Christian Toto, Hollywood In Toto podcast host joins Ryan to recap his review of 'Reagan' and preview 'Am I Racist?' coming to theaters courtesy of The Daily Wire.' Also, the much-anticipated 'Beetlejuice' sequel opens in theaters across the country Friday night. And why was the 15th anniversary re-release of 'Coraline' such a remarkable success?
Home - Hollywood in Toto
Kelly reveals the winner of our Friday Fool of the Week honors.
Home - Hollywood in Toto
Kelly reveals the winner of our Friday Fool of the Week honors.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, we got to get back on track. We've
got to get back on the clock, and a little
long there and hour number one gotta get those Fool
of the Week nomine's out to you and our thanks
to Tricia Calvalrasi, the Democrat candidate for the fourth congressional
district race against Representative Lauren Bobert, for joining us in
that first hour. Turning the page. Now to Hollywood. And
(00:20):
when I think Hollywood, I try to escape from Hollywood.
By doing so, I go to hollywoodintoto dot com and
that is where you can find our next guest and
by that same handle on x formerly known as Twitter
at Hollywood in Toto. He is the great Christian Toto Christian,
welcome back.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Good to be back.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Taking a look at a few movies here, and we'll
try to get as much as we can before this
first break. Otherwise we're going to split it up into
a couple of segments. But one that I was really
anticipating and I got to see over its opening weekend
the final weekend of August was the biopic Reagan now
in theaters. Here's a sound of that. There's nothing in
return your governor can do about the Soviets. But a president,
(01:04):
now you can do a thing or two. Welcome to
I was a lifeguard on a river.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
There's no turn, and I learned how to read the currents,
not just the ones on the surface, the also the
ones deep underneath the water.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
I am about to start the biggest war of this century,
and I'm not going to fire a sent shot. We're
gonna blow up eight years of diplomacy. Well, if you
think that got there undacent one, you just wait, what
did the president know? And when did he know it?
What would you have me do? I want you to
fight for herbs off, tear down Dennis Quaid as President
(02:06):
Ronald Reagan, Penelope Ann Miller as Nancy, and John Voight
with a very important role in this film as well.
And as could be predicted, you go to rotten toomatoes
dot com just twenty one percent from fifty three reviews
on their Tomato meter. Meanwhile, audiences score it ninety eight
percent approval rate. Such a wide range there of seventy
(02:28):
seven points. Well, one of the positive reviews came from you,
Christian Toto. But how do you explain that discrepancy aside
from just sheer partisan politics?
Speaker 4 (02:38):
Well, I mean, that's part of it too, for sure. Listen,
if you're going to a movie like Reagan, and I
think it's been framed in the media as being a
very pro Reagan experience, So I think that's attracting people
who were already enamored with the ex president and was
the very interested in seeing that presentation. They get it,
and so that reason maybe some artisanship on the right
(03:01):
as well. They wanted to say, hey, this is a
really good film. So that's what's going on.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Listen.
Speaker 4 (03:05):
I've been in this game for a long time now,
and most film critics and there's no harm or foul
in this, it just is what it is, are left
of center. What I have known is in recent years
is they've really leaned into that, and instead of trying
to be as fair and balance as possible, they don't.
They basically say, the movie agrees with my worldview, I'm
(03:26):
going to give it a more positive rating.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
And we've seen that.
Speaker 4 (03:30):
Michael Moore movies and films that were positive about RPT
and things like that. So it just is what it is.
But to see it so storically and Rotten Tomatoes, the
disparity is it doesn't match your eye that's for sure.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
It just shows you what's going on in the culture.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Well, let's try our best, you and me, Christian growing
up in the eighties as big fans of President Ronald Reagan,
to be objective about the film. Is it presentation? I
want to start with the device of using Victor Petrovitch
and John Voyd portrays this character as a narrator kind
of piecing this all together. Was that a crutch in
(04:05):
your opinion that it had to be told that way?
Was that an effective use of that device?
Speaker 4 (04:10):
I didn't mind it at all. I mean, I think
this in biopics can be very stayed. So I think
anything you shake up the formula a little bit, that's
probably a plus in the column. So you know, the
fact you got John Boyd doing the heavy lifting there,
I think that worked just fine. And listen, you know
his Reagan's role in the culture and the country and
the world was about bringing down, helping bringing down the
(04:32):
Soviet Union, so that was not an insignificant part of
his resume. That was critical. So I think putting it
in that context that was great. I had no problem
with that at all. But my bigger issue is at
the first third of the movie where you're really looking
at is his younger years. I thought it was very choppy,
very sort of Greatest Hits esque, and I just didn't
think it had the nuance or the cadence that I
(04:54):
wanted from a movie like this. I think once he
gets in the Oval office, it really takes off for me.
And then they also, I would say that the well
Quade was terrific and lead, Oh, I want a little
more depth, a little bit more, I guess layers, I
guess you could say.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
And you know, you can also.
Speaker 4 (05:11):
Say that Reagan was a very simple man. I mean,
he was able to boil things down. He was a
great communicator. So maybe that was in a way an
homage to the way he worked, the way he thought,
the way he shared his message with the public. Maybe
I'm getting it too much credit, but that was just
one of my thoughts.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
Christian, I want to pick up right there. I love
that you use that metaphor of a Greatest Hits album
because I think it fits. It's one hundred and thirty
five minutes. I enjoyed it. I was predisposed to enjoying it.
Ronald Reagane is my favorite all time president. I'm so
glad they made the film. That being said, there was
so much of his life between nineteen eleven and two
(05:47):
thousand and four to account for that. If you try
to check off all the boxes and everything that he
did and every stage of his life, it becomes a
little bit more spread out, shallower, rather than let's say,
one album from a great artist like Revolver or Sergeant
Pepper's Lonely Hearts called Man by the Beatles, rather than
an anthology or greatest Hits album, which you're going to
(06:10):
get the hits, but you're not going to drill down.
Could there be a way to do a Reagan biopic
where maybe you take a narrow sliver, maybe the most
important one is you would define it of Reagan's life
and just really go in depth and in detail about that.
Could that work?
Speaker 2 (06:27):
I think it would work. I think it'd be better
than what we saw.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
I think that maybe if you told it that way,
but then maybe had flashbacks to his youth.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
Into those phone of years.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
That were that we was just sort of little pulses,
little moments for little emotions that kind of sketched it
out for you, rather than being told, okay, this is
why he you know, he had a certain view of
alcohol because his dad drank too much of times, or
that's why he was a person of faith, because this
moment really had a mark on him. So I think
(06:59):
that would have been more artistically interesting. I think it
would have streamlined the story, and it would have given
us more time to get to the bread and butter
of the situation.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
Couldn't agree more. I did enjoy this film, however, and
I would give it a passing grade. I would say,
if I were to score it on IMDb, I would
give it a seven. Christian, what was your final verdict
in your review?
Speaker 4 (07:18):
You know, I don't give scores. I give it three
out of four on run Tomato score. They basically forced
critics to do that. I mean, I think between six
and seven there's a lot. He led a fascinating life.
He was so consequential, so I think you'd be hard
press to ruin this story just by telling the basic beats.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
And they did that.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
And you know, and I think for a smaller budget film,
this is made outside the Hollywood ecosystem, right, I think it.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Looks pretty good, you know.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
I also it's an odd thing to praise, but a
lot of these movies when they take characters over the years,
the aging or de aging or wherever they want.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
To, you know, whatever is happening, it's a little clunky.
Speaker 4 (07:56):
It doesn't feel like it matches with the time and
the years going by. I did a.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Beautiful job, especially with a smaller budget.
Speaker 4 (08:02):
Where Dennis Quaid was looking older and older in a
very naturalistic way, and the same within Lane Miller, who's
quite good as Nancy Reagan. So that's a little thing
that as a movie tour that I kind of noticed,
maybe more than most people, but I just thought that
was a nice Hey, we're going to pay attention to
those details because it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
If you love Ronald Reagan the way that I do,
you will really like this movie, and I strongly recommend
that you go see it. It's in theaters now, simply
entitled Reagan. Our next film here is coming out on
September thirteenth, that is one week from today. You can
pre order tickets through the Daily Wire. It is Matt Walsh,
and you might recall his previous installment, What Is a Woman,
(08:42):
was a raging success and I think it even met
critical acclaim. This next one is called Am I Racist?
And here is an opening. Look, look, kit clear, what's
happening in this country. It's Nazism. Republicans are Nazis.
Speaker 5 (08:56):
You cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people.
Speaker 6 (09:00):
Take those.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Growing up in the nineties, I never thought much about race.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Sure you noticed, but never really seemed to matter that much,
at least not to.
Speaker 5 (09:07):
Me, being a white, straight cysgender man.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
It's the top of the pile. I'm on the top
of the pile. That's me. Am I racist. I would
really appreciate it if you left. I'm trying to learn
a loan this journey.
Speaker 7 (09:17):
Do you please leave.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
I'm going to sort this out. I need to go
deeper undercover. I want to be an ally. I need
to look like one. What is racism? Hard user? King
said not to judge. People buy you that. The King
said a lot of stuff said America inherently racist. What
the hell is that? The word inherent is challenging there?
Speaker 5 (09:41):
America is racist to expones all of the inherently. Yeah,
the entire system has to burn. And I'm not going
to even use save this country. This country is not
worth saving. This country is a piece of shit.
Speaker 8 (09:53):
Oh sorry, sorry, They don't see how race is joining
us down is match by d Ei expert.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
There's my certain questions. Where are you guys in your
anti racist journeys.
Speaker 8 (10:06):
We'll look around the room and point to who we
believe is the most racist person in the room.
Speaker 9 (10:13):
What a renamed the George Washington Monument to the George
Floyd Monument.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
But your mind signing it if you will?
Speaker 8 (10:18):
What do you think about this issue of heteronormativity and
how it intersects with the broader structures of racism in society.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
With white people?
Speaker 6 (10:30):
What are you doing the de center of your whiteness?
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Who's making it the center? Why are you doing that?
Speaker 4 (10:34):
Why you're doing as you're stretching out of your whiteness.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
Listen more for you in this year.
Speaker 5 (10:41):
White folks, whiteh white supremacy, white woman, white boy, white entitlement,
centering white island.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Is there a black person around her? Black person right here?
Does he not exist? Big embraces? Hi, Robin Hi, And
what's your name? I'm Mats. Just had to ask me
you are because yeah, we'll be careful. I'll never read
you careful, They'll say everybody. Matt Walsh another creative attempt
(11:16):
to show what's happening in American culture and Christian What
I like so much about What is a Woman Is
Matt Walsh was very understated and a lot of the
time he would just simply hold up a mirror, and
that was very uncomfortable for a lot of the subjects
he was interviewing. It sounds like much of the same here.
What are your thoughts, what are your hopes for this film?
Speaker 4 (11:36):
Well, I have seen it, and I'm not allowed to
give an official review, so I'm biting my tongue so
much so that I might have a little trickle of blood.
I'm so eager to talk about it. Yeah, it is
fascinating and you know, and I think we receie Matt's
very dry roll delivery. But I think what you see
(11:56):
just in that trailer alone at that he's actually really
funny and he's very insightful. And the fact that he's
able to kind of go through these paces and dain
these very awkward situations. You know, it's almost uncomfortable to
watch at times. It's fascinating, and.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
You know, I think I think you really nailed it.
And what I wrote about at.
Speaker 4 (12:15):
Hollywood and Toto is that in a way, this is
a new borat because what Borat would do, would go
undercover in character, and he would be crazy or wacky,
or he evoke emotions or reactions, and it often exposed
people for who they were. And it's times he would
do something a little bit racist and see if they
you know, if people would agree with them, or if
(12:36):
they were tolerant of his views. And so he had
a method to his madness. And Matt wall Shertainly does
as well. And I think that's a really fascinating way
to look at this through that lens, is that that's
what he's up to. This isn't just a silly documentary.
This isn't just an expose a on DEEI. It's got
something more more meaty, you know, behind the scenes. You
(12:56):
can see it in all these clips. And I will
say that directed the film is Justin Folk, who is
a very talented fellow. He norly did was a woman,
but he did No Safe Spaces, which was some brilliant
film that really warned the culture that this attack on
pre speech was coming and we didn't listen. Now it's here,
but yeah, it's I'm very curiously what other people.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
Will see from this movie.
Speaker 4 (13:18):
But the bottom line is that this is going to
in theaters, you know, usually the daily.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Wire and make something and they put behind their paywall.
Speaker 4 (13:23):
And I get that point. If you get effective, they
want to attract subscribers.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
But if you want to.
Speaker 4 (13:28):
Change the culture or change the conversation, you.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
Get to put out there, and that's what they're doing.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Such a great point, and it leads me to a
two part question. Was you go to break here? Christian?
And that is first and foremost at Hollywood Intoto dot
com on your website. When can people expect your review
of this film after it's embargoed?
Speaker 4 (13:46):
I believe it's September tenth, my birthday, So when my birthday,
I could hit published on that on the site and
you'll check it out. It's and that's pretty typically due
like nik a few days before movie opened gimbargo lifts.
But I always try to respect the publicist andeople behind
the scenes that they have a certain marketing goal in
mine and that's that's perfectly fine.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Well, happy early birthday to you, Christian. Coming up on
the tenth, you can see his review of Ami Racist
there at Hollywood Andtoto dot com. So final question here
before the break Christian, and these two films that they
share in comment Reagan, am I racist? Is they went
outside the parameters of the normal Hollywood production process, and
conservative voices are seeking those types of platforms, as you said,
(14:28):
not just at Daily Wire, but actually getting into theaters.
But what I've heard from Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh
has spoken to this as well, is they are meeting
resistance by the theaters themselves as to whether a lot
of these films are shown on screens or whether that's
diminished or throttled in some way. What is the solution
to that? Is there one? And how does a film
(14:51):
like AMI Racist? How does a producer like Ben Shapiro
or Matt Walsh get over that hurdle?
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Well, when I've heard.
Speaker 4 (14:59):
Some behind the scenes, but often it is that theaters
themselves that are more welcoming, that they see this more
as a business proposition.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
But You're right, there are certainly.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
There are times, and I'll have to investigate more with
this particular movie.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Where they do meet some roadblocks.
Speaker 4 (15:13):
And you know, listen the new rate Bee. It's a
new distribution company handling it, that's basically releasing it across
the country. So this isn't Sony, this is in paramount.
This is in Warner Brothers. It's a new Beast, and
so that's part of the problem. So it's not enough
that you have this sort of counterculture, right leaning content
coming into our lives. How do you get it out there?
(15:34):
How does it get from A to B to C.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
And that's not always easy.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
So it's not enough just to make it on a
smaller budget because you don't have the resources.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
You've got to figure out how to get it to
the masses. So it's complicated going.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
From the political realm back to pop culture. When we
come back. One film that debuts in theaters tonight, that
is September sixth, the sequel long awaited to Beetlejuice and
simply entitled Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice and you Know what happens when
you say it a third time? And also the fifteenth
year anniversary re release of Coraline and why it's been
(16:06):
such a big success. Stay tuned Part two of my
conversation with Christian Tooto Hollywood Intoto dot Com coming up
next on six point thirty.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
K How.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
My mom grew up here? That old house in Hew
like the ghost House is your mom? Lydia deeps. Unfortunately,
shoot legend the living the dead? Can they coexist?
Speaker 2 (16:37):
Ghosts aren't real.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Only global people believe that kind of crap. I don't
believe I'm doing this.
Speaker 10 (16:43):
Beetle Juice, Beetle Juice, Beetlejuice, and you can help me,
say my daughter, how do I know that you're gonna
keep your word?
Speaker 2 (16:55):
I swear.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
Well, you and the boys stand guard. Nobody gets through.
Speaker 9 (17:08):
Good.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
I think for my dream really, mortnacmare material.
Speaker 10 (17:14):
Frank the unknown ansering your fears, and there's nothing harder.
Speaker 7 (17:25):
John, what the.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Thank you all for coming to the special occasion. But
right now, with like a little.
Speaker 8 (17:34):
Privacy, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, the sequel.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
It opens tonight in theaters across the country. Ryan schulingback
with you on six point thirty K. I joined by
my friend Christian Tooto Hollywood intoto dot Com. Now Christian.
One interesting similarity I noticed is that it's exactly thirty
six years after the original Beatle Juice hit theaters in
nineteen eighty eight. And that's the exact length of time
(18:05):
that we had between Top Gun in nineteen eighty six
and Maverick in twenty twenty two. What gives with these
much later sequels.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Yeah, you know, it's usually very suspicious when this happens.
I think about Zoolander two kind of comes to mind,
and it just it feels like.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
A little bit of a desperation ployed.
Speaker 4 (18:25):
But then we saw Top the Maverick and everyone loved
that and it was very, very good, and we all
dismissed the whole cynicism involved with it, and I, you know,
I approached this one a little bit in a similar way,
and also as a I'm not a huge fan of
the original Beatle Juice. I mean, I get the character
as unique and iconic and fun and Michael Keaton can
do just about anything on screen, but I didn't love
love it like everyone else. We listened to the Dayo song,
(18:46):
the quirky characters, the visual landscape, it was all novel
and interesting, so it's certainly worth revisiting. And I have
to say, I think this one didn't win me over
right away, but it wore me down as it went
on and got a little smarter, a little sharper, a
little funnier, and by the end that was all in
so I enjoyed this quite a bit.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
I think people will too.
Speaker 4 (19:07):
I think the early box office predictions are pretty darn good,
so obviously that built up excitement hasn't dissipated over that
thirty fifty years, has only gotten bigger.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
Didn't win you over, but it wore you down. You
know that sounds like Christian. It sounds like Beetlejuice himself,
Michael Keaton in character where he's really off putting at first,
but then there's a charm about him that kind of
wears you down. And that's what happened in the original,
which I did love, and I'll be going to see
this tomorrow with my sister who is in town. One
question I did have from your analysis standpoint, Christian, was
(19:38):
you know, cinema in terms of technology back in nineteen
eighty eight was a totally different ballgame than what we
have available on the palette for directors now. For a
movie like Beetlejuice that really thrives on being so weird,
so wacky in what ways? Maybe was it different from
the original or superior to it in that regard?
Speaker 4 (20:01):
Keep it in line with that original film Two Waves anyways,
But Danny Elfman wrote the score for that film and
the new one.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
I think that's a great choice. His sound is so unique.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
But also you mentioned the effects are religially alluding to
the effects, and they do a lot of what they
call practical effects. That's kind of the new buzzword for
old school stuff, where it's makeup, it's clay, it's foam,
it's something real as opposed to all the ones and zeros.
They can kind of whip up and make something out
of nothing. So I think that really kind of connects
(20:32):
the two films as well, and it's just enjoyable, it's engaging.
There's something captile about that look, and I think.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
That was a great choice.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
Well on a rider in this Catherine O'Hara, so you
get some of the familiar faces, obviously Michael Keaton himself
as Beetlejuice the Monster. And it opens in theaters tonight
all across the country, including right here in Colorado. So
that's a sequel. How about a re release fifteen years later,
a children's film from two thousand and nine that suddenly
(21:01):
comes back to theaters and does maybe even better. Here's Coraline,
welcome back. It's been a while we've.
Speaker 7 (21:09):
Been waiting for you.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
Caroline. You probably think this world is a dream common truth.
Speaker 7 (21:18):
But you're wrong, so sharp you won't you.
Speaker 11 (21:39):
Soon?
Speaker 9 (21:39):
You see things all right?
Speaker 1 (21:45):
Hold on, we are finished it. How do you want
to stay in your blackened up world forever? Or maybe
you're proving up to go back.
Speaker 8 (22:08):
Now?
Speaker 1 (22:08):
Christian. Hearing that preview a second time around right after Beetlejuice,
I noticed some eerie similarities just in thematic standpoint. But
what is Coraline? Why was it re released in theaters,
and why is it doing so well?
Speaker 4 (22:23):
Well, it was a stop motion film, and it was
certainly appealing technically to a younger audience, but they did
have that kind of icky fact. It was a little
bit dark, a little bit brooding, so I think it
even spoke to people of all ages. The reason why
they're rereleasing it is the anniversary is just an excuse.
What Hollywood has been doing in the last couple of
years now is re releasing older films and sometimes drawing
(22:44):
a crowd. Hocus Pocus did quite well. I think the
recent Lord of the Rings films got some attention. But
to me this is almost jaw dropping, because I think
Coraline opened either fifteen or twenty million recently. I get
a fifteen year old movie, and I think the total
right now is about thirty million. Now, there are many
films out there that are brand new that will not
(23:06):
get to the thirty million mark at all.
Speaker 2 (23:08):
They won't even come.
Speaker 4 (23:08):
Close to the fact. You've got a movie that you
can watch at home that's been available forever fifteen years,
and that all of a sudden it's back in the
big screen and drawing such attention. I think it's fascinating.
I mean, I think it's a testament to the movies
that endure. I think it's nostalogia. I think we want
to escape into the at least in past. All the
things to line up. But you know, give credit to
the to the film itself for holding up under extra scrutiny.
(23:33):
It's really interesting and as a movie fan, I just
don't see a downside. I want to see Raiders the
Lost Talk in the theater again. I want to see
Aliens again. I want to see the movies that I
grew up with again in an eater and hopefully direct
my kids along too. So you know, I think that
can bridge generations and also remind people that, hey, go
into the movies.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Is kind of cool, you know. And I think we
need that right now.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
Whether the movie going experience is kind of good and
bad off and on, we're streaming, we're going live. You know,
it's the culture changing, and I think this could maybe
help out the theatrical experience.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
We's wait and see.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
It's an encouraging sign. I think Maverick started this in
a lot of ways. But just like you, Christian, I'm
such a fan of going to the movies, that theatrical experience.
It's social. You want to get out of your house,
you want to go into the theater. You want to
experience these movies for the first time, or experience them
all over again, like you mentioned with Raiders of the
Lost Dark and movies like that. And this is Coreline
(24:26):
Children's film two thousand and nine, re released fifteen years
later just this past August fifteenth, still in many theaters
as well, and doing better and showing life for the
in theater experience. And again, I think that's a great
sign post Covid that we are fully back to normal.
You can find his reviews at Hollywood intoto dot com.
He's also got his own podcast. Subscribe and download that
(24:49):
on any major podcast platform and follow him on x
at that very handle at Hollywood in Toto Christian Toto
always a great time. Thank you so much for joining
us on this Friday. Christian Toto, Hollywood Intoto dot Com.
A final timeout, we'll have our full of the week decided.
Your final chance to vote is during this break. The
(25:09):
nominees once again, Governor Jared Polis were refusing to recant
remarks about the imagination of Danielle Jerinsky contributing to a
fever dream that Venezuelan gangs were in Aurora. They were there.
The Associated Press mischaracterizing and quote for Senator JD Vance
that both Kamala Harris and Tim Walls ran away, with
then issuing a correction that not as many people saw.
(25:32):
And finally, Liz Cheney both she and her father are
voting for Kamala Harris, despite her remarks just four years
ago that Kamala Harris was an extreme San Francisco, California
liberal to the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren
le s Liz Cheney unmoored to principles of any kind.
We'll have that verdict when we come back. Ryan Schuling
(25:54):
live on six point thirty K how all right, looking
for the Beatle Juice Beetlejuice, the sequel, thirty six years later.
I just thought there was an interesting detail that Maverick
was exactly thirty six years after Top Gun nineteen eighty
six to twenty twenty two, Beetlejuice nineteen eighty eight to
Tonight's debut of the sequels and theaters across the country.
(26:18):
Here in twenty twenty four, Ryan schuling back with you,
it's time for our Friday Fool of the Week. The
nominees once again Jared Polis, the Associated Press and Liz Cheney. Wow,
this was a tough one. Kelly went right down to
the wire. It did. We finally have a winner though
it's our governor. Yeah, but he only won by one vote?
(26:40):
One vote? Who was the runner up? Liz Cheney. People
not take an aim at the Associated Press after their Shenanigans,
but I get it. This is a tough contest. But
here again Jared Polis, dodging three times our own Ross
Kaminski over on KOA whether he would take back comments
that attributed this idea the trend de Venezuelan gang had
(27:04):
infiltrated apartments in Aurora, just chucking that up to a
feature of the imagination of Danielle Jorinsky.
Speaker 11 (27:11):
You kind of jumped in a little bit on this
Aurora gang thing about the gang problem being a feature
of Danielle Jorensky's imagination. Do you want to revise and
extend your remarks about gang issues in Aurora.
Speaker 9 (27:24):
Yeah, I mean that's been misportrayed. It was specifically the
building tape, a building takeover which Aurora Police Department says,
you know has not occurred. And I you know there
are sources of intelligence on this and information you.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
Probably said something you shouldn't have said.
Speaker 9 (27:37):
Yeah, we should be no, we should be zero tolerance
for that kind of thing, right, So like if that,
like anybody can make allegations ross you know that allegations
are one thing. If they have the evidence of that,
Aurora should have gone in weeks ago. This is a
very serious investigation. You saw that there were some arrests
from a jewelry store heightst with regard with ties to
trend Agrayo, which is a good step. Ora either has
(28:01):
bad information or they're acting correctly.
Speaker 11 (28:03):
Can I get you to admit that maybe you shouldn't
have said it was a figment of someone's imagination.
Speaker 9 (28:08):
Well, I think that was a reference to is whether
buildings have.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
Been taken over, and maybe they have been.
Speaker 9 (28:13):
Well, if they have been, then why aren't we taking
them back?
Speaker 1 (28:16):
I don't know. That's a darn good that's a darn
good question.
Speaker 9 (28:19):
My comments were showing frustration I was saying rather than
I was talking about. I don't know if you've had
a Danielle vis the other city, because rather than trash
their own city, they should make it safe. They're the
ones in charge that she is the mayor, like like
do it like we're here to help, that's what the
state's for. We're all for it. But like you don't
trash your city and not keep it safe. You take
the actions necessary to keep it safe.
Speaker 1 (28:42):
Trashing her city. If anything, Danielle Jornsky's the one trying
to save her city, unlike you, Governor Jared Polis are
full of the week, just trying to pass the buck
and shift the blame. As for daniel Jorinsky, guy does
jump must be the other guy. She's the galan does
your job. Jared Polis must be the other guy. We
(29:03):
close out now with another installment. No, I didn't forget.
Here's another deep thought from Vice President Harris and now
deep thoughts by Vice President Kamala Harris. There is this
wonderful word.
Speaker 6 (29:22):
That has a great meaning, and it's called hypothesis, which
means that you have an idea and then it is
well accepted, it will be tested, and then you will
learn whether it was correct or not. But there will
be no pride associated with the hypothesis.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Because after all, it was a hypothesis.
Speaker 6 (29:45):
And then you will reconvene and then create a new hypothesis.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
My goodness. On that note, enjoy your weekend. Everybody, stay tuned.
The Dan Kaplis Show is next.
All right, we got to get back on track. We've
got to get back on the clock, and a little
long there and hour number one gotta get those Fool
of the Week nomine's out to you and our thanks
to Tricia Calvalrasi, the Democrat candidate for the fourth congressional
district race against Representative Lauren Bobert, for joining us in
that first hour. Turning the page. Now to Hollywood. And
(00:20):
when I think Hollywood, I try to escape from Hollywood.
By doing so, I go to hollywoodintoto dot com and
that is where you can find our next guest and
by that same handle on x formerly known as Twitter
at Hollywood in Toto. He is the great Christian Toto Christian,
welcome back.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Good to be back.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Taking a look at a few movies here, and we'll
try to get as much as we can before this
first break. Otherwise we're going to split it up into
a couple of segments. But one that I was really
anticipating and I got to see over its opening weekend
the final weekend of August was the biopic Reagan now
in theaters. Here's a sound of that. There's nothing in
return your governor can do about the Soviets. But a president,
(01:04):
now you can do a thing or two. Welcome to
I was a lifeguard on a river.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
There's no turn, and I learned how to read the currents,
not just the ones on the surface, the also the
ones deep underneath the water.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
I am about to start the biggest war of this century,
and I'm not going to fire a sent shot. We're
gonna blow up eight years of diplomacy. Well, if you
think that got there undacent one, you just wait, what
did the president know? And when did he know it?
What would you have me do? I want you to
fight for herbs off, tear down Dennis Quaid as President
(02:06):
Ronald Reagan, Penelope Ann Miller as Nancy, and John Voight
with a very important role in this film as well.
And as could be predicted, you go to rotten toomatoes
dot com just twenty one percent from fifty three reviews
on their Tomato meter. Meanwhile, audiences score it ninety eight
percent approval rate. Such a wide range there of seventy
(02:28):
seven points. Well, one of the positive reviews came from you,
Christian Toto. But how do you explain that discrepancy aside
from just sheer partisan politics?
Speaker 4 (02:38):
Well, I mean, that's part of it too, for sure. Listen,
if you're going to a movie like Reagan, and I
think it's been framed in the media as being a
very pro Reagan experience, So I think that's attracting people
who were already enamored with the ex president and was
the very interested in seeing that presentation. They get it,
and so that reason maybe some artisanship on the right
(03:01):
as well. They wanted to say, hey, this is a
really good film. So that's what's going on.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Listen.
Speaker 4 (03:05):
I've been in this game for a long time now,
and most film critics and there's no harm or foul
in this, it just is what it is, are left
of center. What I have known is in recent years
is they've really leaned into that, and instead of trying
to be as fair and balance as possible, they don't.
They basically say, the movie agrees with my worldview, I'm
(03:26):
going to give it a more positive rating.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
And we've seen that.
Speaker 4 (03:30):
Michael Moore movies and films that were positive about RPT
and things like that. So it just is what it is.
But to see it so storically and Rotten Tomatoes, the
disparity is it doesn't match your eye that's for sure.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
It just shows you what's going on in the culture.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Well, let's try our best, you and me, Christian growing
up in the eighties as big fans of President Ronald Reagan,
to be objective about the film. Is it presentation? I
want to start with the device of using Victor Petrovitch
and John Voyd portrays this character as a narrator kind
of piecing this all together. Was that a crutch in
(04:05):
your opinion that it had to be told that way?
Was that an effective use of that device?
Speaker 4 (04:10):
I didn't mind it at all. I mean, I think
this in biopics can be very stayed. So I think
anything you shake up the formula a little bit, that's
probably a plus in the column. So you know, the
fact you got John Boyd doing the heavy lifting there,
I think that worked just fine. And listen, you know
his Reagan's role in the culture and the country and
the world was about bringing down, helping bringing down the
(04:32):
Soviet Union, so that was not an insignificant part of
his resume. That was critical. So I think putting it
in that context that was great. I had no problem
with that at all. But my bigger issue is at
the first third of the movie where you're really looking
at is his younger years. I thought it was very choppy,
very sort of Greatest Hits esque, and I just didn't
think it had the nuance or the cadence that I
(04:54):
wanted from a movie like this. I think once he
gets in the Oval office, it really takes off for me.
And then they also, I would say that the well
Quade was terrific and lead, Oh, I want a little
more depth, a little bit more, I guess layers, I
guess you could say.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
And you know, you can also.
Speaker 4 (05:11):
Say that Reagan was a very simple man. I mean,
he was able to boil things down. He was a
great communicator. So maybe that was in a way an
homage to the way he worked, the way he thought,
the way he shared his message with the public. Maybe
I'm getting it too much credit, but that was just
one of my thoughts.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
Christian, I want to pick up right there. I love
that you use that metaphor of a Greatest Hits album
because I think it fits. It's one hundred and thirty
five minutes. I enjoyed it. I was predisposed to enjoying it.
Ronald Reagane is my favorite all time president. I'm so
glad they made the film. That being said, there was
so much of his life between nineteen eleven and two
(05:47):
thousand and four to account for that. If you try
to check off all the boxes and everything that he
did and every stage of his life, it becomes a
little bit more spread out, shallower, rather than let's say,
one album from a great artist like Revolver or Sergeant
Pepper's Lonely Hearts called Man by the Beatles, rather than
an anthology or greatest Hits album, which you're going to
(06:10):
get the hits, but you're not going to drill down.
Could there be a way to do a Reagan biopic
where maybe you take a narrow sliver, maybe the most
important one is you would define it of Reagan's life
and just really go in depth and in detail about that.
Could that work?
Speaker 2 (06:27):
I think it would work. I think it'd be better
than what we saw.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
I think that maybe if you told it that way,
but then maybe had flashbacks to his youth.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
Into those phone of years.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
That were that we was just sort of little pulses,
little moments for little emotions that kind of sketched it
out for you, rather than being told, okay, this is
why he you know, he had a certain view of
alcohol because his dad drank too much of times, or
that's why he was a person of faith, because this
moment really had a mark on him. So I think
(06:59):
that would have been more artistically interesting. I think it
would have streamlined the story, and it would have given
us more time to get to the bread and butter
of the situation.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
Couldn't agree more. I did enjoy this film, however, and
I would give it a passing grade. I would say,
if I were to score it on IMDb, I would
give it a seven. Christian, what was your final verdict
in your review?
Speaker 4 (07:18):
You know, I don't give scores. I give it three
out of four on run Tomato score. They basically forced
critics to do that. I mean, I think between six
and seven there's a lot. He led a fascinating life.
He was so consequential, so I think you'd be hard
press to ruin this story just by telling the basic beats.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
And they did that.
Speaker 4 (07:38):
And you know, and I think for a smaller budget film,
this is made outside the Hollywood ecosystem, right, I think it.
Speaker 2 (07:44):
Looks pretty good, you know.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
I also it's an odd thing to praise, but a
lot of these movies when they take characters over the years,
the aging or de aging or wherever they want.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
To, you know, whatever is happening, it's a little clunky.
Speaker 4 (07:56):
It doesn't feel like it matches with the time and
the years going by. I did a.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Beautiful job, especially with a smaller budget.
Speaker 4 (08:02):
Where Dennis Quaid was looking older and older in a
very naturalistic way, and the same within Lane Miller, who's
quite good as Nancy Reagan. So that's a little thing
that as a movie tour that I kind of noticed,
maybe more than most people, but I just thought that
was a nice Hey, we're going to pay attention to
those details because it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
If you love Ronald Reagan the way that I do,
you will really like this movie, and I strongly recommend
that you go see it. It's in theaters now, simply
entitled Reagan. Our next film here is coming out on
September thirteenth, that is one week from today. You can
pre order tickets through the Daily Wire. It is Matt Walsh,
and you might recall his previous installment, What Is a Woman,
(08:42):
was a raging success and I think it even met
critical acclaim. This next one is called Am I Racist?
And here is an opening. Look, look, kit clear, what's
happening in this country. It's Nazism. Republicans are Nazis.
Speaker 5 (08:56):
You cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people.
Speaker 6 (09:00):
Take those.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Growing up in the nineties, I never thought much about race.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Sure you noticed, but never really seemed to matter that much,
at least not to.
Speaker 5 (09:07):
Me, being a white, straight cysgender man.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
It's the top of the pile. I'm on the top
of the pile. That's me. Am I racist. I would
really appreciate it if you left. I'm trying to learn
a loan this journey.
Speaker 7 (09:17):
Do you please leave.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
I'm going to sort this out. I need to go
deeper undercover. I want to be an ally. I need
to look like one. What is racism? Hard user? King
said not to judge. People buy you that. The King
said a lot of stuff said America inherently racist. What
the hell is that? The word inherent is challenging there?
Speaker 5 (09:41):
America is racist to expones all of the inherently. Yeah,
the entire system has to burn. And I'm not going
to even use save this country. This country is not
worth saving. This country is a piece of shit.
Speaker 8 (09:53):
Oh sorry, sorry, They don't see how race is joining
us down is match by d Ei expert.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
There's my certain questions. Where are you guys in your
anti racist journeys.
Speaker 8 (10:06):
We'll look around the room and point to who we
believe is the most racist person in the room.
Speaker 9 (10:13):
What a renamed the George Washington Monument to the George
Floyd Monument.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
But your mind signing it if you will?
Speaker 8 (10:18):
What do you think about this issue of heteronormativity and
how it intersects with the broader structures of racism in society.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
With white people?
Speaker 6 (10:30):
What are you doing the de center of your whiteness?
Speaker 1 (10:33):
Who's making it the center? Why are you doing that?
Speaker 4 (10:34):
Why you're doing as you're stretching out of your whiteness.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
Listen more for you in this year.
Speaker 5 (10:41):
White folks, whiteh white supremacy, white woman, white boy, white entitlement,
centering white island.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Is there a black person around her? Black person right here?
Does he not exist? Big embraces? Hi, Robin Hi, And
what's your name? I'm Mats. Just had to ask me
you are because yeah, we'll be careful. I'll never read
you careful, They'll say everybody. Matt Walsh another creative attempt
(11:16):
to show what's happening in American culture and Christian What
I like so much about What is a Woman Is
Matt Walsh was very understated and a lot of the
time he would just simply hold up a mirror, and
that was very uncomfortable for a lot of the subjects
he was interviewing. It sounds like much of the same here.
What are your thoughts, what are your hopes for this film?
Speaker 4 (11:36):
Well, I have seen it, and I'm not allowed to
give an official review, so I'm biting my tongue so
much so that I might have a little trickle of blood.
I'm so eager to talk about it. Yeah, it is
fascinating and you know, and I think we receie Matt's
very dry roll delivery. But I think what you see
(11:56):
just in that trailer alone at that he's actually really
funny and he's very insightful. And the fact that he's
able to kind of go through these paces and dain
these very awkward situations. You know, it's almost uncomfortable to
watch at times. It's fascinating, and.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
You know, I think I think you really nailed it.
And what I wrote about at.
Speaker 4 (12:15):
Hollywood and Toto is that in a way, this is
a new borat because what Borat would do, would go
undercover in character, and he would be crazy or wacky,
or he evoke emotions or reactions, and it often exposed
people for who they were. And it's times he would
do something a little bit racist and see if they
you know, if people would agree with them, or if
(12:36):
they were tolerant of his views. And so he had
a method to his madness. And Matt wall Shertainly does
as well. And I think that's a really fascinating way
to look at this through that lens, is that that's
what he's up to. This isn't just a silly documentary.
This isn't just an expose a on DEEI. It's got
something more more meaty, you know, behind the scenes. You
(12:56):
can see it in all these clips. And I will
say that directed the film is Justin Folk, who is
a very talented fellow. He norly did was a woman,
but he did No Safe Spaces, which was some brilliant
film that really warned the culture that this attack on
pre speech was coming and we didn't listen. Now it's here,
but yeah, it's I'm very curiously what other people.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
Will see from this movie.
Speaker 4 (13:18):
But the bottom line is that this is going to
in theaters, you know, usually the daily.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Wire and make something and they put behind their paywall.
Speaker 4 (13:23):
And I get that point. If you get effective, they
want to attract subscribers.
Speaker 2 (13:27):
But if you want to.
Speaker 4 (13:28):
Change the culture or change the conversation, you.
Speaker 2 (13:30):
Get to put out there, and that's what they're doing.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Such a great point, and it leads me to a
two part question. Was you go to break here? Christian?
And that is first and foremost at Hollywood Intoto dot
com on your website. When can people expect your review
of this film after it's embargoed?
Speaker 4 (13:46):
I believe it's September tenth, my birthday, So when my birthday,
I could hit published on that on the site and
you'll check it out. It's and that's pretty typically due
like nik a few days before movie opened gimbargo lifts.
But I always try to respect the publicist andeople behind
the scenes that they have a certain marketing goal in
mine and that's that's perfectly fine.
Speaker 1 (14:05):
Well, happy early birthday to you, Christian. Coming up on
the tenth, you can see his review of Ami Racist
there at Hollywood Andtoto dot com. So final question here
before the break Christian, and these two films that they
share in comment Reagan, am I racist? Is they went
outside the parameters of the normal Hollywood production process, and
conservative voices are seeking those types of platforms, as you said,
(14:28):
not just at Daily Wire, but actually getting into theaters.
But what I've heard from Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh
has spoken to this as well, is they are meeting
resistance by the theaters themselves as to whether a lot
of these films are shown on screens or whether that's
diminished or throttled in some way. What is the solution
to that? Is there one? And how does a film
(14:51):
like AMI Racist? How does a producer like Ben Shapiro
or Matt Walsh get over that hurdle?
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Well, when I've heard.
Speaker 4 (14:59):
Some behind the scenes, but often it is that theaters
themselves that are more welcoming, that they see this more
as a business proposition.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
But You're right, there are certainly.
Speaker 4 (15:08):
There are times, and I'll have to investigate more with
this particular movie.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Where they do meet some roadblocks.
Speaker 4 (15:13):
And you know, listen the new rate Bee. It's a
new distribution company handling it, that's basically releasing it across
the country. So this isn't Sony, this is in paramount.
This is in Warner Brothers. It's a new Beast, and
so that's part of the problem. So it's not enough
that you have this sort of counterculture, right leaning content
coming into our lives. How do you get it out there?
(15:34):
How does it get from A to B to C.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
And that's not always easy.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
So it's not enough just to make it on a
smaller budget because you don't have the resources.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
You've got to figure out how to get it to
the masses. So it's complicated going.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
From the political realm back to pop culture. When we
come back. One film that debuts in theaters tonight, that
is September sixth, the sequel long awaited to Beetlejuice and
simply entitled Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice and you Know what happens when
you say it a third time? And also the fifteenth
year anniversary re release of Coraline and why it's been
(16:06):
such a big success. Stay tuned Part two of my
conversation with Christian Tooto Hollywood Intoto dot Com coming up
next on six point thirty.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
K How.
Speaker 1 (16:20):
My mom grew up here? That old house in Hew
like the ghost House is your mom? Lydia deeps. Unfortunately,
shoot legend the living the dead? Can they coexist?
Speaker 2 (16:37):
Ghosts aren't real.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Only global people believe that kind of crap. I don't
believe I'm doing this.
Speaker 10 (16:43):
Beetle Juice, Beetle Juice, Beetlejuice, and you can help me,
say my daughter, how do I know that you're gonna
keep your word?
Speaker 2 (16:55):
I swear.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
Well, you and the boys stand guard. Nobody gets through.
Speaker 9 (17:08):
Good.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
I think for my dream really, mortnacmare material.
Speaker 10 (17:14):
Frank the unknown ansering your fears, and there's nothing harder.
Speaker 7 (17:25):
John, what the.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Thank you all for coming to the special occasion. But
right now, with like a little.
Speaker 8 (17:34):
Privacy, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, the sequel.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
It opens tonight in theaters across the country. Ryan schulingback
with you on six point thirty K. I joined by
my friend Christian Tooto Hollywood intoto dot Com. Now Christian.
One interesting similarity I noticed is that it's exactly thirty
six years after the original Beatle Juice hit theaters in
nineteen eighty eight. And that's the exact length of time
(18:05):
that we had between Top Gun in nineteen eighty six
and Maverick in twenty twenty two. What gives with these
much later sequels.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Yeah, you know, it's usually very suspicious when this happens.
I think about Zoolander two kind of comes to mind,
and it just it feels like.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
A little bit of a desperation ployed.
Speaker 4 (18:25):
But then we saw Top the Maverick and everyone loved
that and it was very, very good, and we all
dismissed the whole cynicism involved with it, and I, you know,
I approached this one a little bit in a similar way,
and also as a I'm not a huge fan of
the original Beatle Juice. I mean, I get the character
as unique and iconic and fun and Michael Keaton can
do just about anything on screen, but I didn't love
love it like everyone else. We listened to the Dayo song,
(18:46):
the quirky characters, the visual landscape, it was all novel
and interesting, so it's certainly worth revisiting. And I have
to say, I think this one didn't win me over
right away, but it wore me down as it went
on and got a little smarter, a little sharper, a
little funnier, and by the end that was all in
so I enjoyed this quite a bit.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
I think people will too.
Speaker 4 (19:07):
I think the early box office predictions are pretty darn good,
so obviously that built up excitement hasn't dissipated over that
thirty fifty years, has only gotten bigger.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
Didn't win you over, but it wore you down. You
know that sounds like Christian. It sounds like Beetlejuice himself,
Michael Keaton in character where he's really off putting at first,
but then there's a charm about him that kind of
wears you down. And that's what happened in the original,
which I did love, and I'll be going to see
this tomorrow with my sister who is in town. One
question I did have from your analysis standpoint, Christian, was
(19:38):
you know, cinema in terms of technology back in nineteen
eighty eight was a totally different ballgame than what we
have available on the palette for directors now. For a
movie like Beetlejuice that really thrives on being so weird,
so wacky in what ways? Maybe was it different from
the original or superior to it in that regard?
Speaker 4 (20:01):
Keep it in line with that original film Two Waves anyways,
But Danny Elfman wrote the score for that film and
the new one.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
I think that's a great choice. His sound is so unique.
Speaker 4 (20:11):
But also you mentioned the effects are religially alluding to
the effects, and they do a lot of what they
call practical effects. That's kind of the new buzzword for
old school stuff, where it's makeup, it's clay, it's foam,
it's something real as opposed to all the ones and zeros.
They can kind of whip up and make something out
of nothing. So I think that really kind of connects
(20:32):
the two films as well, and it's just enjoyable, it's engaging.
There's something captile about that look, and I think.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
That was a great choice.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
Well on a rider in this Catherine O'Hara, so you
get some of the familiar faces, obviously Michael Keaton himself
as Beetlejuice the Monster. And it opens in theaters tonight
all across the country, including right here in Colorado. So
that's a sequel. How about a re release fifteen years later,
a children's film from two thousand and nine that suddenly
(21:01):
comes back to theaters and does maybe even better. Here's Coraline,
welcome back. It's been a while we've.
Speaker 7 (21:09):
Been waiting for you.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
Caroline. You probably think this world is a dream common truth.
Speaker 7 (21:18):
But you're wrong, so sharp you won't you.
Speaker 11 (21:39):
Soon?
Speaker 9 (21:39):
You see things all right?
Speaker 1 (21:45):
Hold on, we are finished it. How do you want
to stay in your blackened up world forever? Or maybe
you're proving up to go back.
Speaker 8 (22:08):
Now?
Speaker 1 (22:08):
Christian. Hearing that preview a second time around right after Beetlejuice,
I noticed some eerie similarities just in thematic standpoint. But
what is Coraline? Why was it re released in theaters,
and why is it doing so well?
Speaker 4 (22:23):
Well, it was a stop motion film, and it was
certainly appealing technically to a younger audience, but they did
have that kind of icky fact. It was a little
bit dark, a little bit brooding, so I think it
even spoke to people of all ages. The reason why
they're rereleasing it is the anniversary is just an excuse.
What Hollywood has been doing in the last couple of
years now is re releasing older films and sometimes drawing
(22:44):
a crowd. Hocus Pocus did quite well. I think the
recent Lord of the Rings films got some attention. But
to me this is almost jaw dropping, because I think
Coraline opened either fifteen or twenty million recently. I get
a fifteen year old movie, and I think the total
right now is about thirty million. Now, there are many
films out there that are brand new that will not
(23:06):
get to the thirty million mark at all.
Speaker 2 (23:08):
They won't even come.
Speaker 4 (23:08):
Close to the fact. You've got a movie that you
can watch at home that's been available forever fifteen years,
and that all of a sudden it's back in the
big screen and drawing such attention. I think it's fascinating.
I mean, I think it's a testament to the movies
that endure. I think it's nostalogia. I think we want
to escape into the at least in past. All the
things to line up. But you know, give credit to
the to the film itself for holding up under extra scrutiny.
(23:33):
It's really interesting and as a movie fan, I just
don't see a downside. I want to see Raiders the
Lost Talk in the theater again. I want to see
Aliens again. I want to see the movies that I
grew up with again in an eater and hopefully direct
my kids along too. So you know, I think that
can bridge generations and also remind people that, hey, go
into the movies.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Is kind of cool, you know. And I think we
need that right now.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
Whether the movie going experience is kind of good and
bad off and on, we're streaming, we're going live. You know,
it's the culture changing, and I think this could maybe
help out the theatrical experience.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
We's wait and see.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
It's an encouraging sign. I think Maverick started this in
a lot of ways. But just like you, Christian, I'm
such a fan of going to the movies, that theatrical experience.
It's social. You want to get out of your house,
you want to go into the theater. You want to
experience these movies for the first time, or experience them
all over again, like you mentioned with Raiders of the
Lost Dark and movies like that. And this is Coreline
(24:26):
Children's film two thousand and nine, re released fifteen years
later just this past August fifteenth, still in many theaters
as well, and doing better and showing life for the
in theater experience. And again, I think that's a great
sign post Covid that we are fully back to normal.
You can find his reviews at Hollywood intoto dot com.
He's also got his own podcast. Subscribe and download that
(24:49):
on any major podcast platform and follow him on x
at that very handle at Hollywood in Toto Christian Toto
always a great time. Thank you so much for joining
us on this Friday. Christian Toto, Hollywood Intoto dot Com.
A final timeout, we'll have our full of the week decided.
Your final chance to vote is during this break. The
(25:09):
nominees once again, Governor Jared Polis were refusing to recant
remarks about the imagination of Danielle Jerinsky contributing to a
fever dream that Venezuelan gangs were in Aurora. They were there.
The Associated Press mischaracterizing and quote for Senator JD Vance
that both Kamala Harris and Tim Walls ran away, with
then issuing a correction that not as many people saw.
(25:32):
And finally, Liz Cheney both she and her father are
voting for Kamala Harris, despite her remarks just four years
ago that Kamala Harris was an extreme San Francisco, California
liberal to the left of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren
le s Liz Cheney unmoored to principles of any kind.
We'll have that verdict when we come back. Ryan Schuling
(25:54):
live on six point thirty K how all right, looking
for the Beatle Juice Beetlejuice, the sequel, thirty six years later.
I just thought there was an interesting detail that Maverick
was exactly thirty six years after Top Gun nineteen eighty
six to twenty twenty two, Beetlejuice nineteen eighty eight to
Tonight's debut of the sequels and theaters across the country.
(26:18):
Here in twenty twenty four, Ryan schuling back with you,
it's time for our Friday Fool of the Week. The
nominees once again Jared Polis, the Associated Press and Liz Cheney. Wow,
this was a tough one. Kelly went right down to
the wire. It did. We finally have a winner though
it's our governor. Yeah, but he only won by one vote?
(26:40):
One vote? Who was the runner up? Liz Cheney. People
not take an aim at the Associated Press after their Shenanigans,
but I get it. This is a tough contest. But
here again Jared Polis, dodging three times our own Ross
Kaminski over on KOA whether he would take back comments
that attributed this idea the trend de Venezuelan gang had
(27:04):
infiltrated apartments in Aurora, just chucking that up to a
feature of the imagination of Danielle Jorinsky.
Speaker 11 (27:11):
You kind of jumped in a little bit on this
Aurora gang thing about the gang problem being a feature
of Danielle Jorensky's imagination. Do you want to revise and
extend your remarks about gang issues in Aurora.
Speaker 9 (27:24):
Yeah, I mean that's been misportrayed. It was specifically the
building tape, a building takeover which Aurora Police Department says,
you know has not occurred. And I you know there
are sources of intelligence on this and information you.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
Probably said something you shouldn't have said.
Speaker 9 (27:37):
Yeah, we should be no, we should be zero tolerance
for that kind of thing, right, So like if that,
like anybody can make allegations ross you know that allegations
are one thing. If they have the evidence of that,
Aurora should have gone in weeks ago. This is a
very serious investigation. You saw that there were some arrests
from a jewelry store heightst with regard with ties to
trend Agrayo, which is a good step. Ora either has
(28:01):
bad information or they're acting correctly.
Speaker 11 (28:03):
Can I get you to admit that maybe you shouldn't
have said it was a figment of someone's imagination.
Speaker 9 (28:08):
Well, I think that was a reference to is whether
buildings have.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
Been taken over, and maybe they have been.
Speaker 9 (28:13):
Well, if they have been, then why aren't we taking
them back?
Speaker 1 (28:16):
I don't know. That's a darn good that's a darn
good question.
Speaker 9 (28:19):
My comments were showing frustration I was saying rather than
I was talking about. I don't know if you've had
a Danielle vis the other city, because rather than trash
their own city, they should make it safe. They're the
ones in charge that she is the mayor, like like
do it like we're here to help, that's what the
state's for. We're all for it. But like you don't
trash your city and not keep it safe. You take
the actions necessary to keep it safe.
Speaker 1 (28:42):
Trashing her city. If anything, Danielle Jornsky's the one trying
to save her city, unlike you, Governor Jared Polis are
full of the week, just trying to pass the buck
and shift the blame. As for daniel Jorinsky, guy does
jump must be the other guy. She's the galan does
your job. Jared Polis must be the other guy. We
(29:03):
close out now with another installment. No, I didn't forget.
Here's another deep thought from Vice President Harris and now
deep thoughts by Vice President Kamala Harris. There is this
wonderful word.
Speaker 6 (29:22):
That has a great meaning, and it's called hypothesis, which
means that you have an idea and then it is
well accepted, it will be tested, and then you will
learn whether it was correct or not. But there will
be no pride associated with the hypothesis.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Because after all, it was a hypothesis.
Speaker 6 (29:45):
And then you will reconvene and then create a new hypothesis.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
My goodness. On that note, enjoy your weekend. Everybody, stay tuned.
The Dan Kaplis Show is next.
Popular Podcasts
Boysober
Have you ever wondered what life might be like if you stopped worrying about being wanted, and focused on understanding what you actually want? That was the question Hope Woodard asked herself after a string of situationships inspired her to take a break from sex and dating. She went "boysober," a personal concept that sparked a global movement among women looking to prioritize themselves over men. Now, Hope is looking to expand the ways we explore our relationship to relationships. Taking a bold, unfiltered look into modern love, romance, and self-discovery, Boysober will dive into messy stories about dating, sex, love, friendship, and breaking generational patterns—all with humor, vulnerability, and a fresh perspective.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com