Welcome to this curated educational transcript of the Joe Rogan Experience. In this session, we provide a deep-dive examination of the critical perspectives and historical dialogues presented in Episode #2452. Our mission is to offer a high-fidelity, searchable research resource for students of cultural history, emerging technology, and global discourse. This transcript has been specifically optimized for academic reference, linguistic study, and archival preservation regarding Cinema History, Narrative Architecture, and the Evolution of Screenwriting. Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out. The Joe Rogan
experience. Train by day. Joe Rogan podcast by
night. All day. Come on, Roger. Yeah, fuck it.
Fuck it. Fuck it. Go for it. Fuck it. We'll do
it live. Do it live. That's a classic. Yeah,
that's a classic look behind the scenes. Fucking
crazy people telling you the news. Yeah, that's
good. And the William Shatner one where, you
know, the studio guy, you know, he says Shatner
is doing some ADR for the cartoon, the Star Trek
cartoon. And he says. You know, he uses the word
sabotage and he gets corrected by the by the
studio guys like, Bill, it's pronounced sabotage.
Please don't correct me. It disgusts me. It sickens
me. And you say sabotage. I say sabotage. I absolutely
love William Shatner. My favorite ones are the
or excuse me. Fuck. Why can't I remember his
name? Rosebud. Orson Welles. Jesus Christ. Orson
Welles. What happened? You started saying it.
I know. What happened? My brain just said, nope,
no access. When Orson Welles was doing the Gallo
wine commercials. Oh, yeah. Remember those days?
Yeah, yeah. Orson Welles. Show no wine before
it's time. I know. Everything was like an exhaustive
sucking of air to come in to speak. But then
he was making fun of how shitty the wine was
in between takes. Like he was angry. Yeah. There
is a CD that you can get. I can't remember what
it's called, but I have them at home. And it's
like all these radio things like that where just
when celebrities, you know, lose it while doing
voiceover and ADR. hilarious. Orson Welles is
a crazy story, right? Because when he made that
movie, when he made Citizen Kane, which was about
William Randolph Hearst, William Randolph Hearst
essentially shut down one of the most talented
guys alive at the time, shut down his career.
Yeah, because the movie was kind of an insult
about, you know, the whole thing about Rosebud
is that's the name of his girlfriend's clitoris.
Oh, that was his nickname for her clitoris. And
so Orson Welles was doing a kind of very like
like he was jabbing at him in a very low level
way. Like, really? Yeah. Rosebud. How did he
know that that was the nickname of his girlfriend's
clitoris? People in Hollywood know these things.
Word gets around. Word gets around. I would keep
that one just to her. Yeah. Who told? Yeah. That's
crazy. But I mean, if you go back to like War
of Worlds and then Citizen Kane, I mean, this
guy was a dynamo. And then they shut him down.
Well, yeah. And he was doing things that nobody
else would do. It's like he's like, oh, I want
the camera down here, like on the phone. Well,
we can't get the camera lens down that low. Like
what you're talking about is impossible to do.
And so he would just. grab like a pickaxe and
just start chopping away at the studio concrete
and dig a hole in the ground so you can put the
camera down that low. Oh, really? Yeah, he was
obsessed with getting a vision on screen that
was, even today, is so advanced. There's a shot
in the very beginning when... Young Kane is like
a little kid, and he's out there playing with
Rosebud. He's out there playing with the sled
in the snow, and the camera is on him, and then
it kind of starts pulling back, and it pulls
through a window, and then we see his parents
and the trust attorney, and the camera keeps
backing up all the way into the room. Well, to
do that in a studio and to have all that snow
and everything, you need so much light, but you
also need a lot of light inside because of the
exposure change. It's like an amazing, incredible
dolly shot, a reverse tracking shot. It's fantastic.
And what year did he do this, too? I don't know
the exact year. Citizen Kane has to be 40s, right?
Yeah, yeah, probably. It's in the late 40s, I
would think. Is that when it was, Jamie? Yeah.
Tell us the... 41. Early 40s. Wow. Yeah. Wow,
let me see that shot. Wartime. Can we find that?
Wartime. It's a Wartime film. What, Jamie? I
was looking for it. I was lost in some other
ones. Wartime, 40s, right. Yeah, right. It's
a Wartime movie. Yeah, yeah. I didn't even think
of that. Yeah. Oh, my God. A lot of stuff going
on back then. Probably hard to get people to
go to the movies back then. No, it would be easy
to go to the movies. In fact, Wartime and Depression
and When Things Are Bad, that's usually the best
time for entertainment because people just want
to escape. Well, that actually makes sense. Be
careful, Charles. Pull your muffler around your
neck, Charles. I think we shall have to tell
him now. Yes. I'll sign those papers now, Mr.
Thatcher. You people seem to forget that I'm
the boy's father. It's going to be done exactly
the way I've told Mr. Thatcher. There ain't nothing
wrong with Colorado. I don't see why we can't
raise our own son just because we come into some
money. If I want, I can go to court. A father
has a right to. So in order to maintain that
background exposure of the little kid in the
window and the foreground, what you're not knowing
is how much light they're using on the interior
part in order to create that balance between
the two with the film stocks back then. And the
other thing is that table gets flown in. Like,
they move that table into the shot because it's
in the way of the camera move. Wow. And so there's
all sorts of, like, you know, mathematics going
on in the creation of this shot. And most people
would just, you know, be like, oh, just, you
know, shoot the kid outside and then cut inside.
You know, just do it like that. But, you know,
Wells was, I mean, he was thinking on a complete
other level. It's just, we've robbed, we got
robbed of so many films. If you really think
about it, what he could have made. You know.
Yes and no. My favorite film of his is Touch
of Evil. And there's this amazing shot with Charlton
Heston where he's playing a Mexican and he's
got like this like pencil thin mustache. And
like Chuck Heston as a Mexican is fantastic.
And then everybody's so sweaty in the movie and
it takes place in Mexico, but it's shot in Venice,
California. And so the whole opening, which is
this. setting of a bomb in the trunk of a car.
And then, yeah, here's the opening shot. And
you can tell that it's actually downtown Venice.
And this is supposed to be Mexico? Yeah, this
is supposed to be like a border town in Mexico.
I don't know if it's Tijuana or some other border
town. But he does this amazing, amazing single
shot. Wow. Which back then, this is really hard
to do. And this is kind of a... I mean, it's
Charlton Heston essentially saying, I believe
in Orson Welles and his vision. This is crazy.
See, that's downtown Venice. The beach is just
beyond that. Oh, wow. God, what year is this?
Actually, I'm sorry. The beach might be behind
us. What year was this? 1958? Yeah, 1958. Wow.
It's an incredible shot. And this is incredibly
difficult to do as well because you've got a
crane on a car. And now you're following the
people. Now you're following the people. And
there's Charlton Heston with his mustache. And
we know as an audience that there's a bomb in
that car. But he doesn't know. Wow. And so he's
still, you know, the. Just the fact that this
is all one shot is crazy. And for back then,
I mean, it's a big deal. Back then, the camera
that you're using isn't just some little handy
cam or something like that now, you know, an
iPhone. It's a Mitchell BNCR, which is, you know,
it takes four guys to move that camera. It's
made out of cast iron. You know, it's a giant
camera with a blimp. A blimp? A blimp is a soundproofing
device. So you have the camera and then you've
got to build a giant encasing for the camera.
Because it makes so much noise? You don't want
to hear that. What did that look like? I have
one in my home. Of course you do. That shot's
incredible. I would have never – I didn't know
that film existed. I bought mine from this commercial
director named Charles Wittenmeyer and he had
a massive collection of stuff and then he liquidated
everything. He just kind of cashed out of Los
Angeles and he had a warehouse full of stuff.
And so I went in and he's like, you know, well,
here's – you can get this and you can get this.
I was like, OK, the Mitchell BNCR. And we went
over to it and he's like, you know, this Mitchell
BNCR was used to shoot The Godfather. So that's
what it looks like with the big lid on it? Yeah,
that's actually, yeah, that's basically the camera.
That's the camera. Is that the blimp is the thing
on top of it? Yeah, the blimp is, well, the whole
thing is actually, the whole thing is a blimp.
I mean, well, there's a smaller area with a blimp
on it. The big one, like the whole thing is a
blimp, and you can actually open up all of these.
these trap doors on it to reveal the camera inside
of it. And then the reels that are in, there
you go. There's an opened up one. Wow. It looks
like it's holding an Aerie on the inside, an
Aerie 100. One of the things about old movies
is they would let a scene cook. You know, you
had so much time before people would talk and
you just let like the average daily life sort
of play out. Yeah. And it set the tone for the
film and they don't. Now it's like it's like
built for Netflix. Yeah. Well, now you have a
white paper that Netflix gives you. And that
I think was it Ben Affleck that was talking about
it? You know how you've got to have a beat in
the beginning and you've got to have this and
this and this and regular things. I mean, there
was this book by Sid Field, which was a screenwriting
book that. You know, at one hand, it gave a kind
of formula on what a movie should be. You know,
by page seven, your inciting event should happen.
And by page 30, the first day, you know, he had
everything mapped out by page. And that eventually
found its way into the hands of studio executives.
And they were like, oh, now we know what a screenplay
is supposed to be structured like, you know,
in order to have proper story arcs and structures
and a satisfying design. And and that's just
the next iteration is Netflix giving you a white
paper saying you have to shoot with these cameras.
You have to process at these labs. You have to
have, you know, tech specs that are within this
range. And that's now extending to story because
they've analytically looked at what audiences
are, you know, able to process now, which is
less and less probably because of the covid shot.
completely frying their pineal glands so they
can no longer pay attention to anything. And
then on top of that, the mind -controlled device
of cell phones. And, you know, with all of that,
they're now like, well, how do we maintain the
audience? And so you end up with white papers.
Don't you think it's options too? It's almost
like if something is not really fascinating within
the first 20, 30 seconds, people just want to...
Let's see what else is on. They just want to
keep searching. Well, there is that. I mean,
there's something magical about being in a movie
theater. You know, you're in this congregation.
You know, Quentin always talks about how, you
know, movies are my church. Well, it is a congregation
and you're having you're sitting in the dark
next to someone you don't even know. They might
have completely different ideologies, race, creed,
color, like everything is different about them.
And yet you're sitting in the dark next to them
having this ecstatic dream, this waking dream,
sitting like insects looking at the flicker on
the screen. And you're sharing this kind of experience
that you're. physically trapped in. You don't
get up and leave the theater. Well, you might
if you have to go to the bathroom. get some popcorn
or something, but they'll even bring that to
you now. You're having this kind of ecstatic
experience absorbing the movie with someone you
don't know, and you're sharing your bodily electricity
with them. And I think this kind of, this is
the magic that they often talk about of movies.
It's not necessarily the movie itself on screen.
It's the shared experience of being next to people.
And that, there is a kind of, unseen electricity
between people that unifies us. And I think that
there are dark forces in the universe that are
attempting to divide people up and to take that
away, to take away that congregation. Do you
really think that that's by design, or do you
think that's just a natural function of streaming
and televisions and phones and having access
to things instantaneously? I personally think
that streaming was by design to eliminate residuals.
By design? But isn't it just a function of technology
emerging? You notice that all of the executives,
well, yeah, I mean, part of it is technology,
but technology gets pushed and brought to the
forefront for specific reasons. And, you know,
digital cinema hasn't been the greatest thing
for the creative process. And I think we see
that in the works that we're looking at. I mean,
if you watch stuff on Netflix and... We can see
that it doesn't have the same power and impact.
And also, you know, when you were making a movie,
when you were making a film on film, it was like
every time you turn on the camera, you're burning
money. It's like every single frame is like four
cents or whatever, whatever the calculation was.
And so. That was actually an expensive part of
the process. And so, you know, there was all
this preparation to get everything ready. Like,
oh, we want to get all of the props in place,
you know, right before we shoot. And the actors
are in their trailer and they're figuring out
what they're going to do. And then you're on
your way to set and people are like, hey, I'll
see you in the moment. And what they mean by
that is when the cameras turn on and you actually
hear that happening. suddenly everything pops
into play. And suddenly you're performing in
front of, you know, what you're attempting to
do is capture lightning in a bottle. And you
don't even know that you have it right away.
You ask your DP, like, do we have it? And it's
like, oh, well, there's some dust in the frame
or a hair in the frame. Let's get another one.
You get another one. And, like, then you hold
that all in the dark, all that film, because
you can't expose it, and you send it off to the
lab. And then some... alchemist at the lab at
the castle you know puts it into a potion and
he and the next day what comes out are these
like little stained glass windows and you watch
it and you realize what you caught you're like
we did it we we captured something okay now everything
is different you uh you know you show up on set
and everything's digital and you've got producers
and network executives and broadcasters and everybody's
there studio people in video village and they
set up like a little tent and everybody's sitting
there in their Canadian goose jackets on high
chairs, and they're looking at a big color -corrected
monitor, and there's a guy doing color correction
in a van. And they're basically watching an approximation
of what it's going to look like in the end. And
they're sitting there. Okay, on my first film,
there was none of that. I had to stand next to
the camera. We didn't even have video tap. Stand
next to the camera and look at the actors and
see, did the actors do what I wanted them to
do? And now... You know, they just turn on the
camera and it's it costs more money to stop the
camera and to restart it again. So you just let
it roll and you're just like letting it go. And
you're like, hey, the director now is like, hey,
go back, start over and smile this time. And
then they redo it. And then the editor is now
like having to take those takes and separate
them in the in the editing room. And the actors
are like suddenly the moment is gone. In other
words, it's vanished. Is there a way to do both?
I mean, is it the medium of film? I mean, it
seems like it's the environment as well. You're
describing an environmental thing, right? Video
village, the executives. The problem is now suddenly
you've got a chorus of people sitting there who
are like, oh, yeah, you got it. I saw he got
it. Didn't he get it? You got it. But you as
the director still have to run back and forth
to the camera and to the actors and everything.
And you're like trying to keep it all in place.
And look, it's. Neither is worse than the other.
Right. They are both paint. But one is watercolor
and one is oil paint. And those are opposingly
different. You know, if you were an oil artist
during the British Renaissance of watercolor
paint, where all of a sudden watercolor came
on, everybody wanted watercolor. Why would you
try to make your watercolor paint look like oil
or vice versa? They're just completely different
mediums. They're both paint, but they're different.
And so digital has its advantages and its purposes.
Because you can run a long mag of video. I call
it video. Everybody calls it digital cinema,
but that was just to push it through. And actually,
the technology is different. With film, light
travels through the glass. It travels through
a gate. It exposes the silver and the acetate,
and you keep it all in the dark and send it away.
With video, the light travels through the glass.
It strikes the golden sensor, and then it bounces
back into the glass. And that's why video or
digital cinema is flatter by nature than most
film. And so to combat this, filmmakers have
started to do the exact opposite. of what we
used to do. It used to be that you would go to
shoot something, you're outside, you're on set,
I've got my camera on Joe and I have the sun
behind me because I want all that light on you,
for the most part. I'm over -exaggerating my
point. And the analogy or the saying would be
that at the end of the day, you go home and the
back of your neck is sunburned because you've
always had the light behind you. Now, because
the image is flatter, they rotate the camera
180 degrees and they shoot into the sun to get
lens flare. And Lynn Slayer gives you the illusion
of depth where there is none. This episode is
brought to you by ZipRecruiter. The best way
to learn anything is to ask questions. Be engaged,
be curious, have a conversation. Whether you
want to know more about a friend, start a new
hobby like surfing, or figure out how your dad
makes the best steak, you're not going to get
any answers just sitting around. When you're
hiring... It's also important to ask questions
to make sure the candidate is right for your
role. That's why you need ZipRecruiter. It can
help connect you with people who could be a good
fit. And today you can try it for free at ZipRecruiter
.com slash Rogan. Rated the number one hiring
site based on G2, ZipRecruiter has the features
you need to find the perfect match for your role.
Like filters to show you who's been active recently
on the site. And of course, and most importantly,
importantly, you can add screening questions
to your job post to make sure you're talking
to people with the right skill set. Ask key questions
and hire faster with ZipRecruiter. Four out of
five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a
quality candidate within the first day. Try it
for free at ziprecruiter .com slash rogan. That's
ziprecruiter .com slash rogan. Meet your match
on ZipRecruiter. I always thought that like when
you would watch soap operas, I was like, why
do they look so weird? And it's because they
were shooting them on. video instead of on film
like when we were filming news radio the sitcom
we were doing it on film and they were like really
adamant about doing it on film like they really
wanted it to be on film and then there was some
process where you could make video look like
film and i was like this is so interesting it's
like we're designed like when you take your photo
with your camera on your phone and you use portrait
mode yeah which is you blur out the background
so you're making it shittier you're doing an
artificial yeah that's because uh we associate
the faults of media as film. People think of
old movies as gateweave and sepia tone and dust
and scratches, kind of fast motion. Well, when
those movies were originally made, the motion
was corrected by the cranking of the projector.
And so it was natural motion. There was no sepia
tone change. There was no dust. And there was
no gate weave because it was a fixed image. The
image, the celluloid hadn't yet shrunk or anything
like that. And so we now we have this kind of
filter, nostalgic filter that we associate with
what an old movie looks like. And so if you want
to make something look old, you start adding
all this crap to it. You're adding the faults
and it's the faults of cinema that actually make
it really good. It's not the perfection of cinema.
That's in my opinion, because you would never
be able to sell that if that cinema never existed.
Like if cinema never existed and video came around
and then it was normal video, like soap opera
style, and then someone came along and said,
hey, let's make it blurry in the background.
It's almost like we've become accustomed to the
faults and nostalgically we look at them as if
it's a positive. And it's also led by, you know,
everything is shot on iPhones now. And so that's
becoming the cinematic vernacular, the grammar
that people are used to. And they now expect
that in a big movie. So suddenly you see something
like the latest James Gunn's Superman or Guillermo
del Toro's Frankenstein. And they've got these
crazy wide lenses where there's no distortion
and, you know, kind of infinite depth. And they're
shot in a very large format. But what they're
replicating is an iPhone. Right. And it just
I watched both of those movies and I thought,
OK, both of them are amazingly technically. And
they're made by highly professional people, but
it looks like iPhone. I'm a huge Guillermo del
Toro fan. I even loved his book, The Strain.
It was really good until about three quarters
of the way through. And it seemed like he just
wanted to finish the book. Yeah, probably. Like
a bunch of shit just sort of just happens in
the last quarter of the book. This is kind of
jarring. It became dinner time. Put this aside.
I'm going to go eat. It just seemed like, fuck,
I can't keep going with this book. It's what
it felt like. It felt rushed, just my opinion.
But I'm a huge fan of that guy. I love Pan's
Labyrinth. I love a lot of his films, but I didn't
like Frankenstein. I, you know, like I love Guillermo
and I love his spirit and I love his artistry.
He is an amazing artist. He is. He's a. Just
literally, as an artist, his sketchbooks are
beautiful. And he brings a great amount of passion
to his work. He brings that kind of Mexican passion
to his work. And I adore him as a person. But
to be perfectly honest, I'm not wild about his
movies that much. You didn't like Pan's Labyrinth?
I liked parts of it. But as a whole, it just
kind of... And I don't know what it is about
it, but Blade II is probably my favorite film
of his because it's like the least of – well,
actually it's quite a bit of him, but it's just
the most accessible for me. I didn't know he
did Blade II. Which one that Patton Oswalt was
in where he had the whole bit about Wesley Snipes
and then they replaced him with a cooler Wesley
Snipes? I think that was – Three. Yeah, it was
probably Blade 3. Blade 3. I don't remember Blade
2. I don't remember Blade 2. Blade 1 was awesome,
though. Yeah. That's my favorite of all the comic
book vampire, well, comic book movies. Yeah.
Because I was just a giant fan of the Blade comic
book series. I also like his Pacific Rim movie,
and I like parts of, like, the moment in Frankenstein
that I think is, for me, the entire movie. Like,
I could have, like, left the rest of it. So much
of it was just so melancholic and... You know,
it was just like I just couldn't engage with
it. And but the part that I absolutely loved
was at the Miller's house where he's learning
language. To me, that was the movie when he's
kind of secretly learning how to speak and how
to be and learning morals. And to me, I could
have watched an entire movie about that sequence.
And it was also beautifully made, that part.
I just the rest of it with I could have done
without. It was just a little flat. And also,
it's like, why does it have it's so freaking
long. Like, he could really, like, learn a lesson.
I was going to say he could learn a lesson from
Ridley Scott, who just clips through things like
he takes, you know, there's a dialogue scene.
I'm just going to do the essentials and just
get out like it's a commercial. This dialogue
scene doesn't need to be any longer than 30 seconds.
And he just clips along. Somehow yet his movies
are still like two hours long. Well, they're
so involved. You know what I really loved? Nosferatu.
Did you see the new Nosferatu? No, I haven't.
I don't want to sound like a persnickety guy,
but I had to be in the right - I want you to
be persnickety. I had to be in the right mood
to engage with that movie because I like that
guy's first movie, The Vivitch or The Witch.
I never saw that. I heard it's great though.
I love that film. I think that's a great movie.
And he's like a production designer. He's doing
a werewolf movie right now. Yeah, of course he
is. Of course he is. I love a good werewolf movie.
I did not like his Moby Dickish Lighthouse movie.
Oh, I didn't see that. That was the Willem Dafoe
and Robert Pattinson. Yeah, the Willem Dafoe
one. It was just garish and kind of I felt like
lost its way halfway through. And then this latest
one, Nosferatu. Look, I am a Werner Herzog nut,
and so I adore Werner Herzog, and I love his
Nosferatu. So for me to watch this guy's version
of that, I have to be in the right mood. I have
to be in the right mood. I just wasn't yet in
the right mood to accept it. Which one is Werner's?
Who plays Nosferatu? Oh, Klaus. Incomparable,
Klaus Kinski. I know I've seen it. The thing
about Werner Herzog, when he made his Nosferatu,
the Murnau movie, which is the original Nosferatu,
the very first one with Max Schreck. I saw it
at the library when I was 10 years old. So the
thing about Werner Herzog as a filmmaker is that...
Most filmmakers have their forefathers that they
can look back to. They have a generation before
them that they can kind of imprint on. And because
of the brutality and tragedy of World War II,
he had none. There were no German filmmakers
that he could look to. And so he had to look
to his grandfather, basically, which is Murnau,
when he made it. And so his film is almost like
haunted by the original. And then he brings,
you know, Werner Herzog grew up, Not using a
telephone until he was in his teens. He'd never
seen a telephone before. He had grown up like
in, you know, upper Bavaria in the mountains.
And, you know, so he comes like his film is almost
displaced in time. It's like skipped a generation.
And he does things like, you know, he'll show
two actors in the most emotional part of the
movie when Mina and Jonathan Harker are, you
know, at the beach and they're basically saying
goodbye. Normally, in a Hollywood film, they
would cut to a close -up so that we could see
the tears. We would cut to that close -up. But
because his film is displaced in time, he stays
back. He doesn't even bother shooting a close
-up. To him, it's more melancholic to show them
just isolated as figures in a wide shot. And
it truly is. And so his film is super powerful
that way. And then you have Klaus Kinski. You
know, who is, you know, like the madman actor
of of German cinema and who is, you know, who
was like, I mean, there's a documentary called
My Best Fiend, which which is about the relationship
between Herzog and Kinski. And there's an amazing
scene in the beginning of that where he, Werner
Herzog, visits the apartment that he rented.
And I think it was in Berlin. where he was first
becoming a filmmaker and where he first met Klaus
Kinski. And he goes there and it's now occupied
by these two, you know, just... very conservative,
this German couple. And he starts going through
the house and saying, oh, yes, here, this is
where Klaus, you know, went crazy. And he started
smashing it and shitting on the walls. Because
he was an insane guy. His whole thing was about
provocation. And so he brings a kind of crazy
vampire. I mean, it feels like a real vampire.
I remember it now, but I haven't seen it. What
year was that? You mean the Kinski one? Yes.
I think it was in the 70s, so I'm thinking it
was like 78 or 79, maybe even earlier. I know
I've seen all the Nosferatos. Let me see. Give
me a clip from Werner Herzog's. I will eventually
see this new one. It's fucking good, man. It's
good. The dude who plays the vampire, what's
his name? The guy who played the clown in It?
Bill Skarsgård. Oh, yeah, Bill Skarsgård. He's
so good. He's so good. So is this the scene when
he meets the vampire? I don't know. I just clicked
on it. Yeah, this... Oh, he cuts this. Yeah,
this is it. I mean, that's... I mean, Kinski
brings just an amazing, deep empathy. It could
give you blood poisoning. Oh, this is the English
version. Please, let me do it. It's the oldest
remedy in the world. Oh, forget it. It's hardly
worth mentioning. Just a little cut. You know,
it's only for the best. The original... That's
so awesome. And that's probably Kinski, like,
you know, they're supposed to cut and Kinski
just keeps going. Yeah. I mean, Bruno Gans, I
think it's Bruno Gans, is probably terrified
in real life because he doesn't know. Kinski's
crazy enough where he'll bite him. Right. And
he's got those fake teeth in. Yeah. Let's sit
up for a while. All right, show me a clip from
the new one. You got to see the new Nosferatu.
I mean, I had never seen a vampire like that.
And I think Salem's Lot was made after the TV
movie Salem's Lot. Yeah, Salem's Lot is super
similar to it. There's a scene when he meets
the guy at the castle. I did see one scene from
this online with Lily Rose Depp kind of reacting
to something, which was like very compelling.
Go full screen to this. This is when he makes
it into the castle. It's really dark, man. He
did a fantastic job of like capturing the creepiness
of it and also the surreal aspect of. Him being
under the trance of this vampire, you recognize
that reality is all fucked up and skewed. Like
time passes very quickly. It doesn't make sense.
He's super confused as to what's going on. I
mean, I have to say this movie feels haunted
as haunted by. The Herzog version is Herzog was
haunted by the Murnau version. For you. For me.
I encourage anybody to enjoy all three of them,
I guess. Yeah, I wonder if he was haunted by
that or I wonder if he was haunted by the original.
But this is with the use of all. The little step
frame. Modern ability. Yeah. But it's just the
way they made the castle and the way they made
him is very unique. There's so many aspects of
it that I thought were very unique. Even the
way the vampire feeds on people is unique. This
guy is a very, very, very good filmmaker. I don't
know so much about the way he's talking. It's
weird, but it grows on you. It grows on you.
Well, I'm sure it has a haunting quality over
time. Yeah, like this. The guy just disappears,
and all of a sudden he's way far away. There's
a lot of that in this movie. So the scene when
they get him to sign papers, when he gets up
to that. Questions about the... Right there.
many superstitions here that may seem backward
to a young man of your high learning. I'm sure
Prince Charles was like jacking off to this film.
Before they made that painting. Apparently he
visits Castle Dracula like every year. Well,
isn't he related to... Vlad Tepes? Yeah, it doesn't
surprise me. I mean, he's German. He's of German
ancestry. I think Prince Charles is related to
the original Vlad the Impaler. That would track
with the whole baby eating thing. They give you
a look of what he looks like. They don't want
to give away too much. That was the other thing.
Like, you don't really get to get a look at them
for quite a while. And when you do, it's horrifying.
Yeah. And the movie is made in washes of darkness.
It's very dark. I mean, it's very much a candlelit
movie, which I like because I don't like a film
where you're pretending that people are in a
candlelit, but it's really well lit. Well, and
that's an example of where video actually is.
is a better medium to choose because it, it like
digital loves darkness and it can do things in
darkness that film just doesn't have the capacity
to do. Right. And so it's an excellent choice.
When we did silent Hill, we made the choice of
whenever we're in the dark, we're shooting on
digital. And whenever it's during daylight, we're
shooting on film to create a kind of dissonance
between the two. And so, um, And that's largely
because digital loves dark. And this is a great
use of it. I'm warming up to it. I like I've
been waiting. I bought it on on Blu -ray. I have
the movie. I mean, I keep it. It's in that stack.
I've just been waiting for the right time to
expose it, expose myself to it. I'm in the right
mood. I loved it. I'm no film expert, but it's
my favorite vampire movie ever. Well, that's
that's that's actually saying a lot. That's that's
incredible. I loved it. That's incredible. A
fun vampire movie is 30 Days of Night. Yeah,
30 Days of Night is great. I love that one, too.
It's not as good as this. This is a better movie.
I think I Am Legend is actually a pretty good
vampire movie. The one with Will Smith. I thought
they were zombies. Well, they're kind of... It's
a contagion film, technically. They're not really
zombies, but they've been turned into vampire
-like creatures in that film. That's a really
good one. And then that one that... What's his
name? That Polynesian director who did the Thor
movie did. God, what was it called? I can't remember
the name of it. But it's like a comedy version
of vampires kind of all living in a house. How
old was that? This was made sometime in the mid
-2000s, I think. Vampires living in a house?
What we do in the shadows. Yeah, what we do in
the shadows. Did you see that? Nope. That is
an incredible vampire movie. Really? It's kind
of like a mockumentary, like where they're, but
it takes all of the kind of vampire mythology
and it makes it really, really fun. I've never
even heard of this. It's fantastic. This is his
best film. This is, I'm sure, the foundation
of everything he's done has been on what we do,
for me, what we do in the shadows. Huh. That's
so crazy. I never even heard of it. Yeah, it's
wonderful. Show me the trailer, Jamie. We are
granted protection for the subjects in this film?
Oh, it's like a Blair Witch Project type deal.
It's been like this the whole time, Deacon, on
dishes, and it still hasn't moved in five years.
You're a cool guy, but you're not pulling your
weight in the flat. Oh, I'm glad to hear that
I'm cool. No, that's not the point, though. You're
missing the point. Yeah, no, I know. Not the
flat meeting about how cool you are. When you
get three vampires in a flat, obviously there's
going to be a lot of tension. Viago was an 18th
century dandy. Luke, a ghost cop. Vatislav is
a bit of a pervert. This is my torture chamber.
Deacon's like the young bad boy of the group.
I'm supposed to pay rent? But I don't. The trouble
with being a vampire is you have to be invited
in. Will you invite us in? We need some fresh
blood. The whole movie is like that. It's fantastic.
That's funny. Will you invite us in? Just invite
us in. The bouncer's like, no. And they can't
do anything about it because they're vampires.
Let the right one in. Oh, okay. That is, of all
the modern vampire movies, I mean, I haven't
seen the, what's his name, Eggers? The American
version of it? No, I hate the American version.
The American version is, let them in is terrible.
I had to wash my eyes afterwards with another
movie. I didn't mind it. I hated the, but because
I loved the foreign version. Who, which country
was it from? I think it's Sweden. Sweden. It's
really good. It's an outstanding, outstanding
film. And the book is fabulous as well. It's
an amazing novel. Yeah, I just love a good horror
movie, a well -made horror movie. Because, like,
the suspension of disbelief is, like, inherent
to the enjoyment of the film. Like, you know,
like, just show me. Show me how the guy turns
into a monster. Show me. Yeah, make it so. Make
it so. And also you can see, like, I mean. They
have been making Dracula movies again and again
and again. It seems like every year there's another
vampire movie coming out or every couple of years
at least. And, you know, there never seems to
be an exhausted. The market never seems to be
exhausted. Right. By it. You know, it's zombie
movies. They continue making them. You know,
it's like that's the most overused genre. Is
zombie films. Zombie films, zombie TV shows.
I mean, how many versions of The Walking Dead
are there? There's multiple. Yeah. And I'm not
a big fan of the, I like, I mean. The beginning
was great. I think first season of The Walking
Dead was great. When it started, but then I,
when I realized, oh, it's just sadism. And I
mean, I get the point. After the first season,
I realized, oh, the point is that The Walking
Dead are the living. They're actually The Walking
Dead because they've become emotionally – I didn't
like – it got into the point where they were
just – it was just murder porn. Yeah, and – And
that I mean, I think I even talked about this
before that like that's a real problem with television
is that they're just trying to get the serotonin
levels spiked by killing someone that you care
about. And, you know, real television, you return
because you love the characters and you want
to return to it. Well, sometimes it's done well,
like Game of Thrones. Did a fantastic job of
doing that. But even that kind of lost its way
after a while. Well, there's like eight seasons.
I'm re -watching it right now. We're actually
on season three right now. It's fucking great.
I kind of forgot how great it was. But when you
get to binge it and you don't have to wait, like
there was years in between seasons because it
took so long to produce. Have you seen the Pendragon
cycle? The Rise of the Merlin? No. Okay, so.
These days, you almost don't know where to find
television. And that's because you can find it
anywhere. And the mainstay producers of it, the
studios and everything, they're no longer reliable
in producing quality television. And so suddenly
we see stuff rising out of places that are completely
unexpected. And this was produced by the Daily
Wire. Of all people. Yes. And the CEO of the
Daily Wire directed it. This guy, Jeremy Boring.
Yeah. I hope I'm not mispronouncing his name.
His name is Boring. And this is good? Okay. This
is, to me, this is better than, you know, it's,
I have a very high watermark for Arthurian mythology.
Like, to me, Excalibur is the high watermark.
And this really went through this like. I had
a chip on my shoulder when I started watching
this. I was like, OK, this is very unlikely that
I'm going to enjoy this production. But they
did it for like a for a micro budget. Effectively,
they made something that is absolutely kind of
reinvents the mythology and they do it like proper
television where you kind of love the characters
and they weave an entire reality and universe
that is just fantastic. And it's done for like,
you know, for very, very little, you know. They're
spending billions making these Lord of the Rings
things and like nobody cares. They're just awful
to watch. And in the meantime, these guys just,
you know, without anybody paying attention, cranked
this out. And I've only seen four episodes of
it, but I am like completely blown away by it.
That's so interesting. The Daily Wire. Because
I haven't heard anything about it. I think that's
part of the problem is the Daily Wire. Well,
that's because, well, like we don't hear about
a lot of things. Right. And media is like the
least of it. Right. Good point. But certainly
with the Daily Wire, the problem is it's like
associated with this right -wing production company.
If you can get over that and put that behind
you, then, I mean, this is, to me, as good as
classic television. My prejudice was initially,
oh, they're going to somehow or another embed
right wing ideology in this. Everybody's embedding
their own ideology. Whenever you make any media,
there's usually you have corporate propaganda
and personal propaganda. And usually there was
a balance between the two. You know, if you're
making Midnight Express, for example. OK, that
movie was nothing like the book at all. Really?
Not even close to the book. And it's a complete
alternate experience. And you wonder, why did
that movie, why was that movie such a big success?
Why was that movie such a overwhelmingly like
Oscars and everything? OK, I think it had a little
bit more to do with the politics of what was
going on with Turkey at that time. than anything
else. And, you know, what's his name? Billy Hayes,
who, you know, experienced it, lived it, spent
the rest of his life basically apologizing for
the movie. Why? Because he wasn't, like, raped
in a Turkish prison. Oh, the original guy wrote
the book. That's like a joke that gets, you know,
in Airplane they're making jokes about it. Right.
And so, yeah, Billy Hayes, he was the actual
character or the... person who lived the experience.
And so the movie is a kind of propaganda element.
And that's like all Hollywood does that. You
kind of accept whenever you're making a movie
that you're being used in a certain level to
do something, whether it's to... On a very basic
level, whether it's just to like mortify or scare
audiences or to do things. And we see that more
and more obviously in media as the director,
the personal propaganda when you have something
personal that you want to get on screen has become
more and more diminished. And you have sort of
more corporate propaganda kind of taking over.
And I think the most probably. Crass example
of that is DEI stuff, you know, in movies and
pushing characters in situations that are just
completely out of whack. Did you see the Star
Trek that they tried to make like that? OK, I'm
like a big Star Trek guy. I watch Star Trek every
day. day in my house. We watch like two or three
episodes. And I'm not kidding. My wife is like
a Trekkie. She is like crazy for Star Trek. And
so she puts Star Trek on, you know, like at around
five o 'clock, Star Trek comes on. Well, we cycle
through, we go chronologically from, you know,
the original series through the next generation
and then DS9 and then Voyager and then Enterprise.
back to and sometimes you know when you show
an episode like in DS9 there's an episode called
Trials and Tribulations where all the characters
go into the past and they kind of interact with
Trouble with Tribbles and they kind of blend
them into the set and everything that's happening
we'll then go back and watch Trouble with Tribbles
or you know same thing with Wrath of Khan we'll
do this you know so we'll we'll kind of connect
it all together and so but Every day there's
at least two or three episodes of Star Trek playing
in my house. It's like I usually have to wrestle
away the controller to say we're watching a movie
now. And so and my children were like basically
raised on Star Trek and, you know, the sort of
morals behind Star Trek. And, you know. You know,
and people complain about, oh, you know, I don't
like DS9 as much. It's not as dynamic. I hate
Bajor and blah, blah, blah. But I think Captain
Sisko is one of the most amazing captains there
is because he's also a father. And there's all
these like father -son lessons that are going
on throughout it. It's like really elaborate
television. And by the way, all that kind of
DEI stuff is still in it. It's still there. They're
exploring all sorts of things in Star Trek The
Next Generation. Riker, who's like the second
in command to Picard. In that one, there's an
episode where he goes to a planet of neuters
that are just, you know, they have one gender
and he falls in love with one and they kind of
waken up out of their single gender thing and
realize, oh, I'm female. And that person then
gets taken and reprogrammed. And then there's
an episode where Cork is turned into a woman
in order to. for some cockamamie reason that
they come up with in the show. And, and, and
he kind of likes it. He's like getting into it.
So it's not like they aren't exploring gender
and not just beating you over the head with it.
It's somehow integrated into good storytelling.
And I think something happened at the studios
where they fired all of the legacy people and
they hired on a bunch of new people who just
weren't as good at storytelling or as respectful
of the canon, I guess you could say, is what
it was. But those seasons of Star Trek are, which
I guess you could call the... from the Gene Roddenberry
into the Rick Berman era. And, I mean, they had
such amazing writers. They had guys like Rene
Echeverria and Naren Shankar, and they had technical
advisors. And, you know, so if you were just
into the tech, you could really, like, you know,
and most of our technology and most of our aspirations
have come from Star Trek. You know, our telephones
are basically... You know, like tricorders. Tricorders,
yeah. And when we see it on Star Trek, like,
oh, we talked to the computer. Well, I want to
have that. And so somebody figures out a way
to develop that and to make it so. And now we
have that. Didn't he actually say computer? Yeah.
He would say computer and ask a question? Hey,
Siri. Hey, Siri, same thing. Yeah. Wow. And so,
you know, it's a. I mean, I think it's a fantastic
show. And then this dweeb Alex Kurtzman comes
along and just shits all over everything, just
like craps all over it. And I mean, I went in
and met with the guy, you know, I was like, hey,
I will write for scale. You know, I'll write
on your new show. I'd like. I just want to be
part of it. Just as an opportunity to work on
Star Trek. And I basically found out he didn't
want anybody who had any kind of fondness for
the original show. He wanted to do something
new and to create something new. And boy, has
he shit the bed, like in a big way. And this
latest thing that they've made, this Starfleet
Academy, now it's still ongoing. Maybe it writes
itself at some point. I think they canceled it.
Did they? Good. The newest woke super woke version.
They read the room. They read the room. Finally.
Didn't they stop the idea of a season two? That
fucking Alex Kurtzman, man. His company is called
Secret Hideout, I think. He's going to need a
secret hideout after destroying Star Trek for
this latest generation. Are we talking about
the newest one, the one with Tig Notaro? That's
the newest one. Starfleet Academy? Starfleet
Academy is an abomination. Is that what you're
talking about? Yes. I could not get through three
episodes of Discovery. And I mean, they're just
like, it is just awful, awful storytelling. Well,
it's also clunky dialogue and bad acting. Just
horrible. And they're more interested in the
corporate. corporate – in the corporate propaganda
than they are with any kind of personal propaganda.
Trevor Burrus Right. It seems like that's the
imperative. It's like they get across this inclusive
concept. Matthew Feeney The card was terrible.
It was sad actually. It was just depressing for
me. And so, like, when, you know, when Seth,
what's his name, did that show, The Orville.
And, like, that is, like, you know, the proper
successor. Like, they brought back guys like
James Conroy. I don't know what The Orville is.
It was kind of like a comedy version Seth MacFarlane
did. But he hired all the original people that
they had fired from Star Trek and basically used
them to do his show. And it actually feels a
little bit more like a continuation. I never
heard of this either. And it's on Hulu? Yeah.
It is a Star Trek? No, it's not Star Trek. It's
the Orville. So they just ripped off Star Trek?
They basically just ripped off Star Trek. And
they have a sort of like tongue -in -cheek quality,
but they bring all the writers from the original
and showrunners and people like that. And the
original director is like Jim Conroy. I want
to say Conroy, but I think it's Conroy. Whatever.
And so they bring everybody back, and it has
a little bit more of the same spirit. Another
really good Star Trek -ish thing is Galaxy Quest.
It's something that got kind of buried with—
Sigourney Weaver? Sigourney Weaver. Yeah, that
was good. Galaxy Quest is hilarious. If you love
the original series of Star Trek, Galaxy Quest
is amazing. Like, it's so fantastic. I love Sigourney
Weaver. Yeah. She's one of my all -time favorites.
That's a good example of a movie that was like
a DEI movie that you never even noticed it was
Alien. Yeah. You have a female lead and you never
think about it. It's not like we didn't have
like powerful women in movies before. We've like
had them throughout history. Right. You know,
the history of cinema is built on, you know,
and by the way, a, you know, a complex woman
character can have faults. Right. Like that's.
Part of it is characters have faults. Characters
have things wrong with them. Yeah. They're not
always just, you know, like, you know. Dominant
and noble. Dominant and like can do everything
immediately. Exactly. Like some of the Star Wars
ones went woke. There was a few of those. Well,
yeah. I mean, you know, it's funny. You had –
I think it was here. Ben Affleck was on and they
were talking about AI and how it always goes
to the middle and, well, you know, it always
goes to the middle. It always goes to the middle.
And I was like – J .J. Abrams always goes to
the middle. And boy, was that Star Wars he did
the middle where he just basically took the Luke
Skywalker story and just reinterpreted it with
a strong, strong woman character. And I just
thought it was bland and just tasteless and just,
you know, nothing new. He just went to the middle.
So you don't need A .I. to go to the middle.
This episode is brought to you by Visible. Folks,
there's one thing nobody wants this season and
that's getting catfished. And it's not just dating
profiles that are putting you at risk. It's also
big wireless carriers. You know the type. Looks
great at first. Promises a low price. But once
you're locked in, surprise fees and an expensive
bill that isn't what you were expecting. Your
knight in shining armor? Visible wireless. It's
one -line wireless with unlimited data and hotspot
for just $25 a month, taxes and fees included.
Now that's a green flag. The best part, Visible
is all digital, so you can switch as fast as
you can swipe. Don't fall for the trap of getting
catfished by wireless. Visit visible .com to
learn more and start loving your wireless carrier.
Terms apply. See visible .com for plan features
and network management details. No. No, you just
need a mandate. And the thing about Alien, too,
is like... You didn't know who the hero was.
Alien 2 or aliens? You mean aliens? As well.
I mean, Alien 1. I didn't like Aliens 2 as much.
It was fun. But it was like, why are they so
easy to kill now? Why are they so obvious? Well,
they were, you know, space marines. Marines are
tough. Marines are badass. I know. But the first
alien was clever. But those aliens, they still
overwhelmed her. I know, but the first Alien
was clever. He was hiding. He would sneak around.
He would jump. You didn't get to see much of
it, and that was also cool, too, because it kind
of captured you with the suspense. It's one of
the best movies ever made. Ever. And it's a 1979
movie, too, which is crazy. People don't even
know how old it is. What's funny, I recently
went back and started watching all the Ridley
Scott movies I hadn't seen. There's a ton of
them that I just kind of missed along the way.
And I started off with... God, what was it? Oh,
I started off with Napoleon because I just missed
it when it came out. And I'm like, what happened
to Ridley Scott? And I have not liked any of
his recent alien movies. I just think they're
– I'm confused by them, to be honest. The Prometheus
ones. It's just like when you need a web episode
in order to understand what the hell he's talking
about in the movie, you failed. And they're just
like – they're technically – technical marvels.
Like, nobody shoots big canvas cinema like Ridley
Scott. Like, no one shoots a helicopter crashing
like Ridley Scott shoots a helicopter crashing.
And, you know, you watch Napoleon and, sure,
the Battle of Austerlitz. amazing to watch you
know cannonballs going into the the lake and
the ice breaking and people falling in the water
but the minute anybody talks in that movie it
just collapses on its own weight it's just like
you just Don't care. My wife was like, this is
the worst date movie. You're not going to sleep
with me after this. What's wrong with it? I didn't
see it. Well, Joaquin Phoenix, and I think he
made a choice because I consider him to be an
excellent actor. But in this movie, I think he
made a choice to just play it. He just kind of
talks. Everybody else is doing sort of a British
or French -ish accent. They're all kind of pretending
that they're in a period piece. But not Joaquin
Phoenix. He just plays it like he just walked
off Hollywood Boulevard. Really? And just like
the battle scene. There's no passion in any of
his performance. It's kind of this weird, dead,
dead performance. You think he did it on purpose
to portray like a sociopath? I think he came
on. He was like, I am going to do whatever I
want to do the way Napoleon would. And I'm not
going to try. I'm a Corsican and I'm not I'm
going to be an outsider to all of these other
people who were. I think there was an intellectual
idea behind what he did and it completely failed.
So I'm like, OK, I adore watching Ridley Scott
do these big scenes, but what a terrible movie.
And. you know, like failure. And then I, and
so then after that, I'm like, okay, let's, let's
watch something else. Well, oh, he did Exodus.
I've never seen that. Gods and Kings with Christian
Bale. Same thing. It's like you start watching
that movie and there's some interesting things
in the film. He's got like chariot battles and,
you know, archers shooting things. And like,
you know, whenever he's doing that, like Ridley
Scott's like, oh, this is my day on set. And
he's got a cigar and 20 cameras and cameras everywhere.
And he's like, shoot from every angle. And he's
like a like a great general, you know, shooting.
But the minute anybody talks, that movie falls
apart. And actually. I mean, I don't know how
to say this, but that movie almost did its best
to turn me on the Jews. Like I'm watching it
and I'm like, this is like, first of all, is
anybody even Jewish making this? Like, it seems
like nobody involved in it was was Jewish. And
like they start like, you know, how is that even
possible? Well, Moses as a character, when he's
an Egyptian, when he's like the adopted Egyptian
brother, I'm like totally with him. For some
reason, then he becomes Moses after getting like
hit in the head with a rock. And and all of a
sudden he's, you know, kind of he's like a lunatic.
And you're like, everybody's following him. Like
he's distasteful all of a sudden. But every now
and then they would show a battle scene and it's
like, okay, Ridley Scott's doing his thing again.
And you know who's also really good in it is,
God, I can't remember, Joel Egerton, who plays
Ramses. It's really funny because Joel Egerton
is, you know, usually you imagine Egyptians when
they're cast as being kind of tall and, you know,
sort of. He's noble looking and everything. He's
kind of like this butch, like sort of tough,
you know, wide bodied butch Ramses, just kind
of like a tough Ramses. And every now and then
his Australian accent comes out. And so he's
like, oh, he's like an Australian Ramses. And
John Turturro plays his father, you know, a bald.
I'm like, is that John Turturro? Like, what a
crazy choice this is. And so there were all sorts
of like interesting things going on in the movie.
But again, I was like, oh, this is. Is it impossible
for you to watch a movie without just becoming
hypercritical about all these different aspects,
like how I would do it, what I don't like? Yes
and no. So the next Ridley Scott movie I watched,
which I stayed away from and with great apologies
to Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, was The Last Duel.
And I just kind of avoided it. I was doing other
things at the time. And the poster looked awful.
And I was like, I'm not going to go see that.
And then I put it on after watching these other
two. And I was like, OK, here we go. Let's go
again. And lo and behold, one of the best films
of the century. Really? Absolutely. First of
all, those guys know how to write a script. And
I know that they wrote it with Nicole Hofsenotter
or whatever her name is. And look at Ben Affleck.
When I saw him blonde, I was like, that's one
of the reasons it kept me away from it. But he's
hilarious in the movie. He's a genius in the
film. I never even heard about this movie. I
was gripped by this film. And this is a great
date movie. Like this, my wife got turned on
after this film. Believe it or not. That's hilarious.
I don't know anything about this movie. And Adam
Driver is magnificent. And like this relationship
that these two guys have. And it's kind of a
Rashomon story. Meaning that like Akira Kurosawa's
Rashomon, which was three stories that are all
sort of the same event told from different perspectives.
And Matt Damon is like, And this movie says so
much about Hollywood. Like when I watched this,
I was like, OK, I'm Matt Damon and Quentin is
Adam Driver for sure. Like Adam Driver totally
knows how to like you learn about Hollywood in
this film. And I'm sure they're writing it like
knowing about Hollywood, that the way to really
get along in court is to join the orgies. You
know, to be in the orgy with everybody is like
how you get along. It's like we all fuck together
and that's how we do it. But Matt Damon, who
by all accounts. in this is a great... You know,
he's a fighter. He's a great knight. He's true
in his heart. But he's just like a pill to hang
out with. And he doesn't go to the orgies. And
because of that, he's just kind of marginalized.
And the whole movie plays off of this friendship
that just kind of goes awry where jealousy comes
into play. And it's ruinous to everything until
they're finally fighting in the very end. And
this is where Ridley Scott just does what he
does, which is he has this. This insane fight
between these two guys, which like was just every
blow was painful to look at. And this to me was
the best Ridley Scott movie I've seen of the
century. I mean, I guess Black Hawk Down. I also
very much like Gladiator, although Gladiator
2. I throw that in. I never saw that. Throw that
in with Exodus, Gods and Monsters. It was actually
boring to watch. I love Gladiator 1 though. Gladiator
1 is magnificent. It had some kind of secret
sauce in it that was fantastic. And Gladiator
2, it just kind of goes through the paces. It's
just kind of everybody shows up. Speaking of
showing up, when Sigourney Weaver shows up in
Exodus, Gods and Monsters, she's not even trying
at all. She knows that she's there for a paycheck.
Like she just shows up and she's just like. does
not put on an accent of any kind. She just shows
up and just speaks the lines and I'm out of here.
I'm going into Morocco or whatever, into town.
I'm going to go party for a while. Do you think
she just thought it was a bad film and just checked
out? I'm not sure what she was thinking, but
like she may have been thinking what, I mean,
maybe she was trying, but I don't, it just didn't
look like it. It just looked like she was. That's
got to be a weird thing when an actor makes a
choice with a character and it just doesn't work
and they don't realize it, but they're committed
to it. And the other Ridley Scott movie that
I just watched that I hadn't seen again, I avoided
it partly because of the. The title of the film
and they're just nothing excited. I thought it
was a comedy. In fact, I'd been avoiding it.
It was on my plex. There it is. I look at the
thing. It looks like a comedy. It's got Javier
Bardem and Cameron Diaz and they're all kind
of Javier Bardem looking exactly like Robert
Downey Jr. Like in it, like just kind of this
crazy Robert Downey Jr. in his crazy phase, you
know, with like colorful glasses and everything.
Robert Downey Jr. with like a. broken up nose
or whatever's going on with that nose and um
okay so i put on the counselor and this movie
so looking at that i thought this was a comedy
i thought oh it's going to be a romantic comedy
this movie after i saw it i was like i feel like
i've seen too much i feel like i know too much
now about the world like it's it and and it and
it's made like right before you know i think
this movie was kind of a disaster for ridley
scott And he, you know, had to recover from it,
probably because of the failure of it. But I
never even heard of it. It's written by, oh,
my God, Cormac McCarthy. And so it is dark, dark,
dark. And it is a an analysis of how power works
in the modern world, which is basically a giant
cartel. The cartel runs everything and you cannot
escape the cartel. And it is such a spectacular.
I think that's such a spectacular movie. I loved
it. I loved it. When did that come out? Like
2014, I think. 2013. 2013. Did you ever hear
of it, Jamie? I don't think so. There's too much
content. Well, there's too much content. And
he's cranking out movies like every year he's
doing a movie. It's like just knocking him back,
knocking him back. And constantly making films.
And so that was why I hadn't. And so finally,
I was like, well, I got to catch up on some Ridley
Scott. And Quentin had been talking about Black
Hawk Down and how much he loved it and how he
thought it was the best film of the century.
And, you know, he's largely correct. That's not
a bad. I could have done without the UNICEF commercial
at the very beginning where it's just like, you
know. a little UNICEF commercial about people
starving in Africa and Somalia. But the rest
of the movie is just insanely beautiful. And
so I wanted to check out all the movies I hadn't
seen of his. And so that's why I started researching
them and looking them up again. And like the
counselor, how did that fall through the cracks?
And it gets terrible reviews. Like people hated
the film, apparently. And what's the criticism?
People like, I think they were just like, we
don't believe it. They just don't believe that
that's what the world is like. And, you know,
I found the film to be like. Do you think that's
just because of the time period it was released?
I think Ridley Scott knows things that and Cormac
McCarthy know things about the world that they
put on film before everything was known. Like
I think if that movie was released today, people
would be like, yeah, that's what's happening
today. Yeah. And so, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, they're
putting people in sulfuric acid into drums. Yeah,
what the fuck? And shipping them around the world,
you know, as a joke. That's in the film? Yeah.
Did you see the thing in the Epstein files? Oh,
yeah. Those Epstein files. In fact, I can't believe
that, like, everybody just kind of like, oh,
okay. And they're moving on with their lives.
Did you see that guy at the Atlanta airport?
flipping out the well -dressed black dude who
just freaks out. When? Just like a couple of
days ago. I saw it on Twitter or X. And this
guy is just... freaking out in the Atlanta airport.
He's like, I read the upstate files. Like all
of you, you're going about your lives like nothing's
happening. Look at your old zombies. And he's
right. It's like invasion of the body snatchers.
Everybody is just numb to everything. Like dudes,
we had a global pandemic, aliens, you know, all
these like revelations. People are, you know,
eating babies. Here's the guy. And there's a
longer version of that where he's, but he's basically
like, you're all acting like nothing's happening.
Like, what the fuck? You know, you're all just
pretending you're just drones going on in your
normal lives. I think people are waiting for
a condensed version that lays out all the facts.
It's the people that are like really interested
in reading all the emails. I think the Luciferians
cast a spell on the world. For real? Oh, absolutely.
You know, it's just like how vampires can't go
into a house unless they're invited. They tell
you, you know, what's going on ahead of time.
It's predictive programming. And once you say
it out loud and you put it out there and make
fun of it and do a little skit like Stephen Colbert
did a little skit on his show where, oh, here's
a baby. I'm going to take this baby and I'm going
to give it to Moloch. And he goes into like a
cloudy red. you know, furnace and hands the baby
over and the baby's going to be fine. And they
make a joke about it and the audience laughs.
OK, we're all now conditioned to it. We've all
seen it. And by laughing at it, we were complicit.
You think that that's a that's on purpose, that
this is like some sort of a grand design to get
us to be desensitized to the idea of demons eating
babies? Yeah, for sure. Really? For sure. And
by the way, nobody's doing anything about it.
We know what's happening. But that has to take,
like, there has to be a person or some group
of people. Yeah, like about 8 ,500 people. That
are manipulating the Colbert Show? That are manipulating
everything. It's all an illusion. Like, reality
as we know it is fake. That's the revelation
that that guy is having. And he's looking around
and he's like, it's like Invasion of the Body
Snatchers. It's – see, I don't – the thing about
the emails is – one of the things is it's just
stuff written down. And so that's sort of hard
to digest. Like what is this? Like what are they
saying? Like some of it is in code. Like walking
over beef jerky. Like saying – talking about
jerky. Could you walk beef jerky over to this
person? Like what does that mean? For all this
pizza they're talking about, you never see any
pizza. Right. Yeah, yeah. They're ordering pizza.
I'm going to get some – grape soda. It's like
with my cheese pizza. Yeah. And like there's
all this coded language and everyone's like,
you know, oh, that's you're just you just have
periola. You know, the you're just seeing things
where you want to see them. No, there's clearly
a code. Well, that was the thing about pizza.
It's absolutely a code. And in fact, Mundus Volt
Decipi Ergo Decipiatur. It's a long known concept.
And so in Latin, mundus volt decepi means the
world wants to be deceived. Ergo, decipiatur.
Therefore, it is. We want to be deceived. We
don't want to believe the horrors that are actually
behind the veil. Well, I think with the Epstein
files, people are, because of these emails that
have been released, people are just now starting
to be aware of the bizarreness of the code. some
of the things, like the facts, like let's just
talk about the sulfuric acid. So this was like
right after he was indicted in 2018. Yeah, I
got to get rid of some bodies. Yeah. I got to
dissolve up some bodies. What did it say he ordered?
Like, let's... Like 8 ,000 gallons. Maybe we
can get our sponsor Perplexity to process this
and give us a synopsis of what exactly happened,
some sort of a breakdown. Because one of the
things they're saying is like he was indicted,
and then right after he's indicted, he orders
how many gallons? Six 55 -gallon containers full
of sulfuric acid. Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ.
What? What? They're eating babies, man. So that
you think is real? Well, yeah, not only that.
I think that there's, you know, sacrifices going
on every day in Los Angeles. I mean, you know,
allegedly like, you know, high level musicians,
let's say high level female musician is like,
you know, killing chickens every day, doing sacrifices
like, you know, high level. Well, I don't want
to say names because I don't want to get sued.
And I don't want to be dead either. What does
it rhyme with? Here's the purchase order. I go,
I start looking at the comments for some stuff.
Not that this is the best answer, but a quick
answer someone gives is that this could be for
like a reverse osmosis water treatment system.
It's true. He is on an island. He's on an island.
I mean, there's enough pushback because mundus
volt decipi, ergo decipiatur. But like the timing
of all of that, like where are the purchase orders
for all of that sulfur? acid before that. Oh,
no, I just want to put sulfuric acid into my
swimming pool. Muriatic acid. Well, that's the
question. Was there orders for sulfuric acid
before this? If they do have a water treatment
plan? How does sulfuric acid play into water
treatment? It says it here. It says it's commonly
used. This explains it. I don't fucking know.
Okay. It says... RO plant reverse osmosis seawater
desalination facility. Sulfuric acid is commonly
used in the maintenance of such facilities. Not
everything you don't understand adds up to the
worst possible thing it could be. Deception.
Look, maybe they're all eating pizza and grape
soda. Who is that guy that's saying this? How
many billionaires do you know that sit down and
eat lots of pizza and grape soda and ice cream?
This is weird. A trial lawyer saying this. That's
why I just go with grain of salt. This is just
a plausible answer. I don't know that it is the
answer. I could even be wrong. Okay, so does
he have a desalination plant on the island? Oh,
it's a reverse. Oh, yeah, for sure. He had everything.
He had a dump. So that's tunnels. So they were
using that. So they were taking seawater and
converting it into fresh water for what? For
irrigation or for drinking, for all the above?
One similar email that he wrote to someone said
that around his island is like Damascus. And
I'm like, what the fuck does that mean? He was
like, you go explore buried shit around my island?
Or what else could he mean by that? Huh. What
does that mean? I don't know. I mean, they say
a lot of things, and they're not really coding
it very much. Well, the code, it's glaringly
obvious. When they say pizza and when they say
jerky, that's glaringly obvious. How do you walk
jerky? Yeah. You know what I'm saying? And why
do I need a chilled container to, you know, a
chilled bag or whatever they say? Jesus Christ.
So you think they're eating babies? Oh, yeah.
I absolutely believe that. You should get together
with Kurt Metzger. You two would go crazy. I
don't doubt it. For a second. And I think this
dates back like, you know, a long, long time.
This is Moloch worship. Well, there was the other
email that said, thank you for the torture video.
I enjoyed the torture video. Yeah. And it's like
people just. They don't want to accept it. People
don't want to believe it. They don't want to
accept it. Okay. Some commentary notes that a
remote island with water treatment and energy
systems could plausibly stockpile such quantities
for one to two years of operations, although
others argue that using it directly for reverse
osmosis, as stated in one social post, is technically
questionable for membrane health. Hmm. Highly
corrosive, strong mineral acid that can severely
burn skin, eyes, dehydrate and char organic material,
which is why it features in both legitimate industrial
processes and in darker hypotheticals online.
Darker hypotheticals. Darker hypotheticals is
where I'm leaning. When you get indicted for
sex trafficking and then you order. six drums
of sulfuric acid right away. Are you really worried
about your reverse osmosis plant right after
you get indicted? I feel like you know you're
going to jail. If it looks like a duck and it
quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. It's
probably a duck. 330 gallons of sulfuric acid.
It says this was the only documented... purchase
order for it. I came out here last time and I
talked about, you know, the pedo cult inside
of the Kubrick film. Yes, by the way, that went
viral. And I got so much blowback from that.
You know, online critics are like, no, no, there's
nothing in there. Mundusvalt, SAP, they don't
want to see it. They don't want to see those
two guys walking away with that girl in the end.
They just like, no, no, it wasn't in the Schnitzler
novel and blah, blah, blah. I mean... Dude, look
at that movie. It's about a cult. Like, what
are you talking about? It's a secret cult. And
in fact, Sidney Lumet's character even says at
one point, you know, do you know what these people
do? I'm not going to tell you what they do, but
let me tell you, if I told you what they do,
they would like scare the hell out of you. I
mean, like that's after he's been to the. place
and seeing everybody walking around at the in
the sex club i mean it's obviously there's obviously
more going on in that movie but people don't
want to see it i like like i had what was it
new york magazine or whatever went so far it's
like you know aggressively trying to get me to
debunk it and uh and which is fine which is fine
it's just an interpretation of a movie Right.
But that interpretation resonated. I mean, that
clip went very, very viral. Especially now. It's
like people are like looking at it and they're
like, well. He was obviously saying something.
Even if you extract that out of the movie, he's
obviously saying something about people at high
levels of power. Well, there's always been weird
secret groups and rituals. Yeah. And it's one
of the ways to ensure that you're compromised.
You'll stay. It's a confidence operation. Yeah.
And so what you do is you find somebody when
they're young and they're less inhibited and
they. you know, or uninhibited and you catch
them doing something that is illegal and maybe
you even. provide the mechanism for that to happen.
And then once it's happened, you now have the
video proof or the audio proof or whatever proof
you have. You've got proof of it and you show
it to them and you say, look, this is what we
have on you and we can ruin you at any minute.
But you know what we're going to do? We're going
to give you $20 ,000 a month or we're going to
give you $20 million a year, whatever level that
is instead. And you're going to work for us.
And and what else explains some of these people
who are so flipped out about like, you know,
about Trump? He's a putz. He's like it's over
the top. It's you know what? It's strange how
people behave regarding that. It's bizarre. Don't
you think that's also just because the Democratic
Party didn't want him to get into power because
he was a complete outsider? I don't think there
are parties. I think that's all an illusion also.
I think everything that you think that it is
is an illusion. It's all fake. I don't think
that any history before 1600, I think everything
has been falsified before the year 1600. How
so? Well, there's this guy, Anatoly Fomenko,
who's a Russian mathematician and historian,
and he wrote a book called The New Chronology.
It's actually a series of books. It's like six
volumes, and I've read them all. And also his
addendum book, The New Chronology. He has an
addendum book about it. And he basically says
that all of history has been changed. About a
thousand years have been added to the timeline
in order to justify land claims. And those land
claims largely have to do with the Eurasian Horde
and the elimination of the Eurasian Horde by
collusion between the Vatican, the Romanovs,
the— So you mean like the— Mongols and the Huns?
Yeah. And if you look on very, very old maps,
you see that there used to be a country called
Tartaria that was in existence. And at a certain
point, they wiped them out. And so his theory,
and it's just a theory. It's just a posit. But
when you see how history is constantly being
rewritten in real time, it's not so hard to believe.
And then he uses, you know, astronomical evidence
and mathematically kind of proves it. And he
basically says that let's see if I can get this
right, that. Rome and Greece and, you know, those
and Egypt were actually active till around 1600
and that Rome actually fell around 1600. So kind
of imagine or more like late 1400s, 1492. As
opposed to what's the conventional timeline?
About a thousand years before. And so and so,
you know, if you can wrap your head around it,
the Salem witch trials took place around the
same time as the Inquisition. Columbus was discovering
America around the time Rome fell and that all
of this was designed to justify or to erase this
entire civilization from history. And then there
are people who believe that there are a lot of
buildings that are still in existence that were
this. They claim that Jesus Christ was, I can't
remember. the emperor's name. It's kind of a
composite story. There's a number of... So they
think a thousand years are missing from the time.
Well, think about it. If you're a Byzantine guy
and you're like, hey, I want to move to the country
and you look over at France, let's say, and Germany
and you're like, yeah, there's all these like
indigenous peoples there and we want to wipe
them out. And so you hire, you know, a mercenary.
You hire a guy named Charlemagne and you get
him to go in there and kill all the chieftains
in one day, like five. thousand chieftains were
killed in a single day apparently by Charlemagne
and you completely wipe out everything and then
you move in you become Jerome the first and you
run Paris or you begin you know France and what
it really is is just land and so you add time
to the timeline in order to justify that land
claim because what makes more sense that history
was cruising along like this and then suddenly
flatlined for a thousand years and then picked
up again or does it make more sense that somebody
took that time that the dark ages and kind of
added added to the timeline so i'm confused so
but isn't there like documented history from
multiple cultures about that time period? Yeah,
but it's all like, you know, written down by
the Jesuits who were completely in the control
of, you know, it's that history. History is easily
changed. And in fact, we see history being changed
before our eyes in real time. And so the deep
past is easy to change. So we're not in 2026.
No, we're like in the 1700s. Oh, Jesus. Oh, my
God. Just a theory. It's just this guy, Antony
Flamenco. And it's a very interesting theory.
And so I read that and I kind of had a tentpole
collapse. It was like, well, holy crap. Explain
to me the flatness. Like, what do you mean by
history goes up and then flat? Well, the progression,
the progression of humanity through history as
we kind of are progressing as we go. And then
all of a sudden there's this flat line called
the Dark Ages where nothing happened. Is there
a conventional explanation for this? Flatline
for a thousand years? The collapse of Rome and
falling into the time of barbarism. That's not
plausible? Everything is plausible. It's plausible
that sulfuric acid is used for RO, reverse osmosis,
water cleaning. And so everything is possible.
The question is, is it probable? Well, Jamie
just pulled up that that was the first time they
had ever ordered that. Oh, really? Yeah. Okay.
So, well, there it is. Yeah. That's not good.
Yeah, that's not good. I mean, that's the least
of the things. The thing is we become desensitized
to stuff. I mean, look at everything that has
happened in the last six years. It's like an
insane amount of stuff has happened and everyone's
just kind of like numb to it. Well, they get
desensitized. And I think it literally is that
people's brains have been fried. You think by
COVID vaccines? Yeah, for sure. Well, there's
some scientific evidence that for some people,
at least, it crossed the blood -brain barrier
and had some sort of a detrimental effect on
their cognitive function. mRNA is reprogramming
your system. And we've been looking at a giant
die -off of people. People are collapsing left
and right. Nothing is normal anymore. I mean,
that guy at the airport who's flipping out. That's
what he's realizing. He's having a sudden awakening
and he's tweaking over it. He's like and he's
looking around and no one cares. Everyone just
wants to like, you know. through their day. They
do. Everyone wants to just make their next movie
and maybe they'll let me make their next movie
and everybody wants to just, you know, I just
want to keep going at my job and I just want
to do my thing and I just want to protect my
thing. There's certainly a lot of that going
on. The British only care about it as long as
I have my daily pint at the end of the day. That's
all they care about. You know, in the meantime,
their entire country is being overtaken and overrun
by, like, when else in history has this happened
and ended well? No. Well, it's so shocking how
quickly it's happened. Yeah. Because they're
doing this mass arrest thing with social media
posts, which is bizarre. It's bizarre to watch.
And then they eliminate jury trials for anything
other than like murder and rape. If you say anything,
you're in jail. If you repost anything, you're
just immediately sent to jail. Look what's going
on in Canada right now, you know, with Carney.
I mean, like, I think that's insane what's going
on. And most Canadians are just kind of vibing
along with it. Nobody wants to rock the boat.
Nobody wants to be racist. Nobody wants to be,
you know, nobody wants to be discriminatory in
any kind of way. Rightfully so. Like, you know,
you and you want to believe that your leaders
are are taking care of you and they're not. And
it's over. We've lost. It's over. I mean, you
think it's over here in America as well? Well,
it got slowed down a little bit. Whether you
like Trump or not, and I'm not like a – I don't
really like anybody. That's a healthy perspective.
It definitely added a road bump. In the actions
of the cabal of the Clintons and the Obamas and
the bankers that control them. And that's when
you see the movie The Counselor. That's what
you realize is that, wow, the cartels are the
banks and they are law enforcement and they are
the media and they are everything. And there
is no fighting it. There is no individually fighting
it. Like there's nothing. any of us can do. And
I don't mean to be, I mean, the only thing you
can do is affect what's happening around you
locally within the moment. But don't you think
that more people are aware of what's going on
right now? There's more pushback than ever before.
And so there's a possibility that it could be
stopped. Yeah, look at that guy in the airport,
though. Everyone's like he's crazy. Yeah, but
you're yelling at a fucking airport. I would
think he's crazy, too. If I was there waiting
for my flight to go visit my parents and there's
some fucking guy yelling out the Epstein file,
you're just living your life. Like, yeah, what
do you want me to do, dude? I'm headed to Florida
right now. Invasion of the Body Snatchers was
about McCarthyism and what was going on at that
time. Really? Oh, yeah. It was the original Invasion
of the Body Snatchers was all about McCarthyism.
I'm a fan of the Donald Sutherland one. Well,
and look at how that ends. That ends with you're
walking through the streets pretending to be,
you know, like you're just pretending to not
be an alien, hoping that you can get by. And
then, you know, the minute you show any kind
of emotion, that's it. You're caught. And then
they're going to make you go to sleep. So the
original script was written about McCarthyism?
The original film. The Kevin McCarthy movie.
And in the end, look how that movie ends. That
movie ends with him, like that guy in the airport,
on the street. They're aliens. He's basically
running through the street just in traffic. People
just keep driving. I don't remember the original
one. I might not have even seen it. But the Sutherland
one was amazing. I never would have thought that
that's what it was about. I mean we're experiencing
a kind of Bolshevik revolution at the moment
right now. In what way? Well, there's a rise
of Bolshevism. It's like we see it occurring.
How do you define Bolshevism? Well, it's the
– And Bolsheviks were essentially a kind of –
I mean it's not correct to say communism but
it's basically a kind of authoritarianism in
the guise of egalitarianism and helping the world
know we're all going to be equal and everything.
And they were murdering Christians. Socialism,
yeah. They were murdering Christians and social
– and we're very, very close to that now. We're
very, very, we're on, we're standing on, civilization
is standing on the precipice at the moment. And
by the way, you know, after this podcast comes
out, people are going to be like, oh, Avery's
crazy. Avery went to jail. Avery's, you know,
a killer. They're going to say all sorts of shit
about me to discredit anything that I say. And
that's fine. Like, I'm easy to discredit. And
so it's not really my right to speak up anymore
about anything. You're a human being. It's always
your right to speak up. Well, it is. They can
eat shit. As I look around, like civilization
is on the precipice. And, you know, mostly good
people tend to not take action against stuff.
Until they have to. Until they have to. We were
talking about this yesterday, actually, with
Cheryl Hines. And I was saying, I think we were
talking about this. I was talking about this
recently where I was saying that it's almost
like we need something like a 9 -11 to wake us
up. I would never want that to happen. But I
do remember that after 9 -11, we were united
because we realized, oh, threats are real. Danger
is real. Like we really do need to be united
as one group, a community, and recognize that,
that we are brothers and sisters in the streets
are not our problem. And yeah, but. We even know
about 9 -11 now that like so much of it was like
Building 7, Thermite, like the evidence is there
for anyone to look at. Nobody wants to. And nobody
wants to look at it because and that is. Nobody
wants to look in the conspiracy like how did
these guys get a hold of these planes? How did
they fly into the building? Who? Why were the
the dancing Israelis watching it, cheering it
on? Why did they get. You know, shipped out of
the country. Yeah. And that guy who who owned
the building, who bought it, who took out it
like the insurance policy and then, you know,
had Eliot Spitzer kind of push it through and
force it through so that he could receive his
billions in insurance claim money. And really
because they wanted to tear it because they wanted
to tear down that building and it would have
been too expensive to do and all the asbestos
and everything. So it's like, what was that building
housing? Like Building 7. Well, Building 7 was
housing all sorts of – it was an IRS – I mean
– NSA. Yeah. It was NSA. What was in Building
7? Let's find that out so we don't just – I think
– but there was certainly some intelligence and
data that was being collected in Building – the
fact that no one wants to admit that that building
fell like a controlled demolition is really crazy.
And again – I'm not saying it's a controlled
demolition, but the fact that people want to
say, no, it wasn't like a controlled demolition.
Like when was the last time you ever saw a fucking
building collapse like that ever? Only controlled
demolitions. Yeah. There's been many buildings
that have been very badly damaged and lit on
fire, but their frame remains. Reputable structural
engineers have basically also proven the towers
could not have fallen the way they fell without
explosives. pre -planned explosives. And the
people on the scene, the rescuers on the scene,
the people who were there said, yeah, I heard
explosion. Boom, boom, boom, boom. And they're
describing the sounds of controlled demolition.
U .S. Secret Service. Floors 9 through 10, CIA,
the Department of Defense sharing the 25th floor
with the IRS and the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission. Like you put all that together, CIA,
Department of Defense, IRS. Who thinks any of
those people have your – Right. Also, if you
want to destroy data. You want to destroy data.
Like, didn't the part of the Pentagon that got
hit wasn't – and that was also a day after Rumsfeld
was saying that there was trillions of dollars
that were unaccounted for. Yeah. Didn't the accounting
part of the Pentagon get hit by that, air quotes,
plane? Yeah. Yeah, that plane that came in very
– What's that, Jamie? The building contained
about 24 ,000 gallons of diesel fuel for generators
used by tenants like Salomon Brothers and the
Emergency Command Center. Floors 46 through 47
and parts of the lower level were mechanical
spaces, while files from federal investigations,
Secret Service cases were stored there but lost
in the collapse. And the SEC. And the SEC. Whoopsies.
And has the world been the same since then? The
SEC, like having that there too, boy, that's
super convenient. Guys, we lost the data. Let's
just start from scratch. There's no case anymore.
Whatever they were doing. And yet nobody wants
to accept it. And nobody cares, actually. What's
the video of it that is like really shocking?
I had this really dumb guy on the podcast once
that was a skeptic, a professional skeptic. And
he was really angry with me for saying that it
looked like a controlled demolition. You were
promoting a dangerous conspiracy theory. I'm
like, no, I'm saying it looks like you're saying
it doesn't look in control. Let's watch it. I'm
like, let's watch it. Conspiracy theorists have
had a pretty good run lately. Let's watch it.
Let's watch Building 7 collapse because it's
kind of kooky. Now, one thing that people do
point out that is true is that the center, like
there is a small structure at the top of the
roof of Building 7 that collapses first. And
it does it. Like, I think a minute before the
actual building collapses. Yeah, but these are
skirt buildings. And what that means is that's
actually the most structurally sound part of
the building. The rest of the movie is a facade
that's hanging off of the inner structure. The
rest of the building, yeah. Yeah, that's the
most sound part of the building. It was built
over a Con Edison substation requiring large
transfer trusses on lower floors to support the
tower above, creating long -span floors vulnerable
to thermal expansion. Long, unsupported floor
beams and... girders up to 50 feet connected
to critical in critical interior columns like
column 79 with sheer studs that failed under
fire induced lateral loads rather than just gravity
it was the auto manual flip -flop the exterior
tube frame provided stiffness but the open interior
layout lacked redundancy to prevent fire induced
progressive collapse with connections not designed
for horizontal thermal forces Okay, that's a
cute way of saying that's why it fell at freefall
speed and looks like a controlled demolition.
Because if that was my building, I would say,
give me my fucking money back. You made this
shit -ass building. This building got lit on
fire and just collapsed on itself. Let's watch
it collapse. Because the way it collapses is
so kooky. Because it really does it at freefall
speed. Or close to it. It's strange. Like, there's
never been a building that looks that intact
that falls like that. It's weird, man. I mean,
it's fucking weird. Anybody that says it's not
weird, look, this is how it happened. It's weird.
Now, the planes hitting Tower 1 and Tower 2,
okay, that makes maybe more sense to me. Does
it? Yeah. Does it? Yeah, because it fell from
the top down. Like, it looks normal. It doesn't
collapse into its base. Tower 7 collapses into
its base. The way Tower 1 and Tower 2 fell. But
how about the testimony of people saying they
heard multiple pop, pop, pop, pop, pop explosions?
Is that just girders snapping? It could be. Yeah.
I mean, you've got to think you have immense,
immense amounts of weight. And it is collapsing.
So if it does collapse the way it looks it's
collapsing from the top down, it's not going
to be silent. You're going to hear tremendous
explosions when concrete hits the slabs below
it. It's going to sound like explosions. Also,
you have the fog of war, right? So you have these
people that are involved in an extremely traumatic
situation and their memory is very fucked. Like
your memory is fucked when you experience something
like this. You remember things funny. You have
confirmation bias. There's a lot of weird stuff
that happens. This is the explanation that a
piece of the plane falls down and hits that building.
There's a big tower on top. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I'm sorry. A piece of the building. I meant to
say. Sorry. So that piece of the building falls
down and not a plane, obviously, hits the building
next to it, Tower 7. And that gash is all it
took to take that building down. That's super
suspect. And I do know that there was a fire
inside the building. I'm sure. I'm sure there
was. But the way it fell was crazy. See, Tower
1 and Tower 2, it's like, I don't know what happens
when a jet flies into a building like that, and
neither do you. And also you've got to deal with
corrupt construction companies cutting corners,
not doing things up to code. Perhaps, perhaps.
I'll give you that. I'll be super charitable.
But with Building 7, I'm like, come on, man.
That's weird. That one's fucking weird. Because
it doesn't fall like 1 and 2. 1 and 2 fall from
where the impact was, the deterioration of the
structure, the weight of what's above the impact.
It falls down on it, and you see a progressive
collapse from the top to the bottom. Tower 7
is nuts. Tower 7 just drops, just drops all at
once, free fall speed into its base. That's weird.
Anybody that doesn't think that's weird is being
naive. That's never happened before to a building
that hasn't been a controlled demolition. Again,
not saying it's a controlled demolition. Maybe
it's accurate that these enormous drums of diesel
are creating this fire, unprecedented load on
the structure of the building. But even that
- With everything else that occurred, with all
the tangential stuff that's occurred, you're
still giving the benefit of the doubt. You'll
have suspension of disbelief. But I'm saying
right now, I was trying to finish. That fire
is not on every floor uniformly. So why is it
collapsing uniformly from the top down into the
base? Why doesn't the base where you have this
incredible fire load, why doesn't that weaken
and it fall over sideways because it no longer
has structure anymore? Why is it every floor
has the same amount of damage and it gives in
at the exact same time? That kind of doesn't
make sense because the fire is not uniform throughout
the building. It's not like the building is one
gigantic flame ball and then it all gives out
at the same time. But even then, I would think
it would tip over. It would fall to the side,
falling into its base. That seems to indicate
some sort of a control. Like it was done uniformly.
They time it. When you watch like in Vegas when
they blow up a casino, it's like, and then it
does that. Let's watch an actual controlled demolition.
So when you watch an actual controlled demolition,
it looks just like that. It looks just like that.
And then I don't know. I mean the testimony of
your eyes are telling you the truth. But your
brain will come up with all sorts of stuff because
mundus volt decepi. Well, I'm not allowing it
to with Tower 7. I've always maintained a pretty
open mind with that. But also I lean towards
shenanigans in that one because that one just
seems fucked. Tower 1 and Tower 2, maybe, maybe.
Tower 7, come on. Yeah. Tower 7. Nobody looks.
And if they're telling you that Tower 7 seems
normal, they seem so gaslighting. Everybody that
says that seems like they're gaslighting. So
here we go. Hit it. Okay. This one, they're setting
up for a controlled demolition. So they're showing
you how. That's kind of a shitty one. There's
other ones that have done a better job with.
But it's the same kind of thing. It's still falling
onto itself. Yes. It's falling into itself the
same way Tower 7 did. That's a different shape.
That has a skirt building. It's got a center
structure. Yeah, it's a different kind of structure.
It has a different look to it. Let's watch that
one. Okay, like there. Come on. That looks exactly
like Tower 7. Back that up again a little bit,
please. Watch that from the top, from the beginning.
Just a little bit right before it drops. So watch.
They're looking. They're watching. We're going
to watch the building drop. There it is. That
fucker goes right down like Tower. From there,
come on. That's exactly like a controlled demolition.
And even the way it looks as it's going down
looks exactly like Tower. You know, we were talking
about... predictive programming and how movies
and like spells can predict stuff in advance
and, you know, kind of prepare you for the future
of what's coming. You know, in 1999, a movie
came out, which was effectively a manifesto.
And that movie was called Fight Club. And what's
the end of that movie? The end of that movie
is the collapsing of the buildings, which are
the financial system. you know, of the future
so that they can create a new future. Who produced
that movie? Arnon Milchan. Who is Arnon Milchan?
And they got a commercial director to do it,
Fincher. And, like, he's an excellent director.
And I think it's an excellently, beautifully
made film. But who is Arnon Milchan? Well, you
know, he... himself has said i am a massad agent
and he said that out loud like that's not me
saying that that's him saying that and uh fincher
said oh yeah my last movie oh that was made by
an arms dealer well that's him that's arnon milshan
and so you know And what's another Arnon Milchan
movie? The Medusa Touch with George C. Scott
and I think Lee Remick. And in that movie, what
happens? An airplane crashes into a building.
You could probably pull that one up, too. An
airplane crashes into a building. This guy's
obsessed with airplanes crashing into buildings
and buildings collapsing in movies. And so what's
likely? Has he been reading the scenario plans
that defense departments make and that are maybe,
you know. the Mossad plans that are made. I've
worked for the DOD through John Milius, and we
wrote scenarios. They gathered together a bunch
of Hollywood writers into a, you know, into a,
what is it, like a conference room, like a, it
was like more like a ballroom, but like a small
one, and gathered a bunch of us together around
a table and said, let's come up with ways on
how to attack Los Angeles. And we all wrote scenarios
on how to attack LA. And now they just use AI
to do all that. But so, you know. So has he just
been like reading these? Does he have access
to them? And so he just puts them into his movies.
Well, that movie was made in 1999. And what happened
right after that movie got released? Those buildings
came down. 9 -11 came down. And so is it predictive
programming where you're showing the world what's
to come and that makes it almost somewhat acceptable
to do? Whoa. Or is it just coincidence? And most
people out there will say, oh, no, it's just
coincidence. It's coincidence. He just happens
to be. I mean, that's what he has said. I don't
know if he is or not, Mossad, but that's what
he said. Well, that's the thing about the pejorative
term conspiracy theorist. It's slapped on things
and it immediately sort of diffuses any real
questioning of, oh, my God, are things this bad?
Is there this much? But as time goes on and you're
confronted with more and more information, and
I think we're in the beginning stages of reckoning
with these files that were just released where
so many people, like, I haven't really read much
of it. I've only read the things that are really
outrageous that my friends have sent me because
I'm just trying to maintain my sanity. Well,
that's just it. Most people want to maintain
sanity. I just want to get through the day. You
know, I just want to like, yeah, well, it's even
more than busy. I want to be happy. Right. I
want to raise my children in a in a world that
is, you know, a peaceful world and where people
respect each other and where we can like you
can make something out of yourself, you know,
through hard work and through merit. You know,
it's like that's the world I want to live in.
And more and more, it feels like we're not in
that world. Did you see that thing that was just
released today? I think it's the. AI company,
Anthropic. I think that's the company. So one
of its engineers resigned and essentially said
that humanity is doomed and he's going to move
to the UK and just write poetry and just wait
it out. Hasn't that guy seen Threads? The UK
is like one of the most dangerous places to be.
That's where he's going to wait it out? Well,
he probably has this romantic idea. Well, when
he says UK, does he mean like where does he mean?
I'm not sure. Maybe he means like the Scottish
Highlands. Maybe he's going to hide and go into
some small town and fucking just hang out at
a pub. Yeah, they're going to populate that town
with... Suddenly 800 war -capable men from another
country are going to move in and they're going
to move into the local – Someplace that the West
has conveniently been bombing and creating refugees
on. Yeah, creating angry people. Yeah. Yeah,
and who have – You don't want to think that it's
all planned out like that. Of course you don't.
But that was a bit of the exposure of USAID.
So I, like many people, thought USAID was about
aid. I thought it was like a beautiful philanthropic
program where the United States donates money
to all these poor countries. That's how they
get food. Like I had Bono on the show. And he's
like, I've heard that 30 ,000 people have already
starved to death because of this. 30 million
people are going to die. And I'm like, OK. But
do you know how much corruption was involved
with this? Do you know that? But it's not aid.
It's the Agency for International Development.
And mostly what they were doing was regime change
shit. And Mike Benz laid it out and he said USAID
was for tasks that were too dirty for the CIA.
Which is crazy. So like if they've been engineering
this long game and engineering the collapse of
legitimate governments all throughout the world,
bombing places, creating refugees, and then having
these not just open border policies, but inviting
and helping people get into countries and then
giving them money when they get there. So many
people do not want to admit that that was really
going on, despite all the evidence. It's designed
to destroy whatever confidence you have in law
enforcement, in civilization, in the electoral
process. What's the answer? OK, so given a choice
between totalitarianism. or cannibalism, you
know, which would you prefer? Right, right. You
take cannibalism because you don't want to be
eaten. Yeah. No, I mean, you take totalitarianism
because you don't want to be eaten. I would rather
not be in the movie The Road. But I feel like
I turn that one off immediately. I feel like
we're increasingly in the movie Children of Men.
And I mean, that's that movie was a pretty accurate
futurist example of where we're heading. Yeah.
With collapsing birth rates and at least portions
of civilization looking at extinction. Yeah.
And I mean, they're experiencing a totalitarian
South Korea. Yeah. And what is it? Can you find
that guy's manifesto? I think Corona is a genius
for me. that film, I just want to say. Children
of Men? Yeah. Fantastic movie. So today is my
last day at Anthropic. I resigned. Here's the
letter I shared with my colleagues explaining
my decision. That's a lot to read. What is the
synopsis? Just ask perplexity what the synopsis
of what this guy said. Okay. Sharma, who built
defenses against AI -assisted bioterrorism and
pushed for transparency on model risks at the
San Francisco AI firm, announced his resignation
on Monday. He described struggles to let values
guide actions amid mounting pressures, planning
to return to the UK for a poetry degree, and
step back from the spotlight. His exit follows
other safety team departures amid Anthropic's
launch of Clawed Opus 4 .6 and a massive $20
billion funding round at $300 million. $350 billion
valuation, fueling debates on balancing safety
with commercial speed. Okay, but what is he saying
specifically is the issue? Let's click on that.
Fuck it. Let's click on his... His AI started
talking to him and scared the bejesus out of
him. The safehold. He's part of the guiding of
the... Damn it, lost the word. Yeah. Buy a weapon.
Look, this guy's built something and all of a
sudden he's realizing all the players that are
funding it are likely, you know, scary, scary
people. Yeah. Scary people who are all in the
same club, you know, drinking baby blood and
awful together. What's awful again? Shit. Meconium.
Meconium, which is like a thing. Baby poop. Yeah.
That's in the files. What comes next, I do not
know. I think fondly of this famous Zen quote,
not knowing is most intimate. What? My intention
is to create a space to set aside the structures
that have held me these past years and see what
might emerge in their absence. He's already working
on his poetry right here. feel called to writing
that addresses and engages fully with the place
we find ourselves and that places poetic truth
alongside scientific truth as equally valid ways
of knowing. It was written for him by AI. Elon
said something very bizarre recently. He was
talking about the speed of light, that the speed
of light cannot be, you can't bypass or exceed
the speed of light. If you believe Einstein.
He said, unless we live in a simulation. Or unless
Einstein was wrong. Right. I mean, a lot of astrophysics
is based on a false premise that P equals P prime
and that the sun is like designed a certain way.
And it's completely wrong. And everything that
we know about the stars and how we view the nature
of the universe is. fundamentally incorrect.
How is it wrong? It's based on this idea of the
stability of Kelvin temperatures in the sun,
which is this P equals P prime thing. And the
guy who invented CAT scan machines, there's sort
of a Venn diagram overlapping of this photographic
technique and astrophysics. And what he realized
is, holy cow. That is not true. And therefore,
so much of everything that we know about how
we view the cosmos is incorrect. And so... Now,
how'd they find out that it was incorrect? Well,
he's a mathematician. He figured it out. I would
have to look up his name and everything. And
what is incorrect about it? Do you remember that?
Well, it's... at the beginning of astrophysics,
there is this formula. And if that formula is
wrong, then the preceding calculations are also
wrong, or at least off. And so the idea is that,
you know, what we view is really just a, it's
kind of a cartoon that's painted for us using
all these formulas and using radio telescopes.
And so, you know, it's, things are not as they
seem. Well, they already have issues with the
findings from the James Webb telescope. Oh, yeah.
Well, that's probably part of it. You know, I
have to say, like, I mean. I'm a provocateur,
and so I'm always interested in finding that
which upsets people's, you know, concepts of
things. And that's partly because I'm a screenwriter
and I'm looking for these kind of conflicts and
interesting ideas and stuff like that. So take
what I'm about to say with a grain of salt. But
the big one, the biggest conspiracy theory that
freaks everybody out is Flat Earth. Now, I don't
know what the Earth is. But experientially, through
the testimony of the eyes, it is flat. And there
is very little chance that I will ever in my
life, or most of us will ever in our life experience
anything other than what is effectively a flat
Earth. And the way laser sighting across large
bodies of water or navigation maps for air travel
for pilots is always a presumption of a flat
Earth. It's always in the pilot manuals and on
maps. How so? Well, if you're flying a jet at
low altitude, you're not making corrections for
curvature, even though you're going fast enough
where you should be. And so what's actually happening
there? Well, and so the idea is, look, I don't
know what the world is or what the realm that
we're in is, but experientially, from my perspective
in life, it is nothing but it's a flat earth.
But what about travel routes? Like, what about
when they fly over Antarctica? What about what
if they... Don't fly over Antarctica. But you
can watch the sun rise and fall as you fly. They
don't even fly from Cape Town to Buenos Aires.
There's an understanding of the procession of
the equinoxes. They travel up into the other
hemisphere and, like, land in London or something
and then travel back down whenever you're doing
a flight across the Atlantic. And so, like, when
you look at it on a flat Earth map, and there
are plenty of them. Yeah, but there's satellite
photographs of Earth from space. Those are all
cartoons. What are you talking about? the NASA,
the guys who actually do those composites, those
are composite imagery of... Listen, I am not
saying that... But it seems like you're saying
that the Earth is possibly flat. I'm saying experientially.
Right. But that's a scale. That's a scale issue,
though. Correct. We're a tiny little thing on
an enormous thing. Correct. But, you know, snipers
have to calculate for the curvature of the Earth
when they shoot. Only the curvature of the landscape
that they're on. Right. Why do you think the
landscape curves? The landscape doesn't curve.
It is a mountainous and uneven. Not always. No.
On flat plains, you have to do the same thing.
If you're making a long shot over a flat area,
like if you had to shoot. Well, then why don't
pilots make adjustments? I'm not a pilot. I don't
know. But I do know that when you look at the
film from the space station, when you look at
the film from the space station, you see an Earth
that's not just round, but spinning. I see. Actually,
the... The space station, you know, the International
Space Station is actually not high enough to
see curvature. And what you're seeing is lens,
you know, the lens distortion. It's not high
enough to see curvature when you look out into
the horizon? It's actually even, like, it's very,
very close to the... Let's look at footage from
the space station of Earth. So when you see satellite
images that are taken of the Earth, you think
they're lying? You think there's this grand conspiracy
to piece all these pictures together and turn
it into a circle instead of having it flat? All
I'm saying is that's the fundamental conspiracy
theory that unravels everyone. Well, it doesn't
make any sense because everything that we see
in the cosmos that's a planetary body is round,
including stars. So it's all round, except for
small moons. Everything is round. I'm not even
certain that space exists. Well, that the moon
is anything more than a plasma. A plasma? Yeah.
What does that mean? That it's a... Plasma effect,
a lenticular effect of some kind. So that it's
not a real thing, but it affects the tides. It
is something that we have landed. At the very
least, we've landed probes on. We don't know
that it affects the tides. People theorize that
it affects the tides. So this is footage from
the space station. This is live footage from
the space station. And I'm saying that's lens
curvature and that what you're actually seeing
- Why do you think that's lens curvature? And
that what you're seeing is horizon. So what you're
talking about is like a fisheye lens. I'm saying
if I'm trying to provoke you, that's what I'm
saying. Right. But let's not do that right now
because I don't want you to be completely fucking
insane because this is a round body just like
the moon, just like Mars, just like Jupiter,
just like Uranus. That appears to be a - But
in your practical life experience, you have -
You have to accept a certain amount of faith
is what I'm getting at at any moment. But they
understand the procession of the equinoxes. Do
you know that the procession of the equinoxes
is how they measure the sky over a period of
26 ,000 years? I see right there a little stitching,
like right there. So this would just keep going
straight forever? Do you see that line right
there? What is that? What is that line? Yeah,
what is that line? Well, that looks like stitching
to me. It looks like they've stitched together
and it crosses over there through that mountain
range right there. That is weird, whatever that
is. So by your very example, I'm just saying
that you have to have a certain amount of faith
in that. And on the surface, mundus volt decepi.
Okay, okay. You're freaking me out. Go back to
that, Jamie. So what is the explanation? Go back
a little bit. Yeah, what is the explanation of
that line right there? Right, but how weird is
that? That is weird that there's this line. Right,
because that in itself is a composite image,
a cartoon that has been put together for you
to look at this apparent live imagery. So is
this multiple images that are supposedly pieced
together? Is that what they're – I'm saying that
things fall into – like the way perspective works
is that things appear to fall into the horizon.
But now you use a – what is that camera? Is it
a P200 camera where you can actually zoom in
and lift things out of the horizon that have
appeared to fall into the horizon? This live
video. This live video feed from the International
Space Station has been temporarily interrupted.
Has been interrupted because you're watching
too much. Due to either a change in the onboard
camera configuration or a loss of signal with
the communications network, the video will return
when the connection is reestablished. So this
is during the live feed. This isn't from NASA's
YouTube channel. It's just down right now. It's
just down right now. Okay. So. You're saying
that this is like a fisheye effect of a lens.
Yeah, I'm saying that. Potentially. I'm saying
that. And that we can even see that whenever
they're up there shooting with cameras outside,
you're like, oh, there's the curvature. And then
every now and then the camera turns and it inverts
for a moment. Then it goes back down. I've never
seen that. I watch a lot of NASA stuff. And listen,
I'm not saying that we're not living on a globe
or at least an oblate spheroid as Neil deGrasse
Tyson. and says, but have you ever noticed how
spasticated that guy gets whenever you throw
out the word flat earth? He flips out like the
way Robert De Niro flips out on like irrationally.
Well, he flips out when you say that men can't
be women, which is very weird. Yeah, exactly.
They should be able to compete in women's sports.
Which is very weird. Like for a man of science,
that's bonkers. Or that they should be able to
go to jail and that a sex offender. Fucking insane.
Not just that, but rapists. Yeah. Like people
who have raped children. And then they have to
pay for their electrolysis and breast augmentation,
which is okay. At what point in time do you say
that this is some sort of a bizarre agenda that
you're trying to get us to accept something that
doesn't make any fucking sense? So much so that
you're willing to how. male prisoners in with
females because they say they're a male with
an intact penis and then even after they get
like female prisoners pregnant or rape them We're
all just trying to construct what reality is.
And it tends to be a consensus of what it is.
But, you know, there are fringes that on the
ends that don't believe with what the consensus
says. Are they wrong? But do you know how many
people would have to be involved to promulgate
this idea that there's a flat earth? And you
got to cover up that thing and pretend it's round?
And what's the motivation of covering up the
fact that the earth is flat? I mean, if we're
really fundamentally getting down to it, it's
about God. And it's about what is this realm
that we're in? And are we part of creation? But
why would it be more likely God if it was flat?
Every culture throughout recorded history draws
us in this kind of... flat, earthish environment
with a dome, a firmament that covers it up until
like when, the 1930s or so? Right, when they
start making telescopes. Well, and... Right,
I mean, so this is a grand conspiracy, like Galileo
was wrong, Copernicus was wrong, all these people
didn't know. All of recorded history is wrong.
And, I mean, the other option is that we are
just specks of nothing. floating around in an
endless, vast nothing that goes on forever and
that you are completely insignificant, that you
are not God's perfect creation, which I think
you are. Well, they're not mutually exclusive.
Just because we are in this vast cosmos that's
almost impossible for mammal minds to grasp the
magnitude of it doesn't mean that God's not real.
It's exclusive to people who believe the Bible
word for word. I'm not saying I do necessarily.
I would be considered apostate by most people.
I've been reading the Bible a lot. And one of
the problems that I find is it's clearly got
the hand of man on it. Well, it's been edited.
Yes. It's been edited. You know, the King James,
who was King James? He wrote books on demons
as well. Well, even the Old Testament. The Old
Testament has the hand of man on it. Not just
that, but it's also been translated so many different
times. Like ancient Hebrew, the letters double
as numbers. There's no numbers in ancient Hebrew.
So words have numerical value to them. And imagine
translating such a complex language where like
the word God and the word love, they have the
same numerical value. I believe. Here's another
thing. I've read that. I don't know if it's true.
So let me find out if that's true. Put that into
perplexity. There's a lot of weird stuff in the
Bible. In Genesis, when the Nephilim come down
and they find women comely. And so they're like,
okay, what's actually going on there? These angels
or Nephilim are coming down and they're... taking
women from men and having sex with them and then
creating, you know, hybrid offspring. When Representative
Anna Paulina Luna was here, she told me about
the Book of Enoch. She's like, you have to read
that. Have you ever read it? I don't know. So
I read it. Have you seen The Carpenter's Son,
the Nicolas Cage movie? No. Incredible. What
did I just have you look up, though, before I
lose my train of thought? That King James Bible
thing. What? That's what I was trying to ask
specifically. Which part did you want to ask
about? No, what I asked you was ancient Hebrew.
So the letters also double as numbers. Yeah,
the letters double as numbers. That's what that
movie Pi is all about. And that the word love
and the word God have the same numerical value.
I'm very certain that that's true, but I want
to really double check. Well, numerology exists
around us. And, you know, everything seems to
have a kind of – that's what the Aronofsky film
Pie was kind of all about. That was a great movie.
Yeah. It's a very – He's a very interesting film.
There was also a really fascinating statement
by this mathematician. We talked about it on
a recent podcast was that how strange is it that
we find out that the universe is made out of
math. And that it's encoded in the universe itself.
So a tool that we used, that human beings created
to measure the universe, it turns out that that
tool is how the universe is actually encoded.
Well, this gets back to what Elon is saying about
the world being a simulation. I mean, what is
a simulation? So it says no in ancient Hebrew,
whatever that word is, gematria. No direct name
of God shares the exact same numerical value
as the word for love. So what is the basis of
that rumor? Sacred name equals 26. A name for
God equals 86. Okay. Is there a word for God?
Elohim. Does that have the same? It's a name.
Right. What is the value of... Click on that.
Below that, where it says, what is the gematric?
What's that word? I had to look it up. Gematria.
Gematria. Primary Jewish mysticism. Oh, Kabbalah.
Yeah. Religious studies define hidden spiritual
meanings in sacred texts. Okay. It is fascinating
that there's numerical value in words. There's
no way you're going to get that when you translate
it to Latin. Or Greek. That is a value of 86.
And what is love's value? What is the ancient
Hebrew word for love? What is the ancient Hebrew
word for love? What you mean by love is going
to be very... You have to say, do you mean like
love between two people? Okay, what is the Gementria?
Love that doggy in the window. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
That's a good point. That's a good point. You
probably have different words for it. Definitely.
So what is that? Click on that. What's the Gementria
value of Avala? Right there? Right there? Yeah.
Click on that. It's 13. So that's a different
number too. Interesting. 13 twice equals 26,
the value of Yahweh. Huh. This movie, The Carpenter's
Son, is all about the infancy of Jesus, I think
is written by Matthew. And it's part of these,
I may have this wrong, but Coptic texts. And
it is like, Nicolas Cage is so good in this movie.
So twice 13 equals 26, the value of Yahweh implying
love mirrors or completes God's essence. Okay.
So that's where that comes from. I was going
to ask where it came from. Right. That's where
it comes from. God is love. So God is love. So
love twice is God. So here's a question. What
happened? I understand. I understand. Go to ask
a follow -up. How was the numerical value of
ancient Hebrew language lost when they translated
it to Latin? To Greek. To Greek first, right?
How is the numerical value of ancient Hebrew
words lost when they translated it to Greek?
Because it seems like if the it's not just context,
like what is your word for that? Like the word
meant a different thing to them. You know, numerical
values of ancient Hebrew words calculated via
germatria were letters double as numbers was
not preserved in Greek translations. Hebrew letters
inherently carry fixed numerical values, enabling
word sums. Greek letters have their own values.
Equivalents rarely match Hebrew sums exactly.
So you're going to lose it. Like, you know, when
you read like Russian translations of English
or English to Russian, it gets like super screwy.
For sure. For sure. Is this for sure like real?
Ancient Spanish. It's incredibly difficult. All
words mean another number that all have some
sort of secret meaning. Runic writing from the
Nordics is the same thing. And there is a striking
resemblance between many of the runes with Hebrew.
And so these ideas and these glyphs and symbols
that Odin first saw while hanging upside down
from the tree and learned language and how to
speak are somewhat universal across the planet.
Let's get to that for a second. But let's find
out what Jamie's saying. primarily used in Jewish
mysticism and religious studies to find hidden
spiritual meanings in sacred texts like Torah
by assigning numerical values to Hebrew letters
and words, revealing connections between concepts
and exploring the universe's underlying structure.
What's interesting is like it's an older language,
but doesn't that seem like a more complex language,
a language that combines numerical value with
words? Like if you said something to me, it's
not just implied by your tone or by the context
of what you're saying that I understand what
it means to you. But it's in the numerical value
of the words. That seems like a better way to
communicate than just nouns and verbs and adverbs.
Rather than bifurcating numbers and letters together.
It sounds like a way better move. I mean, doesn't
it? It seems like. If you can understand that
and if you grew up with that, that seems like
that would be a much richer and deeper way of
communicating. Isaac Asimov wrote a book called
Asimov on Numbers, which is fantastic, which
talks about this. And he talks about Kalahari
Bushmen who have no concept of the number zero
and how they process and understand. Concepts
like, you know, when no one is around, you know,
if the village is empty and things like that.
And so just different people are just trying
to figure out how to articulate everything. Computer
programming is a language that utilizes numbers.
It's weird when there's like certain languages
that don't have a word for something. So people
really grasp. They have a hard time grasping
what the fuck you're trying to say. What's the
translation for this? We don't have a word for
that. We don't understand the concept of empathy.
Well, there's certain cultures that are like
tribal cultures that can't understand the concept
of maintenance. Yeah, yeah, yeah. They don't
have it. I've heard that. Yeah, which is weird.
Like you think about it like, oh, right. Why
would they need maintenance? Right. Why would
they need maintenance? If you live a subsistence
lifestyle, you live off the land, you don't need
maintenance. And then suddenly you're thrust
into the 21st century and the Chinese are building
highways for you. And the highways collapse.
Yeah, and the highways just collapse because
no one's maintaining it. Right. Yeah. It's interesting.
But it's interesting when - Iron Age or – and
dropping them suddenly into – So to take this
back to this idea that we're missing 1 ,000 years.
So if we really are missing this one – there's
two things I want to get to that. Added 1 ,000
years. Yeah, yeah. Added 1 ,000 years. I really
want to get to that and – well, I meant by missing
like they don't exist in the real world. Right,
right. I want to get to that and I want to get
to is there a conventional explanation for that
stitching, why that image – What is the mainstream?
I've got to dig up what we're even looking at.
Right. It was not the NASA channel we were looking
at. I can dig down that rabbit hole. What were
we looking at? I've tried to pick up a video
of the live. You know, the globe imagery that.
Hold on a second. So that image might not have
been an official image. That might have been
something that someone created. I'm not saying
that. Well, let me retract so words aren't taken
out of context. I'm just saying it seemed like
a live video. It was live on YouTube. Oh, but
it could have been AI or shit. Yeah, I have to
go back to look at the chart. I'm working fast
over here. No, I get it, dog. I get it. Jamie,
you do the job of 15 dudes, so I appreciate what
you do. I found a video from 11 years ago on
Vimeo that is from SpaceX, so it's not NASA.
It's someone else, and it's up and down of the
rocket. You can argue all day that it's got curvature.
It doesn't have curvature. When you see a rocket
launch, what does it do? It goes kind of sideways
across the sky. And so, like, we've now seen
that, you know, pretty regularly. And that's
because they're really not going above the troposphere.
Well, I watched the SpaceX launch live. I was
there. It went straight up in the air. And then
it curves and it travels sideways across the
sky until it meets the horizon. Well, it gets
to a certain orbit and then it traveled and dropped
off in Australia 35 minutes later. But out of
your view. No. I watched the entire thing from
the command center. I watched it from like 24
different cameras. But how high did it go? Did
it go above the troposphere? Not likely. What
is the troposphere? How many miles is that up?
This is low Earth orbit. Right. But at low Earth
orbit, Jesus Christ, that looks like a globe,
huh? But watch as the camera rotates. This is
also an edited video. I don't want to get stuck
in this fucking space. As Elon would say, it's
real because it looks fake. Or when it looks
fake, that's when you know it's real. Say that
about Bigfoot then, bitch. Because Bigfoot looks
fake as fuck and it's definitely not real. You
know what's real? That Turkish sharpshooter.
That dude was a G up in the corner. Press play.
See what this is supposed to be. It cuts. It
cuts. Okay. Oh, I see, I see. So it cuts a bunch
of different images. Now you can actually see
an inversion occurring on the horizon right there.
Oh, you're only seeing a small piece of it. Correct,
but the lens distortion on the side of the frame
is causing the horizon there to invert, and that's
because of lens distortion. I see what you're
saying. It is. And the fact of the matter is,
even at the height that these are orbiting at,
and I'm not saying like presuming a globular
planet, even the word planet, plane, it's like
a plane, or the horizon is horizontal. Even presuming
that, the height that they're at right now, you
would still only see a circular. You would see
the limit of your vision. Because it's so massive.
Yeah, because it's so massive. You're still not
high enough to truly see curvature. If we are
in a simulation and if consciousness affects
the reality of things and they are only real
if we are experiencing them. that's when things
get really squirrely. The testimony of your eyes.
Like, I know that I am here right now. Not just
the testimony of your eyes, but your consciousness
interacting with reality is what creates it.
Correct. That's where things get super squirrely.
How do you know gravity exists, for example?
Well, gravity is not clearly defined. Correct.
We understand the numbers. Gravity is a concept,
and it's a non... truly non -provable concept
because you can prove the exact same thing through
density and buoyancy. You know, the density and
buoyancy, you know, make a lot of sense. How
come the oceans, you know, react the way they
do and don't, you know, it's not necessarily
provable, but it's believable. You come to a
certain point where you're like, okay, faith
takes over at this point. My faith in that, in
gravity, my faith in the globe. because that's
what's been told to me since I was a baby, at
a certain point that just takes over. Not just
that. And you accept that as a fundamental piece
of what reality is because we want to believe
we understand the universe. What I'm saying is
we don't understand jack shit about the universe.
We don't know anything. And all we do is we believe
what they tell us. And they is just the cumulative
understanding of how things are. But in ancient
times, they had a different understanding of
things. And that was how it was back then. And
so because they had no other way to describe.
Right. But even then, the reality is just built
things based on where the sun was going to be
during the solar equinox. They also were aware
of the procession of the equinoxes, which is
the wobble of Earth's orbit. So Earth spinning
around doesn't spin perfectly. There is a 26
,000 year wobble. You could predict it by the
night sky. Somehow Polaris remains centered in
the sky and all stars. rotate around it. That's
extraordinary. If we're traveling— What do you
mean? So during the precession of the equinoxes
over a 26 ,000 -year cycle, Polaris remains in
the exact same spot? Supposedly that's because
that's where we're flying towards as a solar
system as we travel through the galaxy. Right,
but with the precession of the equinoxes, this
wobble over a 26 ,000 -year period, it will move
in the sky. Well, the point of Polaris will always
remain where it is, directly to the north. The
perspective of it will vary depending upon where
we are in this 26 ,000 -year cycle. It undergoes
a kind of penumbra of sorts, a kind of motion
of sorts. It changes. A figure -eight motion
through time. It changes. Look at it. It says
right here. Due to the 26 ,000 -year axial precession
cycle, the North Star changes over millennia.
While Polaris is the current North Star, other
stars have held this position, including Thuban,
3000 BC, and future stars will include Arai,
Alderman, and Vega. So it's not the same star.
It's just what is dependent upon where we are
in the precession of the equinoxes. That's why.
Well, there it is. It's not that the Earth is
flat. I know it's true because it's on Google.
But it's not just that. We know where they've
been able to accurately predict the motion of
the precession of the equinoxes based on the
constellations, which are clearly mapped out.
So we understand this wobble. And this wobble
may be responsible for cycles of Earth's climate,
how things change and be dependent upon where
the equator sits and where these poles sit and
how it wiggles around. Remember when we were
younger, the sun was kind of yellow and orange
and now it's just like white? But reality is
changing. I mean, things change. The sun looks
exactly the same to me. It does? Yeah. You think
the sun is the same? To me, it's... I think pollution
has affected it somewhat, especially if you live
in L .A. Well, there used to be more pollution,
and so maybe that's an excuse of why the sun
would be more yellow. But I've lived all over
the world. Did you see Epstein talking about
gravity? Oh, boy. Oh, here we go. Here we go.
Let's be with it. It's not... I don't know. It's
very... I'll just say... What does he have to
say? It's fine. It's only 45 seconds. I just
let it go. So someone's pushing the ball because
I know that I am confident that the only thing
That gets something to move is with a force that
pushes so there's a force that's pushing the
ball down in fact That's kind of he called it
gravity he measured how fast it was pulled but
Never was able to explain why it happened. How
is it? What is gravity? It's this Everybody says,
well, why did the ball fall to the ground? Because
gravity took it. But what's gravity? That's,
as Feynman would say, that's the name of the
thing. We have no idea what it is. That's the
end of that clip. Or it's just density and buoyancy.
He was really into this topic, apparently. Apparently.
He knew a lot about it. You know who you should
have on is Eric Dubé. Do you know who this guy
is? Oh, he's the Flat Earth guy. Yeah, he's the
Flat Earth guy. And he's written a book called
100 Proofs. And in order to prove something,
you also have to prove things wrong. You went
down some rabbit holes, Roger Avery. Look, I'm
a screenwriter, and so I'm always looking for
things like this to write stuff about. So in
order to prove, say that again? In order to prove
what? Whenever you have a proof, you also have
to disprove. He wrote a book called 100 Proofs
about the nature of the earth and how it is.
And it has explanations for many of the things
you're talking about. Hasn't he debated people
that actually understand how you can prove that
the earth is round? He does it very calmly and
it infuriates people. Right, but I don't think
he's done well. It's very enjoyable to watch
because it's really funny. But to people that
are actual cosmologists, he's not performed well
in these. Well, the cosmologists will say things
that still need to be – if you're making statements,
they still need to be – you still need to disprove
the other proofs. Right, but there's plenty of
people that have disproven that the Earth is
flat. All I'm saying is experiential. With simple
experiments. The Joe Rogan experience throughout
life. You are really, like when you go up into
an airplane, I do not see the curvature of the
earth. Well, you can't because of perspective.
Because you're so tiny. Correct. Because you're
so tiny. So all I'm saying is that through experience,
that the testimony of your eyes, you will never
experience a globular earth. But you do experience
the effect of an Earth that's a globe if you
go to the other side of the Earth and it's dark
out when it's sunny in California. They've made
models of how that could work. Dorks have. Dorks
have made models. But it doesn't line in with
our understanding of cosmology. It doesn't line
in with our understanding of our orbit around
the sun. That's assuming you believe that we
orbit around the sun. Listen, I'm not saying
that we don't orbit around the sun. I'm not saying
we don't live on a globular Earth. Don't take
me wrong. But the numbers match. If you do assume
that they're correct, that we orbit around the
sun, their calculations are completely accurate.
If they make the calculations on their flat earth
model as well, then you still have to prove that
wrong. Right. But is NASA doing that? Is MIT
doing that? Of all people to believe, the ones
who are digitally stitching shit and saying,
that's a government agency. You went so deep
with this. Boy. No. All I'm saying is my experience.
You know, when I get on the plane later today
and I'm flying back and I look outside, I'm going
to see a flat, you know, a flat horizon, a horizontal
horizon before me. And when I land and, you know,
it's everything else is faith -based. Well. That's
all I'm saying. It's not, though. It's science
-based. It's based on data. It's based on our
understanding. The word science means observation.
It means testimony of the eyes. Which I'm talking
about the measurements, data. The data is so
far removed, one, from my ability to understand,
but from most people's ability to understand.
But you can understand the circumference of the
Earth, right? You can understand the numbers.
And the numbers line up exactly with how much
time it would take for the Earth to go around
in a day. Sure. And it works. In what other experiment
can you show me where water clings to a spinning
ball? Like that's kind of the classic flat earther
thing that they'll ask you. Like, well, show
me any other example of that. Show me a fucking
ball that's 24 ,000 miles wide. And the answer
to that is gravity. And what he's talking about
in that clip that you just showed is gravity
is just sort of this idea that we came up with
to justify that. But there's clearly a force.
That does that, right? That's density. Just density?
Yeah, density. Well, then how come these two
things will fall at the same time if I drop them
when this is far heavier? How come? I do not
have an answer for that. Right. But gravity does,
right? Gravity is, like he said, it's just a
measurement. It's a measurement of how things
fall. Right. And the word that they invented,
gravity, is just an explanation for how objects
are pulled downward. Right, but those objects,
if it was just density, wouldn't a heavier object
drop faster? There's a bowling ball and feathers
dropping in a vacuum, and they're falling at
the exact same time. How weird. Vacuum, no density.
They both fall at the same time because of gravity
or whatever the force we call gravity is. But
there is some sort of a force that we call gravity
that can be measured in a vacuum. Look how excited
they all are. Yeah. Brian Cox would be pissed
if he was here right now. He'd be shitting. Oh,
no. He'd be. I'm not. Listen. I'm not. All I'm
saying is that my experience in the world. Of
course. But your experience is based on perspective
of being a tiny little thing on an enormous thing.
Correct. Yeah. That is correct. Yeah. That is
correct. There's a few YouTube channels that
have broken down all of those. Flat Earth Ideas,
too. A ton. Go watch those. I tried years ago
and I gave up. It is absolutely a rabbit hole.
But what's interesting about it is that if you
extract the faith that you have in these kind
of ideas and you supplement it with the faith
of these other ideas, they're exchangeable. They're
only exchangeable if you don't understand the
data and if you don't understand what's actually
been measured or if you don't understand the
path of satellites or if you don't understand
how many different people would have had to lie
about this shit and not achieve the same observational
results that all these different space agencies
have. That the idea that they're all in collusion,
that Japan and India and even countries that
hate each other, they're all in collusion on
this lie that the Earth is round. It seems much
more likely that there's a bunch of people with
schizophrenia that think that the earth is flat
and they make these YouTube videos where they're
very compelling because they're articulate and
they use great words and they say it all in a
nice way without being challenged by real facts
along the way by someone who actually has studied
this their whole life. Right. I still saw digital
stitching on your example. Yeah, it wasn't my
example. It was some shit Jamie randomly pulled
offline. That was weird though. perfect for this
world that we live in, to have sort of a glitch
like that. But that's kind of what I'm getting
at is there's so much out there that it just
falls to faith. And also, what does it really
matter? That's kind of what I'm getting at, ultimately,
is what does all of that really matter? What
does it matter to anybody that there's a cabal
of 8 ,000 plus people who are secretly controlling
the world and doing occultism and drinking baby
blood? Does it really matter as long as you can
just have your daily pint? This is a very different
subject now. We've shifted. You've moved away
from the concept of the earth being flat and
it's a giant lie that's promoted by a huge group
of people that aren't even connected in any way,
shape, or form to evil people that are involved
in cult -like rituals, which has, by the way—
always existed. And this is why it's very difficult
for people to imagine today that some of the
things that you're hearing from the Epstein files,
like the potential that they were eating children
or killing children, or that they use that sulfuric
acid to boil bodies. We don't want to believe
in evil that is that deep. But in my opinion,
if you can find out that evil is real. Right.
Evil most certainly is real. There's evil acts
that we have documented all throughout the world.
There's evil that the cartel does. I just watched
a video where the cartel chopped this guy's head
off and put it on a drone and flew it over to
where the other cartel was. They probably thought
that was funny. They probably did. Having a good
time. That's clearly evil. There's plenty of
evil. Do you believe in demons? I believe in
the concept of demons. I mean, demons don't materialize
before us necessarily. They rest upon the shoulders
of men and whisper into their ears. And then
people do evil things. This is what I believe.
I believe that if I was a demon or if demons
were real, they would get people to do things
which are verifiably true, that they have done.
If you were a demonic idea. And you got into
Oppenheimer's head or Patton's head or anybody's
– and you wanted them to do something horrific
to a bunch of innocent people. And you could
say this is because we're at war. So we're going
to drop a nuclear bomb on Hiroshima. Like that's
a demonic act. It's a demonic act of eliminating
hundreds of thousands or 100 ,000 -plus people
off the face of the earth who did nothing. They're
just citizens that are unfortunately involved
in a country that is in a conflict with some
people that they don't even know. And then you
just got vaporized like that. That seems demonic.
You've just expired 150 ,000 souls. But there
are people who would argue that the war would
have continued. I've heard this argument before.
I've heard that argument too. That the war would
have continued and so many more would have died.
Well, if I was a demon, I would want to propagate
that idea. I would want you to think that you
have to do it. Is evil justification of things?
Certainly. Of actions? If you wanted to find
a way where a demon – just like assume that demons
are real. How would demons best be able to enact
demonic things on earth? Would they do it by
saying I'm a demon and this is – This is what
you should do and this is horrible and evil.
Or would you creep into someone's head and find
justifications for doing a demonic thing? There's
a lot of things. You would creep into someone's
head. Right. And you would boil the frog slowly.
Like let's imagine this is the AIDS crisis and
you know that AZT is killing people. But you
also know that you are making. an insane amount
of profit off of killing people with AZT, and
you have already established a narrative, and
Fauci said this publicly, that the reason why
they only prescribe AZT is AZT is the only thing
that is both safe and effective. He literally
used the same language that he used during the
coronavirus. He's been doing this for a long
time. He has. If I was a demon, I'd want to get
in that guy's head, and I'd want to get him to
keep doing it and say, look how much money they're
making. You've got to keep this money. There's
a way to justify this. You're the purveyor of
information. You are the gatekeeper of the truth.
You just find a way to dance around these numbers.
You do not know what you are talking about. This
is not gain of function. I mean, just what he
did there, that was evil. By taking a virus.
funding it, even though it was illegal to fund
it in the United States, by doing it through
EcoHealth Alliance and then farming it out to
them. They do it at the Wuhan lab. And you are,
in fact, doing gain -of -function research on
a virus designed for human beings to make it
more deadly and more contagious. That's demonic.
You don't have a cure. There was a researcher
in Canada at the Manitoba Level 4 lab, Dr. I
think it's how you pronounce her name. And she
was the one who solved Ebola. Like she had come
up with the vaccine for Ebola, which is manufactured
by a California company that is basically a Chinese
company. And like a rock star, she had made a
like it was like a hit. She had a hit, a huge
hit. And just like a rock star, everybody's asking
you what comes next, what comes next. And so
she started actively working. working really,
really hard at coming up with that next thing.
And like most people, you don't want to stand
in line. And these level four labs, they have
to, whenever you move your research from one
lab to another, you have to go through all sorts
of stuff in order to do that because it's all
patented, all of these microbes and viruses and
Ebola strains and whatnot. It's all patented.
And so, for example, there was this one kid who
was working at the lab in Canada, and he was
moving, I think, to the one in Atlanta. And so
he was crossing the border, and he didn't want
to. to like, you know, have to reproduce all
of his work. And so he just put it into a thermos
inside of a thing and tried to cross the border
and he got caught. Well, she got caught in 2019
by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, basically
moving stuff from Canada via Air Canada Freight
from Manitoba, from Winnipeg, this is the Winnipeg
lab, to Wuhan. And they were moving everything.
And I tracked where those, because I was writing
a screenplay about it. And so I tracked, like,
where did that come from? Well, it's like the
cutter or maybe it was Abu Dhabi. I can't remember
the lab there. And then that went through in
order to get around. It got sent to the one in
Amsterdam and that got sent to her. And she was
able to do all this stuff. And she was basically
just shipping, you know, everything, Hanta and
all these patented things to Wuhan, you know,
in order to to do it. And the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police basically, you know. stopped it
and she got like walked out of the laboratory
and everything because they were like is there
a misappropriation of money going on here like
what are all these flights that are occurring
and they redacted who her financer was and we
still don't know who her financer was but it's
one of three people and it's the people you probably
can guess you know these uh people who have an
interest in uh in in this and uh and but her
thing was just ambition It was just like anybody.
She was just wanting to have that next hit. And
she would do anything to do it, to repeat what
she did with Ebola. So she was helping to engineer
viruses? Yeah, they were engineering stuff. And
then she would ship them via Air Canada freight
from Winnipeg directly to Wuhan, literally on
Air Canada flights. So you're flying on Air Canada
to Wuhan. Down below in cargo, there's all this
leprosy and some horrible strain of something.
It's something that's patented. And then they're
just shipping it over. And none of this has come
out. Some papers in Canada, like the Winnipeg
Free Press or something, was trying to cover
it. But it just gets kind of buried. That was
one of the weird things that I had also seen
that I don't know if it's true in the Epstein
files, that there was talk about. engineering
a pandemic yeah yeah was it did you yeah i read
that too i read that too that they were like
actively working on it like you know running
models and figuring it out and you know well
if we do this then this will happen and You know,
they were pretty successful at that. But why
would Epstein be involved if he's a financier?
He was involved in everything. Right. He was
involved in everything. It was like amazing the
energy that that guy had. Who has the energy
to be like doing all this stuff like all over
the world and like, oh, in Nigeria, we're doing
this. And in Yemen, we're doing this. And here
we're doing that. And at the same time, trafficking
all these girls and, you know, and young children
and like all this stuff. Right. What's the energy
to do that? It says, no credible evidence in
the recently released Epstein Files links Jeffrey
Epstein or his associates to engineering the
COVID -19 pandemic. Claims stem from a misinterpreted
2017 email referencing routine pandemic preparedness
discussions, not a plot. So what was the claim?
The original claim? Go down. I didn't ask it
about COVID -19. Right. You just asked it about
engineering a pandemic. So what is the pandemic
claims? Scroll up a little so I can read that.
That's all. Scroll down a little. There it goes.
So 2017 email originally from 2015 discussions
to Bill, widely assumed to be Gates, forwarded
to Epstein, proposed recommendations and technical
specifications for pandemic modeling of various
strains. It focused on healthcare data, simulations
for preparedness, and neurotechnology, not creating
or engineering a virus. Gates Foundation later
ran public event 2001 and 2019, a standard exercise
with John Hopkins and WHO predating COVID reports.
That whole public event 2001 is fucking weird.
Event 2001 is weird. Context and debunking pandemic
simulations are common public health tools like
those for SARS or flu. Right. But why is Jeffrey
Epstein involved in these discussions? He's involved
in everything. He's involved in gravity. But
how fucking weird is that? How weird is a pandemic?
A pandemic was reportedly mentioned in the Epstein
Files. It was running the world. Three years
before COVID -19. It was running the world. Well,
this is what my friend Eddie Bravo believes.
And creating the illusion. In the meantime, Ghislaine
Maxwell is running the Reddit forum on World
News. Like, she's literally shaping the World
News Reddit forum. She was? Yeah. She was running
the World News forum on Reddit? Yeah, she was.
And it all went dark the minute she got picked
up, her person. But she was like the... The main
contributor did thousands of posts, like all
day long posting world news, shaping our perception
of things. One email was a subject preparing
for pandemics, was sent by a person whose name
was redacted. By the way, did you see that? Why
would they redact the person who sent that? That's
not a victim. You're supposed to redact. I think
they just they did like supposedly they just
did massive redacting. But sometimes you can
see like, oh, the name is short. It's probably
Bill. And then the one that comes after that,
if it's a little longer, it might be Clinton.
And if it's a little shorter, it might be Gates.
But again, that's just, you know. There's no
– it's like plausible deniability until they
release all these names. Did you notice that
Jeffrey Epstein's Fortnite account suddenly became
active in Tel Aviv and that somebody is playing
under his – right after his supposed death. Right.
Suddenly he's playing Fortnite again. Yeah. He
doesn't even have the decency to make a new account.
Well, he wants to keep all of his like – His
stats. His stats. He wants to keep all that stuff.
And he's safe in, you know, in another country.
So do you think they just like did those? That's
another thing. There was another Reddit thread
about some guy who said that he was a guard.
It was a 4chan thread. It was a 4chan? Yeah.
So it was a 4chan thread where this guy said
that he was a guard at the facility and he posted
this before Epstein was killed. He was a guard.
They uncovered using whatever way they do it,
but using phone records or whatever from 4chan
they discovered. He was a guard and he was like
a legit guy. He got caught basically talking
about it, that they snuck, they used a decoy
body. There was an unscheduled ambulance arrival
that night. They never logged in and you're always
supposed to log in. There's footage of like,
you know, orange, people in orange moving through
the facility on the, you know, just glimpses
of it. So you think he's alive somewhere? It's.
It's not impossible. It's not impossible. It's
probable. Also didn't... It's a probability.
It's more than a possibility. The guy who did
the autopsy, did anything happen to him? The
guy who... He committed suicide. Yeah, let's
find that out. That would be fucking crazy. Because
that happened to the guy who did the autopsy
on Andrew Breitbart. Didn't he wind up dying
shortly after that? Like Andrew Breitbart? Yes.
And who's the guy who said the Podesta? An alarming
amount of people commit suicide. Alarming. Who
are doing this stuff. Or die of something real
weird. Yeah, suddenly they do it. I saw people
in jail who committed suicide and they didn't
commit suicide. They got killed by their cellie.
Nobody bothered checking in on that. Yeah, that
makes sense. The guy who did the autopsy for
Jeffrey Epstein, did anything happen to him?
I mean, it was a woman. A woman? New York chief
medical examiner, Dr. Barbara Sampson, and she
just resigned a year ago. Okay, so nothing happened
to her. You're talking about evil? You know who
the devil was in The Exorcist? Who? Well, it's
like Pazuzu, and we're presented with an actual
devil, but when you actually watch the movie,
there's kind of evidence that, and people have
talked about this, that there's evidence within
the film that... It's more than just demonic
possession, that the demonic possession comes
from some place. And by the way, Jeffrey Epstein
was doing also funding research in how trauma.
effects like clairvoyance and telepathy and things
like that, how you're able to invoke those out
of trauma. And in The Exorcist, you have Reagan,
who's Linda Blair, and there's that party scene.
You remember in The Exorcist, they're making
a movie within the movie. You know, they're they're
actually shooting a movie. The the character
of the mother is she's acting in a film inside
of the movie. And there's a director in that
film and they have a big party scene after it.
And the director, you know, he's he's basically
yelling at the the butler, her her house man,
you know, calling him a Nazi and stuff like that.
And he's I bet you went bowling with gobbles
and things like that. Well. For a while, he vanishes
from the party. And we later see like Reagan
afterwards, like completely flipped out, like
laying in bed. And then after that, she comes
and then he's leaving the party and he turns
to the mother and he's like, I have to tell you
something. I have to tell you something. Fuck
it. And he leaves. And so and then. After that,
Reagan comes down and she looks to the astronaut
guy and says, you're going to die up there. And
then she pisses on the floor and everybody's
like shit. And from that moment on, there's all
this like highly sexualized devil speaking through
her with a British accent. And the guy, the director.
is a British guy. And so the implication, and
then he is for some reason left with Reagan and
then gets thrown out of the balcony and his head
is twisted all the way around and he dies as
a character. So the implication is that the director
is the one who has raped Reagan and thus invoking
this demonic presence into her. And it turns
out that... I thought it was a... Some totem
that they found and it was possessed. All of
that stuff is there. The Ouija board is there
and everything. But it turns out that William
Peter Blatty actually made a movie called John
Goldfrapp, Your Life is blah, blah, blah. I can't
remember the exact title of the film. And he
made that movie with Shirley MacLaine. And the
director of the film is this guy, J. Lee Thompson,
British director, who looks exactly like the
actor in that. The idea is that Reagan's mother
is Shirley MacLaine and Reagan is her daughter,
Sasha. And the British director is J. Lee Thompson.
And when you start looking at his movies, they're
a little strange. You know, there's like, you
know, he directed the original Cape Fear, which
has a kind of strange. thing going on in it.
So does the second one. Yeah, they all do. And
then, especially, they amplify it in the second
one. Yeah, with Juliette Lewis and Robert De
Niro. He did this movie, Kinjite, with Bronson,
and that all has kind of like a weird pedophilic
thing. He did this movie, The Reincarnation of
Peter Proud, where Peter Proud dies and then,
or rather... Peter Proud remembers his reincarnation.
He remembers his iteration of his other self
who was murdered. Then he hunts down the woman
who maybe did it and then starts sleeping with
her daughter, which is basically sleeping with
his daughter because he's reincarnated. So this
guy, as a filmmaker, has done all this. And so
William Peter Blatty worked on that film with
Shirley MacLaine and shortly thereafter wrote
the book The Exorcist. And Sasha in her, you
know, autobiography even mentions, you know,
God, the person on the cover of the book looked
a lot like me. And everyone's just saying, oh,
it's just a coincidence. And, you know, well,
I never walked down the stairs on all fours and
I never vomited, you know, pea soup or whatever,
that none of that ever happened to me. But there's
a pretty dark implication behind the whole film.
And I brought it up with William Friedkin. Hey,
is this meant to be J. Lee Thompson? Is this
a way to talk about that that actually happened
in real life? He said, I cannot talk about that,
but I'm not saying you're wrong. Whoa. And so,
you know, and there's actually a moment where.
And Reagan is talking to her mother and she's
like, well, do you like him? Do you like him
like you like daddy? And so there's this idea
that he's been coming over and they've been having
this affair. And then all of a sudden she says
to her daughter, and it kind of jumped out at
me when I rewatched it. She says to her daughter,
well, I like pizza, but I wouldn't marry one.
And it was like, oh, my God, there's like a pizza
reference in the middle of this, in the middle
of everything that's happening. How long is that?
That's Periola, but still. Ben Swan brought up
during the whole Pizzagate thing that got him
fired. But how long has the term pizza been used?
Well. It jumped out at me and The Exorcist is
in the early 70s. And and so what is it, 1971?
And that movie that he did with Shirley MacLaine,
who is effectively that's the movie that shooting
inside of the movie. And so this was a way for
Peter Benchley. I mean, it's not Peter Benchley,
William Peter Blatty to to kind of. Transcode
all of that. And the astronaut in the film, Shirley
MacLaine, talks about the, I can't remember if
it was her husband or boyfriend that she remarried
who was an astronaut. And in her autobiography,
she talks about how he was cloned. He came back
from space and a different person that he was
cloned. And she kind of, everybody kind of laughed
it off like, oh, it was just kind of a joke that
I wrote into my autobiography. But it's kind
of weird. Real weird. Yeah, it's really strange.
People speak through movies, and they hide information
in films. Some more than others, right? Yeah,
William Peter Blatty, who was doing all sorts
of Ouija stuff with Shirley MacLaine, who was
really into that kind of thing back in the late
60s and early 70s. And, you know, he sits down
to write his book, and what's he writing about?
Well, he's writing that movie's about Shirley
MacLaine. Her daughter, Sasha, Sachi, I'm sorry,
Sachi. And, you know, the astronaut and, you
know, it's all and J. Lee Thompson, who basically
he eviscerates within the film, but in a way
that nobody really connects it. It all happens
off camera. But but the implication is, is that
she was raped by that director. And from and
from that moment on has a kind of. You know,
she's speaking with a British accent as the devil.
It's his voice, actually, that's coming out of
her. She's talking about, you know, being raped
by a crucifix. That actor, that's his voice?
Is that what you're saying? Yeah, that's what
I'm saying. It's like the voice of, I think his
name is Gowan. And he died like shortly after
the film was made also. Shortly after The Exorcist
was made. Well, we know that people have encoded
very bizarre things. Kubrick was famous for it.
Yeah, well, that's Kubrick. Everybody does it.
I do it. Everybody does it. I mean, motion pictures
are a kind of magic spell. And, you know, when
you write, you're hearing, I hear voices and
they come through me and they land on the page.
And I don't know where they come from. But it
is a kind of. invite to possession and that these
things come into you and that you put it on the
page and then you make this movie and everybody
like I said sits in a theater in the dark watching
a flicker of this thing and it's telling you
both our myths and traditions but it's also predictive
programming everybody and so Jesus dude have
you seen Have I seen what? Well, actually, I
was thinking about, like, the Daily Wire thing.
But, you know, media comes from a lot of different
places now. You don't know where you're going
to find your next entertainment. Right. And there's
this show that I really like that show Rome.
Did you see Rome? No, I never saw it. Okay. I
loved Rome. I watched the first episode and I
thought it was. Flat. Because it told the story
of ancient Rome through Shakespeare and through
history and through Plato and all these kind
of. ideas of ancient Rome or Socrates and all
these ideas of ancient Rome and then it told
a very ground level story from the perspective
of like handmaidens and centurions and still
has Mark Anthony and Cleopatra and everything
going on in it but it tells a very you know soap
opera like drama through it and so there was
this other show and it had been out like three
seasons when I started watching it And it did
the exact same thing. Nobody had ever like nobody
was talking about it. Nobody had ever heard about
it. Most people don't even know about it. It's
The Chosen. Do you know this show? What was that?
It does the exact same thing, but it does it
with the Gospels. And it's all about Christ.
And it's like a low budget or it was low budget,
crowdfunded story of Jesus. And it just basically,
like Rome, tells this historical tale about Jesus.
And OK, so I'm watching. I've seen every movie
about Jesus ever made. I've seen King of Kings
of both versions. I've seen, you know, the Zeffirelli
film. I've seen Last Temptation of Christ. I've
seen The Passion of the Christ. I've seen all
of them. I've seen the Jeremy Sisto Jesus movie.
I've seen everything. I worked with Paul Verhoeven
on his Jesus film that was unproduced. And so
like I had a lot of experience in it and I never
really got it. to be perfectly honest. I never
really understood the story. This show, I started
watching it and I was like, okay, I've got a
chip on my shoulder. Let's see. And it's really
cheap. It's like rocks are made out of styrofoam.
They can't afford a, you know, a house. And so
they just use blankets and a gourd hanging. And
so it's like, it's really, really inexpensive.
And the script is even a little bit contemporary,
which almost becomes like a joke as you're watching
it. It's kind of funny. But lo and behold. I'm
watching it, and there came a moment by about
episode three where it was like, ding, I get
it. Like, Jesus is kind of punk rock. He's basically
saying there are no rules to anything. Like,
you know, you can commit miracles on the Sabbath.
You know, there are no rules. Anybody is led.
All you need to be is wanting of salvation. And
it was like a third eye opened up to me. And
this show is fantastic, and it breaks all the
rules. It's outside. of the Pharisees of Hollywood.
One guy, this guy Dallas Jenkins, who's absolutely
my favorite modern filmmaker right now. I think
this guy's brilliant. He's directed every single
episode of this show, and they've got like seven
seasons out, and you can watch it for free. On
what? On anything. Like if you have an Apple
TV, you can just look up the Chosen app, and
boop, up comes the Chosen app. So it's an app
thing. Or you can watch it on YouTube or you
can watch it. I think Netflix eventually, I think
it was Netflix eventually bought it. Now they're
showing it. Basically, you can see it anywhere.
They give it away the way the Gideons give away
the Bible. And, you know, I thought it was fantastic.
And then season two came around and suddenly
they had all this money and they're doing all
these like, you know, they've got this ancient
Judea set with cobblestone streets and, you know,
like this detailed set. Roman colonnades and
stuff like that. And I was like, wow, like they
really got a big budget. And then I looked it
up and I was like, oh, no, they're using the
Mormons have all these standing sets for their
biblical productions in Utah. And they're incredible.
These sets are unbelievable. If I had known it's
like Chinachita in Utah. It's it's it's absolutely
fantastic. And and the characters are like they
only have money for like three Romans costumes
probably. And so they're kind of like making.
do with what they have but they've got this guy
playing the legate there who is hilarious he's
in the first season he is absolutely hilarious
and the show is great and then like proper television
you're watching it and you're starting to love
these characters and you're starting to like
it's and it's you know what it is the bread and
butter of hollywood is revenge and wrath like
that's what makes that's the the fuel that that
pushes most hollywood movies it is much more
difficult And and requires much more maturity
to make a movie about forgiveness. And this kid,
Dallas Jenkins, I call him a kid, but he's not
a kid. That's an insult. He's he's super great.
He he is making every single episode is effectively
because it's the Gospels about forgiveness. And
he has done this magnificent, unbelievable achievement.
And the show is huge. Now, they've got like seven
seasons. They built a studio. You know, like
outside of Dallas -Fort Worth on a Salvation
Army property that they've built sound stages
and everything. And it is – and that's like you
can get it anywhere. You can watch it anywhere.
And they're making programming that should have
been on HBO. It should have been produced by
HBO the way Rome was. And instead, it's just
– it's coming out of the ether. And it's almost
like with the inattention given to – you know,
most modern, or rather the way that people are
making things, that they're focused on wrath
and revenge, like this other thing, like the
Pendragon cycle and the Chosen have kind of risen
out of the vacuum that the studios and broadcasters
have kind of created, because they're no longer
making that kind of product, at least not as
much. And so I think this is actually one of
the most exciting times in media and television.
Yeah, I definitely think it's a very unusual
time where the normal people that are producing
things don't have a complete monopoly on what
people see. And that many of the times these
alternative things have gotten much larger than
the mainstream thing. I find it like almost impossible
to get a movie going. Like I'm, you know, I'm
like an independent filmmaker. I go out there
and I usually I work on a script and then I figure
out the budgets and I figure out that and I go
out and I hit the pavement. And it's a really
hard part, probably because I'm a flat earther
kid. I am not a flat earther. I just like to
provoke people. But, you know, I go out there
and I try to get this stuff made and it's like
almost impossible. And then I built a technology
company over the last year. And basically making
AI movies. And all of a sudden, boom, like that
money gets thrown at it. And all of a sudden,
just by attaching the word AI and that it's a
technology -based company, all of a sudden investors
came in and we're in production on three films
now. AI is not right now. I know. That's the
crazy thing is that it was so easy for me to
get that going and so difficult for me to get
a traditional movie going through the traditional
route like going to – you know, A24, blah, blah,
blah, trying to like, you know, hit the pavement.
I have to go to Europe to gather together financing
and everything like that. No, just put AI in
front of it and all of a sudden you're in production
on three features and we're making a Christmas
movie, a family Christmas movie that'll be in
theaters this holiday season. We're making a
faith -based film for next Easter and then we're
making a kind of big... romantic war epic and
like as classical movies and we have like a proprietary
stack of technology that we use for our process
and I partnered with this company Massive Studios
AI and formed my company which is General Cinema
Dynamics and I'm based here in Texas now and
or my company is and I'm slowly transitioning
and it's like It's actually kind of, I think,
you know, so many people are against AI like
Guillermo and, you know, love him, but he's like,
fuck AI, fuck AI. But all it is is visual effects.
And I have experience like with that Beowulf
movie doing it. And what used to be a million
dollars a minute is now $5 ,000 a minute. And
so to do it really, really well, like it looks
kind of amazing, actually. And so I think for
independent cinema and for the future of film
and television production. These are super exciting
times. All right, Roger, we just burned through
three hours plus. Really? Oh, my God. Yeah, it's
already 4 o 'clock. I figured this out. I'll
share it with you. All right, so what I pulled
up is this. This is NASA, right? This is proper
NASA. Let him talk. So this is a far TV. They're
pulling in multiple feeds. There's three different
boxes at the bottom. As you can see, this one
in the middle says offline. So as I showed you
also, I pulled up the NASA feed, which is this.
It says it's offline. When that is offline, this
channel adds a 3D model. showing where the satellite
currently is so that you can still follow along.
30 minutes ago, it wasn't offline. It was showing
a different feed, and I wish I could have showed
it to you then, but I didn't interrupt. Got it.
There is a Flat Earth Reddit account asking this
exact thing. What is that? And the people on
the Flat Earth Reddit gave me the answer. The
crazies. The crazies have come out to... Mm -hmm.
Okay. There you go. So that was what that was.
Well, I'm glad we put that to— So just as the
video description, switch to a simulation with
the ISS above the Earth when the connection is
lost, a .k .a. offline. I was going to point
that out because you can see the stars in there,
and you can't normally see the stars while you
can see the Earth. I'm glad we can be comforted
by at least one thing that is secure and stable
in our understanding of reality. Roger, that
was very fun, though. Thank you very much. Let's
do this again. Really a pleasure. It was a good
time. Really super pleasure. Thank you, brother.
Appreciate you very much. All right. Bye, everybody.