All right, I'm gonna take you back to twenty eighteen.

Okay, it felt impossible to turn around without hearing Lady Gaga belting out I'm off the Dee Band and watch as a dive in how Never Meet the Ground.

Okay, you know what I mean, But you're welcome.

The song is Shallow and it's a duet between Lady Gaga and actor Bradley Cooper.

It won an Oscar.

The movie where Cooper and Gaga sing this song is called A Star is Born.

Now.

What you might not know is that the twenty eighteen A Star is Born with Lady Gaga is actually a remake of the nineteen seventy six A Star is Born with Barbara Streisand, and the nineteen seventy six A Star is Born with Barbara Streisand is actually a remake of the nineteen fifty four A Star is Born featuring Judy Garland, and the nineteen fifty four A Star Is Born featuring Judy Garland is actually a remake of the nineteen thirty seven version of A Star is Born featuring Janet Gainor, and the nineteen thirty seven version featuring Janet Gainor is actually a remake of the nineteen thirty two film called What Price Hollywood.

That's a lot of stars being born?

Huh.

Hollywood is, of course all about remakes.

It's a business and it's an art form, so in some ways they've always been about sticking to stories that work.

But why does Hollywood keep remaking?

A Star is Born?

And there seemed no one better to look into this than film critic, author, and podcast host Karina Longworth, who loves A Star is Born.

It is, for me the quintessential example of a Hollywood movie about Hollywood in that it tells you that it's pulling back the curtain to show you how things really are, to show you the dark underbelly.

But in the process of doing that, it kind of reinforces your love for Hollywood and your appreciation for the magic.

That can be created by the movies.

Here we Go again, again, again again.

Hey I'm Calpen and this is Here we Go Again, a show that takes today's trends and headlines and asks why does history keep repeating itself?

Here go?

Hi, how are you?

I'm great?

Thank you so much for doing Koreana Longworth is an acclaimed American film critic, author, journalist, and producer, and is known for creating and hosting the influential podcast You Must Remember This, which explores the hidden and forgotten histories of Hollywood's first century.

She's also written a handful of books, including Seduction, Sex, Lies, and Stardom.

In Howard Hughes's Hollywood, Welcome, Karina.

Thanks for having me.

Of course, I'm really excited to talk to you, not just because I'm a history nerd and an actor, so like selfishly, just the breath of knowledge that you have.

We could talk about things like remakes more generally, but I wanted to start with a question about I think it's more interesting to sort of focus on the film A Star Is Born as a case study, because it's been remade four times in eighty eight years.

So for people who are unfamiliar, can you tell us briefly the basic story of A Star Is Born?

Yeah?

I mean, there's actually arguably five movies, because there's also What Price Hollywood, which is a film that predated the first A Star is Born, which is the same story.

But basically, A Star Is Born tells a story of Usually it's a romantic couple, a man and a woman, and usually the man is an established star, but he has personal problems and he's perhaps at the peak of his fame when he meets a woman who is trying to break into the industry, and over the course of their relationship they sort of switch places where his star declines and her star rises.

And I think at the end of everyone the man is dead and the woman survives, and she has her stardom as a kind of consolation prize for her dead husband.

That is a fantastic summary.

I'm curious, when you've studied the remakes potentially five of this film, what are the reactions that people have to the different actors playing these characters.

And here's why I think about it.

So, my favorite acting teacher used to say that actors don't own roles.

And that's been something that's obviously been said tons of times, but it's something I actually held pretty close artistically as I was growing up and as I was studying theater and drama.

And so when it comes to remakes of say Shakespeare, I feel like, you know that all makes sense.

We approach things very differently than perhaps a remake of say A Star is Born.

And I'm curious in your experience why you think that is, Like did everyone just have mister Kazakov the best acting teacher in the world from Central New Jersey, or like what accounts for sort of the pop culture versions of these things versus high art.

Well, just to keep it specific to a star is born every time that movie has been made.

While the story, as I just said, it stays the same, all of the details change and they're always very specific to that time period.

So you know, the first two stars warn't is not a musical.

Then the reason to remake it is to remake it as a musical with Judy Garland, who is a generational musical and acting talent.

And then the next reason to remake it is because you have Barber Streisand who is a generational musical and acting talent, but it's a different kind of music than in the nineteen fifties.

And then the next time you have the same thing with Lady Gaga.

So it's not so much that it's these women playing the same role.

It's more that they're kind of trying to speak to what stardom is in their specific era and what.

Was in nineteen fifty four or the first version.

No, the first version I want to say is nineteen thirty seven, it's with Janet Gaynor, and that's the one that's not a musical, and then the first musical is nineteen fifty four.

Because so fifty four was the musical.

That's when, arguably then this story really entered the public consciousness.

How was the film received in the fifty four version?

So the fifty four version, which is you know, full disclosure, my favorite film of all time?

Oh wow?

Is yeah.

So it it has a complicated story because it was an early case of the star Jdi Garland producing the movie with her husband, and of course this happened later with the Barbar streis End version as well, her boyfriend John Peters produced the movie.

But with this case, the star had a lot of power and was able to kind of tailor it specific to her, and so this was perceived as a big comeback for Jdie Garland, who had had some rough years due to her own personal problems, and so it was really wrap suriously received.

But it was very long.

It was three hours long, and Warner Brothers wanted decided after they had already started releasing it, but it was too long to make as much money as they wanted.

They wanted to be able to fit another showtime into each day.

So while the director had already left to go on another project, and the studio took the film out of theaters kind of indiscriminately cut out forty minutes and then put it back in theaters.

And so the version that, yeah, that became the theatrical version in the version that was available until the nineteen eighties, and that version is not as good, it doesn't make as much sense.

And I think it's because of that more than anything else, that Gida Garland didn't win the Best Actress Ocscar.

Oh wow.

So ultimately it was kind of a huge disappointment, but I think that it has stood the test of time, perhaps better than any other version of that story.

I mean that for that to be your all time, like favorite movie of all time, I am I'm just going to grow throw out the Goonies.

It was only made once, sadly, but I would love to remake The Goonies probably top three, top three favorite movies of all time.

I'm a little bit of a nerd for the wave that technology and also tax evasion were responsible for Hollywood taking foot in Hollywood from Edison to New Jersey.

Why did they go?

Ask the weather being able to evade taxes, among a whole bunch of other reasons.

And patents, yeah, exactly, patents all yeah, all the shadiness that grounded our wonderful business.

And then one of the new versions of this that I'm that I remain fascinated by is technological revolutions.

Right.

We just had a really big labor dispute with SAGRAFTA and the WJA of which I'm a member of, both in large part because of AI and what these companies sort of wanted to take away from us.

So what changes were underway in the early nineteen fifties in Hollywood that might have impacted the nineteen fifty four version of this film.

The thing to talk about in terms of technology with the stars Warren had to do with what was happening in the industry at that time, with the movies feeling really threatened by television.

And so you can see that reflected in that version in a couple of ways.

One is the length.

It has an epic scope.

Another is a lot of attention paid to wide screen cinematography.

You know, it sounds simple to us now, but the television was a little box and everything was in a little square, and so one way that the studios tried to combat that was like expanding the frame of cinema so that you could only see wide screen if you went to the movies.

That's very cool.

I mean there are versions of this today right with movies that are like, you have to go see it in the theater.

It's clearly made to get you into a seat, especially after COVID a couple of these big blockbusters.

Is that the first time that that's happened, I mean because of TV threatening it.

Well, in the nineteen fifties that was, Yeah, that was a common thing happening.

I mean, I can't remember the exact film stock that A Starsborn was shot on at.

Maybe they called it Warner Vision, but it was basically Warner Brothers wide screen format, and the studios were having some limited success with making like three hour epic films with intermissions.

Story Is Born originally had an intermission that were in these wide screen formats, and that as well as three D you know, the kinds of double features that you'd go see at a drive in.

So usually like B movies, these were all ways in which the industry was trying to combat the threat of people just being able to stay at home.

Okay, and you touched on this already, but I wanted to go a little bit deeper, if you could on just like the significance of how the story changed from version version, the flip from film to the music industry.

Addiction mental health is a through line the relationship.

And you know the obvious gender dynamics in each version.

Was that more a sign of the times, Like is it art imitating life, life imitating art, neither some combination of those.

Well, I think in every version the may is an addict of some kind, So that stays the same.

The thing that really changes is the way it reflects the specific concerns of either the music industry or the film industry of the time.

The first version in nineteen thirty seven was scripted by Dorothy Parker, and it was a really kind of acidic satire of what was happening in movies in nineteen thirty seven, and then in nineteen fifty four, you still get some of that acidic satire about Hollywood.

And one of the reasons why I love it is because it is, for me, the quintessential example of a Hollywood movie about Hollywood in that it tells you that it's pulling back the curtain to show you how things really are, to show you the dark underbelly.

But in the process of doing that, it kind of reinforces your love for Hollywood and your appreciation for the magic that can.

Be created by the movies.

And then you know, the Barbi Striisen version is explicitly said in the rock and roll world, which was not the case with the music of the Gude Garland version.

I mean that she's doing sort of like mid century kind of as influenced, but it's not like contemporary rock and roll music.

And then of course Lady Gaga is doing Lady Gaga.

Yeah, this will be a little bit of a spoiler alert if folks are joining for this long without having seen the film.

But you know, the movies about tragedy as much as it is about romance, and I'm curious what you think.

This is less of like a factual question and more just the pondering as I look at the things that are being remade, the things that we tend to watch.

Is part of the appeal that we like watching famous people crash and burn like literally or figuratively, or are there layers to this that you think have changed over time that also appeal to people.

I think that one of the key appeals that has not changed over time is not just the crash and burn, but the rise and fall or the fall and rise.

You know, there's a really important myth that all of these films tell, which is that there's this idea that one of the things that makes Hollywood special, or makes the entertainment industry special, is that only the.

Greatest can end up there.

You have to be at the top of your game, and there's only so much room in the Hollywood heavens for so many stars, and so it's like this kind of mythological thing of like the woman cannot possibly like rise to the zenith unless the man falls at the same time, because he's created an opening for her, and so you feel the tragedy, but you also feel the exhilaration.

Yes, while you're While you were saying that, I always think of like when actor friends and I talk about, you know, like all most of our careers have these massive roller coasters, and so it's usually it's either like you're walking down the street and people will just say things like, man, you're in everything, or you're walking down the Street, and people are like, hey, what happened to you?

Like like, it's never, it's never one or the other in the same time period.

And so obviously at the at the level where these actors are in all of these versions of a Star is Born, it's sort of like there's so much farther to fall from that level, versus sort of just like working actors who who come and.

Go yeah, because it's it's told on the level of myth, right, it's not, and it's told for an audience that is not people who are working actors necessarily.

It's for people who are on the outside, like looking at this world with a sense of wonder.

Yeah, totally.

I find the timing well, I'm curious if there's any significance to the timing of all the remix So, Craig me if I'm wrong.

It's nineteen thirty seven, nineteen fifty four, nineteen seventy six, and then twenty twenty three.

I think that I think the Lady Gaga one is pre pandemic.

I want to say it's twenty eighteen, but.

Ok, okay, so by timing itself, but is there the re emergence of this story at those specific intervals.

Is there is there anything happening broader in our in our culture, in our economy.

Is it all just the industry wanting to remake it or the Is there a desire or need or like a market testing?

Was it a quirky executive, It was like, you know what we need?

I mean, I think the thing that motivates all of the remakes, not the original in nineteen thirty seven, but all of the remakes is that it's a vehicle for the female star.

And in all of these cases, you know, I think that star is kind of in a period of transition.

I mentioned how Gidie Garland.

You know, she was seventeen when she made The Wizard of Oz in nineteen thirty nine, and so she was, you know, really like she'd had kind of a young adult career, but because of her mental issues and addiction issues, you know, she was really on the downswing in the early nineteen fifties, and so this was intended as a way of reintroducing her to the audience and showcasing what she could do, which I think the movie.

Does really well with Barbara streisand by.

Nineteen seventy six, you know, she's still of trying to prove herself and specifically trying to prove herself as somebody who's not like a character from the past.

You know, she became famous and funny Girl.

That was her first movie.

She won an oscar for it, but that's a period piece and she wanted to kind of prove that she was cool, and so that's why she does a rock and roll A Star is Born, I would Lady Gaga.

I mean, it's really about transitioning into becoming a movie star from a pop star.

The different actors who play these roles.

I think it's so interesting that sometimes we really root for them, like here's somebody who can do no wrong in the mythology of who they are as actors or as artists playing these characters.

And then other times, you know, you root for somebody and they say or do one wrong thing, or a movie of theirs doesn't do so well and you feel personally attacked by an artistic choice, and then you know, then everyone's like rooting for them to fail or rooting for them to crash and burn.

And I kind of think about this in the context of each remake of A Star is Born, because it captures a different moment in Hollywood.

But this theme of industry self loathing, if you will, kind of remains.

I don't have a theory right now, so I'm going to lean on you to answer this question, like what is it about those of us in Hollywood that allow us to recognize that, like we hate ourselves so much?

But you know what I mean, like why does Hollywood hate itself so much?

But why can it also then tell the story about overcoming that?

Well?

I mean, I guess I don't see a star is Warren as being self loathing at all.

I think of it as being more celebratory.

Yeah, I think it's it's actually one of Hollywood's most celebratory myths about itself.

And it's almost like a pep talk.

It's like, you know, the Norman main character, which is that at least that's his name in the nineteen fifty four version, but generally the male character, even though he is, you know, in every version of this story, becomes an alcoholic or a drug addict, and you know, sometimes he drowns, sometimes he crashes his car and dies, but he meets like a tragic end in each one.

We're also meant to understand that he was one of the greatest stars of all time at one point, and that he reached the pinnacle of the profession.

The thing that fascinates me about certain movies about Hollywood, I would say this one.

I would say Sense a Boulevard is that the way that they the attraction for the audience is that it's going to show you something that you don't know or something that is kept hidden about the people who make the movies.

But by the end of it, you're more fascinated than ever.

A quick break and then we'll get back to my conversation with Karna Longworth.

Wow, all right, we're back with Here we go again and we're talking remakes with Karina Longworth, specifically Hollywood's attachment to the story of a star is born.

We did touch on this in the beginning, but I had a follow up for you the twenty eighteen You were a twenty eighteen iteration of this story stars Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga, who are obviously massive stars.

This follows the Garland Christofferson, streisand star machines that you'd mentioned in the past versions.

Is there a sense of how much of a remax success is about the resonance of the story and how much can be chalked up to the star power in particular, like it does one override the other?

Does it have to be a perfect storm of both?

I think it depends on what you know we're talking about here.

I think in the case of a Star is Wren, so much time elapsed between the Judy Garland version to the Barbisterisen version and then from the Barbi Sirice End version to the Lady Gaga version that I don't think most viewers were that familiar with the stories, but they certainly were familiar with the Stars.

So if they're not familiar with the stories, then then then my fallow up to that.

Actually, so there are scenes and moments in each of the Stars Born's of the remakes that remain in each version, like the let me take one more look at You've seen, embarrassing Awards show, pisspants, tragic ending, Like what do these repeat moments mean?

I guess both to fans right, people who are expecting that they're there.

But if if you're saying there isn't that much traction between different versions, then what is it about those repeat moments?

Like why not just cut them and write something different.

Do you know what I mean?

Like in adaptation remakes at all?

Right?

I know, but I'm saying, what is it about.

The question that I have?

Yeah?

Yeah, I mean I don't you know.

I guess the people who are making these movies just think that those are core to the story.

I immediately think of the the pissing their pants in public scene in Billy Madison, which I'm like, Oh, I wonder if they got it from that in some way.

The criticism of remakes is that people will accuse the filmmaker inevitably of being lazy, but they're also incredibly popular with audiences.

And you did mention this, but I want to go a little deeper, Like the fifty four version of A Star is Born as your favorite all time movie?

Why do you love it so much?

What are the reasons?

Well, I think I had There's so much.

I mean, for me, it is the best Hollywood movie about Hollywood, both in the highs and in the lows.

I think Judy Garland's performance is just absolutely magnificent.

I can't think of a star who gives as much of herself to a performance from that era.

And then also, you know, she's just a virtuosic singer, and the film has really been shaped around her specific talents so that you can appreciate it in a way that maybe you can't when she's part of an ensemble or you know, certainly after this she never got an opportunity to do as much as she's doing in this film and to play as wide of a range of emotion.

I mean, one of the things that's really exciting to me about the movie is that it combines this sort of nineteen forties early fifties massive production design, you know, really sort of very expensive and beautiful staging, with a kind of acting style that is ahead of its time.

It's related to the method.

Acting that's being done in the nineteen fifties by people who are coming over from the after studio, but it feels to me more like something you'd see in a John Cassavetti's movie of the late sixties and seventies.

And one thing that Judie Growin did get to do after this was work with Cassavetties and a film called A Child Is Waiting.

We talked in the first part of the podcast about technological examples that contributed to the nineteen fifty four version, so Now I want to talk about how technology might have influenced the twenty eighteen version of A Star Is Born.

And to do so, I'm going to naturally start by talking about a classic film.

Back in twenty twelve, we did the third Harolding Komar movie.

It was called Harolding, A very Harolding Kumar Christmas.

It was a Christmas movie that came out in July, which was like appropriate for Stoner is why not?

And it was shot in three D.

Watching a Stoner buddy comedy in three D is not necessary.

If you just wanted to check out the film, you probably didn't need to see it in three D, but it added a little bit extra.

I'm wondering if there were other advances aside from kind of the competent between the advent of TV.

Were there were there those considerations in the various iterations of A Star Is Born?

I mean, its certainly like Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper could benefit from digital makeup.

That's that hadn't existed from, you know, in any other version.

But I think that you know, the real modernization that you see there is is that it's it's it's the modern music.

You know, it's it's Gaga's style of music, and it's it's talking about a world that has been changed by the Internet in terms of stardom.

I don't think that the the innovations are necessarily in the filmmaking.

It's more in terms of what it's reflecting about the world of celebrity.

Do you have a Do you have a favorite uh version as far as the songs go, or is it the one your all time favorite?

Like would you yeah?

I think that I think the songs in the Juda Green version are the most memorable to me, you know, I I I was not really a fan of the music in the in either a Barbar Starisend or Lady Gaga version.

Okay, Well that answers the question that there's not even like one song that you're like, oh, it's better in this version.

That's interesting though, right, Like, well.

They're not because they don't say there's no overlap in the music, you know, they're completely different songs.

It would have.

I mean Gaga, you know, I'm a big fan of hers, and I went to go see her doing her jazz and piano show in Vegas, which she was doing like as part of her Oscar campaign for Stars worn, and you know she's not in that situation.

She's singing these these American standards that are more similar to the songs from the Judie Garland version of A Star Is Worn than they are to her version of a Stars Worn that she's promoting at that moment, and she's you know, she proves herself in that situation to be such a phenomenal generational talent.

But you know that's not what her version of a Star Is Born is about.

It's about the music industry circa twenty eighteen.

Karina and I will be right back after this break.

Wow, welcome back to here we go again.

So, Karina, I I have a couple of maybe sillier questions for you.

You spend a lot of time thinking about Hollywood's past and your work.

Do remakes frustrate you are there?

Aside from this film?

Are there examples that you love or the remakes you're like, oh, this was incredible?

Is it something that it seemed like you share my frustration of like everything is a remake these days?

We just want to do original content.

Do you do you personally find that frustrating or is it something you like?

Well, I mean I've kind of I feel like I've been pushed out of contemporary of caring about contemporary Hollywood because there's just so little that's being produced that is of interest to me.

And i'd you know, I could not name for you a recent remake, but I could also could not name for you a recent Hollywood film.

Okay, I'm just like, I'm just not going to see them.

I find it more fascinating to think about things like A Star Is War and in other films that Hollywood has done iterations of over time, and to think about, you know, some of the stuff we've been talking about about how the time period or technology changes those things.

But yeah, I.

Certainly would prefer if more original stuff was being made.

Now do you live in La?

Yeah?

Do you go to the theater?

So I used to live in LA and there was this awesome theater I think it was on Fairfax and Beverly, Like it played old movies, like only old movies.

So there's a couple over there.

There's a new Beverly theater which is on Beverly between lebra and Fairfax, and that's owned by Glinnin Tarantino and so he only shows movies on thirty five and he programs based to his taste.

Cool.

And then there also used to be a theater on Fairfax kind of between Melrose and Beverly, which was called Sine Family and now it's called brain Dead.

And what they do there.

Is I think it's really cool.

It's like they're kind of doing hipster film school.

You know, it's like for the new generation that's never seen Jim Jarmush movie or never seen a Gus van Stamt movie, Like you can see them all there.

That's cool.

Yeah, So I mean that is the kind of film event that I go to.

I mean, the American Cinema Tech in LA is fantastic.

I actually do a screening series with them.

Also.

Okay, what I love about this is so anybody who's listening, who like, you know, you don't live in LA and you're visiting LA and you're doing all the touristy stuff, these are the places that are not going to show up on your like when you google the touristy stuff to do, like go see a movie in these theaters they're excellent, Go to the you know, go to the New Academy Museum is excellent, or all of these things that are like not going to pop up on the hop On Hop Off Tour.

I'm not dispriging the hop On Hop Off Tour, by the way.

I'm just saying there's like there's those sorts of community artsy things that exist that I really love about.

LA.

Since you're an expert in in old Hollywood, what do you think the future of Old Hollywood looks like?

Are there restorations that you were happy with that took place.

Is there a new movement in like silent film or or preservation outside of like obviously the academies and some of the studios have their own things.

But yeah, actually the studios don't do a great job of preserving their own history.

I'm actually in September, I'm going back to school to study film preservation.

Oh cool, So like, talk to me in a year and I'll know more about it.

But yeah, I do think that there is actually and it's not even really underground when you think about the popularity of things like the Criterion Channel and the Criterion Collection.

But I think there is sort of a new movement towards embracing not just American film history, but world film history, and embracing physical media.

You know, you mentioned not everybody lives in la and can go to these theaters, but you can buy a Blu ray, you can have a subscription to the Criterion channel and stream and stuff, and I think that's really great.

And you know, I've been a big fan of Turner classic movies for a long time, and I think that they've done a pretty good job of evolving with the times to the extent that they can without alienating their core audience.

So yeah, I mean, I am really actually excited about what happening right now in terms of it feels like there is a youngeration that's kind of finding.

The past, and maybe they are finding it.

Because there's just not that much happening that's new that feels like daring or speaking to you know, the human experience rather than the robot experience.

And I think this analogy is accurate.

Correct me if you don't feel the same way.

But you know, like you can't replace the quality of music on a record, and so through generations there are people who will go out and buy like I have a record player, you know, in my apartment, and you just there's nothing that matches that quality.

Your app is just not at the level, and some of it might be nostalgia.

Some of it might just you like the tactile thing of putting a record on the turntable and having to switch it every thirty minutes or whatever.

But I feel like going to see a film that's being projected in thirty five where there's somebody in the booth that has to watch the thing and change the reels like there.

To me, you can feel that when you go in it's so much different than the digital projection.

A.

Do you think that that's still true?

And then B what are the other places around the country, Like are there still film clubs around where people are sourcing these prints and having nights like that?

Yeah?

For sure.

I mean I've noticed, just in terms of the film programming that I've done and the things that I've attended, that if you advertise that you're showing something on thirty five or seventy or nitrate, which is an obsolete film stop that is flammable and there's only you know, a few hundred prints on nitrate left in the world.

If you advertise this stuff, you get bigger audiences and you get more passionate audiences.

The actually the place where I'm going to school, the George Eastman Museum in Rochester, New York.

At once a year they do a Nitrate Film Festival and it's like it's like four days and they show six things a day and they don't announce what their program is until the day it starts, and it sells out.

Every year.

People buy these like, you know, multi hundred dollars passes and they go and they see everything.

They see, you know, thirty movies in four days or whatever it is, because it's so hard to see nitrate and it's so exciting to see it.

That's awesome.

Yeah, and I forgot that it was flammable.

I remember learning about it is, Yeah, and that's why you can't see it everywhere.

I mean in Los Angeles they I'd actually saw a nitrate film last weekend in Los Angeles at the Egyptian Theater.

The Academy can do it, but not very many people around the world can do it because you have to have a very you have to have real specific fire controls, and you have to the project the projection booth has to be especially outfitted for nitrate.

But yeah, in terms of around the country, you know, I think there's a lot of really interesting repertory film programming and places like Austin at the Austin Film Society and in Chicago.

You know there's there are venues, you know, in a lot of major cities, and also you know other places as well.

I'm gonna you don't have to answer this question, but I feel like I like it because I obviously have some strong feelings on This is one of the reasons that current movies have not appealed to you, whether it's new IP which is rare, I know, or a remake.

Is it because so many actors are being replaced by like social media stars.

And when I say this, I feel like I've talked about this before on the pod, Like I just need to reiterate.

I'm not disparaging anyone who's made a living off of TikTok or other social media platforms.

It's an incredible skill, one that I don't possess.

But I feel like a lot of executives these days have confused internet personalities with trained actors, and I can see the result of that in terms of the quality of work.

But then sometimes these projects come out and they do quite well financially, So like it's one of those like I'm now the old man who's like all the reason I'm not going to go see that is he didn't have any actors or union writers kind of a thing.

Is this trend hitting you in the same way or is there something else perhaps keeping you away from new movies.

I am not aware of this trend.

Oh, I can't really speak to it.

I mean, I yeah, I don't want to go to the movies because when I look and see what's playing, it's like the Minecraft movie.

It's like a lot of movie movies for children, and I don't have children, and I don't care about Marvel or you know, superheroes, and so most of the time when I see what's playing, there's nothing new that I want to see.

And if there is something new that I want to see, like David Cronenberg put out a movie this year, I happen to be out of town for the two weeks that it was playing in Los Angeles, you know, and so it's it's just it's really difficult to get to see all of the things that are sort of under the radar that I would like to see, and then the stuff that is getting kind of a wide release is just really not for you know, a forty five year old woman.

These two week limited runs are wild because I've had the same thing.

I travel a lot, and so something will come out and it only opens an Elier, New York first, and I'm gone, and then I come back and it's out of theaters and it's playing somewhere in Philly.

But like, I'm not taking the train to Philly to watch a movie.

I like Philly, but not for you know, are you when you study film preservation?

Are you are you ending you must remember this or are you able to continue it?

Well, I'm actually writing a season right now that will probably be released while I am in school in twenty twenty six.

And then as for after that, I just I don't know, you know, I want to be open to you know, maybe I'll fall in love with some aspect of film preservation and pursue a career in that.

I think probably what is most likely, though, is that I'll kind of combine my new information with what I was doing previously and start some kind of foundation or business to help draw attention to new restoration projects, to help them get funded and hopefully to help them get out in the world.

That's very cool.

This was so interesting creative here that was Karina Longworth.

She's a writer, film historian, and a podcast host of the pod You Must Remember This.

If you want to learn more about the secret and forgotten history of Hollywood, give it a listen.

It's a great podcast.

You can also follow Karina at Corina Longworth.

Here we Go Again as a production of iHeart Podcasts and Snaffoo Media in association with New Metric Media.

Our executive producers are me kalpen ed Helms, Mike Falbo, Alissa Martino, Andy Kim, Pat Kelly, Chris Kelly, and Dylan Fagan.

Caitlin Fontana is our producer and writer.

Dave Shumka is our producer and editor.

Additional writing from Megan tan Our.

Consulting producer is Romin Borsolino.

Tory Smith is our associate producer.

Theme music by Chris Kelly, logo by Matt Gosson, Legal review from Daniel Welsh, Caroline Johnson and Megan Halson.

Special thanks to Glenn Basner, Isaac Dunham, Adam Horn, Lane Klein and everyone at iHeart Podcasts, but especially Will Pearson, Carrie Lieberman and Nikki Etour.

Thanks for listening.

See you next week.