The Breakdown of a Lost Episode - King Kong (1976), Finding Ohana, Yes Day, and The Last Blockbuster

This week hosts Christopher Spicer and Scott Martin wandered around in the vault and discovered an episode that never made it to the podcast feeds. It is a lost episode! It was recorded back in 2021, and they reviewed four movies. They look at the big blockbuster remake of 'King Kong' from 1976. They discuss two family movies 'Finding Ohana' and 'Yes Day'. They cap it off with a trip down nostalgia lane with 'The Lack Blockbuster.'

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Welcome to the latest episode of theMovie Breakdown. I am Christopher Spicer,
and are you ready for some dungeonsand Dragons honor among thieves, the much
promised deep dive. Well, you'regonna have to wait another week. Yes,
that episode is recorded as I promisedway way back. But we were

(00:23):
mozing on about in the vault,the Movie Breakdown vault, and we were
checking out some archives and we realizedthere's a lost episode, a lost episode
from way back in twenty twenty,back during the peak of COVID, and
we noticed that we had an episodewhere we talked about the nineteen seventy six

(00:48):
King Kong remake and let's just saywe can't agree on that one. It's
a fun one. It's one wherewe clash heads a little bit on the
quality of that pitch. And sothis is an episode that for some reason
never made it up onto the podcastfeeds, and so it's been just floating
around the abyss for several years,and we decided we would unearth it this

(01:12):
week where you can listen to usdisagree on King Kong and review three other
movies. So check that out.It is a fun episode. I do
want to apologize a little bit aboutthe quality of this one. Once again,
one of those mysteries. I can'tremember now what happened there, but
there's a bit of mic feedback andmaybe it's not the crispus sound. It

(01:34):
was recorded before we did. SpeakerPrime our podcast host, and so I
do want to once again thank SpeakerPrime, who now is our host.
And another way that you can sortof show your appreciation to Speaker is you
can listen to us on the Speakerapp and it actually helps us out.

(01:56):
It actually increases our at revenue ifyou listen through the Spreaker app. And
you might say, oh, whydo I care if you make more AD
revenue, Well, once again,it allows us then to focus more on
this and to grow the podcast.So if you want to say thanks for
the years of podcast we've done,consider listening to this podcast through the Spreaker
app. But anyways, enjoyed thisepisode way back from several years ago.

(02:21):
As we talk King Kong and someother pictures that came out around that time,
we get nostalgic about Blockbuster and we'vegot two family pictures talking about.
So thank you so much again.You guys are great and We'll be back
next week with the finally the reviewof Duje Dragons on our monthies a Deep

(02:42):
Dive, so we'll see it then, but enjoy this episode this week.

(03:09):
Welcome everybody to the latest episode ofthe Movie Breakdown. Get yourself comfy and
cozy, because we're going to betalking about movies this week, and we
got four movie reviews for you.We're going to continue our series of the
Big Giant eight movies. We didthe original last week and now we are

(03:30):
doing the remake this week in thenineteen seventy six version of King Kong.
As well. We've got some familymovies for you, and one of them
is starring and produced by the wonderfulJennifer Garner. In Yesterday all that and
so much more, I'm Christopher Spicerand I'm Scott Martin. Yes, she

(03:50):
is the wonderful Jennifer Gardner, andwe will be talking about her in a
bit. The first movie we're gonnabe talking about isn't Netflix original. It
is a family flick. It iscalled Finding Ohan and it is about a
family, a fairly young family fromHawaii who lived in Brooklyn and they are

(04:11):
heading out to back to the islands. Because the mother's father he needs some
help, and it's the reason toget people back there, because then we
have people sort of confronting their heritage. You know, it's one of those
movies. It's not something that's notever been done. People going back to
you know, the small town theygrew up in, or you know,
the their home country or whatever itis. And then the movie, you

(04:36):
know, inevitably is going to beabout them refining, you know, finding
their culture again and ultimately probably stayingthere. And you know, the harpsichord
may be featured once or twice throughoutthe film. Us it's not gonna,
you know, knock any barriers downof being original. I also have to

(04:59):
say this, I'm just getting someof this stuff out of the way.
At the very beginning, I feltlike the acting here at times was not
the strongest suit of the film.It felt almost like Canadian television from the
nineties or eighties at times, andI think part of that was the dialogue,
and it could be a number offactors. But when we strip away

(05:21):
those things and we're sort of leftwith our main character, Peely played by
Kia Pa, who she's this younggirl we learned at the very beginning,
she likes geo cashing, and ather grandfather Chemo's property, she comes across

(05:42):
basically what is like, you know, Henry Jones Seniors Grail Diary, and
the movie will reference Indiana Jones anumber of times because it does have that
sort of feel to it. Whatit also leans into heavily is the Goonies.
Now we can sort of question isthis just trying to reimagine the Goonies

(06:06):
in a different way? Is thisripping the Goonies off? Is this part
homage? And I would say thatit's not. I don't think it is
ripping off the Goonies. I meanwe can look at certain things. Peely's
brother, hunky muscular brother Eoni playedby alex Iono. He ends up having

(06:29):
like a headband on, very similarto Josh Brolin in The Goonies. Like
like I'm talking super similar. Hischaracter is super similar. Gotta go after
the younger sibling, find out what'sgoing on. Get over here. Why
did you go off like that?Yes, scamp So, I mean you
might be thinking, okay, wellthat's you know, that's pretty broad for

(06:53):
you to bring up. Well,there's also holding up the coin. There's
a coin with holes in it that, when held up a certain way,
matches up with landmarks, which,if I'm not mistaken, exactly happened in
the Goonies as well. And thenthere's also a point in the movie where
they say the phrase slick shoes.I think, I honestly think that director

(07:16):
Jude Wang is making it clear thatGoonies is an influence here. Goonies is
the sort of the spirit they're tryingto tap into. And yeah, it's
some of the stuff in here isnot the most original, and yeah,
the acting maybe not the best we'veseen, but I think when it does

(07:40):
capture the spirit of the child adventure, it does it well. I picture
myself as a young boy watching thismovie. I'd want to go ripping around
the house into any box that Icould find that looked old enough to hold
some sort of like treasure map oryou know, grail diary or something like

(08:01):
that. I'd be seeking it outand then going in the backyard and going
on my adventure and pretending that therewas all sorts of traps or whatever in
my way. It struck that chordwith me, It hit that mark,
and you know, when you lookat it, you kind you may ask
is it just hitting the nostalgia button, But I think no, it's got
the nostalgia button for me, becauseyes, it is playing heavily into Goonies.

(08:26):
But the thing was Goonies was agreat kid adventure. I think if
someone saw this without ever even knowingwhat the Goonies was, they'd still see
this for that same thing, akid adventure and something that would be fun,
you know, something that every kidwould want to be the one that
ends up finding the treasure. Andthen, you know, the big thing

(08:46):
for a kid, would would youleave the treasure if that was you know,
if if you were compelled to leavethe treasure for moral reasons, would
you There's there's I think a lotof fun here for the kids, and
I had fun as an adult,So issues aside, I still give this
three stars. I think that thelocations were wonderful. It really felt you

(09:11):
were on Hawaii, So yeah,I think the locations were were well scouted.
It felt felt like this lush environment. It felt like a great adventure.
I think the caves were well designed. I don't think they actually found
caves with that much natural light inthem. Something tells me these are sets,

(09:31):
but who knows. I've never beenlost in a cave before, you
know, sixty meters underground with lotsof natural light about. But the yeah,
everything, I think this, LikeI said, the sets were designed
well. I love the grandfather's house. It sort of had that feeling of
the type of place it's been inthe family for a while. The sets

(09:54):
were smartly, smartly stopped, selectedand built, so it immerse. I
think it'll really immerse kids and it'lltake their parents back to days of old.
Yeah, this was definitely a reallya good looking movie. I mean,

(10:15):
it helps that they're shooting them ingorgeous locations, but I think you
and I have learned with a lotof movies that you can have the gorgeous
locations, but if you don't havea good cinematographer, they're not taking advantage
of those gorgeous locations. They're notusing them to add to the adventure.
And I think this is a moviethat very much used the locations to sort

(10:37):
of help tell the story and tohelp elevate that fantasy adventure. Whether the
two kids are basically going across thatfield and the kids were marking this is
where Jurassic Park was filmed. Imean also they're playing on nostalgia that but
you're getting that sense of adventure,You're getting that sense that we're going on
this really fun journey. And it'sbecause of that strong cinematography there. It's

(11:01):
because of those long shots and they'resoak it up because I'm thinking of something
like World War Z. We're thatsupposed to be this big globe trotty movie,
and we apparently were in all thesedifferent countries. And one of my
biggest criticisms was every place seemed thesame to me. Well, I think
everything place seemed the same because therewere so many interior shots. You know,

(11:24):
it's not so bad. It's ashamelessly throwing landmarks because then that helps
the audience recognize that you're you know, you're not just okay. Let's let's
set up a new set over inthis hangar over here, and I am
with you. I think the setdesigns here were really good. Like this
feels like a movie at one pointwas going for a theatrical release, because

(11:46):
I often don't feel like Netflix sortof thinks this kind of money in their
production stuff, or at least oftenthe things don't feel well to me.
This felt like a big screen movie, because I thought the caves were really
interesting. The part where they're hada brave I think that was like really
tense, and I think they justcreated this really cool set of caves that
basically they're following theagoony thing where theyknow Monk who was this great explorer and

(12:11):
they're basically falling his path and tryingto find his treasure. And I thought
they did a good job of sortof using set designs and stuff to kind
of tell that story and make itlook lived in, Like it did not
look like it was constructed on astage. It looked like real caves,
but like you, I don't thinkthey were, and so I think they're
really well crafted. But they lookedsort of like that fantasy level cave that

(12:33):
a kid would sort of feel alivein, like you would feel excited,
Like I want to explore those kindof caves. Absolutely, I really want
to end up down there. Iwantant to be looking for pirate gold.
Yeah, my son now wants togo on a trip to Hawaii. So
this movie was a good travel logI was similar to you two where I

(12:58):
probably already shared this on the podcastbefore, but I remember I think it
was great too. Or so itwould have been after seeing Goonies, because
Goodies was a huge influential movie forme. I remember creating a map out
of like construction paper and trying tomake it look all old and ripped,
and then I slipped it into mymath book. And then when recess came,
I was like, guys, guys, look what I found in my

(13:20):
math book the ancient map of CaptainHurley or I don't know what, but
I came up with something. Andso then me and the kids basically during
recess were following this map to tryto find the treasure, because apparently this
great pirate captain store his treasure inour school, which was nowhere near any

(13:41):
oceans or anything, but that's wherethey buried the treasure. He hid it,
and he hid the map in yourmath book, yeah, my math
book, and no one had seenit till lie. It's just awesome.
So I was that type of kid, So honestly I could totally relate to
this little girl like you. Ifell into the really great lost scenery and

(14:05):
the sense of adventure and sort ofthat journey and stuff. Because I also
thought the performances were weak at spots. It definitely felt like the kids were
acting. I also think the dialoguelike you was a little weak, and
I think my biggest you too isI felt they try to elevate the conflict
too much at the beginning. Ithought that everyone was like yelling at each

(14:28):
other and they're getting mad about everything, and of course the girl that the
guy meets, they can't get alongat the beginning, and so there's a
lot of this contrived conflict between peoplethat I didn't really feel it's necessary.
So that type of stuff kind ofbogged me down, and they just seemed
to be sort of to get alongthe plot, kind of hamp fisted stuff,
like you're saying that they're coming fromBrooklyn. Now they got to go

(14:52):
to Hawaii, and you sort ofright away know how they set things up.
The kids are so opposed to beingin Hawaii. You kind of know,
oh, they're gonna end up inHawaii at the end, aren't they?
Like they were just television movie typescreen ready here, like very predictable
stuff. But at the same time, even though the acting wasn't great,
I was charmed by these kids.I was charmed by this adventure, So

(15:13):
like, yeah, I'm giving itthree stars. Even though I do think
there was a lot working against usmovie when it came to acting and script.
Yeah, the acting, Like Isaid, I didn't know exactly what
where the fault lay, whether itwas with necessarily just the script and people
were having a hard time getting intoAnd I also didn't know if maybe the
director was because you said was likethe tension was really forced. You kind

(15:35):
of had this feeling was you know, was the director saying okay, no,
no, like like really emphasize it, like really get it out there,
and like pushing them to these placeswhere things are over acted and don't
seem sincere don't seem realistic. Idon't know exactly. I think maybe it
was a combination of all three,but that if you're gonna sit down and

(15:58):
watch it, just know that you'renot going to get the best acting.
The charm is in, and Imean the kids too, they will They
eventually charmed and won me over,But I mean it's hard to buy and
even my kids couldn't buy the factthat Okay, you're from Brooklyn, that's
where your friends are, But howare you not excited you're in a place

(16:21):
as gorgeous as Hawahite. They basicallyare in New York for like five minutes,
and they don't really create any kindof attachment to that place. No,
No, they don't. Like shedoes the race at the beginning,
she does sending the kids into likea super dangerous and creepy like kidnappy area.

(16:41):
I didn't believe that. But itwas a fun scene. It was
well directed. It was a funscene. But if you, yeah,
if you step back for a moment, you think, like, this is
a kid Like this is the thingthat you would tell your kids. Okay,
you know, you don't get ina car with strangers and you never
end up in locations like this.Every never go to rape corner. Yeah.

(17:04):
One of the things are that savedthis movie for me because I was
sort of on the fence with itbecause of the issues we've mentioned. I
think they are pretty serious. Butwhat two things that really saved it for
me was one I did like sortof the family message at the end,
and that idea of how family issuch a big part of Hawaii. I
thought that was a cool thing thatthey incorporating that and that kind of family

(17:29):
bond and your traditions and sort ofrespecting your background and stuff. I thought
how they put that in at theend I think worked really well. I
think the acting just really picked upat the end when they were being sincere
with each other, because maybe theseare actors that really they've been filming and
they cared about each other, andso I thought there was a good heart
at the end that I thought wasearned that sort of made it work for

(17:52):
me. And then the other aspectis I liked that it was this adventure,
but it was also I think payingimage to Hawaiian culture and Hawaiian history
and the respect for the land andthe respect for the dead, and that
idea of sort of respect for ourancestors. And I know that I don't
know a lot of the Hawaiian culture, but I know that's a major part

(18:15):
in Hawaii culture for the bits thatI do know, and I know that
a lot of the Paulsian Islands,the big thing about respecting your ancestors in
your past is a huge thing withtheir culture, and so I did really
appreciate that incorporation into the movie.I did think that they sincerely were trying
to say something about Hawaiian culture andabout ancestors and respecting our past, and

(18:38):
so I like the fact that theywere able to do a kid's adventure but
kind of teach young kids about somethingto teach about respect and sort of it
did a different take on the treasurehunting thing, and so that aspect,
I think is really what saved themovie for me. Yeah, then that's
what I really liked about the movietoo, was sort of that ethical decision

(19:00):
at the very end, and sortof like Goonies, just the question of,
you know, is it right totake this treasure? Maybe Indiana Jones
would have been a lot more thoughtfulif he ever, you know, got
to the idol and really, youknow, just had that moment of should
I be grave robbing? Should Ibe doing this? And in this case

(19:21):
too. Again like I'm not sayingthat I am anyone that knows a lot
about Hawaiian culture, but here Ifeel like the movie was trying to enlighten
us on stuff it was. AndI also liked that it didn't need or
it didn't feel embarrassed or shy ofsupernatural elements. I thought that was wonderful.
Well, what I thought was wonderfulabout it was it was not a

(19:45):
bestball supernatural elements, but I feellike it was using that to elaborate maybe
some of the customs and the traditionsand the I don't want these superstitions,
but sort of like the spirituality ofmaybe those tribes there. I think it
was. There's a lot of good, good stuff around this film. I
think, yeah, yeah, Andlike I said what everyone, I sort

(20:07):
of was on the fence. Butin the end, I think it's a
good spirited movie. And like whatScott said, your kids will probably love
it. I likely have two criticsthat are rating that demographic that can tell
me. So they got to seea few things with you this week.
Yeah, yeah, they did thenext one they haven't seen with me yet,
but I know that my boy atleast really wants to see this one,

(20:33):
so eventually where you are going tofind a time to see it together.
And what I'm talking about is KingKong, the nineteen seventy six version.
For those people that are with us, last week, you know that
we reviewed the original nineteen thirty threeKing Kong, so now we're doing the
one that is the remake. WhatI love about this movie, and I

(20:53):
think I mentioned last week, isthat the big giant poster for the nineteen
seventy six King the remake was billedas the most exciting original motion picture of
all time. They have a differentdefinition of original than I do, because
usually a remake is not an original. But they clearly were trying to trumpet

(21:15):
this as a big blockbuster, butit most definitely was. This was a
bought by a Dino de Larentis,who was a powerhouse Italian producer in the
nineteen seventies and the nineteen eighties.Some people would know him as he's the
one that outbid George Lucas and boughtFlash Gordon away from George Lucas, which

(21:38):
then caused George Lucas to create StarWars because he did not have the rights
to Flash Gordon anymore. And thenafter Star Wars came out, Dino remembered
he had the rights to Flash Gordon. It made his own version of Flash
Gordon. Also, he was theproducer behind stuff like Conan the Barbarian and
some of the Halloween sequels. Hedid a lot of sort of pulp and

(22:00):
big budget movies from the seventies andthe eighties, but he also did sort
of like Prestige fair too. Hedid Serpico. He was the director of
that The Man Hunter, which wassort of the first time he saw handble
electors, So there's a lot ofstuff. You know. Mentis is definitely
one of the more well known producers, and he was the man behind this

(22:21):
one, and he got himself adirector that does have some history with blockbusters.
He got John Gillerman to do thisone, and we talked about blockbusters
of the nineteen seventies and they're sortof the two big blockbusters would have been
sort of you got Jaws, whichthen triggered sort of the big monster animal

(22:42):
movies, and then you had thedisaster pictures. And the person who directed
this, King kongwe also did TarrenInferno, and Tarren Inferno was one of
the biggest blockbusters of the nineteen seventies. So you had a big name director
that is behind this picture. Andlike I said, the blockbusters were different.
It wasn't comic book movies back then. A lot of them were sort

(23:03):
of stuff like Jaws or stuff likethe big disaster pictures. They were the
huge hits. But this was afilm that was treated like a big movie
event and it was one of thehighest grocering movies of it's year, so
it was a successful hit at thetime. Jeff Bridges would be known because
I believe Last Picture Show came outat this before this, and so he

(23:27):
did have some name. Definitely agood looking star, and so they put
him sort of in the lead.Jessica Lane was This was her debut as
an actor, and she was amodel before this, and they brought her
in. Charles Groden sort of haddone a lot of kind of comedy and
sort of had that kind of sleazycharacter down, so they brought him in

(23:48):
and he sort of now this timea different take on sort of what the
director would have been in the original. And what I'd like about this picture
is they didn't try to do astraight up remake. They try to set
it in modern times, to setin the nineteen seventies instead of the nineteen
thirties, and they try to doa very kind of nineteen seventies take on

(24:11):
it, instead of it being amovie director, instead of it being a
director who's sort of going out thereand trying to shoot a picture, they
try to make it very contemporary.And what was a contemporary issue in the
nineteen seventies. There was a massiveenergy crisis in the nineteen seventies in the
United States, there's these tales ofpeople having huge, huge lineups going to

(24:33):
gas stations because there is so littlegas at the time, where you would
have to wait an hour just topump your gas. There was a big
depression in the nineteen seventies, therewas big financial concerns, and so this
movie sort of plays on that becauseinstead of being a movie director, we
now got ourselves a guy who ispart of an oil company. This is
the Pet Trucks oil company, andthey hear that they there is all these

(24:59):
oil reserves on this unknown island,and so that's why they're going to this
unknown islands island that is covered inmist that he wants to go there with
the potential of getting all this oil, and so I like that different take.
And then they happen to come acrossa girl who who was on a
director's yacht that just kind of randomlyexploded, and so that's how they kind

(25:19):
of get the Jessica Laying character inthere a little bit shoehorned, and then
eventually sort of then get the samemovie as the original, all the kind
of same beats are expecting. ButI did like that different take of it
being an oil company because I feelthey are sort of just like the first
King com. I think they aretackling themes, and this is a big

(25:41):
blockbuster that is trying to say something, but it's say different things this time.
I think this one speaks a bitmore on American colonialism. I think
this speaks a bit more on sortof big corporations and sort of how they
feel they have the rights to things, and this idea of the dangers of
the American dream. All three ofthese people, the Jeff Bridgess character,

(26:03):
of Jessica Laine character, the child'sgrowning character, they all want success,
they all want fame, they allwant financial ideas. Those things drive them,
and it's showing the dangers of thoseof where you let that drive you,
And this idea that American companies orNorth America I should even say America,
I should say the West feels theyhave the rights to things, they
have the obligations to things, theycould conquer things. I think this movie

(26:26):
explores that even more, that dangersof wanting to be success and that idea
of pillaging and that idea that wefeel we have the rights to stop.
I think entitlement is a big thingthat this movie pushes and showing those dangers
of that and consumerism, the dangersof consumerism as they are getting pushed.
We got to find this island andwe need to get all its resources,

(26:48):
and then when the oil's not there, oh, we'll just bring this big
ape or we'll use as a marketingthing. And so I think it really
shows the dangers of exploitation. Sothat I think is a big aspect of
this movie. A lot of moodmoney was sunk into this movie, and
you can see a lot of moneywas sunk into the King Kong character.

(27:10):
I think, just like the firstone, they did a really good job
with King Kong here and with himgiving emotion. King Kong once again feels
like its own character. And Ithought they did a better job this time
around of building the relationship between KingKong and this time a character called a
dawn, the female character Jessica Lane. I think they built that relationship better

(27:33):
this time rather than in the originalwhere the girl just screened all the time.
There is a bomb that's created betweenKing Kong and Jessica Lane, and
you get the idea that she soothesthe beast and she makes the beast had
new ideas, and I think Theydid a good thing there, making Kong
feel like this living, breathing thingand building a better relationship between her.
You understand why they love each otherand why he's connected and drawn to her,

(27:56):
and how she soothes his beast ideaand calms him down. That they
this time, they definitely focus moreon King Kong. You still have the
build up to seeing King Kong,but King Kong I think is in this
movie more and you definitely get moreof Jessica Lang and can come together.
You get that kind of that relationship. I think it's built up better in

(28:18):
this one and you get that bond, and I think they do a good
job there by Charles Grodan makes hischaracter. I think he could slimier this
time. He does a great jobas a villain there here. I think
they build that up really well.And I think Jeff Bridges fitz well as
the villain to or as the herohere. One of the things I remember

(28:41):
Jessica Lane was just toward apart forher performance in this movie. I remember
critics ripped her to the point whereshe was so skewered that she stopped acting
for two years after this movie andmade her doubt her skills and she stopped
acting for two years. I don'tsee it. I don't know why there
was huge criticisms for her. Ithink for what she's asked to do here,

(29:03):
I thought she is captivating. Ithink she commands the camera. I
think she is a gorgeous woman,and to me, she feels like a
movie star right off the bat.I don't think there's anything well with her
performance. I do think there's someissues with her writing. There is sometimes
where she seems to be completely opposedto the Beast, and then all of
a sudden, they've decided now shecares about Kong, and I think that

(29:26):
could have been written a little bitbetter. But to be honest, I
think that Jeff Bridges character isn't totallygreat. Isn't written great here too,
because there's times where he sort ofsees to be opposed to Kong, and
then he's defending Kong when we getin the last stretch of the movie.
I think it is really well written. When they focus when they decide that
Laye and Bridges care for Kong.I think that part works better and they're

(29:47):
able to put on better performances.But I do think there's a few parts
sort of on the boat and they'vecaptured Kong, where the writing is a
little bit for the characters messy,and they're sort of trying to figure out
are they in it for the richesor do they care about Kong? And
I think maybe they could have sortedthat stuff out a little bit better.
But I do think the most partthe three leads are good, and I

(30:08):
think they helped drive the messages ofthe movie. And I said, I
think they do a great job withthe special effects of Cong and that the
creating Cong as a character again tomake you care. Apparently they dropped tons
of money into a big robotic congywere did they made this big giant robot,
But for most of the movie it'sfacial mass and it sort of suits

(30:32):
and stuff because I guess that themuch like Jaws and much like sort of
a lot of the Star Wars creatures. The original Star Wars, the machine
was hard to operate and the robotdidn't really work, and so the robot
only shows about fifteen seconds in thewhole movie. I think I know where
the robot is in New York.And then initially they are unveiling Kong.

(30:53):
There's one part where Colin looks differentthan any other part of the movie,
and he's not moving. He's juststanding there straight and I think that's the
robot, the malfunctional robots. Sothey did get the robot in there,
and that was one of the funthings I had in this movie, trying
to figure out where is the robotthat was supposed to be a big part
of the movie, but he didn'twork. If I have one other major

(31:15):
criticism too, is Skall Island isnot as exciting and fantasful in this version
as it was in the original movie. I know Scott criticized that Kong fought
two many monsters in the first one, but there's almost no monsters in this
one. The dinosaurs were totally gone, and apparently a producer De Laurentis did
not want to do stop motion andso because of that and they wanted to

(31:38):
cut down the budget. Because there'sso much money put into the Kong character,
they wanted to cut stuff out,and so the dinosaurs are completely eliminated
from Skaal Island. There's no dinosaurs. There's almost no cool creatures in this
We get Kong fighting a giant bulkconstructor and that is it, and I
do think that loses something. Ithink you lose a little bit of the

(32:00):
fantasy of Skong Island Skoll Island whenyou don't have all those creatures. I
love the ambition the first Kong.I would have loved there to be a
few more creatures here. But Ido think they make Kong matter. I
do think they do a better jobwith a relationship with Kong and the lead
lady here. So I think theoriginal is still a classic. The original

(32:21):
is still better. I gave thatfour stars. I think this is a
lot better that it's reputation, thoughI give it three and a half.
I really enjoyed this. We've gota massive disagreement. It's time. I
did not like this movie at all. I thought it was boring. I
did not like any characters in here. Looking at Jessica Lang's character, I

(32:43):
think it is one of the mostuseless characters I've seen in a while.
Like she's just she comes to everybodyshe knew that she was with has perished
and died, and she's just like, oh, my name's don No,
no Dwan, you just move thew and the a ha ha. Yeah,
everyone's ff and dead and you're justI'm so so blonde. That was

(33:09):
horrible. I'm not going to arguethat there was parts where her writing was
bad, and that's what I wassaying. It's hard to connect with her
at a certain time. I thoughther relationship with an ape here was good
though, that was one of thebetter. At least they tried to have
more of a relationship. The firstone was just a screaming lady in a

(33:30):
in the hand of an ape.This one, yeah, they tried to
focus on that more. I thinkthat the run time, like, I
think they could have trimmed a lotof stuff down and uh, some of
some of that stuff down because theruntime for me, at two hours and
fourteen minutes, is feels excessive becausefor me, the a lot of the

(33:53):
drama doesn't hit. Cong's not doinga whole lot, which I'm fine.
They could have been more Stall Islandtoo, because it was just then walking
through jungle, I'll give you that. And they could have done more with
the first one. They could havedone more with the natives at Skull Island
too. The natives were just useless, absent to the story pretty much.
And then also, you know,you just start as you're watching it and

(34:14):
if you're not connected to the movie, you started wondering, wait, how
did they get a bulldozer ashore?How did what did that airplane dropping supplies
drop a bulldozer into the water.It just you start wondering these things.
Yeah, I took that with thembecause I see I took the message the
movie. Of the message is sortof the dangers of good sumerism and the

(34:37):
dangers of American imperialism, and thisidea of sort of big American companies pushing
their way through. So it's notbelievable, but I accepted it because of
that idea. And I think Isaw this movie a bit more as a
B movie and a bit more thatit had a sense of humor where it
cast sound like Charles Growdan. SoI think I accepted some of the more

(34:59):
cheesier moments of the movie because Ithought it was going for those lass do
you at at seventeen? Was atseventeen million dollar budget in nineteen seventy seven.
I didn't think they were trying forwell, maybe the Groden character.
Okay, I'll concede, because Growdenis it could be like, because I
mean, you're casting a guy wholargely did comedies before this. Yeah,

(35:21):
I'll concede that. There you go, it's conceded. Now. This one
was twitter part by critics, butobviously not audiences. It was a hit.
It was a hit. Yeah,Michael Bay knows what that's like.
Yeah, I guess I was inthe minority here. I was hoping you'll
go beyond my team. I knowthis is not largely accepted. Maybe I

(35:43):
just loved Big AG because they alwaysworked for me. Here, here's the
thing. When I was at work, one of the people I worked with
were was talking about Battleship and howthey they loved it. They thought it
was just if nothing's going on,it's a great movie and the bat background.
And I was going to say,well, I didn't like it,
but then I realized, well,I don't know how many times I put

(36:06):
on Rambo First Blood Part two andI screamed from the rooftop rooftop. So
that's the best Rambo movie. Itis, just you know, it was
one of those moments this weekend orthis week where I realized, just yeah,
how subjective everything about films is,and how different things hit people different
ways. If I saw the originalKing Kong growing up and had that you

(36:28):
know that giant ape bug in me, which I do. Yeah, would
I have viewed this and would ithave like hit the nostalgia buttons like I
was talking about with Finding Ohana andit could have that's I think the Yeah,
Like the thing that I really feltthat was I was thinking about this
week was that whole aspect of peoplecan end up liking things so differently than

(36:53):
other people. Yeah, I don'tthink this. Yeah, this movie didn't
really drake for me. I mean, I definitely see all a cheesy element.
I definitely see. I thought thatJeff Bridges and Jessica Lane character had
some issues at certain parts in thescreenplay. I will give all that.
But I do like when they startedtrying to defend Kong. I think that

(37:15):
stuff kind of works. I likedDwan and what she does with King Kong.
I all thought thought they did areally good job with the Giant eight.
Well you give me that. Yeah. I didn't find it as a
motive though. Maybe I was comparingit directly to the first one, which
is a classic, and I willgive you that. So I like visually

(37:38):
though when I was watching it,I was thinking nineteen seventy six, this
is pretty good. I mean,it's not one of those things where you
look back, you know, youbecause there's some movies from like five years
ago you can watch back on andbe like, holy crap, that's awful.
Yeah, cgi dates worse than thiskind of technology. Yeah, it

(37:58):
really does. And this I thinkthey did a really good job. I
mean there was a lot of inventivenessin the original King Kong. I think,
you know, knowing about that kindof inventiveness and then thinking about Peter
Jackson and thinking, wow, that'sa good match made in heaven, because
I think the reason why Peter Jacksonwas a great choice for the Lord of
the Rings was because he was veryinventive in how you use the camera as

(38:22):
far as like perspectives and all that, which worked well with the Hobbits and
all and dwarves and such. Butyeah, you sort of see that first
Kong movie and think, yeah,Peter Jackson perfect for this type of film,
which we get I guess we getto find out next week because they
still haven't seen that one and it'seven longer than this one, so I'll

(38:43):
warn you that. But what you'lldefinitely get for the King Kong from when
I remember is he had a deeplove for the original. You're going to
see that is he's more trying torecapture what's happened in original because the original
there's famously apparently a sea whereas thecharacters fall into the spider pit. There's

(39:04):
this legendary spider pit scene that Iguess forever reason it's got cut from the
original movie, and people are alwayswondering, like, where's the spider pit,
like the mythological spider pit scene thatwas in the original King Kong and
so like, because you're double hold. There's so many creature scenes in the
original. Apparently there's supposed to beone other they got cut because the director
at the time decided pacing wise,okay, there's too much of that,

(39:27):
we got to get back to theGiant eight because it's about the Giant eight.
So they cut out this spider pitsscene that people have never seen.
I don't know. Maybe also therewas some special effects issues and stuff,
and so Peter Jackson definitely is tryingto really build up kind of Skull Island
because I think he'd loved that somuch from what they have in the original
one. And I will say,well, you're sort of Chrisicis to hear

(39:49):
the acting and not liking the characters. I think it's criticism was Skull Island
was a dude. It was adude, wasn't it? Like where do
you see the first one? Andseeing? Because I always liked this movie,
but we visit after just watching thefirst home like they really messed up
Skull Island, They really did.I think that part was just kind of

(40:09):
you get a snake? Yeah?Oh, did you know that? In
one of the posters for the KingKong sequel, he's standing on the World
Trade Centers and there's fighter jets circlingaround him. Doesn't that quite what you
get in the movie. It's agood thing they stuck with the film.
What happened in the film? Twoof the King Toll movies also the Empire
state building. This one is theTwin Towers, So it is interesting that

(40:30):
Twin Towers kind of I guess theywould have been brand new around this time,
so that's probably why they wanted touse them. So that's an interesting
thing there. I thought the finalehere though, again maybe because I was
often more invested in this movie thanyou, but that was pretty emotional.
Are you talking from the Unveiling ofKing Kong forward or like from yeah,

(40:52):
like that part like with Kong sortof on the run. I thought Jessica
Lane Jeffords is a really good theirperformances there. I thought the big finale
at the top, I thought theyit's very I'd like that they did something
different than the original, and Ithought what they decided to do different work
for the type of movie they createdhere. I found that to be the

(41:14):
most interesting part of the film,and also I think it felt like the
biggest sort of wasted opportunity as well, because you do have the two main
characters who have turned to they don'tlike what's happening to Kong and they don't
want him hurt or anything. Butthen when he gets out, he's They
make sure you know that civilians aredying, Civilians are getting stepped on,

(41:39):
they're getting grabbed from inside like acommuter train and thrown across the city.
I felt like a call That wasone of the few times I felt that
was a call back to thirty threewhen they had that scene with a girl
in the tower. It felt likethat to me, so I thought maybe
it was leading towards some very likeI don't know, like a harder message

(42:00):
of you know how we feel abouthim, but then you know, Dwan
and Jack they're just like, butyou're hurting him. Well, the dudes
just killed a city blocks worth ofpeople. It felt like it was a
moment where they could there could havebeen I don't know, this tension of

(42:21):
you know, yeah, I don'tknow. It felt like it was a
bit wasted because they could have beena lot more complex. Yeah, I
kind of see where you're coming from. I think I did feel the tension
a bit more. I think themovie did pull off a bit more of
trying to make Coling a more complicatedcharacter, but because I thought the message
there was sort of like, thisis why he should have not been brought

(42:44):
here. He doesn't belong here.What's with people in Briana apes over to
the mainland? Right? Yeah?I mean, And so I took that
and that they weren't that's trying tosay like, oh, Coling is the
hero, we should be rooting forhim. I took it more like,
look how misguided American corporations are.Look how this kind of we are.

(43:06):
We brought a beast that should havenever been here, and now he's going
to die. Like, I feelthat they really showed sort of this almighty
dollar and this idea again of colonialismand news striping cultures and bringing it look
at the dangers that we've done,and what we've done to calm colonialism wasn't
great showing up. That's the otherthing. I know it's just a throwaway

(43:30):
line, but I even like theidea of where grown is thinking, look,
we saved these native people because wetook the giant april away and bridges
being like you've taken away their purpose. Yeah, I like that. Like
there's I think, I think,dick down, you know that this is
a better movie than it's reputation.I don't know about that unless you're,

(43:50):
you know, setting it back inthe nineteen thirties, with the invention of
satellites and all that. It's harderto justify things like how this island was
never found. It's hard to justifywith those of this modern times. First.
Yeah, and I and while it'skind of like, well, okay,
when they're on the island, theyget like sunny skies, so the

(44:14):
island's not necessarily covered with fog,So when't they What I'm trying to say,
is I actually kind of. Idid like the idea that this time
it was that that petrol company thatis looking for the next big, you
know thing, a big reserve.I like the fact that it was sort
of showing that colonial aspect of weshow up when we take things, because

(44:36):
I mean, hey, the ideathat you show up to a country with
like a society with their own cultureand all that, and like, yeah,
I think we'll take it. It'syou know, it's looking around.
Yeah, yeah, we'll take it. That idea. I don't think it's
necessarily used a lot in theater oras much as it should be, since
it's such a huge part of humanhistory. It could have done it better.

(45:00):
It could have, But how manyother movies did it even as good
as this one. I'll have tocome back to you and does work.
And again, this is one ofthose hard things where you've got like Jeene
Siskel and thousands of critics on yourside. But I just I connected with
this movie. I'd like it's ambition. I liked what it tried. I

(45:21):
thought Jessica Laide did better than whathistory says where they said it's like the
worst performance of the year. Idon't think it is. I don't.
I think people were unfair with her. I think the special effects hold up
really well compared to some other things, like you say, like you compare
that's the Gods of eject. Ithink this is better. Oh oh absolutely,
And I mean on the special effectsfront, some heavy hitters in there,

(45:45):
Rick Baker and Carlo Rambaldi, whodid the alien at least like the
head of the alien from Alien.Well, both those guys are legends,
and Grimbaldi also did et if Irecall. Yeah, So I mean,
when you've got, yeah, twoof the biggest names in special effects,
you're gonna have a cong that looksas good as it did. And like

(46:08):
I said, looking back at itfrom this day and age, it still
looks quite good. Yeah. No, I was actually impressed with how well
it held up. And yeah,I was pleasantly surprised. I went in
thinking I wasn't going to recommend thismovie, and because it's been a long
time since I've seen it, Iwas pretty sure this is one of the

(46:29):
ones that didn't hold up. Ithink it does hold up. I was
absolutely enthralled. You've heard of mycriticisms, but I liked the different take.
I liked that it ran a differentway than the original, and I
think I think it pulled it off. Like I said, I'm giving this
three and a half, and Imean people who listened to show long enough
know who to trust. That's right, the one that's not just throwing the

(46:51):
stars around like Candy Canes. Igive it too. Oh yeah, no,
no this I didn't like this movie. Oh And after all this time,
Scott, I thought I had trainedyou of how to watch movies proper,
and then I learned properly. ThenI snuck off and watched a few
films on my own, and yeah, it's just unfortunately, really, you

(47:16):
dropped the ball this time, Scott. I think you're missing a lot of
the gem in this movie. No, I I think I saw it,
and I think if you got torewatch, you'll like it more. I
saw the treasure in it. Isaw the treasure in it, and then
I realized best for humanity to leaveit in this cave and respect it.

(47:37):
It'll just leave it where it isand not bringing out into the light,
and I'll go to Charles growded itand try to exploit it for all it's
worth. For all the sea.I did like his death. You've got
this giant ape walking through a stadiumof people. Impossible to miss the ape.
Everyone's running away from it, andCharles Grodin for some reason, runs

(47:57):
up to it, looks up,sees King in front of him, screams
and falls onto his back and staysin. This is what I see that
You're not supposed to take all thisseriously. See, I don't know,
because back at that time that likeand there's a certain timeframe of cinema where
things like that happen and it's totallynot for jokes. It's like, oh,

(48:22):
this would be a cool way tokill him because he gets stomped on
by the beast that he unleashed.Yeah, I get you kind of.
But I also like the big budgetmovies at that time. We're those disaster
pictures like Tyron Inferno and Poseidon Adventure. And this is the director who did

(48:43):
Tyn Inferno. I don't even thinkin the seventies people took the disaster movie
seriously. See, I know theopposite. I think people took these type
of movies less seriously then then wedo now. Because I think the big
budget movies back and like even likeplay at the Apes and like I said,
all those disaster pictures, they're kindof just big budget camp Uh.

(49:08):
I don't know. I get theargument. I get the feel that they
were playing playing things straight with thisone. Well they drift her up.
We're disagreement. I don't think we'reever going to agree on it. We're
not. We're not. Let's moveon to something we will agree on.
Say, even though you feel you'rewalking away winning here, which I know
you didn't, but you have tosay that I do provide decent arguments.

(49:31):
Yeah, yeah, that that totallydo not change my stance at all.
I love it now. One thingwe can't agree on is that there is
a Last Blockbuster in Bend, Oregon. I don't know if we can any
say wait wait, we'd have togoogle it to make sure it still exists.
But there is a documentary that poppedonto the Netflix called The Last Blockbuster,

(49:53):
and I decided to add it tothe podcast schedule because I knew for
certain that within the next few weeksof it being out, I would see
it and Chris would see it regardlessof whether it was on the schedule,
So why not talk about it?And if you don't know what blockbuster is
you're you're a very young listener andthank you for joining us to subscribe.

(50:19):
And the thing with this is itwhen if I talked about the nostalgia being
tapped a bit in Finding Ohana,this block this documentary about Blockbuster is really
a nostalgia trip to to I'd sayit's detriment in areas because I think it

(50:40):
doesn't it Everything is rose covered glassis basically when it comes to Blockbuster and
what it was. And it likethe documentary about Quincy Jones that we had
seen, it never looks at ormaybe it brushes over, some of the
bad decisions the CEOs of Blockbuster made, but it never really looks into anything

(51:02):
that was very negative at all,and it's just about the very romantic nostalgia
of walking into a Blockbuster. Thereare a number of different people that are,
you know, interviewed for this documentary. I would say that there are
a lot of the comedians or actorsin here may not be the biggest household

(51:25):
name people. That doesn't mean that, I think in this sort of thing,
it doesn't necessarily mean that it's anyless valid because what they're doing is
talking about the experience of what thevideo store was to them and you know,
what's going in and walking around feltlike and you know, going in
with friends. And the documentary doeslook at sort of the rise of home

(51:49):
video and video rental. I didnot realize that when you know, the
VCR was coming out and studios weregonna put movies on it, that they
were planning on selling the movies fora hundred bucks apiece. I did sell
them. I remember those ads.Yeah, I don't remember that at all.
Yeah, no, no memory ofthat at all. So you know,

(52:12):
you could get WRESTLEMANBA three for likeseventy bucks if you want to buy
it. I remember the ad.Oh wow, yeah, Well, uh,
the thing was it it was informative, Like there was a bunch of
stuff that I knew going into this, but there was also stuff that I
didn't, so learning about the riseof Blockbuster and how it sort of became

(52:34):
a thing and how it expanded.And also what I didn't know was how
that they were basically putting it intodebt to try and buy Paramount. I
didn't know that. I had noknowledge of that. So there's some interesting
stuff in here, but I ultimatelywhat this documentary is is a walk down
memory lane. It is looking atwhat it was like going in on a

(52:57):
Friday or a Saturday night with yourfriends and being in there for an hour
walking around to rent a film.You know, I try to look at
the modern day landscape and the waythings are searchable. People are hanging out,
and there's Netflix, there's there wassomething different and I'm not saying this
to sound like the old person thatrefuses to read a digital book, but

(53:21):
there was something about being able topick up the either VHS tape or DVD
box and look at it, readthe back, see the pictures that are
on the back. There was somethingto that physical part of the exploration of
the store that is completely gone.It is sort of just wiped out from

(53:43):
existence us in its completeness, andyou know, as someone who remembers that
stuff, well, this documentary reallywas kind of fun hearing people talk about
how, you know, the moviethey really wanted to see wasn't in,
but they found out that it couldbe returning any minute. Now. I
remember with friends waiting, Yeah,wait, you would wait for an hour

(54:07):
to two hours in the store becauseyou're grabbing that thing. When the person
returns that movie, you're grabbing it. The wonderful thing about the physical video
store was being able to find thingsin different sections, being introduced to things
that you'd never ever heard of before, just because you were all, you

(54:27):
know, a group of six peoplejust spread out, just fan out in
this store looking for stuff. Ithink the thing here too, is that
for me, it's more of areflection on what the video store itself was.
I wasn't anyone who was loyal toBlockbuster. If there was a Blockbuster
within the same walking distance as aJumbo Video, I would have one hundred

(54:50):
percent every time probably gone to theJumbo Video. This is very specific to
people going and going over Blockbuster,which I near the end, you go,
you could go to the theater andsee a movie in the theater for
the price of a new release atBlockbuster. They just kept jacking that price
up and up and up. So, you know, the the idea that

(55:13):
this is just completely rose covered glasses, I think loses sort of the reality
of the time capsule here. It'ssort of we forget what this this experience
was, the good and the bad, But the idea of remembering those you
know, two decades where we couldgo into a store and as people like

(55:37):
you and I, you know,head over to the horror section and just
pick up all sorts of different casesand look at things and thinks like,
you're just making this list. Okay, when I'm older, I'm gonna watch
this and I'm gonna watch this.And you did that too, I'm guessing
you did. Oh yeah. Andand that's the thing. It's an unreplicable

(56:00):
experience. And so I really reallyliked it. It's it's a decent documentary.
It's good for the nostalgia, butit's one of those things where it
just really feels like it is itis just completely rose colored glasses, and
sometimes I felt as as a bitof a knock against it is it Lea
really tried to lean into humor attimes where I think it maybe disconnected a

(56:24):
bit. Like there's a whole sequencewhere they were re enacting, you know,
someone going to the video store,and it just kind of like does
it even fit with what's going on? Like they're doing a drunk history sort
of thing where the narrator's talking andthe people are lip sinking to what the
narrators saying, and it just kindof missed. And then there was a

(56:47):
they interviewed someone from from trauma abouttoxic avengers, and it had nothing to
do with anything, and it endedup making me wonder you put it in
for humor but didn't help, didn'tadd anything. I give it three stars
if you were the kind of personthat would just here's the thing too.
This is even lost, this ideaof it's Friday, we're gonna meet up

(57:12):
at Blockbuster, or we're gonna meetup, we're gonna meet up at the
video store, and that that wasFriday night. That's gone. So it
really is that, you know,trying to be that time capsule. I
think it is a good dose ofnostalgia for people who remember that sort of
thing. I give it three stars. For me, it was meet up
the Blockbuster Saturday night because we almostwent to the theater every Friday night we

(57:36):
were I was a big theater persontoo, but it was definitely part of
the thing. I think you're alsoright where with you and I. Our
nostalgia is probably heavier on video storesrather than Blockbuster, because Blockbuster was the
Walmart Video Stars. I gobbled upall the moment pops and like this movie
does show it didn't essaily have thelesser known things or there's certain things that

(57:59):
you couldn't get that you'd be ableto have got at the other movie theater
or at the other video stores.And so in some ways I went to
Blockbuster because it was there, butI always had a little bit of resentment
towards it because I also knew itgobbled up some of my favorite video stores.
Well, that's the thing, andthey never quite look at that aspect
of it, which you're not harmingthe memory by talking about those things.

(58:22):
I never understand when people stay awayfrom those aspects, because you're still people
are still going to feel warm andfuzzy at the end. Yeah, And
that's the thing. Is this movie, the last Blockbuster, I think is
perfectly crafted for you and I AndI will confess one hundred percent I enjoyed

(58:44):
watching this and I got massive streamsof nostalgia for it. But after watching
it, I had to sit backand think of this as a movie.
And that is why I've given ittwo and a half because I think as
a movie it was very scatter shot. It gave a lot of interesting things.
The introduction to the trauma guy whohas resentment towards Blockbuster is very interesting.

(59:06):
The idea that there's a studio traumawho did Toxic Avenger and all these
lesser things a Blockbuster wouldn't really pickit up. Is interesting, but should
have been in this movie. Idon't think so sould have had its own
documentary. I think the rise andFall of Blockbuster is very scatter shot.
Here. It tells you little bitof nuggets, some of the stuff I
knew. I already knew that thereason video stores flourished was because studios were

(59:31):
selling their movies for too much.That's why video stores were able to happen,
because for a hundred dollars, nobodywas buying a movie, but they
would buy them and then rent them. I knew that part. That's interesting,
but I feel it only glosses overthat sort of initial studio video stores
were hostile, then they became friends. And the mistake and like you said,

(59:52):
it doesn't even really talk about anyof the major mistakes Blockbuster did to
go out of business. There's verySo my issue was there's so many nuggets
of interesting stuff, but it doesn'tcome for a movie. And so what
this movie should have been was thelast Blockbuster. It should have been the
last blockbuster in ben Oregon. Ithought the lady who was keeping this blockbuster

(01:00:14):
going was a very fascinating person.I thought her family was fascinating. I
thought it was fascinating that what madethis blockbuster last? Why did this blockbuster
survive when all his other fall fell. But because there was so many other
things, this movie tried to jamit to ninety minutes. I don't think
I ever learned why this one lasted. No, And I think this is

(01:00:36):
the thing you're you're hitting it correctly. It should. This movie, I
think would have been better if itwasn't about that broad nostalgia and if it
was about what keeps this alive?And because yeah, that woman Sandy Harding
when she's like pulling apart old computersto Frankenstein something together, to that stuff
is just so fascinating. That isAnd that's the heart of it too.

(01:01:00):
It's you know, there's a reasonwhy that specific store is still operating.
There's a reason her. Yeah,it's not because it's just happens to be
the last one to go down.No, it's her. It's the fact
that someone walks into her blockbuster says, do you have gods of Egypt?
No? I don't. But shegoes out to Walmart that day and grabs

(01:01:22):
Gods of Egypt, which I endedup giving a three star to it,
and but not King Kong, butbut not King Kong. Absolutely, But
you know that that that dedication tocustomer service, the fact that she'd be
willing to do that, what ishe let's even look at the city of
Bend, Oregon. What makes thisthe place where this is happening. They

(01:01:44):
just hinted at it like that's thething is? I think you and I
probably look this at the same level. I totally admit that I'm the right
person for this and the nostalgia buds. I enjoyed it all the way through.
But why I can't recommend it?It's those little things? Is it
the end? What did I reallyand it was just a bunch of nuggets.
And if this movie is supposed tobe about the last blockbuster, what

(01:02:05):
makes ben different? What were thethings that she did? How did she
connect with her customers? I thinkthere's little bits of it. There could
have been so much more. Yeah, there really could have. It was
Okay, it hit the spot.Yeah it should have been about that specific
last blockbuster. I agree, Andbut yeah, no, I was totally
that kid and I can relate toyou one hundred percent. My dad was

(01:02:25):
a movie buff. Two. Now, we didn't go to a blockbuster there's
a lot like in the mid eighties, because I don't think there was a
blockbuster in Bradford yet. But wewent to the video store a lot,
and there was always I got torent something and my dad got to rent
something. Usually my dad would writea horror movie or an R rated action
movie, so I wouldn't get tosee it. But I remember always with
excitement looking at what did my dadrent, and think, well, one

(01:02:47):
day I'm going to be able tosee slumber Party Massacre. So like there'd
be these things that are determinator,like those are two remember him rent Dad.
I don't think he liked slumber Partyin Massacre, but he did like
the Terminator, and there's that idea. And like you, I would rent
my movie, but then I wouldslip into another part and peek at sort
of the other horror movies or theother action movies. Say one day I

(01:03:08):
was going to see them. SoI remember that. I remember video places
always been my happy place. ButI said this before the show was recorded.
It's I'll reveal it now. Ialso admit that I was a little
bit of a different type of moviegeek. I think full on movie geek,
because I was also the kid thatlooked forward to the Friday newspaper because
a Friday newspaper would have the newmovies and there would be a section in

(01:03:30):
the paper that would have all thoseshowtimes. Back then, they put the
showtimes in the paper. It wasdifferent than now obviously, and they would
have all because there wasn't online.You couldn't go on to the Sinpack website
back then, so they had theshowtimes all in the paper. But also
you have about two pages that hadposters for every single movie that would have

(01:03:50):
come to Branford, because that's whereI would have and we had the Branford
Paper, and I just love soakingup every poster, so get every movie
and thinking what was this plot?Like? What was this? I was
the type of kid where I createdmy own newspaper because I'd like to write
too, and i'd have the moviesection. I'd create my own posters and
create my own movies that would oneday be made. So I get that
was a special kind of geek.So I had the same nostalgia I think

(01:04:13):
though for movie theaters and I anticipationas I did for the movie, for
the rentals of video stories, andyeah, I remember seeing those movies and
I think there is something lost.I think there is something lost in the
community of being able to go toa video store, be able to talk
to the clerk, be able tosay what were their picks, and that
conversation. Unfortunately, Netflix, you'lllose that social aspect that once was created

(01:04:38):
by the video store, and Imiss it dearly. I missed that social
aspect. I missed that being ableto instead of algorithms, today it's people
and people's recommendations and having that conversationand for something a lot. It's funny
though, because this movie is talkingabout how they miss that with a Blockbuster.
I felt the Blockbuster is so corporate. My memories of real relations is

(01:04:59):
when you went to a moment Paulstores. Yeah. Absolutely. When when
I lived in North Bay, wehad Bandeto video and it wasn't until I
moved to to Brantford that you know, all of a sudden, the local
video store, the big one wasa Blockbuster. And because by the time
he got that, I think allthe ones I'd loved had been eaten up.
Yeah, and so I mean Iliked that they you know, guaranteed

(01:05:21):
the big rentals when they came out. But there was I mean when I
went to the Bandeto video or whenI was near a Jumbo video, the
selection of off the wall things wasjust incredible. The best video store ever
ever that I ever went in wasin Cambridge, Ontario Video Kingdom, where

(01:05:44):
they had I mean, my gosh, that's where we got Crazy Fat Ethel
two. The obscurity of some ofthe films they had were just I mean,
you'd go in there and if youwere, you know, looking for
that B movie, that hidden treasure, because that's what it came for for
us, was that, Okay,we like B movies, but a lot

(01:06:05):
of B movies aren't fun. Sowho can find the one that is like
so memorable that you're laughing every twoto three minutes and you're not getting You're
not going to Blockbuster for that sortof hunt. Well. I also remember
there was a Jensen's video in Branford, and this was when I was younger,

(01:06:25):
so I wasn't essay seeking out Bmovies, but I know that they
had a great selection of movies likethe fifties and the sixties. That helped
build up my film literacy of olderfilms, and I do think Blockbuster wasn't
the best at having older movies.No, the classic section was not great.
Kevin Smith made something interesting. Ido think maybe one day, and

(01:06:47):
I don't think they'll ever be assuccessful again. But just because physical media,
I think there is a crave forthat, or at least people like
you and I miss physical media.I wouldn't be surprised if it's some day
there's at least like a few retrovideo rental stores. Again, I wouldn't
be surprised. No that because Imean because some like some record stores are

(01:07:12):
making comebacks and things like that.So he does bring up that point,
and I think it's I think it'sa decent point, and I really hope
it's true. I really do.No, do you now, I don't
know Blockbuster did this. I'm notserve if they actually did, but I
know some of the other video rentalstores. Do you remember, because I
remember, like you, waiting fora movie to come back? God,
So I remember the day when youcould call and is the movie I out

(01:07:34):
there? No, but it's comingback six Well, can I reserve it?
Yes? Yes? Then you arrived, isn't there yet? No?
And you're waiting around because you wouldserve he reserved it absolutely. That one
thing too, before we move onthe whole, Like when they said no
more, that there's gonna be nomore late fees, to me, that
was a sign that things were prettymuch done. I even knew when they

(01:07:56):
did that. I was like,yeah, how can that work? Because
who's going to break down? Becauselike, is it that? Were the
late fees a huge injustice? Ifyou don't want to pay them bring the
movie back when you're supposed to.If you can't guarantee that you're going to
bring the movie back, don't rentit. That like, late fees are
not an injustice on the human societyor making people charge like charging you fifty

(01:08:17):
cents because you didn't rewind the moviewhen it takes like a minute and a
half to do that. I didn'tunderstand that. You know, you're not
you're not catering to a legitimate needby saying no more late fees. Well
because even like by the mid twothousands, I think they had four to
eight hour rentals and if it wasa new release, they had like forty

(01:08:41):
of them. So you really weren'tworry about not gay where you want or
be able to rent it when youwant. So yeah, like fees are
unnecessary. That was just them,Yeah, in a law of trouble,
and really it just started digging theirgrave even faster. If you want to
know some irony. The blockbuster thatwe had in Branford, when now it
got out of business. It gotreplaced by a fitness center. So it's

(01:09:04):
about as active as a blockbuster rightnow. I guess right now it would
be. Yeah, I was justthinking that Law's watching this. I was
like, the thing that replaced theblockbuster is not doing great this year either.
No, it's not our next movie. I feel it's something that's very
much in this nostalgia. This isa movie directed by mcgrell or Tarno,

(01:09:29):
and one of the producers is JenniferGarner, who I feel in the last
few years has really been pushing todo kind of family movies, and because
she's a mother of like I thinkit's two children now, and so that
seems to be the big things she'sdoing is she plays a mother a lot
in movies now, but it seemsto be wanted to do a lot of
family movies. This movie is calledYesterday, and it really reminds me of

(01:09:51):
the type of family movies that we'rebig kind of in the nineteen nineties.
Sort of family movies have changed nowwhere they've become much more kind of animated,
and the animated films have kind ofelevated, but that's what we sort
of see as blockbusters. But therewas back in the day where it's sort
of wacky kids or the family goeson a wacky day adventure. That's going

(01:10:12):
to be the thing you would seea lot in nineteen nineties things, and
so this reminded me kind of ofthat idea, and a lot of those
movies, basically, to be honest, are big, hot garbage, and
so that standard. I think yesDay actually holds up pretty well because I
thought this movie, well, again, you could say the plot points don't

(01:10:33):
really work and it's Smoltsy. Ithought it is a shaming film. I
think for the most part, it'skind of an uplifting film. It's got
a good message and for what it'strying to be, which is just kind
of a Smoltz feel good family movie, I think it mostly delivers. The
first part of the movie definitely kindof is ham fisted. It tries to

(01:10:59):
handle your dad. We learned thatJeffer Garner and Edgar Ramirez or once were
a married couple that said yes toeverything and they were brave, but then
they got kids and they were alwayssaying no. Wa wa wa. And
then they have one scene that Ifelt was a little over the top where
the one son made a video ofJeffer Garner saying no, and that the

(01:11:19):
daughter wrote a poll about her sayingno. Basically the teachers saying it seems
like you say no to your kidstoo much. They really don't like you.
And that part was definitely a littlebit over the top. But what
it's set up was her saying,you know what, I'm going to say
yes for one day. I'm goingto have a yes day. And it
was brought to her in a scenethat I thought was really fun. The

(01:11:42):
guidance counselor was hot on a familyinterview day. The guidance counselors hiding away
with Tater Tots played by Natt Factson, and that's how he reveals yesterday to
them, and I thought that factsit was just a lot of fun.
Here hide you await the tater totsand so though they do the yes Day
and again, like I said,I know, the first part is old
ham fisted, but once they getinto the yes Day, I think it

(01:12:05):
kind of works because I felt allthe actors here had a pretty good chemistry
together and I thought, you gotthis loving family and you bought that.
And what really sells as Jeffer Garner. I think Jeffer Garner is great here.
I think she's having a lot offun. She feels like the spirited
mom, and once they get pastthe oh she's ludol mom, and when

(01:12:25):
she got to be the yes daymom, she's into it. She's this
incredible mom. They do this reallyfun sort of water balloon game that I
thought was directed really well, andshe becomes like the champion of it.
I thought that worked really well.And I think the stuff with her daughter
played by Jenner Ortega, I thoughtwas heartfelt. I thought they got along
well. I believed them as afamily. I kind of cheered for them

(01:12:45):
as a family. And what alsoworked for me is there's a lot of
cameos here that I thought we're mostlyfun. Nate Faxon as mister Deacon is
a lot of fun. You've gota police officer who sort of wants to
be cool with the kids, playedby Taro Castro. He had sort of
a fun introduction Fortune Fenster. She'sa comedian that we've seen a few cameo

(01:13:06):
roles. She plays a paramedic.Here this crazy paramedic who doesn't even know
how to drive. I thought shewas kind of crazy and fun. So
I thought the cameos were funny enough. And so even though this is very
generic, very formulaic, I likethe heart about it. I like the
message for if You Radio. Asa sappy movie, I think it is

(01:13:28):
heartfelt. I give the credit toJeffer Garner, I give the credit to
the cameos. But it's just sortof a light, little family snack.
It worked for me three stars.I gave it three as well. Oh
I thought I was gonna get rippedagain by you. No, I don't
do that. When you select appropriatefilms. What I would be improbably you.

(01:13:49):
You nailed probably one of the worstaspects of this movie, and like
I rulingly horrible, just oh mygosh, when she's at parent teacher interviews.
But then it ended up being fun. It ended up being nice and
light well, very well, verywell paced. Actually liked her chemistry with
Edgar Ramirez, Fortune Feamster, whopaid plays the gene the paramedic and Nate

(01:14:13):
Facts and they both have been inLife and Pieces. There you go.
I haven't seen Life of Pieces,but they are both very funny in their
cameos there. I just love hisdedication to the tots. I think the
last time we talked about him wasin Father of the Year. That's sad,
that's too bad. He's an Oscarwinner. He won an Oscar for

(01:14:35):
writing. He shouldn't be a movielike that. No, he's viewed much
better here and Fortune Finster. It'slargely cameos, and every time she's in
a came and I feel like Ifeel like she's just waiting for her first
kind of lead role in the comedy. She can. Her delivery, her
comedic delivery is just just brilliant wellwritten. This movie it just helps.

(01:15:00):
She delivered them made me laugh absolutely. She's always, always, always funny,
and I really hope that she's ableto get a much much bigger role
in something because she can, Likejust she she will just steal a scene
from other people, it doesn't matter, she doesn't care. She'll take the
scene from you, and I didlike Agar Ramier's The Father, his kind

(01:15:21):
of story where you sort of talkabout the good cop, bad cop and
then sort of him eventually wording hisresponsibility. I think this movie is good
about sort of as parents, wecan light it up sometimes. I mean,
we don't necessarily need to sort ofcall our kids, but at times
you do need to know when tostand up and to support your spouse.

(01:15:43):
I thought I thought they handled outas well as he could for a light
sandy commony. No, they did. They made it so that there was
I don't know, like a reasonfor both the parents to be the way
they were, to sort of challengethem both. Yea, I know it
ended up hitting the right spots.So it's just like finding Ohanna at the
end of like, oh my gosh. I didn't think i'd like this when

(01:16:05):
I started, but here I am. Yeah. I was a little bit
hesitative of having two family movies thesame week, but yeah, they both
were good. I think Jeffer Garnerwas just She's what Willie made this for
me because she so threw herself intothis, Like you could totally tell she
believed this movie, and once shegot out of sort of having to be
the rigid munk and which just feltnot her when she got to be sort

(01:16:28):
of I think, which is morethe type of person she is. She
was a lot of fun in thatsecond half at Elvay the movie, and
just because I do mention them,so I should mention it here. There
is a stinger in the middle thathas that fact in. Again, it's
fun. It's nothing where you haveto go back and see her in the
thing. The movies we talked aboutthis week, first one family fun film,

(01:16:49):
Finding Ohana. It is the Gooniesand it's it's not the tightest film
necessarily in all areas. However,what it does do well is put us
on an adventure in some very coollocales, great landscape, cool caves.
Both Chris and I thought it was. It was what it was, and

(01:17:12):
it did that well, gave usthat sense of childhood adventure. We gave
it three stars. Then it's KingKong, the nineteen seventy six version.
Man Jeff Bridges look at that likepantine pro v hair of his. He
should have been, He should havebeen in some hair commercials. It's a
shampoo. No he did. Helooked good and he's without a shirt at

(01:17:33):
one point, and I actually remarked, well, there's two gorgeous people on
the screen right now. And thenonly a few years later he would play
a hot, cool arcade owner namedFlynn because everyone knew that, like people
who owned arcades were celebrities in theircommunities. Yeah, they were the coolest

(01:17:54):
people I knew and they yep.Anyways, King Kong. Both Chris and
I saw it quite differently. Chrisliked the message of it, and he
liked the performance. I agreed thatthere and especially we both thought the special
effects were wonderful. I did notlike the movie so much. I did

(01:18:15):
not like the acting. However,I did concede a few things, and
I did like the fact of howthey tried to shift to a modern day
plot to make it a lot morecurrent with the times. I gave it
to Chris gave it three and ahalf. Then the last blockbuster. This
is video store nostalgia, you know, all the way, and it lacks

(01:18:41):
the ability to look at sort ofthe full experience of the video store.
Everything is rose covered or colored glasses. Everything is just like foreign nostalgia.
And it could have been I thinka lot better documentary However, I saw
it and thought it was just brazynostalgia kick me down that road, yo.
And Chris he had a harder timebeing able to recommend it after he

(01:19:05):
saw it and sort of thought moreabout it as a as a documentary and
not just a nostalgia trip. Ihad given it three stars, Chris gave
it two and a half. Andthen yesterday another dually noted film by us,
both of us giving three stars.Really really ham fisted introduction or kickstart

(01:19:28):
into our main character of Jennifer Gardner'ssort of looking at herself as a mother
and who she's become. That washorrible. That was just like really,
schools would pull you aside and like, look, you say no to your
kids a lot. Well, ifyour kids are monsters, you're gonna be
saying no to them a lot allthe time. Like no, we don't

(01:19:49):
shave the cat. No, right, Like it's just you're gonna be saying
no. And you know me,normally, bad intros to a move,
we basically check out for the rest. And so that shows how strong it
got that I'm still recommended absolutely becauseit ended up becoming a very fun film
and you sort of attach yourself tothis family as they go along. So

(01:20:13):
we both give it three stars.And yeah, if you are into family,
feel good films. I think Netflixshows right now that they've got two
solid ones in Finding Ohana and Yesterday. Yeah. And I really think that
Scott missed the boat on this onewith King Kong. I think King Kong

(01:20:34):
is a really thoughtful blockbuster that offersthings that other blockbusters have not since or
before. I really think people shouldcheck out King Kong. That's what I
think, missing the boat. Let'sthink about the boat for a second.
So it's this ship, but thehold is apparently big enough that King Kong

(01:20:56):
can stand up, like on hisfeet and reach up all the way.
Somehow that this boat it's it's holdis probably like two hundred feet deep,
because well, King Kong can standup and jump around in the ship.
Ah. Just one of those momentswhere you know when you're checked out of

(01:21:16):
a movie and you're kind of lookingat it thinking, wait, wait,
wait a minute, things don't addup, Chris, they don't add up.
And I understand how important realism isfor every movie you've ever liked.
When you were talking giant apes thatcan climb climb buildings, and terrorize it

(01:21:38):
the city because of their size andtheir fierceness. We're talking about complete realism.
Well you got it. I waswrong all along. You were wrong
all along. That's right. Theboat thing didn't even bother me. It's
just like you said, boat,and I thought, let's bring that up.
You know, good audio. Youstill got it wrong. Now tell

(01:22:00):
us what you think about our thoughtsall the movies we reviewed this week,
or you can give us recommendations.We're always looking for sort of topics and
stuff to talk about. Maybe youcan tell us how mad you are that
we didn't do a tribute segment toJessica Walter. You could do that if
you want, and you could dothat all by email is one way you

(01:22:23):
can do it. The Movie Breakdownat gmail dot com. Or you can
contact us through the Twitter at breakat Movie Breakdown one as well as Facebook
dot com the Movie Breakdown so allthose We've got a Facebook page, We've
got the Twitter page. You cancontact us through all those areas and we'd
love to hear for you, hearfrom you, and interact with you.

(01:22:44):
We are on all the different waysto listen to podcast, so please subscribe
to us and rate us on thoseplaces that's Stitcher, that's cast Box,
that Spotify, Apple Music, andAmazon Music. And if you do rate
us, and if you do subscribe, it actually helps us in the right
things. It will help us increaseas a show. We've been doing this
for several years now and we justwant to get bigger and better and reach

(01:23:08):
as many people as possible. Thisis something we'd love to do and we
hope you love it as well.Another thing I hope that you guys love
is my writing and you can seethat on my website, Beyond the Balcony
It is the Earl is Beyond Balconydot com. Yeah, and you know,
we've got a good show plotted outfor next week. You might think,

(01:23:31):
wow, you just talked to KingKong two weeks in a row.
Wow, Well, we're going totalk at three in a row, and
then on our fourth week we're goingto take it even a step past King
Kong talk something even crazier. Butnext week we got King Kong brought to
us by Peter Jackson, who wementioned earlier. And I've never seen this

(01:23:53):
one, just like any of theseKing Kong films, never ever, so
quite excited about this one. It'sone for two so far, so far,
I'm one for two this one.I'd heard that Skull Island's got more
magic as far as creatures and stuff, which I'm excited about. So we're
gonna be talking that as well.We're going to be talking about Bad Trip.

(01:24:14):
This is a buddy comedy film.It is with Eric Andre and Lil
Raill Rell how how his name is. It's a tongue twister to me,
I've never once been able to sayit properly. Lil Rel Howry, who
we first came to know in GetOut and has one of the best lines

(01:24:38):
in a movie and really really establishedhimself, even though he had so few
scenes, established himself in that movieas someone who we do want to watch.
So we've talked movies today and nowit is time for us to disperse
and spread our wings and fly.So I'm going to change my jackets and
change my shoes and head out thedoor. Or just like mister Rogers,

(01:25:00):
once stick take care of everyone willcatch you next week. Try everybody