August 18, 2026 • 50 mins
Once more, it's time for a dose of Stuff to Blow Your Mind and Weirdhouse Cinema listener mail...
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind Listener Mail.
My name is Robert Lamb.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
And I am Joe McCormick, and today we are doing
a listener mail episode. These are the ones where we
read back messages from the Stuff to Blow your Mind
email address. If you are a listener and you've never
gotten in touch before, now is a great time to
try it. You can email at contact at stuff to
Blow your Mind dot com. We accept all kinds of messages.
(00:37):
If you just want to send a friendly note let
us know what you like about the show where you
listen from, that's great. We especially like if you have
something interesting to add to a subject we've talked about
on the show, maybe from your own professional experience or
just from your personal life or culture. Whatever you got,
send it our way contact at stuff to Blow Yourmind
dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
While we're at it, I'll go ahead and mention that
we have a discord server if you'd like to join that.
It's a tight net little group, but they're always welcoming
of new listeners. All you have to do is send
us an email and ask to be given the invite
link and we will provide it. Likewise, you can find us.
You can find us other places on social media. I
(01:19):
would say check us out on Instagram STBYM podcast. You
might be thinking yourself, I think I followed stuff to
blow your mind many years ago on Instagram. Well you
may have, but that account went away, it died and
a new one was reborn, and you'll have to rejoin
it and refollow it. And it's I think one of
the better places to sort of keep up with what
we're doing. We have little posts, little videos that come
(01:42):
out that will help you stay abreast of what our
latest episodes are. And then if you were a fan
of Weird House Cinema, look for us on letterboxed. We
are Weird House there and that's a great way to
keep up with the movies that we're covering on our
Friday episodes.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
All right, Rob, do you mind if I kick things
off with this mess from Pamela about diatoms. Let's do it,
subject line diatoms and imaging science. Pamela says, greetings, Rob
and Joe, still listening ten or twelve years later, Love
(02:17):
you guys. Haven't felt the need to write in for
a while, but better late than never. While listening to
your episode on diatoms, one of the things that caught
my attention was your discussion of the very real differences
between images from different magnification sources. I figured I would
discuss this because I have experience using scanning electron microscopes
(02:38):
or SEM, along with other high magnification microscopy. One of
the things that is obvious to regular users, but I
realize would be strange to someone with less knowledge, is
that SEM images are in gray scale only. If you
see color on an SEM image, that is coloring added
(02:58):
after the fact, similar to the colored images published by
NASA for stars and galaxies. Scanning electron microscopes do not
measure light. They collect signal from a focused, high energy
beam of electrons bouncing back off the item being measured.
This produces topographic images only of the surface detail of
(03:20):
a very small sample. Interestingly, even when you are measuring
something that is transparent or has transparent layers or parts,
this will still be presented in the image's grayscale and
return the surface topography of the exposed part of the
transparent part, so all grayscale and nothing below the surface.
A fun fact about SEM images of biological items is
(03:44):
that until the last ten to fifteen years ago, these
samples would have required an ultrathin sputtered layer of gold, yes,
traditionally gold. This gold layer existed to provide enough electron
bounce activity for the collector to receive gave a signal
back instead of the electrons mostly passing into or through
(04:04):
the subject. This is a very simplified, non technical description.
I've only personally imaged non biological samples myself, but in
the nineteen nineties there was often an image of some
nightmare fuel looking blown some nightmare fuel looking blown up
bug posted just to show potential customers what the lab
could do with something easily interpreted. I remember one lab
(04:28):
had a poster size image of a cricket that was
made of about sixty sem photos carefully pieced together because
of how small the individual image area is visible. Light
microscopes offer color and show transparency to one degree or another,
depending upon the direction of the light source and the
filters that may be involved. Many biological samples are taken
(04:52):
with fluorescing scopes and or other filters to improve the
visibility of colorless items. Important thing to remember is that
each of these tools is selected for different purposes. You
can't get the crisp topography from visible light, and you
cannot get the genuine color from a scanning electron microscope,
(05:13):
though I'm sure someone is working on that. I hope
this provides some context for why images of microscopic samples
are the way they are, as they are intended to
provide very different information about the sample. So, yeah, this
is really interesting. And this is picking up on a
comment from the Diatoms episode where we were talking about
how different, how different they look in these two different
(05:36):
imaging methods, Like the scanning electron micro microscope images. These
micrographs often had the more alien gears look. It emphasized
the kind of inorganic seeming elements. They were, of course
all organic, but you would see these little shells, the frustuls,
looking like pieces of machinery, broken clockwork, that sort of thing.
(05:59):
But then when you would look in the light based images,
you would see things that look more like art, maybe
like stained glass or water colors. You would still get
strange angles, like you know, we talked about those rectangular diatoms,
the kind of strange looking thing to see in nature.
But yeah, the colors add a more organic and artistic
(06:19):
element to it, and some of these differences are down
to just literally different shapes of different kinds of diatoms,
but other differences are down to the imaging method used.
So this is great, Thank you Pamela, But Pamela's not done.
She has things to say about Weird House as well.
Before I sign off, I would like to offer some
requests for future Weird House episodes. Both are nineteen sixties
(06:42):
era Japanese movies Oni Baba from nineteen sixty four and
Jigoku from nineteen sixty Oni Baba has one of the
most powerful uses of atmosphere I've ever watched. The moody
black and white film made. The way the very tall
grasses move around like they are alive and intentional was
(07:03):
deeply creepy, particularly joined with the odd soundtrack elevator pitch
quote even back when there were samurai, no one really
comes out of a war undamaged. Jigoku, also called The
Sinners of Hell, maybe the first movie to really go
for it, presenting images of possible hells and punishments, warning
about the bizarre rather naked but technically legalish credits at
(07:26):
the beginning, but they present a completely different vibe from
than the rest of the film. I strongly recommend both
of these. Thanks for all the entertainment you have provided
throughout the years. My commutes and workouts are better for it. Pamela, Well,
thank you so much, Pamela. As I was just saying
at the top, we'd love getting notes like this. Please,
(07:46):
anybody out there, if you're listening, if you ever have
something to add to a subject we've talked about on
the show, from your own field or domain of expertise,
or from your own culture or personal experience, always feel
free to write in contact at stuff to blow your mind.
I'll say it again, Yeah, we love stuff like this.
Thank you so.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
Much, and I really appreciate these film recommendations. I've seen
only Baba. It's been many years. I think I used
to own this on Criterion DVD. I think it was
a Criterion DVD and for some reason I liquidated it
at some point. I haven't seen the Centers of Hell,
but I'm sure both of them are at Video Drome,
Atlanta's own video drum store, which I think I'm contractually
(08:27):
obligated to mention since Joe and I are both wearing
our video drum t shirts at the same time in
the same podcast when we have choice.
Speaker 3 (08:36):
Just from the top of the head there, yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
Yep, yep, but yeah, I would love to check out
either of these, but only Boba I remember as being
quite atmospheric. I remember those. I remember the tall grass
and that creepy mask. For sure.
Speaker 3 (08:52):
We didn't coordinate our outfits. By the way, it's always
an accident.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
It is an accident. Yes, yes, when it happens, we
celebrate it. Bye. This next one comes to us from
Stephen and Steven says, Hi, Robert and Joe, I just
discovered your podcast last week. Stuff to Blow your mind
and Weird House Cinema are just fantastic. I have a
lot of listening catch up to do and it is
a joy. You guys are smart, funny and charming. Thank you.
(09:16):
May I offer a bit of nerdy info, okay, And
in this the listener is going to be responding to
our Weird House Cinema episode on the nineteen sixty one
film The Mask, which, if you haven't seen it or
you know you didn't listen to this episode. This was
a bizarre three D picture that centered around like in
(09:40):
a cult scenario with a mask and a lot of
like dreamy imagery.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
It was a real trip, not the one with Jim Carrey.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
No, no, Jim Carrett. This is not the Jim Carrey mask.
So anyway, the listener continues. For the nineteen sixty one
film The Mask, the actor who performed the role of
the Waxy young Man was, and I hope I'm pronouncing
this correctly, Rudy Lynn Chowton, a mind performer who studied
with Marcel Marceau. I don't have a lot of info
about him, except that he also performed at the Canadian
(10:09):
theater company called the New Play Society, which existed until
nineteen seventy one, where he was a staff member who
offered mind teaching and demonstrations. In The Mask, you can
see his mind training clearly during the Surreal Sequences. I
would also like to suggest a few nineteen forties films
that I think would slot into the weird House vibe
(10:30):
very nicely. And I'll go ahead and add this is
I greatly appreciate this because I think when you do
a breakdown by decade, not counting, like without getting into
anything before the nineteen thirties, the nineteen forties are that's
probably the decade that we've featured fewer films from. Part
of that is the selection pool, but obviously there are
(10:53):
still some weird films from the nineteen forties, and it
is a decade I would like to come back to.
So anyway, this is what this is what Stephen has
for us. The Devil Commands Boris Karloff seeks his dead
wife with wild uncanny valley finale. Okay, sounds good. I
haven't seen it me neither. Night Monster great, great title already,
(11:16):
I'm kind of sold already. Great ensemble performances and an
outrageous murderer reveal.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
Now, I think this is different from the Navy Versus
the Night Monster or Navy Versus the Night Monsters, which
indeed has some Navy officers in it, but also has
killer trees.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
Hmm, let's see yeah, night it must be yeah, Night
Monster nineteen forty two. Yeah, directed by Ford bb. So
this is one that I, uh, yeah, I would check
this out. I've never seen it either.
Speaker 3 (11:48):
Look up the poster for Navy Versus the Night Monsters.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Oh gosh, this is great. This is great. I see
the Navy in the background a little bit in the foreground,
but that monster looks amazing. There's no way we're getting
this into actual picture, but I like the look of
the poster.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
I've thought about this one for Weird House. We may
do both night Monster and Navy versus Night Monsters.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
Yeah yeah, bring on the night Monsters. All right, Let's
see what else we have. The mad Ghoul Evil George
Zuko turns hapless student into a ghoul.
Speaker 3 (12:21):
All right, haven't seen it me.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Neither sounds good though, man made monster evil lionel Atwill
turns Lon Cheney into electro creature. Okay. I love both
of those guys, and electro creatures are good to go
as well.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
This one's on my list. I actually haven't seen any
of these zero for four.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
All right, We've got to return to the forties soon,
so Stephen says, in my honest opinion, these are the
weirdest of the forties horror bees. I think you will
like them. Thanks for everything. Appreciate you best, Steven.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Thank you, Steven.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
All right, Joe, looks like we have one that has
to do with our dog Days episodes, which which I
do want to throw in. I was just looking the
other day. Are we in the dog Days? Technically? As
according to the Stars, and I don't think in our
neck of the woods we are quite yet. I think
we're the dog Days are still coming.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
We still haven't got the wow. And we've had some
hot times. Yeah, yeah, good thing, good thing. The stars
don't really control the temperature.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
Yeah. I was. I was on a hike with my
family Sunday morning and we were just we were just
swimming through it. It's just so hot and humid. And
they were like, is it. This is the dog Days?
This is it? And I'm like, Nope, not yet, not yet.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
Okay. This comes from Mark. Mark says, Hey, guys, I'm
a recent fan of your show, and I'm looking for
your discord link to make it easier to send questions.
All right, we have you already hit him up?
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Nope, did not, so I'll circle back to that.
Speaker 3 (13:59):
After we were this episode, Mark says, I enjoyed your
dog Day's episodes. I might have heard it incorrectly, but
I think you got the Greek myth of lee lapse
and the two Messian tu Messians must mean too Messian
fox slightly wrong. At least according to Wikipedia, Zeus turned
them both into stars Canus Major lee Lapse and Canus Minor.
(14:22):
The too Messian fox. I think you said he turned
the dog into a star, but the fox into a stone.
Wikipedia also points out this myth of a dog that
always caught its prey versus a fox that could never
be caught as an example of the irresistible force paradox,
classically formulated as what happens when an unstoppable force meets
(14:43):
an immovable object. So it's interesting to me why you
said he turned one of the animals into a stone.
Do some references say that. I thought about it for
a while and then it seemed like it fit very
well with magnetism, with a simple compass, if serious, w
sort of a magnetic north and the stone or spear
that always points in that direction is the tip of
(15:05):
o'rion's spear. That's kind of what that constellation in the
sky has looked like, has looked to me like for
over fifty years. Interesting. Thanks for the show. You can
quote me anytime, Mark. Well, thanks Mark. So I'm going
to start off addressing this note about Greek mythology here again.
So it's the story of the hound lee lapse and
(15:26):
the two Messian fox and what they were. The question
is what were they turned into? So I dug deeper
into this, and the interesting thing that I found is,
by far the most common version of the story in
ancient sources actually seems to be neither what my source
in the original episode said nor what you read on
(15:48):
the wiki. So I think the most common answer is
something different entirely, and I'll try to untangle this. So
this story appears in many different ancient sources, with some
details being different across the different accounts, Usually the core
is pretty much the same. And just to pick one
of these tellings to start with, I'm going to read
(16:09):
from the Metamorphoses of Antoninus Liberalis. This is a Greek
text from the second or third century CE, and the
English translation I'm using is what I found online by
Francis Celoria. So in this book, the story sits in
the middle of this complicated saga involving a bunch of
(16:29):
other characters, including the Athenian princess Procrus and her husband,
the ruler Cephalus. These two they're married, but then they
get kind of tested and driven apart, like the gods
get between them. I think the god Aos of Dawn,
Goddess of Dawn seduces Cephalus, I believe, and then Cephalus
(16:50):
jealously tests his own wife and finds her loyalty wanting.
So they get split up, and always Medlin gods are
messing around. Also, you know, jealous love on Earth aren't
doing any They're not doing themselves any favors. So pro
Chris is split up from her husband. She goes out
of wandering, and through this wandering she comes into possession
(17:12):
of a couple of magical hunting tools. One is a
spear and the other is a hunting dog. And Antoninus says, quote,
no animal could escape these two, and they always reached
their target. So the spear always hits what you throw
it at, and it's a hound that always catches its quarry.
How did she get these two treasures, Well, this is
(17:34):
a pretty weird story. They were given to her by Minus,
the king of Crete, because pro Chris helped Minus overcome
a sexual curse against him. I think in some tellings
this curse is cast by Pacify, Minus's own wife, because
you know, Minus is fooling around, so she casts a
(17:55):
sexual curse on him. In the telling of Antoninus, it
frames it more as a fertility issue. So basically, according
to Antoninus, pro Chris figured out a way for Minus
to beget children despite the fact that he would ejaculate
snakes and scorpions, and the solution she came up with
involved using a goat's bladder as a condom. Pretty interesting.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
This is a it's really hard to figure this one out.
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Yeah, yeah, I don't know. It doesn't get super into
the mechanics of all this, but anyway, Minus is very
grateful for pro Chris's cleverness and help with this problem,
so he gives pro Chris the spear and the dog,
which neither of which could fail in the hunt. And
then later in the story, pro Chris, disguised as a man,
(18:44):
goes to Attica and becomes the hunting buddy of her
own estranged husband Cephalus without him recognizing her. So they're
hunting together, but she's in disguise, and then Antoninus Liberalis
writes quote, when Cephalus saw that he never caught anything
when hunting while everything went the way of pro Chris,
he yearned to have that spear for himself. Pro Chris
(19:07):
promised to give him the dog as well if he
would agree to enjoy her youthful charms. So they lie
down together and then pro Chris reveals who she is.
She's like Cautia, but still a deal's a deal, and
he gets to keep the magic spear and the dog.
And then we cut to another character, Infittrion, who this
(19:27):
is a guy from Greek mythology who would later become
interesting because he is the earthly stepfather of Heracles, who
has a you know, divine, divine father, but Infittrion is
his earthly father, kind of like, you know, Joseph, father
of Jesus, gotcha. And so the following passage gives the
details of the story where you actually get to the
(19:48):
fox and the hound. It gives the details in a
somewhat bizarre order, but I'm just going to read it
as written. Infittrion, who needed the dog, went to Cephal
and asked him if he would be willing to join
him with the dog in going after the fox. He
promised to hand over to him a share of the booty,
(20:10):
which he would take from the Teleboans, for at that
time there had appeared in the land of the people
of Cadmus a fox that was a monstrous creature. Yeah,
it's like the ordering of these sentences is strange, but
so we get this monstrous creature, the fox plaguing the
people of Cadmus. Quote. It would regularly issue out of tumesis,
(20:31):
snatching up Cadmians. Every thirty days, they would put out
a child for it, and the fox would take it
and eat it up. Imphitrion had asked Creon and the
Cadmians to help in making war against the Teleboans. They
refused unless he helped them do away with the fox.
Imfitrion accepted these conditions from the Cadmians and went to
(20:54):
Cephalus and told him about the agreement and urged him
to go to Thebes with the dog. Cephalus accepted the
proposal and set out to hunt the fox, but it
had been ordained that the fox could not be taken
by any hunter, and that nothing should escape the dog
when it went hunting. Zeus saw them when they reached
(21:15):
the plane of Thebes and turned them both into stones.
So that's how you get to the turning them into things.
And note there, what did Zeus turn them into stars
constellations or one into a stone, one into a star. No,
here he turns them both into stones. So I checked
the telling in the Biblioteca, the library of Pseudo Apollodorus.
(21:38):
This is another early so I think this is actually
going to be a second or third century CE source,
but it's attributed probably incorrectly to an earlier author. But
basically the details are the same. Certainly in the conclusion
of the story, they're about the same. At the end,
Zeus sees the hound chasing the killer fox, and both
creatures are turned into stone. Now neither source says why
(22:04):
Zeus changes the fox and the hound into stone, but
my interpretation is that this is done to avoid a
logical contradiction. It's like to solve a paradox which, if
it were allowed to go on, would possibly cast doubt
on the authority or consistency of the gods. It's kind
of like the more familiar paradox to monotheists is, if
(22:28):
God is all powerful, can he create a rock so
big that he cannot lift it? Like, if the gods
are all powerful, can they make a fox that can
never be caught and a dog that always catches the
fox at the same time, what if these two things
come together? It's a contradiction. Yeah, yeah, so yeah, that
seems to be what's going on there. Is Zeus is like, oh, yeah,
(22:49):
you can't have this thing kind of thing going on,
So we just got to change in both to stone.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
It's like a dungeon master has been too liberal, is
that gifting of magical items, powerful magic items to his players,
And then suddenly those atoms are in conflict with each other,
and instead of like ruling one side or the other
just goes ahead and kills the whole party.
Speaker 3 (23:09):
They both disappear. Yeah. Also, I just wanted to mention
one of the footnotes from James Fraser's translation of Pseudo
Apollodorus in the Telling of the story, because Fraser writes,
quote by an easy application of the rationalistic instrument, which
cuts so many mythological knots. The late Greek writer Palofatus, Yeah,
(23:34):
Palofadus converted the ferocious animal into a gentleman named Fox
of a truculent disposition and predatory habits, who proved a
thorn in the flesh of the Thebans until Cephalis rid
them of the nuisance by knocking him on the head.
Cephalis knocked him on the head. That's it anyway. So
(23:57):
bring this back to the original discussion in our episode
of From the Dog Days. So when this came up.
I was talking about a nineteen eighty four paper by
the American folklore scholar Eleanor Long, in which she was
writing about the star serious and its association with dogs,
and she referred to this myth by saying that at
(24:19):
the end of the story, the fox is turned into
a stone and the dog into a star. So I
went back and I checked the reference. This is in
fact what she says. I didn't get it wrong from
her paper, but I was like, well, why does she
say this? Well, Long does have a footnote. She cites
this fact to a source called the Polyvisova, which is
(24:40):
a German language encyclopedia about classical antiquity, and she adds
in the same footnote actually that in an earlier version
of the story, both animals are turned into stone. Which there,
that's exactly what I found. So I don't have access
to this reference work that she cites the Polyvisova, so
I don't know what its basis is for saying that
(25:02):
one animal became stone and the other became a star.
In all of the full text versions of the story
that I could find, both animals are turned into a stone.
But there are other reference sources, like, for example, the
Star Myths page of Theoi dot Com which make reference
to ancient sources in which the Hound and the Fox
(25:24):
are turned into constellations or are turned into stars. And
I believe it's possible there could be another source from
antiquity where you know, you get a mix and match
like that, or where they're turned into stars like some
point to a source by Aritosthenes that I was not
able to find in full text, So I don't know,
(25:45):
I'll maybe I'll find that later. We can circle back
to that in a future listener mail. But the main
takeaway is that in most versions of this story, it's
not stars at all. They just get turned into rocks.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
M Okay, well, it's good to know before we actually
travel through these places in spaceships and expect to find
some sign of Canine or fox origin there. All right,
let's look at another one here. This one's from a
(26:18):
different mark. Okay, this is subject line Netflix in the Uncanny.
Hi guys, I started watching y'all on Netflix recently. Yeah,
reminded everyone out there that we are an audio podcast,
but there's a video component if you check us out
on Netflix. Go check that out. And I got to
say it's a trip. It's funny to say, but it
took me a long time to reconcile the hundreds of
(26:40):
hours of listening to your voices with those same voices
now coming out of your faces, which is surprising because
I did already know what y'all look like. It made
me feel a small bit of how I imagine prosopagnosia
might feel, something like, that's definitely what Robert and Joe
look like, but it's not my Robert and Joe imposters.
Truly uncanny. I wonder if there's any science on this.
(27:03):
I had also not realized that your record that you
record a new version of your name introductions with each episode.
I really thought it was the same each time, but
turns out it's always new, always anyways, Once I adjusted,
Netflix is a great way to catch the show. Definitely
a new perspective and remove the ad breaks. I also
find myself laughing more because I can catch the subtleties
(27:25):
of your expressions. So I appreciate you putting it out
there with gratitude.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
Mark, Thank you so much. Mark. I'm I'm always gratified
to hear people are enjoying the video version of the
show because I'm not really a consumer of video podcasts myself,
and you know, I can't remember if we've talked about
this on air before, but at the beginning, I was like,
I don't know if this is a thing people want
or not, but a lot of people are telling us
(27:50):
it is a thing they want, so that's great.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Yeah, so yeah, so hey, if you enjoy it that way, yeah,
share it with other folks, tell them about it, and
certainly keep watching slash Listening on Netflix. As for us
not looking like we're supposed to look, I mean, I
don't know. I feel that way a little bit as well,
Like it's not I'm used to looking at myself in
a mirror and that's not the way I look in video.
(28:13):
So already I get a little bit of the uncanny
when when I see it.
Speaker 3 (28:19):
I've never looked the way I'm supposed to look.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
Yeah. Yeah, But plus, I mean, everything's in too much,
you know, the quality is too high. I I've heard
this from I think stand up comedians talking about this,
like like seeing yourself in HD, It's it's just too
much detail. It's just too much. Nobody's supposed to see
see that much detail on their face. It's in a
casual setting, like you know, walking in somewhere and seeing
(28:44):
it on a screen, or or searching a Netflix for
something unrelated to your own podcast, and then suddenly there's
your face. It can be a little jarring.
Speaker 3 (28:53):
If I'm going to be on screens, I would really
prefer to have some jallo lighting and a soft focused lens.
That would be nice.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
That's not can pitch that, yes, and at least for October.
Speaker 3 (29:02):
Right, yeah, all right. Let's take a look at a
couple of messages that came in on discord. This one
is from Gorpie regarding our episodes on the Prairie. I
think this was sent in not after the whole thing
was aired, only one or two episodes had aired at
this time.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
Mid Prairies.
Speaker 3 (29:18):
Okay, Gorpie says, also you mentioned little House on the Prairie.
I lived briefly in Walnut Grove, Minnesota, where Laura Ingles
Wilder grew up. It was explained to me that the
name Walnut Grove came from the fact that walnut trees
(29:38):
grow quickly and hardy enough in one season to survive
the yearly burning. So this is tying into our discussions
about fire in the maintenance of the prairie and the
plant balance there, Gorpie says, making the walnut trees the
primary trees in the area. It's also important to remember
that the prairies of the Midwest, even before Europeans, were
(29:59):
not in a complete natural state. Native groups maintained and
burned the areas to prevent tree growth, creating more land
for bison. More bison trampled and composted more plants and
seeds in ways that promoted more grassland. It was all
very complicated and manufactured for millennia before European footprints. And yeah, Gorpia,
(30:21):
I think that's largely true. We talked about this sum.
I don't know which parts of the series you had
heard when you did this comment, but yeah, we talked
about this sum in the series that the Plains Native
American tribes frequently used fire to manage the bison populations
and to clear routes for travel and things like that.
So fire was used by a native peoples before the
(30:42):
arrival of Europeans on the Plains. Yeah, totally. So all
humans have an impact, but what individual humans and groups
of humans choose to do has a different impact than
doing something else. Exactly.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
Yeah, we'll see we had another message. This was from PK,
a frequent commentator, and PK says I wanted to comment
on this new episode as I listen and I have thoughts.
I grew up in the Prairies southern Manitoba, and I
didn't appreciate the vastness. To me, it was boring reality.
(31:19):
Many who grew up there are very keen on seeing
the rocky mountains. They love to visit the ocean too,
but they don't really want to live there. In part,
it might be a change in climate not comfy, and
for me, the first time I drove through the mountains
it felt claustrophobic. On the plains, I was used to
having at least a dirt road to turn off every
kilometer and larger roads not too far away. Driving inside
(31:41):
the mountains felt like a tunnel, no way out until
the very end. But I eventually moved to British Columbia
in the mountains and slowly it changed. Eventually, being nestled
in the mountains felt like a safety blanket somehow, and
when I returned to the Prairies, I felt a tinge
of agoraphobia. It felt cold. I've never moved back and Honestly,
(32:01):
I still can't appreciate the big, open sunrises and sunsets
as much as most, it seems. And also I feel
bad when, as in every spot I've ever visited, some
local senior citizen tells me this is God's country, the
most beautiful place on earth, be it the flat prairies
or the swampy lands north of there, and I feel
nothing because I can't appreciate the ecosystem. I also have
(32:23):
a tree bias. I ended up wanting to live on
the ocean, like I feel a need to have a
view of it from my window, and the only place
I could afford to do that at the time was Newfoundland,
so I moved way out east, never having been there before,
being been here before a prairie boy who can't even swim, who,
unlike most others who grew up there, felt no attachment
(32:45):
to it and wants to live by the water and
ideally mountains too. Thankfully, I'm moving back to the warmer
West coast soon. I used to be a tree planner,
and yet I didn't know the prairies were treeless, in
large part due to fires. That's very interesting. We were
once driving behind some person on a prairie highway next
to a grassy field. I saw them flick out a
cigarette a little ways in front of us, or at
(33:06):
least I saw the flicking motion. And as we drove
by that spot, I looked back. The grass was already
on fire. We called it in, and I'm sure it
was quite big before anyone arrived to put it out. Yeah,
it makes sense that in this dry climate, with this
grass kindling, it would hurt a young tree's chances. And
then pKa also has some stuff that he shared about
(33:28):
grizzly bears, which I thought was also fascinating. But anyway,
it was great to hear from someone who has a
lot more experience with the prairie landscape and then comparing
it to others. I particularly liked that bit talking about
again to be clear, like not talking about actually driving
through a mountain tunnel, but feeling like just driving through
the mountains it felt constrained like that, as if one
(33:50):
was in a tunnel. I thought that was a nice detail.
Speaker 3 (33:53):
All right, do you want to do some weird house
cinema messages?
Speaker 2 (33:56):
Yeah, let's do it.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Okay, this first one we should definitely mention a few
things about So this is somebody writing in about the
scene in the Beast from twenty thousand fathoms where the Ritosaurus,
the monster the dinosaur in the movie attacks a lighthouse,
and what was the deal with the Pokemon scene we
compared this to.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
I had just been searching around and found that there
was an episode of the Pokemon TV show where basically
the same thing happened, like clearly inspired by either this
movie and or the original story upon which it was based.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Okay, cool, So there was a scene yeah, where a
giant Pokemon sort of attacks, or at least looms against
a lighthouse. And we said, in passing not Pokemon experts here,
certainly not, I can't claim to be. It was like, yeah,
it looks like a Charizard, right, I think I know
what it looked at me.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
I think that was my initial judgment as well. It's like, oh,
it's a giant chartsar. Surely. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:53):
And then after we finished recording, our producer JJ was like,
it was like, sorry, guys, not charizard.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
You're gonna get messages. Do you want to rerecord it.
We're like no, no, it's fine, we're gonna hear the corrections.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
Well, here from Taylor, our regular Pokemon correspondent, you want
to take this one.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Rob, Sure, Sure, Taylor says, hello stuff to Will your
Mind crew, as the podcast self declared Pokemon pedant, I
am duty bound to respond to your call out for details.
On the nineteen ninety seven Pokemon anime episode Mystery at
the Lighthouse, the Pokemon featured in the episode is not Charizard,
(35:34):
but rather the dragon Dragonite. In the episode, a lighthouse
keeper hears the quote beautiful and eerie call of a
huge beast on foggy nights, accompanied by the protagonist. The
lighthouse keeper records and plays back the call, leading to
an encounter with a colossal variant of the Pokemon Dragonite.
(35:54):
The lighthouse keeper speculates that this Dragonite is perhaps the
last of its kind, deprived of and came to the
lighthouse seeking company. When Team Rocket these are the bad
guys I believe assaults the Dragon Nighte in an attempt
to capture it. It attacks the lighthouse in a rage
and retreats into the ocean. The similarity of the plot
beats in Mystery at the Lighthouse to the Beast from
(36:16):
twenty thousand Fathoms is no coincidence. The writers have commented
that like the Beast, Mystery at the Lighthouse is adapted
from Ray Bradbury's The Foghorn. It is a mysterious and
melancholy entry in the usually boisterous anime. As ever, thank
you for continuing to enrich my life with your thought
provoking contemplations and weird film recommendations. May you keep doing
(36:37):
so as long as it brings you joy. Cheers Taylor.
Speaker 3 (36:41):
Thank you Taylor as always.
Speaker 2 (36:44):
Yeah, and I should have asked my kiddo about this
as well. Like they they're I guess less like actively
engaged in Pokemon content these days, but I think it's
one of it's like we've heard from so many other people, like,
once you've had that initial influx Pokemon knowledge, it never
truly leaves you and it remains a part of your being.
So so yeah, I should have checked with them as well.
Speaker 3 (37:08):
Yeah, that would be my guess. Pokemon fluency is for life. Okay,
let's see, should I do this one from Alan?
Speaker 2 (37:26):
Yes? Yes, I think. Okay, we're going to be berated,
but go for it.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
Alan writes to chastise Us, I told myself I would
stop asking about the Ice Pirates, but I was listening
to the Weird House Cinema rewind episode about the movie
Invitation to Hell. That was the made for TV movie
about the country club that is actually hell where you
go to Hell with Robert Urick. And who else was
(37:54):
in that?
Speaker 2 (37:54):
Oh, I'm blanking on her name right now, but the
soap opera queen.
Speaker 3 (38:00):
In something.
Speaker 2 (38:03):
I had to look it up to remind myself, but
it is Susan Lucci.
Speaker 3 (38:06):
Yes, Lucis.
Speaker 2 (38:07):
She does Erica Kane from All My Children.
Speaker 3 (38:10):
If you haven't watched Invitation to Hell, just watched the
first minute of it. She's yeah. Anyway, Alan goes on
to say, watched the movie Invitation to Hell. I sat there,
stunned at first, then a little broken hearted. You discussed
leading man Robert Urick at some length and didn't once
(38:30):
mention the other great weird movie he started in, and
that was released the same year, The Ice Pirates. At
this point, I may have already talked it up too much,
but I would still love to hear an episode about it.
Your content has yet to disappoint, so I trust you
know what we're doing, what you're doing, and we'll make
this episode if and when the time is right, And
I'll keep poking when I think the time is right.
(38:52):
Hopefully not so much that you end up blocking me. Thanks, Alan,
No worries, Alan, It's fine. I assume. I assume we'll
get around there. Sometimes I don't know why we haven't
done it yet.
Speaker 2 (39:02):
We almost did it one week. I remember, you know,
I don't know if there was something we were going
to do and we decided not to do that, and
I was like, well, maybe we'll just do Ice Pirates.
Then we did something else instead, But I don't remember
how exactly that.
Speaker 3 (39:13):
Came to be we having trouble finding it.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
Well, that might have been an issue. Sometimes that is,
sometimes we expect there to be a problem sourcing a
particular disc or or stream, and then other times we
just assume that we can access the movie, and then
we discovered that it's harder than we thought it would be. Yeah, yeah,
in the you know, because it's also we want to
watch something generally, we want to watch it in a
certain quality, and if that quality isn't available, then sometimes
(39:41):
we you know, we wait a bit. Like The Amazing
Colossal Man, for example, I really want to do that
when I've wanted to do that for years, but I
feel like if I to do it. I'm going to
have to watch it on a VHS tape or a
rip and I don't know I should Maybe I should
stop waiting for the right time and we just watch
it all w whatever. We can find a disc of
unknown origins and.
Speaker 3 (40:02):
I can't wait until we get a Criterion disc of
Colossal Man.
Speaker 2 (40:06):
It deserves a Criterion disc. Yeah, or you know, you know,
at least there's a whole complicated story behind it, and
I only know a quarter of it. But at some
point we'll get.
Speaker 3 (40:16):
It, all right, rob take your pick of what's next?
Do you want to do? Mouth and Madness?
Speaker 2 (40:20):
Oh? Yeah, yeah, we got some good stuff here. This
one came to us from Matt, and I suspected Matt
would write in about this subject line Church from in
the Mouth of Madness. Matt writes, Robert and Joe, I
really enjoy your show, especially the movie episodes you mentioned
the massive church used in the Mouth of Madness. Feel
(40:42):
free to share any of my reminiscences that I share here.
About fifteen years ago, when my fiance now wife and
I were driving north of Toronto to meet the jeweler
who is designing the rings for our wedding. Along the way,
I suddenly spotted an enormous and imposing church building that
in a seemingly random area, surrounded by farmers fields on
one side and across the way from more recent housing
(41:05):
developments on the other side. It stuck out from the
surrounding landscape in an obvious and ill fitting way. I
made a mental note to look it up later. Some
time after that, I was watching in the Mouth of
Madness for the second or third time, and I suspected
that the church was the one we had recently discovered
north of Toronto. IMDb confirmed it. A few years later,
(41:26):
I was an Anglican seminarian at the University of Toronto. Somehow,
that same church came up in a class discussion a
random tangent, and our professor was generally familiar with its history,
which included some tensions between its local Eastern Catholic congregation
and the wider church authorities. This is in line with
(41:46):
Wikipedia's noting of it having been closed for about a
decade and then more recently being used by a different congregation.
I also noticed that apparently the recently excommunicated Society of
Saint Pios the Tenth currently rents the space. It is
ironic and sad that a church consecrated by a pope
has been the focus of repeated tensions. A side note,
(42:10):
the seminary professor who mentioned the church is a neighbor
of filmmaker Bruce McDonald, director of Hardcore Logo and Pontypool.
Another bit of trivia is that the covered bridge that
appears in the film is the same one filmed for
the recent It movie adaptation, and it is located just
a few minutes outside of where I live, Kitchener Waterloo,
(42:32):
about an hour and a half southwest of Toronto. I'm
happy to report that married almost fifteen years now, we
are still very happy with our rings, though mine fits
a bit more tightly than originally. Discovering that remarkable church
building helped make a long and frustrating rush hour drive
through Toronto traffic worthwhile and memorable mat. All right, So
(42:52):
that's one mat. But here's the fun thing. There's another mat.
In our discord, server who is also visit to this
church and shared some photos from his visit to these locations,
and so these are in the discord. If you join
our discord you can find them there. I pulled these
up for you to look at as well Joe, but
(43:13):
you can clearly see up there's the Cursed Church from
in the Mouth of Madness rising up off of the
grasslands there. And then he also this Matt traveled to
two other locations in the film. One is a I
believe this is a water treatment plant that stands in
for the Insane asylum. Very location, yea beautiful. And then
(43:36):
there is the Ellington Grand This is the movie theater,
at least the exterior of the movie theater that we
see at the very end of In the Mouth of Madness.
And I had to look this place up because obviously
this would be the movie theater to catch a showing
of In the Mouth of Madness at. And apparently, when
(44:00):
in the Mouth of Madness had its original theatrical run,
it did play here. Because this is an historic Art
deco movie theater. It was built in nineteen thirty six,
that's I think three years before Atlanta's o Plaza Theater,
and it showed movies I'm reading for sixty seven years
or thereabouts until two thousand and three, and now it
(44:22):
is just an event's venue. So not to say someone
couldn't do some sort of screening there, but it mostly
seems set up for weddings and social events events now,
so you'd have to do an in the Mouth of
Madness themed wedding here, I think. I'm not sure if
you could, if anyone's thought about actually doing a showing.
(44:43):
The location was only used for exteriors. However, they apparently
filmed inside of another Toronto theater which no longer exists.
Speaker 3 (44:52):
Man, can you imagine going to see the movie at
that theater but not knowing that it was going to
be in the movie.
Speaker 2 (44:58):
That would be simpling.
Speaker 3 (45:00):
Some people did.
Speaker 2 (45:00):
Yeah, yeah, some people did. I mean I don't. Again,
I don't think the movie did that well, so not
that many people did, but some people had that experience,
and I hope they were aware of it. For that matter,
I hope some people get married here and then later
are watching or rewatching in the Mouth of Madness and
have have the realization that they had a wedding in
(45:22):
the Mouth of Madness, and and I hope that they
they realize how special that is as.
Speaker 3 (45:29):
Their spouse turns into tentacles in the.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
Best Yeah, but man, yeah, I think and in the
Mouth of Madness themed wedding would be great. You could
be you could have Setter Cane impersonator do the the officiating.
It would be pretty great. Everybody's wearing crucifixes all over
their their bodies and faces.
Speaker 3 (45:48):
Good times, he sees you. Yeah, okay, Next, I'm going
to do this message from Chris, subject line weird House
explosion fest. Hi, Rob, Joe and JJ. Warning spoiler alert
for anyone who has not viewed Nemesis. Oh what's the
spoiler about Nemesis going to be? Chris says, got around
(46:11):
to watching Nemesis this weekend after your excellent weird House
episode a few months ago. Got to say, this is
going to be a new fave. I don't remember if
you discussed this in the episode, but in the last
half one third of the movie, the amount of just
absolutely gratuitous shooting and the subsequent enormous explosions from what
(46:32):
appears to be normal gunfire is just amazing. Such a
fun watch. Thanks for sharing this gem that I wouldn't
have discovered without you all stay weird, Chris. Well, thank
you so much. Chris. I really appreciate the message, Except
where was the spoiler? Is this a spoiler that there
are explosions in Nemesis? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (46:52):
I mean it's it's a selling point. I think. Yeah,
there will be there will be explosions, there will be
gratuitous gunfire, and there will be cyborgs. That's it's all
there in the first book of Nemesis.
Speaker 3 (47:03):
What's this about the second half or third that's in
the beginning too, the beginning. Do you remember that huge
shootout in the waste land?
Speaker 2 (47:09):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's honestly, there's a lot of it
that is now just a glorious blur of gunfire. I
mainly remember that scene where like one of the characters
escapes from the building with gunfire, like like like blast
the big hole.
Speaker 3 (47:25):
Yeah, shoots a hole in the wall or in the floor.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
Yeah, amazing.
Speaker 3 (47:33):
I think in the world of Nemesis, they use gunfire
based construction methods, so like when they're building a house,
they just like shoot the boards together, and they probably
move their cars by just sitting and shooting out the
back of them.
Speaker 2 (47:47):
Yeah. They don't use a leaf blower. They use a
gatling gun. They just let it go. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (47:53):
Okay, let's see, do we want to do another message
or should we wrap it up there?
Speaker 2 (47:58):
Let's see. I mean, we had a good message from
Chris about something from the twenty twenty two Jordan Peel
film Nope. However, it does include spoilers about something in
that picture. And yeah, like we could read it and
I could give you a spoiler warning and you could
(48:18):
zip ahead or duck out early. But I don't even
know if you've seen.
Speaker 3 (48:22):
Let's talk skip this one. Well I had, Let's skip
this one for now. Maybe we can find a non
spoiler way to come back and talk about Chris's point later.
Speaker 2 (48:31):
Yeah. I talked about what Chris is talking about here
on an episode of The Monster Effect once, but I
had to like put big spoiler warnings on that. So
before we can read this, everyone go out and see Nope.
If you haven't seen it once, everyone that listens to
stuff to blow your mind has caught up and watched
the movie, then we can safely cover When is.
Speaker 3 (48:50):
The appropriate time cut off for spoilers? Is there just
not one? If it's like a really good surprise.
Speaker 2 (48:57):
Yeah, I mean, you know, there are true surprises that
are just really a lot of fun to experience, And
I guess that's what I come down to, Like, is
it fun and do you want to pass that fun
on to someone else? Then that's what I'm thinking about
and then other times it's like, I want people to
see this film, and to get you to see it,
you're gonna have to have a little bit of spoiler,
like you know most films. We've got to have a reason.
(49:19):
We got to have some sort of cheese on that
you know, that's baiting us into the whole scenario. So
I don't know, you know, it's a fine line though.
Speaker 3 (49:27):
Of course, if you're new to the show, as we
usually say, our Weird House discussions are full spoiler if
you go to the end, so always be warned there. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (49:35):
Yeah, once you've read to the end, you're done for
all right, Well, I think that's a good place to
go ahead and call it here. We didn't get to
everything in our notes, but you know that means we
have some listener mails to come back to in the future,
so keep them coming in. If you have thoughts about
recent or ongoing episodes of stuff to blow your mind, yeah,
go ahead.
Speaker 3 (49:55):
And chip in.
Speaker 2 (49:56):
If you have thoughts on episodes of Weird House Cinema,
any of the shorty episodes we put on Wednesdays, all
of that is fair game recommendations for the future. Just
keep it coming We love your field reports, we love
your suggestions, we love your corrections. Whatever it happens to be.
Speaker 3 (50:11):
Huge, thanks as always to our excellent audio producer, JJ Posway.
If you would like to get in touch with us
with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest
a topic for the future, or just to say hello,
you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow
your Mind dot com.
Speaker 1 (50:32):
Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For
more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind Listener Mail.
My name is Robert Lamb.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
And I am Joe McCormick, and today we are doing
a listener mail episode. These are the ones where we
read back messages from the Stuff to Blow your Mind
email address. If you are a listener and you've never
gotten in touch before, now is a great time to
try it. You can email at contact at stuff to
Blow your Mind dot com. We accept all kinds of messages.
(00:37):
If you just want to send a friendly note let
us know what you like about the show where you
listen from, that's great. We especially like if you have
something interesting to add to a subject we've talked about
on the show, maybe from your own professional experience or
just from your personal life or culture. Whatever you got,
send it our way contact at stuff to Blow Yourmind
dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
While we're at it, I'll go ahead and mention that
we have a discord server if you'd like to join that.
It's a tight net little group, but they're always welcoming
of new listeners. All you have to do is send
us an email and ask to be given the invite
link and we will provide it. Likewise, you can find us.
You can find us other places on social media. I
(01:19):
would say check us out on Instagram STBYM podcast. You
might be thinking yourself, I think I followed stuff to
blow your mind many years ago on Instagram. Well you
may have, but that account went away, it died and
a new one was reborn, and you'll have to rejoin
it and refollow it. And it's I think one of
the better places to sort of keep up with what
we're doing. We have little posts, little videos that come
(01:42):
out that will help you stay abreast of what our
latest episodes are. And then if you were a fan
of Weird House Cinema, look for us on letterboxed. We
are Weird House there and that's a great way to
keep up with the movies that we're covering on our
Friday episodes.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
All right, Rob, do you mind if I kick things
off with this mess from Pamela about diatoms. Let's do it,
subject line diatoms and imaging science. Pamela says, greetings, Rob
and Joe, still listening ten or twelve years later, Love
(02:17):
you guys. Haven't felt the need to write in for
a while, but better late than never. While listening to
your episode on diatoms, one of the things that caught
my attention was your discussion of the very real differences
between images from different magnification sources. I figured I would
discuss this because I have experience using scanning electron microscopes
(02:38):
or SEM, along with other high magnification microscopy. One of
the things that is obvious to regular users, but I
realize would be strange to someone with less knowledge, is
that SEM images are in gray scale only. If you
see color on an SEM image, that is coloring added
(02:58):
after the fact, similar to the colored images published by
NASA for stars and galaxies. Scanning electron microscopes do not
measure light. They collect signal from a focused, high energy
beam of electrons bouncing back off the item being measured.
This produces topographic images only of the surface detail of
(03:20):
a very small sample. Interestingly, even when you are measuring
something that is transparent or has transparent layers or parts,
this will still be presented in the image's grayscale and
return the surface topography of the exposed part of the
transparent part, so all grayscale and nothing below the surface.
A fun fact about SEM images of biological items is
(03:44):
that until the last ten to fifteen years ago, these
samples would have required an ultrathin sputtered layer of gold, yes,
traditionally gold. This gold layer existed to provide enough electron
bounce activity for the collector to receive gave a signal
back instead of the electrons mostly passing into or through
(04:04):
the subject. This is a very simplified, non technical description.
I've only personally imaged non biological samples myself, but in
the nineteen nineties there was often an image of some
nightmare fuel looking blown some nightmare fuel looking blown up
bug posted just to show potential customers what the lab
could do with something easily interpreted. I remember one lab
(04:28):
had a poster size image of a cricket that was
made of about sixty sem photos carefully pieced together because
of how small the individual image area is visible. Light
microscopes offer color and show transparency to one degree or another,
depending upon the direction of the light source and the
filters that may be involved. Many biological samples are taken
(04:52):
with fluorescing scopes and or other filters to improve the
visibility of colorless items. Important thing to remember is that
each of these tools is selected for different purposes. You
can't get the crisp topography from visible light, and you
cannot get the genuine color from a scanning electron microscope,
(05:13):
though I'm sure someone is working on that. I hope
this provides some context for why images of microscopic samples
are the way they are, as they are intended to
provide very different information about the sample. So, yeah, this
is really interesting. And this is picking up on a
comment from the Diatoms episode where we were talking about
how different, how different they look in these two different
(05:36):
imaging methods, Like the scanning electron micro microscope images. These
micrographs often had the more alien gears look. It emphasized
the kind of inorganic seeming elements. They were, of course
all organic, but you would see these little shells, the frustuls,
looking like pieces of machinery, broken clockwork, that sort of thing.
(05:59):
But then when you would look in the light based images,
you would see things that look more like art, maybe
like stained glass or water colors. You would still get
strange angles, like you know, we talked about those rectangular diatoms,
the kind of strange looking thing to see in nature.
But yeah, the colors add a more organic and artistic
(06:19):
element to it, and some of these differences are down
to just literally different shapes of different kinds of diatoms,
but other differences are down to the imaging method used.
So this is great, Thank you Pamela, But Pamela's not done.
She has things to say about Weird House as well.
Before I sign off, I would like to offer some
requests for future Weird House episodes. Both are nineteen sixties
(06:42):
era Japanese movies Oni Baba from nineteen sixty four and
Jigoku from nineteen sixty Oni Baba has one of the
most powerful uses of atmosphere I've ever watched. The moody
black and white film made. The way the very tall
grasses move around like they are alive and intentional was
(07:03):
deeply creepy, particularly joined with the odd soundtrack elevator pitch
quote even back when there were samurai, no one really
comes out of a war undamaged. Jigoku, also called The
Sinners of Hell, maybe the first movie to really go
for it, presenting images of possible hells and punishments, warning
about the bizarre rather naked but technically legalish credits at
(07:26):
the beginning, but they present a completely different vibe from
than the rest of the film. I strongly recommend both
of these. Thanks for all the entertainment you have provided
throughout the years. My commutes and workouts are better for it. Pamela, Well,
thank you so much, Pamela. As I was just saying
at the top, we'd love getting notes like this. Please,
(07:46):
anybody out there, if you're listening, if you ever have
something to add to a subject we've talked about on
the show, from your own field or domain of expertise,
or from your own culture or personal experience, always feel
free to write in contact at stuff to blow your mind.
I'll say it again, Yeah, we love stuff like this.
Thank you so.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
Much, and I really appreciate these film recommendations. I've seen
only Baba. It's been many years. I think I used
to own this on Criterion DVD. I think it was
a Criterion DVD and for some reason I liquidated it
at some point. I haven't seen the Centers of Hell,
but I'm sure both of them are at Video Drome,
Atlanta's own video drum store, which I think I'm contractually
(08:27):
obligated to mention since Joe and I are both wearing
our video drum t shirts at the same time in
the same podcast when we have choice.
Speaker 3 (08:36):
Just from the top of the head there, yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:38):
Yep, yep, but yeah, I would love to check out
either of these, but only Boba I remember as being
quite atmospheric. I remember those. I remember the tall grass
and that creepy mask. For sure.
Speaker 3 (08:52):
We didn't coordinate our outfits. By the way, it's always
an accident.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
It is an accident. Yes, yes, when it happens, we
celebrate it. Bye. This next one comes to us from
Stephen and Steven says, Hi, Robert and Joe, I just
discovered your podcast last week. Stuff to Blow your mind
and Weird House Cinema are just fantastic. I have a
lot of listening catch up to do and it is
a joy. You guys are smart, funny and charming. Thank you.
(09:16):
May I offer a bit of nerdy info, okay, And
in this the listener is going to be responding to
our Weird House Cinema episode on the nineteen sixty one
film The Mask, which, if you haven't seen it or
you know you didn't listen to this episode. This was
a bizarre three D picture that centered around like in
(09:40):
a cult scenario with a mask and a lot of
like dreamy imagery.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
It was a real trip, not the one with Jim Carrey.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
No, no, Jim Carrett. This is not the Jim Carrey mask.
So anyway, the listener continues. For the nineteen sixty one
film The Mask, the actor who performed the role of
the Waxy young Man was, and I hope I'm pronouncing
this correctly, Rudy Lynn Chowton, a mind performer who studied
with Marcel Marceau. I don't have a lot of info
about him, except that he also performed at the Canadian
(10:09):
theater company called the New Play Society, which existed until
nineteen seventy one, where he was a staff member who
offered mind teaching and demonstrations. In The Mask, you can
see his mind training clearly during the Surreal Sequences. I
would also like to suggest a few nineteen forties films
that I think would slot into the weird House vibe
(10:30):
very nicely. And I'll go ahead and add this is
I greatly appreciate this because I think when you do
a breakdown by decade, not counting, like without getting into
anything before the nineteen thirties, the nineteen forties are that's
probably the decade that we've featured fewer films from. Part
of that is the selection pool, but obviously there are
(10:53):
still some weird films from the nineteen forties, and it
is a decade I would like to come back to.
So anyway, this is what this is what Stephen has
for us. The Devil Commands Boris Karloff seeks his dead
wife with wild uncanny valley finale. Okay, sounds good. I
haven't seen it me neither. Night Monster great, great title already,
(11:16):
I'm kind of sold already. Great ensemble performances and an
outrageous murderer reveal.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
Now, I think this is different from the Navy Versus
the Night Monster or Navy Versus the Night Monsters, which
indeed has some Navy officers in it, but also has
killer trees.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
Hmm, let's see yeah, night it must be yeah, Night
Monster nineteen forty two. Yeah, directed by Ford bb. So
this is one that I, uh, yeah, I would check
this out. I've never seen it either.
Speaker 3 (11:48):
Look up the poster for Navy Versus the Night Monsters.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Oh gosh, this is great. This is great. I see
the Navy in the background a little bit in the foreground,
but that monster looks amazing. There's no way we're getting
this into actual picture, but I like the look of
the poster.
Speaker 3 (12:05):
I've thought about this one for Weird House. We may
do both night Monster and Navy versus Night Monsters.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
Yeah yeah, bring on the night Monsters. All right, Let's
see what else we have. The mad Ghoul Evil George
Zuko turns hapless student into a ghoul.
Speaker 3 (12:21):
All right, haven't seen it me.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
Neither sounds good though, man made monster evil lionel Atwill
turns Lon Cheney into electro creature. Okay. I love both
of those guys, and electro creatures are good to go
as well.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
This one's on my list. I actually haven't seen any
of these zero for four.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
All right, We've got to return to the forties soon,
so Stephen says, in my honest opinion, these are the
weirdest of the forties horror bees. I think you will
like them. Thanks for everything. Appreciate you best, Steven.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
Thank you, Steven.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
All right, Joe, looks like we have one that has
to do with our dog Days episodes, which which I
do want to throw in. I was just looking the
other day. Are we in the dog Days? Technically? As
according to the Stars, and I don't think in our
neck of the woods we are quite yet. I think
we're the dog Days are still coming.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
We still haven't got the wow. And we've had some
hot times. Yeah, yeah, good thing, good thing. The stars
don't really control the temperature.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
Yeah. I was. I was on a hike with my
family Sunday morning and we were just we were just
swimming through it. It's just so hot and humid. And
they were like, is it. This is the dog Days?
This is it? And I'm like, Nope, not yet, not yet.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
Okay. This comes from Mark. Mark says, Hey, guys, I'm
a recent fan of your show, and I'm looking for
your discord link to make it easier to send questions.
All right, we have you already hit him up?
Speaker 2 (13:56):
Nope, did not, so I'll circle back to that.
Speaker 3 (13:59):
After we were this episode, Mark says, I enjoyed your
dog Day's episodes. I might have heard it incorrectly, but
I think you got the Greek myth of lee lapse
and the two Messian tu Messians must mean too Messian
fox slightly wrong. At least according to Wikipedia, Zeus turned
them both into stars Canus Major lee Lapse and Canus Minor.
(14:22):
The too Messian fox. I think you said he turned
the dog into a star, but the fox into a stone.
Wikipedia also points out this myth of a dog that
always caught its prey versus a fox that could never
be caught as an example of the irresistible force paradox,
classically formulated as what happens when an unstoppable force meets
(14:43):
an immovable object. So it's interesting to me why you
said he turned one of the animals into a stone.
Do some references say that. I thought about it for
a while and then it seemed like it fit very
well with magnetism, with a simple compass, if serious, w
sort of a magnetic north and the stone or spear
that always points in that direction is the tip of
(15:05):
o'rion's spear. That's kind of what that constellation in the
sky has looked like, has looked to me like for
over fifty years. Interesting. Thanks for the show. You can
quote me anytime, Mark. Well, thanks Mark. So I'm going
to start off addressing this note about Greek mythology here again.
So it's the story of the hound lee lapse and
(15:26):
the two Messian fox and what they were. The question
is what were they turned into? So I dug deeper
into this, and the interesting thing that I found is,
by far the most common version of the story in
ancient sources actually seems to be neither what my source
in the original episode said nor what you read on
(15:48):
the wiki. So I think the most common answer is
something different entirely, and I'll try to untangle this. So
this story appears in many different ancient sources, with some
details being different across the different accounts, Usually the core
is pretty much the same. And just to pick one
of these tellings to start with, I'm going to read
(16:09):
from the Metamorphoses of Antoninus Liberalis. This is a Greek
text from the second or third century CE, and the
English translation I'm using is what I found online by
Francis Celoria. So in this book, the story sits in
the middle of this complicated saga involving a bunch of
(16:29):
other characters, including the Athenian princess Procrus and her husband,
the ruler Cephalus. These two they're married, but then they
get kind of tested and driven apart, like the gods
get between them. I think the god Aos of Dawn,
Goddess of Dawn seduces Cephalus, I believe, and then Cephalus
(16:50):
jealously tests his own wife and finds her loyalty wanting.
So they get split up, and always Medlin gods are
messing around. Also, you know, jealous love on Earth aren't
doing any They're not doing themselves any favors. So pro
Chris is split up from her husband. She goes out
of wandering, and through this wandering she comes into possession
(17:12):
of a couple of magical hunting tools. One is a
spear and the other is a hunting dog. And Antoninus says, quote,
no animal could escape these two, and they always reached
their target. So the spear always hits what you throw
it at, and it's a hound that always catches its quarry.
How did she get these two treasures, Well, this is
(17:34):
a pretty weird story. They were given to her by Minus,
the king of Crete, because pro Chris helped Minus overcome
a sexual curse against him. I think in some tellings
this curse is cast by Pacify, Minus's own wife, because
you know, Minus is fooling around, so she casts a
(17:55):
sexual curse on him. In the telling of Antoninus, it
frames it more as a fertility issue. So basically, according
to Antoninus, pro Chris figured out a way for Minus
to beget children despite the fact that he would ejaculate
snakes and scorpions, and the solution she came up with
involved using a goat's bladder as a condom. Pretty interesting.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
This is a it's really hard to figure this one out.
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Yeah, yeah, I don't know. It doesn't get super into
the mechanics of all this, but anyway, Minus is very
grateful for pro Chris's cleverness and help with this problem,
so he gives pro Chris the spear and the dog,
which neither of which could fail in the hunt. And
then later in the story, pro Chris, disguised as a man,
(18:44):
goes to Attica and becomes the hunting buddy of her
own estranged husband Cephalus without him recognizing her. So they're
hunting together, but she's in disguise, and then Antoninus Liberalis
writes quote, when Cephalus saw that he never caught anything
when hunting while everything went the way of pro Chris,
he yearned to have that spear for himself. Pro Chris
(19:07):
promised to give him the dog as well if he
would agree to enjoy her youthful charms. So they lie
down together and then pro Chris reveals who she is.
She's like Cautia, but still a deal's a deal, and
he gets to keep the magic spear and the dog.
And then we cut to another character, Infittrion, who this
(19:27):
is a guy from Greek mythology who would later become
interesting because he is the earthly stepfather of Heracles, who
has a you know, divine, divine father, but Infittrion is
his earthly father, kind of like, you know, Joseph, father
of Jesus, gotcha. And so the following passage gives the
details of the story where you actually get to the
(19:48):
fox and the hound. It gives the details in a
somewhat bizarre order, but I'm just going to read it
as written. Infittrion, who needed the dog, went to Cephal
and asked him if he would be willing to join
him with the dog in going after the fox. He
promised to hand over to him a share of the booty,
(20:10):
which he would take from the Teleboans, for at that
time there had appeared in the land of the people
of Cadmus a fox that was a monstrous creature. Yeah,
it's like the ordering of these sentences is strange, but
so we get this monstrous creature, the fox plaguing the
people of Cadmus. Quote. It would regularly issue out of tumesis,
(20:31):
snatching up Cadmians. Every thirty days, they would put out
a child for it, and the fox would take it
and eat it up. Imphitrion had asked Creon and the
Cadmians to help in making war against the Teleboans. They
refused unless he helped them do away with the fox.
Imfitrion accepted these conditions from the Cadmians and went to
(20:54):
Cephalus and told him about the agreement and urged him
to go to Thebes with the dog. Cephalus accepted the
proposal and set out to hunt the fox, but it
had been ordained that the fox could not be taken
by any hunter, and that nothing should escape the dog
when it went hunting. Zeus saw them when they reached
(21:15):
the plane of Thebes and turned them both into stones.
So that's how you get to the turning them into things.
And note there, what did Zeus turn them into stars
constellations or one into a stone, one into a star. No,
here he turns them both into stones. So I checked
the telling in the Biblioteca, the library of Pseudo Apollodorus.
(21:38):
This is another early so I think this is actually
going to be a second or third century CE source,
but it's attributed probably incorrectly to an earlier author. But
basically the details are the same. Certainly in the conclusion
of the story, they're about the same. At the end,
Zeus sees the hound chasing the killer fox, and both
creatures are turned into stone. Now neither source says why
(22:04):
Zeus changes the fox and the hound into stone, but
my interpretation is that this is done to avoid a
logical contradiction. It's like to solve a paradox which, if
it were allowed to go on, would possibly cast doubt
on the authority or consistency of the gods. It's kind
of like the more familiar paradox to monotheists is, if
(22:28):
God is all powerful, can he create a rock so
big that he cannot lift it? Like, if the gods
are all powerful, can they make a fox that can
never be caught and a dog that always catches the
fox at the same time, what if these two things
come together? It's a contradiction. Yeah, yeah, so yeah, that
seems to be what's going on there. Is Zeus is like, oh, yeah,
(22:49):
you can't have this thing kind of thing going on,
So we just got to change in both to stone.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
It's like a dungeon master has been too liberal, is
that gifting of magical items, powerful magic items to his players,
And then suddenly those atoms are in conflict with each other,
and instead of like ruling one side or the other
just goes ahead and kills the whole party.
Speaker 3 (23:09):
They both disappear. Yeah. Also, I just wanted to mention
one of the footnotes from James Fraser's translation of Pseudo
Apollodorus in the Telling of the story, because Fraser writes,
quote by an easy application of the rationalistic instrument, which
cuts so many mythological knots. The late Greek writer Palofatus, Yeah,
(23:34):
Palofadus converted the ferocious animal into a gentleman named Fox
of a truculent disposition and predatory habits, who proved a
thorn in the flesh of the Thebans until Cephalis rid
them of the nuisance by knocking him on the head.
Cephalis knocked him on the head. That's it anyway. So
(23:57):
bring this back to the original discussion in our episode
of From the Dog Days. So when this came up.
I was talking about a nineteen eighty four paper by
the American folklore scholar Eleanor Long, in which she was
writing about the star serious and its association with dogs,
and she referred to this myth by saying that at
(24:19):
the end of the story, the fox is turned into
a stone and the dog into a star. So I
went back and I checked the reference. This is in
fact what she says. I didn't get it wrong from
her paper, but I was like, well, why does she
say this? Well, Long does have a footnote. She cites
this fact to a source called the Polyvisova, which is
(24:40):
a German language encyclopedia about classical antiquity, and she adds
in the same footnote actually that in an earlier version
of the story, both animals are turned into stone. Which there,
that's exactly what I found. So I don't have access
to this reference work that she cites the Polyvisova, so
I don't know what its basis is for saying that
(25:02):
one animal became stone and the other became a star.
In all of the full text versions of the story
that I could find, both animals are turned into a stone.
But there are other reference sources, like, for example, the
Star Myths page of Theoi dot Com which make reference
to ancient sources in which the Hound and the Fox
(25:24):
are turned into constellations or are turned into stars. And
I believe it's possible there could be another source from
antiquity where you know, you get a mix and match
like that, or where they're turned into stars like some
point to a source by Aritosthenes that I was not
able to find in full text, So I don't know,
(25:45):
I'll maybe I'll find that later. We can circle back
to that in a future listener mail. But the main
takeaway is that in most versions of this story, it's
not stars at all. They just get turned into rocks.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
M Okay, well, it's good to know before we actually
travel through these places in spaceships and expect to find
some sign of Canine or fox origin there. All right,
let's look at another one here. This one's from a
(26:18):
different mark. Okay, this is subject line Netflix in the Uncanny.
Hi guys, I started watching y'all on Netflix recently. Yeah,
reminded everyone out there that we are an audio podcast,
but there's a video component if you check us out
on Netflix. Go check that out. And I got to
say it's a trip. It's funny to say, but it
took me a long time to reconcile the hundreds of
(26:40):
hours of listening to your voices with those same voices
now coming out of your faces, which is surprising because
I did already know what y'all look like. It made
me feel a small bit of how I imagine prosopagnosia
might feel, something like, that's definitely what Robert and Joe
look like, but it's not my Robert and Joe imposters.
Truly uncanny. I wonder if there's any science on this.
(27:03):
I had also not realized that your record that you
record a new version of your name introductions with each episode.
I really thought it was the same each time, but
turns out it's always new, always anyways, Once I adjusted,
Netflix is a great way to catch the show. Definitely
a new perspective and remove the ad breaks. I also
find myself laughing more because I can catch the subtleties
(27:25):
of your expressions. So I appreciate you putting it out
there with gratitude.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
Mark, Thank you so much. Mark. I'm I'm always gratified
to hear people are enjoying the video version of the
show because I'm not really a consumer of video podcasts myself,
and you know, I can't remember if we've talked about
this on air before, but at the beginning, I was like,
I don't know if this is a thing people want
or not, but a lot of people are telling us
(27:50):
it is a thing they want, so that's great.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Yeah, so yeah, so hey, if you enjoy it that way, yeah,
share it with other folks, tell them about it, and
certainly keep watching slash Listening on Netflix. As for us
not looking like we're supposed to look, I mean, I
don't know. I feel that way a little bit as well,
Like it's not I'm used to looking at myself in
a mirror and that's not the way I look in video.
(28:13):
So already I get a little bit of the uncanny
when when I see it.
Speaker 3 (28:19):
I've never looked the way I'm supposed to look.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
Yeah. Yeah, But plus, I mean, everything's in too much,
you know, the quality is too high. I I've heard
this from I think stand up comedians talking about this,
like like seeing yourself in HD, It's it's just too
much detail. It's just too much. Nobody's supposed to see
see that much detail on their face. It's in a
casual setting, like you know, walking in somewhere and seeing
(28:44):
it on a screen, or or searching a Netflix for
something unrelated to your own podcast, and then suddenly there's
your face. It can be a little jarring.
Speaker 3 (28:53):
If I'm going to be on screens, I would really
prefer to have some jallo lighting and a soft focused lens.
That would be nice.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
That's not can pitch that, yes, and at least for October.
Speaker 3 (29:02):
Right, yeah, all right. Let's take a look at a
couple of messages that came in on discord. This one
is from Gorpie regarding our episodes on the Prairie. I
think this was sent in not after the whole thing
was aired, only one or two episodes had aired at
this time.
Speaker 2 (29:17):
Mid Prairies.
Speaker 3 (29:18):
Okay, Gorpie says, also you mentioned little House on the Prairie.
I lived briefly in Walnut Grove, Minnesota, where Laura Ingles
Wilder grew up. It was explained to me that the
name Walnut Grove came from the fact that walnut trees
(29:38):
grow quickly and hardy enough in one season to survive
the yearly burning. So this is tying into our discussions
about fire in the maintenance of the prairie and the
plant balance there, Gorpie says, making the walnut trees the
primary trees in the area. It's also important to remember
that the prairies of the Midwest, even before Europeans, were
(29:59):
not in a complete natural state. Native groups maintained and
burned the areas to prevent tree growth, creating more land
for bison. More bison trampled and composted more plants and
seeds in ways that promoted more grassland. It was all
very complicated and manufactured for millennia before European footprints. And yeah, Gorpia,
(30:21):
I think that's largely true. We talked about this sum.
I don't know which parts of the series you had
heard when you did this comment, but yeah, we talked
about this sum in the series that the Plains Native
American tribes frequently used fire to manage the bison populations
and to clear routes for travel and things like that.
So fire was used by a native peoples before the
(30:42):
arrival of Europeans on the Plains. Yeah, totally. So all
humans have an impact, but what individual humans and groups
of humans choose to do has a different impact than
doing something else. Exactly.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
Yeah, we'll see we had another message. This was from PK,
a frequent commentator, and PK says I wanted to comment
on this new episode as I listen and I have thoughts.
I grew up in the Prairies southern Manitoba, and I
didn't appreciate the vastness. To me, it was boring reality.
(31:19):
Many who grew up there are very keen on seeing
the rocky mountains. They love to visit the ocean too,
but they don't really want to live there. In part,
it might be a change in climate not comfy, and
for me, the first time I drove through the mountains
it felt claustrophobic. On the plains, I was used to
having at least a dirt road to turn off every
kilometer and larger roads not too far away. Driving inside
(31:41):
the mountains felt like a tunnel, no way out until
the very end. But I eventually moved to British Columbia
in the mountains and slowly it changed. Eventually, being nestled
in the mountains felt like a safety blanket somehow, and
when I returned to the Prairies, I felt a tinge
of agoraphobia. It felt cold. I've never moved back and Honestly,
(32:01):
I still can't appreciate the big, open sunrises and sunsets
as much as most, it seems. And also I feel
bad when, as in every spot I've ever visited, some
local senior citizen tells me this is God's country, the
most beautiful place on earth, be it the flat prairies
or the swampy lands north of there, and I feel
nothing because I can't appreciate the ecosystem. I also have
(32:23):
a tree bias. I ended up wanting to live on
the ocean, like I feel a need to have a
view of it from my window, and the only place
I could afford to do that at the time was Newfoundland,
so I moved way out east, never having been there before,
being been here before a prairie boy who can't even swim, who,
unlike most others who grew up there, felt no attachment
(32:45):
to it and wants to live by the water and
ideally mountains too. Thankfully, I'm moving back to the warmer
West coast soon. I used to be a tree planner,
and yet I didn't know the prairies were treeless, in
large part due to fires. That's very interesting. We were
once driving behind some person on a prairie highway next
to a grassy field. I saw them flick out a
cigarette a little ways in front of us, or at
(33:06):
least I saw the flicking motion. And as we drove
by that spot, I looked back. The grass was already
on fire. We called it in, and I'm sure it
was quite big before anyone arrived to put it out. Yeah,
it makes sense that in this dry climate, with this
grass kindling, it would hurt a young tree's chances. And
then pKa also has some stuff that he shared about
(33:28):
grizzly bears, which I thought was also fascinating. But anyway,
it was great to hear from someone who has a
lot more experience with the prairie landscape and then comparing
it to others. I particularly liked that bit talking about
again to be clear, like not talking about actually driving
through a mountain tunnel, but feeling like just driving through
the mountains it felt constrained like that, as if one
(33:50):
was in a tunnel. I thought that was a nice detail.
Speaker 3 (33:53):
All right, do you want to do some weird house
cinema messages?
Speaker 2 (33:56):
Yeah, let's do it.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Okay, this first one we should definitely mention a few
things about So this is somebody writing in about the
scene in the Beast from twenty thousand fathoms where the Ritosaurus,
the monster the dinosaur in the movie attacks a lighthouse,
and what was the deal with the Pokemon scene we
compared this to.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
I had just been searching around and found that there
was an episode of the Pokemon TV show where basically
the same thing happened, like clearly inspired by either this
movie and or the original story upon which it was based.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Okay, cool, So there was a scene yeah, where a
giant Pokemon sort of attacks, or at least looms against
a lighthouse. And we said, in passing not Pokemon experts here,
certainly not, I can't claim to be. It was like, yeah,
it looks like a Charizard, right, I think I know
what it looked at me.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
I think that was my initial judgment as well. It's like, oh,
it's a giant chartsar. Surely. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (34:53):
And then after we finished recording, our producer JJ was like,
it was like, sorry, guys, not charizard.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
You're gonna get messages. Do you want to rerecord it.
We're like no, no, it's fine, we're gonna hear the corrections.
Speaker 3 (35:07):
Well, here from Taylor, our regular Pokemon correspondent, you want
to take this one.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Rob, Sure, Sure, Taylor says, hello stuff to Will your
Mind crew, as the podcast self declared Pokemon pedant, I
am duty bound to respond to your call out for details.
On the nineteen ninety seven Pokemon anime episode Mystery at
the Lighthouse, the Pokemon featured in the episode is not Charizard,
(35:34):
but rather the dragon Dragonite. In the episode, a lighthouse
keeper hears the quote beautiful and eerie call of a
huge beast on foggy nights, accompanied by the protagonist. The
lighthouse keeper records and plays back the call, leading to
an encounter with a colossal variant of the Pokemon Dragonite.
(35:54):
The lighthouse keeper speculates that this Dragonite is perhaps the
last of its kind, deprived of and came to the
lighthouse seeking company. When Team Rocket these are the bad
guys I believe assaults the Dragon Nighte in an attempt
to capture it. It attacks the lighthouse in a rage
and retreats into the ocean. The similarity of the plot
beats in Mystery at the Lighthouse to the Beast from
(36:16):
twenty thousand Fathoms is no coincidence. The writers have commented
that like the Beast, Mystery at the Lighthouse is adapted
from Ray Bradbury's The Foghorn. It is a mysterious and
melancholy entry in the usually boisterous anime. As ever, thank
you for continuing to enrich my life with your thought
provoking contemplations and weird film recommendations. May you keep doing
(36:37):
so as long as it brings you joy. Cheers Taylor.
Speaker 3 (36:41):
Thank you Taylor as always.
Speaker 2 (36:44):
Yeah, and I should have asked my kiddo about this
as well. Like they they're I guess less like actively
engaged in Pokemon content these days, but I think it's
one of it's like we've heard from so many other people, like,
once you've had that initial influx Pokemon knowledge, it never
truly leaves you and it remains a part of your being.
So so yeah, I should have checked with them as well.
Speaker 3 (37:08):
Yeah, that would be my guess. Pokemon fluency is for life. Okay,
let's see, should I do this one from Alan?
Speaker 2 (37:26):
Yes? Yes, I think. Okay, we're going to be berated,
but go for it.
Speaker 3 (37:30):
Alan writes to chastise Us, I told myself I would
stop asking about the Ice Pirates, but I was listening
to the Weird House Cinema rewind episode about the movie
Invitation to Hell. That was the made for TV movie
about the country club that is actually hell where you
go to Hell with Robert Urick. And who else was
(37:54):
in that?
Speaker 2 (37:54):
Oh, I'm blanking on her name right now, but the
soap opera queen.
Speaker 3 (38:00):
In something.
Speaker 2 (38:03):
I had to look it up to remind myself, but
it is Susan Lucci.
Speaker 3 (38:06):
Yes, Lucis.
Speaker 2 (38:07):
She does Erica Kane from All My Children.
Speaker 3 (38:10):
If you haven't watched Invitation to Hell, just watched the
first minute of it. She's yeah. Anyway, Alan goes on
to say, watched the movie Invitation to Hell. I sat there,
stunned at first, then a little broken hearted. You discussed
leading man Robert Urick at some length and didn't once
(38:30):
mention the other great weird movie he started in, and
that was released the same year, The Ice Pirates. At
this point, I may have already talked it up too much,
but I would still love to hear an episode about it.
Your content has yet to disappoint, so I trust you
know what we're doing, what you're doing, and we'll make
this episode if and when the time is right, And
I'll keep poking when I think the time is right.
(38:52):
Hopefully not so much that you end up blocking me. Thanks, Alan,
No worries, Alan, It's fine. I assume. I assume we'll
get around there. Sometimes I don't know why we haven't
done it yet.
Speaker 2 (39:02):
We almost did it one week. I remember, you know,
I don't know if there was something we were going
to do and we decided not to do that, and
I was like, well, maybe we'll just do Ice Pirates.
Then we did something else instead, But I don't remember
how exactly that.
Speaker 3 (39:13):
Came to be we having trouble finding it.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
Well, that might have been an issue. Sometimes that is,
sometimes we expect there to be a problem sourcing a
particular disc or or stream, and then other times we
just assume that we can access the movie, and then
we discovered that it's harder than we thought it would be. Yeah, yeah,
in the you know, because it's also we want to
watch something generally, we want to watch it in a
certain quality, and if that quality isn't available, then sometimes
(39:41):
we you know, we wait a bit. Like The Amazing
Colossal Man, for example, I really want to do that
when I've wanted to do that for years, but I
feel like if I to do it. I'm going to
have to watch it on a VHS tape or a
rip and I don't know I should Maybe I should
stop waiting for the right time and we just watch
it all w whatever. We can find a disc of
unknown origins and.
Speaker 3 (40:02):
I can't wait until we get a Criterion disc of
Colossal Man.
Speaker 2 (40:06):
It deserves a Criterion disc. Yeah, or you know, you know,
at least there's a whole complicated story behind it, and
I only know a quarter of it. But at some
point we'll get.
Speaker 3 (40:16):
It, all right, rob take your pick of what's next?
Do you want to do? Mouth and Madness?
Speaker 2 (40:20):
Oh? Yeah, yeah, we got some good stuff here. This
one came to us from Matt, and I suspected Matt
would write in about this subject line Church from in
the Mouth of Madness. Matt writes, Robert and Joe, I
really enjoy your show, especially the movie episodes you mentioned
the massive church used in the Mouth of Madness. Feel
(40:42):
free to share any of my reminiscences that I share here.
About fifteen years ago, when my fiance now wife and
I were driving north of Toronto to meet the jeweler
who is designing the rings for our wedding. Along the way,
I suddenly spotted an enormous and imposing church building that
in a seemingly random area, surrounded by farmers fields on
one side and across the way from more recent housing
(41:05):
developments on the other side. It stuck out from the
surrounding landscape in an obvious and ill fitting way. I
made a mental note to look it up later. Some
time after that, I was watching in the Mouth of
Madness for the second or third time, and I suspected
that the church was the one we had recently discovered
north of Toronto. IMDb confirmed it. A few years later,
(41:26):
I was an Anglican seminarian at the University of Toronto. Somehow,
that same church came up in a class discussion a
random tangent, and our professor was generally familiar with its history,
which included some tensions between its local Eastern Catholic congregation
and the wider church authorities. This is in line with
(41:46):
Wikipedia's noting of it having been closed for about a
decade and then more recently being used by a different congregation.
I also noticed that apparently the recently excommunicated Society of
Saint Pios the Tenth currently rents the space. It is
ironic and sad that a church consecrated by a pope
has been the focus of repeated tensions. A side note,
(42:10):
the seminary professor who mentioned the church is a neighbor
of filmmaker Bruce McDonald, director of Hardcore Logo and Pontypool.
Another bit of trivia is that the covered bridge that
appears in the film is the same one filmed for
the recent It movie adaptation, and it is located just
a few minutes outside of where I live, Kitchener Waterloo,
(42:32):
about an hour and a half southwest of Toronto. I'm
happy to report that married almost fifteen years now, we
are still very happy with our rings, though mine fits
a bit more tightly than originally. Discovering that remarkable church
building helped make a long and frustrating rush hour drive
through Toronto traffic worthwhile and memorable mat. All right, So
(42:52):
that's one mat. But here's the fun thing. There's another mat.
In our discord, server who is also visit to this
church and shared some photos from his visit to these locations,
and so these are in the discord. If you join
our discord you can find them there. I pulled these
up for you to look at as well Joe, but
(43:13):
you can clearly see up there's the Cursed Church from
in the Mouth of Madness rising up off of the
grasslands there. And then he also this Matt traveled to
two other locations in the film. One is a I
believe this is a water treatment plant that stands in
for the Insane asylum. Very location, yea beautiful. And then
(43:36):
there is the Ellington Grand This is the movie theater,
at least the exterior of the movie theater that we
see at the very end of In the Mouth of Madness.
And I had to look this place up because obviously
this would be the movie theater to catch a showing
of In the Mouth of Madness at. And apparently, when
(44:00):
in the Mouth of Madness had its original theatrical run,
it did play here. Because this is an historic Art
deco movie theater. It was built in nineteen thirty six,
that's I think three years before Atlanta's o Plaza Theater,
and it showed movies I'm reading for sixty seven years
or thereabouts until two thousand and three, and now it
(44:22):
is just an event's venue. So not to say someone
couldn't do some sort of screening there, but it mostly
seems set up for weddings and social events events now,
so you'd have to do an in the Mouth of
Madness themed wedding here, I think. I'm not sure if
you could, if anyone's thought about actually doing a showing.
(44:43):
The location was only used for exteriors. However, they apparently
filmed inside of another Toronto theater which no longer exists.
Speaker 3 (44:52):
Man, can you imagine going to see the movie at
that theater but not knowing that it was going to
be in the movie.
Speaker 2 (44:58):
That would be simpling.
Speaker 3 (45:00):
Some people did.
Speaker 2 (45:00):
Yeah, yeah, some people did. I mean I don't. Again,
I don't think the movie did that well, so not
that many people did, but some people had that experience,
and I hope they were aware of it. For that matter,
I hope some people get married here and then later
are watching or rewatching in the Mouth of Madness and
have have the realization that they had a wedding in
(45:22):
the Mouth of Madness, and and I hope that they
they realize how special that is as.
Speaker 3 (45:29):
Their spouse turns into tentacles in the.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
Best Yeah, but man, yeah, I think and in the
Mouth of Madness themed wedding would be great. You could
be you could have Setter Cane impersonator do the the officiating.
It would be pretty great. Everybody's wearing crucifixes all over
their their bodies and faces.
Speaker 3 (45:48):
Good times, he sees you. Yeah, okay, Next, I'm going
to do this message from Chris, subject line weird House
explosion fest. Hi, Rob, Joe and JJ. Warning spoiler alert
for anyone who has not viewed Nemesis. Oh what's the
spoiler about Nemesis going to be? Chris says, got around
(46:11):
to watching Nemesis this weekend after your excellent weird House
episode a few months ago. Got to say, this is
going to be a new fave. I don't remember if
you discussed this in the episode, but in the last
half one third of the movie, the amount of just
absolutely gratuitous shooting and the subsequent enormous explosions from what
(46:32):
appears to be normal gunfire is just amazing. Such a
fun watch. Thanks for sharing this gem that I wouldn't
have discovered without you all stay weird, Chris. Well, thank
you so much. Chris. I really appreciate the message, Except
where was the spoiler? Is this a spoiler that there
are explosions in Nemesis? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (46:52):
I mean it's it's a selling point. I think. Yeah,
there will be there will be explosions, there will be
gratuitous gunfire, and there will be cyborgs. That's it's all
there in the first book of Nemesis.
Speaker 3 (47:03):
What's this about the second half or third that's in
the beginning too, the beginning. Do you remember that huge
shootout in the waste land?
Speaker 2 (47:09):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's honestly, there's a lot of it
that is now just a glorious blur of gunfire. I
mainly remember that scene where like one of the characters
escapes from the building with gunfire, like like like blast
the big hole.
Speaker 3 (47:25):
Yeah, shoots a hole in the wall or in the floor.
Speaker 2 (47:28):
Yeah, amazing.
Speaker 3 (47:33):
I think in the world of Nemesis, they use gunfire
based construction methods, so like when they're building a house,
they just like shoot the boards together, and they probably
move their cars by just sitting and shooting out the
back of them.
Speaker 2 (47:47):
Yeah. They don't use a leaf blower. They use a
gatling gun. They just let it go. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (47:53):
Okay, let's see, do we want to do another message
or should we wrap it up there?
Speaker 2 (47:58):
Let's see. I mean, we had a good message from
Chris about something from the twenty twenty two Jordan Peel
film Nope. However, it does include spoilers about something in
that picture. And yeah, like we could read it and
I could give you a spoiler warning and you could
(48:18):
zip ahead or duck out early. But I don't even
know if you've seen.
Speaker 3 (48:22):
Let's talk skip this one. Well I had, Let's skip
this one for now. Maybe we can find a non
spoiler way to come back and talk about Chris's point later.
Speaker 2 (48:31):
Yeah. I talked about what Chris is talking about here
on an episode of The Monster Effect once, but I
had to like put big spoiler warnings on that. So
before we can read this, everyone go out and see Nope.
If you haven't seen it once, everyone that listens to
stuff to blow your mind has caught up and watched
the movie, then we can safely cover When is.
Speaker 3 (48:50):
The appropriate time cut off for spoilers? Is there just
not one? If it's like a really good surprise.
Speaker 2 (48:57):
Yeah, I mean, you know, there are true surprises that
are just really a lot of fun to experience, And
I guess that's what I come down to, Like, is
it fun and do you want to pass that fun
on to someone else? Then that's what I'm thinking about
and then other times it's like, I want people to
see this film, and to get you to see it,
you're gonna have to have a little bit of spoiler,
like you know most films. We've got to have a reason.
(49:19):
We got to have some sort of cheese on that
you know, that's baiting us into the whole scenario. So
I don't know, you know, it's a fine line though.
Speaker 3 (49:27):
Of course, if you're new to the show, as we
usually say, our Weird House discussions are full spoiler if
you go to the end, so always be warned there. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (49:35):
Yeah, once you've read to the end, you're done for
all right, Well, I think that's a good place to
go ahead and call it here. We didn't get to
everything in our notes, but you know that means we
have some listener mails to come back to in the future,
so keep them coming in. If you have thoughts about
recent or ongoing episodes of stuff to blow your mind, yeah,
go ahead.
Speaker 3 (49:55):
And chip in.
Speaker 2 (49:56):
If you have thoughts on episodes of Weird House Cinema,
any of the shorty episodes we put on Wednesdays, all
of that is fair game recommendations for the future. Just
keep it coming We love your field reports, we love
your suggestions, we love your corrections. Whatever it happens to be.
Speaker 3 (50:11):
Huge, thanks as always to our excellent audio producer, JJ Posway.
If you would like to get in touch with us
with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest
a topic for the future, or just to say hello,
you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow
your Mind dot com.
Speaker 1 (50:32):
Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For
more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Stuff To Blow Your Mind News
Hosts And Creators
Robert Lamb
Joe McCormick
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.