Cantankerous Episode #11: My Rifle, My Pony and Me

Posted by on August 17th, 2010   Filed under: Cantankerous, Featured

Reed Farrington

The sun is sinkin’ in the West, which means it’s time for episode 11 of Cantankerous! This episode Reed completely massacres one of the greatest on-screen musical numbers in film history (along with some help from Jay) and we finally get to hear Mr.Farrington’s thoughts on Christopher Nolan’s Inception. This results in an occasionally heated discussion in which Jay and Sean attempt to understand and accept Reed’s criticism that the film lacks any new real-world scientific discoveries in the field of dream research and technology. Then we get in to some dream discussion and eventually end up discussing whether or not Twitter actually draws us closer to celebrities. Thank us later, it’s the new Cantankerous! GOTTA LOVE IT!™

Download the MP3 (63MB)
Cantankerous Archives

Subscribe to the podcast feed:
RSS iTunes



←  Older Comments
 →
  • Xidor

    Here is an exchange from Star Trek IV:

    Amanda: Spock, does the good of the many out weigh the good of the one?
    Spock: I would accept that as an axiom.
    Amanda: Then you stand here alive because of a mistake made by your flawed, feeling, human friends. They have sacrificed their futures because they believed that the good of the one – you – was more important to them.
    Spock: Humans make illogical decisions.
    Amanda: They do, indeed.

    The podcast, hinges on whether you self-identify with Spock or Kirk.

  • Jay, I think you’re misinterpreting Armond White’s view of cinema. He actually compares everything he sees to the ultimate classics, be it DEATH RACE, NORBIT or INCEPTION. If you read his reviews you’ll see that he definitely doesn’t buy into the good-for-what-it-is philosophy. I’m on board with him regarding this issue; supposedly trashy genre films have often proven that they could be more affecting and cinematically innovative than “respectable” A-list films, so why shouldn’t THE EXPENDABLES be criticized and analyzed with the same rigor or be held to the same standards as, say, THERE WILL BE BLOOD? Of course they’re wildly different films, but they both try to achieve their respective goals through image, sound, rhythm, tone, etc. They’re both films, regardless of the genre they’re working in.

    Maybe it’s the wrong place to talk about that, though.

    ————–

    I mostly agree with Defendor regarding Cantankerous but thought this episode was excellent. The picking on Reed was annoying at first but it quickly left to be replaced with a personal and casual conversation between friends, albeit one that put strong emphasis on Reed. I too found the show more engaging when Jay used to put his own personality to the forefront.

    Also, film conversation with Reed is, to my ears, infinitely more compelling than film conversation on the regular Film Junk podcast. He’s not the most coherent debater, but he often brings up unusual and valid points that spark great interaction. I love Sean & Greg as hosts, but they’re a bit stale when it comes to film-talk.

  • Just to clarify my “The picking on Reed was annoying at first…” sentence; I’m not trying to paint Reed as a helpless victim to two brutish thugs who just want to humiliate him, you guys are obviously friends and have known each other for years so I’m not in position to judge your relationship.

    What I mean is that, as a show, I think Cantankerous works even better when Reed’s stories/opinions/comments are followed by further investigation or solid counterpoints.

  • Continuing my ridiculous conversation with myself…

    “I love Sean & Greg as hosts, but they’re a bit stale when it comes to film-talk.”

    This sounds way too harsh, sorry. I intended to say that Sean and Greg aren’t very argumentative about their film-related opinions. They very rarely confront each other or Jay when they disagree, staying in a nice “let’s agree to disagree” mode that makes the weekly reviews feel dry from time to time. I guess fake arguments would be a lot worst though, and anyway it’s not like the show as a whole isn’t consistently fun and addictive.

    Let’s hope I won’t feel the need to clarify this re-clarification.

  • Maxime, thanks for keeping this post alive with your comments! :-)

    And thanks for appreciating my contributions to the Film Junk podcast. I have a hard time listening to the Film Junk podcast when I’m not on it. I mean, people think I’m always playing devil’s advocate, but it’s just that Jay’s inconsistent analysis of films drives me up the wall! People seem to hate when I interrupt him, but I can’t help it when every sentence he says makes my jaw drop.

  • It’s not surprising that you’d consider my analysis of films inconsistent (I don’t analyze films, I just talk about whether or not I like them) seeing as your approach is to just dislike everything. I will agree that yes, you are more consistent in your negativity towards the majority of films than I am. :P

  • Well, if Film Junk reviewed porno films, maybe I’d like more films.

  • We did just review Piranha 3D.

  • Kamen Liew

    The title of this episode sounds like a porno title.

    “My rifle, my pony and me”.

  • El Ultimo Hombre

    I remember when Ricky Gervais came out with his podcast. It was really funny and I listened to every episode. Then he started charging for it. While it was a great podcast, it just wasn’t worth paying for. Now I don’t know any of the guys on this podcast, I don’t really know anything about their lives or relationships outside of the podcast and I don’t know Reed Farrington. It seems pretty clear that Reed Farrington isn’t even his real name. But if Reed Farrington kept making Cantankerous and started charging for it, I’d pay up.

  • Defendor

    I apologize for my presumptuous comments. My points came out harsh and unfair. Jay is right (in the intro of Film Junk #284) – I don’t know the hosts, outside of what’s edited and offered on the podcast. I don’t wish to dictate the course of the show or fault strangers’ relationships, and regret my public criticisms.

  • I don’t want it to sound like we won’t accept criticism of Cantankerous, and it’s always good to know how each episode comes across. I think we just want to reassure people it’s not our intention to cut down Reed or to put on a mocking tone for the sake of entertainment. Our reactions just come from natural frustration and familiarity with the guy.

  • Henrik

    Well, seing as this was brought up on the podcast, I might as well defend myself here as well.

    When Reed says:

    “You understand correctly with regards to my quibble with Inception’s lack of inspiration.”

    it clearly shows that he did have a point with what he was trying to say, and that he only started joking after Jay and Sean leapt to the scientific discovery conclusion. Either Reed is only willing to stand up for what he believes in comments sections, or he doesn’t feel the environment of the podcast is supportive enough for it to be worth standing up for something, and his opinion on film would seem less garbled, if you DID give him the benefit of the doubt. He at least seems willing to participate seriously in the comments, but I guess that could be the only place.

  • That’s a nice compliment, El Ultimo Hombre. Thx! BTW, your bill is in the mail. :-)

    Henrik, when I find that I can’t explain any better, I figure it’s better to go with the flow or move on rather than go over the same point again and again.

    Defendor, I don’t think you need to apologize for your valid interpretation of the dynamics of our relationships at Film Junk. It’s interesting to hear about people’s perceptions because they’re just as important as the reality of the situation.

    I

  • El Ultimo Hombre

    You’re welcome but I’m absolutely serious. You should charge $1.00 for the next podcast to see how badly fans really want you to do this. Of course you might have to split that money up between all of you so it’s really just more of a tip. But you never know, you could make a fortune!

  • Defendor

    @Double_A:
    ” Don’t listen to the Defendors of the world (“I like the early funny ones.”). ”

    Just for the record, the big reason I enjoy Cantankerous and Film Junk isn’t because I find them funny, but for for the authentic, wonderful chemistry shared among the hosts.

    I wasn’t hooked on Film Junk until Greg joined. Sean and Jay are great together but the addition of Greg’s personality creates a perfect trio. And seriously, how many other shows have you heard with such complementary, balanced *voices*? I could listen to these three all day.

    Similarly with Cantankerous, Reed and Jay have an unexpectedly compelling rapport, enhanced by the quirky musical interludes. I dare not try to quantify what I find so interesting about their conversations, and I think the sheer length of this comment thread speaks to the show’s unique and indescribable charm.

    Not to say it’s limited to Jay and Reed…the occasional guests are usually fun and bring an extra spice to the mix. But I think folks are correct in observing that a third permanent member is unnecessary, and tends to swing the balance to place Reed as the outsider.

  • rot

    Aside from Reed and Jay (D-grade celebrities), I have received a direct tweet response from Rosario Dawson so I guess I win (a thoughtful reaction to my suggestion she play in Y The Last Man film)

  • D-grade, rot? Let’s see if I ever respond to you again! (Oh, I guess I just did. I mean after this response.)

    Appealing to Rosario’s inner-geekness was a smart move.

←  Older Comments
 →