grudlian.

Normally, I'd agree with you... I AM THE BEST! I AM THE BEST! I AM THE BEST! But seriously, all I did was ask a friend some questions. I guess the real winner is my friend. Now if I could convince Paul to buy stuff based my own personal expertise like Taylor Anne, that's the real comment of the week.

In theory, no, I don't need to rewatch every movie recently to confirm my opinions on it. With Platoon, yeah, maybe. I know there aren't literal mystical Indians in the final movie but a lot of the characters felt like archetypes more than real people in places. They are archetypes in Wizard of Oz but they are very different movies doing very different things. I'm honestly just kind of half heartedly defending my position because I'm not big on ranking things if there are more than a few items (hence having no list on letterboxd). I'm probably not watching Platoon ever again because ehhh I liked it okay and that's about it. Wizard Of Oz I will definitely watch again. Platoon didn't accomplish all of its goals while I think Wizard Of Oz did. I can get completely swept away in Oz but never did in Platoon. Others are free to disagree with me. That's cool. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind just state my own thoughts on it.

Platoon is debatably better at storytelling. Wizard Of Oz doesn't have the depth of Platoon but it absolutely nails what it sets out to do. Platoon is muddled in parts and I remember the narration being really corny in parts. I'd also argue that storytelling is only one aspect of being great. I think Wizard Of Oz excels are probably everything else. It's visually more impressive. I think the acting is honestly better (though it's hard to compare since they are very different types of roles). I like the music more. I think it's just better all around. I also haven't seen Platoon in a long time. So, maybe I'm misremembering how much some of it turned me off but hearing Amy and Paul talk about mystical Indians and what not makes me think, no, I'm remembering its flaws just fine.

I didn't rewatch Platoon but Wizard Of Oz is the better movie.

James Cameron?

I just had a sudden flashback about the Striptease poster after seeing it so much on Letterboxd. I used to occasionally run the orientation at the theater I worked at and part of that was a sexual harassment video. One of the examples they used was for putting a bunch of potentially offensive posters up together. And Striptease was the example poster.

some people aren't millennial snowflakes

I agree with this to a point. Bill and Ted was made when using homophobic slurs was deemed acceptable though. I take that kind of stuff with a grain of salt. It's easy to let things slide that way even if maybe we shouldn't. Crank 2 isn't even a decade old. Things have changed a lot in the last 10 years but this was offensive then. Maybe not as offensive but still definitely offensive. And I definitely knew better for some of this stuff. And that isn't even the reason I disliked it this time. I don't know.

I guess if you like any movie before the past couple years, you almost certainly like a movie that has some problematic stuff in it. I guess you can like them in spite of being offensive. But I'm trying to figure out why I don't like this and the main reason isn't it's offensiveness. I've just figured out how to pretend I'm working...or no one expects anything from me. Either way.

Maybe this is saying a bit too much about myself but honestly, the biggest change in enjoyment between 2009 and 2018 for Crank was the energy. There really isn't a movie, except maybe Gamer, that feels like these movies. The very loose grip on reality, the insane concept, the everything really. Neveldine and Taylor are singular auteurs of a sort (good auteurs is another discussion). And, that's what made me not enjoy Crank this time. Being racist, misogynist, homophobic, transphobic, etc. didn't bother me. It does bother me but that's not why I didn't enjoy this movie this time. It wasn't fun. It didn't feel energetic, or crazy. It was boring. Maybe part of that is the offensiveness but I don't think it was all of it. I'm not even sure why that wasn't my main problem with Crank 2. Maybe it's an unwillingness to let go of liking it? Some kind of Goonies conundrum thing? I don't know.

I bet neither of them had seen them in years. I listened to the HDTGM episode and everyone there loved it as well. I'd be very curious how June feels about it now. I suspect everyone else kind of cooled off but June I think would hate it. I genuinely loved both of them when I saw them in theaters. Crank was probably the longest sustained laughing fit I've ever had. From 30 seconds in until the end, non stop laughing and loving how ridiculous it is. Last Friday, it was boring. The frenetic energy from the crazy editing wasn't there.i recognized the movie as offensive at the time but I guess it didn't bother me because they were being so unapologetic about it (and one of my biggest problems was Bai Ling taking like the Full Metal Jacket prostitute and she wrote that dialogue herself). A lot of the movie is playing off of our referencing he first one. So, that's lost if you haven't seen, or seen in a while, the first one.

As I recall, isn't the satellite we see a laser? I know it was planned to be one but it's not made explicit in the movie.

The good news is it has pretty much the exact same plot. The bad news is there are no jokes to really focus on.

I could have sworn I had seen commas in some names for people with Sr. or Jr. in them. It turns out this is the traditional way of doing it but seems to have fallen by the wayside. It looks like it depends on which style guide you adhere to. MLA says to do it. Chicago Style Guide said not to starting in 1993. Associated Press says to not do it. I would say it's up to the person whose name it is.

I'm voting now. Whenever Crank comes up in the HDTGM Classics, let's skip to whatever is next.

Wasn't the public reaction kind of "This dumb chick movie! Why does it even exist?"

I guess we never nailed down for certain who is hosting this time. Taylor Anne, are you still good to do it?

This is one of the things that bummed me out. The women who worked in the club were totally accepting of Demi Moore and they supportive of each other. I can understand why Demi doesn't want her daughter to see her dancing. I can understand not wanting to do this job and wanting out of this life. But she clearly has no respect for this job or these women and that's not the same thing at all as not exposing her daughter to this life. They were the only good people in the movie which is, completely by accident in my opinion, a great message. I think it's subtly pointing out how life probably is for women in this profession. They have to help each other because of the stigma against erotic dancers. So many people think dancers are shitty people or get easy money. These women have to support each other because no one else will. Even Demi Moore's character who is literally doing this job and should understand their plight. Fuck Demi Moore in this movie

Also, I agree that it's stupid Demi Moore couldn't be an agent or director or training or profiler or whatever for the FBI. She had already played a naval lawyer by this point in A Few Good Men. We had X-Files and Silence Of The Lambs at this point. She didn't need to be a secretary. I'd argue it makes more sense for her to be an agent after finding out you can't have a relationship with local police. She could have a whole story of "I'm trained to be in law enforcement. That's what I'm best at. Now I can't do that because the FBI doesn't want me and the police don't trust me/want to cross a potential line." Being a secretary for the FBI probably means you could get a job at ANY place needing a secretary because you've done one of the hardest secretarial jobs.

So, I messaged a friend of mine from college who works for the FBI. Looks like it's not only plausible, but very likely that this would happen. I think it's interesting to note you can't even be involved with police. While I didn't ask for different rules for agents versus secretaries, I would assume they have similar rules just because they probably have access to a lot of information.

I didn't see this when I posted. Aren't there occasionally custody hearings well at a divorce if things change? I think it's major changes or extreme extenuating circumstances. I could see Robert Patrick being the kind of guy who would get his ex fired then telling his lawyer to try and get custody.

You're right. I guess I was thinking the scenario was she lost get job because of his criminal behavior then they got divorced. I'm thinking it's more likely, in the words mind but not the real world, that they got divorced a while ago and she just recently lost her job. Someone here read the book. Maybe they explain it more there.

I had a thing written out based on a former coworker who lost his job but then I realized we're taking about her ex husband. How do you lose your job because your ex is a scumbag. Being married is one thing but you can't control what your ex does?

Someone said in the mini thread that working for law enforcement could require a background check on criminals you may know. This was for working in a prison and if you knew people in that specific prison. That's a far shot away from an FBI secretary being married to a police informant. So, I guess it's plausible but still unusual. EDIT: It just occurred to me a friend from college is in the FBI. I might ask him of he knows the policy for being married to criminals.

I think part of the reason Burt Reynolds did this movie for scale is because his career was at a real low point. He went from being one of the biggest movie stars in the country to mostly failed sitcoms (except Evening Shade which is great) and cameos. His last kind of successful movie was Cop & 1/2. I could see him lobbying to get into what was probably billed as a sexy crime thriller starring probably the biggest actress of the day.