Cinecast Episode 370 – Floating Death Marbles

Despite car destruction and Canadian terrorism, Toronto After Dark carries on, as does the further adventures of World War II – this time carried on the backs of tanks and Brad Pitt. John Carpenter’s biggest film (in terms of budget) is on tap in the 1984 Project with Starman: starring brother Shamus, Jeff Bridges and a career performance from Karen Allen. In this episode we have everything from Alamo tanks and a literal fog of war, to super heated crowbars, records of pure gold, women peeing, 26 short films, Hitchcockian suspense, Jim Broadbent clones and Steven McHattie taking charge. And to think next week, is Birdman… how much more exciting can the cinema experience be than right now?

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





show content



– American Movie Critics (book) series on The Frame and The Matinee.
Flyway Film Festival this weekend.
– Kurt’s new electric car (Nissan Leaf).




~ 1984 PROJECT ~



Housebound | our review
ABCs of Death | our review | VOD
Hellmouth | our review
Open Windows
Kumiko, the Treasure Hunter

| all of our TAD reviews |



The Golden Record



– White Bird in a Blizzard
– Birdman
– Dear White People


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

In-house business: 1:29
Fury [SPOILERS] 27:50
The 1984 Project: Starman 59:28
Watch List: 1:31:35
Next Week: 2:10:13
Outro music: 2:16:33

Mike Reilly

Another great review by the boys.
I don’t know if I hear Kurt mention LEBANNON as a precursor/inspiration for FURY. It’s worth a poke to be sure.
I also have a soft-spot for Kevin Reynolds’s THE BEAST, which I know Kurt didn’t mention so maybe I’m a lone admirer of it.

Kurt Halfyard

Yea, I am a fan of Lebanon, I mentioned it in the podcast but only briefly.

Sean Kelly

Wyrmwood is a very enjoyable film and much more than that “Mad Mad vs. Dawn of the Dead” tag line.

La Menthe

You don’t exactly have to know much about WW2 history to find some of the war scenes in this movie (like the first big action scene) ridiculous and stupid. And that last scene, with the hoards of stupid nazis (basically stormtroopers from Star Wars – which interestingly had their name based on German soldiers during that era) attacking them, was too long and too stupid. Nothing, in terms of tactics, formation, how people behaved etc. in this film were like what people back in that time did. And the American troops just randomly and deliberately executing German prisoners like that? Sure, they committed a lot of crimes, but not like that! The same goes about the way the Germans were portrayed: disgusting, unintelligent, fanatical brutes.

This film has a couple of really good scenes (the dinner scene), and some very, very entertaining and action packed moments. But it goes so much off historical accuracy in so many parts, that it becomes hard to take it seriously. It kind of falls into the same category as 60s and 70s WW2 films like Where Eagles Dare and Kelly’s Heroes. A more modern example to compare with is with Enemy at the Gates.


I’m quite a big fan of ENEMY AT THE GATES. It’s far more a character piece than a spectacle film like this one though.


Thanks for the mention of our series! We’re definitely enjoying the conversation – it’s difficult to figure out exactly how accessible it is to people who haven’t read it, but we’re trying to make sure we include enough context so people know what we’re responding to, and the conversations have tended to go off on tangents about criticism in general. It’s not quite weekly; it’s kind of whenever we get to it, but I think it’s been roughly every two weeks bar a longer break for TIFF.

The book we’re going through is an anthology of criticism, curated and edited by Philip Lopate. So everything is the actual words of the critics themselves, it’s not like a narrated history of criticism. It’s chronological, so we’re just now hitting the sound era, heh. It’ll be a while before we get to the big guns, but it’s been fun to read this early stuff, which is in part critics and enthusiasts arguing that the movies are even worth talking about critically.

Andrew James

That last bit you mentioned sounds fascinating. I suppose movies weren’t instantly regarded as an art form so it would be fun to read about stage critics and the like discussing this new form of entertainment.


Interestingly, it’s been a couple of poets, a psychologist, a couple of literary critics/essayists, a playwright, etc. There’s been a mixture of enthusiasm and skepticism. Definitely an interesting read so far.

Courtney Small

Kurt – Funny that you bring up Nebraska when discussing Kumiko. I noticed in the final credits that Alexander Payne was listed as an executive producer. Not sure how much involvement he actually had, but hopefully his name value can get Kumiko a decent release.

Sean Kelly

While Kumiko was OK enough a film, it was also a major gamble for Toronto After Dark, since other than the cult/Fargo connection, it was quite out of place with the rest of their programming.

This is definitely a film that would’ve been more at home in TIFF’s Contemporary World Cinema programme.


I agree that it seems baffling that TIFF would have passed on this (Considering the film had a pretty good reaction at SUNDANCE earlier in the year, and TIFF loves to scoop the best of Sundance into their programme).

Still, I wish that TADFF would program more films like this, take more chances, and expand the audience where it can instead of constantly pandering with and endless stream of Zombie Comedies…

Andrew James

I feel like TADFF does a pretty good job of mixing it up so that we do have some fun with the “Night of the Living Dork” type of movies, but also mixing it up with stuff like this.

Sean Kelly

But Dead Snow 2 was so fun to watch!!! 😛