuth-lead and Uranium really don’t get us anywhere, either. And it’s not like we can go down to Radio Shack and find a gamma spectrometer that doesn’t incorporate lead to replace our existing one.
I’d like less regulation telling companies every little thing they need to do and let them focus on what best keeps their employees safe. The first thing I see every morning is the electronic marque noting the date and how many days since our last “lost time accident”.
Do we really need more than one style of clothing? One type of food? C’mon, yes some people desire new forms of eye liner, they buy it and industries put out new ones each year.
Like I said that’s subjective. Helium and hydrogen are heavy when you deal with electrons and quarks all the time, but they’re near non-existant if you spend your time dealing with enzymes. Who decides what is unnecessary? Surely no company would conduct testing they consider unnecessary.
I never said it had happened. That’s your strawman. I’m just afraid it will happen.
Kidchameleon, you’ve been warned about the personal insults. Just a little friendly advice - you ought to lay off the subject now.
I asked if we need more kinds of eyeliner, not if we need one kind. What’s up with you changing the argument? If we had to torture animals to get a new clothing style, then we can do without that particular style.
I didn’t ask if people desire it; I asked if we need it.
That does not change what I said.
??? Non-sequitur.
That is by no means a surety.
Well now you’re just outright lying. I said it’s disingenuous to keep bringing it up. And in fact, you DID bring it up. I didn’t claim you “said it had happened”; I said you brought it up, which you did. Here’s exactly what you said:
That is most certainly not my strawman. Those are YOUR words, quoted exactly from your post. Please don’t tell lies; it just makes you look bad.