Latest / This Film is Lit / Prequel to Nimona - Do more Steves mean a better movie?

Transcript

Prequel to Nimona - Do more Steves mean a better movie? · This Film is Lit

• 0:07
  Speaker A: On this week's prequel episode, we follow up on our big Fish listener polls, talk about stats, wizardry that we received from a listener, and preview nemona hello and welcome back to another prequel episode of this film is lit. I implore you all. You're really gonna want to stick around for the learning thing segment this week. Listener Miko from Goodreads truly has gone above and beyond. Has gone above and beyond. I don't want to spoil it. We'll get to it when we get to it before too long here. But man, just an incredible comment message that he sent us with some incredible information that we can't wait to share with you all. So stick around for that in the learning things segment. But before we get to that, we're gonna go ahead and do our patron shoutouts. I put up with you because your father and mother were our finest patrons. That's why. No new patrons this week, but we have our Academy Award winners, and they are Eric Harpo Rat, Nathan Vic Vega Matild Steve from Arizona. Paul Teresa Schwartz Ian from wine country. Winchester's forever, Kelly Napier Grey Hightower gratch. Just scratch. Shelby is no more that darn skag. V. Frank and Alina Starkov. We are chuckling because in the middle of the scratch pause. Grindy, our cat, chose that exact moment to wail from the bedroom.
• 1:44
  Speaker B: I don't think. He probably did not pick up on the microphone.
• 1:47
  Speaker A: Probably didn't pick up.
• 1:49
  Speaker B: Just the saddest. Imagine the saddest, most pathetic little cat whale from the other room.
• 1:55
  Speaker A: Yes. We have to unfortunately, lock him in the bedroom with Katniss while we record. So that he. Cause otherwise, he will sit right outside this door and wail at us. And it will be very noticeable. Cause he likes being around us. So anyway. Well, when we're in the house, he doesn't mind when we're gone that much, I don't think. But when we're in the house, he hates when we're not around.
• 2:19
  Speaker B: And he can't be in the studio with us because he will cause chaos the entire time.
• 2:23
  Speaker A: He will destroy things. Like, he will knock things off shelves because we won't be paying attention.
• 2:27
  Speaker B: And, like, get in our faces and rub on the microphones.
• 2:30
  Speaker A: An attention starved, needy little. I say starved. He gets all the attention in the world.
• 2:33
  Speaker B: He thinks he's attention starved.
• 2:35
  Speaker A: He's a needy little cat. So. And I say little. He's gigantic.
• 2:40
  Speaker B: You say he's not that little.
• 2:41
  Speaker A: Anyways, that's enough cat talk. Let's go ahead and thank you all Academy Award winning patrons. Let's go ahead and see what the people had to say about big fish. Yeah, well, you know, that's just like your opinion.
• 2:58
  Speaker B: Man on Patreon, we had five votes for the movie and one for the book. Kelly Napier said, I picked the movie over the book because I liked the more fleshed out backstory of the son trying to reconcile and repair his relationship with his dad. I also enjoyed the circus storyline in the movie and agree with y'all that it seems like it would have come from the book. What I did like in the book over the movie was the darkness of Spectre. The movie version of the town made it seem like people didn't leave because they were just so content there, where in the book, people were literally unable to leave the town if they weren't pure enough in their intent to go. The plot point of the town dog that either gives you its approval or eats your fingers if it doesn't was really interesting to me.
• 3:44
  Speaker A: Eats your fingers.
• 3:46
  Speaker B: I was looking closely in the movie to see if they included the detail of people missing fingers. That is, people who had tried to leave and failed the test of the dog and was disappointed that it wasn't present. But overall, like I said, I liked the movie more for a lot of the reasons you did as well. The expansion of the story with the sun and the callbacks to all the people Edward had met throughout his life, especially Don Price, instead of everything being standalone vignettes, worked really well for me.
• 4:15
  Speaker A: Sweet. No? Yeah, it makes a lot of sense. Yeah. The dog eating fingers, huh?
• 4:20
  Speaker B: Yeah, I'm that one didn't really do anything for me, like the dog part of it. Specifically, I liked the idea of the town being this dark place that kind of traps you in your anxiety and having no confidence in yourself. The dog thing didn't really do anything for me, but I'm glad Kelly liked it. Our next comment was from Nathan, our only book voter, and Nathan said, I'm picking the book over the movie by the slightest of margins, but I really didn't feel particularly fond of either. I found the way the book used repeated tellings of the same death scene to demonstrate the evolution of the son's relationship to his father to be pretty clever. I also quite enjoyed the metaphor of the town outside of Ashland. It didn't read as a purgatory for me, but as a way to illustrate the stickiness of living in a small town. So many folks have grand dreams but get stuck in or near their hometowns due to things beyond their control. I agree with Brian's point about the movie. I think it's totally fair for the son to expect communication with Edward to be a two way street. He struggles to connect to the father behind the stories, and that is a legitimate feeling to have and one that I can. That I definitely share with him. I think the movie was more interested in telling a tale about the value of storytelling, which is valid, but short changes what could have been a really interesting way to step beyond the book's perspective.
• 5:56
  Speaker A: Mm hmm. Yep. Obviously I agree with that because that was my point. But I wanted to go back because I don't remember you mentioning this and see if you can expand on it at all. It said, what do you say? I found the way the book used repeated tellings of the same death scene to demonstrate the evolution of the son's relationship to his father to be pretty clever. What has.
• 6:18
  Speaker B: So in the book, there are, like. The book is mostly these, like, tall tale vignettes about the father's life. But a few times throughout, like, three or four times, I want to say we go back to what in the movie would be, like, the real world part of the movie, where we're with the son and the father, and they're titled my father's death, take one. My father's death, take two. Take three. And I wasn't quite sure, as I was reading if they were supposed to be separate events or if they were different tellings of the same event, because they're all very similar, down to some little details. But there is kind of a progression throughout them to where we gradually build to the last one, which is where we get, like, the story of the father turning into the big fish.
• 7:22
  Speaker A: Okay, interesting. Yeah, that sounds interesting. Sounds intriguing. And this movie obviously doesn't do anything like that. So.
• 7:30
  Speaker B: Yeah, the movie has a much more, like, straightforward frame story.
• 7:34
  Speaker A: Yeah. Where we kind of just jump back and forth between the real world story that progresses pretty much in order, and then the fantasy flashbacks, essentially.
• 7:43
  Speaker B: Our next comment was from Steve from Arizona, who said, I'm going with the movie on this one, and not because it's better than the book. I personally have trouble connecting with both my parents, who are pretty closed off about their personal lives. Of course, we're very disparate due to our politics, but it kind of bothers me they don't share more. I guess that's why I like movies that address some inner turmoil about our relationships with our parents. The movie is generally okay, but hot take, in my opinion. This was the. This was really the last decent film Tim Burton made. I don't think that's a hot take.
• 8:20
  Speaker A: I was gonna say I don't think that's a hot take at all.
• 8:22
  Speaker B: And I think. I believe Mattel replied her comment and said the same thing.
• 8:27
  Speaker A: Yeah, I think that's a hot topic commonly considered. I would have to look. I don't know, but I believe that is.
• 8:32
  Speaker B: Yeah. And now, to be fair, I have not seen a lot of. Yeah, I'm going off in the, like, intervening years, but, like, my general understanding is that a lot of them have not been well reviewed slash received in the intervening years.
• 8:47
  Speaker A: Yeah. And that I think a lot of people do kind of cite big fish as maybe around the time where he.
• 8:54
  Speaker B: Stopped or maybe a corpse bride might have come out like a year or two after this. I'm not for sure. I'm looking for right now.
• 9:01
  Speaker A: We have.
• 9:03
  Speaker B: Cause I think people, like, generally liked that one. I don't know how well it was received critically, but.
• 9:08
  Speaker A: Peewee's big adventure in 85, Beetlejuice 88, Batman 89, Edward Scissorhands 90, Batman returns 92, Edwood 94. That's a great stretch of movies, right?
• 9:21
  Speaker B: So that's like the golden era, right?
• 9:24
  Speaker A: Mars attacks 96, which is mixed, but people still enjoy it. Sleepy hollow 99, which is plan of the apes, was not good. 2001, big fish 2003. And then you're right, corpse bride was 2005, but so was Charlie and the chocolate factory. So that's the start of. And then. So, yeah, Charlie chocolate factory, corpse bride. Sweeney Todd's not terrible.
• 9:48
  Speaker B: Yeah, Sweeney Todd's.
• 9:49
  Speaker A: Sweeney Todd's fine. And then the first Alice in Wonderland, dark shadows. Frankenweenie, which I think Frankenweenie, big eyes, I heard, was not awful, but also not, like, amazing. Then miss Peregrine Dumbo. Yeah. So, yeah, generally speaking, I think a lot of this is considered, like, his last great quote unquote great. It definitely on IMDb, it has the highest rating of any movie post 2000.
• 10:17
  Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, I feel like post, like, sleepy hollow, maybe a lot of them have been like, okay. Or not great. Yeah, pretty much. He's never really been able to replicate that early success.
• 10:32
  Speaker A: I don't think there's anything. This is definitely the best. This one actually has the highest rating on IMDb other than. Actually. It has the highest rating on IMDb of, like, all those movies I listed.
• 10:46
  Speaker B: Really?
• 10:46
  Speaker A: It has an eight on IMDb.
• 10:49
  Speaker B: Even over, like. Like, Edward scissorhands big adventure sevens that people love.
• 10:54
  Speaker A: Beetlejuice 7.5, Batman 7.5, Edward Scissorhands 7.9 Batman Returns 7.1 Ed Wood 7.8 Sleepy Hollow 7.3 Planet of the Apes 5.7 big fish eight. So yeah, it literally has his highest IMDb rating of any movie.
• 11:11
  Speaker B: Okay, so the hot take is that this is Tim Burton's only good movie.
• 11:15
  Speaker A: Yeah, that would be the hot take.
• 11:17
  Speaker B: Oh, so Steve went on to say. Anyway, good review. And for those that care, there were nine steves in the production.
• 11:24
  Speaker A: Oh, just you wait, Steve.
• 11:26
  Speaker B: With my limited research so far, the closer to double digit steves in a movie production, the more likely Katie chooses the movie. Give me a few more months and I might even have a mean for this.
• 11:37
  Speaker A: You don't even need to wait long. You won't need to wait long at all, buddy.
• 11:43
  Speaker B: Our last comment on Patreon was from Mathilde who said voted for the movie. The book was fine, but it didn't lean enough into the tall tales to my taste and it had an undercurrent of bitterness in the narration that I didn't appreciate much. The movie isn't Tim Burton's best.
• 12:01
  Speaker A: I think critically it's not considered his best, but on IMDb, it's best.
• 12:04
  Speaker B: On IMDb. According to IMDb, it is best.
• 12:06
  Speaker A: That's the fan scores best.
• 12:08
  Speaker B: The movie isn't Tim Burton's best, but it is pleasantly different than what he usually does, especially visually, and it has a lot of heart and charm. I watched the movie only once before when it came out back when I was just a teen who religiously watched anything with Ewan McGregor. Fair it hit me emotionally then, but nowhere close to how much it did this time around. But I think it's the kind of movie that would have that effect when you can relate to it, and I sure can. My dad passed away from cancer two years ago. He wasn't into grandiose storytelling like Edward, but he was a bit like him. A narcissist who would demand an audience all the time. A big man who took a lot of space. Not an easy man to live with or to love, but he was unapologetically himself. I actually missed his last moments by half an hour. I only have what my sister who was with him told me as a memory of how he went. It was peaceful and simple. Seeing wills story at the end of the movie made me wish for something similar for my dad. I feel like he deserved a big finale too, so I found it very emotional to see Edward have the ending he wished for. I would agree that the movie takes a side between father and son, and the burden is on the son to make the compromise in the way they communicate. I can relate. My dad wasn't one to make the compromise, but once I accepted it, realized that it wasn't much of a sacrifice on my end, but would be too big of a change on his. Things got a lot better. Then again, I'm a person who can't lie to save my life, but who writes fiction. So maybe it's easier to take those steps when you're not completely stuck on truth and honesty. I do like some embellishment in my life. Clearly, will doesn't. I actually like the differences between the characters in Edwards stories and how we see them at the end. It makes sense. But I also took it as a compliment. After all, is there really a real us? Don't we all exist differently in people's minds? It's kind of sweet that Edward saw them all bigger and more of themselves than they might really be. Carl isn't just a tall guy. He's the biggest and the strongest. The twin sisters might just be so close and strong together that to Edward, they're fused. It made me think about how my friends or coworkers or my siblings would describe me. I don't think any of them would be right or wrong, and I don't really care, but I would like it if they were all this passionate when talking about me.
• 14:38
  Speaker A: I think that's fair. I agree with a lot of that. I agree with that. Mainly talking about the end part here, that there's truth to that. My point in the episode was that. Yeah, I still think it's. I don't know. I think some of elements of his storytelling about the people bordered into a place that felt. I won't say disrespectful, but I think that's the word I used in the episode. But it may be something bordering on disrespectful in terms of kind of caricaturizing them, if that's. I don't know what even the word for that is.
• 15:08
  Speaker B: Yeah. I think, like, particularly with the twins, it borders a little bit into something that's a little uncomfortable.
• 15:15
  Speaker A: Yeah, but your point is very solid that. Yeah. Obviously, the version of us that exists in other people's heads lives is very different than the version of us that exists in our heads and the version of us that exists in. You know, what. What Katie thinks of who I am versus what a random coworker thinks of who I am versus a random person I've met on the street thinks of who I am are all very different things. Versus what I think are all very different things. So your point? Yeah, very good point. But that all being said, it still does feel a little. I don't know, I was just a little like. Seems kind of. Yeah. But anyways, that's all. That's all I had. And I don't have much else to add because it was a very personal comment and appreciate you sharing it.
• 15:58
  Speaker B: I think it is. It's a very sweet way to look at it.
• 16:01
  Speaker A: Yeah. Yes, I agree. Yeah.
• 16:03
  Speaker B: And I think it is kind of in line with the, like, kind of romantic nature of the. Of the big fish story.
• 16:12
  Speaker A: Right.
• 16:12
  Speaker B: Anyway, on Facebook, we had one vote for the movie, zero for the book. Twitter, one vote for the movie, zero for the book, and one listener who couldn't decide. And on Instagram, we had four votes for the movie and zero for the book. Tim, Wahoo said book is always better.
• 16:31
  Speaker A: If you can read, but didn't vote for the book.
• 16:34
  Speaker B: Yes, it did, in fact, vote for the movie in the poll, which makes me question if Tim can read.
• 16:40
  Speaker A: Yeah, it seems possible. He cannot.
• 16:42
  Speaker B: Seems maybe possible. Seems likely. Let us know, Tim. We had two votes for the movie, none for the book. And then on Goodreads, we had one vote for the movie, no votes for the book, and Miko said my book didn't arrive in time, so I had to make do with a 30 minutes preview of the audiobook. You probably did okay with that. Even in that, I noticed the lack of a through line, and based on Katie's description, that's something the whole book suffers from. I would agree with that. Yeah. The movie, however, was delightful, for lack of a better word. While I couldn't really see Ewan McGregor and Albert Finney as the same character, I enjoyed both their performances.
• 17:24
  Speaker A: I will agree with that. Not that they didn't necessarily. I could see, because I saw pictures of, like, young Albert Finney, and I could see, like, what the producers or whatever, you know, people involved in the casting were thinking, but their performances didn't feel like the same person to me.
• 17:37
  Speaker B: I agree.
• 17:38
  Speaker A: And I think probably somewhat intentional or I think it's.
• 17:42
  Speaker B: I think it could be intentional. And I do think it is realistic that, like, you're going to be a very. You could be a very different person in old age as you're dying than you were and, like, the prime of your life as you have everything stretching out before you.
• 17:57
  Speaker A: But I think it would have been nice, and I at least, and I didn't notice it. Maybe on a second viewing I would. But even some sort of little quirks or some element that really, like, made it like made them feel like the same person. Some, even some sort of small speech pattern or. I don't know. I don't want to say there was nothing because there may have been that I just didn't catch it, but it did. That is an interesting point that I hadn't really thought about, is that it doesn't. I never. And I think that's honestly kind of ties into what I was surprised that Ewan McGregor was the same guy from like the trailer and stuff. I thought he was the sun. But anyways, yeah, I do think that they don't. It doesn't necessarily feel like the same person. But your point is also true that, yeah, people change a lot.
• 18:40
  Speaker B: People do change a lot. And also, you know, we can keep in mind that it's the tall tale.
• 18:46
  Speaker A: I think that's when I was saying intentional. That was kind of what I was referencing is that it is this tall tale version. So it's not like really, you know, we're not watching like footage of him being younger. We're getting relayed this fantastical version of him from a younger. So yeah, that's fair too.
• 19:02
  Speaker B: Mika went on to say, when Ed discovered Spectre, I realized I had seen the movie before. I had hazy memories of the ending, so it didnt hit as hard as it might have otherwise. I sympathized with will not so much because of the father son relationship, but simply due to preferring a factual recounting of events over a fantastical story. The one scene that bugged me was Ed telling the parrots speak French in Congo story. It wasnt a tall tale about his life, nor a joke like the dream Raven story. It was simply nonsense. It didnt seem to serve any other purpose than have him hog the spotlight. I agree with Brian that Ed should have at least tried to meet in the middle, even if just saying sorry that will doesnt seem to understand him. Theres nothing wrong with a good story, but theres a time for stories and time for straight talk. However, while these things detracted from the story, they mainly came up after the movie while thinking about it, not while watching. Even having only listened to the beginning of the audiobook, I feel confident about my verdict. One vote for the movie.
• 20:08
  Speaker A: So I would agree with all that wholeheartedly. It was also one of those things that didn't really bother me much while watching it. It's just kind of thinking about it more that it started to bug me a little. The whole thing with Ed having to or not Ed, with Will having to meet his father, where he was, and his father, I think just one little moment of his dad, you know, having, like, I don't know, a real conversation with him. And I agree also, I hadn't really thought about it, but the whole. The whole scene of the parrots speak French in the Congo. He's just making up nonsense. Yeah. Like, it's literally not even, like, this, like, fun, more interesting version of his life that, like, thematically represents what he was going through. He's just lying. Like, he's just making, like. And that. That is one of those things that's just, like.
• 20:55
  Speaker B: Isn't that, like, an urban legend? Probably, like, a thing that people say. That's not true.
• 20:59
  Speaker A: Oh, I've never heard it.
• 21:00
  Speaker B: Maybe I feel like I've heard that before, but maybe I'm just remembering the first time I saw the movie when it was in theaters.
• 21:06
  Speaker A: I'd say I've never heard of that, but it doesn't mean it could be. I don't know. I'm unaware of it. But, yeah, that is one of those moments where it's just like, all right, man. You're just. You're just saying stuff to say stuff. Cause, yeah, you get attention, like. And it's. And the movie just purely romanticizes and celebrates that without any sort of, like.
• 21:24
  Speaker B: I mean, I do think that that scene is maybe the most critical that the movie is of his, like.
• 21:29
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 21:30
  Speaker B: Need to just say things for attention, right?
• 21:33
  Speaker A: Yeah, the movie is a little bit. Yeah. Yeah. But again, it's still just the way it ends. Yeah, that's fair. I guess that scene does kind of have a little bit. Kind of in the way it's presented is.
• 21:45
  Speaker B: I'm not saying it's, like, does a good job of that, but I do think, arguably, it is the most critical that the movie gets.
• 21:53
  Speaker A: Yeah, that's fair.
• 21:55
  Speaker B: So, our winner this week was the movie, to probably no one's surprise, with 14 votes to the books, one, plus our one listener who couldn't decide.
• 22:07
  Speaker A: Sweet. All right, movie. Crushed it. Now, very excited for this. It is time to learn a little bit from Miko's data wizardry. No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
• 22:25
  Speaker B: So when I went yesterday to look for comments, I have them all listed out in my prequel episode. I have a template doc that I use to make all of these. So I just go right down on the line, and I check everywhere and see if we have any comments. So I went to Goodreads, saw our comment from Miko that we just read. And then I saw that we had a message, which was good because I don't always see the messages on Goodreads.
• 23:01
  Speaker A: Yeah. I'm so glad you happened to see this one.
• 23:05
  Speaker B: So we got this message from Miko and Miko said, hi. Your conversation about the movie quality versus the number of steves in the latest prequel episode made me ponder about the ratings of the books and movies you've covered and how they correlate. So I made a website showing how the Goodreads ratings of the books compare with the IMDb and Metacritic ratings of the movies and how your book movie was better verdicts fit them. And of course, how the number of steves impacts the quality of the movie.
• 23:42
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 23:43
  Speaker B: So. And then inserted a link. A link, yes.
• 23:47
  Speaker A: Which we will share.
• 23:48
  Speaker B: Yes.
• 23:48
  Speaker A: We will share this on this episode. But also we're probably going to do a separate post with just this information to highlight it even more for people.
• 23:55
  Speaker B: Yeah. I'll put this in the comments on the prequel episode post, and then we'll do like a separate.
• 24:00
  Speaker A: I can also put it. I'll put it in the descript. Like the episode description for the episode. Yeah.
• 24:07
  Speaker B: So this website has a couple different. Are these scatter plots?
• 24:13
  Speaker A: That's three of them. Yeah.
• 24:14
  Speaker B: Which I was never very good at.
• 24:17
  Speaker A: They're a little tough to read, but once you start to kind of get a look at it, you can figure it out. But yeah, it is a scatterplot of three different things specific. I can't get. Hold on. I'm trying to open the link and I had it open a second ago.
• 24:34
  Speaker B: So there's Goodreads versus Metacritic.
• 24:36
  Speaker A: Yes. I'm just going to read the description here. The graphs compare the Goodreads ratings of the books to the IMDb and Metacritic ratings of the movie adaptations. So the graphics are interactive, which is incredible. You can hover over, if you have a mouse over the data. You can also on, if you're on like, because I can do it on my iPad, I can click on them like with my finger. And it shows me hovering over the data points, shows the corresponding movie and the ratings it has. And you can also apparently visit toggle the visibility. Yeah. If you click on the little book wins, movie wins. You can turn on and off different data. And so what we have here is the first scatter plot is a, the x axis is the Goodread score, and the y axis is the metacritic score. So you can see how things correlate that way then. And the scatter plot points are each of the episodes we've done. And they're color coded to. Either the book wins, the movie wins a tie disagreement. And then there's a linear, like a line that showcases the. Like, I guess the. I don't even know the right word. The trajectory of the data or whatever. Then the second graph. And this is going to be very hard to describe. This isn't super. You're just going to have to go click on this and play around with it. Which, while you're listening to this, you can do that. Because again, this episode. This link episode will have the links information. The second scatter plot is the Goodread scores versus the IMDb scores. So this is the fan, you know, audience scores. And then the final one compares the portion of the. Like the proportion of Steeves and Stevens in the cast and crew against the movie's metacritic ratings. So we actually have a. And it's also based on. Obviously. Cause they're color coded. You can see whether or not the book one or the movie one. There's probably more that can be done with this data, as he said. But it is fantastic. You can see everything. It has been graphed out. You can see. And the final one, the Steve chart is amazing. Cause you can really. You click on it and it tells you, like what per percentage? I believe it's what percentage of the cast and crew list is Steve's. And then you can tell what sort of rating it got. For example, I don't think he mentions this one later. I'll just pick a random one here. Children of men. We said the movie one on that one. It has an 84 on Metacritic. And it has a actually pretty high percentage, I think, of Steve's. Yes. The proportion of steves in the crew is. And I think I'd have to. Can figure out. Come on. It won't show me now. Is 0.0297, which I believe is approximately 2%. I think that might be how that works. I don't know. We'll double check here. Because Miko did. We went the extra step and gave us a few fun little tidbits about this information. But you can continue with what he said.
• 27:55
  Speaker B: So Miko went on to say, you can do with this what you will, if you want. You have my permission to talk about it or share the link.
• 28:02
  Speaker A: I'm absolutely going to. Are you kidding me?
• 28:04
  Speaker B: Also, this was less work than you probably think. I had already made a script for IMDb scraping and data plotting for another project. And your book movie was better shelves on Goodreads meant I could just copy those and not go through every single episode one by one. The only mild annoyances were due to the two parters. This was just the kind of nerdy hobby project I enjoy.
• 28:27
  Speaker A: Amazing.
• 28:29
  Speaker B: About the data. Goodread's ratings aren't the best. I agree. Your reviewed books span only from 3.42. I know what you did last summer to 4.62. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.
• 28:42
  Speaker A: It is hilarious to me, and it's fitting. Telling, I guess, that Harry Potter is the highest rated book on Goodreads that we've done. Not that we've done a bunch of like, literary classics, but we've done some. We've done some.
• 28:57
  Speaker B: We've done some.
• 28:58
  Speaker A: It's just cracking me up that Harry Potter is the highest rated.
• 29:02
  Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, that is the problem with. It's not a great rating system on Goodreads. Most stuff falls between, like at a three or four.
• 29:10
  Speaker A: And it also seems like it's skews heavily like ya. Like it's ya gets weighted like heavily. Cause I. Maybe the user base is just.
• 29:18
  Speaker B: I think it's the user base. Yeah. I get that the books have to be sort of good to be made into a movie, but I'd like to see at least some spread in the ratings. Still, there's a visible trend in the plotted data. The better the book, the better the movie. I love having that confirmed.
• 29:36
  Speaker A: I mean. Yeah. Reasonable. Seems like you would expect.
• 29:40
  Speaker B: Yeah, you would expect. Also, it seems you're generally in agreement with the greater audience. You can see that the top left of the data cloud is pretty well covered by the movie wins. And the bottom right with book wins entries, as one would expect. Couple of notable data points based on which data points are furthest from the linear fit line. We can say the worst movie based on the best book is either the cat in the hat or slapstick of another kind. Going by Metacritic or IMDb ratings, respectively, that seems accurate. Yeah.
• 30:16
  Speaker A: I'm trying to think of another example.
• 30:18
  Speaker B: No, that first, anytime somebody asks for the worst ones, those are two that, like, immediately, immediately come to mind. Similarly, the best movie based on the worst book is either rear window or die hard.
• 30:32
  Speaker A: I think that tracks.
• 30:34
  Speaker B: I don't remember.
• 30:35
  Speaker A: I don't think you disliked rear window.
• 30:37
  Speaker B: I don't recall that I disliked it, but I do recall thinking that it wasn't very interesting.
• 30:43
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 30:44
  Speaker B: Like, especially compared to the movie. Like, it just wasn't very compelling.
• 30:48
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 30:48
  Speaker B: Um. And then die hard. I remember almost nothing about that book. I do remember that I did not really enjoy reading it, but I often chalk that up to genre.
• 31:00
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 31:01
  Speaker B: When I don't enjoy a book because it's just not a genre that I like.
• 31:05
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 31:05
  Speaker B: But also, people love that movie so much. I think it makes sense.
• 31:09
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 31:09
  Speaker B: I also determined when your vote differs the most from the opinion of the general audience. That is where one would expect you to vote differently based on the trend. Based on the data, one would have expected you to vote for the 50 shades books. However, there's clearly a ton of hate votes behind the movie ratings, bringing them unnaturally low.
• 31:32
  Speaker A: Also, I think. Yes. Because I think it's a lot of people who haven't read the books, just like, oh, and they don't.
• 31:38
  Speaker B: And the movies are stupid, but they don't understand how good they are compared to the books. A more proper result here would be Jumanji, which is interesting to me. Similarly, the Godfather vote should have gone for the movie based on the general trend.
• 31:56
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 31:57
  Speaker B: You know, thinking back, I feel like the Godfather was maybe one that I got wrong.
• 32:02
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 32:03
  Speaker B: I don't know. I just thought the book was interesting.
• 32:05
  Speaker A: Yeah. Yeah. And I think you were close. It wasn't like a. You definitely, you know, it wasn't like, oh, I'm definitely obviously picking them, Buck.
• 32:12
  Speaker B: Yeah. It was up close. Yeah. And finally, the most devastating news.
• 32:18
  Speaker A: Here it is. Steve. Sorry.
• 32:20
  Speaker B: Plotting the portion of Steve Stevens and Stevens with a ph.
• 32:25
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 32:25
  Speaker B: In the crew versus the Metascore reveals an inverse correlation. The less steves, the better the movie disaster. The ultimate example of this is rear window. No steeves, but a perfect 100 in Metacritic.
• 32:43
  Speaker A: Unbelievable fun fact.
• 32:47
  Speaker B: The highest portion of Steve's is in ever after, in which a 3.8% of the cast and crew are Steves.
• 32:56
  Speaker A: That's amazing.
• 32:58
  Speaker B: Incredible. I thought we would have to wait so long to get ourselves.
• 33:02
  Speaker A: Yes. I really did think we would have. This would, like, be a thing that eventually, the years down the road, we might get something. But then, little did we know, we had a data analyst in our audience.
• 33:15
  Speaker B: And then Amiko's last note here was, there's a ton of fun air quotes, statistics, and biases behind this data. So don't take this too seriously. That's a story for another time. Smiley face.
• 33:28
  Speaker A: Amazing. That is absolutely incredible.
• 33:31
  Speaker B: I truly, as a person who struggles with the most basic of basic math.
• 33:39
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 33:40
  Speaker B: I cried my way through my entry level stats class in college. I wept my way through it.
• 33:46
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 33:47
  Speaker B: This is incredible to me.
• 33:49
  Speaker A: I will give you this. Steve, I want you to know this. So I think I'm trying to find ever after.
• 33:58
  Speaker B: It's the red dot. Way at the top.
• 34:00
  Speaker A: Way at the top.
• 34:00
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 34:01
  Speaker A: Okay, so that is 3% is what he said. Okay, so I was right. I'll give you this, Steve, in good news for you. So obviously, rear window has zero steves and 100% on Metacritic. But what he left out, what Mikko left out in this facts, is that there's another movie with 100 on Metacritic. The Godfather. And it has 2.4% of the cast and crew are Steve's. So there's, you know, you got. You got one there. But, yeah, it's incredible. If you go through, you can click and see how many Steve. What's this other outlier up here? With the tie disagreement that misses doubtfire, 3.7% of the cast and crew were Steve's. And it's. It's got a 54 on Metacritic, but it's a. Got a lot of steves. What's the worst movie so many. With the least amount of steves? Rambo. Rambo has a. Well, it's not even. Oh, hold on. I wonder if that's not so. This says Rambo.
• 35:04
  Speaker B: Oh, that could be the wrong Rambo.
• 35:07
  Speaker A: I just saw the Metacritic score of like 43 or whatever. Like 46. And I was like, there's no way first blood has a 46 on. I would be amazed if first blood has a 46. But there is a movie called Rambo. That's like one of the terrible sequels, I believe.
• 35:23
  Speaker B: No, we had a whole conversation about that on that episode, about what the heck was going on with the sequel.
• 35:29
  Speaker A: Yeah. So first blood, which is the one we actually did, has a Metacritic score or 61%. It's also possible I mislabeled that episode. I thought I called it first blood, but I don't know. Anyways, so I bet what happened there is. Yeah, Miko just used the wrong ram, the wrong film for that. But anyways, tons of fun stuff. You can go in and take a look at all of this different data. We'll put this link out there. It's interactive.
• 35:56
  Speaker B: I know what was going on with the Divergent series now. Not enough steves.
• 36:01
  Speaker A: Is that. Where are they at? I don't even.
• 36:04
  Speaker B: They're. Divergent is, uh, one.
• 36:09
  Speaker A: Oh, I see it.
• 36:10
  Speaker B: 2% Steve. And then where did the other one?
• 36:14
  Speaker A: I saw insurgent also. Twilight's right there.
• 36:17
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 36:18
  Speaker A: New moon.
• 36:20
  Speaker B: Less than 1%. Steeves. And then allegiant has like, 1.4%.
• 36:26
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 36:27
  Speaker B: Steves. Not enough steves.
• 36:28
  Speaker A: Not enough steves. Yeah, that's again, I cannot stress enough how incredible this data is. It's so funny and so fun. And I'm glad we solved the Steve mystery immediately. I will say this. I imagine he is metacritic. Maybe because it was easier to skim that data than rotten tomatoes or something like that. I always include both scores. I think most people generally use rotten tomatoes over Metacritic in terms of, like, critical consensus. But metacritic is totally fine and works just. Just great for this. So again, thank you. Miko. Can't just. Unbelievable stuff. Thank you for sending that in and letting us share it with the world. Just because I'm curious, is this your date? Is this what you do for a day job? You don't have to get into specifics, but I would be interested to know if, like, this is purely just a hobby or, like, is correlational to your actual job, because that is a. It was fascinating. All right, that's our learning things segment this week. Hope you all have fun with that. Now it's time to learn a little bit about our next book slash movie, a Steven kind of in.
• 37:44
  Speaker B: Yeah, in the last game.
• 37:46
  Speaker A: We're gonna learn now about the graphic novel Nimona.
• 37:50
  Speaker B: Hey, boss.
• 37:53
  Speaker A: Who are you?
• 37:53
  Speaker B: The name's Nemona. Your sidekick has her eyes.
• 37:57
  Speaker A: I don't need a sidekick.
• 37:58
  Speaker B: Every villain needs a sidekick.
• 37:59
  Speaker A: I'm not a villain. The real villain is still out there, and I do need help.
• 38:05
  Speaker B: And then who do you want to kill first? What? Look, I can help you, but promise me you won't freak out.
• 38:10
  Speaker A: Why would I trust you?
• 38:11
  Speaker B: Promise?
• 38:11
  Speaker A: I promise.
• 38:12
  Speaker B: Even when you see the horn. Horn. Promise.
• 38:14
  Speaker A: I promise. Promise I will not freak.
• 38:19
  Speaker B: This is the part where you run. They call me hell. They call me.
• 38:24
  Speaker A: You're ashamed.
• 38:25
  Speaker B: They call me hell. Nimona is a 2015 science fantasy graphic novel by american cartoonist Endy Stevenson, whose work you might also know from the comic book series Lumberjanes and or the Netflix animated series she Ra and the princesses of power.
• 38:47
  Speaker A: I did not realize this was the same person initially. I did once I did my research for the movie, obviously.
• 38:53
  Speaker B: But I believe. I believe he did, like, everything for it.
• 38:58
  Speaker A: Like, yeah, it was like the showrunner.
• 38:59
  Speaker B: Yeah, showrunner, creator, writer, all that stuff.
• 39:04
  Speaker A: Yep.
• 39:05
  Speaker B: So a note on Stevenson real quick. Stevenson came out in 2021 as transmasculine and bi gender. Wikipedia says that he uses any pronouns, but all of his social media accounts that I found say he him. So that's what I'm sticking with.
• 39:21
  Speaker A: I saw the same.
• 39:22
  Speaker B: Not necessarily saying that Wikipedia is wrong, but Wikipedia can often be out of.
• 39:26
  Speaker A: Date on that kind of thing. I've noticed that tends to happen where somebody. Things will have changed and Wikipedia doesn't keep up necessarily.
• 39:36
  Speaker B: So Stevenson began working on Nemona while attending the Maryland Institute College of Art, actually revisiting a character that he had created while in high school. Shudder to think what would happen if I revisited the characters I created in high school. According to Stevenson, he created Nemona by combining the shapeshifter with a joan of Arc inspired character that he was drawing at the time. So Nemona's look was actually based on his own experiences with cosplay. Stevenson preferred cosplaying as male characters rather than female characters, and wanted to do a costume that people who weren't as interested in looking particularly buxom or sensual might want to dress as.
• 40:22
  Speaker A: Fair goal.
• 40:23
  Speaker B: Yeah. So after that initial, like, character concept, other characters, and then a story followed as Stevenson revisited the concept several times over his junior year, and then later received approval for the comic to become his senior thesis. So that's cool.
• 40:41
  Speaker A: Yeah. I had no idea about this. Kind of.
• 40:43
  Speaker B: Sometimes people get to do fun stuff for school and I think that's neat.
• 40:47
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 40:49
  Speaker B: Stevenson initially published Nemona on Tumblr from 2012 through 2014. According to him, an agent reached out to him shortly after he had posted the first few pages, and he was still at school when he learned his agent had sold Nemona to HarperCollins, which is. I mean, that's a major publisher. That's pretty good.
• 41:12
  Speaker A: Yep.
• 41:12
  Speaker B: The completed comic was then published as a young adult graphic novel in 2015, as I said, and has been translated into 16 other languages as of 2022. And Nemona went on to win an Eisner award, a Sybil's award, and a cartoonist studio prize. It was also nominated for another Eisner Award and a National Book award, and the hardcover edition became a New York Times bestseller.
• 41:41
  Speaker A: Wow.
• 41:43
  Speaker B: And aside from the movie that we'll be talking about, the novel did also receive an audiobook adaptation, 2016, which. Yeah, I'm not sure how common it is. I agree that it feels uncommon. I'm not sure, actually how uncommon it is, but I would be interested to give that. Yeah.
• 42:02
  Speaker A: I wonder if there's, like, more elements to it. Like if maybe.
• 42:05
  Speaker B: I mean, you would have to include some kind of descriptive, like, it has.
• 42:09
  Speaker A: Descriptions or somehow it's more like a radio play than like a traditional audiobook. Yeah. I don't know. It's interesting. All right. That's a little bit about Nemona the graphic novel. Let's learn now about Nemona the movie.
• 42:22
  Speaker B: Something. Something we win I'll mister cat if they call me the ball.
• 42:28
  Speaker A: If anyone can find them, it's me.
• 42:31
  Speaker B: They call me.
• 42:34
  Speaker A: Ambrosius. Really thinks I'm a murderer.
• 42:37
  Speaker B: You got betrayed by someone you trusted because once everyone sees you as a villain, that's what my face. That's what you are. Do you think you still was? Yes. Corner that the world kicks you around sometimes, but together we can kick it back.
• 43:02
  Speaker A: Nimona is a 2023 film directed by Nick Bruno, who did spies in Disguise as director, but was also an animator on Ice Age, the Meltdown. Horton hears a whole Rio epic, Rio two, the Peanuts movie, bunch of other those that studios movies, and Troy Queen, who was also director of spies in Disguise and was a storyboard artist and animator on storyboard artists on all these films, but also was an animator on some of these on epic nine, the Wild, Enchanted, the Peanuts movie, and Ferdinand among others.
• 43:35
  Speaker B: Hey, we did that.
• 43:36
  Speaker A: Yes, he's primarily seemed to be a storyboard artist, but he also had animation credits and both of them seemed to be a director's partnership. Who did this movie end spies in Disguise before it film was written by Robert L. Baird, who did big hero six monsters University. Ferdinand tangled ever after big wolf on campus.
• 43:56
  Speaker B: That is so random.
• 43:58
  Speaker A: Yep.
• 43:59
  Speaker B: Are you kidding me?
• 43:59
  Speaker A: I must have mentioned that when we did Ferdinand, I have sure that you did great tv show Big Wolf on campus. If you've not watched it, it is Buffy, but for pre teens, which Buffy is maybe arguably Buffy. And about werewolves. It's about a dude who's a werewolf but is on it's very similar monster of the week style. It was a tv show I loved as a kid because I, for whatever reason, wasn't watching Buffy at the time. Maybe I was just a little too young for Buffy, I don't know. But this one was definitely more for younger and it was for a slightly younger audience than Buffy, but the same style of show. And also written by Lloyd Taylor, who wrote spies in Disguise, Orion in the Dark, which is a recent movie, I think, from this year, and the Wild, among other things. And then there were story credits for like, seven other people that were involved, but those two had the screenplay. Like the main screenplay credits. The film stars Chloe Grace Moretz, Riz Ahmed, Eugene Li Yang, Francis Conroy, Lorraine Toussaint Beck Bennett, RuPaul, India Moore, Julio Torres and Sarah Sherman. It has a 91% on Rotten Tomatoes, a 75% on Metacritic, and a 7.5 out of ten on IMDb.
• 45:09
  Speaker B: Percentage of Steve's pending.
• 45:11
  Speaker A: Yes, percentage of Steve's pending so there is no box office on this because it was. It did release on Netflix. It wasn't originally the plan, but ultimately it came out on Netflix. But it was nominated for best animated feature film this year and lost to the Boy and the Heron. It was also nominated for Hugo. But, yeah, in the Oscars. That just happened, what, a couple months ago, two months last month, it was up for best animated feature. So getting into some of the kind of production history because it's pretty long and storied on this one, which was originally part of what was going to be the learning.
• 45:44
  Speaker B: Yeah, I was initially going to maybe dive a little bit into that for the learning segment.
• 45:49
  Speaker A: We'll hit on some of it here. So I didn't go into it as much as I thought because originally, I think I wrote this before when you had a placeholder learning thing segment. Yeah, you were going to do the studio thing, so I didn't. It's fine. 20th Century Fox Animation studio got the rights to adapt Nemona in 2015 and had Patrick Osborne set to direct, who did the Oscar winning animated short feast. It was like the main thing he was known for. He's done some other stuff, but that was the only thing I recognized.
• 46:17
  Speaker B: That's the Pixar one with the dog that eats things.
• 46:20
  Speaker A: No, maybe I only saw the poster and it was like a big table piled with food and there's like a. I don't know, maybe it is. But it's called feast. Oscar for best animated short. Then in 2017, or at the time in 2017 when he was still working on it, the film was scheduled to be released in February of 2020, then in 2020. Osborne left the film after years of delays and issues. And at that time, Brno and Quaint. Was it burnout Bruno? Bruno and Quain Quan were brought on to continue producing or continue working on production during COVID Then in February 2021, Disney announced that Blue Sky Disney acquired Sony or something like that, or acquired 20th Century Fox or whatever, whoever was working on blah, blah. And part of that was Blue Sky Studios, which was the animation studio that was working on this film, and they shut down Blue sky and canceled this movie, apparently. This is very heartbreaking for all the people involved, obviously, because they all thought it had potential to be really special and was also pretty far along at this point. I'll get into that here in a minute. But the movie was not like in the early stages. The movie was fairly far along. Then in March of 2022, Disney was facing some controversy for their involvement in Florida's parental rights and education bill. Which is the whole what's his name? Shithead thing down there. And during that time, apparently a few former Blue sky staff members said that they had actually received some pushback from Disney leadership about the film's lgbt theme. Lgbtq themes. And as a same sex kiss that was going to make an appearance in the film, according to these three people from Blue sky. So there's some bad press swirling that, you know, Disney had canceled this. They're kind of admired in controversy over the lgbtq thing in Florida. And then these blue sky people are like, yeah, that's part of what they didn't like about our movie, blah, blah, blah. So then on April 11 of 2022, it was announced that Annapurna Pictures and Netflix had bought Nemona and would move forward with finishing the film. According to sources involved with working on the film, about 70% of it was complete when it was cancelled. I don't think it's, like 70% fully animated and everything, but 70% of the work supposedly was done at the time it was canceled. And when it was revived, much of the work that Blue sky had done was retained, including, apparently about 90% of the script that they had been working on. So there wasn't a whole lot of changes made to the original version. They basically just took it and finish it, finished it. Annapurna did. And as a tribute to Blue Sky's work on the film, part of the end credits include the entire staff of Blue sky who had worked on the film. And also there are apparently a few Easter eggs that pay homage to the work that Blue sky did. Although I couldn't find what those were. I'm sure it's out there somewhere, but I did a cursory bit of digging and didn't see what those were. So look out for Blue sky in the movie. I guess that's anytime there's.
• 49:22
  Speaker B: I mean, I would assume it would. References to other blue sky movies.
• 49:26
  Speaker A: Yeah, maybe. Yeah. I don't know what those. I say, are those blue? Is that blue sky? Okay. Okay. I wasn't sure. I thought it might be based on the other people involved in their, you know, their backlog, their catalog of films they'd worked on, but I wasn't 100% sure. So, anyways, so, yeah, film did eventually come out and got pretty good reviews. So let's talk about those. For Variety. Peter Debrouge called Nemona, quote, subversive, fun, praising the, quote, hip and impulsive nemona and the out of the box animation, the LGBTQ themes and vocal performances. Oh, wait, the LGBTQ themes and the vocal performances, particularly that of Moretz. Chloe Grace Moretz, which he remarked as, quote, a delicious sense of anarchy. Had a delicious sense of anarchy, I guess. Writing for Empire, Ben Travis compared the film to Shrek, saying, quote, it's a satirical subversion of the fairy tale formula, and, quote, both enthusiastically irreverent and deeply sincere. Nemona is a revisionist fairy tale that forges. It forges its own path visually and narratively to beautiful effect. And Hollywood reporter Frank Scheck said it was, quote, a consistent delight and commended the screenplay, direction, animation, score and performances in Screen International. Windy Ide called it, quote, a slick, enjoyable package with a couple of distinctive selling points that should sell it apart, and opined, quote, whether or not the, whether or not they understand the film's subtext, younger audiences will no doubt relish the exuberant mischief and humor that Moretz brings to her voice performance, as well as Nemona's gleeful disregard for authority and her appetite for instruction, end quote. And then for the Guardian, Peter Bradshaw gave the film a three out of five, saying, quote, nemona is likable and engaging entertainment that finds its way through self created chaos to some humane life lessons, end quote. And for the Associated Press, Lindsey Barr said, quote, it's a fantasy adventure with riot girl energy and praise, the animation, soundtrack and lead performances. So, yeah, critics were fans.
• 51:35
  Speaker B: So Blue Sky Studios productions includes all of the ice Age movies, both Rio movies. That's the parrot one.
• 51:45
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 51:46
  Speaker B: Robots, Horton hears a hill epic, the Peanuts movie, Ferdinand and spies in disguise. Okay, I don't know what some of. What a couple of these are.
• 51:58
  Speaker A: Yeah. But. So, yeah, we did Ferdinand, obviously. I guess I should have realized that was blue sky. I just forgot. Some of those times we do that stuff, I forget.
• 52:07
  Speaker B: Yeah, it's not like super duper memorable.
• 52:11
  Speaker A: Yeah, yeah.
• 52:12
  Speaker B: And Ferdinand was not like a super memorable movie for either of us, I think.
• 52:17
  Speaker A: No. But anyways, so that's that. Katie, as always, people can do us a favor by heading over to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Goodreads threads, any of those places interact. We'd love to hear from you. You can drop us a nice little five star rating review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever else, and then you can also head over to Patreon and get early access, bonus content, all that good stuff.
• 52:36
  Speaker B: One thing on Patreon that we often forget to mention is that we publish our schedules a month that way. Yes, on that.
• 52:43
  Speaker A: That's another good benefit if you want to know what we're doing considerably ahead of time. So that it's easier to read. You can. I mean, we'd still announce the episodes, you know, what, a week or two ahead of.
• 52:54
  Speaker B: Or I guess usually, like, I post that, like, the Sunday before the prequel. So it's like a week and a half ish.
• 53:01
  Speaker A: Yes. But if you would like to get that super early, you can head over to. And that's at the lowest tier. Yeah, that's at all tier. So just even the. Just the $2 a month tier, you get that. That schedule of what we're doing ahead of time. So that is going to do it. Katie, blue air. Can people watch Nemono?
• 53:19
  Speaker B: Netflix.
• 53:20
  Speaker A: There you go. Very simple, very straightforward. It's on Netflix. That's who has it, I believe, everywhere. Probably around, I would imagine. Like, no matter where you are in the world, it's probably on Netflix. I think, could be wrong about that. But who knows? I'm excited for this one because I had not. I don't. I had heard of this movie, but I hadn't. I didn't know what it like was. It kind of flew. I like, it wasn't one of those very often these kind of movies I'll at least have, like, heard, like, some rumblings about or, like, have an inkling of, like, what it is or what it's about or anything like that. I think I had heard people say it was good, but, like, I hadn't heard, like, oh, this is, you know, blah, blah, blah. I don't know. So I'm interested to check it out because it looks. It looks like a lot of fun based on what I've read.
• 54:00
  Speaker B: Yeah, I agree. And I'm, like, looking forward to it, too, because the graphic novel has been, like, kind of floating on my to read list probably since 2015.
• 54:11
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 54:11
  Speaker B: So pretty excited about that.
• 54:13
  Speaker A: Sweet. Alright, come back in one week's time. We're talking about Nemona. Until that time, guys, gals, non binary pals, and everybody else keep reading books, watching movies, and keep being awesome.