Latest / The Kulturecast / Déjà Vu (2006) — "I'd try."

Transcript

Déjà Vu (2006) — "I'd try." · The Kulturecast

• 0:04
  Speaker 1: Weird way being.
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: You think you know what's coming, you don't have a clue.
• 0:52
  Speaker 3: You don't have a clue. It's a phenomenon known as dejevo.
• 1:05
  Speaker 3: It's a phenomenon known as deja vu. You arrive at
• 1:17
  Speaker 3: a place you've never been, but it feels familiar. But
• 1:24
  Speaker 3: it feels familiar. You look into the face of a
• 1:29
  Speaker 3: stranger and you feel like you've known her all your life.
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: Have we met? Deja vu is believed by many to
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: be a trick of the mind, but the truth is
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: far more extraordinary.
• 1:47
  Speaker 4: What if you had to tell someone the most important
• 1:50
  Speaker 4: thing in the world, but you knew they'd never believe you.
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: I try.
• 1:55
  Speaker 3: I have been put in charge of a newly formed
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: investigative unit.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: I want you on the team. Got some unique time constraints.
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: He has been shown a secret to brand new program.
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: We can look anywhere four days in the past. The
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: government doesn't want you to know.
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: This is not surveillance, this is the actual past.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: Yes, they found a way to fold space back onto itself.
• 2:16
  Speaker 5: Remember that lack how we.
• 2:17
  Speaker 4: Had a few years back after Northeast You're saying you
• 2:19
  Speaker 4: got fifty million homes.
• 2:21
  Speaker 5: My bad.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: Wow, this Thanksgiving the key to stomping a disaster.
• 2:27
  Speaker 2: You think you know what's coming, you don't have a clue.
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: It starts by unraveling the mystery of DejaVu.
• 2:33
  Speaker 3: What if you had to tell someone the most important
• 2:35
  Speaker 3: thing in the world, but you knew they'd never believe you.
• 2:39
  Speaker 4: I try, I got it, I got it.
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: You know you don't have to do this. They've already
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: had dejah. If you think it's just a feeling, go
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: back and look again.
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: Hello everyone, and welcome to the Culture Cast. I am
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: your host, Chris Tashue, and I'm joined by my good friend.
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: He is the professor of Media and Communications over at
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: Texas Tech University TTU, the home of Patrick Mahomes. Yay,
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: your friend and mine, doctor David pearl Mutter.
• 3:26
  Speaker 5: Hello, Chris, thank you again.
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: I would say you're Texas Tech's most famous export, but
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: I think Patrick Mahomes may take the cake now for that.
• 3:34
  Speaker 2: Would you say you're Switzerland's most famous export, doctor David
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: pear Mutter. Or is that chocolate?
• 3:39
  Speaker 5: I think cheese, chocolate and meltin sar Lebrond is more
• 3:44
  Speaker 5: focused on them.
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. If you clicked on this episode, or
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: if you're sitting in a lecture hall listening to it,
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: or if your professor has told you to grace your
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: ear holes with it. On this episode of the Culture Cast,
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: we're gonna be talking about a film from two thousand
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: and six that stars someone who just to bury the
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: lead here. I'm not normally he's super big of a
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: fan of his, so I am really excited to be
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: more or less reminded that Denzel Washington is an actor
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: that I don't resonate with particularly. However, that's not the
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: case with this film we'll be talking about. Two thousand
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: and six is Tony Scott directed Deja Vu So. The
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: film is directed by Tony Scott, written by Bill Marcilly
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: and Terry Terry Rossio, stars Denzel Washington, Val Kilmer, Paula Patton,
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: Bruce Greenwood, Adam Goldberg, and Jesus Christ himself Jim Cavizl.
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: The film is about an ATF agent who is effectively
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: attempting to prevent the Oklahoma City bombing from happening in
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: New Orleans, and he sort of prevents it but doesn't
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: prevent it because time travel is involved. It's a confusing movie.
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: We will be spoiling it if you've never seen it before,
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: so go ahead and watch it. Come on back, because
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: if you've never seen it, this conversation may get a
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: tad confusing if we talk about the plot of the film,
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: par Mutter, you and I talked on the phone before
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: I was going to the True False Documentary Film Festival
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: in Columbia, Missouri last week, and you were rattling off
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: some films that you enjoyed watching or wanted to talk about,
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: and this was on that list. So, sir, I am
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: so very curious. Why Deja Vu a film that I
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: know I saw in theaters, but no one in my
• 5:21
  Speaker 2: family can remember if they saw it with Well, I.
• 5:23
  Speaker 5: Think that was part of the deja vu part.
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: I see this movie, did you see it?
• 5:28
  Speaker 5: That that would be a true time travel movie? Right? Nobody?
• 5:32
  Speaker 5: Nobody saw the movie. Nobody remembers even though they were there. Yeah,
• 5:36
  Speaker 5: this movie has two prices of entry. One, it's a
• 5:40
  Speaker 5: Denzel Washington movie, and Denzel Washington plays Denzel Washington, which
• 5:45
  Speaker 5: is perfectly acceptable. There's been many stars in Hollywood history
• 5:49
  Speaker 5: who were fantastic at playing themselves.
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: He's a starring in the mold of a star that
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: doesn't exist anymore. Yeah, and that's that either you resonate
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: with him or you don't. Like that's just the way
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: it is with an actor like Denzel. Like you said,
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: he's kind of always playing himself for the most part
• 6:04
  Speaker 2: recently anyways, I think.
• 6:07
  Speaker 5: There's a fan theory online that all Denzel Washington movies
• 6:10
  Speaker 5: are in the same universe, like he just he's he
• 6:13
  Speaker 5: will find out in his final film that he was
• 6:16
  Speaker 5: some sort of it was some some sort of Star
• 6:18
  Speaker 5: Trek split personality and tractures to multiverse. Yeah, but so
• 6:23
  Speaker 5: so for he is an excellent actor. He plays a
• 6:27
  Speaker 5: certain role, the very smart, charming, personable guy who's also
• 6:32
  Speaker 5: very tough. I mean, you've got a little bit of
• 6:35
  Speaker 5: Michael Caine, a little bit of John Wick, you know,
• 6:38
  Speaker 5: a little bit a little bit of shards of other
• 6:40
  Speaker 5: stars of the past. But as you said, some people
• 6:45
  Speaker 5: just don't want to watch Denzel Washington. So there's Denzel
• 6:48
  Speaker 5: Washington playing an ATF agent, but he's Denzel Washington playing
• 6:52
  Speaker 5: an ATF agent. And then the other price of entry
• 6:55
  Speaker 5: is that it's a Tony Scott film. So you're going
• 6:58
  Speaker 5: to see shockingly you know, and bless his memory, but
• 7:01
  Speaker 5: you're going to see a Tony Scott film, like you're
• 7:03
  Speaker 5: gonna have five hundred cuts per minute, and you're gonna,
• 7:08
  Speaker 5: you know, there's gonna be interesting uses of light reflecting
• 7:12
  Speaker 5: off of mirrors. And it's a Tony Scott film. So
• 7:15
  Speaker 5: if you pay those two prices of entry, I think
• 7:17
  Speaker 5: you get a pretty clever, thoughtful, fun and uh occasionally
• 7:23
  Speaker 5: deep time travel time twisting movie. And it's worth That's it.
• 7:29
  Speaker 5: That's what it's worth. I mean, this should not have
• 7:31
  Speaker 5: won an Oscar. It did. It did not, unsurprisingly, but
• 7:36
  Speaker 5: it's there's something to take away. And I've always been
• 7:38
  Speaker 5: a fan of attempts and I use the word attempts
• 7:42
  Speaker 5: to make time travel work as a plot because it
• 7:45
  Speaker 5: has so many inherent problems. Right, I'm going back, Yeah,
• 7:50
  Speaker 5: I'm going back to any I guess I guess it's
• 7:52
  Speaker 5: a spoiler the Superman, the original Christopher Reeve Superman movie,
• 7:57
  Speaker 5: right where you've got a plot, and the plot was
• 7:59
  Speaker 5: all this self by Superman going back in time.
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: Doctor Pearl Mutter. He flew around the Earth backwards so
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: fast that the Earth spun backwards, going back in time. Yeah,
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: but a mechanism through which he does it is so
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: Superman specific that the only way it could ever work
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: is in a cartoon setting, because if that's how Denzel
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: said he was going to time travel in this movie,
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: Val Kilmer and everyone else would have laughed him out
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: of the building.
• 8:25
  Speaker 5: Yeah, and there's a lot to talk about. I'm always
• 8:28
  Speaker 5: interested in the portrayal of science in movies, and I
• 8:31
  Speaker 5: think this also does a good job of not going
• 8:34
  Speaker 5: the full Star Trek route of having long explanations of
• 8:38
  Speaker 5: essentially magic, crazy stuff that doesn't exist in real world.
• 8:43
  Speaker 5: But on the other hand, it doesn't under explain. I mean,
• 8:46
  Speaker 5: the mechanism of time travel or time projection or time
• 8:50
  Speaker 5: viewing feels good, Like, the technology looks good. So I
• 8:54
  Speaker 5: could go through the basic plot and then we could
• 8:57
  Speaker 5: just cover some of the parts of it that we
• 9:00
  Speaker 5: usually find interesting. But yeah, the other Yeah, let's start out,
• 9:04
  Speaker 5: if you don't mind. I was a professor at LSU
• 9:07
  Speaker 5: during Hurricane Katrina. So the other part about this film,
• 9:11
  Speaker 5: which has a resonance more than just an adventure movie
• 9:15
  Speaker 5: or a fun mark or a thriller, was that this
• 9:19
  Speaker 5: is in.
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: Post Katrina New Orleans. Yeah, and they make, they make,
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: they make, they don't they make mention of it. I
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: think one time, and then there's a poster or a
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: couple banners that say, like still strong after Katrina. They
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: don't blabor the point, but it is very clearly post.
• 9:35
  Speaker 5: Katrina, yes, and yeah they don't. This is not a
• 9:38
  Speaker 5: meditation on Katrina. H But for those of us who
• 9:42
  Speaker 5: lived nearby, and I lived in Baton Ruge, and we
• 9:45
  Speaker 5: were impacted in the sense of like there was weather
• 9:48
  Speaker 5: there not as disastrous as New Orleans, and then we
• 9:51
  Speaker 5: got several hundred thousand people moving out of New Orleans
• 9:55
  Speaker 5: coming up the just it's an hour up the highway there.
• 9:58
  Speaker 5: So a lot of the scene, a lot of the
• 10:00
  Speaker 5: setting were very familiar, and there was a certain sadness
• 10:04
  Speaker 5: about it. In fact, that's one of the themes in
• 10:07
  Speaker 5: this movie is lost. What can you do to regain
• 10:10
  Speaker 5: something you've lost, even when you maybe not don't even
• 10:13
  Speaker 5: know that you've lost it. And then we'll get back
• 10:15
  Speaker 5: to that moment. But as you said, this has got
• 10:18
  Speaker 5: some elements of some other like it's like in the
• 10:21
  Speaker 5: news stuff.
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: Basically I meant at the time in the news. I
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: would say now a lot in the news as well,
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: but at the time death.
• 10:29
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean people using bombs to commit terrorism in
• 10:35
  Speaker 5: the United States is unfortunately not out of the news.
• 10:39
  Speaker 3: Uh.
• 10:40
  Speaker 5: But but so you begin with Denzel Washington. He arrives,
• 10:45
  Speaker 5: we've seen a terrible crime occur, a faery that is
• 10:50
  Speaker 5: carrying Navy personnel and their families out into the river
• 10:57
  Speaker 5: that New Orleans and you know the Atlantic Ocean, but
• 11:02
  Speaker 5: the waters off New Orleans that everybody's familiar with from Katrina.
• 11:06
  Speaker 5: And the bomb explodes and I guess probably hundreds of
• 11:10
  Speaker 5: people are killed.
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: And I have one hundred and forty three to be exact.
• 11:13
  Speaker 5: Yeah, and there are some pretty grizzly moments there. I
• 11:17
  Speaker 5: mean you're seeing small children and innocent civilians burned to
• 11:21
  Speaker 5: death and so on. I mean, it's not quite forensically lingering,
• 11:26
  Speaker 5: but there's a lot of dead bodies in this movie.
• 11:28
  Speaker 5: So right away you get established horrible crime. Then Denzel
• 11:33
  Speaker 5: Washington shows up, and of course he's Denzel Washington. So
• 11:36
  Speaker 5: there's two thousand police officers and members of every other
• 11:40
  Speaker 5: agency imaginable. But Denzel Washington walks through the crime scene
• 11:45
  Speaker 5: and notices three or four things right away that immediately
• 11:48
  Speaker 5: is a big breakthrough in the case. So that's okay,
• 11:52
  Speaker 5: it's a Denzel Washington movie, he's gonna be the one
• 11:54
  Speaker 5: who solves most of the case, and you're thinking, like,
• 11:58
  Speaker 5: this could be a regular crime thrower. I mean, he's
• 12:00
  Speaker 5: done like twenty of these movies before. Right, He's a
• 12:04
  Speaker 5: tough cop who's smart and notices things other people don't
• 12:08
  Speaker 5: know this, and he chases down the bad guy and
• 12:10
  Speaker 5: captures him and probably saves a woman that he's in
• 12:14
  Speaker 5: love with along the way. So like part of the
• 12:16
  Speaker 5: plot is already in your head, but it takes an
• 12:18
  Speaker 5: interesting twist, which is that he emerges because he's den
• 12:23
  Speaker 5: to Washington as the lead breakthrough investigator, not necessarily in rank,
• 12:29
  Speaker 5: but just in ability, and he is recruited to go
• 12:34
  Speaker 5: to it seems like it's temporarily set up. It's a
• 12:37
  Speaker 5: mobile base.
• 12:38
  Speaker 2: It has to be mobile, I think by convention of
• 12:41
  Speaker 2: what they're getting at, it has to be moved.
• 12:44
  Speaker 5: This is not like they go to Area fifty one
• 12:47
  Speaker 5: or you know, some secret Antarctic layer or something like that.
• 12:50
  Speaker 5: It's a trailer, but the trailer with Adam Goldberg and
• 12:54
  Speaker 5: some scientists there and Bruce Breenwood always playing a great
• 12:59
  Speaker 5: role as versus r. Greenwood is always like the head
• 13:03
  Speaker 5: of something like he's the president of robot Incorporated in
• 13:07
  Speaker 5: eye World.
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: Literally the president of the United States in thirteen days.
• 13:12
  Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, Jonathat. He has that authority that just seems
• 13:16
  Speaker 5: to lend itself to presidential managerial just in charge roles,
• 13:22
  Speaker 5: and so he's sort of in charge here. But he
• 13:25
  Speaker 5: introduced his Denzel Washington brings them in. Now you can
• 13:27
  Speaker 5: tell Denzil Washington at the very beginning of this introduction
• 13:31
  Speaker 5: to these scientists, who this is two thousand and six, right,
• 13:35
  Speaker 5: so like flat screen TVs and big monitors are still
• 13:39
  Speaker 5: relatively a new thing. I mean today, of course, we
• 13:43
  Speaker 5: go into some secret science base and that'd be three
• 13:46
  Speaker 5: hundred giant, two hundred inch flat screens. But I remember
• 13:50
  Speaker 5: looking at it and going like, yeah, this is really interesting.
• 13:53
  Speaker 5: They've got all of these screens, all of this technolog
• 13:55
  Speaker 5: the technology looks good for two thousand and six, that like,
• 13:59
  Speaker 5: oh this is some sort of high tech. And it's
• 14:01
  Speaker 5: explained to him that oh yeah, we are able to
• 14:05
  Speaker 5: coordinate collate all the video cameras, all the surveillance cameras
• 14:10
  Speaker 5: of the entire city of New Orleans. And there's some
• 14:13
  Speaker 5: rules like I think you can only go back three
• 14:15
  Speaker 5: days four days.
• 14:17
  Speaker 2: Six four days and six hours.
• 14:18
  Speaker 5: Specificy okay, yeah, you you watched it more than I did.
• 14:23
  Speaker 5: And you can tell Denzel Washington is already getting a
• 14:25
  Speaker 5: little because suspicious, like, oh wow, this is pretty neat technology.
• 14:30
  Speaker 5: I had never heard of this before. Oh yeah, it's
• 14:32
  Speaker 5: a secret technology. But what kind of secret technology is it?
• 14:37
  Speaker 5: And I'm going to sort of accelerate the plot here,
• 14:40
  Speaker 5: but we find out that what they're really doing is
• 14:43
  Speaker 5: they are looking back through time. They can see what
• 14:47
  Speaker 5: happened in the past live as if it's happening right
• 14:51
  Speaker 5: in front of them. That's reveal number one, which is
• 14:54
  Speaker 5: not the only one to come now.
• 14:57
  Speaker 2: There are there are several in this movie. This movie
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: ties itself into notts very quickly, I feel, which I appreciate.
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: I appreciate about it, but I do I do a
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: pretic longe like weave this technology. It's called snow white
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: because it's a magic mirror, and we're able to do
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: like Lucius Fox in Batman and the Dark Knight, and
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: we have everything linked together, and we essentially have this
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: view of the city because of all the cameras linked together.
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: I like how there's the bait and switch of that
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: because that feels very pedestrian, given where this film ultimately
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: ends up going.
• 15:29
  Speaker 5: Yes, And when we've talked before, I've said that I
• 15:33
  Speaker 5: have a rule that I wish all Hollywood filmmakers would follow,
• 15:38
  Speaker 5: and nobody's consulted me. But the rule is actually one
• 15:41
  Speaker 5: made up by people who have some authority. I heard
• 15:45
  Speaker 5: Isaac Asimov say this, Arthur C. Clark, Georgia R. Martin said
• 15:50
  Speaker 5: this too, which is that if you're going to have
• 15:53
  Speaker 5: either a accelerated amazing technology plot or a fantasy plot,
• 16:00
  Speaker 5: you have to have hard walls and you have to
• 16:02
  Speaker 5: have some rule you can't keep coming up with. So
• 16:05
  Speaker 5: if you introduce dragons in chapter one of your fantasy epic,
• 16:10
  Speaker 5: and the dragons can fly, that's fine. They can breathe fire, okay,
• 16:14
  Speaker 5: that's fine. They can talk, that's fine, they're telepathic, great, okay.
• 16:18
  Speaker 5: But in book three we can't find out that they
• 16:21
  Speaker 5: can magically time travel, and and it's because they would
• 16:25
  Speaker 5: have used it right right to get out of some
• 16:28
  Speaker 5: other plots. So it's so adding on new capabilities, and
• 16:32
  Speaker 5: I think this movie goes a little bit too far
• 16:35
  Speaker 5: in that because we're jumping ahead. But like we at
• 16:38
  Speaker 5: first Okay, you can only see back in the past,
• 16:41
  Speaker 5: and there's no interaction with the past, right, we can't
• 16:44
  Speaker 5: affect seemingly.
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: Seemingly it's communicated.
• 16:47
  Speaker 5: Then, yes, that's right. But then we find oh, yeah
• 16:50
  Speaker 5: we can of course Denzel Washington being Denzel Washington playing
• 16:55
  Speaker 5: Denzil Washington in a theater near you as Denzel Washington
• 16:59
  Speaker 5: flashes a little light on the screen and the person
• 17:02
  Speaker 5: from the past reacts to it, which is I thought
• 17:05
  Speaker 5: was very clever. Yes, so okay, so that's the next
• 17:09
  Speaker 5: reveal is like, oh, there is some level of interactivity there. Ah, okay, yeah,
• 17:14
  Speaker 5: But then of course the final reveal is that if
• 17:17
  Speaker 5: you squeeze yourself really tightly into a small homunculus.
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: Uh, into a into a dumb waiter, and a time
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: traveling dumb waiter.
• 17:26
  Speaker 5: Essentially, Yeah, that that's not a very good moment there.
• 17:29
  Speaker 5: That's not that where he has to squeeze himself real small.
• 17:33
  Speaker 5: I just somehow visually it just doesn't look real good.
• 17:36
  Speaker 5: But he can travel to the past. So we finally
• 17:38
  Speaker 5: no way.
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: One way, only one way. It's a one way trip.
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: You are going into the past, and that is it.
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: And uh and and effectively the kind of the dodge
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: here the way they get around the well, how hasn't
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: anyone been doing this the whole time? Is you in
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: going through the Einstein Rosen Bridge and e MP essentially
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: goes off that kills you on the other side, So
• 18:00
  Speaker 2: the dodges, you would have to have a way to
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: be resuscitated more or less immediately on the other side
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: if you were a time travel That's what they hint at.
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: They don't say that explicitly. That ends up being the
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: way that they get themselves out of the position they
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: put themselves in, which goes to my point about this movie.
• 18:16
  Speaker 2: I love that this movie doesn't treat the audience like moron.
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: This movie actually respects the audience because there are moments
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: early on in the movie that the movie doesn't be
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: labor points that are things that if you watch the
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: movie again you'll pick up on, Like when he's walking
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: on the docks at the beginning of the movie and
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: he hears his phone ringing, and he looks at his
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: phone trying to figure out why his phone is ringing.
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: It's because he's hearing the phone ringing on his dead
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: body that he's standing two feet from and doesn't realize
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: it because it's in a body bag. That's not something
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: that you are even meant to give any thought to
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: at the beginning of this movie, because you're not even
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: meant to know at the beginning of this movie that
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: there's time travel in them. And yet the movie is
• 18:55
  Speaker 2: giving away itself early on, but not in a way
• 18:58
  Speaker 2: that feels ham fisted for me as kind of higgleley
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: piggleley as the time travel in this movie can be
• 19:03
  Speaker 2: and is at times. I think for me, this is
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: one of my favorite uses of time travel in a movie,
• 19:08
  Speaker 2: because it feels like they sew it all up pretty tightly,
• 19:11
  Speaker 2: but they do leave a little gap for divine intervention,
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: possibly question mark. It's almost like this is Tony Scott going,
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: maybe there is a God, because they essentially allude to
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: the fact that it would take an act of divine
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: intervention to move the stream over, to tide the stream over,
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: to move it, to damn the stream and move it.
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: And I mean we see ostensibly at the end of
• 19:37
  Speaker 2: the film the film, the outcome of the events is
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: changed at the end of the film, so there must
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: be something else. Denzel Washington alludes to it several times
• 19:46
  Speaker 2: in the movie is well, what if there's something else too,
• 19:49
  Speaker 2: Like it could be science and something else. It's a
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: very weird movie because at times it feels like amusing
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: on faith and science together, which I did not remember
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: the last time I watched this movie. When I saw
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: I was sixteen, twenty years ago in theaters.
• 20:03
  Speaker 5: Yeah, this movie, it has some of the elements of
• 20:08
  Speaker 5: what are in fact a really good science fiction movie,
• 20:11
  Speaker 5: which is that they don't try too hard to explain
• 20:14
  Speaker 5: too much. That is too crazy, right.
• 20:18
  Speaker 2: It's not the point of the movie. It it would
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: do nothing other than it's like the stranger things of
• 20:23
  Speaker 2: it all. If you start explaining too much, you just
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: you have to explain everything. If you take it upon
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: yourself to explain a couple things, you then take it
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: upon yourself for most of these screenwriters to explain everything,
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: and it's like some ambiguity left up to the viewer
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: is actually beneficial. It has.
• 20:39
  Speaker 5: So an example of that is that he starts falling
• 20:44
  Speaker 5: in love with a woman that he's never met. Although
• 20:48
  Speaker 5: you know, New Orleans is an interesting city in that
• 20:51
  Speaker 5: it's a large metropolitan city, but like there's places that
• 20:55
  Speaker 5: people tend to go more than others. So plausibility for
• 21:00
  Speaker 5: me was that they never met. But anyway, there's a
• 21:03
  Speaker 5: young woman who is found dead at the same time
• 21:06
  Speaker 5: or a little bit later than the terrible terrorist bombing,
• 21:11
  Speaker 5: and okay, there's she's found in the river and she
• 21:14
  Speaker 5: has burns. But it turns out, okay, surprise, it's not
• 21:18
  Speaker 5: she's not found connected to the bombing. It was like
• 21:22
  Speaker 5: earlier she.
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: Was sound like ten minutes before the bombing happened.
• 21:27
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I think it was maybe a couple hours or something.
• 21:29
  Speaker 5: But the point was that, okay, so so somehow she's connected.
• 21:33
  Speaker 5: And then talking about this science plus something higher or
• 21:38
  Speaker 5: something more. Denzil Washington is introduced to the very beginning
• 21:42
  Speaker 5: of the movie as somebody who's a loner. I mean,
• 21:45
  Speaker 5: he's very successful. It's not clear what past life he's had,
• 21:50
  Speaker 5: but he's not obviously with anybody. He's not married, doesn't
• 21:53
  Speaker 5: any kids, and he starts this is Paul Patton. He
• 21:57
  Speaker 5: starts looking at this woman. And now here's where there's
• 22:01
  Speaker 5: these interesting layers of discomfort and also sympathy. Right. The
• 22:07
  Speaker 5: discomfort is that we are watching somebody in their house, right,
• 22:12
  Speaker 5: which at that time that was sort of a fantastic technology.
• 22:18
  Speaker 5: But of course. Now, I mean there are a bit
• 22:21
  Speaker 5: you cound with with some of the infrared technology I've
• 22:26
  Speaker 5: seen us like military have, like you can see through
• 22:29
  Speaker 5: a wall and at least see the heat signature of
• 22:31
  Speaker 5: somebody outside the wall. With satellites, you can see through
• 22:36
  Speaker 5: somebody's window. So it's we're getting real close to a drone,
• 22:42
  Speaker 5: you know, hanging out outside your house and watching you,
• 22:45
  Speaker 5: which happens to people all the time now. So the
• 22:48
  Speaker 5: surveillance society that we are living in, where our phones
• 22:53
  Speaker 5: listen to us, we don't know who when we're being watched.
• 22:57
  Speaker 5: Every detective show that I've ever watched in the last
• 23:01
  Speaker 5: ten years has a real problem. In fact, you almost
• 23:04
  Speaker 5: wonder why they make detective series anymore because there's a
• 23:08
  Speaker 5: camera everywhere. Right. We just went through this with the
• 23:12
  Speaker 5: uh whatever happened to poor this is Nancy Guthrie. Is
• 23:16
  Speaker 5: that you saw like somebody coming to her house masked
• 23:21
  Speaker 5: ready for the cameras, And of course everybody's got cameras, right,
• 23:24
  Speaker 5: So there's cameras everywhere in the detective series. I've noticed
• 23:27
  Speaker 5: I don't watch that many of them, but have noticed
• 23:29
  Speaker 5: a lot of them have a plot where the detectives
• 23:32
  Speaker 5: sort of range around doing different things, and then like
• 23:35
  Speaker 5: three minutes before the end, oh yeah, let's pull the
• 23:37
  Speaker 5: security camera tapes across the street. Oh there's the murderer
• 23:40
  Speaker 5: right there, right right. But this wasn't quite there yet
• 23:44
  Speaker 5: in two thousand and six, so we're still removing.
• 23:47
  Speaker 2: From the iPhone for what eighteen months almost. I mean,
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: you know, this film is one of the last like
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: pre iPhone films.
• 23:54
  Speaker 5: I think he's got a flip flug, right, he does,
• 23:55
  Speaker 5: he does.
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: He has like a Nokia essentially, like yeah, even I think, yeah,
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: it's either a flip phone or it's just one of
• 24:01
  Speaker 2: those like hard body Nokia's the little like the Snickers
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: bar phone.
• 24:05
  Speaker 5: Yeah, those things could survive an explosion. You could play
• 24:09
  Speaker 5: snake on them too.
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, to be fair, his phone is going
• 24:13
  Speaker 2: off at the end of the movie after he was
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: in blast radius of a bomb. So he's dead, but
• 24:19
  Speaker 2: his phone survived being underwater and blown up. So I
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: think you're right.
• 24:22
  Speaker 5: Maybe maybe Nokia would have prospered more if they could
• 24:25
  Speaker 5: advertise that we survived time travel and being blown up.
• 24:28
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, his phone survived time travel even huh.
• 24:32
  Speaker 5: So anyway, I do like that I do like those
• 24:36
  Speaker 5: layers you could. You can tell he and a number
• 24:40
  Speaker 5: of the scientists are uncomfortable with this, like we are
• 24:44
  Speaker 5: watching somebody's private life. You know, she's taking a shower,
• 24:47
  Speaker 5: she has a personal moment. But then you have this
• 24:51
  Speaker 5: overriding issue of like, well, we're trying to catch somebody
• 24:55
  Speaker 5: who just killed five hundred plus people. So this is
• 24:59
  Speaker 5: this goes go to something we faced in society all
• 25:02
  Speaker 5: the time. Is ends justifying me, right, and they've got
• 25:06
  Speaker 5: this new technology. Never has any new technology ever been
• 25:10
  Speaker 5: developed that people stop themselves from using, with a few exceptions, right, right,
• 25:15
  Speaker 5: But you can imagine it's the Ian melcame.
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: Of it, all right. I mean it's the yeah, we
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: didn't ask if we We never stopped ourselves and asked
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: if we should. We just did, you know. And I
• 25:24
  Speaker 2: love and I love the conceit in this movie with
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: Adam Goldberg's character where they're like, well, we were researching
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: something else and then we found out we could generate
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: a wormhole, and it's like that. I love that conceit
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: as well, because that is such a fun way of
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: like we were doing something else and this came about
• 25:40
  Speaker 2: because of it, which also feels very real. World feels
• 25:43
  Speaker 2: very real, Like you know, some a lot of inventions
• 25:46
  Speaker 2: that have come out of the you know, out of
• 25:48
  Speaker 2: the world have been from military technology or vice versa.
• 25:51
  Speaker 2: Was not a military technology and turned into military technology,
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: like that is a thing. So it's interesting. I like that.
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: It's like a bunch of these like Cambridge students were
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: you know, trying to figure out how to increase optic
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: lens enhancement and they ended up creating a wormhole. Like okay,
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: like you know what, I could believe that. It's more
• 26:08
  Speaker 2: believable than other wormholes we've seen recently that are just
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: like a wormhole happened. It's like, but what that's no, Like,
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: if you're gonna mention it, you got to explain it
• 26:19
  Speaker 2: somehow or give us some If you're going to explain
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: it a little bit, you have to explain it a
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: little bit more than you think, but don't overdo it.
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: This movie, I think underdoes it at times. I think
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: there's one or two moments where I'm like, we're verging
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: on a little much here. But I think this movie
• 26:33
  Speaker 2: does a good job at balancing that less explanation is more,
• 26:37
  Speaker 2: but you have to give some to keep people engaged.
• 26:40
  Speaker 5: Yeah, it feels science adjacent. It doesn't feel science lunatic
• 26:45
  Speaker 5: or crazy. I mean, there's enough science there to feel
• 26:48
  Speaker 5: like it respects science. And what you just said is
• 26:51
  Speaker 5: really important because I'm at a university and one of
• 26:55
  Speaker 5: the arguments that scientists stem people and so scientists humanists
• 27:01
  Speaker 5: make is that often, as you're saying, like is a
• 27:04
  Speaker 5: long history of inventions that were not discovered linearly, Like
• 27:08
  Speaker 5: somebody was doing basic research. They were not trying to
• 27:13
  Speaker 5: design a microwave oven, They were not trying to design
• 27:17
  Speaker 5: something in particular, but they were trying to understand the
• 27:20
  Speaker 5: fundamental workings of the universe, and boom, something practical came
• 27:25
  Speaker 5: from it. So when science is funded, it's important that
• 27:29
  Speaker 5: it's not always asked, Okay, what's going to be the
• 27:32
  Speaker 5: practical result. So we don't know where we're going to
• 27:36
  Speaker 5: get time travel from, which I don't believe is possible,
• 27:39
  Speaker 5: but it isn't this movie.
• 27:40
  Speaker 2: Well, you can travel to the past, but you can't
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: try or it's you could travel to the future, but
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: you can't travel to the past, is what it is.
• 27:47
  Speaker 2: And I think that that's I think that that's the
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: thing that I appreciate about this movie, and you know,
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: it's it's funny to think about something else that utilizes
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: time travel and almost tries to explain it in a
• 27:57
  Speaker 2: similar way. Is a Vengers. Endgame tries to use this
• 28:00
  Speaker 2: same theory of time travel, like we have the bending
• 28:04
  Speaker 2: time back on itself, right, which is the initial theory
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: of how we're doing it. But then we also have
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: the female character, Shanty, who's one of the other scientists
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: who's kind of at odds with Adam Goldberg. She says, hey,
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: there's also this other idea that there are all these
• 28:19
  Speaker 2: concurrent timelines going at the same time, and so while yes,
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: you are traveling back on yourself, you could possibly change something,
• 28:28
  Speaker 2: which means you have created another timeline concurrence to the
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: other timeline that's still going. And what I like about
• 28:35
  Speaker 2: this movie is it actually integrates the two things together.
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: Endgame tries to and I think fails because it overexplains like, oh,
• 28:42
  Speaker 2: it's look back to the future. There's none of that
• 28:45
  Speaker 2: in this movie. They just say it and they move on.
• 28:47
  Speaker 2: We get Adam Goldberg folding the paper in on itself,
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: but we don't get impressing the pen through it as
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: my point, they stop short of Adam Goldberg sticking the
• 28:55
  Speaker 2: pen through the piece of paper that's folded to signify
• 28:57
  Speaker 2: we can punch a hole through space time, because I
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: think the do that in at least Avengers Endgame, possibly
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: Stranger Things, and at least and Interstellar as well. I
• 29:07
  Speaker 2: think where it's like we fold it like this and
• 29:09
  Speaker 2: punched through, it's like, okay, I'm glad they don't do
• 29:12
  Speaker 2: it here. We get like the halfway of it like that.
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: This movie is very restrained with what it's doing, and
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: I think it pays off in a movie that doesn't
• 29:20
  Speaker 2: treat its audience like we're mumbling idiots who aren't here
• 29:24
  Speaker 2: for a sci fi Yeah.
• 29:25
  Speaker 5: It does what is achievable in a reasonably good science
• 29:30
  Speaker 5: fiction movie, which is it states some things which may
• 29:33
  Speaker 5: not be scientifically correct now who knows right, and they
• 29:37
  Speaker 5: may not be completely plausible, but like just enough of
• 29:41
  Speaker 5: them that we can get the plot going and we
• 29:44
  Speaker 5: don't have to stop every five minutes for a new
• 29:46
  Speaker 5: scientific explanation. So it's got a level of confidence that
• 29:51
  Speaker 5: that's warranted. Right, Like, I mean to meet the signature
• 29:54
  Speaker 5: action scene in this movie, which probably I am really
• 30:00
  Speaker 5: I did it's funny. I didn't remember it, but like,
• 30:02
  Speaker 5: oh yeah, this was the most enjoyable.
• 30:04
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I didn't remember it either.
• 30:06
  Speaker 5: Yeah, Like I mean, okay, So there's a car chase,
• 30:09
  Speaker 5: and the car chase is probably Hollywood's most repeated signature event, right,
• 30:17
  Speaker 5: a car chase in a movie, And of course over
• 30:20
  Speaker 5: the years, they've tried every possible variation of the car chase.
• 30:24
  Speaker 5: I remember there was one, was it a Roger Moore
• 30:27
  Speaker 5: James Bond where they've always had car chases and James
• 30:31
  Speaker 5: Bond movies the signature car chase and like a stunt, right,
• 30:34
  Speaker 5: and they this one. They gave him like like a
• 30:37
  Speaker 5: little tiny Fiat, like a little tiny car, like not
• 30:41
  Speaker 5: a not a four hundred thousand dollars sports car. And
• 30:43
  Speaker 5: because they were just trying to come up with some
• 30:45
  Speaker 5: variation on a car chase, well, this this is quite
• 30:49
  Speaker 5: a variation on a car chase because Denzel Washington is
• 30:52
  Speaker 5: following somebody in the past, like he's he's using a
• 30:58
  Speaker 5: camera that can see in the past to follow somebody.
• 31:02
  Speaker 5: And I think you have to watch the movie if
• 31:04
  Speaker 5: you haven't to appreciate it. But it's like really well done.
• 31:06
  Speaker 5: I mean it's what Tony Scott does best is a
• 31:10
  Speaker 5: kinetic action sequence.
• 31:12
  Speaker 2: It is a technically impressive scene from like you said,
• 31:15
  Speaker 2: from a filmmaking standpoint, but from a conceptual standpoint, it's
• 31:19
  Speaker 2: so interesting. We have, like you said, we have a
• 31:22
  Speaker 2: character trait who knows where the bomber is going to be,
• 31:27
  Speaker 2: and he follows his car, but he's following his car
• 31:30
  Speaker 2: in the past, and he isn't orientated correctly initially, so
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: he's on a bridge with the guy going the wrong
• 31:36
  Speaker 2: direction and he has to figure out a way to
• 31:38
  Speaker 2: turn around, and he literally just ends up like causing
• 31:40
  Speaker 2: like a three or four car pile up, which one
• 31:43
  Speaker 2: of my favorite lines of the movie is just call
• 31:45
  Speaker 2: the police to the to the Crescent City Bridge, like, yeah,
• 31:48
  Speaker 2: that's gonna help the guy whose car went flying through
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: the air and did like a hero wet through the
• 31:53
  Speaker 2: air that you hit. But it's such a novel idea because,
• 31:56
  Speaker 2: like you said, the car chase is such a I
• 31:59
  Speaker 2: wouldn't I say tired, but it is such a easy
• 32:02
  Speaker 2: trope to go back to, especially in action movies, especially
• 32:05
  Speaker 2: if you're looking to fill time easily, and like you said,
• 32:09
  Speaker 2: this is such a novel way of doing it. It
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: feels so unique and different, and I didn't remember it either.
• 32:14
  Speaker 2: I am almost like kicking myself or not remembering it,
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: because I can't think of another car chase in a
• 32:19
  Speaker 2: film that's like this at all. I mean, this is
• 32:22
  Speaker 2: unique unto itself as a car chase in a film.
• 32:25
  Speaker 5: Yes, now there are some familiar elements. I remember when
• 32:29
  Speaker 5: I was very young, I watched the film called Lethal Weapon.
• 32:33
  Speaker 5: And this is so long ago. I mean, I'm Joe,
• 32:36
  Speaker 5: I'm laughing as I'm saying that. Like I watched the
• 32:38
  Speaker 5: film called Leith the Webble. It's become an iconic film,
• 32:41
  Speaker 5: but it was such a long time ago that the
• 32:43
  Speaker 5: trope of the police officer who gets in the car
• 32:47
  Speaker 5: chase and kills fifty people driving home from work. But
• 32:51
  Speaker 5: the only thing he gets is that his boss says, hey,
• 32:54
  Speaker 5: don't do that again or else.
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: Lap on the wrist.
• 32:57
  Speaker 5: Yeah, well, i'll put you in the work unit and
• 33:01
  Speaker 5: you'll be filling out forms, you know, don't ever kill
• 33:03
  Speaker 5: those fifty people again, you know. But so that that
• 33:06
  Speaker 5: has been something that just I mean, it's been lampooned
• 33:09
  Speaker 5: and fall Guy, I'm sorry, sorry, the family guy and
• 33:12
  Speaker 5: all a lot of other shows and this one. Yeah
• 33:15
  Speaker 5: that it sort of bothered me even at the time.
• 33:19
  Speaker 5: It's just like really, but because he goes the wrong way, right,
• 33:23
  Speaker 5: he's the one he's coosi. Yeah, that's see the actual
• 33:25
  Speaker 5: terrorist disobeying the rules of the rooms, right, Denzil Washington
• 33:30
  Speaker 5: is causing all the may have there. But uh, it
• 33:34
  Speaker 5: is really done well and it's a signature. It stands
• 33:38
  Speaker 5: out like.
• 33:38
  Speaker 6: And again, I as you've said, I don't think I've
• 33:42
  Speaker 6: seen anything quite like it done even with today's technology.
• 33:46
  Speaker 6: And in fact you've said this on your show before.
• 33:49
  Speaker 6: We're lucky to have some of the stunts in the
• 33:51
  Speaker 6: past done in the past where they had to use,
• 33:55
  Speaker 6: for example, practical effects, and they they don't have bad
• 33:59
  Speaker 6: ais I'm sure they would use nowadays. When you were
• 34:05
  Speaker 6: watching this, you were going like, Wow, a lot of
• 34:07
  Speaker 6: stunk people took a lot of risk to make this happen.
• 34:10
  Speaker 6: Like impressive, that's great.
• 34:12
  Speaker 2: I know, I like you said, like, I'm actually kind
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: of disappointed in myself in a way for not remembering
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: this movie kind of the chasing in this movie more
• 34:21
  Speaker 2: fondly because it is such it's such a good it's
• 34:25
  Speaker 2: such a good chase scene and it's such a well
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: thought out chas scene. And again, it's one of those
• 34:29
  Speaker 2: things where this movie I wouldn't I don't know what
• 34:32
  Speaker 2: you would consider this movie outside of it being a
• 34:34
  Speaker 2: sci fi movie. I don't think it's much of an
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: action movie. It has a couple action set pieces, and
• 34:40
  Speaker 2: this is a very good action set piece in in
• 34:42
  Speaker 2: otherwise I would say non action kind of like I
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: wouldn't say specific. But the point of this movie is
• 34:49
  Speaker 2: to not beat you over the head with the action,
• 34:51
  Speaker 2: is my point. But it is a very good chase
• 34:53
  Speaker 2: scene in a movie that is not necessarily concerning itself
• 34:56
  Speaker 2: with action scene. Which is interesting given the Tony Todd
• 34:59
  Speaker 2: of it or the Tony Scott of it all, because
• 35:01
  Speaker 2: Tony Scott kind of known for shooting, and you brought
• 35:04
  Speaker 2: it up, so let's talk about it a little bit,
• 35:06
  Speaker 2: known for shooting action scenes that maybe I don't necessarily
• 35:09
  Speaker 2: resonate with because they're not shot particularly well. Because the
• 35:13
  Speaker 2: way that he chose to shoot things is just not
• 35:15
  Speaker 2: something I personally resonate with as a film watcher, and
• 35:19
  Speaker 2: it would seem to me you maybe have a similar concern.
• 35:22
  Speaker 5: Well, I think that I have evolved over my lifetime.
• 35:27
  Speaker 5: When I was younger, I was able to put up
• 35:30
  Speaker 5: with an inordinate amount of cuts and swishing, swinging, wildly
• 35:35
  Speaker 5: gesticulating cameras, lens flair. Yeah. I think maybe by brain
• 35:41
  Speaker 5: in its decay years. I just find it headache inducing.
• 35:45
  Speaker 5: And I as I I.
• 35:47
  Speaker 2: Am thirty six, I am thirty six, and it was
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: still frustrating to me. Okay, it is not just you.
• 35:53
  Speaker 2: I mean I look at a film like a Paul
• 35:57
  Speaker 2: green Grass film, and I think the same thing. Like
• 35:59
  Speaker 2: though some of the later Born identity movies, it's like,
• 36:02
  Speaker 2: just cool it with the cuts. Cool it. We don't
• 36:05
  Speaker 2: need fifty cuts in one scene.
• 36:07
  Speaker 5: Yeah, And that's why you know, if you if you're
• 36:10
  Speaker 5: a Hollywood filmmaker or you're an aspiring filmmaker, I think
• 36:14
  Speaker 5: when if you ever have a chase scene or an
• 36:16
  Speaker 5: action scene, it's to me more expensive, but it's also
• 36:21
  Speaker 5: easier to do the five hundred cuts, right. I mean,
• 36:26
  Speaker 5: we've had some examples.
• 36:28
  Speaker 2: To me.
• 36:28
  Speaker 5: The most famous one, I guess when I was growing
• 36:31
  Speaker 5: up as an example of like an action scene that
• 36:34
  Speaker 5: was all one take, was Orson Wells at his movie
• 36:38
  Speaker 5: Touch at Evil. Very first, long, long, long, no cuts
• 36:43
  Speaker 5: there and that's that's interesting. I mean, you can't do
• 36:47
  Speaker 5: it very often, but I mean the point is that
• 36:50
  Speaker 5: not every action scene has to be shot so frantically
• 36:54
  Speaker 5: and kinetically. Sometimes the action itself is enough to get
• 37:00
  Speaker 5: our attention. The other part about this, which I like
• 37:03
  Speaker 5: to get your opinion as our representative of youth on
• 37:06
  Speaker 5: this panel here, Chris, is that I actually like the
• 37:10
  Speaker 5: love story here.
• 37:11
  Speaker 2: I agree.
• 37:12
  Speaker 5: I think it has a lot of problems in the
• 37:15
  Speaker 5: sense that like, hmm, he was introduced to her by
• 37:19
  Speaker 5: basically spying on her, but I think he registers the
• 37:23
  Speaker 5: amount of discomfort that he should. It is told to us,
• 37:27
  Speaker 5: I mean shown to us that she has died horribly,
• 37:30
  Speaker 5: so like the propellant of like solving her murder as
• 37:35
  Speaker 5: long along with the murders of these other people that
• 37:38
  Speaker 5: she's linked to, seems like it's reason enough to violate
• 37:43
  Speaker 5: her privacy, especially as the movie goes on and they
• 37:48
  Speaker 5: start dropping hints and finally a confirmation that he might
• 37:52
  Speaker 5: actually be able to save her.
• 37:54
  Speaker 2: I so, interestingly enough, I think that and you know
• 37:57
  Speaker 2: you you ask me, as the you know you representative
• 38:01
  Speaker 2: of the group today, what do I think of the
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: romantic relationship between our lead who effectively meets the other
• 38:09
  Speaker 2: romantic lead on an autopsy table ten minutes into the film,
• 38:14
  Speaker 2: because that's I mean, that's the first scene that they
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: share together. Is she's already dead and he is, you know,
• 38:19
  Speaker 2: examining her or he's part of you know, in the
• 38:21
  Speaker 2: room during her autops So it's it's strange. I mean,
• 38:25
  Speaker 2: it's very different in terms of the way it's even
• 38:28
  Speaker 2: framed to open it. And like you said, there is
• 38:30
  Speaker 2: kind of this I wouldn't say icky level, but it's
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: could we call it a moral gray area, because, like
• 38:36
  Speaker 2: you've alluded to, the loss of one's privacy should come
• 38:40
  Speaker 2: at the trade off of higher security. At least that's
• 38:43
  Speaker 2: what we've been sold in this country. That's why we
• 38:45
  Speaker 2: when we go through TSA, we essentially give up our
• 38:48
  Speaker 2: rights through going through the TSA. Pendulette always talks about
• 38:52
  Speaker 2: having a little bill of rights printed on a piece
• 38:55
  Speaker 2: of metal in his pocket so that when they go
• 38:56
  Speaker 2: through the TSA they can literally take his rights away
• 38:59
  Speaker 2: as supposed to just figureatively doing it. They sell those
• 39:01
  Speaker 2: at his show in Vegas. I know because I own
• 39:04
  Speaker 2: one and I keep it on me from time to time.
• 39:07
  Speaker 2: So it's interesting in a post nine to eleven society,
• 39:10
  Speaker 2: that this is one of the few movies I can
• 39:12
  Speaker 2: think of that exists as a I am meeting her
• 39:16
  Speaker 2: because we have been spying on her, but we are
• 39:18
  Speaker 2: spying on her under the auspices of preventing her death
• 39:21
  Speaker 2: from happening, which is not a it could happen. It
• 39:25
  Speaker 2: is a it has happened, and we are trying to
• 39:27
  Speaker 2: prevent a thing that is a given from happening.
• 39:30
  Speaker 5: Right, her rights are being diminished, but it's.
• 39:33
  Speaker 2: Rights are already diminished effectively. It's kind of the converse,
• 39:36
  Speaker 2: is kind of the The argument I would make is
• 39:38
  Speaker 2: it's less sicky than it seems only because she's already dead.
• 39:42
  Speaker 2: But I think that that plot contrivance works in the
• 39:44
  Speaker 2: film's favor, because otherwise this movie would not be Not
• 39:49
  Speaker 2: that it's a meat cute, but it's somewhat of a
• 39:51
  Speaker 2: meet cute in the way that they want to play
• 39:53
  Speaker 2: it off, like, oh, they met through the this you know,
• 39:56
  Speaker 2: insane murder terrorism investigation, and that bonded them forever. I mean,
• 40:01
  Speaker 2: at one point he kisses her when he runs off,
• 40:04
  Speaker 2: and I'm like, why are you kissing her? Like why
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: are you kissing her? But it totally works because you
• 40:09
  Speaker 2: have to sell that by the end of the movie,
• 40:11
  Speaker 2: she will be willing to talk to him, to tell
• 40:15
  Speaker 2: him what he told her, to get him up to
• 40:18
  Speaker 2: speed with what happened, because, like she says, what if
• 40:22
  Speaker 2: you had to tell the most important person in the
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: world the hardest thing you've ever had to tell him,
• 40:26
  Speaker 2: and it's you know, I try. Like I love that
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: there is that at the center of this movie because
• 40:32
  Speaker 2: it it, like you said, like, ultimately the film is
• 40:34
  Speaker 2: about what do you do in moments of grief and loss,
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: but also what do you do in moments where you
• 40:41
  Speaker 2: have to find immense amounts of strength within yourself to
• 40:46
  Speaker 2: do something that seems impossible. Because again we get the
• 40:49
  Speaker 2: sense that what Denzel Washington does in this movie is
• 40:52
  Speaker 2: impossible and it is through only some some kind of
• 40:56
  Speaker 2: divine intervention that he is able to stop Jim Cavizl
• 40:59
  Speaker 2: from blowing up this faery. There is some divine intervention
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: in this movie, is there not?
• 41:03
  Speaker 5: Yes, let me just talk about that. A fan theory
• 41:07
  Speaker 5: that I have, which I'm not sure I've seen anywhere else.
• 41:11
  Speaker 5: So this is my own completely lunatic fan theory that
• 41:14
  Speaker 5: I can register trademark right now is that this like
• 41:18
  Speaker 5: a lot of Denzil Washington movies. He I've seen some
• 41:20
  Speaker 5: interviews with him. He is a deeply spiritual person, like
• 41:24
  Speaker 5: he does believe in hereafter and God and so on,
• 41:29
  Speaker 5: and I think that that enters some of his characters
• 41:31
  Speaker 5: in movies. I got a feeling that something that was
• 41:35
  Speaker 5: implied but not stated, which is pretty unusual for Tony Scottsfield,
• 41:40
  Speaker 5: was that maybe somehow the essence of time travel or
• 41:45
  Speaker 5: the system of time travel that they have met before,
• 41:48
  Speaker 5: in the sense that like maybe the plot of the film,
• 41:52
  Speaker 5: it isn't that they're in a time loop, but some
• 41:54
  Speaker 5: of the energy. And I know I'm sounding like I'm
• 41:57
  Speaker 5: spouting pseudoscience, but I think it's part of like the
• 42:00
  Speaker 5: theory of how time travel works, is that he didn't
• 42:04
  Speaker 5: do this already and they're just going in a loop.
• 42:07
  Speaker 5: It's just that when he's looking at her, there is
• 42:10
  Speaker 5: this moment of like, wait a minute, do I know her?
• 42:13
  Speaker 5: Is there some recognition? And then the same thing. And
• 42:15
  Speaker 5: I think these are two excellent actors. She's a very
• 42:18
  Speaker 5: good actors.
• 42:19
  Speaker 2: Oh, Paula Patton is fantastic. They have great chemistry together.
• 42:23
  Speaker 2: That's what works. That's why it works is because they
• 42:27
  Speaker 2: share all of like three or four scenes together when
• 42:31
  Speaker 2: they're alive, and it works like Gangbusters. The two of
• 42:34
  Speaker 2: them like really works. And that's the only way this
• 42:36
  Speaker 2: movie works is because they actually have chemistry when they're
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: on screen.
• 42:40
  Speaker 5: Yes, and so they're able to accomplish something of subtlety here,
• 42:44
  Speaker 5: which I think if it had been stated, like if Tony,
• 42:48
  Speaker 5: if the script had Denzel Washington said, you know, in
• 42:52
  Speaker 5: a way we have met before, and I think there's
• 42:56
  Speaker 5: a magical resonance in time travel that comes from a
• 42:59
  Speaker 5: high park. Those things are better left unstated, right, it
• 43:04
  Speaker 5: should be. A good actors can just give you a
• 43:07
  Speaker 5: feeling of something that you take away walking out of
• 43:11
  Speaker 5: the movie. And I think that was something that was
• 43:13
  Speaker 5: going on there, that there was something beyond just the
• 43:17
  Speaker 5: events there and something else you said, and I'm going
• 43:19
  Speaker 5: to go on a little tangent I apologize. Is this
• 43:22
  Speaker 5: is my lecture hour for the next two minutes. One
• 43:25
  Speaker 5: of the challenges whenever you watch any kind of genre movie,
• 43:29
  Speaker 5: or especially a subgenre okay, a time travel movie, a
• 43:32
  Speaker 5: zombie movie, a spy movie, is you go sort of
• 43:35
  Speaker 5: ask yourself yeah, haven't these people ever watched the movie before?
• 43:38
  Speaker 5: In the TV series Pluribus, the main character, who is
• 43:43
  Speaker 5: caught in a sort of hive mind world where everybody
• 43:48
  Speaker 5: else is almost everybody in the world is thinking differently.
• 43:51
  Speaker 5: She says, we've all watched this movie before. And the
• 43:54
  Speaker 5: fact is, like nobody on planet Earth should be shocked
• 43:57
  Speaker 5: at a time travel plot. They just might be shocked
• 44:00
  Speaker 5: it's happening to them. So there's a little fun little
• 44:03
  Speaker 5: movie which I don't know where it's worth like devoting
• 44:07
  Speaker 5: an episode, but I really loved it. It's called Round
• 44:10
  Speaker 5: and Round and it's a Hallmark movie, and yeah, it's
• 44:14
  Speaker 5: a Hallmark movie, but it's a really good Hallmark movie.
• 44:16
  Speaker 5: It's one of their few honekh movies. And in the movie,
• 44:20
  Speaker 5: the main the main character is a young woman and
• 44:23
  Speaker 5: she gets caught in a Groundhog Day time loop. But
• 44:26
  Speaker 5: they do two things which are very clever, which, like Lifted,
• 44:30
  Speaker 5: Beside it being funny and interesting, Lifted above not only
• 44:34
  Speaker 5: the typical Hallmark movie, but like the typical time loop
• 44:37
  Speaker 5: movie is they recognize that these people exist in our universe.
• 44:41
  Speaker 5: So like the first thing she thinks of is, oh
• 44:43
  Speaker 5: my gosh, I'm in a groundhog Day situation. But then
• 44:47
  Speaker 5: they go further in cleverness and where Okay, suppose you
• 44:51
  Speaker 5: actually found yourself in something that's familiar from the movie world, right,
• 44:56
  Speaker 5: like you found your like, my gosh, I am actually
• 44:58
  Speaker 5: reliving the same day over and over again.
• 45:01
  Speaker 2: Right right right?
• 45:02
  Speaker 5: Well, where would you go where you could find people
• 45:06
  Speaker 5: who would believe you and might have clever ideas on
• 45:10
  Speaker 5: what to do? A comic bookstore. And that's what happens
• 45:14
  Speaker 5: in the movie is the her love interest happens to
• 45:17
  Speaker 5: know these guys at a comic bookstore who they're geeky
• 45:21
  Speaker 5: guys who know all popular culture from all time and
• 45:24
  Speaker 5: have discussed every situation, like they've had three hundred conversversations
• 45:28
  Speaker 5: like yeah, what if we were in a timeloop? What
• 45:30
  Speaker 5: would we do? And these guys come up with some
• 45:33
  Speaker 5: ideas of what to do to get out of the
• 45:35
  Speaker 5: time loop. Okay, so that's a completely different movie than
• 45:37
  Speaker 5: the one we're talking about, But I do like that
• 45:41
  Speaker 5: in this movie. While nobody says, hey, you know, I
• 45:45
  Speaker 5: saw five time travel movies before and they did this,
• 45:49
  Speaker 5: there is a sort of understanding of, like, what are
• 45:52
  Speaker 5: the possibilities right right when he's apple.
• 45:55
  Speaker 2: Or then we understand here your science does not fine
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: and explain everything. And I like that there's that it's
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: a it's a crack is left open. But the movie
• 46:06
  Speaker 2: at the end it it, it goes right to that
• 46:09
  Speaker 2: crack and peers through it and says, yeah, we're we
• 46:12
  Speaker 2: know if you're looking through it with us, we see you.
• 46:14
  Speaker 2: Because that moment at the end of the film where
• 46:16
  Speaker 2: Denzel looks at her and goes no and then they
• 46:19
  Speaker 2: drive off, it's like he doesn't need to do anything else.
• 46:21
  Speaker 2: That one line and that look at her is all
• 46:24
  Speaker 2: you need to know that he understands in that moment
• 46:28
  Speaker 2: the entire plot of the movie that has come before,
• 46:30
  Speaker 2: and it's just like it's no fucking way, like no way,
• 46:33
  Speaker 2: and it's like, yeah, you're right, no way, Like I
• 46:36
  Speaker 2: don't know how he would believe it other than giving
• 46:39
  Speaker 2: himself over in that moment to some other divine be
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: because there is no explanation that the movie is going
• 46:47
  Speaker 2: to give otherwise. And so my assumption is the explanation
• 46:51
  Speaker 2: that Denzel gives is the explanation the movie wants us
• 46:54
  Speaker 2: to have. And I'm curious if that was in the
• 46:56
  Speaker 2: film to begin with if that wasn't something that Denzel
• 46:59
  Speaker 2: brought to the table, because, like you said, I have
• 47:01
  Speaker 2: also seen interviews with him, and he seems to be
• 47:04
  Speaker 2: a deeply spiritual person who and he also seems like
• 47:07
  Speaker 2: he's the kind of guy who knows what he likes
• 47:08
  Speaker 2: and what he does when he works with people. So
• 47:11
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't be surprised if he was like, put this
• 47:13
  Speaker 2: in there, or let's include this, or let's have this,
• 47:15
  Speaker 2: let's lean into this a little bit more, because it's weird.
• 47:18
  Speaker 2: Science and faith tend to not intersect one another. They
• 47:22
  Speaker 2: tend to be separate lanes, and when they do intersect,
• 47:24
  Speaker 2: they're not intersecting in a complementary, commingling way like they
• 47:28
  Speaker 2: are here. This movie is essentially saying time travel exists,
• 47:32
  Speaker 2: but also God exists and has some capacity to be
• 47:36
  Speaker 2: in control of time travel.
• 47:37
  Speaker 5: God is there somewhere in this movie. There's no question
• 47:40
  Speaker 5: we get a sense of it. There was I years ago.
• 47:44
  Speaker 5: Carl Sagan is probably the most famous science popularizer, but
• 47:48
  Speaker 5: there was another gentleman of biologist, very accomplished biologist, named
• 47:52
  Speaker 5: Stephen Jay Gould. He wrote a lot of popular science books,
• 47:55
  Speaker 5: and he had this one sentence that was in an
• 47:58
  Speaker 5: essay about science and religion, and I always remember the
• 48:01
  Speaker 5: sentence because, gosh, it's so well written. He said science
• 48:04
  Speaker 5: and religion should be non overlapping magisteria. What he meant
• 48:09
  Speaker 5: was scientists really shouldn't give advice about religion, and people
• 48:15
  Speaker 5: who are religious shouldn't give advice about science, and will
• 48:18
  Speaker 5: just agree that these worlds are not antithetical to each other.
• 48:23
  Speaker 5: But just like we should, we can respect both worlds, right, right.
• 48:27
  Speaker 5: And I think this is a movie. It's not often
• 48:31
  Speaker 5: that we describe a Tony Scott's film as restrained.
• 48:34
  Speaker 2: No no, no, no, no, no, that's that last thing
• 48:37
  Speaker 2: I would describe a Tony Scott film in a lot
• 48:39
  Speaker 2: of ways.
• 48:39
  Speaker 5: Yeah, but I feel like this is among his best
• 48:43
  Speaker 5: movies because for me, because it chooses to leave, as
• 48:48
  Speaker 5: you say, certain things unexplained, certain things implied, certain things
• 48:53
  Speaker 5: just as a feeling that honestly would sound stupid or
• 48:57
  Speaker 5: silly or just feel wrong if they were just straight
• 49:01
  Speaker 5: out some character yapped away at them. And that ending
• 49:05
  Speaker 5: where we fill in that they're gonna by the end
• 49:09
  Speaker 5: of the conversation, they're both going to be convinced that
• 49:11
  Speaker 5: something happened and you know, I hope they get married
• 49:14
  Speaker 5: and live happily ever after. That's great.
• 49:16
  Speaker 2: What I love about the movie is that by the
• 49:21
  Speaker 2: end of it, you foresee what you just said being
• 49:23
  Speaker 2: a reasonable possibility because of the chemistry, because of the restraint,
• 49:27
  Speaker 2: because the movie doesn't club you over the head with
• 49:30
  Speaker 2: what it's getting at either. I love that, like you said,
• 49:34
  Speaker 2: we don't have an over explanation of the time travel
• 49:37
  Speaker 2: where the movie at the end feels like it can't
• 49:39
  Speaker 2: just let time change. It can't. Like normally, when you
• 49:42
  Speaker 2: put yourself into a box, sometimes you put a lid
• 49:45
  Speaker 2: on that box, even and in putting a lid on
• 49:47
  Speaker 2: that box, you have no way out of said box.
• 49:49
  Speaker 2: In putting a little faith or the mystery of the
• 49:53
  Speaker 2: divine into this, you kind of give yourself a little
• 49:55
  Speaker 2: bit of a parachute out of here where you're like, well, hell,
• 49:58
  Speaker 2: there is the odd faith, there is the divine interference.
• 50:02
  Speaker 2: It could have been that. And they don't need to
• 50:05
  Speaker 2: labor that point. They just go okay, all right, Like
• 50:09
  Speaker 2: don't I don't need a movie sometimes to do any
• 50:11
  Speaker 2: more than that, because I can make my own conclusion.
• 50:14
  Speaker 2: I can get to the point the movie wants to
• 50:15
  Speaker 2: get to the movie doesn't have to drag me. I
• 50:17
  Speaker 2: am coming along willingly.
• 50:19
  Speaker 5: And we've talked a lot about Denzel Washington and Paul
• 50:22
  Speaker 5: Patten's character, but let's give recognition to Adam Goldberg because
• 50:26
  Speaker 5: he actually embodies a lot of what you're saying. Like
• 50:29
  Speaker 5: at the beginning, he comes off like, Okay, this is
• 50:32
  Speaker 5: gonna be the smug, know it all, jerk scientist character
• 50:37
  Speaker 5: that we're all pretty familiar with, as like he knows
• 50:41
  Speaker 5: everything and he's cynical and doesn't have any real feelings
• 50:45
  Speaker 5: or emotions.
• 50:46
  Speaker 2: But I don't have any time to explain this to you. Yes,
• 50:49
  Speaker 2: essentially the way his character comes off, but.
• 50:52
  Speaker 5: And so obsessed with the science that he's not thinking
• 50:55
  Speaker 5: about the human ramifications of the science. Right that group
• 50:59
  Speaker 5: of scientists, they have one who tends to be more
• 51:04
  Speaker 5: caring and the one who's always making some cynical, smug remarks,
• 51:08
  Speaker 5: you know, and and Adam Goldberg is sort of in
• 51:10
  Speaker 5: the middle. And by the end talk about it, there's
• 51:14
  Speaker 5: a wonderful moment and a sort of I find a
• 51:17
  Speaker 5: slightly silly moment. But yeah, Adam, Adam Goldberg says, well,
• 51:21
  Speaker 5: you know, I think we you can time travel, and
• 51:24
  Speaker 5: so Denzil Washington gets into the machine and sort of
• 51:27
  Speaker 5: squeezes in there, and you can Adam Goldberg is a
• 51:30
  Speaker 5: good enough act that he is resonating like, okay, you've
• 51:34
  Speaker 5: taught me something, you know. I'm the science is what
• 51:37
  Speaker 5: I was obsessed about, because of course we want our
• 51:40
  Speaker 5: sciences obsessed with science. You produce better science when you're
• 51:43
  Speaker 5: obsessed with something right, right, right, But you can see
• 51:47
  Speaker 5: that he feels like he's taken something about we haven't
• 51:51
  Speaker 5: mentioned the word love, but like not beyond spirituality and
• 51:56
  Speaker 5: God and something beyond the physical realm. There's love here,
• 52:00
  Speaker 5: right about the love between these two main characters, and
• 52:03
  Speaker 5: he is and Goldberg sort of registers, Yeah, I get
• 52:07
  Speaker 5: there's something more important than science here.
• 52:10
  Speaker 2: Love right which is?
• 52:11
  Speaker 5: Which?
• 52:13
  Speaker 2: Which?
• 52:13
  Speaker 5: No?
• 52:13
  Speaker 2: To your point, I think is very interesting because again,
• 52:16
  Speaker 2: the the movie goes, the movie goes places I wouldn't
• 52:19
  Speaker 2: have expected it to go, because it feels like it's
• 52:21
  Speaker 2: being written by two screenwriters who I think have a
• 52:25
  Speaker 2: better sense of what makes this an interesting story is
• 52:29
  Speaker 2: taking it to an interesting spot and actually leaving it
• 52:32
  Speaker 2: there and not just taking us to that interesting spot
• 52:35
  Speaker 2: and then just kind of looking at it like and
• 52:37
  Speaker 2: then running away and not giving us time Like. I
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: think this movie is really invested in doing something different
• 52:45
  Speaker 2: and forcing the audience to kind of sit with it
• 52:47
  Speaker 2: and to look at the two screenwriters. Bill Marcilly has
• 52:50
  Speaker 2: not done a whole lot, but Terry Rossio has done
• 52:52
  Speaker 2: a lot of things, both television and movie, and you know,
• 52:56
  Speaker 2: doing the research, the two of them were friends who
• 53:02
  Speaker 2: worked on a you know, Rossio had an idea for
• 53:05
  Speaker 2: a one page script where a cop is looking back
• 53:08
  Speaker 2: a week to investigate his girlfriend's murder. And you know,
• 53:12
  Speaker 2: that is where the notion of the idea came from,
• 53:15
  Speaker 2: and then it kind of blossomed from there and that idea.
• 53:18
  Speaker 2: You can see that base idea here at the center
• 53:20
  Speaker 2: of this script, but it's so much more built out
• 53:22
  Speaker 2: than that you have the I mean, we haven't even
• 53:24
  Speaker 2: talked about Val Kilmer yet, who's an interesting kind of
• 53:28
  Speaker 2: He's almost more hands off than I would have wanted
• 53:30
  Speaker 2: him to be as a character, as an and as
• 53:32
  Speaker 2: an actor because I love Val Kilmer so much, and
• 53:34
  Speaker 2: obviously he's no longer with us, so any role that
• 53:37
  Speaker 2: we get to see of him now is you know,
• 53:39
  Speaker 2: cherish it because we're not getting anymore. He's not in
• 53:42
  Speaker 2: it enough. But the person that I want to talk
• 53:44
  Speaker 2: about that I found very interesting is Jim cavesal of
• 53:47
  Speaker 2: all people playing what I would put he's doing his
• 53:50
  Speaker 2: best timoth best Timothy McVeigh in person is what I
• 53:54
  Speaker 2: perceive it as, like, it's very Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols,
• 53:58
  Speaker 2: Ruby Ridge, like one of those people that now seemed
• 54:03
  Speaker 2: to be running around with more prevalence than they were
• 54:07
  Speaker 2: in two thousand and six, which is very interesting to
• 54:10
  Speaker 2: me because that in and of itself feels kind of prescient,
• 54:14
  Speaker 2: with the rise of kind of a certain kind of
• 54:17
  Speaker 2: feeling and sentiment that his character embodies that was around
• 54:21
  Speaker 2: for a long time. And you see that here too,
• 54:24
  Speaker 2: because we get a whole scene of him back and
• 54:26
  Speaker 2: forth with Denzel kind of outing himself as to what
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: his you know, modus operandi or his motivating forces for
• 54:33
  Speaker 2: why he blows a faery of military members in their family.
• 54:38
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I want to go back to Vell Kilmer for
• 54:41
  Speaker 5: a moment. Yeah, he's in a forgettable role. I mean,
• 54:46
  Speaker 5: anybody could have been FBI agent Jones. I forgot how
• 54:49
  Speaker 5: to spell it.
• 54:51
  Speaker 2: Paul Pizwara, which, by the way, they gave him the
• 54:53
  Speaker 2: most difficult name to pronounce on top of everything else.
• 54:56
  Speaker 5: If I've rewritten the screenplay, I would have not done
• 55:01
  Speaker 5: the Marvel thing. A lot of the people that are
• 55:03
  Speaker 5: like Claire Kutcheverer, Paul Bizarro, you know, never never do
• 55:08
  Speaker 5: the alliteration to to Clark Kent or whatever. But anyway,
• 55:13
  Speaker 5: he has just a moment. Really, it's he's not a
• 55:16
  Speaker 5: major role. I think honestly, his role and the Bruce
• 55:20
  Speaker 5: Greenwood role could just been compacted into one person. Agreed, yeah,
• 55:26
  Speaker 5: but it is. It shows something else Tony Scott had
• 55:29
  Speaker 5: as a filmmaker, which was that almost all the time.
• 55:32
  Speaker 5: It's hard to think of any of his films where
• 55:35
  Speaker 5: anyone was a bad actor or completely miscast. Usually he
• 55:40
  Speaker 5: found really good people in roles. Now, sometimes those roles
• 55:43
  Speaker 5: were pretty stereotypical or what you'd expect, but he he
• 55:48
  Speaker 5: had a crew Valcilmer being one of them that just
• 55:52
  Speaker 5: they were always good in what they did right, and
• 55:55
  Speaker 5: this film was there. So I guess for me, this
• 55:58
  Speaker 5: movie is not and like the greatest movies ever made,
• 56:02
  Speaker 5: but it is a movie that checks a lot of
• 56:05
  Speaker 5: boxes for success. I was like to tell my students
• 56:08
  Speaker 5: one way to look at a movie is was it
• 56:10
  Speaker 5: successful in what it's set out to do? Because if
• 56:13
  Speaker 5: somebody if something is setting out to be a light,
• 56:15
  Speaker 5: frothy comedy and something else is supposed to be a dark,
• 56:18
  Speaker 5: disturbed journey into the abyss of the human mind, you
• 56:22
  Speaker 5: can't really compare them and say one's better than the other.
• 56:25
  Speaker 5: It just did they succeed right in what they were attempting.
• 56:29
  Speaker 5: And so I felt like, this is an action thriller,
• 56:33
  Speaker 5: a love story, and a little bit of spiritual philosophy, meditation,
• 56:39
  Speaker 5: a time travel movie, and it does all of those
• 56:42
  Speaker 5: things pretty well.
• 56:43
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I would agree, I think, you know, for me,
• 56:47
  Speaker 2: I think it probably in terms of it being an
• 56:50
  Speaker 2: action movie. I think it doesn't do much in terms
• 56:53
  Speaker 2: of the kind of one set piece we get with
• 56:56
  Speaker 2: the car chase through time I would say, or reverse
• 57:01
  Speaker 2: car chase, orhever you would want to interpret it. I
• 57:03
  Speaker 2: don't think that the film really does a lot else,
• 57:05
  Speaker 2: and it doesn't really bother itself with being an action
• 57:08
  Speaker 2: movie per se, which I feel like is a tad
• 57:10
  Speaker 2: of a missed opportunity. But at the same time, you know,
• 57:13
  Speaker 2: I like we've clearly already talked about like the movie
• 57:16
  Speaker 2: is not necessarily concerning itself with being an action movie
• 57:20
  Speaker 2: per se. I mean, I think it has I think
• 57:22
  Speaker 2: the problem I maybe have with the movie is it
• 57:24
  Speaker 2: feels like there is actually something more interesting to be
• 57:27
  Speaker 2: said here in the movie actually is not getting to it. Ah,
• 57:30
  Speaker 2: And I think that there is an interesting story that
• 57:32
  Speaker 2: could be told about the intersection between time travel and
• 57:37
  Speaker 2: faith and the idea of what does that mean and
• 57:40
  Speaker 2: how and how does one put one's faith in technology
• 57:44
  Speaker 2: to go back and do something like this with the
• 57:46
  Speaker 2: belief and faith that the change that you're making is
• 57:51
  Speaker 2: the right one or a positive one. And I you know,
• 57:53
  Speaker 2: that's the other thing that the movie never gets to.
• 57:55
  Speaker 2: You know, we go with the character that Denzel Washington
• 57:58
  Speaker 2: is playing that what he is doing will cause a
• 58:01
  Speaker 2: positive change in the world, saving her life, But that
• 58:04
  Speaker 2: is a question that he never asks himself about the
• 58:07
  Speaker 2: other five hundred and forty three people on that boat
• 58:09
  Speaker 2: that he saves and what their possible moral compasses in
• 58:13
  Speaker 2: what direction they may be pointing. And that's an interesting
• 58:16
  Speaker 2: conversation that the movie doesn't have. But it starts verging
• 58:19
  Speaker 2: on having a intellectual conversation about time travel that most
• 58:25
  Speaker 2: movies that use time travel don't have any interest in
• 58:27
  Speaker 2: getting involved.
• 58:28
  Speaker 5: Well, it's interesting because most time travel TV shows and
• 58:32
  Speaker 5: movies have as a sort of overriding driving principle that
• 58:38
  Speaker 5: stated out loud is we can't change the past. Whatever
• 58:41
  Speaker 5: we do, we can't change the past right over and
• 58:44
  Speaker 5: over and over and over, and sometimes will be told like,
• 58:48
  Speaker 5: oh gosh, if you change the past, there'll be terrible consequences.
• 58:51
  Speaker 5: And there have been some very famous science fiction stories.
• 58:55
  Speaker 5: I'm thinking of one will go too far in there,
• 58:58
  Speaker 5: but like people go back in time, I'm to the
• 59:01
  Speaker 5: era of the dinosaurs and a guy steps on a butterfly. Yeah,
• 59:05
  Speaker 5: and the ripples through time.
• 59:09
  Speaker 2: The world of movie is terrible, by the way.
• 59:12
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I won't even mention it.
• 59:13
  Speaker 2: It.
• 59:13
  Speaker 5: Sound of Thunder is the story. It should never.
• 59:16
  Speaker 2: Has Ben Kingsley in it too, by the way, which
• 59:19
  Speaker 2: is just oh yeah, I was gonna say that the
• 59:22
  Speaker 2: Butterfly Effect. While the Sound of Thunder is terrible, the
• 59:25
  Speaker 2: movie The Butterfly Effect does that same thing, I think poorly,
• 59:29
  Speaker 2: but it gets to the same idea of you know,
• 59:32
  Speaker 2: small changes in the past occurring, you know, changing things
• 59:36
  Speaker 2: broadly or bigger in the future. I like that this
• 59:39
  Speaker 2: movie goes you know what, we're just ignoring that kind
• 59:42
  Speaker 2: of and hanging a lantern on it in the corner.
• 59:44
  Speaker 2: And the point is to change it, like we don't
• 59:48
  Speaker 2: care what happens if we change it. We're trying to
• 59:50
  Speaker 2: change it.
• 59:51
  Speaker 5: Screw the time travel, you know, the continuum there, There.
• 59:56
  Speaker 2: Isn't that kind of this movie in a way, like
• 59:58
  Speaker 2: we're trying to change it, Like, oh, don't change you
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 2: can't change the past. That's what we're trying to do.
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 2: So we're going to do anything within our power to
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 2: do that.
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 5: I think there's an argument about whether you can change
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 5: the past, and this goes to this idea. Of course,
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 5: a lot of time loop movies, when you go back
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 5: in time, it turns out to be part of time
• 1:00:17
  Speaker 5: that you went back in time, so there's nothing changed
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 5: because you have it's already figured into the universe. And
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 5: then I'm also thinking, of course of the incredible time
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 5: travel episode of there's several one in the original Star
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 5: Trek but they go back in time to the nineteen
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 5: twenties and they meet Edith I think I even remember
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 5: her name, Edith Keeler. I think, yeah, yeah, yeah, And
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 5: they meet a young woman who in that timeline is
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 5: going to start a peace movement and prevent America from
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 5: entering World War two and allow the Nazis to win
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 5: the Second World War. And so, I gosh, I think
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 5: eleven year old me thought this was some of the
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 5: deepest science fiction philosophy ever. It really is a beautiful story,
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 5: and absolutely beautiful story. And they realized Spock, especially realizes that, yeah,
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 5: she has to die. There's no way to avoid letting
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 5: they had done something to change the past, that they
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 5: have to unchange it. So this movie blithely ignores that
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 5: Star Trek episode and a lot of other.
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 2: Terminator as well. I mean, Terminator is the other big one, right,
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 2: Like Arnold has to die at the end of Terminator
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 2: two to close the loop so that the robots don't
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 2: take over. That's not what happened. They couldn't help themselves,
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 2: and that's not our fault. But if Terminator two had
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 2: ended the way it was supposed to, Arnold dies, there's
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 2: no chips left. That's it. Bob's your uncle. They've prevented
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 2: the robot uprising. I mean again, like they's we are
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 2: literally living with time travel for the most part, not
• 1:01:56
  Speaker 2: changing things. In Avengers Endgame, they have to take the
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 2: Jewels back at the end of the movie so that
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 2: nothing happens untoward in the timeline, and then they just
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 2: didn't care anyway. It's you know, I like that this
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 2: movie just says, screw your rules, We're gonna do this anyways.
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 2: And it really it works in a way. It works
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 2: in a way that if you don't constrain yourself so much,
• 1:02:18
  Speaker 2: you can get away with from time to time because
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 2: everybody else is constraining themselves so much. If you bring
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 2: up other time travel movies when you're talking about time travel,
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 2: you are doing too much to try to explain.
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 5: Yes, as I said, it worked in this round and
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 5: round because they I felt that they had to bring
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 5: up Groundhog Day, like it just was not credible that
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 5: any human on the planet had not thought a little
• 1:02:40
  Speaker 5: bit about right, I agree, the Groundhog Day, But then
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 5: they run with it and it's a fun brought the
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 5: you know, light comedy that has some interesting philosophical bigs.
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 5: But what I'd like to end on is something that
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 5: you have mentioned and we've talked a little bit about,
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 5: is and I felt was part of the beauty of
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 5: the Arrival with Amy Adams, which is based on a
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 5: Ted Chang towards a famous short story about the idea
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 5: of continuity of something that happens in the future has
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 5: also already happened, right, And I do feel that this
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 5: is a movie that doesn't state it as explicitly as
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 5: a rival, where like the terrible thing that happens in
• 1:03:22
  Speaker 5: the future and the terrible thing that happened the past
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 5: are equally already occurring and influences somebody, and philosophically you
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 5: just have to accept that. But I think it is
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 5: implied here, and I think it lends somewhat depths to
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 5: this movie that you wouldn't get from either the average
• 1:03:41
  Speaker 5: time travel movie or the average you know, would be
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 5: action thriller.
• 1:03:45
  Speaker 2: I also think for me, the other thing that's fun
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 2: because I went and did some you know, digging online,
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 2: because again, this is a movie that feels like, like
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 2: you just said, it ties everything up and it cares
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 2: about making sure that everything is given a time and
• 1:03:59
  Speaker 2: place and an explanation. The overwhelming fan theory with this
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 2: film is we're actually not seeing the first time that
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 2: this has happened, but we're actually seeing the second time
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 2: that this has happened. Because how else would we have
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 2: his dead body at the beginning of the movie sitting
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 2: on the pier, And what happened in the first round
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 2: is he did not prevent the bomb successfully from going off,
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 2: and his body was somewhere on the boat at the
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 2: beginning of the movie, or he was on the boat
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 2: somewhere at the beginning of the movie and we never
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 2: saw it, or something happened that caused him to be
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 2: on the boat at the beginning of the movie. That's
• 1:04:32
  Speaker 2: why his cell phone is on someone's dead body, his
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 2: own dead body at the beginning of the movie, which
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 2: would be a crazy level of continuity to cop to,
• 1:04:41
  Speaker 2: because that would mean a whole nother movie happened before
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 2: the movie we even saw.
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I said that my theory was that they could
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 5: be in some sort of loop, but that it happened
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 5: once before. I mean, I think some of these people
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 5: who've gone deep, I mean amazing how Groundhog Day, which
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 5: I do think is a truly amazing film, has produced
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 5: so much scholarship, you know, like right, philosophy, right, And
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 5: of course I think people have talked about the fact
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 5: that Bill Murray probably went through at least hundreds, if
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 5: not thousands of days.
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it to become an expert at any one of
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 2: those things takes hundreds of thousands of hours, which is
• 1:05:24
  Speaker 2: hundreds of not thousands of days.
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 5: But in order for him to remember the skill sets
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 5: that he had, there had to have been some physical continuity.
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 5: I mean, like the cells in his brain stayed the
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 5: same cells, right, So in order for him to learn
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 5: the piano, he couldn't just repeat a thousand days and
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 5: set reset. So in this movie, it is saying that
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 5: there is a ninety nine point nine percent reset, but
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 5: there's something else, And again, I just think it works
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 5: really well.
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 2: Is that is that the faith of the movie. Do
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 2: you think that that one percent is what the movie
• 1:05:59
  Speaker 2: is giving the space for the faith of the movie,
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 2: because that's what it feels like to me, is that's
• 1:06:03
  Speaker 2: the little bit of faith that the movie gives the intangible, unexplainable.
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 2: Is the movie giving that little bit of space to
• 1:06:11
  Speaker 2: I mean, you know, why why did the Beach Boys
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 2: come on at the end of the movie again? You
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 2: know what I mean? That's it's that little moment of
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 2: like divine the divine intervention is the Beach Boys comes
• 1:06:22
  Speaker 2: on again at the end of the movie. Right, a
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 2: song that just played not five ten minutes before is
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 2: playing again on the radio and it's that same song
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 2: and he hears it and he heard it before not
• 1:06:32
  Speaker 2: ten minutes Like that feels like the small amount of
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 2: divine intervene that, like you said, the one percent and
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 2: it's time travel movies don't concern themselves with this kind
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 2: of stuff at all, and it's weird that this one
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 2: does because it feels I remember enjoying this movie when
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 2: I saw it, but I don't remember thinking that this
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 2: is one of the most interesting time travel movies I've
• 1:06:51
  Speaker 2: ever seen. This is one of the most interesting time
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 2: travel movies I think that has ever been made, because
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 2: it actually makes time travel seem not plausible, but it does.
• 1:07:00
  Speaker 2: It make it feel like by the end of it,
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 2: I couldn't follow along with what it was getting it,
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 2: and that's a rarity for time travel.
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 5: Yeah. One thing I forgot to add, which I really
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 5: liked was the time travel was incredibly inordinately expensive.
• 1:07:13
  Speaker 2: Right and Black East Coast.
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 5: I don't like time travel movies where the time travel
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 5: is accomplished with two double A batteries. And I realized, like, hey,
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 5: you know, shout out to back to the future that
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 5: like they had a little mini nuclear reactor and something
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 5: like that. Even then they realized you're going to have
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 5: to spend some energy time if you're going to time travel.
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 5: But this one, there's a very cute scene where they
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 5: talk about some blackout I think, to the current in Boston,
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 5: and one of the scientists said, yeah, that was me,
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 5: my bad. So that's a moment of humor that sort
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 5: of lends a little bit of scientific credibility, like, yeah,
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 5: we can look back in the future, but we're going
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 5: to and talk about Pressian. The moment when I was
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 5: watching this film again three weeks ago preparing for today,
• 1:08:02
  Speaker 5: the moment that when I saw that, I thought, oh
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 5: Ai and data centers, right, Like, we have this new technology,
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 5: which I mean people are using it for a very
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 5: advanced things, and people are also using it just to
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 5: like make pictures of kittens, but it's costing us a
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 5: massive amount of energy and water. The price of the
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 5: new technology is extremely high, and this movie sort of
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 5: gave a little bit of hint of that for what
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 5: was to come.
• 1:08:29
  Speaker 2: I will also mention the other thing about time travel
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 2: that I appreciate is we never get a sense of
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 2: what they could do with the time travel otherwise, because
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 2: it feels so I wouldn't say it feels so useless,
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 2: but it does kind of feel useless, right, Like the
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 2: time travel seems so specifically useful, it almost feels broadly useless,
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 2: Like what are you going to do four days in
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 2: the past in most capacities if you can't go back
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 2: in time and you can't affect it, like it will
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 2: be only kind of specifically used full in a specifically
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 2: useful way. It's like having a really high powered telescope,
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 2: which is why it's so interesting that they allude to
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 2: initially that it's like, well, it's just a high powered
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 2: imaging catalog that's essentially creating a three It's essentially what
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 2: they hitch it as is it's creating a three D
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 2: space that you're watching things occur inside, and what it
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 2: actually is is you're seeing back in time. Either way,
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 2: that technology is effectively useless. Broadly, it's niche useful. But
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 2: I love is that we don't get the typical well
• 1:09:31
  Speaker 2: the military tried to use this for its own functionality,
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 2: Like there's no usefulness the military wouldever get out of
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 2: this like at all, And you get the sense that
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 2: this technology is almost more trouble than it's worth in
• 1:09:42
  Speaker 2: a lot of ways, Like they're moving this giant thing around,
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 2: it's blacking out the Eastern seaboard for what, like for
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 2: what are we getting out of it? Like very little seeming.
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 5: Yeah, I mean, everybody who owns the telescope is able
• 1:09:55
  Speaker 5: to view back in time, right, because if you have
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 5: a especially powerful telescope up in orbit, you're looking back
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 5: billions of years. So you are seeing a star dying
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 5: billions of years ago because of course the light took
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 5: five billion years to reach us or something like that.
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 5: So the idea of looking back in time is actually
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 5: very familiar. But the interactivity combined with our surveillance world
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 5: where everything is being recorded, is something that was pretty
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 5: innovative for two thousand and six. I mean there's I'm
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 5: a science fiction buff, so I can name some stories
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 5: that I grew up reading where they had time viewers,
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 5: and I remember those. One story I usually completely forgotten
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 5: who wrote it. I think was not some famous author,
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 5: but like somebody in then it's a time viewer and
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 5: they can see Alexander the Great right live the same
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 5: way here. So that wasn't like a lot of popular
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 5: Hollywood movies are reprising very familiar plots from old science
• 1:10:58
  Speaker 5: fiction of the forties and fifties. We just it's the
• 1:11:00
  Speaker 5: first time we're seeing it on the screen, right. But
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 5: I just again, this movie did not win the Academy Ward,
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 5: did not deserve the Academy Ward. But it's worth viewing
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 5: as what it is, and probably it even a little
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 5: bit more than what it was, like a little bit
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 5: higher level than the average either action thrower or a
• 1:11:18
  Speaker 5: time travel movie.
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 2: Well and given that, you know, like we've already alluded to,
• 1:11:22
  Speaker 2: and I've mentioned several times now, the Avengers Endgame of
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 2: it all making time travel that much more ubiquitous, that
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 2: much more mainstream, making time travel a component of the
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 2: biggest film ever to be released, and effectively doing time
• 1:11:36
  Speaker 2: travel in the same way that this movie is both
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 2: having a folding time back in on itself and multiple
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 2: timelines going at the same time, like Avengers Endgame tried
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 2: to do the same thing, like this movie on one
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 2: one thousandth of the budget did a better job in
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 2: one scene with Adam Goldberg and Val Kilmer explaining time
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 2: travel than Mark Ruffalo and Tilda Swinton could have in
• 1:11:58
  Speaker 2: Avengers Endgame, and it just goes to show that the
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 2: creative level that some writers operate at in Hollywood is
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 2: just at a different level, and the expectation of certain
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 2: writers for their audiences is different. Because I feel like
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 2: the reason this film resonates with so much with me
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 2: and you so much is because it doesn't treat us
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 2: as the audience like idiots, like we've never seen a
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 2: time travel movie before, like we don't know where this
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 2: is already going. But it does some interesting things to
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 2: keep us as the audience engaged. It keeps us kind
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 2: of guessing, It keeps us on our toes. It seems
• 1:12:33
  Speaker 2: like one thing, it becomes another thing, and ultimately it's
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 2: another thing. Those three twists in tandem all kind of work.
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 2: It's a movie that just I think, like you said,
• 1:12:42
  Speaker 2: is it the best movie I've ever seen? No, but
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 2: it's definitely up there for one of the best time
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 2: travel movies I've ever seen. Of a certain ilk, it's
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 2: definitely the best. Is it time Crimes?
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 5: No?
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 2: Is it? You know some of those other I'm trying
• 1:12:55
  Speaker 2: to remember the other one where it's the two guys
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 2: in the business office going into the box over and
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 2: over again. You know you I don't know.
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 5: No, no, no, no, no, no, I know, I know
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 5: what you're talking. Zero budget movie that that has just
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 5: become famous one way it.
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 2: Utilizes time travel.
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 5: This Looper was another one where it was it was
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 5: pretty well done. I mean, I think you've covered it, yeah, but.
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 2: I've never covered it. But I but it's again, it
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 2: gets it gets mentioned in that same conversation. But I
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 2: don't think you need a massive budget to do time
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 2: travel interesting. I don't think you need a massive budget
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 2: to tell a time travel story as long as you
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 2: sort out how it's going to work and make it
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 2: make sense within reason, in the construct of the the
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 2: box you've constructed for yourself. And I think this movie
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 2: does just that. I think this movie is entertaining, it's compelling,
• 1:13:48
  Speaker 2: and it uses time travel in a way that you know,
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 2: other movies I think wish they could. Really So I'm
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 2: glad we got to I'm glad we got to talk
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 2: about this movie. Like I said, I'm glad I got
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 2: to watch it. Tony Scott's not someone I necessarily go
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 2: to my way to watch all the time. I think
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 2: the last Tony Scott movie I watch was True Romance,
• 1:14:04
  Speaker 2: which is one of the few Tarantino movies that I
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 2: can stomach, and it's probably because he didn't direct it.
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 2: So I'm glad I got to watch this. I've already
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 2: mentioned it to a couple people, like you should rewatch
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 2: this movie. It's definitely worth checking out. So hopefully I'll
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 2: get a couple more people reprising or taking a reprisal
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 2: of this film. But thank you so much for introducing
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 2: or reintroducing me to this movie. It was a pleasure.
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 2: This is a good one.
• 1:14:26
  Speaker 5: Thank you. A memorable film that people should think about.
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 2: I agree. So as always, you can follow me on
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 2: Twitter at maybe don't follow me on Twitter, never mind,
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 2: don't do just like rate and review the show on
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 2: iTunes and Spotify, which is more than likely where you're
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 2: getting it. If it's not on Spotify, get it on iTunes.
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 2: If you're not getting it on iTunes, get it on Spotify.
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 2: Do me a favor, like the show, leave a review.
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 2: If you want to help us out financially, head on
• 1:14:53
  Speaker 2: over to patreon dot com slash culture cast, where you
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 2: can kick a couple dollars our way to join the
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 2: community and get access to ranking on bond where we
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 2: talk about James Bond once a month if you're interested.
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 2: Doctor Pearl Mutter mentioned James Bond. We talk about him
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 2: a lot, like every single one of his movies, So
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 2: go on over and do that. Join us there where
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 2: we talk with Richard, had him and Mike White about
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 2: James Bond, and come back for the next episode of
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 2: the Culture Cast.