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. That's the day of the week. We
Speaker 1: read back messages from the mail bag stuff you have
Speaker 1: sent in to our account, which, if you'd like to
Speaker 1: get in touch, is contact at stuff to Blow your
Speaker 1: Mind dot com. You can write in for any reason,
Speaker 1: if you've got feedback on a recent episode, if you
Speaker 1: want to share something interesting, if you just want to
Speaker 1: say hello, any of that's fair game. Email us at
Speaker 1: contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. Let's
Speaker 1: see here, Rob, would you like to kick us off
Speaker 1: with this message about the Monster Fact? Sure? This one
Speaker 1: comes to us from Tim. Tim says, Hi, Stuff to
Speaker 1: Blow your Mind team. I love the podcast, and I'm
Speaker 1: particularly excited for the Monster Fact episodes featuring Warhammer forty
Speaker 1: thousand or Warhammer forty k I've never been into the games,
Speaker 1: but the lore of that realm is creepy cool and
Speaker 1: fascinatingly weird, so I can't wait to hear more. And
Speaker 1: then Tim goes on and says, when you make multi
Speaker 1: part episodes. I'm always especially keen to listen to them
Speaker 1: because you guys get really deep into the topic. I've
Speaker 1: often heard about the concepts before, so a shorter, shallow
Speaker 1: we're handling would just be rehashing. I let them stack
Speaker 1: before listening to them all though, So if the name
Speaker 1: could include part X of Y or part X slash,
Speaker 1: why that would help my arrangement of listening time so
Speaker 1: I can fully engage with the topic rather than being
Speaker 1: left unsatisfied having jumped into a two parter only to
Speaker 1: find out that there's a third part teasing my brain
Speaker 1: with incompleteness if possible, practical Please and thank you. Keep
Speaker 1: up the great work you make my monotonous hours at
Speaker 1: a lab bench at work far more interesting. Regards Kim,
Speaker 1: Thank you Tim. I'd say if we could do that
Speaker 1: with the episode numbering, we it, but we don't always
Speaker 1: know how many parts we're gonna do when we start
Speaker 1: a series, so sometimes we'll think that it's gonna be
Speaker 1: two parts, but then you know we're recording part two.
Speaker 1: We realized we've got a lot more stuff that we've
Speaker 1: turned up and we'd like to get into, so it
Speaker 1: ends up going to three. Uh So, yeah, but by
Speaker 1: the time we published the first part, we don't always
Speaker 1: know how deep we're gonna go. I guess I could
Speaker 1: go in and add part X of Y to a description,
Speaker 1: if not the title, then certainly the description after the fact,
Speaker 1: like once we've completed a particular journey. Um, I hadn't
Speaker 1: really thought to do that before, but I don't think
Speaker 1: there's any practical reason why I couldn't do that, and
Speaker 1: certainly why we couldn't do that when we re air
Speaker 1: those episodes the following year. So yeah, there might there
Speaker 1: might be some things we can do, but yeah, most
Speaker 1: of the time, we just we do not know that's
Speaker 1: gonna be. Sometimes we think it's gonna be one episode
Speaker 1: and then it becomes three. Hey. Though, on the other hand,
Speaker 1: to bring up something that we mentioned in last week's
Speaker 1: listener mail, UH, tim you you know, you listen to
Speaker 1: the show at your own pace. You listen whenever you
Speaker 1: want to. That's all up to you. But we have
Speaker 1: been told by people here at the company that there
Speaker 1: are some cases where UH listeners may be affected by
Speaker 1: waiting to catch up on episodes. That like some platforms
Speaker 1: such as Apple Podcast may stop downloading episodes of our
Speaker 1: show into your feed, even if you're subscribed, if you
Speaker 1: haven't consumed the most recent x number of episodes, it
Speaker 1: might be like five episodes or something, And so this
Speaker 1: apparently sometimes affects numbers if people are waiting to catch
Speaker 1: up or letting episodes stack up before they binge them. Obviously,
Speaker 1: if that's the way you want to listen, that's fine.
Speaker 1: But if you do want to help the show out
Speaker 1: and make sure that nothing like that happens to you,
Speaker 1: and uh, you know you're you're always getting new shows
Speaker 1: of ours in your feed. It is apparently helpful for
Speaker 1: you to be current on the show. So if you
Speaker 1: want to help us out and help yourself out to
Speaker 1: make sure you're always getting new stuff, that's the thing
Speaker 1: you can do. Absolutely And uh and Tim, thanks for
Speaker 1: the kind words on the Monster Fact episodes. Uh yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna keep I did a three partner on the
Speaker 1: Tyra Aids of Warhammer and uh yeah, I heard some
Speaker 1: nice things from some folks, so I might return to
Speaker 1: the Warhammer World for future Monster episodes after skipping around
Speaker 1: back into mythology and folklore and so forth. All right,
Speaker 1: what's that I hear, Joe? It sounds like sleigh bells.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, we got a straggler from the holidays that
Speaker 1: this always happens when it's like February and we're still
Speaker 1: getting episodes related to uh, just sort of a Christmas
Speaker 1: time or whatever, which you know, we're always getting feedback
Speaker 1: about stuff that came out a couple of months ago,
Speaker 1: but it's just especially funny when it's Christmas themed. Well,
Speaker 1: this time it has to do with eggnog, and in
Speaker 1: a way it's fitting because, as we discussed in the
Speaker 1: Eggnog episode, egg based alcoholic beverages used to be consumed
Speaker 1: just year round. That's right, yet to protect you from
Speaker 1: the fog drafts while you're walking to work in the
Speaker 1: morning or setting out a long journey from an inn
Speaker 1: in Maryland. So anyway, this is from Bianca. Bianca says, Hi, guys,
Speaker 1: I'm a bit behind my podcast listening. I just listen
Speaker 1: to your eggnog episode and was quite surprised when you
Speaker 1: mentioned that eggnog is considered a drink for everybody in
Speaker 1: the US. I live in Austria, and I would say
Speaker 1: that here it is mostly thought of as an alcoholic drink.
Speaker 1: I've never encountered a non alcoholic version in the stores.
Speaker 1: Although I'm sure it exists, I thought it interesting considering
Speaker 1: you mentioned that in the early days of eggnog, it
Speaker 1: was also thought of as an alcoholic drink first and foremost. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the the earliest references to eggnoga seemed to be exclusively
Speaker 1: references to a hard, boozy drink, not not something that's
Speaker 1: uh sold in cartons and given to children. Bianca says,
Speaker 1: Although I am no expert, I would guess it has
Speaker 1: at least partially to do with the German name for eggnog,
Speaker 1: which is ier liquor. I think that means egg liquor. Uh.
Speaker 1: The liquor part literally translates to liquor in English. The
Speaker 1: alcohol is therefore already in the name, but I suppose
Speaker 1: that's not the whole story. Also, people seem to have
Speaker 1: an ambivalent opinion about eggnog. I do not drink out
Speaker 1: the hall of myself, but I recall many people telling
Speaker 1: me they do not like it, and people seem to
Speaker 1: buy it in heaps when it's Christmas time, so there
Speaker 1: must be something to it. I guess. Keep doing what
Speaker 1: you're doing. Really enjoy listening to your show. Greetings from Austria.
Speaker 1: Bianca well, um, I know, as a as a grown up,
Speaker 1: when you have a glass of eggnog that is also spiked. Um.
Speaker 1: It is often my experience that I will have this
Speaker 1: beverage and I will find it lovely, but afterwards there's
Speaker 1: almost a sense of shame for having consumed it because
Speaker 1: you realize, oh wow, that was that was rich, that
Speaker 1: was a lot, and I probably shouldn't have another glass
Speaker 1: of that this year. It's just a nice, boozy mug
Speaker 1: of melted ice cream. It's great, But I mean maybe
Speaker 1: that has something to do with people being ambivalent about it.
Speaker 1: And then I don't know, you know, it's easy to
Speaker 1: be ambivalent about anything that's tied up. And they just
Speaker 1: the the over celebration of the holidays um in many
Speaker 1: parts of the U. S And the Western world. So uh,
Speaker 1: you know, everyone's going to have their own opinion of
Speaker 1: the matter. Okay, we got a message about our episodes
Speaker 1: on the reptiles of the Galapagos. This is from Sean.
Speaker 1: Sean says, hey, guys, I'm an archaeologist in New York State.
Speaker 1: I just listened to the Galapagos reptile episodes. I was
Speaker 1: struck by the urine intensive nesting I remember this was
Speaker 1: in the section about the nesting habits of the Galapagos tortoises,
Speaker 1: where they would when when one of the females would
Speaker 1: come and lay a clutch of eggs, um, I don't
Speaker 1: know if clutch is the right word, lay late some
Speaker 1: number of eggs in the sand. They would like dig
Speaker 1: out a hole and then lay the eggs and then
Speaker 1: bury it and pe on it and use the urine
Speaker 1: to form a kind of cement there So, Sean says,
Speaker 1: I was struck by the urine intensive nesting. It reminded
Speaker 1: me of the North American pack rat, whose burrows are
Speaker 1: lined with urine to make almost a natural cement fall
Speaker 1: soul burrows are handy for archaeology little time capsules. Maybe
Speaker 1: you've done a show on these guys already, but if not,
Speaker 1: might be interesting. Love the show, Sean, Sean, I think
Speaker 1: that is a fantastic idea. The pack rat is a
Speaker 1: really weird and interesting animal when you look at their middens. Yeah, Rob,
Speaker 1: I don't know how much you've read about these guys.
Speaker 1: With these little rats, so they'll often make nests in
Speaker 1: like caves or crevices. But then I think they can
Speaker 1: also find similar kinds of wedge like spaces in human
Speaker 1: built structures, and they will just fill them up with these,
Speaker 1: uh you know, with just junk, all different kinds of
Speaker 1: things they find from the environment, packing them in and
Speaker 1: then peeing on them to form a kind of cement.
Speaker 1: I think like the sugars and other kind of chemicals
Speaker 1: in the urine helped crystallize all the stuff together. And
Speaker 1: it's like a it's it's like a p made skyscraper
Speaker 1: in like a wedge in a rock. Yeah. I vaguely
Speaker 1: remember researching something about them that I can't rememb number
Speaker 1: if it was for a text based piece or for
Speaker 1: a past episode of the show. At any rate, it's
Speaker 1: it's it's certainly something that would be fun to explore
Speaker 1: or re explore on the podcast. All right, here is
Speaker 1: one that comes to us from Rusty in response to
Speaker 1: our episode or episodes on animals and then ultimately humans
Speaker 1: throwing things, Rusty says Robert and Joe. Thanks for all
Speaker 1: your work on the pod. Wide selection of interesting topics
Speaker 1: is appreciated as a lover of all things to do
Speaker 1: with evolutionary biology. I enjoyed the series on animals throwing
Speaker 1: things as I'm sure many other listeners are also animal lovers.
Speaker 1: I thought i'd share with them my personal favorite example
Speaker 1: of creatures tossing things around. Part of courtship among two
Speaker 1: cans can involve an adorable game of catch. A gift
Speaker 1: of a small barrier nut will be offered, sometimes being
Speaker 1: passed back and forth multiple old times. In some species,
Speaker 1: this can escalate into whipping their enormous beaks around to
Speaker 1: catapult the object toward the potential mate from a distance.
Speaker 1: Presumably the repeated throwing and catching acts as a fitness
Speaker 1: test for eyebeak coordination and fine motor control. Thanks again, Rusty.
Speaker 1: I will point out rob we we usually don't include
Speaker 1: last names when people say them, but this is obviously
Speaker 1: a pseudonym, because this listener wrote in under the name
Speaker 1: Rusty Shackleford, which is the fake name that Dale Gripple
Speaker 1: always gives him King of the Hill. Oh okay, I
Speaker 1: I didn't realize that. I don't think I've ever watched
Speaker 1: too much King of the Hill, so I didn't catch
Speaker 1: the reference. Oh it's great. Dale Gribble is the the
Speaker 1: lovable paranoid sovereign citizen stry and so anytime somebody uh
Speaker 1: in any official capacity asks his name, he gives a
Speaker 1: fake one, and it's usually Rusty Shackleford. Okay, okay, I
Speaker 1: know which character you're talking about. Yeah, well this is
Speaker 1: a great example though involving two cans um too. Ends
Speaker 1: have a lot of personality, so I enjoy watching them
Speaker 1: whenever I have the chance. Usually it's you know, obviously
Speaker 1: a a captive environment, but I have gotten to see
Speaker 1: them in the wild on occasion, and uh yeah, amazing birds.
Speaker 1: I had no idea about this throwing thing. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: have to look this up, so thank you, Rusty. Alright,
Speaker 1: this next message is from Scott. It's about our episodes
Speaker 1: on Horror Vakaway or Fear of the Void. Scott writes,
Speaker 1: at the end of your last episode on Horror Vakaway,
Speaker 1: you mentioned that there are several possible meanings of nothing
Speaker 1: which need to be distinguished, and that confusions might result
Speaker 1: from not doing this. This perked my ears because it's
Speaker 1: a common example of what in philosophy has has become
Speaker 1: known as contextualism, the idea that the meaning of many
Speaker 1: terms depends on their context, though often they can be
Speaker 1: rigorously defined given that context. For example, the box is
Speaker 1: empty may mean one thing if said in a class
Speaker 1: discussing quantum physics, another in a physics lab attaching a
Speaker 1: vacuum hose to the box, a third to a child
Speaker 1: shaking a decorated cube under a Christmas tree. Furthermore, the
Speaker 1: phrase this room is clean may mean one thing, from
Speaker 1: a child to a parent after wiping up some spilled sugar,
Speaker 1: another to a maid speaking to a house owner, and
Speaker 1: a third to a manager of semiconductor factory. It's not
Speaker 1: just that the word has metaphorical meanings which don't apply
Speaker 1: across all contexts, like an FBI agent speaking of a
Speaker 1: filthy bathroom where alas no drugs were found, but that
Speaker 1: the word can in some sense mean the same thing
Speaker 1: in each context devoid of something. But how clean or
Speaker 1: empty it must be depends on the context. Another common
Speaker 1: application is to the word knowledge. I know it is
Speaker 1: safe to do X has one set of standards when
Speaker 1: playing a game or a little as at stake. Another
Speaker 1: wind spoke and in the control room of a nuclear reactor,
Speaker 1: and a third one said in a philosophy class discussing
Speaker 1: Cartesian skepticism. Scott, Yeah, I think that's a great point. Scott, Yeah,
Speaker 1: so I think nothing would be subject to contextualism in
Speaker 1: these different kinds of discussions, Like so a box that
Speaker 1: you know, you might say that there's nothing in a
Speaker 1: box when actually it's just full of atmosphere, or you
Speaker 1: might sort of meaning the same thing, but just applying
Speaker 1: a higher level of rigor, say there's nothing in a
Speaker 1: box when it is fully evacuated of of atmosphere and
Speaker 1: just just a vacuum inside. I mean, assuming that we're
Speaker 1: possible again, when you're talking about a vacuum inside a container,
Speaker 1: it's always just lower and lower gas pressure. But then
Speaker 1: you would also have another level of like there's nothing
Speaker 1: in a box, meaning there's not even space in there.
Speaker 1: And in that case, I don't even know what that
Speaker 1: would mean. Maybe that's an oxymoron or not an oxymoron,
Speaker 1: I don't know, an incoherent claim. But I also think
Speaker 1: this last example you use about knowledge is a right
Speaker 1: one that like you can use the word no to
Speaker 1: mean totally different things in different contexts, even are not
Speaker 1: totally different things, but just having different levels of rigor
Speaker 1: for what counts as knowledge, and people leverage exactly this
Speaker 1: equivocation in arguments and conversations all the time. This is
Speaker 1: a major type of argument by equivocation. Of course, equivocation
Speaker 1: is using the same word two different ways in two
Speaker 1: different steps of your argument. So you can basically try
Speaker 1: to undermine or refute anything anybody believes by just saying like, well,
Speaker 1: do you really know that for sure? And of course
Speaker 1: any reasonable person like if you pride them like that,
Speaker 1: we'll start admitting will like, no, I don't have a
Speaker 1: hundred percent certainty on anything I think I believe, you know,
Speaker 1: that kind of Cartesian skepticism level of certainty, where like
Speaker 1: you can only believe things that are a logical necessity. Uh,
Speaker 1: And then you try to leverage that against them, just
Speaker 1: believing something to be true, believing they have knowledge about
Speaker 1: something the same way we have knowledge about all kinds
Speaker 1: of things in our everyday lives. And that's that's really
Speaker 1: a kind of illicit move because the level of certainty
Speaker 1: that you need for everyday knowledge is a lot lower,
Speaker 1: and yet it still justifies all all the normal knowledge
Speaker 1: beliefs you have. You know, how do you know, like
Speaker 1: anything you see in front of you is actually there?
Speaker 1: I mean, there's no real reason to doubt that unless
Speaker 1: you just put on a VR headset or something. Yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: you know, sometimes you just have a you have a
Speaker 1: bad potato or bad bad stew or something. Right, there's
Speaker 1: something wrong with your gruel. Yeah, what does it? There's
Speaker 1: more gravy than grave about you. Yes, all right. Should
Speaker 1: we do a couple related to Weird House Cinema? Sure? Yes.
Speaker 1: This one comes to us from Andrew. Andrew says, Hi,
Speaker 1: guys love the show, etcetera, etcetera. I was a little
Speaker 1: disappointed in the both of you when you were discussing
Speaker 1: instance is in film of normally populated areas being depopulated
Speaker 1: for effect, and neither of you mentioned the airport in
Speaker 1: the one Solid Gold classic TV mini series The Langoliers.
Speaker 1: You can make it up to me by featuring the
Speaker 1: legal Ears on Weird House Cinema. There's a character whose
Speaker 1: personality is that he's hungry. There are meatballs that eat
Speaker 1: the past. It's a no brainer for Weird House. Please
Speaker 1: and thank you Andrew. There are meatballs that eat the past.
Speaker 1: That is. I think a literal description of the monsters
Speaker 1: and the lango ears is that they are like c
Speaker 1: g I hairy meatballs who fly around eating time. Now,
Speaker 1: the weird thing is, I remember when this came out.
Speaker 1: I was getting out TV mini series, and it has,
Speaker 1: at least looking back on it now, as a pretty
Speaker 1: solid cast. You've got the likes of Frankie Faison and
Speaker 1: Dean Stockwell and it David Morris Um and some others
Speaker 1: of note um. But I never saw it. I read
Speaker 1: the novella though, and I remember loving the novella, and
Speaker 1: it came out one of those King collections of like
Speaker 1: four novellas or something. I figure which one it was,
Speaker 1: but I remember really digging the Langoliers. I totally pictured
Speaker 1: the meatballs as the Critters from the Crits from the
Speaker 1: Critters movies. I I don't think the the the the
Speaker 1: original novella was very shy about this. It seemed like
Speaker 1: they were just basically the crates. But I and I
Speaker 1: remember enjoying it, it being kind of like this fun
Speaker 1: Stephen King Twilight Zone episode sort of story. I don't
Speaker 1: think I realized it was based on a novella, or
Speaker 1: if I ever knew that, I had forgotten, I would
Speaker 1: have assumed it was straight to TV. There was a
Speaker 1: whole thing in the eighties through the nineties of this
Speaker 1: vibe that was the TV adaptation of Stephen King. So
Speaker 1: I'm not talking about Stephen King novels adapted into R
Speaker 1: rated movies to go in the theater. But Stephen King
Speaker 1: novels made as a multi as a like a mini
Speaker 1: series to be on T and T or ABC or something.
Speaker 1: Uh didn't they? They did the Stand I think, and
Speaker 1: they did the Langal Years and wasn't even it wasn't
Speaker 1: the original it movie and made for TV mini series.
Speaker 1: He certainly was. Yeah, there was also Golden Years in
Speaker 1: their Golden Years was like an original screenplay of Memory
Speaker 1: Serves from Stephen King and was not finished. I remember
Speaker 1: thinking it was amazing when it came out because I
Speaker 1: was just really excited for Stephen King TV content, But
Speaker 1: nobody else was excited about this. I don't think they
Speaker 1: did one for Rose Red, uh that I think that
Speaker 1: was into the two thousands. They did Let's see the
Speaker 1: oh oh, the Shining not the one, not the Cooper one,
Speaker 1: but the one that was quote more faithful to the book.
Speaker 1: That was a TV mini series, wasn't it with the
Speaker 1: guy from Wings on it? Yeah? Yeah, that was the
Speaker 1: guy from Wings, not wings Houser. That would have been different.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, you should have had wings Houser as
Speaker 1: Jack Torrence. The acting question is Stephen Webber, who is
Speaker 1: a fine actor. He's he's been in some things I've
Speaker 1: really left. He's an one of my favorite episodes of
Speaker 1: Tales from the Crypt titled Morning Mess or Morning Mess
Speaker 1: about Google's eating people in the cemetery. Um. And I
Speaker 1: think he was maybe kind of a favorite actor of
Speaker 1: of Stephen Kings, or is a favorite actor Stephen Kings
Speaker 1: because I remember Stephen King. Uh. There's a Stephen king
Speaker 1: episode of the nineties Outer Limits series and I think
Speaker 1: he played memory serves on this. He plays the voice
Speaker 1: of and the picture in a picture frame that keeps
Speaker 1: talking to this lady after she gets shot in the head.
Speaker 1: It's a Christmas episode. Wait, no, I'm still thinking even more.
Speaker 1: Wasn't the Toby Hooper Salem's Lot adaptation actually a made
Speaker 1: for TV mini series? I believe it was. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think that was. That was also not not a theatrical release. Um.
Speaker 1: And Tommy Knocker was another. Oh my god, yes Tommy.
Speaker 1: Now there were so many of them. Yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: part of it's probably these are some some long books,
Speaker 1: so if you can you start adapting them and then
Speaker 1: you quickly realize I don't think this is the film, guys,
Speaker 1: I think this is a mini series, and I'm sure
Speaker 1: we're missing some prime examples as well. Yeah, I just
Speaker 1: think that's so funny that, like a popular author noted
Speaker 1: for very R rated grotesque ory, and the source material
Speaker 1: it was so associated with made for TV content. Yeah. Like,
Speaker 1: coming back to the line leers for example, it's a
Speaker 1: TV mini series. It's two episodes, so, um, again, I
Speaker 1: haven't seen it. I'm not even sure how long each
Speaker 1: episode is. Off the top of my head, i'd have
Speaker 1: to look at the and and I'm not I'm not
Speaker 1: finding Oh here it is. It looks like each episode
Speaker 1: is an hour and thirty minutes. So we're talking a
Speaker 1: three hour movie here, which I guess nowadays especially people
Speaker 1: were like, yeah, aren't all movies three hours? Um? That
Speaker 1: seems like like how how long I spend in the
Speaker 1: movie theater if I go to one, um, not counting
Speaker 1: the commercials in the three and a half hours once
Speaker 1: the trailers are in there. But you know, it's if
Speaker 1: you're gonna tell the whole story, you're either gonna have
Speaker 1: to know you're gonna have to cut it down, or
Speaker 1: you're gonna have to figure out how you're gonna fit it,
Speaker 1: and at the time, maybe they just didn't fit into
Speaker 1: the movie theaters. I don't know. Maybe the argument could
Speaker 1: be maybe the Lango Leaders is not something you want
Speaker 1: to actually have in theaters. Maybe it is more ultimately
Speaker 1: the tv um TV project. And certainly it's very Twilight
Speaker 1: Zones and its styling, so maybe it makes sense. Do
Speaker 1: do we have Peter Jackson to thank for that that?
Speaker 1: Like it's just normal for movies to be three hours long? Now?
Speaker 1: I don't know, Uh, that would be an interesting um
Speaker 1: discussion to look at, you know, long films and especially
Speaker 1: I guess key to what we're talking about here, long
Speaker 1: major US releases as opposed to like long art films
Speaker 1: and so forth. Mhm. So I don't know, open question
Speaker 1: at least for for us. Okay, Rob, I think you've
Speaker 1: got to do this one from Eric because it's on
Speaker 1: the subject that I know is dear to your heart.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, this one's from Eric. This is be
Speaker 1: a discord um. So if you want to join the
Speaker 1: stuff to blow your mind discord, just email us. We're
Speaker 1: going to share the email address in a bet and
Speaker 1: we'll send you the link that seems to be the way,
Speaker 1: it works best for folks to join it. But anyway,
Speaker 1: Eric writes and says, I started listening to the last
Speaker 1: Starfighter episode and I have to pay respects to your
Speaker 1: kind words about Underworld three. I feel like I never
Speaker 1: see anyone praising any of those movies. I myself am
Speaker 1: a fan of the first three actually, uh the three
Speaker 1: Underworld films, but I agree with your comments about it
Speaker 1: actually being a good prequel. I usually have a disdain
Speaker 1: for many prequels right out of the gate, since they
Speaker 1: typically seem to exist only to be a cash grab.
Speaker 1: The powers that be need to make another buck, but
Speaker 1: don't know how to push a story forwards, so they
Speaker 1: go backwards. No doubt Underworld three exists for these reasons. However,
Speaker 1: Underworld three, I thought did a really good job at
Speaker 1: making a good prequel, expanding on a little bit of
Speaker 1: info we got in the first film. All so, Michael
Speaker 1: Sheen's Lucien is a great character. Sorry, a little random
Speaker 1: ha ha. I was listening and was like, WHOA someone
Speaker 1: else actually likes an Underworld movie exclamation point. I have
Speaker 1: seen no Underworld movies, but Rob, I I really appreciate
Speaker 1: how you know the the some of the camp movies
Speaker 1: that you champion are not only like the ones that
Speaker 1: have become cult classics that like folks, you should know that.
Speaker 1: I was once invited to Rob's house to watch Chronicles
Speaker 1: of Rittick and we it was a good time. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I still stand by Chronicles of Rittick, and this I
Speaker 1: think feels this is I would put this into some
Speaker 1: of these films in a similar category. So I still
Speaker 1: need to rewatch Underworld three this decade, so I'm not
Speaker 1: super fresh on it, but I do remember it fondly.
Speaker 1: It has the two best actors from the first Underworld movie,
Speaker 1: Michael Sheen and Bill Knight, who are both marvelous actors
Speaker 1: and and but very versatile. They can both play I
Speaker 1: mean Michael Sheen, for example, we think of him for
Speaker 1: playing more dramatic or certainly even over the top comedic roles,
Speaker 1: but in Underworld three, he's like this ripped action star um.
Speaker 1: And of course Bill Night is the same way. You
Speaker 1: can play a very relatable, compassionate figure. He can be
Speaker 1: uh uh, he can play comedy, and he can also
Speaker 1: play just a vile vampire lord anyway, So those those
Speaker 1: actors get to have a lot of screen time um,
Speaker 1: and I feel like the plot of the movie works
Speaker 1: well with the inherent limitations of a prequel, at least
Speaker 1: in my recollection. I was just thinking about what I
Speaker 1: know Michael Sheen from I realized I think he's read
Speaker 1: at least one audio books that I really enjoyed, but
Speaker 1: I can't remember what it was. I associate him with
Speaker 1: being a good audio book reader. May have to come
Speaker 1: back to that, but I know he's also he's in
Speaker 1: some of those Twilight sequels where he he like, hang,
Speaker 1: isn't he Am I wrong about that? No? No, he is.
Speaker 1: He plays a vampire lord in in those movies, okay,
Speaker 1: but a very like a aristocratic and fancy uh that
Speaker 1: it is regrettable that we must kill you that kind
Speaker 1: of Uh. Yeah. He has some sort of over the
Speaker 1: top character in that that Tron remake Slash sequel that
Speaker 1: they did as well, so he can go, we're very
Speaker 1: broad and his performances, but can also like really, you
Speaker 1: know again, very versatile performer. Uh. He had a fun
Speaker 1: role on thirty Rock playing um a character by the
Speaker 1: name of Wesley Snipes who was a British man that
Speaker 1: Liz Lemon dates and it was it was a fun
Speaker 1: uh fun. I guess lower key kind of comedic performance.
Speaker 1: So I don't know. Maybe maybe maybe we'll come back
Speaker 1: around Underworld. But I couldn't just throw you right into
Speaker 1: Underworld three. If we were to do weird House, you'd,
Speaker 1: I guess you'd have to see Underworld one through two,
Speaker 1: and and then there are additional Underworld I think he
Speaker 1: goes up to five, but I only saw the first three.
Speaker 1: After the third one, I was like, Okay, this is
Speaker 1: this is as good as it's gonna get. So I'm
Speaker 1: done as good as this franchise can get. I need
Speaker 1: to add that caveat. I'm not talking about cinema in general.
Speaker 1: Well wait, this is kind of country. The last time
Speaker 1: you were talking to me about the Underworld movies, you
Speaker 1: said skip one, skip two, and go to three, and
Speaker 1: I was like, hey, this is the same thing you
Speaker 1: should do with the Fast and the Furious movies. Well,
Speaker 1: I guess you could. It is a prequel. But then again,
Speaker 1: I mean I look back and I remember really enjoying
Speaker 1: the first one when it came out, and and a
Speaker 1: lot of people did not enjoy it. Um so, and
Speaker 1: I don't know, I don't know if I would be
Speaker 1: up for rewatching the first one at this point, but
Speaker 1: I remember liking it back in the day. I remember
Speaker 1: the second one was I was less into and found
Speaker 1: it kind of um and I just couldn't immerse myself
Speaker 1: in it. And then I enjoyed three. So yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: not sure. Maybe I'll still I'll still stick with that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: just just skip to three or start with two. I
Speaker 1: don't know you can. You can forge your own path
Speaker 1: through the franchise. Okay, do we need to wrap up
Speaker 1: there for today? Yeah, I think that's probably a good
Speaker 1: place to go ahead and close everything out. But we'll
Speaker 1: be back with more. We have more listener mail that
Speaker 1: we didn't get to do in this episode, and more
Speaker 1: of it we'll keep coming in thanks to you find listeners.
Speaker 1: So yeah, lets let us have it. Keep sending in
Speaker 1: your listener mail, send in your thoughts on past, present,
Speaker 1: and future episodes of Stuff to Blow your Mind, Weird
Speaker 1: House Cinema, The Monster Fact, or just other episodes of
Speaker 1: listener mail. We'd love to hear from you. We read
Speaker 1: it all, even if we don't read it on listener
Speaker 1: mail or respond to you personally. Huge thanks to our
Speaker 1: audio producer J J. Paseway. If you would like to
Speaker 1: get in touch with us with feedback on this episode
Speaker 1: or any other, to suggest a topic for the future,
Speaker 1: or just to say hello, you can email us at
Speaker 1: contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. Stuff
Speaker 1: to Blow Your Mind is a production of I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the i
Speaker 1: heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to
Speaker 1: your favorite shows.