Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of My
Speaker 1: Heart Radio. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind.
Speaker 1: Listener mail My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick,
Speaker 1: and it's Monday, of the day of the week. We
Speaker 1: read back some messages from the mail bags applied to
Speaker 1: us by our loyal mail bot Carney. Here right at
Speaker 1: the top of today's episode, I wanted to feature a
Speaker 1: correction by our listener Dorry, and usually if a correction
Speaker 1: comes in, we try to put that near the top. Uh.
Speaker 1: Dorian's response was in reference to the Odometer episode where
Speaker 1: I did, indeed do do a major geometrical screw up.
Speaker 1: So Dorian pointed out that it's in the part of
Speaker 1: the episode where I'm discussing the odometer described by Vitruvius,
Speaker 1: and I, for some reason, I said that the formula
Speaker 1: for the circumference of a circle is pie our squared.
Speaker 1: That is not correct. That is actually for the area
Speaker 1: of a circle. UH circumferences to pie r. Though as
Speaker 1: a weird coincidence, since we were talking about a wheel
Speaker 1: specifically with the radius of two of two ft, UH,
Speaker 1: the different formulas gave the exact same answer. In this
Speaker 1: one case, which is twelve point five six. So thank
Speaker 1: you Dorian for pointing that out. Always appreciate people letting
Speaker 1: us know if a mistake like that gets through. Uh,
Speaker 1: and I did. I did listen back. There was a
Speaker 1: way to to snip that little reference out of the episode,
Speaker 1: so so the episode should be corrected. Now. Alright, this
Speaker 1: next one comes to us from Ben. Hey, guys, someone
Speaker 1: else may have already mentioned this, but it occurred to
Speaker 1: me that one factor in the accuracy of the Benitists
Speaker 1: who measured distances by counting pacers would have been the
Speaker 1: inclines in a route to be measured, as one's pace
Speaker 1: length would naturally shorten when walking up or down a
Speaker 1: steep incline. Perhaps they took this into account and counted
Speaker 1: uphill or downhill paces separately. Anyways, a fascinating episode. Thanks.
Speaker 1: I did not think about that at all, but yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a very good point. Now. This is referencing the
Speaker 1: the idea of Alexander the greats Bematists and other bimatists
Speaker 1: from the ancient world, people who were said to measure
Speaker 1: distances by pacing. Uh. There was some suggestion that because
Speaker 1: they came they came up with distance measurements between milestones
Speaker 1: or cities that are actually quite accurate, even as measured today.
Speaker 1: There was some suggestion that maybe some of these people
Speaker 1: actually used an odometer or some type of machine that
Speaker 1: we don't know about, and that's possible. It's possible they
Speaker 1: just were able to keep an accurate kind of paces
Speaker 1: for some reason. I guess we don't really know. But yeah,
Speaker 1: this is one thing that would certainly affect pacing. That
Speaker 1: would I think not affect a mechanical odometer. Is the
Speaker 1: incline that you're walking up or down, I guess, and
Speaker 1: that would be a problem even if they were to
Speaker 1: say this is ridiculous. Of course, if they were to, uh,
Speaker 1: do some twine to tie their ankles together and always
Speaker 1: do maximum stride. Oh well, now that's a good point.
Speaker 1: But I guess when you're going up or down a
Speaker 1: lot of times, the distance between your feet is not
Speaker 1: that's true. Well, the twine thing is a good idea.
Speaker 1: I didn't think about that. If you want to regularize
Speaker 1: your pace, Yeah, but then what do you do with
Speaker 1: wild animal attacks or um or the enemy shows up
Speaker 1: to assault the caravan? It's like, oh, sorry, measurement dudes,
Speaker 1: your best defense is just to fall over at this point.
Speaker 1: I mean, even then, I think if you're like stepping
Speaker 1: up or down on on an incline, that might make
Speaker 1: a difference. Though if it's like, I don't know, if
Speaker 1: you're talking about trying to like, I don't know, scramble
Speaker 1: up or down over rocks or something, that would also
Speaker 1: be something that a wheeled odometer couldn't really go over, right, right,
Speaker 1: all right, I think maybe we should mention some responses
Speaker 1: to the episodes on paragraphs. Now. One of the things
Speaker 1: we talked about in that episode was we asked listeners
Speaker 1: to send in their favorite examples of paragraphs or favorite
Speaker 1: opening paragraphs from literature. I guess with an eye towards
Speaker 1: selections that are not just a chunk of text that
Speaker 1: you like, but one where the paragraph boundaries, like the
Speaker 1: actual placement of the line breaks, feel like especially strong
Speaker 1: or significant choices. And I thought one great submission came
Speaker 1: from our listener Anna. Anna begins by selecting the book
Speaker 1: Jane Eyre great choice and giving some background on its
Speaker 1: themes and composition. I'm going to pick up a couple
Speaker 1: of paragraphs in here. Anna writes the book was very popular,
Speaker 1: but there was also a fair bit of criticism from
Speaker 1: people who did not like the fact that there was
Speaker 1: a story about a girl who had her own mind
Speaker 1: and spoke up for herself. Charlotte Bronte, who was writing
Speaker 1: under the name kerrr Bell, hit back at critics in
Speaker 1: the preface to our second edition quote, I mean the
Speaker 1: timorous or carping few who doubt the tendency of such
Speaker 1: books as Jane Eyre, in whose eyes, whatever is unusual
Speaker 1: is wrong. She goes on to say that conventionality is
Speaker 1: not morality, self righteousness is not religion. Those are pretty
Speaker 1: strong words, especially considering it was hard to get a
Speaker 1: book published in those days. The fact that the book
Speaker 1: had a second edition within a year of its first
Speaker 1: publishing is a testament to its popularity. Anyway, I could
Speaker 1: go on and on about how much I like this book,
Speaker 1: but instead I will reproduce my favorite paragraph, uh and
Speaker 1: note that this is going to be a scene between
Speaker 1: the protagonist, Jane, and her her brooding forbidden love interest,
Speaker 1: her employer Mr Rochester. Now onto the quote, which begins
Speaker 1: first with a line of dialogue and then a separate
Speaker 1: second paragraph. This is Mr Rochester speaking, you examine me,
Speaker 1: Miss Eyre said he do you think me handsome? And
Speaker 1: then line break, I should, if I had deliberated, have
Speaker 1: replied to this question by something conventionally vague and polite,
Speaker 1: but the answer somehow slipped from my tongue before I
Speaker 1: was aware. No, sir, uh Anna goes on, This is
Speaker 1: so relatable, and I really think you could put a
Speaker 1: scene like this in a modern movie and people would
Speaker 1: think it was great. I think this would be a
Speaker 1: good quote to put on the back of the book
Speaker 1: to give readers a feeling for what the book is like.
Speaker 1: One of the things about Jane is that she speaks
Speaker 1: the truth even when it gets her in trouble, something
Speaker 1: we now call speaking truth to power. It's also an
Speaker 1: indication of the relationship between Jane Eyre and Mr Rochester.
Speaker 1: She never knows where she sits with Mr Rochester? Is
Speaker 1: he trying to be funny? Is he rude and vain?
Speaker 1: Does she reply no, sir, because she actually thinks he
Speaker 1: is not handsome? Or because it is such a rude
Speaker 1: question to ask You have to keep reading to find out.
Speaker 1: It's the sort of paragraph that you read and you
Speaker 1: immediately have to know what happens next. Thanks anna, uh,
Speaker 1: and I agree. I really like that as a paragraph.
Speaker 1: It is a wonderful little compact unit. I have never
Speaker 1: I don't think I've ever read Jane Eyre, or or
Speaker 1: if I did, I did it for school and forgot
Speaker 1: all of it. Um, I don't think I've seen any
Speaker 1: of the movies, so I'm having to like glance real
Speaker 1: quick and see, like, okay, well, who played Mr Rochester
Speaker 1: in a movie adaptation? Looks like William Hurd played him once.
Speaker 1: Mr Rochester is one of the famous so called byronic heroes.
Speaker 1: You know, he's like a Jane is obviously drawn to him,
Speaker 1: but he's also you know, he's not just like straightforwardly
Speaker 1: uh handsome and lovely in every way. He's like brooding
Speaker 1: and dark, and he has terrible secrets and in fact,
Speaker 1: in many ways could be considered quite a bad person.
Speaker 1: But also he's in some way irresistible. It looks like
Speaker 1: Fastbender played him in an adaptation. Yeah. I don't know
Speaker 1: if the idea of a spoiler for a book as
Speaker 1: old as Jane Eyre really comes into play, but spoiler alert,
Speaker 1: he I mean, you do find out that he essentially
Speaker 1: uh has he he already has a wife, and she
Speaker 1: has gone mad and he is keeping her trapped in
Speaker 1: the attic of his house. Uh, well, he's he's pursuing
Speaker 1: this relationship with Jane. You know. Looks like Kieran Hines
Speaker 1: played him in a in an adaptation, which also makes
Speaker 1: sense another kind of like uh got you know, British
Speaker 1: actor with intense eyes. It's really good at playing dark
Speaker 1: characters anyway, But I digress. Let's see. Now, we got
Speaker 1: notes from a number at least two, maybe three listeners,
Speaker 1: all suggesting the same opening paragraph as a favorite of theirs. Rob,
Speaker 1: do you want to pick one of these to read? Sure? Sure,
Speaker 1: let's see. Um, let's see. Yeah, we heard from anders
Speaker 1: on this, We heard from Jeff on this. Um, those
Speaker 1: are at least two of them. Let's say, yeah, they
Speaker 1: both had good points to make. Um. Le'll start with Andrews. Here. Hi,
Speaker 1: longtime listener, first time writer. I just listened to the
Speaker 1: paragraph part one episode, and my all time favorite opener
Speaker 1: came to mind. I'm sure it's a favorite for many
Speaker 1: since it's quite famous. It's from Stephen King's The Gun Slinger,
Speaker 1: the first book in his Seven Books series, and I
Speaker 1: still distinctly remember reading it for the first time some
Speaker 1: twenty years ago. For me, it both set the tone
Speaker 1: and in a way captures exactly the plot of the book.
Speaker 1: And also it's just a really cool line. Here goes
Speaker 1: quote the man in Black fled across the desert and
Speaker 1: the gun Slinger followed. My guess is you'll get other
Speaker 1: emails for the same entry either way. I always enjoy
Speaker 1: your stuff. Keep up the good work. Greetings from Denmark. Uh.
Speaker 1: And then Jeff also wrote in, and I'm just going
Speaker 1: to read part of what Jeff said about this. He says, uh,
Speaker 1: we learned the protagonist, antagonist, and setting all in one line.
Speaker 1: Um and uh. He also has this to say, thanks
Speaker 1: for the podcast. My new favorite Friday tradition is watching
Speaker 1: that week's weird how cinema movie if I can find
Speaker 1: it streaming anywhere. Oh well, that's that's sweet. And yes,
Speaker 1: we we heard from I think more even more than
Speaker 1: than these two about that opening line from The Gun Slinger,
Speaker 1: which is, indeed, yeah, a great line. I definitely remember
Speaker 1: this being a line that captivated me as a young reader,
Speaker 1: and I've been I've been meaning to reread at least
Speaker 1: just The Gun Slinger at some point because I think
Speaker 1: King went back and and um, and did an edit
Speaker 1: pass through it and sort of brought it up to
Speaker 1: speed with the later books at some point. And I
Speaker 1: don't think i've read that version of it. I think
Speaker 1: I've only read the older version of it. So I'm
Speaker 1: kind of interesting to see how how things are stitched together.
Speaker 1: Not that I remember all the details from the first time,
Speaker 1: but I remember really loving that book again as a
Speaker 1: young reader and like junior high and then of course
Speaker 1: I read all the other ones as they came out
Speaker 1: over the years. So my my, my reading of the
Speaker 1: Dark Tower series. Like I guess most people or a
Speaker 1: lot of people, it's yeah, it's spread across the decades.
Speaker 1: I actually do not know the Dark Tower series. I
Speaker 1: think I started reading the first book one time a
Speaker 1: long time ago, and I liked it, but I didn't
Speaker 1: finish it. That's all. It's Internet, you know. I saw
Speaker 1: a meme to this effect recently about people bouncing on
Speaker 1: the first book and sort of like, um, I think
Speaker 1: that it's like the illestration is somebody digging a tunnel
Speaker 1: and they're almost to the gold or the diamonds or something, uh,
Speaker 1: implying that the first book is kind of a slog.
Speaker 1: But then the rest of the series is the is
Speaker 1: the reward, and uh, I don't know, I I you know,
Speaker 1: there are all there are many reasons to bounce off
Speaker 1: of a particular book, to stop reading it, to set
Speaker 1: it down, or to give up on it, etcetera. So
Speaker 1: you know, you can't really find one rule for anything
Speaker 1: like this. But I remember, at least as a younger reader,
Speaker 1: really digging the first one, maybe finding the second one
Speaker 1: a bit more of a slog, just because a lot
Speaker 1: of it's in the real world and it is a
Speaker 1: little more less set in the fantasy, but then returns
Speaker 1: to the fantasy and so forth. Uh, and then being
Speaker 1: like all in on three. I don't know, I'm not
Speaker 1: going to go a book by book, but I feel
Speaker 1: like it my my engagement level goes up or down
Speaker 1: depending on which book it is in the series, But
Speaker 1: in general I was I was always on board for
Speaker 1: the saga, and once you've spent enough time with it
Speaker 1: in your head, you're kind of locked in. I see,
Speaker 1: I feel like it's one of those things I'll get
Speaker 1: around to one day. Oh yeah, it's not going anywhere, okay. Uh.
Speaker 1: Next message about favorite paragraphs from books is from d
Speaker 1: D says, hey, there, just listen to this episode. Lots
Speaker 1: of fun, especially considering how I fell down the pill
Speaker 1: crow research rabbit hole about a month ago. On the
Speaker 1: topic of memorable paragraphs, your discussion made me think immediately
Speaker 1: of Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse five, in which this happened. And
Speaker 1: to provide some context, I um, I didn't look this up,
Speaker 1: and I'm pretty sure this comes in the scene where
Speaker 1: the newly arrived Allied POWs they get to the new
Speaker 1: camp and they eat a bunch of rich soup. After
Speaker 1: having eaten I think nothing for a long time. Uh,
Speaker 1: and it makes them sick. And so the book goes
Speaker 1: and note where the paragraph breaks are. An American near
Speaker 1: Billy wailed that he had excreted everything but his brains.
Speaker 1: Moments later, he said, there they go, There they go,
Speaker 1: he meant his brains. Paragraph break. That was I, that
Speaker 1: was me, that was the author of this book. Break.
Speaker 1: Billy reeled away from his vision of hell. He passed
Speaker 1: three Englishmen who were watching the excrement festival from a distance.
Speaker 1: They were catatonic with disgust. And then D goes on,
Speaker 1: I see this as one paragraph, but the middle sentence
Speaker 1: rips you so hard out of the narrative that it
Speaker 1: is deserving of a single line paragraph all its own.
Speaker 1: Thanks for the great podcast. I'm off to listen to
Speaker 1: part two now. Cheers, d D. I agree. Ever since
Speaker 1: I read that book for the first time, that moment
Speaker 1: has stuck in my brain. I think of it often. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I hadn't really thought about this. This it from it
Speaker 1: as much, um, I guess I tend to come back
Speaker 1: to some of the other moment. There's a lot to
Speaker 1: stick in a young reader's head. And Slaughterhouse five it's uh,
Speaker 1: there's a there's a lot of of interesting and kind
Speaker 1: of at times I guess, provocative content in there. Um,
Speaker 1: But of course it's a it's a great novel, and
Speaker 1: it does I can't remember if this is actually the
Speaker 1: opening line of the book or it's just the opening
Speaker 1: line of one of the early chapters, but of course
Speaker 1: it has that line. Listen, Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck
Speaker 1: in time, um or or Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck
Speaker 1: in time, something to that effect. But um, that's a great,
Speaker 1: great line as well. I mean that instantly tells you
Speaker 1: whoa something has happened here? What's what's happened to Billy Pilgrim?
Speaker 1: And even the name, I guess that's an interesting thing,
Speaker 1: like sometimes just having a um an insightful name for
Speaker 1: your character. Uh, that also adds to the flavor like
Speaker 1: Billy Pilgrim. Uh, you know that's um kind of ties
Speaker 1: into the idea, you know, some of the flavor of
Speaker 1: the children crusade and so forth. Yeah, I'm sure vonna
Speaker 1: get junkies out there have a lot to say about it.
Speaker 1: I am um, but it's been so long since I've
Speaker 1: read it or really given it much thought. All right, uh, Rob,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna read this very short message from Alvaro UM,
Speaker 1: and then maybe we'll move on to some weird house cinema.
Speaker 1: So Alvaro right rights in with subject lines single paragraph novel.
Speaker 1: We were talking about those, uh, and Alvaro says, greetings.
Speaker 1: I was listening to your paragraph episode and I remembered
Speaker 1: a novella that consists of a single paragraph. It's called
Speaker 1: Nocturno de Chile by Roberto Bologno. It's pretty good, though
Speaker 1: not an easy read, as all of Bologno's books are.
Speaker 1: Now that was the whole message, but I looked this up.
Speaker 1: And to add to this, I think the idea of
Speaker 1: this novella being a single paragraph makes a lot of
Speaker 1: sense when you consider the contents of the book. This
Speaker 1: is the first sentence in English translation, I am dying now,
Speaker 1: but I still have many things to say. The story
Speaker 1: is actually presented as a kind of transcript of a
Speaker 1: night long deathbed confession by a deeply morally compromised Jesuit
Speaker 1: priest who ends up getting involved with like rich people
Speaker 1: in political power players and somehow eventually serves as a
Speaker 1: nighttime tutor for the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and uh
Speaker 1: so so anyway, the form the book takes is like
Speaker 1: a meandering, rambling divulgence of everything this old man can
Speaker 1: think of to say before he dies. So a single
Speaker 1: paragraph somehow makes a lot of sense to me as
Speaker 1: a stylistic choice. Like, I think the whole point is
Speaker 1: that the story is not organized, but a stream of consciousness,
Speaker 1: rambling as a man thinks back on through like the
Speaker 1: process of the moral corruption of his life. Interesting, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I can see where this, uh this style would fit
Speaker 1: the su premise. All right, we also have some weird
Speaker 1: house messages here, this one comes to us from L L. Right, So,
Speaker 1: my goodness, you finally watch Return to Oz. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: so jealous. I too would like to have the experience
Speaker 1: of being rolled over by the film for the first time.
Speaker 1: I first saw it as an unassuming child, so I
Speaker 1: just sort of took the film and stride with all
Speaker 1: the other weirdness of television and film produced for children,
Speaker 1: though it be insane or dark or what have you.
Speaker 1: As a child, I felt all the same emotions, the
Speaker 1: fear of the awe, et cetera. At the points you
Speaker 1: described in your Weird House episode, I marveled at the
Speaker 1: visual and creative beauty of the world imagined into being
Speaker 1: by the artist, though I did not consider the creators
Speaker 1: behind the scenes at all at the time. The only
Speaker 1: difference in response would be my take on the Wheelers.
Speaker 1: Though I knew they were the bad guys and did
Speaker 1: route for the good guys in the fight scene, I
Speaker 1: absolutely loved them. I got a huge kick out of them,
Speaker 1: and there wildly over the top acting. You know, it
Speaker 1: is wildly over the top. One of my favorite parts
Speaker 1: was when Dorothy and billina Are were trapped in the
Speaker 1: locked room before discovering TikTok. Dorothy asserts that they have
Speaker 1: done nothing wrong, and the lead wheeler says, in this
Speaker 1: grand accusatory fashion, isn't that a stolen lunch pail? And
Speaker 1: that is that a chicken in there with you? The
Speaker 1: absurdity of the accusation always made me laugh. Oh yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: because so Dorothy has a lunch pail that she picks
Speaker 1: off of the lunch pail tree. So yeah, I guess
Speaker 1: she didn't know who that lunch pail tree belongs to. Um,
Speaker 1: But yeah, the other thing is like, and you've got
Speaker 1: contraband in there. That's a chicken. Yeah, oh yeah, And
Speaker 1: of course the chickens and especially chicken eggs, are a
Speaker 1: great threat to the Nome king, as we learned later
Speaker 1: in the film. Yeah, yeah, we have no idea why
Speaker 1: at this point it would be a problem for her
Speaker 1: to have a chicken. L continues here to close, I
Speaker 1: need all of the people responsible for making this film
Speaker 1: to reunite and produce a slew of OZ films using
Speaker 1: material from Bombs many other books like Confest. I haven't
Speaker 1: read more than two, but as a child I was
Speaker 1: very much aware of the others because my brother loved
Speaker 1: them and read them all. Thanks for the great content.
Speaker 1: Sorry for sending you mail twice in one week. All
Speaker 1: topics are more interesting when hashed out and discussed by YouTube.
Speaker 1: There is something about getting to experience a movie like
Speaker 1: this as a child. Um. And and also I have
Speaker 1: found getting to re experience movies like this viewing them
Speaker 1: with a child. UM, it's been great fun to re
Speaker 1: explore older films that of this nature with my son.
Speaker 1: And in the case of of Return to Oz see
Speaker 1: something like this for the first time and gets get
Speaker 1: to view it through his eyes. Though sometimes it backfires.
Speaker 1: I mean he's not interested in movie. Like I keep saying, hey,
Speaker 1: how about how about the black Hole? Is it time
Speaker 1: to watch the black Hole? And he just he does
Speaker 1: not care. I can't get him into him, Like, look,
Speaker 1: it's got cute robots, it's got Anthony Perkins. What what
Speaker 1: could What's what's possibly wrong with this? And he's like, no,
Speaker 1: I'm not doing it. Well, you're trying to sell him
Speaker 1: on it based on Anthony Perkins. No, No, not really.
Speaker 1: I I focus on the robots in the space and
Speaker 1: I'm like look, and I'm like it's on Disney. Plus
Speaker 1: you know, there's a good chance you're gonna like it,
Speaker 1: but he's he's they can't can't get him interested for that.
Speaker 1: This This is really funny images possessing my brain now,
Speaker 1: Like the idea of somebody trying to get there, like
Speaker 1: you know, their their child to watch a movie because
Speaker 1: it's got Dan Hedea in it. You know, like, well,
Speaker 1: I think that kind of that does say something about
Speaker 1: the film and maybe how miscalibrated it is. Like you
Speaker 1: look at the actors in the black Hole, and he's
Speaker 1: got a number of great actors in it, but I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna list them all, and maybe we'll talk about
Speaker 1: it someday. But it's got a great cast, but it's
Speaker 1: not necessarily cast members that are gonna appeal to ten
Speaker 1: year olds. They're not gonna look at this cast be like, yeah,
Speaker 1: who are these interesting middle aged people up to in space?
Speaker 1: That that's to get the parents in? All? Right? Uh?
Speaker 1: Should I do this one from Richard? Yeah, let's hear
Speaker 1: from Richard. Okay, Richard says, I love your regular science
Speaker 1: history episodes. You're a great team. You've held my attention
Speaker 1: with some subjects that that would have bored me in
Speaker 1: lesser hands. Kudos. I love Obscure oddball films, So I
Speaker 1: greatly enjoy weird how cinema. You frequently note that such
Speaker 1: films are released with different cuts, different names, etcetera. Have
Speaker 1: you ever considered devoting an episode to this phenomenon? You
Speaker 1: could easily do ninety minutes on the how and why
Speaker 1: of that. It's got a pretty rich history, from indie
Speaker 1: productions to blockbusters. Here's one I don't know if you're
Speaker 1: aware of. I'm one of the very few people who
Speaker 1: saw Hands of Steel in a theater years ago. Remember
Speaker 1: that's the the the Italian Terminator off that we that
Speaker 1: we watched. Yeah yeah, John Saxon is in that one. Um. Also,
Speaker 1: George Eastman has a has a small role Simonetti soundtrack.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, really fun. Richard goes on. So the movie
Speaker 1: ended before the DVD version that you reviewed. In the
Speaker 1: theatrical release, the protagonist reveals that his head is full
Speaker 1: of circuitry, then delivers the line poco Quai act doesn't exist,
Speaker 1: maybe he never did, and then the music swells and
Speaker 1: the credits roll the end. It was a memorable ending
Speaker 1: to an otherwise forgettable film. Anyway, keep up the good work, sincerely, Richard. Huh, Well,
Speaker 1: you know I don't clearly remember everything that happened at
Speaker 1: the end of the film. I could be wrong about this,
Speaker 1: but I vaguely recall it having a kind of voice
Speaker 1: over about how like love can defeat evil or something
Speaker 1: after a scene where he blows up John Saxon and
Speaker 1: a factory. Oh, then there's also something about the age
Speaker 1: of the cyborg had begun or something, some frozen texts
Speaker 1: on the screen. Yeah, Uh, this is interesting. Now, I
Speaker 1: don't I don't think we we know where Richard was seen.
Speaker 1: We had viewed this film. So that's one thing we
Speaker 1: always have to take into account is that these films
Speaker 1: had different releases and different cuts in different markets, Uh,
Speaker 1: depending on you know, who is releasing them. And then
Speaker 1: it's content was cut for various reasons like that, just
Speaker 1: because this was fresh on my mind. Conquest, the Luccio
Speaker 1: Fulci movie that we we discussed the last couple of weeks, Like,
Speaker 1: that's one where I think some initial releases of it
Speaker 1: had cut down on some of the violence and also
Speaker 1: some of the oozing source that make up a large
Speaker 1: junk of the later portion of the film. Uh. So
Speaker 1: you have a little things like that, and then yeah,
Speaker 1: then you have alternate cuts occurring for various reasons. It's uh,
Speaker 1: it is an interesting topic. It's always something that's um.
Speaker 1: It's a note when considering films. But I don't remember
Speaker 1: reading about a different ending for Hand of Hands of
Speaker 1: Steel when we are discussing it, So that's that's cool,
Speaker 1: all right. Well, on that note, we're going to reach
Speaker 1: the ending of this podcast episode as always right in.
Speaker 1: We'd love to hear from you about about this episode
Speaker 1: of Listener Mail, about past episodes of Weird House Cinema
Speaker 1: and Stuff to Blow Your Mind, as well as future episodes.
Speaker 1: Just a reminder that our core episodes published on Tuesdays
Speaker 1: and Thursdays, and the Stuff to Blow Your Mind podcast
Speaker 1: feed We have Listener Mail on Mondays, we have Artifact
Speaker 1: or Monster Fact on Wednesdays, and on Fridays we do
Speaker 1: Weird How Cinema. That's our time to set aside most
Speaker 1: serious concerns and just talk about a strange film. Huge
Speaker 1: thanks as always to our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson.
Speaker 1: If you would like to get in touch with us
Speaker 1: with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest
Speaker 1: a topic for the future, or just to say hello,
Speaker 1: you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow
Speaker 1: your Mind dot com. Stuff to Blow Your Mind is
Speaker 1: product of I heart Radio. For more podcasts for my
Speaker 1: heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or
Speaker 1: wherever you listen to your favorite shows.