Post Woke Cinema

Garrison is joined by Bailey Newposter and Janie Danger to discuss the politics of Superman and Eddington, how each reacts to differing types of American decline, and the psychosis of online political opportunism.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Cool media.

Speaker 2 (00:05):
This is it could happen here, a show about things
falling apart. I'm Garrison Davis. Today we're talking about movies,
one of my favorite topics that I never get to
talk about on the show, but I'm able to talk
about it this week because I've found a way to
talk about how movies are covering the death of Woke
and to help me in this doomed endeavor, I have

(00:25):
recruited artists and designer Bailey new poster.

Speaker 3 (00:29):
Welcome Hi, It's lovely to be here.

Speaker 2 (00:32):
Bailey also is behind the new top Cup City show
art which will eventually go public maybe in a few
weeks whenever I finally finished that episode, so keep pounding
me about it. So we're going to talk about two
films that came out this past July, Superman and Eddington,
which I think are actually very closely related despite being

(00:56):
very different from each other. I believe they're kind of
equal and opposite films. And I realized this after I
saw Eddington at a theater in Brooklyn and walked outside
to the posters for Superman and Editing being right next
to each other, which are very different, and then I
realized this is actually kind of the same movie, but
doing like or they're they're very related films right now.

(01:21):
I think they really are like the equal and opposite
of each other. Both are like uber contemporary, they're very online.
They have a sort of like gestural politics, and I
think they're both reactions to a conflicting view of American decline.
Both have surprised Tucker Carlson appearances, and both have failed cancelations.

(01:43):
There's a lot of overlap in some of the plot
points of this film, and I think what they're actually
kind of saying about current American culture, current current American politics,
and how it relates to social media. I think we
should first talk about Superman to get over that, so
we can I discuss Eddington because I need to discuss

(02:04):
Eddington in relation to Superman in some ways. So I
guess people have been enjoying this film. I think a
big part of why is how the film tackles geopolitics.
Oddly enough, the geopolitical conflict in the film was most
likely based on what it was written trying to pull from,
like Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But because the film took

(02:26):
a long time to write, by the time they shot
the film, there was a whole other geopolitical conflict happening,
which influenced at the very least the visual language of
the film, which which pulls from Israel and Palestine.

Speaker 4 (02:38):
It's nice to see it, like represented, I guess on
a blockbuster film, like that's what it feels like.

Speaker 1 (02:44):
It felt like nice to see it.

Speaker 2 (02:46):
You know, it's like an acknowledgment of the atrocities happening. Yes,
like essentially a Benjamin Nett and Yahoo stand in is
basically like the secondary villain of the film. And at
this point, I guess we'll just have to talk about
hashtag spoilers. If you haven't seen these and you want to,
you can. You can go see them if you're okay

(03:07):
with hearing us talk about it, and that might make
you want to see them more.

Speaker 5 (03:10):
Then feel free. I don't think spoilers actually ruin a movie.

Speaker 2 (03:13):
But yeah, like net and Yahu dying in the film
gets like a massive, a massive crowd reaction at least
when I saw it opening night, and and people definitely
feel a degree of like catharsists like watching you know,
superheroes stop the IDF from massacring you know, civilians who
are you were like you know, like like Arab civilians
like it's it's it's at that point they transcend, like

(03:35):
the Russia Ukraine aspect, and it's like very very clear
what they're visually pulling from.

Speaker 4 (03:40):
Yeah, I think the falafel card guy is the one, like, yeah,
that's crazy.

Speaker 2 (03:46):
Lets Luthor executes a falafel card owner. And I'll talk
about more about how the film like riffs on Palestine
in a bed. There's there's other aspects I think of
how Superman is reacting to what James Gunn sees as
like American decline, because I think Superman as a film
is kind of a partially vapid take on like the

(04:06):
corruption of sincere positive futures and like the loss of hope.
It honestly feels very like Biden twenty twenty. It's like
a battle for the soul of America type thing. And
I also see this as like a reaction to the
victory of toxic masculinity, especially among like the twitch streamer
class and like manfluencers like Andrew Tait, and instead you

(04:29):
have Superman as this like goody two shoes boy Scout
the way he like he should be. And this is
the aspect of the film I think works. The best is,
honestly is their characterization of Superman. The cast is phenomenal.
David Cornsweat does a really good job, and I do
like this version of masculinity. It's it's still funny to
see like post online of people being like, Wow, I'm
actually gonna try, you know, being nice to my neighbors

(04:51):
now that I saw Superman, Like what the fuck.

Speaker 4 (04:55):
To pick up my girlfriend today and be happy when
I'm around her.

Speaker 2 (05:00):
Yeah, So that feels a little odd, but like, I
guess it's good that people can feel like Superman when
they're doing good things, helping an old lady cross the
street or whatever. I think that aspect of like decline,
I sympathize with this like loss of like positive masculinity,
and I think a Superman can be a simpol for
that for new people who are addicted to watching like
sneak O or whatever.

Speaker 5 (05:22):
I think that's probably good.

Speaker 2 (05:24):
And in some ways I think this film, honestly, like
the exact same film would have been received a lot
worse if Kamala Harris was president. I think that the
fact that everyone feels so hopeless, like depress, hopeless and
defeated because of Trump. I think this actually contributes to
the positive reception the film is taking. And myself and
a few other people kind of even predicted this, like

(05:45):
back in November, trying to like forecast like the reception
of Superman and like Fantastic Four and like all these
companies who are trying to like save the superhero genre
from like eating itself right now. But for me, at least,
there is a more insidious aspect of Superman that I
do not see being discussed as much beyond you know,
James Gunn still still obviously upset that he got canceled

(06:09):
and is thinking that a core plot points in this
film is he's actually super bad and he shouldn't have
been canceled.

Speaker 4 (06:17):
He shouldn't be canceled, and the people canceling him were
monkeys at Typewriters.

Speaker 3 (06:23):
And which way, honestly that that part is true.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
Yeah, people try to cancel James gun were monkeys, and
on one typewriters.

Speaker 1 (06:30):
I thought that bit was great.

Speaker 4 (06:32):
I thought that bit was very I was like, that's
very like one panel gag in a comic, which is
you know, wonderful, very The movie felt very great.

Speaker 5 (06:40):
Morrison, totally, those are the aspects that I really liked.

Speaker 4 (06:44):
Yeah, totally staying on the on the political subject, I
think you can draw a very good analogy between this
and or Not. Just this feels like this year's Barbie,
if that makes sense. Sure, like the kind of like
corporate political not girls get it done this time. Obviously,
this is like more of like anti not even anti

(07:05):
toxic masculinity. I think it's just pro this form of masculinity,
which I think is more productive.

Speaker 1 (07:10):
Yeah, but I also.

Speaker 4 (07:11):
Think, yeah, there's like neolib stuff going on, and also
the fact that the movie, because it's a blockbuster, can't
properly handle anything like it kind of has to just
leave everything at the road, yeah, on the side of
the road by the end of it.

Speaker 1 (07:24):
Yeah, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (07:26):
This is very much similar to Barbie, in which I
kind of had the same reaction to.

Speaker 5 (07:31):
It's like they're like o K movies.

Speaker 2 (07:33):
But I find the political posturing actually slightly insulting in
a certain way based on how shallow it is. And
I'm gonna I'm going to actually get into that more
on Superman here. I've seen people talking about how like
emotional they got during the scenes, like very evocative of
the Palactini and genocide like people like, you know, crying
and tearing up and feeling so seen and again. On

(07:57):
one hand, that's good, but that also gives me a
bit of an icky feeling. And someone else expressed this
very well, the co host of the Hit Factory podcast
at Deep Impact Crier on tweeter. She's the host of
the podcast Hit Factory. Wach was about nineties to cinema.

(08:18):
I think her name is Carly, and she expressed this
kind of soft disgust that was growing in me, but
both kind of during some of these scenes and frankly
watching people's reaction to it. She said, quote, that's the point,
isn't it To immerse you in a fantasy where civilian
life matters, to distract you from the reality where civilian
life does not matter, To offer you abstractions of already

(08:41):
abstracted images of imperial violence so that you could experience Catharsis,
escape and absolution. A movie like Superman exists to take
the literal spectacle of genocide filling our feed for two years,
and further mediate, slash, abstract the spectacle so it can
be transposed onto another product of empire and strategic interpassivity
to keep us ideologically and emotionally confined to its order.

(09:03):
Any empathetic impulse engendered by forms and aesthetics of imperial
violence and memetic rhythms of technology it trades in confines
us to the limits of the language of empire. It
keeps us operating on its terms. We need cinema that
ruptures familiar imperial forms and its rhythms unquote. So movies
like Superman and the way that they depict atrocities actually

(09:25):
like make us more indebted to the imperial system because
the imperial system can give us a product to make
us feel Catharsis about the violence that the empire actually does,
and that Catharsis keeps us going, like that's what allows
us to not like fucking destroy everything around us, because
we get enough of that Catharsis that it makes us
able to keep living. And that's in the end, what

(09:48):
products like Superman are kind of doing. They're making us
feel just good enough by expressing the displeasure we have
at what our government is doing, but still making us
like fully made married to the existence of that empire,
Like we can't live without it because of the comfort
it provides us. Including this cathartic comfort watching fucking Guy

(10:09):
Gardner stop the Palestinian genocide, which if you told me
that sentence like five years ago, I would have not
believed you. I would have not believed that a cinematic
depiction of Guy Gardner is going to stop the Palestinian genocide,
that that Hawk girl is gonna is gonna kill Netanyahu.
I would I would have not believed you for a

(10:29):
single second. And that kind of shows the level of
absurdity that we're kind of dealing with, and that aspect,
I think is what makes what Superman is doing actually
far more insidious than any of the controversial politics in
something like Eddington.

Speaker 4 (10:42):
I also think that the whole like indebted to empire thing.
I think this is like the case in point example
of that considering Superman is literally a symbol of American values.

Speaker 2 (10:54):
Or certainly has like become that, and like yeah, you know,
had a more positive version of that in some ways
during his like birth in World War Two as a
way as like a symbol of like Nazi resistance, but
instead now is you know, it very much turned into
like truth justice in the American way, to the point
where a lot of his you know, like immigrant aspects
have been have been kind of undercut in the in
the past, in the past few years.

Speaker 4 (11:15):
Yeah, I saw an article I didn't actually end up
fully reading because it was on the I forgot what
it was then the Washington Post or maybe it was
the New York Times where it was it was.

Speaker 5 (11:24):
Like blocked or something, one of the big two.

Speaker 3 (11:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (11:27):
Yeah, it was an author who I think was an immigrant,
and it was like talking about how Superman undercuts the
the immigrant experience and that he is like literally born
on the planet anyway, so it's not really like an
it's not necessarily he doesn't go through any like cultural conflict.

Speaker 1 (11:45):
I guess, you know, totally.

Speaker 4 (11:47):
I also wondered about, well, you know, I get I
guess it doesn't.

Speaker 1 (11:51):
I guess it doesn't.

Speaker 4 (11:52):
I was gonna I was gonna think about the taking
the immigrant aspect and then talking about one of the
main parts of the movie, which was his parents are
like you need to go and make a harem on
Earth or whatever, is sort of interesting.

Speaker 2 (12:07):
Yes, the aspect that his immigrant background has been very
corrupted in this film, like there's like a certainly like
foreign evilness associating with Superman.

Speaker 4 (12:17):
Now, Yeah, you're an immigrant, and like that's good and
that's great and very American, but you shouldn't be what
your parents were, your like foreign parents because they wanted
a harem of lovers and to like conquer the West
or whatever. Yeah, which, you know, considering the fact that
this was written during the Russia Ukraine thing and not

(12:38):
mainly during the Israel Palestine thing, I don't know if
that's like, but because that's in the movie, I have
to think about it, you know.

Speaker 2 (12:46):
Yeah, I don't think James Gunn was conceptualizing of that
when he wrote it.

Speaker 4 (12:50):
I think it's an unfortunate product of what happened aesthetically,
but it's not that big of a deal, but it
is weird, Like it's something to think about.

Speaker 2 (12:58):
That aspect did not bother me as much as it
did for some other people. For my overall thoughts in
the film, I think it's basically as good as every
other James gun film, which frankly just is not my
cup of tea. I've never really loved the Guardians films.
I don't think James Gun's a very compelling filmmaker. I
thought it was just fine. It definitely felt like episode
thirteen of a TV show that doesn't exist, which as
a comic book appreciator I like. As a film appreciator

(13:21):
I don't like, But certainly the more campy aspects I
enjoyed a lot. I think now is time to go
on a quick break, and then we will return to
discuss the anti woke cinematic masterpiece of the twenty twenties Eddington.

(13:47):
All right, we're back, So I would like to now
talk about Eddington for the rest of the episode essentially,
But like I said before, Eddington is the equal and
opposite of Superman. Both are both are very contemporary, very online.
Both their politics gesture and I think they're they're reactionary,
but they're specifically reactionary in very different ways. I think

(14:08):
they're they're reacting to two very different types of decline
in America, or like perceived decline in America. So Eddington
is directed by Ariastor, who made Hereditary, Midsummer and Both Afraid.
I'll talk more about my thoughts on ari Astor at
the end in a conversation with Jennie Danger. But I
think Eddington is not anti woke. Actually I was lying.

(14:33):
I think anything is a post woke expression of kind
of scared nihilism, or like like a depiction of the
nihilism inherent to American politics right now, like every everything
is a conspiracy theory, there's this specter of cancelation around
the corner, and like speaking specters, I think so so
much of both Superman and Eddington for me is like

(14:56):
there's this specter of wokeism that's haunting America, and both
films are trying to deal with that specter. I think
Superman partially mourns that wokeness, and Eddington deals with its
more like actual and like haunting and like in like
a ghostly quality, some of its more like uncanny qualities.

Speaker 5 (15:13):
Sometimes more than.

Speaker 2 (15:14):
Anything, Eddington digs into how we have created a profoundly
anti social culture, which even leftists contribute to and in
some cases actually conceptualize that as a form of like
based process, and how we've all become just reflections of
our Internet feeds and used politics as a justification for
personal cruelty, or the very least, use politics as an

(15:36):
outlet to channel anti social behavior in a way that
you can self perceive as being morally good. And I
think both the left and the right do this obviously,
Like the right does this with their like pedophile crusader shit,
never mind the whole Epstein thing, just just ignore that,
ignore all of the actual right wing pedophiles.

Speaker 1 (15:52):
But well, it's entirely about aesthetics.

Speaker 4 (15:54):
It's about absolutely Yeah, who looks like a pedophile to me?

Speaker 1 (15:58):
And it's the gay person.

Speaker 2 (16:00):
Ascetisized politics, right, it's because huge on I think political
extremism in general politics start developing more aestheticized forms. You know,
this is true among anarchists, and I think fascism more
more purely, I think is actually like politics ascetisize to
the point we are aesthetisizing, you know, like like people
and like culture and like race. Right, Like that is
a whole a way different version than you know, like

(16:23):
crust punks or like yeah, like like you know, black Bloc.

Speaker 4 (16:27):
Did you see the uh? I don't remember what the
account was. It was like something of defense tweeted like
some AI like from one of those like mill military
fiction like accounts or something, And it was like a
picture of like a white dude holding like a fucked
up looking m for because it was AI generated and
he's got like a bald eagle.

Speaker 3 (16:46):
On his head.

Speaker 5 (16:47):
No, but that sounds great.

Speaker 1 (16:49):
It got tweeted today.

Speaker 4 (16:50):
It's like the fucking lamest thing I've ever seen, and
like I just don't even know, like not only the
fact that he's like obviously he's using a photo of
somebody else, but it's not even a real picture of anybody.

Speaker 1 (17:03):
It's like a fake image of somebody that somebody.

Speaker 4 (17:05):
Else made, like that he got off of like one
of those like gun larp aesthetic accounts.

Speaker 1 (17:11):
I just found that very interesting.

Speaker 5 (17:14):
I don't know, Bailey, what did you think of Eddington?

Speaker 1 (17:18):
I adored it. I loved it.

Speaker 4 (17:20):
The moment that I knew that I was going to
enjoy it was probably where it's revealed the energy plant
is called perfect Gold Magic carp or whatever, which is
like so funny, like all those AI guys making all
their products, like they're calling it Sourn's eye or whatever.

Speaker 3 (17:38):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, so good.

Speaker 4 (17:40):
But I adored it. I think that Joaquin Phoenix is
wonderful in it. He's a great actor. I think Ari
Astor is like one of the few directors that can
perfectly slot him into this like just neurotic impotent man role,
you know, very impotent you have, Yes, So the scene
that I really like that I think about probably the most,

(18:02):
or the character I think of probably the most is
the homeless guy. Yeah, the homeless guy who wanders into
the film and is the you know, he's a stranger,
walks into a strange town like opening of the film,
and then all of the scenes where he's like he
kind of bothers everybody, like he's you know, like in
Gavin Newsom's like anti homeless policies. You know, it's a

(18:25):
it's a very bipartisan we have a bipartisan anti.

Speaker 1 (18:29):
Homeless thing going on, obviously.

Speaker 4 (18:32):
And he is also like even when his character like
snaps and kills somebody, he like kills the homeless guy first,
which I found very interesting.

Speaker 2 (18:43):
Yes, I think this is really crucial that when the
sheriff starts his murder rampage, the first expression of violence
that he feels personally justified in doing or feels CATHARSI
isn't doing, isn't isn't like the fake woke mayor, it's
not Antifa. It's the homeless guy that is the first
target of acceptable violence in the mind of the sheriff.

(19:05):
And I think that is a very accurate look at
American politics, and that's not something I've seen discussed very
much in relation to the film.

Speaker 4 (19:14):
No, and I in a way, he's still impotent after that,
He's like he's he's not even enacting. I wouldn't even
label that as political violence. I just label that as violence, right.
Like earlier in the movie, all the like teen woke
protesters are like sitting out in the street, and the
homeless guy's kind of just standing and like he's.

Speaker 1 (19:33):
Like, hey, man, I don't have any money. Like he's
not even asking for anything. He's just kind of standing
there and making them all uncomfortable.

Speaker 4 (19:38):
You know, he is the specter of the other wandering
into this town and then everybody has to like and
he's like the you know, the beginning of conflict.

Speaker 3 (19:48):
You know.

Speaker 4 (19:49):
Yeah, they're they're like the easiest group to other is
the homeless and the mentally unwell.

Speaker 2 (19:54):
No, I think that that part of the film works
really well. And I guess this film is received a
mixed reaction, which I talk a little bit about with
with jan which you'll you'll hear in a sec. And
I guess I'll start by talking about how I believe
Eddington works as a as a piece of post woke

(20:15):
cinema and I was talking about this with someone and
they asked me what post woke was, and I was
a little confused, because that's a term that I feel
like I understand really well, but then I failed to
accurately describe it to them. And I think it relates
to this whole cultural moment that we're in now, especially
after the twenty twenty four election, where we're facing this
larger cultural backlash against you know, woke TM and how

(20:39):
that highlights like the limits of diversity representation and complicated
language to explain topics that might actually be you know, reasonable,
but by expressing them you sound very unreasonable. And I
think what post woke is and the reason why Eddington
is post woke and is not anti woke like like

(20:59):
Eddington's centrist movie. I think it actually is fairly political,
but it's post woke in such that it is a
continuation of radical politics, which incorporates critiques of the woke era,
what critics would describe as an overreach or excessive focus
on language or singular identity, trading inaccessible education in favor

(21:19):
of in group signaling to prove personal political purity. I
think post woke hues a shallow performative politics adopted to
provide social capital, and instead may deliberately flaunt humor, camp,
or irreverence in ways that may have been labeled problematic
or taboo during the peak of twenty tens online activism,

(21:39):
but often in a way that signals both accurate awareness
of social issues as well as an exhaustion with or
a playful rebellion against socially alienating language and ideas. And
this can include using irony, parity, and camp to engage
with social issues without the existential gravity or earnestness of
prior education focus eras, there may now be jokes, themes,

(22:03):
or performances that skirt or playfully violate previous norms of
cultural sensitivity, but not out of ignorance, but as a
conscious reversal or escalation, while actually emphasizing material support over
linguistic gestures and systematic pressure over individual personal action.

Speaker 5 (22:20):
So that's what I mean by post woke.

Speaker 2 (22:23):
I had to workshop this definition with a friend earlier
this morning, but I think that works for both. Like
what Eddington is doing, I think that works for what
events like Twins Versus Dolls is doing. How it's it's
it's it's not anti woke, but and it's not purely
reactionary against woke it is it is actually a continuation
and an escalation while adapting to fit the current political

(22:46):
climate and still like reflecting on some of the shortcomings
of the quote unquote woke era, which we see throughout
Eddington a lot in the form of like, you know,
performative politics, especially that like one like zoomer guy character,
oh ye who you know, goes on that whole rant
about like abolishing whiteness to his parents based on like
googling these concepts like thirty minutes ago, and now feels

(23:08):
like he has like an academic level understanding of whiteness
as a concept.

Speaker 4 (23:12):
The intro to him, I guess it's the second it's
the second time you see him.

Speaker 1 (23:15):
But he's at the he's.

Speaker 4 (23:16):
At the party or whatever, and like he gives kind
of an opinion to this.

Speaker 1 (23:22):
Girl that he has a crush on.

Speaker 4 (23:24):
They're talking about like you know, whiteness and like privilege
and stuff like that, and he class yeah, and class
is the really like because clearly he I think I
think he's supposed to kind of be like a lower
class like character that then yeah, jumps up the ranks
through political opportunism. Right, yeah, yeah, he brings up class

(23:45):
and is immediately shut down.

Speaker 2 (23:46):
And googles Angela Davis seconds before, but only but only
so that he can flirt with a girl more effectively,
which is very funny, incredible, It's so good. Other small
bits like that. I really enjoy that. The like fake
woke Mayor who's actually just like a tech company shill
has he him pronouns on his Zoom profile, very very

(24:09):
funny to me.

Speaker 1 (24:11):
There are so many little things in this movie.

Speaker 3 (24:14):
It's a lot of little stuff.

Speaker 2 (24:15):
Yeah, and like very obviously this is a film that
Ariasta wrote well like way too online during twenty twenty,
like he was in specifically Twitter, right, this is an
extremely Twitter movie, which is both works for the movie
and sometimes works against the movie.

Speaker 5 (24:29):
I have no idea how this film is going to age.

Speaker 2 (24:32):
Maybe it'll age very well because we'll use it as
like a cultural artifact to like look back on and
be like, yeah, that's kind of what twenty twenty felt like.

Speaker 4 (24:41):
In a couple of years, we're all going to be
looking back on it and saying, how dare they made
fun of our new currency crypto, our new bitcoins.

Speaker 1 (24:48):
Everybody has bitcoins.

Speaker 3 (24:49):
All of the bitcoin stuff is really good, like I do.

Speaker 4 (24:53):
Also, I like that they gave the I don't remember
his name, the black police officer, who's like kind of
another like main through line.

Speaker 1 (25:02):
For the movie.

Speaker 4 (25:03):
Yeah, but he his only other thing is that he's
really into crypto.

Speaker 3 (25:07):
He's so funny, so good.

Speaker 2 (25:10):
If anything, I think Eddington is really good at showcasing
types of guy. There's so many like type of guys
in this film, and I think that's that's one of
the real highlights. And at least for me, Like I'm
obviously been very politically aware and engaged since you know,
twenty eighteen or so, especially starting in twenty twenty, So

(25:34):
like knowing this film is set in twenty twenty and
knowing it kind of gets into what that year was.

Speaker 5 (25:40):
Like, I actually was able.

Speaker 2 (25:41):
To go into the film pretty pretty blind, and I
was able to start calling shots really fast as soon
as as soon as I realized like what Ari was doing.
So like, the film starts off as this like political
satire on like the absurdity of COVID lockdown America, and
then we get into this like crime thriller genre. Then

(26:01):
it concludes with this action genre, but at the very
start of the film, when it's just like this kind
of kind of quaint like like like parody of Lockdown America,
I was like, okay, so at like forty five minute mark,
we're gonna get George Floyd. Right at at one hour
in there's gonna be riots our you know, hour fifteen,
there's gonna be some like ANTIFA type situation. And I

(26:22):
called so many things. They just started happening like exactly
what I thought they were going to. So I was
not really surprised by anything in this film necessarily. I
saw everything it was doing like I saw it coming,
because I, you know, lived that for so much of
twenty twenty, especially like the twenty twenty protests in Portland,
but also my familiarity with it was also I was

(26:43):
also able to then like diagnose how the film was
subtly like diverting from reality and just showcasing what twenty
twenty felt like, and like what twenty twenty was the
minds of, like people who believed in conspiracy theories more
so than the actual reality of twenty twenty, which I
also discussed more with Jennie Danger later. But I think
like the genre switching and then setting up all of

(27:03):
these like twenty twenty hallmarks. I think the film does
really well doing like pretty solid foreshadowing and hitting all
the points you're going to have to hit if you're
gonna make a film about twenty twenty.

Speaker 3 (27:13):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (27:13):
Yeah, we have the Wayfarer pedophile closets.

Speaker 5 (27:18):
Totally qan on cults, child trafficking.

Speaker 3 (27:21):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (27:22):
So I watched the movie Network like for four days
before I watched this.

Speaker 2 (27:26):
Need I need to see Networks. Oh my god, Robert's
been trying to get me to watch it for years.

Speaker 5 (27:31):
I just have never found the time. I guess I
don't know.

Speaker 4 (27:34):
Ari Astro like explicitly brought up Network and said like
he was thinking about it while making this movie, but
that he wanted it to be more because the Network
is definitely more like it tells you what it means
sure kind of thing, and like what it thinks is
the right way to do things.

Speaker 2 (27:48):
And this film purposely does not get into that too much.
It lets its own depiction tell you.

Speaker 3 (27:54):
It doesn't.

Speaker 2 (27:55):
It doesn't like stop you and explain whatever, like you know,
like what it's politics are. I think the movie does
the politics.

Speaker 4 (28:02):
Yes, But I also I thought, in comparing it to network,
which I will try my heart is not to spoil
the network, but there there is definitely a theme in
this and in the network of like forces above this.
This movie is about political puppets about like non political actors,

(28:23):
right walkin Phoenix's character talks about how like he's not
for the government, he's for the people kind of thing,
so he's clearly doing like a populist thing. And then
by the end of the movie he's all the more
like he's literally a puppet, right Like he's he's like
just a sack of meat that is like it has
to watch his mom is not even his mom, mom

(28:46):
mother in law, mother in law, has.

Speaker 3 (28:48):
Ex mother in law.

Speaker 4 (28:49):
It's just incredible, one of the most horrifying concepts. But
this movie is about like, yeah, a bunch of stuff happens,
like stuff that's like they're trying to kind of throw
off the balance.

Speaker 2 (29:01):
Yeah, people are trying to make political change while dealing
with this problem that politics is both very real, it's physical,
it determines almost everything about our lives, but it's also
very vague and nebulous and removed. So like, how do
you exert agency over something that is both real and
non real? To be a political actor, do you have

(29:24):
to literally be like an astroturfed paid actor. The people
that seemingly have the most political agency aren't even acting
on any personal agency but instead of just furthering the
interests of other entities.

Speaker 4 (29:39):
Yeah, but the corporation's the big money people. Whoever's like
in the background, right the playing with the giant hand
holding the globe and the.

Speaker 3 (29:50):
Antiva globe jet. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (29:52):
Yeah, So Okay, here's a question because because when I
watched it, I thought that it was it's like paid actors, right,
Like they're paid like a paid clisson group.

Speaker 3 (30:03):
That's what That's what I write it as.

Speaker 2 (30:05):
I think it's left for audience interpretation whether whether or
not this is like the George Soros funded Antifa like
Specop's crew, who are genuine about their beliefs, or if
they're like a false flag crew who's just going around
so in chaos to promote like political discord, but not
for like ideological reasons, like just just through like false
flag attacks. I think it's intentionally left up to the audience,

(30:28):
and I think it's it's depicting that because of all
of like the Antifa conspiracy theories going around in twenty twenty,
and I view that as a it's like a manifestation
of how the right wing viewed this concept of Antifa,
even though Antifa is actually just teenagers wearing black hoodies. Yeah,
but they treated it as if it was this like
organized group going around.

Speaker 4 (30:48):
Doing push ups on their private chat, smoking big cigars,
getting air dropped into into small towns to go exactly
blow things up.

Speaker 3 (30:59):
Is exactly so funny of Antifa are coming in.

Speaker 4 (31:04):
Yeah, And then that leads into what I think is
the best joke in the movie, the TikTok zoomer guy
shooting while holding his phone, and then like it cuts
immediately into like a now this uh like.

Speaker 1 (31:19):
TikTok about the Antifa. It's like militia time is And
then he's like a.

Speaker 4 (31:25):
Hype guy and he's got like a podcast where he's
talking about if Michelle Obama's going to run for president
or whatever, like so good, what did.

Speaker 3 (31:34):
You what did you think of?

Speaker 4 (31:35):
Kind of the the semi cliffhanger conclusion of some of
the threads, I guess because and I'm only thinking about
this as a cliffhanger because he's talked about it him
making a sequel if that makes sense.

Speaker 5 (31:50):
Yeah, like a like like a loose sequel.

Speaker 1 (31:52):
Yeah yeah, with like some of the same characters.

Speaker 3 (31:55):
I guess, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (31:56):
I have felt pretty satisfied with how this wrapped up,
because I mean, twenty twenty did not have a real ending.

Speaker 5 (32:03):
We are still living in the shadow of twenty and twenty.

Speaker 2 (32:05):
There still is loose threads, like COVID still is a
thing that exists of We're still living with, like the
way political violence escalated and never fully went away with,
especially like January sixth, and how even the concept of
pedophilia still runs almost all of politics. Like this is
what politics is about, is like deciding who is and

(32:25):
isn't a pedophile. Yeah, like the whole conspiracy theory angle.
More people are conspiracy theorists now than I think they
were in twenty twenty, including like liberals. Oh yeah, no,
the whole like blue and on conspiracy theories, the alt
National Park, Blue Sky accounts, the Trump assassination was staged,
like all of that kind of stuff. Is like this
has just become all of what politics is.

Speaker 1 (32:47):
It's what your mom does.

Speaker 4 (32:49):
It's what like your mom or like your every one
of your parents.

Speaker 2 (32:52):
Does and not just your right wing mom now like
this is like everybody's mom. Yeah, And I think that's
the sort of American decline that are Yeah is depicting.
As opposed to the type that James Gunn is depicting.

Speaker 1 (33:03):
I think it's much more accurate.

Speaker 5 (33:04):
I agree, and it's much more holistic.

Speaker 1 (33:06):
Yes, I don't think you could.

Speaker 4 (33:07):
I obviously, I don't think you could kind of really
hold the schizophrenia that the post twenty twenty post lockdown
political schizophrenia that we exist and currently I agree, where
like everything is ungrounded. You know, you can't do a
superhero story like that. I don't think there's like no
way to do that.

Speaker 2 (33:27):
No, unless you use my favorite superhero, the Question Yes,
in which you could do that, and James Gutt if
you're listening, I will write to a Question film and
it will be crazy. But like in terms of like
like filmmaking, I think I think post woke as like
a filmmaking style, and like what our aster is doing
here is a reaction to the past, like ten years

(33:50):
of liberal self aggrandizing movies as content slop right, which
tries to get points for like diversity casting without having
any actual substance of politics or will like gesture to
things relating to class, even though it's made by these big,
you know, multi billion dollar corporations. And I think that
whole era produced this sort of schizophrenia because everything feels

(34:12):
so paradoxical and self contradictory. And I think part of
the feelings that evokes is what Eddington is trying to
pull on and depicting those feelings as a subject itself,
not just as like a background thing that we try
to either like acknowledge sort of or try to like
not acknowledge and like ignore. I think viewing that that
cultural schizophrenia as a subject, if anything, that's like the

(34:36):
main character of Eddington. And I think that's the part
that that worked the most for me.

Speaker 4 (34:41):
I I yeah, I think it structure wise, A lot
of people were talking about like it feels like too.

Speaker 3 (34:46):
Scattered of a movie.

Speaker 4 (34:48):
I think I saw that a lot, and like the
critiques of it, and I think, like, sure, if we're
talking about like just you know, does it become a
little confusing to follow. Maybe, but it's like that's the
point and not to say like that's the point, so
it washes that away. But like I don't think you
can I don't think you can make a movie accurately.

Speaker 2 (35:07):
You can't make a movie about that era without it
feeling scattered like that.

Speaker 1 (35:11):
Yeah, that's why I really respect our astor. I think
I was talking to my partner.

Speaker 4 (35:17):
Yesterday about who's the guy that made like Nosferatu and
all those movies.

Speaker 1 (35:22):
Robert Eggers.

Speaker 4 (35:23):
Robert Eggers very good filmmaker, but he's explicitly talked about
how he doesn't ever.

Speaker 5 (35:28):
Want want to do modern films.

Speaker 4 (35:30):
Yeah, a modern film, I guess. I haven't seen The Shrouds,
but I've heard very good things about it.

Speaker 3 (35:35):
Me neither me neither.

Speaker 1 (35:36):
Yeah, I want to see that.

Speaker 4 (35:37):
Movie because I think Cronenberg is another one who's like
I also want.

Speaker 1 (35:41):
I watched a great lineup for this movie.

Speaker 4 (35:43):
I watched Cronenberg's What's the Video Drome recently?

Speaker 3 (35:48):
That's good.

Speaker 2 (35:49):
I can definitely see Eddington kind of being a grandchild
of video drone in some ways.

Speaker 4 (35:55):
I would also recommend. I've also I've been reading Mark
Fischer's Flatline Constructs.

Speaker 5 (36:00):
This is a very Fisher movie.

Speaker 1 (36:01):
Yeah, very Fisher.

Speaker 3 (36:03):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (36:03):
I literally I listened to the stupid Russell Brand audiobook
of Capitalist Real No.

Speaker 3 (36:11):
Oh, that sucks.

Speaker 4 (36:12):
I know, Russell Brand sucks, but I was at work
and I just needed something to listen to, so I
didn't like blow my head off and it didn't end
up working out actually because I was working my shitty
job and listening to.

Speaker 2 (36:24):
Capitalists Brandy Russell Brand, Russell Brands capitalist realism.

Speaker 3 (36:30):
Oh god, what a bummer.

Speaker 5 (36:32):
Yeah, truly, Mark Fisher is only l Yeah.

Speaker 4 (36:35):
It is unbearable to have to listen to his voice.
But it's a great book. I would definitely recommend reading
that if you want to go into Eddington even more
like locked In, I guess, but this is a very
like yeah, like uh you know, capital can convert anything
into the image of something else. There was one shot

(36:56):
that I really I found very evocative, which was the
shot of him walking Phoenix's characters having his haircut by
his whatever stepmom ex stepmom, and she's talking about like
conspiracy theory while filming it. That's good for TikTok, And
it's like this is so perfect and so morbid and.

Speaker 2 (37:17):
Like, yeah, no, there's a little bit of like Butdriard's
book on America here, there's certainly a lot of Gedaboard
in this, and I think that also was part of
what relates it to me to Superman is how much
like Superman is accidentally doing gedaboard regarding the genocide and Palestine,
and how much I think that critique is actually built

(37:38):
into Eddington.

Speaker 1 (37:40):
No.

Speaker 4 (37:41):
Absolutely, yeah, I Superman is such an an interesting movie
to take on that subject because obviously, in a way
you're kind of like, well, good for James Gunn for
doing something daring.

Speaker 1 (37:53):
I guess daring, I say with air quotes.

Speaker 4 (37:56):
But it's also like you have the Israel Palestine stuff
right after a scene where Superman saves a green baby
from a river of like cosmic sludge.

Speaker 3 (38:07):
Of like CGI squares.

Speaker 4 (38:09):
Yeah, which, by the way, I'm sure I don't know
if this is the general consensus, but I thought that
that scene was ugliest sin.

Speaker 1 (38:16):
And I kind of hated it.

Speaker 2 (38:18):
Also, I hated the whole Pocket dimension. Yeah, aspect I
don't I don't know why they didn't do a quick,
like ten minute interlude into the Phantom Zone keep it that.
But no, I think that that whole Pocket Dimension like
forty minutes like derailed and stagnated a lot of the
film for me and did not look very good.

Speaker 4 (38:36):
He's doing like Lex Luthor's Peter Teal, Lex Luthor is
Elon Musk Lex Luthor's which could work. Yeah, yeah, which
I think. I think I found it funny at least
I've said, like totally. I watched it and I thought like, oh,
I know what he's doing. You know that he's Peter Teal,
shut down Gawker.

Speaker 5 (38:51):
Or whatever, crying men baby.

Speaker 1 (38:54):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (38:54):
Yeah, so it's like I get it, but I also,
I mean, it's been done before kind of thing, like
I don't find it, you know that I don't know,
but he hey, his performance is great. But then the
whole Palestine stuff is also capped off with a scene
where Lex Luthor gets like bullied by a dog. You know,
it's sandwiched between two things that are just like I

(39:15):
don't know if you can do this or if you
should do this, Like I don't know.

Speaker 2 (39:20):
No, it is I think it's it's part of that
sort of cultural schizophrenia that I think that Eddington is
pulling on. Yeah, is moments like that in the David
Zaslov Winner Brothers Discovery Superman twenty twenty five.

Speaker 4 (39:36):
Eddington just is you know, it's a film that is
like its entire thesis is that is the is the
jumping around, the just ret like his car is covered
in shit for the entire movie.

Speaker 1 (39:48):
I love it so funny.

Speaker 4 (39:50):
All the slogans are like kind of like they're all
trying to put in their own little thing, you know,
Like he's like, can we make it about bitcoin?

Speaker 1 (39:58):
Can we make it about.

Speaker 2 (39:59):
It's like a twenty twenty conservative Facebook feed brought to life.

Speaker 4 (40:02):
Yes, Yes, it's a great movie. I love Eddington. I
think that this movie will age very well.

Speaker 5 (40:09):
Well, what would you like to plug daily new Poster?

Speaker 1 (40:13):
I think you should follow me.

Speaker 4 (40:16):
If you have an X, you should follow me on
at what is it called?

Speaker 1 (40:21):
At New Poster two?

Speaker 4 (40:23):
On X. If you're on Instagram, you should follow me
at postalytical blame, which is a terrible username, but I
made it's my writing username, like ages ago, I think.
And then on Blue Sky if you use that, you
should follow me at what even is micha blue Sky?

Speaker 1 (40:39):
I don't even use I'm gonna be honest, I don't
use Blue Sky.

Speaker 2 (40:42):
But if you if we got to fix the vibes
on there, Bailey, we got it, we got we got
we got to get more like crazy crazy unhinged art
on Blue Sky.

Speaker 4 (40:50):
Right, it's it's new poster dot, blue sky, dot social
or whatever.

Speaker 3 (40:56):
So there you go if you need that.

Speaker 1 (40:58):
There, there's the there's the plugs.

Speaker 5 (41:00):
Well, thank you for coming on to talk about Eddington
and Superman.

Speaker 4 (41:03):
Thank you so much for inviting me. This has been wonderful.
I love Eddington. I enjoyed Superman. So this is a
good talk.

Speaker 5 (41:11):
There you go, Lovely Lovely.

Speaker 2 (41:23):
For the last segment of our post Woke Cinema episode,
I'm gonna play a conversation I had with Atlanta musician
Jane Danger, who we talk about her thoughts on the
film Eddington and the way it manifests twenty twenties hyperreality.

Speaker 3 (41:42):
Just a little background, I guess, like I really like
ari Asta. I remember talking with you about Bo's Afraid
a while ago. I remember you weren't a huge fan
of it, not so hot.

Speaker 5 (41:52):
I'm Bo's Afraid. I'm Afraid.

Speaker 2 (41:54):
I wanted to like it too, because whenever people talk
about this like like like off putting long slows in
him up about like anxiety, like I want to like that.
Like Inland Empayer is one of the best films ever,
there's other other other films that do is that that
that also tackle its not just like David Lynch. Yeah,
and like the rest of Ariaster, I was always like

(42:16):
lukewarm to kind of positive on Like, I don't hate
him as a filmmaker. I don't have that as part
of my personality the way some people do. Yeah, I
think his movies are just fine. I think he does
dabble in or I guess he like overlies on a
degree of shalk value, which you could even see in
his earlier like Student films. Yeah, I think are like
very juvenile and not interesting. I think Hereditary is fine.

(42:38):
So ari Aster has always like been there, but I've
never been like a Ariaster in bio.

Speaker 3 (42:43):
I think he's kind of cool to hate now, Like
I think with.

Speaker 2 (42:46):
He's very cool to hate now people people people really
like hating him. But Eddington I think has done him
a lot of favors though among the people who used
to hate him.

Speaker 3 (42:54):
I've kind of noticed that it seems like with Hereditary
in Midsommer, those were generally like very well received by
like the a twenty four crowd yea, and it was
kind of like, I guess the cool opinion would be
to be like those movies are mid and then like
Bo was Afraid is a masterpiece or whatever. I like
his horror movies. I think they're slick, well made films

(43:15):
with good stories. I love bo Was Afraid though, I
think it's incredible, but it is not the kind of
it's the kind of movie that like, as much as
I love it, as much as it means to me,
as seen as I feel by that film, it's not
the kind of thing that, like, if you don't like it,
I'm not gonna like convince you. You know, Like there's
probably like if you told me you didn't like Maholland Drive,

(43:37):
like I'd be like, you're fucking stupid and wrong, You're dumb.
If you tell me you don't like Bo Was Afraid,
it's like fair enough. It's it's sure certainly the kind
of thing that's not for everyone. I bring it up
mostly because I think with Bo and Eddington, it's a
very interesting thing he does that is kind of I
guess I compared to maybe like a French new wave directors,

(44:01):
maybe like something like Selene and Julie go Boding, where
the like protagonists are living in like a fake insane reality,
where in other directors, like most other films, like you'd
have someone who's like going insane and hallucinating and like

(44:22):
everyone's trying to kill them, et cetera. And then maybe
there would be like a cut.

Speaker 5 (44:26):
Which is kind of what happens to Bow Is Afraid.

Speaker 3 (44:28):
Yeah, but in other movies there would maybe be like
a cut away for someone else where they see like
the character like arguing to a shadow like the quote
unquote real perspective. Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly. And I think
that bo Is Afraid it's like, it's no, this is real.
And I think Eddington does a very similar thing where

(44:48):
the beliefs of the characters are real. And that's why, like,
you know, all the conservatives, like I mean, if you
remember twenty twenty, they're like there's Antipho super soldiers that
are going out and doing terrorism. It's like so in
this world, in the Eddington universe, it's like what if
that was real? Like what if Fox News was actually

(45:09):
in motion here? And I think that's very interesting.

Speaker 2 (45:13):
The approach that he does in Eddington, I think is
a little bit more subtle than the way there's in
Bo's Afraid, because you start the film way way more
as like as like you know, a political satire on
the absurdity of like pandemic era America, and then the
reality starts diverting from what we can agree as like
as like a shared consensus reality, and then it diverts

(45:35):
from that the same way reality diverted away from that
in twenty twenty for people, and we created this like yeah,
massive like reality fracture point.

Speaker 3 (45:42):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (45:43):
Like the first time I noticed this in the filmmaking
was there was like a news clip about like a
Portland riot in twenty twenty, and it had people like
exchanging gunfire on rooftops and it was played next to
actual news clips of like the Third Precinct burning down,
Like it was played off as like a real, legitimate
news clip. Yeah, and like I was, I lived in
Important in twenty twenty. I know that's not real, but

(46:04):
to many people viewing, they might not catch that. Yeah,
that might just be like that might just go into
the background. So at that point I realized that actually
the way that reality is getting diverted into film is
way more subtle. And then of course you get like
the Antifa super soldier private jet later and it's more obvious,
like what he's doing, But even like small things like that,
I started to really appreciate you, Like, no, you're like

(46:26):
getting into the mind of people who believe these things,
and that's what we're that's what's being depicted, Like the
feelings of twenty twenty are more important than the reality
of twenty twenty, and that is what he's trying to show.

Speaker 3 (46:39):
That's even kind of like a meta in a sense,
because it's like if you watch that scene of like
the footage of the Portland like shooting and stuff, and
you as the audience are like questioning if that was real,
then it's like your consensus reality is also diverging from
the regular consensus reality. It's like it kind of makes

(47:01):
you a cipher for the characters, which which also leads
me to something something else, So something I don't see
a lot of people talking about. But the vagrant character
that starts the film where he comes in and he's
just like mumbling like messages, and if you've ever been
around like a you know, like a homeless person on

(47:22):
a bus or something, they like to mumble. And it's
I read that as someone who's like just essentially doing
what everyone else in this movie eventually comes to do
totally yes, which is just taking all of your like
internalized like messages, traumas like things you've heard, things you believe,

(47:46):
and just like grumbling it, spitting it out and to
anyone who talks to you, just incessantly, just like messages, messages, messages.

Speaker 2 (47:54):
The similarity of that character to like the mom character
who does the same thing but is seen in a
very different way.

Speaker 3 (48:01):
Yeah, because a house she.

Speaker 5 (48:03):
Has like a home to live in and has like family.

Speaker 1 (48:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (48:05):
Absolutely, And there's no there's no place for a person
like the vagrant in this world, but there is a
place for all these other types of insane people, and
they're all able to find their little little niches and such,
when maybe in a world before that, in a world
before it was so easy to find such niches, maybe

(48:29):
like you would, I don't know, go to therapy, maybe
like maybe your family would would be concerned. It is
very interesting because people very are are very prone now
and it's like that's because they're able to like get
pulled into these cults. They find their own kind of
Austin Butler figure who's able to talk to them directly

(48:51):
and be like, no, come with me, You're okay. And
just to go back to the point of like messages
and stuff. I think that the uh, the Joaquin Phoenix character.
I think he starts out as a very like uh
like Hank Hill, like very I mean, he doesn't he
doesn't want to wear a mask. He's obviously leans a
bit conservative, but.

Speaker 2 (49:11):
But he's like trying to kind of be like a
reasonable guy, right, And I.

Speaker 3 (49:15):
See him as someone who's trying to like avoid the
messaging from everyone. Like even when people tell him about
like certain news stories and stuff, he's like, I don't know,
like he just doesn't know. And Yeah, in the process
of him like avoiding all these messages, what does he do.
He buys a truck and covers it in fucking messages.

Speaker 2 (49:37):
In messages he starts broadcasting his reality to everyone around
him exactly.

Speaker 3 (49:41):
It's like, uh, I don't know. I think that Normally,
normally I would call it bad writing for like every
character to be like a cipher. But I think what
what he does in this is is really really interesting.
Like I think it's uh, I don't know. I guess
like one more thing that I really like, do want
to say is like Ari Astor did an interview with

(50:02):
Will Miniker and Hesse of like Chapo, and he said
that he kind of wanted to make this movie like
a Rorshack test of sorts, and I think he maybe
overly succeeded in that definitely. And in fact, if I
had one criticism, it's that maybe I wish there was

(50:24):
like a few things like tied together that and I
just wish Austin Butler and Emma Stone got a little
more meat to do things. But aside from that, one
of the biggest criticisms that I'm honestly just going to
dismiss outright as people saying that this is like a
centrist movie totally, or comparing this to South Park or
something like that. And if you view this as a

(50:45):
centrist movie, I mean the liberals in this are like
kind of annoying, ineffectual. A lot of them don't really
believe what they do. Some of them do. I think
the girl character is very sympathetic, but like the younger girl.
But Joaquin Phoenix, the ostensible like you know, right wing
version of this, kills a child like he kills three people,

(51:07):
including like a teenager.

Speaker 2 (51:08):
Like the woke characters engage with politics in a that
but and self serving way to mask their own insecurities
and shortcomings and for their own personal benefit. The right
wing characters murder and have rape cults, and.

Speaker 3 (51:24):
Yeah, right, Like, I don't see how you could look
at the actions of the characters in this film and
just be like, yeah, I guess everyone is stupid. I
guess everyone is wrong, because it's like no, like I mean,
I guess everyone is a little stupid and everyone is
kind of wrong about things. But like, that's not like

(51:44):
what it's getting across. I think that's a very shallow
read of the film.

Speaker 2 (51:49):
This is what people outside of the Brooklyn theater were
complaining about when I eavesdropped for like nearly forty five
minutes after the film, just to hear what people were
talking about. I love eavesdropping, I love snooping, So I
was really feasting out there, and yeah, a lot of
people upset at how quote unquote little this film had
to say. It's just it's just depicting these things but
doesn't have the audacity to actually like say anything about

(52:13):
them or like take a quote unquote stance, and like, yeah,
that's so not what the film is trying to do.
That the film is pointing out, like the social media
style engagement with politics is this incredibly self serving thing.
And it's this performance that we put on for other
people and sometimes put on even for ourselves. And twenty
twenty was a way because of the conditions of the lockdown,

(52:36):
the internet and real life combined in a way more
like totalistically than they have ever before. And then that
combination grew pressure and shot outwards into physical reality in
a very bombastic way, both for the twenty twenty protests
and eventually something like January sixth, Right, both these things, Yeah,
I think you can you can look at a similar
like political pressure like building and manifesting.

Speaker 3 (52:58):
And it's not saying these things are equal.

Speaker 2 (53:00):
It's not the centrist I'm better than thou for you
look at all these crazy guys, But it's it's talking
about how we as a culture associate with politics now
and like how as like American culture we associate with
politics now, and maybe that's kind of troubling and kind
of scary. That's like the horror of the film is, Yeah,
the way that we associate with social media politics now

(53:22):
is really frightening. Which isn't like a revolutionary thing to say, right,
This isn't like, you know, breaking new ground here, but
he is expressing something that everyone I think has felt
at a certain point. Sure, but it's it's presented in
a way that I think is it very much is
a Rorschack test for a lot of people.

Speaker 3 (53:39):
I think a lot of people are uncomfortable. I think
some people just see too much of themselves, and like
I was speaking specifically to like liberal audiences, I think
a lot of them are seeing something of themselves and
they feel like they're being made fun of and they
don't appreciate that. I'll just say I was at the
Black Lives Matter protests and stuff.

Speaker 2 (53:58):
I was there, and I don't feel that way. No,
I don't think I was being made fun of.

Speaker 3 (54:03):
Yeah, I don't like Like I think that, like that's
kind of on you as a viewer for like expecting
a movie to like look directly in the camera and
be like, I believe the same things you believe, you know,
because that's I mean, that's bad filmmaking, that's bad Riding.

Speaker 5 (54:20):
Explains the exact type of communist that I am.

Speaker 3 (54:23):
Right, Yes, I'm the exact kind of leftist you are.
We are on the same side and we're all laughing
at the same things together.

Speaker 2 (54:29):
It's like, no, and if if your engagement with like
social justice and anti police brutality protests is shallow enough
to feel called out in a film like this. I
think that is cause more for self reflection for why
you participated in those things. Yeah, I agree, not a
fault of the film where it's not the film taking
a stance against those things. I think it's it's showing

(54:52):
there's certain types of people who participated in an extremely
performative and like self serving manner. Yeah, and like specifically
the way that like the main like like like zoomer
guy character who in the end becomes a right wing
grifter kylet. It's like it's I think this manifests this
like like like perfectly. Like I think his his character,

(55:13):
I think is one of the funniest characters in the film.
One of the best jokes is just him like liking
a tweet googling Angela Davos. So I think that kind
of stuff is more what it's talking about. And when
you have those types of people being some of the
most vocal people at these events, it contributes to this
like kind of psychosis. Yeah, and that I think that's

(55:36):
what the film is specifically saying.

Speaker 3 (55:39):
I mean, do we forget that people like Sean King
were like popular in twenty twenty. Look, if you see
this and like the portrayal of like these liberal characters
doesn't apply to you. I don't know why you're mad.
I don't know why you would like look at that
and being like, oh, they're making fun of me and everything.
I believe because if it doesn't apply to you, then

(56:00):
it doesn't apply to you. And that was how I
watched the film, Like I didn't feel like any of
these characters applied to me, so I don't really care.
And I guess a final point is like I haven't
heard anyone else say this, but like Shriff Joe at
the end of the film is I feel like it's

(56:21):
very unsubtle symbolism to say that he's lobotomized with if
Ice stabbed in the in the head with a knife.
That's what happened to all of us in a way.
And I mean, it's funny that Ariastra avoided a lot
of mother related trauma up until the very very end
of the movie. The very last seed he had just

(56:42):
squeezed it in there. I know, I know which it was.
I know, and he's being like raised in the bed
and this kind of like angelic like ascension kind of thing.
I don't know. I think that it's I think it's
a pretty unsubtle and funny way of saying that, like
there's really for some people after going fully there in

(57:06):
like being insane, after like just plunging yourself into the
heart of all of this like chaos and unreality, that
the only thing that is going to save you is
a lobotomy, if nothing else. I think that's very funny.
So yeah, I enjoyed it a lot. I've wondered after

(57:28):
about a week after I saw it, I was kicking
it around in my head more and I was wondering,
like will this grow on me? Will this age well?
And I think it definitely has grown on me the
more I've thought about it.

Speaker 2 (57:40):
Same it has also grown me more over time. Once
I got out of the theater, I was storting through
a lot of different feelings about what I just saw,
and it has definitely grown me over time. Where can
people find you and your work?

Speaker 3 (57:54):
Yeah, so I'm a musician. You can go to Jenidanger
dot com and find most of my links and stuff.
I have a new song and video out. I'm working
on a new album that should come out later this year,
and if you're in the Atlanta area, I'm playing a
show at the end of August at Bogs Social and
the Mainline Music Festival in September. But if you follow

(58:17):
me on like Instagram or whatever, you should have all
your updates there, and you can follow me on letterbox
at Jenny Danger. So yeah, thanks for having me.

Speaker 5 (58:26):
Thank you Jane.

Speaker 2 (58:28):
That does it for us at It Could Happen Here.
Thanks once again to Jane Danger and Bailey new Poster.
Follow them both online. They do great work. If you
want some good music, listen to Jane. If you want
some cool art, look up a Bailey new Poster. Oh boy,
I guess I will hopefully see you on the other
side of this post. Woke Nightmare, Bye bye.

Speaker 3 (58:53):
It Could Happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media.

Speaker 2 (58:56):
For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
cools one media dot com, or check us out on
the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
You can now find sources for It Could Happen Here
listed directly in episode descriptions.

Speaker 5 (59:10):
Thanks for listening.