Netflix Is Creating a Problem By Canceling TV Shows Too Soon (insider.com) 170
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Insider: Netflix is killing its most interesting shows in their infancy and it could be the streaming giant's downfall. In the seven years that Netflix has produced original content, the world of TV streaming has dramatically changed. Now Netflix is getting left behind in the race it started. Many of its unique and ambitious shows have been canceled before they could reach their full potential. And Netflix keeps churning out more shows each year, without replicating the breakout success of 2016's "Stranger Things."
Statements from executives have described the cancellations as the result of a cost analysis that tells Netflix a longer-running show won't lead to new subscribers. Still, with syndicated shows such as "The Office" and "Friends" leaving its platform and a string of disappointing cancellations, including "Glow," Netflix has set itself up for a disaster when it comes to its reputation as a TV-watcher's must-have service. In 2020 alone, Netflix has canceled 18 original series. Of those, 14 had only one season. [...] TV lovers in these fandoms can only be burned so many times before they stop investing. Why should a Netflix subscriber spend 10 hours watching a new show if there's a decent chance they'll never see it end?
Statements from executives have described the cancellations as the result of a cost analysis that tells Netflix a longer-running show won't lead to new subscribers. Still, with syndicated shows such as "The Office" and "Friends" leaving its platform and a string of disappointing cancellations, including "Glow," Netflix has set itself up for a disaster when it comes to its reputation as a TV-watcher's must-have service. In 2020 alone, Netflix has canceled 18 original series. Of those, 14 had only one season. [...] TV lovers in these fandoms can only be burned so many times before they stop investing. Why should a Netflix subscriber spend 10 hours watching a new show if there's a decent chance they'll never see it end?
True (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:True (Score:5, Interesting)
The more I think about Firefly the more I think maybe it was cancelled at most 1 season early. I dunno if confederates in space really had much more than 2 seasons of content, beyond the slow burn to the reaver reveal. I'm more than happy to rewatch what they made.. but it could have just as easily dragged on too long like Heroes.
Season cliffhangers are just a dick move anyway, there are plenty of long running shows that were self contained in each season, they just had cliffhangers between episodes.
All that said, I'd still /really/ like to have seen more of Ascension which had a lot more story development in the one series than a lot of other shows I've seen, I'd even still recommend watching it knowing it got canned.
Re: (Score:3)
Ascension remains one of the best Sci-Fi TV series I ever saw. In some ways, another season would have been great - but in another way I feel like the story was told enough.
I wouldn't dream of posting a spoiler here, but when the person did the thing and went to the place at the end, I felt the story was wrapped up pretty nicely. Sure, subsequent to that point, things could have continued to happen. But they would have been part of another story, set in the same universe.
Hey. Everyone. Watch Ascension.
Re: (Score:3)
Firefly was caught up in the mass genocide of TV shows perpetrated by Fox around that time. They killed off a lot of shows part way through the first season. Basically if it didn't become an instant hit they replaced it with something else immediately.
Netflix used to be better, in fact had a reputation for picking up cancelled shows. Now it looks like they are going the same way as Fox, just another purely numbers driven network.
Since they lost the Marvel shows (Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron Fis
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't understand the whole Firefly deal. It's like a western but set in space with very light scifi tones? Same with Serenity.
True, but most deserved it (Score:3)
Re:True, but most deserved it (Score:4)
It is not the quality of the show. It is how well that show attracts users to Netflix and how much does it cost. You see, in an odd way, the shows are advertisements for using Netflix, they either attract users to Netflix or they do not. There is filler content but the problem becomes looking for what you want to watch if there is too much bad content (the amazon version, whole lot of content, so much of it really bad hard to find the good stuff, so the service feels bad).
The easy way, they made a mistake in the review system, they should let users rate 1 out of ten and convert that into a more symbolic representation in the ratings sections ie red star gold star amber star and possible three stars, generate more of a feeling about how good the program is, sometime people are happy with empty filler and sometimes they want the good stuff.
People are getting pretty pissed off with Youtube Netflix could buy a whole bunch of reasonable quality content and have it for ever, sometimes people will be happy with it and the more content producers you have in that section they more they will actively promote netflix.
You do need sub-elements of a streaming service. They need to seperate movies and TV more, so they can add in old sports streams (attract those users) and shifted youtube content (attract those who will promote the service), not in the one lump but separated a little, so searches for one do not fill with results from the other.
Re: (Score:2)
It is not the quality of the show. It is how well that show attracts users to Netflix
Aren't the two related? Take "the boys" for instance (it's not Netflix but anyway), started as an unpretentious show, and by word of mouth attracted many viewers (it's now a huge hit). ... Some are good, really good. Take Narcos for instance, it's good and deserved to reach the hit status (8.8 IMDb).
Netflix created many average (or lower) shows, that after a few episodes were lacking, weak plot, clichés,
Now "Ratched". Being a big fan of "one flew...", I really wanted to watch the new show. It was disa
Re: (Score:2)
You see, in an odd way, the shows are advertisements for using Netflix, they either attract users to Netflix or they do not.
That seems to be the Netflix view, but it's a rather silly one. They're ignoring the future value of these shows, once they enter cultural lore.
People still watch Black Adder, Red Dwarf and Friends. They wouldn't if those had all ended after just a single series.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Either way, I know Netflix's tendency to kill shows early is part of the reason I don't subscribe. I'm not interested in
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix's tendency to kill shows early is part of the reason I don't subscribe
That's not really relevant. Netflix creates many more shows compared to HBO, Amazon... But the number of viewable shows on Netflix is probably comparable to what the competition has to offer. The "good/all" ratio is just smaller, and you would probably not be interested in keeping watching one of the "bad" shows anyway.
Does Netflix produce anything? (Score:2)
Netflix might order a new show, and even have a bit of a hand in planning out "Netflix" shows and movies, but it's 3rd party studios that actually write and produce the content.
Why don't they move over to Hulu or another streaming provider? Or is what they produce "owned forever by Netflix"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:True (Score:5, Interesting)
Simple solution: Make shows that end.
Seems like every show has to end the season on a cliffhanger these days, with the producers crossing their fingers and hoping for an extension.
Re: (Score:2)
No mod points!
Re: (Score:2)
Simple solution: Make shows that end.
Seems like every show has to end the season on a cliffhanger these days, with the producers crossing their fingers and hoping for an extension.
Yeah, there's a reason Breaking Bad was so good. It was cohesive from start to finish because they knew the story they wanted to tell and how long it would take to tell. Of course if you're doing that there's a risk that you get cancelled part way through the arc, or that you become wildly popular and can't capitalize on it by doing more seasons.
Re: (Score:3)
A very large number of shows do have that planned, but what good does it do when you have 4 seasons planned if you get cancelled after season 2?
Re: True (Score:2)
Not really a season should be long enough to tell a story. Some can be shorter than others and the story can be open, but at least wrap up a few things. But at the same time netflix like the new hotness and next big idea and doesn't want to continue stories that am nd should keep going
Re:True (Score:5, Insightful)
I like the shorter seasons. Less episodes tends to mean a more cohesive plot with less filler. So many network shows are mostly "monster of the week" episodes with a little character development or a little main plot development.
Re:True (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: True (Score:3)
So basically they're the WB. (Score:3)
So basically, they're the WB. Good != popular. And most shows that are not pablum for the masses take a while to build up an audience.
At this point, with so many other content providers taking their toys and going home, most of what Netflix has going for it at this point are its original shows. If viewers feel like their time is being wasted with shows that get cancelled before they finish telling a story, a lot of potential viewers will wait to watch until the second season to see if it gets renewed, and at that point, it's all over, because nothing ever will be. And that's when subscriber numbers will start to fall off a cliff.
Netflix would be wise to plan father ahead require evidence of a certain level of quality story-wise before committing to a show at all, then commit to a longer run up front (perhaps three seasons), knowing that some of them might not be financially successful, but that the knowledge that the whole story will get told will avoid turning off would-be viewers before they get started.
And of course, if the show works well, they can always renew the contract for additional years. There's no reason to be silly and cancel everything reflexively after three seasons; that would make them Disney. :-)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm wondering if they're taking into account viewers that are tired of getting burned with shows getting cancelled before their ending. Those people wait until a show is completed before starting to watch it. I'm afraid Netflix has no way of counting those future/potential viewers.
Re: (Score:3)
Netflix was supposed to be good for shows that took time to build up a following. Unlike a TV network they didn't need instant success, they could keep the show on there indefinitely and allow it to develop and gain popularity.
So many shows and movies were cancelled and then became popular later as word got around.
I've noticed that some networks renew shows before the first season airs. I wonder if it's because they got good scores with test audiences or if they they are trying to reassure views that it's w
Re: (Score:2)
--Mod parent up.
> Netflix would be wise to plan father ahead require evidence of a certain level of quality story-wise before committing to a show at all, then commit to a longer run up front (perhaps three seasons), knowing that some of them might not be financially successful, but that the knowledge that the whole story will get told will avoid turning off would-be viewers before they get started.
--Someone should sponsor you having a lunch meeting with the Netflix honchos.
not a new problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:not a new problem (Score:5, Insightful)
The business model is kind of artistically broken. They need new subscribers, which is why they keep picking up cancelled shows from other networks; it brings in those shows' fans. Meanwhile canceling their own successful shows may piss of their existing subscribers, but as long as they don't cancel *all* the shows those subscribers have to watch on Netflix those subscribers aren't going to leave.
Re:not a new problem (Score:5, Interesting)
Then there were contractual issue. Shows like the Rockford Files were made just to comply with James Garners contract, even though he would have been happy to have it end, as it was wrecking his body.
The Netflix model does not generate maximum profit for the show runners, and would not be feasible for traditional US TV channel that requires 20 some odd episode every year for as long as advertisers pay enough to run ads. But as long as Netflix bring decent shows, and does not have wasted fillers like we get on TV, I am good.
Re: (Score:3)
Traditionally, i read, profit form a TV show came in the form of syndication. You made a 100 episodes, you sold it, they got stripped on daytime TV, and money rolled in.
Pretty close.
The broadcast networks pretty much paid for the show. They would buy, back in the old days, 26 episodes and pay for them. Each show had a budget that was basically 1/26th of this amount. The broadcast networks would air these shows and make money selling advertising during the show. Back in the old days, the networks were not allowed to produce their own entertainment content--ABC could not own/be owned by a studio. The studios that produced the shows made little money from the broadcast n
Saying what we've known all along (Score:5, Insightful)
A longer running show won't lead to new subscribers perhaps, but cancelling too soon leads to losing the subscribers you already had.
This is a perfect example of corporate short term thinking. Obsessing on new business while assuming that the customers you already have will be with you forever. And then you find that's not true, but it's too late.
Re: (Score:3)
Due to inertia most people won't end up cancelling, but continually just automatically pay the monthly fee without realizing it. They're not likely to lose too many over a single cancelled show.
Re: (Score:2)
This is what I think. As keyboard warriors we love to blow off steam and complain when a corporate giant does something we don't like, but all too often we don't back it up with our choices as consumers. It's also extremely hard to figure out why certain subscribers are cancelling. Short of seeing a dramatic drop in numbers after an announcement, how could Netflix even tell?
Re: (Score:2)
How about a text box in the cancellation form... "Why are you cancelling your subscription?"
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Same thing here. Most of what I've pirated in the last few years are things with no streaming in my country, or are the only thing on their service I'm interested in. I was perfectly happy to pay to see what I wanted as long as the cost per show wasn't too high, but as you say this sudden split into a million services is making piracy start to look like an attractive option, again. I don't want to mess with a dozen services to watch what I want to watch. For the last 5 years I had Netflix, Hulu, and (to a l
Re:Saying what we've known all along (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. Almost no new shows finish the storyline after one season, so why commit to watching a program unless you know that there will be more seasons when Netflix has a history of cancelling?
Long term, fewer views and fewer subscribers.
Perhaps Netflix should invest in mini-series. Series that wrap up the storyline after one season.
Re:Saying what we've known all along (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect the bigger danger is big name producers not wanting to commit to Netflix. If I'm developing a serious production with multiple big name stars attached, I'm going to be *very* nervous about signing up with netflix who might just cancel after a season or two automatically based on the subscriber thing, regardless of how popular the show was. Every time they prematturely cancel a show that hadnt been running into troubles, hundreds and possibly thousands of hollywood people are walking away with a chip on their shoulder about netflix, and this IS NOT a sustainable habit to get into.
Remember, the key point of netflxis's behavior here is not "how popular the show is" but "how many new subscribers are we converting". It might make sense for netflixes accounting department, but marketing and acquisitions ought be pretty nervous about the whole thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix has to date been doing a good job of unearthing new talent, writers and creators without an established name but a potential hit show. If you are an up and coming talent with only a good idea and a draft script to offer then you're not going to be too choosy. Producers rely on this kind of desperation to be able to make new content on the cheap, I don't see it changing. This could make Netflix the kind of studio where you go to establish yourself and take a risk that if your show is good but not gre
Altered Carbon (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Altered Carbon (Score:5, Insightful)
The first season of Altered Carbon was an awesome science fiction mystery, and we binged it to death. The second season was a tiresome series of fights and we started fast-forwarding to find any plot, then gave up.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't remember the plot of the books that well. But, that's basically why. Planet hopping always means getting a new body. Usually to bodies that are already available. Appearance is minor to soldiers compared to the combat abilities of the body-strength, speed, etc. Kovacs was really good at adapting, so his face was even less important than for the average person.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Altered Carbon (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Altered Carbon S1 was great. I didn't get around to watching S2 yet, but it's a bummer it got canned.
I'm really regretting cancellations of Marco Polo (epic visuals) and the OA (great story). At least with Marco Polo there's some closure after S2, but some cool, dark foreshadowing amounts to nothing. The OA ends on a clifhanger, which is a dick move to your customers.
Glow was pretty fun too.
I have to say, I'm a Netflix customer who is starting to get annoyed about shows being cancelled out of the blue, with
Re: (Score:2)
This was my favorite show, and they cancelled it. Hopefully they figure things out because if they only license old shows and produce reality tv, I think they will fail over the long run.
I personally would love it if these streaming services did what they used to and provide wide ranging access to other's content rather than pretending they are some cable company.
Seriously, Netflix developing their own shows, and show developers developing their own streaming services was the start of the decline. Streaming hit a peak a few years ago, now it's just a milking cash grab from inside a walled gar...prison (garden implies you can come and go as you please).
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Season 1 was a white sleeve, 2 was a black sleeve. The original Asian body was featured both seasons. Did you watch the show?
Re: (Score:2)
Patience (Score:2)
Maybe 15 years ago I decided to stop watching shows that never got a good ending. That's when Netflix's model (DVD at the time) made that viable. Stories with no ending just suck.
It turns out I had kids about the same time and certainly don't have time for shows, but if I did I would still follow this model.
That is - if you watch a show for a story. Some people watch shows because they don't have much else to talk about at work, but many fewer people here than average will fit that description.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now they have probably determined that pulling a show from under most people doesn't result in a canceled subscription, so expect more of the same.
Enjoy It While You Can (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Many years ago shows had self contained episodes, and you could enjoy a single episode, a bunch of episodes, or the whole season or series. Sure the good ones also had somewhat of a story arc across it all. but if you missed an episode or two, or there was no final conclusion, it didn't diminish the enjoyment of the individual episodes.
That ship has long sailed. Shows now are one indivisible story from first episode to last episode with no smaller self contained stories at all. If there's no resolution in t
Replace Netflix with Fox (Score:2)
I mean seriously, they canned shows like Firefly and Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.
I have a long list of shows that were cancelled despite good or great ratings over many different channels.
I don't even bother vesting any effort in shows anymore, unless there are either more than 2 seasons, or there is a "planned" ending.
On the other hand, CW seems interesting in milking dead/decomposing cows for their shows.
And thanks Netflix for Longmire (FU A&E) and Lucifer extra seasons.
Re: (Score:3)
Fox destroyed so many good properties. Harsh Realm, Dark Angel, Firefly, Sarah Connor Chronicles. It got to a point where I simply stopped watching Fox shows because if it was worth watching, they were GOING to kill it. Period.
Netflix is heading that direction.
There seems to be two CWs. The sci-fi/fantasy CW seems to be alright at providing a fairly decent series of shows with satisfying or at least complete conclusions. The 100 and Supernatural wrapping up this year are on that list. Then there's the
Long tail (Score:2)
Apparently they haven't read The Long Tail
Anime (Score:2)
Shasta McNasty cancelled after one year (Score:2)
What about "existing subscribers"? (Score:2)
I don't get the obsession with "new subscribers", what about "existing subscribers"? It's not like Netflix is a "one-time fee", existing subscribers are also a revenue stream for Netflix. Keep cancelling shows, and given that the shows from other networks keep getting removed, then soon those existing customers will leave too!
And that's not the only blinder that they have. I would think some people would subscribe because they have access to plenty of complete shows, not just that one "breakout show". If th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but analysis is wrong (Score:2)
Look, I am a big fan of The OA but I could see why it was canceled. It simply is not for everyone (even more so than a lot of "not for everyone" shows). It was never going to be another Stranger Things...
Not every show has to be the next big hit, Netflix has carried shows beyond two seasons that a lot of people really liked (like 3% or Nailed It). While not a massive hit, they already have a good showing with some new shows like The Witcher or The Umbrella Academy.
Look around, what other networks are rea
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't even know The OA existed. I started after it was canceled, not realizing it.
This practice is just going to leave people avoiding netflix shows for multiple seasons just to make sure they aren't canceled and then ratings will plummet.
Good (Score:2)
"Always leave them wanting more"
Better ten new shows than one more season of Big Bang Theory, for the same cost.
How many American shows keep going long after jumping the shark?
There should be a 4-season limit. But Game of Thrones will now be remembered for its awful final Season.
And need I even mention House of Cards ? The Princess Bride is now forever tainted.
(The excellent original UK House of Cards was 3 "seasons" of 4 parts each. )
Maybe micropayments (Score:2)
What? (Score:3)
Just because you liked a show doesnâ(TM)t mean it had potential. You donâ(TM)t know what statistics and costs Netflix had.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite true. And unfortunately since they don't share numbers, I don't have anything to measure their cancellations by so I'm left to draw my own conclusions (unranked but numbered to highlight different thoughts).
1) Netflix makes a lot of crappy, unpopular TV hence they cancel it. Given the volumes of data they have on member viewing habits, they can't manage to figure out what a killer should needs to be?
2) Make a whole lot of stuff in hopes something sticks approach. Netflix makes a diverse buffet of TV v
Re: (Score:2)
Just because you liked a show doesnÃ(TM)t mean it had potential. You donÃ(TM)t know what statistics and costs Netflix had.
I wish users had some sort of a vote or got to pick "top 3" shows to keep.
There is very little I can do on Netflix to express which of the shows are my favorites.
Re: (Score:2)
I wish users had some sort of a vote or got to pick "top 3" shows to keep.
There is a whole TV show format in that idea, or at least an episode of Black Mirror.
Re: (Score:2)
Lol that's how Neilson ratings used to work. Popular shows were renewed. Not always though, some shows popular only with critics would sneak by. Homicide: Life On The Street is a good example.
What they're not understanding (Score:2)
With the current trend of cancelling seasons, folks like myself will eventually decide that it's not worth my time to even begin a series since the odds of it being cancelled before the story finishes are high.
It's akin to being handed a book with the last chapters ripped out and being puzzled about why I won't even start it. :|
Re: (Score:2)
I don't watch new shows as I'm not going to waste my time getting invested in show only to have it disappear due to a writer's strike, the Olympics, or ratings that didn't soar immediately and stay there. I think the last "new" shows I got invested in were Angel and Babylon 5.
This appears to be case of (Score:2)
Netflix not giving a shit about their existing user base and just trying to bring as many new customers in as possible.
I saw this same pattern with AOL back in the 90s when they were dumping free trial AOL disks into every mailbox they could find, all while ignoring the mountain of complaints from existing users about constant busy signals and shitty connections.
Whatever looks best on the spreadsheet I suppose.
Don't ask how we got here. (Score:2)
"Why should a Netflix subscriber spend 10 hours watching a new show if there's a decent chance they'll never see it end?"
Well, thanks for the Insider analysis there, Dick ButtCouchKiss.
I have a feeling those actually armed with years of knowing your every click and chill Netflix move, know far better than you...in fact they know exactly why there's more than a decent chance almost all of them will spend 10 hours and more. Damn near every time.
TL; DR - You're talking to the Vine Generation. They ain't got but a few Tik Toks worth of attention to give you, and move on in far less than 280 characters. Ain't nobody got time f
Easy fix (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They can do it but I would certainly never watch it.
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, they killed off Wash and Book in "Serenity", so the ensemble dynamic wouldn't be the same. Another movie that picks up after "Serenity" and shows the Alliance and society 15 years after learning the truth about the Reavers would be interesting, but I don't think there's enough there for a full series.
"I want them laid out on the nose of our ship. Put Book front and center. He's our friend, we should honor him. Kaylee, find that kid whose taking a dirt nap with baby Jesus - we need a hood ornament
Re: (Score:2)
"who's taking a dirt nap..."
I'm grammatically challenged this morning.
Hardly a Netflix only issue. (Score:2)
The return of Family guy from being cancelled, Season 4, North by North Quahog. They jokingly list the shows fox cancelled in 3 years, 29 named.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0576952/trivia [imdb.com]
I had hoped Netflix wouldn't be just like the networks in this regard.
10 hours, indeed (Score:5, Insightful)
>"Why should a Netflix subscriber spend 10 hours watching a new show if there's a decent chance they'll never see it end?"
And when did a "season" become 10 hours/shows, or 8, or even 6? I am old enough to remember that a "season" was actually around 22 to 26 episodes. And it had been that way most of my life. Sometimes a first season is shorter due to risk and piloting, but still never only 10 hours. Still, just pick nearly anything pre-streaming:
STTNG: 26 episodes per season
Friends: Ave 23.6 per season
Lost: Ave 20.2
Dallas: Ave 25.5
Vampire Diaries: Ave 21.4
Grey's Anatomy: Ave 22.7
The Flash: Ave 22.2
Big Bang Theory: Ave 23.25
Supernatural: Ave 21.4
Simpsons: Ave 21.5
Modern Family: Ave 22.7
House: Ave 22.1
Carol Burnette Show: 25.4
SVU: 22.8
Fresh Prince: 24.7
X-Files: 22.4
Charmed: 22.3
Will & Grace: 22.4
You get the idea
Re: (Score:2)
When they became expensive to make, the studios switched to the British format, which is, indeed, usually 8 episodes per season.
Re: (Score:2)
I am old enough to remember that a "season" was actually around 22 to 26 episodes.
You must be American. I've travelled enough to know that "seasons" are variable in length depending on where in the world you go. Netflix's business model was based on the idea that they weren't blockbuster or a cable company. Why should they automatically adopt the standard length season when they produce content?
Amazon Netflix (Score:2)
1) I totally agree with these observations: I've become quite disinterested in investing in the time to watch Netflix shows since it is highly likely they will get canceled too soon/before they mature.
2) In the past few years, I have come to realize that I like Amazon's shows much better on average than Netflix shows. Currently, The Boys, but also Homecoming, Jack Ryan, Hanna, Hunters, Goliath, Good Omen, Tales from the Loop, etc... not all excellent, but in general more watchable than Netflix shows (with a
Re: (Score:2)
Good Omens is the only one of those I've seen - it was on BBC - but it had something that Netflix don't do: A full, complete storyline with a close.
The setting and characters could indeed be extended into another series but they don't have to. The audience can enjoy what's there and feel satisfied without needing continuation.
That closure makes a massive difference.
So like UK shows then ... (Score:3)
Hey, better than dragging out shows until really everybody hates them. (Yes, hello Simpsons!)
Though a third season of Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency would have been *so* needed. Cut off the story in the best show of two decades, right where it meta-blew your mind. GRRRR
There's a word: balance. (Score:2)
If you show loyalty to your customers and treat them well, they stay with you. If you don't, they walk. This is NOT a new phenomenon. I pretty much gave up watching TV after Star Trek was canceled, for example.
Once a company gets a reputation for mistreating the customers they already have, it makes it a lot harder for them to convince people to become new customers so that they can be mistreated to attract new customers.
I don't even start a show if (Score:2)
If it has no ending in sight. What story is that? Would you buy a book that's missing the last chapter?
The show format is going to die soon (Score:3)
The format of the shows is becoming more and more popular because the longer running time allows them to build better characters and stories, than movies and at the same time the technological gap, that once existed, between Cinema and home entertainment equipment is closing. On streaming platforms however, this longer running time doesn't have to be split up in distinct "episodes" like in shows aired on TV.
A longer running movies like "The Irishman", but extended to something like 5-6 or even 8 hours, maybe annotated with chapters, is going to be a more efficient way of story telling than the episodic show format.
Re: (Score:2)
This episodic form of TV series is a remnant of, well, the TV era. On a streaming platform you don't need to split the story in episodes, especially on Netflix where they release the whole "season" at once.
The format of the shows is becoming more and more popular because the longer running time allows them to build better characters and stories, than movies and at the same time the technological gap, that once existed, between Cinema and home entertainment equipment is closing. On streaming platforms however, this longer running time doesn't have to be split up in distinct "episodes" like in shows aired on TV.
A longer running movies like "The Irishman", but extended to something like 5-6 or even 8 hours, maybe annotated with chapters, is going to be a more efficient way of story telling than the episodic show format.
I completely disagree.
Most people don't want to sit down and watch a 8 hour movie, if only to be able to stop, get up to do something else, and then come back to it. Having set stop points is often preferable. By having set stop points, we avoid the stigma of going "I couldn't get all the way through it" and instead going "I got through episode one and two, I'm going to come back to episode 3 tomorrow.".
While having specific timed stop points is much more flexible with Binging, not being beholden to a speci
Prefer movies (Score:3)
Movies are hardly cancelled in the middle of the story.
Unless you have the follow-up movies (almost like series), usually a bad sign.
Series also protract the story and take up too much time in many cases.
Doctor Who (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Incorrect Diagnosis from the Symptoms (Score:3)
Netflix, second only to WB, chased social media acceptance, mistakenly believing ratings and commerce would follow. But they don't.
Netflix recruits young employees. It's "hip". But "hip" doesn't sell like it once did. It changes too quickly and it's generally intolerant in the name of tolerance. They live-and-breath social commentary, while viewers outside of their narrow demographic just want to have some escapist fun. None of the most popular shows from past decades could get approved on Netflix today; they're too white, too straight, too funny and therefore offense to someone somewhere, too slow... The same characteristics that get you production approval (angst, rage against society, disapproval of the 80%) pretty much ensure nobody else will want to watch your preachy crap-ass production.
Re: (Score:2)
So they could sell you a copy for $15, or when you want to rewatch it you can resubscribe for $15, and maybe stay longer. That's an easy choice for them (not to mention there's no chance in hell they would do DRM free)