Yup. Anyone other than an equity partner is literally a little money machine made of meat. A third-year will bill 2000+ hours (and most can bill maaaaybe 80% of their working hours) at $800-$1200 per hour and take home maybe $300k in salary and bonus.

Doesn’t really matter, as long as you add the sugar while the liquid is hot enough to go into supersaturated solution.

Then chill and add ice.

He’s not wrong exactly, but to a certain extent the market has spoken. A critical mass of people would prefer to watch quiet dramas in their own time and on the setup they control. The takeover by HD and the proliferation of bigger screens and soundbars or easy home theater solutions has created a “middle space” where the average viewer has something that, while not a proper cinema, is miles ahead of the 480i standard definition nonsense we had at home in the 90s and earlier. Then, at the other end, those same trends have allowed some percentage of connoisseurs to invest their resources into home theaters with curtains and posters and tiered seating and the works. Any form of home viewing, of course, avoids the scheduling and interpersonal downsides of going out to see a movie.

So, these types of films are getting squeezed at both ends. Most people will just catch them on their 50" Roku 4K from Walmart and be happy with that. Others who appreciate getting to 95% of the “cinema experience” will watch on their fancy projector and surround sound system. The only people left are the ones who value the communal experience and/or that last bit of quality presentation. If that’s not enough to support wide distribution of “adult drama,” then I just don’t know what to tell the auteurs. For all the same reasons we don’t bother with many lowest-common-denominator revenge dramas on the live stage, we’re not really going to see a ton of prestige character pieces scheduled into the limited slots at the multiplex.

Oddly, though, you can’t just cut it out from shows that have it, especially if they actually film in front of a live audience, though even those with canned laughter are playing in the same sandbox. The pacing and the vibe gets completely thrown off because the writers and actors have to account for the laughs, and it becomes eerie without them. It’s a different style of making TV that’s seeking a different type of reaction from the TV audience, and has different limitations. Understanding that can let you enjoy the best examples of the form (admittedly almost all 20 years old or more). Stock characters slinging zingers and potentially doing pratfalls can be amusing (though the form has a direct lineage to radio shows so it tends to be light but verbal – the physicality is a huge part of what made I Love Lucy groundbreaking), but it doesn’t shine when trying to do cringe, nuance, dramedy, or densely packed humor.

This is not to say that you should watch The Big Bang Theory. You should not. It’s awful. The easy tropes and low cost of production (other than stars’ salaries if a show takes off) means that so much garbage has been done in this format, I daresay higher than single-camera “movie style” shows. It’s just that it’s not quite so simple as “write more funnier.”

IMO, it’s almost like telling a musical theater writing team that their play would be better if the characters weren’t constantly breaking into song. For the record, my instincts and tastes leave me sympathetic to that last point, so I just don’t watch many musicals, live or recorded. It’s not that they’re bad; the appeal is just lost on me. Same with multi-cam sitcoms with laugh-tracks.