The 'It Ends With Us' controversy, Raygun culture wars and Industry's triumphant return

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
S1 (00:08):
Hey, I'm Osman Farooqui and this is The Drop, a
weekly culture show from the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age,
where we dive into the latest in the world of
pop culture and entertainment. I'm here with Thomas Mitchell and
Meg Watson. How are you guys doing?

S2 (00:22):
Hey. I'm good. I'm happy to be here. The I'm
sorry to say that I'm not the book person in
Mel's absence.

S1 (00:28):
Yeah, it's very exciting to have you, Meg, but it
is a very unfortunate episode for Mel to be missing.
She is sadly a bit unwell, but it's devastating timing,
considering that the focus of today's episode is the movie
adaptation of one of the best selling books of all time,
Colleen Hoovers It Ends With Us, starring Blake Lively. But
you know we can hold it down. I don't actually
know if this is one of Mel's, like, favorite books.

(00:50):
Do you have any insight into that? Thomas?

S3 (00:51):
I can't imagine if she's a what is it, coho?
What do they call themselves? The fans. I can't imagine that.
She's a big Hoover head, but, you know, she has
just good takes on most things book related. So we
do miss her. But we shall persevere.

S1 (01:05):
We'll persevere. Look, the film, the book subject of much controversy,
and there's a lot of behind the scenes drama that
we're going to get into as well. But how are
you doing over there, Thomas? How are things?

S3 (01:15):
Yeah, not too bad. Just, you know, dealing with the
first confirmed case of hand, foot and mouth in our household.
My child is at daycare, and it's one of the big, like,
kind of big three, I guess, alongside gastro and NITs.
I can only assume that Mel also has hand, foot
and mouth. That's why she's not here.

S2 (01:33):
Did she give it to your child?

S3 (01:34):
Yeah, I don't know, but, like, it's just I don't know.
There are one. There's just, like, too many words in
that disease. It's like you don't want three different things
going on.

S1 (01:42):
Well, okay, this is a thing about this disease that
has always confused me, right? Because you've heard about foot
and mouth disease, which is something that cows get and
then they kill them by the millions. And so when
I first heard of hand, foot and mouth disease, I
was like, well, that's even worse because now a hand
is involved. But apparently they don't just like, you know,
euthanize children.

S3 (02:01):
Yeah, there's not, like a secret slaughtering of millions of toddlers. Um,
I mean, to be honest, I've thought about slaughtering them
a few times over the last 24 hours because it's
pretty annoying, but.

S2 (02:10):
Oh, no. And you can. Can you get it as well?
Can adults get it? Well, no.

S3 (02:13):
So this is the thing you actually most people like
had it when we were younger and stuff. So it's
not really very contagious. So like I can assure you all,
even though you guys are in Melbourne and I'm in Sydney,
my hand, feet and mouth are completely clean.

S2 (02:26):
I'm making a I'm making a little cameo here today
as well, because when I went to drop my one
year old daughter at daycare this morning, I had her
in the carrier and she was coughing and threw up
all over me. So I'm in the office for a
bit and then straight back home for single duty parenting.

S1 (02:41):
What a what a life.

S2 (02:41):
I recommend it, it's great. It's really fun.

S1 (02:43):
First time I've been not the first time, but I
feel very outnumbered. And now all of a sudden, um,
you guys doing your bit for the future?

S2 (02:50):
Oh, that must be hard for you all the free
time and money.

S1 (02:53):
All right, so as well as discussing all of the.
It ends with US drama and the movie itself. We're
also going to talk about the return of industry, one
of my favorite TV shows for the past couple of years.
It's a show that has steadily been growing in popularity,
and I think there's a couple of star studded additions
to the cast this season. It's got the famed Sunday
night HBO time slot replacing House of the Dragon. So

(03:15):
I think this show is ready to really get into
the mainstream. But before we get to that stuff, the
Olympics guys. They're finally over. How are you feeling? You happy? Sad? Relieved?
Missing it?

S3 (03:30):
I think I'm missing it a little bit. Yeah. Uh,
I feel like the closing ceremony almost got me, like,
too hyped that it was like, you know, it's sad
that this is now over bringing out Tom cruise. I mean,
I think we all love Tom cruise and having him
on a motorbike in Paris, like, yeah, it feels four
years now, feels too long. And I also think, um,
I mean, very funny to include Dre and Snoop when

(03:51):
you really think about their backstory, it's very funny that
they're like the face of the LA games.

S1 (03:56):
It's crazy. It's crazy that they are the mascots of
this city when when they first burst onto the scene
and was NWA and stuff, it was like, shut these
guys down, send them to jail.

S3 (04:04):
Yeah, it's a real full circle moment. But yeah, I'm
very hyped. But I am sad that it's gone.

S1 (04:08):
And so you reckon we'll see. Like one for doing
the handover from London to Brisbane or something?

S3 (04:14):
Sadly I just still think it'll be, um, Shepherd.

S2 (04:18):
And maybe it'll be like Savage Garden and Jacob Elordi.
He's a Brisbane boy.

S1 (04:22):
Actually, they're actually Brisbane X1. Four's not a Brisbane act.
Didn't really think that one through. Um, how about you?
How about you, Meg? I actually don't know what your
sort of general engagement with the Olympics was. The last
couple of.

S2 (04:32):
Weeks are pretty high. Yeah, I'm really sad to see
it go because it's just that perfect, collective, easy experience.
I mean, you guys talked about it on the pod before.
It's just you get home from work and you're just
like staying in and everyone's watching the, like Boulder and
lead at 8 p.m. or whatever. What a dream. And
you don't have to think about what to do. But
then it's also kind of nice. It's got to a

(04:52):
point where it's like, oh, what film and TV is
going on? Like, I've kind of lost touch.

S1 (04:56):
Yeah. It's nice. It's nice that industry waited for the
Olympics to finish before starting, but yeah, I mentioned it
on the pod last week, but it what really made
me so happy about the last few weeks was every
single person it seemed like was across the same couple
of things, whether it was like, you know, the French
pole vaulter who we talked about or the Turkish shooter

(05:17):
or Australia winning gold and the Fox Sisters, and perhaps
none more than the ray gun stuff that happened.

S2 (05:25):
What a way to go out. Oh my God.

S1 (05:27):
Look, it's not even been a week since that dance
really took over. The world like that went properly viral
in a way that few things have in a very,
very long time. But in the last, like 5 or
6 days we've been through not even like 4 or
5 days, been through so many levels of the discourse
cycle on it. Part of me is exhausted about thinking

(05:49):
about Ray gun, but this is our first time together,
the three of us, to talk about this, and there
is so much like misinformation about it, so many theories
and rumors. We've done some really great stories. One of
our reporters, Francis Howe, has done a really good, basically
explainer of how Rachel Gun made it to the Paris
Olympics as a breaker, what the process was like in Australia,

(06:11):
how people within the breaking community feel. So a couple
of bits to unpack there, but kind of like initial takes, folks.
What did you what were your reactions to seeing Australia's
women's breaking entry last weekend?

S2 (06:25):
I mean, the joy that I felt on Saturday morning
was pretty unmatched just seeing those first clips roll through.
It's so rare that you see something like that, right?
Like in what other sport? In the Olympics could you
see someone who's, you know, average to good and just
that harsh comparison. I actually immediately I saw the clips

(06:45):
online and they're just hilarious. And so I immediately went
and watched the whole competition because I was like, there's
no way this is fair. It's probably just like one
weird little thing. I highly recommend the full watch. Um,
but yeah, I mean, my first take was that it's
so funny and very confusing, and you wanted to know
that backstory, but then there is kind of a sadness
about it as well, because you think, who else could

(07:07):
have taken that spot? How does it affect the Australian
breaking community? And I mean, it's it's kind of Australia
as a whole is reflected in this, right? Like, Rachel
Dratch is playing Reagan on The Tonight Show in the
Australian tracker uniform. Like that was crazy to see. Australian
Daggy ness is on full display and that's very funny.
But it's also, I mean, not the point of the Olympics, right? Yeah.

S1 (07:29):
Was there any part of you, Thomas, that felt sort
of like, disrespected, that this is what Australia was doing
on the national stage, international stage in this sport?

S3 (07:39):
Yeah, it was weird. Like, I think you're right in
that it's kind of evolved through so many different like
discourse cycles already. My initial thing was like, oh, it's
kind of funny, but like, surely if I go down
to fucking time zone, there's like ten better breakdancers there.
Like I could just I could just round them up and, like,
take them to the Olympics. Um, and then and then
I thought what was quite funny though, was that like,

(08:00):
at first everyone was like, oh, this is this is
like a funny meme. There was maybe a little bit
of like an attitude of like, oh, we've done, you know,
it's been our greatest Olympics ever. Like, we've won more
medals in Paris than we did in Athens 2004. And yet,
like the kind of lasting memory of Australia will be
ray guns. Like, maybe not so great technical performance, but
at first I felt like everyone was kind of down

(08:21):
to like almost, I don't know, embrace the like, Kath
and Kim ness of it all. And then once it
became like an international thing, it's almost like our protective
Australian ness kicked in and we're like, okay, it's only
okay for us to make fun of her. And now
that you guys are making fun of her, that's not
cool anymore. So it's been like almost interesting to watch
as like an Australian identity exercise. I have kind of

(08:42):
flip flopped so much on like what I think is
the right thing. And you mentioned our colleague Francis story.
Definitely worth the read because like that gave me a
lot of context and I think, like I basically feel
now we just don't have many good breakdancers in Australia, especially, like,
you know, the women's like community of breakers is very small.
She kind of, you know, legitimately won her way there.

(09:03):
She this might sound really slack. I'm probably going to
make an enemy of the, I don't know, tens of
people that do breaking in this country. But like she
is perhaps the best of a bad bunch. I don't
think we perform well at the World championships like historically,
so I don't know, like it's maybe it's sad that
there is really good breakers out there that aren't part
of the correct avenues to get to places like the Olympics.
But I think the discourse of her being like, oh,

(09:25):
you know, this is like a white privilege thing, and
she's just, you know, cheated her way there. Probably unfair,
even though I understand the frustration that, you know, to
go to the Olympics and put on a performance that
is kind of embarrassing and perhaps technically not up to scratch,
is also very frustrating.

S2 (09:40):
It's definitely not true. She cheated her way there. We
should say that. Like she definitely went through the qualification processes,
but I think it's still a failure of the systemic
system in place in breaking, which is, you know, a
relatively new sport if we're going to call it a sport.
And there's a lot of contention about whether it should
be in the Olympics at all. And I think it's
not fair to say that Rachel Gunn, it's her fault

(10:03):
that she's the representative and it's taking away the opportunity
from someone else. But I think it's probably fair to
say that of the system which sends people through, why
weren't there more scouts picking up people at Time Zone?
I mean, if you're a 16 year old breaker from like,
Western Sydney, are you going to even know that there
is a pathway? The person with a PhD in breaking
is probably the person who will know.

S1 (10:25):
Yeah, maybe it's worth sort of unpacking a little bit
of how we ended up here, because it was, I think,
to a lot of people, incongruous to see Australia represented
at breaking, which, you know, breaking b boying, b girling breakdancing.
It's one of the four pillars of hip hop. You know,
it has its genesis in black communities in America in

(10:46):
the 70s and in the 80s, and in Australia. Like
most people, when you think about B-Boys and B-girls, you
think about the Filipino Korean kids out in public places
in the city just absolutely carving it up. And then
all of a sudden it's this academic from Macquarie Uni, this,
this 36 year old white lady who looks like she's
taking the piss in terms of her outfit. And the

(11:07):
moves are not good. So it's like, okay, hang on,
what happened here? And that's led to all these rumours.
You know, there's these weird things going around on social media.
There's this petition that's got thousands and thousands of signatories,
suggestions that her husband was a judge, and he's the
one who kind of snuck her in. I think the
short version of this essentially is like, yes, there's a
lot of B-Boys and B-girls in Australia who just participate

(11:30):
in the sport socially and casually. This sport gets picked
quite late in the piece to be a new part
of the Paris Olympics. The community here scrambles to create
some sort of framework and structure to decide who is
selected to go to Paris. There's a handful of volunteers
who put their hands up. They create this process. It's
not ideal. It's not perfect. There's this one event in

(11:52):
Sydney that's the best chance to send someone along. That
obviously skews it to who knows about this process, who's
got the resources to get to Sydney and spend a
weekend there? It potentially excludes a whole bunch of people
from Western Sydney, like you pointed out, Meg, and from
all different parts of Australia who couldn't participate. And so yeah,
there's not a conspiracy. It's just a sport that's in

(12:12):
its professional infancy. That led to something that looked quite jarring.
And I think it has ultimately it's kind of unfair.
Like I've been at the centre of some social media pylons. Thomas,
we've discussed your recent forays in that in that world
as well. Being the subject of global ridicule is something

(12:32):
like quite intense. And I don't think it doesn't matter
how bad an athlete is. I don't think anyone really
deserves that. I think it's also true that it looked
like a lot of Australian athletes crashed out at this
Olympic Games. You know, like Rohan Browning, who's apparently the
fastest man in Australia, he finished sixth in his heat
for the Olympics. Like it wasn't a great run, but
he just ran slightly less fast than everyone else. So

(12:54):
no one kind of pointed at him and said, you suck.
You're a bad athlete when you're dancing and dancing. It
already is this kind of subjective thing, and you look
a bit weird. You're going to get piled on more
in a way. So I think all of that is
like very unfair and I feel a bit sad about
what happened to her, but I also feel a bit
I'm also a part of me that's like, you know,
even though this sport is in its infancy and there

(13:14):
wasn't a good enough process or a lot of resources
to get them there, it did feel like, depressingly Australian,
that breaking when these other countries managed to find ways
to send really good and interesting and diverse competitors, we
just kind of didn't bother engaging with it to that extent,
and it felt like a missed opportunity in terms of
what Australia can offer in these things. And like you said, Meg,

(13:36):
we've done so well in the Olympics up until then,
we had this great reputation. Everyone was like, how cool
is Australia? There I became the most nationalistic I have
been for, you know, three years since the Tokyo Games.
And then it's like, oh cool, a daggy Australian in a,
you know, looks like a P.E. teachers uniform, seemingly taking
the piss out of hip hop, hip hop culture. I
didn't really appreciate that. And I will go as far

(13:57):
as to say, as an Australian, I felt let down
that this is the best that we could offer the
world stage.

S3 (14:04):
Oh God, I can hear the Daily Mail headlines now.
Yeah it is, it is weird. And she, you know,
she kind of has said quite openly that she I
think new again because of her like performance at the
World championships in Belgium where all of the Australian dancers,
I think came last. Um, she knew that she wasn't
going to be as technically proficient as the other dancers.
And so her kind of angle was to go like

(14:25):
for originality. And that's why some of her moves were so,
you know, out there and stuff. And again, I do
see why people are like, well, fuck, come on. Like,
you can't really like go all the way to the
Olympics and then just like, take a gamble on doing
something absolutely wacky and hope that that maybe pays off.
So yeah, it's very weird that this has become the
enormous talking point that it has. And I guess this

(14:46):
is the beauty of the Olympics. But yeah, I still think, um,
just like for whoever cares or what it's worth, the
goat of the Olympics is the Turkish shooting man.

S1 (14:55):
Yeah, a lot of people have compared Rachel Gun to
like Eric the Eel. Do you remember him from Sydney
Olympics 2000, where he finished last and was the first
time he'd actually swum that far? Because the country he
comes from didn't have pools. And I actually find that
to be a ridiculous comparison. Like, this guy went up
against all the odds to make it to the Olympics
and came from a very poor part of the world,

(15:16):
and struggled and managed to do it. And like that,
that sort of narrative of overcoming all adversity and and
making a name for yourself, that's the magic of the Olympics.
I don't know if Rachel Gun it falls into that
kind of like going to the Olympics with a lot
of structural support. And tanking is not an Eric the
Eel situation.

S2 (15:36):
I think she's a bit more of our Steven Bradbury.

S4 (15:40):
At least he won a medal.

S2 (15:41):
No, but you know what I mean. Like, that's a
celebration of Australian mediocrity. It was a guy who was
losing and just happened to chance it. And, you know,
Reagan happened to chance her way into the Olympics. And
you kind of have to root for that underdog or
you feel bad for them. And like, obviously it's not
the same because she didn't win. But I mean, to
avoid a pile on and ruining this woman's life, you're

(16:03):
left with little else to do other than, like, support her. Yeah.
Once it's done.

S1 (16:07):
Yeah. I want to turn this into a cultural studies PhD. Like.
Like Rachel Gunn has.

S3 (16:14):
I think the real winner at the end of the
day is obviously the next season of dancing with the stars. Yeah.
She will be the first person cast. And to be honest,
Kevin could probably use the win. It's been a big week.

S4 (16:23):
She will have.

S2 (16:23):
A long career on Australian TV.

S1 (16:26):
Well, I the what I was going to say and
you know, maybe this is straying too far into like
just social theory territory. I always find it interesting which
celebrities or athletes mainstream Australia is very quick to like,
feel sympathy for and try to redeem and which ones
they continue to take down. I mean, you don't have
to get into the specifics of this, but like Latrell

(16:47):
Mitchell's like back in the news. This is an athlete
who is like actually extremely good, but, you know, is
also a vocal, proud black man. And the opportunities and
the second chances afforded to him by the powers that
be seem like quite in contrast to kind of mediocre,
well-meaning like white athletes. I think that's just a part
of the way that Australian society has functioned and continues

(17:10):
to function. Again, I don't want to use Rachel Gunn
as an example of everything wrong with, you know, the
discussion around tall poppy syndrome in Australia. But I think
it is interesting the way that the fault lines have emerged. Like,
who is upset with her and who is willing to
just say she just gave it a go? She's a
nice lady. Let's leave her alone. But I reckon we
probably leave the Reagan conversation there.

S2 (17:32):
I did see a friend of mine said, and I'm
sure a lot of people have said the same as
succulent Chinese meal man has fallen, a new hero must
rise in Australian meme culture.

S3 (17:43):
Exactly. The cycle just continues.

S1 (17:44):
It does feel like this will be one thing that
we do talk about in like 20 or 30 years,
and I like that. I think it's nice to have
monoculture again for that reason, because she's going.

S2 (17:52):
To write an incredible paper about this.

S1 (17:56):
A couple of other quick bits of news before we
get into the main focus of today's app. Do you
guys see the trailer for the new movie Saturday Night?

S5 (18:06):
NBC makes more money playing reruns of The Tonight Show.
NBC is lucky to have something as relevant as this show.
They don't even want it. That's logical. That's why they're
paying us all to be here. I mean, 90 minutes
of live television by a group of 20 year olds
who have never made anything. Do you ever stop and
wonder why they said yes? A counterculture show starring total
unknowns with zero narrative and even less structure. What the fuck?

(18:34):
They want you to fail.

S6 (18:38):
We just have to make it to air.

S7 (18:44):
Am I still in the show?

S3 (18:45):
I am very hyped for this. Um, I, I feel
like Saturday Night Live was a big thing in my house.
My dad's like a big SNL guy. He's got all
the books. I kind of felt like I lived through
a lot of iterations of it through him. So I'm
really excited about this. And also I think, like, I
don't know, Nicholas Braun as Jim Henson could be like
one of the great casting choices. The whole thing just
looks like I'm down.

S1 (19:06):
He's having fun in the trailer so, so quickly. This
is a movie by Jason Reitman. It's based on the
real life events leading up to the night of the
first episode of Saturday Night Live. It's got a stacked cast.
Finn Wolfhard, Nicholas Braun, you mentioned Gabriel LaBelle from the
Steven Spielberg movie The Fabelmans, Rachel Sennott, Cory Michael Smith,

(19:28):
Cooper Hoffman, Kaia Gerber, Willem Dafoe, Matthew Rhys, J.K. Simmons
John Bettis is crazy. Um, what did you think of
the trailer?

S2 (19:36):
I think it's really interesting, the drama in that trailer.
It was like they were landing a man on the moon.
And even I saw John Mulaney recently roasting John Mulaney,
who was a longtime SNL writer, and star roasting it
on Seth Meyers. Also, SNL alum just saying, like, wow,
I didn't know it was that dramatic, guys.

S1 (19:56):
Yeah. The, um, the Mulaney bit was very, very funny.
Even like the poster for the film is so funny,
it says the writers are inebriated, the set is on fire,
the sound system is wrecked, the actors are physically assaulting
each other. The crew is in open revolt. They have
90 minutes to figure it all out. Will they do it?
It's like, well, we know they didn't like Lorne Michaels,

(20:16):
like the most successful TV producer in history.

S2 (20:18):
I mean, I'm I'm invested in the drama. And I think,
you know, us and everyone who listens to this podcast
probably feels the same, even if you don't love SNL
and specifically in its current iteration, which is not the
height of what it has been. It's this incredible institution.
So much pop culture stuff to dive into there. Well,
normal people go into the cinema. Care? I don't.

S4 (20:37):
Know. Yeah. If you're not in the bag.

S1 (20:38):
For SNL, why do you care about this.

S4 (20:40):
Movie?

S3 (20:40):
Yeah. It's weird. Also, I feel like that blurb could
just apply to most TV shows. It could apply to
this podcast. The crew is in open revolt.

S4 (20:47):
Who's the.

S2 (20:48):
Who's the Chevy Chase of this.

S4 (20:49):
Podcast?

S3 (20:50):
But yeah, I do. I do wonder how niche it
is like. And also especially it's such a like, you know,
American product. Like do people in are people in the
UK going to go and watch a movie about like
Saturday Night Live or many people in Australia would care
enough to go and see it? But yeah, I guess
we'll see.

S2 (21:05):
I think it could have an incredible press run at least. Yeah. Yeah, totally.
Because they've done so much research and like the film
itself is modeled together from all these interviews with so much,
so many past cast and crew. And that's really interesting.
There's so much to dive into there, plus the people involved.
I mean, why is Nicholas Braun playing two people in this?

S4 (21:23):
It's so weird.

S2 (21:23):
And he's playing Andy Kaufman, which is like a historically very,
you know, difficult role.

S4 (21:27):
Yeah. Yeah.

S2 (21:28):
As well as Jim Henson. I mean, I you know,
I love the guy, but what's what's up?

S1 (21:32):
I think the sheer amount of star power will get
people in. People will just be like, I kind of
know that guy. I want to see him do something. Um,
the other bit of film news that caught my attention make, like,
a long time ago. Maybe like ten years ago or more.
You told me about a movie that I should watch.
And it had that movie had a sequel that you
told me I should watch. And I ended up watching

(21:54):
those two movies, and they probably had two of my
top ten favorite movies ever made.

S4 (21:57):
They changed your life. You changed my.

S1 (21:58):
Life. You changed my life. They are Mamma mia! And
Mamma mia! Here we go again.

S4 (22:02):
Let's go.

S1 (22:04):
There was, um. There was an interview. Christine Baranski, who is,
I guess, like a sort of secondary cast member of
those films, did with The Hollywood Reporter. Uh, and she
was asked about the possibility of Mamma mia! Three, and
she said, very excitingly, that she had lunch with, uh,
Judy Craymer, one of the producers of those films, and
she said that she's working on it. She's come up

(22:26):
with a plot and that she's keen to make it happen.
My favorite quote from this interview, though, was, uh, you know,
she's talking about how this is the kind of movie
we need to get people in the theaters. She said,
it's the kind of movie that makes people happy, witnessing
how much people are showing up for these Democratic campaign rallies.
Now there's a lot of smiles and a lot of laughter.
People are drawn to happiness and joy. Mamma mia made

(22:49):
so many millions of people around the world happy. So
I don't know if she's like, linking the future of
this franchise to the political fortunes of Kamala Harris. But regardless, like,
I'm excited if this comes back. I love how.

S3 (22:59):
It's like we've come up with a plot like, I
bet you maybe it'll be in Greece. Like maybe something
will happen in Greece for Mamma mia! But yeah, I
will obviously go and see it. I mean, I love
any movie set in Greece and they make three boys,
so why? I mean, if they can make three wog
boys and you know that I love Nick Giannopoulos, you know,
as if he's one of those. That's a great point.

S1 (23:19):
We can't we can't have the Wog Boy being, like,
the longest running franchise set in the Greek islands.

S4 (23:24):
No way.

S3 (23:24):
Man. No, that's a crime against cinema. So, yeah, I
reckon I'm giving it my green light anyway.

S2 (23:29):
What? What's your take on the Mamma mia franchise, Thomas?

S3 (23:32):
I love Mamma mia! I'm also like, yeah, it's got
everything you need. It's got, like, happy music, famous people
in it, the Greek islands. Like, there's no way you
go and watch those films and have a bad time.

S1 (23:42):
I might have already said this on the podcast before,
but when I watch Mamma mia! Here We Go Again,
I was struck by how the narrative structure is one
for one for The Godfather two. Like it's exactly the
same thing. And that is a sequel, but also a
prequel through flashbacks, and you learn more about what made
the characters act in certain ways and shaped them. And
I thought I was going crazy. And then I read

(24:02):
an interview with the director, and he was like, my
daughter watched The Godfather two and she was like, hey,
you should make Mamma mia two, but you should make
it like The Godfather, where it's a prequel and a sequel.
So it's a very deliberate choice there.

S2 (24:15):
That's very interesting. But on behalf of all women, I'm
not going to let you hijack the Mamma mia discussion
to talk about The Godfather. That's not in the spirit
of this film.

S1 (24:23):
Oh, that's very That's very funny. Um. All right, guys.
Got a question for you. How familiar are each of
you with the works of one Colleen Hoover?

S2 (24:34):
I have heard of her.

S4 (24:35):
Okay.

S2 (24:36):
I have been to airports.

S3 (24:39):
Yes, I, too have been to airports, but I am.
I am across Colleen Hoover. I have young nieces who, uh,
get very swept up in the booktok movement, I suppose. Um, and,
you know, any opportunity to mention that I once wrote
a book, but at the at the time that my
book was published, which was 20, 21, Booktok was really
blowing up. And my publishers kept saying to me, like,

(25:00):
have you seen Colleen Hoover on Booktok? Like, you should
really try and, like, start a TikTok account and do
some book talking. And so I think if you were
to go and scour the internet, there is like a
book talk that I started in like mid 2021. Me
talking shit about me anyway. I didn't become Colleen Hoover.

S1 (25:14):
I'm absolutely going to scour the internet to find that,
my friend. That's what I'm doing immediately after this podcast recording.

S3 (25:20):
Yes. But yeah, I I'm across her and she did
very well. It turns out.

S4 (25:24):
She did very well.

S2 (25:25):
Very well for a self-published author at the start, for sure.

S1 (25:28):
Yeah. So she started writing in 2011 and self-published her
first few books. I got kind of really good reviews
on different independent blogs and things like that. But her
biggest selling book, It Ends With Us, which has sold
nearly 7 million copies around, which is just, you know,
for context, an insane amount of books like people don't
sell that many books. I think in a couple of
years it outsold the Bible, which is, you know, famously,

(25:50):
like the most selling book every year that was released
in 2016. But it had this big boost in 2021
during the pandemic when everyone was on book talk. It
Ends With Us is a romance novel. It's loosely inspired
by the abusive relationship between her mother and father. And
if you think those two things sound like odd together,
they are definitely. And it's going to be a big

(26:13):
part of our conversation around the film adaptation. Uh, the
movie is extremely successful. It's number two at the box
office behind Deadpool and Wolverine, which gives us a sort
of weird Blake Lively Ryan Reynolds synergy. I think if
you said ten years ago that those two would be
the leads in the biggest two movies at the global

(26:35):
box office, that would feel a bit weird. Anyway, it
stars Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni, who's also the director
of the film, also stars Jenny Slate and Hasan Minhaj
in supporting roles. Lively's character, Lily Blossom Bloom, is a florist.
The names the names in this movie are crazy. Um.

(26:57):
She is a florist. Strikes up a relationship with Rail Kincaid, uh,
who's played by Justin Baldoni. Uh, most of the film
plays out kind of a straightforward romance story. They go
on dates, there's some fun montages, they move in together.
She works with Ryan's sister, who's played by slate. The
sister becomes her best friend. They work together in this florist.

(27:18):
It's all kind of, like, nice and romantic. And while
that story is developing, we also get flashbacks to younger Lily,
who befriends a homeless boy named Atlas. They become close.
They end up sleeping together. As the movie progresses, we
end up getting some pretty heavy revelations. Turns out Lily's

(27:40):
dad was physically abusive to both her mother and to
her friend. The young Atlas. We also learn that Ryle
has actually been physically abusive to Lily multiple times, something
the film kind of avoids showing until quite late on.
We think it's just like a nice, beautiful relationship, but
it turns out that no, the movie's hidden from us.

(28:02):
Some pretty intense things that have been going on between them,
and that's the main tension point of the movie. Lily
grapples with what to do with her relationship and her life.
This this was a very unusual movie. I was not familiar.
I mean, I was familiar with the source material but
hadn't read it. At times it felt like a rom com,
particularly the early bits of their relationship, particularly every time

(28:24):
Jenny Slate and Hasan Minhaj are in the movie. I mean,
they're comedians, so you wouldn't cast them if you weren't
trying to make it sort of funny and comedic. But
then there is this really abrupt and unsettling tonal shift
when the film starts to become about abuse and domestic
violence and you know what to do about that. I
kind of thought it was unclear what the movie's message

(28:46):
was about, some of those bigger themes, so much to
talk about in terms of the movie itself, the performances,
all of the drama that has been playing out during
the press tour. But kind of maybe it's a starting point.
Simple question. Meg, what did you make of it? Ends
with us.

S2 (29:02):
Yeah, it's a it's a strange film. I think it, um,
your perception of it probably depends on how you walk
in and what information, you know. I think even saying
that plot summary, you know, that's going to give people
a different impression if you didn't know there's anything about
domestic violence in this film, which arguably a lot of
the marketing doesn't want you to know.

S1 (29:21):
Yeah, the trailers do not suggest anything of that kind.

S2 (29:23):
No. In fact, one of the trailers quotes a tweet
that says, bring your bring your girlfriends, wear your florals,
make it a girl's night out, which is deeply upsetting. Um,
but so, I mean, I went in with low expectations,
I think. I've not read the book, but I know
the book's kind of notorious for being quite poorly written. Um,

(29:45):
as popular as it is, I think that popularity comes
from the shock and melodrama of it. I mean, the
TikToks you talk about were all like Gen Z women
kind of crying as they were blindsided by those violent twists. Um,
so I went in with very low expectations. I thought
it was kind of an upgraded life lifetime movie type thing,
and I really found it that way for half of

(30:07):
the film, two thirds of the film, really cringeworthy dialogue,
the romance it sets up. I mean, as a romcom,
it Fails. It's not funny. There's no real tension or
stakes other than will she or will she not go
on a date with a hot neurosurgeon? Um, and so

(30:27):
I was it was very cringeworthy. I didn't enjoy those
parts of the film. But then I think I found
the last third of the movie surprisingly more compelling than
I thought I would. Not so much that it redeems
the entire movie for me. I wouldn't say it is
great cinema, but I think it's very interesting in what

(30:48):
it's doing. And, you know, there are there are worse
stories out there. I think there were people crying in
the cinema behind us.

S1 (30:55):
Yeah, our cinema was full of younger women sobbing. I,
I found that quite perplexing. I was not at all
emotionally invested in the stakes of this.

S2 (31:05):
I think in those moments I was I think the
way that it does some of those violent sequences was
surprisingly Bracing. And I think Blake Lively, who I don't
like as an actress, was really great in those moments.
And the questions it raises and the dynamic it presents

(31:26):
is compelling for a lot of women to think about,
I think. And I think those women who were crying
were probably having pretty compelling discussions afterwards as well.

S1 (31:35):
I couldn't disagree more with most of what you said,
but I want to get Thomas's take on, on on
the movie. What did you think about this one? Yeah.

S3 (31:43):
Once again, good to have Osborne and I leading the
discussion on this.

S4 (31:46):
Um.

S3 (31:47):
Yeah, I think I watched it alone in a cinema,
which just felt like such an odd thing to do
for me to be just heading off to see it
ends with us. But, like, I think it's really tricky
because there's so much, like, emotional buy in with this
movie that people have before you even walk into the cinema,
because like, really, everyone knows this story. I mean, we're

(32:10):
probably in the minority in that the three of us
saw the movie and haven't read the book. Like I
would say, many of the cinema girls will have been
massive Hoover heads and were fully, I mean, like part
of this story since 2021, you know, and so like,
I don't know if they care what the movie's like.
And I get the feeling that the people making the
movie didn't really care either. That's kind of how I

(32:31):
felt watching it. Like they as far as I can tell,
there are a couple of changes from the book, but
it's a pretty faithful adaptation. But I thought, yeah, it
was like it did really feel like a lifetime movie.
And then at the very end, like, you know, this
dark stuff happens. And I wasn't sure if it was
supposed to, you know, like, leave us with a message
about anything, really.

S2 (32:50):
I mean, I think there's different ways to watch it.
I think if there's a message, it's dismantling some of
the ideas about domestic violence and relationships. I think there's
often this idea that men who hurt their partners are
kind of like, there's this thing of the monster myth.
It's this, you know, big bad guy who's going to

(33:11):
come out of nowhere and smack you. And he's all
evil all the time. And I think this film does
a good job of showing that's not the case. You know,
hot neurosurgeons can also have massive anger problems and hit
their partners. And those relationships can have days and times
which are very good. And sometimes people stay in those
relationships because they cling on to those good times, or
they're gaslit into thinking the bad times were an accident

(33:34):
or weren't what they thought it was, or a mistake.
That won't happen again. And I think it did show
that in a compelling way. And I think the idea
of whether to leave, whether you should leave, whether you're
seeing a situation in the reality that you should was
done quite well. And even with the knowledge of how
the movie was going to turn, because, you know, it's

(33:55):
got this violent edge towards it, you can watch those
kind of more lifetime movie parts of it picking up
the little red flags in a way. And if anything,
that was the tension of the earlier parts. You know,
you see him in the very first time you see him.
He's like thrashing, kicking a chair. There's these violent tendencies
unearthed early on in the way that they're flirting. There's

(34:15):
like line crossing as well. It's like at one certain
point she wants to stop doing things and he kind
of like Flirtatiously pushes on. Those are red flags. And like,
watching those sequences as a women, as a woman can
have a more insidious response, I suppose. So even if
it's kind of boring, it's an experience of getting inside

(34:39):
a relationship like that. Um, I don't think it nails
like as a public service announcement, as a public campaign.
It's not incredible, but as a talking point about domestic
violence and how it actually plays out in real life,
I think it's interesting and worthwhile. I think like the
end is also something we can talk about, the way
it kind of almost redeems him a little bit by

(34:59):
giving him motivation almost to why he has these angry,
angry responses. He's got this childhood trauma he's kind of
responding to in one way, you know, that shows that
these feelings of anger and frustration come from somewhere and
can be worked on by men, which is important. But
in another it gives you a bit of an out
as well. Um, yeah, I don't know. I think there's

(35:21):
a point, but I think it's not clear.

S1 (35:23):
I think that that what you just said then that
there is maybe a point it's not clear and maybe
the end contradicts some of what it's trying to say.
I think that's that's a fair that's kind of more
close to how I feel. And I guess I don't
I don't really disagree with a lot of what you
said there, but I think it's maybe more generous. And
I think someone with your knowledge, experience, engagement with culture

(35:46):
and conversations around this, you can fill in some of
the blanks around, you know, oh, is the film trying
to suggest that she should have recognized that he's abusive
because he kicked the chair and stuff? I'm not as
convinced that one. That is what they're trying to do
in this movie. And we'll talk about who directs it.
And two audiences will walk away with a clear sense of, okay,
this is what bad behavior looks like. This is what

(36:08):
a healthy relationship should look like. I think the part
of the problem with the way that this film tries
to engage with very like, firstly, no one is forcing
anyone to make a movie about this stuff, right? Like,
they've chosen to make a film about domestic violence, generational
trauma in multiple different contexts. There's multiple different experiences and

(36:29):
representations of it. And I think if you're going to
do that, you have to think very clearly about what
are you trying to say about this? What are you representing?
What are the risks around this? And I'm not convinced
they have thought through that. And I think part of
the problem with it is this book was written in 2016,
before Harvey Weinstein was exposed, before the kind of MeToo

(36:50):
movement which then ushered in a wave of generally like
a lot of really interesting and good movies that go
to what you were saying. Explain that, you know, this
myth of the monster is not really how this stuff
always manifests. And you know what leads people to do
certain things, but also the reasons why some victims feel
compelled to stay, and just all the kind of complexities

(37:10):
and nuances around that. It just doesn't feel like this
movie is in dialogue with any of that stuff. It's
just telling this story from 2016 that was not really
well written, that was criticized at the time for not
engaging with things. And if like, I agree with you that,
you know, it shows that a hot neurosurgeon can also
be abusive, but I'm not convinced that's a problem that

(37:33):
needed to be solved. Like, I'm not I'm not convinced
that most people now are still in that mindset. And
I think even when it does show that, I still
find it kind of confusing because I think throughout most
of the movie, even if Baldoni's character, Raoul Kincaid, is
shown to be a little bit boundary pushing, he's still
ultimately shown as being kind of a loving boyfriend. Like,

(37:55):
that's why the reveal is so dramatic, right? Because you're
led to believe that this is a pretty happy and
good and positive relationship. And then, oh my god, turns
out he's quite bad and you live in that space
for a short period of time. And at very quickly
after that you realize, oh, he's bad because something bad
happened to him as a kid, and now he's just
trying his best to overcome it. And none of that
feels like the reality of this stuff. Like, it almost

(38:18):
feels like that undermines what you were suggesting the movie
is trying to do, which is explain that all sorts
of people can do bad things, and we have to
understand that not this guy is perfect. But if it
wasn't for this thing that happened to him as a kid,
he wouldn't have these anger issues and beat up his wife.
And now he's going to figure it out, and now
he's going to end up being kind of redeemed by
the end of it, I would say.

S2 (38:39):
Yeah, I do think the movie has a structural issue. Like,
I agree with you that in a perfect world, for
both the movie's sake and kind of social context sake,
it would be good to have shown that relationship more
in the bad times, and to see what it's like
to be stuck in a relationship like that, and kind
of even if she's second guessing herself and enjoys some
of it, more of that kind of being trapped feeling,

(38:59):
because that is the reality for most of it, that
that honeymoon period is very short, but in the movie
it's very long. Mhm. Um, and then also I've heard
a lot of criticism about how it doesn't show how
difficult it is to leave.

S4 (39:10):
Well yeah. I mean you.

S1 (39:10):
Don't see that at all.

S2 (39:11):
You don't see that at all.

S1 (39:11):
See her in a very horrific situation and then she's
just out.

S4 (39:14):
Yeah.

S2 (39:15):
Yes. And it's because the characters are so thin as well.
I mean, like, who is this woman and where does
she get all her money? She's got this flower business
of dying flowers.

S1 (39:25):
I looked this up because Meg and I watched this
movie together, and we were whispering to each other, like,
what is she selling here? Apparently, in the book, it's
a steampunk florist. Yeah.

S3 (39:35):
Yeah. Yeah, I think, like, I mean, they're all very
good points. I just think, like. And I believe this
was some of the criticism like, initially aimed at the book.
It's like everything that it's trying to do and you know,
it is definitely a talking point that people need to
discuss that, you know, like what? What? Perhaps, maybe the
stereotypical idea of like, a violent relationship is not what

(39:56):
most of them look like. And that's important that we all,
you know, like discuss and know that. But it always
felt like the, the as far as I'm aware. Anyway,
some of the criticisms of the book is that it
was trading in like the rom com territory and really
trading off of that in order to like, leverage its popularity.
But then at the same time, it's like, but it
kind of like shoehorns in these other issues. It's like,
you know, you're trying to have your cake and eat

(40:17):
it too. And I felt the movie did that. It's
not that, you know, the moments where they showed how,
you know, kind of like confusing or murky those relationships
can be that was done pretty well. But then like,
and again, this is where I think I struggled to divorce.
What I know about the marketing of the film and
everything I'm like, it left a kind of weird taste
in my mouth. The press tour has kind of like
lined up with the Deadpool thing, and we've got like

(40:38):
a barbenheimer thing, and it's like it just doesn't feel
like tonally they've paid respect, I guess, to the issues
they're trying to tell us that they want to really
seriously address. And so it all just made me feel
a bit funny. And then at the same time, yeah,
like I appreciate they do have to show the bits
of the relationship that are nice, but it still felt
it was like trying to sell a rom com and

(41:00):
then also get buy in from people who like, want
to talk about and think about these serious issues.

S1 (41:05):
Yeah, like, why are Hasan Minhaj and Jenny Slate in
this movie?

S2 (41:07):
I think it's to create some fun because otherwise it's
just awful. Right. It's like very hokey, cringe worthy romance
and then straight up trauma. Like, you've got to have
something else in the mix. Um, but yeah, I mean,
it's telling that even after the book people, these young
readers were describing themselves as like Team Atlas or Team Rachel. Like,
that's very upsetting. And it's proof that the story is

(41:28):
not done well enough because you should not be.

S4 (41:31):
Team domestic.

S2 (41:32):
Abuser.

S4 (41:32):
Totally. Totally.

S3 (41:33):
Exactly. Like, there are so many Reddit threads that are like,
I read one yesterday that's like, hey, like, didn't want
to admit this, but I actually kind of am Team
Rachel and I'm like, what the fuck? Like this. But
that's because I feel like the book and the film consciously, like,
buy into this, like Stan, you know, kind of culture
that we have in order to get buy in from them.
But then they also want the serious side. And it's
just and like, you know, this will probably get I'm

(41:54):
sure if we end up on TikTok with this, there'll
be a million teenagers disappointed with me again. But like
Colleen Hoover probably isn't the good enough writer to have
done this. But she struck gold and then continued to
strike gold. And then now we're all kind of here
talking about it.

S1 (42:06):
I think there's a wider context as well. Like, you know,
this this book lives in the shadow of 50 Shades
of Grey with the kind of romance books that that
have certain dynamics around, uh, you know, dominant, more aggressive,
controlling men. Those books have been criticized as well. But
I guess there's a difference between those kinds of dynamics
within a BDSM context and conversation and consent and whatever

(42:31):
this book and film are kind of modeling those domineering,
aggressive and violent things without any like of that framework
around it, which feels like watered down from something that
is already pretty, not great. And then by the time
it filters down to regular viewers, they're on Reddit being like,
I actually thought Raoul was pretty hot. It's pretty cool when,

(42:51):
you know, a guy just takes control in the bedroom.
That's pretty fun, right? I mean, the.

S2 (42:54):
Film does end in a place where, you know, are
we doing full spoilers?

S1 (43:00):
I think I think at this stage. Fair enough.

S4 (43:02):
Yeah.

S2 (43:03):
The film ends in a place where she. The inspiring
thing is she does make a choice for herself. I mean,
it shouldn't be a shock with a name like it
ends with us. That's about domestic violence. Like she. The
inspiring thing for women watching the film is making the
decision to leave and actually standing by it. Even if
there are these reasons. Maybe he's got childhood trauma, maybe
he has issues. It doesn't matter because it's your life,

(43:23):
and what you deserve matters. It does get there. There's there's,
you know, there's a fudgy stuff around the sides, but
it gets there. So does that matter for anything?

S1 (43:33):
Well, I was going to say, I think maybe the
elephant in the room around the conversation. And I think
this helps pivot to the wider context because, as Thomas said,
the movie's ultimately a vehicle for the Blake and Ryan
show more than it is a vehicle to really, seriously
discuss and grapple with these ideas. The elephant in the
room is that the bad guy, quote unquote. Ryle is
the director of the movie, and I do wonder if

(43:56):
the movie would look and be paced and structured differently,
or just the way certain things are shot and the
perspectives were shown would be different if the director wasn't
the guy who was ultimately the abusive one. And I
think that's maybe why so much of the movie does
show him just being a handsome, charming hunk.

S2 (44:14):
I'm not so sure about that, because then also, he's
the guy in the press tour who's actually doing the
domestic violence campaigning like he's the only one talking about
the issue. And everyone else is kind of talking about
the rom com. So, you.

S4 (44:26):
Know, yeah, it's a good.

S2 (44:27):
Point. He's the guy who came up with the framework
for the film, and I have to assume that comes
from somewhere. Like, you think that just because he's in
the main character role, he wants to launch himself as
a Hollywood hunk?

S1 (44:37):
I don't know if it's as straightforward as that. So
Blake Lively is a producer of this movie. I think
having a star as the producer. The other star as
the director, there clearly being some tension that has led
to neither of them talking to each other. Blake and
most of the other cast, I think everyone except Hasan
Minhaj has unfollowed Justin Baldoni. They're not doing this press
tour together. Something clearly happened. There are suggestions that Blake

(45:01):
got a friend of Ryan's to do a re-edit of
the movie. I don't know if that's actually the edit
that was released or not, but it is worth pointing
out that Blake Lively or the young version of a
character is in every single scene of this film. There
is no scene of this film where you see Rachel
dealing with anything, Atlas dealing with anything that doesn't revolve around.

S4 (45:22):
That's actually crazy, isn't it?

S1 (45:23):
It's bizarre. It's bizarre. So yeah, I wonder whether maybe
actually we're both maybe right here in a way that
like he's shooting it in a certain way. Maybe he
wants to grapple with these ideas, but he ultimately doesn't
want to come across as a super evil guy. But
then at the same time, Blake's like, no, no, no,
this movie needs to be about me. Her and Ryan
allegedly buddy up to Colleen Hoover and the distributor Sony

(45:44):
and like, take control and Final Cut. And what we're
left with is a really confusing and strange film like
that is potentially what's happened here. Or maybe he saw
the final cut of the movie and was like, this
is dogshit. I don't want anything to do. I'm not
coming to the premiere. I'm not doing anything. But it's
been a crazy drama, right?

S3 (46:00):
Yeah. It's bizarre. Like, I mean, it's already obviously had
comparisons to the whole don't worry, darling thing. It is
very odd, though, to, like, have a press tour for
an enormous movie. It's like number two at the box
office and not have the two leads who are, you know, like,
this relationship is so key to the entire message of
the film, just not together. He's also the director of
the movie. She's only doing press with other members of

(46:21):
the cast. He's doing press completely alone. And it's just like,
it's almost I mean, they're very cynical. Part of me
was like, is this some kind of plant? Like, are
we being played here? So we do, you know, people
like us sit here and talk about it. But I
do find it very odd, like even just to come
out with a statement, maybe like to say like, hey, look,
we had some creative differences, but, you know, we're all
in support of the movie and we hope you enjoy it.
Like Hashtag Blooms by Lily or whatever. It just seems

(46:46):
really strange. And, you know, there are obviously so many
different stories. The one that I was like have kind
of seen the most is that they both she did
a cut or she actually got someone from Deadpool versus
Wolverine to do a cut, which is crazy because that
movie is possibly even worse than this one. But then
and then he did a cut and Sony preferred his,
but Colleen Hoover preferred hers. So there's like so many
weird things going on. And like, you know, I think

(47:08):
to most normal people out of the maybe like media,
social media bubble, that thing of like, oh my God,
they all unfollowed him on Instagram seems like probably meaningless
and ridiculous, but like that means something in this day
and age. So clearly he is on the outer of
this like clique. And the funny thing is, there is
a sequel book which is inevitably going to be made
into a sequel film. And like, I would not be
surprised if he was recast. I feel like basically my

(47:30):
social media feed and the internet has been dominated by
Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds the last month. It's been
very strange to live in, um, like, there's so much
cross-promotional with these two movies that have nothing to do
with each other, aside from the fact that their leads
are married. And the whole time I've just felt this
a bit jarring.

S1 (47:46):
Well, there's even like, Blake did a thing on the
red carpet where she just chucked out. Oh, by the way,
Ryan wrote this scene and this balcony scene. I saw
that clip before I watched the movie, and I was like, oh,
there's like this romantic, funny scene on the balcony. The
balcony scene wasn't that good.

S4 (48:03):
It's so bad.

S1 (48:03):
It's so bad. So I don't, but I don't know
if that was her sort of trying to just like,
ensure that there were headlines about her and Ryan to,
you know, force that barbenheimer narrative that you mentioned Thomas
or whether she was trying to suggest, actually, me and
Ryan were the creative forces on set here. We were
doing rewrites. It's not Justin Baldoni's film.

S2 (48:21):
I also saw the screenwriter respond to that. She was like,
that's the first I've heard of that.

S1 (48:27):
Um, yeah. There is a, um, there is a sequel
book and it does feature all the same characters, so
it'll be interesting to see who returns. I was reading
the Wikipedia summary of it yesterday. Uh, it's seemingly more
unhinged than this film. There's a weird bit where, um, uh,
Baldoni's character, Ryan Kincaid is watching Finding Nemo, and he

(48:50):
has never seen Finding Nemo before, and he discovers his
character called Dory, and that is the middle name of
the child he and Blake Lively's character have, and then
he goes through her diaries and discovers that she watched
it for the first time with Atlas, and he has
a meltdown.

S2 (49:05):
Well, are you two aware that the majority of the
book takes place as essentially diary entries to Ellen DeGeneres?

S4 (49:11):
Are you joking?

S3 (49:13):
I only learned that yesterday.

S1 (49:15):
That's why Ellen was in the movie. There's a scene
where she's watching Ellen.

S4 (49:19):
Yeah.

S2 (49:20):
And I assume why Dory is important to her.

S4 (49:22):
Is this. Oh, because Ellen's dory. Yes. This book is
sold more than a million.

S2 (49:29):
Copies, you.

S4 (49:30):
Know.

S3 (49:31):
Do you reckon the next. The next movie will be
announced and they'll just recast, riles. But it'll be Hugh
Jackman just so they can all three of them hang
out forever. Annoying.

S2 (49:39):
I mean, honestly, could it be Ryan Reynolds?

S4 (49:41):
Yeah.

S1 (49:42):
Jeez. Well, look. Weird movie. Extremely popular. Is is doing very,
very well. A lot of people will watch it. Really
glad we talked about it and had that kind of conversation.

(50:03):
The other thing that we wanted to discuss on the
podcast this week is the return of one of my
favorite shows, Thomas. I think it's become one of your
favorite shows as well. Meg I believe it's a show
you've seen one episode of since I Ambushed You, with
the fact that we were going to talk about it.

S2 (50:18):
Correct. I watched one episode last night, so I'm ready
to go.

S1 (50:22):
Um, it is industry HBO show. It airs on Binge
in Australia. It comes out Monday every week. Season three
premiered this week. Thomas, do you want to do you
want to give us a bit of a rundown of industry?
What's it about? Why do we love it before we
talk about the return of the show?

S3 (50:37):
Yes. Well, I will quote one of the great minds
of our time in that it is the Gossip Girl
of investment banking, essentially. Um, which is a quote that
I made up all by myself. But anyway, basically everyone, uh, basically, look,
as you said, season three just started, but basically industry
is a show kind of set in the high stakes
world of investment banking, a world that I know nothing about.

(50:59):
But I get so, like hyped by the numbers anyway.
And it basically, like, focused on the sales floor of
the fictional financial institution Pierpoint, which I guess is like
a Goldman's. It's a private equity firm, and each year
they take in like a new batch of graduates fresh
out of college. And that's kind of where the show
picks up. The first season aired in 2020. We meet
this batch of graduates, um, and they're basically told from

(51:21):
the get go at the end of, you know, your
first six months slash the end of the first season,
only a few of you will be kept on. Um, so, like,
you know, the entire first season is kind of imbued
with this tension of that some of these people will
not survive. Uh, and basically it kind of then throws
us into this high stakes world where they're dealing with,
you know, sickening amounts of money every day, but also

(51:41):
so much of their role. And that industry is about
networking and going out and getting to know your clients
in a deeper level. There's like sex, there is a
lot of drugs, there is a lot of relationships blowing up,
people falling in and out of love. It really is
a show that has it all kind of, I guess,
like the the person we follow the most is Harper.

(52:02):
She's a young American girl who moves to London, which
is where the show is set, and she's like kind
of a genius, but also the queen of self sabotage.
But she she leads this group of young graduates that
we follow through from season one to season three, which
is where we pick up right now.

S1 (52:16):
Nice one. Thank you. Great breakdown. Meg, the episode that
you've watched is that the pilot of season one?

S4 (52:21):
It sure was directed by Lena Dunham. Is it really? Yeah. Yeah, yeah.

S2 (52:27):
Well, well, my impression was it's kind of skins meets suits.
Does that carry on?

S1 (52:32):
Well some people. Okay, that's so interesting because the first
episode of the show, despite all the hype about Lena
Dunham directing it, I think is like maybe one of
the worst. I think the show Tonally and, like performance wise,
finds a different groove and I would call it more
euphoria meets succession.

S4 (52:49):
Okay.

S1 (52:50):
So skins versus suits is kind of like the B-grade version.
I agree.

S2 (52:53):
Yeah. I mean, yeah, it was all right. That was
my review of the first episode. Did she continue directing or.

S4 (52:58):
Just no telling?

S1 (52:59):
Yeah, well, I think I think what is really interesting
about this show and, and I think this extends into
season three as well. We've talked a bit on this
podcast about what television kind of used to be versus
what television is now. Right. And so right now, the
kinds of shows that we all love, shows like succession,
shows like The Bear, there are these, you know, really
complicated thought through developed rich characters who are interacting with

(53:24):
the purpose of going somewhere. And these stories, episode by
episode of season by season, have these very specific self-contained arcs,
and we're kind of being pushed gently towards a direction
compared to shows of yesteryear, which are just like, here's
a bunch of characters. They're going to get stuff thrown
at them, they're going to have to handle it. There's
going to be new challenges. We don't really know where
the show is going, but we're kind of like seeing

(53:45):
these guys hang out, interact. Maybe some of them date,
maybe some of them break up. They get into fights.
This feels like a really interesting blend of both of
those things. It has a really interesting prestige vibe in
terms of the writing and the cast and the performances,
the sets, the the kind of sharp, sleek way the
show looks and feels and the way it grapples with like,

(54:08):
pretty contemporary and interesting political issues. The second season, for example,
is set immediately like after like Covid has stopped, you know,
lockdowns and stuff have ended, people coming back to the workplace,
a lot of discussion around like the financial impact of that,
the mental impact of that on people, what that did
to the world, as well as people's one on one relationships.
Season three is very firmly like set now debates around

(54:32):
like wokeness and environmental sustainability and gender equality and finance
and people on different sides of those debates. So it's
punching at a, you know, pretty high range in terms
of the themes and the ideas, but then it's also
just about a bunch of like kind of young people
in their 20s who's smart in their workplace sense, but
also kind of dumb because they're young people in their

(54:52):
20s and keep doing coke in the middle of the
week and keep sleeping with each other when they probably shouldn't.
And I actually love the fact that those two things
are melding really well. Like over the last few years,
I've come to love these characters as weird as they
all are. And it's like, what will happen to now? Like,
what's Yasmin going to do? What? What are all these
guys up to? And I invested in them as characters,

(55:14):
but also loved the way that the show's writers use
the concept as a vehicle to discuss, like, contemporary social
and political stuff. And I think my initial reaction to
the pilot was similar to yours. I was like, this
feels like okay, but like maybe a bit mid-tier. I
think it just gets better and better and better and better.
And I think season two is a level up from
season one. And I think season three from the premiere

(55:37):
that we've seen is a significant level up again. How
did you find the premiere of season three? Thomas.

S4 (55:42):
Yeah.

S3 (55:43):
Again, I thought, like, it is so rare for shows
to just keep getting better and better, and probably is
a show where you need to stick with the three
episode rule that you have to watch at least three
of the first season to really, like, get into the world. Um, yeah,
I thought season three premiere was great. The fact that
we now have this kind of new character in that
in Kit Harington, it's like a bit of a star power.
And yeah, the fact that it is looking at contemporary

(56:03):
issues and, you know, this whole like the kind of
conscious investor, the clean energy that being a space that
people want to align themselves either because they really want
to or they want to appear to be good. Um,
it is impressive that they've managed to keep such a
finger on the pulse, but then, yeah, at the same time,
I'm like, it is fun watching these young, hot people
do like coke on the weekend and stumble out of
the club and then like, change their shirt in the

(56:24):
company bathroom and be like, I'm good to go, everybody. Um,
so yeah, it gets like the mix really, right, I think, um,
I still can't shake that. There is a sense maybe
to have a, you know, a throwback reference has industry
kind of Steven Bradbury its way into the dialogue. A
lot of the other shows have fallen off, like succession
is no longer around to compete with like this. This

(56:44):
show has been around for a little while, and it's
never it's always been like close but never quite there.
Whereas as you said, it's now got this prime time
HBO slot on the Sunday night, which is historically the
slot given to, you know, the most talked about show
on the planet. And maybe industry just had to like,
wait its turn. And luckily, this season does seem to
be like the best one yet. But I don't know.
I don't know if I could ever put it into
this succession tier category, but it's very close.

S1 (57:08):
I think that's a really interesting question. I think that
I think what's interesting is that the different shows that
are going in different trajectories, like we talked last week,
we talked the week before about the season three problem
so many shows have where clearly some auteur had this
great vision to tell a particular story. They executed it
in season one. They got greenlit for season two, and
by season three they're kind of like, what are we

(57:29):
doing here now? Like, this is not what we wanted
to do. Whereas this show had the opposite. They had
such a big and interesting cast, kind of of a
lot of unknowns initially. And still a lot of these
actors aren't necessarily super famous, and that means you meet
them without any sense of expectation. You get to watch
them settle into their groove. And I think, like the

(57:49):
old network shows, when there were 25 episodes a year,
you know you love it when I talk about that. Thomas. Um,
over the course of each season and over the course
of multiple seasons, the show adapts to like what these
characters are good at. What are the interesting dynamics? What
if we threw Eric in a room with Harper for
a few episodes? What if it's now Yasmine and Eric

(58:09):
doing coke in her lawyer's office? Like, what does that
throw up? And that's a fun place to exist in.
I think that's what TV can do at its best.
I think that's really different to something like succession or
even The Bear, which isn't about maybe just like chucking
characters together and seeing what happens. It's about extremely, extremely
tight and sharp writing, executed at a very high level

(58:29):
by very famous, successful like theater actors that have been
around for 30 or 40 years.

S3 (58:34):
Yeah. And I think I mean, like I said, it
is very odd. I guess it is similar to what
I experienced in succession. What we all kind of did
is that like, you know, you find yourself so immersed
in these scenes that they're like yelling at each other
and the tension is ramping up about something. I have
no idea what any of it actually means. So like,
they're like 44 points at 45,000,003 quarters and I'm like,
oh my God, they're not going to do it. Are

(58:55):
they like I don't. And then same thing £4.80 a share.
That's crazy. Yeah exactly. And succession they used to do
like have like similar business chat and I'd be like
this is insane. They're about to make this decision not
knowing anything that's going on. So yeah like it's it's
quite nice to be sent into a world where you're like,
I know it's stressful and I know it's crazy, but

(59:16):
I don't know what they do for a job. Exactly.

S4 (59:19):
I have a.

S2 (59:19):
Question. Why do you think it isn't? Why was the
show not popular when it first came out? Why did
it never have the cut through moment? It came out
in 2020 when we were all in lockdowns, desperate for content.
I hadn't watched it. Why is that? Do people not
want to watch investment bankers when they were losing their jobs?

S4 (59:35):
It could.

S1 (59:36):
Be that. I mean, it's funny, like Covid was this
time where we had so much to watch, but there's
a bunch of shows from that year that I think
are some of the best shows that just kind of
got lost in the midst of it when people stuck
to like rewatching The Office or friends and things like,
I think about things like station 11 and Watchmen, some
of the literally best TV shows I think of the
past decade. Um, I also think like I enjoyed season one,

(59:59):
but I wasn't shouting about it from the rooftops. Like,
I think you're right to point out that there is
like sometimes a cutesy vibe or sometimes a skinny vibe.
For me, it was really season.

S4 (01:00:09):
Skins is great. Skins. Skins is not underrate skins.

S1 (01:00:13):
Um. Season two, you know, there was a two year
break between it because of Covid and stuff. So I
think it lost a bit of momentum. And by the
time it came back with season two, which is really,
really good, people kind of forgotten about it. And now
I think and I think also let's, let's be honest,
like we talked about this earlier, HBO has now just
put it in the Sunday slot. And it may be
that with succession, with a couple of other big shows,

(01:00:35):
they just thought, this is good, but it's not our
top tier. This is kind of like the second tier show.
We're not going to put all of our marketing and
stuff behind it while we've got succession. Now the deck
is cleared. This is like a show coming out at
a time when there isn't a lot of stuff. And
I guess that's your point, Thomas. Is it is it
the Steven Bradbury of kind of prestige TV? I think
in a way it is, but it's also pretty good.

S3 (01:00:55):
Yeah, that probably won't be a pull quote that binge
uses to.

S4 (01:00:57):
Like on the.

S3 (01:00:58):
Landing screen. But even I think the marketing of season three,
like it's been very strange for me because I haven't
watched it like as the seasons have dropped. So I've
basically watched the first two seasons like over the last
two weeks. So I haven't had that context. But watching
being aware of season three coming and the marketing from
HBO reminds me heaps of the marketing from succession. Like

(01:01:18):
suddenly they've got these big, like kind of like black
and white posters of single characters on like, bus stops
and stuff. Like they've obviously really hedging their bets on it.
So yeah, I mean, I'll be and I do feel
like I've heard a lot of people talking about season three,
so there is like a vacuum there. And I guess this,
this will hopefully fill it.

S1 (01:01:36):
Well, yeah, I mean, let's let's talk about, um, like awards, right?
It hasn't been nominated for anything. Like it's not an
Emmy contender, I think probably drowned out by succession. I
think the the only award it's won is a British
Royal Television Society craft and Design award for casting. Um, but,
you know, Rotten Tomatoes is an imperfect thing in so

(01:01:57):
many ways. But as an example, I think of the
trajectory of the show critically. Season 176%. Season 296%. Third
season so far 100%. So it's a show that it
took a little while, I think, to figure it out.
But luckily you've got us and we're telling you about
it now, so you've got it sorted.

S3 (01:02:13):
It makes a lot of sense to me that Emily
in Paris also came out during the pandemic, and everyone
was like, this is fucking art. And now we've got
Emily in Paris, which drops, I think, tomorrow or today
on Netflix season four. Um, but like, that was I guess,
the show people needed at that time and industry maybe wasn't. Yeah.

S1 (01:02:29):
It's a good it's a good point. Like what were
we looking for at that time. Most people wanted like
sort of comfortable, fun, dumb stuff. I was the only
weirdo that wanted to watch station 11, a show set
immediately after a global pandemic that destroyed society. I watched
contagion 100 times.

S3 (01:02:46):
Yeah, I watched I think a lot of people watched contagion. Yeah, contagion.

S4 (01:02:48):
Let's see what I think.

S2 (01:02:49):
Most people did that for about a week.

S4 (01:02:50):
And then they were like, no more. It's too.

S1 (01:02:51):
Much. Um, yeah. The show has a lot of, like, anti-heroes.
Like most of the people in the show are quite conflicted,
quite terrible, betray each other. And and what you were
saying before, Thomas, about how it represents the the finance world.
I totally agree. Like, I don't understand how most of
this stuff operates. I think the show is really smart
at not overexplaining like there's not a lot of exposition
that would just dumb it down and make us feel

(01:03:14):
a bit stupid anyway, but at the same time you
understand why it matters. Like you get the stakes and
when they're throwing numbers out there, you're like, oh shit,
this person needs to like, win this thing. Otherwise X, Y,
and Z will happen. It reminds me a lot of
Margin Call, like one of my favorite films, where they
just don't really tell you what's going on, but you understand.

S4 (01:03:31):
What it's like.

S2 (01:03:32):
Succession as well, right? Like, how much do you know
about mergers and why waste our shit mattered? You don't.
But Kendall seems mad about it so totally.

S1 (01:03:41):
And I still think the 100 was a good idea.

S3 (01:03:43):
Yes. Me too. And then I was. I was like,
with a friend on the weekend who is in this space.
He works for a hedge fund and, you know, is
in private equity. And I was like, man, you have
to watch industry. And he was like, oh, I don't know.
Like he's like, would you watch a show like that?
But about like journalism and media.

S4 (01:03:59):
Yeah. And it's the bold type.

S1 (01:04:00):
Well, Meg and I watched a one of our favorite
scenes from The Newsroom yesterday after newsroom.

S3 (01:04:06):
That was that was a weird show where everyone for
like half an hour was like, this is really good. Ah.

S1 (01:04:10):
It's not. No, no, it was terrible show. It was
a terrible show. Um, yeah. I think that's the problem.
When you're so close to something, you don't really want
to watch it because it's just annoying to point out,
like how wrong it is about this stuff. All right,
before we finish up today, we have our regular Impress

(01:04:32):
Your Friends segment where we share something we watched, read,
listen to, or otherwise consumed in the world of culture. Meg,
you're a wonderful guest this week. You get to go first.
What have you got for us?

S2 (01:04:44):
Uh, mine is somewhat pandemic related, I suppose. So there's
a new four part docu series coming out called Chimp Crazy.
It's an HBO show which is co-directed by Eric Goode,
who was one of the directors of Tiger King. It's
following on in a similar kind of trajectory. It looks
at the people who own chimpanzees, who keep them as

(01:05:07):
pets in their home. And so it's got very much
those eccentric characters that we saw in Tiger King. There's
this woman, Tonya Haddix, who's the main character who looks
like a Dolly Parton character, like she actively styles herself
like Dolly Parton. Her house is all pastel pink. She's
got the big blonde hair, and she keeps chimps as
essentially her children. So it's got this light, frothy vibe,

(01:05:27):
which is kind of silly and zany, but it's also
in a way that's slightly different to Tiger King. I
think it takes the animal welfare issues a bit more seriously,
and there's some scenes in there which are really pretty harrowing,
and it follows a lot of work that Peta have
done in this space. You know, it looks at women
who've kept chimps as their little babies and literally breastfed
them at times. But it also, you know, tells the

(01:05:50):
story of that chimp who literally bit a woman's face off. Um,
and you know how that could be avoided? What needs
to be done, uh, to avoid those situations? It also
features Alan Cumming. Wow. Um, so one of the chimps
that Tonya owns is a very famous chimp called Tonka.
He had a long career in the 90s. He was

(01:06:10):
like the George of the jungle chimp.

S1 (01:06:12):
Like he was in George of the jungle.

S4 (01:06:13):
Oh, wow. He's a.

S2 (01:06:14):
Famous chimp. Wow. And he was in a film with
Alan Cumming in the 90s. And since then, Alan's become
like a Peta spokesperson. He's kind of realized, you know,
we shouldn't have chimps in these movies. It's not fair
to them. Detrimental for all sorts of reasons. Um, but
the the docu series is really it's super entertaining for

(01:06:34):
all those reasons. But it's also a really compelling object
to discuss kind of ethics and documentary filmmaking. So, uh,
Eric Goode really had to talk his way back into
the animal community after Tiger King. It was received really poorly,
for obvious reasons.

S4 (01:06:49):
That makes sense.

S2 (01:06:50):
To the point that he's actually made this, this show
with a proxy director. So the subjects in the series
didn't know that he was the director.

S4 (01:07:00):
Didn't know this was being.

S1 (01:07:01):
Done by the Tiger.

S4 (01:07:01):
King. Yeah.

S2 (01:07:02):
So and it actively interrogates that the scenes with him
kind of discussing how he feels about it and also
the twists and turns that the series takes, which are
quite entertaining, are also just really, really interesting to think about.
You know what? What do you owe the subjects of
a documentary? What do you owe the audience? How should
a director conduct themselves? It's only four episodes and it's

(01:07:25):
dropping weekly on binge, so I think it'll be a real, like,
talky show. And it starts on this Monday.

S1 (01:07:30):
Yeah, I've been hearing you get excited about this for
the last couple of weeks, and I think it's going
to be a big one. I think people will be
chatting about this.

S2 (01:07:37):
Yeah, I watched all four episodes back to back and
just lost my mind in the office.

S1 (01:07:41):
So yeah, yeah, no, I'm excited to watch this and
I think it could be something that we talk about more.
Thank you. My great recommendation is, um. Thomas, what do
you got?

S3 (01:07:49):
Yes. Well, in Mel's absence, I thought someone had to
recommend a book. And so I will be taking that
mantle today.

S4 (01:07:57):
Colleen Hoover's sequel.

S1 (01:07:59):
To it ends with us. It starts with us.

S3 (01:08:00):
Yes, correct. Uh, speak on book talk. No. So this
is Long Island Compromise by Taffy Brodesser-akner. It came out
a month ago. Um, and just kind of gotten through it.
It is. I'm not sure if you guys have read
her first novel, Fleishman.

S4 (01:08:14):
Is in Trouble.

S1 (01:08:14):
Great novel, great TV adaptation.

S3 (01:08:16):
Exactly. And this feels like a I mean, it's not
a sequel, but it feels like a stylistic sequel. It
has much of the same kind of vibe, I guess,
as Fleishman. Basically, it's set in on Long Island. Unsurprising
in the 1980s. Carl Fletcher, he's a prominent local businessman,
and basically he's coming home from work one day and
he's ambushed on his driveway and kidnapped and tortured and

(01:08:39):
then eventually, weirdly returned to his family. But basically, the
novel then kind of splits into it's told by his
three children in three different parts. And I guess, weirdly,
as is a strange theme of today's podcast, it very
much looks at generational trauma, how the kidnapping of their
father affected these kids and also affected their father and
the family unit. But at the same time, I guess

(01:09:00):
it plays into similar space to Fleishman, and it's a
satirizing or a skewering of the rich. You know, these
people have got endless resources, and they kind of live
in a bubble. And how that community and that family
almost tries to downplay the trauma of what happened to Carl.
So it's both a commentary on suburbia and, you know,
the Uber wealthy, as well as a look at how

(01:09:22):
trauma kind of trickles down. It's got the similar thing
of like, you know, Fleischman featured, I guess a big twist,
almost like or that twist energy. There's a lot of
that in the book. I really am a big fan
of Jaffe's writing. She writes for The New Yorker a lot.
So if you've ever read any of her stuff or
have read Fleischman or even watched the TV show, I
think you will love Long Island compromise. Um, yeah, that's
my recommendation for this week.

S1 (01:09:42):
Wow, you guys are hitting it out of the park.
That's great stuff. Thanks, man. And thanks for keeping the
book stuff going.

S3 (01:09:48):
I'm just trying. It's basically a play for me to
get the metal heads on side while she's up.

S4 (01:09:52):
Hand, foot.

S3 (01:09:53):
And mouth.

S4 (01:09:54):
That's really.

S1 (01:09:54):
Funny. No, the metal heads transferred very neatly to Meg,
and I think whatever. Thomas and Oz heads exist. Also
transferred to Meg today. Yeah. Um, my recommendation is an
artist called, uh, Beer Barbie. Uh, she's 24 year old
Filipino British singer. Uh, been a fan for a while.
She's got a new album. Was released last week. It's

(01:10:15):
called This Is How Tomorrow Moves. Beabadoobee is like very
firmly part of this. Like Gen Z revival of 90s stuff.
She wears her influences on her sleeve. She's talked a
lot about loving Mazzy Star, pavement. I think there's a
song she's got named after Stephen Malkmus, The Cardigans. It's
a real fun throwback to that sort of sound. Uh,

(01:10:38):
a bit of Bic Runga, you know, sway energy on
this new album as well. Uh, her last album had
a lot of tracks that made me really nostalgic for
the era where, like, Hilary Duff was releasing music, but
she's also firmly part of the contemporary pop wave as well.
You know, she's toured with Taylor Swift. She understands what
people want from contemporary young women pop stars as well.

(01:11:00):
It's a really interesting marriage of those two things. She's
really great person to like, read articles and interviews with.
She's talked a lot about being an Asian woman growing
up in the West and loving pop music, but not
seeing herself represented and then seeing, you know, Karen O
on stage and being like, wow, I could do stuff
like that as well. Yeah, she's only 24. She's really,
really good. This album is really great. It's a cool

(01:11:21):
entry point into her kind of music if you want
to give it a spin. So yeah.

S4 (01:11:25):
That's my rock.

S2 (01:11:26):
That's a wild combination of influences. I'm keen to check
it out.

S1 (01:11:28):
It's it's wacky, it's confusing the pavement thing, but also
like it works. It works in terms of how a
lot of the tracks bring these things together. And then
sometimes it's like, that's a mazzy star track. That's a
I'm just gonna.

S3 (01:11:38):
Have fade into you playing in my head all day.

S1 (01:11:41):
Yeah, yeah. Maybe we'll fade out with that one.

S3 (01:11:43):
Oh, ladies and gentlemen.

S1 (01:11:46):
Tom, it's great to chat. Meg, thank you so much
for joining us.

S4 (01:11:48):
Thanks for having me. Thanks, guys.

S1 (01:11:53):
This episode of The Drop was produced by Kai Wong.
If you enjoyed listening to today's episode of The Drop,
make sure to follow us on your favorite podcast app.
Leave us a review or better yet, share the episode
with a friend. I'm Osman Farooqui.

UU (01:12:06):
See you next week!

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

Therapy Gecko

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The 'It Ends With Us' controversy, Raygun culture wars and Industry's triumphant return

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

Therapy Gecko

All Episodes

The 'It Ends With Us' controversy, Raygun culture wars and Industry's triumphant return

Dateline NBC