…for acknowledging in an ad what everyone has been saying since last May , which is that Francis Coppola‘s Megalopolis is more nuts than audacious. This is called “getting in front of the controversy, and then owning it.” This is a little bit like MGM marketing’s decision to acknowledge the fact that counter-culture viewers of 2001: A Space Odyssey were tripping (in some cases literally) through the lightshow finale, and adopting an audience-friendly slogan: “The Ultimate Trip.”

I had rsvp’d to a Joker: Folie a Deux screening in Manhattan, but given the almost bizarrely negative reviews this far plus the fact that I can see it tomorrow evening locally via my AMC membership, it didn’t seem worth the train fare.

I am actually looking forward to liking this film, and that’s largely due to my understanding that it’s highly dismissive of typical D.C. fanboy expectations. This in itself turns me on.

Australian critic Peter Gray: “In the same way that it was quite the baffling result that 2019’s Joker ‘laughed’ its way to a billion dollar haul at the box office, Joker: Folie à Deux and all its ‘fuck you’ energy to WB fandom and mainstream appeal is a strikingly anti-audience effort that deserves praise for being so bold with its mentality, but not for its final result as a narrative we can invest in.

“Whether or not writer/director Todd Phillips has anything intentional to say or not with his off-putting psychological drama is best left to the audiences to decipher, but the fact that he’ll no doubt [attract] said audiences to theatres this weekend for a film that’s so aggressively subversive and oppositional to what the fans expect is the biggest laugh of all; and it’s the only one this taxing sequel is going to get.”

THR‘s David Rooney:

“Todd Phillips and Scott Silver deserve credit for going their own way with a canonical DC character. But it’s difficult to imagine hard-core Batman universe aficionados being thrilled by a movie that — OK, this is definitely a spoiler — would seem to wipe out an entire future for a key nemesis enshrined in comic-book mythology, rendering him a sad, broken man.”

The only voters who will explore or even casually scan special prosecutor Jack Smith‘s 165-page filing, which has been publicly released and which focuses at length upon Donald Trump‘s alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election results, are those who are already in the pro-Harris, anti-Trump tank.

Pro-Trump, red-state bumblefucks won’t even glance at it, of course, and will hail Trump as a martyr and say that Smith’s filing is a grossly unfair attempt to influence the 11.5.24 election, etc.

Here’s the whole 165-page, partially redacted filing, courtesy of Judge Tanya Chutkan and the N.Y. Times.

Yesterday Olivia Nuzzi filed a civil lawsuit against ex-boyfriend Ryan Lizza, claiming that Lizza, desperate to somehow prod or manipulate her into re-starting their sexual relationship, fed details to reporters about her provocative (if non-physical) relationship with RFK, Jr.

New York‘s Herb Scribner reported the story today. The things that jilted ex-lovers will do to keep things going. Nuzzi’s lawsuit is unproven but would Nuzzi have filed it if she didn’t have the proof horses that affirm her argument and then some?

There are two sides to every breakup saga.

…in a family relationship film, co-written by DDL and his twentysomething, red-haired son Ronan Day-Lewis and directed by the latter. But dear God, the title of the film is so precious-sounding, so dandified, so high-falutin’and Charlie Kaufman-esque (remember Anomalisa?) that it will probably repel or elude 97% of potential moviegoers or streaming viewers out there….trust me.

It’s called Anemone, and while the word signifies a kind of flower, to most people it will probably sound like an exotic disease.

Don’t get me wrong — I’m delighted that DDL is back on the stick. I’ll probably watch Pheromone…sorry, Anemone at least two or three times theatrically. I love pretentious-sounding titles and the movies they adorn, seriously, and I’m literally humming with excitement about this one. Even though we all understand that this is purely DDL’s gesture of love and support for Ronan, which makes you wonder how good the script is.

There’s been a slight press dispute about the title. It’s almost certainly called Anemone (according to Variety and other outlets) but if you’re inclined to believe Daily Mail reporter Amelia Wynne, it may instead be called Avelyn.

Who’s betting on Avelyn? Not me. I’m just presuming Wynne made a rookie mistake, even though her story was updated last night at 6 pm eastern.

If you ask me the Day-Lewis clan probably wants the Anemone title to repel or elude or at least sightly confuse. It’s their way of saying “we’re too sensitive and attuned to the invisible, spiritual beauty of life to use a schlubby common-man hot dog title, and if you don’t like our decision….well, sorry.”

There would be more interest in this film among the schmoes, trust me, if Anemone was called Flapdoodle or Manchester Soup or Sod Off, Dad! or Advanced Toenail Fungus.

Either way DDL, 67, is back in business after retiring from acting in 2017, when he turned 60.

DDL’s Anemone costars are Sean Bean, Samantha Morton, Samuel Bottomley and Safia Oakley-Green.

Variety‘s Owen Gleiberman is a staunch ally of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz, but in a Variety essay penned late last night he had the moxie to step back and coolly assess who performed “better” in the Walz-Vance debate. I don’t like his verdict — I think the vp debate was a draw so I don’t fucking agree with it — but his words nonetheless put a chill into my system.

I wrote last night that Walz “is a smart, decent, honorable fellow, but J.D. Vance is a taller, smoother operator with blue eyes and a nicely trimmed goatee. They’ve both indicated that they respect each other. Hell, they almost even like each other. Nobody’s doing any bitch-slapping here.

“I think the debate was a draw. Walz closed strongly, especially when discussing he Affordable Care Act and the criminal chaos of Jan. 6th. Vance did a little bit better, I think, during the first half-hour. Vance’s lying aside and attempts to sane-wash the crazy, it was a reasonable discussion for the most part. I don’t think it changes the Presidential race at all.”

Gleiberman was having none of this. He declared Vance the winner.

“Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are fighting to save America,” Gleiberman wrote. “Yes, they are, and I believe they’re the ones to do it. But the way you save America is by winning the election. And on that score, JD Vance gave an astonishingly impressive performance that was all wrapped up in the aura of a winner.

“With those piercing eyes and that perfectly coiffed hair, his FM-DJ-meets-Fox-News voice, and his absolute refusal to get riled about anything, even if it was one of his pet ideologies (like the evils of immigration), he worked the debate stage with remarkable panache.

“Vance had confidence; he had calm; he had a Mona Lisa smile that allowed him to stay above the fray. And, to my surprise, he had a touch of what Ronald Reagan did — the ability to make all his statements sound like a form of assurance. That was true even when he was selling pure malarkey.”

HE to Gleiberman: You’re basically saying that Walz is a better, more humane and highly principled man and a Minnesota straight-shooter but last night he put out antsy, nerve-jangled body and facial signals while Vance is a fucking liar who’s serving a total sociopath criminal beast but he lied in a very smooth and confident and well-coiffed Reaganesque way. So yay Vance!

Vance was mainly running for the 2028 MAGA presidency.”

Okay, Owen wasn’t actually saying “yay, Vance!” He was trying to discuss the thing that woke media never talks about: what actually wins elections. The fact that they don’t talk about this enough — and that the Republicans do — is part of the reason Kamala may, believe it or not, lose in a squeaker. Owen was trying to call the debate in a reality-based, non-woke way, and ‘yay Vance!’ has nothing to do with it.