Highest 2 Lowest Review, Jaws Review, Weapons Feedback

or at least worth exploiting for this setup. They're both in their early twenties, and on the movie's titular scale, their reactions lean more lowest than highest. But age isn't really the issue. Their Spike Lee history is between them. They've seen just one of his previous films. Experiencing his work for the first or second time can be jarring. Calling anyone much less an artist didactic is rarely a compliment, Yet we've both used the term lovingly to describe Lee.

His audacity is only matched by his fearlessness. And if for some reason you needed to mount a quick defense of the tour theory, say you show up at a party, and boom, someone's been reading Pauline Kle and suddenly starts

laying into you. You know how it is at these parties, Josh, Uh, sure, he could be your exhibit A whether we're discussing films he wrote, directed and acted in like Do the Right Thing, Jungle Fever, and Malcolm X. Or films he wrote and directed like He Got Game, Shyrack and Black Klansman, Or films by other writers that he directed, like Twenty Fifth

Hour and Inside Man. Or films other directors already made, like Old Boy, The Sweet Blood of Jesus, and now Highest to Lowest, which he calls a reinterpretation, not a remake. There is one indisputable double truth, Ruth. A Spike Lee joint is always a spike Lee joint. I don't know where you currently fall, Josh, but I'm going to guess that, even if you're positive on it, you probably don't consider Highest to Lowest to be top tier or quite possibly

even middle tier Spike Lee. For what it's worth, I consulted the experts vultures Will Leach and Tim Grierson. In their recent ranking of every Spike Lee film. They slot it at twenty one out of twenty nine, just behind nineteen nineties No Better Blues, and ahead of nineteen ninety

six is Get on the Bus. Here's my hunch again, admittedly based on wildly insufficient data, longtime le viewers are going to be more forgiving of his bold swings within a movie despite what could be a disappointing hit to miss ratio. If so, whether you are lukewarm or cold on the film, surely there were enough Spike Lee flourishes to gettily glue you to your seat or even youphorically

elevate you out of it. Give me your favorite, but conversely, tell me the choice that made you feel like maybe you were just stuck in your seat.

So that's one tier we can't even really talk about. Again. There's probably a tier below that that has better films than highest to lowest. I'm going to put it off the top of my head right now, in the next tier down, which I still think is upper. And for those who are in countering Lee relatively new now, I would not recommend they start here. I think this is something I have only thought about right now as you

were talking at them. I might point them to Malcolm X. I think it's in some ways it has all those touches you're talking about. It's absolutely a not a tourist project, piece of work, piece of art. But I do think it also fits the biopic formula enough that an new viewer to Lee would be comfortable with the as you say, didacticism. I like to say, and I reserve this for Spike Lee. It's direct address cinema, and we have two instances of

direct address cinema in highest to lowest one. I'm going to get too quickly here because I think it's just so fun. And another one which you know, it's one of the investigating policemen starts talking about the plan and he delivers it right to the camera.

highest to lowest, still really like this movie. I'll answer your question now because I have an answer. It's not what I liked most about the movie, but it is the answer to your question, what is the Lee choice? What is the Spike Lee And it is that you know, when you're going to a Spike Lee movie, you are going to get a distinctly cultural product coming from a distinctly specifically cultural point of view, and obviously Black culture is a part of that, and it's not Black culture

is not a monoculture. This is a culture Spike Lee grew up in. There are black icons he admires in sports, in music that he will pepper in his movies, and you get that here. I just learned today that some of the artwork in David King's penthouse is actually artwork that is from lee'sone collection and was in the Spikely exhibit I saw a couple of years ago when I was in New York City where he showed some of his movie posters and paintings and so forth that he's collected.

So you get that here. You get this slice of a particular part of black culture that I love experiencing in his movies because obviously it's not as familiar to me, but you get so much New York City culture that's a part of that Adam, which I found again new to me, been there many times, didn't grow up there, so I don't know it as well, but I love seeing it through Spike's eyes. There's the sports element of this.

His son, Denzel Washington Sun plays basketball, and so you get you know Rick Fox, Lakers legend as his coach, and there's a little back and forth between Celtics fans and Knicks fans and throw some Lakers stuff in there. I enjoyed all that, but the pinnacle of the New York City culture stuff for me in High Suloist was the money drop sequence, which I also think is a fantastic bit of filmmaking. And this is I don't think

you know, this is not necessarily a spoiler. Halfway through the film, we realized that David King is going to pay the ransom for the son of his driver, the Jeffrey Wright character, and it involves riding the train. Also in Chris awas riding a train, so I like that they retain that the subway. It gets to an above ground track and he's supposed to drop it. And the setting for this the Kidnapper is devised. It's going to

take place during a Puerto Rican Pride festival essentially. Now when we're on the train, when King is on the train, it's also fans Yankees fans en route to a game against the Red Sox, so you get a a little bit of that sports element. Here's the other direct direct address bit, Adam, there is a Yankees fan leading the cheer, Let's go Yankees. Boston sucks. The whole car is chanting this.

It's Nick de Turo, John t Turro's brother, a Spike leavet a great face for cinema, and he turns and looks right into the camera and delivers a Boston sucks. I mean, so that's the sort of stuff you're going to get in the midst of a high stake, suspense action sequence that gives you that Spike flavor, that Spike texture. I mentioned the Puerto Rican going on. We get cutaways to the Eddie Palmieri Salsa Orchestra playing the street festival. He's introduced by Rosie Perez. Just a nice little touch

there as Rosie Perez. And so we're cutting back and forth with this music, this amazing salsa orchestra music interwoven with the chant Boston socks. And this is the texture. This is the great New York City stew the texture that Spike Lee is going to bring to what could have been a rote standard suspense sequence. And I loved it. I was like this, You're not going to get this from anyone else. So that's the Spike answer. But as I said, it's not why I liked Hi Solois quite

so much. We'll get to that. But what did you First of all, did you like it? And what did you What was the spikiness level for you?

be positive on it. Somehow I thought that Hit to Miss Ratio was a little bit tighter, and I thought, oh, when I sit down to really prepare for my review, I know, here are things I like about it, and I know there are many things I like about it, but I was going to have to acknowledge some of those bold and those audacious spike choices that maybe don't totally work or maybe don't work at all. And then Josh, I started preparing and it's it's almost exclusively positive, and

so then I love. That's That's where I really started to doubt myself. And now I'm all in on this film. We'll get to a few things, or at least I will that maybe we can talk about not totally working. But there is so much that does work about this film. And you talked about that sequence, that key sequence in relation to what Spike is doing in terms of incorporating New York and that cultural heritage that is there that

is so important. I think what I'll try to do is just mention it in terms of or discuss it in terms of how important the music is there, but not only there, how important the music is to the entire film. Right, So I do think that entire sequence, and we have to mention not only Matthew Lebetique, the director of photography who also shot Inside Man shot Shyraq for Spike, but a few other films as well, his cinematography and the editing by Barry Alexander Brown and Alison C. Johnson.

The work they're doing here is incredible. It is intense, it is unpredictable. It is such a long sequence from the moment Denzel leaves the condo and a combination of different types of shooting hand held but also some very elegant work. But it's unpredictable. It's chaotic, but it's very controlled filmmaking. And because it is Spike Lee, it is

You're right, fundamentally culturally at its core New York. And that choice to have the music coming from Eddie Palmieri, that song Puerto Rico, to have it be a parade that's going on, have it be so core to this sequence and thus this movie, and have it be diagetic, not imposed on the sequence, have it be diegetic. It's happening, this is happening in this neighborhood. Now, that only adds

to that intensity and the suspense. And I think that sequence, it isn't just the standout sequence in this film, and there are a lot of great scenes and moments, but it's the standout sequence here. And I think it is as suspenseful and thrilling as the famous French Connection scene, which is clearly an influence for Spike Lee on this sequence, sure, but as suspenseful and thrilling as anything Spike Lee has done. Also. I don't know if you saw this. It popped up

for me somewhere that Eddie Palmieri had passed away. And not only has he passed away, Josh, he just died on August sixth.

in a way that somehow feels new and different. Despite the fact the Spike Lee himself and so many other filmmakers have already shot these same vistas so many times before. But it's spiked too, Josh. So he's got this great ironic sense of humor. Even just taking the song. It's ironic because we know going in how his day is going to unfold. Yeah, but what he thinks his day

is going to unfold. Like, there's the irony there. But just taking that song out of its milieu, written originally for Oklahoma and adopting it trans play to New York City is genius and it works on all of those levels. But it is more than that too, Josh, And I think this is one of those areas. I think this

goes back to my setup. It actually is the key element here that maybe inspired what I was thinking when I was talking about something that might turn off people who are just coming to Spike's work for the first or second time and they're not as used to it. There is music. It's not just these big flourishes, these big choices where songs are playing throughout these entire sequences.

There is music almost constantly throughout the film. The score, and I think most of it works very well, but the score here, I want to make sure get the name right. The score is done by Howard Drawsen, and there's other artists that you hear as well, in addition to the ones that we've mentioned, and I'll mention a couple of artists here, or at least one more famous

artists in a second. But there is scoring that is underneath so many scenes, especially through the first forty five minutes to an hour of this movie, And in some cases I feel like there are folks who might feel like it's almost soap opera ish, but that that feels right for Spike because it's almost as if he is so musical and so musically inclined. It's like he wants to give each scene not just not just broad pieces

or sequences, but each scene its own theme. And just as I'm thinking that, just as I'm thinking that, there's a moment early in the film where Denzel's you know, David King gets in the car with Paul for the first time and he says, I need a theme, and

what happens. Paul picks out the perfect theme and the song I think is Ain't No Stop in Us Now, which is like a disco hit from the seventies, But that's what they're feeling at the time, So that becomes the theme for that moment later when they're in the car again and their head to do something. What's the

theme for that moment. It's the Payback by James Brown, right, But there are also themes musical instrumental themes for every other moment that is in the movie, and so that that use of music, especially in the money drop sequence, is incredible, but how we used it throughout is one of the touches that for me really made highest to lois something worth seeing and worth listening to.

but that's that's more of a quibble. I completely agree about the use and the specific selections. When you're mentioning that song, the opening song being from Oklahoma. That's another part of the the cultural fabric Spike Lee weaves. Because it's not just black culture, sports culture, New York City culture.

He also often takes quote unquote American approved historical culture and subverts it question reappropriate, reappropriate, And that's what you were describing in that opening number, which I love.

we're talking about. Maybe it's even arguably an obvious one. And I'll say briefly too. I don't think it's something that works on the same level is what Steven Soderbergh does in The Limi. I mentioned this movie last week, the casting of Peter Fonda in that movie, the footage of Terrence Stamp from the ken Loach movie Poor Cow. The way those work in that film, for me, are not just stunts and not just practical. We needed to show Terrence Stamp as a young man, so we found

this footage. There are choices that significantly add to the meaning and the experience of the movie. So maybe not quite on that level, but there are constant references to the art that you mentioned and different artifacts, and when David King is doing his most soul searching and really what he's wrestling with is his legacy, his legacy, there is some added I think it was for me, there was added potency to seeing these celebrated, authentic visages of himself,

of his actual self haunting him. Would it be more potent if there was a meta element to it, if Denzel was a problematic figure or someone who truly was wrestling with his legacy. I don't know. Maybe I'm not gonna wish that on him. Certainly but also I don't know that it's necessary because he's seventy years old, and there is going to be a logical reckoning with that legacy for him and then vicariously vicariously through us as

the audience. And I also don't think it's a stretch to suggest that within the Black community over the last forty years of popular culture, Denzel Washington is one of those figures those visages, certainly portraying just the image of him portraying Malcolm X, portraying Alonso in Training Day, but just him as a sex symbol what he's meant as a philanthropist. That added element I thought was really crucial to the film.

And I did worry a bit at the beginning about this quality and how it was going to play in this film, because to my mind, David King when he first appears, is a little awkward, a little out of touch, a little acting younger than he should and fairly, and I was wondering, like, has Denzel lost it? Are we starting to see? But of course, I mean, this is

just me being dumb. That's part of the nuance of the performance, is what I came to understand, because David King is a little too old, and characters reference this, he may have lost his touch, or if he hasn't lost his touch, it's because he's been focusing on the wrong things. He's been focusing on sales and stock prices rather than new artists and musing. There's a reference his wife references that he doesn't listen to music as much as he used to. And so I do think it's

awkward to see an awkward Denzel Washington. But I think that's an intentional part of the performance, because as the movie goes on and David King makes different choices, both moral and artistic, he begins to reclaim some of that swagger we recognize, and there's a moment that's very distinct

for me. Adam there's an early scene where he's trying to make a business negotiation with a partner and there's a gold mic in the conference room, like a gold embossed mic, and he's kind of using it as a prop, like talking into it then holding it to his partner.

And at first I'm like, oh, that's kind of like clever charisma, right, But then he keeps doing it, and I'm thinking, Okay, you're pushing this a little bit, Like you're pushing this bit a little bit, And it's tied into what I eventually realized is it's because David King is pushing that, right. It's him trying to rely on the old charisma he used to have. Notice Dunzel Washington's shift into real charisma later in the film, and I do think it correlates with his reclaiming his moral and

artistic integrity. I think that's when we start to see the real David King come out, which, to us as audience viewers, is the real Denzel Washington. So I could talk about this more in detail in a climactic scene where there's a face off with the kidnapper, but I don't know how much of that I want to spoil because I think that's the brilliant performance because we see, let's just say, we see David King try to rap a little bit and it's not it's not great, but

it's not it shouldn't be great in that scene. Yet somehow he balances yeah, real swagger, authority, charisma, gravitas in that scene as well. So it's different from the early David King. It's a different David King at that point. And again I think it's because he's he's come to understand who he is as a music producer on the artistic side and as a man making the right moral choice as it regards to the ransom for his driver's son.

and especially the more unraveled he becomes. But we see it even early on, as you said, when he isn't really himself because he's trying to get things done and he's not sure he's not going to be able to pull them off. He's unsure if he can.

the lower his volume gets throughout the film. And he does have once he finds himself, he does seem to have of that natural confidence and command, and he doesn't have to like people who actually have that type of swagger. He doesn't have to be overly forceful, right, and you see that.

I did want to throw in real quick because there may be people who are going to call this an old man movie, and he does. David King does have an anti kids are on their phones too much rant early on, an anti AI rant early on, and both of those exactly. I mean, we're old guys too, we agree, but but in the moment I'm thinking, like, oh boy, are we in for like a couple of older filmmakers using this chance to kind of like tell us what

they think about the world. Again, I realized it was all in service of the character and appropriately.

gonna talk just vaguely. There is a showdown of sorts between those two characters, and I don't think Josh that what matters about that is we're supposed to believe that old man David King, that Denzel as old man David King actually has the rap skills of a sap Rocky as this character, but he does have to match the swagger.

He is never going to back down from anyone in a scene, no matter what they're doing, or no matter who that other actor is. So on, he got game. If, for example, he's playing legitimate star slash very good NBA player Ray Allen as his son one on one, and he knows in his heart he knows in his heart he's not as good. Sure, he's not going to beat Ray Allen one on one, but on that day, on that set, he is going to not give an inch

and he is going to try to beat him. And in those moments, he is going to play as if Denzel Washington, the forty year old actor or whatever, can absolutely beat him, and he'll do whatever it takes to beat him. That's how he played that game against him,

as if he could beat him. And Spike said that a lot of that that sequence that we're talking about was unscripted, and Denzel decided to show up and basically be like, oh, young kid, you think you got it, Well, I've got some surprises in my bag, right, So he he of course, just like the Ray Allen situation, he of course cannot actually out wrap a sap Rocky, But that didn't mean he still wasn't going to approach it, Yes, with the confidence, Yes, as if as if he couldn't

be as good as it, because that that's what's important, that's what comes through.

most about High Stalls? Because I think I think you're gonna love it.

and so obviously that's in my mind right away. And then I'm realizing that both Denzel and Toshira Maffune, the Star of High and Low have played McBeth throw the Tragedy of Macbeth right yeap throwing a blood for Kursawa and Joel Cohen's Tragedy of Macbeth, where Denzel is just amazing in the part. So I had a lot of fun, Adam, just tracing how this movie. Who knows if this was on Spike Lee's mind or exactly, yeah, of course, first

time screenwriter. I believe Alan Fox Am I getting that right. Yes, who knows if they were thinking of this, But I was having fun watching it flow back and forth. I don't think it's a perfect parallel for either of them, but you think about you know, in the Biblical story of King David, he sacrificed Bethsheba's husband to protect his reputation.

And I realized right away this this terrorist, This beautiful Terris you referenced in the opening scene that David king has has to be something like the palace roof that's described in the Bible where David spied on Bathsheba. So you got all that going on, and then you know, the Macbeth stuff is fascinating to me because there is

definitely ambition at play in this character. He is in the midst of this takeover deal when the kidnapping crisis occurs, so he's making a power grab even though he's established he is not satisfied with his career. The ambition eats at him and he is. You could describe it as protecting what he's built, but it's also an ambitious power grab, and you get we haven't mentioned David King's wife yet, played by Ilfineshdera. I think she gets a Lady Macbeth moment.

They're in the bedroom together and she is like, yeah, I don't know that we should pay the ransom for Paul's kid either, like it might now overall she's not played that way, but there's that moment where I was like, ooh, that's that's an interesting And then I want to talk about this, Adam, because I do think you'll like this. You reference the scene where he's looking at portraits of himself or photos of himself earlier, when he's trying to decide do I pay the ransom or not, and he

keeps repeating what would you do? And he's saying that to his own photos, but he's also picking up like framed portraits of I think I have this right, James Brown. I think Aretha Franklin's in there, possibly Stevie Wonder and each one he picks up looks at what would you do?

to protect your own reputation. So this is where I just kind of started thinking, whatever thread this might be, however strong, or however intended. I was having a blast tracing that throughout and seeing how it played out. I do think, and we can't get into this. It's very interesting to ask yourself at the end of this movie. Is David King more of a King David figure who experiences repentance, confession, or is he more of a meth

figure who you know. Obviously, it's a tragedy, it goes bad in the end, So that's a whole other conversation we can't have about spoilers. But I do think it's interesting in this parallel to see how this David King fits along these really you know, grand classic narratives that I think it's possible Spike Lee is playing with intentionally a little bit.

what I'd point to. But otherwise, I think you're onto something, especially when you consider ultimately, and I guess this goes to where you are s. You may possibly read the film where it's going the end of the film. We won't. We won't discuss it too much, but there's a question about whether or not this is ultimately a redemption film. And I think the final choice made in this film,

it's a final choice. It's a final scene that I'm not a huge fan of Josh, and it's also and there's a final there's a final utterance by the main

character by David King that Hammer's home. I think the idea of it being more redemptive than anything, I'm not sure that we needed that final scene would be would be my my argument there again for spoiler territory, here's here's my my biggest issue, and maybe this is the thing, Josh that as I walked out of the theater, I thought, Oh, I had more more things going on, And it was really just this one thing that was was kind of

nagging at me. And it's funny because we talked about weapons last week or or whatever week it was, and two weeks ago, and then we're gonna talk about spoilers later and this might come up again. You talked about how the movie kind of requires us to think the police department in this town must be the dumbest police department of all time.

terrible scene. But b but be they wouldn't even be having that conversation because they would have started pursuing that lead and others like that lead immediately after the second phone call from the kidnapper.

would have been onto this guy from the jump. It's crazy that they somehow didn't come up with a different screenwriting solution to justify the last forty minutes of this film. And I think there are some other things, the contrivance with the headband that's so important to the film, some screenwriting, some dialogue moments that feel overwritten. But that's that's the big one, and we all you know you talked about it with weapons. Clearly you enjoyed the movie enough that

you were able to get past that. I had a similar reaction to how that was handled, some of the suspension of disbelief. I got pasted it there. I did have a little bit of a harder time getting pasted it here because so much of the movie hung on this and having to buy it. That said, the filmmaking here is still just too electric for me to care too much about it.

It's followed after the drop by a needless and endless motorcycle chase, with multiple motorcyclists changing hands of the money bag. Every time they change hands. The guy who gets it next basically heads right back to where the police are coming from. So I didn't understand the logic of that. And then they catch the guy they think they do,

and the backpack doesn't have the money. The guy they catch because they've been you know, switching it out that thread we never hear again, who like they have a prime right accomplice in.

the background. And while the whole conversation is going on whether they're going to pay, whether Mafune is going to pay for his son's release, this guy doesn't say a word. He just kind of cowers more and more and shrinks in the background. And it's heartbreaking and clearly all about class. Like it's just it's inconceivable that a chauffeur would get the same would deserve the same sort of monetary investment in his child as an executive what so.

of the law enforcement. Well, immediately they suspect he's involved when they learn of his past and that he is King's driver, right, and then even when they clear him of that because it's his kid's son. Notice the difference in response to the investigation. When it's David King's son, it's all hands on deck, like bring out the twelve computers. And then when it's Paul's son, they're still on the case, but they're annoyed by him. They're not taking as much care.

And I just think that's a nice extra wrinkle that is, you know, to bring us back to where we started. It's a little bit of cultural perspective that's injected that someone like Spike Lee Brings.

some voice messages from film Spotting family members. These were submitted ahead of Film Spotting Fest back in March.

in a couple of weeks. But here too. As promised, you're gonna hear from Film Spotting, Madness Godfather, Mike Marrigan, and another one to two folks here that if you've listened to the show at all over the last ten years, or if you've participated in a few trivia spottings, or maybe you were a regular indie wire reader, these names will be familiar to you, so let's hear from them.

for the very first time as Sam van Holgren. I was already a huge fan of the way show talked about filmmaking and everything that goes in to it, but then to hear two people share a genuine spontaneous moment, including if I remember correctly, a rare Adam Kempener f bomb, that just proved how special this show could be, and indeed has been. In all the years since. Everything I loved about the show has come from that same spark

and that same shared passion and fun. You all are wonderful and have changed my life in ways that I can't even begin to fathom.

to whoever our eventual winner is. We all know that it's not going to be Josh Larson and guys Happy twentieth. I cannot wait to see what the next twenty years has in store.

We do have more members than this family members, but that discord is up to I think four hundred now, Josh. And it's just such a wonderful community where we can have conversations, really serious conversations about film, can really silly conversations about film, or I think there's a music spotting channel, a theater spotting channel, a food spotting channel, book you know, book spotting, book spotting, I mean, you name it. You got really smart people that you can have any kind

of conversation with. So I say that because if you are a family member who hasn't taken the plunge, and maybe you're one of those family members who's like, I don't I don't do the discord thing. I don't know what discord is. I'm intimidated by it. Guess what I was in your shoes like six or eight months ago. It's really not that complicated, Josh. You probably felt the same way. It's not that complicated. It's easy, it's fun. Take the plunge, and if.

It's also available on Plex, which may have a commercial or two in it, but otherwise it's free and spoilers. Stray Dog really really good, So watch it and then come listen to our discussion as part of our bonus episode. If you'd like to learn more about the film Spotting Family, you can learn that at Filmspottingfamily dot com.

a spoiler segment. We are going to read some feedback from listeners. All of it features spoilers on the movie. We'll have some responses, and that's how we're going to do a spoiler segment on this movie. Are you ready, Josh?

Half were laughing uncontrollably, absolutely uncontrollably. The other half was sitting in absolute stunned silence, myself included. I got to the end and asked myself how anyone could have found that funny. Would love to hear your thoughts. You might check out the interview Craiger did on The Big Picture podcast. He talks about the humor issue around the one four mark and says, I don't think of this as being

a funny movie. He does acknowledge a couple of purposely funny moments, but he honestly sounds surprised people are talking about the humor so much.

borderline wacky, were at the end of the film. So I'd wonder if if Craiger thought, yeah, I was trying to make those funny, or for him they were three other moments in the film that nobody else in the world might think were funny. Again, Matt doesn't mention that, and I haven't listened to the podcast. I would also throw this back on Matt and say, the half of the audience, including you, you sat there in stun silence.

Why why did you sit there in stun silence? What was it about the ending that kept you from laughing? Because here's what I can say about the ending of the movie. Here's what I remember, very vividly. I was all already kind of chuckling before this. But I can remember, and I might get I might get some of the particulars wrong. I'm not going to remember the exact shot, but you can. You can tell me, Josh if I'm misremembering here. Or how you recall the scene, the moment

in that sequence. So this is the end the clown. Gladys is running for her life and these kids, these twenty kids or whatever, nineteen kids, however many there are, they are chasing after her, screaming too, and they're trying to kill her. Like we know they're trying to kill her. They're going to attack her. We don't know exactly what they're going to do when they get to her, but we know it's not going to be good for her. And they're they're screaming and chasing her. And again I

was already kind of chuckling. But when I knew, or I thought I knew, oh he's going for laughs. Here was when there was a shot where the camera was is like on the sidewalk or in a front lawn or something, and it's it's looking at like the backyard, the part in between like two houses, right, so you can see the grass, but it's like in between two houses kind of thing. So you're seeing the backyard, but

just that space in between. And and you I think you can hear the yelling, you can hear the shouting, so you know you know it's coming.

to try to elicit a laugh. I just don't believe it.

process it is that I will laugh. But also I'm prompted by the familiarity with bits as you just described another bit when they it's a common bit whenever there's a chase sequence that a family is going about their business in their house and James Bond runs through a superhero runs through name name your character. Right here, we get that, except it's it's nothing we've ever seen before. It's a crazed clown witch running through. Weird enough, the family.

experienced it wrong. Like there's no policing someone's interpretation or experience of a movie. This is why I love Weapons, because I think in a good way. So many people are responding to it so differently. So the stunned silence I can understand. You know, there might be responses where I'm like, I don't know where you got that out of it, right, But in this one I can understand because it is deeply disturbing. That's partly why I laughed.

It's some you know, I have that response to some horror, and I will just say that I am less sure as I think you are, Adam. And maybe this will come up in further feedback about the final section of the film where we get that voiceover narration of the young girl. I believe that that I feel is next email. Yeah, okay, let's go ahead and read that.

her body, guts and blood and stuff spilling everywhere. Of course, that on a visceral level, on the most immediate primary level, is horrifying. And if you were someone sitting in the audience, you sat there and stunned silence and just thought that was awful, And we're not laughing at all. I completely

understand that reaction. But if you were someone that maybe like you, Josh and me, even to some extent, you almost couldn't do anything but laugh at the absolute absurdity of it, the absolute over the top absurdity of it. And and in your case maybe even like a sort of Catharsis of the kids like getting this revenge of it, like the crazy, the crazy nature of their revenge. I can see that. I can see that too.

the only one that doesn't really fit. But like Josh, I was very into the Gonzo ending. The part of the ending that really didn't work for me is the voiceover over the final image. I might suggest listeners who haven't seen weapons yet plug their ears the moment that thing happens to that character and watch the last thirty seconds of the movie listening to your own heartbeat. It

will make for a much more powerful final moment. So, Josh, I would actually love for you to maybe fully express or paint a picture of what Aviv is articulating there, because I don't know if I fully remember exactly what he's referring to here, what's being said, what that final image is, and do you agree with what he is saying?

Josh Brolin reconnects with his son. Yeah, and the voiceover tells us like some of the kids eventually spoke again, and yes, to me, I guess the way that was handled was it opened more questions to me about the timeline about what the kids experienced, because I think those who express concern that children, or at least child characters are forced to endure such horror in this movie, you know, you don't want that to be flippant. And so maybe this is a gesture on Craiger's part to attend to

these kids as actual children, but to me. It the way it was done again just confused me. I didn't quite understand are these kids now? Why are they out of the spell? And other characters were under different spells. It started to open this can of worms that it then did not squeeze back in by the.

of forgot about. I mean, I didn't forget it. It came back to me, but I wasn't really reckoning with the ending as far as that final line or that. For me, Yeah, it was something that bothered me. I was thinking about the ending in terms of the number they pull on Gladys right and how crazy it was. But I guess I would say, at least in quick response, that your defense of it, even as it didn't totally

work for you. I do think is the right one in that the risk Krigger takes as a filmmaker is if you end on that note of the spell is broken because they just tore her limb from limb, and then the movie ends somehow just with the kids kind of walking off into the neighborhood or the parents reuniting with them or whatever is, then it does almost it

potentially lends. I think that actually potentially opens up the door for more questions than answers, because then it makes us think, well, maybe they just all go back to normal after that, and that opens the door for us to think that somehow the trauma, the trauma's over and at least this ending tells us that, no, they're probably never going to be the same after this experience, whether the spell is broken or not.

conversations on Reddit really unlocked the movie for me. I also easily latched onto the school shooting aspect of the film on my first viewing, but the theme I missed out on was that of addiction and perhaps specifically alcoholism. Several Reddit users pointed out that the triangle inside of the circle that was seen in the beginning of the

movie is the symbol for alcoholics anonymous. From my limited Internet research, it sounds like alcoholism and addiction is touch Kreger's life significantly, and that he wrote Weapons in response to his longtime collaborator Trevor Moore's death, which sounds like it was in part caused due to being intoxicated. I think this theme unlocks the movie in a lot of ways. The school shooting theme does not not that both cannot be in the movie, but from the characters we follow

to the idea of transference of pain. I think the addiction theme is the stronger theme of the movie. Once I started thinking about addiction, I started seeing it everywhere in the movie, and I am curious as to your thoughts on this as well. I also have taken issue with people seeing the final scene as just kind of bonkers and random. To me, this scene is vital to the idea of the youth being abandoned and leeched off from their elders, elders who are fine with stealing their

children and grandchildren's future for their present. Once that younger generation has had enough, they will rebel and tear everything down, and it will feel fun, crazy and satisfying until it's over and everyone realizes the problem still needs solving and they have been left with few tools to solve them.

Weapons is that I saw that there. I didn't know either that the triangle in the title represented alcoholics anonymous.

So a good movie opens it up to these readings as long as what's on the screen can support each of them, and I think it to support you know, those three that we just mentioned and possibly some more.

That doesn't suggest that we have to read the movie only one way, but objectively, if what inspired movie was him dealing with the death of a friend and that was brought on by someone who had a problem with addiction, and maybe that was also addiction to something that touched his life prior to that, then yes, that's something he's working through. But that doesn't mean that's the only thing that that's the only thing this movie is about. That can open the door to lots of kinds of pain

or lots of kinds of issues. But yes, this is fascinating and it's really interesting to hear from people like Emilio and like this one from Mike Bell in Dallas. And as I read this, if anyone hearing it says, oh, is Mike really comfortable with Adam sharing this on air? This is usually very private. Yes, Mike is a longtime listener. And I asked him if he was okay with this or if he just wanted to keep it between us,

and he said absolutely, read it. I went straight from a certain meeting that I go to every Thursday to see weapons. Imagine my surprise when the symbol adorning the door at the very meeting that I had attended a triangle embedded in a circle appeared in the title of the movie. Imagine my greater surprise at the fact that the movie thematized the subject matter of the meeting I had attended, and even mentioned such meetings in Alden Ehrenreich's

phone conversation with his fiance. Imagine my even greater surprise when one character successfully tempted another to do what we call going back out, leading to regret and ruin. I don't know exactly how it all adds up, but clearly alcoholism is somewhere near the forefront of Craiger's mind. Here I read an interview in which Craigor, himself a recovering alcoholic and the son of an alcoholic who died of cirrhosis, said that he intended the final segment to be a

metaphor for living with an alcoholic parent. A nefarious force invades the house, taking away the personality of the parent you once knew. It's food for thought, and I'll need to see the movie again to develop a stronger read on it. But there's something there. I was a longtime listener from the beginning of the show until around twenty fifteen. I used to write in from Staten Island and later

a story of Queens. But I only recently returned to the fold glad to see the show is still growing strong. Thank you, Mike.

instead try to maintain the facade of a functioning family. Finally, I want to highlight the cinematography. I generally love it when filmmakers use long, uncut takes as they make a movie more immersive. Weapons was full of these, and I really love them. You already discussed the one with Justine sleeping in the car. I agree that it worked great, especially the part where we only hear the car door and don't see what is happening. Oh, I'm already getting

goosebumps there. I'd like to add two more examples that were more dynamic. When Paul chases James and the camera is in the car, it really feels like we are sitting in the backseat and taking part of the chase. It also made the geography of the space much easier to understand. If the chase had been shown with many cuts instead, we would have needed to reorient ourselves after each one, whereas here we always know who is where.

Another long take highlight for me was at the end when the camera follows one of the kids running through gardens and houses and jumping through windows. In my opinion, the movie deserves an Oscar nomination for Best Cinematography.

done with the setup. The motif of alcohol addiction and how it impacts people differently, the gas station incident with the cheated on wife where she douses Justine, and Boo's parental concern slash grief, where I was really hoping it would spend more time being a parent of a toddler. Police procedural drug abuse, school closures, COVID came to mind a Rascha Man riff, which came to mind watching these slightly differing recollections of the police slash junkie interaction from

each perspective. But no, we get a much more rote witch story. Yeah, because we needed more cursaba in this show, Josh, and boy do we get a witch story. By the end, you almost entirely forget about all those other far more interesting avenues. The movie ops to bypass, and like you guys pointed out, we had some gory fun while getting there.

I believe I get what he's getting at, namely a school shooting allegory, But other than showing, or rather telling, at the very end, the impact of the trauma and the survivors, it skips over that idea. The very real and wrenching story turns into a total supernatural cop out. Tying the whole movie up in a nice bow so you don't have to think about it after leaving the theater. Welp,

it was just a witch. That explains it. The filmmaking style is excellent, the acting is superb, the setup is gripping, and instead of what could have been a powerful evocation of an all two real social problem, it becomes a boring old witch story like any Blumhouse Jumps Scarre movie. What a shame. I'm definitely a game to keep seeing Craiger movies, but I wish he'd done so much more with the potential here cheers to twenty years. Please keep up the great work.

this is an eye of the beholder thing. I go to Weapons, and I find a movie that Alex isn't wrong. It is ultimately a witch story, but in this case it's a loaded witch story that, as we've been discussing now for a of minutes in concert with a number of listeners, did sustain the readings that Alex described with

enough on text evidence to support them. So that's I need to think more about why Together didn't work for me and Weapons did in this central issue of having an easy explanation for your horror story, but it can hold deeper resonance. Together didn't Weapons did. I think the answer I would give right now is that I find more support for the interpretation I latched onto on the screen, as well as your interpretation, Adam, and the addiction one

we've been talking about. I think it's a richly conceived enough film that it can hold all of those interpretations at once while being a simple witch story. And I'll go to another witch story that does that. The Witch, you know, I think that is clearly, at the end of the day, a witch story, but it's also about religious oppression and fundamentalism and all these other things. In ways you know, it holds all those things too. I think I think Weapons does that for me at least.

But where Alex and I agree a little bit, because I expressed this a little bit during the review is unlike you, rather than having that moment of catharsis when the when the witch was being torn apart, all the witch stuff only distracted me from the Catharsis I wanted, which was more about the Catharsis of the characters themselves, Alex and his parents, Josh brol and Archer and Matthew, Justine and all of her storylines, Like that's that's why

I was invested in. Yeah, and maybe going back to how we started this conversation about you know, where the movie ultimately wraps up. I left the theater kind of like Alex did, just thinking, Oh, it's kind of a silly witch movie. Even though I still was thinking about

pain and all that stuff. I kind of was thinking, oh, that was kind of a that was kind of a silly witch movie, rather than thinking about the characters and their pain and how the story resolved or didn't resolve around them, because I was too busy still thinking about the absurdity of the ending.

structure and given us a PostScript from each person's perspective. Yeah, like yes, and maybe it could have been a year later, maybe it could have been from that those same last three minutes. But because I think you're onto something good here is it spent so much time with those characters. It is a little disappointing not to find a bit of closure with each of them. And maybe that would be Maybe that's a terrible idea in unga only a way to do it, but it just popped in my

head as you were talking there. Yeah.

and yet it really is a good pairing. So right now they're going to be talking about The Sweet Hair after and then they will get to their Weapons review on the following episode. New episodes of The Next Picture Show drop every Tuesday and you can find them wherever you get your podcasts.

So we will have something in your feed, and we think right now we still have to have some conversations here behind the scenes, but our plan right now, you know, we've been sharing some film spotting Fest audio from March, dolling that out over the course of the past few months, and we haven't shared yet our conversation with Coganata about the movie Columbus from Film Spotting Fest, and with his new movie coming out here in September, we thought we

would share that. We might also share your conversation with a Dana Stevens wonderful conversation about pother Panchali She was rt he was so good, so we might share that as well, or we'll save that for later in the year. So you will have you will have new audio or audio you haven't heard before unless you were in the audience at Film spotting Fest in your feed next week and then the following week, we're planning on another Sacred Cow,

another Pantheon project review thirty fifth anniversary. We're finally doing it. Been in the Pantheon all this time, but we've never discussed Martin Scorsese's Goodfellas.

has come on TV, I watch it. If I'm at someone's house and it's on, Yeah, I watch it, like I know every scene from that movie almost by heart.

their adventure and Goonies. It's a stretch, not really, but you also mentioned the cinematographer is the same guy that shot Everything Everywhere all at once, which stars a grown up data key Akwon.

an accuracy that was both incredible and incredibly disturbing. I guess it's probably equally disturbing that I know how accurate they are. This was maybe my favorite movie, Massacre Theater ever. Adam's Ma Fratelli kudos to you for really going for it. Half James Cagney, half Gonzo All and Ramsey.

So thanks for that. Not having seen Weapons yet, I'm sure there are many connections between Goonies and this week's show I missed, but the most obvious one was that it features Josh Brolin. Brolin has said he believes Weapons is a project that has the potential to have a lasting impact in the same way as Goonies. This was somewhat echoed by Josh and that he believes the imagery of the kid's running arms spread out into the night

is something that could become something lasting and iconic. Again, I have not seen weapons, and it does not arrive in theaters in my little backwater part of Norway for a couple of weeks. But your review has me excited and I'm looking forward to checking it out. As always. Keep up the good work.

who also got it before you were done. Goonies is such a part of Oregon Coast culture that one of the hotels in Cannon Beach I recently stayed at had three DVD cop Why you need three such high demand? Uh huh, because what else would you do while staying at a place that overlooks Haystack Rock, then revisit the quest for One Eyed Willie's Treasure.

The performances Donner derives from these kids are spectacular. I think if this film is existing in the spielburghing in school of directing kids, Spielberg having served as the original story writer and producer, it's our time down here. Feel that, Josh, did you feel that?

But a convenient hook is a convenient hook, Which is all to say for those of you who aren't particularly interested in hearing a discussion of Jaws framed around our current administration, just give us a little wiggle room here. I'm pretty confident we're both more excited to talk about Steven Spielberg's camera tricks than his politics. But it's a little eerie how precient his game changing nineteen seventy five

blockbuster is forty five years later. The movie that promised Will Never Go in the Water Again also presents an all too dangerously familiar type of huckster politician during a crisis who fails to heed the warnings of scientists, dramatically downplays and dismisses the potential loss of life. Can't wait to pat himself and his cronies on the back, loves to preen for a TV camera, and who demands those beaches be open because business demands they be open. Yep, Sorry,

even the scary shark movie is actually about coronavirus. And I'm far from the only one who has noticed. My Twitter timeline has jumped the snark over the past couple of months, including this from Frank Rich just a few nights ago, commenting on a New York Times breaking news tweet that read Vice President Mike Pence encourage governors to repeat a misleading claim about coronavirus outbreaks, Rich wrote, Pence

makes the Jaws Mayor look like Churchill. Mayor Vaughan is played with a Penzian affable smugness by Murray Hans Hamilton, and one line I had always kind of overlooked this struck me on this rewatch is when he's spurning the pleas of Roy Scheider's chief Martin Brody and Richard Dreyfus's Matt Hooper to keep the beaches closed. On July fourth, America's data celebrate its independence and pre eminence, and he explains, I don't think either one of you are familiar with

our problems, our problems. You see, Matt is a visitor to Amity, and the chief, well, he's an interloper. He's a cop from New York City who just moved his family to the island a year ago. Mayor Vaughan translated, why should I take advice on what my people should do from you foreigners? Maybe he would have listened to the warnings of a police chief who was a born and bred Islander. Maybe not, but Martin's otherness sure makes

him really easy to ignore. So, Josh, I'm curious. As a starting point anyway, on this viewing, was your mind still mostly blown by Jaws remarkable craft or in the midst of this pandemic starring Inn satiable predacious virus that's always lurking out of sight? Was it the movie surprising relevancy that had you jumping out of your seat.

But sitting down to watch the movie again, it's the details that are so one to one that did absolutely shock me. And I want to say at the start, you know, I realize that this is not as cut and dried. On the one hand that the administration wants things to seem, it's, you know, not as cut and dried maybe for some people. On the other hand, I don't own a small family business, you know, but my livelihood is not tied to something that is directly affected by these closings. So I do get it that this

is a real issue for some people. Yet the broad scale opening I think that the White House has been pushing not only seems unwise but is very much in line with what we see Amity's mayor pushing for in this movie. And just quotes like Murray Hamilton saying we need summer dollars. You know, you can just you basically have been hearing that for two months now. And I think there are other details worth mentioning. The Pence correlation,

Adam is absolutely the amended autopsy report, right. They fudge the autopsy report to make it not look like a shark attack. That's what's going on in the case. In this recent case of Pence, you mentioned Hooper, and there's this distrust of Hooper. I don't I didn't make the you know, the outsider immigrant connection quite as much. I think that's that's really smart. But I think of him as like the outside experts, who's bringing scientific evidence and data?

Right This is who is immediately distrusted, is the person with the facts. And that again is all we're seeing from up on top right now, the eagerness for an easy solution. When the fishermen catch the first shark and right away it's like, let's have a parade. It's over. Everybody get in the water immediately. And how about this one. This is a more subtle one that it's maybe not

as easy to laugh about. But the distraction from the issue at hand, I mean, how much nonsense we're always putting up with nonsense coming out of the White House, But how much did that amp up after COVID nineteen hit. And it's very much in line with that conversation Hooper and Brody and the mayor have underneath the amity sign and it's been vandalized, right and so immediately for the mayor, that's issue number one.

Everyone is rushing to get to shore. There's one guy, there's one guy who a was dumb enough to go in the water, right, but then when things go bad, he pushes those kids off the raft and steals it and desperately paddles back to shore in terror. That's Trump. If you want to look for Trump in that movie and how he's behaved throughout his presidency and particularly when crisis hits, he's that dumb guy.

He speaks to the panic. Yeah, it speaks to the panic. It speaks to the selfishness, It speaks to all the things that we're talking about. And yes, we definitely will geek out on the formal elements of this movie, I'm sure, But having not really devoted a lot of time to studying this movie or having discussed it in detail before on this show, I got all the Twitter jokes over the past couple of months, But it was because, Yeah, of course, I've always just kind of taken the idiot

it may or aspect. For granted, that was part of the story. It wasn't really some kind of statement on Spielberg's part with regard to American politics or Americans in general. But it is very hard to watch it now and separate that aspect, and even more interesting for me than all the parallels that were touching on and you really

nicely articulated. For me, what's fascinating is where the political and the personal intersect in this film, which I think fits nicely with what this movie does as a whole, so very well, which is mixing the horror and those thriller adventure aspects with the personal too. It's in getting to know these people, it's having an attachment to Chief Brody in his family. That great scene at the dinner table after the slap is one of my favorites. I think I may have had it in my top five

Spielberg moments. But just going off memory, coming into this film, I thought of Chief Brody as this purely heroic figure and that it was the idiot mayor and the greed of the townspeople that prevent this guy, this stand up righteous man, from doing his job and saving lives, and that he's almost this Cassandra like figure who unfortunately is ignored, except when you watch closely, you realize he doesn't really put up a fight when the medical examiner changes the

police report, as you pointed out, from a shark attack to a boting accident. He doesn't actually really protest. What he does is what so many of us do. He just tries to cover his ass. The exact lines are, that's not what you told me over the phone. And when theme says I was wrong, we'll have to amend

our reports, Brody says, and you'll stand by that. So, in other words, as long as the medical examiner will go on the record and say that that's the cause of death, then Chief Brody's willing to wash his hands of it. Right, And when they catch the tiger shark, and they all do preemptively celebrate, he's all too eager, Like how much attention Spielberg pays to Shier smiling, and how willing he is to congratulate everyone and even pose

for the picture himself triumphantly. Right, it's not because, like the others, he really probably wants the glory and he wants the publicity. I think we understand that about who he is as a person, but you know what it is. It does make life so much easier, doesn't it. If the shark was caught, it makes his life so much easier. So he's immediately willing again, like so many of us are. He's immediately willing to assume the truth of what is told to him and what seems to be shown to him,

rather than dig deeper and actually confront the truth. And what finally does prompt moments of reckoning for both Brody and the mayor. I think it's really worth pointing out that it isn't until missus Kittner slaps him. Brody doesn't

show much remorse. You can tell that this is weighing on him, but he is willing to celebrate, as I said, in that moment, and he doesn't reflect or really show remorse or awareness of his guilt that Alex's death could have been prevented if he hadn't been complicit in basically covering up the shark attack. And for the mayor, it's

the same. It's when he says, my kids were on that beach too, So it's that Hooper line that's actually the response to the line I quoted in the setup from the mayor about not wanting to hear from them. They don't understand our problems. He says, I think that I'm familiar with the fact that you're going to ignore this particular problem until it swims up and bites you on the ass, until it swims up and bites them

on the ass. The chief is willing to look the other way, the mayor is willing to look the other way. A lot of us are willing to look the other way.

And so there's a negotiation there. And I don't know about you, but as things are open up and we're trying to follow what actual experts say is safe to do right now, just not governmental bodies who have perhaps other interests. Yet at the same time, we have teenage kids who are desperate to associate with their friends, and we have some friends whose families are making some decisions, some who are making other decisions. We're kind of like, do we let our kids go in the water? Like?

Which body of water do we let our kids go into? And how are we making our own compromises. So I'm glad you brought that up about Brody because it does complicate things in a way that I think is more true to life. And it adds absolutely And maybe here's where we can get into other aspects of the film. Into what you were talking about, Adam, is how personal this film is not only tied to Brodie's family, but

really to an extent, this community at large. And let me give you an example that'll also get us into the craft. It was Michael Phillips number three Spielberg scene, and it is that first bea attack sequence. First of all, just the patience of the filmmaking there watching it again, how much time is spent on building the suspense. But here's here's what I mean about it being personal. Each potential victim in that sequence gets a story it's patient enough to give them a story. So we have the

boy who's begging to go back in the water. Right, that's a mini picture of a real family right there. Any of us with kids know that conversation. There's also the woman floating peacefully alone. The shot is long enough to wonder is she just at the beach by herself? You know? Is what is she? You know, just chilling for the day? What's her story? Then how about.

to know intimately, but we formed. Spielberg is patient enough, and the shot selection is intentional enough to allow us to form a little bit of relationship so that when the chaos strikes it's all the more terrifying.

filmspotting dot net just click on lists. I don't remember my exact top five Spielberg moments, but if I was redoing it now, that sequence wouldn't be just at number three, it would probably be at number one. And let's be honest, we could do at minimum a top five moments just from this film.

of this film Brody on the Beach. He's watching obsessively, and I'm going to come back to why I think that part of it is actually important in a second, and we get those wipe cuts on movement, the residents, the residents walking in front of him, almost like it's the blinking of his eye, and every time we get one of those blinks, we get closer to his face, and it does just take everything you were talking about.

All that tension, all that dread is just mounting, and it mounts with every single one of those little innocent cuts, those little innocent blinks, and it's all just sound, right. There's no real dialogue, there's no music at this point. It's all just sound and motion, sound and motion, which is filmmaking, right, Filmmaking at its core is sound and motion.

And even then we get that shot where Spielberg employs a little trick that is a preview of another trick that's going to come, where Brody's perspective is obscured by the guy, another guy who kind of gets a story, Josh, to your point, Yeah, the guy we all know who's the busybody who only cares about what the reckless holmbs

in town or whatever are doing to him. And he's really got to take a look at that he's telling the chief, right, and his perspective is obscured by that guy in his shoulder, and we watch as Brody does what we want him to do. Lifts his eyes, lifts his head over the guy's shoulders so we can see,

and then we get a diopter shot. I'm pretty sure it's a diopter shot that obscures the perspective between what Brody's seeing and in the foreground that guy's face and then in the water what he's looking at, which again

it does just continue to heighten the tension. Something seems very off in that moment, and that diopter shot actually comes the second before a scream, But it's a scream in the water that isn't the attack yet, so it's all just to tease to well, it's the scream of those kids who are playing in the water, the teenagers, and all of that is what actually sets up the

classic shot, the vertigo trick shot. It's one thing to think of that when you take it just on its own as a scene to analyze, and you recognize that he is zooming forward at the same time he is pulling back. That's the technique that gives that amazing effect of fear and awareness of what's happening when the Kittner attack actually begins, as the camera focuses in on Brody. But that's exactly what it's doing just as the shots before it, those cuts were playing with distance and playing

with perspective at once. That's what's happening here. Time and space is completely collapsing in that moment.

You know, my pick from Jaws for our top five Spielberg scenes, which will probably get to though I went on and on and on when we did that episode, is show Me the Way to Go Home, the comparing scours scene. But I do agree in terms of craft, maybe in terms of characterization, that's the best scene in the film. In terms of craft, it's this one here

that we've been talking about. But you know you're in for this high level of craft from the very start of this film, And one thing I did not remember watching it again is that John Williams score is the first thing we get I think before even any images, we're getting that score. So how supremely confident the filmmakers

were right of William's work here to do that. And then we get the teenagers on the beach at night time, and I loved how the camera movement shift here and really moves us into the terror because when they're on the beach hanging out, there's a tracking shot along all of them that shows us clearly we're on stable ground. It's a smooth shot. Right before we get on the water.

Things are smooth. Then the two of them run to the water and the movement increases, the camera picks up speed, still tracks, but is going faster now, a little jostling. And then finally when we get in the water, it is when we start to have that sort of lulling effect that we'll have throughout much of the film. And that's just kind of a way to take us from from stable land to a place of instability and fear. And I think, you know, that attack itself is scary

because at first she's confused. You know, we know what's happening because we're here to see Jaws, even if this is the first time we saw it, right, But she does not doesn't understand what's happening to her. Then she gets that moment of reprieve hanging on to the buoy. Then the final bite comes pulls her under and we have stillness and silence. So all of this establishes the water as a place of danger compared to the land.

And what do we get after this sequence? The first shot Brody uneasily looking out the window of his house at the bay, at the water. So you know you're in the hands already of someone where every shot is going to count. Not a second is wasted. Even think of that moment right there with Brody and his wife, who I do want to get to. There's another shot.

I don't know if it's a diopter, but he takes the phone call in their kitchen in the foreground while the mother and son are attending to the child's cut. In the background. Blood, right, that's what we're getting. There is more blood in the background again, a little kind of a setup scene for the narrative. But Spielberg is doing so much, squeezing so much efficiency and important imagery into that shot as well.

a little bit. He's just always playing with movement right in a really really fascinating way, and all of those shots matter. I think I went with when we did that top five Spielberg moments my cliche, and there are so many of them that are just so great and so classic from this movie to pick from, I think I went with the Chalkboard sequence, right, the one where we get that great, one of the all time great

character introductions into cinema to Quint. But the other one that a lot of people would point to, and it's still great no matter how many times you watch it, is the Indianapolis speech. And I did notice one thing this time. There was always obvious before, I just never zeroed in on. It is one little touch, one little decision with the framing I think Spielberg makes that heightens every thing with that speech is that he keeps Richard

Dreyfus in the shot. We know how invested Matt Hooper is in all things sharks, right, yeah, and their history, their legacy almost if you will. He knows that story. We know without him even saying it that he knows, and he does actually verbalize it, I think at one point, but we know that he probably is familiar with all of the lore of the Indianapolis, and he's also fascinated

by and also terrorized by to an extent, Quint. Yes, And so when Quinn starts telling a story that puts him in that place and having had that experience, he's in awe and just by keeping him in the right of the frame visible the entire time Dreyfus plays it perfectly, doesn't react at all, is just completely focused on Quint's words, his investment in the story that becomes our investment, and it already is a reflection of our investment as viewers.

But I think then we're just hanging on every word in a way that maybe we wouldn't even if it wasn't for the fact that we've got a surrogate there in the scene who is showing us how important every word is, how important this experience is, and how important the storytelling itself is, the act of storytelling.

up with that. Now, Sackler didn't get screenplay credit, but Spielberg mentioned that he came up with the idea and inserted it, and then John Millius apparently did some work on the speech at some point, and then Robert Shaw himself, you know, brought his own addition, Spielberg said, which you can imagine. So I think I kind of cheated and rolled the Show Me the Way to Go Home Scar

scene right into Indianapolis, and that was my pick. But at a little touch I noticed this time was after they the two are comparing their scars, so Quint and Hooper, and it's really like, you know, they're they're pretty close Hooper's had some tough experiences there, even compared to quint. At the end of that, Brody pulls up his shirt quietly in the corner away from them. He's not at the table, and we see he's got a scar too

across his abdomen. He just looks at it and pulls his shirt down and it looks like a you know, a pretty big scar like I don't think it was just like a bike accident, but still it's just like, you know, the levels of manliness at play among the three of them, it's not enough for him to enter that contest. Another great character touch that I love. What's that one?

of the Benchley source material. But another new thing for me watching this time, Josh, And this is where I was going when I was hinting at the obsessiveness of Roy's watching, is I don't think that classic shot on the beach, the zoom pull back is the only Hitchcock theft in this film or the only direct homage to Vertigo even in this film, right, because that's where it comes from, right, And maybe there are other instances in cinema history, But famously that shot in Vertigo Scotty Jimmy

Stewart hanging over the ledge looking down. We get that same effect zooming and pulling back in that disorienting sense that it gives us as viewers. Well, Brody is a lot like Scotti in Vertigo. Both are cops, both effectively are retired from being police officers. There's some little character details that we get that I'd also never paid attention to really before, about what being on the beat or being on the job in New York City was like

and how different that is. And instead of heights, what's his fear, he's afraid of water? Right, it's elemental. He does not want to go near the water. So there's

a perfect correlation here actually to Vertigo. And I do think that whether that's just spiel film school playfulness at work and we can geek out about that a little bit, that fear and making that a psychological foundation for Brody is something that really gives this film a richness that maybe another filmmaker would not bring to what could have been obviously just kind of a B movie where the types of scares we get when the face pops out at Hooper under the water, and maybe some of the

shark attacks could have been more gruesome and bloody. We could have gotten that type of bee picture here. But it's not just the craft. It's those character touches that you have pointed out, and it's also that psychological underpinning that's there.

the show off touch of the shark. At this point, I think it has three barrels harpooned to it should be impossible to go underwater at all. Not only does it go underwater, it goes under the boat right to just kind of like kind of give them a little middle finger that really with them, to tally with them. I do want to jump back because I mentioned her character briefly, Brodie's wife, but not the actress Lorraine Gary as Allen, and I just you know, I think she

stands in a line of it. I don't want to give Stielberg too much credit here. He's a male dominant filmmaker, absolutely, but Lorraine Gary as Allen is in a line of fully envisioned and fully performed women characters. Again, they're sidelined because they never really get their full stories. But think of Karen Allen in Raiders of the Lost Dark, think of d Wallace in Et the Extraterrestrial, Terry Ghar in

Close Encounters. Again, you could reorient most of those movies perhaps around each of those women, and they might be just as interesting different experiences, and it's sad that we haven't gotten a cinema like that alongside the cinema of men. But for the amount of screen time they have, I think they are given attention by Spielberg as a filmmaker, and I think the actors these actresses give such great performances.

Lorraine Gary here, I love how she's supportive of Brody, like you know, she's got his back, but she also has her own ideas, like she pushes back on him. She has her own ideas about their family, but when it comes to if it's going to come down to the island or them, she's gonna stand right next to him and protect the family against the island and the mayor and that sort of stuff. She also has a sardonic sense of humor about that community. She deflates their pretensions.

I love the little line like how much work does a line like this do? And the delivery by Gary when she just says want to get drunk and full around. I mean, in a second, you have that marriage right, you know them, and it's it's because of how she delivers it. And again you mentioned the dinner family scene, just another wonderful domestic touch, which was such a strength of Spielberg's early films, in particular when it ends with Brody's son mimicking him and Brody just says to him,

give us a kiss, you know. And again another line interaction delivery where this family becomes so fully formed even though it's not really about them. This story isn't meant to be about them, but it still becomes so much about them because of performances like this.

including its timelessness. And I'm really glad you brought up Lorrange Gary, because I agree with everything you said, and I also get to point out that if someone would like to while they're listening, go to Google and type in Lorraine Gary Jaws and look at her hair and hairstyle and see if it maybe reminds you of someone like I don't know Kim Novak from Vertigo, just a

little bit that blonde hair, the way it's up. But I will also point to a character moment with her that I love that I also think is so indicative of human nature. It just speaks to who she is, but who we all are. And it's in that moment where after the first attack, I think, after the first body is washed up on shore, he's reading all the books and he's trying to learn what he can about sharks. And he looks out and he shouts at his kids who are out in their little boat that one of

them got for his birthday. But they're just along the dock, and the mom's like, what are you doing? What are you doing? They're just along the dock, they're in the boat. They're fine. But then what happens. She glances down at a page in the book where a boat is being attacked by a shark, and in that moment, she then screams at the boys to come in, and Brody has no idea what's happening. And I love that because wouldn't

we all do that very same thing? You have that initial dismissal, you go, they're fine, what are we worried about? But the moment, and this kind of goes back to what we were talking about earlier, the moment it becomes visual, the moment it becomes real in your mind and you can actually imagine what you just saw in that book happening to your children on that boat right the second Then the panic sets in. Then the protective instinct sets in, and she shouts at the boys to come in, speaking

of fear. I will also say this, and this is not an exaggeration at all. So I go back all the jokes about this movie making people afraid to go in the water. I think I've alluded to this before. I remember as a kid being afraid. I'd lay in my bed. This is like from ages maybe seven to ten, or maybe maybe past that. Josh, we don't have to get into the numbers here. Who's counting?

all over again. I'm watching this movie. I'm sitting on the couch in my office sort of viewing area, and it's one of those where the side also reclines like a chair. And there were two moments where I caught myself pulling my feet back off of the extension. I couldn't let myself fully recline because my toes were dangling on the floor and Jos was going.

to try that sometimes. But just to go back to your note about the books, the pictures in the books, it's effective in that scene as a character development and motivation for that moment, but also I noticed you know, we've talked, I'm sure at some point on the show, and everyone talks about all the filmmaking tricks Spielberg had to do to get around this faulty mechanical shark, right, John Williams score is one thing. Using the camera point of view as the shark is another way. But it

struck me this time. That's why we get so many insert shots I think of these books is because he can't show the shark attacking. So let's show something even scarier, not like a yankee mechanical shark, but actual photos of attacks from real life, and the autopsy description that Hooper

can barely get through that serves the same purpose. So those are just a few other things that stand in place of the actual shark here, in addition to the more traditional ones people mentioned, like the barrels or like the peer breaking and then turning around and coming after

the Yeah, there's just again. It goes back to the efficiency, the killer great white shark like efficiency of this movie, where yes, even an insert shot of a shark attack in a book is going to serve multiple purposes for the film.

us what the shark would see. And that's all we need to experience to really feel the horror of Jaws.

on film We are independently produced and listeners supported. You can support the show by joining the film Spotting Family at film spottingfamily dot com, listen early and ad free get a weekly newsletter. Get monthly bonus episodes and access to the entire show archive. For show t shirts and other merch go to film spotting dot net slash shop.

earlier this week. And my favorite part of that top five is when I was certain I was going to get praise from camal Bell for including that deep cut of Deja Vu in my top five, only to have him laugh at me for putting it on my list.

is on Netflix streaming. A retirement community or friends from a retired community form the club of the title to work on cold cases for fun when they find themselves in the middle of a live murder case. It's directed by Chris Columbus, but the cast Helen Mirren, Ben Kingsley, Pierce Brosnan.

Phenomenal work from Strathurn. Really great. He's He's always great. Also, we should mention the Tell You Write Film Festival is starting through September first. If you happen to be out there now, this is a good one. I've actually never seen this somehow, despite being a huge Prince fan. Prince Sign of the Times in Imax in limited release. This was originally out in nineteen eighty seven. Now it's out

in Imax. Producer Sam this is his four star letterbox review, Like if gene Kelly directed porn.

out in wide release. Aeronofsky's new film Caught Stealing, a nineties crime drama starring Austin Butler as a former baseball player who finds himself mixed up in New York City's criminal underbelly. This also has a really good cast Zoey Kravitz, Regina King, Matt Smith, Lee Have Schreiber, Vincent Dinafrio, and others. The Roses I've never been interested. I wasn't interested in

the Michael Douglas Kathleen Turner version. If you just on paper seeing another version of the eighties black comedy The War of the Roses, this one with Olivia Coleman and Bennett Cumberbatch, Andy Samberg's in it, Kate mckinning, Alison Janney on paper, I don't care. I've seen the trailer a few times though, and maybe it's just how game Coleman and cumber Batch are. Looks kind of fun.

Tasha Robinson, our friend from the Next Picture Show, caught it back in twenty twenty three and said this, there's a whole lot of huh. I've never seen anyone explode quite like that before in this extremely goofy, utterly self aware remake. Also, there is no scenery left in the entire world because Kevin Bacon has now eaten it all.