Groundhog Day (film)

Groundhog Day
Groundhog Day
Directed by	Harold Ramis
Written by	Danny Rubin (story) Danny Rubin and Harold Ramis (screenplay)
Produced by	Trevor Albert Harold Ramis
Starring	Bill Murray, Andie MacDowell, Chris Elliott, Stephen Tobolowsky, Brian Doyle-Murray
Cinematography	John Bailey
Music by	George Fenton
Distributed by	Columbia Pictures
Release dates	February 12, 1993
Running time	101 min.
Country	United States
Language	English
Budget	$14,600,000

Groundhog Day is a 1993 comedy film directed by Harold Ramis, starring Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell. It was written by Danny Rubin and Harold Ramis and based on a story by Rubin.

In the film, Murray plays Phil Connors, an egocentric Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania TV weatherman who, during a hated assignment covering the annual Groundhog Day event (February 2) in Punxsutawney, finds himself repeating the same day over and over again. After indulging in all manner of hedonistic pursuits, he begins to reexamine his life and priorities.

In 2006, Groundhog Day was added to the United States National Film Registry as being deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant." It is listed as the 186th best movie of all time at the Internet Movie Database as of January 2007.

Plot

TV meteorologist Phil Connors, his producer Rita, and cameraman Larry from the fictional Pittsburgh television station WPBH-TV travel to Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania (which, in real life, as in the movie, holds a major celebration for Groundhog Day) to cover the annual festivities with Punxsutawney Phil.

After the celebration concludes, a blizzard develops that Connors had predicted would miss them, closing the roads and shutting down long-distance phone service, forcing him to spend an extra day in Punxsutawney. Connors awakens the next morning, however, to find it is again February 2, and the day unfolds in exactly the same way, over and over again. For Connors, Groundhog Day begins each morning at 6:00 A.M., with his waking up to the same song, Sonny & Cher's "I Got You Babe", on his alarm clock radio, but with his (and only his) memories of the "previous" day intact, trapped in a seemingly endless "time loop" to repeat the same day in the same small town.

After briefly trying to rationalize his situation, and then thinking he is insane, Connors takes advantage of learning the day's events and the information he is able to gather about the town's inhabitants, and that his actions have no long-term consequences. He revels in this situation for a time: seducing beautiful women, stealing money, even driving drunk and experiencing a police chase. However, his attempts to seduce his producer, Rita, are met with repeated failure. He begins to tire of, and then dread, his existence. In a vain attempt to break the cycle, he kidnaps Phil the Groundhog. After a police pursuit, both man and rodent die in a fiery explosion; but the loop does not stop. He commits suicide several more times — he electrocutes himself and falls from a tall building (other attempts are alluded to) — but mere death cannot stop the day from repeating. After he dies, he simply wakes up listening to Sonny & Cher in the same bed again.

He initially tries to seduce Rita by learning as much as he can on a daily basis. He succeeds to an extent. He finally manages to seduce her in a more sincere fashion. He tells her of his circumstances - how he is reliving the day over and over again - and somewhat surprisingly manages to convince her.

He opens his heart to Rita, and her advice helps him to gradually find a goal for his trapped life: as a benefactor to others. He cannot, in a single day, bring others to fulfill his needs but he can achieve self-improvement by educating himself on a daily basis. After seeing an elderly homeless man die, Phil vows that no one will die on "his" day and performs many heroic services each and every day, including performing the Heimlich Maneuver on a choking man and saving a little boy who falls from a tree. He however becomes despondent for being unable to save the homeless man, despite trying to get him medical care. A hospital nurse tries to console him when he wishes to learn the cause of the mans death, saying "it was just his time." Though the film does not specify the number of repetitions, there is enough time for Connors to learn to play jazz piano, speak some French, sculpt ice, and memorize the life story of almost everyone in town. He also masters the art of flipping playing cards into an upturned hat, which he offhandedly suggests takes six months (director Ramis has stated Phil repeats the day for about 10 years, noting that it would take that long to become as proficient on the piano as Connors does from daily lessons, though the original script had February 2 repeating for ten thousand years.)

Eventually, Connors enhances his own human understanding which, in return, makes him an appreciated and beloved man in the town. Finally, after professing a true love to Rita, one which she is able to accept, he wakes up on February 3 — though again to "I Got You Babe." Yet it is a new day, with Rita beside him on the bed. Phil suggests to Rita that they live in Punxsutawney, though he suggests (in an improvised line) "We'll rent to start." The closing song is "Almost Like Being in Love" from Brigadoon, a musical which also dealt with a village trapped in time.

Cast

• Bill Murray - Phil Connors
• Andie MacDowell - Rita
• Chris Elliott - Larry
• Stephen Tobolowsky - Ned Ryerson
• Brian Doyle-Murray - Buster Green
• Rick Ducommun - Gus
• Rick Overton - Ralph
• Robin Duke - Doris, the Waitress
• Marita Geraghty - Nancy Taylor
• Angela Paton - Mrs. Lancaster
• David Pasquesi - Psychiatrist
• Harold Ramis - Neurologist

Development of the movie

"Ned's Corner" commemorative plaque, Woodstock Illinois

According to the director's commentaries from the DVD, there are several differences between the original script for Groundhog Day, as written by Danny Rubin, and the film as it was actually released, due to changes made by the film's director, Harold Ramis. In the original script the film began in the middle of the narrative, without explaining how or why Phil was repeating Groundhog Day. However the filmmakers became concerned that the audience would feel cheated without seeing Phil's growing realization of the nature of the time loop. Rubin had also originally envisioned Andie MacDowell's Rita reliving Groundhog Day with Phil and wished to portray the pair as being stuck in the time loop for far longer than in the final film, possibly for thousands of years (Phil tracked time by reading a page of a book each day and had managed to read through the entire public library). Consequently, the love story was less developed in the original script than in the final movie.

There was also a second draft script, which gave an explicit reason for the time loop — a voodoo spell cast by a woman who worked at the television station and was involved with Phil before he rejected her — that did not appear in the final film.

The location for most of the shooting of the film was not actually Punxsutawney but rather Woodstock, Illinois (only a short drive from Murray's hometown of Wilmette). The inhabitants of Woodstock helped in the film's production by bringing out heaters to warm the cast and crew in cold weather. In Punxsutawney, the actual Gobbler's Knob is located in a rural area about 2 miles (3 km) east of town. However, the location used in Woodstock gives the impression that the Knob is inside the town. The Tip Top Cafe in Woodstock, where much of the film takes place, was originally a set created for the film, but local demand led to its opening as a real cafe. It eventually closed down, but a "Tip Top Bistro" has taken its place.

Some of the film was also shot in nearby Indiana, Pennsylvania, with aerial shots also being filmed in Pittsburgh. An aerial view of the WPBH van shows the buildings for the Pittsburgh Press and Post-Gazette newspapers, as well as Gateway Center, the home of KDKA TV and Radio.

Reception

Groundhog Day was a solid performer in its initial release, grossing $70.9M in North America and ranking 13th among films released in 1993 , but did not achieve blockbuster status. It found a second life on home video and cable, entrenching itself as one of the great American films of the late twentieth century. The film is number thirty-four on the American Film Institute's list of 100 Funniest Movies, and Roger Ebert has revisited it in his "Great Movies" series.

This film is number 32 on Bravo's "100 Funniest Movies". In Total Film's 1990s special issue, Groundhog Day was deemed the best film of 1993. In 2000, readers of Total Film magazine voted it the seventh greatest comedy film of all time. The Writers Guild of America ranked the screenplay #27 on their list of 101 Greatest Screenplays ever written. National Review magazine featured the movie on its cover on February 14, 2005. It maintains a 94% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

"GROUNDHOG DAY LITIGATION POST-SETTLEMENT LAWSUIT- TERRORIST EXTORTION SCAM" by Helen Lerner, M.D. 1-5-08

  The term "Groundhog Day Litigation Post-settlement Lawsuit-Terrorist Extortion Scam ” was coined by Helen Lerner, M.D. 
   In the "Groundhog Day" movie starring Bill Murray, the character is repeatedly forced to re-live the same nightmarish day. Similarly, the term"Groundhog Day Litigation" refers to a real-life legal nightmare in which a party is forced over and over again to re-litigate the same case they already settled.
   In contrast to the way the mass media presents Court settlements, cases do not necessarily end when the parties formally agree to settle. The media creates the false assumption that settling a case ends the ordeal for a defendant.
    So most people presume in error that a Court-adjudicated settlement guarantees an end to the lawsuit and frees a party from further worry and expense.   
    However, certain "lawsuit terrorists" have developed a post-settlement extortion scam against their victim. Even after such a lawsuit terrorist agrees and accepts financial settlement payment from their victim in a Court-adjudicated proceeding, they continue to misuse the Court system thorugh a variety of filings. Such post-settlement filings include appeals and even re-titled lawsuits on the same issues that they already had settled.  The lawsuit terrorist files more lawsuit papers to harass the victim with the hope of extorting additional money.

The hapless defendant is forced into this Groundhog Day legal nightmare with the enabling complicity of the Courts. Most Courts will not protect any targeted victim from this post-settlement extortion racket. They will not block such a lawsuit terrorist from improperly continuing to file and re-file hundreds of papers on any settled case, indefinitely. Nor will the Courts necessarily ever sanction such a lawsuit terrorist.

Every such improper filing forces the victim to take action to respond in legal format and under a strict Court deadline. Every such compelled action incurs time and expense for the victim. If the victim does not answer such improper post-settlement filings, they are subject to a mistaken default judgment, with a sheriff confiscating their property. 
   A notable exception to the usual absence of Court oversight and protection of adjudicated settlements is the legislation enacted by North Carolina.   In North Carolina, those litigants whom the state identifies as continually abusing the Court system with excessive, repetitious improper filings must first submit any proposed filings to a specific assigned Magistrate Judge familiar with the case. This Magistrate makes a Preliminary evaluation of the filing BEFORE they allow the filing to be accepted by any Prothonotary office. (See North Carolina Court of Appeals, NO. COA01-1231, Filed: 6 August 2002, Elsie M. Lee v. Richard O'Brien and Wife, Hazel O'Brien, Wake County, N.C., No. 00 CVD 2269. http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/2002/unpub/0112311.htm).     This approach ensures access to the Courts for such people but prevents them from continuing to misuse the system to terrorize their victims. This policy also protects all parties involved in litigation, including those who settle matters in good faith, and who reasonably expect the Courts to enforce the settlement and end costly litigation.             
 In states without such protective legislation, the Groundhog Day post-settlement extortion is possible due to four flaws in the Court system:    a) The Prothonotary offices of most United States Court systems, including those of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,  indiscriminately accept all filings without any pre-screening whatsoever, even those that illegally violate a Court-adjudicated and approved settlement. This practice allows anyone to re-file redundant, meritless papers even after settling a case. 

b.) The Prothonotary offices operate under the premise that all citizens must have open and equal access to the Courts. However, Prothonotary departments have a perverse financial incentive to accept all filings, even repeated improper post-settlement filings. All filings require fees, which initially constitute a huge revenue stream to the city and state.. Therefore, the Prothonotary fiefdom and other officials may not want to stop any lawsuit terrorist since the city and state make significant revenues from these improper filings. (A recent Freedom of Information Act report requested from the Pennsylvania Auditor General revealed that Pennsylvania Prothonotary filings are a source of millions of dollars in revenue. Thus, this extra revenue may be why they accept these improper filings.)

However, any lawsuit terrorists' sometime frameseds of post-settlement filings end up costing city, state and thus taxpayers far more than they receive from initial filing fee revenues.  This happens because each redundant case entails sizeable Court operating and administrative costs. These Court costs far out-pace any initial filing fee revenues. Further, these excessive filings cause a significant burden upon the precious resources of the Court.   

c) There are huge expenses required to defend against any filed case, including post-settlement filings.. d.) Typically, due to a backlogged Court schedule, it can take years before a Judge addresses such a case. It is true that a Judge eventually dismisses the accumulation of this slew of repetitious and improper post-settlement filings. The Judge usually rules that the settlement violator had long since lost any further legal rights in the case after accepting settlement. Until this dismissal ruling, the defendant-victim is forced to respond within often exceedingly short time frames. Every response to a post-settlement filing must be in the form of a formal Court-specified pleading, not, for example, a simple letter of protest to the Judge. Any failure to meet such deadlines or format requirements can easily precipitate a default judgment in favor of the lawsuit terrorist, by a newly assigned Judge unfamiliar with the previously settled case.

However, each eventual post-settlement judicial decision that re-affirms the prior settlement and rules against the lawsuit terrorist, is irrelevant to such an unscrupulous individual. The lawsuit terrorist does not seek to win a Court case. Instead, they seek to extend the already settled litigation with their repeated cycles of new filings, and embroil the victim in the Groundhog Day extortion scam all over again. In this scam, the lawsuit terrorist can file pro se (without a lawyer and the associated lawyer fees.) Although there is nothing inherently wrong in filing pro se, such a lawsuit terrorist then avoids exposure to sanctions the Court might issue against a lawyer for such improper post-settlement Court filings. Thus, that lawsuit terrorist can afford to avalanche his victim with Court filings, and the Court does nothing to stop him.   
         In contrast, the harassed victim has to pay huge legal fees that can bankrupt them and completely disrupt their life.  This situation can be so oppressive that the victim may agree to pay the lawsuit terrorist more extortion settlement payments to stop the terrorist's actions. The victim may do so in a desperate attempt to end the costly litigation. 
    To an uninitiated outsider it may seem obvious that such payments only encourage the perpetrator. However, the only apparent alternative for the victim is more extensive litigation costs. Aggrieved parties can file costly post-settlement Motions against the settlement violator with quashes, temporary restraining orders, protective orders, Court sanctions for contempt of Court, and injunctive relief and fines. Each of these Motions cost additional post-settlement time and money to file. In addition, unfortunately, each of these Motions also provide another opportunity for the lawsuit terrorist to respond and object, and thereby further extend and complicate litigation which had already been formally settled.
   For example, since a "Quash" Motion can be used as an answer to any and all Court filing, the settlement violator can file an unending ping-pong series of these Quashes.  Since Preliminary Objections can be made to Preliminary Objections, the settlement violator can also misuse Preliminary Objections and other types of filings as piggybacked vehicles for additional endless bombardment. The victim is involuntarily drawn in to the legal ping-pong series since they are required to answer all filings in correct and costly legal format and under a time deadline.  Also, Courts will not necessarily ever rule on such additional and increasingly costly Motions. The overburdened Courts may have a perverse incentive to remain uninvolved, apparently hoping the targeted victim will collapse and give in to the lawsuit terrorist's demands.   In addition, even if the Courts were ever to indeed eventually rule, this apparent relief would arrive only  after the victim had already suffered extensive financial and personal burdens. Also, the lawsuit terrorist would still be free to then file endless appeals through many (at least three if not) more levels of the Court system. In each level of appeal, the lawsuit terrorist can generate hundreds more filings.  
 The irony is that this flaw, in effect, makes the Prothonotary offices and the Court system apparent accomplices to lawsuit terrorists who violate Court-adjudicated and approved settlements as an extortion scam. There is presently no process in place to stop this particular abuse of the Court system, at least not in the state of Pennsylvania.   A strong argument can be made that these lawsuit terrorists are committing the crime of  Barratry (see 18 Pa. C.S. 5109). According to Black's law dictionary, "A person is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third-degree if he vexes others with unjust and vexatious suits. Barratry is the offense of frequently exciting and stirring up quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise. Repeated such actions can warrant jail time.(See State v. Batson, 220 N.C. 411.17 S.E. 2d 511,512,513.)" 
    Apparently, neither Courts nor law enforcement agencies, such as the city District Attorney’s office nor the State Attorney General, have responded to complaints and charged lawsuit terrorists with this crime. That is why such such unethical persons can abuse the Court system to extort their targeted victim with impunity. 
      Some Court officials glibly suggest that this specific abuse of the Courts can be solved by the victim either counter-suing the perpetrator or filing a Motion for contempt of Court against the lawsuit terrorist. However, they are well-aware that such proposed actions are either not appropriate or not feasible solutions in most cases for the following three reasons: 

First, the legal burden is then placed on the aggrieved individual to personally seek redress. The victim of the lawsuit terrorist should not be forced to re-litigate a Court-adjudicated and settled case. The whole point of an adjudicated settlement was to rely on Court supervision to end the huge legal bills and hardships of a lawsuit. Therefore, the victim should reasonably expect that when a party violates a Court-adjudicated settlement with illegal filings, the Court will not accept such filings. The criminal justice system should intervene to deal with such post-settlement extortion scams.

Second, many of those who perpetrate this scam actually anticipate the possibility of a countersuit. They protect themselves by becoming "judgment-proof". They do this under the questionable guise of an "In Forma Pauperis" Court petition, thereby claiming to have no money and therefore to be "judgment proof."  
Third, as noted earlier, because these lawsuit terrorists usually file Court papers themselves pro se (without a lawyer) and as so-called paupers, they bypass both filing fees (at taxpayer expense) and the cost of daunting attorney fees. They also avoid the sanctions that Courts might impose on lawyers if they were to file papers that violated a Court settlement.    
      In recent years, the state of Pennsylvania, in the United States, has clearly recognized and tried to grapple with the burgeoning issue of frivolous lawsuits. The State enacted Dragonetti-type statutes for "malicious prosecution" or "abuse of civil proceedings." One might think such statutes would be a possible solution to deliberate violations of Court settlements. Unfortunately, such well-meaning statutes can not be applied to, and do not stop the extortion-minded individuals described above, for the following reasons: 
    First, the Dragonetti-type statutes allow a countersuit for malicious prosecution only to someone who has won the prior case. However, in most civil lawsuits (including this type of extortion lawsuit), the parties settle. By the very nature of settling a case, no party "prevails" (or wins). Therefore, these Dragonetti-type statutes which always require that a party "prevail" cannot be used in most cases. 
    Second, as explained above, the extortionist does not care about a countersuit for "misuse of civil procedure" or "malicious prosecution." This is because a strategic element of their racket is that they file pro se, and thereby incur no detrimental lawyer fees in such a counter-suit. Also, another part of their racket is their claim of being "judgment-proof", Therefore, the victim while sustaining huge legal fees to bring such a countersuit, could never recover monetary damages in such a counter-suit, even if such a favorable ruling was ever made.  
   In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, there are several unscrupulous individuals who operate this type of scam. One is known by local Court and Philadelphia City Hall officials as a "lawsuit terrorist" and "Mr. Wrongful Use of Civil Procedure, Himself." For four years now, this person has made hundreds of Orphans' Court-adjudicated, post-settlement-violating filings. These filings are estimated to have cost the State over a million dollars. This person can keep improperly suing his victim until the day he or his victim dies. Note that he does so entirely at taxpayer expense since as a supposed "pauper" he pays no filing fees, and the significant Court administrative costs are bourne by taxpayers.  Like other lawsuit terrorists, he gets away with doing so simply because the Courts don't stop him. 
Repetitious Court filings on an already settled case threaten the legitimacy of all settlements, and the underpinnings of the entire Civil Court system. In Pennsylvania, there is currently an initiative to introduce legislation to correct this current flawed Court Prothonotary procedure, following the model already enacted in North Carolina and other states. Concerned citizens continue to contact relevant officials. Such officials include their State Senators;  the Chairman of the Civil Procedure Rules Committee, Honorable R. Stanton Wettick, Jr.,[ at 5035 Ritter Road, Suite 700, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-795-2110, e-mail:civil.rules@pacourts.us]  as well as counsel to the Civil Rules Committee, Harold K. Don, Jr., Esq. at the same address and e-mail.   Citizens also contact  Steve Crawford, Secretary of Legislative Affairs, Governor's Office Executive Staff, [ at  238 Main Capitol Building, (717)772-3820, e-mail c/o Anne Wonsettler, executive assistant, awonsettle@state.pa.us  ]
Meanwhile, to be fair and informative, in all Court-adjudicated and approved settled cases, authorities should mandate and provide an official Disclaimer to all litigants, such as the template as proposed below by Helen B. Lerner, M.D. In the spirit of full and honest disclosure, this Disclaimer would confer several benefits: a.) It would at least forewarn parties who seek refuge in settlement as to potential future risks. These risks include the bitter reality that the Court will not protect the settlement if a rogue litigant re-files on the same case to further harass victims to try to extort further shakedown payments b) The routine attachment of such a Court Disclaimer to every Court-adjudicated and approved settlement would also protect and avert possible liability to city and state officials for individual and class-action lawsuits by aggrieved victims for failing to uphold Court-adjudicated and approved settlements. Such officials include Prothonotary officers and Judges, as well as city and state officials who are charged with supervising the Courts.        

APPENDIX — SUGGESTED (ONLY SOMEWHAT FACETIOUSLY) DISCLAIMER TO ALL LITIGANTS REGARDING COURT-ADJUDICATED AND APPROVED SETTLEMENTS:

• We, the Court are delighted and relieved that you were persuaded, however reluctantly, to accept this settlement. By doing so, you will measurably relieve our heavy workload and the unwieldy and backlogged Court docket of cases under which we Court officials labor.
• In submitting to your settlement, you should be aware that you have sacrificed your constitutional right to have a trial.
• We, the Court, however, will NOT be responsible for, nor provide any judicial oversight to prevent any future filings against you by your opponent that violate this settlement despite such settlement having been formally adjudicated and approved by this Court.
• Specifically, we, the Court, will NOT necessarily impose any sanctions, fines, disciplinary, or other punitive measures against a litigant who violates this settlement which we adjudicated.
• We, the Court acknowledge that you have may been driven to accept these settlement terms, regardless of merit. We recognize that even if you think the settlement terms were unfair, you nevertheless agreed to it in order to end the case. You may have done so only to avoid added costly lawyer fees, stop the waste of time, and end the oppressive harassment of a continued lawsuit. However, even if your opposing party subsequently violates the settlement with more improper filings, we will NOT necessarily compel this violator to return any money that you were required to give that party to settle the case-let alone, a return with penalties and interest.
• Even if your settlement agreement formally stipulates that all filings in this case must cease, your opponent will nonetheless be allowed to violate the settlement terms with impunity. Your opponent will be permitted to file papers in various Prothonotary offices; papers that violate this settlement agreement, for the rest of their life or yours.

• The Prothonotary filing office will welcome and accept any filing without any pre-screening, question, review, or cross-checking. Such filings bring in millions of dollars in initial revenues to the Courts, the City and the State, due to the associated lucrative filing fees. (Of course, in the long run the administrative and operational Court costs bourne by the municipality and eventually by taxpayers far outpace such initial filing revenue.) Such unquestioningly accepted filings include those that violate a closed, settled case, including improper appeals. The Prothonotary will even accept those filings from your opponent which improperly re-title the issues of the same case under a different heading.
• The Court will not necessarily rule on any of your Motion filings objecting to any post-settlement violations. Such Motion filings include requests for quashes, temporary restraining orders, protective orders, Court sanctions, and injunctive relief and fines.
• The Court acknowledges that it will almost certainly take years, if ever, before any Judge rules to dismiss any of these improper post-settlement-agreement filing violation(s).
• If your opponent should re-file regarding the core dispositive issues that were supposedly settled, take note that you will be burdened with a repeated de facto lawsuit. This lawsuit will reproduce many of the same torturous conditions that compelled you to settle the original case, such as huge lawyer bills, harassment, emotional trauma, and expenditure of time.

*If you do not answer the improper post-settlement filings of the lawsuit terrorist, for any reason. there may be serious consequences for you. Your reasons may include doing so as an act of protest on your part, or to avoid additional significant post-settlement legal fees and expenditure of time, or because the lawsuit terrorist deliberately does not  properly serve you with notice of their redundant lawsuit. Nonetheless, if you do not answer such filings that violate this settlement, you may be placed in Default Judgment by a Judge unfamiliar with the past history of the case. Consequently, if for whatever reason you do not answer (in proper format and within the  mandated deadline)  you may find your property confiscated for a sheriff's sale.

• If for similar reasons, you do not come to administrative hearings or oral arguments scheduled by Judges unfamiliar with the previous settlement of this case, you may be in danger of being placed in contempt of Court. Penalties for Contempt citations include fines and incarceration.
• Your opponent may choose to violate the settlement, and under the guise of "serving" legitimate papers, repeatedly lurk at your home or place of work and distribute these papers to inappropriate recipients there. Thereby, you can expect further public humiliation and exposure of your private affairs, without recourse.
• If, after we the Court fail to intervene to stop such continued post-settlement harassment, you attempt to obtain a Protection Order, please note that this maneuver will require yet another Court hearing procedure. Your opponent may use this required procedure as an excuse to generate even more filings and appeals against you in that proceeding. They may even initiate a new lengthy lawsuit alleging "Abuse of Process" on your part, regarding your meritorious request for a Protection Order against their post-settlement harassment.
• I,(insert name and signature of party), in addition to the actual Court-adjudicated and approved settlement, also agree to the terms of this Court Disclaimer. I agree to hold harmless the Court, its employees, the City and State and their heirs in perpetuity, for their negligence in failing to protect me and the Court-adjudicated and approved settlement to which I have agreed.

_________ _____________ _________________

Date Signature Notary

Awards

• British Comedy Awards 1993 (Comedy Film)
• Saturn Award for Best Actress (Film) (Andie McDowell, for playing Rita)
• BAFTA - The British Academy Awards - Best Screenplay 1991) (Danny Rubin)

Details from the film

• The poetry Rita quotes to Phil is from the sixth canto of The Lay of the Last Minstrel by Sir Walter Scott, also known as Patriotism. The French poem Phil quotes to Rita is La bourrée du célibataire by Jacques Brel. Translated, he says "The girl I will love / is like a fine wine / that gets better / a little each morning."
• The book Phil is reading as Rita is falling asleep is Poems for Every Mood, edited by Harriet Monroe; the poem he was reading to Rita was Joyce Kilmer's 119. Trees.
• The set construction and theme music for WPBH-TV in the movie were based on those of WTAE-TV, the real-life ABC affiliate in Pittsburgh.
• At the dance, when Ned (Stephen Tobolowsky) asks Phil and Rita "Where are we going?", Rita pinches his cheek and says "Oh, let's not spoil it!". In the DVD commentary, Harold Ramis says the line as originally written in the script was "Let's not ruin it." The word was changed because of Andie McDowell's Gaffney accent distorting the word "ruin".
• The jazz piano piece that Phil plays at the party begins with the 18th variation of Rachmaninoff's Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini
• Phil seeks out piano lessons after hearing the first movement of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Piano Sonata No. 15 in F major, KV 533/494 in the diner
• In the German restaurant there is a poster on which you can read "Herzlichen Glückwunsch zum Eichhörnchentag" ("Congratulations on Squirrel Day"). This is a mistake, because the German word for "groundhog" is "Murmeltier", while "Eichhörnchen" means "squirrel."

See also

• Time loop

Further reading

• Gilbey, Ryan, Groundhog Day, London, British Film Institute, 2004. ISBN 1-84457-032-0

External links

• Groundhog Day at IMDb
• Groundhog Day at Rotten Tomatoes
• Blogus groundhogus: Screenwriter Danny Rubin's website, with interviews and discussion forum/blog about the creation of the movie
• Template:Rogerebert (from 1993-02-12)
• Template:Rogerebert (from 2005-01-30)
• Movie Reviews
• National Review's Jonah Goldberg's Cover Story on Groundhog Day
• Real-life "Groundhog Days" studied
• Script to the movie (Jan 1992)