Celine Song’s new not-quite-a-rom-com MATERIALISTS openly evokes Jane Austen in its focus on the rituals and codes of courtship, as well as its frankness about how one’s net worth can shape their romantic prospects. That could have led us to any number of Austen adaptations, but few as instantly beguiling as Joe Wright’s 2005 feature debut, PRIDE & PREJUDICE. So this week we’re discussing what makes Wright’s “muddy hem” take on the material stand out in a crowded field of Austen adaptations, whether the film’s lush style complements or drowns out its substance, and why that hand flex made such a meme-able impression. And in Feedback,  a listener schools us on poetry and philosophy as it relates to the most opaque segment of I’M NOT THERE. Please share your thoughts about PRIDE & PREJUDICE, MATERIALISTS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro: 00:00:00-00:03:41 Pride & Prejudice Keynote: 00:03:41-00:28:59 Pride & Prejudice Discussion: 00:28:59-48:23 Feedback/outro: 00:48:23-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Like I’M NOT THERE, Alex Ross Perry’s new docu-like feature PAVEMENTS takes a “print the legend” approach to its subject, blurring reality and fiction to convey the significance of defining ‘90s indie rock group Pavement from a few different semi-fabricated angles. Is that approach better suited to established fans, including our returning guest and longtime friend Noel Murray, than it is to newcomers less equipped to parse how the film skews the band’s history and creative output? Perhaps, and we get into that this week before placing PAVEMENTS’ slanted snapshot next to I’M NOT THERE’s fractured Bob Dylan portrait to see how each attempts to portray an artist’s essence, if not their biography, and explores how fame can turn a person into a persona. And in Your Next Picture Show we recommend another one of Perry’s experiments in using music-biopic conventions to tell a different kind of rock-n-roll story, 2018’s HER SMELL.  Please share your thoughts about I’M NOT THERE, PAVEMENTS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730.  Next Pairing: Celine Song’s MATERIALISTS and Joe Wright’s PRIDE & PREJUDICE Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:34 Friendship discussion: 00:02:34-00:31:28 Friendship/The Master Connections: 00:31:28-00:53:11 Your Next Picture Show: 00:53:11-00:57:40 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 00:57:40-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alex Ross Perry’s new hybrid documentary PAVEMENTS rejects convention in a way that’s both in keeping with the spirit of the ’90s indie-rock band at its center, and reminiscent of Todd Haynes’ deconstructed Bob Dylan biopic I’M NOT THERE. And while you arguably don’t need to be well-versed in either act to appreciate the films about them, it certainly doesn’t hurt, which is why we’ve brought in our old friend Noel Murray to help us parse two films that are more concerned with conveying an artist’s essence than their biography, beginning this week with I’M NOT THERE’s freewheelin’ approach to Bob Dylan. Then, in place of Feedback, our resident Dylan scholars provide several recommendations that offer some other, more straightforward angles from which to approach the man and his music.  Please share your thoughts about I’M NOT THERE, PAVEMENTS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro: 00:00:00-00:04:09 I’m Not There Keynote: 00:04:09-0010:12 I’m Not There Discussion: 00:10:12-00:43:23 Feedback/outro: 00:43:23-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We were admittedly a bit dubious going into this pairing, which was spoken into existence by writer-director Andrew DeYoung invoking THE MASTER when describing his new Tim Robinson/Paul Rudd comedy FRIENDSHIP, but it’s not the stretch we thought it would be. In fact, Paul Thomas Anderson’s discomfiting psychological drama proves such an interesting lens through which to view FRIENDSHIP’s discomfiting absurdist comedy that we move into Connections early, to discuss how each of these two films about lonely men at odds with their own reality bucks convention, not only in terms of narrative and character, but in style and structure as well. Then in Your Next Picture Show we give a glimpse of the episode that could have been if we had chosen the PTA film we went into FRIENDSHIP expecting to be reminded of (and still kind of were): PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE. Please share your thoughts about THE MASTER, FRIENDSHIP, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next Pairing: Alex Ross Perry’s PAVEMENTS and Todd Haynes’ I’M NOT THERE Intro: 00:00:00-00:01:57 Friendship discussion: 00:01:57-00:16:17 Friendship/The Master Connections: 00:16:17-00:48:01 Your Next Picture Show: 00:48:01-00:51:22 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 00:51:22-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We can’t say that it would have occurred to us to pair the new Tim Robinson/Paul Rudd comedy FRIENDSHIP with THE MASTER if writer-director Andrew DeYoung hadn’t specifically invoked Paul Thomas Anderson’s 2012 psychological drama, but the two films do wind up being unexpectedly complementary portraits of relationships between emotionally unstable men. Plus, we’re happy to have an excuse to revisit THE MASTER, a slippery film wherein nearly every scene has a claim to being the most important one. So this week we’re taking a closer look at a few of those scenes and the multiple interpretations they invite. And in Feedback we’re still fielding listener interpretations of SINNERS, this time one that addresses one of Tasha’s only complaints about the film.  Please share your thoughts about THE MASTER, FRIENDSHIP, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro: 00:00:00-00:06:04 "The Master" Keynote: 00:06:04-00:12:17 "The Master" Discussion:00:12:17-00:57:26 Feedback/outro: 00:57:26-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The new THUNDERBOLTS* assembles a group of leftovers from various MCU stories to face off against their personal failings in a way that’s broadly reminiscent of, yet tonally distinct from, the wannabe superheroes of 1999’s MYSTERY MEN. It’s also tonally distinct from most recent Marvel projects in a way that we all responded to, even if we differ on whether THUNDERBOLTS* is punching above its power class in the metaphor department. We debate that before bringing MYSTERY MEN back in to explore the various power differentials both between and within these two groups of superheroes with self-esteem issues. And in Your Next Picture Show we entertain another hypothetical “misfit superheroes” pairing that Scott argues has a better claim to the “classic” designation than MYSTERY MEN.  Please share your thoughts about MYSTERY MEN, THUNDERBOLTS*, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next Pairing: Andrew DeYoung’s FRIENDSHIP and Paul Thomas Anderson’s THE MASTER Intro: 00:00:00-00:01:39 Thunderbolts discussion: 00:01:39-00:34:23 Thunderbolts/Mystery Men Connections: 00:34:23-01:03:20 Your Next Picture Show: 01:03:20-01:06:51 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 01:06:51-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The new THUNDERBOLTS* assembles some leftovers from the Marvel Cinematic Universe who are tough to describe as superheroes but nonetheless step up to save the day when their city needs them, which reminded us of MYSTERY MEN and its negligibly powered not-so-superteam. A flop in 1999, the comedy is as chaotic and sloppy as its titular (with an asterisk) group, but that imperfect charm is arguably central to the cult appreciation it’s attained since. So this week we’re taking a closer look at MYSTERY MEN’s small-time wannabe crime-fighters to determine how they fit into the bigger picture of modern superhero cinema. Then in Feedback, we keep the SINNERS conversation going with the help of some prompts from our listeners. Please share your thoughts about MYSTERY MEN, THUNDERBOLTS*, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro: 00:00:00-00:07:56Mystery Men Keynote: 00:07:57-00:15:51Mystery Men Discussion: 00:15:52-00:45:35Feedback/outro: 00:45:36-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:03 Sinners Discussion: 00:02:04-00:28:46 Connections: 00:28:47-1:02:37 Your Next Picture Show, next pairing, and goodbyes: 1:02-38-end Director Ryan Coogler has been generous in sharing his many points of inspiration for SINNERS, including the other film in this pairing, but his exceptional new feature is refreshingly singular in both vision and execution. It makes for an admittedly lopsided comparison with FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, but also an illuminating one: examining Coogler’s vision through the lens of the 1996 Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino teamup sheds light on the added depth SINNERS brings to its own vampire mythology, criminal-brother protagonists, and mid-film genre shift. And in Your Next Picture Show, we briefly imagine the conversation we could have had if we’d instead paired SINNERS with the Coen brothers’ O BROTHER, WHERE ART THOU?   Please share your thoughts about FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, SINNERS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next Pairing: Jake Schreier's THUNDERBOLTS and Kinka Usher’s MYSTERY MEN  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Comparing 1996's FROM DUSK TILL DAWN to the new SINNERS can feel a bit like, as Scott puts it, comparing “Chopsticks” to Beethoven’s Fifth. But Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino’s sleazy vampire flick was clearly on Ryan Coogler’s mind when crafting his own film about a pair of brothers who spend one fateful night defending a nightclub from an invading horde of the undead. Coogler’s film also has much more on its mind beyond that pulpy premise, which we’ll get into next week, but for now we’re digging as deep as we can into the shallow pleasures and frustrating shortcomings of FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, from the awkward but arguably endearing performances from George Clooney and Tarantino as fugitive brothers, to the moments that test the limits of Rodriguez’s run-and-gun filmmaking approach — and yes, of course we have to talk about the foot stuff, too. Then in Feedback, we respond to a couple of listeners pushing back on some of our Cronenbergian categorization in the last pairing.  Please share your thoughts about FROM DUSK TILL DAWN, SINNERS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro: 00:00:00-00:06:57 From Dusk Till Dawn Keynote: 00:06:57-00:11:55 From Dusk Till Dawn Discussion: 00:11:56-00:54:04 Feedback/outro: 00:54:04-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Over the decades, David Cronenberg has carved a distinctive and provocative filmography out of his interest in human decay and death, up to and including his new THE SHROUDS, a late-career entry in the writer-director’s body-horror canon. It’s a film that left some of us confounded in a way that our returning guest, critic Charles Bramesco, might argue is part of its Cronenbergian appeal; but placing it next to THE FLY in Connections clarifies how much it’s simply an evolution of the same pet themes Cronenberg has been circling since 1986 (and earlier), from overlapping obsessions with the mutability of bodies and technology, to the horror and guilt of watching a loved one deteriorate before our very eyes. And in Your Next Picture Show, we’re inspired to talk over another recent, highly personal project from an elder-statesman auteur that received a mixed reception, and which we never got to cover on the show: Francis Ford Coppola’s MEGALOPOLIS. Please share your thoughts about THE FLY, THE SHROUDS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next Pairing: Ryan Coogler’s SINNERS and Robert Rodriguez’s FROM DUSK TIL DAWN Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:00 The Shrouds discussion: 00:02:04-00:26:23 The Shrouds/The Fly Connections: 00:26:24-00:59:16 Your Next Picture Show: 00:59:17-01:03:15 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:03:16-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The way David Cronenberg’s new THE SHROUDS splices together unsettling ideas about technology and bodily transformation made us think of… well, a lot of his filmography, but the film’s visceral interest in how the human body decays feels directly connected to the director’s unlikeliest hit, his remake of THE FLY. We’re joined this week by critic and our nascent “gross and scary” correspondent Charles Bramesco to teleport back to 1986 and examine what lies beneath the rotting flesh of THE FLY, from its tender central relationship to its oozing physical effects to its Howard Shore score, that makes it a distinctly Cronenbergian grossout. Then in Feedback, a listener uses our recent discussion of THE THIN MAN to broach a bigger question about what we value most in our mystery stories.  Please share your thoughts about THE FLY, THE SHROUDS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro: 00:00:00-00:03:38 The Fly Keynote: 00:03:39-00:08:18 The Fly Discussion: 00:08:19-00:44:11 Feedback/outro: 00:44:12-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

BLACK BAG, Steven Soderbergh’s latest 90-minute collaboration with writer David Koepp, is in theory a sprawling international spy thriller, but in practice it’s a more intimate study of how a marriage can thrive in an environment where trusting your spouse is considered a weakness. This week we talk about how that genre disconnect works for and against BLACK BAG, before bringing in this pairing’s companion film, 1934’s THE THIN MAN, to compare how Nick and Nora Charles’s bantering, crime-solving partnership compares to the cooler, less boozy charms of Cate Blanchett and Michael Fassbender’s married spies. Then for Your Next Picture Show, we reach back to one of this podcast’s very first episodes to cannibalize a recommendation for a film that we’ve already covered on the show, but was too clear an inspiration on BLACK BAG to ignore. (And really, is there ever a bad time to recommend WHO’S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF?)  Please share your thoughts about THE THIN MAN, BLACK BAG, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next pairing: David Cronenberg’s THE SHROUDS and THE FLY Chapters: Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:04 Black Bag discussion: 00:02:04-00:29:03 Black Bag/The Thin Man Connections: 00:29:03-00:58:35 Your Next Picture Show: 00:58:35-01:04:50 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:104:50-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Steven Soderbergh’s new BLACK BAG is a spy thriller, sure, but it’s also the story of a marriage, and watching its sophisticated central couple banter their way through a sprawling mystery, it’s hard not to be reminded of one of cinema’s most enduring and endearing crime-solving couples, Nick and Nora Charles. So this week we’re going back to their film debut, 1934’s THE THIN MAN, to see how W.S. Van Dyke’s (barely) pre-Code crime caper balances the effervescent charm of its hard-drinking stars against the plot mechanics of a murder mystery, and whether any of the film’s many supporting players ever manage to steal the spotlight from Nick, Nora, and their disobedient dog Asta. Then in Feedback, a listener writes in with a notable omission from our recent discussion of STARSHIP TROOPERS. Please share your thoughts about THE THIN MAN, BLACK BAG, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Chapters: Intro/favorite movie dinner scenes: 00:00:00-00:08:44 The Thin Man Keynote: 00:08:45-00:15:43 The Thin Man Discussion: 00:15:44-00:56:44 Feedback/outro: 00:56:45-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Bong Joon Ho’s new MICKEY 17 takes a lot of big swings, from star Robert Pattinson’s vocal affectation to a comedic fixation on “sauce,” all of it in service of big, bold, arguably blunt satire. It all makes for a somewhat messy but highly discussable film, both on its own and in conversation with Paul Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS, another big swing of a sci-fi satire that aims to entertain as it undermines propagandistic societies where leaders rule by catchphrase, where citizenship is conditional, and where working-class lives are expendable. We dive into all of that, plus space bugs that may not actually be bugs, then offer a Your Next Picture Show recommendation for another MICKEY 17 pairing contender, Duncan Jones’ MOON. Please share your thoughts about STARSHIP TROOPERS, MICKEY 17, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next pairing: Steven Soderbergh’s BLACK BAG and W.S. Van Dyke’s THE THIN MAN Chapters: Intro: 00:00:00-00:01:55 Mickey 17 discussion: 00:01:56-00:31:19 Mickey 17/Starship Troopers Connections: 00:31:20-1:07:03 Your Next Picture Show: 1:07:04-1:12:50 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:12:51-1:16:11 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week’s pairing is brought to you by: space bugs! Specifically, space bugs as a metaphor for a fascistic society’s disregard for any perceived-to-be-lower life form, human or otherwise. Inspired by the clear satire of Bong Joon Ho’s new MICKEY 17, we’re revisiting Paul Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS, whose satirical intent was less clear to some audiences when it hit theaters in 1997. Today, while we’re on the same page as far as what Verhoeven was going for with his propagandistic display of military might, opinions still differ among our panel as to how well he pulled it off. We get into that disagreement, as well as the surprisingly enduring effects and the improbability of a film like this being made in Hollywood today. Then in Feedback, a listener inspired by a recent pairing shares their reaction to a first-time viewing of THE KILLING FIELDS.  Please share your thoughts about STARSHIP TROOPERS, MICKEY 17, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Intro/space threats discussion: 00:00:00-00:06:02 Starship Troopers Keynote: 00:06:03-00:11:41 Starship Trooper Discussion: 00: 11:42-00:52:46 Feedback/outro: 00:52:47-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Carson Lund’s feature debut EEPHUS moves at the same deliberate pace as the trick pitch for which it’s named, leisurely unfolding over the course of a season-ending game between two small-town recreation leagues that’s also probably the last time many on the field will ever play. This week we’re joined again by film critic and baseball lover Tim Grierson to discuss how EEPHUS approaches that sense of finality with low-key humor and a subtle sense of nostalgia, before bringing Ron Shelton’s BULL DURHAM back on the field to compare these two films’ ideas about aging, masculinity, and America’s pastime, emphasis on the “past.” And in Your Next Picture Show we offer a recommendation for another unconventional baseball movie that offers a rarely seen perspective on the game, 2008’s SUGAR. Please share your thoughts about BULL DURHAM, EEPHUS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next pairing: Bong Joon Ho’s MICKEY 17 and Paul Verhoeven’s STARSHIP TROOPERS Chapters: Intro: 00:00:00-00:01:51 Eephus discussion: 00:01:52-00:27:37 Connections: 00:27:38-1:00:12 Your Next Picture Show: 1:00:13-1:04:25 Next episode preview and goodbyes: 1:04:26-end Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Quietly observing as a small-town recreation league plays out their last game of the season, and likely ever, the new EEPHUS is a feature-length subversion of “the big game,” simultaneously embracing and rejecting such baseball-movie cliches in a manner that reminded us of 1988’s BULL DURHAM. We’re joined this week by pinch-hitter Tim Grierson to discuss all the ways Ron Shelton’s classic, often cited as the best baseball movie ever, throws out the sports-movie playbook, from its multiple protagonists and rom-com structure to its acknowledgment that baseball, like life, has an expiration date. And in Feedback, a frequent contributor returns with some bonus observations from our recent pairing of PRESENCE and THE OTHERS. Intro/favorite movie sports teams: 00:00:00-00:08:51 Bull Durham Keynote: 00:08:51-00:14:55 Bull Durham Discussion: 00:14:56-00:56:14 Feedback/outro: 00:56:14-end Please share your thoughts about BULL DURHAM, EEPHUS, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The story of two journalists reporting on a common cause despite their vastly different backgrounds is what gives NO OTHER LAND its narrative shape — and is what inspired us to pair it with 1984’s THE KILLING FIELDS — but the Oscar-nominated documentary is at heart a story about activism, and the weight of maintaining hope amid a generations-spanning conflict with no resolution in sight. We’re joined again this week by Slate culture writer Sam Adams to discuss how NO OTHER LAND makes the political personal, then bring THE KILLING FIELDS back in to compare these two portrayals of journalism from very different moments in journalism history, and the quandaries of privilege and guilt that accompany partnerships of unequals. Then in Your Next Picture Show we tout SWIMMING TO CAMBODIA and Jonathan Demme’s ability to spin Spalding Gray’s monologue about his bit role in THE KILLING FIELDS into a BTS feature like none other. Intro: 00:00:00-00:02:25 No Other Land discussion: 00:02:26-00:24:28 Connections: 00:24:29-00:46:00 Your Next Picture Show/Goodbyes: 00:46:01-00:56:35 Please share your thoughts about THE KILLING FIELDS, NO OTHER LAND, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Next Pairing: Carson Lund’s EEPHUS and Ron Shelton’s BULL DURHAM Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Intro & Oscars Chitchat: 00:00:00-00:08:52 Keynote: 00:08:53-00:13:50 The Killing Fields Discussion: 00:13:51-44:37 Feedback & Outro: 00:44:38-end Summary:  The Oscar-nominated documentary NO OTHER LAND, a collaboration between Palestinian and Israeli filmmakers whose common cause and eventual friendship does not change the stark contrast in their political status, brought to mind another story of two journalists from strikingly different backgrounds who bond in the midst of a geopolitical hotspot: 1984’s THE KILLING FIELDS. We’re joined this week by Slate writer and critic Sam Adams to revisit Roland Joffé’s dramatization of the relationship between New York Times reporter Sydney Schanberg and Dith Pran, the Cambodian interpreter who worked alongside him as the country fell to the Khmer Rouge, to consider how THE KILLING FIELDS plays several decades removed from a conflict that would have been recent history for contemporary audiences. And in Feedback we share a listener’s explanation for one of our lingering questions from our recent discussion of THE OTHERS.  Please share your thoughts about THE KILLING FIELDS, NO OTHER LAND, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Steven Soderbergh’s new PRESENCE flips the typical haunted house narrative inside out, but unlike the other film in this pairing, THE OTHERS, it makes its point of view clear from the opening frames. But that POV doesn’t slide fully into focus until PRESENCE’s final-act reveal, which left us with some questions, both critical and metaphysical, to dig into this week. Then we bring THE OTHERS back into the conversation to discuss how these two very different takes on the haunted house — one classical, one revisionist — each makes use of confined space, complex parent-child dynamics, and ambiguity about how time functions in an eternal afterlife. Then we keep the ghost stories coming in Your Next Picture Show, with some recommendations for films with an unusual or memorable perspective on domestic hauntings. Intro: (00:00:00-00:01:58) Presence review (spoiler-free): (00:01:590-00:20:10) Presence review continued (spoilers): (00:20:11-00:27:56) Connections: (00:27:57-00:56:14) Your Next Picture Show: (00:56:15-01:06:50) Next episode preview and credits: (01:06:51-01:11:05) Please share your thoughts about THE OTHERS, PRESENCE, or anything else in the world of film, by sending an email or voice memo to comments@nextpictureshow.net, or leaving a short voicemail at (773) 234-9730. Your Next Picture Show: • David Lowery’s A GHOST STORY • Guillermo del Toro’s CRIMSON PEAK • Jack Clayton’s THE INNOCENTS • Sidney J. Furie’s THE ENTITY Next Pairing: NO OTHER LAND and THE KILLING FIELDS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices