👍 The audiobooks planted both Lesley Manville & Fiona Shaw in my head; I had to work up to Celia by microdosing The Diplomat, but I got there in the end.

100% agreed. Maybe a scruffed up Andy Serkis would have worked? I 💚 PB, but yes, he's just a smidge too... groomed? IMO Ron DEFINITELY has untrimmed ear &/or nose hair.

Thank you! Watched it on yr rec & it’s as close to a perfect series as I’ve ever found. (Related: Have you seen Deadloch, the Oz crime series?)

Here's the Lunch 101 post by the way -- and to be clear, it was compiled by Drew Marquardt, but I don't have his skandle.

(I dunno if "skandle" is the right term, but maybe it should be?)

blog.quoteunquoteapps.com/the-producti...

I've seen a handful and regret every second of it. In the US, guild/union membership is triggered by working for companies that pay guild/union rates & follows g/u work rules. So no, vertical work doesn't help on that front. It does pay, but much, much, much less than g/u rates.

Sorry, had this same confusion, learned the distinction then promptly forgot other people are not psychic. This content = vertical b/c it's watched on a phone in vertical mode & filmed that way. Made by orgs unaffiliated w major studios. Vertical viewers = audience for this content.

They're so low budget they make student films look like Cameron's Titanic. Single takes, no coverage, dialogue dubbed in post, performers using own clothes for costuming, etc. Plus hiring non-union actors & crew marooned by the production shut down for teeny amounts of $$.

I think vertical viewers are locked in a similarly restrictive content ecosystem, and the larger marketplace currently doesn't offer a compelling alternative (or has priced it out of the viewers' reach.) But I think new development will pick up eventually and eat verticals lunch.

I think it's a bit like Edgar Rice Burroughs et al in the age of pulp serials; he's a wildly effective storyteller for readers who are constantly made to wait for the next installment. But you watch John Carter's first 30 minutes and suddenly the same beats are clunky af.

(Obviously, if you need money to eat and you can drive a Lyft, go for it. But it's an imperfect solution for many people, and that's exactly how I would characterize verticals-as-employment.)

Verticals eat bandwidth and craft -- the patience, curiosity, skill, attention needed to do create believable visual storytelling. The result: Sleep-deprived artists with short tempers and barely sublimated shame, all of which can undermine their work the next time they land a guild/union job.

Also, like Uber/Lyft/AirBnB, the suppliers are seemingly "finding a use" for an "otherwise-wasted resource." But just as AirBnB eats housing stock, creating false scarcity, overheated pricing and housing insecurity....

The overlap with the Shein model is NOT subtle; the delivered buzz is 95% recreational consumption, 5% actual gratification. When that 5% dissipates, users are already locked into a market/ecosystem that seamlessly stimulates initiating another cycle. (See also slot machines, carnival games, etc.)

4. The anticipated "high" -- the story is so bonkers, it HAS to have a satisfying ending, right? -- is based on past viewing of well-crafted serie, which work hard to hide why/how they satisfy. So users blame THEMSELVES for their disappointment. 5. But "next time" they'll pick a better series.

Some weaponized addictive mechanisms: 1. The first chunk of episodes is always free, then you have to pay to see "how it ends"; 2. Payment via tokens, which you buy in large batches; 3. This hides the "real" cost and means you have some "left over" -- so why not start another series?