Hey! Someone wrote a companion piece to my "Alamo Sucks Now" tirade

I very rarely remember which social media interactions wind up in following someone, or how conversations get started that lead to what would have - in the golden age of blogging - led to blog rings.  (Remember those?  They were neat.)

Anyway, in the past few months I came upon Library DVD Love, and it's been a Substack I get in my email box, and I give it a read.  

I'm at the age where I'm mostly just *curious* about what people are saying if they're a reasonable person talking on a topic I care about, be it movies, comics or baseball.  And that's because most conversation about any topic on the internet feels like it starts at an 11 and goes up from there.  Or, if the writer is going for a drier approach it's so in pedantic or in the weeds, it becomes homework to get through.  

Library DVD Love is that nice hit up the third baseline, just on the right side of the chalk.  Neither foul nor a pop fly.  A straight shot just past the baseman.  Maybe I don't always know what the hell this blogger is always talking about (I do not see *that* many movies), or maybe I don't agree, but in der clerb, we all fam.  

Anyhoo, I guess he's been reading this site, because he did post about my rant on the change in priorities at Alamo Drafthouse under new CEO/ shit-weasal Michael Kustermann.  

Always wild to realized actual humans are reading your writing.

Sunday post: Alamo Drafthouse and phones in theaters by twinsbrewer

Annoying phones in theaters, and a chain that used to care about it.

Read on Substack

By the way, no, I haven't been back.   It also seems that the Alamo is now basically selling frozen food?  

It sounds like Alamo is actively working to dismantle the culture and make it a place for casuals while still charging premium prices for an "Alamo experience".  Which, thanks, no.

Neo-Noir Watch: Gloria (1980)

Watched:  04/19/2026

Format:  Video on Demand/ YouTube

Viewing:  First

Director:  John Cassavetes

For some reason the algorithm has been asking me to watch this movie for years.  

I'm not really sure why the algo does this, but my YouTube TV will find a movie that it decides it wants to recommend, and then the movie will follow me around.  First among these has been Gloria (1980), and because I don't think I've ever seen Gena Rowlands be anything less than great and because Cassavetes' movies are, at minimum, interesting, I wanted to check it out eventually.  So, I guess, thanks, data?

On paper, the movie is deceptively simple.  An accountant for the mob (Buck Henry) has been skimming (and maybe doing other things) and is found out.   Knowing the enforcers are coming, he's trying to leave, but everyone in his family of five is scared and doesn't know what to do - his wife, their two kids and his mother-in-law.  All are resorting to their comfort and security measures instead of just getting the f out.

When neighbor Gloria (Gena Rowlands) comes by to return the sugar she borrowed in the middle of all this, they make her take the boy - aged 6 or 7 - back to her apartment.  Almost immediately, the mob shows up and kills the rest of the family.  Gloria tries to flee the scene with the kid, but the press is outside and snaps her picture with the son.  

Con Watch: The Sting (1973)

Watched:  04/18/2026

Format:  DVD from the Library

Viewing:  Second

Director:  George Roy Hill

The Sting (1973) reunites the Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid team of Robert Redford, Paul Newman and director George Roy Hill for a 1930's period piece film about a small-time grifter who - when a grift leads to seeing the mob kill a friend - teams up with Paul Newman's veteran conman in order to pull one over on a mob boss played by Robert Shaw.

It's a clockwork script that has a steel-trap ending that's tough to beat.  The closest I can point to in structure from movies I was around for is probably the 2001 remake of Ocean's 11.  

There's not a ton of character building in the movie, the runtime spent on the execution of the long con - we don't even see the planning, just the Rube Goldberg plan in motion.  And that's plenty.  Redford gets the most screentime and characterization, but even that isn't exactly a script that makes you wonder how his character grew and changed.  What we see of who he really is feels a little thin, but that's not really the point of the film.  But Redford's charm and Newman's charisma can pretty much carry anything.