|
catlord posted:Hasn't Zaslav gotten pissy at Netflix over something that's been a thing for ages but he's just now noticed and has like, killed all talks of new projects with them? Zaslav got pissed at the payment terms that the previous administration worked out with Netflix for The Sandman (I think Netflix only has to make payments at the 6-, 12- and 24-month marks after launch), and also how long they were taking to order a second season. And so Zaslav ordered that its arrangements with Netflix and other third-party streamers be re-evaluated, including possible exit options. Arist posted:From what I've heard it's a pretty poorly-kept secret that between content acquisition and the overhead of running the platform, streaming is pretty hard to make money on. It's not necessarily hard to make money--Netflix did for years before they got into the film production and distribution business, causing them to hemorrhage about two-thirds of their licensed content since 2014--but the balkanization of streaming services has led to a ridiculous arms race in terms of content spend that is absolutely in no way sustainable. Netflix is spending $17 billion a year on content; Apple TV+ is spending $6 billion; Amazon Prime Video spent $16 billion last year; God knows what Disney's spend on D+ and Hulu is, and then you have the smaller players like Paramount+ and Peacock and Starz and AMC+ and so on. It's an all-out war for eyeballs, and there are only so many hours in a day available for people to watch stuff. I mean, remember that Netflix forked out $450 million for two Knives Out sequels. Can Ted Sarandos say that two Knives Out sequels are going to generate anywhere near that much money in new subscriptions? Timby fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Jan 8, 2023 |
#
?
Jan 8, 2023 22:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 10:41 |
|
|
Timby posted:I mean, remember that Netflix forked out $450 million for two Knives Out sequels. Can Ted Sarandos say that two Knives Out sequels are going to generate anywhere near that much money in new subscriptions? There's definitely going to be another? Hooray! Maybe I won't cancel my sub.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
Put another way, Netflix made money when they were pretty much the only streaming service around. They started making their own content when it was clear they'd start losing what they have to home grown services. With a few exceptions, I think the Netflix stuff has been made with a tight eye on budget, they seem to have a model of a few tentpoles (like Knives Out) and a bunch of lower budget stuff that's made to have compelling drops at the end of each episode so folks say "ok, I'm not sure if that made sense, but I'll watch the next one".
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
Netflix made money because the contracts back then were relatively small. Once the other companies knew there was money in it they either built their own or wanted a lot for the rights.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:There's definitely going to be another? Hooray! Maybe I won't cancel my sub. Rian Johnson also has a case-of-the-week series on Netflix with Natasha Lyonne.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Rian Johnson also has a case-of-the-week series on Netflix with Natasha Lyonne. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 00:35
|
|
|
I love the WB Exec as Homer Simpson Pee-Wee football coach that's going on Now comes the easiest part of any hatchet man's job - The Cuts. Now while I wasn't able to cut everyone I wanted to, I have cut a lot of you. Westworld, is cut Raised by Wolves is cut Wonder Woman, you're out of here Batgirl, I like your hustle and you have good buzz, which is why it was so hard to cut you The rest of you will continue as planned. Except you, you and you (Points to Aquaman, Shazam, Black Adam)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 00:38
|
|
|
Timby posted:It's not necessarily hard to make money--Netflix did for years before they got into the film production and distribution business, causing them to hemorrhage about two-thirds of their licensed content since 2014--but the balkanization of streaming services has led to a ridiculous arms race in terms of content spend that is absolutely in no way sustainable. Netflix is spending $17 billion a year on content; Apple TV+ is spending $6 billion; Amazon Prime Video spent $16 billion last year; God knows what Disney's spend on D+ and Hulu is, and then you have the smaller players like Paramount+ and Peacock and Starz and AMC+ and so on. It's an all-out war for eyeballs, and there are only so many hours in a day available for people to watch stuff. WB as a giant studio should be able to keep this going as long as Disney does, but it seems they got saddled with billions in debt from AT&T and a CEO (Mr. Zsas) who only knows slashing (budgets) and killing (projects). 
Assepoester fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Jan 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:There's definitely going to be another? Hooray! Maybe I won't cancel my sub. I mean you could probably cancel it for a couple years at least
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 00:54
|
|
|
Oh right, my bad. So many dang streaming services now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:08
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Oh right, my bad. So many dang streaming services now.   lol remember DC Universe?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
F.D. Signifier posted:
And I've got at least five others through a combo of my library card, a VPN, and some passwords from American friends.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:26
|
|
|
Timby posted:It's not necessarily hard to make money--Netflix did for years before they got into the film production and distribution business, causing them to hemorrhage about two-thirds of their licensed content since 2014--but the balkanization of streaming services has led to a ridiculous arms race in terms of content spend that is absolutely in no way sustainable. Netflix is spending $17 billion a year on content; Apple TV+ is spending $6 billion; Amazon Prime Video spent $16 billion last year; God knows what Disney's spend on D+ and Hulu is, and then you have the smaller players like Paramount+ and Peacock and Starz and AMC+ and so on. It's an all-out war for eyeballs, and there are only so many hours in a day available for people to watch stuff. I wonder how well D+ and Hulu do by virtue of not taking stuff off they have the rights to in perpetuity. Like I do have friends with kids who keep D+ just because if there's nothing else they can watch they can always have them watch Frozen or something for the millionth time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:41
|
|
|
D+ has had massive losses and was part of what got Chapek fired.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
There is no reason a company should not or could not put their entire video library on their streaming service.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:46
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:D+ has had massive losses and was part of what got Chapek fired.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:There is no reason a company should not or could not put their entire video library on their streaming service. That's what drove me off HBO Max even before everything. Pretty sure you can always have 1978's Superman on it since you own it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 03:47
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:There is no reason a company should not or could not put their entire video library on their streaming service. There are still some streaming rights holdovers where they sold it to someone else before they had their thing. Like how Paramount Plus doesn't have Yellowstone on it despite it being one of Paramount's flagship shows because they signed an exclusive streaming deal with someone else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:27
|
|
|
Also if you out your entire catalog on then everyone watches their fill and doesn't reup. Disney+ saw a big drop off and that was a major part of it
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:46
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:There are still some streaming rights holdovers where they sold it to someone else before they had their thing. Like how Paramount Plus doesn't have Yellowstone on it despite it being one of Paramount's flagship shows because they signed an exclusive streaming deal with someone else.  Opopanax posted:Also if you out your entire catalog on then everyone watches their fill and doesn't reup. Disney+ saw a big drop off and that was a major part of it There is over 100 years of movies and TV shows for these companies. People will never run out of content
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:47
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:
Sure, but nobody is signing up for D+ to watch the Don Knotts collection. You watch the big stuff you haven't seen in years, then delve into some of the more obscure stuff, and then after a year or two you're just waiting for new stuff. Disney at least has been pumping a lot of new content out, but they also have enough money to do that and let them be loss leaders
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:56
|
|
|
Thank you Opopanax for explaining how limiting access to art and culture is in fact good. 👍
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:02
|
|
|
I’m not defending it, I’m saying why they don’t do it. At the end of the day these are all multi billion dollar corps and they’re going to bow to the almighty dollar over what’s best for the customer every time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:17
|
|
|
Disney literally has been doing this since home video existed. Remember the Disney vault?FlamingLiberal posted:Chapek was really not well liked by the shareholders. Whereas they adore Bob Iger. Chapek took over Disney right before the pandemic really hosed them over so rightly or not he took the blame for the last couple of years that were impacted by Covid. Yes, but once they canned him they discovered he hid massive D+ losses even beyond what they thought in other departments. Would it have suffered the same losses under Iger though? Almost certainly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:26
|
|
|
Disney had to be dragged into Home Video and resisted releasing poo poo like Snow White for yeaaaaars. It's frankly amazing they're not cycling out classics left and right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 06:25
|
|
|
Zack Snyder has probably the best gig anyone could have right now. His own IP(s) and a studio that (for better or worse) tends to not meddle with filmmakers much and he can do whatever he wants and go wild and do weird poo poo. Idk why people need him to be dragged back into the dceu where he was clearly jerked around way too much to produce something coherent. (Extended cuts not included bc they were so much better) Like instead of wishing James Gunn dies maybe just don’t watch the Dc movies and just be stoked that Snyder is doing cool poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 14:11
|
|
|
But those movies don't have Batman in iiiiit! -some dude, somewhere
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 14:16
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Zack Snyder has probably the best gig anyone could have right now. His own IP(s) and a studio that (for better or worse) tends to not meddle with filmmakers much and he can do whatever he wants and go wild and do weird poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 14:22
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:But those movies don't have Batman in iiiiit!  Ḩ̸̙̤͖̀̅̈́̀́̋̄̀́̕͝Ȩ̶̹̹̬̈́͊͒̋̕Y̶̡̧̢̭̥͍̥̹̠̖̙̍̓̀͗̎̎͒̇̏͝Õ̴̞̰̤̝̮̺̓̀̌͆Ö̶̜̮͍͚̼͇̳̺͕̯́͜Ỡ̵͗̌̐̈́̊̈́̽̕͜Ó̷͍̬̲̘̰̼͉͌̆̓̓̾Ơ̸̧͕͚̖͓̘͕̥͛͒́͗͜O̶̧̲͉̠̟̰̙̻̰̥̤̽̉̅̅͂O̶͉͖̣̲̬̱͈̅́̀̃͑̿̏͐͠Ǫ̶̨͓͖͙͕̦̤̱͓̜͐͐̊̎O̸͚̮̭̗̭̲͒̾͐͑͗̉̈́͆͝
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
I like Snyder and I’m happy he’s doing his own stuff because he can just go wild with it and not have to worry about either a dumb exec or fans not liking his vision
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 15:10
|
|
|
No I saw Army of the Dead. He still has to deal with the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 15:12
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Pretty sure they only care when Snyder is doing DC stuff I don’t know, I imagine there’s probably a large intersection in the Venn diagram of online weirdos who obsess about DC movies and people who want to see The Fountainhead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 15:42
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:No I saw Army of the Dead. He still has to deal with the latter. Yeah but it’s his movie. Not the studios.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 15:46
|
|
|
The cult of personality around certain directors is very much tied to their attachment to superhero films imo. Snyder is the most extreme example, but the only other filmmakers who come close to that level of fanbase is Nolan and Raimi. Super famous directors like Spielberg and Scorcese, though more celebrated widely, don't have a vociferous fanbase in the same way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:00
|
|
|
It happens in the comics themselves too. The "Carol Corps" didn't support the book at all when DeConnick left.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:19
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:No I saw Army of the Dead. He still has to deal with the latter. Remember how this movie went out of its way to show a Chekhov's Gun that made the audience immediately think about how sick it was going to be when it went off, then never actually fired it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
Gravitas Shortfall posted:Remember how this movie went out of its way to show a Chekhov's Gun that made the audience immediately think about how sick it was going to be when it went off, then never actually fired it? https://twitter.com/thejedahliker/status/1191438425552850944?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:39
|
|
|
Please. Chekhov's Gun isn't a TV trope it's a Cinema Sin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:It happens in the comics themselves too. Also the book got better when she left. Aphrodite posted:Please. Chekhov's Gun isn't a TV trope it's a Cinema Sin. Chekhov's Gun SUBVERTED.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 10:41 |
|
|
The theatrical theory and criticism courses I took decades ago in college weren't that dissimilar from TV Tropes, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:47
|
|
