transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:02] Hello, and welcome to this episode of The Rest Is Entertainment, Questions and Answers Edition. I'm Marina Hyde.

Speaker 2:
[00:08] And I'm Richard Osman. Welcome one, welcome all. Hey, Marina.

Speaker 1:
[00:10] Hello, Richard. How are you?

Speaker 2:
[00:12] Yeah, I'm okay. Are you well?

Speaker 1:
[00:13] I am. There has been a significant response to your appeal for a question about actors and celebrities that people mix up.

Speaker 2:
[00:21] Yes, because we were talking about Bill Paxton and Bill Palmer, and they both became famous at roughly the same time. And even now, I couldn't pick the two of them out of a line up.

Speaker 1:
[00:28] And when I say significant, I mean, it is the biggest response I think we've ever had.

Speaker 2:
[00:32] Yeah, it's gone absolutely nuts.

Speaker 1:
[00:33] It's gone post bookshelves. It is huge. Purely on the basis that she sent the first question, I am going to ask Heather Walford's question on behalf of Heather. In my house, says Heather, there are two actors, Eddie Marsan, Ray Donovan, Sherlock Holmes, and not Eddie Marsan, line of duty, Ashes to Ashes, the Thursday Murder Club. Recently, we have realized that not Eddie Marsan is actually Daniel Mays. The film Vera Drake was very confusing. Do you have any actors or musicians that you constantly mix up?

Speaker 2:
[01:04] Thank you, Heather. That's a good question as well. If you're going to be the first one in, that's a good one to do. I've got so many.

Speaker 1:
[01:11] Can I say I'm so scared of doing this because the ones that I don't already have, some synaptic malfunction will now happen and I will forever think that, which I will never get my Chris's in the right order again.

Speaker 2:
[01:23] Well, shall I go through some of the ones that our listeners have sent in, people that get mixed up? Gene Hackman and Gene Wilder. The one that most people have, the one that you could, can you guess the one that most people have had?

Speaker 1:
[01:35] These are the similar name ones, right? So I feel like you're going to, yeah. The Ryans, we know the Ryans are very good. Gosling.

Speaker 2:
[01:42] Gosling and Reynolds are very, very hard too. They also have a similar level of fame. I mean, yeah, and they're a similar age.

Speaker 1:
[01:49] A name-cut American. Yeah. I mean, you're in the danger area there.

Speaker 2:
[01:54] A similar vibe. Barbara Streisand and Bette Midler, people are mixing up. Glenn Close and Meryl Streep. I don't know about that. I know Meryl Streep when I see Meryl Streep.

Speaker 1:
[02:01] That seems like sacrilege.

Speaker 2:
[02:03] Callum Turner and Josh O'Connor.

Speaker 1:
[02:04] Surely Callum Turner and Harris Dickinson. Yeah. I mean, don't get into that particular age of Richard actors.

Speaker 2:
[02:10] A lot of Bradley Walsh and Brian Connolly.

Speaker 1:
[02:13] Yeah, that's huge.

Speaker 2:
[02:14] That's huge. Although they literally recently went on tour with each other. That would have blown people's minds. Susan Sarandon and Sigourney Weaver.

Speaker 1:
[02:20] Yes.

Speaker 2:
[02:21] This is one I have absolutely nonstop. I've seen the whole film by the second actor and thought it was the first actor. Matt Damon and Mark Wahlberg.

Speaker 1:
[02:29] Oh, really?

Speaker 2:
[02:30] Yeah. Is that not a blindness you have?

Speaker 1:
[02:33] Well, I was going to say Bryce Dallas Howard and Jessica Chastain. I thought that was the one that you were going to say.

Speaker 2:
[02:39] No.

Speaker 1:
[02:39] No, no, no. Okay. No, I don't have a Matt Damon blindness, but there are others that I just have to remind myself each time.

Speaker 2:
[02:47] I have definitively watched an entire Mark Wahlberg movie and at the end realized it wasn't Matt Damon. And you see, I mean, that's it. I mean, but it's weird, given how much hard work they put into those things and they don't even need to turn up.

Speaker 1:
[02:59] Yeah, it's great for Mark Wahlberg because Nolan's never giving him a call, let me tell you.

Speaker 2:
[03:03] That's true. Yeah, he does get elevated in my brain. I'm quite bad on Emily Blunt and Emma Stone. When I see them individually, I know what's going on.

Speaker 1:
[03:11] And when I say they're nothing like each other, yeah, they don't.

Speaker 2:
[03:13] That's definitively not. I get them mixed up when I look at them. There's something about their careers. If I see one of them is cast in a movie, I'm like, which one is that? I can't immediately picture which one is which. So I don't get them mixed up when I look at them for sure. Steve Buscemi and Billy Bob Thornton, we have from a lot of people. Really? Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[03:34] That's so distinctive.

Speaker 2:
[03:36] Brian Cox and Brendan Gleeson.

Speaker 1:
[03:38] Yes, fair enough.

Speaker 2:
[03:40] You can sort of imagine they might be the same person. Brian Cox and Brian Cox, nobody said that. Somebody who says Wes Craven and John Craven, that I'm afraid is, yeah, come on. I have to give special mention to Jennifer Amell Duke Divine, not only for the name because Jennifer says, though they are not both in entertainment, when I read out the rest of this, that is a real understatement. Okay, carry on. Though they are not both in entertainment. Though they are not both in entertainment, says Jennifer, I used to confuse Alfred Hitchcock and Adolf Hitler, and use the names interchangeably.

Speaker 1:
[04:14] I just want to say I'm not speaking, because I am speechless.

Speaker 2:
[04:18] Until I was about 14, I thought there's a single man who had committed absolute atrocities, but had made some insightful psychological thrillers along the way.

Speaker 1:
[04:25] Well, I hope this podcast is expanding your mind, Jennifer.

Speaker 2:
[04:30] A few more. Michael Cera and Jesse Eisenberg.

Speaker 1:
[04:33] Oh, yes.

Speaker 2:
[04:33] A lot of people think they are the same person.

Speaker 1:
[04:36] That's a look-wise thing.

Speaker 2:
[04:37] Yeah, that's really weird. And also the types of movies they're in. That's the thing is when people have either a similar name or a similar look, and are in the same sort of movies, like Bill Paxton and Bill Pullman could interchangeably be in each other's films. So could Michael Cera and Jesse Eisenberg, very different human beings, but they look very, very similar. The one that I was talking this week to somebody who I'm very, very aware gets called the wrong name, has been called the wrong name her entire life. Her entire life. And you can guess the name that she gets called because that person gets called her name. And that's Gabby Roslyn, who is constantly called Gabby Logan. And Gabby Logan is constantly called Gabby Roslyn.

Speaker 1:
[05:19] Really?

Speaker 2:
[05:20] All day, every day, they are constantly mixed up with each other. Again, people know they're different people, but that's a name one. They get the names mixed up. Can I say the one to this day that I will never, ever, ever, or Stacey Solomon and Stacey Dudley, by the way. We had lots of people talking about that as well, which they think they're the same person. But here's the one that I will never, ever, ever get right. There are people in a certain country to whom this would be insane, but it just happens to be the case. That is, I would not at gunpoint be able to tell you which one is which, if you showed me Jimmy Fallon and Jimmy Kimmel.

Speaker 1:
[05:55] Yes. Well, I think that's a lot of people.

Speaker 2:
[05:59] I like which one is which, right? I can get it in my head for a bit if I see Jimmy Fallon, and people say that's Jimmy Fallon. I'm like, yeah, okay, I've got it. Absolutely.

Speaker 1:
[06:10] Don't suggest gunpoint in that great nation, of course, because it's so easy to arrange.

Speaker 2:
[06:14] Somebody will. Then the other one, who have I said Fallon? The other one, Kimmel. But that's because I know they're both called Jimmy. I get that.

Speaker 1:
[06:21] But we don't have their late night shows. Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 2:
[06:24] They're not in our lives constantly. But Kimmel and Fallon, I know they're completely different names, but there's something about them that are also the same, which is they sort of sound a bit familiar.

Speaker 1:
[06:34] Yeah, they're in a suit behind a desk.

Speaker 2:
[06:36] And they've got two syllables in the surname. I know there's something about it. So that's my number one, is Fallon and Kimmel. The Gabbies are the ones I think most constantly get called each other's names. But yeah, the...

Speaker 1:
[06:51] The Ryan's is big.

Speaker 2:
[06:53] That's the big one.

Speaker 1:
[06:53] I have to say the Chris's, keeping your Chris's straight has been, you know... So we've got Pratt and Hemsworth and league two Chris, Pine.

Speaker 2:
[07:02] See, I think it's because I can just about deal with Evans, Pratt and Hemsworth. It's when you throw Pine in it as well, that I suddenly get them all mixed up because that's too much Chris.

Speaker 1:
[07:12] It's too much. The equation is too complicated to consider at the same time.

Speaker 2:
[07:15] And that royals the other three together as well. In a way, they weren't previously roiled as soon as Pine comes in. There are some other funny name ones. Rick Wakeman and Alan Rickman.

Speaker 1:
[07:28] I can see it though. I mean, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[07:30] That's funny. Willie Russell and Willie Rustin. That's for people of a certain age. Very similar names. And then Tim Curry and Tim Rice, which I...

Speaker 1:
[07:39] I think it's just the surnames.

Speaker 2:
[07:41] I know it's the surnames. I like Curry, but I can sort of see it.

Speaker 1:
[07:45] I've got the feeling this will just jump off in some different area next week, but we hope we've covered some of your...

Speaker 2:
[07:51] All of that stuff, especially like British actors. People you see on TV here, you think of the same person, do you? I mean, we've had so many emails, but I know for a fact that there are other great ones out there. I know. But the two Jimmy's, absolutely clueless. Absolutely clueless. But if you've got better ones or people you've spent your whole life thinking about somebody else, then absolutely do let us know. There's some poor person at Goalhanger having to spend their entire time going through your emails on this. A question for you, Marina, from Roger Lever. That's a good name.

Speaker 1:
[08:24] Very good name.

Speaker 2:
[08:25] That's a strong name.

Speaker 1:
[08:25] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[08:26] Roger Lever. Yeah. He says, I've always wondered about Jess Glynne's song, Hold My Hand, which seems to have been used by Jet Two Holidays for years now in adverts and even on planes. How does that actually work financially? Is it typically a one-off licensing fee, an annual deal, or anything tied to usage? Because it definitely feels like they have an incredible value out of it over time.

Speaker 1:
[08:43] This is a very good question. There's a line in the first Bridget Jones movie about her friend Tom says, 80s pop icon who only wrote one hit record and retired because he found that one record was quite enough to get him laid for the whole of the 90s. Jess Glynne had a hit 11 years ago and has discovered it is quite enough to get her paid throughout the whole of the next decade. She had other hits as well. I'm not suggesting. She had a lot of hits. However, Jet 2 first used Hold My Hand in late 2015, which was the year it actually came out. Typically, when you're doing a deal like that, it's for multiple TV and social ads. By the way, now, you still hear it on all their TV and social ads on their booking videos and when you get on the plane. They play, I know. Someone said that they were on a plane. Someone told me they were on a plane and they had to change the crew for some reason and it just continued to play and people who work on Jet 2 Cruise say they just totally screen it out. They don't hear it anymore.

Speaker 2:
[09:40] It must be like torture. That's nothing against the song, but to hear it all day, every day.

Speaker 1:
[09:45] It is amazing, though, that it's endured so long and originally it would have been a licensing and royalties deal and it's a sort of upfront sync deal, as they would call it. You get royalties every time the ads broadcast or whatever and it's a licensing agreement, but it would certainly not have been for 11 years. So they will have renewed and renegotiated it several times and she will have earned millions off it by now.

Speaker 2:
[10:08] Millions?

Speaker 1:
[10:08] Yeah, because it's gone on for, think, and not just by this way in a way that I'm about to talk about, because remember, in the old days, people used to think that advertising music was sort of in for a dig and that you were kind of selling out if you're allowing a band to allow their music to be used in advertising. But I do think, as we've said before, that Gen Z, Gen A, they're so, selling everything so enmeshed in all of the content they watch. Isn't that stigma whatsoever anymore about giving your song?

Speaker 2:
[10:36] I saw someone doing, we talked briefly on, well, we talked on Monday show about influences. I saw someone on Instagram saying, amazing news, amazing news. I've just signed a deal with X car company. And all the replies were, oh my God, this is incredible. Congratulations. Rather than, sorry.

Speaker 1:
[10:55] Sorry.

Speaker 2:
[10:56] Okay.

Speaker 1:
[10:57] You total sell out. It's just completely part.

Speaker 2:
[11:00] You got a free car and you want us to be happy. But everyone was like, oh my God.

Speaker 1:
[11:03] Everyone was happy.

Speaker 2:
[11:04] This is awesome. I just thought, okay.

Speaker 1:
[11:06] It's become, which is very interesting, which is a definite shift for creative artists involved in this stuff. And as we've said before, those generations are kind of time blinded. They don't mind when a song that they discover via TikTok or via advertising is from. If they like it, they like it. And last year, I think it was the song of the year on TikTok. Yeah. But it's become a trend in the meantime. It's used on TikTok for people to soundtrack their sort of holiday mishaps or travel chaos or anything. If you've got a massively long queue and you've got nothing to do in the queue other than posted TikTok saying nothing beats a Jet 2 holiday. Posts using that song have been viewed more than 80 billion times on TikTok. I mean, it's so not only is Jess Glynne making money from the repeatedly renegotiated deal with Jet 2, she is also getting all the halo effect from streaming, download, all the other stuff. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[11:59] And also an amazing for Jet 2 as well. If you've suddenly got something that constantly goes viral on TikTok, even if occasionally it is lightly poking fun at you, that's an incredible bit of marketing.

Speaker 1:
[12:09] You cannot, you literally cannot buy this engagement that they've had from this song. It's just all come together in a way that it doesn't often, which is why they're keeping using it. And in the old days, you're right. By the way, when people use it as a soundtrack to their meme, they're not necessarily, in fact, probably more times than not are not on a Jet 2 holiday. Now, in the old days, any firm involved in that sort of thing would have, if you open your window and you've got a terrible view of a building site and is that you say nothing, it's a Jet 2 holiday, the firm would have said, hang on, this isn't even a Jet, you're not even on a Jet 2 holiday. But what they've decided to do clearly, I don't know, I haven't spoken to Jet 2 about it, but you can see because it would be, you couldn't police it. They've just decided to roll with it, which is actually pretty modern. And to think, you can't police this, it's beyond, when something's had 80 billion, whatever, you can't get in touch with every single one. But actually what's happening is that your name is being mentioned all the time, to the point where Jet 2 has almost become in our national brain synonymous with the various holiday. So you honestly can't buy what has happened with this particular song, and you can absolutely see why they can continue to use it. For Jess Glynne, who's done brilliantly out of this, and fair play to her, nothing else can obviously be done with this song at all now because, apart from a bit of a song in concert, because of this. And it's a sort of earworm, it's a national earworm, it's a cross internet earworm. But it couldn't have worked out better, I would say, for both parties involved.

Speaker 2:
[13:35] Yeah. And at a time where it's harder and harder to make money out of recorded music.

Speaker 1:
[13:38] It's not totally unique, but it's the kind of leading example of something unusual. And I do think it's interesting that they don't bother to take anything down because you're not saying Jet 2 holidays are rubbish, because almost no one is on a Jet 2 holiday when they post. The passport queue isn't Jet 2's fault, but it's just become something that people constantly say your brand name and constantly.

Speaker 2:
[14:00] And also that has the word holidays in it.

Speaker 1:
[14:02] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[14:02] Yeah. It's perfect.

Speaker 1:
[14:04] Right. Shall we now go to a break?

Speaker 2:
[14:06] Wouldn't it be amazing if Jet 2 were advertising here?

Speaker 1:
[14:08] Sadly, I don't think they are.

Speaker 2:
[14:09] I don't think they are, but can you imagine? And everyone go, oh, that song.

Speaker 1:
[14:13] Oh, that's why they did the question. This is not a sponsored video.

Speaker 2:
[14:17] This is hashtag not paid. Welcome back, everybody. Marina, a question for you from Ava McKay, or Ava McKay. I just read that a bunch of Hollywood celebs, including Mark Ruffalo and Emma Thompson, have signed an open letter in opposition to Paramount buying out Warner Brothers. Would it make any difference?

Speaker 1:
[14:43] Yes. This is the, not yes, it will make a difference. This is the block, the merger.

Speaker 2:
[14:48] No, it won't make a difference.

Speaker 1:
[14:49] Yeah. Well, I think we know where this is going. This is the block, the merger campaign, and thousands of Hollywood creatives have signed it against the David Ellison bid for Paramount Skydance, bid for Warner Brothers.

Speaker 2:
[14:59] A lot of the same celebrities who were saying, whatever you do, don't let Netflix buy it.

Speaker 1:
[15:03] Yes.

Speaker 2:
[15:03] Yeah. Careful what you wish for.

Speaker 1:
[15:05] They have got lots and lots of big people. They got directors, they've got Denis Villeneuve, Celine Song, lots of actors, Mark Ruffalo. I mean, what hasn't he signed? Brian Cranston, Tiffany Haddish. They've got lots of those. They've got some showrunners, but not all of them have shows going at the moment. They've got David Chase, Damon Lindelof, JJ Abrams. What they want is the California Attorney General and various other states Attorneys General to block it.

Speaker 2:
[15:36] By the way, absolutely beautiful plural there. Your pluralization Attorney General.

Speaker 1:
[15:41] Did I do it right? I'm quite surprised because it goes definitely 50-50 on that one. I think moving that showrunners are key.

Speaker 2:
[15:49] Showrunner.

Speaker 1:
[15:50] Showrunner. Now, I'm not going to be able to do a plural for the rest of the show. I think showrunners are key because lots of people depend on them. But as a result, because lots of people depend on them, you may not get people. I personally don't think someone like Taylor Sheridan would sign it anyway. But when lots and lots of a huge ecosystem of people depend on them for income and mortgage and everything, I read it was tearing apart agencies and both companies involved as to whether you have or haven't signed it. I mean, all I would say is, please don't bother tearing yourself apart because it will not make the blindest bit of difference at all. I mean, I can't tell performers not to be performative because you may argue against gravity. But in my view, open letters are all performative nonsense. I'll talk a bit about them in general and then probably my own experience with them. But there are so many of these in an era of click far more than there ever were. When it's so easy to circulate them digitally, in the old days, you had to make a call and say, I'm getting this letter together, would you be on board? There was a whole thing.

Speaker 2:
[16:54] You had to actually sign your name as opposed to just saying, would you have your name on this list?

Speaker 1:
[16:59] I think it's so infantile. The idea that this is tearing people apart because you haven't signed it. It's like people saying, if you won't sign this letter, are you sort of pro the killing of people and guards? I mean, don't be ridiculous. This is so infantile and I'm sort of pro being a realist and not sort of performative self-importance. The open letters that have actually worked in the whole of human history are pretty short. The one, Emile Zola, the novelist, wrote during the Dreyfus Affair about someone who was wrongly accused by the French government, that worked. That's a signatory of one, though. It was open. The problem with the open letters, also with many, many signatories, is that they're sort of watered down and they're in this kind of deniable, wishy-washy language that everything, because you want the most possible people to get on board with them. I would say that I do think that the kind of letters that went on and on from climate scientists for a very long time, there was a point to that to say, there are many of us and there is a consensus here. I think that moved the debate.

Speaker 2:
[17:59] Also, they're climate scientists and they're answering a question about climate science. Can you explain this exactly?

Speaker 1:
[18:04] Yeah. Me too. I mean, even now, when we look at the backlash against it, you have to say it's difficult. I would definitely say to you that celebrities make things worse. We know this overall, that they don't actually, people want celebrities not to do these performative things in general politics and in business and maybe even in something like Me Too, where they were talking advisedly about their own industry. So I think that's on the fence. But in general, they don't work. I remember a huge strategy during the Remain campaign, which famously didn't do very well, was to get open letters from 100 big business leaders, 100 small medium business leaders to the Times. It's like I'm starting to feel that maybe this isn't the format you think it is. There was famously one against Einstein. He-

Speaker 2:
[18:53] Oh, I signed that.

Speaker 1:
[18:54] Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[18:55] I thought finally something, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[18:57] Finally, something I can get back. He published his Theory of Relativity, and then this pamphlet came out, which was 100 Authors Against Einstein.

Speaker 2:
[19:05] Wow.

Speaker 1:
[19:06] He said the thing which I've just said, which is why? Why 100? If they were right, one would have been enough. He understood maths, which is relevant to open letters, and he understood as his theory proved that frames of reference are subjective. I'm trying to think if I've signed any open letters. I'd really try not to. I signed one letter to the Guardian's letters page from other Guardian writers about not selling the Observer, because I thought there would be different ways, if it were me, which it wasn't, of getting down headcount if you were willing to have a confrontation with the Union as an example. I signed that, but I don't know.

Speaker 2:
[19:45] That's not really an open letter, is it? It's not really, is it? It's a term management from workers.

Speaker 1:
[19:48] Yeah. I've signed internal things at places, but even not very many of those, but I have signed things, and I would always think it would be more effective to write alone about something than, but I really think it's a way, so often, of people in the public eye kind of ticking off, like, look, I've said I'm against this or that, I'm said I'm against this war crime I'm witnessing, I've said I'm against whatever it is. It's just a way of saying, of sort of addressing your responsibilities. And I really think they do not make any difference. And I absolutely don't think they're going to make any difference in this whatsoever.

Speaker 2:
[20:26] Yeah, I think you do get asked to sign a lot. I tend to, the only thing I was asked if I put my name in that blank book, which is Authors Against AI. And I thought, well, I am an author and it's a, it's a publicity stunt. Nothing more, nothing less, I'm not trying to-

Speaker 1:
[20:41] But it's about your industry and it's about, I think there's something slightly different. I mean, again, you'll say, well, this is about their industry. I think it was something so specific and you have been a victim of an alleged crime.

Speaker 2:
[20:53] Yes, exactly.

Speaker 1:
[20:53] And why shouldn't you?

Speaker 2:
[20:54] Yeah, yeah, but it's, yeah, they very, very rarely do anything. And I am with you. I think that it tends to turn people off things rather than the other way around. I think, you know, it's one of those things that it's very, very easy to use its weight against it.

Speaker 1:
[21:15] They're very welcome individually to say in all their interviews, all their whatever. These are people with access to public platforms, I think we've established. So they're welcome to do that all. But I think in the general sort of, please don't tear yourself apart on it. It's a complete waste of time doing that. You're in even worse trouble than you are already.

Speaker 2:
[21:32] But also not signing a letter doesn't mean you disagree with the letter. It just means you disagree with having your opinion put with 500 other people's opinion. And yeah, which is a different matter.

Speaker 1:
[21:43] Agree. Here's a good one about panelists writing notes from Cat, no surname, which I know you'll disapprove of.

Speaker 2:
[21:50] Yeah. Maybe it's Cat from 8 Out Of 10 Cats.

Speaker 1:
[21:52] Maybe it is. Maybe it's Cat from The New Power Generation and Prince.

Speaker 2:
[21:56] What do you think?

Speaker 1:
[21:57] Yeah, I think so.

Speaker 2:
[21:58] Wow. She would say, wouldn't she?

Speaker 1:
[21:59] Well, she says she loves watching panel shows, so case closed as far as I'm concerned.

Speaker 2:
[22:02] Oh, may well be.

Speaker 1:
[22:03] Yeah. Okay. I love watching panel shows. My favorites are Would I Lie To You and QI. I often see the comedian panelists writing down what seem to be notes when something funny is said. What are they writing down? I doubt they could use the same exact joke again. So what will they do with those notes? It's been bugging me for years.

Speaker 2:
[22:19] Wow. Well, it's been bugging you for years. Well, let me debug you if you know what I mean. It's different on different shows really. On Would I Lie To You, you'd never really take on notes. I mean, you might have a pen and obviously you got bits of paper you can write on there. But with a show like QI-

Speaker 1:
[22:35] Why? Because it's happening so quickly that-

Speaker 2:
[22:37] Well, because what are you writing? I mean, that is the question. What are you writing notes about? Occasionally, what you might do and it's what I'll talk about now. Because I think there's only one reason you write things down on a panel show. So often you'll take on notes. So if you don't have a good news for you, for example, you roughly know what some of the stories might be. And so you noted down a line or something. You will see people very rarely look at their notes because, if you're a new comedian on that show, sometimes you would have written jokes just to make sure you get off at a good start and occasionally you'll see someone just sort of glancing down at a written joke. But usually you wouldn't. Usually you would, you know, if I'm on, I'll just write one, two, three, four, and I just go, you know, budget Trump. It just to know roughly, you know, what we might be talking about. The only time I take notes, I think, is the same as other people. It's a real comedian's thing and it's callbacks. And that's the only reason you would write something down. So, say I'm doing Have I Got News For You? And on round two, which is, you know, where they kind of look at the silly little stories of the week, there's a question about, you know, say there's Councillor Stephen Anderson from, you know, so and so and so where who's the crime commissioner of a certain council has been arrested for, you know, stealing stuff or, you know, fiddling expenses or something like that. And that's the story. Now, if that comes up, so it's a story no one knows. That's a story we haven't heard, of course. But I know now in the show, there's a story about a guy whose thing is that he's a thief. And his name is Councillor Stephen Anderson. So I will write down the name Councillor Stephen Anderson because later on in the missing words round, you know, might be something like experts say what can be seen from space. And you can just go, is it Councillor Stephen Anderson's expense account? You know, it's stuff like that. Anything that comes up that is an interesting person or an interesting concept or idea during that show, you might just write down just to remind yourself that it came up or be, as I say, if it's someone's name, just remind yourself who that person's name is. Just because it helps you later on when you're doing a callback. Because what you want to do is make the show feel like it's of one piece. And that you're not just going in with pre-prepared jokes about something that you are aware that the show is its own thing and that Councillor Stephen Anderson can become a comic character in the rest of that show. But if you've forgotten his name, then he's not going to become a comic character at all. So it's just that really, there's no other reason to write stuff down. People sometimes will doodle. That's definitely the case because there'll be moments of little recording break or something. Or don't forget when you're recording it, you record it for much, much, much longer. So if you're on What I Lied to You and you've just said, I once stole an Easter egg from Jeremy Clarkson, I'd be like, okay, so we're questioning you for 10 minutes and very early on, you say this is 1997. So I'll just write down 1997 just like a police officer would do in an interrogation. So that's very specific to that. But other than that, it is literally just for the comic conceit of what might be useful later on in the show. You're not writing down what someone said or someone else's joke or anything like that. You're literally going, oh, this is one of the characters of this show. I'm going to write that down. But it is literally just a little aid memoir or doodling.

Speaker 1:
[25:56] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[25:56] And those are the only things that can be, I'm afraid. Or very, very occasionally, if you're asked to do a pick up, you will write down what that pick up is. But you'd never see that in the final version of the show anyway. So Cat, I hope that is helpful. Last but not least, Andrew, no surname. Andrew says, I am baffled, baffled by the recent decision, Andrew this is, by Los Angeles County to revoke permission to film the reshoot of the iconic 90s show Baywatch at Venice Beach after only two days of filming. I note that Karen Blass, lockdowns of these mayor has tried to row back. Nevertheless, what signals does this give producers who are deciding on which city to base their shoots? I'm sure that having to relocate must have cost a production a fortune. Who complained and why was the complaint upheld?

Speaker 1:
[26:40] By the way, I think this story is based on a false report from Cruise Stories, which is an online forum where people anonymize their experience of working on various shows. It's almost always to say, we're being taken advantage of or look at this scandalous thing that has happened. Cruise Stories, yeah. But in Los Angeles, in state of California, you do, by the way, need a permit for absolutely everything. Every single tiny thing in life, you need a permit for. In this case, you needed one from the California Coastal Commission. They were given it, and actually, I think it has been updated because they needed more space. They need a larger footprint on the beach. They need to be able to do night shoots. Don't worry, it's still going ahead and it's still on the iconic Venice Beach. They've got a tiny bit of the beach shut off. I mean, it's an extraordinary small piece. I read somewhere that it was something like 300 square foot of beach that they can shut off at any one time, which when you know that beach, it's very, very big. Also, I'm amazed how they're happy. I was making it look like lots of different bits of beach because that's a very small footprint. But it's interesting the question simply because they are, as you've probably read, they're trying to bring as much filming back to California and to Los Angeles in particular. There's always been a sense that Los Angeles could end up like Detroit, a place that was once a thriving center of industry. But it falls into decline in this kind of baroque and awful way, really. Baywatch is a keystone of this because you think of how many productions are filmed all around the world and so many now in the UK. But I say what you like about our weather. The one thing you're not going to be doing on just outside the M25 is Baywatch.

Speaker 2:
[28:23] That's not going to be Kramer.

Speaker 1:
[28:24] I'm sorry. Leaveson hasn't got it, I'm afraid. But they've given them $21 million in tax credits for 12 episodes, which is a lot. One of the reasons they want to build it back is, if you think of that particular city and particularly around Hollywood, is that there's a whole ecosystem and there are lots of little small businesses, like Drivers and Florists and all the things that make up a whole economy, and outside places, none of that happens. There really are so many stories of unemployment in the business. But the reason it may be difficult to do it is because, once again, I have to say that the reason LA is very expensive is unless they do huge tax incentives, and we do in this country, by the way, which is why so much is now here, is because of their labor laws. They are so unionized, it's so much more expensive to make something there, and that's one of the big stumbling blocks. But the other thing is, yes, you are right, it is massively bureaucratic, and it is a lot easier to get permits here than it is there, but the sunshine, the weather, very much. But yes, that is one of the big stumbling blocks to it getting back, and they've had to have a lot of meetings and go back and forth to expand those permits, but they have got them. But the two stumbling blocks do remain, their labor laws and the sheer amount of bureaucracy to get something done. If you're filming in a studio lot, of course, that's fine.

Speaker 2:
[29:46] Yeah, but imagine how easy it would be to shoot that in South Africa, say, which often stands in for outside, outdoors America. It would just be, they'd throw out the red carpet would be out for you, the tax dollars would be there, or the tax rands.

Speaker 1:
[30:01] And unpicking it all, given it's on the statute, but is actually quite difficult. So, I mean, I do think that they are going to have to, apart from offering the big incentives, I would not suggest that they went into battles with the unions, but I would say that unpicking some of the bureaucracy is a big part of how they're going to, if they are going to bring more production back to LA, they'll have to unpick some of the bureaucracy.

Speaker 2:
[30:20] Put it this way, it's so hard to film Baywatch before it started, David Hasselhoff was called David Hoff.

Speaker 1:
[30:28] He was hassled, he was beyond hassled.

Speaker 2:
[30:30] Yeah, you see.

Speaker 1:
[30:31] That winds us up for today, other than to say that tomorrow we have the final instalment in our epic Spice Girls series for members. If you would like to join for ad-free listening and bonus episodes, it's therestisentertainment.com. Otherwise, we'll see you on Tuesday.

Speaker 2:
[30:46] See you next Tuesday.