Cows in the Field

THE BABADOOK (2014)

Is it a bad book or the Ba-Ba-Doo-Doo-Doooooook?? We chat with Libby Hill (The Wrap) about Jennifer Kent’s painful and potent allegory about grief, anxiety, depression, parenting… you know — the BIG STUFF. We discuss how the imagery of the Babadook conveys enveloping dread, and ongoing struggles with our own Babadooks. We talk about being a caregiver without a support system, and how community and friendship can help someone out of a dark place. We also laugh and cry and talk about moms and children and the Babadook’s metafictional role as a queer icon.

You cannot get rid of MEEEEE!
The Babadook

← Back

Thanks!

THE EXORCIST (1973)

It just so happens that one of us is probably possessed, and is in need of THE EXORCIST! Join us and Carly Severn (KQED San Francisco) to discuss the Friedkin / Pazuzu of it all. Why is this movie so deeply terrifying, even today, FIFTY years after its initial release?? We talk about parents — being parents, being kids, dealing with parents, and kids, and why all those familial relationships are apt targets of twisted horror. We talk sacrifice, losing control, the many bodily fluids, and wonder whether Pazuzu is more of a David Blaine style demon, or Siegfried and Roy style demon (spoiler: obviously the latter). You don’t want to miss out on this classic spooky movie and this spooky discussion of it!

If you need someone to perform an exorcism, I’m not your man. I’m not a priest anymore.
Father Karras

← Back

Thanks!

BRAM STOKER’S DRACULA (1992)

Join us and Bilge Ebiri (New York Magazine / Vulture) to delve into Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 masterpiece. We discuss the early critical reception and why the broader consensus has come around to this sexed-up, theatrical, in-camera-practical-effects-driven, reinvention of the classic vampire story. We discuss the uncanny and the helplessness induced by the film’s meandering epistolary style, as well Coppola’s genre reinventions and the standoff between materialism and spiritualism. If you haven’t seen this movie, CHECK IT OUT! And then come back and join us for a spooky conversation!

Ja, she was in great pain. Then we cut off her head and drove a stake through her heart and burned it and then she found peace.
Abraham van Helsing

← Back

Thanks!

THE RETURN OF THE KING (2003)

We are joined by Jamelle Bouie (NYTimes / Unclear and Present Danger Podcast) to discuss the conclusion to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and bring our miniseries to a close. We pick up the discussion about heroism with Frodo’s empathy towards Gollum, Sam’s faithfulness to Frodo, and Aragorn’s radical faith in the hobbits. Then, we discuss at length Charles Mills’ recent essay about the racial ideology embedded in Tolkien’s writings and consider what we should make of this in light of our love of these books and films.

Listen to Unclear and Present Danger!

Follow Jamelle on Twitter and read his column in the NYTimes!

Read Mills on Middle Earth here!

Well… I’m back.
Samwise Gamgee

← Back

Thanks!

THE TWO TOWERS (2002)

We sit down with Agnes Callard (Philosophy, Chicago) and Robin Hanson (Economics, GMU) to discuss the second installment in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Two Towers! We talk about the film as a transitional piece that deals with the transformations of its main characters, the addictive and corruptive capacity of power, and wonder about who the hero of the film is and what that tells us about the notion of heroism. We consider Tolkien’s religious inspirations as well as (drawing on Charles Mills’ recently published essay) the racist shorthand he drew on to characterize good and evil. Will the heroes (and us) survive the night at Helm’s Deep? Tune in to find out!

Agnes loves Gollum so much she has the official Gollum promo shirt!

Listen to Agnes and Robin’s podcast, Minds Almost Meeting!

Read Charles Mills’ essay, “The Wretched of Middle-Earth: An Orkish Manifesto”

I can’t do this, Sam.
Frodo Baggins

← Back

Thanks!

THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (2001)

Welcome to the start of our Lord of the Rings miniseries! We kick things off with the first film of Peter Jackson’s trilogy, which marks the beginning of Frodo’s quest and introduces us to the main players and themes of the books/films. We welcome Bennett Eckert (MIT) and Rebecca Kuang (Yale) to consider what makes Jackson’s trilogy such a powerful and successful adaptation, and explore how on (Middle) earth he managed to make these films. We explore the film’s central themes while discussing Tolkien’s pessimistic view of history and the endless lore he infused into his stories. Find out who would try to use the ring and become corrupted by it, and who would refuse it, in this adventure-filled episode!

I am ready to go home.
Frodo Baggins

JURASSIC PARK (1993)

It’s time to visit Jurassic Park! We discuss the tenuous relationship between science/art and commerce, while thinking about the relationship between order, chaos, and personal responsibility. Does Spielberg see a bit of himself in Hammond, the doomed entrepreneur who wants to bring magic to the masses? It’s a movie about procreation and playing god, but also coming to terms with limitations. Justin goes on a rant about why night time shooting doesn’t look as good as Jurassic Park did over 25 years ago, and Laura reflects on the sheer size of that triceratops poo.

Which of these looks better to you?

Hold on to your butts.
Ray Arnold

CLOSER (2004)

Join us and Carly Severn (KQED San Francisco) to talk about Mike Nichols’ 2004, super emo and eminently re-watchable melodrama, Closer. It’s a game of sexy Tetris between four hot people, but also a contrapuntal reflection on appearance and reality, and also a movie about two dudes who can’t get over the fact that the women they’ve slept with have slept with other men. We somehow hit on nice guy-isms, the film’s use of elision, love, passion, and Damien Rice. Also, did you know that many of the photographs in Anna’s studio and apartment are of famous philosophers?! Check it out!

Steve Pyke’s photographs of philosophers:

Thank you for your honesty. Now fuck off and die, you fucking slag.
Larry

NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959)

Today we’re joined by friend of the show Adam Kane to discuss Hitchcock’s bombastic spy thriller North By Northwest! We discuss film’s confusing setup, symbolism (and Hitchcock’s refusal to read into this film), the demand not to ask silly questions, how old Cary Grant’s character is supposed to be, the many MacGuffins, the many love triangles, Mount Rushmore, and Saul Bass himself. This episode is sponsored by Crop Duster Assassins Ltd. — if you need to take someone out and you want to do it in the least efficient way possible, give them a call!

Call it my woman’s intuition, if you will, but I’ve never trusted neatness. Neatness is always the result of deliberate planning.
Leonard

SULLY (2016)

Join us to talk about the Miracle on the Hudson with friend Chris Kaiser (Columbia University / the podcast Said and Done)! We delve into Eastwood’s hatred of bureaucracy and tease apart his complex feelings towards individualism and collective heroism. Is the film dripping with gay subtext? We explore the semiotics of a mustache and wonder what goes into Sully/Skiles slash-fiction. We also consider the possibility that, through his filmmaking, Eastwood is helping us repair our relationship to our own history. Also, Clint hates computers more than anyone who has ever lived. Welcome aboard!

Can we get serious now?
Sully