Leaderboard

No, we keep them in our rats.

The one thing I still do not understand is why Grace was able to keep blackmailing Ro. I would think Ro would have done her research. First yes they killed her father but it was out of self defense. He was abusing Ro or at least seemed to have a history of it. Since when the mother attacked and killed the father it was more out of reaction to what was happening and protecting her daughter she committed manslaughter rather than a planned murder. If it was only manslaughter then the statue of limitations in New York is 5 years, which means Ro and her mother would be immune to Grace's blackmailing before she graduated high school.

Did anyone catch that the baby's name is "Rowen" whereas the movie's main character's name is "Rowena?" I don't think anyone on the episode pointed that out. Sure would hate to think that these folks bought tickets to the podcast taping, watched the movie beforehand, went into labor before they could go to the show, and subconsciously named her child after this horrible movie.

Medieval Times Woman is my hero. I want her life.

Also, throwing a hissy fit for not being able to publically out a gay man in the media: not a good look.

I hope you all will subscribe to Paul's new show on Stitcher Premium! (Shout out to my BF for making this for my BFF, "that girl" with the question; I was sitting next to her! )

I'm guessing that whoever was responsible for the "Bruce Willis: Tulip Expert" article read by the audience member was also responsible for this: (credit where credit's due: IMDB trivia)

At some point while they were concocting their plan, Miles suggests that Ro get online and "practice flirting" over the computer before going after Hill, so it seems that Miles set her up to look for some rando to cyber with, and used that as an opportunity to get her to dirty talk to him. Considering this, combined with his "voice acquisition" software, he was probably in his jack shack listening to Ro's voice enunciate all the dirty talk, having himself a good ol time. By the by, if I were starting my message board account today, "Jack Shack" would be my screen name. Maybe "Jack Shaq." 2007 was prior to the ubiquity of smart phones, and that, to me, is when the phone addiction really took off. Prior to that, most people I knew treated their phones much more causally. Yes, they took their phones out with them, but they'd be much more likely to leave a Nokia flip phone at the table while they went to the bathroom because they wouldn't have been able to look at YouTube while on the john like they can now.

The way they refer to the bar ("We'll be at Chumley's ordering copious amounts of drinks on this paper") it seems like it's their regular spot for after-work drinks, so that's not that strange...

I was just uploading an oddly similar picture just now from watching the last 30 minutes.

Great show about a not-so-great movie! But I do feel that two very important parts of it were not discussed at all: The fore-shadowing and "post"-shadowing (if you can call it that). The fore-shadowing was the eye scan the movie started with just before Ro entered the Senator's office, which is of course connected to the big "breakthrough" Miles has later on with the enlarged images of the diluted eyes on the wall at the office. The opening (and closing) credits were actually displayed on top of stylized versions of this scan, too. The "post"-shadowing happens during the very last seconds of the film, where it seems that someone saw Ro killing Miles from a window across the street, suggesting the cycle of blackmail might not be closed, after all, or maybe that Ro won't get away with her crimes. I actually had to go back and try and figure out if this person was shown before, but no, just some random dude. Weird way to end a weird movie.

You would have to argue it down to manslaughter to even get to the statute of limitations, because if they had a witness and a body, you can bet a prosecutor is going for a full tilt murder charge. But it doesn't make sense that Halle was giving into the blackmail years after the deed was done, her mom was hospitalized, she knows a bit more about the world, why not just call Grace on her bluff?

Correction: It wasn't just because the gay lover of the Senator clammed up that the story was killed by Halle's editor, he was also a supporter of the senator and killed the story, and then has her take a forced vacation for the heat to die down on the story. Yet it's not like Halle couldn't just put that story in a blog post or anything, especially when this movie was one of the first films to use an interactive marketing campaign that featured fully running blog and Youtube pages for the characters of Rowena, Grace, Mrs. Hill, especially as Rowena was using a pen name for her work at the paper, which not only seem like she got a huge scoop as a unknown reporter. As for the alternate endings that were shot, I could find nothing as to who was revealed as the killers in them. I assume Hill was actually the killer in one and then Miles maybe as he was shown to have had a relationship with Grace, but there is no confirmation one way or another. One written ending that was confirmed was that had Miles apparently successful in blackmailing Rowena, though I have to assume that was just too much of a bummer ending. Also in reference to the phrase "Show me a hot woman and I'll show you a man who's tired of sleeping with her," is crasser version of "the grass is always greener" where you see something or someone and wish that was in your life, but for the person who already has that in it, it's old hat and they are maybe looking at you and want what you have.

I used AIM well into 2014 because it was easier and less stressful for me than Facebook. My friends and I found it particularly useful when we would watch movies "together " even though we were all scattered around the globe.

I have a beef with the whole Grace backstory. If Grace, as a young girl, witnessed Ro and her mother burying a body in the back yard... is this really the person she chooses to antagonize for her whole life? The person willing to be, at least, an accessory to murder? For all Grace knows, Ro was the killer, yet Grace slithers around her like Biff from BTTF (Ro is George McFly.) It seems like a normal person would stay as far away from the "murder family" as possible for pretty much their whole life... or at least act a little scared of them... but, no, Grace openly taunts Ro with BARELY veiled innuendo.

It's so confusing... she just happened to think that trublu was some random person IMing her the first moment she's online. They text for hours (there's a clock time fade) and we learn later that it is Miles, but Miles had another IM username. But WHY? What point does any of that serve? My thing was how they treated IMing as a sexual act... like just the simple act of IMing was some sort of foreplay in and of itself. She had barely spoken to Adex before he says "Are you turned on?"... Turned on? From WHUT?

Is it common for people in New York City apartments to leave a spare key for their apartment right outside their door? I found it odd and unsafe that both Ro and Miles had a key to their place easily accessible for anyone in the building to find.

Ok so this movie actually came out around the time that News International newspapers in the U.K WERE being investigated for hacking into people 's shit. It's a really fucked up the shit they did including hacking into a murdered(then missing) child's voicemail, Milly Dowler, and erasing voicemails because her inbox was full which made her parents think she was still alive. From the Wikipedia on the scandal: "The News International phone-hacking scandal was a controversy involving the now defunct News of the World and other British newspapers published by News International, a subsidiary of News Corporation. Employees of the newspaper were accused of engaging in phone hacking, police bribery, and exercising improper influence in the pursuit of stories. Whilst investigations conducted from 2005 to 2007 appeared to show that the paper's phone hacking activities were limited to celebrities, politicians, and members of the British Royal Family, in July 2011 it was revealed that the phones of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, relatives of deceased British soldiers, and victims of the 7 July 2005 London bombings had also been hacked. The resulting public outcry against News Corporation and its owner Rupert Murdoch led to several high-profile resignations, including that of Murdoch as News Corporation director, Murdoch's son James as executive chairman, Dow Jones chief executive Les Hinton, News International legal manager Tom Crone, and chief executive Rebekah Brooks. The commissioner of London's Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), Sir Paul Stephenson, also resigned. Advertiser boycotts led to the closure of the News of the World on 10 July 2011, after 168 years of publication. Public pressure shortly forced News Corporation to cancel its proposed takeover of the British satellite broadcaster BSkyB. The prime minister David Cameron announced on 6 July 2011 that a public inquiry, known as the Leveson Inquiry, would look into phone hacking and police bribery by the News of the World, consider the wider culture and ethics of the British newspaper industry and that the Press Complaints Commissionwould be replaced "entirely".A number of arrests and convictions followed, most notably of the former News of the World managing editor Andy Coulson."

A comment on whether or not brands expect you to brandish all their shit in your company - I am not in the Advertising field but I did work for a well known commercial photographer here in Dallas for a bit after college. He told me that once he was photographing a lot of Pepsi stuff for a new ad campaign they were building, and apparently they had forgotten to fill their fridge with Pepsi products and had a lot of Dr Pepper in there instead and let's just say Pepsi was extremely unhappy. After that he said his studio always makes sure they have enough of the actual brand on site to appease the clients. So yeah, if they were photographing Reebok then he definitely wouldn't allow anyone in the studio to wear anything from Nike.

Subtext of that interview between Bruce and Halle is that he moved out of his house next to hers prematurely so she couldn't keep pressuring him into appearing in any more terrible movies with her.

Oh, I do. It's not my personal favorite, but I get it. We'll discuss more when Woody Allen comes up on the podcast, which I'm sure will not be controversial at all.

Yea, I haven't listened to the ep yet... I usually do it on my commute and today is off, so I'll refrain from too much commentary until I do listen. But I agree with Cameron about the 'romance' and categorization of Stingo. I saw some description calling it a 'love triangle / holocaust movie' and I really think that misses the point entirely. I'd argue Stingo wasn't actually in love with her, and I think Sophie knew this and he probably did too. He was just inexperienced and sucked in and wanted to give her an 'out'. Maybe there's a little infatuation with 'the girl next door', but still, not love. I don't think 'love' was really in this movie at all, not real romantic love anyway, it was more like, intense relationships just to cover up or distract from feelings/life.

I’m not done with the episode, but I’m shocked how they feel like Stingo is some kind of interloper into Sophie and Nathan’s relationship. From the beginning, for reasons that are unclear, they are the ones always pulling him into their vortex. Now, if you were to ask Stingo, I’d say *he* would probably say that he was an interloper, but they are the ones coaxing him to play piano with them. He doesn’t just say, Move over, I got this.” They invite him to dinner. They invite him to Coney Island - and not, like, Melvin or any of the other residents of the house. I feel like they see Stingo as being like them - an artist and free spirit- but in desperate need of experience. I mean, another visual metaphor I would point to is the three of them in Sophie and Nathan’s sex hammock. To me, it’s not that he’s a third wheel so much as the whole relationship is somewhat open and fluid. In my opinion, I also wouldn’t classify Stingo as “incel” as that implies a certain level of anger and entitlement that I just don’t feel is present in his character. He doesn’t hate or resent Nathan. He doesn’t act like he’s “owed” anything - at least not to me. I don’t feel like he’s just pretending to be her friend in order to get close. He just feels naive, which is something he tells us right at the beginning. He hasn’t had a life yet and is suddenly faced with two people who have lived too much life. Honestly, I’m still surprised that Amy and Paul (And iTunes apparently) classify this as a romance, but if we are, then I’d say the romance is between all three of them.