Speaker 1: There are many secrets to writing streaming content and episodic content, and the number one thing, and this goes against everything else you learn in the writing process, and that is that you never solve anything. What you do instead is you go out there and you say, all right, my main goal is to take people that the audience loves, put them in situations where they get a chance to get into a room with one another and get into a conflict, and then resolve the smaller conflict by the end of the episode, but never really resolve the bigger conflict. In fact, when you look at certain projects that have, shall we say, jumped the shark, the number one reason is that they've changed something fundamental about the show. If you think about it, what went wrong, and I know this is going back in history, what went wrong with Moonlighting? What went wrong with Moonlighting is when Matty and David finally sealed the deal. What was a challenge with the X-Files? A challenge with the X-Files was that Scully and Mulder admitted that they had an attraction to one another. What hurt Beverly Hills 90210? Well, they all got a little bit older, and I mean, okay, sometimes biology kicks in as well. The number one challenge that a show will have is when you have singles who decide to get married. In the case of Friends, Friends was able to slide over that, but I think part of that was because between the time Friends started and the time everyone started getting married, they never really lost their original base key demo, and between the start of the series and then, so many of the viewers went from being urban singles to being urban married, so it kind of tied in. Looking on another way, look, Mad About You. The challenge with Mad About You was that it became a double-income no-kids show into being a parental show, and even though it remained successful, it did lose a core of its audience because it didn't have that built-in base, so that's the real thing. The other thing is that you don't want to have the characters not be true to themselves, and what do I mean by that? If you look at certain older shows that, quote-unquote, jumped the shark, what usually happened is you had someone learn a lesson, and from then on, that person changed their personality. Note that has never happened in The Simpsons. Art has never grown up, whereas if you look at All in the Family, why is it that whenever that's rerun, and I know it's almost 50 years ago, but even now, when you rerun it, you never see the reruns with Daniel Brisebois or Archie Bunker's place. You still end it, more or less, where Archie and Edith are still married and Mike and Gloria have just moved away, and if you look at something like MASH, MASH was able to sustain and do innovative things that went out of genre primarily because it was so successful that people forgave it for everything. There just aren't many shows like that, as we saw recently with what happened with Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones took what should have been, in my opinion, an entire other season and crammed it all into about three episodes, and what that did is it didn't give an audience time to move into the way it ended, and consequently, you have people who do not look at that as quite the classic show it used to be. I'm not going to say it's not, but I am going to say that because it had an ending that did not satisfy people in a big way, that 30 years from now, it will probably not be that generation's Roots. It'll be more like that generation's Princess Daisy.