Apple TV Plus

the-making-of-apple-tv’s-murderbot

The making of Apple TV’s Murderbot


Ars chats with series creators Paul and Chris Weitz about adapting Martha Wells’ book series for TV.

Built to destroy. Forced to connect. Credit: Apple TV+

In the mood for a jauntily charming sci-fi comedy dripping with wry wit and an intriguing mystery? Check out Apple TV’s Murderbot, based on Martha Wells’ bestselling series of novels The Murderbot Diaries. It stars Alexander Skarsgård as the titular Murderbot, a rogue cyborg security (SEC) unit that gains autonomy and must learn to interact with humans while hiding its new capabilities.

(Some minor spoilers below, but no major reveals.)

There are seven books in Wells’ series thus far. All are narrated by Murderbot, who is technically owned by a megacorporation but manages to hack and override its governor module. Rather than rising up and killing its former masters, Murderbot just goes about performing its security work, relieving the boredom by watching a lot of entertainment media; its favorite is a soap opera called The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon.

Murderbot the TV series adapts the first book in the series, All Systems Red. Murderbot is on assignment on a distant planet, protecting a team of scientists who hail from a “freehold.” Mensah (Noma Dumezweni) is the team leader. The team also includes Bharadwaj (Tamara Podemski) and Gurathin (David Dastmalchian), who is an augmented human plugged into the same data feeds as Murderbot (processing at a much slower rate). Pin-Lee (Sabrina Wu) also serves as the team’s legal counsel; they are in a relationship with Arada (Tattiawna Jones), eventually becoming a throuple with Ratthi (Akshay Khanna).

As in the books, Murderbot is the central narrator, regaling us with his observations of the humans with their silly ways and discomfiting outbursts of emotion. Mensah and her fellow scientists were forced to rent a SEC unit to get the insurance they needed for their mission, and they opted for the cheaper, older model, unaware that it had free will. This turns out to be a good investment when Murderbot rescues Bharadwaj from being eaten by a giant alien worm monster—losing a chunk of its own torso in the process.

However, it makes a tactical error when it shows its human-like face to Ratthi, who is paralyzed by shock and terror, making small talk to get everyone back to safety. This rouses Gurathin’s suspicions, but the rest of the team can’t help but view Murderbot differently—as a sentient being rather than a killing machine—much to Murderbot’s dismay. Can it keep its free will a secret and avoid being melted down in acid while helping the scientists figure out why there are mysterious gaps in their survey maps? And will the scientists succeed in their attempts to “humanize” their SEC unit?

image of Murderbot's head with data screens superimposed over it

Murderbot figured out how to hack its “governor module.”

The task of adapting Wells’ novella for TV fell to sibling co-creators Paul Weitz (Little Fockers, Bel Canto) and Chris Weitz (The Golden Compass, Rogue One), whose shared credits include Antz, American Pie, and About A Boy. (Wells herself was a consulting producer.) They’ve kept most of the storyline intact, fleshing out characters and punching up the humor a bit, even recreating campy scenes from The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon—John Cho and Clark Gregg make cameos as the stars of that fictional show-within-a-show.

Ars caught up with Paul and Chris Weitz to learn more about the making of Murderbot.

Ars Technica: What drew you to this project?

Chris Weitz: It’s a great central character, kind of a literary character that felt really rare and strong. The fact that we both liked the books equally was a big factor as well.

Paul Weitz: The first book, All Systems Red, had a really beautiful ending. And it had a theme that personhood is irreducible. The idea that, even with this central character you think you get to know so well, you can’t reduce it to ways that you think it’s going to behave—and you shouldn’t. The idea that other people exist and that they shouldn’t be put into whatever box you want to put them into felt like something that was comforting to have in one’s pocket. If you’re going to spend so much time adapting something, it’s really great if it’s not only fun but is about something.

It was very reassuring to be working with Martha Wells on it because she was very generous with her time. The novella’s quite spare, so even though we didn’t want to cut anything, we wanted to add some things. Why is Gurathin the way that he is? Why is he so suspicious of Murderbot? What is his personal story? And with Mensah, for instance, the idea that, yes, she’s this incredibly worthy character who’s taking on all this responsibility on her shoulders, but she also has panic attacks. That’s something that’s added, but we asked Martha, “Is it OK if we make Mensah have some panic attacks?” And she’s like, “Oh, that’s interesting. I kind of like that idea.” So that made it less alarming to adapt it.

group of ethnically diverse people in space habitat uniforms gathering around a computer monitor

Murderbot’s clients: a group of scientists exploring the resources of what turns out to be a very dangerous planet. Credit: Apple TV+

Ars Technica: You do play up the humorous aspects, but there is definitely humor in the books. 

Chris Weitz:  A lot of great science fiction is very, very serious without much to laugh at. In Martha’s world, not only is there a psychological realism in the sense that people can have PTSD when they are involved in violence, but also people have a sense of humor and funny things happen, which is inherently what happens when people get together. I was going to say it’s a human comedy, but actually, Murderbot is not human—but still a person.

Ars Technica: Murderbot’s favorite soap opera, The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon, is merely mentioned in passing in the book, but you’ve fleshed it out as a show-within-the-show. 

Chris Weitz: We just take our more over-the-top instincts and throw it to that. Because it’s not as though we think that Sanctuary Moon is bad.

Ars Technica: As Murderbot says, it’s quality entertainment!

Chris Weitz: It’s just a more unhinged form of storytelling. A lot of the stuff that the bot says in Sanctuary Moon is just goofy lines that we could have given to Murderbot in a situation like that. So we’re sort of delineating what the show isn’t. At the same time, it’s really fun to indulge your worst instincts, your most guilty pleasure kind of instincts. I think that was true for the actors who came to perform it as well.

Paul Weitz: Weirdly, you can state some things that you wouldn’t necessarily in a real show when DeWanda Wise’s character, who’s a navigation bot, says, “I’m a navigation unit, not a sex bot.” I’m sure there are many people who have felt like that. Also, to delineate it visually, the actors were in a gigantic stage with pre-made visuals around them, whereas most of the stuff [for Murderbot] was practical things that had been built.

Ars Technica: In your series, Murderbot is basically a Ken doll with no genitals. The book only mentioned that Murderbot has no interest in sex. But the question of what’s under the hood, so to speak, is an obvious one that one character in particular rather obsesses over.

Chris Weitz: It’s not really addressed in the book, but certainly, Murderbot, in this show as well, has absolutely no interest in romance or sex or love. This was a personable way to point it out. There was a question of, once you’ve got Alexander in this role, hasn’t anybody noticed what it looks like? And also, the sort of exploitation that bot constructs are subjected to in this world that Martha has created meant that someone was probably going to treat it like an object at some point.

Paul Weitz: I also think, both of us having kids, you get a little more exposed to ways of thinking that imply that the way that we were brought up thinking of romance and sexuality and gender is not all there is to it and that, possibly, in the future, it’s not going to be so strange, this idea that one can be either asexual or—

Chris Weitz: A-romantic. I think that Murderbot, among neurodivergent communities and a-romantic, asexual communities, it’s a character that people feel they can identify with—even people who have social anxiety like myself or people who think that human beings can be annoying, which is pretty much everyone at some point or another.

Ars Technica: It’s interesting you mentioned neurodivergence. I would hesitate to draw a direct comparison because it’s a huge spectrum, but there are elements of Murderbot that seem to echo autistic traits to some degree.

Paul Weitz: People look at something like the autism spectrum, and they inadvertently erase the individuality of people who might be on that spectrum because everybody has a very particular experience of life. Martha Wells has been quoted as saying that in writing Murderbot, she realized that there are certain aspects of herself that might be neurodivergent. So that kind of gives one license to discuss the character in a certain way.

That’s one giant and hungry worm monster. Apple TV+

Chris Weitz: I don’t think it’s a direct analogy in any way, but I can understand why people from various areas on the spectrum can identify with that.

Paul Weitz: I think one thing that one can identify with is somebody telling you that you should not be the way you are, you should be a different way, and that’s something that Murderbot doesn’t like nor do.

Ars Technica: You said earlier, it’s not human, but a person. That’s a very interesting delineation. What are your thoughts on the personhood of Murderbot?

Chris Weitz: This is the contention that you can be a person without being a human. I think we’re going to be grappling with this issue the moment that artificial general intelligence comes into being. I think that Martha, throughout the series, brings up different kinds of sentients and different kinds of personhood that aren’t standard human issue. It’s a really fascinating subject because it is our future in part, learning how to get along with intelligences that aren’t human.

Paul Weitz: There was a New York Times journalist a couple of years ago who interviewed a chatbot—

Chris Weitz:  It was Kevin Roose, and it was Sydney the Chatbot. [Editor: It was an AI chatbot added to Microsoft’s Bing search engine, dubbed Sydney by Roose.]

Paul Weitz: Right. During the course of the interview, the chatbot told the journalist to leave his wife and be with it, and that he was making a terrible mistake. The emotions were so all over the place and so specific and quirky and slightly scary, but also very, very recognizable. Shortly thereafter, Microsoft shut down the ability to talk with that chatbot. But I think that somewhere in our future, general intelligences are these sort of messy emotions and weird sort of unique personalities. And it does seem like something where we should entertain the thought that, yeah, we better treat everyone as a person.

murderbot with fave revealed, standing in a corner with his head bent and leaning against the wall, back to other other people

Murderbot isn’t human, but it is a person. Credit: Apple TV+

Ars Technica: There’s this Renaissance concept called sprezzatura—essentially making a difficult thing look easy. The series is so breezy and fun, the pacing is perfect, the finale is so moving. But I know it wasn’t easy to pull that off. What were your biggest challenges in making it work?

Chris Weitz: First, can I say that that is one of my favorite words in the world, and I think about it all the time. I remember trying to express this to people I’ve been working on movies with, a sense of sprezzatura. It’s like it is the duck’s legs moving underneath the water. It was a good decision to make this a half-hour series so you didn’t have a lot of meetings about what had just happened in the show inside of the show or figuring out why things were the way they were. We didn’t have to pad things and stretch them out.

It allowed us to feel like things were sort of tossed off. You can’t toss off anything, really, in science fiction because there’s going to be special effects, visual effects. You need really good teams that can roll with moving the camera in a natural way, reacting to the way that the characters are behaving in the environment. And they can fix things.

Paul Weitz: They have your back.

Chris Weitz: Yeah. Really great, hard work on behalf of a bunch of departments to make things feel like they’re just sort of happening and we’ve got a camera on it, as opposed to being very carefully laid out.

Paul Weitz: And a lot of it is trusting people and trusting their creativity, trying to create an environment where you’ve articulated what you’re after, but you don’t think their job better than they do. You’re giving notes, but people are having a sense of playfulness and fun as they’re doing the visual effects, as they’re coming up with the graphics, as they’re acting, as they’re doing pretty much anything. And creating a good vibe on the set. Because sometimes, the stress of making something sucks some of the joy out of it. The antidote to that is really to trust your collaborators.

Ars Technica: So what was your favorite moment in the series?

Paul Weitz: I’d say the tenth episode, for me, just because it’s been a slow burn. There’s been enough work put into the characters—for instance, David Dastmalchian’s character—and we haven’t played certain cards that we could have played, so there can be emotional import without telegraphing it too much. Our ending stays true to the book, and that’s really beautiful.

Chris Weitz: I can tell you my worst moment, which is the single worst weather day I’ve ever experienced in a quarry in Ontario where we had hail, rain, snow, and wind—so much so that our big, long camera crane just couldn’t function. Some of the best moments were stuff that had nothing to do with visual effects or CGI—just moments of comedy in between the team members, that only exist within the context of the cast that we brought together.

Paul Weitz: And the fact that they loved each other so much. They’re very different people from each other, but they really did genuinely bond.

Ars Technica: I’m going to boldly hope that there’s going to be a second season because there are more novels to adapt. Are you already thinking about season two?

Paul Weitz: We’re trying not to think about that too much; we’d love it if there was.

Chris Weitz: We’re very jinxy about that kind of stuff. So we’ve thought in sort of general ways. There’s some great locations and characters that start to get introduced [in later books], like Art, who’s an AI ship. We’re likely not to make it one season per book anymore, we’d do a mashup of the material that we have available to us. We’re going to have to sit with Martha and figure out how that works if we are lucky enough to get renewed.

New episodes of Murderbot release every Friday on Apple TV+ through July 11, 2025. You should definitely be watching.

Photo of Jennifer Ouellette

Jennifer is a senior writer at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban.

The making of Apple TV’s Murderbot Read More »

the-third-crisis-dawns-in-foundation-s3-teaser

The Third Crisis dawns in Foundation S3 teaser

We have our first teaser for the upcoming third season of Foundation.

It’s been nearly two years, but the third season of Foundation, Apple TV+’s epic adaptation (or remix) of the Isaac Asimov series, is almost here. The streaming platform released an action-packed teaser of what we can expect from the new ten-episode season: the onset of the Third Crisis, a galactic war, and a shirtless Lee Pace.

(Some spoilers for first two seasons below.)

Showrunner David S. Goyer took great pains in S1 to carefully set up his expansive fictional world, and the scope only broadened in the second season. As previously reported, Asimov’s fundamental narrative arc remains intact, with the series taking place across multiple planets over 1,000 years and featuring a huge cast of characters.

Mathematician Hari Seldon (Jared Harris) developed a controversial theory of “psychohistory,” and his calculations predict the fall of the Empire, ushering in a Dark Age period that will last 30,000 years, after which a second Empire will emerge. The collapse of the Empire is inevitable, but Seldon has a plan to reduce the Dark Ages to a mere 1,000 years through the establishment of a Foundation to preserve all human knowledge so that civilization need not rebuild itself entirely from scratch. He is aided in this endeavor by his math prodigy protegé Gaal Dornick (Lou Llobell).

The biggest change from the books is the replacement of the Empire’s ruling committee with a trio of Eternal Emperor clones called the Cleons—a genetic triune dynasty comprised of Brother Day (Pace), Brother Dusk (Terrence Mann), and Brother Dawn (Cassian Bilton). Technically, they are all perfect incarnations of the same man at different ages, and this is both the source of their strength as a team and of their conflicts. Their guardian is an android, Eto Demerzel (Laura Birn), one of the last surviving androids from the ancient Robot Wars, who is programmed to protect the dynasty at all costs.

The Third Crisis dawns in Foundation S3 teaser Read More »

apple-loses-$1b-a-year-on-prestigious,-minimally-viewed-apple-tv+:-report

Apple loses $1B a year on prestigious, minimally viewed Apple TV+: report

The Apple TV+ streaming service “is losing more than $1 billion annually,” according to The Information today.

The report also claimed that Apple TV+’s subscriber count reached “around 45 million” in 2024, citing the two anonymous sources.

Ars reached out to Apple for comment on the accuracy of The Information’s report and will update this article if we hear back.

According to one of the sources, Apple TV+ has typically spent over $5 billion annually on content since 2019, when Apple TV+ debuted. Last year, though, Apple CEO Tim Cook reportedly cut the budget by about $500 million. The reported numbers are similar to a July report from Bloomberg that claimed that Apple had spent over $20 billion on Apple TV+’s library. For comparison, Netflix has 301.63 million subscribers and expects to spend $18 billion on content in 2025.

In the year preceding Apple TV+’s debut, Apple services chief Eddy Cue reportedly pushed back on executive requests to be stingier with content spending, “a person with direct knowledge of the matter” told The Information.

But Cook started paying closer attention to Apple TV+’s spending after the 2022 Oscars, where the Apple TV+ original CODA won Best Picture. The award signaled the significance of Apple TV+ as a business.

Per The Information, spending related to Apple TV+ previously included lavish perks for actors and producers. Apple paid “hundreds of thousands of dollars per flight” to transport Apple TV+ actors and producers to promotional events, The Information said, noting that such spending “is common in Hollywood” but “more unusual at Apple.” Apple’s finance department reportedly pushed Apple TV+ executives to find better flight deals sometime around 2023.

In 2024, Cook questioned big-budget Apple TV+ films, like the $200 million Argylle, which he said failed to generate impressive subscriber boosts or viewership, an anonymous “former Apple TV+ employee” shared. Cook reportedly cut about $500 million from the Apple TV+ content budget in 2024.

Apple loses $1B a year on prestigious, minimally viewed Apple TV+: report Read More »

innie-rebellion-is-brewing-in-trippy-severance-s2-trailer

Innie rebellion is brewing in trippy Severance S2 trailer

Severance returns to Apple TV in January for its sophomore season.

Severance was one of the most talked-about TV series of 2022, receiving widespread critical acclaim. We loved the series so much that Ars staffers actually wrote a group review so that everyone could weigh in with their thoughts on the first season, pronouncing it “one of the best shows on TV.” Needless to say, we have been eagerly awaiting the second season next month. Prime Video just released the official trailer at CCXP24 in São Paulo, Brazil and it does not disappoint.

(Spoilers for first season below.)

In the world of Severance, people can completely disconnect their work and personal lives. Thanks to a new procedure developed by Lumon Industries, workers can bifurcate themselves into “innies” (work selves) and “outies” (personal selves)—with no sharing of memories between them. This appeals to people like Mark (Adam Scott), who lost his wife in a car crash and has struggled to work through the grief. Why not forget all that pain for eight hours a day?

It’s no spoiler to say that things went… badly in S1 as a result of this process. As Ars Deputy Editor Nate Anderson noted at the time, “The show isn’t just bonkers—though it is that, too. It’s also about the lengths to which we will go to dull or avoid emotional pain, and the ways in which humans will reach out to connect with others even under the most unpromising of circumstances.” In the process, Severance brought out “the latent horror of fluorescent lights, baby goats, cubicles, waffles, middle managers, finger traps, and ‘work/life balance.’ Also cults. And vending machines. Plus corporate training manuals. And talk therapy. Oh, and ‘kind eyes.'”

The first season ended on quite the cliffhanger, with several Lumon employees activating an “overtime contingency” to escape the office confines to get a taste for how their “outies” live—and some pretty startling secrets were revealed. S2 will naturally grapple with the fallout from their brief mutiny. Per the official premise:

Innie rebellion is brewing in trippy Severance S2 trailer Read More »

apple-tv+-spent-$20b-on-original-content-if-only-people-actually-watched.

Apple TV+ spent $20B on original content. If only people actually watched.

For example, Apple TV+ is embracing bundles, which is thought to help prevent subscribers from canceling streaming subscriptions. People can currently get Apple TV+ from a Comcast streaming bundle.

And as of last month people can subscribe to and view Apple TV+ through Amazon Prime Video. As my colleague Samuel Axon explained in October, this contradicts Apple’s long-standing approach to streaming “because Apple has long held ambitions of doing exactly what Amazon is doing here: establishing itself as the central library, viewing, search, and payment hub for a variety of subscription offerings.” But without support from Netflix, “Apple’s attempt to make the TV app a universal hub of content has been continually stymied,” Axon noted.

Something has got to give

With the broader streaming industry dealing with high production costs, disappointed subscribers, and growing competition, Apple, like many stakeholders, is looking for new approaches to entertainment. For Apple, that also reportedly includes fewer theatrical releases.

It may also one day mean joining what some streaming subscribers see as the dark side of streaming: advertisements. Apple TV+ currently remains ad-free, but there are suspicions that this could change, with Apple reportedly meeting with the United Kingdom’s TV ratings body recently about ad tracking and its hiring of ad executives.

Apple’s ad-free platform and comparatively low subscription prices are some of the biggest draws for Apple TV+ subscribers, however, which would make changes to either benefit controversial.

But after five years on the market and a reported $20 billion in spending, Apple can’t be happy with 0.3 percent of available streaming viewership. Awards and prestige help put Apple TV+ on the map, but Apple needs more subscribers and eyeballs on its expensive content to have a truly successful streaming business.

Apple TV+ spent $20B on original content. If only people actually watched. Read More »

silo-s2-expands-its-dystopian-world

Silo S2 expands its dystopian world


Ars chats with cinematographer Baz Irvine about creating a fresh look for the sophomore season.

Credit: YouTube/Apple TV+

The second season of  Silo, Apple TV’s dystopian sc-fi drama, is off to a powerful start with yesterday’s premiere. Based on the trilogy by novelist Hugh Howey, was one of the more refreshing surprises on streaming television in 2023: a twist-filled combination of political thriller and police procedural set in a post-apocalyptic world. It looks like S2 will be leaning more heavily into sci-fi thriller territory, expanding its storytelling—and its striking cinematography—beyond the original silo.

(Spoilers for S1 below as well as first five minutes of S2 premiere.)

As previously reported, Silo is set in a self-sustaining underground city inhabited by a community whose recorded history only goes back 140 years, generations after the silo was built by the founders. Outside is a toxic hellscape that is only visible on big screens in the silo’s topmost level. Inside, 10,000 people live together under a pact: Anyone who says they want to “go out” is immediately granted that wish—cast outside in an environment suit on a one-way trip to clean the cameras. But those who make that choice inevitably die soon after because of the toxic environment.

Mechanical keeps the power on and life support from collapsing, and that is where we met mechanical savant Juliette Nichols (Rebecca Ferguson) at one with the giant geothermal generator that spins in the silo’s core. There were hints at what came before—relics like mechanical wristwatches or electronics far beyond the technical means of the silo’s current inhabitants, due to a rebellion 140 years ago that destroyed the silo’s records in the process. The few computers are managed by the IT department, run by Bernard Holland (Tim Robbins).

Over the course of the first season, Juliette reluctantly became sheriff and investigated the murder of her lover, George (Ferdinand Kingsley), who collected forbidden historical artifacts, as well as the murder of silo mayor Ruth Jahns (Geraldine James). Many twists ensued, including the existence of a secret group dedicated to remembering the past whose members were being systemically killed. Juliette also began to suspect that the desolate landscape seen through the silo’s camera system was a lie and there was actually a lush green landscape outside.

In the season one finale, Juliette made a deal with Holland: She would choose to go outside in exchange for the truth about what happened to George and the continued safety of her friends in Mechanical. The final twist: Juliette survived her outside excursion and realized that the dystopian hellscape was the reality, and the lush green Eden was the lie. And she learned that their silo was one of many, with a ruined city visible in the background.

That’s where the second season picks up. Apple TV+ released the footage of the first five minutes last week:

Official sneak peek for the second season of Apple TV+’s sci-fi drama Silo.

The opening battle, with all new characters, clearly took place in one of the other silos (Silo 17), and the residents desperate to break out did so only to meet their deaths. The footage ends with Juliette walking past their skeletons toward the entrance to Silo 17. We know from the official trailer that rebellion is also brewing back in her own silo as rumors spread that she is alive.

The expansion of Silo‘s world was an opportunity for cinematographer Baz Irvine (who worked on four key episodes this season) to play with lenses, color palettes, lighting, and other elements to bring unique looks to the different settings.

Ars Technica: How did you make things visually different from last season? What were your guidelines going into this for the cinematography?

Baz Irvine:  There’s few different things going on. I love season one, but we were going to open it up [in S2]. We were going to introduce this new silo, so that was going to be a whole other world that had to look immediately familiar, but also completely different. We start season one with an exterior of the dystopian, future blasted planet. On the technical point, I saw two things I could do very simply. I felt that the format of season one was two to one, so not quite letterbox, not quite widescreen. When I saw the sets and I saw the art, everything the amazing art department had done, I was like, guys, this needs to be widescreen. I think at the time there was still a little bit of reticence from Apple and a few of the other streamers to commit to full widescreen, but I persuaded them.

 I also changed the lenses because I wanted to keep the retro feel, the dystopian future, but retro feel. I chose slightly different lenses to give me a wider feel of view. I talked to my director, Michael Dinner, and we talked about how at times, as brilliant as season one was, it was a bit theatrical, a bit presentational. Here’s the silo, here’s the silo, here’s the silo…., So what you want to do is stop worrying about the silo. It is incredible and it’s in the back of every shot. We wanted to make it more visceral. There was going to be a lot more action. The start of episode one is a full-blown battle. Apple released the first five minutes on Apple. It actually stops at a very critical point, but you can see that it’s the previous world of the other Silo 17.

We still wanted to see the scope and the scale. As a cinematographer, you’ve got to get your head around something that’s very unusual: the Silo is vertical. When we shoot stuff, we go outside, everything’s horizontal. So as a cinematographer, you think horizontally, you frame the skyline, you frame the buildings. But in the silo, it’s all up there and it’s all down there, but it doesn’t exist. A bit of the set exists, but you have to go, oh, okay, what can I see if I point the camera up here, what will VFX brilliantly give me? What can I see down there? So that was another big discussion.

Ars Technica: When you talk about wanting to make it more visceral, what does that mean specifically in a cinematography context?

Baz Irvine: It’s just such a lovely word. Season one had an almost European aesthetic. It was a lot of very beautiful, slow developing shots. Of course it was world building. It was the first time the silo was on the screen. So as a filmmaker, you have a certain responsibility to give the audience a sense of where you are. Season two, we know where we are. Well, we don’t with the other silo, but we discover it. This role for me meant not being head of the action. So with Juliet, Rebecca Ferguson’s character, we discover what she sees with her, rather than showing it ahead of time.We’re trying to be a point of view, almost hand-held. When she’s running, we’re running with her. When she’s trying to smash her helmet, we are very much with her.

On another level, visceral for me also means responding to action—not being too prescriptive about what the camera should do, but when you see the blocking of a scene and you feel it’s going a certain way and there’s a certain energy, responding to that and getting in there. The silo, as I said, is always going to be in the background, but we’re not trying to fetishize the silo too much. We’re going to look down, we’re going to look up, we’re going to use crane moves, but just get in with the action. Just be with the people. That means slightly longer lenses, longer focal lengths at times. And from my point of view, the fall off and focus just looks so beautiful. So I think that’s what visceral means. I bet you somebody else would say something completely different.

Ars Technica: Other specific choices you made included using a muted green palette and torchlight flashlight. So there is this sense of isolation and mystery and a spooky, more immersive atmosphere. 

Baz Irvine:  The challenge that I could see from when I read the script is that a large part of season two is in the new Silo 17. So the new Silo 17 hasn’t been occupied for 35 years. It’s been in this dormant, strange, half-lit state. It’s overgrown with plants and ivy. Some of the references for that were what Chernobyl looked like 20 years down the line. When humanity leaves, nature just takes over. But as a counterpoint, we needed it to feel dark. Most of the electricity has gone, most of the lights have gone out. I needed to have some lighting motivation to give some sense of the shape of the Silo, so that we weren’t plummeting into darkness for the whole episode. So I came up with this idea, the overhead lights that power the silo, that light the silo, were in broken -down mode. They were in reserve power. They’d gone a bit green because that’s what the bulb technology would’ve done.

Part of the reason to do that is that when you’re cutting between two silos that were built identically, you’ve got to have something to show that you’re in a different world. Yes, it’s empty, and yes, it’s desolate and it’s eerie, and there’s strange clanking noises. But I wanted to make it very clear from a lighting point of view that they were two different places.

The other thing that you will discover in episode one, when Juliet’s character is finally working her way through the Silo 17, she has a flashlight and she breaks into an apartment. As she scans the wallshe starts to notice, oh, it’s not like her silo, there are beautiful murals and art. We really wanted to play into this idea that every silo was different. They had different groups of people potentially from different parts of the states. This silo in a way developed quite an artistic community. Murals and frescoes were very much part of this silo. It’s not something that is obvious, and it’s just the odd little scan of a flashlight that gives you this sense. But also Silo 17 is scary. It’s sort of alive, but is there life in it? That is a big question.

Ars Technica: You talk about not wanting to all be in darkness. I’m now thinking of that infamous Game of Thrones episode where the night battle footage was so dark viewers couldn’t follow what was going on. That’s clearly a big challenge for a cinematographer. Where do you find the balance?

Baz Irvine: This is the eternal dilemma for cinematographers. It’s getting notes back from the grownups going, it’s too dark,it’s too dark. Well, maybe if you were watching it in a dark room and it wasn’t bight outside, it would be fine. You have to balance things. I’ve also got Rebecca Ferguson walking around the silo, and it can’t be in so much shadow that you can’t recognize her. So there’s a type of darkness that in film world I know how to convey it. It’s very subtle. It is underexposed, but I used very soft top light. I didn’t want hard shadows. By using that light and filling in little details in the background, I can then take the lighting down. I had an amazing colorist in Company 3 in Toronto and we had a chat about how dark we could go.

We have to be very dark in places because a couple of times in this season, the electricity gets pulled altogether in the old silo as well. You can’t pull the plug and then suddenly everybody’s visible. But it is a film aesthetic that, as a cinematographer, you just learn, how dark can I go? When am I going to get in trouble? Please can I stay on the job, but make it as dark as possible? You mentioned Game of Thrones, clearly audiences have become more used to seeing imagery that I would consider more photographic, more bold generally. I try to tap into that as much as possible. If you have one character with a flashlight, then suddenly that changes everything because you point a flashlight at the surface and the light bounces back in the face. You have to use all the tools that you can.

Ars Technica:  In season one there were different looks (lighting and textures) for different social hierarchies of the social hierarchies. Does that continue in season two?

Baz Irvine:   I tried to push that a little bit more in season two. I loved the idea of that J.G. Ballard high rise, the rich at the top, everything inverted. The silo is crazy tall. We worked it out. It’s about a kilometer and a half.

The mechanical is the fun bit because mechanical is the bottom of the silo.  Down there, we wet the walls, wet the floors, so that the more greeny, orangey colors you associate with fluorescent lights and more mechanical fixtures would reflect. You keep the light levels low because you get this lovely sheen off the walls. As you move up through the middle, where a lot of the action takes place, the lighting is more normal. I’m not really trying to push it one way or another.

Then you go up top where the judicial live, where the money and power is. You’re a lot closer to the light source because there only is this one huge light source that lights down in the silo. So up there the air is more rarefied. It’s like you’re on top of a Swiss mountain. It just feels cleaner. There’s less atmosphere, slightly bluer in light, different color temperatures on the practical lighting in offices. It’s less chaotic, more like a more modern aesthetic up there. You’ve got to be careful not to overplay it. Once you establish colors, you run with it and it just becomes second nature. It was a lot of fun to be able to demarcate—ss long as you remembered where you were, that was always the trick.

Ars Technica: What were the most notable challenges and highlights for you—without giving away anything beyond episode one.

Baz Irvine: I think the big thing about episode one is that it’s like a silent movie. Rebecca Ferguson has maybe two lines, or maybe she doesn’t actually say anything. It’s a journey of discovery, and there’s some quite scary, terrifying things that happen. There’s a lot of action. Also, we find out there’s water in Silo 17. Silo 17 is flooded. You don’t find that out until she slips and falls and you think she’s fallen to her death. From the outset knew that there would be an extensive amount of underwater, or on the surface of the water, filming that would need to take place. We had to do a massive amount of testing, looking at textures of water, what equipment we could use, how we could get the depth, the width. We built a huge tank at one of our studios in London and used Pinewood’s famous underwater tank for the fall.

Also there was the challenge of trying to do shots of that scale outside because we actually built sets. We could probably see 50 feet beyond Rebecca. We had the surface of the scorched surface, but beyond that is VFX. So we had huge blue screens and all these different cranes and things called Manitous with massive frames and had to control the sun. That was very challenging. You can really go down a very cliched path when trying to imagine what the fallout of a massive nuclear attack would look like. But we didn’t want to overplay it too much, we wanted to embed it in some sort of reality so that you didn’t suddenly feel at the start of episode one, oh my, you’re on the surface of Mars. It had to feel real, but also just completely different from the interior world of the silo.

Ars Technica: I assume that there’s a lot more exciting stuff coming in the other episodes that we can’t talk about.

Baz Irvine: There is so much exciting stuff. There’s a lot of action. The silo cafeteria, by the way, is just incredible because you have this huge screen. When I turned up, I was thinking, okay, well this is clearly going to be some big VFX blue screen. It is not. It is a projected image. The work that they did to make it feel like it was a camera mounted to the top of the silo, showing the world outside, and the different times of day—we just literally dialed in. Can I have dusk please? Can I have late afternoon with a little bit of cloud? It was such a fun toy box to play with.

New episodes of Silo S2 will premiere every Friday through January 17, 2025, on Apple TV+.

Photo of Jennifer Ouellette

Jennifer is a senior reporter at Ars Technica with a particular focus on where science meets culture, covering everything from physics and related interdisciplinary topics to her favorite films and TV series. Jennifer lives in Baltimore with her spouse, physicist Sean M. Carroll, and their two cats, Ariel and Caliban.

Silo S2 expands its dystopian world Read More »

rebellion-brews-underground-in-silo-s2-trailer

Rebellion brews underground in Silo S2 trailer

Where we left off

The first season opened with the murder of Juliette’s lover, George (Ferdinand Kingsley), who collected forbidden historical artifacts, which silo sheriff Holston Becker (David Oyelowo) investigated at Juliette’s request. When he chose to go outside, he named Juliette as his successor, and she took on George’s case as well as the murder of silo mayor Ruth Jahns (Geraldine James). Many twists ensued, including the existence of a secret group dedicated to remembering the past whose members were being systemically killed. Juliette also began to suspect that the desolate landscape seen through the silo’s camera system was a lie and there was actually a lush green landscape outside.

In the season finale, Juliette made a deal with Holland: She would choose to go outside in exchange for the truth about what happened to George and the continued safety of her friends in Mechanical. The final twist: Juliette survived her outside excursion and realized that the dystopian hellscape was the reality, and the lush green Eden was the lie. And she learned that their silo was one of many, with a ruined city visible in the background.

The official S2 trailer picks up there but doesn’t provide many additional details. We see Juliette in her protective suit walking across the desolate terrain toward the other silos, human skulls and bones crunching under her feet. When Juliette’s oxygen runs out, she finds shelter and survives, and we later see her trying to enter a silo—whether it’s her original home or another one is unclear. Meanwhile, Holland gives an impassioned speech to his silo residents, declaring her a hero for sacrificing herself.  But rumors swirl that she is alive, and rebellion is clearly brewing, with Juliette becoming a symbol for the movement.

The second season of Silo debuts on Apple TV+ on November 15, 2024. Ferguson has said that there are plans for third and fourth seasons to wrap up the story, which will hopefully be filmed at the same time.

Rebellion brews underground in Silo S2 trailer Read More »

brad-pitt-stages-a-formula-one-racing-comeback-in-first-teaser-for-f1

Brad Pitt stages a Formula One racing comeback in first teaser for F1

Vroom, vroom —

Pitt: “You’ve never seen speed, you’ve never seen just the G forces like this.”

Brad Pitt and Damson Idris co-star in F1, coming to theaters next summer.

Can a washed-up Formula One driver come out of retirement to mentor a young rookie into a champion? That’s the basic premise for F1, a forthcoming film starring Brad Pitt and directed by Joseph Kosinski (Tron: Legacy, Top Gun: Maverick). Warner Bros. dropped the first teaser for the film yesterday, right before the 2024 British Grand Prix.

Pitt plays Sonny Hayes, a fictional Formula One driver who crashed horribly in the 1990s and retired from the sport. Then his longtime friend Ruben (Javier Bardem), owner of the fictional team APXGP, approaches him about coming out of retirement to mentor his team’s rookie prodigy, Joshua “Noah” Pearce (Damson Idris). “They’re a last place team, they’re 21-22 on the grid, they’ve never scored a point,” Pitt told Sky Sports last year. “But they have a young phenom (Idris) and they bring me in as kind of a Hail Mary and hijinks ensue.”

In addition to Pitt, Bardem, and Idris, the cast includes Kerry Condon as Kate; Tobias Menzies as Banning; Kim Bodnia as Kaspar; Shea Wigham as Chip Hart; Joseph Balderrama as Rica Fazio; Sarah Niles as Noah’s mother, Bernadette; Samson Kayo as Cashman; Callie Cooke as Jodie; and Layne Harper as Press.

  • Brad Pitt plays mentor to Damson Idris’ hotshot rookie driver.

    Warner Bros/Apple TV+

  • This film is really about the cars.

    YouTube/Warner Bros.

  • Racing footage was shot on location during the regular F1 season.

    YouTube/Warner Bros.

  • Ready for its closeup.

    YouTube/Warner Bros

  • In the driver’s seat.

    YouTube/Warner Bros.

Playing themselves in the film: seven-time Formula One champion Lewis Hamilton, Max Verstappen, Carlos Sainz Jr., Sergio Perez, Benoit Treluyer, and the rest of the F1 drivers and team members. Hamilton is a co-producer on the film and was also involved during the script-writing process to keep the film as realistic as possible by drawing on his own experiences. “We want everyone to love it and to really feel that we can encapsulate what the essence of this sport is about,” Hamilton said last year.

We don’t get much dialogue in this first teaser, or much information about the plot. Honestly? The teaser comes off as a bit cheesy from a marketing standpoint. (Since when do people in the racing community scoff so dismissively at safety concerns?) But that’s all real racing footage shot on actual tracks during bona fide F1 Grand Prix weekends. Pitt himself raced an adapted F2 car between practice sessions around the Northamptonshire circuit.

“There are cameras mounted all over the car,” Pitt told Sky Sports during filming at the 2023 British Grand Prix. “You’ve never seen speed; you’ve never seen just the G forces like this.” Based on the teaser, the visual efforts to immerse audiences in the F1 experience paid off. This is a film you’ll probably want to see in IMAX.

F1 arrives in theaters in the summer of 2025 and will stream on Apple TV+ sometime after that. It’s the sixth film from Apple Original Films to snag theater distribution, following in the footsteps of Martin Scorsese’s Oscar-nominated Killers of the Flower Moon and this weekend’s Fly Me to the Moon, among others.

Apple Original Films/Warner Bros.

Listing image by Warner Bros/Apple TV+

Brad Pitt stages a Formula One racing comeback in first teaser for F1 Read More »

comcast’s-streaming-bundle-is-$15/month-for-netflix,-peacock,-apple-tv+,-and-ads

Comcast’s streaming bundle is $15/month for Netflix, Peacock, Apple TV+, and ads

Triple play (with ads) —

It’s $25 or $10 cheaper than separate subs, but note the plans you’re getting.

Xfinity log on a tablet, with fossil rocks, glasses, and a notepad on the desk beside it.

Enlarge / Comcast/Xfinity’s new bundle of streaming services harkens back to a much earlier era.

Getty Images

Disaggregation is so 2010s, so Comcast, facing intense pressure from streaming services, is bringing back the old bundle-it-up playbook. Its previously announced bundle of Netflix, Peacock, and Apple TV+, only to Comcast/Xfinity cable or broadband subscribers, will cost $15 per month. It’s a big discount on paper, but the fine print needs reading.

The “StreamSaver” bundle is considered a “companion to broadband,” Comcast’s CEO David Watson said at a conference today, according to Reuters. It cuts more than 30 percent off the separate price of certain tiers of each service and can be bundled with Comcast’s own “NOW TV,” which has 40 other cable channels streaming. The service is due out May 29 in the US.

Take note that Comcast’s bundle gives you Netflix’s “Standard with ads” plan (which also locks you in at “Full HD” resolution and two devices), Peacock’s “Premium” (which also has ads), and Apple TV+, which has made some recent moves toward an advertising infusion. The things that people liked about streaming—being able to pick and choose TV and movie catalogs, pay to avoid advertisements, and not be beholden to their cable company for entertainment—are effectively countered by StreamSaver. The lines get blurrier, and the prices go up.

If you were already set on paying for the cheapest versions of each service and don’t mind not being able to cancel any one of them once you’re tired of it, $15 is indeed a savings. Doing the math earlier this month, Ars’ Scharon Harding totaled up all three networks at $39.47 per month with no advertising, or $24.97 per month with ads.

Tacking streaming services onto your Comcast subscription would help the company out, as would signing up, especially for StreamSaver. Comcast lost nearly 500,000 cable TV subscribers in Q1 2024, down to 13.6 million subscribers, compared to 16.1 million at the end of 2022. Peacock, the streaming service it owns, has not made money since its 2020 launch and lost $2.7 billion in 2023.

Comcast’s streaming bundle is $15/month for Netflix, Peacock, Apple TV+, and ads Read More »

cable-tv-providers-ruined-cable—now-they’re-coming-for-streaming

Cable TV providers ruined cable—now they’re coming for streaming

Cable 2.0 —

Comcast wants to tie its cable/Internet to your streaming subscriptions.

Cable TV providers ruined cable—now they’re coming for streaming

In an ironic twist, cable TV and Internet provider Comcast has announced that it, too, will sell a bundle of video-streaming services for a discounted price. The announcement comes as Comcast has been rapidly losing cable TV subscribers to streaming services and seeks to bring the same type of bundling that originally drew people away from cable to streaming.

Starting on an unspecified date this month, the bundle, called Streamsaver, will offer Peacock, which Comcast owns, Apple TV+, and Netflix to people who subscribe to Comcast’s cable TV and/or broadband. Comcast already offers Netflix or Apple TV+ as add-ons to its cable TV, but Streamsaver expands Comcast’s streaming-related bundling efforts.

Comcast didn’t say how much the streaming bundle would cost, but CEO Brian Roberts said that it will “come at a vastly reduced price to anything in the market today” when announcing the bundle on Tuesday at MoffettNathanson’s 2024 Media, Internet and Communications Conference in New York, per Variety. If we factor in Peacock’s upcoming price hike, subscribing to Apple TV+, Netflix, and Peacock separately would cost $39.47 per month without ads, or $24.97/month with ads.

According to Roberts, Comcast is hoping that the upcoming package will help Comcast “add value to consumers” and “take some of the dollars out of” other streaming businesses.

For subscribers, the more immediate effect is the continuing and rapid blurring of the lines between cable and streaming services. And Comcast knows that.

As Roberts notes: “We’ve been bundling video successfully and creatively for 60 years, and so this is the latest iteration of that.”

Comcast is hemorrhaging subscribers

Last month, Comcast said it lost 487,000 cable TV subscribers in Q1 2024. It ended the quarter with 13,600,000 subscribers, compared to 14,106,000 at the end of 2023 and 16,142,000 at the end of 2022.

Comcast’s broadband subscriber base also decreased from 32,253,000 at the end of 2023 to 32,188,000.

Peacock, Comcast’s flagship streaming service, hasn’t made any money since launching in 2020 and lost $2.7 billion in 2023. However, in April, Comcast said that Peacock’s Q1 losses lessened from $704 million in Q1 2023 to $639 million in Q1 2024.

It’s worth noting that in January, Comcast raised prices for its cable and Internet services by 3 percent, blaming the price hikes on broadband investments and an increase in programming costs.

Déjà vu

One of the common reasons people abandoned cable TV were bundled packages that forced people to pay for services, like phone or Internet, or channels that they didn’t want. Now, Comcast is looking to save its shrinking subscriber base by bundling its cable TV or Internet service with some of its biggest competitors. Like streaming services, Comcast is hoping that bundling its products will deter people from canceling their subscriptions since they’re tied to each other.

Subscriber churn is also a problem in the streaming industry. Antenna, a subscription analyst company, estimates that around 25 percent of video-streaming subscribers in the US have canceled at least three such subscriptions in the last two years. These high-churn subscribers represent around 40 percent of new subscriptions and cancellations last year, Antenna told The New York Times in April.

But Comcast’s announcement hints at déjà vu as Comcast blatantly seeks to re-create the cable bundle or triple-play package using the very streaming services that are eating away at Comcast’s cable business. Ironically, Comcast is seeking to bandage a declining business by feeding some of the biggest contributors to that decline, using the same tactics that drove many customers away in the first place.

We’re expected to hear a lot more about bundled services. Last month, we learned that a Disney+, Hulu, and Max bundle would be released this summer, for example. And there’s already a lengthy list of streaming bundle packages available from third parties like Verizon and T-Mobile.

But for people who left cable to avoid overloaded bundled packages and to get away from companies like Comcast, which group cable TV or Internet with streaming services that often raise prices, limit show and movie availability and features, and increasingly focus on ads, it just isn’t worth the monthly savings.

Cable TV providers ruined cable—now they’re coming for streaming Read More »

masters-of-the-air:-imagine-a-bunch-of-people-throwing-up,-including-me

Masters of the Air: Imagine a bunch of people throwing up, including me

Masters of People Vomiting Everywhere —

It’s a bad show. I wanted to love it, but it’s just not good.

Photograph showing two stars of the show standing in front of a B-17

Enlarge / Our two main heroes so far, Buck and Bucky. Or possibly Bucky and Buck. I forget which is which.

I’m writing this article under duress because it’s not going to create anything new or try to make the world a better place—instead, I’m going to do the thing where a critic tears down the work of others rather than offering up their own creation to balance the scales. So here we go: I didn’t like the first two episodes of Masters of the Air, and I don’t think I’ll be back for episode three.

The feeling that the show might not turn out to be what I was hoping for has been growing in my dark heart since catching the first trailer a month or so ago—it looked both distressingly digital and also maunderingly maudlin, with Austin Butler’s color-graded babyface peering out through a hazy, desaturated cloud of cigarette smoke and 1940s World War II pilot tropes. Unfortunately, the show at release made me feel exactly how I feared it might—rather than recapturing the magic of Band of Brothers or the horror of The Pacific, Masters so far has the depth and maturity of a Call of Duty cutscene.

Does this man look old enough to be allowed to fly that plane?

Enlarge / Does this man look old enough to be allowed to fly that plane?

Apple

World War Blech

After two episodes, I feel I’ve seen everything Masters has to offer: a dead-serious window into the world of B-17 Flying Fortress pilots, wholly lacking any irony or sense of self-awareness. There’s no winking and nodding to the audience, no joking around, no historic interviews with salt-and-pepper veterans to humanize the cast. The only thing allowed here is wall-to-wall jingoistic patriotism—the kind where there’s no room for anything except God, the United States of America, and bombing the crap out of the enemy. And pining wistfully for that special girl waiting at home.

Butler clearly gives a solid performance, but the man’s face is too perfect, like an Army Air Corps recruiting poster, with his tall hair and his cap parked jauntily at an angle atop it. He’s pretty to the point of being a distraction in every single scene he’s in. He noted in interviews that he signed up to work with a dialect coach to drop the Elvis accent he picked up while filming with Baz Luhrmann, and being notionally a cowboy from Casper, Wyoming, he wears his character’s “well, aw, shucks” down-home attitude as comfortably as the silk aviator’s scarf around his neck. But at least to this native Texan’s ear, there’s still a lot of Memphis coming out of the man’s mouth.

Every member of the cast has their 1940s-ness dialed up to 11—and perhaps that’s appropriate, given that World War II ended 80 years ago and “World War II” is fully a period aesthetic at this point, with its own rules and visuals any audience will expect to see. But the show wastes no opportunity to ram home that ’40s feeling—every room is dimly lit, and every Allied office feels like a ramshackle clapboard mess. Each scene’s framing feels like it was carefully assembled from comic book clippings, with barely disguised CGI trickery to keep everything hanging together. Watching in 4K HDR was beautiful, but it also made me cringe repeatedly whenever a VFX shot with bad tracking or bad color matching would flash past. There’s just nowhere to hide the digital-ness of it all, and boy, does it ever shine through. The overall effect is less like Saving Private Ryan and more like Sucker Punch—with a bit of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow thrown in.

Masters of the Air: Imagine a bunch of people throwing up, including me Read More »