Leaderboard

There's a difference between "shitty people" and an actor that was accused of beating his girlfriend, or say a director that was convicted of raping a 13 year old girl and fled the country to avoid sentencing, or say a producer that raped multiple women over decades. Also... it's almost as if we can concentrate on multiple issues at once...

I think Paul was just making a joke. Since he was recording this early and doing canned responses, he was making a funny excuse to not have forum answers.

Oh totally. I think it's a very personal choice and I don't blame anyone for what they decide. I try to live my life by this great Amy Poehler quote from her book Yes Please. "Good for you, Not for me". It works for most things and I've found that I'm genuinely happier because of it.

I think this is what I was trying to get to. It doesn't matter how much it is to me because it's still a message of support and I am actively choosing to contribute something to them, and that's not something that sits right with me.

It's really not about the money for me so much as I feel like when I do buy their stuff (even older stuff in some people's case) it's like I'm saying " I support you and I don't care what you did. " That's not always how I feel and it definitely depends on the context. Also sometimes it honestly upsets me to see them as someone who has a good number of people in my life who have suffered abuse or sexual assault. That's just me though and in general I take it case by case .

Me either! I know so many people who talk about what an amazing fundamental movie it is/ was for them but somehow I've just never seen it. I would love to see it with you guys!

Anyone seen John Wick 3 yet? I have tickets for Sunday. And remember, don't touch Jason.

If you feel this place is unwelcoming or if dipshits from reddit are talking shit, I understand why you want to leave. But, as Cameron said, please stay.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but if you can't hear the accent, it means you have the accent too. In all seriousness though, I was surprised by the prevalence of the southern accent when I moved to West Virginia (as far as urban vs. rural, there's really no such thing as urban West Virginia), although the farther north in the state you go, the more the accent sounds like a mix of the Pittsburgh/western PA accent and a southern accent, but the southernness definitely wins out (the "yinz" to "y'all" ratio is pretty minuscule). So there are plenty of variations of southern accents, not just in different states but in different regions of the same state, so I could buy the idea that the Georgia accents are milder in some way than those of other areas. As far as Gregory Peck's accent, I also found it believable that a well-educated, well-read, and well-spoken man in Alabama could sound like that, which is to say there is just the slightest hint of a southern accent. I'd love to hear what a linguist has to say about how what factors determine the gaining or losing of an accent though.

I think the argument of "how dare you support ____________!" kind of went out the window a few years ago. When people naively thought it was just Roman Polanski and Woody Allen, it was a lot easier to feign moral superiority for abstaining from a movie. Now that we're aware that abuse and molestation are rampant, you'd need to skip virtually every movie. Anyone who tries to guilt me over a movie needs to provide me with a list of their last 10 watches because I'll find someone guilty of something awful. We all have different lines of acceptability. I have the celebrities I won't support anymore. You have the celebrities you won't support. I won't shame you for watching a celebrity I don't support if you won't shame me.

I feel like as of late there's been a lot of misunderstanding of how we all talk to each other on the boards. Paul inferred something similar during the Snow White conversation over on the Unspooled side of the forums and he said that we all didn't want it on the list because it's problematic now and I was like wait what? No one even talked about the problematic side of the film???

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.

Syncasey, did you call in on the minisode about neon clothing? Because the call was your post verbatim. If not, then we can now confirm people are stealing our posts for calls. EDIT: It just occurred to me that it could be an earwolf employee reading the post. So, idk.

One of the few times, that I've re-listened to a single episode of ANY podcast. I really hated that it ended. I couldn't stop laughing the entire time, and this was also the best of Sonas laugh. I could listen to her crack up for eternity.

Oh, make no mistake, I am THERE for shirtless volleyball. All day every day. It's the blatant, yet somehow unspoken, homoeroticism that makes the mortal terror so potent!

Oh, so you’re not in it for the shirtless volleyball. Just me then?

Sorry for the late reply here, but this is in response to the comments about not being able to relate to Zula and Wiktor and individuals; more like they were ciphers or ideas of people. I dunno, I found them instantly compelling and I connected with them very deeply. Maybe I'm just sort of attracted to that archetype of a Doomed Romance, one you recognize straight from the beginning. They burn so bright and so hot, they are destined to run out of fire. But the fact they keep orbiting each other, keep coming back to each other, is something I find fascinating as well. Also, I tend to take certain historical periods pretty personally, I guess. For me, the Cold War itself is one of those (not the only one, but it's the one we are talking about here). Obviously, I did not participate in anything resembling the events of the film, but my predilections for taking history personally might be why I am so easily absorbed into, say, Bond films or stories of being trapped behind the Iron Curtain. Anyway, my dad was a P-3 Orion pilot for much of the 80s and 90s, so it was the later stages of the Cold War, but the operational mission of the Orion was to find Russian subs. Sure, the plane did other reconnaissance and whatnot, but it was designed to hunt (and maybe blow up) submarines. Soooo... when I would watch Top Gun, for example, those faceless Russian pilots were the dudes who might literally KILL MY DAD, so I found myself rather invested in Cold War narratives from the age of, you know, 5. I realize this movie has NOTHING to do with any of that, but the inclusion of other things I am fascinated by, like the bridging of musical cultures, folk music (the centuries-old kind), Eastern European art, political propaganda, etc. create a heat seeking missile straight to my soul. This movie gets at me.

I never understood the attachment to Tom Bombadil! He's not that big of a deal, is he? I am still torn though on Mockingbird, not on how much I love it because I do, but on how much it really adds/changes from the book. Most of the positives I heard Paul and Amy mention are straight up from the book. Paul said the direction was sort of 'avant garde' and I'm not so sure I agree, it feels fairly straightforward and simple to me. I mean, obviously, not screwing up a very popular book is not an easy thing to do, so credit there. But as a top-100 film of all-time? What does this film do cinematically that's all so special? For example, I think the Lord of the Rings should be on there as an adaption, because it adapts such a complicated work of fantasy history and it pushed computer effects much further than just about anything before it. But I'm a little less sure about Mockingbird, which I'm having a hard time seeing on its own separate from the book. I'm leaning to the acting (by Peck and the kids and everyone!) as being enough to push it there, but I'm still a tiny bit torn.

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.

I wasn't sure if I wanted to admit this but I should own my truth in that I have never actually seen A League of Their Own. I just know everything that happens and feel like I have seen the movie but legit I have not lol.

this industry we call showbiz

They don't outright say it. But I think this episode confirms what we've always suspected about how James gets in the funny zone (time+editing tricks)

Bob Odenkirk. Conan has brought up Bob in several episodes. It's time to bring him on the show.

Conan, when are you going to interview Andy Richter or Will Arnett? Also I would be interested in an interview with your wife. I would assume she’s interested in being your friend. Would you interview Norm MacDonald?