Episode 101: Charlie Kaufman's Metacinema Trilogy

[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign. Hello, everyone, and welcome to Odd Trilogies with Logan and Andy. I'm Logan, so watch. [00:00:23] Speaker B: And I'm Andy Carr. [00:00:24] Speaker A: In our trilogies, we take a trio of films where they're tied by cast and crew, thematic elements or just numerical order, and we talk about the good, the bad and the weird surrounding each film. And, boy, is this trilogy weird. This is a trilogy that is curated by our very own Andy for this one that I think we have had in discussion over the years off and on. [00:00:46] Speaker B: But, yeah, I mean, I think it's been one that we've both been really interested in doing just as a concept for almost the entire life of the pod. I mean, I. I don't remember when I first put this on our long list, but it's been up at the top of our interest for a while. And we've just been kind of waiting for a good opportunity where we can, you know, have the time to sit and breathe and marinate on these films. Because they are complex, to say the least. [00:01:18] Speaker A: Yeah, that's an understatement. [00:01:19] Speaker B: And we knew that. [00:01:20] Speaker A: Oh, yeah. [00:01:20] Speaker B: You know, I mean, the fact that we're. It's in the title, Meta Cinema. We're talking about movies that are about movies, about storytelling, about screenwriting and expressing yourself through art and all of that. So there's a lot to unpack. [00:01:38] Speaker A: Oh, yeah. From Madame Web all the way over to, like, Sonic. This year we've been doing a lot of trilogies and Rise of Hess as well. Just very silly, very straightforward trilogies that we thought that, you know what, there'd be a lot of fun tying to stuff that's coming out as of right now. But it's good if we had some space in between that. We didn't really feel like we wanted to force anything that was coming out to tie together. Well, if you've been paying attention, we are also, at the time, right now, doing our Mission Impossible retrospective in honor of Final reckoning, coming out May 23rd. [00:02:16] Speaker B: Yeah. Check out our retrospective [email protected]. [00:02:20] Speaker A: Yeah, at this point, your Fallout review should be. [00:02:25] Speaker B: I think I. Yeah, Fallout. And then next up is Dead Reckoning, which I'm also doing. But you are handling our new release review for the Final Reckoning, and you also did the original trilogy and Rogue Nation for us, so. [00:02:41] Speaker A: Yes, and I can't be more excited to spend nine hours watching Final Reckoning three times just to prep for that review. The review will be out in July. No, but intermixed with just, you know, new releases and doing stuff that we thought, with other guests that we thought would be fun, even though there's maybe not a lot of meat on the bone. I think the funniest thing about this podcast, in a way, and it's like, it's not that I don't bring some weird shit to the table as well, but I love when I have built and tried to send ideas of curated trilogies to you. They are silly and stupid. Usually. You're just, like, really conceptual, mainly, and just like how fascinating it is. More so than the actual films itself. [00:03:28] Speaker B: Sure. [00:03:28] Speaker A: And then the one that you have, you know, been pushing to me here and there, that we should do, and I'm so excited that we have done, is about as complex and as dense and as meta as. As meta can truly be. And in case you haven't looked at the title yet of this episode, it is Charlie Kaufman's Meta Cinema Trilogy. [00:03:48] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:03:49] Speaker A: Andy has curated three films from the writer, director Charlie Kaufman, who's a man you would probably know from the three films, I'm about to say, but also from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. [00:03:59] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:04:00] Speaker A: He's got, you know, constant collaborators with Michel Gondry, Spike Jones. Right. Gosh. What about to say, John Malkovich, John Cusack. [00:04:10] Speaker B: Yeah. I mean, Cage, you may have heard his name with a couple years ago with the Netflix movie. I'm thinking of ending things, which I. [00:04:18] Speaker A: Love, which I think I talked about on this podcast when we did our best films of 2020 or 2021. [00:04:24] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:04:25] Speaker A: But no, we have. Andy has picked three films that perfectly capture Kaufman's kind of specific niche. And I think a lot of people's favorite part about Kaufman is being able to dive deep into a meta narrative of stardom, of the filmmaking process, of screenwriting, of the creative process that is basically a Sisyphusian like, can feel that. [00:04:56] Speaker B: Way for when you are creating. Yeah. [00:04:59] Speaker A: And the three films that we're talking about today are 1999's Being John Malkovich, 2002's Adaptation in 2008's Synecdoche New York. [00:05:09] Speaker B: Yeah. All films that in some way or another, concern themselves heavily with the concept of creating a story, writing a screenplay, performing the pitfalls of celebrity, living through, you know, escapism. All of that. All of these ideas that we associate with not just cinema, but storytelling in general and have kind of a meta aspect to them to varying degrees. [00:05:37] Speaker A: Yeah. There is a level, and we'll talk about it more, especially when we get to the final film in this trilogy, because I think it really hits home the most when it comes to this idea. But there's a lot of catharsis in these three films. [00:05:49] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:05:50] Speaker A: In vastly different ways. [00:05:51] Speaker B: But hard, Hard. Fairly hard watches across the board. [00:05:56] Speaker A: Oh, yeah. [00:05:57] Speaker B: These are not, you know, throw on in the background movies. [00:06:00] Speaker A: Yeah. We wanted to watch at least one of these films together and we watched the other two separately. And so we decided to start with Syndetoche because was the one that, like, we both knew the least about, but we were kind of the most excited to see. [00:06:14] Speaker B: Intrigued. [00:06:15] Speaker A: Because again, with this trilogy, which is so. It's fun that Andy has put this trio together because these are like a trio of films that are considered, like, I would say, a film buff. Sweat Dream, in terms of, like, if you look at any litter box account, chances are you can throw a stone and have at least one of these films. [00:06:33] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. [00:06:34] Speaker A: In their top four. [00:06:34] Speaker B: I mean, they're all sitting comfortably over four out of five on average on Letterbox, which, you know, is kind of not to put too much stock in user ratings of any kind, but it's like, you know, that's a. That's kind of a cream of the crop area to be in. [00:06:50] Speaker A: Yeah. Because these films and the fact that we're nearly about to hit 30 years since John Malkovich had come out and. [00:06:58] Speaker B: 30 years of odd trilogies. Oh, yes. For a while. [00:07:02] Speaker A: Truly, we have age, just like Hoffman does in Synecdoche, which is not at all or sometimes way too much. [00:07:08] Speaker B: Depends really on inconsistently and sometimes backwards. [00:07:11] Speaker A: Yes. But Kaufman has this fascinating figure as an auteur as well as a writer, because for the majority of his career. The fascinating thing about this trilogy too, even though it's called Kaufman's Metacinema trilogy, is that he writes all three of these films, but only directs one of them. [00:07:29] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:07:30] Speaker A: Because he's mostly known for his incredible scripts that end up becoming stuff like Being John Malkovich, which he is heavily a part of with Spike Jonze. Or he also could do something like Eternal Sunshine, which is, you know, Jim Carrey. Kate Winslet is an iconic sci fi drama that is probably out of all of his films. Maybe my favorite of his. Maybe second favorite. [00:07:54] Speaker B: Okay, yeah, yeah. [00:07:56] Speaker A: But like, his films are very heady, but in a way that doesn't feel pretentious, which is something that I really enjoy about these three. And if it's meant to feel pretentious, it's an intentional pretension. Like, it's almost like looking at a mirror. [00:08:11] Speaker B: Yeah, it's kind of a lot of these. I mean, these three Especially kind of grapple with the pretense inherent to trying to express something through art. Like just the. You can tell that Kaufman's getting out a lot of, like. I don't know if self loathe. Self loathing might be a word, but kind of, you know, self criticism at least of like feeling like it's pompous to even think that, you know, you should be able to write a movie about your own personal experience. [00:08:47] Speaker A: It is. It is hilarious to see the man just be like, clearly having a free reign to do and write. [00:08:55] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:08:56] Speaker A: Whatever he wants in certain situations. And then to have his characters in his own films basically ridicule that concept in terms of what would I even do with that kind of power? [00:09:06] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:09:07] Speaker A: As if he's not already using that power in a fascinating way. So it gets even more meta. I mean, it gets to the point where, like, this is a trilogy that I genuinely would advise to people that this is a trilogy, that if there is a meta rabbit hole, it only gets deeper with each one of these films to a point where. Where I think Synecdoche New York is a meta narrative black hole. [00:09:30] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:09:30] Speaker A: It is going to suck you in in the best and worst ways to a point where you will yourself feel like you have aged 10 years since the film has started. [00:09:42] Speaker B: Yeah. I think on letterbox you described it as narrative ouroboros. [00:09:47] Speaker A: Yeah. [00:09:48] Speaker B: Which is a good way because it does feel like it's just kind of circling itself and swallowing itself and it's. Yeah. [00:09:54] Speaker A: Because the best part. Yeah. And I would say arguably. And we'll get to it more. But in Synecdoche, the way that the final line in that film is, if you are not in the right. If you are not vibing with the film well enough, you would assume the final line of Sinetki New York is calling you an idiot as a viewer for watching that movie. While I personally was like, that's one of the funniest things that could have ever ended this movie. [00:10:19] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:10:20] Speaker A: I mean, doesn't mean it deserves to be two plus hours, but, like. But before we get into that, I do want to talk, starting from the beginning, with the film, that I think maybe most people probably. I would think in a general audience sense, most people would know this one mainly because of the title as well as just how weird this movie was out the gate. [00:10:45] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:10:46] Speaker A: And how it commits to its art. Because again, too, it's like Being John Malkovich is a film you might have the feeling and thought of, like, is this a film where this was not meant to be Malkovich. Is this a film that was meant to be somebody else? And what's so funny is that this film, from the beginning was about. Supposed to be about John Malkovich. [00:11:08] Speaker B: It's always gonna be John Malkovich. And Kaufman has said on multiple occasions that he had no backup ideas for other actors he could get to fill the role, both in the text and in casting. [00:11:20] Speaker A: Apparently, Malkovich was, like, immediately just very uncomfortable as to why it was him to be chosen. And it gets to a point. [00:11:29] Speaker B: But loved the script. [00:11:30] Speaker A: Yeah. [00:11:30] Speaker B: Like, thought it was great, but wanted no part of being in it. [00:11:34] Speaker A: Again, this is the thing about Kaufman, too, I would recommend, before going into this trilogy, I think you should watch Eternal Sunshine, personally. [00:11:43] Speaker B: Yeah, that's a good. [00:11:44] Speaker A: Because I feel like that's a good. [00:11:45] Speaker B: I think it would get you on the right wavelength or, like, at least set your expectations of what of a writer or storyteller. [00:11:53] Speaker A: Kaufman is as well as the kind of collaborators that I think mesh well with him. Because while Michelle Gundry does not do any of these films in this trilogy, it's hard not to watch Eternal Sunshine and be like, gosh, if it wasn't him, I just feel like this film would fall flat because it's like. It feels like Kaufman is on the same wavelength as Gondry in a way that is, like, you want Kaufman to have the right outlet, the right funnel to really kind of, like, make the finest version of what that script is. Basically. That script is probably just, at times, all of the scripts have to, at some point, feel like you're just reading just like scribbles on a wall. [00:12:33] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:12:33] Speaker A: I think it was trying to mentally try to understand. [00:12:36] Speaker B: It's a little bit manic. [00:12:37] Speaker A: I cannot imagine trying to read Adaptation that would hurt my brain in a. [00:12:43] Speaker B: Way that I. Yeah. Without. Without the aid of visualizing everything. [00:12:48] Speaker A: Yes. [00:12:49] Speaker B: Yeah, that would be. That would be tough because it's. Yeah, we'll get into it. But, like. [00:12:53] Speaker A: Yeah, but with John Malkovich, it was funny because it is a. It is the film itself. Because, again, going into this, I had not seen any of these films. Andy had seen an adaptation. [00:13:04] Speaker B: Yeah, that's the only one I seen. [00:13:05] Speaker A: The only one he'd seen. We had both seen clips of the other two. [00:13:10] Speaker B: I gotta be honest, I don't know if I'd ever seen any actual footage beyond a trailer for Synecdoche. [00:13:15] Speaker A: Really. [00:13:16] Speaker B: That was the one that was like, okay, everybody seemingly loves this movie, but I've never seen anything from it. I've never Heard anything about it other than it's great. [00:13:26] Speaker A: Yeah. And at this point in the podcast, I will tell you, do not watch a Clippa Sinet New York and expect to understand contextually. [00:13:33] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:13:34] Speaker A: Because you will watch the film and the context you are given will still not give you enough context as to. [00:13:40] Speaker B: What is going on. Well, like any scene you watch in isolation could theoretically take place at any point in the movie because it's. There's almost no. Like, not that there's no rhyme or reason, but there's almost no continuity. [00:13:55] Speaker A: No. Yeah, it is like Malkovich is as a film. It is about a puppeteer played by John Cusack in the greasiest rat tail. I think I've seen someone wearing quite a while. Basically is at a rut creatively because he is a puppeteer in a world where they. In his world, there's already a big puppeteer who's already doing wild pop. [00:14:23] Speaker B: Puppeteer. [00:14:24] Speaker A: Yeah, a pop. [00:14:25] Speaker B: Call him Jeff Dunham. [00:14:27] Speaker A: Yes. A sellout, if you will, who by the point, like early in the film has already done, I believe, a stunt where he has a 60 foot Marie Antoinette puppet that he puts over a bridge and like 80 people are like puppeteering it. [00:14:44] Speaker B: And John Cusack's character, Craig, I think is his name is watching on the TV and he's just like, what a gimmick. [00:14:50] Speaker A: Yeah, sellout. And ultimately just can't find anything to take for the outlet of puppeteering. And he's in a bit of a rut. And so he takes a dead end job as a filer because since he's so good with his hands, he's just apparently just a phenomenal fast filer. He can sort really well and he works for this company. [00:15:12] Speaker B: High dexterity score. [00:15:13] Speaker A: Yeah, a high dexterity score. He works on the seven and a half floor because it was built for little people. [00:15:22] Speaker B: Yeah, that's. That's kind of the first indication of the film's surrealism is. Yeah, yeah, he. This place that he goes to apply for a job is literally a half a floor and I'm moving my stuff around. [00:15:39] Speaker A: I don't know if that was me or you. Oh my gosh. But yeah, I. From the get go again, the reason why I say it kind of goes down a meta narrative rabbit hole is because being John Malkovich pretty much out the gate already tells you this is already going to be high, high reality in a sense. But it is something where immediately he is. Yeah, he is a. He's a puppeteer in a world where puppeteers are not Ridiculed literally is a. Like is very clearly feels like it is a sense of like, you know, if you're making independent artistic films and you see one of your co workers make a blockbuster. [00:16:19] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:16:20] Speaker A: And it's like, oh, that guy's a sellout. He's making that kind of movie. But instead it's about puppets. [00:16:25] Speaker B: The movie starts the competitive landscape of puppeteering. [00:16:28] Speaker A: And the movie starts with genuinely a beautiful dance number. [00:16:33] Speaker B: Oh, yeah. [00:16:34] Speaker A: That is all done with a puppet of John Cusack that realize that is being puppeted by John Cusack while during the dance number and starts to get existential during said puppeteering act. [00:16:48] Speaker B: Yeah. The John Cusack puppet becomes aware that he's being puppeteered by John Cusack already. [00:16:55] Speaker A: From that point of view, I mean, at least personally, I'm like, this is gonna be absolute chaos. I'm on board. And then after that, you have Cameron Diaz as Kachunky's ex character, Craig's wife, who instead of having children, they have basically a tiny zoo in their studio apartment. She has a chimpanzee, she has an iguana, she has a parakeet. [00:17:22] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:17:23] Speaker A: Any. Everything but dogs and cats, it seems like, is what she has. And clearly it feels like it's stand in for like a married couple with like two children. [00:17:33] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. [00:17:35] Speaker A: And so he's in a weird place and decides to go. Yeah. Work at a place that is introduced as a young Octavia Spencer, even before her small role in Raimi's Spider Man. [00:17:48] Speaker B: Right. [00:17:49] Speaker A: Is in the elevator with John Cusack, tells him how to get to the seven and a half floor. They get to floor seven, right. As it turns to eight, she stops the elevator, gets a crowbar and puts it where it. It's been dented multiple times. [00:18:05] Speaker B: Opens it, pries the door open, and. [00:18:08] Speaker A: Then they are in a very small office place that is made for little people. [00:18:14] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:18:15] Speaker A: Because the creator of the building back in the early 20th century had a wife that was small and wanted to make her feel, I guess, normal sized in a sense. And this is all shown during a training video after Craig gets the job. [00:18:33] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. [00:18:33] Speaker A: After Craig goes through a secretary that is literally cannot understand anything that anyone is saying to her, even though she is right in front of them. At one point, I think, makes a pass at Craig. And then the boss, I believe, also says, isn't my secretary a hot piece of ass? And also is like, oh, yeah, the best thing the boss does, it goes, which one would you file first? And then he writes an R on a piece of paper and then it's just scribbles on the other piece. [00:19:06] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:19:07] Speaker A: And then it is. It is a level that is not full blown Naked Gun because that's more Synecdoche. All the goofy shit in Synecdoche just feels like a parody. Like, I'm losing my mind. This isn't like this movie. But it's just silly enough that it is very fun. It is goofy. You have Craig basically have a crisis of faith in terms of his own marriage as well as his own self and his creativity. And while all this is happening, he accidentally loses a file behind a filing cabinet. Pulls up the filing cabinet, finds a tiny door that leads to the brain of John Malkovich. And for 15 minutes, every time you go into that door, you live your life as John Malkovich. [00:19:54] Speaker B: Yeah. You basically just see through his eyes and see everything he's doing. [00:19:58] Speaker A: Yeah. [00:19:59] Speaker B: And so, you know, what is the first thing you do when you find a portal into somebody else's mind? You sell it as an attraction. [00:20:06] Speaker A: So, yeah, around the same time that he gets this new job, John Cusack's character runs into Kathryn Keener's character, who I believe Maxine. I think Maxine, who I believe also works at their company. [00:20:19] Speaker B: She does. She works there. And she immediately interprets. Interprets every interaction with him as him hitting on her. [00:20:27] Speaker A: Which certain degree is every so often. [00:20:30] Speaker B: Well, yeah, it does. It's not the case at first, but then I think probably the consistent rejection, unnecessary rejection, cultivates an interest in him and he eventually does try and pursue her. [00:20:45] Speaker A: Yeah. Maxine is toxic, like, entirely in a way that is like when they go out to have a drink, Craig is not initially hitting on her, so she just assumes he's gay. And he goes, no, I am totally into you. And she goes, oh, okay, that's great. And then pretends to be interested. And then she says he works with puppets. And then it's the immediate, check, please. And then it, like, hard cuts her the bar. [00:21:08] Speaker B: Yeah. Maxine is every bit as much a, like, cartoon character as the rest of the people around Craig's office. Like his boss and the secretary in that she is like the kind of extreme, edgy, independent, kind of like sort of, you know, manipulator person. And she's just kind of like constantly playing head games with Craig. [00:21:41] Speaker A: Yeah. Like, again, Cusack has a greasy ponytail, almost a stubble. Very nerdy esque glasses, disheveled suit. His wife, Cameron Diaz in the film has this huge frizzy hair and contact lenses that are brown, which I Didn't even realize I knew Cameron Diaz's eye color until I watched this movie. And I was like, your eyes are not brown. There's no way. And then you get to Kathryn Keener, and she is wearing all white, this very strong, like, dark red lipstick, and is constantly smoking, almost like she's in Basic Instinct. And she just sticks out like a sore thumb in a way where. Where it's like, well, no wonder Craig is going to, like, gravitate towards her. She's like the only other woman we've met so far that is, like, design wise, vastly different than, like, the normal people he runs into, including his own wife. [00:22:33] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:22:34] Speaker A: And then. Yeah. Once he finds the hold of Malkovich's mind, he. To basically, you know, work with Maxine, just have an excuse to be with her. They start to do JM Ink, which is John Malkovich Inc. And they start to sell 15 minutes of pop for $200. [00:22:55] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:22:56] Speaker A: And it becomes a racket to make money on the side after they just work a whole day. [00:23:01] Speaker B: Right. [00:23:02] Speaker A: And ultimately Cameron Diaz gets brought in because she's being told by Craig what he's doing. Craig just absolutely, like, doesn't. The funny thing about Craig, and it's clear that this is intentional, is that, like Andy said, everyone around Craig is overly silly and very. Just like on another planet. And the best thing about Craig is that kind of a twist of fate is that he basically is in that same boat. It's just he has main character syndrome. He's basically like, I am the protagonist. I have now found the thing that no one else could find. This must be something that is important to me. I must figure out what this means to me. [00:23:41] Speaker B: I'm a struggling artist. Artist, and I have found my new thing. Yeah. [00:23:45] Speaker A: And it's like the constant dynamic is, like, immediately, like, when. When Craig finds the Malkovich hole, he goes to Maxine's like, I don't know what to do in my life. Just, like, creative. Like, what do I do? And then Maxine literally just points at an open window and she says nothing. Like, it's just like, that's their dynamic the whole time. And if that was just it, that would just be. I think it would get pretty stale pretty fast. But when Diaz is brought into the equation, it is so weirdly progressive in a way that, like, it feels intentional. But I don't even think Kaufman himself or Jones could have ever expected. [00:24:19] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:24:20] Speaker A: How fascinating it is to have Diaz get. Diaz's character gets to a point where her experiences in Malkovich's Mind almost makes her question her own gender. [00:24:31] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:24:32] Speaker A: In a way of like, almost in a sense, a trans experience in 1999, which, to be fair, is not done perfectly in any way, because once Cusack hears this, he's very much just like. I don't even want to say disgusted, but it's like you're just overthinking it. You just. You just want to be John Malkovich too much. But, like, it's very fascinating to see how Diaz's nuances in this moment where she has, like. While Craig is having this, like, you know, epiphany artistically of, like, oh, my God, maybe I could become a better artist if I just keep hanging out in John Malkovich's head. Diaz's whole thing is just, like, almost opening up a perspective in her mind she never thought she would ever want to do, which becomes even more kind of problematic, but also complicated when Maxine starts. Maxine uses the Malkovich hole as an advantage to get into John Malkovich's actual life. [00:25:33] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:25:34] Speaker A: And basically starts a relationship with John Malkovich just so Maxine could have sex with Cameron Diaz's character in John Malkovich's head. [00:25:42] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:25:43] Speaker A: And if you're already confused at this point when we're talking about this, that's understandable because talking about the film, it does seem very convoluted or very complicated. But what's great about the movie is when you're watching it, it is done so spectacularly. How it introduces these ideas and really takes the time and marinates on a lot of these ideas and also has a lot of comedic energy to it. [00:26:06] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:26:06] Speaker A: An absurd and, like, an absurdist energy that is all the way through all three of these films. [00:26:12] Speaker B: Well, it kind of stair steps you up this ladder of, you know, bizarre concepts. You know, it first introduces the portal, and then it's like, okay, we can see his world, but we can't interact with it. We're just playing witness. And then, yeah, you know, they start to figure out, oh, we can actually influence his behavior. And then, you know, that starts a whole spiral for Craig of. [00:26:33] Speaker A: Yes. [00:26:34] Speaker B: You know, and his wife. [00:26:36] Speaker A: You know, we haven't even gotten to the Malkovich of it all. Which is, like, Malkovich in the film is delightful. [00:26:44] Speaker B: He is just, from the get go, absolutely fed up. [00:26:47] Speaker A: He is. He is fed up. He is. I mean, immediately when they start fucking with his brain. He doesn't understand it yet, but it just, like, every single time he shows up, it is just. He is so funny in a way that is, like, very Burn after reading Esque, there's a hilarious scene that has aged poorly in a place where a random guy comes up to Malkovich to say he really liked performance Enough Mice and Men, but doesn't say it that nicely. [00:27:22] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:27:23] Speaker A: And it's clearly a comedic bit. And while it is constantly. This man constantly saying the R word, constantly to Malcolm Malkovich's face is so awkward, yet trying to be pleasant, it almost just makes it funny on that level of just being like, this man keeps calling me this. And I'm just, like, trying to end this conversation as fast as responsible. [00:27:46] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:27:47] Speaker A: But Malkovich, the far. The more he gets intertwined with Craig and Maxine and what is Cameron Diaz. Yes. And Lottie, he becomes even more interesting, like, performance wise. Because, you know, Malkovich, I believe, has said. When he talked about, like, taking this role, because at a certain point Malkovich even said, do you want to make this film about Tom Cruise? [00:28:13] Speaker B: Yeah, he did not want to be in the film. He thought it was a great script. But, like. And even offered to produce it if Kaufman would change the actor in it. And Kaufman was like, no, I'm not doing that. [00:28:26] Speaker A: Yeah, I think you're perfect for this. And Malkovich, I think, again, shows that he doesn't. There is an awkwardness in, like, the level of ego you would think someone would have to play themselves in a film that is called being. Insert this actor here. And Malkovich, I think, does a phenomenal job by just doing the basic. The most straightforward thing of just. He approached this version of himself as a fictional character because it is. This is not like this. Of course, he has his background and he is an artist, he is an actor. But, like, it is a version of himself that is more heightened in a silly situation that he's never been before. His best friend is Charlie Sheen in the film when it was, I think, originally supposed to be Kevin Bacon. [00:29:15] Speaker B: Oh, okay. [00:29:16] Speaker A: And I believe, like, someone who's close to Sheen, while Sheen, I believe, was in rehab, got the script and was like, I want to do this. When I think Bacon either couldn't do it or, like, you know, turned it down. But, I mean, Malkovich just. He gets to a level that is just so much fun in such a chaotic energy in a Malkovich way. And then the film, towards the very end, takes a twist with Malkovich in performance wise, that makes it even more engaging and more interesting and I think really ends in a way that is so funny to think that by the time you get to the end of being John Malkovich, you are Watching Malkovich, basically. Not play John Malkovich. [00:30:02] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:30:03] Speaker A: You're playing people pretending to be him. [00:30:06] Speaker B: Yeah. Eventually his. His body becomes kind of a vessel for a number of different people throughout the movie. [00:30:13] Speaker A: And it ultimately, I would say out of the three of these films, it is the most like, straightforward narratively. [00:30:24] Speaker B: Yeah, narrative. And structurally, this is the most conventional, the most accessible. [00:30:29] Speaker A: Conventional. Makes it seem like, again, that it sounds normal. It still isn't. Because again, on top of all this, you have Spike Jones, who at this point, if you don't know him from being John Malkovich, you might know him from her. You might know him from the myriad of music videos he did for Beastie Boys. For gosh, Beastie Boys is what comes to my head all the time. But like, if you've ever seen a jackass film and you've seen a man dress up as an old grandma that gets her clothes ripped off in public, that is writer, director, Spike Jones. [00:31:03] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:31:04] Speaker A: The creator, the director of her. The director of the where the Wild Things Are adaptation, he was very much the rumor, I think is. And you can debunk this or not, Andy, if you know. But I think the story goes is that Kaufman writes Being John Malkovich, of course, was not going to push on that. People start reading it, loving the script, but at the time Francis IV Coppola gets a hold of the script. Coppola's daughter Sophia was dating Spike Jonze at the time. [00:31:35] Speaker B: I think they were married. [00:31:37] Speaker A: They were married. Yeah, they were married. They were married. And I believe gets the script through his father in law at the time. And that's how he gets involved because he's like, this script is wild. I want this because pretty much everyone in this film, I think, has the similar story of in some way, shape or form. They get a hold of the script and they go, this is insane. I love this. I want to be a part of this. And the people that are involved are just like really just firing on all cylinders. All three of these films pretty much have a cast that are just firing on all cylinders in a way that is like, you really wouldn't think they would go this hard, especially with some of the scenarios and the characters they're playing. I mean, hell, Chris Cooper wins an Oscar for adaptation for a character that I think if you put in any other film would be a background character or comedic relief. But the way that Kaufman really just in these films, even though that there's a silliness or sometimes even in Synetici's case, an architecture like an archetype kind of feeling where it's like, they're not even really people. They're almost just like, you know, dolls performing this and that. And just like, having characters that are basically portraying other actors in the film. And Kaufman still kind of comes to it in a angle that is like, when the emotion is needed, when there is moments of empathy needed it is crucial to have them at those certain moments. And he gives it to them. And with the right director, I think those emotions get amplified. In being John Malkovich. I think one of the only truly heartfelt or emotional moments is when it's pretty much, I think, obvious to Lottie and Maxine that while their relationship is not inherently like, at first, a lesbian relationship because it seems like Maxine is just really into Lottie and John Malkovich's body ultimately it's very clear that Maxine is into Lottie and Lottie is into Maxine. And there's a moment where it's one of the. Honestly, one of the best sequences in the whole film where Maxine and Lottie get put into Malkovich's subconscious which has all these fucking horrible nightmare moments and has, like, some of the funniest bits tied with the darkest bits. I think the first thing they fall into is Malkovich watching his parents have sex and be traumatized by it. [00:34:14] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:34:15] Speaker A: And then there's a later scene where, like, there's supposed to be, like, I think teenage Malkovich, but it's just regular Malkovich. And, like, a woman going, you're so creepy. And he just, like, turns into sad, as this chase sequence is. And I think it's like, again, reason why I say eternal sunshine. Very internal sunshine coded in terms of, like, how it handles the energy and the set design and, like, the camera work in that moment that ultimately leads to a moment where, like, Lottie and Maxine, like, Lottie's just, like, confesses her love to Maxine. And Maxine as a character is really just like. She's a shithead for the most part. She's funny. Her funny moments are basically being, like, just an. And just. She wants to get ahead in life. She wants to be. She wants to be famous. She wants to be rich in some way and then ultimately finds a way to get it. [00:35:06] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:35:06] Speaker A: And then admits to herself that, like, at a certain point Maxine finds out that she is pregnant with Malkovich's child and says that the only reason why she kept that child is because she knows that that was Malcolm. That is Lonnie in Malkovich. [00:35:23] Speaker B: Right. [00:35:23] Speaker A: Like, it was conceived when Lottie was in Malkovich and they had sex. [00:35:27] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:35:28] Speaker A: And it's like the most heartfelt thing. Maxine says, like, the only reason why she kept that baby is because she knew it was like there's a part of Lottie there, even though physically. No. And then there's like, a great moment where, like, I think Maxine says. Maxine says something that is supposed to be like, I always had such and such for you in, like, a classic Maxine way. And Lottie, just outright ghost. That is such bullshit. And Maxine goes, yeah, no, it is. And it's like the most real Maxine is. Is at the end of the film. And it feels very much, like, gratifying to have Lottie as a character who were Lottie at a certain point, while she's also taking advantage of Malkovich is honestly, like, I think, the most innocent out of the three of them. [00:36:11] Speaker B: Yeah. She has the most, like, understandable motive, I guess, in that, like, she's. She's finding herself. Yeah. Admittedly by violating the personal rights of another person. [00:36:29] Speaker A: But not only just any person. Famous actor John Malcolm. Yeah. But it is like. [00:36:34] Speaker B: But it's more empathetic because it feels like, okay, she's not just trying to make a buck. She's not just trying to advance her career. She's living out this confusion and trying to sort out some part of her. [00:36:46] Speaker A: Because Cusack, because Craig, is basically living what I think, you know, every person. You know, any kind of obsessive person with a parasocial relationship with any celebrity now would want is basically living the life of the person they kind of idolize in a way. [00:37:02] Speaker B: Yeah. Well. Yeah. I mean, Cusack is a struggling artist whose career never really took off in the way that he wanted. And when he gets to pilot the body of somebody who made it, he's like, all right, yeah, I'm going to take. Take advantage of this platform. [00:37:16] Speaker A: He. Yeah, he just really wanted that Con Air reunion. And they weren't going to. They weren't going to get Nichol Cage in this one. That's the next film. But, yeah, and it's. It just is, like, from top to bottom. I think it's a very good film. I think it's a great film. That. [00:37:33] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:37:33] Speaker A: Just. [00:37:34] Speaker B: Well, and it's. I think it's a. It's a prescient film and that, you know, this came out just before the turn of the century and, like, in a similar way to how, like, the Truman show was kind of ahead of its time in predicting, like, reality tv, this is. Feels that way, but, like, kind of about social media and like all of our collective kind of addiction and like, you mentioned the parasocial relationships we have with the versions of people that they post online and, like, living through other people and kind of faking our way through it. This is all about that. [00:38:14] Speaker A: I can imagine Kaufman probably felt a little weird seeing, like, when realizing that there were people online and like, social media sites that were just pretending to be the actors and actresses, like, full fan account. [00:38:28] Speaker B: Pretend to be the official account. Yeah, yeah. [00:38:30] Speaker A: And really tricking people because of how just dedicated they are to wanting to be this person. [00:38:35] Speaker B: I'm gonna start a fake Charlie Kaufman account. [00:38:38] Speaker A: Oh, man. If that man has ever been on social media, I feel sorry for him. There's no way. [00:38:44] Speaker B: I mean, I. I can't verify that, but, yeah, that seems like something that he would just view as a hellscape, because it is rightfully so. Because I think this movie, like, spells that out. Even though he didn't have social media as a frame of reference, I think, you know, this movie kind of discusses the same reason, the same things that, like, you know, make social media such a toxic space for so many people. [00:39:06] Speaker A: And it really does. It's hilarious how a lot of the film is showing how living vicariously, even through someone that most people don't even know off the top of their heads, is still living vicariously. And that it's like, in a sense, the dark undertone of the film is like this kind of this beat down corporate world of the mid to late 90s and how anyone is just willing to do anything to not think about what they have to do every single day. And so when people are like, yeah, I'll pay $200 to, I guess, talk to a. Talk to a linen salesman as John Malkovich for 15 minutes. Yeah, they all come out of it not feeling like they were ripped off. They all felt like they were an experience that they'll never experience again. Like, yes, it is hilarious how the film shows, of course, like, you know, the artistic kind of downfall of being, you know, comparing yourself too much in like a fraud fallacy or like a false idol. And yeah, really taking a human being and propping them up as to be something more important that they actually are. Like, in a godlike sense. Especially when Malkovich is not asking for this and doesn't want to, like, just. [00:40:17] Speaker B: Wants to be left specifically asking for. Not this. [00:40:19] Speaker A: Yeah. And then ultimately, when you, like, the big twist of the film is that, you know, the head of the company that hired Craig is Like this. Like, immortal. [00:40:32] Speaker B: Yeah. This. This ageless entity that basically is this cabal of people that live eternally through other people's bodies. [00:40:40] Speaker A: It's usually the 44th birthday of. [00:40:43] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:40:45] Speaker A: It is like there are people that are constantly living vicariously through other people's lives and will never stop doing that. And it shows a great emotional moment where Lottie has the ability to do so and doesn't take it. [00:41:01] Speaker B: Right. [00:41:01] Speaker A: And honestly, lives like, both it. Honestly, Lottie and Maxine are the only people that live happily ever after. [00:41:08] Speaker B: Yeah. One get to, you know, do so through their own lives. [00:41:12] Speaker A: Yeah. [00:41:13] Speaker B: Manage to eventually. [00:41:14] Speaker A: Yeah. And even Charlie Sheen loses his hair more so than he ever did in real life, which is so funny. [00:41:22] Speaker B: There's still time. [00:41:23] Speaker A: There's still time. But it is. It's a film that just, I think, from beginning to end, even when you're starting to really vibe and understand what it's putting down, it'll still find ways to surprise you. Even in. Even all these years later, it still has found ways to just be so fascinating in a way that is, like, unique even to Kaufman, where Kaufman has done other films in this trilogy and other films afterwards that don't inherently feel like a being John Malkovich ripoff nor does anyone else really done anything that's felt like that either. [00:42:00] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:42:01] Speaker A: Or they have. They have been forgotten. [00:42:02] Speaker B: I mean, especially in comparison to, like, the other two films we're talking about today. It feels the least like Kaufman just, like, getting something deep, dark and personal out of his system. You know, it feels more like, oh, okay, I just had an interesting concept for a story and I'm gonna tell it. [00:42:20] Speaker A: Yeah. Because, like, it's. [00:42:21] Speaker B: Whereas the other two are very much like self. Insert self expression type things. [00:42:26] Speaker A: Because it's almost as like, if Kaufman is fully seeing himself one to one to Craig, it is like him realizing that if he truly. Just like he. He would ultimately end up becoming a sellout in a different way than what he already thinks is bad of a sellout in, like, the traditional sense, where, like, he would just use another person's life to fulfill his puppetry in that film. And it is, again, I think catharsis is a common theme with all three of these films in very different ways. And I think with this one, it's the catharsis of living through an experience that is once in a lifetime, but not letting it define you in a detrimental sense and being able to use that in Lottie's sense, to Lottie's case, to grow and build as a person. And realize what you really want in life and going for it. And again, just like in an era where Cameron Diaz is like Charlie's Angels, the mask Cameron Diaz. And here she is popping in with this super huge frizzy hair and brown eyes and is going toe to toe with John Cusack and Malkovich. And even though she's still, I think, pretty early on until she builds up more in her career with Kathryn Keener. [00:43:39] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:43:39] Speaker A: Katherine Keener is a phenomenal actress too. And it's like she is. Diaz is holding her own and I think ends up becoming the heart of the film and ultimately I thought would just be a background character. [00:43:50] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:43:50] Speaker A: And I'm so glad that she's not because I really enjoy her care. I enjoy all the characters in this movie. This movie's great. Yeah, I actually. I really enjoy this film. I, When I initially watched it, now I'm enjoying it more the more we talk about it. [00:44:02] Speaker B: Yeah, I'm kind of in the same boat. I watched it and it was very much a, you know, a strong appreciation, but not like a visceral love for it. [00:44:11] Speaker A: Yeah. [00:44:12] Speaker B: But now that we talk more about it, I'm like, you know, damn good movie. [00:44:16] Speaker A: When the initial exhaustion of finishing that film and really having to convey, like, just can take everything that I seen from those two hours. The farther I get away from that exhaustion, the more I think I get more into that film. [00:44:28] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:44:30] Speaker A: And that I can't fully say about adaptation because out of all three of these films, this is the most recent one I've watched. [00:44:35] Speaker B: Okay. [00:44:36] Speaker A: As we're, as we're recording, I just watched this yesterday and it is. Here's the thing. I am so glad we watched Synecdoche. [00:44:47] Speaker B: First because it was the hardest one to watch. [00:44:50] Speaker A: It was the one that now, like, it's fascinating to think about the fact that it is in fact a downward spiral into a meta sense with each one. Because going into Adaptation, this was the one I would expect. I think I'm accurate in saying it's the most critically acclaimed. [00:45:08] Speaker B: It seems to be. Yeah. [00:45:09] Speaker A: Because like, Malkovich was, I think, beloved by critics, but I don't think really made. I think it was pretty moderate in the box office. [00:45:18] Speaker B: It was smash adaptation. Absolutely. Made the most money and probably got the most awards attention because it won an Oscar. [00:45:25] Speaker A: It's an Oscar winning film. And out of Kaufman's. Out of Kaufman's career, I think it's one of the only films I think that. And Anomalisa, because Anomalisa also won. [00:45:35] Speaker B: Right. [00:45:36] Speaker A: An Oscar. But adaptation. So in between, during the process of being John Malkovich, Charlie Kaufman, as a writer, I believe, is asked to make an adaptation of a nonfiction book called. [00:45:56] Speaker B: The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean, which is a real book by a real journalist and novelist. And Yeah, I mean, basically the Orchid Thief was a book that came out in 94 and was a bestseller, very well regarded book. And I think immediately studios were trying to figure out how to make a movie out of it because usually. [00:46:20] Speaker A: Yeah, because it seems when there is a popular book or like a book that. Because now it seems like every book that hits New York Times can become a New York Times bestseller. There's At a certain point it feels like in. It happens depending on the genre now too. But if it's a bestseller, chances are there's somebody in Hollywood, somebody's trying to. [00:46:39] Speaker B: Make it a movie. [00:46:40] Speaker A: How can we put Meryl Streep in this? [00:46:42] Speaker B: Yeah. Or nowadays, how can we make this a limited series? HBO Max docu series. Yeah. [00:46:48] Speaker A: Yeah. And at a certain point, Kaufman tries to turn this extremely very non fiction book into a narrative that seems. Into a narrative story that is. Doesn't seem like there's many highs or lows or arcs attached to it. [00:47:06] Speaker B: Yeah. Relatively mundane. Not exactly like a story so much as like just kind of a reporting of events and people and circumstances. [00:47:19] Speaker A: A man who basically through loopholes was able to get orchids out of their natural habitats to basically sell or use for certain properties and is basically is. It's. I mean, she is a. Susan Arlene is a journalist and writes that book apparently like it's an article. [00:47:39] Speaker B: Yeah. It's like very procedural. [00:47:40] Speaker A: Yeah. And it was beloved. And Kaufman basically had the most difficulty. [00:47:46] Speaker B: Yeah. The ultimate writer's block. Trying to figure out how to adapt it into a film. [00:47:51] Speaker A: And so lo and behold, when you are a man who's already built a career off of making metanarratives, whether about cinema or just in general is cerebral stories, no surprise that Kaufman finds a way to talk about the Orchid Thief by talking about the process of even trying to turn the Orchid Thief into a narrative. [00:48:14] Speaker B: Yeah. Ultimately he ends up writing a script about trying to. To write a script for the Orchid Thief. [00:48:22] Speaker A: Yeah. The premise of Adaptation is that Nicolas Cage plays Charlie Kaufman. Yes. [00:48:29] Speaker B: His character literally named Charlie Kaufman and. [00:48:31] Speaker A: Must deal with the fact that because of his writer's block, any attempt at trying to turn the orca Thief into the script is putting him into a crisis. [00:48:41] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:48:42] Speaker A: An internal crisis that becomes this thing where all of the issues or at least all the perceived issues in Charlie's life. And it's not gonna get confusing because I'm talking about Nicholas Cage. Charlie. [00:48:54] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:48:55] Speaker A: In Charlie's life, in terms of his love life, in terms of, like, his dissatisfaction with himself physically as well as, like, socially, basically, is just like, manifesting even more so into his writer's block. Especially when his twin brother, Donald Kaufman. [00:49:16] Speaker B: Also played by Nicolas Cage, who does not exist in real life. [00:49:20] Speaker A: No. Very much feels like his existence in the script almost feels like Donald and Charlie. Charles, because Donald always calls him Charles. Donald and Charles are clearly both versions of Charlie Kaufman, but Charles is like the social anxiety, like, the creative aspect. [00:49:43] Speaker B: Yeah. Charles is more how. I mean, this is how I interpret it. Kaufman may have already disagreed with me, and you may disagree with me. That's fine. Charles feels like Charlie Kaufman, real Charlie Kaufman's view of himself, or at least his view of himself as he was writing this. [00:50:02] Speaker A: Absolutely. [00:50:03] Speaker B: Donald is kind of. It feels like everything that Charlie Kaufman hates about screenwriters or hates about his worst tendencies as a screenwriter or something, or things he's afraid of being as a storyteller. Because Donald is. His work is rife with cliches. He's very new to it. And he's, you know, he's kind of like the type of guy who. Who picks up a book on screenwriting and follows it word for word and is like, this is the end all. Be all of screenwriting. This is how you be a writer is just read a book. [00:50:39] Speaker A: Cause that's another fucking thing about this. [00:50:41] Speaker B: Movie, is that he reads Robert McKee's story. [00:50:44] Speaker A: So around the time that this movie is coming out, and also not even just around this time, all the way up until when I was. We were in college, because I actually owned story by Robert McKee. I actually had the. That book for screenwriting class growing. Going to College. But Robert McKee writes a novel called Story, basically talking about the narratives that are commonplace in story and what you should look for, what you should arc wise, character wise, what's the setup? How should you end? What should the emotions be? Basically is the book that most people would tell you if you want to write a script, you should probably read the. This book. [00:51:25] Speaker B: Yeah. It's become a staple of screenwriting and film studies classes. [00:51:30] Speaker A: The Mount Rushmore of screenwriting books and, like, you know, conversations. There's, like, the screenwriting bible, which I also own. [00:51:37] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:51:38] Speaker A: There's Robert McKee's story. And besides the fourth one, I can't think of off the top of my head. But Joseph Campbell's A Man With a Thousand Faces is also one because, you know, Campbell is considered another, you know, archetype in terms of. Of the narrative and the rising action, the climax, all these ideas that, like, you know, are commonplace in most traditional storytelling. And Kaufman doesn't really. He does traditional storytelling, but not in the sense that most people would like. He. He does a way to kind of hide it under a lot of the minutia, the cerebral, metanarrative aspects of certain mans, like, of, you know, conversations in these films. So when Donald Kaufman, his. His twin brother basically writes a script which sounds like Seven meets Identity. [00:52:27] Speaker B: Yeah. It's kind of a generic murder thriller. [00:52:31] Speaker A: Sounds like a film that genuinely would have probably gotten made in the 90s in the hype of like, seven. [00:52:37] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:52:38] Speaker A: And seems like he's writing this full feature script in, like. And in the film. [00:52:44] Speaker B: Feels like in a few days. [00:52:45] Speaker A: Yeah. I think it takes like 30 to 45 minutes, the film, for, like, Donald to go from beginning to end. [00:52:50] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:52:52] Speaker A: Which again, Donald is like, practically homeless, living off of Charlie's couch. [00:52:57] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:52:58] Speaker A: We don't really get a specification as to why. [00:53:01] Speaker B: No, I mean, I get the impression in watching the movie that Donald's just kind of a fuck up. Like, he, you know, Charles is the one who. He followed his passion. He wrote a script that got turned into a movie that was critically acclaimed. Like, he's riding that high, trying to figure out his next movie, and Donald's just kind of a goofball. And so Donald moves in with him or is temporarily living with him and decides like, maybe I'll try writing a screenplay. And it's kind of. At first it's like, oh, okay, he's the idiot brother who's gonna suck at it. And that's Charles's view on it. But then he keeps getting all this traction on it and keeps getting all these ideas and all these people keep telling him it's a great script and. Yeah. [00:53:44] Speaker A: Yeah. And then he starts dating Maggie Gyllenhaal, who is a. Who's a makeup artist. [00:53:49] Speaker B: Makeup artist on Being John Malcolm. [00:53:50] Speaker A: Yeah. Because the film. Because Andy again, has seen this film and did not prep me for the fact that this movie. This movie starts with VHS footage, basically, like camcorder footage of John Malkovich, like, pep talkied everyone about how to shoot a scene. [00:54:06] Speaker B: Yes, because the. The film opens during the production of Being John Malkovich with Charlie Kaufman, fictional Charlie Kaufman, you know, attending the set and. And things like that. [00:54:17] Speaker A: Yeah, because. So it's a scene where you're watching, you're like, this is clearly actual BTS footage. This is like really cool. And then it turns and you see Nick Cage's face and you're like, oh fuck. Oh. This is the movie we're actually watching. [00:54:31] Speaker B: Yeah. So we're, we're not by any means stretching it when we say that like Charlie Kaufman literally wrote this script about himself. It's. I mean, it's not fair to call it fully autobiographical. It's because of how fictionalized the events of the movie are, which we'll get into. But yeah, in terms of like the premise, Charlie Kaufman literally wrote a script about Charlie Kaufman writing a script about the Orchid Thief. [00:55:00] Speaker A: Yeah, because. Because it was more interesting, clearly, than actually trying to force a genuine, maybe fake narrative into a straightforward Orchid Thief adaptation. [00:55:11] Speaker B: Which is also the plot of the film. [00:55:14] Speaker A: Yes. [00:55:15] Speaker B: Is trying to avoid faking. Yeah. Like adding fake Hollywood bullshit to the script. Like that is the conflict that Charles in the movie is going through as he tries to write the script and tears his brain doing so. [00:55:29] Speaker A: Because Tilda Swinton is in the film. The cast is fucking stacked in this movie in a way that I didn't expect. But Tilda Swinton is basically asking Charlie to add a love story into the Orchid Thief even though in the book it really is just a journalist following her subject as non biased as possible. Yeah, Just basically taking all the facts that Laroche, who is played by Chris Cooper in the film, basically taking what he does as the Orchid Thief and how he gets away with it and why he does it. What led him to get to this point. And in that point you have Charlie. I mean, the film just the thing about adaptation is that it's a film that it should not get away with anything. It is a film that you feel like at any point you should be able. It should turn and then it should just say pretentious and you go, haha, I fucking knew it. This is so pretentious. You're so full of shit. But the thing about Kaufman again, being an acclaimed writer who clearly the love and accolades that he had gotten in the 90s led to him having a crisis of his own. Creativity leads to adaptation. [00:56:46] Speaker B: Yeah, the imposter syndrome. How do I do it again? [00:56:50] Speaker A: Yeah, he basically leads a creation of himself that I always kind of. I just kind of assumed that Charlie is kind of like the standard. Like Charles is how Charlie sees himself, but that's kind of how he probably is in most cases. Well, Donald, I always kind of assumed is like an aspect of himself that is still Charlie, but just disconnected enough that he doesn't feel like. Because he's. I mean, people are multifaceted and not in. Someone who is neurotic does not mean that they are not take risks sometimes or is fun loving or is like someone who likes to, like, you know, has a small social battery and doesn't like to be, you know, very active all the time in social situations. Doesn't mean that they cannot be, like, flirtatious and just the life of the party. And a lot of the dynamic between the two just feels like. It almost feels like Donald is saying the dumb things that Charles does think about but doesn't say out loud. [00:57:50] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, it could. Yeah, it could well be that Donald is the more extroverted side of real Charlie Kaufman, the socialite version. [00:58:00] Speaker A: There's a hilarious graph that our friend of the pod and in real life, Jack Atwood, who you just probably heard on the God's Not Dead episode that we just released years ago, he was a big cards against humanity guy, and he showed us a graph forever ago of the correlation between someone's happiness versus how many Fast and Furious films they've seen and adaptation. Feels like Charles Kaufman seen none of those films and is full and will never see them. And Donald has watched all of them multiple times. And it's the. Is the most happy man. And again, it shows how hilarious, too, where it's like, you know, the real, I think conflict of the film is hilariously is, you know, the real antagonist, even though there's genuine, like, surface level threats happening to Charles at some point. Yeah, the real. The real antagonist to Charles is himself. [00:58:56] Speaker B: Yeah. [00:58:57] Speaker A: It is ultimately him not believing in himself enough to really just, you know, commit to even an idea that could maybe not work. Like he constantly talks about in the film, like he actually. No, it's like it's not until the Robert McKee scene, which is the only scene I've seen from this movie beforehand, Which. Yes, Robert McKee's story. The reason why I brought that up is not only does Donald read that book, he goes to a seminar. [00:59:23] Speaker B: Well, Charles goes to. Well, I guess they both do. [00:59:25] Speaker A: Donald goes to a seminar and then writes a script, basically after that seminar, Charles, who says, I don't want to fucking do that, ultimately chickens out when he wants to go meet Susan Orlean, who's played by Meryl Streep in this. So instead of going to actually talk to Susan, he just goes to Robert McKee's seminar. And Robert McKee is a small part in this film, but is Played by Brian Cox and probably the most iconic scene from this movie is just Charles just openly admitting that, like, his goal to make the Orchid Thief as honest and as accurate as possible to the book means that there's no one changes narratively. There's no conflict and there's no drama. [01:00:15] Speaker B: Which he views as a reflection of the real world. [01:00:19] Speaker A: Yeah. And reflection of the real world. And feels like that is the truest adaptation of the Orchid Thief, which is just basically reading the book. And then Robert McKee and Brian Cox himself just rips into him in a way that is just like fucking incredible and is wonderful in a way that is like. It's not that you want to see Charles get destroyed, but it's like he clearly needed that. [01:00:49] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, he was dooming. He was a doomer and he needed some hopium. [01:00:55] Speaker A: And it's funny too, because as the film progresses, the first half of the film is basically hearing Nicholas Cage's monologue. S Charles writing the script about going back to the meteor that kills the dinosaurs, Evolution, where do flowers come from? Reading books on orchids, going to an orchid show. And like, constantly voiceovers about, this is how the movie begins. This is what this scene's supposed to be about. And then after the Robert McKee scene, the movie becomes the most pacing wise as well as narratively the most straightforward, and also becomes the least amount of voiceovers we get. It becomes the most emotional narratively. It becomes the most engaging traditionally, because the first half of the film is engaging in a non traditional sense. Because you're just watching this, you're like. [01:01:56] Speaker B: Where the fuck is this gonna go? [01:01:58] Speaker A: Every time you think this man is gonna make leeway in a script, he just ends up jerking off. [01:02:05] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, it is. [01:02:07] Speaker A: Just think, I'm just like, okay, this is where we're at. I guess I get it. [01:02:14] Speaker B: Interestingly enough, that Robert McKee seminar scene is also the turning point where the film starts to more closely resemble a Donald script. A conventional Hollywood bombastic excitement fest where all of the things happen that Charles did not want to include in his adaptation of the Orchid Thief. We have, you know, sex and intrigue gets involved, violence, chase sequences. Yeah, bombast in general. Just all the movie begins to evolve or devolve, depending on your perspective into basically what would be Donald's version of this adaptation. [01:03:08] Speaker A: Yeah. And it is very much so leads to the best emotional stuff, especially with Charles. And again, we're talking about him playing the twins, but we're not really talking. We haven't talked too much about his performance. But, like, this is one of Cage's best performances. [01:03:23] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:03:24] Speaker A: He plays two different people in a way that is so clear as to, like, clearly identify it. As soon as you see both of them, what they're diagnosing, you can tell which one is which, who is having the most fun, how much fun Cage is having, in a sense, as Donald, by basically being the golden retriever of the group. And you have grumpy cat Charles, who is just, like, sad and just wants to stay in his bed and is always moping constantly, basically having Nathan Fielder faces every other scene. Sadness. And Cage has this, like, you know, entered. But it's like, the best part is, like, it doesn't mean it's an excuse for Charles to have no energy or Donald to not have any kind of agency or emotional aspect to him. [01:04:14] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:04:14] Speaker A: Because it's like, when you finally get them together and they're finally working together, they are so much fun. It's so much fun to see how Cage bounces off of himself. [01:04:25] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:04:25] Speaker A: In a way that again, I mean, we're. There's literally the film that is out in theaters right now that shows just, like, how good of an actor can be just by bouncing off of themselves. When you have the right script. [01:04:35] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:04:36] Speaker A: The right direction and just, like, the space to kind of build off of. [01:04:40] Speaker B: Because, I mean, I think this is. I didn't really think about it while I was watching it, but that now makes me think that this might be, like, Cage's most transformative role in that. Like, I. I mean, I've been a big Cage fan for a long time. Like, when I was. When I was young, when I was a preteen teenager, I was a huge fan of Nicolas Cage as a teenager. And a lot of that was the kind of meme factor of Cage's career that, you know, in the Cage became known for, you know, taking basically any job and doing really crappy movies and doing these outlandish performances that felt like they were kind of, you know, immersion breaking for some people. And, like, as a kid, I ate that shit up. I thought he was hilarious. Blah, blah, blah. That evolved for me into, like, a genuine love of Cage as an artist, as a performer. Yeah. But, like, even through my genuine love for him, I've always felt that, like, most Cage roles feel very Nick Cage. Like, you know, it's hard to see anybody else giving that same performance. He stands out as himself, which he would probably hate to hear because I think he's somebody who wants to get lost in his roles. But this. This is a role where Cage almost like genuinely disappears into the role. I don't really see Nicolas Cage. I didn't really think about Nicolas Cage during this movie. [01:06:15] Speaker A: It's also like the most physical transformation. [01:06:17] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, he looks totally different. He's got curly. He's got curly reddish brown hair. He's just a little chubby. He's. [01:06:25] Speaker A: You know, you can also tell that he put on that weight because like, I was. [01:06:29] Speaker B: Yeah, you can see it in his face. He's got cheeks and his hands. [01:06:32] Speaker A: He's got huge. I mean, because Cage is not a small guy, but you can see in his physicality that he is in fact lost himself in this version of Charlie Kaufman. Yeah, the weight and. Yeah. The hair that like the. The bald spot. Receding hairline and. [01:06:50] Speaker B: Well, and it's interesting too because Cage himself has said that, like, he basically threw all of his acting instincts and knowledge out the window for this role and just played it exactly how Kaufman, real life Kaufman and Jones told him to play it. So he was strictly going off direction. None of his acting instincts, which is so fascinating. It's like, okay. And this is his most like, invisible role. [01:07:18] Speaker A: Immediately as Charles starts talking to Tilda Swinton, because it's the first big moment Cage is working with something early on in the film. It's hard not to just watch him work and be like that. Just. That's gotta be Kaufman. That's gotta be actually him watching Kaufman and just like. And just again, embellishing and exaggerating because Charlie sees. Charlie's writing a version of himself that is like way more neurotic, way more self deprecating, way more insecure than he probably actually is. And the way that Cage is talking, that. Yeah, it's like one of his most transformative roles in a way that is like when you get those moments of Cage, I guess Cage is a. Technically with Donald because Donald is kind of like the most. [01:08:06] Speaker B: You're a little more. Yeah. Animated. [01:08:10] Speaker A: Yeah. And he's just like, you know, I'm just gonna sit down, I'm gonna lay on my back. I'm sorry, my back is really hurting. It's like those moments feel like Cage just running just with the. With just running with the ball and just not letting go. And leads to a phenomenal moment where like at the very end of the film, there's this heartfelt scene between Charles and Donald where it's like the first time, I think in the entire film they are on the same wavelength. [01:08:37] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:08:38] Speaker A: Emotionally. Because they're in a. They're in a situation where it's like, we could die. [01:08:43] Speaker B: Right. [01:08:43] Speaker A: This is like. And they just get into this conversation about something that, like, clearly feels like it's coming to. Charles is coming to, like, this angle of like. Like, clearly there's parts of Charles that wants to be Donald. [01:09:00] Speaker B: He wishes he could have that confidence in himself. [01:09:04] Speaker A: I think he also has. He wants to write the scripts that take half of his brain cells to write and gets a bunch of money for it. [01:09:13] Speaker B: Right. Right. He has a resentment for the fact that he's too prideful about his work to do that. [01:09:20] Speaker A: But then it's like, you see when Donald responds to their conversation in their story, that is like, Donald is not writing these things half assed. He is not. He is not half assed himself. He is someone who is very much aware of how he's perceived. [01:09:34] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:09:35] Speaker A: How people make fun of him. And yet, you know, that doesn't take away who he is. [01:09:42] Speaker B: Yeah. And it's, you know, he's not what makes him fun. An idiot. He's just in touch with the things that he likes and wants to make those things and feels no. Makes no apologies for doing that. [01:09:53] Speaker A: Yeah. It very much feels like you're watching a creator realize in a cathartic way because, like, this is. This is basically a cathartic film for any screenwriter, whether aspiring or experience. It feels very much like if you've ever written anything and you've had a moment that is like, you know, the stupid piece of shit, episode one from, like, BoJack Horseman. [01:10:13] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:10:13] Speaker A: This is a film that has make you very cathartic and like, hey, just settle down. [01:10:18] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:10:19] Speaker A: And has this moment where it's like you. The. The person that usually are the. The auteurs that you follow this whole kind of, like, expectation that, like, if you write stuff like Being John Malkovich or Eternal Sunshine or later on Synecdoche, and like, I'm thinking of ending things as an adaptation on Melissa. You have to be. Maybe you have to be weird, you have to be quiet, you have to be neurotic. You have to. You have to like these things, but you can't like these other things. [01:10:48] Speaker B: Right. [01:10:48] Speaker A: And. And ultimately it seems very much like Kaufman is someone who probably likes a lot of stupid things, is a goofy. He's goofy as hell. [01:10:57] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:10:57] Speaker A: It's hard not to watch these films and be like, this man loves a goof. [01:11:00] Speaker B: Yeah. He's a silly love. [01:11:02] Speaker A: Silly stuff. He. A scamp. Coffin's a bit of a scoundrel and a scamp. And I Feel like it's something that I think nowadays we are being more, I think, open to, like, kind of being honest with ourselves about because, you know, like, for years and years, we, you know, there's been this whole kind of thing of putting Christopher Nolan up as this high quality, serious. [01:11:24] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:11:25] Speaker A: But as soon as, you know, it was revealed that one of his favorite go to films is literally Talladega Nights. [01:11:32] Speaker B: Yeah, well. And he's like, you brought it up earlier. He's a massive fan of Fast and Furious. [01:11:36] Speaker A: Yeah, he's. He is one of the only people in my camp that took you adrift is better than people give the credit for. And I never thought fucking Christopher Nolan favor. But it's like, yeah, you hear them talk about stuff like that and it's like, oh, that's right. As a create. Like when you are. You were still a person. [01:11:55] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:11:56] Speaker A: And like this whole kind of expectation of like, God, if I don't do this one thing right, I am just the worst person in the world. The best part about Adaptation is that it ends with Charles getting a confidence that is like, even when it's at the worst time, there's one moment that is supposed to be this big romantic gesture in his head, but it's at the worst time. It is something where he pulls a Donald and he's like, I know it's at a weird time, but I have to do it. Like, I'm sick of being lying to myself. [01:12:31] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. Not doing the things I want to do and not being true to my feelings and desires. [01:12:39] Speaker A: He even says, like, oh, God, Rob McKee says we shouldn't do voiceovers. Ah, forget it. Yeah, voiceover's good right here. And it's like, yeah, it's the confidence of, like, this idea that you can't. You can't have a little bit of both. You can't have a little bit of Charles and a little bit of Donald in a script and then ultimately ending with like, no, you can have both. You can have both. It's hard to balance that. But I think Adaptation, again, hilariously shows that a film about someone writing a script that ultimately becomes about that balance and how it kind of can help you grow as a person, ultimately leads to a film that is. Does the same exact thing narratively to people and viewers, where it's like, actually does help you grow and shows a bit of catharsis in a screenwriting sense, where it's like. Because again, the film does have, like, little moments here and there where, like, Cage as Charles will just be like, that's a trope no one likes. And, like, we'll just pull up this random thing. Or, like, of course, you know, Brian cox, basically, Robert McKee basically just like. Like, blurts out how the film is going to end in, like, a thematic way. [01:13:47] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:13:47] Speaker A: It says, just don't bring up a deus ex machina. [01:13:50] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:13:51] Speaker A: Hate that. Just having moments like that where you can be meta. And I think viewers can still enjoy it without it feeling like it's going like you're talking about something they don't understand. Because, again, it's like, the thing that's so fascinating about when you watch so many movies. Movies or TV shows and stuff is like, nine times out of ten, most people know almost all the tropes in so many shape or forms, they just don't know the definition. They don't know the actual phrase of it. [01:14:20] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:14:20] Speaker A: So when you, like, you hear Deus ex machina, probably the first time you hear it, you're like, what is that? And then you're like, oh, it's like something that just kind of fucking pops out of nowhere. Yeah, that's cheap. Yeah, it's like. Yeah, it's like. It very much is like the film Coffin does it in a way where, like, there's plenty of ways you can do this. Like I said, that is pretentious. But Kaufman is a fucking good writer. He's a good writer, and he's phenomenal at what he does. It's phenomenal. To watch him take a film that really doesn't have agency for the most part, and yet is engaging, is funny. It's sad in the right way. It'll make you cringe in a sense. Sense that is like, this is way too real. I don't like this. But it's also funny, right? I mean, the movie just starts with, like, a minute and a half of black screen as the credits roll of. [01:15:13] Speaker B: Just Charles internal monologue. [01:15:16] Speaker A: Yeah, like, you know, I think I might be dying. I hate myself. I'm too fat. Maybe if I worked out today, I'd be less fat and it'd help me write things. Like, all these things that are just like, if I could do A, then. [01:15:28] Speaker B: I could do B. Yeah. [01:15:29] Speaker A: And just, like, all these different things. [01:15:31] Speaker B: Spiraling. [01:15:32] Speaker A: Yeah. Bargaining with yourself as you're spiraling. And, yeah, I'd probably say out of the three films, this is my favorite. [01:15:41] Speaker B: Me, too. I think it's. [01:15:43] Speaker A: You definitely like this movie more than I do. But that's not saying that I don't think this movie's Great. And this movie's great. [01:15:48] Speaker B: I mean, I don't. I don't know that that may not even be true. I absolutely adored this movie the first time I watched it when I was a teenager. And this was probably like the first, like weird, critically acclaimed movie that I saw. I was probably like 14, 13, 14, like a really out there movie that people really loved. And for a long time I held that it was one of my favorite movies of all time. And rewatching it, I mean, I still think it's a really great movie. I really enjoyed it, but didn't. It doesn't hold the same. I don't hold quite the same regard for it relative to other movies I've seen. But that's probably because I've just, you know, I'm a lot more well read as a. As a cinephile, as a movie lover. No, you could these days. And yeah, you know, there. I think there are things you could nitpick this movie for. Sometimes it's. It's overt meta. Ness. Feels like a little bit too grandiose for its own good. But like, yeah, I still think it's a great movie, but I actually, I came down on it a little bit. [01:16:58] Speaker A: Oh, really? [01:16:58] Speaker B: On rewatch, I still think it's great. It's still fucking awesome. But yeah. Yeah, I actually, I think on letterboxden in my head I'd rate all these the same, really. But I have the most, like, personal affection for this one. [01:17:19] Speaker A: Okay. All right. I would agree as well, if. I think if it wasn't for the fact that the last film in this trilogy is definitely the most dense, is the most dense. It is the most. Here's the thing, all three of these films are unique in their own way. In a way that it shows like Kaufman, being the acclaimed writer and director that he is, is because the way that he writes is genuinely unique in a way that like, he is someone who doesn't really have an equal. He has comparisons, of course, it's like hard. It's. With Kaufman, you can think of Gondry, you think of Jones, you think of other author, like other meta narrative kind of conversations. But like, these three films are unapologetically Kaufman. They are not pretentious in any way, in my opinion. And like, are just like at the end of the day. And it started with this movie in particular with Sinetic New York. I got to a point where I was like, even if I come out of these three films and I don't love them, I respect the absolute hell out of Them appreciate their existence. [01:18:26] Speaker B: Yeah, there's a deep appreciation here, especially in this third one. More so than, like, personal enjoyment. [01:18:34] Speaker A: Yeah. Because I would say I personally enjoyed Being John Malkovich, but was very exhausted by the end. [01:18:40] Speaker B: End of it. [01:18:41] Speaker A: Adaptation, I believe, is very exhausting in the beginning, just because you're wrapping your head around, because the very beginning of the film, it cuts. It cuts to modern day, to two years ago, to five years later. It goes back. [01:19:00] Speaker B: Yeah, I think it's following the Susan. [01:19:02] Speaker A: Orleans story on top of Kaufman having a midlife writer's block crisis. And initially it is like, kind of like jarring because you're like, how many times have we jumped time in the last, like 10 minutes? But like, at a certain point you basically. Yeah, you get. You get involved. But what's so crazy is that, you know, these first two films are Kaufman as a writer and probably as a producer as well. Synecdoche is the. Is the triple threat. He is not only a writer, he probably not only produces this film in some way, shape or form, he is also his directorial debut. So more than a decade into all of these classic, kind of iconic Kaufman narratives, through Eternal, through Being John Malkovich, through Adaptation especially, that Adaptation won an Oscar and was critically acclaimed, Kaufman decides to do a directorial debut that is just absolute insanity. It is a film that. I am not kidding when I say when we got 30 minutes into this 2 hour and 17 minute film, I looked at Andy and said, we are not even an hour in. And I just want to know when the plot is going to begin. Because the thing about this film is that Sinnitze New York as a premise is Philip Seymour Hoffman, who is fucking phenomenal in this movie because the late, great Philip Seymour Hoffman was just great in practically anything he was in. He plays basically a theater director who is working on a play that does basically not even off Broadway. It's a small play, but it's very well regarded and does so well that basically a theater company or a specific organization gives him carte blanche on his next project to the degree that they basically give him two warehouses, two empty warehouse spaces to build out his next project. And so he decides, since both of these warehouses are basically connected to one another in some way, shape or form, his next play is going to be his magnum opus, which is rebuilding a section of New York from the ground up. And it would be a full scale, full scale interactive play that takes place in New York City. And ultimately, due to his personal life as well as his, like, you know, neuroses surrounding his health and just, you know, constantly dealing with the fraud fallacy and just, you know, wondering if he's just gonna die at any minute because he's so old and. [01:22:03] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:22:03] Speaker A: All these different things that are coming happening at the same time. Ultimately, he starts to morph the play into a one to one version of his actual life. Inadvertently, I would say. Like, it almost feels like it kind of just happens. [01:22:24] Speaker B: Yeah. The plight that belabors the main character in this is similar in concept to the plight that Charles Kaufman's dealing with in Adaptation. [01:22:38] Speaker A: Yes. [01:22:38] Speaker B: In that he becomes so consumed with this notion of doing something true and real to the world and making an impact. Yeah, Making an impact, leaving a legacy, being all encompassing to the human experience that, you know, he kind of creates this monster for himself. It is unlike Adaptation in that adaptation, you know, the lesson is almost like, hey, it's okay to, like, use conventions and embrace what's enjoyable to you. And, you know, very cathartic in that way. And synecdoche is like, he kind of goes down the dark path of, oh, yeah, I am. I am totally going to let myself be consumed by this need to create the ultimate thing and realizing that the. [01:23:31] Speaker A: Creating the ultimate thing, in an artistic sense is clearly meant to be recreating life. Recreating life, but also is meant to be basically make his real life mean something in a way that it'll be satisfying. He has gone through a divorce, an estrangement from his daughter, multiple love interests, love lives that have just kind of fallen to the wayside. [01:23:57] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:23:58] Speaker A: All these, like, you know, tragedies in his life that like. [01:24:01] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:24:02] Speaker A: Can't fully convey emotionally, but he can artistically. [01:24:07] Speaker B: Well, he's. Yeah, he's kind of using it as a way to like, distance himself from the issues in his own life while also, like, it's kind of self therapy. It's also kind of self, you know, self critique and also just allows him to sort of work out the things that are going on in his life without actually working out the things that are going on in his life. And he kind of lets his real life, you know, deteriorate in the process. [01:24:44] Speaker A: It is catharsis to the maximum degree because it's basically committing to the idea that if you had full creative control, if you had full control over a budget that was unlimited, you could have any actor you want, you could do whatever you want at the unlimited amount of time. No one is going to stop you. [01:25:08] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:25:08] Speaker A: Will you be satisfied with your own life? Will it actually help? And the answer to that Is. No, the catharsis comes from. Because the movie is depressing. The movie is depressing in a way that is very intentional. Is also. Is very comical. And how depressing it gets. [01:25:29] Speaker B: Yeah. It's bleakly hilarious because, again, it's like. [01:25:32] Speaker A: Kathryn Keener comes back in a Kaufman film in this. She is an adaptation. But she's playing Catherine Keener as Maxine at times because. [01:25:40] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, yeah. She's playing the actress. [01:25:43] Speaker A: Yeah. And Kathryn Keener plays Philip Seymour Hoffman's wife. First wife. [01:25:50] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:25:50] Speaker A: In this film. And you never see them get divorced. In fact, I don't think they fully even. [01:25:54] Speaker B: I don't think they do. She just leaves him. [01:25:57] Speaker A: She goes to Germany and never comes back. [01:25:59] Speaker B: She becomes a famous artist and never looks back. [01:26:03] Speaker A: Yeah. And has. [01:26:04] Speaker B: Takes the kid with her. [01:26:05] Speaker A: Takes the kid and becomes. In a polygamous relationship, I believe, with two male. [01:26:09] Speaker B: Two German artists and becomes an art superstar. [01:26:13] Speaker A: Yeah. Who makes very tiny artist pieces with very tiny boxes to ship them. [01:26:20] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:26:21] Speaker A: This is a film that will constantly. Like, the thing that is, you know, I would say with both Bingo and Malkovich and Adaptation, is that the. You know, they're great because you can watch both of them and one swoop. If you can only watch those movies once, you know, right now, and maybe you can get a chance to watch them in the future. You get pretty much everything you want out of those films. The first go around, you get. You get a lot of good stuff all around. Great emotional moments, great comedic moments. You understand what Kaufman's trying to do with those. In Synecdoche, you understand where Kaufman is coming from in terms of what he's doing narratively, in a cathartic sense. However, Synecdoche is a film where when someone looks you dead in the eyes and goes, yeah, it took me three watches, but I think I kind of understand Synecdoche. It is genuinely being. That person's. Being earnest. This is kind of a Mulholland Drive situation where when most people talk about this film, they say, like, the first time they watched it, they were incredibly confused, but they were enthralled by how wild and dense it was. And then with each watch through, whether it happened immediately after they couldn't help themselves or over the years they rewatched it, they start to understand it more and more. And to be honest, I think that that's probably a good case that we would probably. Now that we know what we're getting into. But if I were to say that this was a easy experience, an experience that didn't have me cackling at times, pinching my forehead in frustration because I was wondering where the it was going. [01:28:01] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:28:03] Speaker A: Anxious in my chair. Because I didn't. I genuinely didn't know. I just assumed it was going to end at any moment at a certain point. And it went for another 30 minutes. [01:28:12] Speaker B: Yeah. It's a. It's an interesting experience in that it's not. At least I didn't feel that it was ever boring. And yet I very much reached a point where I was like, can this please end? [01:28:25] Speaker A: Gosh. [01:28:26] Speaker B: And not. Not in a way where I was hating what I was watching, but it was just kind of like. It becomes so kind of. I don't know that convoluted is really the word, but just kind of wrapped up in its own navigating of this concept of this man kind of thing, throwing his life away for his art. That it's, like, does feel very repetitive at a certain point. [01:28:55] Speaker A: It is taking kind of like the human experience of, like, I think anyone who works, you know, a normal 9 to 5 and is constantly, you know, just like, in the grind of, like, getting through the day, getting through the week. The constant idea of how a week can feel like years. Yeah. At the same time, also just feel like minutes. [01:29:16] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:29:16] Speaker A: Where it's like, you can be like, gosh, this is a crazy week. Am I right? And someone go, it's Tuesday. And this is a film that is basically at every given turn, there is like, half the people are constantly being like, it has been years since we've dealt with a situation like this. While Hoffman is basically like, what are you talking about? I just saw you two days ago. [01:29:38] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:29:38] Speaker A: Like, it's this idea of, like, how everyone again, that the world doesn't revolve around one of us, it revolves around all of us. And we're all going through different things at the same time. And some people are progressing much faster than others. [01:29:52] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:29:53] Speaker A: And in this film, in a comedic sense, it leads to situations. Like, the last time we see Hoffman's daughter consistently in the story, she's like 10, 11, 12. Ish. Maybe, actually. Oh. [01:30:05] Speaker B: Like before. Before the mom takes her. [01:30:07] Speaker A: I think she's at most 10. [01:30:08] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:30:09] Speaker A: And then about 10 to 20 minutes after the last time we see her, it is pretty much implied that she is now a woman in her 30s with a French accent. [01:30:19] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:30:20] Speaker A: Who has now been. Who believes she's been neglected by her father purposely, when in reality, he has no idea where they moved in Germany. And when he goes there to try to find her can't find her, but finds her babysitter, who now has a horrible accent, played by Jennifer Jason Lee, who hasn't aged a day. [01:30:40] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:30:41] Speaker A: And so it's like this. [01:30:42] Speaker B: Well, and Hoffman's character makes some reference to, like, she's just a child, she's four years old. [01:30:47] Speaker A: Yeah. [01:30:48] Speaker B: And it's like clearly in that moment, he has completely lost all concept of time. And so have I. Yes. [01:30:54] Speaker A: Because that's. Yeah, it is a film that is, like. [01:30:57] Speaker B: It will jump years in a few seconds, and then it will sit at that same time for an inordinate amount of time. It. Time is very malleable in this film. Yeah, it's. And it kind of feels like it goes backwards at some points and. Yeah, it's just wild. It's all over the place. [01:31:14] Speaker A: Yeah, it's. It's like. [01:31:15] Speaker B: I think in total, it spans over 20 years. [01:31:19] Speaker A: 20 to 25. [01:31:20] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:31:21] Speaker A: Because at a point, certain point, I think that. Don't they say, we've been working on this play for 17? [01:31:26] Speaker B: Yeah, they do say that. [01:31:27] Speaker A: And that's, like, halfway through the film, if not towards the end. [01:31:30] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:31:32] Speaker A: The big moment in the trailer is that scene. And that scene does not give any context because, again, this is a movie where if you just watch a scene out of context, it doesn't really give you that much more context than in context. Sometimes. [01:31:43] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:31:44] Speaker A: It contextually. It is a film that is, like, from scene to scene. It'll just fuck with you because it is fucking with Philip Seymour Hoffman's character because the man is so dedicated to his craft and is so dedicated to creating this artistic piece that will not only fulfill him, but maybe can fulfill other people through it. He, at a certain point, has been so committed to this role that not only has he casted his new girlfriend as this, as his, like, old flame that he kind of was into at his own play, that. That new love interest, Michelle Williams. In the film. They get married and they already have a child together by the time the wedding is over. [01:32:27] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:32:28] Speaker A: And there is no acknowledgment of how much time has passed. There is. There's constant times where something will just happen and the world will just go on and then something absolutely batshit will happen in the background. [01:32:44] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:32:44] Speaker A: And you're like, what the fuck was that? And the movie will just keep going. The amount of times I heard Andy go, what? Just by, like, you know, I think at one point we're watching it, and this is. I think this is one of the times because the movie I had Moments of like, I was locked in was kind of losing it because I'm trying to figure out, out, like, where the. Would you even end this? And they get locked back in at a certain moment where I was locked in. I think you were coming down off it a bit, and I think you checked your phone for half a second and you looked up and you went, why the. Are they old all of a sudden? What the hell happened? Why is she like this? And I'm like, I'm so sorry, Andy, you. That was two scenes ago. [01:33:23] Speaker B: Yeah. Why is. Why is Philip Seymour Hoffman's hairline disappearing behind the back of his skull? [01:33:29] Speaker A: The saddest man in any film possible as Phyllis Seymour Hoffman. [01:33:33] Speaker B: I watched the movie Happiness last year by Tom Salons, and Philip Seymour Hoffman is in that. And I really didn't think I'd ever watch a movie with a sadder Philip Seymour Hoffman in it, but this movie somehow does it. [01:33:50] Speaker A: Hoffman again, shows in his filmography up until his untimely death. But, like, he is a man who is like, if something. If it's. Even if it's like, truly fucking weird, if he can really gravitate with it, he will go for it full hog. And I think he really, in this film, like, he does some wild things. And I think in a sense where, like, if other actors did it, it would come off too funny or maybe even too insensitive at times. [01:34:16] Speaker B: There's one scene the, like, seizures. [01:34:19] Speaker A: He has a seizure at one point, calls a doctor and is like, what's wrong? And he just says, I'm sick. [01:34:25] Speaker B: He's just screaming, yeah, I'm sick. [01:34:28] Speaker A: As if that makes anything make sense to this person. [01:34:31] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:34:32] Speaker A: And it's just, he's. The amount of times he will just scream, what, like, what is going on? And then just like, yeah, he. It just sells the idea of, again, like I said earlier in the podcast, like, this, you know, this Sisyphus esque character who is constantly pushing this boulder of, like, artistic integrity and vision. And again, in a sense where this film. I do not think this film is pretentious. I think it's like, genuinely. And I think it feels like Kaufman getting out this idea of, like, clearly, like anyone who's had. Who has ever had any sense of creativity in a writing sense or even visually or painting, if you have been into a creative hobby and you've had, like, these crazy amount of ideas, just how much of a burden it can be at times where you just don't feel like you have enough time, you don't have Enough resources. You don't have enough people who could help you do this. [01:35:30] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:35:31] Speaker A: And making a film where it's like, the unfortunate truth is that you could have all of that, but, like, at the end of the day, it. You're still you, and what does that mean to you? And it ultimately leads to, like, this, I would say, is the funniest part of this entire film. And I. It's a scene that I had said earlier in this podcast that I can understand if this would piss people off if they see it. But when the movie ends, the last thing he says before he dies is after, like, spending his entire life, basically, and indescript amount of years working on this project. His final line is, I think I know what my next project is going to be like. He got the magnum opus. This is what it's supposed to be. And yet he's already thinking about, like, actually, I'm kind of bored with this. I actually want to do this. And it's funny seeing how, like, adaptation has that energy of like, a Charles a Charlie Kaufman who is like, do I kind of want to write Schlock? Does that make me less of an artist if I do that? Well, as you get to Synecdoche, where it's like, all right, now I have all the creative ability in the world, but shit, I'm just still me. Like, I still have all my neuroses. I still have all this, like, it is a very humbling film. And I can imagine this being a very depressing film for some. [01:36:54] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:36:55] Speaker A: But I think. I think especially because, again, this also. And I think I put in my letterbox review this film. I think to call it a midlife crisis film is an understatement. This very much has the energy of, like. The first 30 minutes is basically a man waking up having a rash. He doesn't understand what it is. So therefore, it has to be cancer. It has to be this. [01:37:18] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:37:20] Speaker A: If it was made in 2018, he'd be on WebMD. Every five seconds he'd be looking at Google AI and they would give him the wrong thing. And at a certain point, he bonks his head and it starts bleeding profusely and he thinks he might die. And it gets to a point where the first part of the film is like, him constantly thinking that, like, holy shit, if I don't get this surgery, if I don't do this, I'm gonna be constantly like, I'm gonna die. And then halfway through the film, when he becomes solely dedicated to. To his craft, people around him Just start dying. [01:37:56] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:37:56] Speaker A: Because since he is not focused on, you know, the people around him in his life or his own personal life, his parents die off screen. We see them once in the movie, but they both die off screen in a way where it's like, hey, I just want to let you know, I know you're busy working, but your. Your dad passed. [01:38:14] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:38:15] Speaker A: And there's like, he goes to a funeral and that's it. And they do the same thing for his mom. They even do that at a certain point for his first wife. [01:38:23] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:38:23] Speaker A: And it's like. I mean, they even do that for his daughter. He outlives his daughter in the story. And his daughter also is like lovers with her old babysitter, which is so. [01:38:34] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. He's. He's almost cursed to walk the earth longer than everybody else because of how afraid he is of dying an illness. Like, he's constantly obsessed with all these things going wrong with his body, and yet he still neglects them, and yet he still lives. [01:38:53] Speaker A: I feel like if you're friends with Spike Jones and Michel Gondry, you have a. Have to have a little bit of a sick sense of humor where it's like you are constantly. You're neurotic enough that you think anything is going to kill you, and yet you live longer than everyone else who was just living their lives. And just how fucking just. Just darkly comedic that is. And I mean, this is just a. This is a very, very dense film that I. I would argue. Here's the thing, and that's because I don't know if this is gonna piss anybody off, because I want to make it pretty clear. This is probably my least favorite same. Yeah, but it's not because this movie is bad. Because, again, the reason why I started off talking about this film saying that I admire the hell out of all these films is because with Synecdoche, this is a truly wholly unique experience that I will never forget. And I'm glad that Kaufman was able to make it. [01:39:46] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:39:47] Speaker A: Do I think Kaufman has tighter, better projects? Yeah, I personally think he does. I would even argue that now that I've seen most of his films in terms of writing and directing, hilariously enough, I think I've only started to love. Solidify my love from thinking of ending things because I feel like that film has a lot that hilariously is an adaptation of a short story that has a lot of Kaufmanisms, has a lot of actors that you have never seen him work with, and yet perfectly capture his sick sense of humor as well. As, like, the existentialism, like, is. He's perfect in a film that is, like, trying to be very existential but also comedic. [01:40:29] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:40:30] Speaker A: What I'm trying to say is if Kaufman does another film, it should have Jesse Plebiscite Plummons in it. Because he is. [01:40:36] Speaker B: Yeah, he's kind of perfect for that. [01:40:38] Speaker A: He is. Plemons is perfect for just about anything. Everything. Yeah, it's Yorgos Kaufman. Garland of Garland. Like, if he wants to show back up in one of those. But, like. [01:40:49] Speaker B: Yeah, he kind of reminds me of. Of Philip Seymour Hoffman, like, as a performer. [01:40:55] Speaker A: It's funny that you say that, because you did hear who Plemons is now playing. [01:41:00] Speaker B: Oh, is he playing him? [01:41:01] Speaker A: He's playing Plutarch. He's playing a younger version of Hoffman's character in Catching Fire. In the Hunger Games films, they're casting Clemens as a younger version because Hoffman. Because Hoffman was in Catching Fire. He's like. He's, unsurprisingly, one of the best parts about that movie. Because it's fucking Hoffman. [01:41:21] Speaker B: Right. [01:41:21] Speaker A: But unfortunately, he passed away before they could do. Before he could. Because his character comes back and Mockingjay. [01:41:27] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:41:28] Speaker A: So I think 14. I think 14. 15, because. Because I think 18. 17. 18, I think, is when Mockingjay Part 2 comes out and they CGI him. [01:41:39] Speaker B: Oh, yeah. [01:41:39] Speaker A: In a certain scene or two, they don't do AI thing. [01:41:41] Speaker B: They don't do the deep fake thing. [01:41:43] Speaker A: Because that wasn't really a thing yet. [01:41:44] Speaker B: Right. [01:41:45] Speaker A: But, yeah, apparently Rogue One, baby. Yeah. But Plemons has just been, I think, announced to be in the. [01:41:52] Speaker B: Yeah. 14. [01:41:53] Speaker A: The Woody Harrelson Haymitch prequel from. Because that's a book that just came out. And now, of course, since it's a. It's a cat. It's. Since, you know, Songs and Snakes, I think, did well. [01:42:04] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:42:05] Speaker A: They basically were just waiting for the next book to release and they go, we're making it. [01:42:10] Speaker B: Right. Yeah. [01:42:11] Speaker A: It's gonna be in theaters now. So it's funny that you say that, because Plemons is, in fact, I guess, reprising a Hoffman character. [01:42:17] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:42:17] Speaker A: Not Synecdoche, sadly. Could you imagine Prequel with Jesse Plemit. [01:42:25] Speaker B: Synecdoche sequel. Yeah, I was gonna say, because Born Again Synecdoche New York. Born Again Electric Boogaloo. [01:42:34] Speaker A: Yeah. But it's just like. It's fascinating to think that, like, pretty much after Synecdoche, it feels like Kaufman's directed films, which, hilariously, is a trio of itself, because it's only Synecdoche. Anomalisa, which he co directed. [01:42:49] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:42:49] Speaker A: And I'm thinking of ending things. It kind of goes smaller. [01:42:53] Speaker B: Right, right. [01:42:53] Speaker A: It goes smaller narratively, but I think conceptually has some really interesting ideas. [01:42:59] Speaker B: I mean, arguably also smaller conceptually. [01:43:02] Speaker A: Yeah. Synecdoche feels like an artist who has gotten all of, like, the wiggle room and kind of, like, the. The grievances out about their own creative process and, like, writing and just the silly things in the back of his head that he's always wanted to talk about. And that was like, well, I'm getting $20 million to just do what I want. [01:43:22] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:43:23] Speaker A: And the film looks great. The film, I think, is immensely well acted across the board. Everyone involved in this film knows exactly what film they're in, and I love that. And I think the script, at its best, has very hilarious moments, very well done dramatic moments, and I think, even has, I think, a finale that I will probably admire more as time goes on because of. Just like, it ultimately ends with a creator being more satisfied with the simplistic aspects of his. Of his. Of his creation more so than the intricacies of everything. [01:44:02] Speaker B: Right, right. [01:44:03] Speaker A: And it is. It's just. It's just fun to watch a creator be able to, like, get to that point in their career where it's like, here it is. I don't know how you're gonna market this. It doesn't matter. You know, it's like, it doesn't. [01:44:15] Speaker B: Ultimately, you don't make it, and you make no money off of it. [01:44:18] Speaker A: Yeah. And that's. [01:44:19] Speaker B: Right. [01:44:19] Speaker A: So you don't have to like it. Like, clearly with Kaufman, it's like, he's not. There's nothing about this film that screams like he's trying to do something that is going to, like, the first art film that's gonna break a hundred million or anything. Like, this is clearly just a labor of love that he commits to in a. In the most meta way possible. Because at a certain point, you were literally watching Hoffman being followed by a man who is hired to be Hoffman in the play. [01:44:47] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:44:48] Speaker A: Then I think at a certain point, there's one other level. [01:44:51] Speaker B: There is. Yeah, there's another. [01:44:53] Speaker A: There's another level. And then they have to recreate scenes that we've actually seen in the film. And it's just like. It gets to a point where it's like, if of all three of these films, if you watch this film, and for some reason, you're like, I just can't right now. Yeah, Understandable. [01:45:09] Speaker B: Right. [01:45:10] Speaker A: We watched this on a random Wednesday Night. [01:45:12] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:45:12] Speaker A: And one of my roommates joined in, just being like, I'm just gonna work on art while I watch this with you guys. And they were locked in, but I don't think because they initially wanted to. I think they were just like, morbidly curious at times. [01:45:28] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:45:29] Speaker A: Because it is very. It is a film that is very low key at times and then very, very silly and then super intense and visceral and then goes back to like, just being normal. [01:45:39] Speaker B: Yeah. And just. Just kind of constantly confusing. [01:45:44] Speaker A: It's funny that, like, earlier in the pod you said that, like, it's not necessarily convoluted, but it does kind of feel like its intention is to be convoluted enough that you don't lose what the film was trying to do. But it's also like you're just feeling like discombobulated. [01:46:01] Speaker B: Yeah. I mean, the. Just the number of layers to the. Yeah. The play within a play within a. You know, it's kind of like what adaptations doing on steroids because it's happening in real time, whereas adaptation is just, okay, here's a movie about trying to make a movie. And Synecdoche is like, here's a movie about a guy who makes a play about his life and then the play about his life goes on for so long and becomes so massive and intertwined that it becomes about itself. And then there's plays happening within there. [01:46:37] Speaker A: Becomes too needlessly complicated. [01:46:40] Speaker B: Yeah. It is kind of almost like convolution is the point. [01:46:44] Speaker A: But I will say, and I think we both would probably agree on this, it does have one of the best running gags I've seen any film. Just give like Stone Cold, which is the fire. [01:46:55] Speaker B: The house fire. Yeah. [01:46:56] Speaker A: The house fire is the payoff for. The house fire is genuinely one of the funniest things in a film that is not inherently a full blown comedy. I think I've ever seen a film commit to. [01:47:07] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:47:08] Speaker A: And I. [01:47:08] Speaker B: That's Samantha Morton's character, Hazel. Yes. She buys a house that is currently on fire as she's touring it. And she's like talking with the realtor, like, oh, I don't know. I don't know if I. It's a lovely house, but I'm a little hesitant because it's on fire and I don't want to die in the fire. But she buys it anyway. And there's a man living in her basement. It's the realtor's son or nephew or something. And then like kind of every time we see her, the house is still on fire. She's still alive in it. And then she's like, she's in a relationship with the guy in her basement. And then they're married. And then I think they have a kid. [01:47:47] Speaker A: They have two kids. [01:47:48] Speaker B: They have two kids. And then they grow up. Yeah, they grow up. And. Yeah. [01:47:53] Speaker A: And Samantha Morton's character is like, basically in Hoffman's perspective, the one that got away. [01:47:59] Speaker B: Right. Yeah. [01:48:00] Speaker A: Like, it just wasn't the right time. He didn't feel like it really worked out in a way that, like, just. It didn't feel right for him, so he felt like it must have not been right for her. [01:48:09] Speaker B: Well, and he was also hung up on his wife leaving him and. Yeah. [01:48:14] Speaker A: Yeah. And then ultimately, when they do get together, there's a moment that happens that is just. Is sad because it just perfectly fits the sadness and tragedy of Hoffman's character. And then the reason as to why it happens. [01:48:29] Speaker B: Yeah, it's just dark irony and inevitability. [01:48:33] Speaker A: Again. Kaufman is a sick son of a. In the best way when it comes to his comedy. And I think it's why, you know, later films, I mean, Nomisa, I probably thought, has a little bit of that too. But, like, I don't think, if anything, does have some sick sense of humor. I mean, there's. There's a joke in that movie that is just basically digging on another creator in the wildest way possible. And it's so funny. But, yeah, I mean, that's Kaufman's metacinma trilogy. It is something that I think is, like, you know, definitely after these last kind of few runs of fun, silly, quirky films. Yeah, with a lot of fun with our. With our co hosts, with our guests and whatnot, as well as God's Not Dead. But it was fun to kind of have, like, this heady, you know, something that Andy said, like, we've had on our list for a while that were, like, it just perfectly fit at this moment. And considering I was also the one that really wanted to do Sonic, I felt like it was, you know, just, let's let it. I want Andy to have. Feel like he. He has a choice more so than he already does. [01:49:36] Speaker B: Yeah. You act like this was like some kind of trade, but I feel like we both wanted to do this. [01:49:41] Speaker A: We both want to do it. But I remember when we were building the. We were building like, the. Our. What we wanted to do for the year, and I was like. I remember how every time we talked about Sonic, you were always mad about it. [01:49:53] Speaker B: Well, yeah. [01:49:55] Speaker A: And so I just knew, like, well, if I'm gonna push this man to nearly sit in like a two hour episode where, like there's gonna be where. [01:50:03] Speaker B: He doesn't get most of the references. [01:50:05] Speaker A: Yeah. It's basically gonna be like me with the Bionicle episode. He's gonna sit in a corner and listen to all this weird shit. The least I could do is be like, well, actually this thing we've been wanting to do for a while. Yeah, fuck it, let's do it. And we did it. And I'm, I'm glad that I've now finally see all three of these movies because they are again, experiences that I understand why people love all three of these movies. I also understand why, at least specifically Synecdoche is maybe controversial to some, but yeah, it's really good. I think all three of these are worth watching. But I also understand that if you start watching maybe one or the like, maybe adaptation or Synecdoche and maybe even a little bit of John Malkovich where it's like, ah, I don't know if I have the time for just like really cold lead on to this right now. Understandable. These are like, really like, if it's a lazy Sunday and you've got nothing else to do, and these have been on your watch list for a while. Give them a try. See if, like how it really hits. But yeah, now that we have really delved deep into meta cinema, we have decided that maybe there's something even deeper that we want to get into. Maybe that the whole of a specific, specific trio of comedy films that, you know, maybe is even deeper and scarier than anything that Synecdoche could really throw at us. Like, what if you had a twin that was Danny DeVito? [01:51:28] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:51:29] Speaker A: Or what if you are a muscle, muscular man who was pregnant? [01:51:34] Speaker B: Yeah. Or what if Arnold Schwarzenegger was a comedy star? [01:51:37] Speaker A: Yeah. And a kindergarten. But yeah. On May 24, we are going to be covering the Reitman Schwarzenegger comedy trio, which is basically 1988's twins, 1990s kindergarten cop, and then 1994, it's Junior. [01:51:57] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:51:58] Speaker A: Really just, I know for people that are listening to this, a real whiplash from this episode. [01:52:04] Speaker B: Yeah, absolutely. But you know what, it's, it's in character for us to be jumping back and forth tonally. And also it's, you know, we love looking at like, you know, these are the only three movies that these two, you know, figures in Hollywood made together. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Ivan Reitman. [01:52:26] Speaker A: Yeah. Which you would probably know most Notably is like, the director of Ghostbusters. [01:52:31] Speaker B: Ghostbusters, Right, right. [01:52:33] Speaker A: Among other things. [01:52:34] Speaker B: Yeah. Kind of two titans of rather different areas of the film industry crossing over three times in a given era. Pretty significant. And I have seen none of these, but I don't know if you've seen any of them. [01:52:52] Speaker A: I think I've seen Kindergarten Cop on TV once when I was younger. [01:52:56] Speaker B: Okay. Well, I remember Junior and Twins. Those trailers were on some VHS tapes we owned growing up. So I saw those a ton. And that, you know, I've always been curious about these movies. And so I was like, yeah, I. I kind of want to. Kind of want to see what this is all about. [01:53:15] Speaker A: I think Twins was in, like, constant rotation when it came to movie news for the last, like, decade or so. For a while. Because before Reitman passed, I believe there was a. There was a moment where they were going to make triplets. [01:53:29] Speaker B: Oh, yeah, right. [01:53:30] Speaker A: With Eddie Murphy. Because they constantly wanted Eddie Murphy to be triplets. And then that just never to be. I think now, especially since. Right. Men has passed. But, yeah, these are films that, like, the. Less so the trailers and more posters. Like, the posters, the VHS boxes, like, these are, like, films that I could walk through, like a blockbuster and I can remember, like, I can see in my head Schwarzenegger's face in, like, all three of these. [01:54:00] Speaker B: Yeah. [01:54:01] Speaker A: Like, I'm. Because it's like. Yeah. Schwarzenegger with a pregnant belly. With, like, Emma Thompson. [01:54:07] Speaker B: Yeah, I think so. [01:54:10] Speaker A: And DeVito. And it's. Yeah, it's the fact. It's like this hilarious thing where, like, Schwarzenegger at, like, you know, height of, like, prime Predator time and, like, action star Commando era. This man makes a shift that you would probably. It would probably be considered career suicide if it wasn't for the fact that this does so well, that literally all other action stars of the time basically tried to do this. [01:54:35] Speaker B: Yeah. Of the time. And since, I mean, the Rock did it, Vin Diesel did it, you know, it has become kind of a. A trend where these, yeah, big, meaty action stars end up taking the comedy turn. [01:54:49] Speaker A: Stallone, I think, has. Stop or My mom will shoot Stallone. [01:54:52] Speaker B: Did it far less successfully than Dolph even does. [01:54:57] Speaker A: Kindergarten Cop 2. [01:54:59] Speaker B: Oh, really? In 2020, we'll have to do a prequel. [01:55:05] Speaker A: But, yeah. No, but we're not. [01:55:07] Speaker B: Again, we're not alone. [01:55:08] Speaker A: We're not alone on the. This one. I'm excited because this is, I think, the very first time this person showed up on the podcast. But we are, you know, going to be joined by a fellow member of the IFJ and, you know, local reviewer, also podcaster. Correct. [01:55:26] Speaker B: He doesn't have a podcast of his own. He's. He's a frequent, frequent guest on the local podcast scene, and we're lucky to finally get him on ours. [01:55:34] Speaker A: I'm very excited to have him on the show. It's Sam Watermeyer. [01:55:37] Speaker B: Yeah, Sam Watermeyer, colleague and friend writer for Midwest Film Journal. And yeah, he's also probably the biggest fan of the 1990s that I've ever met. So we're right in his. We're right in his wheelhouse. I know he's seen these movies and thoroughly enjoys them, and I've already heard from him that he's excited to. To Reese to sink his teeth back into some comedy. Schwartz. [01:56:08] Speaker A: I'm expecting in our Google Meet that he should have his VHS box of Junior in the background or just a picture of it. [01:56:17] Speaker B: That'll just. That'll be the episode cover art is just him holding his VHS tape. [01:56:23] Speaker A: You put his face on the. You put his face over Schwarzenegger. We basically. You put us as twins. [01:56:30] Speaker B: Right, Right. [01:56:32] Speaker A: That's actually. That's gonna be the COVID Is that you pick which film, which one of us is which Schwarzenegger in the posters. But yeah, tune in on May 24 when we talk about the Reitman Schwarzenegger comedies with our friend Sam Watermeyer, which I cannot wait. But until then, I'm Logan Sowash. [01:56:52] Speaker B: And I'm Andy Carr. [01:56:53] Speaker A: Thank you so much for listening. Bye.