Latest / Houselights: A Film Director Podcast / The Seven-Per-Cent Solution (1976) - Herbert Ross | Houselights #267: Wing of Sherlock

Transcript

The Seven-Per-Cent Solution (1976) - Herbert Ross | Houselights #267: Wing of Sherlock · Houselights: A Film Director Podcast

0:03
Speaker 1: Welcome to the ned Palty.
0:20
Speaker 2: Welcome back to House Lights, our director discussion show here
0:23
Speaker 2: on the Nerd Party Network. This week, we're continuing with
0:27
Speaker 2: the Wing of Sherlock as we examine different directors, actors,
0:31
Speaker 2: and interpretation of the famed British detective. The seven percent
0:36
Speaker 2: solution might be up there for most unusual title we've covered,
0:41
Speaker 2: but that's all right. Nicole Williamson is our star as
0:45
Speaker 2: Sherlock Holmes, but top billing does go to Alan Arkin
0:49
Speaker 2: for doctor Sigmund Freud. I'm your host this evening, Darren Moser,
0:54
Speaker 2: and I'm just so excited for the initial run of
0:56
Speaker 2: my new train, Locomotive and carriage. Hope nothing happens to it.
1:00
Speaker 2: And I'm joined again by doctor Tristan Riddell and doctor
1:05
Speaker 2: John Mills. You decide what their professions are, Well, let's
1:09
Speaker 2: mix up that seven percent solution look but not touch
1:13
Speaker 2: in the Wing of Sherlock Holmes. Yeah, that title is
1:18
Speaker 2: so strange.
1:19
Speaker 3: Just to clarify audience, we are not going to be
1:22
Speaker 3: mixing up now seven percent solution tonight.
1:27
Speaker 2: But what does that means?
1:28
Speaker 4: That really throws off my plans for the evening, But fine,
1:33
Speaker 4: Thanks for the curveball on that one.
1:36
Speaker 5: I'll put my little vials away here, thank you very much.
1:38
Speaker 2: I always get it mixed up. Is it heroin or
1:40
Speaker 2: cocaine that the solution is, it's the hair cocaine cocaine.
1:44
Speaker 5: It's cocaine.
1:45
Speaker 4: But I think, like, I don't know, I haven't read
1:47
Speaker 4: the book or anything, but I always thought he had
1:49
Speaker 4: a heroin addiction and it's changed cocaine for Freud, because
1:53
Speaker 4: Freud was a big cocaine guy, right, yeah, yeah, in.
1:57
Speaker 3: The books as far as I remember, it's heroin exactly
1:59
Speaker 3: like you said. But seven percent solution is seven percent
2:03
Speaker 3: cocaine and then ninety three percent saline.
2:07
Speaker 2: Geez.
2:10
Speaker 4: But in defense of the concept, you know, a lot
2:15
Speaker 4: of people were very strong advocates of cocaine for any
2:19
Speaker 4: number of reasons, oh, very significantly Sigmund Freud then yeah, yeah,
2:24
Speaker 4: who was he prescribed it.
2:25
Speaker 2: Like he had prescribed it pharmacy, like yes.
2:29
Speaker 3: And I think it wasn't until his friend died because
2:33
Speaker 3: I think he gave his friend cocaine to help with
2:36
Speaker 3: his opioid addiction.
2:39
Speaker 2: Yes, so out of.
2:42
Speaker 3: Gee yeah, and then the guy ended up, you know,
2:45
Speaker 3: killing himself because of his addictions to both, and that's
2:48
Speaker 3: when Freud was like, you know what, maybe I need
2:51
Speaker 3: to rethink this narcotics thing. And he did, and he
2:55
Speaker 3: became a huge opponent to it in later years of
2:58
Speaker 3: his life and actually spoke against it, wrote articles about it,
3:00
Speaker 3: everything like that.
3:02
Speaker 4: The important thing to keep in mind, though, is, as
3:04
Speaker 4: we've watched this film, the romanticized vision of Freud has.
3:09
Speaker 5: Faded over time.
3:10
Speaker 4: I read a book a year ago, a year or
3:12
Speaker 4: so ago, but Freud was in the title, but I
3:16
Speaker 4: forget what the subtitle was, but it was like a
3:18
Speaker 4: six hundred page book, and this author really went to
3:22
Speaker 4: town on Freud, like completely dismantled all of the mythos
3:25
Speaker 4: around him, including the fact that his advocacy for cocaine
3:30
Speaker 4: was basically him stealing stuff from other people because he
3:34
Speaker 4: just wanted to be famous above all, and stuff like that.
3:37
Speaker 4: But in the nineteen seventies, that wasn't people's vision of
3:39
Speaker 4: Sigmund Freud. So Alan Arkin's portrayal of him here is
3:43
Speaker 4: completely in line with what people thought.
3:45
Speaker 3: So I think I read somewhere where Alan Arkin knew,
3:50
Speaker 3: like did research on Sigmund Freud, and he's just like,
3:54
Speaker 3: this guy is a jackass. Yeah, he was, and then
3:58
Speaker 3: he started talking working with the director about it, and
4:01
Speaker 3: he figured out that the writer who we all know
4:05
Speaker 3: in Love his father was a Nicholas Meyer's father was
4:11
Speaker 3: a psychologist or psychiatrist. And so Alan Arkin thinks that
4:17
Speaker 3: it's more of a betrayal of mister Meyer than Sigmund Freud.
4:22
Speaker 2: That would be fair well. And this is one of
4:25
Speaker 2: those interesting stories where you have a legitimate real person
4:30
Speaker 2: integrated into a story of a fictional person. So you
4:34
Speaker 2: have you know, Charlotte Colmes was not a real person
4:37
Speaker 2: as a character, but Sigmund Freud, Yeah, we're gonna definitely
4:40
Speaker 2: look at a harsher lens because he is a real
4:43
Speaker 2: person who had real opinions and real impact on society.
4:48
Speaker 4: Just to follow up what you're saying there, And I
4:50
Speaker 4: know we're starting off on a weird tip here, but
4:52
Speaker 4: like my daughter came in while I was watching seven
4:56
Speaker 4: percent Solution, the seventeen year old not the ten year old, right,
5:00
Speaker 4: which see which see well, it was, oh my gosh,
5:02
Speaker 4: it was. I think there was about thirty forty minutes
5:04
Speaker 4: left and Holmes and Freud are talking and I explained
5:08
Speaker 4: the concept of the movie.
5:09
Speaker 5: I'm like guh you know.
5:11
Speaker 4: Yeah, I'm like, you know, Sigmund Freud and Sherlock Holmes
5:13
Speaker 4: team up, and she goes, but they never met, And
5:15
Speaker 4: I go, well, yeah, she goes, so why is the
5:19
Speaker 4: movie putting them together? I was like, because Sherlock Holmes
5:21
Speaker 4: never existed, so it's sort of like a historical.
5:24
Speaker 5: Fiction sort of thing. She goes, what, he never existed?
5:28
Speaker 4: I said, you thought Sherlock Holmes was a real person,
5:31
Speaker 4: So I have to dig a little deeper, are you No? No,
5:35
Speaker 4: But the thing is, I got to dig a little deeper.
5:37
Speaker 4: It's entirely possible that a kid like I probably would
5:40
Speaker 4: have thought Sherlock Holmes was a real dude when I
5:42
Speaker 4: was younger, you know, like, I don't.
5:44
Speaker 2: Know, do you guys?
5:45
Speaker 3: Remember in twenty twelve when we had the one hundred
5:50
Speaker 3: year anniversary of Titanic, and you know, documentaris were coming
5:54
Speaker 3: out and people were talking about and all these young
5:56
Speaker 3: people were like, wait, that wasn't just a movie with
6:00
Speaker 3: back and Rose, Like, no, I remember that, like that
6:03
Speaker 3: was a real thing. I was just like, oh no,
6:07
Speaker 3: you know, your.
6:08
Speaker 2: Knowledge begins and ends with the James Cameron movie. And
6:12
Speaker 2: I mean, we laugh at it, but Honestly, unless someone
6:15
Speaker 2: tells you, and you're little, you have no way of
6:18
Speaker 2: knowing what is and isn't real.
6:20
Speaker 4: Yeah, or I mean, my gosh, the way curricula has
6:24
Speaker 4: changed over time, I think they'll never get around to
6:27
Speaker 4: working seven percent solution into the school reading curriculum.
6:31
Speaker 2: That's why we're here on House Lights to complete the education,
6:35
Speaker 2: no bringing it back around. So okay, so we're looking
6:39
Speaker 2: at Sherlock again. This is a very interesting story in
6:45
Speaker 2: that it's kind of a dual dual protagonist way, like
6:49
Speaker 2: obviously Sherlock is Sherlock's and Watson's kind of there, but
6:53
Speaker 2: like Holmes not home, sorry, Freud kind of sucks up
6:57
Speaker 2: a lot of the Watson air, like a lot of
6:59
Speaker 2: things that have been kind of given to Watson was
7:03
Speaker 2: spoken by Freud. And you also have you know this
7:09
Speaker 2: for us on House Lights. You know, we jumped from
7:13
Speaker 2: fifty nine to now seventy six, so another couple of
7:16
Speaker 2: decades into what I kind of feel is the first
7:20
Speaker 2: legitimate maybe that's not the right word, but like this
7:23
Speaker 2: the what's what is being carried in this performance is
7:27
Speaker 2: I think you know, cinema has become cinema. You know,
7:31
Speaker 2: this story is well pulled out. You know, we're meeting
7:34
Speaker 2: a historical, real world figure. So all that to say,
7:39
Speaker 2: that's the big wind up for my question. So John,
7:42
Speaker 2: with when you were coming into this, you know, were
7:45
Speaker 2: you expecting more homes e sayings and little pieces, you know,
7:53
Speaker 2: like where he's kind of caricature, or were you expecting
7:57
Speaker 2: this to kind of, Oh, he's he's meeting a real person.
8:00
Speaker 2: It's going to be grounded in more reality, Like how
8:03
Speaker 2: was that approaching it?
8:05
Speaker 4: I was stunned, honestly, because I didn't know anything except
8:08
Speaker 4: the fact that Nicholas Meyer had written it and that
8:10
Speaker 4: Sigmund Freud was in it. I was stunned with the
8:13
Speaker 4: way the story progressed because this is one of those
8:16
Speaker 4: things where I looked like Ford's, oh, well, how are
8:19
Speaker 4: they going to meet up? And I think that the
8:22
Speaker 4: beginning part of this film you're left a lot. I
8:25
Speaker 4: think the reason you're talking about Freud resonating so much
8:28
Speaker 4: is I think the movie doesn't really come together until
8:32
Speaker 4: Freud comes in. And I mean that in the most
8:35
Speaker 4: negative sort of sense, because until Freud comes in, I'm
8:38
Speaker 4: sitting there sort of like what.
8:40
Speaker 5: What what are we even doing here?
8:42
Speaker 4: It shodily sets up its premise where it's like, Okay,
8:46
Speaker 4: so Watson is the narrator and he's copying to the
8:52
Speaker 4: fact that he wrote fantasy stories based on his friend
8:56
Speaker 4: Sherlock Holmes, and this is the real sure Walk. And
9:00
Speaker 4: I'm like, there's a whole lot here that could have
9:03
Speaker 4: been sussed out a lot cleaner. And then you have
9:07
Speaker 4: Holmes is now an addict and he's talking about Moriarty.
9:10
Speaker 4: And the first sense where I was I knew I
9:13
Speaker 4: was gonna have a little trouble plugging into things is
9:16
Speaker 4: those first flashes of him as a child walking up
9:19
Speaker 4: the staircase come out of nowhere. But there's no there's
9:23
Speaker 4: nothing like it's it's just smashed together in the edit
9:27
Speaker 4: as opposed to some sort of like a dream, uh
9:32
Speaker 4: look to it or anything like that. And so you know, right,
9:36
Speaker 4: and it's a kid walking up and I'm like, oh,
9:38
Speaker 4: it's hit, but there's like no narration over to be
9:40
Speaker 4: like I remember walking up the stairs, Watson, and it's
9:42
Speaker 4: like what stairs homes. It's just all of a sudden
9:45
Speaker 4: there's a kid walking up the stairs and.
9:46
Speaker 5: Like what wait, what?
9:47
Speaker 4: And so yeah, I think I think what you're reacting
9:51
Speaker 4: to is that Holmes is not terribly well defined until
9:54
Speaker 4: he's given Freud to play against.
9:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, I kind of agree that the beginning pieces with Moriarty,
10:01
Speaker 2: while they were they felt kind of added to play
10:07
Speaker 2: in the home sandbox, like the traditional he's in London,
10:10
Speaker 2: it's after Moriarty, but it was almost kind of disjointed,
10:15
Speaker 2: and then, like you said, it did kind of pick
10:17
Speaker 2: up once they got him on the hunt, you know,
10:20
Speaker 2: the false hunt to get to Sigmund, which I thought
10:23
Speaker 2: was really clever. How they're like, how we have to
10:25
Speaker 2: trick him to get him over there? But what about you, Tristan,
10:29
Speaker 2: Like the first act, you know, how is that kind
10:33
Speaker 2: of coming across, especially on a lesser known story as
10:38
Speaker 2: far as it's not Baskerville, it's not, you know, the
10:41
Speaker 2: big one. We hear Moriarty's name thrown around a lot,
10:44
Speaker 2: but is it connecting or are you having to jump
10:49
Speaker 2: between trains at the beginning.
10:51
Speaker 3: I think it's connecting. I think it's all making sense.
10:55
Speaker 3: But I think the structure is probably the worst thing
10:58
Speaker 3: about this movie where it wasn't because you know, like
11:02
Speaker 3: like John was talking about, you're just kind of spinning
11:04
Speaker 3: your wheels a little bit you're just like, where is
11:06
Speaker 3: this going? What's going on? And then once you get
11:10
Speaker 3: to Freud, you're like, okay, cool, this is gonna be
11:12
Speaker 3: about his recovery. Maybe we'll discover some hidden truths. Maybe
11:17
Speaker 3: we'll you know, like maybe we'll do some throwbacks to
11:20
Speaker 3: some other cases, or maybe we'll have like a retrospective
11:23
Speaker 3: with Watson and helping you know, Sherlock get through it,
11:27
Speaker 3: you know, like at his bedside. But then we shift
11:30
Speaker 3: heres again at I think over the hour mark, we're
11:34
Speaker 3: past that the half point, and then all of a sudden,
11:37
Speaker 3: there's a case that's you know, thrown in his lap
11:40
Speaker 3: and they and you're just like, wait a second, is
11:43
Speaker 3: this going to be a Sherlock Holmes mystery?
11:45
Speaker 2: Now?
11:45
Speaker 3: And we're past the half mark? What movie does this
11:49
Speaker 3: want to be? And I think that's what I really
11:52
Speaker 3: struggled with. Now, before we keep going, I do want
11:55
Speaker 3: to talk about Herbert Ross, the director. So this was
11:58
Speaker 3: directed by Herbert Ross, written by Nicholas Meyer that was
12:02
Speaker 3: based off his own book, and his own book was
12:05
Speaker 3: a huge success, like everybody loved the book, everyone bought
12:08
Speaker 3: the book. It was a financial success. Thus that's why
12:10
Speaker 3: they made a movie.
12:11
Speaker 2: Now.
12:11
Speaker 3: Herbert Ross is a very well known director, but he
12:16
Speaker 3: also is a choreographer, and I think that in itself
12:20
Speaker 3: is really really cool when you see directors come from
12:23
Speaker 3: a different kind of background other than writer or actor
12:27
Speaker 3: or things like that. Where so like he did the
12:31
Speaker 3: choreography for Doctor Doolittle and Who's Afraid for Virginia Woolf,
12:36
Speaker 3: the Fantastics and a lot of really fun stuff. But
12:41
Speaker 3: as a director, he has done Funny Lady, Played against Sam,
12:47
Speaker 3: He did the Goodbye Girl, Footloose, The Secret of My
12:51
Speaker 3: Success with Michael J. Fox Steel, Magnolia's My Blue Heaven,
12:56
Speaker 3: True Colors, Undercover Blues, which I freaking love. That's one
13:00
Speaker 3: of my favorite movies when I was a kid is
13:02
Speaker 3: Undercover Blues. And Boys on the Side was his last
13:05
Speaker 3: film in ninety five. So this this director is a director,
13:08
Speaker 3: like he knows what he's doing. He comes from a
13:10
Speaker 3: really interesting background. And I want to know from you guys,
13:15
Speaker 3: like are you are you guys familiar with his work
13:17
Speaker 3: at all? You know besides Footloose obviously, you know, like
13:19
Speaker 3: everybody's everybody's seen Footloose and knows it. But where either
13:23
Speaker 3: of you guys aware of Herbert Ross's work before you
13:29
Speaker 3: went into.
13:29
Speaker 4: This unwittingly familiar with some of his films, is what
13:32
Speaker 4: I would say, Yeah, like I he the director of Footloose.
13:36
Speaker 4: Doesn't enter my brain and you say director of Footloose.
13:39
Speaker 4: I was like, oh, yeah, okay, but you know, play
13:42
Speaker 4: it again, Sam, And my brain is always because he's
13:44
Speaker 4: he's stars in it, is I'm like, oh, I thought that.
13:47
Speaker 4: I thought Woody Allen directed that, Like I have to
13:48
Speaker 4: be reminded somebody else directed that every single time. And
13:52
Speaker 4: it's like, because Woody Allen is the star, and I
13:54
Speaker 4: just presume what he Allen directed it because that's usually
13:57
Speaker 4: how that went. But yeah, I guess I didn't pay
14:01
Speaker 4: any attention that he did My Blue Heaven, which is
14:04
Speaker 4: it's actually a pretty pretty funny movie. Actually, Steve Martin
14:08
Speaker 4: really having fun with that with Rick Marianis.
14:12
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's kind of the same like back when we
14:15
Speaker 2: did McTiernan, where like you kind of knew the name,
14:17
Speaker 2: but you had never I'd never sat down and been like, oh,
14:22
Speaker 2: what what has he done? And you know, you start
14:25
Speaker 2: to find all these little check boxes of oh, I
14:27
Speaker 2: know that one. But it is kind of before the
14:30
Speaker 2: era of you know, Spielberg and the named known director
14:35
Speaker 2: where you like, I went to that movie because it's
14:37
Speaker 2: a Spielberg. You know, it wasn't like, oh, I'm going
14:40
Speaker 2: to go see a Ross movies like No, No, that
14:43
Speaker 2: that we weren't there yet nothing against the director. Is
14:46
Speaker 2: just wasn't the era of the named and promoted director
14:53
Speaker 2: as part of that process. So okay, well let's talk
14:57
Speaker 2: a bit about you know, we've touched a bit on
14:59
Speaker 2: the editing and pacing, and as we're talking about Herbert
15:03
Speaker 2: Ross with directing, you know, there's definitely some standout scenes
15:08
Speaker 2: in this movie. The horse sequence is really engaging. As
15:14
Speaker 2: they're you know, trying to not be staying I'm not
15:16
Speaker 2: saying it's the greatest thing. I'm just saying it's engaging.
15:18
Speaker 2: But i will say I will say though that overall,
15:24
Speaker 2: as as we often will remark here on House Lights,
15:28
Speaker 2: I felt really good about spatiality and placement over Like
15:33
Speaker 2: I knew where I was in the hospital, I knew
15:36
Speaker 2: where I was, like there anytime they're retreading or revisiting
15:40
Speaker 2: a place, it was very easy to tell where things were,
15:44
Speaker 2: where rooms connected to rooms, and buildings to buildings. In
15:48
Speaker 2: a general sense, like I really enjoyed that. It never
15:50
Speaker 2: felt like, Oh we turned a corner and I'm lost.
15:53
Speaker 2: You know, even though I've never been in this fictional
15:56
Speaker 2: you know, not fictional city, but fictional story.
15:58
Speaker 3: Uh but were there any We don't know, if we
16:02
Speaker 3: don't know until I go there personally, I can't confirm
16:07
Speaker 3: that it's real.
16:08
Speaker 2: So all right, the Vienna of Holmes Era, I see,
16:13
Speaker 2: this is the thing.
16:13
Speaker 4: This is what I'll say, since you know, with Ross
16:16
Speaker 4: as a director and everything, even when when I think
16:18
Speaker 4: about the movies of his that I have seen in
16:20
Speaker 4: addition to this Ross, I think you're right, Darren, He's
16:24
Speaker 4: not I'm not going to go see the new Herbert
16:26
Speaker 4: Ross movie. He's going to put it together. He's going
16:30
Speaker 4: to he knows how to get things, get the shot,
16:33
Speaker 4: get the actors to perform, and then sit in the
16:35
Speaker 4: editing bay with the editor and assemble things. There's nothing
16:39
Speaker 4: about this film. While I don't lose a sense of place.
16:43
Speaker 4: I mean, it's very aided by the fact of course,
16:46
Speaker 4: like you said, Tristan Vienna is real, but like it's
16:50
Speaker 4: one of those things where while I never lose my
16:52
Speaker 4: sense of place, there's nothing really innovative happening. Like when
16:56
Speaker 4: you referenced Hound of the Baskervilles before I can look
17:00
Speaker 4: at a Hammer film like I say, that's a Hammer film.
17:02
Speaker 4: I look at this and I say, this is pretty
17:05
Speaker 4: much almost every British movie I've ever seen from the seventies,
17:09
Speaker 4: with the way that it's lit and the filters and
17:12
Speaker 4: all of that type of stuff, Like it's very okay, guys,
17:15
Speaker 4: we've got to put a film together. This is what
17:16
Speaker 4: we do. We pull this off the shelf, we set
17:18
Speaker 4: the camera up, and we go. And I would say
17:21
Speaker 4: that also taking his whole body of work in in
17:24
Speaker 4: addition to the sense of place that you're calling out,
17:28
Speaker 4: I don't get the sense of a director that is
17:31
Speaker 4: giving his actors a lot of direction. And what I
17:35
Speaker 4: mean by that is he seems to be saying to
17:39
Speaker 4: them and you know, this can be a great positive
17:41
Speaker 4: as well.
17:42
Speaker 5: You're the pros. You figure it out.
17:44
Speaker 4: I don't get a sense like what's like a it's unfair.
17:48
Speaker 4: But like when I watched like a David Fincher movie,
17:50
Speaker 4: I can tell that Fincher is sitting there and there's
17:53
Speaker 4: a certain point at which an actor might be like, well,
17:55
Speaker 4: I think this and Fincher will be like, that's great,
17:57
Speaker 4: but that doesn't go in line with what I'm trying
17:58
Speaker 4: to do here, so that down, whereas this feels much
18:02
Speaker 4: more like yeah, cool, run with that. Well, we'll put
18:04
Speaker 4: it all together and we'll see how that works. And
18:06
Speaker 4: I think that you know that, That's the thing I
18:09
Speaker 4: struggle with most is the direction in this movie.
18:13
Speaker 3: Clint Eastwood is the kind of director that you're talking
18:16
Speaker 3: about where he'll get veterans and like Morgan Freeman, and
18:22
Speaker 3: he'll just go up to Freeman and so go you
18:24
Speaker 3: got it. He's like yep, and then he yells action
18:27
Speaker 3: and that's it. And Morgan like, I think one time
18:30
Speaker 3: there was a an interview where like somebody asked Morgan Freeman, like,
18:36
Speaker 3: what's your what's your least favorite kind of direction to
18:39
Speaker 3: get from a director, and he goes direction, Yeah.
18:45
Speaker 2: Of course, because.
18:46
Speaker 3: He's Morgan Freeman, he's allowed to say that, well yeah.
18:49
Speaker 2: And say it in his voice. Now looking around onto
18:54
Speaker 2: the cast, you know, Alan Arkin is definitely also one
18:58
Speaker 2: of those names that like you've heard a million times,
19:01
Speaker 2: you know, maybe you associate him with a specific role.
19:05
Speaker 2: The most recent thing I could remember him off the
19:07
Speaker 2: top of my head would have been two thousand and
19:12
Speaker 2: eight Get Smart. He was the chief in that and
19:15
Speaker 2: that was a fun, little comedy role, but obviously a huge,
19:18
Speaker 2: you know, body of work going back decades. But in
19:23
Speaker 2: this one, you know, like I've stated, in some of
19:26
Speaker 2: our other Sherlock escapades, you know, they're so much younger
19:32
Speaker 2: in the more recent work. I know that's you know,
19:34
Speaker 2: how aging works. But just seeing him, he's got full beard,
19:38
Speaker 2: you know, he's just I think he was really well
19:42
Speaker 2: cast in the version of Freud we got, like I
19:46
Speaker 2: enjoyed it not being a to like the point you
19:49
Speaker 2: said John about this was a high point for Freud
19:53
Speaker 2: as far as how people considered him. So he wasn't
19:56
Speaker 2: a caricature, you know, it wasn't it was they were
20:00
Speaker 2: trying to take it kind of in a serious way.
20:04
Speaker 2: And you could picture the elevator pitch of like what
20:07
Speaker 2: if Sigmund Freud met you know, and helped try to
20:10
Speaker 2: cure Sherlock Holmes of his addiction. And and they even
20:14
Speaker 2: are giving him high marks towards the end when he's
20:16
Speaker 2: trying to figure stuff out, and he's like, oh, brilliant.
20:19
Speaker 2: You know, I would have figured it out the same way,
20:22
Speaker 2: and Watson's just standing there, you know, holding up the
20:24
Speaker 2: wall and doing and doing nothing but Risin. You know,
20:29
Speaker 2: we've talked about protagonist confusion and things like that. Does
20:33
Speaker 2: it get that far in the seven percent solution where
20:36
Speaker 2: it starts to like, whose movie is this is? Is
20:40
Speaker 2: Fewed you know, coming across or sorry, not Feud Freud,
20:46
Speaker 2: Sigmund Freud coming across so strong? Or is he just
20:51
Speaker 2: the lead in that part of the story. I was
20:55
Speaker 2: confused at first, like I thought it was going to be.
20:58
Speaker 2: I was confused about my lack of confusion. I felt like.
21:01
Speaker 3: It was okay the way that they did it, because
21:04
Speaker 3: when I saw that Alan Arkin got top billing, I
21:07
Speaker 3: was a little confused. I was like, is this going
21:09
Speaker 3: to be a Freud movie with Sherlock Holmes? Is it
21:13
Speaker 3: going to be a Sherlock Holmes movie with Freud uyd In?
21:16
Speaker 3: And it's just Alan Arkin is the bigger name, and
21:18
Speaker 3: so he gets top billing. But then we get a
21:20
Speaker 3: lot of Robert Duvola's Watson at the beginning, so and
21:23
Speaker 3: I'm just like, okay, so is it Duval's picture because
21:26
Speaker 3: we've seen that before, you know, like to Sherlock through
21:28
Speaker 3: the Eyes of Watson. I mean that that basically is
21:30
Speaker 3: the shtick of all of Sherlock Holmes. But regardless, I
21:34
Speaker 3: feel like it is a Sherlock Holmes movie that is
21:39
Speaker 3: much more ensemble than we're used to. I truly believe
21:44
Speaker 3: that I didn't have any protagonist confusion because everything was
21:48
Speaker 3: centered around Sherlock. That's the only reason why everyone was
21:51
Speaker 3: together was because of Sherlock, and I think that really
21:55
Speaker 3: grounded it.
21:56
Speaker 2: Tricking you into going to Vienna.
21:58
Speaker 3: Because that, you know, like the only reason why Watson
22:02
Speaker 3: is going to Freud is because Sherlock is sick. The
22:05
Speaker 3: only reason why Shirk Sherlock is there is because he's,
22:08
Speaker 3: you know, working with Freud. The only reason why Freud
22:11
Speaker 3: is helping out trying to solve the kidnapping case is
22:14
Speaker 3: because Sherlock is hair is there working with him. So
22:17
Speaker 3: it's all around him. It's all centered around him, even
22:20
Speaker 3: if he's not in every single scene.
22:22
Speaker 4: Yeah, I I think I think that a lot of
22:26
Speaker 4: this is I think part of the issue is that
22:30
Speaker 4: it feels very It's put together in a very bookish
22:33
Speaker 4: sort of way. This feels like a story I want
22:35
Speaker 4: to read instead of watch, And I think that's not
22:40
Speaker 4: to its credit, but I think that the other thing
22:43
Speaker 4: with the gear shift is that you wind up when
22:47
Speaker 4: Vanessa Redgraves character pops up there, I was sort of
22:52
Speaker 4: just I don't know, it just it was just sort
22:55
Speaker 4: of flat for me because it felt like, well, here's
22:57
Speaker 4: another thing. And then when we get to Freud's psychoanalyzing
23:02
Speaker 4: him with hypnosis at the end, I'm like, by the
23:05
Speaker 4: time we got to that, I was like, oh right, oh, okay,
23:08
Speaker 4: that's uh right. That has to do with the thing
23:11
Speaker 4: from the beginning, okay, and Moriarty being all all koy
23:14
Speaker 4: and everything. And I can honestly say that when we
23:17
Speaker 4: got to that point and we find out that, you know,
23:20
Speaker 4: Holmes's fixation on Moriarty was why it was. I thought
23:25
Speaker 4: it was just weird because it was it actually left
23:30
Speaker 4: more questions than answers sort of thing, and it felt
23:32
Speaker 4: like a very tossed off psycho pop psychoanalysis type of
23:38
Speaker 4: thing to be like, oh, well, he hates Moriarty because
23:41
Speaker 4: Moriarty was having an affair with his mom who got
23:45
Speaker 4: shot by his dad in front of her face. But
23:48
Speaker 4: Moriarty is still alive form But for some reason, what
23:54
Speaker 4: Moriarty part was odd to me because.
23:59
Speaker 2: And maybe maybe on a rewatch it might make more sense.
24:02
Speaker 2: Probably not, but the fact that you're now they're introducing
24:08
Speaker 2: a third layer to the story, which is that Watson
24:14
Speaker 2: is kind of an unreliable narrator when he's told stories
24:19
Speaker 2: about homes that there are there is a real person
24:23
Speaker 2: named Moriarty. But but his interaction with Holmes is it
24:27
Speaker 2: maybe what you think it is? And I'm like that
24:29
Speaker 2: that's kind of a step too far for me. I'm like,
24:32
Speaker 2: I understand is meant to be, you know, memoirs and
24:36
Speaker 2: kind of like that. But it's like in this world
24:38
Speaker 2: that I'm already accepting that they he knows Freud like
24:42
Speaker 2: I need Moriarty to be Moriarty and that's just what
24:45
Speaker 2: it is in the stories and the fact that it
24:49
Speaker 2: and it's like he's not even the rest of the movie.
24:51
Speaker 2: He's just gone. And I'm like, keat, Like they kept
24:54
Speaker 2: chasing that one super sketch guy and I'm like, is
24:57
Speaker 2: that Moriarty? Maybe is he coming back? I don't, yeah,
25:01
Speaker 2: I think the once I started saying like Moriarty is
25:05
Speaker 2: helping us trick you into going to I'm like, you're
25:09
Speaker 2: kind of losing me. Here like this is this is
25:12
Speaker 2: getting I don't need a redemption of Moriarty and he
25:16
Speaker 2: was just mysdified. But that doesn't make sense.
25:19
Speaker 4: But that even breaks into you, Like one of the
25:22
Speaker 4: issues is it's one thing to pick up a book
25:25
Speaker 4: and be like, oh, this is another author's spin on Holmes.
25:29
Speaker 4: Right you come into this.
25:31
Speaker 2: The Holmes verse is getting messed up.
25:33
Speaker 4: The homes verse is handled by multiple people at multiple times,
25:37
Speaker 4: from multiple studios, and this is one of those things
25:41
Speaker 4: where it's like, well, you know, here's a different take
25:43
Speaker 4: on Holmes. Sure hope you know who he was before
25:45
Speaker 4: we started deconstructing him here, And it's like, I think
25:48
Speaker 4: maybe that's what we're all looking for, is some sort
25:51
Speaker 4: of establishment in the beginning of Holmes as a detective
25:56
Speaker 4: before his fall, or some flashback to before the Seventh
26:00
Speaker 4: sent Solution got a hold of him. So that if
26:02
Speaker 4: I come into this movie, Colt, this is my first
26:05
Speaker 4: Sherlock Holmes movie, I don't know why I should give
26:08
Speaker 4: a damn that he's a cocaine addict or not, Like
26:11
Speaker 4: I'm just it's just people are telling.
26:12
Speaker 2: Bad If this is your first Holmes movie, this is
26:15
Speaker 2: a terrible one to start off of exactly.
26:17
Speaker 4: But that's but that's a problem for me because it's
26:20
Speaker 4: not even part of like a series or anything. It's like, oh, yeah,
26:23
Speaker 4: you know that character, Sherlock Holmes, this is our spin
26:25
Speaker 4: on them. And I'm like, well, your spin on which
26:27
Speaker 4: version of them? Because there are different versions of him
26:29
Speaker 4: out there.
26:30
Speaker 2: And that's true. It being a Nicholas Meyer I this
26:35
Speaker 2: is probably was not as much of an issue in
26:37
Speaker 2: the seventies because people knew the book, they knew it
26:39
Speaker 2: was written by Meyer, like as opposed to I. In
26:43
Speaker 2: my mind, I'm still thinking Arthur Conan Doyle like as
26:46
Speaker 2: if he wrote this, which he obviously didn't, and that
26:50
Speaker 2: starts to detract it from making as much sense. But well,
26:56
Speaker 2: justin I want to get your your point of view
26:58
Speaker 2: on Robert Davall, while one of the other biggest names
27:01
Speaker 2: of this cast as as Watson, and in my opinion,
27:06
Speaker 2: fairly well cast like it was a really nice little
27:10
Speaker 2: role for him, unfortunately having to share a lot of that,
27:14
Speaker 2: you know, with with the Freud character, as we discussed,
27:17
Speaker 2: you know, taking a lot of his pieces. But from
27:20
Speaker 2: what we did get, you know, how did you feel
27:24
Speaker 2: from the other Watson portrayals we've seen so far, or
27:27
Speaker 2: even in your own mind, you know this stacked up
27:32
Speaker 2: well as our third one.
27:33
Speaker 3: He was definitely the most competent, even though you know
27:38
Speaker 3: with the second with Baskerville's of fifty nine, you know
27:41
Speaker 3: you didn't have a bumbling fool, but it was he
27:44
Speaker 3: was still kind of at the mercy of Sherlock Holmes.
27:47
Speaker 3: We're in the thirty thirty nine, it was just him
27:50
Speaker 3: walking around going der and so with Robert Duval, you
27:55
Speaker 3: actually feel like this guy. I mean, Robert Duval has
27:58
Speaker 3: a presence. There's a reason why he's a movie star,
28:01
Speaker 3: and it's crazy that we just lost him at the
28:04
Speaker 3: time of this recording. We lost him like what last week,
28:07
Speaker 3: two weeks ago, something like that.
28:09
Speaker 5: Very very short time ago.
28:11
Speaker 3: Yeah, and it's a I think it was. It was
28:14
Speaker 3: really nice to see him at the beginning and how
28:17
Speaker 3: he was working, because it very much felt like the
28:20
Speaker 3: Watson you used to read. And I feel like this
28:24
Speaker 3: was a very accurate portrayal of what we hoped Watson
28:28
Speaker 3: to be and what we picture Watson to be while
28:30
Speaker 3: we're reading Sir Arthur Cornan Doyle, but in very very
28:35
Speaker 3: accurate Holmesian style. As the movie goes on. As the
28:39
Speaker 3: tale goes on, Watson just kind of stands in the
28:42
Speaker 3: background and goes, really, wow, how'd you figure that out?
28:46
Speaker 3: And then we just have exposition scenes. So I feel
28:50
Speaker 3: like it was a really strong role for him at
28:52
Speaker 3: the beginning, but then he just kind of fell into
28:54
Speaker 3: the set dressing.
28:57
Speaker 5: Yeah.
28:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think we're all kind of on this
29:00
Speaker 2: page that it really is Freud. And again, nothing is Arkins,
29:04
Speaker 2: just the character of Freud, like he sucks up all
29:06
Speaker 2: the air that Watson was there to breathe and there's
29:09
Speaker 2: no room left for him. And I get making a
29:14
Speaker 2: story about Holmes equal, you know, someone who is also
29:19
Speaker 2: very clever and smart and of science, and you know,
29:23
Speaker 2: so I get the idea of putting them together, and
29:26
Speaker 2: you know, even throwing in, oh, he could cure him
29:29
Speaker 2: of his addiction, you know, but we'll just change the
29:31
Speaker 2: addiction and match for some reason. But but yeah, all
29:35
Speaker 2: that to say, you know, I'm glad, I'm glad this
29:38
Speaker 2: isn't one of those. And then Lestrage shows up, and
29:41
Speaker 2: then you know it's like, no, no, no, we don't
29:42
Speaker 2: need all the random Holmes characters showing up here.
29:48
Speaker 4: Yeah, you know, but since Holmes is central, you know,
29:52
Speaker 4: I will I will step back and say that, you know,
29:56
Speaker 4: Nicol Williamson's homes. I think once once the film figures
30:01
Speaker 4: out how to spotlight what he's doing, how to give
30:04
Speaker 4: him the space to be Holmes, I think he's very
30:07
Speaker 4: interesting as Holmes, and I think that's enough to hang
30:10
Speaker 4: your hat on for.
30:12
Speaker 5: All the other flaws that are going on.
30:14
Speaker 4: But in terms of the characters that they bring in,
30:19
Speaker 4: based on what I was reading, it said that the
30:22
Speaker 4: back half of this movie is changed from the novel.
30:26
Speaker 4: So basically, if you were to read the novel, the
30:30
Speaker 4: back half of this story is not recognizable. So I mean,
30:34
Speaker 4: you know, Tristan, I and Darren, like, are either of
30:38
Speaker 4: you intrigued from this to go and read the book?
30:41
Speaker 4: Is there enough here where you're like, you know what?
30:42
Speaker 4: I would like to go read the book to figure
30:44
Speaker 4: out how it's different.
30:47
Speaker 3: I would skim it.
30:49
Speaker 2: I'm going to wait for them to turn the book
30:51
Speaker 2: into a movie and then I'll let you know. Now
30:55
Speaker 2: I don't know it. Only the name Meyer gives me
30:59
Speaker 2: an even inkling of maybe wanting to sit down with
31:02
Speaker 2: it because of his other other work, especially in Star
31:06
Speaker 2: Trek and such. But I Honestly, I just know of
31:10
Speaker 2: my amount of time I have to dedicate to something
31:12
Speaker 2: like that, it would it would fall off, it would
31:14
Speaker 2: not happen, just so I was honest with myself. But so, okay,
31:20
Speaker 2: rounding out a bit of the cast, we have Vanessa
31:22
Speaker 2: Redgrave as Lola Devereaux. And this was really interesting to
31:29
Speaker 2: me because yeah, not only is she kind of like
31:33
Speaker 2: in the second in like the two point five act section,
31:37
Speaker 2: like again, it's kind of really weird when she comes in.
31:40
Speaker 2: But for me, so I'm a huge Hercule pro fan.
31:45
Speaker 2: That's my favorite detective. And I had to make sure
31:48
Speaker 2: I didn't say Belgian detective and I said British detective
31:50
Speaker 2: at the beginning of this episode, but I had to
31:52
Speaker 2: say it was just interesting the semi trope of you know,
31:58
Speaker 2: the detective kind of falling for you know, a baroness
32:02
Speaker 2: or a you know, a person of high society. You know,
32:07
Speaker 2: just it was just what did you guys think about
32:10
Speaker 2: sprinkling in this bit of you know, they're on the
32:13
Speaker 2: ship together and he saved her, and like, are they
32:17
Speaker 2: trying to is this gonna be a relationship? I don't
32:19
Speaker 2: even know what this is. It's so bizarre. But well,
32:24
Speaker 2: it made as much sense as the tennis match. Yes,
32:28
Speaker 2: was that tennis? What sport was that I was not?
32:31
Speaker 2: That was like, uh, springball in d S nine whatever
32:36
Speaker 2: that one was. That's what it felt like.
32:38
Speaker 4: It felt like that one that that I've seen it
32:41
Speaker 4: likes played in Miami with but like instead of rackets,
32:44
Speaker 4: it's got like these these almost like quasi.
32:46
Speaker 5: Lacrosse things like sure, why not?
32:50
Speaker 2: But yeah, you're talking about high they they throw it,
32:52
Speaker 2: look up.
32:52
Speaker 4: At the wall and it bounces down and stuff like that.
32:55
Speaker 4: That's what I thought of, I mean, but I mean,
32:58
Speaker 4: I'd rather talk about that than the terrible idea of
33:00
Speaker 4: putting two newly recovering addicts on a cruise together for
33:06
Speaker 4: god knows where to put him in a relationship or not.
33:10
Speaker 2: Sitting in that chair, I'm pretty sure she has a stash.
33:12
Speaker 4: Like I'm going to say, this is not the best
33:15
Speaker 4: step for an ongoing recovery. But that ending was was interesting.
33:22
Speaker 4: The problem for me is that I can't think of
33:25
Speaker 4: Vanessa Redgrave without thinking of The Simpsons, where Sideshow Bob
33:29
Speaker 4: is in prison and he's talking about the terrible state
33:32
Speaker 4: of television and he overhears a Fox promo for Vanessa
33:38
Speaker 4: Redgrave in a new you know, Naughty Granny sitcom, He
33:41
Speaker 4: goes farewell Vanessa. I think that it's it's weird because
33:47
Speaker 4: Redgrave's character feels I mean, she is, she's just a
33:52
Speaker 4: plot device, and it's like there's almost defense. Even though
33:55
Speaker 4: it's always unfair to say something like this, why did
33:58
Speaker 4: you bother casting Vanessa Redgrave in it? Like it feels
34:01
Speaker 4: like a massive waste of talent, Like that's a that's
34:05
Speaker 4: a talent that you write up for where you say,
34:07
Speaker 4: oh god, we got Redgrave. Okay, well we got to
34:09
Speaker 4: redo this character and make give her something more substantial.
34:12
Speaker 4: And it feels like they cast Redgrave and they were like,
34:15
Speaker 4: character's fine, just leave it the way it is. And
34:17
Speaker 4: it's like that's no fun.
34:19
Speaker 2: I mean, it's the definition of damsel in distress, Like
34:22
Speaker 2: she has practically no agency the entire time.
34:26
Speaker 3: And practically no lines, like she has that one bit,
34:29
Speaker 3: that one scene, that's it, and John, I know exactly
34:32
Speaker 3: what Like that is absolutely spot on, like why would
34:35
Speaker 3: you get Redgrave? Why would you even spend the money
34:38
Speaker 3: to get Redgrave when you could get literally anybody else
34:42
Speaker 3: on such a low end position. And I remember there
34:45
Speaker 3: was a story about the director of Princess Diaries was
34:51
Speaker 3: working with the author and she's the author of the
34:56
Speaker 3: book that the that the screenplay was based off of,
34:59
Speaker 3: and the it was mainly about the princess and her father,
35:04
Speaker 3: like that was the main relationship of the book, and
35:07
Speaker 3: she was reading the screenplay and she goes the author
35:10
Speaker 3: was reading the screenplay, went to the director and said,
35:12
Speaker 3: what's the deal? Why, like, why are you living up
35:14
Speaker 3: the grandma so much? And then the director says, oh,
35:17
Speaker 3: we're living up the we're building up the Grandma because
35:19
Speaker 3: we could get Julie Andrews. And the author's like, oh, yeah.
35:22
Speaker 4: Do that?
35:23
Speaker 2: Do that?
35:24
Speaker 3: Do that? Because why wouldn't you. If you can get
35:28
Speaker 3: Julie Andrews, you make that the focus. If you can
35:31
Speaker 3: get Vanessa Redgrave, you make her a focus. And even
35:34
Speaker 3: though like earlier I talked about how this is an
35:36
Speaker 3: ensemble piece, this is an ensemble piece, and there's Vanessa Redgrave,
35:41
Speaker 3: it would have been much nicer if we were able
35:43
Speaker 3: to say this is a you know, ensemble piece, and
35:46
Speaker 3: there you go.
35:48
Speaker 5: Yeah, you know.
35:49
Speaker 4: I think that I think it's probably just a victim
35:52
Speaker 4: of the fact that it has been like That's what
35:53
Speaker 4: makes me so interested to read the book is I'm like,
35:56
Speaker 4: I feel like that that's a character that got screwed
36:00
Speaker 4: in whatever rewrites they did. Like I feel like they
36:04
Speaker 4: got Redgrave and then they made changes after because we
36:07
Speaker 4: all know they changed the scripts after they get you know,
36:08
Speaker 4: blah blah blah.
36:09
Speaker 5: That's just how it works. I think that that's a character.
36:12
Speaker 4: That probably in the book is much more you know,
36:17
Speaker 4: believably and satisfyingly drawn out, because there's no other reason
36:21
Speaker 4: ever end up on the boat with homes at the
36:23
Speaker 4: end unless.
36:24
Speaker 5: There's been something more significant.
36:26
Speaker 4: Now that's not to say that you know, chasing somebody
36:29
Speaker 4: through the Charnel house that they're being you know, filtered
36:33
Speaker 4: through to be sold off into human bondage to pay
36:37
Speaker 4: off a gambling debt from Monaco is insignificant. I'm just
36:41
Speaker 4: saying that Holmes and she should have had more opportunity
36:45
Speaker 4: to connect together, like gone on the run when other
36:48
Speaker 4: people were fighting the bad baron and stuff like that.
36:52
Speaker 5: I mean, and.
36:53
Speaker 4: There's also and this is where I'll throw Ross under
36:57
Speaker 4: the bus as a director again, like there's even the
37:00
Speaker 4: of like okay, well, you know, it's probably something that
37:03
Speaker 4: came over from the book, Oh well, we grabbed the nun,
37:05
Speaker 4: but when we killed her, And like, that's something that
37:07
Speaker 4: you could have excized from this completely with absolutely no
37:11
Speaker 4: detriment to the story, and you wouldn't have had this
37:13
Speaker 4: extremely awkward moment where you know, they're having like a
37:17
Speaker 4: mad cap comic chase around the thing with Joel Gray,
37:22
Speaker 4: and then you had to constantly say to yourself, Oh wait,
37:25
Speaker 4: there's a dead nun with her throat cut in the
37:29
Speaker 4: bed through this whole thing. That's not funny, and you
37:32
Speaker 4: shouldn't have funny things happening right now, Like you just
37:35
Speaker 4: you raise the stakes too much. And I know I
37:38
Speaker 4: went off on like a little tangent there, but like
37:40
Speaker 4: I think that take the nun out, give an extra
37:43
Speaker 4: scene to Vanessa Redgrave, have them almost meet, have them
37:46
Speaker 4: almost get her back, that sort of thing. That's a
37:49
Speaker 4: rewrite that you do, as opposed to leaving dead nun
37:52
Speaker 4: in the bed through this excended sequence.
37:56
Speaker 3: Well, I think that's the thing, Like you hit on.
37:58
Speaker 3: One of my main complains besides the structure, is the tone,
38:03
Speaker 3: Like what tone are you going for? Because there are
38:08
Speaker 3: certain moments when I thought, oh, they're going to do
38:11
Speaker 3: this tongue in cheek. That could be interesting m M.
38:15
Speaker 3: Where every once in a while it's going to be
38:18
Speaker 3: like a wink to the audience or it's not going
38:21
Speaker 3: to be like slapstick or a parody. But they you know,
38:25
Speaker 3: maybe they'll be able to recognize that they're being ridiculous
38:27
Speaker 3: here and there. And I feel like they were kind
38:30
Speaker 3: of walking that line and achieved neither. Yeah, because of
38:35
Speaker 3: situations like that where like you you have that like
38:39
Speaker 3: like they see the bad guy in the in the
38:40
Speaker 3: restaurant and they all hop up and they're going to
38:43
Speaker 3: chase after him, and you realize realize that they're playing
38:45
Speaker 3: it kind of ridiculous to the.
38:46
Speaker 2: Point where they see was so odd.
38:50
Speaker 3: Yeah, and then like Freud like even grabs his food
38:52
Speaker 3: right right right before he runs away. You know, like
38:55
Speaker 3: things like that happen, or like how ridiculous Holmes was
38:59
Speaker 3: with the with the Bloodhound. You know, things like that.
39:02
Speaker 3: There was these moments of levity here and there. Either
39:06
Speaker 3: lean into it or don't, because what happens is you
39:10
Speaker 3: end up with a nun and her throat cut and
39:12
Speaker 3: then they're cracking jokes while there's a dead body literally
39:16
Speaker 3: right next to Freud.
39:17
Speaker 4: Yes, and dead bodies are typically not funny unless it's
39:20
Speaker 4: weekend at Bernie's. That's the only time that I can
39:24
Speaker 4: think of offhand that dead bodies are funny.
39:26
Speaker 2: Yeah. No, I think you're absolutely right, John. They could
39:29
Speaker 2: have taken that whole part out. She was already going
39:32
Speaker 2: with him willingly, right, and then they both go willingly
39:35
Speaker 2: because he spins a little tail. So yeah, but that
39:40
Speaker 2: chase was so odd because he clearly sees them. They
39:44
Speaker 2: clearly see that he sees them, and yet they're still
39:48
Speaker 2: following each other like step by step, and it's like,
39:51
Speaker 2: what is happening? Like all the little chases were kind
39:55
Speaker 2: of weird, Like I like the concept of the flower
39:59
Speaker 2: one where oh she left the trail, like, oh, that's great,
40:02
Speaker 2: and then oh, but it didn't matter because Freud figured
40:06
Speaker 2: it out too, and he beats you there. I'm like, oh,
40:08
Speaker 2: so it didn't it didn't matter? Okay.
40:10
Speaker 4: Well, additionally, you know, if the flowers had been slightly
40:13
Speaker 4: smaller than you know, they were footlong Lily's, I mean,
40:18
Speaker 4: was that supposed to be funny? But also, you know,
40:20
Speaker 4: the comedic timing being completely off with you know, the
40:25
Speaker 4: chase would have been silly. I guess if it had
40:28
Speaker 4: been faster. But instead you're like, oh, he opened another door.
40:33
Speaker 4: He going and I'm going to double back to the
40:35
Speaker 4: horse because everybody heard me groan when you said the
40:38
Speaker 4: horse thing was what they were going for that entire scene.
40:43
Speaker 4: I was sitting there and I was just thinking to
40:44
Speaker 4: myself through the entire thing, man, modern editing has really
40:48
Speaker 4: come a long way since nineteen seventy six, because I'm
40:52
Speaker 4: just looking at the way that it was. Obviously they
40:54
Speaker 4: just filmed. Okay, film the horses running in a circle.
40:57
Speaker 4: All right, get the horses out. Now we're going to
40:59
Speaker 4: drop the actors in. We're gonna have a run around
41:01
Speaker 4: the same space. Okay, bring the stunt guys in. Have
41:04
Speaker 4: somebody running the horses around in a circle. You might
41:06
Speaker 4: see them in a shot, but that's fine. And you know,
41:09
Speaker 4: you go around and it's like, I'm just sitting there.
41:12
Speaker 4: I'm like, this was so silly because it also had
41:15
Speaker 4: no real impact on anything. You could lift that whole
41:18
Speaker 4: horse thing out and it does nothing.
41:21
Speaker 2: Nothing.
41:22
Speaker 5: It's like Star Killer Base.
41:23
Speaker 2: There's no point. I mean, get like a line where
41:27
Speaker 2: the baron's known for raising horses. Something to connect it
41:30
Speaker 2: to the villain, so at least it's like a thread.
41:33
Speaker 2: But it was just like, so, you know, we got
41:35
Speaker 2: these horses that Bob knows a guy, so we could
41:38
Speaker 2: put that in the movie. Okay, Like that's that's as
41:41
Speaker 2: connected as it felt. To say, it was not very well.
41:46
Speaker 2: I feel the more we circle this drain, the more
41:51
Speaker 2: we're going to regret our discussion. So as we start
41:56
Speaker 2: to talk about our different ratings. For me, it was
42:00
Speaker 2: also interesting because I found more references for another version
42:08
Speaker 2: of Holmes The Great Mouse Detective, the cartoon with the rat.
42:12
Speaker 2: But in that one, they also have a bloodhound who
42:14
Speaker 2: is named Toby, and I'm like, oh, that's where it
42:17
Speaker 2: comes from. We have you know, I know he's been
42:19
Speaker 2: and other things. I'm assuming, but I like things like
42:22
Speaker 2: that where you have you know, it's not just a
42:25
Speaker 2: random named dog. It's a dog that is home's dog.
42:28
Speaker 2: And I'm like, that's really cool. So yeah, for the
42:33
Speaker 2: seven percent solution, I mean, we're just giving it marks
42:36
Speaker 2: for a really weird title, like it spells out percent
42:42
Speaker 2: in two words and that just keeps tripping me up.
42:44
Speaker 2: But yeah, all that to say, I am going to
42:48
Speaker 2: give this movie. I'm giving it a two, and the
42:52
Speaker 2: only reason I'm not giving it a one is because
42:54
Speaker 2: I actually really like Arkans performance. I think he does
42:58
Speaker 2: a really good job with Freud, and if I were
43:02
Speaker 2: rewatching anything, I would be to rewatch his part. Again,
43:06
Speaker 2: nothing against Holmes, he was good as well, but that
43:10
Speaker 2: they had the right person I think to carry this.
43:14
Speaker 2: What if these two characters met story like they cast
43:17
Speaker 2: it right. So I'm giving him two stars for that.
43:21
Speaker 2: Tristan lead us off with your rating for the seven percent.
43:26
Speaker 3: I think I'm gonna give it two and a half.
43:28
Speaker 3: I think this is I don't I don't think it's
43:31
Speaker 3: the worst movie ever, but I also don't think it's
43:34
Speaker 3: very good, And like two and a half is just
43:35
Speaker 3: like straight down to media. You know, I don't know
43:39
Speaker 3: what did I give the previous movies? Could you?
43:42
Speaker 2: So you gave it thirty nine at one point five
43:45
Speaker 2: and you gave fifty nine a two.
43:47
Speaker 3: So yeah, I'm giving this too and a half. I'm
43:50
Speaker 3: giving this two and a half because I did like
43:52
Speaker 3: this more than fifty nine, but not by much. I
43:55
Speaker 3: feel like it was it was a nice ensemble. There
43:59
Speaker 3: were certain things that I really enjoyed. There were certain
44:01
Speaker 3: conversations that I enjoyed. I felt like the betrayal of
44:05
Speaker 3: Holmes was spot on. I really liked it how sporadic
44:09
Speaker 3: and crazy it was at times, but also methodical, and
44:14
Speaker 3: Arkin was a delight. Duval was interesting, even though Redgrave
44:18
Speaker 3: was underutilized. Yeah, two point five. It's mediocre. It's you
44:24
Speaker 3: can't recommend it, but it's also not the worst thing ever.
44:28
Speaker 2: I know, I almost wish we had. We kind of
44:30
Speaker 2: needed to do a recap of what this movie was
44:32
Speaker 2: about at the very beginning, because as we got into
44:35
Speaker 2: our discussion, I was like, do people even have any
44:39
Speaker 2: idea what this like? We usually assume the viewer has
44:42
Speaker 2: maybe seen this movie. I didn't even know this movie existed.
44:47
Speaker 2: So all that to say, dear listener, hopefully you were
44:50
Speaker 2: able to look up at least the IMDb summary. But John,
44:55
Speaker 2: take us through your thoughts on the seven percent solution.
44:59
Speaker 4: I wind up give a two and a half because
45:01
Speaker 4: I thought it was I thought the like the last hour,
45:05
Speaker 4: I was like, oh, okay, all right.
45:06
Speaker 5: It came together. It's kind of going along.
45:08
Speaker 2: Here.
45:09
Speaker 4: The other problems I had, but you know, they were
45:12
Speaker 4: surmountable problems. I just I think that first like hour
45:14
Speaker 4: and twenty minutes is just it's tough to get through.
45:18
Speaker 4: I do admire that Nicol Williamson trying to just contextualize it.
45:24
Speaker 4: I don't know if this is true or not, but
45:26
Speaker 4: it feels like he's the first one to really try
45:29
Speaker 4: something super different with homes and make homes more flawed
45:34
Speaker 4: than superhuman in his self, which I can respect. And
45:40
Speaker 4: of course he would go on to play I believe
45:43
Speaker 4: Merlin in ex Caliber and of course Cagliostro in Spawn,
45:47
Speaker 4: so an illustrious career in front of him after a
45:51
Speaker 4: seven percent solution. But you know, yeah, so two and
45:56
Speaker 4: a half from me. Will I ever watch this again?
45:59
Speaker 4: Probably not, But I do have to give Williamson an
46:04
Speaker 4: Arkin credit, even if the psychoanalysis stuff was just I
46:10
Speaker 4: don't know, man, I don't know. You know, we talked
46:12
Speaker 4: about why would you cast Redgrave. I don't know why
46:15
Speaker 4: you cast Olivier in this? I was just like, what, Okay, Sure,
46:19
Speaker 4: that's fine. Anyway, two and a half. That's it, all right.
46:23
Speaker 2: Well, we're gonna be jumping at least another decade as
46:26
Speaker 2: we continue through the wing of Sherlock Holmes. Next week,
46:29
Speaker 2: we're covering young Sherlock Holmes, Is it a prequel? Is
46:33
Speaker 2: it a sequel From nineteen eighty five, Here
46:37
Speaker 1: On, house lights join the revolution, join the net Party,