May December with Kiran Deol

On this episode, we chat with special guest Kiran Deol about May December.

Follow Kiran on Instagram and Twitter at @shitfromkiran 

We're doing live shows in early February in San Francisco, Sacramento, Dallas, Austin, and San Diego!

Grab tickets at linktr.ee/bechdelcast!

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hello Bechdel Cast listeners.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
We we we wu. This is future Jamie and Caitlin
recording this a week after we recorded this original episode.
With two quick notes at the top.

Speaker 1 (00:12):
The first thing we want to do is plug the
tour that we've got coming up. You've probably already heard
about it, but in case you haven't, we are doing
several live shows in early February. We will be in
San Francisco, Sacramento, Dallas, Austin, and San Diego in that order.

(00:35):
The dates range from February first to February tenth. You
can get more information all the details all the dates
as well as tickets if you go to link tree
slash Bechdel Cast and we hope to see you there.
We have such fun shows and we're doing Barbie.

Speaker 2 (00:53):
It's the Barbie tour we've been in in dating you.
But yeah, we're already sold out in Dallas and Sacramento,
but stay tuned there may be more shows announced and
get your tickets to the other shows. Yeah. The other
thing we wanted to touch on really quick. This is
a movie that is both about highly sensitive themes and
it just came out. So since we recorded this last week,
there has been a fair amount of reaction and the

(01:16):
reaction to the reaction, and we've had a week to
sit with the movie and we have a few worthings
we just wanted to talk about. So if you want
to get to future JB and future Caitlin's thoughts on that,
and I guess I don't know why I am like
high to get that Villi Fulau has now seen and
reacted to May December. If you're not aware who that is.
This movie I think is pretty clearly based on the

(01:38):
Mary Kay Laturno and Villi Fulou abuse saga of the nineties. Yes,
and you know he has since reacted to the movie.
There's been reaction to the reaction. We're going to talk
about it. And I also feel like I'm losing listeners
at the very beginning because the filmmakers insist it's not
based on that. Just go to the end of the episode.

(01:59):
We also talk about it content with the episode It's
a monster. This was a really challenging episode that we
had a great time recording. It's just because this movie,
for everything we liked and disliked about it, is really challenging.
So for sure, buckle in, we hope you enjoy the
discussion and we'll see you in the future. At the
end of the episode, yep, enjoy.

Speaker 3 (02:21):
On the Bechdelcast, the questions asked if movies have women
and them, are all their discussions just boyfriends and husbands
or do they have individualism? It's the patriarchy, Zeffi bast
start changing it with the Bechdel Cast.

Speaker 1 (02:36):
Doo doo, doo doo.

Speaker 2 (02:38):
I don't think we have enough hot dogs. And that's
when I knew I was going to enjoy whatever happens
in the movie May December, which I did not know
what it was about or any of the themes. Wow,
I know.

Speaker 1 (02:53):
But the hot dog representation is very prominent, especially in
those first five to ten minutes.

Speaker 2 (02:58):
Yeah, and they're making more hot and there are people
we're talking about three to a head by my math. Yeah,
unless there were some kids, I wasn't saying whatever. Welcome
to the Bechdel Cast. My name's Jamie Loftus, And on
this podcast, we always have enough hot dogs. Over the years,
some have said we have too many. It comes up
to abundance, a surplus, if you will, order of hot dogs.

Speaker 1 (03:19):
And I'm Caitlin Dorante and this is our show where
we examine movies through an intersectional feminist lens, using the
Bechdel test simply as a jumping off point to initiate
a larger conversation.

Speaker 2 (03:30):
And boy, do we have a conversation have today?

Speaker 1 (03:34):
Do we really do? Yes? The Bechdel Test is a
media metric originally created by Alison Bechdel along with her
friend Liz Wallace. That's why it's often called the Bechdel
Wallace Test. Originally appeared in Alison Bechdel's comic Dicks to
Watch Out For, and the original intention behind it was

(03:55):
just like an examination of do women speak to each
other in media? In movies? And how fucked up can
it get? This movie seeks to answer that question, it
really truly does.

Speaker 2 (04:08):
I feel like that's sort of a concerted interest of
Todd Haynes's work overall. He wants to see how many fun,
dumb ways he could pass the Bechdel test. And I
think that that's a really noble pursuit.

Speaker 1 (04:18):
It is it is. We're proud of him for it.
In any case, there are many different versions of the
Bechdel test. The one that we use is as follows,
do two characters of a marginalized gender have names, do
they speak to each other? Is the conversation about something
other than a man and a little caveat that we add?

(04:39):
Is is the conversation narratively impactful or is it just
kind of like throwaway dialogue that could easily be cut not.

Speaker 2 (04:48):
An example of this is we don't have enough hot talks,
which I think passes the Bechdel test because just because
we don't hear it doesn't mean the hot dogs didn't answer.
They said, there is enough hot dogs. Look at us,
there's sixty. Did you see how many damn hot dogs?
Charles Melton was brilliing there was enough.

Speaker 1 (05:06):
Yes.

Speaker 2 (05:07):
Anyway, we're talking about May December. I feel like it's
been a while since we've talked about a movie like
right as it was coming out. But this movie went
directly to streaming, so it's allowed we can do it.

Speaker 1 (05:18):
It always stresses me out to do a movie that
recently has just come out because I'm like, I need
more time to mull it over. So I kind of
feel that way about this movie.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
I mean, there's a ton to go through, and I
think like, yeah, this is the kind of movie that,
like the conversation will evolve with age two, but there's
been I think, a really interesting wide variety of discussion,
including the classic like Golden Globes, Like why is this
being called a comedy?

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Right?

Speaker 2 (05:46):
I just am so exhausted with that conversation in general,
I don't want to hear it. We have an amazing
guest joining us today who bravely requested to cover this movie.

Speaker 1 (05:55):
Yes, indeed, she is a comedian. She'll be releasing an
hour special later this year, so be on the lookout
for that. She's also in the Shutter movie Destroy All Neighbors,
which I think at the time of this episode's release
will be available on Shutter.

Speaker 2 (06:09):
Credible title It's Kiran Deal.

Speaker 4 (06:12):
Welcome, Come, Hello, you guys. This is so exciting.

Speaker 1 (06:16):
The excitement is all ours.

Speaker 4 (06:18):
I love the way you're like. She bravely suggested this
movie aka she doesn't watch films anymore and happened to
catch this on Netflix because she was like, Oh, I
know Natalie Portman, Let's see what this thing is about.
And then I thought it was the director of Tar,
which I believe. I guess Caitlin, I thought it.

Speaker 2 (06:35):
Was Todd to Todd's we were talking about, Yeah, the
various interests of the todd O tour community. In the
last two years or in the last ten years, men
named todd seemed to be obsessed with making movies where
the thesis seems to be, you know, women can be
sex criminals too, which is true, Which is true, and

(06:57):
the Todds feel that they are the one to say it.
I also think that these Todds also have a vested
interest in casting Kate Blanchett as a complicated lesbian. Yes,
because we have that in Carol and we have that
interre are different wow kinds of Kate Blanchett's on display,
but Todds nonetheless. Anyway, what's your history with this movie, Caitlyn.

Speaker 1 (07:23):
I had just seen it for the first time four
or so days ago. I considered not watching it a
second time because it is a decidedly uncomfortable movie, but
I was like, I gotta do my job. I need
to absorb it more fully. So yeah, I've just seen
it twice now in the past few days, and I'm

(07:45):
excited to talk about it, or I guess, like I know,
we kept being like is excited the right word here?
But I found it intriguing certainly, And do I ever
want to watch it again? After this, I would say
not no, but I think it will elicit an interesting discussion, Jamie,

(08:05):
what about you?

Speaker 2 (08:06):
This is going to sound excessive. It is completely by
coincidence that I have not seen so many award season
movies this year, but I've seen May December three times style.
I watched it the weekend that it came out, because
once I did find out what it was about. This
is weirdly it sounds weird to say that this is
in my wheelhouse, but because I did the Lolita podcast

(08:28):
a couple of years ago, I've seen and analyzed quite
a few movies that have predatory and abusive dynamics. We've
talked about it, I think briefly on the show I
Can't for the Life and we remember in what episode
this would have come up, but how infrequently up until
quite recently, like representing an abusive dynamic and child sex

(08:49):
abuse that takes place between an adult woman and a
young man is like almost never shown or discussed up
until pretty recently. So once I found out what this
movie was about, and also the tabloid case that it
was loosely based on, which I was brag too young

(09:09):
to remember, so I had to kind of go back
and do some research on how heavily based it was.
But so I was really interested to see this movie.
I feel like it does like with a movie where
this is the subject matter, which is I mean, like
we'll place the trigger warning in this entire episode for
child sex abuse, for emotional abuse, for kind of every
sort of toxic relationship dynamic that you could imagine, and

(09:32):
also women being assholes, which is my favorite one. But yeah,
so I was really interested to see it. I think
it's really like well written and well done and well acted.
I have some thoughts on it. I'm really excited to
talk about it with y'all. And then I also saw,
before I prepared for this episode, I went to a
SAG screening where Julianne Moore and Charles Melton and Todd

(09:58):
Haynes spoke after the movie, and I thought that the
way that they discussed what to me felt like a
very clear theme in the movie to be very interesting.
So I'm excited to talk about that as well. Yeah,
but in general, I think it's at least for how
generally poorly this subject matter is handled in media, that

(10:20):
this feels like a stronger attempt. And also it is
about other things to it, and I think it's cool
how the Natalie Portman character is just sort of this
embodiment of how cynically media tends to treat abused people.

Speaker 1 (10:37):
True, Kieren, how about you? What's your relationship with this movie?

Speaker 4 (10:42):
So? I watched the film and I remember thinking huh, okay.
So I didn't really know what it was about, and
I was curious, and I watched the whole movie and
then I was like, huh interesting. Interesting. Then I went
into a kind of wormhole of looking up the source

(11:06):
material about the movie, and like an interview that is
by Ausie Press on the film that's about twenty minutes long,
and it was one of those movies for me which
I think is interesting. I was like, huh interesting, Okay, cool.
And then it was like as the evening went on,

(11:26):
or as I went out, and then like I was like,
why don't I feel good? Why is there like a
niggling feeling that like I was weirdly cheated or something
like what's bothering me? Is what I was the question
I particularly felt what's bothering me? And it took me
a while to unravel that. Right around that time is

(11:48):
when I got Jamie's email saying what movie would you
like to choose? And that's my history with this film.

Speaker 1 (11:56):
Well, I'm excited to talk about that feeling that you
were feeling in a bit. I mean, I am old
enough to remember the Mary Kay Laturno y, like I
remember what the cases. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So the
movie is loosely based on Mary Kay Laturno, who was

(12:16):
arrested in the late nineties on two counts of child
rape because she sexually abused a twelve year old boy
named and I might get this pronunciation wrong, really Fullau
And yeah, I remember when this was in the tabloids

(12:37):
and just like the regular news, like this story was
covered very heavily in ninety seven when it happened.

Speaker 2 (12:45):
What was your memory of like how it was covered.

Speaker 1 (12:50):
I was eleven at the time, so I don't think
I had quite like a nuanced enough interpretation. I mean,
maybe this is just like me retroactively having like my
adult brain and being like, yeah, I remember it being
super sensationalized, but I don't know if that's actually true.

Speaker 2 (13:07):
I think so.

Speaker 1 (13:08):
Yeah, I just remember it was covered very heavily, and
I do remember a lot of people's responses to it
just like people my own age. There were boys that
I went to school with who would have been around
the same age as the survivor of this abuse, who
were like, oh, I wish you know X, Y and
Z teacher would do this to me, and like just

(13:30):
that was a lot of the response that I was
hearing from, like my peers. It was a bizarre time.

Speaker 4 (13:37):
Can I say One thing I do find really fascinating
is how when you are a kid, especially when you're
kind of like going into those teenage years, how much
of a grown up you feel like, and how certain
that adulthood can feel to you, even to the point
where like I've had like a nephew, Like and I
remember like taking my nephew around and I was like,

(13:59):
we're gonna stay until ten and he's like, no, I'm
putting my foot down and I have to like kind
of stop and be like, no, wait, I'm the grown up.
I'm the grown up. No, no, no, I pick when we
go to sleep, you know what I mean, Like, you're
still a kid.

Speaker 1 (14:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (14:11):
And I think about that with something like the movie Kids,
you know, like watching it when I was in college
or something and seeing it and kind of being like yeah,
this is how kids are versus then seeing it as
a grown up and then being like oh no, oh no,
oh no, oh no, how terrible. Oh no, that's the
differential I hear when you're talking about those boys, which

(14:32):
is just a really interesting developmental difference, you know.

Speaker 1 (14:38):
For sure.

Speaker 2 (14:38):
One of the things I appreciate about this movie is
like it attempts to comment on like how media portrayed
cases like this through the Natalie Portman character, which we'll
like get into, but when she's like being tasked with
helping to cast like an underage actor and she's giving

(15:01):
notes that they're like, quote unquote not sexy enough, and
then when you see the product at the end of
the movie, the character has clearly been aged up, which
almost always happens in movies of this nature, which in
some ways it's I think a positive thing, certainly for
the actor, Like you don't want that to be happening

(15:24):
to a twelve year old actor. Again, interesting that Natalie
Portman is in this because she's in Leon the professional,
which is very much that kind of role. And Yeah,
there's so many weird layers to this movie. But then
it also as a viewer conditions you to think that
a thirteen year old isn't a thirteen year old, a
thirteen year old as a sixteen year old, and a
sixteen year old as a twenty two year old. And

(15:45):
it's like the way that it's also weird that we
have Charles Melton because that's what Riverdale is. You know,
he's like thirty years old playing a seventeen year old. Sure,
I don't know, like, yeah, this movie touched I guess
I have thoughts on it. But this movie did end
up touching on way more than I thought it was
going to on, like the way that stories about child
sex abuse are covered and then subsequently like portrayed, because

(16:08):
Natalie Portman's character really thinks she's doing something when in.

Speaker 1 (16:12):
Fact, she is part of the problem, the most evil
person alive.

Speaker 2 (16:18):
I can't say. The one thing I like about her
character is that she openly hates her fiance because it
seems like he sucks. Yeah, and so that's the one
that's the one place where I'll be like, all right,
I see it.

Speaker 1 (16:30):
Well, let's get into it with the recap, but before that,
let's take a quick break and then we'll come right back,
and we're back here. We are Okay, so here is

(16:52):
the recap, and we'll place another content warning here for
child sex abuse, emotional abuse, rooming, things of that nature.

Speaker 4 (17:02):
I just do want to apologize for covering this film
one more time. Takes a lot, Karen, So sorry, so sorry.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
I mean these things must be discussed.

Speaker 2 (17:11):
So, no, it's true, and it's not the first. Virtually,
it's not the first. I was it might be the first.
I were talking about. Well, it doesn't matter. We've talked
about the show before many times.

Speaker 4 (17:21):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (17:22):
Also, Kieren, feel free to jump in that. It's a
very open summary discussion.

Speaker 1 (17:26):
Okay. So we are in Savannah, Georgia, and we meet
Gracie played by Julianne Moore. She's prepping for a barbecue
with her husband, Joe played by Charles Melton, who is
noticeably much younger than Gracie. There's talk of a movie
star named Elizabeth Barry who is going to be there

(17:50):
doing research for a role, and she'll be shadowing Gracie
because Elizabeth is playing Gracie in an upcoming movie.

Speaker 2 (17:58):
She keeps calling it art house. It is revealed at
the end that it appears to be lifetime, right, She's like,
it's an art House movie. I was like, oh no,
I don't know. It seems like you're in Burbank, got
their ass.

Speaker 4 (18:11):
Wow, a lot of Burbank shade. Wasn't expecting Burbank shade.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
I mean dunking on the valley.

Speaker 2 (18:17):
Wow, just just throw a grenade to start the discussion.

Speaker 4 (18:20):
Sure, Burbank hasn't had enough difficulties.

Speaker 2 (18:23):
Hasn't Burbank been through enough? Yeah?

Speaker 4 (18:25):
Exactly. Wow, I wasn't expecting that from this.

Speaker 2 (18:28):
I'm really sorry I didn't sleep last day. All due
respect to Burbank. I love Burbank.

Speaker 1 (18:33):
I mean they have three AMC's all within a like
five hundred foot radius of each other.

Speaker 4 (18:39):
Yeah, some of your best friends live in Burbank, y'all.
We've heard it all before.

Speaker 2 (18:43):
Yeah. I'll never live it down.

Speaker 1 (18:48):
Okay. Anyway, So Elizabeth Barry we meet her on screen.
She's played by Natalie Portman. She shows up to Gracie's
house and gets acquainted with everyone, including Gracie and Joe's
teenage kids, twins named Charlie and Mary. Gracie seems apprehensive
about this situation where this movie is being made about her.

(19:12):
There's mention of, you know, like getting the story right.
And making sure Gracie is seen and understood. There's a
friend of Gracy's who tells Elizabeth, like, be kind in
your portrayal of Gracy. Also, we see that someone has
sent Gracey a box of like literal shit in the mail.
So something's going on. We don't quite know what exactly yet, and.

Speaker 2 (19:36):
It already like we covered sense a Boulevard yesterday, and
it's just like already just a real week of characters
that are women in their fifties who have an entire
scary bubble to protect them from reality and surrounding them
from moment one.

Speaker 1 (19:53):
Yes, indeed. So then Elizabeth starts studying Gracy and going
through tabloids from the ar early nineties, and we get
a glimpse of who Gracie is and what her story is.
She had spent time in prison, she gave birth while
she was in prison, and there are pictures of her
with a very young Joe We're talking like middle school age,

(20:15):
so things are starting to come into focus. Elizabeth spends
more time with Gracy, asks her and Joe a bunch
of questions. We learn that Gracie's eldest son from a
previous marriage. His name's Georgie is the same age as Joe.
We also learn that Gracy and Joe met when he
came into a pet store where she worked. He was

(20:38):
looking for a job, so we're getting more details. And
then Elizabeth meets with Gracie's ex husband, Tom and he
confirms the full story, which is that Gracie, in the
early nineties, when she was thirty six years old, started
an affair aka committed child sexual abuse with Joe when
he was thirteen years old. Then Elizabeth continues her research,

(21:05):
interviewing people around town, such as the owner of the
pet store where Gracie was caught sexually abusing Joe. She
talks to Gracie's defense attorney, as well as Gracie's older son, Georgie,
who tells Elizabeth that this ordeal ruined his life. There's
also ongoing tension between Gracey and Elizabeth because Gracey still

(21:31):
just seems uncomfortable about the idea that this movie is
being made. She thinks that like Elizabeth is just kind
of like meddling and always around too much, which is true,
which is true, she is yes, And then there's a
different kind of tension between Elizabeth and Joe. She points
out that they're the same age more or less, and

(21:54):
it also feels like Elizabeth is trying to flirt with
Joe when she goes to visit him at work. Joe
tells Elizabeth, people act like I'm some kind of victim.
But Gracie and I have been together for twenty four years.
Why would I stay if I wasn't happy? And it's
not clear at this point how Elizabeth feels about this

(22:14):
whole situation. Then things start to really fall apart. We
see Gracie having a meltdown, although the thing that she's
crying about is cake, because she's like a professional baker.

Speaker 2 (22:30):
Right, But even that is like not exactly true, because
he's like another sunset full of our overlap where it's
like all of Normandesmond's fan mail is written by her butler,
all of Gracie's cakes are purchased by her neighbors just
to like quote unquote keep her busy, right, which, yes,
very bleak.

Speaker 4 (22:49):
Why did they live in such a nice house?

Speaker 1 (22:51):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (22:52):
I asked that so many times, and my boyfriend kept
making excuse. He's like, maybe she sold her life, right
that maybe that's why. I was like, maybe, but that's
the only thing because it doesn't it doesn't make it
sound like either of them wrote a book. He works
as an X ray tech which is a good job,
but not like mansion good job. Like I don't understand.

Speaker 4 (23:08):
It's a weird thing where it's like a lot of
the issues I have with this Like I love that
it's two women to strong female leads, whatever, but like
a lot of my issues with this movie are actually
around class and the treatment of the Charles Melton character.
The lack of development of that little boy for sure,
the fact that he is a prop in this movie,

(23:29):
the fact that none of the relationship is explored, the
fact that you know, you're saying it's an interesting commentary
Jamie on like the press and the predatory nature of
the media. But Julian Moore is letting these people into
her home is the other piece of it. So there's
there's definitely like a duality to that. Also, I just
think back to film school or any time that like,
not that I went to film school, but what I've

(23:50):
heard that people who went to film school have said
is like, isn't there always like something about being first
person and verite, which is kind of like, you know,
understanding this like hology, the depth of the psychology of
like verite in terms of putting somebody in the firestorm
of the most interesting action, and the immense privilege that
comes with like having this very slow burn, Like you

(24:13):
took the least interesting approach on this insane topic, Like
you did it through the point of view of a
lifetime movie actress walking into the home of like the
twenty four year relationship between a teacher and a child,
and we follow Natalie fucking Portman.

Speaker 2 (24:34):
What are we doing.

Speaker 4 (24:35):
We're talking about hot dogs and cake. I'm so sorry.

Speaker 1 (24:38):
I know I'm excited to discuss this further when we
like get into the full discression.

Speaker 4 (24:43):
Sorry, and I interrupted your very thorough breakdown. I mean,
you don't even have to watch this film.

Speaker 1 (24:48):
I love it, but like these are the things that
we do want to talk about, so we'll get to it.
But anyway, Gracie's having a breakdown because someone stopped ordering
her cakes, and I'm like, sh okay. Anyway, Then there's
a scene where Joe also breaks down and cries because
he's high on drugs, and we sense that he's like

(25:09):
starting to maybe kind of interrogate things from his past.

Speaker 4 (25:12):
And Caitlin, he's never done drugs before. Right, he does
drugs on his roof with his teenage son, and his
teenage son gives him the drug, right, and he's never
done them before, indicating some level of like, you know.

Speaker 1 (25:24):
Rested development. Perhaps.

Speaker 2 (25:26):
Yeah, I mean, I completely agree with you, Karen that
Joe is an underdeveloped character who has been sidelined in
these narratives his whole life and is still being sidelined
twenty four years later. Like, it's still very clear that
Gracie feels like she is the romantic protagonist of this story,
and it's like he's sidelined in every single way, including

(25:48):
in this movie. So I feel like I had to
like cling to little details like and he's never got
to smoke weed because of the way his life has gone.
And also just like how tremendously controlling she is. Like
one of the first details that I picked up on
is like when he enters the scene for the first time,
she's like, that's two beers today, and it's like, oh

(26:11):
my god.

Speaker 1 (26:12):
Let the man live away from you.

Speaker 2 (26:15):
Yeah, I can get the creditor.

Speaker 1 (26:17):
Let him go anyways, Yes, Then we get a scene
with a graduation dinner because their twin kids are about
to graduate from high school. And afterwards, Elizabeth talks to Georgie,
Gracie's adult son, who tells Elizabeth that Gracie's older brothers
sexually abused her starting when she was twelve years old,

(26:38):
but that Gracie refuses to talk about it, and she
still has a close relationship with these brothers, it seems.
Then Joe gives Elizabeth a ride home and they kiss
and they have sex, and she keeps telling him that
he's young and he could leave Gracie and start over,

(26:59):
and he's like, no, I would destroy her and this
is my life we're talking about, and he gets upset
and storms out, and then he goes home and has
a conversation with Gracie where he's like, hey, like what
if I was too young when we got together?

Speaker 2 (27:16):
And she shuts it down.

Speaker 1 (27:18):
The emotional abuseome manipulation really amps up here, where she's like,
you're the one who seduced me and he's like, I
was thirteen, and she refuses to listen to him or
allow him to express his feelings and she storms off.

Speaker 2 (27:33):
And that whole scene is okay, I forget if we've
talked about this already, but like that whole scene is
pretty directly pulled from an actual interview that Mary Kayla
Turno did on television, Like it's horrific hearing it in
a private setting, but then when you go and watch
the clip, you're like, it's just like so horrible and

(27:54):
uncomfortable to watch.

Speaker 4 (27:56):
It's the who's the boss line, like like she had
pieces so many times in the Yeah, who's in charge?
Or who is the boss? Who's the boss? I thought
that was the most interesting scene in the film. To me,
that felt like the starting point of a film. You know,
that felt like like from there, from that jumping off point.

Speaker 1 (28:13):
Now let's explore Joe.

Speaker 4 (28:16):
Yeah, let's figure out who Joe is and let's figure
out what this is. And the fact that that was
the culmination of this movie. It took a while to
settle in because I do think the directing is good.
I think all of I think, especially Natalie and Juliane
are both like incredible actors. Like, so kudos to like
the makeup scene, which I know you didn't mention, Caitlin,
where the two of them are putting on the makeup
is like I thought that was very compelling, Like when

(28:38):
Natalie does the monologue. It's very compelling, Like just the
performances are really marvelous, so I can understand why they
were attracted to the performances. But from a storytelling point
of view, I was just like bruh, Like.

Speaker 1 (28:49):
Way to focus on the least compelling and least important.
I would say part of this narrative, bah rah oh
ruh was my answer. Okay, so Gracie kind of is
manipulating him, and she shuts this conversation down. Then we
cut to Elizabeth rehearsing a monologue where she's impersonating Gracie.

(29:12):
You know, she's like preparing for this performance she's going
to give in the movie. The words that she's rehearsing
are presumably coming from a letter that Gracie had given
to Joe at the start of their relationship. Joe gave
this letter to Elizabeth, and now she's like performing this
as a monologue, and in the letter, Gracie acknowledges that

(29:34):
she crossed a line that what she's doing is illegal
and unethical, So she knew at the time what she
was doing.

Speaker 2 (29:42):
She lies about the whole movie that she like, and
that was like an element of the Barry Kayla turta
story too. She was like, I was not aware that
sexually a music a child was illegal.

Speaker 4 (29:51):
I was like, yeah, fuck you. You're like, girl, you're
a teacher.

Speaker 2 (29:56):
You're a teacher, You're a thirty six year old teacher.
You've fucking freak.

Speaker 1 (30:00):
Anyways, yes, okay. So then it's the day of the
twins graduation and Gracie approaches Elizabeth afterward and she's like,
you know that thing that my son Georgie told you
about my brothers, that was a lie. Georgie is really insecure,
but not me. I'm a very secure person. Parentheses put

(30:22):
that in the movie bone Chilling, and we're like, ah.
And then we cut to the set of the movie,
the biopic that Elizabeth is shooting about this ordeal, and
it's fucking creepy and gross the end.

Speaker 4 (30:40):
Yeah, and Katelin, can I just add that in that
last scene where it was like Julian Moore approaches Natalie Portman,
which she's like, my son told you that that and
none of that was true. Natalie was like, oh, wait,
what you know? Wait he told you that? And then
she goes, of course I speak to him every day,
and there's kind of like this in the same way

(31:02):
that like what's her relationship with it? Like if you're
looking for the breadcrumbs of it, it's like, what is
that relationship with that son?

Speaker 2 (31:08):
Then no idea, Like that scene is consistently baffling to me,
where I'm like, there's no reason to believe Gracie. She's
complaintly delusional, but also because of what she put her
family through, her son is not a reliable narrator either.
That like horrible cringey scene where he's like, I will
give you information for your.

Speaker 4 (31:31):
Be that yeah, if you let me be the music supervisor.

Speaker 2 (31:34):
Yeah right, He's like, I know good songs, and you're like,
oh my god, I hate this whole it's just a catastrophe.

Speaker 4 (31:42):
And then the other one was when Julian Moore like
leaves the bathroom because the scene where it's the graduation
dinner kind of goes terribly wrong, and the children who
have left the house are kind of like out of
her grasp or spell and maybe seem to realize that
their lives have been particularly messed up, and so there's
a level of rebellion. She gave them a scale for

(32:03):
their graduation gifts or whatever, and she wanted a beautiful time,
and then Natalie happens to be in the bathroom at
the same time. Of one line I do remember thinking
was like quite interesting, was like the I guess I've
always been naive, you know, and that's helped me or
something like Julian Moore says something to that, like I've
always been naive.

Speaker 2 (32:20):
Yeah, you know this character's obsession with control, including controlling
how well, wait, should we take a break.

Speaker 1 (32:28):
Yeah, let's take a quick break and then we'll come
back and really dive into this discussion. So we'll be
right back and we're back. So, yes, we've already kind

(32:49):
of started this discussion and let's keep going.

Speaker 2 (32:52):
Yeah, Karen, I want to go back to what you
were saying about how I mean, I think Joe is
the character to really art with here because like, I
completely agree that we we're kept at arm's length from
him the entire story, and you start to see towards
the end there are a few really beautifully done scenes

(33:16):
by Charles Melton. In the scene where he's finally confronting
his abuser and stating what's happened. I think the scene
with his son is really good too, and like there's
a few really good scenes with him late in the movie,
but for the most part, we're kind of like kept
it arms length through him, and I wasn't able to like,

(33:37):
I don't know, I don't hate the framing device for
this movie, but I also think that there were ways
that were like obvious to more meaningfully include Joe even
within that framing device. But then I wonder, I'm like,
is it possible when it's like, to me, this movie

(33:57):
should be more about Joe, but then it seems to
want to be about a struggle for a narrative control
between Gracie, who's pretty obsessive about getting people to think
a very certain thing about her that isn't true, and
she knows that, like, she's not a naive person at all,
she's a control freak that wants people to think she's naive.

(34:18):
But that comes at the expense of focusing on who's
been abused, And I feel like that is like consistently
an issue, no matter how well other portions of it
are done. That seems to be like a consistent issue
in movies about abuse and also just dealing with abuse

(34:38):
on a longer timeline, because that's so like you never
see that someone coming to terms with abuse, you know,
over twenty years later, which is like a common experience,
and I feel like, yeah, we were kind of cheated
by not getting to go with Joe on that journey. More.

Speaker 4 (34:56):
Did you see that other movie by that filmmaker that
was on a I think it was nominated for an
Emmy and it was about her abuse experience and kind
of realizing that this relationship that she had when she
was like thirteen years old was actually an abusive one.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
Was it?

Speaker 2 (35:10):
Did this come out a couple of years ago? Yes, Okay,
I did. I can't remember what it was called. Oh god,
I don't. I hate these search terms, but yes, sorry,
I continue.

Speaker 4 (35:20):
I can't remember the name of that film, but I
remember thinking the psychology of that film was so illuminating,
And even the way we are discussing this film now
feels like it has more depth and substance than what
was put on the page in the movie I watched,
And it's like the audacity to take this topic if

(35:44):
you don't have the kind of grit to examine the
psychology of like who these people are, why they are
the way they are. When the culminating scene is the
last scene in an actual interview, like when that should
have been kind of a jumping off point. The whole
thing felt for me, the kind of you know, the
third person, like really abstract eye of the framing device

(36:06):
on top of it to remove you even further from
that narrative just felt like like again, I watched this
movie and I was like, oh, that's well directed, that's like,
these actors are great. And then there was a niggling
feeling and I was like, why don't I what is
it that's bothering me? I always felt like something was
going to happen, and like nothing happened, and it's like

(36:27):
all in hot dogs and cakes, and like the entire
movie is existing in these like these scraps that you
were kind of clawing for, and it never felt like
it ever came to a head or illuminated anything, or
came together. And so in that way, it becomes the
exact voyeuristic exercise that it's trying to comment on, you know,

(36:47):
because it's offered nothing of actual value into the human psychology.
This is the last thing I'm going to say, and
this is a thing that has bothered me a lot,
and I don't think a lot of people talk about
it in entertainment. It's like when you watch the real
interview of the guy, he is like a dark skinned kid,
you know, and the actor that they cast is a
biracial actor. You know, he's a pretty like white passing face.

Speaker 1 (37:11):
You know.

Speaker 4 (37:11):
It's like why is that okay? So much of the time,
like why are we willing to do that with these
actors who should be Like, that's a real person. I
remember seeing that in the Facebook movie and Social Network,
like there's an Indian guy named Vivia, real Indian guy.
Anthony Minnguela ends up playing him again very like light

(37:31):
skinned person lights.

Speaker 1 (37:33):
He's not damn if he's not.

Speaker 2 (37:36):
He's not Indian.

Speaker 4 (37:37):
He's like I mean, and this is like a brown
dark brown skin. This is a real person, you know,
and we're we're so specific when it comes to like, oh, well,
who's a real cab driver or who's a real like
do you know what I mean? Like all then it's
all about authenticity. But what do your emergency rooms look like?
You know, like what do your doctors look like? And
then what do your doctors on television look like? And

(37:58):
a lot of that to me, I can I feel
myself getting angry, and I don't want to be that person.
I'm reading tichn Han right now to try to deal
with the seeds of my own anger. But quite frankly,
I do still blame the world.

Speaker 1 (38:09):
That's the truth it is at though, like you have
every right to be angry about that.

Speaker 4 (38:15):
But then it's really like what is the eye of
the person or the institution or the system that is
making the film and what they deem as like I'll pass,
that's fine, that doesn't matter, and what is seen as important?
And I say that specifically because this is a real person,

(38:35):
you know, this is a real person. And you see
the casting controversies over like the Little Mermaid being black,
you know, or fictional characters, like it's just wild to
me that in these cases where you have a real
human being, there was no maybe there was an effort made,
I don't know. And then the irony is that the
screenwriter is a casting director, you know, so cal like

(39:00):
girl I found it.

Speaker 2 (39:02):
Well, it's kind of like a two prog thing. First
of all, this movie is completely disinterested in talking about
any race or class dynamics in a way that is
very frustrating because they're right there and it's like, I
still I do think that this movie is unique and
that there are elements of it that definitely like I

(39:23):
haven't seen before that I thought were positive, But it
is like there's so much that's kind of left on
the table and leaves you feeling frustrated for days afterwards,
where it's the only clue you sort of get within
this relationship that Gracie is very disinterested in dismissive of
Joe's race, is that she gets it wrong. The one

(39:44):
time that it comes up, she says, oh, you're the
only Korean family in the neighborhood. He's like, well half Korean,
and she's like yeah, yeah, yeah, and then keeps going.
So it's like this is allegedly someone that she loves
and can't even you know, isn't even interested in enough
to get that correct. But outside of that, it goes
essentially completely undiscussed and unexplored, And I feel like on

(40:09):
the writer's part, I feel bad, Like she was a
first time screenwriter. She came out of casting like great.

Speaker 4 (40:16):
Flowers to it all happening, and like it's absolutely an
impossible business and we were happy for you.

Speaker 2 (40:21):
And the fact that like, you know, women don't get
to right movies enough. Obviously you could tell a woman
wrote this movie. All that said, I think that there's
like just it rubs me in such a weird way
that this is so obviously the Mary kay Laturno story.
But in every single interview I've seen that is like

(40:42):
either like walked back by every single person who's asked
anything about it. And I feel like Kieran, like speaking
to your point. One of the things that you can
get away with by taking a step away from the
story it's obviously based on, to the point where there
is an entire scene that is ripped from an interview
related to this case, is that you could quote unquote
get away with changing the race of a character and

(41:04):
casting a lighter skinned actor because you're like, well, it's
not that story, it's a different story, when that's absolutely
not true. And then also watching that interview, you can
see that Villi Fulau is sitting next to Mary Kayla
Turno incredulous that whole time, where with Joe, it's more
like in the context of the scene of where we're

(41:25):
at in the movie, it makes sense, but it's just
like Joe isn't allowed that sense of incredulousness that is
reflected in the real story.

Speaker 1 (41:36):
Because when we do see that in Joe's character arc,
it's not until the last twenty or twenty five minutes
of the movie, and then we cut away from that,
and then the rest of the story focuses back to
Gracie and Elizabeth and then the movie's over. So like
like you said here and like right when, because sure,

(41:57):
like the agenda of this movie is to examine, you know,
like how difficult it is, especially for people who abuse,
and specifically child sex abuse, for whom it has been normalized.
Those people having a difficult time kind of interrogating that
because it has been normalized. But then you know, when

(42:19):
they start to examine it and think about it and
acknowledge what happened and reflect, then they start to be like,
wait a minute, this was messed up, Like this is
a very traumatic thing that happened to me, and like
the movie seeks to explore that process, but it focuses
way too much on Gracey, not nearly enough on Joe,

(42:44):
and I would also also say not nearly enough on
their kids, especially like the twins. It just is like, well,
but what about that? To me? That scene where Gracie's
putting the makeup on Elizabeth. I was like, what is this?
Why is this? He cut it? I don't care about this, Like,
I just found it unnecessary to the more core story here,

(43:06):
which is, like, what does it look like when someone
for whom sex abuse child sex abuse has been so normalized?
What does it look like when they do start to
interrogate that and feel their feelings and try to confront
their abuser, and like that, why isn't that the core
of the story?

Speaker 4 (43:26):
And what is the conversation around sex with your children?
What is it when your child brings home a partner?
Like what is like?

Speaker 2 (43:32):
Seems like? Nothing like?

Speaker 4 (43:34):
And and then the other thing is if you're taking
from that interview, if you're literally ripping from that interview,
the thing about Villy is he actually seems pretty smart
in the real case, came from like a broken family
and says very specifically in that interview, he says, I
wanted my children to live in a two parent home
so that they had that growing up. Like there's a

(43:55):
point of view there that's clear and it's quiet and
it's strong, but like there's absolutely a point of view
if you're paying attention when you watch that interview and
I think, to me, this film is a really interesting
lesson and who gets attention? Who gets to be paid
attention to even in a story like this one, Because

(44:16):
the most interesting thing about this story for me was
the story, not the storytelling.

Speaker 2 (44:22):
Yeah, I mean I feel like, ultimately, like if you're
coming to this movie hoping to get a what we
never get in stories about specifically child sex abuse and
people recovering from child sex abuse, which is a focus
on that you're gonna leave disappointed. I feel like the

(44:43):
way in which I was able to engage with this
movie is because these movies almost universally in a way
that this movie is not different centers the abuser. I
think that the one strength of this movie is that
I don't think it like leaves you wondering like is
she a good person? Which a stunning number of these

(45:07):
movies do of, Like, not only is the story of
Lolita centered on Humberd Humbred, there is like ways that
a lot of people leave the movie adaptations of that
being like this was a tragedy. Ultimately, this is a
romantic tragedy. So not only do we have no interest
and active demonization done of the victim, but you have

(45:30):
this sort of bizarre, underhanded redemption arc for the abuser.
I think that this movie lays out pretty clear, especially
like on repeat viewings, that like she is delusional, she
is unapologetically a monster, she will never face herself, which

(45:51):
seems to be the experience of Mary Kayla Turno who
died in twenty twenty, and so in that way, I
think it is interesting saying the Natalie Portman character. Honestly,
I like the idea of it, and like I feel
like there are a few moments where it felt valuable
where you see Natalie Portman so actively taking part in

(46:14):
the continued exploitation of this story, the continued like her
whole job there is to focus on the abuser, which
is why I feel like it takes her a while
to get even develop an interest in Joe, and when
she does develop an interest in Joe, it's gross. She
goes to the pet store and tries to fantasize what

(46:34):
it was like for Gracie to sexually abuse him in
a pet store, and it's like framed as like this
is such a goofy thing that I'm doing. I don't
think the movie thinks she's right for doing that, And
I think it's like really gross to have to watch
someone so invested in exploiting this and then at the
end exploiting it badly on top of it. But it

(46:57):
still makes like all the same, not even like I mean,
it just like completely turns its head towards who was
abused and then who gets abused by extension where you
get moments with Georgie, but then you sort of get
it suggested like well but Georgie was kind of evil,
and you're like, well, I don't know, and I agree
with the kids where it's like everything you know about

(47:18):
the kids is for the most part in relation to
her and not him, you know that, like he seems
to be invested in being a really good father. I
do feel like, going back to your point, Kreen, like
if we're comparing Joe and the real life analog, really
who is of Samoan descent, that he's actively kind of

(47:42):
dumbed down a little bit. It seems like he's made
to seem more bumbling, less smart, more easily dismissed by
the narrative, and she's just like a bulldozer.

Speaker 4 (47:53):
It was, and he was wooden. He struck me as
quite Wooden like not anyway. Whatever, it's fine.

Speaker 2 (48:03):
Yeah, the performances are.

Speaker 4 (48:04):
Good here in Stall. It's fine. It's fine. It's whatever.
We have to move on. But that's literally what this
podcast is about. We don't have to move on.

Speaker 1 (48:14):
I mean, we can talk about till the Cows Come Home.
I mean. The movie's other agenda is to examine how
often something like child sex abuse gets sensationalized and mishandled
in media, especially you know, tabloids and Hollywood movies, which
is why that final scene plays out the way it does,

(48:37):
and why you see Natalie Portman's characters are pan out
the way it does, because at first, she seems, you know,
objective about this, as far as like, I'm conducting this research,
I'm talking to these people, I'm trying to understand how
they feel, why this happened, all of that stuff. But
then you see her start to engage in really gross behavior.

(49:01):
She manipulates Joe into a sexual relationship with her, much
like his abuser did when he was a child. Like
it's just I think that that's something this movie handles well.
Is like that examination of the mishandling of other Hollywood movies.
But as far as the way this movie's structured, I

(49:23):
feel like Natalie Portman's character coming in should just sort
of be a catalyst that gets Joe and their teen
kids to be thinking about this and interrogating it and
processing something that they've clearly never had a chance to process.

Speaker 2 (49:43):
Right, It's not even like you need to get rid
of the Natalie Portman character, because I mean, it's devastating
to see Joe once again put through the cycle of abuse,
and Natalie Portman is sort of like peacocky around like
she's a fucking journalist. She's not, and I think people
a trusting her as if she is, which is a
huge miss and I think that that's the mistake that

(50:04):
Joe makes, is he entrusts her as if she is
not just a journalist, but an ethical journalist, and she's neither.
She's on a show called Nora's Arc like she which
I do think is really funny every time I hear it.
But I think all three of us sort of agree
that the movie's mission versus what we would have wanted
focused on is different. But even going with what the

(50:26):
screenwriter chose to go, and why can't we see people
talking behind Natalie Portman's back. She is not God, She's
not even good at her job. I would have loved
like especially with the kids and her daughter Mary like that.
Maybe it is just like the dressing room scene that
is like so devastating, and like Mary, I wanted to

(50:47):
see more with all three of them, but with her specifically,
because it seems that of the three, she is going
through like coming to terms with who her mother is
for is who she's been conditioned to believe her mother
is still loving her mother, and working through that and

(51:09):
going through like the fact that Gracie's character is at
different points controlling and critical of all three of her
children's bodies. It's like, drink milk, you're not strong enough,
your arms look fat in that dress, and I gave
you a scale for graduation like she's I think in
a way that is very typical of like white boomer

(51:30):
women obsessive about like monitoring their children's weight. But Mary,
in particularly, it seems like she's going through so so much.
When she's about to leave this house, they're clearly worried
about what's going to happen to their dad once he's gone.
Why can't we see the kids talk to each other,
Like those are really really interesting conversations, and it makes

(51:51):
sense that, like the scene with Charlie and Joe and
the roof is really good and it's also clear and
just like remembering being a teenager with like a parrot
who is going through shit or is like emotionally fragile, Like,
those conversations with them are totally different than the ones
you have with your sibling where you're like, what the
fuck is going on? Like they know what's going on?

(52:14):
Why don't we get any insight? It feels like this
movie will only be as interested as Natalie Portman's character
is in anything that's happening, and that seems like a
huge missed opportunity.

Speaker 4 (52:24):
And if you had her be the lead, it's kind
of like the inconsistency. Okay, great, this is the framing
device of the movie. We're deciding that this is what
we're going with.

Speaker 2 (52:31):
Great.

Speaker 4 (52:32):
Is she a B movie actor that's like in a
bad thing that isn't good? Or is she like incredible
at delivering this monologue in an Oscar winning performance? Is
she you know, genuinely interested? Like there's like a little
bit of tonal like because Natalie is a pretty invested actor,
and that's a phenomenal monologue. She crushes the game on

(52:53):
that shit.

Speaker 2 (52:53):
So it's like, but then it's bad ten minutes later.

Speaker 4 (52:56):
Yeah, yeah, But then it's like, let her be amazing
at her job so that she can ask better questions
and we can learn more as an audience, do you
know what I mean? Like as opposed to being so surface,
I don't know what the solutions are because it's like,
in order for you to have the conversations with just
the siblings or whatever, then she's not around, do you
know what I mean? Like, there aren't a lot of
like third person omniscient. It's weird like sometimes it will

(53:18):
show you just the relationship between Juliane and Charles Melton,
but like but then it weirdly shifts into like third
person omniscient, like sometimes but it's mostly Natalie Portman. We're
looking at everything through every scene, so I don't think
it quite decided, if that makes sense. So that's the
only reason I'm saying, like, Okay, but from the lensing device,
like make an omniscient third and she's one of an

(53:39):
ensemble of characters, and then we can actually see a
little bit more like portraiture and it's.

Speaker 2 (53:44):
Like you don't even need to lose the focus that, Like,
it seems like another big mission of this movie is
to like, I don't like in a way that the
more I'm so glad we're talking about that, Like, the
more that we talk about it, the more it's like
it is frustrating that, Like Gracie is really obviously needing
to control the narrative around her life, and she's like,

(54:07):
I don't know about this movie, but clearly if she
can get Natalie Portman on her side, that is a
huge win for her in controlling this narrative. And she
wants to, you know, be like we are a normal family,
we are happy. Why would you portray us, you know otherwise.
But like there's a way to like even still center
how she is being controlling without giving the lens to

(54:31):
Natalie Portman. Then, like, even if you give it to
Julianne Moore, you still get a lot more insight into
what this family is. Like, I mean, you do get yeah,
like Karrian, You're right, you do get those moments where
you're back in the house and it does shift to
Joe in moments, But it's like only to an extent
and only really to the extent that it serves Gracie

(54:52):
or Elizabeth's story, not outside of that, except I think
the only real exception to that is the scene with
his son and the scene this father. Those are the
only two like moments we get to see Joe, and
then when he's texting his secret girlfriend and I'm like,
go to her, go to her whatever, go get the
butterfly girlfriend, get out of there.

Speaker 1 (55:12):
Yeah, but we also don't have any sense of how
Joe's father or Joe's son feels about this situation, except
like a tiny little glimpse where Charlie when they're on
the roof and he says just something like I can't
wait to leave home, implying this situation's fucked up. And
I had thought it was normal because that's all I knew.

(55:35):
But when I sat down and thought about it off screen,
maybe it's not great and I want to leave. But
we can only sort of speculate it what he's feeling.

Speaker 2 (55:44):
I also want to know, like why if we have
the older sister Honor who is out, and I think
she's like more empowered to be like this fucking sucks
now that she's out. She has like incredible freshman year
in college energy I really love her where she's just
like you guys fucking suck like and she's right or
her mom fucking sucks and she treats her as such.

(56:06):
But it's like, does Honor talk to her half siblings?
Like is that something that is? It doesn't seem like that,
but we don't know for sure. It seems like in
my mind, why wouldn't once you're out of that house,
why wouldn't you want to go talk to your half
siblings and sort of have some validation of how fucked
it is to have to be in Gracie's life at all,

(56:30):
much less be her child. Like there, I don't know,
there's a million relationships that you can explore, but it
just more focused on like the bubble that is carefully
built around Gracie to protect her, and that mission has
made clear super early because it's like Kaitlyne, what you
were saying with the neighbor being like be nice to her.
We know that the lawyer's wife buys a million pineapple

(56:51):
upside diame cakes from her to make her feel like
she is liked. No one is worrying about Joe. Joe
is a critical component to preserving Gracie's reality. And that's
I mean, I think that that like does reflect real
life dynamics that happened, but like get more into it.

Speaker 4 (57:13):
It's also like you can show how controlling somebody is
by all the people around them who talk about them
behind their back. It's all those conversations around somebody that
you can be like, oh, this is the way that
they're manipulative, because then you can watch their behavior but
then see how that plays in contrast, even down to
like that dinner table conversation when the teenager like stomps
upstairs and he doesn't have the milk something. It's like

(57:36):
if Julianne Moore was just like teenagers, you know, teenagers,
you can't control them, do you know what I mean?
And it's like but really though, because you fucked one,
you know. So it's like the kind of like if
you could even just twist the knife a little bit
deeper into like having the character have to confront some
of what she did because of the presence of Natalie

(57:59):
Portman and the questioning that would come up as a
result of this person. Because even that Ozzie interviewer in
that interview does more of it than this film does
in my opinion. You know, he was like, Mary, you
were wrong. Mary, come on, you were wrong, Mary, Mary,
come on, come on, Mary right? And Mary, he was
a child, Mary, you know what I mean?

Speaker 2 (58:17):
Like, and then Villie is also sitting right next to
her being like I was a child. Like it's if
you're listening to this episode, you haven't seen that interview.
It's brutal, but it is important to and I haven't seen,
like I find it really frustrating. So when I went
to the SAG screen, I was really confused and bothered,

(58:38):
especially having seen so many movies like this how everyone
but also Julianne more specifically, and I love Julianne where
but she will not call this character a child sex
abuser or an abuser at all, Like it was really
And at first I was like, maybe this was a
weird interview, Like I don't know, it felt off to

(58:59):
me because first of all, the name Mary kay Laturno
or really fill out did not come up in this
forty five minute discussion they had, which is already like
I was like, is there like a life right's evasiveness?
But then I was like, no, she's dead, Like why
could we not acknowledge the very very clear source material
here that which has been consistent in their press tour

(59:20):
are then julian more specifically, like this is pulling from
a Todd Fields right.

Speaker 1 (59:27):
Todd Haynes is the director of not Todd Tar Todd Haynes.

Speaker 4 (59:33):
Towar Todd's toward Tod's hard to keep them straight.

Speaker 2 (59:35):
I like his work, but I can't remember it. Sorry,
Sorry to Todd Haynes. Okay, this is an interview he
did with Sit and Sound where he's describing what my
recollection of that Q and A was. So he says, quote,
I already mentioned how I was not ready to think
about certain aspects of the Mary kay Laturno story. But
Julianne had a very strong idea that this woman wasn't

(59:56):
a pedophile, that she had a princess syndrome, an intense
kne to be rescued by a young, virile man. It's
like the myth of the young knight, who, with his
sheer virility and stunning youth, will save you the damsel
in distress. This enabled both parties to deny the age difference,
because the power could shift back into his sure hands
or whatever. And I did want those lines in the

(01:00:16):
final bedroom scene, who's the boss and who is in charge?
Who is in charge? To suggest the myths that they
live under. This movie was just so full of extremes
and exceptions and tabloid excess. It's also about people who
refuse to look at themselves and the choices they make,
which we all do, and I knew I also was
doing unquote, so.

Speaker 1 (01:00:36):
I like, wait, so Todd Haynes is saying that Julianne
Moore refused to acknowledge that Mary Kayla Turno was a
sex criminal and a rapist. Is that what I'm gathering,
I'm not.

Speaker 2 (01:00:50):
Totally clear, and I don't want it, Like that's a
huge thing to level against someone. Yeah, it sounds like
at least in her process to prepare for this character,
she was like, well, Gracie doesn't think that she's a pedophile,
So I as an actor cannot just.

Speaker 1 (01:01:06):
Like a going method kind of like I have to
get into this character psyche.

Speaker 2 (01:01:11):
And it sounds like that, but it's also like, I mean,
I don't know, and then at this point I'm reviewing
some interviews I watch, but still it's just like it
is weird to me that she's not playing the part anymore?
Why can't you comment on this part, like, if you
have to put yourself in a fucked up heads place
to play a character to some extent, that's the job,
that's how a lot of people do it. But you

(01:01:32):
filmed this a year ago. Why can't you not like
acknowledge who you were clearly basing your performance on. Because
there was a lot of talk about the creative choice
of the list, but that also comes from Mary Bayla Turnal,
so like acknowledge, Like, I mean whatever, I just think
it's a very confusing choice to not acknowledge. To continue

(01:01:53):
in the press tour, be like, well, I have to
honor this character. You're like, no, you don't. Your character
is a sex abuser. They went to.

Speaker 1 (01:02:01):
Jail, especially because that's in direct conflict and contrast to
what this movie's trying to say, which is, look how
fucked up Hollywood mishandles and how it sensationalizes child sex
abuse in movies about that, Like.

Speaker 2 (01:02:17):
It was really the only person and I'm blood so
like the screenwriter Sammy Birch is like, yeah, I remembered,
like as I think Sammy Burch is like in her
late thirties and like remembered basically being the age of
Villy Fulau when the story happened, Like has talked about
that at length, but every other major creative player like

(01:02:38):
will not go there. And I just think it's weird.
I don't get it because, yeah, like you're saying, celet
that feels like it plays into the tropes around these movies,
because I feel like with these movies, the content of
them and the way that they're discussed in public is
like almost equally important. I know that Todd Haynes can't

(01:03:01):
control the way his movie has discussed or received, but
it's just as significant. That's also kind of what the
movie is about. So I just think it is. I
just it's been on my mind for weeks. Thank you
for listening to my Ted talk at Why won't Julianne
you're Todd Todd, My Todd talk Tod Ted talk. Why
won't Todd make her talk about this? Why want Tod

(01:03:22):
tell her to talk about it?

Speaker 4 (01:03:24):
Do you remember Jamie that did you? Were you able
to find the name of that other movie on HBO
that some other very good actor played.

Speaker 2 (01:03:31):
Unfortunately, there are so many movies about child sex abuse
on HBO. I can't find the one that I'm because
I know it came out in twenty twenty or twenty
twenty one.

Speaker 4 (01:03:40):
I wish I could tell you. I might be able
to find it for you later.

Speaker 2 (01:03:42):
But it's it was really good.

Speaker 4 (01:03:46):
I just remember watching that. I love the feeling when
I watch something a feeling illuminated. I just love the
feeling of feeling like I understood someone else's experience that's
so different than mine, and you take me into the
lens of like their erience, even if it's not my experience,
Like that's kind of to me the magic of the
storytelling in the filmmaking. And I just remember that that

(01:04:06):
film that I cannot remember the name of. Clearly I'm
terrible with names.

Speaker 1 (01:04:10):
I don't even remember this coming out.

Speaker 4 (01:04:12):
It was nominated for an Emmy, Was it okay?

Speaker 2 (01:04:14):
I don't think I knew a lot of people that
watched it. I mean, but it's a really hard movie
to watch.

Speaker 4 (01:04:18):
Yeah, it was a hard movie to watch for sure.
The Tale, The Tale, The Tale, The Tale.

Speaker 2 (01:04:23):
I totally agree with you, Karen, like it really puts
in perspective over the course of a couple of hours,
just like what a difficult experience that is to like
untangle in your head even well into your adulthood, which
is what Joe is going through. And the movie only
shows you the very very beginning of him and like

(01:04:43):
leaves him in this interesting place too, where he doesn't
want to sit next to the family at graduation, but
he's still so proud of his kids, and you're just like,
please just get in the car and never go back, please.

Speaker 1 (01:04:54):
And take your kids with you, like get them out
of there. Well they're out, that's the thing.

Speaker 4 (01:04:59):
Well, yeah, yeah, I'm just reading this is Wikipedia. The
Tales are twenty eighteen American drama thal written and directed
by Jennifer Fox, starring Laura Dern. It tells the story
about Fox's own childhood sexual abuse and her coming to
terms with it later in life. So I think it
was probably because it was her personal story that it
was like, oh wow, that was a film where I

(01:05:20):
kind of watched something and I was like, damn, Like
I watched someone go on a journey and learn how
they saw something and then how they learned what something
else was in a way that I don't know was
just like wildly elegant. It was a hard movie to
watch and not a lot of people watched it, you know,
and maybe that's part of it, do you know what
I mean, Like, maybe it's all of this is also

(01:05:42):
like a game of marketing and distribution and like who
gets eyeballs for whatever reason, et cetera. You know, But
that I do think, in contrast to May December, is
like an interesting counterpoint, just I think specifically because it
centers the victim.

Speaker 2 (01:05:57):
It's like and we both liked it and didn't remember
the name because no one talks about it anymore. It's
that sort of terrible. The book that I wanted to
recommend that sort of deals with the same perspective is
called My Dark Vanessa came out in twenty nineteen twenty
twenty by Kate Elizabeth Russell, based on experiences from her childhood.
But it's basically about it's told in flashbacks and in

(01:06:20):
the present, where it's about an adult woman coming to
terms with the fact that she was groomed and sexually
abused by her teacher and did not believe that to
be true until she's I think the characters in her
mid thirties when she starts to deal with it, and
it's I mean, it's brutal, but it feels like both
of those projects are doing what you would want and

(01:06:44):
what I think should be more common. And this isn't
a problem specific to May December, but it does feel
like in a movie that is trying to comment on
how these stories are told, It's gross to say, but
I do think it is more marked to center the
abuser and the stories that are not centered on the

(01:07:05):
abuser do not tend to get this same promotional push.
Because it reminded me, Okay, this is like me being
a broken record, but it reminded me of doubt Go
with Me Here, which is a movie that is also
about child sex abuse, but that there is this mystery
about the way that that movie is made of, like
did he do it? That feels completely beside the point

(01:07:28):
of like, yes, he obviously did it. Why can't we
center the family more? Why is Viola Davis only a
one scene? Why do we barely see the child all
that stuff? And it feels like, because of the way
that this movie is framed, the movie ends on this
weird cliffhanger, like where Julia Moore is just saying shit
at this point and then you're like, oh, what is

(01:07:50):
her deal? And you're like I don't think that should
be the central question of this movie, Like I, I
don't know.

Speaker 4 (01:07:56):
So here's a controversial point. It's like in an industry
with notoriously so many high powered groomers and sex abusers,
like I mean, because the thing that's interesting to me
about the tale that we both don't remember is it's
also centered on an adult, like it is. It's actually
I can understand why it would be difficult to watch
a child, but it's interesting that it's another like very

(01:08:19):
prominent like Oscar nominated, brilliant kind of I think caliber
of like Julian Moore, Natalie Portman like kind of actor.
It's a great cast, it's beautifully done. Why didn't it
get the same push? Why didn't that get the theatrical
We don't know. We don't know what the story is there,
but there's something. And again this is not the conspiracy
theorist in me, but it's like, is it a cultural

(01:08:40):
thing where it's like the audience isn't down or is
it like a is it like a gatekeeper thing as
to what stories we think are like what somebody in
top position decides to put their push behind good question
whether that's conscious or subconscious, not even that it's like
some conspiracy theory and citious thing. But I do think

(01:09:01):
it's hilarious that we live in a post Harvey Weinstein world,
a post Les Moonvez world, running CBS for years and
then getting out on million dollar deals, and it's just
like people failing upwards after they're like grooming and sexual
abuse habits, like even in this business to this day,
it's like and then we're surprised that, like the stories

(01:09:22):
that get centered in this business are the ones that
like center the abuser and the mystery around them. Like
is it that surprising?

Speaker 1 (01:09:30):
Right? It's the same way that our cultures obsessed with
like true crime from a ooh the serial killer standpoint,
like ooh, the perpetrators of these crimes, let's learn all
about them and how did they get to where they
are and blah blah blah, whereas we rarely remember who
the victims were, and we don't talk about them and

(01:09:53):
we don't remember their names. I don't know. There's just
something about our current cultural climate that we are, for
some reason able to more easily stomach learning about and
hearing stories about criminals and perpetuators. Are these horrible things that.

Speaker 2 (01:10:13):
I don't even think that it's our current cultural climate. I
just feel like it's just like a stagnant Yeah, it's
gone on forever. I don't know. I mean, like, what
seems abundantly clear is that the stories that are told,
it's very in line with the stories we see pop
off and get really pushed in media. The only reason
this movie exists is because the Mary kay La Turno
story was treated in the way that it was, to

(01:10:35):
the extent that a writer felt, thirty years later the
need to comment on it because the coverage affected her
so strongly. But the coverage did not take an interest
in Billy and mischaracterize it as an affair, which is
like what this movie is attempting to grapple with. But
it's like you're just like caught in this fucking feedback

(01:10:56):
loop of commenting on how poorly it's talked about. And
I hope that like this movie being well regarded. I
don't feel optimistic about it, honestly, but that this movie
being generally well reviewed, well thought of, will at least
indicate that there is an interest in confronting these kinds
of stories, hopefully centering the right people, the people who

(01:11:20):
are being victimized and who are surviving on long periods
of time having experienced this abuse. I also think that
like this, I mean, who knows how you characterize this movie.
It like it is objectively weird to be like this
is a comedy. It's not, But there are moments of
weirdness and moments of levity in it that I thought, Like, again,

(01:11:45):
if there is a movie about survivor of child sex abuse,
it doesn't need to be tragedy porn, even if they
are going through something really difficult, Like, you can have
moments of levity. You can have moments of like be
a person and experiencing day to day shit and weird
stuff in your life while grappling with this. If the

(01:12:09):
concern is like it's going to be too depressing, yeah,
it's going to be really difficult to talk about.

Speaker 4 (01:12:14):
But it's like, I.

Speaker 1 (01:12:15):
Mean, think how many stand up specials are about a
comics trauma in some way?

Speaker 2 (01:12:21):
Yeah, Like it's possible to have levity to these stories
and center survivors as opposed to the perpetrators of it.
But I don't know. And also the two stories we're
talking about, the Tale and My Dark Vanessa, while like
closer to what we're wanting to see in storytelling are
centered around young white women, and like, you don't see

(01:12:44):
stories like the fictional character of Joe or the real
life person really fulau dealt with in anything that gets produced.
So the fact that the tale comes out and not
many people get to see it is like, it's just
I don't know, it's really discouraging.

Speaker 4 (01:13:03):
Yeah, I will say that when you brought up Caitlin
the like why is our culture fascinated with the murderers,
It's like because I've never really been that interested in that.
But when I hear other people talk about it, the
thing that I've heard them say, which I thought was interesting,
is like it's so far from my life, do you
know what I mean? Or like my life is calm.
I want my life to be calm. So there's like
a voyeuristic element of like an escapist voyeuristic element of

(01:13:27):
like let me see how like dark and weird other
people's like fucked up lives are. Because then I go
back to my life and it's like my kids and
my family and I like feel good. Or it's like
I've heard the same reason that people like reality television.
I just love the drama because I don't like it
in my life. So this is like an outlet, kind
of like the way that sports is an outlet for war,

(01:13:47):
you know what I mean. Like it's like a way
to be competitive in like a war sense. I mean
that's not the way I see it personally, but I
think that there's an interesting take of Like the other
question is what do you want from your media? You know,
and how much space do we have in a market
place and in this attention economy? Like who gets the attention?
To that end, I hope you have millions of listeners
because otherwise I'm going to be devastated.

Speaker 1 (01:14:10):
We have billions.

Speaker 4 (01:14:11):
Wow, Okay, great Zuckerberg numbers. I love that.

Speaker 1 (01:14:15):
Yeah, our Patreon is eleven billion people and we don't
there are not even that many people on the planet. Yeah,
but we have alien listeners from other solar systems.

Speaker 4 (01:14:25):
Oh that's so chic.

Speaker 1 (01:14:26):
Yeaeah, pretty cool.

Speaker 2 (01:14:28):
It's a new pilot program that Patreon's doing. We've had
a lot of luck with it.

Speaker 1 (01:14:32):
Just yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:14:33):
I mean reaching out to new markets is really the move.

Speaker 3 (01:14:36):
Yea.

Speaker 1 (01:14:37):
Our reach is far and wide, epernomical.

Speaker 2 (01:14:40):
It's terrifying.

Speaker 4 (01:14:41):
What I do think is very funny about the movie though,
is like I can't think of that many movies that
have like, oh, like I kind of watch it was
like okay, And then as time went on, I was like,
why is this bothering me? I think that's the reason
I picked it as the one to talk about was
I was like, it took me a while to figure
it out because there's enough skill in the way that

(01:15:02):
it's done.

Speaker 1 (01:15:03):
Yeah, because it does have something to say that is valuable.

Speaker 2 (01:15:07):
Yeah, It's like I don't think it's a bad movie.
It's just like not as subversive as it's presenting itself.
I think it's right.

Speaker 4 (01:15:14):
Yeah, And in a weird way, it's like the insidious
nature of the way that like the things that were
wrong with it crept up on me. It's like weirdly
reflective of like the insidious nature of the entire story,
do you know what I mean, Like about abuse and
all of the other Like that's why I thought maybe
it would be like a kind of a rich discussion
because everyone has a very specific take, and I guess

(01:15:36):
you could argue that that's also good storytelling.

Speaker 1 (01:15:41):
I mean, it also makes you ponder this movie not
being that subversive because of who it centers, which is
privileged white women. Like consider if the Mary kay Laturno
or like, you know, a woman who abused a young
boy was a woman of color, that story probably would

(01:16:04):
have not gotten nearly the same media coverage that the
Mary Kayla turnout case Scott or it would.

Speaker 2 (01:16:09):
Have been treated tremendously differently.

Speaker 1 (01:16:11):
Yeah, because of the way that like, white women doing
bad things get so sensationalized in media, and then this
movie is just kind of like perpetuating that same thing
of like, well, yeah, we're focusing on the two white
women of this story versus the survivor of the abuse,

(01:16:31):
who is a person of color, and we're barely going
to focus on him.

Speaker 4 (01:16:37):
So yeah, and that's all a function of the fact
that this movie was on the Blacklist and Natalie Portman
took an interest in it, probably because she played that
rolling lee on the professional you know, back in the day.

Speaker 2 (01:16:48):
So we're about like for yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:16:49):
Yeah, exactly, And so she took an interest in it,
and she's famous enough to take it to her friend
Todd Haynes and like, and then he's famous enough to
know Julian Moore and those people are able to get
this story made because those people have, like from a
financier's perspective, it's enough like Cloud that it makes the

(01:17:11):
financial investment of the film worth it. So there's like
also these weird mechanisms where it's almost built in, do
you know what I mean, Like it's like if it
wasn't a prominent like, how many prominent black actors are
there who could do that? How many prominent POC actors
are there that have that level.

Speaker 1 (01:17:28):
Of cloud institutional support?

Speaker 4 (01:17:30):
Yeah, the institutional support where the name and the attachment
is like, Okay, we're going to take this first time
screenwriter's movie and get it made kind of thing, right,
you know what I mean? Like that's I think that
there's also like a bias or a skew, just in
terms of that's a vestige of like you said, culture
begets culture to an extent, right.

Speaker 2 (01:17:47):
Yeah, right, And then like going off that and again
I'm presenting it as a hypothetical because I don't know
because the way that this movie has been discussed it has
been so bizarre to me, like because of the sort
of sequence of this script getting handed from person to
person to person in the way you're describing, was it
ever handed to anyone who would have had the foresight

(01:18:12):
to be like, hey, where's Joe for this section? Or
just like asking the questions because Charles Melton is the
least famous lead actor, how empowered do you really feel?
How included in the conversation do you feel? I don't know,
but it doesn't seem like at least because I know
that Todd Haynes worked with Sammy Birch to revise this

(01:18:33):
script before he directed it. But it's like there was
clearly no one in the room. If these conversations did happen,
I'd be curious what took place, because it's like, I
feel like you should be tracking Joe in scene to
scene and like finding points in the movie where you're like, okay,
if we're not going there with him, why, Like what

(01:18:54):
is the narrative function of excluding him at this point
in the narrative? What is the new and a function
of not sharing this? Like is this I don't know?
And again it's just like I think the core frustration
is they wanted to tell a story that we don't
think it is as relevant or interesting.

Speaker 4 (01:19:10):
Which is arts Like you know, it's like I've always
heard when you give notes on a movie give notes
on the movie you watch, not the movie you would
have made. So we have not done that in this podcast.

Speaker 2 (01:19:24):
Todd Haynes didn't ask us for notes. So we talk
our shit.

Speaker 4 (01:19:28):
Yeah, yeah, we can talk our shit all we want.
But that's the kind of It's like you said, it's
not the story they wanted to tell. And I think
maybe this is too cynical to say, but also maybe
they just didn't care. You know. I think the one
thing we don't talk about enough is like a lot
of times the people in the room just don't care.
I think they don't care. I just don't think they care.

(01:19:49):
It's not that you don't know. It's not that you
haven't read the articles. Is that the person in the
room has to give a fus shit, And it's a
much easier position to pretend you give a fuck or
to say that you It's exactly the duality you're describing
with Mary. You know, it's like it's much easier to
pretend to be a person who can who gives a fuck,

(01:20:10):
than to truly face yourself and see the hypocrisy of actually, no,
he just wasn't that important to me, and anything that
was confronting and pointed out that it was important to
me was something I didn't want to listen to, and
that wasn't given space in that room period. Like not
in a mean way, but just in a like you know.

Speaker 2 (01:20:28):
And in like the cynical Hollywood way. It's clear that
this movie once it was cast, they're like, well, regardless
of whether these are the most interesting characters, this is
what we're gonna give everything to because we got Natalie
Portman and Julianne Moore and no one in this movie.
Even though I think that there are performances I don't
love this Natalie Apartment performance, to be honest, Like, there

(01:20:50):
are performances that I think exceed and characters that are
more relevant to the story. But they're like, well, we
got to keep the famous person on because otherwise Netflix
executives people turn it off if Natalie Portman's not on.
Who gives a shit if this character is you know,
the story or not? Who knows. I know that those

(01:21:10):
processes are so, but it's like, I, cynically, I do
believe that that is sort of why characters get focused
on that are not as important, and like, oh, for sure,
I don't know.

Speaker 4 (01:21:22):
I think the thing about it that, Like, I think
for the longest time, I thought, Oh, people just don't know.
And then the longer I've spent I was like, oh, no,
they don't care.

Speaker 1 (01:21:31):
They don't they don't want to be bothered.

Speaker 2 (01:21:32):
Oh they don't care.

Speaker 4 (01:21:34):
And to understand that, you're like, Okay, then this is
a whole different thing, and maybe that's. Yeah, it's hard.
It's hard to confront any of our own whatever it is,
do you know what I mean? Like I try to
remind myself that I'm like, you know, those iPhones are
made with like chips that are kind of like ruining countries,

(01:21:56):
and I still have an iPhone. I try to remember
my own hypocrisy even if I'm not faced with that hypocrisy,
and how easy it is to kind of turn away
and say I don't want to deal with this because
like I need my iPhone because of X Y or Z,
even though I know that where that chip is coming
from is actively making the world and other people's lives worse,
you know what I mean. Like it's like hard to

(01:22:16):
confront all of your own versions of hypocrisy. So like
I try to remember that as a human being and
like have empathy for that position too. You know, but
I haven't been able to like kind of reconcile the
understanding of like preaching one thing public facing and then
the like apathy. Yeah yeah, but the actually I'm just

(01:22:39):
like just I wish people would just say, yeah, we
didn't care, because it's like, let me know where you stand.
It's kind of like the thing where it's like I'd
rather just hear, yeah, I'm racist than have somebody pretend
that they care and then like, actually there's all this
like insidious shit going on behind the scenes. I'm like,
at least I can respect.

Speaker 2 (01:22:55):
Your position that you're aware.

Speaker 4 (01:22:57):
I respect your take like it sucks and I don't
agree with you, but like, at least you have this
self awareness to be like this, who I am, bitch,
you know what I mean, like, and you stand by
and with that. But we don't live in that world.
And I think that's why I've never really been a
fan of Earth.

Speaker 1 (01:23:16):
And that's why we have so many Intergalactic listeners.

Speaker 4 (01:23:22):
That Patreon.

Speaker 2 (01:23:24):
It's so frustrating, and like goes back to what your
point is is. I feel like there are elements of
this movie that are trying to make that point while
doing the same thing where it's like Bracie is a
character who is aware of what the truth of the
situation is but would never admit it, and she is
made out to be kind of the villain of the story,

(01:23:48):
when it's like this movie wouldn't have been produced and
that character wouldn't exist if these same systems weren't already
in You know, we certainly do live in this society
tone we Does anyone else have any thoughts on this
movie they'd like to share.

Speaker 4 (01:24:04):
I was just gonna say, that's why we do comedy,
because it feels like the only thing left to do
is laugh a lot at the times, you know, I
feel like the only thing left to do is laugh
and listen. The other thing that's great is that you
guys do this podcast and you have this space to
speak about it, Like I wouldn't have said it half
the fucking shit I said on this podcast in most places,

(01:24:24):
And honestly, when we get off this call, I'll probably
ask you to delete most of it.

Speaker 1 (01:24:32):
No, what you've contributed here today is very valuable.

Speaker 4 (01:24:35):
And please don't put these opinions out there.

Speaker 2 (01:24:39):
Sorry, this was all between us.

Speaker 1 (01:24:41):
Yeah, it's just like a private, private comedy.

Speaker 2 (01:24:44):
We're just for curious.

Speaker 4 (01:24:45):
Ye, cool cool cool cool cool, But.

Speaker 2 (01:24:47):
No, I mean, it's like this conversation was tremendously helpful
for me to, yeah, just to like tease out, like
what is working about this? What is it? And why
is that? I feel like I hadn't gotten deep enough
into that and why is that? And for a movie
that just came out, that's a super valuable discussion for
us to have.

Speaker 4 (01:25:05):
And it's also interesting to see how much movies are,
Like the one cool thing about a movie that's coming
out right now is movies are, to an extent a
reflection of the moment we're in, the cultural moment we're in.
And so it's like sometimes if you can ask why
is that, you also start to understand the society around
you a little bit better. You know, the society you

(01:25:26):
live in, and why you know the way that maybe
some of the choices in that movie were reflective of
some of the systems in place, you know, that would
make that be the movie that was told, which has
its own value and merit, And like, you know, it's
also like we all understand that this is a bunch
of like well meaning artists, I'm sure for the most part,
who are like trying to make something good and that's

(01:25:46):
always hard, and you get the money where you can
and you fucking run with it. I'm sure all of
those people have like ten things they are trying to
get made that can't get made. You know, when you
listen to like Martin scor says, he's whatever his stories about,
like spending thirty years trying to make I don't know
that movie with those old people in it, you know.

Speaker 1 (01:26:06):
Yeah, I mean this feels like a stepping stone movie
where it's like cutting in a more right direction but
still missing the mark in some regards. But it'll open
the doors to other movies and other stories down the
road that do more meaningfully explore the things that are

(01:26:27):
lacking in this movie, So we'll see.

Speaker 2 (01:26:29):
I hope that we live in a world where a
big director not just has the interest but also the
like institutional support to tell the story of a Joe
as opposed to intentionally or not. This movie like accomplishes
further turning Mary Kayla Turno into this American character that

(01:26:55):
is still with us, and it's like, come on, guys,
I can't like.

Speaker 1 (01:27:02):
Yeah, we need a new Todd to make a different movie.

Speaker 2 (01:27:05):
But I don't incurred that was more Todds.

Speaker 4 (01:27:08):
That's what we did, all right, More Todds is definitely
the conclusion of this podcast, and I think we've all
decided more Todds.

Speaker 1 (01:27:18):
Okay, so this is a future Caitlin and Jamie popping back.

Speaker 2 (01:27:21):
In as promised. Yes, we're recording this pick up on Wednesday,
January tenth, if there are more updates. Unfortunately, this is
why we don't usually cover movies that just came out. However,
we did want to just sort of touch on a
few things first. I guess, having had a week to

(01:27:43):
sit with the discussion we did in this episode, I
feel like it was a lot of talk about what
we would have liked versus what we got, and I've
been struggling with I've been sitting with this conversation, which
I'm so glad we had because it was so challenging
and so like, I don't know, I guess I just
wanted to add that as much as I think it

(01:28:05):
is like clear that it's not necessarily for the good
of all for there to be this bevy of movies
that ask you to try to understand the abuser, I
feel like I might have oversimplified how I approach that.
I don't think that that is a useless thing to
attempt within a film. I don't think it's necessarily the

(01:28:26):
most important thing. But I was thinking about it just
from the perspective of how I've heard a lot of
survivors of abuse talk about, not this movie specifically, but
movies that tackle these themes. Where as a culture, how
do we prevent abuse if we don't understand it? And sure, so,

(01:28:47):
I just like wanted to add that as an addition
to what we spoke about. I don't think it resolves
a lot of the issues that we had to this movie,
but I don't think that that is like a completely
cynical and terrible thing to attempt.

Speaker 1 (01:29:02):
No, And I don't think we explicitly said that. It's
more just like, why does the focus always tend to
be off the perpetrator and very rarely on anyone else involved.

Speaker 2 (01:29:14):
So the other thing that we need to talk about
is the fact that we obviously discussed the many parallels
that the story of Made December shares with Mary Kay
Laturno and Billy Fulau. Since we recorded that the Golden
Globes have happened, Natalie Portman, Charles Melton and Julianne Moore
were nominated, so there's a lot of interviews that took

(01:29:34):
place in the week leading up to it. Villy Fulau
actually did watch and release a statement about this, so
I just wanted to share what that was quickly. I
think it's very pointed. And then also Julianne Moore and
Natalie Portman have since reacted to that. So this was
originally in an interview done with the Hollywood Reporter. You know,

(01:29:55):
long story short, no surprise here. He does not like
the movie and offers clear reasoning why. He says, quote,
I'm still alive and well, if they had reached out
to me, we could have worked together on a masterpiece. Instead,
they chose to do a rip off of my original story.
I'm offended by the entire project and the lack of
respect given to me who lived through a real story

(01:30:17):
and is still living it unquote, and so I think
I mean that unfortunately connects to the discussion we were
having about the fact that the more time that passes,
I find it incredibly evasive and dishonest that the filmmakers
are not acknowledging the parts of this movie. I understand
that it is not one hundred percent biographical. It couldn't

(01:30:39):
be because they didn't reach out to him, right, But
I just think that it's like, for a movie that
seems to want to make a point about the exploitation
of survivors and of the media cycle, this press tour
from May December does not feel challenging of that at all.
It's extremely evasive. Every single response that you see as that, well,

(01:31:00):
it's not based on that. But meanwhile, the climax of
the movie features direct polls from Mary kay Laturno. Julian
More discussed watching documentaries about this case. I find it
really frustrating. His quote continues quote. I love movies, good movies,
and I admire ones that capture the essence and complications
of real life events, you know, movies that allow you
to see or realize something new every time you watch them.

(01:31:23):
Those kinds of writers and directors. Someone who can do
that would be perfect to work with, because my story
is not nearly as simple as this movie portrays. Unquote.
So here like again, I feel like I understand just whatever,
having seen biopics, the limitations of writing a biopic, how

(01:31:43):
you are behold into a lot of things that often
produce a frustrating movie. If that is the case, this movie,
I don't think like has a case for being transformatively
different enough from like change more details, is what I'm saying.
If you don't want to feel beholden to this real
life survivor of abuse, who a lot of his biography

(01:32:06):
was completely glazed over, Like you can't just change his
race and make him less smart and be like transformative.
And I was seeing a lot of like back and
forth on Twitter that generally fell on the side of
the movie. I just found it frustrating. What I found
really frustrating was the actor's response is to this. I

(01:32:29):
know that I reference the SAG screening that i'd been
to Yeah brag, oh okay, where it was my first
sort of encounter with like this press tour feels weird
to me that continued. So to be fair, these actors
are being confronted on a red carpet, so it's not

(01:32:49):
like they've had time to put their thoughts together about
the reaction. It appears that both actors did not. This
is what we're talking about. Julian Moore Natalie Portman was
not able to find a Charles Melton reaction, which is
what I'm most interested in, But what right? In any case,
I do think Charles Milton was robbed for the Golden Globe,
But in any case, Yeah, So it seems like Julian

(01:33:10):
Moore and Nadelie Portman are learning this for the first
time on the Red Carpet, So take that into consideration
with these quotes. Sure, but Julian Moore says, ah, I'm
very sorry that he feels that way. I mean, Todd
was always very clear when we were working on this
movie that this was an original story. This was a
story about these characters. So that's how we looked at

(01:33:31):
it too. This was our document. We created these characters
from the page and together quote, I just think this
is not true. This is demonstrably untrue. I just listened
because why am I mad at Julianne Moore. That's not
something I want for myself. But that's like not accurate.

Speaker 1 (01:33:47):
It's just false because there are several interviews that happened
much earlier that I'm pretty sure Julianne was present for.
And even if she wasn't, she I feel like would
have been privy to this information. Where screenwriter Sammy Birch
specifically referenced the Mary kay Laterno case as being an
inspiration and then like, right, you know, Julian Moore and

(01:34:08):
Natalie Portman have both admitted this story was an inspiration
but not meant to be a depiction of these real
life people. It's just an inspiration.

Speaker 2 (01:34:19):
But it just ends up feeling like in this situation,
I'm most inclined to empathize with Sammy Birch, who has
been the most forthcoming. It's her first screenplay. Like, but
I just I just find this to be incredibly dishonest
because she mentioned having watched a lot of merycula, and
I do believe that she did. She look at other

(01:34:40):
cultural figures. Sure, I guess it is like it presents
the question of like, I don't think we've ever talked
about it in this context, but like what determines commentary
that is transformative? Yeah, for me, this doesn't clear the bar.
It feels like and again, we talked about it this movie.
I liked a lot of what it had to say,

(01:35:01):
what it was trying to, like the messages it was
trying to explore it. We've talked about that for two
hours at this point, Right, but like it it doesn't
clear Okay, Julian Moore continues to say, it was a
very challenging part. She's somebody who has transgressed in a
major way again evasive language, and I think in order
to justify what she's done, she sort of tells a

(01:35:22):
story about her life. There's a lot of I don't know,
it's interesting, you know, Natalie's character comes in and these
two women are in a struggle for narrative dominance. Who
gets to tell this story, Who's right, who's wrong? Unquote. Okay,
fair point, but I feel like the reaction to VILLI fulaus.
It's just doing the thing again. I find it so
cutly Natalie Portman reacted like this quote. I'm so sorry

(01:35:46):
to hear that. It's not based on them. It's you know,
obviously their story influenced the culture that we all grew
up in and influenced the idea, but it's fictional characters
that are really brought to life by Julian Moore and
Charles Melton so beautifully, and yet it's its own story.
It's not meant to be a biopic unquote. I find
I don't know. The more I sit with this, I

(01:36:08):
know that everyone, I mean, I can see because there's
like critics and friends that I respect and take their
opinion in stride, But I just like it feels like
this press tour is getting away with something that it
just really doesn't sit well with me.

Speaker 1 (01:36:25):
That in getting away with something that the movie seems
to be critical of, which is how the media handles
these types of cases.

Speaker 2 (01:36:34):
Yeah, I think both of these sort of stories, the
villifulau reaction and then the subsequent reaction. I haven't seen
a lot of coverage about it. I've seen repeated and
justified praises of Charles Milton's performance. I've seen a lot
like there are a few May December press narratives that
have really endured, you know, in the months since it's
come out. It feels yucky to me.

Speaker 4 (01:37:00):
Mhmm.

Speaker 2 (01:37:00):
And that's future Jamie and Kate.

Speaker 1 (01:37:04):
Yes, and now we dismount and return.

Speaker 2 (01:37:08):
To the PA. All right, this movie does pass the
Backfeld test. It does. It simply does. Yeah, And that's
not necessarily super relevant to the conversation that we've had,
but true, we always say at the end of the

(01:37:28):
episode whether it does, and it does, and I think
that's all I really have to say about it.

Speaker 1 (01:37:34):
I agree, let's move on though to our nipple scale,
our scale of zero to five nipples, where we rate
the movie examining it through an intersectional feminist lens, and
I do appreciate the things that this movie is attempting
to say about the topic of child sex abuse and

(01:37:56):
how it's difficult for people to andate, especially if it
has been very normalized for you, which for a lot
of people it has because of this rape culture we
live in, and because of the unchallenged sexualization of underage
people that exist to this day and has existed for

(01:38:20):
all of time, that has been normalized, unfortunately, and the
movies commenting on that, it is commenting on as a
byproduct of that, how media and Hollywood sensationalize stories where
child sex abuse has happened. And yet it doesn't, you know,

(01:38:41):
hit the mark all the way because it's still I think,
you know, we all agree here that it focuses on
the wrong people. We would have liked to see more
about Joe's point of view, the kid's point of view,
how they are processing this, how they're dealing with this,
all of that stuff. So because of that, I think

(01:39:03):
I'm only gonna give it. I'll give it three nipples.
For what it's trying to do but also what it's
failing to do. And I will give them two. I'll
give one to Charles Melton, I will give one to
real life person Reilly Vulao, and I will give my

(01:39:28):
third nipple to all the Todds of the world. All right,
I'll give it to all the hot dogs. At the
beginning by raw Dog by Jamie Loftus, thank you so much,
You're welcome.

Speaker 2 (01:39:45):
I'm gonna go right down the middle here, I'm gonna
go two and a half nipples. I think, unfortunately it
is still a big deal in any major release movie
to acknowledge that an adult woman can sexually abuse a boy.
I hate that is the case, but that you know,

(01:40:06):
up until very recently was not like the way that
you describe kids at your school talking about it is
clear evidence of that. Like that that is a fairly
recent cultural shift that I think that it is like
net positive to have a successful movie that unequivocally acknowledges
this was abuse. Yeah, having seen a lot of movies

(01:40:28):
about this subject, I think this this movie is definitely
like better than most, but still commits a lot of
the same exact problems that we see in movies that
really mishandle the subject of child sex abuse, as with
a lot of movies, like right when we talk about
them after they come out, I feel like we did
a good job this time. But sometimes it's just like

(01:40:49):
when a movie just came out and you don't hate it.
I feel like you generally give it credit for being
more progressive or subversive. Then it actually ends up being
and you reflect on it down the line.

Speaker 1 (01:41:02):
We have done this in the past.

Speaker 2 (01:41:04):
It's true the things we said about Captain Marvel, I
swear to God.

Speaker 1 (01:41:08):
And Wonder Woman, like ugh, we were so young.

Speaker 2 (01:41:13):
The point is never again. No, I think that, like,
I am not unhappy that this movie exists. I find
it really frustrating. It's doing certain things well and then
it's ignoring a lot of subjects that you would think
if it really were like a subversive work, it would
have more interest in. And also no one movie could

(01:41:34):
you tackle an issue as complicated as child's sex abuse.
And I feel like sometimes it's easy to be like, well,
I didn't it do everything. It's one movie. Hopefully, like
you're saying, Caitlin, this is a step towards being able
to tell a story that it seems like all three
of us were more interested in And you know, I
just think, like in all movies right now, I'm like,

(01:41:56):
I just am like not really particularly interested right now
in like narrative movies of like understanding a very evil person.
And there's so many like that right now, and I
think that sometimes they're like, but it's a girl boss
that You're like, I don't. It's still not working for me.
But anyways, I like Todd Haynes, I love Carol and

(01:42:20):
I'm giving this two and a half and I'm giving
it all to the hot dogs.

Speaker 1 (01:42:24):
Nice, Yeah, Karen, how about you?

Speaker 4 (01:42:27):
I'd like to actually rate this on a scale of
hot dogs as a post to nipples.

Speaker 2 (01:42:30):
If that's cool, fine, Yeah, as as you're right.

Speaker 4 (01:42:33):
Yeah, and I'd like to give it. I mean, I
see this movie as beginning and ending for me. When
I looked at that grill and I saw those hot
dogs on the grill, and I think that Jamie really
said this best. There's not enough people to eat all
these hot dogs.

Speaker 2 (01:42:50):
It makes you think were.

Speaker 4 (01:42:51):
They going to sell them to Costco afterwards? Yeah? It
makes you think. And I think the enigma of that moment,
you know, is a metaphor for the enigma of everything
we've spoken about today. So you may not give this
movie a lot of nipples, but I will give this
movie forty hot dogs.

Speaker 1 (01:43:10):
Of course, amazing out of how many is the max number?

Speaker 4 (01:43:14):
I'm not so sure.

Speaker 1 (01:43:16):
Okay, okay, that's fair.

Speaker 2 (01:43:17):
I'm just happy to be with you on this journey.

Speaker 4 (01:43:21):
You're like, what is the maximum number of pot dogs?
It's difficult to say.

Speaker 2 (01:43:24):
Yeah, that's so true, that's so true.

Speaker 4 (01:43:27):
I feel like we'd have to go back and rewatch
the movie, and I don't think that's something any of
us are gonna do.

Speaker 3 (01:43:33):
Not I.

Speaker 1 (01:43:35):
Yeah, Well, it's been a delight to have you, Karen.

Speaker 2 (01:43:42):
Thank you so much for coming on for this truly
like challenging episode. I mean, it feels weird to be like,
I had a great time, but I thought this is
a great discussion. Thank you for We just covered Shrek four,
so we're pretty you know, like the discourse has just
been all over the place this month, on the Pods.

Speaker 4 (01:44:00):
The Donkey Man, love him exactly, exactly.

Speaker 1 (01:44:03):
Where can people check out your stuff, follow you online,
et cetera.

Speaker 4 (01:44:08):
I'm on the internet at shit from Kieran Shit like
the poop that comes out of your butthole, how foor
gets delivered to you in the mail if you are
a character in May December, just shit from Kieran on
all the platforms on the internet. Forgive me Internet, and
dear listeners and intergalactic listeners. I did come up with
that a long time ago, and it was foolish of me,

(01:44:30):
and it's too.

Speaker 2 (01:44:30):
Late to change it.

Speaker 1 (01:44:32):
Yeah, sorry about that.

Speaker 4 (01:44:33):
Yeah, it was I did it to myself. I was like, oh,
this is flippant, but that was ump. That was dumb
and I have regrets. And here we are.

Speaker 1 (01:44:42):
And be sure everyone to watch Destroy All Neighbors, starring Kieran.

Speaker 4 (01:44:48):
No, it's not starring me. It's starring Jonah Jonah Ray
You're and Alex Winter from.

Speaker 1 (01:44:54):
Oh Bill and Ted right, Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:44:56):
Yeah, very nice, gentlemen. And it's a little horror comedy
and it'll come out on January twelfth, and you guys
will have to review that movie, not with me, and
see if that passes the Bechdel test.

Speaker 1 (01:45:10):
Will it's on the top of our list.

Speaker 4 (01:45:14):
I won't be listening to that episode, just so you know.
And I don't want to know how many nipples or
hot dogs it gets because of my deep sensitive no whatever,
it's a fun horror comedy.

Speaker 1 (01:45:26):
Hell yah nice, Well, thanks again for coming on the show.
You can check us out at Bechdel Cast on Instagram
and Twitter slash x bla, as well as our Patreon
at patreon dot com slash Bechdel Cast. Become a matron yes,

(01:45:48):
and you'll get access to two bonus episodes every month,
plus the entire back catalog. Also check out our link
tree for tickets to our upcoming tour in early February.
We're going to cities in California and Texas.

Speaker 2 (01:46:04):
Why because we've felt like it. That's just how it
ended up.

Speaker 1 (01:46:08):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:46:09):
And then you can also get our merch at teapublic
dot com slash v Bechdel Cast. And with that, let's
have a hot dog? Is that the song I kind
of forget? Bye Bye Bye Bye.

Speaker 1 (01:46:31):
The Bechdel Cast is a production of iHeartMedia, hosted by
Caitlin Derante and Jamie loftis produced by Sophie Lichterman, edited
by Mola Board. Our theme song was composed by Mike
Kaplan with vocals by Catherine Volskrosenski. Our logo in merch
is designed by Jamie Loftis, and a special thanks to
Aristotle Acevedo. For more information about the podcast, please visit

(01:46:53):
Linktree Slash Bechdel Cast