Cakebug Tranch

I didn't get to rewatch yet but I'll get to it soon. Just wanted to pipe in and say that I played Barnaby in a high school production when I was 16! I wish I had photos to show. ETA: I just checked my photo albums and sadly there are none to be found. I found pictures of me in Guys and Dolls and Fiddler on the Roof, but no Barnaby pictures. I wore round glasses and a tartan tam, by the way.

I'd strongly recommend the 'I Was There Too' episode: it's really informative. Things like the scene where Hans speaks to McLane in his American accent - that was an improv moment from the writer to cover a continuity issue that was going to come with being able to identify the terrorists by their wristwatches, something that fell between the cracks in shooting. Apparently it's a film that really came together in the edit.

Also, 'Die Hard' was never expected to become the classic it's now seen as - it was based on a little-known novel, starring a TV actor and an English stage performer (and the dad from Family Matters), and was written on the fly. The amazing 'I Was There Too' episode with the screenwriter shows just how slapdash the writing and filming process was - major plot points we see as integral now were made up on the spur of the moment. 'Die Hard' was supposed to be a down and dirty, forgettable cop thriller. They just managed to catch lightning in a bottle and came up with something that became beloved. For that reason, I don't think it would be considered prestige at all. Of course, with ALL of that said, the studios also thought that 'Casablanca' stunk too. So maybe the theory is flawed.

I must admit, I got an electric thrill of anticipation when Paul said it was a BMX movie: I thought maybe it might be 'BMX Bandits' (featuring an extremely young Nicole Kidman as a BMX rider who helps foil a robbery), but no such luck.

Or Gleaming the Cube? I can't remember if that's HDTGM-worthy or is actually good.

Yeah, I totally get why the forum isn't front and centre the way it is in minisodes, but I would have loved the chance to be polled about the question of the week, and hoped that we might hear about things here. I guess it just comes down to checking Twitter a bit more often, no biggie. Cam's opinion about Paul and Amy killing it is officially co-signed here. Such a great podcast.

I've listened to the first couple of episodes. The production side - the music and the soothing nature of Michael's voice makes it a very calming podcast, almost ASMR in nature. I've never read Jude either but I'm excited for this one.

The awesome getting-off-the-subway-then-back-on-again dance was so much fun. What on earth did Popeye think Charnier would think? By that point Popeye might as well walk up to him and say 'I'm following you now, bud'. I loved the walking stick stopping the door opening, and best of all the little wave Charnier gives as he rolls out. So badass. Of course, the main question I have is: who is buying Custard on a train platform in New York City? How much are you selling that it becomes your stand's main selling point?

Is the question that we all HONESTLY need to hear an answer to in regards to Nic Cage "would you swap faces with him like in 'Face/Off'"? Really? What a missed opportunity to ask something tangible, Blake.

One other thing: I was a little sad that the observations and contributions from this forum on 'Swing Time' weren't mentioned, but polls on Twitter were a big part of the conversation. As someone who doesn't use Twitter, I missed that completely! Is the plan that Twitter is going to be the place to post about Unspooled, or will this forum also be incorporated sometimes? After seeing both Paul and Amy drop in last week I thought that there might be some interaction (and I know it's tough with a 60 minute podcast to fit everything in), but I would like to think that if Twitter poll questions were asked in this forum, you'd get plenty of feedback and contributions! Many of us in here are used to the HDTGM model so you know there'll be material worth using. If nothing else, if anyone sees a Twitter poll, link it in here, maybe.

I hadn't seen a moment of this film before this week, so thanks to Unspooled for the motivation to watch. I knew about Popeye and his porkpie hat (the only WORSE undercover headgear might be a silk top-hat, I mean honestly) and knew there was a big car chase scene but for some reason in my mind I thought it was the hill jumping chase from 'Bullitt'. I'm glad it wasn't - the subway chase was thrilling and a wonderful surprise for me. What I loved about this was that it was so unfocused in terms of dialogue. So much of this film would be trimmed and edited for redundancies today, but there is so much that happens that isn't necessary to the plot - and the tailing scenes are way longer than you'd ever see now - that it feels like the real slog of policing. Following a hunch but having no idea if it will work out. Nowadays buddy cop movies are all about the miracle policing where they jump from clue to clue without a chance to pause. I loved that the jubilation they express after getting a lead from the wiretap felt earned. I also seriously love movies that show us the grime and state of New York City in the '70s. As someone who never visited NYC until 1999, I have never personally seen the seedy side of things, so I lap up movies like 'The Taking of Pelham 123', 'Dog Day Afternoon', 'Taxi Driver', and the like. There's a brilliant comparison site that I enjoyed looking through, that showed the locations then and now: http://www.scoutingny.com/french-connection-filming-locations/

Eeeeeeeeeeee! This was the first musical I was ever in! Hooray!

There's only one answer...

Pens down, everyone. Polly and Grudlian win this week. It'll be a serious shame if Paul doesn't read these ones on the mini. Awesome observations!

The part that I found craziest was at the end when Breeze and Maggie are trying to get out of the truck and to safety, they're driving alongside Will's truck, with the Evening Wear Hackers in the back of the truck. Maggie tells Breeze to hold the truck steady so she can jump over to the truck, which she does. Then Breeze needs to jump over, so he asks the Lady Hacker to take the wheel so he can jump, which he kind of does, nearly dying yet again. Then they try to help the Evening Wear Hackers jump over, reaching out and trying to save them, disregarding their past deeds and coming together as human beings united for a cause. But if Lady Hacker makes it over to the truck, how will Gentleman Hacker survive? This is a terrible plan that can't possibly work out for them. And indeed, after trying to save the Evening Wear Hackers from the Hurricane, the Hurricane eats them and Maggie, Will and Breeze all shrug and go, 'meh, we tried'. Why do the Evening Wear Hackers sacrifice themselves for these chuckleheads to jump to safety? Why does no one remember the noble price these two paid?

Time to talk about the other movie that has clearly influenced the action in this awful movie: the all-time classic, Die Hard. There are obviously quick parallels - classy international thieves in nice suits, hacking of computers to enter vaults, undercover and well organized entry into the building, a suave leader (although Perkins is no Hans Gruber). But then of course we get to the more overt connections: when Will and Maggie are on the roof of the mall after somehow climbing down from being ragdolled up in the air by the Hurricane, they run away from a tidal wave of water and jump off the edge of the mall, swinging in and landing: That exactly mimics the famous scene from Die Hard where John McClane ties a fire hose to his waist and jumps off the exploding roof of the Nakatomi Tower, to swing down, hit a window, and land. More conspicuously, in both films we have a pair of unhinged terrorist brothers, and after the younger one is killed in wacky ways ("Now I have a machine gun, ho-ho-ho"/Flying hubcaps) the elder one goes into a psychotic rage and swears to kill the guy who did it (although in this one he's convinced it's Maggie).

Yes! I couldn't believe that they were using real-life tragedies as plot points - starting out with Hurricane Andrew (real-life death toll: 65) and then name-checking the Oklahoma City Bombing (real-life death toll: 168) without considering that people in their audiences might have been affected by those events. And to name-check the now-executed murderer who set that bomb off is really tone-deaf. And then naming the hurricane "Tammy" when an actual storm called Tammy (a tropical storm) actually happened, and killed ten people in 2005? They went to the trouble of fictionalizing the town they live in, why not fictionalize these other elements that remind us of such terrible things?

I loved that moment when Mabel says that she used to come to the upstate cabin "before the war", to which Pop replies "which war?" But of course in pre WW2 times, she means before the Great War of 1918, and he's suggesting that it's a war prior to that, perhaps the Spanish-American war? Or the Crimean War? The Civil War? Point is, to us, it's strange to hear someone mention the previous war and mean WW1: the same line a decade later would have very different meaning. My immediate reaction was that she was saying 'before WW2' and Pop was saying 'or was it WW1?', but of course the movie predates WW2, so Pop is calling Mabel even older that he appears to be.

The movies we do in the Musical Mondays thread over in HDTGM are usually pretty good - there's the occasional HDTGM-worthy one but usually we have a good time discussing great musicals. You're welcome to join us!

Great observations, Max! Plenty of excellent things there that we didn't get to yet! I really like the idea that the original version of this opening number featured Mia and Seb (although Boulder City doesn't fit into the lyrics as nicely as Santa Fe), but I think it's the right call to remove them from it. Whenever I watch this number I'm always distracted by knowing that every single person dancing on those cars are all living their dream trying to break in to being in the movies, and are another inch closer, but are still anonymous. In ten years we'll talk knowingly about how the next big star was one of the car dancing people, way in the background. The stories about dropping everything and coming to LA with a dream and not a dime in their pockets are probably incredibly familiar to most of those extras. Anyone notice the old dude awkwardly clapping (in the blue shirt on the left in the gif below) in the part where they open the back of the truck? I want to know HIS deal!

Agreed, I found it such an interesting moment where Fred and Ginger have their first kiss behind the door, then they giddily say goodbye to each other, and then he happily runs to his dressing table and starts smearing the black makeup on his face, humming the 'Bojangles' song, entirely untroubled by the image he's about to portray. It's easy for us today to see how terrible it is, but part of the point behind minstrel shows was not just the makeup, but it was the double effect of seeing that the performer has transformed themselves. By showing him beginning to put the black makeup on, we get to see that transition before we see him in full makeup in the next scene. This allows the audience not only to enjoy the dancing, but to note the transition of the actor, which is the whole reason white actors would perform in blackface, rather than just having an African-American performer do the dance. It's those layers that were interesting to audiences then, and his carefree use of the makeup shows that it's no big deal back then.

Paul and Amy hypothesize it's because of the film's position in the Library of Congress, and the final stair-dancing scene, which was considered the greatest dancing achievement ever at the time. They also suggest laziness on the part of the AFI!

I loved so much of this film but, rightfully so, was really knocked sideways by the 'Bojangles of Harlem' scene (not 'Mr Bojangles') - the things that were great effects, like the shadow dancing and the uncrossing of the giant legs, weren't enough to forgive the blackface and 'face-on-shoes' image (and the casual retention of his blackface in his next scene backstage). That's why I was so happy to hear in today's podcast such a brilliant use of Earwolf crossover, with Tawny and Andrew from 'YITR' giving their perspective on this really problematic element. As a white guy I found this scene really uncomfortable and clueless, but it's terrific to get an expert opinion on the details of the scene. The thing that I found most striking about this segment was not that Astaire was 'paying tribute' to Bill Robinson, but that his tribute was inaccurate and heightened, wearing costumes that weren't associated with Bojangles, and, as this New York Times article notes, he's not moving in the same way as Bojangles either. So what's the point of the tribute?

Working on my Mia/Kelci fanfic as we speak. It'll cover 20 pages easy.