Follow us on Twitter

Podcasts - Remote Viewing: Episode 48

So much quality stuff this week, we don't even know where to begin. You're not going to want to miss this one, if not just for to hear us talk about some of the more requested titles for us to review of late, but of some REALLY amazing stuff that you've probably never even heard of. Definitely, Check it...

12:13

31:00

34:19

46:38

52:25

62:22

68:58

75:44

85:27

92:19

98:06

104:55

109:20

114:34

119:30

Tags: podcast, spill, spill.com, remote viewing, dvd, blu-ray, review, cyrus, brian, luke

80 Comments for Remote Viewing: Episode 48

February 22, 2013 at 5:16 PM, cat said ...

I really love Victor/Victoria. It's a lot of fun. It drags like hell in the second half but it's still very charming and worth a watch.
February 22, 2013 at 5:13 PM, cat said ...

I watched Camelot recently. It's kind of terrible. While there are redeeming moments, the actors they chose just don't have the voices to do the songs justice. The acting is all over the place. It feels long and since they cut a lot for the movie I wish they would have been more thoughtful about what they did spent time on. In a musical, you need to maintain the tension throughout a song, especially if it has a fairly repetitive melody. But, I've never seen it on the stage and it's one of my favorite scores so if you've also never seen it performed, it might be worth a viewing just to give the songs context. Just fast forward through the slow bits.
February 22, 2013 at 5:39 AM, B.Bally said ...

I'm with Brian, From Russia With Love is my favorite Bond film.

I disagree about Jonathan Pryce, I thought he was an enjoyable villain, he was more like Rupert Murdoch than Ted Turner.
February 22, 2013 at 5:19 AM, randy said ...

I love Deathtrap so much, very much reminded me one of my favorite films of all time Sleuth.
February 21, 2013 at 11:30 PM, said ...

@Brian Salisbury - I recall you guys talking about Trekies and how Jedi Junkies tried and failed to do what they did. I may have missed where you mentioned The People vs. George Lucus, but you guys were totally right about documentaries needing an emotional core.

Congrats on taking over the LEOG news section, I'm still waiting for the day when they animate you for a review
February 21, 2013 at 11:17 PM, Brian Joseph McNally said ...

we're getting sinister next week right
February 21, 2013 at 10:47 PM, said ...

Yeah, the proposition that James Bond is a title is absurd, and flies in the face of everything that the books laid out. It even negates the 'idea of James Bond as an audience avatar for adventure'. I always thought that it was hard fact that Casino Royale was a reboot. Every piece of writing about Casino Royale, even down to the Wikipedia entry for the movie, seems determined that it is a reboot; and I agree. This is a direct quote: "establishing a new timeline and narrative framework not meant to precede or succeed any previous Bond film, which allowed the film to show a less experienced and more vulnerable Bond". The previous movies even contradict this theory: George Lazenby looked much younger in On Her Majesty's Secret Service than Connery did in You Only Live Twice, but the movie presents him as the same character by making reference to previous movies. Then, Lazenby gets married, and, although by the time we reach For Your Eyes Only, Moore looks waaay older than Lazenby did, he still visits Tracey's gravestone. Hell, Moore even gets upset/distant in The Spy Who Loved Me when Amasova mentions Tracey. Why would you get upset over/visit the tombstone of the wife of another person who you likely never met, and simply inherited the title of?

"Well, if it's meant to be a reboot, how do you explain the DB5 and Q references?" - I got the impression that these references were for the audience's benefit. To say: "hey, you'll remember this thing, we did it before, 50 years ago". But that's it. That moment in Skyfall is the first scene in the new Bond canon that we see this car that Bond owns. It is not meant to literally be the same car that was in Goldfinger, but this continuity's version of it. Why has he kitted out an old car instead of one from 2012? Cause old cars are awesome, and maybe Craig's Bond thinks so too.
February 21, 2013 at 7:42 PM, said ...

I still can't understand this obsession with trying to prove the "Bond is just a title" theory. There are hints in the first fourteen movies (that's kind of fun to type) that Sean Connery, George Lazenby, and Roger Moore are indeed all the SAME character, and those hints have to be overlooked for the fan theory to work - that's confirmation bias; that in itself disproves the theory. Even when it comes to the newer movies where Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig cannot possibly have lived through what the earlier Bonds did - so? They're movies; not historical documents. Batman has been around since 1939, and people accept that there are just different interpretations of that character.

It's fun to try and roll all the films into one, cohesive universe, but I feel like some people have taken it so seriously that it drains the fun out of it. And even the theory that Bond is a Time Lord sounds much more plausible.
February 21, 2013 at 6:35 PM, said ...
February 21, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Brandon Mack said ...

Bond was trying to capture the assassin not kill him it just didnt work out that way. He was not driven by revenge but duty. The reason they show the assassination is because Bond was looking for a chance to strike plus it shows how cold blooded Bond is like the scene Brain was talking about (the Dr. No scene). The guy was not the mission so he's useless to Bond.
February 20, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Davril Chorster said ...

@Cyrus, please, please, please rewatch Skyfall. You missed the point entirely and there are no coincidences in the story. That includes the Shanghai sequence. Bond follows the casino chip, not the woman across the street. Her being at the assassination and relating to Silva shows how the plot comes together; it's not a huge coincidence.

But whatever. Most people think that Bond is a moron and constantly makes terrible mistakes throughout the film, and don't seem to realize that since its start every single mistake or bad thing that happens is entirely M's fault. It's M's film and all of the cliches, tropes, and gadgets existent in previous films, here are replaced with a thematic, character driven story. This is one of the top 3 best Bond films ever made.

Call this a subjective point of view and leave it alone. :O)
February 20, 2013 at 5:10 PM, CasperVonSidecar said ...

@Undead--Did you listen to the show? We talk extensively about The People vs. George Lucas and how Jedi Junkies pales in comparison.
February 20, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Tony Tab said ...

Brian should do his Whistler voice for all the commentary

"Yeah well some of us can't see in the dark ya f**&^% nipple head, what am I supposed to do?"
February 20, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Jason Kroll said ...

M new Bond was alive. The whole, "Where the hell have you been?" as well ain regards to her talking about his obituary, "I knew you'd hate it."
February 20, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Jack Martine said ...

Statistically, komodo dragons have been known to kill people.
February 20, 2013 at 1:04 PM, MyWifeDave said ...

The second someone mentions the "Bond is just a title" theory, I completely loose interest in everything they have to say.
February 20, 2013 at 11:44 AM, said ...

So lets pick apart the first five minutes of a bond film based solely on something not being believable in a world where a car shoots missiles and where a Komodo dragon kills a guy.
February 20, 2013 at 11:02 AM, said ...

The assassin was working with Silva; Severine and the other Silva goons were setting the target up for the assassin, and promptly moved the body afterwards. Later on, Silva tells Bond all the various villainous things his cell does; it's natural he would have a few guys to snipe. Bond was focussing on taking out the sniper guy; he could have tried to stop him but it was probably too dangerous.
February 20, 2013 at 10:46 AM, said ...

100% Agree with your review on The perks of being a wallflower Cyrus. It didnt need the heavy drama at the end as it was a great film and still is but yeh , didnt see that coming!!
February 20, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Julio Francisco Suarez Gonzalez said ...

I think the confusion that Cyrus might have with Skyfall and the assassin is that it's probably something that Silva took into account. He is played as a villain with everything in the palm of his hands. How this could be something that "doesn't make sense" when the character is meant as an unimaginably smart individual is strange to me. Also, the part where they discuss when he's underwater was a total waste of time in the podcast. Biggest none-issue of the entire movie.
February 20, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Julio Francisco Suarez Gonzalez said ...

Die Another Day is camp as fuck to me and I can enjoy it on an ironic/pure level. It's a sucky movie but I think it was fun to watch. That one time, like 7 years ago when I watched it.
February 20, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Santos said ...

I wasn't a big fan of Sinister which sucks because I was really looking forward to it.
February 20, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Santos said ...

I'm really looking forward to next week's episode when you'll (hopefully) discuss Argo. I just re-watched that last night. So damn good.
February 20, 2013 at 7:25 AM, said ...

If you guys want a really great documentary on STAR WARS fans, you should check out The People vs. George Lucas, I believe it is still on Netflix.
February 20, 2013 at 7:23 AM, Issac Valdmir Kojiro said ...

Partially for the break before thieves I was expecting

Showing 25 out of 80 comments View All

Connect With Spill