Cameron H.

Yeah, R&J is just a mess of dysfunction. I’ve never really taken them to be “in love” either. Not only was Romeo hung up on Rosalind, but Juliet was being forced to marry the much older Paris. Juliet serves as a rebound for Romeo, and Romeo is an “out” for Juliet. Like, I think they were attracted to each other, but the only way their love would ever actually be “eternal” is through death. I always quietly chuckle when people hold R&J up as romantic ideals. Like I said previously, I think it’s more about squandered youth - dying young - over something stupid (e.g. a family feud, a gang rivalry) I think WSS sells Tony and Maria’s love a little better, to be honest. Sure, they’re being a bit naive, but I think that’s okay when you are first falling in love - or at least it should be. Cutting out the Rosalind character also helps sell the audience on Tony’s feelings for Maria; and Chino never really feels like as much of an issue for Maria as Paris does for Juliet.

Lol - yeah, that’s cool. Here are my first five off the top of my head: 1) The Core 2) Blank Check 3) Live a Little, Love a Little (or some other Elvis movie) 4) Monkeybone 5) Town & Country

Um...I’m only about 20 minutes in, but I’m going to have to go ahead and add Live a Little, Love a Little to the list of HDTGM worthy Elvis movies. So far, it is fucking bananas. It’s like a erotic, psychodrama - Elvis-style. Or if Misery were filmed with a Beach Blanket Bingo aesthetic. I literally don’t know if Elvis is going to make it out of this one or not...

Here’s a question we haven’t asked in a long awhile: what are the top five movies you hope HDTGM will cover in the future? I think they’ve done a bunch of mine, so I’ll have to think about it myself... (Taylor’s not allowed to say Queen of the Damned )

Good morning all! Now...

I would consider Tony seeking out Chino to be suicide. I also think of Maria’s fate as a kind of metaphorical suicide. She’s not really going to “live” anymore, if you know what I mean. (I love Annie, too!)

Personally, I love Singin’ in the Rain, and if you asked me a week ago, I probably would have put it above West Side Story. However, on this re-watch WSS felt like the better picture. When it comes down to it, SitR is a great movie, but the plot feels kind of like pap. It’s a jukebox musical about famous actors trying to stay famous, having their talent recognized, and falling in love. WSS feels more visceral to me with its themes. Outside of Tony, Maria, and Anita, there aren’t really “good guys” and “bad guys,” just points of view. And the movie does a decent job of presenting both points of view. No, it’s not perfect, but it has a lot more weight than just “how can we fool everyone into thinking that this woman who can’t sing actually can so we can stay rich?” I mean, yeah, it’s essentially Romeo & Juliet, but it adapted really well. It delivers a contemporary message that is able to extend beyond Shakespeare’s intention. In R&J, Shakespeare introduces us to the Capulets and Montagues as being “alike in dignity,” and we really don’t get too much in terms of their rationale for disliking each other. R&J can’t be together just sort of...because? And in the end, we’re sad because we recognize what a waste it is for two young people to die without reason. WSS, on the other hand, doesn’t have the same balance. While both groups are equal in street rep, it’s clear that the “whiter” gang is favored by the police. I think this distinction helps set it apart from R&J while introducing its own themes about race and clashing cultures. When Tony dies, we not only think “how tragic to die over something so silly,” but hopefully, what can I personally do to make sure this never happens again? It forces the audience to reflect on their own prejudices in a way that R&J doesn’t. Again, I love SitR. I would absolutely not remove it from the list. But for me, WSS is more emotionally satisfying and that puts it ahead of SitR on my own personal list. ETA: Just continued listening and the are basically making my same point. Oops. Guess I should listen to an entire episode before commenting

I’m commenting as I’m listening, and I hate to break it our hosts, but yeah, Maria doesn’t date again. She doesn’t move on. We have to check our cynicism at the door and accept that what Tony and Maria has is True Love. You don’t just move on from that. And remember, this is Romeo and Juliet. And while Maria may not physically die like Juliet, her notion of romantic love certainly does. She will not recover from Tony’s death. But if you want to know what happens to her, I think the movie gives us some visual clues. First, the image of her holding Tony is reminiscent of La Pieta, the statue of Jesus’ mother Mary holding his body after the crucifixion. And of course the image of her in the shawl at the end further evokes the image of the Virgin Mary. (Not the movie image, but the moment I’m thinking of) So given these images and the tragedy of the situation, I think it’s a pretty safe bet Maria becomes a nun. It’s not the end of her literal life, but perhaps it’s the end of her worldly life.

As someone who is currently making his way through Elvis’ filmography, I just wanted to say Elvis does not have a knife in Jailhouse Rock. He kills a man with his bare hands! That’s what lands him in jail. Also, Elvis dies in Love Me Tender, his first film role, and Flaming Star, one of his Westerns. There may be others as well. As far as whether or not Elvis would be a good Tony, personally, I don’t think it would be a good fit. However, it's not that I don't think he could pull it off acting-wise. I’ve seen quite a few of his movies now and the issues with them are rarely due to his acting. He feels like a part of whatever world he’s in - even if that world is completely ridiculous. I think he would be capable of handling the material, but he’s incapable of not being Elvis. (I’ve wondered in some of my Letterboxd reviews why they don’t just call all his characters “Elvis” because he’s not fooling anyone.) Again, it’s not that he can’t act, but his look is so iconic that it becomes a distraction. I think he would have come off as too sexy as well. I think Tony needs to feel a bit sweet and vulnerable. And while Elvis had a great voice with remarkable range, I don’t think it would be great fit for West Side Story’s style of music. He also never did an accent. I’m not saying he couldn’t, but maybe that would have been beyond his capabilities. I don’t know, but with New York being such a crucial backdrop, having your lead speaking with a thick Southern drawl might look and sound a bit silly. Still, I think Elvis was a solid enough actor that had he been given better material, he could have done well. Or at least, better than he did. Oh, and since I'm on the topic, Clambake and Stay Away, Joe would both be good candidates for HDTGM The first one is just flat out ridiculous and the second has Burgess Meredith made up to be a Native American. It is upsetting.

I HAVE to finish this episode now. This is a travesty!

This week Paul & Amy sing the praises of 1935’s Marx Brothers comedy “A Night At The Opera!” They take apart the film’s most famous scene in detail, listen to the “Shallow” of 1935, and debate what modern comedies could make the AFI list now. Plus: Amanda Garrett from the Old Hollywood Films blog talks about the life of Margaret Dumont, and Frank Ferrante tells us what he’s learned as a world-class Groucho Marx impersonator. Next week, help us make a musical montage by calling the Unspooled voicemail line at 747-666-5824 and singing a little bit of West Side Story’s “America”! Follow us on Twitter @Unspooled, get more info at unspooledpod.com, and don’t forget to rate, review & subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts. Photo credit: Kim Troxall This episode is brought to you by The Human Algorithm Podcast, Linkedin (www.linkedin.com/UNSPOOLED), and Fracture (www.fractureme.com/UNSPOOLED).

I think we are generally. And not in the sense that we are all lock step with one another and push out dissenters. We all disagree from time to time - sometimes passionately - but it's usually about a specific point in a movie or something that was said. Taylor and I have gotten into it ourselves once or twice. The thing is, we know and trust each other and we always try to be thoughtful with what we say. There is a pattern of behavior of people who come in here rarely, or create an account expressly for, criticizing female guests. Not just here, but on other podcasts as well. (I Think CBB had an issue the last time Tig was on). I've been posting here for almost five years, and I don't know that I've ever seen a person create an account to complain about a male guest. Does that mean all criticism of a female guest is inherently sexist? No. But it doesn't change the fact the pattern does exist. Taylor was only pointing out, in her own inimitable way, that out of the first 8 posts, five were critical of Erin. Only yours pointed out Brian and Jason as well. She wrote one post, and over on Redditt, the forums were already being accused "policing" criticism of Erin. One post out of 9 was enough to accuse us of being fascist. All Taylor was trying to say, if she doesn't mind me maybe putting words in her mouth, is "We've seen this before and could we maybe not do it this time?" If someone posts that they don't like a guest, fine, "like" that post and move on. Your voice has been heard and recorded. There's no need to dog pile with multiple posts that essentially say the same thing. We get it. You've made your opinion known, but please, let's not bog down the thread with negativity for negativity's sake when, normally, this is really such a positive place. That's what most of us did with Taylor's post. We liked it, but didn't comment further. (Of course it's been brought up again since then, but the point stands.) So for my part, I welcome everyone. We don't always have to agree. I love our dumb little debates. We can be respectful to each other, to our hosts, to their guests, and to Earwolf. Paul has always been extremely helpful with constructive criticism. He does read the forums (sometimes), and if he feels like it's something worth addressing, he will. He's always been super cool about that. I just say we should try to be just as cool back. Complaining about a guest doesn't really add to the conversation. Like, I haven't necessarily liked 100% of the guests on the show, but I've never once felt compelled to come here and complain about any of them. They're real people with feelings who may come on here to read how the fans responded to the show. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. Why do that? I don't want to be responsible for anyone else's bad day.

It's especially noticeable to those of us who are here most often. We see the pattern of people who either dust off or create an account just to complain about a guest, and more often than not, those guests tend to be women. What annoys me about it further is whether the person they are complaining about is a woman or man, gay or straight, or even if the complaint is completely justified, there's nothing constructive about it. The episode has been birthed. It's out there in the world and there's nothing anyone can do about it except...not listen. I know people like to think that their opinion is going to matter, but I seriously doubt Paul does pre-show huddles backstage at Largo with Jason, June, and the guests and is like, "Okay, we got some complaints from first time poster AssDisaster39 on the forums about yelling into the mics. So let's try to keep the energy low tonight for the live audience. Also, I printed out the plot synopsis from Wikipedia, so let's try to keep on topic and take it beat for beat . You know structured: the essence of improv." My point is, no one needs the negativity. You don't have to love every episode or every guest. But unless your complaint is valid, and not just grousing, and you have a workable solution that might actually help the show, keep it to yourself. No one on the show or at Earwolf is taking you seriously - at all. Constructive criticsm isn't, "My ears were bleeding!" Constructive criticism sounds more like "I think the levels were off during the episode. It might be an issue with the sound needing to be properly Normalized, Compressed, and the the loudness matched." This is a polite, workable complaint that doesn't mention anyone by name and could maybe even be corrected. Anyway, if you truly have a problem, your best bet is to not listen. If HDTGM notices a steep drop in downloads for Live episodes, I'm sure they'll look into the problem and correct it if they feel it's necessary. However, I don't think there's quite the numbers to justify that quite yet. I think the episode, or the first half I've listened to anyway, has been great!

I think the biggest mystery for me is which one of you nerds championed so hard for confectioners on the pod survey that Paul now has to shill for Twix. (Loving the episode, btw. Black mold as a character flaw had me rolling.)

I just want to say, because I haven’t already, I’m really looking forward to this one. I’ve never seen it before.

Damn. We were, like, spot on with our replies - lol

It’s only available on Stitcher Premium under the Pee Cast Blast festival banner. I haven’t listened to it since it came out, but I remember it being really good. Doug Benson was the guest.

I’ve already guessed and provided two clues (although, admittedly, one was by accident)

It’s in my watch list already

I can hardly wait to totally not watch MASH again - ever.

Hey man, it sounds like you’ve got a great positive attitude going into this. I wish you luck whatever the outcome, and if you ever need a place to vent your frustrations, we’re always here

I definitely think Mel Brooks should be represented although I prefer Young Frankenstein to Blazing Saddles.

I’ve got great news for you: https://www.earwolf.com/episode/rad-live/

Almost like a certain “Goonies Conundrum...”

Holy crap!