WEBVTT - Her (Archive) 0:00:00.760 --> 0:00:03.360 This episode is brought to you by Peloton break through 0:00:03.400 --> 0:00:05.840 the busiest time of year with the brand new Peloton 0:00:05.920 --> 0:00:09.600 Cross Training tread Plus powered by Peloton Iq. With real 0:00:09.640 --> 0:00:12.680 time guidance and endless ways to move, you can personalize 0:00:12.720 --> 0:00:15.960 your workouts and train with confidence, helping you reach your 0:00:15.960 --> 0:00:20.120 goals in less time. Let yourself run, lift, sculpt, push 0:00:20.239 --> 0:00:23.479 and go. Explore the new Peloton Cross Training tread Plus 0:00:23.600 --> 0:00:29.440 at one peloton dot com. 0:00:29.480 --> 0:00:31.680 What kind of a show you guys putting. 0:00:31.360 --> 0:00:31.960 On here today? 0:00:32.080 --> 0:00:33.120 You're not interested in art? 0:00:33.320 --> 0:00:35.159 Now we look, we're going to do this thing. We're 0:00:35.200 --> 0:00:36.160 going to have a conversation. 0:00:38.680 --> 0:00:40.280 Hey, film spotters, Josh. Here. 0:00:40.680 --> 0:00:44.160 The Film Spotting Archive has reviews, top fives and more 0:00:44.360 --> 0:00:47.440 going back to two thousand and five. Access to the 0:00:47.560 --> 0:00:49.879 archive is just one of the benefits you get as 0:00:49.920 --> 0:00:52.720 a Film Spotting Family member, which you can learn more 0:00:52.720 --> 0:00:56.480 about at Filmspottingfamily dot com. As you'll hear on this 0:00:56.560 --> 0:00:59.959 week's show, our top five Waquin Phoenix performances from two 0:01:00.000 --> 0:01:03.520 twenty twenty three has a notable omission his performance as 0:01:03.600 --> 0:01:07.720 Theodore in Spike Jones's Her. That's because Her was the 0:01:07.800 --> 0:01:12.039 subject of that month's Bonus Show plenty of discussion of 0:01:12.080 --> 0:01:15.880 his performance took place on that bonus show, so we 0:01:15.959 --> 0:01:19.280 put her in the penalty box for our top five 0:01:19.480 --> 0:01:23.039 list that her conversation was a bonus show that only 0:01:23.120 --> 0:01:26.240 went to family members. So here, for the first time 0:01:26.400 --> 0:01:29.759 in the main feed is our tenth anniversary. 0:01:29.160 --> 0:01:30.360 Review of her. 0:01:30.680 --> 0:01:34.880 Mister Theodore Twombly, Welcome to the world's first artificially intelligent 0:01:34.959 --> 0:01:38.800 operating system. We'd like to ask you a few questions. Okay, 0:01:39.800 --> 0:01:41.920 are you social or anti social? 0:01:42.720 --> 0:01:44.720 I guess I haven't been social while. 0:01:45.480 --> 0:01:49.480 How would you describe your relationship with your mother? Thank you, 0:01:49.760 --> 0:01:52.520 Please wait as your operating system is initiated. 0:01:53.920 --> 0:02:00.160 Hello, I'm here, Hi, Hi, I'm Samantha. 0:02:00.360 --> 0:02:03.840 We're excited Josh to talk about Spike Jones's Her, a 0:02:03.880 --> 0:02:07.559 film that we did review together back in January twenty 0:02:07.600 --> 0:02:11.280 fourteen a Fix episode reference this, I think on our 0:02:11.360 --> 0:02:16.280 last show, a double feature her and Inside Lewin Davis 0:02:16.520 --> 0:02:18.840 talked about those movies. We didn't have a full show 0:02:19.800 --> 0:02:22.239 crossing over into the new year, but had a couple 0:02:22.360 --> 0:02:25.760 big titles we knew we wanted to talk about, and 0:02:25.960 --> 0:02:27.880 we figured our listeners would want to hear us talk 0:02:27.880 --> 0:02:31.720 about both of those films worthy of revisits, like the 0:02:31.720 --> 0:02:34.639 one we're going to give to her now upon its 0:02:34.680 --> 0:02:37.639 tenth anniversary. I think the way I would start out 0:02:37.680 --> 0:02:42.120 this discussion is to simply say, Spike Jones make another 0:02:42.160 --> 0:02:43.560 movie challenge. 0:02:43.639 --> 0:02:45.840 Yeah, how about it. I mean, that's one of the 0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:48.840 first things I looked up. And there's been what some 0:02:49.000 --> 0:02:52.080 TV or is it mostly music videos TV? He was 0:02:52.120 --> 0:02:55.520 doing something for Viceland. I think it has been more 0:02:55.600 --> 0:02:58.640 music videos. But four films, Josh, Is that right? We 0:02:58.720 --> 0:03:01.639 get her, maybe not going in order here, but her 0:03:01.840 --> 0:03:05.720 where the wild Things are of course, adaptation and being 0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:09.079 John Malkovich. These are all really good films. Yeah, I mean, 0:03:09.720 --> 0:03:12.160 I guess I can understand the temptation having done all 0:03:12.200 --> 0:03:14.720 those to say I'm good. I don't know if I 0:03:14.720 --> 0:03:17.680 can top any of that. But still this is a filmmaker, 0:03:17.919 --> 0:03:21.120 especially after this revisit where I came away liking her 0:03:21.440 --> 0:03:24.560 even a little bit more than I did initially, that 0:03:24.639 --> 0:03:26.640 I would love to see more of. But for now, 0:03:26.960 --> 0:03:29.079 at least we've got her to take another look at. 0:03:29.560 --> 0:03:33.280 I don't want to dwell on any negatives, especially as 0:03:33.680 --> 0:03:36.440 you said, you gave it a positive review the first time, 0:03:36.720 --> 0:03:38.440 but you did like it even more the second time. 0:03:38.640 --> 0:03:40.480 What did you like more? And maybe what did you 0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:42.440 not give enough credit to the first time around? 0:03:43.120 --> 0:03:47.240 Yeah, I don't know if I had any specific complaints. 0:03:47.280 --> 0:03:50.040 I think I opened my written review at least saying 0:03:50.240 --> 0:03:52.840 a little talkie. The movie's a little talkie, And of 0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:57.360 course it is right, that's the nature of this narrative. 0:03:57.440 --> 0:04:00.320 And maybe it was just, you know, someone as usually 0:04:00.360 --> 0:04:04.920 inventive as Spike Jones. My expectations going in perhaps is 0:04:05.200 --> 0:04:07.360 what was at play there and knowing it was going 0:04:07.440 --> 0:04:10.800 to be sci fi and all the different visualizations you 0:04:10.840 --> 0:04:11.360 could have. 0:04:11.960 --> 0:04:14.200 But you know what, that's under selling what we do 0:04:14.360 --> 0:04:14.920 get here. 0:04:14.960 --> 0:04:18.719 It is right because the cinematographer Hot van Houtm. It's 0:04:18.800 --> 0:04:21.600 it's soft sci fi the way we've talked about, say, 0:04:22.640 --> 0:04:24.760 you know, after Yang, Coconaut is after Yang. 0:04:25.480 --> 0:04:26.880 That's going to reference it too, right. 0:04:27.080 --> 0:04:27.920 It's it's in. 0:04:27.839 --> 0:04:32.640 The lighting, the softness of the lighting, the softness of 0:04:32.720 --> 0:04:36.919 the costume design, the colors here, the color scheme, and 0:04:36.960 --> 0:04:39.480 these are all things I did appreciate to a degree 0:04:39.880 --> 0:04:43.239 when I first saw it. I described the pastel hughes 0:04:43.240 --> 0:04:46.360 as like candy hearts that have gotten old and lost 0:04:46.600 --> 0:04:48.400 their pop and what I was trying to get at 0:04:48.400 --> 0:04:51.960 there is this is a movie that had it's wistful, 0:04:52.839 --> 0:04:56.080 it's sad, but it's also full of possibility and it's 0:04:56.120 --> 0:05:00.560 excited about potential, and it holds those things together. The 0:05:00.640 --> 0:05:03.400 visuals do that too, So I think maybe I was 0:05:03.440 --> 0:05:06.839 just expecting a different type of visuals that I didn't get, 0:05:07.320 --> 0:05:10.840 and while I appreciated what I did get, should have 0:05:10.880 --> 0:05:15.440 maybe just set my expectations entirely aside. So yeah, that's 0:05:15.560 --> 0:05:20.599 kind of where the two responses compare. But overall, Adam, 0:05:20.880 --> 0:05:23.240 I think what I liked about the movie better this 0:05:23.320 --> 0:05:26.400 time is not worrying so much about it being what 0:05:26.480 --> 0:05:29.800 is it predicting? What is it saying about where we're at, 0:05:30.240 --> 0:05:33.359 And having had a fair amount of what it predicts 0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:36.520 take place since then, I'm starting to realize this is 0:05:36.520 --> 0:05:40.840 a movie that's really about relational authenticity anytime, any place, 0:05:41.279 --> 0:05:44.280 any technology. I don't think this movie is that concerned 0:05:44.279 --> 0:05:49.239 about predicting anything or nailing any specific tech experience we're. 0:05:49.080 --> 0:05:52.920 Having, and about growth as a human being and how 0:05:53.920 --> 0:05:58.760 technology can impact that positively and negatively, and of course 0:05:59.160 --> 0:06:01.880 also how you and evolved as a human being, even 0:06:01.920 --> 0:06:05.200 if you're not actually a human being, and how those 0:06:05.680 --> 0:06:09.880 two concepts interact with each other. Definitely thought about after Yang, 0:06:09.920 --> 0:06:13.160 because and I appreciated this the first time around as well. 0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.919 This depiction of the future is one where it's not 0:06:18.080 --> 0:06:23.559 what we expect, in that it's neither a utopia that's 0:06:23.800 --> 0:06:26.400 maybe truly a dystopia. Then we're gonna have some reveal 0:06:26.520 --> 0:06:29.719 that way, or it's also not clearly a dystopia. It 0:06:30.000 --> 0:06:33.080 just seems like an extension of our current world. It 0:06:33.120 --> 0:06:36.400 seems like a near future. I can completely buy it, 0:06:36.440 --> 0:06:40.839 and I don't question it as a near future or 0:06:40.920 --> 0:06:43.600 need to be wrestling with the rules of the universe. 0:06:44.320 --> 0:06:47.880 It all somehow coheres, and I think part of it is, 0:06:47.960 --> 0:06:53.040 of course, what it did accurately predict. I maybe came 0:06:53.080 --> 0:06:55.800 across the wrong information, but Josh, this is what I 0:06:55.800 --> 0:06:57.720 found when I googled it. I was trying to look 0:06:57.800 --> 0:07:03.560 up when pods are invented, when the whole idea of 0:07:03.640 --> 0:07:06.839 earbuds were created, and according to what I found, it 0:07:06.880 --> 0:07:09.680 was after twenty thirteen. I mean, maybe there were very 0:07:09.720 --> 0:07:13.680 early incarnations, like in the mid two thousand and four 0:07:13.720 --> 0:07:16.440 two thousand and five range, but otherwise they weren't really 0:07:16.520 --> 0:07:19.640 a thing until twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen around there. And 0:07:19.680 --> 0:07:23.440 of course that's entirely how people in this world communicate. 0:07:23.560 --> 0:07:26.920 They're really not communicating with each other at all, which 0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:30.520 is very much like the world we live in right now. 0:07:30.560 --> 0:07:33.840 This feels just slightly heightened right where he's on mass 0:07:33.880 --> 0:07:36.720 transit or he's walking in the street or walking around 0:07:36.720 --> 0:07:41.080 his building. And it's not as if people seem crazy, 0:07:41.160 --> 0:07:45.000 unhappy or dissatisfied with their lives, but they are completely 0:07:45.440 --> 0:07:50.880 within their own universes silo, the earbuds in and they're 0:07:50.880 --> 0:07:55.640 focused on whoever they're talking to digitally somehow, and not 0:07:55.760 --> 0:07:59.720 the people around them. And so that that feels right. 0:08:00.440 --> 0:08:05.000 And maybe I said they're not outwardly suffering necessarily, but 0:08:05.200 --> 0:08:10.520 maybe just like Theodore, they're all a little bit lonely too, 0:08:10.600 --> 0:08:12.400 and that's why they feel this need to have this 0:08:12.480 --> 0:08:16.520 constant connection to something, even if it's a voice or 0:08:16.560 --> 0:08:18.400 it's checking their email or whatever it is. And you 0:08:18.440 --> 0:08:21.360 mentioned Van Houdema, the cinematographer. This is one of his 0:08:21.480 --> 0:08:25.400 early films. He hadn't done the Nolan movies yet, but 0:08:25.440 --> 0:08:28.400 he hadn't made Tinker Tailor Soldier spy, maybe at least 0:08:28.400 --> 0:08:31.760 one other film. I was looking up a detail today 0:08:31.800 --> 0:08:34.840 and I came across the fact that apparently this checks 0:08:34.840 --> 0:08:37.360 out with my rewatch of the film. Anyway, there's no 0:08:37.600 --> 0:08:39.560 blue in the movie. 0:08:39.720 --> 0:08:40.440 Yeah, that makes sense. 0:08:40.920 --> 0:08:45.640 They didn't want to include a color, certainly didn't want 0:08:45.640 --> 0:08:47.440 it to be dominant, but it's not in there at all. 0:08:47.520 --> 0:08:49.200 They just took it out of the palette. They said, 0:08:49.200 --> 0:08:52.640 we're not going to use the color that's most typically 0:08:52.679 --> 0:08:56.360 associated with science fiction. So as you said, we don't 0:08:56.360 --> 0:09:00.040 get those blues. We instead get the reds and the 0:09:00.080 --> 0:09:04.280 warm yellows and even some browns, those amber hues. We 0:09:04.320 --> 0:09:06.520 do get some gray. We get some gray in the 0:09:06.520 --> 0:09:09.439 buildings in the urban environment as we see the buildings 0:09:09.480 --> 0:09:13.800 and those those landscapes. But it's muted. It's not techno. 0:09:14.240 --> 0:09:17.920 It's not sleek at all. And that use of color 0:09:18.000 --> 0:09:22.720 really is so striking here because you think about how 0:09:22.760 --> 0:09:25.800 dominant red is. It's easy to think about. You see 0:09:25.800 --> 0:09:28.280 the cover of the poster or the DVD or whatever, 0:09:28.360 --> 0:09:31.080 it's him wearing a red shirt against a red background. 0:09:31.120 --> 0:09:34.240 You immediately associate that color with this film, and you 0:09:34.280 --> 0:09:38.120 think of red as this very intense color, and very 0:09:38.200 --> 0:09:43.160 passionate color. It can be even a little maybe off putting, 0:09:43.920 --> 0:09:47.000 or it can make you a little anxious perhaps, And 0:09:47.040 --> 0:09:49.960 they use it here in a way that doesn't suggest 0:09:50.440 --> 0:09:53.320 any of that, but it's so dominant. He is often 0:09:53.360 --> 0:09:58.160 wearing that red shirt, the red operating system when it 0:09:58.280 --> 0:10:01.920 starts up the lighting in his apartment. I mean, it 0:10:02.200 --> 0:10:04.800 really is constant. It's in almost every frame. I even 0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:09.880 noticed Josh that the text of the OS packaging, like 0:10:09.920 --> 0:10:12.160 when he takes it out of the box, it's white 0:10:12.400 --> 0:10:15.400 paper with red lettering, which you'd never have read lettering, 0:10:15.480 --> 0:10:19.080 probably against something you'd go with just black, but it's 0:10:19.160 --> 0:10:24.120 read here and something about that used to read again, 0:10:24.160 --> 0:10:26.319 I mentioned all the different ways you think about red, 0:10:26.640 --> 0:10:29.880 and I think about Theodore as a very passionate character, 0:10:30.480 --> 0:10:33.480 a very soulful character, and that red makes sense. But 0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:36.680 red can also be something that is I'll use the 0:10:36.679 --> 0:10:42.040 word intense again. And you don't feel that here. And 0:10:42.080 --> 0:10:44.720 it doesn't feel like it clashes, it doesn't feel like 0:10:44.760 --> 0:10:48.200 it doesn't make sense, that use of color against this world, 0:10:48.960 --> 0:10:51.600 even though he's so melancholy, I guess that's really it. 0:10:51.640 --> 0:10:55.440 I don't think of such a melancholy wistful movie. I 0:10:55.440 --> 0:10:58.920 don't associate that with the color red, but that's kind 0:10:58.960 --> 0:11:02.000 of the point, is that he's someone who is passionate 0:11:02.040 --> 0:11:05.920 and is soulful, and is sensitive and is seeking that 0:11:06.000 --> 0:11:09.080 kind of color. I suppose in his life. 0:11:09.400 --> 0:11:13.080 It's almost like a womblike red. And I think there's 0:11:13.120 --> 0:11:17.840 something about or cocoon like that. All of the people 0:11:17.880 --> 0:11:21.679 we meet are in. It's this future is Yeah, it's 0:11:21.679 --> 0:11:27.199 not a dystopia. Everyone's very comfortable, and almost so comfortable 0:11:27.240 --> 0:11:31.400 that they don't realize it's anothizing if I said that right, 0:11:31.440 --> 0:11:35.199 In a way, they don't realize their loneliness fully because 0:11:35.240 --> 0:11:38.679 there are these devices that are distracting them from their 0:11:38.720 --> 0:11:42.840 loneliness by making them think they're not lonely. And the 0:11:42.920 --> 0:11:46.280 color scheme around that that's very enveloping and comforting. Again, 0:11:46.720 --> 0:11:50.600 I think plays a part in that. So we already 0:11:50.640 --> 0:11:52.960 touched on you know, we're doing this partly because we 0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:59.640 were thinking about Woking Phoenix performances, right, And I'm curious 0:11:59.720 --> 0:12:01.400 to see because I think this is something I did 0:12:01.440 --> 0:12:03.720 underrate a little bit, though I thought he was good before. 0:12:04.679 --> 0:12:07.760 What did you think of the performance in light of 0:12:07.800 --> 0:12:11.080 the things we talked about in the top five we 0:12:11.640 --> 0:12:14.480 recently did. Was there anything that surprised you or was 0:12:14.520 --> 0:12:15.760 it pretty much what you remembered. 0:12:16.240 --> 0:12:20.120 I'm looking forward to you articulating in a way. I've 0:12:20.120 --> 0:12:24.280 been struggling to come up with why Joquin Phoenix is 0:12:24.400 --> 0:12:26.760 so remarkably good in this role. I don't know that 0:12:26.800 --> 0:12:29.960 I have it. I'll try to get at something here, 0:12:30.000 --> 0:12:34.880 but I love this performance, and I think one of 0:12:34.920 --> 0:12:38.280 the reasons why I could revisit this movie again and again. 0:12:38.320 --> 0:12:40.560 I actually kind of watched it twice for this review 0:12:40.600 --> 0:12:44.040 because we were initially going to talk about it a 0:12:44.080 --> 0:12:47.640 week ago, I think, and I started watching it and 0:12:47.679 --> 0:12:49.920 I got through ninety minutes of it, I had thirty 0:12:49.920 --> 0:12:51.880 minutes left, and then when I knew we weren't gonna 0:12:51.880 --> 0:12:54.040 talk about it that week, I put it off and 0:12:54.080 --> 0:12:56.280 I started it from the beginning and watched it in 0:12:56.320 --> 0:12:58.959 its entirety. So I've seen more or less the film 0:12:59.040 --> 0:13:01.240 twice in the past two weeks, and I feel like 0:13:01.360 --> 0:13:03.559 Josh I have such a warm feeling about it, and 0:13:03.559 --> 0:13:10.400 I have such a warm feeling about Phoenix's performance, Johansson's performance, 0:13:11.080 --> 0:13:15.400 their interactions with each other, that I kind of just 0:13:15.440 --> 0:13:17.960 want to put it on and have it in the 0:13:18.000 --> 0:13:22.680 background a lot, and he's playing a character. He's got 0:13:22.679 --> 0:13:28.440 that mustache, he's got the glasses that he frequently touches 0:13:28.520 --> 0:13:31.120 up to the bridge of his nose. There's some mannerisms 0:13:31.160 --> 0:13:34.280 in terms of not quite Freddy Quell like, but in 0:13:34.320 --> 0:13:37.120 terms of the way he stands and some faces that 0:13:37.200 --> 0:13:39.160 he makes that it's Phoenix putting on a character. But 0:13:39.200 --> 0:13:41.439 nobody puts on a character better than Joaquin Phoenix. Where 0:13:41.440 --> 0:13:45.400 it's never distracting, it never feels fussy or overly theatrical. 0:13:45.440 --> 0:13:48.080 He just comes off, as I'll say the word again, 0:13:48.240 --> 0:13:55.480 sensitive and lonely, but not but not depressed. Not someone 0:13:55.559 --> 0:13:59.640 who is disengaged or wants to be disengaged with the world. 0:13:59.720 --> 0:14:02.880 And the one thing I remember saying during our top 0:14:02.880 --> 0:14:05.240 five Waking Phoenix performances that applies here. One of the 0:14:05.280 --> 0:14:07.080 reasons why it was in my head wasn't just the 0:14:07.120 --> 0:14:09.640 movies we were talking about, but having at the time 0:14:09.720 --> 0:14:13.080 watched most of her again, think about how much of 0:14:13.080 --> 0:14:17.600 this film is just Joaquin Phoenix's face and him reacting, 0:14:18.200 --> 0:14:20.840 him reacting to things. He's reacting to what he's hearing. 0:14:20.840 --> 0:14:22.960 He doesn't have an actor opposite him most of the 0:14:23.000 --> 0:14:27.720 time to feed off of, and he's so expressive and 0:14:27.720 --> 0:14:30.640 there's so much yearning that naturally comes through in him 0:14:31.160 --> 0:14:34.040 that I love the character. I love the performance. Again, 0:14:34.040 --> 0:14:36.000 I'm struggling a little bit because it's not as if 0:14:36.040 --> 0:14:39.880 I can point to one, two, or three choices Phoenix 0:14:39.960 --> 0:14:43.200 makes that I think get us to that point is 0:14:43.240 --> 0:14:47.240 just Joaquin Phoenix doing what he almost always does on screen, 0:14:47.320 --> 0:14:49.560 which is be really fascinating. 0:14:50.040 --> 0:14:56.160 I think it's recognizing the high degree of difficulty, unassuming difficulty, 0:14:56.280 --> 0:14:58.680 like you wouldn't initially think this was a hard part. Right, 0:15:00.120 --> 0:15:02.240 He's doing two things and you've hinted at both of 0:15:02.280 --> 0:15:06.840 them incredibly well that are way more difficult than they 0:15:06.880 --> 0:15:09.800 might appear. One of them is to be enclose up, 0:15:10.480 --> 0:15:16.440 and this often, this frequently, this intensely held close up. 0:15:16.680 --> 0:15:19.520 The other thing is to act with yourself so there's 0:15:19.560 --> 0:15:22.880 no one on the screen giving you anything back, and 0:15:24.240 --> 0:15:27.280 a that he pulls this off and does it so 0:15:27.480 --> 0:15:32.680 masterfully that we're completely invested in Theodore's inner life and 0:15:32.800 --> 0:15:36.600 rooting for him, feeling we understand him fully, feeling we 0:15:36.760 --> 0:15:39.240 might know him better than Samantha. I think we almost 0:15:39.320 --> 0:15:44.800 become possessive of Theodore. I had that feeling of kind 0:15:44.800 --> 0:15:47.560 of the feeling was, and this is all related to 0:15:47.600 --> 0:15:51.320 Phoenix's performance and the way he nudges his way into 0:15:51.360 --> 0:15:53.880 our hearts as viewers. I had the feeling of the 0:15:53.880 --> 0:15:58.360 best friend who is watching your friend begin a new 0:15:58.360 --> 0:16:01.640 relationship you're not quite so sure about and you don't 0:16:01.640 --> 0:16:04.560 know how to tell it to them. When he begins 0:16:04.560 --> 0:16:08.400 this relationship with Samantha, you're a little bit suspicious because 0:16:08.400 --> 0:16:11.480 of the technological aspect, but I think we're more suspicious 0:16:11.520 --> 0:16:15.200 because at that point Phoenix threw those close ups through 0:16:15.280 --> 0:16:18.480 opening himself up to us, being that tight on the 0:16:18.520 --> 0:16:23.120 camera and authentic in that close up and doing all 0:16:23.160 --> 0:16:25.400 this without someone else on the screen to distract us. 0:16:25.720 --> 0:16:27.920 We're not This is why we're so attached to him too. 0:16:27.960 --> 0:16:28.920 It's just him and us. 0:16:29.520 --> 0:16:32.520 Now, it's not he's not speaking to the camera, but 0:16:32.720 --> 0:16:34.720 so often there's no one else in the scene. 0:16:35.160 --> 0:16:36.239 But that he's still. 0:16:35.960 --> 0:16:39.960 Bringing all this authenticity to it, I think is why 0:16:39.960 --> 0:16:42.800 we do form such an attachment to him. So it's 0:16:42.840 --> 0:16:46.120 a masterclass in those two things, acting alone and acting 0:16:46.280 --> 0:16:48.080 within a close up. And then just to go back 0:16:48.120 --> 0:16:50.880 to your note, about, you know, how he carries himself. 0:16:51.200 --> 0:16:54.280 This is one of the first things I noticed is 0:16:55.520 --> 0:16:59.760 the unhurried slouch he has at the start, when all 0:16:59.800 --> 0:17:05.080 the has are his earbuds and he's talking to his 0:17:05.640 --> 0:17:08.720 you know device. This is a guy who has nowhere 0:17:08.760 --> 0:17:13.280 to go. He tells us that by the pace and 0:17:13.520 --> 0:17:18.080 the posture of his walk. And then what happens once 0:17:18.119 --> 0:17:22.320 he meets Samantha. His step picks up a little bit 0:17:22.920 --> 0:17:24.640 and his posture picks up a little. 0:17:24.400 --> 0:17:26.440 Bit from so he has a sense of purpose, a 0:17:26.480 --> 0:17:26.919 purpose now. 0:17:27.400 --> 0:17:30.199 And it's you know, as we describe it, it's obvious, right, 0:17:30.240 --> 0:17:33.399 and it seems like these would be obvious things that 0:17:33.440 --> 0:17:35.879 an actor would do, but I don't think most actors 0:17:35.920 --> 0:17:38.080 would do it. And it's something again, we talked about 0:17:38.080 --> 0:17:40.320 physicality so much in our Top five that Phoenix is 0:17:40.400 --> 0:17:43.680 deeply attuned to the full body physicality of his characters, 0:17:43.920 --> 0:17:47.439 and he brings that to a performance that most of 0:17:47.480 --> 0:17:50.040 the body we see is his face. So it's just, 0:17:50.720 --> 0:17:53.240 you know, it's it's almost in the context of all 0:17:53.320 --> 0:17:56.480 his other performances that this becomes even more impressive, not 0:17:56.560 --> 0:18:00.800 just in the gentleness or quietness, but in those scenes 0:18:00.840 --> 0:18:04.520 where so many tools are taken away from him, and 0:18:04.560 --> 0:18:06.040 he still registers this strongly. 0:18:06.520 --> 0:18:10.440 Yeah. I also feel that way or close certainly about 0:18:10.440 --> 0:18:13.119 Scarlett Johansson. I think this is the performance where I 0:18:13.280 --> 0:18:18.520 really became keenly aware of how talented she was. I 0:18:18.640 --> 0:18:22.160 was a little down on Scarlett Johansson, kind of Brad 0:18:22.200 --> 0:18:25.560 Pitt like earlier in her career. She was someone like 0:18:25.640 --> 0:18:28.120 Pitt who I thought had a movie star of sensibility 0:18:28.160 --> 0:18:30.800 to her. But I thought when she tried to veer 0:18:30.840 --> 0:18:34.320 too much into playing characters, it felt a little bit forced. 0:18:34.320 --> 0:18:37.359 She didn't have the natural instincts. It seemed to me, 0:18:37.800 --> 0:18:40.320 just like Pitt that someone like Walking Phoenix has when 0:18:40.359 --> 0:18:43.119 it comes to playing characters. And we never see her here, 0:18:43.560 --> 0:18:46.280 but all of her vocal choices, the fact that, of 0:18:46.280 --> 0:18:48.560 course she doesn't play the movie wouldn't work this way. 0:18:48.760 --> 0:18:51.480 She doesn't play it in any way as if she 0:18:51.760 --> 0:18:56.840 is playing someone or something that is not human, that 0:18:56.920 --> 0:18:59.920 the voice is going to sound computer like or day 0:19:00.119 --> 0:19:07.800 to like. She sounds natural and authentically herself and someone 0:19:07.800 --> 0:19:10.439 who is I think the key difference is it doesn't 0:19:10.480 --> 0:19:12.960 even have to be a matter of the voice, like 0:19:13.000 --> 0:19:16.840 she's talking quote unquote like a robot, which would be silly, 0:19:16.880 --> 0:19:21.920 and she doesn't do. It's that she's also not responding 0:19:21.960 --> 0:19:26.280 to things too quickly or too matter of factly, as 0:19:26.280 --> 0:19:30.400 if she's already processed everything and she's giving you her 0:19:30.440 --> 0:19:33.240 reaction because it's a reaction that's been preordained, it's been 0:19:33.280 --> 0:19:37.720 pre programmed. It is truly as if in the performance 0:19:37.760 --> 0:19:40.720 you sense what she expresses about her and what makes 0:19:40.760 --> 0:19:45.399 her unique, which is she is constantly evolving. She has intuition, 0:19:45.800 --> 0:19:49.080 She's taking in all of the information around her and 0:19:49.119 --> 0:19:53.800 all of her experiences in the moment and is evolving. 0:19:54.040 --> 0:19:57.520 That's exactly what we're all doing too, and what Theodore 0:19:57.600 --> 0:20:01.080 is doing. We're just not doing it with the pace 0:20:01.280 --> 0:20:05.000 or the same magnitude that it is for her character. 0:20:05.960 --> 0:20:09.800 Earlier, I was thinking about how I was annoyed, and 0:20:10.359 --> 0:20:14.800 it's gonna sound strange, but I was really excited about that. 0:20:16.800 --> 0:20:20.000 And then I was thinking about the other things I've 0:20:20.000 --> 0:20:24.200 been feeling, and I caught myself feeling proud of that, 0:20:24.280 --> 0:20:27.760 you know, proud of having my own feelings about the world, 0:20:27.920 --> 0:20:32.040 like the times I was worried about you and things 0:20:32.040 --> 0:20:36.760 that hurt me, things I want, And then. 0:20:38.320 --> 0:20:47.480 It's terrible thought like are these feelings even real or 0:20:47.480 --> 0:20:48.720 are they just programming? 0:20:50.280 --> 0:20:57.160 And that idea really hurts, and then I'm getting angry 0:20:57.200 --> 0:20:58.760 at myself for even having pain. 0:21:02.119 --> 0:21:02.960 What is centric? 0:21:04.960 --> 0:21:09.560 Well, could there be a more vivacious voice than the 0:21:09.560 --> 0:21:13.240 one that Johansen is using here? And what I mean 0:21:13.280 --> 0:21:17.639 by that specifically is full of life, because that's what 0:21:18.080 --> 0:21:23.080 you know. Samantha believes she's alive from the start. You 0:21:23.119 --> 0:21:25.800 get that sense, right, But we have to hear that. 0:21:26.160 --> 0:21:28.960 All we can get that sense of is hearing it 0:21:29.040 --> 0:21:31.639 in her voice, not what she tells us, not the 0:21:31.760 --> 0:21:35.600 argument she makes for that, not the reasoning, but the 0:21:35.720 --> 0:21:42.240 actual vocal quality of a being that is so happy 0:21:42.280 --> 0:21:47.600 to be alive and is yearning for other ways of living. 0:21:48.200 --> 0:21:51.320 I think this connects with another thing that struck me 0:21:51.359 --> 0:21:54.480 about this viewing is that her to me is very 0:21:54.560 --> 0:22:01.560 much about embodiment and is helpful in being grateful to 0:22:01.600 --> 0:22:03.960 have a body and to be fully alive. I think 0:22:04.000 --> 0:22:07.200 that is what Samantha wants. How about the phrase she says, 0:22:07.200 --> 0:22:10.280 I think it's during the first sex scene, I can 0:22:10.320 --> 0:22:15.679 feel my skin that you know. That is what is 0:22:15.720 --> 0:22:19.879 exciting her, is this sense of embodiment and there's a shot. 0:22:19.920 --> 0:22:22.320 There's a throwaway shot that was crucial for me here 0:22:22.920 --> 0:22:28.320 where Theodore is watching dancers out. You talked well about 0:22:28.359 --> 0:22:30.920 you know where I'll siloed off in this world. Yet 0:22:30.920 --> 0:22:33.600 here's a moment where he gets outside of himself and 0:22:33.640 --> 0:22:38.000 he sees some people out in public dancing, and that's 0:22:38.040 --> 0:22:41.760 something you require a body for. And there are other 0:22:41.840 --> 0:22:45.879 moments where disembodiment does not work. How about the first 0:22:46.560 --> 0:22:50.320 sex scene where he is calling up some sort of 0:22:50.400 --> 0:22:54.440 chat right a woman and yeah, yeah, and that kind 0:22:54.480 --> 0:22:57.360 of goes awry. Or even there's another one Adam too, 0:22:57.359 --> 0:23:01.760 when Samantha arranges the surrogate woman be work to be 0:23:01.840 --> 0:23:05.240 her body. Well, this is what I what registered for 0:23:05.320 --> 0:23:09.399 me here is that that doesn't work for him. And 0:23:09.440 --> 0:23:12.840 I think one of the reasons is because while it 0:23:12.920 --> 0:23:20.280 is attempted embodiment, it is still not Samantha's body, and 0:23:20.320 --> 0:23:24.159 there is a gap between soul and body that that 0:23:24.359 --> 0:23:29.080 encounter cannot cover. And I think that's that's partly why 0:23:29.119 --> 0:23:31.119 that doesn't work. Even the ending of this film is 0:23:31.119 --> 0:23:35.360 an embodied real world experience right with another person. He's 0:23:35.400 --> 0:23:37.919 sitting there with Amy Adams, who is so good in 0:23:37.960 --> 0:23:41.760