19 thoughts on “Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 209: Deepwater Horizon (2016)”

1. I came to leave my double review of ‘Jean De Florette’ and ‘Manon of the Spring’ in Ep 208 and, whammy!…..new Ep!! Sweet, I’ll just leave it here.

   So, last episode, in the comments, Carl with a K recommended these two movies to me/us all. I got them from the building with the free books and stuff and watched the first, ‘Jean De Florette’.

   Carl with a K is right, this is a classic tale.

   It’s set in a small French town, just after WWI. Old-school old man is the last of what was once a prominent family in this area. Through what I think they’re referring to as in-breeding and an unfortunate bout of depression in their genes, it’s down to him and his nephew, who returns from the War as the movie opens. OSOM’s plan is to sink some of his saved ‘fortune’ into things for his nephew to cultivate the land and work hard like he did and eventually marry and carry on what was once a proud name to bear.

   Youngster Nephew has other ideas. Despite being a dimwit, he has a plan. He’s brought back carnation cuttings from wherever you fight a war and have access to carnation cuttings and plans to plant them and make a fortune off of them. The town florist confirms, they would be flora gold. The catch is that growing these flowers requires a ton of water. So, OSOM and YN need to figure a way to bring more water to their land.

   The solution comes in the neighbor’s land. Through a madcap event, OSOM and YN are about to end up with their neighbor’s land, as he’s passed, and a surviving heir shows up to claim it. Enter Gerard Depardieu and his beautiful wife and charming daughter.

   When GD came on the scene in the US, back in the eighties or so, I was young. I didn’t really think anything of him or his acting. But, yeah, he’s good in this. He’s young, but he’s playing a hunchback, and it works. The character is a hunchback, so he’s discriminated against for that. But he’s also educated and from a modern city, so he’s double-whammied for that too.

   Anyway, the movie comes down to really talking about comparing and contrasting old and new ways. On a couple levels. The main point is farming, but the movie goes a bit deeper and touches on old and new ways of thinking, of socializing, of finding love.

   Throughout the movie, OSOM and YN scheme to force GD and his fam to move off the land so that they (OSOM&YN) can acquire it on the cheap. Some hilarity ensues. Some tragedy ensues. It all comes together nicely with some very good performances from the three main characters, and the two side characters (GD’s wife and daughter).

   Then I got wrapped up with life and had to take some time before ‘Manon of the Spring,’ which is part two to this story. When I finally got to it, I wasn’t disappointed.

   ‘Manon’ flashes forward 10 years. The daughter of GD is grown into a beautiful young woman, but is feral, for lack of a better term, living in the hills, tending goats near the land that her father owned in the first film.

   She’s learns of some inappropriate actions from the first film and enacts her vengeance. That’s about all I can say without going into more spoilerish territory. This is a really good movie too. The young woman playing Manon is definitely striking, in a ‘Disney-princess-come-to-life’ way, but more than that, she portrays this non-typical role well. It’s great to see the whole story line come full circle and be resolved in the way it does.

   Sorry if this is a bit scattershot. I should’ve taken notes for a better review, but I really do thank Karl for recommending these flicks. ‘Jean De Florette’ I give a 9 and ‘Manon of the Spring’ I give an 8.5. Together, their a nice duo, portraying a great story of life, love, greed, pride, vengeance, retribution, regret….they touch on so many basic themes. Strong rentals, to be sure. 🙂

   Reply ↓

2. I have not seen any of the Godfather movies and I am 36 years old and I love movies Ryan. I always meant to watch them, I just never got around to watching them.

   They have always been on my list to watch, I think it’s partly due to the fact that I have heard so much about them that I feel like I have seen them already. This episode has motivated me to and watch them though.

   It’s so funny that you were talking about The Kingdom. I just watched it for the first time yesterday. Then Jay said “you have to watch the director’s cut” . I was thinking dam it I don’t think the blu ray I bought has the director’s cut. I thought the opening part of the movie was so realistic and very upsetting. I loved the movie though. I still like Three Kings better though.

   I also watched Kiss Kiss Bang Bang the other day. This movie was so hilarious, I saw it on cable but I am going to go and buy it. I was laughing out loud the whole movie. Val Kilmer was really good and Robert Downey was brilliant.

   I am watching season 2 of 60 Days In. This is such a compelling show. I think all of you will love it. Its about real people being placed in jail for 60 days. They are in there to try and find out how drugs are getting into the jail and to report back to the warden at the end about how to improve the jail. It is so nail biting, they are ordinary people being put in jail with criminals and they are in very real danger. After an episode finishes you want to immediately watch the next episode. Its the best reality show I have ever seen and you can’t help picking out at the start who you think will last and who won’t. Everyone should watch this show!!!!

   Love the podcast guys.

   Reply ↓

3. Oh….with Affleck’s ‘The Accountant’ out today, I’d be remiss if I didn’t post this here…..

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9PMI7a2Fw4

   It’s a short film an audit class professor showed in a class I had in school. It’s pretty great. It has a tremendous Ray McKinnon and not the earliest Walter Goggins, but a fairly early one. You can’t beat that team up, even if it is only a short.

   I hope you all enjoy. 🙂

   Reply ↓

4. I think Jay probably sorted things out correctly in the end: He just had “The Kingdom” and “Kingdom of Heaven” (which does have a widely praised director’s cut) mixed up. That’s a minor offense, Jay, a mere peccadillo. It’s not as though you admitted to a worldwide podcast audience that you’ve never seen a major genre touchstone from 1973 like “Westworld,” starring the great Yul Brynner. Whenever someone tells me that they love movies, I always ask them what they thought of “Westworld.” If they haven’t seen it, then I just shake my head sadly, turn my back and walk away. If they’ve never even heard of it, then I always say, “Piss off! You don’t love movies.” And THEN I shake my head sadly, turn my back and walk away.

   Also, I hate to break it to Karl, but John Malkovich is not only capable of sucking, he doesn’t even have to put his mind to it. I can think of two movies off the top of my head where he sucks the suck like a Hoover: “Eragon” and “Transformers: Dark of the Moon.” I’ll grant you that he’s not given the best material to work with in either instance, but he certainly doesn’t do anything to improve it. Actually, I’d almost believe someone who told me that John Malkovich did, in fact, try to suck in “Eragon” (in which he plays the evil king; he’s the Sauron of Eragon World). My wife STILL cracks up about this scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TxlvvmDsOs

   I don’t have any memory of how, when, or most importantly, why SHE saw the movie. I watched it for work, back in the day, and I’m sure she heard from that it was crap. Maybe she hate watched it. Maybe we even hate watched it together. I hear that’s a thing. 🙂

   And not to pile on poor Karl, but Jay is so right. “Trans4mers: Age of Extinction” is probably not the worst movie in that franchise (lookin’ at you, “Revenge of the Fallen”), but it is completely terrible. It’s not good at all.

   Reply ↓

5. J, you mentioned the Dear Zachary documentary in a recent episode. I just watched it. Now I need to go look at pictures of bunnies and puppies.

   Reply ↓

6. Sorry Ry, but I’m almost totally on Jay’s side when it comes to the Godfather argument. I mean what if you’re a 16 yearold who’s only been in love with the cinema for a few months? What if you’ve decided to start at the very beginning and work forward? There’s a huge amount of incredible cinema to get through before The Godfather. What about listeners who aren’t from the US and have less of the US cinema culture ingrained in their upbringing? What about people who love the cinema but whose preferences dictate less mainstream offerings? I could very easily turn around and say that someone can’t claim to love the cinema without having seen something as equally classic as Bladerunner, a film that until very recently I believe you yourself hadn’t seen!

   That said I do understand the seeming ridiculousness of being super precious regarding spoilers of very old films. But I think it’s impossible to claim that someone isn’t a true fan of the cinema for having overlooked one movie in thousands of classics.

   Reply ↓

   • Generally speaking, I think that spoiler culture has gotten a little bit ridiculous in recent years. That said, it’s always easy to rail against the idiots who “haven’t seen [Name of Movie/Show] by now” when one has seen it oneself and doesn’t want to be bothered with talking in code. “OF COURSE everyone else in the world should have seen all of the films/shows that I personally have seen.” It sounds ridiculous when you say it that way, but I think that’s what people are actually saying more often than not when they get crabby about films that other people haven’t seen yet. If it’s one of our own cinematic blind spots, then we tend to either a) be far more forgiving/understanding of others who haven’t seen the movie in question, or b) keep our mouths shut and avoid making eye contact with anyone.

     I’m with Jay and David here. Everyone has a different life experience and a different cinematic background and the list of films that a “true” cinephile ought to have seen in his or her life gets longer every year. No one has the right to sit in judgment on anyone else’s personal choices and dismiss their commitment to an art form because of what they have or haven’t explored yet. More to the point, why would anyone who truly cares about a given art form even want to drive other people away by ridiculing them based on what they do or don’t know about it? I attend a Shakespeare festival here in Utah with my wife and children every year and have seen all but four or five of Shakespeare’s plays performed live. When I talk about those experiences with other people, I want them to buy in, not get lost. I want other people to appreciate and enjoy those plays as much as I do. And I think that’s how most people who really get excited about movies feel as well: You don’t try to kick people out of the club because they’re not as cool as you. You want everyone to join the club and find out how great things are on the inside.

     Reply ↓

     • Well said Cody I completely agree. If it’s something you love, you want to encourage more people to see it, so hopefully they can get the same amount of enjoyment as you got.

       Reply ↓

     • Hamilton.

       Reply ↓

       • Very true ….until recently I hadn’t seen Bladerunner. So my argument for certain can be used against me here , obviously I don’t love the cinema as much as I claim to. The difference being is that I don’t fault others for telling me about Bladerunner. It is my sole responsibility to have seen that movie. If I haven’t then it is literally no one else’s fault. Spoiler Culture can suck my wang.

         Reply ↓

7. You said it on the show, Jason, but it’s so perfect that the first ever pull-quote attributed to MPW came from a guest. I was in tears from laughing so hard when I heard that.

   Seriously, though, congratulations. Whether or not the words came from one of the hosts doesn’t really matter – they were said on the show and the producers of The 2 Dollar Bill Documentary deemed it worthy enough for the cover of their DVD case. That’s big stuff.

   As far as the discussion of whether or not you can spoil a mainstream movie that came out 40+ years ago, the obvious answer is yes, you can. And the worst part about this discussion is the fact that THESE MOVIES IN QUESTION ARE THE ONES THAT ABSOLUTELY SHOULD NOT BE SPOILED because they are such classic films.

   Many others have already commented on this discussion with very well-presented arguments, so I’ll just leave this little anecdote:

   #########SPOILERS FOR THE STAR WARS UNIVERSE#########

   My oldest son, who is already a budding movie buff and lover of cool, geeky things like superheroes and Star Wars, was able to watch the original trilogy with fresh eyes. I succeeded in shielding him from the “Luke, I am your father” spoiler that is omnipresent in pop culture today (one of my proudest parenting accomplishments), so his 5 y/o mind was blown when Vader dropped that bomb in Episode V. I’m so glad he was able to experience that in the same way I could when I was a kid, and I would have been pissed if someone spoiled that for him with an off-the-cuff comment just because they assumed you can’t spoil an old mainstream movie.

   #########END SPOILERS#########

   I find that the people who argue you can’t spoil an old movie are people who generally don’t care about spoilers themselves. And, honestly, I feel that approach just lacks a certain level of consideration to others. I love you, Ryan, but I think you’re wrong on this one.

   Reply ↓

   • Dino–

     In my everyday walk around I don’t purposefully look for things to spoil….I didn’t walk out the theatre telling everyone that Tom Hanks eventually loses the volleyball.

     I’m considerate enough to take recent movies and tv shows into account and don’t seek and destroy. That’s just being a dick.

     But at a certain point the responsibility has to fall on the folks who haven’t gotten around to seeing forty year old movies. The other side of that argument is ludicrous.

     Reply ↓

     • I see your side of the argument to a point, Ryan, and I definitely didn’t mean it as a personal attack on you (upon re-read, that’s how it came off). I think you just need to consider your audience. If you were to spoil No Country for Old Men – a 10-year old movie I just haven’t gotten around to seeing yet – then I agree that would be on me to a certain extent. However, as in my example above, if you were to spoil Empire in front of my 6 y/o son, then I still think you’d be in the wrong.

       I acknowledge that spoiler culture has gotten a bit out of control, and feeling the need to be ultra-sensitive about spoilers often hinders normal conversation. I also recognize that I am on the extreme side of the scale when it comes to spoilers. However, I still think it’s possible to spoil “classic” films.

       Reply ↓

8. Catching up on some recent viewings:

   THE ACCOUNTANT: A wooden Affleck works great for this part, and I liked the story and backstory around everything. 8

   MASCOTS: I’m a big Christopher Guest fan, but I haven’t loved anything of his since A Mighty Wind (his best film as director, IMO). The premise is great and there are genuinely funny parts of this, but it’s pretty weak as a whole. Still, if you’re a Guest fan, it’s worth the watch. 6

   CAFE SOCIETY: Typical Woody Allen themes of infidelity and angst in a celebrity society. On the more engaging end of his work, though, and Jesse Eisenberg makes a great Woody Allen stand-in. 7

   GENIUS: I haven’t read any Thomas Wolfe, but I loved this movie, nonetheless. It’s a talky drama about an author and his tireless editor, but I found it very interesting and engaging. Jude Law teeters on the edge of overacting, but I generally liked the energy he gives this, and Colin Firth, Nicole Kidman, Laura Linney and Guy Pearce round out a great ensemble. 9.5

   THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN: Better than I had heard. Pretty dreary and depressing, though, but I could watch Emily Blunt in Reading the Phonebook. 6.5

   BIRTH OF A NATION: Some powerful moments, but uneven. Promising debut for the director, though. 7

   MASTERMINDS: Engaging enough throughout, but really lost its comedy pulse after a strong start. 6

   Also, I’m very much digging Westworld. Pretty great so far, and is essentially the new Lost as far as fan speculation about what’s going on. (Hopefully will have a better ending than Lost, though.)

   Reply ↓

9. Karl, I’ll back you up about the Godfather being overrated. I watched it again last year, and it’s great in terms of setting and character but kind of lacking in the story. A solid 8 out of 10 for me, but not one of the best films ever. I need to watch the sequel again, though. I don’t remember much other than DeNiro playing a younger Don Corleone.

   I’ll disagree with you, though, about Pirates. I didn’t care too much for the first one, and didn’t see what the hype was all about. However, the second one (Dead Man’s Chest) is terrific. More confident in the writing and direction, more interesting of a story, we’re introduced to the fun characters of Davy Jones and Tia Dalma, there are two amazingly creative and fun action scenes (the cliff and the waterwheel), and the Kraken is a heck of a cool ending. The next two films after that do indeed suck, but the second is the clear winner from that series.

   Reply ↓

10. J, with Halloween looming, can I ask your thoughts on Halloween III? At the time, my friends and I were huge horror fans (and that original Halloween is still a classic, I’d say), and we were super stoked to see this, but then were like “whaaaaaa??” In retrospect, it was a pretty ballsy movie to make and to give that title, and had a pretty horrific angle. But of course we felt gipped that it had nothing to do with Michael Myers, and kind of dismissed it and mocked it. I’m gonna try to find it to watch again this week to see if it holds up at all on its own. What do you think of that film?

    Reply ↓

    • Hi Eric,
      Sorry for the delayed response. I appreciate “Halloween III: Season of the Witch” somewhat, and I think that, much like “Alien: Resurrection,” if it weren’t associated with its titular franchise, then people would be able to appreciate it much more. Having said that, I still rated it as an “Avoid” on HMP.

      The premise of “Halloween III” is truly horrific, and I can appreciate that. But no, it doesn’t really fit very well into the Michael Myers-centric series…

      We discuss this much more in-depth and analyze its roots and origins here with The Pumpkin King, a man who is such a big Halloween fan, he had an exact replica of the Myers house built and he lives in it currently:

      http://horrormoviepodcast.com/horror-movie-podcast-ep-027-halloween-1978-and-halloween-ii-1981-and-halloween-iii-season-of-the-witch-1982-part-1-of-5/

      Our review starts, ha ha, around the 3 hr, 37-minute mark!
      Jay

      Reply ↓

      • Ha, thanks for the heads up of where that discussion starts. 🙂

        Then again, I do have a long drive today.

        Reply ↓

11. MPW still lives! Sorry about the delays. October is rough because HMP ramps up production. We’ll make it up to MPW listeners…

    Here’s a new one! https://moviepodcastweekly.com/movie-podcast-weekly-ep-210-the-girl-on-the-train-2016-and-masterminds-2016/

    J

    Reply ↓