Brandon: 0:00

When you, as a director, feel like you've made this production, or you've tried to make this production, and the company has kind of railroaded your original vision, and they've made you turn it into something completely different than what you had. And so I supported that idea, but at the same time, I think it was mom that originally said this first, with the whole idea that we learn from our mistakes and grow from them. I don't know if using Alan Smithee negates that necessarily in the accountability that goes with putting your name onto something. Hello, and welcome to the Cup of Tea Critiques Podcast. I'm your host, Brandon Chaisson, and like always, I'll be joined today by the great team that brings you cupofteacritiques.com we are excited to get started on our podcast where we will share our perspectives on several areas in movies and television. At cup of tea critiques, we review movie and television series and tag them with a tea brew that evokes a feel for the production in this way you can decide for yourself if they're your "cup of tea." Here on the Cup of Tea Critiques Podcast, we will dive even deeper into the productions and topics we broach on our website, engaging in conversation and sharing our unique perspectives. Ready for a deep look with the deep brew. This week's topic, Alan Smithee. So let's get started. Cup of Tea Critiques is a family business, and I'm here with my brother, Chris, my mother, Reba, and my father, Terry. And Chris, you're actually the one that introduced us to Alan Smithee, so why don't you do us a favor and tell us who he is?

Chris: 1:41

Yeah. So in 1969 the production of a Western with a kind of a middling budget called Death of a Gunfighter.

Excerpt from Death of a Gunfighter: 1:50

Trailer from Death of a Gunfighter

Chris: 1:53

You know, it started to shoot. And the director, his name was Robert Totten. When they got most of the way through the shoot, he wasn't really happy without it was going. He wasn't pleased with some of the creative choices that he was kind of being forced to make, and and he bowed out of the project. And Don Siegel took over and finished out the project. And he didn't really want his name on a project that he'd worked on a small portion of, essentially, and so he didn't really want to be credited as the director. Neither did Robert Totten. And so Robert Totten petitioned the Directors Guild of America to put a pseudonym in place of his name in the credits, and that pseudonym was initially Alan Smith, which they decided was a little too common of a name, and so they changed it to Alan Smithee eventually, because it was plain enough, but not too common, essentially. So moving forward, Alan Smithee just became a common pseudonym for directors to petition to the Directors Guild of America to place on a movie when they weren't satisfied with some of the creative choices that were made with the influence of the production company you know that had backed the film you know. Which so often it ended up being placed on TV edits that were cut down for a two-hour run time, you know, including commercials. Or an in-flight entertainment type of edit, cut down again to two hours, and maybe had some some material removed to make it more digestible. And so, but just kind of became a regular thing for made for TV, movies, for movies that weren't very good, for movies that were being edited into different versions and directors weren't really happy with and didn't want their name on. And so it kind of continued for about three decades. One of the most notable movies that had Alan Smithee on it was Dune in 1984.

Excerpt from Dune (1984): 4:26

Excerpt from Dune

Chris: 4:37

Which people know it by the very successful remakes now, but the the 1984 version was directed by David Lynch, who wasn't very happy with it, because, again, that was another movie that had an almost four-hour run time. He worked to get it down to three, and they said, no, we want it to be like two. And so he wasn't happy with the final product either. It was ripped by critics. Um. So they wanted to put Alan Smithee on that one. Another one that almost ended up with the name Alan Smithee on it was American History X.

Excerpt from American History X: 5:09

Excerpt from American History X

Chris: 5:22

Which is maybe the most critically acclaimed movie that almost ended up in this batch of movies, because the director Tony Kaye did not get along with the lead actor, Edward Norton, and eventually he he went on this kind of press tour. Essentially, he kept basically publicizing it to everybody. So when he petitioned for the DGA to put Alan Smithee as a director, they said, no, we've already basically told everybody, you work on it. So no. So Tony Kaye didn't actually get his name removed from it, and ended up being praised by critics anyway. And then the title, the pseudonym, Alan Smithee, kind of took a big hit. And event..., you know, this was basically the beginning of the end. A movie in 1997 a movie called an Alan Smithee film, Burn, Hollywood Burn was released which starred people such as Coolio, Chuck D, Naomi Campbell and ...

Excerpt from Burn Hollywood Burn: 6:37

Excerpt from Burn Hollywood Burn

Chris: 6:43

And then the the title character was played by Eric Idle, and the title character was Alan Smithee, a guy who was, you know, assigned to direct a movie, wasn't happy with it, wanted his name removed, but couldn't have Alan Smithee put on it, because his name was Alan Smithee. And so he goes to basically burn them, burn the film, and the production company tries to stop him, and hilarity ensues. Except it wasn't considered very, very funny by critics. Roger, Roger Ebert slam did, said it said it was terrible. You can find Siskel and Ebert's review of it on on, on YouTube today, actually, and so. And ironically, so the writer of the film, Joe Eszterhas, you know, did not really see eye to eye with the director, Arthur Hiller. You know, they were kind of oil and water. And Arthur Hiller wanted his name removed him. Arthur Hiller successfully got Alan Smithee, his name put on there from an Allen Smithee film, Burn, Hollywood Burn, to replace with Alan Smithee. Um, and so, so art imitating life and vice versa, I guess. But that was kind of the the end of that pseudonym, the unofficial ending of that pseudonym, now that everybody knew about it. So that's a little bit of the history of of the Alan Smithee. There's plenty more stories, but for time, that's just the gist of it.

Brandon: 8:22

Okay. So I found so much of that fascinating that it sounds like you wanted to make a comment.

Terry: 8:27

Yeah, I was just gonna say. I thought it was funny that Roger Ebert gave it a zero, which was a very rare thing for him to do with any movie. But that just show you how bad he thought it was.

Brandon: 8:40

Yeah, I you know, Siskel and Ebert, very famous critics of movies, and so I didn't get to watch that whole thing. And I didn't get a chance to see this movie either, from 1997 but I did have some skepticism as to why he gave it such a low rating, because it was putting on blast the situation in Hollywood. And I almost wondered, was he pointed in that direction, like, hey, don't give this film any love, hopefully it goes away. But you know, ultimately, it didn't, obviously, and it was large enough that we realized we had to do away with Alan Smithee. So, one thing about this topic, though, with Alan smithee, when I was reading about this and we were discussing it, the question comes across, have you in your own personal life, had any type of Alan Smithee moments where you wanted to just have your name removed from something, whether it's like from a project, from like a, Chris you were even talking like from a terrible sports team or something like that. So the question is, like if have you had an Allen Smitty moment? And with that in mind, I'll start real quick first, like I am a very proud White Sox fan. And 2024 I really wish I could remove my name from that, because it is the worst. It's the worst season in history.

Baseball Sound Effect: 9:50

Baseball Sound Effect.

Brandon: 9:59

And I. I can't remove that from my friend's memories, that I'm a fan, because last year happened, but that would be my Alan Smithee moment for myself. I'll start with you guys, Mom and Dad. What about you guys? Have you had an Alan Smithee moment in your life?

Reba: 10:11

Yeah, I do. I wrote a high school research paper that was poorly written. Very early my freshman year of college, I went back and read that and saw how poorly written it was, and I just wanted to bury my head under a cover and never come out. So I know it sounds obsessive, but yeah, it was just terribly, terribly written. And I was just just really pissed off at my senior English teacher, that she could ever pass me on that paper and that she never taught me to write any better than that. By the time I got the college I was writing much better and I was just pissed. But anyway, that's, that's mine.

Brandon: 10:52

So real quick. Dad, before you you give yours my I want the audience out there to know that my mother is a wonderful writer. Now, what you should know by going to cupofteacritiques.com and checking out any of the critiques that she has wonderfully written. But I can also it says firsthand that she's a good writer, because if I take away my sports fandom example, my mother helped me avoid an Alan Smithee moment. I will always remember this paper. Going way back to fourth grade, I wrote a paper about the kangaroo rat where, let's just say that, first off, I didn't understand how bad plagiarism was, as well as didn't do a good job of understanding how to discern any kind of information. So I wrote what probably amounted to like an eight or 10 page, completely plagiarized paper that did not have any direction whatsoever. And by the time I actually turned it in, it was it was a much better, succinct piece that actually made some sense, and I cited the people that I got the information from, so you know. And from then, I had a lot of great grades on my written work, and that started with my mother working on it. So mom, you you no longer write bad papers since that senior year. You write some pretty good works, and thankfully, you've helped me write some pretty good stuff as well. All right, go ahead. What's your example?

Terry: 12:02

Oh, no, my example is just from days of coaching sports. There's moments that I wish I could kind of take back, and those are my Alan Smithee moments, not a lot, but enough that you just go, Oh, I wish we could take that back.

Reba: 12:20

You have to be specific.

Terry: 12:22

No.

Brandon: 12:25

Can you give us an example of like, a decision that you wish you could take back?

Terry: 12:30

No, because anyone listening would that has any knowledge of it, would know exactly what I'm talking about.

Basketball Drop Sound Effect: 12:35

Basketball Drop Sound Effect

Brandon: 12:46

Alright, bro, you got one of your own?

Chris: 12:49

Yeah, when I was in third grade, I did a science fair project, a group science fair project, where we had to make, well, we didn't have to make this, we just chose to do this. We made atomic models of different, you know, atom combinations and and we use Play-Doh and toothpicks, you know, to show what water look like, and all these other different substances. And so the night of the science fair, the other two people on the project didn't show up, so I was just standing at a table with crumbling, crumbling Play-Doh and toothpicks, you know, and sharpie next to it, and a big post, a big one of those big trifold poster boards with litters on it. So I was just standing there with these, with these lame-looking Play-Doh models. And then, and I'm, you know, I was never a good science student, so I didn't really know, not that anybody stopped me to ask anything. I wouldn't have known exactly how to, how to describe them beyond the one with the two hydrogens and the oxygen is water, if you didn't know. And that's about all I had. That's about all I had. That was about two hours of my eight year old life. And not only would I like those back, but I would like to put Alan Smithee in place of that.

Brandon: 14:32

So the cup of tea critiques crew, those ...

Excerpt from Weird Science: 14:43

Excerpt from Weird Science

Brandon: 14:45

Our regrets clearly go way back in time. So Alan Smithee at least, and it sounds like for all of us, those actual true ones predate the 1997 movie. So we should have been able to use it in those cases. So, but if you want nicely written works, make sure you go to cupofteacritiques.com Telling you none of those are Alan Smithee worthy at all. They're much better with what we got going on. So with that in mind, though, you know, again, as we kept going through this topic, one thing that struck me was they were allowed to put Alan Smithee on a finished work, and that is very weird to me, that something can be completely done, and all of a sudden you want to say, I don't want to be tied to it. And that's that's different. Now, based on our research, I have my own opinion on if, if something should have that opportunity. But let me pose this to the group. Do you agree with directors, or, for that matter, any position in entertainment having the ability to use a pseudonym after a production has been completed? Do you guys agree with that?

Reba: 15:38

I I am on the fence about it. I am on the fence about it. I'll be, I'll be honest about that. On the one hand, I feel that there are lessons that can be learned from the things that we do poorly. I think, I think that, you know, in the end, we're ultimately judged by the body of our work. Most of those things will be good, hopefully, and only a few of those things will be bad. And of those things that are bad, my hope is that we have learned from that and gradually improved. That's how I see that. So you know, producing something that's bad does not necessarily make you somebody who can't, you know, accomplish something further down the line. So that is why I don't think it's, you know, good necessarily that someone should be able to just cover up their work and pretend like it's something that, you know, I cannot own that's, that's, that's, you know, just one way of looking at that. You know, on the other hand, though, I think about the podcast we did on movie ratings, and in that podcast, there were a lot of complaints from directors in not being able to control the ratings of their films. And I think directors, in this case, use Alan Smithee to basically say, look, I did not have control over my final work, and because of that, I don't want to have to claim it. And the Directors Guild say, okay, you don't have to claim it. They effectively gave them Alan Smithee as an out. And so it's just a way for them to be able to control their work. And to some degree, I understand that, so. And that's why I'm on the fence about it.

Terry: 17:48

Yeah, I don't know. I'm not on the fence at all about it. I Why should anyone you know, directors in particular, be allowed to remove their names from the work that they're involved in. They got paid for the project. They were in from not necessarily start to finish, because we know sometimes things get interrupted, but you worked on the project. I mean, the actors are part of the project. They don't get to easily remove their names from it. They live with the fact that, yeah, I was in a bad production. You know, I don't think they should be able to run away from the finished product because they don't agree with the finished product.

Brandon: 18:32

Okay? So I want to Chris, before you respond, I do want to follow up with you, Dad, you mentioned particularly the financial piece. And one thing about the use of Alan Smithee was that, if I understood this correctly, they were supposed to completely disassociate themselves with this, with this production, which I I took to mean that also any of the extra residuals or whatever they were no longer getting as well. But if you're saying that your issue, or you're you called out the piece that they got paid for it. If there was some sort of financial penalty, say, like, half payment or something like that, would it change your opinion on the use of the moniker?

Terry: 19:08

I don't know. I don't I just don't think they should run away from the fact that they were involved in the project. It's, to your mother's point on some of it, it's a learning experience. In a previous podcast, Chris said, one of the things that you learn working on a project is compromise, that things aren't going to go your way 100% you're not going to get everything you want in it. And I just think that this kind of falls into that same category, is that you know, you live with the experience. It's okay. I was part of a project that didn't go well,

Brandon: 19:46

Okay, Chris, I'm gonna go ahead and switch over to you. What about you? What do you, what is your opinion on the use of the moniker?

Chris: 19:52

Um, I think I'm leaning No, it's not a good thing. Um. On the one hand, I do understand how if you're worried that a bad experience isn't going to just remain a bad experience, and it's going to follow you around and greatly inhibit your ability to make a living beyond it, I do see why you'd be tempted to throw a pseudonym on there when, when it's because of choices that were outside of your control? Um, but just in the more abstract sense, I do think you should just kind of own your L's. You know, if you you signed on to the movie knowing someone else was going to have input, you didn't think you were going to have final say, you know, altogether, um, you know, any kind of creative knows that the business side of things is going to come in and that they're going to have to, you know, they're going to have to figure out a way to package it and to make it digestible, or to make it able to be distributed in certain realms. And so if you know that going in, you know why sign the contract, take the money and then try to wipe your hands of it.

Terry: 21:14

Yeah. I mean, I understand using pseudonyms, maybe in certain instances where maybe you weren't paid for the project. It was something you did as trying to help out or work, and maybe you want the focal point to be on others, new actors that are, you know, breaking in this project, or whatever. I can maybe understand using a pseudonym in a case like that, where you don't want to draw your attention to yourself.

Brandon: 21:46

You guys have me pondering this a little bit differently now, and I've been trying to figure out if I lean one way more than the other, or if it's dissuaded me from the way I was originally feeling and leaning. You know, this topic in general, oddly enough, made me think, you know, I'm a big sports guy as well. And so during pre production, I talked about this comparison to being a. This happened in the NFL a lot, where a lot of the head coaches wanted to become GMs, because the old adage of, if you want me to cook the meal, you should allow me to shop for the groceries. And in that dynamic, GMs, especially in the past, would typically get the players for the roster and tell the coach, here's what you got go make it work. And as we've learned over time, you have to have the players that fit your philosophies in order to have to at least hopefully, have the best success. And so with that in mind, I very much understood the reason for the use of Alan Smithee when you as a director, feel like you've made this production, or you've tried to make this production, and the company has kind of railroaded your original vision, and they've made you turn it into something completely different than what you had. And so I supported that idea, but at the same time, I think it was mom that originally said this first with the whole idea that we learn from our mistakes and grow from them, and I agree that all of that to be true. I don't know if using Alan Smithee negates that necessarily and the accountability that goes with putting your name onto something. But this is something that was only granted by the Directors Guild, and if you have directors that are not a part of this Guild, then they don't have those same protections. They're forced to put their names on this stuff. And so I was thinking about those in particular when I said that, like, Yeah, you should be able to put your name on here, because those ones that can't be a part of the Guild are probably lesser known. Let have not had as many opportunities, and maybe this production they're a part of, this was supposed to be their big break. And if, because they don't have the same connections or the same cachet as the bigger names that their works get railroaded, it would really stink to put it out there. And it turns out, it's a bad production, and they didn't even get the opportunity to really put out the product that they had attempted to put together, you know, for for whatever various reasons. So I just, I guess I land on, yeah, I think that something like this should be something there, because it at least holds accountable both sides. But I also liked it, at least the Guild. You had to petition for it. It wasn't just not right. Like, hey, I don't like this. So put Alan Smithee on it. You had to get permission in order to use this. And so from that standpoint, yes, I agree with the use of Alan Smithee myself. Yes, any rebuttals?

Reba: 24:27

Yeah. I mean, I think that's fair. Brandon, I think all the points everyone's made have been fair points. I guess it concerns me that, you know the degree to which we let in general, this just a general point, the degree to which we let you know our failures define us. I think that's problematic. I think there's this tendency to define ourselves by just everything we do. Um, with our wins, we're very happy to define ourselves as winners. With our losses, we wind up defining ourselves as losers. And I think both are especially problematic. You know, we are who we are, and we are a culmination of our wins and our losses. What we should be doing is constantly trying to just become better versions of ourselves. And I know that's a cliche, but that's truly what we're all trying to do. And so I think this, I think the Allen Smithee pseudonym is effectively a cop-out. While I understand where it's coming from in terms of them wanting some semblance of control over their work, it does effectively act as a cop-out. Instead, what they should do is Ah, okay alright, so f'ed this one up. Let me just move forward and learn from this. Next time I'm going to build, you know, a certain clause in my contract, or next time I won't work with this particular personality type. Or, you know, next time I'm going to suggest, you know, the the film be edited is this way. Whatever that is, you learn from it, and then you move forward. And as you go forward as a filmmaker, you're going to be building your team in a more perfect way than you did the time before. Learn from your mistakes and move forward. But I'll let your dad jump in here.

Terry: 26:30

I'll I think an analogy would be a group project where, because this is kind of what a film is is a group project. There's a group project and you wind up with a bad grade that kind of lends itself more towards this. And someone says, Well, yeah, you know what? You got a bad grade. You were part of this project, but we're going to allow you to take your name off of it, so it's not going to count against your grade.

Brandon: 27:01

Maybe that is a good comparison. I just, I feel like what directors are concerned with attaching their name to these products is that if it's early enough in their career, and it's a dud that they didn't even have any control over, now they've been branded as somebody that can't really put a film together properly, and that might be the only opportunity that they get, or at least their only opportunity on the scale that this production was supposed to be on. So I could understand why they would want that anonymity if they didn't agree with the direction it took when it was taken out of their hands. I'm empathetic to the idea of being allowed some creative license to put something together and then being told, No, we don't want that. We're going to make you do it this way instead. So unless that production company states clearly exactly the type of production they want, and the director on their end decides to just blow past their instructions, then yeah, I agree with the production company taking over at that point, and the director should have to sit with it. But there definitely should be some sort of contractual situation there that holds both pieces accountable in that sense. So that, I think that's what I want most, most importantly there. Alan Smithee, to me, in general, represents accountability, and that piece of it, no matter what side of the fence we land on; that's the part that I like.

Chris: 28:11

I think maybe it represents power too. Maybe to

Terry: 28:11

Should the screenwriter be afforded the same kind of directors, it's the only card they have to play because they are conceding, Look, I'm the artist. I have to bend to the will of management, of the business side of things, and the only real card I have to play is to is to remove my name. You know that they get to really do what they want with it. It's like saying all you have is your name, kind of, or not your name. thing? You know, they wrote the screenplay one way, and

Brandon: 28:48

They they are held accountable. That's why a bunch of them end up getting removed from a project. I mean, not to try and be a jerk here, but Blade has gone through like 19 different writers, and we haven't seen a production yet. And I, the original script. I know they got rid of it, and I don't know the person's name right in this moment, but I know that a lot of it had to do with the talent in the movie not liking the script. It was so in their minds, poorly written. And so there's plenty of time between the writing of the film and the production of the film. That's why they don't get afforded that same opportunity, because a script has to be chosen before they can even go forward. So that won't be the same situation. They won't ever have to worry about.

Chris: 29:27

Well, a writer, a lot of times writers are are selling the script. So sometimes you're selling a script, and you have no control over what happens after it, and you are handing over the right to it. Yeah, so and so. I mean, obviously writers will work out deals where they get to, you know, they get to keep some control of that. You know, you see authors do that sometimes, when their stuff gets adapted, or something like that. Like, I want to be in on the process. But, but in, you know, a writer would have an awful lot of nerve to sell, to sell it, you know, full on sell it, and then be like, wait a minute, you didn't do what I wanted with it. It's like, well, you gave it to me. It's not yours anymore.

Brandon: 30:08

Exactly. I'm 100% with you on that, bro. I mean, if you sold it at that point, it's somebody else's property. They they get to do whatever they want to with it. So just can't find the same comparison point. Dad, you about to say something?

Terry: 30:20

No, I was just gonna say that. I don't think it's that far of a stretch. I mean, director's work, to your point, has been, it's completed project. It goes into editing or whatever. Again, ultimately, I think the editor is responsible for the final product in that respect.

Reba: 30:36

I mean, look, none of us owns the means of productions. We don't control our own work. Unless you control your own work, you can forget it. You're always going to have issues with the final product. There's going to be something there. And the bottom line is, directors are contracted with studios to direct a project. There is going to be some influence that the studio or someone else on the team, whether it's editing, whatever it is, is going to be shaping that final product. And so the idea that what comes out at the end is going to be 100% purely the director's vision is just, is just a pipe dream. That's just not the case. And so as you brought up, Terry, there's some compromise. There has to be some room, some give and take in this process.

Brandon: 31:31

So I want to move this forward real quick to one more question, but I will say Chris, now that I know Steven Soderbergh, pseudonyms, I've decided that mine will now be, and Mom and Dad I won't put you on blast specifically, but just know that it'll be Brandon and then Dad's middle name, Mom's maiden name. So if y'all can figure those out, that's what my pseudonym would look like. So I won't make that for public consumption. You guys are gonna have to search. So I got one last question though for the panel today. So, you know, we, it was interesting, Chris, because we started this off with you defining Alan Smithee, letting us understand what that name, you know, the origin of this name. And in order to do so, you actually had to list the people who started this trend, like, why, how Alan Smithee really became the pseudonym for anonymity anyways, but given today's day and age, you know, not only just with the Internet, but with like, new media deals, the streaming services and everything, do we even think having a pseudonym like that could even exist today? Or should everybody just kind of take a the acceptance of the fact that this is going to be their work. Do we think this could even work today?

Chris: 32:47

Um, I think the the secret won't stay secret for long. You know this, the secret won't stay secret for very long. I just think today you got, you got Reddit boards, you got all these all these circles, all these spaces where fans can congregate, where you know different people with different insights, maybe different levels of access, can you know, spill the beans, essentially. So I feel like any union is going to have a tough time keeping, keeping things in house. I mean, to illustrate the importance of that, as I mentioned American History X, you had a director running around telling everybody he hated his lead actor, and that was enough to get him not to be able to do that. So that kind of illustrates how much you needed privacy. You needed a little bit of closed lips for this mechanism to even work out at that point in time. So I just think now it would be very hard if that was the only um motive behind it. But there's also the possibility that a director is not just taking his name off it so that nobody knows that he was on it. Maybe he's taking his name on it off of it to signify how disgruntled he was with the final product in terms of his level of creative control. So it may be a signifier being of just how the director feels, more so than whether or not he actually worked on it.

Reba: 34:19

I think it means something to people who produce things that that thing that is published not bear their name, if they don't want it to bear their name, it doesn't matter that all the talk on social media indicates that everybody knows the truth. That doesn't matter. That's not official, though, when you go to IMDb or somebody has the DVD, you know, as long as their name is not stamped on that, that's what they want. That is what they care about. And so, yeah, I think, and Alan Smithee could exist today despite social media, despite the way news works in social media. So yeah.

Terry: 35:10

Yeah, I mean, I agree, if the purpose is to put that thought forth, then yeah, it works today as it worked then, in terms of anonymity? No, I think that to Chris's point, and what we talked about in pre production, a lot of this stuff is done so much in advance of a release of something, the director's name is put out there. Who's going to be in it. There's all this marketing work that pushes all these things forward. So it's kind of hard to at the the end of Nope, that wasn't me. I mean, you know, you can't do Shaggy.

Reba: 35:52

Yeah.

Chris: 35:53

Yeah, I mean, to that point. I mean, you know, just take the movie that kind of ended it all. Alan Smithee, Burn Hollywood Burn. He's so so committed to that he tried to destroy the film itself. And for anyone who's curious, who would like to see it themselves, I think you can rent it for $4 on prime. But Katelyn Amber, who hosts The Tinsel Factory, a Film History Podcast, Burn Hollywood. Burn is not, not a good film, probably not worth $4 and you might not get through the whole thing, so suit yourself. So.

Brandon: 36:38

That's hilarious, and that's where we're gonna go ahead and wrap it up for today. Thanks so much for listening and figuring out your cup of tea along with us. Honestly, we could go on and on like we do at our dinner table, but we look forward to you joining us again next week for another great discussion. Make sure you rate and follow the Cup of Tea Critiques Podcast, wherever you listen to your favorite podcasts. Got an Alan Smithee, moment of your own? Leave a comment and share it with us. You can stay in the loop on all things COTC by subscribing on our website at cupofteacritiques.com. You can also find us on Facebook. Check out our Instagram@cupofteacritiques and on Letterboxd at COTCritiques. For Reba, Terry, and Chris. I'm Brandon. We'll see you next week for another deep look with a deep brew.