Straight Dope Message Board

Straight Dope Message Board (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php)
-   Cafe Society (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Obvious things about a creative work you realize after the millionth time (OPEN SPOILERS POSSIBLE) (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=525685)

Lamia 10-07-2009 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shot From Guns (Post 11637818)
Sooooo if you walked out of a bar and saw a guy hitting himself, you wouldn't stop to watch?

Like Skald, I'd probably get the heck out of there before he started attacking passers-by. But I have no difficulty believing that a lot of people would stop to watch a guy hitting himself. What I don't believe for one moment is that these gawkers would then join the self-hitter's cult. One of those homeless squeegie guys would be a more likely guru.

CalMeacham 10-07-2009 01:40 PM

Quote:

you wouldn't stop to watch?
Heck, that's what his Boss does (and us, since we're stuck in the theater) when he beats himself up inside the office. That time he unquestionably WAS beating himself up.

Shot From Guns 10-07-2009 02:08 PM

It didn't start as a cult, though--it started as a group of people watching a guy beat the shit out of himself. By the time it got to cult status, there were only a tiny number of men who'd watched the Narrator beat himself up in the parking lot.

Lamia 10-07-2009 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shot From Guns (Post 11638462)
It didn't start as a cult, though--it started as a group of people watching a guy beat the shit out of himself. By the time it got to cult status, there were only a tiny number of men who'd watched the Narrator beat himself up in the parking lot.

The problem is that there's no logical path from "Let's watch this crazy dude hit himself!" to "I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter." The original Fight Club members had watched the narrator beat himself up, and it makes no sense for them to take him seriously after that.

Peter Morris 10-08-2009 08:36 PM

I watched I don't know how many Zorro movies and TV episodes before I figured out that Zorro is Spanish for fox.

TBG 10-10-2009 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Morris (Post 11643528)
I watched I don't know how many Zorro movies and TV episodes before I figured out that Zorro is Spanish for fox.

And I didn't know it until just now.:)

Histrion 10-12-2009 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11639473)
The problem is that there's no logical path from "Let's watch this crazy dude hit himself!" to "I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter." The original Fight Club members had watched the narrator beat himself up, and it makes no sense for them to take him seriously after that.

I disagree - meaning, I can believe that one of the following two things would happen:
  1. At least one passer-by would be curious enough about his behavior to stop and ask. (The fact that it's the only pair of passers-by that we see is just a movie shorthand.)
  2. More relevantly, one of the two passers-by asks, "Can I be next?" Which, considering the way Fight Club progresses, could easily mean, "Can I pummel you next?" Remember, too, these are guys who just came out of a bar, in a movie whose theme is at least partly to do with the feral impulses that bubble just beneath the surface.

I haven't read the book - does it go into more detail on this point? Anyone? Anyone? Bue-*punch*

Miller 10-12-2009 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11639473)
The problem is that there's no logical path from "Let's watch this crazy dude hit himself!" to "I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter." The original Fight Club members had watched the narrator beat himself up, and it makes no sense for them to take him seriously after that.

I never had trouble buying into the premise of Fight Club. Look at something like Jackass, which is founded on a premise not to unlike that: a bunch of guys go out and attempt to inflict as much grievous bodily harm on themselves as they can without permanently crippling themselves. And they're minor celebrities for it. Of course, Johnny Knoxville is unlikely to attempt to destroy society, at least on purpose, but there are a lot of people who admire him for his ability to throw himself down a flight of stairs. It's not an unreasonable extrapolation to take that and say, "What if this guy had that sort of mesmerizing charisma that you see in people who found cults of personality?" Real life cults, and even political movements, have been founded by weirder people than Tyler Durden.

Lamia 10-12-2009 11:50 PM

Miller, I wrote a rather lengthy reply but then decided I don't want to spend the time on a movie I disliked so much. I realize that many people enjoyed Fight Club, but there is no way anyone is going to convince me that the basic premise was reasonable, realistic, or even interesting. Anyone who believes it was those things is free to do so, but I don't.

Mr Happy 10-13-2009 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11657222)
Miller, I wrote a rather lengthy reply but then decided I don't want to spend the time on a movie I disliked so much. I realize that many people enjoyed Fight Club, but there is no way anyone is going to convince me that the basic premise was reasonable, realistic, or even interesting. Anyone who believes it was those things is free to do so, but I don't.

So instead of posting the reply, you just delete it and tell us that you DID write a lengthy reply, effectively wasting your time?
That just looks silly.

Although if you write a well thought out response to this and then delete it, that'll really show me!

Shot From Guns 10-13-2009 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11657222)
I realize that many people enjoyed Fight Club, but there is no way anyone is going to convince me that the basic premise was reasonable, realistic, or even interesting.

Lamia, I contemplated writing a rather lengthy reply, but then I realized I'd be wasting my time on someone who's displaying what seems to be an attitude of such willful ignorance.

Seriously, I get "I don't like it and never will," but I'm boggling as "I am going to ignore every single scrap of possible evidence that I'm wrong about something factual, i.e., that this could possibly be a feasible premise." Why even post here if that's how you feel?

Lamia 10-13-2009 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Happy (Post 11657896)
So instead of posting the reply, you just delete it and tell us that you DID write a lengthy reply, effectively wasting your time?
That just looks silly.

I did post the reply. Since it existed as a post for several minutes before I removed it, and since Miller is a Mod and may (I'm not sure) be able to see edited posts, I didn't see any point in pretending that I hadn't written my original post. I do wish I really had not written it though, because it was a waste of time.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shot From Guns (Post 11658847)
Lamia, I contemplated writing a rather lengthy reply, but then I realized I'd be wasting my time on someone who's displaying what seems to be an attitude of such willful ignorance.

Seriously, I get "I don't like it and never will," but I'm boggling as "I am going to ignore every single scrap of possible evidence that I'm wrong about something factual, i.e., that this could possibly be a feasible premise." Why even post here if that's how you feel?

This kind of thing is exactly why I deleted my previous post. I do not care to get sucked into a nasty argument with fans of a popular movie that I hated. If you loved Fight Club then that's wonderful for you. I'm not going to try to change your mind about it or make nasty remarks about you because you refuse to share my opinion of the movie.

Shot From Guns 10-13-2009 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11659040)
This kind of thing is exactly why I deleted my previous post. I do not care to get sucked into a nasty argument with fans of a popular movie that I hated. If you loved Fight Club then that's wonderful for you. I'm not going to try to change your mind about it or make nasty remarks about you because you refuse to share my opinion of the movie.

I don't care that you don't like the movie. De gustibus non disputandum est, as the saying goes. I care that you've explicitly stated that you would ignore evidence about a factual point. From what you said, someone could point to a real-world example of this happening, and you'd still refuse to believe it was possible. That kind of attitude, on this message board, what I'm incredulous about.

Miller 10-13-2009 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shot From Guns (Post 11659236)
I don't care that you don't like the movie. De gustibus non disputandum est, as the saying goes. I care that you've explicitly stated that you would ignore evidence about a factual point. From what you said, someone could point to a real-world example of this happening, and you'd still refuse to believe it was possible. That kind of attitude, on this message board, what I'm incredulous about.

I'm not really sure what would constitute factual evidence for this sort of claim. Short of finding someone who really did start an anarchist cult by standing outside of a bar punching himself in the head, any evidence presented one way or the other is going to be largely subjective in regards to how well it matches what's portrayed in the movie.

Lamia 10-13-2009 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shot From Guns (Post 11659236)
I don't care that you don't like the movie. De gustibus non disputandum est, as the saying goes. I care that you've explicitly stated that you would ignore evidence about a factual point.

No, I didn't. I didn't use the word "evidence" at all, and the question of whether something is plausible isn't really a factual one. "Plausible" isn't the same thing as "possible". Since the question of what is plausible is largely a matter of opinion, I decided it wasn't worth my time or anyone else's to discuss the matter further. I just don't care that much about Fight Club. I wish this had struck me before I hit "Submit Reply" on my longer post, but instead it happened a minute or two later. I was hoping to avoid a total hijack of this thread by writing over material that would only have fueled a pointless argument*.

I'm sorry the short message I left in its place upset you so much, but it was late at night and I had only a couple of minutes before the "Edit" window closed so I couldn't craft a work of brilliant prose. If I'd known people were going to flip out at me over this I wouldn't have bothered with any message at all, but since for all I knew someone was reading or even replying to my longer post while it was still up I thought it would be rude to remove it with no explanation at all.
Quote:

From what you said, someone could point to a real-world example of this happening, and you'd still refuse to believe it was possible.
No, that's actually the only thing I can think of that would change my belief that this part of the premise was completely ridiculous. Find me a real-life example of a cult leader who attracted followers by standing around and hitting himself and I will humbly take back my criticism of Fight Club (on that point, at least). Barring that, I would prefer to let the subject drop and would appreciate it if you'd get off my case about it.

*Just for the record, it's not Miller in particular I was worried about. He's a reasonable guy, and even if he were unreasonable there's only one of him. If I'd been writing a private email to him then that would have been fine. But by posting here I was inviting every Fight Club fan on the boards to argue with me.

Lamia 10-13-2009 03:51 PM

And I see Miller posted something very similar while I was writing my own post. I knew he was a reasonable guy. ;)

Justin_Bailey 10-13-2009 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11659510)
*Just for the record, it's not Miller in particular I was worried about. He's a reasonable guy, and even if he were unreasonable there's only one of him. If I'd been writing a private email to him then that would have been fine. But by posting here I was inviting every Fight Club fan on the boards to argue with me.

I'm a pretty big fan of the movie and I agree with you completely about the origins of Fight Club. The beginnings of Fight Club make absolutely no damn sense.

The rest of the movie is fantastic in my mind, but only if you ignore the fact that the Project Mayhem cult was started by a guy who wrestled with himself in a parking lot. No one is going to commit terrorist acts for a nutball who can't stop hitting himself.

Face Intentionally Left Blank 10-13-2009 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11657222)
Miller, I wrote a rather lengthy reply but then decided I don't want to spend the time on a movie I disliked so much. I realize that many people enjoyed Fight Club, but there is no way anyone is going to convince me that the basic premise was reasonable, realistic, or even interesting. Anyone who believes it was those things is free to do so, but I don't.

Your entire take on this seems to be predicated on the idea that people behave logically. I can understand this as you probably try to think and behave logically, however, do you see where there might be a flaw in this? Do you not see or read things daily in the news that puts lie to this?

It just seems to me that we're asked to "go with" all kinds of unlikely or impossible things in many movies, and this is far from the worst example. Hell, in the same move, Ed Norton puts a gun in his mouth and shoots himself, then stands and watches as the buildings collapse.

Miller 10-13-2009 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11659510)
No, that's actually the only thing I can think of that would change my belief that this part of the premise was completely ridiculous. Find me a real-life example of a cult leader who attracted followers by standing around and hitting himself and I will humbly take back my criticism of Fight Club (on that point, at least).

How about the flagellants? Someone had to be the first, and he did pretty well at convincing people that whipping yourself bloody made God like you more.

'Course, lots of things seem more reasonable if there's a plague on.

Shot From Guns 10-13-2009 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11659510)
No, that's actually the only thing I can think of that would change my belief that this part of the premise was completely ridiculous.

Then I'll accept that you were just being ridiculously hyperbolic when you said (and I quote, with emphasis added) "there is no way anyone is going to convince me that the basic premise was reasonable, realistic, or even interesting." It was that "no way" that really pissed me off.

Corner Case 10-13-2009 06:08 PM

There is no way anyone is going to convince me that that really pissed you off. ;)

Lamia 10-13-2009 07:29 PM

Getting back to the topic of the thread, I first read Little Women when I was only 7 or 8 years old and re-read it a number of times through my teens. That whole time I believed that the "little books" the March girls received as Christmas presents and were encouraged to read every night were copies of Pilgrim's Progress. I thought this because the characters and narrator made many references to Pilgrim's Progress (a lot of the chapter titles are even taken from PP), so that book was clearly a big deal to the March family.

It wasn't until I was in grad school and taking a course in children's literature that I realized the "little books" were copies of the New Testament. I can't even claim I figured this out on my own, it was mentioned in one of the assigned readings before we got to the actual book. I don't know if I'd have questioned my childhood assumption otherwise, although while re-reading Little Women for my class it did strike me as very obvious that the "little books" were meant to be New Testaments. When Jo finds her Christmas gift it's described as "that beautiful story of the best life ever lived", and the girls are always being encouraged to read from their "little books" and apply this reading to their own lives. Since I knew Pilgrim's Progress was a Christian book it had made sense to me that the girls would be encouraged to study the moral lessons presented in the story, but it makes a lot MORE sense if the book is the New Testament. Especially since the girls are the daughters of a minister.

In defense of my young self, I'd never seen a copy of the New Testament alone, and the Bible as a whole is hardly "little". Alcott also never spelled out exactly what these books were, probably because her intended audience would have gotten it right away. Google Books tells me that in the text of Little Women no "little book" is ever described as a "Bible" (which without the Old Testament I guess wouldn't be an accurate label anyway), that the word "Jesus" never appears in Little Women at all, and that there's only one reference late in the book to Amy owning a "little Testament".

Shot From Guns 10-14-2009 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corner Case (Post 11660125)
There is no way anyone is going to convince me that that really pissed you off. ;)

We need an :apoplexy: face. :D

JohnT 10-14-2009 02:43 PM

There's a rapper called "Mos Def".

Two obvious things I didn't realize about this name until I started watching The Wire:

1. The "Mos" is not pronounced the same as "Mos Eisley".
2. It's short for "Most Definitely".

I think.

Fortunantly, I saved myself from major embarrassment by never being in a position where I had to reference the guy. ;)

salinqmind 10-15-2009 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11660346)
Getting back to the topic of the thread, I first read Little Women when I was only 7 or 8 years old and re-read it a number of times through my teens. That whole time I believed that the "little books" the March girls received as Christmas presents and were encouraged to read every night were copies of Pilgrim's Progress. I thought this because the characters and narrator made many references to Pilgrim's Progress (a lot of the chapter titles are even taken from PP), so that book was clearly a big deal to the March family.

It wasn't until I was in grad school and taking a course in children's literature that I realized the "little books" were copies of the New Testament. I can't even claim I figured this out on my own, it was mentioned in one of the assigned readings before we got to the actual book. I don't know if I'd have questioned my childhood assumption otherwise, although while re-reading Little Women for my class it did strike me as very obvious that the "little books" were meant to be New Testaments. When Jo finds her Christmas gift it's described as "that beautiful story of the best life ever lived", and the girls are always being encouraged to read from their "little books" and apply this reading to their own lives. Since I knew Pilgrim's Progress was a Christian book it had made sense to me that the girls would be encouraged to study the moral lessons presented in the story, but it makes a lot MORE sense if the book is the New Testament. Especially since the girls are the daughters of a minister.

In defense of my young self, I'd never seen a copy of the New Testament alone, and the Bible as a whole is hardly "little". Alcott also never spelled out exactly what these books were, probably because her intended audience would have gotten it right away. Google Books tells me that in the text of Little Women no "little book" is ever described as a "Bible" (which without the Old Testament I guess wouldn't be an accurate label anyway), that the word "Jesus" never appears in Little Women at all, and that there's only one reference late in the book to Amy owning a "little Testament".

Interesting! Their father was a minister, after all. I, too, read Little Women over and over many times since I got a beautiful first copy at age 12. There were a lot of words and references and ideas I didn't understand until much, much later. I seriously think there ought to be a glossary of Victoriana included. Who today knows anything about charabancs, blancmange, crinoline, or Pilgrim's Progress (I had to figure out on my own it was a popular book they read!). And am I correct in inferring that at the time, the German language, art, culture, etc. was considered the very zenith of culture and intellectualism? Germans seemed to be held in very high regard, and so is that a reason for Jo to marry her professor - that she chose the life of the mind (Prof. Baer) over the life of materialism (Laurie)?

Annie-Xmas 10-16-2009 09:24 AM

I recently discovered that combing MAO inhibitor drugs with certain foods, including organ meets, legumes, and red wine, causes a serious and often fatal rise in blood pressure.

So remember folks: NEVER take your anti-depressants after downing a meal of liver, fava beans and a nice Chianti (slurp, slurp).

KneadToKnow 10-16-2009 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnT (Post 11663193)
There's a rapper called "Mos Def".

....

2. It's short for "Most Definitely".

My first exposure to that person was in the movie The Italian Job with, um, what's his name, Dirk Diggler and the other guy, um, Bruce Banner. Anyway, he plays a guy with partial hearing loss in the film, and, thinking it was meant to pay respect to the actor's actual disability, I presumed that his name was short for alMOSt DEaF.

Imagine my chagrin.

ministryman 10-16-2009 02:15 PM

So I'm responding to another thread about Nelly, and I find this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoIahxl7uXg

At , the D.J. (Cedric the Entertainer) says that the roof is on fire. the crowd's response is "we don't need no water, let the motherf*cker burn (Rockmaster Scott and the Dynamic 3)".

In the movie, Head of State (which features an Black Alderman being nominated for and winning the Presidency), the same scene happens, except the crowd (affluent white people) respond this way:

Screams...Panic...Fire Department being called.

LOL

Lamia 10-16-2009 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by salinqmind (Post 11665925)
Interesting! Their father was a minister, after all. I, too, read Little Women over and over many times since I got a beautiful first copy at age 12. There were a lot of words and references and ideas I didn't understand until much, much later. I seriously think there ought to be a glossary of Victoriana included. Who today knows anything about charabancs, blancmange, crinoline, or Pilgrim's Progress (I had to figure out on my own it was a popular book they read!).

You just reminded me of a less long-lasting misinterpretation I made when I first read Little Women. At the beginning of the book, after the girls give their mother her Christmas presents, it says that Mrs. March fastens the flower Beth gave her "in her bosom". At the time I had the vague idea that "bosom" was a synonym for "bottom" or maybe "hips". I gave some thought to how one might wear a flower there. I was too young and innocent to think of the possibilities that are coming to mind now, and soon decided it must mean that the flower was tucked into the sash of her dress.

I don't think I labored under this misapprehension for long, because I can't remember being confused about "bosom" any other time in my life. I may have looked it up in the dictionary, or I may have figured it out in context thanks to Little Women. It's used several other times in the book where it more obviously means "heart" or "chest". But when I think of that scene from Little Women I still picture Mrs. March with a rose tucked into her sash.

It did only strike me while writing this that the rose was probably pinned onto Mrs. March's dress like a corsage rather than tucked into her cleavage. A minister's wife probably wouldn't have been wearing a low-cut dress, and sticking a rose stem between your breasts sounds like a bad idea.

mshar253 10-17-2009 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superhal (Post 11573101)
Sherlock Holmes was actually a total jerk who treated Watson like a retarded child. "Elementary, my dear Watson" actually means "What an idiot you are, Watson." I figured this out after becoming a huge fan of House MD and learning it was based on Sherlock Holmes.

I am replying to this over a month after it was posted, but I couldn't let this slide.

Did you ever read the Sherlock Holmes stories? Sherlock and Watson had a very good relationship. Sherlock was cold, sure, and he had his flaws, but it was apparent that he cared for Watson very much.

Also, Sherlock never said, "Elementary, my dear Watson." He said things were elementary, and he used the phrase "my dear Watson," but it's a misconception that "Elementary, my dear Watson," was some kind of trademark phrase in Doyle's stories.

Mister Rik 10-17-2009 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mshar253 (Post 11673043)
Also, Sherlock never said, "Elementary, my dear Watson." He said things were elementary, and he used the phrase "my dear Watson," but it's a misconception that "Elementary, my dear Watson," was some kind of trademark phrase in Doyle's stories.

Sort of like "Play it again, Sam!"

I've been told/read somewhere (here?) that the phrase in question was used in early Sherlock Holmes movies/TV shows, despite never appearing in the original stories, and that's how it filtered into the public consciousness.

Oh, and just because: Wassup Holmes?

WotNot 10-17-2009 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Rik (Post 11673137)
Sort of like "Play it again, Sam!"

I've been told/read somewhere (here?) that the phrase in question was used in early Sherlock Holmes movies/TV shows, despite never appearing in the original stories, and that's how it filtered into the public consciousness.

I learned just yesterday that the first person to use the phrase was PG Wodehouse. In Psmith, Journalist (1915) he has
Quote:

"Elementary, my dear Watson, elementary," murmured Psmith.
Fancy that.

Nobody 10-17-2009 05:59 PM

I just realized that 70's westerns filmed in Italy were called spaghetti westerns because spaghetti is an Italian dish :smack:. (I've always known that spaghetti is Italian, but I never knew why Italian westerns were called Spaghetti westerns until a few days ago.)

Last week while watching Poker After Dark it occurred to me that the sit-com Full House was named after a poker hand :smack::smack:.

Sofis 10-18-2009 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamia (Post 11660346)
In defense of my young self, I'd never seen a copy of the New Testament alone, and the Bible as a whole is hardly "little". Alcott also never spelled out exactly what these books were, probably because her intended audience would have gotten it right away. Google Books tells me that in the text of Little Women no "little book" is ever described as a "Bible" (which without the Old Testament I guess wouldn't be an accurate label anyway), that the word "Jesus" never appears in Little Women at all, and that there's only one reference late in the book to Amy owning a "little Testament".

I wonder if referring to the New Testament as "little book" is a reference to referring to the Bible as "the good book" (or even "the book", sometimes)?

WotNot 10-18-2009 04:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sofis (Post 11675525)
I wonder if referring to the New Testament as "little book" is a reference to referring to the Bible as "the good book" (or even "the book", sometimes)?

I suppose it's possible, but to my mind the most obvious interpretation is that they were, in fact, simply small in size. I can't speak with any authority on Massachusetts in the 1860s, but certainly here in the UK in the first half of the 20th century, pocket-sized editions of the New Testament used to be very common they were given as confirmation presents, or school prizes and so forth. When I was a child, we had two or three copies around the house, and they were by far the smallest books we had. And we weren't what you would call religious; they were just things that accumulated. I've got one here, in fact: it's three inches by four and three quarters by three quarters.

Chronos 10-18-2009 07:02 PM

Those little pocket-sized New Testaments are still around. Once a year or so, the Gideons come to campus and hand them out from the street corners.

Annie-Xmas 10-19-2009 02:47 PM

I saw Max Von Essen in Dance of the Vampires in 2003.

I certainly knew that Thomas Von Essen was the NYC Fire Commissioner during 9/11.

On Saturday I read a book of essays that explained Thomas is Max's father!:smack: I never made the connection.

filling_pages 10-19-2009 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nobody (Post 11674412)
I just realized that 70's westerns filmed in Italy were called spaghetti westerns because spaghetti is an Italian dish :smack:. (I've always known that spaghetti is Italian, but I never knew why Italian westerns were called Spaghetti westerns until a few days ago.)

And now the phrase "ramen western" is starting to crop up, referring to westerns made in Japan. Sukiyaki Western Django is the only one I've seen, but it's worth checking out. A friend asked, "Is that set in western US or western Japan?" but we decided it was just sort of set in The West.

Nobody 10-19-2009 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filling_pages (Post 11679981)
And now the phrase "ramen western" is starting to crop up, referring to westerns made in Japan. Sukiyaki Western Django is the only one I've seen, but it's worth checking out. A friend asked, "Is that set in western US or western Japan?" but we decided it was just sort of set in The West.

Thanks, but I'm really not into watching westerns.

filling_pages 10-19-2009 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nobody (Post 11680589)
Thanks, but I'm really not into watching westerns.

I was just noting that, like spaghetti westerns (so named for a dish in Italy, where they were filmed), westerns made in Japan are being called ramen westerns (named for a dish in Japan).

Miller 10-19-2009 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filling_pages (Post 11680771)
I was just noting that, like spaghetti westerns (so named for a dish in Italy, where they were filmed), westerns made in Japan are being called ramen westerns (named for a dish in Japan).

A noodle dish, no less.

KneadToKnow 10-19-2009 06:23 PM

Some of my best friends are noodledish.

Shot From Guns 10-20-2009 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miller (Post 11680812)
A noodle dish, no less.

Fun Japanese noodle dish trivia: the word ramen in Japanese is borrowed from the Chinese lo mein.

Annie-Xmas 10-29-2009 09:13 AM

I saw "Dancing Homer" last night for the upteenth time, which includes the following exchange:

Bart: We need a pitcher, not a belly itcher.
Lisa: We need a catcher, not a belly scratcher.

Let's see; Itcher & Scratcher. Itcher & Scratcher......Itchy & Scrachy:smack:

Justin_Bailey 10-29-2009 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Annie-Xmas (Post 11716602)
Bart: We need a pitcher, not a belly itcher.
Lisa: We need a catcher, not a belly scratcher.

Let's see; Itcher & Scratcher. Itcher & Scratcher......Itchy & Scrachy:smack:

Great coincidence, but "belly itcher" and "belly scratcher" as baseball taunts go back a long time.

Annie-Xmas 11-20-2009 10:26 AM

I just saw a rerun of Family Fuy where Stewie and Brian go back in time to 1930 and Stewie dresses up like Hitler. He then runs into the real Hitler, and they imitate the famous mirror scene of Lucille Ball and Harpo Marx.

Later I remembered that Harpo's first name was Adolph. (He later changed it to Arthur).

bup 11-20-2009 10:31 AM

That doesn't count as obvious. In fact, unless you provide more evidence they had 'Harpo's name was Adolph' in mind when they came up with the joke, I'm going to say that's coincidence.

Mister Rik 11-20-2009 05:41 PM

I had to look up the Lucy/Harpo thing on YouTube, cuz I'd never seen it. Brilliant!

Maiira 11-20-2009 06:24 PM

A couple from Newsies:

The very beginning of the movie (after the opening monologue) is shot in sepia tones, and slowly changes to color. Took me YEARS to realize this (though I suspect this was due to my switching from watching fullscreen to widescreen).

When Joseph Pulitzer (played by Robert Duvall) says "when I created the world..." he means his newspaper (The World), and is not intentionally being tongue-in-cheek.

Baal Houtham 11-22-2009 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Rik (Post 11802360)
I had to look up the Lucy/Harpo thing on YouTube, cuz I'd never seen it. Brilliant!

And the original.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.