Problem: Given the question: Given the below context:  The NSWCA were outraged by Lord Harris's letter and convened a special meeting to consider their response and subsequently had their honorary secretary, Mr J.M. Gibson, write to The Daily Telegraph in reply.  Gibson argued that "the misconduct of those who took possession of the wickets has been exaggerated" and that Lord Harris's account was "universally regarded here as both inaccurate and ungenerous." The letter said that "We cannot allow a libel upon the people of New South Wales so utterly unfounded as this to pass without challenge". It went on to accuse Harris of omitting certain facts in his account, which according to the NSWCA, depicted Australia and the cricket authorities in a poor light. These included an accusation that Harris had failed to note that the NSWCA and the media had immediately and strongly condemned the disturbance and treatment of the English visitors. Gibson also criticised Lord Harris for claiming that Coulthard was "competent", while "admitting 'he had made two mistakes in our innings'", especially as Coulthard's not out ruling against Lord Harris "was openly admitted by his lordship to be a mistake" that favoured the Englishmen. The letter further denied the claim that those who incited the riot were associated with the NSWCA and accused Harris of inflammatory conduct during the disorder. Certainly the conduct of Lord Harris did not tend to calm the general excitement. His lordship elbowed his way out through the crowd in a manner so violent as to invite assault. He kept his men 'exposed to the fury of the mob' for about an hour and a half upon the absurd and insulting plea that if he did not 'the other side would claim the match!'. But not one of the team received a scratch, and Mr. Hornby dragged a supposed offender of very diminutive stature through the mass to the pavilion, a hundred yards away, in triumph, and amidst general applause, with only a torn shirt as the penalty of his heroism. Spofforth, Australia's leading bowler, commented on the incident in an 1891 cricket...  Guess a valid title for it!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Sydney Riot of 1879


Problem: Given the question: Given the below context:  Young lawyer Emily Reed travels to New York City for an interview with an international law firm, which immediately offers her a job on the condition that she can fly to Rio de Janeiro the following morning. Emily agrees and is introduced to Claudia Dennis, one of the firm's top executives. They arrive in Rio to finalize the purchase of a hotel, but angry Claudia must fly to Buenos Aires, Argentina, to meet the hotel's owner. Claudia instructs Emily to cover her date for the night. While viewing the hotel, Emily sees two locals having animalistic sex, which unnerves her and she returns to her own hotel. She meets Claudia's date; a wealthy man named James Wheeler. They have dinner, accompanied by James' bodyguards. James intrigues Emily; he is quiet and asks personal questions without being demanding or rude. After dinner, they attend a street carnival; Emily leaves after a masked man who looks like James tries to seduce her. The next morning, Emily wakes to find James watching her. He gives her a bouquet of orchids and denies making advances to her the previous evening, and as an apology, he offers to show her the city. She is initially reluctant but consents; they attend a party with a married couple that they noticed in the restaurant the night before. Some navy sailors at the party try to make advances on the wife; James fights them and he, Emily, and the couple leave quickly in his limousine. The married couple is having marital problems because of the wife's infidelity. She wants to reconcile with her husband. James encourages the couple to have sex in the limo, which they do. Emily finds their actions disturbing. Emily and James then visit the hotel that her firm wants to buy, and she tells James that she fears he would disappear if she touched him. When Emily hugs James, he pulls away from her, telling her that he does not like to be touched.  Guess a valid title for it!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Wild Orchid (film)


Problem: Given the question: Given the below context:  In Texas, a drifter faces the death penalty in just a few days. His only hope is that his lawyers can persuade the serial killer Richard Ramirez to confess to the crime instead. His legal team includes Kit, who is tasked with traveling to California, and visiting Ramirez in San Quentin State Prison in an attempt to persuade him to confess. She stays in a budget hotel and spends time in a bar during her time off. The murder in Texas took place before Ramirez's first known killing. Kit initially speaks with Ramirez by phone through glass; he refuses to reveal anything until they meet in a visitation room. There, he demands she remove her gold jewelry; he says that he is a Satanist, and gold is offensive to Satan because it is God's metal. He remains uncooperative because guards are in the room, but suggests that they can have privacy if she says she's his lawyer. Even then he remains uncooperative and insulting, demanding that she reveal personal details about herself to make herself interesting enough that she deserves to know more about him. As a child, she lived in the same neighborhood as one of Ramirez's notorious crimes, and she was obsessed with his crime spree, which was one of her inspirations to become a lawyer.  Guess a valid title for it!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
The Night Stalker (2016 film)