Cinecast Episode 286 – Posted, Hosted and Toasted

No video version this week folks; sorry. Holidays and sickness are taking just too much of a toll. But that didn’t stop us from talking for about an hour on Tarantino’s latest joint. Plus a look back at the Top Five male performances of 2012. We get into a healthy and dynamic Watch List this week as well as some of our usual tangents. Thanks so much to everyone who contirbuted to the Homework segment of the show for the past few months. You’re all winners but in the end there could only be one, so we get into that a bit in the beginning. We’ll be back next week with our year in review. In the meantime, enjoy the Tarantino tongue bathing.

As always, please join the conversation by leaving your own thoughts in the comment section below and again, thanks for listening!

show content



[mp3player width=560 height=70 config=cinecast.xml file=] DOWNLOAD mp3 | 120 MB




To view/edit the full show notes, please visit the Wiki:

Andrew James
Podcaster. Tech junkie. Movie lover. Also games and guitar. I dig music.


  1. On re-watch the pacing problems are apparent, especially once they meet Monsieur Candy. Don’t get me wrong, the film is still awesome.

  2. Give Ryan McNeil a blu-ray box set for winning the homework and the 2 runners up a fancy edition of a blu ray AND invite Ryan on to your next cast.

    Jeez, talk about being cheap. Use some of the donations you were talking about so effusively to pay for them.

    I know Christmas is is over but you’re coming across as a scrooge Mr James.

    And please get a third podcaster in when one of you can’t make it. Maybe Jandy, Jonathan, Ryan or any of the Filmjunk crew.

  3. It’s quite ironic that I would get to to discussion on TAKE THIS WALTZ as I was heading home from the Bell Lightbox, where I saw both an on-stage conversation with Sarah Polley (she had quite a bit to say about the mixed reaction of the film) and a “Canada’s Top Ten” screening of STORIES WE TELL (which really is quite excellent).

  4. I haven’t gotten to the Waltz portion yet but I already know Andrew is wrong 😛 – I’m sure Jim has already taken him to the woodshed already so I’ll first just link to my own review here:

    and that complaints about their cutesy dialogue or the ‘kill’ dialogue is so so so so off. Those touches are all about how intimacy looks so alien from the outside. People talked about it being a quirky indie affectations.. well, I’ve been in a relationship with baby talk here and there, and stuff that would seem odd or even scary to others. There’s a relationship language built early on that comes from experiences, in jokes and references that we don’t get, and the movie intentionally shuts you out. In fact at one time she tries something with neighbor boy and he doesn’t get it, because they have their own language which has been built on him pushing her buttons and her being so introverted.

    Furthermore saw a complaint about popcorn… that’s so weird to worry about. why? Do I have to go down to the aquatic centre and take a picture of the concession stand for you?

    At any rate, Take This Waltz was only surpassed by me this year by Polley’s Stories We Tell, which if anything only adds even more texture and understanding to Take This Waltz and Away From Her. They are bound together. Polley makes the most emotionally intelligent films out there.

    • It isn’t the “hurt” dialogue in itself. I found that TOTALLY believable. Just like when they talk into each others’ eyes. It’s the shit at the end where it’s used as a “Jerry Maguire”-like punchline that irks me. And the popcorn is just one thing in a sea of other bullshit stuff.

      I’m glad people found it so close to heart.

      I don’t think I even mentioned the Sarah Silverman stuff in the Cinecast. But that’s pretty craptacular as well. Using her alcoholism as barely barely a plot point but bringing it back at the end, also as a punchline, just had me sighing and wishing the movie was over.

      • I think the alcoholism stuff compliments the main thrust of the film fantastically. They put the main argument of the film about life having gaps in it/don’t just go and fill it, into the mouth of a character who is dealing with the gap in her life by trying to drown it/run away from it. We don’t know what drives her to drink the way she does, and it could very well be that she has decided to stay in a relationship that she should have left.. but won’t because of her kid. Unlike Williams and Rogen who do not and like a lot of people their age are more ‘free’ to jump.

        Again, the movie doesn’t make it easy. Just like making the decision to make Rogen a nice guy rather than the easy route of him being a jerk and thus making Williams more sympathetic, the movie puts wisdom in the mouth of a hypocrite, who only has the courage to speak up because of her own failings.

        And the baby chicks are funny.


Leave a Comment.

Prove you're human... * Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.