They can’t even attract me to a 1st season because I know there’s next to no chance of a second.
People still pay Netflix money?
I have no idea of the figures but I suspect many (in the US at least) have it through their cell phone carrier’s “extras” that I don’t believe anyone ever asked for but that’s a whole other thing.
That I get. I think I have paramount because I don’t have to pay for it.
But, come on, has Netflix been with a shit in at least half a decade? Surely it isn’t mobil contract extras that are keeping the lights on?
The Boroughs just got this treatment. Sure it wasn’t a smash hit but it was fun to watch and the first season concluded without too many questions from earlier episodes going unanswered.
Because we know there’s no 3rd season coming anyway.
Yup. If they actually finished shows people might want to invest their time.
It doesn’t need to be 20 seasons. Just give it a conclusion if you’re done with it.
This is a problem of Netflix’s own creation. Long gaps between seasons of on-going series followed by cancelation a without conclusions drive most viewers to stick to “limited series”. At this point, “limited series” and self contained seasons (think Apple’s Slow Horses) are the only format they should follow.
I think Apple does it best with Slow Horses where at the end of the last episode of the season, they preview the next season which has already begun production.
It feels like it’s many years between seasons for some shows. By the time they release season 2 everybody has moved on to the hundred shows that released since season 1.
Seems like it takes them like 4 months to shoot a show and almost a year in post production. I think they must sit on a lot of shows and delay releasing for optimal viewership counts, and they never do two seasons at once anymore, it’s always do one then wait and see.
3 Body Problem released in March 2024. I’d love to watch more of it. Season 1 was only 8 episodes. Season 2 will be 6 episodes, and Season 3 will be just 5. This is based on a book trilogy that is 410 pages for book 1, 510 pages for book 2, and 600 pages for book 3. Popular enough for more seasons, but not popular enough to even consider 10 episodes, here have 5 instead.
My guess is that you don’t hook viewers, emotionally engage and capture their investment in the plot and characters by producing 8-10 episodes. Shows used to do ~24.
If I spend less time with your character while you’ve got my attention at the start, the connection will more quickly fade away and when it comes to season 2 I have forgotten caring.
Exceptional exceptions excepted.
My guess is that you don’t hook viewers, emotionally engage and capture their investment in the plot and characters by producing 8-10 episodes. Shows used to do ~24.
Some of the best shows going are between 8-10 episodes a season though. And it’s not as if any competitor of netflix now is doing 24 episodes a season. That’s mostly exclusively reserved for network procedurals.
All of the shows “going” are that length these days. That means that the best ones have to be that length and that’s survivor bias I think. Just because some shows that length survive doesn’t mean a majority will.
Most shows have always failed though. Including the old long-form 24 episode shows that got cancelled all the time.
Yeah. But an investment in a longer season is more likely to translate to sustained viewership for subsequent seasons. There was also less choice in the past. But really I think it’s about emotional investment.
The less choice here is key. People were more likely to be focusing on one or two TV shows at once because there were simply less TV shows being made. That’s all gone now. There’s far more competition for people’s interest now across the board. There also was much less international options too. Lost was not competing with Korean or Spanish or German shows for people’s attention.
I’m routinely emotionally engaged by 90 to 120 minute films. If a show can’t manage it in ten episodes, it’s just not a very good show.
Emotionally engaged for that 90-120 minutes. Most people would not be invested enough to watch a season about the same character 2 years later. It’s an entirely different proposition and different mode.
American shows always used to have crazy long series of mostly filler episodes. Dunno how anyone could ever be bothered actually following them.
The first season of Tina Fey’s relationship comedy series The Four Seasons had 11.9m views, but the recent second outing only garnered 4.4m; a drop of 63%.
They made another season? Why did they make another season? It was a complete story.
The other problem with Netflix: shows can’t count on getting multi-season runs, so they try to tell a complete story in one season. If Netflix chooses to renew, they wing the rest and milk it for as much as they can get until it’s eventually canceled.
Viewers are onto this and have a hard time getting invested in Netflix shows that go for multiple seasons, because quality drops and they’ll probably get canceled anyways.
I didn’t watch it, but I heard that’s basically what happened with Altered Carbon, even though there was a complete template to follow.
Yeah, season 1 was great. Season 2 was a massive let down. I managed to force myself through season 2 anyway, but I definitely didn’t end with the excitement for more I had at the end of season 1. Dropping Joel Kinnaman was a mistake too. Anthony Mackie is an okay actor, but Joel really nailed that character.
I’ve watched season 1 a handful of times, some of my favourite TV sci-fi. Read the books before the show was announced, loved them.
Season 2 doesn’t exist in my head at all.
But it’s in the name, there must be 4 seasons
You are both correct, and it is a good 2nd season. I think it is more about people’s life crisis than about a story.
deleted by creator
Too long between seasons.
A television show is a commitment and a re-commitment harder than a continuing commitment
It’s because they walked away from the tried and true broadcast television model:
- long seasons, often 20+ episodes
- new episodes air in the evenings (prime time) during fall & winter, when everyone stays indoors during
- shows air weekly, same night (usually a weeknight) every week, not all at once
- reruns during the summer
This model was created out of necessity: the technology was broadcast television, no video recording technology cheap enough to distribute episodes in bulk. However the model had a number of advantages. First of all, it created audience loyalty because shows had a consistent and timely presence in people’s lives. People would gather around the water cooler or on the playground to talk about last night’s episode, since it came out for everyone at the same time.
It also gave shows evolving cultural relevance, as longer runs gave the writers opportunities to respond to current events, fashion trends, or changes in technology.
Lastly, it was immune to the “binge burnout” and “cramming amnesia” effects, two terms I just made up (but describe real phenomena). Everyone who has binge watched a season of a show knows the bad feeling you get at the end. It’s a mixture of burnout but also of grief, because you’re forced out of a world you’d immersed yourself in. Cramming amnesia should be instantly familiar to anyone who has crammed for an exam, and everyone knows that spaced repetition over the long term is much better at building memory, whereas cramming leads to forgetting.
Broadcast television could have aired a whole season’s episodes all at once in a marathon, but they didn’t, because they knew it was a bad idea. Netflix letting everyone binge a season of a show is just dumb, but now they can’t go back without upsetting people. They built a model almost perfectly designed to get people to cancel their subscriptions after bingeing all the seasons they want, rather than a sustainable model for long-term subscription revenue. I don’t know why they chose to do that, perhaps they were repulsed at the idea of becoming a cable company?
It’s because they walked away from the tried and true broadcast television model:
long seasons, often 20+ episodes
There’s far more competition in television now than in the era of regular 20+ episodes a season shows. There’s simply more TV shows, and thus more options for audiences. Actors in TV now are also regularly in movies and many other shows. Many actors now worth hiring simply do not want to tie themselves down to 20 episodes a season, and define themselves by one show. Audiences also expect higher CGI quality than you would usually get in 20 episodes a season shows.
There’s a reason it’s primarily only network procedural shows that stick to that formula.
This model was created out of necessity: the technology was broadcast television, no video recording technology cheap enough to distribute episodes in bulk. However the model had a number of advantages. First of all, it created audience loyalty because shows had a consistent and timely presence in people’s lives. People would gather around the water cooler or on the playground to talk about last night’s episode, since it came out for everyone at the same time.
I mean, the watercooler culture is also gone primarily because of the increase competition. Two avid TV watchers now could be watching an entirely different array of TV shows with zero cross-over because of the prominence and accessibility of options to audiences - especially from the Non-US world. That was simply far less likely to happen 10 years ago, Shows like Lost in the 00s were not indirectly competing with Korean or German shows. They just weren’t.
It also gave shows evolving cultural relevance, as longer runs gave the writers opportunities to respond to current events, fashion trends, or changes in technology.
Shows that try to incorporate contemporary trends within their plot tend to not age very well.
Lastly, it was immune to the “binge burnout” and “cramming amnesia” effects, two terms I just made up (but describe real phenomena). Everyone who has binge watched a season of a show knows the bad feeling you get at the end. It’s a mixture of burnout but also of grief, because you’re forced out of a world you’d immersed yourself in. Cramming amnesia should be instantly familiar to anyone who has crammed for an exam, and everyone knows that spaced repetition over the long term is much better at building memory, whereas cramming leads to forgetting.
Not all networks use the binge formula: Apple and Amazon don’t always do this. (Apple never does this).
There’s far more competition in television now than in the era of regular 20+ episodes a season shows. There’s simply more TV shows, and thus more options for audiences.
That’s a situation largely of Netflix’s own making. There was a time when they were the only game in town for streaming movies and TV shows. They had the opportunity to build a gargantuan and loyal subscriber base and they blew it. Their decline is what opened the door to all this competition.
You might be happy with all this competition but then why are we even here for this discussion? It’s clear that too much competition has led to most shows dying prematurely.
Audiences also expect higher CGI quality than you would usually get in 20 episodes a season shows.
Star Trek TNG’s show runners knew how to deal with this: you don’t use the same budget for every episode. Some episodes get a big budget, others get a small one. The latter were called bottle shows and they turned out to be some of the best episodes in Star Trek history because they had no effects budget so they had to rely entirely on writing, acting, and editing.
That’s a situation largely of Netflix’s own making. There was a time when they were the only game in town for streaming movies and TV shows. They had the opportunity to build a gargantuan and loyal subscriber base and they blew it. Their decline is what opened the door to all this competition.
There’s competition from outside of Netflix too. Plenty of other streaming services pump out content here too.
You might be happy with all this competition but then why are we even here for this discussion? It’s clear that too much competition has led to most shows dying prematurely.
Shows used to get cancelled all the time. Including long-form TV shows.
Star Trek TNG’s show runners knew how to deal with this: you don’t use the same budget for every episode. Some episodes get a big budget, others get a small one. The latter were called bottle shows and they turned out to be some of the best episodes in Star Trek history because they had no effects budget so they had to rely entirely on writing, acting, and editing.
Even the specific Star Trek episodes with the highest budget wouldn’t come anywhere near to the usual per-episode budget of TV shows now.
But that’s only one reason why the old 20-24 episode formula has declined. Not the only reason. Actors in TV now are also regularly in movies and many other shows. Many actors now worth hiring simply do not want to tie themselves down to 20 episodes a season, and define themselves by one show.
I didn’t realize another season of man on the inside came out, will take a look (not on netflix ofc)
It was pretty good imo
I believe it is because they don’t advertise their popular shows. Netflix is now an advertising platform, and instead of advertising their own merchandise, you will see the exact same Chevy commercial every 15minutes for 8-10 episodes. Now that they are no longer growing, they have to maximize profits.
