Podcast Like It's ...

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily wrap up their Valentine’s Day Wong Kar-wai miniseries with a deep dive into My Blueberry Nights (2007), joined by David Sims (Blank Check). They discuss Norah Jones’ debut performance, Jude Law’s rom-com era, the film’s Cannes premiere, its American road movie structure, and why this English-language detour feels so different from In the Mood for Love and 2046.Is it a misunderstood romantic trifle or Wong Kar-wai’s strangest experiment?Follow the show & guests:Podcast Like It’sInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeitsPhil IscoveInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscoveEmily St. JamesInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjamsDavid SimsInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/davidlsims

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily continue their Valentine’s miniseries on the films of Wong Kar-wai with a deep dive into his dreamy, decadent, and divisive follow-up to In the Mood for Love: 2046. Joining them is Screen Drafts co-host Clay Keller to unpack memory, desire, sci-fi metaphors, hotel rooms, and the many women orbiting Tony Leung’s endlessly romantic (and endlessly messy) Chow Mo-wan.Early in the episode, Phil provides context for listeners who may not have seen the film, walking through its fractured narrative, a futuristic train that takes passengers to a place where memories can be reclaimed, and a writer blurring fiction and reality as he drifts through the Oriental Hotel and the ghosts of love past.The conversation explores how 2046 expands Wong’s romantic universe into something colder, more reflective, and more haunted. Is it a sequel? A remix? A sci-fi epilogue? A man trying to freeze time so he never has to grow up? The trio discusses the film’s nonlinear structure, its lush visual language, recurring musical motifs, and the way longing becomes both theme and architecture.They also touch on the film’s limited U.S. release, its evolving critical reputation, and how it fits into Wong Kar-wai’s broader body of work. Along the way, the episode offers a brief glimpse behind the scenes of this Valentine’s miniseries and how close to release these conversations sometimes are.🎙️ Guests & HostsClay Keller📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/claykellerPhil Iscove📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscoveEmily St. James📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjams🎧 Follow Podcast Like It’s🎙 Main Feed (The 2000s / The 90s)Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/podcast-like-its/id1369075017Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3Hh2n0eZxJ9V0XHnHh1SxP💜 Patreon (Bonus Episodes + The 1990s feed + Video):https://www.patreon.com/podcastlikeits📸 Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits🐦 X / Twitter:https://twitter.com/podcastlikeits🧵 Threads:https://www.threads.net/@podcastlikeits🔷 Bluesky:https://bsky.app/profile/podcastlikeits.bsky.social🎥 YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@podcastlikeits

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily kick off a brand-new Valentine’s miniseries on the films of Wong Kar-wai with one of the most celebrated movies of the century: In the Mood for Love. Joining them are Katie McGrath and Tom Mison, making their first appearance on the main feed after many beloved appearances on Podcast Like It’s the 90s (the Patreon-exclusive show).The conversation explores why In the Mood for Love has become the defining cinematic text of longing, memory, and restraint. The group digs into Wong Kar-wai’s sensual, dialogue-light approach; the role of ambiguity and audience interpretation; the film’s obsession with time, repetition, and missed connection; and how Tony Leung and Maggie Cheung deliver one of the most emotionally charged screen romances ever filmed without ever fully consummating it.They also discuss the film’s slow critical “glow-up,” its influence on filmmakers like Sofia Coppola and Barry Jenkins, the role of Criterion in canon-building, and why this movie works as pure cinema something that couldn’t exist in any other medium. Along the way: conversations about memory, performance without dialogue, and what it means for a film to trust its audience completely.Follow Us:Phil Iscove📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscoveEmily St. James📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjamsShow:Podcast Like It’s the 2000s🎧 Listen & subscribe: https://linktr.ee/podcastlikeits📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits💜 Patreon (bonus episodes & video): https://www.patreon.com/podcastlikeits

We continue our Pixar 2000s miniseries with one of the studio’s most unexpectedly profound films: Ratatouille. Joined by Brooke Solomon and Jordan Gustafson of The Queer Quadrant, we dig into why this movie about a rat who cooks somehow became one of Pixar’s most emotionally resonant works.We talk about Ratatouille as a love letter to food, Paris, and creative ambition; the film’s quietly radical worldview; the cultural impact of “ratatouilling” someone; and why the movie asks us to accept its reality completely or not at all. Plus: gay rat discourse, cursed 2007 box office math, and why this might be Pixar at the absolute height of its powers.Brooke Solomon & Jordan Gustafson co-hosts of The Queer Quadrant🎧 Podcast: https://www.thequeerquadrant.com📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thequeerquadrantHosts:Phil Iscove📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/pmiscoveEmily St. James📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilystjamsShow:Podcast Like It’s the 2000s🎧 Listen & subscribe: https://linktr.ee/podcastlikeits📸 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/podcastlikeits💜 Patreon (bonus episodes & video): https://www.patreon.com/podcastlikeits

On this episode of Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil and Emily continue their Pixar 2000s miniseries by finally pulling into Radiator Springs to talk Cars with critic and scholar Myles McNutt.Often dismissed as “the lesser Pixar,” Cars is also one of the studio’s most commercially dominant films and one of its strangest cultural phenomena. The trio digs into why this movie connected so deeply with kids, how Disney merchandising helped shape its legacy, and why Cars feels philosophically out of step with Pixar’s more emotionally precise storytelling. They also explore the film’s obsession with nostalgia, small-town Americana, Route 66 iconography, and the uneasy politics lurking under its warm glow.Along the way, they discuss Pixar’s evolving reputation, the film’s place in the studio’s broader lineage, Cars Land as a theme-park response to Harry Potter, and why even if it’s flawed Cars might still be essential viewing to understand Pixar’s 2000s run.Ka-chow!Follow us:Guest: Myles McNutt @Memles on instagram and X and SubtackPatreon: http://patreon.com/PodcastlikeitsTwitter: http://twitter.com/podcastlikeitsInstagram: http://instagram.com/podcastlikeits

This week on Podcast Like It’s the 2000s, Phil Iscove and Emily St. James continue their Pixar of the 2000s miniseries by diving into Brad Bird’s The Incredibles with critic and writer Libby Hill.Released in 2004, The Incredibles sits at a fascinating crossroads for Pixar part family sitcom, part mid-century spy fantasy, and part superhero deconstruction years before the genre would dominate Hollywood. Phil, Emily, and Libby unpack why the film’s action sequences double as character studies, how its superpowers function as metaphors for family roles, and why the movie still feels sharper than most modern comic-book adaptations. They also discuss the film’s complicated nostalgia, its cultural blind spots, and why The Incredibles managed to “get away with” things that live-action superhero movies still struggle to pull off.Along the way, the conversation touches on Brad Bird’s direction, Pixar’s voice-acting process, the film’s critical and commercial legacy, and where The Incredibles sits in the larger Pixar pantheon especially when compared to its sequel.