Welcome to Joshuaonline

Hello and Welcome to Joshuaonline , we like to look at the TV and Media here it's not updated everyday but we try have a few posts each month, hope you enjoy and thanks for visiting



NETWORK TV Fall 2025

It's that time of year again! The networks are releasing their fall line ups


Fall Line up: FOX NBC CBS ABC The CW

Thursday, June 19, 2025

Tales of the Unexpected: The Sound Machine (Plants feel Pain)

The Flashback    Tales of the Unexpected  Joshuaonline UK 



        Tales of the Unexpected was a British series from Anglia Television that ran from 1979 to 1988. The series was created by Roald Dahl, yes the one who made "Matilda" amongst other stories.  He brings his twistedness to this series which is "Twilight Zone" like. Episodes are different stories with different flavors and stories, with usually twist endings, because Unexpected. 

            I have decided to write about an episode of this show. So from Season 4, episode 7, it's "The Sound Machine". 


         Plants are have an interesting designation. They are alive but unlike animals and people they aren't moving, active and give off the sense of being alive in the same way.  Their being alive but unable to kind of do anything about it does make a little cognitive dissonance to us , the people.  A kid picks a dandelion out of the ground to blow the seeds around, the plant has done its mission of repopulating the Earth, but also it's slowly dying , and was probably ripped out from its roots. If that plant was to scream out lout in painful agony there'd be a different thought  about such an action. Cutting grass then hearing the sound of hundreds of blades of grass crying out in pain would be horrific.  

             In theory, plants don't feel that kind of pain, at least we hope so. This episode decides to go with a question of what if we could?    The story takes place in summer 1935, as the intro says. Why summer 1935? I don't know. There's a man, a botanist, named Mr. Klausner who is working on a machine.   We're introduced to Dr. Scott, who was talking to a neighbor --this is British Show , uh Neighour, named Mrs. Saunders. She seems to be also be talking a lot about him.  




        The Doctor decides to go see Mr. Klausner to see if he's alright and the man is focused on his machine. He's interested in the machine as it made him curious. Klasuner says he is looking for sounds that we can't normally here.  He points to a spider and says he wonders what noise the spider actually makes.  He wants to find sounds beyond our comprehension.(He wants to find 99.5 ROCK FM the station that rocks beyond human thought)  
I want to play EDM 

                The doctor leaves and he goes outside to see if his machine will pick up something. He hears a loud screaming sound and sees his neighbour cutting some roses and asks her like a crazed man to cut another rose. The screaming sound comes at the same time she cuts one. He tells her that he heard roses screeching every time she cut one.  He goes and finds a small flower to pluck and it screams.  This development has disturbed him deeply.  He decides to take his machine to find out if it's just flowers and maybe "stronger" plants are immune. 

            He goes to the graveyard to find some trees (as one does) and then grabs an ax to out of context scare Mrs. Saunders as he goes back.   He hits the tree with the ax and he hears a moaning scream. He says he's sorry to the tree.  He decides to call the doctor (because this episode has a limited cast) and might not have been the best decision for him.  

I'm not a plant killer! 



              Dr. Scott shows up and the man asks him to put on the headphones then the man hurts the tree again.  A branch falls from the tree as if it's mad.   The doctor denies that he heard a sound, but thinking about the branch. It's interesting to see his reaction as he pretty much did hear it but doesn't want to admit it.  Klausner asks him help the tree's "wound" and then asks for iodine to help the cut.  

         What is interesting here is that the man has heard a living thing in pain and wants it to be treated as one does if another person, or an an animal had been injured. He apologized earlier  to the tree, the first time, he tells the tree that the iodine will sting but it's there to help.  Dr. Scott is taking this not in a mean way but he thinks that this isn't healthy for the man. 


               Dr. Scott has called the asylum and is waiting there with man who doesn't know he has.  Klausner wonders what plants call pain.  He wonders what the sounds of wheat being cut sound like. The doctor goes back to the sound machine and the tree from earlier and touches it and tells the tree it's alright.  Then it ends.
I'm sorry tree, please don't tell the others 



             The idea of someone being able to hear the pain of plants and now wondering with that info the awfulness of that is a concept that is horrifying.  We know that there are animals killed for the purpose of being food, but even there there's humane rules and steps that have been put in place as humans have decided to be more civil to other living things.  This man was driven to distress, if we knew that every time we walked on grass or giving flowers as a gift meant plants were screaming in utter agony it would probably make us go mad. Good thing this episode didn't explore bugs and spiders.   It explores the horror from our point of view of being empathic to living things. 

            The doctor did hear the noise but didn't want to tell the man as probably a way to a) not think of it himself,  and b) to have the man calm down. But later he goes back to the tree and he tells the tree it's alright is showing that he also has the same feelings. He was concerned about the man as he did seem to really be losing his composure. Still feels kind of mean, though. 

            The episode does feel open to interruption as well , you can take it literally and the concept works there. It also could be like the idea of the horrors of our world around us, but we can't hear them. That there are people out there who are being inflicted in pain and we just can't hear them or quick to refuse it. There's probably a even a big pro-nature be kind to our greenery part of the idea too. 

              It's a very basic episode, small cast, and very intimate in design.  It's horror is more existential than a killer or a force, so it is kind of slow and dry.  It's one of the episodes I think of from this show when recalling it, it's an episode that stuck in my mind, and only few of them have.  If you are interested in the whole show, it's not a whole sample of the show as each episode is different.   I liked this episode and think it's pretty strong and makes one think. 

         That's it for now, tune in next time when we tell you that every bug you've killed is noted by the other bugs and they are planning something.   

Thursday, June 12, 2025

The Jungle Book : 2016 Edition

Disney 





             The strangest thing I find about Disney doing remakes of their animated films, but in live-action is that it seems more unnecessary in a different way. Many of the stories Disney uses aren't their own. They add their own things to them, but they didn't overtly create them.  That's actually what public domain's amazing existence is for. Disney added their own touches to these stories to make them memorable.  So to me, Disney can , and actually in the case of "The Jungle Book"  make a second/third etc. movie based off a public domain story not having to tie into their original animated movie.  I think that would have softened the blow on some of the reactions to some of the remakes, they shouldn't have been remakes.  

Thursday, June 05, 2025

A Good Disney Remake: Pete's Dragon (2016)

Disney  

    

        Sadly, this is an evergreen part of the post, though I wish it wasn't The Disney remake. Specifically, Disney has taken an animated movie and decided to remake it in live-action form and whatever 2019 The Lion King was.

         I could write about how a remake was bad, like totally bad, but that probably has been done and also be like beating a dead goat. (what?)  I'd like this blog to do things that stand out somewhat, just because. This time, I'm making the case for a good Disney remake. Funny enough, it's not a remake of an animated film turned live-action. It's a remake of a live-action/ animation hybrid into live action/animation hybrid. (Though, I'm here for a Disney live-action turned into animation remake)  

         Pete's Dragon is a 1977 Disney movie that seemed to take a long time for Disney to even think about putting together in concept in the first place.  It's not a bad film either, that's also me having a soft spot for 1970's Disney live-action movies in general. (Like Freaky Friday) This film is pretty fun and a charming musical. It also has Helen Reddy so yes, The original movie did make money, but it didn't seem to be big in the Disney canon. It is kind of a surprise they wanted to remake it, but they did. 

Pete's Dragon 1977 /Copyright Disney 



         In 2013, Disney announced they were going remake this movie. There was going to be some differences to the original film. One thing, it wasn't going to be a musical - Disney, minus Disney Channel, wasn't into the whole musical thing, and we really don't get musicals in theatrical movies anymore. (Though, yes, Disney did take High School Musical and put a film version in theaters with the third film) This is kind of a remake in the sense that the title was taken and there's a boy named Pete and there is a dragon, but all the rest was going to different , making a new story.  That's interesting.  

       The movie  is written by David Lowery and Toby Halbrooks. Lowery also directed. The duo worked on indie films. Sometimes even together. Funny enough, Lowery had been asked to work on remakes before, but turned them down, but something made him want to jump at  the chance. Disney seemed to want make a remake but in mostly name only. The movie changes from it's original, beyond not being a musical, by having the movie not take place pre-depression era or in New England. Instead, it's the Pacific Northwest and maybe the 70's or 80's but leaving space to not feel hooked to a time.  There still would be Pete and a dragon (duh).   (Source

           To note on that, I'm big remake person, in general. There can be ways or something that can hook me into one, but that's something that has to work for me. The concept of it being something different from the original is something interesting. That also makes it hard because that can also be something that can be a turn off , so even that depends. Though, I do have to note that doesn't take away the original existence - unless they somehow wipe it out. (odd statement) 

         Pete's Dragon, the remake, came out in 2016.  Which is also interesting that's the same year The Jungle Book remake came out.  Disney was going for some theme. That one came out first, just like how Jungle Book came out before Pete's Dragon. (Time is a  cube)  I will not be doing any comparisons to the 1977 film  because that'd be unnecessary, but I will remark on surface similarities- like having a boy named Pete. (duh) 

           The movie starts and you can already tell, something bad is going to happen. It's parents in a station wagon with their young boy, Pete, and yeah oh no no. (Might as well just stick a sign on the screen the yelling THIS IS GOING TO NOT GO WELL, THERE WILL BE DEATH)  Pete, who is 5, in this starter is learning to read and is reading a book about a puppy named Elliot. (I'm going  to mention that someone on Wikipedia thinks the movie starts in 1977, which would be a good touch and a fun Easter egg)  Remember that. 

What a wonderful day to be alive, I hope nothing makes us not alive soon/ Copyright Disney 



            Having writers who worked in indie films before this, can be seen in the core of the film. Actually, if you strip away the Disney logo at the start, it wouldn't feel out of place to think of it not as a Disney film. The movie starts quiet and gentle as it builds up to the bad thing that's going to happen and start the story.  

         Pete asks his parents what 'adventure' is (alright, there is a part of this movie that's being too on the nose, calm down).  Anyway, Bambi gets revenge, a deer runs in front  of their station wagon and that apparently causes them to swerve to death. (I'd hope a Live-action Bambi movie, would have Bambi going on a revenge mission and takes out people in their cars) Three things: 1) Cutting to the deer as it seems to be watching in delight of it's murder is something, 2) 70's station wagon crash kills parents, but young boy in only a lap belt, because 1970's car is alive, 3) I'm going to assume Pete knows what death is. Just going to assume that. 

"Yeah I killed them, I'll kill again," /Copyright Disney 



        This movie was filmed New Zealand, instead of the actual Pacific Northwest, the actor for young Pete was Levi Alexander who is from New Zealand.  Being filmed in New Zealand but not in PNW is not a knock against the movie, just found that an interesting tidbit. 


           Anyway, little Pete is then surrounded by wolves. (Hey Wolves, don't eat the boy, there's a deer I need you to talk too). I would say the wolves seem a little to excited to want to eat a human boy there, like one licked its chops. The cinematography for the movie is good, it's well done.  This part is dark, because it's almost night and dark because well there's danger right there as Pete could possibly die. The only thing that might take away from the urgency is that it's called Pete's Dragon and that probably means he's not going to be wolf food at like 4 minutes in.  (unless... [don't you start]) 

            
It was from that day, Pete swore his revenge on deer / Copyright Disney 


            In speaking of Pete's Dragon, the dragon shows up and scares off the wolves.  (Hey we got Pete and the dragon in under 5 minutes, good work!)  I like Pete's question to the dragon, asking it if it was going to eat him, expecting an answer.  He didn't ask the wolves that, but I guess they made their intentions clearer.

         The original film, the dragon was animated like an animated movie at the time, but put into live action. Since this modern times, we have technology.  So yes, computer generated dragon. Which to bring up "The Jungle Book" 2016 that movie also was using computer animals as it was all animated except of Mogwai and you can see Disney is working some tech here, that would probably lead into a 2019 film of some Lion sort thing going on.  Also fuzzy dragon. I like the idea of it being fuzzy, it's different, and kind of gives him a more friendly vibe that fits for a movie where the dragon won't be wiping out Seattle. (You can read the reason why he's fuzzy here and that's good reason)  
I ate that deer for you, let's be friends/ Copyright Disney 



           The part where the dragon [I'm holding off on using his name to remark on it later] stretches out it's paw? paw? for Pete to get on in a trust moment was nice too.  Let's see we got Pete, and the dragon so roll the title card. (I was wondering what movie this was) 

            The movie skips ahead six years.  That's where you can join us after the jump.