Jump to content

sycasey 2.0

Members
  • Content count

    1007
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

sycasey 2.0 last won the day on May 19

sycasey 2.0 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1847 Excellent

About sycasey 2.0

  • Rank
    Bling Bling
  • Birthday 08/18/1980

Recent Profile Visitors

2299 profile views
  1. sycasey 2.0

    Episode 213 - Minisode 213

    That was not me on the phone, so definitely an Earwolf person reading one of the forum posts.
  2. sycasey 2.0

    To Kill A Mockingbird

    A bit, but they also note that Atticus is supposed to come off as an educated guy, someone who is set apart from the rest of the town in that way, so it kind of makes sense.
  3. sycasey 2.0

    To Kill A Mockingbird

    Was that in a larger city, though? I wonder if people in small towns (like in the movie) are more likely to have strong accents.
  4. sycasey 2.0

    Episode 213 - Shanghai Surprise (w/ Jordan Rubin)

    Right, if it's just that you personally don't feel good seeing this person on screen or paying money to see them or whatever, then that's fine. I don't share that feeling, but I understand. I bristle when the argument becomes: "I'm not supporting this person, AND YOU SHOULDN'T EITHER because you are enabling them!" I just don't find that very convincing when you're talking about a $4 rental of an old movie.
  5. sycasey 2.0

    Episode 213 - Shanghai Surprise (w/ Jordan Rubin)

    Yes, I have given it a lot of thought and decided that I'm okay with it. I think that holding a hard line on something like this would ultimately result in closing myself off to too much of popular culture, for the sake of (in my view) a pretty non-impactful boycott. Again, just my own thinking on it, not trying to impose. I also won't knock anyone who doesn't want to watch it, just based on personal preferences. I only offer my own rationale into the dialogue.
  6. sycasey 2.0

    Episode 213 - Shanghai Surprise (w/ Jordan Rubin)

    That contribution seems very minor, though. Like, so minor as to basically not matter or have any real impact on their future career prospects. But this is also something I very much care about: being able to view and study past works in a medium I love (film). To me that overrides whatever minimal impact an iTunes rental might have on someone's pocketbook.
  7. sycasey 2.0

    To Kill A Mockingbird

  8. sycasey 2.0

    Episode 213 - Shanghai Surprise (w/ Jordan Rubin)

    I understand not wanting to support new work from these people, but for old stuff I've decided that I'm fine with watching it. If I had to cut out all old artwork from potentially abusive people I would be missing out on a lot.
  9. sycasey 2.0

    Episode 213 - Shanghai Surprise (w/ Jordan Rubin)

    I was curious about Sean Penn's neon-colored wardrobe and wanted to make sure this was actually a historical anomaly for the time presented or if maybe I just wasn't aware of neon clothing in the 1930s. https://thekit.ca/style/clothing/history-of-neon-clothing/ From what I can find, it looks like while neon SIGNS were in existence at the time, there's no evidence that neon or fluorescent colored clothing ever existed before the 1960s at the earliest, and of course it was not widely popular until the 80s.
  10. sycasey 2.0

    The Silence of the Lambs

    By screen time you're right of course, though this time I thought about how much time the movie devotes to Hannibal Lecter's character development. Take that long sequence of Lecter's escape: that scene is entirely about him (not about Clarice at all) and helps make the case for him as a "co-lead" character -- Hopkins isn't on screen for most of that, but his character is driving the action. He's the protagonist for a significant stretch of the film. Then you also have the scene where Chilton brings Lecter to the Senator, which again is mostly about Lecter's development and motivation within the story and doesn't involve Clarice. The film also closes with Lecter on screen, not Clarice. I would still probably call him a supporting character, but the case for him as a lead is stronger than I thought.
  11. sycasey 2.0

    The Silence of the Lambs

    I wasn't sure if I was going to vote for this one, but a re-watch confirmed it. They touched on this in the podcast episode, but I do think Silence of the Lambs was the precursor and original inspiration for all of the "true crime" and serial-killer movies that happened in the 90s and beyond. The entire visual style of The X-Files seems lifted from this movie, something I hadn't really understood before (though I certainly could tell that Agent Scully's first-season hairstyle was inspired by Clarice Starling). The stuff with the trans/cross-dressing serial killer is still a bit problematic, but honestly I expected that to play worse than it did. I noted that they do have Clarice and Hannibal discuss Buffalo Bill's particular psychology and state outright that real transsexuals tend to be non-violent and that Bill is something else. So it's more sensitive than you might think, if you are paying attention to the details.
  12. sycasey 2.0

    The Silence of the Lambs

  13. sycasey 2.0

    Tootsie

    He definitely does. I'm not disagreeing with your point here, just also expanding upon my own.
  14. sycasey 2.0

    The Silence of the Lambs

    Yeah, the hipster movie fan opinion for some time has been, "Brian Cox's subtle intellectual Lecter was so much better than Hopkins' over-the-top performance." I think both interpretations are valid and work for the movie they're in. IMO, a lot of people incorrectly interpret "subtle" acting as automatically "better" acting. Not so.
  15. sycasey 2.0

    Tootsie

    Well, within the context of the movie they say he's not untalented, he's just too difficult to work with. So he starts getting work because he's in disguise, not specifically because he's a woman. Anyway, I'm not commenting on the later plot developments once he's disguised as a woman, more the setup that he has trouble getting work and yet is supposed to be a talented actor. I think that is actually decently explained in the movie.
×