Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of My Heart Radio. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. Listener mail My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick, and it's Monday, of the day of the week. We read back some messages from the mail bags applied to us by our loyal mail bot Carney. Here right at the top of today's episode, I wanted to feature a correction by our listener Dorry, and usually if a correction comes in, we try to put that near the top. Uh. Dorian's response was in reference to the Odometer episode where I did, indeed do do a major geometrical screw up. So Dorian pointed out that it's in the part of the episode where I'm discussing the odometer described by Vitruvius, and I, for some reason, I said that the formula for the circumference of a circle is pie our squared. That is not correct. That is actually for the area of a circle. UH circumferences to pie r. Though as a weird coincidence, since we were talking about a wheel specifically with the radius of two of two ft, UH, the different formulas gave the exact same answer. In this one case, which is twelve point five six. So thank you Dorian for pointing that out. Always appreciate people letting us know if a mistake like that gets through. Uh, and I did. I did listen back. There was a way to to snip that little reference out of the episode, so so the episode should be corrected. Now. Alright, this next one comes to us from Ben. Hey, guys, someone else may have already mentioned this, but it occurred to me that one factor in the accuracy of the Benitists who measured distances by counting pacers would have been the inclines in a route to be measured, as one's pace length would naturally shorten when walking up or down a steep incline. Perhaps they took this into account and counted uphill or downhill paces separately. Anyways, a fascinating episode. Thanks. I did not think about that at all, but yeah, that's a very good point. Now. This is referencing the the idea of Alexander the greats Bematists and other bimatists from the ancient world, people who were said to measure distances by pacing. Uh. There was some suggestion that because they came they came up with distance measurements between milestones or cities that are actually quite accurate, even as measured today. There was some suggestion that maybe some of these people actually used an odometer or some type of machine that we don't know about, and that's possible. It's possible they just were able to keep an accurate kind of paces for some reason. I guess we don't really know. But yeah, this is one thing that would certainly affect pacing. That would I think not affect a mechanical odometer. Is the incline that you're walking up or down, I guess, and that would be a problem even if they were to say this is ridiculous. Of course, if they were to, uh, do some twine to tie their ankles together and always do maximum stride. Oh well, now that's a good point. But I guess when you're going up or down a lot of times, the distance between your feet is not that's true. Well, the twine thing is a good idea. I didn't think about that. If you want to regularize your pace, Yeah, but then what do you do with wild animal attacks or um or the enemy shows up to assault the caravan? It's like, oh, sorry, measurement dudes, your best defense is just to fall over at this point. I mean, even then, I think if you're like stepping up or down on on an incline, that might make a difference. Though if it's like, I don't know, if you're talking about trying to like, I don't know, scramble up or down over rocks or something, that would also be something that a wheeled odometer couldn't really go over, right, right, all right, I think maybe we should mention some responses to the episodes on paragraphs. Now. One of the things we talked about in that episode was we asked listeners to send in their favorite examples of paragraphs or favorite opening paragraphs from literature. I guess with an eye towards selections that are not just a chunk of text that you like, but one where the paragraph boundaries, like the actual placement of the line breaks, feel like especially strong or significant choices. And I thought one great submission came from our listener Anna. Anna begins by selecting the book Jane Eyre great choice and giving some background on its themes and composition. I'm going to pick up a couple of paragraphs in here. Anna writes the book was very popular, but there was also a fair bit of criticism from people who did not like the fact that there was a story about a girl who had her own mind and spoke up for herself. Charlotte Bronte, who was writing under the name kerrr Bell, hit back at critics in the preface to our second edition quote, I mean the timorous or carping few who doubt the tendency of such books as Jane Eyre, in whose eyes, whatever is unusual is wrong. She goes on to say that conventionality is not morality, self righteousness is not religion. Those are pretty strong words, especially considering it was hard to get a book published in those days. The fact that the book had a second edition within a year of its first publishing is a testament to its popularity. Anyway, I could go on and on about how much I like this book, but instead I will reproduce my favorite paragraph, uh and note that this is going to be a scene between the protagonist, Jane, and her her brooding forbidden love interest, her employer Mr Rochester. Now onto the quote, which begins first with a line of dialogue and then a separate second paragraph. This is Mr Rochester speaking, you examine me, Miss Eyre said he do you think me handsome? And then line break, I should, if I had deliberated, have replied to this question by something conventionally vague and polite, but the answer somehow slipped from my tongue before I was aware. No, sir, uh Anna goes on, This is so relatable, and I really think you could put a scene like this in a modern movie and people would think it was great. I think this would be a good quote to put on the back of the book to give readers a feeling for what the book is like. One of the things about Jane is that she speaks the truth even when it gets her in trouble, something we now call speaking truth to power. It's also an indication of the relationship between Jane Eyre and Mr Rochester. She never knows where she sits with Mr Rochester? Is he trying to be funny? Is he rude and vain? Does she reply no, sir, because she actually thinks he is not handsome? Or because it is such a rude question to ask You have to keep reading to find out. It's the sort of paragraph that you read and you immediately have to know what happens next. Thanks anna, uh, and I agree. I really like that as a paragraph. It is a wonderful little compact unit. I have never I don't think I've ever read Jane Eyre, or or if I did, I did it for school and forgot all of it. Um, I don't think I've seen any of the movies, so I'm having to like glance real quick and see, like, okay, well, who played Mr Rochester in a movie adaptation? Looks like William Hurd played him once. Mr Rochester is one of the famous so called byronic heroes. You know, he's like a Jane is obviously drawn to him, but he's also you know, he's not just like straightforwardly uh handsome and lovely in every way. He's like brooding and dark, and he has terrible secrets and in fact, in many ways could be considered quite a bad person. But also he's in some way irresistible. It looks like Fastbender played him in an adaptation. Yeah. I don't know if the idea of a spoiler for a book as old as Jane Eyre really comes into play, but spoiler alert, he I mean, you do find out that he essentially uh has he he already has a wife, and she has gone mad and he is keeping her trapped in the attic of his house. Uh, well, he's he's pursuing this relationship with Jane. You know. Looks like Kieran Hines played him in a in an adaptation, which also makes sense another kind of like uh got you know, British actor with intense eyes. It's really good at playing dark characters anyway, But I digress. Let's see. Now, we got notes from a number at least two, maybe three listeners, all suggesting the same opening paragraph as a favorite of theirs. Rob, do you want to pick one of these to read? Sure? Sure, let's see. Um, let's see. Yeah, we heard from anders on this, We heard from Jeff on this. Um, those are at least two of them. Let's say, yeah, they both had good points to make. Um. Le'll start with Andrews. Here. Hi, longtime listener, first time writer. I just listened to the paragraph part one episode, and my all time favorite opener came to mind. I'm sure it's a favorite for many since it's quite famous. It's from Stephen King's The Gun Slinger, the first book in his Seven Books series, and I still distinctly remember reading it for the first time some twenty years ago. For me, it both set the tone and in a way captures exactly the plot of the book. And also it's just a really cool line. Here goes quote the man in Black fled across the desert and the gun Slinger followed. My guess is you'll get other emails for the same entry either way. I always enjoy your stuff. Keep up the good work. Greetings from Denmark. Uh. And then Jeff also wrote in, and I'm just going to read part of what Jeff said about this. He says, uh, we learned the protagonist, antagonist, and setting all in one line. Um and uh. He also has this to say, thanks for the podcast. My new favorite Friday tradition is watching that week's weird how cinema movie if I can find it streaming anywhere. Oh well, that's that's sweet. And yes, we we heard from I think more even more than than these two about that opening line from The Gun Slinger, which is, indeed, yeah, a great line. I definitely remember this being a line that captivated me as a young reader, and I've been I've been meaning to reread at least just The Gun Slinger at some point because I think King went back and and um, and did an edit pass through it and sort of brought it up to speed with the later books at some point. And I don't think i've read that version of it. I think I've only read the older version of it. So I'm kind of interesting to see how how things are stitched together. Not that I remember all the details from the first time, but I remember really loving that book again as a young reader and like junior high and then of course I read all the other ones as they came out over the years. So my my, my reading of the Dark Tower series. Like I guess most people or a lot of people, it's yeah, it's spread across the decades. I actually do not know the Dark Tower series. I think I started reading the first book one time a long time ago, and I liked it, but I didn't finish it. That's all. It's Internet, you know. I saw a meme to this effect recently about people bouncing on the first book and sort of like, um, I think that it's like the illestration is somebody digging a tunnel and they're almost to the gold or the diamonds or something, uh, implying that the first book is kind of a slog. But then the rest of the series is the is the reward, and uh, I don't know, I I you know, there are all there are many reasons to bounce off of a particular book, to stop reading it, to set it down, or to give up on it, etcetera. So you know, you can't really find one rule for anything like this. But I remember, at least as a younger reader, really digging the first one, maybe finding the second one a bit more of a slog, just because a lot of it's in the real world and it is a little more less set in the fantasy, but then returns to the fantasy and so forth. Uh, and then being like all in on three. I don't know, I'm not going to go a book by book, but I feel like it my my engagement level goes up or down depending on which book it is in the series, But in general I was I was always on board for the saga, and once you've spent enough time with it in your head, you're kind of locked in. I see, I feel like it's one of those things I'll get around to one day. Oh yeah, it's not going anywhere, okay. Uh. Next message about favorite paragraphs from books is from d D says, hey, there, just listen to this episode. Lots of fun, especially considering how I fell down the pill crow research rabbit hole about a month ago. On the topic of memorable paragraphs, your discussion made me think immediately of Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse five, in which this happened. And to provide some context, I um, I didn't look this up, and I'm pretty sure this comes in the scene where the newly arrived Allied POWs they get to the new camp and they eat a bunch of rich soup. After having eaten I think nothing for a long time. Uh, and it makes them sick. And so the book goes and note where the paragraph breaks are. An American near Billy wailed that he had excreted everything but his brains. Moments later, he said, there they go, There they go, he meant his brains. Paragraph break. That was I, that was me, that was the author of this book. Break. Billy reeled away from his vision of hell. He passed three Englishmen who were watching the excrement festival from a distance. They were catatonic with disgust. And then D goes on, I see this as one paragraph, but the middle sentence rips you so hard out of the narrative that it is deserving of a single line paragraph all its own. Thanks for the great podcast. I'm off to listen to part two now. Cheers, d D. I agree. Ever since I read that book for the first time, that moment has stuck in my brain. I think of it often. Yeah, I hadn't really thought about this. This it from it as much, um, I guess I tend to come back to some of the other moment. There's a lot to stick in a young reader's head. And Slaughterhouse five it's uh, there's a there's a lot of of interesting and kind of at times I guess, provocative content in there. Um, But of course it's a it's a great novel, and it does I can't remember if this is actually the opening line of the book or it's just the opening line of one of the early chapters, but of course it has that line. Listen, Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck in time, um or or Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck in time, something to that effect. But um, that's a great, great line as well. I mean that instantly tells you whoa something has happened here? What's what's happened to Billy Pilgrim? And even the name, I guess that's an interesting thing, like sometimes just having a um an insightful name for your character. Uh, that also adds to the flavor like Billy Pilgrim. Uh, you know that's um kind of ties into the idea, you know, some of the flavor of the children crusade and so forth. Yeah, I'm sure vonna get junkies out there have a lot to say about it. I am um, but it's been so long since I've read it or really given it much thought. All right, uh, Rob, I'm gonna read this very short message from Alvaro UM, and then maybe we'll move on to some weird house cinema. So Alvaro right rights in with subject lines single paragraph novel. We were talking about those, uh, and Alvaro says, greetings. I was listening to your paragraph episode and I remembered a novella that consists of a single paragraph. It's called Nocturno de Chile by Roberto Bologno. It's pretty good, though not an easy read, as all of Bologno's books are. Now that was the whole message, but I looked this up. And to add to this, I think the idea of this novella being a single paragraph makes a lot of sense when you consider the contents of the book. This is the first sentence in English translation, I am dying now, but I still have many things to say. The story is actually presented as a kind of transcript of a night long deathbed confession by a deeply morally compromised Jesuit priest who ends up getting involved with like rich people in political power players and somehow eventually serves as a nighttime tutor for the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and uh so so anyway, the form the book takes is like a meandering, rambling divulgence of everything this old man can think of to say before he dies. So a single paragraph somehow makes a lot of sense to me as a stylistic choice. Like, I think the whole point is that the story is not organized, but a stream of consciousness, rambling as a man thinks back on through like the process of the moral corruption of his life. Interesting, yeah, yeah, I can see where this, uh this style would fit the su premise. All right, we also have some weird house messages here, this one comes to us from L L. Right, So, my goodness, you finally watch Return to Oz. Yeah, I'm so jealous. I too would like to have the experience of being rolled over by the film for the first time. I first saw it as an unassuming child, so I just sort of took the film and stride with all the other weirdness of television and film produced for children, though it be insane or dark or what have you. As a child, I felt all the same emotions, the fear of the awe, et cetera. At the points you described in your Weird House episode, I marveled at the visual and creative beauty of the world imagined into being by the artist, though I did not consider the creators behind the scenes at all at the time. The only difference in response would be my take on the Wheelers. Though I knew they were the bad guys and did route for the good guys in the fight scene, I absolutely loved them. I got a huge kick out of them, and there wildly over the top acting. You know, it is wildly over the top. One of my favorite parts was when Dorothy and billina Are were trapped in the locked room before discovering TikTok. Dorothy asserts that they have done nothing wrong, and the lead wheeler says, in this grand accusatory fashion, isn't that a stolen lunch pail? And that is that a chicken in there with you? The absurdity of the accusation always made me laugh. Oh yeah, yeah, because so Dorothy has a lunch pail that she picks off of the lunch pail tree. So yeah, I guess she didn't know who that lunch pail tree belongs to. Um, But yeah, the other thing is like, and you've got contraband in there. That's a chicken. Yeah, oh yeah, And of course the chickens and especially chicken eggs, are a great threat to the Nome king, as we learned later in the film. Yeah, yeah, we have no idea why at this point it would be a problem for her to have a chicken. L continues here to close, I need all of the people responsible for making this film to reunite and produce a slew of OZ films using material from Bombs many other books like Confest. I haven't read more than two, but as a child I was very much aware of the others because my brother loved them and read them all. Thanks for the great content. Sorry for sending you mail twice in one week. All topics are more interesting when hashed out and discussed by YouTube. There is something about getting to experience a movie like this as a child. Um. And and also I have found getting to re experience movies like this viewing them with a child. UM, it's been great fun to re explore older films that of this nature with my son. And in the case of of Return to Oz see something like this for the first time and gets get to view it through his eyes. Though sometimes it backfires. I mean he's not interested in movie. Like I keep saying, hey, how about how about the black Hole? Is it time to watch the black Hole? And he just he does not care. I can't get him into him, Like, look, it's got cute robots, it's got Anthony Perkins. What what could What's what's possibly wrong with this? And he's like, no, I'm not doing it. Well, you're trying to sell him on it based on Anthony Perkins. No, No, not really. I I focus on the robots in the space and I'm like look, and I'm like it's on Disney. Plus you know, there's a good chance you're gonna like it, but he's he's they can't can't get him interested for that. This This is really funny images possessing my brain now, Like the idea of somebody trying to get there, like you know, their their child to watch a movie because it's got Dan Hedea in it. You know, like, well, I think that kind of that does say something about the film and maybe how miscalibrated it is. Like you look at the actors in the black Hole, and he's got a number of great actors in it, but I'm not gonna list them all, and maybe we'll talk about it someday. But it's got a great cast, but it's not necessarily cast members that are gonna appeal to ten year olds. They're not gonna look at this cast be like, yeah, who are these interesting middle aged people up to in space? That that's to get the parents in? All? Right? Uh? Should I do this one from Richard? Yeah, let's hear from Richard. Okay, Richard says, I love your regular science history episodes. You're a great team. You've held my attention with some subjects that that would have bored me in lesser hands. Kudos. I love Obscure oddball films, So I greatly enjoy weird how cinema. You frequently note that such films are released with different cuts, different names, etcetera. Have you ever considered devoting an episode to this phenomenon? You could easily do ninety minutes on the how and why of that. It's got a pretty rich history, from indie productions to blockbusters. Here's one I don't know if you're aware of. I'm one of the very few people who saw Hands of Steel in a theater years ago. Remember that's the the the Italian Terminator off that we that we watched. Yeah yeah, John Saxon is in that one. Um. Also, George Eastman has a has a small role Simonetti soundtrack. Yeah yeah, really fun. Richard goes on. So the movie ended before the DVD version that you reviewed. In the theatrical release, the protagonist reveals that his head is full of circuitry, then delivers the line poco Quai act doesn't exist, maybe he never did, and then the music swells and the credits roll the end. It was a memorable ending to an otherwise forgettable film. Anyway, keep up the good work, sincerely, Richard. Huh, Well, you know I don't clearly remember everything that happened at the end of the film. I could be wrong about this, but I vaguely recall it having a kind of voice over about how like love can defeat evil or something after a scene where he blows up John Saxon and a factory. Oh, then there's also something about the age of the cyborg had begun or something, some frozen texts on the screen. Yeah, Uh, this is interesting. Now, I don't I don't think we we know where Richard was seen. We had viewed this film. So that's one thing we always have to take into account is that these films had different releases and different cuts in different markets, Uh, depending on you know, who is releasing them. And then it's content was cut for various reasons like that, just because this was fresh on my mind. Conquest, the Luccio Fulci movie that we we discussed the last couple of weeks, Like, that's one where I think some initial releases of it had cut down on some of the violence and also some of the oozing source that make up a large junk of the later portion of the film. Uh. So you have a little things like that, and then yeah, then you have alternate cuts occurring for various reasons. It's uh, it is an interesting topic. It's always something that's um. It's a note when considering films. But I don't remember reading about a different ending for Hand of Hands of Steel when we are discussing it, So that's that's cool, all right. Well, on that note, we're going to reach the ending of this podcast episode as always right in. We'd love to hear from you about about this episode of Listener Mail, about past episodes of Weird House Cinema and Stuff to Blow Your Mind, as well as future episodes. Just a reminder that our core episodes published on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the Stuff to Blow Your Mind podcast feed We have Listener Mail on Mondays, we have Artifact or Monster Fact on Wednesdays, and on Fridays we do Weird How Cinema. That's our time to set aside most serious concerns and just talk about a strange film. Huge thanks as always to our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson. If you would like to get in touch with us with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest a topic for the future, or just to say hello, you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. Stuff to Blow Your Mind is product of I heart Radio. For more podcasts for my heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.

Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of My Heart Radio. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. Listener mail My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick, and it's Monday, of the day of the week. We read back some messages from the mail bags applied to us by our loyal mail bot Carney. Here right at the top of today's episode, I wanted to feature a correction by our listener Dorry, and usually if a correction comes in, we try to put that near the top. Uh. Dorian's response was in reference to the Odometer episode where I did, indeed do do a major geometrical screw up. So Dorian pointed out that it's in the part of the episode where I'm discussing the odometer described by Vitruvius, and I, for some reason, I said that the formula for the circumference of a circle is pie our squared. That is not correct. That is actually for the area of a circle. UH circumferences to pie r. Though as a weird coincidence, since we were talking about a wheel specifically with the radius of two of two ft, UH, the different formulas gave the exact same answer. In this one case, which is twelve point five six. So thank you Dorian for pointing that out. Always appreciate people letting us know if a mistake like that gets through. Uh, and I did. I did listen back. There was a way to to snip that little reference out of the episode, so so the episode should be corrected. Now. Alright, this next one comes to us from Ben. Hey, guys, someone else may have already mentioned this, but it occurred to me that one factor in the accuracy of the Benitists who measured distances by counting pacers would have been the inclines in a route to be measured, as one's pace length would naturally shorten when walking up or down a steep incline. Perhaps they took this into account and counted uphill or downhill paces separately. Anyways, a fascinating episode. Thanks. I did not think about that at all, but yeah, that's a very good point. Now. This is referencing the the idea of Alexander the greats Bematists and other bimatists from the ancient world, people who were said to measure distances by pacing. Uh. There was some suggestion that because they came they came up with distance measurements between milestones or cities that are actually quite accurate, even as measured today. There was some suggestion that maybe some of these people actually used an odometer or some type of machine that we don't know about, and that's possible. It's possible they just were able to keep an accurate kind of paces for some reason. I guess we don't really know. But yeah, this is one thing that would certainly affect pacing. That would I think not affect a mechanical odometer. Is the incline that you're walking up or down, I guess, and that would be a problem even if they were to say this is ridiculous. Of course, if they were to, uh, do some twine to tie their ankles together and always do maximum stride. Oh well, now that's a good point. But I guess when you're going up or down a lot of times, the distance between your feet is not that's true. Well, the twine thing is a good idea. I didn't think about that. If you want to regularize your pace, Yeah, but then what do you do with wild animal attacks or um or the enemy shows up to assault the caravan? It's like, oh, sorry, measurement dudes, your best defense is just to fall over at this point. I mean, even then, I think if you're like stepping up or down on on an incline, that might make a difference. Though if it's like, I don't know, if you're talking about trying to like, I don't know, scramble up or down over rocks or something, that would also be something that a wheeled odometer couldn't really go over, right, right, all right, I think maybe we should mention some responses to the episodes on paragraphs. Now. One of the things we talked about in that episode was we asked listeners to send in their favorite examples of paragraphs or favorite opening paragraphs from literature. I guess with an eye towards selections that are not just a chunk of text that you like, but one where the paragraph boundaries, like the actual placement of the line breaks, feel like especially strong or significant choices. And I thought one great submission came from our listener Anna. Anna begins by selecting the book Jane Eyre great choice and giving some background on its themes and composition. I'm going to pick up a couple of paragraphs in here. Anna writes the book was very popular, but there was also a fair bit of criticism from people who did not like the fact that there was a story about a girl who had her own mind and spoke up for herself. Charlotte Bronte, who was writing under the name kerrr Bell, hit back at critics in the preface to our second edition quote, I mean the timorous or carping few who doubt the tendency of such books as Jane Eyre, in whose eyes, whatever is unusual is wrong. She goes on to say that conventionality is not morality, self righteousness is not religion. Those are pretty strong words, especially considering it was hard to get a book published in those days. The fact that the book had a second edition within a year of its first publishing is a testament to its popularity. Anyway, I could go on and on about how much I like this book, but instead I will reproduce my favorite paragraph, uh and note that this is going to be a scene between the protagonist, Jane, and her her brooding forbidden love interest, her employer Mr Rochester. Now onto the quote, which begins first with a line of dialogue and then a separate second paragraph. This is Mr Rochester speaking, you examine me, Miss Eyre said he do you think me handsome? And then line break, I should, if I had deliberated, have replied to this question by something conventionally vague and polite, but the answer somehow slipped from my tongue before I was aware. No, sir, uh Anna goes on, This is so relatable, and I really think you could put a scene like this in a modern movie and people would think it was great. I think this would be a good quote to put on the back of the book to give readers a feeling for what the book is like. One of the things about Jane is that she speaks the truth even when it gets her in trouble, something we now call speaking truth to power. It's also an indication of the relationship between Jane Eyre and Mr Rochester. She never knows where she sits with Mr Rochester? Is he trying to be funny? Is he rude and vain? Does she reply no, sir, because she actually thinks he is not handsome? Or because it is such a rude question to ask You have to keep reading to find out. It's the sort of paragraph that you read and you immediately have to know what happens next. Thanks anna, uh, and I agree. I really like that as a paragraph. It is a wonderful little compact unit. I have never I don't think I've ever read Jane Eyre, or or if I did, I did it for school and forgot all of it. Um, I don't think I've seen any of the movies, so I'm having to like glance real quick and see, like, okay, well, who played Mr Rochester in a movie adaptation? Looks like William Hurd played him once. Mr Rochester is one of the famous so called byronic heroes. You know, he's like a Jane is obviously drawn to him, but he's also you know, he's not just like straightforwardly uh handsome and lovely in every way. He's like brooding and dark, and he has terrible secrets and in fact, in many ways could be considered quite a bad person. But also he's in some way irresistible. It looks like Fastbender played him in an adaptation. Yeah. I don't know if the idea of a spoiler for a book as old as Jane Eyre really comes into play, but spoiler alert, he I mean, you do find out that he essentially uh has he he already has a wife, and she has gone mad and he is keeping her trapped in the attic of his house. Uh, well, he's he's pursuing this relationship with Jane. You know. Looks like Kieran Hines played him in a in an adaptation, which also makes sense another kind of like uh got you know, British actor with intense eyes. It's really good at playing dark characters anyway, But I digress. Let's see. Now, we got notes from a number at least two, maybe three listeners, all suggesting the same opening paragraph as a favorite of theirs. Rob, do you want to pick one of these to read? Sure? Sure, let's see. Um, let's see. Yeah, we heard from anders on this, We heard from Jeff on this. Um, those are at least two of them. Let's say, yeah, they both had good points to make. Um. Le'll start with Andrews. Here. Hi, longtime listener, first time writer. I just listened to the paragraph part one episode, and my all time favorite opener came to mind. I'm sure it's a favorite for many since it's quite famous. It's from Stephen King's The Gun Slinger, the first book in his Seven Books series, and I still distinctly remember reading it for the first time some twenty years ago. For me, it both set the tone and in a way captures exactly the plot of the book. And also it's just a really cool line. Here goes quote the man in Black fled across the desert and the gun Slinger followed. My guess is you'll get other emails for the same entry either way. I always enjoy your stuff. Keep up the good work. Greetings from Denmark. Uh. And then Jeff also wrote in, and I'm just going to read part of what Jeff said about this. He says, uh, we learned the protagonist, antagonist, and setting all in one line. Um and uh. He also has this to say, thanks for the podcast. My new favorite Friday tradition is watching that week's weird how cinema movie if I can find it streaming anywhere. Oh well, that's that's sweet. And yes, we we heard from I think more even more than than these two about that opening line from The Gun Slinger, which is, indeed, yeah, a great line. I definitely remember this being a line that captivated me as a young reader, and I've been I've been meaning to reread at least just The Gun Slinger at some point because I think King went back and and um, and did an edit pass through it and sort of brought it up to speed with the later books at some point. And I don't think i've read that version of it. I think I've only read the older version of it. So I'm kind of interesting to see how how things are stitched together. Not that I remember all the details from the first time, but I remember really loving that book again as a young reader and like junior high and then of course I read all the other ones as they came out over the years. So my my, my reading of the Dark Tower series. Like I guess most people or a lot of people, it's yeah, it's spread across the decades. I actually do not know the Dark Tower series. I think I started reading the first book one time a long time ago, and I liked it, but I didn't finish it. That's all. It's Internet, you know. I saw a meme to this effect recently about people bouncing on the first book and sort of like, um, I think that it's like the illestration is somebody digging a tunnel and they're almost to the gold or the diamonds or something, uh, implying that the first book is kind of a slog. But then the rest of the series is the is the reward, and uh, I don't know, I I you know, there are all there are many reasons to bounce off of a particular book, to stop reading it, to set it down, or to give up on it, etcetera. So you know, you can't really find one rule for anything like this. But I remember, at least as a younger reader, really digging the first one, maybe finding the second one a bit more of a slog, just because a lot of it's in the real world and it is a little more less set in the fantasy, but then returns to the fantasy and so forth. Uh, and then being like all in on three. I don't know, I'm not going to go a book by book, but I feel like it my my engagement level goes up or down depending on which book it is in the series, But in general I was I was always on board for the saga, and once you've spent enough time with it in your head, you're kind of locked in. I see, I feel like it's one of those things I'll get around to one day. Oh yeah, it's not going anywhere, okay. Uh. Next message about favorite paragraphs from books is from d D says, hey, there, just listen to this episode. Lots of fun, especially considering how I fell down the pill crow research rabbit hole about a month ago. On the topic of memorable paragraphs, your discussion made me think immediately of Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse five, in which this happened. And to provide some context, I um, I didn't look this up, and I'm pretty sure this comes in the scene where the newly arrived Allied POWs they get to the new camp and they eat a bunch of rich soup. After having eaten I think nothing for a long time. Uh, and it makes them sick. And so the book goes and note where the paragraph breaks are. An American near Billy wailed that he had excreted everything but his brains. Moments later, he said, there they go, There they go, he meant his brains. Paragraph break. That was I, that was me, that was the author of this book. Break. Billy reeled away from his vision of hell. He passed three Englishmen who were watching the excrement festival from a distance. They were catatonic with disgust. And then D goes on, I see this as one paragraph, but the middle sentence rips you so hard out of the narrative that it is deserving of a single line paragraph all its own. Thanks for the great podcast. I'm off to listen to part two now. Cheers, d D. I agree. Ever since I read that book for the first time, that moment has stuck in my brain. I think of it often. Yeah, I hadn't really thought about this. This it from it as much, um, I guess I tend to come back to some of the other moment. There's a lot to stick in a young reader's head. And Slaughterhouse five it's uh, there's a there's a lot of of interesting and kind of at times I guess, provocative content in there. Um, But of course it's a it's a great novel, and it does I can't remember if this is actually the opening line of the book or it's just the opening line of one of the early chapters, but of course it has that line. Listen, Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck in time, um or or Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck in time, something to that effect. But um, that's a great, great line as well. I mean that instantly tells you whoa something has happened here? What's what's happened to Billy Pilgrim? And even the name, I guess that's an interesting thing, like sometimes just having a um an insightful name for your character. Uh, that also adds to the flavor like Billy Pilgrim. Uh, you know that's um kind of ties into the idea, you know, some of the flavor of the children crusade and so forth. Yeah, I'm sure vonna get junkies out there have a lot to say about it. I am um, but it's been so long since I've read it or really given it much thought. All right, uh, Rob, I'm gonna read this very short message from Alvaro UM, and then maybe we'll move on to some weird house cinema. So Alvaro right rights in with subject lines single paragraph novel. We were talking about those, uh, and Alvaro says, greetings. I was listening to your paragraph episode and I remembered a novella that consists of a single paragraph. It's called Nocturno de Chile by Roberto Bologno. It's pretty good, though not an easy read, as all of Bologno's books are. Now that was the whole message, but I looked this up. And to add to this, I think the idea of this novella being a single paragraph makes a lot of sense when you consider the contents of the book. This is the first sentence in English translation, I am dying now, but I still have many things to say. The story is actually presented as a kind of transcript of a night long deathbed confession by a deeply morally compromised Jesuit priest who ends up getting involved with like rich people in political power players and somehow eventually serves as a nighttime tutor for the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and uh so so anyway, the form the book takes is like a meandering, rambling divulgence of everything this old man can think of to say before he dies. So a single paragraph somehow makes a lot of sense to me as a stylistic choice. Like, I think the whole point is that the story is not organized, but a stream of consciousness, rambling as a man thinks back on through like the process of the moral corruption of his life. Interesting, yeah, yeah, I can see where this, uh this style would fit the su premise. All right, we also have some weird house messages here, this one comes to us from L L. Right, So, my goodness, you finally watch Return to Oz. Yeah, I'm so jealous. I too would like to have the experience of being rolled over by the film for the first time. I first saw it as an unassuming child, so I just sort of took the film and stride with all the other weirdness of television and film produced for children, though it be insane or dark or what have you. As a child, I felt all the same emotions, the fear of the awe, et cetera. At the points you described in your Weird House episode, I marveled at the visual and creative beauty of the world imagined into being by the artist, though I did not consider the creators behind the scenes at all at the time. The only difference in response would be my take on the Wheelers. Though I knew they were the bad guys and did route for the good guys in the fight scene, I absolutely loved them. I got a huge kick out of them, and there wildly over the top acting. You know, it is wildly over the top. One of my favorite parts was when Dorothy and billina Are were trapped in the locked room before discovering TikTok. Dorothy asserts that they have done nothing wrong, and the lead wheeler says, in this grand accusatory fashion, isn't that a stolen lunch pail? And that is that a chicken in there with you? The absurdity of the accusation always made me laugh. Oh yeah, yeah, because so Dorothy has a lunch pail that she picks off of the lunch pail tree. So yeah, I guess she didn't know who that lunch pail tree belongs to. Um, But yeah, the other thing is like, and you've got contraband in there. That's a chicken. Yeah, oh yeah, And of course the chickens and especially chicken eggs, are a great threat to the Nome king, as we learned later in the film. Yeah, yeah, we have no idea why at this point it would be a problem for her to have a chicken. L continues here to close, I need all of the people responsible for making this film to reunite and produce a slew of OZ films using material from Bombs many other books like Confest. I haven't read more than two, but as a child I was very much aware of the others because my brother loved them and read them all. Thanks for the great content. Sorry for sending you mail twice in one week. All topics are more interesting when hashed out and discussed by YouTube. There is something about getting to experience a movie like this as a child. Um. And and also I have found getting to re experience movies like this viewing them with a child. UM, it's been great fun to re explore older films that of this nature with my son. And in the case of of Return to Oz see something like this for the first time and gets get to view it through his eyes. Though sometimes it backfires. I mean he's not interested in movie. Like I keep saying, hey, how about how about the black Hole? Is it time to watch the black Hole? And he just he does not care. I can't get him into him, Like, look, it's got cute robots, it's got Anthony Perkins. What what could What's what's possibly wrong with this? And he's like, no, I'm not doing it. Well, you're trying to sell him on it based on Anthony Perkins. No, No, not really. I I focus on the robots in the space and I'm like look, and I'm like it's on Disney. Plus you know, there's a good chance you're gonna like it, but he's he's they can't can't get him interested for that. This This is really funny images possessing my brain now, Like the idea of somebody trying to get there, like you know, their their child to watch a movie because it's got Dan Hedea in it. You know, like, well, I think that kind of that does say something about the film and maybe how miscalibrated it is. Like you look at the actors in the black Hole, and he's got a number of great actors in it, but I'm not gonna list them all, and maybe we'll talk about it someday. But it's got a great cast, but it's not necessarily cast members that are gonna appeal to ten year olds. They're not gonna look at this cast be like, yeah, who are these interesting middle aged people up to in space? That that's to get the parents in? All? Right? Uh? Should I do this one from Richard? Yeah, let's hear from Richard. Okay, Richard says, I love your regular science history episodes. You're a great team. You've held my attention with some subjects that that would have bored me in lesser hands. Kudos. I love Obscure oddball films, So I greatly enjoy weird how cinema. You frequently note that such films are released with different cuts, different names, etcetera. Have you ever considered devoting an episode to this phenomenon? You could easily do ninety minutes on the how and why of that. It's got a pretty rich history, from indie productions to blockbusters. Here's one I don't know if you're aware of. I'm one of the very few people who saw Hands of Steel in a theater years ago. Remember that's the the the Italian Terminator off that we that we watched. Yeah yeah, John Saxon is in that one. Um. Also, George Eastman has a has a small role Simonetti soundtrack. Yeah yeah, really fun. Richard goes on. So the movie ended before the DVD version that you reviewed. In the theatrical release, the protagonist reveals that his head is full of circuitry, then delivers the line poco Quai act doesn't exist, maybe he never did, and then the music swells and the credits roll the end. It was a memorable ending to an otherwise forgettable film. Anyway, keep up the good work, sincerely, Richard. Huh, Well, you know I don't clearly remember everything that happened at the end of the film. I could be wrong about this, but I vaguely recall it having a kind of voice over about how like love can defeat evil or something after a scene where he blows up John Saxon and a factory. Oh, then there's also something about the age of the cyborg had begun or something, some frozen texts on the screen. Yeah, Uh, this is interesting. Now, I don't I don't think we we know where Richard was seen. We had viewed this film. So that's one thing we always have to take into account is that these films had different releases and different cuts in different markets, Uh, depending on you know, who is releasing them. And then it's content was cut for various reasons like that, just because this was fresh on my mind. Conquest, the Luccio Fulci movie that we we discussed the last couple of weeks, Like, that's one where I think some initial releases of it had cut down on some of the violence and also some of the oozing source that make up a large junk of the later portion of the film. Uh. So you have a little things like that, and then yeah, then you have alternate cuts occurring for various reasons. It's uh, it is an interesting topic. It's always something that's um. It's a note when considering films. But I don't remember reading about a different ending for Hand of Hands of Steel when we are discussing it, So that's that's cool, all right. Well, on that note, we're going to reach the ending of this podcast episode as always right in. We'd love to hear from you about about this episode of Listener Mail, about past episodes of Weird House Cinema and Stuff to Blow Your Mind, as well as future episodes. Just a reminder that our core episodes published on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and the Stuff to Blow Your Mind podcast feed We have Listener Mail on Mondays, we have Artifact or Monster Fact on Wednesdays, and on Fridays we do Weird How Cinema. That's our time to set aside most serious concerns and just talk about a strange film. Huge thanks as always to our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson. If you would like to get in touch with us with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest a topic for the future, or just to say hello, you can email us at contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. Stuff to Blow Your Mind is product of I heart Radio. For more podcasts for my heart Radio, visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.