Timestamps! 0:00 Intro, Joel Haver’s TH-cam Channel 12:53 Joel Haver’s Feature Films 33:38 The Matrix Resurrections (spoilers) 1:12:03 Faces (spoilers) 1:45:15 Pizza Time! I mean Question Time! 1:45:25 What is the best fourth installment in a franchise? 1:48:54 How do you feel about characters that switch out voice actors? 1:52:19 How do you feel about the portrayal of teenage characters going through heavy themes? 2:00:00 The “show, don’t tell” rule is often broken by musicals, etc. Do you think this is a problem? Are there good examples of telling, not showing? 2:06:25 What are your thoughts on Siskel and Ebert? 2:16:29 Adum recommends The Thing (1982) The best fourth installment in a franchise is obviously “Returning to an RPG that you haven’t played in a while”! Good stuff guys.
@@wormswithteeth Pretend That You Love Me or Drowning in Potential are probably my go to recommendations right now. The former for something more personal and real and the latter for a more classic fiction film. Thanks for asking!
I'm so hyped you're on the podcast, it makes so much sense that you're a listener given your film interests so it's awesome to see my TH-cam worlds collide. I hope you come back again sometime!
Joel thank you I got called in many times last week all full time/overtime and my coworker said to me: “You have been totally insane-o mode…” It made my day THANK YOU
Joel talking about Cassavetes is what I really love to hear in film analysis. He went into the catalogue, hes seen other movies by the director, he shares personal anecdotes about what he connects with and what he reflects on while watching the films and after. Sometimes film analysis on youtube and even the boys here with the Matrix, become too much of a bad movie bashing scene. That is all in good fun, and I can enjoy that too, but Joel's point of view and more detailed opinions can really jump start a great conversation and thoughts. Adam really jumped on that vibe in particular with Faces and shared then his own more detailed responses to the film.
Loved hearing from Joel, great guest. I'm looking forward to what Adum thinks of A Woman Under the Influence! It's one of my favorites, and I'm lucky because it's playing at my theater next month.
U are lucky I wish I can see it on theater I watched it last month just because I’m thinking of ending thing references and I’m falling in love with this movie it’s a great movie
2:00:00 thank you so much for answering my question! To be more clear on my point, I don’t think it’s a problem at all for musicals to tell rather than show via song. I mainly meant it as a thought experiment on why a writer would rather tell than show. Show don’t tell is more of a guideline than a hard, fast, rule after all. That being said, thank you so much for responding, you guys are the best!
Musicals are first and foremost a product of the stage - "show don't tell" is a loose rule of thumb when it comes to filmmaking, not stage shows. You really CAN'T control what the audience sees on the stage. Visual storytelling is hard to portray to people sitting in the cheap seats when you have no ability to zoom in on important details and project them on to a massive screen. A lot of the time when a story originally written for the stage (or a book for that matter) is adapted for the screen, a LOT of expository dialogue will be translated into visual storytelling and cinematic shorthand instead - but you can't really do that with a musical because the exposition is done through song, and the songs are why people are watching the musical in the first place.
Alex and Adum continue to hold out their due to Ralph. On Sardonicast #19 you two made a $50 bet (each) to Ralph that the sony Venom would NOT be a part of the MCU/ in a MCU movie by 2022. No Way Home had the sony Venom and Tom JUST make the cut at the end of 2021. Where is Ralphs money. Justice for Ralph!!
Eyyyy I got my Euphoria question answered lol One thing I wanted to add about the discourse was that people would see fans of the show as lowkey pedos or drug glorifiers just because they like it. As if the show completely doesn’t condemn drug use and statutory rape. As if the only things teenagers are allowed to watch are family sitcoms on Nickelodeon and Disney Channel. It’s a dumb discussion, and I’m not just saying that because I love the show.
Great episode as usual. I loved hearing Joel's approach to filmmaking, very inspiring. I am Lso excited that next episode is The Thing. I bought it recently and haven't watched it yet. Now, I have a great reason to revisit this great film. Thanks
So I just (knowingly) discovered Joel today through this podcast, and to go from hearing him go so in depth about Faces here (which I loved by the way, both his analysis & the film itself) to then being one of the Charlie clones finally teaming up with Big Charlie is incredible. So much props to this man, I can tell I'm about to go on a great journey with this man's art.
Joel was a fascinating guest who I've only just heard about. Definitely gonna check out his stuff. The Thing commentary track with Carpenter and Russell is great because they hardly talk about the movie. Same with big trouble in little china
@@BiglaSagna I really think Alex and Adam need to ask him follow-up questions so he can then explain the reasons for his points, that is what I think is missing.
@@kairos_fluent this. I feel the same as the others in this thread and have for a while but it also feels like they don’t want him in the discussion either because they never have him expand on his thoughts or question much of what he says and it just results in being annoyed whenever he says anything
@@covvardice8296 Maybe that's how they feel, which is a shame. I think Adam and Alex can find a healthy way to encourage Ralph to be more willing to expand on what he says. Kinda related - it would be cool if there was an entire episode not reviewing any film but just talking about philosophical/theoretical aspects of something like film studies. I think this would open up and express each three of their perspectives' on movies in a really fruitful way.
Never heard of Joel before this so thanks for introducing him! The talk at the start about perfectionism and showing imperfections really spoke to me and inspires me to put more out there, thank you so much, great cast as always!
I can relate to Joel's disenchantment with the official channels for film distribution and qualification. I've made a feature recently that has been rejected by dozens of mid and even small sized festivals, rejected by distributors, rejected by awards shows, rejected by all my local news media publications. But I've had 5, going on 6 screenings, mostly self funded and self advertised, and almost 1,000 people have seen it, and the audience reaction is MASSIVELY positive. Including from complete strangers. I'll do an online and home media release soon, and likely I won't have any big distributor, but I think it's going to do quite well.
Having Joel on the podcast was a great idea, he comes off like a very kind person. I like the guest episodes a lot and I'd love to see some of them back (especially Chris Stuckmann). Skipped the matrix discussion though because I haven't seen it yet
Would like to recommend Deep Focus Lens (Maggie) as a guest. Mostly since I just noticed Adum follows her on Twitter ha. Very very knowledgeable and fun to listen to.
OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH I just got the "Let's Get It Started" joke. The Black Eyed Peas song "Let's Get is Started" was originally called "Let's Get Retarded"
That sort of issue is really highlighted in a lot of video games. Like how in Grand Theft Auto (specifically GTA 4 and 5) the protagonists keep talking about how they want to be good people but then gameplay shows us that they're the worst people on earth as they gun down thousands of innocent people, especially with Niko and Michael who literally have whole monologues about how much they hate violence before gameplay resumes and you see them commit the most heinous acts possible.
as a child i literally thought movies are perfect and if they seemed like they sucked i just didnt get..something. because they logically HAD to be perfect with all the thousands of people working on it and the millions of money. only through youtube i learned that a movie could have like a bad plot or bad characters or be legitimately boring
@2:00:49 I’m not a general fan of musicals for this reason. But in their defense I think a song’s purpose is to offer some emotional depth into the charecters perspective. It has to be done right tho. Like I just saw that Cyran movie with Petrer dinkledge and some of the songs offer no story progression or charecter insight, they were just there to be there
When Adum said "You could set it in the 90s" it made me mad because that would be so much better and serve the point they were trying to make, like everyone is stuck in the 90s right now, doing the same thing over and over again. The movie even starts like that, they just drop it super quick and spin their wheels before just going off the rails.
Fuck it, Adam should make films now, his ideas about the matrix are just too impressive and it would've looked so freaking cool if that was in a movie, damn!
Regarding the Euphoria question, what if there was an HBO show that was edifying and about people who try to be noble and heroic ? Would the same people who like the typical HBO shows call out this exception and say it's bad for influencing the youth/public ?
David Lynch's Dune lost me in the begining when we first hear the Emperor think: "Why would they be concerned about the duke's son?" and then says out loud: "Aren't you referring to Leto, his father?". Like fuck off.
I came into Resurrections as positively as possible, but I've accepted it's really not that good over time. I'll stand by, however, that Reloaded and Revolutions aren't bad. I watched all four movies before Resurrections and had a good time with each one. If nothing else, this new one makes them look better, but they have a lot going for them that just landed awkwardly for a lot of audiences at the time. I'd recommend "The Matrix Sequels are Good, Actually" by Sophie from Mars to get a new perspective on the whole deal.
ralph and a lot of people who talk about cassavetes say that a lot of the script is improvised, but most of the time it's the opposite. everything in his most acclaimed a woman under the influence is heavily scripted and in faces its mostly the same.
If you think the CGI in early 2000s films didnt look convincing at the time, then you weren't there at the time. The effects in Lord of the Rings were amazingly revolutionary, Xmen 2 had a bunch of well made effects that made you believe unbelievable things were happening (Nightcrawler in the Whitehouse), and while some Spiderman effects look cartoony now, that wasn't the opinion anyone had at the time and a lot of the web slinging stuff still holds up really well even now.
I would only contest the point on Spider-Man. The effects were actually a source of contemporary criticism at the time. That being said, I agree that it can largely be overlooked,
unfortunately they didn't care for MATRIX: RESURRECTIONS. (good to hear their takes tho) But I really love it. Seek out contrary opinions; this movie has a lot more love than you'd think!
I mean, both Euphoria and 13 Reasons Why are TV-MA and come with more than enough warning as to what content is within. Children watch both anyways because they can relate even if it isn't for them. Malcolm & Marie rocks.
I wish Joel mentioned his thoughts on the Killing of a Chinese Bookie. Of all of Cassavetes’ films I’ve seen, that one I found to be the hardest to get through.
I believe this is objectively the best guest they've ever had. It's way better than anyone I can remember as 2nd. It's not so much that he was particularly great in this but his work is amazing (and I don't mean just the meme animation).
Did you know that Tom Hardy was supposed to be in the movie as Eddie Brock/Venom due to Venom filming at the same time but got cut out of the film lol that would have been real Meta
As someone who is overly obsessed with metanalysis, I thoroughly enjoyed Matrix Resurrections on that level. However, I'm not going to argue in favor of the quality of the actual filmmaking. Putting it politely, the film is a complete mess. However, I figured I'd at least give my rationalization and interpretations of some of the things brought up in the conversation. I detail a lot of this in the latter half of my recent video on The Matrix, and I think I contextualize and articulate it much better there than I can in a single comment. But rather than just shamelessly self promo, I'll paraphrase stuff here. Don't get it twisted, I'm not here to start fights or convince anyone the film is a masterpiece, because it simply is not a masterpiece in the slightest. If you read this and still think any of this is immensely stupid, I do not blame you in the slightest. The idea of an Adaptation-esque "movie within the movie" scenario with Keanu sounds brilliant as a different film, but I think it betrays what Neo being the creator of the Matrix is trying to communicate thematically. Neo is a stand in for both the artist (Lana Wachowski) and the audience (people who grew up loving the Matrix). He is the creator of the Matrix who is also enveloped in the Matrix, much the way that Lana Wachowski is a product of her own creation. The Matrix has been heavily influential on both the filmmaking and pop culture landscapes, and Lana Wachowski likely has a hard time processing that the Matrix has essentially become indistinguishable from reality. Nearly everyone now exists as a digital projection of themselves in a polarized technological world. Hence why Neo in this film is suffering from mental breakdowns and attempts to end his own life. This also ties into the "Why show him as an old guy?" thing. I can't excuse it plot-wise because, for the sake of the story, there was no reason for that to be included. But I think it's supposed to be metaphorical for how the audience projects themselves onto the media they consume. Neo looks like an old man, but sees himself as Neo. He is projecting himself onto the clips being shown, which are literally being projected onto curtains. Just as a lot of people did watching The Matrix for the first time. A lot of people who love The Matrix see themselves as Neo, they project themselves onto him, because that's the archetypal role he fulfilled in the film. As far as The Analyst is concerned, I think that the "girlboss" ending (as Adam calls it) was set up throughout the film. In his monologue to Neo, The Analyst reveals that he has constructed this entire new Matrix film. He rebuilt Neo and Trinity at a tremendous cost (200 million USD to be precise), and tried to set it up in a way that he knew an audience would like. As he states, "They want to be controlled. They crave the comfort of certainty." As Ralph said, "They should've just made the same thing again." The Analyst is an amalgam of many things, but mostly he's a stand in for people who misinterpreted The Matrix over years. People who buy into and are indebted to the systems they're apart of and use The Matrix as their Bible, people who say "red pilled" unironically. Alt-rights, incels, bad faith critics, corporate goons, market researchers, etc. (This is also why he names Trinity's husband "Chad.") He is spelling out what the audience wants. Well choreographed action sequences, groundbreaking special effects, simplistic black and white narratives, etc. He even says people don't want the love story ("They don't want this sentimentality."), which has always been one of the biggest criticisms of the Matrix. This film says screw all that, and gives you ONLY the love story and nothing else. While I think Joel's point about "We all live in the Matrix, so maybe the best we can do is love" is close to my interpretation, but I take it more as "The only way out of this Matrix is through love." I think that's a powerful message. Again though, I don't disagree with nearly anything being said in this episode on a technical level. If the actual filmmaking made it damn near impossible to engage with any of this stuff, that's valid. Was this the best way to communicate all this? Was it completely thought through to a T? Does this even work as a film? I think a lot of this stuff could've been infinitely more compelling had the execution lived up to its ambitions, but I don't have any doubt in my mind that a lot of this stuff we're debating over was done deliberately or at least with an intent. Overall I think the film, while not soundly constructed, is vastly more interesting and human than anything else in this new wave of nostalgia driven reboots. I'm glad we got this instead of a play it safe, pandering remake. I loved it, warts and all, but I completely understand why people don't share that sentiment!
Adum is entirely missing the point on the Euphoria conversation. It's not about the whole "ouuhhh controversial content" conversation, it's about how morally ok it is to sexualize underage characters. In fact, no one on the podcast ever acknowledges any of the male gaze problems pervasive in media and Joel is the only one bringing the actual problems up, which Adum quickly diverts back to rant about censorship or whatever.
Sorry for commenting 2 years after the fact but I think as male youtubers who usually don’t make social-political criticisms it would not only be out of place to bring that up but it would also be inappropriate for them to comment on it without the proper scholarly training and experiences. Hearing that from a non-theorist male point of view would add little to the discourse
@@Pumpkinlumpy No problem lol, it's funny that someone still reads any of the comments. I get where you're coming from, but the problem in this episode was very much Adam being absolutely obtuse to what the question was about and not engaging with the criticism. If they didn't feel comfortable with answering the question or didnt feel like they have the proper tools, they could've just acknowledged that and move on. I also disagree with the idea that you can only talk about those things if you're properly schooled in them. Yes, theze subjects require sensitivity and care, but especially Adam has no problems talking about subjects at length he isn't really super familiar with. And I honestly think that as people that talk about movies on the internet to a large audience, with a certain amount of authority, they should be more familiar with those kinds of analytical tools. One doesn't even have to read complicated media theory, Lindsey Ellis' vids are right there
@@johnnystevens1248 Very fair, seems like he connected any insinuation of problematic content to "nagging grandma's censoring my edgy content". And Lindsey Ellis' Transformer videos are in total only about the length of two Sard episodes so idk what I was rambling about with scholarly training
Timestamps!
0:00 Intro, Joel Haver’s TH-cam Channel
12:53 Joel Haver’s Feature Films
33:38 The Matrix Resurrections (spoilers)
1:12:03 Faces (spoilers)
1:45:15 Pizza Time! I mean Question Time!
1:45:25 What is the best fourth installment in a franchise?
1:48:54 How do you feel about characters that switch out voice actors?
1:52:19 How do you feel about the portrayal of teenage characters going through heavy themes?
2:00:00 The “show, don’t tell” rule is often broken by musicals, etc. Do you think this is a problem? Are there good examples of telling, not showing?
2:06:25 What are your thoughts on Siskel and Ebert?
2:16:29 Adum recommends The Thing (1982)
The best fourth installment in a franchise is obviously “Returning to an RPG that you haven’t played in a while”! Good stuff guys.
Bless you, kind wizard
The Thing recommendation let’s go
I already can't wait for the next episode to hear them talking about The Thing.
@@thepoultryking1973 I was gonna comment as Adum loved it more than the other ones lol
Thank you Michael
I'm an avid listener and being invited on was truly surreal! Thanks again for having me fellas
It's my favorite TH-camr guy.
Which film of yours should we watch first? :)
@@wormswithteeth Pretend That You Love Me or Drowning in Potential are probably my go to recommendations right now. The former for something more personal and real and the latter for a more classic fiction film. Thanks for asking!
I'm so hyped you're on the podcast, it makes so much sense that you're a listener given your film interests so it's awesome to see my TH-cam worlds collide. I hope you come back again sometime!
Joel thank you I got called in many times last week all full time/overtime and my coworker said to me:
“You have been totally insane-o mode…” It made my day THANK YOU
Joel talking about Cassavetes is what I really love to hear in film analysis. He went into the catalogue, hes seen other movies by the director, he shares personal anecdotes about what he connects with and what he reflects on while watching the films and after. Sometimes film analysis on youtube and even the boys here with the Matrix, become too much of a bad movie bashing scene. That is all in good fun, and I can enjoy that too, but Joel's point of view and more detailed opinions can really jump start a great conversation and thoughts. Adam really jumped on that vibe in particular with Faces and shared then his own more detailed responses to the film.
Loved hearing from Joel, great guest. I'm looking forward to what Adum thinks of A Woman Under the Influence! It's one of my favorites, and I'm lucky because it's playing at my theater next month.
U are lucky I wish I can see it on theater I watched it last month just because I’m thinking of ending thing references and I’m falling in love with this movie it’s a great movie
2:00:00 thank you so much for answering my question! To be more clear on my point, I don’t think it’s a problem at all for musicals to tell rather than show via song. I mainly meant it as a thought experiment on why a writer would rather tell than show. Show don’t tell is more of a guideline than a hard, fast, rule after all. That being said, thank you so much for responding, you guys are the best!
Musicals are first and foremost a product of the stage - "show don't tell" is a loose rule of thumb when it comes to filmmaking, not stage shows. You really CAN'T control what the audience sees on the stage. Visual storytelling is hard to portray to people sitting in the cheap seats when you have no ability to zoom in on important details and project them on to a massive screen. A lot of the time when a story originally written for the stage (or a book for that matter) is adapted for the screen, a LOT of expository dialogue will be translated into visual storytelling and cinematic shorthand instead - but you can't really do that with a musical because the exposition is done through song, and the songs are why people are watching the musical in the first place.
Alex and Adum continue to hold out their due to Ralph. On Sardonicast #19 you two made a $50 bet (each) to Ralph that the sony Venom would NOT be a part of the MCU/ in a MCU movie by 2022. No Way Home had the sony Venom and Tom JUST make the cut at the end of 2021. Where is Ralphs money. Justice for Ralph!!
Bazinga!
Gets. Me. Every. Single. Time.
Adum has been doing it for close to a decade now and I still crack up. Thank you.
Only half an hour in and so far this is your best guest yet dig this guy’s vibe
i’m 20min into the video but this is by far the most interesting guest you had ever. looking forward to checking out this dude’s work
For real, this guy knows his stuff and I loved listening to him
Would Highly recommend you check out his feature films Pretend that you love me, island and I’m going to be famous
This is such a wholesome episode. Adum seemed so passionate to learn more about Joel's experience XD
Eyyyy I got my Euphoria question answered lol
One thing I wanted to add about the discourse was that people would see fans of the show as lowkey pedos or drug glorifiers just because they like it.
As if the show completely doesn’t condemn drug use and statutory rape.
As if the only things teenagers are allowed to watch are family sitcoms on Nickelodeon and Disney Channel.
It’s a dumb discussion, and I’m not just saying that because I love the show.
Joel was an S tier guest. Would love to see him on again!
@@alcoholicgoat He's literally one of the most down to earth filmmaker I've seen. What are you on about?
@@alcoholicgoat a little but he's not a bad guy
He went insaneo style
Great episode as usual. I loved hearing Joel's approach to filmmaking, very inspiring. I am Lso excited that next episode is The Thing. I bought it recently and haven't watched it yet. Now, I have a great reason to revisit this great film. Thanks
So I just (knowingly) discovered Joel today through this podcast, and to go from hearing him go so in depth about Faces here (which I loved by the way, both his analysis & the film itself) to then being one of the Charlie clones finally teaming up with Big Charlie is incredible. So much props to this man, I can tell I'm about to go on a great journey with this man's art.
The best TH-camr has arrived
Man, I'm excited for all the folk who are just discovering Joel now... Boy, you are in for a treat! Lucky buggers...
You know you’ve made something special when Adum likes your movie more than the recommended movie that you picked lol.
Awesome guest! One of the best podcasts in a while! 😄
One of the best eps, this was truly epic. This was your guys’ Aquaman
Joel was a fascinating guest who I've only just heard about. Definitely gonna check out his stuff. The Thing commentary track with Carpenter and Russell is great because they hardly talk about the movie. Same with big trouble in little china
isnt the movie they dunk on is escape from LA? i dont think that was The Thing
Raph about Faces: "I prefer some of his other films."
Raph about Faces, 5 minutes later: "I think this is my favorite Cassavetes movie"
Ralph brings this show down sooo much. They need to get rid of him honestly.
@@BiglaSagna I really think Alex and Adam need to ask him follow-up questions so he can then explain the reasons for his points, that is what I think is missing.
@@kairos_fluent this. I feel the same as the others in this thread and have for a while but it also feels like they don’t want him in the discussion either because they never have him expand on his thoughts or question much of what he says and it just results in being annoyed whenever he says anything
@@covvardice8296 Maybe that's how they feel, which is a shame. I think Adam and Alex can find a healthy way to encourage Ralph to be more willing to expand on what he says.
Kinda related - it would be cool if there was an entire episode not reviewing any film but just talking about philosophical/theoretical aspects of something like film studies. I think this would open up and express each three of their perspectives' on movies in a really fruitful way.
@@kairos_fluent Just popping in here a month later to tell you that's a really good idea.
This podcast was really Insaneo Style, guys.
Totally insano style
i swear this podcast gets the best guests
Because it's the best podcast
Never heard of Joel before this so thanks for introducing him! The talk at the start about perfectionism and showing imperfections really spoke to me and inspires me to put more out there, thank you so much, great cast as always!
Great episode, hadn't heard much from Joel but he's very insightful and was a great guest
I can relate to Joel's disenchantment with the official channels for film distribution and qualification. I've made a feature recently that has been rejected by dozens of mid and even small sized festivals, rejected by distributors, rejected by awards shows, rejected by all my local news media publications. But I've had 5, going on 6 screenings, mostly self funded and self advertised, and almost 1,000 people have seen it, and the audience reaction is MASSIVELY positive. Including from complete strangers. I'll do an online and home media release soon, and likely I won't have any big distributor, but I think it's going to do quite well.
Having Joel on the podcast was a great idea, he comes off like a very kind person. I like the guest episodes a lot and I'd love to see some of them back (especially Chris Stuckmann). Skipped the matrix discussion though because I haven't seen it yet
Now I really wanna see Joel's videos of visiting the three of you.
I really hope the Matrix: Parabaylium wins Kickass Award at the 420s
Have Joel back again another time! What a great addition to the cast
that wes craven's new nightmare version of the hypothetical matrix sequel is an amazing idea
Would like to recommend Deep Focus Lens (Maggie) as a guest. Mostly since I just noticed Adum follows her on Twitter ha. Very very knowledgeable and fun to listen to.
i loved the movie pretend you love me, cried at the end
OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHH
I just got the "Let's Get It Started" joke.
The Black Eyed Peas song "Let's Get is Started" was originally called "Let's Get Retarded"
This podcast episode goes INSANEO STYLE!
Dang wow, Sardonicast went INSANEO STYLE this week.
The whole podcast is run by Tony Lazuto
what?
I think "telling" bothers me when the "telling" and the "showing" feels un-intentionally contradictory to one another. It can be very alienating.
That sort of issue is really highlighted in a lot of video games. Like how in Grand Theft Auto (specifically GTA 4 and 5) the protagonists keep talking about how they want to be good people but then gameplay shows us that they're the worst people on earth as they gun down thousands of innocent people, especially with Niko and Michael who literally have whole monologues about how much they hate violence before gameplay resumes and you see them commit the most heinous acts possible.
as a child i literally thought movies are perfect and if they seemed like they sucked i just didnt get..something. because they logically HAD to be perfect with all the thousands of people working on it and the millions of money. only through youtube i learned that a movie could have like a bad plot or bad characters or be legitimately boring
That’s how I sort of felt as well. However the few movies/shows that I genuinely did hate tho…that’s how u know they we’re bad
I had the exact same thoughts
@2:00:49 I’m not a general fan of musicals for this reason. But in their defense I think a song’s purpose is to offer some emotional depth into the charecters perspective. It has to be done right tho. Like I just saw that Cyran movie with Petrer dinkledge and some of the songs offer no story progression or charecter insight, they were just there to be there
When Adum said "You could set it in the 90s" it made me mad because that would be so much better and serve the point they were trying to make, like everyone is stuck in the 90s right now, doing the same thing over and over again. The movie even starts like that, they just drop it super quick and spin their wheels before just going off the rails.
It's cool that they brought Cosmonaut Variety Hour back for a 2nd time!
why do they both constantly talk like they just inhaled a doobie
I laughed
Not nearly filled with as much bad faith.
This podcast was INSANEO STYLE.
Just came here to add on to the popular opinion, Joel was a great guest! One of the most informative and enlightening episodes. Very cool.
I hope we get The Hockey Guy as a guest on the podcast one day!
I just love how unapologetically messy and raw Faces is; it’s like a representation of life to me. That’s why I find it so beautiful.
Never miss my Sardonicast dose. Thank you boys.
100 mg's of sardonic vibes
i'm super interested in joel haver now. i'd never heard of him before. he seems dope
You are in for a treat my friend... he's one of the best on this platform imo
He's Insaneo Style even
It's so cute to hear Ralph getting jealous at Joel getting more props than him.
Frustrating considering I feel like he hasn’t really added much to this podcast in a while
@@covvardice8296 Agreed. I sometimes can feel Adam rolling his eyes when Ralph talks
@@MatrakenKEN It's funny because it used to be the other way around imo.
My favourite tell and show is Snatch. They tell a lot, but the telling has awesome character introductions and gags.
Haver was an awesome guest! Wellspoken and had some great insight on film and filmmaking. 10/10 listen
Straight insaneo style up in here!
Wow
I'm so hyped for this crossover
The thing! Is also my favourite horror movie. Can’t wait
joel haver was such a great guest! loved his perspectives and insights
Fuck it, Adam should make films now, his ideas about the matrix are just too impressive and it would've looked so freaking cool if that was in a movie, damn!
UnIronically Hannibal Burress as Morpheus would have been more believable than whoever they got for the new one
Not familiar with Joel but holy shit he sounds just like Marcus from Cosmonaut Variety Hour
I don’t think Joel Haver misrepresents the media he criticizes nearly as much as Cosmonaut
Regarding the Euphoria question, what if there was an HBO show that was edifying and about people who try to be noble and heroic ? Would the same people who like the typical HBO shows call out this exception and say it's bad for influencing the youth/public ?
2:00:00 2019s "The Vast of Night" is a premium example for tell don't show.
David Lynch's Dune lost me in the begining when we first hear the Emperor think: "Why would they be concerned about the duke's son?" and then says out loud: "Aren't you referring to Leto, his father?". Like fuck off.
I came into Resurrections as positively as possible, but I've accepted it's really not that good over time. I'll stand by, however, that Reloaded and Revolutions aren't bad. I watched all four movies before Resurrections and had a good time with each one. If nothing else, this new one makes them look better, but they have a lot going for them that just landed awkwardly for a lot of audiences at the time. I'd recommend "The Matrix Sequels are Good, Actually" by Sophie from Mars to get a new perspective on the whole deal.
Best episode I’ve heard. Loved the insight
ralph and a lot of people who talk about cassavetes say that a lot of the script is improvised, but most of the time it's the opposite. everything in his most acclaimed a woman under the influence is heavily scripted and in faces its mostly the same.
Da Matrix let s get it started
his audio is so much louder compared to the other 3
fck
I would suggest you have Wendigoon on as a guest
My favorite fourth installment in a film franchise is Ishiro Honda's Mothra vs. Godzilla (1964). Top tier kaiju cinema.
Glad to see Critikal back on the podcast
36:31 That low shutter effect Joel mentions made me think of Wong Kar-wai films when I watched it, felt pretty out of place in this Matrix sequel.
Speaking of WKW, I can't wait til one of his movies gets recommended
This podcast hadn't been this good since Jenny Nicholson
Joel is awesome
If you think the CGI in early 2000s films didnt look convincing at the time, then you weren't there at the time. The effects in Lord of the Rings were amazingly revolutionary, Xmen 2 had a bunch of well made effects that made you believe unbelievable things were happening (Nightcrawler in the Whitehouse), and while some Spiderman effects look cartoony now, that wasn't the opinion anyone had at the time and a lot of the web slinging stuff still holds up really well even now.
I would only contest the point on Spider-Man. The effects were actually a source of contemporary criticism at the time. That being said, I agree that it can largely be overlooked,
Have Joel back some time. Great Guest !
I hope Joel Haver rotoscopes a Sardonicast animation one day
Maybe he can join them for a day at the inevitable Sardonicast Disneyland trip! 😂
JOEL HAVER!!!!!!!!!
I missed this holy drop of an episode! I love Joel 🥰
unfortunately they didn't care for MATRIX: RESURRECTIONS. (good to hear their takes tho)
But I really love it. Seek out contrary opinions; this movie has a lot more love than you'd think!
I feel like the bois might have enjoyed A Woman Under the Influence a little more. I'd say that's more accessible than Faces in some ways.
Agreed they should watch that first then faces tbh
Around 1:08:30 - AQUAMAN is the blockbuster that embraces creativity and overthetop-ness
I love The Matrix Resurrections. It takes the piss out of the idea that everything is nostalgia.
Oh, I thought Joel was in Faces. I almost actually saw it
Damn this episode went insaneo mode
One of my work's clients is in Marshall, NC!
I mean, both Euphoria and 13 Reasons Why are TV-MA and come with more than enough warning as to what content is within. Children watch both anyways because they can relate even if it isn't for them. Malcolm & Marie rocks.
Yesss
Just when I needed it the most
David Fincher is also pretty known for his exposition.
Two things would have made this movie way better. 1. Well shot action in the style of the original 2. Hugo Weaving!!!
I wish Joel mentioned his thoughts on the Killing of a Chinese Bookie. Of all of Cassavetes’ films I’ve seen, that one I found to be the hardest to get through.
Hell yeah, excited
I believe this is objectively the best guest they've ever had. It's way better than anyone I can remember as 2nd. It's not so much that he was particularly great in this but his work is amazing (and I don't mean just the meme animation).
Did you know that Tom Hardy was supposed to be in the movie as Eddie Brock/Venom due to Venom filming at the same time but got cut out of the film lol that would have been real Meta
As someone who is overly obsessed with metanalysis, I thoroughly enjoyed Matrix Resurrections on that level. However, I'm not going to argue in favor of the quality of the actual filmmaking. Putting it politely, the film is a complete mess. However, I figured I'd at least give my rationalization and interpretations of some of the things brought up in the conversation.
I detail a lot of this in the latter half of my recent video on The Matrix, and I think I contextualize and articulate it much better there than I can in a single comment. But rather than just shamelessly self promo, I'll paraphrase stuff here. Don't get it twisted, I'm not here to start fights or convince anyone the film is a masterpiece, because it simply is not a masterpiece in the slightest. If you read this and still think any of this is immensely stupid, I do not blame you in the slightest.
The idea of an Adaptation-esque "movie within the movie" scenario with Keanu sounds brilliant as a different film, but I think it betrays what Neo being the creator of the Matrix is trying to communicate thematically. Neo is a stand in for both the artist (Lana Wachowski) and the audience (people who grew up loving the Matrix). He is the creator of the Matrix who is also enveloped in the Matrix, much the way that Lana Wachowski is a product of her own creation. The Matrix has been heavily influential on both the filmmaking and pop culture landscapes, and Lana Wachowski likely has a hard time processing that the Matrix has essentially become indistinguishable from reality. Nearly everyone now exists as a digital projection of themselves in a polarized technological world. Hence why Neo in this film is suffering from mental breakdowns and attempts to end his own life.
This also ties into the "Why show him as an old guy?" thing. I can't excuse it plot-wise because, for the sake of the story, there was no reason for that to be included. But I think it's supposed to be metaphorical for how the audience projects themselves onto the media they consume. Neo looks like an old man, but sees himself as Neo. He is projecting himself onto the clips being shown, which are literally being projected onto curtains. Just as a lot of people did watching The Matrix for the first time. A lot of people who love The Matrix see themselves as Neo, they project themselves onto him, because that's the archetypal role he fulfilled in the film.
As far as The Analyst is concerned, I think that the "girlboss" ending (as Adam calls it) was set up throughout the film. In his monologue to Neo, The Analyst reveals that he has constructed this entire new Matrix film. He rebuilt Neo and Trinity at a tremendous cost (200 million USD to be precise), and tried to set it up in a way that he knew an audience would like. As he states, "They want to be controlled. They crave the comfort of certainty." As Ralph said, "They should've just made the same thing again."
The Analyst is an amalgam of many things, but mostly he's a stand in for people who misinterpreted The Matrix over years. People who buy into and are indebted to the systems they're apart of and use The Matrix as their Bible, people who say "red pilled" unironically. Alt-rights, incels, bad faith critics, corporate goons, market researchers, etc. (This is also why he names Trinity's husband "Chad.") He is spelling out what the audience wants. Well choreographed action sequences, groundbreaking special effects, simplistic black and white narratives, etc. He even says people don't want the love story ("They don't want this sentimentality."), which has always been one of the biggest criticisms of the Matrix. This film says screw all that, and gives you ONLY the love story and nothing else.
While I think Joel's point about "We all live in the Matrix, so maybe the best we can do is love" is close to my interpretation, but I take it more as "The only way out of this Matrix is through love." I think that's a powerful message. Again though, I don't disagree with nearly anything being said in this episode on a technical level. If the actual filmmaking made it damn near impossible to engage with any of this stuff, that's valid. Was this the best way to communicate all this? Was it completely thought through to a T? Does this even work as a film? I think a lot of this stuff could've been infinitely more compelling had the execution lived up to its ambitions, but I don't have any doubt in my mind that a lot of this stuff we're debating over was done deliberately or at least with an intent.
Overall I think the film, while not soundly constructed, is vastly more interesting and human than anything else in this new wave of nostalgia driven reboots. I'm glad we got this instead of a play it safe, pandering remake. I loved it, warts and all, but I completely understand why people don't share that sentiment!
Damn I was gonna go to Ralph's YT but he didn't say the website.......sucks to be a NYC hack with one less subscriber I guess
Cassavetes is a top ten filmmaker all time
The Matrix…it BLEW YOUR MIND!
I think the actress who played bugs tried the most out of everyone who worked on this movie, and im not just saying that cuz she’s cute lol
Adum is entirely missing the point on the Euphoria conversation. It's not about the whole "ouuhhh controversial content" conversation, it's about how morally ok it is to sexualize underage characters. In fact, no one on the podcast ever acknowledges any of the male gaze problems pervasive in media and Joel is the only one bringing the actual problems up, which Adum quickly diverts back to rant about censorship or whatever.
Sorry for commenting 2 years after the fact but I think as male youtubers who usually don’t make social-political criticisms it would not only be out of place to bring that up but it would also be inappropriate for them to comment on it without the proper scholarly training and experiences. Hearing that from a non-theorist male point of view would add little to the discourse
@@Pumpkinlumpy No problem lol, it's funny that someone still reads any of the comments.
I get where you're coming from, but the problem in this episode was very much Adam being absolutely obtuse to what the question was about and not engaging with the criticism. If they didn't feel comfortable with answering the question or didnt feel like they have the proper tools, they could've just acknowledged that and move on.
I also disagree with the idea that you can only talk about those things if you're properly schooled in them. Yes, theze subjects require sensitivity and care, but especially Adam has no problems talking about subjects at length he isn't really super familiar with. And I honestly think that as people that talk about movies on the internet to a large audience, with a certain amount of authority, they should be more familiar with those kinds of analytical tools. One doesn't even have to read complicated media theory, Lindsey Ellis' vids are right there
@@johnnystevens1248 Very fair, seems like he connected any insinuation of problematic content to "nagging grandma's censoring my edgy content". And Lindsey Ellis' Transformer videos are in total only about the length of two Sard episodes so idk what I was rambling about with scholarly training
Jack Stauber would be a great guest. Idk if anyone has proposed this yet
"If you watch a movie about Hitler and don't see yourself in that character, you're lying."
Who ever coulda guessed Joel Haver’s a cassavetes fan
They said Stephan Chow, nice.