Some great deep analysis, really appreciate Richardâs even handed and fully immersive approach. Joanna is an interesting host, beautifully detailed, wide knowledge but also reminds me of grad school when one student is so sure their interpretation is the most correct they steamroll the discussion. And she has great points but can miss things, and it sounds like Richard just barely gets his point in and we genuinely want to hear his insights too. Both are vital but would like it more equal. Perhaps more back and forth, and sharing? Also donât strawman another podcast. The guys at Ringer are awesome too and know their stuff and have a great style of sharing info and several viewpoints.
This podcast is in need of some adults in the room. The dialogue sounds as if Iâm listening to a couple of 20 year olds discussing a TV show while trying to be entertaining rather than putting real thought into what they are saying. They donât seem to have done any preparations, while jumping to whatever comes into their heads. Iâm not sure who their target audience is, but with all of their blathering I think it must be for teenagers.
I agree with everyoneâs comments. Get some elocution lessons! Itâs so distracting from the content, which is interesting.
Great place to get Versace fix satisfied.
Joanna and Richard are great. Iâve been listening to Joanna for years with Dave, I love listening to Richard as well. I never write podcast reviews but I had to after the new spoiler warning song this week. Canât believe the content we get for free these days...
Keep your personal politics out of the podcast!
Listened to True Detective episode 2. RL casually mentions heâs watched ahead a few episodes and then still offers his theory? Which after watching episode 3 was clearly built upon or at least reinforced by data beyond the episode that he was recapping. I assumed after the ânot a spoiler section but more foreshadowingâ debacle with Sharp Object they would at least pretend to care a bit. Alas, they do not. Honestly, I wish you all would just move on past podcasting at this point.
Such good content, but the voices are super annoying - nasally and or/garbolly, fast talking, stuttery, hmms all over the place. So annoying but I listen anyway!
Some of these reviews are, like, way harsh. Both Joanna and Richard are smart, funny, and engaging hosts who bring different perspectives to their discussions. The podcast is a mix of recap and criticism that has added to my enjoyment of each show theyâve covered. Thanks, guys!
Iâve become a super-fan of Joanna and Richardâs smart analysis, easy chemistry, and in-depth interviews with creators. I started out listening to something I was already watching (Westworld), then watched something just because they were covering it (Sharper Objects), then tried an episode of The Romanoffs and thought âMehâ but continued to listen to their breakdown of each episode, even though I was no longer âstill watchingâ The Romanoffs. Theyâre that good. Keep it coming, Joanna and Richard!
Hi Joanna and Richard! I loved your coverage of The Romanoffs, but I canât find the final episode anywhere.Did you decide not to discuss it for some reason?
Was so glad to find these two podcasters / interesting people discussing this Amazon series. So far the episodes have been intriguing ( and Im a Mad Man super fan forever). Looking forward to more chat about the show!ð¤
Please stop saying âlikeâ so much (each of you). You are professional grown folks now. It is a vexing, obnoxious, and juvenile habit that takes â2 starsâ away from your talent. Do you write this way?
I mostly enjoy listening to these Sharp Objects recaps but can we watch it on saying âsort ofâ and âkind ofâ in front of everything, itâs a verbal tic that people have started doing over the past decade and just... eeek. And sorry to say something contrary because itâs not like Iâm putting out a free podcast for anybody so I appreciate the recaps but just bringing it to your attention.
Had to stop listening in the middle of the âDirtâ episode because of another instance of the hosts talking about elements of the show that arenât in the book. As someone who hasnât read the book, I donât want to risk my experience of the show being adversely effected by this. Save any talk about the book until the end, please.
Sadly, the audio of the Patricia Clarkson interview was inaudible. Otherwise, great commentary and critique.
Ok ... they speak to fast and if I had a quarter for every time they said âEh Umm, ya know, Uh, it, sort of, like andâ I would be a VERY RICH person. Good insight Sometimes but itâs Very hard to listen to with all the stutters and frivolous words as much as I love the tv show Sharp Objects I canât finish one of these podcast episodes.
I love the content and the guests but there are so many "like" and "you know" and "um"s, etc. The delivery is just annoying. Especially Robinson. It just undermines the content when the delivery is loaded with so much noise.
Couldnât get through the episode Bc I could hear the dudes nose whistling. Turn the mic down, please!
Season 2 finale breakdown belonged in the Westworld podcast. Not the sharp objects podcast. UPDATE* Seriously?????! You tell us who the killer is in the FIRST EPISODE of this podcast?! You literally just RUINED this show for me. What are you thinking?!
I should have known from past Joanna Robinson podcasts (game of thrones), but itâs a bad idea to listen to her commentary when she has knowledge beyond the episode. While I know she tries not to spoil things, she canât help herself. I gave episode 4 a shot, as this podcast was the first to release an episode... spoiled within the first few minutes. They discuss how a character is given an expanded role in the show vs the book. Ok, I guess that rules out that character for being the murderer. Super annoying to be basically told âitâs not this personâ. THATâS A SPOILER JOANNA
Just listened to this weekâs Still Watching Sharper Objects and am shocked both of you missed the fact that Ashley was cleaning up a bunch of blood she found under Johnâs bed. She wasnât just randomly cleaning which didnât make sense. I think Iâm done with this podcast. How could you both have missed that and consider yourself qualified to discuss the show.
Enjoyed this very much until they(she) blurts out who the killer is in the second episode. Surely there is a way to discuss the show without ruining it for those who havenât read the book already. Other podcasts seem to manage it. ððð
Love this pod so much! I really appreciate that they have different sections for show-watchers and book-readers. I read the book ages ago, and itâs great to listen to a pod about the show that takes the source material into account too. I also love how closely they watch the show. I thought I caught every detail/Easter egg/etc. while watching, but every episode thereâs a few fleeting things they point out that I missed. Love having a few more pairs of eyesâwe all need them with this amazingly quick editing. Canât wait to hear more. :)
The hosts are wonderful. They are both funny, considered, and passionate about the topic. They manage to bring insights I donât hear on any other Westworld podcasts.
Joanna Robinson is one of the most intelligent and brightest media critics out there. She has a plethora of podcasts but I believe in this one she shines brighter than in any of the others. She caught attention by being one of the earliest adopters of the William is the man in Black theory in the first season of Westworld and in the second she became one of its most perceptive yet loyal critics. If you are a fan of the show you need to be listening to this podcast.
Listening to this podcast, as with many Joanna is on, is like having to sit in a class taught by a graduate student who discusses concepts like social justice and white privilege with the passion of someone who just discovered them. Like the student in this hypothetical Intro to Composition course who just wants to learn how to be a better writer, I find myself asking why I have to deal with her and her cohost's snarky comments about race and mainstream religion just to get to what I came for: a discussion of a show we all seem to like and admire. It's a shame, too, because Joanna (unlike many of the Westworld podcast hosts out there) clearly has had some training and often has a sharp eye for evidence-based interpretation. I just get tired of her banal cultural criticism.
I love your analysis but I have to disagree slightly with your analysis of episode 8. I agree that the episode was good and the acting was excellent the episode felt off a bit to me. All of the reveals in the episode were things we already knew. His revelations mirror those of Delores and Maeve which might work better for me if there werenât so much stuff to reveal this season. I guess my point is this episode might be way cooler if it were in season 7 of this show but if we leave season 2 with all our questions not answered it will feel like a waste
Nothing more than a recap of what literally we just watched, punctuated by an overabundance of virtue signaling.
I am so glad this show exists. You get to hear the brilliant Joanna without the incessantly negative cohost which drags down her other shows.
As two of my favorite people on Blank Check and/or Fighting in the War Room pods, Richard and Joanna already sold me on giving this pod a shot. I find their perspective and sensibility unique in the Westworld analysis cottage industry. Also very funny!
So the thing with reviewers is that you can find one for almost any side of an argument.I try to find one that shares my preferences. Then I can put some stock in what rating or opinion they have.So, Joanna is really smart and does A LOT of TV. I enjoy her podcasts, but man we always disagree. She says weak episode just when I was excited about a great episode.I like a story line and she doesnât or vice versa.We clearly have different taste in shows. Thatâs OK, but it spoils my fun.Also, when she says I hate to say this, thatâs a clue she shouldnât. Maybe she watches too much TV?
So so happy I found this pod! Love what yâall do please keep up the amazing work!!
Compared to a bunch of other WW podcasts, this one has hosts that do their homework leading into their recording sessons.
If a borage of âummm...likeâ doesnât bother you, then go for it.
Ask for the spice tray, bump the spiciness
Enjoyed Robinson on Decoding Westworld, thought I would try this one. Why is Lawson there? Provides minimal help and seems bored or uninterested.Will wait for Decoding Westworld.
Informative analysis of Westworld; however, there are a few things that would make their explanation of the episodes easier. So, Iâve noticed that when the hosts of the podcast are describing an episode they will say things like âAnthony Hopkins then programmed them this way..â or something like that instead of saying the name of the character in the narrative they will use the actors name instead. This is all well and good for Anthony Hopkins bits, but it does make it harder to remember the scene they are describing when it is an obscure actors name they mention instead of the actual character in the show the viewer is presumably familiar with. They did the same thing for The Assassination of Giana Versace and I found it tremendously annoying.
The show is rendered almost unlistenable with the incessant overuse of the filler word like. I gave 5 starts as an honest grade of content with the hope that the hosts take the feedback and try to modify an admittedly accepted speech pattern that is nonetheless very distracting and annoying.
Davidâs absence is glaring. Very strange decision to do a podcast without him.
The Vanity Fair brand helps this podcast bag the stars of ACSV, so the interviews with cast and crew are genuinely compelling. Great interview questions and excellent background to the show.The first half of this podcast though, oy. It's a lot of humble-brag filler that makes the first half "as ever" skippable. "Well, when I was on set..." "At the [insert fancy critics' event]" "Since we had access to all of the episodes..." :bored Whitney Houston gif:
Really enjoying the podcast, I love the commentary the day after each episode. The San Diego Opera house setting is in the Los Angeles Theater on Broadway in Downtown LA. I recognized it immediately last night. Funny you commented on it today
I enjoy getting the backstory & drill down on what may be conformed and what may be fictional. Even though I followed Andrew and read all the Maureen VF articles still informative. Or I am just losing my memory. Lol.
Well done! Good insights and conversation. I agree- I think this series should be rewatched. There are many small (but significant) details you realize come back as we go backwards in time. I like how this series doesnât tell you TOO much and lets you figure things out yourself, but I do agree that some scenes do feel a little forced.
They do talk way too fast. Found myself looking for the button to slow down the speech.
I have listened and enjoyed Joanna Robinsonâs Game of Thrones and Westworld podcasts with David Chen, where she brings a real critical eye to the proceedings. I love Little Gold Men and Richard Lawson. So what happened here? This seems like a part of FXâs promotional platform for the show. Thereâs lots of gushing about how amazing it is. VF was clearly given access to the actors and writer. So thereâs a sense it can never do a take down when the show is really bad (and sometimes, yes, it is). This is unfortunate, as we know from GoT that Robinson does not shy away from a good take down. Here, sheâs just a publicist, and it kills her credibility. She seems genuinely mystified when Lawson attempts to bring the criticism, like when he didnât buy the deep connection between Versace and his partner. She was baffled. And poor Lawson, the film critic for VF and recent YA author, just doesnât want to be here. He seems reluctant to rock Robinsonâs cheerleader boat, but thankfully canât help himself. He clearly would rather be at Cannes or on a book tour, and who can blame him? This is an assignment, and his lack of enthusiasm is palpable. Personally, Iâm waiting for someone to suggest that Darren Criss is not up to the role, but thatâs never going to happen. It makes me wish for a guest appearance by David Chen.
But I've been an on and off listenener to Little Gold Men. It's the same problem. Johanna Robinson is amazing, probably the best popular culture reporter/podcaster out there. Katey Rich is good, and more importantly she actually read the book that is the basis for this WHOLE first podcast. Richard Lawson didn't bother to read the book. In fact it's my sense he doesn't bother to check in for these podcasts. Maybe they are beneath him? Maybe he's too busy, but could we not include the dude if he has nothing valuable to say?I was so turned off by his commentary on last year's Cannes festival that I swore off Vanity Fair for a while. (He mainsplained Wonder Woman? Really?) Is it that you wanted a gay voice for this episode? (Hey, I feel I can say that. I'm queer.) Or is it that you have to invite him. Either way it wasn't worth it.
I just managed to to finish the first episode but donât think I can do more. I cannot listen to Joanna Robinson VFâing her way through at speed - essentially simply reprising the details of the episode but barely adding any depth to the conversation. Her counterpart is completely wasted in this exchange - all heâs able to do is throw in the occasional testy âuhuhâ and try to offer something before getting ridden over again.Itâs a rich series and touches on some really potent issues that havenât gone away - it deserves better than whatâs being delivered here.
"Still Watching" is the perfect accompaniment to American Crime Story: The Assassination of Gianni Versace - it's equivalent the FX series' "special features" or commentary - required listening, for me, that fleshes out the colorful details of the storyline while putting the historic facts of the case in cultural context 20 years later. The cast interviews are superb so far, particularly Judith Light's segment. I'm caught up to "A Random Killing," eagerly awaiting the next show!
A vigorous and intelligent analysis of ACS: Versace supplemented by terrific interviews with the artists involved. I hope this continues with other shows. [Note to the critics: donât be embarrassed to hawk your different work on your podcasts! I was thrilled to learn of this on Little Gold Men...but weeks after it started. And keep plugging your book, too...Iâm ordering a copy!]