<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><feed
	xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0"
	xml:lang="en-US"
	>
	<title type="text">Genevieve Koski | Vox</title>
	<subtitle type="text">Our world has too much noise and too little context. Vox helps you understand what matters.</subtitle>

	<updated>2020-01-30T18:39:44+00:00</updated>

	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/author/genevieve-koski" />
	<id>https://www.vox.com/authors/genevieve-koski/rss</id>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.vox.com/authors/genevieve-koski/rss" />

	<icon>https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/08/vox_logo_rss_light_mode.png?w=150&amp;h=100&amp;crop=1</icon>
		<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Tanya Pai</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[The Puppy Bowl, explained]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/2/4/14480722/puppy-bowl-explained" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/2/4/14480722/puppy-bowl-explained</id>
			<updated>2020-01-30T13:39:44-05:00</updated>
			<published>2020-01-30T13:41:48-05:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Explainers" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="TV" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[On Super Bowl Sunday, Americans across the country will gather in front of their televisions and laptops, forgetting for a few brief, shining moments their bitter ideological divides and giving themselves over to one of the cultural events that truly makes America great: the Puppy Bowl. Animal Planet&#8217;s most adorable competition airs Sunday, February 2, [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="Daphne, a participant in Puppy Bowl XIII. | Animal Planet" data-portal-copyright="Animal Planet" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7925999/daphne.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Daphne, a participant in Puppy Bowl XIII. | Animal Planet	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On Super Bowl Sunday, Americans across the country will gather in front of their televisions and laptops, forgetting for a few brief, shining moments their bitter ideological divides and giving themselves over to one of the cultural events that truly makes America great: <a href="http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/puppy-bowl/">the Puppy Bowl</a>. Animal Planet&rsquo;s most adorable competition airs Sunday, February 2, for the 16th year in a row of delighting football fans and non-fans alike with hours of furry antics.</p>

<p>But how exactly did the Puppy Bowl become the surprisingly elaborate, sponsor-heavy cultural staple it is today? Here are a few things you may not know about the pup-ular television event.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Puppy Bowl was conceived as something akin to the Yule Log, but for football (and with puppies)</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13726198/GettyImages_160313888.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Dan Schachner referees the Puppy Bowl. | Linda Davidson/The Washington Post/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Linda Davidson/The Washington Post/Getty Images" />
<p>The year 2005, when Jacksonville, Florida, hosted the New England Patriots and the Philadelphia Eagles for its first Super Bowl, also marked the birth of the Puppy Bowl. It was designed as counterprogramming to the biggest event in American sports, but the actual concept &mdash; tiny puppies cavorting on a mini football field &mdash; was, like many great ideas, initially suggested in jest, by Animal Planet executives. As Rolling Stone <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/americas-other-cuter-super-bowl-the-story-of-the-puppy-bowl-20140131">recounted</a> in 2014:</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>During a meeting, a suggestion was made that the best defense against the programming juggernaut would be to &#8220;point a camera at puppies&#8221; on a football field, in a sort of dog version of the&nbsp;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yule_Log_(TV_program)">televised burning Yule Log</a>&nbsp;that airs every holiday season. Margo Kent, the executive producer for Puppy Bowl I, remembers that &#8220;It was always a joke: How do you counter the Super Bowl? Let&#8217;s just put a box of puppies up there and call it a day. It&#8217;s not worth trying to go against the Super Bowl.&#8221;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But that joking suggestion found an audience: Puppy Bowl I, filmed in Silver Spring, Maryland, drew 5.8 million viewers across its 12-hour broadcast, and an annual tradition was born.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Puppy Bowl scores big for Animal Planet’s ratings — and its advertising dollars</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13726174/GettyImages_160313883.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Per Getty Images, “At one time they tried putting cheerleading skirts [on] the hedgehogs but they didn’t stay on given the animals have no waistline.” | Linda Davidson/The Washington Post via Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Linda Davidson/The Washington Post via Getty Images" />
<p>Since that first Puppy Bowl, the event has grown immensely in both scope and viewership, to the extent that it now dominates Animal Planet&rsquo;s Super Bowl Sunday programming. Where the first Puppy Bowl was a low-concept 12-hour montage of puppies wandering in front of a camera, <a href="http://adage.com/article/special-report-super-bowl/animal-planet-s-puppy-bowl-plays/291154/">sans commentary or sponsors</a>, the Puppy Bowl as we know it today is a highly structured and marketed capital-E Event that represents Animal Planet&rsquo;s biggest annual programming initiative.</p>

<p>Though it was conceived as &ldquo;counterprogramming&rdquo; to the big game itself, and is frequently presented as alternative viewing for those who aren&rsquo;t interested in the Super Bowl, the Puppy Bowl&rsquo;s initial broadcast each year is in the early<strong> </strong>afternoon, in the lead-up to the Super Bowl&rsquo;s broadcast later in the day, positioning it more as supplemental viewing than competition for eyeballs.</p>

<p>In 2018, Animal Planet also debuted a companion program, &ldquo;The Puppy Bowl Presents: The Dog Bowl&rdquo;; the one-hour special aimed to spotlight older adoptable dogs, who often get passed over at shelters. It returns this year, airing on February 1 at 8 pm; per <a href="https://people.com/pets/animal-planet-dog-bowl-2020-adoptable-dogs/">People</a>, this year&rsquo;s 65 participants (divided into Team Goldies and Team Oldies) come from 32 shelters and range in age from 3 to 15.</p>

<p>The animal programming is even spilling over to other channels; also on February 1, the Hallmark Channel is airing &ldquo;<a href="https://www.hallmarkchannel.com/cat-bowl">Cat Bowl II</a>,&rdquo; featuring participants from previous Kitten Bowl halftime shows (more on that below).</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19659017/Annie_PBXV.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Annie, a 13-year-old long-haired dachshund, is part of this year’s Dog Bowl. | Animal Planet" data-portal-copyright="Animal Planet" />
<p>Factor in other supplementary Puppy Bowl programming like a pregame show, a &ldquo;where are they now&rdquo; special featuring players from Puppy Bowls past, and a Puppy Bowl&ndash;themed episode of Animal Planet&rsquo;s brilliantly mindless series <em>Too Cute!, </em>and the Puppy Bowl accounts for almost an entire day of the network&rsquo;s programming.</p>

<p>This strategy has paid off in terms of both ratings and sponsorships, and underlines the Puppy Bowl&rsquo;s evolution from a &ldquo;what if&rdquo; lark to a robust television franchise. In its sixth year in 2011, the Puppy Bowl drew more than 9 million viewers over its multiple airings, a benchmark that Animal Planet general manager Rick Holzman <a href="http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-animal-planet-puppy-bowl-20150130-story.html">characterized</a> as a tipping point for the event, the moment when it &ldquo;[took] on a life of its own,&rdquo; and &ldquo;became part of the pop-culture fabric of the Super Bowl.&rdquo; Since then, each Puppy Bowl has drawn 10 million or more viewers over its 12-hour block &mdash; a fraction of <a href="http://www.vox.com/2016/2/5/10921574/super-bowl-ratings">the 110 million-plus who tune in to the Super Bowl each year</a>, but a very healthy pull by cable standards.</p>

<p>That increase in ratings and profile has turned the Puppy Bowl into a sponsorship bonanza in recent years. The Puppy Bowl field, which became the Geico Puppy Bowl Stadium in 2012, is now plastered with brand names both pet-related (Pedigree, Petco) and not so much (Subaru, AT&amp;T). There are plenty of supplementary branding opportunities that take their inspiration from football, like a <a href="http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/puppy-bowl/kiss-cam-contest/dairy-queen-kiss-cam/">Dairy Queen Kiss Cam</a> and a Sheba cat food &ldquo;VIP suite.&rdquo; And Animal Planet&rsquo;s <a href="http://fortune.com/2015/01/30/melinda-toporoff-puppy-bowl/">strategy</a> of making potential Puppy Bowl sponsors commit to advertising on the network&rsquo;s other programming has turned the event into a big part of the network&rsquo;s advertising year.</p>

<p>To keep things feeling fresh (and conveniently allow for even more sponsorship opportunities), the network has also added an ever-increasing number of bells and whistles over the years. One of the event&rsquo;s better-known features, the kitten halftime show &mdash; sorry, make that the ARM &amp; HAMMER&trade; SLIDE&trade; Cat Litter&nbsp;Kitty Halftime Show<strong> </strong>&mdash; has been around since the event&rsquo;s second iteration, in 2006.</p>

<p>Newer flourishes include but aren&rsquo;t limited to a rotating species of cheerleaders (bunnies inaugurated the role in 2010, and it&rsquo;s since gone to chickens, pigs, hedgehogs, penguins, Nigerian dwarf goats, and <a href="https://www.bustle.com/articles/139479-the-puppy-bowl-chicken-cheerleaders-are-new-for-the-2016-game-so-heres-what-you-should">Silkie chickens</a>); a bird &ldquo;commentator&rdquo; named Meep that live-&ldquo;tweets&rdquo; during the game; a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q3telSkZoU">hamster-piloted mini blimp</a>; halftime cameos from animal celebrities such as <a href="http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/puppy-bowl/videos/the-one-and-only-keyboard-cat-at-the-bissell-kitty-halftime-show/">Keyboard Cat</a>; and refereeing assistance from <a href="http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/puppy-bowl/videos/ref-gives-sherry-the-sloth-a-pep-talk/">Shirley the rescue sloth</a>. In 2014, there was even a Puppy Bowl &ldquo;training camp&rdquo; hosted on the White House lawn by then-first lady Michelle Obama and first dogs Sunny and Bo.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Yes, there are rules to the game &#8230; sort of</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="Star of the Puppy Bowl Scores a Double Touchdown | Puppy Bowl XII" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/x3KAF0KEdbk?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Unlike its human-based rival event, the Puppy Bowl does not happen live. It&rsquo;s actually filmed several months in advance, using multiple cameras and rotating its furry participants in and out; the footage is then cut down to highlight the cutest and most action-filled moments possible. As longtime Puppy Bowl referee Dan Schachner explained in a 2015 Reddit Ask Me Anything session:</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>The Puppy Bowl is shot about 3 months in advance. A lot of people don&#8217;t know this. The reason why it takes so much time is the Puppy Bowl broadcast is a 2 hour event, but it is not a 2 hour event to film &#8211; it takes 2 FULL DAYS to film. Reason being, we are trying to showcase as many different puppies as possible, and we want to rotate them in and out, and give them as many chances to have action on the field as possible!</p>

<p>Additionally, there are 17 cameras shooting the action on the field at the same time. You can imagine, 2 days of shooting, 17 cameras, that is hundreds if not thousands of hours of footage that needs to be watched, logged, and edited.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>As multi-year Puppy Bowl camera operator Cory Popp <a href="http://www.avclub.com/article/plexiglas-poop-and-penguins-life-behind-scenes-pup-214284">told the A.V. Club</a> the same year, &ldquo;What you see on TV is only the best of the best, but there&rsquo;s actually like 70 dogs there and you&rsquo;re never quite sure what they&rsquo;re going to do. Because they&rsquo;re puppies, they&rsquo;re not trained, they&rsquo;re just doing whatever they want to do. It&rsquo;s just hoping for the best.&rdquo;</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7928013/giphy__1_.gif?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Giphy" />
<p>Over the years, the Puppy Bowl has introduced various new camera angles, such as a water bowl camera (just what it sounds like) and even cameras attached to the chew toys scattered about the field. Peanut butter smeared on the larger (hopefully waterproof) cameras encourages the pups to lick them while in action, and while Schachner is the only person seen onscreen during the bowl, a robust staff of humans work behind the scenes to keep the field mostly free of (on-camera) puppy accidents.</p>

<p>The rules of the Puppy Bowl aren&rsquo;t too stringent and are mostly loose riffs on existing American football rules. If a puppy drags one of the multiple on-field chew toys across the finish line (on either side), it&rsquo;s considered a touchdown. Though as Popp recounted to the A.V. Club, it&rsquo;s more exciting for the observing humans than the participating dogs:</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>[The people are] screaming and yelling as the dog&rsquo;s going toward the goal line, and it happens, I don&rsquo;t know, a hundred times throughout the day where a dog will make it like five yards from the goal line and then drop the toy and start playing with another dog. It&rsquo;s this big arc of emotion and then it drops because everybody&rsquo;s really bummed that he didn&rsquo;t run across the goal line and score a touchdown.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There are also pun-based rulings like &ldquo;pass inter-fur-ence&rdquo; and &ldquo;unnecessary ruffness,&rdquo; as well as more, er, dog-specific calls like &ldquo;premature watering of the field.&rdquo;</p>

<p>As for the <a href="http://www.animalplanet.com/tv-shows/puppy-bowl/photos/puppy-bowl-xiv-starting-lineup/">participants themselves</a>, there are a few eligibility requirements: They must all be within 12 and 21 weeks of age, well-socialized, and vaccinated. They must also meet certain height and weight restrictions due to the size of the &ldquo;stadium.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Since the Puppy Bowl&rsquo;s inception, one dog has been crowned MVP of each game &mdash; though now it changes with each repeat broadcast, depending on online votes from viewers.<strong> </strong>But it wasn&rsquo;t until 2015 that actual competition was introduced. Since then, the puppies have been divided into Team Ruff and Team Fluff, with the &ldquo;highest-scoring&rdquo; team taking home bragging (wagging?) rights. And starting in 2017, an actual prize has been awarded to the winning team: the &ldquo;Lombarky Trophy,&rdquo; a large Petco-branded stuffed toy.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Puppy Bowl is a high-profile showcase for adoptable animals from across the country</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="&#039;Puppy Bowl XIV&#039;: Meet The Adorable All-Stars! | Access" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5wPHvKZuG1w?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Despite all the spectacle, the Puppy Bowl has stayed true to its tradition of giving a major platform to adoptable dogs and animal shelters. A video on the Puppy Bowl&rsquo;s website brags that the event is &ldquo;the biggest game in adoption,&rdquo; and it&rsquo;s true that every year the canine participants (there are 96 total this year) come from shelters and rescue organizations around the country, and are all available for adoption. (Same goes for the featured kittens and many of the other animals that appear onscreen during the event &mdash; not the penguins, though.) Some of last year&rsquo;s contestants, for instance, hailed from rescue operations in Costa Rica and Puerto Rico, which was struggling to recover from Hurricane Maria.</p>

<p>Such well-publicized balls of fluff seem to have no trouble finding furever homes. Because the Puppy Bowl is filmed several months before it airs and the participants are well-publicized on the event&rsquo;s website, generally all Puppy Bowl participants are adopted before or even during the event. If any dogs haven&rsquo;t been adopted by the time the Puppy Bowl airs, come kickoff they&rsquo;re likely to go quickly.<strong> </strong>As Schachner explained in his <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2u3zy3/i_am_dan_schachner_the_official_puppy_bowl/">Reddit AMA</a>:</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>Literally, it takes MINUTES. As soon as people start watching Puppy Bowl, they can go to AnimalPlanet.com and look up the puppy profile, which will connect you with the shelter or rescue center that has them! And you can be sure that within 5 minutes &mdash; you have to act quickly. So what we like to say is &#8220;Don&#8217;t worry if the dog or cat you fell in love with is no longer available &mdash; because they are part of litters, and they will probably have brothers or sisters that you can adopt, even if that one star puppy isn&#8217;t there!</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Also of note is that Animal Planet commits to featuring dogs with disabilities in the event&rsquo;s lineup. Says <a href="https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/nfl/superbowl/meet-all-the-cute-dogs-competing-in-the-2020-puppy-bowl-on-super-bowl-sunday/65-76774e12-3df6-481d-8bc7-633850c8f099">WUSA9</a>: &ldquo;Puppy Bowl XVI will also feature five special needs players including Ferris, a three-legged Labrador Retriever mix; two hearing impaired pups, a blind and hearing impaired puppy and one with a cleft palate.&rdquo;</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19659011/rooster_sanctuary_rescue_fluff_2.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Rooster, who has a cleft palate, is one of the special needs players in the 2020 Puppy Bowl. | Animal Planet" data-portal-copyright="Animal Planet" />
<p>Animal Planet also works with organizations on real-life adoption events that double as Puppy Bowl promotion: A <a href="http://www.aspca.org/news/puppy-bowl-season-kicks-26-adoptions">2017 New York City event </a>featuring Schachner resulted in 26 animal adoptions, with fees covered by Animal Planet, and similar <a href="http://www.pawschicago.org/our-work/pet-adoption/adoption-events/woofstock/">Puppy Bowl-related events</a> are a common fundraising and promotional opportunity for shelters and rescues.</p>

<p>So while the Puppy Bowl may have morphed from its humble roots into a ratings and branding juggernaut over the years, its intentions have always gone beyond making money for Animal Planet and its sponsors. And as it turns out, when your cause involves adorable puppies, it&rsquo;s easy to get the message across.</p>

<p><em>Puppy Bowl XIV airs Sunday, February 2, at 3 pm Eastern on Animal Planet, and will repeat throughout the day. The Dog Bowl airs Saturday, February 1, at 8 pm, also on Animal Planet. If you don&rsquo;t have a cable login, you can find clips on the </em><a href="https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMilupvERrnDGu2XpdIWZ2AOQ48vBkHyP"><em>Puppy Bowl&rsquo;s YouTube channel</em></a><em>. </em></p>
<hr class="wp-block-separator" /><h2 class="wp-block-heading">Watch: How the Puppy Bowl gets made</h2><div class="video-container"><iframe src="https://volume.vox-cdn.com/embed/8dd69f57b?player_type=youtube&#038;loop=1&#038;placement=article&#038;tracking=article:rss" allowfullscreen frameborder="0" allow=""></iframe></div>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Nisha Chittal</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Trevor Barnes</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Stavros Agorakis</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Michelle Garcia</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Aditi Shrikant</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Kaitlyn Tiffany</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Gaby Del Valle</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Kate Dailey</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Dara Lind</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Tim Ryan Williams</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Libby Nelson</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Alissa Wilkinson</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Constance Grady</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Alex Abad-Santos</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Li Zhou</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Susannah Locke</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Laura Bult</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[We read all 25 National Book Award finalists for 2018. Here’s what we thought.]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/11/12/18068468/2018-national-book-award-finalists-winners" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/11/12/18068468/2018-national-book-award-finalists-winners</id>
			<updated>2018-11-28T09:34:55-05:00</updated>
			<published>2018-11-15T10:08:52-05:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Books" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Reviews" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Every year, the National Book Foundation celebrates the best of American literature by handing out the National Book Awards. And every year (okay, every year since 2014), we here at Vox read all of the finalists to help smart, busy people like you figure out which ones you&#8217;re interested in. Traditionally, there have been 20 [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Javier Zarracina/Vox" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429031/NBA_2018.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
		</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Every year, the National Book Foundation celebrates the best of American literature by handing out the National Book Awards. And every year (okay, <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/11/8/16552828/2017-national-book-award-nominees-reviews">every</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/15/13362580/2016-national-book-award-nominees">year</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/11/18/9753832/national-book-award-2015-nominee-reviews">since</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/2014/11/19/7246149/national-book-award-nominee-reviews">2014</a>), we here at Vox read all of the finalists to help smart, busy people like you figure out which ones you&rsquo;re interested in.</p>

<p>Traditionally, there have been 20 finalists total, spread evenly across four categories &mdash; five in fiction, five in nonfiction, five in poetry, and five in young adult. But this year, the National Book Foundation has expanded its scope and added a brand new category to recognize literature in translation, for a total of 25 finalists.</p>

<p>Here are our thoughts on the 25 finalists, with the winners at the top of each category.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Fiction</h2><h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Friend-Novel-Sigrid-Nunez/dp/0735219443/"><em>The Friend</em></a> by Sigrid Nunez — WINNER</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429137/The_Friend.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Friend by Sigrid Nunez" title="The Friend by Sigrid Nunez" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Riverhead" />
<p>Sigrid Nunez&rsquo;s <em>The Friend</em> is a powerful meditation on love, loss, and grief. The protagonist, who is never named, is a writer who loses her longtime best friend, a fellow writer, when he takes his own life. After his death, she finds herself responsible for the care of his Great Dane, Apollo, when his third wife no longer wants the dog. Over time, the woman bonds with Apollo as a way to deal with the grief of losing her friend, and says that having the dog is like having a bit of her friend with her.</p>

<p>But she ultimately becomes almost single-mindedly obsessed with caring for the animal, neglecting her friends and letting her life slowly unravel as she becomes more and more isolated from the rest of the world. Apollo becomes her coping mechanism, her outlet for channeling the overwhelming grief she has yet to process.</p>

<p><em>The Friend</em>, which is full of literary references and beautiful prose, is also a tribute to the potential power of humans&rsquo; relationships with their pets. The dog in this story becomes so significant, so important to its protagonist&rsquo;s journey, that he remains the only named character in the entire book. It&rsquo;s also a sad story, one about loss and mourning. But if you believe in the power of animals to help heal, don&rsquo;t miss it.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Nisha Chittal</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Lucky-Man-Stories-Jamel-Brinkley/dp/1555978053/"><em>A Lucky Man: Stories</em></a> by Jamel Brinkley</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13395627/luckyman.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="A Lucky Man" title="A Lucky Man" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Graywolf Press" />
<p>The nine stories in Jamel Brinkley&rsquo;s <em>A Lucky Man</em> involve men unmoored &mdash; from parents, from spouses, from lovers. They are, quite often, men forced to raise themselves or their siblings, due to absent fathers, or haze-devoured mothers, or younger brothers who just need <em>someone</em> to step up. They are impetuous and needy and empty, crying out for something to fill a void that&rsquo;s always existed, even if they struggle to name it.</p>

<p>Truth be told, this makes the book a touch repetitive when read all at once. The stories&rsquo; themes recur so frequently that the individual tales can feel like glosses on the same handful of relationships and conflicts. But as standalone stories, all the pieces in <em>A Lucky Man</em> offer exquisitely crafted glimpses into the lives of black men and boys living in New York.</p>

<p>Brinkley&rsquo;s talent for choosing precise images and details that perfectly exemplify his characters is especially clear in &ldquo;J&rsquo;ouvert 1996,&rdquo; in which a teenage boy&rsquo;s forced outing with his younger brother slowly goes sour, and in the book&rsquo;s titular story, in which a middle-aged teacher finds himself accused of a crime he committed &mdash; but not in the way his accuser thinks he did. This is Brinkley&rsquo;s first collection, and if his talent for exacting vivisection of his protagonists continues, he&rsquo;ll be a talent to reckon with.</p>

<p>&mdash;<em>Todd VanDerWerff</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/6/13/17450240/florida-lauren-groff-review"><em>Florida</em></a> by Lauren Groff</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11531205/FLORIDA_high_res.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Florida by Lauren Groff" title="Florida by Lauren Groff" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Riverhead Books" />
<p>Florida is just as much a character in Lauren Groff&rsquo;s latest story collection as it is a setting. The state&rsquo;s humid air and the threat of lurking, dangerous swamp creatures are a constant presence. The protagonists, much like Groff&rsquo;s representation of Florida itself, seem to straddle a contentious line between wilderness and civilization. Humidity is oppressive, but air conditioning is artificial; snakes and gators are dangerous, but so is the suburban sprawl that threatens their habitat.</p>

<p>The stories themselves aren&rsquo;t quite supernatural, but they&rsquo;re undoubtedly otherworldly. Most start out similarly: A protagonist is introduced in a seemingly placid suburban scene, and then disaster &mdash; usually of the natural variety &mdash; strikes. Some are reminiscent of post-apocalyptic fiction, and yet the calamities Groff describes are familiar to anyone who has spent time in the Sunshine State.</p>

<p>Hurricanes, power outages, sinkholes, and the possibility of death by reptile all play a part. But these threats are less interesting than how the protagonists respond; they work best as a backdrop through which each character can reflect on their fears, both existential and immediate.</p>

<p>Even once you&rsquo;ve figured out the pattern, though, Groff&rsquo;s stories are far from formulaic. The only real certainty is that the storm will eventually pass.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Gaby Del Valle</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Where-Dead-Talking-Brandon-Hobson/dp/1616958871/"><em>Where the Dead Sit Talking</em></a> by Brandon Hobson</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429129/Where_the_Dead_Sit_Talking.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Where the Dead Sit Talking by Brandon Hobson" title="Where the Dead Sit Talking by Brandon Hobson" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Soho Press" />
<p>The scope of <em>Where the Dead Sit Talking</em> stretches from death (as made clear by the title) to adolescence and gender, from dysfunctional families to the United States&rsquo; foster care system, from Native American culture to the seeming inescapability of dusty, rural 1980s Oklahoma. But it&rsquo;s all connected by the idea of the devastating, sometimes sneaky havoc that trauma leaves on our lives.</p>

<p>Brandon Hobson&rsquo;s bleak novel tells the story of a 15-year-old boy named Sequoyah who, after his single mother is put in prison for drug charges, finds himself in the care of Harold and Agnes Troutt, a pair of foster parents who are already caring for two other teens. Sequoyah bonds with Rosemary because of their heritage (they share Native American ancestry) and the fact that they&rsquo;re both survivors of abuse.</p>

<p>But is this bond healthy? Is it an unhealthy attraction? Does it cross into infatuation? Is it a twisted fantasy?</p>

<p>The more we learn about Sequoyah, and the rage and trauma roiling beneath his skin, the darker the answers become. Hobson&rsquo;s prose is as intense as it is precise, and the results are unnerving. Sequoyah is a survivor, but not all survivor stories are triumphant. Some, as Hobson reveals in <em>Where the Dead Sit Talking</em>, are a deep tragedy.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Alex Abad-Santos</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Great-Believers-Rebecca-Makkai/dp/0735223521/"><em>The Great Believers</em></a> by Rebecca Makkai</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429131/Great_Believers.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Great Believers by Rebecca Makkai" title="The Great Believers by Rebecca Makkai" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Viking" />
<p>Two parallel plot lines &mdash; one set in 1985 and another in 2015 &mdash; hurtle toward convergence in this devastating examination of the US AIDS epidemic.</p>

<p>The first &mdash; and the stronger &mdash; of the two storylines zooms in on a group of friends composed predominantly of gay men in Chicago during the &rsquo;80s. Members of the group grapple with how to navigate a world where person after person they know dies of AIDS while the government is more than comfortable turning a blind eye. Scenes from the novel chronicling everything from dissatisfaction with a partner to petty work politics read like their own contained dramas until the reader is sharply reminded of how the backdrop of AIDS looms over any and all decisions, big and small.</p>

<p>The book&rsquo;s second storyline focuses on how one woman copes after her brother and several of her friends are killed by the disease. It follows her on a quest to Paris, where she attempts to rebuild her relationship with her daughter, who also saw her life acutely marked by her mother&rsquo;s losses.</p>

<p>The two subplots are clearly tied to one another by common characters and a shared pain, but their real connection lies in the striking point both end up making about the tragedy of lost potential &mdash; and whether it can ever be recovered.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Li Zhou</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Nonfiction</h2><h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/New-Negro-Life-Alain-Locke/dp/019508957X"><em>The New Negro: The Life of Alain Locke</em></a> by Jeffrey C. Stewart — WINNER</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429163/The_New_Negro.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The New Negro by Jeffrey C. Stewart" title="The New Negro by Jeffrey C. Stewart" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Oxford University Press" />
<p>Everyone&rsquo;s heard of the heaviest hitters of the Harlem Renaissance: Langston Hughes, Zora Neale Hurston, Bessie Smith, and so on. These artists, thinkers, and activists solidified black America&rsquo;s stake in broader American culture, demanding equality through their work &mdash; just a few decades removed from ancestors who would have probably been enslaved, undereducated, or perceived to be worth nothing more than &ldquo;the help.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Alain Locke, though, isn&rsquo;t quite a household name. He was a professor of philosophy who established his voice during this historical era and<strong> </strong>was dubbed its &ldquo;dean,&rdquo; despite not earning some of the same acclaim as some of his peers. Jeffrey C. Stewart&rsquo;s comprehensive biography of Locke is a surprisingly gripping read &mdash; I&rsquo;ll be honest, I was taken aback by its heft when I first picked it up. But Locke&rsquo;s life story, beginning as a young black man who was born to a middle-class family in Philadelphia, and who was especially close with his mother, is compelling right from the beginning.</p>

<p>Stewart,&nbsp;a professor of black studies at the University of California Santa Barbara, not only covers Locke&rsquo;s work as a top black intellectual of his time but also gives us a window into who Locke was as a complex man full of conflicting points of view on race, sexuality, art, integrity, and equality.</p>

<p>Locke&rsquo;s 1925 anthology, <em>The New Negro</em>, functioned as a celebration of his era in black art, intellect, and society. This biography plays the same role for Locke himself. It&rsquo;s full of insightful details attributed to big names and small.</p>

<p>It almost feels silly for me to frame him this way, but had Locke been alive and in his prime today, it would be easy to picture him the darling of both black and gay Twitter, with thoughtful, eye-catching books about #BlackExcellence on the New York Times best-seller list and essay upon essay in the most celebrated news outlets of our time.</p>

<p><em> &mdash;Michelle Garcia</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Indian-World-George-Washington-President/dp/0190652160/"><em>The Indian World of George Washington: The First President, the First Americans, and the Birth of the Nation</em></a> by Colin G. Calloway</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429143/Indian_World_of_George_Washington.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Indian World of George Washington by Colin G. Calloway" title="The Indian World of George Washington by Colin G. Calloway" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Oxford University Press" />
<p>Most people who&rsquo;ve taken an American history class in high school or college likely know, or at least knew, the basics of the relationship between the nascent United States and the world&rsquo;s other great powers in the wake of the Revolutionary War. Far less attention is paid, though, to relationships with other leaders who were equally important and consequential: the American Indians who controlled the vast swaths of territory that the founders hoped their new country would one day occupy.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Colin G. Calloway&rsquo;s <em>The Indian World of George Washington</em> is a magisterial correction to this omission, putting Washington&rsquo;s life in a context too often forgotten &mdash; from Washington&rsquo;s first foray into Indian diplomacy as a 21-year-old, trading a &ldquo;string of wampum and a twist of tobacco,&rdquo; to the president who saw his nation&rsquo;s future in lands that still belonged to the Indians. Washington&rsquo;s sobriquet among the Iroquois was &ldquo;town destroyer,&rdquo; and Calloway&rsquo;s work makes clear the ways it was well-founded both in his time and later: Washington took many first steps down a path to cultural genocide.&nbsp;</p>

<p>But the real achievement of Calloway&rsquo;s detailed and nuanced portrait is its illumination of the ways early American history and American Indian history are intertwined &mdash; juxtaposing the birth of one nation, as his title has it, with the twilight of many others.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Libby Nelson</em></p>

<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/American-Eden-Hosack-Medicine-Republic/dp/1631494198"><em>American Eden: David Hosack, Botany, and Medicine in the Garden of the Early Republic</em></a> by Victoria Johnson</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429153/American_Eden.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="American Eden by Victoria Johnson" title="American Eden by Victoria Johnson" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Liveright" />
<p>Depending on who you are, the primary appeal of <em>American Eden</em> &mdash; ostensibly a biography of David Hosack, who founded the first (spoiler alert: failed) public botanical garden in the United States &mdash; is in one of the following. It&rsquo;s fresh gossip on Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr (and other members of the founding generation) through the eyes of the doctor who attended their duel. It distills the Enlightenment-inflected sense of discovery and mastery that inspired Lewis and Clark and a generation of natural scientists who were determined to learn everything about the newly Europeanized American continent. It&rsquo;s a cautionary tale about how hard it is to build civic institutions so they&rsquo;ll last. It&rsquo;s a book about a really, really ambitious garden.</p>

<p>Author Victoria Johnson treats all of these subjects with equal levels of archive-spelunking enthusiasm. The prose initially comes off as deliberately breezy in the style of Stephen Greenblatt, but once Johnson gets the opportunity to slow down and show off her research, each paragraph pops open like an overstuffed but delightful cabinet of curiosities &mdash; an appropriate metaphor for the scientific polymathy (or perhaps dilettantism) of the Enlightenment gentlemen she&rsquo;s writing about.</p>

<p>For non-gardeners, the lists of plant names can get a little tedious (though they&rsquo;re easy enough to skim). And Johnson&rsquo;s language can get almost <em>too </em>vivid when she&rsquo;s describing 18th-century surgical techniques in detail; you will never forget what a hydrocele is after reading this book. Yet it&rsquo;s worth reading not just because it&rsquo;s fun historical nonfiction, but because it&rsquo;s a reminder that knowledge doesn&rsquo;t simply accumulate over time like silt: It has to be deliberately collected, preserved, and appropriately funded.</p>

<p>&mdash;<em>Dara Lind</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Heartland-Memoir-Working-Richest-Country/dp/1501133098/"><em>Heartland: A Memoir of Working Hard and Being Broke in the Richest Country on Earth</em></a> by Sarah Smarsh</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429159/Heartland.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Heartland by Sarah Smarsh" title="Heartland by Sarah Smarsh" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Scribner" />
<p>In the form of a letter to her unborn daughter, Sarah Smarsh recounts her family history in a smart, compelling book that seamlessly toggles between the state of the US economy and her own family struggles. By intertwining the Homestead Act, the farm crisis of the &rsquo;80s, and Ronald Reagan&rsquo;s presidency with her own family history, Smarsh is able to give concrete examples of how American policies facilitated a disdain for those who don&rsquo;t have money.</p>

<p><em>Heartland</em> presents life as a poker game, where one player is the government and the other is white working-class families. What cards you&rsquo;re dealt determine whether you get shelter, food, and education.</p>

<p>Smarsh is refreshingly aware that she can only speak to the experiences of the white working class, and sometimes only those of white working-class women. Born to a teenager who was born to a teenager, she articulates the disproportionate burden that poverty puts on women, and how this affected her own view of motherhood. Many of her stories live at the intersection of being poor but also being perceived as a walking womb, and are told in a matter-of-fact way that is void of judgment or sentimentality. Though the result does not always read smoothly, it offers an intimate but measured look at the cyclical nature of poverty.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Aditi Shrikant&nbsp;</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/We-Corporations-American-Businesses-Rights/dp/0871407124/"><em>We the Corporations: How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights</em></a> by Adam Winkler</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429165/We_the_Corporations.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="We the Corporations by Adam Winkler" title="We the Corporations by Adam Winkler" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Liveright" />
<p>It is deeply shocking that <em>We the Corporations</em> is not boring. The book is primarily a literature review of 300 years of Supreme Court majority rulings on corporate personhood, preceded by a history of pre-Revolutionary War trading company charters. And yet, four chapters in, we&rsquo;re knee-deep in a dramatic conspiracy against the Constitution. (By chapter six, we&rsquo;re &ldquo;handling dynamite.&rdquo;)</p>

<p>Adam Winkler, a constitutional law expert at UCLA and the author of <em>Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America</em>, has no interest in his own opinion. Instead, he stands back, using McGraw-Hill language but pairing it with vicious, cool timing and framing to expose the history of the highest court of the United States as one smeared with banal, capitalist corruption and what amounts to petty, unforced treason on the part of self-interested, self-aggrandizing men.</p>

<p>In the process, he illuminates how the best, most basic tenets of the Constitution &mdash; the 14th Amendment&rsquo;s attempt to promise that all people live free from discrimination, the First Amendment&rsquo;s guarantee of freedom of the press &mdash;&nbsp;were contorted to award rights to businesses, far more often than they were actually invoked to protect anyone else.</p>

<p>By the time you get to 2000 and <em>Citizens United</em>, <a href="https://www.vox.com/cards/super-pacs-and-dark-money/what-is-the-citizens-united-decision-citizens-united-v-fec">the notorious Supreme Court case</a> that bludgeoned democracy by putting<strong> </strong>an end to virtually all limits on corporate campaign financing, it feels like nothing more or less than a stupid-obvious epilogue, hundreds of years in the making.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Kaitlyn Tiffany</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Poetry</h2><h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Indecency-Justin-Phillip-Reed/dp/1566895146"><em>Indecency</em></a> by Justin Phillip Reed — WINNER</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429191/Indecency.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Indecency by Justin Phillip Reed" title="Indecency by Justin Phillip Reed" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Coffee House Press" />
<p>Justin Phillip Reed&rsquo;s debut poetry collection, <em>Indecency</em>, is an unflinching exploration of power, race, sexuality, gender, the personal and the political.</p>

<p>He presents the true indecencies of Americans&rsquo; racism and other violence on the national scale &mdash; and in the daily personal attempts to navigate a system that cannot be won.</p>

<p>He deconstructs whiteness, taking on the voice of indifference: &ldquo;No one / is responsible while we have the luxury / to see ourselves as infinite ones, ocean / of individual possibility.&rdquo;</p>

<p>And throughout, he shows what it feels like to be seen as a body to be used, as in the poem <em>Consent</em> (&ldquo;he&rsquo;s into a groove that / is darkly reminiscent of crossways and rolling stops&rdquo;) and in this finale of <em>The Fratricide</em>:</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>How can we tell ourselves apart for you. How can<br>we help you to tell us apart. How can we help<br>you to tell us apart. How can we help you to tear<br>us apart. How can we help you. You tear us apart.<br>How can we tear us. You help us apart. You help<br>us part. How can we tear you. How can we tear<br>you. How can we help us to tear you apart.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><em>&mdash;Susannah Locke</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Wobble-Wesleyan-Poetry-Rae-Armantrout/dp/0819578231/"><em>Wobble</em></a> by Rae Armantrout</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429171/Wobble.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Wobble by Rae Armantrout" title="Wobble by Rae Armantrout" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Wesleyan" />
<p>The term &ldquo;language poetry&rdquo; does an admirable job of somehow making poetry &mdash; that famously inaccessible genre &mdash; sound yet more instructable. (That&rsquo;s even before you find out its &ldquo;real&rdquo; name is L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poetry.)</p>

<p>But I&rsquo;m here to tell you there are many pleasures, even conventional ones, to be had in celebrated language poet Rae Armantrout&rsquo;s new collection, <em>Wobble</em>.</p>

<p>Like her peers, Armantrout is interested in muddying the relationship of poet and reader. But she cites plain-spoken Williams Carlos Williams (he of the recent spate of &ldquo;<a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/12/1/16723210/this-is-just-to-say-plums-twitter-baby-shoes">This Is Just to Say&rdquo; memes</a>) as perhaps her foremost influence, and she fully exploits the same dizzying possibilities of spare lyricism and short, broken lines.</p>

<p>Armantrout&rsquo;s poems are never difficult for difficulty&rsquo;s sake. <em>Wobble</em>&rsquo;s opening lines could hardly be any more universal: &ldquo;&lsquo;What made this happen?&rsquo; / you ask every time.&rdquo; The poet goes on to muse about causation but pauses on a sure-footed image of a &ldquo;crown of leaves &hellip; sifted by wind &hellip; brightening into rust-red / at the tips.&rdquo;</p>

<p><em>Wobble</em> is timely, too, with a keen sense of the language and excuses of violence, both old and new. Lips &ldquo;smack&rdquo; in the Garden of Eden; Rapunzel&rsquo;s hair is let down, &ldquo;solicitations / never meant for you.&rdquo;</p>

<p>Not everything is so weighty; Armantrout gets in some good ribbing of everyday foibles: She notes wryly that &ldquo;Humans / photo-bomb the planet&rdquo; and that &ldquo;There&rsquo;s a lot going on in / &lsquo;the&rsquo; / zombie apocalypse.&rdquo; In the book&rsquo;s titular poem, fate rests on an errant satellite broadcasting &ldquo;World&rsquo;s Smallest Pets.&rdquo;</p>

<p>&ldquo;Sometimes I wish I had a job where I could be quiet, maybe as a jeweler cutting stones,&rdquo; <a href="http://www.bookslut.com/features/2010_07_016299.php">Armantrout has said</a> of the sometimes wearying prospect of teaching poetry. Let&rsquo;s listen in while we can.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Tim Williams</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/American-Sonnets-Future-Assassin-Penguin/dp/0143133187/"><em>American Sonnets for My Past and Future Assassin</em></a> by Terrance Hayes</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429181/American_Sonnets_for_My_Past_and_Future_Assassin.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="American Sonnets for My Past and Future Assassin by Terrance Hayes" title="American Sonnets for My Past and Future Assassin by Terrance Hayes" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Penguin Poets" />
<p>Terrance Hayes&rsquo;s <em>American Sonnets for My Past and Future Assassin</em> is a collection of poetry that could only exist in the America of right now &mdash; a book of poetry that concerns itself again and again with living in Donald Trump&rsquo;s America, and particularly living in Donald Trump&rsquo;s America in a black male body. &ldquo;Something happened / In Sanford something happened in Ferguson,&rdquo; Hayes writes, &ldquo;And Brooklyn &amp; Charleston, something happened / In Chicago &amp; Cleveland &amp; Baltimore&hellip;&rdquo;</p>

<p>To create a work so anchored in a moment runs the risk that it might one day, when &ldquo;right now&rdquo; becomes &ldquo;back then,&rdquo; seem ephemeral. But Hayes&rsquo;s work is too energetic, too vital, too specific and original and vivid for that; it is anchored in its time, rather than contained by it.</p>

<p>This is a book with one sonnet that begins with <a href="https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/6/29/17515192/maxine-waters-sarah-sanders-red-hen-restaurant-trump">Maxine Waters</a> and another that dwells on the particular and peculiar skin tone of the president (&ldquo;Are you not the color of this country&rsquo;s current threat / Advisory?&rdquo;) &mdash; subjects that might seem ripped not just from the headlines but from Twitter tropes. And Hayes&rsquo;s writing, in its urgency and originality, is the antidote for a thousand tired tweets.</p>

<p>And not <em>all</em> of the poems are ripped from the headlines; a few lines about Jesus&rsquo;s imagined sister &mdash; &ldquo;she was in her / Forties the first time she turned water into wine. / A late bloomer, she began a small wine business&rdquo; &mdash; rolled pleasingly around my head like a marble for days.</p>

<p>To echo the words of another American poet who chose assassinations as a topic, Hayes&rsquo;s work is large; it contains multitudes. His sonnets are vital and unforgettable, anchored by their sense of place and time rather than contained by it.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Libby Nelson</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Omnidawn-Open-Diana-Nguyen/dp/1632430525"><em>Ghost Of</em></a> by Diana Khoi Nguyen</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429187/Ghost_Of.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Ghost Of by Diana Khoi Nguyen" title="Ghost Of by Diana Khoi Nguyen" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Omnidawn" /><blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>I keep trying to wake up. I keep getting things wrong.</p>

<p>I&rsquo;m ready to feel better.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Before Diana Kho Nguyen&rsquo;s brother killed himself, he cut his likeness out of family photographs. His absence, both literal and figurative, fills the pages of <em>Ghost Of</em>.</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>Each day I want my hair short. And the next day, the opposite.<br>Each day I want my hair long, and the next day, the opposite. <br>Each day is the next day, and its opposite.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Nguyen&rsquo;s poems replicate a grieving brain. Some thoughts are magical (&ldquo;Are you a blacksmith where you are, bending iron, love bending you&rdquo;), some cynical (&ldquo;Nature makes mistakes&rdquo;), some unfinished, some punishingly repetitive. They are thoughts that morph and meld, but never let you be:</p>
<blockquote class="wp-block-quote has-text-align-none is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p>I am glad that you are dead, I am glad that you are dead, I am glad that you are glad that you are I am glad that you are I am dead that I am dead glad that you are dead glad that you are dead are you dead I am dead</p>
</blockquote>
<p>She crams some stanzas into the jagged, narrow, negative space left by her brother in those family photographs, and formats others to preserve the empty space. In interludes called Gyotaku, after the Japanese art of fish printing, the shapes repeat over and over again until they become something else, text illegible, images crowding the margins.</p>

<p>Are you still a person with a brother, if that brother no longer exists? If not, what are you?</p>

<p>Why is Nguyen is still here, enjoying meals, listening to music, feeling the air move around her, when her brother is &hellip; where, exactly? (&ldquo;When I am nothing, I am going to miss the groceries here,&rdquo; she writes).</p>

<p>What do you do with this void in your heart? &nbsp;</p>

<p><em>Ghost Of</em> says: You fill the space with words, because words are all you have left. You turn the words into fish and make them swim off the page. You write it all down, and wait to feel better.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Kate Dailey</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Eye-Level-Poems-Jenny-Xie/dp/1555978029"><em>Eye Level</em></a> by Jenny Xie</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429199/Eye_Level.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Eye Level by Jenny Xie" title="Eye Level by Jenny Xie" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Graywolf Press" />
<p>Jenny Xie&rsquo;s <em>Eye Level</em>, which has already won the <a href="https://www.poets.org/academy-american-poets/prizes/walt-whitman-award">Walt Whitman Award</a>&nbsp;for debut poetry collections, is a master class in shifting perspectives. Roaming from Hanoi to Kerkyra to Manhattan, Xie&rsquo;s language veers between precise imagery, with the details of the world rendered in intimate close-up, and elegant aphorism, zooming out to take in a universal truth from a wide shot.</p>

<p>In &ldquo;Phnom Penh Diptych: Wet Season,&rdquo; Xie starts small and tender, with the details: &ldquo;And how combed through, this rain! / The riled heat reaches the river shoal before it reaches the dark.&rdquo; There&rsquo;s a softness to her imagery, a kind of bewildered affection for the world &mdash; but she goes cold and clinical as her perspective sweeps outward and she turns to aphorism. &ldquo;I wake up one morning to find beauty suspect,&rdquo; she writes.</p>

<p>Over the course of her slim collection, Xie explores what it&rsquo;s like to be a Chinese immigrant in America, and to be a Chinese American traveling through Asia. &ldquo;<em>Can you fix this English?</em>&rdquo; a restaurant owner asks her, and so, &ldquo;I translate what little I can, it&rsquo;s embarrassing.&rdquo; But this is not an interior book: Xie keeps her readers firmly outside of her head, at eye level, watching the world. And with her sweeping, exact language, watching the world with Xie is nothing but a pleasure.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Constance Grady</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Translated Literature</h2><h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Emissary-Yoko-Tawada/dp/0811227626"><em>The Emissary</em></a> by Yoko Tawada, translated by Margaret Mitsutani — WINNER</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429219/the_emissary.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Emissary by Yoko Tawada, translated by Margaret Mitsutani" title="The Emissary by Yoko Tawada, translated by Margaret Mitsutani" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="New Directions" />
<p>Set in a post-apocalyptic Japan, this strange little gem of a book follows 107-year-old Yoshiro as he struggles to care for his great-grandson Mumei. In the wake of some unspecified nuclear catastrophe, the country&rsquo;s<strong> </strong>children and elderly have diverged to the point where they&rsquo;re almost different species: Mumei&rsquo;s generation was born frail and sickly, while Yoshiro&rsquo;s generation finds itself hale, healthy, and unable to die.</p>

<p>This probably makes <em>The Emissary</em> sound like a sci-fi novel, but it&rsquo;s harder to categorize than that. Yoko Tawada&rsquo;s matter-of-fact realism and lighthearted humor emphasize the surreal elements of the story by contrast, like they&rsquo;re happening in the real world. And with a government in the undefined near future embracing nationalistic policies and suppressing its citizens&rsquo; language, the novel feels disturbingly contemporary.</p>

<p>For most of the story, there&rsquo;s no real plot &mdash; just a series of vignettes about the characters&rsquo; daily lives peppered with beautifully bizarre imagery, where the morning light is &ldquo;yellow as melted dandelions&rdquo; and Mumei&rsquo;s &ldquo;baby teeth drop out one after another like pomegranate pulp.&rdquo; But then, literally eight pages from the end, we learn something about the titular Emissary Association that retroactively links all those loose vignettes into an actual narrative. Honestly, I&rsquo;ve never seen a novel do anything like this before, and when it happened, I threw the book across the room in joy.</p>

<p>&mdash;<em>Trevor Barnes</em></p>

<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Disoriental-N%C3%A9gar-Djavadi/dp/1609454510/"><em>Disoriental</em></a> by N&eacute;gar Djavadi, translated by Tina Kover</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429205/Disoriental.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Disoriental by Négar Djavadi, translated by Tina Kover" title="Disoriental by Négar Djavadi, translated by Tina Kover" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Europa Editions" />
<p>As <em>Disoriental</em> begins, our narrator Kimi&acirc; Sadr is sitting alone in a fertility clinic in Paris. She is trying to get pregnant. She is also thinking about her father Darius, and about how he refused to take the escalators in Paris &mdash; because escalators, Kimi&acirc; explains, were for &ldquo;you, obviously. You, the ones who were going to work on that Tuesday morning in April. You, the citizens of this country, with your income taxes and compulsory deductions and council taxes.&rdquo;</p>

<p>The two strands of thought &mdash;&nbsp;children and citizenship &mdash; seem separate, but as <em>Disoriental</em> continues, they weave themselves together until it becomes clear that for Kimi&acirc;, they are inextricably linked.</p>

<p>Tina Kover&rsquo;s translation from French is lively and complex, with N&eacute;gar Djavadi&rsquo;s rich, elegant sentences shining through. Together, they tell the story of the Sadr family, beginning with Kimi&acirc;&rsquo;s great-grandfather in Iran and extending through Kimi&acirc;&rsquo;s hypothetical unborn child in Paris. But <em>Disoriental</em> is also the story of Kimi&acirc; herself, and how she left Iran at the age of 10 to come to Paris, and how in the process, she was <em>dis-oriented</em>, in both senses of the world: She was disoriented, confused; and she was dis-Oriented, so that she lost her Persianness.</p>

<p>&ldquo;To really integrate into a culture,&rdquo; Kimi&acirc; explains, &ldquo;I can tell you that you have to <em>dis</em>integrate first, at least partially, from your own. You have to separate, detach, disassociate.&rdquo;</p>

<p>As the book goes on, however, it becomes clear that if Kimi&acirc; can just do the task she has set out to do &mdash; if she can just have a baby, despite the fact that she is gay &mdash;&nbsp;then she won&rsquo;t be quite as detached from her old culture as she thought. She&rsquo;ll just be reinventing her relationship to it.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Constance Grady</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Love-Hanne-Orstavik/dp/0914671944"><em>Love</em></a> by Hanne Ørstavik, translated by Martin Aitken</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429213/LOVE__rstavik_cover.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Love by Hanne Ørstavik, translated by Martin Aitken " title="Love by Hanne Ørstavik, translated by Martin Aitken " data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Archipelago" />
<p>Hanne &Oslash;rstavik&rsquo;s <em>Love</em> was first published in Norway in 1997, a tale of desire and neglect that seamlessly switches perspectives between a mother and son. Vibeke and her son Jon, who have recently moved to a remote part of northern Norway, are spending their evenings separately the night before Jon&rsquo;s ninth birthday. Jon goes out to sell raffle tickets for a school fundraiser to the neighbors, and encounters a number of strangers &mdash; some more unsavory than others. Vibeke goes to the library, hoping to see the man she&rsquo;s attracted to, but finds that the library is closed, and ends up at a carnival instead. It&rsquo;s less of a plot-driven story than one about the ways that loneliness and longing both create the distance between its characters and drive them toward their dark conclusion.</p>

<p>As translated from Norwegian by Martin Aitken, <em>Love</em> is a compelling, spare novel; an anxious mood hangs over Vibeke and Jon&rsquo;s story like a thin, cold cloud. Both mother and son pursue the things they most desire &mdash; safety, warmth, a sense of security &mdash; in ways that are both doomed and deeply felt, particularly in the starkness and minimalism of &Oslash;rstavik&rsquo;s translated prose. It&rsquo;s the sort of book you want to gulp down in a sitting, enfolded by a blanket, sinking into the gray need we all feel to be loved.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Alissa Wilkinson</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Trick-Domenico-Starnone/dp/1609454448/"><em>Trick</em></a> by Domenico Starnone, translated by Jhumpa Lahiri</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429217/Trick.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Trick by Domenico Starnone, translated by Jhumpa Lahiri" title="Trick by Domenico Starnone, translated by Jhumpa Lahiri" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Europa Editions" />
<p><em>Dolcetto o scherzetto</em> &mdash; treat, or trick? In his latest work, famed Italian author Domenico Starnone does not give us an option; rather, he sends us on a trip filled with trickery, whether that&rsquo;s of the mind, of art, of human relationships, or, better, of our own self.</p>

<p>In this poignant translation by Jhumpa Lahiri, Starnone details the brief encounter between Daniele Mallarico, a brilliant yet faded book illustrator, and his 4-year-old grandson Mario, on the former&rsquo;s visit to his childhood home in Naples. Left alone by Mario&rsquo;s parents, who head to Milan to mend their broken marriage under the guise of attending an academic conference, the two start off on the wrong foot but quickly try to adapt to each other&rsquo;s ways.</p>

<p>Their relationship, perfectly captured by Starnone&rsquo;s precise writing, gives the novel a rich foundation to allow for a juxtaposition of the old and the new, the rigid and the silly, while also providing readers with moments of pure comic relief, marked by the characters&rsquo; signature, witty <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stichomythia">stichomythia</a>.</p>

<p>But on a deeper level, <em>Trick</em> challenges us to reflect on our own mortality, as evidenced by Daniele&rsquo;s own grudges with his past and present, and to decide: Is there time to play one last trick with life?</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Stavros Agorakis</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Flights-Olga-Tokarczuk/dp/0525534199/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&#038;qid=&#038;sr="><em>Flights</em></a> by Olga Tokarczuk, translated by Jennifer Croft</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429225/Flights.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Flights by Olga Tokarczuk, translated by Jennifer Croft " title="Flights by Olga Tokarczuk, translated by Jennifer Croft " data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Riverhead" />
<p>Polish author Olga Tokarczuk&rsquo;s <em>Flights</em> is epic in its scope and mission. Her novel has a narrator &mdash; a nameless woman who wanders the world with no apparent destination &mdash; whose journey is punctuated by several disconnected vignettes that take place across the world and through time, from centuries ago to a surreal near future.&nbsp;</p>

<p>This journey through space and time has an unsettling and disorienting effect. <em>Flights</em> reads as a sprawling, surreal meditation on what it is to be alive in an increasingly transient world. The ability to vanish from one place and move on to the next becomes the object of a new field of study: &ldquo;travel psychology.&rdquo; In the book&rsquo;s more humorous scenes, experts in this fictional field give lectures in airports to passive travelers waiting to board their planes.&nbsp;</p>

<p>It is the fixation on the mortal body in <em>Flights</em>&nbsp;that is most striking; bodies are fetishized, taxidermied, reduced to their parts and preserved in glass jars in museums. In one story, a Dutch anatomist discovers the Achilles tendon by dissecting his own amputated leg. And there is an injustice to being reduced to a body. A female character reflects on the sexism of becoming invisible as she ages; in a series of letters, a woman pleads<strong> </strong>with the emperor of Austria for a proper burial for her late father, an African man whose body was skinned and stuffed and put in a racist display.&nbsp;</p>

<p>In <em>Flights</em>, mobility is what helps us transcend these imperfect vessels. There are vanishing acts throughout the novel, like when the wife and child of a man inexplicably disappear while on vacation on a tiny Croatian island. But if we vanish &mdash; by death or otherwise &mdash; what remains of us if not our bodies? Tokarczuk offers a clue by way of her narrator: what we have written down.&nbsp;</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Laura Bult</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Young People’s Literature</h2><h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Poet-X-Elizabeth-Acevedo/dp/0062662805/"><em>The Poet X</em> </a>by Elizabeth Acevedo — WINNER</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429233/The_Poet_X.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo" title="The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="HarperTeen" />
<p><a href="http://www.acevedowrites.com/">Elizabeth Acevedo</a> is an established slam poet, and her debut novel, <em>The Poet X</em>, takes the form of an extended free-verse poem winding its way through a coming-of-age narrative set in modern-day Harlem. The book begins as the purported journal writings of high school sophomore Xiomara Batista. But as Xiomara wrestles to embrace her independence and nascent sexuality in the face of a censorious, extremely religious mother, <em>The Poet X</em> eventually reveals itself as a rhythmic literalization of a young woman finding her voice.</p>

<p>Many of the book&rsquo;s supporting players are familiar ones from the young-adult canon &mdash; the supportive but polar-opposite best friend, the domineering immigrant mother and apathetic father, the improbably tender love interest, the unusually with-it teacher who changes the course of our protagonist&rsquo;s life. But they&rsquo;re given new shape through Xiomara&rsquo;s/Acevedo&rsquo;s free-flowing verses, which merge spoken-word and hip-hop tropes with an appropriately teenage plainspokenness.</p>

<p><em>The Poet X</em> travels a narrative that&rsquo;s so well-trod by contemporary YA that it borders on clich&eacute;, but its highly expressive approach to the language of emotion gives it a personal-epic vibe that&rsquo;s all its own.</p>

<p>&mdash;<em>Genevieve Koski</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Assassination-Brangwain-Spurge-M-T-Anderson/dp/0763698229"><em>The Assassination of Brangwain Spurge</em></a> by M.T. Anderson and Eugene Yelchin</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13395641/brangwainspurge.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Assassination of Brangwain Spurge" title="The Assassination of Brangwain Spurge" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Candlewick Press" />
<p>Exceptionally clever, <em>The Assassination of Brangwain Spurge</em> all but begs you to immediately reread it upon finishing the first time, so well handled is a late-in-text reveal. The actual story &mdash; an elfin historian (the Brangwain Spurge of the title) becomes the first emissary in years sent to the goblin kingdom, where he&rsquo;s met by a goblin archivist named Werfel &mdash; is a bit thin, the oft-told tale of opposite numbers learning they&rsquo;re not so different after all once they&rsquo;re forced to spend a lot of time together. But the method of telling reveals surprising depths.</p>

<p>In essence, <em>The Assassination of Brangwain Spurge</em> is told in three voices. Author M.T. Anderson handles the text, which includes frequent letters from the spymaster who is hoping to use Brangwain to figure out the source of the goblins&rsquo; magic. It also contains third-person segments, told from Werfel&rsquo;s point of view. Meanwhile, illustrator Eugene Yelchin offers beautiful, woodcut-like drawings depicting Brangwain&rsquo;s dispatches from the goblin kingdom, extracted from his thoughts and beamed back to the elves via a magic spell.</p>

<p>If you&rsquo;ve guessed that this is a way to play around with ideas about prejudice and perception, you&rsquo;re right. But it&rsquo;s not as if the world doesn&rsquo;t need more stories about how to overcome our prejudices and inaccurate perceptions, and Anderson and Yelchin structure their lesson in such a way that you&rsquo;ll likely find yourself paging back through the text to notice all the clues they&rsquo;ve sprinkled throughout about just how inaccurately Brangwain and Werfel understood each other until it was almost too late.</p>

<p>&mdash;<em>Todd VanDerWerff</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Truth-Told-Mason-Buttle/dp/0062491431"><em>The Truth as Told by Mason Buttle</em></a> by Leslie Connor</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429237/The_Truth_As_Told_by_Mason_Buttle.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Truth As Told by Mason Buttle by Leslie Connor" title="The Truth As Told by Mason Buttle by Leslie Connor" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Katherine Tegen Books" />
<p><em>The Truth as Told by Mason Buttle</em> is an exceptionally warm and sweet-hearted book &mdash; as warm and sweet as its main character. Poor 12-year-old Mason is an easy target for bullies:&nbsp;He&rsquo;s big for his age; he lives in a falling-apart old farmhouse with his grandparents, while everyone else lives in a ritzy housing development built out of the family&rsquo;s old farm; he&rsquo;s highly dyslexic; and he sweats too much, so that he constantly admonishes himself, &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t be a gross-out.&rdquo;</p>

<p>But despite the fact that every day after school, the other boys in his grade pelt Mason with lacrosse balls or apples, Mason refuses to let himself become mean-spirited or cruel in response. He&rsquo;s a genuinely nice kid, and he&rsquo;s willing to fight to protect those who need it, like a smaller boy in his grade, or a dog.</p>

<p>Which makes it all the more heartrending when it slowly becomes clear (and it&rsquo;s clear to the reader long before it&rsquo;s clear to Mason) that the police believe Mason had something to do with the tragic death of his best friend the year before. Mason&rsquo;s friend died when the ladder to his treehouse collapsed underneath him, and now the cops keep asking Mason pointed questions about how he built the ladder and whether Mason would ever want to play a practical joke on someone with said ladder. Mason doesn&rsquo;t understand why they keep asking him at all. He told them everything he knew, didn&rsquo;t he?</p>

<p>Yet even though Mason must clear his name with the cops, this book is not a detective story or a mystery. It&rsquo;s the story of Mason Buttle trying to protect the people who matter to him and find a safe space for himself in a world that keeps trying to hurt him &mdash; and Mason is such an instantly lovable character that there&rsquo;s nothing to do but root for him to survive.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Constance Grady</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Journey-Little-Charlie-National-Finalist/dp/0545156661/"><em>The Journey of Little Charlie</em></a> by Christopher Paul Curtis</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429239/The_Journey_of_Little_Charlie.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Journey of Little Charlie by Christopher Paul Curtis" title="The Journey of Little Charlie by Christopher Paul Curtis" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Scholastic Press" />
<p><em>The Journey of Little Charlie</em> is a cunningly sophisticated middle-grade novel, one that hides the trauma and horror of its content beneath a sprightly and charming voice. The story is told by 12-year-old Charlie Bobo, a white boy living in South Carolina in 1858, and he is a likably plucky kid who narrates everything in full-on old-timey Southern dialect. &ldquo;I&rsquo;d seent plenty of animals by the time I was old &lsquo;nough to start talking,&rdquo; he begins, and you know immediately that you&rsquo;re in for a sunny story of country hijinks.</p>

<p>But then Charlie&rsquo;s father dies, and to pay his debts, Charlie is forced to work for the odious Cap&rsquo;n Buck, an evil plantation overseer and slave catcher. Cap&rsquo;n Buck at first tells Charlie that they are headed to Virginia in order to retrieve $4,000 stolen from Buck&rsquo;s employer, but it gradually becomes clear that what Buck actually has in mind is catching a family of formerly enslaved people who ran away 10 years before &mdash; a family that was worth $4,000.</p>

<p>Charlie is a product of his time and place, and as <em>The Journey of Little Charlie</em> begins, he has no particular qualms about slavery as an institution. But when he is pushed to participate in it actively, to become complicit in depriving a family of their freedom, he finds himself rapidly reevaluating the legitimacy of a practice he has always accepted without question. Crucially, Christopher Paul Curtis allows Charlie to reach his epiphany without ever losing sight of the personhood of the black characters whose freedom Charlie threatens: They are complex figures in their own rights, not just props for Charlie&rsquo;s personal growth.</p>

<p><em>&mdash;Constance Grady</em></p>
<h3 class="wp-block-heading"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Kiddo-National-Book-Award-Finalist/dp/0545902479/"><em>Hey, Kiddo</em></a> by Jarrett J. Krosoczka</h3><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13429247/Hey_Kiddo.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Hey, Kiddo by Jarrett J. Krosoczka" title="Hey, Kiddo by Jarrett J. Krosoczka" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Graphix" />
<p>Jarrett J. Krosoczka has the magical skill of capturing the joy, warmth, and uncertainty of being a kid and melding it all into a <em>Hey, Kiddo</em>, a touching graphic memoir. There may be moments where it feels like Krosoczka watched you grow up and captured the tiniest of details about your childhood &mdash; the smell of comic books, the color of your best friend&rsquo;s shirt, the voice of your favorite teacher &mdash; and recorded them in his story.</p>

<p>Then there&rsquo;s the part that&rsquo;s a little more painful: the stuff you can only see as an adult, and may never be able to fully leave behind.</p>

<p><em>Hey, Kiddo</em> reveals how Krosoczka slowly came to realize that his mom was addicted to drugs and that the way he grew up wasn&rsquo;t the way that kids are supposed to grow up. The details of things we take for granted, like his surprise at how his grandparents feed him, are heartbreaking to readers who don&rsquo;t share Krosoczka&rsquo;s experiences.</p>

<p>It&rsquo;s with those details that Krosoczka evokes a relatable yearning to understand everything about our parents, and the impossibility of that desire. There are some things about the people who gave us life, regardless of our relationships with them or how close we are with them, that we&rsquo;ll never fully know.</p>

<p>And though Krosoczka&rsquo;s mother&rsquo;s circumstances changed his life, <em>Hey, Kiddo</em> is about how love &mdash; all different kinds, from all the people in his world &mdash; made it so that those circumstances didn&rsquo;t define it.</p>

<p>&mdash;<em>Alex Abad-Santos</em></p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Karen Han</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[4 new TV shows to try, from Halloween horror to the Flight of the Conchords]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/10/5/17938928/fall-tv-shows-new-best-flight-of-the-conchords-happy-together-into-the-dark-i-feel-bad" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/10/5/17938928/fall-tv-shows-new-best-flight-of-the-conchords-happy-together-into-the-dark-i-feel-bad</id>
			<updated>2018-10-05T15:40:43-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-10-05T15:50:01-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="TV" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[As fall TV enters October after a very busy September premiere week, you&#8217;d be mistaken for thinking it&#8217;s stopped to catch its breath. But you&#8217;d be &#8212; well, not wrong, exactly. Things have gotten slower. But there&#8217;s still tons of stuff debuting, and we&#8217;ve been consuming all of it, the better to let you know [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="This week brings Happy Together, I Feel Bad, Into the Dark, and a Flight of the Conchords special. | CBS, NBC, Hulu, HBO" data-portal-copyright="CBS, NBC, Hulu, HBO" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13222487/headshots_1538763684366.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	This week brings Happy Together, I Feel Bad, Into the Dark, and a Flight of the Conchords special. | CBS, NBC, Hulu, HBO	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/25/17897710/fall-tv-shows-new-fbi-review-new-amsterdam-a-million-little-things-mr-inbetween">fall TV</a> enters October after <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/25/17897710/fall-tv-shows-new-fbi-review-new-amsterdam-a-million-little-things-mr-inbetween">a very busy September premiere week</a>, you&rsquo;d be mistaken for thinking it&rsquo;s stopped to catch its breath.</p>

<p>But you&rsquo;d be &mdash; well, not wrong, exactly. Things have gotten slower. But there&rsquo;s still tons of stuff debuting, and we&rsquo;ve been consuming all of it, the better to let you know what might best distract you from the chaos of life today.</p>

<p>This week, we&rsquo;ve got two brand-new CBS sitcoms, both featuring lead actors of color, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7942794/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><em>The Neighborhood</em></a> and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7976568/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><em>Happy Together</em></a><em> </em>(that&rsquo;s unusual for a network that has <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/8/1/16078570/cbs-diversity-tca">had diversity problems in the past</a>). Then there&rsquo;s NBC&rsquo;s new Amy Poehler-produced <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7979042/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><em>I Feel Bad</em></a>, and Hulu&rsquo;s brand new horror anthology <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8427140/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><em>Into the Dark</em></a>, which will release one new episode per month, themed around a holiday that falls during that month. (Fittingly, the first three episodes are Halloween-, Thanksgiving-, and Christmas-themed.) And finally, the week comes to a rousing conclusion with a new HBO special from the <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0863046/?ref_=nv_sr_1">inestimable comedy duo Flight of the Conchords</a>.</p>

<p>Few of these shows are great, and as critics, we often have limited information on whether they&rsquo;ll get better. (It&rsquo;s rare to impossible for broadcast networks, especially, to send out many episodes for review beyond the first couple.) But there&rsquo;s something in all of these shows worth checking out, especially if you&rsquo;re a particular fan of their genres.</p>

<p>(A note: We&rsquo;ve only given ratings to shows where we feel we&rsquo;ve seen enough episodes to judge how successful they will be long-term. For right now that&rsquo;s just the Conchords special, where we&rsquo;ve, uh, seen the entire special and can assure you it&rsquo;s good.)</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Both of CBS’s new Monday-night sitcoms boast tremendous casts. But only one has staying power.</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="First Look At Happy Together on CBS" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/s4Oqyv75His?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Based solely on the pilots of CBS&rsquo;s new sitcoms <em>The Neighborhood</em> and <em>Happy Together</em>, many progressive young viewers might be more drawn to <em>The Neighborhood</em>. Its gentrification-driven premise &mdash; a white family from the Midwest moves into a historically black neighborhood in Los Angeles &mdash; holds promise for talking about social issues, while the crackerjack cast (led by Cedric the Entertainer and <em>New Girl</em>&rsquo;s Max Greenfield) will presumably keep the laughs coming in between the weightier stuff.</p>

<p>Yet in the four episodes CBS made available to critics, <em>The Neighborhood</em> disappointingly doubles down on jokes about how crazy the differences between white and black people are, and even if the cast members are trying their hardest (and they are!), it&rsquo;s all but impossible to improve upon jokes based on such a tired premise. And that&rsquo;s before you get to some of the more questionable ideas contained therein.</p>

<p>That&rsquo;s why <em>Happy Together</em>, which airs right after <em>The Neighborhood</em>, could prove so instructive. It, too, has a great cast, but its pilot is actively bad because the show&rsquo;s premise barely provides enough fodder for a single half-hour episode, let alone an entire series: A married couple in their 30s (Damon Wayans, Jr. and Amber Stevens West) end up living with a major pop star (Felix Mallard), who employs the husband as his accountant. (It&rsquo;s very loosely inspired by producer Ben Winston&rsquo;s <a href="https://www.bustle.com/p/is-happy-together-a-true-story-harry-styles-life-inspired-this-hilarious-new-sitcom-12108087">brief time with real pop star Harry Styles</a> as his housemate.)</p>

<p>But once you get past the pilot and into the two additional episodes CBS made available for review, <em>Happy Together</em> shows a refreshing willingness to just leap past the awkward premise and do the thing it was born to do: Let funny people hang out together and give Wayans the chance to perform some brilliant slapstick gags.</p>

<p><em>Happy Together</em> isn&rsquo;t going to change your life, but its goofy, low-conflict stories about attractive people doing fun things together remind me just a bit of Wayans&rsquo;s late, lamented sitcom <em>Happy Endings</em>. It&rsquo;s not on <em>Happy Endings</em>&rsquo; level yet, but the idea that it could get there isn&rsquo;t all that implausible. <em>&mdash;Todd VanDerWerff</em></p>

<p>The Neighborhood <em>airs Mondays at 8 pm Eastern on CBS, and </em>Happy Together <em>airs at 8:30 pm Eastern. The pilots of both shows are available on CBS&rsquo;s website and CBS All Access, but you can really just skip straight to </em>Happy Together <em>episode two, which airs Monday, October 8.</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><em>I Feel Bad</em> isn’t a good show just yet, but it has the potential to become a unique twist on the typical family sitcom</h2>
<p>NBC&rsquo;s new comedy<strong> </strong><em>I Feel Bad</em> has plenty going for it &mdash; including Amy Poehler&rsquo;s backing as executive producer, a multiracial family at its center, and Sarayu Blue&rsquo;s (<em>Blockers</em>, <em>No Tomorrow</em>) long-overdue turn in a leading role &mdash; so it feels bad to root against it. But <em>I Feel Bad</em>, at least in its first three episodes, is &hellip; well, maybe not bad, but also not good just yet.</p>

<p>Broadly speaking, the single-camera comedy format sounds like a perfect fit for a show about an Indian-American mom trying to have it all. But it unfortunately flattens the show&rsquo;s most interesting element &mdash; the fact that Blue&rsquo;s character Emet is a first-generation immigrant who must negotiate cultural differences with her white husband (Paul Adelstein) and their mixed-race children, while maintaining her relationship with her mother and father (Madhur Jaffrey and Brian George). At the end of the day, <em>I Feel Bad</em> either needs sharper jokes, or to get a little more serious.</p>

<p>Additionally,<strong> </strong>the idea of career women &ldquo;having it all&rdquo; has been widely explored in film and TV, both before and after <em>30 Rock</em>&rsquo;s Liz Lemon memorably yelled, &ldquo;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jO5U7-_zks">I can have it all!</a>&rdquo; in the middle of an airport security line, in defiance of being forced to choose between love and a sandwich. And <em>I Feel Bad</em> doesn&rsquo;t yet promise to revitalize the topic: The show&rsquo;s writing is thin, as if it has only just discovered that particular conversation about female identity.</p>

<p>In part, this lack of focus isn&rsquo;t surprising &mdash; Blue&rsquo;s role <a href="https://www.glamour.com/story/i-feel-bad-sarayu-blue">was not originally written</a> as Indian-American, so the show has clearly undergone some reworking since she was cast. But it either hasn&rsquo;t been reworked enough, or it&rsquo;s been subsequently sanitized in a way that seems to question what still is or isn&rsquo;t considered &ldquo;normal&rdquo; on network TV in 2018. <em>&mdash;Karen Han</em></p>

<p>I Feel Bad <em>airs on Thursdays at 9:30 pm Eastern on NBC</em>.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading"><em>Into the Dark</em> is a roll of the dice, but worth tuning into once a month</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="Into the Dark: Teaser (Official) | Hulu" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gKtcYhWSrPQ?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>The anthology format has long been making a comeback, with season-long stories like <em>American Horror Story</em> and more episodic offerings like <em>Black Mirror</em> becoming more common. And yet Hulu&rsquo;s <em>Into the Dark</em> is singular in its plans to debut one episode every month, with each standalone installment of the Blumhouse-produced horror series revolving around a holiday that falls during the month in which it&rsquo;s released.</p>

<p>October&rsquo;s debut episode naturally takes place on Halloween. It&rsquo;s a bit of a disappointment; despite a strong leading performance from Tom Bateman as a killer for hire, the story trips into unsurprising twists and boring tropes.</p>

<p>But that&rsquo;s where the anthology format kicks in to the show&rsquo;s advantage: If one episode falters, it has no bearing on what comes next.</p>

<p>Episode two, set on Thanksgiving, is a blast, in no small part thanks to a wild performance from Dermot Mulroney. And though it won&rsquo;t air until November, it establishes <em>Into the Dark</em> as unlike its anthology peers in how disparate it feels from the first episode. The two installments feel more like individual movies that would be programmed together in a double feature &mdash; indeed, each clocks in at almost 90 minutes &mdash; than parts of the same TV show.</p>

<p>As a result, <em>Into the Dark</em> is difficult to recommend as a whole, because any given episode could be a hit or a miss, and the two episodes sent out for review suggest that even the <em>type</em> of horror will vary from episode to episode. But as things stand, the strength of the second episode &mdash; on top of how remarkable the series<strong> </strong>feels as a throwback to old-school anthology shows like <em>The Twilight Zone</em> &mdash; is enough to give the series a chance (or several). <em>&mdash;KH</em></p>

<p>Into the Dark <em>premieres October 5 on Hulu, with a new episode every month</em>.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The new <em>Flight of the Conchords</em> special is both a comeback special and greatest hits retrospective. It’s so much fun.</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="Biggest Band in New Zealand | Flight of the Conchords: Live in London (2018) | HBO" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qFcj24A6W3g?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>The Biggest Band in New Zealand has returned, and they&rsquo;re as small and unassuming as ever.</p>

<p>Thirteen years after Flight of the Conchords made their HBO debut on <em>One-Night Stand</em>, and nine years after their eponymous series wrapped, the aggressively modest musical-comedy duo returns to the network with <em>Live in London</em>, which splits the difference between comeback special and greatest-hits retrospective.</p>

<p>The Conchords haven&rsquo;t been entirely absent from the comedy scene in the intervening years, though the band has gone relatively low-profile as Jemaine Clement and Bret McKenzie have found individual career success. But outside of some light bobbles and false starts in <em>Live in London, </em>the pair&rsquo;s musical and comedic chemistry is as sharp as ever.</p>

<p>Over their 20-year history together, Clement and McKenzie have honed the personas of &ldquo;Bret&rdquo; and &ldquo;Jemaine&rdquo; to a fine point, and fall easily back into their roles as deadpan naifs, even as they play in front of a sold-out crowd at London&rsquo;s Eventim Apollo. (The special was recorded this past July as part of a UK arena tour.) It&rsquo;s apparent from the tiny smiles and stifled chuckles that punctuate their bone-dry banter that the pair is happy to return to the world of the Conchords, and feed off the energy of an appreciative audience.</p>

<p>As such, the Conchords devote a good chunk of <em>Live in London </em>to their most well-known songs, but also make room for new or lesser-known tunes that tend to sprawl and spiral in delightful ways. &ldquo;Father &amp; Son&rdquo; and the hyper-meta &ldquo;The Seagull&rdquo; are slow builds with satirical premises that become more apparent &mdash; and more hilarious &mdash; as the songs go on. The &ldquo;Devil Went Down To Georgia&rdquo; riff &ldquo;Ballad of Stana&rdquo; and &ldquo;Summer of 1353 (Woo a Lady),&rdquo; meanwhile, are classic Conchords absurdity, right down to a climactic recorder breakdown in the latter.</p>

<p>That recorder breakdown doubles as a reminder that, for all their silliness, McKenzie and Clement have always been talented multi-instrumentalists with a keen ear for genre- and era-specific sounds. And that is at the heart of what makes <em>Live in London </em>such a pleasure: Watching the Conchords bound between sounds, instruments, and comedic reference points as easily and amiably as they ever did offers an uncomplicated, comforting sort of joy that feels even more special today than it did a decade ago.  &mdash;<em>Genevieve Koski</em></p>

<p>Flight of the Conchords: Live in London<em> premieres on HBO at 9 pm Eastern on Saturday, October 6. It will be available on HBO&rsquo;s streaming platforms beginning Sunday, October 7.</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">And also&#8230;</h2><ul class="wp-block-list"><li>NBC’s<em> <strong>Superstore </strong></em><strong>(Thursday, 8 pm) </strong>returned Thursday, October 4, and if you’re not already watching this gem of a workplace sitcom, check out its intricately constructed season four premiere — which boasts a lovely twist at its end — to find out why you should be.</li><li>ABC’s <strong><em>Fresh Off the Boat </em>(Friday, 8 pm) </strong>and<strong> <em>Speechless</em> (Friday, 8:30 pm) </strong>return to once again show that the network’s family comedy game is so strong it can slide two of its very best shows in that category off to Friday nights in an attempt to relaunch its TGIF brand. If you’ve never seen <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em> star Constance Wu play Jessica Huang on <em>Fresh Off the</em> <em>Boat</em>, the sitcom that brought her to fame, you owe it to yourself to check out one of the decade’s best comedic performances. And <em>Speechless</em> continues to tell fresh, funny stories about a family where one of the kids has cerebral palsy.</li><li>BBC America’s <strong><em>Doctor Who</em> (Sunday, 1:45 pm Eastern/10:45 am Pacific) </strong>is <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/7/21/15999684/doctor-who-woman-doctor-jodie-whittaker-thirteen">celebrating the very first woman Doctor</a> (Jodie Whittaker) and a new showrunner (Chris Chibnall) with a premiere that will air live on both sides of the Atlantic, so those pesky Brits aren’t several hours ahead of all of us here in the US. But don’t worry — if you’d rather wait to watch in primetime, it will be rebroadcast throughout the day, including at 6 pm, 8 pm, and 10 pm. (We’ve seen it and can’t say much beyond — it’s really good!)</li><li>Finally, AMC’s <strong><em>The Walking Dead </em>(Sunday, 9 pm) </strong>is back for its ninth season, which is going to see some <a href="https://ew.com/tv/2018/07/30/andrew-lincoln-walking-dead/">major cast turnover</a>. (Don’t click that link if you don’t want to know!) Having to build toward some upcoming departures has given the series a slight sense of renewed purpose — though if you’ve already fallen off the <em>Walking Dead</em> wagon, that renewed purpose probably won’t be <em>quite</em> enough to get you back on.</li></ul>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Karen Han</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[8 winners and 5 losers from the 2018 Emmy Awards]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/18/17872900/emmys-2018-winners-losers-mrs-maisel-game-of-thrones" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/18/17872900/emmys-2018-winners-losers-mrs-maisel-game-of-thrones</id>
			<updated>2018-09-18T08:57:29-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-09-18T08:29:06-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Awards Shows" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Emmy Awards" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="TV" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[The 2018 Emmys were at once enthralling and utterly anticlimactic. You could feel it in the way FX&#8217;s The Americans won for writing and lead actor (Matthew Rhys), while Netflix&#8217;s The Crown won for directing and lead actress (Claire Foy) &#8230; only for both to founder on the rocks of boring ol&#8217; Game of Thrones [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="Another Emmy ceremony, another win for Game of Thrones. | Frazer Harrison/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Frazer Harrison/Getty Images" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13106733/1035234276.jpg.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Another Emmy ceremony, another win for Game of Thrones. | Frazer Harrison/Getty Images	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The 2018 Emmys were at once enthralling and utterly anticlimactic.</p>

<p>You could feel it in the way <a href="http://www.vox.com/the-americans">FX&rsquo;s <em>The Americans</em></a> won for writing and lead actor (Matthew Rhys), while <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/12/9/16748048/the-crown-season-2-review">Netflix&rsquo;s <em>The Crown</em></a> won for directing and lead actress (Claire Foy) &#8230; only for both to founder on the rocks of boring ol&rsquo; <a href="http://www.vox.com/game-of-thrones"><em>Game of Thrones</em></a> winning its third Emmy for drama series.</p>

<p>Of course, taking one step forward and five steps back is an Emmy tradition, so nobody should be too surprised when previous winners keep raking in trophies. And the evening&rsquo;s presentation of trophies was mostly an enjoyable, even sprightly time.</p>

<p>And yet that <em>Game of Thrones</em> win was the perfect way to cap the evening. After a couple of years in which it felt like the Emmys were shaking off some of their bad habits, the 2018 awards were here to remind you they could never quite shake off all of them. For every cool winner, there have to be three or four winners that make you roll your eyes just a little.</p>

<p>So here, then, are eight winners and five losers from the 2018 Emmy Awards.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: Amazon, <em>The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel,</em> and Amy Sherman-Palladino</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="70th Emmy Awards: Amy Sherman-Palladino Wins For Outstanding Directing For A Comedy Series" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rU9v_ZE7jB4?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Two weeks ago, Amy Sherman-Palladino had no Emmy awards. The <em>Gilmore Girls</em> creator was a prior nominee (for her writing on <em>Roseanne</em> way back in 1992), but she hadn&rsquo;t been back as a nominee since that ceremony, despite the high praise for her earlier WB series.</p>

<p>Now, after the Creative Arts Emmys on Saturday, September 8, and tonight&rsquo;s primetime awards, Sherman-Palladino has <em>four</em> Emmys for her new <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/11/30/16715280/marvelous-mrs-maisel-amazon-review">Amazon series <em>The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel</em></a> &mdash; for music supervision, writing, directing, and comedy series. It was the sort of night that makes one go from, &ldquo;Oh, it&rsquo;s awful that she doesn&rsquo;t have an Emmy!&rdquo; to, &ldquo;Doesn&rsquo;t she have too many awards already? Let someone else win some!&rdquo; in about five seconds. Indeed, Sherman-Palladino became the first person <em>ever</em> to win the comedy writing and directing Emmys in the same night.</p>

<p>But <em>Maisel</em> won awards beyond its behatted showrunner. It roped in prizes for two of its stars (Alex Borstein for supporting actress and Rachel Brosnahan for lead actress). It won awards at the Creative Arts Emmys for casting and editing. It won eight awards in total, right behind <em>Game of Thrones</em> (which won nine across both ceremonies), but without the sorts of big special effects sequences that lead to so many of <em>Thrones</em>&rsquo; wins.</p>

<p>The wins were also a big moment for the show&rsquo;s beleaguered network, Amazon Prime Video, which has had a rough go of it in recent years and has seemed to fall behind both Netflix and Hulu in the battle for buzz. Yet <em>Maisel</em> becomes just the second streaming series to win one of the big three series awards, after <em>The Handmaid&rsquo;s Tale</em> won for drama last year. <em>Maisel</em> didn&rsquo;t put Amazon on the map, but it helped keep it there.</p>

<p>Now, you could quibble that a series about standup comedians in &rsquo;50s New York is pretty much custom-designed to win Emmys, and you wouldn&rsquo;t be wrong. Still, it&rsquo;s a big victory for Amazon and perhaps a bigger one for Sherman-Palladino.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winners (but also kind of losers): Netflix and HBO</h2>
<p>It made headlines when <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/7/12/17564922/emmy-nominations-2018-winners-losers-snubs-surprises">Netflix finally dethroned HBO</a> as the most nominated network at this year&rsquo;s awards, and heading into tonight&rsquo;s ceremony, post-Creative Arts awards, HBO had just one more win than Netflix.</p>

<p>That reversed over the course of the program, until, heading into Drama Series, the final category of the night, Netflix now had one more win than HBO across both ceremonies. And then <em>Game of Thrones</em> won, and the two networks ended up exactly tied &mdash; with 23 wins apiece at both ceremonies.</p>

<p>Now, on the one hand, this is a huge victory for Netflix, which went from having almost no nominations to very nearly garnering the most nominations <em>and</em> the most wins in less than a decade. (Remember: The service&rsquo;s first original series, <em>House of Cards</em>, only launched in 2012.) On the other hand, a win for Comedy Series, Drama Series, or Limited Series remains out of Netflix&rsquo;s grasp, when both Hulu and Amazon (its chief streaming competitors) have won a series prize by this point.</p>

<p>And while HBO managed to claw its way back to a level playing field with Netflix, it had to do so without the sort of Emmy dominance it showed as recently as 2015 (when it won basically every competitive category at the primetime awards). It&rsquo;s going to slip behind Netflix inevitably &mdash; and probably sooner rather than later.</p>

<p>So it&rsquo;s not hard to see it as a big night for both networks &mdash; and at the same time imagine they&rsquo;re feeling just a twinge of disappointment at how everything ultimately turned out.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: Glenn Weiss</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="Glenn Weiss Proposes To His Girlfriend After Winning The Emmy For Directing The Oscars" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MP-Opt-x1u0?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Yes, Glenn Weiss won an Emmy, but <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/9/17/17872634/emmy-awards-2018-proposal-engagement-glenn-weiss-jan-svendsen">we&rsquo;re talking about that proposal</a>! While accepting the award for outstanding directing for a variety special &mdash; his 11th Emmy overall &mdash; Weiss took the opportunity to propose to his girlfriend Jan Svendsen.</p>

<p>He began his speech by paying tribute to his late mother, saying, &ldquo;Mom always believed in finding the sunshine in things, and that&rsquo;s why she adored my girlfriend, Jan.&rdquo; He continued on to gasps from the crowd, &ldquo;Jan, you are the sunshine in my life. And mom was right: Don&rsquo;t ever let go of my sunshine. You wonder why I don&rsquo;t like to call you my girlfriend? Because I want to call you my wife.&rdquo;</p>

<p>When Svendsen came on stage, Weiss dropped to one knee and presented her with the ring his father had given his mother. The moment &mdash; and its attendant reactions, including from a delighted, gobsmacked Sterling K. Brown &mdash; may just be the only compelling argument that public proposals can be good.</p>
<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-rich is-provider-twitter wp-block-embed-twitter alignnone"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true" data-conversation="none"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">we are all <a href="https://twitter.com/SterlingKBrown?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@SterlingKBrown</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Emmys?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Emmys</a> <a href="https://t.co/SEaOe6tby8">pic.twitter.com/SEaOe6tby8</a></p>&mdash; Shirley Li (@shirklesxp) <a href="https://twitter.com/shirklesxp/status/1041863184137764865?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div></figure><h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: FX (sort of)</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="70th Emmy Awards: Matthew Rhys Wins For Outstanding Lead Actor In A Drama Series" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uyVbKex3FGM?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Lurking right behind HBO and Netflix, in a strong third place for most wins at this year&rsquo;s Emmys, is FX, which won 12 categories total and an impressive five at the primetime awards. FX&rsquo;s big contender was supposed to be its comedy series <em>Atlanta </em>(more on that in a second). Instead, <em>Atlanta</em> won three Creative Arts awards and then won <em>none</em> of the eight primetime awards it was nominated for, getting swept away by the <em>Maisel</em> flood.</p>

<p>Instead, FX patched together its showing via <em>The Assassination of Gianni Versace</em>, which won Limited Series, Directing, and Lead Actor (Darren Criss), along with four Creative Arts Emmys; and <em>The Americans</em>, which somewhat unexpectedly won its first major competitive primetime awards, pulling in Emmys for writing and Lead Actor in a Drama Series (Matthew Rhys).</p>

<p>It&rsquo;s a showing that FX has to be incredibly proud of &#8230; but the network has yet to win the big Drama or Comedy Series prize, despite numerous attempts. <em>Atlanta</em>&rsquo;s 16 nominations should have given it the edge. If only it had some &rsquo;50s standup comedians. Speaking of which&#8230;</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Losers: <em>Atlanta</em> and <em>The Handmaid’s Tale</em></h2>
<p>Both <em>Atlanta</em> and <em>Handmaid&rsquo;s Tale</em> entered the night with three Creative Arts wins to their name, as well as eight nominations at the primetime awards. Both series were considered major contenders for their respective series prizes, and if that didn&rsquo;t happen, well, they&rsquo;d surely get an acting win or two, right?</p>

<p>Nah. In a pretty severe awards show slump (unmerited, in this writer&rsquo;s opinion!), both shows were completely blanked. <em>Atlanta</em>&rsquo;s multi-hyphenate Donald Glover lost writing and directing to Sherman-Palladino, then lost actor to <em>Barry</em>&rsquo;s Bill Hader, while <em>Handmaid&rsquo;s</em> band of actors couldn&rsquo;t beat out <em>Thrones</em>&rsquo; Peter Dinklage, <em>Westworld</em>&rsquo;s Thandie Newton, or <em>The Crown</em>&rsquo;s Claire Foy.</p>

<p>Both series will surely be back the next time they&rsquo;re Emmy-eligible. But boy, that Emmy night must have taken the wind out of their sails, just a bit.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: old people</h2>
<p>Henry Winkler and Betty White were among the honorees of the night, with Winkler taking home the Emmy for Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series for <em>Barry</em> and White making a speech during a segment honoring her long career.</p>

<p>This is Winkler&rsquo;s first acting win, after five nominations for his role as the Fonz on <em>Happy Days</em>. &ldquo;If you stay at the table long enough, the chips come to you,&rdquo; Winkler said in his speech. &ldquo;Tonight, I got to clear the table.&rdquo; To a similar effect, White marveled at how long she&rsquo;d been working, saying, &ldquo;Little did I dream [when I started] that I would be here. It&rsquo;s incredible that I&rsquo;m still in this business and you&rsquo;re still putting up with me.&rdquo; Both moments were sweet little testaments to longevity in an industry where that&rsquo;s frequently hard to come by.</p>

<p>And just to be clear, we don&rsquo;t mean &ldquo;old people&rdquo; disparagingly here &mdash; the term also includes all of us delighted that the ceremony ended on time so we could all go to bed.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Losers: the crowd</h2>
<p>Clapping and cheering and just generally making a ruckus, this might have been the loudest Emmy crowd in recent memory, and they were <em>not</em> shy about making their preferences among the Emmy nominees known. Get some better seat fillers, Academy!</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: <em>RuPaul’s Drag Race</em></h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="70th Emmy Awards: RuPaul&#039;s Drag Race Wins For Outstanding Reality-Competition Program" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/J85ck3UrpMs?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>RuPaul&rsquo;s venerable reality competition series <em>RuPaul&rsquo;s Drag Race</em> has been kicking around long enough for it to be called &ldquo;venerable,&rdquo; but it&rsquo;s only in the past few years that the Emmys have started to take notice of the phenomenon &mdash; mostly its eponymous host, who&rsquo;s won Outstanding Host for a Reality or Reality Competition Program for the past three years, 2018 included.</p>

<p>But this year, <em>Drag Race</em> also managed to break open one of the Emmys&rsquo; most impenetrable categories, Outstanding Reality Show Competition, which since its introduction in 2003 has been absolutely dominated by <em>The Amazing Race</em> and, to a lesser extent, <em>The Voice. </em>The former has won 10 times, the latter four, while <em>Top Chef </em>managed to squeeze its way in there for a single win in 2010.</p>

<p>All three of those shows were also nominated in the category this year, making <em>Drag Race</em>&rsquo;s victory an even bigger upset &mdash; and a testament to the increasingly mainstream acceptance of a revolutionary cult hit.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Losers: Michael Che and Colin Jost</h2>
<p>Throughout the night, hosts Michael Che and Colin Jost were largely overshadowed by the presenters around them. Following a <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/9/17/17872394/emmy-awards-2018-monologue-che-jost">lukewarm monologue</a> and similarly flat bits throughout the ceremony, Che and Jost generally came off as stiff and indifferent to being at the Emmys, an air that only played worse in light of how peppy everyone else seemed to be.</p>

<p>Though they attempted to spice things up by bringing on Maya Rudolph and Fred Armisen to play clueless Emmy historians, the pair were surrounded by more dead air than most, and it seemed like Che and Jost&rsquo;s ambivalence <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/colin-jost-michael-che-tease-political-emmys-2018-plans-1143401">leading up the ceremony</a> as to whether they&rsquo;d tackle more political material stranded them in a bit of a dead middle ground.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: Lorne Michaels</h2>
<p>Che and Jost might not have been the best hosts, but the pace of this Emmy show was surprisingly brisk, and when Kenan Thompson announced <em>Game of Thrones</em> had won Drama Series, there was still plenty of time left for a speech and to get the show in on time. And if you&rsquo;ve ever watched an awards show, you know that&rsquo;s an accomplishment.</p>

<p>Credit goes to producer Lorne Michaels, who had clearly drilled everybody involved to keep things moving. He didn&rsquo;t even have to resort to the sorts of tricks other awards show producers do to keep the show on track. Right up until the end, every category had its clips package, so viewers could see the nominated work.</p>

<p>And the cherry on the top? Michaels won his umpteenth (technically his 16th) Emmy for <em>Saturday Night Live</em>, which pulled out the win in the variety-sketch category. Congratulations to you, Lorne Michaels, an unheralded showbiz figure!</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Winner: presenters</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="70th Emmy Awards: Stephen Daldry of &#039;The Crown&#039; Wins For Outstanding Directing For A Drama Series" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-K_fGinKuk8?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Though occasionally accompanied by some truly baffling choices of walking music (loser: classical music), the presenters for the night were mostly great. Aidy Bryant and Bob Odenkirk, Tiffany Haddish and Angela Bassett, the new <em>Queer Eye</em> Fab Five &mdash; though the night failed to bring any real surprises (except maybe <em>Godless</em>&rsquo;s two wins), it was still a mostly charming time thanks to well-curated (and brief) presentation bits.</p>

<p>One of the standout presenters was <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/7/5/17527478/hannah-gadsby-nanette-comedy"><em>Nanette</em>&rsquo;s Hannah Gadsby</a>, who joked that she&rsquo;d gotten the gig because she didn&rsquo;t like men. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s a joke, of course,&rdquo; she quickly said. &ldquo;Just jokes, fellas, calm down. #NotAllMen &mdash; but a lot of them.&rdquo; She followed up that bit by noting, &ldquo;Nobody knows what jokes are &mdash; especially not men. Am I right, fellas? That&rsquo;s why I&rsquo;m presenting alone.&rdquo;</p>

<p>It was perhaps the only moment of the night that didn&rsquo;t get the reaction shot it needed, i.e., one of Michael Che, who still <a href="http://www.vulture.com/2018/07/has-michael-che-seen-nanette-an-investigation.html">may or may not have seen <em>Nanette</em></a>.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Loser: first-time winners</h2>
<p>Okay, sure, the show eventually got a fair number of first-time winners &mdash; like Rhys, Foy, and Newton &mdash; but for a shockingly long amount of time, every single winner of the evening already had an Emmy from some previous ceremony.</p>

<p>To be sure, a couple of those people (Sherman-Palladino and Borstein) had Emmys from last week&rsquo;s Creative Arts awards &mdash; so more of a technicality than anything &mdash; while Winkler&rsquo;s other Emmys are Daytime Emmys (which shouldn&rsquo;t count, obviously). But then you had folks like Dinklage or 14-time winner Glenn Weiss or three-time winner Regina King (who won Lead Actress in a Limited Series for her &ldquo;blink and you missed it&rdquo; Netflix show <em>Seven Seconds</em>).</p>

<p>The Emmys love people who&rsquo;ve previously won Emmys. We know that. But <em>this much</em>? We look forward to rejoining you in 2019, when <em>Game of Thrones</em> mops up 22 trophies for its final season.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Loser: “Diversity”</h2>
<p>The disparity between the night&rsquo;s lively <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/9/17/17872322/2018-emmys-diversity-song">opening number</a> &mdash; which joked about Hollywood having &ldquo;solved diversity&rdquo; because the nominee pool was the most diverse it&rsquo;s ever been &mdash;and Che and Jost&rsquo;s lifeless opening monologue proved to be something of a harbinger for the night to come, as efforts to celebrate diversity ended up flopping in practice.</p>

<p>Despite wins for stars like Regina King and Thandie Newton, <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/9/17/17870008/emmy-winners-2018-list">the Emmy winners list</a> doesn&rsquo;t quite reflect the diversity of the pool of nominees, a sentiment best expressed in a post-ceremony tweet by John Leguizamo (who was nominated for his work in <em>Waco</em>):</p>
<figure class="wp-block-embed is-type-rich is-provider-twitter wp-block-embed-twitter alignnone"><div class="wp-block-embed__wrapper">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">What can I say?  I tried to represent for 20 million Latinxs and I failed! I’m sorry!  Underrepresentation is a bitch of a burden! <a href="https://t.co/bk4Ld0lloR">pic.twitter.com/bk4Ld0lloR</a></p>&mdash; John Leguizamo (@JohnLeguizamo) <a href="https://twitter.com/JohnLeguizamo/status/1041894997362999296?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
</div></figure>
<p>The Academy isn&rsquo;t hopeless on diversity &mdash; for the first time ever, all four guest acting winners were black performers, and Sherman-Palladino&rsquo;s triumph is groundbreaking for women in comedy &mdash; but the overwhelmingly white slate of winners in 2018 pales slightly in comparison to previous years, when actors like Sterling K. Brown and Donald Glover took home trophies in topline categories. So yes, TV has definitely made some strides &mdash; but there&rsquo;s still clearly a long way to go.</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Constance Grady</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Aja Romano</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Alissa Wilkinson</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Why romantic comedies matter]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/29/17769168/romantic-comedies-crazy-rich-asians-all-the-boys-set-it-up" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/29/17769168/romantic-comedies-crazy-rich-asians-all-the-boys-set-it-up</id>
			<updated>2018-09-13T14:48:44-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-08-29T08:30:02-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Movies" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="TV" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Until very recently, it felt like romantic comedies &#8212; at least the big-budget Hollywood kind &#8212; finally might have died. The culprits blamed for the genre&#8217;s decline ranged from the death of mid-budget movies to the genre&#8217;s reputation for being &#8220;unserious&#8221; to, uh, Katherine Heigl. But this summer, it&#8217;s come roaring back, specifically thanks to [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="Christina Animashaun/Vox; IMDB" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12661691/rom_com_roundtable_draft.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
		</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Until very recently, it felt like romantic comedies &mdash; at least the big-budget Hollywood kind &mdash; finally might have died. The <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/2/14/14604300/romantic-comedy-dead-netflix-crazy-rich-asians">culprits blamed for the genre&rsquo;s decline</a> ranged from the death of mid-budget movies to the genre&rsquo;s reputation for being &ldquo;unserious&rdquo; to, uh, Katherine Heigl.</p>

<p>But this summer, it&rsquo;s come roaring back, specifically thanks to three movies that made waves with audiences: the big-screen hit <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/17/17694932/crazy-rich-asians-movie-reviews-news-hollywood-milestone"><em>Crazy Rich Asians</em></a>, and the Netflix sensations <a href="https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2018/6/29/17513562/set-it-up-review-netflix-romantic-comedy-romcom"><em>Set It Up</em></a> and <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/19/17756330/to-all-the-boys-ive-loved-before-review-netflix"><em>To All the Boys I&rsquo;ve Loved Before</em></a><em>. </em>All three hew to romantic comedy conventions but with a twist, and suddenly it feels like rom-coms may be back after all.</p>

<p>Vox&rsquo;s culture writers love a good romantic comedy. So to celebrate the burgeoning rom-com renaissance, we sat down to discuss the limits and possibilities of the genre, the hang-ups that hold it back, how rom-coms can be more inclusive, and what (and <em>who</em>) we&rsquo;d like to see in rom-coms in the future.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Ingredients for a great rom-com: time-honored tropes, charismatic leads, and a lot of joy</h2>
<p><strong>Alissa Wilkinson: </strong>Some of the most beloved films of all time are rom-coms, but the label is often used as shorthand for &ldquo;unimportant,&rdquo; &ldquo;fluffy,&rdquo; and &ldquo;inconsequential.&rdquo;<strong> </strong>There are a few reasons for that, one of which is that rom-coms are seen as geared toward a female audience, and films for women have often been considered less important or less substantial than &ldquo;prestige&rdquo; films. Couple that with the lasting sense, in some quarters, that comedies just aren&rsquo;t as worthy of serious consideration as dramas and you end up with rom-coms being sidelined.</p>

<p>Yet I believe, and I think you all do too, that there&rsquo;s a lot of value to rom-coms, and a reason they endure as one of the oldest and most beloved forms of storytelling. What, in your view, do rom-coms do well? What makes them have so much staying power?</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11620313/youvegotmail.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan in You’ve Got Mail" title="Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan in You’ve Got Mail" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan in &lt;em&gt;You’ve Got Mail.&lt;/em&gt; | Warner Bros." data-portal-copyright="Warner Bros." />
<p><strong>Constance Grady:</strong> I think any defense of rom-coms has to begin with the idea that it can be enjoyable and worthwhile to watch two attractive people trade banter, face complications, and eventually fall in love, and <em>there is nothing wrong with that</em>. That basic plot template is not inherently less valuable than the one about the sad, mean man who is really good at something and so has no excuse but to be terrible to the people around him, or the one about the people who fight in a war and are very brave. The fact that we treat rom-coms as frothy nonsense for dumb people stems from the fact that romantic comedies are generally marketed to women, whom our culture does not like &mdash; not from the genre&rsquo;s inherent value.</p>

<p>At their very best, romantic comedies are sheer joy. They are about forging human connections and people changing each other for the better &mdash; all of which is complex stuff that is worthy of sustained aesthetic attention &mdash;&nbsp;and they approach their subject matter with glee.</p>

<p>I was reminded of that fact when watching <em>Set It Up</em> and <em>To All the Boys I&rsquo;ve Loved Before</em>, two of the best rom-coms of the summer and the result of Netflix&rsquo;s decision to try to fill the long-ignored rom-com market niche. Romantic comedies are about happiness! It&rsquo;s a joyous experience to watch <em>Set It Up</em>&rsquo;s Charlie and Harper accidentally fall into a slow dance and then painstakingly drag a pizza up a New York fire escape. It&rsquo;s a joyous experience to watch <em>To All the Boys I&rsquo;ve Loved Before</em>&rsquo;s Peter Kazinsky bashfully splash water at Lara Jean because he can&rsquo;t <em>quite</em> bring himself to tell her he likes her.</p>

<p>This is a genre that&rsquo;s about delivering joy to the audience, and what is wrong with that?</p>

<p><strong>Genevieve Koski: </strong>It&rsquo;s also a genre whose success is heavily dependent on charisma, which is the sort of cinematic juju that&rsquo;s tough both to define and to replicate. Note, charisma is not the same thing as chemistry &mdash; I&rsquo;d argue that a lot of the most successful rom-coms of the past 30 years or so feature leads with chemistry that&rsquo;s lukewarm at best. But at least one half of your romantic duo, and ideally both halves, need to possess that tricky balance of relatable and aspirational qualities that makes it possible to engage with and care about characters whose narratives are usually, but not always, defined by contrivance. (See: the notorious &ldquo;meet-cute.&rdquo;)&nbsp;</p>

<p>Rom-com nonbelievers love to roll their eyes at this kind of narrative, characterizing it as cheesy or clich&eacute;d while willfully ignoring the fact that this type of storytelling has been around since the days of Shakespeare&rsquo;s comedies. But with the right character(s), played by the right actor(s), those contrivances become a path to the sort of joyful human connection Constance is talking about. You need to care about the characters; even if you don&rsquo;t necessarily like them, you need to be invested in them, and by extension their journey. And while that starts on the page, with the writing, it&rsquo;s ultimately dependent on the people who bring those characters to life onscreen.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3898414/clueless.0.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Alicia Silverstone in clueless" title="Alicia Silverstone in clueless" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Ugh, as if! | Paramount Pictures" data-portal-copyright="Paramount Pictures" />
<p>So when we talk about the rom-com drought (and possible resurgence), for me one of the biggest issues at the heart of the trend is, as <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/2/14/14604300/romantic-comedy-dead-netflix-crazy-rich-asians">Vox&rsquo;s own Todd VanDerWerff put it</a>, many actresses&rsquo; reticence to do rom-coms. This is all tied up with a lot of other issues facing the genre, like the perceived lack of prestige that you note, Alissa &mdash; and which I definitely want to come back to, since some of the most beloved and respected films of the 1940s and &rsquo;50s are rom-coms, directed by legendary directors and featuring some of the biggest movie stars in history!</p>

<p>Somewhere along the way, they took on negative (and, yes, gendered) baggage, thus limiting the pool of actors who are both capable of and willing to bring life to this kind of story. The fact that this baggage has denied us the Rachel McAdams-led rom-com wave we all need and deserve is a grievous wrong that must be righted.</p>

<p><strong>Aja Romano: </strong>I think another significant factor in the denigration of the rom-com is that they are built so heavily on tropes; their predictability is a huge part of their appeal, but like every other genre that relies heavily on genre tropes, the rom-com has been treated contemptuously by &ldquo;serious&rdquo; creators and authors for decades.</p>

<p>The mainstreaming of geek culture has gradually granted legitimacy to all the other heavily trope-based genres &mdash; comics, fantasy, sci-fi, video game narratives, horror &mdash; because they appealed to men, and male nerds have been ascendant. Yet trope-heavy genres dominated by women, which are mainly rom-com, erotic romance, and young adult at this point, have continued to struggle to gain any kind of cultural legitimacy.</p>

<p>I think it&rsquo;s significant that a lot of the most critically successful recent films in this vein (<em>Silver Linings Playbook</em>, <em>Young Adult</em>, <a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/11/2/16552860/lady-bird-review-saoirse-ronan-greta-gerwig"><em>Lady Bird</em></a>, <a href="https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2018/7/13/17561970/eighth-grade-review-bo-burnham"><em>Eighth Grade</em></a>) generally attempt to layer a rom-com structure onto another kind of narrative &mdash; the teen comedy or the family dramedy. It suggests to me that Hollywood is most interested in giving these tropes attention when they&rsquo;re approached ironically or at angles.</p>

<p>That makes the recent immediate success of Netflix&rsquo;s rom-coms, as well as <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em>, an ebullient reminder that the audience for these tropes is mighty and vocal, and they know what they want and are very interested in owning it, being positive about it, and having it delivered unto them. I see <em>Jupiter Ascending</em> as a significant precursor here: Female fans lost their minds over that movie precisely because it was so open and unabashed about embracing its romance tropes and catering to viewers&rsquo; desire for self-indulgent id-fantasy &mdash; which, of course, was <a href="https://www.themarysue.com/review-jupiter-ascending-the-worst/">the very same reason</a> it was <a href="https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jupiter-ascending-2015">critically</a> <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-reviews/jupiter-ascending-255497/">trashed</a>.</p>

<p>This also plays into the huge dominance of fanfiction culture&rsquo;s sincere embrace of tropes, where fans are very upfront about wanting endless repetitions of coffee-shop meet-cutes and high school teen romances and office rom-coms, and there&rsquo;s no high/low cultural divide, or any shame attached to loving these tropes. There&rsquo;s a huge overlap between these transformative fans and the audiences turning out in droves for <em>To All the Boys I&rsquo;ve Loved Before</em> and <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em>, and that is, I hope, a sign that the female-dominated side of geek culture is finally starting to make inroads toward the cultural mainstream, and that its desire for these kinds of stories is starting to become more widely understood and accepted.</p>

<p><strong>Todd VanDerWerff: </strong>Allow me to say a few words in favor of my beloved television, where the romantic comedy has migrated in these recent years of trial. <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/9/9/9295685/youre-the-worst-season-2-fxx-review"><em>You&rsquo;re the Worst</em></a> has had its rough patches, but whenever it turns its eyes toward being a straightforward rom-com with an acerbic point of view, it&rsquo;s aces. Similarly, <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/2/11/16997268/jane-the-virgin-chapter-seventy-four-recap-sex"><em>Jane the Virgin</em></a> has had, like, 17 different rom-coms stuffed into its candy-colored confines, and that&rsquo;s only a slight exaggeration. And <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/1/19/16885806/crazy-ex-girlfriend-songs-ranked-list"><em>Crazy Ex-Girlfriend</em></a> deconstructs rom-com tropes better than almost anybody else.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/987244/YTW_110_1746_hires2.0.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="You’re the Worst" title="You’re the Worst" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="&lt;em&gt;You’re the Worst&lt;/em&gt; is one of TV’s most acerbic — and funniest — comedies. | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p>But there&rsquo;s also something to the idea that the best format for a romantic comedy is a movie, because you get to have the happy ending climax of the lovers walking blissfully into the sunset without any of the complications that follow, which TV inevitably has to get into. You also get to see attractive people enacting those tropes, which gives film a boost over novels in this regard. (At least for me. I&rsquo;ll take the controversial stance of saying that I like pretty people.)</p>

<p>I wouldn&rsquo;t say that the rom-com completely disappeared in the past 10 years, so much as its many tropes got submerged into different movies. Judd Apatow&rsquo;s entire oeuvre is based on transplanting rom-com tropes into movies aimed more explicitly at the guy-heavy raunch-com audience. (I like a lot of his films too! I&rsquo;ll even stan for <em>Funny People</em>, which I realize isn&rsquo;t his most popular title.)</p>

<p>And a lot of the very perfunctory romantic subplots in superhero movies feel ripped directly from the rom-com playbook. Like, it&rsquo;s really easy to imagine a version of <em>Iron Man</em> that&rsquo;s just Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow falling in love, with him occasionally flying off to fight evil. That&rsquo;s how much fun it is to watch them banter.</p>

<p>But I look at rom-coms and see something similar to what happened to horror, where the genre got laden down with a bunch of relatively unpleasant movies in the mid-2000s, which turned off a more general audience, and it went into hiding. But where horror has experienced a resurgence, thanks to the rise of a whole new indie horror aesthetic and the relentless work of horror super-producer Jason Blum, rom-coms are still searching for their next big launchpad. My hope is that the rom-coms of summer 2018 are that launchpad, but I&rsquo;ve been burned before.</p>

<p>My question has always been why some Jason Blum wannabe doesn&rsquo;t just make a deal with a studio to make a bunch of cheap ($5 million and under) romantic comedies, just as Blum did with Universal and horror. But my fear is that for a variety of reasons &mdash; including the genre&rsquo;s perceived appeal only to women, and the fact that its dependence on strong actors means studios have to pay those actors more, which adds up quickly &mdash; this is unlikely to happen.</p>

<p>That leaves Netflix. And while I love some of its movies, a lot of its rom-coms are kind of reprehensible. And a bad rom-com too often isn&rsquo;t just a bad movie; it&rsquo;s also propping up some pretty toxic worldviews. So I want to believe in Netflix as a savior, but I have my doubts.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11620285/setitup1.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Glen Powell and Zoey Deutch star as two put-upon assistants in Set It Up" title="Glen Powell and Zoey Deutch star as two put-upon assistants in Set It Up" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Will Netflix save the romantic comedy with films like &lt;em&gt;Set It Up&lt;/em&gt;? | Netflix" data-portal-copyright="Netflix" /><h2 class="wp-block-heading">Can rom-coms become more inclusive?</h2>
<p><strong>Alissa: </strong>What we&rsquo;ve been saying, in many ways, is that what makes a rom-com great has a lot to do with who is in it and how it uses (and sometimes messes with) the tropes of the genre, many of which have been around for centuries. The rom-com is surprisingly durable, and as Genevieve pointed out, some of the most respected films of the 1940s and &rsquo;50s are rom-coms &mdash; it&rsquo;s just that they&rsquo;ve attained such canonical status that people talk about them as &ldquo;classics,&rdquo; not &ldquo;rom-coms.&rdquo; (As if &ldquo;classic&rdquo; can be a genre anyhow, but I digress.)</p>

<p>That does lead us down an interesting path, though: If the story and the stars are a lot of what makes great rom-coms work, and Hollywood is feinting toward more inclusive casting and storytelling, how will rom-coms evolve going forward? The rom-coms marketed at the &ldquo;mainstream&rdquo; audience have often starred white actors portraying straight characters. Is that going to change? And are there films, maybe some that have flown under the radar for some moviegoers, that have already<strong> </strong>challenged those rom-com conventions?</p>

<p><strong>Constance: </strong>For my money, part of what makes this year&rsquo;s rom-com revival so exciting &mdash; and what gives me hope that it will have some sort of enduring effect on the industry &mdash; is the kind of stars it&rsquo;s making.</p>

<p>We&rsquo;ve talked a little already about how vital the charisma of a star is to making a rom-com work, but the reverse is true as well. The rom-com and its stars are in a symbiotic relationship: The right stars will make a romantic comedy sing, and the right romantic comedy can jump-start its stars&rsquo; careers. Because when you watch a really good romantic comedy, you fall a little bit in love with the actors involved. You want them to succeed. You might even be willing to go to a different movie just to see them again.</p>

<p>Landing the leading role in a good romantic comedy can transform a working actor into a household name. And right now, the stars that the rom-com revival is making aren&rsquo;t just white people.</p>

<p>One of the biggest narratives of the summer has been that with movies like <em>To All the Boys</em> and <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em>, Hollywood is <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/17/17682032/crazy-rich-asians-representation-asian-men">finally letting Asian people fall in love</a>. It&rsquo;s hard to say for sure if this is a blip or a genuine sea change&nbsp;(way back when <em>The Joy Luck Club</em> came out in 1993, the narrative was that Hollywood was finally telling stories about Asian people, and then no one made another Asian ensemble film for 25 years), but while this moment lasts, it&rsquo;s putting incredibly talented and previously overlooked actors into the spotlight.</p>

<p>Constance Wu has been killing it on <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3551096/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><em>Fresh Off the Boat</em></a> for five seasons, but after <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em>, now she&rsquo;s a movie star. Lana Condor has spent years languishing in action movies, <a href="https://uproxx.com/movies/to-all-the-boys-ive-loved-before-lana-condor-interview-2/2/">not even daring to hope that she could get placed in a romantic comedy</a>, and now she&rsquo;s the face of one of the buzziest hits on Netflix.</p>

<p>For as long as Hollywood continues to make romantic comedies that center on marginalized people &mdash; and there&rsquo;s no way of knowing for sure how long that moment will last &mdash; it&rsquo;s going to keep giving actors from marginalized communities the chance to make audiences fall completely in love with them. And that means there&rsquo;s a shot that they&rsquo;ll become genuine stars.</p>

<p><strong>Aja:</strong> I think, too, that we&rsquo;re seeing a renewed awareness that you don&rsquo;t necessarily have to subvert rom-com tropes to create fun and enjoyable stories that people respond to &mdash; you can just have fun retelling them again and again, because so much of the validation does come from watching charismatic actors carry the storyline.</p>

<p>And that makes the rom-com a really fruitful space, I think, for marginalized communities of actors and creators who&rsquo;ve traditionally been barred from telling stories like these, because now there&rsquo;s nothing stopping anyone from remaking <em>It Happened One Night </em>or <em>Bringing Up Baby</em> with a whole new ensemble. There&rsquo;s every indication that the audience will be there &mdash; for instance, look how successful K-dramas, with their <a href="http://www.dramabeans.com/2017/01/our-top-10-favorite-k-drama-tropes/">shameless embrace of rom-com tropes</a> and their tendency to <a href="http://kdramabuzz.com/6-korean-remakes-loved-original/">retell well-known storylines</a>, have been, both overseas and in the US.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8723089/bigsick1.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Kazan and Nanjiani in The Big Sick" title="Kazan and Nanjiani in The Big Sick" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Zoe Kazan and Kumail Nanjiani starred in &lt;em&gt;The Big Sick&lt;/em&gt; in 2017. | Amazon Studios" data-portal-copyright="Amazon Studios" />
<p>I also want to mention <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/3/16/17126926/love-simon-review-movie"><em>Love, Simon</em></a> and perhaps even <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/2/27/14748332/moonlight-best-picture-why-it-won"><em>Moonlight</em></a><em> </em>and <a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/11/21/16552862/call-me-by-your-name-review-timothee-chalamet-armie-hammer"><em>Call Me by Your Name</em></a> here, because while those latter two aren&rsquo;t rom-coms, and <em>Love, Simon</em> might be arguably more of a teen comedy than a rom-com, they collectively indicate an emerging positive space for queer romance. It pains me endlessly to realize that the last queer rom-com I can remember making a mainstream splash is 2005&rsquo;s <em>Imagine Me &amp; You</em> &mdash; which is also one of the few really pure, trope-a-licious queer rom-coms.</p>

<p>That film capped a decade starting in the mid-&rsquo;90s when indie queer rom-coms (<em>Jeffrey</em>, <em>Trick, The Opposite of Sex, But I&rsquo;m a Cheerleader</em>, <em>Big Eden</em>, <em>Touch of Pink</em>, the <a href="https://forums.thedigitalfix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=245468">long-rumored</a> <a href="https://everythingyouloveisgay.wordpress.com/2017/05/03/bend-it-more-like-straighten-it-a-look-at-the-queer-subtext-of-bend-it-like-beckham/">original cut</a> of <em>Bend It Like Beckham </em>the world deserved, sigh) were pretty easy to find but often deeply flawed, tinged with understandable sadness and sociopolitical edge, and more than a little weird. We are overdue for a queer romance renaissance in which the gays just get to have fun and fall in love without having to undergo a social reckoning.</p>

<p>That&rsquo;s a huge part of why <em>Love, Simon</em> is so important &mdash; and I&rsquo;m hopeful the love and support queer romances have been getting lately will open the field for more mainstreamed queer and genderqueer rom-coms that allow queer people to participate in universal love stories. In other words, I want to see queer and genderqueer remakes of <em>His Girl Friday </em>and <em>The Women</em>, let&rsquo;s do this, Hollywood!</p>

<p><strong>Todd: </strong>It&rsquo;s also exciting because this is really one of the first times in Hollywood history where you can just make a rom-com around LGBTQ themes, aimed at a large audience, that doesn&rsquo;t need to be explicitly about the larger experience of being LGBTQ.</p>

<p>Even 10 years ago, there was at least a minor expectation that these stories needed to be filtered through a cis/hetero lens, and they always contained a certain element of, like, &ldquo;being gay, explained.&rdquo; There&rsquo;s less of that now. A movie like <em>Love, Simon</em> can just exist, can just be thoroughly adequate. That&rsquo;s revolutionary in its own way, but we&rsquo;re rapidly approaching a point where it won&rsquo;t feel revolutionary, which is even more impressive.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/10434779/love_simon_dom_DF_00057_CROP_rgb.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Love, Simon" title="Love, Simon" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="&lt;em&gt;Love, Simon&lt;/em&gt; garnered mixed reviews, but that’s part of why it’s important. | 20th Century Fox" data-portal-copyright="20th Century Fox" />
<p>But I think the larger point I&rsquo;m nodding toward here is cultural specificity. There&rsquo;s far less need to indulge in explaining things to the audience over and over again, out of fear that not everybody will &ldquo;get it.&rdquo; The <a href="https://www.vox.com/first-person/2018/8/17/17723242/crazy-rich-asians-movie-mahjong">mahjong scene in <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em></a><em> </em>simply flies by, trusting you to get the emotional impact of what happens even if you can&rsquo;t explain all the machinations within the game itself. It works because we&rsquo;ve all freaked out about pleasing the parents of someone we really care about.</p>

<p>Similarly, <a href="https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2017/6/21/15837678/big-sick-review-kumail-nanjiani-emily-gordon-zoe-kazan-islam"><em>The Big Sick</em></a> trades on a conflict rooted in incredible cultural specificity &mdash; the main character&rsquo;s desire to choose his romantic partner, rather than his parents getting a say in the process &mdash; that broadens out to a more universal consideration of the way family can make it harder to fall in love.</p>

<p>This means a lot of the old rom-com tropes feel ripe for exploration again. And thus, I hope more actors try their hand at the genre. Which performers would you like to see appear in a romantic comedy? I&rsquo;d love Michael B. Jordan to get a shot at one after seeing the romantic scenes in <em>Creed</em>. I suspect we&rsquo;d all fall in love with him.</p>

<p><strong>Genevieve: </strong>I&rsquo;m going to table that question for just a moment, Todd, because this is probably a good place to acknowledge that the past 20 years or so have seen <a href="https://www.essence.com/celebrity/our-15-favorite-black-romantic-comedies-all-time/">their fair share of black romantic comedies</a>, very few of which have been able to break out of that unfortunately niche distinction but have collectively established a roster of black actors with a proven history of carrying a rom-com.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Taye Diggs, Gabrielle Union, Sanaa Lathan, and Queen Latifah have all had multiple go-rounds in a subgenre that has produced a handful of &ldquo;surprise&rdquo; box office successes in the past decade or so, some of which trade in exactly the sort of cultural specificity Todd is describing.</p>

<p>I&rsquo;m thinking of 2011&rsquo;s <em>Jumping the Broom, </em>which &ldquo;overperformed&rdquo; in its debut and went on make back five times its production budget; 2012&rsquo;s <em>Think Like a Man, </em>a cameo-festooned adaptation of a Steve Harvey book that took in $33 million its opening weekend &mdash; that&rsquo;s right around <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/8/27/17786046/crazy-rich-asians-box-office-success">what <em>Crazy Rich Asians </em>pulled in</a> &mdash; and produced a 2014 sequel that opened nearly as big; and 2013&rsquo;s <em>The Best Man Holiday</em>, a sequel to Malcolm Lee&rsquo;s beloved 1999 film <em>The Best Man</em>, whose $30 million-plus opening weekend debut &ldquo;<a href="http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-thor-2-box-office-best-man-holiday-20131117-story.html#axzz2l0Z9zN00">trounced all expectations</a>.&rdquo;</p>

<p>The box office performance of <em>The Best Man Holiday</em> in particular <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2013/nov/19/entertainment/la-et-mn-best-man-holiday-black-films-20131119">started</a> <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2013/11/18/the-lesson-of-the-best-man-holiday-black-people-like-movies-too/#47a8a3157662">a dialogue</a> about the assumptions around these films that lead to these &ldquo;surprise&rdquo; big openings, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/is-love-lost-on-the-black-romantic-comedy/2016/10/06/a2c0a3f2-84da-11e6-92c2-14b64f3d453f_story.html?utm_term=.4b21cf031693">assumptions</a> that combine misconceptions about the rom-com with misconceptions about black films: that mainstream audiences don&rsquo;t show up to black films, and that, as one studio executive <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/is-love-lost-on-the-black-romantic-comedy/2016/10/06/a2c0a3f2-84da-11e6-92c2-14b64f3d453f_story.html?utm_term=.4b21cf031693">told</a> <em>Brown Sugar</em> screenwriter Michael Elliot, &ldquo;Love does not really resonate with black people. Comedy does.&rdquo;&nbsp;</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/12665545/thinklikeaman.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Think Like a Man was a big box-office hit in 2012." title="Think Like a Man was a big box-office hit in 2012." data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="&lt;em&gt;Think Like a Man&lt;/em&gt; was a big box office hit in 2012. | Screen Gems" data-portal-copyright="Screen Gems" />
<p>What exactly am I getting at here? I&rsquo;m honestly not entirely sure, and I don&rsquo;t want to suggest I&rsquo;m some sort of expert on black romantic comedies &mdash; I&rsquo;ll guiltily admit that I haven&rsquo;t seen most of the films I just mentioned, though I am quite aware of how they are often misperceived by the industry, and of how my ignorance of them contributes to those misperceptions.&nbsp;</p>

<p>But I think if we&rsquo;re talking about the broad assumptions surrounding romantic comedies, and if we&rsquo;re talking about more inclusive storytelling, and if we&rsquo;re talking about bankable romantic leads who aren&rsquo;t white, and if we&rsquo;re talking about whether romantic comedies can succeed at the box office, we can&rsquo;t not talk about the lack of consideration that&rsquo;s been afforded to black romantic comedies over the years by the broader film community.</p>

<p>When Vulture published its <a href="http://www.vulture.com/2014/02/25-best-romantic-comedies-since-1989-when-harry-met-sally.html">2015 list</a> of the best rom-coms since <em>When Harry Met Sally, </em>a list that included no films with black or LGBTQ leads, it did so with the admission of its own &ldquo;blind spots,&rdquo; conceding in its intro that &ldquo;there are movies this list needs.&rdquo;&nbsp;</p>

<p>All that said, there has not been, to my knowledge, a financially successful black rom-com film since 2014&rsquo;s <em>Think Like a Man Too</em>, which came out almost five years ago at this point. (Diggs co-stars in <em>Set It Up</em>, but he&rsquo;s more of a romantic <em>antagonist </em>there, and I don&rsquo;t think anyone would dare categorize it as a black rom-com.) If we are indeed in the midst of a rom-com renaissance, I hope those looking to revive the genre remember the legacy-within-a-legacy of the black rom-com, if for nothing else than to help correct what might be the mainstream rom-com&rsquo;s biggest, most shameful blind spot.</p>

<p>Anyway, please cast GuGu Mbatha-Raw, of <em>Beyond the Lights</em> and <em>Black Mirror&rsquo;s </em>&ldquo;San Junipero,&rdquo; in a romantic comedy, thank you.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">How we’d set up future rom-coms for success</h2>
<p><strong>Alissa: </strong>Speaking of dictums aimed at Hollywood! Suppose a studio executive approaches you at a cocktail party and says that they think the rom-com is about to have a resurgence, and wants your best piece of advice for making a great one.</p>

<p>What do you say?</p>

<p><strong>Constance:</strong> I&rsquo;m going to take my inspiration from <em>To All the Boys</em> and get really earnest here: I think the most important thing for a romantic comedy to have is emotional honesty.</p>

<p>Part of what killed the romantic comedy in the mid-&rsquo;00s was that the biggest studio rom-coms, your <em>How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days</em> or your <em>Ghosts of Girlfriends Past</em>, were getting increasingly slick and smarmy and cynical. They followed the formula of a rom-com on a surface level &mdash;&nbsp;aspirational jobs, fancy clothes, beautiful people &mdash;&nbsp;but they were made with a palpable contempt for both their characters and the people who enjoy watching romantic comedies. These movies didn&rsquo;t care about their characters or why they should fall in love; they were just putting them through the motions. And watching them didn&rsquo;t feel escapist and joyous and fun. It felt gross and slimy.</p>

<p>That&rsquo;s part of why it&rsquo;s felt so refreshing and exciting that this year&rsquo;s best romantic comedies are suffused with sincere affection for the genre and for their characters. It&rsquo;s because we can feel that these movies love their characters that we&rsquo;re able to fall in love with them too, and that love is something that can&rsquo;t be faked. It has to come from a place of honest respect and affection.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11953657/MV5BYzI2NTMyZDktMTAzZC00ZTRjLWJhMGItMDg3ODZjOTYzMWRhXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTkxNjUyNQ__._V1_SY1000_SX1500_AL_.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Crazy Rich Asians" title="Crazy Rich Asians" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="&lt;em&gt;Crazy Rich Asians&lt;/em&gt; loves its characters, so we do too. | Warner Bros." data-portal-copyright="Warner Bros." />
<p><strong>Todd: </strong>I would double up on Constance&rsquo;s suggestion: Sincerity is key. If you don&rsquo;t believe in the love story, then there&rsquo;s no good reason to tell it.</p>

<p>But I would also encourage this imaginary exec to continue exploring the ways that falling in love can feel universal, even when rooted in very specific experiences. A film I didn&rsquo;t talk about earlier was Azazel Jacobs&rsquo;s <em>The Lovers</em>, which is maybe a little too dark to be a classic rom-com but definitely has the trappings of one. What I liked about that movie was how it rooted its rom-com shenanigans in the very specific milieu of a long-lasting marriage, between two people exiting middle age for their elderly years who are just pretty sick of each other. It gave what could have been a tired story an extra boost of dramatic stakes, and that was all it took.</p>

<p>But really, so long as Matthew McConaughey is nowhere near this rom-com renaissance, we&rsquo;re doing something right. Sorry, Matthew. Love your smarm, but not in this genre.</p>

<p><strong>Aja:</strong> My suggestion is probably why I don&rsquo;t wind up getting invited to many cocktail parties: I&rsquo;d tell them to read more fanfic. Because in fanfiction, especially queer fanfiction, writers tend to simultaneously embrace and explode rom-com tropes. They do that by treating them extremely seriously and with that much-coveted sincerity, but also by centering them within very self-aware lived experiences, making conscious choices about how to either subvert the tropes they&rsquo;re working with or reframe social issues in order to shamelessly leverage those tropes to create even more shameless fantasy.</p>

<p>Fanfiction is all about cultivating a fantasy version of reality where challenging romances can thrive, but fanfiction also never lets us forget that its creators are driven to build that fantasy version of reality <em>because</em> the real one sucks. I&rsquo;m reminded of the 2009 sci-fi romance <em>Timer</em>, which is explicitly about that fantasy/reality divide. It&rsquo;s not a happy movie, but it inadvertently created <a href="https://fanlore.org/wiki/Soulmates#Soulmate-identifying_Marks">a massively popular recent fanfiction trope</a>, because people who write romances have increasingly used the genre and its tropes to thwart socially imposed norms that tell us what love should be and look like.</p>

<p>I believe the way to keep this genre resurgence going is to keep writing it within that framework &mdash; by embracing romantic fantasy as a powerful palliative and social remedy. Tension between fantasy and reality makes romance stories more passionate, and the more people we have telling these stories, the more diverse and fascinating real-world experiences we can draw on as we create new fantasies for everyone to enjoy.</p>

<p><strong>Genevieve: </strong>I&rsquo;m going to second all of this, but conclude with some cold pragmatism that might seem to undermine what we&rsquo;ve been talking about. Just bear with me, because studio execs in particular need to hear this: Please don&rsquo;t think of rom-coms as potential blockbusters.&nbsp;</p>

<p>So much of Hollywood&rsquo;s modern movie model is built on the quest for big openings and big international box office tallies, and those are not expectations that this genre is in a position to meet. The latter is particularly tough for a genre built on two things &mdash; comedy and romance tropes &mdash; that don&rsquo;t easily translate between cultures (give or take the occasional cross-cultural property like <em>Crazy Rich Asians</em>).</p>

<p>I worry that a studio exec who&rsquo;s deeply internalized this model might hear the words &ldquo;rom-com resurgence&rdquo; and be tempted to throw millions at these movies, paying through the nose for bankable international stars and big-name directors with the expectation of a return on investment that is unlikely to happen.</p>

<p>As previously mentioned by Todd, the recent indie/Blumhouse horror revival is the model to follow here: Think small but distinctive, cheap but memorable. Invest in lesser-known talents with a passion for the genre who are eager to bring something new to it while respecting its roots. At the very least, you&rsquo;re likely to get a good return on investment; if you play your cards right, you might even get some prestige shine in the deal.</p>

<p>The rom-com could and should be a strong part of a studio&rsquo;s portfolio, but overinvesting in a genre that tends toward the small and the intimate by design is a recipe for a resurgence that&rsquo;s DOA. As I think we&rsquo;ve proven with this discussion, there&rsquo;s plenty of enthusiasm out there for the genre; if Hollywood wants to capture that enthusiasm, it needs to let the rom-com succeed on its own terms.</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Alissa Wilkinson</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Aja Romano</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Forget Best Popular Film. Here are 6 new categories the Oscars actually need.]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/9/17665634/oscars-new-categories" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/9/17665634/oscars-new-categories</id>
			<updated>2018-08-16T16:53:46-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-08-09T14:40:02-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Awards Shows" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Movies" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Oscars" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[The 2019 Oscars will feature the first new category since the animated feature prize joined the ceremony in 2002: Next February, the award for Best Popular Film (which is still a nebulously defined, hard-to-understand title) will join the other 24 categories for the first time ever. But if the Academy is going to start awarding [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="GIVE! JOHN WICK! AN OSCAR! | Summit Entertainment" data-portal-copyright="Summit Entertainment" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7947393/john_wick_angry.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	GIVE! JOHN WICK! AN OSCAR! | Summit Entertainment	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The 2019 Oscars will feature the first new category since the animated feature prize joined the ceremony in 2002: Next February, the award for <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/8/17664416/oscar-changes-popular-film-telecast-runtime">Best Popular Film</a> (which is still a <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/8/17664682/oscars-popular-film-category-2019">nebulously defined, hard-to-understand title</a>) will join the other 24 categories for the first time ever.</p>

<p>But if the Academy is going to start awarding prizes in new categories, there are so many other things it could be rewarding, things that actually have something to do with the craft of making films, not just an arbitrary distinction between &ldquo;popular&rdquo; films and everything else.</p>

<p>Some of those categories are ones that Hollywood folks have been requesting for ages. Others have only recently become trendy causes. But if the Oscars want to expand, here are six categories they should prioritize over &ldquo;Best Popular Film.&rdquo;</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">1) Best Stunt Coordination</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3923220/cruisemission.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Things blow up in Mission Impossible." title="Things blow up in Mission Impossible." data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Finally, an Oscar for Mission: Impossible. | Paramount" data-portal-copyright="Paramount" />
<p>If the Academy&rsquo;s (dubious) goal in creating a &ldquo;Best Popular Film&rdquo; category of some kind is to bring more recognition to films with broader audience appeal &mdash; and to get people interested in the Oscars who gravitate toward big-budget fare &mdash; stunt coordination would be a stellar addition to the roster of categories. As with some of the other technical races, like those for Costume Design, Makeup, and Special Effects, stunts are usually the purview of films with a big enough budget to pay for them.</p>

<p>And as with those other technical categories, if the stunts are great, you <em>notice</em> them. The people who coordinate the stunts are usually seasoned stunt performers themselves, and their job is multifaceted: Often they both cast the stunt performers (which requires finding both a specific skill set and, in some cases, physical resemblance to the actor they&rsquo;re doubling) and figure out how to execute the stunt safely and with maximum impact. That deserves recognition &mdash; especially since great stunts can and often do elevate a movie with otherwise predictable plotting, dialogue, and even performances into something memorably mind-blowing.</p>

<p><strong>Some recent possible winners of this category: </strong>Darrin Prescott (<em>Baby Driver</em>, <em>Black Panther, </em>the <em>John Wick</em> movies), <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/8/2/17639144/tom-cruise-mission-impossible-fallout-stunt">Wade Eastwood</a> (<em>Mission: Impossible &mdash; Rogue Nation, Edge of Tomorrow</em>), Sam Hargrave (<em>Atomic Blonde, Captain America: Civil War</em>), Glenn Suter (<em>Mad Max: Fury Road</em>)</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">2) Best Casting</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7367587/20151024_Moonlight_D09_C1_K1_0303_rgb.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Moonlight" title="Moonlight" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Imagine Moonlight winning an Oscar for how effortlessly it found mostly unknown actors to play instantly iconic parts. | A24" data-portal-copyright="A24" />
<p>There&rsquo;s long been a call for the Oscars to add a &ldquo;Best Ensemble Cast&rdquo; award, similar to the Screen Actors Guild&rsquo;s ensemble prizes for the casts of films and TV shows. But ensemble awards often struggle to figure out which actors to include and which to leave behind when it&rsquo;s time to hand out prizes. (The SAG Awards make incredibly arbitrary cutoffs &mdash; like if you share a billing card with another actor, you&rsquo;re ineligible &mdash; because there&rsquo;s basically no other way to adjudicate such a prize.)</p>

<p>And then there&rsquo;s the problem of, if all of the actors in a cast win the ensemble prize, do they all automatically become Oscar winners? The Academy likes to make the idea of winning an acting prize somewhat selective, which would go out the window in this scenario.</p>

<p>But you know what a good way to reward an ensemble cast where each and every actor was perfectly chosen would be? Awarding the casting agents who selected those actors for their roles. This would help explain the process of how your favorite actors wind up in certain movies, and winners would probably alternate between movies where a bunch of famous actors were terrifically suited to their specific roles (like <em>The Shape of Water</em>) to movies where the casting directors had to find unknowns to perfectly inhabit the characters (like <em>Moonlight</em>).</p>

<p>There&rsquo;s danger that this award would just become the &ldquo;largest cast&rdquo; award &mdash; something like <em>The Post</em> might be hard to avoid honoring &mdash; but hey, it&rsquo;s not like other Oscar categories don&rsquo;t occasionally award the <em>most</em> of something, rather than the <em>best</em>.</p>

<p><strong>Some recent possible winners of this category: </strong>Robin D. Cook for <em>The Shape of Water</em>; Yesi Ramirez for <em>Moonlight</em>; Kerry Barden, John Buchan, Jason Knight, and Paul Schnee for <em>Spotlight</em>; Beth Sepko for <em>Boyhood; </em>Lindsay Graham and Mary Vernieu for <em>American Hustle</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">3) Best Voice Performance</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11915829/poohbear.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Christopher Robin" title="Christopher Robin" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Oscar! Winner! Jim! Cummings! As! Winnie! The! Pooh! | Laurie Sparham/Disney" data-portal-copyright="Laurie Sparham/Disney" />
<p>Voice acting is most frequently associated with animated movies, so there&rsquo;s an argument to be made that honoring voice acting separately from the &ldquo;real&rdquo; acting categories further ghettoizes a medium that already has a hard time breaking into the top-tier Oscar categories. But that argument overlooks the fact that, in addition to its rich history in animation, voice acting is an increasingly important part of modern live-action film.</p>

<p>This is especially true as movies continue to embrace the use of computer-generated characters within a live-action environment. This year alone, a Voice Performance category would hold the potential for an ursine showdown between Ben Whishaw (for <em>Paddington 2</em>) and journeyman Jim Cummings (for <em>Christopher Robin</em>), not to mention a handful of big names who provided CGI character voices for <em>Avengers: Infinity War </em>(Bradley Cooper, Carrie Coon, and, erm, Vin Diesel? Maybe not that last one.)</p>

<p>But more crucially, this category would also be a way to honor less recognizable faces who have nonetheless been integral in the characterization of many cultural icons, like the aforementioned Cummings (who&rsquo;s been voicing Winnie the Pooh since 1988, in addition to several dozen other animated characters) and puppeteering legend Frank Oz, responsible not only for most of your favorite Muppets, but Yoda himself. Hell, the opportunity to give Frank Oz an Oscar should on its own be reason enough for this category to exist.</p>

<p><strong>Some recent possible winners of this category: </strong>Frank Oz (as Yoda in <em>Star Wars Episode VII: The Last Jedi</em>), Dwayne Johnson (as Maui in <em>Moana</em>), Ben Kingsley (as Archibald Snatcher in <em>The Boxtrolls</em>), Phyllis Smith (as Sadness in <em>Inside Out</em>),  Scarlett Johansson (as Samantha in <em>Her)</em>, Alan Tudyk (as King Candy in <em>Wreck-It Ralph</em>)</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">4) Best Motion-Capture Performance</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8842685/apes2.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The apes discover a hiding place" title="The apes discover a hiding place" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Andy Serkis should have at least an Oscar nomination by now for his groundbreaking motion-capture work. | 20th Century Fox" data-portal-copyright="20th Century Fox" />
<p>It&rsquo;s impossible to propose a motion-capture Oscar without talking about Andy Serkis, whose work as Gollum in the <em>Lord of the Rings</em> films helped establish the notion that a motion-capture performance could be just that &mdash; a <em>performance</em> &mdash; rather than a technical exercise. His subsequent mo-cap roles in <em>King Kong </em>and especially the excellent recent <em>Planet of the Apes</em> trilogy have ensured that every year in which there is an Andy Serkis mo-cap performance has been a year <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/06/movies/war-for-the-planet-of-the-apes-andy-serkis.html">in which people wonder</a> whether <em>this </em>is the year the Academy will deign to nominate him in the acting category.</p>

<p>Serkis himself <a href="https://www.indiewire.com/2018/02/andy-serkis-oscars-motion-capture-performance-planet-of-the-apes-1201928484/">has said that</a> the Academy has been nudging its members toward recognizing motion-capture performance, so why not just cut to the chase and make it a breakout acting category?</p>

<p>And it wouldn&rsquo;t just be the Honorary Andy Serkis award, either (though he likely would and should be a winner in this category). Motion capture &mdash; and its close cousin, motion reference, which could be folded into the same Oscar category &mdash; has become an increasingly common component of filmmaking in recent years.</p>

<p>Several of the most, ahem, <em>popular</em> films of the last decade have relied heavily on actors doing motion capture, from <em>Lord of the Rings</em> and <em>Avatar</em> to this year&rsquo;s <em>Ready Player One </em>and <em>Avengers: Infinity War</em>. So if the Academy is indeed looking for ways to recognize more blockbuster films, why not honor a performance medium that&rsquo;s increasingly at the heart of those very films?</p>

<p><strong>Some recent possible winners of this category: </strong>Andy Serkis (as Caesar in <em>War for the Planet of the Apes </em>and/or as Snoke in <em>Star Wars: The Last Jedi</em>), Lupita Nyong&rsquo;o (as Maz Kanata in <em>Star Wars: The Force Awakens</em>), Sean Gunn and/or Bradley Cooper (as Rocket Raccoon in <em>Guardians of the Galaxy</em>), Zoe Saldana (as Neytiri in <em>Avatar</em>)</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">5) Best First Film</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9588765/ladybird3.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Saoirse Ronan in Lady Bird" title="Saoirse Ronan in Lady Bird" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Lady Bird was director Greta Gerwig’s solo feature film directorial debut, and she didn’t win anything for it. Let’s create a category to rectify THAT issue. | A24" data-portal-copyright="A24" />
<p>It&rsquo;s hard enough to make a great movie, but coming right out of the gate with a stellar debut is especially difficult. Most first-time feature directors &mdash; even those who had thriving careers as actors or in television &mdash; are still relatively unknown quantities to the often risk-averse purse-string controllers, which means lower budgets, tighter timeframes, and possibly less artistic freedom.</p>

<p>Many first-time directors end up going the indie route with limited budgets &mdash; and when their films break through the noise, it feels like a miracle. A new director often rattles the cages, challenging conventional films in a way<strong> </strong>that audiences and critics alike respond to. And it usually takes a fresh vision and distinctive voice to pull that off.</p>

<p>But without the name recognition of more established directors, who command attention before their films have even been seen, a first film doesn&rsquo;t always get the Oscar campaign push it might need. A Best First Film category would even the playing field, and also help bring attention to movies by a more diverse set of filmmakers than the Oscars have typically honored, setting them up for future success.</p>

<p><strong>Some recent possible winners of this category:</strong> <em>Lady Bird</em>, <em>Get Out</em>, <em>The Act of Killing</em>, <em>The Babadook</em>, <em>The Witch</em>, <em>Dear White People</em></p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">6) Best Trailer</h2><div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="BLADE RUNNER 2049 - Official Trailer" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gCcx85zbxz4?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>Hear us out. At this point in the zeitgeist, trailers can often have as much cultural impact as the films they are made to promote. The best of them can <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/3/2/14782338/alien-covenant-trailer-horror-tropes">spawn entirely new trailer sub-genres</a> and <a href="https://www.indiewire.com/2018/04/facebook-creep-the-social-network-zuckerberg-watch-1201958208/">continue to impact the cultural conversation</a> years later.</p>

<p>Don&rsquo;t believe us? Look at the Ringer&rsquo;s recent bracket for the greatest trailer ever made, which ended in a battle between two of the most iconic trailers in history, <a href="https://www.theringer.com/movies/2018/7/20/17594790/best-movie-trailer-since-1990-bracket-final-round"><em>Inception</em> and <em>The Social Network</em></a>. Both examples show how a trailer can shift our cultural language <em>and</em> our cinematic language, while still remaining relevant nearly a decade later &mdash; all thanks to powerful editing, an almighty backing track, and a spark of creative innovation. That&rsquo;s the kind of feat that can get diluted over the course of two hours.</p>

<p>The omission of the technical awards presentation from the Oscars&rsquo; televised ceremony means there&rsquo;s even more need for a Best Trailer category, since trailers are a synthesis of technical achievements, editing, sound design, and cinematic magic.</p>

<p>Plus, the creators of the best trailers go overlooked even as their films get love. Not many people know that the iconic <em>Inception</em> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoHD9XEInc0">BWAAAAAM</a>, which originated from its trailer, was created not by <em>Inception</em> composer Hans Zimmer but by the <em>trailer</em> composer, <a href="https://www.slashfilm.com/inception-trailer-composer-zack-hemsey-profiled/">Zack Hemsey</a>.</p>

<p>Are you outraged that this information has been kept from you for the past eight years? There&rsquo;s a simple solution: Add a Best Trailer category to the Oscars and give more geniuses their due.</p>

<p><strong>Some recent possible winners of this category: </strong><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kw1UVovByw"><em>Skyfall</em></a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEJnMQG9ev8"><em>Mad Max: Fury Road</em></a><em>, </em><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiTiKOy59o4"><em>Gravity</em></a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCcx85zbxz4"><em>Blade Runner: 2049</em></a><em>, </em><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YOYHCBQn9g&amp;t=1s"><em>It Comes At Night</em></a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRfnevzM9kQ&amp;t=3s"><em>Get Out</em></a></p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Why “Missing U,” Robyn’s first new solo music in 8 years, is a gift to her fans]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/1/17634820/robyn-missing-u-new-music-single-album-fans" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/8/1/17634820/robyn-missing-u-new-music-single-album-fans</id>
			<updated>2018-08-01T16:13:54-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-08-01T15:45:02-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Music" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[For the past decade or so, being a fan of Robyn &#8212; the effervescent Swedish singer-songwriter responsible for modern dance classics like &#8220;Call Your Girlfriend&#8221; and &#8220;Dancing on My Own&#8221; &#8212; has been an exercise in feast and famine. Now, after a too-long hiatus, Robyn is giving fans a taste of what they&#8217;ve been missing. [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						<p>For the past decade or so, being a fan of Robyn &mdash; the effervescent Swedish singer-songwriter responsible for modern dance classics like &ldquo;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6ImxY6hnfA">Call Your Girlfriend</a>&rdquo; and &ldquo;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcNo07Xp8aQ">Dancing on My Own</a>&rdquo; &mdash; has been an exercise in feast and famine. Now, after a too-long hiatus, Robyn is giving fans a taste of what they&rsquo;ve been missing.</p>

<p>After literal years of teasing a new record, Robyn has unveiled the first concrete sign that her full-length follow-up to 2010&rsquo;s three-album album series <em>Body Talk</em> is on the horizon: a single, titled &ldquo;Missing U,&rdquo; which the singer <a href="https://pitchfork.com/news/listen-to-robyns-new-song-missing-u">released on Wednesday</a>, August 1 following a week of buildup.</p>

<p>&ldquo;Missing U&rdquo; trades heavily in the strain of triumphant melancholy &mdash; or perhaps melancholic triumph &mdash; that characterizes some of Robyn&rsquo;s most beloved hits, like &ldquo;Call Your Girlfriend&rdquo; and &ldquo;Dancing on My Own.&rdquo; The new song embodies the sense of catharsis and resilience that&rsquo;s become a big part of Robyn&rsquo;s sonic brand, which has endeared her to a fan base &mdash; a good portion of them queer or otherwise outside the pop mainstream &mdash; that knows and cherishes the kind of visceral emotional release that can happen in the middle of a packed dance floor.</p>

<p>The song&rsquo;s lyrics may address an unnamed absent lover, but for fans fluent in Robyn&rsquo;s favorite lyrical motifs, &ldquo;this empty space you left behind&rdquo; translates to the two-way void that&rsquo;s opened up between the singer and her fans since <em>Body Talk</em> catapulted her into the broader cultural consciousness. Fans have missed Robyn, yes, but in choosing &ldquo;Missing U&rdquo; as her first solo single in more than half a decade, and explicitly dedicating it to her fans, Robyn has made it clear that the feeling is mutual.</p>

<p>That idea of mutual respect between artist and fan is not unusual in pop music, where &ldquo;doing it for the fans&rdquo; is one of the most enduring clich&eacute;s outside of doing it for Mama and/or God. But in the case of Robyn and &ldquo;Missing U,&rdquo; it feels not only true but also sort of profound, a statement on the enduring strength of a symbiotic relationship built on a shared recognition of the power in dancing your way through pain, pleasure, and everything in between.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">“Missing U” may not be <em>about</em> Robyn’s fans, but it is expressly <em>for </em>them</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11908185/112262068.jpg.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="Coachella Valley Music &amp; Arts Festival 2011 - Day 1" title="Coachella Valley Music &amp; Arts Festival 2011 - Day 1" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Robyn performs at Coachella in 2011, the era of Peak Robyn. | Charley Gallay/Getty Images" data-portal-copyright="Charley Gallay/Getty Images" />
<p>Robyn&rsquo;s popularity and attendant fandom exploded in 2010, when she released three career-defining albums back to back: The <em>Body Talk </em>series, comprising two &ldquo;mini albums,&rdquo; subtitled <a href="https://open.spotify.com/album/4ektWErsV6EIxW0jBWq1Jn?si=XimQCGK2RpeJmkp5cLuY4w"><em>Pt. 1</em></a><em> </em>and <a href="https://open.spotify.com/album/77jvaKjAJW0O7c3QLSq1ne?si=PVp-c7saQAuzwfxCHf3LIg"><em>Pt. 2</em></a><em>,</em> and one longer album, called simply <a href="https://open.spotify.com/album/0Rzg7fqyWE39G6wKipxrns?si=iwkJnmPoR6mJ22MsU5YZNQ"><em>Body Talk,</em></a> that compiled songs from parts one and two alongside five new tracks. Altogether, the <em>Body Talk </em>era was responsible for around two dozen excellent, <a href="http://www.metacritic.com/search/all/body%20talk/results">critically acclaimed</a> dance songs, which became the crown jewels of a discography that also includes earlier hits like 2007&rsquo;s &ldquo;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lY6XYkDqiNc">Handle Me</a>&rdquo; and her 1997 <em>Total Request Live</em>-era breakthrough &ldquo;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhWEI6-_w9E">Show Me Love</a>.&rdquo;</p>

<p>The two years following the release of <em>Body Talk</em> were the era of Peak Robyn, full of high-profile <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7R0ZvXOCIo">TV appearances</a>, Grammy nominations, festival and tour performances, and one classic music video, for &ldquo;Call Your Girlfriend,&rdquo; that achieved <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbEOr5Weqb8">mini-meme status</a> for Robyn&rsquo;s one-of-a-kind dance moves.</p>

<p>Then Robyn kind of disappeared.</p>

<p>Well, not entirely: There was a 2014 collaborative five-track EP with electronic duo R&ouml;yksopp, a smattering of <a href="https://www.stereogum.com/1930557/preview-new-robyn-song-honey-debuted-in-last-nights-girls/music/">one-off tracks</a>, and a handful of live appearances. But mostly, there was the promise of a proper <em>Body Talk</em> follow-up that never quite materialized amid the smaller-scale side projects, leaving fans to subsist on her existing body of work as they waited out the Great Robyn Famine.</p>

<p>One group of those fans, based in Brooklyn, became instrumental in keeping the spirit of Robyn fandom alive via This Party Is Killing You, a recurring Robyn-themed dance party in Williamsburg that&rsquo;s been enduringly popular in the years since its post-<em>Body Talk</em> genesis. (The party takes its name from a repeated lyric in the <em>Body Talk Pt. 1 </em>track &ldquo;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7975tw0EJA">Don&rsquo;t Fucking Tell Me What to Do</a>.&rdquo;) So it&rsquo;s entirely appropriate that This Party Is Killing You would serve as the setting for Robyn&rsquo;s reentry into her fans&rsquo; lives and speakers.</p>

<p>In the lead-up to the release of &ldquo;Missing U,&rdquo; Robyn previewed the track via a short film released on Monday, July 30, designed <a href="https://twitter.com/robynkonichiwa/status/1023916928568578048">to both tease the single and celebrate the devoted fans</a> who have been waiting for this moment for years.</p>
<div class="youtube-embed"><iframe title="Robyn - Missing U - A Message To My Fans" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ICiyddrnqdw?rel=0" allowfullscreen allow="accelerometer *; clipboard-write *; encrypted-media *; gyroscope *; picture-in-picture *; web-share *;"></iframe></div>
<p>The seven-and-a-half-minute clip &mdash; subtitled &ldquo;A Message to My Fans&rdquo; &mdash; briefly tracks the history of This Party Is Killing You via its creators and attendees, who team up to send Robyn a series of voicemails urging her attend &ldquo;the Robyn party&rdquo; and sharing what she and her music has meant to them. It then switches to Robyn listening to the voicemails and talking a little about her struggle to follow up <em>Body Talk </em>(and performing a version of the backward somersault she does in the &ldquo;Call Your Girlfriend&rdquo; video).</p>

<p>The clip reaches its climax as it follows the singer to make a surprise appearance at <a href="https://www.stereogum.com/1997405/watch-robyn-debut-full-version-of-honey-in-surprise-brooklyn-set/video/">what appears to be the May 2018 party</a>, where she DJed and performed another recently teased single, &ldquo;Honey,&rdquo; which briefly appeared in the final season of HBO&rsquo;s <em>Girls.</em></p>

<p>But &ldquo;Honey&rdquo; didn&rsquo;t end up being Robyn&rsquo;s comeback single. It&rsquo;s &ldquo;Missing U&rdquo; that plays throughout the clip, an appropriate soundtrack to this reminder that for her fans, Robyn and her music have never gone away &mdash; they&rsquo;ve only grown more resonant to a generation of devotees whom she&rsquo;s helped find themselves, both on and off the dance floor.</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Teen Titans Go! to the Movies is a candy-colored cure for superhero movie fatigue]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2018/7/26/17610148/teen-titans-go-movie-review-dc-superhero-comedy" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2018/7/26/17610148/teen-titans-go-movie-review-dc-superhero-comedy</id>
			<updated>2018-07-27T12:10:32-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-07-27T12:10:28-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Movies" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Reviews" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Right on the heels of Teen Titans leader Robin declaring, &#8220;Fuck Batman!&#8221; in the gloomy trailer for the upcoming live-action TV series Titans, a very different version of the Boy Wonder is leading his teenage team into theaters to issue a much more family-friendly rejoinder to the Caped Crusader &#8212; and, more pointedly, to the [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="The Teen Titans are here to save the day, skeptical question mark? | Warner Bros." data-portal-copyright="Warner Bros." data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11758399/TTG_FP_087.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	The Teen Titans are here to save the day, skeptical question mark? | Warner Bros.	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Right on the heels of Teen Titans leader Robin <a href="https://www.polygon.com/2018/7/19/17593782/titans-fuck-batman-trailer-geoff-johns">declaring, &ldquo;Fuck Batman!&rdquo;</a> in the gloomy trailer for the upcoming live-action TV series <em>Titans</em>, a very different version of the Boy Wonder is leading his teenage team into theaters to issue a much more family-friendly rejoinder to the Caped Crusader &mdash; and, more pointedly, to the grim-and-gritty strain of superheroism he&rsquo;s come to embody over the past few decades.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7424200/"><em>Teen Titans Go! to the Movies</em></a><em>, </em>the new feature-length extension of the Cartoon Network series <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2771780/"><em>Teen Titans Go!</em></a>, is a product of Warner Bros. Animation &mdash; and therefore technically exists in the same cinematic universe as the company&rsquo;s line of live-action DC films. It&rsquo;s a lineage the movie revels in subverting.</p>

<p>An eye-searingly bright kids&rsquo; movie bedecked with songs and jokes about butts and their various functions, <em>Teen Titans Go! to the Movies </em>&#65279;could not offer any starker contrast to such evergray, rain-and-angst-soaked DC films as <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/11/15/16646484/justice-league-review-gadot-momoa"><em>Justice League</em></a><em> </em>and <a href="https://www.vox.com/2016/3/23/11291550/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-review"><em>Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice</em></a><em>. </em>And yet it openly takes place in a world where those films, or simulacrums of them, not only exist but have created a cottage industry where literally every superhero (and sometimes their butler) has their own movie &mdash; except the perpetually overlooked Teen Titans.</p>

<p>If you can&rsquo;t already tell, meta comedy is the fuel that makes these Teen Titans go. In this respect, the film often plays more like an all-ages version of the recent <em>Deadpool</em> movies than any of its DC cinematic brethren &mdash; and not just because, like the <em>Deadpool</em> films, it pokes cheeky fun at superheroes owned by other companies (including Deadpool himself). Like <a href="https://www.vox.com/2016/2/9/10949482/deadpool-review">both</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/summer-movies/2018/5/14/17350316/deadpool-2-review"><em>Deadpool</em>s</a>, it delights in its status as an outlier within the superhero movie complex, both of and apart from an industry it mocks with glee.</p>

<p>Plus, there are butt jokes. So many butt jokes.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">The Teen Titans are here to remind us that superheroes can be silly</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11758183/TTG_FP_102.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Beast Boy (Greg Cipes), Starfire (Hynden Walch), Robin (Scott Menville), Raven (Tara Strong), and Cyborg (Khary Payton) in their natural environment: mid-musical number. | Warner Bros. Pictures" data-portal-copyright="Warner Bros. Pictures" />
<p>While many pearls have been clutched over the years over the pervasiveness of the &ldquo;<a href="https://www.paleycenter.org/watchmen-grim-and-gritty/">grim and gritty</a>&rdquo; strain of superheroism, it would be hugely unfair to paint the entire genre with that brush. There are plenty of superhero stories, on both page and screen, that are colorful, funny, and ultimately optimistic.</p>

<p>But it&rsquo;s much rarer these days to see superheroes who are <em>silly, </em>particularly in film<em>. </em>Even something as brightly comedic as last year&rsquo;s <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/10/26/16537186/thor-ragnarok-review"><em>Thor: Ragnarok</em></a><em> </em>ultimately takes seriously the business of saving the world/universe and acknowledges the nobility of those who make it their business to do so.</p>

<p>Enter <em>Teen Titans Go!, </em>which debuted on Cartoon Network in 2013 and is now in its fifth season. Developed by <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1739338/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Aaron Horvath</a> and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2398585/?ref_=tt_ov_wr">Michael Jelenic</a> &mdash; who also wrote the film, with Horvath directing alongside series producer <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5715866/?ref_=tt_ov_dr">Peter Rida Michail</a> &mdash; the series features the same characters and voice actors of the beloved, acclaimed early-aughts animated series <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343314/?ref_=nv_sr_2"><em>Teen Titans</em></a>.</p>

<p>Though <em>Go!</em> has angered some purists for the ways it departs from its predecessor&rsquo;s more conventional approach to superhero storytelling and characterization, its more lighthearted spin on the team has earned the show its own passionate fan base. The Teen Titans of <em>Go! </em>tend to strike a more ironic, bratty pose than their forebears, and are frequently less concerned with fighting crime than they are with <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqL0y7u12DQ">pizza</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF0RlKm3VUc">singing goofy songs</a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HOlXJ2EJxw">messing with each other</a>, and, erm, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFgs18qh1Yg">building equity</a>.</p>

<p><em>Go! to the Movies, </em>somewhat improbably, proves that the Teen Titans&rsquo; rowdy, chaotic, song-filled approach still works when extended from an 11-minute cartoon to an 88-minute animated movie. In fact, it may work even better when given the grounding force of a feature-length narrative, which gives Horvath and Jalenic the space to explore some bigger ideas as well as a focal point upon which the chaos can converge.</p>

<p>That focal point takes the form of Titans leader Robin (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0579914/?ref_=tt_cl_t11">Scott Menville</a>), who heads to Hollywood alongside his teen teammates, Starfire the alien princess (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0906945/?ref_=tt_cl_t10">Hynden Walch</a>), Beast Boy the shape shifter (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0996651/?ref_=tt_cl_t8">Greg Cipes</a>), Raven the sorceress (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0152839/?ref_=tt_cl_t3">Tara Strong</a>), and Cyborg the cyborg (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1146051/?ref_=tt_cl_t9">Khary Payton</a>). They&rsquo;re hoping to ride the superhero-movie wave into a claim of legitimacy, something they&rsquo;ve been denied due to their propensity to do things like halt a big villain fight so they can perform their own theme song.</p>

<p>But although mega-filmmaker Jade Wilson (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0068338/?ref_=tt_cl_t1">Kristen Bell</a>) is handing out movies to just about every superhero in existence (resulting in some deep-cut jokes that will delight comics historians in the audience), she deems the Teen Titans unworthy of the big-screen treatment.</p>

<p>This snubbing spurs the Titans, led by Robin and the ever-deepening chip on his shoulder, to do whatever it takes to prove their super-hero bona fides. Their first course of action: Find themselves an archnemesis. One quickly presents himself in the form of Slade (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004715/?ref_=tt_cl_t4">Will Arnett</a>), a gun-and-sword-wielding assassin (who is definitely not Deadpool) with a plan for &mdash; what else? &mdash; world domination, which might just involve all the A-list superheroes who are off making movies.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11758649/TTG_TRL2_88420.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="" title="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="The Teen Titans meet Slade (Will Arnett), who is definitely not Deadpool. | Warner Bros. Animation" data-portal-copyright="Warner Bros. Animation" />
<p>Those A-list superheroes &mdash; specifically Batman (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0453994/?ref_=tt_cl_t13">Jimmy Kimmel</a>), Wonder Woman (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7214498/?ref_=tt_cl_t7">Halsey</a>), Superman (Nicolas Cage, in a particularly <a href="https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/nicolas-cage-finally-gets-play-superman-1094375">inspired bit of casting</a>), and Green Lantern (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm8540143/?ref_=tt_cl_t14">Lil Yachty</a>) &mdash; pop in and out of the story to help underline the Titans&rsquo; outsider status.</p>

<p>They also help underline <em>Teen Titans Go! to the Movies</em>&rsquo; disinterest in adhering to any sort of larger continuity involving the Justice League and their various movies: Both <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/6/5/15740256/wonder-woman-movie"><em>Wonder Woman</em></a><em> </em>and <em>Batman v Superman</em> are specifically referenced as movies rather than in-world events, and no one seems to realize or care that the non-teen Cyborg has appeared as part of the live-action Justice League.</p>

<p>These heroes, their movies, and their backstories are all thrown higgledy-piggledy into a story that somehow finds coherence, mainly thanks to the film&rsquo;s firm commitment to its own riotous subversion of the superhero game. (This extends right on through its obligatory end<strong> </strong>credits sequence, which anyone familiar with the Teen Titans&rsquo; onscreen history will want to make a point to stick around for.)</p>

<p>That all may make <em>Teen Titans Go! to the Movies </em>sound much more cerebral than it actually is. This is, after all, a PG-rated film aimed at kids, and it behaves as such at all times. But its kid-friendly, free-for-all spirit rides atop an undercurrent of pointed commentary about the state of the superhero industry (and the entertainment industry more broadly) that will give those parental guides something to hold on to amid the candy-colored cacophony.</p>

<p>Or they could just surrender and enjoy the butt jokes. They&rsquo;re pretty good butt jokes!</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Dylan Matthews</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Libby Nelson</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[The Americans seeks a new “START” in a tremendous series finale]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/5/30/17392334/the-americans-series-finale-recap-start-season-6" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/5/30/17392334/the-americans-series-finale-recap-start-season-6</id>
			<updated>2018-05-31T10:28:36-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-05-30T23:32:02-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="TV" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Every week, some of Vox&#8217;s writers gather to discuss the latest episode of FX&#8217;s spy drama&#160;The Americans.&#160;This week, critic at large Todd VanDerWerff, news editor Libby Nelson, senior writer Dylan Matthews, and deputy culture editor Genevieve Koski offer their takes on&#160;&#8220;START,&#8221;&#160;the series finale.&#160;Needless to say, spoilers follow! Todd VanDerWerff: After six seasons and 75 episodes [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="After all this time, what will become of Philip and Elizabeth Jennings? | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11451385/americansfinalemain.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	After all this time, what will become of Philip and Elizabeth Jennings? | FX	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Every week, some of Vox&rsquo;s writers gather to discuss the latest episode of FX&rsquo;s spy drama&nbsp;</em><a href="http://www.vox.com/the-americans"><strong>The Americans</strong></a>.&nbsp;<em>This week, critic at large Todd VanDerWerff, news editor Libby Nelson, senior writer Dylan Matthews, and deputy culture editor Genevieve Koski offer their takes on&nbsp;</em><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5780830/?ref_=ttep_ep_cur"><em><strong>&ldquo;START,&rdquo;</strong></em></a><em>&nbsp;the series finale.&nbsp;<strong>Needless to say, spoilers follow!</strong></em></p>

<p><strong>Todd VanDerWerff: </strong>After six seasons and 75 episodes of longing and spy games and dark twists and turns, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2149175/?ref_=nv_sr_1"><em>The Americans</em></a> finally revealed its core self in &ldquo;START,&rdquo; and that core self was an unabashed romantic, with a side of icy cold tragedy.</p>

<p>Philip and Elizabeth live. They don&rsquo;t just live; they escape to the Soviet Union to begin a new life together there as Mischa and Nadezhda. But both of their children stay behind in the US &mdash; Paige by choice and Henry completely unknowingly. Stan finds out the truth about his neighbors. He confronts them in a parking garage and pulls a gun on them &mdash; but ultimately lets them go. Oleg rots away for years to come in an American prison cell. Ren&eacute;e is maybe a spy, or maybe she&rsquo;s not.</p>

<p>Oh, yeah, and Philip and Elizabeth <em>save the world</em>, bringing news of the attempted coup against Gorbachev back with them to the Soviet Union. It&rsquo;s not depicted onscreen, but this, I assume, is why the two end up in a car with Arkady, the one character from the show&rsquo;s past to make an appearance in this finale. There&rsquo;s a fitting symmetry here &mdash; the Jennings marriage is saved, and so is the world. The two were more reliant on each other than we ever might have guessed.</p>

<p>As both a series finale and an episode of <em>The Americans</em>, &ldquo;START&rdquo; is a terrific achievement. For starters, it&rsquo;s a beautiful showcase for the show&rsquo;s main players. (The little gasp<a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005392/?ref_=tt_ov_st_sm"> Keri Russell</a> gives when Elizabeth realizes leaving Henry in the US is the right call is Emmy-worthy in itself.) But it also somehow ties off every story thread that matters, and it ties off most of them in vastly unexpected ways. And the few that it leaves open, it really lets you know it&rsquo;s leaving open, so you have little bits and pieces of doubt hanging over you about the resolution of the show. (Poor Stan! Loses his best friend and has to wonder if his wife is a KGB spy all in one fell swoop.)</p>

<p>I dare not go on too much longer &mdash; except to point out that this series finale falls on the <em>Sopranos</em> end of my <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/10/17/16462246/series-finale-best-worst-tv-halt-and-catch-fire-americans">&ldquo;<em>Sopranos</em> to <em>Six Feet Under&rdquo; </em>series finale scale</a> &mdash; because there&rsquo;s a lot to talk about, and I want to get your very high-level thoughts on the episode before we dig into the nitty-gritty (and let a few of our colleagues offer their thoughts as well). So: What did you think?</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Does this finale make us completely rethink everything we know about <em>The Americans</em>?</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11451403/americansfinalehenry.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Americans" title="The Americans" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Now we can finally write the “Henry Jennings gets drafted by the Washington Capitals” fanfic of our dreams! | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p><strong>Libby Nelson: </strong>It&rsquo;s a tremendous finale. I haven&rsquo;t been able to stop thinking about it. And it&rsquo;s made me wonder if I ever understood anything about <em>The Americans</em> at all.</p>

<p>For the past six seasons, I would have said we were watching the story of two people who gave everything they had in service of a doomed cause. After all, we all knew that the USSR&rsquo;s collapse was practically imminent. Everything Philip and Elizabeth did &mdash; exiled Martha to Moscow, cut up Anneliese and stuffed her into a suitcase, killed Lisa, ruined Young Hee&rsquo;s marriage, strangled the airport worker on a bus, shot a teenage busboy, forced an old woman to swallow pill after pill until she died, stabbed Sophia and Gennadi in front of their son &mdash; would, in the end, be for nothing. They would lose. It was a tragedy.</p>

<p>And yet, while the Jenningses seduced and blackmailed and murdered their way through the larger metropolitan area known as the <a href="https://www.washingtonian.com/2015/07/06/whos-responsible-for-naming-greater-washington-the-dmv/">DMV</a>, I rooted for them, because I&rsquo;m human, damn it. From the start, Philip, Elizabeth, and their marriage were tremendously complex and compelling. I wanted them to get away with it, in part because I knew they wouldn&rsquo;t. Tragedies don&rsquo;t get happy endings. Antiheroes don&rsquo;t grow old together and die quietly in their beds. And no matter how much I cared about the Jenningses, they were antiheroes, weren&rsquo;t they?</p>

<p>Or were they? Can antiheroes save the world?</p>

<p>&ldquo;START&rdquo; takes its title from the landmark nuclear treaty signed in 1991 &mdash; a treaty made possible, we learn, by Philip and Elizabeth. The Jenningses aren&rsquo;t going to be left behind on the battlefield, soldiers for a lost cause; they&rsquo;re behind the scenes, making sure the ceasefire happens at all.</p>

<p>It&rsquo;s not the ending I expected. I&rsquo;m not even certain it&rsquo;s the ending the Jenningses, strictly speaking, deserve. (Poor Oleg did his utmost for world peace too, and ends up in prison for his pains!) But it&rsquo;s an ending I&rsquo;m going to be thinking about for a long, long time. I love that this show subverted my expectations up to the very end, and I can&rsquo;t wait to rewatch the whole thing to see what I missed the past five years while I arrogantly assumed I knew what it was all about.</p>

<p><strong>Dylan Matthews: </strong>Longtime viewer, first-time discussant here, and what an episode to jump in on.</p>

<p>I hesitate to disagree, especially on my first outing, but in a way, I saw this episode as the ultimate triumph of the Jenningses&rsquo; ideological commitments over their personal attachments. Those commitments are not, of course, to hardline Soviet communism, of the kind that Elizabeth espoused in the early seasons (or even earlier this season, with her stating misgivings to Philip about glasnost and fear of becoming just like Americans). Their ideology is, in a way, blunter than that, but no less real and no less divorced from their concrete personal loyalties.</p>

<p>The Jenningses have always been nationalists &mdash; or at least patriots, if you want to put a nicer spin on it. From their explanation of their jobs to Paige in <a href="https://www.vox.com/2015/4/2/8335137/the-americans-stingers-recap-review">season three&rsquo;s &ldquo;Stingers&rdquo;</a> (&ldquo;We serve our country&rdquo;) down to Stan&rsquo;s confrontation in the parking lot, when Philip insists, &ldquo;It seemed like the right thing to do for my country,&rdquo; the one thing that always rang true when they explained their jobs to outsiders was a deep sense of national duty. The show underlined this again with last week&rsquo;s flashback to Elizabeth abandoning a comrade in Moscow and being chastised for it by her trainer. You don&rsquo;t let down countrymen.</p>

<p>And even apart from being dangerous to world peace, Claudia and the KGB&rsquo;s plot to bring down Gorbachev was a kind of treason, a betrayal of the nation. Gorbachev, love him or hate him, was the Soviet Union&rsquo;s legitimate ruler. He was chosen fair and square under the autocratic system governing the country. Claudia and her co-conspirators actually did what we&rsquo;ve spent the past few months hearing President Trump accuse the FBI and Department of Justice of doing:&nbsp;exploit the powers of the &ldquo;deep state&rdquo; in an attempt to bring down a legitimately, if not exactly democratically, selected leader.</p>

<p>That, I think, is why Claudia&rsquo;s revelation to Elizabeth was her breaking point. Elizabeth thought she was serving the Soviet Union. She was not. She was just serving an internal faction attempting to launch a coup against the Soviet leadership.</p>

<p>And so the Jenningses blow up their entire lives. Philip collaborates with Oleg to stop the traitors back home. Elizabeth breaks with her handler and kills a fellow officer to protect her nation&rsquo;s government against internal enemies. If she hadn&rsquo;t been monitoring Nesterenko to protect him from KGB assassins, then Philip wouldn&rsquo;t have had to meet with Father Andrei, he wouldn&rsquo;t have seen the FBI on his tail, and the whole family might not have fled.</p>

<p>Instead, they did flee, and the Jenningses wound up abandoning their son (on purpose), their daughter (by necessity), and, of course, their next-door neighbor, who, it&rsquo;s never been clearer, truly was Philip&rsquo;s best friend. They paid an absolutely extraordinary personal cost, out of duty to country &mdash; and, if you want to be an idealist, perhaps a desire to avoid nuclear war too.</p>

<p>I keep coming back to an exchange between Father Andrei and Aderholt, where the father notes that Aderholt is asking him to &ldquo;let down people who trust me.&rdquo; &ldquo;I have to let down people who trust me all the time,&rdquo; Aderholt responds, somewhat glibly. Later, he insists to Andrei, &ldquo;We were meant for better things. We all were.&rdquo; The Jenningses, in their way, agree. They let down the people who trusted them more than anyone, in the pursuit of better things for their country.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Why “START” is one of the 10 greatest TV finales of all time</h2>
<p><strong>Genevieve Koski: </strong>This one definitely makes it into my list of the 10 greatest TV finales ever, not just for the consideration and care that went into the construction of it (and the final season as a whole), but for how thoroughly and almost radically it puts a bow on the series&rsquo; central preoccupation: the Jennings marriage.&nbsp;</p>

<p>What&rsquo;s so breathtaking to me about that final image of Philip and Elizabeth overlooking Moscow isn&rsquo;t simply that they&rsquo;re back in Russia after all this time, but that they&rsquo;re there <em>alone, </em>contemplating what their lives might have been like had they never left and what they <em>will </em>be like now that they&rsquo;ve returned.</p>

<p>The entire time we&rsquo;ve known them, their marriage has been defined by its various constraining factors: their work, their children, their sources, their secrets. The version of their marriage they were able to build and keep alive &mdash; sometimes just barely&nbsp;&mdash; is one that&rsquo;s always been informed by these factors, and now suddenly it&rsquo;s just &hellip; not. They&rsquo;re no longer Philip and Elizabeth, super-spies and parents; they&rsquo;re Mischa and Nadezhda, two Russian citizens back in a country they no longer know, without their children, their jobs, or anything else to give them a sense of identity. Nothing beyond each other.&nbsp;</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11451413/americansfinaleelizabeth.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Americans" title="The Americans" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Elizabeth pauses for a moment in the cold woods. | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p>This extreme and heartbreaking distillation of the Jennings marriage down to its most basic element &mdash; Philip and Elizabeth&rsquo;s commitment to each other &mdash; feels like the flip side of their world-saving efforts. As the series fades to its closing credits one last time, the question that hovers over it all is less &ldquo;At what cost?&rdquo; (though the loss of their children is certainly a <em>huge</em> cost), and more &ldquo;What now?&rdquo;</p>

<p>And that makes me feel like this <em>is</em> the ending Philip and Elizabeth deserve: After everything they&rsquo;ve done, they&rsquo;ve lost their children, their careers, and the country at least one of them called home for decades. They may be heroes, but they&rsquo;re tragic ones, and the comparatively small stakes of what they now face &mdash; figuring out how to just <em>be married</em> to each other &mdash; in comparison to what they&rsquo;ve been doing for years is a stark realization.</p>

<p>I&rsquo;m dwelling on that final image because it&rsquo;s such a pitch-perfect coda to this series, but there are a handful of scenes in &ldquo;START&rdquo; that made me break out in a cold sweat, chief among them Stan&rsquo;s face-off with Philip in the garage and Paige&rsquo;s desertion. I feel we could probably write several thousand words on either of those&hellip;</p>

<p><strong>Todd: </strong><em>OH BOY, STAN AND THE JENNINGS FAMILY IN THE PARKING GARAGE!!!!!!</em></p>

<p>One of the worries I&rsquo;ve had about this season was whether it had pushed back Stan&rsquo;s realization so far that it would ultimately fall flat. When Stan finally confronts Philip and Elizabeth with what he knows, with Paige standing there, gamely trying to keep up the lie, so much is riding on the scene that it would have been so easy for it to turn into a long, long exposition dump. And in an upcoming episode of my podcast, <a href="http://www.vox.com/i-think-youre-interesting"><em>I Think You&rsquo;re Interesting</em></a>, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0276278/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Joel Fields</a> and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2913498/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Joe Weisberg</a> admit that, yeah, this was the scene they spent the longest figuring out during the production process.</p>

<p>But goodness me, did they figure it out! There&rsquo;s this almost ecstatic relief on Philip&rsquo;s face when he can finally admit the truth to his best friend, while Stan looks like he&rsquo;s been gutted, like even though he was sure of his hunch, he really didn&rsquo;t want it to be true &mdash; he wanted there to be another explanation for catching the family together like he did. (I instantly thought Paige should have said she was pregnant. It might have thrown Stan just enough off his game to let the three get out of there.)</p>

<p>The scene takes up nearly all of an act &mdash; the stretch of story between commercial breaks &mdash;  and it uses every single bit of that time (nearly 10 minutes) wisely. It even features Philip telling one last half-truth to get away, when he says that no way did he kill Sofia and Gennadi. He doesn&rsquo;t commit <em>murder</em>! And, of course, we know that he does, but we also know he didn&rsquo;t kill Sofia and Gennadi, even if he has every reason to suspect that Elizabeth did.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001187/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Noah Emmerich</a> hasn&rsquo;t always been served particularly well by this show &mdash; especially in the fifth season &mdash; but the last half of the last season finally pushed him closer and closer to center stage, and he&rsquo;s just magnificent in this scene. He tries like hell to do what he knows is right, but he&rsquo;s also broken by this revelation, so broken that &ldquo;what&rsquo;s right&rdquo; no longer makes complete sense to him. He should arrest his friends. But he can&rsquo;t.</p>

<p>I&rsquo;m sure some people will question exactly why Stan lets the Jennings family escape, but what else is he going to do? The central idea of this show has always been that people trump ideologies, and the second you lose sight of that is the second you stop being human yourself. (I think I say a variation on this every week.) Stan is living out the central thesis of the show, especially since nobody will ever know. His little playacting of, &ldquo;I&rsquo;ll kill him,&rdquo; when Aderholt shows him the sketches of Philip and Elizabeth is just the right note of very, very angry and very, very sad. Plus, now he has to wonder for the rest of his life if Ren&eacute;e is a spy!</p>

<p>But deep down, he knows the truth: Philip and Elizabeth are headed out of the country. Which brings us to Paige Jennings and the finale&rsquo;s most fateful choice.</p>

<p><strong>Libby Nelson: </strong>Before I get to Paige, I owe an apology to somebody (or many somebodies) about the Ren&eacute;e arc, which I was frequently and loudly derisive about. This endless guessing game for the audience about whether she was a spy, I proclaimed, was beneath <em>The Americans; </em>I resented the time we were spending on it.</p>

<p>I was playing checkers and the writers were playing chess. Making us frequently wonder what Ren&eacute;e&rsquo;s deal was, and then never telling us, was brilliant. By making the audience constantly second-guess her motives based on very little evidence, the mystery of Ren&eacute;e demonstrated how living life undercover, never trusting anyone, can warp you.</p>

<p>And speaking of how living with secrets can change your life &hellip; Paige. How great and tense was that scene on the train? And how successful was it at misdirection? I didn&rsquo;t think Paige would really end up safely in the Soviet Union, but at that point, I wasn&rsquo;t sure any of them would; the last glimpse of her lightly disguised face on that train platform will stay with me for a long time.</p>

<p>In 2016, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/07/discovered-our-parents-were-russian-spies-tim-alex-foley">the Guardian profiled a Russian spy couple who</a>, after years of posing successfully as an American family, fled to their homeland, leaving behind two adult children and lingering doubt about what the older child knew and when. In retrospect, it was sort of a spoiler hiding in plain sight, but my takeaway here is that there&rsquo;s likely no way to stop Paige and Henry from eventually meeting up with their parents in a country without an extradition treaty &mdash; or, to be precise, the challenges are more emotional than they are legal or logistical.</p>

<p>But I&rsquo;m not sure Paige (and especially Henry) would ever want to. In the end, Paige made a choice that echoed the message in Elizabeth&rsquo;s flashbacks last week: You don&rsquo;t leave a comrade (or a sibling) behind. At least she had a choice; Henry was blindsided.</p>

<p>At times during the series, I struggled to invest in Paige. But now I am dying to know what happens to her next. Does she just pick up and return to her life like nothing happened? What does she tell Henry? Where does that leave Stan, who has to know that she was somehow involved?</p>

<p>I&rsquo;m not sure I actually want to know the answer to that question, or any of my others. (Do Philip and Martha run into each other in Moscow? Can anyone get Oleg out of prison? Can Stan&rsquo;s marriage survive? Does Henry have to work at a tannery in West Virginia to pay tuition?) That, to me, is the true strength of this finale: It left me wanting so much more, but also knowing that in some ways, it&rsquo;s more satisfying not to get it.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Some final thoughts on the best drama of its era</h2>
<p><strong>Genevieve: </strong>I&rsquo;m right there with you on being impressed with this series&rsquo; handling of Ren&eacute;e, Libby, particularly for how it contributes to that sense of satisfying open-endedness you mention. What strikes me as so genius about the decision to have Philip tell Stan that he suspects &mdash; but has no proof&mdash; that Ren&eacute;e might be &ldquo;one of us&rdquo; is how it extends the central conflict of Stan&rsquo;s character, the tension between his personal life and professional one, into the indefinite future.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11451435/americansfinalephilip.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Americans" title="The Americans" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="A goodbye to Philip. | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p>The embodiment of that conflict, Philip, has exited his life forever but left behind a new seed of doubt for Stan to nurture in his absence. And the fact that <em>we</em> don&rsquo;t know the truth either, beyond whatever we might read into that final look Ren&eacute;e gives the now-deserted Jennings home &mdash; and kudos to <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0390229/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Laurie Holden</a> for selling that moment as well as she does &mdash; puts us right there in Stan&rsquo;s shoes, obsessing over a gut feeling, maybe forever.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Stan has a long and storied history on <em>The Americans</em> of letting his relationships impede on his professional obligations, from Nina to Oleg and now finally Philip, whom he allows to walk away from certain capture out of some hazy combination of personal connection and exhaustion with counterintelligence work. That character history, combined with the fact that we&rsquo;ve reached more or less the end of the Cold War on this series, with everyone feeling burned by having been a part of it, makes me suspect that Stan will end up not pursuing those suspicions about Ren&eacute;e, whether consciously or not.</p>

<p>The fact that we won&rsquo;t be able to see that happen is perhaps a little disappointing, but also not, because the series has given us everything we need to understand what Stan will do, and why.</p>

<p><strong>Todd: </strong>So it&rsquo;s me, then? I&rsquo;m wrapping up this whole thing &mdash; this <em>whole show</em>? Well. All right. (It&rsquo;s fitting that I&rsquo;m wrapping up this show as it started: by <a href="https://tv.avclub.com/the-americans-pilot-1798175668">recapping an episode with Genevieve</a>.)</p>

<p>Our discussion about what motivates Philip and Elizabeth is a rich one because that question within the show is a rich one. You can argue that both are motivated by blind ideology. You can argue that they&rsquo;re motivated by nationalism. You can argue they&rsquo;re motivated by personal attachments both in the US and in the USSR. And you can argue they&rsquo;re motivated by love.</p>

<p>All of these statements are true, because the characters and their relationship are that compelling and complex, as were their relationships with Paige, with Stan, with Claudia. (Henry was a solid character, but he never quite escaped the role of being symbolic of the series&rsquo; dramatic stakes in the way his sister did.) They are, like all of us, a bunch of different people simultaneously &mdash; ideologues, nationalists, parents, friends, partners.</p>

<p>But &ldquo;START&rdquo; makes one thing incontrovertible: Philip and Elizabeth Jennings survived because they had each other. They also became worse at their jobs because they had each other. (It is, after all, their marriage that would have gotten them arrested, if not for Philip&rsquo;s extreme running skills.) But in the end, when everything else fell apart, they had each other, and they made it out of the series alive, and together, and maybe not sure of who they are without their job. We only get to imagine what their lives will be like now, in some Moscow apartment, trying to figure all of this out, probably with U2 wailing away somewhere on the soundtrack.</p>

<p>The series began with Fleetwood Mac&rsquo;s &ldquo;Tusk&rdquo; in its pilot &mdash; both an expression of a relationship falling apart and a product of a time when the Cold War was fully operational. It very nearly ends with U2&rsquo;s &ldquo;With or Without You,&rdquo; a product of the Cold War&rsquo;s thaw and an expression of something firm and unshakable, even if maybe it should be shaken here and there. Neither Philip nor Elizabeth can live with or without the other. There&rsquo;s something perfect in that.</p>

<p>So we leave them, with a million questions swirling, overlooking a city they no longer know, which is about to erect Pizza Huts and McDonald&rsquo;s, which is about to look a whole lot more like the land they left but also remain itself. <em>The Americans</em> has always asked what it means to build a home, and in its finale, it suggests that laying the foundation with another person you can&rsquo;t quite stand and can&rsquo;t quite leave behind is, if nothing else, a really good start.</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Genevieve Koski</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Emily St. James</name>
			</author>
			
			<author>
				<name>Libby Nelson</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[The Americans spends its penultimate episode raising lots of very big questions]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/5/23/17376758/the-americans-season-6-episode-9-recap-jennings-elizabeth" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/5/23/17376758/the-americans-season-6-episode-9-recap-jennings-elizabeth</id>
			<updated>2018-05-23T23:11:20-04:00</updated>
			<published>2018-05-23T23:12:01-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Criminal Justice" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Policy" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="TV" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Every week, some of Vox&#8217;s writers gather to discuss the latest episode of FX&#8217;s spy drama&#160;The Americans.&#160;This week, critic at large Todd VanDerWerff, news editor Libby Nelson, and deputy culture editor Genevieve Koski offer their takes on&#160;&#8220;Jennings, Elizabeth,&#8221;&#160;the ninth episode of the final season. Needless to say, spoilers follow! Todd VanDerWerff: At every turn, the [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="The “Jennings, Elizabeth” of the episode title. | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11371977/TA_609_PH_0241.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	The “Jennings, Elizabeth” of the episode title. | FX	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Every week, some of Vox&rsquo;s writers gather to discuss the latest episode of FX&rsquo;s spy drama&nbsp;</em><a href="http://www.vox.com/the-americans">The Americans</a>.&nbsp;<em>This week, critic at large Todd VanDerWerff, news editor Libby Nelson, and deputy culture editor Genevieve Koski offer their takes on&nbsp;</em><a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6268292/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1"><em>&ldquo;Jennings, Elizabeth,&rdquo;</em></a><em>&nbsp;the ninth episode of the final season. <strong>Needless to say, spoilers follow!</strong></em></p>

<p><strong>Todd VanDerWerff: </strong>At every turn, the final season of <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2149175/?ref_=tt_ov_inf"><em>The Americans</em></a> has defied expectations &mdash; usually thrillingly so. We&rsquo;ve only got one episode left now that &ldquo;Jennings, Elizabeth&rdquo; is over, and Stan still doesn&rsquo;t have the proof he so desperately seeks (despite calling Pastor Tim!), while Philip and Elizabeth aren&rsquo;t quite burned just yet. We still don&rsquo;t know a thing about Renee, and literally everybody listed in the opening credits is still alive. Indeed, this episode includes the biggest death of a recurring character this season, and it&rsquo;s Tatiana (the wonderful <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4383411/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Vera Cherny</a>), not a more prominent character.</p>

<p>Maybe the show is only defying my expectations, which have been heavily set by previous final seasons of serialized antihero shows where the shit hit the fan early and regularly (most notably in <em>Breaking Bad</em> but also memorably in <em>The Sopranos</em> and <em>The Shield</em>). Those seasons featured tense standoffs and high body counts. <a href="http://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/the-americans"><em>The Americans</em></a> hasn&rsquo;t lacked for tension, but it&rsquo;s come from other arenas, using our knowledge that the show is ending to let the prospect of doom hang over every frame.</p>

<p>And yet even this show must eventually hit certain storytelling beats. As &ldquo;Jennings, Elizabeth&rdquo; ends, Philip is very nearly caught by the FBI, which will presumably soon swoop in to capture Father Andrei, who has seen Philip and Elizabeth sans disguises. As Libby <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/5/16/17350210/the-americans-season-6-episode-8-recap-the-summit-final-season">pointed out last week</a>, falling in love has <em>always</em> been the worst thing that ever happened to these two, so it only makes sense that making their marriage official would be what finally takes them down.</p>

<p>So we end this episode with Philip on the run, with Elizabeth grabbing the couple&rsquo;s go bag, with Stan sure he&rsquo;s on to something but not quite <em>there</em> yet, and with poor Oleg sitting in prison, where nobody cares that he&rsquo;s trying to save Gorbachev. It&rsquo;s at once big and exciting, and slightly deflating, the way that a real-life tragedy has a weird mix of horror and morbid fascination at what might come next, at how many more shoes can possibly drop.</p>

<p>&ldquo;Jennings, Elizabeth&rdquo; &mdash; the title refers to Stan&rsquo;s futile attempts to turn up information on his neighbors in a computerized crime database &mdash; isn&rsquo;t the season&rsquo;s strongest episode. It&rsquo;s a little too occupied with setting things up for that. But it portends some pretty massive things for the finale, while also leaving that finale to deal with almost all the plot threads the show has left dangling. Can either of you think of any threads that have been neatly tied off? I guess the show could leave Claudia roughly where she is and have that be a pretty satisfying ending for her &mdash; but that&rsquo;s really about it.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">What happens to Philip and Elizabeth if Directorate S isn’t protecting them?</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11371983/_DSC0540.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Americans" title="The Americans" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Is this the last we’ll see of Claudia? | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p><strong>Genevieve Koski: </strong>I think Elizabeth&rsquo;s conversation with Claudia is a solid endpoint for the latter&rsquo;s run on this series, but it also functions as a definitive break between Elizabeth and the KGB. Obviously that break is not a clean one, and leaves some dangling threads of its own &mdash; chief among them, what happens to Philip and Elizabeth once they&rsquo;re outside the protections of Directorate S? &mdash; but it&rsquo;s a huge resolution in terms of Elizabeth&rsquo;s character, which has always been largely defined by her loyalty to her cause and the conflicts it creates.</p>

<p>This episode, through judicious use of flashbacks to Elizabeth&rsquo;s spy training &mdash; for once, thankfully, devoid of sexual assault &mdash; serves to clarify the foundation of that loyalty. This (final? I&rsquo;m guessing final) confrontation with Claudia boils down to whether Elizabeth serves the Soviet Union as represented by the KGB, or whether she serves a higher patriotic duty to her countrymen. We watch flashback Elizabeth pass by a gravely injured man without assisting, because it&rsquo;s what would be expected of her in America &mdash; don&rsquo;t stop, don&rsquo;t risk getting caught, for any reason. But as her handler chastises her, in Moscow, you don&rsquo;t leave a comrade behind, no matter what. It&rsquo;s a tacit acknowledgment that there is a greater morality, a broader duty to one&rsquo;s country and its people, that supersedes the principles of spywork.&nbsp;</p>

<p>In manipulating Elizabeth in order to take down Gorbachev, the KGB has thrown this conflict between politics and patriotism into sharp relief for one of its most loyal soldiers. That Elizabeth made the right choice &mdash; or at least the choice that aligns with our historical reality &mdash; is a huge resolution for her character, even if it necessarily raises a host of other questions leading into the finale.</p>

<p>Elizabeth has another confrontation in this episode that brings a similar sense of resolution, in similarly gut-wrenching fashion. I&rsquo;m less inclined to believe her final scene with Paige is the last we&rsquo;ll see of that character, but as with the Claudia confrontation, this mother-daughter face-off surfaces a conflict that&rsquo;s been simmering for two seasons now, and blows it to smithereens. Paige has long suspected that her mom&rsquo;s been leaving out crucial aspects of the job, and the plight of poor Jackson the intern was the piece that made it all click into place.&nbsp;</p>

<p>There&rsquo;s a strong mirroring happening between this confrontation and the one between Elizabeth and Claudia, but with Elizabeth taking roughly Claudia&rsquo;s position in her conversation with Paige; note how both women use the justification of a wartime sensibility in explaining themselves to their accusers. And in both cases, honesty is the sticking point: Elizabeth counters Claudia&rsquo;s shaming techniques with &ldquo;If you knew me, you&rsquo;d know never to lie to me,&rdquo; implying that a breach of trust is at the core of her supposed betrayal; then a few scenes later, Paige delivers an ultimatum to her mother &mdash; &ldquo;If you lie to me now, after everything, I swear I will never forgive you&rdquo; &mdash; which Elizabeth answers with yet another lie, moments before the full truth comes tumbling out of her in a rage (don&rsquo;t call your mother a whore, Paige) and Paige leaves, maybe forever, skeptical question mark?&nbsp;</p>

<p>I don&rsquo;t really think this is the last we&rsquo;ll see of Paige before series&rsquo; end, but this scene does feel like the end of her nascent spy career, and possibly the end of her relationship with her mother. And as with the end of Elizabeth&rsquo;s relationship with the KGB, it boiled down to a massive, world-shattering breach of trust.</p>

<p>Speaking of breaches of trust, and of the political/patriotic divide, how about that scene between Oleg and Stan? What about these men&rsquo;s history made Oleg think he could trust Stan with the truth, and what do we make of Stan&rsquo;s response?</p>

<p><strong>Libby Nelson:</strong> Who else was Oleg going to tell? Oleg and Stan have a lengthy, complicated backstory, but they&rsquo;ve each had to put quite a bit of trust in the other, and Stan has certainly proved worthy of Oleg&rsquo;s trust. Given that Stan essentially blackmailed the FBI director last season to keep Oleg safe in the USSR, I was initially surprised that he greeted the big reveal about the KGB&rsquo;s opposition to Gorbachev with such indifference.</p>

<p>It&rsquo;s true, though, that Stan has never been as invested in the geopolitical stakes as other protagonists. As one of the few actual Americans in the show, he hasn&rsquo;t needed to. Unlike most of our other protagonists, he&rsquo;s not consciously befriending people whose values he supposedly loathed. There&rsquo;s no comparable intra-American debate to the Soviet fight over perestroika and glasnost, no question about whether maybe the US should become a little more like the USSR. While Philip and Elizabeth were caught in a deep ideological conflict, Stan gave a Thanksgiving toast that suggests he sees the US/USSR divide in black and white &mdash; freedom versus its enemies.</p>

<p>But I&rsquo;m curious what you think we, as viewers, are supposed to make of this, in a season that&rsquo;s imbued the division between reformers and hardliners with more moral urgency than it ever did the divide between the USA and USSR. Oleg, an idealist, committed treason in season four to protect the world from biological warfare. Philip risked his marriage and spied on Elizabeth for Gorbachev. Elizabeth&rsquo;s killing of Tatiana seemed to be framed as a redemption. Stan&rsquo;s indifference makes sense, given what we know about him, but how does it fit into the show&rsquo;s moral universe?</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">What happens when Stan <em>finally</em> finds out the truth about Philip and Elizabeth?</h2><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11371993/TA_609_PH_1176.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Americans" title="The Americans" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Aderholt and Wolfe have a little chat with Father Victor, who puts them on the track of Father Andrei. | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p><strong>Todd: </strong>Well, there&rsquo;s the ultimate question of what happens when Stan learns that his best friend was also a KGB spy, something I&rsquo;m now quite sure will happen, even if it&rsquo;s only after Philip and Elizabeth skip the country (which is presumably their next move &mdash; would they dare try to start over in Missoula, Montana, or something?). Like a lot of Americans in the &rsquo;80s, Stan has bought the propaganda about what the communists represent; unlike a lot of Americans, his line of work brings him into contact with horrible things the KGB has done on a regular basis, which only bolsters his beliefs. Maybe learning that Philip was also a spy will challenge that belief a little bit. But I somehow doubt it.</p>

<p>I suspect this is why the series has always thrown Stan and Oleg into storylines together. They&rsquo;re superficially similar in a lot of ways, and they both loved Nina at one time. But Oleg&rsquo;s the guy who left behind the safe bubble of his homeland and realized the people he&rsquo;d been taught to demonize were, ultimately, just people, that the KGB was just as responsible for bad actions as the CIA.</p>

<p>I don&rsquo;t find it all that hard to imagine a version of Stan who did something similar, who perhaps traveled to work in the American Embassy in Moscow and slowly but surely realized that there are good and bad actors on both sides. One of the points of the series has always been that &ldquo;the Americans&rdquo; is a different concept from any one American, or even a small group of Americans. None of us is our ideology. Ideologies are broken, inherently, because they try to say &ldquo;people always do this,&rdquo; and people have ways of surprising you. But people, even broken ones, are worth understanding.</p>

<p>All of the above is part of why, say, it&rsquo;s easier to hope that Philip and Elizabeth can get away with their many crimes where other antiheroes might not. They&rsquo;re battling in the name of an ideology, and once they realize how broken that ideology is, they give up that fight. Would Stan do the same? I hope so. But that&rsquo;s an entirely different show, and it would necessarily have to begin with him realizing just how closely tied he was to a couple of KGB spies.</p>

<p>This brings me to something I <em>didn&rsquo;t</em> like about this episode &mdash; Paige&rsquo;s revelation that she found out about what her mom had done from Jackson the intern was one of the few times when I felt like this series took place in a world with about six people in it. It took a surprisingly complex portrayal of sexual coercion and the darker sides of Elizabeth&rsquo;s job, and it got it all mixed up with Jackson needing to be in a place to say a thing that would make Paige have a late-in-season turn that might jeopardize her parents&rsquo; mission. I get why it needed to happen this way, and I can mostly justify it from a story sense. But emotionally, psychologically &mdash; it felt rushed. Tell me I&rsquo;m wrong.</p>

<p><strong>Genevieve: </strong> Oh, I would never tell you your feelings are wrong, Todd &mdash; but I don&rsquo;t particularly share them in this case. Given that the information about Jackson comes to Paige secondhand through her own intern sorta-boyfriend Brian, it doesn&rsquo;t seem unreasonable that a bunch of congressional interns (or former interns, in Jackson&rsquo;s case) would get a little sloppy together over beers, nor does it seem unreasonable that Brian<em><strong> </strong></em>would relay that information to Paige, given that their relationship thus far has been predicated on her asking him about his job and the people he works with.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Now, I&rsquo;ll grant that the timing of this revelation is certainly convenient, in terms of Paige getting the last bit of confirmation she needs about her mom just as things are going, ahem, topsy-turvy at work. But <em>The Americans</em> has been sowing the seeds of this conversation all season, going back to episode two when Paige first broached the subject of the Book &mdash; which she brings up again here as the moment she first knew something wasn&rsquo;t quite right about the bill of goods Elizabeth was selling her.</p>

<p>And Paige&rsquo;s curiosity surrounding her parents is well-established; it makes sense that she&rsquo;s been stewing over this in the background all season, and it all just happened to click into place at just the moment the narrative structure required it to. It&rsquo;s neat, sure, but it didn&rsquo;t feel out of place to me.</p>
<img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/11372003/TA_609_PH_0116.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" alt="The Americans" title="The Americans" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-caption="Elizabeth and Paige have a devastating confrontation. | FX" data-portal-copyright="FX" />
<p>What did feel a little out of place &mdash; though not objectionably so &mdash; was the sudden reappearance of Pastor Tim, overworked but happy in his new position in Buenos Aires. Don&rsquo;t get me wrong, as a Pastor Tim-head, I appreciated the check-in, but it was one of the few moments this season I&rsquo;ve felt like <em>The Americans</em> was contorting itself in the name of tying up loose ends. And Pastor Tim wasn&rsquo;t really even a loose end! As this phone call with Stan confirms, he recognizes and is willing to hold up his part of the bargain that landed him and his family safe in another country, and he isn&rsquo;t going to risk that, his personal feelings on the Jenningses and the Ninth Commandment be damned.</p>

<p>I suppose we could have walked away from <em>The Americans </em>wondering if Pastor Tim might ever spill what he knows, but, well, <em>would </em>we? I don&rsquo;t think I would have. But hey, nice to see you all the same, Tim.</p>

<p>Since we&rsquo;re diving into the portions of &ldquo;Jennings, Elizabeth&rdquo; that made us go a little squinty-eyed, though, I hope you lot can clear up something for me: What exactly was Stan on about when he offered Philip a loan to save the travel agency? Even if Philip had accepted, surely with the suspicions Stan has at this point, he wouldn&rsquo;t actually deliver on such an offer, right? Was this some sort of maneuver as part of his off-the-books investigation, or simply an illustration of how Stan&rsquo;s loyalty to Philip endures even in the face of his suspicions? And more importantly &mdash; is this the last we&rsquo;ll see of the travel agency??</p>

<p><strong>Libby Nelson: </strong>I&rsquo;m not sure exactly why Stan offered that loan; if Philip had taken it, would it have been evidence, to Stan, that he was genuine (because the travel agency was in such desperate straits that he&rsquo;d take a loan from a friend) or that he wasn&rsquo;t (because he&rsquo;d go so far as to <em>take Stan&rsquo;s money, </em>in circumstances when the &ldquo;right&rdquo; thing to do is clearly to refuse)? But more to the point, I&rsquo;m not even sure if Stan is sure why he offered that loan. Noah Emmerich is, as always, doing a tremendous job playing Stan as someone who, deep down, knows his idea is right and yet clearly, obviously wants to be wrong.</p>

<p>Stan might have made that offer strategically. But he also might have made it reflexively &mdash; relieved that Philip is at the travel agency, where he&rsquo;s supposed to be, and that the agency itself, bigger and yet desperate for business, backs up Philip&rsquo;s story. (I don&rsquo;t know how much Stan knows about the financial side of the KGB&rsquo;s arrangements; even after six seasons, I just learned recently that &ldquo;illegals&rdquo; typically lived off the money they earned from legitimate work at their cover businesses, not secret Soviet payments.) Stan might be acting like a friend in the name of the investigation, or just acting like a friend because Philip is his friend. Philip has been doing the same thing with Stan for years.</p>

<p>We&rsquo;re back here to a question <em>The Americans</em> has circled for its entire run: What does it mean for something to be &ldquo;real,&rdquo; anyway? At what point, if you&rsquo;ve acted like a friend or a spouse for long enough, even out of operational necessity, are you just a friend? If Philip was friends with Stan just to keep tabs on the FBI, it would have been easy (and understandable) if they&rsquo;d drifted apart between 1984 and 1987. Stan went back to criminal investigation, Philip quit the KGB, and Stan remarried &mdash; a real-life reason many friendships grow more distant. All the evidence suggests instead that they&rsquo;re closer than ever.</p>

<p>When Philip said to Elizabeth last week that <em>they</em> had done everything they&rsquo;d done, not the KGB, he was referring to the trail of bodies and betrayal they&rsquo;ve left behind them. But it seems to apply here too. Befriending Stan was a strategic maneuver, but it wasn&rsquo;t the KGB who befriended Stan. It was Philip, and the friendship, to me, seems real. But somehow I doubt, if Stan ever finds out the truth, he&rsquo;ll see it that way.</p>

<p>I guess what I&rsquo;m saying is, if we get a series finale that spends more time on the Stan-Philip friendship than the Jennings marriage, I won&rsquo;t even be mad. Todd, what storyline do you want most to have a satisfying ending? Paige? Pastor Tim? MAIL ROBOT?</p>

<p><strong>Todd: </strong>I say if the series doesn&rsquo;t end with Mail Robot escaping the FBI to right wrongs and break hearts across the great American landscape, we write a strongly worded petition to FX. Beyond that, I am ready for anything &mdash; <em>anything</em> &mdash; the series wants to throw at us. One more episode! Ever!</p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
	</feed>
