Played by the legendary character actor Joe Spinell, Willie Cicci made his first appearance inThe Godfather. For whatever reason, Spinell isn’t credited in The Godfather. In fact, we don’t even learn that name of his character until the sequel. Unlike Tom Rosqui’s Rocco Lampone and Richard Bright’s Al Neri, he spends the majority of the film standing in the background. However, he definitely makes an impression. With his acne-scarred face, his thin mustache, and his menacing stare, Willie Cicci is probably the menacing Corleone soldier not named Luca Brasi.
Towards the end of the film, as Michael settles all accounts, it falls on Willie Cicci to assassinate one of the heads of the rival families. Cicci traps the man in a revolving door and then guns his helpless victim down. In a finale that is notable for its violence, Cicci’s sadism leaves the viewer shaken. It’s all in the eyes. Other soldiers kill as a part of the job. Cicci seems to enjoy his work.
Later, Willie is among the soldier who stands in the background while Tom Hagen informs Tessio that he can’t get him out of trouble for old time’s sake. Willie doesn’t necessarily look happy about taking Tessio on a final ride but one gets the feeling that it’s still not going to keep him up at night.
And yet, Willie Cicci is not quite a villain in The Godfather, mostly because he works for the Corleones. By the end of the first film, it’s impossible not to cheer a little when the Corleones get their revenge. As savage as it is, they’re taking out people who tried to take them out. The Corleones may have been bad but Barzini, Cuneo, Stracci, and Tattaglia were far worse.
Willie Cicci really doesn’t achieve true villain status until The Godfather, Part II. That’s when, having been arrested after the attempt by the Rosato brothers to kill Frankie Pentangeli, Willie Cicci resurfaces as a witness at the congressional hearings on organized crime. Cicci, obviously enjoying the attention, testified about the Family’s activities. “Yeah,” he says, with a laugh, “the family had lots of buffers.”
That’s the moment that Willie truly becomes a villain. In a gangster movie, you can do a lot of bad things and still be a hero. But the minute you turn rat, it’s over.
Willie Cicci doesn’t get a lot of screentime in either Godfather movie. In The Godfather Part II, he’s even spared Michael’s vengeance. While Hyman Roth, Frankie, and Fredo Corleone all die on-screen, we never see what happened to Willie. It’s as if Michael doesn’t even consider Willie worth worrying about. For viewers, though, Willie Cicci is one of the many unforgettable characters to show up over the course of the film. A lot of Willie’s unexpected popularity is due to the memorably unhinged performance of Joe Spinell. If one was not familiar with Spinell’s other films, one might be forgiven for assuming that he was an actual mob associate who just happened to be hanging out on the set.
Willie Cicci was originally slated to appear in the third film. By this point, his character would have been one of New York’s most feared mob bosses. (I guess the whole testifying before Congress thing wasn’t held against him.) However, Spinell died before shooting began and Willie Cicci was replaced by Joey Zasa, the debonair mobster played by Joe Mantegna.
Personally, I’ll never forget Willie Cicci. He’s one of the unforgettable characters who makes The Godfather special.
“As I was going up the stairs, I met a man who wasn’t there. He wasn’t there again today. I wish, I wish he’d go away.” — Malcolm Rivers
There’s a certain kind of movie that thrives on a rainy Sunday afternoon or a late-night cable scroll—something pulpy, clever, and self-contained, with a cast that makes you sit up a little straighter. James Mangold’s Identity from 2003 is exactly that breed of thriller. It’s not trying to reinvent the wheel, but it’s having a damn good time spinning it through mud, rain, and a whole lot of psychological fog. On the surface, Identity is a slasher-adjacent whodunit set in a deserted Nevada motel during a biblical storm, and it wears its debt to Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None like a bloodstained badge of honor. That classic novel—where strangers are lured to an isolated island and picked off one by one according to a nursery rhyme—provides the blueprint. Mangold swaps the island for a rundown motel, the nursery rhyme for room keys, and adds a thick layer of rainy noir atmosphere. But underneath the jump scares and dripping dread, Identity is also a sly, shaggy-dog meditation on identity, trauma, and the stories we tell ourselves to survive. Mangold, who’d go on to direct Walk the Line and Logan, shows his genre dexterity here—he treats the material with just enough seriousness to keep you invested, but not so much that you can’t laugh at the absurdity when the twist finally snaps into place.
The setup is classic Christie with a tar pit of dread. A motley crew of strangers gets stranded at a rundown motel when a flash flood washes out the roads, just as the guests in And Then There Were None find themselves cut off from civilization. There’s a former cop turned limo driver (John Cusack), a has-been actress (Rebecca De Mornay), a newlywed couple, a cop escorting a prisoner, a nervous motel manager, a prostitute with a heart of gold (Amanda Peet), and a few others who might as well have target silhouettes painted on their backs. The storm rages, the power flickers, and one by one, they start turning up dead. The killer leaves behind clues—room keys, specifically—and the survivors realize the bodies are being dropped in the order of the motel’s room numbers. It’s a wonderfully cheap gimmick that works because the film leans into its own artificiality. The rain never stops. The Nevada landscape is featureless and black. The motel feels less like a real place and more like a diorama in a psychiatrist’s office. Which, as it turns out, is almost exactly what it is.
Now, here’s where the review has to carefully step around spoilers, because Identity lives and dies on its midpoint rug-pull. But seeing as the movie is over twenty years old, a gentle acknowledgment is fair: the motel carnage is intercut with scenes of a criminal psychologist (Alfred Molina) arguing with a judge during a late-night hearing about a convicted serial killer’s sanity. That killer, Malcolm Rivers, is awaiting execution, and the defense is presenting new diary evidence. You don’t have to be a detective to start connecting dots. Mangold and screenwriter Michael Cooney aren’t interested in subtlety; they want you to squirm as the two storylines begin to converge. The motel guests, we gradually realize, are not random travelers. They are fractured pieces of a single damaged psyche—personalities inside Rivers’ mind, duking it out for survival as his body faces a real-world lethal injection. The killer in the motel isn’t a man in a mask; it’s the most malevolent alter among them, systematically erasing the others. Where Christie’s novel uses a hidden murderer working through a fixed list, Identity twists that formula by making the setting itself a psychological construct.
On a technical level, Identity is a masterclass in low-budget atmosphere. Phedon Papamichael’s cinematography drenches every frame in gray-blue gloom, and the sound design makes every creak and drip sound like a gunshot. Mangold directs the ensemble with a steady hand, and the cast clearly knows what movie they’re in. Cusack brings his usual blue-collar soulfulness to Ed, the ex-cop with a guilty conscience. Ray Liotta, as the suspicious cop, chews scenery in the best way—he’s all twitchy aggression and bad intentions. But the real standout is Amanda Peet as Paris, a call girl who just wants to start over on a Florida orange farm. She’s smarter and tougher than the archetype usually allows, and her final scene in the motel’s office carries an unexpected tenderness. That’s the trick of Identity: it makes you care about figments. For a good hour, you’re genuinely invested in whether the newlyweds survive or if the motel manager will finally clean that damn room 6.
Where the movie loses some people is in the execution of its twist. When the narrative finally snaps from the motel to the real-world courtroom, there’s a jarring shift that feels almost like a different film. The last fifteen minutes become a race to explain the rules of this shared-mind universe, and here the logic gets wobbly. How exactly does a personality “die” inside a system? Why does the motel order matter? And without giving too much away, the film’s famous final reveal—which involves a third-act twist on the twist—pushes credibility to the breaking point. Some viewers will throw their hands up and groan. Others will grin and applaud the audacity. I land somewhere in the middle. On one hand, the final image is genuinely chilling, a perfect little joke about evil’s persistence. On the other hand, the film spends so much time setting up the motel’s internal rules that it forgets to make the real-world stakes feel as urgent.
Still, Identity works best if you don’t overthink it. Think of it as a B-movie with an A-movie haircut, or as And Then There Were None filtered through a late-night cable dream about multiple personality disorder. Mangold directs the violence with a knowing wink—there are no gratuitous gore shots, just quick, sharp cuts and clever misdirection. One death involving a baseball bat and a laundry machine is as goofy as it is brutal, and that tonal tightrope is hard to walk. The film also has a sneaky thematic resonance beneath the pulp. At its heart, Identity asks whether people can truly change. Every character is trapped not just by the storm, but by their own backstory: the cop who failed a case, the actress past her prime, the prostitute who dreams of orange groves. In the motel of the mind, these backstories are just narratives the personality uses to justify itself. When Paris pleads, “I get to start over,” she’s speaking for anyone who’s ever wished they could delete a bad version of themselves. The film’s bleak final twist suggests that some stories are stronger than we think—the ones we tell ourselves about who we are, and who we’ve always been.
For a thriller that runs just over ninety minutes, Identity has surprising legs. It’s not a masterpiece, but it’s a tight, well-oiled machine of suspense with a gimmick that still feels fresh if you haven’t been spoiled. The dialogue crackles with noir-lite attitude, and the pacing never sags—once the bodies start dropping around the twenty-minute mark, you’re locked in. The biggest flaw is that the movie is so proud of its puzzle-box structure that it forgets to breathe between twists. You never get a quiet moment to sit with the characters as real people because, well, they’re not real people. But that’s also the point. Identity is a movie about a metaphor, and like most metaphors, it works until you poke it too hard. If you’re looking for a rainy-night thrill ride with a cast that commits to the bit and a final shot that’ll stick in your brain like a bad dream, check in. Just maybe avoid room 6.
4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
Today, the Shattered Lens wishes a happy 87th birthday to the legendary actor, Harvey Keitel! It’s time for….
4 Shots From 4 Harvey Keitel Films
Mean Streets (1973, dir by Martin Scorsese, DP: Kent L. Wakeford)
Taxi Driver (1976, dir by Martin Scorsese, DP: Michael Chapman)
Reservoir Dogs (1992, dir by Quentin Tarantino, DP: Andrzej Sekuła)
Bad Lieutenant (1992, dir by Abel Ferrara, DP: Ken Kelsch)
John Woo’s A BETTER TOMORROW was such a gigantic hit in Hong Kong cinemas when it came out in 1986 that you had to know that a sequel would soon follow. A BETTER TOMORROW II would open a year later, bringing back all the stars from the original. This film would go even bigger with both the action and the melodrama, with varying levels of success, but we’ll get to that in a little bit.
The plot seems familiar at first, as ex-gangster Ho (Ti Lung) is let out of prison to work with the police to dig up dirt on his old friend Lung (Dean Shek), a former criminal who’s trying to run a legitimate business down at the shipyard. The main reason he agrees to help though, is because his younger brother / undercover cop Kit (Leslie Cheung) is working on the case and Ho wants to protect him. After a series of double-crosses and betrayals, it seems that we’re in for the same type of story that we got in the first film. Key differences emerge when Lung is framed for murder and escapes to New York City. There we meet Ken Gor (Chow Yun-Fat), the conveniently discovered twin brother of tragic hero Mark Gor. Ken tries to help Lung, who has fallen into a state of catatonic shock upon learning that his daughter has been killed. When death squads come after him in New York, Ken shows his badass cred and saves his ass. Lung eventually snaps out of it and the two head back to Hong Kong together. There they team up with Ho and Kit to exact bloody vengeance on all who have gotten in the way of their efforts at personal reform!
The first thing I’ll say about A BETTER TOMORROW II is that the film has some incredible action sequences, some of the best you’ll ever see, and some of Woo’s best work. The finale where the trio of Ken, Ho and Lung storm the bad guy’s mansion is a masterpiece of extended and creative bloody violence. I 100% recommend the film for the action.
The second thing I’ll say about A BETTER TOMORROW II is that it has some of the most over the top melodrama that you’ll ever see. My comment is mainly aimed at the section of the film where Ken tries to get Lung to snap out of his shock. I really don’t enjoy these scenes, with my least favorite being the scene where Chow Yun-Fat tries to force a completely zoned out Dean Shek to eat. There is a lot of good-looking food wasted in that scene, and I cringe every time I watch it!
I’ve read that the film was a troubled production, and that John Woo and producer Tsui Hark had very different ideas on the type of movie that each wanted to make. Both tried to produce different edits of the film, and with too many cooks in the kitchen, we ended up with this glorious Frankenstein. When the dust settled, John Woo mostly disowned the film except for that majestic, crimson-stained finale. Tsui Hark would take over the series and turn out A BETTER TOMORROW III a couple of years later, while Woo would move on to THE KILLER.
There are interesting ideas here, and the film almost wants to turn into a comic book. For example, the scene that first introduces us to Ken Gor, Mark’s twin brother, features an old man who’s devoted his life to drawing storyboard illustrations of the adventures of Mark, Ho and Kit. He even has Mark’s trademark sunglasses and blood-stained, bullet-riddled coat, which you know Ken will put on at some point. This seems appropriate to many of the shenanigans that go on, but then the film will switch its focus to extended scenes of a depressed Kit or a drooling Lung, and it seems like we’re in a different movie. There are parts of this film that I love and there are parts that I just want to be over.
At the end of the day, if you’ve come to A BETTER TOMORROW II for the promise of John Woo’s awesome action, you will get your fill. You’ll get to see Chow Yun-Fat at his charismatic best, wearing his long coat and sunglasses, and wielding twin barettas as he takes out hordes of henchmen. You’ll get to see Ti Lung swinging a sword that might bring back images of his Shaw Brothers heydays! Just be prepared to watch Dean Shek spill milk, eat through an orange (peel and all), and gnaw on a piece of frozen meat along the way.
A BETTER TOMORROW II is currently streaming on Amazon Prime, Tubi, and Plex.
On this date, 119 years ago, Katharine Hepburn was born in Hartford, Connecticut. She would go one to become a cultural icon, a performer who survived being labeled box office to poison to eventually become one of our most acclaimed actresses. Hepburn was a total of four acting Oscars over the course of her career, a record that has yet to be topped.
Today’s scene that I love comes from 1940’s The Philadelphia Story and it features Katharine Hepburn acting opposite another one of my favorite performers, the great James Stewart.
4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!
Today is the 96th anniversary of the birth of Jesus Franco! One of the most prolific filmmakers of all time, Franco made movies that …. well, they’re not easy to describe. Jess Franco was responsible for some of the most visually striking and narratively incoherent films ever made. He made films that you either loved or you hated but there was no mistaking his work for being the work of someone else.
Today, in honor of his birthday, here are….
4 Shots From 4 Films
The Awful Dr. Orloff (1962, dir by Jess Franco, DP: Godofredo Pacheco)
Nightmares Come At Night (1970, dir by Jess Franco)
She Killed In Ecstasy (1970, dir by Jess Franco, DP: Manuel Merino)
Female Vampire (1973, dir by Jess Franco, DP: Jess Franco)
Before I say anything else, want to express how much I appreciate how straight-forward the title of Rustlers On Horseback is. There are horses and there are rustlers and often the rustlers do ride the horses. No lies detected.
Mistaken for being an outlaw, Marshal Rocky Lane (Allan Lane) becomes a member of a gang that’s led by Leo Straykin (Roy Barcroft). Leo has taken over the Reynolds Ranch and he’s planning on cheating a land agent out of $100,000 so that he can finance his future crimes. However, Leo isn’t working on his own and Lane and Nugget Clark (Eddy Waller) work to discover who the outlaw’s secret boss really is. (This is a low-budget, Poverty Row western so there aren’t that many possibilities.) However, Lane is not the only person working undercover. George Nader plays the son of the murdered ranch owner. Nader is looking for his own revenge.
This is a pretty standard Poverty Row western, with Lane looking convincing while riding a horse and shooting a gun. The “secret boss” makes the film a little bit more interesting than I was expecting but not that much more interesting. As is so often the case with these movies, how you react will depend on whether nor not you’re already a fan of the western genre when you watch it. If you like westerns that don’t have much filler between the chases and the gunfights, a western like this will be up your alley. If you’re not a fan of the genre, this film won’t change your mind.
This film was one of George Nader’s early roles. Nader made a handful of B-movies, including the infamous Robot Monster, before he branched into more mainstream films. Eventually, he found work in Europe and found fame as FBI Agent Jerry Cotton in a series of German films. After an accident left him sensitive to light and ended his acting career, Nader found success as a writer.
As for Allan Lane, he went on to become the voice of Mr. Ed.
There’s a scene early in SMOKE SIGNALS where Victor Joseph, played by Adam Beach, tries to teach Thomas Builds-the-Fire (Evan Adams) how to be a real Indian. He ends the scene with “This ain’t Dances-with-Salmon you know?!” It’s a funny exchange, but it also clues the audience in on the fact that this isn’t going to be your typical Hollywood movie about Indians. Directed by Chris Eyre and written by Sherman Alexie, it’s the first feature-length film written, directed, and produced by Native Americans to reach a wide audience both in the United States and beyond. As such, we get a story that feels fresh while tackling a variety of difficult subjects with humor and optimism.
The story focuses on Victor as he travels from the Coeur d’Alene Indian Reservation in Idaho to Phoenix, Arizona to retrieve his father’s possessions after learning that he’s passed away. His father abandoned him and his mother when he was just a boy, and he’s clearly been scarred by the situation. Along for the ride, mainly because he can afford to pay their bus fare, is Thomas Builds-the-Fire, his nerdy and talkative friend. From this point, the film becomes a road trip, and we follow along as they make it to Arizona and back. While there is funny stuff along the way, the movie is mostly interested in observing Victor as he comes to terms with the trauma and pain left behind when his dad went away.
I’ve always liked Adam Beach, and he’s very good here as Victor. His character spends a lot of the movie angry at the world, but from time to time, he’ll flash this big, wonderful smile. It’s a nice inside-out performance as he seems to be simmering on the inside and just trying not to explode. And then there’s Evan Adams, whose Thomas is awkward and optimistic, and who loves to tell big stories about Victor’s dad. For example, they have this awesome exchange where Thomas tells Victor that his dad looks like Charles Bronson. As Bronson’s biggest fan, I can tell you that Victor’s dad, played by Gary Farmer, looks nothing like Charles Bronson. The scene has a nice punchline as Thomas tells him that he doesn’t mean the Charles Bronson from the first DEATH WISH, but more like the Charles Bronson of DEATH WISH 5! The movie has several unexpected scenes like this, and the genuine chemistry between these two guys is what makes the movie work for me. I believe it when their characters begin to understand and appreciate each other, and it’s their emotional connection that gives the film some staying power even after the credits roll.
There are some additional performances that I enjoyed. I mentioned Gary Farmer, who plays Victor’s dad. His Arnold Joseph is not the most sympathetic character in the world, as he chooses to run away from a guilt that he can never deal with. Somehow, by the end, we have some understanding of his actions. And then there’s Irene Bedard as Suzy Song, the young lady who befriends Victor’s dad and calls his mom when he passes away. Best known for being the voice of Pocahontas in the Disney animated classic, she conveys kindness and compassion in her relatively small role. Tantoo Cardinal is good as Victor’s mom, and Tom Skerritt even shows up in a cameo as a police chief in Arizona. Sherman Alexie’s screenplay, based on his book “The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven,” is simple, yet full of depth, and it’s brought to life by an excellent cast.
Even though SMOKE SIGNALS was made almost thirty years ago, it’s still a very relevant film to this day. It’s funny, it tackles difficult subjects that are universal to all of us, and it’s told from a Native American perspective that we seldom see. In other words, it feels like we’re dealing with real people, not the romantic caricatures or noble victims that Hollywood still tries to push on us in movies about Indians. It’s not a flashy film in any way, and that’s okay. It’s one of those movies that understands its characters and trusts the audience enough to just hang out and observe them. Anchored by an excellent performance from Adam Beach, it’s a perfect example of how movies can be a lot better when Hollywood gets out of the way and let’s genuine, talented people tell their stories.
I watched SMOKE SIGNALS on the Paramount Plus streaming service.
“I mean, I wouldn’t take out a cartel leader. Turn one cartel into 50. Besides, killing kings doesn’t start wars, it ends them.” — Matt Graver
Sicario: Day of the Soldado is a tense, often entertaining follow-up that never quite reaches the same level of dread, complexity, or visual identity as the first Sicario. It’s a movie that knows how to hit hard in the moment, but it doesn’t linger in the mind the same way, and a big reason for that is how much it shifts from being a layered border thriller into something more like a blunt-force crime action movie.
What stands out right away is that the film still has strong ingredients. Taylor Sheridan’s script gives Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro plenty of room to do what they do best, and both actors make this thing watchable even when the movie itself starts feeling thinner than it should. Brolin brings that loose, swaggering menace to Matt Graver, making him feel like the kind of guy who smiles while ordering something morally awful. Del Toro, meanwhile, gives Alejandro a cold, haunted intensity that fits the character perfectly. He doesn’t need much dialogue to sell the idea that this man is basically a weapon walking around in human form.
But that’s also where the movie’s biggest issue starts to show. For all the credit Sheridan deserves for keeping the world of Sicario alive, the absence of Denis Villeneuve in the director’s chair is obvious. The first film had this slow-burning, oppressive grip on you; every scene felt like it was pulling you deeper into a nightmare that had structure, purpose, and a real sense of moral unease. Here, that layered feeling is much weaker. The sequel becomes more interested in forward motion, shootouts, and tension-by-incident than in developing the deeper political and thematic weight that made the original so memorable.
That doesn’t mean Sicario: Day of the Soldado is empty. It just feels like it has less on its mind than the first film. The original Sicario was about systems, corruption, compromise, and the way law enforcement and criminal violence blur together until nobody gets to stay clean. This sequel touches on similar territory, but it often feels like the movie is more focused on creating a harsh atmosphere around its two lead men than on really digging into what all of it means. In that sense, it starts to feel like a vehicle for Brolin and Del Toro first, and a larger statement second.
Stefano Sollima does a solid job with the action, and to his credit, he understands that this world should feel mean, chaotic, and stripped of comfort. There’s a gritty professionalism to the violence that works well enough, and the film certainly doesn’t shy away from brutality. Still, the action doesn’t always carry the same weight as it did in the first movie because the buildup isn’t as rich. The tension is there, but the emotional and thematic buildup behind it is thinner, so some of the set pieces land more as effective genre beats than as moments that actually deepen the story.
The film’s biggest strength, beyond the performances, is its atmosphere of moral corrosion. Nobody in Day of the Soldado feels especially noble, and that’s part of what keeps it interesting. Brolin’s Graver is still the kind of operator who treats human lives like pieces on a board, while Del Toro’s Alejandro remains a deeply damaged figure who seems to exist somewhere between avenger, assassin, and ghost. Their relationship gives the movie a sharp edge, because you’re never really sure whether these guys are working together, manipulating each other, or simply following the same dark logic from different angles.
Still, the movie’s structure is less satisfying than the first one’s. It leans harder into a straightforward escalation of events, and once that happens, some of the mystery and suspense gives way to a more familiar crime-thriller rhythm. That isn’t automatically a bad thing, but it does mean the film loses some of the special quality that made Sicario feel so bracing. The sequel is darker in tone, sure, but not necessarily deeper. It’s more aggressive than observant, more kinetic than reflective.
A lot of this is why the movie works best when it keeps its focus on the two men at the center. Brolin and Del Toro are compelling enough to hold attention even when the screenplay starts feeling a little schematic. Their characters are so insulated by violence and secrecy that they almost seem to belong to a different kind of movie than everyone else around them. The downside is that this also makes the surrounding story feel less important. The first film balanced character and theme in a way that felt inseparable; this one often feels like it is using theme as a backdrop for the characters rather than letting the ideas shape the entire film.
Even so, Sicario: Day of the Soldado isn’t a failure. It’s a good-looking, well-acted, often tense sequel that knows how to stay nasty and efficient. It just doesn’t have the same confidence in its own ideas. The result is a film that is entertaining in a hard-edged, grim way, but also one that makes you think about what it could have been with a stronger directorial voice pulling everything together. Taylor Sheridan’s fingerprints are still all over it, but Villeneuve’s absence leaves a noticeable gap in the film’s pulse and perspective.
In the end, the movie feels like a solid but diminished return to a brutal world. It gives you Brolin and Del Toro doing sharp, controlled work inside a story that never fully rises to match them. That’s enough to make it worthwhile, but not enough to make it essential. Compared to the first Sicario, this one is more of a hard-nosed spin-off in spirit than a true continuation of the original’s power, and that difference is felt in almost every scene.
Hi, everyone! Tonight, on twitter, I will be hosting one of my favorite films for #MondayMania! Join us for 2017’s The Wrong Man!
You can find the movie on Prime and then you can join us on twitter at 9 pm central time! (That’s 10 pm for you folks on the East Coast.) See you then!