33 thoughts on “Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 179: Triple 9 (2016) and Eddie the Eagle (2016) and the 88th Annual Academy Awards”

1. Just wanted to say that I am forever a devotee of HMP and MPW…I’ve noticed the great growth of listeners and contributers to the sights and it makes me so happy and proud of you guys…Good things happen to good people…I don’t say as much as I did when I first joined this family because there are so many articulate family members now…and I just can’t hang with them…but I will throw my two cents in when I can…Best damn podcasts in the world…Thanks you all for all the joy you bring to my life!!!

   Reply ↓

   • Wow, Shannon. Truly flattered. It really means a lot, and I’m not just being trite. Genuinely, thank you. (And believe me, if we four morons can produce an audio podcast for this very intelligent and insightful cinephile community, then you can certainly hang on the comment boards.)
     J

     Reply ↓

   • You can hang proud on the boards, Shannon. Your comments never fail to communicate a genuine and heartfelt love for the cinema and that’s what it’s all about!

     Reply ↓

     • I just love the cinema!!!

       Reply ↓

2. Haven’t listened to this episode yet, but I noticed in the notes about there being no listener comments about the Don’s Plum story, so I’ll chime in…

   I enjoyed the interview on GCL, and it was very interesting, but it was hard to listen to with the bad sibilance on the recording. But anyway, I agree with your comments from last ep, J. I can totally sympathize with the guy’s frustration and betrayal, but at this point, it seems like it’s eating away at him. He sounds very bitter and angry sounding. And yeah, that’s understandable, but there’s a point where continuing to eat the poison is only killing you, not the other person.

   As some measure of compensation or validation, I would think there must be some options and interest for a book or documentary. Problem with a documentary is that perhaps the film footage can’t be used, or maybe that would be suppressed from being released, too? Seems like something that Netflix would be all over producing, but then again, maybe Leo’s clout is really that far-reaching. I feel like at some point there will be a wider story covering this.

   Actually, what might be interesting is a “fictional” film that tells the essential story but changes the names, about two big Hollywood stars who successfully repress an earlier film that might have damaged their career trajectory. A sad thing to consider is that for both Tobey Maguire and moreso Leo, it worked. Their careers both skyrocketed after that time. Of course, we’ll never know if they might have, anyway, even if Don’s Plum had been released (I think so, especially for Dicaprio). And I certainly don’t condone that action. But in a sense, they probably both feel it was the right choice based on how things went after that.

   Another thing to consider is that we really only have one side of this story. I’m inclined to want to side with the director, but we don’t really know if maybe there was some jerkiness from the director’s side about how the actors were treated or what their expectations were. At least, we don’t know that from the GCL interview… perhaps that is documented better elsewhere.

   Anyway, it’s an unfortunate story any way you slice it. I haven’t had time to watch the film yet… probably this week.

   Reply ↓

3. I didn’t watch the Oscars so I can’t comment on them. Nevertheless Piers Morgan can shove his opinions up his stupid butt. Whenever I see him he’s just grinning smugly and talking about his amazing, extravagant holidays in expensive locales. People don’t watch TV to see pompous, phone-hacking newspaper oligarchs telling us how much better you are than them, Piers!

   Man, I hate that guy.

   Reply ↓

   • This isn’t to denigrate Karl any by the way. His opinions I respect.

     Reply ↓

     • But I’m on Andy’s side in this discussion. Not to get too political, but as proved by the popularity of someone like Trump, there’s a whole bunch of very ill-informed folks out there; people who won’t go out and do any independent research and find out “oh, he’s not actually a competent businessman at all!” or “wow, his stances are actually incredibly inconsistent and designed only as a populist agenda rather than a sincere grass-roots campaign”. There are so many people who rely solely on the mainstream media for their information and that simply isn’t a reliable or credible source any more (if it ever was). To my eyes pop culture is ever being de-politicised. The idea of actual independent journalists writing for big newspapers is almost extinct, music that raises important questions that audiences might otherwise not think to ask is relegated to the underground to be replaced by formulaic, pre-packaged, vacuous crap promoting hedonism and not much else. It’s in the best interest of big corporations to downplay issues such as environmentalism and inequality and, thanks to their ever expanding influence on society, they have the power to do so. So in my view any chance to promote important causes to a huge audience of people who might not usually be mindful of such issues, especially by people they likely admire and respect, should be taken.

       I guess it can seem phony or soap-boxy or hypocritical and therefore unpleasant to behold. But those pejorative terms are something I generally associated with award shows anyway. As I say though, I didn’t watch The Oscars this year and maybe the tonal shifts were clumsy and the pleas miscalculated and seemingly inappropriate but fundamentally I think the people up there do have a responsibility to try and reach a large audience on certain important issues at any juncture possible.

       Reply ↓

4. So I know I’m a week late posting my list but it took me a while to really get my head around the concept of “guilty pleasures” or “shame cinema” or whatever it’s called and why I don’t really align with such an approach. Ultimately I feel like my taste in films has developed in such a way that it exists in a world that’s separate from conventional standards. I guess we all probably feel this way to a certain extent and for me I imagine it’s due to the fact that I spent so much of my youth watching really grotty, low-budget B-movies with my friends. So much so that I eventually grew to enjoy trashy cinema, not simply in a “so bad it’s good way” but also based on it’s own merits. There’s a charm to amateurish acting and crappy dialogue (at least if there’s some good intent and genuine heart behind it) and a beauty to hokey sets and z-grade special effects. It’s interesting to see creativity born from limitation and I’ve come to consider a movie as flat out unique as “Troll 2” to be something worth cherishing. Now I’m aware that flicks like The Deadly Spawn, Ninja Terminator, Sleepaway Camp, The Video Dead, Basket Case etc would be dismissed as deplorable by the average cinema-goer but my appreciation for these kind of films has become so inbred that I’m just beyond caring. I love them and that’s that. No guilt. So, that being said I decided to try and follow Juan’s lead and throw together a list of films that, even given my predilection for trashy video-store relics, might garner derision or surprise from my peers:

   1. Jingle all the Way (1996)

   Yes. Jingle all the Way. Pre “Now this is podracing!” Jake Lloyd, put-that-cookie-down, Sinbad, Arnold Schwarzenegger looking more confused than ever while cosplaying as a Beetleborg or something. I know this is terrible, schmaltzy, lowest-common-denominator Christmas schlock but still it holds a nostalgic place in my heart because I saw it when I was about 9 years old. Even then I probably knew it sucked. But if it’s on in the run up to the holidays then I will watch it and it will fill me with a sort of weird compromised-by-cynical-90’s-commercialism version of Christmas cheer.

   2. Cannibal Holocaust (1980)

   So this might be the only movie on this list that I do feel genuinely guilty about. I will defend this as an amazingly well made film (especially considering it’s type) but the animal deaths are totally indefensible. Brilliantly constructed cinema that I feel utterly rotten inside for having watched.

   3. Beaches (1988)

   I’ve mentioned loving this film a few times before but I guess a lot of guys would probably laugh at me if they knew how many times I’ve cried watching this (not actually that many but I’m not a big crier when it comes to films). It’s that damned song. Also probably has something to do with the fact that I saw this when I was really young and just wasn’t accustomed to sad things happening in films. In fact this might be the first time I ever remember being concious of the fact that people could die from something other than old age.

   4. Death Wish 3 (1985)

   This one is only really on here because of my feelings regarding it in the context of the franchise; I like the first two Death Wish movies a lot but Death Wish 3 is by far the most enjoyable for me. And as far as I can tell that is not in line with the general consensus on these films.

   I’ve seen this one get derided for being “way over the top” and “totally ridiculous” but that’s what makes it so incredibly fun. I love how gritty and relentlessly violent it is. I love how Death Wish (which I assume is the vigilante-superhero name that Charles Bronson’s character has formally adopted by this point in the franchise) just cold bloodedly murders his way through this cabal of punk criminal caricatures without even blinking. I love when Death Wish shoots a bad guy through a window using a bazooka. The earlier films were grim and sobering and the moralistic politically correct side of me says that’s the way that such dark subject matter should be handled. But the part of me that likes guys getting shot out of windows by bazookas says otherwise.

   5. Vibes (1988)

   This is another movie that I’ve professed by adoration for several times before but it’s going on here just because I always feel a definite twinge of anxiety when recommending this to people; a voice in my head says “it’s actually not that great, you only like it because you have a weird crush on Cyndi Lauper and are of the opinion that Jeff Goldblum and Columbo can literally do no wrong”. But to be honest I don’t know what to believe because so few people seem to have seen this movie that I have not litmus test of external opinion. I guess it was kind of a flop. Which I don’t fully understand because those three aforementioned leads in an 80’s comedy-adventure about psychic powers might be the single greatest pitch ever made.

   6. Fist of the North Star (1986)

   80’s Anime ultra-violence at it’s dumbest, most macho and most ridiculously excessive. Miyazaki this ain’t and even though it’s closer in tone and appeal to something like Akira, it doesn’t hold a candle to that classic in terms of intelligence and animation quality. It’s also kind of a Mad Max rip-off. A lot of folks would write this film off as pure, gore-drenched trash and it is exactly that. Which is why it’s so bloody awesome.

   7. Ghost (1990)

   Another of these chick-flicks that I guess I’m supposed to be so embarrassed about. I had to put some Patrick Swayze on here, not least because in my mind he looks so much like an anthropomorphised version of the 1980’s. Sure this is cheesy and there’s that pottery scene that I always confuse with that Lionel Ritchie video. If the guys beating me up when I was a kid would have known I liked this film then it probably wouldn’t have made a difference but I’m still glad they didn’t know.

   8. Shotgun (1989)

   Shotgun Jones is one of the worst action hero cops ever. He wears a cardigan that his grandma must have knitted for him and he looks like a Geico Caveman.

   9. Mrs. Doubtfire (1993)

   I think this tends to get a lot of hate. I can’t say I know anyone else who actually likes it anyway. And maybe constructing the jokes in a family comedy film around the concept of cross-dressing might be considered a little offensive these days but this film is pure childhood nostalgia for me. Maybe that’s why I still find some scenes from this genuinely funny. Maybe my mind is broken.

   10. Dirty Dancing (1987)

   More Swayze. Here’s a quote from the first review of this movie that I came across on Letterboxd: “There is absolutely nothing to see here but poorly delivered horrible dialogue and shirtless Swayze.” What the hell else does anyone need?

   In retrospect an alternative title for this list could easily be “My favourite films of the 80’s and early 90’s”.

   Reply ↓

   • And how could I forget Waterworld! I think that movie gets so much stick because at the time it was super expensive and turned out kind of schlocky but it’s nowhere near as bad as people made it out to be. It’s a lot more fun than some more recent and even more expensive action movies I’ve seen. If Waterworld is on then I am more than happy to sit down and watch it.

     Reply ↓

5. My biggest disappointment coming out of the Oscars was the lack of a Mark Ruffalo win as Best Supporting Actor. Granted, I haven’t seen Bridge of Spies, so perhaps I should take my opinion and shove it, but I don’t care. Ruffalo’s performance in Spotlight is one of the very few times I ever sat back in awe and instantly predicted that he’d win an Oscar. Just his mannerisms alone were fantastic. After awhile, I began to just focus on what Ruffalo was doing. His big emotional monologue was the best from movies I saw in 2015.

   I would go watch Bridge of Spies now, but I now have an irrational hatred for Mark Rylance. Screw that guy!

   Reply ↓

6. In regards to Fuller House, I’m someone who at 29 has fond memories of watching Full House during my childhood before I was old enough to recognize that it wasn’t that swell of a show. Fuller House is even worse and it’s legitimately awful. Yet, I do find that it’s so bad that it ends up being unintentionally entertaining.

   The biggest flaw in the show is that it’s very concept doesn’t work. The whole basis of the original show was that it featured three men, two of which weren’t fathers and one working dad, trying to come together and figure out how to raise these three girls. It worked for it’s time period because society hadn’t grown so accustomed to stay at home dads and just men doing all of the raising themselves. These days, I imagine Full House would feel terribly dated because men raising kids is not uncommon.

   Flash forward to Fuller House and it’s a story of three women, two of which are already mothers, coming together to raise three boys. Okay, what’s the big deal about that? Why should they have a difficult time? Whether this is a fair statement or not, no one is going to look at Stephanie as being out of her league being a parent since she is a woman. You don’t have that same dynamic with the ultra cool Jesse trying to parent on Full House.

   Ultimately, why did they even need to flat out copy the basic concept of Full House? Would the show really be all that different had DJ’s husband not been killed or that Kimmy and Stephanie lived nearby instead of in the same house? The creators were so incessant to copy the Full House story that they never stopped and realized that that story didn’t make sense as a concept for Fuller House. Furthermore, the concept isn’t what drew old fans into checking out this new series. The sole reason why any unlucky SOB chose to subject themselves to this show is to see what DJ, Kimmy, Stephanie and the others are doing now.

   If this new show has a long run, I’d be shocked. A season 2 is a lock simply due to everyone checking out the new show just to see what it’s like, but after that? I don’t know how confident I am that there will be a season 3.

   Avoid Fuller House if you’re not a fan of truly terrible shows, but give it a watch if you’re a fan of a hot mess that will cause you to laugh at how unfunny everything is. Either way, it’s only thirteen episodes. You can be like me and binge through it quickly, feel shameful about yourself for a few days, and then go about your business.

   Reply ↓

7. The last few minutes of this podcast made my balls retract into my abdomen.

   Reply ↓

   • I’m perplexed by how oddly interested I am about that upcoming episode of Geek Cast Live.

     Reply ↓

     • Not nearly as interested as I am let me assure you.

       Reply ↓

   • Yeah, that was brutal.

     Reply ↓

   • What’s worse is I feel partly responsible for having neutered Jason earlier in the show with his tip-toeing around the premise of Triple 9 so as to not offend those “highly sensitive of spoilers,” then the show ends the way it did…

     Reply ↓

8. The movie Bubble Boy that was on my list was the Jake Gyllenhaal…2001 comedy…Which was inspired by the 1976 movie The Boy in the Plastic Bubble…It came out the same year as Donnie Darko.

   Reply ↓

   • You want $500 dollars …. $500 dollars…. $500…. best line in the entire movie…. Good pick Shannon.

     Reply ↓

9. I have been a listener for some time,

   And now i just had to place a comment here,..Because of the opinion a lot of you had about the content of the oscar winners speeches.

   ” it is no there job ” “Not the place to give there opinion , or view about those topics”

   I think big stages like that, where you got the whole world viewing is the stage for messages of importance about the world we live in.

   The real problem is, that the people, who have the job of doing something about it, or helping things along in the world, dont do it well enough. That is why speaking out every chance you get is important.

   It would be great if there would not be an need for it. but people around the world, keep destroying and depleting our natural resources.

   Also Racism still is a issue, .. i think it is to short sighted to dismiss it because it is no there job, or not the place for them to speak out about topics like that. Because when is the place really? Nothing ever changed by waiting for the right time, you got to grasp every chance you get, to be heard, and maybe trigger other people of influence so that we can move forward.

   Movies can be escapism, but lets not stay in there during a award show, we are in the real world, where other things matter to, not only a star rating, or a golden statue. It would be nice to not be bothered b all of it, and dismiss al problems in the world. But clearly we have to be reminded a lot, because change isn’t coming quick enough, it almost never does. that’s why we are sill facing a movie industry with not enough equality and football fields of rainforrest are still being cut down every minute.

   I just found it such a disgrace too dismiss / find it annoying, because it would not be the place to speak out about those things.

   People would need to speak out even more, so that people in power get forced and or triggered by the common views of the people to change the ways things are done.

   but for the rest, great podcast! Listen to it every week at work.

   Keep it up!

   Reply ↓

   • Welcome to the comments, Ivo. Heck of a way to introduce yourself!

     And, for the record, I mostly agree with everything you said… that’s not to say I completely disagree with some of the things said on the show, but I generally side with you on this.

     Reply ↓

10. Hello MPW,

    Thanks for another great PODCAST that had me laughing, yelling and totally up in arms about some of your conversation.

    First thank you Karl telling me that Bugsy Malone is brilliant and not to be ashamed of that pick! For Ry liking my pick of the Postman I can’t believe Jay you have not seen it! Also Jay why do you hate “Lady in the water” but love the “Village” which is so much worse???

    As for “Fuller House” you have to take it as it is a corny sitcom, that as kid growing up loved watching on TGIF on ABC in the late 80’s and early 90’s it reminds me so much of my childhood that it will always be my go to show to make me feel good.

    Also loved Karl’s review on “eddie the eagle” he was right on it is a paint by numbers kind of movie and predictable but I still loved it. I gave it 8.5 and to watch it in the theater. Also agree with Karl about the Oscars if you win best Director the film you directed wins best picture makes common sense. To this day im still shocked that Saving Private Ryan did not win best picture but “Shakespeare in love” did!! It is like the academy wanted every one to have a trophy for participation !

    Well look forward to your next podcast and your next homework assignment have a great time at the movies!

    Mario “LOON” Leon

    Reply ↓

11. Oscars…

    Ack, Ryan beat me by one. I had 17 right. Got lucky guessing a couple of the short films, though.

    As you guys said, Chris Rock’s monologue was great, but the whole racial thing was run into the ground after that. I did love the Jack Black gag, though, and the idea of inserting black characters into films was clever, although the actual examples could have been funnier.

    I totally disagree with Karl in that I think the best people should always win, even if that means ten years in a row. Not that the best things are always recognized, anyway, but if there is a restriction to winning multiple times, then that further dilutes the meaning of awarding the best of the industry. And it creates the potential for someone to be recognized or remembered for work that isn’t their best. Regardless of what you think about Gravity (I loved it… I’m with you there, J) and how qualified the cinematography was, let’s say that Lubezki wins for that (as he did), but then can’t win again. He ends up doing better work (I would agree) in Birdman and The Revenant, but can’t win for those?? And also, it creates the awkward situation where people know that someone didn’t really deserve to win, but only won because someone else who was clearly better couldn’t win because they’d won the year before. That’s lame.

    So it’s fine that Inarritu won again, but just in terms of merit, I thought George Miller deserved best director for Fury Road, considering all of the challenges he faced in getting that made (the story of the Revenant’s filming challenges were more fresh, but Fury Road had a very rocky development history of its own), all of the creative work that went into it, the unique vision and style that it had, and the amazing film it ended up being (not with you there, J). Miller not winning that was my biggest disappointment (and I would have tied Ryan, then).

    Much as I loved Ex Machina, I’d have rather it won for Best Screenplay than for VFX. But I’m glad it was recognized. I also think that Alicia Vikander’s win (and nomination) was in part due to her recognition from Ex Machina.

    Reply ↓

    • Completely agree with your disagreement of Karl’s position – it’s an awards show, so the winner should be “the best.” After all, every Oscar has “Best [insert category]” inscribed right on it. These aren’t participation trophies!

      I also agree that Miller not winning best director for Fury Road was the biggest disappointment of the show. I know, I’m biased, but it seems odd that the person heading the movie that won every technical award was not recognized for his/her achievement.

      Reply ↓

      • And I’m a bit surprised that the consensus on the show was that Ennio Morricone’s win was more of a lifetime achievement award than something he actually deserved for his score of The Hateful Eight. While I agree that the score for Sicario was outstanding, Morricone’s score went beyond just being outstanding and actually played a highly influential role in the film. To me, that was one of the no-brainer awards of the show.

        [especially considering that Disasterpeace was snubbed of a nomination for It Follows]

        Reply ↓

        • I had meant to say something similar before. I LOVE LOVE LOVE the score for Sicario, but I think a reason it didn’t win is because it’s a bit more of a subtle moody kind of thing, and more electronic sounding, whereas Morricone’s was a bit more noticeable orchestration, and also really chilling and evocative.

          Reply ↓

12. Triple 9 was okay, even great at times (the action sequences, especially the one in the middle where they go into the building to find the one guy, were very well done), but I felt like the cast was better on paper than on film. Casey Affleck was excellent, but it felt like a phone-in for Woody Harrelson (he was better with this same kind of character in True Detective) and I didn’t really dig Aaron Paul in his role. Similar vibe and feel as Sicario, but Sicario was much better, overall. Same with Heat. 6.5 for me.

    Reply ↓

13. Jason –

    I feel like you hand-pick comments to share on the show that make me seem like a big jerk. Thanks. 🙂

    Regarding the Piers Morgan op-ed piece… generally speaking, is there much difference between celebrities using the Oscars as a political platform and, say, a movie-themed podcast discussing topics such as gun control or police violence against African Americans? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t necessarily mind having those discussions on this podcast. I listen to the podcast because I like the personalities and the interaction, so even though I don’t come to MPW for discussion of global affairs it doesn’t necessarily bother me. That said, it seems a bit hypocritical for you to criticize the political preaching on the Oscars when you’re not immune to it on your own show.

    Now, with that out of the way, I will say that I agreed with something someone said (I think it was Ry… maybe Andy) that it is problematic when a non-expert takes a position of authority on a topic before an audience. However, I think it’s perfectly fine to raise awareness of socio-political affairs, and that seemed to be the case more often than not at this Oscars. At least to me.

    Reply ↓

14. Re: Jason’s idea of moving the technical awards off the main show to a different night…

    Jason, that’s a horrible idea. Never mind the fact that those “technical” awards are all the elements that go into making a movie. It’s a horrible idea because one of the main benefits of the Oscars is to raise awareness of the cinema at large; to shine a spotlight, if you will, on as many quality films from the prior year as possible. If you eliminate those categories and only have seven or eight awards on the show, then you’re severely cutting down the number of films that will gain exposure from the Oscars.

    Additionally, many of us (including you) constantly lament the paucity of recognition given to genre films by the Academy, and it’s these “technical” categories where genre film usually earns the most recognition. So, if you eliminate the technical awards from the main show, then you’ll almost entirely eliminate genre film from the Oscars (except on the rare occasion of a truly transcendent genre film, like Fury Road).

    I think a better answer is to eliminate one or two of the longer bits later on in the show, like the horribly awkward girl scouts cookies bit, and/or to eliminate the best original song performances.

    Reply ↓

15. Jumping the gun on Zootopia here… I really liked it, but probably not quite as effusively as some of the reviews and ratings I’m seeing. I loved how it had some clever ways to show prejudice, with some of the animals both exhibiting that and receiving that. And it was overall fun and entertaining. Another big win for Disney, who is on quite the run of late (better than Pixar the past few years). But at the same time, I didn’t feel it differentiated itself too much from other animated fare these days; characters and situations doing about what you’d expect. Eh, definitely better than most, I suppose. I give it an 8.

    But wowzers for seeing that Jungle Book trailer again. Like the Fury Road trailer last year, it’s an example of a movie I was kind of apathetic about when I read about it, but then the trailer blew me away. I hope that one delivers like Fury Road did.

    Reply ↓

16. Jay, I can’t wait to hear your review of The Assassin. If you thought Kumiko was slow, then I suggest you get a six pack of Coke and a family size bag of chips because this is infinitely slower. I love slow movies and this was way too slow even for me. I fell asleep multiple times. I’ve never fallen asleep during a movie before. It was a very frustrating viewing experience. This is watching ice melt in a freezer levels of slow. The movie was fine, perhaps a little too artsy for my taste (think Upstream Color), but the pacing really killed me here. I’d give it a 7 just because the locations and cinematography are gorgeous. I also loved the aspect ratio. It made it feel like a very intimate tale. It’s quality filmmaking for sure, just not for me.

    Reply ↓

17. Hey Ryan, I thought of a way you can use your love of South Park while having your vasectomy. There is a line in the episode when Mr. Garrison has his reassignment surgery that is classic. So since you are gonna be recording I think a “So Long Balls!” while the doctor is describing what he is going would be comedy gold. Your welcome!

    Reply ↓

18. MPW Ep. 180 is finally posted! : )

    https://moviepodcastweekly.com/movie-podcast-weekly-ep-180-london-has-fallen-2016-and-whiskey-tango-foxtrot-2016-and-zootopia-2016-and-the-assassin-2016-and-mpws-top-10-movies-of-1984/

    J

    Reply ↓