73 Questions Is A Good Number Of Questions For No Reason

Usually I’m like “I really don’t care.” about YouTube videos and series especially when you add the qualifier “from Conde Nast Entertainment.” Cool story, bro. This is why it is very unusual that I I’ve become somewhat obsessed with the concept of Vogue’s 73 Questions interview (“interview”) series.

The videos feature a guy who shouldn’t be hanging out in intimate, personal places with giant celebrities—Reese Witherspoon, Anna Wintour, Sarah Jessica Parker—who act like it’s totally normal for him to be asking them all sorts of random things. Yet, that is the joy of the format: it’s absurdist and natural yet planned. There’s so much conflicting information (Why 73? How did they book these people? Moms? Cocktails? What?) that you become all wrapped up in it.

73 Questions is a triumph of the online, bitesized format—perhaps even the best form, too. It is a piece of media that can only be consumed online, it is perfectly buttoned up and self-contained, it is both long and short form, and it is unencumbered by talent, somehow. It couldn’t evolve into a longer program nor does it feel right for it to be shorter. Yet, it still feels polished and professional and not at all like “online content.”

They’re very fashionable, too. While they absolutely skew a bit cool mom and Heartland, insider subjects like Wintour and Victoria Beckham make them feel exclusive. (This said, I refuse to watch a Blake Lively, Daniel Radcliffe, etc. video as they don’t feel as special.) (But Amy Adams? I’m all ears.) You learn something in every episode, even if it really is just a “celebrity interview.”

More For You To Read