Let's Hope 2025 Brings Better Movies Than Last Year!

[RodeoSchro]

LANDMAN
January 4, 2025

But it hasn't yet!

My YouTube algorithm is both my best friend and my worst enemy. I bet that's true for pretty much everyone.

On the good side, I get directed to new rock and roll, and also I've watched what seems like 100 4-minute scenes from various seasons of "Justified". They're great! Raylan Givens generally shoots someone, beats up someone, or outsmarts someone in every clip. I've only seen maybe two complete episodes of "Justified" but I don't need to see any more. Good old Al Gorithm gave me the good stuff!

But Mr. Gorithm isn't always right. Case in point - "Landman".

We all know series can jump the shark but that usually happens deep into the series' lifespan. Have you ever seen a series jump the shark in its very first episode?

If you've watched "Landman" then, yes - yes you have!

Good gosh is this thing bad. Maybe it's not that "Landman" jumped the shark so much as its series created Taylor Sheridan has. You already know how incredibly stupid, bad, idiotic and moronic "Yellowstone" was. Even Sheridan's "Tulsa King" went off the rails this year. But back to "Landman".

It's so bad. The characters are laughable. Look, I'll say this up front - I am no oil man but growing up in an oil refinery town, and living in the Energy Capital of the World, you can't help but interact with people from all parts of the oil industry. From the bottom to the top.

No one on "Landman" bears any resemblance to anyone in the real world as far as I know, and God help us if there ARE people like this out there.

I'll start with Billy Bob Thornton, who is the closest thing to a real human being on this crapfest. Now, I've only watched the first three episodes of this and don't plan on watching any more but who knows? Anyway, Thornton plays a dude who apparently was a speculator or wildcatter and lost it all, and now has to work as a landman because he has $500,000 in debt. First of all, if he had a lot of money and then went broke in the oil industry, he'd owe a LOT more than $500k. Do you know what $500k gets you in the oil industry? Nothing. It gets you nothing. I guess you could be a minority partner in one oil well? If so, then you'd be a nameless, faceless, losing investor, of which there are 43,581 walking around Midland, Texas right now.

But he must have been filthy rich at one point because his ex-wife is clearly a trophy wife who is now married to some actual rich guy, and his kids are clearly rich kids. We'll get to them in a minute but back to BBT. He's a decent guy but has his sarcastic pessimism turned up to 10. And here's something that ought to be a crime, and hell yes I am talking about his incessant smoking. Not just that, though - when called on being a two-pack-a-day smoker, BBT launches into one of his patented I-Know-Everything soliloquies, claiming that in Japan, people smoke like there's no tomorrow and guess what? "Lung cancer ain't even in the top ten causes of death. So it's not the cigarettes that kill you, it's all the sugar and shit". WRONG.

Do you what the second-leading cause of death among Japanese men is? You get three guesses and the first two don't count and yeah - the answer IS lung cancer. Four out of the top ten causes of death in Japan are various cancers. Thornton says the same thing about China and of course, he's wrong there too. China is responsible for almost HALF of the lung cancer cases and lung cancer deaths in the whole world. The USA is a distant second, and Japan is third. And yeah, I have the receipts:

Lung cancer statistics | World Cancer Research Fund

The latest statistics on lung cancer rates globally. Lung cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. It is the most common cancer in men and the 2nd most common cancer in women.

www.wcrf.org

How in the hell Taylor Sheridan got that "cigarettes don't kill you" BS into a TV show should be a crime. It really should. Kids are gonna smoke because Taylor Sheridan had Billy Bob Thornton tell the world that smoking doesn't kill you.

The ONLY way out of this IMHO is for Billy Bob Thornton's character to die a protracted, painful death from lung cancer and have everyone else on the show say, "See? We told you so!" about one hundred times.

Remember - BBT is the only semi-decent character on this show and he's promoting death. So you can guess how bad the rest of these characters are.

His ex-wife Angela is the worst caricature of a ditzy blonde rich Texan that I've ever seen. Again - I'm met dozens and dozens and dozens of rich oilmen, and their families. I've never come across anyone even remotely as idiotic as BBT's ex-wife. I've never met anyone from any walk of life whatsoever that's as vapid as she's portrayed. "Clueless" doesn't begin to describe her. She is the worst female character you'll ever see and I sure hope that doesn't make you want to tune into this dumpster fire. So trust me - don't watch this, you'll hate yourself for wasting your time if you do. It's as if Taylor Sheridan thought, "There has to be a Guiness World's Record for Most Idiotic Character On A TV Series and by golly, I'm going to set the new record!"

The two kids are morons. The son is a wispy loser who quit college one semester shy of a geology degree because he just can't wait to run an oil company. Hey, moron - do you know how many college drop-outs get hired by oil companies to be executives? The same as the number of Oscars you have on your mantle. All I can do is sigh and shake my head.

But he's the paragon of genius compared to his sister. She's 17 and decorum prevents me from actually quoting her view on her sex life. Put it this way - don't let your kids watch this show. Just don't.

Jon Hamm has only been in a couple scenes so far but I can predict that this is the role he's going to be most embarrassed about when he looks back on his career. I'd ask some of the guys I know who are big oilmen what they think about Hamm's character but I don't want to get laughed out of Houston.

Demi Moore is in this but only so they can show a woman who swims a lot.

If by chance you have read this and for some reason still aren't sold on how bad it is, and just HAVE to watch it, then I can help. Below is the opening scene of Episode 1. It is the ONLY scene worth watching. After that, go watch something else, and let's all hope "Landman" is the worst thing put out all year. I mean, there's nowhere to go but up!

 

[RodeoSchro]

THE UNION
January 11, 2025

Do you watch American football? I do! And I have for pretty much all my life.

About 20 years ago, I noticed something in the NFL; specifically, it was the terminology used by announcers and referees. Even more specifically, it seemed like every year there was a new word, slogan or catchphrase that entered the lexicon. And it is repeated over and over and over and over ad nauseam by every single person who announces an NFL game.

The first one actually goes way back, lots longer than 20 years ago - "ensuing". If you've ever watched highlights of a game, you've heard the announcer say, "On the ensuing kickoff..." Now be honest - have you ever heard "ensuing" used anywhere, for anything, other than to describe a kickoff after a touchdown?

You have not. And you won't.

It's a real word but it's never used anywhere except by football announcers. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd think that was by design. But I'm not a conspiracy theorist or, as some misguided minions call themselves, "conspiracy investigators".

After a few years, I noticed each year there was a new addition to the NFL vocabulary. The best one was "matriculated", used by former Kansas City Chiefs coach Hank Stram waaaaaaaaay before Taylor Swift was born. Stram said, "Just keep matriculating the ball down the field boys!" when he was mic'ed during a broadcast. Lots of people made fun of that but Stram got the last laugh - "matriculating the ball down the field" is now an acceptable way to describe football plays.

The NFL took notice. I am sure there were more but the next one I remember was "impetus". This was introduced to the announcers via a rule, which had something to do with how a receiver was moving with respect to a thrown football. I can still hear some announcer dude screaming "Remember, it's the receiver's IMPETUS! IT'S HIS IMPETUS!" as the refs were trying to decide if the receiver made a catch or not.

I'm pretty sure that dude couldn't actually define "impetus". Shucks, I don't think I can.

When we were kids, there was a penalty with the greatest name ever - "too much time in the huddle". That's awesome! Hey - you dudes took too much time in the huddle and the play clock expired, but what exactly were you guys doing in the huddle that took so long? Now though, the penalty is called "delay of game". How utterly boring.

Not boring is "giving him the business". It's not a real penalty description but it should be!

​

We need to bring back "giving him the business".

Next came "footspeed". This was the term de jour to describe someone fast but announcers couldn't just say he was fast - they had to say "he has great footspeed". You've got to agree - that one is stupid. But this is the NFL we're talking about and if you didn't know, many people think "NFL" stands for "No Fun League".

Then we got "football move". You see, whether or not a receiver made a "football move" after dropping a pass determines whether or not the drop is a fumble. "DID HE MAKE A FOOTBALL MOVE?!?!? DID HE MAKE A FOOTBALL MOVE?!?!?!?!?!?!?" No one really knows or ever will know. Blame super slow motion because every blink of an eye is captured and it always makes it look like every move is a "football move".

This, of course, led to replay controversies and that, of course, led to a new phrase - "clear and convincing evidence". If a referee makes a call and then it gets reviewed, there must be "clear and convincing evidence" on the replay tape that the ref did screw up, as we all know refs do all the time. But this leads to a "don't believe your lying eyes" situation a lot of times because while there are 496 cameras at every NFL game, somehow the critical angle needed for "clear and convincing evidence" is almost never delivered.

Which leads us to the latest ridiculous NFL-mandated phrase but before that, let's harp on what the NFL did the referees.

Some time around the mid-2000's, the NFL made a crucially dumb referee gesture change. I am talking, of course, about the the movement to describe an incomplete pass; a missed field goal; or the declination of a penalty.

REAL REFEREES cross their hands over one another, like this AI referee from 15 years ago demonstrates. And isn't it creepy to learn there was AI 15 years ago? I couldn't figure out how to cue up the video, so go to 2:18 and invest 5 seconds of your precious time:

]​

But NOW, the NFL has starched the shirts of the refs and they have to have the finger tips of their hands touch in the middle of their chest and then the hands explode outwards. No crossing of hands allowed! It looks like that move cheerleaders make, usually when they're starting a cheer. It's a great move for cheerleaders but a stupid move for referees. Then again, we're talking about the No Fun League.

Which brings us to the newest and in my opinion, dumbest thing the NFL has ever done with respect to nomenclature:

"By rule..."

Wait - "by rule"? As in when the referee says, "The infraction is a 15-yard penalty. By rule, the ball will be placed at the 20-yard-line"? By RULE? What else can it be by? You are the referee and your only power is to enforce the rules. You don't have to say "by rule" because everything you do is mandated by the rules.

I don't know about you but I've never heard the penalty for a rule violation be decided by, say, a coin flip or a quick game of Mumblety Peg. That'd be cool though - "Number 57 is guilty of holding. The refs played three rounds of Rock, Paper, Scissors. The umpire won and he thinks the penalty should be ten laps around the stadium so number 57, start running!"

I know what you're all thinking - "Gee RodeoSchro, is this all you have to worry about?" No, I also have to worry about how bad "The Union" is, which is why I dedicated zero words about it until now.

No stars - by rule, you have to avoid "The Union".

 

[Rob0607]

I truly wish the Live at Glam Slam 1992 Paisley Park is allowing AMC Theatre to show in ONE theatre in California can at least be shown in each state!

 

[RodeoSchro]

I truly wish the Live at Glam Slam 1992 Paisley Park is allowing AMC Theatre to show in ONE theatre in California can at least be shown in each state!

No kidding! I have to think that it's going to be shown everywhere else but who really knows?

 

[RodeoSchro]

A FAMILY AFFAIR/DEXTER - A JUXTAPOSITION
January 25, 2025

I'd heard of "Dexter" when it came out but thought, "Why would I want to watch a show about a serial killer, as I assume he's the kind of serial killer that kills innocent people, as all serial killers in my knowledge are and have been?"

But recently a friend set me straight - "Sure, he's a serial killer but he only kills bad people who got away with murder". Well, why didn't anyone tell me this years ago?!?

Or to put it another way, "Thank goodness someone told me now, just when we're looking for a new series to watch!"

And so we did.

We're through the first six episodes of Season 1 (no binge watching for us! No binge anything-ing!). It's been really good. He's offed some of the most horrible people you can imagine, all the while being played like a puppet by a real serial killer. I can't wait to see how it turns out!

But last night the ladies said, "Find us a movie!" and so I did. Actually, the blame falls not on me but I am waaaaaaaaaaaaay too smart to tell you on who the blame falls. Meh - if I was really smart, I'd not even typed that because I am sure you've already figured out on who the blame must fall and yes - I've already made plans to buy jewelry so as to get out of the doghouse I'm going to be in probably very soon.

That's not the main thing, though. The main thing is - what in the Sam Hill is Nicole Kidman doing in this monstrosity?

She's got an Oscar, a British Academy Film Award, a Volpi Cup (no, I don't know what that is), two Primetime Emmys and SIX Golden Globes. Although she was born in Hawaii, because her parents are Australian and were in Hawaii on student visas, she's technically an American citizen as well as an Australian citizen, which explains why she's listed as the first Australian to receive the AFI Lifetime Achievement Award. Plus, she's married to Keith Urban, one of the best guitar players on Planet Earth.

Kidman has no business being in a movie this stupid.

Here's how stupid it is, and this is where the "juxtaposition" comes in:

56% of the way through the movie, all of us thought it would be a good idea if Dexter showed up and sliced everyone in this thing into his trademark tiny bits.

Sadly, he did not. As soon as we realized there was no possible way for Dexter to show up and slice everyone into his trademark tiny bits, we turned this off and salvaged the evening by cuing up Episode 6 of the real thing.

"A Family Affair" is just so, so stupid. No one and I mean NO ONE in this "rom-com" is likable. No one and I mean NO ONE in this "rom-com" is funny. No one and I mean NO ONE in this "rom-com" has a shred of romantic chemistry.

I'd love to pile on and mention how stupid and unlikable Joey King's character is, or how improbably Zac Efron's character switches between Ultimate Hollywood Mimbo and Regular Guy, or anything you'd like to say about Nicole Kidman's stunning lack of judgment in taking this role.

However, I am going to my favorite restaurant and eat a nice steak, drink some high-quality bourbon, and resolve to never ever hold the selection of this movie over Mrs. Rod.......I mean, over whoever it was that picked it.

C'mon 2025 - step your game up!

 

[Dancelot]

The Substance (2024)

this was for free on some streaming channel so Mrs. Dancelot and me decided, okay, why not?

And actually this was not bad at all.
I am anything but an expert on horror movies, but even I catched tons of more or less direct nods, references and easter eggs to/from horror classics, which I won't spoiler (just as I said : NO spoiler ), that was pretty fun.
Film itself creates a slightly surreal atmosphere, yet towards the last half hour it really gets over the top, maybe a bit out of hand even.... probably too much for some! LOL

I have one complaint though which ruins the whole premise and internal logic of the film:

Spoiler: spoiler

The dealers & producers of the substance constantly claim that the two split persons are the same, yet when one wakes up and the other goes to sleep, she can't even remember what the other one has been doing the last week... but if Demi does not live through the life of the younger version herself, then what what the fuck does she gain??? Instead she could simply hire a younger actor to play her younger self, do model jobs and have sex with young guys, while Demi stays at home for another week.... same result, less risk, less blood.... makes no sense of course

okay, but if you forget about that "small" detail it's still a nice watch

only possible rating in this case is 7 capsules, one dose for each day of the week

 

[Dancelot]

Back To Black (2024)

I so much looooove Amy Winehouse and her music, so I was scared I could be disappointed.

However, this was a great movie and besides a few minor details rather authentic as far as I can tell. Tragic story as we all know, but with talent and music out of this world.

Maris Abela gave a highly credible and convincing performance, a great job in the acting department, but also the singing which as I understand she did all by herself, and that is quite a challenge considering Amys unique voice and style.
Great job, and Mrs. Dancelot thought so as well.


I'd give this 7.5/10 for now, just rating the music it would be 9.5

 

[RodeoSchro]

THE MONKEY
February 26, 2025

Dang - given what we've seen so far, I cannot think of any reason to watch The Oscars. Not this year OR next year. Of course, my tastes don't run to the usual The Oscars flair, do they?

Back in the day, I was a voracious reader of all things Stephen King. I especially enjoyed his selections of short stories, one of which gave us "The Monkey". Technically, "The Monkey" was included in Skeleton Crew.

What a great book! Skeleton Crew gave us "The Mist", which formed the plot of one of the first video games I ever played. It also gave us "The Jaunt", a story about teleportation that concludes with a kid saying "Longer than you think! Longer than you think!" before gauging his eyes out.

And of course, it contains "The Monkey". First of all, know that "The Monkey" was originally published in a skin magazine called Gallery. Incredibly, Gallery was founded in part by attorney F. Lee Bailey - at one time the most famous criminal defense attorney in America. He represented O. J. Simpson as well as some other crooks and criminals. I know some stories about him and his clients but I can't tell them here. They're worth hearing, though.

Gallery also published not only Stephen King (two of Skeleton Crew's stories were published there first) but it also published 37 short stories from Isaac Asimov. Thirty-seven! You'd think a dude like Asimov wouldn't have to go to a skin magazine to get published, but what do I know? Maybe the pitch was, "Hey Isaac - let us publish your short stories so that when teenage boys take our magazines to the bathroom, they might actually convince mom that they really ARE reading it for the articles!"

"The Monkey" short story was so good that at least three literary critics wrote articles about it back in the day, including one who commented on the story's intertextual links with Edgar Allan Poe's "Murders in the Rue Morgue".

Or, possibly, these critics dummied up their reviews so as to claim to their mothers/wives/girlfriends that they really were buying Gallery for the articles because really - why were ANY literary critics reading ANYTHING in Gallery?!?

By the way, Gallery is now owned by 1-800-PHONESEX so if you get caught calling 1-800-PHONESEX, you might be able to get out of trouble by saying you were calling about getting a subscription to the magazine that has published Stephen King and Isaac Asimov, in hopes of there being more great stories for you to read.

If any of y'all try that and it works, be sure to let us know!

I've spent a lot of comedic capital talking about everything but this movie and that's because the movie is just average at best. I guess I can't put reviewing it off any longer.

I have to tell you that "The Monkey" short story and "The Monkey" movie don't have a whole lot in common. The movie begins with the one and only appearance by Adam Scott, who's covered in blood and is trying to return the monkey to a novelty store. The owner points to a sign that says "No Returns" but the monkey plays his drum, some Rube Goldberg stuff happens, and the store owner is run through by a spear gun, which then retracts thereby pulling out ten yards of the guy's guts. A promising start!

Scott then grabs a flamethrower, takes the monkey outside, and immolates it, laughing maniacally as he does so.

Naturally, you think "Wow! How did Scott get that monkey? For that matter, how did that novelty store get it? Whose blood is Scott covered in and how did it get there? Tell me now!"

You will not be told any of that, sorry.

The movie then goes back to - or maybe it all started in? - 1999 which for some reason is made up to look like 1979. Apparently Adam Scott is the father of two kids - twin boys but they aren't identical - and he's run off with a floozy, leaving behind various junk. One piece of junk is a round box with the monkey in it. I guess the immolation didn't take. "Turn the key and see what happens!" says the box.

So one of the kids - the one who's "younger" and is always picked on - does and their babysitter gets beheaded at Benihana's. The younger one - he's Hal - gets bullied at school, figures out the monkey is a killing machine, and winds it up again. But instead of killing his bullying brother Bill, their mother dies of an aneurysm.

The boys are sent to live with an aunt and uncle, who are then forced to give up their swinger lifestyle. It's not as funny as it should be. The uncle gets trampled by 97 horses so the boys throw the monkey down a well.

Nothing happens for 25 years but then their aunt dies in a humorous yet gruesome way. Then lots of other people from their little hometown start dying in strange accidents. Hal figures the monkey is back, and it is. I forget how it got back to the town but it does and Bill sends a hippie kid to buy it at a yard sale.

Bill has the monkey and is a recluse. He keeps winding it, trying to get Hal killed but instead wipes out half the town. The survivors think all this is funny.

Hal and Bill meet up, have it out, and the monkey kills Bill by shooting his head off with their dead mom's bowling ball fired from a cannon.

Yeah.

Hal and his son - the less said about that character, the better - decide they're stuck with the monkey and the only thing they can do is make sure no one ever winds it up again. As they're leaving town, a Pale Rider goes by and acknowledges them, which is something I bet none of the Gallery short-story reviewers ever mentioned.

Then a school bus carrying all the town's cheerleaders goes by, and all the cheerleaders are leaning out of the bus windows, waving their pom-poms and generally happy about all the mayhem.

A semi-truck going the other way gets too close to the bus and decapitates all the cheerleaders. The end.

"The Monkey" could have been much better, so all I can really recommend is that you search out the old copy of Gallery magazine that has this story in it, and read that. Everyone will probably believe you DID buy the magazine for the articles.

"Alien Opponent" is the movie to watch if you want to see decapitated cheerleaders. "The Monkey" is only a Two Decapitated Heads out of Ten Decapitated Heads substitute.