This is so good! When I was a kid I wanted to make a billion dollars so I could buy the Philadelphia Eagles and guide them to their first Super Bowl victory. Now I want to make a billion dollars so I can buy Castle Rock Entertainment and let these guys make Seinfeld Adventure.
> Well, firstly, here’s what we DON’T want to make. We don’t want to just create a fan service game that repeats jokes or plots that people already are familiar with.
> Elaine reminds him that the publicist was supposed to get them all tickets to the opening night of the new movie “Rochelle, Rochelle 2”
They should just go ahead and do it regardless, like the various Trek fan groups have done. If they aren't going to re-hash the same jokes, they could make an unrelated game that doesn't use any CastleRock assets, then leak an "illegal texture pack" that swaps around names to convert the game into the real deal.
That would just get them sued and their game blacklisted, which as fans of the show I doubt they would want.
Jerry Seinfeld et. al. might not care about a game made with their property, but that doesn't mean they won't protect their rights against copyright infringement if it happens without their approval. Star Trek fan films have to follow a strict set of guidelines set by Paramount, but there are no such guidelines for Seinfeld.
I think there’s an outside chance it could happen. Jerry Seinfeld has a deal with Netflix. Netflix has been exploring interactive television technology, for example that choose your own adventure black mirror episode that came out last year. I could imagine Netflix meeting with these guys and pitching a deal where Seinfeld/Castle Rock most of the money.
Can't help but say that your childhood dream reminds me of Homer Simpson's childhood dream of buying the Dallas Cowboys - he ended up getting the Denver Broncos. Needless to say, he wasn't very impressed.
I always enjoyed the fact that this episode aired in 1996 and the Broncos went on to win the Superbowl in 1997, 1998, and then again in 2015. There is no question that the Broncos have been a much more successful franchise than the Cowboys since the air date of that episode. I guess Jerry Jones isn't as smart as Homer.
Or Jerry Jones wasn't as lucky as Homer. Don't judge intelligence on outcomes, money is just a proxy for success which is a proxy for how smart a person is perceived. Drawing causal relationships on 2nd order effects is inferior and goes against Occam.
I'm not a big Seinfeld fan but everything about this feels right. It's the right art style. Right era. Right genre. Point and click adventure leaves a ton of room to explore all the various locations and relevant objects to Seinfeld lore.
Though I think it's just gonna be a rolling show of Seinfeld references and that will disappoint me.
Maybe, but they did explicitly state that's not what they want to do.
> We don’t want to just create a fan service game that repeats jokes or plots that people already are familiar with. We will write a brand new story revolving around the Seinfeld characters designed to work in this medium, remaining faithful to the tone and themes of the show.
>Jerry gets paranoid about his girlfriend’s past when her iPhone automatically connects to the wi-fi at Newman’s apartment.
That is just the plot of an existing episode with a slight modern twist on the inciting incident. This highlights how difficult a project like this can be. There is a fine line between writing in someone else's voice and just copying that voice while making a few tweaks.
All the tweet posits is the inciting incident. You're reading a lot into nothing to suggest that that a plot that was never written for the new episode would have to be the same as the one that already exists.
I'm not reading anything into it. The individual beats of the plot might be different, but the overall plot, Jerry deals with the idea that his girlfriend dated Newman, is similar enough that it would get the new idea thrown out if it was pitched for an episode of the show.
Absolutely you are. The tweet makes no mention of his girlfriend having dated Newman, only that her phone connected to his wifi. Hearing that pitch, I would assume that the drama of the episode would be working out why, not a presumption that they must have dated.
Thanks for sharing this , I wish they can recast the show and come up with new current episodes. Curb your enthusiasm is close to this but not the same
I want to like this but the part that seems missing is the writing. They have somebody who can make games and who can make pixel art, but do they have somebody who can write seinfeld jokes?
The guy who makes games did a solo comedy point-and-click, and the guy who can make pixel art has a day job as a “writer/director”, so presumably they can both write competently. Whether they can write Seinfeld jokes is another matter.
I am also quite sure that “maybe some of the folks from the show’s writer room will be interested!” is one of their dreamed-of scenarios.
I think, and I also trust, the author’s take on this, as the art, stylization, etc, on this is all on point.
Some people can respect an original work well enough that it becomes canon, I witnessed this in the Sonic Retro community by watching an incredible C-based Sonic the Hedgehog eventually become the best official Sonic game in years, Sonic Mania.
SEGA’s treatment of the fan developer community, listening to them and apparently even hiring from them is diametrically opposed to, say, Nintendo’s approach of ‘Cease and Desist’.
True, though I like to think the characters are so well-defined in the community's consciousness that it wouldn't be hard to come up with good jokes (e.g. https://mobile.twitter.com/SeinfeldToday)
Besides, it's a show about nothing, how hard could it be? ;)
I feel they are going to have a hard time convincing Jerry and Larry if they keep calling it “show about nothing”, show about nothing was supposed to be a joke about the show within the show - here is Jerry confirming as much in an AMA[0]
This gives me an idea of how they could maybe get Jerry and Larry to sign off on it...make this game about the show within the show. Then the writing could actually stray from the actual show. (Larry has more or less said the "Modern Seinfeld" Twitter sucks.)
I doubt they will sign off on it though, or will care if it disappoints people that they won't. I'm a HUGE Seinfeld (and Curb) fan, and would play the hell out of this, but having heard and read about the two comic geniuses, I wouldn't get my hopes up.
You might be onto something, if this can be pitched as a bad cash grab thought up by Kramer and George that Jerry and Larry officially “disapprove” of but “can’t” shutdown
People need to eat, but ignoring that for a moment, it'd be very cool if they just dropped a torrent link on /r/Seinfeld and did the whole thing anonymously... this is the sort of things legends are made of. Hell, make fake CD manuals and boxing and put the images in on imgur. Spin it into an AR game! The possibilities are endless, Jerry!
the new story pitch is actually very good. i just rewatched the whole 9 seasons in the past weeks, and it feels right at home.
edit : now that i think about it, i wonder how they'll manage to get multiple variation of the story unfold depending on your choices. it's already hard enough to write one linear... i suppose they'll just block you until you click on things in the right order. Wonder how interesting or funny this could be in that context. Maybe a lot ? Like, making the absurd choice and bad decisions the character usually make and see the consequences unfold... this could be fun.
Great execution pertaining to the “unofficial pitch” website. Great organization of explanation. Transparent, open, and direct. Great UX. (Also my dad says he will preorder).
I remember someone asking Jerry what he thought of the "modern seinfeld" twitter account and his response was a really dismissive "eh not a fan". Id totally play it but I have trouble seeing it ever being approved.
Ah yeah that's probably it. I just read an AMA where Jerry was more thoughtful and basically said people pitching ideas didn't realise how much effort they put into finding good premises.
"Turns out Seinfeld is actually still an incredibly relevant show whose relatability is timeless, with the show’s streaming rights bought by Netflix recently for half a billion dollars."
So, isn't the trick here getting 1) someone high up / creative type at the copyright owners level to notice this and give approval before the 2) lawyers / corporate sharks at the knee-jerk level send a cease-and-desist or copyright notice and decide to shut you down and steal the idea to develop themselves?
Because I imagine what lawyers worry about is (at worst) whether letting you go on with this website shows that they did not assert their rights in the face of a derivative work, or (at best) whether the trouble of negotiating with you on the terms you want for the development you've already done is more trouble than just taking the idea and doing it themselves?
I would guess you have a bit of a ticking clock to spread as much word about this and try to reach the person in the first category (through contacts, "phone-a-friend-who-might-know-xyz", etc), before inevitably the 2nd category catches wind of it.
I imagine that with lockdown rules, it has more chance of being noticed and approved. It'd be cool to see Larry or Jerry mention it. Even cooler if they wanted in.
Fantastic idea but the episode #1 plot sucked. Seriously there's nothing new there. They should go to https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditWritesSeinfeld/ and pick one if the top plots there.
> We need an official contract providing us the rights to create a game based on the IP. Even a “Yeah cool” from Jerry or Larry would help. Without it, even releasing a “free fan game” can get us into deep waters if they so choose to target us.
There's an interesting copyright case where a court held that Seinfeld "facts" aren't real facts (which would otherwise be excluded from copyright protection).
Epistemological issues aside, the case unfortunately seems to come down pretty heavily in favour of the Seinfeld rightsholder.
Seems to me that without the actors, some Seinfeld fan fiction in game form would just fall flat. Just make a funny point and click game with original IP.
Read the "Modern Seinfeld" Twitter account posts which read like mini episodes (Jerry's new GF's phone automatically connects to Newman's WiFi so Jerry is freaked out). Also the Reddit story of George dating the "slow walker". The great thing is that if you've watched enough Seinfeld, you can actually hear the actors saying the lines in your head.
I would buy this game instantly, no questions asked. I grew up watching reruns of Seinfeld (I was too young to understand it in the 90s). To this day, I stream a few episodes every month when there isn't anything else to watch. I think I've watched every episode at least 5 times and some, even more than that!
Yes, but there was a whole "meta" episode where the characters tried to make a sitcom about nothing, which was clearly a commentary on the show itself.
"Kramer says he knows who can help. Someone with a sworn vendetta against email. Someone who has devoted their whole life to analogue mail and sees email as a threat to his livelihood. Someone named Newman."
It's Always Sunny absolutely takes inspiration from Seinfeld.
They're even self aware about it in the episode "The Gang Does a Clip Show" where they mistake a bit from Seinfeld as one of their own memories - https://youtu.be/fCwI3KDGtRk
How did you like Mythic Quest? I'm really glad to see Rob and Charlie involved but it's definitely a bit more tame. I really like Danny Pudi playing a Dennis-esque character and the actress who plays Poppy is hilarious.
I really enjoyed MQ. It is ridiculous but also quite true to life according to my wife who is a video game producer. A lot of big personalities, egos, etc.
I loved F. Murray Abraham's character. Quite the departure from Dar Adal in Homeland. Overall the whole cast on MQ was very good though.
I never watched Seinfeld or Curb Your Enthusiasm however I grabbed season 1 of Curb two weeks ago as I am in lockdown and wanted something different/new (to me) to watch and fell in love with it.
I am now on season 8(!) and there hasn't been a single episode I have not thoroughly enjoyed.
It is a superb show with some excellently executed jokes. Probably some of the best I have seen on TV. Some of the jokes are so superbly setup as well that you don't realise until the punchline drops that the build up has been several episodes.
I also watched Mythic Quest earlier in the year which was a lot of fun. We mostly watched it because my wife is a video game producer so we had a good time laughing at how real some of the craziness can be in the video game production world.
Avenue 5 took a while to find its pace but by the end of the season it was quite fun. Different but well done. I am looking forward to season 2.
I plan to sit down and watch Always Sunny, Veep and Seinfeld now :)
The sibling comments all have great shows listed. I'd say It's Always Sunny/Arrested Development get closest to the format of "a sitcom about terrible people".
Seinfeld also contains a stand up comedian playing himself. In that respect shows like Louis and Master of None are also quite similar.
Louis in particular is a fantastic show if you can ignore Louis CK's recent scandal.
I never get this comparison. The characters on Seinfeld have completely reasonable and funny criticisms/observations of every day life- the characters on Its Always Sunny In Philadelphia are just boring jerks.
Disclaimer; I am a pretty big fan of Seinfeld. But, I don’t think anything comes close to what the writers and actors achieved with Seinfeld. Luckily if you’re anything like me you can continue to watch Seinfeld for over a decade and still not get tired of it.
> the characters on Its Always Sunny In Philadelphia are just boring jerks.
Ah! Triggered! /s
I agree that the "jerks" trope is at play here. But I don't think the characters are boring or without their observations on the world. The characters have plenty of observations about arising cultural moments, political issues, etc. Many episodes are essentially "The Gang Takes Opposing Views on X". Then we get to see these characters take each side to weird extremes while learning very little from the experience.
Like the "show about nothing" It's Always Sunny is in its prime during meta commentary episodes like "The Gang Tries Desperately to Win an Award".
I suppose trope has a negative connotation but I view them as tools in a writer's toolbox, not as an indicator of lazy writing.
Having said that, tropes are usually a little more specific or identifiable than just the concept of "mean characters", so it probably wasn't the best use of the word.
Why exactly are you upset by this? It's a word that describes commonly used narratives. It's incredibly common to tweak or reuse commonly known narratives and there's nothing inherently negative about that.
I love it’s always sunny, but I agree. I think “Seinfeld is a bit terrible people” is really heavily influenced by the final episode. The true core of Seinfeld is having a violation of minor social norms blow up in your face, and funny word play.
> I think “Seinfeld is a bit terrible people” is really heavily influenced by the final episode.
I agree. Most people who I tell this opinion to who are also Seinfeld fans disagree though.
The social norms violation thing is also why Curb You Enthusiasm comes so close; it is mostly about Larry David’s opaque social norms being constantly violated.
I'd say Peep Show! They're both fairly similar in that they're both about chaos and nihilism where the characters completely fail to grow. If you like Seinfeld you'll almost definitely enjoy that.
Peep Show is pretty good but a great deal darker than Seinfeld which tends to keep its comedy pretty tame- which in my opinion is what makes it so good.
There’s an episode of Peep Show where one of the two main characters kills a dog and then feeds it to his girlfriend- the owner of the dog. Totally different level of dark. It’s a totally different sense of humor actually.
Being regrettably engaged is a relatable situation, and miraculously being relieved of that engagement thru a freak accident is definitely Seinfeld’s darkest moment but is still fairly innocent. It’s actually one of the reasons season 7 is so unique and funny but I would hardly put it next to Peep Show in terms of darkness.
What actually happens is Jez accidentally runs over his "girlsfriend"'s dog (hard to really car her a girlfriend when they had only just met) while backing up the car, then hides the body in a messenger bag to conceal the incident. Later in the episode, he tries to burn the corpse but fails at that. Toward the end, they're on the girl's father's boat, and the girlfriend asks what's in the bag. Jez replies that it's barbeque chicken(?) and reluctantly takes a bite. Shortly after, they find the dog's collar in the bag and discover the horrible conclusion.
Jez may be a lot of things (selfish, lazy, etc.) but he's no murderer.
Maybe I misremembered it but your description of the episode doesn’t really refute my argument at all- that’s all far more disturbing than any situation on Seinfeld.
There's no maybe about it; you clearly misremembered if you thought Jez murdered a girlfriend's dog and then purposely fed it to her. Not only that, but it's uncharacteristic of any of the characters on the show.
The premise of the episode can be boiled down to the following:
1. Jez meets attractive girl.
2. Jez wants to date this girl (they get along well).
3. Jez accidentally does something that would prevent #2 from happening.
4. Jez tries his darndest to hide his mistake.
5. The truth gets found out and girl casts Jez away.
The entire ordeal is comical because Jez makes repeated efforts to hide the dog's corpse and fails at every turn. The only really "dark" thing about the episode is that the dog was pregnant, which was only briefly mentioned (and easily forgotten).
Never used the word "murdered" not sure where you got that from? He did in fact kill the dog.
> then purposely fed it to her.
I did misremember this part. I still stand by the idea that eating a dog in front of their owner is really, really dark.
> The premise of the episode can be boiled down to the following:
> 1. Jez meets attractive girl. 2. Jez wants to date this girl (they get along well). 3. Jez accidentally does something that would prevent #2 from happening. 4. Jez tries his darndest to hide his mistake. 5. The truth gets found out and girl casts Jez away.
If you ignore the part of the script where Jez KILLS the girls dog and then EATS IT IN FRONT OF HER then yeah it is pretty innocent.
> The only really "dark" thing about the episode is that the dog was pregnant, which was only briefly mentioned (and easily forgotten).
If you think that is the only really dark thing about the episode then I think you and I might really disagree on what constitutes dark and this argument is pointless.
> Never used the word "murdered" not sure where you got that from?
> one of the two main characters kills a dog and then feeds it to his girlfriend- the owner of the dog
The way you framed it implies murder. Yes, he kills the dog but it is entirely accidental, which is the relevant part that you conveniently omitted for the sake of your own argument.
> If you ignore the part of the script where Jez KILLS the girls dog and then EATS IT IN FRONT OF HER then yeah it is pretty innocent.
Again, you're intentionally framing it in a misrepresentative way. He only takes a bite out of a piece of the burnt corpse out of desperation because the group of people present are inquiring about what is in the bag. He says it's BBQ chicken and takes a bite to try to convince the others that's it completely innocuous. He's not doing it out of malice; he's doing it out of panic. And he's definitely not enjoying it either as he's visibly uncomfortable with doing it.
Anyone who watches the episode will clearly see that the way you're framing the whole episode is completely skewed and disingenuous.
Jez kills the dog. Jez then eats the dog. In front of the dogs owner. No amount of hand waving or interpretation changes that it is what happens in the episode. It is also very dark.
So what you're saying is that pertinent details that provide context for any given situation is "hand waving" and irrelevant? Seems like an obtuse approach to arriving at a conclusion.
The pertinent details are that he eats a person's pet in front of the pets owner! His motivations don't matter! His motivations do not absolve him from his actions. No Seinfeld character comes close to this level of sociopathy and I challenge you to come up with an example where it does.
And just for the record I like peep show, and I think the holiday episode is funny if a bit disturbing.
Detectorists, two small town “smartest guys in the room” try to rediscover their friendship through their shared love of metal detector operation
https://imdb.com/title/tt4082744/
Steins;Gate, hard to generalize and hard not to spoil anything but it feels like if Back to the Future were made as a modern anime
https://imdb.com/title/tt1910272/
FLCL is a world where change seems distant or impossible, and the sameness itself is stifling and a major source of conflict in the plot, as in Seinfeld.
Steins;Gate's protagonist's alter-ego Hououin Kyouma is a larger-than-life egotistical (comedy) genius which is analogous to Jerry when he's on-stage in the monologue segments of the show. But that same SG protagonist as his "normie" self Rintaro Okabe is crippled by self-doubt, upstaged by his own alter-ego, and would do anything for his friends, much like the version of Jerry we see outside the monologue segments. If you've seen the last episode of Seinfeld, the parallels between the two are a bit more clear. In Seinfeld, the past catches up with Jerry and the crew, and they cool their heels in jail as a kind of karmic payback or comeuppance for their years of prior shenanigans. In Steins;Gate, at a certain point the comedic backdrop lifts, the folly of Rintaro's ego and hubris is laid bare and elevated, and the karmic debt seeks its due via time and space.
Kyouma is far more of a Kramer than a Jerry Seinfeld. Jerry's the snarky straight man surrounded by oddballs, that role in Stein's Gate would probably be Kurisu.
Good point about Jerry being the straight man. I was trying to explore the difference between onstage Jerry and offstage Jerry and draw a comparison to Rintaro/Kyouma, but I don't disagree with your interpretation. I think if we bring in the sequels, Maho is the closest we get to a straight (wo)man foil to Kyouma's color man.
Naota: Nothing amazing happens here. Everything is ordinary. We crossed the bridge as usual, and before we knew it the seasons had changed. Mamimi left town. She said she wanted to be a photographer. I don't know what happened to her after that.
This is just one quote, but it captures the vibe of the show IMO. Events happen and reactions to those events happen, but the sameness itself is the source of conflict in the plot, without getting into spoilers or character motivations or backstory.
I need to watch the sequels too, as my thoughts are based on the original 6 episodes comprising S01.
Just about everything that came after Seinfeld copied much about it so it is hard to find something that seems to be comparable because everything you've seen shared so much.
I know its's not thier intent but the promo video comes across as snarky, in my opinion the spirit of of the show was a true comedy in a sort or zen way with a flash of synchronicity, laughing in the face of tragedy and how rediculous everything is. Possibly just the voice actor that adds the odd vibe, but it seems to miss the underlying spirit of the show, its not just about Jerry's snarkiness.
I monitor their Twitter feed and generally see reasonable takes, so I was concerned that they are considered anti-Semitic. I asked for an example, but got down voted, so now I'm really concerned.
The usual connection is Bannon's work with Breitbart News. They had no problem working with folks who themselves had histories of antisemitic .... or just generally a lot of xenophobia, racism, and the usual hate associated with nationalism.
To be clear I personally don't know of any statements from Bannon himself regarding a specific case for antisemitism, and I'm not looking to make a case either way on that point specifically. As far as Breitbart News goes their history about other hateful things is pretty apparent, personally I'm not really sure it matters if it is antisemitism, or racism or whatever, and I'm not sure the folks running the show there cared either way.
Getting hung up on anything he said or didn't is probably missing the forest through the trees ;)
The reason I'm looking for actual content that shows anti-Semitism, racism or hate that was written by a Breitbart reporter or editor is that I've been burned by taking a popular opinion as fact. Wading into the deepest waters...
I'd taken it as a matter of fact that Trump is deeply racist. The message was loud and clear for years, and the level of conviction displayed by those who repeated it was pretty intense. I didn't initially question it.
Later, I thought about it. He'd beaten Clinton. That means that 50%+ of voters voted for him. His racism seemed to be widely known, which implied that those voting for him would need to be at least tolerant of racism, if not also racist. It occurred to me that I've known literally thousands of people. Out of all of them, there is one I could say for sure was a racist. It didn't add up, even considering selection bias.
Moreover, labeling someone as a racist gives others a moral imperative to harm them. Perhaps passively by not allowing your children to play with theirs, or actively by attacking them in public. Since the label is so powerful, I felt that really, before I repeat that he is racist, I should at least convince myself. So I started looking for it.
I had forgotten this, but I recall now, Trump ran for President in 2000. He got pretty far into his campaign, up to the point of pursuing a vice president running mate. His person of choice was Oprah Winfrey. She declined, and he pressed on for a bit. But then he got endorsed by David Duke. At that point, and he stated for that reason, he suspended his campaign.
There was a point in the 90s when Jesse Jackson and his Rainbow/PUSH lost their lease for their meeting space in New York. Trump provided them a large room in one of his Wall Street buildings at no charge. There is a YouTube video of Trump at one of their meetings, with Jackson thanking him and recognizing Trump's support.
More recently, Trump reinstated the federal death penalty. The first person in line for execution is an avowed white supremacist (double homicide, if I recall correctly).
Trump pushed for prison reform. The reform sought to release inmates who had been given long sentences for minor third strike offenses. So far, more than 3,000 inmates have been released under the program, 90% of whom are black.
I found more in the same vein.
I heard the primary evidence supporting his racism from Joe Biden when he announced his campaign. He said that Trump had called racists fine people. That didn't line up with the information countering it, so I went to the actual video of Trump saying it. It's actually very clear that Trump said the opposite of what Biden claimed.
So... I'm open to any statement or claim, but in cases that it's harmful to others, I like to see the actual evidence that the sentiment is based on.
I don’t really have a dog in the fight of if Trump is a racist or not, but your logic seems to be based on two false premises.
First Trump was not elected by a population majority, so one can’t use that as evidence for his racism being supported by others. Additionally, view that Trump is racist is mostly supported by Democrats and not Republicans.
Secondly, one can be racist without defining it in ways that harm black people. For instance, one can merely be anti Latino, or anti Polish, or anti Asian. Trump may merely hate traditional white supremcists as they would be against his children and wife, for their Eastern European ancestors.
Historically you can find many examples of this. Such as during the 1800s, some would think that native Americans were a noble people, but blacks mere savages or vice versa.
Why is it so acceptable these days to judge people by their associations, even with so many degrees of separation between them? He worked with a company which worked with people who used to be antisemitic. Who hasn't done that? A similar thing happened to the queen of England who was criticized by the media for riding in a car with a man (her son) who was friends with a convict.
"There are dozens and dozens of investors and people that you never meet or know about. These are giant, multi-national corporations of, you know, NBC, which then became Turner, and then got bought by Comcast, so I mean, I don't know."
Pick anything you are a fan of. You probably really don't want to know how the sausage is made.
Perhaps, but it's not clear this would fall under any syndication rights. It's also not clear if he was honest about having part of the deal, from your link:
> During the New Yorker’s investigation into the veracity of the claims, reporter Connie Bruck was unable to find records of payments to Bannon. However, it’s possible his deal was capped and paid out between Seinfeld’s syndication in fall 1995 and Turner Broadcasting’s merger with Time Warner in late 1995. Following the deal, Turner’s Castle Rock came under the Warner Bros. umbrella and the company started sending out all of profit-participation statements. Prior records from the earlier months of syndication are not readily available.
And:
> On the other hand, when Bannon submitted an “income and expense declaration” during a contentious court battle with his ex-wife, any Seinfeld profit participations should’ve shown up. The New Yorker surmises either the profits weren’t substantial or Bannon failed to disclose them in a sworn statement.
I bet he made a few bucks in the 90s and and used the allure of the show to impress people since then. Seinfeld is still generating massive amounts of money so someone should know if they're sending any of it to Bannon.
I was surprised to find recently about Bannon having involvement in the Biosphere 2 project as a strategist while getting sidetracked on a Biosphere rehash journey one afternoon.
> Well, firstly, here’s what we DON’T want to make. We don’t want to just create a fan service game that repeats jokes or plots that people already are familiar with.
> Elaine reminds him that the publicist was supposed to get them all tickets to the opening night of the new movie “Rochelle, Rochelle 2”
You can't have both!