production

Richard Madeley is among names remaining in roles on ITV programmes, like Good Morning Britain, despite a huge cull this summer – a bloodbath which will see more than 200 off-screen roles cut

Backroom staff at ITV are reportedly “furious” to see “the little people get the boot” in favour of “the big names” amid the broadcaster’s bloodbath.

ITV is making huge changes to its daytime programming, and is axing more than 200 off-screen roles as a result. Good Morning Britain is merging with ITV News, but all of their top presenters – who include Susanna Reid, Richard Madeley, Julie Etchingham and Tom Bradby – will remain in post for now at least, it is said.

Madeley, 69, penned a short-term deal to remain in his position for six more months at least. It is understood Kate Garraway is safe – as is presenter Adil Ray, who looked set to be axed. Instead, insiders say his shifts will be cut. Yet, ITV was brutal to axe Noel Edmonds’ big TV comeback after just one series despite its huge launch.

And the daytime cuts primarily affect tireless production staff, who work off screen. The consultation period, which will determine who will be the victims of these brutal financial cuts, has been underway for some months and employees are said to be angry with the situation.

READ MORE: Frank Grimes dead: Coronation Street actor dies after short illnessREAD MORE: The Chase’s Shaun Wallace surprises followers with move away from ITV show

One insider told Mail Online: “All the big names are staying while the little people get the boot. It is horrendous. You’d think if you wanted to save a big lump of cash you could get rid of some of the presenters. There are loads of them. But no, instead they’ve all been told they are safe.”

For now, everyone on Good Morning Britain and ITV News will continue their separate shows. This Morning’s presenters will also stay in situ. In response to this, he insider added: “The cuts will fall to those who earn pennies in comparison. When this was all announced, we thought some of the stars would go – and rightfully so. Some of them are rubbish. Rather than there being three or four backstage workers doing a certain job, there will be one – but there will still be loads of presenters.” The source did not identify names when using the word “rubbish”.

ITV has always said it has to slash costs. Some onscreen journalists are also facing the axe in a bid to balance the books, but it is thought none of the mainstay hosts are affected.

One presenter told Mail Online: “It’s awful to see, awful. These people work so hard and they’ve still lost their jobs. And where are they going to go?… The industry is getting smaller and smaller for production staff.”

Loose Women and Lorraine have also been decimated by the cuts, with presenters on the former facing the prospect of only being aired for 30 weeks a year. Lorraine, too, is going from 52 weeks a year to 30, as well as being cut back from an hour to just half an hour in transmission time.

Cynthia Erivo, a noted theatrical divinity, redeemed the title of “Jesus Christ Superstar” at the Hollywood Bowl last weekend in a magnetic, heaven-sent performance that established God the Savior as a queer Black woman, as many of us suspected might be the case all along.

Divine dispensation allowed me to catch the final performance of this revival of Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice’s 1971 breakout musical. I returned from vacation just in time to join the pilgrimaging hordes carting cumbersome picnic baskets and enough wine for a few dozen Sicilian weddings. The vast number of attendees caused bottlenecks at entry points, prompting one wag to crack, “What is this, the Second Coming?”

The headliners, Erivo as Jesus and Adam Lambert as Judas, certainly have sizable fan bases. But so too does the subject of this Greatest Story Ever Told, a messiah whose following has few equals in the history of the world. Suffice it to say, it was a supercharged evening, comparable more to a rock concert than one of the Bowl’s forays into the musical theater past.

The hard-charging exuberance was appropriate for a production that went back to the concept album roots of a rock opera that, like other countercultural musicals of the period — such as “Hair” and “Godspell” — preached peace and love while rebelling against oppression and conformity. “Jesus Christ Superstar” reminds us that Lloyd Webber wasn’t always a symbol of the bourgeois establishment.

Yes, the composer behind “Cats,” “The Phantom of the Opera” and “Sunset Boulevard” had an early revolutionary streak, challenging authority and testing social taboos. What made “Jesus Christ Superstar” controversial wasn’t simply the depiction of Jesus of Nazareth as a man with vulnerabilities and doubts. It was the blast of guitars and vocal shrieks that accompanied the telling of his last days and crucifixion in a manner more akin to the Who’s “Tommy” than the church organ interludes of a traditional Sunday service.

Cynthia Erivo delivered a heaven-sent performance in “Jesus Christ Superstar” at the Hollywood Bowl last weekend.

(Farah Sosa)

Director and choreographer Sergio Trujillo leaned into the concert nature of “Jesus Christ Superstar.” The metallic scaffolding staging, the mythic scale of projections and the rhythmic flow of cast members, moving from one musical number to the next, freed the production from literal illustration.

The religious meaning of the story was communicated through the intensity of the performances. Erivo and Lambert are incapable of ever giving less than 100% when translating emotion into song. But the human drama was most evident in the handling of duets, the musical give and take that showcases the richness of all that lies between lyrics.

The conflict between Erivo’s all-seeing, all-feeling Jesus and Lambert’s competitive yet remorseful Judas was thrillingly brought to life in their different yet wholly compatible musical styles. In “Strange Thing Mystifying” and “The Last Supper,” Lambert, a Freddie Mercury style-rocker, and Erivo, a musical theater phenomenon who can pierce the heavens with her mighty voice, revealed a Judas who can’t account for all his actions and a Jesus who understands the larger destiny that is both sorrowfully and triumphantly unfolding.

Phillipa Soo provided sublime support in a cast that had considerable Broadway depth.

(Farah Sosa)

Phillipa Soo’s Mary Magdalene brought a probing, tentative and profound intimacy in her adoration of Erivo’s Jesus. In her exquisite rendition of “I Don’t Know How to Love Him,” the tenderness between Mary Magdalene and Jesus, at once earthy and ethereal, deepened the expressive range of the love between them.

Soo, best known for her graceful lead performance in “Hamilton,” provided sublime support in a cast that had considerable Broadway depth. Raúl Esparza, whom I can still hear singing “Being Alive” from the 2006 Broadway revival of “Company,” played Pontius Pilate with lip-smacking political villainy. Josh Gad, who missed Friday’s performance because of illness but was in sharp comic form Sunday, turned King Herod into a Miami-style mobster, dressed in a gold lamé getup that would be just perfect for New Year’s Day brunch at Mar-a-Lago.

Raul Esparza as Pontius and Cynthia Erivo as Jesus in “Jesus Christ Superstar.”

(Farah Sosa)

The acting company distinguished itself primarily through its galvanic singing. Music director and conductor Stephen Oremus maintained the production’s high musical standards, bringing out the extensive palette of a rock score with quicksilver moods.

One could feel Erivo, a generous performer who understands that listening can be as powerful as belting, building up trust in her less experienced musical theater castmates. The way she registered Lambert’s bravura moments bolstered not only his confidence in his non-singing moments but also the miracle of her own fully realized performance.

Ultimately, Jesus’ spiritual journey is a solitary one. In “Gethsemane,” the path of suffering becomes clear, and Erivo’s transcendence was all the more worshipped by the audience for being painfully achieved. Unmistakably modern yet incontestably timeless, abstract yet never disembodied and pure of heart yet alive to the natural shocks that flesh is heir to, this portrayal of Jesus with piercings, acrylic nails and tattoos met us in an ecumenical place where all are welcome in their bodily realities and immortal longings.

Lloyd Webber is undergoing a renaissance at the moment. Fearlessly inventive director Jamie Lloyd has given new impressions of “Sunset Blvd.,” which won the Tony for best musical revival this year, and “Evita,” which is currently the talk of London’s West End.

Trujillo’s production of “Jesus Christ Superstar” deserves not just a longer life but more time for the actors to investigate their momentous relationships with one another. The drama that occurs when Erivo’s Jesus and Soo’s Mary Magdalene interact should provide the model for all the cast members to lay bare their messy human conflicts. “Jesus Christ Superstar” depends as much upon its interpersonal drama as its rock god swagger — as Erivo, in a Bowl performance that won’t soon be forgotten, proved once and for all.

Netflix Inc. has begun using artificial intelligence video generation software from startup Runway AI, testing the waters with a technology that’s controversial in Hollywood.

Netflix is currently using the New York-based startup’s tools in content production, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named in order to discuss private conversations. Netflix declined to comment.

Walt Disney Co., meanwhile, has been testing out Runway’s technology and has talked with the startup about possible uses for its generative AI tools, the person said. A Disney spokesperson said the company has no plans to integrate Runway’s software into its content production pipeline at this time. Runway declined to comment.

The companies’ use of Runway’s AI video tools, which has not previously been reported, could raise concerns in the entertainment industry. Many film and TV professionals are anxious about AI’s impact on their livelihoods. Disney recently sued Midjourney Inc., another AI image and video startup, for copyright infringement. But AI also offers the promise of speeding up some video production tasks and saving money.

In a conference call Thursday, after Netflix released its second-quarter results, co-Chief Executive Officer Ted Sarandos said the company is using AI in content production. That includes creating special effects shots more quickly and cheaply than it previously had been able to with traditional visual effects tools and processes.

Sarandos said Netflix used the technology for the first time on screen to depict a building collapsing in a show called “El Eternaut” from Argentina. He did not disclose which AI software it used for that particular scene; a source familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named in order to discuss private information, said Runway’s software was not used to create the effect.

Runway is competing in an increasingly crowded corner of the fast-growing market for AI tools with established companies like OpenAI and Google, along with a slew of smaller, newer startups.

The startup has more traction than most AI startups in Hollywood, however. It kicked off a frenzy around AI video generators in early 2023 with the release of a model that could produce slightly choppy-looking three-second clips based on written prompts such as “drone footage of a desert landscape.” Its technology has since become far more capable and the company has inked a deal with Lionsgate to train an AI model on the studio’s content that can be used in its film projects.

Investors have poured $545 million into the company thus far, with a funding round of $308 million earlier this year valuing the company at more than $3 billion.

More recently, Runway has pushed deeper into the world of animation and special effects. Earlier this month, the company started rolling out a new AI model called Act-Two that is meant to make the motion-capture process — traditionally clunky, pricey and time consuming — simpler and cheaper. The model, which works with Runway’s flagship Gen-4 AI system, can map a video of a person’s body movements onto animated characters.

Other AI startups have also tried to make inroads in the entertainment industry. As Bloomberg News previously reported, OpenAI spent months talking to large studios, including Disney, about its AI video generator, Sora. While OpenAI has found a receptive audience among some filmmakers, it has yet to announce a large commercial partnership for the product.

Metz writes for Bloomberg.

US President Donald Trump says he’s ordered the US Justice Department to produce “all pertinent” grand jury testimony related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

“Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.

Attorney General Pam Bondi posted minutes later: “We are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts.”

The development comes after days of sustained pressure from Trump’s Make America Great Again (Maga) supporters demanding further disclosures in the Epstein case.

It’s unclear from the post whether Trump is authorising the public release of additional documents or when that could come – though such action would typically require the approval of a court.

While campaigning last year, Trump promised to release files relating to the disgraced financier.

However Bondi last week announced that the US Justice Department did not believe Epstein had a so-called client list that could implicate high-profile associates, and that he did take his own life – despite conspiracies over his death.

That prompted furious response from scores of Trump’s most ardent supporters who have called for Bondi to resign after failing to produce the list, which Trump officials had previously claimed to have in their possession.

Epstein died in a New York prison cell in 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. His death while incarcerated happened more than a decade after his conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor, for which he was registered as a sex offender.

By now, many Disney fans have had a chance to see the officially released images by the company as well as close-up pictures taken by park guests. There have been quibbles, to say the least, with many a fan showing snapshots of the animatronic side by side with pictures of a much younger Disney. It’s important to note that the figure captures Disney in 1963. Disney died in 1966 at 65.

The show has me thinking a bit on how the animatronic medium can be used best. Disney introduced its audio-animatronics in 1963 with the Enchanted Tiki Room, but elevated the form in 1965 with the “Great Moments With Mr. Lincoln” production. We have no filmed footage of Abraham Lincoln, meaning he exists to us largely in our mind. “Walt Disney — A Magical Life” contains a 15-minute documentary-like film, “One Man’s Dream,” which is narrated by Disney and Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Bob Iger, allowing us an instant comparison.

From my vantage point — again, about three-fourths of the way into the theater — the animatronic was a more-than-respectable approximation of Disney. It’s not perfect, perhaps — the face is a little bulky, the cheeks just a bit off — but that’s because I still think the medium is best suited for more fantastical characters and creations, shows and figures that let us use our imagination rather than aim to capture life. Audio, however, is taken direct from Disney’s speeches, with an emphasis on creative inspiration, and while it has been cleaned up, there’s no mistaking that it’s Disney’s voice.

Ultimately, Walt Disney Imagineering, the creative team responsible for theme park creations, deserves to be commended for this risk, as it has me eager to see how audio-animatronics will continue to evolve and elevate our immersive experiences. At its core, this is a robot, and no robot will directly capture human life, at least not yet, but this is as close as Walt Disney Co. has come.

The Walt Disney animatronic figure has been in the works for about seven years, according to Walt Disney Imagineering.

(Richard Harbaugh / Disneyland Resort / Image Group LA)

“The Seagull: Malibu” and the seldom-revived “Strife,” two ambitious offerings in Theatricum Botanicum’s outdoor season, are reset in the American past.

Ellen Geer, the director, calls her version of Anton Chekhov’s play, “a retelling.” She relocates “The Seagull,” as a program note specifies and her production flamboyantly conveys, “to the self-centered Me Generation of the ’70s that followed the social upheaval of the ’60s.” Malibu, a California world unto its own, hemmed in by the Pacific Ocean on one side and the Santa Monica Mountains on the other, sets up a groovy, glamorous equivalent to the backwater country setting of Chekhov’s original, in which all of the characters seem to be suffering from terminal ennui.

“Strife,” John Galsworthy’s 1909 social drama about the human cost of a deadlock between management and labor, is transferred from the England-Wales border to Pennsylvania of the 1890s. The play, directed by Ellen Geer and Willow Geer, isn’t adapted in the freehanded way of “The Seagull: Malibu,” and the change of locale doesn’t always seem natural.

The production’s opening scene is slightly disorienting. The directors, called to an emergency meeting at the home of the chairman of the board of the American Steel Corp., have the haughty mien of British aristocrats. Later, at the freezing cold abode of one of the leaders of the strike, the impoverished scene takes on unmistakable Dickensian notes. There are a fair number of Irish accents in the mix, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if one of the actors broke out his best cockney.

“The Seagull: Malibu” isn’t always consistent in setting up the time period, but the production’s larkish approach is infectious. Arkadina (Susan Angelo) plays the self-absorbed actress mother who sold out to Hollywood. Defensive about her age, she’s even more prickly about the condescending attitude of her would-be avant-garde playwright son, Constantine (Christopher Glenn Gilstrap), who basically thinks she’s a B-movie hack.

Gilstrap’s Constantine looks more like a future yacht rock frontman than a theatrical renegade. Angelo’s Arkadina seems destined to have her career resurrected in the next decade by a recurring role on either “Dallas” or “Dynasty.” The charged Oedipal dynamics between them are vividly fleshed out.

Rajiv Shah and Susan Angelo in “The Seagull: Malibu” at Will Geer Theatricum Botanicum.

(Ian Flanders)

Willow Geer plays Masha, the Chekhov character who insouciantly declares that she’s in mourning for her life. Her Masha is a pothead and sloppy self-dramatizing drunk, hopelessly in love with Constantine, who only has eyes for Nina (Caroline Quigley). Masha confides her discontent to Dr. Dore (Daniel Reichert), a Gestalt therapist who, like Chekhov’s more traditional Dr. Dorn, has an empirical worldview that stands in stark contrast to the romantic dreaminess of everyone else at the estate.

Thad (Tim Halligan), Arkadina’s rechristened brother, suffers from fragile health and a sketchy backstory. Halligan, however, gives the character definition, especially when advocating for his nephew and risking the wrath of his volatile, penny-pinching sister. Trigger (Rajiv Shah) is the new version of Trigorin, the established writer who, as Arkadina’s younger lover, resists becoming her property even as he enjoys the perks of their celebrity relationship.

The boldly amusing and good-natured production makes the most of the fading California hippie era. The final act, unfortunately, is dreadfully acted. Quigley’s Nina is a delight in the play’s early going, all innocence and starry-eyed enthusiasm. But there appears to be no artistic growth when she returns to encounter a still-lovesick Constantine. Quigley’s acting is as melodramatic and artificial as Nina’s was said to be before her travails and losses transformed her talent.

This isn’t the production’s only failure of subtlety, but it’s surely the most consequential. Still, if you can cope with a deflating finale, there’s much to enjoy in this update of “The Seagull,” not least the glorious Topanga summer night backdrop, which translates Chekhov’s setting into a rustic West Coast paradise.

Emily Bridges and Franc Ross in “Strife” at Will Geer Theatricum Botanicum.

(Ian Flanders)

I can’t remember ever having seen a Galsworthy play, so I was grateful for Theatrium Botanicum’s vision in producing “Strife.” Awarded the Nobel Prize in literature in 1932, Galsworthy is better known for his novels than his plays. (The 1967 BBC television adaptation of his Forsyte family chronicles brought him immense posthumous acclaim.)

“Strife” is an intelligent thesis play, not on the verbal or theatrical level of George Bernard Shaw’s sparkling comedy of ideas but impressive all the same for its complexity of argument and compassionate determination to understand all sides of a problem. The play is especially resonant at this moment when workers are treated like items in a budget that can be erased without regard for human consequences.

There’s a rousing speech about the God of Capital, “a white-faced, stony-hearted monster” that says, “‘I’m very sorry for you, poor fellows — you have a cruel time of it, I know,’ but will not give you one dollar of its dividends to help you have a better time.” These words are spoken by David Roberts (Gerald C. Rivers), a labor hard-liner and rabble-rouser, who is the ideological enemy and (mirror image of) John Anthony (Franc Ross), the chairman of American Steel who refuses to give an inch to the demands of the workers.

In portraying these intractable figures in equivalent moral terms, Galsworthy reveals, if not his privileged background, then his muddled thinking on economic justice. But this large-cast drama (one of the reasons it’s rarely produced today) provides a broad spectrum of human experience, adding depth and nuance to what is undeniably a vigorous debate.

Brian Wallace, left, and Gerald C. Rivers in “Strife” at Will Geer Theatricum Botanicum.

(Ian Flanders)

Enid Underwood (Emily Bridges), Mr. Anthony’s married daughter, is desperate to help her ailing servant, Annie Roberts (Earnestine Phillips), whose health has been destroyed since her husband, David, has been on strike. Enid’s sympathy is strong, but her class allegiance is stronger, setting up an intriguing character study that takes us into the heart of the societal dilemma Galsworthy diligently dissects.

The acting is often at the level of community theater — broad, strident and overly exuberant. Galsworthy, to judge by this revival, seems to be working far outside the tradition of realism. I wish the directors had reined in some of the hoary excesses of the performers, but I felt fortunate to experience a play that might not be an indelible classic but is too incisive to be forgotten.

The opening scene unfolds onto a bird’s-eye view of a sedan making its way down a stretch of unmarked highway, as Woody Harrelson’s unmistakable drawl is heard off-camera. “You ever wonder if this industry of ours is just chasing its own tail?” he asks.

Matthew McConaughey, in his equally distinctive cadence, shoots back, “No, I don’t wonder. Restrictions, regulations, nickel and diming productions, political lectures,” before the camera pans in for a close-up of the actors.

The sequence pays homage to the gritty, atmospheric crime drama “True Detective.” Indeed, it was directed by Nic Pizzolatto, the show’s creator.

Woody Harrelson and Matthew McConaughey have played major roles in the effort to increase Texas film incentives.

(Lester Cohen / WireImage)

In January, this four-minute video, “True to Texas,” was released as part of an unusual campaign by a coalition of A-list actors — Dennis Quaid, Renée Zellweger and Billy Bob Thornton make appearances — independent creatives and Lone Star Republicans to appeal to the Texas State Legislature.

The goal: to help bring increased film incentives to a state not known for its wholesale embrace of Hollywood or government subsidies — particularly for something like the arts.

Despite considerable push back among conservative lawmakers, the effort paid off. Last month Gov. Greg Abbott allowed the passage of an unprecedented bill boosting tax incentives for film production in the state to $300 million every two years — guaranteeing that funding for 10 years. The law goes into effect Sept. 1.

The aggressive bid to nab a slice of Hollywood furthers the ongoing rivalry between California and Texas. Several major Golden State-based companies including Tesla and Hewlett-Packard have relocated to the Lone Star State, lured by lower taxes and its business-friendly environment. It also comes as California is struggling to keep movie and TV production, having recently doubled its own tax incentive ceiling to compete with film subsidies in three dozen other states and abroad.

The new bill puts Texas in a position to become a major player among the growing list of global and regional filming hubs in an industry that has become increasingly unmoored from its historic Hollywood hometown.

“Texas now has a program that is going to be competitive,” said Fred Poston, the executive director of the Texas Media Production Alliance. “When you really take a close look at it, you realize this is a big deal. We have this new level of funding to start building more industry around it.”

The Texas bill is not only bigger and better, but found itself an unlikely champion in Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick wants to make his state the world’s film capital.

(Eric Gay / Associated Press)

“We are not trying to make Texas the next Hollywood — we don’t like Hollywood. We want to export Texas values,” said Patrick in a campaign update. A staunch conservative who has relentlessly opposed legalized marijuana, gambling and abortion, Patrick has vowed “to make Texas the Film Capital of the World.”

The bill, which supports the Texas Moving Image Industry Incentive Fund (TMIIF) program, offers tiered grants up to 25% for projects spending $1.5 million in the state. Faith-based films and those that shoot in historic sites or employ a percentage of crew who are Texas-based military veterans can push grants up to 31%.

The governor’s office, through the film commission, has broad discretion over which projects receive funds and awards can be denied at any stage in the review process for material that portrays Texas negatively or contains “inappropriate” content.

Conservative backlash

Still, even with the bill’s Texas-style protectionist wrangling, its passage was far from assured.

Weeks before the Senate vote, there was hand-wringing among conservative lawmakers and others who opposed the bill on economic, moral and even biblical grounds. Critics took swipes at profanity-laced scripts and what they saw as inaccurate portrayals of the state’s oilmen on TV. Some viewed the grants as akin to taxpayer theft. Many shuddered at the thought that the bill would usher in the unholy influence of a debauched Hollywood on Texas.

“The Bible warns us of the consequences of the government wrongfully taking money from some and handing it out to others,” said the Texans for Fiscal Responsibility in one of several papers it published decrying the bill.

Republican State Rep. Brian Harrison called the bill “an abomination. And shame on everybody who voted for it.”

Harrison launched his own “Don’t Hollywood My Texas” crusade.

One of his followers, the Freedom Bard, a self-proclaimed “patriotic” lyricist, recorded an earworm of a protest anthem denouncing the bill with such lyrics as: “Keep your failed policies and your liberal BS.”

“This is big government liberal redistributive socialism,” Harrison told The Times, “The governor and lieutenant governor of the supposedly Republican-controlled state of Texas chose to keep property taxes billions of dollars higher so that you can subsidize a rich liberal Hollywood movie industry — how embarrassing.”

He plans to introduce legislation at a special hearing later this month to repeal the law.

The ‘Third Coast’

Despite the hostility toward Hollywood, Texas was once known as the film industry’s “Third Coast.”

Many of the westerns of the 1920s and ‘30s were filmed in the state.

Texas’ sweeping backdrops and larger-than-life characters have inspired some of the most celebrated movies and television shows, including the 1956 epic “Giant,” the 1974 slasher classic “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,” the 1990 sleeper hit “Slacker” and the acclaimed small-town TV series “Friday Night Lights.”

The 1956 classic “Giant,” starring James Dean, was primarily shot in Texas.

(Warner Bros. / TCM)

The state’s cultural soil has nurtured a fertile creative community with filmmakers like Robert Rodriguez (“El Mariachi”), Wes Anderson (“Bottle Rocket”) and Richard Linklater (“Boyhood”).

By the early 2000s, however, neighboring states began chipping away.

“Texas had been highly competitive, we had all of these ingredients,” said Rebecca Campbell, CEO of the Austin Film Society. “Then all of a sudden, Texas stories were getting shot in New Mexico and Louisiana.”

In 2007, the state established its first program for film incentives, earmarking $20 million. Although the program expanded in later years, it became chronically underfunded, prompting the producers of “Fear the Walking Dead” in 2021 to relocate to Georgia after filming four seasons around Austin.

Linklater had to rework his 2024 romantic crime thriller “Hit Man” starring Glen Powell, originally set in Houston, when filming relocated to New Orleans because of a lack of available incentive funds.

Director Richard Linklater on the set of “Hit Man,” with Adria Arjona and Glen Powell.

(Brian Roedel / Netflix)

“We’re completely surrounded by states that have very active film incentive programs,” Linklater told the podcast “Friends on Film.” “They really support this industry, and you have to do that to compete.”

But a perceptible cultural and economic shift in the Texas landscape began to slowly take shape during the pandemic, when a wave of actors and filmmakers relocated to the state.

Filmmaker Nate Strayer, formerly of Los Angeles, moved to Austin in 2021 and later founded production company Stray Vista Studios.

“We started to realize that we could have an industry here where our stories aren’t being pulled away to other states,” said Strayer, whose company produced the “True to Texas” video.

Noah Hawley has made Austin, Texas, his base of operations.

(Justin Cook / For The Times)

Until the pandemic shut down Hollywood, “Fargo” series creator Noah Hawley flew every other week from his home in Texas to Los Angeles for meetings with his production company when he wasn’t shooting. When the pandemic ended, Hawley found he no longer needed to be based in Hollywood.

Last year he moved his company, 26 Keys, to Austin.

“My wife and I wanted to be a bigger part of our community in Texas,” he said. “What Austin provides for me is more of a local, handmade place.”

The ‘Sheridan effect’

The other wave to hit Texas’ film industry was Taylor Sheridan.

Taylor Sheridan films an episode of “Landman.”

(Emerson Miller / Paramount+)

The “Yellowstone” creator, who grew up in Fort Worth, began filming many of his hit television shows — including “1883” and “Landman” — across the state.

The productions brought in hundreds of millions of dollars to local businesses and a stream of tourists in what many began calling “the Sheridan Effect.”

Production of “1883” alone led to 13,325 booked hotel nights in Fort Worth, according to the city’s film commission.

Beyond the economic boom, Sheridan showed that Texas could tell its own stories and help seed larger ambitions.

In February 2023, Lt. Gov. Patrick had dinner with Sheridan.

Shortly afterward, Patrick described Sheridan as the “best screenwriter of our time and one of the best storytellers ever to make movies” and said, “My goal is for Taylor to move all of his TV and movie production to Texas.”

Soon, Sheridan had a multiplier effect.

The Wonder Project, the faith-based, family-oriented production company behind Amazon‘s “House of David,” was established by filmmaker Jon Erwin (“Jesus Revolution”) and former YouTube executive Kelly Merryman Hoogstraten in 2023 with more than $75 million from such investors as Jason Blum, Lionsgate and Leonard Leo, the wealthy conservative lawyer and Federalist Society co-chairman.

Two years ago, Hill Country Studios, a $267-million film and television studio, broke ground in San Marcos. The plans include 12 soundstages spanning 310,000 square feet, two back lots, a virtual production stage and 15 acres of outdoor production space.

Zachary Levi, the star of “Shazam!” and “Chuck,” is raising $40 million to develop his Wyldwood Studios in Bastrop east of Austin. Plans call for two 20,000-square-foot soundstages, along with a hotel, restaurants and homes.

Zachary Levi is planning to create a new kind of studio system in Texas.

(Chris Pizzello / Invision / AP)

“I really felt this … calling on my life to go and build what is essentially a new version in the lineage of United Artists,” he said. “That allows the artist to really take the power back, take their destiny back.”

But for all the activity, there was no getting around the math. If Texas did not pour resources into a substantial rebate program, it would continue to lose out.

The challenge was to convince the conservative Legislature that an incentive program was not simply a Hollywood handout.

Thus began a campaign in spring 2023 with Texas voices advocating for a strong film industry.

That May, “Good for Texas,” the video precursor to “True to Texas,” showcased Lone Star-born actors such as McConaughey, Quaid, Owen Wilson, Powell and others in support of increased incentives.

Filmmaker Chase Musslewhite, a sixth-generation Houstonian who was one of the video’s producers, said she was motivated to get involved when she lost funding for her first feature after her financier opted to shoot in Louisiana.

She joined forces with Grant Wood, a Midland native, who had studied film and ran a Dallas start-up, to launch the Media for Texas advocacy group.

“We wanted to help get the film community aligned and put forth one bill with one idea to make it as easy as possible for the Legislature to push for it,” Musslewhite said.

The Texas Film Commission painted a rosy picture, saying that for every dollar invested in the incentives, Texas received $4 of new money into the economy.

A pivotal moment arrived in late summer 2024. Media for Texas co-hosted a private screening of the film “Reagan,” starring Dennis Quaid, with Patrick at Austin’s Bullock Texas State History Museum. A number of state legislators attended.

Patrick took to the podium and announced his aim to “make Texas the media capital of the world,” Musslewhite recalled.

That was the push people needed, Musslewhite said.

Last October, Patrick convened a special hearing of the Senate Finance Committee, where a new bill for a robust film incentive was front and center.

Patrick marshaled McConaughey, Harrelson, Quaid and Sheridan to support him. Joining the effort was billionaire Ross Perot Jr.

Dennis Quaid, second from left, standing next to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, looking up, at the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo in March, is one of the many prominent Texas-born Hollywood actors and filmmakers to rally around film incentives.

(Cassie Stricker / Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo)

During the hearing, a denim-clad Quaid voiced his support. “I, for one, feel that the world is beginning to turn right side up again and common sense prevails, and I’d like to see that reflected in our films and entertainment.”

When Sheridan spoke, he expressed regret that his 2016 film “Hell or High Water,” a story of two bank-robbing brothers trying to save their Texas family ranch, had to shoot in New Mexico because of its subsidies.

“No one will be here without the incentives,” the filmmaker said.

During the last stretch before the vote, McConaughey, in a cowboy hat, made a final overture to legislators in March.

“If we pass this bill, we are immediately at the bargaining table for shooting more films and TV and commercials in our state,” he said. “That is money that’s going to local Texas restaurants, hotels, coffee shops, dry cleaners, street rentals, home rentals ― even Woody’s barber,” in a nod to Harrelson, who was also in attendance.

The high-profile campaign worked. Two months later, the bill passed in the Senate with a 23-8 vote, and by June it had become law.

A slippery slope?

Nonetheless, concerns remain about the program.

For one, the bill, which emphasizes a positive portrayal of the state, does not specifically address whether a film or show that has themes such as abortion, gun control or LGBTQ+ characters will receive funding.

In 2010, then-Gov. Rick Perry’s administration yanked funding for the Robert Rodriguez film “Machete” over concerns that the movie portrayed Texas negatively.

Funding for Robert Rodriguez’s film “Machete” was denied over concerns it portrayed Texas negatively.

(Ryan Green / Netflix)

George Huang, professor of screenwriting at UCLA School of Theater, Film, and Television, cautioned this could be “a very slippery slope.”

“I understand that with incentives you don’t want to appear to fund controversial subjects,” he said. “But where do you draw the line on censorship? Who in the governor’s office is the arbiter of good taste?”

Many inside the Texas film community stress that these are still early days and believe the film office will ultimately take a case-by-case approach.

“I think that those fears are misplaced, because the opportunity for what Texas can provide to the country and to the world outweighs the risk,” Musslewhite said.

For now,the Texas film community is elated.

“Texans kind of warmed up to the idea that if an industry were to grow in Texas, it doesn’t have to look exactly like it looks in some of these other places,” Strayer said. “I think they came to realize that you can kind of write your own rules.”

And what’s more Texan than writing your own rules?

Toni Gray’s phone is blowing up these days.

The head of production at Dhar Mann Studios, which makes shows for YouTube and other online platforms, said entertainment industry friends in Los Angeles had once held out before seeking work in the digital realm.

But now, with jobs few and far between at the legacy studios, they are reaching out “all the time” looking for opportunities at the Burbank-based studio, known for posting family-friendly dramas addressing topics like bullying.

Seeing some of her peers now flock to be a part of production companies built for distribution on YouTube and other online platforms is exciting for Gray, who worked in traditional television for more than a decade and joined Dhar Mann Studios in February.

“It’s giving people hope that they can get back to work again,” she said. “And it’s not just monetary hope for their house and their kids. It actually is giving their own being life again to bring their creative element.”

Pave Studios founder Max Cutler.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

In Hollywood’s TV and film industries, droves of workers are competing for jobs at a time when many companies are consolidating and laying off hundreds of people at a time. But one segment of the entertainment industry has emerged as a bright spot — the economy made up of people creating video for YouTube and social media.

That part of the industry, once dominated by amateurs making funny viral videos with smartphones has blossomed into a formidable entertainment force, where video creators are setting up real businesses with large studios in Southern California funded through advertising by major brands.

Dhar Mann Studios plans to add 15 positions to its staff of about 75 full-time employees. In Sherman Oaks, Pave Studios, which produces wellness- and true-crime-related shows, is adding 16 full-time workers to its staff of 67 contractors and employees.

Nationwide, there were more than 490,000 jobs supported by YouTube’s creative ecosystem last year, according to the Google-owned video platform, citing data from Oxford Economics. That’s roughly 60,000 more jobs than in 2023, YouTube said.

“It’s beginning to mature into creators really building businesses,” said Thomas Kim, YouTube’s director of product management for creator monetization. “We see more and more of that, and that also means that the number of employees and help that they need to sustain their business has grown over time.”

Sean Atkins, chief executive of Dhar Mann Studios, called it a big growth opportunity in the market. YouTube is a major player in streaming, representing 12.5% of U.S. TV viewing in May, according to Nielsen, more than streaming services including Netflix and Amazon Prime Video.

“Everything is so new and nascent,” said Atkins, a former president at MTV. “I imagine, particularly when you walk around our studio … that this is what it looked like in the ‘20s when MGM and Disney and Warner [Bros.] were [founded]. Just this enthusiastic chaos where everyone’s trying to figure out what this environment is.”

The growth in Southern California influencer businesses is a boon to the local production economy that is otherwise struggling. L.A. County saw a 27% decline to 108,564 employees from 2022 to 2024 in the motion picture and sound recording industries, according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Many Hollywood workers have struggled to find roles, as studios cut down on their programming after the 2023 actor and writer strikes and after overspending during the streaming wars. For years, productions have fled the area to take advantage of lucrative financial incentives out of state and abroad. Production in L.A. County also took a hit following devastating wildfires in January.

Meanwhile, the amount of employment in the creator economy is trending up, according to the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. Total workers in the L.A. County creator economy, composed of businesses such as media streaming distribution services and social networks, as well as independent artists, writers and performers, increased 5% to 70,012 from 2022 to 2024, LAEDC said. Companies in the creator economy space also increased 5% to 46,425 businesses during the same time period, according to LAEDC.

The bleak job market has caused more people who have worked in traditional studio and TV networks to apply for jobs at digital media companies that produce content for platforms such as YouTube or work with influencers who are growing their staffs.

The migration reflects changing realities in the business. Consumers’ habits have shifted, where more people are watching YouTube on TV screens these days instead of on smartphones in the U.S., eating into territory held by broadcast and cable television. Video creators have adapted, building production teams and expanding into podcasts, merchandise and sometimes scoring streaming deals.

For example, one of YouTube’s top creators, Jimmy Donaldson, known as MrBeast, has a reality competition show on Amazon Prime Video, sells products such as Feastables chocolates and has brand partnerships and sponsorships. His North Carolina holding company, Beast Industries, employs more than 500 people.

Kyle Hjelmeseth, chief executive of talent representation firm G&B Digital Management, said he is receiving more calls from people coming with traditional media backgrounds seeking collaborations with influencers.

“Five years ago, it would have been very different,” he said. “Anytime that somebody from Hollywood or the entertainment complex talked about creators, it was with such a different lens … a little bit like nose in the air.”

His company, which has 25 contractors, part-time and full time employees, added four people last month with plans to hire more.

“All the pressures of what’s happening in Hollywood and the growth of the creator economy [are] crashing into each other in this moment, and that’s why we’re having a conversation about jobs, because there’s such a shift in the energy, and we’re certainly feeling it,” he said.

Morgan Absher, left, and Kaelyn Moore, right, record “Clues” podcast at Pave Studios.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Pave Studios launched last year with fewer than 10 employees and now has grown to 67 contractors and employees. Part of that growth is fueled by the increasing audience for its videos and podcasts available on platforms including YouTube, Spotify and Apple Podcasts. The company is hiring for roles including executive producers, with a pay range of $95,000 to $145,000, depending on the show, said founder Max Cutler.

“As we grow and as the business becomes more complicated, you need more specialists and more people,” Cutler said. “Video is definitely a leading growth area for us.”

Jen Passovoy joined Pave Studios in January as a producer, after working for 10 years at Paramount on competition series such as “RuPaul’s Drag Race” and “Ink Master.”

“Coming from a traditional TV background, I was drawn to how nimble and audience-focused the company is,” Passovoy said in an email. “There’s less red tape and more room to actually create. You get the energy of a startup with the same high-quality content you’d expect from a major studio.”

Passovoy, 34, said the job market for traditional studio and TV network workers is really tough right now.

“I know more people out of work right now than working, which says a lot,” she said. “The traditional TV model just doesn’t exist in the same way anymore. Budgets are shrinking and the jobs that used to be steady aren’t there. There have been so many layoffs across the industry, and it’s forced a lot of incredibly talented people to rethink how and where they create.”

Skills that people develop in traditional studio and TV roles can translate to digital-first roles, including video editors for influencers and digital media companies, industry observers said.

The creator economy also has more specialized roles, such as thumbnail designers — people who create the images used to tease videos on sites including YouTube. Those jobs can pay six figures annually, as they can be instrumental for getting audiences to click on those videos.

Roster, a hiring platform that lists job postings in the creator space, said the number of employers signing up to hire on the site has increased by nearly 80% from January to June 2025. Based on a sampling of 1,430 creator job posts in 2025, Roster said the most popular open position was video editor (representing 42.5%), followed by thumbnail designer (16.1%) and producer (10.6%).

There are downsides. Not all jobs are full-time. Many creators opt to hire freelancers.

“Their production needs need to expand and shrink like an accordion,” said Sherry Wong, CEO of Roster. “That’s why we see a lot of creators, even if they’re really big established creators, they are hiring freelancers, contractors, and being able to keep it as lean as possible.”

With so many people looking for work, there‘s intense competition for those jobs, and the ways to apply can be creative and involved.

Miami-based creator Jenny Hoyos found freelancers through a hiring challenge she hosted on Roster. Applicants were given 10 minutes of raw video footage and instructed to edit it down to a video short, roughly 30 to 60 seconds long.

Hoyos, 20, requested that applicants create a final product that was engaging, cohesive and matched her specific style. She received more than 100 submissions.

While there were strong contenders from California, the winners ended up being from Brazil and India. They became her two go-to freelancers, who she said are essentially working an amount equivalent to full-time editors.

This method of seeking talent was Hoyos’ way of making sure the people she brought on to her team were willing to go the extra mile, she said. Those hoping to break into the digital media world don’t necessarily have to have grown up with YouTube and social media like she did, but they do have to “commit to being addicted to watching” content, she said.

Not everyone who works for YouTube creators gets paid.

Screenwriter Natalie Badillo isn’t earning a salary while she tries to build up an audience on YouTube. Badillo, who sold a self-titled project to HBO Max a few years ago, said she was looking for a way to “not wait 8 billion years for a TV show to get picked up,” and creating a YouTube channel, “Great Job Nat,” was a way to get her material out into the world.

“Why wait for somebody to throw you a party when you can just throw your own party?” she said.

Badillo draws on her connections with folks from the traditional film and TV world to produce the YouTube videos. While the channel is getting up and running, collaborators work for low pay or simply for the fun of it and to gain experience. Still, her ambitions are big. “I want to be the Jon Stewart of the West,” she said.

The pay disparities can be an issue for people from traditional media industries looking for jobs. While some programs featuring influencers and vertical excerpts of TV shows and movies are covered by union agreements, other projects don’t have those protections.

“With temporary hiring, it’s like everything else in Hollywood — you either need to have another job that balances things out or you need to get to a critical mass of enough work on enough different projects,” said Kevin Klowden, executive director at Milken Institute Finance. “The number of sustainable Hollywood jobs has shrunk.”

But as the two worlds collide, traditional media companies are already paying attention to the popularity of creator shows and are trying to find ways to partner with influencers. Amazon earlier this year announced more seasons of MrBeast’s reality competition series “Beast Games,” and digital media companies are adding people with traditional media backgrounds to their staffs.

“It’s still a lot more tiptoeing,” Hjelmeseth said. “Everybody’s kind of like looking at each other from across the room, like, ‘Should we dance?’”

The announcement last month that Occidental Studios would be put up for sale marked a historic turning point in a studio once used by Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks to make silent films.

It also underscored how dramatically the market has shifted for the owners of soundstages across Los Angeles that have been buffeted by a confluence of forces — the pandemic, strikes in 2023 and the continued flight of production to other states and countries.

As film activity has fallen to historic levels in the L.A. region — film shoot days dropped 22% in the first quarter of 2025 — the places that host film and TV crews, along with prop houses and other businesses that service the industry, have been especially hard hit.

Between 2016 and 2022, Los Angeles’ soundstages were nearly filled to capacity, boasting average occupancy rates of 90%, according to data from the nonprofit organization FilmLA, which tracks on-location shoot days in the Greater L.A. area.

That rate plummeted to 69% in 2023, as dual writers’ and actors’ strikes brought the industry to a halt.

Once the strikes were over, production never came back to what it was. In fact, last year the average occupancy rate dropped even further to 63%, according to a FilmLA report released in April.

So far this year, there is “no reason to think the occupancy numbers look better,” said Philip Sokoloski, spokesperson for FilmLA.

“It’s a trailing indicator of the loss of production,” he said. “The suddenness of the crash is what caught everybody by surprise.”

Studio owners, who have watched their soundstages go from overbooked to frequently empty, are celebrating the new state tax credits meant to boost their industry and create action on their lots.

The California Legislature’s decision to more than double the amount allocated each year to the state’s film and television tax credit program to $750 million could be a tipping point toward better times, studio owners said, but the climb out of the doldrums is still steep.

“This is definitely a defining moment and to see whether or not L.A. is going to get itself back up to the occupancy levels that it had prior to COVID,” said Shep Wainwright, managing partner of East End Studios. “Everyone’s pretty bullish about it, but it’s obviously been such a slog for the past few years.”

Sean Griffin of Sunset Studios called the tax credit boost signed into law last week “a massive stride in the right direction” while Zach Sokoloff of independent studio operator Hackman Capital Partners called the decision “an enormous win for the state.”

Sokoloff hopes to see its Southern California facilities, which include Radford Studio Center and Culver Studios, perk up the way their New York properties did when the state increased its film and TV subsidy to $800 million in May.

“We had stages that had been sitting empty, and almost 24 hours after the passage of the tax credit bill in New, York, our phones were ringing,” he said. “We had renewed interest in soundstage occupancy there.”

Community member William Meyerchak, left, Los Angeles City Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky, center, and Zach Sokoloff, senior vice president of Hackman Capital Partners, right, celebrate after the passing of the $1-billion TVC project, which will expand and redevelop the old CBS Television City site at Beverly Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue, on Jan. 7, 2025.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Los Angeles Center Studios, where such shows as “Mad Men” and “Westworld” filmed, also has felt the effects of the production slump.

The 26-year-old facility in downtown L.A. has six 18,000-foot soundstages and three smaller stages, along with a number of practical locations on the lot for shooting. Before the pandemic, its stages were 100% full for more than 10 years, said Sam Nicassio, president of Los Angeles Center Studios.

He declined to state the studio’s current occupancy rate, though he said it was above the average for about 300 soundstages throughout the area, which his company tracked at 58%.

“It’s been a struggle,” he said. “The slowdown in overall production activity, coupled with coming out of the strikes and all of us expecting to have a jump-start again and we didn’t, was very difficult. There’s a lot of soundstages for not a lot of users right now.”

Not long ago, private equity firms saw L.A. studio stages as good business opportunities.

A billboard for a Netflix streaming show “The Diplomat,” on a building across the street from where WGA members walk a picket line around Bronson Sunset Studios, in May 2023.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

WGA members walk a picket line around Bronson Sunset Studios lot, where Netflix leases space for production and offices, in May 2023.

(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)

A number of firms participated heavily in the construction of new facilities, which seemed like smart bets due to advancements in production technology, the desire of studios and streamers to cut down on unpredictable risk from on-location shoots and — especially after the pandemic — health and safety systems like air filtration and more space to prevent workers from getting sick.

“Stages are critical to being able to do, especially TV, on time and on budget,” said George Huang, a professor of screenwriting at the UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television. “They are the backbone of making movies in Hollywood.”

But after the pandemic, strikes and a cutback in spending at the studios, production slowed. Then in January, the Southern California wildfires hit, further affecting production and causing many in the industry to lose their homes — and reconsider whether they wanted to stay in the Golden State.

Working with influencers

As Hollywood production slowed, soundstage operators looked for new ways to make up revenue, including shoots for the fashion industry, music videos, DJ rehearsals, video game production and even private events like birthdays or weddings.

Hackman Capital Partners, which owns and operates Television City in Los Angeles, recently announced a partnership with Interwoven Studios to open a boutique production facility catering to social media influencers, online media brands and other creators who work in nontraditional formats such as YouTube.

Among the well-known creators who have worked lately at Television City — home to such classic shows as “All in the Family” and most recently “American Idol” — are Logan Paul and Jake Shane, actress-singer Keke Palmer, livestreamers FaZe Clan and hip-hop artist Big Sean.

“As the segment of the content-creation universe grows on the smaller end of production, we’re going to be a partner to them,” Sokoloff said. “Necessity is the mother of invention.”

Sunset Studios, which operates 59 stages in the Los Angeles area, has long made a point of working with short-form creators through its smaller Quixote division, said Griffin, who is head of studio sales. “We’ve always been involved with influencers, music videos and commercials.”

Such tenants working on smaller stages sometimes move up to TV and movie-sized stages when they land a big television commercial or music video, such as Selena Gomez’s “Younger and Hotter Than Me” music video recently shot at Sunset Las Palmas Studios.

Paul McCartney leased a studio at Sunset Glenoaks Studios to rehearse for his 2024 tour and and made a music video there.

In general, though, stages are still underused, he said.

“Once the strikes ended, we got a about a good healthy quarter” of production, he said. Then business “really quieted down, and we haven’t seen the show counts rebound very much.”

The vacancies have created a tenant-friendly market as studio owners compete for their business on rental prices, Griffin said.

“This is a very tough market,” he said. “Everyone is competing very, very hard.”

One reason for optimism about the new tax credits is that they apply to 30-minute shows for the first time, he said.

“L.A. is a television town,” Griffin added. “Opening up the tax credit to 30-minute comedies is going to be really helpful.”

And there are signs of life for longer scripted shows that take multiple stages and shoot for longer than other productions, Griffin said.

Developer David Simon is betting heavily on a turnaround. He is building a new movie studio from the ground up in Hollywood. His $450-million Echelon Studios complex is set to open late next year on Santa Monica Boulevard.

“We think content creation is here to stay in various forms,” he said, and that big soundstages will continue to be used even as the technology to make content changes.

Simon said he is close to signing leases with fashion brands that are creating content with celebrities and collaborating with influencers.

“We’re not nearly where we were prepandemic,” he acknowledged, but “California is the entertainment capital of the world, and the producers and directors and actors that want to stay in state will help bring back and retain our fair share of production.”

For now , at least, soundstage operators are still “treading water,” said Peter Marshall, managing principal at Epic Insurance Brokers & Consultants, who works in media insurance and counts some L.A.-based soundstages as clients.

“Most operators are pretty concerned,” he said.

Yet, the fact that there are still new soundstages opening and others are in development suggests a “high level of confidence” that production will eventually return to L.A., Sokoloski of FilmLA said.

“I am optimistic that we will keep more production here than we have in the last few years,” Nicassio said. The new tax credit program “puts us on a competitive level now with other states and countries.”

Others in the industry say that more is needed and have advocated for a federal tax credit that would help make California a morecompetitive location. Gov. Gavin Newsom has pushed for the idea, urging President Trump to work with him on the issue.

“When you have a governor and big private equity firms both focusing on promoting one thing, that might, who knows, get the federal government involved,” Marshall said. “That would be the game changer.”

A sequel? For spring? Groundbreaking.

After 19 years and some mixed messages from the cast, “The Devil Wears Prada 2” is officially in production and set to hit theaters in May.

The original film, based on the 2003 bestselling novel by Lauren Weisberger, is set in the cutthroat New York City fashion industry. Here’s everything we know so far about the upcoming sequel.

Who‘s returning from the original cast?

Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway, Emily Blunt and Stanley Tucci will be reprising their roles for the highly anticipated sequel.

Joining the stars onscreen will be Tracie Thoms — who played Lily, the best friend of Anne Hathaway’s character, Andy Sachs — and Tibor Feldman, who is reprising his role as Irv Ravitz, chairman of Runway’s parent company, Elias-Clarke.

Director David Frankel, who led the first film to a $326 million worldwide box office haul, will be returning, as will screenwriter Aline Brosh McKenna (co-creator of “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend”).

Who isn’t returning?

Adrian Grenier’s Nate Cooper, Andy’s boyfriend who’s since been dubbed by the internet as the “real villain” of the film, reportedly won’t be back for the sequel.

Who’s joining the cast?

Kenneth Branagh will join the cast to play the husband of Streep’s character, Miranda Priestly. Other notable additions include actors Lucy Liu, Justin Theroux, B. J. Novak and Pauline Chalamet.

What‘s “Devil Wears Prada 2” about?

While plot details are being kept under wraps, the movie reportedly follows Streep’s Miranda as she navigates a floundering magazine publishing industry. and reunites with Blunt’s character, Emily Charlton, who is now a high-powered executive. The movie is set nearly 10 years after the original and may also borrow from the book’s 2013 sequel, “Revenge Wears Prada: The Devil Returns.” Let’s hope there’s a nod to Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour, the inspiration for Miranda’s character, stepping down from her post.

What’s the release date for the sequel?

Disney’s 20th Century Studios announced the start of production with a stylish teaser on June 30. The movie will open in theaters May 1, giving fans plenty of time to get ready.

If you’re itching for a refresh, you can stream the original “The Devil Wears Prada” on Disney+ and Hulu. The movie is also available to rent on Prime Video.

July 5 (UPI) — Eight OPEC+ nations on Saturday agreed to increase their crude oil production by 548,000 barrels per day starting in August.

Of the dozen Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, five voted to increase the output: Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Iraq, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates. There are 10 subset members with Russia, Kazakhstan and Oman joining the member nations in boosting production.

OPEC nations not voting to increase output are Iran, Venezuela, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Libya, Nigeria.

The increase represents half of a percent of the worldwide production.

In April, the group increased production by 411,000 barrels a day. Also, there were changes in November 2023.

The nations said the change was based on “a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals, as reflected in the low oil inventories.” It also was in accordance with a decision on Dec. 5 to start a gradual and flexible return of the 2.2 million barrels per day starting April 1.

They said the “increases may be paused or reversed subject to evolving market conditions. This flexibility will allow the group to continue to support oil market stability.”

The two largest oil producers are Saudi Arabia at 9.8 million barrels per day in August and Russia at 9.3 million. Iraq is third at 4.1 million.

The United States, which is not a member of OPEC, produced an average of 13.4 million barrels of crude oil a day in August 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Global Commodity Insights, a research firm, has said it expected supply would outpace demand by 1.25 million barrels a day in the second half of this year. These changes come amid the summer driving season and more oil for air conditioning amid heat waves in many places around the world.

The eight OPEC+ countries will next meet on Aug. 3 to decide on September production levels.

The Saudis have been seeking to boost production to please U.S. President Donald Trump, who has fostered a strong relationship with Saudi Arabia and UAE, The New York Times reported analysts as saying.

On Friday, August West Texas Intermediate oil futures settled at $68.30 per barrel, a decline of 50 cents. It dropped to $57.13 on May 13, which was the lowest since January 2021. The rose to $80.04 on Jan. 15 with it hitting $120.67 in June 2022.

The version of “Elio” that hit theaters on June 20 is not the same movie that Adrian Molina, the film’s original director, intended to put out.

Pixar removed LGBTQ+ elements from the animated feature after receiving negative feedback from test screenings with audience members and executives, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

The film follows an 11-year-old boy named Elio who is mistaken for Earth’s ambassador by aliens and is beamed up to the Communiverse — an intergalactic organization — to represent the planet.

Trouble began in the summer of 2023 during a test screening in Arizona. After the film was over, audience members were asked to raise their hand if the movies was something they’d pay to see in theaters. No one did, causing Pixar executives to worry.

According to THR, Pixar Chief Creative Officer Pete Docter informed Molina after a separate screening for company executives that storyboard artist Madeline Sharafian would be promoted to co-director. Molina, who is gay, was given the option to co-direct the film with Sharafian but chose to exit the project instead after his original vision was changed. Shortly after, Docter announced internally that “Turning Red” director and co-writer Domee Shi would join “Elio” as co-director.

Changes to the film included getting rid of a scene in which Elio shows off a pink tank top made out of beach litter to a hermit crab, as well as removing picture frames from Elio’s bedroom wall that displayed a male crush. Executives also asked him to make the main character more “masculine.”

“I was deeply saddened and aggrieved by the changes that were made,” former Pixar assistant editor Sarah Ligatich, who was a member of the company’s internal LGBTQ+ group and provided feedback during the production of “Elio,” told THR.

Ligatich added that a number of creatives working behind the scenes left after the new directors went in a different direction.

“The exodus of talent after that cut was really indicative of how unhappy a lot of people were that they had changed and destroyed this beautiful work,” she said.

Actor America Ferrera was originally attached to the project as the voice of Elio’s mother, Olga. Following Molina’s departure, the “Barbie” actor left the production because the film lacked “Latinx representation in the leadership.” The character was later changed to be Elio’s aunt and was voiced by Zoe Saldaña.

In March 2025, Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger announced Molina would return as co-director for “Coco 2,” a follow-up to the 2017 film he co-wrote and co-directed.

“Elio” earned Pixar its worst domestic opening after it premiered on June 20. he film made $21 million at the box office and currently holds a “fresh” 83% critics rating on the website Rotten Tomatoes.

“The Elio that is in theaters right now is far worse than Adrian’s best version of the original,” a former Pixar staffer who worked on the film told THR.

“[The character] Elio was just so cute and so much fun and had so much personality, and now he feels much more generic to me,” added another Pixar staffer.

In a 2018 interview with the Huffington Post, Molina said he was “all for it” when asked what it would take for an animated studio to green light a story with a queer protagonist.

The Times reached out to Pixar for comment, but the studio did not respond.

Nine months ago, Gov. Gavin Newsom pledged to more than double the annual amount of funds allocated to California’s film and television tax credit program.

Flanked by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, legislative leaders and union representatives, Newsom said the state “needed to make a statement and to do something that was meaningful” to stop productions from leaving the state for more lucrative incentives in other states and countries.

Though Hollywood was born in California and the entertainment business became the state’s signature industry, “the world we invented is now competing against us,” he said at the time.

On Wednesday, Newsom signed a bill that will increase the cap on California’s film and TV tax credit program to $750 million, up from $330 million. Industry workers say the boost will help stimulate production that slowed due to the pandemic, the dual writers’ and actors’ strikes of 2023, a cutback in spending by studios and streamers and the Southern California wildfires earlier this year.

“We’ve got to step up our game,” Newsom said in a speech before he signed the bill. “We put our feet up, took things for granted. We needed to do something more bold and significant.”

The bill was passed by the state legislature last week and came after intense lobbying from Hollywood.

Rebecca Rhine, Directors Guild of America executive and Entertainment Union Coalition president, credited Newsom for staying committed to the production incentive boost even after the wildfires in Southern California, federal funding cuts, the state’s budget deficit and the deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles.

“You understand that our industry is vital to the state’s economy and cultural vibrancy, while also sustaining thousands of businesses and attracting visitors from around the world,” she said during the signing ceremony. “Now, let’s get people back to work.”

Critics of the program and taxpayer advocates have said, however, that the tax credit is a corporate giveaway that doesn’t generate as much economic effect as promised. California’s increase also comes as states like Texas and New York have also ramped up their own film and TV tax credit programs.

But the fight isn’t over yet. Lawmakers and Hollywood industry leaders are gearing up for a vote Thursday in the legislature on a separate bill that would expand the provisions of the film tax credit program, which they say is key to making production more attractive in California and must pair with the increased program cap.

That bill, AB 1138, would broaden the types of productions eligible to apply for the program, including animated films, shorts, series and certain large-scale competition shows. It would also increase the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for movies and TV series shot in the Greater Los Angeles area and up to 40% for productions shot outside the region.

California currently provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. Production companies can apply the credit toward any tax liabilities they have in California.

The bump to 35% puts California more in line with incentives offered by other states such as Georgia, which provides a 30% credit for productions.

“This bill is the second step,” Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur said during Wednesday’s press conference. “It’s about maximizing economic impact, prioritizing equity and turning the tide on job loss.”

Newsom also held out hope for the possibility of a federal film and TV tax incentive, which he had floated in May after President Trump called for tariffs on film produced overseas.

“We’d like to see [Trump] match the ambition that we’re advancing here today in California with the ambition to keep filmmaking all across the United States, here in the United States,” Newsom said. “I am hopeful that we, in the hands of partnership, continue to work with the administration.”

After weathering a pandemic, dual strikes and massive wildfires, Hollywood is finally getting a lifeline.

California legislators voted Friday to more than double the amount allocated each year to the state’s film and television tax credit program, raising that cap to $750 million from $330 million.

The increase is a win for the studios, producers, unions and industry workers who have lobbied state legislators for months on the issue.

Other states and countries have increasingly lured productions away from California with generous tax credits and incentive programs, leaving many in Hollywood without work for months. In interviews, town halls and legislative committee hearings, industry workers said that without state intervention, they feared Tinseltown would be hollowed out, similar to Detroit after the heyday of its auto industry.

“It’s now time to get people back to work and bring production home to California,” Directors Guild of America executive and Entertainment Union Coalition President Rebecca Rhine said in a statement. “We call on the studios to recommit to the communities and workers across the state that built this industry and built their companies.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom called to expand the annual tax credit program last year, saying at the time that “the world we invented is now competing against us.”

From there, state lawmakers looked to expand the provisions of the program. A separate bill going through the Legislature would broaden the types of productions eligible to apply, including animated films, shorts and series and certain large-scale competition shows. It would also increase the tax credit to as much as 35% of qualified expenditures for movies and TV series shot in the Greater Los Angeles area and up to 40% for productions shot outside the region.

That bill, AB 1138, was unanimously approved Thursday by the state Senate Revenue and Tax Committee. It will be up for final votes next week.

California provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. Production companies can apply the credit toward any tax liabilities they have in California.

The bump to 35% puts California more in line with incentives offered by other states, such as Georgia, which provides a 30% credit for productions.

Lawmakers and industry insiders have said the increased tax credit cap and the proposed criteria changes to the incentive program must both be approved to make California more competitive for filming. The bill was written by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles) and state Sen. Benjamin Allen (D-Santa Monica).

“After years of uncertainty, workers can once again set the stage, cue the lights, and roll the cameras — because California is keeping film and TV jobs anchored right here, where they belong,” Zbur said in a statement about the $750-million cap. “This is a historic investment in our creative economy, our working families, small businesses, and the communities that depend on this industry to thrive.”

One of the oldest movie studios in Los Angeles is up for sale, perhaps to the newest generation of content creators.

The potential sale of Occidental Studios comes amid a drop in filming in Los Angeles as the local entertainment industry faces such headwinds as rising competition from studios in other cities and countries, as well as the aftermath of filming slowdowns during the pandemic and industry strikes of 2023.

Occidental Studios, which dates back to 1913, was once used by Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks to make silent films. It is a small version of a traditional Hollywood studio with soundstages, offices and writers’ bungalows in a 3-acre gated campus near Echo Park in Historic Filipinotown.

Kermit the Frog above the Jim Henson Company studio lot in Hollywood.

(AaronP/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images)

The seller hopes its boutique reputation will garner $45 million, which would rank it one of the most valuable studios in Southern California at $651 per square foot. A legendary Hollywood studio founded by Charlie Chaplin in 1917 sold last year for $489 per foot, according to real estate data provider CoStar.

The Chaplin studio known until recently as the Jim Henson Company Lot was purchased by singer-songwriter John Mayer and movie director McG from the family of famed Muppets creator Jim Henson.

Occidental Studios may sell to one of today’s modern content creators in search of a flagship location, said real estate broker Nicole Mihalka of CBRE, who represents the seller.

She declined to name potential buyers but said she is showing the property to new-media businesses who don’t present themselves through traditional channels such as television shows and instead rely on social media and the internet to reach younger audiences.

Occidental Studios, which dates back to 1913, was once used by Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks to make silent films.

(CBRE)

New media entrepreneurs may not often need soundstages, “but they like the idea of having the history, the legacy” of a studio linked to the early days of cinema, she said. It might lend credibility to a brand and become a destination for promotional activities as well as being a place to create content, she said. Mihalka envisions the space being used for events for partners, sponsors and advertisers as well as press junkets for new product launches.

Entertainment businesses located nearby include filmmaker Ava DuVernay’s Array Now, independent film and production company Blumhouse Productions and film and production company Rideback Ranch.

Neighborhoods east of Hollywood such as Los Feliz, Silver Lake, Echo Park and Highland Park have become home to many people in the entertainment industry, which Mihalka hopes will elevate the appeal of Occidental Studios.

“We’ve been seeing film and TV talent heading this way for a while,” she said, including executives who also live in those neighborhoods.

The owner of of Occidental Studios said it’s gotten harder for smaller studios to operate in the current economic climate that includes competition from major independent studio operators that have emerged in recent decades.

“Once upon a time, you did not have multibillion-dollar global portfolio companies swimming in the waters of Hollywood,” said Craig Darian, chief executive of Occidental Entertainment Group Holdings Inc., citing Hudson Pacific Properties, Hackman Capital Partners and CIM Group. “They are not content producers, but have a long history of providing services for multiple television shows and features.”

Competition now includes overseas studios in such countries as Canada, Ireland and Australia, he said. “When production was really robust and domiciled in Los Angeles, it was much easier to remain very competitive.”

Another factor threatening the bottom line for conventional studios is rapidly changing technology used to create entertainment including tools as simple as lighting.

“You used to know that equipment would last for decades,” Darian said. “The new tools for production are becoming obsolete in far shorter order.”

Writers’ bungalows at Occidental Studios.

(CBRE)

Nevertheless, Darian said, the potential sale “is not motivated by distress or urgency. Nothing is driving the decision other than the timing of whether or not this remains to be a relevant asset to keep within our portfolio. If we get an offer at or above the asking price, then we’re a seller.”

Darian said he may also seek a long-term tenant to take over the studio.

Occidental Studios at 201 N. Occidental Blvd. comprises over 69,000 square feet of buildings including four soundstages and support space such as offices and dressing rooms.

It’s among the oldest continually operating studios in Hollywood, used by pioneering filmmakers Cecil B. DeMille, D.W. Griffith and Pickford, who worked there as an actress and filmmaker in its early years. Pickford reportedly kept an apartment on the lot for years.

More recently it has been used for television production for such shows as “Tales of the City,” “New Girl” and HBO’s thriller “Sharp Objects.”

Local television production area declined by 30.5% in the first quarter compared with the previous year, according to he nonprofit organization FilmLA, which tracks shoot days in the Greater Los Angeles region. All categories of TV production were down, including dramas (-38.9%), comedies (-29.9%), reality shows -(26.4%) and pilots (-80.3%).

Feature film production decreased by 28.9%, while commercials were down by 2.1%, FilmLA said.

The latest round of California’s film and television tax credit program will provide government incentives to 48 upcoming projects, according to the California Film Commission.

The slate, which includes both major studio projects and independent films, is expected to employ more than 6,500 cast and crew members and 32,000 background performers, measured in days worked. These projects will pay more than $302 million in wages for California workers, the commission said Monday.

The projects are estimated to collectively generate $664 million in total spending throughout the state.

Of the awarded films, five are features from major studios, including the sequel to Sony Pictures’ “One of Them Days,” which is expected to receive almost $8 million in tax credits and spend $39 million in qualified expenditures.

An untitled Netflix project, which is set to film in California for 110 days, is expected to receive the largest credit of the slate at $20 million.

The rest of the awarded projects are independent, with 37 of them operating on budgets under $10 million. More than half of the films will be shot in the Los Angeles area, the commission said.

“California didn’t earn its role as the heart of the entertainment world by accident — it was built over generations by skilled workers and creative talent pushing boundaries,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “Today’s awards help ensure this legacy continues, keeping cameras rolling here at home, supporting thousands of crew members behind the scenes and boosting local economies that depend on a strong film and television industry.”

The announcement comes as the industry has expressed concern over the amount of production fleeing California in favor of other states or countries that offer more attractive tax incentives.

Late last year, Newsom proposed an increase to the state’s film and TV tax credit, upping the annual tax credit allocation from $330 million to $750 million in an attempt to keep production in California.

In March, the commission announced it was selecting a record 51 projects with tax incentives, marking the most amount of awarded films in a single application window.

Leo Frank, the superintendent of a pencil factory in Georgia, was accused of murdering a young employee, 13-year-old Mary Phagan. His 1913 trial led to his conviction despite shoddy evidence and the manipulations of an ambitious prosecuting attorney, who shamelessly preyed on the prejudices of the jury.

After a series of failed appeals, Frank’s sentence was commuted by the governor, but he was kidnapped and lynched by a mob enraged that his death sentence wasn’t being imposed. The story garnered national attention and threw a spotlight on the fault lines of our criminal justice system.

This dark chapter in American history might not seem suitable for musical treatment. Docudrama would be the safer way to go, given the gravity of the material. But playwright Alfred Uhry and composer and lyricist Jason Robert Brown had a vision of what they could uniquely bring to the retelling of Frank’s story.

Olivia Goosman, from left, Jack Roden and the national touring company of “Parade.”

(Joan Marcus)

Their 1998 musical was a critical hit but a difficult sell. More admired than beloved, the show has extended an open challenge to theater artists drawn to the sophisticated majesty of Brown’s Tony-winning score but daunted by the expansive scope of Uhry’s Tony-winning book.

Director Michael Arden has answered the call in his Tony-winning revival, which has arrived at the Ahmanson Theatre in sharp form. The production, which launched at New York City Center before transferring to Broadway, proved that a succès d’estime could also be an emotionally stirring hit.

“Parade” covers a lot of cultural, historical, and political ground. The trial, prefaced by a Civil War snapshot that sets the action in the proper context, takes up much of the first act. But the musical also tells the story of a marriage that grows in depth as external reality becomes more treacherous.

It’s a lot to sort through, but Arden, working hand in hand with scenic designer Dane Laffrey, has conceptualized the staging in a neo-Brechtian fashion that allows the historical background to be seamlessly transmitted. Sven Ortel‘s projections smoothly integrate the necessary information, allowing the focus to be on the human figures caught in the snares of American bigotry and barbarism.

Danielle Lee Greaves, left, and Talia Suskauer in the national tour of “Parade.” Suskauer plays Lucille, Leo’s wife.

(Joan Marcus)

The 2007 Donmar Warehouse revival, directed by Rob Ashford, came to the Mark Taper Forum in 2009 with the promise that it had finally figured out the musical. The production was scaled down, but the full potency of “Parade” wasn’t released. An earnest layer of “importance” clouded the audience’s emotional connection to the characters, even if the Taper was a more hospitable space for this dramatic musical than the Ahmanson.

Arden’s production, at once intimate and epic, comes through beautifully nonetheless on the larger stage. “Parade,” which delves into antisemitism, systemic bias in our judicial system and the power of a wily demagogue to stoke atavistic hatred for self-gain, has a disconcerting timeliness. But the production — momentous in its subject matter, human in its theatrical style — lets the contemporary parallels speak for themselves.

Ben Platt, who played Leo, and Micaela Diamond, who played Leo’s wife, Lucille, made this Broadway revival sing in the most personally textured terms. For the tour, these roles are taken over by Max Chernin and Talia Suskauer. Both are excellent, if less radiantly idiosyncratic. The modesty of their portrayals, however, subtly draws us in.

Chris Shyer, left, and Alison Ewing play Governor Slaton and his wife, two of the more noble figures in the show.

(Joan Marcus)

Chernin’s Leo is a cerebral, Ivy League-educated New Yorker lost in the minutiae of his factory responsibilities. A numbers man more than a people person, he’s a fish out of water in Atlanta, as he spells out in the song “How Can I Call This Home?” Platt played up the comedy of the quintessential Jewish outsider in a land of Confederate memorials and drawling manners. Chernin, more reserved in his manner, seethes with futile terror.

The withholding nature of Chernin’s Leo poses some theatrical risks but goes a long way toward explaining how the character’s otherness could be turned against him in such a malignant way. His Leo makes little effort to fit in, and he’s resented all the more for his lofty detachment.

It takes some time for Suskauer’s Lucille to come into her own, both as a wife and a theatrical character. It isn’t until the second half that, confronting the imminent death of her husband, she asserts herself and rises in stature in both Leo’s eyes and audience’s. But a glimmer of this potential comes out in the first act when Lucille sings with plaintive conviction “You Don’t Know This Man,” one of the standout numbers in a score distinguished less by individual tunes than by the ingenious deployment of an array of musical styles (from military beats to folk ballads and from hymns to jazz) to tell the story from different points of view.

Max Chernin’s Leo is a cerebral, Ivy League-educated New Yorker lost in the minutiae of his factory responsibilities.

(Joan Marcus)

“This Is Not Over Yet” raises hope that Leo and Lucille will find a way to overcome the injustice that has engulfed them. History can’t be revised, but where there’s a song there’s always a chance in the theater. Reality, however, painfully darkens in the poignant duet “All the Wasted Time,” which Lucille and Leo sing from his prison cell — a seized moment of marital bliss from a husband and wife who, as the last hour approaches, have finally become equal partners.

Ramone Nelson, who plays Jim Conley, a Black worker at the factory who is suborned to testify against Leo, delivers the rousing “Blues: Feel The Rain Fall,” a chain gang number that electrifies the house despite the defiance of a man who, having known little justice, has no interest in defending it. Conley has been sought out by Governor Slaton (a gently authoritative Chris Shyer), who has reopened the investigation at Lucille’s urging only to uncover contradictions and inconsistencies in the case. He’s one of the more noble figures, however reluctant, married to a woman (a vivid Alison Ewing) who won’t let him betray his integrity, even if it’s too little, too late.

Hugh Dorsey (Andrew Samonsky), the prosecuting attorney preoccupied with his future, has no regrets after railroading Leo in a politicized trial that will cost him his life. Dorsey is one of the chief villains of the musical, but Samonsky resists melodrama to find a credible psychological throughline for a man who has staked his career on the ends justifying the means.

Lucille (Talia Suskauer, left) and Leo (Max Chernin) sing a poignant duet from his prison cell.

(Joan Marcus)

Britt Craig (Michael Tacconi), a down-on-his-luck reporter who takes delight in demonizing Leo in the press, dances on his desk when he’s landed another slanderous scoop. But even he’s more pathetic than hateful. One sign of the production’s Brechtian nature is the way the structural forces at work in society are revealed to be more culpable than any individual character. The press, like the government and the judiciary, is part of a system that’s poisoned from within.

The harking back to the Civil War isn’t in vain. “Parade” understands that America’s original sin — slavery and the economic apparatus that sanctioned the dehumanization of groups deemed as “other” — can’t be divorced from Leo’s story.

The musical never loses sight of poor Mary Phagan (Olivia Goosman), a flighty underage girl who didn’t deserve to be savagely killed at work. It’s exceedingly unlikely that Leo had anything to do with her murder, but the show doesn’t efface her tragedy, even as it reckons with the gravity of Leo’s.

When Chernin’s Leo raises his voice in Jewish prayer before he is hanged, the memory of a man whose life was wantonly destroyed is momentarily restored. His lynching can’t be undone, but the dignity of his name can be redeemed and our collective sins can be called to account in a gripping musical that hasn’t so much been revived as reborn.

Some of Blake Lively‘s text messages with friend Taylor Swift could be disclosed in court, in a recent development of the actor’s winding legal battle against her “It Ends With Us” co-star Justin Baldoni.

U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman on Wednesday filed an order denying the “Gossip Girl” alumna’s request to keep her messages with Swift out of litigation, according to legal documents reviewed by The Times. “Given that Lively has represented that Swift had knowledge of complaints or discussions about the working environment on the film, among other issues, the requests for messages with Swift regarding the film and this action are reasonably tailored to discover information that would prove or disprove Lively’s harassment and retaliation claims,” reads the order.

Baldoni and his Wayfarer Studios filed a request for production connected to the Lively-Swift texts in February, asking for “‘all documents and communications related to or reflecting Lively’s communications with Taylor Swift” about their 2024 romantic drama and subsequent legal proceedings.

The “It Ends With Us” co-stars have engaged in a legal back-and-forth for months after Lively accused director Baldoni of sexual harassment on the set of the film and accused his team of orchestrating a smear campaign against her in December. The allegations first surfaced in a report from the New York Times. She formally sued Baldoni in federal court on Dec. 31. Baldoni and nine other plaintiffs — including his crisis PR team and executives at Wayfarer Studios — hit back that same day with a $400-million countersuit against Lively and her husband, “Deadpool” star Ryan Reynolds, and a separate defamation complaint against the New York Times.

Liman dismissed Baldoni’s complaints, which failed to meet legal standards, earlier this month. The judge said in his Wednesday order that “Lively’s motion is rooted in the broader concern that the Wayfarer Parties are using demands for communications with Swift not ‘to obtain information relevant to claims and defenses in court, but to prop up a public relations narrative outside of court.’ ”

Wednesday’s order also denied Baldoni’s cross-motion to compel Lively to produce documents connected to the production.

Baldoni’s team subpoenaed Swift earlier this year but eventually withdrew it after the singer and her legal reps dismissed it as an “unwarranted fishing expedition,” according to Variety.

In a statement shared with multiple outlets, a representative for Lively reacted to this week’s order, claiming, “Baldoni’s desire to drag Taylor Swift into this has been constant dating back to August 2024” and is an effort to influence the singer’s fan base. In the past, the devoted league of Swift supporters known as Swifites have banded together to criticize the singer’s high-profile exes and in recent years, rallied against Ticketmaster over allegations of fraud, price-fixing and antitrust violations.

“We will continue to call out Baldoni’s relentless efforts to exploit Ms. Swift’s popularity, which from day one has been nothing more than a distraction from the serious sexual harassment and retaliation accusations he and the Wayfarer parties are facing,” the spokesperson added, according to People.

Representatives for Swift and Baldoni did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment.

James Gunn has his own theory about why the movie industry is “dying.”

The filmmaker, screenwriter and co-head of DC Studios contends that the reason for bad movies is Hollywood’s tendency to begin productions before screenplays are complete, he told Rolling Stone in a new interview.

“I do believe that the reason why the movie industry is dying is not because of people not wanting to see movies. It’s not because of home screens getting so good,” Gunn said. “The number one reason is because people are making movies without a finished screenplay.”

That’s why one of his main rules at DC Studios is that movies must have finished scripts before they go into production. In fact, Gunn just scrapped a project because the screenplay wasn’t ready, he said. On the other hand, he described the scripts for the upcoming DC films “Supergirl,” “Lanterns” and “Clayface” as “so f—-ing good.”

Before taking the reins of DC Studios in 2022, Gunn co-wrote and directed three “Guardians of the Galaxy” movies for now-competitor Marvel Studios, which he said has been “killed” by Disney’s directive to increase output.

“We don’t have the mandate to have a certain amount of movies and TV shows every year,” Gunn said of DC Studios. “So we’re going to put out everything that we think is of the highest quality.”

During the interview, Gunn also addressed rumors that Matt Reeves’ sequel to “The Batman,” starring Robert Pattinson, has been axed. The film, which Gunn confirmed is still titled “The Brave and the Bold,” has been delayed a year and is now expected in October 2027.

“That’s the other thing I hear all the time — that ‘Batman Part II’ is canceled. It’s not canceled,” Gunn said. “We don’t have a script. Matt’s slow. Let him take his time. Let him do what he’s doing. God, people are mean. Let him do his thing, man.”

Finishing the scripts for the “The Batman” sequel and “Wonder Woman” are among DC Studios’ top priorities, Gunn noted.

Additionally, Gunn reflected on the 2018 scandal that saw him briefly fired from “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3” when tweets resurfaced of him joking about pedophilia and rape. He said without that experience, his script for “Superman” — hitting theaters July 11 — would have been much different.

“That opened the door for me to stop creating so that people would like me. That’s downplaying it — so people would love me,” Gunn said. “I think on some level, everything I had done came from a pleasing place.”

When asked whether he’s worried about ever running out of ideas, Gunn didn’t seem too concerned.

“If I do, then I’ll go raise goats,” he said. “I really am fine. There’s a lot of directors who get worse as they get older, and I don’t wanna do that. Or maybe I do — I don’t know. It’s like, if it runs out — it hasn’t so far. But who knows?”

When you gather the creative minds behind six of the most entertaining and acclaimed shows of 2025, the conversation is destined for narrative intrigue. The writers who took part in this year’s Envelope Roundtable touched on social media blackouts, release strategies, runaway production, even the wonder of Bravo’s “The Valley.” How’s that for a twist?

This panelists are Debora Cahn of “The Diplomat,” about an American foreign service officer thrust into a thorny web of geopolitics; R. Scott Gemmill of “The Pitt,” which focuses on front-line healthcare workers inside a Pittsburgh hospital during a single 15-hour shift; Lauren LeFranc of “The Penguin,” a reimagining of the Batman villain Oswald Cobblepot as a rising Gotham City kingpin, Oz Cobb; Craig Mazin of “The Last Of Us,” an adaptation of the popular video game series about survivors of an apocalyptic pandemic; Seth Rogen of “The Studio,” a chronicle of the film industry’s mercenary challenges as seen through the eyes of a newly appointed studio chief; and Jen Statsky of “Hacks,” about an aging comic’s complicated relationship with her outspoken mentee.

Read on for excerpts from our discussion.

The 2025 Writers Roundtable: Lauren LeFranc, left, Jen Statsky, Craig Mazin, Seth Rogen, Debora Cahn and R. Scott Gemmill.

Lauren, you’re making a series that is tethered to source material that’s really beloved by fans. I’m curious what the conversations are like with DC, or “The Batman” director Matt Reeves, when your series has to fit into a larger canon.

LeFranc: I knew where Oz ended in “The Batman.” I knew my job was to arc him to rise to power and achieve a certain level of power by the end. Outside of that, I was given carte blanche and I could just play. And that’s the most exciting thing to me. We both were in agreement that this should be a character study of this man. I love digging into the psychology of characters.

So many people were like, “Do you feel pressure? What’s this like for you?” And I was like, “Am I numb as a human?” I don’t feel that kind of pressure. I feel pressure to tell a great story and to write interesting, engaging characters that are surprising and to kind of surprise myself. I’m not the first type of person you would think who would get an opportunity to write a guy like Oz, necessarily, and to write into this type of world. I think there’s been a lot of crime dramas and a lot of genre shows or features that don’t have the lens that I have on a man like that. So I took that seriously. And I also really wanted to pepper the world with really interesting, complicated women as well. I felt like, in some of these genres, sometimes those characters weren’t as fully formed.

Craig Mazin of “The Last of Us.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Craig, you know what it’s like working with source material, and we knew the fate of fan-favorite character Joel, who dies in Part 2 of the video game. Tell me about your experience of the death of Joel in the video game — playing it — and how that informed what you wanted to see out of Season 2 and where exactly it would fall.

Mazin: I was upset when it happened, but I wasn’t upset at the game. It was, narratively, the right thing to do. If you make a story that is about moral outcomes and the consequences of our behavior, and somebody goes through a hospital and murders a whole lot of people, and kind of dooms the world to be stuck in this terrible place, and takes away the one hope they have of getting out of it, yeah, there should be a consequence. If there’s no consequence or even a mild consequence, then it’s a bit neutered, isn’t it? It made sense to me and it made sense that if we were going to tell the story, that was the story we were going to tell. Sometimes people do ask me, “Was there any part of you that was like, ‘Hey, let’s not have Joel die?’” No. That would be the craziest thing of all time.

How quick were you watching the real-time reaction from fans?

Mazin: I don’t do that.

Rogen: But how do you get validation? How do you know to feel good?

Statsky: Can you teach me not to look?

Mazin: I think I’m looking for validation. Really what I’m looking for is to repeat abusive behavior toward me — that’s what my therapist says. For all of our shows, millions and millions and millions of people are watching these around the world. And if 10,000 people on Twitter come at you for something, that is a negligible number relative to the size of the audience, but it sure doesn’t feel [like it]. So I made a choice. The downside is I do miss the applause. Who among us doesn’t love applause? I’ve just had to give that feeling up to not feel the bad feelings.

Seth Rogen of “The Studio.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

With a show like “The Studio” or “Hacks,” does it feel cathartic to lampoon the industry or show the ridiculous nature of the business and the decision–makers sometimes?

Rogen: What’s funny is, as we were writing the show, we never used the word “satire.” To us, the goal was not to make fun of any element of the industry — honestly, it’s mostly based on myself and my own fears, as someone who’s in charge of things, that I’m making the wrong choices, and that I’m prioritizing the wrong things, and that I’m convincing my idols to work with me and then I’m letting them down, and I’m championing the wrong ideas. That I’m making things worse and that I’m giving notes to people that are detrimental rather than exciting, and that I’m mitigating my own risks rather than trying to bolster creative swings. That was the startling moment where I realized I personally relate in my darkest moments to a studio executive more than I do a creative person in the industry in many ways. And that was kind of the moment where I was like, “Oh, that’s a funny thing to explore.”

Jen Statsky of “Hacks.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Statsky: But it’s interesting when you put it like that, because of the part of showrunning where you become management and you’re much more on that business side [of] running a show. We’re executives in many ways too.

Mazin: I have a question for you. How do you deal with the fact that — as we kind of move through things as writers, we are always comrades, we are colleagues of people. When you become a showrunner, you don’t notice it at first, but there is this barrier between you and everybody, and one day you wake up and realize, “Oh, it’s because they look at me and see someone who can fire them, who can elevate them, who can change their lives for better or worse.” And you start to feel very, very lonely all of a sudden.

Statsky: Oh, there’s a group text you’re not on.

Mazin: And it’s about you.

Statsky: It’s about you. It’s such a hard part of this job that I struggle with very much because as writers, we are empathetic to others, and we are observing the world, and we are trying to commune with people as best as possible. But then you do this thing and you’re like, “I like writing, I like writing, I like writing.” And they’re like, “Great. Now here’s a 350-person company to manage and you become a boss.” I struggle with it a lot, the thinking of people’s feelings, thinking of people’s emotions, wanting to be in touch with them, but then also, at the end of the day, having to sometimes make really difficult management-type decisions that affect people’s livelihood. I find it very challenging. I need your therapist for that as well.

Debora Cahn of “The Diplomat.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Debora, you have a character, a female vice president, who’s been doing the bidding of an older president whose capabilities have been called into question, and spoiler alert, she becomes president. The season launched a week or so before the 2024 presidential election. What was that like? And how is it writing a political drama now versus when you were working on “The West Wing”?

Cahn: Back in “The West Wing” days, we would have people come in, people who worked in the field, and we would say, “What are you worried about that we don’t know to worry about yet?” And that was a pretty good barometer for getting an interesting story that was likely to still be topical in a year. That’s all you want, really, is to not be completely lapped by the news when you’re trying to tell a story that’s not going to go to air for a year. Now, we’re released from any boundaries of any kind. There’s nothing that we can do that’s more absurd than what’s happening. Suddenly, we’re doing a documentary, or we’re doing a balm for what you wish government was like or what you vaguely remember it was like. But we’re trying to stay in the headspace of, “What is the foreign policy community going to be thinking about in the next two years?” and trying to find something that will continue to feel relevant. But more and more it’s like, “What are the conflicts that sane people have with each other in this field? What happens when you can look at two people and you feel like they both have good values and they are kind to children? What do they fight about?”

R. Scott Gemmill of “The Pitt.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Let’s talk about release strategies. There’s the traditional, week-to-week model and the more modern, all-at-once model. There’s a mix of both in the marketplace. Scott, with “The Pitt,” you could just see the way people rallied around every week to see what happened next. What do you like about the weekly release?

Gemmill: I’ve only ever done that. This is my first streaming show, and we are doing it in a traditional drop a week. So I’ve never had a show that was bingeable. I don’t know any other way. At one point, they were going to release three episodes at once, but they only released two [at the start]. I don’t have a dog in that fight. I think my show, just because of the nature of it, would be very hard to binge.

Rogen: As someone who’s been bingeing it, I can attest to that. [To Cahn] Yours comes out all at once.

Cahn: It does. I don’t love that. It’s not what I would choose. I think Netflix offers a lot of other pluses. [It’s] got a big audience all over the world and that’s really nice. But I came up in broadcast television, and the idea that you’ve created this thing and it’s a story that you’ve experienced over time, and then people are like two days and done, it just —

Mazin: It’s weird.

Cahn: And it changes the way that you write.

Mazin: Over the last few years, what’s happening is, for shows that are coming out week by week, people will now save up three at a time. So they don’t want to watch week after week. There’s this weird accordion thing going on, and I don’t know where this is going. I don’t think any of us do. I’m a little nervous about the week by week. I am just hoping that it remains.

I thought for sure one day Netflix would go, “Why are we doing this?” Because I really didn’t understand. I still don’t understand.

Cahn: I have this question every three months.

Rogen: They don’t have an answer.

Cahn: It works for them.

Gemmill: Wonder why they complain about grind. Because it’s not there. Well, it’s because you put it all out at once.

Mazin: But then what I’m worried about is that they’re right. I’m just wondering if people are starting to lose their patience.

Statsky: Attention span. I think they are. I’ve even noticed, because we used to drop two a week. In this season for “Hacks,” we’ve done one a week. I saw a couple tweets where people were like, “Why are the episodes shorter this year?” I was like, “Well, they’re not. You used to watch two.” But I do think the one-a-week model, because now people are so trained [to binge] — like you’re saying, the attention span, it’s scary. I don’t think people want to watch like that anymore.

Rogen: I produced “The Boys,” and we actually went from them all coming out at once to weekly. And it did not affect the viewership in any way, shape or form was what we were told. What it did affect, that we could just see, was it sustained cultural impact. People talked about it for three months instead of three weeks of incredibly intense chatter. It just occupied more space in people’s heads, which I think was beneficial to the show.

Cahn: When they’re coming out one a week, you can repeat things that you can’t when they’re coming out all together. You have to look at them in terms of, did they each have the same rhythm? Are they each really featuring the same characters and storylines? You have to think about it in terms of, “If people do three at a time, what’s their experience going to be?” It’s terrible.

The talk of the town is runaway production and how to stop it. Scott, “The Pitt” is set in Pittsburgh and you did film exteriors there, but principal production happened on the Warner Bros. lot. Talk about why that was important for you.

Gemmill: The show could have been shot in Moose Jaw. But it was important to bring the work here, so we fought really hard to get the California tax credit. The most important part of my job besides writing producible scripts that are on time is to keep my show on the air as long as possible, to keep everyone employed as long as possible. And that’s the thing I like the best about it. This is the first show that Noah [Wyle]’s done since he left “ER” that’s shot in Los Angeles. It’s a shame. There’s more production now, but when we first were at Warner Bros. for this, it was a ghost town. It’s so sad because I’ve been in the business for 40 years and still get excited when I go on a lot. And to see them become unused just because it’s cheaper to shoot somewhere else … and there’s so many talented people here, and it’s hard on their families if you have to go to Albuquerque for six months. I don’t ever want to leave the stage again.

Mazin: We did our postproduction on the Warner Bros. lot, but we shoot in Canada. And I love Canada. But yeah, of course, I’d love to be home. I like doing postproduction here. I’ll take what I get. The financial realities are pretty stark, that’s the problem. If you are making a smaller show, the gap is not massive. If you’re making a larger show, every percentage becomes a bigger amount of money and also represents a larger amount of people to employ. But what’s good is it seems like they’re starting to get their act together in Sacramento. I do worry sometimes it’s a little bit too late, because the rest of the world seems to be in an arms race to see how many incentives they can give to get production to go there.

I’m hoping that at least we can start to move the needle a bit because, listen, that Warner Bros. lot, when I was a kid starting out, I would go on that lot, I would see the little “ER” backlot with the diner and all of it. And I was like, “That’s on TV. It’s here.” And now I walk around the Warner Bros. lot and it’s just a single tram full of tourists and no one else. And it’s so, so sad.

Lauren LeFranc of “The Penguin.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

LeFranc: It’s really heartbreaking. You used to be able to write what you’re doing, produce, do post all on the same lot. You had a family that you were able to form, and you could mentor writers. I would not be able to be a showrunner if not for all the people who came before me who mentored me, and I could walk to set, produce my own episode, and then I can walk to post. It’s so hard now where you’re asking writers, especially if networks aren’t paying for writers to go to set, “Can you pay for yourself to fly to New York?” It just makes it so hard to be able to educate people in the way that I feel like I was privileged enough to be educated. What are we going to do about that?

Gemmill: Mistakes get made. The best part about the whole business is it’s collaborative. But when you’re separated by thousands of miles, sometimes there’s a disconnect.

Before we wrap, please tell me what you’re watching. Jen, we were talking about “The Valley” earlier.

Rogen: Oh, I watch “The Valley” too. It’s amazing. Do you watch “The Valley” aftershow? It’s almost as good as “The Valley.”

Statsky: I’m really worried about Jax.

Rogen: We watch reality television. I see the blank looks on everybody’s face.

Statsky: We’re in comedy.

Mazin: I can’t believe how scared I was when you were talking, and then how good I felt when you’re like, “It’s a reality show.”

Statsky: So, you know “Vanderpump Rules”?

Mazin: Ish.

Statsky: It’s an offshoot.

Rogen: Which is an offshoot of —

Statsky: “Real Housewives.”

Mazin: This is an echo of an echo. Go on.

Statsky: Yes, it’s an echo of an echo of garbage.

Rogen: But it’s so good.

Statsky: But it is the worst indictment of heterosexual marriage I’ve ever seen.

Rogen: Yes, it really is.

Mazin: Oh, so incidentally, the San Fernando Valley is what it’s [about]? It’s about Valley Village.

Statsky: Valley Village. It’s the couples that have moved to the Valley and are having children and —

Rogen: And they are all in very bad places in their lives. It’s amazing.

Statsky: You think [in] reality shows most people are in bad places. That’s sadly what people want to watch. These people are in particularly bad places.

Rogen: And the show seems to be compounding it, I think.

Statsky: Yeah, weirdly, being on a reality show is not helping their problem.

Rogen: I find that I watch reality TV because when I watch all of your shows, I find them intellectually challenging. They make me self-conscious, or they make me inspired or something, which is not how I want to feel necessarily after a long day at work just watching something. And so reality TV makes me feel none of those things. It in no way reminds me of what I’ve done all day.

Mazin: If you make me dissociate, I’m watching.

Statsky: You’re going to love it. But once you start watching, Jax owns a bar in Studio City. We can all go. We can reunite.

Mazin: I’ve gone to that bar.

Rogen: You been to Jax’s?

Mazin: Yes, I’ve been to that bar.

Statsky: Wait, hold on. But everyone else in that bar was there because they watched the reality show. Why were you there?

LeFranc: Out of context, I’m so invested in all this.

Rogen: You’ve got to watch it. … Nothing I will ever make is as good as “The Valley.”