By Walt Hickey
Welcome to the Numlock Sunday edition.
This week, I spoke to Alyssa Rosenberg, Sunny Bunch and Peter Suderman, the three panelists of the outstanding film podcast Across the Movie Aisle. I really enjoy the show and have been a longtime fan of their individual work.
I think that they’re a group with genuinely diverse opinions but who have a lot of love for cinema and as a result have some of the most deeply interesting conversations about the art form of any show I listen to.
The show just split off from The Bulwark’s network and is striking it out independently. Do check them out!
This interview has been condensed and edited.
Hey, Across the Movie Aisle. Thank you so much for coming on Numlock. I really appreciate it.
Absolutely.
Thank you for having us.
Yes, this is the first three-on-one conversation that I’ve ever done here, so we’re gonna have to juggle a bit. Either way, I am just such a fan of the show. I really, really enjoyed it, subscribed to the Bulwark for it when I heard that you guys were going independent. I was really excited to see what was motivating that, what opportunities you were seeing out there. It’s just such a really fun program, and I think it’s so unique in the space.
Before we get into talking about the movies, do you wanna talk a little bit about where this show came from, where it started, then what you would say your perspective on the film industry is?
Sonny: Sure.
Alyssa: Who wants to tell the story?
Sonny: The origin of the show was back in 2019. I started working for an independent film studio that’s based in Dallas, where I live now. I moved here for the job. The pitch was, “it’s like Fangoria,” but for action movies and thrillers and heist movies, that sort of thing. And one of the things I wanted to do when we came over was a little podcast network. We were gonna have some shows, some storytelling things, et cetera. And one of the things I had wanted to do for a while (and hadn’t really had an outlet for) was a show I had envisioned as like Crossfire or McLaughlin Group or something like that, but by way of movies.
So Across the Movie Aisle — I’ve always shorthanded it as Siskel and Ebert meets Left Right Center. And the idea here is that I am a conservative. I don’t know how other people would describe me, but I still think of myself as a center-right person. Alyssa is the center-left person.
Peter: Would you even say that you are a neoconservative?
Sonny: Well, I’m a neoconservative with libertarian tendencies, which is a funny thing.
Peter: “You work at the Weekly Standard,” is a good way to think about your politics? And they basically haven’t changed since you worked at The Weekly Standard. Is that fair? That’s the long and the short of it.
Sonny: Then Peter is whatever Peter is. I’ll let him define himself. But the idea here was you have three people with differing political views talking about movies and other stories about movies. The show has two segments. The first is called Controversies and Nontroversies. The second is a review. And the Controversies and Nontroversies segment was initially thought of as we tackle some dumb internet outrage of the day and decide if it’s really worth being mad about.
And that evolved into something slightly different, right? Right, guys? I feel like it’s now more about the business of Hollywood.
Alyssa: Yes, exactly. But I think it’s worth noting that our story actually starts way before 2019. The three of us were all critics in some respect or other. I was over at ThinkProgress running their culture and sports verticals. Sonny, were you at the Weekly Standard when we started or were you at the Free Beacon then?
Sonny: I think I was at the Washington Free Beacon when we met. So it must’ve been 2012 or 13.
Alyssa: The three of us were going to screenings every week and somehow just gravitated towards each other. We would sit together. We were the people who were hanging out and hashing things out together after the screening ended. When I moved to the Washington Post, I ended up bringing Sonny over as a contributor to the blog that I was working on there. They were invited to my wedding. We were authentically contentiously friends years before we started the podcast.
I think that’s been a little bit of the special sauce for us, right? We are capable of having conversations that are somewhat harder to have elsewhere because (even before we started working together) there were five, six years of trust built up in in-person conversations and discussions over beers at the really terrible bar near the former AMC in Friendship Heights. Nobody is here on this podcast to blow each other up. But it’s also not like “We’re friends for the camera!”
I think the show has always been like both a reflection of our dynamic. It’s also the way that we hang out every week, even though Sonny lives in Dallas, and Peter lives in Boston some of the time. So for me, it’s like my night out.
I mean, as a listener, I really find the appeal to be exactly that. I think that having different perspectives on something as universal as film makes the show super compelling to listen to, even if I don’t always necessarily agree with the perspective on it. What makes movies just so good to view from multiple different angles? There are lowercase “c” conservative films, there are lowercase “l” liberal films, that stuff. How do you guys find approaching the current state of the film industry from these different points of view?
Peter: Alyssa talked about how our story goes back even before 2019, when the podcast started. And just for people who may not be familiar with the dynamic of Washington that all of us came up in in our 20s, Alyssa was working for ThinkProgress, which was the journalism arm of the Center for American Progress, which is this leading democratic or democratic affiliated think tank. Sonny was working for the Weekly Standard and then for the Washington Free Beacon, these feisty, conservative journalistic outlets.
I actually started writing movie reviews for National Review for a couple of years. When I moved over full-time to Reason Magazine, which is where I’ve been for more than 15 years now, and also to the Washington Times, which is someplace that both Sonny and I wrote for. It’s a conservative-leaning paper that has undergone many transformations. If you live in Washington, your social circle and your conversations and your life are so frequently segmented by politics.
What we liked about being friends with each other and seeing movies with each other was that we saw that it didn’t have to be the case. Movies and art and pop culture, even disagreements about them, were ways that we could come together and maybe not even agree, but like learn about each other. We’re really good friends, but we also like each other’s minds. This is something that is really important and drew us all together. I have learned a lot about movies from Sonny. I have learned about culture from Alyssa. I don’t know if they’ve learned anything from me. Maybe they’ve been annoyed about how I’m fine with A.I.
Having those perspectives, it’s not just that it’s like, “Oh, that’s nice that you’re a little different.” This is a learning opportunity for all of us. It also makes the act of watching movies together much richer. When you’re watching the movie, if you’re watching it next to Alyssa, I know what she’s thinking. Maybe not what I’m thinking, but it’s like having another set of eyes. If you’re a critic, if you’re somebody who likes movies, if you are somebody who likes movies for the social aspect of them, seeing them with somebody else and talking about them afterwards just makes it so much more enjoyable. The fact that we then get to have that conversation in public for an audience that seems to enjoy this is really rewarding.
Alyssa: I have a very hard time with certain kinds of violence in movies. But I can sit in a theater with Peter, and he can tell me when I need to cover my eyes, but also when I’m gonna be okay when it’s over. And he’s always right, right? And that’s the thing that we get.
Peter: But also when we see the Taylor Swift movie, I show up, and Alyssa has friendship bracelets for us. Everybody’s bringing something to the party here.
Alyssa: Peter, you joked about whether or not we’ve gotten anything from you. And I actually think that in some ways, I’m the one of us whose politics and aesthetics have changed most as a result of doing the show with both of you. I came up in an era of lefty cultural criticism when there were real incentives for tearing things apart. And I think I, in some ways early in my career, helped advance a fairly doctrinaire vision of what political conversations about art should be. And I have some regrets about some of the things that I wrote and some non-regrets too. I did a lot of work at that point in my career that I liked a lot.
But one of the things I’ve come to believe in my conversation with these guys is that art is at its most politically powerful not when it affirms an agenda or a worldview that is defined by a political movement, but it is at its most powerful and interesting when it creates space for conversations that are not possible in conventional political formats and political venues. I think the unpredictability of movies and the inability to shove movies neatly into a partisan schema is where their power comes from.
It is not in being subordinate to an agenda, but in opening the space for new possibilities. And I think that having a space to come to that conclusion made me a better critic and a better person. Maybe less employable as someone who writes about this stuff full-time in a predictable way. But I really enjoy seeing the world through the lenses that Peter and Sonny helped me apply to all of this.
Peter: And just to underline that really quickly, a little bit more. One of the things that brings all of us together is that we are all three people who moved to Washington to work in political journalism, to work in discourse about politics. We have very strongly held beliefs. At the same time, I think all three of us come to movies, to art and to culture thinking, “You know what, you can make good art. You can make a great movie that maybe I find doesn’t in any way align with my beliefs, right?” It has nothing to do with my political world or is even critical of my political worldview, but it’s still a great movie.
And this is a thing that you see very rarely in Washington and political discussions of art and film, but also in criticism. You have so much criticism that is out there, especially in the movie criticism world, that is just straightforwardly, politically determined. I don’t think that that is the best way to approach art and to live a life that is about art because. Of course, it engages with politics. And of course you have to talk about that. And of course, you have to deal with that, but it’s not just politics. If what you want from a movie is for it to be an op-ed, then what you want isn’t a movie, it’s an op-ed.
I think that’s really interesting. And actually, let’s dive into that real quick. We’ll go around the horn, perhaps. Peter, you brought it up. What is an example of a film or a piece of media that maybe either subverts or goes upstream compared to your personal politics that you nevertheless enjoyed? Or you, nevertheless, in spite of where you were coming from on that, really tended to like?
Peter: So we all had mixed reactions to Paul Anderson’s, P.T. Anderson’s One Battle After Another, which is quite a political film, just came out. All of us thought that on a micro level, scene by scene, as a piece of filmmaking, it’s genius. But on a macro level, its big ideas are kind of a mess. I go back to another Paul Anderson film from the aughts, There Will Be Blood, which is fairly critical of capitalism and of the capitalist tendencies that are deeply rooted in America. And it’s not just a polemic, just an op-ed. It’s not something that you can sum up in a tweet. It is quite a complex film in so many ways. And I’m a capitalist. I am a libertarian. I am a markets guy. And it is, I love that movie.
Sonny and I frequently have arguments over whether There Will Be Blood is the first or second best movie of the last 25 years or so. Sonny thinks it’s maybe the best. I think it’s the second best. This is a movie that I think offers a deep critique of my ideology and my political worldview. But it is so profound on an artistic character narrative, just deep engagement level. I could talk about it for a long time. It’s a movie I really love that doesn’t support what I believe about politics in the world.
Yeah, Sonny, how about you?
Sonny: Bernardo Bertolucci’s The Last Emperor is commie agitprop, but it’s also very good. It’s one of those movies where the lesson of the movie is literally “The elite overclass needs to be taught how to pee correctly in a bucket, so as not to annoy the normals.” But it’s a beautiful movie, including the bucket. You don’t have to agree with a film’s politics to recognize that it is a great movie. It certainly doesn’t hurt. I flipped through my rankings, and a lot of it does line up.
But another one is JFK. Oliver Stone’s JFK is a movie that is nonsense as history. If you look at it as a history text, you are reading the film wrong. What it excels at and the way that it is great is that it’s the absolute perfect distillation of sitting next to an insane conspiracy theorist and hearing them ramble. The way that Oliver Stone edits together all of these disparate ideas — the way he edits is like hearing a conspiracy theorist talk.
The way a conspiracy theorist talks is that they overwhelm you with information. They will just throw out random things and be like, “And this is connected to this, and this is connected to this.” And you are not able to actually judge these things because you have no idea really what they’re talking about. You’re not steeped in this stuff like they are, but it all sounds right. And all of a sudden, yeah, I believe that the military industrial complex murdered JFK at the behest of a fascist homosexual conspiracy, which is just another amusing little element to JFK by Oliver Stone.
Those would be two examples, I would say.
I love that. Alyssa, how about you?
Alyssa: I would say Dirty Harry. I did a huge project about 10 years ago on depictions of the police in pop culture. And the ways in which law enforcement, as an industry, has actually really shaped their depictions on film. And look, I don’t think the police always get everything right. And I think that shooting people is not a viable solution to a crime, especially without a trial. But God damn, does Clint Eastwood make like a sweater and a blazer and a real big gun look awesome, right?
Sonny: Those are things that look awesome. Of course, they look awesome on Clint Eastwood.
Alyssa: Of course, they look awesome, but they look especially awesome on Clint Eastwood. And they look even more awesome when he’s shooting a crazed hippie who has commandeered a bus
Sonny: Full of children.
Alyssa: Yes, a bus full of children. The evil hippie deserves to get shot, and Clint Eastwood is the man to set things right. The thing about aesthetics is that they can get you to set aside your politics momentarily in a theoretical way. But I also think that good movies can get you access to spaces and mindsets that you might not have access to otherwise.
When you asked that question, the movie that I immediately thought of, not necessarily of challenging my politics, but like bringing me a place I can’t go, is Alex Garland’s Warfare from earlier this year. It is one of the best movies I’ve seen this year. And also a movie about (both as a social and cultural environment) an all-male combat unit in the US military and a situation (the war in Iraq) that I have no access to. I cannot go there. My being in the space would fundamentally transform the space. And that opening sequence with this platoon watching this music video in a weird, sexualized group bonding ritual, I just found fascinating and oddly touching in a way that I think is interesting to watch, especially if you’re steeped in left-leaning critiques of traditional masculinity in all-male spaces.
And I found that movie, despite how harrowing it was, kind of beautiful and tender to watch in a way. And I just felt very grateful for it.
Awesome. Yeah, again, I really appreciate how much thought goes into viewing not only movies as cultural entities, but also their space in politics, but also how the culture can overwhelm that. I really think that you guys have such fun takes on this. I wanna back out a little bit and talk a little bit about this year and this moment. I think one thing I really enjoy about your show is that it’s obvious how much you guys really enjoy going to the movies, enjoy consuming this stuff. I know that there’s a lot of fairly understandable doom and gloom sometimes around the movie industry, around the exhibition industry. A lot of that, I think, comes from some of the more industry side of things and infects the viewing public’s view.
I’ll just throw it to you. What is a trend or something going on these days within movies or Hollywood that you actually think is a good thing, that you’re actually enjoying? Or a transitional moment that you think could be fun? I guess, Sunny, I’ll start off with you. I don’t know.
Sonny: That’s a hard question to answer because everything is bad right now.
Alyssa: To be clear, this is Sonny’s default position about all eras and all things. All things.
Peter: He’s a cheerful man.
Sonny: All things, really. No, everything is bad. But if I were looking at a few green shoots, I like the rise of the draft house style theater, a combination of dining, bar, movie space. I know some people have issues with the waiters scurrying back and forth. And it’s not my real cup of tea either, but that’s all right. You mentioned this question right before we started taping. I was trying to sketch something out, so I didn’t have nothing.
But I do think the rise of the boutique Blu-ray and 4K UHD retailers has been a good thing. I don’t know that it’s enough to save physical media in the film context, but the rise of your Vinegar Syndromes. Criterion, of course, is the longest player in this space, and they’ve been doing it since the days of Laserdisc. They’re very good at what they do, and they have a great catalog.
But even smaller places, like your Vinegar Syndromes or your Shout Factory and your Scream Factory. The studios themselves are getting into it. Lionsgate has their Lionsgate limited thing that they do, which is just sucking money out of my pockets. A24 has also been good in this space. I like the idea that there is a small but committed cadre of collectors out there. And it’s not just ownership for the sake of ownership. It’s not the high fidelity, “the things you own matter. So you should show them off so everybody can see them and see how cool you are” kind of thing. There are actual quality differences to having a disc as opposed to a streaming service, which always come in at lower bit rates, and they look and sound worse.
But this is so niche. Very few people who collect this stuff (Blu-rays, 4Ks, et cetera) really understand how niche they are.
If you look at the monthly pie chart of sales of discs every month, it’s still 50 percent DVD, 20 percent to 25 percent Blu-ray, and then 25 percent to 30 percent 4K, depending on what’s out at any given time. But 50 percent of discs are still being bought by people browsing Walmart shelves, like “Ooh, I’ll watch this new movie for $5. Sure, why not?”
Yeah, having something for the sickos is always something viable, right? Peter, I’ll throw it to you.
Peter: So, on this podcast, I have probably been the biggest MCU, Marvel Movie Universe booster. What I think is a good thing that is happening right now is that the MCU is in a decline, or at least a reset period. It’s not overwhelming Hollywood in the way that it was throughout the 2010s. It’s hurting theaters and exhibition because those movies are not performing the way they used to, and that’s a downside for real.
But what it is doing is creating a space for young filmmakers and for young acting talent to rise up without having to immediately be sucked into the MCU or something comparable, like the DC movies that were trying to start up and never really got going. Now they’ve rebooted the DC universe with the James Gunn Superman film. But, it really felt like in the 2010s, anyone who was in their 20s or 30s and was a really promising actor or a really promising director was gonna make one or two movies. And then they were gonna get sucked into the Marvel or maybe the Star Wars machine, one of these big franchise things.
It wasn’t like even 25 years ago when Sam Raimi was making Spider-Man films, and they were very distinctly Sam Raimi films. I mean, you watch the Dr. Octopus POV sequence in Spider-Man 2, and it’s the same thing he was doing in Evil Dead, except he had $150 million to make that movie, right?
These weren’t even altruistic superhero films. They were just being brought in to lend their names a small amount of flavor to whatever it was they were doing. And now, in an era in which the MCU is not gone, but is diminished, a lot of acting talent and a lot of directing talent are going to be free to spend that formative period of third, fourth, fifth, sixth movies to make the things that they wanna make and to experiment.
Like I said, this does have downsides. This is not great for theatrical exhibitors who are suffering right now because there are fewer movies and because the big movies are not as big. But in that space, you get the opportunity to try new things. And I love seeing new things, and I love watching new talent develop.
That is cool. I like that. Alyssa?
Alyssa: I’m glad you said that, Peter, because what I was gonna say is I am delighted to see some of the directors who did time in the MCU or other franchises coming back and making original movies. Obviously, Sinners is one of the big success stories of the year. It’s also a success story because Ryan Coogler is not only making franchise movies.
I saw Seeing Fruitvale, which turned Fruitvale Station, at the Sundance Film Festival. It was like a seminal moment for me early in my career as a critic. I was like, “Holy God, this guy is great.” Even though I like what he did with the Rocky movies and I like the first Black Panther, I just felt this sense of profound regret for him getting diverted from telling these original stories. I’m really excited for Chloe Zhao’s Hamnet. I expect to be emotionally incapacitated by that movie. Honestly, it is great for people who love movies that Immortals was just such a disaster.
Peter: Eternals.
Sonny: Eternals, that’s how good it is we can’t even remember the title.
Alyssa: Yes, Destin Daniel Cretton is working on a Shang-Chi sequel, but he is also collaborating with Ryan Coogler on a project that I think is drawn from their childhoods.
Sonny: He’s directing a new Spider-Man movie right now.
Alyssa: But there’s other stuff coming. There’s the possibility of life outside franchises. And, I’m excited to see what some of these folks do when they’re not in front of a green screen and when they’re telling stories about actual human beings. I am excited to just see more movies like Weapons, like Materialists, coming from younger directors who are still figuring things out, but have interesting things to say. And this year, at least, appears to be able to do okay at the box office.
I love that. People are recovering from their exile in Atlanta and have a chance to make some cool movies. You guys have been so generous with your time. I do want to just finish on one last note: where do you assess Hollywood’s position within the world to be?
Obviously, in the States, they’ve had a lot of pressure from things like TikTok coming from below, things like the federal government coming from above. But even internationally and geopolitically, you’ve seen international players start to compete with Hollywood at the Oscars. For instance, in Best Animated Film last year, as well as some big markets shutting down for them, like China is not really doing anything. From a political perspective, where do you assess the state of Hollywood right now?
Peter: From a political perspective, I think Hollywood is going to start producing movies that read less overtly liberal, less conventionally left-leaning. I think we’re already seeing some of that. I don’t mean that Hollywood is suddenly going to be MAGA, that it’s suddenly gonna be like reading Buckley’s National Review or anything like that. I just mean that at the margins, you’re gonna see more movies that don’t toe the line in the way that you saw movies before. There was a moment, especially right before and right after the pandemic, where it really felt like too many movies were towing a very predictable left-of-center political line. And it was obvious and there was no nuance to it.
Again, I do not oppose movies that may have a different worldview than mine, but it felt like they were running scared in a lot of cases. I mean, in sports, if your team is behind, that’s the time when you try new stuff. You don’t use the same strategy if you are losing. Hollywood’s losing right now. They’re losing economically and they’re losing as a cultural force. While that’s in some ways not great for the art form, that is going to be good for experimentation. And that’s gonna be formal and craft experimentation. That’s going to be talent. We’re going to see new and interesting people. And that’s also going to be ideas both for stories and for politics and ideology.
Sonny: A big question is what happens with the retrenchment of the global box office? Because I do think, for a long time, you could count on basically two-thirds of the box office of a major Hollywood release coming overseas and one-third coming domestically. And those numbers have, in some cases, inverted. It’s closer to 50/50 for more of them. It’s not universally true. F1 did more business overseas than domestically, which you might expect for something that’s based on F1 racing. But the big question is what happens if the rest of the world is like, “We’re not that interested in the big Hollywood blockbuster stuff that we have been eating up for the last 15 or 20 years”?
This goes hand in hand with Alyssa’s point about originals. That’s probably a good thing, honestly. It’s probably a good thing to get away from the theory of the movie industry being like, “We need to make things that appeal despite language barriers.” Language matters; words matter. And tailoring your words to the correct audience matters. American movie studio should tailor their stuff to American audiences.
Alyssa: And also getting away from the idea of appealing to the Chinese censors who controlled which American movies got access to Chinese markets, which was not the same thing as appealing to Chinese audiences. But yeah, I totally agree.
My father-in-law works in the foreign exchange industry, and he said something that I’ve been thinking about a lot. They’re just seeing real declines in people who want to come here or feel comfortable coming here. Until July, I was the letters editor at The Washington Post, and it was astonishing to me just how much rage Canadians were feeling towards the United States. I don’t know that these will translate into a rejection of American movies. American culture exports have been unbelievably strong for a long time.
But I do see an opening for Korean pop culture, which has already been very popular abroad. I think there’s a real chance that we will see a rejection of American culture in some ways. And, it will take Hollywood a while to respond to that. It always lags a little bit. But I do think it would be very interesting to see what more aggressively American movies look like. And I think that could take many forms.
But scale is in many ways the enemy of interestingness. If there is not and opportunity to turn everything into a two billion dollar movie because you sell it overseas, what stories do you tell? What actors do you put on screen? What voices do you elevate? And I think the answers to those questions could be really interesting.
Peter: I agree with all of this in the sense that I think it will be good for the art form, like I have been saying. But there’s a cost to this that all of us should recognize. When budgets get smaller and the market shrinks, that is going to be bad for people who work in the industry. And in particular, it’s going to be rough for the below-the-line talent, the people whose names you see at the end credits — when these credits now scroll for 10 minutes after a Marvel movie because they have employed hundreds, maybe even a thousand people.
And there was a story in The Wall Street Journal just this summer. You mentioned the time in Atlanta about how Marvel has moved most of its production out of Atlanta. There are people there who had built lives, bought houses, had earned pretty good middle-class incomes, but weren’t superstars by any means. Now they don’t know what to do because they thought they were living in Hollywood East, and suddenly, Hollywood East doesn’t exist anymore.
We may be in a position where Hollywood West, as we have long know it, L.A., the film center, also doesn’t exist anymore, at least or at least as much smaller, much less important and much less central to filmmaking than it has been for the last nearly 100 years. And again, as a critic, I like the new stuff. I often like the smaller stuff. I’m an American; I want movies made for me. But also, these are people with jobs and livelihoods, and it is going to be hard for them in many cases.
Sonny: Oh, I’m glad to see the A.I. King over here take the side of the little guy who’s losing out on his on his livelihood.
Peter: I think A.I. is going to help the little guy. Small creators are going to have a leg up because of it.
Sonny: Sure.
All right. Well, I love some of those thoughts, love some of those lessons. Publicly traded companies are famously risk-taking, so we’re going to be fine, definitely. Either way, I really do love the show. I really, really enjoy it. I think it’s one of the best discussion shows, chat shows about any movie podcast out there. It is really, really fun. It is very cool to see you guys go independent.
I just want to throw it to you a little bit. What is your pitch? What is the show? Where can they find it? What’s the best way to support it? And where can they find you all?
Sonny: The show’s a lot like this, like what you just listened to.
Alyssa: Peter has developed this catchphrase when Sonny asked him how he’s doing to kick off the show, and he always says that he’s excited to be talking about movies with friends. We want to be your movie friends. You should come hang out with us. Hopefully, we will be going live a little bit more, maybe meeting up in person some. I will hopefully be doing some writing for our sub stack, if you have missed my blatherings about movies and movie trends.
But yeah, come hang out with us every week. We’re fun.
Sonny: Movieaisle.substack.com. That’s where you should go. You should I’m I’m I’m sure I’m sure there will be a link to it or something. Movieaisle.substack.com is where it lives now. We’ll have a proper URL at some point.
Terrific. And wherever you get your podcasts?
Sonny: And wherever you get your podcasts!
That’s great. Peter, Alyssa, Sonny, thank you so much. This is really, really fun. Again, I really dig the show so much. I’m very, very happy for you guys being able to spring out independent. So really, thanks for coming on.
Edited by Crystal Wang
If you have anything you’d like to see in this Sunday special, shoot me an email. Comment below! Thanks for reading, and thanks so much for supporting Numlock.
Thank you so much for becoming a paid subscriber!
Send links to me on Twitter at @WaltHickey or email me with numbers, tips or feedback at walt@numlock.news.
