Podcast appearances and mentions of alexandra schwartz

When “Jaws” hit theatres in 1975, no one—neither the studio executives involved nor the film's twenty-six-year-old director, Steven Spielberg—was betting on its success. But it dominated at the box office and promptly revolutionized the way movies were promoted, distributed, and merchandised. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz trace how Spielberg inaugurated a new phenomenon in Hollywood: the blockbuster. He would tap his own playbook again and again with such hits as “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” “E.T.,” and “Jurassic Park,” all of which drew impressive audiences and profits. The hosts talk through his filmography, culminating in his new release, “Disclosure Day,” which both replicates and iterates on themes and techniques found in his earlier work. Though other directors may share his capacity for spectacle and action-packed set pieces, much of his appeal lies in his profound earnestness. “What Spielberg is so good at is bringing the human to the fore in these extreme, sci-fi circumstances,” Schwartz says. “And that's what makes a great blockbuster.”   New episodes of The New Yorker Radio Hour drop every Tuesday and Friday. Join host David Remnick as he discusses the latest in politics, news, and current events in conversation with political leaders, newsmakers, innovators, New Yorker staff writers, authors, actors, and musicians. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When “Jaws” hit theatres in 1975, no one—neither the studio executives involved nor the film's twenty-six-year-old director, Steven Spielberg—was betting on its success. But it dominated at the box office and promptly revolutionized the way movies were promoted, distributed, and merchandised. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz trace how Spielberg inaugurated a new phenomenon in Hollywood: the blockbuster. He would tap his own playbook again and again with such hits as “Close Encounters of the Third Kind,” “E.T.,” and “Jurassic Park,” all of which drew impressive audiences and profits. The hosts talk through his filmography, culminating in his new release, “Disclosure Day,” which both replicates and iterates on themes and techniques found in his earlier work. Though other directors may share his capacity for spectacle and action-packed set pieces, much of his appeal lies in his profound earnestness. “What Spielberg is so good at is bringing the human to the fore in these extreme, sci-fi circumstances,” Schwartz says. “And that's what makes a great blockbuster.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Jaws” (1975)“Disclosure Day” (2026)“Minority Report” (2002)“Oscar Wars,” by Michael Schulman“What Went Wrong” 's episode about “Jaws”“Close Encounters of the Third Kind” (1977)“Jurassic Park” (1993)“E.T.” (1982)“Alf” (1986-90)“Schindler's List” (1993)“One Battle After Another” (2025)“American Journal,” by Robert Hayden“Heart of the Beast” (2026)“Sinners” (2025)“Nope” (2022)“Barbie” (2023)“Obsession” (2026)“Backrooms” (2026)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Since the days of Aesop, stories about animals have been used to explore distinctly human values, virtues, and vices. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider such childhood classics as E. B. White's “Stuart Little” and C. S. Lewis's “Chronicles of Narnia” series, as well as “The Sheep Detectives,” a recent entry in this canon that centers on a flock who learn poignant lessons about life and loss. Works of adult literature, too, have explored the animal-human bond. Our tendency to project onto animals translates to the real world in strange ways, with figures like Timmy the Whale and Punch the Monkey going viral on our social feeds even as our day-to-day lives are more detached from the natural world than ever before. But the distance between us can be instructive, too. “Reckoning with their similarity to us and also their total strangeness to us . . . that's where works about animals really get me,” Schwartz says. “Not just as a direct transfer onto the human experience but also this other thing that really does enrich our lives: to be in contact with species that are not our own.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:Homer's Odyssey“Stone Fox,” by John Reynolds Gardiner“The Mare,” by Mary Gaitskill“The Sheep Detectives” (2026)“Stuart Little,” by E. B. White “Bambi” (1942)“The Lion King” (1994) C. S. Lewis's “Chronicles of Narnia” Series“Tom and Jerry” (1940-67)Aesop's Fables“Frederick,” by Leo Lionni“ ‘Wake Up Dead Man' and the Whodunnit Renaissance” (The New Yorker)“Zootopia” (2016) “Why Earnestness Is Everywhere” (The New Yorker)“Babe” (1995)“Tiger King” (2020-21)“Monkey Business in ‘Chimp Crazy,' ” by Vinson Cunningham (The New Yorker)I am Bunny on TikTokNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

This week, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz kick off the summer months with a new installment of the Critics at Large advice series. Listeners' questions run the gamut: a high-school economics teacher seeks films for his students which aren't set in the world of finance; a caller from Iran looks for cultural works to help endure periods of extreme uncertainty; and two friends on the cusp of college graduation ask for recommendations to guide them in their next chapter. “Art is not a thing separate from our troubles or from our awareness of the insane contingencies of life,” Cunningham says. “It's meant as a companion and a response to those. I think that's shining through in some of these questions.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Sorry to Bother You” (2018)“My Architect: A Son's Journey” (2003)“Les dites cariatides” (1984)“Twenty Minutes in Manhattan,” by Michael SorkinThe photography of Eugène AtgetThe music of the Notorious B.I.G., Heavy D, Fat Joe, and Big Pun“Sentimental Education,” by Gustave FlaubertVáclav Havel's “Audience”“The Best of Everything,” by Rona Jaffe“How to Murder Your Life,” by Cat Marnell“Becoming a Centenarian,” by Calvin Tomkins (The New Yorker)“This Old Man,” by Roger Angell (The New Yorker)“Tabula Rasa,” by John McPhee (The New Yorker)“Kramer vs. Kramer” (1979)“Divorcing,” by Susan TaubesElena Ferrante's Neapolitan novels“Ghost World,” by Daniel Clowes“Frances Ha” (2012)“Asparagus” (1979)Roger Payne's “Songs of the Humpback Whale”“Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: An Introduction,” by J. D. SalingerThe poetry of Sylvia Plath, particularly “Tulips”Tony Kushner's “Angels in America”“I Will,” by the Beatles“St. Judy's Comet,” by Paul Simon“Sail Away Ladies,” by OdettaNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

For many of us, daily life is defined by a near-constant stream of decisions, from what to buy on Amazon to what to watch on Netflix. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider how we came to see endless selection as a fundamental right. The hosts discuss “The Age of Choice,” a book by the historian Sophia Rosenfeld, which traces how our fixation with the freedom to choose has evolved over the centuries. Today, an abundance of choice in one sphere often masks a lack of choice in others—and, with so much focus on individual rather than collective decision-making, the glut of options can contribute to a profound sense of alienation. “When all you do is choose, choose, choose, what you do is end up by yourself,” Cunningham says. “Putting yourself with people seems to be one of the salves.”This episode originally aired on March 13, 2025. Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Could Anyone Keep Track of This Year's Microtrends?” by Danielle Cohen (The Cut)“The Age of Choice: A History of Freedom in Modern Life,” by Sophia Rosenfeld“The Federalist Papers,” by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay“What Does It Take to Quit Shopping? Mute, Delete and Unsubscribe,” by Jordyn Holman and Aimee Ortiz (The New York Times)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The phrase “toxic masculinity,” deployed ad nauseum over the past decade, now borders on cliché, but the fact that men are in some kind of crisis feels beyond dispute. Statistics on boys' prospects are bleak, showing falling graduation rates, diminished employment opportunities, and dismal mental-health outcomes. Meanwhile, the manosphere has fanned the flames of these discontents. The question of what's to be done is more pressing than ever. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider a new wave of texts that aims to diagnose men's ills, and to offer a path forward. The men in these works fall, broadly, into two lanes: the damaged, sometimes violent types who are front and center in such series as Richard Gadd's “Half Man,” and the softer, more emotionally attuned protagonists of shows like “Heated Rivalry” and “DTF St. Louis.” But this tidy schematic falls apart in real life—and, as looksmaxxers have taught us, obsessing over models of manhood may only compound the problem. “Usually, if I'm thinking about being a man, it is in a self-reproving or self-indicting way that is not helpful to the situation,” Cunningham says. “When you're asking how to be a man, often the real answer is just how to be a person.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Half Man” (2026)“Magnolia” (1999)“Fight Club” (1999)“Heated Rivalry” (2025—)“‘Heated Rivalry,' ‘Pillion,' and the New Drama of the Closet” (The New Yorker)“Adolescence” (2025)“DTF St. Louis” (2026)“The New Masculinity of ‘DTF St. Louis,' ” by Alexandra Schwartz (The New Yorker)“Lord of the Flies” (2026)“Lord of the Flies,” by William Golding“Can Starting from Scratch Save ‘Vanderpump Rules'?” by Naomi Fry (The New Yorker)Clavicular's appearance on “Impaulsive”“Why So Many Guys Are Obsessed with Testosterone,” by Azeen Ghorayshi (The New York Times)“Louis Theroux: Inside the Manosphere” (2026)“The Pitt” (2025—)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

A few years back, novels classed as “romantasy”—a portmanteau of “romance” and “fantasy”—might have seemed destined to attract only niche appeal. But since the pandemic, the genre has proved nothing short of a phenomenon. Sarah J. Maas's “A Court of Thorns and Roses” series has repeatedly topped best-seller lists, and Rebecca Yarros's 2025 title “Onyx Storm” became the fastest-selling adult novel in decades. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz are joined by their fellow New Yorker staff writer Katy Waldman as they delve into the realm of romantasy themselves. Together, they consider some of the most popular entries in the genre, and discuss how monitoring readers' reactions on BookTok, a literary corner of TikTok, allows writers to tailor their work to fans' hyperspecific preferences. Often, these books are conceived and marketed with particular tropes in mind—but the key ingredient in nearly all of them is a sense of wish fulfillment. “The reason that I think they're so powerful and they provide such solace to us is because they tell us, ‘You're perfect. You're always right. You have the hottest mate. You have the sickest powers,' ” Waldman says. “I totally get it. I fall into those reveries, too. I think we all do.”This episode originally aired on February 13, 2025.Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Did a Best-Selling Romantasy Novelist Steal Another Writer's Story?,” by Katy Waldman (The New Yorker)“The Song of the Lioness,” by Tamora Pierce“A Court of Thorns and Roses,” by Sarah J. Maas“Ella Enchanted,” by Gail Carson Levine“Fourth Wing,” by Rebecca Yarros“Onyx Storm,” by Rebecca Yarros“Crave,” by Tracy Wolff“Working Girl” (1988)“Game of Thrones” (2011-19)“The Vampyre,” by John Polidori“Dracula,” by Bram Stoker“Outlander” (2014–)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In the original “The Devil Wears Prada,” a hapless Andrea Sachs stumbles into the office of Miranda Priestly, the exacting editor of Runway magazine and a titan of the fashion world. The film, released in 2006, was adapted from a novel by the former Vogue staffer Lauren Weisberger, and it spun the glamour of the industry into a crowd-pleasing confection for the big screen. Two decades later, the atmosphere of its sequel is darker. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss the reality-inflected elements of the new film, which finds Priestly and her team chasing clicks and catering to the whims of billionaires who might solve Runway's financial woes. The question of billionaire influence was also present at this year's Met Gala. The event's lead sponsors were the Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and his wife, Lauren Sánchez Bezos, who reportedly donated ten million dollars to become honorary co-chairs. Attendees paid a hundred thousand dollars just to get in the door. Why, the hosts ask, does the gala still matter to the average fashion enthusiast? “It's the one time where, divorced from utility and other reasons, it's O.K. to just look at fashion,” Cunningham says. “I tend to defend our opportunities to just look at things that provoke pleasure.” Read, watch, and listen with the critics:The 2026 Met Gala“The Devil Wears Prada” (2006)“The Devil Wears Prada 2” (2026)“Guys Are Wearing Slutty Little Reading Glasses Now” (GQ)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Cynicism is widely considered a defining quality of our conspiracy-addled, irony-poisoned age. But audiences and creatives alike now seem ready to cast it aside in favor of an attitude that's long been out of style: earnestness. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz trace this trend from the outer-space buddy comedy “Project Hail Mary” to the real-life Artemis II mission, whose crew has spoken movingly about Earth as a “lifeboat” in the middle of a vast, mysterious universe. The hosts also consider two buzzy new books—Lena Dunham's “Famesick,” and “Transcription,” by Ben Lerner—which find their authors turning to earnestness in midlife, after precocious beginnings. In this era of political, economic, and environmental precarity, younger generations, too, have come to celebrate big feelings, rather than living in fear of seeming cringe. “We've just seen too much awful stuff, and it's impossible to ironize,” Cunningham says. “The only sane response to that is to kind of sober up and say, ‘All right, what resources do humans still have?' ”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Project Hail Mary” (2026)“The Pitt” (2025-)“Love on the Spectrum” (2022-)“Heated Rivalry” (2025-)“Famesick,” by Lena Dunham“Girls” (2012-17)“Transcription,” by Ben Lerner“Climbing Cringe Mountain With Gen Z” (The New York Times)“Amos & Boris,” by William SteigLászló Krasznahorkai's Nobel Prize lectureNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In 2019, marriage rates in the United States hit their lowest point in a hundred and forty years. They still haven't rebounded. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider how recent cultural offerings mirror this increasing dissatisfaction with matrimony. They discuss the new season of the Netflix anthology show “Beef,” which centers on two couples locked in a feud that gradually exposes the cracks in each relationship, and the A24 film “The Drama,” about a wedding that goes off the rails in spectacular fashion. They also consider real-life examples, including Lindy West's recent memoir, “Adult Braces,” which has sparked a flurry of discourse about polyamory and open marriages. As such alternative ways of organizing our love lives enter the mainstream, the narrative around one of our oldest institutions is shifting, too. “I think we're in a place where we're trying to make marriage seem more like a positive choice, rather than an obvious obligation,” Schwartz says. “It's a fascinating fiction that those who get married subscribe to, hoping that the fiction becomes true.” Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Beef” (2023-)“The White Lotus” (2021-)“The Drama” (2026)“Strangers,” by Belle Burden“A Hymn to Life: Shame Has to Change Sides,” by Gisèle Pelicot“Madame Bovary,” by Gustave Flaubert“Parallel Lives,” by Phyllis Rose“Adult Braces,” by Lindy WestNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Last fall, a group of masked men broke into the Louvre in broad daylight and made off with some of France's crown jewels. The stunt swiftly became an online phenomenon. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss the sordid satisfaction of watching a heist play out, both onscreen and off. They dive into the debacle at the Louvre, along with a range of fictional depictions, from the fantasy of hyper-competence in “Ocean's Eleven” to the theft that goes woefully awry in Kelly Reichardt's  “The Mastermind.” Part of the fun, it seems, lies in rooting for those who identify and exploit the blind spots of an institution. “Someone else, just like me, is seeing that everybody is an idiot. But, unlike me, they're able to best those people in charge,” Fry says. “It's an alternative morality—a morality of wits.”This episode originally aired on November 13, 2025.Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Mastermind” (2025)“Ocean's Eleven” (2001)Stella Webb's impression of “the Louvre heist Creative Director”Jake Schroeder's “Ballad for the Louvre”“Showing Up” (2022)“The Italian Job” (1969)“How to Beat the High Cost of Living” (1980)“Drive” (2011)“Le Cercle Rouge” (1970)“This Is a Robbery: The World's Biggest Art Heist” (2021)“Good Time” (2017)“George Santos and the Art of the Scam” (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In the new HBO miniseries “DTF St. Louis,” Jason Bateman plays a weatherman living with his wife and kids in a sleepy town just outside of St. Louis. He befriends a coworker, Floyd Smernitch (David Harbour), and the two sign up for a dating app that specializes in clandestine affairs. By the end of the first episode, Smernitch is dead. So begins a whodunnit set against the backdrop of suburban America and the discontents simmering beneath. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz survey how the setting has been used over the decades, from the films of Douglas Sirk and the stories of John Cheever in the nineteen-fifties and sixties to the fantasy of that era seen in 1985's “Back to the Future.” Today, the locale is being assessed anew. Like “DTF,” the recent docuseries “Neighbors” strips the suburbs of their glamour, focussing instead on petty grievances and property disputes. “They are small stakes, but of course, everything that is quintessentially American—property, the right to violence, the right to protect land—are all intensely operative in this space,” Cunningham says. “And if something goes wrong, somebody pays for it.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“DTF St. Louis” (2026—)“‘DTF St. Louis' Peers Into the Suburban Male Psyche,” by Vinson Cunningham (The New Yorker)“The Swimmer,” by John Cheever (The New Yorker)“Judy Blume: A Life,” by Mark Oppenheimer“Wifey,” by Judy Blume“Back to the Future” (1985)“All That Heaven Allows” (1955)“Desperate Housewives” (2004-2012)“American Pie” (1999)“Buffy the Vampire Slayer” (1997-2003)“Adventures in Babysitting” (1987)“The Five-Forty-Eight,” by John Cheever (The New Yorker)“Neighbors” (2026—)“All Her Fault” (2025)“Friendship” (2025)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The K-pop group BTS—by many metrics, the most popular band of all time—had a meteoric ascent before its members were called away by mandatory South Korean military service. Now, nearly four years later, the group has returned with a new record, “Arirang.” On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz delve into the album as well as the live-streamed concert and documentary that have accompanied its release, both on Netflix. “Arirang” is being framed as a return to the group's Korean roots, albeit one that signifies a new, more mature era for its members, who are now in their late twenties and early thirties. The hosts consider BTS's meticulously crafted image and its relationship to its devoted followers, known as ARMY. Intense fandom is nothing new—just ask the Beatles—but K-pop stans are particularly invested in the lives (and livelihoods) of their favorite idols, even paying for the chance to message them directly. “This further privatization of what we call parasociality,” Cunningham says, “if that can be monetized and organized, it really is the final frontier of the pop star.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:BTS's “Arirang”“BTS: The Return” (2026)“KPop Demon Hunters” (2025)Justin Bieber's “Swag”“The K-Pop King,” by Alex Barasch (The New Yorker)The music video for BTS's “Swim”“Judy Blume: A Life,” by Mark OppenheimerThe Beatles' “Let It Be”New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The Washington Roundtable is off today, and will be back next week. In the meantime, enjoy an episode of The New Yorker's Critics at Large podcast about the FX series “Love Story,” which drops audiences into the lives of one of the most talked-about couples of the nineties: J.F.K., Jr., and the style icon Carolyn Bessette. The hosts Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz, who are staff writers and critics at The New Yorker, discuss how the show re-creates the look and fashion of the era in granular detail while reducing the relationship itself to a generic fairy tale. “Love Story” 's focus on style underscores how much the Kennedy legacy lives in aesthetics, which risks obscuring some of the darker chapters of its history. “It does seem like we have ever more efficiently stripped the Kennedys and their image, and their style, from any notions of political power,” Cunningham says. “The look of something and the sort of moral thrust of something are not always one to one working in parallel.”New episodes of “Critics at Large” drop every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

“Love Story,” an FX series produced by Ryan Murphy, drops audiences straight into the lives of one of the most talked-about couples of the nineties: J.F.K., Jr., and the style icon Carolyn Bessette. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss how the show re-creates the look and fashion of the era in granular detail while reducing the relationship itself to a generic fairy tale. Despite its many flaws, the show has been embraced with a zeal that reflects the enduring allure of the Kennedys—often said to be the closest thing America has to a royal family. The hosts consider why this political dynasty has so persisted in the popular imagination, discussing everything from the work of the paparazzo Ron Galella to Oliver Stone's “JFK” and Pablo Larrain's “Jackie,” two very different treatments of the aftermath of John F. Kennedy's assassination. “Love Story” 's focus on style underscores how much the family's legacy lives in aesthetics, which risks obscuring some of the darker chapters of its history. “It does seem like we have ever more efficiently stripped the Kennedys and their image, and their style, from any notions of political power,” Cunningham says. “The look of something and the sort of moral thrust of something are not always one to one working in parallel.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Love Story” (2026–)“Once Upon a Time: The Captivating Life of Carolyn Bessette-Kennedy,” by Elizabeth Beller“How Can ‘Love Story' Get Away With This?,” by Daryl Hannah (The New York Times)“American Prince: JFK Jr.” (2025)“Seinfeld” (1989-98)“Jackie” (2016)“The Kennedy Imprisonment,” by Garry WillsThe photography of Ron Galella“JFK” (1991)“A Battle with My Blood,” by Tatiana Schlossberg (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

On this episode of Critics at Large, with the ninety-eighth Academy Awards just around the corner, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz are joined by their fellow staff writer Michael Schulman to take stock of Oscars season. They discuss the biggest races and consider whether the year's Best Picture nominees—many of them both critical and commercial successes—might represent a return to the bygone era of “grownup movies.” At the center of all this pageantry is the host: a notoriously tricky role for even the most seasoned performers. Together, the critics revisit the highs and lows of Oscars hosting history, from the long tenure of Bob Hope to the golden age of Billy Crystal. These m.c.s' success hinges on their ability to walk a fine line, embodying the celebratory spirit of the evening while also poking fun at its absurdity. “It's about that insider-outsider aspect. You are the court jester,” Schwartz says. “Are you really wanting to be vizier to the king, or are you O.K. in that jester role?”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Oscar Wars,” by Michael Schulman“Marty Supreme” (2025)“Sinners (2025)“The Secret Agent” (2025)“One Battle After Another” (2025)“‘Come to Brazil?' The Oscars Just Might,” by Michael Schulman (The New Yorker)“Sentimental Value” (2025)“The Mastermind” (2025)“Peter Hujar's Day” (2025)Billy Crystal's opening monologue for the 1990 OscarsChris Rock's opening monologue for the 2005 OscarsRicky Gervais's opening monologue for the 2020 Golden GlobesNikki Glaser's opening monologue for the 2026 Golden GlobesNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

When Emily Brontë published “Wuthering Heights,” in 1847, critics were baffled, alarmed, and mostly unimpressed. James Lorimer, writing in the North British Review, promised that the novel would “never be generally read.” Nearly two centuries later, it's regarded as one of the great works of English literature. In a live taping of Critics at Large at the 92nd Street Y, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss the staying power of the original text and the countless adaptations it's inspired, from the 1939 film featuring Laurence Olivier to Andrea Arnold's 2011 version. The most recent attempt comes from the director Emerald Fennell, whose new “Wuthering Heights,” starring Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi, reads as a romantic fever dream. The movie has been polarizing in part for the way it excises some of the weirder and wilder aspects of its source material. But what's discarded—or emphasized—can also be revealing. “It's an audacious proposition to adapt a great novel … I don't think it needs to be faithful, necessarily,” Fry says. “The adaptation itself becomes a portrait of the time in which it's made.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Wuthering Heights,” by Emily BrontëKate Bush's “Wuthering Heights”Emerald Fennell's “Wuthering Heights” (2026)“Emerald Fennell's ‘Wuthering Heights' Never Plumbs the Depths,” by Justin Chang (The New Yorker)“Barbie” (2023)“Saltburn” (2023)“Promising Young Woman” (2020)“Jane Eyre,” by Charlotte Brontë“The Communist Manifesto,” by Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx (1848)Peter Kosminsky's “Wuthering Heights” (1992)William Wyler's “Wuthering Heights” (1939)Andrea Arnold's “Wuthering Heights” (2011)“All the King's Men,” by Robert Penn Warren“I Love L.A.” (2025–)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Toni Morrison was many things in her lifetime—Nobel laureate, renowned author, Princeton professor, and generous mentor to young writers. Her appeal translated seamlessly to the internet, where old interview clips still bubble up regularly on social media, reminding us of her sharp wit and commanding presence. But, as Namwali Serpell argues in a new book of essays, “On Morrison,” this undeniable star persona risks eclipsing the genius—and complexity—of the eleven novels she wrote. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz dive back into these works to rediscover the writer as she was on the page. The hosts discuss Morrison's début novel, “The Bluest Eye”; “Beloved,” which is widely regarded as her masterpiece; and “Jazz,” the experimental 1992 novel believed to be her personal favorite. Throughout her career, she insisted on writing flawed, dynamic characters rather than paragons of virtue. “The Morrison project is to put Black life, and particularly the lives of Black women, at the very center of literature—but to do it in a way that's true to character and to human experience,” Schwartz says. “The people she's writing about are damaged, are greedy, are jealous, are sad . . . and also are generous, and loving, and hurt and trying to heal.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“On Morrison,” by Namwali Serpell“Toni Morrison, the Teacher,” by Vinson Cunningham (The New Yorker)“The Bluest Eye,” by Toni Morrison“Song of Solomon,” by Toni Morrison“Toni Morrison and the Ghosts in the House,” by Hilton Als (The New Yorker)“Jazz,” by Toni Morrison“Beloved,” by Toni Morrison“Sula,” by Toni Morrison“Black Writers in Praise of Toni Morrison” (The New York Times)“The Blue Period: Black Writing in the Early Cold War,” by Jesse McCarthyMonuments at MOCA and the Brick“Language as Liberation,” by Toni MorrisonNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Every year, ahead of Oscar night, the film critic Richard Brody joins the New Yorker Radio Hour to discuss his picks for the year's best films. David Remnick sits down with Brody and the staff writer Alexandra Schwartz to discuss the movies that didn't get enough credit, the ones that got too much, and the lesser-known gems among the year's releases.New episodes of The New Yorker Radio Hour drop every Tuesday and Friday. Join host David Remnick as he discusses the latest in politics, news, and current events in conversation with political leaders, newsmakers, innovators, New Yorker staff writers, authors, actors, and musicians.

The new adaptation of "Wuthering Heights" from director Emerald Fennell has generated a lot of press for playing fast and loose with historical accuracy, for the casting of Jacobi Elordi, and for the sex scenes between Elordi and Margot Robbie. But how close will this movie be to the spirit of the original novel by Emily Bronte? Alexandra Schwartz, New Yorker staff writer and co-host of the "Critics at Large" podcast discusses the original novel, and the potential pitfalls of a new adaptation. Schwartz, along with Vinson Cunningham and Naomi Fry will be hosting a live, in person taping of the podcast about Wuthering Heights on Feb. 19 at 92NY.Photo: Jacob Elordi and Margot Robbie at the "Wuthering Heights" World Premiere held at the TCL Chinese Theatre on January 28, 2026 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Michael Buckner/Variety via Getty Images)

Once the fervor around Charli XCX's 2024 album “brat” had cooled, the singer was approached to make a documentary about the tour—a practice that's been embraced by the likes of Taylor Swift and Beyoncé. But Charli, who has built her brand in opposition to mainstream expectations, instead released “The Moment,” a tongue-in-cheek satire about the pressures stars face to milk career highs like “brat summer” for all they're worth. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider “The Moment” alongside both the sanitized documentaries it mocks and other artists' attempts to subvert the form. Many of these projects promise genuine insight into their subjects, but what they actually show is the increasingly delicate balancing act of “authentic” celebrity. “It is really hard to both reveal and conceal at the same time,” Fry says. “To invite the fan in—but not in a way that feels unsafe, or that could get you cancelled, or could make you sell less, or could make you unloved.”See Critics at Large live: the hosts will be discussing “Wuthering Heights” onstage at the 92nd Street Y on February 19th. Both in-person and streaming tickets are available. Buy now »Read, watch, and listen with the critics:Charli XCX's “brat”“The Moment” (2026)“Homecoming: A Film by Beyoncé” (2019)“Gaga: Five Foot Two” (2017)“A Hard Day's Night” (1964)“Spice World” (1997)“Taylor Swift: The End of an Era” (2025)“Sean Combs: The Reckoning” (2025)“Renaissance: A Film by Beyoncé” (2023)“Gimme Shelter” (1970)“Madonna: Truth or Dare” (1991)“I'm Still Here” (2010)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

“Heated Rivalry,” a low-budget Canadian series that began streaming on HBO Max late last year, quickly made the leap from unexpected word-of-mouth success to full-blown cultural phenomenon. The show, which follows a pair of professional hockey players who fall for each other, has been name-checked by everyone from the N.H.L. commissioner to Zohran Mamdani; its two young leads, Hudson Williams and Connor Storrie, just served as Olympic torch-bearers. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz unpack “Heated Rivalry” 's appeal, considering its embrace of earnestness and its place in a broader lineage of stories about gay love. The way the protagonists are forced to hide their relationship recalls dramas set in earlier eras, from E. M. Forster's “Maurice” to Annie Proulx's “Brokeback Mountain”—but the function of the closet in art is ever-evolving. The hosts also discuss “Pillion,” a new film starring Alexander Skarsgård and Harry Melling, which features parents who are supportive of their son's gayness but in the dark about his life as a sub. “It's interesting, these contemporary stories where gay relationships are, in the larger culture, totally accepted—and that there are sort of closets within closets,” Cunningham says. “There's a deeper place that others cannot go.”See Critics at Large live: the hosts will be discussing “Wuthering Heights” onstage at the 92nd Street Y on February 19th. Both in-person and streaming tickets are available. Buy now »Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Heated Rivalry” (2025–)“Pillion” (2026)Elena Ferrante's Neapolitan NovelsEsther Perel's response to “Heated Rivalry”The novels of Sally Rooney“The Delicious Anticipation–and, Yes, Release—of ‘Heated Rivalry,' ” by Naomi Fry (The New Yorker)“Maurice,” by E. M. Forster“Brokeback Mountain” (2005)“The Price of Salt,” by Patricia Highsmith“Carol” (2015)“My Own Private Idaho” (1991)“The Swimming-Pool Library,” by Alan Hollinghurst“The Loves of My Life,” by Edmund White“I Love L.A.” (2025–)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz celebrate the one-hundredth episode of Critics at Large with a special installment of the podcast's advice series. Together, they counsel callers on everything from turning non-readers into bibliophiles to the art of curating the ideal road-trip playlist. They're joined by David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, who shares some cultural dilemmas of his own. Finally, the hosts turn the tables and ask for guidance from their listeners.Read, watch, and listen with the critics:Billie Holiday's “Body and Soul”Bob Dylan's “Blonde on Blonde”Joni Mitchell's “Blue”The music of Laufey“I Regret Almost Everything,” by Keith McNally“The Palm House,” by Gwendoline Riley“Task” (2025—)“Die, My Love” (2025)“Carol” (2015)“The Price of Salt,” by Patricia Highsmith“Surface Matters,” by Naomi Fry (The New Republic)Geese's “Getting Killed”“What Went Wrong”Richard Linklater's “Before” trilogy“The Ambassadors,” by Henry James“Marty Supreme” (2025)“Why Football Matters” (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Someone looking to understand America might do well to study the nation's embrace of football. N.F.L. games regularly outperform anything else on television, and, in 2025, some hundred and twenty-seven million viewers tuned into the Super Bowl—more than ever before. As this year's championship approaches, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz are joined by their fellow New Yorker writer Louisa Thomas to unpack the sport's allure, which has persisted despite increasingly dire evidence of the danger it poses to players' health. Together, they discuss football's origins as a “war game,” how fictional depictions have contributed to its mythos, and the state of play today. “A very compelling reason for football's popularity is that it's not only a simulation of war,” Thomas says. “It's a simulation of community.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Friday Night Lights” (2006–11)“The West Wing” (1999–2006)“Football,” by Chuck Klosterman“The End of the NFL's Concussion Crisis,” by Reeves Wiedeman (New York magazine)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In “The Testament of Ann Lee,” a new film directed by Mona Fastvold, Amanda Seyfried plays the founder and leader of the Shaker movement—a woman believed by her followers to be the second coming of Christ. Fastvold uses song and dance to convey the fervor that Mother Ann shares with her acolytes. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss how such depictions of religious devotion might land with modern viewers. They trace this theme from Martin Scorsese's docuseries “The Saints” to “Lux,” a recent album in which Rosalía mines the divine for musical inspiration. These stories, many of them centuries old, might seem out of step with modern concerns. But we're still borrowing their iconography—and anointing saints of our own—today. “The bracing and sort of terrifying thing about them is precisely that they are human beings,” Cunningham says. “What they say to us is, ‘If you had the juice, you could do it, too.' ” Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Marty Supreme” (2025)“The Testament of Ann Lee” (2025)“Martin Scorsese Presents: The Saints” (2024—)Rosalia's “Lux”“Conclave” (2024)Michelangelo's “The Temptation of Saint Anthony”“The Flowers of Saint Francis” (1950)Madonna's “Like a Prayer”“The bizarre rise of ‘convent dressing,' ” by Eleanor Dye (The Daily Mail)“What Kind of New World Is Being Born?,” by Vinson Cunningham (The New Yorker)“Patricia Lockwood Goes Viral,” by Alexandra Schwartz (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Though Jane Austen went largely unrecognized in her own lifetime—four of her six novels were published anonymously, and the other two only after her death—her name is now synonymous with the period romance. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz choose their personal favorites from her œuvre—“Emma,” “Persuasion,” and “Mansfield Park”—and attempt to get to the heart of her appeal. Then they look at how Austen herself has been characterized by readers and critics. We know relatively little about Austen as a person, but that hasn't stopped us from trying to understand her psyche. It's a difficult task in part because of the double-edged quality to her writing: Austen, although renowned for her love stories, is also a keen satirist of the Regency society in which these relationships play out. “I think irony is so key, but also sincerity,” Schwartz says. “These books are about total realism and total fantasy meeting in a way that is endlessly alluring.”This episode originally aired on June 12, 2025. Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Pride and Prejudice,” by Jane Austen“Persuasion,” by Jane Austen“Emma,” by Jane Austen“Mansfield Park,” by Jane Austen“Sense and Sensibility,” by Jane Austen“Northanger Abbey,” by Jane Austen“Virginia Woolf on Jane Austen” (The New Republic)Emily Nussbaum on “Breaking Bad” and the “Bad Fan” (The New Yorker)“How to Misread Jane Austen,” by Louis Menand (The New Yorker)“Miss Austen” (2025—)“Pride and Prejudice” (2005)Scenes Through Time's “Mr. Darcy Yearning for 10 Minutes” SupercutNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Many of this year's most talked-about releases were, in some sense, diagnostic: from Ryan Coogler's “Sinners” to Paul Thomas Anderson's “One Battle After Another,” films offered up assessments of the nation's ills. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss these and other reflections of American life, which arrive at a time when reality itself feels more nebulous than ever. Then, the hosts consider the “broken mirror” of A.I., and how the second Trump Administration's effort to erase unflattering chapters of U.S. history has further muddied the distinction between fact and fiction. Despite these dark developments, the art that's emerged from this moment, much of it focussed on activists and renegades seeking change, also functions as a warning against stasis. Cunningham says, of the cultural shift: “This fixation on democracy on the ground—whether it's violent or not, whether it's misguided or not—I hope describes a yearning for more action. A move away from the mirror, and out into the streets.” Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Sinners” (2025)“Fruitvale Station” (2013)“ ‘Sinners' Is a Virtuosic Fusion of Historical Realism and Horror,” by Richard Brody (The New Yorker)“Eddington” (2025)“ ‘Eddington' and the American Berserk” (The New Yorker)“Gimme Shelter” (1970)“One Battle After Another” (2025)“One Paul Thomas Anderson Film After Another” (The New Yorker)“Bugonia” (2025)“Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence” (The New Yorker)“Our Fads, Ourselves” (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for December 12, 2025 is: waggish • WAG-ish • adjective Waggish describes someone who is silly and playful, and especially someone who displays a mischievous sense of humor. The word can also describe things that such a person might do or possess. // He had a waggish disposition that could irk adults but typically delighted children. // She denied the prank but did so with a waggish smirk that didn't match her disavowal. See the entry > Examples: “[Patricia] Lockwood began her writing life quietly, as a poet. She found her first major audience on Twitter, posting self-proclaimed ‘absurdities' ... that quickly came to define the medium's zany, waggish ethos ...” — Alexandra Schwartz, The New Yorker, 25 Aug. 2025 Did you know? One who is waggish acts like a wag. What, then, is a wag? It has nothing to do with a dog's tail; in this case a wag is a clever person prone to joking. Though light-hearted in its use and meaning, the probable source of this particular wag is grim: it is thought to be short for waghalter, an obsolete English word that translates as gallows bird, a gallows bird being someone thought to be deserving of hanging (wag being the familiar wag having to do with movement, and halter referring to a noose). Despite its gloomy origins, waggish is now often associated with humor and playfulness—a wag is a joker, and waggery is merriment or practical joking. Waggish can describe the prank itself as well as the prankster type; the class clown might be said to have a “waggish disposition” or be prone to “waggish antics.”

We all know the formula: it begins with a dead body, and quickly introduces a motley crew of outlandish characters, each with a motive for murder. The whodunnit genre has been a cultural fixture since the days of Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie—the latter of whom has been outsold only by the Bible and Shakespeare. Recently, though, the murder mystery has achieved a new level of saturation, with streaming services offering up a seemingly endless supply of glossy thrillers. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss how these new entries are updating the classic form. “Wake Up Dead Man,” the latest of Rian Johnson's “Knives Out” movies, slyly incorporates social commentary, while shows like “Search Party” and “Only Murders in the Building” poke fun at the figure of the citizen sleuth. In our era of conspiracy theories and vigilante actors, there's also a dark side to the archetype. “This desire to be the hero and to follow the logical trails and take things into your own hands—it's very appealing, if you do it right,” Schwartz says. “It's great if you catch the right guy. If you don't, and you catch the wrong one, the entire foundation of society crumbles.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Knives Out” (2019)“Glass Onion” (2022)“Wake Up Dead Man” (2025)“Big Little Lies” (2017-)“The White Lotus” (2021-)“And Then There Were None,” by Agatha Christie “Rian Johnson Is an Agatha Christie for the Netflix Age,” by Anna Russell (The New Yorker)“The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side: A Miss Marple Mystery,” by Agatha Christie“Only Murders in the Building” (2021-)“Nicole Kidman Gives Us What We Want in the Silly, Soapy ‘Perfect Couple,' ” by Vinson Cunningham (The New Yorker)“The Residence” (2025)“The Adventure of the Speckled Band,” by Arthur Conan Doyle“Search Party” (2016-22)“The Hound of the Baskervilles,” by Arthur Conan DoyleThe “Encyclopedia Brown” books“Clue” (1985)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Since it was penned more than four hundred years ago, Shakespeare's “Hamlet” has been in production nearly continuously, and has been adapted in many ways. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider why this story of a brooding young prince has continued to speak to audiences throughout the centuries. They discuss the new film “Hamnet,” directed by Chloé Zhao, which recasts the writing of “Hamlet” as Shakespeare's response to the death of his child; Tom Stoppard's absurdist play “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead”; Michael Almereyda's 2000 “Hamlet,” which presents the protagonist as a melancholy film student home from college; and other adaptations. What accounts for this story's hold over audiences, centuries after it was written? “I think it endures because every generation has its version of the incomprehensible,” Cunningham says. “It's not just death—it's politics, it's society. Everybody has to deal with their own version of ‘This does not make sense and yet it is.' ”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Hamnet” (2025)“Hamnet,” by Maggie O'Farrell“Hamlet,” by William ShakespeareKenneth Branagh's “Hamlet” (1996) Michael Almereyda's “Hamlet” (2000)“Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead” (1990)John Gielgud's “Hamlet” (1964)Robert Icke's “Hamlet” (2017, 2022)“Every Generation Gets the Shakespeare It Deserves” by Drew Lichtenberg (The New York Times)“Hamlet and His Problems" by T. S. EliotNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

The American musical is in a state of flux. Today's Broadway offerings are mostly jukebox musicals and blatant I.P. grabs; original ideas are few and far between. Meanwhile, Jon M. Chu's earnest (and lengthy) two-part adaptation of “Wicked”—an origin story for the Wicked Witch of the West that first premièred on the Great White Way over twenty years ago—has struck a chord with today's audiences. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss “Wicked” before stepping back to trace the evolution of the musical form, from the first shows to marry song and story in the nineteen-twenties to the seventies-era innovations of figures like Stephen Sondheim. Amid the massive commercial, technological, and aesthetic shifts of the last century, how has the form changed, and why has it endured? “People who don't like musicals will often criticize their artificiality,” Schwartz says. “Some things in life are so heightened . . . yet they're part of the real. Why not put them to music and have singing be part of it?”This episode originally aired on December 12, 2024.Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Wicked” (2024)“The Animals That Made It All Worth It,” by Naomi Fry (The New Yorker)“Ben Shapiro Reviews ‘Wicked' ”“Frozen” (2013)“Hair” (1979)“The Sound of Music” (1965)“Anything Goes” (1934)“Show Boat” (1927)“Oklahoma” (1943)“Mean Girls” (2017)“Hamilton” (2015)“Wicked” (2003)“A Strange Loop” (2019)“Teeth” (2024)“Kimberly Akimbo” (2021)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Vince Gilligan's new show, “Pluribus,” opens with an unconventional apocalypse. A benevolent alien hive mind descends on Earth, commandeering the bodies of all but a handful of people who appear to be immune, including a curmudgeonly writer named Carol Sturka. Though the world that the “joined” are building seems ideal—no more crime, efficient resource distribution, an end to discrimination—it doesn't leave much room for Carol's messy humanity. Is it worth it? On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss “Pluribus” and other perfect societies imagined and enacted by artists and thinkers, from Thomas More's 1516 satire, “Utopia,” to the Shaker movement and beyond. They reflect on why these experiments have rarely held up to scrutiny or benefitted more than a select few, and why we keep coming back to them anyway. “I'm not the most optimistic person,” Fry says. “But if you're stuck in pessimistic, dystopic thinking, are you foreclosing on greater promise or greater potential of imagination?” Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Pluribus” (2025–)“Breaking Bad” (2008-13)“Better Call Saul” (2015-22)“The X-Files” (1993-2002)“The Giver,” by Lois Lowry“Utopia,” by Thomas More“Les Guérillères,” by Monique Wittig “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” (1977)“The Testament of Ann Lee” (2025)“The Hunger Games,” by Suzanne Collins“Utopia for Realists,” by Rutger Bregman“Ragtime” (1996)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

On October 19th, a group of masked men broke into the Louvre in broad daylight and made off with some of France's crown jewels. Suspects are now in custody, but the online fervor is still going strong. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss the sordid satisfaction of watching a heist play out, both onscreen and off. They dive into the debacle at the Louvre, along with a range of fictional depictions, from the fantasy of hyper-competence in “Ocean's Eleven” to the theft that goes woefully awry in Kelly Reichardt's new film, “The Mastermind.” Part of the fun, it seems, lies in rooting for those who identify and exploit the blind spots of an institution. “Someone else, just like me, is seeing that everybody is an idiot. But, unlike me, they're able to best those people in charge,” Fry says. “It's an alternative morality—a morality of wits.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Mastermind” (2025)“Ocean's Eleven” (2001)Stella Webb's impression of “the Louvre heist Creative Director”Jake Schroeder's “Ballad for the Louvre”“Showing Up” (2022)“The Italian Job” (1969)“How to Beat the High Cost of Living” (1980)“Drive” (2011)“Le Cercle Rouge” (1970)“This Is a Robbery: The World's Biggest Art Heist” (2021)“Good Time” (2017)“George Santos and the Art of the Scam” (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture. Please help us improve New Yorker podcasts by filling out our listener survey: https://panel2058.na2.panelpulse.com/c/a/661hs4tSRdw2yB2dvjFyyw Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Padma Lakshmi is unquestionably a woman of taste. As a host of the beloved food-competition series “Top Chef” and the star of the culinary docuseries “Taste the Nation,” she's spent nearly two decades artfully conveying—and critiquing—flavors and aromas for an audience. Before that, she was a fashion writer and model, cultivating her own sense of what's worth wearing and seeing. And she isn't done evolving: she's recently begun performing standup comedy, an art form with a notoriously steep learning curve. In a live taping at The New Yorker Festival, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz talk with Lakshmi about the difference between discernment and pickiness, how travel has expanded her taste, and her approach to rendering judgement on TV. “I see my job as helping,” Lakshmi says. “I see my job as being the person in the kitchen who's saying, ‘Does this need a little salt?' ”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Top Chef” (2006—)“Taste the Nation” (2020-23)“RuPaul's Drag Race” (2009—)“American Idol” (2002—)“Project Runway” (2004—)“Padma's All American,” by Padma Lakshmi“Padma Lakshmi Walks Into a Bar,” by Helen Rosner (The New Yorker)“Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence” (The New Yorker)Dijon's “Baby”“Frankenstein” (2025)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker which explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Horror movies are big business: this year, they've accounted for more ticket sales in the U.S. than comedies and dramas combined, bringing in over a billion dollars at the box office. And the phenomenon goes beyond a hunger for cheap thrills and slasher flicks; artists have been using horror to explore deep-seated communal and personal anxieties for centuries. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz, along with the New Yorker culture editor Alex Barasch, use three contemporary entries—“The Babadook,” “Saint Maud,” and “Weapons”—to illustrate the inventive filmmaking and sharp social commentary that have become hallmarks of modern horror. “In the past, the horror would be something external that's disrupting a previously idyllic town or life. Now there's a lot more of: the bad thing has already happened to you,” Barasch says. “You already have a trauma at the beginning of the film—or even before the film begins—and then that is eating you from the inside, or trying to kill you, and you have to grapple with that.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Babadook” (2014)“Rosemary's Baby” (1968)“Scream with Me,” by Eleanor Johnson“Hereditary” (2018)“The Substance” (2024)“Saint Maud” (2020)The “Saw” franchise (2004—)“The Exorcist” (1973)“The Case Against the Trauma Plot,” by Parul Sehgal (The New Yorker)“Weapons” (2025)“Barbarian” (2022) “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (1974)“Get Out” (2017)“Alien” (1979)“The Blair Witch Project” (1999)“Talk to Me” (2022)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker that explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Generative A.I., once an uncanny novelty, is now being used to create not only images and videos but entire “artists.” Its boosters claim that the technology is merely a tool to facilitate human creativity; the major use cases we've seen thus far—and the money being poured into these projects—tell a different story. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss the output of Timbaland's A.I. rapper TaTa Taktumi and the synthetic actress Tilly Norwood. They also look back at movies and television that imagined what our age of A.I. would look like, from “2001: A Space Odyssey” onward. “A.I. has been a source of fascination, of terror, of appeal,” Schwartz says. “It's the human id in virtual form—at least in human-made art.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:TaTa Taktumi's “Glitch x Pulse”Cardi B's “Am I the Drama?”“Pop Star Academy: KATSEYE” (2024)“Dear Tilly Norwood,” by Betty Gilpin (The Hollywood Reporter)Tilly Norwood's Instagram account“Holly Herndon's Infinite Art,” by Anna Wiener (The New Yorker)“2001: A Space Odyssey” (1968)“The Morning Show” (2019—)“Simone” (2002)“Blade Runner” (1982)“Ex Machina” (2014)“The Man Who Sells Unsellable New York Apartments,” by Alexandra Schwartz (The New Yorker)“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” by Walter Benjamin“The Death of the Author,” by Roland BarthesNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Critics at Large is a weekly discussion from The New Yorker that explores the latest trends in books, television, film, and more. Join us every Thursday as we make unexpected connections between classic texts and pop culture.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In the latest installment of the Critics at Large advice series, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz answer listeners' questions about a range of conundrums. Some seek to immerse themselves in fictional worlds; others look for help with their own creative practices. Plus, the actor Morgan Spector (best known as Mr. Russell on “The Gilded Age”) calls in to ask the critics about poetry. “As always after we do this kind of show, my faith in humankind is restored,” Fry says. “Our listeners want to connect—they want to grow. They're looking to pass through life not just on autopilot but to look to culture for meaning.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Ethan Hawke: Give yourself permission to be creative” (TED)The poetry of Diane Seuss“Lilacs,” by Rainer Diana Hamilton“The Wire” (2002-8)“The Americans” (2013-18)“Billy Joel: And So It Goes” (2025)“The Good Wife” (2009-16)“30 Rock” (2006-13)“How a Billionaire Owner Brought Turmoil and Trouble to Sotheby's,” by Sam Knight (The New Yorker)“Lupin” (2021—)“The First Wives Club” (1996)“A Quick Killing in Art,” by Phoebe Hoban“Where Have All My Deep Male Friendships Gone?” by Sam Graham-Felsen (the New York Times Magazine)Aaron Karo and Matt Ritter's “Man of the Year”“The Archers” (1951—)“How to Cook a Wolf,” by M. F. K. Fisher“Home Cooking,” by Laurie Colwin“Fresh Air with Terry Gross”“What Was Paul Gauguin Looking For?,” by Alexandra Schwartz (The New Yorker)“Wild Thing,” by Sue Prideaux“Mr. Turner” (2014)“Topsy-Turvy” (1999)“The Work of Art: How Something Comes from Nothing,” by Adam MossSuzan-Lori Parks's “Watch Me Work”New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Scrutiny of the figure of the “trad wife” has hit a fever pitch. These influencers' accounts feature kempt, feminine women embracing hyper-traditional roles in marriage and home-making—and, in doing so, garnering millions of followers. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss standout practitioners of the “trad” life style, including Nara Smith, who makes cereal and toothpaste from scratch, and Hannah Neeleman, who, posting under the handle @ballerinafarm, presents a life caring for eight children in rural Utah as a bucolic fantasy. The hosts also discuss “The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives,” a reality-television show on Hulu about a group of Mormon influencers engulfed in scandal, whose notions of female empowerment read as a quaint reversal of the trad-wife trend. A common defense of a life style that some would call regressive is that it's a personal choice, devoid of political meaning. But this gloss is complicated by societal changes such as the erosion of women's rights in America and skyrocketing child-care costs. “In American society, the way choice works has everything to do with child-care options, financial options,” Schwartz says. “When you talk about the idea of choice, are we just talking about false choices?” This episode originally aired on Sept. 5, 2024. Read, watch, and listen with the critics:@ballerinafarm@gwenthemilkmaid@naraazizasmith“How Lucky Blue and Nara Aziza Smith Made Viral Internet Fame From Scratch,” by Carrie Battan (GQ)“The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives” (2024–)@esteecwilliams“Mad Men” (2007-15)The Little House on the Prairie series, by Laura Ingalls Wilder“Wilder Women,” by Judith Thurman (The New Yorker)“Meet the Queen of the “Trad Wives” (and Her Eight Children),” by Megan Agnew (The Times of London) New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Over the course of his three-decade career, the director Paul Thomas Anderson has dramatized the nineteen-seventies porn industry (“Boogie Nights”), the Californian oil boom (“There Will Be Blood”), and a mid-century London fashion house (“Phantom Thread”). Now he's trained his gaze on present-day America. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss Anderson's latest: the sprawling, surprisingly political blockbuster “One Battle After Another.” They contextualize the new work within his œuvre—and debate what his portrayal of militant left-wing activists and the white-supremacist right has to say about the state of the nation. “I think our present reality has far outstripped most depictions of it,” Schwartz says. “Slipping it into this kind of caper—is that delivering us to somewhere that gets people to think or to look or to feel?”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“One Battle After Another” (2025)“Vineland,” by Thomas Pynchon“Inherent Vice” (2014)“Boogie Nights” (1997)“The Master” (2012)“Punch-Drunk Love” (2002)“There Will Be Blood” (2007)“Phantom Thread” (2017)“ ‘Eddington' and the American Berserk” (The New Yorker)Gil Scott-Heron's “The Revolution Will Not be Televised”New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In contemporary cookbooks—and in the burgeoning realm of online cooking content—there's often a life style on display alongside the recipes. Samin Nosrat is a fixture of this landscape, and her new book, “Good Things,” aims to pick up where her mega-best-seller “Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat” left off, giving people a new framework for feeding themselves and loved ones. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz share their personal experiences making dishes from “Good Things.” Then, New Yorker staff writer Helen Rosner joins them to explain the state of home cooking today, from the rise of culinary influencers and the New York Times Cooking app to the aspirational dimension of what's on offer. “Not only is cooking supposed to be part of a life, but, specifically, it can be a part of the life of the mind,” Cunningham says. “Your choices in the kitchen can be deeply connected to your desires outside of the kitchen.”Read, watch, and cook with the critics:“Tender at the Bone,” by Ruth Reichl“Heartburn,” by Nora Ephron“Good Things,” by Samin Nosrat“Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat,” by Samin Nosrat“The Joylessness of Cooking,” by Helen Rosner (The New Yorker)“All-Consuming,” by Ruby Tandoh@wishbonekitchen“Jerusalem,” by Yotam Ottolenghi“Ottolenghi Simple,” by Yotam Ottolenghi“Dining In,” by Alison Roman“Nothing Fancy,” by Alison Roman“Alison Roman Cooks Thanksgiving in a (Very) Small Kitchen” (The New York Times)“Let's Party,” by Dan Pelosi“How to Cook Everything,” by Mark Bittman“Serial Monogamy,” by Nora Ephron (The New Yorker)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

In the past twenty years, more than a third of all American newspapers have shuttered; trust in media institutions is now at a historic low. And yet we're still drawn to depictions of reporters onscreen. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss two recent entries into the genre: “The Paper,” a workplace comedy from Greg Daniels and Michael Koman set at a failing local newspaper, and “The Lowdown,” a crime noir from Sterlin Harjo about a freelancer and self-styled “truthstorian.” They compare these new works with earlier examples to illuminate how the practice—and perception—of journalism has changed. In classics such as “All the President's Men,” Fry notes, “The airing of the facts via the news, via this character of the journalist, makes us feel like it's gonna be O.K. Like, the truth is out!” Today, she says, “I'm not sure we treat newsmaking the same way.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Paper” (2025–)“The Lowdown” (2025–)“All the President's Men” (1976)“The China Syndrome” (1979)“Citizen Kane” (1941)“The Gilded Age” (2022–)“The Office” (2005–13)“‘The Paper' Is Old News,” by Inkoo Kang (The New Yorker)Brian Stelter's Reliable Sources newsletter“Spotlight” (2015)“Succession” (2018–23)“My Undesirable Friends” (2025)404 MediaNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Last week, it was announced that Polymarket—a site where you can bet on basically anything, from the likelihood of a government shutdown to the winner of New York City's mayoral race—will be allowed to operate in the U.S. The decision was the culmination of a broader trend: since 2018, some thirty-nine states have legalized sports betting, and the rise of online gambling has made the practice a part of daily life. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider how platforms like Polymarket and DraftKings have changed our relationship to what we're wagering on. They also examine the way games of chance have been depicted in literature and film—and our enduring susceptibility, in art and otherwise, to the promise of a hot streak. “Gambling is a way for the individual to test themselves,” Schwartz says. “It comes back to this fundamental question everyone has about themselves, which is: do I got it, or don't I?”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Shayne Coplan's Big Bet Is Paying Off,” by Jen Wieczner (New York Magazine)“Online Gambling Is Changing Sports for the Worse,” by Jay Caspian Kang (The New Yorker)“Daniel Deronda,” by George Eliot“The Noble Hustle,” by Colson Whitehead“Rounders” (1998)“War and Peace,” by Leo Tolstoy“The Sopranos” (1999–2007)“Uncut Gems” (2019)“The Big Short” (2015)“To Catch a Thief” (1955)“Casino Royale” (2006)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Though the character known as Labubu has been around for a decade, the toy version—around six inches tall, sporting bunny ears and a demonic grin—is only just becoming a must-have accessory. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz join the trend and unbox their very own Labubu before diving into the history of such fads. They draw a distinction between collecting and speculating, from the seventeenth-century Dutch tulip mania through to the eBay-fuelled Beanie Baby craze of the nineteen-nineties and the far more recent rise and fall of non-fungible tokens. And they attempt to understand why this slightly unsettling children's toy is now inspiring such intense reactions. “People were flooding my D.M.s, like, ‘This thing is the end of culture,' ” Schwartz says. “This thing is not the end of culture. It's a point on a line.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“The Monsters,” by Kasing Lung“Where the Wild Things Are,” by Maurice Sendak“What the Labubu Obsession Says About Us,” by Jia Tolentino (The New Yorker)“A Dubai Chocolate Theory of the Internet” (“Search Engine”)“IRL Brain Rot and the Lure of the Labubu,” by Kyle Chayka (The New Yorker)“Little House on the Prairie,” by Laura Ingalls Wilder“Toy Story” (1995)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Today on The Run-Through with Vogue, we bring you an episode from The New Yorker's podcast, Critics at Large.Audiences have been bemoaning the death of the romantic comedy for years, but the genre persists—albeit often in a different form from the screwballs of the nineteen-forties or the “chick flicks” of the eighties and nineties. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss their all-time favorite rom-coms and two new projects marketed as contemporary successors to the greats: Celine Song's “Materialists” and Lena Dunham's “Too Much.” Do these depictions of modern love—or at least the search for it—evoke the same breathless feeling as the classics do? “I wonder if the crisis in rom-coms has to do with a crisis in how adult women want to be or want to see themselves,” Schwartz says. “I think both of these projects are basically trying to speak to the fact that everyone's ideals are in question.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Sex, Love, and the State of the Rom-Com” (The New Yorker)“Materialists” (2025)“Too Much” (2025)“Working Girl” (1988)“You've Got Mail” (1998)“When Harry Met Sally” (1989)“Love & Basketball” (2000)“The Best Man” (1999)“Our Romance with Jane Austen” (The New Yorker)“Girls” (2012-17)“Adam's Rib” (1949)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Nineteenth-century Americans regarded Paris as a libertine paradise: a smorgasbord of food and fashion, of night life and sex. Today, the pull toward France endures, though the precise nature of its appeal has shifted. On the second in a series of Critics at Large interview episodes, Alexandra Schwartz talks with the staff writer Lauren Collins about her work as The New Yorker's woman on the ground in France and the long lineage of Francophilic Americans—from Edith Wharton to James Baldwin and, yes, even “Emily.” The two consider how French femininity has been marketed to American women and how modern influencers transmit an incomplete picture of Paris. “Yes, it's romantic, and, yes, it's picturesque, but it's also a big, loud, dirty, profane, complicated city that evolves and changes like everywhere else,” Collins says. “There's a lot of misbegotten essentializing that happens when Americans start talking about France.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Ces restaurants qui gonflent l'addition des touristes américains,” by Mathieu Hennequin (Le Parisien)“Can Emmanuel Macron Stem the Populist Tide?,” by Lauren Collins (The New Yorker)“The Unlikely Rise of French Tacos,” by Lauren Collins (The New Yorker)“Dearest Edith,” by Janet Flanner (The New Yorker)“The Custom of the Country,” by Edith Wharton“Go Tell It on the Mountain,” by James Baldwin“Giovanni's Room,” by James Baldwin“The Discovery of What It Means to Be an American,” by James Baldwin (The New York Times)“Emily in Paris” (2020–)“Sex and the City” (1998–2004)“French Women Don't Get Fat,” by Mireille Guiliano“Bringing Up Bébé,” by Pamela DruckermanNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Two weeks ago, when Paramount cancelled “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” insiders in Hollywood and Washington alike deemed the move suspicious: Colbert had just called his parent company's payout to Trump a “big fat bribe” on air. Paramount, for its part, claims that the decision was purely financial—Colbert's show is losing forty million dollars a year. But both the political and economic explanations reveal how the landscape of late night has changed since Johnny Carson's day. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz consider Colbert's body of work and the state of the genre more generally, from the so-called late-night wars of the nineties through to the modern challenge of making comedy in a country where nothing feels funny anymore. “Late-night hosting is an art, but it's also business. So, if your job is to get as many eyeballs on you as is humanly possible, what do you do?” Schwartz says. “It's not easy to have fun with the news, as it is. And if you are having fun with it, something may very well be wrong.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Strangers with Candy” (1999–2000)“The Daily Show” (1996–)“The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” (2015–26)“The Staying Power of the ‘S.N.L.' Machine” (The New Yorker)“Lessons from ‘Sesame Street' ” (The New Yorker)“The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson” (1962–92)“David Letterman's Revolutionary Comedy,” by Emily Nussbaum (The New Yorker)“The Colbert Rapport,” by Emily Nussbaum (The New Yorker)“Carpool Karaoke” (2017–23)“What the Cancellation of Stephen Colbert's ‘Late Show' Means,” by Vinson Cunningham (The New Yorker)“After Midnight” (2024–25)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Ari Aster's wildly divisive new movie “Eddington” drops audiences back into the chaos of May, 2020: a moment when the confluence of the COVID-19 pandemic, the murder of George Floyd and subsequent Black Lives Matter protests, the rise in conspiracy theories, and political strife shattered something in our society. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz situate “Eddington” in the lineage of “the indigenous American berserk,” a phrase coined by Philip Roth in his 1997 novel “American Pastoral.” They consider an array of works that have tried to depict moments of social rupture throughout the country's history—and debate whether the exercise is ultimately a futile one. “I think when you're dealing with the realm of the American berserk, the big risk is getting the bends,” Schwartz says. “You're trying to describe a warping. So how do you not get warped in the process?”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Eddington” (2025)“Writing American Fiction,” by Philip Roth (Commentary)“Stalking the Billion-Footed Beast,” by Tom Wolfe (Harper's)“American Pastoral,” by Philip Roth“Natural Born Killers” (1994)“Benito Cereno,” by Herman Melville“The Bonfire of the Vanities,” by Tom Wolfe“Apocalypse Now” (1979)“Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse” (1991)“War Movies: What Are They Good For?” (The New Yorker)“Sorry to Bother You” (2018)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

For The New Yorker's series Takes, Carrie Brownstein—the co-creator of Sleater-Kinney and “Portlandia”—writes about an iconic rock-and-roll image. In the summer of 2003, the musician Chan Marshall, better known as Cat Power, was transitioning from an indie darling to a major rock artist, and the staff writer Hilton Als wrote a Profile of her in The New Yorker. Facing his piece was a full-page portrait of Marshall by the celebrated photographer Richard Avedon that puts her in the lineage of rock rebels of generations past. With a long ash dangling from her cigarette, a Bob Dylan T-shirt, and her jeans half unzipped, Cat Power “maybe doesn't give a shit about being in The New Yorker,” Brownstein thinks, “which I can't say is usually the vibe.” Avedon's image reminds Brownstein “to keep remembering … to keep going back to that place that feels sacred and special and uncynical.” Carrie Brownstein's Take on Richard Avedon's portrait of Cat Power appeared in the April 20, 2025, issue. Plus, audiences have been bemoaning the death of the romantic comedy for years, but the genre persists—albeit often in a different form from the screwballs of the nineteen-forties or the “chick flicks” of the eighties and nineties. On this episode from the Critics at Large podcast, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss their all-time favorite rom-coms and two new projects marketed as contemporary successors to the greats: Celine Song's “Materialists” and Lena Dunham's “Too Much.”

In 1954, a young David Attenborough made his début as the star of a new nature show called “Zoo Quest.” The docuseries, which ran for nearly a decade on the BBC, was a sensation that set Attenborough down the path of his life's work: exposing viewers to our planet's most miraculous creatures and landscapes from the comfort of their living rooms. On this episode of Critics at Large, Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz trace Attenborough's filmography from “Zoo Quest” to his program, “Mammals,” a six-part series on BBC America narrated by the now- ninety-eight-year-old presenter. In the seventy years since “Zoo Quest” first aired, the genre it helped create has had to reckon with the effects of the climate crisis—and to figure out how to address such hot-button issues onscreen. By highlighting conservation efforts that have been successful, the best of these programs affirm our continued agency in the planet's future. “One thing I got from ‘Mammals' was not pure doom,” Schwartz says. “There are some options here. We have choices to make.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Mammals” (2024)“Zoo Quest” (1954-63)“Are We Changing Planet Earth?” (2006)“The Snow Leopard,” by Peter Matthiessen“My Octopus Teacher” (2020)“Life on Our Planet” (2023)“I Like to Get High at Night and Think About Whales,” by Samantha IrbyNew episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.This episode originally aired on July 11, 2024.  Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

David Remnick is joined by Alexandra Schwartz, the co-host of the podcast Critics at Large, and The New Yorker's august film critic Richard Brody. They talk about the past year in film and predict the victors of the Academy Awards. Brody dismisses “The Brutalist”—a film that merely uses the Holocaust “as metaphor”—and tells Remnick that “Wicked” might win Best Picture. “I think there's a huge desire for cinematic comfort food that makes a billion dollars.” Continuing the Radio Hour's annual tradition, Brody discusses nominees and selects the winners of the coveted award that we call The Brody.