28 Years Later: The Bone Temple and What’s Making Us Happy

Summary

---

Pop Culture Happy Hour

Episode: 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple and What’s Making Us Happy

Date: January 16, 2026
Host: Stephen Thompson
Guests: Ronald Young Jr., Sam Yellowhorse Kessler

---

Overview

This episode dives deep into "28 Years Later: The Bone Temple," the freshly-released sequel in the storied British zombie franchise, and unpacks the film’s strengths, weaknesses, and place in the saga. The team evaluates the movie’s tonal shifts, character development, and how it balances franchise expectations with its own cinematic aspirations, offering both critique and praise. The show caps off with each guest sharing "what’s making us happy this week," a signature Pop Culture Happy Hour segment.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Franchise Background & Sequel Setup

[01:03–02:41]

• The original 28 Days Later (2002) started the Rage Virus/zombie franchise, continued with 28 Weeks Later (2007), and was rebooted with the new 28 Years Later (2025).
• “The Bone Temple" is set directly after the 2025 film, focusing on teenage Spike, a new cult of humans known as "the Jimmies," and Dr. Kelson (Ralph Fiennes) sheltering in the eerie memorial known as the Bone Temple.
• Directed by Nia DaCosta (Candyman, The Marvels), written by Alex Garland (franchise originator).

---

2. First Impressions: Strengths & Weaknesses

[02:42–05:40]

• Sam (Jimmy) Yellowhorse Kessler:
  • Liked the film as a strong sequel more than as a standalone; praised the “cross-pollination” of directorial styles (DaCosta’s visual flair, Boyle’s horror energy, Garland’s cynicism).
  • Critique: “There just was not a ton of, like, character development in it.”
    (03:16)
• Stephen Thompson:
  • Emphasized the reliance on the previous film—viewers who haven’t seen “28 Years Later” would be confused.
  • “If I hadn't just watched 28 Years Later, I would have been so confused.”
    (03:43)
• Ronald Young Jr.:
  • Found the film “fine," citing enjoyment of Ralph Fiennes’ performance and that the movie lingered in his thoughts.
  • Criticized scenes of “gratuitous torture” early on.
  • “There are some scenes early in the film which feel like gratuitous torture, which… took me out of the film.”
    (04:21)

---

3. The “Bone Temple” Title Debate

[05:07–05:43]

• Ronald objects to the title, feeling it misleads viewers who haven't seen the last film.
• Stephen and Sam counter: “There is truth in advertising. There was a bone temple.”
  • Discussion about the lack of deeper explanation or utilization of the titular Bone Temple in this installment.
• Ronald jokes alternative titles: “28 Years Later: Jimmy and Them”, “Two Jimmy Two Furious”, “The Bone Doctor”.

---

4. Violence, Tone, & Genre Expectations

[06:05–09:05]

• The hosts tackle the film’s tonal whiplash—shift from intense human-on-human torture ("torture gore") to its signature zombie action ("jump scare horror").
• Stephen draws a stark line: “There is a huge, huge difference between zombie gore and torture gore… they really linger on the torture in the first portion of that film.”
  (06:41)
• Ronald appreciates the payoff for the violent opening but laments its prominence.
• Sam finds the cult (“the Jimmies”) subplot “Shakespearean”—but with muddy motivations and ambiguous leadership.

---

5. Pacing, Character Arcs & the “Middle Film” Problem

[09:05–13:53]

• Subplots (mistaken identity, cult leader's belief/hallucination) discussed. Ronald wishes some devices were handled more sharply rather than “like a sitcom hijink.” (10:09)
• Sam argues putting human violence up front (vs. lurking threat in previous films) gives the film a lopsided effect; not enough character depth for "Jimmy".
• The team identifies structural issues—this film is the “bridge” in a pre-planned trilogy, making it inherently unsatisfying on its own:
  • “Anytime you are telling a story that is the second part of a trilogy, you have to find a way to get past the ‘I am just trying to get you from point A to point C.’”
    (11:51)
• Ronald notes both this and previous film were shot back-to-back, impacting the storytelling and making “The Bone Temple” feel like a detour.

---

6. Directorial Identity & Franchise Challenges

[14:09–14:47]

• Sam relates the challenges DaCosta faces to Rian Johnson's Star Wars: balancing personal style and fan expectations.
• Sam: “You want to put your own stamp on it… but you also have competing demands… To me, it largely worked then didn’t work. But it sounds like for you guys, it largely didn’t work then it worked.”

---

7. The (Spoiler-Free) Payoff

[14:47–15:21]

• Stephen teases an “enormously enjoyable and satisfying” climactic scene: “If you can stomach the torture porn… I recommend this film for the payoff that exists late in this film… I found [it] enormously enjoyable. Extremely funny, great, vivacious filmmaking.”
  (14:49)
• General agreement: the ending is strong, and franchise fans are likely to enjoy the journey despite unevenness.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “There are some scenes early in the film which feel like gratuitous torture… took me out of the film.”
  — Ronald Young Jr. (04:21)
• “If I hadn't just watched 28 Years Later, I would have been so confused.”
  — Stephen Thompson (03:43)
• “There is a huge, huge difference between zombie gore and torture gore.”
  — Stephen Thompson (06:41)
• “28 Years Later: Jimmy and Them. 28 Years Later: Two Jimmy Two Furious.”
  — Ronald Young Jr. (05:43; joked as alternative titles)
• “It is an investment that is finally seeing returns.”
  — Sam Yellowhorse Kessler (about “Industry” S4, 19:05)
• “I think it'll work as a great binge watch one Saturday morning.”
  — Sam Yellowhorse Kessler (on the trilogy’s future, 15:45)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [00:21] – Introduction to “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple"
• [02:42-05:40] – First reactions: strengths and weaknesses
• [05:07-05:43] – Discussion on the film’s title
• [06:05-09:05] – Tonal shifts, violence, and horror style
• [09:05-13:53] – Discussion on structure and pacing
• [14:09-14:47] – Directorial style and franchise challenges
• [14:47-15:21] – Spoiler-free discussion of the film’s climax and its payoff

---

What’s Making Us Happy This Week

[17:56–22:59]

- Sam Yellowhorse Kessler:

• Industry Season 4 is out; he praises its strong start and character evolution — “It is an investment that is finally seeing returns.” (19:05)

- Ronald Young Jr.:

• The Buffalo Bills’ NFL playoff run; shares lore about their Super Bowl history and hopes for victory — “Please clip this and remind us when the Buffalo Bills win the Super Bowl, that Ronald Young Jr. said it first.” (20:50)

- Stephen Thompson:

• The essay collection Sloppy or Doing It All Wrong by Rax King — praises her wit, candor, and voice, and encourages people to read her and follow her online.

---

Summary

The panel finds “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple” a visually stylish and thematically ambitious sequel that struggles under the weight of serving as the middle film in a trilogy. While Ralph Fiennes’ performance and DaCosta’s cinematic flair are praised, the film’s intense early violence, muddled cult subplot, and lack of standalone impact are recurring critiques. The episode wraps with a trademark round of recommendations—from prestige TV and football lore to literary essays.

For newcomers and franchise veterans alike, this episode offers a thoughtful, candid, and frequently funny breakdown—balancing appreciation and skepticism, and closing with the always delightful “What’s Making Us Happy.”

Transcript

[A]

This message comes from NPR sponsor Capella University. Interested in a quality online education. Capella is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more at capella. Edu.

[B]

Last year, 28 years later, jump started a long dormant zombie franchise which began more than two decades ago now. Now it's already got a gruesome sequel starring Ralph Fiennes. I'm Stephen Thompson. Joining me today on NPR's Pop Culture Happy Hour. To talk about 28 years later, the Bone Temple is Ronald Young Jr. He's the host of the Film and Television Review podcast Leaving the Theater. Hey, Ronald.

[C]

Hello, Stephen.

[B]

Also with us is Sam Yellowhorse Kessler, a producer for NPR's Planet Money. Hey, Sam.

[D]

I'm sorry, what did you say? That name Once again, that didn't sound quite right. I think you meant Jimmy. I think is what you meant.

[B]

I'm like, is Sam doing a bit? Sam's doing a bit. It's Jimmy. Hey, Jimmy.

[D]

It's Jimmy. Of course it is.

[B]

So, in the original 28 Days later movie from 2002, a horrifying plague descends upon Great Britain. It's called the Rage Virus and it instantly transforms the infected into bloody zombie monsters. Danny Boyle directed the film, which was followed by a sequel called 28 Weeks later that came out in 2007. But a long delayed follow up film called 28 Years later dropped last year. And as its title suggests, it's set in a world where survivors have a lot of experience keeping the infected at bay. At the end of that film, a boy named Spike, played by Alfie Williams, ventures out on his own into the dangerous mainland, only to be rescued from the infected by a group of vigilantes. We meet their creepy leader, a fellow by the name of Jimmy Crystal, who's played by Jack O'. Connell. 28 years later, the Bone Temple is set in the immediate aftermath of the first film film. We soon learn that Jimmy's group presents a threat and a horror that's more terrifying than the infected themselves. In fact, they're a murderous cult and Spike soon finds himself in way over his head. But another story unfolds at the same time as Dr. Kelson from the previous film. He's played by Ralph Fiennes, makes an unlikely friend in his medical refuge. Slash memorial site. Slash Bone Temple 28 years later. The Bone Temple was directed by Nia Dacosta, who also directed Candyman and the Marvel, and it was written by Alex Garland, who wrote the first and most recent film in the series. It's in theaters now. Sam, I'm gonna start with you. What did you think of 28 years later? Colon, the Bone Temple.

[D]

The Bone Temple. Yeah, I really liked the Bone Temple. I thought it was like a really strong sequel in the sense that. Like the truest sense of a sequel as like this kind of bridge between two different movies. And maybe not so much of a great standalone movie, per se, but, you know, like, I found the plot very simple and it kind of was incredibly easy to follow and it was tight, but there just was not a ton of, like, character development in it. But I did find it had like this kind of nice cross pollinations between all these different directors and producers styles, you know, like Nia da Costa. I just saw Hedda and I didn't love, love Hedda, but I was really pleased to see DaCosta getting back to some of these kind of like, Candyman creepy camera flourishes that really work very well for me in that movie. And then some, like, you know, little bits and borrowing here and there of like, Danny Boyle frenetic horror and some Alex Garland cynicism sprinkled throughout. So overall I liked it, but it did not leave me with a lot to think about after the fact.

[B]

I think it's interesting that you kind of brought up the notion of this film as any kind of standalone film, because one of my first takeaways from this film was that if I hadn't just watched 28 years later, I would have been so confused.

[D]

Oh, really?

[B]

I think it's really necessary to 28 years later before this one because it refers to that movie so much. All right, Ronald Young Jr. What did you think?

[C]

Overall, I think it was fine. I think it was not a terrible movie by any means. But I am going to say some things that I did not like about it more than I will say the positive things about it. So let me just start with two positive things. I really enjoyed Ralph Fine's acting and I found myself thinking about this story and this world a lot as I left, which means that it did have an impact on me and I'm still thinking about it. However, comma, there are some scenes early in the film which feel like gratuitous torture, which is the only way I feel like I can describe it. That kind of took me out of the film and made me wonder why it was happening. I think there is some version of payoff or some reasoning why later in the film, which was like, you know, good enough for me, but it left enough of an impact on me and left A bad enough taste in my mouth that it started to impact what I felt about the film as a whole. A much smaller quibble I have was I do not think that this film should have been called the Bone Temple. Well, here's why. I have a real reason.

[D]

It certainly was a bone temple.

[B]

I would say there was a bone temple. There is truth in advertising, there was.

[C]

There was a bone temple. However, in the first 28 years later, the one that came out last year, they did a lot more explaining of what the bone temple was and the purpose of it. And there's more interaction with the actual bone temple itself. Whereas in this film stuff happens at the bone temple. And if you don't know that from the first one, you kind of get a couple of lines but no real explanation as to what the bone temple is. So there's a couple of quibbles I have with it, but overall I think it was fine.

[B]

You think it should have been called 28 years later Colon, the creepy Jimmy Colt?

[C]

Honestly, 28 years later, Jimmy and them 28 years later, two Jimmy 2 Furious, anything, something with the Jimmies or even yet 28 years later, the Bone Doctor, Something like that. Something that references like Ralph Fiennes Bone Doctor.

[D]

I had kind of the opposite thought, which was that like it's the glass onion, a knives out mystery type problem of they need the branding, but they should just.

[B]

The Bone temple. Colon, a 28 years later story. Yeah, I will say I really agree with Ronald about the gratuitous nature of the first roughly third of this story. I think there is a huge, huge difference between zombie gore and torture gore. And one of the interesting things about this franchise as a way of treating zombies is these zombies and they're called the infected. They're not really called zombies in these movies. They move quickly. They're frenetic. They're very differently from how people usually think about zombies. You usually think about zombies and you.

[C]

Think about like grains and these are like there's literally a.

[D]

At one point they chase you.

[B]

They're fast.

[D]

Like zombie jumps up with the arms up and everything.

[C]

Bleh.

[B]

Part of the effect of that as a horror movie fan is it's more jump scare horror than it is evisceration horror. Even though there are eviscerations. And when you pivot away from jump scare to blood fountains to humans torturing other humans, that is a very different kind of horror. And I think they really linger on the torture in the first portion of that film. And that makes the pivot to this Kind of gentler story, this kind of sweeter subplot.

[D]

I always called it, like, Shakespearean in the way that it gets into, like, theater and, like, different groups kind of interacting and having their own kind of little backside motives. I was like, oh, this is reading, like a play at this point, right?

[B]

Creates this really tonally jarring effect where, like, I want to hang out at the bone Temple with Dr. Kelson and listen to Duran Duran records. And there is this sweeter and also more comedic storyline that, for me, really clanks against the kind of gruesome torture of the first third of this film. Now, as Ronald says, there is a payoff to that. It is going somewhere with it. But I would have cut the torture stuff down by two thirds to get to kind of this, I think, more interesting story about Dr. Kelson and the lore of the franchise. I felt like a lot of the stuff with the cult is kind of pulling us away from this larger story of the infected and what to do about the infected. So for me, once it kind of dispenses with that side of the story and starts giving us the payoff, starts spending time at the Bone Temple and kind of tells that story. I found this much more satisfying in part because I love this Ralph Fiennes performance, which is so committed and so big and kind of gets bigger and more theatrical as it goes along. Like you, Ronald, I still found myself thinking about this movie days later. But it was mostly because of that stuff and not necessarily because of this kind of Clockwork Orange punk torture. Guys.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, I agree. I think the movie still ends where it needs to end, but there's a subplot of mistaken identity. I will say that really crosses over the Jimmies with the Doctor. I saw this movie with producer Mike Katsiff, and I talked to him quite a bit about this afterwards. Whereas I struggled with the idea of the Jimmies and the belief that they actually believed the things they were saying. I know there was two levels of it where the acolytes believed one thing, but the main Jimmy, I wondered if he actually believed the thing. And I felt like the movie wasn't certain until maybe one point where it's like, oh, maybe he does believe this thing. Or is he hallucinating? Whatever. It just felt like in that point because it wasn't clear. I would have preferred it to be a little sharper. How that crossover happens instead of it being something that, for me, felt like a sitcom hijink in terms of that crossover. Not saying that it wasn't well executed. Because I really enjoyed that part of the movie. However. But in terms of it actually being a device to bring them together, I was like, well, this is at least a little bit flimsy. But if they were gonna end up there anyway, there was probably a different way that you could have got the jimmies to the bo.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

I want to push back a little bit on the kind of sense that, like, the torture wasn't really working or was kind of, like, incongruent with what was happening. I think part of what maybe the issue is, is that it comes so soon in the movie and it's a little bit lopsided in the way that the audience hasn't really warmed up for it. And I'm definitely like, see what you mean of zombie violence versus torture. Violence is so different. And I was very shocked by that scene and was not really totally prepared for it. But I think what has worked a lot in the 28 days later franchise for me is that there's always been this kind of core of, like, the zombies. I mean, this is classic to, like, the zombie genre, this idea that the zombies aren't necessarily the greatest horror that's out there, that humans are sometimes more horrific. But what happens in the first 28 days later and 28 weeks later movies is that it comes at the very end. And it's kind of like this core that gets unwrapped over time. In this one, it is so upfront because you have to begin with the jimmies and you have to show how awful and evil they are, that it kind of creates this lopsided thing where, yeah, once that happens and you don't really unpack where that comes from. For the head Jimmy, the main Jimmy, it's lacking a character debt. And so I feel like that's probably what you guys are bumping up against, is that there just wasn't enough time spent on what makes Jimmy tick.

[C]

I don't know if that would have made it better for me, to be honest, because I probably wouldn't be complaining about how it slowed down or how it was a slog or I don't care about his backstory. You know what I mean? If anything, I think they probably could have seeded it more 28 years later.

[B]

And it is seeded a little bit. So I don't know how much is exactly the right amount. I think some of my issues with this film are structural. From a standpoint of this is the second film in a planned trilogy. A third 28 years later film has been greenlit. 28 years later part one came out last year. This is kind of part two. And anytime you are telling a story that is the second part of a trilogy, you have to find a way to get past the. I am just trying to get you from point A to point C. You are naturally going to have a story that in some ways is just like trying to situate characters in a certain way. You're not really completing a story. And there are characters whose story is completed in this film. But I'm not necessarily sure it can be 100% satisfying. Cause you're really trying to move one set of characters from one movie to another.

[C]

I think. I mostly agree with that. What I think might also be an issue here is that 28 years later and 28 years later, the Bone Temple were filmed back to back. So I think that is going to produce a different type of storytelling. Actually, maybe I am agreeing with you, Steven. Because especially if it's the second movie and you're saying, we're gonna end this part of the story here, but there's a third one coming. And I remember at that point saying, hmm, this is kind of a new branch of this story. I would almost prefer you shot three films concurrently that close out this Lord.

[D]

Of the Rings style.

[C]

Yeah, exactly. And then introduce Lord of the Rings. And then introduce something new in the future that then continues the main plot, if you will, if that's not what you were doing here. But that being said, I like this part of the 28 franchise later universe. But you're right, if we go part one and part two and then part three is greenlit and then shot later, there is going to be some separation between these films. And then it makes me wonder, what is your goal in the third? What story are we ending, concluding or continuing?

[B]

It makes this movie feel like a little bit more of a detour. And as somebody who is like, I wanna watch Dr. Kelson, listen to Duran Duran records. I don't necessarily want this other story, you know, that's naturally gonna create some uneven anticipation for the third movie.

[D]

It's reminding me a lot of, like, this kind of unpleasant task of being the director to take up a sequel that Rian Johnson had with, like, the Star wars, where it's like you wanna put your own stamp on it. But you also have kind of these competing demands of getting from the point A to the point C and incorporating a lot of different styles. And, you know, a kind of question of how much to please a fan base that expects a certain product. And you have to kind of compile all of those, while also making it clear that you are doing something of your own voice and your own style. To me, it largely worked then didn't work. But it sounds like for you guys it largely didn't work then it worked.

[B]

Maybe there is a payoff. There is a scene in this film that is so enormously enjoyable and satisfying that it is building to. If you can stomach the torture porn and you have seen 28 years later from last year, I recommend this film for the payoff that exists late in this film, which I am not going to spoil, which I found enormously enjoyable. Extremely funny, great, vivacious filmmaking. This film does succeed in what it is building to.

[C]

I'll just say that I think you're right. I think it ends well and I think regardless of every negative thing I've said about this, I did like this movie, but I also really liked 28 years later. So it was a higher bar for me for it to clear. But if you liked 28 years later, you're probably going to like mostly 28 years later, the Bone Temple maybe. I don't know.

[D]

I think this movie's gonna work really well in the 3DV box set that it eventually gets released upon. I think it'll work as a great binge watch one Saturday morning.

[C]

It's going to be a bleak day.

[B]

I was going to say you're just going to spend a day watching people get torn asunder. What better way to spend a weekend?

[C]

All right, well, we want to know.

[B]

What you think about 28 years later the Bone Temple. Find us on [e-mail] PCHH and on [e-mail] NPRpopculture we will leave a link in our episode description. Up next, what is making us happy this week?

[E]

This message comes from BetterHelp President Fernando Madera shares BetterHelp's commitment to expanding access to therapy.

[C]

Our State of Stigma report helped us understand that believing in mental health is easy, but asking for help is not. Now, with the report on our hands, we can work to make mental health care more accessible.

[E]

To get matched with a therapist, visit betterhelp.com NPR for 10% off your first month. This message comes from Warby Parker. Prescription eyewear that's expertly crafted and unexpectedly affordable. Glasses designed in house from premium materials starting at just $95, including prescription lenses. Stop by a Warby Parker store near you.

[A]

This message comes from NPR sponsor Capella University. Sometimes it takes a different approach to pursue your goals. Capella is an online university accredited by the Higher Learning Commission that means you can earn your degree from wherever you are and be confident your education is relevant, recognized and respected. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more about earning a relevant degree at Capella. Edu.

[E]

This message comes from Sony Pictures Classics. From Alan Bennett and Nicholas Hittner comes the chorus. Called one of the most genuinely heartwarming films of the year by Awards Watch Collider, raves Ralph Fiennes gives an amazing performance. Divided by war, united by music. The Guardian calls it a heartbeat of wit and poignancy. Now playing only in theaters.

[B]

Now it's time for our favorite segment of this week and every week. What's making us happy this week? Sam Yellow Horse Kessler, what is making you happy this week, buddy?

[D]

What is making me happy is Industry Season 4. It is out now, at least the first episode. And finally we are getting back to appointment viewing. You know, every week on my calendar, there it is, Industry Season 4. So if you haven't watched it before, Industry is about a group of young bankers, financiers in a British bank, a fictional British bank who are trying to climb the ropes and achieve financial success in this really, really competitive field. When it started, it focused on kind of new actors and really just establishing a vibe of this high finance world. But since then it has evolved a lot where they get a lot of kind of prestigey actors involved and the drama has just been upped since then. And season four feels like a real culmination of that. They have a ton of new characters entering. So besides fan favorites like Ken Leung as Eric Tao and Maihala as Harper Stern, they have Kiernan Shipka. Charlie Heaton plays a journalist, which I was very thrilled to see. And it's just I'm so excited for this season. It started off really, really strong and I think it's one of those shows that I hate when people say, oh, you just gotta get through like the first season and it'll be good. But really it is appropriate to the world of industry. It is an investment that is finally seeing returns.

[B]

Nice. All right. Thank you, Sam, Yellow Horse Kessler, Ronald Young, Jr. What's making you happy this week, friend?

[C]

Well, it was industry, but I am going to now pivot to the other.

[B]

I'm going to pivot at the last minute. From what I was going to talk.

[C]

About, what I was going to was an impassioned, defensive industry. But now I will say that it is the Buffalo Bills. And I know this is sports, which is more pop culture adjacent. I am not a Buffalo Bills Fan. However, I really like Buffalo Bills lore, and I like Josh Allen, their quarterback. The reason why I'm talking about lore is because I'm a fan of an NFC east team called the Dallas Cowboys. And I know a bunch of people are throwing tomatoes and getting mad. Yeah, okay, Steven. Yeah, whatever. Oh, right. I don't know.

[B]

You're going into a tunnel.

[C]

Here we go. Yeah.

[B]

Oh.

[C]

This is why I don't ever tell anyone. Cause I know this is the reaction that I get from people, but there goes. I'm a Cowboys fan, but I'm also an NFC east fan. More writ large. And the four times that Buffalo made it to the super bowl in the 90s, they were bested by four NFC east teams in this order. The New York Giants at that time, the Washington Commanders by their other name, and the Dallas Cowboys twice. That was the four falls of Buffalo. However, this year, the Buffalo Bills have won their first playoff game and the Philadelphia Eagles have lost, thereby clearing the path for the Buffalo Bills to win their first Super Bowl. I believe it's going to happen. It's making me happy to think about and I cannot wait. Please clip this and remind us when the Buffalo Bills win the super bowl, that Ronald Young Jr. Said it first. That's what's making me happy this week.

[B]

My fear is that you've cursed them as a Green Bay packers fan who is just wishing for anything but the Chicago Bears. I am a fan. Free agent.

[C]

Yes.

[B]

So I'll go ahead and co sign that.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

Come on over to Bill's Nation with.

[B]

Me and our big athletic boy, Josh Allen.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

All right. That is the Buffalo Bills. That's what's making Ronald Young Jr. Happy. Nothing about football is making me happy. All right. Last year, on the advice of friend of the show, Josh Gondelman, I went on Blue sky and started following a writer named Rax King. I was an instant fan. She is funny, she's bawdy, she's full of hilarious lore. Super smart, such a great writer. She put out her second book of essays last year. I finally picked it up last week and cracked it open and lo and behold, shocker. It is funny, it's bawdy, it's super smart, it's full of hilarious lore. She is such a great writer. The book is called Sloppy or Doing It All Wrong. It's a book of essays about being a lovable screw up. And if you've ever felt like a lovable screw up or an unlovable screw up, or if you've ever known a screw up, or seen things in your own brain that keep trying to direct you to screw things up. You will find something something to love in this book. Rax King has such an incredible gift for breezy, funny conversational language. Funny turns of phrase pop up in this book that are going to stick with you. She manages to write about substance abuse and shoplifting and bad decisions in ways that aren't needlessly self glorifying. But you never stop rooting for her. I highly recommend picking up the book. I recommend following her on social media. I recommend reading her writing wherever you can find it. I think we should start a petition here and now to cast her on the next season of the Traitors. I recommend Rax King and her book which is called Sloppy or Doing It All Wrong. That is what is making me happy this week. If you want links for what we recommended plus some more recommendations, sign up for our [e-mail] popculturenewsletter that brings us to the end of our show. Ronald Young Jr. Sam Yellowhorse Kessler, thanks so much for being here.

[C]

Thanks for having me.

[E]

Thank you so much.

[B]

This episode was produced by Carly Rubin, Kayla Latimore, Mike Katsif and edited by our showrunner Jessica Reedy. Hello. Come in provides our theme music. Thanks for listening to Pop Culture Happy Hour from npr. I'm Stephen Thompson and we will see you all next week.

[A]

This message comes from NetSuite. Every business is asking how can they make AI work for them? No more waiting with NetSuite by Oracle, you can put AI to work today day trusted by over 43,000 businesses. It's the unified suite that brings your financials, inventory, commerce, HR and CRM into a single source of truth. That connected data is what makes your AI smarter, helping you make fast decisions. Right now, get the business guide demystifying AI [e-mail] story this message comes from Lisa. Lisa has a lineup of beautifully crafted mattresses tailored to how you sleep sleep. Each mattress is designed with specific sleep positions and feel preferences in mind. Leesa mattresses are meticulously designed and assembled in the USA for exceptional quality. Plus they back it all up with free shipping, easy returns and a 120 night sleep trial. Go to leesa.com for 25% off mattresses plus get an extra $50 off with promo code NPR.