grudlian.

I think this is more a coincidence than anything else. The Legend Of Zelda came out February 1986 and Legend came out in Japan in 1987 according to imdb. But I'll support the Legend (and Zelda) love. I know Legend has gained some appreciation with the director's cut, but I thought the theatrical version was fine in high school. Maybe not the strongest fantasy movie but definitely worth checking out.

I'm so glad you said this. I definitely thought he was a detective and assumed I had misremembered him being at the crime scene. I could see a lawyer visiting a crime scene but it seems very unlikely they would visit at the time of discovery. They were still bagging evidence and I'd think a lawyer could easily contaminate everything.

I'm definitely interested.

Penetrating my heart with his sensitive portrayal of The Elephant Man.

I'm not entirely sure what they do at live Room showings but I'm kind of against those in general. The Room seems more like its just insulting a bad movie and Rocky Horror is about championing something they love. I'm familiar enough with a lot of the Rocky Horror specific bits from knowing people who like it. It's all just not for me personally.

I've seen this twice and both at home. Once in middle school by myself and didn't like it. I saw it again in college and, again, didn't like it. I've had people, as you've said, insist you need to see it live with audience participation. I've had big fans this week tell me it's just as good at home. Personally, I don't think the audience participation or shadowcast sounds like my thing. I've avoided live shows of the The Room for the same reason. So, maybe this just isn't for me.

I admit I did misread the original post that episodes should be uncut versus as uncut as possible. I agree with you. I'm really just trying to offer an explanation that I think editing is good for the episodes and speculating why certain things probably get cut (or relegated to a mini). Getting people to listen to minis is probably part of it. The runtime is purely guesswork on my part but I'd be surprised if a network as big as Earwolf doesn't take that into consideration For episodes you mentioned specifically, I'll speculate. Hobbs and Shaw is part of a series that HDTGM has done regularly and maybe they expect a bigger built in audience no matter what. For Drop Dead Fred, that was a very unusual episode and maybe they wanted as few cuts as possible to allow both sides time to speak. Or maybe they were experimenting with the idea "Does episode runtime really affect one of our biggest podcasts?" Or maybe the editor thought this episode wasn't as funny as Drop Dead Fred and cut it short then Paul said "you cut my favorite bit... put it in the minisode". Again, just throwing out ideas that may hold no water.

I look at it the same way I look at deleted scenes in a movie. Sometimes it just flows better without a scene even if that scene is fine. This is pure speculation but ehile podcasts don't have run time limitations, I bet longer episodes get listened less which means less likely to get ads revenue. For some podcasts, I've definitely thought "ugh...I don't have time for this right now." My completionist mentality forces me to listen to every episode but not everyone does. I'm sure someone has done some study that's concluded "If a podcast is 90+ minutes, X% compared to three average don't listen. If it's 89 minutes or less, X% or more will listen." Obviously, I'm making up the run time and there are plenty of other variables. I could speculate on several similar reasons but I figure the editor of these normally has some basic guidelines they follow to keep the show good. I agree that I'd like to keep the episodes as uncut as possible but I also get why they cut stuff.

The Starcrash was really choppy but I'm fine with them editing them in general. The live shows have more dead space than you might think and they use jokes multiple times. If I'm listening at home, I don't want to hear the unedited several minute long "Raise your hand if you have a Second Opinions theme. Ok. I'll pick you... you... you... you... you... and you. Here's directions to get to the stage." It's necessary to get that audience participation but it's a long, not particularly funny section. I bet it sounds the exact same every line show. That would get tiring if you hear a 5-10 minute set of instructions every single live episode. Plus, a lot of jokes gets reused. While Paul walks around, this clip had "don't look at us." That's made it to an episode before. I attended two live shows in one night and Jason said it at both live shows. So, I assume he does it virtually every show. It lands at the live shows because you haven't heard it 50 times. Imagine hearing that every live episode. I'm sure there are more we don't hear every episode. I'm sure it keeps us sane from not hearing a joke repeatedly and it keeps them sane by having a go to joke that gets a laugh every show instead of filling dead air a new line every show. There was also that weird run where guests called in to the minisodes about masturbating to stars of the movie. It was really uncomfortable. I know there was someone here who said an audience member had a really long, uncomfortable question about finding an actress hot at a live show. That never made it to air either and I'm thankful for that. I do think it's kind of weird to cut bits that get turned into shirts. So, maybe leave that stuff in.

I think people got burned out on 3D because filmmakers weren't utilizing it well. Friday the 13th at least did some gimmicky stuff with it which at least fit the movie. So, I don't know if modern audiences would care but I do think the people who would watch a 30 year old slasher in theaters would eat it up. So, idk.

I'll be honest. I don't remember that one at all but, the one time I watched 2-6, was a day long marathon in college. It nearly broke me and my friend.

I agree. The first of any slasher series is the best. I bet the other Nightmare movie you're thinking of is the one in the mental institution. I don't know which number it was, but it's definitely the best of the sequels. I also really like New Nightmare in concept. It kind of sucks from being too bland and 90s in execution but it's such an awesome idea.

I found the Nightmare series went way downhill once Freddy started joking a lot. I generally dislike when horror movies have you rooting for the killer though which is what his jokes kind of turned into. It worked in the first one and, of all the slasher movie series, I remember the first Nightmare being the scariest. The 3D effects in Friday The 13th Part 3 are really fun in a theater. I saw a midnight show of it a few years ago before 3D came back. Maybe it wouldn't be as much fun now that people hate 3D again but the audience was going crazy for most of the 3D gags.

Corey Feldman was 13 passing a 12 year old. The guy playing Tommy in Part V was 25 playing a 17 year old. The guy playing Tommy in Part VI was 27.

https://fridaythe13th.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Friday_the_13th_series Here's a timeline from a Friday the 13th fan wiki. This movie does take place in 1990 which really is mind blowing. Even with a name change, I think people would probably remember. Parts 2-4 take place over a long weekend and Jason killed 34 people. That's international news. Especially when it's only 5 years after a mass murder by the same killer's mother in the original movie. Then there's the copycat killer in part 5. There's the benefit of being pre-internet where it's harder to research this but you'd think locals would get something in place to prevent the camp from opening after all this.

Just an FYI, I won't link it but this episode can easily be found online with a Google search. Zeke got his nose bit off. He became a plumber because he didn't mind the smell. There was a gas leak that caused an explosion killing Zeke. Now he wears a mask to cover his face and wanders the camp looking for his cursed plunger. If you have the plunger, he'll suck out your brains.

I think the movie is basically a Lovecraftian horror movie (based on my limited knowledge of Lovecraft). It's just a person, or possibly two people, going mad from exposure to isolation and seeing an otherworldly monster. I didn't care much for the movie. I appreciated the look of it. I think the acting was top notch. I'm really glad Robert Pattinson is shedding Twilight and I hope he starts getting the recognition he deserves. But I was bored for a lot of the movie and nothing really came to anything I found compelling.

A boat motor still has a throttle. A motor being on doesn't mean the propeller is spinning. Think of it like a car. You can start your car's engine but you still need to step on the accelerator.

I don't think it was entirely dependent on Iron Man's success since Incredible Hulk came out the next month. It was another two years until the next one which was Iron Man 2. So, it was definitely relying on Iron Man's success. I don't know if we would have gotten Thor and Captain America so quickly if there hadn't been a tease of an Avengers Initiative and the conversation that sparked.

I think Paul's take on the Marvel movies that Jon Favreau found the special formula ignores the biggest thing in that, starting with Iron Man, Marvel decided to make an interconnected universe. Iron Man is fine but it wasn't until Avengers brought them together that the truly separated themselves from other superhero movies. As for Godfather II, I really hope the Solo thing isn't a nod to it. The scene was bad enough on its own but doing that as an homage is oof, not good.

For sure this. I think virtually all perfumes and colognes smell the same or 95% the same. Unless they have a very specific, singular scent they are replicating (say vanilla or something), they might as well all be the same to me. I assume I just don't have a sensitive smell palette (idk what this is called for your nose). Also, why can't the be perfume that smells like freshly baked bread? If you want to get my attention, that will do it. Everyone likes bakeries.

"Potting" a ball means getting it in the pocket. I assumed he was an actual vampire but, only now, do I realize how weird that is. I thought the telekinesis was strange but we've seen vampires have a range of powers that aren't consistent. So, the weirdest thing about it is that he's seemingly never used it before.

Yeah. That's the version I saw. There seems to be a lot of conflicting information on this movie. I've seen three years of release and this was maybe a tv movie. I saw something claiming this has a two hour runtime.

The is technically a way to score higher than a standard 147 maximum break. It requires your opponent to go first without pocketing any balls and make a mistake (I want to say a specific mistake but I don't remember). This can mean the official can award another ball on the table giving another scoring opportunity but you then have to do a full maximum break including the extra ball. This makesthe highest possible score 155. This has never happened in an official snooker game by has been accomplished a couple times in non-regulation play.

It turns out the characters in this are inspired by real life snooker players. The green baize vampire is based on Ray "Dracula" Reardon and Jimmy "The Whirlwind" Webb. I don't know how The Whirlwind ties into an American western hero but, I guess so? I couldn't find any information about them wagering their careers or even notable matches against each other. So, I not sure why these two other than they were big figures in snooker in their day.