#287: What kind of geek are you?

We ask the question: What kind of geek are you? We discuss the Conan backlash. And we run down the week in geek, including, well, lots of geek-related news and awesomeness.

Direct Download
Blog Post

Correction: Jaime Murray is the daughter of Billy Murray, a British actor. Not Bill Murray the grumpy old d-bag. Now we can all return to our bunks with clear minds. :groucho:

Just a few notes;

  1. Star Wars Blue Ray’s - They really should also release the original theatrical versions as well. Those are historic documents in themselves. I myself was not very fond of most of the changes made in the Special Editions, though the revised EFX were good. My personal pet peeve is the replacement of Anakin at the end of ROTJ.

  2. South Pacific - Ummm it was shot in Technicolor, and the set design included that crazy color scheme from it’s transition from stage. There was never a version shot in Black and White. The extensively loud color was due to a specific decision by cinematographer Leon Shamroy using polarization to intensify the color palette. He was nominated for an Oscar for the way he shot it, even though folks at the time also complained about the loud color. I recently saw a version of Gone With The Wind where they redid the Technicolor print direct from the original negs. Please note that that Technicolor is a printing process not a photographic process that uses ink on cellophane. Far more durable and better lasting color than the Ektrachrome prints of the late 50’s through the 70’s. Why Technicolor is making a comeback.

  3. Conan and Citizen Kane - OK. I have not seen the new Conan Movie, however I will defend Kane. It was a “flop” since it was not distributed due to pressure from William Randolf Hearst. Even though it was shown in only a very few theaters, it did win the Oscar for best screenplay. Kane is considered, justifiably, the greatest film ever made. Much like Birth Of A Nation, Kane completely changed the visual vocabulary of cinema. Before Kane, no one had the balls to approach such a subject with that level of alacrity. A good example is the “f64” cinematography of the opening sequence. No one, absolutely no one, had ever attempted or pulled off that sort of deep DOF shot in a motion picture before. Too many people today (and yes I will be going on a little rant here) have no conception of the history of cinema, and therefore make some really uneducated statements about it. Watch movies made before Kane. They look so dated from both the cinematography and story standpoints. Kane looks and feels like a modern film, because it is the first true modern film. It is sort of looking at silent films before Birth Of A Nation and films after Birth Of A Nation. Granted, the subject matter is very difficult to deal with, but before it, films looked simply like stage plays that someone filmed from the back of the room. DW Griffith introduced multiple cameras, fast intercuts, close ups, cameras on a trolley, etc all in that film. Kane did much the same along with perhaps the first ever hard bio-pic (even if Kane was a pastiche of the afore mentioned Hearst) ever committed to film.

quick question… which episode did the crew talk about X-MEN first class? I know there’s one when they talked about it spoiler free.

For those who are wondering and have not taken a Photography, Film or Telecommunications class; I believe that what Photonutz means by DOF is Depth of Field.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_field

Yes I do certainly mean Depth Of Field there :slight_smile: Thank You Omra for the assist :smiley:

for folks intersteed in the next Holmes flick - I created a thread -

http://forum.galacticwatercooler.com/showthread.php?13953-Sherlock-Holmes-A-Game-of-Shadows&p=377570&viewfull=1#post377570

You can look for it in Uchiha’s podcast spreadsheet. :wink: Which is not quite up to date…but close enough I think.

I would add Kane is considered (by snooty film critics and film teachers) to be the greatest film ever made. Our film teachers went on endlessly about it in art school. The technical significance and the shooting brilliance etc. I always looked at it as the longest movie about a burned up sled in history. All the worlds asshole-ishness to pick from and they choose to pull the focus on a sled. I’m not saying Mr Hearst should have put the clamps on the movie… but I understand.

The Portal 2 marriage proposal

[video=youtube_share;o8SdYz7cq04]http://youtu.be/o8SdYz7cq04[/video]

Citizen Kane did amazing things for Cinema. That being said, as a movie it blows.

LOL!!! A rather shocking turn of events! For one shining moment, Default Prophet and I are in complete agreement! :wink:

That’s not fair as long and you’re not talking about video games or things you have a nostalgia boner for we usually agree =P

Well I’m neither a snooty film critic nor a film teacher, and I do agree it is the greatest film ever made. The reason the sled is so damn important is it’s name, Rosebud and it’s significance. It represents something Kane never had, his childhood, and watching it burn like that in the final shot, you symbolically see his life destroyed from the moment it was, from his childhood. The other reason why it is important is the name itself, “Rosebud”, which was Hearst’s pet name for his mistress’s clitoris. Here the film is saying that Hearst had destroyed his own personal reputation and life (which he actually did) all over some woman. It was that scene more than anything else that upset Hearst and why he tried to suppress the film.

I would disagree. I’m a film geek for lack of a better term. To say Kane blows is akin to saying that Joss Whedon couldn’t write or direct his way out of a paper bag to a Browncoat.

Kane is amazing cinema and films forever where changed by it. The story is very captivating, and the history of how this film made it finally to a theater is the stuff of legend really. Personally if someone tells me they don’t like Kane, and provides valid reasons I can respect that. However to just dismiss the film and say it sucks, is like saying Ansel Adams sucks or similar and just make me think that person is being a typical hipster douche.

Personally, I don’t think it was that bad. I mean the tentacle sex scene was a bit much, but that was the directors vision :smiley:

Now that is comedy gold!

Well never having played the game, I must say that was really sweet :slight_smile:

See I cannot agree with you about the story. At all. And that’s the point.

There’s two different film lovers in the world: Those that think Citizen Kane is the best film and those that think Casablanca is and that has a lot to do with how important story and characters are to you imo.

Ah. The ‘Is Citizen Kane the greatest ever?’ debate. This popped up before. (I think the last time Sean blasted it on a 'cast)

Give props where props are due. For its time, ‘Citizen Kane’, as photonutz points out, was way ahead of the curve. It was innovative with technique and creative with its storytelling. It was the Star Wars of its time ahem actually Gone With the Wind was the Star Wars of that time. Where was I? Oh yeah.

I get the whole snooty film critic bash. I remember being at some dinner with some posh folks and they were discussing classical music. “This bloke is better than that bloke.” At the time, my sum of experience with classical music was John Williams and movie scores. When I tried to join the conversation, I was met with snickers and treated like an uncultured buffoon. My passion and appreciation was unimportant compared to their superior opinion.

I left the party feeling a fool and intimidated. Long story short, I realized Bach and Mozart, et al. collection of work is genius and should not be placed in competition. These folks were keeping up with the Jones. I lived in a shack down by the river and enjoyed listening to Led Zeppelin and The Imperial March on an 8-track in my van. IMO, once it becomes a competition the artistic value gets cheapened.

To me, Citizen Kane is a great film and intriguing as a human drama. I did not know the Rosebud connection to Hearst (thank you, photonutz. That adds more complexity to Kane’s character). Charles Foster Kane is a tragic hero. He is a boy who never grows up. He never matures so he is incapable of mature love, either expressing it or receiving it.

I don’t tend to think in terms of greatest. It has a tone of superiority. I roll with favorites. I have many favorites. Some of those favorites, folks agree with. Some, they despise. Hey! That’s cool. We all don’t have to like chilled monkey brains.

Citizen Kane is just not Sean’s rodeo show.