Leonardo DiCaprio has garnered a ton of praise for his on-screen performances over the years while simultaneously being a little sketchy when it comes to his personal life. Sure, he’s never confirmed his various flings, but when you are 49 years old and making out (allegedly) with your 25-year-old GF (allegedly), it becomes hard to ignore. Allegedly!
It seems like not everyone is enamored with the actor. Bravo star Jordan Emanuel recently spoke about running into Leo while she worked in nightlife. She told Page Six, “I used to serve him. He dresses like he smells, and I’m like, this is crazy!” she recalled. What does one wear that makes them look smelly besides an old pair of Birkenstocks?
When asked to recall his attire, Emanuel explained, “Ok so, socks like mine but not cute, like white tennis socks, you know what I mean, very old dirty sneakers, cargo shorts cream, white baggy T-shirt and a baseball hat,” she confirmed. So it seems like he is wearing the official Marvel Superhero In Disguise look we all know. Not bad, but not expected from a millionaire.
Emanuel then clarified that he “smelled fine,” but that he “just looked dirty,” which is just as bad, since most people will never ever have the opportunity to smell Leonardo Dicaprio in their life. It might be easier on the people if we all just spread a rumor that he really does smell, you know, to soften the blow.
Compton DJ/rapper Channel Tres is kicking off the rollout to his 2024 project with “Walked In The Room,” its funky first single. The video, directed by Aris Chatman, higlights Tres’ slick dance moves as he explores Los Angeles’ LIttle Tokyo. The house-driven production anchors the upbeat track, while Tres’ cool vocals detail his laid-back outlook on life.
“Walked In The Room” is the firstsingle from Tres’ upcoming project, as well as his first since dropping the February EP Real Cultural Sh*t. The EP was the Hub City artist’s first major-label release and featured the singles “Just Can’t Get Enough,” “No Limit,” and “6am.”
Also this year, Channel Tres began expanding his reach with a series of collaborations, introducting his funky “Compton House” take on dance music to new audiences. In January, he teamed up with UK producer SG Lewis and Charlotte Day Wilson on “Fever Dreamer.” Then, in February, he and fellow West Coast native Terrace Martin released “Chucks,” a groovy ode to the unofficial official footwear of Los Angeles and its surrounding cities.
Most recently, Tres joined forces with the current standard bearer of Black dance music, Kaytranada, on “Stuntin‘,” the B-side of Kaytranada’s single “Lover/Friend” with fellow Canadian Rochelle Jordan. The 1-2 punch ensured that more music fans will be finding out about Jordan — and Tres.
Check out the video for “Walked In The Room” above.
Compton DJ/rapper Channel Tres is kicking off the rollout to his 2024 project with “Walked In The Room,” its funky first single. The video, directed by Aris Chatman, higlights Tres’ slick dance moves as he explores Los Angeles’ LIttle Tokyo. The house-driven production anchors the upbeat track, while Tres’ cool vocals detail his laid-back outlook on life.
“Walked In The Room” is the firstsingle from Tres’ upcoming project, as well as his first since dropping the February EP Real Cultural Sh*t. The EP was the Hub City artist’s first major-label release and featured the singles “Just Can’t Get Enough,” “No Limit,” and “6am.”
Also this year, Channel Tres began expanding his reach with a series of collaborations, introducting his funky “Compton House” take on dance music to new audiences. In January, he teamed up with UK producer SG Lewis and Charlotte Day Wilson on “Fever Dreamer.” Then, in February, he and fellow West Coast native Terrace Martin released “Chucks,” a groovy ode to the unofficial official footwear of Los Angeles and its surrounding cities.
Most recently, Tres joined forces with the current standard bearer of Black dance music, Kaytranada, on “Stuntin‘,” the B-side of Kaytranada’s single “Lover/Friend” with fellow Canadian Rochelle Jordan. The 1-2 punch ensured that more music fans will be finding out about Jordan — and Tres.
Check out the video for “Walked In The Room” above.
Do you ever stop to consider what celebrity roommates might be like together? Ben Affleck has been pretty open about feeling smothered in garbage while living with best friend Matt Damon when they were struggling actors. If you are Edi Patterson’s roommate, on the other hand, she might make you dance, but what of Joaquin Phoenix?
I’d imagine that he’s a nice quiet roommate who adores getting lost in books, so you wouldn’t have to worry about him throwing parties, which is the opposite of his shambolic and chaotic manner of public speeches. As it turns out, the Napoleon star really is a pretty great roommate.
Mark Ruffalo (who is promoting being slapped by Emma Stone in Poor Things) sat down for First We Feast’s Hot Ones with host Sean Evans, and we didn’t hear about any book-reading habits, but Joaquin sounds like a clean and considerate guy who can make some mean vegan meals:
“He’s a great cook, and he turned me on to vegan cuisine and so he would cook all the time, and he was a great roommate. He was a roommate who would be out and you’d get a text: ‘You need anything? Do you need me to pick up anything?’ The place is clean, all the dishes were washed, he’s got a great sense of humor. He was super thoughtful.”
The two were roomies during their time filming 2007’s Reservation Road. You can watch the full interview below, and the Joaquin part surfaces after 11:45 in the below video.
Do you ever stop to consider what celebrity roommates might be like together? Ben Affleck has been pretty open about feeling smothered in garbage while living with best friend Matt Damon when they were struggling actors. If you are Edi Patterson’s roommate, on the other hand, she might make you dance, but what of Joaquin Phoenix?
I’d imagine that he’s a nice quiet roommate who adores getting lost in books, so you wouldn’t have to worry about him throwing parties, which is the opposite of his shambolic and chaotic manner of public speeches. As it turns out, the Napoleon star really is a pretty great roommate.
Mark Ruffalo (who is promoting being slapped by Emma Stone in Poor Things) sat down for First We Feast’s Hot Ones with host Sean Evans, and we didn’t hear about any book-reading habits, but Joaquin sounds like a clean and considerate guy who can make some mean vegan meals:
“He’s a great cook, and he turned me on to vegan cuisine and so he would cook all the time, and he was a great roommate. He was a roommate who would be out and you’d get a text: ‘You need anything? Do you need me to pick up anything?’ The place is clean, all the dishes were washed, he’s got a great sense of humor. He was super thoughtful.”
The two were roomies during their time filming 2007’s Reservation Road. You can watch the full interview below, and the Joaquin part surfaces after 11:45 in the below video.
It is shocking when someone creates something so integral to popular culture but doesn’t realize it. You know the GIF, you see it almost every day even though you might not realize what movie it’s from. There’s Antonio Banderas rejoicing, but also trying to keeping emotions in check, but he can’t quite do it and he lets himself have a quick moment of glee. You know, this one:
Warner Bros.
This GIF is from the movie Assassins – Brian Helgeland’s first of two movies with Richard Donner; the second is Conspiracy Theory and we get to that one, too. In Assassins, Banderas thinks he’s just gotten the upper hand on his rival assassin, Robert Rath (Sylvester Stallone), but, spoiler, that’s not how things turn out. Helgeland, who would win an Oscar two years later for his LA Confidential screenplay, wrote that scene and was on set the day that was filmed (and, ahead, takes us through that scene), but had no idea of its place in culture today. (If nothing else comes of my life, at least I got to tell him this has happened.)
Helgeland has been around awhile and has written and directed a lot of movies you probably like (starting with writing A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master), so it’s kind of weird to watch his latest film, Finestkind, which he wrote and directed, and wonder where all this naive optimism comes from. It turns out Helgeland wrote this script about a recent college graduate who just wants to be a fisherman like his brother – which later devolves into heroin smuggling to pay off debts – was written over 30 years ago when Helgeland was in his 20s. He mentions there are plot points he wouldn’t have done today. I mention, well, he’s the director, he could change them. He says no, he wants to respect the writer, speaking of his younger self as if it’s a whole different person. Which, yes, that’s probably true. It’s an extremely interesting exercise in filmmaking. And when Taylor Sheridan is on your side asking if you need more money, well that certainly doesn’t hurt.
I’m an admirer of a lot of your filmography. Even the theatrical version of Payback, which I know you hate…
I don’t hate it. I don’t hate it. I just do the variation.
Well, you have done a masterful job making the theatrical version disappear. If you go try to buy this movie, it’s only your director’s cut version now.
Yeah, I have nothing to do with that, really. I don’t know how that happened. But I think there are rights issues with the theatrical version or something. I don’t know. Everything works out for a reason.
While watching Finestkind, I felt like I do watching your ’90s movies in the sense of, “Wait, what the fuck just happened?” I think that kind of thing used to happen more often with movies.
I mean, I think movies today, they’re so made by committees and they’re so corporate in a way that what those guys don’t realize is the audience is way smarter than they are. And they don’t trust anything. They want everything spelled out. “Why are you the bad guy again? And why are you doing this noble thing?” It’s all spelled out and it’s silly. The audience is so far ahead of studio people that it’s kind of sad.
Have you experienced this in the last few years?
I mean, yeah, always. I’m trying to think of a specific example, but yeah, it’s always a fear of subtlety.
You have an Oscar, so you’d think people would listen to you. When did that change?
I think it started when things were getting consolidated. This is a little before that, but it gives away the idea, is that when Warner became Time Warner and then Time Warner AOL, and then Time Warner Discovery. And movies stopped being their main gig, basically. Movies are now just a part of what we do. And the people in charge weren’t movie people anymore, even studio executives and that kind of thing. But it was the last 15 years ago or so, somewhere in there.
With this one, I’m watching it and I felt like your voice is all over this thing. Did you feel that way and how did you get away with that?
No, I totally felt that way. I mean, the script was written years and years ago. I wrote this script thirty-odd years ago. And so it really has that feel because it’s when I wrote it. And for whatever reason, it never got made. There were different incarnations, but the script is a ’90s script … literally. The joke is the sixty-year-old version of me is directing the twenty-eight-year-old writer version of me. I’m not sure I would’ve done certain things the same.
Well, wait, you’re the director, you still could have changed it.
I kind of respected the writer in a way. I had been a commercial fisherman for a couple of years when I got out of undergraduate school and it was all based on that experience, so I didn’t want to. And I still was very romantic about it. It served it for the character of Charlie, the Toby Wallace character because he’s a young guy who was just going fishing. I didn’t want to cynic it up.
Charlie has this innocence and he’s also kind of naive. It now makes perfect sense you wrote this in your 20s.
And I think if I had rewritten it, it would’ve just felt like an old guy pretending he knows what a young guy thinks. Luckily, I had that version of it still. And that’s why it probably has the ’90s feel because it was written during the ’90s.
Taylor Sheridan is a producer. Does that help getting it made the way you want it made?
Yeah, but 101 produces his stuff, so they’re not the same company. But 101 does all the Yellowstone and all of Taylor’s stuff. So he came on as a producer through them and really did have a lot of respect for me and for my career and stuff. I talked to him a couple of times and he said, “Look, if you don’t have enough money, call me, because I love getting more money.”
Well, that’s a nice thing to hear.
And also he’s a cash cow for Paramount+, who put up some of the money.
Yes, he is.
He never had to flex muscles or anything, but I think the fact that he had them to flex if he wanted to, it was helpful for the budget.
So you didn’t have to make that call?
No, no.
I re-watched Assassins for the first time since the ’90s. I had a great time re-watching that movie. I know at the time when it came out, people weren’t in love with it. But there are a lot of movies from the ’90s that are being reevaluated because they look great, have real stunts, filmed on film…
And plus, Assassins was the first time I worked for Dick Donner…
Right, then you did Conspiracy Theory after with him.
And it was a great learning experience. He had me on the set the whole time, everything’s real. There’s a stunt coordinator. Even Conspiracy Theory, we repelled guys out of helicopters in Union Square in New York. Four helicopters came in at two in the morning and we controlled all that outside the Barnes & Noble bookstore there. And it was like, you could never do that today. It would all be CGI and it would look that way. It’s a weird thing. It’s like people don’t think they need that reality. But especially stunts, it’s like if you ever watch The Road Warrior again, it’s gripping because you don’t have to be consciously thinking it’s real, but you feel it’s real and there’s just no substitute for it.
The thing I wanted to specifically ask about Assassins, do you find it weird that arguably the most popular GIF on the internet is from a movie you wrote?
Which GIF is it?
This one
Warner Bros.
I know what scene you’re talking about, but I didn’t know that was the most popular GIF.
I see that scene pretty much every day.
I remember when we shot that because we shot it on Lake Union. We built a hotel room for him on Lake Union in Seattle, literally, because Dick wanted to. At the end of the day on Friday he wanted to be able to get on a seaplane and go to his house out in the islands out there. And I remember when we were shooting that stuff with Antonio playing chess. And when he did that, it was so charismatic when Antonio did that, and everyone was like, “Oh my God.” I know “rizz” is the word of the year, but that was. He was just so full of the charisma, or rizz, or whatever you want to call it. I remember him doing that. Just all that kind of “ay-ay-ay” that he could do. It was all over the place.
I’m glad I told you this.
Yeah, I didn’t know.
I just re-watched Conspiracy Theory a few months ago. Here’s what I kept thinking. Mel Gibson’s Jerry Fletcher has all these crazy ideas and it’s just like everyone else in the movie treats him as this one kook. Is it weird for you, having written that movie, back then it’s like, “Look at this one weird guy with these ideas?” Where now 35 percent of the country shares his theories?
Yeah, it’s really strange. It almost is quaint, right?
Yes, that’s exactly the word I was thinking. It’s like back when one person might have some kooky ideas, and now it’s like 35 percent of the country has kooky ideas.
I guess the thing is he’s only publishing his newsletter, which, he has a mimeograph. I forget what he says in the movie, he’s got 8 or 12 subscribers? Of course, all of whom turned up to have been murdered. But now it’s like people have hundreds of millions of subscribers.
Jerry Fletcher was basically the guy who ran QAnon, but back then he had eight people listening to him. Quaint is a good word, but it kind of did predict where things were going.
I always loved conspiracy theories, just because they were so outrageous and fun to think about, but not so much anymore.
Did you ever listen to Art Bell back in the ’90s? It was like, “Hey, there’s a hole in the ground that goes to the center of the earth.” Stuff like that, it did used to be fun.
Now you’d have to make it like Reality Theory or something. Some guy was trying to tell the truth and no one believes him.
It is shocking when someone creates something so integral to popular culture but doesn’t realize it. You know the GIF, you see it almost every day even though you might not realize what movie it’s from. There’s Antonio Banderas rejoicing, but also trying to keeping emotions in check, but he can’t quite do it and he lets himself have a quick moment of glee. You know, this one:
Warner Bros.
This GIF is from the movie Assassins – Brian Helgeland’s first of two movies with Richard Donner; the second is Conspiracy Theory and we get to that one, too. In Assassins, Banderas thinks he’s just gotten the upper hand on his rival assassin, Robert Rath (Sylvester Stallone), but, spoiler, that’s not how things turn out. Helgeland, who would win an Oscar two years later for his LA Confidential screenplay, wrote that scene and was on set the day that was filmed (and, ahead, takes us through that scene), but had no idea of its place in culture today. (If nothing else comes of my life, at least I got to tell him this has happened.)
Helgeland has been around awhile and has written and directed a lot of movies you probably like (starting with writing A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master), so it’s kind of weird to watch his latest film, Finestkind, which he wrote and directed, and wonder where all this naive optimism comes from. It turns out Helgeland wrote this script about a recent college graduate who just wants to be a fisherman like his brother – which later devolves into heroin smuggling to pay off debts – was written over 30 years ago when Helgeland was in his 20s. He mentions there are plot points he wouldn’t have done today. I mention, well, he’s the director, he could change them. He says no, he wants to respect the writer, speaking of his younger self as if it’s a whole different person. Which, yes, that’s probably true. It’s an extremely interesting exercise in filmmaking. And when Taylor Sheridan is on your side asking if you need more money, well that certainly doesn’t hurt.
I’m an admirer of a lot of your filmography. Even the theatrical version of Payback, which I know you hate…
I don’t hate it. I don’t hate it. I just do the variation.
Well, you have done a masterful job making the theatrical version disappear. If you go try to buy this movie, it’s only your director’s cut version now.
Yeah, I have nothing to do with that, really. I don’t know how that happened. But I think there are rights issues with the theatrical version or something. I don’t know. Everything works out for a reason.
While watching Finestkind, I felt like I do watching your ’90s movies in the sense of, “Wait, what the fuck just happened?” I think that kind of thing used to happen more often with movies.
I mean, I think movies today, they’re so made by committees and they’re so corporate in a way that what those guys don’t realize is the audience is way smarter than they are. And they don’t trust anything. They want everything spelled out. “Why are you the bad guy again? And why are you doing this noble thing?” It’s all spelled out and it’s silly. The audience is so far ahead of studio people that it’s kind of sad.
Have you experienced this in the last few years?
I mean, yeah, always. I’m trying to think of a specific example, but yeah, it’s always a fear of subtlety.
You have an Oscar, so you’d think people would listen to you. When did that change?
I think it started when things were getting consolidated. This is a little before that, but it gives away the idea, is that when Warner became Time Warner and then Time Warner AOL, and then Time Warner Discovery. And movies stopped being their main gig, basically. Movies are now just a part of what we do. And the people in charge weren’t movie people anymore, even studio executives and that kind of thing. But it was the last 15 years ago or so, somewhere in there.
With this one, I’m watching it and I felt like your voice is all over this thing. Did you feel that way and how did you get away with that?
No, I totally felt that way. I mean, the script was written years and years ago. I wrote this script thirty-odd years ago. And so it really has that feel because it’s when I wrote it. And for whatever reason, it never got made. There were different incarnations, but the script is a ’90s script … literally. The joke is the sixty-year-old version of me is directing the twenty-eight-year-old writer version of me. I’m not sure I would’ve done certain things the same.
Well, wait, you’re the director, you still could have changed it.
I kind of respected the writer in a way. I had been a commercial fisherman for a couple of years when I got out of undergraduate school and it was all based on that experience, so I didn’t want to. And I still was very romantic about it. It served it for the character of Charlie, the Toby Wallace character because he’s a young guy who was just going fishing. I didn’t want to cynic it up.
Charlie has this innocence and he’s also kind of naive. It now makes perfect sense you wrote this in your 20s.
And I think if I had rewritten it, it would’ve just felt like an old guy pretending he knows what a young guy thinks. Luckily, I had that version of it still. And that’s why it probably has the ’90s feel because it was written during the ’90s.
Taylor Sheridan is a producer. Does that help getting it made the way you want it made?
Yeah, but 101 produces his stuff, so they’re not the same company. But 101 does all the Yellowstone and all of Taylor’s stuff. So he came on as a producer through them and really did have a lot of respect for me and for my career and stuff. I talked to him a couple of times and he said, “Look, if you don’t have enough money, call me, because I love getting more money.”
Well, that’s a nice thing to hear.
And also he’s a cash cow for Paramount+, who put up some of the money.
Yes, he is.
He never had to flex muscles or anything, but I think the fact that he had them to flex if he wanted to, it was helpful for the budget.
So you didn’t have to make that call?
No, no.
I re-watched Assassins for the first time since the ’90s. I had a great time re-watching that movie. I know at the time when it came out, people weren’t in love with it. But there are a lot of movies from the ’90s that are being reevaluated because they look great, have real stunts, filmed on film…
And plus, Assassins was the first time I worked for Dick Donner…
Right, then you did Conspiracy Theory after with him.
And it was a great learning experience. He had me on the set the whole time, everything’s real. There’s a stunt coordinator. Even Conspiracy Theory, we repelled guys out of helicopters in Union Square in New York. Four helicopters came in at two in the morning and we controlled all that outside the Barnes & Noble bookstore there. And it was like, you could never do that today. It would all be CGI and it would look that way. It’s a weird thing. It’s like people don’t think they need that reality. But especially stunts, it’s like if you ever watch The Road Warrior again, it’s gripping because you don’t have to be consciously thinking it’s real, but you feel it’s real and there’s just no substitute for it.
The thing I wanted to specifically ask about Assassins, do you find it weird that arguably the most popular GIF on the internet is from a movie you wrote?
Which GIF is it?
This one
Warner Bros.
I know what scene you’re talking about, but I didn’t know that was the most popular GIF.
I see that scene pretty much every day.
I remember when we shot that because we shot it on Lake Union. We built a hotel room for him on Lake Union in Seattle, literally, because Dick wanted to. At the end of the day on Friday he wanted to be able to get on a seaplane and go to his house out in the islands out there. And I remember when we were shooting that stuff with Antonio playing chess. And when he did that, it was so charismatic when Antonio did that, and everyone was like, “Oh my God.” I know “rizz” is the word of the year, but that was. He was just so full of the charisma, or rizz, or whatever you want to call it. I remember him doing that. Just all that kind of “ay-ay-ay” that he could do. It was all over the place.
I’m glad I told you this.
Yeah, I didn’t know.
I just re-watched Conspiracy Theory a few months ago. Here’s what I kept thinking. Mel Gibson’s Jerry Fletcher has all these crazy ideas and it’s just like everyone else in the movie treats him as this one kook. Is it weird for you, having written that movie, back then it’s like, “Look at this one weird guy with these ideas?” Where now 35 percent of the country shares his theories?
Yeah, it’s really strange. It almost is quaint, right?
Yes, that’s exactly the word I was thinking. It’s like back when one person might have some kooky ideas, and now it’s like 35 percent of the country has kooky ideas.
I guess the thing is he’s only publishing his newsletter, which, he has a mimeograph. I forget what he says in the movie, he’s got 8 or 12 subscribers? Of course, all of whom turned up to have been murdered. But now it’s like people have hundreds of millions of subscribers.
Jerry Fletcher was basically the guy who ran QAnon, but back then he had eight people listening to him. Quaint is a good word, but it kind of did predict where things were going.
I always loved conspiracy theories, just because they were so outrageous and fun to think about, but not so much anymore.
Did you ever listen to Art Bell back in the ’90s? It was like, “Hey, there’s a hole in the ground that goes to the center of the earth.” Stuff like that, it did used to be fun.
Now you’d have to make it like Reality Theory or something. Some guy was trying to tell the truth and no one believes him.
Calling out the year’s “best Scotch whisky” feels very subjective. And for the most part… it is. You’re relying on my expert opinion as a whisky critic, judge, and consultant. You have to give me a level of trust based on my whisky palate (something I’ve been developing my entire adult life). I can assure you that I take that trust very seriously, and I take calling out something as the “best” as a solemn assignment.
So when I announced yesterday that Talisker 30 is the best Scotch whisky of 2023, I meant it in my bones.
This year’s Talisker Single Malt Scotch Whisky Aged for 30 Years is both divine and special. The “divine” aspect is admittedly where the subjectivity comes in — so we’ll get to that later. Let’s focus on the objective fact that this is a truly special expression of Scotch whisky, full stop. First and foremost, Talisker is one of the most unique distilleries in the world. The nearly 200-year-old distillery is nestled on the quiet Loch Harport in the tiny village of Carbost on the Isle of Skye off the northwest coast of Scotland. The Oyster Shed next door has informed generations of whisky makers as they’ve refined the process of making Talisker all those years, and that shines through in the final products.
But perhaps more importantly the slow life and subdued pace of the surrounding region also informs one of the most delicately peated whiskies on the market today. Yes, this is a peated whisky but it’s never a medicinal smoke bomb or ash/asphalt-driven sipping experience. Talisker has this balance of bright fruits and seaside vibes that don’t square on paper but somehow sing on your senses — hence, it being beloved for generations.
Diageo
What makes 2023’s Talisker 30 so special is the process. The softly peated malts are slow-fermented in old washbacks that have seen eons of yeast, water, and malt pass through them — think of this like a well-seasoned pan in an old professional kitchen that’s been producing the best food in the region for centuries. Once that distiller’s beer has just the right balance of fruity tang and alcohol volume, the juice is then distilled through old copper pot stills that are cooled by a special line of pipe that runs outside and into a wood vat that’s fed with seawater (from mere feet away) to cool the steam into the spirit — a process wholly unique to Talisker.
Finally, that spirit was left to rest in refill ex-bourbon casks (casks that were already used for aging Scotch whisky at least once before) for 30 long years in a warehouse a few feet away from both the stillhouse and the sea. Amazingly, the angels were light in taking their share of the barrels that made it to 30 years, and we were gifted with a beautiful elixir.
Over those years, the whisky took on a different vibe entirely. Science became magic. Stuart Morrison, Diageo’s Master Blender and Whisky Specialist, breaks it down for us:
“As the spirit aged through its twenties, the fruit flavors became even more complex, giving us fragrant tropical notes and the peppery smokiness that moves from coal-tar to a warming, smoldering bonfire.”
This process reminds me of the Lincoln County Process that Tennessee whiskey produces uses. Bear with me. That process — in a very broad brushstroke — of filtering hot distillate through 10 feet of sugar maple charcoal strips the heavy oils from the distillate left by the grains, allowing the softer fruitier yeast notes to shine through before aging. Then those fruity notes become the dominant factor as the whiskey ages on new American oak. Talisker is going through something similar but in a very different way. Instead of accelerating the stripping of the heavy peated grain notes via charcoal filtering, they’re using time — and a lot of it — for those heavy oily chemical phenols to fade away on their own, leaving those fruity yeast esters to take center stage all while the thick sea air slowly makes it mark decade after decade until this whisky turns into something completely new and unique.
The French call it “merroir” in that the terroir is driven by the sea instead of the land.
Diageo
Time, space, and place are what makes this bottle of whisky so damn special. And you cannot replicate that with science or engineering. This is magic that simply takes time and we get to taste that magic in each glass of this whisky. So let’s dive into what’s actually in the pour:
The nose is soft and subtle to an almost shocking level. You’re best suited to pour this one and let it rest in the glass for a good 10 minutes before you start your journey. Once the whisky takes on some air, this soft sense of a smoldering beach campfire will start to sneak in from far down a rainy beach as someone puts nori in the embers. And just then, the nose shifts towards this buttery rich dark chocolate over dried cranberries, currants, and huckleberries with a good pinch of sea salt next to a fleeting sense of seafood chowder loaded with bacon, clams, gently smoked salmon, freshly cracked black pepper, and oyster crackers.
The first sip brings that nori-filled campfire a step closer as the wet grey and black rocks of a pebbly beach crunch underfoot. The chowder takes on a mild sense of smoked salmon fat and oyster liqueur before seared peaches come into play with a fleeting moment of pear brandy over marzipan, adding a whole new dimension to the mid-palate of the sip. Then this faint moment of malt arrives like a salted oat milk cut with nutmeg, clove, and soft white pepper (that cask strength coming through).
The finish is like getting kissed by merfolk on a beach next to a campfire that’s heating a cauldron full of spicy stewed peaches in more of that smoked cream before this beautiful sense of the nori-stacked campfire fades back into the far distance and the pear brandy, grilled peaches, and soft orchard leaves mellow the final notes toward a delicate warm hug from your dearest relative.
This, folks, is where the “divine” comes into play and the subjectivity of my palate. This whisky speaks to my youth growing up in the Pacific Northwest. After all, I can only tell you what I sense based on my lifetime of building my palate. There’s more here beyond my sense memories, though — and that’s exciting. You’ll surely find things that I do not when you sip this whisky.
Diageo
This is a sipping whisky through and through. It’s so balanced yet runs this gamut of vibrant, deep, and dark while being bright and refreshing. Over a single rock, that creaminess mounts with the fruit, creating an almost cream pie vibe before hitting reminiscent notes of eggnog, mocha espresso, and oyster bisque with a sense of the campfire fading further down that rainy rocky beach until you start to sense the dry grasses of the hills more than the sea breeze.
While you can drink this neat, add water. Let this bloom in the glass to experience that deeper whisky. Pour it over a single rock and see what you find there too. And then … make a Manhattan with this (well, Rob Roy technically). It’ll be astounding. That creamy smokiness with a light and floral French sweet vermouth, a hint of orange oils, and a touch of Angostura spice will elevate this whisky into the stars. Add a smoked brandied cherry and you’ll be dialed in for one of the best cocktails of your life.
All of this leads us to the elephant in the room. This is not an everyday experience for most whisky drinkers. There were only 3,195 bottles released this year and only 561 made it to the U.S. market. The price is steep. Expect to pay around $1,500 at retail. But it is 100% available for the right price right now. If you’re out of the “full bottle” convo, a bar pour of this will be closer to $150 an ounce (maybe more).
The good news is that Talisker 30 is also going to be a yearly release for the first time (another reason this expression is special this year). The last Talisker 30 dropped in 2021 after an even longer hiatus. Going forward, there will be a Talisker 30 release every year for the foreseeable future. It’s very exciting, as anyone who gets to taste this dram will surely agree!
The idea of predicting the future has been the subject of countless books, movies and televisions shows (and is basically the basis of all gambling). Outside of a few uncanny instances, no one can tell exactly what the future holds, especially for the world at large. But people sure love to predict it anyway.
The BBC shared a video compilation of kids in 1966 sharing what they imagine the year 2000 would be like, and their predictions are fascinating. After five or six kids share, it becomes clear what some of the most pressing concerns of the 1960s were. Some kids thought we’d have bombed ourselves into oblivion. Others believed we’d be so overpopulated we would be packed like sardines and wouldn’t be able to build houses anymore.
Not all of the predictions were so dark. Some kids had some hilarious predictions about cabbage pills and robots. Others thought we’d have better cures for diseases and less segregation among the races, which we have.
Watch what these young folks envisioned nearly 40 years into their future—now more than 20 years into our past:
Thankfully, the year 2000 wasn’t as dire as many of these kids imagined it would be. In fact, hearing these predictions might even make us feel pretty good about how humanity has fared in the past 60 years.
How about the kid predicting the future of automation? Or the kid who said people would be regarded more as statistics than people? Or the one who predicted animals being kept in buildings instead of grazing so they could produce more?
And hey, props to the kids who didn’t predict an overpopulated nuclear hellscape. It can be hard to see negative news and not think the world is on a downward spiral. But if nothing else, seeing that these kids’ doom and gloom predictions didn’t come true is pretty heartening and a good sign that our own future may not be as dark as it sometimes appears.
Landing Neil Patrick Harris as the classic Doctor Who villain The Toymaker seemed like a major casting coup when the announcement was made last year. Pairing Harris with David Tennant was a match made in heaven for fans. However, showrunner Russell T. Davies has since shared a hilarious piece of trivia as Harris’ episode gets ready to stream on Disney+: The actor had no idea what the show was or even about.
“He’d never heard of it in his life, bless him,” Davies laughingly said while revealing how we was able to lock down Harris for the role.
“I was lucky enough to work with the great man on a show called It’s a Sin, about the AIDS crisis in the 1980s, and working with him was such a joy. The Toymaker, he’s kind of the god of games, so he shuffles cards, he does magic tricks, and all of that fits Neil Patrick Harris. If you go through agents, they often tell you to go away. I was able to send just a text saying, ‘Do you fancy reading this?’ He read it and literally phoned me up going, ‘Let me get this right, so the Doctor’s an alien, right?’ I was like, ‘Oh my god, you really have never heard of Doctor Who!’ But he couldn’t resist it, and he came to Cardiff, and we had the most spectacular time.”
Tennant concurred that Harris was a quick study.
“Oh, he’s good,” Tennant told EW. “I don’t quite know if he knew what to expect, but he dived in with such gusto and brio. This part requires a lot of skill sets and Neil turns up with them all. I don’t want to give away too much about what might be required of the Toymaker, but you need a sort of an all-round entertainer to play that part and a very good actor.”
The third Doctor Who special episode, “The Giggle,” starring Neil Patrick Harris streams December 9 on Disney+.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
