MISCHKE: The Odyssey (ep. 132)

Summary

Podcast Summary: Garage Logic - MISCHKE: The Odyssey (Ep. 132)

Date: July 29, 2026
Host: Mishke
Guest: Niles (of the Niles Film Files)
Main Theme:
A robust, freewheeling analysis of Christopher Nolan’s epic film "The Odyssey", as Mishke and Niles dissect its cultural impact, artistic choices, interpretive liberties, and Nolan’s philosophy, set amidst a wider discussion about art, monoculture, and the enduring power of stories.

---

Episode Overview

The episode centers on Christopher Nolan’s film "The Odyssey," its cultural resonance, artistic interpretation versus Homeric tradition, and the rare phenomenon of a true “monoculture” film event in 2026. Mishke and Niles offer a blend of nostalgia, critique, and philosophical musing, coloring their cinephile discussion with humor, personal anecdotes, and candid reflections.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Return of Monoculture & Film Event Status

• Monoculture Resurgence:
  Niles opens by marveling at how “refreshing” it is to have a film everyone is talking about again, reminiscent of mainstream hits like “Avatar.”

  "Isn't it amazing or refreshing to have the monoculture back, if only for a little bit?” —Niles [02:39]

• Mishke and Niles debate whether widespread shared cultural moments outweigh the benefits of endless choice in the streaming era.
• Film as a Touchstone:
  Mishke notes how “The Odyssey” is a touchstone—everyone approaches it from different angles: cultural, political, artistic, sociological [01:00–04:00].

The Nolan Interpretation vs. Homeric Roots

• Artistic Liberties:
  Niles acknowledges Nolan’s “Odysseus” is not Homer’s—he’s more modern, guilt-ridden, and less the “cunning” trickster:

  “This is not Homer's Odysseus, this is Christopher Nolan's Odysseus... a sad sack, self-appraising, guilt-ridden Nolan hero.” —Niles [15:41]

• Removed Fun & Sex:
  Mishke laments the “wildness” and sensuality of Homer’s tale is largely absent from Nolan:

  “This is quite a tale. That's why what I saw wasn't Homer's story. Homer's not in this.” —Mishke [18:46] Niles relates Nolan’s tendency to avoid sex and stick with cerebral drama and “stiff upper lip” restraint [17:36–19:04].

• The Siren and Lotus Scenes:
  Both discuss deviations in scenes like Calypso and Circe, where mythic sensual imprisonment is replaced with toned-down, ambiguous encounters [18:13–22:28].
  The lotus eater sequence—a metaphor for escapism—drawing sympathy from both.

Casting & Performance

• Matt Damon as Odysseus:
  Mishke critiques Damon as a visible “movie star,” lacking the full chameleonic immersion of someone like Daniel Day Lewis:

  “You always recognize the Matt Damon-ness of Matt Damon.” —Mishke [26:38]

• Niles argues Damon's relatability works for audiences, and likens him to Robert Redford—always himself, but effective.
• Supporting Cast:
  Niles praises Samantha Morton as Circe (“almost a scene-stealing role”) and discusses the controversy over “woke” casting—Lupita Nyong’o as Helen, a trans actor as a Greek warrior—while dismissing such complaints as unfounded [11:21].

Political & Philosophical Layers

• Discussion of the political “culture war” angle, but both hosts agree the film transcends partisan takes—Ben Shapiro, for instance, liked the film despite critiquing casting [12:09].
• Thematic Shift:
  Nolan’s film is “post-Christian” in its guilt and atonement themes, diverging from Homeric glorification and classical values:

  “...when he finally talks to Penelope after 20 years, what's separating them looks a lot like a Catholic confessional screen... that's not a Hellenistic idea, it's a post-Christian one.” —Niles [30:29]

• Kindness & Hierarchies:
  Mishke parses the motif of “being kind to beggars,” noting the subtle but crucial moral twist Nolan introduces versus Homer's original ([31:55–33:03]).

Artistic Choices & Presentation

• Visuals and Theatrical Experience:
  Niles describes the rare, organic spectacle of seeing the film in 70mm IMAX, emphasizing the immersive, “alive” quality of analog film—the colors, lighting, and shadows [44:06].
• Effects:
  The Cyclops scene stands out for practical makeup over CGI, invoking real-world deformities and horror (“looked real to me” —Mishke [41:54]); the transformation of men into pigs compared to practical throwbacks like “An American Werewolf in London” [20:20].

Dialogue, Language, and Tone

• Some critics find the dialogue stilted or too contemporary (“Hi, Danny” instead of Shakespearean); Niles defends the accuracy, noting even Telemachus uses “Daddy” in the original Greek [35:29].
• Both dismiss complaints about American accents as superfluous, referencing the power of non-historical authenticity in films like “Last Temptation of Christ” [36:06].

Larger Reflections on Movies and the Art Form

• Modern vs. Traditional Storytelling:
  Mishke wonders about replaying ancient stories (“amazing that we can pull 3,000-year-old stories out in 2026 and say, yeah, this will still work”).
  Niles sees contemporary resonance: “The film is set at the precipice of a dark age... a recalcitrant defiance to the end of things... I’m still gonna follow the light.” [49:12]
• Nolan’s Influences and Cinema’s Trajectory:
  Both hosts reflect on Nolan’s power post-Oppenheimer and what it means for studio filmmaking—a possible return to the creative freedom and ambition of 1970s auteurs [45:42–48:49].
• Comparison with Single-Location Films:
  Mishke pivots to an appreciation of “one-room” films like “The Big Kahuna,” “My Dinner with Andre,” and “Carnage,” contrasting their intimacy with Nolan’s large canvas. [55:43–57:18]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On Monoculture

• “We have to talk to each other suddenly, or we want to talk to each other again about this subject.” —Niles [03:41]

On Nolan’s Style

• “He doesn't like emotional complexity.” —Mishke [18:55]
• “Nolan doesn’t really do sex scenes. He's not a sensualist. He's very cerebral.” —Niles [18:46]

On Art vs. Audience

• “First of all, where was it written that you get to have your movie exactly how you want?” —Mishke [12:22]

On Film Technology

• “The black spaces of that frame, I think, allows your imagination to run with it and you descend into it.” —Niles [44:06]

On Legacy and Literature

• “Translations of the Odyssey surging up the bestseller charts. People are out buying the book. Homer is a best seller again. He is back.” —Mishke [50:03]

On Directing and Acting Methods

• “Who would you say is of the Daniel Day Lewis caliber? Where when the person plays a role, they're gone. They're not there anymore.” —Mishke [27:16]

---

Timestamps of Major Segments

• 00:00–05:05: Introduction, the monoculture, context around "The Odyssey"
• 07:41–15:41: First reactions to the film, discussion of Homer vs. Nolan’s Odysseus
• 17:36–22:59: Sensuality, fun, Circe and Sirens scenes, use of practical effects
• 26:31–28:07: Matt Damon, movie star casting, acting styles
• 30:29–33:35: Nolan’s philosophy, post-Christian themes, moral reinterpretations
• 41:54–45:42: Cyclops scene, visual presentation, practical effects, IMAX spectacle
• 49:12–50:03: The film’s message, chasing the light, modern relevance
• 55:43–58:34: Conversation about single-room movies, comparing scope in cinema
• 61:03–63:47: Nolan’s future, film direction in Hollywood, final reflections

---

Final Impressions

Mishke and Niles craft a compelling, multidimensional review of “The Odyssey,” blending close-reading with personal taste, cultural speculation, and critiques of art’s purpose. Their conversational chemistry, laced with humor and sharp insight, extends far beyond typical film review, touching on the nature of storytelling, the evolution of film, and why stories like “The Odyssey”—retold, reinterpreted, and wrestled with—still matter.

Recommended for:
Movie lovers, literature fans, anyone interested in the intersection of ancient myth, modern cinema, and the culture wars, as well as those who enjoy thoughtful but playful cultural criticism.

Transcript

[A]

As technology becomes more complex, cyber reality dominates the culture, and AI becomes an endless, anxious discussion, simple, old human storytelling becomes all the more precious. And that's what you'll find on the Mishki Podcast. In the end, we're all just people. Folks with our brilliance and our absurdities and stories about people. Well, they never get old. The Mishke Podcast, wherever you get your podcasts, gonna take you on a bit of an odyssey here. Buckle up. I'm here in the old outpost ready to give you yet another show. My name's Mishke Hudie Yuti. You. Gearing up for a barn burner? Welcome, folks, to the old podcast Mishke here with you as is Niles of the Niles Film Files. We mentioned earlier in the summer when Odyssey came out, Niles and I would regroup. Last time we talked, it was after disclosure day. This one feels a little bigger. This one feels a little more monumental. This one feels a little more talked about. Not that the other one wasn't. This one also seems to be making more money. A Christopher Nolan film seems these days to be more of an event. Anyway, we're going to talk about the Odyssey because when you talk about the Odyssey, you're talking about everything. Culture, life, philosophy, art, humanity. People have taken on this film from every single direction. It's like a touchstone culturally right now. And I can go in a dozen different directions with Niles on this film. I have no idea what he thinks of the film. I know he's seen the film. This is the first time he and I are going to talk about it. And you can eavesdrop. Welcome, Niles.

[B]

Hi, Mishki. Isn't it amazing or refreshing to have the monoculture back, if only for a little bit? Everyone is talking about the Odyssey. That's all they're talking about.

[A]

It's interesting when you say, isn't it nice to have that back? I almost have to think back to when I felt that way. When was the last time you felt

[B]

that way in regards to movies? I don't know. Might have to go Back to the 2000s, Avatar, or even before that. We've been blessed and cursed in the sense that the televisual mediums have fractured so much. I mean, there's so many directions and things that people could watch and listen to and so on, but, you know, no one's talking about the same thing in terms of water cooler discussion, that kind of stuff.

[A]

Yeah, it is interesting to look at it as a blessing and a curse. We don't all get to talk about the same thing anymore. But we all get to find something we really like. I don't know how to weigh that.

[B]

Neither do I. But we have to talk to each other suddenly, or we want to talk to each other again about this subject. I think.

[A]

I guess I'll err on the side of it's better to have fewer choices and have something we can all talk about. I don't know that we need all the shows we have out there. I don't know if we need all the streaming shows, the movies and the TV series and the films and the theaters, and I don't know that we need it all. I would say we probably don't. I always think about Lincoln. Good old Abe, the old rail splitter, as we call him in my family. I think about Abe Lincoln growing up with the Bible and Shakespeare in that log cabin. He could peruse the Bible or Shakespeare and educated himself on the stories he found in both of those books.

[B]

You could take both of those on a desert island and probably live out the rest of your days reading, rereading, interpreting, reinterpreting.

[A]

And hopefully there'd be another guy on the island to talk to about him and not some guy who says, I brought my own book. I brought Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Don't bother me. Let's assume that a good percentage of the people listening caught the film and a good percentage of the people listening did not catch the film. It's been out since. What about the 17th?

[B]

Yep, July 17th.

[A]

You and I have both seen it. I think we should just agree that spoilers will be all over the place in this discussion. And if people are bothered by that because they want to go see the film, they should check out now. I don't want to be hampered by that. There's a lot to talk about here. Let's dig in. When did you see the film first?

[B]

Saw the film probably two weeks ago at a pre screening, actually.

[A]

You saw it at a pre screening where other critics were invited.

[B]

Yes. So I was surrounded by the other eggheads, so to speak, my colleagues.

[A]

And you, I thought, had a policy of not talking about the film with those folks right afterward. Is that true?

[B]

That's true. I don't like talking about a movie asap. Afterwards. I like to marinate a bit. And with this one, I needed to marinate. I know a lot of people were applauding the instant the credits rolled. I overheard people saying that was one of the most amazing things ever. And I had to sit with it for a while. And I saw it a second time a couple days after that.

[A]

All right, I saw it only once. I think it's fair to say in this film's case, a second viewing was probably called for. I'm not a fan of seeing films twice. I read something within the last 48 hours that I'm sure you're going to agree with. Let me see if I can find it here. I saved it because I wanted to bring it up here. It has to do with just what I'm talking about here. Oh, of course. It's from Kubrick. He says the idea that a movie should be seen only once is an extension of our traditional conception of film as entertainment rather than art. And yet I am a man who likes to be surprised, likes to not know what's coming next. Thinks a story is best when you don't know it already. And thus a second viewing just isn't something I'm up for. I don't think of it the same way as looking at a painting twice. I really think you sit down in a theater and. And say, tell me a story. And I don't know how many times around a fire after a person tells me a story in life I've ever said, that was great. Tell that again exactly like you did. Start to finish. Once more with feeling. I never think that I want that story told again. But you're gonna give an argument for why you do go back. What is that?

[B]

Well, in this case, this story has been told so many times anyway, over 3,000 years.

[A]

Not that story. That's one of my arguments in this show, is that's not the story. This is Nolan's story.

[B]

Yes, and I actually agree with that. But the thing is that variations of this story have been told over and over again. The plot is, for the most part, the same plot. The story, which you could differentiate from the plot or the contours and texture of it is totally different. And that's actually a reason why I revisited this. Because I'm kind of a literature nerd, and I'm very familiar with Homer and the Odyssey and the Iliad and with the liberties that this film took. That's what I had to chew on in terms of why he's making those changes. And when I returned to it, things cleared up. In addition to just kind of my basic problems with aesthetic problems with Christopher Nolan, I think his movies are kind of clunky here and there, especially in this case during the first 20 minutes. And then it gets into gear. And now that I know the rhythm of it, When I return to it, it's a whole new experience. And after I watched the second time, there was a lot more that clicked in terms of what he was going for.

[A]

I've heard people say, why did we lose the great tradition that was once common in America of the intermission? Lot of people talking about missing parts of this film due to needing to use the bathroom.

[B]

I'm with you. I wish the intermission would come back.

[A]

When I read an article and the article was just about this, I said, my God, yet another take on the odyssey I didn't see coming. As somebody who for years going back to the 90s, has gotten up every day and taken a look at the world around me through the media available to me, I don't know that there's been a film written about to this degree from as many angles from all sectors, cultural, political, artistic, sociological. Somebody when I brought this up, said, what about Barbie Heimer? Oppen? Barbie And I know those are two movies. Those are two movies. People talked about both of those movies coming out in a summer.

[B]

In both cases it was warranted. And they were both films that asked people to talk about them as cultural events. But I think the way they bounced off each other and barbieheimer Weekend was a thing, and it was a month and it was a whole year, basically. If they had just been released independently of each other, I think it wouldn't have been as significant.

[A]

Right.

[B]

This involves the culture wars. The Passion of The Christ in 2004, a lot of people were talking about that and it was a huge success. And before that, the Last Temptation of Christ in 1988, everyone was talking about that at the time, but nowhere near in terms of commercial success.

[A]

Right. I would argue you have two things different going on here. One is the success of this film. This film, folks, is going to make a lot of money, and I mean profit. It is going to make a lot of money. And a lot of people tried to kill interest in this film early on. They hoped to by taking on its supposed.

[B]

Its political accused by the.

[A]

The.

[B]

The identitarian woke. Right, let's say of being. Of being a woke movie, of being a woke left movie of DEI casting, that kind of thing. Because you have a trans actor playing a Greek warrior, or you have Lupita Nyong' o playing Helen of Troy. And as these people seem to allege that you can't have a black woman playing the most beautiful woman in the world. They're laying their cards on the table in a really disgusting way.

[A]

First of all, it should Be mentioned that this is not universal. A far right guy, no two ways about it would be. Ben Shapiro absolutely loved this film.

[B]

Yes. And this is the thing about when it gets into the weeds of politics is that, yeah, Ben Shapiro loved it. He still criticized some of the casting.

[A]

He called that minor, though it doesn't

[B]

get in the way of the movie for him.

[A]

First of all, where was it written that you get to have your movie exactly how you want? I'd like to change some things in every movie I ever see. I want this and I want that, and this would be better for me. First of all, I'd like every single movie simplified because every single movie I ever see is too complicated. I can't follow the damn thing. But let's agree that you don't get to have the movie your way. It's not tailor made for you. There's not a director out there saying, I wonder what Bob in Minneapolis wants in his film. So some of these criticisms are just so absurd to me because it's not for you. It's not a film being made so that you can be happy. It's doing just fine. It's probably going to end up making billions.

[B]

This is $1.3 billion is what they're saying.

[A]

But besides that, as Ben Shapiro said, it's not like this flaw or that flaw, if you see it as a flaw, ruins the movie. There's one hell of a lot going on in this movie. If you take away all the articles I've read, if you take away the fact that every day I get up, look at the world through the media that's presented to me, media coming at me from all directions, it's there every day, some new way of talking about it. If you take that away, for me personally, it was just a movie I went to that told a story. I walked out not 100% sure if it was the greatest film I ever saw, I wasn't sorry I went, and I certainly enjoyed it while I was sitting there. But I now feel so affected and so molded by what I've read. I don't even know if I can get back to that guy who just sat and watched the movie. I watched it in a little screening room in some theater built in 1920 in La Crosse, Wisconsin. A rickety little place. Noisy ramps you go up to to get there. Floors are uneven. You get up there, maybe 38 other people can fit into this room. Certainly didn't get the IMAX effect. But you shouldn't have to. You shouldn't have to It's a story, it should hold up, period. But I probably needed that second viewing that you went and had. And I probably would have seen A, B, C, D, E, F and G and said, oh, I get it now. I understand what he was doing there. I understand what that was all about. I've already laid my cards on the table. This has been the story of my life. This is not a new thing. In general, movies are too complex for me. In general. They're trying to do too many things and somehow they're convinced I'll pick up on it all and I don't. Despite all that, I can still enjoy this stuff. I never end a show saying, what the hell was that? I get it. I was told a story, I understand it. And, and yet someone else could say, how about this and how about that? And what about when that happened? And I'll say, I missed all that. I don't know what you're talking about. I miss a ton of stuff. My brain does not pick up a ton of stuff. And such was the case with the Odyssey. And I'm sure we'll hit on that as you start talking about it. But when you finished watching it the first time, it doesn't sound like you walked out saying, I just saw a masterpiece.

[B]

No, that's not how I felt about it the first time. I thought it was a big Christopher Nolan movie. I thought it was spectacular. I thought it was heavy handed in some cases. Some parts I found to be absolutely magnificent and other parts to be clumsy. But the anchor for the movie that is Matt Damon's Odysseus I thought was very solid. Even though one could argue in. A lot of classicists have argued, I mean, like Daniel Mendelssohn, Mary Beard and Emily Wilson, whose translation of the Odyssey was apparently the basis for Nolan's screenplay. They've said that this is not Homer's Odysseus, this is Christopher Nolan's Odysseus. This is not the witty, cunning character from the Iliad and the Odyssey, but this is kind of a sad sack, self appraising, guilt ridden Nolan hero in line with, say, Robert Oppenheimer from Oppenheimer or Bruce Wayne from the Batman movie, or the magicians from the Prestige or Pacino and insomnia, et cetera, et cetera, void of fun. I think there is fun in the movie where it's during the cyclops scene, which is, I thought, just a horrifying fun sequence when a character realizes that the cyclops can talk and he says to one of the soldiers, says, To Odysseus, you think we should reason with it. And then Odysseus says, I think we're beyond that.

[A]

Okay, that was a good line.

[B]

That's a good joke.

[A]

There's one funny line there. But I would say in general, the sex was removed from this. The wildness of Odysseus, he was more of a. Like. He would have been described as wily and a guy who wasn't necessarily a heroic figure in the classic sense. He wasn't Achilles. He was kind of a guy you maybe wouldn't even have liked.

[B]

Yes, and that's the question, a main question one has when thinking about the poem versus the film. Because if you had a one to one or a film approaching a one to one adaptation of the poem, a question is, would people like it or would it alienate viewers? And I think when you take into consideration Hellenistic morality and customs and mores about sex, about hierarchies and things like that, no, people would not like that. People would run away. People would find it disgusting and horrifying.

[A]

Charlize Theron PLAYS CALYPSO yes. She, in this movie should have had designs on our man Odysseus. Sexual designs, yes.

[B]

In the poem, she basically keeps him as a sexual prisoner. For sure.

[A]

She sure does. And that was absent from this film, as was a whole lot of sex and I will argue, a whole lot of fun. This is quite a tale. This is quite a wild romp by Homer. That's why what I saw wasn't Homer's story. Homer's not in this.

[B]

No. And Nolan doesn't really do sex scenes. He's not a sensualist. He's very cerebral. He does not want to slow his movies down.

[A]

He doesn't like emotional complexity.

[B]

Well, I think there is some complexity here. I think.

[A]

I don't see these people as very layered emotionally.

[B]

You could argue that Homer's not layered emotionally or psychologically. The thing about Homer is that he lays everything down in the poem for you. There is no suspense in Homer. There's no psychological ambiguity. Homer. And you can't do a lot of the things that Homer does in the Iliad and the Odyssey in a drama. People just wouldn't buy it. Presenting the gods as they're presented in Homer. I don't think that stuff would go over too well. You know, adjacent to that. Calypso, as you pointed out, I think as you were getting to in the poem, she's a goddess and here she's just a beautiful woman on an island. And Circe is also a Goddess in the poem. And here she's played by Samantha Morton and I think a tremendous performance, almost a scene stealing role. She's kind of like an old country witch.

[A]

But in the poem, she also had romantic interests.

[B]

He spends a year mounting her bed and that's gone.

[A]

In some ways, Nolan just comes across as your classic stiff upper lip. British. By the way, the scene with Cersei, a wonderful scene where the guys are turned into pigs, that's not with special

[B]

effects, it's with makeup effects. It feels like such a beautiful throwback. It reminded me of American Werewolf in London or the Company of Wolves.

[A]

Thank God. It reminded you of something. It reminded me of nothing I've ever seen in my life. It was very difficult to watch, by the way. I mean, I've watched incredible violence in films and for some reason, watching men actually turned into the animal we know as a pig was. I think that wasn't that great, though.

[B]

That's. That's the thing. It gets an emotion out of you. And I mean the way that even before they turn to pigs, it's like Nolan films them and eating, masticating in reverse motion, as if they're regressing. Cersei is basically presenting to us who these people perhaps really are or who she thinks they are. Because with the Circe scene, there is this subtext of this person may have been raped.

[A]

Yeah. You get the feeling that when these guys come and she turns them into pigs, she's perhaps wanted to do that to many a guy who's come there because of how they treated her. So I'm with you on that. The Sirens. I was very disappointed that there was so little time given to that part of the Odyssey.

[B]

Really? You wanted to see more of the Sirens?

[A]

Oh, I always do. The greatest scene in the history of filmdom is the Sirens in O Brother, Where Art Thou?

[B]

You don't really see them that much in the poem, though. And I loved the way that Nolan put together the siren scene. You have like two or three shots of them on their little island in a wide shot, and you can't really discern much.

[A]

No.

[B]

And I found myself when revisiting the movie, it's like I'm squinting. I want to see more. But you see, the thing is, that's kind of the point. I am that guy who jumps out of the boat because I want to see more. And Nolan will not show us that because these guys in the boat can't. They have to block out what's happening over there. I think it's a totally Effective scene. I love it.

[A]

I'll give you that. I'll give you that.

[B]

Love what he does with the sound. And I love the camera pushing in on Damon as he's screaming. And I love his description of it to Calypso afterwards, where he's describing. Describing something that you want most and that you can't have. And what is it that you can't have? It's the thing that you had and that you lost. And it lands perfectly.

[A]

Someday, there will be a museum of driving. A child will lean toward a steering wheel behind glass, tilt his head slightly and ask, what did people do with this Grandpa? And the old man will smile. He'll say, they escaped. And the kid will point to another exhibit, a child seat. And what about that? Grandpa will say, the first ride home with a little one. Who provided these experiences? Someone will ask. And in Minnesota, the answer will have been the same. Since 1963. Fury Motors. For generations, families have begun their stories at Fury Motors. Whether they drove home in a Dodge, a Chrysler, Jeep, Ford, Buick, gmc. Whether from Waconia, from Forest Lake, from Stillwater, from South St. Paul. Millions of departures, millions of arrivals. Someday, all of our vehicles may belong to museums, but the memories won't. That steering wheel, that feeling of freedom. Fury Motors. There was a time when every neighborhood had one. No, not a coffee shop. Not a grocery store. A banker. A neighborhood banker. Someone who knew your first name before they knew your account number. Someone who'd ask how your daughter was doing and actually knew where she was going to school. Someone who understood why your business had a slow January. Cause they lived here, too. Somewhere along the way, America traded neighbors for numbers, for networks, relationships for algorithms. Decisions became distant. But six places in the Twin Cities never got the memo. The six locations of North American Banking Company At North American Banking Company they still believe a community bank should belong to the community. Six locations. That's it. There's one near you. Big enough to help you grow, small enough to know who you are. North American Banking Company member, fdic. Equal housing lender. I received a text from a woman I know who saw the film within the last week. And she said, boy, I don't know how smart it was to go with all the big stars. I had a hard time getting out of my head that I'm watching these stars, these great actors, as who they are. In other words, these people didn't get completely lost in their character to the point where this woman could forget who she was watching. I understand that. I would argue there are five people Maybe available that you could have gotten who are big stars and could have gotten so lost in this role that you would have forgotten who they were. Daniel Day Lewis is one of them. Daniel Day Lewis could have played Odysseus and you would not have thought, that's Daniel Day Lewis. But Matt Damon is not of that caliber.

[B]

It's a movie star performance. So I think you do recognize the Matt Damon ness of Damon, but I think that's why it works.

[A]

You always recognize the Matt Damon ness of Matt Damon.

[B]

Yeah. There's something relatable, I think about Matt Damon. Even when he's playing a scumbag like in the Departed, he's easy to grasp. And I know some people who didn't like him in Oppenheimer because he was too Matt Damon. And to me, the thing is, he works perfectly in Oppenheimer because again, he's the anchor for us, the quote unquote normie viewer. When we're surrounded by a bunch of aspergistic goofball scientists, he's our witness.

[A]

You know who he reminds me of from an earlier generation? Robert Redford.

[B]

I could see that.

[A]

Yeah, you always know it's Redford and Redford's always playing Redford. Who would you say is of the Daniel Day Lewis caliber? Where when the person plays a role, they're gone. They're not there anymore. They've disappeared. He was Abraham Lincoln. I did not see Daniel Day Lewis there. Who are they today? Who does that today?

[B]

Who's the succession guy? He played Roy Cohn in the Apprentice.

[A]

He was also Bruce Springsteen's manager. Yeah, in that film. You think that guy can, huh?

[B]

That's what I hear about him.

[A]

He's a freakish method actor. Whoever his co star is in succession, the older guy, the older British guy, Brian Cox. Yeah, that guy had no time for that method bs. Drove him mad.

[B]

It's like Olivier and Hoffman on Marathon Man.

[A]

Yes, but what's interesting about Laurence Olivier's criticism, Hoffman couldn't defend himself. But Daniel Day Lewis does a magnificent job in some interview of defending Hoffman and being quite critical of Sir Laurence Olivier's failure to understand what this great actor is doing and why. And really nails Olivier for beating up on the method approach.

[B]

Well, everyone has their different methods. Think about the directors that have to deal with both schools of thought, though. If you're a director, you have to satisfy everyone. And William Friedkin has this anecdote about working with Tommy Lee Jones and how much he loves it versus working with Benicio Del Toro, who's More of the day, Lewis School. Tommy Lee Jones just needs basic direction and he delivers. And you could say the same thing about Gene Hackman or Duvall. You know, they only like to do a few takes versus, you know, Pacino apparently would do 30 takes and everyone would be different. It's just two different things for a director to juggle with. That makes me.

[A]

Who did Tommy Lee Jones hate working with more than anyone else? There's some famous stories of him just wanting to kill. Was it?

[B]

Oh, Jim Carrey. Jim Carrey from Batman Forever?

[A]

I think he told him to his face. I hate you. Yeah. And seeing Tommy Lee Jones face as you're Jim Carrey and hearing those words, good Lord, Terrifying. All right, but back to the Odyssey. So I don't know how we got down this road. Another direction people are coming at this film with is the direction of the philosophical take of Nolan and his philosophy that comes pouring through this film is we are these complex creatures who have horribly messed up things in this world and there aren't many heroes among us. We're a warring, cruel, twisted bunch of folks who need to atone somehow. There's this dark image of humanity and it's not the image Homer delivered.

[B]

No, Homer's all about glory and strength. He's all about Hellenistic values. And these are post Christian ideas. And there's a reason, I think, why, when you have that confrontation between Odysseus and Penelope, when he finally talks to her after 20 years, what's separating them looks a lot like a Catholic confessional screen to me. And what happens is essentially a confession. That's not a Hellenistic idea. It is a post Christian one.

[A]

A take one would have after there was the Christian faith.

[B]

Yes. I wonder if Nolan has read Tom Holland's book, the Other Tom Holland, the historian. Tom Holland's book Dominion, which is all about how Christianity actually is more world changing than we might recognize in terms of how it's influenced progressive liberal dispositions. The way they look at the meek and the poor and the downtrodden. Here it's more explicitly stated, for example, you know, in the way the film treats beggars. It's different from Greece, where you elevate those who have strengthened and you look down on those who don't. Here you have beggars in the background who have been invited into the Ithaca palace.

[A]

Tell me if I have this wrong. A dominant theme in this film is Zeus's law, which is more or less the golden rule to treat others as you would want to be treated. But there also is this idea that you want to be kind to a beggar because it may be a God in disguise.

[B]

Yes.

[A]

That actually is not a Christian take. A Christian take would be a little different than that. The idea would be it is God. Because to say it could be a God in disguise implies that if it were just a beggar, then you could treat it poorly. And that's not a Christian take.

[B]

To quote Tom Holland, I mean, he says any beggar, any criminal might be Christ.

[A]

But I mean, the Christian take is the Christ is in that beggar as sure as it's in you. That's the reason everybody is your brother. They don't go that far in this movie. They don't really see the weak as something to be loved. They only do on the off chance it might be one of the gods in disguise. I haven't heard anybody bring that up. But you don't treat a beggar kindly because it might be a God.

[B]

I mean, the hierarchies are still in place.

[A]

The hierarchies are in place.

[B]

The accent, the register, the key is inflected in a different way.

[A]

What's fascinating to me is Zeus's law implies that you don't send a Trojan horse through the gates filled with guys who are going to rape, pillage and destroy. And if you do that, you should be racked with guilt as Odysseus is. And that, I don't think is anywhere to be found in the Odyssey.

[B]

Absolutely not. That kind of remorse is completely absent. And that's not a Greek value. The psychological problem that Odysseus is going through, why hasn't he gone home? Well, maybe he doesn't want to go home because he might as well have destroyed his own home with what he did in Troy. You know, that's kind of another interesting amalgamation or compositing events. When he's talking to Calypso on the island, it incorporates the lotus eaters section. They eat the lotus to forget. And that's what we find him doing for several years with Charlize Theron.

[A]

By the way, I'm a big fan of lotus eating. I've always struggled with the idea that there's something wrong with that.

[B]

You know, the way you said that reminded me of one of the most beautiful line deliveries in the movie where Charlize Theron tries to tell Matt Damon to stop eating the lotus. And he says, but I love it.

[A]

I mean, if you see enough human suffering, it's very hard not to appreciate the lotus eaters and the peace they find away from all that suffering. Sure, nothing interesting is going to happen in their life. Sure, they're just going to eat lotus, but it's what?

[B]

Is there anything worse than spending 10 years doing awesome drugs and having sex with Charlize Theron? I can't think of anything.

[A]

No, it was a. We don't all have to build the pyramids. Some of us just want to catch a sunset and have a glass of wine. All right, so another lament again. There are 500 ways to come at this film. People are going crazy over the dialogue, being heavy handed, sounding like it's out of Father Knows Best instead of Shakespeare. My dad's going to be coming home soon. Hi, Danny.

[B]

As Daniel Mendelsohn, another translator of Homer has made it clear that basically the Greek word used in the Odyssey that Telemachus uses is basically Daddy.

[A]

It is?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Then you're in trouble with that criticism. It took some people out of the movie. You know, they expect to say, my father will be coming home soon.

[B]

I don't get that. It's like early on in the picture, I think Odysseus says, 10 years on this expletive deleted beach. Some people were complaining about that. To me, the line lands perfectly. It's great.

[A]

How about making them all have American accents?

[B]

I don't care at all about that. That's like people complaining about a film that Nolan screened for his cast and crew, Scorsese's Last Temptation of Christ, where I think Harvey Keitel's greatest performance is as Judas in that movie. And it's, you know, definitely inflected with that New York flavor. And it works great. To say nothing of Willem Dafoe as Jesus. And what do you want him to do, speak Aramaic?

[A]

Harvey Keitel as Judas. I was just about to say, boy, did they cast that perfectly when you mentioned Willem Dafoe was Jesus. I hate to say it, but Willem Dafoe could have done a pretty fine Judas as well. That guy creeps me out a lot. I don't think Jesus and think Willem Dafoe very often.

[B]

Well, as Defoe himself put it, Scorsese had probably seen Dafoe play a creepy guy to live and die in la. But then he had seen Dafoe play a quite angelic guy in Oliver Stone's Platoon. And mix them together and you got

[A]

his Jesus in general. He's a guy that has that look. It's kind of the same thing as John Malkovich, where I don't know that I want to live next door to this particular fella. They got things Going on in the basement at night. Here's a mishke criticism. This is just my thing. The fight scene at the end where Matt Damon takes on how many people?

[B]

Do you figure the number we're given is? Dozens. I think in the poem it's over a hundred.

[A]

Okay, well, if I'm reading the poem and they say Odysseus is magic, then maybe I'll cut him some slack. But we all accept that one guy can take on more than one guy. Even though probably one guy can't take on more than one guy. Probably one guy can't take on two guys. For sure can't take on three guys. I just don't believe that. Okay, four. If he's got super training, there's a number we hit where it has to be somewhat realistic. Or you have to say, the guy's a Marvel comic character. Well, then he is a superhero. That's different. But this was just a man. Up until now, all we know about Matt Damon is he's just a guy and the numbers were too great. Especially when the other guys started getting weapons and still couldn't whip him. You know, it starts out they don't have weapons. Okay, I get it. But once they have weapons and they still can't take this one guy out, I'd have to go back to the poem to find out, did Zeus come and help out? How is that possible?

[B]

I think Athena helps a little bit in the poem. But the thing is here, first of all, he's not just a guy. This is a guy who's hardened after years of combat in Troy.

[A]

Which is why I would have been fine with him taking out 10 guys, 10 on one. I would have been good.

[B]

But these dudes, you know, were the draft dodgers. They were the fortunate sons who just stayed home drinking and eating.

[A]

That's why I was okay with even 20 of them.

[B]

Okay, we'll go 20. Also in the poem, I don't think Odysseus is vulnerable at all. He does have Telemachus helping him from the get go. Whereas here he says, you can't help me out. But then at the end, as Matt Damon is getting stabbed, he is getting hurt. Telemachus helps out his dad and stops things. Also, you see a lot of the suitors kneel in deference to their king here. Whereas in the poem, that doesn't happen. In the poem, they're all killed. In fact, there's one dude who's like, I'm really sorry. I didn't do that much. Please have mercy. And Odysseus is like, how about this? And cuts his head off.

[A]

That's not very good at all.

[B]

In addition to that, and this is where one could argue, and people have argued, Nolan pulls his punches in the poem, Odysseus wants to get the complicit maidservants, of which there are 12 out of 50. These 12 women are rounded up and they're supposed to clean up and fumigate the hall of all these dead bodies. And then they're supposed to be taken outside. And Telemachus is supposed to hack them to bits. He doesn't hack them to bits, he hangs them. And Nolan does not do that. Also, the cowherd guy kind of gets off easy too. In the film he's just stabbed by Telemachus, whereas in the poem he's ordered to have his nose cut off, his ears cut off, his hands and feet cut off, and then his genitals ripped off and fed to the dogs. And it's not specified whether or not he dies or not.

[A]

I just want to say for me, if I'm ever the guy being treated this poorly, I don't care what or who you feed it to afterward. That's not going to bother me. That's not an insult to injury thing, who you feed it to. Oh, come on. And now you're feeding it to the ducks. I don't care anymore after that. Do whatever you want. Speaking of deformity, the greatest thing Nolan does in this film is create the Cyclops in my mind. Now, I haven't seen a lot of presentations of the one eyed creature. John Goodman in O Brother, Where Art Thou? I know that version. He's got a patch over his eye. But I haven't seen a lot of presentations. But I have read all the different ways people have tried to present what would this one eyed monster look like? And Nolan nails it by treating this thing as sort of something with a pretty bad birth defect.

[B]

It looks like a Picasso portrait, a

[A]

little like a Picasso, but I'm told there are birth defects, they're rare, that leave one looking not dissimilar to the cyclops. And because that is a natural facial deformity when it's a birth defect, it was actually more believable. And what has happened in the past is people have not made the Cyclops believable. This guy looked real to me.

[B]

And I think that it also helped by stressing deformity as you are. It works that he's by himself versus having a whole bunch of other Cyclops bros outside. Like there is in the poem around that, just the scream after that piercing of the eyeball, and then the sense of this strange language he's talking to himself, which we gather from the rumor of the other shipmates that he was praying to his father, Poseidon. So it ties those things up in, I think, a more believable way, or a way that works in a film narrative, that what we have in the poem wouldn't go over.

[A]

Nolan, since he was 16 years of age, has wanted to do a movie in imax. And I will never see it in the way he ultimately would like all of us to see it. Because I believe there are only 40 theaters on planet Earth where I could see it that way. And it sounds like most of them are sold out for months. But my sense is, were I to see it the way he intended. Is the term 70 millimeter IMAX, is that it?

[B]

Yeah, I mean, we have IMAX in the Twin Cities, but it's digital. To actually get the analog film IMAX presentation, you have to go to one of those 40 theaters.

[A]

I've heard it described as almost watching 3D without 3D glasses. The sense would be that I would be on that ocean. I would be in that ship with those people. I would be there. It would be so big that it would be immersive. I would not be able to escape or tell myself I'm in a movie theater. I would be there.

[B]

The resolution of IMAX film is extraordinary. I saw it in the digital iMax, and, yeah, it was great. Very impactful. But I also saw it in the 70 millimeter, just 70 millimeter presentation at Willow Creek Theater, I think, where you've been before. And I actually preferred that, you know, it is film, so it is alive. You could feel how alive it is. The texture is different and the colors seem to pop more. And there's, like, this flatness to the digital presentation that I don't really like. And something that's so intrinsic to this movie and the way it was shot is how lighting is different. Because lighting is very, very important for film because you need a lot of it, and it needs to be very specific. And when you have the Siege of Troy, just the fire dancing around all those dark spaces, and those dark spaces are black. It's not this murky, mucky gray stuff that you have in so many digital films that I just dislike. The black spaces of that frame, I think, allows your imagination to run with it and you descend into it. And that's part of how the presentation is so effective in this movie and not Just in the Siege of Troy. But the cyclops scene in the cave where again, it's fire lit, but the forms moving around in that darkness, all this, this blackness moving through the frames like you're wondering, was that another soldier or is that the cyclops? It builds up to the suspense in terms of trying to situate and parse out an environment, a space, a setting in your head as you're experiencing the movie.

[A]

Nolan, because of Oppenheimer, I believe the story goes, because of the tremendous success of Oppenheimer had free reign. He really was given the kind of power that was most commonly seen 70 to 80, 1970 to 80, when directors just could go wild and do anything they want and overspend and the studios would have to put up with all these anti heroes and people that they couldn't believe that the audience were ever going to like. And something he had thought about for years and years and years, making the Odyssey, he finally knew he could do it now. People would stay out of his way. He was free. And God knows he's free once again. Now he. He's so exhausted from this damn thing, he doesn't want to think about another film for a few years. He says three years, and I get that. But whatever he does next, he has free reign to because of how much money this thing's going to make. I'm fascinated by him. People are dissecting this man's psyche right now.

[B]

I mean, he has his people who think he's the second coming of Stanley Kubrick and other people who actually don't like him because they think of him as kind of a spawner of film bros. And he's not as aesthetically gifted as, say, a Spielberg, which I agree with. But I mean, that's like saying you're not Shakespeare. But I enjoy most of his movies and I think he's got something that just works in grasping the public imagination in a popular way and at the same time making something artistically satisfying. So, for example, Oppenheimer, I mean, I read that book, Kai Bird's book, American Prometheus, a year before the movie was announced. And while I was reading it, I was like, this will make four really good movies. Young Oppenheimer, Los Alamos, the Communist witch hunt after. And then an old man dealing with the gravity of what he's created. And Nolan just made the whole thing. It's not my style of movie. It moves too fast. I want things to be slower and take gets time. But then the way he makes it, it's like it's A symphony leading up to this big crescendo. And it works. And then after that you're embroiled in this procedural courtroom drama and you almost forget that the nuclear bomb exists. And damn it, that's kind of the point because it's all about a world where we, we've grasped godlike technology and the only way we could go on is forgetting the reality of what we've wrought. And then it brings it back at the end and you go home disturbed. That whole formula for a three hour drama worked like gangbusters. And it hit in the same way that one of his Batman movies hit a decade or so before. And he's very well ready this movie. I think he's bringing Virgil to it, he's bringing Dante to it, he's bringing Madeline Miller to it and all these other descendants of Homer to create this big canvas, an expression of something in the year 2026.

[A]

It's a 3,000 year old story. I don't know if it's our best story. It's amazing that we can pull 3,000 year old stories out in 2026 and say, yeah, this will still work. I think of us as being far more primitive back then and not being able to spin a good yarn. I don't know, I at the fact that we're still playing around with this story.

[B]

The film is set at the precipice of a dark age. I think a lot of people nowadays feel that we're on that precipice now again too. But what do Odysseus and Penelope do? They are going to chase that escaping sun. That's the heroism of Nolan's film. It's like a recalcitrant defiance to the end of things. You know, in his previous film Interstellar, there was that use of the Dylan Thomas poem, rage, rage against the dying of the light. And that's the same thing that's happening here on a wider scale. And his main takeaway here is a very humanistic one and found it to be kind of a beautiful sentiment at the end. I'm still gonna follow the light. That's what he's.

[A]

Imagine a memory care center where every hallway, every window, every decision was built for the life that's still there in that person. The life that's vibrant, it's vibrant. It's only the memory that is fading. At the Wellshire, they honor every stage of memory decline by breaking up their memory care center into the four stages of memory care. Four households. They don't force lives into a building, they build A place around the lives. Because even when memories fade, life doesn't. Dignity shouldn't. And living is still beautiful. The well shire of Medina and Bloomington. Some things in this world don't make it for the long haul. Restaurants fade, stores rebrand, factories turn into lofts. But every now and then, something sticks around. One family, one name, one promise kept. So many times it stops feeling like a promise. For 108 years, Minneapolis St. Paul plumbing, heating, air and electric has been the call. People round these parts make parents, grandparents, their grandkids, great grandkids. Four generations, one family at MSP caring for multiple generations of Minnesotans through wars and recessions, through blizzards and heat waves, neighborhood after neighborhood, they just kept showing up through the decades. 108 years, maybe the highest compliment a community can give is when you stop thinking of a company as a business at all. They just become part of the story of the community itself. Find [e-mail]. Interesting, Interestingly, translations of the Odyssey surging up the bestseller charts. People are out buying the book. Homer is a best seller again. He is back. Man, I'd like to have met that fella. Wonder if it's one of those deals like Shakespeare where there were these periods in history where people say, was there really a Homer? Actually, wasn't he? Seven different guys remember that? With Shakespeare, I don't think there actually was a Shakespeare.

[B]

Yeah, and I mean that's for the most part it's crap. But you know, there are some plays of Shakespeare where he probably had a collaborator.

[A]

But there was a brilliant guy who was able to actually see humanity in that multi layered, extraordinary way that few of his time could compete with. I mean, every now and then there's this one off, just this one individual who can create in a way no one else can around them. And you don't even understand how that's possible. I mean, truly we're talking about rarities here. I mean, I don't know who gets to be set alongside Shakespeare. Cervantes. Cervantes, who's another one of the great ancient storytellers besides Homer.

[B]

Chaucer, Dante, Boccaccio, Virgil.

[A]

I can't hear Chaucer without realizing that I am Chaucer. I always have to remember that. I went to a psychic one time who said, did you know you were Chaucer in an earlier life? Just casually mentioned that. I said, hey, no thanks.

[B]

I could see that, interestingly enough, just,

[A]

just throws that out. I thought for a second she's going to tell me I was the Cyclops. The second time you saw it. We haven't gotten to this yet, but I just want to get to this. You walked out of the film, I assume, with a full, far greater appreciation, far more impressed, far more moved on all three counts.

[B]

Yeah. You know, I walked out and I'm like, I love that movie. Thought it was tremendous. And I was not like that the first time I saw it.

[A]

The same exact thing that happened to you with Disclosure Day, as I recall.

[B]

Yeah. Yeah. I think I prefer the Odyssey to Disclosure Day on the whole, this epic,

[A]

this extraordinary piece of work. This director who immersed himself in this world, didn't even allow CGI to bail him out. Threw himself at it. Millions and millions of dollars spent. What would he have done with my dinner with Andre? I thought of this during the Odyssey because he did go to these places. He did enter these worlds, he did go out in the ocean. He did throw himself here and there. I mean, I can't imagine Ollie had to deal with making this film. And then you go and watch a film which is also out this summer, lovely little film called the Invitation. Did you see it?

[B]

The Invite.

[A]

Yes, the Invite. That's what it was. The Invite. I watched that and I thought, I wonder if the director of this ever says, God, I'd hate to be Nolan. Look what he had to do. My entire film was shot in one little room here in an apartment. What was the last movie I saw shot entirely in an apartment? One of my favorite movies of all time. I'm gonna name it if you don't. Actually was shot in a hotel room.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

The Big Kahuna.

[B]

Oh, okay.

[A]

The Big Kahuna. I think a guy's doing that. And My Dinner With Andre all shot at a little dinner table. And these are successful films. They make people money. I just wonder when guys get films in Hollywood when they get them presented. Hey, you want to fund this one? You feel like sending some money to me to make this? Well, I got this one guy who's making the whole film in a little apartment, and you want to make the Odyssey, you're going to have to really make some money, pal. My guys in that little room are going to make some money. Did you like the Invite?

[B]

Yes, I did. I got good word of mouth on it before I saw it. I don't like Olivia Wilde's other movies as a director, Booksmart and Don't Worry, Darling. So I was a little skeptical at first, but no, it popped for me. The rhythm, the acting, the humor.

[A]

There's a newfound appreciation in my mind for Films that take place in one room. If you tell me there's a new film out and it takes place in one room, I'm going to it. I just saw it play the other night at the Gremlin Theater in. In my little neighborhood. There's a lovely little theater by a brewery. And went to see this comedy, the Cottage. Just delightful, just delightful. All takes place in a room. Another one of my favorite films. All takes place in a condo in New York. Carnage.

[B]

That's what I was gonna say. I thought you were talking about Carnage.

[A]

I recommend you people find these one room movies. Carnage. The Big Kahuna, the invite. Can you think of anything else?

[B]

Well, you just said my Dinner with Andre.

[A]

I'm not going to recommend that. The last time I did that, I ruined Undertaker Fred's entire life. I sent Fred there. Fred. I had gotten this recommendation from Fred to see Jim Carrey in the Majestic. So Fred sees the Majestic. I never saw it, but he calls up my radio show back in the 90s, he says, you gotta go see the Majestic. And I said, well, while you're recommending that, let me recommend one for you and your wife. Okay, Tommy, what do you got? My Dinner with Andre. Fred, you have to see it. Most powerful film I've ever seen in my life. Well, my wife and I are going to watch that tonight. Well, the most confused 80 some year old man you've ever met called me the next night. God, I messed with that couple. I shouldn't have done that. To be fair. I've had friends of mine after I recommended it to him, call me later and say, what the hell was that? It was as though I just. I threw a rock at him or something. And I said I was quite serious when I was recommending it to you. Not to Undertaker Fred, but to you. Mishke. Don't ever recommend films like that to me again.

[B]

You have to know your audience.

[A]

It is one of my favorite movies of all time. And it does just take place at a restaurant, the whole thing. And some people don't like it. I'm certainly not alone. And made one hell of a lot of money. And it's still to this day a favorite of many. So it's not like I'm out here in the wilderness liking this film. Here's what I love about it. If you can hold my attention. And I'm wrapped and I'm all in. And I'm intensely, powerfully interested in what's going to happen next. And the scene never changes. You're doing some brilliant writing. I just saw a Netflix program on the movies from 1975. Have you caught this?

[B]

No, but that's one of my favorite years.

[A]

The whole show on Netflix is about the single greatest year in the history of Movies Ever, 1975. And they make one hell of a case for it. And I watched that and I said, oh, man, I didn't know what we had in 1975. My life was going to the movies back then, and I could sneak into any R rated movie that was no problem at all. But I didn't know what I had. I didn't know that I was watching the greatest year of films in the history of moviemaking. And the argument they make is that movies were absolutely honest and truly reflecting one after another after another after another after another, who we are. No bs, no filters, no dressing it up for the happy endings. Just raw, real storytelling about who we are as people. And the directors were free, unencumbered, and great artists did their best work. I think Nolan's going to have some fun the next time around. I'm now curious to see with free reign and nothing but money, what he does the next time. That's really something to look forward to. Truly knowing that, you know, we're not going to get a Marvel Comics book movie out of this guy. Something great's going to happen. I mean, he's an intellect and he's going to do something unlike anything he's done before. And it's worth being excited about. This is an era where you want to have a guy like this at work with the free reign that he's going to have. You want to see for better or worse, what he does with this time. He's still a young guy. How old a fella is he?

[B]

Mid to late 50s.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Along with Tarantino, he is the most well known Gen X filmmaker. And I think like Tarantino, he's someone who could probably get anything that he wants made. So every movie that he makes is an event.

[A]

Yeah, every movie is an event. That's why it's fun to know that he's out there and still working. And there's something exciting about knowing a guy like that is going to come up with something versus a of the schmaltz we see out there. Is Tarantino really working hard anymore? I hear rumor he's retired.

[B]

He plans on retiring after making his 10th film, which because he's always said that he only wants to make 10 movies.

[A]

What kind of a moron talks that way?

[B]

That's what Christopher Nolan would say. But his whole Thing is that he doesn't want to become an old director who's lost his gifts.

[A]

How old is Tarantino?

[B]

Early 60s, from what I understand. He's working on a play that's going to be put on in London, and he has later this year, the Adventures of Cliff Booth, starring Brad Pitt as the character he played in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. This is a film that Tarantino wrote. He did not direct, but David Fincher is directing of the Social Network fame it had. Tarant has Tarantino's stamp of approval. And in addition to that, he has finished the screenplay for his 10th film, and then he will be retired, although he does say that he will still work in theater. You know, I know film is different in some ways because it's so logistically challenging in terms of expense.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

Just making a movie with friends, you know, I could tell you it's just a pain in the ass. Imagine doing that with thousands of people.

[A]

I can't. I sit and watch the credits after every movie, and I turn to who's ever with me, and I say, look at that. Look at who all they had to get to pull this off. Look at all the people who gave blood, sweat, and tears. Look at that crew. Look at that crowd. To make one film. And that is when I periodically say to myself, and then it's a bad film,

[B]

even if it's good, that doesn't mean it's going to be successful.

[A]

Right, Right. And how depressing. You put all that into a film. And the critics say, yeah, thumbs down. All right, I gotta run. I'm so delighted with your time and insights, your wonderful way of enlightening me on much of this stuff. I do feel I need to go give it another viewing. I think it's only fair. I probably will say see it again, so. Thank you, Niles.

[B]

My pleasure.

[A]

Until we speak again. You be well.

[B]

And you as well. Thank you so much for having me again.

[A]

Absolutely. So long.