November 26, 2024 • 48 mins
Drive down the cinematic enigma of Zyzzyx Road with Parliament After Dark! This inaugural episode of our Reel Lit/Shelf Criticism special takes a closer look at the lowest-grossing domestic film of all time, a bizarre thriller starring Katherine Heigl, Tom Sizemore, and Leo Grillo. Was it a misunderstood masterpiece, a marketing disaster, or just a mess best left buried in the Nevada desert?
Join Stephen, McKenzie, and Raegan as they explore the history behind the film’s infamous $30 box office, dissect its plot, performances, and production, and debate its merits—or lack thereof—with their signature blend of wit and insight. From cringe-worthy scenes to unexpected moments of depth, this midnight movie gets the full parliamentary treatment.
Will Zyzzyx Road get a unanimous thumbs-up or an unceremonious gavel down? Find out on Parliament After Dark!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
On a balmy April day, Mackenzie, Reagan and Stephen, three discerning minds with a shared
(00:14):
obsession for stories, weatherbound in print or projected on celluloid, joined forces to
create Owls of Palace, a production company dedicated to the fine art of analysis, banter,
and occasional film related existential crises. With real, lit and shelf criticism under their
wings, these three have explored the highs and lows of storytelling with an impeccable eye
(00:35):
of detail and taste. Or so they'd like you to believe. But what are the forgotten cinematic
oddities that lurk in the recesses of late night streaming services? What are the less
affair that wants grace premium cable in the hazy hours of insomnia fuel channel surfing?
The direct to video gems you rented on a whim when the new releases wall at Blockbuster had
(00:55):
failed you. Surely these deserve their day or at least their midnight in court. This is
Parliament after dark, the periodic special episodes where your nocturnal cinephile hosts take on
the weird, the wild and the questionably watchable films of the midnight movie canon. From cult
classics to hidden gems, low budget wonders to cinematic fever dreams, no film is too obscure
(01:16):
or outrageous for our after dark exploration. Each episode will journey into the heart of
the late night cinematic abyss, dissecting what makes these films enduring curiosities
or perhaps just enduring mysteries. So whether you're here for the nostalgia, the camp or
the unexpected gems buried in the rubble of cinematic chaos, you're in the right place.
(01:38):
Dim the lights, settle in and step into the shadows of the unconventional, the bizarre
and the utterly unforgettable. Now the parliamentarians are seated. Let the session begin.
Welcome everybody. How's it going Mackenzie? You know it's going really great. I mean I'm
(02:03):
excited. I'm excited for the special episode. Yeah it's kind of strange isn't it? We're
sitting here in the studio and it's not real lit. It's not real lit and you know some random
person just decided to walk in and join. Yeah why don't you introduce yourself? Hello. Hi
I'm the random person. Reagan. I'm super excited and honored to be joining today. Yes absolutely.
(02:24):
Reagan has been our producer for every episode of real lit. Since she's such a wonderful
addition every time we get together to talk she brings in new light to all of our conversations
so I'm excited to hear her opinions today. Absolutely because we made her watch a truly
terrible film. So welcome to the club. Yes it was an enlightening experience to say the
least. So the the premise of this we're not sure how far we're going to take it but we
(02:48):
have real lit. We have shelf criticism and there are just some of those oddities that
defy categorization what we would sometimes call midnight movies or late night movies
because we're the Alice of Palace as our production company hence the title of this
parliament after dark. You have to play on all the words. Yes you just have to. We're masters
of bad puns on we. In the job description I'm pretty sure. So I am really excited about
(03:14):
the first film that we have so we're going to start this segment as a midnight spotlight
just kind of another play on words you know as a midnight movie to put a spotlight on
it and the first film in our inaugural dalliance is Zizek Road. This 2006 film stars Catherine
Heichel Tom Sizemore Lee Grillo. You've either never heard of it or you know it by its infamy.
(03:38):
The lowest grossing domestic box office in history. This film took home a whopping $30.
There are extenuating circumstances of course but still this film will carry one of the
most ignominious reputations in the history of celluloid. And you heard that right. $30
whole dollars. Yes Stephen made me aware of this film. I was definitely shocked by the
(04:00):
combination of actors with that financial income. I just stumbled across an article
that mentioned the lowest grossing film ever made and I'm like well I got to find out what
that is and then I was like I've got to watch this. My first thought was like is this some
kind of low budget student film that somehow miraculously made it into the rotation but
no. We're talking Catherine Heichel Tom Sizemore used to be a pretty well known actor as well
(04:24):
so. I'm not going to lie I thought a little less of Catherine Heichel after watching this
movie. That's right you were a big Grey's Anatomy fan aren't you. Yes. And I like Catherine
Heichel as well. I thought she was personally the best part of this film. I could not agree
more. I do. I can chop her on display. She's quite the actor. Even the different parts
(04:45):
of her face that we saw. We will get into that I suppose. So I guess we should tell
the story then. As we said there are extenuating circumstances. We're working mostly off of
an article from Entertainment Weekly by Rob Brunner called Hal Zizek Road Only Grows
$30. This was originally reported by a film site called Chud.com. Y'all don't get that
(05:06):
reference do you. Cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers. Oh goodness. Can't
sound familiar. There's horror movies back in the 80s I suppose. But they first came
across this idea. The reporter was just having to look at IMDB and he saw the box office
for this random film at $30 and thought what. So essentially what happened is Leo Grillo
(05:27):
is a fellow who came to LA in the 70s I think to try to make a name for himself acting. Didn't
really work out. Probably because he can't act. We'll talk about that. But he decided
that he wanted to make a film with animals in it. With dogs. Particularly because he's
a big dog lover. And he gets in touch with John Penny who's a he's been in the business.
He's done some what some assistant directing a little bit of cinematography I believe some
(05:51):
other stuff. And he's working on a screen treatment of this film. So the two kind of
got together and their basic idea was we want to make this film and we're going to release
it overseas first. Maybe we'll release it domestically later but overseas we really
want to make our bank. Hopefully they would make enough to not only support the film that
Grillo wanted to make but also to get a little bit of a reputation. Hey they made this low
(06:13):
budget film. They took it overseas. It sold. Maybe more producers would jump on. The problem
with that of course is according to and by the way I'm not knocking unions. I'm 100%
union. SAG after all y'all folks you need the unions to protect you. We just saw the
writer strike and I was 100% behind them. Sometimes with unions strange rules get made.
If you're low budget film under two million dollars you are required by the actors union
(06:38):
to release it theatrically. So Penny just decided to go to one movie theater in Dallas
and rent it out for a matinee showing for a week so that it was technically released.
Six people saw it. Five dollars a piece. And then two of them wanted to be refunded. Not
wanted to be. Actually they worked on this film and wanted happened to be from Dallas
(06:59):
so they took you know they went to see the film that they worked on and when Penny was
doing another film they wound up working with him again and when they told him that story
he immediately refunded their money. That was nice. It was nice but technically this
thing only grossed 20 dollars. Yeah. And I really like the interesting tidbit of the
actual name. Zizek Road. Especially at the place and it's interesting history but for
(07:22):
a fun fact of the day Zizek is the last word in the English dictionary though just had
to be best for last I guess. And this was the last time I will ever see this movie.
Really we should mention this too. It will not be the last for me. No. Yeah as you know
of course through shelf criticism I'm quite the DVD connoisseur. I swear we didn't plan
(07:44):
this. If you listen to our episode teases for the upcoming shows on Reelit we've been talking
about this for what couple three months. Yeah tomorrow we are recording this on November
25th November 26th the 4K Blu-ray special collectors edition two disc of Zizek Road
releases. Mine is already pre-ordered and is in the mail so it will be in my mailbox
tomorrow. Perfect timing. And I hate this film I gotta say it's awful but I've got to get
(08:08):
that second disc and watch these special features. I've got to know everything about this. If
you're going to be this infamous then I want to know everything there is to know about
it. Yeah we should say this too just because I'm going to savage Leo Guerrillo quite a
bit today but he's a genuinely nice guy. He is a good man. And a man after my own heart
because he actually has a very large animal rescue. He loves it's not just dogs but basically
(08:31):
he realized that people were taking dogs and cats and just dropping them out in kind of
this place where he lives in California where it's kind of rural and he takes those in he
takes care of them but he also it's like horses rabbits everything's got I believe I read
the largest animal rescue in the entire world. So the name of the organization is Delta which
is dedication and everlasting love to animals rescue. Non-profits incidentally also the film
(08:56):
we just mentioned he wanted to make with animals was a film called magic I just have to read
this description it did get made in 2011. Magic the dog is an angel sent to heal a broken
family. Brad is a lawyer doing the best he can do to raise his daughter Kayla without
the wife he misses. Kayla is longing for her mother who died seven years before. Sarah
is a medical research scientist who had an epiphany caused by magic the dog. As magic
(09:20):
escapes the research lab where he is a subject and he is pursued by Dr. Ortero and the laboratory's
entire security force he fulfills his angelic role as a catalyst that helps Brad, Kayla,
and Sarah discover their love for each other. Did you follow any of that? No. I mean there's
a dog in it. There's a dog and may or may not be an angel but he's being experimented
on. There's a medical researcher. Who knows. I will say if you notice that in the film
(09:45):
when his character Grant comes across the dog in the trailer park meth lab wherever
he is you know at first you think he's gonna like hit him with that shovel because the
dog's barking and he's like oh you go booing and he starts petting him. Like okay you're
the villain but you're gonna pet the dog instead of smack it. That is a nice nod. It is a nice
nod. And did either of you I bet neither one of you watched all the way through the credits.
(10:09):
No. You know you should do that. I always try to because every name on there has a mama
and that mama's proud of him right but still I always do just for whatever reason. You
know how they have those sometimes the no animals were harmed in the making of this
film. This one reads and I quote the animals in this film enjoyed performing for you and
were treated like movie stars. Aww. I love that. Yeah it's really hard to hate this guy
(10:34):
and because of knowing all of that because we're all animal lovers. Yeah. Right. So that
being said why don't we hate on it because this is not a good film. Yeah we're gonna
move into what we call midnight musings and this is where we all give kind of a quick
assessment of our takes on the film just briefly. You know I'm going to be honest I liked it
(10:54):
more than zombie strippers. I didn't. I. And I hated zombie strippers. I. At least that
tried to be philosophical. I mean it wasn't a great film by any means but it's not the
worst thing I've ever watched. I also love the music at the beginning and end. I know
that Steven has feelings about that. I thought it was fun. I felt like it was a scary movie
(11:18):
at the beginning with the music. Yeah. I didn't think horror. You did not. I thought
very like. I thought it was like one of those cinemax after dark films or something. I'm
like what have I stumbled into here. There. I mean the effects are poor. The lighting
is funny at times. The light on the RV shined just like this giant star and then it just
(11:40):
disappeared and there was this like dimly lit RV. And so just little things like that
that were so juxtaposed that it was cringy kind of that that got to me throughout the
movie. I don't know if y'all will understand this reference but it made me feel like I
was watching a Tim Robinson sketch. No I totally don't know what you're talking about. Okay.
(12:01):
Well other than that to say something more universal I will give it credit for making
me truly jump out of my skin. The moment where Joey appears during their little rendezvous
in the car that genuinely scared me. And I don't know if the tone of the music just
got me into a very scary headspace. And I mean obviously there were some moments where
(12:24):
they were trying to be kind of thriller shock but it got me. So.
Was this a scary film overall? No. Did you think? No. Yeah I agree. I'm just a baby.
No yeah the things that were supposed to be scary the weapons, the blood, the effects,
(12:44):
all of it was very cringy. That's the word that just keeps coming to mind because every
time I saw it I was like no. You blend it in a little bit more. I don't even know if
they were real knives honestly. They looked very play like so the realism just wasn't
there. The blood was very orange wasn't it? She was not 18. There's nothing you can say
(13:07):
just 26 when this was shot. Yes but she was supposed to be an 18 year old and she just
did not sell an 18 year old to me. That's what I agree. So I actually liked the setting
a lot in the overall plot. I liked the middle of nowhere. I liked the idea of the unknown.
I liked the idea of this female villainess being supernatural or not supernatural. I
(13:30):
really liked that kind of confusion. And the best part to me out of the entire movie was
the opening car ride scene where it's really just dialogue and foreshadowing and its ambiguity.
And you could tell that it was low budget but when they were just talking with each other
in the car I was like okay I can get through this plot development. I like where this is
(13:51):
going these characters are complex. She slurps though. Yeah. Ring pop or whatever you call
it just. And those are so inconvenient to eat. I was like why are you eating that out
of all the things. I saw that as being very suggestive. Oh yeah of course. So but it was
just obnoxious which I think was kind of the point. Yeah she was annoying. To me the problem
(14:13):
is their complexity stopped there. I mean there was no more character development or
growth really. After that the dialogue fell short. It got repetitive. But the opening
car scene I really did enjoy. Fair. Grillo was a very flat character in my opinion. He
had every opportunity to not be that way but it was the delivery of his lines and the way
(14:35):
he engaged in the scenes that just did not do it for me. Yeah and again if you look at
his IMDB page there's like a couple of credits from like 1977 1978 and then there's this
2006. There's probably a reason you couldn't find work buddy. That's kind of low. But you
saved dog so I love you. And then in the opening car scene you know they get to use a zig road
(14:58):
and it's night time and in the car everything's pretty clear but then the night time is just
so dark when they get out of the car. And I do wonder part of that is because you two
watch on YouTube. Yes. I watch it on internet movie archive. Either way it's really low
resolution. It may be a little bit better when you get into a high resolution. It reminded
(15:21):
me of the Game of Thrones scene. The infamous battle in the dark where you could not see
what was going on. You just saw that glimpses here and there. I just remember Twitter was
in an uproar at how bad like it was. Maybe there's no excuse for that to be poorly lit.
I know exactly. Low budget film sure. And it may be poorly lit. They may have actually
(15:42):
gone in and redone it and recolored some of that as well. I don't know we'll find out
tomorrow. You want to come in and have another watch party? You're like no, no. Nothing you
can do. No amount of popcorn is going to bribe you to come watch that again. Well you know
you and I McKinsey get along really well even on real lit. We've disagreed a couple
of times. Yeah. But not very often. Reagan we've not had a chance to argue. But what
(16:06):
better time to actually bring in some debate or as we like to call it parliamentary debate
because again bad puns will abound. So McKinsey you had to take that I did disagree with.
On the lighting? Yes. So it took me a while to try and comprehend this lighting in the
desert specifically when he's talking with Joey. And when he's talking to Marissa it's
(16:30):
very filmy, dim. Then when he's talking to Joey it's very bright, vibrant, almost yellow
toned. And I was like why is this filter switching so dramatically so often? It was kind of hard
for my eyes just to understand. And I thought well maybe this is signifying differences
(16:51):
in perception and reality. I don't know. Yeah. But it was hard to watch. That's absolutely
it. So the times when he's hallucinating imagining Joey to use the technical term.
We have a high key saturated color grading. So it's very bright and it was the colors
pop like the green in that truck when they're out in the trailer part. And then when it's
reality when we're more focused on Marissa it basically desaturates that color, pulls
(17:14):
it back out. And I guess that kind of represents fantasy world, the bright contrast of colors
versus the lack thereof. I think it's a brilliant move. I thought it was very well colored.
I think I really enjoy the concept. I think just the low budgeting of it made it hard
for me to see. Like are you saying the distinction was not as clear to you? Like you noticed
(17:36):
it but the execution of it was not. It's almost like it was too obvious. Like in the
cuts from scene to scene were so abrupt I guess you could say. Like now I feel like
we would have a little bit of a pan, a little bit of a whoosh, like something to segue the
changing color. But for this it was just like camera scene one, then it shifts to camera
(17:58):
scene two and they're completely different colors multiple times. I liked it. Agree to
disagree on that one. Fair enough. More hot takes. I actually did not think she acted out
the snake scene very well. It was just very loud. Let's talk about that snake scene. I
don't like it. I don't like it. Well I mean animal attacks so obviously I'm immediately
(18:20):
drawn to that. Did it really happen? Because that's part of the evidence he's building
in his head that she's recuperated so quickly from the snake bite she has to be a succubus
or I don't think they ever say succubus do they but totally a succubus. Snake makes
sense. You know snake symbolizing evil and seduction and I get it why they call it snake.
(18:40):
And they foreshadowed it earlier talking about diamond backs were in that area. Yeah but
first of all it's in the car right? It's like in the glove box or something. Hey I've
heard of them sneaking up through your toolets. Yeah I don't know how accurate that actually
is. It just makes me wonder if perhaps it wasn't a diamond back maybe it was just another
kind of snake. It wasn't that venomous. I mean she passes out but that could have just
(19:02):
been from fright and shock right? Well I was confused because I thought he said she died
for like a period of time which I mean obviously this goes back to him being a little unreliable
but. Right. He thought she died right? I don't remember how it was phrased. I probably at
that point was just begging for mercy. Lord please let this movie go on quicker. I mean
rattlesnake bites are not always fatal and they talk about how maybe it bit something
(19:24):
else and didn't have all the venom that it normally would have had. That was interesting.
That was really interesting to me. I've never heard that said before. No adult rattlers
won't inject as much venom as say the babies who don't quite know how to control it. They'll
save their venom for the prey you know when they're defending themselves. Maybe it was
that. I mean why not just say it wasn't really a rattlesnake. It was a non-venomous snake
(19:49):
that bit her. I don't know. That was a weird scene. That's what I'm saying is like they
go through links to explain things like that that seem very subtle and then we don't get
a lot of explanation later for things that are like okay I actually do want to know about
this part. I don't really care that much about the snake part but we're going to explain
the snake part a little bit more. We should. It's an animal attack. I guess. That's me.
(20:14):
I'm a little more interested in that than others. I know. So what are we going to argue
over? I don't know if this is an argument but I like the ending. I don't think it was
done well but I like the overall concept of the ending where we don't really know if
he was truly going crazy or not. I like ambiguity. I like that the guilt overtook him in a sense
(20:37):
to where he was in so much turmoil but when he gets hit by the truck and we see him again
he is so perfectly okay other than one little line dripping out of his mouth and I'm like
that makes no physical sense at all. It totally ruined the whole idea of the ending for me
because I saw him and I was like that man could stand up. It's low budget. That's one. You can't
(20:59):
have the mingle body. Did we? I mean is it ambiguous? I took it as like yeah he totally
lost his mind. He did but I mean just the inner part of me and like the American Gothic critic in me
really wants there to be that minute possibility that she is a succulence. Wouldn't that be great
if she like just laughed evilly or morphed the way she did right there? Exactly. That would be so
(21:21):
cool. Exactly. But she did have a little bit of that evil character come out in the cave right?
She was like you've been talking to Joey haven't you? So it does seem like she's kind of the evil...
Yeah but he's imagining that right? I don't know. I don't know. I think that was real.
I've I questioned that one. I question who she is because of the narrative perception I'm getting
(21:48):
of her through the main narrative. What was the color saturation like there? I think it was dark.
I think it was dark because of the cave but I think the actual colors were brighter.
Dare we look it up? Dare we look it up. That's a good point. But Joey was nowhere to be found
in that scene. Are we only going off of color? Are we going off of scenes where Joey is present?
(22:11):
That's fair because Joey's not there. See it shouldn't be this hard to figure this stuff out.
Don't talk about something else while I'm looking. So did she ever even have a tattoo?
I don't think so. I feel like that was a moment where he was victimizing her to justify himself.
It was a pretty ugly tattoo for being honest. Yeah it was definitely doodled on with kind of markers
(22:33):
and that was only just for me. I also thought it was fake because you know I hope she wasn't in an
abusive relationship and if she was though there would be more signs of abuse I feel like than
that single mark. So I feel like that contributed to his hallucination of it. All right so here is
the scene. I just pulled it up. It's hard to tell because it's in the cave. I don't think that's
(22:55):
brought. It doesn't look like the high saturation though does it? There it does. Yeah but he's
outside of the cave now. I tell you what I'm gonna have to get my copy and watch it in my
deaf and see what happens. That is interesting and maybe it's deliberately ambiguous for that reason
too. Maybe Penny's a genius and we're just not picking up on it. I think it's brilliantly directed
(23:19):
way over use of the shaky cam that gets a little old. Otherwise there's some wonderful camera angles
and camera movement in this thing. I think I'm so used to the office and what we do in the shadows
to where I am so used to the shaky camera now. Yeah we definitely debate on that because
(23:40):
I'm just y'all stop shaky cam just it's too much killing me. I do see what you're saying the more
shows and media are coming out with shaky cam scenes. It's like a documentary. Yeah that we almost
become immune to the overuse of it. Not me. I have to drama me half the time when I watch a film.
(24:00):
Let's move to Owl's Talons. I've already been a little vicious but I want to hear Mackenzie be
vicious. What do you want to rip apart in this film? So Owl's Talons is where we do rip our
Talons into a certain aspect or another. I truly did try to find elements of this film that are
effective and that I liked. I like some of the dialogue and music. I like the setting and I
(24:23):
really like the overall plot but the flashback scenes of the hotel room especially the first one
is just really really hard for me to watch. The above two shot on the bed is just not effective
and the lighting is very poor. The colors in the room are great but the lighting is very poor.
(24:45):
The entire scene is just very like childish home movie to me and the comforter with all the little
hearts and I was just like no. What kind of motel is this? It looks like a child's room right and
that was disturbing to me. I just didn't like how it was set up. I didn't like how it was shot.
Well did you notice there's stuffed animals on the headboard and stuff too? Yes. And I was just like
(25:05):
is this a hotel or is it her apartment? I mean I'll be honest I genuinely thought it was her
place. I did too. Just a really crappy apartment. Well she's 18 air quote and where is she? I mean
we never get that answer. Right so I mean she could be I hey this girl is not listening to this
podcast I'm sure but I knew a friend in high school who would watch Disney Channel who had all the
(25:30):
stuffed animals who had the heartbed spread and we were 17 18 years old so maybe they're just
thinking that that could be a feasible thing for an 18 year old girl at this time. I don't buy it. I
hear her refer to as a low lead a type and a lot of criticism and maybe it's that maybe they're just
trying to push that robbing of the cradle aspect of it. Maybe but she doesn't give off that persona
(25:52):
at all in her actions. I also feel like there was maybe a little too much focus on her promiscuity
in some ways more so than we needed is what I mean so the entirety of the scene in the motel
room I just really did not like because of where the focus was a lot of the times it's all the
elements working together I felt icky watching it and like she's super undressed for a super long
(26:16):
time and I just felt like it wasn't necessary. That's another way we differentiate for part of it right
is she's wearing like a negligee or something and then suddenly she's wearing like a tank top and jeans
and I get that like it's probably part of his hallucination or something but still just
it's weird because even with the the switching of the saturation and the color once she gets stabbed
in the leg right she just wears jeans the rest of that time so weird almost like it wasn't well
(26:42):
planned. Anything you want to rip into Reagan? I would say that I was honestly sitting here thinking
how could we make this sound more intelligent and give it more credit than it may deserve.
What if just hear me out what if it was supposed to be this shift from the male gaze into the female
(27:08):
gaze and we see her being more of this developed character by the end and she's holding more of
this power at the end but throughout the majority of the film she is viewed that promiscuous way
she's in dress she looks kind of the dumb blonde stereotype but then toward the end I don't really
(27:28):
feel like she portrays this persona anymore. That's fair. She definitely changes for sure.
And she she's smart the way she says you know give the gun to Joey let him shoot me. Right and I
was really there. I would never have thought of that I'm sure. And we were talking about before
we started recording how the heck she knows he's talking to Joey of all people but still to figure
that out and to make that move that was a clever move. It seems like she gets into his psyche a
(27:53):
little bit. Yeah starts messing with his head. And she ends up having more power than Joey who is in
his psyche. It's okay to read Reagan you got me contemplating. The guy who's credited as meth
maker I never got that was a meth lab until I saw that but I mean it makes sense. He also just
terrible terrible actor just the way he comes look with a gun that we cut that grimace on his face
(28:16):
and then dude just clocks him with a shovel and he's like oh help me. I don't know it's just such
uneven characterization there. Oh one thing that bothered me why was there just a convenient cave
located in the middle of nowhere. It was a mine. Oh it was a mine. Yeah even still you know he goes
to look for Joey and he's in the cave. Whoa that's so shocking. It is convenient. You know like it's
(28:42):
kind of like come on. I even considered this RV like the meth house if it was some sort of hallucinogenic
oasis of some sort like did he hallucinate this whole narrative plot to try and come to terms with
his guilt. Like is this his guilt trip. And then they use props in it and certain things but I'm
(29:03):
like you know that can of dust or whatever it is that she throws could just be sand but he sees it as
it's a fair point. That's true. I don't know. I mean I think he probably actually does clock
the meth man on the head but all the other stuff could be something he imagined. I mean that clothes
line was dangerous. That scene was hard for me to watch. That was a hard scene for me. Yeah those
(29:31):
kind of scenes can work really well you know hiding and reappearing in different places and the wind
blowing it in the shadows but it did not work well here. Well like in an example of where it did
work extremely well was I know what you did last summer with the tires and the alley. That was
spectacular. Absolutely. But this clothesline scene just not good. Not good. Not good. Not great.
(29:56):
So the next segments will probably make more sense in some of the other films we do. You know
there's always you're watching one of those bad B movies from the 80s or something and you go oh
my gosh is that you know it's somebody who became famous at some point. This one yeah Catherine
Heigl we should probably mention had been cast and was was it about to start filming or had already
been filming Grey's Anatomy. It was pre Grey's Anatomy so nobody knew her as Izzy at this point
(30:23):
but even one day she couldn't shoot because they were doing photo promotional stuff for Grey's Anatomy
so it's pre Grey's for Catherine Heigl. She wouldn't have been as known. As a matter of fact
that was one of the reasons Grillo and Penny said they were making on her star power. They were
assuming this was going to be a big hit and she was going to become famous and then Tom Sizemore
of course has his share of issues with substance abuse and the law so that infamy if nothing else
(30:49):
he's a pretty well-known actor but the infamy if nothing else might carry it as well. I mean
they're right about Catherine Heigl at least. Yeah I like Catherine Heigl as an actress and
while her character is a bit cheesy here in this film I feel like she does a good job.
With what she's given absolutely. Yeah except for when she gets bit by the snake.
(31:11):
Except for that. Yeah it was over it was a bit over the top. Even the greatest
have some overacting at some points I suppose. Then similarly going into most hated character
coming in from real lids. That's right we were talking about these segments and I'm like well
I know we're gonna have to bring most hated character because that's McKenzie's favorite segment.
I love characterization. I love to hate a character. I love a good villain and in this one
(31:36):
it really wasn't a contest for me. We have so few characters but it was Grant. He gets to me a lot.
One with his indecisiveness right as a person. He can't decide what to do at any point in time
but also just the way like he is so okay with killing someone but he he acts like he's not in
his words but all of his actions he's so okay. He's not freaking out. He's like we gotta kill Joey.
(32:01):
We gotta kill Joey. Slammed a hand in the trunk that's just rude you know and and then he is okay
with killing her and it's interesting because he's struggling with this guilt the whole time but he
seems okay with his evil actions as well. I just don't like it. I think it is uneven again because
I mean there's that moment where he's got Joey in the in the mind and he rears back to hitting
(32:26):
with the shovel or whatever and he like freezes. He can't do it so he has those hesitations but
then at the very beginning he's like yeah they're talking about doing their taxes and how she needs
to report her income so she can retire and there's supposed to be a dead man in the trunk. They're
going to bury in the desert. That's awfully casual. I agree it's gotta be Grant right. I know the
blow to the head caused most of what caused him to be the aggressor I suppose. I think is that
(32:50):
what the film suggests he gets hit in the head with with their wine bottle by Joey but they just
annoys me all the way around and also he's the worst actor ever. Yeah Grant shocker and I think that
yeah it's some pretty bad acting and I have not seen this bad of acting in quite a while.
(33:11):
You didn't watch zombie strippers with us. No I did not. No I have to go back and look at that now
but I would say that Grant played too big of a role to then fall this flat on his face
and I had a really hard time believing that the hit to the head caused him to be this way
(33:32):
especially when Heigl's character is saying you're the one that bashed the window and you did all
these things. I still couldn't make that connection as to his motive for that. So I have a bit more
of a theory. I think partially it's the blow to the head but also the guilt for cheating on his
life because I mean you get the sense this is the first time he's done it. Maybe his wife's a little
(33:53):
overbearing you know she says like you know what Bryn does like but I do think he's because he's
so worried about losing his daughter right. I think some of that because if you say well I was
seduced by a succubus then who could fault you. You got to forgive your husband if that happened
because it's magic right. Absolutely. I see it as definitely a big lotus trope drink of the lotus
and you'll be enraptured and there's nothing you can do about it to try and get out of the guilt
(34:17):
that you've made the decision. Honestly I think you're changing my mind a little bit because I think
the clue of him petting the dog and having this almost nice guy depiction of himself that he doesn't
want to be the way he is but yet he is doing all of these crazy things that just seem in conflict to
I guess how he wants to be. I don't know. He I think what just makes it fall apart for me is his
(34:44):
hesitation is his casualness because if we had a little bit more emotion from him then I would be
sold on the guilt aspect. But that would require acting. That would require acting exactly.
So now it is time for our WTF moment. Yet another imported from real lit.
What can I say they do things well. Pretty sharp people there. I hear they got a good producer too.
(35:09):
Yeah I've heard. We should use her. Who wants to start. Okay for me this is definitely when she
throws chalk or Reagan is probably right the baby powder or whatever. Yeah whatever she throws.
We don't know what meth looks like. We're such goody too. I was like what is that. Oh really
that's a bad thing. We don't know what meth looks like. And I mean she literally directly throws
(35:33):
this substance at his chest not at his eyes at all and then he starts screaming about his eyes.
It gets on his chin. Yes it's so much on his chin. I'm not a director so I don't know.
I'm not trying to pretend like I can make that decision. I just feel like they could have reached
(35:54):
out that scene to make it a little bit more connecting to what they wanted to show versus
what actually happened physically. Slow budget. They could afford more meth. Oh no.
You know for me and I'm kind of with you here. I'm generally impotervable when it comes to horror
films. The jump scare that got me though is the first time we see Marissa's face just kind of like
(36:17):
meltdown and it's not even the face. It's that the musical stinger that hits you at the same time
and it's just cranked up. It's so lazy to get a jump scare and like that but I just I did not know
what to expect out of this film. I didn't know anything about it so I didn't know if it was horror.
Was it not? At that point I was expecting the jump scares so it didn't get me but you got me
(36:40):
on that first one Penny. I'll give you that one. Also when Joey is attempting to toss the knife he's
like throwing it to himself when he's trying to convince Grant to kill him. And he is acting like
he's like the super cool professional knife thrower and it's so not and I just wanted to cringe so
hard in that moment. I was like stop please do this to yourself because he was just like tossing
(37:05):
it up violently and then just grabbing it by the hill and almost the blade very violently. It was
very strange. And when he's like he's literally giving Joey's dialogue too. Let me see like when
Marissa sees him so he's he'll say something and he'll turn and walk to the other side and turn back.
It's exactly we had the actors from London a couple weeks ago right and sometimes they'll play
(37:25):
the same character on screen. They do this and they do it beautifully to comedic effect.
As far as I know this wasn't supposed to be a comedy though. That was so funny to me at the
end when they're standing on the side of the road and he'll say something and then he'll walk back
over to the other side. Just stop. I feel like the entire film was a WTF moment for me. I agreed I
(37:48):
was afraid that might be WTF moment. It was the film. Well we have the Alice Perch next and this
is a spot where when we're watching some of these less than stellar films perhaps we find some moments
just out of the blue that maybe makes a revelation or something well done, something intelligent,
something we can actually talk about and get a little depth with. I don't know do we have a
(38:12):
place to perch on this one? I mean I really do love this plot arc idea with the uncertainty and
hallucinations. We don't really know what reality is at the end of it and I like that kind of ambiguity
like mentioned earlier. They did well in leaving the viewer uncertain. However I do think that his
guilt is what spiraled this entire chain of events or the hallucinations. I feel like we're almost
(38:38):
reading our perch into it. That may be. I agree with that uncertainty as well. I like that fact
but again I think it's just because nobody knows what to think when they watch this film. I mean
I'd never seen a trailer or a clip from it. I didn't know if it was horror, was it thriller,
was it action, was it could be romance. I don't know but I didn't know what to expect and therefore
(39:01):
I think you really are confused. Is she an actual succubus? Is this just something going on in his
damaged mind? So I thought that was effective but it's more of a long the fact that like this never
got a trailer and we all kind of knew what was going on or what to expect out of the genre more
than anything else. So don't give it too much credit. I try, I try. Don't give it too much credit. I
was over here thinking he was the modern-day Hamlet. Do you see any redeeming qualities or any?
(39:28):
You know I will say this film had an unfair advantage or disadvantage rather because I approached
my movie watching experience knowing it was bad and I think that was unfair to this film. I think
that I should have gone in without knowing anything to then be able to say something that was not
(39:52):
biased today. That's why I'm trying to say he's the modern-day Hamlet because we see the indecision,
we see the hesitancy, the murder, some some parallels going on. Something like a ghost.
Something like a ghost. You know I actually, this is kind of random but there was a trivia
(40:13):
question yesterday on which character is the most like reused or reimagined ever. Hamlet was an option
and that was my guess because I was like Hamlet is Simba in the Lion game. You know Hamlet just
fits so many different kind of archetypes in a way but the answer was Dracula. Just putting that
out there. I could see that too. Yeah so kind of random tidbit but going off Hamlet like I see how
(40:37):
you can see Hamlet in so many different characters. I will concede, Catherine Heigle's performance is
very well done. The woman can act. Tom's eyes more wowed me. Aside from that I don't know. I just
don't know what else I can positively say and I, I mean y'all listen to Shelf Criticism, I try to
(40:58):
find a positive to say about everything and I have here the direction, the acting but as far as a
perch, something where you can go hey let's let's do a close read like our segment on Real Liter.
Let's talk about something intelligent. You pulled the male gaze into it which I'm impressed by but
I got nothing. It's a film. So should you give a hoot? Yes what we are going to do we have to
(41:23):
rank this thing right? We have to give our honest opinions here. So we are going to give a parliamentary
decree. How many gavils? So since we I'm assuming we'll be doing this again at some point we will
give the idea of the gavils here. So one gavil is outvoted. Leave it to the archives. Two gavils
(41:44):
is a split decision approach with caution. Three gavils a clear majority worth considering.
Four gavils unanimously enjoyable and five gavils an Alza Palace approved masterpiece.
Spoiler word this one's not getting five for many of us. I gave this film two gavils split
(42:05):
decision approach with caution because for one it's not the worst film I've ever seen but also
it's the lowest grossing film of all time. You've got to watch it. I mean just to watch it and see.
So you did. Yeah just to say you did. So that's why I gave it a two instead of a one.
I had one gavil and as I was waiting on you two to get here I watched it again
(42:29):
and paid a little bit closer attention and that's when I saw some of the directorial flourishes.
Again was reminded of just how good Heigl is in this that bumped it up. I'm going to give it to
Gorillaz were any worse. I would that would just not get right back down to one but
I will say so I also gave it two gavils and Gorillaz performance peaked my interest in the
(42:53):
fact that it was so bad but it was also entertaining. So Heigl still made me think of Izzy a little
bit toward the end especially when we kind of removed that dumb blonde persona at the end.
So I enjoyed that and overall I was engaged the whole film and I had questions and I was
(43:13):
entertained so that's all you can ask for to get two gavils. You're right well said. Well there you go.
You have now excoriated and slightly praised the lowest grossing domestic box office of all time
and if you are so inclined perhaps you'll go out tomorrow and buy the 4k edition. Oh goodness
you can use our discount code. Shout out. Owls of palace productions are not monetized yet
(43:40):
anyway but then if you're past some buys Isaac road one time. I did want to go.
You know I've done some film tourism seeing the house exactly the house but the place where
Scream was filmed some of those places we've been to see the birds you know Bodega Bay where that was filmed.
I should just next time I go out to California. Yes because I'm always right there in the middle
(44:02):
of nowhere in the Mojave Desert so why not. Yeah why not. Drive to Isaac road just for the heck of it.
How would you compare it to Joshua tree. I don't know. I've never been to either.
Are they both in California. Yes they just seem like the same terrain. It probably is.
Yeah I don't know. I don't know enough about that. Maybe some of our listeners can.
(44:22):
You too's album. I like that Joshua tree album. I do like you too. We have a lot to do. We have
places to visit and we have recipes to make. Yes we do. Next episode of real lit. We're doing
like water for chocolates. Como agua para chocolate. I'm very excited. I have impressive.
There are recipes throughout the book so super interesting. When you watch the film you're
(44:47):
going to get hungry. I can promise. I'll eat chocolate anytime anyway. Absolutely we're
recording that in just a few days. Yep so look out for another episode from real lit but also
shelf criticism. Shelf criticism is on hiatus. Season's over. I know I said I was going to do one more
but I get really busy. I mentioned those actors in town. They kept me busy running around a little
(45:10):
bit taking care of them and then get behind having to crave. Keep talking about this right.
Like they expect us to do our day job and it's so frustrating but yeah so I know twice now I put
off the movie confidence. It will be back at some point. If everything goes the way that I plan then
really just a few days from now probably early next week I'll begin with season two and shelf
(45:32):
christmases. By the way I do not like the holiday of Christmas particularly so everyone on my shelf
I did not buy for Christmas films but yeah got elf the holiday polar express Christmas vacation
which I do like. Classic and then we want to go ahead and talk about our December.
(45:53):
We're doing a little bit of a controversial Christmas. No there's no controversy. It is the
greatest Christmas movie I've ever made. We're doing die hard the film and there is some debate on
whether it's Christmas or not. It's Christmas. There's also a novella 48 minutes right so we'll
be reading that novella talking about that adaptation. That will be fun. And we'll be back
(46:16):
then huh we'll con fab and see when parliament after dark meets again. Absolutely. See what we're
going to do. There are plenty of good options out there so we don't have official websites or email
addresses or anything for this podcast but we do for the others. You want to tell them about real
lit? So if you have not already liked and joined us we would love for you to follow us on social
(46:39):
media at real lit podcast that's R E E L as in a film reel so that's real lit podcast. You can
find us on Facebook and Instagram or you can find us on our website reallitpodcast.com so just go
give us a subscribe when you can. And email us. Email us. I love letters and give us an email at
(47:01):
reallit at reallitpodcast.com. We want your letters. Yeah the same is true for shelf criticism.
Shelf criticism. You can email me at Stephen at shelf criticism that's S T E P H E N. Email us
about those podcasts or tell us what really horrible midnight movie you want us to cover.
Now give us your take on Zizek Road. Yeah I want to hear about that too. Have you actually seen it?
(47:23):
Did you love it? Are you buying the 4k tomorrow? Am I the only weirdo? I think you're the only
weirdo. I'm a completionist. It's what can I say? Look there DVDs on the shelf here too. I like the
commitment. I'm gonna own it. Thank you so much Reagan. Happy to join today thank you all for
having me. You're here with us. We're gonna have you back. I hope so. I hope you do. And as a guest
(47:46):
on shelf criticism real lit I'm sure at some point as well. Absolutely. I don't like that.
Thank you for listening. Parliament is no longer in city.
(48:21):
Killed it.
On a balmy April day, Mackenzie, Reagan and Stephen, three discerning minds with a shared
(00:14):
obsession for stories, weatherbound in print or projected on celluloid, joined forces to
create Owls of Palace, a production company dedicated to the fine art of analysis, banter,
and occasional film related existential crises. With real, lit and shelf criticism under their
wings, these three have explored the highs and lows of storytelling with an impeccable eye
(00:35):
of detail and taste. Or so they'd like you to believe. But what are the forgotten cinematic
oddities that lurk in the recesses of late night streaming services? What are the less
affair that wants grace premium cable in the hazy hours of insomnia fuel channel surfing?
The direct to video gems you rented on a whim when the new releases wall at Blockbuster had
(00:55):
failed you. Surely these deserve their day or at least their midnight in court. This is
Parliament after dark, the periodic special episodes where your nocturnal cinephile hosts take on
the weird, the wild and the questionably watchable films of the midnight movie canon. From cult
classics to hidden gems, low budget wonders to cinematic fever dreams, no film is too obscure
(01:16):
or outrageous for our after dark exploration. Each episode will journey into the heart of
the late night cinematic abyss, dissecting what makes these films enduring curiosities
or perhaps just enduring mysteries. So whether you're here for the nostalgia, the camp or
the unexpected gems buried in the rubble of cinematic chaos, you're in the right place.
(01:38):
Dim the lights, settle in and step into the shadows of the unconventional, the bizarre
and the utterly unforgettable. Now the parliamentarians are seated. Let the session begin.
Welcome everybody. How's it going Mackenzie? You know it's going really great. I mean I'm
(02:03):
excited. I'm excited for the special episode. Yeah it's kind of strange isn't it? We're
sitting here in the studio and it's not real lit. It's not real lit and you know some random
person just decided to walk in and join. Yeah why don't you introduce yourself? Hello. Hi
I'm the random person. Reagan. I'm super excited and honored to be joining today. Yes absolutely.
(02:24):
Reagan has been our producer for every episode of real lit. Since she's such a wonderful
addition every time we get together to talk she brings in new light to all of our conversations
so I'm excited to hear her opinions today. Absolutely because we made her watch a truly
terrible film. So welcome to the club. Yes it was an enlightening experience to say the
least. So the the premise of this we're not sure how far we're going to take it but we
(02:48):
have real lit. We have shelf criticism and there are just some of those oddities that
defy categorization what we would sometimes call midnight movies or late night movies
because we're the Alice of Palace as our production company hence the title of this
parliament after dark. You have to play on all the words. Yes you just have to. We're masters
of bad puns on we. In the job description I'm pretty sure. So I am really excited about
(03:14):
the first film that we have so we're going to start this segment as a midnight spotlight
just kind of another play on words you know as a midnight movie to put a spotlight on
it and the first film in our inaugural dalliance is Zizek Road. This 2006 film stars Catherine
Heichel Tom Sizemore Lee Grillo. You've either never heard of it or you know it by its infamy.
(03:38):
The lowest grossing domestic box office in history. This film took home a whopping $30.
There are extenuating circumstances of course but still this film will carry one of the
most ignominious reputations in the history of celluloid. And you heard that right. $30
whole dollars. Yes Stephen made me aware of this film. I was definitely shocked by the
(04:00):
combination of actors with that financial income. I just stumbled across an article
that mentioned the lowest grossing film ever made and I'm like well I got to find out what
that is and then I was like I've got to watch this. My first thought was like is this some
kind of low budget student film that somehow miraculously made it into the rotation but
no. We're talking Catherine Heichel Tom Sizemore used to be a pretty well known actor as well
(04:24):
so. I'm not going to lie I thought a little less of Catherine Heichel after watching this
movie. That's right you were a big Grey's Anatomy fan aren't you. Yes. And I like Catherine
Heichel as well. I thought she was personally the best part of this film. I could not agree
more. I do. I can chop her on display. She's quite the actor. Even the different parts
(04:45):
of her face that we saw. We will get into that I suppose. So I guess we should tell
the story then. As we said there are extenuating circumstances. We're working mostly off of
an article from Entertainment Weekly by Rob Brunner called Hal Zizek Road Only Grows
$30. This was originally reported by a film site called Chud.com. Y'all don't get that
(05:06):
reference do you. Cannibalistic humanoid underground dwellers. Oh goodness. Can't
sound familiar. There's horror movies back in the 80s I suppose. But they first came
across this idea. The reporter was just having to look at IMDB and he saw the box office
for this random film at $30 and thought what. So essentially what happened is Leo Grillo
(05:27):
is a fellow who came to LA in the 70s I think to try to make a name for himself acting. Didn't
really work out. Probably because he can't act. We'll talk about that. But he decided
that he wanted to make a film with animals in it. With dogs. Particularly because he's
a big dog lover. And he gets in touch with John Penny who's a he's been in the business.
He's done some what some assistant directing a little bit of cinematography I believe some
(05:51):
other stuff. And he's working on a screen treatment of this film. So the two kind of
got together and their basic idea was we want to make this film and we're going to release
it overseas first. Maybe we'll release it domestically later but overseas we really
want to make our bank. Hopefully they would make enough to not only support the film that
Grillo wanted to make but also to get a little bit of a reputation. Hey they made this low
(06:13):
budget film. They took it overseas. It sold. Maybe more producers would jump on. The problem
with that of course is according to and by the way I'm not knocking unions. I'm 100%
union. SAG after all y'all folks you need the unions to protect you. We just saw the
writer strike and I was 100% behind them. Sometimes with unions strange rules get made.
If you're low budget film under two million dollars you are required by the actors union
(06:38):
to release it theatrically. So Penny just decided to go to one movie theater in Dallas
and rent it out for a matinee showing for a week so that it was technically released.
Six people saw it. Five dollars a piece. And then two of them wanted to be refunded. Not
wanted to be. Actually they worked on this film and wanted happened to be from Dallas
(06:59):
so they took you know they went to see the film that they worked on and when Penny was
doing another film they wound up working with him again and when they told him that story
he immediately refunded their money. That was nice. It was nice but technically this
thing only grossed 20 dollars. Yeah. And I really like the interesting tidbit of the
actual name. Zizek Road. Especially at the place and it's interesting history but for
(07:22):
a fun fact of the day Zizek is the last word in the English dictionary though just had
to be best for last I guess. And this was the last time I will ever see this movie.
Really we should mention this too. It will not be the last for me. No. Yeah as you know
of course through shelf criticism I'm quite the DVD connoisseur. I swear we didn't plan
(07:44):
this. If you listen to our episode teases for the upcoming shows on Reelit we've been talking
about this for what couple three months. Yeah tomorrow we are recording this on November
25th November 26th the 4K Blu-ray special collectors edition two disc of Zizek Road
releases. Mine is already pre-ordered and is in the mail so it will be in my mailbox
tomorrow. Perfect timing. And I hate this film I gotta say it's awful but I've got to get
(08:08):
that second disc and watch these special features. I've got to know everything about this. If
you're going to be this infamous then I want to know everything there is to know about
it. Yeah we should say this too just because I'm going to savage Leo Guerrillo quite a
bit today but he's a genuinely nice guy. He is a good man. And a man after my own heart
because he actually has a very large animal rescue. He loves it's not just dogs but basically
(08:31):
he realized that people were taking dogs and cats and just dropping them out in kind of
this place where he lives in California where it's kind of rural and he takes those in he
takes care of them but he also it's like horses rabbits everything's got I believe I read
the largest animal rescue in the entire world. So the name of the organization is Delta which
is dedication and everlasting love to animals rescue. Non-profits incidentally also the film
(08:56):
we just mentioned he wanted to make with animals was a film called magic I just have to read
this description it did get made in 2011. Magic the dog is an angel sent to heal a broken
family. Brad is a lawyer doing the best he can do to raise his daughter Kayla without
the wife he misses. Kayla is longing for her mother who died seven years before. Sarah
is a medical research scientist who had an epiphany caused by magic the dog. As magic
(09:20):
escapes the research lab where he is a subject and he is pursued by Dr. Ortero and the laboratory's
entire security force he fulfills his angelic role as a catalyst that helps Brad, Kayla,
and Sarah discover their love for each other. Did you follow any of that? No. I mean there's
a dog in it. There's a dog and may or may not be an angel but he's being experimented
on. There's a medical researcher. Who knows. I will say if you notice that in the film
(09:45):
when his character Grant comes across the dog in the trailer park meth lab wherever
he is you know at first you think he's gonna like hit him with that shovel because the
dog's barking and he's like oh you go booing and he starts petting him. Like okay you're
the villain but you're gonna pet the dog instead of smack it. That is a nice nod. It is a nice
nod. And did either of you I bet neither one of you watched all the way through the credits.
(10:09):
No. You know you should do that. I always try to because every name on there has a mama
and that mama's proud of him right but still I always do just for whatever reason. You
know how they have those sometimes the no animals were harmed in the making of this
film. This one reads and I quote the animals in this film enjoyed performing for you and
were treated like movie stars. Aww. I love that. Yeah it's really hard to hate this guy
(10:34):
and because of knowing all of that because we're all animal lovers. Yeah. Right. So that
being said why don't we hate on it because this is not a good film. Yeah we're gonna
move into what we call midnight musings and this is where we all give kind of a quick
assessment of our takes on the film just briefly. You know I'm going to be honest I liked it
(10:54):
more than zombie strippers. I didn't. I. And I hated zombie strippers. I. At least that
tried to be philosophical. I mean it wasn't a great film by any means but it's not the
worst thing I've ever watched. I also love the music at the beginning and end. I know
that Steven has feelings about that. I thought it was fun. I felt like it was a scary movie
(11:18):
at the beginning with the music. Yeah. I didn't think horror. You did not. I thought
very like. I thought it was like one of those cinemax after dark films or something. I'm
like what have I stumbled into here. There. I mean the effects are poor. The lighting
is funny at times. The light on the RV shined just like this giant star and then it just
(11:40):
disappeared and there was this like dimly lit RV. And so just little things like that
that were so juxtaposed that it was cringy kind of that that got to me throughout the
movie. I don't know if y'all will understand this reference but it made me feel like I
was watching a Tim Robinson sketch. No I totally don't know what you're talking about. Okay.
(12:01):
Well other than that to say something more universal I will give it credit for making
me truly jump out of my skin. The moment where Joey appears during their little rendezvous
in the car that genuinely scared me. And I don't know if the tone of the music just
got me into a very scary headspace. And I mean obviously there were some moments where
(12:24):
they were trying to be kind of thriller shock but it got me. So.
Was this a scary film overall? No. Did you think? No. Yeah I agree. I'm just a baby.
No yeah the things that were supposed to be scary the weapons, the blood, the effects,
(12:44):
all of it was very cringy. That's the word that just keeps coming to mind because every
time I saw it I was like no. You blend it in a little bit more. I don't even know if
they were real knives honestly. They looked very play like so the realism just wasn't
there. The blood was very orange wasn't it? She was not 18. There's nothing you can say
(13:07):
just 26 when this was shot. Yes but she was supposed to be an 18 year old and she just
did not sell an 18 year old to me. That's what I agree. So I actually liked the setting
a lot in the overall plot. I liked the middle of nowhere. I liked the idea of the unknown.
I liked the idea of this female villainess being supernatural or not supernatural. I
(13:30):
really liked that kind of confusion. And the best part to me out of the entire movie was
the opening car ride scene where it's really just dialogue and foreshadowing and its ambiguity.
And you could tell that it was low budget but when they were just talking with each other
in the car I was like okay I can get through this plot development. I like where this is
(13:51):
going these characters are complex. She slurps though. Yeah. Ring pop or whatever you call
it just. And those are so inconvenient to eat. I was like why are you eating that out
of all the things. I saw that as being very suggestive. Oh yeah of course. So but it was
just obnoxious which I think was kind of the point. Yeah she was annoying. To me the problem
(14:13):
is their complexity stopped there. I mean there was no more character development or
growth really. After that the dialogue fell short. It got repetitive. But the opening
car scene I really did enjoy. Fair. Grillo was a very flat character in my opinion. He
had every opportunity to not be that way but it was the delivery of his lines and the way
(14:35):
he engaged in the scenes that just did not do it for me. Yeah and again if you look at
his IMDB page there's like a couple of credits from like 1977 1978 and then there's this
2006. There's probably a reason you couldn't find work buddy. That's kind of low. But you
saved dog so I love you. And then in the opening car scene you know they get to use a zig road
(14:58):
and it's night time and in the car everything's pretty clear but then the night time is just
so dark when they get out of the car. And I do wonder part of that is because you two
watch on YouTube. Yes. I watch it on internet movie archive. Either way it's really low
resolution. It may be a little bit better when you get into a high resolution. It reminded
(15:21):
me of the Game of Thrones scene. The infamous battle in the dark where you could not see
what was going on. You just saw that glimpses here and there. I just remember Twitter was
in an uproar at how bad like it was. Maybe there's no excuse for that to be poorly lit.
I know exactly. Low budget film sure. And it may be poorly lit. They may have actually
(15:42):
gone in and redone it and recolored some of that as well. I don't know we'll find out
tomorrow. You want to come in and have another watch party? You're like no, no. Nothing you
can do. No amount of popcorn is going to bribe you to come watch that again. Well you know
you and I McKinsey get along really well even on real lit. We've disagreed a couple
of times. Yeah. But not very often. Reagan we've not had a chance to argue. But what
(16:06):
better time to actually bring in some debate or as we like to call it parliamentary debate
because again bad puns will abound. So McKinsey you had to take that I did disagree with.
On the lighting? Yes. So it took me a while to try and comprehend this lighting in the
desert specifically when he's talking with Joey. And when he's talking to Marissa it's
(16:30):
very filmy, dim. Then when he's talking to Joey it's very bright, vibrant, almost yellow
toned. And I was like why is this filter switching so dramatically so often? It was kind of hard
for my eyes just to understand. And I thought well maybe this is signifying differences
(16:51):
in perception and reality. I don't know. Yeah. But it was hard to watch. That's absolutely
it. So the times when he's hallucinating imagining Joey to use the technical term.
We have a high key saturated color grading. So it's very bright and it was the colors
pop like the green in that truck when they're out in the trailer part. And then when it's
reality when we're more focused on Marissa it basically desaturates that color, pulls
(17:14):
it back out. And I guess that kind of represents fantasy world, the bright contrast of colors
versus the lack thereof. I think it's a brilliant move. I thought it was very well colored.
I think I really enjoy the concept. I think just the low budgeting of it made it hard
for me to see. Like are you saying the distinction was not as clear to you? Like you noticed
(17:36):
it but the execution of it was not. It's almost like it was too obvious. Like in the
cuts from scene to scene were so abrupt I guess you could say. Like now I feel like
we would have a little bit of a pan, a little bit of a whoosh, like something to segue the
changing color. But for this it was just like camera scene one, then it shifts to camera
(17:58):
scene two and they're completely different colors multiple times. I liked it. Agree to
disagree on that one. Fair enough. More hot takes. I actually did not think she acted out
the snake scene very well. It was just very loud. Let's talk about that snake scene. I
don't like it. I don't like it. Well I mean animal attacks so obviously I'm immediately
(18:20):
drawn to that. Did it really happen? Because that's part of the evidence he's building
in his head that she's recuperated so quickly from the snake bite she has to be a succubus
or I don't think they ever say succubus do they but totally a succubus. Snake makes
sense. You know snake symbolizing evil and seduction and I get it why they call it snake.
(18:40):
And they foreshadowed it earlier talking about diamond backs were in that area. Yeah but
first of all it's in the car right? It's like in the glove box or something. Hey I've
heard of them sneaking up through your toolets. Yeah I don't know how accurate that actually
is. It just makes me wonder if perhaps it wasn't a diamond back maybe it was just another
kind of snake. It wasn't that venomous. I mean she passes out but that could have just
(19:02):
been from fright and shock right? Well I was confused because I thought he said she died
for like a period of time which I mean obviously this goes back to him being a little unreliable
but. Right. He thought she died right? I don't remember how it was phrased. I probably at
that point was just begging for mercy. Lord please let this movie go on quicker. I mean
rattlesnake bites are not always fatal and they talk about how maybe it bit something
(19:24):
else and didn't have all the venom that it normally would have had. That was interesting.
That was really interesting to me. I've never heard that said before. No adult rattlers
won't inject as much venom as say the babies who don't quite know how to control it. They'll
save their venom for the prey you know when they're defending themselves. Maybe it was
that. I mean why not just say it wasn't really a rattlesnake. It was a non-venomous snake
(19:49):
that bit her. I don't know. That was a weird scene. That's what I'm saying is like they
go through links to explain things like that that seem very subtle and then we don't get
a lot of explanation later for things that are like okay I actually do want to know about
this part. I don't really care that much about the snake part but we're going to explain
the snake part a little bit more. We should. It's an animal attack. I guess. That's me.
(20:14):
I'm a little more interested in that than others. I know. So what are we going to argue
over? I don't know if this is an argument but I like the ending. I don't think it was
done well but I like the overall concept of the ending where we don't really know if
he was truly going crazy or not. I like ambiguity. I like that the guilt overtook him in a sense
(20:37):
to where he was in so much turmoil but when he gets hit by the truck and we see him again
he is so perfectly okay other than one little line dripping out of his mouth and I'm like
that makes no physical sense at all. It totally ruined the whole idea of the ending for me
because I saw him and I was like that man could stand up. It's low budget. That's one. You can't
(20:59):
have the mingle body. Did we? I mean is it ambiguous? I took it as like yeah he totally
lost his mind. He did but I mean just the inner part of me and like the American Gothic critic in me
really wants there to be that minute possibility that she is a succulence. Wouldn't that be great
if she like just laughed evilly or morphed the way she did right there? Exactly. That would be so
(21:21):
cool. Exactly. But she did have a little bit of that evil character come out in the cave right?
She was like you've been talking to Joey haven't you? So it does seem like she's kind of the evil...
Yeah but he's imagining that right? I don't know. I don't know. I think that was real.
I've I questioned that one. I question who she is because of the narrative perception I'm getting
(21:48):
of her through the main narrative. What was the color saturation like there? I think it was dark.
I think it was dark because of the cave but I think the actual colors were brighter.
Dare we look it up? Dare we look it up. That's a good point. But Joey was nowhere to be found
in that scene. Are we only going off of color? Are we going off of scenes where Joey is present?
(22:11):
That's fair because Joey's not there. See it shouldn't be this hard to figure this stuff out.
Don't talk about something else while I'm looking. So did she ever even have a tattoo?
I don't think so. I feel like that was a moment where he was victimizing her to justify himself.
It was a pretty ugly tattoo for being honest. Yeah it was definitely doodled on with kind of markers
(22:33):
and that was only just for me. I also thought it was fake because you know I hope she wasn't in an
abusive relationship and if she was though there would be more signs of abuse I feel like than
that single mark. So I feel like that contributed to his hallucination of it. All right so here is
the scene. I just pulled it up. It's hard to tell because it's in the cave. I don't think that's
(22:55):
brought. It doesn't look like the high saturation though does it? There it does. Yeah but he's
outside of the cave now. I tell you what I'm gonna have to get my copy and watch it in my
deaf and see what happens. That is interesting and maybe it's deliberately ambiguous for that reason
too. Maybe Penny's a genius and we're just not picking up on it. I think it's brilliantly directed
(23:19):
way over use of the shaky cam that gets a little old. Otherwise there's some wonderful camera angles
and camera movement in this thing. I think I'm so used to the office and what we do in the shadows
to where I am so used to the shaky camera now. Yeah we definitely debate on that because
(23:40):
I'm just y'all stop shaky cam just it's too much killing me. I do see what you're saying the more
shows and media are coming out with shaky cam scenes. It's like a documentary. Yeah that we almost
become immune to the overuse of it. Not me. I have to drama me half the time when I watch a film.
(24:00):
Let's move to Owl's Talons. I've already been a little vicious but I want to hear Mackenzie be
vicious. What do you want to rip apart in this film? So Owl's Talons is where we do rip our
Talons into a certain aspect or another. I truly did try to find elements of this film that are
effective and that I liked. I like some of the dialogue and music. I like the setting and I
(24:23):
really like the overall plot but the flashback scenes of the hotel room especially the first one
is just really really hard for me to watch. The above two shot on the bed is just not effective
and the lighting is very poor. The colors in the room are great but the lighting is very poor.
(24:45):
The entire scene is just very like childish home movie to me and the comforter with all the little
hearts and I was just like no. What kind of motel is this? It looks like a child's room right and
that was disturbing to me. I just didn't like how it was set up. I didn't like how it was shot.
Well did you notice there's stuffed animals on the headboard and stuff too? Yes. And I was just like
(25:05):
is this a hotel or is it her apartment? I mean I'll be honest I genuinely thought it was her
place. I did too. Just a really crappy apartment. Well she's 18 air quote and where is she? I mean
we never get that answer. Right so I mean she could be I hey this girl is not listening to this
podcast I'm sure but I knew a friend in high school who would watch Disney Channel who had all the
(25:30):
stuffed animals who had the heartbed spread and we were 17 18 years old so maybe they're just
thinking that that could be a feasible thing for an 18 year old girl at this time. I don't buy it. I
hear her refer to as a low lead a type and a lot of criticism and maybe it's that maybe they're just
trying to push that robbing of the cradle aspect of it. Maybe but she doesn't give off that persona
(25:52):
at all in her actions. I also feel like there was maybe a little too much focus on her promiscuity
in some ways more so than we needed is what I mean so the entirety of the scene in the motel
room I just really did not like because of where the focus was a lot of the times it's all the
elements working together I felt icky watching it and like she's super undressed for a super long
(26:16):
time and I just felt like it wasn't necessary. That's another way we differentiate for part of it right
is she's wearing like a negligee or something and then suddenly she's wearing like a tank top and jeans
and I get that like it's probably part of his hallucination or something but still just
it's weird because even with the the switching of the saturation and the color once she gets stabbed
in the leg right she just wears jeans the rest of that time so weird almost like it wasn't well
(26:42):
planned. Anything you want to rip into Reagan? I would say that I was honestly sitting here thinking
how could we make this sound more intelligent and give it more credit than it may deserve.
What if just hear me out what if it was supposed to be this shift from the male gaze into the female
(27:08):
gaze and we see her being more of this developed character by the end and she's holding more of
this power at the end but throughout the majority of the film she is viewed that promiscuous way
she's in dress she looks kind of the dumb blonde stereotype but then toward the end I don't really
(27:28):
feel like she portrays this persona anymore. That's fair. She definitely changes for sure.
And she she's smart the way she says you know give the gun to Joey let him shoot me. Right and I
was really there. I would never have thought of that I'm sure. And we were talking about before
we started recording how the heck she knows he's talking to Joey of all people but still to figure
that out and to make that move that was a clever move. It seems like she gets into his psyche a
(27:53):
little bit. Yeah starts messing with his head. And she ends up having more power than Joey who is in
his psyche. It's okay to read Reagan you got me contemplating. The guy who's credited as meth
maker I never got that was a meth lab until I saw that but I mean it makes sense. He also just
terrible terrible actor just the way he comes look with a gun that we cut that grimace on his face
(28:16):
and then dude just clocks him with a shovel and he's like oh help me. I don't know it's just such
uneven characterization there. Oh one thing that bothered me why was there just a convenient cave
located in the middle of nowhere. It was a mine. Oh it was a mine. Yeah even still you know he goes
to look for Joey and he's in the cave. Whoa that's so shocking. It is convenient. You know like it's
(28:42):
kind of like come on. I even considered this RV like the meth house if it was some sort of hallucinogenic
oasis of some sort like did he hallucinate this whole narrative plot to try and come to terms with
his guilt. Like is this his guilt trip. And then they use props in it and certain things but I'm
(29:03):
like you know that can of dust or whatever it is that she throws could just be sand but he sees it as
it's a fair point. That's true. I don't know. I mean I think he probably actually does clock
the meth man on the head but all the other stuff could be something he imagined. I mean that clothes
line was dangerous. That scene was hard for me to watch. That was a hard scene for me. Yeah those
(29:31):
kind of scenes can work really well you know hiding and reappearing in different places and the wind
blowing it in the shadows but it did not work well here. Well like in an example of where it did
work extremely well was I know what you did last summer with the tires and the alley. That was
spectacular. Absolutely. But this clothesline scene just not good. Not good. Not good. Not great.
(29:56):
So the next segments will probably make more sense in some of the other films we do. You know
there's always you're watching one of those bad B movies from the 80s or something and you go oh
my gosh is that you know it's somebody who became famous at some point. This one yeah Catherine
Heigl we should probably mention had been cast and was was it about to start filming or had already
been filming Grey's Anatomy. It was pre Grey's Anatomy so nobody knew her as Izzy at this point
(30:23):
but even one day she couldn't shoot because they were doing photo promotional stuff for Grey's Anatomy
so it's pre Grey's for Catherine Heigl. She wouldn't have been as known. As a matter of fact
that was one of the reasons Grillo and Penny said they were making on her star power. They were
assuming this was going to be a big hit and she was going to become famous and then Tom Sizemore
of course has his share of issues with substance abuse and the law so that infamy if nothing else
(30:49):
he's a pretty well-known actor but the infamy if nothing else might carry it as well. I mean
they're right about Catherine Heigl at least. Yeah I like Catherine Heigl as an actress and
while her character is a bit cheesy here in this film I feel like she does a good job.
With what she's given absolutely. Yeah except for when she gets bit by the snake.
(31:11):
Except for that. Yeah it was over it was a bit over the top. Even the greatest
have some overacting at some points I suppose. Then similarly going into most hated character
coming in from real lids. That's right we were talking about these segments and I'm like well
I know we're gonna have to bring most hated character because that's McKenzie's favorite segment.
I love characterization. I love to hate a character. I love a good villain and in this one
(31:36):
it really wasn't a contest for me. We have so few characters but it was Grant. He gets to me a lot.
One with his indecisiveness right as a person. He can't decide what to do at any point in time
but also just the way like he is so okay with killing someone but he he acts like he's not in
his words but all of his actions he's so okay. He's not freaking out. He's like we gotta kill Joey.
(32:01):
We gotta kill Joey. Slammed a hand in the trunk that's just rude you know and and then he is okay
with killing her and it's interesting because he's struggling with this guilt the whole time but he
seems okay with his evil actions as well. I just don't like it. I think it is uneven again because
I mean there's that moment where he's got Joey in the in the mind and he rears back to hitting
(32:26):
with the shovel or whatever and he like freezes. He can't do it so he has those hesitations but
then at the very beginning he's like yeah they're talking about doing their taxes and how she needs
to report her income so she can retire and there's supposed to be a dead man in the trunk. They're
going to bury in the desert. That's awfully casual. I agree it's gotta be Grant right. I know the
blow to the head caused most of what caused him to be the aggressor I suppose. I think is that
(32:50):
what the film suggests he gets hit in the head with with their wine bottle by Joey but they just
annoys me all the way around and also he's the worst actor ever. Yeah Grant shocker and I think that
yeah it's some pretty bad acting and I have not seen this bad of acting in quite a while.
(33:11):
You didn't watch zombie strippers with us. No I did not. No I have to go back and look at that now
but I would say that Grant played too big of a role to then fall this flat on his face
and I had a really hard time believing that the hit to the head caused him to be this way
(33:32):
especially when Heigl's character is saying you're the one that bashed the window and you did all
these things. I still couldn't make that connection as to his motive for that. So I have a bit more
of a theory. I think partially it's the blow to the head but also the guilt for cheating on his
life because I mean you get the sense this is the first time he's done it. Maybe his wife's a little
(33:53):
overbearing you know she says like you know what Bryn does like but I do think he's because he's
so worried about losing his daughter right. I think some of that because if you say well I was
seduced by a succubus then who could fault you. You got to forgive your husband if that happened
because it's magic right. Absolutely. I see it as definitely a big lotus trope drink of the lotus
and you'll be enraptured and there's nothing you can do about it to try and get out of the guilt
(34:17):
that you've made the decision. Honestly I think you're changing my mind a little bit because I think
the clue of him petting the dog and having this almost nice guy depiction of himself that he doesn't
want to be the way he is but yet he is doing all of these crazy things that just seem in conflict to
I guess how he wants to be. I don't know. He I think what just makes it fall apart for me is his
(34:44):
hesitation is his casualness because if we had a little bit more emotion from him then I would be
sold on the guilt aspect. But that would require acting. That would require acting exactly.
So now it is time for our WTF moment. Yet another imported from real lit.
What can I say they do things well. Pretty sharp people there. I hear they got a good producer too.
(35:09):
Yeah I've heard. We should use her. Who wants to start. Okay for me this is definitely when she
throws chalk or Reagan is probably right the baby powder or whatever. Yeah whatever she throws.
We don't know what meth looks like. We're such goody too. I was like what is that. Oh really
that's a bad thing. We don't know what meth looks like. And I mean she literally directly throws
(35:33):
this substance at his chest not at his eyes at all and then he starts screaming about his eyes.
It gets on his chin. Yes it's so much on his chin. I'm not a director so I don't know.
I'm not trying to pretend like I can make that decision. I just feel like they could have reached
(35:54):
out that scene to make it a little bit more connecting to what they wanted to show versus
what actually happened physically. Slow budget. They could afford more meth. Oh no.
You know for me and I'm kind of with you here. I'm generally impotervable when it comes to horror
films. The jump scare that got me though is the first time we see Marissa's face just kind of like
(36:17):
meltdown and it's not even the face. It's that the musical stinger that hits you at the same time
and it's just cranked up. It's so lazy to get a jump scare and like that but I just I did not know
what to expect out of this film. I didn't know anything about it so I didn't know if it was horror.
Was it not? At that point I was expecting the jump scares so it didn't get me but you got me
(36:40):
on that first one Penny. I'll give you that one. Also when Joey is attempting to toss the knife he's
like throwing it to himself when he's trying to convince Grant to kill him. And he is acting like
he's like the super cool professional knife thrower and it's so not and I just wanted to cringe so
hard in that moment. I was like stop please do this to yourself because he was just like tossing
(37:05):
it up violently and then just grabbing it by the hill and almost the blade very violently. It was
very strange. And when he's like he's literally giving Joey's dialogue too. Let me see like when
Marissa sees him so he's he'll say something and he'll turn and walk to the other side and turn back.
It's exactly we had the actors from London a couple weeks ago right and sometimes they'll play
(37:25):
the same character on screen. They do this and they do it beautifully to comedic effect.
As far as I know this wasn't supposed to be a comedy though. That was so funny to me at the
end when they're standing on the side of the road and he'll say something and then he'll walk back
over to the other side. Just stop. I feel like the entire film was a WTF moment for me. I agreed I
(37:48):
was afraid that might be WTF moment. It was the film. Well we have the Alice Perch next and this
is a spot where when we're watching some of these less than stellar films perhaps we find some moments
just out of the blue that maybe makes a revelation or something well done, something intelligent,
something we can actually talk about and get a little depth with. I don't know do we have a
(38:12):
place to perch on this one? I mean I really do love this plot arc idea with the uncertainty and
hallucinations. We don't really know what reality is at the end of it and I like that kind of ambiguity
like mentioned earlier. They did well in leaving the viewer uncertain. However I do think that his
guilt is what spiraled this entire chain of events or the hallucinations. I feel like we're almost
(38:38):
reading our perch into it. That may be. I agree with that uncertainty as well. I like that fact
but again I think it's just because nobody knows what to think when they watch this film. I mean
I'd never seen a trailer or a clip from it. I didn't know if it was horror, was it thriller,
was it action, was it could be romance. I don't know but I didn't know what to expect and therefore
(39:01):
I think you really are confused. Is she an actual succubus? Is this just something going on in his
damaged mind? So I thought that was effective but it's more of a long the fact that like this never
got a trailer and we all kind of knew what was going on or what to expect out of the genre more
than anything else. So don't give it too much credit. I try, I try. Don't give it too much credit. I
was over here thinking he was the modern-day Hamlet. Do you see any redeeming qualities or any?
(39:28):
You know I will say this film had an unfair advantage or disadvantage rather because I approached
my movie watching experience knowing it was bad and I think that was unfair to this film. I think
that I should have gone in without knowing anything to then be able to say something that was not
(39:52):
biased today. That's why I'm trying to say he's the modern-day Hamlet because we see the indecision,
we see the hesitancy, the murder, some some parallels going on. Something like a ghost.
Something like a ghost. You know I actually, this is kind of random but there was a trivia
(40:13):
question yesterday on which character is the most like reused or reimagined ever. Hamlet was an option
and that was my guess because I was like Hamlet is Simba in the Lion game. You know Hamlet just
fits so many different kind of archetypes in a way but the answer was Dracula. Just putting that
out there. I could see that too. Yeah so kind of random tidbit but going off Hamlet like I see how
(40:37):
you can see Hamlet in so many different characters. I will concede, Catherine Heigle's performance is
very well done. The woman can act. Tom's eyes more wowed me. Aside from that I don't know. I just
don't know what else I can positively say and I, I mean y'all listen to Shelf Criticism, I try to
(40:58):
find a positive to say about everything and I have here the direction, the acting but as far as a
perch, something where you can go hey let's let's do a close read like our segment on Real Liter.
Let's talk about something intelligent. You pulled the male gaze into it which I'm impressed by but
I got nothing. It's a film. So should you give a hoot? Yes what we are going to do we have to
(41:23):
rank this thing right? We have to give our honest opinions here. So we are going to give a parliamentary
decree. How many gavils? So since we I'm assuming we'll be doing this again at some point we will
give the idea of the gavils here. So one gavil is outvoted. Leave it to the archives. Two gavils
(41:44):
is a split decision approach with caution. Three gavils a clear majority worth considering.
Four gavils unanimously enjoyable and five gavils an Alza Palace approved masterpiece.
Spoiler word this one's not getting five for many of us. I gave this film two gavils split
(42:05):
decision approach with caution because for one it's not the worst film I've ever seen but also
it's the lowest grossing film of all time. You've got to watch it. I mean just to watch it and see.
So you did. Yeah just to say you did. So that's why I gave it a two instead of a one.
I had one gavil and as I was waiting on you two to get here I watched it again
(42:29):
and paid a little bit closer attention and that's when I saw some of the directorial flourishes.
Again was reminded of just how good Heigl is in this that bumped it up. I'm going to give it to
Gorillaz were any worse. I would that would just not get right back down to one but
I will say so I also gave it two gavils and Gorillaz performance peaked my interest in the
(42:53):
fact that it was so bad but it was also entertaining. So Heigl still made me think of Izzy a little
bit toward the end especially when we kind of removed that dumb blonde persona at the end.
So I enjoyed that and overall I was engaged the whole film and I had questions and I was
(43:13):
entertained so that's all you can ask for to get two gavils. You're right well said. Well there you go.
You have now excoriated and slightly praised the lowest grossing domestic box office of all time
and if you are so inclined perhaps you'll go out tomorrow and buy the 4k edition. Oh goodness
you can use our discount code. Shout out. Owls of palace productions are not monetized yet
(43:40):
anyway but then if you're past some buys Isaac road one time. I did want to go.
You know I've done some film tourism seeing the house exactly the house but the place where
Scream was filmed some of those places we've been to see the birds you know Bodega Bay where that was filmed.
I should just next time I go out to California. Yes because I'm always right there in the middle
(44:02):
of nowhere in the Mojave Desert so why not. Yeah why not. Drive to Isaac road just for the heck of it.
How would you compare it to Joshua tree. I don't know. I've never been to either.
Are they both in California. Yes they just seem like the same terrain. It probably is.
Yeah I don't know. I don't know enough about that. Maybe some of our listeners can.
(44:22):
You too's album. I like that Joshua tree album. I do like you too. We have a lot to do. We have
places to visit and we have recipes to make. Yes we do. Next episode of real lit. We're doing
like water for chocolates. Como agua para chocolate. I'm very excited. I have impressive.
There are recipes throughout the book so super interesting. When you watch the film you're
(44:47):
going to get hungry. I can promise. I'll eat chocolate anytime anyway. Absolutely we're
recording that in just a few days. Yep so look out for another episode from real lit but also
shelf criticism. Shelf criticism is on hiatus. Season's over. I know I said I was going to do one more
but I get really busy. I mentioned those actors in town. They kept me busy running around a little
(45:10):
bit taking care of them and then get behind having to crave. Keep talking about this right.
Like they expect us to do our day job and it's so frustrating but yeah so I know twice now I put
off the movie confidence. It will be back at some point. If everything goes the way that I plan then
really just a few days from now probably early next week I'll begin with season two and shelf
(45:32):
christmases. By the way I do not like the holiday of Christmas particularly so everyone on my shelf
I did not buy for Christmas films but yeah got elf the holiday polar express Christmas vacation
which I do like. Classic and then we want to go ahead and talk about our December.
(45:53):
We're doing a little bit of a controversial Christmas. No there's no controversy. It is the
greatest Christmas movie I've ever made. We're doing die hard the film and there is some debate on
whether it's Christmas or not. It's Christmas. There's also a novella 48 minutes right so we'll
be reading that novella talking about that adaptation. That will be fun. And we'll be back
(46:16):
then huh we'll con fab and see when parliament after dark meets again. Absolutely. See what we're
going to do. There are plenty of good options out there so we don't have official websites or email
addresses or anything for this podcast but we do for the others. You want to tell them about real
lit? So if you have not already liked and joined us we would love for you to follow us on social
(46:39):
media at real lit podcast that's R E E L as in a film reel so that's real lit podcast. You can
find us on Facebook and Instagram or you can find us on our website reallitpodcast.com so just go
give us a subscribe when you can. And email us. Email us. I love letters and give us an email at
(47:01):
reallit at reallitpodcast.com. We want your letters. Yeah the same is true for shelf criticism.
Shelf criticism. You can email me at Stephen at shelf criticism that's S T E P H E N. Email us
about those podcasts or tell us what really horrible midnight movie you want us to cover.
Now give us your take on Zizek Road. Yeah I want to hear about that too. Have you actually seen it?
(47:23):
Did you love it? Are you buying the 4k tomorrow? Am I the only weirdo? I think you're the only
weirdo. I'm a completionist. It's what can I say? Look there DVDs on the shelf here too. I like the
commitment. I'm gonna own it. Thank you so much Reagan. Happy to join today thank you all for
having me. You're here with us. We're gonna have you back. I hope so. I hope you do. And as a guest
(47:46):
on shelf criticism real lit I'm sure at some point as well. Absolutely. I don't like that.
Thank you for listening. Parliament is no longer in city.
(48:21):
Killed it.
Popular Podcasts
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Bobby Bones Show
Listen to 'The Bobby Bones Show' by downloading the daily full replay.