grudlian.

I was surprised by how little metal was in the soundtrack.

I will say unequivocally that I am so glad Facebook didn't even exist until my 20s. My social media accounts in high school would have been aaaaawwwwwwfffffuuuuulllllll.

Every once in a while, I really want the not obviously right leaning sections of the media to actually take the low road and say "Uhhhh, you're being kind of a triggered snowflake begging for a safe space when you think people should leave Trump alone." Not that I think people legitimately needing safe spaces is analogous with a bunch of uptight white people mad they had to make a gay wedding cake. I just think there is some similarity there even if one side isn't justified in their behavior. The closest the US has to 12a is PG-13. In the US, anyone of any age can see a PG-13 movie without a parent or guardian in attendance. As a former theatre employee, I might question a kid if they were very very young buying a ticket. But the age I'd probably start questioning a kid, few adults would probably let their kid run around unsupervised at that age with money to even buy a movie ticket. Where I worked, we had a no one under 6 years old in a rated R movie after 6. Parents would argue to let them bring their children to the movie anyway. You have literally all day to bring your toddler to see Deadpool. Let's just limit it to before 6pm. The worst I remember seeing was a parent bringing their, I don't know, 10-12 year old kids out of Hostel saying it was inappropriate. They thought the movie had too much nudity and thought it would be more like Saw.

I hadn't even thought of the cultural context of this movie. It seems weird think about it now, but would it have seemed weird then?I'm just thinking about we are smack dab in the middle of comic book, superhero, nerd movie heyday. Does it seem weird that we can choose right now between Star Wars and Call Me By Your Name? Or Star Wars and Moonlight last year? Or Star Wars and 45 Years before that?

Oddly enough, the bit Paul discusses in the episode is a Bill Hicks bit.

Peter Weller made the right choice.

I could literally have this conversation for hours but I will spare everyone a song by song, album by album analysis of solo McCartney.

U talking U2 to me is helping U2 for me, but I realized I don't like any of the albums after All That You Can't Leave Behind. They make me think I'll like it but I know I won't. For sure but it was preceded by Kisses On The Bottom which is one of his worst ever. In all fairness, I like all of his albums on some level (except maybe Press To Play or Back To The Egg). But if I'm in the mood for McCartney, anything after Flaming Pie isn't going to be near my first choice.

Pearl Jam and Kendrick Lamar. Paul McCartney still but that's out of obligation more than enjoyment anymore. For directors, Spielberg for sure.

Maybe the Rock Star episode is only gong to be 3 minutes long.

Honestly, Eraserhead could probably qualify as its own HDTGM movie. I'd certainly like to hear June's explanations of what's happening.

I would love if HDTGM did this movie.

That's really why I decided to make the La La Land joke. I don't think Chazelle would deny lifting from Umbrellas. The connections between them are pretty strong.

I was worried there might be some confusion. We are watching Umbrellas Of Cherbourg.

I'd still try and have a balanced party. A cleric will have more attack ability than older editions. A fighter will have done protection and healing ability (but weaker). The balance just helps if you get a bunch of people who don't plan a party well. It just softens things a bit. For example, I've been playing a barbarian for a while. So, I should be the strongest attacker. I can be if I roll well but a friend's character is a kind of fighter who often does just as much damage as me due to weird rules giving him multiple attacks.

I've been playing 5e since it cane out and like it a lot. It's really streamlined a lot of things so you can play instead of worry about how to do things. So it isn't as daunting to new players. Its also pretty customizable (I play a game called Pugmire which mostly used 5e as its core rules). The only problem is things seem a bit too balanced at times. A group of mages don't need to worry destroyed at low levels. A group of fighters don't need to worry about healing. It also takes away a bit of the specialization of each class.

I know I suggested that my pick was going probably going to be from television but I decided on something more traditional. The film director Damien Chazelle said of my Musical Monday selection: "At its heart, it's about two young people who love each other but grow apart once their naivety wears off and they realize life requires tradeoffs" That's what I wanted for for my pick. I wanted, as one of the taglines states, "A film for all the young lovers of the wide, wide world." A movie about love itself and how bittersweet it can be. A movie that is filled to the brim with bright, saturated colors and dream-like cinematography. A movie where the main stars are not even professional singers. A movie that was nominated for a slew of Oscars including Best Song and Best Original Score. It is also a movie with a truly unique Oscar history that I don't think any other film can boast. As I'm sure you've all guessed, we're watching:

As What's Its Mission mentioned earlier, the book explained there were suicide booths for people to donate their bodies to be freejacks. We see the ads for suicide in the movie. It's possible there is a thriving business for voluntary freejacks in the movie that is never explored. Certainly, I could see a depressing reality where people donate their bodies as a way to stave off financial ruin for their families. I could also see a future where criminals are sentenced to be freejacks instead of the death penalty. The entire premise of Freejack reminds me of A Sound Of Thunder where an industry is built up to send people back in time and hunt dinosaurs right before they were going to die of natural causes. I'm in the same boat as you. In fact, I went into this thinking I was really going to love this one. I can sometimes like a movie through the lens of what I would have thought as a kid (and 12 year old me probably would have loved this). It has an...interesting cast. So, I was pretty amped for this despite what everyone's Letterboxd ratings said. A few minutes in and I'm sort of liking it even though I'm confused on what's happening and what year it is. Then it just kind of stops being interesting. It kind of recovers when everyone comes together at the end in Anthony Hopkins' office to switch bodies, but it's too late. There was an hour of being boring. That's such a disappointment because I thought I'd like it. But also because there's a lot to explore with the premise. There are so many ways to approach it. This could easily be an action movie. It could be a depressing dystopian, Black Mirror thing. It could be a science fiction mystery. I would love to see how someone like Ridley Scott or John Carpenter would have approached this in the 80s.

Since Cameron H is sick The Wall Win A Home Sweepstakes is back! Enter for a chance to win $25,000! We watched: No, that's not right. Two soldiers, trapped by a sniper. Their only chance to survive is The Wall No.... War is still hell and it really messes up your children:

One weird thing about the gun is Emilio and Rene Russo are in the elevator and Emilio says he had one bullet left. So, naturally, you expect him to use it in a dramatic fashion, or kill someone of importance, or save it until he needs it. Instead, he leans out of the elevator in the middle of a firefight and shoots some nobody. In that situation, wouldn't you just let the two gangs shoot each other instead of wasting your one bullet.

More or less sex appeal than John Larroquette?

I really thought the "6" was a joke similar to Mr. Burns social security number being 000-00-0002.

When Emilio makes up Anthony Hopkins ID number, did anyone else think it was going to be the number he was entering into the machine to switch souls? I think that makes a lot more sense for the entire ending. Emilio could have memorized those digits for a couple minutes and it's logical that it's the number to switch bodies. Mick Jagger wouldn't need to lie for no reason about Emilio getting the number right.

I won't be able to make the 9th.

The 16th is good with me. Unless something comes up, tomorrow night is also good for me.