avclub-e9fa7473252deddc33483ef8b6dbf48c--disqus
JohnSemley
avclub-e9fa7473252deddc33483ef8b6dbf48c--disqus

We actually had talked about including this, but it was too dependant on which cut of the film you're watching that it kind of falls outside the strict either/or type of endings we're looking at here.

I couldn't help but be reminded of Altman's Short Cuts at the end, where the boy is hit by Lilly Tomlin's car and seems fine but then ends up concussing and dying. Maybe I'm just suspicious of the happy ending.

The original Premium Rush!

I love Louis' freestyle raps, especially, "I'm walking down the street, I'm walking down the road/ There's a frog, and there's a little toad…I made that up, I didn't actually see a frog or a toad."

I've been re-watching Weird Weekends, that BBC2 documentary series hosted by Louis Theroux. Sadly, there's never been an official DVD release. Somebody get on that.

Yeah it was bleak, man.

I think the book validates itself largely towards the end, when it's own constructions bubble a bit more to the surface. Up front, it's mostly the banter that pushes the thing along. But considering that you can read it in a sitting, I'd say it's worth a skim at least.

This becomes more apparent as the correspondence (or "correspondence") eventually ends up being Fingal's solo reflection on his own concern for veracity, which seems more obviously a construction for the purposes of the book and its larger argument. It never really occurred to me that the whole thing was fudged or

Exchanges with the editor are included at first, but then he backs off and lets the two correspond directly with one another. Beyond that, not really.

Isn't there some sort of expression regarding books and their covers?

I think Fingal's snark is tactical though: it read to me like he was intentionally being a prick about checking everything in exhaustive detail only to tie up a piece of work he had a moral problem with from ever actually seeing the light of day. Dick-headed for sure. But also kind of genius.

You're probably right. But it's also of interest to anyone who reads "creative nonfiction" and wants to know what kind of sleights are going on behind the scene. Also royalties from the book are going to a scholarship established in the name of the central figure in D'Agata's original essay, which eases the pain of

Such an interesting post/topic. I want to commission a study on the effects of this convenience on how we actually make sense of movies. I.e., does watching movies via streaming services make the experience more televisual because we can "change channels" by swapping to something different if we're not hooked in the

Me too. Probably too nerdy, but I was marvelling at the public transit infrastructure alone.

McLovin' played Evil Ed. And yes.

I'd generally agree, if only out of hometown pride. But I'm wondering, why do you think that?

By means of comparison, when I screened Point Blank in Toronto a few months ago, it was for six people and we just projected the DVD because nobody could find a print.

Take solace in knowing that NOBODY PLAYS TOUGHER THAN THE OUTFIT!

I fled from Toronto to Chicago for the weekend, and saw Crazy Horse at the Music Box, a lovely, lovely theatre. I'd say it was a highlight, but it was almost depressing, seeing a place this well-maintained with such incredible programming. I was fuming at the upcoming neo-noir programme, which includes four or five of

Way to be wrong. 7SOA7S rules. Ever played with madness? Have fun making life decisions knowing that you are constantly wrong about things.