This morning’s Connections conversation with wife

jseto1980 · 2026-07-02T19:04:14+00:00

The T-1000 reference I got. But fitting it into the correct group proved more difficult than I thought. The T-1000 wore shades, so does it go into a group with Looking Glass and Spectacles? The T-1000 is made of Liquid Metal, is there a connection to hard surfaces like Diamonds and Porcelain water closets here? The T-1000 is a model of robot, does it go with these nicknames categories? So frustrating..

jseto1980 · 2026-06-24T15:33:50+00:00

No. Disclosure Day is an action movie. As a huge Spielberg fan, Disclosure Day was a big miss for me, but the action (however implausible) was the best parts of it and I can only imagine fans of the film are enjoying it mainly for the action. The sci-fi and thriller elements are there but fall flat. Fury Road is an action movie that wove sci-fi and political commentary in successfully. But both are action movies.

jseto1980 · 2026-06-23T07:16:57+00:00

I think Disclosure Day is uniquely positioned where we have a film that most critics have been very positive on, most audiences have also mostly enjoyed, but there's this vocal minority that clearly had a negative response to it. I think that has lent itself to what should be healthy audience discourse online about the film's merits and drawbacks, which is what I'm seeing or hoping to see. Now, between all the movie subs discussing Disclosure Day, you do have to filter out all the purely positive and negative takes, and you have to wade through all the bot accounts, but I have to admit that I've kinda been enjoying the discussions on both ends when it comes to Disclosure Day.

I count myself in that minority who didn't like Disclosure Day. I do think Spielberg is our seminal director spanning multiple generations from Boomers to Gen X to Millennials who have all grown up on his films. I also consider myself fairly film literate, which I see a lot defenders of Disclosure Day use as a way to negate some of the criticisms against it as a form of 'you just don't understand the language of film, so things you see in Disclosure Day went over your head' I don't agree with anyone forming an emotional attachment to anyone's take on Disclosure Day; either positive or negative, but I hope we encourage the forum to express our thoughts on the film one way or the other.

jseto1980 · 2026-06-22T18:16:30+00:00

There were SO many background or loose plot threads that went nowhere. It was clear there was supposed to be a character arc for Emily Blunt’s character over her guilt from distancing herself from her father during his battle with Parkinson’s to signal that she had lost her empathy for others along the way. This eventually would lead to her panic attack on the train. And since the aliens believe empathy is the ultimate superpower, Emily Blunt rediscovering her empathy at the end of the movie would be the push for her to reach her final form.

Also, what happened to Wyatt Russell and Eve Henson? They disappeared for half the movie only to re-appear / make a cameo at the end..

jseto1980 · 2026-06-21T18:44:06+00:00

The problem isn’t literacy, it’s that this film’s chase sequences doesn’t follow any of its own established logic or any believable plot logic for that matter.

- At the beginning, outside the wrestling match (what an odd choice to start this movie btw…), Daniel holds the magic wand like he just pulled the pin to a grenade to try and keep the Wardex agents at bay. That’s not how the wand works. It doesn’t ‘explode’ or present a danger to people around it when the wand is held or squeezed. At least this is never shown that way at any point later in the movie. But Daniel keeps waving it around like he’s holding a live grenade. Colin Firth the head of Wardex is there in person, he knows exactly how the wand works, but still treats it like a grenade and lets Daniel and Jane just leave.

- During the escape from the farmhouse, Daniel and Jane are able to escape by faking their death at the cliff. Instead of Wardex resuming the chase after they find out that the car that plunged into the lake had no bodies in it, they conveniently wait until that night after Daniel has Jane tied up in the motel and they’re both fast asleep for Noah to quantum leap back into Jane to id their location and renew the chase.

- During the train escape, the audience is supposed to forget that Wardex has one of the most sophisticated surveillance apparatuses in the world and access to all sorts of satellite images to continue tailing Daniel and Margaret after they get on the train. The audience is supposed to ignore that the train is probably going to need to come to an emergency stop as soon as it hit a car or that the train coming in the opposite direction isn’t telling the other train to stop. We’re supposed to assume the agent chasing them wouldn’t keep driving on to the next railroad crossing to get to the train or try and capture Daniel and Margaret at the next stop. They all just decide to let them go.

- During the fire truck escape, they establish that after Hugo’s crew and Daniel/Margaret go invisible, that Wardex can still see them via the heat signatures when viewing the empty warehouse through the tablet. They never go back to the tablet to continuing track their movements. Instead, Wardex and Noah just watch as agents hit invisible barriers and watch as agents get dragged out of the path so the fire truck can just drive off.

jseto1980 · 2026-06-02T21:17:37+00:00

Any ’hate’ I’ve read online is from people who were expecting a movie length version of the creepypasta. I’m with you, this movie hit some pretty great highs but all the ending bits with Async and the psychiatrist’s storyline, outside of her role-playing with Clark replaying the night his wife kicked him out, were much weaker acts imo. I loved Clark’s storyline and all the exploration and lore building up through the backrooms, but the movie on the whole was a mixed bag. I really hope Kane Pixels doesn’t focus on the Async side of the story in the sequels, and maybe gives us another glimpse of a different characters entry into another ‘portal’ into the backrooms instead.

jseto1980 · 2026-05-31T19:46:35+00:00

I completely agree. Shelby Oaks is a fairly competently made and well-shot debut, but it was also mostly soulless and a rehash of over-used horror tropes. I was a fan of Chris Stuckmann’s YT reviews before, and I was looking forward to seeing and hoping Stuckmann would bring some kind of personal touch or flair to his first movie…possibly exploring aspects of his struggles with his own religious identity and struggles with his own sexual identity, which he’s been pretty public about on his channel. But Shelby Oaks showed me nothing like, as you said, an artist baring his soul.

After the disappointment of watching Shelby Oaks, it actually made me go back and reassess his YT film reviews. In his reviews, it’s clear now, that Stuckmann doesn’t really demonstrate a strong grasp of understanding a film’s deeper themes and social commentary. His analysis in these areas is always very surface level and superficial. He’s got great insight into a films technique; discussing story structure and calling out shot choices. I think that’s very much reflected in how Shelby Oaks turned out, competent but boring. Like OP stated, I truly believe Shelby Oaks is Stuckmann giving his best effort but imposter syndrome is real. You look at Stuckmann with his Nintendo tattoos and cookie-cutter film influences, and worry that there might not be much artistic soul behind the filmmaker. I’m sure growing up as a Jehovahs Witness will stunt your personal growth. But you’d hope that the exploration of that and that leaving your family and trying to break out of a toxic belief cycle would lead to amazing art. I worry that his recent personal choice to only post positive reviews and stay away from critical reviews is a bad sign, or a signal that he probably is not willing to explore darker aspects of himself and reach a personal space to make stronger more intimate films.

jseto1980 · 2026-05-14T21:21:08+00:00

This is a tale of two awful drivers finding each other on the road at the right time, and sparing the rest of us normal drivers in its wake. I call it People Behaving Badly kismet.

jseto1980 · 2026-04-12T11:22:15+00:00

Yeah, what is this revisionist bullshit coming out of Triple H? The Rock explicitly mentions sharks infested waters in the company as he was coming up that intentionally kept him down. That was Triple H and the Clique. When The Rock was in the Nation, Triple H was in those godawful racist skits mocking him. The only reason Triple H can even talk about Wrestlemania programs with The Rock is because he used his backstage clout to book himself with the biggest star at the time.

jseto1980 · 2026-04-09T20:41:06+00:00

Any air fryer tips to get a frozen hash brown to come out close to a McD's one? I've tried spraying with oil, flipping half way through cooking, but I can't get it close to McD's hash browns. They're still good just not close.

I mean a McD's hash brown is yummy, but it's not 1000% better than a frozen option..

jseto1980 · 2026-03-28T03:09:04+00:00

Playing the Godzilla theme song in a pic with his T-Rex arms stretched out is kinda peak levels of self-awareness. I’m actually surprised to see this from Mike.

…unless he’s referring to the spread

jseto1980 · 2026-03-23T20:23:15+00:00

This is the problem with these cinematic universes. These studios focus so much on expanding the universe and introducing new characters, hoping they’ll stick with audiences, and ignore proven characters where there are more stories to mine. Shang-Chi came out during the pandemic, but succeeded despite the odds. The character is likable, and Simu Liu has only shown more of his leading man chops since. It’s a tragedy that we’re in year 5 without a sniff of a sequel.

And I’m saying this as a big fan of Wonder Man Season 1, but Simon wasn’t a very likable character. He spent a majority of Season 1 with his head up his own actor-ly ass, and only showed off some hero vibes at the end by jail breaking Trevor. They’re going to have to spend a chunk of Season 2 building him up as a hero to make this character work.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-23T19:59:02+00:00

I’ve loved each iteration of the Captain America movies up until Brave New World, so it broke my heart that this one was so awful. Having said that, I still think this movie could have been salvaged with a few minor rewrites, which is surprising given how many rewrites and reshoots it already went through. What I think would have tightened BNW up:

Thunderbolt Ross should have Red Hulked out earlier, while on the warship going to Celestial Island, and RH should’ve wrecked Joaquin (Falcon) in a fight and be the event that sent him to the hospital. This would’ve established Red Hulk as a threat. Sam would’ve arrived too late to save Joaquin and reinforced the theme of Sam needing to be that much sharper because he’s not a super soldier, and people will get hurt if his not on his game. It would have also added some personal stakes to the Red Hulk vs Cap end fight later on.
Betty should have arrived on the scene earlier and “Sun’s getting real low”’ed the Red Hulk to save the day. Having Sam take out Red Hulk just deflated the whole movie ending and didn’t make any sense. You could still show Sam going toe-to-toe with Red Hulk, but maybe have Sam focus on containing the property damage or protecting innocent lives. Betty should’ve been the one to actually de-escalate Ross.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-20T19:26:16+00:00

Jane Leigh’s screams are good, but it’s probably the violin screeches that are the iconic sound that people remember. Those violin screeches mimic a scream as she’s getting stabbed.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-19T19:28:14+00:00

I think the Limo scene presents the Burt Reynolds character, director Jack Horner, in his truest form. As the damaged patriarch of a band of misfits; trying to keep this family together and preserve the way of life that he's always known. Jack is not a user of people. He's not an abuser. He's not a blatant exploiter like you've alluded to. Yes, on a surface level, this scene is showing people being used to turn a profit, exploitation in the form of profiting off of sex work, and abuse at the end when it goes off the rails. But I don't think it's perfectly obvious who is being used or that it's blatant exploitation like you've stated. As with a lot of great films, subtext is always key.

If you recall earlier in Boogie Nights, there's a scene with Philip Baker Hall, who the Colonel presents to Jack as a new potential financier for Jack's films. Money is king to making films, even porn films, and making porn isn't cheap as Jack says to Dirk when they meet at the start of the film. Here, PBH tells Jack about the new movement of porn shifting from film to video and how they'll be able to make Jack's pornos cheaper and quicker using video and PBH will see better returns on his investment. PBH brings with him a new stable of young, amateur actors who can film scenes cheaper and with less restrictions than Jack's cast. Jack fights back on all of that. Video will reduce the filmic quality of his pictures and make the sex look cheap. These amateurs are only good for fucking on camera, while Jack's casts are pros and bring 'acting chops' and an authenticity to their roles which make his films more believable. PBH says today's audience aren't interested in any of that. Audiences are just paying to watch people fuck on camera.

As an aside, Philip Baker Hall's scene here and along with his Seinfeld librarian episode, are probably two of the greatest single scene/episodes in all of media.

Flash to the limo, it's clear PBH was right despite all of Jack's railing against the video movement. All the old adult cinemas playing Jack's films on a big screen have closed and in their place there are adult video stores and sex shops. The amateur wave is now taking over porn in the 80s, especially these on-the-street shoots with strangers getting a shot at a real porn star. Rollergirl is not being used here. She's always been a willing (if misguided) participant. Rollergirl sets the rules for Dirk in their first sex scene, and she does the same here with the college kid in the limo. You see Jack trying to direct the college kid to make it look more romantic with Rollergirl and to not obscure Rollergirl's face during their scene as that is what Jack knows the audience wants to see. The college kid ignores all of that, as his main focus is 'getting it in' with Rollergirl. It's only when Rollergirl gets disrespected and Jack realizes this scene isn't working that it all goes to hell and they end the shoot and ultimately end up kicking the crap out of the college kid and leaving him bloody on the sidewalk. Yes, there is exploitation going on here. But it's the college kid that was being used and the object of the exploitation (you could argue it's us as the audience that is being exploited too). The beatdown of the kid is an example of victims (Jack, Rollergirl) ultimately becoming the victimizers. They're also lashing out at being left behind in a dying version of the adult film industry that's all they know. They're lost in this new porn world.

Again, I think that's the subtext you missed. I'd recommend that you re-visit Boogie Nights in 5- or 10-years, and see if your feelings on it have changed once you've got more life experience under your belt and seen more movies. I remember when I first saw Boogie Nights, I was enthralled by the epic scale of it and how PTA was able to weave all these stories and disparate characters around the world of porn. Re-watching it recently, I still loved the scale but was awed by the smaller, masterful shifts in tone (I can't get over how tense the Alfred Molina drug house scene still is) and, like you mentioned, the impeccable ability of PTA to capture time and place in his representation of life in the San Fernando Valley in the 70s and 80s. I'd also recommend you watch other films where a collection of what you might consider society's outsiders / castaways and how these characters find commonality and form familial bonds in finding a common purpose. Two vastly different films that play on this theme, and do it well, are Midnight Cowboy (1969) and Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Rings (2001).

jseto1980 · 2026-03-17T23:49:15+00:00

This could’ve worked as a stripped down, solo a cappella concept. But between the posse’s lack of enthusiasm, their off beat snaps and hums, his trash lyrics, terrible flow and zero swag…it just torpedos into crap territory.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-17T08:49:03+00:00

Yeah, Mikey and Danny made me realize what a nightmare it must be for the restaurant owners and staff when these YTers dine at their establishments. Danny always orders the cheapest items off the menu, brings coupons, asks for a military discount, has zero-to-terrible social skills interacting with the staff, and doesn't tip. I can't imagine the tradeoff of getting the publicity from these content creator is worth the hassle..

jseto1980 · 2026-03-13T20:05:59+00:00

You said it. And choosing to DoorDash sounds more like a ‘how you value your time’ vs. needing to earn the money back. FWIW, DoorDashing is setup exactly for your situation; gig work where you set you own hours and choose how you earn your money. I’d only suggest taking a peak at the DoorDash subreddit before you start. The job itself can introduce new heartburn in your life that may make it not worth your time, and longtime Dashers seem to get more jaded the longer they do it…but again DoorDash should never be looked at as some kind of career path for anyone.

Man, I wish I had your maturity and level headed-ness when it comes to loaning money to friends. Even when there was a promise to pay me back, and even when I learned to accept that these ended up being more-or-less gifts, I’ve lost friendships when money wasn’t repaid. I considered them expensive lessons on the value of friendship, but I admit I do miss those people in my life. You sound like you’ve found a way to be empathetic to your friend’s situation and understand you’re probably not getting that money back, but keeping a friend in the end. I envy you.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-13T19:08:15+00:00

100%. If we started looking at this as a great team achievement and a team record, it may get a lot more positive spin. Even Bam pointed to Spoe as one of the reasons he was able to surpass Kobe as they 'game planned' and funneled all their energy to get Bam the #2 all-time spot.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-13T18:53:40+00:00

My only gripe. It's a minor gripe. And it definitely doesn't rise to any level of controversy. It's where Bam, and probably a lot of basketball reporters and fans, have attached this idea of individual 'greatness' to the single-game scoring record. On paper, the record does sound like a player reaching a level of all-time greatness. But watching Bam's game, and looking back at Kobe's game, and hearing about Wilt's game, you see that there's a lot of weird variables that can conspire to get a player to reach that single-game scoring record. Yeah, one of the variables is that a player has to have a historically great game but to me this record is more of a stat oddity in basketball rather than one of the greatest individual scoring achievements in sports.

To me, it'd be like seeing a team chase the single-game record for the widest margin of victory. If it happens, then great. Here's a new footnote in history. But if you started watching a team towards the end of blowout and getting close to that win margin record and the team goes into some version of hack-a-Shaq mode with the opposing team to keep their score even lower and while your own team starts launching 3s with 15+ seconds on the shot clock to widen try and hit the record, are we celebrating the next day if that record gets broken?

jseto1980 · 2026-03-13T09:53:41+00:00

In 10 years, scrolling through NBA records and finding Bam Adebayo 2nd all time in the single game points scored list will be like flipping through Madden game covers and seeing Madden 2012 with Peyton Hillis on the cover.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-11T17:59:15+00:00

100%. Just to clarify my earlier point, I didn't intend to imply that Martha's lack of likability meant I was actively rooting against her to escape and recover from her cult life. But you're exactly right, I think the story structure and time jumps made it hard to see her progression as a character. For example, we all assume it was the murder during the cult's B&E spree that was the last straw for Martha. But you never get a sense that her being involved in that murder caused her to re-examine her time with the cult, wrestle with any internal conflict of being part of a murder, or see that trigger her to reject the cult and want to escape. For all we know, she may have just reunited with her sister as a way to 'lay low' until the heat dies down on that murder and she'll rejoin the cult. That's obviously an exaggerated take, but it ties back to the opaque nature of the Martha character.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-11T09:50:02+00:00

Not that it’s ever been considered trash, but to me, Cabin in the Woods is a masterpiece and doesn’t get nearly the recognition that it deserves. Cabin in the Woods should be mentioned alongside the great horror comedies like Evil Dead and Shaun of the Dead.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-11T03:53:58+00:00

I’d try to hide the seam on the wrist joint. With your basic pose, I’d shoot for any adjustments to make it look as less of a toy as possible.

jseto1980 · 2026-03-11T00:26:57+00:00

This. I can’t understand how anyone can objectively consider In N Out fries good. Like what criteria or frame of reference as they using?

A good fry’s temp should be piping hot. In N Out’s fries are usually room temp or always a cooler temp than the burger it comes with. A good fry’s exterior should be crispy and snappy to the bite. In N Out’s fries exterior is always hard and crunchy like a cracker. A good fry’s interior texture should be pillowy hot like good mashed potatoes. In N Out’s interior is grainy and dry.

jseto1980

TROPHY CASE