Links to Some of My Writing about TV

Hi! I write about TV and other things (but mostly TV). Here are recent pieces (and conversations) I’d love you to check out!

  • I wrote about Claire Fraser of “Outlander” for Entertainment Weekly. I really enjoyed this chance to gab about why she’s not only important in her own right, she’s a precursor to the relatively recent wave of ambitious TV shows that unapologetically present stories about complex women.
  • Like another CW show (“Jane the Virgin”), I think “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend” has presented one of the most sophisticated, innovative, creative and entertaining televisual stories of the past decade. I am right about this. Anyway, for the New York Times, I spoke to co-creators Aline Brosh McKenna and Rachel Bloom about where the show’s been and where its going in its final season (no plot spoilers, I promise). We also touched on a few of the songwriting team’s favorite “CEG” tunes.  I’ll miss the show when it’s gone, but before the West Covina chronicle wraps things up, I really hope Darryl and White Josh work it out.
  • I love “Doctor Who”! Even if you know nothing about the show, this in-depth feature story should get you up to speed. For the piece, I talked to new showrunner Chris Chibnall, new lead Jodie Whittaker, a writer, a director and knowledgeable fans of the show; we discussed what it’s all about, why it works, where it has been in its 55 years and where it’s going. This piece was truly a labor of love, and I hope you enjoy it. I’m also excited that, as part of the reporting for the “Doctor Who” story, I got to do this very enjoyable and enlightening interview with star Jodie Whittaker. Go 13!
  • I love “The Good Place“! No Season 3 spoilers, only interesting factoids and thematic thoughts from its creator, Mike Schur, in this recent interview.
  • I wrote about Wynonna Earp for The New York Times, wooo-hooo! Seriously, even if you don’t watch the show, aren’t you intrigued by the fact that this Syfy series already has four conventions devoted just to it? And it’s been on for only three seasons? I think the rip-roaring show’s history, themes and fandom come together to create an interesting saga, one that I think has value to any interested observer of the evolving TV landscape. Also there are tentacles and mustaches, what else do you want?
  • After a year of reporting on Brad Kern, a showrunner cited by dozens of ex-employees for harassment, vindictiveness, inappropriate behavior, repeated mistreatment of a nursing mom and racist comments (among many other allegations), he was finally fired by CBS. As I said in this Twitter thread, “It SHOULD NOT take multiple major stories in the press to remove a toxic exec, showrunner or anyone else with power in TV. That’s not the system working: That’s a sign the system has failed its workers.”
  • The culture of CBS, and entertainment-industry cultures in general, need massive, revolutionary overhauls. Abuses of power for the most part are still ignored, enabled and whitewashed. This is a reported Vulture story, with some analysis of those issues, on Brad Kern, Leslie Moonves, CBS and the changes the past year have not brought about.
  • Speaking of change, I really enjoyed this event! It was the Chicago International Film Festival screening and panel discussion of the documentary “This Changes Everything,” an examination of decades of sexism and the systematic exclusion of women in Hollywood. Fun stuff, right? But honestly, this film (which features Taraji P. Henson, Meryl Streep, Shonda Rhimes, Jessica Chastain and so many other amazing women) is brisk, lively and interesting, and I’m not just saying that because I’m in it (toward the end, they interview me about my reporting on this topic). “This Changes Everything” premiered at TIFF and is on the festival circuit now, but will be more widely available soon. I can’t wait for more people to see it. By the way, the cast list on this review makes me giggle with delight every time.
  • Fuuuuuuuuck nooooooooooo.
  • Some stories give me frustration migraines: This one did not! Yay! I’ve been reporting on issues of inclusion and representation in the TV industry for many, many years (see all the links at the end of this post). HBO has made serious strides since I wrote this story about the then-abysmal stats on inclusion in at high-end TV networks in 2014. Check out this new story, for The Hollywood Reporter, about the progress HBO has made on the inclusion front as of 2018. (FX has changed a lot as well.) No, the TV industry has not fixed everything when it comes to matters of representation in front of and behind the camera. But here’s my two cents, as someone who will continue to shine a light on these issues whenever I can: Why not celebrate real progress when it arrives? I think a lot about how much still needs to be done. But what Casey Bloys of HBO said regarding these issues made me feel hope. I like hope! I am pro-hope.
  • More for The Hollywood Reporter: Devilish problems behind the scenes at “American Gods” during its troubled second season. Toxic showrunner 101: Don’t be this guy. Also, ageism is all over Hollywood and I’m over it. Something fun: The time I met Meghan Markle, plus thoughts on women’s progress, “Suits” and “The Crown.”
  • More for The New York Times: An interview with the great Ann Dowd on “The Handmaid’s Tale” (there’s also a mention of “The Leftovers”); a review/explainer of the fine true-crime series “The Staircase”; a review of the documentary series “The Fourth Estate,” which is about The New York Times; an interview with Keri Russell and Matthew Rhys about the series finale of “The Americans”; “Jane the Virgin” showrunner Jennie Snyder Urman makes it official that Season Five is the final season and talks about why that is and what she’s thinking as she and the team head into the endgame of this wonderful show.
  • I moderated a few panels at the delightful ATX TV Festival in Austin, Texas (you should go, let’s all go next year). Here are links to videos of the full panels for “One Day at a Time,” “Wynonna Earp,” a panel on interacting with fandoms from several smart TV executives and creators, a panel on the dynamics of TV writers rooms, again with several smart writer/producers.
  • I guested on the amazing Professor Henry Jenkins’ podcast, where Henry, showrunner Emily Andras, myself and Professor Louisa Stein talked about Sherlock and Wynonna Earp and LGBTQ issues as they intersect with those fandoms and with TV in general.
  • I guested on the Tom and Lorenzo podcast, check it out here, here and here. I love Tom and Lorenzo so much and we had a blast talking pop culture, film, TV and Me Too. Tom’s baked goods were amazing.
  • More podcastery! I guested on the Extra Hot Great podcast, where we talked about The Fourth Estate and other shows we’re interested in. I nominate an episode of “One Day at a Time” for the TV canon and I definitely did not tear up during that segment. Addendum: “One Day at a Time” is fabulous. Addendum 2: In a 2016 appearance on Extra Hot Great, I participated in a Star Trek TV fantasy draft and nominated a great episode of “Star Trek: Deep Space Nine” for the TV canon. This is when I peaked, folks.
  • For TVGuide.com: My semi-serious, semi-goofing around look at the similarities between “Westworld” and “Game of Thrones.”
  • University of Pennsylvania recently inaugurated its Center for Media at Risk, and on a panel you can view at this link, myself and other experts talk about the risks that reporters, actors, writers and content creators at the media companies face – and why those dangers matter.
  • Speaking of panels that grapple with issues that matter, I was honored to be on a panel at CUNY’s School of Journalism with New York Times critic A.O. Scott, the AP’s Nekesa Moody, and writer/journalist/podcaster Kurt Andersen; CUNY Professor Janice C. Simpson moderated. The panel, which is available as a Studio 360 podcast here, was titled, “When Bad People Create Good Art,” and focused on #MeToo reporting and the effect of the post-Weinstein revelations on consumers and critics of culture.

During the last 16 years or so, I was a TV critic at Variety, at HuffPost, and at the Chicago Tribune. Everything I wrote at Variety, from fall 2015 to spring 2018, is collected here. A smattering of 2016-2018 pieces I would love for you to read are below:

Before I joined Variety, I was the TV critic for Huffington Post. Quite a bit of that work is here. You can also find the HP pieces here, and there are archives going back to 2011 on the right side of that page.

Until the fall of 2010, I was the TV critic for the Chicago Tribune. All that work is collected here, and the archives are organized by show title and by month. Not every program I ever covered is in the show title list, by the way. Although “Wonder Showzen” is, because why not.

Also! I have an Instagram (warning: It’s mostly pictures of pretty flowers). Three other things before I get started for real: One, I frequently get the questions, “How did you become a TV critic? How could I get into the writing-about-TV game?” and I’ve addressed those queries in this post. Two, I still love TV and, as you can see from the links above, I’m still writing about it, reporting on it and even doing the occasional review, but I’m no longer reviewing TV full time, and this Vanity Fair article explains why. Three, if you’d like to know more about my life and tattoos, this post from 2013 is from the middle of my family-pocalypsethis is about life stuff and my arm tattoos, and this is what I wrote when my mom died in 2016. More tattoo content: This is my back piece.

I’ve covered and reviewed so many shows over the years; I’m a lucky human. If you Google “Maureen Ryan” and just about any TV show name, you’ll probably come up with something I wrote somewhere (I’ve even freelanced now and then, and I always forget about that stuff!). What I’m trying to say is, the following roster is horribly, horribly incomplete, because hundreds of shows I’ve loved (or loathed! Or loved and loathed!) are not on it. But here are a few notable stops on my journey down the TV coverage trail:

Here’s a long feature on the production of “Friday Night Lights.” I visited the set in Austin in Season 1 and wrote many stories about how they made the show and how that influenced the intimacy of its vibe. To this day, that long FNL feature is one of my favorite things I’ve ever gotten to do. All my FNL coverage is here. Texas Forever. 

All my “Lost” coverage is here (arranged in reverse chronology; you have to go back [SORRY] to find the first of my “Lost” pieces). I wrote about individual episodes later in the show’s run, and I did a number of interviews with Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse over the years, and during the “Lost” era, I also spoke to the show’s DPs, its composer and a few of the actors. The episodic “Lost” podcast I was part of during that time, “Orientation: Ryan Station,” can be found on various posts. Island Forever. 

Speaking of podcasts, “Talking TV with Ryan and Ryan” is over – if you ever listened, thank you. And you can still listen, if it’s new to you. It usually consisted of Ryan McGee and I blathering about whatever shows we were into (or not into) at that moment in time. Sometimes the podcasts contain interviews with actors and TV writers. (You can search the podcast’s site for show names.) This podcast (which is also on iTunes) may just be in your wheelhouse.

The drama that might be closest to my heart – and the show I’ve almost certainly written about more than any other – is “Battlestar Galactica.” All my coverage starts here (again, it’s in reverse chronology, so post-finale coverage comes first, then finale coverage, etc.). For “BSG’s” final run of episodes, I interviewed the writer of each episode and also offered my own thoughts; those posts are long but I so enjoyed doing them. Perhaps the most extensive post in that array of final-season coverage is an in-depth, post-finale interview with executive producer Ron Moore; that piece also contains my thoughts on the finale as well as comments from actors Edward James Olmos and Mary McDonnell. In late 2013, I interviewed Moore again, on the 10th anniversary of “BSG’s” debut, and you can find that conversation in both story and podcast form. Again, all of the “BSG” intel can be found around here (hit “back” to find earlier installments). I still miss Adama and Roslin and Saul damn Tigh. So say we all.  

Oakley Foster has done a great thing and collected episodic reviews and features on “Mad Men” from a number of critics, including me. It’s truly a useful roundup to have and I’m grateful for it. Season 7 link roundups are here, and links to previous season-by-season link collections are here. Thanks, Oakley. [Oakley let me know he’s also done a similar roundup of episodic and seasonal coverage of “Breaking Bad” by various critics. I can’t overstate how handy this is and how grateful I am for these resources!]

I wish I had one link for all my “Breaking Bad” coverage, but you’re probably best off going to my HPTV page or the Tribune site and searching by an episode’s time frame or just looking for the “Breaking Bad” label and poking around. But here are a few links to some pieces I wrote during the show’s home stretch. I’m still not over “Ozymandias.”

In addition to the ones names above, of course there are dozens of shows I want you to watch and catch up on and love. I don’t have time to list them all, but here are a few worth mentioning: I wrote quite a bit about Spartacus over the years – interviews and reviews and a “what to watch before you binge it on Netflixexplainer. If you think you’re too good for “Spartacus” and that “Spartacus” is something you should sneer at, think again. A more recent Starz offering that’s twisty fun: “Counterpart.” “The Good Fight” (especially Season 2) is swell and this year, I also really loved Amazon’s “A Very English Scandal.”

More swell fare from the last few years: The aforementioned “Wynonna Earp” makes me smile every damn time (and the first two seasons are on Netflix, woo!), “Peaky Blinders,” “Crazy Ex-Girlfriend,” “Rectify” “Happy Valley” are also on Netflix, “You’re the Worst” is on Hulu, get into “The Americans” via Amazon for Lenin’s sake (comrades, that final season!!) “The Returned” is magnificently cry-inducing and weird, “Banshee” and “Strike Back” both had wobbly final seasons but were really worth watching before that.

Comedy is so good in recent years that I wrote a big piece in 2016 about how half-hour shows are crushing it even more than drama (it’s good to live in a world in which half-hours as varied as “Atlanta,” “One Day at a Time,” “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” and “The Good Place”  are so consistently excellent). More raves! “Killjoys” is my sci-fi jam and “Killing Eve” is amazing. As previously stated, I am a megafan of “Jane the Virgin.” Oh, also, “Black-ish!” (And more “Black-ish”!)

Some of the shows listed above are a little bit obscure, but I watch and like a lot of popular dramas as well! Some of them are on my end-of-year Best TV lists. Here’s my 2016 Top 20 list (I ranked shows for the first time! Exciting! I did not rank programs on two other lists of very good shows from that year). Here’s my 2015 Top 20 list (which contains links to two other lists of very good shows from that year). Also, feel free to check out my 2014 Top TV list, my 2013 Top TV list and 2012 Top TV list, all of which you can treat as rosters full of viewing suggestions. Finally, follow me on Twitter if you want the full scope of my daily obsessions, enthusiasms and rants. (Spoiler: I post a lot of pictures of foxes.)

But wait, there’s more! Here are a few reported stories worth noting:

Representation of women and people of color as TV showrunners for the 2016-2017 broadcast network season and what those dire statistics mean for the pipeline of future TV creators.

Representation of women and people of color as TV directors: The amount of scripted TV has doubled in the past five years, but guess who is directing most of it? I bet you don’t have to guess. If you only read one or two sidebars from this story, make it the ACLU interview and/or the roundup of comments from TV directors.

[Addendum to the directors story: If you think real change is not possible when it comes to diversity and inclusion in the TV industry, think again. This story proves that significant improvements are indeed possible. Everyone in the TV industry should take note.]

Representation of women in writers’ rooms. Spoiler alert: The percentages are not great. (This story is a couple years old but … yeah. Still not great.)

Film world bonus! Check out the stats on the writers and directors of “Star Wars.” I love “Star Wars” a lot. Its writers and directors are almost all white guys.

Representation of women and people of color as creators at prestige-drama outlets. Spoiler alert: I’ll let Sisko take this one.

[Four years later update: HBO has changed its ways – everyone in the TV industry should take note. I’m leaving Sisko in place because there’s much more work to be done.]

Why the Fancy Editors of Harper’s and NYRB Are as Idiotic as That Comedy Cellar Moron

I can’t quite let go of something that I brought up in this Twitter thread.

Still on this. I’ve spent days, nights, weekends, lost sleep, rewritten, had legal & fact checkers all over stories, thrown up, re-interviewed sources to MAKE SURE my #MeToo stories were solid. In 1 week, 2 men get to freely rewrite their abusive pasts? Nobody cared about facts?

Regarding Jian Ghomeshi writing for the New York Review of Books and John Hockeberry penning whatever the hell that was for Harper’s, I have so many questions. (No, I’m not linking to them. Ughghhh.)

But one of the biggest questions I have is this: Why were these men allowed to rewrite history?

It’s one thing to say, “These are personal essays and not news stories,” which might be one (lame) defense offered by those publications. But that’s nonsense. First of all, everyone reporting on #MeToo stories and anything at all related to harassment, predation and similarly fraught issues has had to be so, so careful. Any time these topics are in the mix, fact-checking rigor is necessary.

And even when someone is writing a personal essay or an opinion column, the writers of such works don’t get to pick and choose their facts. I’ve had critiques and columns kicked back to me to make sure every assertion in them was accurate. That’s not a defense that holds water.

It’s unconscionable to me that NYRB and Harper’s both allowed these men to publish poorly written, mawkish articles that didn’t move the conversation forward. That’s bad enough.

Worse yet, they didn’t give the survivors of harassment, bullying, assault and violence a real voice in any of this. That’s awful and gross and so typical, unfortunately. I wrote about this process of de-centering the survivors in this piece about Louis C.K. I am so tired of survivors being ignored in favor of the egos of the men who made these messes in the first place. Whether it’s by the men themselves or their acolytes, it’s always the same boring whining about famous men who want their old lives back.

Survivors don’t get their old lives back after they’ve been abused, bullied, harassed, assaulted and raped. No one is owed a career in the media, in the arts, in Hollywood, in sports, in politics. No one is owed any of that. When speaking of these matters, in relation to any profession or any walk of life, the only people who are owed anything are those who’ve been harmed — but they’re usually left to fend for themselves.

The thing is, if a person transgresses norms, ethical guidelines, laws and/or basic ideas about human decency or dignity, that person may pay a price. It doesn’t always work that way, but that’s how this whole thing called human society works. (And let’s not forget, neither man served a day in jail. Both are free to rebuild their lives. Without subjecting us to their epic laments about how this whole “women are human beings with boundaries worthy of respect” thing has kind of gone too far.) 

But let’s put all that aside, just for a moment.

The fact that these two guys were allowed to massage what happened and essentially come up with alternative narratives is not just infuriating but wrong. These publications have now added to the harm done to the survivors of these men’s abuses. That’s because Hockenberry and Ghomeshi’s accounts are far more forgiving about what they did than the picture one gets from journalistic records, court documents and input from survivors. The cherry on top is the lax editing that allowed both men to paint themselves as the real victims.

Those writing about #MeToo perpetrators have had to be so rigorous and unassailable; no misstep was too small to be jumped on by the “has this all gone too far/witch hunt” crowd. Not even one year on, the actual perpetrators get to pretty much just say what they want. Double standard much? 

I’ve no doubt these men experienced pain when they were made accountable for their actions — at last. What did they do with that pain except turn it into meandering pity parties about how what that happened to them was unfair? Well, gents, you didn’t even give us a full and fair picture of what occurred, so the odds that you’re on a path of true amelioration and atonement — the kind  of difficult but necessary journey Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg talks about here — don’t seem especially high. As Michelle Goldberg noted today, “the discussion about #MeToo and forgiveness never seems to go anywhere, because men aren’t proposing paths for restitution. They’re asking why women won’t give them absolution.”

It’s not worth arguing what category these pieces went into — memoir, personal essay, op-ed, reporting, whatever. The fact is, these allegedly prestigious publications allowed these men to whitewash their own actions. To the inevitable people who will, once the Famous Man in Trouble batsignal goes up, appear in my mentions: Yes, I have patience for the “what is the path back” question, as I noted in my Louis C.K. essay. But that’s not my first or second or third or even fifth priority. And it can be a priority only when survivors are not pushed to the margins, and only if perpetrators do real work to truly reckon with the harm they’ve done.

Not only did these men not grapple with the real damage they did, they were false and self-serving about what actually happened. And these influential publications helped them with this craven, damaging and infuriating agenda.

Dear Ian Buruma, you probably don’t give a damn about what I think, because I’m just some woman scribbling words on the internet, but this statement in this interview is wrong, for so many reasons: “The exact nature of his behavior—how much consent was involved—I have no idea, nor is it really my concern.”

You should be concerned about the accuracy of what is in your publication. You should educate yourself about harassment, assault and abuse, and not just decide that everything short of being convicted of rape in a criminal trial is in some whoopsie-oopsie grey area. Read this piece by David Roberts of Vox, and think about getting parts of it tattooed on your body for handy reference. Like, how about this paragraph right here:

Sexual discrimination, harassment, and abuse are everywhere. They are not isolated cases, not rare, and not confined to the powerful or famous. They constitute an ongoing, systemic crisis. #MeToo is meant to draw attention to that crisis. Talking about the perpetrators “moving on with their lives’ at all, much less with sympathy and solicitude, is a clear signal that the moral weight and severity of the crisis has not sunk in. We’re still not taking this shit seriously.

Or how about this one?

[H]arassment and abuse exist along a spectrum. The point is not that everything on the spectrum is the same, but that it’s all the same spectrum — a range of expressions that trace to a core set of ideas, namely that women are objects, adjuncts to men, there to soothe, coddle, please, or serve men, subject to their control and abuse.

These are important ideas you could have hired any number of fine writers of all genders to explore! But you, and the entitled twit who runs Harper’s, gave prime real estate to abusers who have no insight into anything but their own questionable narratives of victimization. Fantastic job, well played.

Last point: Sociopaths and clinical narcissists may be interesting in movies or TV or books, up to a point and in the hands of the right artists. But in real life they’re often really boring, because nothing exists but their own needs. Other people aren’t real to them. I kind of wonder if other people — especially women — are real to the editors of these Very Esteemed Publications. The owner of the Comedy Cellar and others have framed the comeback of Louis C.K. in free-speech terms. The safety of the human bodies in the paths of these angry, entitled men — those things are not not important. Let’s ignore all that so that we can focus on the fancy, high-flown reasons we must make these men the center of attention. Again. 

Edited to add a link to this tremendous essay by Katie Anthony, who absolutely takes apart Ghomeshi’s slippery, clevery toxicity like Tim Gunn deconstructing a terrible frock (but her essay is even better than that). This post is a must-read, in my opinion, because Katie is delivering HOT FIRE in every paragraph: “I realized that this piece has pulled off a strange maneuver. It deserves both less than our contempt and our full attention. Because this self-mythologizing, gaslighting treatise is both wall-punchingly routine and a spectacular — nay, TEXTBOOK — example of how this shit keeps happening. And in case you’re wondering, ‘this shit’ refers to abuse, the way we ignore abuse if we happen to find the abuser useful or entertaining, the way we grant unlimited second-chances to abusers who can also interact with random strangers without abusing them, as if Ted Bundy never murdered YOU so he must be a pretty okay guy after all.”

I’m going to give the last word to Dan O’Sullivan, whom I don’t know, but based on his last name, there’s an eight percent chance we’re related. This thread by him is very good — and absolutely true, in my experience. Take it away, Dan:

The thing I have found with dealing with sociopathic sexual predators is that engaging with them in any way is self-destructive. Their words are poison & grow more lethal they longer you let them talk. They even can acquire a ring of reasonableness, in the face of blinding truth. You may find yourself questioning the obvious truth, because they’re so sure of themselves and even convincing at times, but the truth is, you’re playing by rules and they have none. No rules about how they behave with anyone. They can’t respect anyone’s truth.

And finally:

Ghomeshi simply lies about the facts of his accusations, dramatically so. He reframes it and reduces the scope dramatically. I can’t believe this essay ran.

Me neither.

Elephant vs. African Wild Dogs at Botswana Watering Hole

A Film by Maureen Ryan.

This may be the best thing I’ll ever put into the world. It makes my heart happy just to think about witnessing it. There’s  more info about this below, if you want it, but if you don’t, just experience the magic: 

In July, we spent a few glorious weeks in Botswana, the trip of a lifetime. We were so lucky to be able to go there. There were a few amazing high points, some of which were caught on video. I also took a ton of photos, and I’m posting some of those pictures on my Instagram. (To be clear, some of what’s on my Instagram is from Botswana, and some from around my house, from walks in the woods, or from other trips. But many of the pics lately are from Botswana).  

We all agreed this moment was high up on our list of Greatest Trip Experiences  — this encounter between a pack of African wild dogs and an elephant. I’m going to give you a spoiler up front: Nobody gets hurt, it’s adorable and fun, and there’s no bloodshed. On another day, we did watch a pack of wild dogs take apart a freshly killed impala for about an hour, but I’m not going to show you that particular Hannibal spinoff, ever. We have videos, but nope. It was fascinating to witness, but… so … many…. intestines.

Anyway, here’s what happened in this video: We were staying in Gomoti Tented Camp in northern Botswana. There’s a watering hole right in front of this small (and great) camp, right outside the dining area. As we were finishing breakfast, an impala shot by the watering hole, chased by a wild dog. That wild dog decided to stop running after the impala and hang out at the watering hole. Soon he was joined by about 15-16 packmates. They were all wandering around or lying down or drinking, just chilling, when a solo elephant walked up. It’s not all that unusual to see a solo elephant now and then, though they’re usually in herds. Anyway, this gent strolls up, expecting to have the watering hole to himself, but the dogs know they can literally run circles around him and not get hurt, so they don’t slink off.

What occurs for the next six minutes is him trying to drive them off (“Damn kids, get off my lawn!”), them messing with him by creeping a bit closer, him shooing them off again, and the whole thing becoming kind of a game to both of them. The elephant was a bit annoyed, and the dogs were maybe a little scared, but not really. What came through to me was how the whole thing was kind of a fun, even silly moment. All parties knew they wouldn’t get hurt, it was a low-key and basically harmless interspecies encounter, and it was mighty amusing to witness.

We also got to watch a pack of adult wild dogs feed and interact with their cute-as-a-button pups for about two hours another day. Being able to spend long periods of time observing all kinds of wildlife living their day-to-day lives — I can’t put into words the purity and intensity and joy of that gift. I think about that trip every single day and one hope we can go back to Botswana, especially to the Okavango Delta region. I love it so, so much. 

Anyway, watch the whole thing, if only so you can nominate it for a Most Popular Film Oscar. But if you want to skip around, here are some approximate time codes (and after the first few seconds — when you’ll hear the elephant trumpet — turn down the sound. We sound like excited baboons, and if you’re into that kind of thing, crank the sound, but really and truly, feel free to mute):

First minute: Elephant walks up, charges and trumpets a bit to scare off the dogs. Doesn’t work. Elephant gets himself some water regardless.

Around minute 2 to around minute 3: Elephant flicks water at the dogs while drinking.

Around 3:40: Elephant both kicks out at and flicks water at the dogs.

Around 4:30: Exciting conclusion of the third act: Elephant sprays water out his trunk at the dogs (that is my favorite part).

Around 5:30 to end: My second favorite part. The elephant does a “Homer Simpson” into the bushes — he walks off, but then he decides he doesn’t want to show his backside to those pesky dogs, so he back slowly into the foliage. Classic Homer elephant. 

Addendum: Two more (short) videos from Botswana: African wild dog pups “stalking” a cranky vulture, and here’s a very tiny elephant sniffing the air with his very tiny and adorable trunk!  If you need more of this kind of #content in your life, looking at our friend Steve’s photos (not just from Botswana but from all over the most amazing corners of the world) is one of my go-to strategies for calming myself down. Which I need to do sometimes, because this world.