Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


WatchOutForSnakes last won the day on April 19

WatchOutForSnakes had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

627 Good

1 Follower

About WatchOutForSnakes

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Washington, DC

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That's because rape jokes cross the line.
  2. Except that you said you basically meant, in your original post, that the momdaughter who rapes the dad. And, although it may be a hypothetical you posted, you chose to make it about rape.
  3. WatchOutForSnakes

    The Treasure of the Sierra Madre

    I haven't listened to the ep yet, but I might be with you on this. And I'm totally with you on the honesty/trustworthiness bit. Dobbs goes mad, not because he's greedy, but because his inability to trust leads to mad conspiracy theories about what the others are up to, likely based on his own ideas of what he'd do if he were greedy. I didn't not enjoy this one, but I don't think I find it that great. Everything is so blatantly explained and foreshadowed, that it feels a bit empty to me. But I do see its influence. And I liked the performances in it, generally.
  4. I think it all stemmed from the Greg/Marcia weirdness on The Brady Bunch!
  5. Still catching up on this thread, but wanted to address it... I agree with everything Taylor has said. I, too, had toxic relationships, particularly in high school and there's something about Edward's behavior that goes into triggering territory where Travis Bickle et al. do not. Yeah, he's intentionally creepy, but the audience is supposed to interpret that as a sign of love. Women and girls are brought up to translate men's aggression as affection. "He teases you because he likes you." And he's sneaking into Bella's room, and stalking her because he loves her. Or so the movie/books would have us believe. Men (I'm not even going to try to put a percentage on how many, but enough of them) act this way with girls and women, and we often interpret it as affection because that's all we see. Everywhere. All. The. Time. It takes a lot of counter-programming to get passed some of this stuff. Particularly for an audience of young girls who don't have the capacity to analyze the story or the language to discuss toxic masculinity, I think the author should have known better. You can make Edward weird and awkward and loving without making him a controlling, possessive, emotionally abusive stalker. She could have even kept in all the LDS messages she wanted. It was a choice to make him that way. A way that many boys and men actually think they can act around women. And as Taylor said, it normalizes it, and it shows girls that as long as you're meant to be together, and as long as it's true love, just stick with it. Don't' worry about what your friends and family are saying. Don't worry about all the warning signs. He just really loves you, and you're meant to be together, and definitely, as soon as you're married and have a baby, you'll all live happily ever after. I didn't quite mean to open a whole campaign against the movies, but I legit have a hard time watching that kind of relationship on screen because I've been in one. And yeah, maybe us women who've survived them are tough-as-nails now, but wouldn't the world be better if we could be tough without having to go through it?
  6. WatchOutForSnakes

    All the President’s Men

    Slow Burn, season 1 is amazing. I learned so much about Watergate listening to that. Highly recommend it!
  7. WatchOutForSnakes

    All the President’s Men

    I actually loved the scene with the White House librarian! I think that very well could have been the way things went down, but more than that, I loved how they played the scene. Hoffman's all flustered and excited and walks up to Redford, and as he's telling Redford about it, Redford's already writing the story in his head, and thinking to ask for a comment on why she would change her story. That scene just shows how well the two of them dance together on screen, and how they worked together as a team. I don't think you need any backstory on these guys. The American public sure doesn't have a ton of backstory (though in today's age we can) for its journalists. You know what they write. And we as an audience know that Woodward had only been with the post a few months, and Bernstein had been there a while. Woodward was more buttoned-up, young guy who stuck more to the rules (the scenes of them debating what's fact and what's inference are fascinating), and was less willing to push boundaries, but was dogged in his fact-finding and super quick on his feet. Bernstein, on the other hand, while young, had been there for a while, was more of a free-wheeler (cared less about ironing his shirts), and was willing to blur ethical lines to get someone to open up for him - like when he was asking the secretary about her ex boyfriend, or the scene with the bookkeeper. He was willing to make people uncomfortable if it got him where he was going. Also, he was put on the case, not because he was the best, but because he had connections. And he was persistent. He was waiting outside the office when Woodward was called to cover the Watergate arraignment, and he spends that day in Florida to get the subpoena'd phone records. And he was a good writer. He knew how to write up a story so that it wasn't just telling the facts, it showed why it was important. One other thing I noticed about the movie was that it sets up a lot of juxtapositions of TV news vs. print journalism. The movie opens on TV coverage of Nixon flying to the capitol to address a joint session of congress, and the news reporter is giving the dullest of live reporting about how the President is getting to and entering the capitol, and the movie ends with a scene of Woodward and Bernstein set up at their desks with mounds of paper around them, diligently typing away as Nixon takes the nomination for re-election. My sense is the movie is getting at the necessity of print and investigative journalism in a time when everything is on TV. That also resonates now in our time of "fake news." The Washington Post and the New York Times fought significant legal battles in the 70's and this movie shows maybe better than any other the importance of journalistic investigations of the government to shine the spotlight on, oh, the administration using the intelligence community to commit widespread actual spying on political opponents. This probably is one of my top movies. I'm a politics nerd, which is why I moved to Washington, and I love investigations.. so this hits my sweet spot. But I also think it's important as a movie that I think really seemed to capture what it was like to get these mangled, loose threads of the investigation and put it all together. It's a factually dense movie with a lot of moving parts, and not much action, and maybe it's my own experiences at play, but I find it gripping when they're interviewing people to hear what they're going to say, and feel that excitement of not knowing whether the few people who know what happened are going to shut down on you. And, as a lawyer, people's memories get real hazy when you're trying to nail down facts and you have no 5th Amendment defense. Anyone who's seen a congressional testimony knows the "I don't recall" defense. The last thing I'll say is how much I appreciate that they used accurate filming locations around town. I really enjoyed the sight seeing. So many movies are "based in" Washington, but you never get to see it. Anyway, much of this is rambling, but I'm just in love with this movie.
  8. To add to this - aside from the Google search heard 'round the world, I don't recall them doing anything to try to figure out how to get the daughter back. I may have blocked it out, but the characters feel completely resigned to a "well, this will all sort itself out somehow!" mentality, and then poof! the daughter's back (or IS she?). It just feels so passive and unresolved. You can tell it's a remake of an adaptation of a remake of an adaptation. It's not so clear anymore. If it ever was.
  9. Kim Basinger won an Oscar? I had forgotten about that, which led me to her IMDb page, which led me to learn that she was nominated for a Saturn Award by the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy, & Horror films for her role in Cellular.
  10. I'm so glad Topher Grace brought up the "scientific research" google search. But then, after Duchovny visits the "scientist" he comes back, and the daughter is sitting on the floor crying "Seven years! I'm going to be like this for seven years?!" And that is never brought up again.
  11. deciding to become immortal...as you do This is a good summary. I'm planning on watching the rest of the series since I've seen both parts of the finale.
  12. That's good to know. I don't mean to be the Debbie Downer, but I found the first episode legit triggering and problematic.