(9 replies, posted in Episodes)

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments … n_playing/


(32 replies, posted in Episodes)

Saw Dawn of the Dead 2004 last night for the first time, to prepare for Snyder's Army of the Dead this week. To my delight, I discovered DiF had done a commentary on it which I missed so it was a treat to hear the old gang from a decade ago. Thanks so much for keeping these gems online after all this time! Cheers everyone.


(57 replies, posted in Episodes)

Abbie wrote:

Just wanted to acknowledge that, five years later, Dorkman's "We're doing it to Cuba" embargo statement has finally dated the podcast as he wished would happen.  big_smile

But now it's "undated" again as Trump has reversed Obama's policy (naturally) and re-enforced the embargo


(57 replies, posted in Episodes)

For what it's worth, for better or worse, here's Chapo Trap House's recent coronavirus-era (got nothing else to do) commentary on Episode 1 (II & III to follow)


we're on a two or less social isolation quasi-lockdown here, punishable by fines, jail, etc. First death just recorded today. Rate of increase is slowing despite the worst being still to come.

I'll be fascinated to see which of all these mathematical models of epidemiological statistics actually pans out and what the aftermath is in terms of recession/depression, subsequent flare-ups, and if life-as-we-know-it substantially changes (e.g. working from home becomes the norm not the exception).

I remember after the GFC there were many predictions of the end-of-capitalism, and then we got more inequality than ever and almost all subsequent elections in the Anglo-Sphere were wins for the right. It was business as usual soon enough.

But in any case, this is a serious dress-rehearsal for subsequent pandemics. Governments will need to have Quarantine-towns set to go for all incomers (particularly cruise ships). There'll be debates over how many we can sacrifice to keep the economy afloat and if the government can just print their way out of every crisis.


(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Prequels are out in UHD - time to watch again as the resolution goes up each decade.

MartyJ wrote:

As of now, my solution is: "Keep calm and listen to DiF commentaries." smile

In an alternate reality, DiF has just finished recording their Rise of Skywalker commentary. IFIYH = Imaginary Friends in Your Head.

better still, write something...

How's the DiF/FIYH community coping with all this shit? Is anyone impacted in any direct or indirect way.

How do people feel about it - storm in a tea cup, or 'Bout time the elderly were thinned out - they've been ruining elections for decades now?

Here in the ass-end of the ass-end of the world, we should be the last to go but the first to repopulate the world of course.


(32 replies, posted in Episodes)

Blade Runner is now a period film.


(8 replies, posted in Off Topic)

And November 2019 is also the month that Blade Runner is set, and what's DiF/FIYH's last ever commentary?
And the security cameras weren't working just as the guards went to sleep, while he was on suicide watch? Coincidence?


(8 replies, posted in Off Topic)

As far as I can tell, it's 10 years to the day that Teague first kicked off this site and told us he loved us all in his very first post.

Although I wasn't there right from the beginning, I just wanted to acknowledge the milestone, just in case there isn't going to be a 10-year reunion episode with all the gang smile

Thanks, Teague and everyone, for the original idea, for capturing lightning in a bottle, for the great commentary tracks, and keeping the forum going so long after. Laughed and learned a lot. Fond memories!

All the best!



(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)


Play the old stuff! We wanna hear the catch-phrases and that dada-da-dada every few years, and see the same chases and the endless punch-ups between indestructible robots and stuff.

But if they can get that de-ageing tech to work for an entire movie, that really would be cool...


(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)



Robert Forster, who looks like Lee Ermey (and is just as dead) is in it. Look-a-like Tommy Lee Jones lives on for now.

Anyway, it was alright. Bit like Truman Show - how can I leave town when each way is thwarted?

They're pushing the flashbacks - some as early as a decade ago. Meth Damon getting chubby. Some just nostalgia, some needed to make sense of what's happening. Maybe a bit too many flashbacks for the 120 minute running time. But no actual past footage was used I think.

Aaron Paul has struggled to establish himself as an actor in films after BB, which is a surprise as he was so strong in the series and would have had a mountain of scripts and offers before the series ended. Jesse Pinkman is one of the great TV characters of the 20-teens.

Some tense stand-offs!

Was hoping for a convergence of the Better Call Saul (post-BB) threads at Cinnabon.

Vince loves his time-lapses... a cool top-down apartment sequence.

In summary, recommended! smile

If you listen to the end of the actual official Donnie Darko commentary with guest Kevin Smith, he makes a few pre-#metoo comments about filming naked actresses. It's good to be the Director.

Teague wrote:

General question:

Out of curiosity, what did you know about Donald Trump prior to 2015? What was your impression of him?

(For what it's worth, I actually wrote a really long reply to avatar's post within 12 hours, but then I couldn't decide whether or not to post it, temporarily rejected it, and then forgot for a while. Later today, I'll pull it out of storage, dust it off, and see if I feel any better about posting it now. Sorry, av.)

Looking forward to it.

Before 2015, Trump led the whole birther movement, with all its dog-whistles. Jon Stewart covered his crazy twitter outbursts throughout the Obama years. Never watched Apprentice. At least with Trump, what you see is what you get (rather than some puppet President controlled by others e.g. Dubya and Cheney, or even Reagan. There's no evil secret conspiracy agenda... just an incompetent narcissistic buffoon stroking his own ego. (I'm trying to be generous here and look on the bright side).
The real issue is why 42-46% of the country will support anything he does. Hence my earlier question - is the average Joe Sixpack better off due to any of Trump's policies? Genuine question.
A lot of people are puzzled over the GOP's unconditional support, but that's easily explained...'it's the tax cuts and deregulation, stoopid'.

Nathan M wrote:

Oh my god I saw this on Facebook and then was like OH MY GOD YES! And then I was like, do I remember my login? But I did, so I did then I'm like I have missed this SO MUCH. Every so often I download an old episode so I can hear the friends in my head. Love to all of you.

I still have a couple of obscure commentaries to go, in my quest for 'Completist' rank and a gold star from Teague and the secret link will then open up for the entire Game of Thrones commentary series. wink

Saw Little Shop of Horrors last night. Great fun! Got Orgazmo and The Cowboys still to see.


(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)


Saw Arctic with the very watchable Mads Mikkelsen. Same genre as Cast Away (but without the schmaltz) but more like All is Lost in that there's virtually no dialogue or narration.

Not as prettily shot as The Revenant (no Lubezki as DP) but nevertheless real locations.

Plot distilled to utter simplicity. And don't we love watching someone else struggle to achieve a simple goal and shit gets in their way. Sisyphus with a First Aid Certificate.


Remember to always point the lightsaber out before turning it on.

You'll win some 'my wound is more badass than yours' contests with those.

Hope you recover fast, man.

We don't envy what you're going through! Hang in there bud!

Did any of you catch Operation Live (re: Right Hemi-Colectomy) on Channel 5 late last year? Jaw-dropping operation. Still available if you know where to look. There's a preview here...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/ … ramme.html


(24 replies, posted in Episodes)

After more than five years, finally got around to watching the movie and listening to the commentary. Both a lot of fun. Charming film for anyone that hasn't seen it.

Interesting to hear your prescient comments re: limits to presidential terms pre-Trump. Because not every president is FDR.

Keep piling on that weight! Thanks for the update. I was in the NHS system a couple of years ago - best health service in the world. Whatever your decision, you're in good hands.

Take the specific example of 1M+ Syrian refugees taken into Europe. It's the highest ideal... fleeing a war-torn hellscape and seeking sanctuary and a new life in a modern safe prosperous free liberal western democracy. But invariably, there can be tensions, and if you take a side, you throw the other side under the bus.

Do unto others as you would like have done to yourself?
Do unto others as they would like?

There's a paradox with cosmopolitanism The full spectrum includes: (1) "you can't come in unless you sign up to our values", all the way to, "welcome, do what you want, knock yourself out"

When we visit Dubai, do we expect to hold hands on the beach? Or as guests, we must conform to local laws/customs, which means there are no universal human values we all share?

I'm still wrestling with this. But if you say you have an easy answer to it, I'd love to hear it.

Teague wrote:

As for "tolerance of intolerance," I — for myself — generally find that to be a fairly easy question to answer.

Measure by the violence of the outcome.

Whom do you tolerate? Anybody who's intended outcomes can be stopped (if necessary) without violence. Some positions inherently increase the amount of exclusionary violence in the world — ahem: in the philosophical 'all-politics-is-violence' sense, that is — and some positions increase the amount of inclusionary consensus-attempt. Forget 'tolerance vs. intolerance,' and just seek positions which prevent violence — systemically — as best you can. If you only do half-well at this attempt, you're still way above the worrisome threshold... because it means that you care about allowing your ideas to be refuted without becoming violent in response.

PS #1: I'm not sure if this was too simplified. It was either gonna be this — one short paragraph — or one of my ginormous treatises that nobody enjoys reading. I'm happy to throw out a longer version if anybody's interested.

PS #2: Also, remember the etymology of "violent" — something 'violent' violates somebody's earnestly-willed outcome. Ultimately, to have violence enacted upon you is to be shut down, not injured. It's the ultimate violation of will. With that definition in mind, again: seek positions which prevent violence, systemically, as best you can.

In other words: Intolerability arises from the expected requirement of violence in the outcome of your position.


If, after having adopted your position, society could not "stop engaging in it" without fundamentally rejecting its implicit terms of authority — i.e.: if your thing implicitly includes entitlement to violate — your thing sucked.

It's very abstract Teague. Didn't know you were a Ethics Philosopher teaching a second year course on Utilitarianism. Could you give some real world examples? What I mean about tolerating intolerance, of course, (didn't want to go here) is the entire embracing cosmopolitanism, pluralism, immigration, welcoming refugees, etc... all noble ideals and where I lean, but then you have the issue of how to deal with some medieval mindsets: FGM, women as second class, segregation, etc. Surely we all embrace liberal values of gender equality, but then it feels like we throw women/LGBTQ under the bus if we also don't speak out about less savoury aspects of values from other cultures. Either way, one group gets shafted. There's a tension there. A Universal Bill of Rights is monolithic, almost imperialistic...something out of fashion now. And yet...

sellew wrote:

Unfortunately, every single word of this is absolutely true.

It certainly is a tour-de-force rant, delivered in a single-take without any disfluencies. I wouldn't make it past the first sentence before fluffing my lines.

However, I disagree with one fundamental point i.e. Brexit means the poor want to stick it to the establishment.

If that were true, then the Tories wouldn't have been returned to government in the 2017 General Election.

Austerity has been around since the GFC, and since then the Tories have won TWO elections. In fact, they're STILL ahead in the polls. Thatcher, the archetype of crushing the poor, won election after election after election.

If the Tories represent the 1%, why are half the 99% voting for them?

My take is that the poor vote what the press tell them to. If The Sun says vote Tory, they vote Tory, if The Sun says vote Brexit, they vote Brexit. Right-wing memes are more successfully propagated.

Likewise, we've even seen Trump voters in The South say they'll vote for him again, even if their standard of living is going backwards. Tax cuts for the rich are still getting through, endorsed by the bottom of pecking order.