Meghan at glitzy launch party

[Twistybrancher]

Meghan in LA this week at some fancy launch party. Think these are her friends who own a high end salon.

The wavy hair has made a return, I’m guessing this is the new look she’s going for, for the rebrand. Jury is out out for that particular style- mid parting, flat waves. Thinks she suits a side part, with full waves. But hey!

Personally I like the paired down eye make up look. I always thought the heavy lashes and dark shadows were a bit much for royal duties (I feel Kates is far too heavy on the smokey eye too!)

But it sure does make her look different. I do think ita just make up and not surgery…but other posters are better at spotting these things.

Harry not there. They are her friends, so no real reason but when it’s a social event, doesn’t look great that they aren’t together….again

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14090659/Meghan-Markle-dances-friends-glamorous-launch-party-Los-Angeles-without-husband-Prince-Harry.html

Apols for double posting. The final sentence of my first para should read: "I thought that something like this would fit well with H&M's brave decision to embody a postcolonial, progressive approach to royalty, suitable for the twenty first century."

I have this expectation because of the statement H&M made when they quit the RF in which they said:
"After many months of reflection and internal discussions, we have chosen to make a transition this year in starting to carve out a progressive new role within this institution."

The Polo trailer does not embody this, in fact, the exact opposite.

As someone who watches a lot of trash reality TV to decompress I would watch it just for the cringe factor. I think it will do okay because of that but whether it will have several seasons despite being cringe (aka Selling Sunset which is a ridiculous show but a successful franchise) only time will tell.

They clearly have no idea what they’re doing, and they’re getting it badly wrong.

That’s the things isn’t it, plenty of shows I can’t stand and do find cringe perform extremely well for Netflix…if Polo can do the same and have multiple seasons, they’ll be forgiven for “trashy” tv as it were

somethings I think the general public have terrible taste in shows lol

I think Netflix are banking on people hate watching it, because they don't have enough of a fan base to make it a success.

“They’re controversial, but that’s usually a good thing. You may love them or hate them, but you’re watching.” as per Ted Sarandos.

However, he has been trying to backpeddle and justify the amount of money he paid them, which has made him the butt of many jokes in the industry.

Also, he is not correct about people watching because of H&M, their Netflix series was watched by millions because they were supposedly opening up about life in the RF, and even then, the interest had trailed off monumentally by the final episodes, anything else they have done has not been successful at all.

Just watched the trailer.

I'm amazed The Duke And Duchess Of Sussex (they clearly couldn't resist hammering the titles home) have managed to squeeze as many as five episodes out of braying toffs thundering pointlessly round a field (undoubtedly a private venue the great unwashed can't access) cheered on by braying toffesses.

Seen the trailer, you've very probably seen it all.

And also - I think NF may be fulfilling some kind of contractual obligation in making this prior to running for the hills once the original contract ends.

It's a third show and more than a bit niche with a side order of controversy in the shape of Harold's well documented cruelty to animals which he not they will take the backlash for.

At this point in the timeline I very much doubt they care whether it's a success or not.

Trashy reality TV shows will always have an audience, how big and how sustainable an audience can very much depend. How much of a success this is depends on how many viewers Vs cost to produce.

Depends what the ratio is between love watchers & hate watchers.
If H&M don't really feature much then a fair number of viewers will drop out, if it's too "trash TV" then polo fans may not persevere, if it's too "pure polo" then the reality trash TV fans will drop out.

The Real Housewives franchise shows there is a market for somewhat aspirational out of touch elitism (though polo is in quite another league).

Tricky line for NF and the producers here to tread. Will be interesting to see it play out. So far, NF shows with H&M have only been successful when it's heavily featured them talking mainly about the RF.

Hopefully they can show they're more than that and actually start building a career. It's quite a radical change from their initial aspirations of a "progressive new role within the Monarchy" but, that's life!

'For legacy ...
For courage ...
For glory ...
Polo'

I don't know how much influence Harry and Meghan would have on the trailer so I'm not going to criticise them personally for it.

But. Netflix, what are you thinking?

The whole trailer is a weird mix of boring, grandiose and completely tone deaf.

And for the record 'sweaty, dirty men' are not sexy.

I don't think H&M will feature in it. If they did, there is no way on earth that Netflix wouldn't show them in the trailer, as they would be the chief marketing draw. I think it's safe to assume that the characters introduced in the trailer are going to be the main characters of the reality show.

Real Housewives has been a huge success because it's highly dramatic - it's a subgenre known as scripted reality (apols if you already know this I don't mean to be patronising, just unspooling my thoughts in order). Real Housewives is twisty and has huge drama, up to and including physical fights. My sense of Polo from the trailer is that it's not going to go that far. It seems to be attempting to tread a shaky line between scripted reality and serious sports docu. Both of these are clearly defined TV subgenres, but they tend to have very different audiences (think: Real Housewives vs Senna) and I think it would take a very, very skilled and experienced producer to successfully marry the two in a way that's entertaining and still has depth.

I suspect that what it'll actually be is a mash-up of those two genres, but in a very superficial way. It won't manage to successfully plumb the trashy but exciting depths of well-done reality shows, nor will it really dive into the technical skill and mastery of polo. I suspect it's going to wobble between those two genres and two audience groups, doing neither genre particularly well, and pleasing not many viewers in the process.

On the other hand it could end up being a truly groundbreaking, genre defining and entirely unique piece of TV docu making that inspires generations of docu makers to come, like Up or Blue Planet. H&M's track record, and the disappointing trailer, makes me think that the chances of that are rather slim, but it's just about in the realms of the possible, I suppose.

I am not their target audience as I don’t enjoy this kind of TV.

But maybe there’s a rationale that you can’t really pretend the world of polo is something that it isn’t, so why not lean into it and embrace the other-worldly “toffness” of the world the players inhabit?

I mean, things like TOWIE and Made in Chelsea etc have huge audiences so I guess it’s the same principle?

I can’t bear cringe TV - second-hand embarrassment is horrible haha l! - so all of this is somewhat bemusing to me. But these shows are hits so I’d imagine there’s a potential audience?

How does America respond to this kind of content? If it’s framed as British upper class shenanigans, might it have an appeal?

I think Liz Jones has summed it up perfectly.

Harry is on his leather-padded knees. What next? His own slot on the Shopping Channel? How can Harry and Meghan possibly travel the globe, preaching about poverty and diversity and inclusion, when not one black player can be spied; the men are the colour of a super-yacht's decking, while the funds required to run a polo team doubtless outstrip that of Formula 1.
How can they lecture us about global warming when one player admits he flies to Argentina twice a week? The overdose of conspicuous, sunlit consumption makes me yearn for mud, wellies, fog.
And, yes, we know Meghan once toiled on game shows, but Harry? It's like discovering Princess Anne secretly pole dances. How can someone lose any vestige of class? And to lose it so swiftly (in 150 seconds) by putting his name to something even more gaudy than the ground floor of Harrods. There is no ironic distance, no clever condemnation. It's all as straight as Meghan's perfect teeth.
The trailer ends with portentous banner headlines and orchestral booming: 'For legacy', 'For courage' and 'For glory'. It's hardly the Battle of Bosworth Field. But in styling it as such, Harry really has given his kingdom for a pony.

Americans love trashy TV. And conspicuous consumption. There will be no guilt in watching this. Whether this marks a Harry/Meghan comeback I am less certain about unless they do make a cameo appearance.

I mean what is the brand: Netflix producers of trash TV, barefoot contessa in California, worthy but small cause supporter? All of the above while being very clear everyone knows you are the DUKE and DUCHESS of Sussex. That’s the bit I find a tad hilarious and most Americans will be like, whatever.

Remember that woman who was a Countess on an old series of the Real Housewives? Most people used that as a slight pejorative because these titles are vaguely ridiculous in 2024 in the US of A.

They really do need the US audience to get behind this and if they don't it's dead in the water.

Real Housewives of Dubai is a good example, massive promotion by Bravo. all the glitz, glam, fights, controversies, marriages etc. of the RH franchise, filmed in an exotic location, (albeit tainted with the UAE human rights record), and yet it was a massive flop, cancelled after the 2nd season, the US audience just weren't interested in watching it.

Polo will never be a Drive to Survive, I don't think any sporting fly on the wall documentary will ever reach the masses in the way F1 did. Full Swing (golf) and Match Point (Tennis), two sports with a huge fanbase, both flopped and cancelled. It will be interesting to see if the US audience have the appetite for a fly on the wall documentary about a very niche sport.

And for the record 'sweaty, dirty men' are not sexy.

Except Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn in Lord of the Rings.

...

Sorry, that's my sole contribution to this thread. <skulks away>

😂 I'll agree to disagree on that one!

Update from Highbrow Hippie after their launch, plenty of orders, they are making their way through fulfilment. Happy for them.

Reading this thread in my morning commute. I saw the trailer earlier this week, and it reminded me of a trailer that I saw online for "Rivals". Did they hire the same production crew? I had flashbacks to the original 1980's "Dynasty" for some reason.

Also had lunch earlier this week with a friend who had seen the trailer and asked if people actually played polo in the US. Ended up having a long discussion about how wonderful Ralph Lauren's ads are and how his stores are visually appealing despite neither of us ever buying his clothes ( and never actually stepping foot in a store). Told her that I think it's played in the Hamptons. Neither of us planning to watch.

I highly recommend Rivals. It's a real homage to the trashy 80s.

Having done some research yesterday on polo, I can confirm that yes, it is animal cruelty. Harry did ride a horse Drizzel to death on the pitch - I assumed that was a rumour by Harry haters, but no it's a confirmed fact.

Apparently the type of horses they use are small and cannot cope with the physical demands of the game. Broken jaws are common because the horses get whacked with the polo sticks (mallets? Bats? Whatever.) Also broken legs on the horses very common.

Eurgh.

3 racehorses died at Cheltenham races last Sunday - 2 of heart attacks and one of a broken neck going over a new 'safe jump'. The winner, Abuffalosoldier, died just passed the finishing line - are we condemning his rider of 'riding him to death'? Polo/horse racing - both as bad as each other.

That is horrific @GiveMeSpanakopita I know little to nothing about Polo and hearing about the type of injuries the ponies sustain, I really don't want to know any more about it.

Strange they have put their names and titles in big bold signage and yet appear to not have a big part in the show, unless this is all some strange PR strategy and it will include lots of surprise footage of them enjoying the polo.

I'm with you on that, I really don't condone any sport that includes animals, I have particular hatred for greyhound racing.

Having learned what I know now about the animal cruelty in polo, I'm more surprised than ever that Netflix went ahead with it. It really doesn't fit with their overall stated corporate values.

The other misstep Harry has made recently is to widen the validity of the Invictus Games to include anyone who has ever suffered a 'life changing illness or injury', not just veterans.

It's usually a mistake for a charitable endeavour to widen their remit without proper consultation as it dilutes the brand and can damage public support. A good recent example would be Stonewall. They explicitly widened their remit to include trans people in the mid 2010s and made trans the focus of their campaigning. Trans and homosexuality are uneasy bedfellows, because homosexuality incorporates in its meaning the assumption of exclusivity in sexual attraction. Whereas trans academics and influencers say that exclusivity in sexual attraction is transphobic. As Stonewall moved into the 2020s its support amongst its core gay audience began to fall of drastically due to this. It all became quite controversial. Stonewall is now quietly dialling down its focus on trans.

Same with Invictus. I understand from industry rumour that donations have been damaged due to the damage done to Harry's brand over the past 5 years, and so Harry may be attempting to widen the remit for that reason. However I think it'll lead to further brand dilution and a fall off in support from the core audience of veterans.

There's also some confusion apparently, as the Sussexes' website refers to this new widened remit for Invictus, but the Invictus site itself retains its core focus on veterans. This suggests that communications between Invictus and their most famous ambassador are poor or even non-existent. When a charity relies on a single figurehead, and the relations with that figurehead weaken for whatever reason, it can be very, very damaging for the future of the charity.

Having done some research yesterday on polo, I can confirm that yes, it is animal cruelty. Harry did ride a horse Drizzel to death on the pitch - I assumed that was a rumour by Harry haters, but no it's a confirmed fact.

There are also pictures of Harold's pony with bloodstained sides caused by his enthusiastic use of the kind of supposedly blunt spurs allowed in Polo.

I've posted links to these horrific items before but it's always pertinent in any discussion of the 'sport' and Harold's involvement in it

https://www.tatosmallets.com/collections/spurs

Vile.