We did a thing! P.T., Antonio, and I were fortunate enough to attend three screenings as a part of the Newport Beach Film Festival: Steve McQueen’s Blitz, Mike Leigh’s Hard Truths, and Malcolm Washington’s adaptation of August Wilson’s The Piano Lesson. Meanwhile, Antonio and P.T. got to see an early screening of Edward Berger’s Conclave, hosted by USC’s School of Cinematic Arts in collaboration with Outside the Box [Office] and Focus Features. Great times were had by all; seeing so many films before they come out in theaters made us feel like real film critics for once.

In this episode of The Long Take Review, we reflect on our experience at these screenings and then give our spoiler-free thoughts, ranking the four films against each other. We round out the episode by checking in on awards season in general, speculating about which films are the most likely to be in the Best Picture 10 and which actors could have a shot at a nomination. Who needs to campaign hard to get voters’ attention? Who’s a shoe-in? Who’s a complete unknown (besides James Mangold’s Bob Dylan biopic)? Listen to find out!

This ENTIRE episode is spoiler free, so have at it regardless of whether or not you’ve seen the films mentioned above.

Notes:

We make a lot of references to the promotional materials used during The Newport Beach Film Festival, so checking out these trailers/ads first might help you appreciate our discussion even more. Thank you again to the Newport Beach Film Festival for showing us such a great time! (An especially big thank you to all the volunteers who helped run the screenings.)

Newport Beach Film Festival trailer

An ad for visiting Newport Beach (which everyone should do!) that played before each screening.

This star-studded highlight reel for the Newport Beach Film Festival will give you a sense of the party scene that the three of us largely missed.

Image Credit: Variety, Indiewire, and LA Times

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

Next year, 2025, will mark the 50th anniversary of Saturday Night Live (SNL), and NBC is planning a big live special in February to celebrate. In the meantime, though, Director Jason Reitman, whose own father, Ivan, had a close connection to the sketch comedy series, has made Saturday Night, out in theaters now. The film careens in “real” time towards the moment the first episode of SNL aired in 1975, and stars Gabriel LaBelle (The Fabelmans) as Lorne Michaels, along with a vast ensemble of exciting young actors playing the original SNL cast and well-loved veterans like J.K. Simmons and Willem Dafoe in supporting roles.

After premiering at the Telluride Film Festival to mixed-positive reviews, Saturday Night has been doing okay but not exceptionally well at the box office. Will that hurt its Oscar chances? Will the film meet the same fate as many seasons of SNL, with everyone too busy debating whether or not it’s good that they forget to appreciate the thing itself?

In this episode of The Long Take Review, P.T., Greg, Antonio, and I dissect our own reactions and value judgments of the “put on a show” psuedo-biopic comedy. We shoutout our favorite performances, share our own personal histories with SNL, and contemplate the film’s use of time and space. After our usual Oscars Watch, we do our own SNL cast member draft! After you listen to the episode, vote in the poll below for who you think won.

We (hastily) go into SPOILER MODE at the 23:19 minute mark. If you’re still not yet sure whether you want to check out the film, pause there! Our SNL Cast Draft, which should also be spoiler free, starts at 1:09:06.

Image Credit: IndieWire

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

At a time when so much of public discourse surrounding A.I. swirls in fear and doom, it is rare to find a movie about a robot that does not tap into that sentiment. From Minority Report (2002) to Ex Machina (2014), Hollywood often adopts the position of a canary in the coal mine, trying to warn everyone about our robot overlords. And considering corporate interest in using artificial intelligence to replace human creators, I don’t necessarily blame them for wanting to do that, especially now.

Chris Sanders’ The Wild Robot, however, defies that popular narrative, with a fresh take has been welcomed by critics. Many go so far as to suggest that the film deserves to be nominated not only for Best Animated Feature at the Oscars, but for Best Picture, joining the ranks of the few animated films that have made that jump: Beauty and the Beast (1991), Up (2009), and Toy Story 3 (2010). But how justified is that hype?

In this episode of The Long Take Review, P.T., Greg, Antonio, and I debate how well the film could do (and deserves to do). We also discuss what parts of the film had an emotional impact on us, what the film is trying to say about A.I., how this adaptation differs from its source material, what voice performances stand out, and more.

Before we dive into The Wild Robot, however, we check in to discuss our picks for Vulture’s Movie Fantasy League, in which players must draft 8 movies that were pre-priced based on buzz. Who made a big play for box office numbers? Who went for potential awards attention? Who just went with their heart? Listen to about the first 30 minutes of this episode to find out! Registration for the draft has closed, but if you already registered, you can still join us by emailing [email protected] to say that you’d like “The Long Take Review” to be your “mini-league” before October 14th. We are just one person short of being able to compete for prizes, so please help us out if you can! Plus, our highest-scoring mini-league member will be able to come on the show and discuss a film of their choice.

The Movie Fantasy League talk ends at 30:46 when we start the Short Take on The Wild Robot. We later go into SPOILER MODE at the 42:24 minute mark. If you’re still not yet sure whether you want to check out the film, pause there!

Image Credit: Vulture

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

What if The Scarlet Witch from the MCU, Nora Durst from The Leftovers, and Charlie Cale from Poker Face were trapped in a tiny New York City apartment for several days? I jest, in part; Elizabeth Olsen, Carrie Coon, and Natasha Lyonne play characters who are distinct from their more well-known roles, but they do get to flex their acting muscles in His Three Daughters, a dramatic chamber piece now streaming on Netflix.

The film’s story follows three semi-estranged women who reunite to guide their father through his final days of life. The astringent dialogue offers a thoughtful character study as the claustrophobic milieu facilitates a poignant meditation on death and dying. But could this film be too small and too insular to get any Oscar love?

In this episode of The Long Take Review, P.T., Antonio, and I laud all three of these actresses for their outstanding work and, at the end of the episode, contemplate the film’s Oscar prospects. When dissecting the film itself, we contemplate why it feels so much like a stage play, debate why that might enhance or detract from the film, consider what the film has to say about death, dying, and family, and, because we couldn’t help ourselves, we share which of the three daughters we would each be.

You can hear our official plug for this at the very end of the episode, but we’d love for listeners to join us in Vulture’s Movie Fantasy League, in which players must draft 8 movies that have been pre-priced based on buzz. After registration closes tomorrow night, Thursday October 3rd at 11:59, your team can gain points for box office success (if it hasn’t come out yet), critical reception, and awards recognition. You can play this game with us by entering “The Long Take Review” as your “mini-league.” Join us in movie nerdom and all the Oscar season insanity!

We go into SPOILER MODE around the 21:57 minute mark. If you’re not yet sure whether you want to check out the film, listen up until then.

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: LA Times

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

When legendary artists have really made it, they should be able to do anything, right? Their creativity unfettered and untethered from pleasing others or financial concerns. By this margin, Francis Ford Coppola is living the dream. He became an icon for classics such as The Godfather (1972) and Apocalypse Now (1979). And for forty years he has been working on his magnum opus called Megalopolis. He funded the entire film — $120 million — by taking a line of credit out on his own winery No one could put a damper on his creative vision.

And the result, suffice it to say, is unlike anything any of us have ever seen. But is that a good thing? Is this film going to change cinema forever because it’s so experimental? Or is this more of an emperor’s new clothes situation? On this episode of The Long Take Review, Antonio, Greg, P.T., and I share our fairly unanimous response to the film, and then go on to try to make sense of its themes, socio-political commentary, and stylistic choices. You’ll have to hear us talk about it to believe it!

We go into SPOILER MODE pretty quickly on this one, around the 14:51 minute mark.

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: Vanity Fair

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

For movie nerds and, more fervently, awards season nerds like me, fall is a wonderful time of year because it is nothing but possibility and potential. Like Schrodinger’s cat, movies are both good and bad until you actually see them for yourself. As I impatiently wait to do that, though, there are some indicators: reactions from critics and journalists attending film festivals, awards given by festivals, and whether films without a home score a deal with a big distributor.

In this episode of The Long Take Review, Greg, P.T., and I process and analyze all these indicators coming out of three festivals that have recently concluded: Venice (yes, the one in Italy), Telluride (that’s in Colorado), and Toronto (a.k.a. TIFF). We present our conclusions by listing a set of “winners” and “losers,” though we introduced the idea of “soft” and “hard” losers and it got complicated from there. Listen to find out which movies we’re more excited to see, which we can almost certainly dismiss, and who, if anyone, has emerged as a frontrunner in this early, but very real, phase of the Oscar race.

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: Deadline

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

Box office, box office, box office! Tim Burton’s long-awaited sequel to his 1988 hit has conjured a successful opening weekend at $111 million domestic. This may indicate that audiences show no sign of fatigue for nostalgia-laden sequels (which is good news for Gladiator 2, perhaps?). But how does Beetlejuice Beetlejuice fare as a 36 years later follow-up to one of Burton’s best? Does it contain clunky fan service moments like Alien: Romulus? Or is it more of a fun, don’t-think-about-it-too-hard hang like Deadpool & Wolverine? How well does the Beetlejuice ethos jive with 2024 sensibilities?

These are the questions we try to answer on this week’s episode of The Long Take Review. Greg, P.T., and I share what parts of the film entertained us most, as well as try to devise a thesis for the film. Later in the episode, we fancy ourselves armchair screenwriters, offering up some suggestions for restructuring and recentering the story. Along the way, P.T. breaks multiple pieces of bad news to Greg while Greg regales us with his movie set looky-loo-ing. Take a number and have a seat because we might be a while…

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: New York Times

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

The Alien franchise, suffice it to say, has legs. Xenomorphs and facehuggers are among the most iconic sci-fi creatures in movie history. And multiple directors, including legends Ridley Scott and James Cameron, have made nine Alien films in 45 years. And it would seem that the latest installment, Fede Álvarez’s Alien: Romulus, shows that interest in watching people fight gooey space parasites has not waned. The worldwide box office currently sits at $289.5 million, and it had the second highest opening weekend of any Alien movie to date.

In this episode of The Long Take Review, P.T., Greg, and I compare Alien: Romulus to many other Alien movies (and we’ve all seen different ones!), and in doing so contemplate the contribution the film makes to the franchise overall. P.T. gives not one but two mind-melding monologues: one about the behind-the-scenes story of the original Alien’s development and another about the academic discourse surrounding the franchise’s subversion of gendered horror stereotypes. We talk artificial intelligence, corporate capitalism, horror vs. thriller, and whether or not it’s possible to be an auteur in a franchise sandbox. The bell has rung and class is in session on this one.

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: Variety

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

Director Sean Wang has arrived. His documentary short film, “Nǎi Nai & Wài Pó,” landed an Oscar nomination and, a few months later, his first narrative feature film, Didi, won the Audience Award for the U.S. Dramatic Competition at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival.

While “Nǎi Nai & Wài Pó” has been available to watch on Disney+ for some time, Didi just released in theaters at the end of July. It offers a window into the life of Chris, a Taiwanese-American teenager, the summer before he starts high school. He must traverse friends, family, girls, parties, and online life in 2008. 

No matter how much critical praise Didi, collects, it may get drowned out amidst all of the flashier Oscar contenders on the verge of premiering in the coming weeks. Can Sean Wang strike Oscar nom gold again? Or is an indie coming of age film too small to last all the way through the season?

On this episode of The Long Take Review, P.T., Greg, Antonio, and I try to read the tea leaves and speculate as to Didi’s future. We each share what aspects of the film resonated with us personally, celebrate its funniest moments, and reflect on the halcyon days of AOL Instant Messenger. 

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: Variety

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com

When I think of the genre of prison drama, what do I think of? As a child of the 90s, Shawshank Redemption (1994) and The Green Mile (1999) come to mind first; the former in particular defined the genre forever thereafter. I think of the struggle to survive, full of violence and terror. I think of the bleakness of never getting out and the desperate scheming to escape or undermine the system. I think of crime and corruption perpetuated within the carceral system itself.

Greg Kwedar’s Sing Sing, in theaters now, defies all of these expectations. While it does not shy away from the oppressive confinement of prison life, it offers a story of the hope and joy experienced by inmates participating in the RTA or Rehabilitation Through the Arts Program, which began in 1996 at the Sing Sing Correctional Facility in New York. It’s a moving love letter to the dramatic arts, and is never exploitative or voyeuristic.

In this episode of The Long Take Review, P.T., Greg, Antonio, and I identify ways in which Sing Sing subverts prison movie stereotypes, reflect on how the film represents incarceration, and try to understand how this film achieves its authenticity and avoids saccharine storytelling. Could it be an early frontrunner in the Oscar race? Is Coleman Domingo a shoe-in for Best Actor, hot off his nomination last year? And what additional insight can Antonio’s legal background offer our interpretation of the film? Join our conversation to find out.

You can listen to The Long Take Review on Substack, Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Image Credit: A24

Movie News Update: What’s going on with Joaquin and Todd? (But not the Todd you think.) 3:50

The Short Take: Our spoiler-free review Sing Sing. 12:57

The Recommendation Algorithm: Why might folks who wouldn’t normally go for a movie about prison want to watch this? How does it align with or subvert the prison movie genre? 18:23

SPOILER MODE: How does this film represent incarceration and the criminal justice system? What is it trying to say about the prison system? Featuring Lessons in the Law with Antonio! 24:28

The Rhetorical Situation: How does this film represent theater and the arts? What does this film have in common with our teaching? 51:45

Oscars Watch: This movie seems poised to make an Oscar play. How far can it go? 1:01:11

All music licensed through Epidemic Sound.

Logo art: Illustration 73265080 © Worldofvector | Dreamstime.com