"CATCH YOU FUCKERS AT A BAD TIME?"

Le Samourai

tn_samouraiLE SAMOURAI is a movie I’ve meant to see for years. It just comes up so often when you’re into the shit I’m into. It was a big inspiration for THE KILLER and GHOST DOG, and probly THE AMERICAN, and since it’s both a crime movie and an instigator of that French wave that was new at the time it appeals to a broad range of movie buffs. People who wouldn’t normally watch too many French movies from the ’60s might watch it because it’s about a hitman, and vice versa. (‘Vice versa’ is Latin by the way, not French.)

So after hearing about it all these years it’s kind of a surprise still, ’cause it turns out I got the wrong impression. The way people talk about it I thought it was gonna be way more arty, way more slow and difficult, way more pretentious. But it’s a pretty straightforward crime movie in my opinion. It’s not fast-paced by modern standards, but it doesn’t have much fat on it either. Just alot of quiet. And a bird chirping.

mp_samouraiJef Costello (Alain Delon) is a killer hired by an unknown party to kill a night club owner. He walks in with his cool trenchcoat and fedora, gets into the back room, shoots the guy and leaves. He has an alibi set up, but the cops pick him up at a poker game to be in a lineup. A bunch of witnesses saw him at the club, including a pretty jazz pianist (Caty Rosier) who actually saw him go in the office and heard the gunshot. We know he’s the guy who did it, but did anybody get a good enough look at him to be sure? Or if they did, are they going to admit it?

It’s interesting, the lineups in 1967 France don’t work the way we’re familiar with. They actually have them in the same room. The suspect sees the witnesses and hears what they say. Doesn’t seem like a good system. Could lead to trouble. I hope they’ve changed it since then.

(Of course, men didn’t all wear hats in 1967 France either Melville just thought it would be cool if they did, I think. This isn’t trying to be realistic. But decades and continents removed it seems reasonable that that’s what it would’ve been like then and there. So I’m gonna go ahead and believe it.)

Jef is a stoic individual. He lives alone except for his chirping pet bird. He has a hooker girlfriend he goes to (played by Delon’s wife Nathalie), but possibly more as an alibi than even as a hooker. When he manages to (SPOILER) get cleared and released by the cops the main inspector still suspects him ’cause he’s never seen anybody handcuffed for 48 hours without saying a word. His calm badassness gives him away. If he would’ve whined about missing the poker game and been a baby they probly wouldn’t have suspected him.

You’ve probly noticed by now that despite the title it’s not about a Japanese guy with a sword. The samurai thing isn’t that big a deal. There’s just a fake quote from a Bushido text at the beginning about the solitude of the samurai. I guess the idea is since he’s such a lone wolf he’s like Lone Wolf minus the Cub. His gun is his sword, his coat is his robe, his hat is his topknot, and oh shit I just realized (SPOILS) he basically commits sepukku at the end. I guess maybe there is something there.

I like how procedural the movie is, going through processes in detail. You see how the police investigation works, how cars were stolen in those days, how a bug is planted. There are many great moments: when it looks like he’s washing his hands in the restroom and he turns around and has gloves on, the look on the bartender’s face when the guy who was released from the lineup yesterday is sitting at his bar today, the way he knows someone is about to attack him by looking in his bird’s cage.

For some reason I thought the movie was gonna be in black and white, but it’s in color with a great washed out look, grainy film, shot on location, walls always textured like they’ve been brushed over with charcoal. And that pianist is something to look at too. I looked it up and found out she didn’t really play. She was a model and did release an album at one point, but I think she just sang. Good thing because I was getting ready to invent time travel and have a crush on her, that would’ve been time consuming in my opinion. Not a pianist, though. A total fraud.

So now I finally know what people are talking about when they compare GHOST DOG to this one. The homage is obvious. In fact it made me wonder if Jarmusch was re-watching LE SAMOURAI one day and started thinking it would be cool if the samurai shit was taken more literally and this guy actually used the bird to deliver messages like in ancient times. Costello has his bird, Ghost Dog has his pigeons. LE SAMOURAI has its Bushido quote at the beginning, GHOST DOG has its Hakagure quotes all throughout. Both are hitmen, both have quiet, real time-ish scenes of stealing cars, both have methods of changing license plates. I even think the sort of prog-rockish keyboard music might’ve influenced the more eerie wind-chime type sounds of RZA’s classic GHOST DOG score.

But GHOST DOG is hardly a remake. The plots and themes are entirely different. LE SAMOURAI doesn’t have any kind of master-samurai relationship, it doesn’t bring up ideas about communication, literature, outmoded codes or aging criminal empires left behind by progress or any of the other topics I always think about when I watch GHOST DOG. The villains he’s up against are more clearly threatening. He has less friends. He doesn’t read books or eat ice cream. I don’t think he cares about his bird as much as Ghost Dog cares about his, it’s more of a coal-mine type situation, a watchbird. LE SAMOURAI is more straight ahead. It’s the minimalism, the simplicity that makes it great.

Anyway, it’s good. I wish there was a sequel called LE NINJA where he was more of a sneaky asshole type of killer.

http://youtu.be/EluXfEaODSw

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 6th, 2011 at 12:05 am and is filed under Crime, Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

39 Responses to “Le Samourai”

  1. Vern – The fact you never saw this before really surprises me.

  2. This is the single greatest film of all time. (Along with a bunch of others, of course.)

  3. Love to hear your thoughts on LE DOULOS or ARMY OF SHADOWS.

  4. Gotta admit, I’m also surprised you haven’t seen it until now. The way you’d mention it sometimes always gave me the impression that you had seen it.

    Anyway, it’s good to finally read your thoughts on it. Can’t imagine anyone not loving this film. One of the most influential movies ever, yet I still meet a lot of “film buffs” who’ve never even heard of it.

    Ah well, I guess we all have that one film we should have seen ages ago but never did.

  5. Yes, like others I always just assumed a Vern appreciation for this. Assumptions are for assholes. The most inspirational moment of this flick for me (among manymanymany, and maybe I’ve just forgotten many more) is when we’re inside the Blonde’s apartment… There’s a knock on her door. She asks ‘Who is it?’ There is no response. So, she knows it’s him… (Someone else would have wasted a word responding). ‘Jef?’ She opens door and he enters without saying a word. It sounds like a little thing but, as he’s defined only by what he does and what he doesn’t say, I think this awesome. Door knocking in the middle of the night, hot girl asks who it is, dude says nothing; Shit, that’s gotta be Jef Costello. That’s how cool he is. Alain Delon. He was giving a cursory nod to our rules just by knocking.

  6. Vice Versa, that was a great film.

  7. billydeethrilliams

    February 6th, 2011 at 6:46 am

    The hitman with the most keys is also one of the most badass.

  8. GHOST DOG, THE KILLER, and THE AMERICAN, for sure, but I’m amazed nobody’s mentioned the most notorious LE SAMOURAI homage of them all: Walter Hill’s THE DRIVER! This was a huge inspiration on that film and Hill over all. It was ground zero for hitman movies and pretty much created the idea of the hit man as this elite, monastic super-warrior–the rock star of the criminal underworld. You can trace stuff like the original Charles Bronson THE MECHANIC and COLLATERAL back to it as well. And it’s stylized production design may have influenced THE CONFORMIST, REPO MAN, STREETS OF FIRE, DICK TRACY, ect…

    This may have been the first film to self-conciously and deliberately present it’s characters as archetypes–The Hit Man, The Girl, The Detective–or at least, the first widely seen one to do so. In that sense, it can be argued to have been one of the foundation stones of action movies in general.

  9. Wiki says the English title of movie is “Cop Out”… Well played.

    I know it’s come up somewhere, but is there an official Vern review of Tokyo Drifter?

  10. I’m going to have to revisit this one. It’s been years but I remember really diggin’ it. I recall a cat and mouse chase through the city that reminded me of the FRENCH CONNECTION in a great way.

    As far as french crime thrillers go, Vern, please check out RIFIFI from Jules Dassin. Probably the coolest caper film you’ve never seen. I hear it’s going to be remade so see it quick while it’s still cool.

  11. This RIFIFI?

    https://outlawvern.com/2005/01/01/rififi/

    UN FLIC is also well worth checking out. Another Melville / Delon crime joint, Richard Crenna also turns up in it.

  12. No, not that one. The other RIFIFI. The one that no one has seen but me. I highly recommend it.

  13. Very cool film. If you like this and Le Cercle Rouge, check out Army of Shadows. It’s a French resistance drama that’s got Melville’s eye and chilled-out affect. The Criterions also have good special features showing JPM’s unusual character. (And didn’t he invent the book that he quotes from at the start of Le Samourai?)

  14. Yes Inspector Li. He also made up the quote attributed to the Buddha at the beginning Le Cercle Rouge (which improves any epigraph in my opinion).

  15. We have a lot to thank Alain Delon for, not least for starting Charles Bronson’s career as the toughest actor in the world with the über cool Adieu l’ami (1968).

  16. UN FLIC would rank as one of Melville’s best, I think, if it weren’t for that damn heist sequence where cheap, silly looking models are used for the helicopter and the train. It’s such a great, perfectly modulated crime film before and after that scene, but that one part is so embarrassingly shitty looking that it takes you completely out of the movie.

  17. Great review Vern, I’m glad you’re going back to the roots of Badass Cinema. Just a little anal-retentive correction though: the French New Wave was in the mid-50s, and LE SAMOURAI was hardly an “instigator” of it. However, Melville’s BOB LE FLAMBEUR was a huge, HUGE inspiration and most definitely instigated the French New Wave. Do yourself a favor and check that one out, perhaps on a double bill with the Nick Nolte remake THE GOOD THIEF which is not on the same level in my opinion.

  18. Sorry, make that “late-50s”. We need an edit function.

  19. Dan Prestwich — really? I love that scene in LE CERCLE ROUGE and didn’t think it looked very shitty. I mean the effects are a bit dated I suppose, but in a good way, like spotting a matte painting in a Hitchcock movie.

    CC — Just watched THE DRIVER for the first time recently (holy oversight by the way, what a picture!) and noticed the LE SAMOURAI influence right away.

    Glad you finally saw this one Vern, one of my all time favorite movies. From what I’ve seen of Melville he can do no wrong. Check out LE CERCLE ROUGE, LE DOULOS, UN FLIC and LE DEUXIEMME SOUFFLE if you liked this one, they are all in roughly the same league of all time badass cinema in my humble opinion. ARMY OF SHADOWS is also one of his best, but it’s not a crime flick.

  20. Dan – oops, I mean I love that scene in UN FLIC.

  21. unfortunately I haven’t seen this movie yet either, but I have seen GHOST DOG, which is excellent and was referenced in my favorite anime of all time (the messenger pigeon thing)

  22. I second all the recommendations for Le doulos, Le deuxième souffle, Le cercle rouge, Un flic – also Army of Shadows, which is about the French Resistance, but Melville shot it EXACTLY like one of his gangster movies.

    As for Ghost Dog – have you seen Seijun Suzuki’s Branded to Kill (1967), about yakuza hitmen competing to be Number One Hitman? Because Jim Jarmusch “pays homage to” least two scenes from that in Ghost Dog. He doesn’t even try to be original! which I always thought was strange, because surely half the fun of making a hitman movie would be having to come up with interesting new ways for the hitman to kill his target.

    All of Suzuki’s yakuza movies are worth checking out, by the way. I’m particularly fond of Tokyo Drifter.

    Another film-maker worth checking out if you like Melville is the Hong Kong director and producer Johnnie To. The Mission, Exiles, Breaking News, Mad Detective, Drug Wars, Motorway, Accident etc are all superb.

    ETA I see you’ve already reviewed a lot of these. Sorry, late to the party.

  23. Anne – Those are all directors that I’ve seen a few from and enjoyed enough that I’m foolish to not have dipped in further. I appreciate the recommendations.

  24. I’ve had this one sitting around for years, but last night i rewatched GHOST DOG for the first time in forever (holy shit, you guys, still the fucking coolest) and decided to follow it up by checking out the O.G. And I ain’t proud of this, being of French heritage and all, but it was a real goddamn chore. This samurai fellow is just not cool enough for him to take so long to accomplish so little. His alibi plan is needlessly complex and utterly ineffective (it seems like if he’d gone literally anywhere else except a well known poker game populated exclusively by shady hoods he never would have gotten picked up in the first place) and he never didn’t seem like some kind of poseur dork in his Inspector Gadget outfit. Even his gun is dorky. All the procedural shit goes on way too long to maintain interest and there’s no payoff for all the sullen plodding we’re supposed to think is stoic badassery. It’s also the original non-color color movie, where everything is so desaturated they might as well have just sacked up and shot it in black and white. It’s the kind of movie that’s supposed to intoxicate you with its all-consuming vibe but I found it far too drab and monotone for that to work.

    I’ve been watching a lot of artsy shit lately, so I can handle a movie that’s not nonstop action. I watched THE RED SHOES this week. That’s a two hour and 15 minute movie about ballet. Ballet! And I loved it. As for the French, I’ve gotten down with THE UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG and LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD in the recent past. I thought I was finally ready for this. But I was wrong. I barely made it through. I’m grateful that so many filmmakers took the kernel of coolness from this thing and made a hundred great movies out of it, but the thing itself is shockingly uninvolving.

    Maybe that’s what happens when you finally hear the original version of a song you’ve heard a thousand covers of. The chords are there but they don’t resonate anymore.

  25. I apologize in advance for the rant that’s coming, but this movie got me fired up. I understand that what happens in a film like this is almost inconsequential. It’s a tone poem, all vibes and style and atmosphere. When that stuff works for you, it’s like a beautiful piece of music. You don’t need to figure out what it means or why it move you. It’s only when it doesn’t move you that an autopsy is required. In an effort to do that, I will use the scene in which the cops bug Le Samurai’s apartment as a microcosm of the whole.

    The scene is built around a couple of ideas that are interesting in a vacuum. One is that the cops are indistinguishable from crooks, with their ring of skeleton keys and their silent, methodical way of going about their business. In theory, it should be fascinating to focus only on the nuts and bolts of their work, without stylistic flourishes or cinematic shorthand getting between the viewer and the documentary truth. But what great and fascinating procedure does this gimlet-eyed viewing of the proceedings reveal? They hide the bug behind a curtain. A thing that is supposed to be moved EVERY SINGLE DAY. In other words, the absolute worst hiding spot in the entire room, and, indeed, Le Samurai finds it almost immediately. Thank GOD we spent so much time zeroing in on the minutiae of this crack team of professionals at work. We got all this style, all this intellectualization, of a fairly pointless and uninspired event.

    That’s how I feel about this movie. The style is working overtime to make points its text is not interesting enough to support. If you’re in love with the sound of a song, you don’t care if the lyrics are trite. But if the sound ain’t working, nothing works. For me, this movie is vapid bubble gum pop played like a dirge. Its foundation can’t support its facade. It is the very definition of that most abused of words: pretentious. I’ll take a dozen of the zesty but artless Warner Bros. gangster programmers Melville claims to adore over this bloodless, soulless trifle.

  26. And this is the kind of lazy review we’ve come to expect from someone who obviously wants his movies to be like radio plays or novels. But you won’t get a rise out of me this time. This is a MASTERPIECE, and it’s your loss if you don’t “get it”.

  27. If you don’t like something, you don’t like it. That said, I think one of your first points may have sailed over your head a bit (and obviously, you’re not being shy about spoilers, so I won’t either):

    His alibi plan is needlessly complex and utterly ineffective (it seems like if he’d gone literally anywhere else except a well known poker game populated exclusively by shady hoods he never would have gotten picked up in the first place)

    He wanted to be picked up. It allowed him to spring not only his double alibi but ALSO an eyewitness directly after the crime (if he would hid in a cave for a week, there still may have been some doubt due to perhaps faulty memory). If not for being double-crossed, he would have gotten away with it. Even if the police were certain it was him, they would never be able to get a conviction.

    Granted, this is never underlined, and the info is doled out in an indirect fashion, but if these things bother you, I think it’s safe to say Melville is not your cup of cappuccino.

    Also: They hide the bug behind a curtain. A thing that is supposed to be moved EVERY SINGLE DAY.

    There’s nothing in the room that ISN’T used every single day. That’s the whole joke.

  28. I get what it’s going for. It’s supposed to be a crime movie stripped of everything except “cool.” Except I don’t think this guy’s cool. I think he’s a bland dork who isn’t very good at his job and gets himself killed because of symbolism or something. And he’s definitely not a fucking samurai.

    So that pretty much kills the movie right there. More talking would not have helped.

    The music is cool. And I liked the first shot. I was doing okay for the first hour, but then it completely lost me. I just never gave a fuck about this tool, who embodies that Steve McQueen style of sullen handsomeness that the 60s really thought was the epitome of masculinity but always turned me right off.

    I admit that I like dialogue (the horror!) but I can appreciate a movie that gets by without it. (Noted radio play LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD for instance, referenced in my lazy review.) It’d need to be a lot more interesting than this, though.

  29. But you’re right. So many great filmmakers have gotten so much out of this film, and it’s a shame I can’t feel what they felt. If I’m coming on strong, it’s because I was really looking forward to it and I’m disappointed that it left me so cold. Thank you for tolerating my rants.

  30. I’m probably gonna regret this, but fuck it. Pegsman, that shit hurt my feelings. Was it really necessary to insult me, someone who’s never said a negative thing to you or about you in his entire life, because I don’t like a movie you like? Was what I said really so appalling that it required a personal attack? Are things not shitty enough that we have to be shitty to each other here, one of the few refuges of civility and decency on this wasteland of an internet?

    I know I’m being too sensitive, but that’s because I’m in rough shape right now. A lot of us are. Coming on here and trying to get a conversation going about movies is one of the only things that makes me feel normal. I can’t be the only one who feels like he’s surrounded by enemies. Now I gotta come here and get insulted by my friends? Why? We got motherfuckers lining up to be dicks to us. Can we please just make it a point to not be dicks to each other? I don’t know how I’m gonna make it through the next four years if I can’t even come on here and share a dissenting opinion without somebody coming out of the woodwork to tell me how much I suck because I’m the one guy who didn’t care for the 60-year-old classic. Somehow LE SAMOURAI is still a world-renowned masterpiece despite my negative review, but at least I feel worse about myself and my chosen community now. I’m sure that’s what Melville would have wanted.

    Thank you, jojo, for disagreeing with me in a civil and constructive manner. You’re right, there’s probably all kinds of layers to the movie that I didn’t notice because I found the surface level so uninvolving. I’m sure these things wouldn’t have bothered me at all if I’d been more invested in the character or his milieu.

  31. I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry! My only (poor) excuse is that it was 6 o’clock in the morning, my train was late and I hadn’t slept much. I saw how hard I sounded the second I sent it. I think I was going for a “funny” take on a discussion we had years ago, but I’m not really sure now. And obviously it didn’t work. Been feeling bad all day, so I’m glad you called me out. I promise to never again act as if you commented on my wife’s looks. It is after all only a movie.

  32. Thanks, man. That had really been bothering me. It shouldn’t, but I’m just a raw nerve lately. I appreciate and accept the apology. And I’ll try to not come so hard at universally beloved classics in the future. In my head I’m just trying to get a conversation going, maybe see if anybody agrees with me, but I can see how it just invites combativeness. That’s not what I’m looking for, so I should think about modulating my approach.

  33. I know this in no way concerns me- I haven’t even seen this beloved classic and sheepishly admit I’ve never really heard of it outside of this sight- but I just want to shoehorn in to say that I come here not just for Vern’s reviews but equally for the unfiltered takes from the regular commenters, especially when they are unmodulated and aggressive, especially when they are cranky towards sacrosanct films. I can’t begin to count the times that I’ve learned something new or gotten to see a new angle on a movie due to an offhand observation made in the comments. Even more than that- I laugh my ass off reading some of your comments. I see that Bronson or Lee Marvin PFP pop up as I’m scrolling and I know I’m going to be treated to a bit of wit and filmatistic insight that I’m lucky to be able to read, and it would GREATLY sadden me to not have that to look forward to when I refresh this site. This comment thread makes me wanna watch this movie in order to see the movie from both perspectives and see what impressions it makes on me, and that comes from all of the input, from Vern’s highlighting positivity and potential in nearly every movie to Majestyk’s skepticism and passionate skewering of the ones that fall short for him and Pegsman’s unfiltered and insightful challenges to the same. If modulating is needed to avoid the bruised feelings then I can understand why a filter could help, but for me, there’s nowhere else I know that provides this good-faith but bare-knuckle examination of the artform and all the high and low brows that comprise it. Sorry for going all kumbaya and mushy but I would be truly diminished if not for you guys and the comments you contribute here. So thanks for all of them, including this thread.

  34. “that shit hurt my feelings.” I love the honesty with which you expressed that and owned your feelings as your feelings — completely understandable, relatable, and a big deal. That’s some Matt Damon / Robin Williams GOODWILL HUNTING -level breakthrough shit, and that probably sounds patronizing, but, fuck it, I mean it with complete sincerity. I’m stoked to hear it, so, I’m saying it.

    I mentioned it offhand in the other thread, but I am sorry for the harsh things I said to you awhile back that came out of a combination of how I was reacting to what you said and my own shit I was dealing with. That was harsh, and I apologize, and I knew I had to go off to the mountains to repent and commune for awhile after it was over.

    It’s common and easy to forget or not see the feelings behind these posts (or to not realize that others don’t see our feelings behind our posts), and I think most of us know the experience where we speak to people in very different ways here than we might one-on-one and especially in person. The lack of verbal cues or other humanizing cues fucks with all of us, I think. Anyway, I don’t require or expect forgiveness on that, so, I can take “fuck off” in response. I apologize just the same.

    Commenters come and go, but you’re an institution here, and that’s 100% compliment. You’re a big part of this site for me and many others, I’m sure. Like the Ed McMahon to Vern’s Johnny or the Joker to his Batman or the snake to his mongoose, the Siskel or Lou Reed to his Ebert, the Captain to his Tenille (okay, I’m not sure which way that one goes). You bring a lot to the table here, so, keep on keepin on, kumbaya, etc.

  35. A few years ago I tried to express what Vince means to us with his writings on both movies and more personal stuff. Sadly I used a GARDENS OF STONE reference about “beating the bear” that nobody understood. But most people believed me when I said it was relevant. And here I am some years later, having a go at the man with some ill-judged and lame Gene Siskel parody. Today I’m really happy that younger and smarter people are joining us. I’m obviously past my sell-by date.

    That said, I’ve learned over the years that there’s an interesting debate to be had about movies like LE SAMOURAI, where it can be said that style beats substance. BLADERUNNER is another example where people either love it with a passion or are more “meh”. Most Melville movies (or should we use the term “films” here?) have scenes like the one Majestyk describes, where a lot of movement gives a very meager result. And I guess if you’re not into that particular style it becomes boring very fast. I love it, but I struggle to explain just why. And if Alain Delon in a trenchcoat and Fedora, smoking Galois cigarettes, driving around Paris at night in a Citroen DS to smooth jazz isn’t cool, I don’t know what is.

  36. there’s probably all kinds of layers to the movie that I didn’t notice because I found the surface level so uninvolving. I’m sure these things wouldn’t have bothered me at all if I’d been more invested in the character or his milieu.

    Oh, there’s PLENTY of his movies where the meaning of existence could have been in the second act and I wouldn’t have noticed.

    I won’t go as far as his detractors and say he just makes the same movie over and over, because I don’t think that’s true. I will say he’s very fond of a few things. Namely labyrinth plotting where the details are presented to the audience either offhanded, indirectly, or merely implied. Matched with a bone-dry style that makes Clint Eastwood look like an old-time vaudevillian. In other words, his movies are often REAL easy to zone out to.

  37. OK, so if we’re doing the group hug thing, here’s my shilling’s worth. As an older, dumber person, something I’ve learned by coming here is that although I generally have very clear ideas about what I like and don’t like, I am often very poor at articulating those ideas. Consequently, I am full of admiration for those who can and do explain well and often wittily why they do or do not like something, even when those views don’t coincide with my own.

    I know I have many shocking blind spots for objectively great works – Robert Altman, most of Kubrick, late Scorsese – and I am comfortable those are on me. I also love BLADE RUNNER, FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE, ONCE UPON A TIME IN CHINA, BUCKAROO BANZAI, and, yes, LE SAMOURAI. As we say, and better know, your mileage may vary. We can probably find common ground in the works of Corman, Carpenter, Besson etc.

    I’m sorry you’re in rough shape right now Majestyk; I don’t think you’re alone in that, even if that’s how it feels. I’m also very glad Pegsman is better than he has been and has the strength now to defend what he cares for (although I’m guessing you’ll always have the strength to step up for Peckinpah or Bronson). I don’t really know either of you, but I certainly know Crudnasty’s feeling of expectation when those PFPs show up.

  38. I love you guys. Thanks for still commenting here. It means so much to me that you’ve created this community that happens to be rotating around my goofy reviews.

  39. I want to thank everybody for the kind words. Sometimes I doubt my role in this ecosystem, as it seems like I have earned the reputation as The Guy Who Thinks Stuff Sucks and Can Tell You Why. That’s not how I see myself. If left to my own devices, I’m The Guy Who Loves More Stuff Than Most People Have Even Heard Of. I love SO MUCH STUFF. I live surrounded by the stuff I love. I disappear into it every night. I love nothing more than to find a rich new vein of unmined stuff to spend my time exploring. I pretty much live for it. It just seems like The Stuff I Love doesn’t come up here too often, while The Stuff I’m Not Into For Reasons I Will Currently Explain To You At Length comes up a lot. I’m happy to know that my minority reports are not seen as a pestilence.

Leave a Reply





XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>