S1: Hey, I'm Osman Farooqui and this is the drop a
S1: culture show from the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age,
S1: where we dive into the latest in the world of
S1: pop culture and entertainment. I'm here with Thomas Mitchell and
S1: Mel Cambrai. How's it going, guys?
S2: It's going well. I actually had a bit of a
S2: Thomas Mitchell moment this morning. Oh, that could.
S1: Mean any number of things.
S2: It's good. It's related to the sausage roll incident that
S2: you had where you famously stole the sausage roll. Anyway,
S2: this morning, because of the outage that's going on with
S2: Optus at the moment, when I got my coffee, they
S2: were like, you don't have to pay for the coffee,
S2: just like all the terminals. Let me put your name down.
S2: And I was so uncomfortable with it. I felt like
S2: I was almost like, do you want to take my license?
S2: Like what? What can I give you?
S1: You could just make up a fake name. You could
S1: be mad.
S2: Yeah, exactly. I go by that too. I've been trained.
S2: But it did make me think Thomas. Like it was
S2: very different response. Whereas you. You just took your sausage roll.
S3: Where is this coffee shop?
S2: I'm just downstairs.
S3: Perfect. I'll be down there after this to get myself
S3: a sandwich and.
S2: Just write down Osman.
S1: Very funny. For the moment you go down is when
S1: Optus is back up and running the $354. Please.
S3: All the orders start coming through like on the bear.
S1: Well, speaking of the bear. So there's a bit of
S1: news around that I think is worth touching on. Before
S1: we get into the main topic of today's show. The
S1: first bit of news just this week, Tuesday night, The
S1: Bear was announced that it was returning for season three.
S1: That's exciting. How are we.
S2: Feeling? Really happy for you, Thomas. Really happy for you.
S3: I am obviously very excited. And it's funny because now
S3: somehow my personal happiness is connected to the bears continuation.
S3: I think so, so many people sent it to me
S3: yesterday and they were like, hey, obviously the bears coming back,
S3: you must be having a great day. I was like, yes,
S3: I am.
S2: Also, what do you mean by somehow you have actively.
S1: Yeah, yeah. You've worked very hard to curate.
S3: This is you guys are projected this upon me because
S3: Carmy and I are so similar vibe wise. Well, you.
S1: Both left me hanging. I sent you guys a link
S1: to the announcement late last night, and you.
S3: Just said at 11:18 p.m., I was asleep.
S1: I was watching Afghanistan smash out a huge innings against
S1: Australia in the World Cup, their highest ever one day
S1: international total. Very exciting for Afghanistan.
S3: Close, but not close enough though.
S1: I know I was rooting for them as the underdogs.
S1: And then obviously Glenn Maxwell absolutely destroyed it with the
S1: 201 innings. Incredible stuff. Finishing it with a six. Yes,
S1: I was up watching the cricket like a patriotic Australian
S1: who was secretly rooting for Afghanistan. So I was disappointed
S1: that you guys were asleep.
S3: It was very heroic from Glenn Maxwell, obviously coming through cramp.
S3: And inevitably there will be a channel nine miniseries about it.
S1: Underbelly the cramp. Yeah. The other thing I wanted to
S1: touch on briefly was the latest in the actors strike, which,
S1: depending on who you talk to, is either like about
S1: to end any minute or is going to drag on indefinitely.
S1: A lot of big names have gotten involved in this lately,
S1: like Zachary Quinto, the actor he put an email he
S1: sent to Fran Drescher, who you remember is the president
S1: of the Screen Actors Guild. And he and he kind
S1: of posted it on Instagram saying, Fran, the studio is
S1: like putting the pressure on. They want you to cave,
S1: but don't fold. Like I will pick it for the
S1: rest of history if need be. I'm not sure every
S1: actor is in the same position as Zachary Quinto. He's
S1: still living on that Star Trek coin, I guess. But
S1: there have been some developments this week. The studios, the
S1: amp have said they've sent their final and best offer
S1: to the union. It's worth noting that they say that
S1: all the time. The union say no thank you, and
S1: they come back with another final and best offer. But
S1: from what we hear, agreement has been reached on, like
S1: all the key issues to do with things like pay
S1: and residuals and the kind of revenue share from streaming
S1: providers that could go to artists. The one thing that
S1: hasn't been solid yet is I, and this seems like
S1: a big sticking point. We're kind of now haggling over
S1: the amount of compensation. Both big name actors and background
S1: actors should get for their likeness being sort of scanned
S1: and used in AI generated models. What's interesting, though, is
S1: I don't know if you guys have started noticing this
S1: in work, but even though the strike is still technically
S1: on the vibe from studios and acting PR people is
S1: that interviews are probably going to start happening again soon.
S1: Like releases are going to start happening again soon. Hotel
S1: rooms are being booked for junkets and things, so you
S1: get the feeling that even though it's not been formally announced,
S1: there's a sense in Hollywood that this is going to
S1: be over soon and actors want to get back to
S1: work in terms of acting, be want to actually start
S1: promoting the movies that are going to come out. But
S1: I think this is also really important. This third bit,
S1: the Oscars race is heating up, and a big part
S1: of the Oscar race is actors being able to talk
S1: about their roles, their performances get on the. Campaign trail.
S1: So I think everything is sort of looking like we
S1: may get a deal sometime soon. Is that sort of
S1: chiming with what you guys are reading and seeing around
S1: the place?
S3: Yeah, I think so. It feels like there's a general acceptance.
S3: And look, a lot of the evidence you just listed
S3: there that things are coming to an end. I do
S3: think as well, it's probably a really good time for
S3: it to end. I think it's hard because like these,
S3: the reality is it's a trendy, cool issue when it
S3: breaks and people get around it. But like sadly, when
S3: you're not involved directly, like people do get fatigued, like
S3: I'm talking about the wider public, get fatigue on it,
S3: and then really they just want to watch their shows
S3: and stuff. So I think like, yeah, it's it's gone
S3: on longer than a lot of people thought it would
S3: 120 days.
S1: Yeah. It's a long time.
S3: Yeah. It's crazy. And I think I do suspect that
S3: it will be done like come early the new year,
S3: if not before.
S2: Yeah, obviously we're putting up to Boxing Day as well,
S2: which is such a big day of cinema releases that
S2: it would be great if it could be solved by then.
S2: I don't know though. I feel like we often we've
S2: had a few moments where we're like, it's close to ending,
S2: it's close to ending. So I'm not 100% sure that
S2: it's going to be sorted before the end of the year,
S2: but I hope early into next year we'll we'll finally
S2: get some more actor interviews.
S3: I'm already heartbreaking because they pushed The White Lotus to 2025.
S3: It's like it's like, how do you even begin to
S3: get excited about a show that's over a year away? Yeah,
S3: I think.
S1: That is an understated part of what the strike means.
S1: It's like 2024 is going to be slim pickings, like
S1: there's been a bunch of big movies like Dune Part
S1: two that have been held over from this year. So
S1: there'll be some big cinema releases in the first half
S1: of next year, but I think the second half of
S1: next year will probably be pretty quiet in the cinema front.
S1: And then when it comes to TV, I kind of
S1: don't really know what we've got to look forward to,
S1: which actually kind of does bring us to our main
S1: topic of the day. I'm going to ask you guys
S1: a question as a way to sort of ease into
S1: this one. When I say the words prestige television, what
S1: kinds of shows does that evoke for each of you?
S3: I think the answer that most people will give the
S3: HBO classics The Sopranos, The Wire, then you kind of
S3: move into Mad Men, that era of things, and then
S3: of course, more recently the successions. But I do think
S3: that when when people hear the word prestige TV, it's
S3: really like wedded to that, that wire Sopranos era when
S3: HBO kind of changed the game.
S2: Yeah, I reckon those two are the ones that most
S2: people will say. And then also things like House of cards,
S2: Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, the shows that then continued
S2: on in what is often referred to as the golden
S2: era of TV.
S1: Yeah, it feels like. That's right. Like there's that early
S1: wave of HBO stuff you and I were talking earlier
S1: this morning about Oz, which is a show that sort
S1: of predated The Sopranos by a few years. I really
S1: feel like that did kind of like, lay the groundwork
S1: for a lot of those other HBO shows. And then
S1: I feel like that next era is that kind of
S1: streaming era that Netflix helped usher in when it first started.
S1: Things like House of cards and even Orange Is the
S1: New Black, which no one really talks about anymore. It
S1: sort of disappeared from the culture, but was a big
S1: part of like TV conversation for a while. The reason
S1: why I asked you guys that question is not just
S1: for the sake of it or a prestige pop quiz,
S1: but there's been a lot of conversation lately around the
S1: idea of prestige television, which has shaped, as we've said,
S1: so much of our viewing experiences. This era may be
S1: at an end. I'm going I'm going to read some
S1: headlines to you to this effect. The end of peak
S1: television has the era of prestige TV just ground to
S1: a halt. That was in The Guardian on June 5th.
S1: The era of prestige TV is ending. We're going to
S1: miss it when it's gone. That's The New York Times,
S1: September 21st. The most recent one, The Twilight of Prestige television.
S1: The New Yorker, October 30th, just a week ago. That
S1: last one is a piece by Michael Schulman which traces
S1: the rise and his claims, the alleged fall of what
S1: we describe as prestige TV. It draws in a couple
S1: of books that go into the way that the industry
S1: has shifted in the last decade, decade and a half,
S1: and basically makes the case that the kinds of shows
S1: that we've been talking about, the kinds of shows that
S1: we love talking about on this show, things like succession
S1: may never come back because of a whole bunch of
S1: factors to do with how the industry operates. Now. I
S1: think we've talked a bit about this on the show
S1: and kind of roundabout ways, and we've discussed why there
S1: seems to be a bit of a drought at the
S1: moment with like top tier TV shows. It certainly feels
S1: like since succession, there hasn't really been anything of that
S1: level of quality that has captured a broader kind of
S1: zeitgeisty or conversation. Doesn't seem like, as we were just saying,
S1: that anything looks likely to land in that sort of
S1: succession space in 2024 either. So I've spent a bit
S1: of time talking to you guys about this thesis of
S1: prestige TV potentially being over and what that means for
S1: viewers and for people like us who like to talk
S1: about it. And maybe we can start. By discussing what
S1: we actually mean when we say the words prestige TV.
S1: We listed some of those shows, but what do you
S1: reckon those shows have in common? Like what makes a
S1: prestige show a prestige show? What separates it from the
S1: chaff of most of what you see on TV or
S1: on streaming platforms?
S2: I mean, I think it's hard to define, and I
S2: think prestige TV is kind of become synonymous with quality,
S2: which then makes it very subjective, because one person's prestige
S2: TV could be another person's dumpster fire. Like when you
S2: Google examples of prestige TV, one of the ones that
S2: comes up is Good Wife, which I think is a
S2: great a great show. But am I putting that in
S2: the same category as some of those other ones we've listed?
S2: Probably not. So I think it is like really hard
S2: to define and it's become very kind of subjective. Um,
S2: and also I think prestige is a label that is
S2: given or taken away very quickly and fluidly, like something
S2: might not start off as prestige TV, but then it
S2: becomes prestige TV either when it's had its whole season
S2: run or further on in the future. And the other way,
S2: I think things that do start is prestige TV, something
S2: like Stranger Things. You know, I think we labeled that
S2: prestige TV at the start, and then we kind of
S2: took that away from it as the season continued. So
S2: I think it's a really fluid label is the other thing.
S2: But when I think about what they all have in common,
S2: I think it's kind of high production values, long narrative arcs,
S2: usually longer episodes, bigger budgets. I think they're more character focused,
S2: and there's a lot of kind of moral grayness in them.
S2: They're all about kind of existing in the middle. They're
S2: not kind of clear cut shows with goodies and baddies.
S2: They have complicated narratives and complicated characters.
S3: Yeah, I think that's all very true. But I think
S3: in terms of the actual label, even if we do
S3: take it away or give it, but like, I mean,
S3: succession is a great example because we love talking about
S3: it and B, it's the most recent prestige TV and
S3: it had like the very much the right ingredients for
S3: all the things you need to be labeled prestige. So
S3: it was like critically acclaimed. It was super buzzy. It
S3: was like no one wanted to get spoilers. Every single week.
S3: It did. Like, you know, the ratings weren't crazy to
S3: begin with, but they popped off eventually. But also, it
S3: would sweep every award show. So it had that like
S3: perfect balance of like fans were obsessed with it. Critics
S3: were telling you it was the greatest show and everyone like,
S3: needed to be watching it. No one wanted to know
S3: what was going on. It seized the fascination of the internet.
S3: So how do all those factors at play at once,
S3: which I think is what is really required to be
S3: like prestige as well these days you need to have
S3: like the critical acclaim. The award shows need to be
S3: on your side and you need to kind of have
S3: this internet presence, but.
S2: Then it's a prestige show, just a good show.
S3: No, I think the two things can coexist. But I
S3: just mean when we to also have that prestige label,
S3: those things really have to be in play.
S1: Yeah, I agree with all of those. I mean, there's
S1: a couple of extra sort of metrics or maybe like
S1: checks that I would add for something to be considered prestige.
S1: I think it's not always the case, but often these
S1: shows what they've got in common is like they are
S1: the vision, the singular vision of like a particular auteur,
S1: whether that's either like a writer or a director, like,
S1: I think David Simon and The Wire, like there's writers
S1: rooms involved in this stuff, but True Detective, Nick has
S1: a lot of like, these are visions from one particular
S1: person who wants to use a framing device to tell
S1: a story about, like, decay in modern America. I mean,
S1: that's the other thing a lot of these shows have
S1: in common. They all secretly about decay in modern America
S1: in different ways, you know, even like House of cards
S1: when that first came out, does David Fincher, the extremely,
S1: extremely accomplished film director sitting down and Jesse Armstrong and succession, like,
S1: there are lots of people who make these things come together,
S1: but unlike kind of like even good like network shows,
S1: which there's a premise, but then there's like ten different
S1: people who are equally involved in bringing episodes to life.
S1: I think that's slightly distinct from the prestige world, where
S1: it's an artist attempting to use television to get across
S1: their sort of thesis or their analysis of the world.
S1: And I think there is also an overlap with prestige.
S1: And certain networks or streamers like HBO is the most
S1: obvious one. I feel like that is like a bit
S1: less so the case at the moment. I think it'll
S1: be interesting to see. We'll talk a bit about this
S1: later on. Like HBO is in a very different era
S1: in terms of how it's been swallowed up by these
S1: like huge megacorporations Warner Brothers discovery, like the Discovery Channel,
S1: now owns everything, and HBO has been rebranded to Max.
S1: It's a whole crazy world. I think that's having an impact.
S1: But I also think early era Netflix was pretty synonymous
S1: with prestige, too, and I think that is also shifted.
S1: Do you guys agree? If we sort of I mean, firstly,
S1: I should ask, do you think between all of that
S1: we have a loose definition of prestige, or do you
S1: think we've still got some tension here about what we're
S1: talking about?
S2: I think it's so fluid. It's based on the way
S2: the user deploys it. I think it's an amorphous category
S2: that is always going to be changing. And what's prestige
S2: today won't be tomorrow. What do they say, like marry
S2: the age widow in the next? I just don't I
S2: think it's this like label that people put out, which
S2: is mainly served to get those shows attention. Right. You
S2: want the label prestige because it's going to have all
S2: these kind of signifiers that are not actually connected to anything.
S2: I don't know, I don't really know what we're talking
S2: about when we're talking about prestige TV. Like, are you
S2: calling The Queen's Gambit prestige?
S3: I think I also was going to say it's an
S3: amorphous category, so just want to put that out there.
S2: Like is the Crown? No, actually I just, I don't
S2: like I actually don't understand. I read all these articles
S2: about it and I'm like, no one can pin down
S2: what prestige TV is. So how unhelpful. Well, I'm.
S1: Really glad you're saying this on the podcast where we
S1: decided to talk about prestige.
S3: I totally disagree, I think that is so wrong. I
S3: could list ten shows right to Osbourne right now, and
S3: I could say six of them are prestige in my head.
S3: And I bet you he would pick.
S2: The who is that a reflection of? It's of what
S2: you consider quality. So is not prestige TV just good?
S2: But no, because.
S3: There is a commonly accepted thing. Like what? What makes
S3: prestige TV? Like if I went out and asked ten
S3: people in the newsroom, is success in prestige TV? They'd
S3: say yes. And I'd say is.
S1: Well, the Queen's Gambit is a good one. I don't
S1: think that is. And I don't think most people would
S1: think that would be presented.
S3: That's not prestige.
S2: I reckon. People I reckon people might say no, they
S2: wouldn't stage. They wouldn't. So you're you just think it
S2: needs critical and commercial success.
S3: But it's just one of those things, you know?
S2: Okay, well, anything that people say, they just know I
S2: like I've got a question. You know what I mean?
S3: I would say the Crown is another one. The Crown
S3: is probably prestige TV for a bit. And now I'd
S3: probably say people would no longer say it is.
S1: Okay, what do you guys think about sex in the city?
S1: What is that full in this.
S3: Conversation, not prestige TV?
S2: Yeah, I would say not. Not prestige.
S3: TV. It's a classic, but it's not prestige.
S1: Yeah, interesting. That's like a kind of a borderline one
S1: for me in that I think one of the other
S1: things that I think these shows that we associate with
S1: the label prestige do well, is they often like doing
S1: something new, or that kind of creating a genre like
S1: that is something that shows like us and The Sopranos
S1: and The Wire did, though they reinvented genres something like
S1: sex and the city, which had high production values. Great
S1: writing was like division of a couple of people and
S1: pushed an idea of what television could be forward. That's
S1: quite different to just a well-made show that is doing
S1: a period drama, or that is doing a comedy or
S1: something like that. Male. I feel like it is going
S1: to be difficult to have a conversation about whether or
S1: not we are post prestige, if we don't agree with
S1: each other on what the label is. But I wonder
S1: whether for the purposes of the conversation, we can just
S1: say there is a broad. The glory of like, well-made,
S1: expensive shows that are about meaty, complicated themes are entertaining,
S1: a bit avant garde in terms of the way they
S1: tell stories, where they look, the acting and HBO makes
S1: a lot of them. Netflix used to make a lot
S1: of them, and lots of people are worried that these
S1: kinds of shows might not exist anymore. Can we just
S1: agree on that? As a as a loose categories.
S2: Of the debate, we will accept that definition.
S3: Could I just could I just add one more thing though?
S3: You mentioned sex and the city, and I do think
S3: people also have a hard time including like comedy or
S3: half hour shows in the prestige label like Seinfeld is
S3: probably prestige TV, but it's not. When you asked us,
S3: no one here said Seinfeld, even though it's one of
S3: the greatest shows, because I think prestige has become synonymous
S3: with the 45 minutes to an hour like brooding drama.
S3: So I think that does it gets tricky in that space.
S3: But yeah, well, I.
S1: Think, I mean, I think it's useful, this conversation, even
S1: if it may be there are some people being like,
S1: what the fuck are these guys talking about? But I
S1: think if the three of us, you know, are struggling
S1: to say this is a clear case of what's in
S1: what's at, I think that is relevant and useful for people.
S1: And I think it probably is reflective of the fact that,
S1: particularly in the streaming world, a lot of these boundaries
S1: are kind of blurred, like it used to be very obvious.
S1: What was an HBO show versus an NBC show like?
S1: These shows looked different and we're trying to do different things,
S1: whereas now every streamer is trying to, like, look a
S1: little bit HBO in a way. And shows like The
S1: Queen's Gambit, a borrowing element of what prestige used to do,
S1: but are telling much more straightforward kind of story. So
S1: it is complicated. It is messy. And I think there's
S1: another layer to this, which is that film is like
S1: a shadow of its former self, because a lot of
S1: what used to be films are now TV shows or
S1: limited dramas, some of which are quote unquote prestige and
S1: some of which are not. But there's like a very
S1: it's a messy landscape is what I'm trying.
S2: To say, that you're now having to say prestige with like,
S2: air quotes to show that the meaning is under interrogation.
S1: Yeah. Okay. But if we go back to this idea
S1: of like, really high quality television that is generally critically
S1: acclaimed and builds broad audiences, things like succession, that's what
S1: we're going to stick with for the rest of this conversation.
S1: Do we think there has been a drop off, which
S1: is what a lot of these big, big articles and
S1: big publications from the times to the New York to
S1: The Guardian is saying, have we noticed this?
S3: I think there has been like, you know, there's a
S3: few articles that gardening, one in particular that kind of
S3: talks about how naturally it was a cycle where the
S3: baton would get handed over and it just kind of
S3: happened organically. We kind of went through that, obviously like
S3: post Sopranos, but then we went into like the Mad
S3: Men era. Then Game of Thrones popped up and that
S3: became a thing. And then we had Breaking Bad, and
S3: then it all just kind of kept flowing into one another.
S3: But it did feel like, I think collectively for the
S3: viewing public that there was this, like, I don't know,
S3: that trepidation as succession came to an end, which was
S3: obviously so devastating for everyone anyway, there was no clear
S3: successor in sight and no one like. It's hard to
S3: say why exactly. I mean, we're obviously about to get
S3: into it, but yeah, it does feel like we went
S3: through a bit of a golden age of the golden age,
S3: and then now it's it's looking pretty barren.
S2: Yeah, I feel like I'm less pessimistic about it. And
S2: I think that, no, I don't think I don't think
S2: prestige TV is over. I think the media loves nothing
S2: more than declaring that something is dead repeatedly for decades. I,
S2: I think that succession was a work of art. And
S2: you don't get a work of art like, every year.
S2: Like that's not how it works in music. It's not
S2: how it works in books. I mean, just because we
S2: don't have another succession immediately doesn't mean that TV is dead.
S2: I look at what's on or what's been on lately,
S2: like Bad Sisters, White Lotus Beef, deadlock hacks. All of
S2: these are fantastic shows, and I'm also like, I'm kind
S2: of wary too, because the shows we keep talking about
S2: like The Wire, The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, House of cards,
S2: they're all really one kind of show in a way.
S2: They're like the anti-hero male, and they're all written by
S2: men called David. So I think TV has moved from
S2: that into something different. But I don't think we're seeing
S2: the end of good TV in any stretch, maybe different TV,
S2: but I think quality TV is still there to be found.
S1: This is going to sound like I'm a cop out.
S1: I'm kind of in the middle of both of you,
S1: but I'll explain why. Because I agree with you, Mel,
S1: that just because we don't have 50 amazing shows every
S1: year doesn't mean like, you know, it's the end of
S1: the world and we're not going to get good shows anymore.
S1: But I do think there's been a drop off. But
S1: I think the problem, though is the drop off is
S1: from this, like artificial high that we've been living in
S1: for the last few years. That was never really sustainable.
S1: But we were very lucky for a bunch of different reasons.
S1: I'll go into we got used to having like ten
S1: insanely great shows starring Oscar winners that existed on relatively
S1: affordable streaming platforms that we could just watch at the
S1: drop of a hat, and I feel like we got
S1: used to that. We got fat on that, you know,
S1: we sucked on that teat. We enjoyed ourselves. We, you know,
S1: there's a boom in like podcasts talking about these shows,
S1: people writing about these shows. Audiences love reading about this,
S1: like a little bit of like lifting the veil, like
S1: one of the most read categories on our news sites.
S1: Sydney Morning Herald in the age of the last few
S1: years has been like TV, like people love reading and
S1: watching shiny, exciting, fun, edgy, interesting TV shows. And there's
S1: been so many of them, I would say for the
S1: past like 5 to 8 years. I think we are
S1: seeing a lot less and I think we will continue
S1: to see a lot less. And I think probably what
S1: that means is will go back to the era of
S1: there was one and then two years later there was
S1: another one, and then two years later there was another one.
S1: But that is not going to be satisfying for people
S1: of our generation, because we are not used to the
S1: late 90s, early 2000 model. We used to the current
S1: streaming model where Amazon, Disney, Apple, Netflix, Stan, Binge will
S1: have 2 to 3 of these at any one time.
S1: So that's kind of like why I'm sort of sitting
S1: in between you guys on that one. I think the
S1: reasons as to why this is happening is kind of
S1: more interesting in a way. I think, like what has
S1: happened in the last decade or half a decade is
S1: so there's this term people talk about in like tech land, right?
S1: When it comes to things like the rise of Uber
S1: and the rise of Airbnb. You remember when Uber first
S1: came out and it was like so cheap. Everyone's like,
S1: why would you not use Uber? Because it costs like
S1: $2 to get from Surry Hills to Ashfield. The driver
S1: will give you mints and water. This is amazing. Well,
S1: like disrupting the landscape. Same with Airbnb. Like it was
S1: really cheap to use these kinds of apps. That's not
S1: the case anymore, right? Like all these apps that started
S1: out as cheap and fun are now expensive and terrible,
S1: essentially because they were funded by huge amounts of venture
S1: capital that made them really easy and cheap for us
S1: to use. But those companies lost heaps of money just
S1: to try and build huge market share. That's kind of
S1: what we've been dealing with with streaming as well, like
S1: when these big streaming companies, I think Netflix is a
S1: big one, came out. They didn't make money for a
S1: very long period of time. Their goal was to pay
S1: these big directors, tens or hundreds of millions of dollars
S1: to put shiny shows on their platform. So we would
S1: all subscribe for relatively cheap prices a month that was
S1: never going to last, because the economics of that just
S1: didn't stack up. So we've been enjoying the largesse of like,
S1: venture capital for the last five years that have created
S1: an amazing amount of shows that money is running out.
S1: Money isn't as cheap as it was because of like
S1: rising interest. I sorry to do an economic lecture, but
S1: like this is kind of related. Wall Street is demanding
S1: like big returns on their investments in these companies. And
S1: the end result is what we are living through now,
S1: which is that the cost of all these streaming platforms
S1: is going up, the amount of content is going down,
S1: and the quality of content is going down. Like I
S1: feel like that is pretty unequivocal, right? Like we are
S1: all noticing how cost per month of streaming going up,
S1: and we are seeing shows that are not as good
S1: as that used to be, particularly, I think so, to
S1: single out Netflix. But I feel like Netflix is the
S1: most obvious indicator of this, where they went from being
S1: the prestige network to just like pumping out a lot
S1: more reality and a lot more cheaper drama. Is that
S1: fair to say?
S3: Yeah, for sure. And I think, you know, like that's
S3: when the story broke, like over the last couple of years,
S3: I think it was early last year that Netflix had
S3: like shed subscribers and its like profits had fallen. It
S3: was kind of like chaos, like everyone was in shock.
S3: And I think the rest of the streamers, like, really
S3: took notice that this was like the monolith of the
S3: streaming world. And finally, Netflix was like showing that this
S3: model that had apparently been working so well was actually
S3: not working anymore. And that really had a domino effect,
S3: I think, for everyone, and very much plays into what
S3: we're seeing now because Netflix has had to really learn,
S3: like changed its strategy. Like, no longer are we, you know,
S3: we're about to see The Crown season six, the sixth
S3: and final season of one of Netflix's original kind of
S3: prestige offerings. And that feels very much like the end
S3: of chapter for Netflix, because they don't really do those
S3: types of things anymore. Like, it is true that original
S3: commissions have continued to decline in quality, but as a
S3: result of the fact that they're now shedding subscribers and
S3: their profits are down, they can't spend as much money.
S3: They need to get just like more content out there
S3: to try and, like, keep people on the platform. And
S3: it's just kind of had this like flow on effect. Yeah.
S2: Like I agree with you to some extent. I've watched
S2: enough prestige TV about kind of startup startups to know
S2: that unmitigated growth can't last. But what I think you're
S2: seeing with Netflix is that is just going to be
S2: their strategy. And as the market settles, all of these
S2: streamers will find their own strategy. You know, we can
S2: see it with HBO Max versus HBO, and you will
S2: see different streaming platforms appeal to different subscribers. I mean,
S2: you see it in the news industry. Netflix is going
S2: for the throw everything at the wall and see what sticks.
S2: It's got a more kind of tabloid free access website
S2: versus something like, I don't know, ah, the Sydney Morning Herald,
S2: which goes for a more premium quality subscriber. I think
S2: that's what we're seeing. And I mean, I guess I
S2: was my only question to you is that if they
S2: made all their money off the back of people subscribing
S2: for quality TV, where is the risk that they're going
S2: to lose those subscribers if they're no longer delivering the
S2: quality TV? You know what I mean? Like, I think
S2: your argument relies on the fact that they're not going
S2: to produce quality TV and they think people are going
S2: to keep subscribing. Yeah.
S1: Look, I think my point is not that it worked
S1: for them to spend heaps of money on TV and
S1: get subscribers. I think my point is more, they tried
S1: to do that and they realised after a few years
S1: the numbers didn't add up, which is why the prices
S1: are going up, the quality is going down and we're
S1: getting ads on these platforms like remember what the promise
S1: was of streaming when like they broke cable like like,
S1: you know, five, six, seven, eight years ago it was
S1: you can pay 4.99 a month and get access to everything,
S1: and you won't have to see ads that doesn't exist anymore.
S1: Like all of these streamers are adding ad tiers. I
S1: think a lot of people like. Check out how much
S1: you're paying for these things. Whenever I tell people like
S1: Netflix doesn't cost 799 anymore, like you're probably paying 20
S1: or $30 for like the top tier model, it kind
S1: of shocks people because you used to be able to
S1: pay 70 or $80 a month and you got Foxtel,
S1: and that was every single show in the world that
S1: existed at the time you had access to. Whereas now
S1: we're all fragmented onto these different platforms, paying more money
S1: than ever, still getting ads and not getting access to everything.
S1: We're just getting access to like, whatever we've signed up for.
S1: I think what we are starting to realize is that
S1: the streaming model, which was very appealing to us as
S1: consumers because of its low cost, was not going to
S1: be sustainable in creating high quality stuff like that is
S1: and I think the streaming companies are making purely rational decisions.
S1: They're like, this is fine. We can still make heaps
S1: of money without having to pay David Fincher $80 million
S1: to make a show like House of cards, and I
S1: think that is what we are living in now. But
S1: I think that is why we are not going to
S1: see these great quality shows anymore for a while, or
S1: we're not going to see anywhere near as many of them,
S1: because they're expensive to make. And these companies think that
S1: they can make enough money by giving us more of like,
S1: you know, Love Is Blind season ten or whatever. Like
S1: I do feel like that is the current mode we
S1: are entering. Does that make sense?
S3: Yeah it does. It is funny though, because like, even
S3: though the economics of that all stack up when like,
S3: you know, executives are still kind of very much ego driven.
S3: And the praise that comes with being the home of
S3: a succession is addictive, I think, for everyone. So that
S3: like desire to be lauded with like, oh, where the
S3: home of succession will always be appealing to executives, I think.
S3: So I do suspect that there will always be these
S3: big money offers to kind of the greatest creative minds
S3: out there to try and make the next succession or
S3: Game of Thrones or Mad Men. But yeah, I definitely
S3: don't think there'll be like the regularity or as much
S3: of a we won't have 2 or 3 of them
S3: going at the same time.
S1: Yeah. I think the bigger picture in all of this
S1: is that like TV is a weird institution. And basically
S1: whether it was HBO, whether it's streaming now, artists, creative showrunners, directors, auteurs,
S1: whatever their basically their job was to try and trick
S1: people with lots of money into letting them make wacky stuff. Right.
S1: Like even back to the days of, like, Twin Peaks,
S1: like fuck knows how Lynch managed to convince people to
S1: let him make that show, and they managed to do
S1: it through mainly HBO in that era. And in the
S1: last decade or so, when there was heaps of money
S1: being pumped into these big streamers, all sorts of creatives
S1: were allowed to take risks and do stuff. And you
S1: ended up with, like, I often think about this show, gaslit,
S1: I think, Thomas, maybe you watched I don't know if
S1: you did, Mel, which was a incredible show starring both
S1: Sean Penn and Julia Roberts. That was about the Watergate
S1: situation with Nixon. Based on Slow Burn and extremely successful podcast.
S1: No one watched that show like no one watch that
S1: show was one of the most expensive shows made in
S1: recent history because of the wages of the stars, and
S1: that is like one of maybe like 50 or 100.
S1: Extremely good. Definitely capital pay, prestige TV shows that were
S1: funded in this era where, like, everyone was just willing
S1: to like, give this stuff a crack. And I think
S1: this brings us back to the start of this conversation,
S1: that level of content, that volume of content is going
S1: to disappear. We're still going to get networks fully. Thomas
S1: being like, yeah, we still want to like, win an Emmy.
S1: We still want to give this a crack and we
S1: will still get everyone trying to do this, but I
S1: think it'll be more like it was 20 years ago
S1: than what it's been like for the last five years,
S1: where we had heaps of options. And I think that
S1: has ramifications for like conversations people have about what are
S1: you watching? Like what's coming up, what are we talking about?
S1: And it has ramifications for people like us in terms
S1: of like what we talk about week to week and
S1: what we cover and what we commission, what we recap.
S2: Do you think this could also be an opportunity for
S2: the streamers, like some streamers will potentially reshape as providers
S2: of premium products, you know, and you will subscribe to that.
S2: And people who want that kind of show will subscribe
S2: to that stream of for prestige TV. Like, you know,
S2: if A24 launched their own kind of streaming network, you
S2: would kind of it would take its niche, but rusted
S2: on audience who want a kind of show to it. Like,
S2: isn't that what we'll see happen with. We will see
S2: market providers of a certain kind of show rise up
S2: in the same way as you do. As I keep
S2: saying in other fields, like in literature, you have kind
S2: of smaller providers. Smaller publishers don't hire.
S3: All of you would get there. Eventually.
S2: You will have smaller publishers providing a certain type of
S2: literary quality that you don't get from the bigger publishers,
S2: like you don't get from a Harpercollins, which is doing
S2: the mass publishing. Like, isn't that what we're just going
S2: to see that the market's going to adjust itself?
S1: No, you're you're right, you're right. There'll be a lot
S1: of the bigger streamers that don't do this, and they'll
S1: be small stream. And there are a lot of streamers
S1: doing this already now, right. I feel like Apple TV
S1: is a funny one. I mean, like the morning show.
S1: Great production values. Absolutely. Dog shit. I don't know if
S1: anyone's watching season three. It is completely lost the plot.
S1: It is hilarious. But you know, they've got slow horses
S1: coming back with Gary Oldman. Like they're doing this stuff.
S1: But Mel, my question back to you is that even
S1: if that is what happens, and I think that is
S1: probably what happens TV, in terms of how we consume
S1: and how we talk about it, has for a long
S1: time been a community collective event. If 4 or 5%
S1: of the population has this prestige TV streamer and they
S1: are the only people who are watching these really amazing shows,
S1: it's like if a tree falls in the woods and
S1: no one's sad to hear it, did it fall like,
S1: I kind of worry about that in a way.
S2: But you know, they are the same people who were
S2: watching succession, right? The people you were talking about, succession.
S2: Wasn't that like the numbers didn't really add up for
S2: succession in terms of were more people watching the latest
S2: reruns on NCIS? Of course they were. So the people
S2: you're talking about, you're all still going to be having
S2: the same conversation. You're just going to be subscribing to
S2: one channel.
S3: Like, I see I see what you're saying, and I
S3: think it's going to increasingly get more fragmented. But yeah,
S3: it just it just kind of like worries me that,
S3: I mean, it is we've all so plugged into this
S3: machine and it becomes like this content feeder for everyone
S3: and the entire ecosystem. And like we saw it with succession,
S3: how we all like. And it was it was nice.
S3: It was a nice collective viewing experience. I think people
S3: who are into that show, it was like that appointment
S3: TV and everything. And then like, now that we're kind
S3: of facing this weird future where audiences are like, I'm
S3: just watching this tiny thing and you're watching this thing like, yeah,
S3: it just paints a kind of bleak picture. I think.
S1: I actually didn't expect you to be as pessimistic as me. Thomas,
S1: on this. I sort of thought maybe you'd be the optimist,
S1: and Mel and I would be, like, languishing in terms.
S1: I'm a little bit surprised at how and like, I
S1: don't mean that in a negative way, Mel. Like, I
S1: think it's good to have a rosier view because I
S1: think I have been pretty deep in like. Okay. We
S1: live in an era where the concentration of media, in
S1: terms of who makes it more distributed is more than ever.
S1: Like these companies who run there's like three giant media
S1: companies left in America who make and distribute all this stuff.
S1: Corporate profits are sky high. Hollywood is on strike to
S1: try and get a piece of the pie. The volume
S1: of high quality stuff is going down. The volume of
S1: low quality, largely non scripted stuff is going up. Everything's fragmented.
S1: No one's watching the same stuff. We're living in different worlds.
S1: Nothing about this looks good. So it's sort of nice
S1: to have you just kind of cut through that a
S1: bit and be like, calm the fuck down. We're still
S1: going to get good shows and it's still going to
S1: be the same weirdo nerds like us who watch it.
S1: Not not the masses who watch Big Bang Theory.
S3: Yeah, but the problem is that Mel's version of prestige
S3: TV is like The Queen's Gambit and stuff. So there
S3: will be shows coming out. Look at all this prestige
S3: TV we have and it's like, all of this is rubbish.
S2: I also think maybe, I mean, I agree my outlook
S2: is more optimistic, but I think it's rooted in cynicism
S2: because I don't think I have that much belief that
S2: art always rises to the top of the pile when
S2: it comes to capitalism, and I don't think it does. Like,
S2: I think art getting art made, good art made is
S2: a struggle. And yeah, maybe TV has had a wealth
S2: of it for a while. But you know, when you
S2: look at the numbers, like if Netflix is putting on
S2: shows that aren't prestige, it's because they're getting numbers. And
S2: so I guess my view is kind of that art
S2: is never going to be what is popular, because if
S2: something's popular, it's not always great art or it's popular
S2: at that time, but it doesn't stand the test of time.
S1: Yeah, I think that makes a lot of sense. And
S1: I think this is back to the kind of main
S1: thrust of the show, which is that I think we're
S1: really lucky to have a lot of really great art made,
S1: because we lived in this bubble of like, cheap money
S1: and cheap money and streaming for a while, and now
S1: things are sort of settling. I just think we're going
S1: to be living through an adjustment phase that is going
S1: to take a little bit of getting used to. The
S1: other thing on this I wanted to touch on, we
S1: don't talk about these shows that much, even though they
S1: are the biggest shows in the world. It's like the
S1: Disney Star Wars Marvel thing, right? You guys like a
S1: real Marvel or Star Wars hit? No.
S2: And therefore we don't put it in our prestige TV category,
S2: though I'm sure some people would write because they have
S2: all those.
S3: I would say that even despite not being a marvel man,
S3: I would probably say The Mandalorian accepted as prestige.
S1: Yeah, and in Star Wars Land, like Andor was like
S1: a recent show that was like, generally considered. Tony Gilroy,
S1: who wrote, you know, has written a bunch of great films,
S1: wrote that, and was good. I, for my sins, have
S1: seen every single Marvel film and TV show and every
S1: single Star Wars film, and I am.
S3: So blown away by that. For someone who doesn't really
S3: stay home at night, you still watch a lot of TV.
S3: I just don't understand when it's happened.
S2: When he was sick last week. Just a.
S1: Marvel. My housemate says the same thing. He's like every morning,
S1: you know, he you come home like quite late and
S1: then in the morning you're up and you're like, you
S1: seen like these seven shows, bro. I don't love Marvel,
S1: but I have always thought it's part of my job
S1: in a way to be across it because of how
S1: massive it is. The reason why I bring it up
S1: in this conversation is because. That ecosystem is also going
S1: through like a lot of grim stuff at the moment,
S1: like the last few Marvel shows have not worked like
S1: Loki season two, which is the big one out now,
S1: is just like getting critically panned. It is very hard
S1: to watch its Tom Hiddleston like there's a lot of
S1: good bits to it, but it is not going well.
S1: And same with Star Wars. Like the big show this
S1: year was this one Ahsoka with Rosario Dawson and Australia's
S1: Natasha Lupo. So this is supposed to be a big,
S1: great show. It is so hard to watch. It is
S1: like no one in this show seems to have been
S1: on set at the same time, so they're not like
S1: interacting with one another properly. And this is related to
S1: the prestige convo. It's slightly adjacent to it. Just because
S1: these shows were so big and so reliable for so long.
S1: And I think again, there was this huge like. Turn
S1: the knob to like max amount of volume. And they
S1: pumped so many of them out. And I think the
S1: quality has gone down. So I just bring it up
S1: because we don't love talking about them. We're not obsessed
S1: with them. But I do know that people listen to
S1: the show, are interested in those shows, and I think
S1: it's worth acknowledging that even in that space, which is
S1: driven by like hectic fandom, there is a big conversation
S1: happening about declining quality in that kind of ecosystem.
S3: Yeah, it's funny because I'm not really a big into that.
S3: But I remember especially this kind of coincided with like
S3: when Netflix was just so all encompassing that everyone just
S3: watched basically everything that was on there. And I was
S3: I was quite big into Daredevil and Jessica Jones. Jessica
S3: Jones was really good.
S1: Jessica Jones was amazing. That was a really great Netflix
S1: early Marvel show.
S3: Yeah, yeah. And so I was kind of hooked. And
S3: then I must say, Luke Cage and Iron Fist both
S3: really bad shows. And then like even to the point,
S3: I was like, even I am shocked that these people
S3: have their own, these characters have their own shows, and
S3: they just kind of went so hard and was like
S3: The Defenders, The Punisher, Jessica Jones season two. And it
S3: was just like every other week there was a new
S3: Marvel spin off and they yeah, they definitely got two gradient.
S3: It was like too much of a good thing. And
S3: like then that was kind of, I guess like set
S3: the benchmark for where we're at now.
S2: The other thing I think is worth mentioning, like we're
S2: talking about these big blockbuster franchises, but I do think
S2: that a streamer's kind of face tougher financial circumstances as
S2: the market shrinks. I do worry that the kind of
S2: big losers will be local productions for Australia. And there's
S2: a very live debate in Australia at the moment about
S2: putting on content quotas on the streamers, but I think
S2: that is a risk that local productions will stop being
S2: a high priority for streamers, as they're looking to kind
S2: of make more of a niche market for themselves.
S1: Yeah, I think that's a good point. I think it's
S1: worth acknowledging that, like telling Australian stories in a market
S1: the size of Australia is not always the most profitable
S1: thing for large multinational corporations like Amazon, Netflix, Disney are
S1: happy to operate in this market, Hoover up millions of
S1: dollars in terms of subscription fees. And yet, I mean, look,
S1: Netflix has obviously made a bunch of Australian shows, right?
S1: We've covered them. We talk about them a lot, but
S1: as a proportion of their total spend, like, how much
S1: is it? That's why there is this conversation about the
S1: government potentially passing laws to force them to. And I
S1: think that if you want to see Australian stories told,
S1: you need those laws passed because there's no profit imperative
S1: to do it. This is the whole point of of
S1: this conversation, I think was saying is that the best
S1: art isn't made in television because it makes heaps of money.
S1: It's made because creators managed to trick the right executive
S1: at the right time to give them a bunch of
S1: money or like what we're talking about. The government forces
S1: them to do it. I think this is like an
S1: ongoing conversation. I'm sorry if this got a little bit
S1: like in the weeds in terms of dollars and cents,
S1: but I've been thinking a lot lately about how the
S1: culture we consume TV, but also movies and also music
S1: is so reflective of the economic conditions around it and
S1: who controls distribution and who controls commissioning. And because it
S1: is so much more hyper concentrated than it's ever been
S1: and so much more fragmented than it's ever been, and
S1: the strike stuff is going on, it's made me think
S1: it's really hard to talk about TV and culture without
S1: talking about. The economic basis for it, you know, the superstructure, blah, blah, blah.
S1: Marx had some stuff to say about this.
S2: I'm sure Thomas is all across that.
S3: I was going to do a thing on Marx, but
S3: you've done that now, so I will instead move on
S3: to the latest report from the Australian Communications Media Authority, ACMA,
S3: which actually came out this morning. And it looks at
S3: how much has been spent on Australian content. So subscription
S3: video on demand providers that includes Disney Plus, Netflix, Paramount Plus,
S3: Prime and Stan spent $324 million in the last financial year,
S3: which is down from 335,000,000in the previous year. So that's
S3: the 35 million decrease in commissioned program investment, mainly across
S3: adult drama and documentary. So yeah, it's interesting, like we
S3: are kind of seeing a kind of downward slope in
S3: terms of what's being commissioned and how much is being spent.
S3: So yeah, I mean, it was if it wasn't already
S3: hard enough for like local programming to get up on
S3: these like massive streamers who rely so much on just like,
S3: you know, easy wins, less is also being spent. So
S3: interesting times.
S1: Yeah. And I think if there's a through line from
S1: this conversation we've had, it's that expect there to be
S1: less television for the foreseeable future. Expect there to be
S1: less of the mail. Don't get mad at me for
S1: saying this. Prestige television. It's not all game over, but
S1: like this is a thing I think we have to
S1: get used to. And it'll be interesting in terms of
S1: conversations we have at work and on this podcast about
S1: what we cover, how we cover, because I think we've
S1: been talking about what is the next succession, what is
S1: the next show that we might recap episode by episode.
S1: And there might not be one for a while, but
S1: I'm going to be very excited when we find it.
S1: The last thing I wanted to do in this conversation
S1: was ask you guys to share some, like, hidden prestige
S1: gems that that have existed on these maybe smaller streamers
S1: that maybe we missed in this big glut. We've been
S1: talking about. Mel. Jonah suggests something.
S2: I do, and I will say, until we get the
S2: next big TV show, we'll just have definitional definitional debates
S2: or not on repeat. So that'll keep us going for
S2: a while.
S1: People love meta conversations, you.
S2: Know, I will mention an Australian prestige show. We're just
S2: talking about how important local drama is. Mr. Inbetween. It
S2: is amazing. I feel like it's had new life because
S2: all of the episodes and seasons landed on binge are,
S2: I believe it was last year. This is written by
S2: Scott Ryan, who plays Ray Shoesmith. He's a killer for hire.
S2: It's also got Matt Nable, Damien Harriman, Brooke Satchwell, Nash
S2: Edgerton directed it. It's dark comedy. He kind of plays
S2: this killer for hire, but he's got heart. He's murdering
S2: one moment, playing with his daughter. Who's next? It's just
S2: so well crafted and put together. And I know Scott
S2: Ryan struggled for a while to to get it made.
S2: And it was launched in the US actually before it
S2: came here. But it's just a fantastic show and if
S2: people haven't watched it yet, it's well worth checking out.
S2: I know you guys both love it, right? Yeah, it's.
S1: A great show.
S3: It's great. I was really into it. Very funny. He's
S3: so great. The lead actor and yeah, it's it's it
S3: really didn't get like I think it did. People loved
S3: it but it didn't seem to get the like hype.
S1: I think it got quite like, I don't know if
S1: I've got huge numbers in the States, but the critical
S1: response there was pretty was pretty great. I think. Thomas,
S1: you've got one that I think is going to fracture
S1: our little alliance on this.
S2: Episode, just on this episode.
S1: On this definitional question of prestige television.
S3: I know it's so annoying because I've spent I've been
S3: dying on this hill of prestige. It's so obvious to say,
S3: and now we're going to have an argument about it.
S3: But my one is, this is a fucking good show, man.
S3: It's how to make it in America. It's an HBO show.
S3: It ran for two seasons in 2010, so the show
S3: has become like a bit of a cult hit. It
S3: basically followed like these two young 20 year olds in
S3: America who are kind of like trying to make their
S3: version of the American Dream. It was like part of
S3: the like, entourage era of TV, which I know hasn't
S3: aged well. But this was different. It starred, she starred.
S3: Kid Cudi was in it.
S1: Yeah. Kid Katie was one of my favorite parts into
S1: this show. And like, Bell.
S3: Bell's so good. So it basically was like Bryan Greenberg
S3: and Victor Rusk, these two characters, and they kind of
S3: like trying to make it in the New York fashion scene.
S3: But the thing that was so great about it was
S3: it was like at the start of like hustle culture
S3: and streetwear culture and, and like, you know, just as
S3: social media was becoming so important to our everyday lives. Yeah.
S1: Remember the graphics were very like Instagram, early Instagram. Yeah.
S1: Like sound and.
S3: Filter and stuff. So it was like it was like
S3: very cool. And the fact that Kid Cudi was in it,
S3: they showed like amazing party scenes and it was like
S3: it had the, I guess, like the zaniness of an entourage,
S3: but it had like something more to say. And it
S3: got canceled after two seasons. It is one of those shows,
S3: like if you Google how to make it in America,
S3: there's a million forms. People are like, bring it back,
S3: bring it back. And Bryan Greenberg and Victor Russell actually
S3: a couple of years ago, like put an Instagram post
S3: up and they were like hanging out in some diner
S3: and people like, oh my God, how did it make
S3: an America's coming back? So yeah, look, to me, it
S3: is a hidden prestige TV gem. I loved it and
S3: I miss it and I think everyone should go and
S3: watch it, but I know oseman you don't think it counts?
S1: Well, you've spoken so earnestly about it. I don't really
S1: want to cut you down. I mean, I think it's
S1: a fine show. It sort of lost the whole point
S1: of the show is this guys trying to make a
S1: jeans brand, which is sort of annoying. I'm like, fuck off, dude,
S1: get a job. And then I think. The second season
S1: just becomes about his mate. And like Luis Guzman, who's
S1: like this weird character actor in a bunch of stuff
S1: pops up and he's just trying to sell this, like,
S1: energy drink. The show lost the plot very quickly, I think.
S1: I think that was a good reason it wasn't renewed.
S3: This is like pre Logan Paul with Prime. Like they
S3: were very like they were prophesying the future.
S1: Every celebrity's got an energy drink.
S3: So yeah check it out.
S1: Fair. Yeah. Cool. I got a couple and these two
S1: are I say this a lot and people get sick
S1: of me saying this. I genuinely think these are two
S1: of the best pieces of art that have been created
S1: in the last decade, and not enough people have watched from.
S1: The first one is Watchmen, which came out in 2019
S1: on HBO. It's out here on binge. It's an adaptation
S1: of the very, very, very well known Alan Moore graphic novel.
S1: It's been done by Damon Lindelof, who's really well known
S1: for The Lost and The Leftovers. There was like a
S1: pretty average, mediocre film adaptation of this by Zack Snyder
S1: a while ago. The show is amazing. It's like it
S1: scratches all my itches in terms of what I want
S1: from TV. It is about the current state of America
S1: and decay in modern America. It's about the legacy of
S1: American imperialism, race relations, police violence. It's wrapped in this
S1: like super quirky sci fi mystery. Don't really know what's
S1: going on. The opening to this is so gripping. It
S1: opens with footage of the Tulsa massacre in 1921, when
S1: dozens of black people and hundreds more were injured in like,
S1: a race riot and in fact helped, like re, popularized
S1: the Tulsa massacre in the American consciousness like it is now.
S1: Something people talk about that they didn't as much before
S1: this show came out. And then the first scene that's
S1: set in, like the real time of the show is
S1: these white supremacists doing an ambush and killing these police,
S1: and you're not quite sure what's going on. And then
S1: futures crushed up just drops and you're like, this is
S1: straight out of my brain in terms of what I
S1: want from TV. So go watch the show. The other
S1: one is a show called station 11. This was an
S1: adaptation of a book Mel you'll be excited to know
S1: by Canadian writer Emily Saint John Mandel. It's a novel
S1: about a pandemic and how society rebuilds after pandemic and
S1: what is like, important. Turns out it's like family and
S1: love and art. This was a really interesting production because
S1: they started filming it before the actual pandemic hit, and
S1: then when the actual pandemic hit, they're like, should we
S1: make the show? This doesn't feel like we should be
S1: making this show right now, but they managed to make
S1: something quite beautiful and poignant about the moment we lived
S1: in and went through. It's great. It's on Apple TV+.
S1: I think those two shows, they exist. If you're looking
S1: for something to watch and you're bemoaning the state of
S1: TV right now as we have been, give all of
S1: these shows a watch, even how to make it in America. Okay,
S1: we've just in some recommendations, but we still are going
S1: to do our Impress Your Friends recommendations because we are
S1: nice people who want you all to have things to consume. Mel,
S1: you can go first this time.
S2: As you want shows about the current state of America.
S2: You want shows about the state of decay. Have I
S2: got the ultimate show for you? I've been into the Kardashians.
S2: I'm picking this firstly because I think I need a rebrand.
S2: On the podcast.
S3: You're recommending one of the most popular.
S4: TV shows on.
S2: Prestige. I mean, last week it was The Equalizer. This
S2: week it's the Kardashians using brawn across it all.
S1: Yeah, impress your friends. Hey, I heard this great show
S1: on this podcast. It's called The Kardashians. You're aware of.
S1: Like this. This is about.
S3: A small time.
S1: And the show around them.
S2: Okay. No, I think there's something interesting going on in
S2: this season, particularly since the Kardashians went to Disney. But
S2: I think in this season in particular, because at its heart,
S2: it's a fight between Kim Kardashian, the kind of matriarch
S2: apart from Kris Kardashian of the Kardashian clan and Kourtney Kardashian.
S2: And in real time, you were watching this family decide
S2: about what they want their legacy to be and what
S2: they want their family to be in the future. And
S2: this sisterly fight Kourtney kind of wants out of the family,
S2: doesn't really want to be as involved in it anymore.
S2: Kim wants to double down on all the opportunities. I
S2: think that's really interesting. And also what they've added into
S2: the show lately, increasingly, is that the Kardashians reflection on
S2: their own show. So you're watching them watch edits of
S2: the show, and those edits are having kind of consequences
S2: on the entire you're smiling at me, Thomas. I'm not
S2: convincing you here, am I?
S3: No, no, no, no, because I was going to say, like,
S3: I actually have been watching this, like in the background
S3: as my wife watches it. And I've never been into
S3: the Kardashians and, but it is like super gripping and I,
S3: it annoys me when people are just like, you know,
S3: write the Kardashians off is like, if you're into that,
S3: it's just like, so cringe. And they're a punch line
S3: because like, there are some of the most recognizable people
S3: in the world right now. You can't ignore that. And
S3: the show is like strangely gripping and especially that storyline
S3: between Kim and Kourtney, because I'm just like, this is,
S3: you know, it is like a version of succession happening
S3: in fucking Calabasas.
S2: And the narrative that is going on around the show
S2: is actually affecting the plot of the show. Yeah, the.
S1: Nellie as meta as this podcast. It's good. Totally.
S2: They're like actor and audience at once. It like, blows
S2: my mind. I think there's a lot to unpack.
S1: It's a good wreck. Like I have seen all of
S1: keeping Up with like the first original series, I think,
S1: on E! And then I watched the first season of
S1: the New one and kind of fell off like I
S1: just was a bit like over it, and the narratives
S1: weren't gripping me. But I have heard a lot of
S1: similar things about the last few weeks, and in this
S1: season in particular, which feels more interesting and seems to
S1: have more to say about them, but also like the
S1: reality TV paradigm and how that is like collapsing in
S1: on the real world now. It seems really fascinating.
S2: Yeah, totally. And there's still all the annoying parts, you know,
S2: there's a lot of self promotion and there's promotion of
S2: their individual brands, and there are kind of set up
S2: moments that are there for, you know, obviously just TV
S2: viewing pleasure. But yeah, I think that question is what's
S2: really interesting about this season. Great.
S1: The Kardashians little known show about a little known family.
S1: You heard it here.
S2: Consider yourself impressed.
S1: Thomas. You impressed us. What have you got?
S3: Okay, well, continuing the Freaky Friday theme of this part,
S3: I am now becoming Melanie Cambria and recommending a book.
S2: Welcome. You'll love it.
S3: So yes, I this is a book recommendation from Thomas
S3: Mitchell who.
S2: Gave you this book.
S3: You gave me.
S5: Actually.
S3: So the book is Death Valley by Melissa Broder. We
S3: both read and enjoyed her previous work, Milk Fed, which
S3: was very, very kind of this darkly funny, absurd novel.
S3: This is very funny. Basically, our kind of narrator takes
S3: herself off in the middle of the California desert. She
S3: stays at a depressing Best Western, like the kind of
S3: motel that everyone has stayed at at some point in
S3: their life. Usually when they're like in transit or having
S3: a very bad time. Both her husband and her father
S3: are currently in ICU for two separate issues, and both
S3: are like kind of hanging on for dear life, and
S3: she just takes herself away and stays at this best
S3: Western and then has a kind of like transcendental trip
S3: to the desert where she stumbles upon this like magic
S3: cactus and she enters into the cactus and, you know,
S3: kind of like it gets it gets a weird, like
S3: a bit acid trippy. But she's. So the thing about
S3: Melissa Brody's writing is she's so funny. It's very, very hilarious.
S3: It's very poignant. It's very all these things. As well
S3: as being quite topical and relevant. Her writing is so gripping,
S3: and even though there are kind of like fantastical elements,
S3: it feels rooted in the here and now. It's very funny.
S3: So it's Death Valley by Melissa Broder, and on top
S3: of all that, the cover will look amazing on the gram.
S3: It's kind of like it's playing with like light greens
S3: and yellows. There's a there's a cute illustration of the
S3: Death Valley cactus on the front. Like, if you chuck
S3: that in your tote and then you have like a
S3: macho lady in the background, I will like that shit.
S3: So yeah, that's Death Valley by Melissa Broder.
S1: You're going to if you're going to Clavell Gordon's Bay,
S1: Fitzroy pool, this is the book you want to be
S1: seen reading. Correct. Summer. Do you guys remember the whole
S1: GameStop drama?
S3: I was I was obsessed with it. And I'm sad
S3: that I haven't seen this movie yet.
S1: How much money did you make or lose on that?
S3: That's a private matter and I won't be discussing that
S3: or the current state of my sportsbook account.
S1: So yeah, you might remember a couple of years ago
S1: there was this crazy story Reddit subreddit, Wall Street Bets
S1: were all involved in pumping up the price of GameStop
S1: shares because they were mad that a bunch of hedge
S1: funds were shorting those shares, and the price went astronomical.
S1: And a bunch of them made a bunch of money.
S1: A bunch people lost a bunch of money. There was
S1: congressional hearings. It was all very exciting and revolutionary. And
S1: the memes are great. That has been turned into a
S1: docudrama called Dumb Money, actually directed by Craig Gillespie, who's
S1: an Australian American writer and director. It stars Paul Dano,
S1: Shailene Woodley, America Ferrera, Seth Rogen. This is an interesting one.
S1: I saw this on the weekend and it's an interesting
S1: recommendation in the sense that I didn't love it. Like,
S1: I didn't think this was an incredible movie. I think
S1: this movie is trying to be the Big Short in
S1: terms of like the way that it's edited. It's like
S1: very fun. There's a lot of exposition in terms of
S1: how certain bits of the stock market work. There's a
S1: lot of like fun and music in it and montages
S1: and things. But by making itself look like The Big Short,
S1: it obviously makes you think about the Big Short, and
S1: it just isn't as good in terms of the characters,
S1: the story. Like we are really focused in on Paul Dano,
S1: who plays this guy, roaring Kitty, who sort of kicked
S1: off the whole thing. There's a great cast around him,
S1: but they're pretty two dimensional, and you might be wondering
S1: why I'm recommending this one. I didn't love it. It's
S1: because even though I didn't think it sort of nailed
S1: what it was trying to do, it made me so
S1: angry in terms of like, this is the David and
S1: Goliath story. They are not hiding the fact that this
S1: is about the little guys who just used the tools
S1: they had, and that was the internet, and like TikTok
S1: and Reddit to take on the big, evil, greedy hedge
S1: fund bros. And that is kind of true. Like that
S1: is what happened. And then the rules were changed and
S1: they're all kind of screwed over. And I walked out
S1: being like, that wasn't an amazing movie, but I feel something, right?
S1: And that's like a good experience to have. And there's
S1: a lot of movies you watch and you're like, what
S1: was the point of that? What were they trying to say?
S1: This was entertaining. It was like a fun way to
S1: spend a couple of hours. And if it helps spark
S1: or reignite this, like big question of how this is
S1: really my theme of this pod. The system is rigged
S1: at this point in your life.
S6: Yeah.
S1: And my entire life. Then I think that's like, that's good.
S1: That's good for a movie to do that. So it's
S1: like a fun hang movie, I think, like if you're
S1: looking for a couple of hours to kill at the
S1: movies or when it comes on streaming, so I think
S1: it's worth watching. I think it'd be fun to do
S1: a pod with you guys when we talk about like,
S1: this genre of like, finance film, like Wolf of Wall Street,
S1: dumb Money, maybe that's something we can do when the
S1: next one comes out.
S2: Yes. And there are some good. Oh, well, there are some.
S2: Okay documentaries about this as well that are out at
S2: the moment. If you want to do extra viewing, can
S2: I just say, speaking of you feeling things I rewatched
S2: Past Lives, I think it's now out to stream and
S2: all I can think about the whole time was wondering
S2: if this was where you cried. Like at which point
S2: you got the feels and it was in my head
S2: the whole time. One moment in particular, at the end,
S2: I was like, it was definitely that. It was that line.
S1: Which which bit? I can tell you, you can say
S1: it and I'll tell you whether it was the moment.
S2: Was it when he said something like, it's at the end,
S2: he's getting into the cab, she's going back. And then
S2: he says something like, maybe in our future lives as well,
S2: or something like that, you.
S1: Got it, you got.
S7: It. I knew.
S2: And then I was thinking about what you would have
S2: been thinking about when you felt those things. Anyway, it
S2: was thriller. You've ruined the film for me.
S1: I love to feel. I love to feel in movies.
S7: Is that.
S1: A crime?
S3: That is not a crime? Eating a sausage roll in
S3: movies is a crime.
S2: Not paying for a sausage.
S1: Stealing a sausage roll is a crime, not eating one.
S3: I just wanted to leave it with two things. We
S3: talked about what like, obviously The White Lotus has been
S3: delayed until 2025. And so we're not sure what the
S3: next big prestige TV show will be. And and also
S3: possibly what we might be able to focus on as
S3: a podcast, although I do have and I've been let
S3: down by this show before, but I'm holding out hope.
S3: January 14th we are getting True Detective Season four.
S7: Oh yeah.
S3: So that will star Jodie Foster Collie race. And I
S3: think like True Detective season one was obviously unreal. It.
S3: Season two was really weird. Season three was good again.
S3: So I'm hopeful. Season four. You know this is HBO.
S3: Like we obviously know that they make some mistakes like
S3: with the idol and stuff. But yeah, potentially at the
S3: start of 2024 we could have at least a taste
S3: tester of prestige TV until, you know, I don't know whatever.
S3: Mel Danes, the next prestige TV. The Queen's Gambit season five.
S7: That's what you said.
S1: There were two things. What's the other thing.
S3: I totally forgot. So that's the end of the point today.
S1: All right, a good time to leave it there, guys.
S1: Thank you so much. This episode of The Drop was
S1: produced by Cheong. If you enjoyed listening to today's episode
S1: of The Drop, make sure to follow us in your
S1: favorite podcast app. Leave us a review or better yet,
S1: share it with a friend! I'm Osman Farooqui. See you
S1: next week!