Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:03

Sinners Discussion: 00:02:04-00:28:46

Connections: 00:28:47-1:02:37

Your Next Picture Show, next pairing, and goodbyes: 1:02-38-end

Director Ryan Coogler has been generous in sharing his many points of inspiration for SINNERS, including the other film in this pairing, but his exceptional new feature is refreshingly singular in both vision and execution. It makes for an admittedly lopsided comparison with FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, but also an illuminating one: examining Coogler’s vision through the lens of the 1996 Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino teamup sheds light on the added depth SINNERS brings to its own vampire mythology, criminal-brother protagonists, and mid-film genre shift. And in Your Next Picture Show, we briefly imagine the conversation we could have had if we’d instead paired SINNERS with the Coen brothers’ O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU?  

Please share your thoughts about FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, SINNERS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Next Pairing: Jake Schreier's THUNDERBOLTS and Kinka Usher’s MYSTERY MEN 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Comparing 1996's FROM DUSK TILL DAWN to the new SINNERS can feel a bit like, as Scott puts it, comparing “Chopsticks” to Beethoven’s Fifth. But Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino’s sleazy vampire flick was clearly on Ryan Coogler’s mind when crafting his own film about a pair of brothers who spend one fateful night defending a nightclub from an invading horde of the undead. Coogler’s film also has much more on its mind beyond that pulpy premise, which we’ll get into next week, but for now we’re digging as deep as we can into the shallow pleasures and frustrating shortcomings of FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, from the awkward but arguably endearing performances from George Clooney and Tarantino as fugitive brothers, to the moments that test the limits of Rodriguez’s run-and-gun filmmaking approach — and yes, of course we have to talk about the foot stuff, too. Then in Feedback, we respond to a couple of listeners pushing back on some of our Cronenbergian categorization in the last pairing. 

Please share your thoughts about FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, SINNERS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Intro: 00:00:00-00:06:57

From Dusk Till Dawn Keynote: 00:06:57-00:11:55

From Dusk Till Dawn Discussion: 00:11:56-00:54:04

Feedback/outro: 00:54:04-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Over the decades, David Cronenberg has carved a distinctive and provocative filmography out of his interest in human decay and death, up to and including his new THE SHROUDS, a late-career entry in the writer-director’s body-horror canon. It’s a film that left some of us confounded in a way that our returning guest, critic Charles Bramesco, might argue is part of its Cronenbergian appeal; but placing it next to THE FLY in Connections clarifies how much it’s simply an evolution of the same pet themes Cronenberg has been circling since 1986 (and earlier), from overlapping obsessions with the mutability of bodies and technology, to the horror and guilt of watching a loved one deteriorate before our very eyes. And in Your Next Picture Show, we’re inspired to talk over another recent, highly personal project from an elder-statesman auteur that received a mixed reception, and which we never got to cover on the show: Francis Ford Coppola’s MEGALOPOLIS.

Please share your thoughts about THE FLY, THE SHROUDS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Next Pairing: Ryan Coogler’s SINNERS and Robert Rodriguez’s FROM DUSK TIL DAWN

Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:00

The Shrouds discussion: 00:02:04-00:26:23

The Shrouds/The Fly Connections: 00:26:24-00:59:16

Your Next Picture Show: 00:59:17-01:03:15

Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:03:16-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The way David Cronenberg’s new THE SHROUDS splices together unsettling ideas about technology and bodily transformation made us think of… well, a lot of his filmography, but the film’s visceral interest in how the human body decays feels directly connected to the director’s unlikeliest hit, his remake of THE FLY. We’re joined this week by critic and our nascent “gross and scary” correspondent Charles Bramesco to teleport back to 1986 and examine what lies beneath the rotting flesh of THE FLY, from its tender central relationship to its oozing physical effects to its Howard Shore score, that makes it a distinctly Cronenbergian grossout. Then in Feedback, a listener uses our recent discussion of THE THIN MAN to broach a bigger question about what we value most in our mystery stories. 

Please share your thoughts about THE FLY, THE SHROUDS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Intro: 00:00:00-00:03:38

The Fly Keynote: 00:03:39-00:08:18

The Fly Discussion: 00:08:19-00:44:11

Feedback/outro: 00:44:12-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

BLACK BAG, Steven Soderbergh’s latest 90-minute collaboration with writer David Koepp, is in theory a sprawling international spy thriller, but in practice it’s a more intimate study of how a marriage can thrive in an environment where trusting your spouse is considered a weakness. This week we talk about how that genre disconnect works for and against BLACK BAG, before bringing in this pairing’s companion film, 1934’s THE THIN MAN, to compare how Nick and Nora Charles’s bantering, crime-solving partnership compares to the cooler, less boozy charms of Cate Blanchett and Michael Fassbender’s married spies. Then for Your Next Picture Show, we reach back to one of this podcast’s very first episodes to cannibalize a recommendation for a film that we’ve already covered on the show, but was too clear an inspiration on BLACK BAG to ignore. (And really, is there ever a bad time to recommend WHO’S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF?) 

Please share your thoughts about THE THIN MAN, BLACK BAG, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Next pairing: David Cronenberg’s THE SHROUDS and THE FLY

Chapters:

Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:04

Black Bag discussion: 00:02:04-00:29:03

Black Bag/The Thin Man Connections: 00:29:03-00:58:35

Your Next Picture Show: 00:58:35-01:04:50

Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:104:50-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Steven Soderbergh’s new BLACK BAG is a spy thriller, sure, but it’s also the story of a marriage, and watching its sophisticated central couple banter their way through a sprawling mystery, it’s hard not to be reminded of one of cinema’s most enduring and endearing crime-solving couples, Nick and Nora Charles. So this week we’re going back to their film debut, 1934’s THE THIN MAN, to see how W.S. Van Dyke’s (barely) pre-Code crime caper balances the effervescent charm of its hard-drinking stars against the plot mechanics of a murder mystery, and whether any of the film’s many supporting players ever manage to steal the spotlight from Nick, Nora, and their disobedient dog Asta. Then in Feedback, a listener writes in with a notable omission from our recent discussion of STARSHIP TROOPERS.

Please share your thoughts about THE THIN MAN, BLACK BAG, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Chapters:

Intro/favorite movie dinner scenes: 00:00:00-00:08:44

The Thin Man Keynote: 00:08:45-00:15:43

The Thin Man Discussion: 00:15:44-00:56:44

Feedback/outro: 00:56:45-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bong Joon Ho’s new MICKEY 17 takes a lot of big swings, from star Robert Pattinson’s vocal affectation to a comedic fixation on “sauce,” all of it in service of big, bold, arguably blunt satire. It all makes for a somewhat messy but highly discussable film, both on its own and in conversation with Paul Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS, another big swing of a sci-fi satire that aims to entertain as it undermines propagandistic societies where leaders rule by catchphrase, where citizenship is conditional, and where working-class lives are expendable. We dive into all of that, plus space bugs that may not actually be bugs, then offer a Your Next Picture Show recommendation for another MICKEY 17 pairing contender, Duncan Jones’ MOON.

Please share your thoughts about STARSHIP TROOPERS, MICKEY 17, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Next pairing: Steven Soderbergh’s BLACK BAG and W.S. Van Dyke’s THE THIN MAN

Chapters:

Intro: 00:00:00-00:01:55

Mickey 17 discussion: 00:01:56-00:31:19

Mickey 17/Starship Troopers Connections: 00:31:20-1:07:03

Your Next Picture Show: 1:07:04-1:12:50

Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:12:51-1:16:11

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week’s pairing is brought to you by: space bugs! Specifically, space bugs as a metaphor for a fascistic society’s disregard for any perceived-to-be-lower life form, human or otherwise. Inspired by the clear satire of Bong Joon Ho’s new MICKEY 17, we’re revisiting Paul Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS, whose satirical intent was less clear to some audiences when it hit theaters in 1997. Today, while we’re on the same page as far as what Verhoeven was going for with his propagandistic display of military might, opinions still differ among our panel as to how well he pulled it off. We get into that disagreement, as well as the surprisingly enduring effects and the improbability of a film like this being made in Hollywood today. Then in Feedback, a listener inspired by a recent pairing shares their reaction to a first-time viewing of THE KILLING FIELDS. 

Please share your thoughts about STARSHIP TROOPERS, MICKEY 17, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Intro/space threats discussion: 00:00:00-00:06:02

Starship Troopers Keynote: 00:06:03-00:11:41

Starship Trooper Discussion: 00: 11:42-00:52:46

Feedback/outro: 00:52:47-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Carson Lund’s feature debut EEPHUS moves at the same deliberate pace as the trick pitch for which it’s named, leisurely unfolding over the course of a season-ending game between two small-town recreation leagues that’s also probably the last time many on the field will ever play. This week we’re joined again by film critic and baseball lover Tim Grierson to discuss how EEPHUS approaches that sense of finality with low-key humor and a subtle sense of nostalgia, before bringing Ron Shelton’s BULL DURHAM back on the field to compare these two films’ ideas about aging, masculinity, and America’s pastime, emphasis on the “past.” And in Your Next Picture Show we offer a recommendation for another unconventional baseball movie that offers a rarely seen perspective on the game, 2008’s SUGAR.

Please share your thoughts about BULL DURHAM, EEPHUS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Next pairing: Bong Joon Ho’s MICKEY 17 and Paul Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS

Chapters:

Intro: 00:00:00-00:01:51

Eephus discussion: 00:01:52-00:27:37

Connections: 00:27:38-1:00:12

Your Next Picture Show: 1:00:13-1:04:25

Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:04:26-end

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Quietly observing as a small-town recreation league plays out their last game of the season, and likely ever, the new EEPHUS is a feature-length subversion of “the big game,” simultaneously embracing and rejecting such baseball-movie cliches in a manner that reminded us of 1988’s BULL DURHAM. We’re joined this week by pinch-hitter Tim Grierson to discuss all the ways Ron Shelton’s classic, often cited as the best baseball movie ever, throws out the sports-movie playbook, from its multiple protagonists and rom-com structure to its acknowledgment that baseball, like life, has an expiration date. And in Feedback, a frequent contributor returns with some bonus observations from our recent pairing of PRESENCE and THE OTHERS.

Intro/favorite movie sports teams: 00:00:00-00:08:51

Bull Durham Keynote: 00:08:51-00:14:55

Bull Durham Discussion: 00:14:56-00:56:14

Feedback/outro: 00:56:14-end

Please share your thoughts about BULL DURHAM, EEPHUS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to [email protected], or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices