I didn’t know Tuca & Bertie existed until hearing it was cancelled on Twitter. Netflix’s marketing (including on their own site) was nil. As someone who’s watched every other Netflix adult animated series I definitely should have seen something if they were promoting the show at all. They were not. Self-fulfilling prophesy.
This is the first I've heard of it, ive seen all of bojack but Netflix has instead been trying to force bigmouth down my throat and I don't want it. :(
1. I don't believe a show is defined by its widespread popularity. I don't think someone on the content side should believe that either. TV and movies are forms of art, and good art is good art. If Netflix doesn't value that, it deserves to lose every bit of market share it's about to over the next decade.
2. We don't actually know how the popularity looks because we don't have the numbers. Even with the numbers, show popularity is a function of marketing and time allowed to grow, which is exactly what the article highlights.
Netflix is a business. They need to be profitable, not just make art for the sake of making art. If they go broke, they won't live to make another art. It's a balancing art ;-)
I never said it wasn't a balancing act (in fact I explicitly noted they should care about money) but the content team is exactly the team that should be fighting tooth and nail internally against those constraints. That quote makes it sound like they have rolled over, and their content decisions of the past 3 years tell a similar story.
Content is hard, a good story could be poorly executed and turned into a not so great show. It could be many things that were not obvious until the show is cut. What can the content team do then? Dump it and lose out on all the money spent or release it and learn from it? I believe they are doing the latter
A fair point, but the actions of the past few years align with that PR statement as well. There are also completely ways for the content team to say better things that would fit that unified front. Or perhaps that would worry investors that the company isn't singularly focused on them, which is 100% a part of this issue as well. The problem is that the company caved to that pressure from Wall Street.
The best companies, with true vision, balance their philosophy with the interests of investors and are okay if not everyone is behind their short term moves. The statement IMO either has its original meaning in my first post, or it means Netflix overvalues its short term stock outlook, and that is affecting content. No matter how you slice it, content at Netflix will continue to suffer so long as that holds true / Netflix continues to make similar statements.
Very true, but the balancing act is not as simple as a lot of people seem to think.
Obviously you can't spend a lot on shows that are losing money and stay solvent. But beyond that it's complicated
If you optimize only return-per-unit or viewers-per-unit (unit being movie, series, whatever) you could easily end up being a place that only makes a small number of "big" mass market appeal shows and movies.
That's a business model, but it's not the only one that makes sense. If you want to be a "big tent" sort of content place (very much where netflix started) you need to make some narrower appeal stuff. You have to make sure it still makes you money, but with a subscription service (rather than rental) this isn't actually easy to evaluate.
You also have to thing about time line. If you optimize for ROI on a short time (e.g. initial release) vs long burn, you'll make different decisions.
So part of this isn't just "you have to be a viable business", it's also "what sort of viable business".
>I don't believe a show is defined by its widespread popularity. I don't think someone on the content side should believe that either. TV and movies are forms of art, and good art is good art.
You are alone in that, since it seems that everyone on the content creation site is stubbornly insistent on getting a paycheck. So if for actors, writers, camera men, set builders etc both great art and money go together, why should be different for the corporate overlords.
Seinfield wasn't a hit in it's first season either. The whole premise of the article is that Netflix is no longer giving shows a chance to come into their own like they once did.
You point out that Netflix has usage data as if you have access to that data. Some people like ten-hour reality TV binges and some people like thoughtful content. Netflix is just mirroring cable TV. Since Netflix uses product placement, especially in its age-targeted content, quantity of viewing time is more profitable than quality.
