Speaker 1: Welcome to another episode of Strictly Business, the podcast in
Speaker 1: which we speak with some of the brightest minds working
Speaker 1: in the media business today. I'm Andrew Wallenstein with Variety.
Speaker 1: When the new movie Downton Abbey The New Era hits
Speaker 1: US theaters this week, it will mark the fifth collaboration
Speaker 1: between my next guests. Julian Fellows is the Emmy winning
Speaker 1: writer behind Dowton, and Gareth Name is the executive chairman
Speaker 1: of the movie's production outfit, Carnival Films. Together they have
Speaker 1: overseen a property that has crossed over from mere global
Speaker 1: TV sensation to full fledged franchise. They're here to talk
Speaker 1: about this process. Coming up next on Strictly Business, and
Speaker 1: we're back with Julian Fellows and Gareth Name, the ark
Speaker 1: gitext behind Dalton Abbey, which is returning to theaters this
Speaker 1: week for a sequel. Thanks for coming on the podcast, gentlemen,
Speaker 1: Thank you ver much. Thanks so, Julian's let's start with you.
Speaker 1: It's been probably about thirteen years since Dalton was first
Speaker 1: conceived and began, and so I have to ask, did
Speaker 1: you have any inkling back then about how big this
Speaker 1: would become, that this would eventually even jump over to movies.
Speaker 1: Um No. The short answer to that is no, But um,
Speaker 1: I think it was a It was a different climate
Speaker 1: at that time when period drama was thought to have
Speaker 1: died and that the audience wasn't there for it anymore.
Speaker 1: And Gareth didn't believe that, uh, and nor did I,
Speaker 1: and nor did Peter at I t V uh And
Speaker 1: so we were in a sense, how to prove something.
Speaker 1: The idea was originally Garrett's that he gone to see
Speaker 1: Gosford a park of film I wrote, and we were
Speaker 1: having dinner actually about another project completely, but in the
Speaker 1: middle of it he said, would you ever go back
Speaker 1: into that territory for television? And that was really the
Speaker 1: beginning of the idea. Although Downtown is much warm up
Speaker 1: than Gosford, it's a much cuddlier place where you know,
Speaker 1: Gosford is all about compromises and reluctant decisions and wrong
Speaker 1: decisions and so on, whereas on the whole in Downtown
Speaker 1: everyone is doing their best and it is essentially a
Speaker 1: warm world they live in. But nevertheless, you can see
Speaker 1: how the one was inspired by the other. And then
Speaker 1: we went forward it actually it was it was quite
Speaker 1: an event less wasn't it getting it going? Because you
Speaker 1: went to pet and you and that was it. Really.
Speaker 1: I think we had a meeting and I was commissioned
Speaker 1: right one script and I wrote it, and they commissioned
Speaker 1: a series and we made this Seips. It was a
Speaker 1: rather trouble free journey. But of course, to answer your question, no,
Speaker 1: we thought we would make a successful period drama. That
Speaker 1: was what we set out to do. We had a
Speaker 1: jolly good cast and um, and we did it. But
Speaker 1: the kind of enormous global phenomenon really started a year
Speaker 1: later when it came out in America and then it
Speaker 1: went all over the world and then it turned into
Speaker 1: a sort of magic carpet ride. Gareth, can you take
Speaker 1: us back to that time where the period drama seemed dead?
Speaker 1: Why did it seem dead and why did you think
Speaker 1: it could come back to life? Well, I don't quite
Speaker 1: agree with Julian in that respect. I did. I never
Speaker 1: thought it was dead. Um, it's a perennial favorite. And
Speaker 1: when I got to know Julian in the early two thousand's,
Speaker 1: and I was not only you know, I'd watch Gosfie
Speaker 1: part as a viewer and I thought, you know this,
Speaker 1: this was you know, it was the attention to detail,
Speaker 1: and it was the knowledge. I watched that film and
Speaker 1: I sort of relaxed into my theater chair, thinking, this
Speaker 1: is the most realistic depiction that I've ever seen in
Speaker 1: my life. And I think everything that came before it
Speaker 1: I didn't really believe and I now believe this. And
Speaker 1: then I started reading sort of Julian's novels and I thought,
Speaker 1: this is and I mean, you know, the Academy Award
Speaker 1: that that he one for the screenplayer gossip part should
Speaker 1: have been enough. But you know that combined with the
Speaker 1: with reading Julian's novels, I thought, this is a writer
Speaker 1: that has something to say right around the world, and
Speaker 1: it is highly commercially with my production company hat On.
Speaker 1: I just thought, this is this is a you know,
Speaker 1: and as a British producer, I'm I'm always looking for
Speaker 1: expressly British topics. There are certain you know, there are
Speaker 1: certain subjects that are done all over the world, but
Speaker 1: the English country house, the class system that you know,
Speaker 1: the British Empire and all that kind of thing is
Speaker 1: is a unique sort of British subject for drama. And
Speaker 1: I thought, this is, you know, really something that I
Speaker 1: think could be highly popular both in the UK and
Speaker 1: around the world. So UM And around the same time
Speaker 1: that I was getting to know Julie and I watched,
Speaker 1: I happened to see a historic episode of Upstairs Downstairs.
Speaker 1: I didn't sit down and watch it, but I was
Speaker 1: flicking through the channels one day and I find I
Speaker 1: found on channel three hundred and sixty eight. I found
Speaker 1: this nineteen seven early nineteen seventies episode of a show
Speaker 1: that had been popular in Britain and America called Upstairs Downstairs.
Speaker 1: It was a similar sort of set up, but I
Speaker 1: so I knew what the show was as soon as
Speaker 1: I alighted on the channel. I knew what it was,
Speaker 1: but I've never watched it. And I thought at the time,
Speaker 1: I was about forty or something, and I thought, if
Speaker 1: I've never watched it, because I was too young to
Speaker 1: have seen it, there's two generations, you know, behind me
Speaker 1: that have never have never been exposed to this UM,
Speaker 1: And I thought, you know what this is. This is
Speaker 1: a perennial favorite, and what Julian was doing in in
Speaker 1: in Gossip Park is something that would work as well
Speaker 1: or or better actually an episodic television because you play
Speaker 1: to the strengths of you know, an audience becoming familiar
Speaker 1: with the characters and taking them, you know, to their
Speaker 1: heart and and and becoming more more and more vested
Speaker 1: in in the whole thing. And so yeah, so we
Speaker 1: so Julie and I met up and I said, I
Speaker 1: think we should do this as an episodic TV series,
Speaker 1: And so that's how it came about. And as I said,
Speaker 1: I never thought the genre was over it. It's the genre,
Speaker 1: like many of these genres that that that need constantly reinventing.
Speaker 1: So Julian, I mean it's I was like Gareth had
Speaker 1: a different take on it, and I want to go
Speaker 1: back to you, what at that time had you souring
Speaker 1: on the period drama? What needed to be reinvented? We
Speaker 1: just I've had a couple of things turned down. I
Speaker 1: mean in my personal life, a couple of things turned
Speaker 1: down because period drama. They didn't really want to get
Speaker 1: into it, you know. I when this happens from time
Speaker 1: to time with all different companies and channels and everything,
Speaker 1: it's not a big thing. But also Peter, I keep
Speaker 1: forgetting his surname. What is his name? At the I
Speaker 1: t V. The head of I TV them was called
Speaker 1: Peter Fincham Fincham. Um. He was telling me that when
Speaker 1: he decided to make Dumbton, a lot of his friends said,
Speaker 1: oh no, that's that's all finished, all that you you'll
Speaker 1: lose your shirts on that. Dude, you shouldn't do that
Speaker 1: because it was obviously going to be very expensive. Um.
Speaker 1: So it was just a kind of thing I picked up.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't suppose I thought it was dead forever,
Speaker 1: because nothing is dead forever. The question is whether instead
Speaker 1: now and and that that was what he had been
Speaker 1: told and what I had been told. But it turned
Speaker 1: out that Gareth was right. It wasn't dead, and there
Speaker 1: was an audience for it. I suppose looking back, there
Speaker 1: just wasn't at that time a period drama that was
Speaker 1: a particularly big hit, and so it's sort of kept
Speaker 1: it out of the footlights a bit. It amused. It
Speaker 1: amuses me a bit that you talk about it being expensive,
Speaker 1: because of course that first season on television in we
Speaker 1: now look back on it as being extraordinarily cheap compared
Speaker 1: with absolutely and of course doubt and I think without
Speaker 1: question reinvigorated the genre. Fast forward to today where the
Speaker 1: gentlemen also have another hit here in US on HBO
Speaker 1: with the Gilded Age. Netflix has its own version with Bridgerton.
Speaker 1: Do you guys take credit it for the reinvigoration of
Speaker 1: this genre and how do you explain it's enduring appeal? Well,
Speaker 1: I think that's possibly easier for me to answer than Julie.
Speaker 1: It feels a little less personal. Um. You know, I
Speaker 1: do think that Downton that there's no question in my
Speaker 1: mind that it that it that it started a journey
Speaker 1: not only one that that that rediscovered period drama and
Speaker 1: put it front and center, but but also of course
Speaker 1: globalized television production. It was Downton was the most successful
Speaker 1: non American television show in the US. Um and um.
Speaker 1: It was the first foreign show that really delivered a
Speaker 1: value globally that was equivalent to a Hollywood TV series.
Speaker 1: So it was in that sense, absolutely groundbreaking. And it
Speaker 1: also caused all of the other you know, I mean,
Speaker 1: by the time we made Downtown I Company, I sold
Speaker 1: the company to Universal, so we were already part of
Speaker 1: the Hollywood that the US media landscape. But it caused
Speaker 1: all the other competitors to send executives to London. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know. Now now it's all the studios for many
Speaker 1: years now, I've had London operations and you know, Netflix
Speaker 1: are very big in the rest of the world, headquartered
Speaker 1: out of London, Apple, m Amazon. You know, it really
Speaker 1: opened the door to to to the idea that that
Speaker 1: a foreign show could be as successful globally and could
Speaker 1: make as much money. And that was a simple fact.
Speaker 1: And yes, you're I won't repeat all the examples that
Speaker 1: that that you've you've given us, that there are other shows, well,
Speaker 1: actually I will. I mean, yes, Bridgeton, but I think
Speaker 1: it's impossible to imagine um Netflix making the Crown without
Speaker 1: the success that Downton Abbey had globally. So I think
Speaker 1: it really did unlock a greatly creately and the creative
Speaker 1: potential that was there anywhere and down to really began
Speaker 1: that journey. I think we were also though, part of
Speaker 1: the movement that had sort of started in America with
Speaker 1: the reinvention of serial television with Ian west Wing and
Speaker 1: Madman and you know, Good To all of these shows
Speaker 1: where they had taken the multiarch storylines at the endless
Speaker 1: sixteen stories happening in one episode and all the rest
Speaker 1: of it, which I'd sort of learned from all and
Speaker 1: then gone on with But I think we quite deliberately
Speaker 1: structure that time. It looked incredibly English and it sounded
Speaker 1: incredibly English, but in fact its structure had more in
Speaker 1: common with those American shows that had reinvented television than
Speaker 1: indeed with sort of Jewel in the Crown or something
Speaker 1: of twenty or thirty years before. And it was this
Speaker 1: kind of television for people with attention deficit. It's order,
Speaker 1: you know, with sixteen things happening simultaneously. Uh. That I
Speaker 1: think invigorated period drama and made it seem modern and
Speaker 1: very watchable and so on. And we were part of
Speaker 1: that rebirth really of television. Yeah, you're you're absolutely right.
Speaker 1: We had this, remember that first dinner when we when
Speaker 1: we cooked up this idea. It was a strange mix.
Speaker 1: We talked about of all of the English sort of
Speaker 1: the classic um English drama of merchant Ivory if you're
Speaker 1: familiar with those songs from from the eighties, the sort
Speaker 1: of you know, the country house and the aristocracy and
Speaker 1: the class and the uh, you know, the sort of
Speaker 1: comedy of manners, but with the pace of storytelling of
Speaker 1: West Wing and the west Wing analogy. We used a
Speaker 1: lot because the West Wing is about an entire uh
Speaker 1: you know workplace that is where you've got dozens of
Speaker 1: people who were all doing their thing serving one man
Speaker 1: who is the president. And we saw the connection with
Speaker 1: this new idea that we had that this was going
Speaker 1: to be about dozens of people who were all it
Speaker 1: serve um Law, Grantham and his family, so and mostly
Speaker 1: in one environment. You know, it is sort of in
Speaker 1: one place. So yes, it was that sort of West
Speaker 1: Wing pace of storytelling and focus combined with the lavish
Speaker 1: um you know, English charm of merchant ivory. Well, after
Speaker 1: producing six seasons of television, you made the jump with
Speaker 1: a to the movies with a first hit two and
Speaker 1: thirty eight million dollars in global box office, which I
Speaker 1: would assume you guys realized was certainly not guaranteed. There's
Speaker 1: been plenty of TV shows, successful shows that have failed
Speaker 1: to make the jump to theaters. What was it about
Speaker 1: Doubton that you think enabled it to succeed to the
Speaker 1: point where here you are with a second one who's
Speaker 1: going to answer that? I think I have an idea
Speaker 1: which is that, although I mean, you're quite right, this
Speaker 1: this was the gamble, This was the question mark was
Speaker 1: would we succeed in making the transition, because plenty of
Speaker 1: people haven't in the past. But I think the conception
Speaker 1: of that it was quite cinematic when it was on television,
Speaker 1: and it was quite deliberately for that. If you remembered,
Speaker 1: the very first shot of the very first episode was
Speaker 1: an enormous traveling shot at where you went through all
Speaker 1: the drawing rooms and libraries, and you walked into the
Speaker 1: hall and you went around. It was all a continuous
Speaker 1: shot that was a very filmic opening, and it was
Speaker 1: rather like the famous one of us at Wells or whatever.
Speaker 1: And I think always because the house was a principal character,
Speaker 1: we had a sort of scale of the visuals hide
Speaker 1: of the show that was essentially cinematic, and all the
Speaker 1: cinema would do was give us more opportunity to exploit
Speaker 1: the house and be able to show more of it
Speaker 1: and more of the scale, and that, you know, these
Speaker 1: aerial shots and all the rest of it. So I
Speaker 1: don't think we act to change. I mean, normally, when
Speaker 1: a television show becomes a film, it's quite difficult because
Speaker 1: it looks different, it is differently conceived, and you don't
Speaker 1: feel you're coming home whereas we didn't have that, we
Speaker 1: were able legitimately to expure not to bring the house
Speaker 1: onto the big screen and get even more out of it. Frankly,
Speaker 1: so I think that made it, made it easier. But
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, it's there's a lot of luck
Speaker 1: in these things. I don't think we should ever forget that.
Speaker 1: I agree about the cinema, that the sort of the
Speaker 1: sense of cinema about that that there was inherent in
Speaker 1: the show, which is unlike a lot of television, particularly
Speaker 1: television at the time. Perhaps not so much now, but
Speaker 1: at the time that there was television and film, and
Speaker 1: I think we we already filled that small screen. So
Speaker 1: the sense of you know, that goes back again to
Speaker 1: that you know, the merchant Ivory sort of them, uh
Speaker 1: you know, starting point. It had that rich full screen
Speaker 1: idea too. But I think the other thing is that
Speaker 1: we ended the television show. You know, we quit earlier.
Speaker 1: I think, you know, we this wasn't a television series
Speaker 1: that went on for eight seasons or nine or ten
Speaker 1: and the like shows. You I mean, no, no, nothing
Speaker 1: does now. But but you know, ten twenty years ago,
Speaker 1: it was about really squeezing as much as you possibly
Speaker 1: could about episodic television, and we didn't do that. We
Speaker 1: got out. I I think we feel we got out
Speaker 1: a year or two earlier than we might have done,
Speaker 1: and I think that really did leave the fans thinking
Speaker 1: it wasn't quite over. Um, so there was certainly an
Speaker 1: appetite for these characters. Again, you're listening to the strictly
Speaker 1: bi in this podcast. Will be back in a second
Speaker 1: with more with Julian Fellows and Gareth Name. We're back
Speaker 1: talking with Julian Fellows and Gareth Named, the architects behind
Speaker 1: Downton Abbey, which is back in theaters this week with
Speaker 1: the sequel titled The New Era. We were just talking
Speaker 1: about translating the movie, sorry, translating the intellectual property to
Speaker 1: the movies. The New Era movie is I think releasing
Speaker 1: him to a very different climate than the last one. Uh.
Speaker 1: It's become a very challenged place in theaters for pretty
Speaker 1: much anything that's not a Marvel superhero movie or or
Speaker 1: a horror film. Um. Gareth, do you have any apprehension
Speaker 1: about how Doubton will resonate this time around? Yes, he's
Speaker 1: of course, he's a challenging times and we were very
Speaker 1: lucky with the first movie, I feel that we we
Speaker 1: hit the sweet spot, having been released in September twenty
Speaker 1: nine and it's finished its theatrical run globally by the
Speaker 1: end of twenty nine, so the timing was very fortunate. UM.
Speaker 1: And really, you know, this second installment of downs and
Speaker 1: has filled the space ever since we started. Julie and
Speaker 1: I worked on the script in the first lockdown of
Speaker 1: spring of twenty twenty and we got the film together
Speaker 1: that autumn, and then making the film in one was
Speaker 1: very challenging, UM, because of all of the lockdowns and
Speaker 1: the COVID protocols and all of that. So all the
Speaker 1: way through making this and this was a film like
Speaker 1: many other films and TV shows have been made in
Speaker 1: this new culture. UM. So yes, we we go out
Speaker 1: into the world in in very different times and where
Speaker 1: the sequencing of UM distribution is different, where where you know, films, uh,
Speaker 1: you know come to other platforms much more quickly than
Speaker 1: they did even three years ago, so that there's no
Speaker 1: doubt about the whole landscape is very very different to
Speaker 1: what it was just three years ago. And Julian, you know,
Speaker 1: it's entirely possible given how unpredictable this COVID marketplace, is
Speaker 1: that your film could have potentially not have released in theaters.
Speaker 1: It could have gone straight to streaming or something like that.
Speaker 1: Would that have been a problem for you. You've talked
Speaker 1: about how Doubton is such a distinctly cinematic experience. Are
Speaker 1: you glad that it's going to actually be in cinemas? Oh,
Speaker 1: of course I'm glad, yes, because, as you say quite rightly,
Speaker 1: there was a real possibility at one point that it
Speaker 1: wouldn't be an Indeed, I made another film during lockdown
Speaker 1: which was hardly in cinemas and went straight onto a
Speaker 1: platform because you couldn't get anyone to leave the house. So, uh,
Speaker 1: there's always that side. But I mean, actually, the truth
Speaker 1: is we have lived through a sort of ten or
Speaker 1: twenty period when the nature of release, of showing the
Speaker 1: demonstration platforms where where ordinary terrestrial channels now seem like
Speaker 1: some sort of Victorian table draping. You know, everything has changed,
Speaker 1: and I think you just have to try and keep
Speaker 1: your feet and rock and roll with what's happening. What
Speaker 1: I do think is that you know, there's a big
Speaker 1: audience for this film for when it's sounds other vay
Speaker 1: to say that, but but for when it does hit
Speaker 1: a platform, because I was attacked in my hotel this
Speaker 1: morning by a woman at breakfast who said, my husband
Speaker 1: is six and will not go into a cinema. He
Speaker 1: wants to know when it's going to be on a platform.
Speaker 1: And of course I know nothing, you know, but I
Speaker 1: think there are quite a lot of that generation who
Speaker 1: will wait to see it until they feel they can
Speaker 1: do so safely. So we just have to see what
Speaker 1: effect that adds on us. And you know, I'm happy
Speaker 1: and I'm happy that it's in cinemas in Britain already,
Speaker 1: and and the feedback we're getting is obviously very nice.
Speaker 1: But on the other hand, that's madely from one's friends,
Speaker 1: so that's that's what they would say, wouldn't they. But
Speaker 1: nevertheless it seems quite positive. Well, and I would say,
Speaker 1: all you respected for that lady and the elderly husband.
Speaker 1: But you know, we do want we do want fans
Speaker 1: to come back to theaters. You know, um, you know,
Speaker 1: America is the home of cinema and that's the you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's the largest market, but it's the rest of
Speaker 1: the markets in the world all put together, and we
Speaker 1: want people to come to theaters to see this because
Speaker 1: it is beloved titles that that like Downtown will bring
Speaker 1: people back to theaters. And you know, as much as
Speaker 1: I have you know, huge or and utter respect for
Speaker 1: Marvel and all that it does, we do not want
Speaker 1: movie theaters to become just about Marvel. And we want
Speaker 1: the fans of Downton to come and see it and
Speaker 1: for this to be the title that they come back
Speaker 1: to theaters and and enjoy, you know, in that that
Speaker 1: shared experience. This is a very moving film and a
Speaker 1: very funny film. I mean it's the first film was
Speaker 1: very funny. And you know, in these actors, we have
Speaker 1: extremely good comedic actors as well as dramatic actors. And
Speaker 1: Julian's writing. The great genius of it is the mix
Speaker 1: of drama, romance, all these things, but you know, a
Speaker 1: healthy dose of comedy in the writing as well. And
Speaker 1: this is a very funny film. And I think it's
Speaker 1: a you know, Julian and I have seen it a
Speaker 1: few times now with audiences in theaters, and it is
Speaker 1: a great audience experience. So with great respect to the
Speaker 1: late eighties gentlemen, who's going to watch it at home?
Speaker 1: And I hope you as wife, absolutely love it, and
Speaker 1: many others will see it that way as well. For
Speaker 1: those off later, you'll off saying that for those of
Speaker 1: us who for those of us who love the movie
Speaker 1: going experience, you know, I really hope we'll pull the
Speaker 1: stops out and come out and return to theaters like
Speaker 1: we used to. Gareth, you just use the M word Marvel,
Speaker 1: and so I'm going to use the F word franchise.
Speaker 1: Do you see Downton as a franchise in the way
Speaker 1: Marvel or James Bond is considered a franchise? Because I
Speaker 1: would think after six seasons of TV, two movies, who
Speaker 1: knows how many more, is it okay to use the
Speaker 1: F word? Well, I suppose it might be a kind
Speaker 1: of franchise, but the comparisons that you offer up are
Speaker 1: so radically different that you know, I mean, not a
Speaker 1: superhero in sight and all of that. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: it's a different kind of franchise. If it is, it's
Speaker 1: clearly Um Julian created and the characters were realized by
Speaker 1: these these fantastic act as something that um that audiences
Speaker 1: don't want to let go of. And there's something about
Speaker 1: that world and the the you know, it's possibly one
Speaker 1: of the most successful depictions of a family over a
Speaker 1: long period of time ever um ever enjoyed on screen, actually,
Speaker 1: and people connect with that and they don't want to
Speaker 1: let it go. So I think we we both feel that,
Speaker 1: you know, we hope there's more, and there's more to do,
Speaker 1: and but possibly quite a unique franchise compared to any
Speaker 1: other that you could that you could reference. Yes, I
Speaker 1: mean I think so. Do you think it's finished? I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, lives aren't finished until people die, and characters
Speaker 1: aren't finished until they die. There's there's there's nothing more
Speaker 1: to say about that. We can go on with these
Speaker 1: people as long as the audience wants to go on
Speaker 1: seeing them and as long as they enjoy them, and
Speaker 1: we can, you know, do that in all sorts of
Speaker 1: different ways. I don't know if that makes it a
Speaker 1: franchise or a phenomenon, but either way, I don't see
Speaker 1: any reason to call a halt. But if there's still
Speaker 1: an appetite on the market, really well, to that end, Julian,
Speaker 1: are you already thinking about, huh, what could a third movie,
Speaker 1: a fourth movie, spin off TV show? I mean, are
Speaker 1: you thinking like that? Well, I think it's impossible not
Speaker 1: to think like that a bit because you know that
Speaker 1: these possibilities exist, and one doesn't want to just sit
Speaker 1: there slack Jordan glassy eyed if the topic comes up. Um,
Speaker 1: So I think we are or I am exploring what
Speaker 1: might work. But you know we've seen them developed. I mean,
Speaker 1: one of the storylines of this film is that the
Speaker 1: final kind of revealing of Mary as being in charge
Speaker 1: and as running the place, and also in her own storyline,
Speaker 1: showing that she is capable of the different behaviors and
Speaker 1: adjustments are required in the earlier to mid twentieth century,
Speaker 1: so that she's perfectly able to have a normal conversation
Speaker 1: with the producer director h And you know there's that
Speaker 1: moment when she's on the set and he he says, oh,
Speaker 1: lady Mary, so it says just Mary at leads and
Speaker 1: you realize that she's making herself modern in a way
Speaker 1: that would be beyond her father. So we're already, if
Speaker 1: you like, taking it on into the next stage where
Speaker 1: she's concerned in this film. So I don't see any
Speaker 1: reason why we can't go on, because you know, these
Speaker 1: families did exist, do exist. One of them lives in
Speaker 1: in the House where we film and High Clear and
Speaker 1: they're still there. And obviously getting through those years some
Speaker 1: of the very difficult ones meant lots of imagination and
Speaker 1: getting down to it and taking different tax and I
Speaker 1: think there's a story of the House is survival to
Speaker 1: be told. So you know, there's there's no reason that
Speaker 1: you can't go on with it. I mean, there is
Speaker 1: the moment if a series is about the war, there's
Speaker 1: a moment when the war comes to an end. But
Speaker 1: this war never comes to an end. So I don't
Speaker 1: see why we couldn't go on. I would agree I
Speaker 1: could see this, if I may call it a franchise
Speaker 1: go on for decades. And Gareth, you know you're over
Speaker 1: Carnival Films as part of the NBC Universal family, where
Speaker 1: they know franchise maintenance, big cultural difference. But I'm going
Speaker 1: to mention a movie Fast and Furious, And I just
Speaker 1: wonder whether you know, the top dogs at Comcast haven't
Speaker 1: spoken to you about how do we keep this going
Speaker 1: ten twenty years or are you starting to speak the
Speaker 1: language of franchise. But in the specialty film marketplace, you know,
Speaker 1: the downtown is definitely in that, you know, it's it's
Speaker 1: it's the Holy Grail. It's part of that, you know.
Speaker 1: It's in the special, it's in the VI I P Lounge, UM,
Speaker 1: and it's it's the kind of content really that all
Speaker 1: these studios look to achieve, um and you know, and
Speaker 1: we didn't. We didn't do that by setting out make
Speaker 1: a huge TV and movie franchise that we you know,
Speaker 1: and nobody ever should approach it that way. Julian and
Speaker 1: I sat down, uh, fifteen years ago over dinner and
Speaker 1: had an idea for something that we thought might you know,
Speaker 1: it might work, but it was something we wanted to
Speaker 1: make and we thought it might be popular. And this
Speaker 1: is a great attraction of you knows, as you know
Speaker 1: as a producer, is that you might create you know,
Speaker 1: one sort twice, if you're lucky in a career, you
Speaker 1: might create some content that is there for the for
Speaker 1: the for the long haul. And I agree, I echo
Speaker 1: what Julian says that we've got to be you know,
Speaker 1: wise to the future and think of those possibilities and
Speaker 1: any number of things could happen in the future. And
Speaker 1: that's all very exciting and we'll see. But you're you're right,
Speaker 1: your question is a good one, you know, we're we're
Speaker 1: we're in a We're part of a company whose job
Speaker 1: it is to make the most of this succeptional content.
Speaker 1: When these companies create that content, they should make the
Speaker 1: most of it because there is an a they can
Speaker 1: make money from it, but audiences love it. And when
Speaker 1: audiences love something, well, that's what we came into this
Speaker 1: job for. Well, and I think you could end on
Speaker 1: an any better note than that. I'm looking forward to
Speaker 1: the future of this French guys, Julian Fellows and Gareth
Speaker 1: Named thank you for joining me today on Strictly Business. Well,
Speaker 1: thank you scares good to see. This has been another
Speaker 1: episode of Strictly Business. Tune in next week for another
Speaker 1: helping of scintillating conversation with media movers and shakers, and
Speaker 1: please make sure you subscribe to the podcast to hear
Speaker 1: future episodes. Also leave a review in Apple Podcasts and
Speaker 1: let us know how we're doing.