The Next Picture Show

Lorene Scafaria portrays the criminal scam at the heart of HUSTLERS with a sort of cinematic brio that has earned the film comparisons to the work of Martin Scorsese, in particular the similarly flashy Vegas epic CASINO — and not just because both prominently feature chinchilla fur coats. In this half of our vice-ridden pairing, we talk over what works and what doesn’t about HUSTLERS before diving into the two films’ shared preoccupations with destructive trust and capitalist systems and compare the filmmaking flourishes Scafaria and Scorsese use to draw viewers into their seductive worlds. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about CASINO, HUSTLERS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Show Notes Works Cited: • “The Hustlers at Scores,” by Jessica Pressler (thec

The big question at the heart of Lorene Scafaria’s new HUSTLERS — one about the corrupting force of American capitalism and who is allowed to rip off whom — is the same one that drive’s Martin Scorsese’s 1995 Vegas gangster epic CASINO, a question both films address with no small amount of verve and flash. In this half of our vice-ridden pairing, we dig into CASINO’s reputation as a GOODFELLAS retread and how its characters conform, or don’t, to our expectations about Scorsese characters. Plus, a couple of otherwise unrelated feedback letters get us talking about the expectations we bring to films and how they can shift the viewing experience. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about CASINO, HUSTLERS, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Outro music: Devo, “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It’s too early to know whether Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett’s horror-comedy READY OR NOT will eventually become a cult hit in the manner of 1985’s CLUE, but the two films share a foundation in dangerous games and the even more dangerous people who play them. After parsing how READY OR NOT works as both horror and comedy, and inducting star Samara Weaving into the scream queen hall of fame, we dig into the two films’ crucial central performances, how both incorporate elements of class satire and farce, and the extent to which each is indebted to actual game mechanics. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about CLUE, READY OR NOT, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Your Next Picture Show:  • Scott: Ognjen Glavonic’s THE LOAD • Keith: Netflix’s THE DARK

The gamified murder and mayhem of the recent horror-comedy READY OR NOT put us in mind of a similarly scrappy, low-budget affair with board games in its DNA: John Landis and Jonathan Lynn’s flop-turned-cult-classic CLUE. In this CLUE-centric half of our deadly games pairing, we get into how much both sides of that flop/cult reputation are earned, how much of the film’s genesis in a board game comes across on screen, and how much those additional endings add to the film. Plus, we respond to some feedback taking us to task for one of the many controversial elements of ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD that we left out of our discussion of the film. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about CLUE, READY OR NOT, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.  Works Cited:• “The Crazy Story Of How ‘Clue’ Want From Forgotten Flop To Cult Triumph” by Adam B. Vary (Buzzfeed.com) • “Why Are You Laughing At Bruce Lee?” By Wa

A few decades and a whole industry removed from Barbara Kopple’s HARLAN COUNTY, USA, Steven Bognar and Julia Reichert’s AMERICAN FACTORY is an entertaining yet dispiriting illustration of how much working conditions, labor relations, and blue-collar work have changed — and, in some ways, haven’t. After wrestling with AMERICAN FACTORY’s sometimes-funny, sometimes-demoralizing portrayal of the current state of American industry, unions, and national identity, we dive what unites and separates these films’ approach to depicting the struggles and setbacks of the working American. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about HARLAN COUNTY USA, AMERICAN FACTORY, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Your Next Picture Show:  • Keith: INFINITY TRAIN on Cartoon Network • Gen

The new Netflix documentary AMERICAN FACTORY is funnier than Barbara Kopple’s 1976 Oscar-winning documentary HARLAN COUNTY USA, and not nearly as fraught with violence, but it pivots on many of the same core tensions between workers and corporate bosses. In this half of our pairing of labor struggles past and present, we look back at HARLAN COUNTY to see how the time Kopple’s team spent embedded in Harlan County shaped the film, as well as the 1973 miners strike it depicts; how the film’s style reflects Kopple’s involvement with the Maysles brothers and direct cinema; and which of Harlan County’s colorful residents leave the biggest mark on the film. Plus, we respond to some feedback on recent episodes and go over some of the dozens of suggestions we got for 2019 pairings we received when we recently put the call out on Twitter. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about HARLAN COUNTY USA, AMERICAN FACTORY, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or l

Quentin Tarantino’s ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD looks back at 1969 Hollywood from a 2019 vantage point, where Hal Ashby’s 1975 satire SHAMPOO examines that same era from a much closer distance, but the two films share a funny but bittersweet outlook on what would turn out to be a turning point in history. In this half of our pairing of 1969-set “Hollywood endings,” we share our responses to Tarantino’s newest film, and to some of the discussion surrounding it, before diving into what links these two films, including their shared focus on a single event as a historical turning point, and their respective engagement, or lack thereof, with the counterculture. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about SHAMPOO, ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (7

Quentin Tarantino’s ONCE UPON A TIME… IN HOLLYWOOD filters its wistful look at the end of an era through the lens of a real historical event (albeit one altered for the film), an approach that mirrors the one taken by director Hal Ashby and star/co-writer Warren Beatty in 1975’s SHAMPOO, which situates its late-1960s Hollywood satire within the broader sociopolitical context of the Nixon presidential election. Both films concern characters looking out at an uncertain future and fearing what unhappy endings might await them, and both function as after-the-fact reflections on a turning point in Hollywood, and American, history. In this half of our pairing we dive into SHAMPOO to consider how well it’s aged, whether it feels prophetic about our current reality, and to what extent we’re meant to sympathize with/pity its lothario protagonist. Plus, we respond to two listeners who wrote in with the same observation regarding our recent episode on THE ART OF SELF DEFENSE. Please share your comments, thoughts, and qu

Riley Stearns’ new dark comedy THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE centers on an underground scene of fighters who engage in their own version of the transgressive tactics Tyler Durden plays with in 1999’s FIGHT CLUB, but both films are ultimately about the catharsis of violence. After digging into how ART OF SELF-DEFENSE spins the “fight club” premise to its own ends, we pit these two films against each other to see which reigns supreme!…Or, to determine what each movie has to say about their shared interests in misogyny, toxic masculinity, and the dehumanization of life in corporate America. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about FIGHT CLUB, THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Your Next Picture Show:  • Keith: Alfred E. Green’s BABY FACE • Tas

We’re looking at two films featuring underground fight clubs, secret identities, and male protagonists trying to reclaim their self-worth through violence, beginning with David Fincher’s FIGHT CLUB, which traffics in many of the same themes as Riley Stearns’ new THE ART OF SELF DEFENSE, albeit with decidedly more stylistic flourish. In this half of our toxic masculinity double feature, we dig into what made FIGHT CLUB so divisive in 1999, and what makes it seem so prescient today. Plus, some feedback asking about our podcast hometown of Chicago and its many cinephiliac offerings. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about FIGHT CLUB, THE ART OF SELF-DEFENSE, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Outro music: Dust Brothers, “Psycho Boy Jack” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Our look at musical films that willfully straddle the line between fact and fiction brings in Martin Scorsese’s newest effort for Netflix, ROLLING THUNDER REVUE: A BOB DYLAN STORY, to see how it applies that MO to a documentary format, where Todd Haynes’ VELVET GOLDMINE applied it to a narrative one. After debating to what extent ROLLING THUNDER REVUE tells us anything about its slippery subject, we bring these two films together to see how they each play with ideas about alter-egos and disposable identities, what they have to say about art and commerce, and how each reflect their 1970s setting. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about VELVET GOLDMINE, ROLLING THUNDER REVUE, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. SHOW NOTES Works Cited: • “Truth and Legends: The

Martin Scorsese’s new ROLLING THUNDER REVUE takes a documentary-esque approach to Bob Dylan’s titular 1970s tour-slash-roadshow, blending fact and fiction in a manner reminiscent of Todd Haynes’ 1998 cult favorite VELVET GOLDMINE, which creates a similar sort of parallel fiction around an extraordinary moment in music history. In this half of our pairing looking at “print the legend” musical histories, we focus on VELVET GOLDMINE and its dense, post-modern approach to crafting an ersatz Bowie biopic, debating the advantages and disadvantage of doing a fictionalized history of a real movement, and whether it matters that Bowie himself did not approve. Plus, still more GODZILLA feedback and a theory inspired by our recent BIG episode. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about VELVET GOLDMINE, ROLLING THUNDER REVUE, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.  Outro music: Shudder to Think, “Hot One” Learn mor

What went wrong with F. Gary Gray’s attempt to revive a franchise with MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL? There are many answers to that question, which we dig into this week, but a lot of the DOA sequel’s problems can be traced directly back to the successes of 1997’s MEN IN BLACK. We look at the newest MEN IN BLACK alongside its much funnier, more sprightly forebear to see how the two films’ respective use of humor, movie stars, and setting contribute to their success, or lack thereof. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about any and all MENS IN BLACK, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. SHOW NOTES Works Cited: • “Rewrites, Infighting and No ‘Urgency’: Behind Sony’s Lackluster ‘Men in Black’ Relaunch,” by Borys Kit (The Hollywood Reporter) • “‘Men In Black: Inter

The lackluster new MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL has failed to rekindle much interest in the action-comedy franchise — more on that in the next episode — which makes the 1997 blockbuster from which it stems seem like even more of a miracle in hindsight. Having seen how the franchise’s formula can fail, we’re going back to the source to see how director Barry Sonnenfeld, with no small assist from stars Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones and effects master Rick Baker, achieved that rarest of cinematic feats: a weird blockbuster. This week we dig into the strange performances, mindful effects, and sharp political allegory that enliven this lean, mean galaxy-defending machine. Plus, some feedback on our recent GODZILLA episodes, and a thought experiment inspired by CHINATOWN. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about any and all MEN IN BLACK movies, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.  Works Cited: • “An Ora

The new GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS looks and acts a lot more like one of the other recent entries in Warner Bros’ “Monsterverse” than it does the classic creature features inspired by the original GODZILLA, but it also consciously echoes Ishiro Honda’s 1954 film in some key ways. After airing our grievances with the frustratingly incoherent KING OF THE MONSTERS, we dig into what links this newest film to its very different predecessor, from its city-flattening monster effects to its shaky attempts to inject human drama amid the kaiju destruction. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about any and all GODZILLAs and/or monsters, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.  Your Next Picture Show:  • Scott: Kirill Serebrennikov’s LETO • Tasha: Olivia Wilde’s BOOKSMART

The new CGI spectacle GODZILLA: KING OF THE MONSTERS further extends the longest running film franchise in history, but it’s a far cry (roar?) from the 1954 film that first set this fire-breathing, city-flattening phenomenon in motion. So this week we’re looking back at Ishiro Honda’s originating film to speculate how and why its central nuclear metaphor shifted over the decades, to discuss how the film and its effects—don’t call them dated or Keith will be sad!—benefit from Godzilla’s literal and figurative weight, and debate what, if anything, the central love triangle adds to this story. Plus, some feedback taking us to task for some things we overlooked in our recent discussions of THE WARRIORS and JOHN WICK 3. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about any and all GODZILLA movies, or anything else film-related, by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Outro music: Kesha, “Godzilla” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone

We return again to the deadly streets of the Big Apple at night to discuss Chad Stahelski’s latest entry in the JOHN WICK franchise, CHAPTER 3—PARABELLUM, and its place in the action pantheon alongside Walter Hill’s 1979 cult classic THE WARRIORS. After talking over our reactions to the latest JOHN WICK, and the series as a whole, we bring in THE WARRIORS to compare how these two films’ respective styles approach the streets of New York and action choreography, how they both embrace the trope of “honor among thieves,” and how their respective portrayals of masculinity play on the juxtaposition of vulnerability and indomitability. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about THE WARRIORS, JOHN WICK or anything else in the world of film by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. **Show Notes** Your Next Pictur

The latest chapter in the JOHN WICK saga, the new PARABELLUM, follows its assassin hero on a long perilous journey through hostile territory, a setup that brought to mind Walter Hill’s controversial hit turned cult classic THE WARRIORS. In this half of our pairing of violent journeys through the night, we examine Hill’s film in the context of the director’s late-’70s/early-’80s hot streak, to discuss how its rain-slicked streets and stylized version of New York gang culture came to typify a certain strain of ’80s action filmmaking, and debate whether its portrayals of masculinity and romance work in the context of Hill’s bare-bones approach to storytelling. Plus, the UNDER THE SILVER LAKE feedback keeps rolling in. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about THE WARRIORS, JOHN WICK 3, or anything else film-related by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Works Cited: • Primer: Walter Hill, by Scott Tobias (avclub.com) Outro music: Pop W

It’s rare for a rom-com to situate itself firmly in the realm of contemporary American politics, which makes Jonathan Levin’s new Charlize Theron and Seth Rogen-starring LONG SHOT feel in many ways like a spiritual sequel to 1995’s THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT, right down to both films’ exploration of moral compromise through a big environmental initiative. But LONG SHOT takes a distinctly different comedic approach to its material, which we dig into before bringing these two political romances together to talk about the role dignity, or lack thereof, plays in selling their respective fantasies, how they function as both a romance and a comedy, and how each pulls off its respective grand gesture. Plus, Your Next Picture Show, where we share recent filmgoing experiences in hopes of putting something new on your cinematic radar. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT, LONG SHOT, or anything else in the world of film by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leav

The new Charlize Theron/Seth Rogan rom-com LONG SHOT looks for comedy at the intersection of love and the highest tier of American politics, an unusual combination that positions it as a spiritual successor to an earlier, much more earnest portrayal of a similarly unlikely romance — that of Rob Reiner’s 1995 Aaron Sorkin-penned crowd-pleaser THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT. In this half of our pairing of the two films, we look back at THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT to consider how its Clinton-era populism scans in today’s much different political atmosphere, how it functions as both a political film and a rom-com, and how it handles the extreme power differential at the core of its central romance. Plus, some feedback inspired by our recent episode on UNDER THE SILVER LAKE. Please share your comments, thoughts, and questions about THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT, LONG SHOT, or anything else film-related by sending an email to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Outro music: Kylie Minogue, “Mr.