PHIL [00:00:03] “Man, that’s punk stuff” Dewey said. But having nothing better to do, he looked at the comic book with The Junior. They followed the story. The heroes marched through deserts, they marched over mountains. They marched in the rain and in the snow. They fought every inch of the way.
FILM CLIP: [00:00:22] Warriors! Come out and play!
JAY [00:00:40] Welcome to Dog-eared and Cracked. I’m Jay
PHIL [00:00:44] and I’m Phil,
JAY [00:00:46] And this week, after much anticipation, we finally discuss my pick. Yes, that’s right. We’re going to have a conversation about The Warriors written by Sol Yurick, and its adaptation in the 1979 movie…
PHIL [00:01:03] …Which I just watched again this morning.
JAY [00:01:04] Phil, before we get into the book, can you tell us a bit about the book’s author, Sol Yurick?
PHIL [00:01:10] Yeah, so Sol Yurick, I mean, he probably resented that he is, you know, best known as the guy who wrote the book the movie The Warriors is based on, because he was not particularly fond of the film. And even his obituary in The New York Times ran under a still from the film. I mean, he would have hated that. Yurick was born in 1925 in New York. He was the son of Russian Jews. They were communists. He didn’t speak English for the first four years of his life. And he began writing in the 1950s, which is also when he began working for the New York City Department of Welfare as an investigator. I’ve seen that quoted a bunch of places. I’m not sure what an investigator for the Department of Welfare did, but it did put him in touch with a lot of kids in gangs. Now, his first novel, Fertig, was rejected by 27 publishers and it was only published after the success of The Warriors. And he had a broad range. I was listening to an interview where, this was a 1979 or 1980, where he was working on a new book about a future in which all communication is virtual. He didn’t use the word “virtual,” but he said through telecommunications and kind of run by increasingly sentient algorithms. So I thought that was kind of interesting. And Yorick died at age 87 in 2013, probably still baffled by the success of the film.
JAY [00:02:33] Yeah.
PHIL [00:02:33] But before we discuss the book, I’m just going to give a quick little summary of it. So basically, the story is about street gangs in New York, these very stylized street gangs. Even, even in the the book, they’re quite stylized. And after a big meeting of all the gangs in the city goes wrong in the Bronx, the Warriors have to make it back to Coney Island, which is their home turf. And it’s the Fourth of July. So the streets are full of people all night long. Yurick based the plot of the book on the Anabasis by Xenephon, which was written, I think, around 370 B.C. And you know, it’s the story of a group of Athenian mercenaries who get stuck in Persia and need to fight their way home through enemy territory until they arrive in safety at the Black Sea, much like the Warriors arrive in safety at the at the ocean once they get to Coney Island. So, you know, I know we had talked about doing a couple of a couple of episodes that had film adaptations of the books, and why did you pick the Warriors? Why was this your choice?
JAY [00:03:49] Well, we’re both huge fans of the movie. And I know that we we subjected — that’s a strong word — maybe exposed Tonya and Sara to the, to the quality and entertainment value of The Warriors, the movie. I think they’re still just so impressed by it that they still haven’t thanked us for that opportunity. However, great movie. I think anyone who’s seen it really enjoys it. Can’t remember how I found out there was a book that was the actual basis for the movie. So, as soon as I knew that, I knew that this is something I really wanted to dive into and see how much it compared. We’ll get into this as we kind of do the, do the review. But it’s, it’s interesting, though, how there are some similarities. Colonial Lords are in the book, obviously are the Orphans, which I thought was hilarious.
PHIL [00:04:50] I’m going to disagree with you.
JAY [00:04:52] Really.
PHIL [00:04:52] Yes.
JAY [00:04:55] OK.
PHIL [00:04:55] So I thought if we’re looking for analogues of the gangs, I thought the Colonial Lords too. But then they run into the Borinquen Blazers, and the Borinquen Blazers have the young woman who is taunting the leader and telling him he’s chicken. And also they talk about how “it couldn’t have been that big a meeting if we didn’t know about it.” And they also produce a press clipping.
JAY [00:05:20] Oh they’re the ones. Yeah. OK then. Yeah you’re right. I think Colonial Lords are earlier on. Yeah. They may have just conflated them for the movie so, uh, and then of course Ismael is his name. He is Cyrus.
PHIL [00:05:36] Right.
JAY [00:05:36] And that was fairly close to the movie in terms of this depiction of a charismatic leader bringing the gangs together.
PHIL [00:05:47] But what I found funny is that, is that Yurick, he appreciated that the name was Cyrus. He said someone had read their their Xenephon because Cyrus is the, the, the, the leader in the…
JAY [00:06:01] The Persian leader.
PHIL [00:06:02] Yeah.
JAY [00:06:03] Isn’t he?
PHIL [00:06:03] The Greek, the Greek leader who dies and then leaves them.
JAY [00:06:06] Oh, he’s the Greek one.
PHIL [00:06:07] Yeah. Yeah. So that’s why they’re leaderless. But but also that Yurick was upset that you know, that the speech in the book gets into all the like social underpinnings of why kids join gangs. And you don’t get any of that in the film. And I thought that’s not what people are looking for in the film, so.
JAY [00:06:26] Well. we’ll speak to that. So what do you think the appeal of the movie The Warriors is in that way? It’s really just one long chase sequence.
PHIL [00:06:38] It’s funny because to go back to Yurick, you know, I mean, we had the same edition and in the essay he writes at the end of the book, he says that he can’t imagine wanting to watch a film five times. And yet there are people who have watched The Warriors over and over again. And I think I think there’s a certain, there’s a timelessness to it. I think it says at the start, you know, “in the near future” or something. So it’s not trying to be realistic. It’s not trying to be of a particular time. So it, so that gives it a kind of timeless quality. The opening, I think, is a near perfect film opening just with all, you know, those gangs converging.
JAY [00:07:24] Yeah, absolutely. And the shots with the subway.
PHIL [00:07:27] Yes.
JAY [00:07:27] Going down the tunnels, yeah.
PHIL [00:07:28] And the, and the music. That kind of pulsing music.
JAY [00:07:31] Yeah.
PHIL [00:07:31] And, you know, and it’s it’s, it’s goofy and yet somehow manages to be cool and I guess also just has this heroic quality to it, even even if it’s amped up to a kind of absurd level. I think, you know, I think that would probably be the ongoing, that’s what I see is the ongoing appeal of it. What do you think?
JAY [00:07:54] I I agree that and it’s super rewatchable, and possibly because there’s great sequences in it. There’s scenes that you look forward to seeing. Um, there’s the penetrating. “Can you dig it?” Cyrus’s speech. I love the battle with the punks in the subway washroom. And then of course, the finale on the beach with the Rogues and the non-ominous Baseball Furies. There’s great there’s great charm, the movie has charm, there’s style in the movie, the elaborate costumes and even the late night DJ calling out a play-by-play of who’s where and who’s up to what.
PHIL [00:08:35] Yeah, she was fantastic. And she had the most successful acting career of the lot of them.
JAY [00:08:40] Well, I mean, we’ll digress for two seconds. Do you know, do you remember Fox?
PHIL [00:08:45] Yes.
JAY [00:08:45] In the movie.
PHIL [00:08:46] Yeah.
JAY [00:08:46] So he sort of gets fired. He gets fired halfway through the film. And in fact, if you look, he’s, his character gets thrown into the, into the oncoming subway train and they actually used a body double to do that. That’s how they got rid of him in the film because he was just so terrible. But I ended up seeing on YouTube, this was the reunion, the you know, the, the the last ride back to Coney Island, where they all, you know, 40 years later are all getting on the subway. And he’s there. They actually got an interview with him and he just completely apologizes and says, yeah, I was an idiot and I really regret it.
PHIL [00:09:28] I mean, I think it is a timeless story in a lot of ways. And one of the things that, that Yurick talked about is that people people often talk about it as though he was trying to show that, you know, kids today, they’re just like people in the past, right? But he said actually his point was kind of the opposite, that these kind of heroes from, you know, Greek history and so on, that they were just kids. They were often frightened kids and that, you know, the Athenians got rid of their juvenile delinquents by hiring them out as mercenaries. And so I thought that was kind of interesting and that, you know, if that comes across in the film, that gives, that that I think helps give it that kind of timeless quality.
JAY [00:10:17] Yeah. Fair, fair.
PHIL [00:10:19] I also got to.
JAY [00:10:19] To get back..
PHIL [00:10:20] I also got to improve…
JAY [00:10:21] Yeah…
PHIL [00:10:21] …my vocabulary, looking up the names of the different gangs in the book, like learning what a Janissary is and a Spahi and a Seraph.
JAY [00:10:33] I realize, those are, those are the names of the gangs, are they?
PHIL [00:10:36] Yeah, there’s the Morningside Sporting Seraphs and the Golden Janissaries.
JAY [00:10:42] Oh, that’s right, yeah, I do remember the Janissaries, though, from endless computer games. Let’s let’s get back to the book, shall we, just for for the novel itself. Because I’ll tell you Phil, about midway through, I started to regret actually picking the book because it takes a very different turn. It’s depicting the Dominators, which is the, which is the Warriors, and that’s their name. In the actual book, they transition from a bunch of self-conscious teenagers to an extremely violent gang. There is a point in the book where all of a sudden they stab an innocent bystander to death and then attack the woman who’s with them. So how did you feel reading the book when you came across that?
PHIL [00:11:33] It was really, really, really hard to read. I think, you know, the film has a kind of romanticism to it and you can maintain that romanticism because they don’t actually do anything truly awful. Right? Like, they’re defending themselves. They’re trying to get home. They’ve been falsely accused. They’re not the aggressors.
JAY [00:11:56] It was just so sudden. I’m reading this book thinking here are the Warriors, you know, that I, that I know and love. And then all of a sudden the book flips over to a very dark side. It was like reading an Archie Andrews comic and then all of a sudden seeing him beat Jughead to death. That, that’s kind of.. You know, having said all that, though, did you notice that a number of passages and dialogue in the book were lifted for the movie?
PHIL [00:12:28] So, yeah. Yeah, For all of Yurick’s complaining, I found that the movie was in many ways shockingly close to the book.
JAY [00:12:39] Yeah, it’s almost like, you know, Yurick complained that it wasn’t as violent as it should have been, I guess. And it’s interesting because. He tells a story that at the 11th hour, there was there was already a — the rights had been, the rights had almost been sold, and that at the 11th hour, another film producer, I guess, who was Walter Hill, came in and bid, well, he was the director. But the producer for that film, the ultimate film, came in and outbid another filmmaker at the 11th hour. And Yurick kind of suggests that if that original bidder had won the rights, then it would have more closely followed the book. Like, how do you think that film would have turned out?
PHIL [00:13:29] I don’t know. I mean, I think there are certain structural things in the book that you would have to change. So, for instance, there’s no real antagonist, right? In the book, they are trying to get home and the truce is now presumably off because Ismael has been killed. And so, but there’s, but but you don’t have the sense that they are hunted specifically, right? They’re just one gang trying to get home on this Fourth of July night among all of these other gangs. So you really do need some kind of antagonist and some kind of higher stakes for a film. Right? So I think that, you know, that makes a lot of a lot of sense that they would be falsely accused of the murder and now they’ve got to fight their way back through every gang and they’re not even aware of it at the start. And and I mean, honestly, I don’t know, I have I have seen films that are adapted from books that are wildly different. This one in a lot of ways is very close. And even in areas that, you know, that don’t translate over, there’s some nod to them in the book. So, for instance, there’s a scene where they all get on the train, the gang, the Dominators, and it’s full of people and they can’t figure out why it’s so full of people in the middle of the night. It’s a scene that goes like on and on and on. And they realize they’re all coming back from the track, right? They’re horse-racing aficionados. And there is — so, we don’t have anything like that in the film. But there is a scene in the subway station where you do get a good long look at a poster that’s advertizing betting on the horses.
JAY [00:15:18] Oh, I didn’t realise that. That’s because you saw this film this morning.
PHIL [00:15:20] There’s a scene I’d like to talk about closer to the end where Hinton is is fighting the arcade sheriff. And even though that scene is not in the book, sorry, even though that scene is not in the film, the sheriff is! Swan is standing right next to the sheriff for a good long time. And we got a really clear image of him.
JAY [00:15:41] So, yeah, absolutely. I mean, they, I think they took the best elements of the book and created something that surpassed it in entertainment value. I mean, it would have been dark. He would have, he didn’t understand, Yurick didn’t understand how violent his book was. That’s my sense. He didn’t understand. He thought, well, this is realistic and this is the way life really is, not understanding, I think, in the sense that moviegoers don’t necessarily want to see that. But you know, the similarities, though, in the sense of the — where they pay tribute, where they’ve actually lifted dialogue and sequences, I thought was really impressive. You mentioned that, you mentioned the preface, and I had that same thing in my, I had the same preface in my edition and Sol Yurick, he talks about his background in existentialism, where he studied it, and the writer of, Camus — Have you read L’étranger? The Stranger?
PHIL [00:16:50] Many, many, many years ago.
JAY [00:16:53] Yeah, it reminded me a lot.. in that book in Camus’ book, it’s about someone who shoots and kills a complete stranger on the beach, and it’s cloaked in, it’s emotionless writing, its short terse sentences. And it’s this sense of — there’s really no connection with an indifferent universe. Do you think that’s what Yurick was going for in his book?
PHIL [00:17:26] I don’t know. I mean, he tends, I found his writing very operatic, right? There, there are long sequences like, if you notice when Ismael is speaking, none of it is actually in dialogue. We don’t hear what Ismael says. It’s “he talked about this. He said that.” I found there was kind of a, like I say, a kind of overblown operatic quality to a lot of the writing. But at the same time, you’re right, definitely a lack of a lack of affect to it. I do, I don’t know if this fits in here or not, but one thing that actually made me laugh in the book is that the gangs all have social workers, right? And I did love the fact that before the Dominators start, you know, trying to make their way back to Coney Island, that they call their social worker and ask him to drive them home first.
JAY [00:18:23] Oh, I know. I know. And then there’s the social worker who’s talking to Ismael.
PHIL [00:18:27] Right. He’s hoping he’ll go to university.
JAY [00:18:30] Yeah. And he’s just enamoured with this Ismael. And he, and he basically listens to everything he says. And he waits patiently till he can gain an audience with this kid. And it’s just the yeah. The adults are basically all depicted as, and I think maybe Yurick was going for that. It was supposed to be told from the perspective…
PHIL [00:18:49] I mean, because I had noticed this thing with the youth workers, I did pick up one line in the film that I don’t think I’d noticed before, which was when the, when they’re on the Orphans’ territory there, and the Orphans are talking about, you know, the Orphans’ leader is talking about what a big-time kind of badass he is, and, and one of the Warriors, Fox, he says something like, “Oh yeah, our youth worker talks about you all the time.”
JAY [00:19:25] Yeah, that’s right,
PHIL [00:19:26] Yeah, and buddy from the Orphans says, well, we don’t have one.
JAY [00:19:31] I know that’s the, there, yeah… You know, are there any scenes in the book — there’s one I really, really did not like. Again, this is one where they’re fighting over a candy bar and it goes on for page after page. I don’t know if you remember that in the book…
PHIL [00:19:47] Oh yeah…
JAY [00:19:47] But, and I don’t know what they’re going for, because it was, it was this contradiction where they’re acting like kids. I guess that was the point. At the end of the day, they’re still just children, even though they’re violent and depraved. So he’s going for some type of juxtaposition. Were there any scenes that you liked in the book?
PHIL [00:20:11] Oh, um, well. Yeah, I mean, I have to say, I was, when I started the book, I was really surprised because I knew nothing about Yurick and I expected that it was just going to be like schlock. I really expected like a total schlock kind of novel. And so I was surprised that that isn’t what we got. I think, you know, maybe the final scene. And in the book and, and maybe which — I guess I’ll talk about what it is, but the two scenes near the end with Hinton. So there’s, he’s become separated from the rest of them. He’s the artist. He does have a little bit of that kind of, you know, insider/outsider thing, and the film ends with the Warriors on the beach. They’re home. They’re safe. The Rogues who have, you know, wrongly accused them of the murder have been, have been kind of defeated by the Warriors and then the Gramercy Riffs show up to finish them off and the film ends on the beach. But in the book, you know, they get to, they get to the beach and then Hinton goes to his apartment, which he calls the prison. And remember, he’s like, you know, 15 or something. I think he’s 15. Yeah. Because it says he’s lived 20 different places, which is five more places than a number of years he’s been alive. And his mom and her boyfriend are having sex when he walks in, his sister and and half brother are asleep, naked in bed, which was a scene that Yurick said his editor wanted him to cut because it implied incest. And he said, you know, there was no incest. They were just asleep. The baby is is crying and Hinton gets an old French fry and sticks it in his mouth. It kind of, I like that scene because even if you were to romanticize them, it kind of undercuts the whole thing. Like he’s this kid who lives this miserable, awful life. Like, no, no wonder he is drawn to this gang. Right?
JAY [00:22:25] I don’t know. The entire book is is, to me was something where I never really got to know the characters, didn’t really care about them in the same way that I would have… In the movie, you really root for them. You really want them to get home. In the book, I just was like, well, what’s going to happen next? And that’s kind of the end of it.
PHIL [00:22:47] Well, they’re not really drawn as individual characters, right? Like, it took a long time for me to kind of differentiate them while I was reading it.
JAY [00:22:56] Well, there’s, I don’t know if I’d agree with that. I mean, there was, they characterize them fairly well as in any kind of novel. But, and after awhile, it became apparent that the book was primarily about Hinton as the main character. It’s just — part of it was the writing style. So it’s this existentialist writing style where it’s very non-descriptive, very detached writing, detached narrative, which doesn’t help really. And then it, it kind of redeemed itself with the unhappy ending at the end, because it did kind of wrap it up nicely, I guess. Definitely not something I would reread, though. But, you know, we’ve talked about the book a lot. The movie itself, though, let’s indulge ourselves a little bit. What were your top scenes that you really loved in that movie?
PHIL [00:23:52] I would say I agree with, with Yurick that the opening is is nearly perfect, although I always laugh at the scene where the guy is feeding the tokens into the, into the, you know, the turnstile.
JAY [00:24:07] He’s the treasurer.
PHIL [00:24:07] Yeah. Although in the book they do have, they do seem very concerned with — that they get the right change and they’re always paying when they get on the subway, right? But other than that. So I would say the scene, it’s a very short scene, the one on the train where the prom kids get on. And they just, and they sit opposite Swan and Mercy, who have just been through a fight, they’re filthy. You got a shot of her feet, which are like black and the prom kids are laughing and they’ve obviously, like they’ve been out for a night on the town and then they notice the others sitting across — and you don’t get the sense they’re scared of them. But it’s just like this meeting of these, these two, these groups of people are inhabiting the same space but come from completely different worlds. And what makes that scene — the nice touch in it — is when Mercy goes to straighten her hair and Swan pulls her hand down as if to say, you know, you have nothing to apologize for.
JAY [00:25:10] Yeah, I mean, he gets the flowers for her afterwards, the corsage, he picks it up off the floor and kind of recycles it for her, right.
PHIL [00:25:20] Under the guise that “I hate to see anything go to waste,” because he can’t bring himself to say he actually cares about her.
JAY [00:25:26] I know. One of my favourite scenes is with the Punks. And it’s, it’s a great build up, dramatic tension. So it starts off with almost like this eerie silence. Remember, the Punk is coasting silently on his roller skates
PHIL [00:25:43] Yes, I love how they look like farmers on roller skates, but they’re called the Punks.
JAY [00:25:48] They yeah, they’re all wearing the overalls. That’s great. And then, and then all of a sudden it’s quiet and then it just builds up into this tension. And then that fight scene when they’re in the, in the washroom, it’s beautifully filmed and just exciting to watch.
PHIL [00:26:04] It is the best fight scene for sure. And it, and it avoids that, you know. It avoids that cliche of, you know, you’ve got a bunch of people standing around while one person is attacked one at a time.
JAY [00:26:20] Yeah, no, it’s it’s it’s great. How about Cyrus’s speech, though? That has to be the all time — that is the best scene for me.
FILM CLIP: [00:26:28] “Can you dig it? Can you dig it” Can you dig it?”
PHIL [00:26:35] I noticed this time — I’d never really paid attention to the gangs in the audience watching that scene before, so I did kind of notice how we do see, I think all of the ones from the opening montage, we can pick them out in the crowd, you know, the, even the ones who will never turn up again, like the Electric eliminators.
JAY [00:26:54] Yeah. Yeah. I just like the message like and the way — he’s such a charismatic, it’s just a powerful delivery. You know, he talks about “your turf, your little tiny bit of turf.” He’s just so powerful. “Can you dig it?”
PHIL [00:27:13] You can see why that “can you dig it” has been sampled a few times in songs.
JAY [00:27:18] Oh, it’s great. It’s great. So. favourite gangs other than obviously the Warriors in the movie. So we’ll just focus on that. And what do you think their specific initiation requirements might include?
PHIL [00:27:32] What about you? Do you want to go first, what are yours?
JAY [00:27:35] Well, all the gangs, all the gangs were very diverse. I mean, and in terms of initiation requirements, I mean, you remember the Turnbull ACs? I mean, maybe you have to, to get into that gang, demonstrate that you can balance on the sides of a fast-moving vehicle or if you want to get into the…
PHIL [00:27:54] They can’t even catch up to the Warriors on foot!
JAY [00:27:56] I know. And banging on the side of the bus. That’s really going to hurry it up as well with your baseball bats. Orphans: Always have to prove that you can kind of keep up with clippings of your exploits. I would say, though, my favourite thing, and I wish they’d been in something, was the High Hats. Those are the mimes. And I’ve got to believe that, you know, as part of initiation, first, you’re put into a glass box. You need to make your way out of that.
PHIL [00:28:31] Have you ever played the video game?
JAY [00:28:34] No, you know, I keep hearing good things about it.
PHIL [00:28:36] You get more of the High Hats in the video game.
JAY [00:28:39] Oh, I can’t… But they would be great. I mean, they’re, they’re silent, but they look like they’d be so much deadlier also. They’re one of the most committed gangs. So think about this. I know they they look ridiculous. Are they’re wearing matching red tops, black suspenders, face paint, but literally the most committed gang because this debate comes up a couple of times during the movie. Shall we take our colours off? Should we, meaning should we take our vest off so we can go in as civilians? These guys, these mimes can’t take anything off! They’re committed. They’re — literally, like there’s no mistaking, you know, those face paint colours don’t run.
PHIL [00:29:20] Well, you know, there’s a lot in the book about this. Should we remove our insignia? Right? And the insignia is like, it looks like a Mercedes hood ornament and they wear it attached to their hats. And I thought this was very odd because, you know, there’s conflict in the gang over whether to remove the insignia or not. The woman, the character who’s Mercy in the film, where she asks for one of their jackets, in the book, she asks for, you know, one of their pins, the idea being that, like, if they took off the pin it, it would be safer because they wouldn’t be identifiable as a gang. And yet they’re all wearing identical clothing. These jackets described as monkey jackets, which if you look up what they look like, like, you know, nobody is going to be like, oh, here’s half a dozen guys wearing this outlandish costume. But we don’t recognise that they’re a gang unless they put that pin in their hats.
JAY [00:30:11] Mm. Yeah.
PHIL [00:30:13] And that was one of the things that surprised me in the book as well, was that I think that, I mean they didn’t have anything as over-the-top as the styles of the the gangs in the film, but they did have particular and unusual looks. Like, I forget which, which one it is, who — where they wear ice cream pants. After, after like the fourth mention of ice cream pants or something I went online to look up what ice cream pants were and one of the top results was on Reddit, someone saying, I’m reading the Warriors. Can anyone tell me what ice cream pants are?
JAY [00:30:49] So, yeah, that’s I mean, okay, you’re not you’re not answering the question, though. All right. So what’s your favourite gang?
PHIL [00:30:55] Well, obviously, for me, I would say the Baseball Furies, even though they look like they’re about 45.
JAY [00:31:03] Also, they’re terrible fighters. I just got to throw that out. They need spring training.
PHIL [00:31:08] I would say their initiation is probably like sneaking down from the bleachers into the the good seats at Yankee Stadium.
JAY [00:31:14] Right.
PHIL [00:31:16] And you’ve got to love the Gramercy Riffs. Like, they’re, they’re like the coolest for sure.
JAY [00:31:22] Well, they can elbow people to death. How does it even work? Beginning of the film! Who’s the, who’s the leader again? I’ve already forgotten.
PHIL [00:31:33] Cyrus is is their leader. He gets killed.
JAY [00:31:35] No, but they kill one of the Warriors.
PHIL [00:31:37] Oh, Cleon.
JAY [00:31:37] They elbow Cleon to death! That, that’s how he meets his end.
PHIL [00:31:42] Well, they do start kicking him also. I like the Riffs because they have their style, they have poise, they have discipline. And I don’t know, maybe their initiation is you got to walk through a subway tunnel wearing sunglasses.
JAY [00:31:56] That’s right. Yeah, the sunglasses are the coolest. And a kimono. And see, if you, if you make it out alive you’re in. All right.
PHIL [00:32:06] I thought it was interesting.
JAY [00:32:07] Yeah?
PHIL [00:32:07] That Yurick said he actually walked through the tunnel himself as as research from 96th Street to 110th and…
JAY [00:32:17] Yeah, he captures that in the book, agreed. Like, it’s pretty detailed passage.
PHIL [00:32:21] Yeah. And how you lose all sense of perspective, like, how long have I been here, is the train about to come, you know?
JAY [00:32:30] Yeah, yeah. No, he he definitely did a lot of research. That’s why I just… Well, let’s. let’s jump to that and kind of, let’s maybe rate and review. So scale of one to five where awarding a five means you frequently quote Cyrus’s speech at business meetings and weddings. And one, though, means you wish the Warriors had just stayed home that night, then you would never have been subjected to this experience.
PHIL [00:33:04] I’m tempted to take a leaf out of your book with Hard Core Logo and give a combined rating, you know what I was thinking coming into this, that I would rate the book a three. But having discussed it with you, I would go down to a two and a half. I think maybe the the the idea, the execution doesn’t live up to its potential, you know. I would say if you if you watch the film, you don’t need to read the book, but if you read the book, you should also watch the film.
JAY [00:33:40] Yeah, agreed, but then that’s the quandary, would you recommend someone read the book if they haven’t?
PHIL [00:33:46] It would depend on who it was. I could really, I could really imagine, you know, not liking this book. I wish you could excise the the rape scenes. I think if you could do that, it would make it a much better book. Even like the murder is not as disturbing.
JAY [00:34:04] Yeah. No, it’s, it’s one of those books where is it a true depiction of life as a gang member in the 50s, then I guess it could be read on that basis. But I don’t really feel like it necessarily even is, because I think he’s embellished and put thoughts in people’s heads that don’t actually exist. I know what you’re… sorry I cut you off. What’s your score then? What do you think?
PHIL [00:34:33] Well, I think I would stick with a, I would stick with a two and a half,.
JAY [00:34:36] OK. And how about the movie?
PHIL [00:34:41] Well, it’s hard to say. I mean, I don’t know what you would say objectively, but, you know, given the number of times I’ve seen it, I would probably have to give it a five.
JAY [00:34:49] Yes! Yes! Of course it’s a five! Five out of four or five out of five. It is, it’s an exceptional movie and it’s so rewatchable and so fun. The book, I was going to give it a two and a half out of five. Um, it just really kind of just, the book just was like in existentialist parlance, it just existed. Um, I mean, I could have given a two to five, but, you know, I don’t think that movie ever would have come into being without the book. And so it owes a debt of gratitude to the book. So that’s why I jacked it up to two and a half out of five. So what do we have coming up?
PHIL [00:35:35] Cultural whiplash? A huge change of pace. We have a non-fiction book called The Library Book written by Susan Orlean. Susan Orlean is best known for her incredible book, The Orchid Thief, which I thought of suggesting to you. But I have my own reasons for picking The Library Book.
JAY [00:35:54] I think that’s it for the show. All right, we’ll see you next time.
PHIL [00:35:58] See you next time.
07] See you next time.