Cantankerous Episode #11: My Rifle, My Pony and Me
The sun is sinkin’ in the West, which means it’s time for episode 11 of Cantankerous! This episode Reed completely massacres one of the greatest on-screen musical numbers in film history (along with some help from Jay) and we finally get to hear Mr.Farrington’s thoughts on Christopher Nolan’s Inception. This results in an occasionally heated discussion in which Jay and Sean attempt to understand and accept Reed’s criticism that the film lacks any new real-world scientific discoveries in the field of dream research and technology. Then we get in to some dream discussion and eventually end up discussing whether or not Twitter actually draws us closer to celebrities. Thank us later, it’s the new Cantankerous! GOTTA LOVE IT!™
Download the MP3 (63MB)
Cantankerous Archives
Subscribe to the podcast feed:
Comments (68)
amazing photo!!!!!
Posted by vacancyvideo on August 17th, 2010please make iron on shirts. I’ll buy one.
You said to thank you later, but instead I will thank you now. You guys are the best. That picture is like seeing a baby unicorn. It’s what legends are made of.
Posted by Film Ape on August 17th, 2010If only I was able to download this now! It will have to wait until tonight. Can’t wait to hear it.
Posted by bard on August 17th, 2010awesome, can’t wait to listen.
Posted by Gord on August 17th, 2010Nice.
Will make this my desktop background
Posted by TDR on August 17th, 2010Awesome.
Anyone else having trouble downloading this in iTunes? I get an error message every time I try to download.
Posted by Ken on August 17th, 2010The wait is over ! Thanks.
Posted by Paul Andrews on August 17th, 2010Try it again, I just fixed a case issue with the MP3 filename.
Posted by Sean on August 17th, 2010Wait, does it have Inception spoilers? I want to wait till I watch the movie if it does. Someone please confirm.
Posted by Napalm on August 17th, 2010Yes, it has spoilers.
Posted by Alicia on August 17th, 2010Still ain’t working through iTunes….
Posted by Leigh on August 17th, 2010Sean: It works fine now. Thanks!
Posted by Ken on August 17th, 2010Aw crap! Gotta wait till the dvdrip of Inception to come first. THEN I get to listen to this episode. Theaters here don’t bring Hollywood/foreign movies
Posted by Napalm on August 17th, 2010Name of soundtrack of beginning (the one after my rifle, my poney and me) at the end?
Posted by Mr.Nobody on August 17th, 2010I always forget to post the music cues.
First song: What is Life by George Harrison
Last song: Heaven and Hell by The Easybeats
Posted by Jay C. on August 17th, 2010Amazing! Cant wait to listen to this!
Posted by AdamH on August 17th, 2010Btw I’d love that picture on a t shirt!
Another great episode. Looking forward to the next, even though Reed claims this to be the last.
Posted by Kasper F. Nielsen on August 17th, 2010Reed, why do you say this is your last Cantankerous podcast? Has some record label been listening and made you an offer you can’t refuse? Maybe Simon Cowell has recruited you? Don’t be so cryptic and let us know what you meant by your comment.
Posted by RC on August 17th, 2010a new cantankerous??!?!?!? BEST DAY EVAR
Posted by joe on August 17th, 2010Is August 17 Christmas in Canada?
Posted by Antho42 on August 17th, 2010Jay, you did a fabulous job with the album cover. And I love your description of the episode once again.
@RC: I seriously thought Cantankerous would be defunct after episode 10. The only reason why I did this Cantankerous was to discuss Inception since some people didn’t want me on the regular Film Junk podcast.
I humbly appreciate the fans of Cantankerous, but I don’t get the sense that Jay and Sean enjoy recording Cantankerous with me. BTW, I had copious notes for Inception, but I didn’t think our discussion was much fun, so I thought we had better not continue our discussion.
Jay has better things to do, so that’s why I keep on saying that Cantankerous is over.
@Antho42: For me, every day is Christmas.
@Film Ape: Your “baby unicorn” line made me laugh.
BTW, that photo above shows my eyelid defect perfectly.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 17th, 2010Just to clarify as usual, I have never said I was disinterested in recording Cantankerous. In fact, I think we should do them bi-weekly. REED DOESN’T WAT TOOOOO. EVERY TIME WE RECORD HE SAID ‘FUCK DUDE….THIS IS BORING AND I HATE MY FANS.’
Everyone who wants a regular edition of Cantankerous should email Reed personally and tell him.
Posted by Jay C. on August 17th, 2010And I’m glad you like the album cover Reed. I put a lot of work into it so it better become your Facebook or Twitter avatar at some point.
Posted by Jay C. on August 17th, 2010Do you have the name of soundtrack at the beginning and the end of this podcast Jay (the one after Reeds My rifle, my poney and me)?
Posted by Mr.Nobody on August 18th, 2010@Mr.Nobody: I think Jay already answered your question in comment 15, didn’t he?
@Jay C.: I guess I wanted to end Cantankerous on my own terms. I don’t want to be hurt when you make your move to Hollywood and leave me behind.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 18th, 2010Hah ha, Reed Farrington
Posted by rus in chicago on August 18th, 2010the passive aggressive projectionist!
YESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!
Posted by Andrew on August 18th, 2010that photo contains all the ingredients of something awesome.Go Reed!
Biweekly would be amazing. I love Reed’s point of view.
Posted by vacancyvideo on August 18th, 2010Another great episode. I hope it’s not the last one.
Reed, you need to start doing the podcast bi-weekly like Jay said.
Posted by bard on August 18th, 2010A little know fact about this album cover:
If you add water to the cover and let it sit for two days you can peel back the cover and the original cover is revealed – and it has a picture of Reed on a pony wearing nothing but a speedo and holding a shotgun.
The original cover was deemed too racy and this newer PC version was designed.
Thanks for the new episode guys – awesome stuff as usual !
Posted by Mark In Ottawa on August 18th, 2010I noticed Reed, that you did not disagree with Jay when he said you hate your fans. Wat up with that?
Posted by RC on August 18th, 2010@Mark In Ottawa: Ha ha. My next album cover will be me in a butcher’s smock with meat and broken baby doll bodies scattered about. (I wonder how many of you will understand this reference.)
@RC: I would have hoped that people would know that Jay was joking. I do “roll my eyes” when celebrities ingratiate themselves with their fans by saying how much they love them. Not that I’m a celebrity. But I must say my disguises work really well, because no one recognizes me when I’m in public.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 18th, 2010I knew you’d get that reference – ’cause you’re that damn cool.
Greg could make a good butcher cover addition – He looks like a butcher – AND HE LOVES TO PLAY WITH MEAT …..
Rock on Reed.
Posted by Mark In Ottawa on August 18th, 2010This podcast came across as too much of an ambush.
Reed’s assertions aren’t absolutely groundless. Although I summarily agree with Jay, the worst you can fault Reed with is going into the movie with unrealistic expectations.
Posted by Marty on August 18th, 2010This was hilarious. Solid proof that Reed needs help.
Please please do more.
Posted by Bluelouboyle on August 18th, 2010Reed, I think you are projecting your feelings onto Jay. You are the one in the podcast who claims it to be the last Cantankerous while Jay quickly retorts that there will be more.
I just recently discovered this site and for what it’s worth, I’d like to hear more Cantankerous. If you don’t want to do it anymore, then that’s your choice but don’t make it seem like Jay is the one who wants to pull the plug.
Although I haven’t been listening long, I’ve heard enough of the podcasts to have learned that you misquote Jay quite a bit or put words into his mouth. I suspect that if Jay didn’t want to record any more Cantankerous, he wouldn’t be afraid to say so.
Are you just fishing for compliments?
Posted by RC on August 18th, 2010I don’t blame Reed for wanting to end Cantankerous.
It’s changed a lot since early episodes. Back then Jay treated Reed like a real friend and bared his own soul alongside him. Naturally Jay laughed at Reed’s surprising revelations like anyone would, but also used the opportunity to dig deeper instead of outright dismissing him.
Now it’s just pick-on-the-weirdo hour. It’s all pouncing on Reed for being unusual and ridiculing his ideas and lifestyle.
The most painful part isn’t the abuse towards Reed. It’s that shining a spotlight on his quirks is such an obvious move, as if the audience wouldn’t pick up on it otherwise. The incredulous reactions are like an obnoxious laugh track.
What made Cantakerous fun wasn’t Reed’s co-hosts mocking him, but playing it straight and letting him dig his own hole. Love him or hate him, Reed’s a fascinating guy. Let each listener decide whether or not to laugh at him, laugh with him, or get angry at him, instead of presumptuously jabbing him on our behalf.
(Sorry to be rambling and preachy, but I think you guys have lost a little perspective…)
Posted by Defendor on August 18th, 2010I could of gone my whole life without hearing about Reed’s wet dreams. Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going to go kill some kittens and weep openly while I do so.
Posted by bowenarrow on August 18th, 2010Most marriage counselors will tell you that miscommunication is the number one problem in relationships. It appears that Jay thinks Reed wants to end the podcast and vice versa. Hugs are free and making up can have it’s perks.
Posted by Xidor on August 18th, 2010Reed,
It appears that there are a lot of people that want the podcast to continue and you are just one person.
Spock, “Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”
Kirk, “Or the one”.
Posted by Xidor on August 18th, 2010@RC: It’s always nice to hear compliments, but I’m being sincere in what I say and do. When we do these podcasts, I suppose we are getting paid in compliments. When I said I wasn’t going to be on the Film Junk Inception podcast, Jay said I was playing the martyr and fishing for compliments. Actually, I think I was trying to avoid further animosity which I’m sure would have come if I had appeared on the podcast. In all honesty, there might be another Cantankerous, but I don’t want to get anyone’s hopes up. Cantankerous isn’t a priority in any of our lives.
@Defendor: Hey, that was a pretty good analysis of the direction that Cantankerous has taken. I thought the podcast was focusing too much on me as well. I won’t speak for Jay anymore, but I think Cantankerous went in the direction it did because most of the Film Junk comments were directed at my idiosyncrasies. I think we all realize that I only have so many idiosyncrasies, so it was best to spread out Cantankerous as much as possible.
What I liked about doing the Film Junk podcast is that I got to make “stupid” comments about news stories and things other people have to talk about. (Apparently, some people didn’t like this.)
@Xidor: But in “The Search for Spock,” we have this exchange:
Captain Spock: “Why would you do this?”
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 19th, 2010Kirk: “Because the needs of the one… outweigh the needs of the many.”
More rambling…
If this were high school or another real world setting I’d want to defend Reed from the bullies. But the mic exaggerates people’s personalities so that everyone plays a character to some degree on any podcast. (Except Sean, I believe he’s always a cool cucumber.) I’m sure Reed plays up his idiosyncrasies and contrariness to elicit exasperation for laughs.
What’s most surprising and intriguing about Cantankerous #1 is how different Jay’s character is from what he’s like on Film Junk. We hear much more of his contemplative side, making the title of the show even funnier for the irony of his dialed-down crankiness.
I really like (early) Cantankerous and the Reed House Tour video as footnotes to Film Junk, giving us a pure peek into Reed’s world without bias or judgment. Jay’s skill as a documentarian allows the audience to “reed” between the lines and be surprised by what they find. I’m surprised simply by the range of reactions I have, from delight to frustration. It’s a museum of quirks to be appreciated on several levels instead of a zoo where we point and laugh at the clownish beasts.
I guess it comes down to context. Reed’s appearances on Film Junk are more like a Three Stooges routine, where Greg typically plays Moe. It’s where I go when I prefer to hear Reed-bashing or see him fill the Kramer role.
Maybe if this episode was titled Film Junk episode 279 and 1/2 instead of Cantankerous it wouldn’t bother me.
Posted by Defendor on August 19th, 2010Sort of agree with @Defendor. So many missed opportunities for armchair psychology: Reed’s dreams of his mother, his baby clothes hung on the wall, etc. Instead Jay just calls him “Weird”. It’s like finding a skull on the ground and playing kick ball with it instead of digging for the dinosaur buried below it! Talk about scientific discoveries.
Posted by Ken on August 19th, 2010I’ve heard similar complaints about later episodes of The Ricky Gervais Show, and I guess I can see why people might think we’re just picking on Reed, although I don’t entirely agree. Part of it is our fault for not bringing our own topics to the table to discuss and letting Reed control the direction of the show. Our role becomes strictly reactionary. However, I do think that this particular episode was set up specifically for that, since it was his chance to share his thoughts on Inception. Plus I also think Reed brings up certain things only because he wants us to laugh at him. Either way I’d like to do the show more regularly as well, although Jay and Reed could probably do it even more often if I wasn’t involved.
Posted by Sean on August 19th, 2010This Defendor guy’s pretty sharp!
I do think this was kind of an off-episode, since it just plays like another movie review where Jay gets frustrated at Reed for having perfectly reasonable interests (what interests aren’t?) I still laughed quite a bit, but I also do miss the sincerity of earlier podcasts. It would be interesting and heartwarming to hear an episode where Sean and Jay HAD to go along with one of Reeds peeves – say, the need for scientific discovery in a movie. (Even though, correct me if I’m wrong, but the way I understood it, Reed didn’t mean scientific discovery untill you asked him and he decided to go for the joke. Didn’t he mainly talk about new ideas that would be inspiring, and encourage you to think more about the nature of dreams?) If they had to go along with it and try and listen to Reeds reasoning instead of just going straight to laughter, I think it could be an interesting episode… Oh well, only 3-5 months to go!
Posted by Henrik on August 19th, 2010Off episode? They extensively talked about wet dreams and urine. You people are crazy.
Posted by Film Ape on August 19th, 2010poor Reed, all this analytical talk is going to make him question his actions even more and we’ll NEVER get a honest opinion on anything. Lets end this with a summery:
1. everyone wants more Reed
Posted by rus in chicago on August 19th, 20102. everyone that wants more Reed must shower him with twitter, facebook love because frankly its all he has.
3. Jay can attack Reed, but Sean should take a more active role in allowing Reed’s ideas to not get shot-down completely
4. Reed has to co-manage the bookstore with Greg for min. 3 days and Jay films it!
Great episode – lots of laughs and incredulity. Don’t listen to the Defendors of the world (“I like the early funny ones.”).
Posted by Double_A on August 19th, 2010Cantankerous is deliberately freeform – sometimes like Film Junk, sometimes like Ricky Gervais, always gap-mouthed at Reed’s wonderful way of looking at the world.
So I started listening to this episode while washing the dishes. I didn’t think Jay would include all my awkward “singing” at the beginning. I thought it would have been better to split it up, segueing back into the ending of the song at the end of the podcast. I should note that Jay tuned my guitar to a higher key which threw me off.
I sort of got frustrated listening to myself talk about Inception, the same way some of you get frustrated when I’m on a Film Junk podcast. Most of the times I think I’m not getting my point across and I have difficulty saying something using other words. Other times, I think Jay and Sean get my point, but they have a hard time seeing the validity of the point. Rather than exploring my point of view, they say something that may be valid in and of itself, but draws the discussion away from my point.
@Defendor: I should praise you for your astute observations as Henrik noted, because feedback is too often not helpful.
@Henrik: You understand correctly with regards to my quibble with Inception’s lack of inspiration. When I go see a movie, I want to see or feel something I’ve never seen or felt before, done in an entertaining way. I don’t think this is an unwarranted expectation. Yes, I shouldn’t expect a movie to teach me something new, but I expect it to make me think creatively, or feel something. Inception made me think, but mainly in terms of plot construction and rules. And, yes, I’ve never seen a heist film with fantasy elements, but Nolan didn’t entertain me enough.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 19th, 2010“Inception made me think, but mainly in terms of plot construction and rules.”
See? I can’t imagine anybody saying that this is not a valid criticism of the film. But somehow on the podcast it was turned into wanting Christopher Nolan to research a scientific breakthrough. You could say Reed is to blame for a) not explaining properly (though I thought he did) and b) going along with the joke, but I think it’s just as much Sean and Jays fault for automatically assuming that whatever Reeds saying is going to be something ridiculous.
Posted by Henrik on August 20th, 2010Here is an exchange from Star Trek IV:
Amanda: Spock, does the good of the many out weigh the good of the one?
Spock: I would accept that as an axiom.
Amanda: Then you stand here alive because of a mistake made by your flawed, feeling, human friends. They have sacrificed their futures because they believed that the good of the one – you – was more important to them.
Spock: Humans make illogical decisions.
Amanda: They do, indeed.
The podcast, hinges on whether you self-identify with Spock or Kirk.
Posted by Xidor on August 20th, 2010Jay, I think you’re misinterpreting Armond White’s view of cinema. He actually compares everything he sees to the ultimate classics, be it DEATH RACE, NORBIT or INCEPTION. If you read his reviews you’ll see that he definitely doesn’t buy into the good-for-what-it-is philosophy. I’m on board with him regarding this issue; supposedly trashy genre films have often proven that they could be more affecting and cinematically innovative than “respectable” A-list films, so why shouldn’t THE EXPENDABLES be criticized and analyzed with the same rigor or be held to the same standards as, say, THERE WILL BE BLOOD? Of course they’re wildly different films, but they both try to achieve their respective goals through image, sound, rhythm, tone, etc. They’re both films, regardless of the genre they’re working in.
Maybe it’s the wrong place to talk about that, though.
————–
I mostly agree with Defendor regarding Cantankerous but thought this episode was excellent. The picking on Reed was annoying at first but it quickly left to be replaced with a personal and casual conversation between friends, albeit one that put strong emphasis on Reed. I too found the show more engaging when Jay used to put his own personality to the forefront.
Also, film conversation with Reed is, to my ears, infinitely more compelling than film conversation on the regular Film Junk podcast. He’s not the most coherent debater, but he often brings up unusual and valid points that spark great interaction. I love Sean & Greg as hosts, but they’re a bit stale when it comes to film-talk.
Posted by Maxime Gérin on August 23rd, 2010Just to clarify my “The picking on Reed was annoying at first…” sentence; I’m not trying to paint Reed as a helpless victim to two brutish thugs who just want to humiliate him, you guys are obviously friends and have known each other for years so I’m not in position to judge your relationship.
What I mean is that, as a show, I think Cantankerous works even better when Reed’s stories/opinions/comments are followed by further investigation or solid counterpoints.
Posted by Maxime Gérin on August 23rd, 2010Continuing my ridiculous conversation with myself…
“I love Sean & Greg as hosts, but they’re a bit stale when it comes to film-talk.”
This sounds way too harsh, sorry. I intended to say that Sean and Greg aren’t very argumentative about their film-related opinions. They very rarely confront each other or Jay when they disagree, staying in a nice “let’s agree to disagree” mode that makes the weekly reviews feel dry from time to time. I guess fake arguments would be a lot worst though, and anyway it’s not like the show as a whole isn’t consistently fun and addictive.
Let’s hope I won’t feel the need to clarify this re-clarification.
Posted by Maxime Gérin on August 23rd, 2010Maxime, thanks for keeping this post alive with your comments!
And thanks for appreciating my contributions to the Film Junk podcast. I have a hard time listening to the Film Junk podcast when I’m not on it. I mean, people think I’m always playing devil’s advocate, but it’s just that Jay’s inconsistent analysis of films drives me up the wall! People seem to hate when I interrupt him, but I can’t help it when every sentence he says makes my jaw drop.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 23rd, 2010It’s not surprising that you’d consider my analysis of films inconsistent (I don’t analyze films, I just talk about whether or not I like them) seeing as your approach is to just dislike everything. I will agree that yes, you are more consistent in your negativity towards the majority of films than I am.
Posted by Jay C. on August 23rd, 2010Well, if Film Junk reviewed porno films, maybe I’d like more films.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 23rd, 2010We did just review Piranha 3D.
Posted by Sean on August 23rd, 2010The title of this episode sounds like a porno title.
“My rifle, my pony and me”.
Posted by Kamen Liew on August 24th, 2010I remember when Ricky Gervais came out with his podcast. It was really funny and I listened to every episode. Then he started charging for it. While it was a great podcast, it just wasn’t worth paying for. Now I don’t know any of the guys on this podcast, I don’t really know anything about their lives or relationships outside of the podcast and I don’t know Reed Farrington. It seems pretty clear that Reed Farrington isn’t even his real name. But if Reed Farrington kept making Cantankerous and started charging for it, I’d pay up.
Posted by El Ultimo Hombre on August 24th, 2010I apologize for my presumptuous comments. My points came out harsh and unfair. Jay is right (in the intro of Film Junk #284) – I don’t know the hosts, outside of what’s edited and offered on the podcast. I don’t wish to dictate the course of the show or fault strangers’ relationships, and regret my public criticisms.
Posted by Defendor on August 24th, 2010I don’t want it to sound like we won’t accept criticism of Cantankerous, and it’s always good to know how each episode comes across. I think we just want to reassure people it’s not our intention to cut down Reed or to put on a mocking tone for the sake of entertainment. Our reactions just come from natural frustration and familiarity with the guy.
Posted by Sean on August 24th, 2010Well, seing as this was brought up on the podcast, I might as well defend myself here as well.
When Reed says:
“You understand correctly with regards to my quibble with Inception’s lack of inspiration.”
it clearly shows that he did have a point with what he was trying to say, and that he only started joking after Jay and Sean leapt to the scientific discovery conclusion. Either Reed is only willing to stand up for what he believes in comments sections, or he doesn’t feel the environment of the podcast is supportive enough for it to be worth standing up for something, and his opinion on film would seem less garbled, if you DID give him the benefit of the doubt. He at least seems willing to participate seriously in the comments, but I guess that could be the only place.
Posted by Henrik on August 24th, 2010That’s a nice compliment, El Ultimo Hombre. Thx! BTW, your bill is in the mail.
Henrik, when I find that I can’t explain any better, I figure it’s better to go with the flow or move on rather than go over the same point again and again.
Defendor, I don’t think you need to apologize for your valid interpretation of the dynamics of our relationships at Film Junk. It’s interesting to hear about people’s perceptions because they’re just as important as the reality of the situation.
I
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 24th, 2010You’re welcome but I’m absolutely serious. You should charge $1.00 for the next podcast to see how badly fans really want you to do this. Of course you might have to split that money up between all of you so it’s really just more of a tip. But you never know, you could make a fortune!
Posted by El Ultimo Hombre on August 25th, 2010@Double_A:
” Don’t listen to the Defendors of the world (“I like the early funny ones.”). ”
Just for the record, the big reason I enjoy Cantankerous and Film Junk isn’t because I find them funny, but for for the authentic, wonderful chemistry shared among the hosts.
I wasn’t hooked on Film Junk until Greg joined. Sean and Jay are great together but the addition of Greg’s personality creates a perfect trio. And seriously, how many other shows have you heard with such complementary, balanced *voices*? I could listen to these three all day.
Similarly with Cantankerous, Reed and Jay have an unexpectedly compelling rapport, enhanced by the quirky musical interludes. I dare not try to quantify what I find so interesting about their conversations, and I think the sheer length of this comment thread speaks to the show’s unique and indescribable charm.
Not to say it’s limited to Jay and Reed…the occasional guests are usually fun and bring an extra spice to the mix. But I think folks are correct in observing that a third permanent member is unnecessary, and tends to swing the balance to place Reed as the outsider.
Posted by Defendor on August 26th, 2010Aside from Reed and Jay (D-grade celebrities), I have received a direct tweet response from Rosario Dawson so I guess I win (a thoughtful reaction to my suggestion she play in Y The Last Man film)
Posted by rot on August 27th, 2010D-grade, rot? Let’s see if I ever respond to you again! (Oh, I guess I just did. I mean after this response.)
Appealing to Rosario’s inner-geekness was a smart move.
Posted by Reed Farrington on August 28th, 2010Leave a Reply