December 14, 2024 • 37 mins
Welcome to Season 2 of Shelf Criticism—or should we say Shelf Christmas-ism! This month, Stephen explores the holiday films gathering dust on his DVD shelves, starting with Nancy Meyers’ The Holiday (2006).
In this episode, he breaks down the film’s star-studded cast (Kate Winslet, Cameron Diaz, Jude Law, Jack Black) and explores its picturesque settings, predictable plot, and rom-com tropes. Along the way, he asks: Does the film deserve its reputation as a holiday classic, or is it just a shiny, featureless ornament on the Christmas tree of cinema?
He also touches on some behind-the-scenes trivia, including the surprising inspiration behind Jack Black’s role and an unplanned cameo by Dustin Hoffman. Plus, we introduce a brand-new segment: Shelfless Endeavors, where Stephen offers snap takes on buzzworthy films currently playing or streaming. This week, he tackles Werewolves and Gladiator II—because yes, there are fricking sharks in the Colosseum.
So grab a cup of cocoa, settle in, and join us as we figure out whether The Holiday is worthy of an upper shelf or destined for the rotgut at the bottom. Spoiler: Kate Winslet and Jude Law deserve better.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
It's beautiful.
(00:03):
If it's corny, if it's going to ruin your outfit,
you don't have to wear it.
I like corny.
I'm looking for corny in my life.
That's a nice line.
It's all those movies.
OK, let's do it.
(00:33):
Welcome to Shelf Criticism.
Meet your host, Stephen, a scholar of literature and film
by day, and by night, a cinematic archaeologist
with a penchant for everything from art house to popular
to outright trash cinema.
Over the past quarter century, Stephen
has amassed an eclectic DVD collection,
now occupying five shelves of a curio cabinet
(00:54):
in his living room.
Each week, he bravely selects one of these titles
to dissect.
Join him as he unearths everything from obscure gems
to cinematic missteps.
From blockbuster hits to forgotten flops,
each film gets the critical once over it probably
doesn't deserve but will absolutely receive.
So grab your popcorn and settle in.
(01:14):
It's time to dive into the diverse world of Shelf
Criticism.
Welcome to a brand new season of Shelf Criticism.
Thank you all for listening to season one
and putting up with me as I waxed poetic and pontificated
about film.
Thanks for bearing with me as I learned
(01:35):
the ins and outs of microphone settings and audio editing.
And then that one time I forgot to plug the microphone in.
Sorry about the sound on that Red Rings of Fear episode,
but there's no way I'm going back and re-recording
that one because I never want to think about that film again.
At least for the next few weeks, this will actually
be Shelf Christmasism.
After taking a little holiday, pun intended,
from the podcasting chair, I decided
(01:56):
I would come back in December and knock out some,
if not all, of the Christmas films on my shelves.
There aren't that many.
You see, while I'm in no danger of being visited by three
ghosts this Christmas Eve, while I'm not
plotting to spoil the day for Whoville,
it's just not one of my favorite holidays.
I mean, all the years working in retail,
you're lucky I'm not completely vitriolic in my opposition.
(02:17):
I mean, blinking lights are pretty, but not that mesmerizing.
I like giving to people, but I hate rampant consumerism.
There's not a single Christmas song that's a banger,
and do not bring Mariah Carey into this.
Just no.
And most Christmas films are schmaltzy and saccharine,
emotionally manipulative, and void of any substance.
But I'm going to do it nonetheless.
(02:37):
I'm going to suffer for my listeners.
You should really appreciate the sacrifices I make for y'all,
especially today, because it's both a Christmas film
and a romantic comedy.
And my disdain for that genre is well-documented podcasting
lore at this point.
So I'm doubly inclined to hate today's film.
And since it's possibly the most predictable film I've ever
seen, I'll just be equally predictable
(02:57):
and show my cards off the bat.
Loathe, abhor, detest, and those are exaggerations.
But dislike is not a strong enough word
to articulate my feelings about this film.
Today we're swapping digs, mending broken hearts,
and asking that burning question,
is Jude Law the handsomest man on the planet?
Spoiler alert again, he is.
(03:18):
We're opening up the DVD tray and popping in the 2006 Nancy
Myers film, The Holiday.
The film is currently streaming on Amazon Prime.
So if you want to revisit it or if somehow you've miraculously
avoided it for nearly two decades,
you can check it out beforehand.
Once you come down from the sugar
coma that this overly sweet movie will inevitably give you,
come back and hear me grumble about it.
Today's shelf pick.
(03:39):
On our front cover, we have a banner on top and bottom
showcasing our two romantic pairings.
Jude Law looks down, smiling rakishly,
while Cameron Diaz stares at his profile with the same wonderment
and awe that we all do.
Seriously, that is one good looking man.
I'm straight as an arrow, but he melts my butter.
The bottom banner has Kate Winslet grinning as she looks
into Jack Black's eyes.
He flashes his trademark impish grin.
(04:00):
A plain white banner in the middle
reads the principal cast's names.
For those of you who care about the order build,
it goes Cameron Diaz, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Jack Black.
I'm not sure if Diaz and Winslet are the two biggest names, which
is entirely possible, as Law was fresh off
the heels of a scandal so sordid it would make you want to chant.
Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry.
(04:24):
It could also be, however, that the film just
wants to appeal to its target audience, which is naturally
and unapologetically women.
Case in point, the film's title, The Holiday,
is in the center of the banner.
And hovering over the A and the Y at the end of the words
are a film by Nancy Myers.
Beneath the film's title, we're informed that from the director
of What Women Want and Something's Got to Give,
(04:44):
Myers, of course, is well known for her rom-coms
where they're directing like it's complicated,
to writing them, such as Father the Bride, all three of those,
although she also directed the third of it.
On the DVD back, it reads, and Nancy Myers, The Holiday,
a romantic comedy from the director of Something's
Got to Give and What Women Want.
I feel like I've heard that somewhere before.
Anyway, two women trade homes only
to find a change of address can change their lives.
(05:07):
Iris, Winslet, is in love with a man who is
about to marry another woman.
Across the globe, Amanda, Diaz, realizes the man she lives with
has been unfaithful.
Two women who have never met and live 6,000 miles apart
find themselves in the exact same place.
They meet online in a home exchange website
and impulsively switch homes for the holidays.
Iris moves into Amanda's LA house in sunny California
(05:29):
as Amanda arrives in the snow-covered English
countryside.
Shortly after arriving at their destinations,
both women find the last thing either wants or expects,
a new romance.
Amanda is charmed by Iris' handsome brother, Graham, Law.
And Iris, with inspiration provided
by legendary screenwriter Arthur Wallach,
mends her heart when she meets film composer Miles Black.
(05:51):
This may be the worst written cover copy I've ever read,
particularly that last sentence.
It is a mess.
Yeah, I stumbled all over that sentence at first
when I tried to read it.
There are plenty of other issues,
but I'm just going to let those slide for now.
How I came to own it.
You know, I'm not really sure.
2006 would have been the year my wife and I started dating.
(06:11):
And while that film premiered in early December of that year,
almost like it was planned that way,
the DVD wasn't released until March 13 of 2007.
The two of us were definitely together
for both the theatrical and video release.
But funny thing about my wife, aside from Christmas vacation,
she wasn't terribly fond of Christmas movies either,
with the notable exception of The Night Before,
that Seth Rogen stoner flick.
(06:33):
Side note, I didn't care for that one,
but I like it infinitely more than most Christmas films.
Long story short, though,
I can't really imagine her buying it either,
especially in March.
The only thing that may have possibly happened
was that I saw it on a shelf somewhere,
likely not around Christmas.
Saw two actors I like in Jude Law and Kate Winslet.
And you know, both of those are British,
so I might've just thought that's the term
(06:53):
they use across the pond for vacation.
As in going on holiday to Miami this summer.
Forgive my British accent,
I know I have some listeners across the pond.
Yeah, just go ahead and laugh.
Maybe I knew nothing about the flick,
which is possible,
since I tend to ignore Christmas films in general.
Maybe I didn't even read the back,
because I do impulse buy DVDs a lot.
Actually, I may have a problem.
(07:14):
Still, that scenario I concocted in my head
seems far-fetched.
Occam's Razor would suggest my wife just saw it,
liked all four actors, and thought,
hey, it's a Christmas film, so how bad can it be?
Answer, by the way, pretty darn.
Likewise, I know I saw it once.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't in theaters,
so it had to have been on DVD.
Yet, I can't tell you when or where,
(07:34):
or most importantly, why.
What I can tell you is I recall not really liking it at all,
and nothing's changed there.
But just because I dislike something
doesn't mean others can't enjoy it.
It doesn't even necessarily mean it's bad.
Miracle on 34th Street is a critically acclaimed classic,
but I can't stand that one either.
So perhaps the critics were kinder to this.
Let's take a look in critical reception.
(07:54):
The film currently holds a 51% on Rotten Tomatoes
and a nearly identical 52 on Metacritic.
When you let the moviegoers rate it,
that soars, with Rotten Tomatoes' popcorn meter
giving it an 80%.
And even the more discerning Metacritic users
review it as a 7.1.
As I've stated before, I always watch these films
before I look into any critical opinions.
What I can say is that my thoughts I jotted down
(08:15):
in my notebook were pretty spot on
with what the critics who held a negative opinion
of the film observed.
I could not, however, ever burst out a zinger
like Michael Phillips, who wins the award
for most caustic take.
Quote, the holiday is a 131-minute romantic comedy
for those who, if they had their way,
would still be watching Love Actually.
Burn.
Still, rather than rattle off the litany
(08:37):
of disapprovals of a critic and simply say I agree each time,
I thought it better to look at a positive review.
So let's give the other side an opportunity
to plead their case.
Let's hear what Karina Ciocano has to say
in her Los Angeles Times review,
simply called A Cheerful Holiday.
First off, why the quotes around holiday?
Is she calling attention to the fact
she's making the barest of pun,
if one can even call it that, on the film's title?
(09:00):
Is she quoting it because, sans definite article,
it is the film's title,
even though film should be italicized, not quoted?
You know what?
No more grammar pedant for the rest of this episode.
Maybe.
I'll try, but it's just so hard for me.
The alluring surfaces of other people's lives
can be deceiving, though generally not
in a Nancy Meyers comedy, Ciocano opens,
(09:20):
where thin veneer of fantasy cloaks more fantasy.
I mentioned Meyers earlier,
and the films I rattled off all do fit neatly
into that description.
Meyers seems to rely on upper-class white suburbanites
and their minor grievances and matters from the heart.
That's not to say being cheated on
with your boyfriend's secretary
or struggling with unrequited love
aren't difficult and emotionally taxing.
(09:43):
It's just that, you know, some people have real problems.
Ciocano continues, the holiday is a story of two women
who swap houses over Christmas
and, because they're nice girls,
wind up with their boyfriends they deserve.
No comma before the coordinating conjunction again
and an unnecessary one with that subordinate clause.
Who's the copi-et?
Nope, nope.
(10:03):
I said I would stop.
I lied, but I'm stopping now.
Maybe.
Incidentally, Mr. Ciocano, no shade to you.
That one's totally on the editor.
Also, kudos to our credit on the next sentence.
If you wrapped Jude Law in a bow
and tucked Jack Black into a stocking with a leather bone,
it couldn't be cozier or more Christmassy.
Good writing.
Painstakingly descriptive, avoiding the obvious cliches.
(10:25):
Hey, I applaud you on that one.
Next, she gets into some of the performances.
Kate Winslet, who, and this seems to settle it,
can do no wrong, plays Iris Simpkins,
an alternative version of what Bridget Jones
might have been had she been allowed to retain a shred
of her Englishness and dignity.
I said I wasn't gonna simply say I agree to the critics,
but here I have to do just that, mostly.
Winslet is one of the greatest actresses of a generation,
(10:48):
commanding presence on the screen,
who can channel any role, any emotion,
sell it completely.
I would argue that she can do some wrong,
but my disdain for Titanic is well known,
so I won't launch into another diatribe about that.
Seriously, it's not merely overrated,
it's just flat out bad, but I digress.
Even in that film, Winslet is spectacular.
In The Holiday, there is one exception.
(11:09):
When she finds out about Jasper's engagement
and tramps home, we hear her start to cry off camera
as we fade into the next scene,
and it sounds more like a cross between a foghorn
and a cat whose tail has just been stepped on.
I honestly suspect it wasn't actually Winslet,
but another actress paltry attempt at crying
that was probably shoehorned in in post-pro.
When Winslet cries everywhere else in the film,
(11:31):
when the camera is on her, she's fairly convincing.
And that's not really a trivial critique either,
because the theme of crying is a major plot point.
Case in point, Chicano writes,
"'Amanda's the other girl meet.
"'Successful, stressed to the gills,
"'dauntingly self-sufficient.
"'Her quirk is that she can't cry,
"'which means she can't feel,
"'which means her living boyfriend, briefly played
"'by Ed Burns, has been driven into the arms
(11:52):
"'of a much younger and presumably more
"'lacrimos receptionist.'"
By the way, kudos for using the word lacrimos.
I love that word.
It's so fun to say, and it's just not often used.
But yeah, we get the whole backstory
of Amanda being close to her mother and father,
the three musketeers, as they call themselves,
because cleverness or originality in this film
is nonexistent.
Until out of nowhere, the family splits up
(12:13):
while she's still young,
and that's the last time she cried.
Yeah, divorce.
To be clear, divorce can be deeply painful
and a formative experience, especially for a child.
It's not something to dismiss or to trivialize.
Amanda's inability to cry, though, in her workaholism
are framed as symptoms of the emotional fallout
from her parents' divorce,
and that's a valid starting point.
(12:35):
But Meyer's approach feels more like
a surface-level shorthand for Amanda's issues,
rather than a nuanced exploration
of how such an experience might shape someone.
Divorce is a common but significant event,
one that impacts people differently.
However, it's also a relatively safe and milk-toast choice
for a screenwriter aiming to create a character
with quote-unquote baggage.
It feels like Meyer's stopped short of delving into deeper,
(12:57):
more personal or raw territory,
keeping Amanda's trauma at arm's length
to maintain that breezy tone of the film.
And don't get me started on Iris,
leaning over and smelling the gas on her stovetop
as if she were invoking Sylvia Plath,
only to be saved by the dinging DM of Amanda
wanting to swap houses.
Even with Iris' deep love for Jasper
and the sting of seeing him engage to another,
(13:18):
it felt out of character for her to be suicidal.
Not to mention it's almost played for laughs here,
which is at best tone-deaf.
Can we talk for a moment just about how bad
Diaz sucks in this film?
I know I've seen at least a dozen films she's been in,
and I never really thought about her acting chops
one way or another.
Usually that means an actor is middle of the road,
not ham-fisted enough to stand out
(13:39):
and not dazzling enough to catch my eyes.
They glimmer on the screen.
But here she does stand out, and for all the wrong reasons.
For all her trials and tribulations,
she somehow seems to have a joker-esque manic grin
plastered across her face the entire time.
Her mouth is so wide, I mean seriously,
it's like her jaw's unhinged,
like an anaconda about to swallow water buffalo.
Incidentally, when she's being driven to the airport,
(14:01):
leaving deliciously handsome, wholesome,
and charming Graham behind,
you'll never believe what happens.
This woman who hasn't cried since she was a teenager.
No, no, surely she doesn't shed a tear.
That would be far too derivative and predictable.
How romcommy would it be to have her make the driver
turn around so she can rush back into the arms
of that hot, hunk of man?
Well, it's not like I expect a sixth sense,
(14:21):
seven or gone girl caliber twist, right?
After briefly discussing Amanda and Graham's romance,
Chicano moves back to Iris in Los Angeles.
Soon afterwards, we meet Arthur, Eli Wallach,
a legendary screenwriter in his 90s
who introduces her to the concept of meet-cute.
As Arthur schools her in the ways
of classic screwball comedies,
he gently nudges her in the direction of Miles, Jack Black,
(14:42):
a film composer and the business partner of Amanda's ex,
who like Iris, can't resist a toxic love.
If there's a positive I take from this film,
it is the meta aspect of certain parts.
I mean, it's not deconstructing the romcom
the way Scream did the horror film.
It's not even all that sophisticated.
But still, there's some self-awareness here
and that elevates the storytelling, perhaps.
(15:03):
At the very least, I think it gives a subtle nod
to the audience.
Yes, it's more predictable
than a paint-by-numbers worksheet.
Yes, every beat it hits is telegraphed
from the opening scenes, some on the freaking DVD case,
but it's part of a tradition.
If there is a positive to this film, it's Wallach's portrayal.
He's so charming and lovable,
grandfatherly and gentle, but sage.
(15:23):
As a screenwriter, he's able to use his expertise
to deliver the lines that eventually jolt Iris
from her romantic doldrums.
And it, too, is in the language of film.
Iris, in the movies, we have leading ladies
and we have the best friend.
You, I can tell, are a leading lady.
But for some reason, you're behaving like the best friend.
(15:44):
You're so right.
You're supposed to be the leading lady
of your own life, for God's sake.
While that was at least a quasi-clever quip,
yet again, we have the typical, facile Myers fix-it-for-all
or protagonist trifle.
Amanda just needs to shed a tear.
Iris just needs to be compared to someone in a film.
Therapy?
Psh, who needs therapy?
(16:05):
Just act more like a leading lady.
WWJRD, as in what would Julia Roberts do?
Poof, you're healed.
Speaking of Jack Black, he's not the worst part of the film,
but the casting choice seems a little odd.
Black has been a delight to watch on screen in many outings,
but one thing that he's not is the straight man.
Almost as if realizing this, there are a couple of moments
where Myers lets him indulge in his schtick,
(16:26):
and if I had to guess, letting him improv most of it.
But that feels so uneven for the miles we see
for the rest of the film.
And Jack Black and Kate Winslet are a lot like the transcripts
from my liberal arts degree.
There is no chemistry present.
I honestly would have much preferred
seeing a May-December romance between Arthur and Iris.
Now that would have defied predictability.
Chicano continues, like a magic trick in reverse,
(16:49):
the holiday reveals the mechanics of the formula
while trying to keep up the illusion.
By the time Iris meets Miles, she
has started to take on some of the characteristics
of the romantic comedy heroine, the better
to clear her hurdles.
It's a testament to Winslet's talents
that she can emerge from a door-slamming scene in which she
declares she's got gumption, relatively unscathed.
OK, so yet again, Chicano gives props
(17:10):
to Winslet for her acting chops, and rightfully so.
She and Wallach are pretty much the only redeeming qualities.
And well, Jude Law too, but that's mostly
just because he's a eye candy.
She also alludes to the film's predictability,
and I like the analogy of a magic trick in reverse,
but I also wonder how she means for us to take that.
I mean, it doesn't seem like praise, does it?
Or is that just me?
Matter of fact, I'm starting to wonder why Rotten Tomatoes
(17:31):
called this a positive review.
It makes me wonder if some of the other positives
were simply not savaging it and maybe
making a few scattered, faint notes of praise.
For certain, Chicano could have been harsher,
which is a nice segue into my take.
There's plenty more here to critique on top of what
our critic already has.
Let's just start with one of my biggest pet peeves in film.
Two people unnaturally rehashing dialogue
to give the audience exposition when clearly both parties
(17:53):
should already know this information.
Everything that is transpired between Amanda and Ethan,
all articulated beat by beat by them,
even though both parties live through it.
They're well aware of the story.
Need to understand what's really going on between Iris
and Jasper?
Well, all is revealed in a conversation
between Iris and Hannah.
Anyway, you were shagging him, weren't you?
More importantly, I was in love with him to his below.
(18:15):
Yes, yes, I remember.
Then you found out he was shagging
that trip from circulation.
Which is when we stopped shagging him.
I don't think we should be talking about this.
The office party.
But I always see you two together.
He cheated on you, but you stayed friends.
I was head over heels, you know.
Everyone knew.
That's a lot of shagging.
(18:37):
This is just lazy storytelling, plain and simple.
Especially since the film begins with a long, long,
extra long voiceover by Iris.
During her whole spiel on unrequited love,
she couldn't have covered those plot points too.
Incidentally, I tend to dislike unnecessary voiceovers too,
but it's better than having two characters
recap information for the audience's sake
instead of their own.
(18:57):
Another pet peeve is also present
in the lengthy DMing scene between Iris and Amanda.
Namely, the characters reading word for word
what they're typing.
This is certainly a film that is innocent and free enough
of offensive content that I could see a younger
audience watching it, even if some of it
would go over their heads.
But I don't think it's going to hold the attention of anyone
who has not yet learned to read.
I just hate that setup.
(19:17):
Nobody sits at a keyboard and types out the words
as they also speak them.
And as much as I feel I'm nitpicking on those two,
I won't harp on this much.
But if I may toss out yet another pet peeve of mine,
of which this film is a rank offender, product placement.
I get that Amanda has acid reflux,
but when she goes for that bottle and turns it just
to make sure we see it's pepsid.
The close up of the Google logo on the computer screen.
(19:40):
Are those Sony VIO PCs and laptops?
And let me just check the distributor.
Yep, Columbia Pictures, a label owned by, take a wild guess.
Amanda is wailing along with Mr. Brightside,
cool song by the killers from the album Hot Fuss.
Let's see, distributed by Island Records,
who is owned by Universal.
What other major film company produced this film?
(20:00):
Let's see.
I think the answer to that question
is as predictable as this film itself.
My favorite, however, are the mentions
and the close up shots of the technological wizardry that is,
or rather was, the Blackberry.
I'm sure being featured so prominently
would cause sales to skyrocket, right?
Nothing could stop this product from cornering the market.
Not even some little device announced less than a year
(20:21):
later, something from a guy named Steve Jobs,
has an eye somewhere in it or something.
Those critiques, however, are, yes, just pet peeves.
The presence of anyone, or even all of them,
isn't enough to sink a flick for me,
though I do wish filmmakers would quit doing all of them.
What does really start to detract from the film's watchability
and enjoyability is the pace.
I know I harp on this aspect a lot on films,
(20:42):
but I do think it's important to the overall effectiveness
of a film, and this one just plods.
I've made no secret that I'm not a fan of rom-coms,
but I doubt even the most faithful of fans
really want to sit there 131 minutes.
This is a genre that begs to be neatly packed up
in an hour and a half runtime.
It's plenty of time to have all the characters fall in love.
Nearly walk away from one another,
(21:02):
only to triumphantly run back into another's arms.
And all this has just enough time to also develop
a sassy best friend, a strident parent,
one or two other stock characters.
In The Holiday, it is literally over the half hour mark
before we get all the characters introduced properly
and start to see something even remotely
resembling a plot taking shape.
There's too much time spent with the jerks
our heroines are trying to get away from and get over.
(21:24):
Iris and Jasper get the least amount of time spent on this,
which is ironic because Jasper actually does
come back towards the end.
Meanwhile, we get this overlong scene by Amanda
and Ed Burns' character,
whose name neither I nor anyone else can remember
because he's never seen again.
He's the McGuffin to get Amanda away from the US
and into Jude Law's handsome arms.
(21:45):
The character's a throwaway,
and we spend what feels like an eternity
with him and Amanda arguing.
And yeah, some of that scene is necessary
for developing her character,
though again, it comes through awkward exposition again.
But what is for sure is that that scene could be trimmed
by I would say at least 10 minutes.
And if the film seems to drag, it's also out of balance.
And I do appreciate that the mirrored love stories
(22:05):
are different from one another.
And as I said earlier, the scenes between Winslet
and Wallach are among the best in the film,
but Black lurks in the background
for over half the movie, probably more.
And he only finally asserts himself first as a friend
and then only at the very end,
just suddenly bursting in and declaring his love for Iris.
And while I'm at it, he does it
in the middle of Arthur's speech.
And they're like right there in the front row,
(22:26):
like brood, man.
It does seem clear that the film wants to focus
on Amanda and Graham's romance
and Iris and Arthur's friendship.
Miles is somewhat of an afterthought,
kind of rushed in with an awkwardly timed Dana Ma
before like a Christmas gift,
we wrapped the film neatly in a bow.
I would be remiss if I didn't give the movie
a couple more notes of praise though.
For starters, it's a visually gorgeous piece,
(22:48):
particularly the interiors.
Whether Iris's cozy cottage that looks like something
out of a Thomas Kinkade painting
or Amanda's opulent modern McMansion in the Hollywood Hills,
both feel like flipping through an issue
of architectural digest.
The stark contrast highlights the differences
in the characters backgrounds, personalities,
and aesthetics, sure.
But they're also just, they're a delight to the eyes.
(23:10):
And while I have excoriated this film
for being painfully predictable,
I do have to say that when we finally do learn
Graham's backstory, it is not what we expected.
He seems a drunken sot and a womanizing rake,
but when we learn he's a widower raising two daughters,
our hearts kind of grow three sizes larger
like the Grinch's did.
It may actually be too much.
He may be too likable, too perfect.
Chicano notes, Graham, let's see,
(23:32):
is piled with so many beautific attributes,
you half expect his head to start glowing.
Yes, the word is printed as beautific.
Beautific, it's hard to even say.
It's supposed to be beatific, of course, right?
I swore I wasn't gonna make another remark about grammar,
so I'll, no, sorry, I can't.
Who the heck is the copy editor here?
I can't take much more of this, y'all are killing me.
(23:54):
Standout performance.
I've already touched on the four principal cast members.
Winslet is a generational talent.
Seven Oscar nods and one win prove as much.
She's as good as ever here.
Law shines on screen, and not just because
he's a handsome dog, though my goodness, he really is.
Black feels a little out of his depth
playing the straight man.
He's fine, but those couple of moments
where he veers into his usual schtick
(24:14):
make the characterization uneven.
And then there's Diaz, who, she's just awful.
Whether that's on her or the script, I don't know,
but she's by far the weakest link.
Oh, and did you know that Catherine Hahn
and John Krasinski are in this?
Blink and you'll miss them,
but they play Amanda's coworkers.
They don't get enough screen time even to register here.
Since we're talking small roles,
let's give a shout out to Odette Annabelle.
She's credited as kissing couple alongside Alex O'Loughlin
(24:36):
in the scene where Miles is scoring
at the very start of the film.
Annabelle's career is full of delightfully odd credits.
She's been reefer girl and walk hard.
And did you know this?
Also, her first role was one of the kids
in the class in kindergarten cop.
Did not know that, but I do know that I loved her in Banshee.
Still, less than 30 seconds of screen time,
no dialogue for her, obviously not gonna give it to her.
(24:59):
I think we all know who takes this one.
Eli Wallach, without question.
He's perfect as a lovable old man,
doling out sage wisdom to guide Iris
while letting her guide him in return.
The man's a treasure.
Magnificent Seven, The Misfits,
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, McKenna's Gold.
His IMDB page is a mile long,
though he passed in 2014 at age 98.
(25:19):
He even has a posthumous credit in a 2015 short film.
Whether you love this movie as many do
or loathe it as I do,
I think we all agree that Wallach is a true bright spot.
Cultural context, on this month's episode of Real It,
coming on December 21st,
Mackenzie and I are doing the ultimate
Christmas movie novel slash film combo.
Nothing Lasts Forever,
and of course this adaptation as Die Hard.
(25:40):
Well, that will be debated on the episode
as I claim it's a Christmas film,
and Mackenzie is just factually incorrect.
I say that to say, aside from the shameless plug, of course,
each year it seems there's a spate
of holiday movies released.
Of course, now that we have
the infamously bad Hallmark pabulum
that is either reviled or cherished
depending on how much taste you have or lack thereof.
(26:01):
But there also seems to be at least one,
if not more, studio films
which play in theaters around the holiday.
This year, for instance, we have Red One
starring The Rock and Chris Evans,
which is playing simultaneously in theaters and on Netflix.
Same platform is giving up the Indian film
titled Merry Christmas, exclusively streaming, I think.
Then there's Dear Santa starring,
look at that, Jack Black again.
(26:21):
Finally, there's an adaptation
of the best Christmas pageant ever,
a book I recall reading in second or third grade.
Hey, maybe next year's December real lit episode.
So what about 2006?
Well, you had Deck the Halls
with Matthew Broderick and Danny DeVito,
The Santa Clause Three, The Escape Clause,
unaccompanied minors,
which I literally never heard of
until researching this film,
(26:42):
and the remake of the 1974 slasher film Black Christmas.
All these films are critically reviled.
Aside from Black Christmas,
I've seen a grand total of zero of them,
so I can't rightfully judge.
But from what I hear, they're really bad.
Incidentally, so is Black Christmas.
The 1974 film was really well done, wonderfully acted.
It was a precursor to some of the greats of the genre,
(27:03):
certainly an influence on John Carpenter
for Halloween a few years later.
The remake was unnecessary, poorly executed,
and an affront to what the original accomplished.
Incidentally, they remade it again just a few years ago,
and better, but that doesn't mean it's good.
Since I don't really care for Christmas films anyway,
I can't judge, but suffice to say 2006
isn't really remembered as a great year for them,
(27:25):
with perhaps the exception being the holiday.
It does make me wonder if those who do look fondly
on this film maybe do so because of what it was up against
was so utterly bad.
It didn't go unnoticed that as I read
some of the critical responses,
many mentioned that at least it wasn't Deck the Halls
or the Santa Claus Three.
Only one of those aforementioned films, however,
includes someone being impaled by a Christmas tree.
(27:45):
I'll let you guess which one that is.
Few quick notes of trivia.
Kate Winslet's character is named Iris Simpkins.
This marked the second time Winslet has played a character
by the name of Iris.
In 2001, she played a young Iris Murdoch,
the legendary British author,
in the biopic titled, I think predictability
is the theme here, Iris.
According to IMDB's trivia page,
(28:06):
which oftenly frustratingly does not cite its sources,
the film was written with each of the principal cast in mind.
However, doing a little legwork of my own,
I found an interview with Myers which confirms this.
Even though it does seem a stretch
to wind up being able to snag all four actors you wanted
for a role, also, if she really wrote this part
for Jack Black, I wonder how many of his films
she's actually seen.
(28:27):
One of my favorite moments in the film
was in the video store when Miles is going on
about film scores.
He begins to talk about Mrs. Robinson from The Graduate,
and the camera cuts to Dustin Hoffman
who just shakes his head and says,
"'I can never go anywhere.'"
Apparently this was unplanned.
Hoffman was walking by the video store,
he saw a bunch of cameras and walked over
to see what was going on.
He knew Myers, so they improvised a role
(28:48):
right there on the spot.
Nice piece of serendipity.
As I was thinking about the shameless product placement,
one of the thoughts that came into my head was,
well, at least they made up this website
where Iris and Amanda meet.
Nope, homeexchange.com.
It's a real site, still exists.
By the way, it became so popular after this film
that the UK issued warnings urging those
who used it to be careful.
You never know who you're swapping homes with.
(29:09):
Little bit of a mistake, Iris is from Surrey,
and upon first meeting her, author remarks
that Cary Grant was also from Surrey,
but Cary Grant, in fact, was from Bristol.
And lastly, a bit of a confusion.
Again, I don't really get into a lot of Christmas traditions
aside from my mother making chocolate gravy
every Christmas morning, which I do look forward to.
It's a Southern thing.
If you've not had chocolate gravy, you've not lived.
(29:30):
But I do kind of like the idea of Whamageddon,
just because it's easy for me to win.
I don't really go shopping during Christmas at all.
I try to avoid stores, so I don't hear that over the PA.
I don't listen to the radio.
I certainly don't deliberately seek out Christmas carols.
So I usually win Whamageddon.
I say that to say, as I was looking at the soundtrack
to this film, Last Christmas by Wham is included.
(29:50):
I watched the film.
Matter of fact, I went back and just kind of scanned
through it again.
I did not once hear Last Christmas.
So I don't know if I've lost Whamageddon this year or not.
It would break like a three year streak if I did,
but somebody help me out.
I literally do not remember it playing anywhere in the film.
So I think maybe I'm still good.
Who knows?
Let's move on to Shelf of Steam.
Get this thing on a shelf and get out of here.
For those new listeners, or hey, it's been a few weeks,
(30:13):
those who need a refresher, this is the way it works.
There are five shelves on my DVD Curio.
So I basically take the bartender's model.
Top shelf is reserved for the best.
Bottom shelf is the rot gut.
And then you have second shelf, mid shelf,
and fourth shelf.
Basically a five star rating.
I just have to be clever with it, right?
I've tried to be fair here.
I've admitted this film is a cross of two genres
(30:34):
I don't really like.
I've reiterated yet again that I firmly believe
in the enjoy what you enjoy
and don't feel bad about it mantra.
I've highlighted the positives.
I've given credit where credit was due.
And all that said, I cannot in good conscience
call this anything but a bad film.
And I stress, if you like it, that's okay.
It's perfectly acceptable to like bad films.
Heck, I just saw Werewolves two days ago
(30:54):
and I confess to a colleague I liked it more than I should.
And he laughed at me and said,
yeah, but you like to watch bad films, don't you?
Good sir, I absolutely do.
And that film was just my own particular brand of bad.
So if the holiday is your kind of bad, then own it.
Break it out, watch it every December,
or heck, watch it once a month.
No skin off my nose.
And don't take offense at what I'm about to say.
(31:15):
This film lands squarely on the...
Fourth shelf.
Blasphemous perhaps, given my Kate Winslet
and Jude Law standing, but the film just doesn't stick
to landing on what starts as a decent setup.
In a perfect world, its execution would transcend genre,
making even a minor Scrooge and major rom-com hater
(31:35):
like me enjoy it, but I did not.
And that's what the fourth shelf is for.
Films that appeal to certain people,
despite the fact they are massively flawed.
And I'm just not one of those certain people.
If you adore holiday films, rom-coms,
or just staring at Jude Law's perfect face,
okay, that last one is me, but isn't that everybody?
You'll find joy in multiple viewings of this flick.
(31:55):
But anyone who doesn't already like those genres,
then it's really not worth your time.
And with that, I'm off to prepare for the flood of hate mail.
Podcast contact information is coming up.
But before I do that, I would like to introduce
a new recurring segment for season two,
Shelfless Endeavors.
I've recently vowed to give movie theaters
my business more often, considering it used to be
a commonplace thing for me to do,
and let's face it, they're suffering,
(32:16):
they need some support, and I suppose my paltry $15 or so
every now and again is really gonna turn the industry around.
But yeah, I used to go sometimes more than once a week.
If I don't get out to theaters,
I do also subscribe to nearly every streaming service,
so I should use them once a while.
In short, what I'm saying is I wanna watch more films,
and not just films on my DVD case.
So for this segment, I wanna give my honest snap takes
(32:36):
on films that are currently playing
or are currently generating buzz.
Last week, with Dr. Brenna, some of you may remember her
from our birds podcast on Real It,
she and I went to see Gladiator 2.
I wasn't really that hyped about it
until I heard there was a scene where they flooded
the Colosseum and put frickin' sharks in it.
Interestingly, the Romans would actually flood the Colosseum
to reenact naval battles on occasion.
(32:56):
Sharks, though?
This is a whole new level of ridiculousness.
Sharks are notoriously hard to keep in captivity,
even with today's technology.
Not to mention the sharks in the film
are clearly Great Whites.
No Great White has ever survived in captivity.
Also, no White is gonna be leisurely swimming around
in the Mediterranean.
But I won't split hairs on historical
or biological inaccuracies.
(33:17):
The film itself wasn't the worst.
It was, however, truly, utterly unnecessary.
It was a sequel for the sake of being a sequel.
At best, it's nostalgia porn,
with the film sacrificing logic and plot
to make as many callbacks to the OG Gladiator as it can.
I've seen worse, but I wasn't impressed.
As for the aforementioned werewolves,
there's really no reason it should be as good as it is,
(33:38):
and please understand when I'm saying that.
I'm not saying it's good.
Once you get past the ridiculous premise,
literally, it's the full moon creating the werewolves,
as in normal people exposed to moonlight
during the supermoon become werewolves.
A strange twisting of the werewolf lore.
But once you get past that, and also the dragging first act,
speaking of bad pacing, there's some decent action,
(34:01):
genuine suspense, horror elements.
I think what I liked the most was the dark,
cool-tone color grading of the lighting
and the overpowering synthwave soundtrack.
I think it was deliberately made to pay homage
to those after-dark films from the 80s,
and that alone endeared it a bit for me.
Speaking of after-dark films from the 80s,
hold onto that thought.
I may get back to the theater next week.
(34:21):
I have my eye on Craving the Hunter,
because apparently I'm a masochist
who wants to watch Sony take a giant dump
on one of my favorite comic book characters of yore.
If I do, you can count on another segment
of shelfless endeavors.
In the next couple of days, however,
I'm going back to the shelf for another holiday film,
one also beloved by many.
I've never seen Elf.
Again, not my kind of film, but every time I admit that,
(34:43):
I'm met with a mix of resentment and just utter shock.
It's been sitting on my DVD cabinet,
and I tend to like Will Ferrell mostly.
He's hit or miss.
And then there's Zooey Deschanel, Ed Asner,
Bob Newhart, Mary Steenburgen.
Holy crap, is that Ray Harryhausen?
Okay, I'm looking at myself
with a mix of resentment and shock now.
(35:04):
This time to finally step up and watch Elf.
If all goes well, that episode will drop early next week
with maybe another even later in the week.
What I'm trying to do is get through as many holiday films
as possible before Christmas, frankly,
because I only have a handful and I want to knock them out.
It's not like I'm teaching a three week mini-master class
on top of everything else, you know?
Speaking of the holiday, this will be an eventful December.
(35:26):
I've already plugged real it's holiday episode
where the peerless McKenzie and I
will cover Nothing Lasts Forever slash Die Hard.
And for those who can't get enough of the Owls of Palace,
be sure to check out our periodic special edition podcast,
Parliament After Dark.
In this series, the incomparable McKenzie
and the amazing Reagan and I tackle midnight movies.
Later this month, we're watching Vanilla Ice's
(35:46):
1991 film, Cool as Ice.
And I'm so not looking forward to that.
Unlike my co-host, I actually lived through that era.
And let me tell you,
those were dark days for entertainment.
To stay up on all the news
from all the Owls of Palace's family of shows,
like and follow our podcast feed and social media.
Feel free to email me at steven at shelfcriticism.com.
(36:07):
That's S-T-E-P-H-E-N.
And you can also find Shelf Criticism on Facebook.
Real It's official website is,
as predictable as a Nancy Meyers plot, realitpodcast.com.
You'll find us on social media at realitpodcast.com
and you can email us at realit at realitpodcast.com.
Just remember that's R-E-E-L, as in a film reel.
(36:27):
Well, until next time, DVD aficionados,
remember to treat yourself
to a little shelf indulgence of your own.
Amelia, sing us home.
["Shelf Criticism"]
Shelf Criticism is an Owls of Palace production.
(36:51):
This podcast is in no way connected
with the educational institutions the host is employed by.
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the host
and do not necessarily reflect the views
of any other organisation with which he is affiliated.
Most images displayed are public domain.
Images and stills from films, descriptions of scenes
and passages from books are used for educational
and critical purposes and not for profit
(37:13):
and therefore fall under the terms of fair use.
["Shelf Criticism"]
["Shelf Criticism"]
["Shelf Criticism"]
Sassy.
(37:33):
Love it.
Is this a bad game?
No.
It's beautiful.
(00:03):
If it's corny, if it's going to ruin your outfit,
you don't have to wear it.
I like corny.
I'm looking for corny in my life.
That's a nice line.
It's all those movies.
OK, let's do it.
(00:33):
Welcome to Shelf Criticism.
Meet your host, Stephen, a scholar of literature and film
by day, and by night, a cinematic archaeologist
with a penchant for everything from art house to popular
to outright trash cinema.
Over the past quarter century, Stephen
has amassed an eclectic DVD collection,
now occupying five shelves of a curio cabinet
(00:54):
in his living room.
Each week, he bravely selects one of these titles
to dissect.
Join him as he unearths everything from obscure gems
to cinematic missteps.
From blockbuster hits to forgotten flops,
each film gets the critical once over it probably
doesn't deserve but will absolutely receive.
So grab your popcorn and settle in.
(01:14):
It's time to dive into the diverse world of Shelf
Criticism.
Welcome to a brand new season of Shelf Criticism.
Thank you all for listening to season one
and putting up with me as I waxed poetic and pontificated
about film.
Thanks for bearing with me as I learned
(01:35):
the ins and outs of microphone settings and audio editing.
And then that one time I forgot to plug the microphone in.
Sorry about the sound on that Red Rings of Fear episode,
but there's no way I'm going back and re-recording
that one because I never want to think about that film again.
At least for the next few weeks, this will actually
be Shelf Christmasism.
After taking a little holiday, pun intended,
from the podcasting chair, I decided
(01:56):
I would come back in December and knock out some,
if not all, of the Christmas films on my shelves.
There aren't that many.
You see, while I'm in no danger of being visited by three
ghosts this Christmas Eve, while I'm not
plotting to spoil the day for Whoville,
it's just not one of my favorite holidays.
I mean, all the years working in retail,
you're lucky I'm not completely vitriolic in my opposition.
(02:17):
I mean, blinking lights are pretty, but not that mesmerizing.
I like giving to people, but I hate rampant consumerism.
There's not a single Christmas song that's a banger,
and do not bring Mariah Carey into this.
Just no.
And most Christmas films are schmaltzy and saccharine,
emotionally manipulative, and void of any substance.
But I'm going to do it nonetheless.
(02:37):
I'm going to suffer for my listeners.
You should really appreciate the sacrifices I make for y'all,
especially today, because it's both a Christmas film
and a romantic comedy.
And my disdain for that genre is well-documented podcasting
lore at this point.
So I'm doubly inclined to hate today's film.
And since it's possibly the most predictable film I've ever
seen, I'll just be equally predictable
(02:57):
and show my cards off the bat.
Loathe, abhor, detest, and those are exaggerations.
But dislike is not a strong enough word
to articulate my feelings about this film.
Today we're swapping digs, mending broken hearts,
and asking that burning question,
is Jude Law the handsomest man on the planet?
Spoiler alert again, he is.
(03:18):
We're opening up the DVD tray and popping in the 2006 Nancy
Myers film, The Holiday.
The film is currently streaming on Amazon Prime.
So if you want to revisit it or if somehow you've miraculously
avoided it for nearly two decades,
you can check it out beforehand.
Once you come down from the sugar
coma that this overly sweet movie will inevitably give you,
come back and hear me grumble about it.
Today's shelf pick.
(03:39):
On our front cover, we have a banner on top and bottom
showcasing our two romantic pairings.
Jude Law looks down, smiling rakishly,
while Cameron Diaz stares at his profile with the same wonderment
and awe that we all do.
Seriously, that is one good looking man.
I'm straight as an arrow, but he melts my butter.
The bottom banner has Kate Winslet grinning as she looks
into Jack Black's eyes.
He flashes his trademark impish grin.
(04:00):
A plain white banner in the middle
reads the principal cast's names.
For those of you who care about the order build,
it goes Cameron Diaz, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Jack Black.
I'm not sure if Diaz and Winslet are the two biggest names, which
is entirely possible, as Law was fresh off
the heels of a scandal so sordid it would make you want to chant.
Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry, Jerry.
(04:24):
It could also be, however, that the film just
wants to appeal to its target audience, which is naturally
and unapologetically women.
Case in point, the film's title, The Holiday,
is in the center of the banner.
And hovering over the A and the Y at the end of the words
are a film by Nancy Myers.
Beneath the film's title, we're informed that from the director
of What Women Want and Something's Got to Give,
(04:44):
Myers, of course, is well known for her rom-coms
where they're directing like it's complicated,
to writing them, such as Father the Bride, all three of those,
although she also directed the third of it.
On the DVD back, it reads, and Nancy Myers, The Holiday,
a romantic comedy from the director of Something's
Got to Give and What Women Want.
I feel like I've heard that somewhere before.
Anyway, two women trade homes only
to find a change of address can change their lives.
(05:07):
Iris, Winslet, is in love with a man who is
about to marry another woman.
Across the globe, Amanda, Diaz, realizes the man she lives with
has been unfaithful.
Two women who have never met and live 6,000 miles apart
find themselves in the exact same place.
They meet online in a home exchange website
and impulsively switch homes for the holidays.
Iris moves into Amanda's LA house in sunny California
(05:29):
as Amanda arrives in the snow-covered English
countryside.
Shortly after arriving at their destinations,
both women find the last thing either wants or expects,
a new romance.
Amanda is charmed by Iris' handsome brother, Graham, Law.
And Iris, with inspiration provided
by legendary screenwriter Arthur Wallach,
mends her heart when she meets film composer Miles Black.
(05:51):
This may be the worst written cover copy I've ever read,
particularly that last sentence.
It is a mess.
Yeah, I stumbled all over that sentence at first
when I tried to read it.
There are plenty of other issues,
but I'm just going to let those slide for now.
How I came to own it.
You know, I'm not really sure.
2006 would have been the year my wife and I started dating.
(06:11):
And while that film premiered in early December of that year,
almost like it was planned that way,
the DVD wasn't released until March 13 of 2007.
The two of us were definitely together
for both the theatrical and video release.
But funny thing about my wife, aside from Christmas vacation,
she wasn't terribly fond of Christmas movies either,
with the notable exception of The Night Before,
that Seth Rogen stoner flick.
(06:33):
Side note, I didn't care for that one,
but I like it infinitely more than most Christmas films.
Long story short, though,
I can't really imagine her buying it either,
especially in March.
The only thing that may have possibly happened
was that I saw it on a shelf somewhere,
likely not around Christmas.
Saw two actors I like in Jude Law and Kate Winslet.
And you know, both of those are British,
so I might've just thought that's the term
(06:53):
they use across the pond for vacation.
As in going on holiday to Miami this summer.
Forgive my British accent,
I know I have some listeners across the pond.
Yeah, just go ahead and laugh.
Maybe I knew nothing about the flick,
which is possible,
since I tend to ignore Christmas films in general.
Maybe I didn't even read the back,
because I do impulse buy DVDs a lot.
Actually, I may have a problem.
(07:14):
Still, that scenario I concocted in my head
seems far-fetched.
Occam's Razor would suggest my wife just saw it,
liked all four actors, and thought,
hey, it's a Christmas film, so how bad can it be?
Answer, by the way, pretty darn.
Likewise, I know I saw it once.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't in theaters,
so it had to have been on DVD.
Yet, I can't tell you when or where,
(07:34):
or most importantly, why.
What I can tell you is I recall not really liking it at all,
and nothing's changed there.
But just because I dislike something
doesn't mean others can't enjoy it.
It doesn't even necessarily mean it's bad.
Miracle on 34th Street is a critically acclaimed classic,
but I can't stand that one either.
So perhaps the critics were kinder to this.
Let's take a look in critical reception.
(07:54):
The film currently holds a 51% on Rotten Tomatoes
and a nearly identical 52 on Metacritic.
When you let the moviegoers rate it,
that soars, with Rotten Tomatoes' popcorn meter
giving it an 80%.
And even the more discerning Metacritic users
review it as a 7.1.
As I've stated before, I always watch these films
before I look into any critical opinions.
What I can say is that my thoughts I jotted down
(08:15):
in my notebook were pretty spot on
with what the critics who held a negative opinion
of the film observed.
I could not, however, ever burst out a zinger
like Michael Phillips, who wins the award
for most caustic take.
Quote, the holiday is a 131-minute romantic comedy
for those who, if they had their way,
would still be watching Love Actually.
Burn.
Still, rather than rattle off the litany
(08:37):
of disapprovals of a critic and simply say I agree each time,
I thought it better to look at a positive review.
So let's give the other side an opportunity
to plead their case.
Let's hear what Karina Ciocano has to say
in her Los Angeles Times review,
simply called A Cheerful Holiday.
First off, why the quotes around holiday?
Is she calling attention to the fact
she's making the barest of pun,
if one can even call it that, on the film's title?
(09:00):
Is she quoting it because, sans definite article,
it is the film's title,
even though film should be italicized, not quoted?
You know what?
No more grammar pedant for the rest of this episode.
Maybe.
I'll try, but it's just so hard for me.
The alluring surfaces of other people's lives
can be deceiving, though generally not
in a Nancy Meyers comedy, Ciocano opens,
(09:20):
where thin veneer of fantasy cloaks more fantasy.
I mentioned Meyers earlier,
and the films I rattled off all do fit neatly
into that description.
Meyers seems to rely on upper-class white suburbanites
and their minor grievances and matters from the heart.
That's not to say being cheated on
with your boyfriend's secretary
or struggling with unrequited love
aren't difficult and emotionally taxing.
(09:43):
It's just that, you know, some people have real problems.
Ciocano continues, the holiday is a story of two women
who swap houses over Christmas
and, because they're nice girls,
wind up with their boyfriends they deserve.
No comma before the coordinating conjunction again
and an unnecessary one with that subordinate clause.
Who's the copi-et?
Nope, nope.
(10:03):
I said I would stop.
I lied, but I'm stopping now.
Maybe.
Incidentally, Mr. Ciocano, no shade to you.
That one's totally on the editor.
Also, kudos to our credit on the next sentence.
If you wrapped Jude Law in a bow
and tucked Jack Black into a stocking with a leather bone,
it couldn't be cozier or more Christmassy.
Good writing.
Painstakingly descriptive, avoiding the obvious cliches.
(10:25):
Hey, I applaud you on that one.
Next, she gets into some of the performances.
Kate Winslet, who, and this seems to settle it,
can do no wrong, plays Iris Simpkins,
an alternative version of what Bridget Jones
might have been had she been allowed to retain a shred
of her Englishness and dignity.
I said I wasn't gonna simply say I agree to the critics,
but here I have to do just that, mostly.
Winslet is one of the greatest actresses of a generation,
(10:48):
commanding presence on the screen,
who can channel any role, any emotion,
sell it completely.
I would argue that she can do some wrong,
but my disdain for Titanic is well known,
so I won't launch into another diatribe about that.
Seriously, it's not merely overrated,
it's just flat out bad, but I digress.
Even in that film, Winslet is spectacular.
In The Holiday, there is one exception.
(11:09):
When she finds out about Jasper's engagement
and tramps home, we hear her start to cry off camera
as we fade into the next scene,
and it sounds more like a cross between a foghorn
and a cat whose tail has just been stepped on.
I honestly suspect it wasn't actually Winslet,
but another actress paltry attempt at crying
that was probably shoehorned in in post-pro.
When Winslet cries everywhere else in the film,
(11:31):
when the camera is on her, she's fairly convincing.
And that's not really a trivial critique either,
because the theme of crying is a major plot point.
Case in point, Chicano writes,
"'Amanda's the other girl meet.
"'Successful, stressed to the gills,
"'dauntingly self-sufficient.
"'Her quirk is that she can't cry,
"'which means she can't feel,
"'which means her living boyfriend, briefly played
"'by Ed Burns, has been driven into the arms
(11:52):
"'of a much younger and presumably more
"'lacrimos receptionist.'"
By the way, kudos for using the word lacrimos.
I love that word.
It's so fun to say, and it's just not often used.
But yeah, we get the whole backstory
of Amanda being close to her mother and father,
the three musketeers, as they call themselves,
because cleverness or originality in this film
is nonexistent.
Until out of nowhere, the family splits up
(12:13):
while she's still young,
and that's the last time she cried.
Yeah, divorce.
To be clear, divorce can be deeply painful
and a formative experience, especially for a child.
It's not something to dismiss or to trivialize.
Amanda's inability to cry, though, in her workaholism
are framed as symptoms of the emotional fallout
from her parents' divorce,
and that's a valid starting point.
(12:35):
But Meyer's approach feels more like
a surface-level shorthand for Amanda's issues,
rather than a nuanced exploration
of how such an experience might shape someone.
Divorce is a common but significant event,
one that impacts people differently.
However, it's also a relatively safe and milk-toast choice
for a screenwriter aiming to create a character
with quote-unquote baggage.
It feels like Meyer's stopped short of delving into deeper,
(12:57):
more personal or raw territory,
keeping Amanda's trauma at arm's length
to maintain that breezy tone of the film.
And don't get me started on Iris,
leaning over and smelling the gas on her stovetop
as if she were invoking Sylvia Plath,
only to be saved by the dinging DM of Amanda
wanting to swap houses.
Even with Iris' deep love for Jasper
and the sting of seeing him engage to another,
(13:18):
it felt out of character for her to be suicidal.
Not to mention it's almost played for laughs here,
which is at best tone-deaf.
Can we talk for a moment just about how bad
Diaz sucks in this film?
I know I've seen at least a dozen films she's been in,
and I never really thought about her acting chops
one way or another.
Usually that means an actor is middle of the road,
not ham-fisted enough to stand out
(13:39):
and not dazzling enough to catch my eyes.
They glimmer on the screen.
But here she does stand out, and for all the wrong reasons.
For all her trials and tribulations,
she somehow seems to have a joker-esque manic grin
plastered across her face the entire time.
Her mouth is so wide, I mean seriously,
it's like her jaw's unhinged,
like an anaconda about to swallow water buffalo.
Incidentally, when she's being driven to the airport,
(14:01):
leaving deliciously handsome, wholesome,
and charming Graham behind,
you'll never believe what happens.
This woman who hasn't cried since she was a teenager.
No, no, surely she doesn't shed a tear.
That would be far too derivative and predictable.
How romcommy would it be to have her make the driver
turn around so she can rush back into the arms
of that hot, hunk of man?
Well, it's not like I expect a sixth sense,
(14:21):
seven or gone girl caliber twist, right?
After briefly discussing Amanda and Graham's romance,
Chicano moves back to Iris in Los Angeles.
Soon afterwards, we meet Arthur, Eli Wallach,
a legendary screenwriter in his 90s
who introduces her to the concept of meet-cute.
As Arthur schools her in the ways
of classic screwball comedies,
he gently nudges her in the direction of Miles, Jack Black,
(14:42):
a film composer and the business partner of Amanda's ex,
who like Iris, can't resist a toxic love.
If there's a positive I take from this film,
it is the meta aspect of certain parts.
I mean, it's not deconstructing the romcom
the way Scream did the horror film.
It's not even all that sophisticated.
But still, there's some self-awareness here
and that elevates the storytelling, perhaps.
(15:03):
At the very least, I think it gives a subtle nod
to the audience.
Yes, it's more predictable
than a paint-by-numbers worksheet.
Yes, every beat it hits is telegraphed
from the opening scenes, some on the freaking DVD case,
but it's part of a tradition.
If there is a positive to this film, it's Wallach's portrayal.
He's so charming and lovable,
grandfatherly and gentle, but sage.
(15:23):
As a screenwriter, he's able to use his expertise
to deliver the lines that eventually jolt Iris
from her romantic doldrums.
And it, too, is in the language of film.
Iris, in the movies, we have leading ladies
and we have the best friend.
You, I can tell, are a leading lady.
But for some reason, you're behaving like the best friend.
(15:44):
You're so right.
You're supposed to be the leading lady
of your own life, for God's sake.
While that was at least a quasi-clever quip,
yet again, we have the typical, facile Myers fix-it-for-all
or protagonist trifle.
Amanda just needs to shed a tear.
Iris just needs to be compared to someone in a film.
Therapy?
Psh, who needs therapy?
(16:05):
Just act more like a leading lady.
WWJRD, as in what would Julia Roberts do?
Poof, you're healed.
Speaking of Jack Black, he's not the worst part of the film,
but the casting choice seems a little odd.
Black has been a delight to watch on screen in many outings,
but one thing that he's not is the straight man.
Almost as if realizing this, there are a couple of moments
where Myers lets him indulge in his schtick,
(16:26):
and if I had to guess, letting him improv most of it.
But that feels so uneven for the miles we see
for the rest of the film.
And Jack Black and Kate Winslet are a lot like the transcripts
from my liberal arts degree.
There is no chemistry present.
I honestly would have much preferred
seeing a May-December romance between Arthur and Iris.
Now that would have defied predictability.
Chicano continues, like a magic trick in reverse,
(16:49):
the holiday reveals the mechanics of the formula
while trying to keep up the illusion.
By the time Iris meets Miles, she
has started to take on some of the characteristics
of the romantic comedy heroine, the better
to clear her hurdles.
It's a testament to Winslet's talents
that she can emerge from a door-slamming scene in which she
declares she's got gumption, relatively unscathed.
OK, so yet again, Chicano gives props
(17:10):
to Winslet for her acting chops, and rightfully so.
She and Wallach are pretty much the only redeeming qualities.
And well, Jude Law too, but that's mostly
just because he's a eye candy.
She also alludes to the film's predictability,
and I like the analogy of a magic trick in reverse,
but I also wonder how she means for us to take that.
I mean, it doesn't seem like praise, does it?
Or is that just me?
Matter of fact, I'm starting to wonder why Rotten Tomatoes
(17:31):
called this a positive review.
It makes me wonder if some of the other positives
were simply not savaging it and maybe
making a few scattered, faint notes of praise.
For certain, Chicano could have been harsher,
which is a nice segue into my take.
There's plenty more here to critique on top of what
our critic already has.
Let's just start with one of my biggest pet peeves in film.
Two people unnaturally rehashing dialogue
to give the audience exposition when clearly both parties
(17:53):
should already know this information.
Everything that is transpired between Amanda and Ethan,
all articulated beat by beat by them,
even though both parties live through it.
They're well aware of the story.
Need to understand what's really going on between Iris
and Jasper?
Well, all is revealed in a conversation
between Iris and Hannah.
Anyway, you were shagging him, weren't you?
More importantly, I was in love with him to his below.
(18:15):
Yes, yes, I remember.
Then you found out he was shagging
that trip from circulation.
Which is when we stopped shagging him.
I don't think we should be talking about this.
The office party.
But I always see you two together.
He cheated on you, but you stayed friends.
I was head over heels, you know.
Everyone knew.
That's a lot of shagging.
(18:37):
This is just lazy storytelling, plain and simple.
Especially since the film begins with a long, long,
extra long voiceover by Iris.
During her whole spiel on unrequited love,
she couldn't have covered those plot points too.
Incidentally, I tend to dislike unnecessary voiceovers too,
but it's better than having two characters
recap information for the audience's sake
instead of their own.
(18:57):
Another pet peeve is also present
in the lengthy DMing scene between Iris and Amanda.
Namely, the characters reading word for word
what they're typing.
This is certainly a film that is innocent and free enough
of offensive content that I could see a younger
audience watching it, even if some of it
would go over their heads.
But I don't think it's going to hold the attention of anyone
who has not yet learned to read.
I just hate that setup.
(19:17):
Nobody sits at a keyboard and types out the words
as they also speak them.
And as much as I feel I'm nitpicking on those two,
I won't harp on this much.
But if I may toss out yet another pet peeve of mine,
of which this film is a rank offender, product placement.
I get that Amanda has acid reflux,
but when she goes for that bottle and turns it just
to make sure we see it's pepsid.
The close up of the Google logo on the computer screen.
(19:40):
Are those Sony VIO PCs and laptops?
And let me just check the distributor.
Yep, Columbia Pictures, a label owned by, take a wild guess.
Amanda is wailing along with Mr. Brightside,
cool song by the killers from the album Hot Fuss.
Let's see, distributed by Island Records,
who is owned by Universal.
What other major film company produced this film?
(20:00):
Let's see.
I think the answer to that question
is as predictable as this film itself.
My favorite, however, are the mentions
and the close up shots of the technological wizardry that is,
or rather was, the Blackberry.
I'm sure being featured so prominently
would cause sales to skyrocket, right?
Nothing could stop this product from cornering the market.
Not even some little device announced less than a year
(20:21):
later, something from a guy named Steve Jobs,
has an eye somewhere in it or something.
Those critiques, however, are, yes, just pet peeves.
The presence of anyone, or even all of them,
isn't enough to sink a flick for me,
though I do wish filmmakers would quit doing all of them.
What does really start to detract from the film's watchability
and enjoyability is the pace.
I know I harp on this aspect a lot on films,
(20:42):
but I do think it's important to the overall effectiveness
of a film, and this one just plods.
I've made no secret that I'm not a fan of rom-coms,
but I doubt even the most faithful of fans
really want to sit there 131 minutes.
This is a genre that begs to be neatly packed up
in an hour and a half runtime.
It's plenty of time to have all the characters fall in love.
Nearly walk away from one another,
(21:02):
only to triumphantly run back into another's arms.
And all this has just enough time to also develop
a sassy best friend, a strident parent,
one or two other stock characters.
In The Holiday, it is literally over the half hour mark
before we get all the characters introduced properly
and start to see something even remotely
resembling a plot taking shape.
There's too much time spent with the jerks
our heroines are trying to get away from and get over.
(21:24):
Iris and Jasper get the least amount of time spent on this,
which is ironic because Jasper actually does
come back towards the end.
Meanwhile, we get this overlong scene by Amanda
and Ed Burns' character,
whose name neither I nor anyone else can remember
because he's never seen again.
He's the McGuffin to get Amanda away from the US
and into Jude Law's handsome arms.
(21:45):
The character's a throwaway,
and we spend what feels like an eternity
with him and Amanda arguing.
And yeah, some of that scene is necessary
for developing her character,
though again, it comes through awkward exposition again.
But what is for sure is that that scene could be trimmed
by I would say at least 10 minutes.
And if the film seems to drag, it's also out of balance.
And I do appreciate that the mirrored love stories
(22:05):
are different from one another.
And as I said earlier, the scenes between Winslet
and Wallach are among the best in the film,
but Black lurks in the background
for over half the movie, probably more.
And he only finally asserts himself first as a friend
and then only at the very end,
just suddenly bursting in and declaring his love for Iris.
And while I'm at it, he does it
in the middle of Arthur's speech.
And they're like right there in the front row,
(22:26):
like brood, man.
It does seem clear that the film wants to focus
on Amanda and Graham's romance
and Iris and Arthur's friendship.
Miles is somewhat of an afterthought,
kind of rushed in with an awkwardly timed Dana Ma
before like a Christmas gift,
we wrapped the film neatly in a bow.
I would be remiss if I didn't give the movie
a couple more notes of praise though.
For starters, it's a visually gorgeous piece,
(22:48):
particularly the interiors.
Whether Iris's cozy cottage that looks like something
out of a Thomas Kinkade painting
or Amanda's opulent modern McMansion in the Hollywood Hills,
both feel like flipping through an issue
of architectural digest.
The stark contrast highlights the differences
in the characters backgrounds, personalities,
and aesthetics, sure.
But they're also just, they're a delight to the eyes.
(23:10):
And while I have excoriated this film
for being painfully predictable,
I do have to say that when we finally do learn
Graham's backstory, it is not what we expected.
He seems a drunken sot and a womanizing rake,
but when we learn he's a widower raising two daughters,
our hearts kind of grow three sizes larger
like the Grinch's did.
It may actually be too much.
He may be too likable, too perfect.
Chicano notes, Graham, let's see,
(23:32):
is piled with so many beautific attributes,
you half expect his head to start glowing.
Yes, the word is printed as beautific.
Beautific, it's hard to even say.
It's supposed to be beatific, of course, right?
I swore I wasn't gonna make another remark about grammar,
so I'll, no, sorry, I can't.
Who the heck is the copy editor here?
I can't take much more of this, y'all are killing me.
(23:54):
Standout performance.
I've already touched on the four principal cast members.
Winslet is a generational talent.
Seven Oscar nods and one win prove as much.
She's as good as ever here.
Law shines on screen, and not just because
he's a handsome dog, though my goodness, he really is.
Black feels a little out of his depth
playing the straight man.
He's fine, but those couple of moments
where he veers into his usual schtick
(24:14):
make the characterization uneven.
And then there's Diaz, who, she's just awful.
Whether that's on her or the script, I don't know,
but she's by far the weakest link.
Oh, and did you know that Catherine Hahn
and John Krasinski are in this?
Blink and you'll miss them,
but they play Amanda's coworkers.
They don't get enough screen time even to register here.
Since we're talking small roles,
let's give a shout out to Odette Annabelle.
She's credited as kissing couple alongside Alex O'Loughlin
(24:36):
in the scene where Miles is scoring
at the very start of the film.
Annabelle's career is full of delightfully odd credits.
She's been reefer girl and walk hard.
And did you know this?
Also, her first role was one of the kids
in the class in kindergarten cop.
Did not know that, but I do know that I loved her in Banshee.
Still, less than 30 seconds of screen time,
no dialogue for her, obviously not gonna give it to her.
(24:59):
I think we all know who takes this one.
Eli Wallach, without question.
He's perfect as a lovable old man,
doling out sage wisdom to guide Iris
while letting her guide him in return.
The man's a treasure.
Magnificent Seven, The Misfits,
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly, McKenna's Gold.
His IMDB page is a mile long,
though he passed in 2014 at age 98.
(25:19):
He even has a posthumous credit in a 2015 short film.
Whether you love this movie as many do
or loathe it as I do,
I think we all agree that Wallach is a true bright spot.
Cultural context, on this month's episode of Real It,
coming on December 21st,
Mackenzie and I are doing the ultimate
Christmas movie novel slash film combo.
Nothing Lasts Forever,
and of course this adaptation as Die Hard.
(25:40):
Well, that will be debated on the episode
as I claim it's a Christmas film,
and Mackenzie is just factually incorrect.
I say that to say, aside from the shameless plug, of course,
each year it seems there's a spate
of holiday movies released.
Of course, now that we have
the infamously bad Hallmark pabulum
that is either reviled or cherished
depending on how much taste you have or lack thereof.
(26:01):
But there also seems to be at least one,
if not more, studio films
which play in theaters around the holiday.
This year, for instance, we have Red One
starring The Rock and Chris Evans,
which is playing simultaneously in theaters and on Netflix.
Same platform is giving up the Indian film
titled Merry Christmas, exclusively streaming, I think.
Then there's Dear Santa starring,
look at that, Jack Black again.
(26:21):
Finally, there's an adaptation
of the best Christmas pageant ever,
a book I recall reading in second or third grade.
Hey, maybe next year's December real lit episode.
So what about 2006?
Well, you had Deck the Halls
with Matthew Broderick and Danny DeVito,
The Santa Clause Three, The Escape Clause,
unaccompanied minors,
which I literally never heard of
until researching this film,
(26:42):
and the remake of the 1974 slasher film Black Christmas.
All these films are critically reviled.
Aside from Black Christmas,
I've seen a grand total of zero of them,
so I can't rightfully judge.
But from what I hear, they're really bad.
Incidentally, so is Black Christmas.
The 1974 film was really well done, wonderfully acted.
It was a precursor to some of the greats of the genre,
(27:03):
certainly an influence on John Carpenter
for Halloween a few years later.
The remake was unnecessary, poorly executed,
and an affront to what the original accomplished.
Incidentally, they remade it again just a few years ago,
and better, but that doesn't mean it's good.
Since I don't really care for Christmas films anyway,
I can't judge, but suffice to say 2006
isn't really remembered as a great year for them,
(27:25):
with perhaps the exception being the holiday.
It does make me wonder if those who do look fondly
on this film maybe do so because of what it was up against
was so utterly bad.
It didn't go unnoticed that as I read
some of the critical responses,
many mentioned that at least it wasn't Deck the Halls
or the Santa Claus Three.
Only one of those aforementioned films, however,
includes someone being impaled by a Christmas tree.
(27:45):
I'll let you guess which one that is.
Few quick notes of trivia.
Kate Winslet's character is named Iris Simpkins.
This marked the second time Winslet has played a character
by the name of Iris.
In 2001, she played a young Iris Murdoch,
the legendary British author,
in the biopic titled, I think predictability
is the theme here, Iris.
According to IMDB's trivia page,
(28:06):
which oftenly frustratingly does not cite its sources,
the film was written with each of the principal cast in mind.
However, doing a little legwork of my own,
I found an interview with Myers which confirms this.
Even though it does seem a stretch
to wind up being able to snag all four actors you wanted
for a role, also, if she really wrote this part
for Jack Black, I wonder how many of his films
she's actually seen.
(28:27):
One of my favorite moments in the film
was in the video store when Miles is going on
about film scores.
He begins to talk about Mrs. Robinson from The Graduate,
and the camera cuts to Dustin Hoffman
who just shakes his head and says,
"'I can never go anywhere.'"
Apparently this was unplanned.
Hoffman was walking by the video store,
he saw a bunch of cameras and walked over
to see what was going on.
He knew Myers, so they improvised a role
(28:48):
right there on the spot.
Nice piece of serendipity.
As I was thinking about the shameless product placement,
one of the thoughts that came into my head was,
well, at least they made up this website
where Iris and Amanda meet.
Nope, homeexchange.com.
It's a real site, still exists.
By the way, it became so popular after this film
that the UK issued warnings urging those
who used it to be careful.
You never know who you're swapping homes with.
(29:09):
Little bit of a mistake, Iris is from Surrey,
and upon first meeting her, author remarks
that Cary Grant was also from Surrey,
but Cary Grant, in fact, was from Bristol.
And lastly, a bit of a confusion.
Again, I don't really get into a lot of Christmas traditions
aside from my mother making chocolate gravy
every Christmas morning, which I do look forward to.
It's a Southern thing.
If you've not had chocolate gravy, you've not lived.
(29:30):
But I do kind of like the idea of Whamageddon,
just because it's easy for me to win.
I don't really go shopping during Christmas at all.
I try to avoid stores, so I don't hear that over the PA.
I don't listen to the radio.
I certainly don't deliberately seek out Christmas carols.
So I usually win Whamageddon.
I say that to say, as I was looking at the soundtrack
to this film, Last Christmas by Wham is included.
(29:50):
I watched the film.
Matter of fact, I went back and just kind of scanned
through it again.
I did not once hear Last Christmas.
So I don't know if I've lost Whamageddon this year or not.
It would break like a three year streak if I did,
but somebody help me out.
I literally do not remember it playing anywhere in the film.
So I think maybe I'm still good.
Who knows?
Let's move on to Shelf of Steam.
Get this thing on a shelf and get out of here.
For those new listeners, or hey, it's been a few weeks,
(30:13):
those who need a refresher, this is the way it works.
There are five shelves on my DVD Curio.
So I basically take the bartender's model.
Top shelf is reserved for the best.
Bottom shelf is the rot gut.
And then you have second shelf, mid shelf,
and fourth shelf.
Basically a five star rating.
I just have to be clever with it, right?
I've tried to be fair here.
I've admitted this film is a cross of two genres
(30:34):
I don't really like.
I've reiterated yet again that I firmly believe
in the enjoy what you enjoy
and don't feel bad about it mantra.
I've highlighted the positives.
I've given credit where credit was due.
And all that said, I cannot in good conscience
call this anything but a bad film.
And I stress, if you like it, that's okay.
It's perfectly acceptable to like bad films.
Heck, I just saw Werewolves two days ago
(30:54):
and I confess to a colleague I liked it more than I should.
And he laughed at me and said,
yeah, but you like to watch bad films, don't you?
Good sir, I absolutely do.
And that film was just my own particular brand of bad.
So if the holiday is your kind of bad, then own it.
Break it out, watch it every December,
or heck, watch it once a month.
No skin off my nose.
And don't take offense at what I'm about to say.
(31:15):
This film lands squarely on the...
Fourth shelf.
Blasphemous perhaps, given my Kate Winslet
and Jude Law standing, but the film just doesn't stick
to landing on what starts as a decent setup.
In a perfect world, its execution would transcend genre,
making even a minor Scrooge and major rom-com hater
(31:35):
like me enjoy it, but I did not.
And that's what the fourth shelf is for.
Films that appeal to certain people,
despite the fact they are massively flawed.
And I'm just not one of those certain people.
If you adore holiday films, rom-coms,
or just staring at Jude Law's perfect face,
okay, that last one is me, but isn't that everybody?
You'll find joy in multiple viewings of this flick.
(31:55):
But anyone who doesn't already like those genres,
then it's really not worth your time.
And with that, I'm off to prepare for the flood of hate mail.
Podcast contact information is coming up.
But before I do that, I would like to introduce
a new recurring segment for season two,
Shelfless Endeavors.
I've recently vowed to give movie theaters
my business more often, considering it used to be
a commonplace thing for me to do,
and let's face it, they're suffering,
(32:16):
they need some support, and I suppose my paltry $15 or so
every now and again is really gonna turn the industry around.
But yeah, I used to go sometimes more than once a week.
If I don't get out to theaters,
I do also subscribe to nearly every streaming service,
so I should use them once a while.
In short, what I'm saying is I wanna watch more films,
and not just films on my DVD case.
So for this segment, I wanna give my honest snap takes
(32:36):
on films that are currently playing
or are currently generating buzz.
Last week, with Dr. Brenna, some of you may remember her
from our birds podcast on Real It,
she and I went to see Gladiator 2.
I wasn't really that hyped about it
until I heard there was a scene where they flooded
the Colosseum and put frickin' sharks in it.
Interestingly, the Romans would actually flood the Colosseum
to reenact naval battles on occasion.
(32:56):
Sharks, though?
This is a whole new level of ridiculousness.
Sharks are notoriously hard to keep in captivity,
even with today's technology.
Not to mention the sharks in the film
are clearly Great Whites.
No Great White has ever survived in captivity.
Also, no White is gonna be leisurely swimming around
in the Mediterranean.
But I won't split hairs on historical
or biological inaccuracies.
(33:17):
The film itself wasn't the worst.
It was, however, truly, utterly unnecessary.
It was a sequel for the sake of being a sequel.
At best, it's nostalgia porn,
with the film sacrificing logic and plot
to make as many callbacks to the OG Gladiator as it can.
I've seen worse, but I wasn't impressed.
As for the aforementioned werewolves,
there's really no reason it should be as good as it is,
(33:38):
and please understand when I'm saying that.
I'm not saying it's good.
Once you get past the ridiculous premise,
literally, it's the full moon creating the werewolves,
as in normal people exposed to moonlight
during the supermoon become werewolves.
A strange twisting of the werewolf lore.
But once you get past that, and also the dragging first act,
speaking of bad pacing, there's some decent action,
(34:01):
genuine suspense, horror elements.
I think what I liked the most was the dark,
cool-tone color grading of the lighting
and the overpowering synthwave soundtrack.
I think it was deliberately made to pay homage
to those after-dark films from the 80s,
and that alone endeared it a bit for me.
Speaking of after-dark films from the 80s,
hold onto that thought.
I may get back to the theater next week.
(34:21):
I have my eye on Craving the Hunter,
because apparently I'm a masochist
who wants to watch Sony take a giant dump
on one of my favorite comic book characters of yore.
If I do, you can count on another segment
of shelfless endeavors.
In the next couple of days, however,
I'm going back to the shelf for another holiday film,
one also beloved by many.
I've never seen Elf.
Again, not my kind of film, but every time I admit that,
(34:43):
I'm met with a mix of resentment and just utter shock.
It's been sitting on my DVD cabinet,
and I tend to like Will Ferrell mostly.
He's hit or miss.
And then there's Zooey Deschanel, Ed Asner,
Bob Newhart, Mary Steenburgen.
Holy crap, is that Ray Harryhausen?
Okay, I'm looking at myself
with a mix of resentment and shock now.
(35:04):
This time to finally step up and watch Elf.
If all goes well, that episode will drop early next week
with maybe another even later in the week.
What I'm trying to do is get through as many holiday films
as possible before Christmas, frankly,
because I only have a handful and I want to knock them out.
It's not like I'm teaching a three week mini-master class
on top of everything else, you know?
Speaking of the holiday, this will be an eventful December.
(35:26):
I've already plugged real it's holiday episode
where the peerless McKenzie and I
will cover Nothing Lasts Forever slash Die Hard.
And for those who can't get enough of the Owls of Palace,
be sure to check out our periodic special edition podcast,
Parliament After Dark.
In this series, the incomparable McKenzie
and the amazing Reagan and I tackle midnight movies.
Later this month, we're watching Vanilla Ice's
(35:46):
1991 film, Cool as Ice.
And I'm so not looking forward to that.
Unlike my co-host, I actually lived through that era.
And let me tell you,
those were dark days for entertainment.
To stay up on all the news
from all the Owls of Palace's family of shows,
like and follow our podcast feed and social media.
Feel free to email me at steven at shelfcriticism.com.
(36:07):
That's S-T-E-P-H-E-N.
And you can also find Shelf Criticism on Facebook.
Real It's official website is,
as predictable as a Nancy Meyers plot, realitpodcast.com.
You'll find us on social media at realitpodcast.com
and you can email us at realit at realitpodcast.com.
Just remember that's R-E-E-L, as in a film reel.
(36:27):
Well, until next time, DVD aficionados,
remember to treat yourself
to a little shelf indulgence of your own.
Amelia, sing us home.
["Shelf Criticism"]
Shelf Criticism is an Owls of Palace production.
(36:51):
This podcast is in no way connected
with the educational institutions the host is employed by.
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the host
and do not necessarily reflect the views
of any other organisation with which he is affiliated.
Most images displayed are public domain.
Images and stills from films, descriptions of scenes
and passages from books are used for educational
and critical purposes and not for profit
(37:13):
and therefore fall under the terms of fair use.
["Shelf Criticism"]
["Shelf Criticism"]
["Shelf Criticism"]
Sassy.
(37:33):
Love it.
Is this a bad game?
No.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.