Episode 127.5 - Minisode 127.5

[IJoinedJustForThis 35]

I have to say that I usually can't stand Kline, especially in comedies. There are a few exceptions, but generally I find him to be smug and the expression on his face always seems to say "you're welcome for that."

 

I take exception to that! Maybe I haven't seen all that many comedies with him, but A Fish Called Wanda? Fierce Creatures? Obviously, Wild Wild West was a terrible mistake, but what else?

[Cameron H. 23786]

So far, I'm only about an hour into Streets of Fire, and I have to say, I don't not like it. It's not exactly good, but I'm not finding it to be all that crazy--at least by HDTGM standards. I also found it funny that Paul alluded to writer Lin-Manuel Miranda during the episode since my impression of Streets of Fire is not too different from what he did with Hamilton--albeit, much more deftly and successfully. And, by the way, if any of you haven't had the pleasure of listening to the Hamilton soundtrack, I highly recommend it! I've been listening to it on repeat for the last week, and it is simply incredible! It's all on YouTube, please take some time to listen. I will talk your ear off about it until forever. I'm attaching one of my favorite parts, but you really need to listen to it from the beginning to get the full effect.

 

 

Also, I can watch Rick Moranis in just about anything. I don't think he gets the credit he deserves, and he's great in this movie.

[Lando 2019]

 

I take exception to that! Maybe I haven't seen all that many comedies with him, but A Fish Called Wanda? Fierce Creatures? Obviously, Wild Wild West was a terrible mistake, but what else?

 

It has been a while since I have seen A Fish Called Wanda or Fierce Creatures, and even still he is flanked by two Monty Python alumni so it might not matter. He works in I Love You To Death, and bearable in The Ice Storm (not a comedy), but I dislike Dave and In & Out (which feels like the whole time the jokes are supposed to be like "It's funny because he's gay!!!!")

 

It could just be that I have an irrational and completely unjustified dislike of Kevin Kline for some unknown reason.

[jarrycanada 2483]

This movie is basically the inspiration to both Pluto Nash and the Joel Schumacher Batman films. Also, Rick Moranis might be the biggest asshole in any HDTGM movie, seriously he is so unnecessarily a dick that I'm amazed he wasn't shot in the face right at the start of the main journey.

 

When I first watched this movie months ago, i got very excited about Diane Lane as she was so good in "Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains" as I am a long time fan of that movie, long before i ever started listening to The Fogelnest Files with Jake Fogelnest. I had that movie taped on beta. in the old super channel days, when two powerful channels ruled the world or in Canada anyway.

 

and then the movie played and Diane Lane got up on stage and started singing the most toneless songs. this movie had another name to it, white people can't sing. Rick Moranis plays a dick headed manager who isn't very good at managing his own wardrobe check out his shirt.

 

 

plaid on plaid shirt. and yes that is Elizabeth Daily you remember her from peewees big adventure and Valley Girl. I thought she was hot.

 

I am not sure I would compare this movie to anything Joel Schumacher would ever do. the worlds worst director. second to Uwe boll.

 

watch for Bill Paxton in this movie and get ready to be let down by no one-liner.

[IJoinedJustForThis 35]

 

It has been a while since I have seen A Fish Called Wanda or Fierce Creatures, and even still he is flanked by two Monty Python alumni so it might not matter. He works in I Love You To Death, and bearable in The Ice Storm (not a comedy), but I dislike Dave and In & Out (which feels like the whole time the jokes are supposed to be like "It's funny because he's gay!!!!")

 

It could just be that I have an irrational and completely unjustified dislike of Kevin Kline for some unknown reason.

 

Oh, different strokes and all that. But although I like him a lot (for some reason, he's a familiar childhood face) I can see him coming across as smug, that's why I'm interested. I can only assume it's the mustache.

 

Had to look up, but have seen I Love You To Death, not familiar with Ice Storm. I think Dave was sort of weak, but he was fine in it. This leaves In & Out as the edge case: I remember vaguely liking it when it came out, but I saw it last year or so and it did not hold up at all. In fact, it may well be a good candidate for the show, for all the gay stereotypes alone.

 

Oh hey, another one - he was pretty good in soapdish too, another comedy. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soapdish)

[babyoilbandit 81]

I tried watching Streets of Fire - it turns out I drunk rated it before and I hadn't previously seen it - and I really couldn't stand it. I've seen some awful films because of this podcast and I've given up on some awful films too, like Theodore Rex and Perfect, and I guess this is another of those I'll just have to listen to the podcast and enjoy it without having seen the whole film.

 

So, disregard my earlier advice to watch this, now I'm saying don't watch it. As if anyone cares what my recommendations for bad movies is.

[RyanSz 3140]

 

When I first watched this movie months ago, i got very excited about Diane Lane as she was so good in "Ladies and Gentlemen, the Fabulous Stains" as I am a long time fan of that movie, long before i ever started listening to The Fogelnest Files with Jake Fogelnest. I had that movie taped on beta. in the old super channel days, when two powerful channels ruled the world or in Canada anyway.

 

and then the movie played and Diane Lane got up on stage and started singing the most toneless songs. this movie had another name to it, white people can't sing. Rick Moranis plays a dick headed manager who isn't very good at managing his own wardrobe check out his shirt.

 

 

plaid on plaid shirt. and yes that is Elizabeth Daily you remember her from peewees big adventure and Valley Girl. I thought she was hot.

 

I am not sure I would compare this movie to anything Joel Schumacher would ever do. the worlds worst director. second to Uwe boll.

 

watch for Bill Paxton in this movie and get ready to be let down by no one-liner.

EG Daily was actually pretty upset that she wasn't allowed to sing in the movie, despite that she actually is a pretty decent one. Also the numerous allusions to The Warriors are many and clear in this movie, even down to using Lee Ving as the second in command of the biker gang. I'm more surprised that they actually thought that this would do well enough to warrant two sequels, which was the original plan. Also the whole romance between Diane Lane and the main character was completely worthless as he basically banged her one more time, punched her in the face, and then left her with dickhead Moranis.

[SlidePocket 707]

This film and Eddie and the Cruisers from the year before tried to make Michael Pare a star, but after these two didn't do so well at the box office, Pare has done nothing but B-movie schlock ever since, mostly with Uwe Boll.

[IJoinedJustForThis 35]

Uwe Boll.

 

Oh brother. Uwe "making-terrible-movies-for-tax-break-purposes" Boll. I'd rather watch Christopher Lambert's Beowulf thrice before watching one of his movies.

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

So, I'm about halfway through this thing and... I think I love it? It's like if someone from the 1980s saw a poster of a 1950s biker movie and decided to make what they thought it might be like, listening to Bruce Springsteen's "Streets of Fire" song while writing the screenplay. It's a delusional piece of whacked-out nostalgia and 1980s movie tropes and it's fun as all hell. It's like a mutated version of what happened with Kazaam, where too many cooks got together with a bunch of shitty ingredients to make a terrible, commodified product. Here, a bunch of cooks took a bunch of... insane ingredients and turned it into something singular. Maybe not... good, but something I don't think I've seen before. Maybe like if Happy Days thought it was a gritty crime drama... but also a musical? I am confused as fuck and I like it.

[PlanBFromOuterSpace 3138]

Okay guys, hottest Ma Kent: Diane Lane or Annette O'Toole? I was ready to let Lane run away with that one, but then I got to looking at some older pics of O'Toole, and I'm kind of torn...

[FisterRoboto 7499]

 

Oh brother. Uwe "making-terrible-movies-for-tax-break-purposes" Boll. I'd rather watch Christopher Lambert's Beowulf thrice before watching one of his movies.

Ummm...I legit like the Lambert Beowfulf. At least it wasn't trying to pretend it was telling the story just so they could have a CGI half-nude Angelina Jolie.

 

And I also have a soft spot for wacked-out genre films.

[Cameron H. 23786]

Hey guys, there's been something that's been bugging me for the last couple of weeks and I wanted to put it out there as a conversation starter. This may be a bit controversial, but just know I'm not trying to be negative just to be an asshole--I am writing this with the best of intentions.

 

Ready? Okay...here it goes...Do we really need the Blake Harris articles?

 

Now, before I get into my issues with them (and yes, I get that I don't have to read them) let me say this: I think they are incredibly well-written, fascinating, and often offer surprising insights into the movie industry. In and of themselves, I think they are great, but I don't know how I feel about them as a companion to HDTGM. I get why it's a good move for both Blake and (to a lesser degree) HDTGM, but I do have some questions.

 

First of all, I don't know how I feel about putting a "human face" on the people who make these movies. For example, reading that the director of Kazaam had lost his daughter and wife to AIDS shortly before this movie was made, and how he gained some measure of catharsis through the making of it, almost makes making fun of it (even in the good spirit of the show) seem kind of cruel. I find some of his articles to be kind of like that friend who always sees the rain coming on an otherwise cloudless day. I'm not saying it's not going to rain later or that it's never rained in the past, but for the moment, can we not just bask in the sunlight?

 

My second issue is: how long until Blake's articles start to dictate the content of the show? In other words, I would rather there be no Blake Harris article than have to sit through episode after episode of Death Spa-esque/Canon level movies just because it's maybe easier for him to get interviews with the people involved with making those films. I'm sure it's no easy feat for him to get the interviews together as it is, but imagine if Paul said they wanted to do an episode on The Last Witch Hunter or the latest Fantastic Four movie. When Blake can't get anyone to talk to him (at least in a way that's meaningful or interesting) because they want to keep getting work, do they just scrap the episode altogether?

 

Maybe it's just me, but the first half of 2015 was filled with what I consider to be perfect movies for HDTGM (e.g. Deep Blue Sea, Con Air, Jupiter Ascending) and the second half (after the articles started to be published) to be filled with older, lower budget affairs (e.g. Theodore Rex, Perfect, Lifeforce, Death Spa). I'm not saying that the episodes have been less good, but the movies themselves have been next level terrible. If they are choosing these films over, say, Soul Man, because they've been dying to to do them, that's fine. But if they are only doing them for Blake's sake, then I'm going to have to call shenanigans.

 

I love the show, and God knows I'm not going anywhere anytime soon, I just wanted to get other people's opinions on it. However, let's keep it positive and let's keep it respectful.

 

P.S. Two points in regard to the quote about script writing and combining disparate ingredients.

 

Here were the ingredients for Kazaam:

 

1) Lonely child who spends a lot of time on the streets

2) absentee father

2) musical

3) silly genie

 

These were the exact same ingredients used to make Aladdin. All writers have to make concessions. Do you really think J.J. made the Force Awakens without tons of notes from Disney? And in the case of TFA, many of the notes probably had a lot to do with merchandising. Don't blame the system just because you don't have the talent to work within the framework.

 

Secondly...

 

 

"Chicken Breasts with Brandied Cherry-Chocolate Sauce"

 

All you need to do is garnish it with a couple marshmallows. Voila!

[theworstbuddhist 572]

Oh, Streets of Fire! I saw it when I was a kid in the theatre and I remember liking it at the time, and listening to the soundtrack a lot, especially the Dan Hartman song "I Can Dream About You", which was a big hit on the radio. I'm guessing someone at the label made them tack on the song by The Fixx ("Deeper and Deeper") over the credits.. it doesn't really fit the movie in any way. The Steinman songs, Stevie Nicks and The Blasters were all suitable, and Ry Cooder did a great score.

 

Anyway, my wife and I watched it the other night; she was not born yet when the film came out, so she had no idea what she was in for; she called it "a piece of hot garbage" and I have to agree for the most part. Michael Pare was great in Eddie and the Cruisers and a passable Vinnie Barbarino in The Greatest American Hero, but in this it's like someone game him a copy of Sylvester Stallone's F.I.S.T. and told him to be that guy. Rick Moranis clearly wanted a dramatic role for a change and instead comes off as a raging dickhead. Young Diane Lane is beautiful but the script gives her nothing to do. Like the movie, she only comes to life during the musical performances, and for a film that is supposed to be a musical - sorry, "Rock and Roll Fable"- there isn't a lot of time spent actually performing music. They should have hired leads who can sing and just doubled down on being an actual musical; if they did they might be enjoying fat Broadway royalties right now.

 

The art direction on the picture is bonkers, in a good way, and so is Willem Dafoe, who was going nowhere but up from here. The following year he was another memorable villain in a much better movie (To Live and Die in LA), and after that, Platoon etc. Bill Paxton is fine, the great Robert Townsend is in the Sorels, Ed Begley Jr. has a weird short scene, EG Daily is Diane Lane's friend who DOESN'T sing, Amy Madigan as the Lesbian Who Must Not Be Outed... pretty great supporting cast really. A 14 million dollar movie with a ten cent script.

 

It didn't occur to me until watching it again this week, but Streets of Fire fits in pretty well with a group of films that I remember fondly and which would all probably make good episodes of HDTGM: failed action franchises of the early 80s. We're talking Remo: The Adventure Begins, Hal Needham's Megaforce, Ice Pirates, Buckaroo Banzai (I know, it sort of had a sequel with Big Trouble in Little China), the appalling superhero musical The Return of Captain Invincible with Alan Arkin and Christopher Lee, and so on.

[PlanBFromOuterSpace 3138]

Hey guys, there's been something that's been bugging me for the last couple of weeks and I wanted to put it out there as a conversation starter. This may be a bit controversial, but just know I'm not trying to be negative just to be an asshole--I am writing this with the best of intentions.

 

Ready? Okay...here it goes...Do we really need the Blake Harris articles?

 

Now, before I get into my issues with them (and yes, I get that I don't have to read them) let me say this: I think they are incredibly well-written, fascinating, and often offer surprising insights into the movie industry. In and of themselves, I think they are great, but I don't know how I feel about them as a companion to HDTGM. I get why it's a good move for both Blake and (to a lesser degree) HDTGM, but I do have some questions.

 

First of all, I don't know how I feel about putting a "human face" on the people who make these movies. For example, reading that the director of Kazaam had lost his daughter and wife to AIDS shortly before this movie was made, and how he gained some measure of catharsis through the making of it, almost makes making fun of it (even in the good spirit of the show) seem kind of cruel. I find some of his articles to be kind of like that friend who always sees the rain coming on an otherwise cloudless day. I'm not saying it's not going to rain later or that it's never rained in the past, but for the moment, can we not just bask in the sunlight?

 

My second issue is: how long until Blake's articles start to dictate the content of the show? In other words, I would rather there be no Blake Harris article than have to sit through episode after episode of Death Spa-esque/Canon level movies just because it's maybe easier for him to get interviews with the people involved with making those films. I'm sure it's no easy feat for him to get the interviews together as it is, but imagine if Paul said they wanted to do an episode on The Last Witch Hunter or the latest Fantastic Four movie. When Blake can't get anyone to talk to him (at least in a way that's meaningful or interesting) because they want to keep getting work, do they just scrap the episode altogether?

 

Maybe it's just me, but the first half of 2015 was filled with what I consider to be perfect movies for HDTGM (e.g. Deep Blue Sea, Con Air, Jupiter Ascending) and the second half (after the articles started to be published) to be filled with older, lower budget affairs (e.g. Theodore Rex, Perfect, Lifeforce, Death Spa). I'm not saying that the episodes have been less good, but the movies themselves have been next level terrible. If they are choosing these films over, say, Soul Man, because they've been dying to to do them, that's fine. But if they are only doing them for Blake's sake, then I'm going to have to call shenanigans.

 

I love the show, and God knows I'm not going anywhere anytime soon, I just wanted to get other people's opinions on it. However, let's keep it positive and let's keep it respectful.

 

P.S. Two points in regard to the quote about script writing and combining disparate ingredients.

 

Here were the ingredients for Kazaam:

 

1) Lonely child who spends a lot of time on the streets

2) absentee father

2) musical

3) silly genie

 

These were the exact same ingredients used to make Aladdin. All writers have to make concessions. Do you really think J.J. made the Force Awakens without tons of notes from Disney? And in the case of TFA, many of the notes probably had a lot to do with merchandising. Don't blame the system just because you don't have the talent to work within the framework.

 

Secondly...

 

 

"Chicken Breasts with Brandied Cherry-Chocolate Sauce"

 

All you need to do is garnish it with a couple marshmallows. Voila!

I don't want to feel that I need to read the articles to get the whole experience, and while I'm a fan of things like director commentaries, anything more COULD end up feeling like homework. Hell, sometimes just watching these movies feels like homework, but because I like the hosts and guests on HDTGM, I'll usually give movies like the mid-90s kiddie garbage that was after my time a try. I don't need to read an extensive tell-all piece to know that trying to build ANY movie around Shaq was a bad idea, and I too don't want it to get to a point where it's assumed that I've read the Blake Harris story and that THAT becomes the launchpad for discussion and not the film itself.

 

Speaking of spending more time on something than any movie is worth, if I hear someone tell me I need to watch the Red Letter Media review of "Phantom Menace" just ONE more time, I just might scream. Seriously though, I've never seen people devote more time to something they hate than people that continue to harp on THAT film.

[taylor anne photo 11311]

I don't want to feel that I need to read the articles to get the whole experience, and while I'm a fan of things like director commentaries, anything more COULD end up feeling like homework. Hell, sometimes just watching these movies feels like homework, but because I like the hosts and guests on HDTGM, I'll usually give movies like the mid-90s kiddie garbage that was after my time a try. I don't need to read an extensive tell-all piece to know that trying to build ANY movie around Shaq was a bad idea, and I too don't want it to get to a point where it's assumed that I've read the Blake Harris story and that THAT becomes the launchpad for discussion and not the film itself.

I have to agree with both of y'all on this matter. It almost feels like we have to read it before submitting any corrections and omissions because the gang won't actually talk about things that Blake has written about in his articles. So if we choose not to read them and think they missed something then we're the dumb ones for not doing all of the homework before commenting.

 

At least that's just how I feel about it.

[FisterRoboto 7499]

So if we choose not to read them and think they missed something then we're the dumb ones for not doing all of the homework before commenting.

I mean...it's not like Paul will call you out by name and tell you that you're wrong in the middle of a minisode or anything (even when you're pretty much still right).

 

I think the best Blake Harris article was the one for Furious 7 about the couple that did stunts and how it was all a sort of family thing. I remember even tearing up a bit while reading that one.

 

Overall, I could take or leave them, though. Unless it's something I really want to know more about (like the SW Holiday Special), I usually don't bother reading them because I'd rather listen to the crew and then engage in our discussion. The more the Blake Harris articles go on, the more I agree that they kind of feel like they fall outside of that discussion and sometimes feel shoehorned in.

[paultab 225]

Paul will call you out by name and correct you in a minisode. I have experience in this regard.

 

Just finished watching Streets of Fire, and I streamed the Apple on Prime a month ago (which prompted me to suggest it on the subreddit, which I'm hoping got the movie on the queue). Both of these movies are MUST. SEE. The Apple is exceptionally bananapants -- they're airing Streets first for good reason, because... just see it.

 

The dialogue in Streets is hilarious. Drink every time someone plants a foot verbally ("Lemme get something straight for you" "cut the crap and listen" "I'll tell you how it's gonna be") and you will be well-sauced by the end of the first act.

[FisterRoboto 7499]

Paul will call you out by name and correct you in a minisode. I have experience in this regard.

Yeah, I was joking. He did it to me in the last minisode.

[taylor anne photo 11311]

Yeah, I was joking. He did it to me in the last minisode.

And to me in the one before that lol.

[Cameron H. 23786]

I don't want to feel that I need to read the articles to get the whole experience, and while I'm a fan of things like director commentaries, anything more COULD end up feeling like homework. Hell, sometimes just watching these movies feels like homework, but because I like the hosts and guests on HDTGM, I'll usually give movies like the mid-90s kiddie garbage that was after my time a try. I don't need to read an extensive tell-all piece to know that trying to build ANY movie around Shaq was a bad idea, and I too don't want it to get to a point where it's assumed that I've read the Blake Harris story and that THAT becomes the launchpad for discussion and not the film itself.

 

Speaking of spending more time on something than any movie is worth, if I hear someone tell me I need to watch the Red Letter Media review of "Phantom Menace" just ONE more time, I just might scream. Seriously though, I've never seen people devote more time to something they hate than people that continue to harp on THAT film.

 

I totally agree with you, particularly about the Red Letter Media thing. Can't we just let the prequels go, guys? They're bad movies. We get it. There's no challenge in making fun of them anymore.

 

To your other point, about maybe missing out on something by not reading the articles, I can see that too. I know I used TFA as an example on how to make a good movie while working within the system, but one of my biggest issues with it was how after the movie I would read all these articles about how such and such isn't a plot hole because it's explained in the novelization. Fuuuuuuuuck you, movie! Don't get me wrong, I love to read, but I shouldn't have to read a book based on a movie just to have these gaps filled in. Never mind, I haven't read a movie novelization since I was, like, eleven years old.

 

As for Fister's point, yeah, I could pretty much take or leave Blake's articles. I don't want anyone to think, just because I brought the subject up, that their continued existence is in someway negatively impacting my life. Trust me, I'm not losing any sleep over it. I suppose they have their place just as much as anything. I just like the idea of the question "How Did This Get Made?" remaining rhetorical. Getting a firm answer of "Well, this crazy thing happened because this was going on" kind of sucks the air out of everything. In other words, I don't read them and say, "Hey, that made the episode even better!" It's more, "Oh...okay then," or at the very worst, "Well, now that I know the real story, the gang looks pretty damn insensitive." I mean, if there's a legitimately crazy thing that happened, go for it. But do I need two articles about Shaq's movie career? How is one article about Canon films going to be that much different from another one? It kind of reminds me of what Paul said about Uwe Boll movies during the Dungeon Siege episode. It was something to the effect of, "We did Uwe Boll. I don't think we need to do another one."

 

But most of all, and I know I'm being redundant, I just really don't want it to become a case of the tail wagging the dog. There are so many solid picks left for this show to talk about--we're talking pages and pages of great recommendations--and I don't want the movies to be chosen simply because someone returned Blake's phone call or email. I'd prefer it if they just continue to do their thing, and if Blake can't get something together by the deadline, so be it. Better luck on the next movie.

[FisterRoboto 7499]

How is one article about Canon films going to be that much different from another one? It's kind of reminds me of what Paul said about Uwe Boll movies during the Dungeon Siege episode. It was something to the effect of, "We did Uwe Boll. I don't think we need to do another one."

This is kind of how I feel about all these Cannon films. There are a ton of bad movies out there; we've done several Cannon films. Can we move on yet?

[PlanBFromOuterSpace 3138]

 

This is kind of how I feel about all these Cannon films. There are a ton of bad movies out there; we've done several Cannon films. Can we move on yet?

I do think it gets interesting though when you start throwing in other factors, like when they have to work with a toy company to make "Masters of the Universe", or when they get handed an established film franchise like "Superman". I mean, the end result is almost always a disaster (and they were going to make MARVEL movies...), but at least it's not just "...and the movie only made half its budget back, because they overpaid Stallone" again.

[Cameron H. 23786]

I do think it gets interesting though when you start throwing in other factors, like when they have to work with a toy company to make "Masters of the Universe", or when they get handed an established film franchise like "Superman". I mean, the end result is almost always a disaster (and they were going to make MARVEL movies...), but at least it's not just "...and the movie only made half its budget back, because they overpaid Stallone" again.

 

I have to agree with you. I'm not saying don't do Cannon Films (which I just realized I've been misspelling), after all one of the movies I've been championing is Rockula--which I just found out was Cannon. I'm just saying maybe limit them to maybe one or two a year. With The Apple coming up, that will be three! Cannon films since October. Not to mention stuff like Death Spa, which might as well be Cannon.

[Elektra Boogaloo 3371]

I have to agree with both of y'all on this matter. It almost feels like we have to read it before submitting any corrections and omissions because the gang won't actually talk about things that Blake has written about in his articles. So if we choose not to read them and think they missed something then we're the dumb ones for not doing all of the homework before commenting.

 

At least that's just how I feel about it.

Something I was thinking about this week, since the Slash film article was kind of late, was that I'd prefer it came out with the minisode rather than the regular episode. That way we don't have to read it to comment on the actual episode, it's sort of like an extended corrections and omissions.