Welcome to Pop Culture Case Study, where we analyze pop culture from a psychological angle. I'm your host, Dave, and I'm here with my co-host, Will. Will, this week we have a David Robert Mitchell film coming out, The End of Oak Street. So to celebrate that, we are taking a look at maybe Dave's greatest shame, the fact that he saw Under the Silver Lake and was like, I don't know, man. This is not It Follows. So we— I'm going to rewatch that. We are talking about Under the Silver Lake and nihilism. So, Will, tell me about The End of Oak Street. It continues to be the year of Queen Anne Hathaway. So we have her and Ewan McGregor in this film. Looks very strange. It seems to be a movie where a family's house is somehow transported in time. Dinosaurs show up at some point. How are you feeling about this totally normal appearing movie?

I kind of can't wait for this. And there's plenty of reasons why, one of which dinosaurs. Just get that out of the way. I love, love a good dino. Not, not enough dinosaurs in non-Jurassic Park movies.

If I were to argue, I even love a bad dino, even bad dinosaur movies.

Fine. I think that, you know, kind of to step on some of my feelings about the movie we're going to talk about today, it's, it's wonderful that he has been able to mount this, whatever this is, in the aftermath of his last film, Under the Silver Lake, because there are a lot of criticisms and a lot of comparisons to Richard Kelly's movie Southland Tales when Under the Silver Lake came out.

It's not that bad.

Well, the reason being that the— this guy was like, okay, I've had some success with, you know, a hit movie and let me get my anxieties or whatever there is in me about this business and about storytelling out into the world in the form of a movie. And it didn't land for everybody. So then now it's been 8 years since David Robert Mitchell made a movie, won an announcement of They Follow later. And he's making a movie in which a family's house, like you said, gets transported to the prehistoric age or the edge of the world where there's dinosaurs. I don't really know what it is, and I don't think it's going to be nearly as straightforward as what Warner Brothers is advertising. They're advertising, see it in IMAX. There's dinosaurs and Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor are trying to protect their family and shoot guns at these dinosaurs because that always works. And there's a slowed-down Billy Joel song in the most recent trailer, and it's getting all the mainstream treatment in the marketing. But something tells me, just from what I know about David Robert Mitchell through the movies he's made, um, it's not gonna be that simple. If it is, I'm down for that too, but I just— I highly doubt it.

Yeah, unless this is a paycheck gig.

Exactly. But I doubt it. I doubt it. That's also not what this sector of Warner Brothers has really been doing for the last couple of years if you really look at it. I mean, Coogler making Sinners is in theory a straightforward action horror thriller type deal with music thrown in there, but it's also very audacious. Obviously, One Battle After Another is extremely audacious from PTA. They even threw a fat check at Maggie Gyllenhaal to make The Bride, which didn't work, but I'm glad they tried it. They're doing a lot of—

Charity got her next movie greenlit.

Exactly.

They did.

They're doing a lot of, hey, you did something really, really fucking cool, or you've done really, really cool things in your past projects. So here's a boatload of money to try something.

Right.

You know, they— I hope they continue to do that. And I'm very eager to see what he does with this because, I mean, you mentioned it, Ewan McGregor, Anne Hathaway. That's kind of all I need to know, plus dinosaurs. But David Robert Mitchell is like stamp of approval for Will. I'm in no matter what it is.

Mm-hmm. Yeah, I think, I think I'm in a similar place. Every time I see this trailer, I think, I think about how important the director is. Because imagine this, imagine you have the same or a very similar trailer, and the very end of it there's a lens flare and it says directed by J.J. Abrams. If that's the case, I'm not excited for this at all, right? I'm like, yeah, because I know his style and I know it's going to be kind of trickily sweet and like kind of very simple. And David Robert Mitchell is not that guy. He's not a simple filmmaker. Say what you will about his movies, whether you love them, hate them, or are somewhere in between.

Right.

Even when I originally saw this, I would not call it simple. And I would still say like, well, I'm glad you got to make the movie that you wanted to make. That's pretty cool. Because I like artistic freedom. So I am, even though like, I, let's be real, Any movie with any director starring Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor, 2 of my longest-term crushes in Hollywood, I'm gonna see that movie. It could be directed by you and I'd be like, okay.

Oh, thanks.

Great, let's go, let's go. He's never directed a movie before, but sure, that's fine. And I would be totally in. But the fact that it's David Robert Mitchell definitely makes me a lot more excited about this movie. And I kind of love also that this movie kind of came outta nowhere. Yeah, it did. Like, I didn't hear anything about it and then all of a sudden there was a trailer for this Anne Hathaway movie. And I was like, she's in another movie? Like, Jesus Christ, are you— like 4 or 5 movies this year? Okay. And then saw the trailer and I was like, all right, I'm totally in. Let's go. I am shockingly excited for this movie. Like, I bet if you just gave me the elevator pitch without the stars and the director, I'd be like, I don't know, man. I mean, I'll see it, but like, sure. But given everyone and everything that is involved in this one, This could be fun. This could be one of the year's biggest surprises, like the movie you didn't see coming. So it's like the anti-The Odyssey. The Odyssey we all saw coming, and it's fantastic, but it's not a surprise, right?

Yes.

I think this one would be a little bit of a surprise. All right, so this week we're talking about nihilism. It's essentially kind of the idea that none of this shit matters, man. Forget your symbols, forget your, the, your man's search for meaning. None of it. means anything. So Will, when you're in a really good mood and you wanna ruin it and watch a movie that tells you nothing really matters, your life doesn't matter, your place in the universe doesn't matter, the universe is uncaring, it doesn't care if you live or die, what movie are you popping on to get that feeling?

Oh, I love that feeling. The movie I'm popping on is Lee Chang-dong's Burning from 2018.

Ah, another— I think we've talked about this 'cause I have not seen that movie.

I think we have and that—

Which is crazy.

Kills me every time.

I know.

It's so fucking good. This is, I believe, Li Shangdong's last movie. He's got another one coming out this year, but I want to say this is his last movie. You're typing, so you can correct me if I'm wrong.

I'll let you know.

This is about a guy who meets a girl and she asks him to watch her cat while she leaves town.

Just to interrupt, just interrupt. This was his last movie. He has another movie in post-production called Possible Love.

I believe that's coming out at— or premiering at TIFF. I want to say that was recently announced. Um, in any case, I think he's a terrific filmmaker, and this movie is extremely dark and twisty and interesting. It basically, like I said, it's a guy meets girl, she says watch my cat, then he meets this guy that she knows and may or may not have a romantic entanglement with, regardless of the fact that he wants to have a romantic entanglement with her. And that guy, played by Steven Yeun, who has continued to rise in terms of his notoriety over the years. Soul.

Yeah.

I think he's terrific. He plays a guy named Ben who has a hobby, and his hobby is burning down greenhouses and maybe some darker things. And he's an incredibly nihilistic character, and the movie tends to— starts to kind of spiral in the direction of of his frame of mind as our main character, Jong-soo, uh, becomes kind of more obsessed with revealing the truth about this, this very enigmatic wealthy guy, um, that Jaime, the girl that he is interested in, um, is— seems to be involved with somehow. Very, very good movie. Um, one of my favorites of 2018. And yeah, you got to watch this one. It's so, so good. Very, very dark and totally sold me on anything Chang Dong does in the future. So Possible Love, whatever that ends up being, I don't even care. I'm in.

Okay. The only bad thing is it's going to be on Netflix. I know. So you will be one of the 9 people in the country who will get to see it in the theater. None of the rest of us will. Although I did get to see Frankenstein in the theater, so who knows? Maybe it'll have a rules.

Rules?

When I was thinking about nihilism, like, I'm like, okay, I'm gonna research, I'm gonna start looking up things. But I always knew in the end what my answer was going to be. It's No Country for Old Men.

Yeah.

This is a nihilist masterpiece. You know, for the 9 people in the world who don't know what this movie is about, you have a man who finds a large sum of money after there is essentially kind of a shootout with a bunch of criminals, and then a hitman is sent to go find this money. Anton Chigurh, one of the greatest villains in cinema history. And it's an interesting movie in many ways. Javier Bardem plays that character and Tommy Lee Jones is a local sheriff. And one of the things I love about it is it sets up a story that you think you know, right? There's this unstoppable, force of a villain that shows up. There's a man in danger, and there's a lawman who gets involved who is a little bit past his prime, but maybe he's gonna get it together to solve this and to be brave. And then by the end of the movie, it rips all of that from you.

Yeah.

And it's like, no, actually, we're all cowards. The hitman is going to kill you. You're going to die, and no one's really going to care. It is an absolutely brutal movie to watch. I remember the first time I watched it, and especially hearing— there's a particular monologue from Tommy Lee Jones near the end of the film, and it is— moving is almost the wrong word for it, 'cause moving makes you think like good emotions.

Yeah.

It is completely deflating and demoralizing. And that movie is a great film, 5 stars, whatever grading system you wanna talk about, but it is not a film that I can just pop on at any time. Like, that movie will kind of throw me for a loop for a day or two where it's just like, fuck, man.

Right.

Like, and there's not that many movies that will do that. There are other movies that you could think of, like There Will Be Blood. I enjoy the performances so much in that movie that it becomes more fun than something like No Country. No Country is never fun except for maybe the one woman who survives and Todd Chigurh. That's like the one moment of levity in the film. Everything else is generally— it's genuinely terrifying. And, and I mean this word in the way that it actually is defined— dreadful.

Mm-hmm.

Like, it just makes you full of dread. And it's like, you know, the bad things are gonna happen and you can't help but keep watching. It's, you know, what your favorite Coen Brothers movie is may change on the daily, and it may change depending if you rather Go for drama or go for comedy. But if this isn't in the like top three or four, we don't watch movies the same way because this is just like honest to God a work of nihilism. Yeah, just a fabulous movie. Highly recommend, but not if you're in a sad mood already. Maybe don't watch this movie.

What does it? What does it mean if my favorite Coen Brothers movie is Honey Don't or Drive Away Dolls?

Like it means this this podcast is over.

Thank you, everybody, for listening. Certainly not. And also those aren't Coen Brothers. Brothers movies. Those are Coen and Coates.

A Coen brother.

Yeah, one of them made it with his wife. Um, that's funny that you say that because my most recent experience with No Country for Old Men, a movie I can't even tell you how many times I've seen, is I heard somebody talking about it on a podcast. I can't even remember what it was, and I just said, ah, fuck it, and I rewatched it. Which is interesting because I, I certainly respond to it in a similar way that you do, where I'm like, ooh, you know, dreadful.

Yeah.

But it's just that good that I almost can get past that emotional— I mean, at least in subsequent times watching it. Like, the first time I watched it, I was like, Jesus Christ. But then I watch it again and again and again because it is so masterful. It is personally my second favorite, but that's the Coen Brothers movie. But that's just because I have this undying love for Inside Llewyn Davis that will never waver. I mean, again, it's like you could put a bunch of their movies in a hat, or at least like a like a handful of their movies.

Like 90%.

I would pick one out and be like, yeah, I'll take this one today. I'll watch that.

Yeah.

But I mean, I just, I love No Country for Old Men. It's so— Yeah, it's really great. And then I woke up is like the greatest closing line in 2000s cinema, or at least it's up there.

Yep, for sure. All right, so what else is on your list of your nihilist movies to put you in a good mood?

Yeah, these are all real Charmers. Funny Games, Michael Haneke's original.

I knew that was coming. A movie I still haven't seen, but I know that it's— that is, it's—

Terrific. And no, I'm not talking about the 2007 remake co-starring Brady Corbett. Not talking about that one and Naomi Watts. But I mean, this movie kind of implicates the audience just by being like, hey, this game is really pointless and evil and sadistic that these perpetrators are playing. And you're watching, waiting. For something to happen, I guess that's why it's called Funny Games. It's not funny, haha, but it's funny how this works. Yeah. Pier Pasolini's Salo or the 21, 120 Days of Sodom or Sodom. I can't even say the title of that movie is a tongue twister, but that is just about you know sadistic torture basically for yeah yeah just two hours very briefly because that's on my list as well.

It one of the most upsetting movies I've ever watched and. It's one of the only movies that if you get it half a star or 5 stars, I get it. I get it in either direction because it is deeply upsetting and offensive and terrifying. It's very well made. It's very affecting, but I don't know if I will ever watch it again. That's the thing.

It's a hard one. It's one of those that consistently is mentioned among the, like, greatest movies ever made. And yet there are probably— I could probably count on my hand the amount of people who make or contribute to those lists would go back to, yeah, Solo.

I just, I just remembered that when I was watching it by myself, I went downstairs and warned my wife. I was like, Tessa, in case you walk in on what I'm watching, I just want you to know our marriage is not in danger.

I'm not doing something horrible. This is just a movie.

Yeah, it's a movie. Um, so maybe don't come in here for the next couple hours.

Just just just throwing out there that the word Sodom, i.e., sodomy, is in the title.

So just so you know, and that's the the least of that movie since.

But that movie is deeply deeply fucked up. You know fascism who among us? Mike Lee's naked starring David Lewis. One of the greatest single truly like maybe the he's great. He's he's tremendous. It launched him to stardom, and he plays a guy who doesn't give a fuck about anything and just hurls. himself around London and basically trying to piss people off actively, um, and just do horrible things because he doesn't care. And it's, it's terrific. Um, yes, a little on the lighter side, Harmony Korine's The Beach Bum. Um, yeah, I really hate that. Oh, that's interesting. I really like this movie. Um, and there's basically, I mean, Insofar as Harmony Korine's films have plots, this one is about a poet played by Matthew McConaughey.

A very—

might have more plot, a little bit more than most of their movies. A very, very stoned poet for pretty much the entire film. But he just basically— his art is inspired by how he views the world, which is in a very nihilistic way. So I think it's more fun than than it is dark. And I really responded to this Harmony Korine film, as I do not often respond to all of the Harmony Korine films. Also on my list—

what?

What are you laughing at?

I'm sorry. I just, I just looked at my Letterboxd review of The Beach Bum. Quote, this movie is a pile of shit, just like all of its characters.

Well, so not wrong. At least about the characters.

One star.

Terrific cast though. Matthew McConaughey, Zac Efron, Isla Fisher, Snoop Dogg, Martin Lawrence, as as only you would find in a Harmony Critic film. A couple more. I have Andrei Tarkovsky's Stalker, which I've talked about before on on the pod.

Yep. Also had my heart. One of the greatest single films ever made.

Genuinely, and one of the best. filmmakers. Um, yep. Park Chan-wook's Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, which— anything from the Vengeance trilogy, you could probably—

Yeah, pick one.

Choose. Um, and then Kiyoshi Kurosawa's Cure, uh, which is—

I've heard, I've heard a lot about that movie. Yeah, I need to watch that.

I don't want to even say anything. It's just about murders. It's really good. Very, very dark, gruesome horror movie that if you watch Kurosawa's more recent fare is like You think that stuff's dark? It's not.

Right, right. All right, so on my list, I actually also have a Harmony Korine movie, Spring Breakers, another which I think is Korine's masterpiece. I think it's really—

You are correct.

Really incredible. Difficult, I think difficult for some people to get in line with, but if you get on its vibe, then you're gonna really enjoy yourself. Also The Road, which is kind of, you know, it's another Cormac McCarthy, just like No Country for Old Men. It's essentially a man and his child during— after the apocalypse and trying to function. Definitely nihilist in its own way. Nightcrawler, starring Jake Gyllenhaal as one of the single most despicable characters I have seen in films in quite some time. It's a really hard watch, but it's a movie I've seen more than once.

Same. And if you're talking about nihilism, it's like top, top of the list, which is why I didn't include it because I knew it would come up for sure.

And Dancer in the Dark, we've talked about on this very podcast. Melancholia, we've talked about in glancing because we have both watched that pretty recently. Taxi Driver, we've talked about a couple of times as recommendations. And the last one I'll give you is American Psycho, which has, you know, one of our most nihilist characters in film, in literature. And it's also somehow almost a comedy. It's— that movie is kind of, kind of a miracle.

It really is.

I really admire that movie. I don't know how much I quote unquote like it. It's not like a thing where I'm like, this is— it is a good time, but it's not something I think of and I'm just gonna like throw on for a good time. Like, there's, there's a lot going on.

I mean, honestly, it's kind of funny. I feel like the last couple that you've mentioned are kind of in line with that exact thought of like, yeah, not, not, you know, the best time, but pretty funny.

I mean, yeah, it is.

It's a weird— it's a weird topic. And it leads right into the movie we're going to talk about today in terms of, man, this is really fucked up, but I can't help but laugh. And I'm not only laughing to make myself feel better, but I'm actually laughing because this is pretty funny. It's bizarre that way.

All right. Well, we'll talk about it. All right. So we're going to take a break. I'm going to talk about nihilism and then we'll bring Will back to lighten the mood and talk about Under the Silver Lake. All right. So this week for Under the Silver Lake, we are talking about nihilism. Um, and I can't possibly go over everything that could be contained in nihilism, but I will do my best. So it's a family of philosophical views that rejects the existence of purpose value, truth, or knowledge. Nothing really matters. So there's lots of different types of nihilism, and we'll go over a few of those types. But first, like I said, it's about rejecting and denying ideas about existence. Different types deny different things. For example, existential nihilism denies that life has a higher meaning. Moral nihilism rejects, rejects the existence of moral phenomena. All right, so we'll start with existential. So this says that life has no objective meaning or purpose, and it's not limited to the idea that some people fail to find meaning in their lives, but it makes this broad, huge claim that our existence in general lacks a higher purpose. It suggests that living a genuinely meaningful life is impossible. There's no reason higher reason anyway, to continue living. And all efforts, achievements, happiness, and suffering are at the end without a point. Existential nihilism has many practical implications because people usually act with a purpose in mind and sometimes act with the goal of making their lives mean something. So as a result, the belief that there is no higher meaning brings about amotivation, like a lack of motivation, higher anxiety, and indifference. In extreme cases, this results in high levels of depression and can trigger what we call an existential crisis. Do I even matter? Why am I even here? Some philosophers, especially Martin Heidegger, highlights the connection to boredom, arguing that lack of engagement and goals experienced in this mood can make life appear pointless, even if it's not. There's lots of reactions to existential nihilism. First inspired by Indian philosophy, author Schopenhauer suggested a really pessimistic response, advocating detachment from the world, your desires and no longer affirm life. Nietzsche proposed that accepting the lack of an otherworldly source of meaning actually liberates us from these religious dogmas and affirms life without any illusions of meaning. So he wanted to use nihilism as a disruptive force to reinterpret and reevaluate established values, so that way you could replace this negativity with an affirmative attitude towards life. Jean-Paul Sartre suggested people can create their own values through the free choices that they make, despite no cosmic or religious sense of meaning. So, considering all these responses to nihilism, Albert Camus rejected suicide as an evasion of the human condition and argued instead to be defiant, and that rebels against meaningless— meaninglessness and affirms your freedom. So there's lots of discussions in academia for and against existential nihilism. Arguments from a cosmological perspective assert that human existence is pretty minor and insignificant in comparison to the universe as a whole, which— and the universe tends to be indifferent to our concerns and our aspirations. We might think we are important, but the universe does not. A whole different argument says that there is no God and there can be no objective foundation for values without a God, which I wildly disagree with. But from this perspective, religion might be interpreted as a response to the fear of death. It is an attempt to find meaning in a meaningless universe. Another viewpoint, yet another one, highlights the pervasiveness of suffering and violence while emphasizing the fleeting nature of happiness. So how can there really be any meaning when all this terrible stuff happens and your happiness goes away really quickly? And some folks even believe that mortality, the inevitability of death, actually should make us think about nihilism, because all human accomplishments and achievements are, in a long enough timeline, transient and kind of futile. And now we move to moral nihilism. This focuses on moral phenomena rather than a higher meaning. In its most general form, it is a view that states there are no moral facts. It's also called amoralism or error theory. It denies the existence of morality and argues that theories and practices categorized under that label of morality are misguided assumptions without any real link to reality. So one of the most famous moral nihilists is Nietzsche, and those folks tend to assert that without moral obligations, anything is permitted and suggest that people are allowed to act in whatever way they wish. But others reject this conclusion and argue that the the denial of morality affects not only our obligations, or what we're required to do, but permissions, what people are allowed to do. Something called axiological nihilism, which is related, disputes the objective existence of values in general. This rejection is not limited just to moral values and also concerns other things like aesthetic and religious values. So one argument for moral nihilism is that moral properties don't exist because of their odd nature. They prescribed what to do rather than describing actual facts like shape or size. Science-based versions of this view hold that inquiry does not reveal objective moral facts, or that humans lack a source of moral knowledge. There's a related argument for nihilism that focuses on the conventional aspects of moral evaluations and the difficulties in resolving moral disagreements. Sometimes we have different levels of morality or different ideas of it. And many of these folks believe that morality is pure evolution. It is a product of natural selection without a deeper metaphysical foundation. It is the way we continue to move and continue to survive, but it's not really a real tangible thing. Now, moral realists on the other side have raised objections to this. They argue that moral facts belong to the natural world and can be empirically studied and observed. And common sense philosophers assert that moral beliefs are deeply ingrained in practical experience and our reasoning, making the denial of moral facts pretty implausible. A similar objection asserts that moral nihilism is completely incoherent and rests on a misunderstanding of moral language and what that is. And some philosophers use the term moral nihilism in a more restricted sense. It doesn't imply a rejection of all forms of morality. In one alternative sense, moral nihilism is the same as moral subjectivism, arguing that moral evaluations are purely subjective and lack rationality. So moral judgments are seen as expressions of arbitrary personal preferences, even when they're societal— societally bound, and makes moral disagreements kind of unresolvable. So let's kind of close this off talking about the history of nihilism a little bit. So Nihilism is primarily associated with modernity, but many of its origins trace way back into ancient philosophy, especially ancient Indian philosophy. So, but it's controversial in academic circles to what extent they constitute forms of nihilism in a strict sense. So many interpreters limit nihilism to Western traditions. But in the 6th century BCE, the school of Ajnana developed a radical skepticism and questioned the possibility and usefulness of knowledge generally. Buddhist thought, starting in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, focuses on suffering. It identifies it as a fundamental aspect of existence. It teaches renunciation of worldly desires in order to achieve freedom from suffering in the state of nirvana. According to a common interpretation, from the 2nd century CE, they tend to defend metaphysical nihilism, rejecting the existence of some ultimate reality or foundation underlying experience phenomena that we all go through. And then in the early modern period, the Scientific Revolution took place, and it undermined established religious beliefs and values that were prevalent in the Western world during medieval times. This prepared for the emergence of nihilism. Descartes, who lived in the late 1500s and early 1600s, considered an extreme form of nihilism in his quest for absolute certainty. He suggested that humans can't trust even our most fundamental beliefs unless you can rule out that a malevolent being is not constantly deceiving them. Immanuel Kant in the 1700s drew a sharp distinction between appearance the things underlying those appearances. By limiting knowledge to the sphere of appearance, he prepared a type of existential nihilism, making the deeper meaning of things in themselves inaccessible. In Russia, nihilism gained popularity in the 1800s due to a portrayal in a novel called Fathers and Sons. And starting in the second half of the 19th century, the Russian nihilist movement was a form of political nihilism, It was a radical rejection of traditional social, political, and aesthetic norms. And during this time in Western Europe, the nihilistic egoism of Max Steiner reduced other people simply to their usefulness without respect for their personhood. He formulated a cosmic nihilism that saw the universe as unintelligible chaos. And then also in the 1800s, Kierkegaard explored different lifestyles or spheres of existence. through which people seek meaning in their lives. He warned against a lifestyle of pursuing pleasure without ulterior motives or goals, arguing that it would eventually lead to a nihilistic outlook marked by meaninglessness. And then Schopenhauer in the 1800s developed a pessimistic philosophy, characterizing the world as a place of suffering brought into being by a blind, irrational will. And then much later, in the late 1800s and 1900s, Bertrand Russell, proposed a view aligned with cosmic nihilism and characterized humanity as an accidental and insignificant byproduct of cosmic forces that are alien and indifferent to human concerns. Against the backdrop of World War I, Dadaists expressed aspects of nihilism through art, seeking to undermine established norms and values while embracing the nonsensical and the absurd. The question of this nihilism and its denial of the meaning of life plays a really central role for existential philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre. And finally, in the second half of the 20th century, certain aspects of nihilism emerged in postmodern philosophy, often in response to Nietzsche and Heidegger. Jacques Derrida, in the 1900s, his philosophy of deconstruction challenged the existence of any absolute truth or even stability in meaning. He wanted to expose hidden biases on which all of our viewpoints rest. And this all feels very negative, right? It's this idea of dread, right? That's in the foundations of nihilism. And I think that is something that this film is taking a look at, is not only the idea of nihilism, things not meaning anything, feeling lost, but also the illusion of meaning. There are many circumstances in this film that are like, this is a code, this absolutely means this, and I figured it out. And it's like, Did you or didn't you? And the movie has a lot of things that kind of fight against one another, like, do these things actually have meaning or do they not? And in some ways, this is kind of the philosophical mindset, right? It's very easy as human, human beings to either say nothing matters or everything matters, and neither of those is probably true. All right, so we're gonna take a quick break and then we'll bring Will back to talk about Under the Silver Lake. All right. So we're back. We're back to finally talk about Under the Silver Lake.

Come on in.

I saw you spying on me earlier.

No, it wasn't. Okay. See you tomorrow.

Good.

What the? Who moves out in the middle of the night? Nothing strange about it. She wanted to leave. How does that not make sense? I don't understand why she didn't tell me.

Maybe she didn't like you. Maybe she knows you're poor and haven't paid your rent.

I found some kind of code or like secret message in her apartment. It means stay quiet. Our world is filled with codes, subliminal messages, from Silver Lake to the Hollywood Hills. Could any of this be connected to Sarah?

I know this girl. There's a message in the music.

Really think you're gonna find a hidden message in a pop song? What?

1, 2, 3.

Can't quite see it, but I'm close. Honey, how are you?

Mom, I'm fine. Mostly fine. Um— Why do we assume that all of this information is what we're told it is? Maybe there are people out there who are more important than us, more powerful, communicating things in the world that are meant for only them and not for us.

Yeah.

Oh, you think that's weird? A little—

Add it up, add it up, add it up, add it up.

Welcome to purgatory.

Good to be here. You're living in a carnival, hoping to win a prize.

What are you gonna win?

Under the Silver Lake.

This is a movie that I have said since— let's see, when did I first watch it? Uh, at the end of 2019. I have said I'll go back to this eventually because I feel like, based on a lot of people who I respect, their opinions and their reactions to it and what I tend to like, I feel like, I feel like I'm missing something, or I feel like I wasn't in the right state of mind to watch this movie. And because I want to be honest, I'm going to read you my original review, which is short, of Under the Silver Lake. 2 stars. A mess, but surprisingly boring. I love me some Garfield, and I'm a fan of the director, but I couldn't care less. So that was my initial reaction to— I did not see it in a theater. I saw it on home video. So maybe that had something to do with it. But I will say, Will, this is one of the biggest turnarounds I have ever had on this podcast.

Yeah.

It went, I mean, it went from 2 stars to 4 stars. I really enjoyed this watch a lot. I don't know if it was simply a mood thing or if I was ready for the type of movie it was going to be, because like, you know, of course his most famous movie is It Follows. And I, that's a movie I adore. Like, I, I, I think it is a, one of the best horror movies of the past 25 years. I think it's incredible.

Right.

I think it has depth. I just, you know, it sets a perfect mood, all that good stuff. So my expectations were quite high given that this was the next movie that he did, I believe, or at least the next movie of his that I saw. So I may have had, and expectations are a bitch, man. Like, so if you go in sometimes with way too high expectations or even expectations of what the movie is going to be like, then it can kind of ruin it for you. And I think that may be what happened. But I watched it this time, and, you know, I watched it with Tessa, of course, and I think she liked it a little less than I did. I think she still enjoyed it. You know, you get to look at Andrew Garfield running around. I mean, who— we all win. A lot of, like, a lot of butt shots in this movie, uh, of Andrew Garfield. So you got that going for you no matter what. Um, but I really got on this movie's wavelength this time. And I was like cackling through this movie. And I think the first time I watched it, I don't think I laughed once. So it was like such a different experience. And I found myself really enjoying myself. I'm not going to sit here and say I understand everything that this movie is putting down. I don't. And I think that's the point.

Mm-hmm.

I don't think it's a movie that wants you to be like, here is this thorough line through the movie. It means this, and this is the journey. Some of it is meant to be confusing, and it's meant to have a lot of dead ends. It's like the Winchester Mystery House, you know, like you're taking stairways into ceilings and like, oh, I thought that was something, but I guess it's not. Or maybe it is, but I just don't— I can't grasp it, whatever. And I think you are going on a similar journey as the character is. And I think that's kind of the point. It is not a movie that's going to please everyone. If you are a person who likes an A to B storyline, This movie is not for you at all. You are going to have a really, really bad time at the theater, at home, wherever you watch it. It's not going to be fun for you. But if you like Andrew Garfield playing a very different character than he usually does, someone who's very unsure of himself and kind of a mess, kind of a loser, it's a really interesting part for him to take. And I do love that Garfield seems to take a wide variety.

Yeah.

of types of roles. Like the fact that he did this and Silence, I know, so relatively close to each other is pretty crazy. So all that to say, this time through, that's a pretty good movie, man. I had a really good time and it's something that I might actually throw on again relatively soon, which surprised me. So I love— so, but what about you? This is now your chance to say I was right from the beginning. I knew in 2018.

So go. I I can't— I wish I could say like I was right. I, I don't think that I can say I was right because I—

Not really a thing.

No, never. And I also think that, you know, I was, I was in, in 2018, but like lukewarm. And I rewatch it now and I'm like, I'm pretty much exactly where I was, but I respond to it a little better. Like in 2018, I understood Well, that's an odd word, as you said, to use with this movie. I understood what it was going for, at least in part, and I appreciated the vibe. That's kind of where I was at in 2019, I should say, because it was delayed, delayed, delayed over and over again. And then I also— yeah, I appreciated Garfield's performance. I appreciated this, you know, stoner LA vibe, very different from what I was used to. That was kind of— I tried to view it through a simple lens when you can't really do that with this movie. And I think I watch it now and I'm like, this movie totally knows what it's doing. Robert— David Robert Mitchell totally knows what he's doing. Garfield totally knows what he's doing. I'm responding to the things it wants me to respond to. I kind of met it more on its terms than trying to have it meet me on mine.

Right.

Which I think is exactly how you have to watch this movie because, as you said, it's not going to please everybody. It's impossible for it to please everybody. It is a— it is kind of—

And it also doesn't want to.

Yeah, it is a displeasing movie about a person who is displeasing to be around, as you can gather from every single person he encounters going, God, what's that fucking horrible smell that entered the room the moment you walked in? I think that it's a funny movie. It's obviously a deeply paranoid movie, and it's certainly a nihilistic movie about a guy who believes that everything and everyone is hiding something from him and he has to get to the bottom of it because it only makes sense if he understands it. And he's also a creep and his friends are creeps.

Yeah.

And the movie doesn't shy away from any of that. Um, but you know, he's basically homeless, he reeks, he ogles at every woman that walks past him or They don't even know they're— he's ogling at them, but he is. Um, within the first 20 minutes of this movie, he's beating the shit out of a pair of 12-year-olds because they keyed his car and drew a dick on it. Like, this is—

That is a moment that should not be funny.

No, but it is.

Every time, every time I see Andrew Garfield just throw a slick right jab to a 12-year-old's face.

Shoving an egg in his mouth, like an egg in the shell. It's crazy. The movie's nuts. And I think that it's so cool that David Robert Mitchell goes from making a true blue horror movie that is, you know, while its conceit was really refreshing at the time, it's relatively recognizable to us now. And it's also not that You know, not that confusing, not that difficult to understand, not that refreshing. The more people try to remake it, I think so. I'm being unfair to It Follows, but for him to follow that up with this is like, you do you, man, and you blank check.

And you brought up, you brought up the creep factor, which I find really interesting because this movie essentially opens with him spying on his neighbors, especially the women, essentially trying to find them naked and get a look at them. And then you meet his friend who has, you know, who has a drone with a camera on it so he can watch women undress. And he finds one woman who is particularly attractive, and he thinks she's like a lingerie model because she has a perfect body. And the movie kind of indicts him but also forces you to be in line with them, like forces you to watch this. It's not a thing where they go like, isn't this person a garbage human being? And they kind of focus the camera on them and watch them watching. No, you are the watcher. This is a movie that, you know, I hesitate to say this, but I really think it's true. This is a movie that despises its audience and despises Los Angeles and despises everything that the world of movies represents. Like, it is a very— it's, it's a comedy, but it's a shockingly angry film.

Yeah.

It is really the— I really think, you know, and we mentioned this, I think, off mic a couple weeks ago, this is the devil on the shoulder to the angel that is Inherent Vice. Like, these movies have a lot in common, but Inherent Vice is a lot more stereotypically fun. And strangely, they're both about a woman that our lead character cares about and disappears, and trying to track this woman down. So they are— there is a lot of the— these movies are parallel in a lot of ways, but they have such a different vibe. Like, this movie has like kind of an evil vibe to it.

Yeah.

Like, not just in our lead character, but in everyone he comes in contact with too. Because I think, you know, people who don't live there think of Los Angeles as, you know, the land of dreams, Hollywood, everyone's beautiful, everyone's sexy, everyone's having a good time. And this really shows the underbelly. And I think this is in some ways David Robert Mitchell's way of kind of dealing with his own, like, mild success and all the people that he's come in contact with and all the people that he's dealt with over those years of trying to get his movies made. And it's like you, you have to kind of end up giving a part of your soul to have any kind of success. And this character, by the end of this movie, there's nothing there. Like, he is a shell by the end of this movie. And you realize everyone is— everyone around here is soulless and just cannot be a human. Like, there's not really a single character except maybe his mother on the phone, right, who is— who has kindness. Right. Like nobody does. It is a vicious, ugly, cold movie that also happens to be kind of funny. It's a really weird mix, which is, I think, why I think if you've seen it once and you had a negative reaction, I do urge you to watch it again because I think you might get something different out of it. You might have a different experience once you know the type of movie it is. I think one of the problems I had was Andrew Garfield himself. He's really charming. He's one of my favorite actors, and to see him in a role like this was quite disturbing.

Mm-hmm.

It's something that an actor like Leo DiCaprio has never really done. He's never completely removed his charm. This is Andrew Garfield without any of the things you like about him. And it's a kind of— I mean, I, I hesitate to use terms like this, but for a younger actor in Hollywood who is still building his career at this point, It's a pretty brave decision to take this role. Like, this is an ugly, hideous man that he is playing. There is really— I'm trying to think of something good about him, and there's not much there other than the good that we all have of like, we all want to— we all thought our lives would be something that they're not. I think that is a feeling everyone can relate to. But the way he goes through and about the world, it's like you can't— you're like, yeah, I can't go there with you, man. Like, you just— that's not— nope. Right. There's a lot of that in this movie where I just shake my head and I'm like, yeah, no, I understand you're mad that, you know, your most important thing, your car, was keyed, but you can't punch children in the head.

Like, you know, who says that?

Can't— society? Well, morality? No, I think your mother. Well, like everyone.

It's interesting. You're right. I mean, You asked, can you think of a redeeming quality about this guy? And I got nothing for you. But there is a— it's interesting that Garfield was the— I can understand why Garfield is something you would balk at from the jump, especially he's extremely charming and you really like watching him and stuff. This is the hardest left turn you could take from Spider-Man and, yeah, the Silence and Hacksaw Ridge and Eduardo Saverin in The Social Network.

Like, and just interrupt for a minute. Interesting that, like, you know, I just went on the Wikipedia page kind of half expecting to see, like, well, there were these 9 other actors attached and they all fell off. It was originally Garfield. Like, Garfield and David Robert Mitchell from the beginning pushed to make this movie. So that's crazy.

Which is super cool too, because I mean, you, you know, he, he goes from making this in 2018, the next film he makes is Giacoppolo's Mainstream.

Yeah.

Which again, another kind of gross, creepy character. I remember when that happened and I was just kind of like, is this what Garfield's going to do? And of course it kind of is because he's making— he's playing Sam Altman. But I'm—

so— Getting worse somehow.

Somehow getting worse. He seemed like a nice guy in We Live in Time, and he was Jonathan Larson in Tick, Tick... Boom! So, you know, he's done his penance. He's doing a little bit of everything. He's doing a little bit of everything. He's kind of doing the— I don't mean to make this broad of a comparison, but like Adam Driver is somebody that I like in the two of them. Oh, that's valid. You know, they do the Spider-Man and the Star Wars, and then they're like, I'm going to go over here and make this with David Robert Mitchell and this with Scorsese. to—

Together with Scorsese.

Exactly. Both, both together in silence. Exactly. Um, but I can see how you'd balk at his performance. And yet when I watched it, at least this time— I think the first time it was probably pretty jarring, but I can't remember it that well because I also didn't see it in the theater, I saw it at home. Um, and I honestly probably wasn't paying nearly as much attention as I was this time. Um, because this time it just totally kind of knocked me back watching his body language throughout the entire— like, his body language is a performance in and of itself beyond what Garfield is doing in terms of his words. I mean, he's playing a slacker. He's slouching. He is kind of blasé while also being this morbidly curious dude who can't stop peering through windows and climbing into places that he doesn't—

Yeah.

own or rent or belong. And, you know, just it ramps up to this full-blown paranoid panic by the end of the film. But also, my whole thing with him, with this character, is that for something to have happened or to matter, he has to have experienced it. And those are the worst kind of people that you meet. Like, well, I'm not really sure about that because I don't know about it. It's like, Right. Okay. You are not the only person to ever walk through this city.

Other people exist. It's okay.

Your experiences are not the holistic experience, but that's who this guy is. And I think his body language really shows that he's kind of like really laid back until something freaks him out because nothing's supposed to freak him out.

Right.

And I mean, I mentioned that already, but I think it's a, it's a really clever ongoing bit of sorts that he reeks and that he gets sprayed by skunks somewhat repeatedly. But he also just probably smells of weed, really bad weed. Um, both are probably true. Yes. And, you know, he, he— there are so many times in this movie where he said he'll say something, and I truly, I found myself just audibly laughing. Um, not a chuckle, but an audible laugh. Like, very early on in the film, he's having, uh, I can't remember the actress's name, but he's having sex with his, like, pseudo-girlfriend who he really only brings around when he needs something sexual.

Situationship, I think, would be the term.

Yeah. And she looks up at this poster above his bed, and it's a poster of Kurt Cobain. And she goes, is that signed? He goes, yeah, recently actually. I know a girl who knows his daughter, so it's her signature.

Like, what the fuck?

That's terrific.

Same.

Um, I also— one other thing I wanted to point out about the character construction of Garfield, or of Garfield's Sam character I should say, is, uh, I think, you know, he doesn't have a job. And doesn't really seem interested in having one. Yeah, I actually read—

And people ask him and he's like, nothing.

Yeah, but he gets— he also gets mad. Like, he gets irritated. Why are you asking me? You know, like, oh, where's your— every time somebody asks him about anything that could be, you know, consequential in his life. Where's your car? Oh, it's in the shop. No, it got towed because you couldn't afford it. What do you do?

It might be in the shop.

Why?

Could be true.

He just— these mundane concerns of everybody else are not things that he cares about. And I think that makes the character construction so much more interesting.

Yeah, absolutely. So there's a couple of things I want to talk about, and I think both of them kind of, kind of connect with the nihilism. So there is, of course, I feel like it's silly to like try and detail plot details because none of it really matters as far as like what happens before what. It doesn't matter. It's like a series of crazy events, a series of coincidences that he thinks has a pattern, and it's something he has to solve. And one of the things I love about this movie is that because it's solely from his perspective, you go along with some bullshit that you're like, when you look at it later, you're like, well, yeah, of course that doesn't make any sense. That's stupid. Like, oh, there's this guy who makes this little hand-drawn zine and he must know all the secrets. Like, why? Why would you think that?

Yeah.

You know, the whole sequence with him putting together the code, which when you watch it separate from being ingrained in the movie, you're like, this is stupid. There's no way that this is—

Doesn't make sense.

This is real. This is a real code. But then there's all these coincidences, so the movie pulls you along enough to be like, well, maybe this could be, you know, because you're in this, you know, unemployed potheads frame of mind and you're like, yeah, sure, why not? That could totally be the case. But I love that the movie is mocking him and mocking you. It's saying, like, you think you see all these coincidences as things that matter. None of this shit matters because you're a worthless human being and you need to get off of your ass and do something with your life.

Right.

There's no secret answer to all this stuff. There's no— there's no grand conspiracy that if you could just figure it out, then you would get the girl and everything would be fine. It's not that kind of movie.

Yep.

The other piece, which I think is the, you know, it's a piece that has almost nothing to do with plot, but to me is the most important scene in the entire movie, is the scene with the songwriter. So basically what I'm getting from that scene, which is a very funny scene, very enjoyable, and very well crafted in terms of the way the music works and kind of goes in and out of different very popular songs. You brought up Cobain. It's really important that you know that this is this man's hero.

Right.

He loves Kurt Cobain. Like, he doesn't really say it, but you know, like, this is, this is an artist he worships. And that scene again is telling you all your gods are false. None of this shit matters. This is all created in a lab. It's just written by the same guy who writes pop songs. So you think you're better than someone who likes Britney Spears or the Backstreet Boys or New Kids on the Block because you like grunge? It's the same bullshit, man, and it's all done by committee. And that's not, of course, quote unquote true, right? But in this world it is. So the idea of pulling the rug out from this character that, you know, this unemployed, broke pothead thinks is important, right? The music that you grew up with, the music that made you passionate. Actually, that's bullshit too. You can't depend on that. You can't depend on any of this stuff. You have to get up off your ass and actually do something. You can't sit around all day and think about like, would fucking Kurt Cobain do?

Right.

None of that shit matters. And I love that the movie, like, never really explains that whole thing about, like, who the songwriter is and what that means to this grand conspiracy, because again, it doesn't matter. None of this matters. All these supposed symbols and connections are all just fucking hot air. And everything that you believe in the magic of Hollywood and the magic of music and the magic of heroes. None of that is real. All you have is this moment right now. So if you don't get up off your ass, you might as well get busy dying. It is a really negative, fucked-up movie, but also, like you said, really funny. That scene is really funny, even though it has a man in obvious prosthetic makeup playing a piano with one hand and shooting at your protagonist with the other.

Until his head gets beaten in with his guitar.

Yeah. Right. And it's just like, you know, the guitar that was supposedly Kurt Cobain's. He is like, he's destroying a lie he doesn't want to believe with the tool of something he thinks represents something. But in the end, you know, it's all sound and fury signifying nothing. Like, this is a brutal movie on a— on— on— once you look at it a little bit deeper, once you get out of the like, this is a stoner comedy and it's silly, once you start actually thinking about what David Robitaille is saying, like, I'm like, You got some shit to work through, man. Like, you are really upset with not only what you've had to give up to be an artist, but what that means moving forward. Like, it doesn't surprise me that he hasn't made a whole bunch of movies in the interim, and I don't think it's just because this movie didn't do well. It's because I think he's dealing with, like, do I want to be a part of this machine? And now he's making movies with Anne Hathaway and Ewan McGregor.

So I guess he Guess he figured it out. Therapy. It's been a couple years, right? 8 years since this.

Because I don't think— I, I don't think that movie— I think, like you— we said in the very beginning of this episode, that movie's not going to be a stereotypical straight-line movie, but I don't think it's going to be anything like this either. I think they would have made it— this is as dark as you can get.

It wouldn't have gotten made. That's, that's something that I am really interested in, is that I think this— I mean, like we said, he's making a sequel to It Follows whenever that ends up coming out. He's, he's not a straight down the middle filmmaker, never has been, um, from the jump. And at the same time as I say that, I also, you know, you said if you think about it a little harder, I think the way to think about it a little harder when it comes to this movie is to really take some of the things that are being said by its characters at face value in terms of their tone especially. Like, there are 2 lines that I believe come in very quick succession. I just jotted them down while I was watching, um, that kind of tell you everything you need to know about the outlook of the characters in this movie and what they're saying. Um, one is for us to figure out the outlook. The other is they are actually saying it. Um, the first is when he and Topher Grace, um, are in the backyard having some drinks and smoking, and, and they're using a drone to spy on their neighbor, um, or Topher Grace's neighbor. He's like, I like to peer into houses with my drone and see if I can see any naked women, because of course that's what the people in this—

Like a totally normal—

Like a totally normal thing. Like, but what he said, what Andrew Garfield's Sam says is, where the hell did you get this thing? And Topher Grace goes, where? No question of why you're doing it, but where the hell did you get this?

Where'd you get that?

And Topher Grace without skipping a beat, where you get everything? Amazon. Like, that in and of itself kinda tells you what, what, if you wanna zoom out real far, what David Robert Mitchell's thinking. Like, we have gone, we have fallen so far that it's like, duh, Amazon. We are controlled by consumerism and capitalism. And no, there's no, dream here. It's all— and we don't even—

we don't even— we don't even buy it from a person.

Exactly.

Where you buy everything, we buy it from a website and it shows up.

Um, but then real quick after that, some, uh, I believe it might be Topher Grace or it might be Andrew Garfield, I can't even remember. It doesn't matter because it applies to everybody in the movie. We crave mystery because there's none left. And—

Mm-hmm.

This movie is all about a guy who is craving mystery and searching for it, and it keeps hitting him back in the face that, hey, you're looking too hard.

Mm-hmm.

If there was actually mystery, it would present itself, and it wouldn't— you wouldn't need to go looking for it and seeing all these codes or convincing yourself that there's a code in everything, including fucking Vanna White's eye movement, which he has been tracking since he was very young. Um, like, first time he saw Vanna White, he was like, that's Satan. And he was like, I gotta figure this out. Vanna White is just Vanna White. Like, this guy will look at everything and be like, that can't be right. Um, there's another sign in the— there's a billboard in the movie where it's a contact lenses ad, and I believe it says like, I can see clearly now. Then he's like, that's fucked up. It's like some of—

well, then you find out later that the model is his ex-girlfriend, so it's a way for him to try to process this without actually dealing, right, with the pain that he's feeling. Like, no, this is a signal and I've got to figure it out. I can see clearly now.

What does that mean?

You just don't like— you just don't like seeing your ex-girlfriend on a giant billboard, right? That sucks, man.

But every—

you could just say that sucks.

Like we've been saying, everything he ex— he thinks he's experiencing must have a deeper meaning. And I think what David Robert Mitchell, like you were getting at is saying is that it's not all magic. There's not magic to everything. It actually might just be as shitty as it presents itself to be on paper.

Right.

I mean, this— there is no— it's no coincidence that this movie takes place in Los Angeles and that its main character is jobless and broke and being evicted from his apartment and losing his car. And yet the only thing he can bother focusing on is that there must be some mystery he has to crack in order to figure it all out. No, right? You just need to fucking pay your rent.

Like, right?

That's the point.

And, and I think it's interesting that that's really the only thing he cares about is figuring out some grand mystery and finding a pattern. There's nothing and no one else that he cares about. Not his mother. He's annoyed when she calls. Not this girl that he quote unquote falls in love with. It's— I mean, that is a pleasing body. That's the only thing that he really cares about. The balloon girl that he comes into contact with, he says, like, oh, I really liked your performance. He doesn't. He doesn't care about that. He pretends to like this, you know, Jesus and the Brides of Dracula band. Does not care about them at all until he thinks there's a pattern in their music. That's the only time he gives a shit. And then he ends up beating the living hell out of Jesus. Like, this is the kind of movie that we are watching where it's like, oh yeah, you don't— you're despicable.

Yeah.

Like, you don't, you don't care about anyone or anything. You even pretend to care about this sad, strange little man who has written this zine, who believes in all this stuff, but you don't actually care about him either. When he dies, you're not sad. You're annoyed that you don't have access anymore. Like, this is like in the history of cinema, this is one of the worst humans that we've seen. And it sounds strange because there are movies about serial killers and all this stuff, but like, this is like— as you watch it and as you think about it outside of the laugh moments, you're like, wow, yeah, this evil isn't even the right word because he's too banal to be evil, right? He's just kind of a shithead. and, and damages everyone he comes across. At best, he does nothing. That's like the best possible end. But there are people dying around him, not directly because of him, but when they die, he feels nothing about any of them. It is really disturbing to watch him play a character like that.

It's a tremendous performance in that regard. But it's also— it is very disturbing. And there is a way or in a very obvious way, that's kind of what is— what makes him so evil is that it's not necessarily his fault per se, but he doesn't care and isn't interested in doing anything about it or even interrogating it because there's no mystery in death. It's final.

Yeah, it's like near sociopathic behavior. Very, very.

Like, I mean, there This kind of person is what people online, when they're like, oh, he's a nihilist or he's a nihilist, whatever, however you want to pronounce it. When they say that, like, they're talking about Sam. They just may not know it. But yeah, he doesn't— there's another line to go back to the Topher. I mean, every interaction he has with Topher Grace is very, very, very disturbing.

Very disturbing.

But one of the last things they say after their little drone rendezvous which ends, of course, in a woman undressing down to her underwear and then bursting into tears because she's got something deeper and darker that nobody can see or feel but her. And they're like, oh, man, no nudity.

Right. This is ruining the mood. Yeah.

Bummer. Of me finding this woman. I guess I'll get the drone back. One of the last things Topher Grace says is, be careful out there, buddy. And Andrew Garfield is like, yeah, of course. No, be careful of what? No inkling that there is something to fear or avoid. They just are constantly living in that. And so that drives them on a day-to-day basis. It's fear for themselves, not for anybody else. They don't have anybody else to care about. Frankly, Topher Grace could drop dead in a second and Sam would move on with his day. He'd be like, shh.

He'd take his drone.

Yeah, he would take the drone and be like, I could find a use for this. You mentioned The Odyssey earlier. Odysseus goes west to honor the men he couldn't honor in person because he was fearful of his death. At the end of the film, he says, I'm gonna go west to properly honor them. Sam's way of honoring his men, so to speak, is let me take their belongings and use them for my benefit because that's what they would've wanted me to do. Like, it's—

Yeah.

This guy's a piece of shit. And Garfield's performance is truly, truly tremendous. in that I think sometimes, you know, sometimes actors that we love, we love because of how charming they are. And then the second they play a nasty character, we almost— I don't know if it's give them too much credit because we're like, whoa, what range? But, you know, like—

Mm-hmm.

We talked last week about BlackBerry in— through— while we were talking about Tony, the new, uh, Matt Johnson film, and we were talking about the response to the Glenn Howard performance. And it's like everybody freaked out because Glenn Howerton went from It's Sunny— It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, where he yells a lot, to a dramedy about the invention of the BlackBerry in which he yells a lot and wears a bald cap. And everybody was like, holy shit, it's not an out-and-out comedy. It's funny, but he is amazing. And he is very good. But Garfield, there is real range between what he can do and has done in previous films. It's one of the reasons I'm very, very excited that Neon ended up buying Artificial because—

Yes, same.

From everything that I've seen, Sam Altman seems just as robotic and faceless as what we see of Zuckerberg. And what Jesse Eisenberg did with Zuckerberg is obviously iconic in The Social Network. I'm fascinated to see how Garfield portrays Altman because Because if nothing else, Garfield has always done a very good job of playing either side of the coin. Peter Parker or Sam from Under the Silver Lake. Sometimes he operates sort of in the middle, but he's at least emotive, like in We Live in Time or Silence. He kind of has to have that agonizing feel to his character. But I mean, he's run the gamut in terms of the the types of people he plays. And this is one of, if not the crowning achievement of his career, despite the fact that it was so divisive when it came out.

Yeah, yeah. And I think it's going to be interesting to see him play Altman, because if anything, Altman is more out of touch than Zuckerberg. It's going to be— I think that's going to be a really difficult performance, and I'm really excited to see him take that on, because this is a man who literally has said things like, we want intelligence to be something you buy from us, not something you do on your own, and thinks that's a totally fine thing to say to human beings. Totally normal thing. Like, what the hell? So, yeah. All right. So, Will, next week we have a new movie from Andrew Patterson. Now, even big-time cinephiles may not recognize that name right away. He was even uncredited as a director in his first movie, which is called The Vast of Night, which we'll be covering next week. week. But he is— his new movie is called The Rivals of Amziah King, starring Matthew McConaughey, who we've mentioned more than once on this episode. So definitely looking forward to that. I will actually be reviewing that coming up very soon. So by the time that episode comes out, you will be able to read my thoughts on it. But Will, in the meantime, you're working on something big.

I am.

So things are happening with your writing. So tell the people about it. I'm very excited about it as your editor.

Thank you.

So I want them to get excited too.

Yeah, I, uh, by now you will certainly be able to read— as you literally, as we're recording this, it's available to read, and this comes out in a couple weeks. So by now you will be able to read the first edition of, uh, my new column at In Session Film, Following Direction, um, which tracks filmographies and the recurring themes throughout. First one as I felt was only fitting, is on my and your favorite director. Not your, Dave, but every single human being on the planet's favorite director right now, Christopher Nolan.

But also mine. Yes.

And his tremendous, as many people are agreeing, the odyssey. And I'm going to continue to do that with more filmmakers. I'm very excited to continue to think about filmmakers through this lens and their filmographies and revisiting stuff and obviously enjoying the new stuff as well. Um, haven't locked down exactly this next one's going to be about, but I'm eager to poke and prod. And also I will be, uh, reviewing a couple of things that should probably be available around the summer— certainly will be— um, Her Private Hell and Rosebush Pruning. Um, also very excited about reviewing a smaller documentary called The Last Picture Shows.

Um, take—

obviously takes its title or inspired title from the Bogdanovich film, but is about like the American West and all of the movie theaters that are somehow still running, small town movie theaters in the American West that are still running as of today. So fun times. Dave, what about you, Mr. 100 subscribers?

And you could also find Will on the— oh yeah, that's right. By Will Bjarnar on Twitter. Will Bjarnar pretty much everywhere else.

That's true.

Uh, you can find the show at Pop Case Study. You can find me at Darn That Dave. I am writing a lot more on my Substack. If you wanna help me out, that's what I would love you to do.

Yes.

Go subscribe to my Substack. Honestly, you don't even have to read it. Just subscribe to it.

Just subscribe.

Like, you know, all good ideas start out as bad ideas.

And you know what's not a bad idea? Yeah, subscribing to Dave's Substack.

Nice. Well done. Well done. Uh, so also, as I mentioned, we'll have a review of The Rivals of the Amazigh King. Uh, should have a review of I Want Your Sex. Uh, yeah, I think those are the big ones. So you can find that at In Session. So until next time, we will be here diagnosing your favorites and judging you for what you watch.