word choice - Does an object have "specificity to" or "specificity for" another object?

Does an object possess specificity to or for another object? Every time I go to express this concept in writing, I struggle over which preposition is the more appropriate and more precise.

This is dilemma is encountered all the time in technical scientific writing, for example in biology where one speaks of enzymes with specificity to/for a particular substrate. I can't find much of a consensus there: I'm just as likely to see one form as the other in articles and published papers. My trusty Google consensus search isn't of much help either: the phrase "specificity to" occurs just about as often as the phrase "specificity for" does.

Although all of the examples I can think of at the time are biological in nature, I'm certain that there are others, so I'm asking this as a more general grammatical usage question. Do they mean something subtly different? Should one form always be preferred over the other?

Of course, it may be that either is entirely correct. Given that preposition usage is highly idiomatic in all languages (and English especially), there may not be a rule that definitively resolves this question.

How does Clementine know to come to Montauk in Eternal Sunshine?

The question answered here as follows,

She doesn't, exactly. The whole experience is in his head, and it was
the memory of her that told him to go to Montauk.

We are supposed to take a guess at what her memory erase experience
was like, and assume that she had a similar experience to his, so
maybe when they were clearing her memory, he said the same thing to
her. But remember, she did it weeks before he did, so the real
question is: how did they know to come on the same day? Fate, maybe?

Montauk was an important place in their relationship. That's where
they had a night picnic on the frozen pond, and they were very close
at the time... which is important because it was shortly after that
when their relationship went sour. It suggests that there are some
things that cannot be forgotten, no matter how powerful the science
used against it may be, especially with memories tied to very strong
emotions like Love.

horror - Spirit of murdered waitress seeks revenge

This horror movie was probably released around the same time as Titanic, but not very sure.

A young waitress was serving in a bar/night club and some drunk men put her on the table and asked her to dance. Then someone pulled her skirt off. Later she was being chased and then she was murdered. After the waitress is murdered, her spirit comes back and lures other men into sex and then kills them.

At the end, many houses get on fire and some people are leaving/fleeing that area.

Which movie is this?

grammaticality - Is the sentence "The world is getting smaller and international connections tighter." grammatically correct?

Yes, it's completely grammatical and is an example of ellipsis just as:

Daniel plays tennis while Jonathan and Andrew [play] rugby.

My parents went to Spain and so might my sister [go to Spain].

As exemplified here, ellipsis can occur even when the precise declined forms that the implied words would take if they were expressly included are not necessarily the same as the precise forms actually surfacing in the utterance. So for example, the form "went" is expressed, but the implied form of this verb is the infinitive "go".

What is the CBFC's definition of a Film?

If you mean documentaries, when you say Long TV serials and programs (that is what I can think of, by long programs), then officially, they need to be sent to CBFC for review. I am not sure, whether CBFC actually awards a certification for the same. Reason being, if a certification is given, then it has to be displayed before start of the film/feature/ad/documentary.

As per the details present in the FAQ section on CBFC site, for normal TV serials/programs:

Is there CBFC certification for TV?

There is no CBFC certification for T.V programs and serials. However, under Cable
Television Network (Regulation) Act, 1995 content code / Advertisement
code have been prescribed for programme and advertisements appearing
in cable TV Network. The offences under Cable Television Network
Regulation Act being non-cognizable, a specific complaint has to be
made by an Officer authorised by the State Governments.

However, TV exhibition of a feature film, comes under purview of CBFC certification, and a film must be certified, before it is shown on TV

Will it be illegal to screen uncertified films on the Cable TV?

Yes. Only certified films should be shown on the Cable TV.

Why did Richard Coyle leave 'Coupling'?

Richard Coyle himself said in an interview that he was afraid of being typecast:

I was very keen that that character didn’t stick with me. It’s the kind of character that does.

I’m an actor and I want to be an actor when I’m 60. It’s a lifelong process, why cut it off by boxing yourself into a little pigeon hole early on?

but

It was a very difficult decision; incredibly difficult because there was something nice about the fact that I knew, for three years, once a year we all came together for three months and had an almighty laugh.

The writer/creator of the series, Steven Moffat, had this to say about Richard Coyle's departure:

Richard didn’t want to return. Or do a goodbye episode. Or in fact talk to me. Hurtful behaviour, but it’s showbiz, these things happen. Can’t give you any insight, except these wise words, spoken by – er – a wise person: an actor will forgive you for anything but their first success.

Identify this movie where a woman is backing away from a rat-like creature?

I think it's a common one - I've certainly seen it several times before. This movie has a short clip of a black and white film where a woman is seen (who may have locked herself in a laundry room - details are hazy) backing away from a furry mass with a tail, a bit like a rat/brain combination. It wiggles, she screams, and the clip ends.

Any ideas? The clip isn't scary at all, by the way, and I think the "outer" movie's a comedy.