Cameron H.

No, Thomas Jane was a complete wild card. He just dropped in uninvited. Man-Bun is constantly talking about how your Plan A is only as good as your Plan B, but homeboy sure did leave the lives of his wife and daughter up to chance, didn't he?

Maybe it's just me, but a scene I found to be absolutely hilarious was near the end of the film when The Rumble's men were laying siege to Man-Bun's home, and how they all had industrial grade flashlights blazing even though it appeared to be maybe early dusk. I would think any professional killers worth their salt would try to avoid immediately announcing their presence to their targets--especially when all the lights are on in the house suggests that people inside are probably awake. But what was even crazier, at least to to me, was the reason Thomas Jane was in the kitchen when they arrived was because he was apparently making an elaborate pasta dinner for one? I love to cook, but motherfucker was going to a whole Hell of a lot of effort just to cook a single serving of pasta and a smidgen of marinara. Since you're messing up their kitchen, using their appliances, and eating their food, the least you could do is make enough for Man-Bun's wife and daughter too, asshole.

Sure, it was thrilling for all of us when Thomas Jane, from the the comfort of Chez Man-Bun, sent in a drone at the last minute to rescue Iggy from the Rumble's thugs, but I just wanted to point out that, according to my research, the average battery life of a drone is only about 7 minutes. Granted, considering their drone seems to be built specifically for goon assassination, I'm guessing they probably have a better than average drone. But even so, a top quality drone only has a range of about 8 miles and a battery life of 31 minutes. This means that that vast expanse Iggy gets exiled to is essentially adjacent to Man-Bun's house. People literally drive farther for a quick Target run. I mean, at that point, he might as well have just set up shop in Man-Bun's backyard. At least that would afford him some privacy and a defensible position. Furthermore, it would mean Iggy would be on hand to protect Man-Bun's family, whom the Rumble has already threatened to kill, and not just count on an unexpected midnight visit from your daughter's drunk ass godfather. (Since I just brought it up, I also just wanted to say that one of my favorite scene in the entire movie was when Thomas Jane shows up in the middle of the night, waking Man-Bun up from his nightmare, and they have beer together on the veranda beneath a canopy of twinkling fairy lights. I love the idea of Man-Bun eschewing harsh exterior lighting in favor of creating ambiance.)

Regarding Iggy, I too found his role absolutely baffling. He is set up as the getaway driver, but then is immediately relegated to ground support. Why not just make him their all around vehicle proficiency guy? That way, instead of our main character having to pilot the Money Plane himself, essentially making him narratively useless for a good third of the film, you could have Iggy in the cockpit. From a writing standpoint, this would put Man-Bun front and center on the casino floor where he belongs, while simultaneously adding a bit more drama to the film by forcing him to confront his gambling addiction head on. Honestly, why not add the dimension where he has to be the man on the floor because he's the only one with the gambling skills to survive the Money Plane, but in so doing, risks getting sucked back into the world of illicit gambling and potentially putting the entire mission at risk? And on a story level, having Iggy in the cockpit would also solve the issue of McGillicuddy continually having to "make an appearance" (as he puts it) on the casino floor so he doesn't arouse suspicion. I mean, why the Hell would you assign the job of "front-facing schmoozer" to the person who needs to be able surreptitiously slip away in order to do his job? If the movie really felt the need for a guy on the ground, Thomas Jane was right freaking there!

I honestly still can't believe that we are supposed to buy Man-Bun as some kind of gentlemen thief. The dude is conspicuous as all Hell! Isn't the idea for thieves (and spies) to be sort of nondescript? I mean, if you're already an uncommonly large man, and your objective is to blend, why on Earth would you voluntarily saddle yourself with so many additional easily identifiable features? You'd get caught in a fucking heartbeat.

For me, this movie really highlighted the importance of good editing. Not in a grammatical sense or ensuring that superfluous scenes end up on the cutting room floor, but in how the order of a scene is so important in making them feel necessary. For example, there's a scene where Katrina Norman is attacked. Afterwards, she reveals that the safe she's supposed to crack, but realizes that the specs for the safe are different than what they prepared for. Man-Bun asks her if she can do it. She says, yes, but it will take time -- which he says they don't have. It cuts back to her, she takes the goon's finger, places it on the keypad, and bing! it immediately opens. Not only is that all super boring, but it makes the previous line about the safe being nigh impenetrable absolutely pointless. It would have made far more engaging for her to uncover the uncrackable safe first, call Man-Bun and say, "Hey, bro, we have a problem. The safe is going to take more time than we thought. Plus, it requires thumb print identification." He could then say that they don't have that kind of time, and maybe even give her a ticking clock. (i.e. "If we don't open that safe in the next three minutes we're toast!") THEN, while focused on cracking the safe, she gets caught off guard. So now we have her in a situation where if she doesn't win this fight, she's going to be exposed or killed. At the same time, the fight is also costing precious seconds that they don't have, threatening to blow the entire operation. She could then defeat the guard, maybe give a comedic nod to the fact that there's no way some random guard would have the thumbprint required that will open it, tries it anyway, and boom, it works! My version includes all the elements that made it into the final film, but in reordering them, it increases the the stakes considerably. There's absolutely no point in introducing a problem just for your character to resolve it immediately. Good drama means continually ratcheting the tension by constantly stacking the decks against the heroes.

Oh yes, he was well aware that people didn't really like him. That line about him being forgotten and that the credit for the entire Revolution would be given to Franklin and Washington was a direct quote.. It was also prescient. Again, he was pretty arrogant, but he also had the talent to back it up. He was someone people admired, but didn't necessarily like.

I think another issue with Canada is the fact that there are a ton of amazing Canadian artists, but as soon as they achieve success, they tend to immigrate to America. So Canada ends up losing a lot of that culture that might help define its identiy.

I love the HBO series, and you will see a lot of the same characters found in this movie. It goes a lot more into all of their relationships. (Plus, you'll get a more age appropriate Rutledge who was only 26 or 27 at the time.) I try to watch 1776 and John Adams every year around the Fourth, but...I gave it a pass this year. Talking about it though does make me want to revisit it. Maybe next week... It also has a far different take on Hamilton (played by the fantastic Rufus Sewell). Not that he was "evil" exactly, but he was absolutely manipulative. John Adams wrote the state constitution after the war (1780?), but before we were the United States. Prior to that, we were the Confederate States of America for about a decade. It was much more European in the sense that each state was essentially it's own country. One of the problems with this was each state had its own currency, which lead to a lot of confusion--particularly with exchange rates and whatnot. This is why Hamilton's ideas were so important as it established a National Bank. And, of course, Hamilton (The Musical) goes into it a bit why the South in particular wouldn't want that. They were extremely wealthy, but they also didn't have to pay for labor. It's also fun to note that Adams was right about not writing the Declaration himself. When you compare the Massachusetts constitution to Virginia's (written by Jefferson) it is far more verbose and less poetic.

I think a lot of what you’re describing can apply to depictions of Captain America too. It’s why people outside of America can be fans of his. As far as Adams is concerned, he was always fiercely anti-slavery, primarily through his religious beliefs. Remember, his son Quincy Adams was a staunch abolitionist as well and argued (successfully) in the Supreme Court in the Amistad case. That was based on his upbringing. Adams also made slavery illegal in Massachusetts when he wrote the state’s constitution. No, Adams was a pretty good dude—especially compared to the other founders. He was mostly into justice. He would defend slaves in court, and actually defended the British after the Boston Massacre because he was the only one in the city who would give them a fair defense. (He won that too) By all accounts, Adams biggest flaw was egotism. He always wanted to prove he was the smartest in the room. He also made some pretty unpopular blunders during his presidency with the Alien and Sedition Act and the XYZ Affair, both of which were incredibly dicey political issues that I’m not sure anyone could have navigated any better.

It still frustrates me that John Adams doesn’t have a statue on the National Mall. I’d love to see one made for him (Preferably, with Abagail next to him ) Jefferson is a toughy. He was no doubt brilliant, but on a personal level, he’s definitely more problematic. I mean, on the one hand he did resolve to free his slaves, but in the end, due to excessive debt from his extravagant lifestyle, he never actually followed through. Weird (disturbing) fact, Jefferson truly did love his wife Martha and carried a locket of her hair with him until his death. He never remarried, although, obviously, there was Sally Hemmings (which I refuse to call a “relationship”). Sally Hemmings was actually the half-sister of Martha (through rape) and his attraction to her was apparently due to her strong resemblance to his deceased wife.

Yeah, I think any songs with Martha and Abigail are welcome for this reason. It also helps that Adams and Franklin have distinctive voices—even if they wouldn’t be considered classically “good.” There’s just not a lot of harmonizing going on in general. Musically it’s not very complex. That’s not a criticism, mind you. I love the music.

I suspect it is him (which is really cool), I just meant I couldn’t confirm it 100%. Even before he appeared on screen, as soon as I saw that it was from the people who made Mandy, I was like, “Oh, yeah, it’s probably him.”

I also really like the music in this even if it isn't doing anything particularly groundbreaking. It has an easy, humable vibe to it that I really enjoy. I have had "The Egg" in my head since last night, and "Is Anybody There?" is a tour de force from Mr Feeny Kit John Adams.

Looks an awful lot like him but he's not listed on IMDb, so...I don't know

From a technical standpoint, if I had a criticism, it’s that by virtue of the story being male driven, there’s not a lot of dynamism during company songs. It’s just a wall of baritones bombarding you. That being said, the more I think about it, I wonder if that’s by design. It really gives a unharmonious, cacophonic impression that I feel might be deliberate. I own the soundtrack (which Howard Da Silva [Ben Franklin] wasn’t present for and his understudy is...disappointing) and listen to how it was recorded.

As I said on the earlier thread, I think my first experience with 1776 was over the course of a couple days in, I want to say, 7th grade. It's always stuck with me since then as it combines music and early American History which are things I'm both passionate and fascinated by. What I love about it is it really gave John Adams a lot of credit for what he accomplished--especially as he's largely dismissed as a mediocre president. Which, honestly, is probably true, but I don't think being the head of state was really where his talent was. 1776 is a remarkably accurate retelling of what happened at the time, with much of the dialogue being pulled directly from John Adams's correspondence to his wife. Which, now that I write that, is probably the more logistical reason to put him in the forefront of the Musical.

It’s Monday, and you know what that means. It’s...

Best movie ever

You got it (OMFG! I try to quote respond to @TheeCupcakeKid to them that they correctly quote responded, and somehow I fucked up my own quote response—lol! Oh well...)

I know it won't be for everyone, but this is straight up one of my favorite Musicals. It could be because I was shown it in history class at an impressionable age, but it really hits a lot of sweet spots for me.

Ha! Yes I think I am! Either that, or it's because I started watching Cats last night, and I stopped at "Gus the Theater Cat." Probably a combo of the two To your other point, Kaz doesn't seem to have much control over his lasciviousness. The demon makes him leer, cat call, and goose women uncontrollably. I don't think there's any way he's going to be hired if he's constantly ogling his co-workers. He has Human Resources Violator written all over him.

Thanks for creating the thread @Cinco DeNio Take your time with your pick. I hope your doctor's visit goes well

But none of those character traits are Gus fault, right? I have to hand it to a Rom-Com that’s willing to play the game on Hard Mode.

Honestly, I wondered this to. My “no-prize” answer was while she was working, he was out busking. Since she was providing room and board, he could spend a bit of cash on new clothes.