1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,720
Speaker 1: This is a podcast from wor Back now to the

2
00:00:03,960 --> 00:00:09,240
Speaker 1: WR Saturday Morning Show with Larry Minty. Welcome back. Uh oh.

3
00:00:09,400 --> 00:00:13,520
Speaker 1: New York Post entertainment critic Johnny Oleaczinski hates a new

4
00:00:13,600 --> 00:00:17,400
Speaker 1: play even though it has a big star. Let's talk

5
00:00:17,440 --> 00:00:21,720
Speaker 1: about Christine Chenoweth, who now is in a new Broadway play.

6
00:00:22,079 --> 00:00:25,400
Speaker 1: Everybody loves her from Wicked. She's been a huge star

7
00:00:25,480 --> 00:00:27,600
Speaker 1: on Broadway, so this has gotta be great.

8
00:00:27,760 --> 00:00:30,479
Speaker 2: Oh you bet it isn't. Oh my god, Oh what

9
00:00:30,960 --> 00:00:33,760
Speaker 2: a big fat one star from me. It's called the

10
00:00:33,800 --> 00:00:37,440
Speaker 2: Queen of Versailles. And some people might know this story

11
00:00:38,080 --> 00:00:40,440
Speaker 2: it's about. It's from a documentary about this woman named

12
00:00:40,479 --> 00:00:44,120
Speaker 2: Jackie Siegel. She was married to David Siegel, who was

13
00:00:44,159 --> 00:00:48,680
Speaker 2: in charge of a Westgate time shares right, and she

14
00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:50,800
Speaker 2: marries him. She comes from upstate New York, very kind

15
00:00:50,840 --> 00:00:54,000
Speaker 2: of low class, upbringing. Marys this rich billionaire and then

16
00:00:54,040 --> 00:00:57,720
Speaker 2: they start to build a ninety thousand square foot house

17
00:00:58,440 --> 00:01:02,960
Speaker 2: modeled after Versailles and in France, in Florida, in Orlando,

18
00:01:03,040 --> 00:01:05,319
Speaker 2: and then the house comes in they you know, the

19
00:01:05,400 --> 00:01:09,880
Speaker 2: financial crisis happens and there's all these setbacks that if

20
00:01:09,920 --> 00:01:12,040
Speaker 2: anyone just heard me say that and went, I would

21
00:01:12,120 --> 00:01:17,240
Speaker 2: like to see a music hall about that. There's something

22
00:01:17,280 --> 00:01:19,960
Speaker 2: wrong with you. And it turns out there's so many

23
00:01:20,040 --> 00:01:23,080
Speaker 2: many things wrong with this show. One of the crazier

24
00:01:23,160 --> 00:01:26,760
Speaker 2: things about it is beyond Christian shene With, who I've

25
00:01:26,800 --> 00:01:29,040
Speaker 2: always liked before I'll get into her in a second

26
00:01:29,720 --> 00:01:34,080
Speaker 2: Stephen Schwartz, who wrote Wicked, Rolling in Money Define Gravity

27
00:01:34,120 --> 00:01:37,399
Speaker 2: popular that he wrote Wicked, pippin Gods, spell Rolling in

28
00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:40,640
Speaker 2: Money Terrible scorch, the worst of his career. I wish

29
00:01:40,720 --> 00:01:44,720
Speaker 2: these legendary composers would just pack it up sometimes and

30
00:01:44,920 --> 00:01:48,320
Speaker 2: just enjoy their legacies, as opposed to sullying them with

31
00:01:49,080 --> 00:01:52,800
Speaker 2: subpar new stuff. But then there's Christian Shenow with A's

32
00:01:52,840 --> 00:01:57,160
Speaker 2: this kind of real housewife character. There's just no humanity

33
00:01:57,200 --> 00:01:59,640
Speaker 2: to it. I said, she kind of peacocks around singing

34
00:01:59,640 --> 00:02:03,600
Speaker 2: Bland's songs. It really really was quite bad. So that's

35
00:02:03,920 --> 00:02:06,840
Speaker 2: the verdict from the New York Post. If you read

36
00:02:06,920 --> 00:02:10,600
Speaker 2: the New York Times, which I'm sure so many WR

37
00:02:10,800 --> 00:02:15,640
Speaker 2: listeners are clamoring to do, you'll hear a very different take,

38
00:02:16,960 --> 00:02:21,160
Speaker 2: objectively wrong one that this show is good. They are wrong.

39
00:02:21,240 --> 00:02:23,160
Speaker 2: They are the only people that said it's good. They

40
00:02:23,200 --> 00:02:26,320
Speaker 2: are wrong. Do not waste your money seeing The Queen

41
00:02:26,320 --> 00:02:27,079
Speaker 2: of Versailles.

42
00:02:27,120 --> 00:02:30,560
Speaker 1: Okay, how does that happen when you think something is

43
00:02:30,680 --> 00:02:33,880
Speaker 1: that bad that you can't believe anyone else would like it?

44
00:02:33,919 --> 00:02:37,480
Speaker 1: And I trust you on this, Are there other factors

45
00:02:37,520 --> 00:02:40,640
Speaker 1: in play with some of the critics that they would

46
00:02:40,639 --> 00:02:43,320
Speaker 1: give it a better review than it deserves?

47
00:02:43,880 --> 00:02:47,400
Speaker 2: You know, you think you're implying some sort of corruption.

48
00:02:47,480 --> 00:02:49,639
Speaker 2: I will say that there's none of that is going

49
00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:51,360
Speaker 2: on at the New York Times. It's just that old phrase,

50
00:02:51,360 --> 00:02:54,679
Speaker 2: there's no accounting for taste. Some people have really weird tastes,

51
00:02:54,840 --> 00:02:56,720
Speaker 2: you know that. You say, I love this movie, and

52
00:02:56,720 --> 00:02:58,720
Speaker 2: you go, how could you possibly? And I think it's

53
00:02:58,800 --> 00:03:02,920
Speaker 2: up to us critics to have a broad ranging taste

54
00:03:03,600 --> 00:03:04,799
Speaker 2: for a large readership.

55
00:03:05,000 --> 00:03:08,200
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm not saying it has to be corrupt. I'm

56
00:03:08,200 --> 00:03:10,760
Speaker 1: just saying that there might be other reasons because of

57
00:03:10,800 --> 00:03:15,280
Speaker 1: a personal relationship with liking a certain actress, liking a

58
00:03:15,320 --> 00:03:19,400
Speaker 1: certain producer, you know, liking that person that much that

59
00:03:19,520 --> 00:03:22,520
Speaker 1: it kind of colors the colors their review.

60
00:03:22,639 --> 00:03:25,560
Speaker 2: Oh, that is absolutely true. And this used to happen,

61
00:03:25,600 --> 00:03:27,800
Speaker 2: and he was a great critic. Ben Brantley, but he

62
00:03:27,800 --> 00:03:30,400
Speaker 2: would review. He would sort of write these love letters

63
00:03:30,440 --> 00:03:33,919
Speaker 2: to Starlits, so he would he loved Christian chinaw with

64
00:03:34,000 --> 00:03:36,040
Speaker 2: and he would do the whole beginning of the review

65
00:03:36,120 --> 00:03:39,760
Speaker 2: like behold the goddess of the stage, Christian China, and

66
00:03:39,800 --> 00:03:41,880
Speaker 2: then towards the bottom he might say, well, the songs

67
00:03:41,880 --> 00:03:44,120
Speaker 2: weren't that good and the staging wasn't that good. So

68
00:03:44,360 --> 00:03:46,320
Speaker 2: that absolutely does happen. You're impacted by that.

69
00:03:46,600 --> 00:03:48,880
Speaker 1: That's so funny because whenever I used to read his reviews,

70
00:03:48,920 --> 00:03:51,600
Speaker 1: I'd go to the last paragraph and that was spistically

71
00:03:51,600 --> 00:03:54,960
Speaker 1: what I got everything I needed right there. That's so

72
00:03:55,080 --> 00:03:57,800
Speaker 1: funny that you said that, because I always did that.

73
00:03:57,800 --> 00:03:59,600
Speaker 2: That's what that's kind of. That's sort of a critic

74
00:03:59,680 --> 00:04:03,040
Speaker 2: secret if you like, you kind of bury the criticisms

75
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:03,640
Speaker 2: at the bottom.

76
00:04:04,800 --> 00:04:07,560
Speaker 1: Right, Let's talk about Sidney Sweety. We were just talking

77
00:04:07,560 --> 00:04:09,640
Speaker 1: about her a second ago, because she's getting hit with

78
00:04:09,720 --> 00:04:12,400
Speaker 1: questions as she tries to promote this movie. She's getting

79
00:04:12,600 --> 00:04:15,240
Speaker 1: hit with questions about the jenes Ad, which seems to

80
00:04:15,280 --> 00:04:18,360
Speaker 1: be so unfair. How is Christy.

81
00:04:18,080 --> 00:04:20,400
Speaker 2: Doing, by the way, the jeans Ad that no one

82
00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:23,160
Speaker 2: cares about except the media. Nobody cares it's an ad.

83
00:04:23,560 --> 00:04:26,240
Speaker 2: I don't know why my cohorts in the media are

84
00:04:26,279 --> 00:04:29,839
Speaker 2: so obsessed with talking about this ad and hammering home

85
00:04:29,880 --> 00:04:30,240
Speaker 2: this ad.

86
00:04:30,400 --> 00:04:31,560
Speaker 1: The movie I like. So.

87
00:04:31,600 --> 00:04:33,640
Speaker 2: I saw the movie at the Toronto Film Festival. I

88
00:04:33,640 --> 00:04:35,360
Speaker 2: thought it was really great. I think it's a big

89
00:04:35,400 --> 00:04:39,480
Speaker 2: step for her as an actress. Unfortunately, so people are

90
00:04:39,520 --> 00:04:41,520
Speaker 2: talking and I'm going, so it's one of the lowest

91
00:04:42,560 --> 00:04:45,679
Speaker 2: wide release opening weekends ever. It was like one point

92
00:04:45,680 --> 00:04:48,560
Speaker 2: three million across more than two thousand screens, which is very,

93
00:04:48,680 --> 00:04:51,640
Speaker 2: very bad. It's not her fault. It's not the movie's fault.

94
00:04:51,680 --> 00:04:55,200
Speaker 2: If you go on Rotten Tomatoes it has with the

95
00:04:55,279 --> 00:04:57,760
Speaker 2: audience score, it's like a ninety six percent. So the

96
00:04:57,800 --> 00:05:00,279
Speaker 2: people that are going really really like it. It's just

97
00:05:00,320 --> 00:05:04,080
Speaker 2: this is a bad time for adult skewing movies. There's

98
00:05:04,120 --> 00:05:06,080
Speaker 2: that thing in people's head. Larry, I'm sure you say

99
00:05:06,120 --> 00:05:08,159
Speaker 2: it all the time, like I'll wait till it's on streaming.

100
00:05:08,640 --> 00:05:12,440
Speaker 2: It's the death now for these kind of gems with

101
00:05:12,520 --> 00:05:15,359
Speaker 2: good acting. But now we expect to see movies like Christy,

102
00:05:15,440 --> 00:05:19,960
Speaker 2: which is a biopic of Christy Martin the Boxer. We

103
00:05:20,080 --> 00:05:22,839
Speaker 2: expect to see that on TV, not on the big screen,

104
00:05:22,920 --> 00:05:24,599
Speaker 2: so they wait and then the movie's tank.

105
00:05:24,680 --> 00:05:27,800
Speaker 1: Yeah it might do really well streaming, but people go

106
00:05:27,880 --> 00:05:31,159
Speaker 1: to the theaters now to see big events. Something that

107
00:05:31,320 --> 00:05:34,400
Speaker 1: plays do a big screen. If not, why go you're

108
00:05:34,400 --> 00:05:35,600
Speaker 1: going to see it anyway.

109
00:05:35,279 --> 00:05:37,920
Speaker 2: Then I can't blame them. In New York anyway, you're

110
00:05:37,960 --> 00:05:40,920
Speaker 2: spending sometimes thirty dollars to see a movie and that's

111
00:05:41,000 --> 00:05:43,479
Speaker 2: just the ticket. Then you know, if you take a

112
00:05:43,560 --> 00:05:46,200
Speaker 2: date or your kids and you get popcorn and drinks

113
00:05:46,200 --> 00:05:48,719
Speaker 2: like somehow, you're down at one hundred and fifty bucks

114
00:05:48,800 --> 00:05:50,880
Speaker 2: just to watch a movie on a screen that might

115
00:05:50,880 --> 00:05:52,040
Speaker 2: not be as good as the one at home.

116
00:05:52,560 --> 00:05:56,000
Speaker 1: So Michael Jackson is the first artist to have a

117
00:05:56,360 --> 00:05:59,680
Speaker 1: top ten hit in all six decades, the last six decades.

118
00:05:59,760 --> 00:06:02,680
Speaker 2: Yeah, this is gosh. He's working so hard. He's been

119
00:06:02,720 --> 00:06:06,600
Speaker 2: dead sixteen years and yet just this week, this week,

120
00:06:06,640 --> 00:06:09,200
Speaker 2: he became the first artist to have a top ten

121
00:06:09,279 --> 00:06:12,640
Speaker 2: hit across six decades exsecutively. The previous was five and

122
00:06:12,680 --> 00:06:15,440
Speaker 2: it was someone I couldn't name. It wasn't a big person,

123
00:06:15,960 --> 00:06:18,640
Speaker 2: so uh and the reason this happened, so the song

124
00:06:18,720 --> 00:06:21,320
Speaker 2: is Thriller. Thriller is now in the Billboard Top ten again.

125
00:06:21,800 --> 00:06:25,320
Speaker 2: And that's because the trailer for the new biopick Michael,

126
00:06:25,360 --> 00:06:28,440
Speaker 2: which is coming out next spring, that came out and

127
00:06:28,560 --> 00:06:31,040
Speaker 2: it was all set to thriller. So now there's all

128
00:06:31,040 --> 00:06:34,880
Speaker 2: these new fans watching this and wanting to hear that song,

129
00:06:34,920 --> 00:06:37,880
Speaker 2: which is pretty cool to me. I still think that

130
00:06:38,000 --> 00:06:41,240
Speaker 2: movie's kind of a pathetic and awful thing that's not

131
00:06:41,279 --> 00:06:44,160
Speaker 2: going to confront pedophilia. Not that I want a movie

132
00:06:44,200 --> 00:06:46,360
Speaker 2: about pedophilia, but I mean, he was if.

133
00:06:46,279 --> 00:06:48,200
Speaker 1: You're going to do a biopick on somebody, yes.

134
00:06:48,279 --> 00:06:50,840
Speaker 2: I would say he was demonstrably a pedophile, and now

135
00:06:50,880 --> 00:06:53,359
Speaker 2: we're gonna have but hey, his song is back in

136
00:06:53,440 --> 00:06:55,880
Speaker 2: the top ten, which is kind of neat.

137
00:06:55,880 --> 00:06:59,520
Speaker 1: New York Post entertainment critic Johnny Olegzinski. This has been

138
00:06:59,560 --> 00:07:01,680
Speaker 1: a podcas cast from WR