Last Active
  • Dark (2017) - Spoilers and discussions

    To A.Ron's question why it's always kids that are being kidnapped for the tests with the time machine prototype... I think none of the kids were chosen randomly.

    For example, I think Yassin was almost certainly kidnapped by Noah in 2019 because Yassin was dating Elizabeth (Noah's future wife) at the time. For others, one can only speculate, so I will.

    Erik: if he had not been kidnapped, Bartosz wouldn't have talked the other teenagers into going to the caves to look for Erik's drugs, which ultimately sets the Mikkel-Michael time loop in motion. Also, it is with Erik's cellphone that Noah first gets in touch with Bartosz.

    Mads: recall that Regina says to Ulrich, when they meet in her hotel in 2019 in season 1, that Mads always looked out for her and was nice to her when they were kids. I wonder if Mads was kidnapped because if he hadn't, then Regina may have never married Aleksander and given birth to Bartosz (who then, later in his own life becomes Noah's helper, and later still, may become the guy who builds the tunnel together with young Noah back in the 1920s, by some speculative accounts).
  • Dark (2017) - Spoilers and discussions

    Just finished watching all of it for the third time. I can't say how much I enjoy this show. I love all the attention to detail and how you keep discovering new things on every rewatch. For example, how old Jonas has the neckwound marks already in early season 1. Or the whole time loop of Old Tannhaus telling adult Claudia something in 1986, something that he could only know because Claudia's older self told him 33 years earlier after she travelled back in time.

    I find myself constantly pausing, putting down the tablet and mind wandering about how a character got here, why and whom they are trying to stop from doing what and how it probably all is going to end in a self fullfilling prophecy again anyway :D If the writers don't mess anything up with the last season next year, this may enter my all time top 5.

    @drumore already said it, it's like Mr Robot and Stranger Things but better... I really hope Cecily will convince the guys to cover Dark. They love Looper and Primer and I would love to hear them talk endlessly about bootstrap paradoxes, other worlds and give a complete account of all the times the time machine changed hands so that even I can convince myself that it really is only one time machine, as the writers claim ;)
    ElisaCecilyEine FrauGiovanni
  • Where I felt bald move went wrong in 2018

    The Expanse podcast and the lunches alone were worth my annual subscription fee.

    Please, guys, keep on putting out a new BaldMove TV every once in a while. Without you, I would not have discovered Sharp Objects or Barry, two of my favorite shows this year. Thank you for that!

    For the First Run Bald Movies, I could personally do with fewer super hero and action movies, and more movies that inspire insightful discussion about societal issues like Snowden, The Post, or Annihilation. I love those. Even a bad movie like The Circle sometimes inspires a great discussion.

    I liked Season of the Cage, but I already miss the original Commissioned podcasts. There is just a special type of excitement when suddenly a podcast for one of your favorite classic movies appears in the RSS feed. I'm still hoping to get your take on Goodfellas, on I Heart Huckabees, and on Star Trek VI one day.

    Thank you for your attention and for continuing to enrich my enjoyment of television! Happy 2019!
  • 310 - Lantern

    Chuck telling Jimmy that he never really meant that much to him made me think of A.Ron's take on one of the recent casts, which was how much the two brothers really resemble each other with regard to their manipulativeness and their ability to read and play other people. I don't think that Chuck always felt like he didn't care that much about Jimmy (I think the introductory scene of young Chuck reading to young Jimmy was one way of illustrating that), and that he would never have said something so cold about Jimmy at least until the disbarment case. My take was that when Jimmy confronted Chuck, after all that had gone down between them, Chuck was only looking for the most hurtful thing to say, and saying that he didn't care for Jimmy's remorse ritual and his appeal to the bond between brothers seemed like just the right thing to Chuck. So while it was painful to watch, I felt like I knew why Chuck did it and why he thought he had to do it. Some wounds just don't heal.

    I know it's a controversial opinion on this forum but I really don't get how some people can be so one-sided about this. Yes, Chuck is smug and patronizing. Yes, he deserves punishment, but burning down in his own house after being left by his wife and kicked out by the firm he helped build (not least as a consequence of his own actions, yes, yes), and that makes some people shout: oh, he so deserves this, fuck Chuck!! I don't know... In the end, I feel like I've watched a pretty conventional greek tragedy play out. Two brothers, both with good intentions, from their own moral perspectives, but also with very severe character flaws, and these flaws then become their ultimate downfall. No more, no less. Rest in peace, Chuck!
  • 109 - "The Well-Tempered Clavier"

    Rather than being right, I think people would enjoy the show more if times was spent enjoying the acting and storytelling rather than being so focused on all the theories.
    Thank you for putting this so well. It’s a bit like Sepinwall said in his article on this episode, this show puts mystery before characters (and, may I add, themes). I think it is this that has disappointed many viewers, perhaps even more than the fact that someone else’s theory turned out to be right. I understand that the mystery created by structuring the first season around endless time jumps adds some excitement to the show for people who like murder mysteries and endless speculation, but does it add anything to what the show has to say, thematically? If you watch Memento or Inception, their unconventional story telling structures reflect their subject matter (the nature of anterograde amnesia, the nature of dreaming), but so far it escapes me what the time jumping in Westworld is supposed to tell us about the nature of artificial intelligence or free will, etc. So dear two-timers who had it right from the start, sincere congratulations to you, but please don’t assume that previous nonbelievers are disappointed just because “we” weren’t “right”. I am disappointed because, while in its greatest moments the show addressed deep philosophical questions in captivating scenes with superb actors, these moments often do not get enough room amidst all the “mystery” elements of the show, and the discussion.

    And this priority of “setup and reveal” over substance has, as I have selfishly bemoaned before, negatively affected the podcast in my opinion. Personally, I love it when A.Ron and Jim discuss whether they, as viewers, can feel empathy for any of the hosts or not, or whether the hosts can be called conscious or not, and what that even means. I love it when Jim and A.Ron discuss what it must mean when you, as a host, suddenly realize that all your personal history is a fiction, or whether the way you, as a guest, behave towards hosts says anything about your “true character” or not. Those are the podcast moments I really enjoy and that for me add to the enjoyment of the show itself – big time. I am looking forward to more of those moments much more than to further speculation about whether it’s really three timelines or four, whether MIB is really Logan or William, or whether the mechanics are themselves robots or not. Because we will find out soon enough. No offense of course to the crowd who loves the mystery and speculation, and I understand that A.Ron and Jim need to please that very big part of the audience at least as much. I am merely trying to explain the other point of view here.

    phoenyx1023LukeElisaThe Hand