|
Jesus Christ, this part about tits they're reading is shockingly embarrassing to even listen to 
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
I wonder if this means they're any closer to taking up my Joan Collins request.
Sham bam bamina! fucked around with this message at 05:51 on Dec 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2017 05:49
|
|
|
Oh, now I understand the Dynasty background pic.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
All right, which one of you goons called out Rachel Millman?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:I wonder if this means they're any closer to taking up my Joan Collins request. Edit: Jurgan posted:All right, which one of you goons called out Rachel Millman? Sham bam bamina! fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Dec 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
Hey, I love Rachel Millman's appearances, but that was really bad audio.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Turns out that the magic dog story is Watchers by the ever-prolific Dean Koontz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
I read Hollywood Wives because of this podcast and actually it wasn't THAT bad for what it was??? Better than Scruples, Twopuls, or Thrupuls, anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 09:21
|
|
|
Fossilized Rappy posted:Turns out that the magic dog story is Watchers by the ever-prolific Dean Koontz. I've read this book and it's fuckin wild
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 10:12
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:I've read this book and it's fuckin wild The only think Koontz loves writing about more than superintelligent dogs is stoic manly men who stop supernatural threats by shooting them. http://www.deankoontz.com/trixie/
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
Happy 90th birthday to Scruples genius, Judith Krantz!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2018 00:02
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RBSkq-_St8
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:Don’t be a creep You have a point. drygear fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Jan 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
Don’t be a creep
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
Real bad Starship Troopers takes on this episode, imo
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
Babysitter Super Sleuth posted:Real bad Starship Troopers takes on this episode, imo Yeah, it seems like they had it backwards- the book was sincere, the movie was satire. At least, that’s what I’ve heard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 18:28
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:Yeah, it seems like they had it backwards- the book was sincere, the movie was satire. At least, thats what Ive heard. The book is a military-worship political treatise disguised as action sci fi while the book is a satirical take on the same thing. Heinlein is an awful writer, despite his influence on the genre.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
The book is sincere and strange but works as a better unintentional satire than the movie does an intentional one. The movie is cool and good but dresses its characters as Nazis then pats itself on the back for being a big smart boy who figured out Nazis were bad. Also if you extend that metaphor the movie seems to imply that Jewish people (or Russians?) are monstrous bugs. Also Collision is right when he says Verhoeven didn't understand the book since he has said publicly he didn't read it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
The book is dogshit, 9/10ths of it are just characters dryly reiterating about how the military is the best thing ever and how the military should run everything and how the military's enemies are awful monsters that need to be exterminated. There's absolutely no satire in the novel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:The book is dogshit, 9/10ths of it are just characters dryly reiterating about how the military is the best thing ever and how the military should run everything and how the military's enemies are awful monsters that need to be exterminated. Not intentionally. It's been decades since I read it but if I remember correctly the hero nukes a church in the first chapter and burns fleeing intelligent aliens to death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:Not intentionally. It's been decades since I read it but if I remember correctly the hero nukes a church in the first chapter and burns fleeing intelligent aliens to death. I read the book again a couple years back and the church scene is a grim "I did what I had to do to kill those There's absolutely no satire in the book and it tries very, very hard to convince the reader that the military is great. Paul Verhoeven actually experience war up close while Heinlein enlisted and left during peace time and it really shows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:10
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:Also Collision is right when he says Verhoeven didn't understand the book since he has said publicly he didn't read it. Nah, Verhoeven understood the book extremely well, which is why he threw it in the loving trash after reading two chapters. (Its bad and so are its politics) Also, extremely lol at the idea that Paul Verhoeven, a man who literally grew up during the nazi occupation of the netherlands, is somehow "patting himself on the back for realizing nazis are bad"
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:The book is sincere and strange but works as a better unintentional satire than the movie does an intentional one. The movie is cool and good but dresses its characters as Nazis then pats itself on the back for being a big smart boy who figured out Nazis were bad. Also if you extend that metaphor the movie seems to imply that Jewish people (or Russians?) are monstrous bugs. This is a dumbass take. It wasn’t Verhoeven saying that Nazis are bad, it’s him directly stating US foreign policy is fascist, here’s him saying as much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:The book is sincere and strange but works as a better unintentional satire than the movie does an intentional one. The movie is cool and good but dresses its characters as Nazis then pats itself on the back for being a big smart boy who figured out Nazis were bad. Also if you extend that metaphor the movie seems to imply that Jewish people (or Russians?) are monstrous bugs. Also Collision is right when he says Verhoeven didn't understand the book since he has said publicly he didn't read it. youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu fuckin moron its about how the us military is fascist and dehumanizes its enemies not nazis specifically
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
Babysitter Super Sleuth posted:Nah, Verhoeven understood the book extremely well, which is why he threw it in the loving trash after reading two chapters. (Its bad and so are its politics) In interviews he literally brought up the costumes, and explained that Americans didn't get that his Nazis were Nazis. It's a fine vagina-bug movie, but the satire is juvenile. I mean, maybe I'm asking too much for the man who brought us Showgirls to be more subtle but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
Just for clarification, in Starship Troopers a meteor hits Earth and causes massive civilian casualties, and every human is up on arms about destroying the alien race that’s blamed for it without even giving a cursory glance to if that was even the cause. Starship Troopers came out 6 years before the US blamed Iraq for 9/11 and invaded it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:39
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:In interviews he literally brought up the costumes, and explained that Americans didn't get that his Nazis were Nazis. It's a fine vagina-bug movie, but the satire is juvenile. I mean, maybe I'm asking too much for the man who brought us Showgirls to be more subtle but whatever. quote:Paul Verhoeven, director Gee whiz maybe he was trying to make a point about Americans or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:40
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu fuckin moron Improbable Lobster posted:Gee whiz maybe he was trying to make a point about Americans or something Yeah my point is it's hamfisted and dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Verhoeven, a simpleton: "We dressed up american action heroes as nazis to make a point about fascism and america's foreign policy" Drunkboxer, super genius: "I already know Nazis are bad, checkmate"
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Collision has been rubbing the wrong way for a long while but his hot take on Starship Troopers was nigh insufferable. Is this persona genuine or has he simply driven his schtick too deep?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:Yeah my point is it's hamfisted and dumb. It's pretty clear that you don't actually get it, especially since you think the book is satirical
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:It's pretty clear that you don't actually get it, especially since you think the book is satirical No, I think the book is trying to be dead serious. It's just absurd and scary to the degree that I think it works as an unintentional satire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:46
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:It's pretty clear that you don't actually get it, especially since you think the book is satirical To be fair, he’s saying the book is unintentional satire, which I could grant him. For me, that falls apart because the book just plain ain’t funny, it’s a couple cool but poorly-written action scenes bookending a bunch of political philosophy on the terms and necessity of warfare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:47
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:No, I think the book is trying to be dead serious. It's just absurd and scary to the degree that I think it works as an unintentional satire. It isn't
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Look, I should have known better to kick this particular hornets nest. I've just never been super impressed with Verhoeven in general, despite liking some of his movies. Sorry for the derail.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
PJOmega posted:Collision has been rubbing the wrong way for a long while but his hot take on Starship Troopers was nigh insufferable. Is this persona genuine or has he simply driven his schtick too deep? Collision would be so much better as a semi-regular guest. He’s fine and even fun in smaller doses but he has gotten tiresome over the last year or so. I loved in early episodes when it was still just JW and rotating guests because he’s a solid anchor and guests provide more variety. He and Collision are a little too similar for long-term co-hosts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
X-Ray Pecs posted:To be fair, he’s saying the book is unintentional satire, which I could grant him. For me, that falls apart because the book just plain ain’t funny, it’s a couple cool but poorly-written action scenes bookending a bunch of political philosophy on the terms and necessity of warfare. I don’t think there is such a thing as unintentional satire. If you’re trying to support an idea and fail so badly you undermine the point you’re trying to make, that makes you a comic fool, not a satirist. “Look how well Hitler satirized fascism by losing WWII!”
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 04:46
|
|
|
I was disappointed that he became the permanent co-host but he's grown on me. I think JW balances him out okay.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 04:55
|
|
|
drygear posted:I was disappointed that he became the permanent co-host but he's grown on me. I think JW balances him out okay. I think both of them, but especially Collision, enjoy trolling us. After enough instances of “hey, let’s go on a ten minute rant about an obscure musician Jurgan has never heard of!” I’ve learned to ignore these bizarre tangents even when I think they’re off-base.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Extremely geeky nitpick I will never get an excuse to bring up again: When they did Armor, they acted like the power armored suits were a weird addition to a war clearly based off of Heinlein's Starship Troopers, but they were misremembering because there was also power armor in Starship Troopers, if not in the movie. There, now I may rest easy before someone shoves me in a locker
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2018 05:17
|
|