transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:23] Tom and Lorenzo.

Speaker 2:
[00:24] And this is the Pop Style Opinionfest. Hello kittens, welcome back to another edition of the PSO. I'm the Tea in Your Tealow, Tom Fitzgerald, and I'm here with the Hello in Your Tealow, Lorenzo Marquez, my lovely husband. Once again, we're very late getting this to you, but we said- That's just but.

Speaker 1:
[00:38] That's not even explained by-

Speaker 2:
[00:39] Now I'll say it. We said it on Friday when we did the Bitter Kittens Movie Club podcast. Lorenzo was, I was sick last week, and actually I'm still kind of sick, and then Lorenzo got very sick this week and was-

Speaker 1:
[00:51] Passed it on to me.

Speaker 2:
[00:52] Coughing and hacking and there was just no way we could record a podcast before today, so I'm sorry that it's late.

Speaker 1:
[00:57] We were very sick, trust me.

Speaker 2:
[01:00] We will also be back on Friday for the Bitter Kittens Movie Club, where we will be watching Memento, which I believe is on HBO Max, so get caught up on that now. How are you, Lorenzo? Are you feeling better?

Speaker 1:
[01:12] Yeah, kind of.

Speaker 2:
[01:13] Kind of?

Speaker 1:
[01:14] Yeah, we'll see.

Speaker 2:
[01:15] Yeah, this has been a lingering thing. It's not COVID, but it's not been pleasant. So we're going to talk about a few items. We're going to talk about some TV shows. I feel like we haven't done TV shows in a while. We're going to check in on Meghan and Harry, specifically because I said on the Friday podcast that we were going to have some things to say about it. I feel like the story's already gotten stale because we're late with this podcast, but I said we would bring it up, so I'll bring it up. I thought their Australian tour was a huge mistake. I thought it was badly handled. Now, granted, I don't think there's been an unusual amount of backlash to it. There's always backlash to everything that they do, but personally, I, and listen, I'm not a subject of the Crown or anything like that. I'm not a citizen of the UK. I'm not a citizen of any Commonwealth country. So I'm not speaking on behalf of anyone, but just as an observer of these things, I think it's a mistake that they keep going out on these pseudo-royal tours to Commonwealth countries.

Speaker 1:
[02:24] Right, because it would be a different thing if they were representing a specific-

Speaker 2:
[02:27] America?

Speaker 1:
[02:28] Or a specific organization or something more specific, but they're just going because they're Mother Teresa now. So they just go and-

Speaker 2:
[02:38] And do royal type things, but you're not royal.

Speaker 1:
[02:41] Spreading peace and love throughout the world, but that's not how it works. Even before they got there, there was a lot of backlash at people in Australia asking, why are they coming?

Speaker 2:
[02:52] Why are they coming?

Speaker 1:
[02:53] Why are they here?

Speaker 2:
[02:54] The government didn't ask them.

Speaker 1:
[02:55] They were having a hard time getting people to sign up for the events, which cost a lot of money. Her spa thing or whatever, there was like $3,000 apiece, and then they promise a weekend of whatever.

Speaker 2:
[03:07] Selfies with her or something like that.

Speaker 1:
[03:08] Then she showed up for an hour and a half and then left. That kind of stuff. It just doesn't look well.

Speaker 2:
[03:15] That brings up the second point is, first off, they're doing these pseudo-royal tours, and I think it's a mistake because you famously, I mean famously, made a break from that thing and said you didn't want to do it, and you weren't going to do it anymore, and that you were going to forge your own path and make your own life. All you're doing are these faux William and Catherine type things, but you're not William and Catherine. You gave all of that up. Not for nothing, but I think when you do these pseudo royal toys and you're not royal, and you don't have any of the trappings of royalty, it just looks cheap.

Speaker 1:
[03:53] Combined with the fact that you keep fighting to keep the titles, so what is going on here?

Speaker 2:
[03:58] But to my point, I think it looks cheesy. Because you're not being received as royals. You're not getting God saved the king when you walk into things and that sort of thing. You're not getting any of the pomp and circumstance, but you're still doing these things where you're like visiting children's hospitals and visiting terror sites. I'm just like, why? What does this have to do with anything?

Speaker 1:
[04:21] Yeah. With your gym.

Speaker 2:
[04:23] With your gym. Even with your philanthropy. Now, I know part of the reason he was there was it was Invictus related, but these were not Invictus related events. These were just foe royal events that looked really good on camera. Looked royal on camera. If they were to stick to their specific portfolio of charities, number one is Invictus. And as a sort of addenda to that is any sort of veterans group sort of stuff. Harry's great with that sort of stuff. He's served, he's been devoted to helping veterans out for almost his entire adult life. And that's fine. Go and do that. But when you're doing children's hospitals and it's all of this very Diana-esque stuff. And to me, I think in Harry's mind, it's that image of his mother post-divorce in Angola walking those landmines. And he's just going to do what his mother did, which was to leave it all behind her, but remain this philanthropist celebrating the whole world. But you're not her, you're not her and it's not 1995.

Speaker 1:
[05:42] And my understanding is that they were there to promote her brand as ever.

Speaker 2:
[05:47] Well, I wasn't even getting into that, but yes.

Speaker 1:
[05:49] Is that what it's called?

Speaker 2:
[05:49] As ever, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[05:50] Yeah, so that was the whole point of the whole thing. And I guess they just packed it up with more stuff that, but again, at some point you have to stop and think, okay, is this right that we're doing this together with my jam? It's like, I don't know.

Speaker 2:
[06:03] Diana wasn't, you know, she was walking those landmines and everything, but she wasn't trying to sell, she wasn't an influencer on top of it. And this is the other major issue I have with how they conduct themselves is, you're trying to do this pseudo-royal stuff and you're marrying it to this influencer lifestyle, and it's just cheap to me, it just looks cheap. She, you know, and you know, I do want to be careful here because these conversations tend to default to her, she, she, she, but they are a partnership and-

Speaker 1:
[06:35] I agree.

Speaker 2:
[06:36] Meghan is not doing a single thing that Harry doesn't also want to do. There's this idea that she has him wrapped around her finger or something like that, and I don't believe that at all. They are both who they are. And I, you know, it came out that they had registered all these brands in Australia, which gives an indication that she's planning on selling there. And she partnered with ShopMy, which is like this affiliate brand.

Speaker 1:
[07:04] Well, that's the other thing.

Speaker 2:
[07:05] Right. And then she was basically selling links to the outfits that she wore on this trip. And that's gross. That's gross. You're not just some influencer. Or actually, you can just be some influencer. Meghan Sussex with her jam brand. But you insist on being treated like royalty. You insist on keeping the titles and you insist on your children being referred to as Prince and Princess. All while you're doing selling jam and posting affiliate links.

Speaker 1:
[07:34] My problem is that there's no limit. Fine if she wants to sell everything she wears. But at some point, you're like, all right, I'm going to see a cancer patient now and I'm going to see people who were attacked by a terrorist. So maybe those items won't be on the site.

Speaker 2:
[07:47] Yeah, maybe not those items.

Speaker 1:
[07:49] We'll skip these two events.

Speaker 2:
[07:51] I'm sorry, I think they're both so crass now.

Speaker 1:
[07:54] They were available immediately.

Speaker 2:
[07:55] I know.

Speaker 1:
[07:57] So there's a thought process there. I mean, people thought about it. It's not like randomly done.

Speaker 2:
[08:02] Yeah, when I go to the mass death site, I'm going to sell my jeans. And she literally did that. Poor, poor behavior.

Speaker 1:
[08:12] Always judgment.

Speaker 2:
[08:12] I'm actually a little shocked that the two of them have not been called out more for how they acted on that trip.

Speaker 1:
[08:18] But they're all talking about the clothes they're selling and all that. It's just a lot. It's just a lot.

Speaker 2:
[08:23] And then she put out the candles.

Speaker 1:
[08:24] And then immediately after they got back, there's two new candles.

Speaker 2:
[08:28] Named after her children.

Speaker 1:
[08:30] And it's not on the packaging, but the press release came out with their names, full names, Prince whatever.

Speaker 2:
[08:36] Prince Archie and Prince Lillibet.

Speaker 1:
[08:38] The full name.

Speaker 2:
[08:39] Princess Lillibet.

Speaker 1:
[08:39] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[08:40] And again, that's a little gross. And we talked a little bit about this before we flip the mics on. King Charles sells items from his estate, from like the orchards or whatever on his estate. And Buckingham Palace has a gift shop and they sell a bunch of things too. They sell china, they sell all this branded stuff. But I do think most of that stuff is monarchy branded. It's about the institution, which that is a national cultural institution. So for them to have a gift shop in Buckingham Palace is perfectly understandable. And I don't think it's comparable to what Meghan and Harry are doing. And to monetize your children's names, I mean, that is pure influencer crap. But fine, you're allowed to do it. Putting their titles in the marketing information, that's gross. I'm sorry, and I think the two of them are really skirting up to the line of getting their own titles. And I realize it takes an act of parliament to get their titles revoked, but they keep doing shit like this. And guess what?

Speaker 1:
[09:38] They keep fighting for the title. My understanding is that they want the children to have the titles because they think, I think that's what I read, that they believe that the children should have the choice later on when they become adults if they want to pursue any royal whatever or just drop the whole thing.

Speaker 2:
[09:54] As if they're going to be welcomed into the fold? Do you think William is going to be like, sure, come with me.

Speaker 1:
[09:58] But like 20 years later, they're going to come and like, oh sure.

Speaker 2:
[10:00] They don't even know their cousins. No, that's a bullshit answer. They just want their children to have those titles. And frankly, I'm an American and I don't think residents of America should have royal titles. And if you want your children to be referred to as prince and princess, maybe you should move back to the UK, or at the very least to a commonwealth country. But in America, expecting those children to be referred to that way? Gross. I'm sorry. I have been very supportive. People love to paint us as like, I don't even know what the term is, derangers? Or I don't even know what, I don't keep track of any of that stuff. But or sugars. No, derangers are the Kate fans and sugars are the Meghan fans. I can't even keep track of it. I've been accused of being both. I'm all for Meghan and Harry finding their own way.

Speaker 1:
[10:50] I agree.

Speaker 2:
[10:51] I think it was very, very damaging for Harry to be around that family much longer. I think he found it untenable. I think the British press treated her terribly. So I want them to forge that life. We made fun of the Netflix show and everything, but that's the stuff you should be doing. These faux Diana things, I'm sorry, it looks cheap, I think in the end, you're cheapening the memory of your mother, and you are pissing off the people who hold the power to take away your titles.

Speaker 1:
[11:25] I also want to mention the MasterChef Australia thing that she did.

Speaker 2:
[11:28] That was just goofy.

Speaker 1:
[11:29] Which is fine, goofy, whatever. But then there was this whole conversation later that she was introduced as the Duchess of Sussex. Then later, apparently, allegedly, she said that she was embarrassed by it, which I don't buy that at all because we've been on shows, and the producers come to you and say, how do you want to be introduced? There's a conversation about how they're going to introduce when you walk out. So there's no way she didn't know that we're going to say Duchess of Sussex or whatever that she was going to be introduced like the Duchess.

Speaker 2:
[11:59] If Meghan just traveled down to Australia to do a guest spot on a reality TV show, I would be like, all right, great. That's good publicity. But she combined it with Children's Hospitals and Terrorist Site Attacks and then they did that aboriginal walk, but she wore a T-shirt from an LA charity that's being run by a friend of hers, that has nothing to do with aboriginal anything, and that stuff where everything becomes self-promotional. You couldn't show up in some aboriginal jewelry or something to indicate that you understood what you were doing there.

Speaker 1:
[12:36] She probably couldn't sell that on her site.

Speaker 2:
[12:37] Well, she couldn't sell it on her site.

Speaker 1:
[12:38] The thing is that her response is that she's promoting brands. That's why she has the site selling all the stuff she wears. But you're getting a cut.

Speaker 2:
[12:47] Right. Catherine promotes brands too. Every time she wears an Airdem, that dress sells out, but she doesn't get a cut.

Speaker 1:
[12:54] I'm not defending Catherine here, but she wears all these brands. Let me tell you, I go to their Instagram account, the brands, and they never mention anything. They never talk about, oh, she wore this today, they don't use-

Speaker 2:
[13:06] Well, they know that they would lose.

Speaker 1:
[13:08] They would lose the support.

Speaker 2:
[13:09] They would lose the support if they try to make too much.

Speaker 1:
[13:11] But my point is that they don't make a big deal about it. We know the brands, we know who she's wearing in terms of design, but I go to their Instagram accounts and there's no information whatsoever.

Speaker 2:
[13:22] It's just, I think they're being very crass, and I think if they want an influencer lifestyle, they need to not blend it with this philanthropic faux royal. First of all, philanthropic what? What did you do? I'm, you know, this gets into what exactly is the point of royal engagements anyway. But for instance, if Katherine goes to a children's hospital or children's mental health facility somewhere in England, she is supporting locals. She is elevating a local charity. She is bringing insight to that. And because she is a beloved public figure over there, she may have elevated their, you know, whatever contributions people made. You know, there's value to that. What possible value did Meghan and Harry showing up at that children's hospital in Australia? What did it do? Did you raise money? Really? I don't think you did.

Speaker 1:
[14:20] Or at the beach. I mean, you have no relation to this.

Speaker 2:
[14:22] So what's the point of you? You're not raising awareness. Like those things existed before. You're just adding your name to something that already existed.

Speaker 1:
[14:30] Right. When we mentioned that on our site, a lot of people were saying, well, at least they're exposing it. They're bringing it to light again, whatever happened.

Speaker 2:
[14:38] They're just adding their names to it.

Speaker 1:
[14:40] But they're just adding their names to it. I mean, yes, they're bringing it up again, something horrific that happened, but and that we should be all be aware of. But you're promoting your name.

Speaker 2:
[14:50] I know they met with individual survivors of the attack who were there that day and they gave press and they weren't. Of course, I wouldn't even suggest that any individual would not have gotten something out of that. But as a whole, what was the point to this? Except to elevate yourself and to add your name to an important event. That's it and you didn't add anything to this. Same thing with the Children's Hospital, just all of the Aboriginal Walk. It was just photo opportunities. I understand that most royal engagements, like the stuff that Catherine does and William does, it's mostly just photo opportunities as well. But the idea is that they are local cheerleaders for their country, for their- there's just no point in an American and an exiled British man going to Australia and visiting these sites. It does nothing. It just does nothing. It just feels incredibly self-serving. I said we weren't going to have much to say about this, but we had a lot.

Speaker 1:
[15:50] All right.

Speaker 2:
[15:51] Do you have anything else you want to say?

Speaker 1:
[15:52] No, that's it. I just wish they would have a clean start in America as they planned.

Speaker 2:
[15:59] This is working for them, I guess.

Speaker 1:
[16:01] But all I see is them still attached to everything that they left behind.

Speaker 2:
[16:07] As soon as he gets that crown on his head, he's going to work like hell to strip his brother of everything he can. That's why I think they should dial it back a little bit. Maybe you're making money and everything, but there's going to be a backlash, and you forget that they do actually hold the power over you. That family still has power over you because you let them. If you got rid of all your titles, they couldn't do a thing to you. Anyway, that's the end of that. We'll come back after this and we're going to talk about Hacks. We'll be right back. We're back. Having completed our Royal Talk discussion, we are now moving on to TV Talk. We are going to talk a little bit about Hacks, which is back for season five. A little bit about Margo's Got Money Troubles, which premiered last week or the week before. A little bit about season two of Beef, although I will have very little to say about that.

Speaker 1:
[17:00] Now Hacks is the last season. This is the final season.

Speaker 2:
[17:02] This is the final season. I do want to say we were pretty down on it by the end of last season. The end of last season was kind of bitter and dark, and it did wrap itself up in a way that I was interested to see what would happen next. But I didn't count season four as one of its better seasons, and it did start to feel like, all right, we need to wrap this up.

Speaker 1:
[17:26] Right.

Speaker 2:
[17:27] So season five very much has that energy, where the people involved in the creation of the show, they realized that, they realized like, okay, we need to get back to what made this show watchable. And we need to wrap this up, this story. It's not an open story. Like it has either it has an end or there's no point in telling this story. You can't just have Deborah Vance fade out. You have to have some sort of ending to her story. So it looks like that's where they're going. I will say that I think I saw the first two episodes. I thought it was rough the first episode or there were parts of it that I was like, okay, this feels very sitcom-y. It feels very unlikely that you would all be acting this way.

Speaker 1:
[18:12] That's my thing.

Speaker 2:
[18:13] That's some of the stuff with this show is that it goes back and forth between a sort of realistic, semi-realistic adult comedy, and then other times it moves into pure sitcom. I think that's always been my problem with the show. I love the show, but it does have a tonal shift problem. Literally, every time Meghan Stalter is on screen, I'm like, okay, so this is a totally different show from the show I'm watching, or Robbie Hoffman, the same. They're sitcom characters. They're like Kramer on Seinfeld. They're supposed to be annoying and outrageous, and nobody would react to them in the way these people are reacting to them. Every time those characters have a scene, I'm like, all right, well, all the other characters have to start acting like sitcom characters around them. Having said that, I feel like the show is back on track. What do you think?

Speaker 1:
[19:05] I hated the first episode and the second one was a little better, but I do feel like the characters are playing characters, if that makes any sense.

Speaker 2:
[19:14] Yeah, that's true.

Speaker 1:
[19:15] I just don't like that anymore. I mean, Debra does stuff now that I'm like, there's no way in hell this woman would do these things.

Speaker 2:
[19:20] Well, the Mexican Tejana music thing?

Speaker 1:
[19:22] A lot of stuff. I mean, she was always in control. She had her demons or whatever, but she was always in control, and I don't know.

Speaker 2:
[19:32] Do you think maybe that's part of where they're going with this?

Speaker 1:
[19:35] I don't know. First of all, I hate, absolutely despise every single one of these side characters. Hate them all. I mean, to the point that I can't even stand them on my screen. I don't see the point of them. I understand that you can't have a show with just two characters, but they're the show.

Speaker 2:
[19:53] Everybody else is a sitcom character.

Speaker 1:
[19:55] They're the show. When you have those two ladies, on my screen, I love it.

Speaker 2:
[19:59] The show is great.

Speaker 1:
[20:00] The show is great. But when they have all these employees at the agency and all that, that is, oh, I can't stand them. Nobody would put up with that bullshit. The way they talk, the way they... I know. There's no way. There's no way anyone would put up with a character like Kayla. She would be fired no matter what. There's no way. The way she talks, I mean, what is this? And then they introduce Randy and then another one. I'm like, what? And I get it because, what's his name, Paul, whatever his name is.

Speaker 2:
[20:33] Paul Downs.

Speaker 1:
[20:34] Yeah, he's the creator.

Speaker 2:
[20:35] He's the creator and producer.

Speaker 1:
[20:36] He's the creator of the show. So yeah, he's going to create those things and they're all going to say yes to it.

Speaker 2:
[20:42] Yeah, I agree with that. I feel like the writing is trying to, here's what I'm trying to say. I feel like the writing has a point that it's trying to make and that it is leading towards something. We're only talking about the first two episodes of the season, so I can't really judge where it's going. We're not going to, I don't think we're doing weekly recaps of this on the podcast.

Speaker 1:
[21:06] Probably not.

Speaker 2:
[21:07] But we'll wrap it up at the end of the season. I feel like they're trying to unpack a few things about their relationship, the two main characters and how they relate to each other. Obviously, they're very, very close at the moment, closer now than they've ever been. I think Ava is living in her house full time. That's not even something that has just been decided that Ava is going to live in her house. I do think they probably realized that last season when they were at each other's throats for most of the season, that was a mistake. That's not what people were watching this show for. Now we're at wrap up stage where it has to be, and I think this is where they're going. What is the nature of this relationship and what's the point of it? What are we getting at? What are they getting out of this relationship?

Speaker 1:
[21:56] I think she's going to go back to stand up comedy and then be successful. The show is going to end with her being successful again and having-

Speaker 2:
[22:04] I'm sure it will. I can't imagine it's going to end with her in disgrace.

Speaker 1:
[22:07] And have Ava, her person.

Speaker 2:
[22:10] Ava has a new script that their agent is looking at and he's going to start shopping it around. So I'm pretty sure that's where that's going. I said at the end of last season that I thought it was heading towards Deborah buying a comedy club in Las Vegas and running her own comedy club. I still think that might be it. I don't know if that Madison Square Garden thing is going to pan out. I don't know if that- it seems to me like that's- they introduced that like in the first episode, I think. And then the whole second episode was them trying to make it happen. And they got it. They got the date. And I was like, I bet you this isn't going to happen. I think the rest of the season is going to be dealing with why this doesn't happen and then how she picks up the piece. I just can't imagine that. To me, I want Deborah to have an ending that's happy. But I said this last year when she, the whole season was about this 72-year-old female late night television host. I'm like, that doesn't represent anything in our world. It's not- it wouldn't happen. It literally would never happen in the real world. So that whole storyline, I kept waiting for it to implode and it did, because I didn't find it realistic. Subsequently, I'm not going to find it terribly realistic that a 72-year-old female comedian who's on a downward trend in her career is going to somehow pack Madison Square Garden.

Speaker 1:
[23:36] Right.

Speaker 2:
[23:36] I just- I don't think that's where that's going. So that's the setup. I'm here till the end because those two ladies are so freaking watchable when they're together.

Speaker 1:
[23:46] Right.

Speaker 2:
[23:47] As you noted. I don't hate the supporting cast. I just feel like they belong in a different show every time. I don't hate Megan Stalter. I think she can be funny, but she really needs to be on a sitcom somewhere with three cameras and an apartment set and a wacky roommate.

Speaker 1:
[24:03] I don't know the lady, but I hate her character. I think that I understand what the creators of the show are trying to do here. Give sort of a behind the scenes view of how it is and how screwed up people are, how funny they are, whatever. I still remember the scene with Ava buying coffee and it was very expensive in LA.

Speaker 2:
[24:23] I think Hannah Einbinder is freaking hilarious.

Speaker 1:
[24:25] So I love those. It was hysterical. She was like, I forget the price, but she was like, oh, I'm back in LA, coffee for whatever. Anyway.

Speaker 2:
[24:32] It was like $11 for a cup of coffee.

Speaker 1:
[24:34] $11 for a cup of coffee. That kind of stuff is funny. But when you just have losers taking in charge, I mean, it's like, what?

Speaker 2:
[24:44] I remember at the end of last season, I was ready to see Marquez, her assistant who did all her marketing and branding. I was ready to see him written off the show because they didn't know what to do with a character like that. That has always been this structural problem. Marquez isn't a terrible character, but he has been written as a straight man in all of this. No pun intended because he's playing a gay man. But in terms of jokes, he's the serious guy, the guy that all the other wacky characters play off of. He does the slow burn and da-da-da-da-da. But then every other character is increasingly clownish and wacky and wild. So more and more and more, he felt like he didn't belong in the show. He did make an appearance in the second episode, so I'm thinking there's more for him to do. I think he's going to open her club. That's the thing. She's going to open a comedy club. He's going to manage it for her. I bet you that's it.

Speaker 1:
[25:37] I mean, they dropped the daughter.

Speaker 2:
[25:40] That's the thing. Ava's living in the house, and I'm like, okay, but you have a daughter and a grandchild. Not that they should live there, but I just think the show has gone on a little too long, and they have put the characters through too many convoluted storylines, and it's just time. It's time to wrap this up. It's been fun to spend time with all of you. Did Hannah Imbinder, oh, I'm asking you, you wouldn't know. Did Hannah Imbinder win an Emmy? I don't think she has yet. Oh no, yes, she did.

Speaker 1:
[26:11] Because she had that line.

Speaker 2:
[26:12] She did the Ice line. So, okay, everybody's got an Emmy. It's like time to go home, time to go home.

Speaker 1:
[26:17] I think those two characters made a huge contribution, fun, interesting contribution with the show Hacks, and I think they did a fantastic job, but it's time to close the chapter here.

Speaker 2:
[26:28] Shout out to Tony Kushner, who actually, not that he's listening, but I thought he was actually really funny in this, and I just loved seeing a Pulitzer Prize winning playwright really just have some fun with it. We follow his husband, Mark Harris, on social media, and a lot of people follow Mark Harris, and Mark was saying the other day that Tony was like, that's Gene Smart, my co-star. Like, he was like joking about it. But I thought that scene was really key. He was funny. And Ava reacted exactly how a writer would react in that situation, which is like, oh my god, I need to impress this person so badly. Now, the show still has these moments. It kept me hooked. I agree the first episode was dicey. The second episode at the convention with the little debbies, I thought it had a point to it and it made more sense.

Speaker 1:
[27:18] Right. I do like more of that. I mean, I do think that the creators of the show are trying to, again, exposes behind the scenes world of the whole comedy thing and blah, blah, blah. Because I like the whole thing. I thought they were a little too mean with the fans, her fans.

Speaker 2:
[27:33] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[27:34] But that's, you know, they're just making fun of that type of people, which was kind of mean in a way. But I don't know. But it goes with her character. Anyway, I just feel like they get it right sometimes, but every now and then I'm like, all right, I'm stuck with Kayla, you know. Yeah, I know.

Speaker 2:
[27:51] You hate Kayla.

Speaker 1:
[27:52] On the elevator. And I'm like, why? Why am I even here?

Speaker 2:
[27:55] Listen, if, I don't know what Paul Downs' character's name is. I can't remember. If they wanted to do a sitcom around that agency with those three characters, Jimmy, Randy, and Kayla.

Speaker 1:
[28:06] Great.

Speaker 2:
[28:06] That would be a hysterical sitcom.

Speaker 1:
[28:09] Wish I would not watch, but yeah.

Speaker 2:
[28:12] For me, it does not work in this single-camera comedy setup. It just doesn't.

Speaker 1:
[28:17] No.

Speaker 2:
[28:18] Because they're too silly and they don't act like real people. And that's the other thing is that they want to do these grown-up storylines, but at the same token, they resolved them like they would a sitcom. I mean, Jimmy practically beat up the head of a network at the end of last season, and he's just going about his work. Oh, sure, the agency's struggling. No, that guy would be run out of town. He would have zero career, zero clients. But we're just supposed to accept, well, he, you know, he smacked a network head, and that's fine. Agents do that all the time.

Speaker 1:
[28:56] Not even the jokes are funny. Like, Randy is like, oh, I'll drive. I just got my license. What's the point of that? What is the joke here?

Speaker 2:
[29:02] Oh, you're just cranky. You're just being cranky.

Speaker 1:
[29:04] Oh, I can't stand them. Can't stand them.

Speaker 2:
[29:05] All right, let's do it. Have we moved on? Have we done enough with hacks?

Speaker 1:
[29:09] Yeah, we're good.

Speaker 2:
[29:10] Do you want to move on to Margo's Got Money Troubles?

Speaker 1:
[29:15] Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

Speaker 2:
[29:16] That is on what, Hulu?

Speaker 1:
[29:19] It's Apple TV, isn't it?

Speaker 2:
[29:20] No.

Speaker 1:
[29:21] I thought it was. Anyway.

Speaker 2:
[29:22] God, we're selling two old men. We don't even know what we're talking about. Why don't you look that up while I start talking.

Speaker 1:
[29:26] It says watch for free at Apple TV. I think it's Apple TV. Oh, okay.

Speaker 2:
[29:30] I thought it was on Hulu. That's interesting. Okay. Margo's Got Money Troubles is based on a book which I have not read. Starring Michelle Pfeiffer, Elle Fanning, Nick Offerman, and Nicole Kidman who did not appear in the first three episodes. The fourth episode has dropped today, but we have not had a chance to watch it. I got to say, highly recommended.

Speaker 1:
[29:50] Listen, I watched anything with Michelle Pfeiffer. I think she is phenomenal. Love her.

Speaker 2:
[29:56] Same with Elle Fanning though. Yes, Elle Fanning is great. She really has a resume under her belt of really, really good notable work.

Speaker 1:
[30:04] It's funny because you look at her like she's all silly and gorgeous and funny, but you don't expect to have such a great actor, but she is.

Speaker 2:
[30:16] It's really smartly written. It's written by Michelle Pfeiffer's husband, David Kelly, longtime producer and screenwriter. He did Big Little Lies, which is probably why Nicole Kidman is in it. He also did the one where she was the rich woman in New York with the murder. She lived in the nice apartment. I can't remember if she wore that coat.

Speaker 1:
[30:38] Wasn't it in Paris? She went to Paris. That was Paris.

Speaker 2:
[30:40] I can't remember it. No, I can't remember the name of it. The HBO sent us so much crap. Remember? We store all our Christmas decorations in the box. Streamers and cable shows don't really do this like they used to, but they would send all this promotional stuff.

Speaker 1:
[30:56] I spent a lot of money on it.

Speaker 2:
[30:58] I remember the one for that show had chocolates or something, and we store our ornaments in the chocolate box. Anyway, that is a bit of a ramble.

Speaker 1:
[31:10] Margo.

Speaker 2:
[31:10] Margo is about a young college student.

Speaker 1:
[31:15] Is she a college?

Speaker 2:
[31:16] Yeah, she's a college student. That's right.

Speaker 1:
[31:17] Yes.

Speaker 2:
[31:18] Because she gets pregnant by her college professor, and she decides to keep the baby. And it's basically, how does she figure out her life and her family situation? Michelle Pfeiffer plays her mother, Nick Offerman plays her father. They are not together at all. In fact, she has barely seen her father in many, many years. He's a former pro wrestler with addiction, substance abuse issues. And she is a former Hooters waitress, who apparently has done well for herself. Her house is very nice. I don't know what she does for a living. And she's marrying Greg Kinnear, who is like a local pastor or something like that. I mean, it's a hell of a setup.

Speaker 1:
[31:58] It is.

Speaker 2:
[32:00] And I think it does some great work. There were a couple scenes where you and I were like, oh, okay, that was really good. The one about where they were in the car and Michelle Pfeiffer just tears into her and says, I cannot, I cannot be happy about this. Because Michelle Pfeiffer was also a single mom. She also had an unplanned pregnancy with Margo herself. Margo is very aware of this. So she's turning to her mother and her mother is supportive. But it was a great scene. Pfeiffer can act the shit out of something like that. Where she's like, I'm going to love this baby, but I am not happy about this situation because I know what this situation is. I know what your life is going to be.

Speaker 1:
[32:41] It's a very realistic take. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[32:44] Very much a mother talking to her daughter kind of take. And I thought it was a great scene. Another great line was Nick Albermann needing to perform Sanity.

Speaker 1:
[32:53] Oh, I doubt.

Speaker 2:
[32:53] Yeah. She asks her father to move in with her. He's kind of essentially homeless. He has just come out of rehab. And at a certain point, she talks about him leaving. Why don't you live on your own? He makes this... I can't remember what the exact line is, but it's about I need to be able to perform Sanity.

Speaker 1:
[33:13] Yeah. He needs to be with people in the same room living with people.

Speaker 2:
[33:16] And I was like, oh, that is such a good, good, good line. So it's a lot of desperate people. They're not necessary. Some are down on their luck. Some are struggling. And they're all thrown together in this situation. I was very entertained in the first three episodes. However, I thought it was taking very, very long to get to the entire point of the story, which is that in order to support herself, she starts an OnlyFans account and starts producing online erotic material. Right now, she's not posing for any pictures. She's insulting people's dicks or something like that. But it really took a long time to get into that. Anyway, I'm doing a lot of talking.

Speaker 1:
[33:54] No, I agree. Maybe it needed to take that time to explain why she would go that route, why she would decide to open an account and do what she's doing. But I think what I love about the show is it's kind of realistic. It puts you in that position like, okay, I need money. What can I do to support my child? And Elphine is hysterical in the beginning because she goes through the whole thing.

Speaker 2:
[34:19] She's really funny.

Speaker 1:
[34:20] She's funny and she's really open to do all kinds of scenes, which I thought it was great, like dealing with a child, everything that goes.

Speaker 2:
[34:28] It does not romanticize motherhood, not in a physical sense or an emotional sense.

Speaker 1:
[34:33] Everything that a mother goes through with a new baby, first time or whatever as a single mom, all that struggle and how difficult it is.

Speaker 2:
[34:41] She doesn't live with her mother, she lives with roommates.

Speaker 1:
[34:43] The whole roommate thing was hilarious too.

Speaker 2:
[34:46] I thought, okay, well, that's not going to work out for you at all. You could feel that. That was the point is that she's young and she's desperate. She doesn't know. She does not know how to do this at all. I don't know. I find that really enjoyable. Do you want to take a quick break and then we'll?

Speaker 1:
[35:02] Yeah, sure.

Speaker 2:
[35:03] Why don't we take a quick break and come back? We're back. We're talking about Margo's Got Money Troubles on Apple TV+. Yes, we have confirmed that it is on Apple TV+. One thing I want to note is Nick Offerman who-

Speaker 1:
[35:16] Oh my God, he's so good.

Speaker 2:
[35:17] Has just reached a point in his career where he'll just make me cry because he's so good.

Speaker 1:
[35:23] He's very good.

Speaker 2:
[35:24] When he cried when they offered to let him stay, I was like, God, this man's good at that stuff. However, I will say it's the kind of role Nick Offerman can do in his sleep. I mean, he's gruff but lovable. He's got a lot of problems, but he's paternal. In some ways, I don't feel like this is much of a stretch for him because I feel like he's played some version of this character on and off for many, many years now. But he is a joy to watch. There's a scene where, like I said, he and Michelle Pfeiffer have no relationship really. As far as I know, I think they even say at one point, they were like a one-night stand and he went off and had a wrestling career.

Speaker 1:
[36:02] He came back because of the child and then left.

Speaker 2:
[36:05] Yeah, he wasn't involved. There's a great scene where she finds out that he's living with their daughter and she's furious about it and she tears into him and she tears a little bit into her. I turned to you and I said, she is 12 years older than Nick Offerman and you would never ever know that. He always plays a little bit older than his age. He always has. He's younger than people think. She can quite clearly play someone 15, 20 years younger than her because she's beautiful and extremely well preserved, well maintained. But I just thought that was interesting. You don't even get a sense that there's any age gap between those two characters, but those actors are actually 12 years apart. It's actually nice to see that flip because a lot of times, you'll see an older male with a younger female and they're supposed to be the same age.

Speaker 1:
[36:58] What I love about Michelle Pfeiffer is that she always plays these characters that have nothing to do with her. If you watch her interviews and stuff, I mean, she's not like her characters.

Speaker 2:
[37:08] No, she's not.

Speaker 1:
[37:09] I love that.

Speaker 2:
[37:10] Yeah. She's great in this and I'm really looking forward to more from it. Nicole Kidman has not shown up yet, which surprises me that she is taking what appears to be a supporting role in this, and apparently she plays a wrestler. She plays a former lady wrestler, which is not something I'm going to have a hard time buying that to be perfectly honest, because Nicole is delicate.

Speaker 1:
[37:32] I know. We'll see.

Speaker 2:
[37:33] We'll have to say, but she's apparently a former colleague of Nicole from his character. Aside from that, I don't know. It's my favorite new show. I'll say that. It's my favorite new show.

Speaker 1:
[37:46] I was dying to watch it and I'm really enjoying it. We'll see how it goes because sometimes it loses its flavor. But so far, so good.

Speaker 2:
[37:56] I want to get in there and gush about this show because I'm about to trash the next show that we're going to talk about. I'm not going to trash it, but before we get to beef, do you have anything you want to add to?

Speaker 1:
[38:06] No, I think they're great performances.

Speaker 2:
[38:08] It's highly recommended.

Speaker 1:
[38:09] Highly recommended and it's funny.

Speaker 2:
[38:11] It's funny and it's got real moments of heart to it that actually add up to something. I'm genuinely interested to see where it's going to go. It's also got a great cast, not just the people that I'm, like I said, Greg Kinnear is in it, Michael Anganaro, who plays the father of the baby, and Laura San Giacomo has a relatively small part in it. I didn't even recognize her until she let her hair down, then I was like, oh my God, that's Laura San Giacomo.

Speaker 1:
[38:42] Right.

Speaker 2:
[38:43] Yeah. It's a good cast, it's a funny cast, it's sharp writing, it's highly recommended, and yeah, it's my favorite new show of the year.

Speaker 1:
[38:51] It is very funny.

Speaker 2:
[38:52] Now we're going to talk about beef, which I hate it. But let me just jump in.

Speaker 1:
[38:58] Let's talk about beef.

Speaker 2:
[39:00] Jump in as if I haven't been talking non-stop. I will turn the mics over to Lorenzo because I flipped this off after in every sense of the word after one and a half episodes. Beef is the show, it's coming back for season two, it's an anthology show. The first year, it won a string of Emmys. Now, it has a different cast but the same show runner creator. It's a show based on the idea of people pretty much destroying their lives over some beef they have with another person. I never loved the first season, I couldn't really get into it. Even though I know it was critically acclaimed, and sometimes things just don't jibe for you. I like Oscar Isaac, I like Carey Mulligan, I like Charles Milton, and I was like, all right, I'm going to give this a shot. I didn't really feel it the first time around, but let's watch it. It took me two days, and I could not even finish two episodes. I kept having to turn them off. Then finally, I was like 25 minutes into episode two, and I was like, it shouldn't be this hard. The only reason I was watching it, trying so hard to get into it is because, A, you had finished all eight episodes, and B, we had already decided we were going to talk about it. I was like, I got to do this, and finally, you were at your desk, and I walked in and I said, I can't, I'm sorry, you're going to handle this. But I firmly believe that if someone hasn't watched something in its entirety, you should take their thoughts on it with a huge grain of salt, because I don't know where this story went. All I know is it was so freaking unpleasant to watch in the first hour that I could not get into it. And I really wrestled with this idea of, do I need likable characters? And it's like, no, I don't need likable characters. I need interesting characters. And that was the problem. Aside from it being so deeply unpleasant, nobody in this is interesting to me at all. And the one thing I absolutely cannot get away from, and it really turned me off, was it was so clearly a riff on The White Lotus. Like, I felt like I was watching an episode of The White Lotus because all of the themes, all of the character types were right there. It was all class consciousness and people who work for much wealthier people in a country club setting. It's exactly the themes and motifs and everything of The White Lotus. And I'm sitting there going, why would you do this? Why would you do some version of The White Lotus? Like I said, I didn't finish it. I'm assuming it goes off in a direction away from its very, very derivative early scenes, but that's me. That's why I tapped out. I didn't find it pleasant. I found it entirely too derivative. And when I look at The White Lotus, which again, I was fairly critical of, especially the last season, I can at least say that those characters are entertaining to watch. And a lot of them are kind of funny. And I do not feel this about a single miserable person on this show. And now I'm going to shut up because I really have nothing else to say.

Speaker 1:
[42:13] Well, I'll start by saying that Beef was a great idea. The first season was phenomenal. I remember watching the screeners and couldn't wait for people to see it and get their reaction. And because it was an unique idea for a show, it was about rage and what rage can do to you.

Speaker 2:
[42:29] Right.

Speaker 1:
[42:30] And things that can escalate from that rage, from that moment, from one second of your life, and then where that takes you. And I think the show did a good job. And it was also an Asian cast.

Speaker 2:
[42:43] Almost entirely Asian first year.

Speaker 1:
[42:45] And the idea was to show their lives in LA, in California, the whole life of Asian-American. And that was great. That was all unique and different. And I loved the show. I mean, I believe it was the last two episodes of the first season were absolutely phenomenal. They all did a great job and it was great. So when they announced the second season, I was like, oh, great, I can't wait. And I thought it was going to be kind of the same thing, but it isn't. I've watched interviews with the creator of the show and he wanted to do something different, but with Asian characters or Asian actors. And when you start watching, you're like, okay, I get this. And then a lot of people were questioning, well, why are the two main characters white people, like Oscar Isaac and Carrie Mulligan? But then you understand they're part of the cast and all right, that works. And then you start watching the show. And my first reaction was like, this looks like the White Lotus.

Speaker 2:
[43:44] It's way too much.

Speaker 1:
[43:45] I was like, this looks exactly like the White Lotus. You have the Asian people working.

Speaker 2:
[43:50] In a country club.

Speaker 1:
[43:52] Yeah, working.

Speaker 2:
[43:53] With an Asian owner.

Speaker 1:
[43:54] Right. And the white people are in control. Just like the White Lotus. And I do have to say, the first episode, the first fight that they have, the reason why the whole thing unfolds, because they have this major fight, the two major characters.

Speaker 2:
[44:11] Ugly as hell fight.

Speaker 1:
[44:12] It is an ugly fight, but I love the scene. I mean, first of all, I absolutely love Carey Mulligan. I think she is phenomenal.

Speaker 2:
[44:20] Right.

Speaker 1:
[44:20] I think she's really, really good. And it was a great fight. Felt really real. Felt real. Well played by both of them. And then you see what's happening. I think, and I've watched several interviews with the creator of the show. And the idea was to create a show, create a season where it was about capitalism, it was about money and what money does to you, to your relationships and all that, and to destroy things and make you do things that you wouldn't normally do, but you need money, so therefore you're going to do it. You're going to do whatever it takes to survive. And I think that was the entire season.

Speaker 2:
[44:59] Can I just jump in and say, the problem there is, again, I've only seen one and a half episodes, but I must have heard a character voice that exact sentiment at least a half dozen times, late stage capitalism. And when you have your characters openly discussing the themes that you're unpacking, it's just not great, not to me, I'll shut up again.

Speaker 1:
[45:21] No, and then the plot gets even more complicated because the owner, there's a new owner, the club was sold and the new owner is from Korea, this very rich family, powerful family from Korea, and they come to see the club, what they bought and so on. So there's this whole subplot with the Korea family, and I don't want to give too much away, but there's a lot going on there too in Korea, and it just keeps getting, it kept growing and growing, becoming more absurd, I thought, in terms of plot. It didn't need to add that many characters and many things going on in Korea also, that led them to buy the club and money laundry and all that stuff, and it just got very, very big. I don't know, it got to a point that I was like, all right, I don't even know what I'm watching here. It felt like a James Bond movie at some point, because there are all these spy characters and all that, and I'm like, all right, they're on a plane and they're all the spies on the plane, and it was just a little too much.

Speaker 2:
[46:25] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[46:26] But so I enjoyed their performances.

Speaker 2:
[46:30] Charles Melton is a great actor.

Speaker 1:
[46:32] He is incredible.

Speaker 2:
[46:34] He really stood out for me.

Speaker 1:
[46:36] Right. I mean, the creator of the show.

Speaker 2:
[46:38] Also, he's very pretty.

Speaker 1:
[46:39] I forgot his name. He created the character specifically.

Speaker 2:
[46:43] I know he did.

Speaker 1:
[46:43] He had Charles Melton in mind.

Speaker 2:
[46:45] Because he saw May, December or whatever.

Speaker 1:
[46:47] He loved him and said, I'm going to create a character for you. This is all based on, I want you to play this. And he does a very, very, he does a good job. And every now and then, there are good parts about being Asian, being Asian American. There's a line that Charles Melton's character says, they always think I'm Mexican.

Speaker 2:
[47:06] Right.

Speaker 1:
[47:07] Stuff like that.

Speaker 2:
[47:07] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[47:08] And I watch interviews with Charles Melton say that, that really happened to me. They think I'm Mexican. Sometimes they think I'm Mexican. Sometimes they think I'm Asian. And there's another scene with play. Oh, Kayleigh Espany. We forgot about her. She's also-

Speaker 2:
[47:21] I wanted to bring her up.

Speaker 1:
[47:22] She's also very, very good.

Speaker 2:
[47:24] She's very good, but she looks exactly like the actress who played the daughter in the last season of The White Lotus. She looks exactly like that actress.

Speaker 1:
[47:34] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[47:34] And I thought they were the same. In fact, in those opening scenes, I was like, why would you do a White Lotus riff if you've cast someone from The White Lotus? And I had to go look her up. And I'm like, oh, no, she just happens to look exactly like her. She's great. I always like Kayleigh Spany. I like her work. She's got this nervous sort of slightly.

Speaker 1:
[47:51] Yes. There's a great character development because she's this very sweet, naive person in the beginning, and then she turns into this very calculated bitch, which it was great. I thought her character did well.

Speaker 2:
[48:04] I do think, I just want to jump in and say, I thought it was interesting that there's a generational divide here, but it's not that big a generational divide. Oscar Isaac and Carey Mulligan are in their 40s, and Kayleigh Spani and Charles Melton, they're almost 30. I mean, Charles Melton is, he's actually 35, but in the story, he says he's 29. And I don't know how old she is. I think she's a little bit younger, but it's just interesting to me that you barely have much of an age difference here. There is one, but it's not big enough for the kind of, I think those kids could have, well, first off, he's not a kid, he's 29 years old. He acts like a kid.

Speaker 1:
[48:45] Right.

Speaker 2:
[48:45] And I guess that's part of his character arc, is that he's in some sort of arrested development.

Speaker 1:
[48:49] I think the whole Asian-

Speaker 2:
[48:50] But I think, I'm sorry, I think that that aspect of the story would have worked better if he had cast actors who could have been like 22 or 23. I'm sorry, go ahead.

Speaker 1:
[49:00] I think the whole Asian thing, which is the main point of the-

Speaker 2:
[49:02] The whole Asian thing. Let's rephrase that, okay?

Speaker 1:
[49:04] Let's rephrase it. The whole Asian homage, let me put it this way, or exploring the Asian culture and contribution and all that.

Speaker 2:
[49:13] I love that stuff.

Speaker 1:
[49:14] I love that stuff and I think that was great with the first season because it really gave you a sort of like this view or point of view of Asian Americans and Asian Americans with money because some of the characters had money. So that whole life in California of Asian Americans. I think they tried to do the same here, but with people with less money, which was great, but that kind of got lost a little because it just felt like the creator of the show wanted to create a story that also incorporated Korea. So he invited these great actors from Korea, Korean actors to perform, which they're amazing. But it just didn't add much. Everything got lost with a plot, I thought.

Speaker 2:
[50:00] It sounds like he tried to do too much.

Speaker 1:
[50:01] Yeah. It just felt like too much. It didn't go anywhere to me. I mean, towards the end, I'm like, where is this going? It didn't really make a lot of sense. I just gave up and I was like, all right, I'm just here for the great performances.

Speaker 2:
[50:16] So can you recommend this season? Did you finish it because you felt you had to or because you loved it?

Speaker 1:
[50:21] No, because I wanted to finish it to see.

Speaker 2:
[50:23] That's not loving it.

Speaker 1:
[50:24] Yeah. No, I didn't love it. I thought it had great points.

Speaker 2:
[50:31] It's got a great, I mean, a killer cast.

Speaker 1:
[50:34] Carrie Mulligan is phenomenal. Charles Melton is very, very good.

Speaker 2:
[50:37] Oscar Isaac's great. When is he not great?

Speaker 1:
[50:39] I know.

Speaker 2:
[50:40] He's actually funny. They're all great. I just, like I said, it's not that I need likable characters. I need interesting characters. And you know what scene I tapped out on actually? It was Carrie Mulligan was sitting with the country club bitches and they were treating her like a servant. And they were like, could you get us some soda or whatever? And I was like, I'm not interested in this. I'm sorry. If the bitches at the country club are mean to you, I don't give a shit. Like that is not a problem that I care about. And that's been my main issue. That was my main issue with the series or the season, which is like, you're not setting anything up for me that makes me want to continue this story at all.

Speaker 1:
[51:18] I think there were interesting points. There's conversation between Kaylee and Charles characters. They're talking and she's like, oh, why didn't you ever date an Asian girl? And he says, well, no. Oh, why do you always date white women or something like that? And he's like, no, I can't date an Asian woman. I mean, it would be like dating my mother. So stuff like that could have been used more, explore more, the whole Asian culture thing and in the country and being Asian. I don't know. They tried a little when the Korean people come to the club, they kind of ask questions about how is to be Asian here in the United States, in this country, and he talks a little bit about it. But it's very watered down. It doesn't go deep. It was more about creating these situations, these fights and things between the white people and then the Asian people that didn't make a lot of sense. It was just too much. I felt like they were trying to add too much to the story.

Speaker 2:
[52:24] Great. Anything else?

Speaker 1:
[52:26] No, I think that's it. But I give it a shot.

Speaker 2:
[52:30] Give it a shot. That's not a ringing endorsement.

Speaker 1:
[52:32] No, it's not as good as the first season.

Speaker 2:
[52:35] Okay. I would give Margo's Got Money Troubles a ringing endorsement. Hacks is a sort of, I'm going to see it out to the end. It's not bad.

Speaker 1:
[52:45] Right. Hacks is the thing you just want to finish it.

Speaker 2:
[52:48] It was a great show. It's a comfort watch at this point. All right. That's it. We will be back in two days with our thoughts on Memento, so catch up on that for the Bitter Kitten Movie Club. We'll be back next week, hopefully, earlier in the week than this with Whatever Crosses Our Eyes Across Our Desks. Thank you once again for listening. Love you, mean it. Bye-bye.

Speaker 1:
[53:07] Bye.