Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/19/18 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I know this discussion is pretty much dead, but I found this tonight when I was researching and thought you all may enjoy the info. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-halloween-was-all-tricks-no-treats-180966996/
  2. 2 points
    Well, I loved her BEFORE I found out she was gay! (i.e. when I read your post ) And if anyone is interested, Here is Dan Ireland (RIP) for Trailers From Hell on The Girl Can't Help It:
  3. 2 points
    I was all ready to jump on this question and outline my answer, but it's hard to put it succinctly into words. I certainly love the movie (although not to the extent of their guest on the episode) and if I could ever make a podcast that talked about just one thing it would probably be Indiana Jones. If I have to talk purely cinematically, I'll echo Cameron's point about it being very timeless, which to your specific callout of Fast and Furious somewhat fails But more to the point, there's a richness to the all the elements that really raise the movie to a level beyond superficial or fun. The cinematography, the lighting, the acting, the set design, the editing, stunts, the score, all of it is really top of the line and synergized. To be fair, there are certainly faults in the writing/plotting, but in light of its legacy to pulp heroes and old filmreels it stands out as a culmination of the genre. Overall, it's a perfect blend of fantasy and realism (formalism and expressionism) that just defines what a movie-going experience is. Like I said, hard to put it succinctly
  4. 1 point
    I've been out of the country but don't think I haven't been using my time away to cook up a really "spicy" post here goes nothin, prepare yourself for the post a few weeks in the making get your emoji reacting fingers ready: good stuff, very funny!
  5. 1 point
  6. 1 point
    I don't have the "advantage" of knowing the backstory to this scene or the writing of it. I try to look at most movies or television shows in the context they're cut, not whatever got them there, I don't think that's fair to any movie. In other words, I try my best not to bring any sort of stuff that's not ON screen into any critical view of the movie. Otherwise, I'd probably not like the Hitchcock movies I do, knowing what an asshole he was to actors in general and women specifically. I read this scene exactly as you did: not that she was a LITERAL child, but that she was immature, and Indy as a mid-20's guy in the late 1920's may have taken some liberties, but not that she was 15. I figured she was like a 19 year old, wide-eyed kid with dreams of finding a husband (as Amy notes, the "career pursuit" for women was not exactly a widespread phenomenon in American culture then), she met a 26 or 27 year old and much worldlier Indiana Jones. They had a brief and technically consensual affair, he broke her heart and her dad never forgave Indy. To me, there's enough on screen to merit that reading, and not enough to convict Indy of being basically Roy Moore. I had to come in here and get defensive because to me, that scene, from the second his shadow shows up on the wall until "I'm your god damn PARTNER!", is one of the most perfectly executed scenes in modern movies. Maybe besides the shootout part, that scene hits its target exactly, a talky, noiry, sharp back and forth between two sets of two characters. Between INdy and Marian, there's all the backstory (and he absolutely apologizes, he says he's apologized repeatedly, she acknowledges he's apologized repeatedly right after slugging him), there's the set up of Marian as a bad ass, hard boiled pragmatist, smart as fuck because she has the medallion on her and she's holding out for more. THe scene gets even better when Tott arrives and basically shatters the whole thing. The way he says things like "Why don't you tell me where the medallion is, right now?" so softly when he's stoking the fire, and how Marian immediately switches from "We're closed" to "Uh, how about a drink for you and your men?", recognizing instantly that this isn't some run of the mill thug but still not wanting to panic (karen Allen absolutely nails this transition). She says something like "I'm not sure what kind of people you're used to dealing with," to Tott, and he responds with the absolutely CHILLING "Fraulein Ravenwood [without looking]...let me show you what I am used to." Even the capper to the scene, where she tries "Let's be reasonable" in the face of torture, he responds "THe time for that has passed..." I could literally watch this scene every single day and still find something cool in it. It's even tinged with the classic Indy humor, when he asks her for whiskey, or when she takes a shot from the punctured keg. THe rest of the movie is a perfectly paced action movie, it's like a roller coaster, every scene build to something and then pays off. I haven't finished this episode yet, but 66 is WAY too low for this movie. I'm with Paul, this is closer to a top 20 movie than 66. It's a better movie (not a more impressive achievement, a better movie) than Fellowship, so that either means Fellowship is too high (my opinion) or this is at least 49. I guess once you get into the top 20 you kind of have to have an "impact" factor, but I liked this better than Apocalypse Now, the General, The Graduate and the super schmaltzy It's a Wonderful Life. Honestly, how is Empire Strikes Back not on here but Star Wars is #13?!? Sorry, rambling.
  7. 1 point
    I watched the movie last night. All I can say is "Ask my agent."
  8. 1 point
    1. In my mind, Indy has always been close to Marion's age, since at the time they met he was a student of Abner Ravenwood. I can't put a number on his age at that time, but canonically Indy was always presented as doing things as a prodigy/younger than expected age. That doesn't necessarily excuse any "taking advantage" of course, and there was some acknowledgement by the characters that it was a Bad Idea. It fits the time period of the film and the tropes of the genre, but I admit it should make us call it out today. EDIT: I did have a pdf copy of a script attributed as a third draft, written by Lawrence Kasdan, 1979. So obviously not a shooting script. In it, it describes Marion as: "she is MARION RAVENWOOD, twenty-five years old, beautiful, if a bit hardlooking." Subtract from that Indy's quote when the Men from Washington ask him about Abner, her father, and he says "We haven’t spoken in ten years." And, yeah. Ew. No indication of Indy's age description. I'm sure there are ways to justify things character-wise, history-wise, or whatever, but still. Ew. 2. It's pretty clear that Marion chooses to wear the dress, so as to play into the trope in order to escape. Character-wise, she is using Belloq's ego against him, as he's expecting her to act like a helpless damsel when she's really not. (Something about the way men treat "objects" overall in the film?) So, yeah, the film doesn't quite subvert the trope entirely as Indy not only arrives to rescue her but re-ties her up to save the day somewhere else, but it does tweak and play with the idea enough to not be a textbook case.
  9. 1 point
    My standard list comparison post AFI (2007 | 1997): 66th | 60th BFI Critic's poll, 2012 (ranking, US filtered ranking, votes): 447th (all), 173.436th* (US), 3 votes BFI Director's poll, 2012 (ranking, US filtered ranking, votes): 546th, (all) 229.32th** (US), 1 votes IMDB (rank, rating): 43rd, 8.5 rating Metascore: 85 TSFDT (ranking, US filtered ranking): 217th, TBD Oscar BP status: not nominated, winner Chariots of fire Box Office Ranking*** (rank, amount): 1st, $212,222,025 *: 97 of the top 250 are US films, I'm extrapolating to guess its US-filtered rank **: 42 of the top 100 are US films, I'm extrapolating to guess its US-filtered rank ***: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=1981&p=.htm I don't really have a strong opinion on this one. On the AFI it's far enough down that it doesn't feel out of place compared to what's around. I guess I'm a little surprised it isn't a little higher on the IMDB list. As stated, I'm not a big Spielberg fan, but I would have guessed the crowd-pleasing nature of Indiana Jones would have caused it to be ranked higher. It seems like a film that would do well with the IMDB list.
  10. 1 point
    This seems grosser in retrospect, not just in a post-#MeToo era, but also after having read some of the early discussions between Lucas/Spielberg/Kasdan and also the novel/comic-book adaptations that actually peg her age. In the movie itself (absent any outside information), I'd argue that the "I was a child" line reads as more ambiguous. I know that when I originally saw the movie, I took the "child" line as meaning that she was maybe college-aged or late high school (18 or 19) and he was mid-20s. Maybe a little skeevy and you could see why her father would be angry, but not as bad as Indy deflowering Marion at fifteen. Harrison Ford and Karen Allen are actually about eight years apart in age, which doesn't seem wildly out of line for a romantic couple. In some cultures the age of consent is as young as 15 or 16 -- something that you might have to consider given the time period and the globe-trotting nature of this movie. You know, this was also my interpretation when I first watched this scene, but since then I've reconsidered. First, it's maybe a little patriarchal to assume that Marion can't still be the same tough personalty while sometimes also dressing more feminine. Secondly, the way the scene plays out is that she's going along with Belloq's request so she can try to escape. It almost works, too, but then those damn Nazis show up. I don't think this reflects poorly on Marion's intelligence or spunk. There's almost always something in a more than 20 year old movie that does't quite play as well to modern social consciousness, but I'm not sure Raiders is especially bad in this regard.
  11. 1 point
    I think Raiders scratches so many different itches. It’s an Adventure/Paranormal/Romance/Mystery/Comedy. And somehow, it manages to feels both nostalgic and fresh at the same time. Something like The Fast And Furious movies - which I think are just fine - are more one note, and if you don’t dig that note, then you’re not going to feel the symphony. Also, the Fast movies - especially the earlier ones - already feel dated. Setting Raiders in the past allows it to feel more timeless.
  12. 1 point
    I saw this movie when I was five years old. I didn’t rewatch it before listening to the podcast. The only parts I remember are the scene at the end when he gets abandoned with no clothes on in the boat and when the lady passes out at the sight of the stripper’s wiener. Both scenes horrified me enough that they stayed with me all these years. The rest is such a blur that listening to the podcast was like hearing comedians make fun of a dream you barely remember having.
  13. 1 point
  14. 1 point
    Side note, I'm pretty sure what they had does constitute a love affair, which at the time would have been salacious; sex before marriage/etc. Hence the whole running around to motel rooms. When it's with a married person, I believe the full term is extra-marital affair. I think context and common usage just causes us to drop the extra-marital part often.
  15. 1 point
    I've loved Psycho since my teens, and I think it deserves to be the highest rated Hitchcock film on AFI's list given its widespread influence, but personally it's not my favorite of his films. Rear Window takes that crown, and I look forward to that Unspooled episode. BTW, kudos to Paul for mentioning Rope, such an underrated gem. Also, with regards to Vera Miles, Twilight Zone fans may recognize her from the episode "Mirror Image".
  16. 1 point
    So Naomi claims that Adam said he got the wedding CD idea from that Carmen and Dave TV special. Adam says he doesn't remember saying anything like that. Scott says that if someone says they remember something and the other person says they don't, he usually believes the person who remembers something over the person who doesn't. But I think there's a good chance that Adam is the one remembering correctly. It's actually fairly common for people to remember things that didn't happen. Sometimes if we have two memories that are linked in our mind, our brains will conflate them and make a new memory that adds something to one of the memories based on the other one. This is what is happening in what they call the "Mandela effect." We have overlapping memories that make our brains misremember things in the same ways. The crazy thing is that the memories our brain creates this way will seem just as vivid and "real" as the memories we actually experienced. Often even when presented with proof that the memory is false, it is hard to believe that we could be wrong. But stuff like this happens a lot. To take a completely hypothetical example that is unrelated to this show, let's say there were two men who remembered a certain TV commercial from their youth. THen when they were older, The Simpsons did a parody version of the same commercial. It is actually quite possible that their brain would conflate the two, so that they remember something from the animated parody version happening in the original live action version. In fact the brain could even create memories of seeing it happen in the original commercial. they probably still wouldn't believe it because their memory of seeing it in the live action commercial is so vivid. But the fact is that it didn't happen. Anyway I think this might be similar to the totally made up hypothetical I made just now. Adam probably mentioned wanting to make the CD soon after the show came out, and seeing the idea on TV was fresh on her mind, so her brain conflated the two and created a memory of Adam saying he got the idea from the Carmen and Dave TV wedding. Just like those two imaginary guys I mentioned.
  17. 1 point
    "What do you like about this?" "It's rock and roll with a wide-angle lens." "You suck so much." It's fitting that this episode was basically a best-of (I know what best-ofs are) for the Scott & Scott podcasting experience. Looking forward to whatever they come out with next.
This leaderboard is set to Los Angeles/GMT-07:00