Alex Fulton | Cryptokubrology, Movie Magic, & Subliminal Bears

Serenity now, Higher Side Shatters. From the Sunshine State, I'm Greg Carlwood. And over the years, we've spent a lot of time going over the wide range of patterns and weird, uncanny coincidence between highly charged, oftentimes conspiratorial real-world events, works of fiction, occult symbolism, and pop culture iconography, often referred to as synchromysticism. A lot of cultural scrying, as I like to say, or a reverse engineering of rituals encoded into reality, often through 8mm magic by the wielders of the Hollywood wand. And few figures of the film industry are as symbolically potent and layered as the legendary Stanley Kubrick. Like the Gateway Drug or Rosetta Stone for synchromysticism, Kubrick demonstrates a deep degree to which themes, symbols, and ideas can be layered throughout a work, and his resonance with those who are symbolically and conspiratorially oriented has been well-established and is almost never-ending. Well, a subset of the synchromystics, like today's guest Alex Fulton, seems to have taken the focus on Kubrick to a new level with what he calls cryptocubrology, a term coined by Sean Montgomery, the recently departed research partner of Alex's, who defined it as the science behind coincidence, or the study of haunted media, in pursuit of a technical analysis of synchronicity. The sense that our reality is arranged according to some as-yet-undefined a-causal ordering principle. You can find Alex on Twitter as Crypto K, and find his sub-stack articles and podcasts at cryptocubrology.com. I love a synchromystic show, so let's go. The Kubrick decoder, movie magic demystifier, and cinema detail detective. Alex, welcome to THC. Thank you, Greg. It's a pleasure to be here. That was great. So surreal. Surreal to hear that, but it's awesome. Thank you. Well, yeah, it is funny that we actually met in person a long time ago, over a decade ago. You reminded me of this when, I guess I should say, this came about in a weird way. I reached out to you because of a Rife documentary that was actually made by your research partner, Sean, who passed away just a few weeks ago, I understand. And then you reminded me that we met in 2014 when I had a table at the Secret Space Program conference selling T-shirts and CDs with THC episode themes on them. And I did see Tom DeLonge there, by the way, way before he was publicly interested in doing the To the Stars Academy stuff. But you told me a bit about the crypto-cubrology research, and here we are. So this will be fun. It's always nice when someone is familiar with the show before coming on. But to dive into this thing, what is it about Kubrick and his work that has such a gravity to it for those interested in synchromysticism? It's, I'm reminded of what, I've got two departed friends that are kind of important here. One is Sean, and one's another guy named Mark LeClaire, who used to blog as the Wrong Way Wizard. I don't know if you ever read that blog, but, so I've kind of got those two guys on my shoulders here, kind of walking me through this. But one of the things Mark would like to say is like, why do we climb a mountain? Because it's there? And, I mean, he's not the one that said that, but lots of people have said that. But he, in terms of Kubrick, he said that in the sense of like, this is just the pinnacle of the art, really. These films, this guy. And once you start looking closely at him and at the movies, you can't really stop yourself because there is so much there. They're just so deep. And it's really unlike any other filmmaker. But then it's sort of the point where, with CryptoCubrology, where you start looking at these films deeply, that it starts to spill out into other films. And you start to realize that this Kubrick, all these sinks that you see in Kubrick are also in every other movie. But he seems to be kind of consciously employing the language in a way that other filmmakers seem to be doing unconsciously. So that's one reason. And the other reason, for us, really, kind of centers around the whole numerology aspect of it and the dateline temporal thing. It's very, like, I'm glad that you quoted me in there saying, calling it a technical analysis of synchronicity. Because that's what it is. And, like, if you don't know what I mean by that, in terms of like, it's actually in terms of like stock market language. There's fundamental analysis versus technical analysis. Whereas fundamental analysis, you look at, like, the underlying statistics and numbers in a company, their cash flows and whatnot. Whereas technical analysis, you just look at the price. You just look at the price of the chart. Basically, you don't even need anything else. That's what that is. The technical analysis synchronicity is sort of like... You just want the data. Yeah, exactly. The data. You look at the... And it's based on time. That's the other big factor that a lot of synchromysticism has kind of ignored is the factor of time. When something happens, it's just as important as what happens. And you've got to look at the both of them to really understand. And Sean was sort of led to, through Kubrick movies, to this set of these numbers, this numerical pattern that he kept observing in the films and then in real life. And that was sort of like where I came into the picture and started meeting him or talking to him online. We went back and forth with emails for a decade. We got 4,000 emails or something just pouring over all this data and figuring this stuff out. And yeah, here I am. And he passed away a few weeks ago. I don't want to talk about it too much because honestly, it's really sad and personal, but he got sick. So I'm sort of left here carrying the torch. And yeah, we could go deeper into that, the dateline and stuff or wherever you want to go. I don't know. Well, okay. So Kubrick is a lens in which we can look at this certain phenomenon. You could say he's a microcosm of a bigger thing out there, an ordering principle in reality. I'm curious what you think that is. So if Kubrick is just a nice entry point that gets people who have this kind of mind to see examples of it, well, what is it examples of? If we scaled it up to an ordering principle of reality itself, you know I've interviewed Jake Coetzee, Chris Knowles, Stephen Snyder, who wrote a book about Kubrick, and Jason Horsley, all of which somewhat have to talk on synchromysticism to one degree or another. There's also Michael Hoffman. Like Pokemon, I'm trying to collect them all. I love those guys. Matthew J. Bell. I'm happy to be a storied company here. Yes, yes. Well, what do you think these people who have this mind, what are they really picking up on? They all have different conclusions. What are yours? Well, I think the sort of – I'm not going to – borderline crazy conclusion of crypto-cubrology, I think, is that really this whole reality is ordered around – you could call it a Kubrickian principle. But I think Mark LeClaire really hammered home. He was kind of out – he was like a – he had a kind of schizo break at one point involving 2001. Yes, my understanding is that he was up in the north, secluded, and he didn't have a copy of The Wizard of Oz at the time. So he took Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon and synced it up to 2001 A Space Odyssey to see what would happen, and he thought it synced so well with so much meaning. He was overwhelmed and had what is basically described as a Philip K. Dickian type of breakthrough experience, and he was institutionalized, and he took a long time to work through it. Yeah. And that's the story as I know it. You've done your research, so I'm really happy about that. I don't have to tell the story. You've done it. And so – but the point – the end point of all that was basically that Kubrick – or that Mark believed that Kubrick was Saturn, was Satan, was like the spear tip of the entity Saturn in our reality. He – I quote him a lot when he said, the mind of Kubrick is the mind of Saturn. And so you can kind of see that in all of his movies. I mean, it just kind of bears itself out. And in the sense of larger than Kubrick, that's just astrological. This is like a classical Gnostic position of that, like the so-called archons are the seven classical planets, outermost planet being Saturn, the lord of time. The outer, most exterior point of our perception outside of Saturn is extra-temporal. And so Kubrick – like, okay, you mentioned William Snyder, and he – I want to talk about him too, his book, because I just read it. And I'm actually the villain in that book, I just – I kind of realized. I know. I feel bad about this. It's okay. It's kind of funny. It gives me a good opportunity to set the record straight. But CryptoCubrology, he at least gives me props for saying that Eyes Wide Shut is – well, he says Eyes Wide Shut is portraying a Saturnine ritual. Lots of people talk about the Saturnine black cube cult and so forth. And Mark's take was that Stanley Kubrick was like the tippy-top point of that cult and actually a really bad guy. So I don't really necessarily agree with that. But after I kind of was exposed to him, I came along with Sean, and he started peppering me with all this info about time and the synchronicities regarding time and relating to Kubrick. And once I started getting to that, and then like looking at interviews with someone like Jan Harlan, who is Kubrick's stepbrother, executive producer, and there's this funny line where they ask him like, how did Stanley manage to make these movies have all this freedom? And his response was basically, Stanley had the freedom to use time. And like that line stuck in me. I was like, hmm, that seems like something Saturn would do. And I just want to jump in here to say that because if we stay focused on Mark LeClaire for a minute, I have in my notes here, from his work, he did this deep dive on Eyes Wide Shut, and he said Eyes Wide Shut, E-W-S. The missing letter from that is N for North. We have East, West, South, and we're missing N for North. Well, Saturn is in the position north for the ceremonial ritual of the hexagram, an act of magic designed to attune the magus to the frequency of the solar system. And he, it seems from this article, was saying that the ritual at the end of the movie is basically that ritual. And I just thought that was interesting because he goes on to talk about how the main character, Tom Cruise, is kind of navigating Manhattan and doesn't have a true north. His north is missing in the film. North is missing from the E-W-S anagram. Really interesting analysis and details. There's parts where I believe he might go into the actual frames, which is a pretty wild layer, but it's something Stanley Kubrick would have known about and done because he did a lot of his editing, from my understanding. But what about Mark's work? What would you say stuck out as just really impactful or his biggest finds that resonated with you? Well, yeah, I think probably the longest, the best thing is that sync that we talked, that you mentioned before. The sync, well, it's not just that, but it started as Dark Side of the Moon with 2001, which is like, to me, it's the greatest sync film experience there is. It's way more interesting than The Wizard of Oz. It's like, I highly recommend people go and do this and do it yourself. Like, you can go online, and there's a fellow on Twitter, Cyanide Pills, who's awesome, and he's been, like, uploading full things. But I do think there's an important bit of setting it up yourself. And the instruction basically was, start the album. If you remember the intro of 2001, you have the long four minutes of the solar system and the credits, and you have the Zuspig, Zerathustra music. On the very final note, hit the play button on Dark Side of the Moon. Make sure it's looping, and just watch it. And it's amazing. I mean, it really feels like Pink Floyd was, like, the very first image of 2001 is the Dark Side of the Moon, which is funny. You just start it, and there it is, the Dark Side of the Moon, and the camera rises up, and it just goes on from there. But then he also kind of added to that, and he made this whole matrix between three Kubrick films and three Pink Floyd albums. He had 2001, The Shining, and Eyes Wide Shut, and then he had Dark Side of the Moon, Metal, and The Wall. So you kind of mix and match all these albums, and it's really just, it's a mind-blowing experience. But the jewel of the bunch is 2001, Dark Side of the Moon. And if you really like that one, you can experiment with the other ones. But I highly recommend that. And other than that, you know, once he, Mark kind of, he pulled his blog down once he kind of had a, he got some bad feedback, and he just, he wasn't the most stable guy. So he just kind of left the internet scene, so he can't really find his blog stuff anymore. But that, that, I, the essay you quoted from, which is on my blog, which I reposted, is the deep essay of Eyes Wide Shut. And that whole analysis actually is one of the things that, the first thing I read that woke me up to synchromisticism in general. So it's a really good entry point for just really shifting your, your perception. It really did shift my perception in a way, to the point where I had to reach out to him and be like, I gotta talk to this guy. So. Heck yeah. So, you mentioned that Kubrick thing about, like, he had control over time. Yes, it did seem like he had a way of leisurely going through his films, regardless of how much time and money it took. And the studios kind of let him do it. And then he obviously got employed again and again and again. It's a privileged position. And when you have all this symbolism layered throughout the films, you gotta think, well, how does he know that in a pre-internet world? This seems like kind of privileged information. So you start to wonder, like, what is it about this guy's background? Is he put in a position to do this sort of stuff? He maybe is a Saturn archetype. And something I learned from you is that he married into the Harlan family. And the patriarch of that family was the chief Nazi filmmaker under Goebbels. And that's odd because Stanley Kubrick was Jewish, to my understanding. And when you get really into those weeds, there's a lot of German Jews in positions of power. And you're like, well, where's the division here, really? But it seems like an odd family to marry into, if you're Kubrick. What do you think's going on there? Do you think that might have something to do with the privileged position that he ended up in as a filmmaker? Very good question. Yeah, I mean, I think that is a really key point of his biography that a lot of people have missed or don't know about, probably intentionally. It is a really, it's a paradoxical situation. But if you read the biographies and Nathan Abram's book about Kubrick and Snyder's book, he mentions it, that, like, Kubrick was somewhat of a self-hating Jew, it seems, maybe. He, he's been quoted as saying that Hitler was right about almost everything. And, like, just that sort of gossip, that sort of thing is around. So you think what was really going on there? I mean, yeah, Veidt Harlan, who you're talking about, is the, was the father, well, is the uncle of Christiane Harlan, who is Kubrick's wife of 42 years. And he directed, he, he's responsible for the movie Jude Seuss, which was, like, the most notorious Nazi anti-Semitic film that's been banned. And he was, like, there's actually a documentary about him where the Harlins are interviewed. So you can learn all about this and you can learn the story, hear the story of Kubrick going to meet the relatives and, like, having to take a big swig of bourbon or whatever and, like, okay, going into the nest or whatever. But, but I think it's really the connection that I like, I mean, there's a lot of connections to draw, but one of them is we know about the influence of all the paperclip Nazis in NASA. And we know, you know, the Apollo thing, if indeed it was faked, which I think it was, you know, it was a cinematic operation. It involved that sort of business. And NASA's full of these people. Hey, we just, I mean, I just see there's a connection there, you know. Yeah, you're one degree away, you know. He marries the daughter of a chief propagandist in the Nazi apparatus, and then they all come over here in Project Paperclip. We all know they're deeply embedded in rocketry in particular. And then Stanley Kubrick, of all directors, is the one that people are like, I think he might have had something to do with pulling off that fake moon landing on the soundstage thing. And it's right there, you know, and then he has the lenses he takes to Barry Lyndon. I don't think it's a big stretch at all. I mean, he's married into the family in a position of power. If you need someone you can trust, that's who you tap. Yeah. And I mean, yeah, I mean, he can trust. And there's questions of like, what, where were his allegiances? Really? Double, triple, quadruple agent, you know, this sort of deal. Um, I really did appreciate Snyder's book for connecting him to the Kennedys, um, more than most people have, because that makes a lot of sense. Um, that's one aspect of Kubrick's, one of the really otherworldly aspects of Kubrick is his, um, his lifespan, which is kind of, we get into the technical weeds a little bit. But one of the things that we do here in CryptoKey is, uh, find midpoints. We, it's almost like, I like to think of it as kind of an atom smasher for synchronicity or like a, like a hadron collider of synchronicity where you take two points in time, you find the midpoint. And that's like, that's a sync on, and that you can kind of poke, pin to the board and, and examine. All right. You've called this the three parent thesis is my understanding. And you consider this part of map making when it comes to time and the numerological principles that drive it. But yeah, I definitely wanted to get into some examples of this where a quarter of the way through this thing, we know people love examples, but yes, tell us about, uh, using your methodology and applying it to Kubrick's actual life and his place on the timeline. The parent thesis, just, that's what we call that configuration time of, uh, two parents and then child in the midpoint, um, pun on the parenthesis, uh, obviously. But, um, so Kubrick, if you make a parent thesis out of his life, his midpoint is November 15th, 1963, which is exactly one week before JFK is killed. Why is it one week? Why? I mean, we can talk about that, but it's the fact that it's very close is significant. I mean, that's just a sync, you know, that's just a sync. And it's actually happens to be my birthday too. I'm, I'm, I'm born November 16th. So when I first saw that, I was like, Oh, that's kind of interesting connecting me to it. But, um, so Kubrick's lifespan midpoint is basically one week before the JFK, the last week of JFK's life. And then actually, if you find Arthur C. Clark's midpoint, funnily enough, it's 42 weeks before JFK's assassination instead of one week, instead of one week, Arthur C. Clark's midpoint is 42 weeks before the JFK assassination. So that's another sync. And then it goes on and on and on. And just to jump in here and tell people why that's a sync, you say that when it comes to the methodology of your work, you're mainly focused on a few numbers, 19, 42, 153, 237, 666, and 1776. So these are the numbers that come up over and over again. If people look at your threads, you're constantly going to be finding things that pop up on the 19th anniversary of a thing. I mean, obviously the 9-11 work would go into that space, but 42, people know it's the Douglas Adams, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Answer to the Universe, and everything. Probably a layered reason why that's in there. But this is one of those numbers that comes up time and time again. So that Clark's birthday or Clark's midpoint would be 42 weeks before. It's significant because that's that 42. They've gone through different permutations of, like, labels, how I think of them. Originally, Sean called it a temporal algorithm. He felt that it was – his sense was that somewhere in here there is the operating principle of, like, the central algorithm that runs our reality into time. And that it's going to determine when people are born, when they die, when they get married, you know, that whole thing. And it's not that dissimilar from astrology, really, but it's just got a different sort of set of principles. And, yeah, so lately, over the last couple years, after I started getting into reading the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts, I discovered a – well, I came up with a new metaphor for the numbers, which I call them the five seals of Crypto-K, which kind of gives it a more mystical leaning. But – because that's really what they are. They are seals. They are kind of mystical objects. And they – I don't know. When you think of a seal, that's like a lock on a book, something that conceals it that you open. And that's really what it feels like. And then the 19 kind of came in later. And it's, like, almost as an – on an opposite pole. We call it, like, a ruler. The five seals and their ruler, which is another word for Archon, 19. So the five numbers are the lock, and 19 is the key, because once we found 19 and started applying it to these numbers, all this shit started, like, falling out incredibly. And then COVID-19 happened. So it was, like, the whole year of 2019, Sean and I were going back and forth just developing 19. We were like, what's 19? What's with 19? The 19-year Matonic cycle of the moon. I don't know if you're familiar with that. But that's where the moon, the earth, and the sun all return to the same spot every 19 years. You get an eclipse cycle every 19 years. It's a core principle to, like, Hebraic calendar. And that was in 2019. And then, like, the year after COVID-19 happens and, like, shuts the whole world down. Like, the whole world is overrun by 19. And what is 19 alphanumerically but AI? So there's this feeling that 19 represents AI. It's very interesting. A lot of people think 9-11 was this massive departure in the timeline that this ritual sent us off into this weird Patriot Act surveillance state kind of reality. And then, obviously, COVID-19 is a level jump into further putting us off path into this weird technocratic space. And they both contain 1-9. It is interesting. So I wanted to go through a couple examples that I have here from my notes. So Kubrick's birthday is 7-26-28. Same day Joe Jackson was born, you say. Both demiurgic figures. But if you go 42 weeks before his birth, that's the premiere of The Jazz Singer, the first sync sound film. Most people who are into film know about that. 42 weeks after is the first Academy Awards. And those are very significant points, probably in the top five of film history. And they are exactly 42 weeks before and after Kubrick's death, one of these mystical directors. So then you also, to loop in the 237, which people know is the number of the room in the hotel in The Shining that is such a key room. And there's actually a whole documentary, Room 237, about the various theories. So 237 is significant. It's not just a number you pulled out of nowhere. But 237 weeks after Kubrick was born, FDR is declared president. 237 weeks after his 19th birthday, Queen Elizabeth was pronounced Queen. The day of his 19th birthday is also the day the CIA was created and the FBI was created 20 years prior on that same day. So it is weird. Then you go on 237 days after Kubrick died, Being John Malkovich comes out. That's the release date for that film, all about puppetry and possession and manipulating people. And then 237 days before Kubrick died was the release of Something About Mary. And you say there's actually a lot of overlap between those two films. Cameron Diaz is in both of them. And there's a couple, at least one other actor who's in both films. But run us through that a little bit. So those are some examples. But so we have this anchoring of Being John Malkovich on one end and Something About Mary. Two totally different films of different genres. You wouldn't expect any connection at all. Tell us how they are connected. Yeah, they were released on a 237-week spread from Kubrick's death. And Being John Malkovich, there's Something About Mary. Both have Cameron Diaz in them. And her roles are almost like completely opposite in those films. Like in There's Something About Mary, she's Mary. She's the gorgeous blonde that everybody wants. In Being John Malkovich, she's very intentionally, like, dumpy. She's portrayed as, like, just kind of insane and just dry, ugly hair and just as crazy. So there's that. That's just her. There's a couple other actors that are in the same in the movie, too. One of them is W. Earl Brown, who is a very kind of obscure guy. But if you've ever seen the show Deadwood, he is Dan Doherty on Deadwood, which is funny because that's sort of a Dorothy reference. But so W. Earl Brown, how do I put this? And there's something about Mary. W. Earl Brown plays Mary's – I'm going to say the word because this is what, importantly, the word they use, retarded brother. He's named Warren, and he's, like – he's just – he's disabled, and that's the whole point of the movie is that she works with disabled people. And the first time he comes on the screen, in the very first scene, he's wearing a shirt, and it's got a Rubik's Cube on it. And Rubik's Cube is Kubrick's – you know, Kubrick's Cube, you know. Kubrick, that's another key symbolism there. So – but then if you go into being John Malkovich, W. Earl Brown shows up, and he is, like, the first guy that goes inside of Malkovich commercially. Like, he's the first guy that pays to be in – go inside Malkovich, and he's, like, I can be whoever I want to be. And so there's that parallel. There's another actor – and then there's another actor named Willie Garson, who probably people know from maybe Sex and the City, where he played a character called Stanford Blatch. But he's in – there's something about Mary as one of the – one of his friends who's in love with Mary or whatever. He actually has the same – in there, he has the same haircut as Cameron Diaz has in being John Malkovich, funnily enough. But anyway, then he shows up in being John Malkovich, and he talks – he's the guy that interrupts Malkovich at dinner. And he comes up to him, and he says, hey, I really love that movie where you played that retard. I really loved what – I just think what you're doing for retarded people is really – is great. And, like, apparently the direction was you got to say that word as many times as possible in this interaction. So you have this thing about Mary and Willie Garson. This is a movie which is depicting retarded people in a way that you can argue it's positive or not. But – and then here's being John Malkovich. We're directly referencing this. Why is he talking about Malkovich? Malkovich has never played a person like that. What is he talking about? And so I get the sense that there's, like, this punning on the idea that Malkovich is all these other people in a way or way, which is the whole point of puppetry, the human puppetry, and ultimately one of the theses of Crypto-K, which is sort of like that a lot of these people – a lot of people in positions of power and these crucial people in history are being puppeteered by some kind of otherworldly force. Yes, and the mirroring is pretty obvious in those two films. Again, 237 days before and after Kubrick died and then these other connections with actors. But with W. Earl Brown, isn't there a Rubik's Cube element or connection in both films or is it just the one? Because I thought there was something about him using a Rubik's Cube. There is. Yeah, yeah. There's a whole – yes, he has a Rubik's Cube that he's playing with. I even have a – And then he has a necklace or a shirt in the other movie. Well, it's actually both in there. There's something about Mary. He's got – he appears wearing the shirt and then he winds up playing the Rubik's Cube. But then another thing that I do a lot is syncing films, obviously. And so I like – I have this really elaborate sync with being John Malkovich, there's something about Mary and The Shining. And when you watch all these things together, it sort of reveals this – these hidden layers to all the movies, really. There's something about Mary becomes this weird horror movie. And you start to see the connections between that and The Shining. Like, for instance, there's a scene and there's something about Mary where Matt Dillon's character is – he's, like, spying on Mary. And she's getting undressed. And he's, like, getting all excited and he puts his binoculars down or whatever. And then he looks back up and he's at the wrong window and it's the old lady and her prunes or whatever. And it's gross. But that's what Jack sees in The Shining, right? He sees the beautiful young woman and then she transforms into the old hag. So it's, like, the exact same principle. And if you look – who directed – now, who directed – there's something about Mary, the Farrelly brothers. If you go into all of their movies, they're all full of Stanley Kubrick references. And it's in a weird way that, like, Dumb and Dumber, for instance, we could talk about – I mean, so I won't go into all the details there. Most people are familiar with Dumb and Dumber. So give us, like, one or two from that film. Oh, well – Way more popular than Stuck on You. True. Oh, yeah. I need to watch that one. Okay, so Dumb and Dumber. The character Jim Carrey plays is Lloyd Christmas. And if you remember The Shining, Lloyd is the ghostly bartender. And, I mean, Christmas is just – is Kubrick because it's – you know, Eyes Wide Shut is set in Christmas. Christmas is a polar phenomenon. It's like the winter solstice, the Lord. It's a Saturnine thing. So there's this great scene where he's in the bar at the ski joint in Aspen, and he's – it's actually a moon landing joke. He leaves the bar. He realizes – he sees the old newspaper on the wall that says, man lands on the moon. And he's like, no way. We landed on the moon, which kind of marks him like Lloyd in The Shining. It marks him as a man out of time, right? So JFK made – in the early 60s made two really pivotal speeches announcing the intent to go to the moon. Okay, so his first speech was May 25th, 1961. That's when he said, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving, before this decade is out, the goal of landing a man on the moon, blah, blah, blah. That was May 25th. And then he makes another speech on September 12th, 1962. That's the one where he says, we choose to go to the moon and do the other things not because they are easy, because they are hard. But these are very – two very famous speeches. Jim Carrey was born – exact – okay, I don't even know how to put this. But Jim Carrey was born in the midpoint between those two speeches, and it's 237 days either way. Wow. And he was in the fucking movie Man on the Moon, the biopic of Kaufman. That's the – that's the chair – the real focus of things. Wow, man. And I love the Jim Carrey analysis. He's an example I use all the time of the strategic casting of trying to fulfill an archetype because he's basically the green man. The green man is this wild symbol, pan-like entity, and he's the mask. He's the Grinch. There's a third movie, I think, where he's green as well. But also Ace Ventura is just a wild man, you know, the man of nature, unbridled nature. And it's – it just seems like archetypal casting. I wish I could remember the third green example. But, man, 237 days, the midpoint between those two speeches. Yeah, and that's Jim Carrey. So that kind of literally makes him a moon child, which I consider. So – and that – and he's also the Truman Show. That's because – and so that's a big one for obvious Gnostic tale reasons. And let me just throw this in because we're going all over my notes here, but with The Shining, going back to the Rubik's Cube thing, 42 weeks after The Shining, which does contain a cube, a disappearing cube in the movie, is the first speedcubing tournament in the world. So, wild, just – this is the kind of thing where people are either into it or they're not. But if they're – if they're into it, I'm just curious, like, what are we saying? Like, all reality is ordered to some weird degree with these number patterns? And you said it was like astrology earlier, and I love that because astrology is a system of – it's a pattern system, and it applies to people's personality and life paths. And there could be other ingredients in the soup of which a person is, and astrology is one aspect, but maybe there are others we haven't identified that are just as potent and mystical. And this could be a numerological time aspect. Yeah, yeah. It's well said. Astrology kind of depends on the movement of the planets, whereas this stuff depends on the movement of our calendar and, like, just the way we measure time. And so we have to, like, really scrutinize that aspect and be like, well, why do we have this calendar? Why is it behaving this way? And one of the things – one of the nice things, arguably, about CryptoK is that we try not to be like, this is what it means. Like, this is the answer. It's just more of about a process of discovery, of, like, the mystery. But, like, there's definitely hints. And, like, if you read the tea leaves, it starts to, like, seem like, yeah, this whole calendar was set up for, like, this for some weird reason. And it's, like, maybe key, very – actually, maybe instrumental to human history. Like, it might be a really big deal. Well, we've talked about that with other guests because we've gone through many calendars, and the church and certain authorities had a real emphasis on the calendar and some preoccupation with changing it and getting it to sync to certain things. And it was in sync, and then they made it out of sync, and now we have a leap year and all this kind of other stuff to try to make it work with what we see in the sky. So, there definitely has been major efforts to control or alter the perception of the timeline. And thank God I record in the studio now with a man in the booth because he reminded me that the other Jim Carrey green man representation is the Riddler. Of course. Batman Forever. I couldn't believe I forgot that. That ties into The Shining, too. That's a really good parent thesis I could talk about. Well, hit me with that. And then I want to talk Subliminal Bears before we run out of time in the first hour because I want to put Subliminal Bears in the title. Okay, great. We're going to talk about Subliminal Bears for three minutes. Okay, so The Shining, Batman. This is just really classic. Jack Nicholson is in The Shining. He plays Jack. Jack Nicholson is in Batman. He plays Jack. Jack Napier, a.k.a. the Joker. How much time between The Shining and Batman? 474 weeks, which is 237 times two. 237 times two weeks between them. The midpoint is the release date of 2010. A Space Odyssey 2, the sequel to 2001. Not directed by Kubrick, but directed by a guy with the same birthday as Kubrick, July 26, Peter Hyams, who is also the guy who directed Capricorn 1, which is about a faked moon landing or a faked mission to Mars, rather. And a bunch of other science fiction stuff like Time Cop. And so, yeah, 237 times two weeks between The Shining and Batman with Jack Tarantz. And then, okay, in The Shining, what does Jack say? Give me the bat. Give me the bat, Wendy. He's climbing up the stairs, trying to get the bat. He gets bonked on the head with a bat, and he falls. What happens in Batman? He goes up to the stairs. He's trying to get the bat. He gets bonked by the bat. He falls. So it's like this constant, like, just these things keep repeating. And it becomes a question of who's doing it. Is this intentional, or is this, like, something more occult? Yeah. Well, people have always said Hollywood is named that because the Hollywood was the most used magic wand, and it's weird. But, yeah, if occultists and people who saw a value in mass production of film for occult means have been there since the very beginning, since the naming of the place, then it's probably pretty sophisticated. So I understand that, and the casting in particular seems very intentional, but the detail, the nitty-gritty intricacies, it's like, wow, how do you really plan that? But let's do Subliminal Bears because this is not only just very strange and somewhat silly because I don't know what it means in the end, but it's also something we can use the visual references for. They're almost required, and anyone can get that because this will be in the free hour on YouTube. But you say Sean was the inventor or discoverer of the Kubrick algorithm and the Subliminal Bears, and I went down this rabbit hole, and let's get into it. So you write, The Subliminal Bears theory proposed that Stanley Kubrick secretly arranged the scenes of the Shining as to paint for the viewer in every frame a pack of ravenous bears, bears that would register only on a subliminal level. You never think about the bears, but they are always there, lurking in the margins, like the 3D image in the Magic Eye Book, only revealing itself after the eye has relaxed and forgotten what it has seen as anything more than light color and shape. The idea might at first seem outwardly insane, but the more one looks into it, the more it sticks out. You then include the frames in which Danny is sitting there on the bed with the bear behind him, and the red on his collar is exactly where he gets choked later in the film. But he's looking at the bear in the 42nd frame of film, and it just gets really weirder. Obviously, one of the most iconic images and strange, bizarre things in the movie The Shining is the man in the bear suit sucking off a party guest. And then there's also something about a reappearing, disappearing bear rug. I don't quite remember that. I remember The Shining made-for-TV remake, and I believe they animated that thing to come to life in that version of The Shining. But let me turn it over to you so you can explain the complexity of bear symbolism in The Shining. Okay, well, real quickly, because I just was realizing that, and it relates, that King version of The Shining was filmed in the Stanley Hotel. That's where Dumb and Dumber was filmed, by the way. That scene in the moon landing, with all the moon landing, that's in the Stanley Hotel. So that's something I forgot that really kind of ties it all together. Okay, so subliminal bears. Yeah, God, I don't even start with this. It was just something that Sean started noticing in Kubrick's films, and then he kind of started seeing it everywhere else. And it's almost like a shame, because he put this stuff out there, and people reacted so badly to it that it kind of was like, oh, the bear's guy. Let's just, that's the guy who thinks everything's a bear. So it kind of like worked against him in that way. But if you really, if you watch The Shining, there is bears all over it. Subliminal or no, there's overt bear symbolism, like I mentioned. The very first scene, well, not the very first scene, but Danny is being interviewed by the doctor. He's laying on a big bear pillow, which is looming right behind him. It's like holding him, and you notice that its eyes, the way its eyes are shaped, are exactly the same shape as the floor indicator above the elevator, which is where all the blood spills out. Right, that is the one I think is most crazy, because the bear's eye should just be a button. You know, most teddy bears, it's just going to be a button, but this is specifically strange, and it looks just like the classic elevator needle that moves up the various levels of the building. And he even says that those shots in the movie are 42 seconds apart, 42 frames into shot 62 is the first view of the bear pillow eye, and the beginning of shot 60 is the last view of the floor indicator. And there is exactly 42 seconds in the film between those two things. That speaks to significance to me, but then he goes on to show in certain frames where the blood is spilling out of the elevator. The blood, you know, you could say it's the mouth if those two symbols are the eyes, that it is the bear with certain lighting that looks like the bear. And the one that really gets me is probably the poster. So this is another thing we'll throw up on the screen, but if you've ever seen the poster for the movie The Shining, it looks odd. This is the yellow poster with the black graphics and text. I always thought it looked more like Chucky from Child's Play. It's a weird face in the T of The Shining. Doesn't seem connected to the film at all. He found a subliminal bear in there, and I have the image of it where it's highlighted how you can see it. It looks like Tigger almost, but let's say it's a bear. It's definitely a weird thing to see. And then it gets even crazier. So in the scene when Wendy discovers that Danny has apparently been strangled, which harkens back to that first scene because the red collar is exactly in that scene with the bear. You say, In the same room where the long dead bear lies as a luxury item, the camera continues to adjust its position ever so slightly as Wendy approaches Danny until at the final moment of her discovery, the camera settles. And there, revealed by a play of light between the second floor banisters, a word appears. While Jack looks on and Wendy examines the bruises which have appeared on Danny's neck and shoulder in the location of the red streak from the teddy bear shot before, Danny sucks his thumb in shock. And a word appears to lurk above them, and a word appears to lurk above them, and that word is bear. And I have it, I have it right here. I don't know why there's these bears. It's right on the edge of like, is it there, is it not? Like, and maybe even if you look at the, the really high definition, like, uh, it might be harder to see. It might've been like more like, you know, on old TV, fuzzy, like VHS, it appears more clear. It kind of blends and it looks more like the word, but it's all about like this, creating this kind of illusion. Um, like I call it a magic eye where he, you know, Kubrick was making these movies, but the, the, the, the visible narrative is like the ice, the tip of the iceberg of what's really going on in the movies, which is all blending to the surface. And it's all in the subtext and it's all in the timing. And that's like, you know, you're pointing out Sean's breakdown and there was nobody on this planet that was like more deeply in tune with the architecture of the shining than Sean. And like how it was edited together and to express this numeric, these numeric, uh, properties, um, it's just, it's a big loss to have them. And then, you know, this is just so wild, but just to kind of wrap a bow around this, you take it to a level. It really could take a whole two hours, but it gets into Bruno, the bear and Bruce Willis and die hard where and die hard. The plot is to steal bearer bonds. And Bruce Willis is carrying around a teddy bear with a ribbon around its neck, right where Danny was choked, a red ribbon and die hard came out on the 19th anniversary of the moon landing. And has the subliminal 9-11 poster. And with both of those, we're back at Kubrick. And he's barefoot the whole movie. He's barefoot. Jesus Christ. It never, ever ends. Yeah. And that, yeah, that, yeah, that essay kind of concludes with, um, pointing out how that, how die hard, uh, predicts 9-11 and kind of how that's a lot of the thing about crypto K is like, it seems like everything predicts 9-11 in a way and a lot of movies, but a lot of movies do like really intensely. And die hard are one of them and die hard three is another one and bear symbolism is huge in, in die hard. And it does seem like if you read the symbolism in die hard and the shining of the bear, it feels like the bear is some sort of like psychic parasite almost that's like attached itself to Danny. Cause like you mentioned, he has the red thing around his neck. He also has red, the same red around his, uh, hand, his wrists. So it looks like he's got handcuffs on basically these red handcuffs and the red is associated with the hotel. It's the blood in the lobby of the hotel. There are these big pillars. They're all these big red pillars that he walks by. It's, it almost is like, that's the frozen blood of the, that's going to come out of the elevator. And so there's just so much symbolism going on that, like you say, it could take two, six, eight hours to talk about. Yeah. I just thought the bear thing was interesting because the examples are there and the fact that they're intentionally placed or seemingly intentionally placed 42 seconds apart. It's just interesting. That other thing is that, okay. Die Hard directed by John McTiernan directed Die Hard with a Vengeance as well. These predictive of 9-11. He also directed The Hunt for Red October, um, with Alec Baldwin and Sean Connery. And if you go watch that movie, the first scene is Alec Baldwin in his house and his daughter comes up to him. She's got a teddy bear and she says, I can't sleep. Stanley keeps waking me up. Stanley's the bear. The whole movie like is bookended by this, by the quest to find Stanley the bear, a little baby brother, another bear. And he goes to the head of the CIA and he's talking and they say, oh, he mentioned Stanley. And the head of the CIA, who is James Earl Jones, says, who's Stanley? And Alec Baldwin says, Stanley is a bear. And he goes, oh, moving on. So what the, what? What is this? Why? Man. So let's move on to some 9-11 stuff because there are some weird syncs with Kubrick and 9-11 that I never really hear talked much about. The big one being that the Millennium Hilton Hotel, I guess they explicitly say it was designed to look like the monolith of 2001. Well, it's basically at ground zero when 9-11 happened. So you could say the monolith was there watching the event. If the monolith is supposed to be this like alien artifact or in the film, this thing that travels through time that might be like a weird AI or something, just some observer of human evolution and culture. It was there on 9-11 in our real world space watching that event. That strikes me as interesting. Yeah, it's extremely interesting. I mean, it looks if you side by side it with the Millennium Hilton Hotel and the ground zero with the monolith dug out on the moon. And it's a very similar image, you know, the monolith presiding over this big hole in the ground. Kubrick and 9-11. Yeah, I mean, since he directed 2001 A Space Odyssey and then 9-11 happens in 2001, that's just a very kind of conspicuous link that kind of gets underplayed, honestly, by a lot of people that he pointed to 2001. And then that's the that's the time of the big millennial event. And then so, again, one of Mark's big things was that Kubrick was all part in plugged into the bad guys and he helped even help design 9-11 and that 9-11 was a Kubrick production, just like the moon landing, which is kind of insane. But again, it's like it seems like it true more than it might be true. But well, there is that phenomenon where people say that certain CGI things look very real until you have more advanced CGI and then you look in retrospect and you're like, oh, that didn't really look real at all. And there's a lot of people analyzing the 9-11 planes through that perspective. And when you aren't in a heightened emotional state and it's not fresh in your mind, you're not looking at it, you rewatch it and frame by frame, you're like that plane kind of looks like it disappears before it does any damage to the building. And if we're talking about the moon landing and 9-11 as cinema events, which some people say COVID was that, too, what did we see at the beginning of COVID? People dying in the streets in China. That wasn't real. That was a fear thing that got put out there right away. Yeah, Tom Hanks, he's an interesting guy. Being he kind of has the distinction of being one of the few actors who said he was spoken to 37 in multiple roles. Like he says it in Toy Story and in Captain Phillips and there's maybe some other ones, but he's like the super central, like weird casting, you know, for the COVID thing. So, yes, and 237, I did want to touch on to why that number. Here's the thing I think is interesting about Kubrick is there's a lot of little symbolic nods that people pick up on. And when people pick up on them, there seems to be something that gets seated where it's like, oh, well, that wasn't intentional because he didn't really want to do it. He wanted to do this. And then that happened. There's like a lot of little cover stories or little twists on why certain things are in the film. One good example is 2001. Oh, well, it was supposed to be Saturn, but they couldn't do Saturn with the special effects. So it's Jupiter instead. Room 237 is also similar in the book. I believe it's 127 or it's it's a it's 217. OK, so it's it's different. So it's been switched. There's all these weird little things. And then apparently the hotel wanted him to use a different room. And he was like, it's got to be that room. Well, it's well, it's interesting. I mean, the official story is that, yeah, the the Timberline Lodge had they had a room 217 and they didn't want people or they thought people would be scared if they thought it was haunted or something. So they wanted to change it to a room they didn't have. So they don't have a 237. Well, we'll change it to 237. And that's the story. I think that's bullshit. But because it seems like, well, it's a joke because it's literally saying that the hotel told him what to do. It's orders from the house. You know, it's exactly like what's going on in The Shining, like the hotel is dictating what to do here. But like one more. Yeah. Kubrick's choice of 237, two times three times seven is 42. So 42 and 237 are very linked in that way. And in The Shining, they're clearly linked. He, Danny, wears 42 on his sleeve. He watches Summer of 42 on TV. He stands. He goes into room 237. Actually, Dick Halloran, the chef, is when he has his vision of room 237. He's watching TV and you can hear the TV, what he's saying, right before he, right as he's slipping into the vision, the TV says it's going to be 42 degrees in Denver or 42 degrees somewhere. I can't exactly, but he mentions 42 degrees right as he's going into room 237. So it's like all plugged in there. And then one of the craziest, like, real world, real time 237s relates to the Kennedys, which is kind of, I think, I was kind of, I was afraid and sad that Stephen Snyder didn't include this in his book because he's putting this big thing about Kubrick and the Kennedys. Well, JFK was killed on 11-22-63, his brother, RFK, was killed on June 6th, 68. How much time between those two days? 237 weeks, exactly. I mean, if you didn't have any other dateline syncs or whatever, and you saw that, and then you saw room 237, he's like, this must be related. This must be a comment on, and maybe it is. But, again, there's all these other examples of the number in the dateline acting in these weird ways that gives it kind of a plausible deniability that, well, maybe not. Maybe that's just a synchronicity, but we don't know. Well, and because this number seemed significant, you went and looked for examples of 237 used in films before Kubrick, and there are several. There's an old film called The Show Around the Corner from 1940, and the whole film is very intimately about correspondence through mail and letters, and they're always checking P.O. Box 237, and they show it, they say it. It's a big part of the film, and then there's another one called The Sleeper, where Woody Allen says, I'm 237 years old. I should be collecting Social Security, and that's an odd number to choose, and that was released 2,370 days before The Shining on the day. And then in The Shining, he says, there ain't nothing in room 237 at exactly 2,037 seconds into the film. It's really mind-blowing, and when you see the actual clips from the movies, and you have the time going in the corner, and then you highlight it, you bolden it on those markings, it's like, what the hell? Is it intentional, or is it subconscious? It's like a really crazy degree of synchronicity. Yeah, like I said at the beginning, it sort of feels like Kubrick was one of the only people, maybe not the only person, but one of the few people consciously aware of this underlying cinematic, synchronistic system or something, temporal system, and was consciously employing it. You don't have to look far before The Shining. All you have to do is look actually at the movie Alien, which released, I think it's 42 weeks and 42 days before The Shining, but like Alien, the beginning of that, the first scene, she goes to ask the computer, wait, what's the story, mother? Interface 2037, activating. What's the story? It's like, what's the deal with 237? That's the beginning. And then at the end of Alien, she's in the pod, and in the hypersleep or whatever, and there's the number 723 on the glass, and it's positioned right above her womb. So there's some very clear symbolism going on with Ridley Scott, and then Ridley Scott used unused footage from The Shining in Blade Runner afterwards. So you have to wonder, like, were these guys talking to each other and saying, hey, you know, I'm going to put 237 in my film this week, and you're going to do it next year, right? And then David Cronenberg is going to do it the year after that, right? And it's like, you get the sense that there's some weird, like, cinematic cult going on. And I didn't realize 2 times 3 times 7 was 42. That, to me, is, like, really significant, and that's kind of why it's layered in there. Somehow these numbers must relate to Saturn somehow, but, you know, when you do numerology and you break it down, 4 and 2 is 6. 666? Yeah, that's true. 6 weeks is 42 days. So, like, 666 weeks is 42 times 111 days. So it's like... 6 weeks is... 6 weeks is... What did you say? 6 weeks is 42 days, because 6, you know, 7 days in a week times 6. Yeah, 2 times 3. I mean, that's strange. Yeah, I mean, there's... It really seems like these... Our time, the way we measure time is, like, built around all these numbers. The calendar, too, like... And the Bible, even. That's a whole other can of worms. Yeah, I've done whole shows on the Bible as a template for trying to manifest revelations or trying to get the things in the Bible to happen, so you engineer the steps before to try to put us onto that timeline. Well, it definitely seems weird. And there's been so much work done on Freemasons and their hidden codes and their hand signs and secret handshakes. And when you see it in a public appearance, it's like a subliminal sign that, hey, this is a connected event or a connected person or don't listen to the words coming out of my mouth. Look at the fact that I'm doing the hand sign, letting you know this is an op. 237 could be something similar that's been in the occult film history and it just hasn't been unpacked yet because it predates The Shining. And you got weird people like Woody Allen using it. And that all... I don't know. We didn't mention it all possessed either. That's the earliest known example that we have. From 1931, it's kind of a whole rabbit hole on its own. We don't have much time, but it's Joan Crawford is in Possessed, 1931. But then there's also another movie Joan Crawford is in that's called Possessed that was released on Kubrick's 19th birthday. And both of them have 237 in them at the exact same time. At the exact same time? At the exact same time. Like, it's three minutes and 51 seconds. Like, it's beyond weird. It's one of the keystone, like, beyond weirdness that we've found that is... I've written about it in a couple of my articles. I'll write about it again. It's a really amazing synchronicity. Well, that is a good one to go out on. Way to stick the landing. Let people know about where they can learn more and read your stuff because you really do have to go into the details. It requires a visual reference. It kind of requires the stuff being written down rather than listened to. But tell them where to go. Yeah, well, just CryptoCuberology.com. You can spell that. K-U-B-R-O-L-O-G-Y. And also on Twitter, the same. That's basically my two main outlets for where I do my thing. My website is a substack where I do detailed articles. Twitter is more just for fun and promotion. And then I'm also on a pretty regular guest on Sync Tank, which is a YouTube show put on by Andreas Zurtas. And that's on Tuesdays. I'm on there occasionally. And yeah, and you can also still go onto YouTube and watch Sean's videos, which are still up. I don't know how long they're going to be up. Watch them while they're there. He's got lots of detailed stuff, including us talking. There's two videos, which is actually us in conversation. You can hear him talk and get a sense of what he was like, too. So that's worth doing. Yes. And it's sad that you've lost two colleagues on this journey with you. And it's sad that I'll never get to interview Sean about the Rife documentary that really got us connected. And what a roundabout way to even be connected. And then to do a show like this kind of in his honor. All for a reason. I think it's all working out. Exactly. We are just pawns in the great chessboard. But but thanks for doing this, man. Lots of interesting connections. Really great to talk to someone who has such detailed work and also understands and likes the vibe of this show. It's always just a nice little icing on the cake. So thank you and take care. You too, man. Thanks a lot. It's been a blast. Sweet baby Jesus. There we have it. Probably a bit unexpected. And I know these are love it or hate it kinds of episodes. But I just really get into this synchromistic pattern recognition kind of stuff. I mentioned at the beginning the strange way this interview came to be because I was really trying to cover the Rife documentary that his partner Sean made. And then it turned into this once he told me more about the crypto kubrology work and Sean died as we were already starting to talk about doing an interview. Sad that he couldn't join us. Also, quick sidebar, though, on the logistical side of things for me here at home. I figured out how so many YouTubers can talk so long without looking at notes or stopping to gather their thoughts. They have home use teleprompters where the webcam sits right behind the words. You know, see, I'm so far outside of this subculture and doing my own thing. I haven't paid attention to what's grown up all around me. And now that I am in the video space, I need to know about these things. But none of these people tell you that they have home teleprompters, though they are really helpful. Repeat the line. So let's talk a bit more about the bears thing. I know it might sound silly or out of place, but just because we don't know why it's there doesn't mean that it's not there. I tried to make sure the right visuals went up at the right time during that section, and I definitely don't know what it means. But I'm pretty convinced it's intentional, at least. Maybe it's stellar stuff. But the eye on the teddy bear being the exact match for the elevator display, and then being side by side like two eyes, and then them being shown 42 seconds apart, there's some weird magic happening there. And the poster. Alex directed me to a place where Sean highlighted the hidden bear face a bit better. It's totally there. Not only is it there, but the poster on its own makes no sense for the movie. It's like the subliminal message was more important than it actually making sense to promote the movie at the base level. And here's another iconic image from The Shining, and he shows where the lighting creates more bears. Some stronger candidates than others. I don't see the one on the mom's face at all personally, but the others are there. Audio listeners hate this, but I'll put the images in the show notes too, so you could be following along there if you use an app that will display them. Not all of them do, but some do. But there's one more I want to show too, and he has many, many slides like this, but just look at these chairs. I definitely see it, but if you want more of this, just go to Subliminal Bears 3 Shining Kubrick's Archons. And I don't know. The guy died, and who knows how long his work will circulate, so I wanted to pay homage a little bit. Maybe it's a case study in going too deep or whatever, as people say, but the examples do stack up to make you think there might be something there. And so many 237s, it is insane. Funny to me that my man in the booth gave me the assist on the other Jim Carrey, Green Man archetype. How could I forget the Batman Forever Riddler? And then I thought more about Jim Carrey in general. Of course, he's in the number 23, about seeing these patterns everywhere. 23 is two-thirds of 237. What are the odds of that? That a movie about seeing number codes would conform to one of the biggest ones out there is interesting. But get this, so I just started thinking, well, I wonder when the movie, the number 23, came out. Maybe there's a hit. And of course there is. The movie came out 2-23-07. Now, I'm sure a movie about the number 23 would come out on the 23rd. Easy marketing trick. But in 07, I'm losing it, guys. I'm losing it. But again, if Hollywood itself was named after a tool of druidic magic birthed out of a new technology, essentially, and we can loop in the overlap between the occult and gifted tech, it is there. And it had this majorly outsized impact on culture since its inception. If you come at it from the baseline idea that it's been an occult project from its founding, then you'd expect to see some sophisticated, deeply woven stuff like this, even if it's experimental in some cases. You'd expect to see the ones who are involved in seeding these details exalted in that culture, and Kubrick was. So, just interesting. And, you know, there's also a Montauk poster in The Shining on the wall. I just saw that in the trailer of Jay Widener's new Kubrick's Odyssey 3. So, good stuff. With this kind of material, I very much just like to have examples thrown at me. Some are stronger than others. That's fine. But the ones that hit really do charge me up. And if you agree, well, the second hour just keeps the good times rolling. We talked about gatekeeping in Kubrick's legacy and just his life details in general. Connections to time travel and pop culture. The sync community itself and what happened to it. Spoiler alert, Trump. We also talked about Tom Hanks' career and probably my favorite part, the work he's done on Willy Wonka and the strange connections between Elon Musk, Gene Wilder, and Johnny Depp. Plus, we talked about Spielberg's filmography. It's loaded with interesting details, too. Lots of good stuff. Become a Plus member already. Feel good about supporting truly independent conversations that you're interested in and get twice as much of them. Another thing from my outline that didn't get fit in is that Alex also had an article in Bitcoin Magazine before it got pulled from the website. But he talked about Satoshi publishing the white paper on Halloween 2008 on top of the orange logo that it's associated with that came out way later in an unrelated situation. And then, how curious, the first pro-Bitcoin president is often described as the orange man. I consider that a hit. So, what even is reality, I guess? All right. But as we do, we got to talk reviews of the last two episodes, actually, because I did forget. So, we have Seven Seas, Throwing Shade at the Shady Sponsors, and Technocratic Takeover of Podcasting. Dropping in at a 4.7. Love to see it. I agree. He was very good. And we both kind of came to that interview, I thought, with details. It probably helped it stay in that upper tier. And then there's Tom Montauk, a long-time, highly-requested guest. I looked at it yesterday. I saw 4.6. So, that's also very good. Seems like every show so far in this launch window of THC TV is above a 4.5. And so, I'm a happy guy. I do have the next two recorded, and they are interesting. One I like a lot, and the other, I'm still kind of trying to figure out how I feel about it. I don't agree with the guest's takes on things, but as food for thought and something that's engaging and interesting to listen to, it's good. I don't think you'll come away thinking you wasted your time, even if you don't agree with everything. But, you know, everybody's going to have their own opinion, so we will see. All right, meetup calendar time. June 14th, this weekend, the Raw Milk Party in Lanesboro, Massachusetts. June 19th, we have Sterling, Massachusetts, the Black Sheep Tavern. And then June 28th, in St. Charles, Illinois, there is a THC slash FE combo meetup. I'm wondering if that's flat earth. I don't know. Also, June 28th, Orlando, Florida, the Blue Jacket Park, Magic in Orlando meetup. One more new one, July 5th, Roswell, New Mexico at Black Cock Brewery. Okay, cock-a-doodle-doo. See you there. It is the UFO Fest, so lots happening, I'm sure. And then July 21st, Eden Terrence, Auckland, New Zealand, Gale Breaths Alehouse. I'm getting very used to saying that, and I love seeing it go international. Awesome. Love it. Please remember to try to give me two weeks lead time so I can announce these events on the air because the chances of people randomly checking the calendar and living in close proximity to an event without me calling it out is pretty slim. But that is an important piece of the puzzle to keep in mind so that actually people do show up for it. I also saw a Reddit thread on our subreddit that a couple of recent events actually went really well, so that's good to see, too. There's a lot of clashing, let's just say, out in the world right now, so coming together in a positive spirit over such strange subject matter is a beautiful thing. All right. That said, Crypto K on Twitter. If you want to find Alex, give him an attaboy or something. I know he had a little bit of nervousness, but I thought he did great. CryptoKubrology.com for his sub stack. He's always writing articles. And that's it for me. I've done my part. Your move. Hollywood wand wielders, 16 millimeter magic makers, and MKUltra inter-trainers. Your fucking. Jake hat and I got Jake, and it's taking on a life. It might even be mystic eyes. I'm crazy. New is not how my synchromistic eyes. This touch, what does it mean, though? I don't know. I haven't learned that much. Your synchromistic eyes to see. A well-connected tapestry. A capitalistic bird. We still don't know.