*PREVIEW* I Can’t Believe It’s Not Verhoeven feat. Tom Walker
Summary
The hosts dissect the film's conservative, abstinence-only message, criticizing its incoherent plot and the director's decision to remove nudity based on test screenings. They argue the movie fails to satisfy any audience, leaving progressives, conservatives, and general viewers equally dissatisfied with its puritanical take on intimacy. The discussion highlights the absurdity of the characters' lack of sexual experience and the film's reliance on suggestive imagery rather than actual content. Ultimately, they mock the ending's unearned time jump and closed-door fade to black, labeling the …
Topics discussed
The pizza restaurant scene and Maya Hawk's call
Critique of the protagonist's rejection of Maya Hawk
The hallucination sequence and lack of sexual content
Director Will Gluck's rationale for removing nudity
Business perspective on test screenings and audience reaction
The film's bawdy 70s view of sexuality vs. modern sensibilities
Embarrassment factor for younger audiences and conservative views
Critique of the depiction of non-marital sex and nudity
The studio's misinterpretation of audience discomfort
Universal criticism from critics and the religious right
Backlash against the film's poster and public advertising
Connecting the film's ideology to Heritage Foundation views
The Victorian ideology of keeping intimacy private
Comparison to Pride protests and lack of self-awareness
Incoherent plot stakes and narrative consistency issues
The film as an abstinence-only sex ed ad for adults
Critique of the protagonists' lack of sexual experience
The ending: rejecting Maya Hawk and the one-night stand
The lighthouse scene and the decision to wait a year
The unearned time jump and the closed bedroom door
Humorous suggestion of a hardcore pornography cutaway
Discussion on the pressure of sexual expectations in the film
Dua Lipa's comments and the perfect ending concept
Comparison to 300 and MacGruber sex scene edits
Listen ad-free on Castria