The Creators of 'Industry' Know Banking Is a Rigged Game - 3 minutes read




Did being open to the weirdness and idiosyncrasies teach you anything?

MD: You know, the show is hard edge and it’s frenetic. It’s about a very cold industry. And the show works when it reflects all that stuff, but what we discovered in season three is that the show can have elements of romance. And I mean that in the classical sense as well. It can be about striving. It can be about ambition. It can be about a romantic hero's journey as much as it can be about failure and self flagellation.

KK: The characters are so scared of revealing themselves to each other in our show, so those human moments between Harper and Yasmin, or the moment when Henry is really emotionally naked with Yasmin, and Yasmin is really emotionally naked with Rob, they pack a wallop because it is such a busy universe that the characters exist in.

You’ve got a stacked cast. Kitt Harrington and Sarah Goldberg bring an eccentric energy to the ensemble. Roger Barclay, who plays Otto, was a standout for me. He gives a sobering view into the corrupt backdoor politics of London society and the role the media plays in government. What was it about that thematic entanglement that enticed you?

MD: One of the things we didn't do in the first two seasons, especially, is show how Pierpoint fits into the industrial complex, which makes up some of the way that the country is governed. Finance obviously has huge outside influence, and especially when it’s married to politics and media. People within those systems know each other from schooling and university. It was this very insidious network. They help one another out. This exists across most Western democracies—there’s obviously a version of it in the US—but in the UK, it’s polite, it’s genteel, and it happens behind closed doors. Roger’s character is an encapsulation of that. He has tentacles in every single part of society in order to enrich himself. We just found it really interesting.

One of the unintended consequences of the streaming age, I think, was the notion that TV shows could just kind of go on forever. I personally love a show that knows when to leave the party. It doesn’t overstay its welcome. Do you have an idea of how all of this eventually ends for Harper, Yasmin, and everyone—or is it like you said earlier, are you backing yourself into a wall at the end of every season only to later find a way out?

MD: The more you write, the more you start to think about how it’s going to end. But, you know, we write seasons with what we hope are satisfying conclusions, so that if the show is to end, it would be a satisfying end and also enough of the door being a jar so that we can continue if necessary. In the writers room, inevitably, you think, OK, well, what would be an amazing image to end the whole thing? You start to formulate that even subconsciously in your head because you know the characters so well. You start thinking about what would be the perfect end point or encapsulation of this character. But I wouldn’t say we have an end in mind yet.



Source: Wired

Powered by NewsAPI.org