If I am interested in the film or the show, I will listen in to the podcast. I don’t always agree with them, but I get a good idea of it. One thing truly drives me crazy, however: it is how many times the reviewers say , “but for me…”, or “to me…” Yeah, we understand, if you are speaking, it is your opinion. One could easily have a drinking game listening each week. Just take a shot every time you hear one of those phrases.

Used to love the show for a bit of uplifting commentary in a world where negativity and hate is thrown at you. However, the past few years this show has become so critical and the hosts act like they are professional movie/tv critics rather than friends at a “happy hour”. Starts to ruin everything you enjoy if you keep listening.

Big fan, huge. Glen Weldon has a voice made of butter it’s so dang smooth.

This podcast makes me want to be a tv and movie critic. Everyone seems so well versed but also so human! And so enjoyable and engaging to listen to - I often feel involved in the convo even if I’m just listening. Love and recommend this podcast!

I enjoy this pod and always relish the takes and analyses on various shows and subjects. Glen always has interesting perspectives on things and I like the clean concise format. I am actually going to do a shameless plug for a show that I would love to see PCHH review: Scavengers Reign recently added on Netflix. This show is truly mesmerizing. Animation, music,character depth, and storytelling are tops. It is very unique and I would love to hear this show’s take and expose this show to a wider audience. This is the best show I’ve watched in years.

Love the podcast, listen to it when i am interested in something or have seen the thing. But i hate hate hate the change in titles that have made the show unwatchable for me. I typically will scrol through past episodes, see if theres something that piques my interest and queue them up, now reading all the click-baity titles (sometimes spoilery to what they think of the thing) to garner what they are actually reviewing is annoying and has me listening to far fewer episodes. Please go back to the simple naming.

Pop Culture Happy Hour changed my life. It introduced me to the world of podcasts. It introduced me to so many new notions, ideas, and perspectives. I feel like Linda, Stephen, and Glen (as well as several of the the guest contributors—Kat, Barry, Bob, and so many others) are my virtual friends. I will love this podcast forever.

In general the content is good from day to day. However the continual requests for the paid subscription is getting old. In top of that asking listeners to provide content which will be packaged up just for the paid subscribers is not a good look. I’m fast forwarding through those parts. Everything else is fine. This is fine.

It’s great getting lost in the pop culture world with this podcast. My only question is: Where is “Late Night With the Devil?”

I get it, NPR is bleeding money and needs the ad sales. But the length of ads at the beginning is just comically long at this point. It feels like an ad show with some pop culture shows tucked towards the end

Wow. Reviewer of baby reindeer is incapable of looking at this incredibly moving story objectively— instead he is only interested in placing himself at the center of the narrative — as the sole victim. Also admitting you were on your phone while watching it and missing things? And this is your job?

Much more I could say here, but these other folks who wrote in got it covered. I found Baby Reindeer strikingly honest. It resonated with similar experiences of abuse and sexuality (related and separately) in my life and lives around me. To suggest Donny was dating or leading on his abuser, even that the abuser was gay (he identifies out loud as pansexual during the show), or that Donny’s confusion post-assault is implying gay contagion — felt like very simplistic, borderline incorrect reads of a show that is not at all simple. Despite the hosts’ claims of not wanting to police sexuality, this episode perpetuates a tired narrative that bi or questioning folks are betraying the queer cause. And assuming that Jessica Gunning won’t get opportunities because she’s fat is an insult to the live wire of talent she brings to this show. Baby Reindeer is a story about the author’s self-hatred. The hosts seem to miss that and need it to be About queerness or About body size; I loved that those features, like they are in so much of real life, were just details in that story. And like a lot of real life, the story is messy. This has been the most popular show on Netflix for weeks. Please have more than two people review it.

I love your show and I don’t always agree with your takes, thought mostly I really appreciate and love your views, humor and banter. That being said, I was incredibly bothered by the Baby Reindeer episode. I get that we all have our particular views and triggers, but I think you should have included voices of those who have actually experienced sexual trauma. I am a survivor and I found his portrayal of his experience deeply reassuring as I had a similar experience. Whether the perpetrator of the trauma is considered “straight” or “queer” or “gay”, the consequences are nearly identical for many. You act out replaying and repeating the trauma over and over. I spent years having dangerous and maladaptive essentially non-consensual sex as a subconscious way to gain back control or convince myself that it was fine because I really did want that to happen. His character did the same thing. Also sexuality is way more complex than you are born gay or straight and all of our experiences throughout our lives into the choices we make. Sure some people are just what they are but some people are different because in addition to their inherited sexuality, their trauma and experiences inform them. I felt so deeply seen by this character and hadn’t seen such since Flea Bag. I understand that in the past, queerness was used against people and stigmatized and some people still today see it as a disease and that all queer folk are predators. So I get the knee jerk tendencies to see this from that point of view, but that’s not what this is. This man was sexually groomed and assaulted and it just happened to be by a queer man who tried to gaslight him into thinking it wasn’t that. There are queer predators and to verge on saying that he wasn’t assaulted or that by hanging out with the guy and willingly taking his drugs he was “consenting” is beyond gross and irresponsible. No one who is unconscious or under the influence can consent unless there’s some prior verbal agreement about it. There was clearly none. I really wish you had included other people in this review that might have more insight into what an actual victim of assault may go through. Also, I’m a larger cis woman and spent many years feeling bad about my body and it’s only in the last few years that I’ve come to really love and embrace my body and I didn’t perceive and of the fat phobia you all brought up around the stalker character and trust me, I’m highly sensitized to these types of things having lived in a larger body my whole life. In my mind she just happened to be a larger woman with major issues. I didn’t feel she was made to be the butt of any joke. There are plenty of people in the world that find larger people sexually and otherwise attractive so I don’t see any reason to interpret her size as fat phobic, especially if that’s just how the person in real life’s body happened to be. Give your track record, I would have expected better in terms of reviews and addressing the complexity of the issues presented. It sounds like Guy watched the show, was clearly offended and wanted somewhere to vent. I don’t think this was the place for such a one sided rant. Otherwise, I really love everything you do. Keep up the mostly amazing work.

The take on baby reindeer’s grooming and gay culture was WILD. To answer the question, YES if the person was a woman, it still would’ve 100% been grooming and seen as that. I am beyond disbelief at the takes in this episode. Step back and realize this was not about your life - it’s Gadd’s life and his story. He WAS 100% groomed and abused and if it was by a gay man, then it was and that’s reality. Making inferences that Gadd somehow led this abuser on and “who knows if he ever specified if he wanted a purely platonic relationship” and “he sure wanted SOMETHING from hanging around the abuser!!” IS VICTIM BLAMING. SHAME ON YOU.

Love this show! Longtime listener! Can’t get enough. I just finished your episode on Fall Guy and I couldn’t help but wonder - how do you all feel about actors in Hollywood getting plastic surgery? In this case I’m thinking of Emma Blunt but it’s fairly hard to escape at this point - most actors get something done to their face whether it’s filler or Botox or a nose job or other. I have an uncanny valley reaction to plastic surgery and find it so very distracting. I’m either fixated on the plastic surgery that I know an actor has had OR I’m thinking about whether or not someone has had work done because they all look so stinking young. It’s getting to the point where I can’t even stand Hollywood films anymore because everyone’s face looks so strange or strangely unaged. Please discuss!!!

I’ve been listening to PCHH for a very long time and still find it fresh and enjoyable. I love their daily format with rotating hosts; it brings so many voices and perspectives to the media I’m consuming. Team PCHH forever!

Longtime devotee of this podcast. But I’m struggling with this episode. Calling the depiction of his sexual assault as playing into gay panic? He was drugged and raped while unconscious and its referred to as the abuser “hitting on” and “dating” the main character? What the…?

Helps me keep up to das on shows, etc.

What a surprise covering the Conan O’Brien Hot Ones episode! Loved it!

I love Glen Weldon’s hot takes on pop culture, only because he says it in such a way that makes me laugh every time! He always sounds so exasperated to discuss his “controversial” opinion that tends to hit the mark. He reminds me of a quirky English professor. :)

Really enjoy the hosts. Great insights and wonderful banter.

Happened to get linked to this show via Apple Podcast app & listening to Strike Force Five. I checked out this show's episode on Strike Force Five (and the reports of trouble on The Tonight Show set) - only to be subjected to some male commentator turn it into how awful late night tv hosts are, playing the race card because Fallon, Kimmel, Colbert, etc. are all middle-aged white men, and that even the announcer & sponsor of Strike Force Five are in the same demographic. This is all unadulterated "spin" baloney and the reason I'm not a NPR monthly donor any more. I'm not "sustaining" that woke culture anymore.

I listen to this podcast pretty religiously during my work week to start my morning. I really love hearing the diverse opinions on various forms of media. Howwever, I feel more and more lately, there's nothing that this team really likes. I feel there's a lot of dissatisfaction in their critiques and I wonder if anything is ever good enough for them. I really love the hosts, but maybe lighten up a bit.

Why would you host a podcast about a movie you haven’t even seen?

I usually really enjoy your show but today’s show could have included an expert on child abuse explaining the damage that happens to children as they grow older. Although you did comment on the fact that there’s something wrong with the system, I would’ve liked more discussion on the responsibility of the network. It is encumbered upon all of us to ensure that there are guard rails in place (such as regulations and stringent laws) to protect all employees and especially children from abuse. We can no longer afford to put profit over humanity. Before we didn’t have the research that examines the damage that happens to children experiencing abuse but we have that research now.

The reviewers’ gleeful adulation of Jonathan Glazer’s Oscar acceptance speech is almost as offensive and troubling to many Jews as the speech itself. While Aisha called his words “powerful,” many Jews saw his “refuting of his Jewishness” just the newest step in the millennia-long effort to compel Jews to erase themselves - renounce your heritage, your faith, etc. Jews should not need to refute themselves to make people feel better about the Israel-Gaza war. Secondly, Linda’s point that Glazer didn’t need to “stretch to make that connection” between Auschwitz and Gaza is disgusting. 1 million Jews were forcibly deported to and gassed at Auschwitz (and 6 million killed overall in the Holocaust). While the Gaza situation is horrible, deaths are occurring in context of an overall war that Palestinian political leadership (Hamas) initiated; you can condemn death in both cases without equating the two. The podcast doesn’t need to wade into politics at all. But since you’ve decided this is a political podcast, please expect legitimate criticism and condemnation of your antisemitic biases going forward.

Pretentious pop npr npc

I listen to most of these. Fabulous commentary and has introduced me to movies, shows and books. Love it!

I listen to every episode! Great hosts, commentary and content! Keep up the fantastic work!!!

Absolutely love the PCHH crew and their coverage.

Los Alamos is in the mountains, not the desert.

Love your show, your banter, your respect for each other (even though I don’t always agree.) I was yelling at you while listening last week and you didn’t hear me. And I haven’t been able to let it go. The most remarkable portrayal of a platonic relationship of pure love I’ve ever seen on TV is between the marvelous Mrs. Maisal and her manager/friend Susie. It had ups and downs and even a break up. And yet. Decades into the future in one of the best endings (spoiler alert) of any series, Miriam and Susie are living on opposite coasts but watching a game show together through a phone call, laughing, being silly and clearly connected by a life long love. Perfection.

Imagine Congress addressing disagreements with such civility and wisdom. PCHH inserts a snippet of smarts into otherwise dumb days.

Nobody has time to see every new movie, tv show, concert, or read every new book. With this podcast I get to feel up to date on what’s in the zeitgeist and can get a sense of what’s worth checking out. I also love hearing the hosts varying opinions after I’ve watched/read/listened to the subject. I have been listening to PCHH since it started (over 10 years ago now?!)

One of my favorite podcasts, and a great way to learn about new movies and shows. PLEASE do In the Know show on peacock! 😆😆 cmon it’s about npr! 🤣🤣

These hosts are weak on insight and strong on asserting their views in terms of their identities, e.g. "As an [insert identity here], I found this show to be problematic," etc. Their views are predictable, praising shows that feature identities they deem important, and never failing to laughingly dismiss all things white, straight, and male. I'm a left-leaning liberal who shares most of their views, but I find myself tiring of the narrow bandwidth of their discussions and the lack of intellectual substance or expertise in cultural criticism. Marvel populism and identitarian groupthink make me realize the degree to which the defunded, corporatized NPR has lost its way. All that said, Stephen Thompson rules and for him I must continue listening.

Short, snappy, well thought out reviews of a wide breadth of culture. I worry about the folks doing one star for a single episode or for not liking something as much as they did. It’s ok to like or dislike different things and make a case on it as that’s how one has a metered discourse. Just try listening to a different episode or try reviewing based on actual podcasting elements like audio quality, production, diversity of voices based on subject matter and the host knowledge base, etc. There’s no point in doing 1 star for most things it’s unwarranted most the time. If you don’t care for it go listen to something else for free or go create something else yourself instead of spreading negativity.

I’m a huge fan of Pop culture Happy Hour, but I just listened to the Grammy episode and it was incredibly disappointing. I’m not a huge Swiftie by any means, but the guests on the episode were being downright hateful. I’m sorry that Taylor Swift is mega famous and has won lots of awards for albums that are quite popular, but that’s not really her problem. Like a previous commenter said, we don’t pull this “over-saturated” or “peak” commentary when it’s about male artists, so why do we think it’s okay to do it now? Disappointed in that episode and disappointed that people seem so primed to hate her for no real justifiable reason.

I used to listen to Pop Culture Happy Hour on the regular, but the latest episode covering the Grammys has turned me off completely. These high-minded critics are tearing down a global treasure because they think they’re too cool to admire one of the most talented songwriters / performers / directors / artists of our time. Pop Culture Happy Hour? More like Trash Talk Hater Hour. They can take their hate and keep it, I’m going to spend my listening time elsewhere.

In the women shooting down Taylor…I’m a boomer and I think she is a saint…it’s her giving soul, her business aptitude are a greater than we’ve experienced. I love Miley too…I loved them all actually. Celebrate them all.

Have we ever as a society asked if a male performer's career has reached a "peak" and that were "saturated" by them? So gross you guys...and I'm a long time listener. Taylor speaks to people. She produces a monoculture that makes people feel seen and loved. Dampening joy is nasty business. Usually you don't have that look. I was shocked.

Vanderpump rules?! New low 👎🏾👎🏾

I really enjoy hearing the group’s take on specific TV shows and movies. I often find new shows to watch that I hadn’t heard of before listening to the episode. I also like that often each person has a different opinion and offers another view.

I love that they cover low-brow (hello Below Deck, my guilty pleasure) and high-brow. Always a good discussion and they do a great job pulling in guest hosts.

First off, thank you Anastasia for recognizing the subtleties and beauty of this film. The other two hosts have zero understanding of what the film was trying to convey and seem erudite and pretentious, caught up in trolling Bradley Cooper. How could they not even mention the most stunning scene in this film, where Cooper conducts the London symphony orchestra for over 6 minutes and moved me and others to tears? The beauty of that segment was one of the most entrancing moments on film I have ever seen. To focus on REM in the car and criticize the music supervisor???? Dear god. The professorial snobbery reeks to high heaven on this pod. And for that you get a 1 star. WILL NOT RECOMMEND

I wanted to like the show as I’ve heard Aisha on other podcasts and enjoyed her. But this show is too buried in the “artsy fartsy”.

Candace Lim absolutely killed me. I loved her confident delivery.

Why haven’t you reviewed Godzilla Minus One? It has been more culturally significant and financially successful than so many of these other things.

they reviewed saltburn and called it Talented Mr Ripley mashed up with Parasite and immediately lost all credibility they might have been holding onto. no matter who is on the show, they insist on dealing away depth or meaning for bubbly banter that ultimately means nothing while patting eachother on the back.

Love this episode. Felipe and Anna had me in tears