On this episode of Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily are joined by film critics Josh Spiegel and Scott Renshaw to discuss Pixar’s emotional adventure about Carl Fredricksen, a widowed balloon salesman who lifts his house into the sky in search of Paradise Falls only to discover an unexpected stowaway along the way.

The group breaks down the film’s famous opening montage, its unusual elderly protagonist, and why Up represents a key moment in Pixar’s late-2000s creative peak. They also explore the movie’s legacy, its Best Picture nomination, and why its blend of grief, humor, and adventure still resonates.

Follow the show and guests:

Podcast Like It’s…

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits/

Phil Iscove

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscove/

Emily St. James

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams/

Josh Spiegel & Scott Renshaw Podcast:

Mousterpiece Melodies

https://mousterpiecemelodies.podbean.com/

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Phil Iscove and Emily St. James continue their Pixar 2000s miniseries with a deep dive into WALL·E, Andrew Stanton’s 2008 animated sci-fi romance about a lonely trash-compacting robot left behind on Earth.

Joined by Justin and Laura Khoo, they break down the film’s near-silent first act, Ben Burtt’s groundbreaking sound design, the Axiom’s consumerist dystopia, and why WALL·E may be Pixar’s most political film. They also discuss its environmental themes, visual storytelling, and how it fits alongside Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille, and Cars in Pixar’s golden era.

Is WALL·E the studio’s boldest experiment? Its purest love story? Or both?

Follow the Hosts & Guests

Podcast Like It’s

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits

Phil Iscove

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscove

Emily St. James

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams

Justin Khoo

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/juskhoo

Laura Khoo

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/laurajeanettekhoo

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily wrap up their Valentine’s Day Wong Kar-wai miniseries with a deep dive into My Blueberry Nights (2007), joined by David Sims (Blank Check). They discuss Norah Jones’ debut performance, Jude Law’s rom-com era, the film’s Cannes premiere, its American road movie structure, and why this English-language detour feels so different from In the Mood for Love and 2046.

Is it a misunderstood romantic trifle or Wong Kar-wai’s strangest experiment?

Follow the show & guests:

Podcast Like It’s

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits

Phil Iscove

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscove

Emily St. James

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams

David Sims

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davidlsims

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily continue their Valentine’s miniseries on the films of Wong Kar-wai with a deep dive into his dreamy, decadent, and divisive follow-up to In the Mood for Love: 2046. Joining them is Screen Drafts co-host Clay Keller to unpack memory, desire, sci-fi metaphors, hotel rooms, and the many women orbiting Tony Leung’s endlessly romantic (and endlessly messy) Chow Mo-wan.

Early in the episode, Phil provides context for listeners who may not have seen the film, walking through its fractured narrative, a futuristic train that takes passengers to a place where memories can be reclaimed, and a writer blurring fiction and reality as he drifts through the Oriental Hotel and the ghosts of love past.

The conversation explores how 2046 expands Wong’s romantic universe into something colder, more reflective, and more haunted. Is it a sequel? A remix? A sci-fi epilogue? A man trying to freeze time so he never has to grow up? The trio discusses the film’s nonlinear structure, its lush visual language, recurring musical motifs, and the way longing becomes both theme and architecture.

They also touch on the film’s limited U.S. release, its evolving critical reputation, and how it fits into Wong Kar-wai’s broader body of work. Along the way, the episode offers a brief glimpse behind the scenes of this Valentine’s miniseries and how close to release these conversations sometimes are.

Clay Keller

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/claykeller

Phil Iscove

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscove

Emily St. James

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams

🎙 Main Feed (The 2000s / The 90s)

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/podcast-like-its/id1369075017

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3Hh2n0eZxJ9V0XHnHh1SxP

💜 Patreon (Bonus Episodes + The 1990s feed + Video):

https://www.patreon.com/podcastlikeits

📸 Instagram:

https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits

🐦 X / Twitter:

https://twitter.com/podcastlikeits

🧵 Threads:

https://www.threads.net/@podcastlikeits

🔷 Bluesky:

https://bsky.app/profile/podcastlikeits.bsky.social

🎥 YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/@podcastlikeits

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily kick off a brand-new Valentine’s miniseries on the films of Wong Kar-wai with one of the most celebrated movies of the century: In the Mood for Love. Joining them are Katie McGrath and Tom Mison, making their first appearance on the main feed after many beloved appearances on Podcast Like It’s the 90s (the Patreon-exclusive show).

The conversation explores why In the Mood for Love has become the defining cinematic text of longing, memory, and restraint. The group digs into Wong Kar-wai’s sensual, dialogue-light approach; the role of ambiguity and audience interpretation; the film’s obsession with time, repetition, and missed connection; and how Tony Leung and Maggie Cheung deliver one of the most emotionally charged screen romances ever filmed without ever fully consummating it.

They also discuss the film’s slow critical “glow-up,” its influence on filmmakers like Sofia Coppola and Barry Jenkins, the role of Criterion in canon-building, and why this movie works as pure cinema something that couldn’t exist in any other medium. Along the way: conversations about memory, performance without dialogue, and what it means for a film to trust its audience completely.

Follow Us:

Phil Iscove

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscove

Emily St. James

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams

Show:

Podcast Like It’s the 2000s

🎧 Listen & subscribe: https://linktr.ee/podcastlikeits

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits

💜 Patreon (bonus episodes & video): https://www.patreon.com/podcastlikeits

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We continue our Pixar 2000s miniseries with one of the studio’s most unexpectedly profound films: Ratatouille. Joined by Brooke Solomon and Jordan Gustafson of The Queer Quadrant, we dig into why this movie about a rat who cooks somehow became one of Pixar’s most emotionally resonant works.

We talk about Ratatouille as a love letter to food, Paris, and creative ambition; the film’s quietly radical worldview; the cultural impact of “ratatouilling” someone; and why the movie asks us to accept its reality completely or not at all. Plus: gay rat discourse, cursed 2007 box office math, and why this might be Pixar at the absolute height of its powers.

Brooke Solomon & Jordan Gustafson co-hosts of The Queer Quadrant

🎧 Podcast: https://www.thequeerquadrant.com

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thequeerquadrant

Hosts:

Phil Iscove

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscove

Emily St. James

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams

Show:

Podcast Like It’s the 2000s

🎧 Listen & subscribe: https://linktr.ee/podcastlikeits

📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits

💜 Patreon (bonus episodes & video): https://www.patreon.com/podcastlikeits

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this episode of Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily continue their Pixar 2000s miniseries by finally pulling into Radiator Springs to talk Cars with critic and scholar Myles McNutt.

Often dismissed as “the lesser Pixar,” Cars is also one of the studio’s most commercially dominant films and one of its strangest cultural phenomena. The trio digs into why this movie connected so deeply with kids, how Disney merchandising helped shape its legacy, and why Cars feels philosophically out of step with Pixar’s more emotionally precise storytelling. They also explore the film’s obsession with nostalgia, small-town Americana, Route 66 iconography, and the uneasy politics lurking under its warm glow.

Along the way, they discuss Pixar’s evolving reputation, the film’s place in the studio’s broader lineage, Cars Land as a theme-park response to Harry Potter, and why even if it’s flawed Cars might still be essential viewing to understand Pixar’s 2000s run.

Ka-chow!

Follow us:

Guest: Myles McNutt @Memles on instagram and X and Subtack

Patreon: http://patreon.com/Podcastlikeits

Twitter: http://twitter.com/podcastlikeits

Instagram: http://instagram.com/podcastlikeits

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil Iscove and Emily St. James continue their Pixar of the 2000s miniseries by diving into Brad Bird’s The Incredibles with critic and writer Libby Hill.

Released in 2004, The Incredibles sits at a fascinating crossroads for Pixar part family sitcom, part mid-century spy fantasy, and part superhero deconstruction years before the genre would dominate Hollywood. Phil, Emily, and Libby unpack why the film’s action sequences double as character studies, how its superpowers function as metaphors for family roles, and why the movie still feels sharper than most modern comic-book adaptations. They also discuss the film’s complicated nostalgia, its cultural blind spots, and why The Incredibles managed to “get away with” things that live-action superhero movies still struggle to pull off.

Along the way, the conversation touches on Brad Bird’s direction, Pixar’s voice-acting process, the film’s critical and commercial legacy, and where The Incredibles sits in the larger Pixar pantheon especially when compared to its sequel.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily continue their deep dive into Pixar’s 2000s run with Finding Nemo, joined by critic and writer Caroline Framke.

Released in 2003, Finding Nemo marked a major turning point for Pixar pairing cutting-edge animation with a surprisingly emotional story about parenthood, fear, and letting go. The group breaks down how revolutionary the film felt at the time, why it still holds up as one of Pixar’s most accessible crowd-pleasers, and how its influence reshaped both animation and merchandising culture in the years that followed.

They also dig into Albert Brooks’ anxious Marlin, Ellen DeGeneres’ instantly iconic Dory, the film’s surprisingly existential undertones, and the question of whether Finding Nemo has been culturally overshadowed by later Pixar classics or simply made to look “conventional” by its own success.

Along the way, the conversation touches on disability representation, Pixar’s evolving thematic ambitions, and why the ocean remains one of cinema’s most quietly terrifying settings.

You can find Caroline Framke at: www.carolineframke.com

Support the show:

Get more from Podcast Like It's... on Patreon

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Phil and Emily head back to early-2000s Pixar with Monsters, Inc., a movie that feels deceptively simple until you realize how much emotional and thematic weight it’s quietly carrying. Joining them is Griffin Newman for a deep dive into why this film has endured as one of Pixar’s most humane, rewatchable achievements.

The conversation unpacks the movie’s elegant world-building, its labor-comedy roots, and how it turns corporate systems, energy consumption, and fear itself into something legible for kids without flattening the ideas for adults. They talk Sulley as an unusually gentle Pixar protagonist, Mike Wazowski as both comic engine and emotional fulcrum, and Boo as a character whose impact far outweighs her screen time.

They also explore where Monsters, Inc. sits in Pixar’s creative timeline, how its humor is engineered, why its ending lands as hard as it does, and how the film reflects early-2000s anxieties about work, productivity, and empathy. Along the way, the group discusses the studio’s voice-casting philosophy, the film’s visual softness compared to later Pixar titles, and why its central message still plays cleanly more than two decades later.

Whether this was your childhood Pixar favorite or one you’ve come to appreciate more as an adult, this episode reframes Monsters, Inc. as a quietly radical movie about fear, care, and choosing connection over efficiency.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.