Latest / Ryder Lee / JFK X | A CLOCKWORK SHINING

Transcript

JFK X | A CLOCKWORK SHINING · Ryder Lee

0:00
Speaker 1: Hello, conspiracy players. Welcome to another episode today. I have
0:06
Speaker 1: back on writer Lee to talk about something that he
0:09
Speaker 1: teased in the last episode where we were talking about
0:12
Speaker 1: the UFO stuff, and that is none other than his
0:16
Speaker 1: most recent movie, A Clockwork Shining. And I've talked about
0:19
Speaker 1: it a couple times on this show, so if you
0:22
Speaker 1: haven't watched it, listen to this and then watch it
0:25
Speaker 1: or vice versa. But it's a killer movie and Laurel
0:29
Speaker 1: Canyon is one of my favorite topics.
0:33
Speaker 2: Just Kubrick in general.
0:35
Speaker 1: And then you even threw some other stuff in there,
0:37
Speaker 1: and we're going to get into all of it. So
0:39
Speaker 1: welcome to the show. Writer, Thanks for coming on once again.
0:42
Speaker 3: Thanks for having me on. Brother, I really appreciate it,
0:44
Speaker 3: and I'm really happy that you enjoyed the movie and
0:47
Speaker 3: you liked it. But yeah, it was a passion project,
0:51
Speaker 3: a lot of work, blood, sweat and tears. As we
0:53
Speaker 3: were talking about before we started the show. I'll put
0:55
Speaker 3: into the movie, so I hope people after or if
0:58
Speaker 3: they haven't already seen it, they go in support and
1:02
Speaker 3: it's une buy it on Amazon Prime.
1:06
Speaker 1: I would recommend buying it because, like I was telling
1:08
Speaker 1: him earlier before we started recording it, you're just gonna
1:11
Speaker 1: want to watch it again and even maybe more than twice.
1:14
Speaker 2: So just buy the damn thing.
1:16
Speaker 1: Before we get into a Clark clockwork shining though, I
1:20
Speaker 1: do want to for a moment if you don't mind,
1:22
Speaker 1: pick your brain about JFK because your first movie, JFK
1:28
Speaker 1: X Solving the Crime of the Century, you and Jay
1:31
Speaker 1: Widener lay out a theory that I think is probably
1:35
Speaker 1: cooler than anyone I've ever seen, and it makes the
1:38
Speaker 1: most sense. And I also have in the last few
1:41
Speaker 1: years started swaying in two staged events being more common
1:44
Speaker 1: than actual real events. So it made sense to me
1:47
Speaker 1: that being said, what do you think is going to
1:49
Speaker 1: happen with these JFK file releases that we're chomping at the.
1:54
Speaker 2: Bit for, just like we were the Epstein files.
1:57
Speaker 3: Well, here is an article from Vanity Fair. This blew
2:01
Speaker 3: my mind because if you've seen JFKX, you know what
2:04
Speaker 3: the theory is and what j Wyiner basically proposes in there.
2:10
Speaker 3: And this Vanity Fair article came out I think November
2:13
Speaker 3: twenty well, November nineteenth, twenty twenty four. Right here is
2:16
Speaker 3: that thinkay real quick before.
2:18
Speaker 1: You say what you're gonna say, do you want to
2:20
Speaker 1: just lay it out in like a brief summary of
2:22
Speaker 1: what that theory is For those who haven't seen it.
2:26
Speaker 3: Well, you can watch it for free on Amazon Prime,
2:30
Speaker 3: Amazon Prime Free V. You can also watch it for
2:32
Speaker 3: free on two B as well, and it's on a
2:34
Speaker 3: bunch of other streaming platforms. So you can just google
2:37
Speaker 3: jfkx and it'll be one of the first things that
2:40
Speaker 3: pop up for people that haven't seen it. We basically
2:45
Speaker 3: theorize that JFK essentially faked his death, and that might
2:50
Speaker 3: sound really outlandish. And that's why I've brought up this
2:54
Speaker 3: Vanity Fair article because I've shown so many people of
2:57
Speaker 3: this Vanity Fair article that are, like, I know a
3:00
Speaker 3: lot about JFK, and they don't even know what to
3:03
Speaker 3: think of this Vanity Fair article that came out. But essentially,
3:08
Speaker 3: Tibbet officer JD. Tibbitt was also assassinated, supposedly by Oswald
3:16
Speaker 3: on the day of the JFK assassination, and he looks
3:19
Speaker 3: almost identical to JFK. He looks so identical that they
3:25
Speaker 3: even called him h oh shit, this is freaking pop up.
3:29
Speaker 3: They even nicknamed him JFK. And that was the whole
3:33
Speaker 3: reason that Oswald was essentially arrested was for the murder
3:37
Speaker 3: of that police officer. Oswald was never arrested for the
3:41
Speaker 3: assassination of JFK. The public just threw that accusation on
3:45
Speaker 3: him and then he was murdered, right And so we
3:53
Speaker 3: basically surmised that because when you watch this a Bruner film,
3:58
Speaker 3: we have the most clear version of the Zubruter film
4:01
Speaker 3: ever made in our movie JFK X. And there's a
4:07
Speaker 3: splice in the movie when whenever the limousine goes in
4:10
Speaker 3: behind the freeway signs, there's a cut in the Zubruter film,
4:16
Speaker 3: and whenever it emerges back behind the Stimmens freeway sign,
4:21
Speaker 3: JFK looks like he's putting something on the side of
4:23
Speaker 3: his face. I mean, as clear as day, no one
4:26
Speaker 3: can argue with this. There's something on the side of
4:29
Speaker 3: JFK's face, especially when you see it in high definition,
4:32
Speaker 3: in clear video quality, there's something bulging from the side
4:38
Speaker 3: of JFK's face, and it appears there whenever he puts
4:42
Speaker 3: his hands up like this and he looks like he
4:46
Speaker 3: brushes the side of his face and there's something bulging
4:49
Speaker 3: from the side of his face is not arguable. There's
4:53
Speaker 3: something on the side of JFK's face. And then whenever
4:56
Speaker 3: it goes off, you see like this, and we pointed
5:01
Speaker 3: out perfectly in our film, it's like this metal piece
5:05
Speaker 3: just rolls up the side of his cheek and it's
5:08
Speaker 3: even reflecting in the sunlight, and it's just rolling up
5:13
Speaker 3: the side of his face and then it just and
5:15
Speaker 3: it blows off. So this Vanity Fair article is mind
5:21
Speaker 3: blowing because essentially Jackie filmed a fake assassination of JFK
5:28
Speaker 3: two months before the supposed real assassination. This article is wild.
5:35
Speaker 3: I would highly recommend anybody to look up this article.
5:39
Speaker 3: I'm not going to read through it all here, but
5:41
Speaker 3: it basically goes into you know how Jackie staged this
5:46
Speaker 3: fake assassination two months before the supposed real assassination, and
5:50
Speaker 3: that she was all into film and all the Secret
5:53
Speaker 3: Service agents that were there and Dealey Plaza at that
5:58
Speaker 3: time were also a part of this fake assassination that
6:01
Speaker 3: happened two months before. So it's like, whenever you put
6:05
Speaker 3: two and two together here, it's, uh, things aren't adding
6:08
Speaker 3: up right.
6:09
Speaker 1: And that came out four months ago, that article, Yes,
6:13
Speaker 1: what the fuck. So what are they get to say, Like,
6:17
Speaker 1: when they're supposed to release these JFK files, do you
6:20
Speaker 1: think anything's gonna come up it or it's just going
6:21
Speaker 1: to be more carrot and stick?
6:24
Speaker 3: I mean, I hope. So. I think a lot of
6:25
Speaker 3: people are still focused on the multiple shooter theory. But
6:30
Speaker 3: the multiple shooter theory doesn't even make any sense either,
6:33
Speaker 3: because if there was multiple shooters, that would mean that
6:38
Speaker 3: that would have been happening right behind Zubruter, Like the
6:44
Speaker 3: shots would have had to have been fired right over
6:47
Speaker 3: Zabruterer's head from where he's standing in the gazebo area. There,
6:54
Speaker 3: he would have been ducking, he would have heard something.
6:56
Speaker 3: He would have been like moving frantically, but his camera
7:00
Speaker 3: steadily on JFK the limousine all the way until the underpass.
7:06
Speaker 3: He's not moving, he's not ducking unless the only position
7:11
Speaker 3: that a second shooter could have been in to hit
7:14
Speaker 3: that trajectory on JFK's head. So the second shooter where
7:20
Speaker 3: he would have to be doesn't make any sense.
7:23
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it almost seems like the multiple shooter theory
7:26
Speaker 1: is part of the syeup because Grassy Know stuff has
7:29
Speaker 1: been laid out for us in our pop culture for.
7:31
Speaker 2: At least the last thirty years.
7:33
Speaker 1: I mean that would make sense because it's just more
7:37
Speaker 1: conspiracy candy to distract from. I think it's more closely
7:41
Speaker 1: to what you guys have put out in your first movie.
7:44
Speaker 2: So yeah, everybody check that out.
7:46
Speaker 1: And I mean, do you have anything else to say
7:47
Speaker 1: about that before we move on to the main topic.
7:51
Speaker 3: Just watch jfkix with an open mind. I mean, it's
7:57
Speaker 3: a it sounds wild and outlandish. I mean that's what
8:02
Speaker 3: you know. Some of the detractors and the people that
8:05
Speaker 3: said about whenever the movie just came out, they were like, oh, well,
8:08
Speaker 3: this is this is garbage. There's no way that this
8:10
Speaker 3: could ever happen. And then the Vanity Fair article hits
8:16
Speaker 3: where they're like, they FK filmed a fake assassination two
8:18
Speaker 3: months before the real assassination. So it's shaping up like
8:21
Speaker 3: it's not so crazy, right.
8:25
Speaker 2: Yeah.
8:25
Speaker 1: And I didn't even know this article existed until it's
8:29
Speaker 1: probably been a week or two.
8:31
Speaker 2: I listened to you on the.
8:32
Speaker 1: Occult Rejects with jj Vance and Nick there, and you
8:36
Speaker 1: guys brought it up. So I kind of hoped that
8:38
Speaker 1: when I prompted you here you talk about that, because
8:41
Speaker 1: I think everybody needs to read that thing, and if
8:45
Speaker 1: you haven't, in tandem at least watched the movie too,
8:48
Speaker 1: because I think that, yeah, whatever they put out, who knows,
8:54
Speaker 1: the Epstein thing was a big flop, so we'll see.
8:57
Speaker 3: Yeah, a bunch of it was redacted. So I'm sure
8:59
Speaker 3: that that's the way that a lot of these other
9:01
Speaker 3: documents are going to go to. It's a bunch of
9:03
Speaker 3: it's just going to be redacted. I mean, the people
9:07
Speaker 3: that they disclosed in the Epstein documents was like the
9:11
Speaker 3: not the clients, but the contact list. So it was
9:14
Speaker 3: like Michael Jackson and a few other people that were
9:18
Speaker 3: the people that had already been named before, but the
9:21
Speaker 3: client list was completely redacted. So and people are trying
9:26
Speaker 3: to put it out there like that the contact list
9:30
Speaker 3: is the client list, and that's not true. The contact
9:35
Speaker 3: list is different than the client list. The contact person
9:37
Speaker 3: is just somebody that you contact that doesn't necessarily mean
9:40
Speaker 3: that they're a client. But the client list was redacted
9:46
Speaker 3: because they said that those people are victims, which in
9:50
Speaker 3: one sense I understand in a way, But just release it, Broill,
9:54
Speaker 3: just release the whole thing, let us see exactly what
9:58
Speaker 3: was going on, But they're obvious. But this is supposed
10:01
Speaker 3: to be one of three dumps, so maybe we'll get
10:04
Speaker 3: something else in the other dumps. Who knows.
10:06
Speaker 1: The phase thing just reminds me so much of the
10:08
Speaker 1: Twitter files. It's like, why can't we just get a
10:12
Speaker 1: WikiLeaks drop on all of it and then.
10:15
Speaker 2: We can read it.
10:16
Speaker 1: Why do we need a filter of alternative media personalities
10:19
Speaker 1: who are all sketchy to begin with to be the
10:21
Speaker 1: ones to filter it to us? So yeah, I mean
10:24
Speaker 1: I didn't expect anything but the Dog and Pony show
10:27
Speaker 1: it was something else, and I'm not expecting anything big
10:31
Speaker 1: in the other phases.
10:32
Speaker 2: So we'll see.
10:34
Speaker 3: But I mean, we can have hope. At least he
10:36
Speaker 3: has essentially done what he said that he was going
10:40
Speaker 3: to do. I mean, you know what I mean. He
10:42
Speaker 3: said he was going to release release the files. They're
10:45
Speaker 3: going to be released, So I mean, I can't really
10:49
Speaker 3: complain because I really don't believe that anybody else would
10:51
Speaker 3: have even have brought that up. That would never even
10:54
Speaker 3: have been a talking point for any other candidate, right,
10:58
Speaker 3: So at least he's sticking to a guns and what
11:00
Speaker 3: he said that he was going to do.
11:02
Speaker 1: Yeah, essentially ross Olbrick being free.
11:06
Speaker 2: I never saw that happening ever.
11:09
Speaker 1: I mean I was kind of big into that whole
11:11
Speaker 1: thing when it went down.
11:12
Speaker 2: So yeah, the promise is being kept. I'm all about that.
11:17
Speaker 1: But yeah, let's talk about a Clockwork Shining. And I
11:20
Speaker 1: guess i'll just ask you because I know that Jay
11:24
Speaker 1: Widner did his moon landing thing about Kubrick, can you
11:28
Speaker 1: guys briefly touch on that in this movie again? Go
11:32
Speaker 1: watch that if you haven't. And what is that one
11:35
Speaker 1: called the Kubrick Code or.
11:36
Speaker 3: Something like that, Cubric's Odyssey, Cubric's Odyssey one and two.
11:41
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think I was thinking of Jay Dyer or
11:45
Speaker 1: Isaac Waisoffer, one of those guys. But yeah, those movies,
11:49
Speaker 1: and this is kind of like, from what I understand,
11:51
Speaker 1: it's almost like a trilogy now the way that this
11:55
Speaker 1: has been put out.
11:56
Speaker 3: Yeah, this one's like a quasi trilogy to that. So
11:59
Speaker 3: the full title, the subtitle is A Cubric's Odyssey three,
12:03
Speaker 3: So the full title is A Clockwork Shining in A
12:05
Speaker 3: Cubric's Odyssey three. So it's kind of like a quality
12:08
Speaker 3: third installment, finishing up those because he was going to
12:11
Speaker 3: originally do a third one. I think he was going
12:14
Speaker 3: to call it Cubriic The Magician or something like that
12:18
Speaker 3: until I came along and I was like, hey, this
12:19
Speaker 3: is a new theory and I think that it makes
12:23
Speaker 3: one hundred percent sense, and he was like, cool, let's
12:26
Speaker 3: do it, and there it is. So we kind of
12:29
Speaker 3: made it to wrap up his Kubrick trilogy. So yeah,
12:34
Speaker 3: and I think it only made sense to do because
12:36
Speaker 3: he's already done two other movies on Cubriic, so this
12:38
Speaker 3: one's like the third one. So it kind of wraps
12:40
Speaker 3: everything up for him.
12:41
Speaker 1: And so you brought this MK ultra type grand scenario
12:45
Speaker 1: to him, this is your baby?
12:46
Speaker 3: Then yes?
12:47
Speaker 2: Nice? All right.
12:49
Speaker 1: Well, so then I'll ask you just about Kubrick in general,
12:52
Speaker 1: because I think there's three things you could say.
12:56
Speaker 2: He was a bad guy.
12:59
Speaker 1: He was a tool of disclosure, or he was rogue,
13:03
Speaker 1: and maybe it could be a combination of all three.
13:06
Speaker 1: I mean, do you have like an overall opinion on
13:09
Speaker 1: what you think he was all about because he's given
13:11
Speaker 1: us so much, but he also was rubbing shoulders with
13:14
Speaker 1: everybody that we call bad guys.
13:17
Speaker 3: Well, essentially you do have to rub shoulders with people
13:21
Speaker 3: that you necessarily don't want to rub shoulders. But that's
13:24
Speaker 3: really how anything works in business, in the movie industry
13:28
Speaker 3: and politics and like all of that, right, you essentially
13:33
Speaker 3: have to do that. But I think that we kind
13:35
Speaker 3: of purposefuvely didn't bring what exactly we thought about Kubrick
13:41
Speaker 3: into the movie because it's kind of up for interpretation
13:45
Speaker 3: right there. I mean, he's dead, he's passed away. Really
13:50
Speaker 3: the only information that we can get is about you know,
13:52
Speaker 3: people that knew him before or his family, and it's
13:57
Speaker 3: really difficult to dige exactly what was going on with him.
14:02
Speaker 3: So we kind of took a step back from that
14:05
Speaker 3: and not really commenting so much on what we what
14:09
Speaker 3: kind of person we thought Qubreic actually was. And I
14:15
Speaker 3: think that that honestly serves the movie the best because
14:19
Speaker 3: if we're just speaking directly on qubreak and we're like, okay, yeah,
14:22
Speaker 3: he's he's a one good guy, because you're gonna have
14:25
Speaker 3: that division right like that, there's a group of people
14:30
Speaker 3: that's gonna think that he's he was like you know god,
14:33
Speaker 3: and then there's gonna be the other group of people
14:35
Speaker 3: that are like, oh, well, he was a horrible guy.
14:37
Speaker 3: He treated everyone badly. You know, he was harassing people
14:42
Speaker 3: on set and doing a hundred different takes on any
14:45
Speaker 3: given scene, which is fact. He was definitely doing that.
14:50
Speaker 3: But he was a perfectionist, right. He was a filmmaker,
14:53
Speaker 3: he was an artist, and he wanted to bring that
14:56
Speaker 3: realistic nature to his movies. And I think that that's
15:03
Speaker 3: we're just trying to stay away from that, because it
15:06
Speaker 3: was like, it's exactly like what we were talking about
15:08
Speaker 3: with Trump, Like there's going to be a section of
15:10
Speaker 3: people that hate him no matter what, and then there's
15:13
Speaker 3: going to be people that look at him like a god.
15:17
Speaker 3: And I don't think any either one of those are correct,
15:19
Speaker 3: you know, So I think it lies somewhere in the middle,
15:23
Speaker 3: and I think he's he computer back and forth on it,
15:28
Speaker 3: you know.
15:30
Speaker 4: Yeah.
15:30
Speaker 1: And I mean this thing that just popped into my
15:32
Speaker 1: head was the Beef fifty two bomber where he was
15:37
Speaker 1: contacted because he made it too accurate, and you got
15:42
Speaker 1: into that a lot on I heard you on Ground
15:46
Speaker 1: Zero with Clyde Lewis, and he kind of wanted to
15:48
Speaker 1: talk about that a little bit, so even more so
15:51
Speaker 1: than it was in the movie. But I want to know,
15:56
Speaker 1: like when he and this is speculation, probably, but like,
16:00
Speaker 1: when was he brought to the attention to these bigger people,
16:04
Speaker 1: because it seems like just with Doctor Strangelove two thousand
16:08
Speaker 1: and one Space Odyssey, and you mentioned that he had
16:13
Speaker 1: a whole list of people that he, you know, was
16:16
Speaker 1: acknowledging at the end of Space Odyssey, and it's basically
16:22
Speaker 1: just different factions of the Department adjust or the Department
16:25
Speaker 1: of Defense. And I mean we talk about Operation mocking
16:30
Speaker 1: Bird quite a bit on this show, so just the
16:34
Speaker 1: fact that they're still doing it to this day.
16:36
Speaker 2: But yeah, even back then, I don't.
16:37
Speaker 1: Think anybody had any idea that that kind of stuff
16:40
Speaker 1: was going on with military personnel and the overlap with Hollywood.
16:45
Speaker 1: But one thing you brought up that I thought was
16:47
Speaker 1: kind of interesting and I hadn't heard before, is Kubrick
16:51
Speaker 1: did not want to make The Shining and it was
16:53
Speaker 1: almost like they handed it to him after he flopped
16:57
Speaker 1: with what was the movie? Yes, So I just kind
17:02
Speaker 1: of find it fascinating that it is one of his most.
17:05
Speaker 2: Popular movies by far.
17:07
Speaker 1: I think it's right up there with his best and
17:10
Speaker 1: the fact that he didn't want to do it and
17:12
Speaker 1: he ended up doing what he did with it and
17:14
Speaker 1: how it worked out so well, and what you think
17:16
Speaker 1: this overall message he's trying to give to us. It's
17:20
Speaker 1: just like a happy accident basically.
17:24
Speaker 3: Yeah, that makes the most sense to me. And with
17:27
Speaker 3: Doctor Strangelove, I think that is where it started, like
17:31
Speaker 3: this relationship with the intelligence community and the Air Force
17:36
Speaker 3: and the military, because it was like you were saying,
17:38
Speaker 3: no one really knew this since the inception of movies.
17:43
Speaker 3: That's why we have the big Laurel Canyon section in
17:48
Speaker 3: the documentary because it shows that the military was involved
17:53
Speaker 3: in Hollywood, in the Hollywood, that the military was essentially
17:57
Speaker 3: making all of these movies, like thousands of movies that
18:04
Speaker 3: nobody knows exactly what they were because they're still classified
18:08
Speaker 3: to this very day, like tens of thousands of movies.
18:10
Speaker 3: All the footage that we show when we're talking about
18:14
Speaker 3: Laurel Canyon is all real footage. That's all real footage
18:19
Speaker 3: from Lookout Mountain Air Force Base. Like whenever they're grabbing
18:25
Speaker 3: those big barrels of like movie reels, all that's real
18:29
Speaker 3: footage from Lookout Mountain.
18:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, and you had to have like such high level
18:35
Speaker 1: of security clearance to even step foot there.
18:39
Speaker 3: So it makes sense when Cubri got this help from
18:44
Speaker 3: making two thousand and one, and he had he was
18:48
Speaker 3: thinking all the intelligence communities, Langley, Virginia Air Force intelligence,
18:55
Speaker 3: a lot of government contractors were all in the ending
19:00
Speaker 3: credits to two thousand and one A Space Odyssey, and
19:03
Speaker 3: someone had to have seen that and they were like, oh,
19:07
Speaker 3: you can't have that in there, you know, we can't
19:11
Speaker 3: let people know that there's this collaboration regardless of like
19:15
Speaker 3: what it is, regardless if it's something nefarious or if
19:18
Speaker 3: it's not anything nefarious. I mean, they could have just been,
19:22
Speaker 3: you know, giving him things to model the stuff after
19:27
Speaker 3: who knows exactly, you know, what it was. But obviously
19:31
Speaker 3: it seems like it's a lot more because two thousand
19:33
Speaker 3: and one of Space Odyssey was using special effects like
19:37
Speaker 3: Jay Weiner talks about with the front screen projection that
19:39
Speaker 3: had never been done before, you know, So how was
19:42
Speaker 3: he getting all of this really hyper advanced technology to
19:47
Speaker 3: be able to a lot of people say that they
19:51
Speaker 3: were NASA cameras that he was using. They had a
19:57
Speaker 3: special lens on them, and like a special modified lens
20:04
Speaker 3: that he shot with. And it seems like someone's seen
20:10
Speaker 3: that those credits where he thinked all the people and
20:13
Speaker 3: were like, yeah, you got to take that out because
20:14
Speaker 3: we also show documents within the movie of you know,
20:18
Speaker 3: intelligence communities involvement with films that have come out you
20:21
Speaker 3: know since then, like the Transformers movie that was all
20:25
Speaker 3: got through four year requests, Like people send it for
20:28
Speaker 3: four year requests and it would come back and be like, yeah,
20:30
Speaker 3: the military and the CIA tomorrow will never die. Some
20:34
Speaker 3: of the James Bond films, uh, you know had collaborations
20:38
Speaker 3: with the intelligence community and the military. So if you
20:43
Speaker 3: didn't already know about that, it's still important to see
20:47
Speaker 3: in a movie. And for the people that didn't know
20:49
Speaker 3: about it, I'm sure that they were, you know, kind
20:51
Speaker 3: of shocked about it because you know, that's a really
20:54
Speaker 3: important thing and they definitely wanted to take that out
20:57
Speaker 3: and you know, make that a reveal for later on
21:01
Speaker 3: in the future when people really don't care about it anymore.
21:04
Speaker 3: Because that's another thing about these types of documents and
21:08
Speaker 3: things that are you know coming out, is normally they don't.
21:12
Speaker 3: I mean, the JFK Files has been a really long
21:15
Speaker 3: time you know since it happened for them to be released,
21:21
Speaker 3: but you know the Epstein files are different that when
21:25
Speaker 3: that was like twenty and sixteen seventeen, right in that area.
21:30
Speaker 3: And that's one that's really recent that, which is surprising
21:35
Speaker 3: that they're even going to release because it's normally they
21:39
Speaker 3: wait a really long time in between the event happening
21:42
Speaker 3: and then them releasing any kind of real information about it,
21:45
Speaker 3: so by the time that it's released, people no longer care.
21:50
Speaker 2: Yeah, this has been that I're responsible or probably fucking long.
21:53
Speaker 3: Dead exactly so. And I think the the twenty twenty
21:58
Speaker 3: files right won't be released until like twenty sixty or
22:03
Speaker 3: something like that. They already put a date on those,
22:05
Speaker 3: but they should release the freaking nine to eleven files.
22:08
Speaker 3: Why not release the nine eleven files? You bring those out?
22:11
Speaker 3: Has been what twenty twenty four years, Like, release the
22:16
Speaker 3: freaking nine eleven files.
22:18
Speaker 2: That'd be nice.
22:18
Speaker 3: Let's find out about building seven, bro. We all need
22:21
Speaker 3: to know about building solving.
22:22
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I just wanted to throw in there. Anybody
22:25
Speaker 1: who's a fan of the Marvel movies, Disney is.
22:29
Speaker 2: The Pentagon Slash CIA and.
22:32
Speaker 1: The Pentagon, And you can find these some documents like
22:35
Speaker 1: what he's talking about here. They put hundreds of millions
22:38
Speaker 1: of dollars into the Iron Man Iron Man franchise alone,
22:42
Speaker 1: which you gave Elon Musk a little cameo in the
22:45
Speaker 1: second one Tony Stark himself. But yeah, let's get into
22:50
Speaker 1: the shining because the first thing that you brought up
22:55
Speaker 1: that kind of opens this mk ultra theory is she's
22:59
Speaker 1: reading Catcher in the Rye at the kitchen table before
23:02
Speaker 1: they even go up to the hotel.
23:04
Speaker 2: And Catcher in the Rye.
23:06
Speaker 1: I think you mentioned this and it might have been
23:08
Speaker 1: on The Occult Rejects, and I never even thought of this,
23:11
Speaker 1: Like at the time that that movie was filming, those
23:13
Speaker 1: assassinations hadn't even happened yet with you know, John Lennon
23:17
Speaker 1: and Reagan, Yeah, Mark, David Chapman and John Hinckley Junior.
23:23
Speaker 3: And then there was another one that was brought to
23:26
Speaker 3: my attention by William Ramsey. I had him on my
23:29
Speaker 3: show recently. And there was another one that happened that
23:32
Speaker 3: involved Ketcher in the Rye, which I think was I
23:35
Speaker 3: think he said early eighties or somewhere around there, not
23:41
Speaker 3: one hundred percent sure all the time, but her name
23:44
Speaker 3: was Rebecca Schaeffer and it happened in Hollywood, and Catcher
23:48
Speaker 3: in the Rye was involved in that murder slash assassination
23:53
Speaker 3: as well, so there was three. But yes, Catcher in
23:58
Speaker 3: the Rye he had it, Windy is reading it in
24:00
Speaker 3: the very beginning of The Shining Qubriic had it in there,
24:03
Speaker 3: and the movie was released a year before the two
24:07
Speaker 3: assassinations which happened almost back to back, which what you
24:10
Speaker 3: just mentioned John Lennon and the attempted assassination on Ronald Reagan,
24:15
Speaker 3: And how did Kubrick know to have that book in
24:21
Speaker 3: there and have Wendy reading it? And then when you
24:23
Speaker 3: think about it, you're like, oh my god. This book
24:26
Speaker 3: has been involved with, you know, the two major assassinations
24:30
Speaker 3: that everyone knows about, but a third one with Rebecca Schaeffer.
24:33
Speaker 3: And people have theorized that this book as some sort
24:35
Speaker 3: of mk Ultramanchurian Canada style trigger for these assassinations. And
24:41
Speaker 3: what is Jack doing throughout the entire Shining movie. He's
24:46
Speaker 3: attempting to kill his families, attempting to kill Danny and
24:50
Speaker 3: kill Wendy. Right, So you put that together, you're like,
24:55
Speaker 3: holy shit, this is what it seems like. And then
24:59
Speaker 3: you see how he is being you know, made to
25:03
Speaker 3: write the same sentence over and over and over and
25:06
Speaker 3: over again, which is exactly like Sir Hans Sirhan did
25:09
Speaker 3: whenever he supposedly assassinated RFK. He's writing the same thing
25:14
Speaker 3: over and over, RFK must die, RFK must die, which
25:17
Speaker 3: is psychic driving, which was created by human Cameron in Canada,
25:21
Speaker 3: which was to implant certain thoughts and ideas to change
25:28
Speaker 3: the person's behavior on things that they normally wouldn't do right.
25:33
Speaker 3: And that's a real MK ultra technique and we have
25:36
Speaker 3: the real life evidence of that with sir Han Surhan,
25:41
Speaker 3: and Jack is essentially doing the exact same thing the
25:44
Speaker 3: sir Han Sirhan was doing, just in his own way,
25:47
Speaker 3: you know all working to no play makes Jack a
25:48
Speaker 3: dull boy. It's the exact same type of programming. And
25:52
Speaker 3: then when Wendy comes in and realizes that he's not
25:56
Speaker 3: writing a novel, he's just writing the same phrase over
25:59
Speaker 3: and over and over again, he then becomes triggered and
26:02
Speaker 3: then he does then he tries to essentially kill Wendy. Yeah,
26:09
Speaker 3: it goes from Danny to Wendy. So first off, it's
26:12
Speaker 3: it's Danny. Whenever Grady is talking to Jack in the bathroom,
26:17
Speaker 3: he's the focus is on Danny. He's like, the boy
26:21
Speaker 3: is a problem. You need to correct correct him, sir,
26:25
Speaker 3: like I corrected my two daughters, you know. And the
26:30
Speaker 3: focus is on Danny. So then it's not on Wendy.
26:32
Speaker 3: But then when Wendy comes in and essentially triggers Jack
26:36
Speaker 3: by finding out that he's not writing the novel, right,
26:39
Speaker 3: then the focus is on her. And then when Grady
26:42
Speaker 3: is then talking to him outside of the door in
26:45
Speaker 3: the storage room, it shifts focus from Danny to now Wendy,
26:53
Speaker 3: and Grady says that Wendy is stronger than they had thought.
27:01
Speaker 3: Those aren't the exact words, but it's essentially like, Wendy is,
27:05
Speaker 3: you know, stronger than we had thought. And what he
27:08
Speaker 3: means by that is that she's stronger mentally. She's obviously
27:13
Speaker 3: not strong physically, she's you know, a super skinny woman.
27:18
Speaker 3: So she's stronger mentally in her head. She's harder to crack,
27:23
Speaker 3: she's harder to break down, she's harder to mind fracture
27:27
Speaker 3: than Jack was. Because Jack had already you know, gone
27:30
Speaker 3: through trauma, he'd already had the he was already an alcoholic,
27:35
Speaker 3: right and Danny had already been through the trauma as well,
27:39
Speaker 3: with Jack coming in and essentially abusing Danny when he
27:44
Speaker 3: came home and his papers were all over the floor
27:46
Speaker 3: or whatever, and he yanked Danny out by his arm
27:48
Speaker 3: and broke his arm, well, injured his arm, is what
27:51
Speaker 3: Wendy said. And then that's when Danny started receiving his abilities. Yeah,
27:57
Speaker 3: that's all from the movie. That's what the doctor talks
28:00
Speaker 3: Wendy about in the in the beginning of the movie.
28:02
Speaker 3: So Jack has already been traumatized, Danny has already been traumatized.
28:05
Speaker 3: That means that they are way more susceptible to MK
28:09
Speaker 3: ultra style mind control programming. But Wendy isn't. Wendy hasn't
28:13
Speaker 3: had the trauma yet. So whenever Jack comes in and
28:18
Speaker 3: tries to, you know, break down the door with the
28:21
Speaker 3: with the axe to get her, she's starting to get
28:25
Speaker 3: it because that's the traumatic event, right, And then whenever
28:28
Speaker 3: she goes downstairs, and whenever Jack goes after whenever he
28:33
Speaker 3: hears Hollarin pulling up in the snowmobile, the snow cat,
28:37
Speaker 3: he goes downstairs and Hollarin comes through the door, and
28:40
Speaker 3: then he comes through and hits Hollarin in the chest
28:43
Speaker 3: with the axe, kills him. Then he goes after Danny
28:47
Speaker 3: downstairs in the uh. Then they go outside into the maze,
28:51
Speaker 3: and the maze is a maze of the mind. I
28:53
Speaker 3: hope I'm not losing people here too much and kind
28:55
Speaker 3: of just going on and on. So he goes out,
28:58
Speaker 3: and the maze is a metaphor for the mind. So
29:01
Speaker 3: and then Danny has to retrace his steps in the
29:03
Speaker 3: maze in his mind to escape Jack. And then Jack
29:06
Speaker 3: is lost in the maze because he's like catatonic. He's
29:09
Speaker 3: succumbed to the ultra pro style programming. But Wendy whenever
29:14
Speaker 3: she comes downstairs and she sees Hollarin dead on the ground,
29:19
Speaker 3: that's another really traumatic event. And then after she sees
29:22
Speaker 3: Halarin dad on the ground, but one she's not expecting
29:26
Speaker 3: Hollarin to even be there. Two he's dead, very traumatic,
29:30
Speaker 3: and she had just been tried to be killed with
29:33
Speaker 3: an axe by Jack. So after she comes downstairs, all
29:39
Speaker 3: that stuff happens to her. She sees Hollarin dud on
29:41
Speaker 3: the ground. That's when she starts experiencing her what the
29:47
Speaker 3: audience has led to believe as hallucinations. She sees the
29:51
Speaker 3: skeletons in the in the room. She turns around and
29:54
Speaker 3: sees the guy with his head split that's holding the glass.
29:58
Speaker 3: It's a great party, isn't right. That's the symbolization because
30:03
Speaker 3: he has a streak of blood coming down the center
30:06
Speaker 3: of his forehead. That's symbolically referencing the mind split, the
30:12
Speaker 3: mind fracture, And she's starting to succumb to the mk
30:17
Speaker 3: Ultra style mind control programming. She didn't experience any of
30:21
Speaker 3: this stuff throughout the entire movie until she was traumatized
30:25
Speaker 3: by Jack.
30:27
Speaker 1: Yeah, and you pointed out too that Jack and Danny
30:33
Speaker 1: who hallucinate after entering room two three seven. So you
30:39
Speaker 1: want to talk about that a little bit because I
30:41
Speaker 1: found that whole theory to be I mean, you can
30:44
Speaker 1: look up the mk Ultra disclosure files for yourself to
30:48
Speaker 1: see the kind of stuff they were doing.
30:51
Speaker 3: Yeah, so Jack is he goes into meet with Lloyd
30:56
Speaker 3: the bartender. We believe that Lloyd is a real person.
31:01
Speaker 3: We believe that all the people in the hotel are
31:03
Speaker 3: real people.
31:05
Speaker 4: They're actors that are.
31:07
Speaker 3: There like playing a role play. They're essentially they're playing
31:10
Speaker 3: a lart. They're LARPing. It's like Shutter Island, right. Have
31:14
Speaker 3: you seen the movie Shutter Island with Leonardo DiCaprio, where
31:17
Speaker 3: essentially the entire freaking psychiatric facility, all the workers and
31:22
Speaker 3: everything are LARPing their positions at the end of the movie.
31:27
Speaker 3: They're actors playing actors in an acting movie. So that's
31:31
Speaker 3: essentially what all the people at the overlook are. They're actors.
31:35
Speaker 3: They're not ghosts. They're actors there to play a role
31:40
Speaker 3: to essentially see what they can get Jack to do
31:45
Speaker 3: to his family. It's an experiment. It's a giant experiment.
31:50
Speaker 3: So Jack walks into the gold room, meets Lloyd. Lloyd
31:54
Speaker 3: gives them an alcoholic drink. It has been well known
31:58
Speaker 3: that the CIA has spiked alcoholic drinks with some form
32:03
Speaker 3: of health hallucinogenic. This has happened time and time again.
32:06
Speaker 3: Even an LSD aerosol has been sprayed. There's documentation on
32:11
Speaker 3: all this. You can get on and look at the
32:13
Speaker 3: mk ultro files or look up stories of.
32:16
Speaker 2: Operation Midnight Climax.
32:18
Speaker 1: They were trying the air isolation and kind of ended
32:21
Speaker 1: up going with the drinks because it was easier to control.
32:25
Speaker 3: Yep, and so Lloyd gives Jack his first drink of alcohol.
32:30
Speaker 3: Then Wendy comes in and Wendy is like, Danny was
32:33
Speaker 3: attacked by a woman in one of the upstairs bedrooms,
32:39
Speaker 3: so he goes up there, then he encounters the woman.
32:43
Speaker 3: And then later on whenever he goes up to the
32:47
Speaker 3: apartment that they're staying at, Wendy said, Whendy asked him,
32:50
Speaker 3: he's She's like, did you see anything? It's like, I
32:54
Speaker 3: didn't see a goddamn thing up there, which is synonymous with.
33:03
Speaker 1: That.
33:04
Speaker 3: You know, you've essentially been drugged, right, Like you if
33:10
Speaker 3: you experience something that's not there, like the only thing
33:13
Speaker 3: that you can think of is like, oh, well, you've
33:15
Speaker 3: you've been drugged. So it's a combination of drugs and
33:20
Speaker 3: like actors. And then also with the aerosol, it's very
33:25
Speaker 3: apparent that it's either an aerosol that's in room two
33:28
Speaker 3: thirty seven LSD drug aerosol that's in there, because when
33:33
Speaker 3: Danny goes in, that's how he could have experienced that
33:36
Speaker 3: as well. So they sprayed the aerosol on Danny and
33:39
Speaker 3: then they had Jack drink the laced alcohol with LSD
33:45
Speaker 3: and that's how he experienced it.
33:48
Speaker 1: And to just backtrack a little bit to just lend
33:51
Speaker 1: more credence to what you're saying. When they're having the
33:54
Speaker 1: meeting at the beginning talking about him going up there,
33:57
Speaker 1: they keep mentioning our people in Denver, and you have
34:03
Speaker 1: some theories about what that could mean.
34:07
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's something that I really found odd when I
34:11
Speaker 3: was watching it. Several times, I was like, why do
34:14
Speaker 3: they keep mentioning these people in Denver right there? Over
34:18
Speaker 3: and over again. It was at least we put a
34:20
Speaker 3: compilation of it in the movie, and I'm pretty sure
34:25
Speaker 3: it's at least five or six times that either Jack
34:29
Speaker 3: or Almond mentions our people in Denver.
34:34
Speaker 2: Another JFK connection there.
34:36
Speaker 3: Yeah, which Olman looks striking lean similar to JFK's. And
34:41
Speaker 3: we've got the American flag thing on his desk. And
34:48
Speaker 3: Bill Watson, which we didn't really get into it in
34:51
Speaker 3: the movie a lot because it was difficult to find
34:55
Speaker 3: photos of Sydney Gottlieb, but we're essentially relating Bill Watson
34:58
Speaker 3: as the the main person behind the entire operation. He's
35:03
Speaker 3: the silent partner, right, He's actually the main guy that
35:07
Speaker 3: the front is that it's Alman, but it's really Bill
35:12
Speaker 3: Watson that's running the whole shindig, right, you know how
35:20
Speaker 3: that's happened. Sometimes like you'll get that front person, but
35:24
Speaker 3: the person that's really behind that person is the one
35:27
Speaker 3: that actually makes all the real decisions and is in
35:29
Speaker 3: charge of the operation. Yeah, that's that's how what's going
35:34
Speaker 3: on here. And we didn't really bring it up within
35:37
Speaker 3: the movie because it was difficult to relate Bill Watson
35:41
Speaker 3: to Sydney Gottlieb, just because there's very few photos that
35:46
Speaker 3: you can find of Sidney Gottlieb. So but but they
35:50
Speaker 3: do resemble each other in the the way that they
35:54
Speaker 3: dress and the way that they look, and even they're
35:56
Speaker 3: like their facial structure. Yeah, experi similar to each other.
36:01
Speaker 1: I got my hand on a paperback several years ago.
36:05
Speaker 1: It's called Poisoner in Chief and it's about Gottlieb. And
36:08
Speaker 1: I'm trying to remember if you can. You know, most
36:10
Speaker 1: paperbacks have the little thin section of like glossy printed
36:16
Speaker 1: photos in the middle. I don't remember if that one
36:18
Speaker 1: did or not, but yeah, I haven't heard that. I'm
36:20
Speaker 1: looking into that one as soon as we get off here,
36:23
Speaker 1: because that's interesting. So, yeah, the people in Denver and
36:27
Speaker 1: You've mentioned how Denver is kind of maybe a hub
36:30
Speaker 1: for intelligence because it's in the center of the country
36:33
Speaker 1: and they're just overseeing this project up in the mountains.
36:37
Speaker 1: And yeah, you don't think this is the first time
36:40
Speaker 1: this has gone on, right, This is like Jack might
36:43
Speaker 1: be whatever number in a series of experiments they're doing
36:46
Speaker 1: up there.
36:48
Speaker 3: Yes, that's what I believe that the scene of the
36:52
Speaker 3: shining is depicting. It's not depicting anything like reincarnation. When
36:56
Speaker 3: it pans down on July fourth, nineteen twenty one, does
37:00
Speaker 3: have anything to do with reincarnation or spiritual things. It's
37:04
Speaker 3: a date marker for how long they've been running some
37:11
Speaker 3: sort of operation up there at the Overlook Hotel. They
37:15
Speaker 3: do it every year, and they get different kinds of
37:20
Speaker 3: scenarios every single year. And when you think about it,
37:24
Speaker 3: it's like the perfect place, right because no one's up there,
37:27
Speaker 3: it's the middle of the winter, it snows a lot
37:29
Speaker 3: up there, you get snowed into the hotel. It's honestly
37:34
Speaker 3: a perfect location to run some sort of operation up there,
37:40
Speaker 3: some sort of experiments, some sort of mind control type
37:46
Speaker 3: of scenario, and they do it every single year. And
37:50
Speaker 3: that's what makes the most sense to me, and some
37:54
Speaker 3: of the experiments work out, some of them don't. Some
37:57
Speaker 3: of them go a rhyme. For sure, the Grady one
38:03
Speaker 3: went awrye. But I think that that kind of like
38:06
Speaker 3: became the goal. It became the goal to see if
38:09
Speaker 3: they can actually get the person that they're experimenting on
38:16
Speaker 3: to kill people, to murder people.
38:21
Speaker 1: Especially if you would murder your own family, Who wouldn't.
38:24
Speaker 2: You murder.
38:27
Speaker 3: Exactly, and then shown the original ending of the shining
38:34
Speaker 3: It really makes all the sense in the world because
38:36
Speaker 3: Almond comes into the hospital when Wendy is there, Danny
38:39
Speaker 3: is there as well. Almond comes in, talks to Wendy
38:42
Speaker 3: and is like, everything that you said to the police
38:45
Speaker 3: and the staff here at the hospital, we can't find
38:48
Speaker 3: any evidence of there's no evidence of anything that you said.
38:52
Speaker 3: So that means that they essentially went in and cleaned
38:54
Speaker 3: up the entire operation, like get rid of Jack's body,
38:59
Speaker 3: get rid of how and get rid of the weapons.
39:02
Speaker 3: But it can double as somebody that's looking at it
39:05
Speaker 3: on like the surface level, on the you know, the
39:08
Speaker 3: main level, as that it was just ghosts.
39:11
Speaker 1: Yeah, because you've pointed out before that essentially Kubrick made
39:17
Speaker 1: this a psychological thriller.
39:19
Speaker 2: He didn't really have paranormal stuff in there.
39:21
Speaker 1: But yeah, if you just look at the bar scene, like, oh,
39:23
Speaker 1: those are ghosts or the hallucinations in your room two
39:26
Speaker 1: three seven is like ghosts or possession. But it's not
39:32
Speaker 1: your typical paranormal movie and it's not like the book
39:35
Speaker 1: in that way at all.
39:38
Speaker 3: It's not and that I believe that that is why
39:42
Speaker 3: Qubriic made it that way, because he's he's trying to
39:45
Speaker 3: tell you an underlying story. He's trying to tell you
39:47
Speaker 3: a history of these types of operations and these types
39:50
Speaker 3: of programs, and that it involves MK ultra and mind control. Right,
39:56
Speaker 3: because the anything that is that it seems to be
40:00
Speaker 3: on the surface level being paranormal, can also be real,
40:07
Speaker 3: like real physical people. There's nothing other than when the
40:15
Speaker 3: woman turns from a very hot, attractive woman into an
40:20
Speaker 3: elderly lady, which that can be explained by Jack being drugged.
40:26
Speaker 3: Everything else can be real physical people. So he's kind
40:33
Speaker 3: of codd it in there, as it can go either way.
40:37
Speaker 3: So if you're just looking at him on the surface
40:39
Speaker 3: level of it, then okay, it's all just you know,
40:42
Speaker 3: it's just paranormal. Lloyd the bartender is a ghost but
40:45
Speaker 3: somehow has alcohol and is like a physical thing and
40:48
Speaker 3: is able to move things around. All the people that
40:51
Speaker 3: were in the party in the gold Room are somehow
40:55
Speaker 3: ghosts too, but that doesn't make any sense because they
40:58
Speaker 3: all look super real. Grady bumps into Jack with the
41:02
Speaker 3: tray and hits him and then has a full blown
41:05
Speaker 3: on conversation, and Grady doesn't ever admit that he that
41:16
Speaker 3: he's a ghost, right, He says, oh well, I don't recall, sir,
41:21
Speaker 3: So whenever Jack is like, weren't you weren't you the
41:24
Speaker 3: caretaker here? Which is another really strange thing within the shining.
41:29
Speaker 3: He goes by two different names, Delbert Grady and Charles Grady,
41:33
Speaker 3: so Alman calls him Charles Grady and then he refers
41:39
Speaker 3: to himself while talking to Jack, is Delbert Grady. So
41:44
Speaker 3: two different names in there. But he never once implies
41:48
Speaker 3: to Jack that he's a ghost or that he's paranormal.
41:51
Speaker 3: He's like, oh well, I don't recall, sir, yea. So
41:56
Speaker 3: all the things that seem to be paranormal make more
42:01
Speaker 3: if they're real people, if they're LARPing the entire thing.
42:05
Speaker 3: That's how Jack gets let out of the storage room. Right,
42:08
Speaker 3: a ghost. It's Grady outside of the storage room that
42:13
Speaker 3: unlocks it. Alman was the one that rolled the ball
42:18
Speaker 3: toward Danny. Okay, because at the end of the movie
42:24
Speaker 3: in their original ending, the Stanley Kubrick got in there
42:28
Speaker 3: that he cut out after the test screenings. Almond whenever
42:34
Speaker 3: he goes in to talk to Windy and says that
42:36
Speaker 3: nothing that she has said had ever happened there. He
42:38
Speaker 3: also throws the tennis ball that Jack was bouncing off
42:43
Speaker 3: the wall before he goes and looks at the model
42:45
Speaker 3: of the maze, and also is the tennis ball that
42:48
Speaker 3: inconspicuously rolled toward Danny to make him go into room
42:52
Speaker 3: two thirty seven. Right, So how did he know about
42:55
Speaker 3: the tennis ball?
42:58
Speaker 2: That's a good point.
43:00
Speaker 1: Did you talk about that in the movie about him
43:02
Speaker 1: rolling them the ball?
43:04
Speaker 3: Yes, we did, and whenever we were showing the footage
43:09
Speaker 3: from the pictures in the script from the original ending, Okay,
43:15
Speaker 3: that's right. Yeah, I mentioned that all men hands the
43:19
Speaker 3: tennis ball to Danny watches the exact same tennis ball
43:25
Speaker 3: that Jack was bouncing off of the wall. And it's
43:28
Speaker 3: also the same tennis ball the rolls toward Danny.
43:33
Speaker 1: All right, Well, I want to talk about Jack Nicholson
43:36
Speaker 1: a little bit because my girlfriend does a podcast and
43:42
Speaker 1: she's into like Dave McGowan a lot, and not just
43:46
Speaker 1: the Laurel Canyon stuff, but the program to Kill Shit With.
43:50
Speaker 1: You can get into Ted Bundy. But we kind of
43:53
Speaker 1: stumbled upon something and I kind of started thinking in
43:56
Speaker 1: a weird outside the box way because Jack Nicholson and
44:00
Speaker 1: Ted Bundy they almost have the same exact story as
44:04
Speaker 1: far as do you know about Jack Nicholson. He's basically undocumented,
44:08
Speaker 1: there's no birth certificate, and his mother who he thought
44:12
Speaker 1: was his mother or is his grandma and his mom
44:16
Speaker 1: is his sister.
44:17
Speaker 2: Same thing with Ted Bundy.
44:18
Speaker 1: But there's some stuff in the shining with the yellow
44:21
Speaker 1: beetle and he replaced the red beetle as you pointed out,
44:25
Speaker 1: But it was almost like a Ted Bundy thing where
44:29
Speaker 1: I just think there's so many parallels between him. And
44:32
Speaker 1: then we watched this interview footage of Ted Bundy and
44:36
Speaker 1: I think it was when he was in All Places, Colorado,
44:40
Speaker 1: and I swear to God that was Jack Nicholson.
44:42
Speaker 2: It looked like him.
44:43
Speaker 1: It sounded like him, and Ted Bundy was like a
44:46
Speaker 1: chameleon because he never looked the same. There's witness testimony
44:50
Speaker 1: of Yeah, he looked like a different person every time
44:52
Speaker 1: I saw him. And it's almost like Ted Bundy was
44:55
Speaker 1: an operation, and I got to think that Jack Nicholson
44:58
Speaker 1: was a part of it somehow after a a that.
45:00
Speaker 1: I'll have to send you the video because it just
45:04
Speaker 1: seems like Jack Nicholson wearing a little bit of makeup
45:07
Speaker 1: or a prosthetic face or something, And I don't know,
45:12
Speaker 1: it's just something I wanted to throw at you since
45:14
Speaker 1: we're talking about Jack and the shining.
45:16
Speaker 3: That's really interesting. Definitely send me the video. I would
45:19
Speaker 3: like to check that out.
45:20
Speaker 1: Yeah, I will, because the voice and the eyebrows and
45:24
Speaker 1: the smile, the mannerisms, it just I don't know, maybe
45:27
Speaker 1: Ted Bundy was never really one person and it's just
45:31
Speaker 1: like another type of operations. So do you think that
45:34
Speaker 1: Kubrick was privy to this kind of shit going on
45:39
Speaker 1: and he was trying to disclose it to us? So
45:41
Speaker 1: do you think it was just like a theory he
45:42
Speaker 1: might have had.
45:45
Speaker 3: He definitely had to be privy to it, because just
45:49
Speaker 3: based on the fact that he made a clockwork orange
45:53
Speaker 3: in nineteen seventy, right, that's I mean, he had to
45:58
Speaker 3: know that was going on in some kind of way,
46:03
Speaker 3: or I don't think that he could just bring a
46:08
Speaker 3: clockwork orange out of his imagination because it's very similar
46:14
Speaker 3: to what they were really doing.
46:18
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's also based on a book, and he
46:22
Speaker 1: took a lot of fucking liberties like he like he
46:24
Speaker 1: did with The Shining And I mean I tried to
46:27
Speaker 1: read the book. I think I might have got about
46:28
Speaker 1: halfway through. It is just so hard to read. Have
46:30
Speaker 1: you read it.
46:32
Speaker 3: I have not read the book.
46:33
Speaker 2: It's hard, man.
46:34
Speaker 1: If you can get through it, let me know, because
46:36
Speaker 1: it's just it's almost like another language, Like you know,
46:39
Speaker 1: the language they speak in the movie.
46:41
Speaker 2: The book's written like that, so you kind of almost
46:44
Speaker 2: got to.
46:44
Speaker 1: Like learned code the way it's written. So do you
46:50
Speaker 1: what about Eyes White Shut? What's your take on that
46:54
Speaker 1: whole thing?
46:57
Speaker 3: Well, it's a really interesting one, and there's a lot
47:01
Speaker 3: of theories and speculation on that one as well. The
47:04
Speaker 3: people have theorized that there was twenty minutes of the
47:07
Speaker 3: movie that were cut out of the end when he
47:11
Speaker 3: showed it to Warner Brothers and Warner Brothers asked him
47:15
Speaker 3: to cut some scenes out of the movie. He didn't
47:20
Speaker 3: want to do it, and then you know, it turns
47:23
Speaker 3: up dead of a heart attack. But we don't really
47:28
Speaker 3: have any I think the only people that would know
47:30
Speaker 3: would be the executives at Warner Brothers and the main
47:36
Speaker 3: actors that were in the movie, because I'm pretty sure
47:41
Speaker 3: that he invited the main actors to view the movie,
47:50
Speaker 3: and so of course Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise, they
47:55
Speaker 3: would have had to have seen it, so they would
47:57
Speaker 3: be the only ones that would be able to verify
48:00
Speaker 3: if I if there was something different from Kubrick's original
48:06
Speaker 3: cut and what everybody else saw.
48:09
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was listening to Uh.
48:12
Speaker 1: It was a Joe Rogan episode probably a few months back,
48:14
Speaker 1: where Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avery that helped him write
48:18
Speaker 1: the stories for Pulp Fiction. Roger Avery said that he's
48:23
Speaker 1: one hundred percent sure, and I mean he knows a
48:25
Speaker 1: lot of these people in Hollywood that we didn't get
48:28
Speaker 1: the cut Kubrick wanted to put out. And usually when
48:31
Speaker 1: I hear people say that, it's like they're guessing. But
48:34
Speaker 1: he sounded really sure about it, and I mean I
48:36
Speaker 1: got to lean that way myself. A gun to head
48:39
Speaker 1: had to take a guess. But do you know who
48:42
Speaker 1: Sean McCann from Wake the Dead is.
48:45
Speaker 3: No, I don't.
48:46
Speaker 1: So he's got this theory you should look into it
48:48
Speaker 1: where he plays the movie against itself.
48:52
Speaker 2: So he starts he.
48:55
Speaker 1: Just starts the movie like normal, and then he has
48:56
Speaker 1: a time code where he starts it again and then
49:00
Speaker 1: movie almost talks to itself and answers questions, and he's
49:03
Speaker 1: convinced that he's stumbled upon a code that Kuber intentionally
49:07
Speaker 1: put out there. And I mean, it's compelling. I would
49:12
Speaker 1: definitely check it out if it is you. And I
49:14
Speaker 1: know he went on William Ramsey and talked.
49:15
Speaker 2: About it if that might be a good place to
49:19
Speaker 2: look at it.
49:19
Speaker 1: But now he's doing all sorts of things where he
49:22
Speaker 1: plays eyes wide shut, starts the Shining, and there's just
49:26
Speaker 1: this whole I mean, this guy's got a lot of
49:28
Speaker 1: time on his hands. And it's kind of like when
49:29
Speaker 1: you used to like start Dark Side of the Moon
49:33
Speaker 1: with a Wizard of Oz kind of thing.
49:36
Speaker 3: But you know, you can also do that with The Shining.
49:38
Speaker 3: You can play it forwards and backwards at the same time.
49:41
Speaker 2: Really, have you done that.
49:44
Speaker 3: I've never personally done it, but I've seen it done
49:46
Speaker 3: and it's online and pretty much everything like lines up
49:52
Speaker 3: interesting And that's what they say about like per perfection, right,
49:59
Speaker 3: something as per You can do it both ways right
50:07
Speaker 3: and watch your forwards, you can watch your backwards and
50:11
Speaker 3: it's still creates the same story.
50:14
Speaker 2: Are you a David Lynch fan?
50:16
Speaker 3: I do like David Lynch.
50:17
Speaker 1: Yeah. It kind of reminds me of the way he
50:19
Speaker 1: hired that little dude to do the Lions backwards and then.
50:24
Speaker 2: He would play him.
50:26
Speaker 1: He the guy talks backwards so that when you play
50:29
Speaker 1: it backwards, he's talking normally and.
50:31
Speaker 2: It's just like he said, it wasn't even that hard
50:34
Speaker 2: to do.
50:35
Speaker 1: He's like, when, yeah, when you're starting something back and
50:38
Speaker 1: it should make as much sense.
50:40
Speaker 2: I don't know, but yeah, I mean that's.
50:42
Speaker 3: Some martial arts like like the masters will tell you
50:47
Speaker 3: that whenever you're performing like a you know, taekwondo in
50:54
Speaker 3: Korea they call forms, and in karate they call it katas.
51:01
Speaker 3: You become a master when you can perform those forms
51:08
Speaker 3: or those kadas in reverse, so you learn the former
51:15
Speaker 3: kada front words and then but you really learn it
51:21
Speaker 3: when you can do it backwards.
51:25
Speaker 2: Interesting.
51:27
Speaker 1: So Laurel Canyon, that's probably my favorite topic.
51:32
Speaker 2: And you got a.
51:34
Speaker 1: Guy in there as man his I wanted to remember
51:37
Speaker 1: his name, It's Mark Devlin. Yes, that he's like a
51:40
Speaker 1: British dude, right, and man, what a find that was.
51:44
Speaker 1: And to get his input on all that stuff, because
51:47
Speaker 1: you know, all we really have is McGowan and people
51:51
Speaker 1: who have uh kind of taken his researcher and I
51:55
Speaker 1: ran with it. But it seems to me that the
51:59
Speaker 1: fact that you could put Laurel Canyon and the Beatles
52:03
Speaker 1: and all of this and it all ties to the Shining,
52:06
Speaker 1: I just intrigues me because the more research we do
52:10
Speaker 1: and you see that it's pretty much all connected. I
52:13
Speaker 1: mean I was stoked when you said you're gonna put
52:15
Speaker 1: Laurel Canyon stuff in this movie, and as like trying
52:18
Speaker 1: to figure out how it would work out, but it
52:20
Speaker 1: just it really flows into it, just as well as
52:22
Speaker 1: you know, all the Kubrick stuff.
52:26
Speaker 3: Yeah, the Laurel Canyon section was very important because Kubrick
52:31
Speaker 3: lived in la for a couple of years too, so
52:35
Speaker 3: and I'm pretty sure that everybody during that time was
52:37
Speaker 3: at least aware that the military had a freaking movie
52:42
Speaker 3: studio on top of Laurel Canyon. I mean several actors
52:46
Speaker 3: had top ranking security clearance for it. Ronald Reagan had it,
52:50
Speaker 3: Marilyn Monroe, Carrie Grant, James Stewart, and the list goes
52:55
Speaker 3: on and on and me yep, Walt Disney had the
53:03
Speaker 3: had the clearance there as well. So it's like, exactly
53:06
Speaker 3: what what were they doing up there? But we do
53:08
Speaker 3: know that that's where the the nuclear testing footage was done,
53:13
Speaker 3: and all the nuclear testing footage was done on miniature sets.
53:18
Speaker 1: Yeah, because the official story is that they developed the
53:21
Speaker 1: test footage there.
53:22
Speaker 3: It's like, no, you shot it there, Yeah, you can't
53:27
Speaker 3: explode it a supposed nuclear bomb and the camera still survived. Bro,
53:33
Speaker 3: give me a break, dude, not going to happen. You're
53:35
Speaker 3: telling me that a big, giant, bulky camera, because that's
53:39
Speaker 3: what they were back then, right, They're the big freaking
53:43
Speaker 3: shoulder cameras that you had to look through a freaking
53:47
Speaker 3: viewfinder to know exactly what you're shooting, which makes zero
53:54
Speaker 3: sense for the moon landing footage. You're telling me that
53:58
Speaker 3: they that they brought a giant freaking video camera up
54:04
Speaker 3: on a space shuttle and went to the Moon and
54:07
Speaker 3: was able to look through the viewfinder to get a
54:11
Speaker 3: good shot through a space suit, through a space helmet.
54:15
Speaker 3: They were able to know exactly what they were filming. Yeah,
54:19
Speaker 3: and I don't know if you've ever messed around with
54:22
Speaker 3: one of those old cameras before.
54:24
Speaker 2: I've held one. I wouldn't. I've never used one.
54:27
Speaker 3: They are old, they are bulky, and they're inconvenient.
54:33
Speaker 1: Yeah, most of them were hand cranked too, like especially
54:37
Speaker 1: in the forties.
54:40
Speaker 3: Probably the smallest sized one, I don't even have anything
54:45
Speaker 3: for reference.
54:48
Speaker 4: I guess this this, this Egyptian photograph here would probably
54:55
Speaker 4: be the smallest type of camera that they could possibly have.
54:59
Speaker 3: So it'd have a a lens here, and you would
55:03
Speaker 3: be holding it like this in order to film, like
55:08
Speaker 3: up on your shoulder because it's heavy, and the viewfinder
55:14
Speaker 3: would like be here, so you would have it would
55:18
Speaker 3: have to be out like this. You wouldn't be able
55:21
Speaker 3: to be looking through a viewfinder with a giant freaking
55:25
Speaker 3: space suit on. You'd have no idea what you're shooting.
55:29
Speaker 3: It would be all like this. You'd be like, you
55:34
Speaker 3: wouldn't have any idea you couldn't keep it still because
55:36
Speaker 3: it's so heavy.
55:39
Speaker 1: What about I'll just ask, do you think that nuclear
55:44
Speaker 1: bombs even exist?
55:47
Speaker 3: Oh? Man, you have to bring that question out?
55:49
Speaker 1: Well, I don't, so if you don't, if you want
55:51
Speaker 1: to not feel embarrassed, if you feel that way too.
55:53
Speaker 1: But I'm not afraid to say it anymore. I just
55:56
Speaker 1: think there's enough evidence that they faked. I mean, they
55:59
Speaker 1: did fire bomb the fuck out of Japan, sure, but
56:02
Speaker 1: they also did that in Vietnam.
56:04
Speaker 2: It wasn't nukes there.
56:08
Speaker 3: I honestly don't know. I haven't done enough research into it.
56:12
Speaker 3: It's not really something that that interests me to the
56:17
Speaker 3: point that I would like need to look into it
56:20
Speaker 3: that heavily. But I do know about the uh, the
56:26
Speaker 3: one what was the one guy that he did like
56:29
Speaker 3: an experiment with nuclear radiation or something where you went
56:33
Speaker 3: and like touched it or like ate it or something.
56:36
Speaker 3: I don't know what he did, but it turned out
56:39
Speaker 3: to be Okay, I don't I don't know. I don't
56:41
Speaker 3: really have an opinion on it, And really I don't
56:43
Speaker 3: think that it it really even matters that much if
56:49
Speaker 3: like they're not or if they are. I don't think
56:53
Speaker 3: that it changes our reality at all. Like, I'm still
56:56
Speaker 3: gonna have to wake up and do mine normal shit
57:01
Speaker 3: every day and go to the grocery store and do
57:03
Speaker 3: everything that I gotta do. You know, doesn't really make
57:06
Speaker 3: a difference to me if they're real or if they're
57:10
Speaker 3: not real. I mean, and well, we might find out, dude,
57:14
Speaker 3: I don't know that might find out.
57:16
Speaker 1: That's part of the reason I think that they're not
57:19
Speaker 1: is because if they've only been used twice in a
57:24
Speaker 1: three day period, all these world leaders that supposedly have them,
57:28
Speaker 1: I just can't imagine that they wouldn't have been used,
57:32
Speaker 1: since I do think they might fake it a project
57:35
Speaker 1: nuke being kind of thing, because there's an awful lot
57:38
Speaker 1: of talk.
57:38
Speaker 2: Of nukes as a result of like certain.
57:44
Speaker 1: World political things going on right now.
57:46
Speaker 3: But yeah, I just was curious, and well, I mean,
57:49
Speaker 3: if you think about it, like they could be, I
57:53
Speaker 3: don't know. I mean, the reason that they wouldn't do
57:57
Speaker 3: it again is because if they are real, they CAUs
57:59
Speaker 3: way too much destruction. They wrecked too much stuff, right,
58:04
Speaker 3: And you don't want to go in and completely destroy
58:07
Speaker 3: an entire freaking country, right. That's not conducive to anybody
58:12
Speaker 3: that doesn't help anybody. You want to go in and
58:14
Speaker 3: you want to take it over while everything is still standing,
58:18
Speaker 3: because you want to you want to use everything that's
58:21
Speaker 3: already there. So it makes sense that they would have
58:24
Speaker 3: done it during World War two. If they are real,
58:28
Speaker 3: drop them so then people would be like, oh shit,
58:33
Speaker 3: you know, we gotta you just wrecked everything. You know,
58:37
Speaker 3: we got to take a step back and not mess
58:39
Speaker 3: with this anymore. And that's probably a big reason why that. Again,
58:44
Speaker 3: if they are real, that they're never used again because
58:48
Speaker 3: it causes too much destruction. And then if you throw
58:50
Speaker 3: in the alien narrative, right, the extraterrestrial narrative. So whenever
58:54
Speaker 3: we drop the nukes, the ETS came down and was like,
58:56
Speaker 3: oh well, we got to disarm all these nukes. We
58:59
Speaker 3: can't have all the people of the world having the
59:04
Speaker 3: access to all these nukes. They'll blow each other up.
59:06
Speaker 3: And you guys down there on Earth are a whole
59:09
Speaker 3: giant experiment down there. We use your your souls to
59:13
Speaker 3: power our ships, and we chop off your nutsacks and
59:16
Speaker 3: use it for fuel for our UFOs. You can't all
59:20
Speaker 3: be killing each other with these nukes. I mean, that's
59:22
Speaker 3: been a common theory for a really long time. That's
59:25
Speaker 3: what they all love to talk about, like all the
59:27
Speaker 3: whistleblowers that don't say jack shit about anything. I go
59:30
Speaker 3: up there.
59:31
Speaker 4: They're in our nuclear test SARTs, they're shutting.
59:34
Speaker 3: Down on nukes. They have the ability to turn on
59:37
Speaker 3: and off our nukes, and they got the ability to
59:39
Speaker 3: do that, they can.
59:40
Speaker 2: Probably launch it.
59:41
Speaker 3: This is national security at risk.
59:45
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I also got to think that if I
59:47
Speaker 1: was gonna think they're real, just the chain reaction it
59:51
Speaker 1: would set off of the mutually assured destruction kind of
59:54
Speaker 1: thing where if Won drops, yeah, we're just gonna it's
59:59
Speaker 1: just gonna be everybody shooting everybody with him if it
1:00:02
Speaker 1: just ever happened. I mean the Cold War where it
1:00:05
Speaker 1: was like we were this close many times and for
1:00:08
Speaker 1: whatever reason they decided not to do it. But anyway,
1:00:11
Speaker 1: we're kind of getting off there on a tangent. But
1:00:14
Speaker 1: uh yeah, just the Laurel Canyon thing with the lookout
1:00:17
Speaker 1: Mountain Air Force Base, how you kind of shone like
1:00:21
Speaker 1: maybe Kubrick was kind of wanting us to look over there,
1:00:24
Speaker 1: because he made the overlook look quite a bit like it.
1:00:29
Speaker 3: Yeah, he really did. And a very similar name as well,
1:00:36
Speaker 3: the uh No Overlook lookout, you know, they very similar,
1:00:43
Speaker 3: and then looked out, I'm on. Air Force Base also
1:00:45
Speaker 3: had a hotel that set on the exact excuse me
1:00:50
Speaker 3: location of where the Air Force base came in and
1:00:54
Speaker 3: was built, and that hotel burned to the ground. Now,
1:00:58
Speaker 3: at the end of Stephen Kings book, the shining the
1:01:02
Speaker 3: hotel burns of the ground didn't happen in Stanley Kubrick's
1:01:08
Speaker 3: rendition of the movie, but in the sequel Doctor Sleep,
1:01:14
Speaker 3: the hotel burns of the ground, so they finally pay
1:01:18
Speaker 3: that off. I don't know if that's it might just
1:01:21
Speaker 3: be a coincidence, but a very strange coincidence at that.
1:01:25
Speaker 2: That Actually never read the book.
1:01:27
Speaker 1: I did see the movie, and it would be weird
1:01:30
Speaker 1: if it's in the book, because then it would have
1:01:32
Speaker 1: burned down twice.
1:01:33
Speaker 2: But I kind of want to know now.
1:01:36
Speaker 1: But yeah, do you have anything else you want to
1:01:38
Speaker 1: say about about your movie or the just anything in
1:01:41
Speaker 1: general we've talked about.
1:01:44
Speaker 3: Uh, just please support the movie. If you haven't seen it, Yeah,
1:01:48
Speaker 3: please go out there give it a watch. If you
1:01:51
Speaker 3: don't want to, I recommend buying it because you're gonna
1:01:55
Speaker 3: you're gonna want. There's so much information in there. It's
1:01:57
Speaker 3: like packed all tightly in there. Some people that that's
1:02:00
Speaker 3: watched it, they're like, man, I don't even have any
1:02:03
Speaker 3: room to breathe on this freaking thing. It's just like
1:02:05
Speaker 3: constantly hitting you. But that's it's a long movie. It's
1:02:10
Speaker 3: almost two hours long. So and that was that's a
1:02:13
Speaker 3: shortened version of what we could have made. It could
1:02:17
Speaker 3: have been way longer than that. It could have roughly
1:02:20
Speaker 3: have been like three hours long, but that would have
1:02:22
Speaker 3: just been a total freaking nightmare for me to edit
1:02:26
Speaker 3: and put together an entire three hour long movie. The
1:02:29
Speaker 3: almost two hour long one was enough for me. So
1:02:32
Speaker 3: please go out there support it. And if you're not
1:02:36
Speaker 3: you're listening and you want to watch it, and you're
1:02:38
Speaker 3: not in the United States or in the UK, you
1:02:41
Speaker 3: can watch it on Vimeo as well. You can rent
1:02:44
Speaker 3: it or buy it on Vimeo. So if you're in Canada, Australia,
1:02:49
Speaker 3: any other country that you may live, in, Mexico wherever,
1:02:56
Speaker 3: you can watch it on Vimeo. And thanks for having
1:02:59
Speaker 3: me on. Really appreciate it. Was a fun, fun shot
1:03:02
Speaker 3: and I'm really happy that you watched it, and I'm
1:03:05
Speaker 3: really happy you enjoyed it, and you know it's important
1:03:09
Speaker 3: to support independent filmmakers. This was independent film and a
1:03:16
Speaker 3: lot of blood, sweat and tears went into making this.
1:03:18
Speaker 3: So please tell your friends. Share it in the Facebook group,
1:03:22
Speaker 3: share this video, support this man, support this channel, hit
1:03:27
Speaker 3: the thumbs up or leave a comment that helps out
1:03:33
Speaker 3: repost it, share it in Facebook groups, Instagram. This is
1:03:39
Speaker 3: how we defeat this gigantic industry that has been created
1:03:45
Speaker 3: just for the special people and.
1:03:48
Speaker 2: Your show as well. What is it? Is it raised
1:03:50
Speaker 2: by giants?
1:03:51
Speaker 3: Yes, raised by giants on YouTube and Indy and all
1:03:54
Speaker 3: podcast platforms.
1:03:56
Speaker 1: All right, man, Well it's been a pleasure as always.
1:03:59
Speaker 1: I hope you you're gonna take a little break, but
1:04:01
Speaker 1: I do look forward to whatever you take on next.
1:04:04
Speaker 2: You're a young guy.
1:04:05
Speaker 1: You've already got some masterpieces under your belt, and I'm
1:04:08
Speaker 1: sure they're just gonna get better. I will email you
1:04:12
Speaker 1: or send you a thing on X that little snippet
1:04:15
Speaker 1: of Ted Bundy, and you can let me know what
1:04:17
Speaker 1: you think. But all right, brother, I have a glorious
1:04:21
Speaker 1: rest of this Tuesday, March the fourth.
1:04:25
Speaker 2: I didn't even know it was March fourth.
1:04:26
Speaker 1: All right, buddy, Until next time, be well.
1:04:30
Speaker 2: Everybody