'The Princess Bride': Anything but 'mostly dead' in the hearts of viewers
October 4th, 2012
09:34 PM ET

'The Princess Bride': Anything but 'mostly dead' in the hearts of viewers

Twenty-five years after its release, the CNN community still feels ‘twue wuv’ for classic fairytale film, “The Princess Bride.”

The cast reunited for the silver anniversary at The New York Film Festival on Tuesday at Lincoln Center, where they showed a special screening, shared stories - and even talked sequel possibilities.

We shared the reunion story with you and had some fun reminiscing about Westley’s quest to uphold a promise to his one true love, Princess Buttercup; Inigo Montoya’s quest to exact revenge on Count Rugen; Miracle Max’s quest to destroy Prince Humperdink and all of the other fantastical journeys that took place in the Brideverse.

In turn, you shared your stories about how the film affected your lives, your families and your own quests for true love. The responses (edited for clarity and brevity) were practically inconceivable!

Your quests for true love

MarylandBill  I used that movie to screen potential girlfriends.  If a girl didn't like that movie, I knew there really was no chance for us.  My wife liked it :).

MelDoug I'm using the same method.

A family thing 

Shawn Adams I love this movie!!!  Introduced my daughter to it when she was only 5, to this day (she is 13 now), we still quote this movie often.  Just last night, I had to kill an especially large wolf spider.  I stomped it, and she asked is it dead?  And without thinking about it, I said "mostly dead" ... lol

A modern classic

ordinaryguy75 What a special movie ... so heart-warming, funny and innocent. I hope kids for generations to come continue to watch this as my generation watched "The Wizard of Oz" when we were little.

FULL POST

September 26th, 2012
08:16 PM ET

We asked, you answered: Are we really ready to take a look at 'real women'?

There is arguably not much shock value left in Lady Gaga’s out-there and often barely there wardrobe choices. But when the superstar singer decided to bare it all this week showing nothing but a simple bikini, her bod and a few extra pounds, the world stopped to stare – and comment - once again.

Gaga, admitting a longtime struggle with bulimia, proclaimed on her blog that she was embracing her new curves and urged her “little monsters” to do the same.

Photos: Gaga's new curves and most memorable looks

Meanwhile, fashion designer Ralph Lauren made headlines of its own by hiring Australian plus-size model Robyn Lawley. Lawley stands 6-foot-2 and wears a size 12.

The intense focus on fuller figures prompted Lesley Kinzel, associate editor at xoJane.com and the author of "Two Whole Cakes: How to Stop Dieting and Learn to Love Your Body" to write a piece for CNN.com asking our audience "Are we really ready to take a look at 'real women'?"

The CNN community responded to the question in droves. Check out our roundup of conversations about body image happening on CNN.com.

FULL POST

Post by:
Filed under: Advertising • Comments • Gender • Overheard on CNN.com
Who's the monkey? Lesula's famous lookalikes
Who do you think Lesula looks like?
September 12th, 2012
10:29 PM ET

Who's the monkey? Lesula's famous lookalikes

A new species of monkey was unveiled to the world Wednesday after scientists discovered the little guys living in the Democratic Republic of the Congo three years ago.

But after years of studies to confirm the species - Cercopithecus lomamiensis, Lesula for short - was indeed the first known of its kind, many who gazed upon the primate's face had the feeling they'd seen him somewhere before.

More monkey photos

From heartthrob celebs to  favorite family members and friends, the CNN community has gone ape trying to figure out just who this monkey looks like. Here's what some of our commenters had to say. Share your thoughts in the comments below.

family and friends

StraightDs Thats not a new species of monkey, thats David Schwimmer.

lizzy10 Sorta looks like my Uncle Vic, only with kinder eyes.

Jameserizer Hey, I know that dude!  Man, I went to school with that dude!

Rob LeeI don't think it was very nice for them to post my high school yearbook photo. That was 10 years ago and I was really tired and I didn't shave because I wanted to look old and cool. Besides, do you know how long it takes to shave your entire forehead and face?

Sexy celebs

FBr David Lee looks like a cartoon version of jake gyllenhaal, no offense to that good actor.

Abdullah719,Muslim.I can totally see the resemblance of this one with Paris Hilton, can't you??

NavChief Hey, It's Chris Barron from the Spin Doctors.

A blast from the past

MeJustMe The monkey looks like a woodcut of Isaac Newton.

HoneyBee1234 Beautiful monkey. Looks so calm. My first thought upon seeing it was that it reminds me of The Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci.

Jesus... or something like that

Scazman Hey its the restored spanish Jesus!

foofighter73 I see the face of a sad Jesus in that monkey.

Dash Erkina It's Fresco Jesus!

dicyanin hahaha....first thing in mind

Post by:
Filed under: Monkeys • Overheard on CNN.com
NCAA Penn State sanctions: Who pays the price?
Readers react to the NCAA sanctions levied against Penn State University, including stripping wins from coach Joe Paterno.
July 23rd, 2012
02:47 PM ET

NCAA Penn State sanctions: Who pays the price?

The sex abuse scandal that rocked the Penn State University community and football fans across the nation culminated Monday in an unprecedented fine of $60 million levied against the school and severe sanctions for the Division I football program.

NCAA gives Penn State 'stark wake-up call'

The Nittany Lions are banned from the postseason for four years and will lose 20 football scholarships a year for four seasons, NCAA President Mark Emmert said. The NCAA also took away 14 seasons of football victories from the late coach Joe Paterno.

Money raised from fines will be used to start a charity supporting programs that serve the victims of child sexual abuse, Emmert said.

Penn State has accepted the NCAA's decision, and university President Rodney Erickson said it will not appeal.

But CNN.com readers had much to say on the penalties incurred and whether or not justice is being served. You can join the conversation on Facebook, CNN.com or CNN iReport. Here are what some had to say:

FULL POST

Post by:
Filed under: Justice • Overheard on CNN.com • Pennsylvania • Sports • U.S. • Uncategorized
July 14th, 2012
03:25 PM ET

Overheard on CNN.com: Forget uniforms, U.S. Olympians would be better off 'naked'

Editor's note: This post is part of the Overheard on CNN.com series, a regular feature that examines interesting comments and thought-provoking conversations posted by the community.

Just days after the U.S. Olympic team's opening ceremony uniforms were unveiled, it was also revealed that American designer Ralph Lauren's creations were, in fact, not born in the U.S.A. To our readers, the iconic partnership of Lauren with Team U.S.A. seemed like a guarantee that America's best athletes would be sporting homegrown threads as they represented their country at the London games.

However, this is also not the first time we've encountered mother country disconnect when it comes to Olympic uniforms. Australia's uniforms were made in China, and in 2008, Canadian uniforms came from China, as well. In 2002, American athletes sported berets to the Winter Games in Salt Lake City made by Canadian company Roots.

Our readers took to the comments with outrage that addressed not only the shock factor of the news itself, but what it meant for declining American manufacturing, supporting our own country on multiple platforms and even just how un-American the uniforms appeared in the released photo. Some expressed a little more negativity when it comes to an outsourcing attitude that has developed across the country.

One commenter echoed what many readers felt initially upon seeing the headline.

Ken Ewan: What the hell is happening in the United States? Where is our national pride? Make it happen! It's no wonder we are losing out on the trade deficit with China!

Like the decline of the American automotive industry, readers felt that this was only one thread in the unraveling state of our textile industry. We even released a list of products made in America, which commenters are also adding to, to show how people can still "buy American."

Our commenters were quick to point out their knee-jerk reaction to the style of the uniforms themselves - no matter where they were made.

Wyckette: Ralph Lauren may be an "iconic" American designer, but he certainly isn't "modern."  These outfits look like they could have been worn when Gatsby was written.  The committee needs to find a designer who will be a "supporter" (does that mean donates the uniforms free-of-charge?) and who can produce a design which reflect the effort the athletes exert to win and the nation they represent.  Oh, and someone who can find a manufacturer in America who can produce these for less than $1600 per uniform.

FULL POST

Post by:
Filed under: China • Olympics • Overheard on CNN.com • Sports • U.S.
Overheard on CNN.com: Published mug shots - public service or legal blackmail?
May 30th, 2012
04:57 PM ET

Overheard on CNN.com: Published mug shots - public service or legal blackmail?

Editor's note: This post is part of the Overheard on CNN.com series, a regular feature that examines interesting comments and thought-provoking conversations posted by the community.

Are some U.S. citizens paying for the crimes - real or alleged - of their past, long after they’ve done their time?

Donald McMahon, a convicted criminal turned contributing member of society, thinks so and shared his story with CNN. McMahon said he is constantly haunted by the ghosts of his past, his former self constantly resurrected on the pages of publications and websites that post old mug shots then demand large sums of money to remove or hide them.

The story was a catalyst for debate on CNN.com, causing readers to opine on everything from rights to privacy versus the rights of the accused to what’s fair in the pursuit of earning a dollar.

MugshotMadness: As a publisher of a few "mug shot" sites, I feel that I am doing a service for the communities in which we publish. I understand how having your mug shot posted online could adversely affect someone. You also have to understand a couple other things. This info is public and if you had not been arrested, your photo would not have been on our sites. We are one of the few sites who do not not charge to remove a record IF you can send us verifiable information that the charges were dropped or you were found not guilty. I will admit that I am in this business to make a buck, but that does not mean I do not have a heart. If you show up on my sites, it's because of your actions and not because I am trying to extort you.

MichelleBD: "Stop being a victim/take responsibility...." and similar BS mantra sound like something off Fox News. These people are trying to move on with their lives while this lowlife is digging up dirt and publishing it and then demanding large sums of money to take it off. That's like tossing an anvil to a drowning victim and then blaming them for their own drowning. The people that own these sites could not care less about the public's interest, it's all about making a quick buck instead of working at a real job.

In a digital age - is your reputation your responsibility? Or do we need government intervention?

Kristine Harley: How about creating new content about yourself? Blog your positive achievements, post constructive comments on sites, upload videos to YouTube and get friends to comment on them. Build a website of your achievements, your charitable intentions, etc. At least counter your past with your present.

pearlyQ: We should at least be protected from "for-profit mug shot websites and newspapers" that only wish to exploit and extort. They are currently "legal" because arrest pictures and records are legal. These records should only be legal for government agencies and authorized parties use.

FULL POST

Overheard on CNN.com: Does the uniform make the hero?
May 29th, 2012
06:43 PM ET

Overheard on CNN.com: Does the uniform make the hero?

Editor's note: This post is part of the Overheard on CNN.com series, a regular feature that examines interesting comments and thought-provoking conversations posted by the community.

When a soldier puts on his uniform for the first time, has he joined the ranks of our nation’s heroes? Or is he simply doing his job? MSNBC’s Chris Hayes chose Memorial Day to share his opinion that military service alone does not a hero make – an opinion he quickly rescinded and publicly apologized for amid a barrage of criticism.

While many thought the newsman was out of line, others supported him as simply exercising his rights to tell an uncomfortable truth.

Ed He should be fired! Not only is it insensitive but shows that he has no understanding of the news that he reports.

Michael So every person that dies is a hero? If that's a case, we need a new word to describe someone who does something heroic.

Obvious Guy Why should he be fired, Ed? I thought we had freedom of speech, which is exactly what he is exercising.

Alex No, he shouldn't. He told an uncomfortable truth. Not every soldier is a hero. Most are just soldiers, very few are heroes, and (thankfully) a very very few are villains. That distribution is representative of humans in general.
noun, plural he·roes
1. a person of distinguished courage or ability, admired for brave deeds and noble qualities

ConLaw That's right, let's fire him for expressing his opinion. Might as well get rid of the First Amendment while we're at it, the whole right to free speech thing.

Some, including former servicemen, felt that a hero is defined by action in or out of the military.

Beadlesaz The word *hero* is greatly overused. Just serving in the military doesn't make one a hero. If so, what do you call the fellow (or woman) who lays down his life to help his comrades survive? Those who serve in the military do so at possibly great personal peril and the nation should be thankful. But service to one's country should be viewed as good citizenship. And, such service may take many forms – not everyone can or should serve in the military. Let's save the hero worship for those who truly deserve it.

– Retired Navy Captain

RootenTooten No real need for Chris to apologize. If anything maybe Memorial Day might not have been the best time to have such a discussion, but fundamentally he's right – the mere act of putting on a uniform, any uniform, doesn't make a Hero. To broaden that term to anyone who has put on a uniform only makes it meaningless. I've even seen some who post here making it seem like ONLY those in uniform could possibly be heroes, or even understand heroism or be qualified to comment on it – I hate to break it to these folks but plain old civilians save each others lives and sacrifice for others on a daily basis, all over the country and around the world. Are these folks not heroes because they aren't in the military ?

What's most telling about this to me is whenever someone who has performed an act of pure bravery and self sacrifice and saved lives or prevented disaster, military or civilian, is interviewed, the interviewer always asks a question along the lines of "So how does it feel to me/do you consider yourself a Hero ?" and the true Hero always replies "I'm not a hero. I just did what had to be done"

Some debated whether serving in the military is inherently heroic, or just a case of working citizens doing their job.

Phil Dolan The military has defined who is and who is not a hero in the military for centuries. Aren't they more qualified to define a military hero than some news guy who never served? The military rewards men/women who are designated heroes with one or more of several awards for valor.

For example, if you are looking at a soldier wearing a Purple Heart or other award of valor then you are looking at a hero. A real hero.

I served in Vietnam and I've looked in the faces of many heroes. Plus, there is nothing wrong with calling anyone who served a hero. But to say they are not heroes is an insult to everyone who did serve.

Liz Chris is right. For most recruits, joining the service is an economic choice. It's a job, it can pay for college, etc. Just doing what you're paid to do isn't heroic. I'll always whole-heartedly support the troops even though I believe war is wrong and the rationale given the young people is mostly lies. Many, many of them come back disillusioned, traumatized both physically and psychologically, and against war. But heroism is above and beyond what is expected, for the benefit of another.


Overheard on CNN.com: What's the password?
Reports about employers asking job applicants for their Facebook passwords provoked strong reaction.
March 23rd, 2012
12:07 PM ET

Overheard on CNN.com: What's the password?

Editor's note: This post is part of the Overheard on CNN.com series, a regular feature that examines interesting comments and thought-provoking conversations posted by the community.

Would you give up your Facebook password to get a job? Reacting to reports that some employers were requiring job applicants to do so, a lot of CNN.com commenters said no or more accurately, @%&#@ no!

The American Civil Liberties Union is fighting to block employers from requiring users to share their social-networking passwords, arguing that it is an invasion of privacy.

ACLU: Facebook password isn't your boss' business

Facebook also weighed in about the controversial practice, telling employers not to ask for the passwords unless they possibly want to get sued.

Facebook speaks out against employers asking for passwords

Commenter IamBobBobIam says the first thing he does when considering job candidates is check out their Facebook page.

"If they have anything on there bashing a previous employer or anything of the sort, their resume immediately goes into the recycle bin."

(But asking for a password crosses the line, he says.) "In my mind it is the same as asking for their personal e-mail password."

Jason Fournier agreed that it was invasive and said job hunters should sue.

"Demanding an applicant's Facebook password is equivalent to demanding a copy of the key to their house. Civil lawsuits against such prospective employers should easily succeed, and once the first multimillion dollar penalty against an employer idiotic enough to insist the applicant provide their password is won, this whole story will happily go away.

Several commenters evoked the ghost of Johnny Paycheck, who famously sang "Take This Job and Shove It".

Dan Overholtz: If a boss ever asked me to do that, I'd tell 'em where to shove it. I need a job badly but not that bad!

Some commenters sided with companies and understood why these firms would want to know what prospective employees were doing online.

Cat Nippy: In certain jobs, such as those requiring a security clearance, it might be a valid requirement. Some jobs also have a character clause in the employment contract, and the employer might like to know in advance of hiring and training you if you have nasty things posted on your (Facebook) page.

Qroozer: I think it's fair for companies to do this. They should be able to find out everything they can about who they are hiring.

FULL POST


Filed under: Facebook • Jobs • Overheard on CNN.com • Technology
Overheard on CNN.com: What's a girl toy anyway?
December 22nd, 2011
05:20 PM ET

Overheard on CNN.com: What's a girl toy anyway?

Editor's note: This post is part of the Overheard on CNN.com series, a regular feature that examines interesting comments and thought-provoking conversations posted by the community.

Lego launched a new line of toys for girls that features lots of pinks and pastels and introduces characters like the beautician, the social girl, the girl who loves animals and "the smart girl."

This has upset some parents, who say the toys bring back outdated stereotypes of women's roles in the world.

HLNtv.com Art Director Kelly Byrom wrote that her 5-year-old boy would love the "girly" Lego toys and has been known to pair his fireman costume with a tutu to play "fireman princess." She asked why their isn't similar outrage over the "macho" stereotypes in the boy toy aisle.

Her story sparked an interesting conversation about gender roles and how grownups expect little girls and boys to act.  Some commenters said letting a boy run around in frilly pink outfits would make him weak, a target for bullies and possibly even gay. Others said they're just toys and that kids should be allowed to use their imagination.

Where's the outrage over 'macho' Legos?

Some commenters said that boys and girls are different, and that children should be raised knowing that.

Luke Vissering
My son will wear a tutu the day I'm dead. I'm raising my son to be a man and a good man at that. To be helpful, polite and caring. If he plays with a doll, that's fine. He wants to wear a tutu and I'll tell him no. I draw the line there. There is nothing wrong with raising a boy to be a boy.

David Huntwork
If you are indeed truly letting your boy run around in a tutu playing 'fireman' princess not only is that disturbing but probably borderline psychological child abuse. I have three daughers and though we do things like throw the football around or go 'bug hunting' they are still young ladies and not only do I reinforce and encourage that, I remind them of that. Nothing wrong with influencing your daughter with feminine things and your boys with macho things. Understanding and encouraging feminity and masculinity and helping to reinforce gender identity is an important part of being a parent, and you are failing miserably at that if this article isn't just a bit of weird, twisted satire. And where is this boys father who should be providing himself as a proper male role model? If he is in the picture he is doing a horrible job.

Lauren Campbell Bedell
BTW, girls were made to be MOTHERS, and with being a mother we are geared to have certain traits (gentleness, gracefulness, a certain affection for things)...boys are to be men and provide for their families...which means MACHO...hello...that is how nature (and God, if you are a believer) intended it to be. Do you see males acting like females and taking on female roles in the animal world? It does happen, but very rarely...and they're probably the gay ones. LOL. I have nothing against the gay community...I'm just saying. It doesn't make sense for a boy to love things glittery and girly. It just doesn't! Whenever my boys see pink things, they say Ew! I did not TRAIN them that way...in fact, each of my boys have gotten a dollhouse to play with (the Little People kind) as toddlers, but they still grow up hating pink.

Other parents said toys don't have anything to do with kids'  gender identity:

Joe Hatch
Oh dear God people, will you let the kids be kids and play. At 3 my son wore a big purple tutu, he is the center for his hockey team and he helped me drag our deer out this season. My daughter is all girl totally 100% girly and wants an old Chevy pickup with a wood stake bed. Let your kids be kids!

Janeen Winne
I absolutely agree. My son is into princesses, glitter, and rainbows. I constantly have to field questions about how I might be turning him gay. I respond with "what's wrong with being gay" and end up with the litany of "well it's such a hard life" to the traditional religious "it's against God's plan". Meanwhile, it's perfectly acceptable and encouraged for his mother to be very athletic and do hardcore obstacle course runs. For whatever reason, people are really put off by perceived threats to masculinity.

Owen Yarbrough
If she were to constantly restrict her sons interests in pink or her daughters interest in dragons and masculine things, she would raise a child that now is an adult that perpetuates the lessons taught by their parent that pink is for girls ONLY and boys should want to be masculine things when they play, or even worse, the child could grow up hating themselves because they love feminine things and they know their parents feelings towards these objects is negative and the role of their gender in society is not what their parents think is appropriate....moral of story...by repeatedly telling your child that they need to fit a certain gender type or role in society you could potentially make them grow up to hate themselves for not "fitting in" to the things that you consider to be normal. Do you want to indirectly make your kids think you hate them by their inability to meet your expectations.

Reader Jared John Haddock said that letting boy wear pink and tutus might create problems in the future.

You may not care if your boy wears a tutu, but lets talk about the world as it really is. He will not grow up and be confused because he played with a tutu. He will grow up and be confused because the LGBT community will tell him "you played with tutus, you must be true to who you are and be gay". Television will tell him, "you played with tutus as a boy, you must like men", and "it's ok to be who you really are deep inside". It's sophisticated, but it's brainwashing and stereotyping at its best, and by those who claim they are the victims of such stereotyping.

But one gay reader said it didn't work that way.

Adam Zahn
As a gay man, I never played with "girl toys" as a child. I always played with stereotypical toys for boys. That being said, kids will be kids. Forcing a truck in a kid's hand does not make him want to play with a truck anymore then say forcing your kids to play a sport year after year.

Too many people are equating (though not implicitly stating it) that a boy playing with a girl toy is going to end up feminine and gay. That is not exactly how it works. There is a lot of grey to gender.

What do you think? Share your opinion in the comments area below and in the latest stories on CNN.com. Or sound off on video via CNN iReport.

Compiled by the CNN.com moderation staff. Some comments edited for length or clarity.


Filed under: Overheard on CNN.com
Overheard on CNN.com: What is child abuse?
William Adams says he did hit his daughter with a belt in 2004, but says he did nothing wrong.
November 3rd, 2011
05:23 PM ET

Overheard on CNN.com: What is child abuse?

A YouTube video of a Texas judge hitting his then-teenage daughter with a belt has sparked international outrage. Aransas County, Texas, Court-At-Law Judge William Adams faces a police investigation and a judicial probe, but he says he was disciplining his daughter and did nothing wrong.

Some CNN.com readers agreed with the judge and said spankings teach children right from wrong, but others argued that Adams went too far.

The story is generating an interesting debate on where the line is drawn between discipline and abuse. Here's a sampling of what readers had to say:

"He didn't do anything wrong. My mom whooped my ass just like that, and I'll be damned if I didn't straighten up my act after it," jholliday10 wrote. "Too many parents let their kids run over them these days because they don't believe in whooping. Kids don't care about being put in time out, it doesn't hurt and is only a slight inconvenience. Put a belt to that kid, I guarantee you he'll/she'll mind that and will think twice before repeating the same action. I vouch for it because it worked on me! And I wasn't the best kid growing up."

1soundmind said the video showed a spanking, not abuse. "I was spanked 'exactly' in this manner twice by my dad in my lifetime and it was not abuse.  I spanked my sons, now 21 and 23, in this exact manner maybe twice in their lifetimes, and it was a spanking. Anyone who thinks differently is contributing to this generation's 'out of control' youth who have never received a spanking in their life and walk all over teachers, elders and their own parents."

But DemFLA said that saying "This is how I was raised" doesn't excuse abuse.

"I never married because I thought I would 'do unto others as had been done to me,'" he said. "My dad beat and berated me on a daily basis until I was 17, at which point I finally kicked his butt and then went to join the Army. ... I missed out having kids because I truly thought I would do this, too," he said. "Lots of people say I'd make a great father, but I never wanted to chance that. All that jerk ever said to me was 'This is how I was raised' so I kinda thought I did not want to ever raise a child that way."

tvdtt said  "Discipline would have been depriving her of computer privileges for a time. Once he picked up a weapon (yes, the heavy belt is a weapon) and began striking her with it, discipline ceased and violent abuse began.  He is a criminal and should be treated as such."

"This is not punishment, it is just a beating," flonzy said. "This sort of thing does not teach children a thing except resentment against the parent. Look how well she learned that lesson - she just ruined her father as a judge."

Was this discipline or child abuse? Is it ever OK to hit a child, and if it is, how much is too much? Tell us what you think in the comments below, or go to CNN iReport and share your thoughts in a short video.


Filed under: Overheard on CNN.com • Uncategorized