Okay, the recording is on. Good morning once again, and welcome to BC 106 Interpreting Scripture. Today is January 27th, and we are making progress in this course. We are going to get into the details on our artist. We're going to start talking about all the various rules and guidelines involved in interpreting scripture. So we're getting into the main course now. Let's pray together, and then we will get started. May I request somebody to please unmute your mic, and pray together with the class this morning. Let's have ourselves and pray. Please go ahead. Father, in heaven we thank you for today, this wonderful Thursday, on the 27th of January, 2022. Lord, we know that you've got good plans for us. The Bible says that the plans you have for us are the plans to prosper us, Lord. So, Lord, as we are going into hermeneutics, Lord, the interpretation of your word, Lord, please use the pastor as a vessel, because the Bible says that none of us will be and often we shall wait for a conferter. So, Lord, since the time of the conferter came, so please, Lord, use our pastor as a vessel for the conferter to communicate through us. So, Lord, I also pray for all the students here to have understanding. The Bible says in James 1.5, that we serve a laxwith, don't you ask from your Lord who gives freely to all. So, Lord, we open our mind to receive from you in the name of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, we pray. Amen. Amen. Amen. Thank you. Thank you, Collins. All right. Good morning once again. So, last week we finished talking about God's Word, the Miracle Seed, and then we transitioned into the next chapter. So, I hope to be able to just cover chapter 3 and then go to chapter 4 where we will talk about methods and tools that we use for studying scripture. So, let's see how far we get into that. So, let me go ahead and share the PDF today. Right. So, we started talking a little here on chapter 2 on Handling God's Word. Last week we defined some of this terminology that's typically used in this area of hermeneutics or interpreting scripture. We also looked at the fact that God's Word is inspired. So, the inspiration came from the Holy Spirit. He gives elimination or revelation to us today and he also helps us in the interpretation of the scriptures. But we need to do our part as human beings because each one of us are reading the scriptures in our language and we need to apply our mind to understand it and also to help other people to interpret it for the benefit of other people. That's where we stopped in my chapter. So, we then started discussing what are the challenges in interpretation? What are the difficulties that we would encounter or need to address as we look at the scriptures? So, the scriptures, of course, were written a long time ago. The Old Testament, close to 3,500 years, the New Testament, close to 2,000 years ago. They were written in different languages, the original scriptures written in Hebrew, parts of it in Aramaic and the New Testament in Greek. And then, of course, they've been translated into so many different languages. So, for us, the challenge is to rightly divide the Word. So, let's look at Second Timothy chapter 2, verse 15. It's a very well-known and also very often used scripture in the call to interpret scripture correctly. So, could somebody read that for us please? Second Timothy, chapter 2, verse 15. Be diligent to present yourself to approve to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth. So, one of the things if you read Paul's last two episodes, that is First Timothy and Second Timothy, these were the last writings of the Apostle Paul and after he wrote Second Timothy, he was killed, he was martyred. So, you can get the burden there in First Timothy and Second Timothy. As Paul is writing to Timothy, you can get the burden about sound doctrine. You know, that means over and over again, he repeats to Timothy whom he has put in charge of the church in Ephesians, over and over again he repeats to Timothy, you know, make sure that there is sound doctrine. Make sure that you teach the people the wholesome and the whole Word of God. You know, you can find that coming through both the episodes and he wants Timothy. Timothy, you know, the latter times that are going to be people who will get drawn away through deceiving spirits or seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. So, he is warning so you can feel that burden coming through both First and Second Timothy, the importance of sound doctrine. And Second Timothy 2.15 is one of those key verses where he's telling Timothy and therefore all of us who are ministers of God, he's saying, you know, you do your part to present yourself approved to God. That means God must put his mark of approval. Of course, in one sense, we are all approved in Christ. But then in the other sense, which is our part, he's saying, you do your best to present yourself approved to God as somebody who's not going to be ashamed, you know, a worker who's not ashamed. And then in that context, he presents this, he says, rightly divide the word of truth. So part of you and me presenting ourselves as approved to God, somebody, you know, whom God says, yeah, that's somebody I approve. And somebody who will not be ashamed, our responsibility to be approved and unashamed before God, one of them, one of the responsibilities is to rightly divide the word of God. And the word rightly divide simply means if you break it down, it means to make a straight cut, you know, so don't cut according to our own likes and dislikes. I like this part and I like that part. So don't do that. Just make a straight cut the way it's supposed to be. So that's the idea, rightly divide, make a straight cut. Don't cut it according to your personal choices and conveniences. No, make a straight cut, rightly divide the word of God. So that becomes now our responsibility as ministers. True, the Holy Spirit is the inspiration. He's the one who gives the illumination. But our responsibility is how do I make sure that I'm rightly dividing and making a straight cut in when it comes to the word of God, right? And another great example, if you can go to Act 17, 10 and 11, let's read that because I think that's also a good example. Act 17, 10 and 11, somebody could read that for us, please. Act 17, 10, 11, then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to burial. When they arrived, they went into the San Diego of the Jews. This we are more fear-minded than those in Thessalonica. In that day, we see the world with all readiness and search the scriptures daily to find out whether these things fair so. Thank you. So Paul and Silas, second missionary journey, they come to this place called Berea. And usually, whenever they go to a new city, they would start off preaching in the synagogue and what would happen is they'll get thrown out of the synagogue and so they'll go outside and preach. So they went to the synagogue inside of preaching to the Jews there and also the proselytes and the others who came in. And it tells us in verse 11, Act 17, 11 that these people at Berea, they received the word, that means they very patiently heard what Paul and Silas had to say, but what did they do? They went in search the scriptures. So at that time, of course, they had the Old Testament scriptures. And can you imagine, in those days, they preached the gospel from the Old Testament because they didn't have any of the New Testament scriptures, but they preached the gospel of Jesus Christ from the Old Testament. That's what they did. So you can imagine Paul going through all the Old Testament scriptures that were pointing to Jesus and preaching Jesus from the Old Testament. But these Berean Christians, what are they doing? They are going in searching the scriptures. They're looking through the Old Testament. Hey, is what Paul and Silas, is what they're saying, is that correct? Right. So we just want to highlight the effort they made. They went in search the scriptures. Was the Holy Spirit using Paul and Silas, of course, but they were doing their part, which is they were searching the scriptures, whether what they were hearing was right or wrong, and then they believed. So that's a good example, which you and I must also do that, is we put our effort to search, to study, to understand the scriptures so that we can rightly divide. Later on, maybe today, we will learn about the inductive method of studying the Bible. There are many different ways to study the Bible. We will go through those methods, maybe hopefully in the next chapter. And one of the very simple, easy to use ways to search the scriptures is what is commonly referred to as the inductive method. The inductive method is simply asking three simple questions. It involves three things, asking three simple questions, which is observation, what does the text say, interpretation, what does the text mean? And third, how do I apply the text application? It's very simple. Which we can do every day, like even this morning, when I read my Bible, I'm reading through 1st John. So I read chapter 3 on into chapter 4. And after reading, you pause and you just do this. You observe, what is God saying? Or what is God saying through John? What's he saying here? What does it mean? And how does it apply to me? Meaning, what should I do with it? That's a very basic, a simple way to study the scriptures. Something that all of us, I think, are probably doing without necessarily doing it in a very structured manner. But we are doing it. You read it, what does it say? What does it mean? What must I do with it? But we will learn many other ways to search the scriptures. There are many other ways and tools that we can use, which we will share. Now, why are we doing that? What is our goal? See, what was clear to the writer may not be immediately clear to the reader. I mean, the scriptures are written, like we said, so many thousand years ago. And there are a lot of gaps that we have to bridge the spiritual time, geographical cultural language, literary gap. So what was clearly understood by the writer? So the writer is receiving revelation, inspiration from the Holy Spirit. He has understood something that he is trying to put down in words, in the language and in the words and the literary style of his day. And in the context of his day, he's writing it down. But here we are reading it. And we may not necessarily clearly understand what he was saying. So that's what we study. So in our interpreting of scripture, we depend on the Holy Spirit, but we also use the abilities God has given us to think, to study, to research, to reason, so that God can use the effort we put in to correctly understand and interpret the scripture. Some simple guidelines, I think, if you take the some of the older men and people of faith, how they studied, and of course, these are times way back when they didn't have all the tools that we have. How did they study? And it's good to just look at their approach. Martin Luther said, the scriptures are to be retained in their simplest meaning ever possible and to be understood in their grammatical and literal sense, unless the context plainly forbids. Obscure passages are to be understood in the light of clear passages. Scripture is its own interpreter. This is the true method of interpretation, which puts scripture alongside scripture in a right and proper way. So this is a very, very important principle, or these are important parts and principles that we can take away from Martin Luther. So keep it simple, understand it as literally as possible. It's there, okay, understand it, unless the literal interpretation would be an absurd thing. That means then God is speaking metaphorically. Scripture is its own interpreter. So what one practice we must develop is scripture puts scripture alongside scripture in the right and proper way. So scripture is its own interpreter. So whenever we are trying to understand something, try to look at it from a complete perspective and put scriptures alongside each other on the same subject, of course. So in the right and proper way, scripture that are speaking on the same thing, put them alongside each other and then draw the meaning. And of course we have to do it in the light of present truth. That means we will also learn that revelation is progressive. So I must interpret today in the light of present truth, not in the light of what was relevant sometime back. For example, marriage. So you see in the Old Testament, you see the New Testament. Where are we living? We are living in the New Testament. So how was marriage presented in the New Testament? In the Old Testament, people had many wives. New Testament, very clear. Every man be the husband of one wife. So in understanding marriage, yes, I will find scripture in the Old Testament. I'll find scripture in the New Testament. Put them alongside but I must interpret it in present truth. That means what is God's, what is God, what is the last revelation or what is the revelation relevant to where I am, which is New Testament. Every man be the husband of one wife. So that's what the Bible is saying about marriage. So like that, in a way to put scripture alongside scripture, interpret it in the light of present truth. And again, John Calvin mention stated this. It is the first business of an interpreter to let his author say what he does say instead of attributing to him what we think he ought to say. Now this is again a very interesting statement. That means our goal is what is God saying through the author rather than we trying to put the meaning to what he is saying. We attribute to him what we think he ought to say. So we don't do that. What is he saying? And interpreting it of course in the light of the rest of scripture. So what does he say? The application must be always in the light of the rest of scripture. So we will learn to do these things. Now we have to admit that there is the possibility of error during interpretation. The apostle Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 4, too, that some knowingly distort the word. You know, that means they purposely do it. 2 Corinthians chapter 4 verse 2. Can somebody read that please? 2 Corinthians chapter 4 verse 2. But we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. So Paul is mentioning here of people who are like John's version was saying adulterating the word of God deceitfully or here the New Kingdom says they're handling the word of God deceitfully. That means they are knowingly adulterating it, mixing it. They know what the word is but then they are adulterating it. They're handling it deceitfully. They're knowingly doing things with it because they want to use that word to support their own idea, their own agenda, their own position. So there are people who know knowingly do that. But sometimes others unknowingly make faulty interpretation. Now this unknowingly usually happens because they have not done their homework. That means they have not made the effort to do their study. They have not made the effort to apply the rules or make the effort. So then what happens? They come out with faulty interpretations. So some knowingly distort the word. Maybe they want to stay true to their denomination. So even though they're able to see things, they say, no, no, no, I can't say it because I belong to this denomination. I have to say that, you know, things like that for whatever reason. If they knowingly say the wrong thing. But sometimes people are knowingly do it. And many times they are knowingly happens because we haven't done our homework. We haven't made the effort to study. So then they come out with wrong interpretations. And then, like we said in the very beginning, if we interpret things incorrectly, it can, people will misapply the word. They will get into trouble. They will do wrong things. So our goal is to avoid error. That's our goal. Of course, knowingly you don't want to distort the word. You won't do it. But we want to make every effort that even mistakenly we don't misinterpret the word of God. So that is where we study, we put our effort and we will follow these guidelines. Now, the Bible is both a human book and a divine book. So what do you mean? As a divine book, we know that God inspired it. God is the ultimate author of the Scriptures and God sovereignly saw to the forming of the Scriptures, the coming together of the 66 books. God's hand is in it. So we say things and we can say the Bible is inherent. There is no error. The Bible is authoritative, meaning it's final authority in our lives. The Bible has unity. So therefore, the Bible is not going to contradict itself. It's coherent and consistent. Seeming discrepancies, we interpret it in the light of the harmony of Scriptures. And we will address some of these scenarios. We will look at specific examples as we go along. And what may be obscure and secondary, we interpret it in the light of clear and primary passages. So it's okay. What do we know? What is very clear? We follow that. If there are two equally possible interpretations, go with what is clear and sensible. The Bible interprets itself. We will see that example of that as well. And we acknowledge the progressive revelation. That means God over time continuously revealed more and more. And over time, he may have stopped some of the things that he had stated earlier. For example, he gave the law through Moses. Then Jesus came. Grace and truth came for Jesus Christ. And he said, okay, you're no longer under law. You're living in a different way. You're living under grace. So there's a progressive revelation. And God is changing. Or God has changed certain things that he has given to us. So we must be aware there is progressive revelation. And we live in present truth, meaning what God has revealed to us now in the Scriptures. And the Bible is supernatural. That means there are things in the Bible that are beyond human logic and understanding. It's the work of God.  That means it is written in the language of the day and time in which it was written. So the Old Testament was written using the language and the grammar and the figures of speech that were available in that day and time. And as you keep progressing, you come into the New Testament. The New Testament was written in the language that is Greek using the grammar of the Greek language and using the figures of speech that was relevant during those days. So it's a human book because it is using the language and the grammar and the figures of speech of its day and time. And secondly, it's human because it was written by a person to their immediate audience. Most of the time it was written directly to the immediate audience who had a certain historical, geographical setting. There was a certain time in history, they were living in a certain place and it was written for a particular purpose. So it was written by a person to a people for a purpose within a certain historical and geographic context. So that's something, so it's very human. Thirdly, it's human because of the cultural environment in which the person was living. So they would talk about maybe the clothes of their day, maybe the way they traveled or those kinds of things which was relevant to their environment. Some other things is when we understand it, we must understand it in its context. That means what did it mean as it was written in that time to those people in that language, what do those figures of speech mean? So it must be understood in that context. So in understanding that actually going back in time, historically, geographically, culturally, literary, in a literary way, we're going back in time and we're understanding it. But then we have to bring it back to today's application. So we have to do that interpretation. We have to understand it. We have to recognize the literary form that was used in that day and time. And we must understand that the basic principles of logic and communication are being used. That means a certain thought is being developed or the writer is, you know, he's progressively developing an idea. So let's wait till he finishes developing the idea before we arrive at the conclusion. Don't just stop in the middle and then try to jump to a conclusion. You might end up in the wrong conclusion. So follow through. Maybe he takes four or five chapters for him to develop something. Or maybe in chapter seven, he's referring to something he had mentioned in chapter one. That means, of course, they didn't write it in chapter and verse, but what he referred in the beginning, he's referencing a little later. So these forms of logic and communication we must keep in mind and not forget, you know, which is something how we also in our speaking in our writing today follow. So these basic principles of logic and communication, we must also apply as we go back in time to understand the scriptures. Okay. So this is a, you know, a simple introduction. Our next chapter, chapter three, is we're going to get into the tools and methods of study. But before we do that, I want to pause here and see if there are any questions so far. Everybody's with me so far. Any questions? Okay. I see a question there from John Paul. What approach should we should have understanding imprecatory psalms. So I do not know what is what are imprecatory psalms. Could you explain that John? Yeah, this means the science which is written to, which reads about invoking judgment on others, especially since 109 verse nine, which says that their child be fatherless. Things of that sort. Yeah. So there will be, you know, in the Old Testament, thank you John. Thanks for the question. So basically how, you know, how do we understand these psalms? Or let's just extend this question to a lot of things that we see in the Old Testament where God tells his people to go, you know, kill the tribes, you know, kill all the tribes, occupy a land, out of fight against the enemy, or, or, you know, they pray for judgment against their enemies, so on and so forth. Now, again, so we must understand, and which we will be mentioning later on is there is the context where God is leading his people to go in and possess a land and their enemies and so on. And in the Old Testament, in order to achieve that, God has, you know, God directs and empowers his people a certain way, right? So to go possess the land, to go occupy territory, to conquer, obviously the people are militant, the people fight, and they, of course, you know, are intent destruction on their enemies. And that's where all the prayers and such prayers and such things are all, you know, that's the context in which the psalms, those psalms, those prayers and those actions were taken. The context was you have to occupy the territory, that's for you, you have to conquer tribes in order to get access to the land, and then you need to protect the land, which means you need to fight off the people who are trying to attack and take it. So that's the context. So in that context, there is a lot of militancy and fighting, killing, and so on. But that's Old Testament. And when you come into the New Testament, things have changed. It's no longer about having to possess a physical land. It's no longer having to fight tribes of people to occupy something that is your inheritance, that context has changed. Therefore, those things do not translate to us directly. But in the New Testament, everything changes to spiritual dimension. So we are now engaged in a spiritual battle, we are fighting against spiritual enemies, and we are contending for spiritual things. So what was Old Testament context is no longer the same context for us here. What was in the natural has now shifted to the spiritual. So when we read those sounds or read those prayers or read about those actions, understand it in that context. And if there's anything that they're going to translate or take from it, it has to be in the context of our time, which is spiritual engagement. So in fact, I did a complete study and I wrote a book a long time ago called The Lord is a Warrior. So meaning God hasn't changed. God is still a warrior in the Old Testament. He's still a warrior in the New Testament. He's still a man of war. But the context has changed. And so I was just trying to draw a parallel of spiritual warfare principles from the Old Testament to New Testament. I was just drawing a parallel. It's very interesting. It was an interesting study and saying, okay, we can use this parallel. So to that extent, it's fine. But the context has changed, so we cannot directly use it. So today, we won't be paying judgment on our enemies in that sense, because it's not a physical fight. We're not fighting flesh and blood. So we won't pray those kinds of prayers against other people. But they did that in that time because that was the natural context in which they were engaging. Yes, thank you. All right. Good question. Any other questions? Okay. So let's get in now to our next chapter as we make progress. This is some of the tools and methods for Bible study. And after this chapter is when we're going to get into rule by rule on how to interpret scripture. We will go through the rules. But this is laying some background on how to study, because as you start applying the rules, you are studying and then you're applying the rules to what you are studying. So what is our objective in personal Bible study? So this is very important. So when you and I are studying first of all, be it's personal Bible study. That means I must desire to study the Word of God. I remember a long time ago, somebody asked me, do you study the Bible just to preach sermons? Then I had to explain. No, no, no. I study the Bible because I want to know what the scriptures are saying. And I used to study the Bible in various topics. Yeah, just for me to understand that topic. Now, of course, I do study or I do prepare when I want to go preach a sermon. But to prepare a sermon, I might take five minutes or sometimes I might just take, you know, it doesn't take long to prepare a sermon. It's not, you know, sometimes I may put in a little bit more effort because I have to write everything down because our pastors are preaching. But otherwise to prepare a sermon, it's sometimes I don't even need to prepare. I can just open my Bible and speak. Why? Not because I don't value in preparing for a sermon. For me, everything you study in the Bible is part of your preparation for a sermon.   Right? That's what a sermon is if you want to look at it that way. So the sermon itself is not a lot of work. Sometimes it is, but sometimes it's not. Why? Because if you are studying the Bible all the time, you know, various topics and searching and understanding and all of that, then you are putting in, you are ready all the time. You know, if somebody says, can you teach on a particular subject? If you have studied that subject, you're ready to speak. Of course, you may need your notes and that's okay.  But what I really want to encourage all of us is if we want to be ministers of the Word of God and let us put a lot of time into personal Bible study, you study because you want to learn. Don't study because you have to preach a sermon. Study because you want to learn, because you want to know the Word, because you want to be like the Burian Christians, right? That means you want to search the scriptures and know the truth for yourself. Study because of that.  Now, what is our motivation in doing personal Bible study? At least three things. We want to know the truth. That means, okay, what does the Bible actually say about something? So there's a desire to know the truth. There's also, of course, a greater desire. I want to know God through his Word. And so God has given me the Bible and if I look into the Bible, I can understand God. God is unveiled to us through his Word, right? And then there's another desire. What is it? So that I can be changed, right? That as I read the scriptures and I discover the Word, the Word is going to change me. The Word is going to correct me. The Word is going to strengthen me. The Word is going to empower me, equip me, so on. So I'm going to be changed and the net result is God can be revealed through me, right? I will become a little bit more like Jesus and God can be revealed through me. So these are simple motivations. Why you and I study the Bible? We want to know the truth. We want to know what is the right thing. We want to know God and we want to be transformed so that we can reveal God, right? Now, some other background as we do Bible study is a simple question. You know, why do we have so many versions of the Bible? What's the difference and what must, which version must I use? We will get into more details on this in our second year course on apologetics when we talk about the scriptures and so on. But I'm just doing a little bit of background here. You know, there are, you know, so the original or the original copies of the text, the Bible text are known as manuscripts, Bible manuscripts. And there are numerous manuscripts, new testament for the New Testament and the Old Testament. Actually, I think more than around 24,000 copies of our New Testament manuscripts in various languages, Greek 5,800. And there are numerous Old Testament manuscripts, again in different languages. And, you know, people who do translation work, and I'm not an expert in these things, I can just share a little bit here. They categorize manuscripts and they categorize their translation approach, broadly speaking, into two types. So one approach of using manuscripts is the Byzantine text type or the majority. So the Byzantine is an area in Turkey, eastern part of eastern Orthodox area. So it would be more on the eastern part of Turkey, I guess, maybe because of the texts from that area, manuscripts from that area. But the idea here is you have all these manuscripts, what is the majority of the manuscript saying, that's what we will translate. That's one approach. The Alexandrian type, again, Alexandrian refers more to the Egyptian type, looks more on what did the earliest manuscript say, right? So we'll go by that, the date of the manuscript. So there are two ways to do the translation. One is, what is the majority of the text say, we'll go with that, or what is the earliest one say, we'll go with that. In many cases, there is coherence in both approaches. I would say that most of the time there is coherence. In some cases, what happens is there will be in a timeline wise, there may be small changes, variations in later manuscripts, because manuscripts were hand copied, right? So the person copying later may have added a certain few words in order to make it understandable in their time. So in the Alexandrian type, they would say, let's go with what was the earliest. Or in the majority of the manuscripts, there may be one or two that are odd ones out, which may have had a few variations, a little variation in the text. While the majority are saying, say, example, if you have 500 copies of a certain, you know, the Gospel of Matthew and 498 have the same text, but maybe there are two with a little variation, then it's okay, we stay with the 498. So that is it, but the majority are consistent, coherent. But there are these two broadly speaking approaches in the translation of text, just to keep that in mind. And that's why when you read your Bible, and I'm talking about the English Bible, you will find that there will be in the margin or sometimes in the footnotes, there will be in some cases something that says this manuscript says this. That means that is one, you know, okay, here's some slight variation. They're telling us about it. But what have they done? They have stayed with either the majority or they've stayed with the earliest text. And they will let you know, okay, this manuscript says this. Okay, so you'll find that in the footnotes or in the margin, you'll find it. Now, that is one aspect of translation. And then we will get into more details in the second year course on apologetics. But there's another thing we must keep in mind, which is translation philosophy. So when these translators sat and translated the Bible, in most cases, groups of translators worked together. So it's not one person doing the entire translation. There were instances of, you know, the individuals like the early days, I forget their names, like Wycliffe and others who worked independently. But later on, like the King James, new King James, others for groups of translators. So there's big advantage because it has the collective knowledge and understanding of people who knew the language working together. But when the translators were working, or when they start working on a translation, they're going to decide on the translation philosophy. That means, how are we going to translate it? So there are some, so we need to understand. One is referred to as a formal equivalence. That means it's a word for word translation, word for word translation. It tries to be as literal as possible. So this would include the English standard version, the King James version, the new American standard Bible. Okay. They follow the formal equivalence of word for word translation. Then there is the functional equivalence. It is thought for thought. That means, what was that person thinking? Let me say the same thing in today's language. I'm communicating thought for thought. So I'm not translating word for word. That means I'm going to introduce some of my own words, but I'm making sure that I'm bringing across the same thought, which means they're actually doing a little bit of interpretation for you already, right? Because they're interpreting that thought in our modern thought. They're using modern language to communicate the same thought. That's called functional equivalence. The new living translation, the new international version would be of this. Okay. So let me pause here. It's 9-5-0. So we'll take our 10-minute break and I'll come back and we'll go over this and then we can discuss as well. So let's take a quick break here. I hope you're with me up. This is not boring for you. I hope it's interesting. Okay. Let's take a break and we'll come back in 10 minutes and continue.


Now, I love YouTube and I'm very excited to bring this course to you here on YouTube. And what it's going to be about is about business statistics or economic data analysis. Now data is really everywhere and if you want to take your own company anywhere, if you work for a company and you want to get involved in something new, you want to extend yourself, perhaps get involved with some of the teams, work with data, this is really the course for you. Now you can really learn about data analysis everywhere, there are courses everywhere and I urge you to look around because somewhere you're going to find a course or someone explaining this that you are really going to understand. Maybe this course is for you, I hope so, otherwise look for a course that will help because really statistical analysis, data analysis and business is becoming so important. Now we're going to use Python in this course. Now I absolutely love Python, I think there are two main open source programming languages to use are and Python but I really think Python is on the up, it really is such an exciting community and if you read anything online, Python is really where it's at. You can use Python for anything, I can teach you how to do data analysis, statistics with Python but you can use Python to write games if you want to develop websites, write applications, it is such an enormous language and it's so easy to learn. So we're really going to stick to Python, I'm going to show you how to install it, where to get it free of charge and that's the beauty of this open source movement that we are seeing, data analysis done free of charge. A little bit more about myself, I am a surgeon at Khorotyskir Hospital but I work a lot with data analysis and research as well. Before I was in academic practice as a surgeon I worked a lot in private practice and private practice is really a business and you've got to run it as a business. Statistical analysis and business is so important. One thing that I want to do in this course is just connect with you in some way. This is not a classroom, I'm not coming on a stage and you write down what I say and you write an exam about this. I want us through this medium to at least communicate even if most of the communication is going to be one way, but I truly believe as I do when I teach at the university is that you have to know something about your lecturer, you have to connect with that person, you have to know something about them. It cannot just be someone who just comes along and then goes away and there's no connection between the two of you. So I want you to learn a little bit something about myself and I want you to learn something about this environment called Cape Town. Cape Town is a fantastic place. If you ever get the opportunity, come and visit us here in Cape Town. So for many of these lectures, you are going to see just a little bit about Cape Town. I'm going to show you some of the businesses. I'm not connected to any of these businesses. I'm not getting paid by any of these businesses, but I'm just going to show you around the beauty of Cape Town. Now the first place I want to show you is called Spear. Spear is a winery, a wine farm, quite an old established wine farm. It's not about the wine. I'm not going to show you anything really about the wine and it's not about drinking wine or alcohol and anything. Really, it is this wonderful farm that you can take, someone that you know yourself. You can take your whole family and you can have lovely picnics there. There's so many restaurants. You can go grab a basket, buy a few things, sit outside. You can even book a space for yourself beforehand. It is well worth it, well worth place to visit.  Imagine how much data a big wine farm like that might collect. And the way that we are going to look at data analysis from any company's point of view is for that data to be in tabular form. You've seen this before, Google Sheets, Microsoft Excel, some open source version, LibreOfficeCalc, a spreadsheet of data, rows and rows of data, columns of data. Data is what it's all about and that's what this first lecture is going to be about. Now I want you to jot down a few things as you're trying to remember because these are the things that we're going to talk about. The four main types of data. The first two are categorical data types and the second two are numerical. Our first one is going to be nominal data. And then I'm going to move on to ordinal data. So those are the two categorical types. The two numerical types that you must be aware of is interval data and ratio type data. There you go, ratio type data. Both numerical data types, but there's a slight difference between the two. So any of the data that's collected in the business will be one of these four major data types. And you've got to know that column in the spreadsheet, that tabular data, what that is all about. Now there's another way to classify at least numerical data and there's something we will also have a look at and that is called discrete data and continuous data types. So those are the things that we are going to look at in this first lecture. Before we go there, come on over to My World. Let's take a short trip through SPEAR. With a very familiar looking program, it is a spreadsheet. Irrespective of what the program is, as I say Microsoft Excel, you can go Google Sheets, LibreOfficeCalc doesn't matter, it's a spreadsheet. What we're looking at here is tabular data. Tabular data because it is a table. A table with rows and rows. Here's a single row of data, a second row of data, a third row of data. And each row of data represents one object, one sale, one customer. Everything about that row should be about some specific thing. Now seeing we were just on a wine farm, let's just stick to the topic of wine. So it's got nothing to do with the wine, nothing to do with alcohol. Let's just look at the data and the data types. Look down these columns. There's a column, there's a column, another column, et cetera. And it is this column, the whole column that is, contains data that is of a specific type. I like to call each of these data points a data point value for a specific variable. Grape here is a variable. Grade is a variable. Let's assume I know nothing about wine making, by the way. Let's just assume that there's five grades, grade one to grade five. Grade one being the grape is excellent. Grade five being it's not a very good grape. Let's make up something that is the temperature that it was outside when the grapes were harvested. It's in Celsius, it's in Fahrenheit there and the quantity, kilograms, pounds, doesn't matter. It is a quantity. So if we look down these variables with these names, the data point values are of a certain type. So the data point values of a variable is of a certain type. Let's start with the grape. Let's imagine there are these Pinnatars, Pinnatars, Shannon, Cabernet, Chardonnay, Molo, all these different types of grapes that wines are going to be made of. As I say, I don't know much about these. They are all in different parts of this wine farm and each row tells us that there was some Pinnatars. The grade from that harvesting was grade four. It was 20 degrees Celsius or 68 Fahrenheit and 166 kilograms or pounds or whatever was harvested. So that's one harvest. So if we look at these data point values for this grape variable, we notice that they're words. We can't put them in any particular order. We can make up some human order to them. We can say, well, let's do them alphabetically. We could say, let's put them in some form of the way, you know, order in which we like them. But that's not a natural order. I can come up with any order. There's no reason to say a Molo must be higher than a Chardonnay. Somehow one might be more expensive. As I say, these are all just human factors that we can attach to this variable, this data type. So it is a categorical variable type and the specific type is nominal. So it's a nominal categorical data type. We cannot put it in any kind of natural order. The only thing we can do that is really natural is we can count.  Let's move on to grade. It's a bit of a trick. It is not numerical. You might see a number there, but it is most definitely not a numerical variable. It is still a categorical, still from a category. This time though, it is ordinal. We can put some order to it, grade one to grade five. There's a natural order there. We can still attach something, human to it, one being very good, five being bad, or one being bad and five being good, doesn't matter. There is an order to this, a natural order. It is not a number though, in the sense that there is no specific set defined difference between these. The difference between grade one and two is in no way similar to the difference between two and three, even though the numerical difference is one. How do you define what the difference is between these? You've got to just come up with some arbitrary thing. Think about it this way. You can also not say that a grape, say one is bad and five is very good grapes. Let's go in that direction. You cannot say that because four is twice two, that the grape with a grade four is twice as good as a grape of grade two. It's not normal. You can't see numbers in that way. And it's very important when you look at some business data and it's numbers, but they do not represent numbers. They represent categories. Once again, the only thing that you can really do here is to count, count how many ones there are, count how many twos. You can't really express some mathematical operation on these, they are categories, they are not numbers. Now let's move on to the two numerical types. Remember we had interval and we had a ratio. Here we have temperature. We see temperature in Celsius, temperature in Fahrenheit, whichever one you prefer, whichever part of the world you come from. The thing about these are, they are numerical, but there is no two zero. Zero degrees Celsius as where water freezes under normal circumstances at sea level, 32 degrees for Fahrenheit scale. That is not a two zero. It does not mean the absence of temperature. Even if you go down to the zero Fahrenheit, that zero does not mean an absence of temperature because you can go drop below zero. The absence of temperature is actually on the Kelvin scale and that's zero Kelvin. So these are numbers, but there's only an interval type here, in other words the difference between say 30 degrees and 31 degrees is the same as the difference between 50 degrees and 51 degrees. That one degree is really a set-define thing, but the zero here is not the absence of something. So be very careful, this is an interval, the numerical data type. Last one here is quantity. If there was a zero here, that is really the absence of anything. Nothing was harvested on that specific occasion. Zero really exists. And that's why it's called the ratio type because I can now say that if I get 40 pounds or 40 kilograms and I take 20 pounds or 20 kilograms, the 40 is twice more than the 20. But I cannot say 60 degrees is twice as much as 30 degrees because it really isn't on the greatest scheme of things on the Kelvin scale, 16, 30, very close to each other, one is not double the other on the Celsius and Fahrenheit scale because we don't have this absence of a quantity at zero. So be very careful when you do these, especially when it comes to this ordinal categorical type. So remember this, we have on the left-hand side here, we have nominal categorical, ordinal categorical, interval type numerical, ratio type numerical. The four data types that we're going to see in business analysis come up again and again and again. Okay, I hope to see you in the next lecture.


It's looking beautiful. It's a fantastic day, isn't it? The only thing is, we were just moaning in the fact that the weatherman said, I just got a turn of cold. You can believe we just arranged it for you. I'm going to talk a little bit about the weather. I'm going to talk a little bit about New York. I'm going to talk a little bit about New York. Yes, I understand. There is some snow. I'm going to talk a little bit about New York. See, I did say there would be three minutes. How about selling Congress on the internet? Will you ask for an extension of the salt agreement, Geneva? Can we ask for an extension of the salt agreement? Thank you. Could we ask for an extension of the salt agreement? Thank you very much. Thank you. When did you say you were going to talk about New York? I'm going to talk a little bit about New York. It was phenomenal. I'm not leaving. I'm not leaving for the president. I'm not leaving for the president. You're on your shirt. Can you stand up? I'm going to talk a little bit about New York. You can stand up. Do you prefer standing up?  Yes, you're good. Thank you very much. You're welcome. I guess a welcome to the White House and also a great thank you to Bruno Bayer, the policy who asked about that by the press and have been there. There are more things that I will talk about in a moment. The appreciation that we have. Just have a meeting. That's right. I shall go first. I'm honored today to welcome Prime Minister Kraxie back to the United States. Since you were visited in October of 1983, Mr. Prime Minister, you've taken on a new responsibility, assuming the presidency of the European community. We're pleased to have had this opportunity to meet with you as a friend, as a leader of a great nation, and as the representative of the European peoples. Cooperation between Italy and the United States is at a level unsurpassed in our history. Your country, Mr. Prime Minister, is an ally second to none. Our efforts have kept the peace in Europe for almost 40 years. Italy has played an active role in the cause of peace. It continues to do so today in the Middle East, an area which, as Prime Minister Kraxie explained, is of special importance to Italy. And today the Prime Minister and I also discussed East-West relations and arms control. We reviewed the approach the United States will take in the coming Geneva talks and the Prime Minister reconfirmed Italy's continued steadfastness on INF development. Deployment, I should say. We also discussed the Strategic Defense Initiative. The Prime Minister assured me of Italy's full understanding of the program's objectives, and we agreed on the great potential benefits this research effort could provide. We firmly agree that now is the time for alliance solidarity, and our goal remains the reduction and eventual elimination of the means of aggression nuclear and conventional. In another area of cooperation, we look forward to a productive bond summit. I affirm to the Prime Minister the high priority we place on undertaking a new round of trade negotiations by early 1986. These talks are necessary, not just to forestall a possible slide back toward protectionism, but to take new steps for freer and more open trade and a stronger world economy. The United States and Italy are two of the world's great democracies. Our bilateral relations reflecting our shared values are on a high plane. When the Prime Minister last visited, we decided to improve our coordination and cooperation against narcotics, and I'm happy to report that our initiative has now yielded an effective new instrument to combat this scourge, our binational working group on narcotics and organized crime. Our common fight against terrorism is another area of close cooperation, and Italy deserves accolades for its courageous struggle against terrorism. I know I speak for all Americans in thanking you publicly, Mr. Prime Minister, for Italy's successful thwarting last November of a potential bomb attack against our embassy in Rome. As the head of a vital, vibrant democracy nurtured by statesmen like yourself and your illustrious predecessors, you and your coalition partners have put Italy in the forefront of the world's functioning democracies. You've demonstrated your unequivocal and compelling commitment to Western values. We're grateful to the Italian people as our friends and allies, and we're also proud, Mr. Prime Minister, to welcome your historic address to the Congress tomorrow. It will, I'm certain, be another milestone in the numerous and long-lasting ties between our two countries. Mr. Prime Minister America welcomes you with your warmest friendship, and we salute you and your partners and wish you continued success. Mr. Prime Minister America welcomes you with your warmest friendship, and we salute you and your partners and wish you continued success. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. In my colleagues at Washington, we have also examined the international economic situation, confronting our ideas on the ways and means to consolidate and strengthen the recovery in a framework of greater stability. We must better harmonize the national efforts to fully value the benefits and effects of recovery on the occupational levels. But we cannot limit our attention to the well-being of our economies. There are serious problems of a growing gravity in the south of the world that we must help to resolve. We have agreed to encourage an effective consultation between our governments on these issues, also in order to ensure success in the direction of the industrialized countries that will have the 2nd and 4th of May in Bonn. I have underlined in my colleagues the importance of the return of democracy in the civilized nations of that continent, and I have remembered the hope of democratic solidarity of the people that re-vend a regime of freedom. Last year, I defined with President Reagan the intentions for a more incisive bilateral collaboration in the fight against drugs and organized crime, and the results were important and positive. Collaboration has been carried out with reciprocal satisfaction. We will continue these efforts and we will try at the same time to improve bilateral and multilateral intentions to defend our democratic ordinances by every returning threat of international terrorism. Thank you again President Reagan for the fruitful exchange of views. I have confirmed to you how common values and common aspirations in a context of consolidated friendship facilitate the reciprocal understanding and the intention to resolve the problems that see the responsibility of our governments and our countries. I wish to thank President Reagan for the warm welcome he has extended to me. My visit to this great friendly nation has a particular importance in view of the responsibilities which fall upon Italy now that it is holding the presidency of the European community. Our talks have been extensive, open and very constructive. I have renewed to President Reagan the heartfelt congratulations of the Italian government and my own personal ones for the great consensus received at the recent presidential elections. I have also congratulated him for his success in expanding the American economy which has resulted in greater employment. The United States has succeeded in the hard task of combining the modernization of productivity with the creation of new jobs. Europe and United States should work together to achieve coordinated action and initiatives which are necessary to improve transatlantic economic cooperation to mutual benefit. I have expressed to President Reagan my assessment of the issues which Italy follows with the utmost attention. First of all, those of peace, security, development and the safeguarding of the rights of peoples. And while also illustrating the programs and prospects of the 10 for a wider community integration, I have stressed that our willingness to proceed towards European unity is consonant with the framework of constant strengthening of the European-American partnership through a balanced relationship and more effective mutual responsibility. Again, on this occasion, I have realized how deep and strong are the bonds of friendship, alliance and cooperation between Italy and the United States. It is our firm intention to continue to strengthen them. I have particularly appreciated the special consideration shown by President Reagan and his administration for Italy and for the development of Italian-American relations. I consider this attention as a recognition of the consistency and the commitment shown by the Italian government in making a positive contribution to the search of more stable international equilibria in the field of defense as well in the economic and political ones. Our exchange of views confirmed the existence of broad and encouraging convergence and I am convinced that the basic goals of the United States policy remain defense and peace based on a balance of forces. The President has assured me that these same goals will be pursued through the SDI from whose research program we will draw mutual advantages in the scientific and technological field. We attach a fundamental importance to the success of the forthcoming Geneva negotiations. We are firmly convinced that the substantial, balanced and verifiable reduction of armaments is the essential condition for a stable and safer peace. We will work hard to strengthen confidence negotiations in those which are taking place in other fora may develop under the best possible circumstances. There are no substitutes for the negotiation process. An agreement on a gradual and balanced elimination of armaments and on the organization of peace based on an accepted and recognized balance is in the interest of all. We have discussed the Middle East situation and noted with satisfaction the emergence of positive signs indicating that there is a possibility of reactivating the negotiation process towards a political solution of the Arab Israeli crisis. We both noted with interest the recent Jordanian-Palestinian dialogue. We hope that this agreement will shortly allow for a joint Arab stand on the opening of realistic negotiations with Israel. We agreed to keep in constant in order to effectively support all positive steps towards a just, global and lasting peace in the Middle East. In my talks here in Washington we also examined the international economic situation and exchanged views on ways and means to consolidate and strengthen economic recovery within a context of greater stability. We must harmonize our national efforts so that the beneficial results of recovery will be fully reflected on the occupational levels. However, we cannot pay attention only to our own economic prosperity. The increasing serious problems in the third world are a matter of great concern. We must help in seeking solutions to them. We agreed to hold effective consultations between our governments on these issues in order to ensure the success of the summit conference of the industrialized nations to take place in Bonn on May 2nd to the 4th. Having just visited Latin America I also emphasized in my talks here the great importance of the return of democracy in the highly civilized nations of that continent and drew attention to the expectations for the democratic solidarity of the peoples living there who aspire to a regime based on freedom. Last year I worked out with President Trump a program for a more effective bilateral cooperation in the fight against drug traffic and organized crime. The results have been positive and significant. Our cooperation has been carried out with mutual satisfaction. We will continue these efforts while trying at the same time to improve bilateral and multilateral agreements so as to defend our democratic system against any rise of the threat of international terrorism. I wish to thank President Reagan for this fruitful exchange of views. It was for me a confirmation of how much the sharing of values and aspirations in a context of longstanding friendship makes it easier to reach mutual understanding and agreement and how to cope with and solve problems for which we have responsibilities not only as governments but as we have responsibilities to our own peoples.


Hello, and welcome to Release Date Rewind. My name is Marc J. Parker, and I am a film lover, filmmaker, film celebrator. And normally this is an audio podcast, wherever you get your podcasts on your favorite apps. But thanks to Portland Media Center, you are about to watch the video component of this show where I celebrate movie anniversaries with my friends. Each month I usually talk about two different movies that I love with different friends, and we talk about the making of the movies, trivia, any fun memories associated with them. So I hope you enjoy, because now it's time to rewind. Well, two's company, three's a crowd, but tonight three's company, because I have two friends, one friend that hasn't been on the show in a long time, and one friend that's never been on the show. So I'm very excited to welcome back Jeff Bogayski, who was in my very first episode talking about Psycho in 7. Hello, Jeff. Hello, everybody. And I also want to introduce everybody to, you might already have heard of him. You've heard of his podcast, Fry Gay the 13th, a very cool, very queer, popular podcast. Andrew Huff, welcome to Release Date Rewind. Thank you for having me. I'm really excited to talk about this movie today. I am so thankful that you guys are here. Andrew had responded on Facebook when I put out my list to put out my feelers, and then Jeff commented, and Jeff, I remember a while ago. I rewatched this great, crazy movie five years ago for its 20th anniversary. And I feel like that was when I was working with your husband, Tariq. And I feel like I mentioned that to Tariq. And I feel like you guys watched it, too. And I just remember, like, Tariq and I at our desks were, like, humming this amazing score, right? It's very sultry. So I knew that you love this movie. So I'm glad you're here, too. Because now we have our, we have our threesome. Hey, now in our threesome, who do we want to be? Who's Matt Dillon? Who's Denise? Who's our girl, Neve? Do we have a preference? I do not have the chops being Denise in this. I know she's got, she's got so much going on. And, you know, I forgot Denise is actually an amazing actress in this. Of course, it's very campy. A lot of it's over the top. But I don't know the tears this time we're really working for me. She is quite good, I thought. Her stares are pretty intense, right? Lots of snarls. Lots of staring. Oh my God. So many, yes. Yeah, I will say I did grow up in the country. So I guess I technically qualify as a Susie. Oh, okay. I love that.  Can you lift it up a little bit more? Oh, yes. You know, it's so funny that you're wearing the craft shirt because on my latest rewatch today, I thought, something tells me Susie's favorite movie is The Craft. Yeah.  What about you, Jeff? So, okay, if Andrew is Susie, are you Sam Lombardo? Hi, Mr. Lombardo. Or are you Kelly Van Ryan with the smolder, the stares? I don't know. I feel like I'm not, I mean, I am an educator. Yes, you are. So maybe I should be the guidance counselor. Okay. Maybe I should just both hope, you know, bad guy. You totally are. And I mean, it's appropriate. You, yeah, that's you. So then, okay, great.  That's so freaky, by the way. That's like a really weird little detail for me. But anyway, okay. So we're gonna talk about the movie in a minute, but I wanna catch up with you guys quickly. I'm gonna start with you, Andrew. So you have been working on a great podcast called Fragged The Thirteenth for five years now. We were just talking about it. Tell us about the show for anyone out there who isn't sure what Fragged The Thirteenth is. Tell me about it. Sure, yeah. Fragged The Thirteenth, we're a horror podcast. We mix it up a little bit though and we talk about horror in real life and then we match it to a horror in the movies. So if you think about it, we did one time where we did Sorority Row and what was the other movie, but they're both campus movies. So they're both college campus movies and we paired it with kind of what's happening at Notre Dame with the state of like their football program and the rape culture that goes on there and how that's all covered up. And so we kind of like mix it up. We try to take the first half of our show pretty seriously and talk about some, in real life like horrific stuff. And then we try to lighten it up by watching a couple horror movies and really having fun because that's what it's all about at the end of the day is having fun. So, yeah, we've been going strong for a while now. And take us on a ride for sure. There's some high highs and like serious lows. Yeah, but I mean, good for you for going this long and you're just getting more and more popular. It's amazing. What's your secret? Thank you so much. Perseverance. There you go. And having a consistent schedule because as soon as you're off that schedule, then it's like, well, I don't really want to do it anymore or you find a reason not to do it next time or, you know what I mean?  Hi, Jeff. Hi. So, okay, fill us in. What are you doing tomorrow? Well, actually tomorrow, I'm just playing husband and dad. Oh, okay. But it's Sunday is the half marathon. Yeah, it's the New York half marathon. Yeah, starting out in Brooklyn, going down Flatbush, heading into the city, taking the Manhattan Bridge and finishing in Central Park. So, oh my gosh. Have you been training for this for a while? Oh, no. I've been training for one second, but I've been training. So if you hear kids, it's just the kids. They know the rules. It's supposed to be in the other room, but... They're big fans of wild things. Big fans. I think that's so awesome. So, okay, your last marathon was, you said four years ago. The last half was four years ago and the last full was in 2014, so. Wow. Impressive. Me, never. Zero for me, but I'm waving from afar and cheering you on. That's amazing. Now, did you, because I know in the New York running scene for marathons and half marathons, did you have to do like a lottery or anything or is this not like that? Yeah, I got lucky. I did the lot. I know like people that are really like gung-ho about it. You know, they do the races and stuff like that. So most people, they do the races, they do the nine plus one and they try to get involved. I was just like, name and a hat, cross my fingers, hope I get in and I got in. So yeah, this is neat inspiration. Good for you. That's great. What a great way to kick off spring. How would you guys classify this movie? I know we can easily look it up, but in your own words, I'll start with you, Andrew. How would you like, is it, we know it's like a thriller. How, what are the words you would use? Sexual thriller, noir. What would you say? I would say that this is, I think this does fall into a noir, but it's like a specific kind of noir. I would classify this as like, almost like sleazy noir, if you will, because it's acted over the top. It's like, it's kind of all over the place with its twists and turns, but it also does have a good narrative about sticking with people and not trusting people. And really when you go into this, I don't think I ever imagined what this movie was actually about going into it the first time because of the way it's set up. So I would call it like a sleazy noir movie. Yeah, I like that. How about you, Jeff?   It's kind of like, because it's not really a, I mean, it's a thriller, but it's not a who done it, but kind of a who done it. Right. You know, and I remember, you know, I was gonna tell you when I saw the, remember the trailer, well, hold up, so hold up. I have my Wild Things tickets done right here. Oh my God, love it. Oh my gosh. I love it. Who did you go with? Do you remember? You know, I was racking my brain. I'm like, who did I go with? Who would I've gone with this movie? And like, I didn't have a girlfriend, right? Maybe, I think it was like these two guy friends and we were like, okay, this is fun. Okay, interesting. Yeah, two guys from high school. Yeah, it's sleazy. I don't remember being so campy when we sat in the theater. And I think we were like, oh, it's Nef Campbell. Oh, it's this new girl from Starship Troopers or something. And then, you know, Matt Dillon. But yeah, I'm gonna go with Andrew's statement. Yeah. Very long, yeah. Yeah, no, I hear that. I feel like I would call this, yeah, you're right. It's not really a thriller. I mean, it's thrilling, but it's sort of like a, it's not really a mystery, is it?  It's not a caper. I don't know, but it's more than just like a, well, it's obviously more than a drama. It's more than a comedy. It's sometimes, sometimes it's meant to be funny. I have to say, Bill Murray is so funny. Even all these years later, he does make me laugh. But, and then times, of course, and it's accidentally funny. And we'll get into that for sure. Welcome to the town of Blue Bay. Hi, Mr. Lombardo. Hi, girls. So where's your house, Mr. Lombardo? Let's rewind, boys. Let's go back to March 1998, March 20th. When this film came out, I'm gonna just briefly set the scene for us, chime in with your thoughts. I'm gonna tell you what was going on in pop culture, and then we are gonna nerd out over our favorite scenes, favorite lines. There are many, I quoted lots of lines in my notes. Okay, on the music side, the top song was getting jiggy with it, which I feel like is appropriate for this movie to come out during that era. Destiny's Child, No, No, No, and Madonna's Frozen were also in the top five songs at the time. On the theater side, since Jeff, I know, oh, look at you with the cocktail. It's St. Patrick's Day, right? Can we say that? It totally is. You're right. I just have seltzer, but I mean. There's rosé in this cup. Oh, good, good, boy. Drink up, drink up. I need champagne to put all over me and you guys. On the theater side, since I know Jeff goes to lots of theater, lots of concerts, guys, it's shocking. He's available tonight. So thank you for being here. But on the theater side, I thought this was cool to say, because this was such an iconic production. On Broadway, the revival of Cabaret, starring Alan Cumming and Natasha Richardson had just opened just a couple of days before this. So that was huge, right? On the TV side, Dawson's Creek was airing its first season. If you haven't heard out there, I do a long, very thorough, very fun episode all about Dawson's Creek that was last month. Here's some other shows that maybe you guys know, some of them, they all like really spoke to me. So anyone familiar with Bug Juice on the Disney channel? That was kind of fun, a camp reality show? Anything? I'm gonna say no. Okay. How about you, Andrew? Anything? I was definitely more of a Nickelodeon person growing up than a Disney channel, but that name sounds super familiar. Yeah, Bug Juice was, I believe it was a camp either in New Hampshire or Maine, and it was super fun. It was a short show, but I'm sure it's online somewhere. That had just premiered. What else premiered? On ABC, TGIF, two guys, a girl and a pizza place with Ryan Reynolds, back before he was like super chiseled. That had just premiered. Oh my God, get this, the MTV famous, world famous, docu-series, True Life was about to premiere right after this. It was late March that premiered. And then the Teletubbies were about to premiere on PBS. So there you go. A little bit of something for everyone at this time. You know, two guys, a girl and a pizza place has one of the best Halloween episodes of all time, if you can find it. Yeah, it's very good. Wow, Andrew, you know you're two guys, a girl and a pizza place. Yeah, I was obsessed with that show. Were you? I remember watching it. I loved TGIF back in the day, but I have no memory whatsoever. I just remembered Ryan Reynolds was in that. No memory whatsoever. So okay, the Halloween episode. Good to know, gotta find it. And then last thing is popular movies other than Wild Things. Titanic was still number one. It was, I think this was week 14, it was in theaters. I mean, isn't it crazy? Like, no movie could do that now. Can you imagine any movie being number one in theaters for that long? I think it's pretty much impossible now. People are just interested in things and attention is fleeting and, right? Yeah, it's, I've mentioned this before on our show, but like it is kind of incredible how fast movies come to home theaters now. I mean, I remember when I was a kid, you waited a good six, eight months for a movie to go to VHS. And like, it's just, it's so different now. And a full year, I remember to HBO. Remember, you had to wait like a full year now, it's shorter. What were you gonna say, Jeff? Yeah, no, I mean, I saw Cocaine Bear, which if you haven't seen it, it is spectacular. And also it's available on your TV. Like it came out two weeks ago. Like it's already on Apple. You can rent it for, I think you can buy it for $25 or rent it for 20 or something like that. Right. Other popular movies, The Man in the Iron Mask, also starring Leo, the star of early 1998. Primary colors, hush, such a guilty pleasure with Jessica Lange and Good at the House House. Can we talk about that for a minute? We just watched it recently and I was like, oh my God. Like, what is going on in this movie? Like what, there's like, no, like nothing. I mean, something happens, but like nothing happens at the same time, right? And then it just ends. And Gwyneth and Jessica and Jonathan, Shaq, is that how you say his last name? Shaq, Shaq. Yeah, wow, I just remember that being, so even as a kid watching it for the first time, I was like, this I know already is just such a guilty pleasure. Like you just know from the get go like, okay, this is like pretty low level. She got chewed that scenery up, right? Oh my God, so much chewing. And then The Wedding Singer, that was another popular movie. I just talked about that in my last episode. So that was a big rom-com at this time, but in comes wild things. Where innocence can seduce. He started rubbing my shoulders. Accusations can destroy. I'm innocent.  When was this if Sam Lombardo gave you the ride? Did Sam Lombardo rape you? Yeah, okay, he did. He pushed me to the floor. I wanna hear, Jeff, I'll go with you first since you were talking about your movie ticket, Stubb.  Yeah, it says March 23rd, March 24th, and I went to a matinee. So then during the, must have been a weekend because I did not cut school for this. Okay. The ticket was $4.25, $4.25 set. So now- Interesting. So I wonder if March 20th was a Friday because if so, then 21, 22, 23, then the 24th would have been a Tuesday and a matinee on a Tuesday. Maybe it was spring break. Ooh, maybe. It is sort of a spring break movie. I just realized that. Yeah, pretty good. Maybe. I don't know, it's just- Wow. That's so funny. So you were in high school. Yeah, that was my senior year of high school. Oh, how iconic. How about you, Andrew? When did you first see this movie? I remember that I blind bought this on VHS from like the, I don't know what it was, probably like a Meyer or like a, you know, a Best Buy or a Suncoast or something.  Everyone's in love with Nev Campbell. You know, Denise Richards is like fresh on the scene. Everyone's in love with Denise Richards. And so I was like, you know what? I'm just gonna buy it.  Especially at Suncoast. I loved Suncoast and my mall back home, but oh my God, it was very easy to blow a lot of money on like just a couple of movies. Yes. Wow. Okay, good. So you blind bought it. I love that. You just went for the VHS. You saw the girls staring at you. That poster is iconic, right? They're slicking their hair. I mean, Nev looks down right kind of scary. She's so dark.  Oh, love it. Mark, I want to say, I think I had that as a screen saver. Like a screen background on my computer because it was, it was so like sexy and sultry and it's just like, you know, dirty. And yeah, it's so smutty and dirty, but sexy and like intriguing. And I think they're all just so committed like on the poster and also in the film, they're all just giving you looks and they're just serving the smolders.  I forget when I first saw this movie. It wasn't in theaters, unfortunately. Although I definitely saw Scream 2 in theaters a couple of times. But I think this was probably like a pay per view like rental on TV. Once it, you know, probably later in 98 fell in love with it. I agree with you, Andrew. I was, they had me hooked on Neve Campbell. I remember playing the trailer a lot on my old computer. It was very pixelated. The sound was tinny. And I was like, ooh, Blue Bay and like Neve with this red hair. And do you guys remember when Scream 1, Scream, the first one won the MTV Movie Award in the summer of 97, Neve was there with her Susie look. She had the red hair and the, like so she was starting the promotion early. And I remember I was like, why does she look like that? What the heck? And then in comes Wild Things. So yeah, I just remember jaw dropped. So crazy. So I'm going to sound like an absolute fool, guys, but I'm going to just tell you this. So I love Neve Campbell so much, still do. She's not in Scream 6, we know, but at least we're talking about her here in Wild Things. Scream 6 is pretty good, by the way, if you haven't seen it. I saw it, I specifically did not go opening weekend to support Neve. I went on a weeknight and it is, it's worth it. But I loved Neve Campbell at this time so much that I want to say maybe a year or two later, after seeing this movie a bunch of times, I had an audition in New York for, I want to say it was As The World Turns, one of the soaps. And the role of this boy was in a courtroom and he was like a witness to something. And I loved this movie so much that I'm like, I'm just going to act just like Neve Campbell does in Wild Things. I don't know what had nothing to do with the character.  I sat like her in the chair with my leg up, my knee up, and I was like really kind of hunching over and like very kind of like nervous and like totally wrong for the character. I did it the first time and I remember the casting director said, okay, put your leg down, right? Remember, you're in a courtroom. And I'm like, and I think I might have said, I was like, well, Neve Campbell has her leg up in Wild Things. And they're like, all right. And like, you want to change your posture, right? Don't hunch over. I'm like, and I just remember I was annoyed. I was like, no, no, that's not how you do it in a courtroom, right? Mark, you must have still been picking your fingers too, right? Yes, yes, I love that she's doing that. She's hunched and she's like, and I was very quiet. I remember she said, you can speak up. And I'm like, no, you don't get it. You don't know courtroom, okay? So that's how much I love this movie. So a little nerdy- Oh my gosh, that's wonderful. Right? Appearances can deceive. Kelly said that we should do this to hurt Mr. Lombardo. She found out that Mr. Lombardo was in love with her mom, and that was it. Scuse me! So let me introduce just our main players. We can talk about them. So starts with the script, right? Writer Steven Peters. He had written some smaller, more obscure things. This was really big for him. He wrote a film called Dead Center. Now, I'm sure you guys saw. The script was a little different. Not too much different, apparently. The director, John McNaughton did say that they pretty much stuck exactly to his script, but they brought in another writer to just fix some dialogue. But there was apparently a gay scene that we didn't get. How do you guys feel about the lack of a gay scene? Are you okay with it? Or do you really wish we got it? Cause I think I would have liked to have seen it. What do you think, Jeff? Yeah, I mean, we had the threesome, right? We had the lesbian, the bisexual threesome. I think that was good. I don't know if we did an extra man on man. I mean, now maybe, but not then. Yeah, well, the financiers apparently just were like, that's way too far. And apparently Matt Dillon was glad that it was not included. But Kevin Bacon, who also produced this film, really liked the idea and wanted to do it. And I say, thank you, Kevin. I am on your side. What about you, Andrew? Are you cool with it not being in there? Or do you wish it like that other twist was in there? You know, I'm good with it not being in there because too many people are already falling in love with Matt Dillon in this movie. Like literally everyone is falling at the heels of Matt Dillon. And to have another person, it's kind of like, yeah, we get it. Like he's a good looking guy, but it's not, it's not this. Is there no other attractive people in South Florida? Like what's happening? In Blue Bay, in Blue Bay, yes. Oh, I love that Blue Bay. It also sounds like, because later in the year was Disturbing Behavior, which I feel like is this movie's like cousin. And Disturbing Behavior was set in like another bay, not in Florida, but somewhere else. But I just want to like get all the Bay movies together. Yeah, Antonio Bay with the fog. Yes, the fog, yes, exactly, yes. Mark is talking about in Bodega Bay. Yes, I was going to say, Jeff, yeah, Jeff is going to be on my other episode. We're not going to do it tonight because I haven't rewatched it. Maybe next week we'll talk about the birds, another bay, another animal movie from Alligators and Crocodiles to Birds. But what was I saying? Yeah, you know, you bring up a good point, Andrew, that you're so right. Everyone is so, from the get-go, everyone is so obsessed with Sam Lombardo, that you're right. I do actually kind of like that. Like can someone not be attracted to him? Because even Perez, Daphne Rubin-Veva, I forgot that camera zooms in, they are about to kiss. And you know, the horn honks, but like everyone's obsessed with him. That yeah, maybe it's actually kind of nice that at least Duquette, you know, can control himself. Like he's just a guidance counselor. What's the sexual desire here? I don't understand. He has a pension, you know? It's like, ooh, so sexy, you know? It's like- I don't know, guys. It's working for me. He is so good looking. Oh, in this movie? Yeah, yeah. I mean, even though it's like a couple of years after to die for, he was doing something right. Oh my God, things were working. Although, and we'll get to it, his face during the three-way scene is a little goofy. He's doing like an Elvis-like thing. And I'm like, okay, all right. Cool, you know, but no, everything else is working real well for me personally. Those T-shirts fit nicely. And everyone does, everyone looks good. So okay, so that's Steven Peters, the director, John McNaughton. This was kind of random. Maybe you guys saw this too. He had, you know, directed some TV, I think, homicide and, you know, different things. But he was up until this point and still beyond, most well-known for directing Henry, portrait of a serial killer. Huh, yeah, right? So pretty extreme. And then, you know, pretty cool to have that. And then this, I mean, the guy just goes for it. And then let's go through our lead actors. We'll just go through the main four. Our actor and executive producer, Kevin Bacon. He described the script as the trashiest thing he had ever read. But every few pages, there was another surprise. He was hooked. He knew he had to do it. He was just in Sleepers, which I do like. That's a pretty heavy drama and picture perfect. I think that was with Jennifer Aniston the year before. Yes, yeah. Actor Matt Dillon was just in In-N-Out, which I've talked about on the show. Love In-N-Out, where he's blonde. And also Albino Alligator, which I never saw, but I remember seeing the big poster of the video store and just loving that title. Albino Alligator, right? And fun fact, I was looking up everyone's ages. Cause Matt Dillon to me, I think it's just that thing where when you first see a movie, that person is just always older than you. But Matt Dillon was only like 33 or 34. And he seemed so much older to me. I don't know, does he seem older than that to you guys or no? Yeah, I'm just like- Yeah, I feel what that feels about right. You know what I mean? I don't know. It's weird now, but I'm like, I'm older than he was in this movie. I don't look like that. I don't look like- What? You know? He's already kind of got that in a good way. Like the dad bod kind of going, like he's such a man that I'm like, dang, I don't- He gets the voice. He's got the- Yeah.  Like he's kind of been through it. Right, right. Rugged. Right, a little rugged for sure. Then we have Neve Campbell, our girl, as we know she had just come off screen too. She was currently still in party of five. Season four was airing. So she was the it girl. I mean, God, I love her. Actor Denise Richards. Wow, what a splash. Literally in that bathing suit. Oh my God. I like your stroke. Oh my God. Oh my God. She, like we said, had just done Starship Troopers, which I also love. That was a big, big thing. So she was kind of newer-ish on the scene and becoming quite a star. And I was looking up her age. It's funny. She was like 26 or 27. Neve was about 23, 24. And then yeah, Kevin Bacon was older. He was 39. So it's just interesting to- I'm always curious like how old people are when they're playing high school. Cause Denise, I mean, not that 27's old, of course. But she looked, you know, but she looked younger. I think she kind of looked the part. I don't know. What do you guys think? She didn't look too old. Yeah, she looked. Yeah. Yeah, like how kids, how people do in movies, right? Like 10 years older than teenage, right? Yeah. Yeah, very, very soapy. Well, and they definitely like, they definitely like dress her in a certain way too, to make her feel younger. Like you mentioned like the little lace socks and the like buckle shoes. And like, when we were looking at this, I also looked up their ages. I was like, I actually thought she was younger in this movie. If anything, I would have swapped the ages. I would have thought that Denise would have been 24 and Neve would have been 27. Yeah. Yeah. I know it's funny. Neve always, even in scream, like she always looks like so good and so young, but just there's like such a wisdom on her face or something that makes her seem older than that. But yeah, yeah. And you know, something I forgot, those are our four leads, but in the opening and closing credits, Teresa Russell, who is acting for the God's honey, she is in between Neve and Denise. Poor Denise, who is giving a lot of action here. She is fifth on the list. I thought that was interesting. I think this was maybe before Denise had, you know, her and her agent had the power to, you know, get her up there. I just thought that was kind of weird. What was, I know, I know Teresa, I used to, well, Teresa Russell for me used to be on, what, like the late night, like soft core adult movies on HBO. So like last, not last seduction, but like things like that. And I'm like, I remember being in theater, I'm like, good for her, you know? I'm like, finally getting in an A-list movie. Like, you know, we've seen in her movies three hundred times. And now, you know, maybe we'll see them tonight. And I think, yeah, we do see them. We actually do. Yeah, we, she gets her own sex scene early in the film. She's shown it off before the younger kids do for sure. Yeah, she is. I so badly want to see, and I feel like I told Tariq this, Jeff, a long time ago. I need to see a live version of this film. Maybe it can be a musical. I don't care. It can be downtown somewhere. I need to see wild things live. And I need the mom, especially to be played by a drag performer. I just need, right? I just need, she is so over the top from the get go.  I think she's in her underwear or a bikini or something like, oh, is that Sam Lombardo, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, you know, they did that for showgirls. They, like, about 10 years ago, they had a, like, the musical parody of showgirls playing down on 42nd Street. And it was the best thing ever. I mean, I feel like they could do that same thing with wine. Oh my God, absolutely. Yeah, because showgirls and wild things are related for sure. For sure. I think you could even do the top, the three main girls. So the mom, Nev, and Denise, Ella's drag, as drag stars. Yes, thank you, Andrew. Yes, absolutely. That's what I wanted to say, but I didn't want to go overboard, but thank you. Thanks so much for watching. Next week, we'll be part two of this discussion. And in the meantime, please follow Release Date Rewind on Instagram.