Latest / This Film is Lit / Prequel to Hellraiser - American Psycho Fan Reaction, Hellraiser Preview

Transcript

Prequel to Hellraiser - American Psycho Fan Reaction, Hellraiser Preview · This Film is Lit

• 0:10
  Speaker A: On this week's prequel episode, we follow up on our American Psycho listener polls and preview Hellraiser. Well, welcome back to this Film Is lit, the podcast. We're talking about movies that are based on books. Plenty of feedback, plenty of previewing to do on our Halloween prequel episode. So we're gonna jump right in to our patron shout outs. I put up with you because your father and mother were our finest patrons. That's why. Two new patrons this week. One at the five dollar Hugo award winning level, Tashlin Lewis. Thank you, Tashlin. And at the two dollar Newbery medal award winning level, Listener. I don't know if that's pronounced like the word listener, but it looks like a name. Leasener Listener. Anyways, let us know. But thank you for both of you for supporting us. Hope you enjoy that bonus content, that early access, seeing what we're doing coming up, all that good stuff. Let's recognize. Let's recognize our Academy Award winning patrons. And they are. Nicole Goble, Harpo Rat, Nathan Vic Apocalypse, Mathilde Cottonwood, Steve, Teresa Schwartz, Ian from Wine Country, Kelly Napier, Gratch Justgratch. Shelby says help me raise money for Palestine with Arctic Fox copywriting on Instagram. Thatdarn, Skag and V. Frank. Thank you all very much for your continued support. Go check out Shelby's Instagram for her copywriting company, Arctic Fox. Support her there. We'll go make a little donation. I don't know. I don't know what she's doing. What's she doing?
• 1:51
  Speaker B: I don't remember all of the details, but there she has a post about it up on Arctic Fox copywriting and I believe we. I re. Whatever the heck they're calling it on Instagram now where you can repost something to the feed. I don't even know what they're calling it.
• 2:09
  Speaker A: Yeah, so you can.
• 2:11
  Speaker B: You should be able to find the post on our page if you go.
• 2:16
  Speaker A: To like our repost.
• 2:17
  Speaker B: Yeah, if you can't find her Instagram for some reason, you should be able.
• 2:21
  Speaker A: To Arctic Fox copyright. Anyways, cool. Thank you all very much for your continued support. Katie, time to see what people had to say about American Psycho. Yeah, well, you know, that's just like your opinion.
• 2:37
  Speaker B: Man on Patreon. We had three votes for the book and three for the movie. Nathan said so. I hated reading this book for the same reason that Katie mentioned it was a punishing endurance event to read. I thought the whole time that while the message was valuable and accurate, many other books have made the same points without the absurd Amounts of violence. I would never recommend that anyone read the book, but it's worth reading.
• 3:03
  Speaker A: Yeah, that makes sense.
• 3:04
  Speaker B: That was kind of how I felt about it. I was like, this is probably a valuable piece of art.
• 3:10
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 3:11
  Speaker B: But I can't think of a single person I would recommend it to.
• 3:14
  Speaker A: Yeah, it's definitely a specific type of person that you would have to know ahead of time. Like that they're on board for something like that.
• 3:23
  Speaker B: Coming into the movie, I thought I had a chance to make the message without the same violence. However, after watching, I was a little disappointed. It definitely does get a similar message across, but I thought it was a bit ham fisted in the way it did it. Specifically the voiceover was just so on the nose. It does use text from the book for the most part, so the message isn't new, but hearing it spoken out loud over the film felt like it was a bit of spoon feeding for the message.
• 3:50
  Speaker A: I only agree with that at the very end. Like I, I was surprised to see that he just kind of explicitly says, yeah, I am trapped in, like, oh, I can't escape this hell I'm trapped in regardless of my actions and I will find no justice and no whatever. And it's like, okay, that was like the only part where I was like, that's maybe not super necessary to like spell it out that concretely, but I don't know, there's still people googling, what is the end of American Psycho mean? So yeah, maybe even with the very explicit like, you know, kind of ham.
• 4:30
  Speaker B: Fisted explanation and I, I don't remember, I would have to go back and look if those. If like that line specifically was from the book. But I wouldn't be particularly surprised if that was just an. If it was an instance of Brett Easton Ellis like really understanding his audience.
• 4:47
  Speaker A: Yeah, very well convened.
• 4:48
  Speaker B: Like, okay, I gotta really spell it out for these guys.
• 4:51
  Speaker A: I think it is from the book. I thought you either said it was or I read it was or something. But I'm pretty sure it is does come from the book somewhere because. Yeah, and yeah, maybe that is the case. But other than that, like the voiceover I thought worked really well and kind of it was this weird thing like disregarding like how bluntly it spells out some of the thematic stuff just as a voiceover, like the awkward kind of stilted nature of it and the way voiceovers can feel kind of artificial and stilted and weird in movies. I thought worked in this movie's favor. That is because Patrick Bateman is this weird alien who doesn't yeah.
• 5:31
  Speaker B: So like, he's like a weird, stilted.
• 5:34
  Speaker A: Yes. Yeah. Who's like doing this artifice of humanity. And so the voiceover, like, kind of works within that context for me. Again, even though it does kind of spell out a few things. Maybe a little too much. I thought it actually kind of works sympathetically with what the movie is doing. The fact that you have this awkward kind of ham fisted voiceover because that's who Patrick Bateman is. Yeah.
• 5:58
  Speaker B: Nathan went on to say, especially as I think Katie mentioned starting it so early means it gets to the message before the actual film has a chance to development. Again, that was a criticism I agreed with. Yeah. I also agree with Katie that the film really needed at least one scene where it portrays the absolutely horrendous violence of the book. I think the chainsaw scene is the attempt to do this, but it's too wacky and absurd to accomplish the same thing.
• 6:25
  Speaker A: Yeah, it does feel like that scene's maybe trying to be like the truly, like, horrifying scene, but. And it maybe kind of starts that way, like initially, definitely.
• 6:35
  Speaker B: Like when she's running through the apartment.
• 6:37
  Speaker A: Initially when he's like. He comes up from under the covers, like, covered in blood and like.
• 6:42
  Speaker B: Yeah, she's like screaming and running and like seeing. Finding bodies. Yeah, for sure. But like the chainsaw bit itself was like, so like Looney Tunes, like Wile E. Coyote that I just.
• 6:55
  Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely.
• 6:57
  Speaker B: So in the end, I give this to the book, but if you have to only consume one, watch the movie.
• 7:02
  Speaker A: Interesting.
• 7:03
  Speaker B: Other thoughts. I think Brian's point about the conversation with Jean seeming to have kind of two parts or vibes is very astute in the book. It is, in fact, two separate conversations with two different people. The beginning up to and including when Patrick tells the girl involved to put their spoon in the container, not on his table. Along with the part with the double meaning about her being in danger is with a model named Daisy. She's also the character who challenges Bateman about thinking models are dumb. And unlike in the movie, she lives the middle part of the convo with the question about what she wants to do with her life are from talking to Jean. And they definitely show some of the deepest connection for Bateman with another person. Daisy also seems to see a deeper, more sympathetic side to Bateman. However, he does tell her a story about beating a woman senseless. So it would be hard to say that she doesn't at least partially understand what Bateman is really saying when he says he would be dangerous for her. To stay around. I think Jean overall is a bit of a weird character in the book. Patrick has a tendency to assume that all women he interacts with are flirting with him or like him. Classic asshole dude behavior. But with most folks, he says that he thinks they are flirting. But with Jean, he categorically and emphatically states multiple times that she is in love with him. The fact that it turns out she actually is in love and she talks about finding him sweet and considerate strikes me as one of the parts of the book that seems least likely to be real, as it is just profound wish fulfillment for Bateman. Gene doesn't like him. She's just the least shallow person he knows. So they have some, as opposed to zero, actual human connection.
• 8:40
  Speaker A: I think that's. Yeah, it's true.
• 8:43
  Speaker B: As y' all said, this is entirely irrelevant to the plot of the movie, but for me, none of the killing is real. I think Patrick Bateman is, as multiple folks tell him to his face when they think he is someone else, too pathetic to commit the murders described. It's an escapist fantasy. And that is what he realizes at the end, that it's not an actual exit from his hellish experience. The only thing that makes me question is the perspective change during the shootout scene from the book. The lampshading of the most absurd part of the lampshading of the most absurd of his murder scenes make me think that that wasn't real. But since it is different from everything else, it must be.
• 9:21
  Speaker A: Yeah, that is interesting. In the book, the movie doesn't change anything. Doesn't do anything particularly like that, where you go, well, this might be real because the perspective shifts or something about the filming style changes or something. Like if they had gone to some found footage where we're seeing security camera footage, that would be. Okay, well, that must be real, right? So, yeah, that is interesting in the book.
• 9:47
  Speaker B: Yeah, it was a really interesting part that I wasn't sure what to do with because it adds such a different layer onto an already very unreliable narrator. So you don't know whether to interpret it as like, okay, this is different, so that means this must be real, or this is different. So that means this must not be real.
• 10:06
  Speaker A: Just another. Yeah, another layer of unreliable weirdness that. That. Yeah.
• 10:11
  Speaker B: At one point in my copy, there was, I think, a typo of Patrick's last name as Batman. This made me think they have a fair amount in common. Both are rich assholes who perpetrate horrendous extreme violence on others.
• 10:24
  Speaker A: Maybe this is why he Got the part. Bateman, that is. Or Bale.
• 10:28
  Speaker B: Christian Bale, that is. There is a brief scene where Bateman is robbed at gunpoint by his taxi driver because he is recognized as being the guy in a wanted poster at the cab company central office. Supposedly he killed a cab driver. Based on what we know about Patrick's kills, it seems likely he didn't do that killing. But the cabbie can't tell him apart from the real bad guy. I'm not totally sure what this means, but it is the one example of someone outside of the rich folks not being able to tell people apart. Oh, gosh. And this is something we didn't even talk about in the episode. In the book, Tom Cruise lives on the top floor of Bateman's building.
• 11:09
  Speaker A: Wow.
• 11:10
  Speaker B: He interacts with him at one point in the elevator.
• 11:13
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 11:14
  Speaker B: Says that like calls him short in his mind.
• 11:19
  Speaker A: That's interesting.
• 11:20
  Speaker B: Bateman runs into him in the elevator. This would have been a fun scene for the movie if Tom Cruise ended up getting cast in the role, as was discussed.
• 11:27
  Speaker A: I have to check. I can't remember if Tom Cruise. I think he must have been one of the people. I'm sure.
• 11:32
  Speaker B: I think we talked about him being considered or maybe. But on the list or something.
• 11:37
  Speaker A: I think so. Probably. That is also probably true. But one thing I know for sure is true is that Tom Cruise was referenced as Christian Bale. Kept photos.
• 11:47
  Speaker B: Yes.
• 11:48
  Speaker A: Of Tom Cruise and like Donald Trump and other people like that in his trailer as like kind of this. These are the people that Patrick Bateman would idolize. Yeah. And so I. It's funny. It's interesting to find out that he. He clearly was pulling that from the book. Probably because the.
• 12:07
  Speaker B: The Trump thing too is pulled from the book.
• 12:10
  Speaker A: Gotcha. Yeah. Because he. Yeah, but I didn't realize that Tom Cruise was literally in the book. I just assumed that he was, you know, pulling that inspiration just like on who Tom Cruise is as a person and without, you know, it having a direct reference in the book.
• 12:26
  Speaker B: Yeah. It's a funny, awkward scene in the book because he like, wants to talk to him. And then when he finally like strikes up a conversation, he like either can't remember the name of the movie he wants to say something about or he gets the name, like the title wrong. Yeah, but that could have been a funny scene if they had been able to get Tom Cruise to do a cameo.
• 12:49
  Speaker A: Modern Tom Cruise might have done it. He seems a little more self aware.
• 12:53
  Speaker B: Yeah. I don't know.
• 12:54
  Speaker A: In 1999.
• 12:56
  Speaker B: I don't think so. I don't think he would have done it. My favorite chapter of the book is where Bateman is on the phone with his friends trying to get a reservation. He is trying to balance multiple girls who want to go out with him while coordinating with his friends who drop in and out of the plans throughout the process. Process. In the end, they end up with multiple reservations to places they don't really love, but realize it's too late to use most of them because their conversation went too long. It's very farcical. And the jumping between calls, perspectives while time slips away could have been a great scene. Apparently, Mila Kunis plays a killer inspired by seeing Patrick Bateman kill her parents. So it very clearly doesn't not understand the message of this film.
• 13:42
  Speaker A: I assume this is in reference to the sequel. There is a sequel. There's a sequel that Mila Kunis plays the, like, main character in. Yeah, there. There is. I've heard about it.
• 13:53
  Speaker B: I don't think I knew there. Was it, like, to the movie My.
• 13:55
  Speaker A: Tattoo last night Betsy mentioned it because we were talking about American Psycho, and I was like, I. I had heard of it, but I had never. I don't remember if it's. Yeah. American Psycho 2, 2002. It's terrible. Supposedly awful from everything I've heard. It's got, like, awful reviews. It's directed by a different person and, like, some dude and blood, you know, it's. I don't even think it has any of the same characters in it. Yeah, Patrick Bateman's played by a different actor. Subtitle is American Psycho 2 all American girl. Yeah.
• 14:29
  Speaker B: Okay.
• 14:30
  Speaker A: And yeah, Mila Kunis plays the main character, Rachel Newman. I know nothing about it, so I have no idea how much it does or doesn't understand.
• 14:40
  Speaker B: Literally never heard of that.
• 14:42
  Speaker A: Yeah. Yeah. I've seen the box at the movie store before when I was a kid. I remember seeing that box of, like, Mila Kunis Sonnet. It's a very, like, classic.
• 14:51
  Speaker B: Is she, like, a kid?
• 14:53
  Speaker A: No, she's. I mean, she was like, 20 or something. I think it was 2002, so I think. Yeah, I think she was like, wait, maybe she would have been really young.
• 15:02
  Speaker B: I was gonna say. I think she was.
• 15:04
  Speaker A: She was 19.
• 15:05
  Speaker B: Okay.
• 15:06
  Speaker A: Well, when it came out. So she was probably 18 when they filmed it.
• 15:08
  Speaker B: Okay. So not like a kid kid.
• 15:10
  Speaker A: Not kid kid. But, yeah, she was. I don't know. Yeah, I don't know anything about it. Well, it's about her. According to this, they kill. She sees Patrick Bateman kill her parents, so she's probably supposed to be like a high schooler or something, right? Maybe it's a weird play on like this. The, like, weird psych psycho psychosis of being a high schooler. You know what I mean?
• 15:31
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 15:31
  Speaker A: Like, it's about, like, mean girls or something. I don't know. I have no idea. Just.
• 15:38
  Speaker B: All right, our next comment was from Kelly Napier, who said, I don't think I've ever hated a book as much as I hated this book. If it was meant to be satire, I missed the point. And if I had to spend one more minute reading a detailed breakdown of every piece of designer clothing someone was wearing, I was going to volunteer to be Bateman's next victim. I've read a lot of violent stuff, but this just felt so unnecessary in its severity and crudeness. I'm not a prude, but the sex scenes made me wildly uncomfortable. Even before he got violent when he killed the dog, real or not, I was seriously considering not finishing the book. And I have never DNF'd a book ever. Seriously, why did we need that? The author definitely proved his points without having to kill the dog. So just by virtue of it not being the book, the movie gets my vote.
• 16:28
  Speaker A: Fair enough.
• 16:29
  Speaker B: Our next comment was from Ian from Wine country, who said, this is one of the most impactful and also terrible books I've read in my life. What Katie said about the content was true and awful and yet also underplayed the horrific nature of what was written. I wish I could unread that book.
• 16:48
  Speaker A: So stoic. You didn't even. The violence didn't even affect you as much as it affected our readers.
• 16:54
  Speaker B: The parts of the book that are descriptions of things people are wearing or possessing has somehow been underplayed. Those descriptions are roughly one third of the book. The reason she couldn't have done character descriptions is, as she said, there's just too much item description. But, like, there's also so much of the. That's also so much of the book content. I mean, really, he's not even exaggerating. It is like most of the. It's like. It's like. Yeah, like one third descriptions of people and like 2/3 horrific violence, fun.
• 17:30
  Speaker A: And not even descriptions of people descriptions.
• 17:32
  Speaker B: Yeah, descriptions of clothing and, like, items that they have in their homes and, like, things that they're eating. Luxury goods, fancy restaurants. And the. The other reason. I don't remember if we talked about this, but the other reason I couldn't have even done character descriptions was that, like, Most of the characters in this book are interchangeable anyway. Probably intentionally. Yeah, intentionally.
• 17:52
  Speaker A: So that's a whole thing in the movie where everybody gets misconfused for other people because they're all interchangeable clones of each other.
• 17:59
  Speaker B: And as, like, aside from Bateman, the only two, like, male characters that are like, their own thing that we need.
• 18:09
  Speaker A: To remember are detective, probably, or the PI.
• 18:12
  Speaker B: Well, I mean, I went like, of his friends Ariela, the one that he murders.
• 18:17
  Speaker A: Paul.
• 18:17
  Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, Paul. And then Lewis.
• 18:20
  Speaker A: Yeah. Who's gay.
• 18:21
  Speaker B: Who's gay.
• 18:22
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 18:24
  Speaker B: But then also, at the beginning of the book, when we meet Evelyn and Courtney, they're wearing literally the exact same thing, like, down to the brands.
• 18:33
  Speaker A: Yep.
• 18:36
  Speaker B: Reading what pieces of 80s fashion came from which designer, which watch was worth what and how much each. And how each shirt was described abysmal. That alone would have made it intolerable. Although I get the point Ellis was making with it. I got it. Stop.
• 18:53
  Speaker A: Everybody seems to be on board with that as, like, most people's experience with the book is. We get it.
• 19:01
  Speaker B: Well, and. Yeah, and I think I said this in the episode that, like, he. He could have made his point in half the pages.
• 19:09
  Speaker A: Yeah. And I was saying that everybody's echoing what you were saying, which is like, yes, we get it. And like, it's not even necessarily that the violence is completely unnecessary. It's just. And it's so much of what the book does is.
• 19:21
  Speaker B: Yeah, it's very repetitive. The descriptions of his murders and what he did with the body parts, the cannibalism, the fact that he charred parts of the bodies but not others. The parts he described leaving in the fridge. Don't read this book. The movie is actually excellent. Willem Dafoe playing three different versions of every scene and those being mixed in so we never knew how he was feeling. Brilliant. Bale's performance. Brilliant. The movie took a truly terrible read and made it an enjoyable, almost iconic film. Avoid the book at all costs. Fuck that book.
• 19:58
  Speaker A: Fair. Fair. I didn't mention this in the prequel, but I did read this. Is that he's talking about the Willem Dafoe scenes, which I thought was interesting and clever, is that they filmed all of his scenes with Patrick Bateman where he's, like, interviewing him three different ways. Well, then they probably filmed him more than three times. But they filmed him three different ways. They filmed him once where he doesn't suspect anything. Like, his performance is. I don't suspect this guy is guilty of anything. One where he's cautiously. I. This is what broke down one where he's, like, kind of suspicious and one where he's, like, convinced that Patrick Bateman.
• 20:33
  Speaker B: Interesting.
• 20:33
  Speaker A: And then they just mixed all of the clips or all of the takes around to make this kind of interesting. Weird. So where you never know how much Willem Dafoe's character suspects him. It is.
• 20:46
  Speaker B: It's really cool. And I bet that was a really fun, like, acting exercise.
• 20:50
  Speaker A: It's a really clever idea. I was like, that's a really interesting, interesting idea for a scene like that. And I was like, I put that in my back pocket because that's really clever.
• 21:00
  Speaker B: Our next comment was from Diane Takaki, who said, Christian Bale had no business going that hard. This movie wouldn't have even been that interesting without his performance. He said, the ability to make you believe that all this is really happening while at the same time makes you question whether any of this is real. Despite all the other casting rumors for Bateman, no one else could have pulled this off the way Bale did.
• 21:26
  Speaker A: Yeah, I do think that there's very few actors that I can see that would have really worked the way Bateman does. I'm sure there are some others, but nobody jumps to my mind of, like, you know what I will say if he could. I don't know if he would have understood it the way Christian Bale did, but I think Tom Cruise could have done it, but it would have been this weird, like, meta thing of, like, how much is he acting? You know what I mean? And there's probably some other people, but, yeah, no, I completely agree. Bateman, his performance is fantastic. He just nails exactly. And the thing that I think is really telling is that we talked about in the prequels that the director said that Bateman was the only actor that she talked to.
• 22:13
  Speaker B: You keep saying Bateman instead of Bale.
• 22:15
  Speaker A: Bale, yeah. Bale was the only actor that she talked to who didn't think Bateman was, like, kind of cool. That he, like, See, that's important that he was a loser and, like, not cool at all.
• 22:32
  Speaker B: Yeah, that feels very important for the portrayal of this character. Diane went on to say, side note, I've been a fan of Christian Bale ever since seeing him in newsies back in 1993, and even wrote him a letter that same year telling him how talented he is. And he actually wrote me a handwritten letter back thanking me for the compliments. I have this letter framed.
• 22:56
  Speaker A: Amazing. I would love. You don't have to share it, but if you could, if you wanted to send us a picture of That I would love to see that letter. That's amazing. He was like a kid in Newsies. Right?
• 23:07
  Speaker B: He was young. Yeah.
• 23:09
  Speaker A: Probably because he's not that old in this movie. And this is like 90, I guess 93. He would have been maybe like late teens, early 20s. Probably because in this he's like mid, late 20s.
• 23:20
  Speaker B: So. Am I a little biased about Bill's performance? Of course. But seriously, he is truly astounding in this movie.
• 23:28
  Speaker A: He is.
• 23:29
  Speaker B: The fact that this movie is getting rebooted with Austin Butler rumored as Bateman and directed by Luca Guadagnino. Guadagnino. Guadagnino probably is interesting.
• 23:42
  Speaker A: The guy who did Call Me by youy Name and.
• 23:44
  Speaker B: Oh, interesting.
• 23:47
  Speaker A: Roma. Not Roma, That's Quran. I can't remember. He did something. We saw Challengers, which we didn't see, but I wanted to see. He did Challengers. He did. I think he would probably understand it, it seems like from. Definitely. But like, I don't know. It's a movie, though, that doesn't need.
• 24:04
  Speaker B: It doesn't need to be made. Yeah, we don't need it.
• 24:07
  Speaker A: We don't need it. And it's. It's. There's nothing you need to update. Perfectly applicable. Like the version then is perfectly applicable today. Like you don't. You wouldn't need to change anything about it to make it. You know.
• 24:22
  Speaker B: The word on the street is that the reboot might be, quote, more faithful to the book's narrative structure than the 2000 film, which some fans fear. If this reboot happens, I'll probably pass. If it's more faithful to the book, I'm definitely passing. Yeah, I don't need that. I don't need that noise.
• 24:39
  Speaker A: No.
• 24:41
  Speaker B: Regarding the book, based on what you all are saying and what Katie had to go through, I'm glad there was a 25 week wait for the book at the library and that the only version of the audio was in German. Dodged that one.
• 24:54
  Speaker A: Sure did.
• 24:55
  Speaker B: Yeah. I don't know the. Because I was on a wait list to try to get an ebook version of it. I never actually got it. I canceled my whole. After we did the episode.
• 25:04
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 25:05
  Speaker B: But I was on for months. I was on a wait list for it.
• 25:08
  Speaker A: Interesting.
• 25:10
  Speaker B: I wonder how many people who request that are actually reading all of it.
• 25:16
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 25:16
  Speaker B: Yeah. That is interesting because I can't imagine that number's high.
• 25:19
  Speaker A: I wonder. You would think it would just get returned a lot.
• 25:22
  Speaker B: You would think.
• 25:24
  Speaker A: Maybe It's a lot of people, they start reading it, they get so disgusted, they throw it across the room and falls behind a bookcase and never gets returned. That's what's happening to it.
• 25:31
  Speaker B: Our next comment was from Eric, who said, since the book's getting annihilated in the comments, I just wanted to say that I loved it. When I read it many years ago, I was totally captivated by the endless descriptions, the unreality of it. It all felt like sand shifting around. I could never grasp what was real or who anybody was. I'd never read a book that made me feel like that. And I was so impressed.
• 25:55
  Speaker A: I think that is a thing I would be interested. I like. Because there is something that I think. I think for some people, maybe Eric and I think maybe myself, the unique experience of having never read a book like this that made me feel this way, I think would make me appreciate the book.
• 26:12
  Speaker B: Maybe is. It is definitely on a similar level.
• 26:16
  Speaker A: On a similar level. You don't have to be as negative about the book as some of the.
• 26:21
  Speaker B: People of some of our fans are reading. It was a very unique experience and I really admire the uniqueness of the style and the skill in writing it. Like, from a technical perspective. I would never read it again, Right?
• 26:40
  Speaker A: Sure. Oh, I believe I would never read.
• 26:42
  Speaker B: It again and like I said, cannot think of a single person I'd recommend it to.
• 26:47
  Speaker A: Exactly.
• 26:49
  Speaker B: But I do think that it is a very well written book and that it accomplishes what it is intending to accomplish.
• 26:57
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 26:57
  Speaker B: Which is really all you can ask for as an author.
• 27:00
  Speaker A: Absolutely.
• 27:02
  Speaker B: Eric went on to say, the caveat is that I did read it in my edgy young adult phase when violence didn't bother me. And I specifically remember eating while reading the rat scene. I. I don't know how I feel about that, Eric, because the rat scene was the worst one, in my opinion.
• 27:18
  Speaker A: Oh, God.
• 27:20
  Speaker B: Eric finished off saying, can't imagine I'd be able to do that today.
• 27:24
  Speaker A: Well, that's nice. We've grown.
• 27:27
  Speaker B: Yeah. I don't even want to talk about the rat scene. If you know, you know, our last comment on Patreon is from Shelby says, help me raise money for Palestine with Arctic Fox copywriting on Instagram. And Shelby said, I heeded the content warnings and didn't join you for this one. So unfortunately, I missed out on Morbius's murder.
• 27:52
  Speaker A: Yeah, it's. Maybe the. You could get something very cathartic out of this. For some people who are not maybe Jared Leto fans, which is most people.
• 28:01
  Speaker B: Which is a lot of people. Yeah.
• 28:03
  Speaker A: Except for studio execs.
• 28:04
  Speaker B: For some reason, they just Keep casting.
• 28:07
  Speaker A: Them, putting them in stuff. I think it's gotta be done after the Tron Ares fiasco, Like, it was a huge bomb. There's no way. They gotta get you to the point, okay? Like, three, like, a handful of movies in a row, complete bombs. Everybody's making fun of. Like, they gotta. Gotta realize we gotta stop putting Jared Leto and stuff.
• 28:27
  Speaker B: The whole episode. I couldn't stop thinking about that tweet from years ago. It was something like, why do we need female directors? No one watches their movies. Just my opinion. And the entire Internet showed up to list popular movies directed by women. I bet that person watched American Psycho having no clue it was a chick flick.
• 28:46
  Speaker A: Oh, there's a ton of people who have no idea American Psycho was directed by a woman. This is definitely. Yes.
• 28:54
  Speaker B: And a lot of them are men who think Patrick Bateman is super cool.
• 28:58
  Speaker A: Yes. The people who misunderstand the movie, probably intentionally or at least subconsciously. Intentionally. Yes. Are unaware that it was directed by a woman.
• 29:09
  Speaker B: All right. We didn't get anything on Facebook this time. Not even any, like, reactions.
• 29:15
  Speaker A: Wow.
• 29:15
  Speaker B: I think Facebook buried it. Yeah, I don't know, man. I keep trying different things and none of it seems to make any difference.
• 29:24
  Speaker A: So stupid.
• 29:27
  Speaker B: On Instagram, we didn't have any comments. We had one vote for the book and three for the movie. Nothing on Threads or Blue Sky. And then on Goodreads, we had one vote for the book, zero for the movie. Movie. And Mikko said, I hope this doesn't make me sound like a full psychopath, but I enjoyed this book. The actions and people in it are horrible, but the style really drew me in. I enjoyed the movie too. Bale's performance is great, but I feel like we miss something when we're watching his slipping mask and not directly experiencing the mess behind it. The style of the book is just that unrelenting. You really feel like you're in Bateman's head. You get to experience how little self awareness he has when he criticizes someone, going into, quote, mind numbing detail. And literally one line later goes on to list every single piece of brand clothing he can see for the thousandth time. You can also see how the alpha male thinking really hasn't changed at all in 30 years. My overriding intelligence tunes in and lets me know how it can sense how much she wants me. Yeah, sure it does, buddy. Sure. I fully agree that the movie is more approachable, but my vote goes to the book.
• 30:42
  Speaker A: Fair enough. Yeah, that's. But yeah, that's what we were just Talking about the. There's no reason to remake the movie.
• 30:49
  Speaker B: Yeah, it is still fully applicable.
• 30:53
  Speaker A: Yes. Unfortunately, a single bit of it is just as. And even apart from that, it's not even like there's anything in it, like referentially that has aged poor. Like everything about it works well because like, even like the Reagan stuff works, you know, like just everything about it. I guess the only thing would be that the restaurant thing is a little dated kind of. But like, even still, you people know what it. Like you get what it's like the weird specific kinds of restaurants and stuff they go to. Like, it is a kind of specific 90s, early 2000s thing. But even that, I think it totally still works well.
• 31:32
  Speaker B: And I guess it would depend on whether this reboot was intending to keep it set in the 80s or if it was intending to like set it now.
• 31:41
  Speaker A: Yeah, you would assume they would set it in a mo. My guess would be that the point is because, like, I can imagine the idea is like, well, look, this is saying a lot of. Really there's a lot here that's applicable today in terms of like this weird, you know, it's like hyper capitalistic hellscape and like fucking incel. Alpha male failsons and like it's. It's all mixed up in like the. A ton of cultural stuff today that is incredibly relevant and people are, you know that a lot of our political discourse is centered around. Which is true. And so I could see the idea of like, well, so like we should do this story for people today. But it's like. But I would get that if the story they did 25 years ago needed to be updated for today, but it doesn't because it's perfectly.
• 32:33
  Speaker B: Well, I mean, I was saying specifically for the like, restaurant thing. Right. But like, if you were keeping it set in the 80s, you could just go even harder with that.
• 32:41
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 32:42
  Speaker B: Like satirizing the, like the fine dining scene in the 80s. Or if you were to update it, you would just like, like, like reference the. What dining is now.
• 32:54
  Speaker A: Yeah. Which.
• 32:55
  Speaker B: Which is also kind of silly in a similar way.
• 32:57
  Speaker A: Different thing. Yeah, it's. Yeah.
• 32:59
  Speaker B: You.
• 32:59
  Speaker A: It would be. You would be. It would be more in line with like the. The menus. Satirization of.
• 33:05
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 33:06
  Speaker A: Fine dining and whatnot. But yeah.
• 33:08
  Speaker B: So our winner this week was the Movie by a hair, with six votes to the books.
• 33:13
  Speaker A: Five barely eked it out.
• 33:15
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 33:15
  Speaker A: Perfect. Well, thank you all for your feedback. Love hearing it, love talking about it. So much fun to discuss. Katie, it's time to preview The Hellbound Heart by Clive Barker. I have seen the future of horror. His name is Clive Barker. Hellraiser beyond any terror you have imagined.
• 34:02
  Speaker B: The Hellbound Heart is a horror novella by English writer and filmmaker Clive Barker. It was first published in November 1986 by Dark Harvest in the third volume of its Night Visions anthology series before being re released as a standalone publication in 1991. A little bit of backstory and I'm just gonna read this exactly as it was written on Wikipedia. Barker worked as a hustler in the 70s. I was scared to look up what that meant.
• 34:37
  Speaker A: Yeah, I don't actually know what I think it.
• 34:40
  Speaker B: I think it has something to do with sex work.
• 34:42
  Speaker A: I would assum. Is it just pimping by a different term or.
• 34:47
  Speaker B: I don't know.
• 34:48
  Speaker A: I don't know.
• 34:48
  Speaker B: I was. I like. I kind of googled it and then I was like, I'm scared to dig too deep into this. But it worked. As a hustler in the 70s and his experiences made him want to tell a story about, quote, good and evil, in which sexuality was the connective tissue.
• 35:05
  Speaker A: This just says a sex worker or prostitute is like one of the definitions. So he may have just literally been a sex worker. Maybe.
• 35:13
  Speaker B: Maybe.
• 35:14
  Speaker A: Because I mean this like the first definition. A person who obtains money by fraud or deceit. Yeah, but one of the other ones is just sex worker, specifically a male hustler. So maybe it was a term. Yeah, maybe it was just a prostitute sex worker.
• 35:30
  Speaker B: So that inspired this. Yeah, this story apparently the look of the Cenobites. Is that right? I think it's Cenobites. I think Cenobites was inspired by S M clubs, such as an underground club called Cell Block 28 in New York where people were getting pierced for fun. He came up with the idea about Le Marchand. We'll find out how all these things are pronounced.
• 35:58
  Speaker A: It looks presumably.
• 36:03
  Speaker B: Because he did not want to resort to, quote, drawing a circle on the floor with magic symbols around it to get access to hell, as that seemed cliche. So instead he was inspired by a puzzle box that his grandfather, who was a ship's cook, had brought him from the Far east when he was a kid.
• 36:22
  Speaker A: Yeah, my. My dad had one of those puzzle boxes, like the little like wood ones where you have to slide like certain panels around in different ways and then once you get them just right, you can open the box.
• 36:35
  Speaker B: Gotcha.
• 36:36
  Speaker A: We had one of those and it's probably still in my parents basement.
• 36:39
  Speaker B: Probably, yeah. The novella did receive two sequels. 2015's the Scarlet Gospels by Clive Barker and 2018's the Toll, which was written by Mark Allen Miller with story by Clive Barker. So we got a Ghost Rider, quote unquote, ghostwriter for that one. The Cenobites are also briefly mention mentioned in passing in Clive Barker's 1987 novel, Weave World.
• 37:12
  Speaker A: I. I know nothing about Clive Barker, so.
• 37:15
  Speaker B: Yeah, I really don't either. Aside from the 1987 movie that we're going to be watching, the novella was also adapted as a full cast audio play in 2018. Additionally, because I didn't see that you had mentioned this anywhere, the 1987 film has nine sequels as well as a 2002 remake.
• 37:37
  Speaker A: Yeah, it's a whole, whole big thing. Yeah, absolutely. The only thing I know about Clive Barker is when he showed up on that episode of Face Off.
• 37:45
  Speaker B: Oh, yeah, he was.
• 37:46
  Speaker A: On one episode of Face off they did a Clive Barker challenge that was like, create a creature that looks like it could be in a Clive Barker movie and had some of the really cool makeups. That's that one. I think Emily won with that, like, cage head creature thing. That was really cool. Anyways. All right, that is it for the books. Time now to learn a little bit about the movie. A nightmare. No, unlike anything you have witnessed is born because within these walls the unholy is unleash. Hellraiser, a film by Clive Barker. We'll tear your soul apart. Hellraiser is a 1987 film written and directed by Clive Barker, known for Hellraiser, Candyman, Nightbreed, Lord of Illusions and others, but actually had a smaller filmography than I expected.
• 38:59
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 38:59
  Speaker A: And he wasn't actually involved in like many of the sequels beyond maybe writing parts of it or any. And story by credits or characters by credits and stuff. But I don't. Even from what it looked like, I don't even think he wrote most of the sequels. So his filmography was, again, for whatever reason, a lot shorter than I expected. Because I've never seen a Clive Barker movie. Never read a Clive Barker book. This will be the first one. So it was. For whatever reason, he's just kind of a prolific name in horror movies, so I assumed he had made more movies.
• 39:30
  Speaker B: Than he had, but I guess he didn't need to.
• 39:32
  Speaker A: Yeah, fair. The film stars Andrew Robinson, Claire Higgins, Ashley Lawrence, Sean Chapman, Oliver Smith, Robert Hines, Doug Bradley, Nicholas Vince, Simon Bamford and Grace Kirby. The film has a 71 on Rotten Tomatoes, a 56 out of 100 on Metacritic, and a 6.9 out of 10 on IMDb which I like this think is intentional, but probably not. It made 30 million against a budget of just a million dollars, which is why they made a million sequels, because it was wildly successful for how cheap it was made. So after Barker was disappointed with how the first two adaptations of his novels had turned out, a film called Underworld and Rawhead Rex, which he wrote both of but did not direct, he decided that he wanted to direct a movie for himself of his. He wanted to adapt his own.
• 40:22
  Speaker B: Fine, I'll do it myself.
• 40:23
  Speaker A: He did the Stephen King route, Do it myself and then made. Well, Stephen King made a terrible movie. The one about the truck. Possessed Truck, I think. I'm pretty sure that's a Stephen King. Is it called like Over? Stephen King directed one movie, I think Maximum Overdrive. He directed one movie, maximum overdrive in 1986 and it was a huge bomb and everybody thought it sucked anyways.
• 40:44
  Speaker B: All right.
• 40:45
  Speaker A: But he did the same thing of like, I don't like these adaptations, I'm gonna do it myself. And then poof. Clyde Barker apparently did a pretty good job though. He talked to a film producer buddy of his about how, how cheap a movie needed to be in order for like a first time director to get it made. And his buddy said that you needed to be less than a million dollars, which you could do if you shot, set it in like a single house, used unknown actors. So like come up with something simple basically was his thing. You can do it for under a million dollars if it's like one main location and that sort of thing. So Barker decided that Hellbound Heart would be a good choice to adapt under those constraints. And New World Pictures decided to fund the film at a $900,000 budget. The film had a working title of Sadomasochists from Beyond the Grave. Barker himself wanted to call the movie Hellbound or Hellbound Heart. But the. But his producer buddy from earlier suggested Hellraiser and I thought this was interesting. Where'd that other note go? Supposedly when disagreements amount with them, and this is for mine to be trivia, but supposedly when there were disagreements about what the movie should be named, Barker like asked for ideas from the crew. And a 60 year old female crew member suggested, quote or not quote the title, what a woman will do for a good fuck, they did not use that one. But Barker apparently enjoyed shooting the film a lot and said that both the cast and crew, like everybody who worked on it, was very forgiving of his shortcomings things as a first time director. He said it was delightful and everybody was Very patient with him. The fact. Despite the fact that he didn't know what he was doing. And I was like, God, that's. Yeah, that is nice. So after the movie was shot, New World convinced Barker to change the setting of the film from the UK to the us which meant that they had to go back and change some lines in the film in ADR and get rid of some of the characters that had British accents or not the characters, but redub them to have American accent accidents and stuff like that. But apparently there's. You can tell it's shot in the uk.
• 42:44
  Speaker B: I wonder what the.
• 42:46
  Speaker A: They just thought it would be more appealing to American audience. Like.
• 42:49
  Speaker B: I mean, yeah, but that's. I don't know, man. That just seems like.
• 42:52
  Speaker A: It's weird.
• 42:53
  Speaker B: It seems like not worth it for the amount of work that you'd have to do to change that.
• 42:57
  Speaker A: My only guess would be that it couldn't have been that much work to change. Like, there's maybe only a handful of lines or something. And maybe, like one character.
• 43:04
  Speaker B: I guess it must.
• 43:05
  Speaker A: You know what I mean? That's the only way I could think. But I also think it's silly because, like, American people.
• 43:10
  Speaker B: Americans love.
• 43:11
  Speaker A: We love British set in the uk. It's silly. But again, I think the idea was they probably thought, like, well, okay, because we're doing this horror movie. If you want it to feel like this is something that could happen to them.
• 43:24
  Speaker B: Right.
• 43:25
  Speaker A: Them being the majority of our audience is going to be American. Setting it in America will make it more scary. I maybe was the idea. So the MPAA originally gave the film an X rating, so they had to re edit parts of the film. There were a handful of shots cut from the first Hammer murder, whatever that means. Have you seen the movie? I mean, somebody killed the Hammer.
• 43:45
  Speaker B: We're gonna find out.
• 43:46
  Speaker A: And another murder scene where the victim was originally filmed nude. They actually filmed it both nude and clothed. And then they used the nude cut initially. And then they had to go back and put in the clothes.
• 43:56
  Speaker B: Good thing they did both.
• 43:57
  Speaker A: Yep. And also a scene towards the end where somebody's head explodes was cut.
• 44:01
  Speaker B: Okay.
• 44:02
  Speaker A: Also talking about that kind of censorship by the mpaa, Barker had a couple quotes here that I wanted to read, which was, quote, well, we did have a slight problem with the eroticism. I shot a much hotter flashback sequence than they would allow us to cut in. Mine was more explicit and less violent. They wanted to substitute one kind of undertow for another. I had a much more explicit sexual encounter between Frank and Julia. But they said, no know, let's take out the sodomy and put in the flick knife. End quote. So pretty classic American sensibilities about that. Which Violence. Horrible violence.
• 44:36
  Speaker B: We would rather have horrible violence.
• 44:38
  Speaker A: Get that shit out of here.
• 44:39
  Speaker B: Yeah, we don't want it.
• 44:41
  Speaker A: Yeah. He also said that they did a version of a scene where that had some spanking in it. And the MPAA was not very appreciative of that. The MPAA told me I was allowed two consecutive buttock thrusts from Frank. But three was deemed obscene.
• 44:57
  Speaker B: Classic.
• 44:57
  Speaker A: Which is a. That said like a. Literally a joke in a Key and Peele sketch where they're like talking about. It's like an NFL celebration thing. And the football player, when he's like doing his touchdown celebration, he's like air humping. But he can only air hump twice. And if he does the third one, he gets a penalty. I was like, that's the exact thing.
• 45:18
  Speaker B: Classic American puritanism.
• 45:20
  Speaker A: Yes. Couple IMDb trivia facts here. Some. Apparently viewers have talked about some of the poor quality of the effects. Effects of the effects at the end of the movie. Barker explained that due to a very limited budget, they didn't have any money left at the end to get those effects done professionally. Instead, Barker and quote, a Greek guy animated those scenes by hand over a single weekend. Barker also commented that he thinks the effects turned out pretty well considering the amount of alcohol the two consumed that weekend. Which I thought was very funny.
• 45:50
  Speaker B: Oh, God.
• 45:51
  Speaker A: Yeah, there was. I also did. I don't know if those were the effects they redid. I assume not. But I read somewhere that I didn't include here is that after the movie, the studio saw a first cut of the movie. They actually liked it so much that they gave him some additional money to go back and reshoot some of effect scenes to look better. Basically they were like, hey, we actually like this. Here's some additional money to make it look a little bit better. But apparently some of the scenes they still didn't have enough to completely get how they wanted. Another thing that I thought was interesting, so Doug Bradley's character. Doug Bradley plays the Pinhead. He is the. The actor who plays Pinhead. That character was. It was named Priest in earlier drafts of the script. And ultimately his character in the script is just referred to as lead Cenobite. In the shooting script. Pinhead that everybody calls him was a nickname for the character. And it stuck, obviously, because that's what he is. And they actually started using that in the sequels in some capacity, depending on whatever But Clive Barker actually disliked the name. He thought it was very undignified and not befitting of his main horror villain. And in his Hellraiser comic series produced for Boom in 2011, everybody refers to Pinhead as Priest again. So, getting to some reviews, we kind of have it split here into UK reviews and US reviews. In the uk. Timeout, London referred to the film as Barker's dazzling debut that creates such an atmosphere of dread that the astonishment, astonishing set pieces simply detonate in a chain reaction of cumulative intensity and concluded that the film was, quote, a serious, intelligent and disturbing horror film. The Daily Telegraph said, quote, barker has achieved a fine degree of menace. Melody Maker said, quote, is the best horror film ever to be made in Britain. Kim Newman for the Monthly Film Bulletin said that the most striking aspect of the film was its serious tone. In an era where horror films like Nightmare on Elm street and Evil Dead tended to be fairly comedic. Newman stated, quote, the film suffers from a few minor compromises, notably a decision made fairly late in shooting to change the specifically English setting for an ambiguous and unbelievable Mid Atlantic one, end quote. In the United States, reviews were not quite as rosy. New York Times stated that Barker, quote, cast singularly uninteresting actors. And the special effects aren't bad, only damn end quote. The Washington Post referred to the film as, quote, a dark, frequently disturbing and occasionally terrifying film, but also said, quote, barker's vision hasn't quite made the conversation or the conversion from paper to celluloid. There are some weaknesses, particularly the framing of close ups and the generic score, but there are some moments of genuinely inventive gore. The film falls apart at its climax, degenerating to a surprisingly lame ending full of special effects and triumphant something good. End quote. And finally, Roger Ebert gave the film one and a half stars out of four and said, quote, Wait, it's a one.
• 48:52
  Speaker B: Is it one and a half or one.
• 48:54
  Speaker A: Sorry, one half of a star out of four. Ebert. This is kind of the movie that Ebert was not generally a fan of, from what I've seen. He has. He had specific points of, like, types of movies that he just kind of deemed like, not. Maybe not lewd, but just like. Like he. You could tell he was not going into them and meeting them on their level, is what I would say occasionally. He gave the film one half of a star out of four and said, quote, it says, dreary a piece of goods, as has masqueraded as whore in many a Long Cold night. This is one of those movies you sit through with mounting Dread as the fear grows inside of you that it will indeed turn out to be feature length. And quote, this is a movie without wit, style or reason. And the true horror is that actors were made to portray and technicians to realize it's bankruptcy of imagination. End quote. So, Ebert, not a fan.
• 49:46
  Speaker B: Bankruptcy of imagination is incredible.
• 49:49
  Speaker A: It is. And seeing I just, I haven't seen the movie, so maybe I'll agree with him, but I just find that hard to believe.
• 49:56
  Speaker B: Like from everything that I have heard about it and like seen, I can.
• 50:01
  Speaker A: Expect being like, it's not a great movie. Maybe.
• 50:04
  Speaker B: Yeah, sure. Bankruptcy of imagination feels dramatic.
• 50:09
  Speaker A: Yeah. Anyways, that's gonna do it for this episode. As always, you can follow us on social media, go find us on all those platforms. You can drop us a review on Apple podcasts or Spotify or wherever you listen to us. And you can Support us@patreon.com thisfilmislet get access to bonus content. We just recorded our October bonus episode which is on the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I will have that out this weekend, so look out for that. Katie, where can people watch Hellraiser?
• 50:36
  Speaker B: Well, unfortunately, I didn't see it streaming anywhere with a subscription.
• 50:40
  Speaker A: I would thought it would have been somewhere.
• 50:42
  Speaker B: Yeah, you can now, of course, we always recommend that you check with your local library. I did request a DVD copy. They didn't have a Blu Ray copy through ours.
• 50:52
  Speaker A: We always.
• 50:52
  Speaker B: It's also taking.
• 50:53
  Speaker A: We don't watch them.
• 50:54
  Speaker B: Even if we don't watch them, we always request them. Yes, because your library needs those circulation statistics in order for your local library panel to prove to the city that it should continue to have funding.
• 51:08
  Speaker A: So even if you're gonna like not watch their dvd, still get it and then just request it, check it out.
• 51:15
  Speaker B: You can even check it out and turn it right back in. Yeah, that still counts.
• 51:18
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 51:20
  Speaker B: Or if you still have a local video rental store, show them some love.
• 51:24
  Speaker A: Yeah, absolutely. Otherwise some weird guy behind the counter will love to talk to you about Hellraiser.
• 51:30
  Speaker B: Absolutely.
• 51:30
  Speaker A: If you have that movie store still, which varies.
• 51:32
  Speaker B: Few places do, but otherwise you can rent this for between like four and five bucks from YouTube, Apple TV, Fandango at home, or Amazon.
• 51:45
  Speaker A: Fantastic. I'm excited to watch it. It's another one of those where it's like, it's. And there's a lot of horror movies like this where it's like, never seen this. Obviously kind of a famous, you know, property.
• 51:56
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 51:56
  Speaker A: And I mean especially the first one, I'm interested to see if it is because it's often the thing where like, you know, they late once there's nine of them and the sequels suck and everybody's like. The series kind of becomes a joke. Yeah, but it's, it's not uncommon for the first movie to actually be like a pretty good. You know what I mean? Like, maybe there is something kind of compelling.
• 52:15
  Speaker B: I mean, all that hype comes from somewhere, right?
• 52:17
  Speaker A: There's a reason they made nine movies. And that it, you know, it appealed to so many people in the way that it did. We'll find out what that.
• 52:23
  Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, and I'm really interested because now that I've like done a little bit of research on it, I know a little bit more about what this movie is about. But like going into that, I really had no idea. Other than Pinhead.
• 52:35
  Speaker A: Yeah, no, I, I didn't either until, I don't know, a year or so ago. I, I saw, I read, I read a little bit about what the movie was actually about or something. I can't remember what. But I, I saw, I was like, oh, that sounds kind of interesting actually. Cuz I. Before that. Yeah, I literally was like, I don't know, Pinhead shows up and like kills people. Like maybe I, you know, is he like Michael Myers or. I had no idea. But it's not. Not really what it seems to be at all. So. Yeah, I think it should be a lot of fun. That'll be our Halloween episode. Look for that in just a few days of this. Well, a little under a week because we're recording this prequel episode. But it'll be out just couple days before Halloween next week. So until that time, guys, gals, non binary pals and everybody else keep reading.
• 53:16
  Speaker B: Books, keep watching movies and keep being awesome.
• 53:21
  Speaker A: Sam.