SHOOT HER

This is The Drive with Josh Graham Podcast. We are killing it online. Tune into The Drive weekday afternoons 3 to 7 on WSJS. Ready, set, let's go! This is The Drive with Josh Graham.

So glad to have you! On this Thursday Drive, it is WSJS News Talk Sports for the Triad, and we must talk about what's going on in the ACC right now. Even though very little about the move would make sense at this point, you should still expect that the ACC is going to expand with the additions of Cal, Stanford, and SMU. Because it's not really hard to read the tea leaves today and realize where this is all headed. The right reporters are all over this, saying things like, it's ramping up. A vote seems inevitable, and we've learned that they don't take a vote unless they already know they have at least 12 of the 15 university presidents voting in approval of whatever the subject happens to be. In this case, conference expansion.

Pete Thamel of ESPN, Cole Auerbach of The Athletic, Pat Fordy of Sports Illustrated. These are the guys that are dropping those hints out there. So rather than discussing the merits of it, we've been pretty clear that this is not the best for the ACC. A lot of it doesn't seem to make sense. Rather than talking about whether or not it's going to happen, let's talk about why this is happening.

And it's not just a blanket, because of the money type of answer. Duh. It's not a very smart observation.

Not very interesting either. This is happening because university presidents are in control. Jim Boeheim griped about this last week, saying, we gave control to these university presidents, and this is what happens. University presidents are in the academic world. And in academia, you're closer to a politician than you are a sports administrator.

What's that mean? You're probably not listening to sports radio, for starters. You might not be as knowledgeable about sports as the average sports radio listener. Yet you're the one that gets to press the button on yes or no on big decisions such as this for conference expansion. It also means that if it doesn't work out, they're not going to be nearly as crushed, as devastated as the people who have devoted their lives to these teams, to these programs, these schools, these sports. They'll just say, well, I made a business decision here. They're bean counters.

If it doesn't work out, okay. We ended up richer as a result of it, though, and we're all left looking at their wake, what they ended up doing. You've got Condoleezza Rice and President Bush last week lobbying ACC presidents. That might not mean much to you or maybe even to coaches or, you know, these athletic directors. But the university presidents?

It probably matters a great deal, and you're only talking about having to flip one vote. NC State, North Carolina, Florida State, Clemson, those are the four that said no. If one changes their mind, changes from a no to a yes, then Cal, Stanford, and SMU join the league.

That's why it feels like this is inevitable. It was inevitable that they were going to re-broach this subject since the ACC didn't put out a statement a couple of weeks ago saying, we are not going to expand after the first straw poll didn't produce the result that 11 of the schools voted wanted it to produce. You also have Notre Dame pushing for this. Here was Jack Swarbrick with Dan Patrick on Cal and Stanford specifically joining the ACC. We've been pretty vocal in the past month about we need to find a home for Stanford and Cal. You can't have two of the great academic institutions in the world not have a place to play.

What kind of solution you got? We're working on it. Meaning? Well, there's still consideration of the ACC as a home for those schools. They're the most vocal on this.

They have the least amount of association of the schools with 15 votes and they are the most vocal, Notre Dame is. It's something I want to talk about with Matt Fortuna later. Then you have the report of the $72 million figure. That might be enough to sway one of the presidents. Ooh, an extra $72 million?

That sounds fantastic. Put the devils in the details. That doesn't mean you have $72 million to split to Florida State and Clemson and North Carolina to keep them happy.

That's not what that means. It's $24 million approximately each school is going to net from ESPN given their television agreement. Each school is going to produce $24 million for the week. Cal and Stanford, they said in the initial years, they're not going to take even 50%. They'll take 30% based on some of these reports I see out there. SMU is not even going to take any of the television revenue for the first seven years of its existence.

Now, let's acknowledge the obvious. After seven years, they're going to eat at that pie. And are schools all of the sudden going to want to take less at that point? Fat chance on that. And then Cal and Stanford, I'd imagine that 30% number is going to ramp up as time goes on.

But let's just take that at face value right now. $72 million, Cal and Stanford get 30%. You're talking about $7 to $8 million apiece for each of those schools. Which means $72 million now becomes close to $55 million. Still sounds like a lot to distribute.

Okay. Then you talk about the millions of dollars of travel that you have to do, not just for football, but for all the other programs, the Olympic sports to go to and from the West Coast. And the logistics of that that you have to figure out. That's going to cost millions of dollars as well per school eating away at that $72 million. Then are we going to give the rest just to the schools that are the loudest? Is it going to be performance based solely or are they going to evenly distribute some of that funds, some of those funds evenly?

If not, are you going to get those 11 votes that you need, those 12 votes that you need in order to push this thing through? If it's distributed evenly at all, then you're talking about Florida State getting close to what? If you split it across 14 schools, $5 million, $6 million?

If some performance incentives are added on this? And we've already heard FSU say that's not going to be enough to keep them happy. It's simply not going to be enough.

So from that point, why even do it? If it's not even going to keep Florida State Clemson and those schools inevitably happy with the amount that they get from those $72 million, that's $72 million that you receive. And the answer to that, you have to go next level. This is happening really because there are no visionaries in the ACC right now. If there were visionaries, they would have added Oregon and Washington last year, more valuable properties before the Big Ten did it, after the USC and UCLA move.

They would have added schools that the Big Twelve already added, rather than pulling at the scraps that those schools didn't want in Stanford and Cal. If you had visionaries, you would have done that by now. But they don't exist here.

You have a bunch of followers. That's what we're talking about. And you have people that are being driven by fear. That's what this is about.

It really is. Peer pressure. Oh, the Big Twelve's adding. The SEC, the Big Ten, we can't be left behind or else we're going to end up like the Pac-12. We can't be the school with the smallest amount, the conference with the smallest amount of schools. Fourteen, we need to add. Just for the sake of adding, we need to add. And if we lose Florida State or lose Clemson, what are we going to do then?

Oh, we need to have Stanford and Cal to protect ourselves, as if those are the schools that are going to protect you. It doesn't make sense. It never made sense. This is a financial band-aid. That's all it is. It's kicking something down the road, kicking the can down the road.

But at this point, it's something we should expect to happen. The ACC is going to expand. On Twitter, at WSJS Radio, if you want in. DJ Turner, in for Will Dalton, who's producing The Morning Show, pinch hitting on The Morning Show this week. W.D. watched Jurassic Park for the first time last night, and even though he's not here right now, we do have his next classic that he's going to watch, Narrow Down to Four here. Which of these is the best movie?

Movie, DJ. Inception, Unforgiven, Point Break, or The Notebook? Which of those is the best movie, purely? That I think he will like would be Point Break.

Not what I asked. What's the best movie? Unforgiven.

I agree with that. What's the movie that's the most fun? Um, let's see. Point Break, Inception, Unforgiven. What was the last one? The Notebook.

What would be the most fun? Point Break. That's why I hope that one wins, but Inception right now is cleaning up. If you're not gambling, come on now, let's talk some money. You're not trying. You're so money. You don't even know it.

But you do. Let's play some bats. I'm gonna make you rich. This is Graham's gambling. Let's not keep the people waiting 74, 56, and 2 last year. That is nearly a 60% hit rate for Graham's gambling. We pick football games. That's what we do. And we pick football games very well.

Just trying to prime ourselves for when gambling is legal in the state of North Carolina. We'll hand out these picks anyway. And I've got four for week zero.

Yes, there's only seven games. Most of them are gross and you're probably not gonna want to watch them. I'm gonna watch them all. And I'm gonna fire off on four of them here. We're trigger happy to start the season. So let's get started with the game that most people will be paying attention to. Notre Dame Navy.

This is overseas in Ireland. And if you know this segment, you probably know I hate giving out first half anything. That's not generally what we do around here. And we generally don't bet unders either because that's usually betting against fun. And who wants to do that?

The answer? Me. To open the year.

Because I like picking winners more than I care about all those other things I just mentioned. We're going with first half under 25 and a half for Notre Dame and Navy. Because it's gonna be iffy where you're trying to build chemistry with guys. You've got a lot of new parts there. New offensive coordinator, new quarterback in Sam Hartman who transfers from Wake to Notre Dame. They're gonna be slowly trying to figure things out. Navy generally plays Notre Dame tight. Last year in fact was a single digit game between Notre Dame and Navy. And with the new rules as well with the play clock and the clock moving even after first downs. The way that Navy runs it with the triple option, they're gonna shorten the game a little bit. I think 25 and a half is a bit too many for the first half.

So we're going under 25 and a half. Next pick here. This is my favorite pick and perhaps the weirdest one that I'm gonna give out. Jacksonville State. Do you know what Jacksonville State's mascot is DJ?

Take a guess. Tigers. Gamecocks. Gamecocks. The Jacksonville State Gamecocks. They're opening up with UTEP in week 0.

And here's what you need to know about the Cocks. Jacksonville State is getting one and a half. They're at home. They're coached by former Michigan and West Virginia coach Rich Rodriguez. Yes, Rich Rods in the house and this game is Jacksonville State's first FBS football game.

So they're gonna be fired up. They play great defense. The Miners, they're losing a quarterback. They're losing an OC. Jacksonville State's gonna win the game on the field, but we'll take the small number anyway. Gamecocks plus a point and a half. You're gonna hate this pick. This pick might even make me a bad person.

But again, I like being right more than I care about being a good or bad person. Vanderbilt minus 17 and a half against Hawaii. Yes, it's Vanderbilt football and they're laying 17 points. Vanderbilt football. And everybody's wanting to root for the Rainbow Warriors who's having tragedy all around them in the state on the island.

There's terrible headlines coming from there and we certainly sympathize with that. But on the field, Vanderbilt flew to Hawaii last year in week zero and beat Hawaii by 50. Not a joke. They won by 50 on the field. Vanderbilt supposed to be better this year than they were a year ago under Clark Lee. So I'm not saying they're gonna win by 50, but they're gonna win by more than 17.

That's what I'm saying. Vandy minus 17 and a half against the Rainbow Warriors of Hawaii. And the last one that we have, this is what we call a hold on to your butts classic. Paying homage to Jurassic Park, which W.D. is gonna review.

He watched for the first time in the last 24 hours. San Jose State is getting 31 at USC and we think that that sounds about right. At San Jose State, they're gonna be able to cover that number. Spartan up!

This is Sparta! San Jose State had one of the best offenses in the Mountain West last year. They bring their quarterback back.

They bring their staff back. You know, there was only two games last year. They scored fewer than 21 points. USC's defense is crummy. There was only three or four games that they allowed fewer than 21 points. USC in the Pac-12.

So, yes, Caleb Williams is gonna get his with our guy Lincoln Riley. They're gonna put up a ton of points and win this game going away. All we're saying is, hey, San Jose State, can you get to 21? Can we get to 21?

That's what I'm asking. Because, yeah, we think that USC will score 48, maybe get to 50. We think that.

Sure. But, can they cover 31, San Jose State? I say they can. We're going with the Spartans.

I already know how this is gonna end. USC's backup defense is in there and they're down 34, San Jose State. But they're wanting to score and play till the end and that's what they're gonna do and they're gonna cover that number. Because we're really good at this. As we spelled out.

74, 56, and 2. So, in review again, we got Notre Dame Navy first half under 25.5. Jacksonville State plus a point and a half against UTEP. Vanderbilt minus 17.5 against Hawaii. That just feels so crummy to do.

And San Jose State plus a lot against USC. Send me that cash out, family. It's here! Week zero, baby! Week zero, baby!

Graham's gambling for week zero. Complete disaster. And listen, I'm not, everybody in the industry has to take responsibility here.

I'm not excluding myself from that. Complete disaster. That's what Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick called the current state of college athletics with Dan Patrick yesterday. Hmm. Let's sit down and think really hard which people have been primarily responsible for where college football is right now. I'm gonna have to put my thinking cap on. Really start to think about who might be responsible for all this.

That's a tough one. As somebody who used to know the friend zone very well back in the day, it's pretty familiar to me watching the way Notre Dame is treating the ACC. Notre Dame has completely friend zoned the ACC, putting them in a position where they're leading them on. They are, Notre Dame's leading the ACC on. They're never gonna love them back, but that's not what the ACC thinks is gonna happen.

They're still holding out hope. And at the same time, Notre Dame is taking full advantage of the fact they know that the ACC is head over heels in love with them. While sitting down with Dan Patrick, we played some of the clip there a second ago, Jack Swarbrick wouldn't even acknowledge Notre Dame's relationship with the ACC.

Here he was on what it would take, for example, for the Irish to shed its independence and join a conference. We didn't have a media partner, that we didn't have a fair path to the college football playoff. If the NBC media plan was not there, would Notre Dame be in a conference?

If we didn't have somebody else who was willing to step up, yes. And would that be the Big Ten? I don't know. It'd be interesting to have that discussion with each of the available conferences. You haven't had those discussions before?

We've had lots of inquiries we've never negotiated. Now here's a fun fact. Notre Dame contractually agreed that if it were to join a conference before 2036, this is part of their written agreement with the ACC, that they'd join the ACC. So the answer to Dan Patrick there should have been, no, we can't join the Big Ten.

The only conference we could join is the ACC, because that's what they contractually agreed to. But that's not what Jack Swarbrick said. Jack Swarbrick spent 15 minutes sitting down with Dan Patrick, acting like Notre Dame wasn't in the ACC at all.

It's the equivalent of having that guy that you friend zone go to an ice cream parlor with you and pretending like you don't know the guy at all. Oh yeah, that guy? Steve? Oh man, he's nothing.

He's no threat. I'm not dating Steve. Steve and I aren't together. What are you talking about, Steve?

Not even talking to that guy. That's what's happening here. That's the way that Jack Swarbrick talks about the Atlantic Coast Conference so dismissively. And even though Jack Swarbrick will never love the ACC back, he will take advantage of them. He noted there, what would get Notre Dame to join a conference if they don't have fair access to the college football playoff? Now, let's think about who created the college football playoff model. Well, because of Notre Dame's association with the ACC, the ACC did not have its commissioner on the four-person subcommittee that created the 12-team playoff format. Instead, rather than having an ACC official, they had Jack Swarbrick sit on that committee, almost as a representative of the ACC. And he created the 12-team format, which means that Notre Dame can tie its shoes and essentially make the playoff every year. That's a way that he likely used his association with the ACC in order to benefit Notre Dame.

And on top of that, he's the one most loudly. Think about this. The ACC is likely going to add Cal and Stanford. They need to get one more university president that said no to say yes, and then you'll have 12 of the 15 votes. Have you noticed we haven't really heard from any of the other 10 schools that have votes and voted yes, pushing for Cal and Stanford? We've only heard from Notre Dame.

This is me wanting to quote Mean Girls and be the guy in the hoodie that says, you don't even go to school here. Notre Dame is the most vocal school in the ACC on the Cal-Stanford issue. And they have the least amount of affiliation out of the 15 schools that have a vote. That's true. And why is Notre Dame pushing for Cal and Stanford?

Of course, for selfish reasons. They've had a long history with Stanford. They've played every year since 1988, and there's a fear that if Cal or excuse me, if Stanford does not get into a bigger conference, they're going to stop playing D1 football. They're going to go down a grade from FBS to FCS football. That's a concern. So Notre Dame is pushing to get Cal and Stanford into the conference, which is not good for the ACC and not good for the student athletes, certainly.

Why? Because he wants his precious Stanford Notre Dame rivalry to continue. That's why this is happening. That's why he's pushing for it. And if John Swafford, the former ACC convention, had a backbone back in the day, John Swafford did plenty of fantastic things.

The pros far outweigh the cons. He is one of the most important people in the history of this conference. But he dropped the ball on the Notre Dame issue. If he had a backbone with Notre Dame, Notre Dame would be in the ACC today. Here was Jack Swarbrick on the closest that Notre Dame came to joining a conference. You know, I don't know that it was particularly close, but if we hadn't been able to find a home for our Olympic sports with the ACC, maintaining football independence would have been problematic. We needed a partner who would allow our Olympic sports to participate at the level we want them to.

Hmm. So if John Swafford strong-armed them and said, hey, the Big East is falling apart, Notre Dame, you can't have your schools. What are you going to do with your schools? You have to join in football if you want those other programs to have a home at the highest level. Maybe Notre Dame joins.

Better example is 2020. Notre Dame has a really good team. Notre Dame went to the college football playoff. They've only been to the playoff twice.

This is one of the two times. But they had an independent schedule and everybody was playing just conference games in 2020 because of COVID. That was the scenario. And I've had football coaches tell me this, that the ACC could have given Notre Dame an ultimatum and said, listen, if you want us to put together a conference schedule for you, you need to join the conference. Instead, John Swafford, in his final year as ACC commissioner, said you can be a conference member just for this year and then go back to your independence. And they had the best season that they've had since Brady Quint was playing quarterback for them in the mid-2000s. The ACC allowed for that to happen. And now we're seeing the results of it.

The ACC has been completely friend-zoned by Notre Dame. Before we get to Will Pelagic who will join us in just a few minutes, voice of Charlotte FC, we need to figure out a movie for WD to watch next week. So he's not in here. So we're going to choose these movies on his behalf because we know he's seen none of the good movies. And he's watched Jurassic Park. He's going to review that next hour.

Maybe DJ Turner can help me out with this. DJ, you and Stan Cotton have something in common. Stan is a huge fan of westerns and you're a big fan of westerns and you're also a big fan of Clint Eastwood. So when you think of Clint Eastwood, what movies do you think of? What's the first movie that comes to mind?

The Good, The Bad, The Ugly. Excellent movie. WD actually has seen that movie.

Good. What else do you think of? Outlaw of Josie Wells. Thanks to Stan Cotton, he's seen that one as well. What's another western Clint Eastwood? Unforgiven. No chance that he's seen Unforgiven. So let's write that one down. In fact, Mike DeCorsie was on the show yesterday quoting Unforgiven. So that fits kind of well.

Close to a 30 year anniversary on that one too. So we'll have that in there with Gene Hackman and such. UNWD, you know, we're talking earlier, I heard you both, about Patrick Swayze and that's the look that he goes for. Like, he's, WD's going for the Patrick Swayze and Roadhouse look. Well, he looks like Dalton in Roadhouse.

That's what he's going for. So we made him watch Roadhouse and he watched Ghost 2. He watched both those movies. He hasn't seen Point Break though. Point Break's awesome. I know you love John Wick. So that feels like the right choice. We're gonna go Keanu Reeves.

We'll go with Patrick Swayze. Point Break, that's another option for WD. I watched Barbie earlier this week. I know WD hasn't seen The Notebook, which is amazing.

Not the movie, but amazing that he hasn't seen it. So we'll throw that in there. We'll make that happen. You can vote on that. And how about Christopher Nolan?

He's been all the rage with Oppenheimer. Inception's been on this poll a few times and not gotten it. This might be its best shot. We'll give Inception another chance too. I fell asleep. I did not like it. Are you into Nolan movies?

I am. I did not like that movie. I didn't like Inception, or I like Inception. I didn't like Interstellar much, but I really liked it.

No, okay, so I've got him confused. Interstellar was the movie I couldn't watch. Space movie, McConaughey, not so great.

It was awful. DiCaprio, and this one's really good. Will Dalton, who is not producing today's show because he's pinch hitting this week Mornings with Triad today, has popped into our studio just for this segment. He's driven from Greensboro to our Providence Lane studios in Winston-Salem just to talk about his favorite subject of movies. Will, I'm surprised you're still awake right now. Yeah, it's a lot of caffeine.

We just got some new coffee in the kitchen back there, so I'm kind of jacked up, so it's helping me out. It is the 30 year anniversary of Jurassic Park. This was a blind spot movie for me for a very long time until I, myself, watched it for the first time earlier this year. DJ, do you remember the first time you watched this movie? I do. Was it in the theater?

It was, and it was terrifying. I bet. That's something I'd like to get to in this segment.

So how about we just get straight to it. It's At The Movies with the W.D. Unless you're talking about Star Wars. Obi-Wan has taught you well. Movies aren't exactly Will's thing. I don't get it. But that's about to change because Josh can't stand it anymore.

This is At The Movies with Will Dalton. And just so we don't get the phone calls, DJ doesn't get the calls of, Why aren't you talking about sports, sports guy? We'll get back to sports in about 10 minutes or so.

Plenty to get to in those regards. W.D., we ask you what you liked, what you didn't like, a best quote, and you guessing, trying to get within five points of the Rotten Tomatoes score, the audience score. Let's start with what you liked on the positive end about Jurassic Park 1993. Well, to DJ's point, they made this thing feel very big. Like when they're first showing them the dinosaurs when they get out to the park, like they made it feel very big. And there was like a sense of wonder. It being the Tyrannosaurus Rex. Yes, the dinosaurs.

They're just roaming by when they're seeing them for the first time. I bet this would have been something to see in IMAX back in the day. So, DJ, when you're in the theater, it's 1993. We have never had a movie quite like this before. It still holds up where things look like real dinosaurs and things. That had to be a staggering experience. Like when you think about in your life movie experiences that really stand out in the theater, how high up on the list is Jurassic Park? You know, you thought Star Wars was an amazing accomplishment back in the day, back in the 80s.

The big ship coming over top. But then all of a sudden you go to Jurassic Park and it's believable. And you're like, holy cow, 1993. And this is the thing you gotta remember. The thing I like the most about rewatching this movie again is the blend of CGI and practical old school special effects.

Apparently, this is based on the internet. It only had 55 frames of CGI. So, you had things like, and to put that in perspective, your Marvel movie today that's made has thousands upon thousands of CGI frames. So, you had that, you know, some CGI plus a guitar string that's used underneath like the body of water to make it look like a ripple effect when the T-Rex is coming by. You have, you know, you built actual dinosaurs. You built actual dinosaurs and it looks great and that's an achievement. Like 30 years later, this movie does not look outdated.

It still looks fantastic and that's an achievement, I think, for this movie. What didn't you like about Jurassic Park? The fact that somehow a glass windshield can be used to stop a raptor. When those kids were like holding it, like when the raptor was like crushing the car and they're like... Was this the raptor or the T-Rex you're talking about?

I can't remember. Whatever it was attacking them that had just crushed the car and flipped it over and it crashed or cracked the windshield in so they're holding it as a shield. By the way, this is classic Steven Spielberg. What makes this attack of a T-Rex feel a lot different than say Godzilla fighting a massive ape or whatever? It's that little kids are in the car and the T-Rex looks so big. What you're filming, it looks so small, like it looks so big to the audience. If you just have a gorilla fighting a dinosaur and they're the same size, by scale it just looks like a couple of people fighting almost.

So it does make it even more terrifying that that's the case. So you're just calling shenanigans that this T-Rex can't hurt the kids, but they were telling you like you have to stay still. I felt like they explained it pretty well, what they were supposed to do. They had an expert right there. They did, but as that car was being crushed, I mean the kids are screaming and all they just magically get away.

Okay, yeah. W.D., he would have liked the kids to get murdered by the T-Rex. He would have enjoyed that. That's the thing that he pinpoints that he doesn't like about Jurassic Park, that the kids weren't killed by a T-Rex. Put that on the ESPN scroll.

That's the bottom of the screen. That's what W.D. just said.

Didn't you just do that? They were kids! I mean what else are they going to do? They don't know any better.

They've never encountered a dinosaur before. What else are you going to do? It's plot armor if I've ever seen it. You know, while we're talking about CGI and all these things, what this movie did to movies since I don't like. Just think about this. They shot this somewhere near Hawaii on one of those islands out there. You wouldn't do that today.

You wouldn't scope out the perfect island in the Caribbean or whatever. You just CGI. You wouldn't do all those tricks that we talked about before because you have CGI. The sequels of this movie, the marketing, turning everything into a lunchbox and, you know, a toy that people can buy. It's made everything a trilogy. It's made every story endless where nothing is close-ended so you have a string of movies. I don't know if that's what Steven Spielberg intended when the movie came out 30 years ago, but you can see the effect today that Jurassic Park's had on everything. And I don't think I like what has come from that, even though I really like the movie. But my grandson, who is nine years old now, he saw Jurassic Park for the first time when he was eight. And he was, I mean, he loved the movie. Did he want to become a paleontologist?

No. Why would anybody want to become a paleontologist? Well, because of this movie. Apparently, like in the 90s, that was one of the more popular degrees after this movie came out. Like people wanted to get into paleontology the same way that after All the President's Men came out like 50 years ago, everybody suddenly wanted to get into journalism.

That's a real thing. Archaeology, Indiana Jones. This movie is so popular, if you want to spin it to sports, before 1993, nobody knew what a raptor was. And then this movie comes out and is it a coincidence a few years later that the NBA franchise is called the Toronto Raptors?

No, I don't think so. I think Jurassic Park, if Jurassic Park doesn't happen, that franchise in Toronto is not called the Toronto Raptors. This movie made raptors cool and made people know what raptors were, which is kind of amazing. What's the best quote from Jurassic Park? I got two here. Shoot her!

Shoot her! And Dockson! Dockson, we got Dockson here!

I don't know what that is. Whenever he brought the money to Newman, Nedra. Newman? Hello Newman. Hello Newman. The two lines I think have stuck out the most or like have had the most staying power over the 30 years.

It's just John Hammond's reading of, welcome to Jurassic Park, the way that you say that. And early Samuel L. Jackson saying hold on to your butts. I still say that regularly all the time. We're in the fourth quarter of a close game, hold on to your butts. All the time. Not quite as good as we need a bigger boat, but good enough.

Shoot her! The opening scene was so good. There's a lot of gold bloom lines, including one involving a big pile of, well you know. And also, life finds a way.

It does. Alright, let's see if we can get it within five points here. At the movies with the W.D. Rotten Tomatoes score, what do you think? I'm going to shoot high with a 96.

91. There you go. Five on the dime. As it should. Yeah, that's why I went high with it.

And that's been At the Movies with the W.D. So, you're just going to leave now? Is that how this works?

Yeah. What are you going to do the rest of the afternoon? I'm probably going to make some more coffee when I get home. Probably not going to watch more movies since I watched my movie for the week last night. We're going to decide ourselves and you're going to have no part in the process of what movie you're going to watch next week. Yeah, it's going to be blind test for me. I don't know if I like that. Yeah, we'll figure that out by the end of the show, but thanks for being, for the first time, a guest.

Yes, on the show I produce. The drive. Welcome. And goodbye.