Pop Culture Happy Hour – "The Roses And What's Making Us Happy"

Date: August 29, 2025
Host: Stephen Thompson (NPR), with Linda Holmes, Waylon Wong, and Chloe Veltman

Episode Overview

This episode centers on the new film The Roses, a darkly satirical adaptation starring Olivia Colman and Benedict Cumberbatch. Drawing from Warren Adler’s 1981 novel The War of the Roses and the infamous 1989 film adaptation, the panel dives deep into the movie’s tonal shifts, performances, narrative choices, and its relationship to previous versions. The conversation closes, as always, with the hosts' recommendations in "What's Making Us Happy."

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Premise and Setup of "The Roses" (00:21-01:55)

• The Roses reimagines The War of the Roses, focusing on a marriage that devolves into mutual sabotage.
• Modern updates: Theo (Cumberbatch) is an architect sidelined by career troubles, whose wife Ivy (Colman) achieves entrepreneurial success.
• Supporting cast includes Andy Samberg, Kate McKinnon; directed by Jay Roach and written by Tony McNamara.

2. Immediate Reactions to the Film

Waylon Wong (02:24)

• Loved the film’s humor from the opening:

  "I laughed within the first minute of this film, which I thought was a good sign. And then that kind of carried me through." (02:24)

• Praised the chemistry and writing for Colman and Cumberbatch. Wanted the focus to remain on their dynamic.
• Critiqued the American supporting cast as "dead weight" and condescending:

  "I felt like what they were given to do, I just felt condescended to. It was like, here are some SNL alums ... because you're not going to enjoy a comedy of manners without... come on, guys." (03:14)

Chloe Veltman (03:30-04:58)

• Criticized the film’s claim of being set on the Mendocino coast—"clearly shot in Devon, England."
• Praised the film’s warmth compared to the original:

  "Even in their battle for supremacy at the bottom of this relationship, I think is a lot of love. So I found it to be delightful." (03:36)

• Enjoyed the supporting cast and the cultural contrasts in the ensemble dinner party scenes.

Stephen Thompson (04:45)

• Challenged Chloe’s take, emphasizing the film’s darker undertones.
• Noted the film as a "very dark comedy":

  "There's glass half full and then there's viewing not just the film, but the relationship at the center of it as, quote, lovely and delightful. This is an acrid, very dark comedy." (04:45)

Linda Holmes (05:24-06:28)

• Agreed with Chloe that this retelling is "softer" but found it disappointing and toothless:

  "Which is why I was completely bored by it and thought it was totally toothless." (05:24)

• Labeled the plot as a retread of familiar "middle-aged rich people fighting" stories.
• Expressed confusion over the film’s purpose, given divergence from original themes:

  "I do think it is possible to get so far from the original material that I no longer understand why you're doing it." (06:18)

3. Themes and Character Dynamics

• Waylon: Describes the lead couple as "huge snobs," united in their contempt for others:

  "At one point, one says to the other, I hate everyone but us. And...they just think they are better than everyone." (07:42)

  • Compared the dynamic to Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and Succession's Tom and Shiv.

• Stephen: Finds the depiction of the couple growing apart, not just being "toxic," dark in a sad, relatable way:

  "It's not just a story of two people who hate each other, but of a love that is constantly curdling." (09:08)

• Chemistry of Colman and Cumberbatch widely praised for grounding the relationship believably.

4. Supporting Cast Debate (10:12-12:49)

• Mixed reactions:
  • Waylon and Linda felt Samberg and McKinnon's roles were grating and underwritten:

    "This is the only time I have ever run out of patience with Kate McKinnon being weird and horny." (11:12)

  • Chloe enjoyed the ensemble as a comedic foil and cultural contrast.

5. Tone, Realism, and Satire (12:49-15:04)

• Chloe: Sees the film as broad, magical, and intentionally unrealistic.
• Linda: Wishes the film chose between realism and farce:

  "It's either too grounded or it's not grounded. It's in a weird middle space." (13:39)

  • Found it muddled by mixing the sensibilities of Poor Things and Meet the Parents, two very different comedies.

6. Gender Roles and the Symbolism of the House (16:22-18:43)

• In this version, Ivy finances and Theo designs the dream house.
• Linda: Found the house’s significance—central in prior versions—less developed in this adaptation:

  "The purpose of the house is much less clear to me in this version of the story." (16:35)
  "This is about the marriage. And I just didn't think it was as interesting to me." (18:34)

7. Conclusion: A Range of Opinions

• Panel agreed the film provokes divided reactions: from "delightful" and "chuckling throughout" (Chloe), to "toothless" and "muddled" (Linda), to praise for its honest depiction of adult relationship struggles (Waylon, Stephen).
• Invitation for listeners to share their views on social media.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Waylon on the film’s humor:

  "I laughed within the first minute of this film, which I thought was a good sign." (02:24)

• Chloe on the film’s tone:

  "Even in their battle for supremacy at the bottom of this relationship, I think is a lot of love." (03:36)

• Linda on why it didn’t work:

  "I was completely bored by it and thought it was totally toothless." (05:24)

• Waylon on the couple’s dynamic:

  "I hate everyone but us ... They just think they are better than everyone." (07:42)

• Stephen on the couple's chemistry:

  "They have chemistry in opposition to each other, but they also have chemistry that makes you understand why they would get together." (09:08)

• Linda on Kate McKinnon’s character:

  "This is the only time I have ever run out of patience with Kate McKinnon being weird and horny." (11:12)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 00:21: Introduction to The Roses and panelists
• 02:24: Waylon’s review
• 03:30: Chloe’s review
• 05:24: Linda’s critique
• 07:42: Waylon on the couple's dynamic
• 09:08: Stephen on the chemistry and darkness
• 11:12: Supporting cast discussion
• 12:49: Debate over tone and realism
• 16:22: The house as a symbol
• 18:43: Wrap-up and social media call
• 20:58: What’s Making Us Happy segment

What's Making Us Happy This Week (20:58–27:04)

Waylon Wong:

• Carly Rae Jepsen’s Emotion 10th Anniversary Edition

  "I'm like so, so excited for Emotion 10th anniversary." (21:05)

Chloe Veltman:

• Classic Björk TV performances resurfacing on YouTube

  "...watching her skipping around the stage... just delightful." (22:45)

Linda Holmes:

• The game Is This Seat Taken? (logic puzzle, calming, available on Switch)

  "It is so calming, it is so chill and it is so kind of pressure free. And it's also immensely satisfying..." (24:12)

Stephen Thompson:

• The Jeff Buckley documentary It’s Never Over: Jeff Buckley

  "My daughter is named Grace because that is the title of his album from 1994, which remains one of my all time favorites." (24:45)
  "...the arrival of this documentary is leading new audiences to discover Jeff Buckley's music..." (26:28)

Tone and Final Thoughts

Maintaining the show’s signature blend of sharp cultural observation and friendly disagreement, the hosts offer varied but thoughtful perspectives on The Roses—from its comedic and dramatic tensions to questions of adaptation and audience engagement. The “What’s Making Us Happy” segment wraps up the episode on a high note, sharing pop culture picks that connect personally and broadly.

Useful For…

• Listeners curious about whether The Roses is worth seeing—and why opinions might diverge
• Fans of Olivia Colman/Benedict Cumberbatch seeking insight on performances
• Pop culture enthusiasts interested in adaptation, genre, and ensemble-driven comedies
• Readers looking for recs in music, games, and documentaries