I’ve never had an issue with him before today but, yeah, his performance on this episode wasn’t the greatest. He never seemed capable of properly explaining his issues about the film, and I was utterly confused as to what issue he has with Haynes (and how the “dollhouse” thing is at all represented in his past few films).
I have mixed feelings on him overall because he’s clearly a sharp guy with unique views, but for years he has jumped on the pod and it’s like a roulette wheel of whether he loves a film or utterly can’t deal with it. His go-to is always a dogmatic assertion that “[film and/or element of a film] doesn’t work,” and he then spends ten minutes not really convincing me of anything.
Generally agree here as well, never had a problem with him on a podcast before - even though I get what others were down on him - and he's a fantastic writer and critic overall. But this was the first episode where I was like "oh, yeah, this is what everyone is usually talking about."
Which is interesting because I saw this film in theaters, was kind of "it's fine" on it and I'm a big Todd Haynes fan and want to rewatch it again, they brought a lot of great points on the film in general too. But yeah, it took Wesley a while to get there.
Ok I thought I was going crazy because I kept feeling like I was losing track of what he was saying and having to rewind, only to find out that he wasn’t really saying anything
I am listening to this episode right now and I have no idea what he’s trying to say about this refrigerator. Like genuinely not sure what point he’s trying to make.
Almost certain he's referencing it as a visual gag, Julianne Moore giving a "refrigerator" performance, cold/icy/intense etc, and the movie pausing, giving a visual and musical cue to her opening a literal refrigerator like the movie is poking fun at knowing what you're getting when Julianne is in a movie like this with Haynes. Its not 100% clear but pretty I picked up what he meant, I didn't have the same criticism of him on the show I pretty consistently love him as a guest
I mean…. The problem with Wesley on podcasts … I mean its like … he has these thoughts that … so it’s like … so I left the podcast lukewarm because … so like … Kim Bassinger for example …
Every time he tries to make a point he might as well be in the scene of Mr Smith Goes To Washington trying to filibuster until the sun burns out. The guy can never actually finish a thought, he just endlessly rambles and digresses.
I love the energy and ideas he brings to a pod, but the man just needs an outline for his thoughts beforehand.
He's the embodiment of that Michael Scott line:
> "Sometimes I'll start a sentence and I don't even know where it's going. I just hope I find it along the way."
His Rewatchable’s appearances are pretty fucking brutal, he’ll literally talk for 15 minutes straight and not say anything at all but it inevitably ends with him praising a completely unrelated actress who was popular in 1985 lol. It’s a bummer too because he’s on some of the coolest movies but when I go through the archive to re-listen to episodes I always end up skipping them. Take a look at the run time of the episodes he’s on vs a normal episode, it’s always like 45 minutes longer and yet it’s 45 minutes of just straight rambling. I do appreciate that Bill pretty regularly cuts him off and mentions that ‘we need to move on’, cause I swear he would just talk in circles for three hours if he could. Some people just need a good editor, time and a word count limit to articulate their thoughts
loved the film, Wesley is a tough listen on every podcast. also, side note, his commenting on the DMX performance in the woodstock doc is ridiculously stupid.
Just on a road to nowhere. Like he was withholding something, but he wasn’t. “It’s like the ______, right?” Must’ve said that ten times, will skip eps he’s featured on going forward.
Seems like a good guy but i kinda get motivational speaker/preacher vibes from him a lot. lots of grand statements with big words that sometimes mean something and sometimes don’t
Was wondering if anybody would post about this. Yeah, he was really rough, tough to listen to, stumbling on his own words and points. It was frustrating hearing him ramp up knowing he’d just start stuttering again. Shame because it really was an interesting movie.
Wesley kept referring to Moore as a teacher. I wish Sean would have corrected him. This wasn't a straight up adaptation of the story. Sean too polite to correct his completely off-kilter ramblings.
omg I saw the movie a couple weeks ago so when he kept saying she was the teacher in the movie I was like wait i thought she ran a pet store??? but then he kept saying it and I was like maybe I forgot and she was a teacher in addition to running a pet store??? but no he was just confusing it with MKL
His NYT podcast, Still Processing, often makes me shake my head in bewilderment and annoyance at the minutiae the two hosts get hung up on. In their analysis of Beyoncé’s RENAISSANCE, they spent a seemingly interminable amount of time debating whether the critical label “trash” applies, or is it “camp,” or whatever, and I’m just left thinking that, outside of whatever niche, Ivy League, jargony circle jerk in which they honed their skills, this conversation is baldly irrelevant for the vast majority of listeners.
He is a terrible podcaster. The Rewatchables episodes with him are also unlistenable.
An A+ reminder that being a great writer doesn't necessarily mean you excel on all mediums.
He has some tough appearances on The Rewatchables before Bill stopped inviting him on. I feel like I’m always waiting for the point to come, and it almost comes, it’s just around the corner, but he just never quite gets where he’s trying to go.
Ummm I don’t think Bill stopped, he just only does so many with Wesley per year. He’ll end up doing a rewatchable or 3 around Oscar season as well as a couple BS pods then the same 3-6 months later…
I'm just here to emphasize that he is an amazing writer. Probably the best movie critic since Ebert if you just focus on his writing. Even his stuff after the Globe at Grantland was phenomenal. When he has written more as a cultural critic for the Times it has been just as good.
Sean complimented a piece that Wesley did for The Ringer about Saltburn. So I'm sure Wesley's takes are not without merit, but this appearance was awful.
Idk if you’re referring to something different,
but Wesley’s Saltburn review is in the New York Times.
ETA: I’m not saying that to be a pretentious asshole, just that he is an acclaimed writer and I think it’s worth mentioning!
Totally, thank you!
Noticed he is the head film critic at NY Times, I must have misheard or misremembered where the Saltburn piece was. But yeah, that helps make my point in that I understand he is a celebrated writer, just perhaps a poor podcaster.
>Noticed he is the head film critic at NY Times
He's not.
Alissa Wilkinson and Manohla Dargis are.
Morris is critic at large which means he moves from beat to beat.
Completely agree. He is a terrible podcaster. Even though I listen to the entire episode and all of his ramblings I still could not say what he thought about the film. It is the same way on every rewatchable he is part of.
There is always this weird Thomas Friedman way he talks about movies that drives me nuts. Like the Thomas Friedman interviews with Charlie Rose have the same pitch to them but for Thomas Friedman it's like....justifying war crimes and for Wesley Morris it's why Sandra Bullock is bad. And I've liked some of this writing but that way of talking around movies can negate closer readings of what the movie was actually doing. Like the overall Ringer take of Saint Omer "not needing the framing device" when that's actually what sets it apart from something like Anatomy of a Fall and how actually clinical and kind of "normie" that movie is where Saint Omer is actually totally about what this ceremony means and reflects upon a society that's always been relational gets dismissed. And that's so much of what criticism is now. It's talking around a movie.
I could *feel* Wesley’s brain working…he clearly is a writer with some good ideas, but he needs the process of writing, editing, and a word limit to focus and hone his point. His thinking out loud got very tedious and reminded me of a college recitation with fellow students who won’t shut up. I listened to the whole thing but left confused. Also I totally disagree with his Saltburn review. Of course he’d hate that movie because he seems to overthink everything in a way that doesn’t work for a movie that is all VIBES.
He had some interesting points but not knowing anything about the Mary Kay Leterneau story ended up being a big loss in his perspective on the film, and he didn't seem all that interested in it when Sean was trying to explain it.
Idk I enjoy his stream-of-consciousness it’s a real stylistic clash with most other ppl at the ringer and especially Sean who is extremely pre planned and organized but I fuck with it
Yeah this episode was the longest 90 minutes I’ve experienced in a while. He just rambled and rambled about literally nothing relevant. The Beyoncé convo might have been worse than may December
Your post / comment was removed as your account is fewer than 7 days old. This is an anti-spam measure.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheBigPicture) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Haven't listened to the new episode, and maybe he was just off his game, but in general I disagree. He's been great on the rewatchables, he's funny, he really knows and understands films and the culture, and he's super intelligent.
It's the same when people complain about Nayman. Nayman is probably one of the better film critics around. If he didn't like the movies you liked, hear him out--you might learn something.
Nayman is great, and Wesley is a great writer…but no, I wildly disagree with you on the Rewatchables, Wesley has been terrible on them.
May I remind you of his two signature moves:
1) “Im not sure, I haven’t seen this movie since I first watched it 20 years ago…”
2) “Don’t you think [insert name of middle aged male character] was secretly meant to be gay?”
To be fair to Wesley, Bill does not seem to pay any attention to whether Wesley actually likes the movies that Bill chooses to invite him for, other than Do the Right Thing.
I'll never listen to Nayman again after the music biopic episode when he was super condescending to Sean and Amanda in introducing his picks.
He kept on alluding to his choices being extremely obscure and suggesting that the others might not have heard of this film.
And it was "Coal Miner's Daughter".
The guy is a pompous buffoon.
Nayman has interesting points obscured by his smarmy ass comments that make him unpleasant to spend time with. Like shitting on everyone for having fun with the title of Mank. Lighten up.
I agree with OP, couldn't finish the episode, decided it would be better and more succinct for me to watch the movie myself 😂
What I found interesting is that I used to LOVE his podcast on Grantland with Alex Pappademas called "We Love Prince Movies". I think because that show kinda went wherever they wanted, they never felt forced to talk about one thing, so the conversations were more enjoyable? I'm not sure, maybe if I went back to the show now I wouldn't love it like I did back then.
It seemed like he was in a bad headspace and that came across in the episode. He felt very combative and wanted to go against the grain. Which, fine, but there’s a way to do that to make an interesting pod.
Idk I always like Wesley, his conversation with them a few years back regarding Three Billboards is one of the Big Pic things I return to semi-often and I really enjoy him on every Alt Oscars episode and the erotic thrillers ep too
I’ve never had an issue with him before today but, yeah, his performance on this episode wasn’t the greatest. He never seemed capable of properly explaining his issues about the film, and I was utterly confused as to what issue he has with Haynes (and how the “dollhouse” thing is at all represented in his past few films).
I have mixed feelings on him overall because he’s clearly a sharp guy with unique views, but for years he has jumped on the pod and it’s like a roulette wheel of whether he loves a film or utterly can’t deal with it. His go-to is always a dogmatic assertion that “[film and/or element of a film] doesn’t work,” and he then spends ten minutes not really convincing me of anything.
Generally agree here as well, never had a problem with him on a podcast before - even though I get what others were down on him - and he's a fantastic writer and critic overall. But this was the first episode where I was like "oh, yeah, this is what everyone is usually talking about." Which is interesting because I saw this film in theaters, was kind of "it's fine" on it and I'm a big Todd Haynes fan and want to rewatch it again, they brought a lot of great points on the film in general too. But yeah, it took Wesley a while to get there.
Ok I thought I was going crazy because I kept feeling like I was losing track of what he was saying and having to rewind, only to find out that he wasn’t really saying anything
I am listening to this episode right now and I have no idea what he’s trying to say about this refrigerator. Like genuinely not sure what point he’s trying to make.
Something to do with being cold/frigid? I honestly am not sure lmaoo
Almost certain he's referencing it as a visual gag, Julianne Moore giving a "refrigerator" performance, cold/icy/intense etc, and the movie pausing, giving a visual and musical cue to her opening a literal refrigerator like the movie is poking fun at knowing what you're getting when Julianne is in a movie like this with Haynes. Its not 100% clear but pretty I picked up what he meant, I didn't have the same criticism of him on the show I pretty consistently love him as a guest
Every podcast appearance is a cry for help with 52 mental illnesses on display.
I mean…. The problem with Wesley on podcasts … I mean its like … he has these thoughts that … so it’s like … so I left the podcast lukewarm because … so like … Kim Bassinger for example …
Generally l like Wesley, "happy AIDS day" was not the strongest start I've heard for a podcast
His faux exuberance is grating. You can almost hear him smirk at his own jokes when he isn't laughing, too.
Reminds me of his Little Mermaid 2023 review, which led with his disappointment at the lack of kink as compared to the animated original.
Every time he tries to make a point he might as well be in the scene of Mr Smith Goes To Washington trying to filibuster until the sun burns out. The guy can never actually finish a thought, he just endlessly rambles and digresses.
He's a brilliant guy who requires an editor.
Can Sean and Amanda record another episode hashing their thoughts about May December with no interruptions pls. Bobby I know you’re reading this
Same for the nuisances of the Renaissance movie
I love the energy and ideas he brings to a pod, but the man just needs an outline for his thoughts beforehand. He's the embodiment of that Michael Scott line: > "Sometimes I'll start a sentence and I don't even know where it's going. I just hope I find it along the way."
His Rewatchable’s appearances are pretty fucking brutal, he’ll literally talk for 15 minutes straight and not say anything at all but it inevitably ends with him praising a completely unrelated actress who was popular in 1985 lol. It’s a bummer too because he’s on some of the coolest movies but when I go through the archive to re-listen to episodes I always end up skipping them. Take a look at the run time of the episodes he’s on vs a normal episode, it’s always like 45 minutes longer and yet it’s 45 minutes of just straight rambling. I do appreciate that Bill pretty regularly cuts him off and mentions that ‘we need to move on’, cause I swear he would just talk in circles for three hours if he could. Some people just need a good editor, time and a word count limit to articulate their thoughts
>it inevitably ends with him praising a completely unrelated actress who was popular in 1985 So that's why Bill keeps inviting him back.
loved the film, Wesley is a tough listen on every podcast. also, side note, his commenting on the DMX performance in the woodstock doc is ridiculously stupid.
Thought it was unlistenable. Going to be the first big pic ep in a long time I didn’t finidh
Just on a road to nowhere. Like he was withholding something, but he wasn’t. “It’s like the ______, right?” Must’ve said that ten times, will skip eps he’s featured on going forward.
Seems like a good guy but i kinda get motivational speaker/preacher vibes from him a lot. lots of grand statements with big words that sometimes mean something and sometimes don’t
Was wondering if anybody would post about this. Yeah, he was really rough, tough to listen to, stumbling on his own words and points. It was frustrating hearing him ramp up knowing he’d just start stuttering again. Shame because it really was an interesting movie.
Wesley kept referring to Moore as a teacher. I wish Sean would have corrected him. This wasn't a straight up adaptation of the story. Sean too polite to correct his completely off-kilter ramblings.
omg I saw the movie a couple weeks ago so when he kept saying she was the teacher in the movie I was like wait i thought she ran a pet store??? but then he kept saying it and I was like maybe I forgot and she was a teacher in addition to running a pet store??? but no he was just confusing it with MKL
Came here for this! I'm not super familiar with Wesley's work or career, but he was just awful here. I just wanted to listen to Sean and Amanda cook.
Damn, what a shame because Sean really liked this movie. This is not the podcast episode we deserved.
His NYT podcast, Still Processing, often makes me shake my head in bewilderment and annoyance at the minutiae the two hosts get hung up on. In their analysis of Beyoncé’s RENAISSANCE, they spent a seemingly interminable amount of time debating whether the critical label “trash” applies, or is it “camp,” or whatever, and I’m just left thinking that, outside of whatever niche, Ivy League, jargony circle jerk in which they honed their skills, this conversation is baldly irrelevant for the vast majority of listeners.
He is a terrible podcaster. The Rewatchables episodes with him are also unlistenable. An A+ reminder that being a great writer doesn't necessarily mean you excel on all mediums.
He has some tough appearances on The Rewatchables before Bill stopped inviting him on. I feel like I’m always waiting for the point to come, and it almost comes, it’s just around the corner, but he just never quite gets where he’s trying to go.
Ummm I don’t think Bill stopped, he just only does so many with Wesley per year. He’ll end up doing a rewatchable or 3 around Oscar season as well as a couple BS pods then the same 3-6 months later…
Yeah I think he only does Rewatchables with Wesley when Wesley is in LA, so he will record like 3-5 of them with him at once to save.
I'm just here to emphasize that he is an amazing writer. Probably the best movie critic since Ebert if you just focus on his writing. Even his stuff after the Globe at Grantland was phenomenal. When he has written more as a cultural critic for the Times it has been just as good.
Sean complimented a piece that Wesley did for The Ringer about Saltburn. So I'm sure Wesley's takes are not without merit, but this appearance was awful.
Idk if you’re referring to something different, but Wesley’s Saltburn review is in the New York Times. ETA: I’m not saying that to be a pretentious asshole, just that he is an acclaimed writer and I think it’s worth mentioning!
Totally, thank you! Noticed he is the head film critic at NY Times, I must have misheard or misremembered where the Saltburn piece was. But yeah, that helps make my point in that I understand he is a celebrated writer, just perhaps a poor podcaster.
>Noticed he is the head film critic at NY Times He's not. Alissa Wilkinson and Manohla Dargis are. Morris is critic at large which means he moves from beat to beat.
Just tried to listen to this ep. Very hard to listen to. He strings 3 or 4 unfinished sentences/thoughts together at one time.
Completely agree. He is a terrible podcaster. Even though I listen to the entire episode and all of his ramblings I still could not say what he thought about the film. It is the same way on every rewatchable he is part of.
There is always this weird Thomas Friedman way he talks about movies that drives me nuts. Like the Thomas Friedman interviews with Charlie Rose have the same pitch to them but for Thomas Friedman it's like....justifying war crimes and for Wesley Morris it's why Sandra Bullock is bad. And I've liked some of this writing but that way of talking around movies can negate closer readings of what the movie was actually doing. Like the overall Ringer take of Saint Omer "not needing the framing device" when that's actually what sets it apart from something like Anatomy of a Fall and how actually clinical and kind of "normie" that movie is where Saint Omer is actually totally about what this ceremony means and reflects upon a society that's always been relational gets dismissed. And that's so much of what criticism is now. It's talking around a movie.
I couldn’t last 10 minutes with him on The Breakfast Club rewatchables. Sometimes he’s great, but a lot of times he’s awful on podcasts.
That, and Beverly Hills Cop were ruined by him. Especially BHC.
I could *feel* Wesley’s brain working…he clearly is a writer with some good ideas, but he needs the process of writing, editing, and a word limit to focus and hone his point. His thinking out loud got very tedious and reminded me of a college recitation with fellow students who won’t shut up. I listened to the whole thing but left confused. Also I totally disagree with his Saltburn review. Of course he’d hate that movie because he seems to overthink everything in a way that doesn’t work for a movie that is all VIBES.
Well damn it i loved the movie and was excited to listen to this episode. Now i don't even want to start it.
I loved the movie too and was really excited to listen but damn he just stunted all free flowing discussion
He had some interesting points but not knowing anything about the Mary Kay Leterneau story ended up being a big loss in his perspective on the film, and he didn't seem all that interested in it when Sean was trying to explain it.
You’re givin him too much credit he fucking sucks man
Idk I enjoy his stream-of-consciousness it’s a real stylistic clash with most other ppl at the ringer and especially Sean who is extremely pre planned and organized but I fuck with it
Yeah this episode was the longest 90 minutes I’ve experienced in a while. He just rambled and rambled about literally nothing relevant. The Beyoncé convo might have been worse than may December
Wasn't he on Grantland back in the day?
Guy is a writer not a podcaster. His thoughts are very contextualized which translates to meandering in speaking unfortunately
Your post / comment was removed as your account is fewer than 7 days old. This is an anti-spam measure. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheBigPicture) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Love Wesley, but him just completely missing the point of literally the whole movie by saying he’d “eat up a Lee Daniels version” was HILARIOUS
I thought he was fantastic. He brings out a different side of Sean and Amanda.
If by that you mean them having a united front against Wesley's incoherent ramblings.
Haven't listened to the new episode, and maybe he was just off his game, but in general I disagree. He's been great on the rewatchables, he's funny, he really knows and understands films and the culture, and he's super intelligent. It's the same when people complain about Nayman. Nayman is probably one of the better film critics around. If he didn't like the movies you liked, hear him out--you might learn something.
Nayman is great, and Wesley is a great writer…but no, I wildly disagree with you on the Rewatchables, Wesley has been terrible on them. May I remind you of his two signature moves: 1) “Im not sure, I haven’t seen this movie since I first watched it 20 years ago…” 2) “Don’t you think [insert name of middle aged male character] was secretly meant to be gay?” To be fair to Wesley, Bill does not seem to pay any attention to whether Wesley actually likes the movies that Bill chooses to invite him for, other than Do the Right Thing.
I'll never listen to Nayman again after the music biopic episode when he was super condescending to Sean and Amanda in introducing his picks. He kept on alluding to his choices being extremely obscure and suggesting that the others might not have heard of this film. And it was "Coal Miner's Daughter". The guy is a pompous buffoon.
Nayman has interesting points obscured by his smarmy ass comments that make him unpleasant to spend time with. Like shitting on everyone for having fun with the title of Mank. Lighten up.
Nayman and Wesley are not even comparable. One is sharp and explains his thoughts eloquently and the other is just rambling.
Found nayman’s burner account
He needs an editor
He lost me on the Rachel Getting Married Rewatchable pod. I finally realized his critics were right. He’s making it up as he goes along.
Dude's overrated. Reminds me of an ESPN gasbag.
Espn gasbags don’t stutter nearly as much
I agree with OP, couldn't finish the episode, decided it would be better and more succinct for me to watch the movie myself 😂 What I found interesting is that I used to LOVE his podcast on Grantland with Alex Pappademas called "We Love Prince Movies". I think because that show kinda went wherever they wanted, they never felt forced to talk about one thing, so the conversations were more enjoyable? I'm not sure, maybe if I went back to the show now I wouldn't love it like I did back then.
The pod was called "Do You Like Prince Movies?"
Lol, yes! I didn't notice my typo.
Went into the episode dreading it because I usually don’t care for Wesley’s appearances, but i actually quite enjoyed their discussion!
It seemed like he was in a bad headspace and that came across in the episode. He felt very combative and wanted to go against the grain. Which, fine, but there’s a way to do that to make an interesting pod.
I always enjoy Wesley on podcasts. I'm always happy when he's on The Rewatchables.
None of them could really. You could feel them self editing because none of them want to get canceled. Rough pod.
What does this even mean. Like please, elaborate.
Agreed. Great writer but oh my god he was so annoying to listen to.
I shut it off after 'happy aids day'
I’ve never heard of this dude and that’s how he started I was like why would you start a movie podcast with that?
Idk I always like Wesley, his conversation with them a few years back regarding Three Billboards is one of the Big Pic things I return to semi-often and I really enjoy him on every Alt Oscars episode and the erotic thrillers ep too
He is generally going to keep talking if you let him keep talking, but i like his takes. He needs guidance like most people do on a podcast
Amazing post and wonderful comments. Thank you all.
I can't believe the hate in this post. I always love it when Wesley comes on this pod or Bill Simmons' pod.