June 30, 2025 • 68 mins
Original Release Date: Monday 30 June 2025
Description: Phil is in Montecito, California. Dean is ALMOST back into his house in Birmingham, Michigan. They got together via the magic of podcasting (and zoom) to discuss: The week that was for "Cobra Kai" star Martin Kove, the latest company splits for "Legacy Media" conglomerates, and California's now official increase in the annual Film & TV Tax Credit funding. Wes Anderson and The Phoenician Scheme, Apple and their F1 and Fountain of Youth, the Indiana Jones films, Bong Joon Ho and Mickey 17, and the "Mission: Impossible" films all get deep dive analyses as well.
Description: Phil is in Montecito, California. Dean is ALMOST back into his house in Birmingham, Michigan. They got together via the magic of podcasting (and zoom) to discuss: The week that was for "Cobra Kai" star Martin Kove, the latest company splits for "Legacy Media" conglomerates, and California's now official increase in the annual Film & TV Tax Credit funding. Wes Anderson and The Phoenician Scheme, Apple and their F1 and Fountain of Youth, the Indiana Jones films, Bong Joon Ho and Mickey 17, and the "Mission: Impossible" films all get deep dive analyses as well.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Recordings in progress. Yeah, I know this exciting.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Feel the energy.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
No, no moving day is next Wednesday. This ordeal is over.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
It would be great if it was this week. You
could celebrate your independence from the one room studio.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
Yeah, from a secret location somewhere in America.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
This is your Chill Pack Hollywood Hollywood Hour. Your Chill
Pack Hollywood Hour with Dean Hagland and Phil Lareness. Welcome
(00:48):
to year nineteen, episode eight of Your Chill Pack Hollywood Hour,
coming at you from Montecito, an unincorporated town in Santa
Barbara County, California, nestled between the Santa Ynez Mountains and
the Pacific Ocean, don't you know? Phil Lareness and joining
us via the magic of podcasting in zoom, all the
(01:10):
way from Birmingham, Michigan, where they don't have microphones. Oh
my god, it's the Motor City adjacent Madman TV's Dean Haglin.
We've been hearing him regale us with tales of his
forthcoming move back into the main House. He's been a
good boy, He's allowed back into the main house. Yeah, congratulations.
(01:34):
Oh you know what could go wrong between now and then?
Speaker 3 (01:40):
Don't even the tree up front's look at rickety if
it hits them, Oh, well, I'm not going to even
see it. Yes, it's been an ordeal. We moved December
two in the year twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
December? Was it really December?
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Yeah, we spent Christmas, New Year's, Valentine's. December second seems
like a long time from to be living in an
air mattress and eat enough a hot plate.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
But I think it's long enough.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yes, I am shell shocked. My spirits crushed from out
room under me.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Great epic ode poems will someday be written about this,
and will be and will be spread around the fire
that we use as light because we're our civilization is
crumbling and devolving quickly.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
So oh I could tell stories around the firelight.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Yep, you know they might be telling stories about last
week's show when we rolled up our sleeves and talked
about some of the big changes going on in the
business of show, Yes, including Warner Brothers Discovery splitting into
two companies, Streaming in Studios and Global Networks. Why I
totally had overlooked the fact that other legacy media companies
(03:03):
had already pulled off the very same feat. Why Just
a month earlier, apparently, Lionsgate announced they're split from Stars.
Oh Stars Network, they split back up, So it's happening everywhere.
It's not the conglomeration that we've grown so used to.
(03:27):
It's whatever. The opposite of a conglomeration is. They're splitting
it back out to component parts and letting them fend
for themselves.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Does that mean Disney's going to give back Fox Television?
That would be something.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
Oh, just the Muppets would be neat the Hens, the
Henson Company, and yeah, exactly. Maurice Torenzio did, of course
send along the link to the Cagney and Lacy pilot. Oh,
we were talking about this. It's funny, isn't it Funny
(04:02):
being a word I've chosen to use that. We were
talking about the original pilot for Cagney and Lacey, much
of which I watched on YouTube this week, starring Loretta Switt,
who was replaced by Sharing Gless when it went to series.
Funny that we were talking about that pilot because that
show brought Martin Cove to prominence, and he would reach
(04:23):
of course wider fame through his villainous role in the
original Karate Kid It's hard to imagine anyone associated with
Cagney and Lacey having a worse month than Loretta Switt,
after all, she died. But Martin Cove is doing his
level best to have a terrible, terrible, awful month.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
By doing what.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
Oh, you haven't watched the body cam footage, have you?
Speaker 3 (04:50):
So?
Speaker 1 (04:51):
He was kicked out of a fan convention by a
police who were arresting him for having bitten a co
star during a panel at a fan convention.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
Okay, which convention?
Speaker 1 (05:11):
It was in Washington State. I forget the name of
the convention, but you need to look this up. She
is amazing. His co star is amazing. She had apparently
come over, greeted him, patted him on the shoulder. He
turned around, took a bite out of her arm, and
then started kissing her all over, you know, to make
(05:33):
it better, as one does. And yeah, and he was
forthwith removed from the convention by the organizers of the
convention and the police that they called. And the only
reason he's not incarcerated is she refused to press charges,
but as the body cameras show, she did press a
(05:55):
point or two before letting him go. She reads him
a riot act for the ages. Wow in this footage.
So it is wonderful. Anyway, after biting a co star
at a fan convention, you think, well, it can't get
much worse for him right now the news cycle. Oh
(06:20):
but then the news was unsealed that there were sexual
harassment charges against him in twenty twenty four. Oh no, yeah,
on the set of the self same Cobra Kai. Now
that assault did not or it was harassment. It did
not involve physical contact. It was said to be leering
(06:42):
and verbally overt enough that the actress went to the
studio with her concerns about the septagenarian actor and how
uncomfortable he made her. So Sony conducted a review of
the allegations, found them serious enough to look further into
the matter. Immediately they conducted a probe. Anyway, this was
(07:05):
and he was read the Riot Act then apparently by
Sony execs and advisors. You know, he said the right
thing apparently at the time about how he learned a
valuable lesson and he realized, and we've talked about this,
things have changed on sets. And I do have a
(07:26):
certain amount of compassion for people in any walk of
life who have been in a particular field, or in
a particular venue, or in a particular place for so long,
and then you find that the rules of decorum are changing,
and nobody wants to feel stupid, nobody wants to feel
(07:50):
awkward or uncomfortable or how did things change without me knowing?
And so I'm compassionate towards people who make genuine mistakes.
Right the old it's just a joke, That's all right,
if it really was just a joke. Right, But he
(08:11):
said the right thing, and he said he learned a
valuable lesson, which cut to a year later, he's taken
a bite out of a co star's arm on stage.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
Frederick. That's like very.
Speaker 1 (08:25):
Odd, he said about this. I was being playful in
the moment but went too far and there is absolutely
no excuse for my behavior. I regret my actions, for
which I take full responsibility for what I did, and
again I apologize to her and her husband. I'm committed
to learning from this and it will never happen again.
Let's cut to a year from now. What's he doing
(08:47):
because this sure seems like someone who's trying to blow
things up.
Speaker 3 (08:52):
Yeah, well, the act of contrition is one you would
think once you're shamed. You are taking that to heart.
But as you said as a sept Jerry, perhaps his
memories failing what he did a year ago, and now
(09:13):
he's done it again, realizing, Oh, dear, I have forgotten
that statement I made a year ago.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Already there's that Bill Hayter had some big unpleasantness with
Martin Cove when Bill Hayter was starting out as a
production assistant in the business.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Oh what was that?
Speaker 1 (09:33):
So he was a driver assigned to Martin Cove on
a movie out here in southern California. I believe, right,
And you know you have one job get the actor
to the set on time, right, and maybe a second
job help him arrive in a good mood. Right. Maybe
(09:54):
if what's required is quiet, give the actor quiet, don't
talk to them if they don't want to be spoken to,
let them take the lead in what this relationship is
going to be, right, But mostly get him where he
needs to be on time. Bill Hayter, a very conscientious
young man, understood this and was prepared for this. And
(10:17):
this is at least thirty years ago. This is long
before apps, before navigation apps. These are the days of
the Thomas Guide, don't you know and maps provided by
a production you'd get him in your call sheets right
of where you're going. So he had plotted out exactly
when he needed to leave, when he needed to get there,
(10:37):
how to get there, And it becomes apparent when Martin
Cove gets into the car it's Martin Cove's first day
on the shoot. Martin Cove, in addition to not being
prepared for the role he's going to play, has not
ever looked at the script, has no idea what the
story is or who the character is. So Martin Cove
(10:58):
needs time to read the script on the way to
set good So, but Bill Hayter has to get him
there on time, right, Martin Cove starts getting belligerent and
ordering him to take certain routes to get there, saying,
you don't know what you're doing, you don't know how
to get there. You know you're an idiot. This is
(11:18):
how you have to drive to get there, And of
course he's being berated by the star, so he does
what the guy says, and it quickly becomes apparent that
what Martin Cove is doing is getting Bill Hayter intentionally
lost so that Martin Cove will have the time to
read the script. Okay, they arrive late and after Martin
(11:44):
Cove is being escorted to the set. Oh, it's so
great to see you, Martin. I'm so glad you're finally here.
We're sorry about whatever it was that delayed you. Of course,
Bill Hater has read the riot Act by the production manager, right,
and just you know, whittled away to nothing. And the
(12:06):
most interesting part of the story to me is, at
no point does Bill Hater throw Martin Cove under the
bus for this? And I like that that's the smart thing,
by the way, anyone that's listening, right, you gain nothing
by blaming the person who is in fact responsible, because
it is, after all, your job to get him there,
and they need that guy. It doesn't help you to
(12:29):
blame him. And the best that's gonna happen is people
are going to say, oh, well, thank you for letting
us know. We'll get a different driver for him. And
Bill Hayter is out of job regardless. So anyway, So
on the way home, Martin Cove in great spirits, seemingly,
you know, Bill Hayter's not going to talk to the guy.
(12:50):
He's just staring straight ahead and driving, and Martin Cove
is Bill, are you still mad at me?
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Oh? No?
Speaker 1 (12:58):
And you know, so like kind of cajoling him, saying,
come on, Bill, what'll it take? What'll it take for
you not to be mad? Look over there, Bill, there's
like a McDonald's or something. Let's say, look over there.
Is there anything you want from that? I know they
don't feed you. Well on this, is there anything you
want from over there? I want you to pull over
so I can get something. What is it that you
(13:20):
want that I can get you? And finally, Bill Hayter,
just as you know, a milkshake and a cookie, right,
And so Martin Cove, I'm going to get you a
milkshake and a cookie, and you're gonna forgive me. And
so Martin Cove goes in, he comes back out, He's
got a milkshake and a cookie, and he proceeds to
stand in front of the car staring at Bill Hayterer
(13:40):
while he drinks Bill Hayter's milkshake and cookie just as
a power move.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Oh my god, is.
Speaker 1 (13:49):
That not the darkest thing in an industry sometimes built
on dark things that somehow involving a milkshake and a
cookie for a product assistant is one of the worst
things I've ever heard.
Speaker 3 (14:03):
Absolutely, Oh my, that's just your You're thinking to a
level of pettiness that is so outside my conscious realm.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
I can't even imagine. How did somebody do some stuff
like that?
Speaker 1 (14:20):
Don't work anyway. We just spent more time talking about
Martin Cove, I think than we ever thought we would,
and certainly ever had.
Speaker 2 (14:28):
Or ever have.
Speaker 1 (14:29):
That's true, you know, the California Legislature this week Dean
made official Governor Gavin Newsom's proposal to up the annual
film and TV tax credit funding. Oh looks seven hundred
and fifty million dollars annually. He had been pushing for this.
(14:50):
The Assembly finally confirmed the proposal. That sounds great, But
my immediate question was, but how do we pay for it?
I read another headline that gave me an idea.
Speaker 3 (15:03):
Oh okay, well mine is that extra work and people
pay taxes, and there you.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Go, so it pays for itself, pays for itself. I
couldn't help noticing that the same day that the news
about the legislature making that proposal official was the same
day that news broke that California Governor Gavin Newsom has
filed a seven hundred and eighty seven million dollar lawsuit
(15:29):
against Fox News, sighting, among other things, that host Jesse
Waters claimed he had lied about a phone call that
he Newsom had made with Donald Trump. This made big
news that everybody said, you know, Newsom was lying about this.
(15:50):
And to prove Newsom was lying about this, Donald Trump
posted a screen grab of his own cell phone, and
the screen grab in fact, proved to everything Newsome had
been saying. And so, anyway, I just find it interesting
that it seven hundred and eighty seven million, seven hundred
(16:12):
and fifty million. It's as if Newsom's lawyer said, you
know what, if you ask for seven hundred and fifty,
it's going to be way too obvious what you're doing here.
Let's just boost it to seven eighty seven. The jury
will bring it down to seven fifty, and it'll be
a zero sum game. It'll be perfect.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
But that will be his personal But.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
He's passing the savings along to the filmmakers.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
Ah, I see personally, Yeah, well why not?
Speaker 2 (16:44):
I mean, Fox News they can afford it.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
I'm sure they seem to think they're the number one
news channel, so I'm sure advertisers will not advertise on
Fox News.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
The summer movie season is game. It's in full swing.
I don't have to tell you. After all, you've postponed
your July third move back into the house to July
tenth so that you could go see the opening of
the new Jurassic World movie.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
Oh is is that why I did that? That's clever
of me.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
You you saw F one, the Brad Pitt Formula one
movie that opened to Apple's biggest box office hall yet
in what is an completely unintelligible theatrical plan that they have.
(17:39):
But Warner Brothers released through Warner Brothers, and they did
a great job opening this movie. It was a huge hit.
I don't need to tell you how many times did
you see that? This week?
Speaker 2 (17:46):
I did not see that.
Speaker 3 (17:49):
You know, I watched the Formula one Netflix documentary series.
I know, yeah, and I quite enjoyed that. So I
can't imagine a movie to capture that kind of drama
that Netflix producers are doing just on the fly by
going to every Grand Prix race around the world.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
I watched the trailer for this, and I have seen
Formula one movies in the past. I can't say I
ever enjoyed a Formula one movie and yet I have
seen this trailer and am thinking this might be a
(18:28):
movie I actually like, I might want to see this,
real boy, audiences have loved this. They did not give
you know, the exit grade was not the A plus
that they gave the director's previous film, Joseph Kaczynski's Top
(18:49):
Gun Maverick right, the Top Gun sequel that was his
previous film, But they gave it an A which is
really really good and like seventy eight percent must recommend.
So this is a film that, in addition to Wheels,
has legs.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
Probably ah like what you did F one.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
G So, so I think I will be uh will
be seeing this. But you know what I caught before
before F one took all the big screen IMAX from it, No,
a movie that never sniffed anywhere near IMAX. Wes Anderson's
new one, the Phoenician Scheme.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
Oh yeah, Now that has me curious.
Speaker 1 (19:32):
I was curious about how I almost let this go
without seeing it. Why Why have I gotten to the
point that I was almost I could take it or
leave it, you know, without having seen it. I like
why Wes Anderson's brought me so much joy through the years.
(19:52):
Why would I feel that way, and I feel like
I was being I don't know, deflated a little bit
by how much Lily describes as it seems like collectively,
there's a little taking for granted going on now with
Wes and Right, there's lots of Wes Anderson, and it's
(20:13):
unlike maybe other filmmakers where you go if you are
the sort of film goer who chooses based on who
made the movie as opposed to who's in it, you
still might be drawn to you know what I like,
I really like when they make action movies where I
really like their you know, in the old days, it
might have been boy, what a great director of comedy.
(20:34):
I really like their comedies. But Wes Anderson, it's always
pretty much a Wes Anderson movie, right, that's the genre.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
And this one's been met with kind of lukewarm responses
by audiences and critics, and I do feel like we
have reached the point where there is some taking for
granted I think going on where Wes is concerned, but
I personally realized after watching it, I almost don't want
to hear now what people think about his films if
(21:09):
it if it works, and he wants to make it
then kind of who cares what we think about it?
I mean, companies care because they want the film to
return a profit. But from a like review standpoint, what's
the point? Right? This movie works and it's clear this
(21:31):
is what he wanted to make. Okay, So what does
what I have to think about it matter at all?
You know, it's different if it's like Asteroid City. Asteroid
City did not work, it did not accomplish his apparent aims. Right,
This perfectly accomplishes what he sets out to make and
(21:52):
as such it's sort of a bit of a master work.
I mean, how could it not be. I mean he
is such a not only an artist, but a craftsman
as well, and he and he's painstaking and he puts
so much detail, as do all this incredible team of
artists that work with him.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
Right. Yeah, it's the same team over a series of films. Right.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
So the question seems to be more can we be
tired of it? Are we allowed to be tired of it?
And sure, of course, like we're entitled to that, or
can we miss the depths that in certain of his films,
actors like maybe Ray Fine or Gene Hackman or Bill
(22:38):
Murray have brought to their lead roles. Of course, of
course we can long for that, although I would advise
people again who are sleeping on this movie not to
sleep on the work being done by Benicio del Toro
oh as Jean Jacques Korda, the lead in the Phoenician Scheme.
(23:00):
It's a very accomplished, nuanced, subtle and charming lead performance
that he's giving. There might be extraneous elements in this film.
Scarlett Johanson is seemingly only in the movie because Wes
Anderson wants her in the movie. She hasn't given anything
(23:21):
interesting or relevant to do. But her bit lasts moments,
just mere moments. So it's a minor quibble, right, And
the movie doesn't go on. It's not a long movie.
It doesn't go on too long where you are sitting
there going man, if only they had cut this, if
only they had cut that. I'm reminded that the French
(23:45):
Dispatch his movie that kind of was described as an anthology,
though it really wasn't, because all the stories being told
were linked in the umbrella of these are things that
happened under the auspices of this publisher, of this editor.
(24:07):
But I'm reminded that it worked remarkably well. But as
people are wont to do with things that they consider anthologies,
they tend to cherry pick their favorite segments and point
out their least favorite at the same time as if
they don't all belong. And it's funny, because you and
(24:28):
I have talked about this that this is always the
folly of those those forms at preview screenings, that they'll
give an audience what was your favorite scene and what
was your least favorite scene? Yes, and will cut out
the least favorite scene as if it didn't belong in
there just as much people's least favorite scene might have
(24:49):
been because bad things happened to the character they liked
the most, right.
Speaker 3 (24:55):
Yeah, and that's part of the storytelling, right, I mean,
that's exactly what you want. There's peril like oh I
didn't like where the girl left the boy, but they
reunited at the end.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Well, that's every love story basically.
Speaker 1 (25:09):
And so in an anthology or a seeming anthology like
French Dispatch, Okay, that one that one I didn't need.
These are the ones that I needed. Well, but if
you didn't have that one, would the others have been
as pleasing? Would they have as been as resonant because
(25:30):
I guarantee you the same. The themes are being explored
and expressed, so you're taking away something that they might need.
Speaker 3 (25:40):
A fascinating so it's in context. All art is in context,
even bad art, right, so to go.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (25:49):
I always hated those test things too, because it was like, well,
I don't know. I mean, it either works as a
whole or it doesn't if you go individually, see by
scene or phrase by phrase or character by character. Even
it's such a pointless exercise.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
I'm not sure why they do it.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Yeah, well, because they kind of justify the money. Man.
I guess they have to tell they have to have ideas.
Here's the idea, and then I've backed it up with data.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
Yeah right, Well told me I've never read a script before.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
So when they asked me, what do I think, I go,
Can the coach be read instead of Blue going to
be a dog instead of a cat?
Speaker 2 (26:35):
You know, I don't know what to do.
Speaker 3 (26:37):
I don't know what to say, but I'm being paid
six digits a year to say it, So here I go.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
You know.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Interesting proof of this is that when Wes Anderson works
for Netflix to adapt the role doll Stories. Yes, they
actually released them as shorts, right.
Speaker 2 (27:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
And then though someone pointed out, and this is what
I availed myself of, when you watch them all together
as if they were a feature, they are all better
because the themes now come into much clearer focus when
(27:21):
you have them edited together that way, but the tone
becomes sharper and deeper and more affecting. I think you
can only say probably that Wes Anderson has made three
films that were a mess, and therefore I have no
(27:42):
problem with someone saying they aren't good, but none of
them well. One of them, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zisu,
which is a mess, might actually be my favorite of
his films. It doesn't it doesn't achieve the greatness of
the Royal Tenenbombs of the Grand Budapest Hotel, but at
(28:03):
its greatest it's at that level. It has moments where
it hits it, and I'm kind of excited by the
fact that that greatness is made possible by some of
the bizarre attempts they're making that don't pay off. You know,
It's the movie to me, especially coming off Royal Tenin Bombs,
(28:25):
of an artist who's now going all right, let's see
how much I can expand, right, and that's exciting the fences. Yeah,
and it's so it's one of those cases where Okay,
this is a failure that I love. It's a beautiful mess.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
Right.
Speaker 1 (28:44):
It doesn't have maybe the fresh sense of excitement of
his Rushmore or his early forays into animation, but I
love that the film almost has as much as those
and sense of excitement. And like, again, it's a mess.
It's a mess. That's the only way to describe it.
But it is unlike I would say, unlike Darjeeling Limited
(29:09):
or Asteroid City. It's not a glorious, wondrous, hilarious, deeply
felt mess, and therefore it's rewarding in a way that
those aren't.
Speaker 2 (29:24):
Hmm, Okay, well now I'm gonna see this Phoenician thing.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
I was on the fence on it, but now you've
convinced me that it's worth.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
It, because you know you're right.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
You could get tired of Wes Anderson, just like you
can get tired of Picasso.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Right.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
You see three hundred Pcassa's in an art gallery, You go, good.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
Lord, this guy created a lot of crap and you're
looking at it and some are you know, yeah, there's
a masterpiece. But he was also, you know, a great
artist and so and he painted every day of his life.
Speaker 1 (29:57):
MM.
Speaker 3 (29:57):
So you know that there's going to be some things
that are going to be a mess at some things
that are you know, he scribbled on the back of
a paper bag and called it to finished.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
You know.
Speaker 3 (30:08):
So it's a thing that I am now going to
do after I move into my house.
Speaker 1 (30:17):
Something that you don't need to do when you move
into your house, okay, is watch Guy Ritchie's Fountain of
Youth on Apple Plus.
Speaker 3 (30:29):
Really, why shouldn't I do that? Even though I'm not
going to.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
First of all, I think it's fair to call it
ridiculously expensive, And I don't care how much money people spend,
and I don't review movies that way, But ae hundred
and eighty million for a straight to streaming movie on
Apple TV Plus. Again, at the same time that they've
(30:58):
got f one coming out in theaters? Are they doing
what's the plan? Right? One hundred and eighty million dollar
budget means that if they had released it theatrically, Fountain
of Youth would have needed before you get to marketing, right,
would have needed four hundred million, four hundred and fifty
(31:19):
million at the global box office just to break even, Right,
how can this thing be profitable for Apple? Is shoeing
theaters altogether? And it annoys me only in the sense
that I don't think they have an idea of what
they're supposed to release to theaters and what they're not.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Yeah, there's there's an algorithm.
Speaker 3 (31:42):
There's some data matrix that the you know, pencil pushes
use that can predict what the box office will be
so that they know what the budget should be. These
are not hard fast, but clearly somebody did the math, going, Okay,
(32:03):
we spent one hundred and any If we do a
two hundred million dollar campaign, we'll never get that money back.
So let's just dump it on screening, on streaming to
prevent any more hemorrhaging of our cash.
Speaker 1 (32:18):
Which is what they which is what they did with Wolves,
you know, with Clooney and Brad Pitt. And don't get
me wrong, there is no way Fountain of Youth should
have sniff theaters. That's not what I am saying. I
am also saying, nor should it have been made in
the first place. It is so aggressively, relentlessly awful Wow.
(32:44):
And by the way, I really have a soft spot
for archaeology inflected art history celebrating historic mythological mystery adventure films.
How's that for a genre? I love that genre, I
really do. And it's not just that this modern day
(33:06):
tale of that kind wants you to know how much
it likes the Indiana Jones films. It's that it steals
overtly from each of them in turn. Wow, the movie's
never funny while trying the whole time to be funny,
(33:29):
Oh dear, and it pulls off that trick by being witless. No, No,
I felt held hostage by this movie.
Speaker 3 (33:44):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
Now I want to see how bad this thing.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
Is and therefore therefore the money spent on it truly
makes me angry because I feel like all that money
went to hold me hostage? Again, what's the movie division
at app doing? Why make WOLFZ with Pitt and Clooney
and then pull its theatrical at the last moment, alienating
(34:09):
a whole raft of talented, powerful people when that movie
was made for the big screen, and I kid you
not would have played better and been received more warmly
if it had been on the big screen. Why release
(34:30):
f one to theaters, but make this one for streaming.
And some people have actually said to me Dean, when
I've said that, they said, well, f one. You know,
Formula one requires a big canvas. Wait a minute, you
just pointed out what show do you love on Netflix? Yeah,
people are not watching Formula one races around the world
(34:52):
in movie theaters. They are watching them on the small screen.
That's how people are used to watching them. So I'm
not saying don't release one to theaters. I'm glad they did.
I'm actually glad it's a hit regardless of whether I
see it. But what what makes sense? Why is that
one for theaters? This one's for streaming. What is their plan? Again,
(35:14):
I ask you, without any hope that you can answer,
what are they doing?
Speaker 3 (35:20):
Well, you know, here's the thing, and this I always
think about Apple spin off the things is that they're
they don't really have to try as hard as other
studios because they got the iPhone and the tablets, and
they got all that money behind them.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
So they have a shock absorber with the Apple Corporation.
Anything Tim Cook does you know, they'll go great.
Speaker 3 (35:48):
We can now just sort of f around with these
movies and streaming and ideas and see, you know what,
how's the best way to lay this out and which
way to roll? And if we screw well, hey, there's
a billion dollar war horse right behind us that will
still be churning out in revenue whether we screw up
(36:09):
or do this right or wrong.
Speaker 1 (36:11):
That's brilliant leadership, that's all. That's all I can say.
That's worthy of the Steve Jobs and the Walt Disneys
of the of the World, isn't it. I had plenty
of time while watching Fountain of Youth to think about
the Indiana Jones films, and two years removed from the
(36:35):
Dial of Destiny, which came out two summers ago. It
has occurred to me that in terms of quality of
those films, I would actually rank them in order of
their release date. That actually is to me. I would have,
of course Raiders of lost ark as the best, but
I would have Temple of Doom second, I'd have Indiana
(36:58):
Jones in The Last Crusade third, I'd have Kingdom of
the Crystal Skull fourth, and I would have The Last
Isle of Destiny fifth. And I know it's somewhat sacrilege
not to have the third film Last Crusade with Sean
Connery as the elder doctor Jones as the second best.
But still all these years on, Temple of Doom was
(37:18):
a big, bold, badass change up in terms of tone
and really was one of the most thrilling films ever
released up until that point in time. And perhaps since
it was scary, it had one of the three most
touching relationships in the series, Indian short Round and again
(37:41):
Keyway Kwan's come back Oscar winning turn in Everything Everywhere,
All at Once does not hurt the legacy I think
of Temple of Doom in any way. Harrison Ford was
at his high wattage movie star best. The locales were
exotic and nightmarish and fantastic and if and if you
want to color it as culturally insensitive, I understand your
(38:05):
desired to do so. Right, The movie works, though.
Speaker 3 (38:10):
And.
Speaker 1 (38:12):
It's and again it's different when almost every sequel tries
to replicate its original.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (38:19):
Well, and this, to me is the brilliance of Spielberg.
Of course, I always say he's the best second unit
director ever. Then, not the best director ever, but the
best second unit because that guy can see stuff on
the storyboard and turn it into Holy Molly. How to
do that, you know, to say, like I always do,
(38:42):
you have an experimental Nazi plane, you have to get
the arc on it, and then your hero has to
punch a super tall, giant bald guy while the plane's
spinning in a circle and your a is trapped inside,
and tell that whole thing in three minutes and seventeen
seve there's nobody.
Speaker 1 (39:02):
It's a short film, unto itself.
Speaker 3 (39:04):
Unto itself, and there's nothing wasted. And same with the
KRT the mining cart chase in Temple To that you
know is just one thrill after another.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
Well, I think about, you know, going back especially to
what you were describing from Raiders of Lost Ark, all
that stuff that is done in camera, doing as much
in camera as you can, and by the time of
Crystal Skull, we're not doing that.
Speaker 2 (39:37):
No.
Speaker 1 (39:37):
And it's as if either Spielberg just gave in to
the way movies have to be made or he didn't
have the energy that he once had to really push
that boulder of doing stuff in camera. We all remember
the boulder coming down the hill chasing after Indiana Jones.
Someone had to push that boulder up the hill, and
(39:59):
it may very well of Ben Steven Spielberg saying no,
this will work, trust me. The final two films had
no hope of recapturing so much of what was magical
about the original trilogy because too little of their action
was going to be filmed in camera. Right there, you
have put yourself behind the eight ball. It seems you
(40:19):
can't capture that visceral you know, magic. I do think
in retrospect all these years on the spirit and the
tone of Crystal Skull, the one from two thousand and
eight is generally infectious, and some of what people hated
the most, like the way Indy survives the nuclear test
(40:42):
blast inside a refrigerator, I actually think is delightful and
funny in a nod of the Fedora to the old
serials type of way, because that's what these always were
supposed to be. So the fact that it's somewhat ridiculous
is the point, not a weakness. It should have a
(41:03):
tongue in cheek element to it. As as for Dial
of Destiny, there is I don't I'm not the first
to say this. There is a lot wrong with it,
of course, but I would say that Indiana Jones himself
is not one of those things, and seeing it as
a cap or to his story actually makes it ultimately
(41:25):
somewhat worthwhile. It is heartfelt and touching and clearly well
felt by the actor who played the part all those years.
We may not have wanted to see it, but the
guy who brought us so much adventure, the actor who
brought us so much joy, deserved it seems to me
(41:45):
to make it if he wished, and it is deeply felt.
I've watched it more than once and found that it
improves with each viewing, as opposed perhaps to Crystal Skull,
which really doesn't improve upon itach itach viewing it. It
doesn't mean that it's better. It does, in some ways
(42:07):
mean that what's wrong with Dial of Destiny was so
big that it kind of buried the movie, and then
you're free to kind of go, okay, but what was
in here that was worthy a little bit? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (42:23):
Well, well there you go. Well then I followed up
you're thing too. I'm watching Mickey seventeen this week. Yeah,
and we talked about it last week, and you intrigue
me enough to watch it, And you're right, it's not great,
but it's it's not unwatchable either. I think there's just
(42:44):
some missed moments, you know, because it seemed like three
movies and one one.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
You have you follow Mickey one.
Speaker 3 (42:53):
Through sixteen basically, and then Mickey seventeen, you know, his story,
and then he wakes up next to Mickey eighteen, and
there the hijinks is supposed to begin or a moral
issue or I don't. After that, you sort of have
another movie, and then there's a third movie at the
(43:13):
end with all the Crawley bugs. So it seemed like
there was three ideas and none of them really grab
a toehold.
Speaker 1 (43:24):
And I said that so many of the ideas felt
like they were things that he had planned for maybe
snow Piercer, and didn't do. And that could be true.
We know that artists actually do work this way, Right,
you keep it in the memory banks and then we'll
use it later. But actually, since talking to you and
you bringing up the bugs, the bugs on the alien planet,
(43:47):
which actually there's some interesting stuff that could have been
explored there, and almost now feels like, oh, maybe those
were left over from Oaksha Right.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Yeah, there was another.
Speaker 3 (44:05):
You know, fifty pages in that script that they cut
out and put into this one.
Speaker 1 (44:09):
Was this a guy? Is it possible that this guy
was so surprised at the international acclaim, I mean a
best picture for Parasite. I don't know if you saw that.
New York Times did a poll of filmmakers and actors
of what are the one hundred best films thus far
(44:29):
of the twenty first century, and number one was Parasite,
which again is to me recency bias, But also I
was sitting talking about this with people who like Bung Juno,
and it's the most overrated film in his ouvra. But
is it possible that this man was himself sort of
(44:52):
flabbergasted by the embrace and success of that film that
he was going, well, what the hell do I I
do next?
Speaker 2 (45:01):
Right?
Speaker 3 (45:02):
Because if you are well, that's it. That's every artist
suffers that, right. You create a piece and then it
takes on its own astronomical orbit unto itself, and then
you go, well, was that a fluke? Or did I
am I shooting the wrong bullets here? Because I you know,
(45:24):
I know it happens to people a lot that you
then are confused by what's popular and what's not.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
I saw it in stand up all the time. People
just write dumb jokes and.
Speaker 3 (45:34):
They get a huge laughs and then the other guys
would write very thoughtful jokes and they get to titter
and you're like, Okay, don't give up, But she whiz.
It's hard to figure that out.
Speaker 1 (45:58):
I did a rap epic amount of rewatching of Mission
Impossible movies this week for a variety of reasons. I
did this one. It would have been just wrong not
to in the wake of the death of the genius
composer of the Mission Impossible theme Leloh Schiffrin, who died
(46:19):
this week at the age of ninety three. Do you
know it took him all of three minutes to compose
that song for the TV series after a March influenced
theme song was rejected.
Speaker 2 (46:36):
Ah.
Speaker 1 (46:38):
He utilized the unusual five to four time signature because,
according to Schiffrin, people in outer space have five legs
and couldn't dance to our music.
Speaker 2 (46:49):
Well that's pretty good, Okay.
Speaker 1 (46:52):
The themes opening four notes too long, too short correspond
to the Morse code for m oh. But seriously, how
(47:20):
many badass movies were aided and embedded by his stylish
and hard working scores. I mean Kelly's Heroes, which you love,
the Cincinnati Kid Bullet, Dirty Harry, Enter the Dragon, cool hand, Luke.
I mean a lot of my childhood and youth viewing
would have been a lot different and a lot less
(47:43):
entertaining without Lalo Schiffrin's work. So I also thought it
(48:18):
was a good time to delve into these movies because
I've thought about them in context often to how they
achieved what I wish so many of the James Bond
contemporary and modern Bond films could achieve and always come
up short against. And so this week the news that
(48:39):
Denny Villeeneuve will be directing the next long awaited Bond film.
We don't have an actor playing Double O seven yet,
though if varieties report of who the three finalists are,
don't bother telling me, because there's zero chance I'll have
any interest in the film. I mean, I twenty something
(49:02):
actor playing Bond. I don't mind watching young actors. I
love watching young actors. But by all means, the most accomplished,
most effective assassin in the service of Her Majesty's government,
who has figured out how to survive in every corner
of the globe. Yeah, it should be someone in their twenties.
That makes a lot of sense anyway, The idea that
(49:26):
an a list director who is a brilliant filmmaker, we
will agree, is taking over this franchise has been caused
for a lot of excitement and yet no, you'd look
at the Mission Impossible movies, the movies that had a
list directors with signature names, right, Brian DePalma doing the
(49:50):
first one, John Wu during the second one. These are
the weakest films in the series. Yeah, the best films
belonged to those directed by Christopher McCrory, who had won
an out Oscar for writing The Usual Suspects, but who
had only directed two non Mission Impossible movies before he
(50:13):
got involved in the franchise. Rogue Nation was his third
movie as a director. So this has been historically true. Right,
The greatest Bond films were not directed by name brand directors.
So it'll be interesting, let's say.
Speaker 2 (50:34):
So.
Speaker 1 (50:34):
So I dove into I didn't rewatch the Brian Dipalmo one.
I had seen that one so many times through the years.
But the one that I have watched the least is
the one I remember being the worst, and that's the
John Wu one Mission Impossible two.
Speaker 2 (50:49):
Right, it's funny I started watching that this week as well, So.
Speaker 1 (50:54):
It barely feels like a movie in the series. That's true,
It's nothing like any of the other films.
Speaker 3 (51:06):
No, because for some reason, like every third scene just
deflates the pacing, like you know, I mean, you gotta
lay pipe, you gotta have your plot spoken about, but
to be done, and I don't want to say ham fisted,
but just energetically something goes south every about every five minutes.
Speaker 1 (51:31):
And what an odd thing for them not to be
aware of. All I can say is they were so
enamored of the idea that they were working with John
wu right, and that in the moment seeing these scenes constructed,
they might have said, well, this is artistry, right. But
(51:51):
to have followed up the first one, they had to know,
we need to build some momentum here. Yeah, And they
couldn't build momentum within the movie, let alone building it
upon the previous movie. It was a major step down
from the first one. And that first one wasn't great.
(52:12):
Yeah it was. It was oh hey, it had a
neat paranoia to it and a fun sense of humor.
It was Brian Diploma, after all. I think he rolls
out of bed giving you paranoia and a sense of
kind of the macabre fun. But it did not at
any point point the way for a continuing series. That's right, yes,
(52:37):
which always seemed to be the desire in adapting this
franchise in the first place. In the second one, you know,
they did seem to want to go more wildly romantic,
and they do go more balletic in the action. So
on the one hand, you know, enter Tandy Newton, who
(52:58):
at that time in her life was as lumine this
as anyone has ever been on screen. She's the love interest,
and entered John wu for this gunfu poetry. Right, But
it's amazing. Despite being a big hit, and it was
a huge hit, it's still I think the biggest of
(53:18):
the films domestically. Maybe it's the second biggest. But you've
got to point out that Cruise was at that point
infallible as a box office draw.
Speaker 2 (53:27):
Exactly.
Speaker 1 (53:29):
It's it's not only bad that movie. It is bad
in such a uniquely nineties way that it almost to
me coming out in two thousand as it does watching
it this time, Dean, I felt like it was a
time capsule.
Speaker 2 (53:47):
Yeah, right there.
Speaker 3 (53:49):
It was real dated, like even the lighting and some
camera setups felt dated to me.
Speaker 2 (53:57):
It was weird.
Speaker 1 (53:58):
I don't want to bag on Joe Wu and the
influence he had. But is it possible that none of
his Western films hold up if if we were to
like go back and look at them, I wonder remove
from the cultural context of the Hong Kong in which
his voice emerged. I wonder if the effect wouldn't be
(54:21):
on all his Western films exactly what you're describing feeling dated.
Speaker 3 (54:26):
Yeah, well, I mean it's that a product of production design.
Speaker 2 (54:31):
Is that pre visualization? I mean, where is.
Speaker 1 (54:34):
It removing a cultural element from the shores on which
it took root to another country, there's already an element
of tourism, and so what you end up with is
no longer a work of art. You end up with
a souvenir.
Speaker 3 (54:53):
Yeah, oh yeah, yeah, it's like souvenir shots of real
good job move movies.
Speaker 2 (55:00):
That's what it feels like for sure.
Speaker 3 (55:01):
Because I'm sure he had the same team in Hong
Kong for each of his films, So it had he
would have had the freedom and the ability to trust
those around him to do their jobs, as opposed to
them coming to a country and not knowing. These guys
but I'll saying their best and they all say Hey, man,
(55:23):
I love your movies, but can that guy solve this
problem through lighting?
Speaker 2 (55:29):
Can that guy solve this problem through production? You know?
Speaker 1 (55:33):
So, the long delayed Mission Impossible three comes out six
years later, and I did a little bit of reading
about it, and it was because of directors coming on
board and leaving. But it is really interesting, isn't it
that as it ends up happening, they follow up this
one from this cinematic o tour of bealeletic violence who
(55:55):
influenced decades of filmmakers with a TV direct and the
TV director in question making his directorial debut on the
big screen was JJ Abrams.
Speaker 2 (56:08):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (56:08):
Yeah. And the movie Mission Impossible three suffers a little
bit from small screen tropes that I now recognize as
having been taken from Alias and moved to Mission Impossible.
Appropriate perhaps, given let's not forget that Mission Impossible's origins
is as a small screen but it's as a small
(56:32):
screen franchise belying the big screen epic saga that Ethan
Hunt's story would become. But all that aside, it nevertheless
is the first real Mission Impossible movie. I think it's
the one that definitely points the way for the entries
to come, hey, here's a path that you can chart
(56:52):
and follow to big screen success. And in fact, indeed,
the just released supposed big screen finale of Final Reckoning
falls back in many ways to the third film, even
answering some of the mysteries that are left hanging at
(57:13):
the end of Mission Impossible three. So it's in some
ways Part eight is a direct sequel to Part three.
So it's fascinating how it's almost like that's the beginning
right there that we've come to just conclude. Despite being
far and away the best of them I films to date,
(57:36):
at that point, Mission Impossible three barely did half the
business of what we agree is a pretty awful John
Wu Mission Impossible two. The poor quality of that prior
entry probably was going to contribute to some immediate franchise fatigue,
(57:58):
ruled with the six year delay between films definitely accounts
for some of the box office drop off, no doubt,
But again, historic context is necessary. Let's not forget that
was a tenuous time for the future of Tom Cruise
as a box office.
Speaker 2 (58:15):
Draw Right then, Kitty Holmes, the time.
Speaker 1 (58:21):
News news about the exact nature of his involvement with
Scientology was starting to really come out. Uh yeah, the
oddness surrounding his marriage to Katie Holmes jumping up and
down on Oprah's couch.
Speaker 2 (58:37):
Yeah, not helping his.
Speaker 1 (58:39):
Public skirmish with Brookshields.
Speaker 2 (58:41):
Oh help.
Speaker 1 (58:44):
His appeal with women was at an all time low because.
Speaker 3 (58:49):
He fired his publicist around that time and had his
sister be his publicist, who said, show him the real
Tom Cruise. Just you know, that's the real little problem there.
Speaker 1 (59:00):
So I was reminded of all those things watching the film,
because they clearly are making painstaking efforts to rebuild his
brand with women. Specifically, it literally opens with attempts to
(59:21):
rehabilitate that appeal. Several times women are shown on screen
agreeing with each other about what a great guy and
how desirable he is.
Speaker 2 (59:31):
So hey and Jackie chan movie where they go, He's
so handsome.
Speaker 1 (59:35):
Painstaking efforts are made to show what a good, faithful,
devoted and stable husband he is going to be to
his newfound fiance, a surgeon played by Michelle Monaghan. That
relationship ends up paying great dividends in the next two films,
though this is the only one where the Michelle Monaghan,
(59:57):
who's wonderful actress where she really has a bit role.
This is the only one, but the relationship pays off again.
Like I said, in the next two films. It's interesting
how like the previous two films, one of the villains
in this one is from Ethan's own side. Oh my goodness.
In all these movies he's double crossed and portrayed by
(01:00:21):
someone directly from the halls of the IMF. But in
this one, Ethan is also given a straight ahead adversary
and an understandable enemy, and it's Philip Seymour Hoffman in
an almost shockingly frightening performance. He's he's physical, he's imposing,
(01:00:45):
he's dark, he's reluctant and world weary, and he's riveting
as hell in that movie. After all this time, Philip
seymore Hoffman's dea makes me angry. Yeah, like we could
still be getting all time performances from him had he
(01:01:06):
not died in twenty fourteen. I know, and I would
say that his Owen Davian in this film is one
of my ten favorites of his performances. I also love
that Part three introduces Simon Pegg's Benji, a character who
would enjoy a wonderful arc in the franchise. Culminating in
this Summer's Final Reckoning, and I love that it's the
(01:01:29):
first of the films where there's a real sense of
team yea, because that's my favorite element of these movies.
Speaker 2 (01:01:37):
Yeah, everybody working together and having each other back.
Speaker 1 (01:01:41):
I wished that Maggie Q had been able to return,
but it was this film that led to her getting
too much work for her to be available schedule wise.
And certainly the films get better and better at adding
female team members. It's one of the best elements of
(01:02:03):
these movies that, from Paula Patten to Rebecca Ferguson to
Haley Atwell to Palm Clementief, the female team members not
only hold their own, they become more memorable and contribute
more and more indelible moments and scenes on their own.
Speaker 2 (01:02:20):
Cool.
Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
Well, now, now, because two did leave me going why
am I watching these again?
Speaker 2 (01:02:27):
I forget?
Speaker 3 (01:02:28):
But now that you say there's an arc to it
and as some careful consideration on how to relaunch, how
to do damage control, anybody should follow that.
Speaker 2 (01:02:41):
Storyline through history.
Speaker 1 (01:02:43):
The well, I would say, now, having watched all two
through eight recently, here's a way to consider the MII
franchise in the first two installments, they're clearly trying to
figure out what Mission Impossible movies should be. In the
(01:03:07):
next two, In three and four, and let's talk about
four next week. Maybe I think probably my favorite, not
the best of all of them, but my favorite ghost Protocol.
In three and four they had it figured out. In
five and six they perfected it.
Speaker 2 (01:03:27):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (01:03:28):
And in seven and eight they concluded it. And they
concluded it often by deconstructing what had come before. So
it's a really interesting eight installment arc that way, and
you can kind of pair the films that way that
they belong together, not just in terms of story, but
(01:03:51):
in terms of Wow. They these two this is where
they nailed it, and then these two this is where
they elevated it to the top of the genre. And
so it could be kind of cool, I would say,
looking at those first three if I was forced to
give star ratings like I used to do when I
(01:04:11):
was a published film critic, right out of four stars,
because I never liked the five star since time. I
was a classic four star guy. The first Mission Impossible
from Brian to Palm, I'd give two and a half stars. Okay,
the John wu directed Mission Impossible two. I would give
one half start, a half star out of four possible
(01:04:37):
total and Mission Impossible three directed by J. J. Abrams,
I would give three stars out of four.
Speaker 3 (01:04:43):
Wow, look at that. That's a pretty good rating system.
I think I would do. I'm going to have to
watch three again now you say it, because I forgot
how much I liked still Philip Temar Hoffman.
Speaker 2 (01:04:56):
Yeah, he was really good in.
Speaker 1 (01:04:57):
That, really good. And again, like I said, what delight
to be reminded of where Simon Pegg's Benji character begins,
because he's got really good scenes in it, and you
think and he, of course, the actor Simon Pegg thought,
well that's it for me, right. But smart people have
(01:05:18):
been making this franchise, there's no question about them. None
smarter really than Tom Cruise, and they not only enjoyed
working with him, but really liked what he was doing
on screen and recognized the possibilities and recognized early on
if we evolved this character, this could really pay dividends
for us. And that's pretty cool. And I'd like to
(01:05:40):
end there with just something I heard about Tom Cruise.
You know, he'd famously doing all these own stunts of
him and everything, But what a filmmaker he has become.
He's been a producer for a long time. But as
you say about Spielberg, not meaning it as damn someone
(01:06:00):
with faint praise, that he's the best second unit director
of all time, who happens to be a first unit director? Right,
Tom Cruise seems like he's the best first assistant director
in the business because I have just been reading more
and more about how he controls those sets and keeps
(01:06:21):
the energy up, keeps everybody moving, and understands on the
fly the order that these things should be shot in,
like right down to No, Haglin's got a plane to catch,
let's shoot his stuff first. We can then easily use
the same lighting to just turn in this direction and
get this, you know, like he's the one doing that.
Speaker 2 (01:06:42):
Wow. Yeah, impressive.
Speaker 1 (01:06:44):
He yields to the director. The director is his boss. Yeah,
but he knows how to get all the pieces and cheaply.
And it's crazy because he knows that in those famous
stunts that he's doing, it's not just that he's doing
(01:07:05):
the stunts, Dean, it's that he's acting for camera while
doing the stunts and understands the camera, understands what the
camera is seeing. There is a shot in part eight
in the recently released film where he's on a plane
and we see him, you know, in the climactic sequence,
(01:07:27):
and there's this cool rack focus to what he's looking at,
and then back to him as he's looking and reacting
to what he's just seen, and all of a sudden
you realize, well, there's no camera person up there, and
he's tens of thousands of feet in the air, that
(01:07:48):
camera's not being operated by remote control. Tom Cruise is
racking focus on a selfie O what he's looking at
while flying a plane.
Speaker 2 (01:08:06):
Holy smoked, I now now I want to see this
because that sounds amazing.
Speaker 1 (01:08:12):
Belated spoiler alert
Recordings in progress. Yeah, I know this exciting.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Feel the energy.
Speaker 3 (00:08):
No, no moving day is next Wednesday. This ordeal is over.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
It would be great if it was this week. You
could celebrate your independence from the one room studio.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
Yeah, from a secret location somewhere in America.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
This is your Chill Pack Hollywood Hollywood Hour. Your Chill
Pack Hollywood Hour with Dean Hagland and Phil Lareness. Welcome
(00:48):
to year nineteen, episode eight of Your Chill Pack Hollywood Hour,
coming at you from Montecito, an unincorporated town in Santa
Barbara County, California, nestled between the Santa Ynez Mountains and
the Pacific Ocean, don't you know? Phil Lareness and joining
us via the magic of podcasting in zoom, all the
(01:10):
way from Birmingham, Michigan, where they don't have microphones. Oh
my god, it's the Motor City adjacent Madman TV's Dean Haglin.
We've been hearing him regale us with tales of his
forthcoming move back into the main House. He's been a
good boy, He's allowed back into the main house. Yeah, congratulations.
(01:34):
Oh you know what could go wrong between now and then?
Speaker 3 (01:40):
Don't even the tree up front's look at rickety if
it hits them, Oh, well, I'm not going to even
see it. Yes, it's been an ordeal. We moved December
two in the year twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
December? Was it really December?
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Yeah, we spent Christmas, New Year's, Valentine's. December second seems
like a long time from to be living in an
air mattress and eat enough a hot plate.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
But I think it's long enough.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yes, I am shell shocked. My spirits crushed from out
room under me.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Great epic ode poems will someday be written about this,
and will be and will be spread around the fire
that we use as light because we're our civilization is
crumbling and devolving quickly.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
So oh I could tell stories around the firelight.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Yep, you know they might be telling stories about last
week's show when we rolled up our sleeves and talked
about some of the big changes going on in the
business of show, Yes, including Warner Brothers Discovery splitting into
two companies, Streaming in Studios and Global Networks. Why I
totally had overlooked the fact that other legacy media companies
(03:03):
had already pulled off the very same feat. Why Just
a month earlier, apparently, Lionsgate announced they're split from Stars.
Oh Stars Network, they split back up, So it's happening everywhere.
It's not the conglomeration that we've grown so used to.
(03:27):
It's whatever. The opposite of a conglomeration is. They're splitting
it back out to component parts and letting them fend
for themselves.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Does that mean Disney's going to give back Fox Television?
That would be something.
Speaker 1 (03:41):
Oh, just the Muppets would be neat the Hens, the
Henson Company, and yeah, exactly. Maurice Torenzio did, of course
send along the link to the Cagney and Lacy pilot. Oh,
we were talking about this. It's funny, isn't it Funny
(04:02):
being a word I've chosen to use that. We were
talking about the original pilot for Cagney and Lacey, much
of which I watched on YouTube this week, starring Loretta Switt,
who was replaced by Sharing Gless when it went to series.
Funny that we were talking about that pilot because that
show brought Martin Cove to prominence, and he would reach
(04:23):
of course wider fame through his villainous role in the
original Karate Kid It's hard to imagine anyone associated with
Cagney and Lacey having a worse month than Loretta Switt,
after all, she died. But Martin Cove is doing his
level best to have a terrible, terrible, awful month.
Speaker 2 (04:45):
By doing what.
Speaker 1 (04:47):
Oh, you haven't watched the body cam footage, have you?
Speaker 3 (04:50):
So?
Speaker 1 (04:51):
He was kicked out of a fan convention by a
police who were arresting him for having bitten a co
star during a panel at a fan convention.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
Okay, which convention?
Speaker 1 (05:11):
It was in Washington State. I forget the name of
the convention, but you need to look this up. She
is amazing. His co star is amazing. She had apparently
come over, greeted him, patted him on the shoulder. He
turned around, took a bite out of her arm, and
then started kissing her all over, you know, to make
(05:33):
it better, as one does. And yeah, and he was
forthwith removed from the convention by the organizers of the
convention and the police that they called. And the only
reason he's not incarcerated is she refused to press charges,
but as the body cameras show, she did press a
(05:55):
point or two before letting him go. She reads him
a riot act for the ages. Wow in this footage.
So it is wonderful. Anyway, after biting a co star
at a fan convention, you think, well, it can't get
much worse for him right now the news cycle. Oh
(06:20):
but then the news was unsealed that there were sexual
harassment charges against him in twenty twenty four. Oh no, yeah,
on the set of the self same Cobra Kai. Now
that assault did not or it was harassment. It did
not involve physical contact. It was said to be leering
(06:42):
and verbally overt enough that the actress went to the
studio with her concerns about the septagenarian actor and how
uncomfortable he made her. So Sony conducted a review of
the allegations, found them serious enough to look further into
the matter. Immediately they conducted a probe. Anyway, this was
(07:05):
and he was read the Riot Act then apparently by
Sony execs and advisors. You know, he said the right
thing apparently at the time about how he learned a
valuable lesson and he realized, and we've talked about this,
things have changed on sets. And I do have a
(07:26):
certain amount of compassion for people in any walk of
life who have been in a particular field, or in
a particular venue, or in a particular place for so long,
and then you find that the rules of decorum are changing,
and nobody wants to feel stupid, nobody wants to feel
(07:50):
awkward or uncomfortable or how did things change without me knowing?
And so I'm compassionate towards people who make genuine mistakes.
Right the old it's just a joke, That's all right,
if it really was just a joke. Right, But he
(08:11):
said the right thing, and he said he learned a
valuable lesson, which cut to a year later, he's taken
a bite out of a co star's arm on stage.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
Frederick. That's like very.
Speaker 1 (08:25):
Odd, he said about this. I was being playful in
the moment but went too far and there is absolutely
no excuse for my behavior. I regret my actions, for
which I take full responsibility for what I did, and
again I apologize to her and her husband. I'm committed
to learning from this and it will never happen again.
Let's cut to a year from now. What's he doing
(08:47):
because this sure seems like someone who's trying to blow
things up.
Speaker 3 (08:52):
Yeah, well, the act of contrition is one you would
think once you're shamed. You are taking that to heart.
But as you said as a sept Jerry, perhaps his
memories failing what he did a year ago, and now
(09:13):
he's done it again, realizing, Oh, dear, I have forgotten
that statement I made a year ago.
Speaker 1 (09:20):
Already there's that Bill Hayter had some big unpleasantness with
Martin Cove when Bill Hayter was starting out as a
production assistant in the business.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Oh what was that?
Speaker 1 (09:33):
So he was a driver assigned to Martin Cove on
a movie out here in southern California. I believe, right,
And you know you have one job get the actor
to the set on time, right, and maybe a second
job help him arrive in a good mood. Right. Maybe
(09:54):
if what's required is quiet, give the actor quiet, don't
talk to them if they don't want to be spoken to,
let them take the lead in what this relationship is
going to be, right, But mostly get him where he
needs to be on time. Bill Hayter, a very conscientious
young man, understood this and was prepared for this. And
(10:17):
this is at least thirty years ago. This is long
before apps, before navigation apps. These are the days of
the Thomas Guide, don't you know and maps provided by
a production you'd get him in your call sheets right
of where you're going. So he had plotted out exactly
when he needed to leave, when he needed to get there,
(10:37):
how to get there, And it becomes apparent when Martin
Cove gets into the car it's Martin Cove's first day
on the shoot. Martin Cove, in addition to not being
prepared for the role he's going to play, has not
ever looked at the script, has no idea what the
story is or who the character is. So Martin Cove
(10:58):
needs time to read the script on the way to
set good So, but Bill Hayter has to get him
there on time, right, Martin Cove starts getting belligerent and
ordering him to take certain routes to get there, saying,
you don't know what you're doing, you don't know how
to get there. You know you're an idiot. This is
(11:18):
how you have to drive to get there, And of
course he's being berated by the star, so he does
what the guy says, and it quickly becomes apparent that
what Martin Cove is doing is getting Bill Hayter intentionally
lost so that Martin Cove will have the time to
read the script. Okay, they arrive late and after Martin
(11:44):
Cove is being escorted to the set. Oh, it's so
great to see you, Martin. I'm so glad you're finally here.
We're sorry about whatever it was that delayed you. Of course,
Bill Hater has read the riot Act by the production manager, right,
and just you know, whittled away to nothing. And the
(12:06):
most interesting part of the story to me is, at
no point does Bill Hater throw Martin Cove under the
bus for this? And I like that that's the smart thing,
by the way, anyone that's listening, right, you gain nothing
by blaming the person who is in fact responsible, because
it is, after all, your job to get him there,
and they need that guy. It doesn't help you to
(12:29):
blame him. And the best that's gonna happen is people
are going to say, oh, well, thank you for letting
us know. We'll get a different driver for him. And
Bill Hayter is out of job regardless. So anyway, So
on the way home, Martin Cove in great spirits, seemingly,
you know, Bill Hayter's not going to talk to the guy.
(12:50):
He's just staring straight ahead and driving, and Martin Cove
is Bill, are you still mad at me?
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Oh? No?
Speaker 1 (12:58):
And you know, so like kind of cajoling him, saying,
come on, Bill, what'll it take? What'll it take for
you not to be mad? Look over there, Bill, there's
like a McDonald's or something. Let's say, look over there.
Is there anything you want from that? I know they
don't feed you. Well on this, is there anything you
want from over there? I want you to pull over
so I can get something. What is it that you
(13:20):
want that I can get you? And finally, Bill Hayter,
just as you know, a milkshake and a cookie, right,
And so Martin Cove, I'm going to get you a
milkshake and a cookie, and you're gonna forgive me. And
so Martin Cove goes in, he comes back out, He's
got a milkshake and a cookie, and he proceeds to
stand in front of the car staring at Bill Hayterer
(13:40):
while he drinks Bill Hayter's milkshake and cookie just as
a power move.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Oh my god, is.
Speaker 1 (13:49):
That not the darkest thing in an industry sometimes built
on dark things that somehow involving a milkshake and a
cookie for a product assistant is one of the worst
things I've ever heard.
Speaker 3 (14:03):
Absolutely, Oh my, that's just your You're thinking to a
level of pettiness that is so outside my conscious realm.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
I can't even imagine. How did somebody do some stuff
like that?
Speaker 1 (14:20):
Don't work anyway. We just spent more time talking about
Martin Cove, I think than we ever thought we would,
and certainly ever had.
Speaker 2 (14:28):
Or ever have.
Speaker 1 (14:29):
That's true, you know, the California Legislature this week Dean
made official Governor Gavin Newsom's proposal to up the annual
film and TV tax credit funding. Oh looks seven hundred
and fifty million dollars annually. He had been pushing for this.
(14:50):
The Assembly finally confirmed the proposal. That sounds great, But
my immediate question was, but how do we pay for it?
I read another headline that gave me an idea.
Speaker 3 (15:03):
Oh okay, well mine is that extra work and people
pay taxes, and there you.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Go, so it pays for itself, pays for itself. I
couldn't help noticing that the same day that the news
about the legislature making that proposal official was the same
day that news broke that California Governor Gavin Newsom has
filed a seven hundred and eighty seven million dollar lawsuit
(15:29):
against Fox News, sighting, among other things, that host Jesse
Waters claimed he had lied about a phone call that
he Newsom had made with Donald Trump. This made big
news that everybody said, you know, Newsom was lying about this.
(15:50):
And to prove Newsom was lying about this, Donald Trump
posted a screen grab of his own cell phone, and
the screen grab in fact, proved to everything Newsome had
been saying. And so, anyway, I just find it interesting
that it seven hundred and eighty seven million, seven hundred
(16:12):
and fifty million. It's as if Newsom's lawyer said, you
know what, if you ask for seven hundred and fifty,
it's going to be way too obvious what you're doing here.
Let's just boost it to seven eighty seven. The jury
will bring it down to seven fifty, and it'll be
a zero sum game. It'll be perfect.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
But that will be his personal But.
Speaker 1 (16:36):
He's passing the savings along to the filmmakers.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
Ah, I see personally, Yeah, well why not?
Speaker 2 (16:44):
I mean, Fox News they can afford it.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
I'm sure they seem to think they're the number one
news channel, so I'm sure advertisers will not advertise on
Fox News.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
The summer movie season is game. It's in full swing.
I don't have to tell you. After all, you've postponed
your July third move back into the house to July
tenth so that you could go see the opening of
the new Jurassic World movie.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
Oh is is that why I did that? That's clever
of me.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
You you saw F one, the Brad Pitt Formula one
movie that opened to Apple's biggest box office hall yet
in what is an completely unintelligible theatrical plan that they have.
(17:39):
But Warner Brothers released through Warner Brothers, and they did
a great job opening this movie. It was a huge hit.
I don't need to tell you how many times did
you see that? This week?
Speaker 2 (17:46):
I did not see that.
Speaker 3 (17:49):
You know, I watched the Formula one Netflix documentary series.
I know, yeah, and I quite enjoyed that. So I
can't imagine a movie to capture that kind of drama
that Netflix producers are doing just on the fly by
going to every Grand Prix race around the world.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
I watched the trailer for this, and I have seen
Formula one movies in the past. I can't say I
ever enjoyed a Formula one movie and yet I have
seen this trailer and am thinking this might be a
(18:28):
movie I actually like, I might want to see this,
real boy, audiences have loved this. They did not give
you know, the exit grade was not the A plus
that they gave the director's previous film, Joseph Kaczynski's Top
(18:49):
Gun Maverick right, the Top Gun sequel that was his
previous film, But they gave it an A which is
really really good and like seventy eight percent must recommend.
So this is a film that, in addition to Wheels,
has legs.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
Probably ah like what you did F one.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
G So, so I think I will be uh will
be seeing this. But you know what I caught before
before F one took all the big screen IMAX from it, No,
a movie that never sniffed anywhere near IMAX. Wes Anderson's
new one, the Phoenician Scheme.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
Oh yeah, Now that has me curious.
Speaker 1 (19:32):
I was curious about how I almost let this go
without seeing it. Why Why have I gotten to the
point that I was almost I could take it or
leave it, you know, without having seen it. I like
why Wes Anderson's brought me so much joy through the years.
(19:52):
Why would I feel that way, and I feel like
I was being I don't know, deflated a little bit
by how much Lily describes as it seems like collectively,
there's a little taking for granted going on now with
Wes and Right, there's lots of Wes Anderson, and it's
(20:13):
unlike maybe other filmmakers where you go if you are
the sort of film goer who chooses based on who
made the movie as opposed to who's in it, you
still might be drawn to you know what I like,
I really like when they make action movies where I
really like their you know, in the old days, it
might have been boy, what a great director of comedy.
(20:34):
I really like their comedies. But Wes Anderson, it's always
pretty much a Wes Anderson movie, right, that's the genre.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
And this one's been met with kind of lukewarm responses
by audiences and critics, and I do feel like we
have reached the point where there is some taking for
granted I think going on where Wes is concerned, but
I personally realized after watching it, I almost don't want
to hear now what people think about his films if
(21:09):
it if it works, and he wants to make it
then kind of who cares what we think about it?
I mean, companies care because they want the film to
return a profit. But from a like review standpoint, what's
the point? Right? This movie works and it's clear this
(21:31):
is what he wanted to make. Okay, So what does
what I have to think about it matter at all?
You know, it's different if it's like Asteroid City. Asteroid
City did not work, it did not accomplish his apparent aims. Right,
This perfectly accomplishes what he sets out to make and
(21:52):
as such it's sort of a bit of a master work.
I mean, how could it not be. I mean he
is such a not only an artist, but a craftsman
as well, and he and he's painstaking and he puts
so much detail, as do all this incredible team of
artists that work with him.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
Right. Yeah, it's the same team over a series of films. Right.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
So the question seems to be more can we be
tired of it? Are we allowed to be tired of it?
And sure, of course, like we're entitled to that, or
can we miss the depths that in certain of his films,
actors like maybe Ray Fine or Gene Hackman or Bill
(22:38):
Murray have brought to their lead roles. Of course, of
course we can long for that, although I would advise
people again who are sleeping on this movie not to
sleep on the work being done by Benicio del Toro
oh as Jean Jacques Korda, the lead in the Phoenician Scheme.
(23:00):
It's a very accomplished, nuanced, subtle and charming lead performance
that he's giving. There might be extraneous elements in this film.
Scarlett Johanson is seemingly only in the movie because Wes
Anderson wants her in the movie. She hasn't given anything
(23:21):
interesting or relevant to do. But her bit lasts moments,
just mere moments. So it's a minor quibble, right, And
the movie doesn't go on. It's not a long movie.
It doesn't go on too long where you are sitting
there going man, if only they had cut this, if
only they had cut that. I'm reminded that the French
(23:45):
Dispatch his movie that kind of was described as an anthology,
though it really wasn't, because all the stories being told
were linked in the umbrella of these are things that
happened under the auspices of this publisher, of this editor.
(24:07):
But I'm reminded that it worked remarkably well. But as
people are wont to do with things that they consider anthologies,
they tend to cherry pick their favorite segments and point
out their least favorite at the same time as if
they don't all belong. And it's funny, because you and
(24:28):
I have talked about this that this is always the
folly of those those forms at preview screenings, that they'll
give an audience what was your favorite scene and what
was your least favorite scene? Yes, and will cut out
the least favorite scene as if it didn't belong in
there just as much people's least favorite scene might have
(24:49):
been because bad things happened to the character they liked
the most, right.
Speaker 3 (24:55):
Yeah, and that's part of the storytelling, right, I mean,
that's exactly what you want. There's peril like oh I
didn't like where the girl left the boy, but they
reunited at the end.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Well, that's every love story basically.
Speaker 1 (25:09):
And so in an anthology or a seeming anthology like
French Dispatch, Okay, that one that one I didn't need.
These are the ones that I needed. Well, but if
you didn't have that one, would the others have been
as pleasing? Would they have as been as resonant because
(25:30):
I guarantee you the same. The themes are being explored
and expressed, so you're taking away something that they might need.
Speaker 3 (25:40):
A fascinating so it's in context. All art is in context,
even bad art, right, so to go.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (25:49):
I always hated those test things too, because it was like, well,
I don't know. I mean, it either works as a
whole or it doesn't if you go individually, see by
scene or phrase by phrase or character by character. Even
it's such a pointless exercise.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
I'm not sure why they do it.
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Yeah, well, because they kind of justify the money. Man.
I guess they have to tell they have to have ideas.
Here's the idea, and then I've backed it up with data.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
Yeah right, Well told me I've never read a script before.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
So when they asked me, what do I think, I go,
Can the coach be read instead of Blue going to
be a dog instead of a cat?
Speaker 2 (26:35):
You know, I don't know what to do.
Speaker 3 (26:37):
I don't know what to say, but I'm being paid
six digits a year to say it, So here I go.
Speaker 2 (26:43):
You know.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Interesting proof of this is that when Wes Anderson works
for Netflix to adapt the role doll Stories. Yes, they
actually released them as shorts, right.
Speaker 2 (27:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
And then though someone pointed out, and this is what
I availed myself of, when you watch them all together
as if they were a feature, they are all better
because the themes now come into much clearer focus when
(27:21):
you have them edited together that way, but the tone
becomes sharper and deeper and more affecting. I think you
can only say probably that Wes Anderson has made three
films that were a mess, and therefore I have no
(27:42):
problem with someone saying they aren't good, but none of
them well. One of them, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zisu,
which is a mess, might actually be my favorite of
his films. It doesn't it doesn't achieve the greatness of
the Royal Tenenbombs of the Grand Budapest Hotel, but at
(28:03):
its greatest it's at that level. It has moments where
it hits it, and I'm kind of excited by the
fact that that greatness is made possible by some of
the bizarre attempts they're making that don't pay off. You know,
It's the movie to me, especially coming off Royal Tenin Bombs,
(28:25):
of an artist who's now going all right, let's see
how much I can expand, right, and that's exciting the fences. Yeah,
and it's so it's one of those cases where Okay,
this is a failure that I love. It's a beautiful mess.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
Right.
Speaker 1 (28:44):
It doesn't have maybe the fresh sense of excitement of
his Rushmore or his early forays into animation, but I
love that the film almost has as much as those
and sense of excitement. And like, again, it's a mess.
It's a mess. That's the only way to describe it.
But it is unlike I would say, unlike Darjeeling Limited
(29:09):
or Asteroid City. It's not a glorious, wondrous, hilarious, deeply
felt mess, and therefore it's rewarding in a way that
those aren't.
Speaker 2 (29:24):
Hmm, Okay, well now I'm gonna see this Phoenician thing.
Speaker 3 (29:29):
I was on the fence on it, but now you've
convinced me that it's worth.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
It, because you know you're right.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
You could get tired of Wes Anderson, just like you
can get tired of Picasso.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Right.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
You see three hundred Pcassa's in an art gallery, You go, good.
Speaker 3 (29:43):
Lord, this guy created a lot of crap and you're
looking at it and some are you know, yeah, there's
a masterpiece. But he was also, you know, a great
artist and so and he painted every day of his life.
Speaker 1 (29:57):
MM.
Speaker 3 (29:57):
So you know that there's going to be some things
that are going to be a mess at some things
that are you know, he scribbled on the back of
a paper bag and called it to finished.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
You know.
Speaker 3 (30:08):
So it's a thing that I am now going to
do after I move into my house.
Speaker 1 (30:17):
Something that you don't need to do when you move
into your house, okay, is watch Guy Ritchie's Fountain of
Youth on Apple Plus.
Speaker 3 (30:29):
Really, why shouldn't I do that? Even though I'm not
going to.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
First of all, I think it's fair to call it
ridiculously expensive, And I don't care how much money people spend,
and I don't review movies that way, But ae hundred
and eighty million for a straight to streaming movie on
Apple TV Plus. Again, at the same time that they've
(30:58):
got f one coming out in theaters? Are they doing
what's the plan? Right? One hundred and eighty million dollar
budget means that if they had released it theatrically, Fountain
of Youth would have needed before you get to marketing, right,
would have needed four hundred million, four hundred and fifty
(31:19):
million at the global box office just to break even, Right,
how can this thing be profitable for Apple? Is shoeing
theaters altogether? And it annoys me only in the sense
that I don't think they have an idea of what
they're supposed to release to theaters and what they're not.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Yeah, there's there's an algorithm.
Speaker 3 (31:42):
There's some data matrix that the you know, pencil pushes
use that can predict what the box office will be
so that they know what the budget should be. These
are not hard fast, but clearly somebody did the math, going, Okay,
(32:03):
we spent one hundred and any If we do a
two hundred million dollar campaign, we'll never get that money back.
So let's just dump it on screening, on streaming to
prevent any more hemorrhaging of our cash.
Speaker 1 (32:18):
Which is what they which is what they did with Wolves,
you know, with Clooney and Brad Pitt. And don't get
me wrong, there is no way Fountain of Youth should
have sniff theaters. That's not what I am saying. I
am also saying, nor should it have been made in
the first place. It is so aggressively, relentlessly awful Wow.
(32:44):
And by the way, I really have a soft spot
for archaeology inflected art history celebrating historic mythological mystery adventure films.
How's that for a genre? I love that genre, I
really do. And it's not just that this modern day
(33:06):
tale of that kind wants you to know how much
it likes the Indiana Jones films. It's that it steals
overtly from each of them in turn. Wow, the movie's
never funny while trying the whole time to be funny,
(33:29):
Oh dear, and it pulls off that trick by being witless. No, No,
I felt held hostage by this movie.
Speaker 3 (33:44):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
Now I want to see how bad this thing.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
Is and therefore therefore the money spent on it truly
makes me angry because I feel like all that money
went to hold me hostage? Again, what's the movie division
at app doing? Why make WOLFZ with Pitt and Clooney
and then pull its theatrical at the last moment, alienating
(34:09):
a whole raft of talented, powerful people when that movie
was made for the big screen, and I kid you
not would have played better and been received more warmly
if it had been on the big screen. Why release
(34:30):
f one to theaters, but make this one for streaming.
And some people have actually said to me Dean, when
I've said that, they said, well, f one. You know,
Formula one requires a big canvas. Wait a minute, you
just pointed out what show do you love on Netflix? Yeah,
people are not watching Formula one races around the world
(34:52):
in movie theaters. They are watching them on the small screen.
That's how people are used to watching them. So I'm
not saying don't release one to theaters. I'm glad they did.
I'm actually glad it's a hit regardless of whether I
see it. But what what makes sense? Why is that
one for theaters? This one's for streaming. What is their plan? Again,
(35:14):
I ask you, without any hope that you can answer,
what are they doing?
Speaker 3 (35:20):
Well, you know, here's the thing, and this I always
think about Apple spin off the things is that they're
they don't really have to try as hard as other
studios because they got the iPhone and the tablets, and
they got all that money behind them.
Speaker 2 (35:38):
So they have a shock absorber with the Apple Corporation.
Anything Tim Cook does you know, they'll go great.
Speaker 3 (35:48):
We can now just sort of f around with these
movies and streaming and ideas and see, you know what,
how's the best way to lay this out and which
way to roll? And if we screw well, hey, there's
a billion dollar war horse right behind us that will
still be churning out in revenue whether we screw up
(36:09):
or do this right or wrong.
Speaker 1 (36:11):
That's brilliant leadership, that's all. That's all I can say.
That's worthy of the Steve Jobs and the Walt Disneys
of the of the World, isn't it. I had plenty
of time while watching Fountain of Youth to think about
the Indiana Jones films, and two years removed from the
(36:35):
Dial of Destiny, which came out two summers ago. It
has occurred to me that in terms of quality of
those films, I would actually rank them in order of
their release date. That actually is to me. I would have,
of course Raiders of lost ark as the best, but
I would have Temple of Doom second, I'd have Indiana
(36:58):
Jones in The Last Crusade third, I'd have Kingdom of
the Crystal Skull fourth, and I would have The Last
Isle of Destiny fifth. And I know it's somewhat sacrilege
not to have the third film Last Crusade with Sean
Connery as the elder doctor Jones as the second best.
But still all these years on, Temple of Doom was
(37:18):
a big, bold, badass change up in terms of tone
and really was one of the most thrilling films ever
released up until that point in time. And perhaps since
it was scary, it had one of the three most
touching relationships in the series, Indian short Round and again
(37:41):
Keyway Kwan's come back Oscar winning turn in Everything Everywhere,
All at Once does not hurt the legacy I think
of Temple of Doom in any way. Harrison Ford was
at his high wattage movie star best. The locales were
exotic and nightmarish and fantastic and if and if you
want to color it as culturally insensitive, I understand your
(38:05):
desired to do so. Right, The movie works, though.
Speaker 3 (38:10):
And.
Speaker 1 (38:12):
It's and again it's different when almost every sequel tries
to replicate its original.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (38:19):
Well, and this, to me is the brilliance of Spielberg.
Of course, I always say he's the best second unit
director ever. Then, not the best director ever, but the
best second unit because that guy can see stuff on
the storyboard and turn it into Holy Molly. How to
do that, you know, to say, like I always do,
(38:42):
you have an experimental Nazi plane, you have to get
the arc on it, and then your hero has to
punch a super tall, giant bald guy while the plane's
spinning in a circle and your a is trapped inside,
and tell that whole thing in three minutes and seventeen
seve there's nobody.
Speaker 1 (39:02):
It's a short film, unto itself.
Speaker 3 (39:04):
Unto itself, and there's nothing wasted. And same with the
KRT the mining cart chase in Temple To that you
know is just one thrill after another.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
Well, I think about, you know, going back especially to
what you were describing from Raiders of Lost Ark, all
that stuff that is done in camera, doing as much
in camera as you can, and by the time of
Crystal Skull, we're not doing that.
Speaker 2 (39:37):
No.
Speaker 1 (39:37):
And it's as if either Spielberg just gave in to
the way movies have to be made or he didn't
have the energy that he once had to really push
that boulder of doing stuff in camera. We all remember
the boulder coming down the hill chasing after Indiana Jones.
Someone had to push that boulder up the hill, and
(39:59):
it may very well of Ben Steven Spielberg saying no,
this will work, trust me. The final two films had
no hope of recapturing so much of what was magical
about the original trilogy because too little of their action
was going to be filmed in camera. Right there, you
have put yourself behind the eight ball. It seems you
(40:19):
can't capture that visceral you know, magic. I do think
in retrospect all these years on the spirit and the
tone of Crystal Skull, the one from two thousand and
eight is generally infectious, and some of what people hated
the most, like the way Indy survives the nuclear test
(40:42):
blast inside a refrigerator, I actually think is delightful and
funny in a nod of the Fedora to the old
serials type of way, because that's what these always were
supposed to be. So the fact that it's somewhat ridiculous
is the point, not a weakness. It should have a
(41:03):
tongue in cheek element to it. As as for Dial
of Destiny, there is I don't I'm not the first
to say this. There is a lot wrong with it,
of course, but I would say that Indiana Jones himself
is not one of those things, and seeing it as
a cap or to his story actually makes it ultimately
(41:25):
somewhat worthwhile. It is heartfelt and touching and clearly well
felt by the actor who played the part all those years.
We may not have wanted to see it, but the
guy who brought us so much adventure, the actor who
brought us so much joy, deserved it seems to me
(41:45):
to make it if he wished, and it is deeply felt.
I've watched it more than once and found that it
improves with each viewing, as opposed perhaps to Crystal Skull,
which really doesn't improve upon itach itach viewing it. It
doesn't mean that it's better. It does, in some ways
(42:07):
mean that what's wrong with Dial of Destiny was so
big that it kind of buried the movie, and then
you're free to kind of go, okay, but what was
in here that was worthy a little bit? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (42:23):
Well, well there you go. Well then I followed up
you're thing too. I'm watching Mickey seventeen this week. Yeah,
and we talked about it last week, and you intrigue
me enough to watch it, And you're right, it's not great,
but it's it's not unwatchable either. I think there's just
(42:44):
some missed moments, you know, because it seemed like three
movies and one one.
Speaker 2 (42:50):
You have you follow Mickey one.
Speaker 3 (42:53):
Through sixteen basically, and then Mickey seventeen, you know, his story,
and then he wakes up next to Mickey eighteen, and
there the hijinks is supposed to begin or a moral
issue or I don't. After that, you sort of have
another movie, and then there's a third movie at the
(43:13):
end with all the Crawley bugs. So it seemed like
there was three ideas and none of them really grab
a toehold.
Speaker 1 (43:24):
And I said that so many of the ideas felt
like they were things that he had planned for maybe
snow Piercer, and didn't do. And that could be true.
We know that artists actually do work this way, Right,
you keep it in the memory banks and then we'll
use it later. But actually, since talking to you and
you bringing up the bugs, the bugs on the alien planet,
(43:47):
which actually there's some interesting stuff that could have been
explored there, and almost now feels like, oh, maybe those
were left over from Oaksha Right.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Yeah, there was another.
Speaker 3 (44:05):
You know, fifty pages in that script that they cut
out and put into this one.
Speaker 1 (44:09):
Was this a guy? Is it possible that this guy
was so surprised at the international acclaim, I mean a
best picture for Parasite. I don't know if you saw that.
New York Times did a poll of filmmakers and actors
of what are the one hundred best films thus far
(44:29):
of the twenty first century, and number one was Parasite,
which again is to me recency bias, But also I
was sitting talking about this with people who like Bung Juno,
and it's the most overrated film in his ouvra. But
is it possible that this man was himself sort of
(44:52):
flabbergasted by the embrace and success of that film that
he was going, well, what the hell do I I
do next?
Speaker 2 (45:01):
Right?
Speaker 3 (45:02):
Because if you are well, that's it. That's every artist
suffers that, right. You create a piece and then it
takes on its own astronomical orbit unto itself, and then
you go, well, was that a fluke? Or did I
am I shooting the wrong bullets here? Because I you know,
(45:24):
I know it happens to people a lot that you
then are confused by what's popular and what's not.
Speaker 2 (45:31):
I saw it in stand up all the time. People
just write dumb jokes and.
Speaker 3 (45:34):
They get a huge laughs and then the other guys
would write very thoughtful jokes and they get to titter
and you're like, Okay, don't give up, But she whiz.
It's hard to figure that out.
Speaker 1 (45:58):
I did a rap epic amount of rewatching of Mission
Impossible movies this week for a variety of reasons. I
did this one. It would have been just wrong not
to in the wake of the death of the genius
composer of the Mission Impossible theme Leloh Schiffrin, who died
(46:19):
this week at the age of ninety three. Do you
know it took him all of three minutes to compose
that song for the TV series after a March influenced
theme song was rejected.
Speaker 2 (46:36):
Ah.
Speaker 1 (46:38):
He utilized the unusual five to four time signature because,
according to Schiffrin, people in outer space have five legs
and couldn't dance to our music.
Speaker 2 (46:49):
Well that's pretty good, Okay.
Speaker 1 (46:52):
The themes opening four notes too long, too short correspond
to the Morse code for m oh. But seriously, how
(47:20):
many badass movies were aided and embedded by his stylish
and hard working scores. I mean Kelly's Heroes, which you love,
the Cincinnati Kid Bullet, Dirty Harry, Enter the Dragon, cool hand, Luke.
I mean a lot of my childhood and youth viewing
would have been a lot different and a lot less
(47:43):
entertaining without Lalo Schiffrin's work. So I also thought it
(48:18):
was a good time to delve into these movies because
I've thought about them in context often to how they
achieved what I wish so many of the James Bond
contemporary and modern Bond films could achieve and always come
up short against. And so this week the news that
(48:39):
Denny Villeeneuve will be directing the next long awaited Bond film.
We don't have an actor playing Double O seven yet,
though if varieties report of who the three finalists are,
don't bother telling me, because there's zero chance I'll have
any interest in the film. I mean, I twenty something
(49:02):
actor playing Bond. I don't mind watching young actors. I
love watching young actors. But by all means, the most accomplished,
most effective assassin in the service of Her Majesty's government,
who has figured out how to survive in every corner
of the globe. Yeah, it should be someone in their twenties.
That makes a lot of sense anyway, The idea that
(49:26):
an a list director who is a brilliant filmmaker, we
will agree, is taking over this franchise has been caused
for a lot of excitement and yet no, you'd look
at the Mission Impossible movies, the movies that had a
list directors with signature names, right, Brian DePalma doing the
(49:50):
first one, John Wu during the second one. These are
the weakest films in the series. Yeah, the best films
belonged to those directed by Christopher McCrory, who had won
an out Oscar for writing The Usual Suspects, but who
had only directed two non Mission Impossible movies before he
(50:13):
got involved in the franchise. Rogue Nation was his third
movie as a director. So this has been historically true. Right,
The greatest Bond films were not directed by name brand directors.
So it'll be interesting, let's say.
Speaker 2 (50:34):
So.
Speaker 1 (50:34):
So I dove into I didn't rewatch the Brian Dipalmo one.
I had seen that one so many times through the years.
But the one that I have watched the least is
the one I remember being the worst, and that's the
John Wu one Mission Impossible two.
Speaker 2 (50:49):
Right, it's funny I started watching that this week as well, So.
Speaker 1 (50:54):
It barely feels like a movie in the series. That's true,
It's nothing like any of the other films.
Speaker 3 (51:06):
No, because for some reason, like every third scene just
deflates the pacing, like you know, I mean, you gotta
lay pipe, you gotta have your plot spoken about, but
to be done, and I don't want to say ham fisted,
but just energetically something goes south every about every five minutes.
Speaker 1 (51:31):
And what an odd thing for them not to be
aware of. All I can say is they were so
enamored of the idea that they were working with John
wu right, and that in the moment seeing these scenes constructed,
they might have said, well, this is artistry, right. But
(51:51):
to have followed up the first one, they had to know,
we need to build some momentum here. Yeah, And they
couldn't build momentum within the movie, let alone building it
upon the previous movie. It was a major step down
from the first one. And that first one wasn't great.
(52:12):
Yeah it was. It was oh hey, it had a
neat paranoia to it and a fun sense of humor.
It was Brian Diploma, after all. I think he rolls
out of bed giving you paranoia and a sense of
kind of the macabre fun. But it did not at
any point point the way for a continuing series. That's right, yes,
(52:37):
which always seemed to be the desire in adapting this
franchise in the first place. In the second one, you know,
they did seem to want to go more wildly romantic,
and they do go more balletic in the action. So
on the one hand, you know, enter Tandy Newton, who
(52:58):
at that time in her life was as lumine this
as anyone has ever been on screen. She's the love interest,
and entered John wu for this gunfu poetry. Right, But
it's amazing. Despite being a big hit, and it was
a huge hit, it's still I think the biggest of
(53:18):
the films domestically. Maybe it's the second biggest. But you've
got to point out that Cruise was at that point
infallible as a box office draw.
Speaker 2 (53:27):
Exactly.
Speaker 1 (53:29):
It's it's not only bad that movie. It is bad
in such a uniquely nineties way that it almost to
me coming out in two thousand as it does watching
it this time, Dean, I felt like it was a
time capsule.
Speaker 2 (53:47):
Yeah, right there.
Speaker 3 (53:49):
It was real dated, like even the lighting and some
camera setups felt dated to me.
Speaker 2 (53:57):
It was weird.
Speaker 1 (53:58):
I don't want to bag on Joe Wu and the
influence he had. But is it possible that none of
his Western films hold up if if we were to
like go back and look at them, I wonder remove
from the cultural context of the Hong Kong in which
his voice emerged. I wonder if the effect wouldn't be
(54:21):
on all his Western films exactly what you're describing feeling dated.
Speaker 3 (54:26):
Yeah, well, I mean it's that a product of production design.
Speaker 2 (54:31):
Is that pre visualization? I mean, where is.
Speaker 1 (54:34):
It removing a cultural element from the shores on which
it took root to another country, there's already an element
of tourism, and so what you end up with is
no longer a work of art. You end up with
a souvenir.
Speaker 3 (54:53):
Yeah, oh yeah, yeah, it's like souvenir shots of real
good job move movies.
Speaker 2 (55:00):
That's what it feels like for sure.
Speaker 3 (55:01):
Because I'm sure he had the same team in Hong
Kong for each of his films, So it had he
would have had the freedom and the ability to trust
those around him to do their jobs, as opposed to
them coming to a country and not knowing. These guys
but I'll saying their best and they all say Hey, man,
(55:23):
I love your movies, but can that guy solve this
problem through lighting?
Speaker 2 (55:29):
Can that guy solve this problem through production? You know?
Speaker 1 (55:33):
So, the long delayed Mission Impossible three comes out six
years later, and I did a little bit of reading
about it, and it was because of directors coming on
board and leaving. But it is really interesting, isn't it
that as it ends up happening, they follow up this
one from this cinematic o tour of bealeletic violence who
(55:55):
influenced decades of filmmakers with a TV direct and the
TV director in question making his directorial debut on the
big screen was JJ Abrams.
Speaker 2 (56:08):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (56:08):
Yeah. And the movie Mission Impossible three suffers a little
bit from small screen tropes that I now recognize as
having been taken from Alias and moved to Mission Impossible.
Appropriate perhaps, given let's not forget that Mission Impossible's origins
is as a small screen but it's as a small
(56:32):
screen franchise belying the big screen epic saga that Ethan
Hunt's story would become. But all that aside, it nevertheless
is the first real Mission Impossible movie. I think it's
the one that definitely points the way for the entries
to come, hey, here's a path that you can chart
(56:52):
and follow to big screen success. And in fact, indeed,
the just released supposed big screen finale of Final Reckoning
falls back in many ways to the third film, even
answering some of the mysteries that are left hanging at
(57:13):
the end of Mission Impossible three. So it's in some
ways Part eight is a direct sequel to Part three.
So it's fascinating how it's almost like that's the beginning
right there that we've come to just conclude. Despite being
far and away the best of them I films to date,
(57:36):
at that point, Mission Impossible three barely did half the
business of what we agree is a pretty awful John
Wu Mission Impossible two. The poor quality of that prior
entry probably was going to contribute to some immediate franchise fatigue,
(57:58):
ruled with the six year delay between films definitely accounts
for some of the box office drop off, no doubt,
But again, historic context is necessary. Let's not forget that
was a tenuous time for the future of Tom Cruise
as a box office.
Speaker 2 (58:15):
Draw Right then, Kitty Holmes, the time.
Speaker 1 (58:21):
News news about the exact nature of his involvement with
Scientology was starting to really come out. Uh yeah, the
oddness surrounding his marriage to Katie Holmes jumping up and
down on Oprah's couch.
Speaker 2 (58:37):
Yeah, not helping his.
Speaker 1 (58:39):
Public skirmish with Brookshields.
Speaker 2 (58:41):
Oh help.
Speaker 1 (58:44):
His appeal with women was at an all time low because.
Speaker 3 (58:49):
He fired his publicist around that time and had his
sister be his publicist, who said, show him the real
Tom Cruise. Just you know, that's the real little problem there.
Speaker 1 (59:00):
So I was reminded of all those things watching the film,
because they clearly are making painstaking efforts to rebuild his
brand with women. Specifically, it literally opens with attempts to
(59:21):
rehabilitate that appeal. Several times women are shown on screen
agreeing with each other about what a great guy and
how desirable he is.
Speaker 2 (59:31):
So hey and Jackie chan movie where they go, He's
so handsome.
Speaker 1 (59:35):
Painstaking efforts are made to show what a good, faithful,
devoted and stable husband he is going to be to
his newfound fiance, a surgeon played by Michelle Monaghan. That
relationship ends up paying great dividends in the next two films,
though this is the only one where the Michelle Monaghan,
(59:57):
who's wonderful actress where she really has a bit role.
This is the only one, but the relationship pays off again.
Like I said, in the next two films. It's interesting
how like the previous two films, one of the villains
in this one is from Ethan's own side. Oh my goodness.
In all these movies he's double crossed and portrayed by
(01:00:21):
someone directly from the halls of the IMF. But in
this one, Ethan is also given a straight ahead adversary
and an understandable enemy, and it's Philip Seymour Hoffman in
an almost shockingly frightening performance. He's he's physical, he's imposing,
(01:00:45):
he's dark, he's reluctant and world weary, and he's riveting
as hell in that movie. After all this time, Philip
seymore Hoffman's dea makes me angry. Yeah, like we could
still be getting all time performances from him had he
(01:01:06):
not died in twenty fourteen. I know, and I would
say that his Owen Davian in this film is one
of my ten favorites of his performances. I also love
that Part three introduces Simon Pegg's Benji, a character who
would enjoy a wonderful arc in the franchise. Culminating in
this Summer's Final Reckoning, and I love that it's the
(01:01:29):
first of the films where there's a real sense of
team yea, because that's my favorite element of these movies.
Speaker 2 (01:01:37):
Yeah, everybody working together and having each other back.
Speaker 1 (01:01:41):
I wished that Maggie Q had been able to return,
but it was this film that led to her getting
too much work for her to be available schedule wise.
And certainly the films get better and better at adding
female team members. It's one of the best elements of
(01:02:03):
these movies that, from Paula Patten to Rebecca Ferguson to
Haley Atwell to Palm Clementief, the female team members not
only hold their own, they become more memorable and contribute
more and more indelible moments and scenes on their own.
Speaker 2 (01:02:20):
Cool.
Speaker 3 (01:02:21):
Well, now, now, because two did leave me going why
am I watching these again?
Speaker 2 (01:02:27):
I forget?
Speaker 3 (01:02:28):
But now that you say there's an arc to it
and as some careful consideration on how to relaunch, how
to do damage control, anybody should follow that.
Speaker 2 (01:02:41):
Storyline through history.
Speaker 1 (01:02:43):
The well, I would say, now, having watched all two
through eight recently, here's a way to consider the MII
franchise in the first two installments, they're clearly trying to
figure out what Mission Impossible movies should be. In the
(01:03:07):
next two, In three and four, and let's talk about
four next week. Maybe I think probably my favorite, not
the best of all of them, but my favorite ghost Protocol.
In three and four they had it figured out. In
five and six they perfected it.
Speaker 2 (01:03:27):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (01:03:28):
And in seven and eight they concluded it. And they
concluded it often by deconstructing what had come before. So
it's a really interesting eight installment arc that way, and
you can kind of pair the films that way that
they belong together, not just in terms of story, but
(01:03:51):
in terms of Wow. They these two this is where
they nailed it, and then these two this is where
they elevated it to the top of the genre. And
so it could be kind of cool, I would say,
looking at those first three if I was forced to
give star ratings like I used to do when I
(01:04:11):
was a published film critic, right out of four stars,
because I never liked the five star since time. I
was a classic four star guy. The first Mission Impossible
from Brian to Palm, I'd give two and a half stars. Okay,
the John wu directed Mission Impossible two. I would give
one half start, a half star out of four possible
(01:04:37):
total and Mission Impossible three directed by J. J. Abrams,
I would give three stars out of four.
Speaker 3 (01:04:43):
Wow, look at that. That's a pretty good rating system.
I think I would do. I'm going to have to
watch three again now you say it, because I forgot
how much I liked still Philip Temar Hoffman.
Speaker 2 (01:04:56):
Yeah, he was really good in.
Speaker 1 (01:04:57):
That, really good. And again, like I said, what delight
to be reminded of where Simon Pegg's Benji character begins,
because he's got really good scenes in it, and you
think and he, of course, the actor Simon Pegg thought,
well that's it for me, right. But smart people have
(01:05:18):
been making this franchise, there's no question about them. None
smarter really than Tom Cruise, and they not only enjoyed
working with him, but really liked what he was doing
on screen and recognized the possibilities and recognized early on
if we evolved this character, this could really pay dividends
for us. And that's pretty cool. And I'd like to
(01:05:40):
end there with just something I heard about Tom Cruise.
You know, he'd famously doing all these own stunts of
him and everything, But what a filmmaker he has become.
He's been a producer for a long time. But as
you say about Spielberg, not meaning it as damn someone
(01:06:00):
with faint praise, that he's the best second unit director
of all time, who happens to be a first unit director? Right,
Tom Cruise seems like he's the best first assistant director
in the business because I have just been reading more
and more about how he controls those sets and keeps
(01:06:21):
the energy up, keeps everybody moving, and understands on the
fly the order that these things should be shot in,
like right down to No, Haglin's got a plane to catch,
let's shoot his stuff first. We can then easily use
the same lighting to just turn in this direction and
get this, you know, like he's the one doing that.
Speaker 2 (01:06:42):
Wow. Yeah, impressive.
Speaker 1 (01:06:44):
He yields to the director. The director is his boss. Yeah,
but he knows how to get all the pieces and cheaply.
And it's crazy because he knows that in those famous
stunts that he's doing, it's not just that he's doing
(01:07:05):
the stunts, Dean, it's that he's acting for camera while
doing the stunts and understands the camera, understands what the
camera is seeing. There is a shot in part eight
in the recently released film where he's on a plane
and we see him, you know, in the climactic sequence,
(01:07:27):
and there's this cool rack focus to what he's looking at,
and then back to him as he's looking and reacting
to what he's just seen, and all of a sudden
you realize, well, there's no camera person up there, and
he's tens of thousands of feet in the air, that
(01:07:48):
camera's not being operated by remote control. Tom Cruise is
racking focus on a selfie O what he's looking at
while flying a plane.
Speaker 2 (01:08:06):
Holy smoked, I now now I want to see this
because that sounds amazing.
Speaker 1 (01:08:12):
Belated spoiler alert
Popular Podcasts
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!
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