0:03

What kind of a show are you guys putting on

0:06

here today? You're not interested in art? No. Now look,

0:08

we're going to do this thing. We're going to have

0:10

a conversation. From

0:13

Chicago, this is Film Spotting. Speaking

0:15

through an allergy haze, I'm Josh

0:17

Larson. And clear as can be,

0:19

I'm Adam Kempenaar. I

0:23

tried looking you up, but nothing. It's like you don't

0:25

even exist. I guess I'm just your fantasy.

0:30

Glenn Powell get used to being everyone's fantasy.

0:32

That's from the new Hitman about a college

0:34

professor who takes a sideline gig as a

0:36

contract killer. Sort of. The

0:38

Richard Linklater directed film came exclusively

0:40

to Netflix last weekend, and we've

0:42

got a review. Plus, thoughts on

0:44

Inside Out 2 and more. It's

0:47

all ahead. You know, I too am a college

0:49

professor with a sideline gig as a sort of

0:51

film critic. I'm Film Spotting. Welcome

1:04

to Film Spotting, and welcome back Josh.

1:06

I want to hear all about your

1:08

family trip overseas, but even more

1:11

than that, I have to ask. You

1:13

know, I like to imagine myself looming

1:15

largely in your consciousness, even when we're

1:17

not together, when we're not recording. And

1:19

I was imagining you visiting

1:22

ancient Greek ruins, air

1:24

pods in, exclaiming out loud to no one

1:26

in particular. I can't believe you didn't like

1:29

Furioso more. Yeah. Did

1:31

that happen? You were Michael. You were Michael

1:33

Phillips. I mean, I did

1:35

not allow you to ruin our pristine

1:37

trip to Greece. I'll say that. I

1:40

saved it. We did have some

1:42

wonderful days in Athens, and then we just hit

1:44

a quiet island we found

1:47

with a little beach, and

1:49

we just ate and swam

1:52

and ate and napped

1:54

and ate and no. Sounds delightful.

1:56

I was not going to listen

1:59

to. your review

2:01

of Furiosa, but I did when I got on

2:03

the plane, Adam, and it was a rough ride

2:05

for a couple of reasons. We might get to

2:07

home, the plane ride home. I

2:09

can't say your guys' review of Furiosa helped. Okay,

2:12

well, more Furiosa talk and more Michael Phillips

2:14

in a couple of weeks when we share

2:16

our top five films of the year so

2:18

far. Later in this show, some thoughts on

2:21

Pixar's Inside Out 2, which

2:23

comes to theaters this weekend. Also, Ghost

2:25

Light, a new film out in limited release from the

2:27

makers of 2019's St. Francis. First,

2:31

Hitman, directed by Richard Linklater

2:33

with Glenn Powell as an unassuming philosophy professor

2:35

with an unusual side hustle. He's a fake

2:37

Hitman for the New Orleans Police Department. He

2:40

poses as a killer and the people who

2:42

come looking for a gun for hire go

2:44

to jail. Things get complicated for Powell's Gary,

2:47

or is it Ron? When he hits it

2:49

off with one of his marks, a woman

2:51

played by Adria Arjona's Maddie, who

2:53

is looking to knock off her abusive and

2:55

controlling husband. Here's Powell in professor mode in

2:58

a scene from early in the film. So

3:01

what does Nietzsche mean when he

3:03

says, the secret for harvesting from

3:05

existence, the greatest fruitfulness, the greatest

3:08

enjoyment is to live dangerously. Build

3:11

your cities on the slopes of Vesuvius, send

3:13

your ships into uncharted seas, live at war

3:15

with your peers and yourselves. What

3:19

is he getting at here? Only

3:21

Richard Linklater would make a Hitman

3:24

movie in which the supposed contract

3:26

killer is also a philosophy professor

3:28

given to pedantic lectures like that.

3:31

Indeed, this could see to so Linklater that

3:33

it was a surprise for me to learn

3:35

that Hitman, like 2012's Bernie, which Linklater made

3:37

with Jack Black, is adapted

3:39

from a Texas monthly nonfiction piece.

3:42

Linklater wrote the adapted screenplay with the

3:44

movie's lead, Glenn Powell, the current abthrob

3:46

of the likes of Anyone But You,

3:48

who previously had a role in Top

3:51

Gun Maverick and Linklater's Everybody Wants Some,

3:53

where he first came to our attention,

3:55

Adam. Watching Hitman, in

3:57

which Powell's professor Gary Johnson takes

4:00

on an increasing number of guises in service to

4:02

the police as a fake hitman, I began

4:05

to wonder, was this a Richard Linklater

4:07

movie or a Glenn Powell one? As

4:10

I noted, the Linklater touches are there. Texas

4:12

Monthly is a source, the philosophizing, Gary gives

4:14

a few more speeches to his students, and

4:17

the thematic notion of identity. Writing

4:20

about Everybody Wants Some, I described it

4:22

as, quote, a variation on the questions

4:24

that propel just about every Linklater film.

4:27

How do you determine your own identity? And

4:29

once you do that, how do you keep

4:31

it from being co-opted by square society? In

4:34

Hitman, when Gary gives himself over to one

4:36

of his alter egos, a sexy,

4:38

confident killer named Ron, this theme

4:40

becomes the literal text of the

4:42

film. At the

4:45

same time, the charismatic Powell is

4:47

clearly a crucial creative force, not

4:50

only as screenwriter, but also in the various

4:52

ways he employs his considerable charm. I'm

4:54

hardly a Powell expert, though the man a

4:57

few rows ahead of me on my recent

4:59

10-hour plane trip who put anyone but you

5:01

on repeat certainly makes me feel like

5:03

one. I do feel like

5:05

I have enough of a sense of Powell's

5:07

screen presence to recognize how much of it

5:09

permeates Hitman. What did

5:11

you make of this balance, Adam? Did Hitman

5:14

strike you as a meditative Linklater comedy or

5:17

a Powell star vehicle? Or

5:19

do the two, who also worked on Fast

5:21

Food Nation and Apollo 10 and a half

5:23

together, have the sort of

5:25

creative partnership that blends their talents seamlessly,

5:28

turning Hitman into something that showcases both

5:30

of them at their best? Well,

5:33

first, how bad would it be for me to

5:35

suggest that maybe the guy in front

5:37

of you was a little more obsessed with Sid D Sweeney

5:40

than Glenn Powell? Hey, I'm not casting

5:42

aspersions. Whatever kept him returning to

5:44

the well, he was definitely doing it. Considering

5:48

how much I enjoyed this movie and

5:51

the fact that Linklater and Powell were more than

5:53

just collaborators, as you noted, as director and star,

5:55

but also did write the movie together, I'll

5:58

take option C. I'll go with it being a perfect

6:01

blend to the point where I've actually been considering

6:04

is Powell, Linklater's, New

6:07

Ethan Hawke. I'm hoping of

6:09

course. Now Adam. I'm hoping of course.

6:11

You realize Ethan's going to hear this. I

6:14

do. I'm hoping that Hawke and Linklater continue

6:17

to tell stories together, many

6:19

stories together for many decades to

6:21

come. I am not trying to

6:23

shut out one of my favorite

6:25

performers and actor-director duos ever. But

6:27

if there are roles like this

6:29

one and in Everybody Wants

6:31

Some that call for someone younger, someone

6:34

Hawke might have played 15 to 20 years ago, I

6:38

think I'd be just fine with Powell being

6:40

that go-to guy. So maybe there's going to

6:42

be little distinction moving forward, Josh, between a

6:44

Linklater film and a Glenn Powell film. They

6:47

will all just blend seamlessly

6:49

together. And in terms of whether or

6:51

not it is definitely a Linklater film,

6:53

Powell's Gary says in his narration pretty

6:55

early in the film that he lives

6:57

in a world of questions and ideas,

7:00

which might be the best distillation of

7:02

Linklater's artistic ethos you can find if

7:05

there wasn't an even better expression of

7:07

it later when Gary says that his

7:09

primary interest is the eternal mystery

7:11

of human consciousness and behavior. Pretty

7:14

much sums it up, doesn't it? But I

7:16

like that questions and ideas line

7:19

because Linklater's movies

7:21

need thinkers. They need

7:23

actors who can

7:25

embody a combination of intellect

7:27

and emotional intelligence. There

7:30

has to be a certain thrill to

7:32

watching them process the eternal mystery of

7:34

human consciousness and behavior, more specifically their

7:36

own sense of self, their

7:38

own mysteries of human consciousness and

7:40

behavior. So I'm not

7:42

quite ready actually to put him on that

7:45

same pedestal as Ethan Hawke just yet as

7:47

a thinker or as a Linklater thinker

7:50

and philosophizer. But Powell absolutely pulls

7:52

it off. It's fun watching him

7:54

in several scenarios and circumstances, including

7:56

every scene with Arjona, which I'm

7:58

sure we're going to. But

8:00

separate from that and separate from

8:03

the different scenes where Gary is playing

8:05

pretend as different types of hit men and

8:07

all those disguises, I loved

8:09

watching Gary devise solutions in

8:11

real time, processing information,

8:14

like the scene at

8:16

the shooting range that happens in this film, where

8:19

she is doing a terrible job shooting at the

8:21

target. That's a ways off and says,

8:23

Oh, you're, you're a professional. You can do

8:26

this. Show me how it's done. And we

8:28

know that he probably has no real acumen

8:30

with the gun. What's he going to do

8:32

in this scenario? And he has

8:34

to think on his feet. He has to come up

8:36

with something. What he comes up with is he says,

8:39

I'll just move the target a little bit closer.

8:41

He says, that's my range. Right.

8:43

And it's cool as hell. And

8:46

there are many scenes and circumstances like

8:48

that in the film, including great

8:51

role playing scenarios like the scene that's probably

8:53

the best scene in the movie, which maybe

8:55

we'll get to later in spoilers.

8:57

But what did you think is that total

8:59

heresy on my part to even invoke Ethan

9:02

Hawke here? Did you have as much

9:04

fun with Powell and his performances? I

9:06

did. Yeah, it's, it's difficult that that

9:08

did not cross my mind to compare

9:11

him to Hawke at all. And

9:13

I think that speaks to how I can't quite

9:15

get as far as you are with Powell, who

9:17

is an actor I've liked and everything I've seen,

9:20

which again, hasn't been a ton, but I get the

9:22

charisma. He definitely has it. And

9:25

there are definitely moments here where he brings

9:27

it appropriately. The scene you just mentioned we're

9:29

going to get to is a

9:31

crackerjack one that works really well as

9:34

a contained scene. I

9:37

don't think I quite got there with the thinker

9:39

element of it. I didn't quite get there. And

9:41

it wasn't so much in thinker terms that I

9:44

would put it, but really just

9:46

human terms. And

9:49

watching this movie, it occurred to me a

9:51

little while in this felt

9:53

very much like Powell's play

9:56

to be the next Brad

9:58

Pitt. And I know this is how. the

10:00

performance is being received by some, but basically

10:02

this hunk with the ability to pull off,

10:05

not so much the thinker thing, but

10:07

something we've talked about here and there,

10:09

Adam, about Pitt, that quirky comic character,

10:12

capital C character thing, which

10:14

is something I loved about Pitt from

10:16

the beginning, very early on

10:18

when he started taking roles or giving

10:21

other types of roles little

10:23

flicks of this characterness. And

10:26

I just felt here Powell, while

10:28

having that undeniable charm, was

10:30

a character from moment

10:32

one and every mask he

10:35

put on, every wig, every fake

10:38

teeth that he, it was just

10:40

characters piling on characters. Um,

10:43

and I did eventually find myself cringing at some

10:45

of them more than laughing. I, I

10:47

almost think this chemistry with Arona

10:50

that you mentioned is definitely there,

10:52

but it's, they have chemistry as

10:55

performers. They don't have chemistry as the

10:57

people they're playing. It's almost like the

10:59

two of them, they could

11:01

have just been in a, they could, either one of them

11:03

could have been in a scene with a chair and had

11:05

just as much chemistry. There wasn't, there

11:08

wasn't a believable person, um, at

11:11

the heart of this performance. And

11:13

I would say that even Gary, the

11:15

person we meet first and spend a

11:17

significant amount of time with never

11:20

registered as, as a real guy, he

11:22

was, you know, this, this nerdy cat

11:25

loving lecture. And because Powell came in

11:27

to this movie with a reputation as

11:30

a rising sexy star, it's

11:32

almost like he had to comb his

11:34

hair exaggeratedly bad and, and put on

11:36

glasses that were exaggeratedly bad and,

11:39

um, and amp things up to that degree.

11:41

And I go back to Bernie, not just

11:43

because of the Texas monthly connection, but you

11:46

know, Jack Black was also playing

11:48

an extreme character in that movie

11:50

that this flamboyant, um,

11:52

I forget if he was a choir director, just a

11:54

singer, but also he works at a funeral home, but

11:57

it was such also a deeply humane. turn

12:01

where I believed that character as someone

12:03

I could meet in the real world.

12:05

And maybe that's not what Hitman is

12:07

going for. You know, it's very much

12:09

a rom-com that turns into this daytime

12:11

noir, will maybe touch on the genre,

12:13

you know, elements of this. So

12:15

maybe it's not fair to compare it to Bernie,

12:17

but I do think the

12:20

performances were maybe trying to do something

12:22

similar. And were there times

12:24

where I was amused by what Paul was doing?

12:26

Yes. Do I see the appeal? Yes. But

12:29

that human element that I really look

12:31

for, especially in a Linklater

12:33

movie, for me wasn't there. Now that aside, that

12:35

was kind of what held me back from loving

12:38

it as much as you did. I do think

12:40

this is a good Linklater film. I would recommend

12:42

it to people. I sort of felt with, I

12:44

was trying to work out this analogy and it

12:46

probably doesn't make sense, but I'm gonna go with

12:49

that anyway. Because I did see Sam's glowing

12:51

four and a half star review

12:53

roll by on Letterboxd, his rating.

12:56

And I kind of feel like I'm the

12:59

chaperone to this prom that you and Sam

13:01

are at. I'm not gonna

13:03

be on the floor dancing, okay? But I just

13:05

want to enjoy your enjoyment. But

13:08

I am here to keep things from getting out of

13:10

hand. You know, let's roll back the Ethan Hawke comparisons

13:12

quite now. And let's not, you know, four and a

13:14

half out of five is a little extreme, Sam. But

13:16

you know what? I'm glad you guys are having fun.

13:19

I'll say that. Well, thank you. I mean, it's

13:21

at least a four out of five. And I

13:23

wouldn't have said the Ethan Hawke thing if I

13:25

didn't really believe there was potential there. If I

13:27

didn't see that type of connection between- And

13:29

I shouldn't write on Star. I don't want to

13:31

say it's not, it's not possible. But- Just didn't

13:33

come to my mind. Josh, you could have spared

13:35

me all that and just said you're

13:38

still jetlagged. That's fine. Okay? I

13:40

get it. I hear it. I hear

13:42

it. It's allergies and you're still jetlagged.

13:44

You're a little tired from your trip.

13:46

You missed out on an incredibly good

13:48

time with this film. And the only

13:50

way Gary isn't a real guy is

13:52

because he's that cat-loving lecturer with incredible

13:55

abs. And I'm not saying you can't

13:57

be a cat-loving lecturer who has Glen

13:59

Powell. Kyle Abs, you would just have to

14:01

spend two and a half to

14:03

three hours a day at the gym, and we never see

14:06

that character do that. So I'll give

14:08

you that. But honestly, otherwise, the humanity, I

14:10

even use that same word in my notes,

14:12

the humanity is what I saw in the

14:14

characters and in that relationship. And to me,

14:16

they never felt like characters and never felt

14:18

like types. It's

14:20

funny you mentioned Pitt too, because I

14:23

read somewhere that this was originally

14:26

going to be potentially a Pitt role,

14:28

like 15 years ago or whenever it

14:30

was that this text monthly article came

14:32

out and later was thinking

14:35

about making it. And when I posted

14:37

my four star little blurb over

14:39

on letterbox, someone came in and said, oh,

14:41

he's like the next Brad Pitt. But here's the

14:44

thing. I'm going to disagree with you completely as

14:46

I disagree with you completely on early Pitt. This

14:49

is exactly what the early Pitt wasn't for

14:52

me. It wasn't as I

14:54

know you never, you never really went for him. So

14:56

this is this is exactly the type of role early

14:59

Pitt would have embraced and

15:02

would have made it for me almost

15:04

unwatchable. And that's kind of

15:06

how I felt in some of the scenes here.

15:08

And I just wanted to look away. I felt

15:10

oh, I loved every I loved every every

15:12

disguise he put on and

15:14

how he slipped into that character. And it

15:16

surprised me. I didn't know I didn't know

15:19

that Glenn Powell had those chops, that theatricality.

15:22

And I never felt the

15:24

artifice that I always felt in those

15:26

early Pitt performances. So that's that's just

15:29

a different reaction that

15:31

we have, obviously, to that type of performance. But

15:33

you know, this at the top of your setup,

15:35

and maybe we will go from this into the

15:37

genre a little bit while I'll still also talk

15:40

about how what does

15:42

Joker say the line I love in in

15:44

Full Metal Jacket, that Jungian thing, the duality

15:46

of man? Well, every hit man movie is

15:49

about it. But only a link

15:51

later hit man movie, as you noted, builds

15:54

it right into the text. That's what it's

15:56

exploring. And we do have him as a

15:58

as a college philosophy professor. posing a

16:00

lot of these questions directly and depending on how

16:02

you want to slice it, there's

16:05

at least two different pals

16:07

here Maybe three right

16:10

starts out Predominantly, he's gary.

16:12

There's some other personas, but he's

16:14

mainly gary. He's this college professor

16:17

Second part he's predominantly ron

16:20

And then in part three, well, he's

16:22

sort of gary and ron maybe at war

16:25

with each other Let's say and there's three

16:27

different movies, too That first

16:29

part that's focusing on gary. You're not

16:31

really sure where it's going Is this going to

16:33

be kind of a cop movie? Is this going

16:35

to be about him acting as a cop and

16:38

and taking down these these different

16:40

bad people? And doing

16:42

the field research as he calls it

16:45

and then in part two We realize oh

16:47

it it's kind of a romantic comedy, right?

16:51

Where he's embracing this new identity And

16:53

then the third part josh, it's a full-on noir

16:56

riff in the vein of double

16:59

indemnity with twists

17:01

and lies It's three

17:03

different movies But never

17:05

feels disconnected or disjointed the

17:08

movie Transforms into character as

17:10

effortlessly and entertaining as pal does as

17:12

pal does for me. I love the

17:15

Unpredictability of the movie. I love the

17:17

way it plays with and

17:19

I think ultimately defies some of our

17:22

expectations because we feel like we're On

17:24

really familiar terrain and then it kind of pulls

17:27

the rug Out from under

17:29

us and those expectations too are based

17:31

on decades of movie viewing And

17:33

linklater fundamentally understands that too without making it

17:36

at all a movie about movies or even

17:38

a movie that's full of homages To

17:41

other movies. It's about this

17:43

exploration of identity and

17:45

the those narratives that we craft

17:48

for other people To process

17:50

who we are but for us as well to process

17:52

other people and to process the world And so so

17:54

much of the film comes back to

17:57

this idea of role-playing even when it isn't

17:59

about character putting

18:01

on these other disguises and that was

18:03

something that I really fell for. Yeah

18:06

that shift towards noir which and yeah I

18:08

said daytime noir is because this is a

18:10

very sunny film. It's broadly

18:12

comic a lot of it not all that but a

18:14

lot of it takes place during the day so

18:17

it feels like a daytime noir and that's

18:19

I started to get on board more when

18:21

that shift came about and I think it's

18:23

because just for me you know not having

18:25

connected with them as I said on the

18:28

same level you did these characters then I

18:30

could just enjoy some of the machinations

18:32

that you're talking about some of the genre

18:34

playfulness some of the twists some of the

18:36

surprises that it was having and I thought

18:38

that was quite fun. The darker it

18:40

got I would say is when

18:43

I became more interested because this is a

18:45

story again like Bernie that has death sort

18:47

of nibbling around the edges and

18:50

so once it kind of let that reality sink

18:52

in a little bit more I thought

18:55

it was really working on

18:57

a different more entertaining register. I'll

19:00

go back briefly here to what I was saying about

19:03

narratives and this film

19:05

sense of it being a film as

19:08

I watched it I swear to you as I

19:10

started the film and I was just thinking about

19:12

it's Hitman it's a Hitman movie I only know

19:14

the plot synopsis the the very brief kind

19:17

of slug line and I actually did

19:19

think to myself are Hitman even

19:21

real you know or do

19:23

we only know Hitman as a fantasy of movies

19:26

we know this character we feel like

19:28

we know this character we've seen it

19:30

so many times and yet we've also

19:33

all caught enough true crime stuff and

19:35

Dateline mysteries to know that surely

19:37

people do hire or try to

19:39

hire other people to take somebody

19:41

out but it's never like it is in

19:44

the movies so is this even real and

19:46

then the movie tells us directly right it

19:48

starts out with the character saying or at

19:50

least early on he says people are disappointed

19:52

to learn that Hitman don't exist it's a

19:54

total pop culture fantasy and it even then

19:57

does actually show some references clips from other

19:59

films yeah a quick montage there, otherwise

20:01

it's more subtle, right? One of the

20:03

guys who tries to hire him says,

20:06

you have a particular set of skills and

20:08

whatnot, you know? And it's clearly a little

20:11

bit of a nod to Taken. And I

20:13

love how even the pair of cops that

20:15

he works with, like when they meet Ron.

20:18

That's a great scene. Nick to Ron, great scene. But

20:21

the way they do it isn't just

20:23

describing Ron, it's describing all

20:25

the scenarios in which they'd like to

20:28

be with, right? Or

20:30

the ways they'd let Ron do

20:32

things to them. Like they're pretending, they're role-playing,

20:35

even in these moments. And then she describes

20:37

them as a Caucasian Idris.

20:40

Clearly a reference to Idris Elba. And so

20:42

here, she's the only way that she can

20:44

describe how great Ron is, is to describe

20:46

him in the terms of a reference

20:49

to another actor, right?

20:51

Someone that she really admires

20:53

and I'm guessing has the hots for, right?

20:55

And so he talks about that, like putting

20:57

on those characters so he can be the

21:00

person that they needed me to be. And

21:02

in one of those scenes, sort

21:05

of post-coital bliss with

21:07

Hirona, she asks

21:10

him about kind of the parameters of the relationship

21:12

or they're talking about that. And he gives some

21:14

different rules. And then she says, what's your next

21:16

line? Don't fall in love with me. And we're

21:19

expecting that actually to be the line because we've

21:21

seen this conversation so many times. I've heard even

21:23

use that line, what's

21:25

your next line? That's just

21:28

an example, again, of all those ways that

21:30

I think Linklater is having fun with

21:33

our expectations because we think we've

21:35

seen this character and we think

21:38

we've seen this story so many

21:40

different times before. And

21:42

the movie itself is very much about that kind

21:45

of malleable sense of identity and how much of

21:47

the world we take in and

21:49

we process Josh through what we

21:51

think we understand about other people but it's

21:54

really just an image that

21:56

we've got from the culture or

21:58

the art that we've considered. I

22:01

do want to call out those two actors

22:03

who play his colleagues. Yeah, please do. Retta

22:05

from Parks and Rec, people probably recognize them,

22:07

and Sanjay Rao, who I'm not familiar with,

22:09

but yeah, they're so good in that scene

22:11

riffing on Ron's sex appeal

22:13

and really throughout whenever they pop up. They're

22:16

maybe the most sitcom-y characters, but

22:19

it works again with the vein

22:21

that this movie is operating in.

22:23

To your point, the familiar genre

22:25

rhythms and tropes, and every time

22:27

they show up, something

22:29

funny happens. So I don't know,

22:32

can we get into that scene, which I agree is

22:34

also really great using

22:36

the iPhone Notes feature,

22:38

and it's a little bit of a

22:41

spoiler. Maybe we

22:43

should save it till later, because I know, I think you

22:45

had a spoiler question or something you wanted to dive into.

22:47

I think there's some fun stuff to get into, especially in

22:50

relation to what I was saying about double-indemnity

22:52

and playing with our expectations a little bit

22:54

when it comes to noir tropes.

22:56

So yeah, let's go ahead and save that

22:59

part. The last thing I'll say

23:01

here, though it sounds

23:03

like it's just going to be more incendiary,

23:06

fodder for you, Josh. If you're so

23:09

aghast that Sam and I would consider four

23:11

and a half star ratings, and I'm throwing

23:13

out Ethan Hawke, just wait until I do

23:15

this, and I feel like you did this

23:17

recently. Maybe you can remember the movie that

23:19

we were talking about where you talked about

23:21

a couple and you referenced

23:23

this other screen couple. And

23:26

I think I just kind of stayed silent because I

23:28

wasn't totally with you, but not ready to get into

23:30

an argument about it. So now you're really going to

23:32

lose it. Here's

23:34

the other thing about the movie that I felt,

23:36

I know Sam felt, sounds

23:38

like you didn't feel, which is

23:41

this movie and that relationship is

23:43

sexy as hell. No, no,

23:46

no, I don't know. You're

23:50

not a hit man. You can't be. You've

23:53

got old puppies, you played with kids. You've

23:56

opened every door for me tonight. And

23:58

now you kill people. for my man. Chivalry

24:03

may be dead, but I didn't kill it. And

24:06

I tried looking you up and nothing. It's

24:08

like you don't even exist. I

24:12

guess I'm just a fantasy. Okay.

24:16

We'll see about that. As

24:18

I said before, yes,

24:21

because of these two performers

24:23

have an electricity that

24:25

if you're watching any sort of like

24:27

press tour they're doing together, it's the

24:29

same sexiness. They didn't have, they

24:32

didn't have like appeal as these characters again, because

24:34

neither of them are real people in this movie.

24:36

Okay. Well, you, you didn't, you didn't buy that

24:38

when I said that about Rachel Weiss and Brendan

24:40

Fraser and the mummy. Yeah,

24:43

I believe those are similar. Those are

24:45

even more of

24:47

characters. Yes, they definitely are. Which

24:50

is again, why, why my argument in

24:52

that instance works. But I guess I'm

24:54

saying I'm invested in them actually as

24:56

people, like with stories, I believe, I

24:58

mean, it's just really hard. I think

25:00

this movie for me shot itself in the foot early

25:03

on where the first scene

25:05

that, you know, Gary is

25:07

supposed to, without any knowledge, he has

25:09

to jump in for another undercover guy,

25:11

the first scene, like he's not prepared

25:14

for this. He's never done this before.

25:16

Right. And he goes in there and it's just

25:18

like, he just kills it. And, and it's like,

25:21

it's a bit of movie magic, but it's

25:23

not a movie magic. It's it's, it's, it's not

25:25

giving you a real character. Like we've been, I

25:27

had no problem buying it in that instance because

25:29

Glenn Powell is charming and you want to

25:31

see Glenn Powell charm is part of it, but

25:34

that's different than building a real character though. I

25:37

think that's where the, the intelligence, a natural intelligence

25:39

he conveys comes through as well, but I bought

25:41

it in terms of the character. That's the thing

25:43

you either accept it or you don't early on.

25:45

And what I accepted was he's

25:48

a thinker. He has

25:50

processed this information. He's thinking about behavior.

25:52

He's thinking always about behavior. And he

25:54

has been on so many of these

25:56

sits. We haven't seen him, but he's

25:58

been on all. All of these sits, Josh, listening.

26:02

He's now just getting to actually try it out

26:04

for himself. I

26:06

went along with that. And the fact

26:09

that it would go that smoothly immediately,

26:11

I'm sorry, is just ridiculous. Okay. Well,

26:14

yeah, I suppose, but it

26:16

definitely wasn't an issue for me here. Also

26:19

not an issue, certainly that relationship and the heat

26:21

between them. This is the kind of movie without

26:25

being explicit at all in terms of what

26:27

it's showing you, where you're

26:30

glad your kid isn't in the room watching

26:32

with you, or maybe you're glad I

26:34

actually had this thought. I'm really glad this is a

26:36

movie that might have been on when I was a

26:38

kid watching in the same room

26:40

as my parents, that I would have gotten embarrassed

26:42

watching it. But you only kind of really get

26:44

embarrassed when you're watching two

26:46

people that you actually kind of believe really being

26:49

intimate with each other. I think

26:51

it's really sexy. And it's not fun

26:53

to be in the room when something

26:55

sexy is happening, when your parents are

26:57

there. But it's every conversation as well

26:59

that they have together. And here's the

27:01

part I was building up to as

27:03

far as what you won't stand for.

27:06

But I feel like you used this

27:08

couple recently in a conversation. This

27:12

is maybe the closest thing to- Don't go

27:14

clean me in JLo. Don't do it,

27:16

Adam. It is. I haven't done it before.

27:18

I don't think I've done it before, Josh, so I'm going to use

27:20

it here. They generate something

27:22

close to that kind of heat. And

27:25

that movie, Out of Sight, is the modern

27:27

benchmark. And yes, I said modern about a

27:29

movie that's now over 25 years old, whatever.

27:31

But it also kind of makes sense because that

27:34

is another cop criminal

27:36

scenario, which we have here. But

27:39

it's really because there's something dangerous

27:41

happening in every scene. That same kind

27:44

of idea of danger that Nietzsche talks

27:46

about, that Glenn Powell's character, Gary, talks

27:48

about in that scene with his class,

27:51

right, in the opening of the film.

27:54

To listen every time they're together. Sometimes

27:56

there are people listening, so there's an

27:58

added layer of- of duplicity,

28:00

but every scene is duplicitous and

28:03

every scene risks him revealing who

28:05

he really is and ruining whatever

28:07

this highly charged dynamic they've created

28:09

is. Just like those two in

28:12

the back of that trunk are role-playing and

28:14

also role-playing based on characters they remember from

28:16

movies, right? When they talk about like Redford

28:18

and Faye Dunaway and stuff. We have them

28:20

doing that exact same kind of role-playing here

28:22

and it works. Do

28:25

I scare you? No. Do

28:29

I scare you? Should I be scared? That

28:34

depends on what your intentions are. Okay.

28:42

You want to know all about me, but what about you? You

28:45

know all you need to know. Is

28:48

that right? All right, the

28:50

chaperone is pulling the plug on the DJ. This

28:53

has gotten ridiculous. Next thing you're going

28:55

to say, Hitman is better than Double Indemnity. I'm

28:57

going to save you from yourself, Adam. Or out

28:59

of sight. I'm not going to go that far,

29:01

Josh, but that doesn't mean I can't

29:03

think about them in relation to it. Dad.

29:08

You're the dad. You're the scold in the room and

29:11

I'm going to stop talking about sex things. Prom is

29:13

over. Prom is over. Stick around

29:15

for some Hitman spoilers later in the

29:17

show. Don't worry. We will give

29:19

you plenty of warning before we dive into

29:21

those. Hitman is currently playing exclusively on Netflix.

29:23

If you see it and agree or disagree,

29:26

you can email us feedback at film spotting.net.

29:30

There are a couple of very easy ways you can

29:32

help an independently produced show like ours. Whether

29:34

you're a long time listener or just finding us, would

29:36

you take a minute and give us a rating or

29:39

a review on Apple podcasts or Spotify? Very easy to

29:41

do. Go ahead. You could do it right

29:43

now. Each one of these

29:45

helps us reach new listeners. We got

29:47

this review from the Kraken. I've

29:50

been a listener since 2008 and the

29:52

show has been simultaneously entertaining and instrumental

29:55

in expanding my cinematic tastes and education.

29:57

Thank you. The

30:00

Kraken signs off is the Kraken,

30:02

though I noticed. The Kraken with a C,

30:04

not a K. With a C. So the

30:06

K Kraken, I believe is like Norse mythology,

30:08

right? Is there some sort of Greco Roman

30:10

Kraken I'm unfamiliar with? I think, I think

30:12

they're just really into saltines, Josh. Don't overthink

30:15

it. Another way to support

30:17

us, join the FilmSpottingFamily at filmspottingfamily.com. We

30:19

would like to welcome new family member,

30:21

Bruce in Portland. He says, I found

30:24

you guys within the first dozen or

30:26

so episodes and backtracked from there. Two

30:28

quotes that kept me listening were

30:30

she's an age appropriate dialogue delivery device,

30:32

actually character delivery device. Let's get the

30:35

quote, right? That was Sam. And I

30:37

hear what you're saying, but you're completely

30:39

wrong. Yeah. Two classics. Favorite episode. It's

30:41

hard to top the Raiders review. Reviews

30:44

we got wrong. This is good. Ironically, I

30:46

think you racked up the most on the

30:48

movies that Siskel and Ebert got wrong episode.

30:50

That was our episode with Matt Singer His,

30:54

so basically he's saying Siskel and Ebert infallible. Is

30:56

that how I'm reading that? That's correct. Okay. Yeah.

30:59

His four favorites on letterbox, the

31:01

treasure, the Sierra Madre, the master

31:03

Rosemary's baby, and this is spinal

31:05

tap, good stuff. He revisited election

31:07

recently and loved it and a

31:09

random film or filmmaker. He loves

31:12

Sydney. Lumet Lumet's one of those

31:14

guys who I just discovered this the other day,

31:16

looking at the Cisco film center website, the

31:19

Centennial. Yeah. A hundred years. And

31:21

through August, they're looking back on all of

31:23

his films there. Maybe Josh, you can get

31:25

to a few of those like the movie

31:28

that Bruce credits with becoming a cinephile

31:30

Lumet's murder on the Orient express one

31:32

I haven't seen, but would like

31:34

to finally, ironically, a favorite

31:36

book about movies or movie making

31:38

it is not Sydney Lumet's making

31:40

movies, but Robert Evans, the

31:43

kid stays in the picture. Thank you,

31:45

Bruce. And welcome to the family. In addition to

31:47

keeping us doing what we're doing, your support comes

31:49

with perks. You get to listen early and ad

31:51

free. You get a weekly newsletter, you get monthly

31:53

bonus shows. So in may you got our film

31:56

spotting advisory board call audio, but we are also

31:58

bringing you just a little late. We're

32:00

gonna bring you a conversation about the Crow 94

32:03

and then later in June, we've decided

32:05

to go back to the nine from

32:07

99 well, or the

32:09

1999 well, I suppose I

32:11

should say. We did that series a few

32:14

years back. It's the 25th anniversary of that

32:16

incredible movie year. And we're

32:19

gonna do a draft, me, you,

32:21

Sam. I don't know, I'm just kind of throwing

32:23

out. Maybe we bring a special guest in, maybe

32:25

we do a little contest

32:28

to try to get some new family members into the mix, Josh.

32:31

And we randomly pick a family member to be part

32:33

of that draft with us. We could do that. Whoever

32:35

signs up during a certain amount of time, your name

32:37

goes in the hat. Very good.

32:39

More information about that coming soon. filmspottingfamily.com.

32:45

Riley is officially a teenager now.

32:47

You aren't packed yet? I'm the

32:49

worst! Overreact

32:51

much? I barely touched it. Let

32:56

the professional handle this. I'm

32:59

too gross to go anywhere ever

33:01

again! Welp, that's a

33:03

preview of the next 10 years. That's from

33:06

the trailer for Inside Out 2 in

33:08

theaters this weekend. Let me quote you

33:10

here, Josh. Where did these personified emotions

33:12

in Riley's head come from? How much

33:14

autonomy does she actually have? What happens

33:16

to Joy and all the other beings

33:18

in Riley's noggin when she dies? This,

33:21

it turns out, is not from your

33:23

review of the new Inside Out sequel,

33:25

but of a recent sleep-deprived rewatch of

33:27

the 2015 original On a Plane. Look

33:29

at you, even coming back from vacation,

33:31

getting your homework in. So

33:33

first, tell us a little bit more

33:35

about this existential freak-out, apparently, you had.

33:37

And second, how much did that rewatch

33:39

inform your experience with this new one?

33:41

Yeah, it turns out that was a

33:43

bad idea. Loved Inside Out when it

33:45

first came out. Did not find it

33:47

anxiety-producing, ironically, as we'll get to, at

33:50

all. But again, I'm just

33:52

gonna blame it on the surroundings. When

33:54

I did log this on Letterboxd, I had someone

33:57

in the comments say, always go for trash on

33:59

the plane. the safest, it's the safest

34:01

route. And that probably was good advice. I

34:03

entirely set that aside when I

34:05

went into inside out to, which I just saw a

34:07

couple hours earlier today, which is

34:10

a good film. It's a lot of fun.

34:12

It's super smart. I was not

34:14

dragging my feet to it, but kind of sign

34:16

as I think came up in some of our

34:18

previews about Pixar having to do another sequel, but

34:20

this is not a quick cash

34:22

grab. It does feel like

34:24

more of a natural progression. We're talking leak

34:26

later, you know, think about him

34:29

following up before sunrise with before sunset,

34:31

you know, we're, we're visiting in that

34:33

case, characters in this case, a character, Riley,

34:36

this young girl who is now 13. So

34:39

she's in a different phase of life, just

34:41

as they're in different phases of their relationship.

34:43

And it makes sense to bring the same

34:45

artistry and nuance and thoughtfulness to what in

34:47

this case puberty looks like. And

34:50

so for inside out to, that means we

34:52

get a whole new group of emotions in

34:54

Riley's head who are personified anxiety.

34:56

Here's more Hawk talk, Adam, Maya

34:59

Hawk. My favorite vocal performance in

35:01

inside out to comes from Maya

35:04

Hawk. Just that she has a

35:06

very frantic, it's like a panicked patter that

35:08

she has the whole time that's

35:10

fitting a envy is voiced

35:13

by Iowa debris embarrassment by

35:15

Paul, Walter Hauser and on

35:17

we buy Adele XR

35:19

cupola. So then of course you have Amy Poehler's

35:21

joy and the characters from the first film. It

35:23

sounds like maybe they're piling on too

35:25

much, but it really works. The film is

35:27

skillfully written where the new

35:29

characters have their own sets of goals

35:32

and personalities and are of course, they're

35:34

astonishingly visually characterized, just little

35:36

details. And you know so much

35:39

about them anxiety. I'm going to guess you weren't

35:41

a Fraggle rock person. Adam. I

35:44

was okay. I love it. I actually was.

35:46

Well, anxiety is kind of like a Fraggle

35:48

that that stuck its finger in electric socket

35:50

is the look and that works

35:52

really well. So as I said, this

35:54

is smart. The first film was all about, you

35:56

know, arguing for the value of sadness

35:58

alongside joy. I won't get

36:00

into what Inside Out explores, but it's similar

36:03

to how to manage anxiety that I think

36:05

is really helpful for all of

36:07

us, especially kids these days. So yeah, maybe

36:09

not a Pixar movie that I was demanding,

36:11

but I think I'm glad we got. So

36:13

it's worth checking out. Okay. I will check

36:15

it out. Inside Out 2 is currently playing

36:18

in wide release. I just caught up

36:20

with something that's currently out in limited

36:22

release, the Chicago suburb set Ghost Light,

36:24

which was directed by Alex Thompson and

36:26

Kelly O'Sullivan. The pair also collaborated on

36:29

2019 St. Francis. This

36:31

is one I think Steve Prokopy

36:33

talked about, or at least mentioned

36:35

in passing when promoting the Chicago

36:37

Critics Film Festival, which this movie

36:39

played at recently. It's

36:41

a movie about a grieving family, a

36:43

dad, a mom, a teen daughter who

36:45

learned to reconnect through a community production

36:48

of Romeo and Juliet, which I'll

36:50

acknowledge that that little synopsis there may

36:52

sound a little too tidy and saccharine.

36:55

And I do wish without

36:57

giving anything away here, the real

36:59

life circumstances didn't mirror

37:01

the circumstances of Romeo and Juliet.

37:03

So precisely, not that what

37:06

we learn is inconceivable, but it just felt

37:08

convenient in an unnecessary way for

37:10

me where it didn't have to line up that

37:12

way to generate the pathos that the movie is

37:14

seeking and the pathos it ultimately does generate. But

37:17

what I appreciate about Ghost Light the

37:19

most, Josh, is how honest and messy

37:22

it is about grief and

37:24

the complexities of family relationships. Actually, everything

37:26

you were saying about the first Inside

37:28

Out movie really applies to this movie,

37:31

only the character who really needs to

37:34

understand that there's room for grief in

37:36

their life. It does affect

37:38

every character, but it's especially that

37:40

main character, Dan, the father and

37:43

husband, who is the one who

37:45

decides to first sort of

37:47

against his will, but then ultimately, definitely

37:50

of his own

37:52

volition gets involved in this

37:54

community theater productions. These

37:57

relationships are really complex between

37:59

parents and their children between spouses

38:01

and the character revelations are

38:04

mostly subtle. And it

38:06

builds to a cumulative catharsis that I

38:08

found very affecting rather than doing what

38:11

it absolutely could have done, which is

38:13

try to bludgeon us with redemptive moments

38:15

and healing that would have felt false.

38:17

And I think part of the authenticity

38:19

of this movie lies in its setting

38:22

and in its casting too. It's

38:24

set, I believe, shot in Waukegan there in

38:26

Illinois in the burbs. And other than Dolly

38:29

De Leon, who you might remember as being

38:31

the best thing about Ruben Oselin's Triangle of

38:33

Sadness, and she is wonderful here, there

38:36

were no recognizable faces for me. I

38:39

take that back. I have seen one actress in a few different

38:41

things, but all the main characters

38:43

here in most of the ensemble

38:45

were brand new to me. They're

38:47

Chicago theater actors, predominantly. Keith Kupfer

38:49

is the father. Dan, his

38:52

wife is played by his real

38:54

life wife, Tara Mallon. She's the founder

38:57

and artistic director of Rivendell Theater. And

38:59

then their daughter, Catherine Mallon Kupfer is

39:01

their daughter in this movie, Daisy.

39:03

And she's certainly someone we're going to

39:06

be seeing a lot more on

39:08

screen. I swear I didn't plan this, but as I

39:10

think about this movie and

39:13

what I really responded to, it

39:16

made me think about our guy Ethan Hawke

39:18

again. I don't know if this has popped up. I haven't watched

39:20

the entire thing, but I don't know if it's ever popped up

39:22

in your timeline. There's a video

39:24

that's sort of a pseudo Ted Talk.

39:26

I mean, I think it's actually on the Ted Talk website,

39:28

but it's not a traditional Ted Talk that Ethan Hawke gives.

39:31

That's called Give Yourself Permission to Be Creative.

39:34

And he starts out saying, you

39:36

have to ask yourself, do you think human creativity

39:38

matters? Most people don't spend

39:41

a lot of time thinking about poetry, right? And so

39:43

right there I'm thinking, okay, if anyone can bring this

39:45

home, it's Ethan Hawke. But what is he going to

39:47

say to really convince me that

39:50

this setup, which is true, that most

39:53

people in their daily lives aren't thinking

39:55

about poetry and its

39:57

place in their lives? How is he going to make

39:59

the case? that it does or it should. And

40:02

then he says, they have a life to live

40:04

and they're not really that concerned with Allen Ginsberg's

40:06

poems or anybody's poems until their father dies. They

40:09

go to a funeral, you lose a child,

40:11

somebody breaks your heart, they don't love

40:13

you anymore. And all of a sudden you're

40:15

desperate for making sense out of this life.

40:17

And has anybody ever felt this bad before?

40:20

How did they come out of this cloud? Or

40:22

the inverse, something great, you meet somebody and

40:24

your heart explodes. You love them so much

40:26

you can't even see straight. You know, you're

40:28

dizzy. Did anybody feel like this before? What

40:31

is happening to me? And that's when art's

40:33

not a luxury, it's actual sustenance. We

40:35

need it. Of

40:37

course, Ethan Hawke finds a way to

40:39

deliver that message in a way that

40:41

is so true and

40:45

I'll say inarguable. And that's true for

40:47

this movie. Now, we're Josh

40:50

people who we think

40:52

about creativity a lot, we already believe

40:54

it matters. And I

40:56

think about a movie like Ghostlight where those are

40:58

the characters he's talking about. These

41:00

are people who are not thinking about the role of

41:02

creativity in their daily lives. And that's

41:04

especially true, not only just because that's

41:07

not part of their identities, but

41:10

they are overwhelmed and overcome by

41:12

grief and they're caught up in

41:14

that. A movie like Ghostlight has

41:16

to convince us that those people that Hawke

41:19

is referring to can

41:21

find sustenance in art and

41:23

that it can help them make sense out of life when

41:27

they're desperate for it, when they're desperate for those

41:29

types of answers and they're desperate for meaning. And

41:31

the movie convinced me of

41:34

that, which is maybe the highest praise I

41:36

could say for it. So that's Ghostlight, sounds

41:39

like a very good one and it is playing

41:41

in limited release. Inside Out 2 is currently playing

41:43

in wide release. If you happen to catch either

41:45

of those and wanna share your thoughts, send

41:48

those to feedback at filmspotting.net. It's

41:51

such a fascinating night. I

41:55

walk up to the bike and Jeff

41:57

had sort of given

41:59

us his idea. idea for the scene which was we'd

42:02

be doing the scene from maybe 6 feet apart. You

42:05

know we have the whole conversation that way that

42:09

was a more Tom was feeling and so

42:11

he you got

42:13

closer and they got closer and then

42:16

got incredibly close. The

42:18

time in that interview clip is Tom Hardy

42:20

the Jeff director Jeff Nichols the speaker who

42:22

else could it be Austin Butler

42:24

talking about a terrific scene in the

42:26

bike riders so terrific I had to

42:28

ask both Austin Butler and

42:30

Jeff Nichols about it the bike riders is

42:33

out next weekend we did say on a

42:35

recent show we were going to share those

42:37

interviews here this week decided to push it

42:40

back not only give our listeners a chance

42:42

to see the movie Josh would give you

42:44

a chance to see the bike

42:46

riders and next week maybe we'll get to a few

42:48

thoughts on it. Yeah can't wait I think I'm seeing

42:50

it a week from tonight. So it's on the calendar.

42:53

Also next week deeply flawed film

42:55

spotting poll results and I'm going to

42:58

say the results are deeply flawed forget

43:00

the question the results so far are

43:02

deeply flawed. We'll see if you can

43:05

predict why I'm saying that Josh as

43:07

you refresh your memory on

43:09

the question and the options were asking you

43:11

simply to pick your favorite film of the

43:13

year so far the choices. Our

43:16

Alex Garland civil war. Challengers

43:20

dune part 2. Furiosa Jane

43:22

Schoenbrunn's I saw the TV glow or

43:24

rose glasses love lies bleeding and no

43:26

we're not just restricting you to those

43:28

6 options. If you don't like him

43:30

or you like him, but maybe there's

43:32

another movie you like significantly more you

43:34

can go with other and

43:36

write it in so I said it was deeply

43:38

flawed who do you think is winning this poll. I

43:41

mean it's hard to pick you do you think

43:43

I think is a mistake you're Mister curmudgeon this

43:45

year I see 3 titles that

43:48

many people have loved that you were mixed

43:50

to negative on civil war. Dune

43:53

part 2. And Furiosa

43:55

which do I think is leading. no

44:00

idea. It could be any one of those.

44:02

Dune? Is Dune in the lead? Yeah, Dune

44:04

Part 2, maybe not surprisingly, is in lead.

44:06

And you're not totally representing

44:09

my review properly. Furiosa, I am

44:11

favorable on. I am mixed to

44:13

negative on Alex Garland's Civil War

44:16

and Dune Part 2. So those aren't in

44:18

contention for me. I would say you're favorable

44:20

on Furiosa the way I'm favorable on Hitman.

44:23

Yeah, sure. That's fine. I'll go with it.

44:26

Is your number one of the year so far among these choices, Josh? Give

44:28

us a little bit of a sense. See

44:31

my number one, but I do see as things

44:33

stand right now, and we're both trying to catch

44:35

as many titles as we can. I see

44:38

two and possibly three of

44:40

my top five represented here.

44:43

Yeah, I see at least two and

44:46

probably three that are in contention for

44:48

my top five. We'll see where they

44:50

finish. You can vote in our poll

44:52

and leave a comment at

44:54

filmspotting.net. We have a

44:57

giveaway, Josh, and we're going a little

44:59

bit off the beaten path here, though

45:01

Nikki Glaser has been in a few

45:03

movies, but she's a comedian. I certainly

45:05

appreciate and have enjoyed her specials and

45:08

have also enjoyed every time I see

45:10

one of her roast clips,

45:12

especially the clips from the roast of Tom

45:14

Brady pop up in my social media feeds.

45:17

Nikki Glaser is back in her second

45:19

hour-long HBO special, Nikki Glaser, Someday You'll

45:22

Die. It's now streaming on Max. You

45:24

may recall Glaser, Josh in 2015's Trainwreck

45:27

and 2018's I Feel Pretty,

45:30

both starring Amy Schumer. Yeah,

45:32

we have five signed

45:34

posters by Nikki Glaser to

45:37

give away, and all you have to

45:39

do to get a chance

45:41

at winning one of these signed Nikki

45:43

Glaser posters is email feedback at filmspotting.net,

45:46

put in the subject

45:48

line Glaser, that's G-L-A-S-E-R,

45:52

and answer this question. It's

45:54

not so simple. What's the funniest comedy of

45:56

the last 10 years? You

45:59

can only go back 10 years. Is it maybe

46:01

train wreck? Is it something like my beloved

46:03

theater camp? Josh's beloved game night, though I

46:05

love that one too. Maybe bottoms, Josh? Do

46:07

you have an immediate answer when that one

46:09

comes out or would I have to give

46:11

you 15 minutes or so? If I'm looking

46:13

at those options, for me

46:15

it's pretty clearly game night. I mean, I love them

46:17

all, but the one I would put on now and

46:20

immediately want to watch and know it would just

46:22

deliver laughs the whole way through for me

46:24

is game night. Yeah, it's funny too, because even

46:26

before seeing this in our notes, just

46:29

randomly yesterday, I started thinking

46:31

about theater camp. I started laughing about

46:34

different scenes in theater camp. So of

46:36

those options, that would be my

46:38

choice, game night, a close second, but those

46:41

aren't the options. You can write in

46:43

with whatever you think the funniest movie

46:46

of the last 10 years is. Again,

46:48

feedback at filmspotting.net, put G-L-A-S-E-R in the

46:50

subject line, "'Nicky Glaser, Someday You'll Die,'

46:52

now streaming on Max. This

46:54

week on our sister podcast, The Next Picture

46:57

Show, they've got a new pairing. They're looking

46:59

at Furiosa, Mad Max Saga, and going all

47:01

the way back to the first Mad Max

47:03

film from 1979. And

47:05

that one, I can't wait to listen to this, because I

47:07

feel like 79's Mad Max is somewhat

47:10

divisive and being reclaimed by

47:12

folks myself. I appreciate

47:15

what was going on there, but it really

47:17

for me wasn't until Mad Max

47:19

2, The Road Warrior, that Miller really

47:21

got a handle on what he wanted to do.

47:24

But I know that Keith Phipps, Scott Tobias, they

47:26

wrote about this in their reveal newsletter. Both are

47:28

very high on 79's Mad Max. So

47:31

it'll be interesting to see what Tasha Robinson and

47:33

Genevieve Koski make of it as

47:35

well. And then of course, I can't get enough of

47:37

Furiosa talk. So when they get to that, that'll be

47:39

good too. New episodes of The Next Picture

47:41

Show drop every Tuesday. You can find

47:43

the show wherever you get your podcasts.

47:46

Another plug here for those of you

47:48

in the Madison, Wisconsin area, our producer

47:50

Sam Van Halgren hosts a monthly film

47:52

series in Spring Green, Wisconsin, about an

47:55

hour from Madison on Sunday, June 30th.

47:58

He's arranged to screen for the show. those

48:00

fine folks, Josh, one of the finest films

48:02

of the year so far, The People's Joker.

48:05

You can find a link for

48:07

more details in our show notes

48:09

or find Sam at River Valley

48:11

Film Club on Facebook. All

48:13

right, time now for Massacre Theatre, the part of the

48:15

show where we perform a scene and you get a

48:17

chance to win a film spotting prize. A

48:20

couple of weeks back, we massacred this scene. A

48:23

new friend. Real or

48:25

imaginary? Imaginary. Would

48:28

you like to talk about this friend? Frank.

48:32

Frank. What did Frank

48:34

say? He said to follow him. Follow

48:36

him? Where? Into the

48:38

future. And then what happens?

48:42

And then he said... Then

48:45

he said that the world is coming to an end. Do

48:49

you think the world is coming to an end? No.

48:57

That's stupid. That was

48:59

Jake Gyllenhaal and yes, the Catherine Ross

49:01

from The Graduate and Butch Cassidy and

49:03

The Sundance Kid. Here however,

49:06

she and Gyllenhaal are in 2001's

49:08

Donnie Darko, written, directed by Richard

49:10

Kelly. That massacre was part

49:12

of a show a couple of weeks ago when

49:14

we reviewed I Saw the TV Glow and we

49:16

also shared our William Wyler Marathon Awards. So why

49:19

that scene from Donnie Darko? Here's Adam Hofer in

49:21

Memphis. This is the first time I've ever identified

49:23

a scene by the very first sentence. It's not

49:25

even like I've seen Donnie Darko that many times,

49:28

but the dialogue is so strong that you could have picked

49:30

from a dozen different scenes and I would have been able to place

49:32

the film. Like the tie-in, Darko

49:34

follows an upper teenage year's boy who

49:36

is seeking a better understanding of his

49:38

own self-definition while we the viewers watch

49:40

his journey play out in ways that

49:42

lead us to question what may and

49:44

may not actually be reality and what

49:46

is simply a manifestation of the protagonist's

49:48

potentially unsettled mental state. Nicely

49:51

done, Adam. Here's Addison Alley from Salt Lake

49:53

City. While I've yet to see

49:55

I Saw the TV Glow, I know both

49:57

involve outsider teenagers dealing with the breakdown of

49:59

reality. around them. Also, they both

50:01

were Sundance premieres. Finally, Darko's

50:04

Frank often speaks in what appears to be nonsense

50:06

phrases that make no sense to anyone listening to

50:08

him, much like Adam whenever

50:10

he talks about the amazing Rogue One.

50:13

Perhaps the best movie to come from the

50:15

Disney Star Wars era. See, I told you,

50:17

Adam, they're out there and they're passionate.

50:20

It's so funny when I read that for

50:22

the first time today when I pulled it,

50:24

I didn't know where it was going. The

50:26

suspense was killing me, much like Adam when

50:28

he does what? When he says what? It

50:31

was just about Rogue One. Maxwell Fletcher

50:33

in New York City says, the connection

50:35

to I Saw the TV Glow is

50:37

psychological teenage angst. Apocalypse is,

50:39

yes, we've acknowledged that now, but Maxwell

50:42

adds with killer soundtracks. Mm, yeah,

50:44

good point. Here's Marco Gonzalez

50:46

from Moreno Valley, California. I Saw the

50:49

TV Glow does have a lot of

50:51

similarities to Donnie Darko. Jane Schoenbrunn mentioned

50:53

at Sundance that the soundtrack influenced their

50:56

new movie and continuing the teen angst

50:58

genre. Here's Michael in Yokohama,

51:00

Japan. Can't say I'm sure what the connection

51:02

is other than teenage angst, as so subtly hinted

51:04

at during the show. But after listening to part

51:06

of the latest, The Next Picture Show, how

51:08

could I not immediately recognize this week's Massacre Theatre

51:11

as Donnie Darko? Not normally able to guess

51:13

the film. And I got this by the time

51:15

you got to Harvey. Yeah, we did substitute

51:17

in that name and had it locked 100% by

51:19

end of the

51:21

world. I had to enter. And yes,

51:23

our friends at The Next Picture Show did get to

51:26

this first with their great

51:28

pairing of Donnie Darko and I Saw the

51:30

TV Glow. Eric from New Jersey

51:32

shared this. Did you have Jake Gyllenhaal as

51:34

a guest appearance for Massacre Theatre or was

51:36

that Josh couldn't tell the difference? Tie-ins if

51:39

came out in theaters this weekend, which

51:41

is about imaginary friends. Yeah, no, that's

51:43

not where we were going. Finally, Aviv

51:46

Rubinstein. It was delightful to hear Josh's

51:48

rendition of a constipated Jake Gyllenhaal. Was

51:50

that who we had in studio instead?

51:52

A constipated Jake Gyllenhaal? Yeah, actually, his

51:54

brother or cousin, one of the two. Reach

51:58

into the film's fighting hat, which is brilliant. more

52:00

than usual, Josh. So fans out there

52:02

of that film also maybe gave it

52:04

away a little bit with the

52:07

reference to Harvey and the Teenage Angst

52:09

line. Oh well. Our winner

52:11

is Stephen Kilroy in Virginia. Stephen

52:14

shared this note, I've been listening for about

52:16

a year and love having a Midwestern nice

52:18

palate cleanser between my typical

52:20

foul-mouthed coastal cast. Keep

52:22

it up, fellas. I just

52:24

like that for some reason. It's a Midwestern nice

52:26

palate cleanser. We should put that on all the billboards.

52:29

Yeah, that'll bring them in in droves. And I

52:31

feel like we get this every once in a while

52:33

and it almost seems to be always on a

52:35

show where we've ended up bickering with

52:37

each other. Disagreeing with each other. And

52:39

yet here we are, we're still playing nice. That's true.

52:42

Stephen, congratulations. Email feedback at filmspotting.net. We will

52:44

set you up with your very own film

52:46

spotting t-shirt or film spotting tote bag

52:48

or you can get that trial membership

52:51

to the film spotting family. Martin,

52:53

look at me. I am looking at you. You

52:56

know, look at me the way I'm looking at you. Put

52:58

it in your eyes. You're my

53:00

asshole without saying it. How

53:02

about this? What are you telling me? That

53:04

you're sleepy? That you wanna go to bed? We

53:08

move on now to this week's edition of

53:10

Mascara Theater, Josh, a scene that

53:12

I'm guessing we've done before in the show's history. I

53:15

didn't look that up yet, but I'm pretty sure we

53:17

have. And it's a film. I don't think this will

53:19

be a hint to anyone because we haven't talked about

53:21

it much either. It's a film that

53:24

everybody I know likes

53:27

it. I have never heard anyone

53:29

say that they didn't like this

53:31

film except for me.

53:34

I've only seen it once. I've only seen

53:36

it once. Probably Josh on

53:38

VHS. I don't know, DVD, whatever year it came

53:40

out. I just got back and you're trying to

53:42

drive me away on this episode. But here's the

53:45

thing. Here's the thing. I'm willing to admit it

53:47

almost certainly is one of those cases where if

53:50

I watched it now, again, it's been like 30 years

53:52

or whatever. If I watched it

53:54

now for the second time, I'd probably be like, what

53:56

was I thinking? Of course this is fun. This is

53:58

great. Yes. Yes, it's a

54:01

variation. I'm not even gonna,

54:03

I'm not even gonna. You can't say it. No, no, I'm not

54:05

gonna say it. Well, I mean, the dialogue's gonna give it away,

54:07

but. It is, it is. But here's, and also speaking of dialogue,

54:09

there is a bit of a monologue in this scene. And

54:12

as listeners can tell by now. And as I'm the

54:14

superior actor. Sure. The

54:18

strength of my voice is fading due

54:20

to the allergy situation. So you're gonna

54:22

have to take it. You're gonna have

54:24

to. And this monologue is what's gonna

54:27

click for people if you do it right. So

54:30

Mr. Better Actor, this is your chance. Yeah,

54:32

I guess I did it to myself. And now you're

54:34

putting pressure on me because you like watching me fail

54:37

in front of all of our listeners. You're the only one who

54:39

gets to watch me fail. That's not nice. Everyone else just has

54:41

to listen. I wouldn't do that. Okay, well, you

54:44

start it off. I'm gonna give you the action.

54:47

Are you ready, Jess? Let's do

54:49

it. And action. So you, you're

54:52

a government spook? Yes,

54:54

I mean, no, I was before, but I'm

54:56

not now. But that's all irrelevant, really. The

54:58

idea of governments, nations, is public relations theory

55:01

at this point. Don't, I don't

55:03

wanna hear about the theories. I wanna hear about

55:05

the dead people. Explain the dead people. Who

55:07

do you kill? That's very complicated. I

55:09

think at the beginning, it matters, of course, that

55:11

you have something to hang on to, a specific

55:13

ideology to defend, right? I mean, taming unchecked aggression,

55:16

that was my personal favorite. Other guys like live

55:18

free or die, but you know, you get the

55:20

idea, but that's all bullshit. And I know that

55:22

now. That's all bullshit. You do it because you

55:24

were trained to do it. You were encouraged to

55:26

do it. And ultimately, you know, you get

55:28

to like it. And

55:31

scene. And scene. My friend,

55:33

top five massacre theater performance from you. I

55:35

hopefully got the tempo. I at least got

55:37

the tempo, if nothing else. Oh yeah, this

55:39

is an actor, you can tell. Maybe

55:42

not this movie over and over, but you've watched

55:44

films of his. Many, yes. Over

55:47

and over. And it seeped into your

55:49

bones, and came out now,

55:51

just when you needed it. Oh, you're buttering me

55:53

up now. If you know a film we just

55:55

massacred, email the movie's title and your name and

55:57

location to feedback at filmspotting.net. Your

55:59

deadline. is Monday, June 24th, we will

56:01

select the winner randomly from all the correct

56:03

entries and announce it in a couple of

56:06

weeks. Did

56:09

you always know you wanted to be a… Not

56:14

exactly a childhood dream. Do

56:17

you ever think about it? Like,

56:20

if you did something else or if

56:23

you chose a different path? I

56:27

don't overthink things. I'm not very sentimental. Yeah, well, we all

56:29

have regrets. I wish

56:31

I could do that. And I just feel like I'm in prison and I'm

56:34

gonna die in prison. But I'm not

56:36

gonna die in prison because what if me coming here

56:38

and meeting with you is the

56:52

best decision that I've ever made because it's

56:54

for me. Time

56:57

for a little hitman spoiler talk. If you

56:59

found yourself here by accident and haven't seen

57:01

the film yet, you do still

57:03

have time to bail. I

57:05

thought we'd both be just dying to get

57:07

to this portion of the show, Josh, to

57:09

talk about this movie some more. Sounds

57:12

like maybe you're a bit ready to move on.

57:14

But is there any aspect of the film that

57:16

you really didn't get to dive into? You mentioned

57:18

that one great scene in particular that you want

57:21

to talk about here? Yeah, let's do that. As

57:23

I said, the movie picked up for me once

57:25

the twist started coming and you

57:27

realized that Madison

57:29

is actually more than we thought, and

57:32

that made it more interesting. But yeah, go

57:34

ahead. You talk about the scene where

57:37

they're essentially playing roles

57:39

for the cops listening in on

57:41

them. And Ron,

57:43

I guess we should say at this

57:46

point, maybe Gary, is directing Madison what

57:48

to say by typing her dialogue essentially

57:50

on his phone, on

57:52

his Apple Notes app. And

57:55

for me, it just worked on the surface.

57:58

But I can see for you... that

1:02:00

even about it, Josh. I love the playfulness of it,

1:02:02

if you will. And I mean, this

1:02:04

is where I go back to what the movie is doing in terms

1:02:06

of playing with our expectations a little

1:02:09

bit. You assume at some point, since

1:02:12

the movie becomes a rom-com, that it's all

1:02:14

going to build towards the revelation that he's

1:02:16

not who he says he is, and how's

1:02:18

that gonna play out? Well, we learned that

1:02:20

he's a fake hitman. He admits that with

1:02:22

like 32 minutes left. Right? And

1:02:25

it's funny, I've seen a few comments here

1:02:27

and there from people who say

1:02:29

like, oh, it's a happy ending. And

1:02:31

we can talk about the semantics of that, right? And I don't want

1:02:34

to devolve too much into that. Yes,

1:02:36

at the end of the film, they

1:02:38

end up together. It's happy for the

1:02:40

characters. There's cheerful music playing. They seem

1:02:42

like they're very much in love. They've

1:02:44

got kids, they've got dogs. It's

1:02:47

idyllic, right? But the

1:02:49

thing you still have to think about is, she is

1:02:51

directly responsible for the death of two people. He

1:02:53

shares responsibility for, slash, is complicit in

1:02:56

the death of one of those two

1:02:58

people, a cop. To whatever degree both

1:03:00

victims are scumbags, and they are. And

1:03:03

we're not really sad to see them go. It's

1:03:05

still murder. And I think

1:03:07

about a conventional Hollywood happy ending, Josh,

1:03:10

they are usually in these types

1:03:12

of scenarios when they're dealing with

1:03:14

crime. The ending is about justice.

1:03:17

It's about equilibrium being restored. You're

1:03:20

happy for society.

1:03:22

You're happy for us. You're

1:03:25

not so much happy for the characters.

1:03:27

A happy ending, actually, in its

1:03:29

own twisted way, is double-indentity, which

1:03:32

this movie is clearly paralleling finally

1:03:34

by the end with the reference

1:03:36

to insurance and the abusive husband getting

1:03:39

whacked. And I'm using air quotes there

1:03:41

around abusive because in double-indentity, we come

1:03:43

to believe that's definitely a lie. Whereas

1:03:45

here, we see it as truth. And

1:03:48

he's certainly drawn to her because of her

1:03:50

beauty, just like Walter Neff is drawn to

1:03:53

Phyllis. But also, it's caught up in something

1:03:55

larger, just like it was for Walter. And

1:03:57

for Gary, what it's caught up in is

1:03:59

this. this whole idea

1:04:02

of playing this role and doing this kind

1:04:04

of research that he's doing and trying to

1:04:06

understand the self and human behavior. And

1:04:10

the femme fatale in that movie is punished.

1:04:13

She dies. She's a bad

1:04:15

person. She's punished. The hero, if you

1:04:17

will, who also broke society's norms, also

1:04:19

dies. But while

1:04:22

confessing, he gets to reconcile all

1:04:24

that duplicity to the person

1:04:26

he really loves, his mentor, Keys. So Phyllis

1:04:28

and Walter getting away with it isn't a

1:04:30

happy ending, but here they do.

1:04:33

Here they do get away with it. And

1:04:37

we don't like Phyllis because we don't

1:04:39

believe her. We believe Maddie. We

1:04:41

do believe her narrative, which I think is really

1:04:43

important here. And I think that goes back to

1:04:45

the performance too. But I guess what I

1:04:48

want to get at, Josh, is I do love

1:04:50

that final, one of those final moments where we see

1:04:52

a coworker or a teacher

1:04:54

at school say, oh, I could just kill so

1:04:56

and so who didn't do her part in planning

1:04:58

this party? And she says something like that, right?

1:05:01

We've all used that cliche a million times. And

1:05:04

the way Linklater just kind of focuses

1:05:06

that close up on Maddie

1:05:08

as she's reacting and laughing

1:05:11

at that, there's a little flicker

1:05:13

there. And I don't mean a flicker like

1:05:16

it's revealing that she really wants to kill

1:05:18

again and she's blood thirsty. It's not like

1:05:20

some darkness in them that hasn't been sufficiently

1:05:23

sublimated and will burst out suddenly. But it

1:05:25

may be a bit of a darkness in

1:05:27

them that hasn't been sufficiently sublimated and minus

1:05:30

an outlet for their impulses. Maybe

1:05:33

eventually they're not happy together. Maybe that

1:05:35

does start to lead to some destruction,

1:05:37

even if it's just destruction of

1:05:40

their marriage. What I'm saying is

1:05:42

if you're constantly playing that role, eventually,

1:05:44

if you're not able to truly act

1:05:46

on it, will it eventually

1:05:49

unravel? But maybe not because Josh, they're finally their

1:05:51

true selves with each other by the end of

1:05:53

the film, even if their true selves means they've

1:05:56

done harm to people. I mean, I think there's a fair reading

1:05:58

of this film where both of them are. of

1:08:00

as much as that third

1:08:03

act before it where the noir twists

1:08:05

keep coming. And I absolutely adored, I

1:08:08

so adored the button that the revelation

1:08:10

that the real Gary never killed anybody.

1:08:12

That perfect little postscript that we get

1:08:14

zero murders, we made that part up.

1:08:17

It made you realize really what this film truly

1:08:19

is, which is a bit of

1:08:21

a lark, but also the type of lark

1:08:23

that Linklater makes, which is these philosophical meditations.

1:08:25

And so you can see the whole film.

1:08:27

And for me, this is how I see

1:08:30

it. The whole thing is like

1:08:32

a college philosophy class hypothetical, just an extended

1:08:34

one, where we're seeing acted out

1:08:36

some of those very things that

1:08:38

he's posing to his students, some

1:08:40

of those different conundrums. Where it's

1:08:42

testing his students, but also testing,

1:08:44

to an extent, our moral and

1:08:46

ethical boundaries, and also just what

1:08:48

we want. What

1:08:50

we want to see happen and what

1:08:52

we're basing those decisions on, what narratives

1:08:55

we're basing, who we think deserves to

1:08:57

get punished or not. And

1:09:00

part I love related to that is it

1:09:03

felt so much like one of

1:09:05

those philosophy class teasers that

1:09:07

for the longest time while they're talking near

1:09:10

the end in that final scene with the cop, I

1:09:12

think Jasper is his name, she's poisoned him. He's

1:09:15

going to die unless

1:09:19

he intervenes to get

1:09:21

him to a hospital or call someone to save him.

1:09:23

So there's a possibility that he could still live, even

1:09:25

though he didn't kill him. That's

1:09:29

one of those scenarios where it's like, well,

1:09:31

how bad of a guy, is he a worse

1:09:33

guy if he poisoned him or

1:09:35

if he just lets him die or if he

1:09:38

does something to exacerbate his death?

1:09:40

These different layers of complicity in there. And

1:09:42

the fact that he ultimately then makes the

1:09:44

decision, we're not sure if he's going to

1:09:46

do that. Because what if he just

1:09:48

let him die? Is he as

1:09:51

bad of a guy? He didn't poison

1:09:53

him. He's not saving him. But

1:09:55

then he puts the bag over. He says, nope,

1:09:57

nope, I'm doing it. I'm committed to this. I'm

1:10:00

going to save us here. I'm going

1:10:02

to do it. But in

1:10:04

that way, it ties together

1:10:06

how the whole movie is one of those kind of

1:10:09

brain teasers for me a little bit of how, of

1:10:11

what are you really believing? What are you

1:10:13

not believing? Does it justify certain behavior? Does

1:10:16

it make you feel differently kind of about this

1:10:18

character? I actually think, and I know

1:10:20

we probably both don't have the energy to get into this, I

1:10:23

don't think that Maddie arranged

1:10:26

anything. I don't really read the film that

1:10:28

she, like, behind this, she's not Phyllis Dietrichson.

1:10:30

I think that's the point. That's where it's

1:10:32

so funny to me to be thinking, oh,

1:10:35

this is just like double indemnity and then

1:10:37

find out it's really not at all. Certain

1:10:39

circumstances align and we start to doubt her

1:10:41

because we've seen this character before do these

1:10:43

types of things. I believe she's just reacting

1:10:46

like a human being in certain situations. She

1:10:48

just goes a lot farther than most of

1:10:50

us would, which is she actually kills the

1:10:52

guy she's scared of. I think you just

1:10:54

pinpointed our disconnect on this is

1:10:56

it absolutely felt like an

1:10:58

exercise to me in putting

1:11:01

out these scenarios and dramatizing

1:11:04

the intellectualization of them,

1:11:07

which is something that worked for you.

1:11:10

I think that's where I kept getting stuck is like, but where are the

1:11:12

people? Where are the real

1:11:14

people here? That's

1:11:16

just different things are appealing to different folks from

1:11:18

the film. I took a college philosophy class. None

1:11:21

of them were this entertaining or sexy. I

1:11:24

would hope not. And

1:11:26

we will we will end it there

1:11:28

again. Love to hear your thoughts on

1:11:30

Hitman. You can email us feedback at

1:11:32

filmspotting.net. That is our show. You

1:11:35

can connect with us on Facebook, Twitter or

1:11:37

Letterboxed. Adam is at filmspotting and I'm at

1:11:39

Larsen on film at filmspotting.net. You

1:11:41

can vote in the current film spotting poll, which

1:11:44

asks you to name your favorite film of 2024.

1:11:47

So far for show, t-shirts

1:11:49

or other merch. Go to

1:11:51

filmspotting.net/shop. Film spotting is

1:11:53

listener supported. You can join the film

1:11:55

spotting family at filmspottingfamily.com for as little

1:11:58

as five bucks a month. to the

1:12:00

show early and ad free, plus get

1:12:02

a weekly newsletter, monthly bonus shows, and

1:12:04

access to the entire film spotting archive.

1:12:07

In that archive, lots of Linklater, including

1:12:09

a top five Linklater scenes from 2016,

1:12:11

episode 581.

1:12:13

We threw that in the main

1:12:15

feed here recently. The first Linklater

1:12:17

PAL collaboration, everybody wants some. That

1:12:19

was also episode 581. We talked

1:12:21

about one of those hitman movies,

1:12:23

the type we've seen a million

1:12:26

times before, but it's a really good one.

1:12:28

David Fincher's The Killer, also a Netflix movie,

1:12:30

episode 945. You can

1:12:33

go way back in the archive just

1:12:35

before you join the show, Josh. Episode

1:12:37

362, the film spotting SVU

1:12:39

team, Matt Singer and Alison Wilmore, sat

1:12:41

in for a show and they did

1:12:43

their top five assassin movies. Nice. But

1:12:46

again, lots of Linklater there in the

1:12:48

archive as well, if you're curious. You

1:12:50

can get it as a film spotting

1:12:52

family member. Learn more at filmspottingfamily.com. Streaming

1:12:54

a movie I'm ready to proclaim, even

1:12:56

though I haven't seen it, the best movie of the year,

1:12:58

Bratz. I loved the 80s Brat

1:13:01

Pack and it's directed by Brat Packer

1:13:03

himself, Andrew McCarthy, who was my favorite

1:13:05

Brat Packer. So I'm all in. Hope

1:13:08

to make time for that one. I

1:13:10

also hope to make time for Inside

1:13:12

Out 2, which is out wide and

1:13:14

is a movie that you, Josh, recommended

1:13:16

a bit earlier. In limited

1:13:18

release, you can see Robot Dreams,

1:13:20

an Oscar nominee for best animated

1:13:22

feature. That's at the Siskel Film

1:13:24

Center here in Chicago. Firebrand, starring

1:13:27

Alicia Vikander as Catherine Parr, the

1:13:29

sixth wife, Josh, you knew

1:13:31

that, of Henry VIII, played by Jude

1:13:33

Law. Ghost Light, a movie

1:13:35

I strongly recommended earlier in the show,

1:13:38

is also out. And how about this? I've seen

1:13:40

it. You haven't. I'm not going to say anything.

1:13:43

Tuesday with Julia, Louis, Dreyfuss

1:13:45

next week here on Film Spotting. We'll

1:13:48

have a few thoughts on Tuesday and

1:13:50

we will get to those conversations with

1:13:52

director Jeff Nichols and actor Austin Butler

1:13:55

of the bike writers. That film opens on

1:13:57

the 21st. Film Spotting is produced by by

1:14:00

Golden Joe Dessau and Sam Van Halgren. Without

1:14:02

Sam and Golden Joe, this show wouldn't go.

1:14:04

Our production assistant is Veronica Phillips.

1:14:07

And special thanks to everyone at

1:14:09

WBEZ Chicago. More information is available

1:14:12

at wbez.org. For Film

1:14:14

Spotting, I'm Josh Larson. And I'm

1:14:16

Adam Kempinar. Thanks for listening. This

1:14:18

conversation can serve no purpose anymore.

1:14:21

Goodbye. Film

1:14:35

Spotting is listener supported. Join the Film

1:14:37

Spotting family at filmspottingfamily.com and get access

1:14:39

to ad-free episodes, monthly bonus shows, our

1:14:41

weekly newsletter, and for the first time,

1:14:43

all in one place, the entire Film

1:14:46

Spotting archive going back to 2005. That's

1:14:49

at filmspottingfamily.com. Panhandleat.