Speaker 1: What kind of a show you guys putting on here today?
Speaker 2: You're not interested in art?
Speaker 1: Now?
Speaker 2: No, Look, we're going to do this thing. We're going
Speaker 2: to have a conversation.
Speaker 1: From Chicago. This is film Spotting. I'm Adam Kempinar and
Speaker 1: I'm Josh Larson.
Speaker 2: Remain on Interstate for two hundred and forty nine miles David.
Speaker 1: David week, no week talking to each other out.
Speaker 3: Do you want to go on a big, bold, beautiful journey.
Speaker 2: Yes, Colin Farrell and Margot Robbie go on a big, bold,
Speaker 2: beautiful journey in the film of the same name from
Speaker 2: Columbus and After Yang director Cooganada. We've got a review.
Speaker 1: And our favorite Paul Thomas Anderson Decade. That and more
Speaker 1: ahead on film Spotting.
Speaker 2: I have a competition in bed. I want no one
Speaker 2: else to succeed.
Speaker 1: Welcome to Film Spotting. Paul Thomas Anderson's latest, One Battle
Speaker 1: after Another, is out, Josh. We will have a review
Speaker 1: next week. In the meantime, we have a new deeply
Speaker 1: flawed film Spotting poll. We're asking you to name your
Speaker 1: favorite Paul Thomas Anderson decade and I hate to say
Speaker 1: this out loud. Producer Sam Is surely going to hear this.
Speaker 1: But you know how you know it's actually not a
Speaker 1: deeply flawed Film Spotting poll. I don't want to answer it.
Speaker 1: That means it's a good poll.
Speaker 2: I had the same thought. As a matter of fact, Adam,
Speaker 2: this is a poll that forced me to do some homework.
Speaker 2: We do homework all the time for our top five
Speaker 2: lists and other things for the show. Rarely does that
Speaker 2: happen for me with polls. But yeah, this was such
Speaker 2: a good question. I had to do a slight revisit
Speaker 2: of a Paul Thomas Anderson film. I'll share that when
Speaker 2: we get to the poll.
Speaker 1: Okay, our picks maybe in that PTA poll sounds like
Speaker 1: Josh may have a pick and results from our sixties
Speaker 1: musicals poll later listeners have chosen, plus their feedback. Quick reminder,
Speaker 1: Film Spotting is now available as a video podcast. If
Speaker 1: you're a Spotify listener, you can toggle between video and audio.
Speaker 1: You can also watch the show on YouTube. For a
Speaker 1: link to video episodes, go to film Spotting dot net
Speaker 1: slash episodes. But first, a big, bold, beautiful journey.
Speaker 4: Is that your high school?
Speaker 2: Yeah? He'd you know? Well?
Speaker 4: Two reasons one those could only be high school doors
Speaker 4: and the second reason, I'll tell you later what. No,
Speaker 4: I'm not sure what. Well, I went here for four years.
Speaker 4: I don't know who or what. When you know, it's okay,
Speaker 4: high school, it's okay. We'll find out.
Speaker 2: Plenty of places to start with a big, bold, beautiful journey, Adam,
Speaker 2: this is a full movie. It's an ambitious movie. But
Speaker 2: this is Film Spotting, so we have to start with
Speaker 2: the coganata of all. I think we've both been admirers
Speaker 2: of his work pretty much from the beginning. I think
Speaker 2: we both followed the video essays he started out with,
Speaker 2: examining the likes of Breaking Bad, also I believe Harakazu
Speaker 2: Correa's films, and then Columbus his debut as a writer director,
Speaker 2: his feature debut. It won the Film Spotting Golden Brick
Speaker 2: Award in twenty seventeen. This is our annual award for
Speaker 2: emerging and exciting filmmakers. After Yang his follow up that
Speaker 2: came out in twenty twenty two, we both had it
Speaker 2: on our top ten lists for that year, and then,
Speaker 2: of course Film Spotting Fest. Just this past March, where
Speaker 2: we celebrated twenty years of the show, we screened Columbus
Speaker 2: and we're lucky enough to have a post screening conversation
Speaker 2: with Cooganata. But we just shared that in the film
Speaker 2: Spotting Feed a couple of episodes ago. So a big, bold,
Speaker 2: beautiful journey in which Colin Ferrell and Margot Robbie play
Speaker 2: a pair of skeptical singles who are nuts into an
Speaker 2: existential first date. It comes with big, bold expectations. In fact,
Speaker 2: after only Columbus and after Yang, I at least had
Speaker 2: already put Cooganata among those filmmakers who come with a
Speaker 2: separate category of expectations. Think about this, maybe in terms
Speaker 2: of star ratings might help me explain what I'm talking about.
Speaker 2: Three stars for let's say a new Paul Thomas Anderson movie,
Speaker 2: or maybe a new Kelly Reikert movie, or a new
Speaker 2: Jordan Peele movie. That doesn't mean the same thing as
Speaker 2: three stars for the new let's say Gareth Edwards movie.
Speaker 2: And I say that because I'm someone who gave Edwards
Speaker 2: Jurassic World Rebirth three out of four stars. Someone like
Speaker 2: Edwards just has to deliver a decent movie to hit
Speaker 2: that range. I feel like the others I mentioned, though,
Speaker 2: they have to deliver a movie at least as good
Speaker 2: as what they've already done, which has been pretty great.
Speaker 2: So there's a range here, and I think this is
Speaker 2: what Coganata has done to himself with Columbus and with
Speaker 2: After Yang. I can't help it. But when I go
Speaker 2: to see a new film from him now, I'm thinking
Speaker 2: of it in terms of a Coganata scale. So how
Speaker 2: does it compare to his other excellent films just in general?
Speaker 2: How does it extend upon his favorite themes, two of
Speaker 2: which I'd suggest are maybe the family and also modernity?
Speaker 2: How does it exemplify or refine certain esthetic techniques here?
Speaker 2: I'm thinking about his use of space in particular. So, Adam,
Speaker 2: how did all of this play into your viewing of
Speaker 2: a big, bold, beautiful journey, which I should note was
Speaker 2: written by Seth Reese, whereas Coganata wrote his previous screenplays
Speaker 2: adapting a short story. In the case of After Yang,
Speaker 2: I'm not going to ask you how many stars you're
Speaker 2: giving the movie? Instead, how many Coganatas do you give it?
Speaker 1: I'm going to refrain for now from answering that question.
Speaker 1: How much time are you going to give me? I
Speaker 1: was hoping we'd start here, Josh, and if you didn't
Speaker 1: start here, I probably would have found a way to
Speaker 1: make it seem like it was your question. And I
Speaker 1: don't want to suggest that anyone has to be a
Speaker 1: deep cogonata scholar or appreciator like us, someone who has
Speaker 1: the context that we have, like you laid out, to
Speaker 1: like this movie or to address this topic. And I
Speaker 1: wouldn't say that because we have the relationship that we
Speaker 1: have to his work. And I'll throw in that I
Speaker 1: also teach Columbus in one of my classes, and in fact,
Speaker 1: this week my students are turning in their first written
Speaker 1: review and it's of Columbus. So we just watched it
Speaker 1: and talked about it in class. I wouldn't suggest that
Speaker 1: I'm extra qualified to weigh in, but I might be
Speaker 1: well positioned to weigh in. We'll see if my remarks
Speaker 1: hold up, and I'm extra excited to weigh in. And
Speaker 1: maybe the true test of a director's vision of their
Speaker 1: tourist impulses, if you buy into such things, isn't whether
Speaker 1: their imprint keeps appearing in the movies they write indirect
Speaker 1: movies like Columbus and after Yang, as you mentioned, it's
Speaker 1: whether it's apparent even in the movies they don't write
Speaker 1: like this one, And how does it appear in those movies?
Speaker 1: Is it in the visual style, is it in specific
Speaker 1: formal choices, is it in the material? Is it in
Speaker 1: thematic resonance. It wouldn't surprise me to hear someone say
Speaker 1: they felt like this was a departure or that they
Speaker 1: didn't see Koganata in this movie. And yet for me
Speaker 1: it was undeniably a Cooganata film, and a good one.
Speaker 1: And I suppose, if I'm going to answer your question,
Speaker 1: if I'm starting my letterboxed Coganauta ranking right now, I
Speaker 1: am putting it after Columbus and after Yang. But that
Speaker 1: doesn't mean much, because I do like a big, bold,
Speaker 1: beautiful journey quite a bit. And beyond the care that
Speaker 1: clearly went into the look of the film and so
Speaker 1: many of the compositions, and hopefully we'll talk about that more,
Speaker 1: I'll give you one choice, one formal choice that surely
Speaker 1: wasn't on the page this way, and hopefully no one
Speaker 1: will write in and say, well, yeah, it shouldn't be
Speaker 1: on the page this way. That's not how screenplays are
Speaker 1: supposed to be written. I know there's a moment early
Speaker 1: in the film not a spoiler. There's a moment where
Speaker 1: Colin Ferrell is driving in his car and the GPS
Speaker 1: is urging him to take this big, bold, beautiful journey,
Speaker 1: and like his hype person, his coach is getting him
Speaker 1: to say, is trying to get him to say with
Speaker 1: some conviction, I want to go on a big, bold,
Speaker 1: beautiful journey. And it's just like you know, a comic
Speaker 1: saying make some noise or whatever, and that's not loud enough.
Speaker 1: The first two times, it's not quite with enough excitedness,
Speaker 1: and then that last time, rather than us hearing how
Speaker 1: Colin Farrell says it, the choice is to cut to
Speaker 1: the outside of the car and we only see Colin
Speaker 1: Ferrell yelling it seems at the top of his lungs.
Speaker 1: And it takes me right back to the moment in
Speaker 1: Columbus where Jin and Casey are having one of their
Speaker 1: first encounters. I think it's maybe the first meeting where
Speaker 1: they're really walking around the town and they're talking about
Speaker 1: the architecture and Jin asks John cho asks Haley lou
Speaker 1: Richardson's Casey about the architecture and what she loves about
Speaker 1: this building, and she just starts spouting the usual fodder
Speaker 1: that she gives when she's doing a tour. It's one
Speaker 1: of the first modern I thanks in the United States.
Speaker 2: Do you like this building intellectually because of all the facts?
Speaker 1: No, I'm also moved by it. Yes, yes, tell me
Speaker 1: about that what moves you? And in that moment, Cogonauta
Speaker 1: cuts to the inside of the building and we only
Speaker 1: see through the through the mirror or through the window,
Speaker 1: through the glass, we see her talking about it, and
Speaker 1: we don't hear it, but we don't need to hear it.
Speaker 1: We can see her conviction, we can see her passion.
Speaker 1: We know that she's finally talking from her heart about
Speaker 1: what the architecture means to her. And and here it's
Speaker 1: just sort of reverse because now we're getting outside of
Speaker 1: the glass and looking in at at Colin Ferrell's David.
Speaker 1: But it's the same thing. All we need to know
Speaker 1: is the passion, right, And so Coganata is doing something
Speaker 1: very similar there. That's a formal choice that that stood
Speaker 1: out to me there, that that I thought was really effective.
Speaker 1: But beyond that, you mentioned family, and I'm just going
Speaker 1: to give you a few here because there's more that
Speaker 1: I think we can get into. You mentioned family, go
Speaker 1: back to Columbus, you have fundamentally a story about Haley
Speaker 1: Leu Richardson's casey coming to terms with her relationship with
Speaker 1: her mother and what the expectations of that relationship are,
Speaker 1: what the expectations are for her as a daughter, whether
Speaker 1: or not she could and should leave town and pursue
Speaker 1: her own dreams, her own professional dreams, whether or not
Speaker 1: she even wants that for herself, And of course the
Speaker 1: flip side there is Jin having to come to this
Speaker 1: place and be near his father, who he doesn't really
Speaker 1: want any part of, So it's all about this generational angst.
Speaker 1: The angst more applies to Jin and his father, but
Speaker 1: this generational tension in both cases and each of these
Speaker 1: younger characters having to come to terms with their relationships
Speaker 1: with their parents and ultimately who they are, their identities
Speaker 1: as defined by their parents, and who they are going
Speaker 1: to be in the world and where they're going to
Speaker 1: be in the world after. Yang is doing something similar,
Speaker 1: though it's with a dad figure played by Colin Farrell
Speaker 1: and a pseudo son if you will, right, a synthetic son,
Speaker 1: but it's still a generational gap and the father character
Speaker 1: trying to make sense of who this son really was
Speaker 1: now that he's gone, and that is very much what's
Speaker 1: going on. This generational tension is very much what's going
Speaker 1: on in a big, bold, beautiful journey as well, and
Speaker 1: the last one I'll give you here, Josh. I've only
Speaker 1: looked at this point at Rotten Tomatoes and the score
Speaker 1: for this film, and I'll only pontificate a little bit
Speaker 1: and say that I wonder if to some extent the
Speaker 1: title of this movie is hurting it, because I feel
Speaker 1: like I'm getting a lot of Gene Shallat esque reviewers
Speaker 1: who seem to be calling out the movie's title, the
Speaker 1: and their snarky blurbs, and No, I think by design,
Speaker 1: the journey isn't. The journey that these characters go on
Speaker 1: isn't as big or bold, or maybe even as beautiful
Speaker 1: as perhaps the trailer would suggest or or as the
Speaker 1: title would have you believe. I don't think it's a
Speaker 1: spoiler to say that that these characters, the journey that
Speaker 1: they go on, they're often reliving moments from their past
Speaker 1: that are it's not a fantasy, or there are fantasy elements,
Speaker 1: but they're often reliving what are regrettable and painful moments.
Speaker 4: Who's that Cheryl Haywood, she plays Roseman. So are you
Speaker 4: in this show?
Speaker 1: You're in this musical?
Speaker 4: Yeah, play jape Perpon Finch. You're jap Pierpon Finch. Yes, what,
Speaker 4: that's amazing you did the show.
Speaker 1: God, I wish now ex musical groupy.
Speaker 4: After her solo, I am I tell her I love her?
Speaker 1: Oh wow, Okay, she.
Speaker 4: Says, I don't love you. I love Clint Whitford and
Speaker 4: I'm devastated. Who's Clint Whitford's asshole?
Speaker 2: Prick?
Speaker 4: College freshman treats are.
Speaker 1: Like there are moments though, that we we all have
Speaker 1: from our past, and there are moments that we would
Speaker 1: all like a second shot at. And if you go
Speaker 1: back to after Yang and you go back to Columbus,
Speaker 1: Coganata consistently invites his characters to rediscover the familiar with
Speaker 1: fresh eyes. And that's big, bold and beautiful to me,
Speaker 1: and and that that very much worked for me with
Speaker 1: this film. And I'm dying to hear whether or not
Speaker 1: you think I'm crazy, whether or not it worked for you,
Speaker 1: or whether or not you're you're with most critics on
Speaker 1: this movie.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I liked it quite a bit. I think it
Speaker 2: is distinct from his previous two films in ways that
Speaker 2: explain some of that reaction to me. But I think
Speaker 2: you're right in the connections you are making. The description
Speaker 2: of the family dynamics in Columbus make me realize. You know,
Speaker 2: It's why I mentioned it at the top, that you know,
Speaker 2: family is a favored theme of his. But really this
Speaker 2: movie a big, bold, beautiful journey. You could almost say
Speaker 2: it's fifty percent about the relationship between David and Sarah,
Speaker 2: Colin Farrell and Margot Robbie's characters. It's fifty percent about
Speaker 2: their romance, and it's fifty percent about their relationships with
Speaker 2: their parents. This is almost like doubling down on those
Speaker 2: dynamics in Columbus and via flashbacks, these magical realist flashbacks
Speaker 2: exploring the past that they shared with their parents. It's
Speaker 2: inserts to me that also with Columbus, this shares a
Speaker 2: memory or the experience of a parent dying in your
Speaker 2: absence and dealing with the repercussions of that psychologically. Yes,
Speaker 2: so I connected with that. Man. I thought I had
Speaker 2: you on the screaming through the windshield thing, but of
Speaker 2: course you just showed. You just showed Columbus in class.
Speaker 1: Of course you're going to make that connection, though in
Speaker 1: fairness to me, I didn't rewatch it.
Speaker 2: Oh okay, the students said, I just know, all right, Well,
Speaker 2: kudos then, because I put that in my notes, like
Speaker 2: looking for similar things that you know that our touches,
Speaker 2: as you said, those formal touches, and I'm like, oh,
Speaker 2: that's one of my favorite moments in Columbus, and I
Speaker 2: love the echo of it here. And those are the
Speaker 2: sort of things where you pick up on if you
Speaker 2: know a filmmaker's previous films intimately. But you made a
Speaker 2: point Adam early that I want to stress for listeners
Speaker 2: who don't have the relationship with his movies that we do.
Speaker 2: You said, just as an aside, almost that you don't
Speaker 2: necessarily need to have that to appreciate a big, bold,
Speaker 2: beautiful journey. And I concur with that wholeheartedly. We're probably
Speaker 2: going to spend some more time on the things that
Speaker 2: we appreciated because of our familiarity with his work. But
Speaker 2: I think this stands on its own as something distinct
Speaker 2: from those films in a positive way. This is a
Speaker 2: movie that I understand why it's getting the reaction to
Speaker 2: because the negative reaction you mentioned because it is a
Speaker 2: bit precious, it's a bit it's got that word. I'm
Speaker 2: going to use it. It's positive for me, but pejorative
Speaker 2: for many people. It's got a lot of whimsy to it.
Speaker 2: And these sort of movies have put me off generally,
Speaker 2: I think I'm open to them, and in this case
Speaker 2: I was. I think this is a movie that's not
Speaker 2: going to work for everyone. Clearly it already hasn't with
Speaker 2: many critics. But hearts of a certain shape I think
Speaker 2: could really treasure this. I think it could find its
Speaker 2: way to someone's heart who is maybe coming with no
Speaker 2: expectations or different expectations, and this might be something they
Speaker 2: hang on to for many, many years. And people Josh, perhaps, Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean when I think of the movies that it
Speaker 2: made me think of, aside from coganatas though for me
Speaker 2: at least, there are movies that I tend to like
Speaker 2: more than most people which have some element of whimsy
Speaker 2: to them. So I'm thinking like Danny Boyle's A Life
Speaker 2: Less Ordinary, Paul Thomas Anderson's Punch Drunk Love, Damian Choselle's
Speaker 2: La La Land. I don't think a big, bold, beautiful
Speaker 2: Journey for me is quite on the level as most
Speaker 2: of those, but I think it's it's striving for the
Speaker 2: same feeling and for the most part, I think it's
Speaker 2: reaching it. The major touchdown for me, and here's where
Speaker 2: I am quite often alone is with the work of
Speaker 2: Michelle Gandry, and I don't think Eternal Sunshine of the
Speaker 2: Spotless Mind is necessarily the key touchstone here. There's elements
Speaker 2: of that. I think it's more something like Mood Indigo,
Speaker 2: which was more of a whimsy romance than the that
Speaker 2: you know, Eternal Sunshine had a bitterness to it. Mood
Speaker 2: Indigo has a sadness to it, but maybe more of
Speaker 2: a whimsy And I really love that film a lot. Big, bold,
Speaker 2: Beautiful Journey reminded me of that quite a bit. So
Speaker 2: as we do spend more time on how it is
Speaker 2: a Cocaonata film, I just also want to make room
Speaker 2: for those who are like I don't really care who
Speaker 2: made this movie. I like the stars and the trailer
Speaker 2: looked good. You know what, Go see it then, because
Speaker 2: it will offer I think a lot for you as well.
Speaker 2: But yeah, just going back briefly to add to some
Speaker 2: of the things you said, I think the family thing
Speaker 2: is key. I also did appreciate in terms of composition,
Speaker 2: just some choices where it didn't have to look that way,
Speaker 2: but a filmmaker who's putting a lot of thought into
Speaker 2: it did make it look that way. This begins at
Speaker 2: a wedding fairly early on. This is where Sarah and
Speaker 2: David meet, and just some of the blocking and positioning
Speaker 2: them within again, within space, I found just delightful. I
Speaker 2: think of one shot where there's this portico and it's
Speaker 2: raining throughout this wedding sequence, which adds a nice textual element.
Speaker 2: But there's a shot of a portico and each of
Speaker 2: them are at one far side, and they just slowly
Speaker 2: start to walk towards each other, and there's nothing extremely
Speaker 2: complicated about it. Maybe the camera is pushing in a
Speaker 2: bit if I remember at the same time, but it
Speaker 2: does exhibit an extreme care that I think you find
Speaker 2: throughout this movie, which I think is also a signifier
Speaker 2: of Coconatus work and the other thing, you know, I
Speaker 2: don't think he gets a lot of credit for. But
Speaker 2: Columbus and after Yang far weightier than this. I felt
Speaker 2: humor is more at the forefront here. But don't forget
Speaker 2: those two movies had sly streaks of humor to them,
Speaker 2: and I just thought this was quite funny. Phoebe waller
Speaker 2: Bridge has a small part as the rental car agent
Speaker 2: who's kind of instrumental in getting them into these cars
Speaker 2: where they have these GPS devices that end up telling
Speaker 2: them where to go. I loved her exchanges with Kevin
Speaker 2: Klein and with David found that very funny. So I
Speaker 2: think this is quite humorous. Some of the credits should
Speaker 2: probably go to Reese's script for that. There's a there's
Speaker 2: a comedic rhythm to this, and creudent should also go
Speaker 2: to Ferrell and Robbie, who I think are quite good
Speaker 2: and quite funny together. As much as they're romantic together.
Speaker 2: I think they're funny together. And I think that is,
Speaker 2: you know, a signature of coconata as well as that
Speaker 2: that sly sense of humor.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's a lot to respond to there and a
Speaker 1: lot I agree with. First, I have to I have
Speaker 1: to call out. You used a phrase when you said
Speaker 1: hearts of a certain shape and you said something might
Speaker 1: really appreciate this movie. Is is that a phrase you've
Speaker 1: used before? Did you just or heard before or did
Speaker 1: you just come up with that because I have to
Speaker 1: say I find that a very, very kind of moving
Speaker 1: and provocative phrase.
Speaker 2: Now you're terrifying me. I really hope that's not from
Speaker 2: somewhere else. I didn't intentionally grab that on my mind.
Speaker 2: I was just well, well, in my mind, I was
Speaker 2: just trying to think of, like trying to capture this
Speaker 2: sense that people are really not going to like this movie.
Speaker 2: People are gonna be indifferent to it. It's gonna be
Speaker 2: a wide range of reactions. To explain it to me, Josh,
Speaker 2: I got yeah, I just okay, okay. I just want
Speaker 2: to emphasize that to listeners too, though, is like, you know,
Speaker 2: give this a shot because it might be for you.
Speaker 1: Yes, and it the phrase particularly works for me as
Speaker 1: the movie does, because when this movie really is going
Speaker 1: for its boldest emotional moments, they in particular really worked
Speaker 1: on me. I agree there is a fair amount of
Speaker 1: whimsy to this film, and I think where I'm not
Speaker 1: going to and a lot of time speculating on the
Speaker 1: experience of other people are having with this movie, but
Speaker 1: I imagine where there may be a disconnect, because there
Speaker 1: was at times a disconnect for me as well. Is
Speaker 1: watching those other films and even feeling it at times here.
Speaker 1: I don't think of Cogonata as much of a whimsical filmmaker,
Speaker 1: and so there are times where there's whimsy and at
Speaker 1: times where then it feels as if the whimsy, the
Speaker 1: whimsical nature is a little bit forced. And I'll give
Speaker 1: you an example. I like many of those moments with
Speaker 1: Phoebe Wallerbridge. And then there are also times where I
Speaker 1: feel like it was so wonderful to see Kevin Klein
Speaker 1: again on screen, and then I think, well, did we
Speaker 1: really get out of Kevin kline all that we could
Speaker 1: have gotten out of Kevin Klein? Or could that have
Speaker 1: been any other actor honestly saying those lines?
Speaker 2: That's fair.
Speaker 1: And here's a moment in the film that I won't
Speaker 1: spoil the context because I think it's the best joke
Speaker 1: in the film and late in the movie, but it's
Speaker 1: just two words that Colin Colin Ferrell says, and I
Speaker 1: was the only person in the theater who laughed out loud.
Speaker 1: There's there's a moment where there's a pause and everyone's
Speaker 1: looking to him to react to something and he goes,
Speaker 1: I pass And it's brilliant because he could say a
Speaker 1: lot of things, but I pass is not what he
Speaker 1: should be saying there, and it's brilliantly funny. But then
Speaker 1: you have moments like here, here's here's a moment of
Speaker 1: whimsy where something has happened, and then you see a
Speaker 1: sign something there's an accident of some kind. And then
Speaker 1: you see a sign that says outside a hotel and
Speaker 1: it says timely in and it explains like this exact scenario,
Speaker 1: and it's a crazy scenario that really never happens in
Speaker 1: real life, and there never be a hotel out there
Speaker 1: in that scenario. And you go, oh, this movie does
Speaker 1: have that sense of humor, but I haven't really felt
Speaker 1: it or heard it in a long time, so it
Speaker 1: feels like it only it only happens in fits and spurts.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, that's where the whimsy. That's where I
Speaker 1: sometimes felt like, I'll go back to your phrase a
Speaker 1: little bit, where sometimes the movie's heart isn't really in
Speaker 1: the whimsy. The movie's heart is in a lot of
Speaker 1: in a lot of other places, And I like it.
Speaker 1: Even though I like the humor in moments, I like
Speaker 1: where the movie's heart is most of most of the
Speaker 1: other times John.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think perhaps this is a case. I mean,
Speaker 2: who knows what the collaborative process was here, but when
Speaker 2: you have one screenwriter and one director, you know, that's
Speaker 2: very different from someone even in the case of After
Speaker 2: Yang adapting a short story perhaps but still doing the
Speaker 2: adapting and then collaborating with a different voice. And I
Speaker 2: agree with you if there's you know, there are times
Speaker 2: where you can feel the disconnect where there are two
Speaker 2: sensibilities perhaps at work here. I think for the majority
Speaker 2: of the movie there in sync well enough, and then
Speaker 2: there are those moments like some you've pointed out, where
Speaker 2: they're not. I think I'm also thinking of whimsy in
Speaker 2: terms of things like art, direction, production design. This GPS
Speaker 2: device that they have in their cars, which is like
Speaker 2: a retro it's almost like stuck on the dashboard. I
Speaker 2: include that in this whimsical category just because of how
Speaker 2: it's it's designed. It's it has a dial that shaped
Speaker 2: like a film reel, and then it has this red
Speaker 2: light which reminded me of you know, Hal's Eye in
Speaker 2: two thousand and one A Space Odyssey, and from it
Speaker 2: you hear the voice and Jody Turner Smith. Yeah, it
Speaker 2: does a wonderful job of you know this, this sort
Speaker 2: of friendly, encouraging but at times forceful GPS voice telling
Speaker 2: them where they have to go.
Speaker 1: We talk to each other the.
Speaker 2: Screen of the GPS voice too. I loved the and
Speaker 2: this is the meticulousness that you know you're going to
Speaker 2: get from Coganata. The design of the graphics that are
Speaker 2: on that screen are the same graphics that you get
Speaker 2: for the opening credits, which are sort of retro modern
Speaker 2: futuristic in this this space that maybe After Yang played
Speaker 2: in a little bit about the near future, but harkens
Speaker 2: to the past. And so I love the design of
Speaker 2: that screen on the GPS device as well. I probably
Speaker 2: gone down on too long about one prop, but it
Speaker 2: was one of my favorite things in the movie.
Speaker 1: No, and it actually is a nice segue because I
Speaker 1: was going to say another cogonautic connection I think is
Speaker 1: that even though maybe I liked the world building overall
Speaker 1: better in After Yang, it's similar in that that movie
Speaker 1: didn't paint this extravagant sci fi vision of the future,
Speaker 1: but gave us just enough to feel like we were
Speaker 1: we were grounding in a near future and we understood
Speaker 1: the rules of the world just enough and that was
Speaker 1: something I talked about with Koganata when he was on
Speaker 1: the show. And I feel like this movie does just
Speaker 1: enough as well for us to not constantly be questioning, Okay,
Speaker 1: what universe are we in? We're not distracted by whether
Speaker 1: or not this could quote unquote really be happening. It's
Speaker 1: it's fantastical, but it's grounded just enough as well, and
Speaker 1: that's that's a hard trick to pull off, and I
Speaker 1: think Koga Nada does pull it off here. I want
Speaker 1: to go back to what you said about the wedding too,
Speaker 1: because that was another key moment for me. And and
Speaker 1: here I can bring in a little bit of criticism
Speaker 1: of the film. Perhaps I'm with you on on Farrell
Speaker 1: and Robbie. I did read one review of it, Josh,
Speaker 1: because this is a case we're after seeing, and I thought,
Speaker 1: I like this movie so much, and I see the
Speaker 1: Rotten Tomatoes score, and I have to read a review
Speaker 1: at least to see what what is it? What what
Speaker 1: am I missing? And so I went to one of
Speaker 1: our one of our friends, one of our colleagues from
Speaker 1: the reveal, Keith Fipps and his and he was very fair.
Speaker 1: I think he gave it two and a half out
Speaker 1: of five, but overall was pretty fair and had positive
Speaker 1: things to say. The biggest issue was with the love story,
Speaker 1: and says it doesn't really work. And Key's evidence, or
Speaker 1: his main qualm with the love story is this, he says,
Speaker 1: and given that much of the movie is concerned with
Speaker 1: telling a love story, that's a pretty big problem. Not
Speaker 1: only do we know that David and Sarah are obviously
Speaker 1: faded to end up together from the start, they behave
Speaker 1: as if they know it too, and are alternately annoyed
Speaker 1: and excited by their inevitable pairing. And all due respect
Speaker 1: to Keith, that's actually an element of the movie I
Speaker 1: really liked. I agree the movie right. I liked that
Speaker 1: the movie had a self awareness about these types of
Speaker 1: love stories. And actually that was a tension for me
Speaker 1: because I do know what he's saying. But because the
Speaker 1: movie knows that we know that surely it's inevitable they're
Speaker 1: going to end up together, that at least opens the
Speaker 1: door that maybe they won't. Right I thought that was
Speaker 1: a very real possibility. And I liked that the movie
Speaker 1: knew that it was that type of love story, and
Speaker 1: that means that right away Josh, even that moment where
Speaker 1: they first see each other at the wedding, literally the
Speaker 1: first glimpse of each other, and then to the first
Speaker 1: time they're close to each other being introduced, and then
Speaker 1: to that moment where they see each other, you know,
Speaker 1: across that portico, as you mentioned, they feel it's almost
Speaker 1: like a tractor beam. They feel that there is an inevitability,
Speaker 1: and of course then that's why. That's why when they
Speaker 1: stop and it turns out there at the same place
Speaker 1: that their journeys are meant to intersect, and he says,
Speaker 1: or his voice says, pick up Sarah, and Sarah's car
Speaker 1: doesn't start, that's that inevitability. They understand that the universe
Speaker 1: is suggesting they should be together, so there is a
Speaker 1: little bit there's excitement, but what Keith is saying, I
Speaker 1: think they are almost a little bit annoyed. They're annoyed
Speaker 1: that they they know that this has all been somehow faded,
Speaker 1: and they even feel they feel it because they feel
Speaker 1: a connection, they feel themselves pulled to each other, but
Speaker 1: they also know that this shouldn't happen, and there's a
Speaker 1: part of them that doesn't want it to happen, and
Speaker 1: all of that that tension also I thought was very
Speaker 1: effective and that shot. To go back to that shot,
Speaker 1: then that's what I thought Coconaut has set up so brilliantly.
Speaker 1: Was Again, they've had just one look at each other
Speaker 1: as the bride's coming down the aisle, and then they've
Speaker 1: had a conversation after they're introduced to each other, and
Speaker 1: then they see each other. He's out smoking, so he's
Speaker 1: already out there smoking. Then she comes, she's across the way.
Speaker 1: She comes outside just to get some fresh air after dancing.
Speaker 1: The shot then cuts back to a long, a wide
Speaker 1: shot of the space and there's these columns and there's
Speaker 1: a great distance between them, and the camera emphasizes that distance.
Speaker 1: But then what happens The camera doesn't really change, as
Speaker 1: I recall, but they both slide closer to each other. Yeah,
Speaker 1: to a closer column. So just in the staging there's
Speaker 1: that tractor beam like effect. They still maintain a distance,
Speaker 1: but it's like they can't help but move one column closer.
Speaker 1: They are being pulled towards each other, And I love
Speaker 1: how the cinematography emphasized that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I found the romance fairly compelling, to be honest
Speaker 2: with you, For some of those exact same reasons. What
Speaker 2: troubled Keith I thought added interesting complications. I wasn't even
Speaker 2: that convinced that they were going to end up together
Speaker 2: because and this made me think about how someone like
Speaker 2: Cogonata would handle it. It goes back to your observation about him,
Speaker 2: you know, wanting characters to see things in a new way.
Speaker 2: I think this very likely could have been a film
Speaker 2: from him about these two people through this experience together
Speaker 2: learning to see things in a new way. They absolutely
Speaker 2: do about their pass and then that opens two doors.
Speaker 2: One door is now we've learned that and we feel
Speaker 2: we are in a better emotional space to try another relationship,
Speaker 2: or they realize, wow, we've processed a lot. We need
Speaker 2: to go our separate ways deal with it, knowing down
Speaker 2: the road will be healthier for someone. I could see
Speaker 2: absolutely Coconat of making that second that second movie, so
Speaker 2: that tension for me was there. I also, you know,
Speaker 2: I thought about at the beginning of a conversation, starting
Speaker 2: by asking you basically what makes a movie romantic to
Speaker 2: you and does this have it? And then I realized
Speaker 2: we we got to get to the Cocanat thing first.
Speaker 2: But I'm glad we're getting to that now because I
Speaker 2: thought about this myself, and you know, for me, I
Speaker 2: tend to find, for whatever reason, romances that involve longing
Speaker 2: to be the most deeply romantic. To me. It's probably
Speaker 2: why in the Mood for Love is, you know, in
Speaker 2: my top ten of all time at the current moment.
Speaker 2: But the other thing that I do like in romances,
Speaker 2: even if they end positively, is I like there to
Speaker 2: be some element of realism to what the couple is
Speaker 2: going through. And I think what we've been talking about
Speaker 2: brings that to this relationship. Despite all the whimsy, despite
Speaker 2: all the magical realism, it is rooted in that these
Speaker 2: are two people with you know, really troubled backgrounds when
Speaker 2: it comes to relationships with parents, complicated let's say, complicated
Speaker 2: that have affected directly their ability to be in committed
Speaker 2: relationships with someone else. So that's a level of realism
Speaker 2: that the movie gives time to. And I loved how
Speaker 2: despite the universe in the form of this GPS wants
Speaker 2: them to be together, they're expressly not soulmates, right, And
Speaker 2: that for me was key. This is not a movie
Speaker 2: that is just leaning on a magical GPS that puts
Speaker 2: them together, because that's who they were meant to be. No,
Speaker 2: this is about wounded, imperfect people who learn how they're wounded,
Speaker 2: how they're imperfect, and then they learn that they're going
Speaker 2: to need to put in the work, something like this
Speaker 2: relationship they're starting out on is going to work. That
Speaker 2: sounded like a therapy session, but to me, it's kind
Speaker 2: of romantic to watch two people go through that process.
Speaker 1: I found it the same, and I can't say it
Speaker 1: any better than you did. I'll just say that every
Speaker 1: my shorter version of that is every moment that I
Speaker 1: thought for this for a second, we were on the
Speaker 1: verge of crossing into traditional sort of rom com territory.
Speaker 1: The movie surprised me. The characters surprised me. The writing
Speaker 1: surprised me by getting more and more real, by getting
Speaker 1: more and more wounded, by having the characters show even
Speaker 1: more vulnerability. And that is what made it for me too,
Speaker 1: even more romantic. And this is another This ties into
Speaker 1: that and also speaks to the visual approach. There is
Speaker 1: a scene. Remember how I said that, I think the
Speaker 1: title is almost and maybe not even almost is meant
Speaker 1: ironic because so much of the movie is about the
Speaker 1: characters doing relatively mundane things, I mean, fantastical, magically real,
Speaker 1: but but real. Nonetheless, there is there's a moment.
Speaker 2: And difficult memories, not beautiful memories, difficult memories.
Speaker 1: But there's a moment where they get a break. The
Speaker 1: GPS even calls it a break. And the break is
Speaker 1: actually the most boldly beautiful moment in the film. It's
Speaker 1: the one that most scenes outside the realm of the
Speaker 1: every day, right. It is something that that seems like, Oh,
Speaker 1: that's what I would expect from a movie that's going
Speaker 1: to show me something I don't get to see every day, yea.
Speaker 1: And what I like about that moment is that it
Speaker 1: it has a callback to an earlier scene and an
Speaker 1: earlier conversation, and it ends with Margot Robbie's character saying
Speaker 1: to David, are you taking it all in? But on
Speaker 1: that line, what happens the camera cuts to behind them,
Speaker 1: and in that moment then we're taking them in, but
Speaker 1: we're also taking in the grandeur of the shot of
Speaker 1: them within the shot, and it implicitly then asks the
Speaker 1: question are we taking it all in? It becomes a
Speaker 1: break for us as the audience, and it forces us
Speaker 1: here's an implication of the audience. Josh, that's a really nice,
Speaker 1: sweet one, you know, where we get to sort of
Speaker 1: sit there and it it provokes the audience to not
Speaker 1: just think about it from the character's lens. Is David
Speaker 1: finally taking it in? But are we having a respite?
Speaker 1: Are we actually taking a pause in our lives in
Speaker 1: that moment to appreciate the grandeur of that beauty? And
Speaker 1: then by extension, I suppose is do we do that
Speaker 1: enough in our in our own lives in those kinds?
Speaker 2: Yeah, which, and that brings us directly back to after Yang. Right,
Speaker 2: So let me add my note of hesitance as well
Speaker 2: about this film, and it has to do with scenes
Speaker 2: like that break, which I love the idea of it,
Speaker 2: I love the ambition of it, but some of the
Speaker 2: visuals as things did expand wider, you know, when it's
Speaker 2: not contained to a specific set or you know, a
Speaker 2: specific prop like the GPS. I don't know if it was.
Speaker 2: I haven't looked into what sort of special effects may
Speaker 2: have been employed, but it did get to be a
Speaker 2: little visually mushy at times for me. Would they encounter
Speaker 2: these doors that are in the middle of nowhere and
Speaker 2: some doors you can clearly see they're actually in this
Speaker 2: physical space, and then others it's it's.
Speaker 1: Just do you.
Speaker 2: I don't know if you ever saw the Robin Williams
Speaker 2: film What Dreams May Come and when it came out, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: you know, not great and haven't thought about it much
Speaker 2: sense except for some of these more scenes of grandeurur
Speaker 2: in big, bold, beautiful journey, which don't just don't quite
Speaker 2: get there. It's somewhere between painterly and realistic. And again
Speaker 2: maybe that's a I don't know, I can't speculate on
Speaker 2: what it is, but that's maybe some of the moments
Speaker 2: where I was a little bit let down, where they
Speaker 2: seem to be a little bit out of the film's reach.
Speaker 2: But let me then narrow back down to a detail
Speaker 2: which is something I really appreciate, which is the costume
Speaker 2: design in this film. Arjunbassen is the costume designer. With
Speaker 2: each stop that Sarah and David make, I think this
Speaker 2: happens with each one, They're clothing changes, not super dramatically,
Speaker 2: but enough to match the scenes thematic tone. So we
Speaker 2: mentioned these difficult memories. There's one where they make a
Speaker 2: trip to a hospital for one of Sarah's memories that's
Speaker 2: you know, hugely traumatic for her, and she's suddenly wearing
Speaker 2: this mostly gray outfit. David has just a black T
Speaker 2: shirt on. It's very minimalist. There's another wonderful scene where
Speaker 2: they go into a museum at night and are looking
Speaker 2: at the paintings with the flashlight, and I think that's
Speaker 2: the scene where they're suddenly in bare feet, So there's
Speaker 2: a hushed, you know, intimate corresponding bit there. And how
Speaker 2: about I just love the shot of this is outside
Speaker 2: of a burger king at one point, and Sarah's wearing
Speaker 2: this red jumper and holding this yellow umbrella of course
Speaker 2: one of the movie's many nods to the umbrellas of Cherbour,
Speaker 2: but also where she's standing in the background is the
Speaker 2: burger king, like the old school burger king signage, which
Speaker 2: is exactly using those tones of what she's wearing and holding.
Speaker 2: And yeah, that's the sort of meticulousness in the compositions.
Speaker 2: But also hear the costume design that I just love.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's even going to take something that we might
Speaker 1: find vulgar, a burger king sign and yeah, I like
Speaker 1: the juxtaposition of the beauty, right and exactly that's Kochanada
Speaker 1: and the DP Benjamin Lobe I, I'll just close or
Speaker 1: we'll go back and we'll bookend this the conversation about
Speaker 1: what makes it feel like Coganada and and even those doors.
Speaker 1: Something else I asked him about when interviewing him for
Speaker 1: After Yang was about that that symmetry or that that
Speaker 1: similarity in his movies where he has characters and this
Speaker 1: is part of part of the rediscovery and part of
Speaker 1: seeing things with fresh eyes, is the way the way
Speaker 1: characters are constantly opening up doors like closet doors. They're
Speaker 1: they're looking for those clues to the past. They're trying
Speaker 1: to see something that they haven't seen before or maybe
Speaker 1: took for granted before. And this entire movie is predicated
Speaker 1: on opening those doors, these these pathways, these portals to
Speaker 1: the past. And there was something else that I wonder
Speaker 1: if you thought about, Josh, because we spent time on
Speaker 1: this with After Yang. Even though it's fairly subtle here
Speaker 1: in this movie, there's a key conversation late in this
Speaker 1: film that that speaks to a couple different things we've
Speaker 1: talked about in this review. And do you remember at
Speaker 1: one point a character, one of the main characters says wait,
Speaker 1: this didn't happen. You didn't say that, right, remember how
Speaker 1: and after Yang, even though we're seeing a version of
Speaker 1: events that absolutely happened and should be a replay of things,
Speaker 1: but from different angles. It's yeah, there's very different ways.
Speaker 1: There's different versions. There's different versions in different perspectives that
Speaker 1: Coconauta plays with and that happens here just as it
Speaker 1: does and after Yang. And there is one other touch
Speaker 1: that's very much like after Yang, though I don't remember
Speaker 1: it happening in Columbus, and that is he does something similar,
Speaker 1: doesn't he with the credits the credit sequence. We have
Speaker 1: a we have a great opening sequence, and then the
Speaker 1: credits come in a little bit later. Only after we
Speaker 1: get that, we get that prologue. So that was another
Speaker 1: similarity that I found, and there probably are a few
Speaker 1: more as well. But yeah, watching this film, well there's
Speaker 1: there's also a reference to t at one point, so
Speaker 1: you know, of course, we've got a checklist here. And
Speaker 1: maybe the next time I talk or we have a
Speaker 1: chance to talk with Koganata will ask him whether or
Speaker 1: not the reference to Kiki's is a reference to Miyazaki.
Speaker 1: I don't know. There's a business called Kiki's and it
Speaker 1: of course made me think of delivery service.
Speaker 2: And I'm so glad you said say that because I
Speaker 2: the score here Joe Hasayashi, who did so many of
Speaker 2: Studio Jibili films, and I think the score is also
Speaker 2: one of the stronger elements here. It's very gentle. But
Speaker 2: the quality I kept thinking of is it's nudging. It's
Speaker 2: sort of, you know, nudging in a way that is
Speaker 2: in line with this this universe desire to put them
Speaker 2: on this journey. So so yeah, that was that was
Speaker 2: really cool to see that Hasayashi was involved as well.
Speaker 1: Shout out to Stephen Bardon as well, the sound designer
Speaker 1: who Coganata called out at Film Spotting Fest. A Big, Bold,
Speaker 1: Beautiful Journey is currently playing in wide release. If you
Speaker 1: see it and agree or disagree with our thoughts, we
Speaker 1: would definitely love to hear from you feedback at filmspotting
Speaker 1: dot Net.
Speaker 3: This episode is brought to you by Peloton break through
Speaker 3: the busiest time of year with the brand new Peloton
Speaker 3: Cross Training tread Plus powered by Peloton Iq. With real
Speaker 3: time guidance and endless ways to move, you can personalize
Speaker 3: your workouts and train with confidence. Helping you reach your
Speaker 3: goals in less time. Let yourself run, lift, scold to
Speaker 3: push and go. Explore the new Peloton Cross training tread
Speaker 3: plus at one Peloton dot com.
Speaker 2: Well, if you were listening to us or watching us,
Speaker 2: that is the number one thing you can do to
Speaker 2: support an independently produced show like ours. But there are
Speaker 2: a couple of other things you could do. You could
Speaker 2: take a minute to give us a rating or a
Speaker 2: review on Apple Podcasts. You can also do this on Spotify.
Speaker 2: Doesn't matter if you've been I'm listening for all twenty
Speaker 2: years or you've just joined us, go ahead and leave
Speaker 2: a review. Every one of those does help us to
Speaker 2: reach new listeners. The most substantial way to support us, though,
Speaker 2: is to join the Film Spotting Family, which you can
Speaker 2: do at Filmspottingfamily dot com. We want to thank family
Speaker 2: member Fabio Calderon in Charlotte, North Carolina. Fabio is on letterboxed,
Speaker 2: so you can follow him there as.
Speaker 1: The Fobbs or the Fabs. I mean it's probably Fobbs,
Speaker 1: because is it Fabio? Should I be producing this fabulous?
Speaker 1: You know? Okay, I don't know, but I didn't know
Speaker 1: we had a listener by that name, and that's amazing,
Speaker 1: he rights. I don't remember precisely how I found the show,
Speaker 1: but you guys have been an important part of my
Speaker 1: movie watching since my undergraduate years of college. My first
Speaker 1: episode was probably around twenty sixteen. Your insights on film
Speaker 1: helped me grow and nurture my own artistic taste and
Speaker 1: ability to analyze and enjoy film, for which I'm forever grateful.
Speaker 1: Admittedly it has been a few years i've listened, but now,
Speaker 1: after postgrad studies, moving to a different state, and finally
Speaker 1: getting myself established in my career, I found the time
Speaker 1: and passion to get back into my habit of film watching,
Speaker 1: and my first instinct was to check back in with
Speaker 1: my friends at film Spotting and pay back a fraction
Speaker 1: of the value that you've given me over the years.
Speaker 2: I love that. I mean, it's happened to me like
Speaker 2: for some reason, I drop a podcast and you check
Speaker 2: you know. Yeah, well, I mean we'll have to ask
Speaker 2: listeners if if there was a season where they felt
Speaker 2: that was the case. But no, as a listener of
Speaker 2: other podcasts, you know, it's like things get busy, you
Speaker 2: miss one, but yeah, hopefully the good ones you come
Speaker 2: back to so that's great to hear it.
Speaker 1: We're like, we're like death and Taxes. We'll just always
Speaker 1: be here. Maybe favorite reviewer segment Your Manelli Marathon from
Speaker 1: twenty eighteen will always hold a special place in my heart,
Speaker 1: fuse it was the first and sadly one of the
Speaker 1: only times as a listener that I willed myself to
Speaker 1: do my homework and marathon along with the film spotting crew.
Speaker 1: Albeit I only had enough free time and willpower for
Speaker 1: the first three films, but it did introduce me to
Speaker 1: a filmmaker who I was completely unfamiliar with. But what
Speaker 1: I have now grown a great appreciation for. I'm grateful
Speaker 1: for being introduced to the bad and the beautiful in
Speaker 1: particular thanks to this marathon. And I would later discover
Speaker 1: Minelli's The Clock, which is now a favorite of mine
Speaker 1: and is always one of my go to recommendations for
Speaker 1: people who love link Laters before trilogy, especially before Sunrise.
Speaker 1: I am shamed. I haven't seen the Clock.
Speaker 2: I have not seen the Clock. I think that might
Speaker 2: be another Judy Garland collaboration for Minelli. But yeah, look
Speaker 2: at five iOS showing us up.
Speaker 1: I think this is the best response to this question.
Speaker 1: What review, did we get wrong? Let's not ruin this
Speaker 1: good thing We've got going a I love it. A
Speaker 1: letterbox Top four. I like to set my letterbox four
Speaker 1: as the last four films watch from my top one
Speaker 1: hundred favorites. Currently they are Logan, Silence of the Lambs,
Speaker 1: The Nice Guys, and Doctor Strangelove. Favorite movie he revisited
Speaker 1: recently is Doctor Strangelove. After my recent viewing of Failsafe
Speaker 1: to Coen's With Your Guys most recent episode Sidney Lamette
Speaker 1: Marathon episode nine to eighty three, I felt like I
Speaker 1: had to followed up with Kubrick's masterpiece random film or
Speaker 1: filmmaker Fabio loves going to give a shout out to
Speaker 1: Mielo Schfeman. I feel in a lot of ways he
Speaker 1: goes underrated as a more workman director, but I always
Speaker 1: appreciated his interest in exploring disruptive characters prepared to challenge
Speaker 1: the systems they exist within. I mean, Ama, dais we
Speaker 1: got r P. McMurphy, Sure, there's at least two. I
Speaker 1: think he was brilliant, A movie you credit with becoming
Speaker 1: a cinophile, probably not alone with The Big Lebowski. And finally,
Speaker 1: oh Man, this was a plant a book about movies
Speaker 1: or movie making. Y'all ever heard of? Movies are prayers
Speaker 1: by Josh Larson? Heyed pretty?
Speaker 2: How about that? Thank you very kind.
Speaker 1: For joining the family and for all those years of
Speaker 1: listening and even those years when you weren't listening. In
Speaker 1: addition to keeping us doing what we're doing, your support
Speaker 1: comes with perks. You get to listen early in ED free,
Speaker 1: You get our weekly newsletter, you get exclusive opportunities, including
Speaker 1: being part of the Film Spotting Family Discord, and you
Speaker 1: get our monthly bonus shows. Over on the Film Spotting
Speaker 1: Family Discord. We have channels devoted to We have almost
Speaker 1: four hundred members just on the discord, and there's channels
Speaker 1: devoted to conversations about the current episode of our show,
Speaker 1: new film releases, older films. We have TV spotting, music spotting,
Speaker 1: book spotting, sports spotting, and food spotting.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to get a little your dream. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 2: trying to get a little book spotting club going right now.
Speaker 2: About the Muriel Sparks novel The Prime of Miss Gene Barrodi,
Speaker 2: which I read, just watched the Maggie Smith adaptation and whoo,
Speaker 2: that's the adaptation is interesting so yeah, I'm hoping to
Speaker 2: talk to some film spotting family members there about the
Speaker 2: book and then the movie if they check that out.
Speaker 1: By the time everyone hears this will be at least
Speaker 1: one nightroom moved from our September Bonus episode. A little
Speaker 1: bit of trivia spotting quiz master Thomas Todd and a
Speaker 1: bunch of listeners. That will be fun. Josh apparently thinks
Speaker 1: he needs to go to bed at two in the morning.
Speaker 1: Won't be playing. That's fine, that's fine.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And this is the worst part is I see
Speaker 2: that Andrew Corsini, right, Andrew is here in the UK
Speaker 2: with temporarily at and of course he's joining, So like,
Speaker 2: my excuse is blown. Andrew, thank you very much. Just
Speaker 2: because you're a maniac doesn't mean.
Speaker 1: I have to be. He's not even on the payroll, Josh, Yeah,
Speaker 1: exactly us. He pays us, So what's your excuse? Cobra bonus.
Speaker 1: We will be drafting with a family member, some kind
Speaker 1: of movie draft, and that reminds me yet again that
Speaker 1: I need to get the email out to family members,
Speaker 1: So that's coming soon. Be prepared, have your draft topics ready.
Speaker 1: You propose a topic. We randomly pick a listener, and
Speaker 1: we'll pick one of your topics to draft. It will
Speaker 1: be fun. You can only be part of that draft
Speaker 1: if you are a Film Spotting Family member. Learn more
Speaker 1: at Filmspottingfamily dot com.
Speaker 2: This is Bob Fernuson.
Speaker 1: I was a part of the French seventy five. Did
Speaker 1: not got like Tony on in Steve Lockfield used to
Speaker 1: attack r and I cannot remember for the life of
Speaker 1: my only child.
Speaker 2: The answer to your question.
Speaker 1: Maybe you should have studied the rebellion text.
Speaker 2: A little harner.
Speaker 1: Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle after Another comes to theaters
Speaker 1: this weekend. Rumor has a josh it even made it
Speaker 1: to the Shire in Scotland? Isn't that where you're at?
Speaker 1: The Shire?
Speaker 2: The Shire? This is a little little bit of Shire flavor,
Speaker 2: But I think maybe that's more of the Lake district,
Speaker 2: you know, down there south of me. Do you want
Speaker 2: to hear my journey of getting to the theater here, Adam,
Speaker 2: because it was you know, I'm in this delightful university
Speaker 2: gulf town of Saint Andrews, right on the coast of
Speaker 2: the North Sea. No movie theater though, unfortunately so it's
Speaker 2: a two bus ride to it. To the town of Dundee,
Speaker 2: which is a nice town, bigger and there they have
Speaker 2: two multiplexes on opposite sides, which is why it's a
Speaker 2: two bus trip for us. Tried the first theater last
Speaker 2: weekend for a big, bold, beautiful journey, and boy, I
Speaker 2: could have been anywhere USA we were. We got off
Speaker 2: the bus, walked for a little bit into this industrial
Speaker 2: park where there was a Nando's you know, chicken place,
Speaker 2: there was another fast food place I'm forgetting, and they
Speaker 2: were building a McDonald's. Other than that, there was an
Speaker 2: ice rink next to the multiplex theater, which was you know,
Speaker 2: average mall theater. So any any romantic visions of me
Speaker 2: going to the movies here in Scotland you can toss
Speaker 2: that aside.
Speaker 1: It's it's lots urbs, exactly, eggs.
Speaker 2: I was back at the AMC Crestoid yep, and you
Speaker 2: know what I'm talking about exactly.
Speaker 1: I used to see quite a few movies there myself.
Speaker 2: Gosh, m hm. So the good news is they had big, bold,
Speaker 2: beautiful journey. They also have one battle after another though
Speaker 2: this weekend we're we're gonna try the theater on the
Speaker 2: other side of town. See how that looks okay.
Speaker 1: Well, next week here on Film Spotting, I'll be making
Speaker 1: it to my local multiplex to see one battle after another,
Speaker 1: and we'll be reviewing it here on the show. Maybe
Speaker 1: some other new stuff. In fact, I could promise that
Speaker 1: I'm going to talk about a new documentary I saw
Speaker 1: called Predators, and no it is not another installment in
Speaker 1: that franchise. More on that next week. Also another video
Speaker 1: edition of Massacre Theater for a current show schedule. Oh boy,
Speaker 1: you have something to add. We have to make these,
Speaker 1: Like Sam is going to start just ratcheting up the
Speaker 1: pyrotechnics of Massacre Theater, isn't he?
Speaker 2: I know, I wasn't you know what. I wasn't going
Speaker 2: to watch it, but I wanted to test some new headphones,
Speaker 2: and I was like, you know what, why not test
Speaker 2: him on that. I don't know that I've ever paid
Speaker 2: as close attention to you during Masacar Theater because like
Speaker 2: any good actor, Adam, ye, I don't, I don't. I
Speaker 2: don't listen to my screen partner at all. It's all
Speaker 2: about me, good actor, like any good actor, right, I think? So,
Speaker 2: I've never really you missed the lessons? Is it? Is it?
Speaker 2: The other way around, it's the other Okay, Well anyway, Yeah,
Speaker 2: I don't know if you're always like this, but you
Speaker 2: a certain level of your expression is is you're laughing
Speaker 2: throughout You're you're you're not, You're.
Speaker 1: Not like you need to know that now I'm self conscious,
Speaker 1: you're and.
Speaker 2: Well, especially that scene, we were under attack in that
Speaker 2: scene and your voice, you know, you you bring it
Speaker 2: with the voice. But now that we're on video, you
Speaker 2: can't be smiling as well. You have to. You're gonna
Speaker 2: have to bring the facial acting. Also. That's next week.
Speaker 1: Thank you for the direction. Thank you for the direction,
Speaker 1: Elia Kazan Larsen. For a current show schedule, visit phil
Speaker 1: spotting dot net slash episodes.
Speaker 2: Quick note about our sister podcast, The Next Picture Show,
Speaker 2: looking at cinema's present via its past. They have a
Speaker 2: new pairing. They're going to be talking about the Stephen
Speaker 2: King adaptation The Long Walk just came out, and pairing
Speaker 2: that with Sydney Pollack's nineteen sixty nine film They Shoot Horses,
Speaker 2: don't they? That one featuring Jane Fonda and Adam That
Speaker 2: is a title man comes up all the time, and
Speaker 2: somehow I still have not seen it. Are you in
Speaker 2: the same boat.
Speaker 1: I'm with you. I'm in the same Thank goodness. But
Speaker 1: we're rowing. We're rowing over the cliff together.
Speaker 2: Josh, all right, makes me feel better. New episodes of
Speaker 2: The Next Picture Show drop every Tuesday. You can find
Speaker 2: them wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: For those of you who may be listening and you're
Speaker 1: in the Iowa City area or you know, anywhere around
Speaker 1: Iowa City and you're willing to make the trip. I'll
Speaker 1: be back at Film Scenes fourth annual Refocused Film Festival,
Speaker 1: and this is the film festival that celebrates the art
Speaker 1: of adaptation. Every film that plays is some kind of adaptation.
Speaker 1: So it might be from a book, but it could
Speaker 1: be from a poem, it could be from a musical,
Speaker 1: it could be from anything, honestly, and there have been
Speaker 1: some pretty fascinating works that the adaptations you know, originated
Speaker 1: from over the years. It runs October ninth through the twelfth,
Speaker 1: and part of the fun this year is that Michael
Speaker 1: Phillips is coming in for the fest and so on
Speaker 1: October eighth he's coming to my film criticism class, and
Speaker 1: then on the ninth is opening night of the fest,
Speaker 1: and then on the tenth is films Spotting Live. So
Speaker 1: October tenth is film Spotting Live and inspired by the
Speaker 1: opening night film which is called Train Dreams. So this
Speaker 1: is a new movie stars Joel Edgerton and Felicity Jones.
Speaker 1: It's said in the early twentieth century American West, and
Speaker 1: it's adapted from the twenty eleven Dennis Johnson novella. So
Speaker 1: a lot of Dennis Johnson works have been adapted over
Speaker 1: the years, including Jesus's Son. And I hadn't seen this,
Speaker 1: but I'm assuming Sam has his facts right. Producer Sam
Speaker 1: pulled this quote from our friend Brian Talarico rogeriber dot com.
Speaker 1: And if this is true, Josh, it says, and I
Speaker 1: quote one of my favorite movies ever.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: So Brian taler Ole thinks that highly of this movie,
Speaker 1: Trained Dreams. It debuted at Sundance. It comes to theaters
Speaker 1: in November. Opening night film October ninth at the Refocused
Speaker 1: Film Festival in Iowa City at the Gorgeous is not
Speaker 1: playing at film scene. The opening night film is always
Speaker 1: at the Gorgeous Englert Theater, which is a classic theater
Speaker 1: downtown Iowa City. So inspired by that, we always try
Speaker 1: to tie the recording that we do and the top
Speaker 1: five that we do to that opening night film or
Speaker 1: whatever's happening the big thing is at the fest. So
Speaker 1: since it's adapted from a Dennis Johnson novella, Dennis Johnson
Speaker 1: is an MFA grad of the famed Iowa Writers' Workshop,
Speaker 1: So we are going to do a top five movies
Speaker 1: adapted from Iowa writers. So that can include anybody who
Speaker 1: has an MFA from the Iowa Writers' Workshop, but it
Speaker 1: could also mean anybody who was born in Iowa counting
Speaker 1: that as well. It's going to be a fun list
Speaker 1: and I can't wait to do that with Michael at
Speaker 1: the Refocus Film Festival and just real quick, the fest
Speaker 1: is a killer lineup. I mean Andrew Sherburn, who is
Speaker 1: the big dog, the executive director at Refocus, is a
Speaker 1: friend and does such a wonderful job of Ben Delgado's
Speaker 1: the programming director, and he's a longtime friend and Film
Speaker 1: Spotting Listener goes way back to the early days of
Speaker 1: the show. They've got Charlie Shackleton's Zodiac Killer Project, which
Speaker 1: is a movie I recommended when I saw the Virtual
Speaker 1: Sun Dance version of that back in January, and.
Speaker 2: I caught Oh yeah, I caught that at the Chicago
Speaker 2: Critics Film Festival this summer. And yeah, anyone interested, I
Speaker 2: would say, in you know, documentary form in particular, sure
Speaker 2: when playing with other material, I think we'll want to
Speaker 2: check out Zodiac Killer Project.
Speaker 1: And especially of course if you care at all about
Speaker 1: true crime or exactly consuming anything true crime related, you
Speaker 1: really have to see Zodiac Killer Project. And Charlie Shackleton
Speaker 1: will be at refocused. I think it at least two
Speaker 1: screenings of it. Also, you're going to be able to
Speaker 1: see the new film from director Ira Sachs, who made
Speaker 1: one of my favorite films. He was in my top
Speaker 1: ten a few years back. Love Is Strange also made.
Speaker 1: Passages is new one Peter Hoosier's Day stars Ben Wishaw
Speaker 1: and Rebecca Hall. Also, Park Chenook's new film No Other
Speaker 1: Choice is playing there. There's a new documentary from Raoul
Speaker 1: Peck who made I Am Not Your Negro, the James
Speaker 1: Baldwin documentary. But it's George Orwell two plus two equals five.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm telling you there are at least eight
Speaker 1: films I'm dying to see at Refocus. And yes, also
Speaker 1: film Spotting Live is happening at four point thirty on
Speaker 1: Friday the tenth with me and Michael. So I hope
Speaker 1: you get a chance to make it out. If you're
Speaker 1: listening to this, well, if you're listening to this, that
Speaker 1: means tickets are available, because they go on sale to
Speaker 1: the general public on Friday this Friday here, the twenty
Speaker 1: sixth of September, and you can learn more at Refocusfilmfestival
Speaker 1: dot org.
Speaker 3: Nah, this is your new governor's prodi Maria.
Speaker 2: As I saund those signals, you step forward and give
Speaker 2: your name.
Speaker 4: You Willison Carey learn that signal so that you can
Speaker 4: call them when you want them.
Speaker 1: Friedrich. Time for some poll results. A couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: we asked you to choose one and only one sixties musical.
Speaker 1: The occasion was the sixtieth anniversary re release of the
Speaker 1: Sound of Music, which, yeah, fine, I'll confess it. It
Speaker 1: remains unseen by me. I don't know if anyone could
Speaker 1: tell based on everything I was saying two weeks ago.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you were you were pretty cagey. I thought that
Speaker 2: was the case, and then I realized, did you squeeze
Speaker 2: it in at some point? No, you would have made
Speaker 2: a bigger deal of it.
Speaker 1: If you yeah, exactly so the options and then Josh,
Speaker 1: you can give the results Funny Girl, Mary Poppins, my
Speaker 1: Fair Lady, the Sound of Music, the Umbrellas of sure Bore,
Speaker 1: West Side Story, or if you don't like any of
Speaker 1: those choices, you could write in other How did it
Speaker 1: come out?
Speaker 2: Rare case of a title tying in last place with
Speaker 2: other and that would have been Funny Girl. Both received
Speaker 2: three percent of the vote. My Fair Lady received five
Speaker 2: five percent of the vote. Then jumping up to another
Speaker 2: tier where there was a relatively close competition between Mary
Speaker 2: Poppins sixteen percent of the vote and the Sound of
Speaker 2: Music nineteen percent, but in second place jumping ahead twenty
Speaker 2: five percent of the vote went to West Side Story,
Speaker 2: meaning rightfully correctly, the Umbrellas of share Boor won this
Speaker 2: with twenty eight percent of the vote, And I'm really
Speaker 2: encouraged by that. It's just you know that many people
Speaker 2: have seen the umbrellas of Cherboor, whereas you think West
Speaker 2: Side Story, you know, much more common familiar, maybe might
Speaker 2: have taken it, and I you know, adore one way
Speaker 2: more than the other.
Speaker 1: So what you're really saying is in the battle of
Speaker 1: Team Adam versus Team Josh. Team Josh was triumphant in this.
Speaker 2: Case, in this case, on this day, which we will
Speaker 2: celebrate forever.
Speaker 1: So here's Rob Steger, not to be confused with Rod Steiger.
Speaker 1: My parents' first date was West Side Story. So I
Speaker 1: don't know if I'm going to a race myself from
Speaker 1: the timeline Marty m fly style, but I'm choosing the
Speaker 1: umbrellas of sher boor if it's not going to exist,
Speaker 1: I don't want to either. Wow Wow, for you wouldn't
Speaker 1: go that far.
Speaker 2: Josh, no mavel so.
Speaker 1: Shod shot Go.
Speaker 2: He shoter Godmo Nomal Macky. We also heard from Betsy Shane.
Speaker 2: I understand that West Side Story is a little problematic,
Speaker 2: and that many of these others are excellent musicals, But
Speaker 2: Jerome robbins choreography was so game changing. Lettern Bernstein's challenging
Speaker 2: but familiar score is still a go to reference for
Speaker 2: turval ear training and the alternately cheeky and sincere lyrics
Speaker 2: by some young up start named Stephen Sondheim. Also, I
Speaker 2: want Rita Morna to keep her well deserved the Oscar Wow.
Speaker 2: I don't know if we've ever opened that can of
Speaker 2: worms with the the incinerator rule. If the movie goes
Speaker 2: the filmmakers and the actors, they lose all the accolades.
Speaker 2: I mean, this is this is just chaos, Sam has started.
Speaker 1: I think listeners get it that incinerator rules just apply
Speaker 1: to everything we do. I guess, and Interval ear Training
Speaker 1: is the name of my next band, Mark F I
Speaker 1: could make a case for each one in a case
Speaker 1: against each despite their many merits, Umbrellas of Sherbor, West
Speaker 1: Side Story and My Fair Lady are all flawed by
Speaker 1: their lip SYNCD leads. Take that, Josh, my vote is
Speaker 1: for Funny Girl because it's the most complete package, glorious
Speaker 1: Hollywood film craft, a great rise and fall, backstage bio
Speaker 1: journey and the indomitable streisand or Streisan Streisan streisand carrying
Speaker 1: her Broadway breakout roll to the screen.
Speaker 2: I mean, Mark has something that I know has been
Speaker 2: brought up many times, especially you know with umbrellas. I'll
Speaker 2: have to give some thought to about that. No, no,
Speaker 2: never mind, umbrellas is don't here's Sam ought to it,
Speaker 2: Sam Oppenheim, Funny Girl is so so so good. If
Speaker 2: you have that blind spot, please rectify that being said,
Speaker 2: Funny Girl isn't the very best, and though I want
Speaker 2: to pick it, I will instead vacillate between West Side
Speaker 2: Story and the sound of music. Wait, wait a minute,
Speaker 2: why are we reading this?
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: You can't read a comment from someone who's refusing.
Speaker 1: To out Sam Oppenheim. Your your feedback is the incinerator.
Speaker 1: It's gone, Bailey Clark. Let's see if Bailey Clark took
Speaker 1: a stand. The answer is Mary Poppins. Okay, my leaps
Speaker 1: and bounds. The performances and music have been well lauded
Speaker 1: through the years, but there is so much more to appreciate.
Speaker 1: The tirelessly exuberant choreography, the plethora of innovative effects, the
Speaker 1: razor sharp script, and the direction's masterful mosaic of tones.
Speaker 1: It's a magical joy to watch as a child. But
Speaker 1: if you haven't seen it as an adult, you really
Speaker 1: haven't seen it. And I'm going to admit to Bailey
Speaker 1: and all of you, I loved Mary Poppins as a kid,
Speaker 1: and I surely have not seen it as an adult.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I have seen it more recently than childhood, and
Speaker 2: do enjoy it. Bailey's making a good case for it
Speaker 2: as being more than just that, though here is a
Speaker 2: comment from Calvin Chen on a different day, I would
Speaker 2: probably give it to Mary Poppins or the Sound of Music.
Speaker 2: But on the Street where you Live and Wouldn't It
Speaker 2: Be Lovely are two of my favorite musical songs of
Speaker 2: all time, and I have a lot of fond memories
Speaker 2: associated with seeing my Fair Lady for the first time.
Speaker 2: If Audrey Hupburn couldn't take home the Oscar, maybe she
Speaker 2: can at least win a moderately flawed film spotting poll.
Speaker 2: And a note here. The nineteen sixty five Best Actress
Speaker 2: Oscar went to Julie Andrews for Mary Poppins.
Speaker 1: Hepburn wasn't nominated, not even nominated. Here's Craig Schaeffer. I
Speaker 1: understand the praise for Sure Bore, but for my money,
Speaker 1: Demise's next film, The Young Girls of roche For still
Speaker 1: has the songs, plus the radiant Catherine Deneu, but is
Speaker 1: so much stranger and more interesting.
Speaker 2: It is stranger. It's good, Craig, it's good too. Last
Speaker 2: comment here from our MP to counter those who dismiss
Speaker 2: over dubbing actors with singers. I gave my vote to
Speaker 2: Mogal e Azam, the legendary Bollywood budget buster. Some of
Speaker 2: the movies in this poll could have used more dubbing.
Speaker 2: Wouldn't a Stanley Holloway overdubb of Dick Van Dyke's cold
Speaker 2: blooded murder of the COCKI accent have been a massive upgrade?
Speaker 1: Wow?
Speaker 2: Wow, I don't know if I'm qualified to say yes.
Speaker 2: Let's leave this up to Bailey.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what Bailey says? Thank you for all of your feedback,
Speaker 1: except you, Sam Oppenheim. Let's move on to our new poll,
Speaker 1: A truly deeply flawed film spotting poll, because it made
Speaker 1: Josh do homework, and it makes me want to unplug
Speaker 1: my microphone and I might, I might do it. I
Speaker 1: might accidentally shut off my camera, all my equipment lights out,
Speaker 1: just head out the door before the show's done.
Speaker 2: And that this is this is because not to get
Speaker 2: ahead of ourselves. This is the Paul Thomas Anderson decades pole.
Speaker 2: I'm guessing it's forcing you to choose between there will
Speaker 2: be blood and the Master. Is that? Is that the
Speaker 2: central dilemma for you? No? No, okay, no, it's.
Speaker 1: Really not that. And it's it's all three of them, Josh,
Speaker 1: It's just.
Speaker 2: Let's read the options.
Speaker 1: Then you you do the you do the honors.
Speaker 2: Okay, So the nineteen nineties PTA made Hard eight Boogie
Speaker 2: Nights Magnolia. That's one of your choices. Or you could
Speaker 2: go with the two thousands Punch Drunk Love and there
Speaker 2: will be Blood. If you want to do the twenty tens,
Speaker 2: you get The Master, Inherent Vice and Phantom Thread.
Speaker 1: So you can only pick one decade.
Speaker 2: You can only pick one decade. This was a conundrum
Speaker 2: for me because it.
Speaker 1: Forced me with Phantom Thread, well, it forced.
Speaker 2: Me to answer something that I'd been reconsidering in recent years.
Speaker 2: For quite a while, I've said that Punch Drunk Love
Speaker 2: is my favorite PTA movie, and that has been challenged
Speaker 2: by frequent revisits of Phantom Thread, which I did for
Speaker 2: Ebert interrupt Us just within the last year. So I've
Speaker 2: seen that movie and studied that movie closely, you know,
Speaker 2: spent multiple days on that movie with an audience, and
Speaker 2: thought to myself, this is his best movie. It's got
Speaker 2: to be his best movie. To my mind, I knew
Speaker 2: I already liked it more than There Will be Blood
Speaker 2: in the Master char also in that upper tier. But
Speaker 2: there's no way to say that until you've revisited Punch
Speaker 2: Trunk Love. So I've been meaning to and meaning to
Speaker 2: and meaning to, and then not only does Sam propose
Speaker 2: this poll, but as I mentioned in our review of
Speaker 2: A Big, Bold, Beautiful Journey, Punch Drunk Love was one
Speaker 2: of the movies that came to mind while I was
Speaker 2: watching it. So I just thought, it's time, we're gonna
Speaker 2: do it. We're gonna throw it on. Revisit Punch Drunk Love,
Speaker 2: and it clarified this poll, Adam, because still love it,
Speaker 2: but it is now officially my number two PTA film,
Speaker 2: So it goes Phantom Thread then Punch Drunk Love, and
Speaker 2: if I get The Master with Phantom Thread by going
Speaker 2: with the twenty tens. And I also really like Inherent Vice.
Speaker 2: Kind of an easy answer for me.
Speaker 1: I was just trying to bring up while you were talking.
Speaker 1: This won't help, but I was trying to bring I.
Speaker 2: Didn't get I didn't give you enough time to decide
Speaker 2: my letterboxed.
Speaker 1: List. And you know I've got I've got Magnolia and
Speaker 1: Boogie Nights in my top four. I've got Phantom Thread
Speaker 1: and Inherent Vice and The Master in my top six.
Speaker 1: That's pretty compelling, right, I do have there will be
Speaker 1: Blood at number one, number one. Like a lot of people,
Speaker 1: that's messing everything up for you. I it's it's so
Speaker 1: hard because I'll tell you. I mean, here, here's part
Speaker 1: of my thinking. Even though I have There will Be
Speaker 1: Blood at number one, I am applying the logic that
Speaker 1: quantity might matter, and three films is better than two,
Speaker 1: especially when you like to love all eight films right
Speaker 1: here exactly, Okay, so three films is better than two
Speaker 1: and Punch Drunk Love. Unlike you and and many others
Speaker 1: out there who love this film and have seen it
Speaker 1: multiple times, I do have it as my least favorite.
Speaker 1: Pta I've only seen it once. I've only seen it once. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I have it. I have it in the ninth slot.
Speaker 1: I have it below Heart eight, and I like Hard
Speaker 1: eight quite a bit too. I like Punch Trunk Love too.
Speaker 1: I like them all. So let's just be clear. So
Speaker 1: if I have There Will Be Blood one, and I
Speaker 1: have Punch Trunk Love nine, and there's only two, I
Speaker 1: think I'm ruling out the two thousands. It really is
Speaker 1: between the decades that have I answer, yeah, And that's
Speaker 1: the problem is that.
Speaker 2: I so.
Speaker 1: I so love Boogie Knights and Magnolia, that that, despite
Speaker 1: despite how how much I've praised the master over the
Speaker 1: years on the show, I think I'm a nineties guy,
Speaker 1: and I'll tell you I think, oh guy, I think
Speaker 1: I am. I think our revisit of Magnolia sealed that
Speaker 1: movie be as such a masterpiece for me, and I
Speaker 1: still feel that Boogie Knights is as well. If if
Speaker 1: I was if you said, if you applied incinerator rules
Speaker 1: and you said, up all these films, Adam, you could
Speaker 1: only sit down and watch let's say three of them.
Speaker 1: You can only keep three of these movies. Yeah, two
Speaker 1: of them would be Boogie Knights in Magnolia. So that
Speaker 1: kay answer.
Speaker 2: I guess, Yeah, I guess that's a helpful way to
Speaker 2: think about it. Whereas I'd be happy to watch yeah,
Speaker 2: Phantom Thread for one an eighth or ninth time within
Speaker 2: the last twelve months. So that's partly why I'm leading
Speaker 2: towards the twenty tens.
Speaker 1: Okay, it is another case where Team Adam is not
Speaker 1: faring very well. I am decidedly in last place currently
Speaker 1: in the poll. However, h more proof that this is
Speaker 1: not a deeply flawed poll question. It is so far
Speaker 1: very close. Your vote definitely could matter. It could sway
Speaker 1: this one. All three decades have a chance. So please
Speaker 1: do vote, and we would love it if you left
Speaker 1: a comment because we just might share it on the show.
Speaker 1: But you do have to take a stand. You do
Speaker 1: have to vote. You can please take a stand. Yeah,
Speaker 1: come on, Josh does require it or he will shake
Speaker 1: his head at you and.
Speaker 2: You don't exactly.
Speaker 1: You can vote in the poll and leave a comment
Speaker 1: at filmspotting dot net. We will share the results and
Speaker 1: your feedback if you're lucky in a couple of weeks. Josh,
Speaker 1: that is our show.
Speaker 2: If you want to connect with us on social media,
Speaker 2: you can find Adam and the show on Instagram, Facebook, letterboxed,
Speaker 2: and yeah of course YouTube. As film Spotting, I'm at
Speaker 2: all those places as well as Larsen on film. We
Speaker 2: are independently produced and listeners supported. You can support the
Speaker 2: show by joining the film Spotting Family at Filmspotting family
Speaker 2: dot com. You can listen early and ad free. You'll
Speaker 2: also get Sam's weekly, the newsletter, monthly bonus episodes, and
Speaker 2: access to the entire show archive. For show t shirts
Speaker 2: and merch, you can go to film Spotting dot net
Speaker 2: slash Shop.
Speaker 1: In the archive, you'll find conversations about Columbus and After
Speaker 1: Yang with Koganata episodes six fifty and eight sixty eight,
Speaker 1: and another conversation about Columbus with Cooganata live at Film
Speaker 1: Spotting Fest. That's episode ten thirty. That is a show
Speaker 1: we published recently and is definitely currently in the Film
Speaker 1: Spotting public feed. In limited release through October thirteenth, you
Speaker 1: can catch the New York Film Festival. Also in limited
Speaker 1: release is Chain Reactions. Ooh, I wasn't aware of this. Josh,
Speaker 1: a documentary about the legacy of Toby Hooper's The Texas
Speaker 1: Chainsaw Massacre from the director of Lynch Oz and The
Speaker 1: Psycho Docs seventy eight fifty two. Here again, Brian tallerco
Speaker 1: says catnip for horror fans and may even give those
Speaker 1: who don't love TCM yet further appreciation of one of
Speaker 1: the most influential films ever made of any genre. So
Speaker 1: I'm curious and we did a Texas Chainsaw Massacre Sacred
Speaker 1: Cow review back on nine to eighty eight. That was
Speaker 1: a really fun Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, as much as you can enjoy talking about a
Speaker 2: movie like Texas Chainsaw because of its content. That was Yeah,
Speaker 2: very stimulating conversation for sure.
Speaker 1: Strange Journey The Story of Rocky Horror. Yes, it's a
Speaker 1: documentary about the origins of the Rocky Horror Picture Show.
Speaker 1: I would have to actually have seen the Rocky Horror
Speaker 1: Picture Show man. Lots of blind spots coming out on
Speaker 1: this episode. Why why am I just taking shots at
Speaker 1: my own credibility on rough this show? I thought otherwise
Speaker 1: we were doing so good. Dead of Winter Emma Thompson
Speaker 1: interrupts the kidnapping of a teenage girl in snowbound northern Minnesota.
Speaker 1: I'd like to see what a kidnapp being interrupted looks like, Josh. Also,
Speaker 1: we have dreams in parentheses. Sex's Love Okay. This is
Speaker 1: a new one from a Norwegian filmmaker about a seventeen
Speaker 1: year old girl who experiences a sexual awakening when she
Speaker 1: falls head over heels in love with her female teacher.
Speaker 1: It's at the Cisco Film Center in Chicago. One Best
Speaker 1: Film at the twenty twenty five Berlin Film Festival. Also,
Speaker 1: you can catch Eleanor the Great, directed by Scarlett Johansson,
Speaker 1: about a ninety year old woman played by June Squibb
Speaker 1: who returns to New York City after years living in
Speaker 1: Florida in an effort to rebuild her life after the
Speaker 1: death of her best friend. A few wide releases here
Speaker 1: Gabby's Dollhouse. The movie. This is a live action adaptation
Speaker 1: of the popular kids series on Netflix with Kristin Wig
Speaker 1: and Gloria Estefan. The Strangers Chapter two, a sequel to
Speaker 1: twenty twenty fours The Strangers, and you know, Brian Tellurico again.
Speaker 1: Sam's pulling from this will counter nicely what he said
Speaker 1: about Train Dreams atrocious barely a movie.
Speaker 2: Wow. Brian's just experienced the gamut of cinema in this
Speaker 2: last few months, I think, and of.
Speaker 1: Course out wide. The big release, the one we will
Speaker 1: be discussing on next week's show, can't not wait. And yes,
Speaker 1: this will just add another wrinkle into an eventual revisit
Speaker 1: of the film Spotting poll another decade from PTA that
Speaker 1: we'll have to throw into the mix, exactly the twenty twenties.
Speaker 1: We will talk about, one battle after another.
Speaker 2: Film. Spotting is produced by Golden Joe Dessou and Sam
Speaker 2: Van Halgren. Without Sam and Golden Joe, this show wouldn't go.
Speaker 2: Our production assistant is Sophie Kempinar special thanks to everyone
Speaker 2: at wb Eazy Chicago. More information is available at wbez
Speaker 2: dot org for film spotting, I'm Josh Larson.
Speaker 1: And I'm Adam Kempinar. Thanks for listening.
Speaker 4: This conversation can serve no purpose anymore.
Speaker 1: The burn film Spotting is listeners supported. Join the film
Speaker 1: Spotting family at film spottingfamily dot com and get access
Speaker 1: to ad free episodes, monthly bonus shows, our weekly newsletter, and,
Speaker 1: for the first time, all in one place, the entire
Speaker 1: film spotting archive going back to two thousand and five.
Speaker 1: That's a film Spotting Family dot com Panicbly