Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×
Smigg.

Episode 233 — Space Jam LIVE!

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, RyanSz said:

That soundtrack ruled, I completely ruined my cassette copy with how much I was playing it, though that was also of the times too because back in the 90s the soundtracks were as well, or at times, better received as the movies they were attached to. I mean can anyone here think of a recent soundtrack that got as much acclaim as the movie it was for, I think 8 Mile is the closest in the last 20 years.

I would say Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.1. It took me a minute to think of—because I agree, soundtracks aren’t as big as they used to be—but I fucking love that soundtrack and it’s super-popular.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, GrahamS. said:

I would say Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.1. It took me a minute to think of—because I agree, soundtracks aren’t as big as they used to be—but I fucking love that soundtrack and it’s super-popular.

You're right that is a good one. I just remember the soundtracks of the 90s as basically the way for Seal to release his next big single with each new Batman movie.

Also am I alone in thinking that Barkley didn't ask the director for a follow up scene after he got his talent back where he goes back to that park court and utterly dominates that team of kids a la Billy Madison?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, GrahamS. said:

I would say Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.1. It took me a minute to think of—because I agree, soundtracks aren’t as big as they used to be—but I fucking love that soundtrack and it’s super-popular.

The only other one I can think of are O Brother, Where Art Thou and that just barely fits within the last 20 years. Black Panther also had a pretty well received soundtrack but it definitely wasn't bigger than the movie.

If you want to skate by on a technicality, Jesus Is King by Kanye West had a movie with a very limited theatrical release. So, the album was bigger than the movie but that's really pushing the definition of soundtrack and movie.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, grudlian. said:

The only other one I can think of are O Brother, Where Art Thou and that just barely fits within the last 20 years. Black Panther also had a pretty well received soundtrack but it definitely wasn't bigger than the movie.

If you want to skate by on a technicality, Jesus Is King by Kanye West had a movie with a very limited theatrical release. So, the album was bigger than the movie but that's really pushing the definition of soundtrack and movie.

I don't know how well it did commercially but the Into The Spider-Verse soundtrack is pretty great.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, theworstbuddhist said:

I don't know how well it did commercially but the Into The Spider-Verse soundtrack is pretty great.

I know Sunflower was a really big hit, which definitely helped it sell fairly well, but it didn't have any other huge singles which is a shame. It kinda falls into the same category as the Dangerous Minds soundtrack which is basically bolstered by one mega hit while the rest is just kinda there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

When Jordan is initially seized by the Tune Squad, he is informed by Bugs that they are mostly concerned that they will be forced to perform “the same jokes every night.” However, as Paul mentions in the episode, according to the movie’s universe, all Looney Tunes cartoons perform their respective cartoons live. So if Bugs Bunny’s first appearance was in 1940, by the movie’s logic, that means he’s already been performing the same act, non-stop, for 56 years. Aren’t they kind of already doing what they’re afraid they’ll be forced to do?

Instead of the threat being “we’re going to make you keep doing what you love doing, at the same frequency you’re already doing it, just someplace else,” wouldn’t the more appropriate conflict for a movie like this be if the aliens wanted them to *stop* being Looney altogether? At least then the threat becomes existential. Either they win the game, or they cease to be. This also can extend the threat to our Earth by claiming that without their zany antics, our world will turn into dreary, garbage can fire lit dystopia. I don’t know, but “forcing me to do the thing I love to do forever” seems pretty weak as far as stakes go.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Okay a few things about the episode. 

1. When Paul said they stole the players souls and not their talent because of Charles Barkley walking into a wall, I think he got that idea from the episode of the SImpsons where Bart sells his soul and the doors don't open for him. Could be wrong, but that's why when he said stole their soul, I was like "Oh yeah. Makes sense because of Bart Simpson." Also, Jason's been on a real tear lately about souls not existing. I think it is weird that he can suspend his belief for so many things but seems to feel if a soul exists in a movie it must be pointed out that they do not exist. Nothing I love thinking about better during a comedy podcast than the finality of death and the pointlessness of life. I'm tuning in to forgot the likelihood of those things, Zooks! Jeez.

2. Somebody else pointed out the racist undertones of Bugs Bunny talking to Michael Jordan about slavery. Agreed. But even more racist was everything Foghorn Leghorn did. I know he's supposed to be an old Southern gent, but is it really necessary to have him sing the first line of Dixie, the anthem of the Confederacy? Who's that joke for? Young Richard Spencer? Also, I know one of his catchphrases is to say "boy" repeatedly. But if I'm making a movie with a black athlete, I'm not going to have a cartoon rooster hold a sign at him that says "I say 10, boy." If you need to know why that's problematic, ask Michael Evans in Good Times.   https://mademoiselleclipon.tumblr.com/post/142445173366/good-times

3. As for the "Jam" party of space jam, Paul was right that "jamming' is synonymous with a slam dunk. In addition to NBA Jam, there was also Charles Barkley's Shut up and Jam (best game ever!). And in the early 80's, you had the University of Houston teams known as "Phi Slama Jama" featuring future NBA legends Hakeem "the Dream" Olajuwon and Clyde "the Glide" Drexler. 

4. I did not remember how bad this movie was. But as a Knicks fan, it was pleasant to remember a time where we were good. Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley, Derek Harper. And Larry Johnson was on Charlotte on that point, but I'll always remember him as a Knick. BTW, I thought he was better than all the other basketball players at acting. Probably all that experience playing Grandmama. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Kothel said:

Okay a few things about the episode. 

1. When Paul said they stole the players souls and not their talent because of Charles Barkley walking into a wall, I think he got that idea from the episode of the SImpsons where Bart sells his soul and the doors don't open for him. Could be wrong, but that's why when he said stole their soul, I was like "Oh yeah. Makes sense because of Bart Simpson." Also, Jason's been on a real tear lately about souls not existing. I think it is weird that he can suspend his belief for so many things but seems to feel if a soul exists in a movie it must be pointed out that they do not exist. Nothing I love thinking about better during a comedy podcast than the finality of death and the pointlessness of life. I'm tuning in to forgot the likelihood of those things, Zooks! Jeez.

I think Jason may be traumatized from watching Jacob's Ladder and people forcing him to relive it almost every episode, so it makes sense to me that he rejects the idea of the soul.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

While I object to the idea of animated sexualized animals, I think if you're going to have them there should be gender equality. For every Lola Bunny, you should have a male counterpart with abs and a chiselled jaw. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you thought Lola Bunny was weirdly sexualised for a kids movie about basketball... these were actual adverts in the UK, for a chocolate bar.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Smigg. said:

If you thought Lola Bunny was weirdly sexualised for a kids movie about basketball... these were actual adverts in the UK, for a chocolate bar.

 

Well that ad makes sense because that's a fucking sexy chocolate bar.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, RyanSz said:

Well that ad makes sense because that's a fucking sexy chocolate bar.

 

I love a Cadbury's Caramel.  You get a box of Minature Heroes, and the Caramel's have all gone, I'm gonna start swinging.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/14/2020 at 7:59 AM, grudlian. said:

The Monstars only stole the talent from five NBA players. Why didn't the Looney Tunes recruit any of the other current NBA players? Why not get Larry Bird?

Larry Bird retired in 1992, he wasn't current.

Also a correction/omission:

One of the people in the audience notes that the Bulls 72-10 season was the year of the film (1996), right after Jordan returned from baseball/forced retirement. He also said that "it's never been beat!" which isn't true: the 2016 Golden State Warriors went 73-9. They remain the only teams to crack 70 wins, though this year's Bucks seem to be heading there. 

The Clippers in 1996 went 29-63 and were owned by Donald Sterling (hi Paul!).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

In all fairness, the sexualizing of Looney Tunes characters has a long and distinguished history. This is classy stuff, people! And for kids!

IMG_20200215_120936.jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AlmostAGhost said:

Larry Bird retired in 1992, he wasn't current.

The whole reason they got Michael Jordan is because he wasn't current. I'm just referencing him specifically because he's in the movie. Within the context of the movie, it doesn't make much sense to have Bill Murray play and not grab Larry Bird.

Share this post


Link to post

I find it a bit disconcerting just how unquestioningly eager Jordan’s kids were to aid and abet Bugs and Daffy in stank basketball shorts larceny. I know they’re fans of the toons and all, but that’s really not an excuse. I mean, I’m a huge Beatles fan, but if Paul McCartney were to a break into my house at two in the morning to steal my father’s shoes and underwear, I’m going to call the motherfucking cops. Hell, Bugs and Daffy don’t even tell the kids *why* they’re stealing Michael Jordan memorabilia until they’re halfway out the door. 

Honestly, how much of a fuck up of a father do you have to be that your kids will gleefully give up your most prized possessions at the drop of a hat?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm going to posit that the only way this movie could make sense concerning the mash-up of real VS toon worlds is if people of the real world DO know that the Looney Tunes exist and live beneath the earth to supply endless hours of cartoon entertainment for TV. This would be THE ONLY reason why Michael, his children, Wayne Knight and Bill Murray did NOT freak out or even question the existence of the Looney Tunes as actual living beings they were interacting with. I think the director missed a huge opportunity to reference HIS OWN COMMERCIAL by having Michael and Bugs be colleagues from endorsing Nike. Bugs could have just met up with Michael, been like, "Hey, you remember how Marvin the Martian was trying to steal those Air Jordons? Well, we kinda have the same thing going on, except it's 'real' aliens and they want to steal US!" They could've even shown a CLIP of the original commercial.

By the way, the full length version of that commercial is actually 1 min 30 secs.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I was 14 when this movie came out. I'm pretty sure I saw it in theater and at least once or twice on VHS or TV, but had not watched it since the 90s. I remember it being huge, but even as someone who loved Looney Tunes during the 90s (and Tiny Toons and Animaniacs), I just was never that huge a fan of Space Jam. I'm guessing it's because I am not a basketball fan and I didn't find Lola Bunny attractive.

I do remember being shocked to learn later that "Fly Like an Eagle" by Seal was a COVER.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Cameron H. said:

I find it a bit disconcerting just how unquestioningly eager Jordan’s kids were to aid and abet Bugs and Daffy in stank basketball shorts larceny. I know they’re fans of the toons and all, but that’s really not an excuse. I mean, I’m a huge Beatles fan, but if Paul McCartney were to a break into my house at two in the morning to steal my father’s shoes and underwear, I’m going to call the motherfucking cops. Hell, Bugs and Daffy don’t even tell the kids *why* they’re stealing Michael Jordan memorabilia until they’re halfway out the door. 

Honestly, how much of a fuck up of a father do you have to be that your kids will gleefully give up your most prized possessions at the drop of a hat?

Why are you denying Paul McCartney your father’s underwear?? I’m mean, if he’s that desperate at two in the morning to get his geriatric ass outta bed and steal clothes, there must be a good reason. Why be a hater?

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post

I recognize this movie is a commercial, but aren't almost all kids movies, especially animated ones? Artistic merits notwithstanding, a movie like WALL-E presents itself as a cautionary fable, warning us about the dangers of rampant consumerism, cultural complacency, and excess waste, all the while generating thousands of individual products with adorable robots, complete with Disney and Pixar branding, all of which create their own waste. Don't get me wrong, WALL-E is a beautiful film, but at least Space Jam is honest about its blatant consumerism. It's not hiding behind a cute, doughy-eyed Pixar creation. No one is telling you can go "To Infinity And Beyond," as long as you buy this $25 action figure, they're just trying to get you to buy some fucking Gatorade.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

While I get that Michael Jordan is nominally the hero of the movie, I think that amidst all the glitz and glamor of jammed space it’s easy to overlook Lola Bunny’s heroism. You have to remember that Moron Mountain is only interested in the Looney Tunes for their marquee value, and this being Lola Bunny’s debut, there’s no reason to believe that the nerdlucks would have any interest in kidnapping her. Honestly, she could have just let all the other Tunes rot in Theme Park Damnation and used the comedy vacuum left behind to rise to the pinnacle of loonism. However, no matter how tempting that must have been for her, she suppressed that urge and signed up to play. Why? Two reasons: the love of the game and good old fashioned altruism. By joining the TuneSquad, she was deliberately putting a target on her back, risking her freedom and future simply because it was the right thing to do. We should all be so brave.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

While I get that Michael Jordan is nominally the hero of the movie, I think that amidst all the glitz and glamor of jammed space it’s easy to overlook Lola Bunny’s heroism. You have to remember that Moron Mountain is only interested in the Looney Tunes for their marquee value, and this being Lola Bunny’s debut, there’s no reason to believe that the nerdlucks would have any interest in kidnapping her. Honestly, she could have just let all the other Tunes rot in Theme Park Damnation and used the comedy vacuum left behind to rise to the pinnacle of loonism. However, no matter how tempting that must have been for her, she suppressed that urge and signed up to play. Why? Two reasons: the love of the game and good old fashioned altruism. By joining the TuneSquad, she was deliberately putting a target on her back, risking her freedom and future simply because it was the right thing to do. We should all be so brave.

I think this is interesting in the context of Lola being a Looney Tunes character. The classic versions of Bugs, Daffy, etc. (especially the antagonist characters) are habitually self-centered, if not narcissistic. They are content to humiliate their opponents, deriving pleasure and comedy from their victories, with their end goal being to be left alone. The idea of actually stopping, say, Elmer Fudd from killing other sentient Tunes is totally against their nature. They actively turn his guns TOWARDS each other (see: Duck Season vs. Rabbit Season). Lola would be much more at home in the world of Tiny Toon Adventures or Animaniacs, where it was far easier to find altruism and friendship among the main characters.

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Researching Lola Bunny and her character in The Looney Tunes Show is pretty much a complete 180 of her original Space Jam version. Just watch the first 1:50 of this

I don't know how to feel

The Looney Tunes wiki states her character in New Looney Tunes is a bit more clever, but I tried watching a clip and I couldn't... I couldn't make it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Just leaving a quick doodle from memory of THE BEST BUNNY before I go to bed. I'm done spamming for today I promise.

20200215buster.png

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/14/2020 at 7:59 AM, grudlian. said:

The Monstars only stole the talent from five NBA players. Why didn't the Looney Tunes recruit any of the other current NBA players? Why not get Larry Bird?

At the Time of this movie Larry Bird has retired and thus no more talent. As for as grabbing other Players... can’t answer that.

Share this post


Link to post

×