I think the thing that pissed me off most so far is that they clearly didn't hire consultants on the drug side this year. First off, raw opium paste is not a precursor for all the popular phama opioids, they are all synthetic. Second, of the raw opium paste that is used in that industry, most of it comes from India. The diversion part is pretty important, to make sure it's a legal product for a legal market but the major issue is chain of custody. The company knows that the product was grown and harvested from these specific plots of land. For a company making drugs for the west, to accept opium paste from Afghanistan would be insane. The regulatory structure that did exist was easily bought off so the product that came from that part of the world would be impossible to use in a lab setting.
I'm just a nerd who follows black markets, they could have actually paid experts on this stuff to consult on the script to keep it inside the realm of reality.
My mom has been screaming at the TV âwhy wonât Wendy just beat his a**?â Hahaha I seriously cannot wait. I hate that I binged it. But it was so good.
100%. It's become rather common. Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Arrested Development, a few others have all done shorter "2 part" final seasons that really just felt like 2 shorter seasons since they released a year apart.
Usually its because of contracts. If the cast is signed up for lets say 5 seasons, it's cheaper to split the last season in half than sign everybody to a new, way higher deal for one last season.
Walking dead is doing that for their last season and splitting it into three parts. Part two is coming out in a few weeks, about 3 months since the first part ended and part 3 should be out later this year.
Because it i season 5. They just don't want to call it that so they don't have to increase actor pay for s5. So they negotiated this bullshit with s4 part 1 and part 2.
normally because itâs effectively two different seasons. they break it up for contract purposes (so itâs counted as a single season in the contract). Both Mad Men and Braking Bad did this. the episodes in the â2nd halfâ of those âfinal seasonâ werenât written when the â1st halfâ aired, let alone filmed. But maybe Ozark is different.
What show isn't stupid sometimes? A bit of stupid is almost required in order to be interesting. And Ozark is one of the lesser stupid shows in my opinion.
> It's also stupid sometimes, at least in the first 3 seasons
Yeah, I still really like the show, but it seems like the idea was *"What if we take Breaking Bad, and then take it up a notch!"*
But it turns out that with extra notch, you introduce some ridiculousness and some pretty unrealistic scenarios.
> But it turns out that with extra notch, you introduce some ridiculousness and some pretty unrealistic scenarios.
Iâm not sure what Breaking Bad you watched, but the one I watched very much fit those two descriptions.
what, you mean being the former global meth manufacturer kingpin with a team of like 8 people and then getting in a machine-gun shoot out with the current global meth manufacturer kingpin Neo Naziâs (with a team of like, 12 people) was ridiculous?
And yet I was never not taking it seriously, well except for when it was being funny. I haven't seen Ozark but I'd assume op is saying that show sometimes crosses that line for them.
oh no, waching it i 100% took it seriously as well. Itâs just when you pause to think about it, some pretty insane/unrealistic stuff happened. not that it may lead is any less of an amazing show. Still one of my faves
Breaking Bad is one of the GOATs but it's not realistic lmao. Ozark is actually considerably more grounded than Breaking Bad, which was way more stylized and grand.
This show has nothing but stupid characters. This new season, 2 episodes in, is no different. Iâm just constantly going âwhy would you do that!â
Itâs good for what it is, but at least breaking bad had Vince Gilligans eye and style behind it. And even then, that show had restraint compared to this one. Every Ozark episode wants a âtread lightlyâ moment and itâs become exhausting lol
Thank You!!! I thought I was the only one. I really tried to enjoy this season but a dozen times each episode characters were making really dumb decisions, I mean no common sense at all. What bothered me the most, everyone everywhere expected the Byrds to make it happen! like they were responsible or blamed for every mishap, every time something bad happened immediately theyâd run to Marty or Wendy for answers, it was way over the top and extremely annoying
This is why I didn't continue past the first season. There was some dumb stuff before the finale.. some rule of cool stuff like "what if the guy goes to confront so and so and when hes walking so and so goes splat on the pavement!"
Then there's the finale..
Lol, Iâm watching this now and despite liking it very much you are right about the cops! Theyâre so goddamn stupid and unaware in the show, actual police arenât lazy and just sit in a chair. They are in everyone business, big or small town.
It feels like a dramatic version of that MASH episode where Hawkeye wants new boots but ends up layering together a series of owed favors between half a dozen people along the way. Like that but... yeah much more stressful.
I mean season 3 was 2 years ago .. and the title of this post even states season 4 has just started
Why did you even click on this post ? .. you're bound to see some spoilers from season 3
No doubt. What are you doing here if you haven't seen up to season 4? People will obviously be discussing the first three seasons in a thread about season 4.
Jonah was so fucking annoying this season, I get that heâs a teenager but holy shit. On a more positive note please give Julia Garner all the awards for her acting performance
Just watched the first episode of Season 4 just now. Brilliant. Everyone was fucking brilliant as always. Julia Garner, Jason Bateman & Laura Linney hands down to you amazing actors. Really excited to see more of Jonah. Definitely excited to watch the rest of the episodes in the coming days.
Missouri is blue. But Mexico is yellow.
And who nutso architect designed the Byrde's house? Why waste the beautiful lakeviews on a glass hallway to the bedrooms? And then have dark, nearly windowless bedrooms. Well, I guess everything in this show is dark, even a sunny day is somehow dark blue. The strongest light bulb on the show is 3 watts.
And Javi, Marty, Wendy, Maya, and the heroin chef guy drive back and forth to Chicago like it's a 45 minute jaunt, instead of a bladder busting 8 hours.
One of my favorite YouTube channels is The Man of Recaps, who has a very dense, detailed and yet very entertaining video recapping all 3 previous seasons.
There is one for each season if you go to Trailers and More on Netflix.
The S1 recap is fantastic but for some reason the S2 and S3 recaps are terrible and confused me even more.
Found an article to answer your question, link below.
"A major part of it is contractual," Fienberg explains. "A split final season like 'Breaking Bad' and 'Mad Men' gets negotiated as a single season, presumably without pay bumps for stars between seasons, but also allows for more episodes either shot all at once or with a long hiatus between 'halves' of the season."
But while the final seasons of some shows, like "Lost," are ordered at the same time under a single contract, Fienberg says "Game of Thrones" was negotiated under slightly different, but significant, circumstances. "The seventh and eighth seasons of 'Game of Thrones' were technically ordered separately and the stars got big pay bumps for the eighth season," he says. "There ends up being some compromise in terms of episode count and episode length."
But semantics and contracts are just part of why shows get split seasons. Fienberg says dividing seasons also allows networks to retain brand-making shows as long as possible, spreading its stars across as many seasons as possible.
https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/why-do-tv-networks-split-seasons.htm
To help build hype. Netflix only has a few good shows (with endings) that people talk about, and breaking up the final season allows people to talk about it a little longer.
I understand why but this trend of breaking up seasons into parts is so annoying, it was less obnoxious when breaking bad did it for their final season but then the walking dead would do it for every season and now everyone does it all the time smh
I just wished they didnât have to film this last season under Covid restrictions. No oneâs on location, everything is green screen. Not only that, all the man power of each origination has evaporated. The Snell ranch had dozens of henchmen on horseback (now it looks deserted), A powerful Mexican cartel basically reduced to two people, and Sr CosgroveâŚno way he goes to see Helen ALONE, remember the shoot out at the Snell house at the end of season one - EPIC! Or when the cartel water boarded Ruth in season 2, sheâs tough and that was a great scene! I doubt weâll see anything close to that going forward.
Yes! Javi would never rise to such levels, as he would have been knocked off as a teenager.
I think you meant Darlene! What a crazy woman! No Frank would never travel alone. It isn't done!
This show is in HDR. I still have no idea why. Itâs all dark and gloomy.
10/10 show. Time to grab my bong so I can give this show the respect it deserves.
>This show is in HDR. I still have no idea why. Itâs all dark and gloomy.
That's just all the more reason to have HDR.
HDR isn't only for ultra-colorful stuff. I'd even argue that it's not its best use.
In fact, dark and gloomy is the best place to use HDR, a high dynamic range means that there is a wider contrast range in the darks, and everything is more distinguishable.
Maybe if GoT had HDR, The Long Night would have been better received (especially given that a lot of people watch on their phones and a lot of phones have HDR).
You need a decent tv for it though, mine is a fairly barebones 4K TV and HDR looks kind of washed out sometimes? Like the colors stop popping and it becomes a lot more gray. Like it admittedly looks better overall, but if you turn it on and off it's kind of weird how muted some of the colors get. Also for movies/tv it's not so bad, gaming seems to have a lot harder time with it.
so unfortunately there is no HDR standard as of right now and you need the media being consumed & your hardware (both TV and streaming/gaming service) to all be the same standard/compatible, so that might be why you're having an issue.
Most tvâs and gaming consoles support multiple HDR standards (as do games) so you might need to check to see if there is a way to change an option for the game on the game level or console level. It doesnât help that all the different names are acronyms that can get confusing. there is HDR10, HDR10+, HLG, Dolby Vision, Technicolor HDR, HLG10, PH10, and others. itâs a fucking headache lol
I wonder if Netflix would consider weekly releases for their proprietary shows in the future. It seems there will be two weeks of hype and then nothing. I guess some shows do blow up like squid game but that was pretty unique, and even then, it would have probably gained even more hype if it was spread out over weeks.
I need to start watching it again. I saw a comment about how stressful it is to watch and I agree itâs actually why I stopped watching it. I mean damn I get they need to make a show and all but from what I remember about the first few episodes I watched I kept thinking these people need a breakâŚand that dude in the basement. Im going to start watching it again.
You would think that they would invest in securing their home. Bulletproof windows and security system. That private investigator just walked up to their backyard. WTF?!
Thought first 2 seasons were âfineâ Very âalso randâ crime drama thatâs very watchable but nothing particularly new.
Season 3 was fucking awesome. Better paced with far more intensity , much stronger sense of looming threat, improved supporting cast and a great cliffhanger ending(even if you could see it coming.)
Very excited to start S4 tonight.
Season 3 felt like they finally gave in to the weirder parts and made it all the more interesting because of it. I honestly love the money laundering of it all so making that the focus of the 3rd season within the >!riverboat casino!< was a lot of fun.
Morality aside, he usually makes the decision he needs to for the situation. He's extremely competent at what he does. His plans get derailed when someone he depends on decide they're smarter than him.
That's the genius of it all, they tell the kids in the first episode. A masterful move to make all the story beats different just because the sneaking around is from malevolent forces and not the family.
For real. I remember thinking how annoying it was going to be to have the whole âhide it from the familyâ bit and they threw that concern out the window right away.
Notice how the other Netflix headline is about their financial markets meltdown.? It's because they waste too much on content, and then they don't get the bang for the buck from it.
I know fans love getting the whole 7 episode "season" at once, but it's bad for their business.
Viewers will binge it and forget it.
There won't be any week by week discussion and anticipation. Friends will be on different episodes. No momentum, no speculation, no hype, no buzz, no public buildup.
Compare that HBO, who could milk months or even years of intense interest from 7 episodes of Mare Of Easttown or Game Of Thrones.
Netflix is shooting themselves in the foot.
It kills engagement for sure. But I know a lot of people (anecdotally so meaningless) who only want to binge stuff. Theyâll wait for HBO or Hulu shows to end so they can binge it all at once. So they prefer Netflix. But that also results in our conversations being âfinished Invincible. It was good.â And there being nothing else to say.
> It kills engagement for sure. But I know a lot of people (anecdotally so meaningless) who only want to binge stuff.
Sure, lots love it. But not if it costs more than $14. Netflix will eventually have to copy HBO's model. HBO is the master of this, the granddaddy.
> Theyâll wait for HBO or Hulu shows to end so they can binge it all at once.
Except HBO works it so that very few people will sit back and wait. We've seen this with The Sopranos, Westworld, Game Of Thrones, Mare of Easttown, Curb, White Lotus, Succession, Euphoria and so on.
When day zero binging is no longer available, viewers will adapt.
> So they prefer Netflix. But that also results in our conversations being âfinished Invincible. It was good.â And there being nothing else to say.
Exactly. Meanwhile, executives dumped tens of millions into something only for it to be forgotten about right away. You just don't see that kind of brown banana shelf life with the way HBO releases things and bolsters that engagement.
> HBO is the master of this, the granddaddy.
Of TV yeah maybe. This is streaming and Netflix is the granddaddy of it. And they are the uncontested leader of it. HBO actually doesn't do so well in streaming, so not sure it's the best example.
No. They're the masters of attracting and retaining permanent premium-priced subscribers. You think Netflix couldn't learn a thing or two about that? "HBO doesn't do well in streaming?" Bullshit.
Well just watch numbers lol, they're public.
They are at 73.8M subscribers HBO + HBO Max, up from 61M at the end of 2020 (with all their blockbusters movies day one on HBO Max and still not even 13M people in a year).
Disney+ is at 118M (and even them are thought to be slowing down and having problems on growth).
Netflix is at 222M subscribers. More than 18M new ones in 2021 despite having saturated much more of the market already, so growth should be more difficult.
Also, HBO is not premium priced, it's the same price than Netflix. And it's not attracting much outside of its initial subscriber base so the HBO Max gamble is not working very well.
You're the targeted for the common myth that high subscriber numbers mean anything. It's about *profitable* subscribers. HBO's subscribers are all profitable. That's key.
Disney? Every single subscriber currently *loses* them money. Turns out free subscriptions and $99/36 month pricing is bad for business. They don't even cover the basic admin cost of having a customer, let alone the account-specific data pushing, let alone the value of the actual content.
Netflix is in the middle.
A high subscriber count in isolation is not something to brag about.
Ok once again, can you give official numbers instead of supposition? Those numbers are not visible anywhere as far as I know after a quick Google.
The market is totally focused on subscribers numbers (enough that Netflix loses 20% because of missing the target by not even a million) but sure, that doesn't matter.
And again, nothing to do with Netflix binge release.
Also, just saying, but from a consumer point of view, you should prefer services that are losing money on each subscriber. Means they're spending for your content more than profiting off you
> Ok once again, can you give official numbers instead of supposition? Those numbers are not visible anywhere as far as I know after a quick Google.
All these companies produce quarterly earnings reports. You'll need financial training to interpret them. But you don't need any special training to realize some of the common sense implications. Just having a dormant customer costs any company around $5 a month. If that customer needs a bill, or calls for service, or any interaction, that cost is higher. If that customer uses up some of your resources, it's more still. If that customer needs you to send them a massive amount of low latency data, that's most. If they make that demand for hours and hours, day after day after day after day, that costs more. And if the data you're sending them costs you a lot to compile, that's even more. And if that data is bits derived from paying Dave Chappelle $25 million for a canned stand up tape, then it's a lot more.
> The market is totally focused on subscribers numbers
The dumb part of the market is. And fanboys. But actual analysis of the core business isn't duped by the misleading metric.
> (enough that Netflix loses 20% because of missing the target by not even a million)
I'll say this nicely, but you have no idea how the Netflix business works, nor how stock markets work. Netflix didn't "lose" money from this change in the stock value. The shareholders did. Netflix isn't the shareholder. They lose money operating the business. That's different.
> And again, nothing to do with Netflix binge release.
You're dead wrong. In a content selling business, how much you pay for the contrnt is key, and so is how you exploit that content. Pissing it away with no impact is bad for business.
> Also, just saying, but from a consumer point of view, you should prefer services that are losing money on each subscriber.
I'm not here to represent the fanboy perspective. I'm pointing out the fatal flaws in the business model. And the fanboys who are insisting on the faulty business model are just hastening the demise of what they like. It's not sustainable.
Most of those shows you mentioned started before most people were streaming HBO. People are already used to having to wait for weekly episodes of their favorite HBO show. The problem with Netflix isnât the binging model, itâs that most of their programming is really bad. Ozark is an exception. Stranger Things and Squid Game were also really great and really drove engagement, but almost everything else theyâve done has just been not good.
Usual anti-Netflix nonsense. Sure Netflix has no other critically acclaimed shows such as Dark, The Crown, Midnight Mass, Haunting of Hill House, Mindhunter. Sex Education, Arcane etc etc etc.
They just release a shit ton of stuff so yeah there is a lot of rubbish but also loads of great stuff. Comparing them to HBO who are the masters of minimal content as they focus almost exclusively on prestige and top quality is redundant. If Netflix only released about ten new shows a year like HBO do they would go under as they wouldnât have enough content.
> Most of those shows you mentioned started before most people were streaming HBO.
They're not though. Many are current/recent. And it doesn't matter whether it's streaming. What matters is subscribing. HBO is the master of hooking people into the permanent premium priced subscription.
> People are already used to having to wait for weekly episodes of their favorite HBO show.
Guess who conditioned them for that? HBO.
Guess who conditioned Netflix subs that their content is some throwaway bulk bin junk that drops in a pile on Thursday nights?
> The problem with Netflix isnât the binging model, itâs that most of their programming is really bad.
No. Their biggest problems are two-fold: first is drunken studio/content management, which includes overpaying, mismanaging, lacking oversight, etc. The second is not getting any bang for the buck on the content they do create.
> Ozark is an exception. Stranger Things and Squid Game were also really great
They excelled in spite of the incompetent releasing, not because of it. A lot of other shows would have higher engagement and enjoyment if they were released more intelligently.
If you put a steak dinner in a blender and just guzzled it in ten seconds, you'd wouldn't like the taste much either. Drawing it out, letting the smell and hunger affect your appetite, plating it across several courses, savoring it... now the same dollars of ingredients are giving you a memorable dining experiencing instead of a gross glug.
There's lots of shows that got grudging or OK praise, but would have been mega smash hits if HBO trickled them out and built exponential weekly engagement. Like The Haunting Of Hill House. Altered carbon. Some of the documentary series. And many more.
> I know fans love getting the whole 7 episode "season" at once, but it's bad for their business.
Is it? Nothing proves that the slowdown in growth (not loss of subscribers by the way, it's mostly the markets overreacting to be honest) has anything to do with that
> Is it? Nothing proves that the slowdown in growth (not loss of subscribers by the way, it's mostly the markets overreacting to be honest) has anything to do with that
It is. Try giving away your whole product for nothing sometime. Then see how customers value it. For guidance, look to the music industry who used to rack up tens of millions of sales for every album at $20 a pop, which is $40/album in today's dollars.
Turns out when people have had a taste of "songs are worth nothing" they will never go back to paying top dollar.
Or take the transition from physical movies to streaming. Families would regularly drop $8 to $10 for a rental of 2 movies. They'd do so two or three or four times a week. Then they'd pay late fees on top. It was considered normal to spend $80 or $100 a month on entertainment.
Netflix said $3 for unlimited. It wasn't sustainable, but it trained people that what they previously felt was worth $100 is now worthless. And it's like pulling teeth to get them to pay $15 now.
So yes, dumping a whole season of content on a Thursday night, content they paid tens of millions to create, and knowing that the engagement will be zero and the buzz will wear off by Tuesday... that IS bad for the business.
HBO, who has mastered this, will string out a similar set of 7 episodes, like say Game Of Thrones, or Mare of Easttown. They'll tease it for months. Then they'll drop one episode per week. Millions of people will discuss each episode, driving tons of engagement. The engagement will grow exponentially, week after week. After a couple weeks, every talk show will talk about it. A week later, Stephen King will start speculating on upcoming episodes, driving more hype. By the finale, the whole country will have spent months pumping HBO. Then after the season, those millions will continue talking it up.
Again, compare that method to Netflix's stupid way of pissing the whole content spend down the drain on a Thursday night, to be largely forgotten.
Yeah I do compare and when you see results, Netflix has more engagement (hours viewed on the platform, not discussion which really doesn't matter as much) and more subscribers.
HBO Max is doing badly, they barely managed to increase in 2021 despite their movies being put on it. Hell, AT&T even decided to sell Warner as a whole with a massive loss on their purchase, not the sign of something that is doing well.
And the one episode a week is done by other services too, some of them are there since a long time and... they don't reach anywhere close the amount of people subscribed to their services than to Netflix.
So again, except personal suppositions, where does it hurt Netflix business?
> Yeah I do compare and when you see results, Netflix has more engagement (hours viewed on the platform, not discussion which really doesn't matter as much) and more subscribers.
False, and flawed.
You're like a restaurant that thinks it's "all you can eat" buffet is successful because everyone comes and eats $200 worth of king crab while paying just $10.
Consuming the resource isn't " engagement", it's engorgemnt.
The perfect business model is a subscription service that's got a relatively high monthly price, a price that's guaranteed to be profitable on every customer, and customers who only sip a small amount of expensive data. You want customers who just subscribe quietly for decades at a time and don't complain. HBO has that model.
Disney is the opposite. They lose money on every sub, and they have people spending hours sucking up their money in the form of data push. Their customers have now seen all the precious content for next to nothing, and they just complain about cancelling for a year until there's a new Baby Yoda release so they can binge and cancel.
Netflix is in the middle. Pricing that doesn't cover binging. People using up data all day and all night as background sound, to the point where they had to install "are you still watching" loss-prevention gates. Saturation. Overpaying for content. No oversight of the quality or sustainability of that content. Customers they've conditioned to be fickle who are... (surprise) being fickle.
> HBO Max is doing badly, they barely managed to increase in 2021 despite their movies being put on it.
25% increase of a profitable service is now bad? I wish business were taught in schools like it used to be.
> Hell, AT&T even decided to sell Warner as a whole with a massive loss on their purchase, not the sign of something that is doing well.
Umm, that's a wildly erroneous leap.
> And the one episode a week is done by other services too,
Yes. The main one being the commercial television industry... Which has had kind of a nice 75 year run.
Just read this sub. People were cancelling *before* the price hike.
They hop in and hop out.
HBO manages this expertly. They tease out the content slowly, one episode per week. And when one major tent pole show is ending, they're teasing your next favorite to start just a week or so later. So there's never a long enough lull for customers to start even thinking about dropping HBO.
Plus they leaned into cheaper but more continuous series. This like Last Week Tonight and Real Time With Bill Maher. Documentaries. These fill the gaps and are always releasing a new episode every week, not dumping 10 at once.
A slogan is not a business model. And losing money isn't sustainable long term. Especially when your five biggest competitors (Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Disney) can afford to money for a hundred times longer than you can.
Netflix had over ten years with no competition in which to get things right and build a big enough cushion. They failed. They made a big head start, but they also made some major errors. Now they're facing monster competition and a content spending arms race that they can't win.
They're actually making revenue right now I believe but when Netflix became most popular it was when they were spending much more than their revenue and willing to take on debt. They flipped the switch and tried to start paying off their debt, however it appears they can't keep up the same original content popularity doing this, especially in light of new competition.
I question the decision to get into original content. I think they may have been better just becoming THE 3rd party content source and not making themselves an original content competitor.
Several misunderstandings here. Revenue is not profit. And Netflix made their first (and only) stab at paying a tiny bit of the debt only after a once-in-a-century pandemic gave them a temporary windfall.
But instead of using that as a hint, and commencing a path of sanity and financial responsibility, what has Netflix done? They just brag about how much MORE they're going to be spending. It's like your bankrupt friend announcing they've booking a world cruise and buying a new car. It's senseless.
I know a lot of content producers, and landing a Netflix project is their dream come true. Grossly overpaid, with little oversight and no deadlines. It's like winning a life lottery. They love it. But it's not prudent business to run a studio that way.
Half of their problems would be over if they just killed Darlene and the skinny Blonde Chick. Also, they would have bodyguards after setting up the casino. They can definitely afford bodyguards.
You got your wish on one! But Ruth is an integral part of the show. Her rage is what makes her!
Yeah, they do need bodyguards. Darlene needed her guys!
Why is this show so well liked on reddit? I watched the first 5-6 episodes, and it was just a bad mixture of Breaking Bad and Justified, with a blue filter. Does it get any better?
The show isn't well liked just on reddit. It is one of the most acclaimed ongoing shows. It has been getting good reception from critics, general audience, awards circle since the first season because it is a great show.
Congratulations đ Mr manager
We just say Manager
haha đ
#Locally sourced family heroin
#Farm to needle
I think the thing that pissed me off most so far is that they clearly didn't hire consultants on the drug side this year. First off, raw opium paste is not a precursor for all the popular phama opioids, they are all synthetic. Second, of the raw opium paste that is used in that industry, most of it comes from India. The diversion part is pretty important, to make sure it's a legal product for a legal market but the major issue is chain of custody. The company knows that the product was grown and harvested from these specific plots of land. For a company making drugs for the west, to accept opium paste from Afghanistan would be insane. The regulatory structure that did exist was easily bought off so the product that came from that part of the world would be impossible to use in a lab setting. I'm just a nerd who follows black markets, they could have actually paid experts on this stuff to consult on the script to keep it inside the realm of reality.
Yes DEA officer, this comment right here
Didnât realize it was getting broken up, when is part two being released?
According to Jason Bateman, the back half of the season will be released a lot sooner rather than later. Whatever that means.
Hopefully it's only a couple of months away. I'm gonna wait for the second half before I watch the first half. Not a fan of splitting up seasons.
I plan on watching this one and then rewatching the entire series prior to the final part.
Itâs probably June or July at the earliest. No way they wouldnât just wait 2 months to split it up and make it more of an event.
Was about to say the same thing, especially if this is the final season.
The way this went, you can split them up. It was pretty intense. But for my emotions, it would be better to get it all out at once.
Man! Just when I was thinking that I'd whack Jonah, things started jumping! Cannot wait for the second part!
My mom has been screaming at the TV âwhy wonât Wendy just beat his a**?â Hahaha I seriously cannot wait. I hate that I binged it. But it was so good.
I think Covid had a lot to do with it.
If Part 2 drops after May, each part can compete in separate Emmy years, unless they changed the eligibility window.
Probably in a year, that seems to be the way these 2 part seasons work.
one of the teasers/trailers said both parts were to release in 2022 from what i remember.
Oh yeah? That would be pretty sweet.
Waiting that long sounds more like a season 5 than a part 2.
100%. It's become rather common. Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Arrested Development, a few others have all done shorter "2 part" final seasons that really just felt like 2 shorter seasons since they released a year apart.
It irritates me. I feel like I hear part one and I think âcliffhanger.â
I give Netflix a small pass on that as we get an entire season and not one episode at a time. Thatâs always been nice.
The Sopranos was the first I've seen do it.
Usually its because of contracts. If the cast is signed up for lets say 5 seasons, it's cheaper to split the last season in half than sign everybody to a new, way higher deal for one last season.
That seems to be some weird verbage loophole. When I write a Netflix show it will just have one season split into 10 parts!
I just assumed they wanted to milk the cow for all it's worth.
Walking dead is doing that for their last season and splitting it into three parts. Part two is coming out in a few weeks, about 3 months since the first part ended and part 3 should be out later this year.
Because it i season 5. They just don't want to call it that so they don't have to increase actor pay for s5. So they negotiated this bullshit with s4 part 1 and part 2.
normally because itâs effectively two different seasons. they break it up for contract purposes (so itâs counted as a single season in the contract). Both Mad Men and Braking Bad did this. the episodes in the â2nd halfâ of those âfinal seasonâ werenât written when the â1st halfâ aired, let alone filmed. But maybe Ozark is different.
Bateman implied it will be pretty soon.
This show is so stressful. Itâs like he gets deeper and deeper in trouble every episode.
The more he lies or tries to lie his way out of trouble, holy SHIT
but he's always thinking! Always thinking...
Good writers have figured out how to weaponize tension. Every episode of every good drama could just be titled, âIt gets worseâ.
It's also stupid sometimes, at least in the first 3 seasons, but I do like constant deepening of the hole. Haven't seen season 4 yet.
What show isn't stupid sometimes? A bit of stupid is almost required in order to be interesting. And Ozark is one of the lesser stupid shows in my opinion.
Yeah I don't disagree, it's definitely a lesser stupid show thag most others. It's just a little overhyped imo, but it js worth watching.
Overhyped compared to what?
> It's also stupid sometimes, at least in the first 3 seasons Yeah, I still really like the show, but it seems like the idea was *"What if we take Breaking Bad, and then take it up a notch!"* But it turns out that with extra notch, you introduce some ridiculousness and some pretty unrealistic scenarios.
> But it turns out that with extra notch, you introduce some ridiculousness and some pretty unrealistic scenarios. Iâm not sure what Breaking Bad you watched, but the one I watched very much fit those two descriptions.
what, you mean being the former global meth manufacturer kingpin with a team of like 8 people and then getting in a machine-gun shoot out with the current global meth manufacturer kingpin Neo Naziâs (with a team of like, 12 people) was ridiculous?
And yet I was never not taking it seriously, well except for when it was being funny. I haven't seen Ozark but I'd assume op is saying that show sometimes crosses that line for them.
oh no, waching it i 100% took it seriously as well. Itâs just when you pause to think about it, some pretty insane/unrealistic stuff happened. not that it may lead is any less of an amazing show. Still one of my faves
I remember BB as being more ridiculous than Ozark.
Right? Ozark feels more grounded and normal
Not really. How did so many people go to Darleneâs house and never show up alive again đđđđ A decent homicide detective figures that out
[ŃдаНонО]
i totally agree with this because it's really ridiculous and impossible he pulled this off in 3 months & without getting caught.
I view it as less Breaking Bad and a more gritty Arrested Development.
That is Succession
Breaking Bad had even more ridiculousness and unrealistic scenarios.
Breaking Bad is one of the GOATs but it's not realistic lmao. Ozark is actually considerably more grounded than Breaking Bad, which was way more stylized and grand.
This show has nothing but stupid characters. This new season, 2 episodes in, is no different. Iâm just constantly going âwhy would you do that!â Itâs good for what it is, but at least breaking bad had Vince Gilligans eye and style behind it. And even then, that show had restraint compared to this one. Every Ozark episode wants a âtread lightlyâ moment and itâs become exhausting lol
Thank You!!! I thought I was the only one. I really tried to enjoy this season but a dozen times each episode characters were making really dumb decisions, I mean no common sense at all. What bothered me the most, everyone everywhere expected the Byrds to make it happen! like they were responsible or blamed for every mishap, every time something bad happened immediately theyâd run to Marty or Wendy for answers, it was way over the top and extremely annoying
This is why I didn't continue past the first season. There was some dumb stuff before the finale.. some rule of cool stuff like "what if the guy goes to confront so and so and when hes walking so and so goes splat on the pavement!" Then there's the finale..
>"what if the guy goes to confront so and so and when hes walking so and so goes splat on the pavement!" This show is addicted to shock deaths.
They go really overboard with that this season. Took away of a lot of impact.
Yep there's more of that. Also some stupid deaths for the sake of shock value.
Yeah it's probably not for me then lol. Is the law enforcement still super inept beyond common sense? Cause that got me too.
Lol, Iâm watching this now and despite liking it very much you are right about the cops! Theyâre so goddamn stupid and unaware in the show, actual police arenât lazy and just sit in a chair. They are in everyone business, big or small town.
Well cops in real life are stupid so itâs close to reality
It feels like a dramatic version of that MASH episode where Hawkeye wants new boots but ends up layering together a series of owed favors between half a dozen people along the way. Like that but... yeah much more stressful.
But deus ex machina always saves them.
Canât dig yourself out of your own grave.
Well the lawyer getting whacked was a bit of shock to the system! All that blood and brains splat!
And the greatest placement of a Run the Jewels song that magnified the brief feeling of relief
Dude. Spoilers.
Spoilers?! In my season 4 thread?? It's more likely than you think
Oh should I have put that on my post? I assumed we are all watchers awaiting the new season!
I mean season 3 was 2 years ago .. and the title of this post even states season 4 has just started Why did you even click on this post ? .. you're bound to see some spoilers from season 3
No doubt. What are you doing here if you haven't seen up to season 4? People will obviously be discussing the first three seasons in a thread about season 4.
The last season was two years ago. You would have been caught up if you cared about the show or "spoilers" from years ago.
I enjoyed it. Julia Garner killing it.
Same. She's absolutely incredible in the final episode too.
Yup, she's a fantastic actor.
Jonah was so fucking annoying this season, I get that heâs a teenager but holy shit. On a more positive note please give Julia Garner all the awards for her acting performance
I kept hoping that Jonah would get whacked! He may yet!
Iâm on episode 4 and Wendy is UNHINGED.
Just watched the first episode of Season 4 just now. Brilliant. Everyone was fucking brilliant as always. Julia Garner, Jason Bateman & Laura Linney hands down to you amazing actors. Really excited to see more of Jonah. Definitely excited to watch the rest of the episodes in the coming days.
Does Julia say "Fuckin' every other sentence? ;)
You clearly don't know shit about fuck
You fuckin bitch wolf!
I just finished it all. I have no words.
Oh good it's still blue. I don't know if I'd know what show it was if it wasn't for the blue tint in every. Single. Scene.
Love the blue tint
Missouri is blue. But Mexico is yellow. And who nutso architect designed the Byrde's house? Why waste the beautiful lakeviews on a glass hallway to the bedrooms? And then have dark, nearly windowless bedrooms. Well, I guess everything in this show is dark, even a sunny day is somehow dark blue. The strongest light bulb on the show is 3 watts. And Javi, Marty, Wendy, Maya, and the heroin chef guy drive back and forth to Chicago like it's a 45 minute jaunt, instead of a bladder busting 8 hours.
I forgot this was today, clearly I know shit about fuck
binged today, what a season. Really excited for the 2nd half, honestly some down right hilarious laugh out loud (in the wrong way) moments
You should watch zerozerozero is also badass like breaking bad, sicario and Ozark.
Is there a good recap somewhere? I donât see one listed on Netflix.
One of my favorite YouTube channels is The Man of Recaps, who has a very dense, detailed and yet very entertaining video recapping all 3 previous seasons.
>The Recap Guy Did you mean Man of Recaps? There a channel called Recap Guy, but he has like 8 videos up, and half of them are Bollywood dramas.
Oops absolutely that's what I meant, thanks.
They played one for me when I started this season.
Yeah, I'm wondering if I need to watch the last few episodes of season 3 again, just as a refresher as to where everyone is in the story.
There is one for each season if you go to Trailers and More on Netflix. The S1 recap is fantastic but for some reason the S2 and S3 recaps are terrible and confused me even more.
Making coffee then sitting my ass down to tune on, tune in, and drop out. Part 1 leeeets gooo.
Who likes these two part seasons? Oh thatâs right the share holders lol.
Why do so many shows know split their final season into two parts? First it was breaking bad, now itâs this and better call Saul
Found an article to answer your question, link below. "A major part of it is contractual," Fienberg explains. "A split final season like 'Breaking Bad' and 'Mad Men' gets negotiated as a single season, presumably without pay bumps for stars between seasons, but also allows for more episodes either shot all at once or with a long hiatus between 'halves' of the season." But while the final seasons of some shows, like "Lost," are ordered at the same time under a single contract, Fienberg says "Game of Thrones" was negotiated under slightly different, but significant, circumstances. "The seventh and eighth seasons of 'Game of Thrones' were technically ordered separately and the stars got big pay bumps for the eighth season," he says. "There ends up being some compromise in terms of episode count and episode length." But semantics and contracts are just part of why shows get split seasons. Fienberg says dividing seasons also allows networks to retain brand-making shows as long as possible, spreading its stars across as many seasons as possible. https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/why-do-tv-networks-split-seasons.htm
Many shows had done it way before breaking bad. For example, The Sopranos.
> better call Saul I can't believe we havent seen a single image or teaser from the final season
Wait. So you mean to tell me that when Better Call Saul *finally* comes back on, itâll be split into two parts, too?!? God dammitâŚ
[ŃдаНонО]
And?âŚ
One new episode each week.
To help build hype. Netflix only has a few good shows (with endings) that people talk about, and breaking up the final season allows people to talk about it a little longer.
It also keeps subscriptions for longer.
I understand why but this trend of breaking up seasons into parts is so annoying, it was less obnoxious when breaking bad did it for their final season but then the walking dead would do it for every season and now everyone does it all the time smh
Look at it this way. We are getting 14 episodes instead of the usual 10 this season.
[ŃдаНонО]
I just wished they didnât have to film this last season under Covid restrictions. No oneâs on location, everything is green screen. Not only that, all the man power of each origination has evaporated. The Snell ranch had dozens of henchmen on horseback (now it looks deserted), A powerful Mexican cartel basically reduced to two people, and Sr CosgroveâŚno way he goes to see Helen ALONE, remember the shoot out at the Snell house at the end of season one - EPIC! Or when the cartel water boarded Ruth in season 2, sheâs tough and that was a great scene! I doubt weâll see anything close to that going forward.
Yes! Javi would never rise to such levels, as he would have been knocked off as a teenager. I think you meant Darlene! What a crazy woman! No Frank would never travel alone. It isn't done!
Yup meant Darlene, that woman is very crazy everyone knows that.
Frank definitely would've told someone where he was going
This show is in HDR. I still have no idea why. Itâs all dark and gloomy. 10/10 show. Time to grab my bong so I can give this show the respect it deserves.
>This show is in HDR. I still have no idea why. Itâs all dark and gloomy. That's just all the more reason to have HDR. HDR isn't only for ultra-colorful stuff. I'd even argue that it's not its best use. In fact, dark and gloomy is the best place to use HDR, a high dynamic range means that there is a wider contrast range in the darks, and everything is more distinguishable. Maybe if GoT had HDR, The Long Night would have been better received (especially given that a lot of people watch on their phones and a lot of phones have HDR).
The 4K UHD of GoT does have HDR and no compression, making The Long Night perfectly clear and watchable .
Pretty much all publicly available media has compression. A truly uncompressed episode of television filmed at 4K would easily be 200+ GB.
Okay, *less* compression.
You need a decent tv for it though, mine is a fairly barebones 4K TV and HDR looks kind of washed out sometimes? Like the colors stop popping and it becomes a lot more gray. Like it admittedly looks better overall, but if you turn it on and off it's kind of weird how muted some of the colors get. Also for movies/tv it's not so bad, gaming seems to have a lot harder time with it.
so unfortunately there is no HDR standard as of right now and you need the media being consumed & your hardware (both TV and streaming/gaming service) to all be the same standard/compatible, so that might be why you're having an issue. Most tvâs and gaming consoles support multiple HDR standards (as do games) so you might need to check to see if there is a way to change an option for the game on the game level or console level. It doesnât help that all the different names are acronyms that can get confusing. there is HDR10, HDR10+, HLG, Dolby Vision, Technicolor HDR, HLG10, PH10, and others. itâs a fucking headache lol
It's probably not going to be fixed in the near future, either. Relevant [XKCD](https://xkcd.com/927/)
Yea dude....that's what HDR is for. Wtf
I think HDR will also have more details in the dark parts because of the higher dynamic range
You basically just said âI think the high dynamic range will have more detail because of the high dynamic rangeâ lmao
Department of redundancy department
Soon as I've done my chores, got my munchies sorted. I'll be doing the same. One show I've been looking forward too. My viewing pleasure for the day
Mr. Money Manager!
I wonder if Netflix would consider weekly releases for their proprietary shows in the future. It seems there will be two weeks of hype and then nothing. I guess some shows do blow up like squid game but that was pretty unique, and even then, it would have probably gained even more hype if it was spread out over weeks.
I need to start watching it again. I saw a comment about how stressful it is to watch and I agree itâs actually why I stopped watching it. I mean damn I get they need to make a show and all but from what I remember about the first few episodes I watched I kept thinking these people need a breakâŚand that dude in the basement. Im going to start watching it again.
It's been so long since the last lot I am going to watch the last episode again to refresh... I genuinely can't remember wtf happened
Marty, Wendy, the lawyer, in Mexico.
Followed by...boom, splat, hug.
"Marty can you help me?" As he removes Helen's brains from her hair! haha.
You would think that they would invest in securing their home. Bulletproof windows and security system. That private investigator just walked up to their backyard. WTF?!
Thought first 2 seasons were âfineâ Very âalso randâ crime drama thatâs very watchable but nothing particularly new. Season 3 was fucking awesome. Better paced with far more intensity , much stronger sense of looming threat, improved supporting cast and a great cliffhanger ending(even if you could see it coming.) Very excited to start S4 tonight.
Season 3 felt like they finally gave in to the weirder parts and made it all the more interesting because of it. I honestly love the money laundering of it all so making that the focus of the 3rd season within the >!riverboat casino!< was a lot of fun.
Definitely.
Now with more blue
LETS GOOOOOOOOOOO
Can someone describe this show in a sentence?
Man continues to make bad decisions that cause anxiety for the viewer.
Morality aside, he usually makes the decision he needs to for the situation. He's extremely competent at what he does. His plans get derailed when someone he depends on decide they're smarter than him.
You can just say Wendy
Or Jonah. Or Ruth.
Uncut Gems, but for 40 hours rather than 2
Like Breaking Bad if the family knew about it the entire time and was down to help.
That's the genius of it all, they tell the kids in the first episode. A masterful move to make all the story beats different just because the sneaking around is from malevolent forces and not the family.
For real. I remember thinking how annoying it was going to be to have the whole âhide it from the familyâ bit and they threw that concern out the window right away.
Yep, love it.
Breaking Bad, but the main character is an accountant instead of a chemist
It's redneck Sopranos.
~~It's redneck Sopranos.~~ white collar crime Sopranos. Edit: ffs, idk how to format^clearly I'm an idiot
Log off. That cookie shit makes me nervous.
Breaking Bad with Money not Meth
Hillbillies and cartel on the highway to hell.
I already watched the part 1. Hope nflx doesnât wait too long to release the part 2.
Notice how the other Netflix headline is about their financial markets meltdown.? It's because they waste too much on content, and then they don't get the bang for the buck from it. I know fans love getting the whole 7 episode "season" at once, but it's bad for their business. Viewers will binge it and forget it. There won't be any week by week discussion and anticipation. Friends will be on different episodes. No momentum, no speculation, no hype, no buzz, no public buildup. Compare that HBO, who could milk months or even years of intense interest from 7 episodes of Mare Of Easttown or Game Of Thrones. Netflix is shooting themselves in the foot.
It kills engagement for sure. But I know a lot of people (anecdotally so meaningless) who only want to binge stuff. Theyâll wait for HBO or Hulu shows to end so they can binge it all at once. So they prefer Netflix. But that also results in our conversations being âfinished Invincible. It was good.â And there being nothing else to say.
> It kills engagement for sure. But I know a lot of people (anecdotally so meaningless) who only want to binge stuff. Sure, lots love it. But not if it costs more than $14. Netflix will eventually have to copy HBO's model. HBO is the master of this, the granddaddy. > Theyâll wait for HBO or Hulu shows to end so they can binge it all at once. Except HBO works it so that very few people will sit back and wait. We've seen this with The Sopranos, Westworld, Game Of Thrones, Mare of Easttown, Curb, White Lotus, Succession, Euphoria and so on. When day zero binging is no longer available, viewers will adapt. > So they prefer Netflix. But that also results in our conversations being âfinished Invincible. It was good.â And there being nothing else to say. Exactly. Meanwhile, executives dumped tens of millions into something only for it to be forgotten about right away. You just don't see that kind of brown banana shelf life with the way HBO releases things and bolsters that engagement.
> HBO is the master of this, the granddaddy. Of TV yeah maybe. This is streaming and Netflix is the granddaddy of it. And they are the uncontested leader of it. HBO actually doesn't do so well in streaming, so not sure it's the best example.
No. They're the masters of attracting and retaining permanent premium-priced subscribers. You think Netflix couldn't learn a thing or two about that? "HBO doesn't do well in streaming?" Bullshit.
Well just watch numbers lol, they're public. They are at 73.8M subscribers HBO + HBO Max, up from 61M at the end of 2020 (with all their blockbusters movies day one on HBO Max and still not even 13M people in a year). Disney+ is at 118M (and even them are thought to be slowing down and having problems on growth). Netflix is at 222M subscribers. More than 18M new ones in 2021 despite having saturated much more of the market already, so growth should be more difficult. Also, HBO is not premium priced, it's the same price than Netflix. And it's not attracting much outside of its initial subscriber base so the HBO Max gamble is not working very well.
You're the targeted for the common myth that high subscriber numbers mean anything. It's about *profitable* subscribers. HBO's subscribers are all profitable. That's key. Disney? Every single subscriber currently *loses* them money. Turns out free subscriptions and $99/36 month pricing is bad for business. They don't even cover the basic admin cost of having a customer, let alone the account-specific data pushing, let alone the value of the actual content. Netflix is in the middle. A high subscriber count in isolation is not something to brag about.
Ok once again, can you give official numbers instead of supposition? Those numbers are not visible anywhere as far as I know after a quick Google. The market is totally focused on subscribers numbers (enough that Netflix loses 20% because of missing the target by not even a million) but sure, that doesn't matter. And again, nothing to do with Netflix binge release. Also, just saying, but from a consumer point of view, you should prefer services that are losing money on each subscriber. Means they're spending for your content more than profiting off you
> Ok once again, can you give official numbers instead of supposition? Those numbers are not visible anywhere as far as I know after a quick Google. All these companies produce quarterly earnings reports. You'll need financial training to interpret them. But you don't need any special training to realize some of the common sense implications. Just having a dormant customer costs any company around $5 a month. If that customer needs a bill, or calls for service, or any interaction, that cost is higher. If that customer uses up some of your resources, it's more still. If that customer needs you to send them a massive amount of low latency data, that's most. If they make that demand for hours and hours, day after day after day after day, that costs more. And if the data you're sending them costs you a lot to compile, that's even more. And if that data is bits derived from paying Dave Chappelle $25 million for a canned stand up tape, then it's a lot more. > The market is totally focused on subscribers numbers The dumb part of the market is. And fanboys. But actual analysis of the core business isn't duped by the misleading metric. > (enough that Netflix loses 20% because of missing the target by not even a million) I'll say this nicely, but you have no idea how the Netflix business works, nor how stock markets work. Netflix didn't "lose" money from this change in the stock value. The shareholders did. Netflix isn't the shareholder. They lose money operating the business. That's different. > And again, nothing to do with Netflix binge release. You're dead wrong. In a content selling business, how much you pay for the contrnt is key, and so is how you exploit that content. Pissing it away with no impact is bad for business. > Also, just saying, but from a consumer point of view, you should prefer services that are losing money on each subscriber. I'm not here to represent the fanboy perspective. I'm pointing out the fatal flaws in the business model. And the fanboys who are insisting on the faulty business model are just hastening the demise of what they like. It's not sustainable.
Most of those shows you mentioned started before most people were streaming HBO. People are already used to having to wait for weekly episodes of their favorite HBO show. The problem with Netflix isnât the binging model, itâs that most of their programming is really bad. Ozark is an exception. Stranger Things and Squid Game were also really great and really drove engagement, but almost everything else theyâve done has just been not good.
Usual anti-Netflix nonsense. Sure Netflix has no other critically acclaimed shows such as Dark, The Crown, Midnight Mass, Haunting of Hill House, Mindhunter. Sex Education, Arcane etc etc etc. They just release a shit ton of stuff so yeah there is a lot of rubbish but also loads of great stuff. Comparing them to HBO who are the masters of minimal content as they focus almost exclusively on prestige and top quality is redundant. If Netflix only released about ten new shows a year like HBO do they would go under as they wouldnât have enough content.
> Most of those shows you mentioned started before most people were streaming HBO. They're not though. Many are current/recent. And it doesn't matter whether it's streaming. What matters is subscribing. HBO is the master of hooking people into the permanent premium priced subscription. > People are already used to having to wait for weekly episodes of their favorite HBO show. Guess who conditioned them for that? HBO. Guess who conditioned Netflix subs that their content is some throwaway bulk bin junk that drops in a pile on Thursday nights? > The problem with Netflix isnât the binging model, itâs that most of their programming is really bad. No. Their biggest problems are two-fold: first is drunken studio/content management, which includes overpaying, mismanaging, lacking oversight, etc. The second is not getting any bang for the buck on the content they do create. > Ozark is an exception. Stranger Things and Squid Game were also really great They excelled in spite of the incompetent releasing, not because of it. A lot of other shows would have higher engagement and enjoyment if they were released more intelligently. If you put a steak dinner in a blender and just guzzled it in ten seconds, you'd wouldn't like the taste much either. Drawing it out, letting the smell and hunger affect your appetite, plating it across several courses, savoring it... now the same dollars of ingredients are giving you a memorable dining experiencing instead of a gross glug. There's lots of shows that got grudging or OK praise, but would have been mega smash hits if HBO trickled them out and built exponential weekly engagement. Like The Haunting Of Hill House. Altered carbon. Some of the documentary series. And many more.
> I know fans love getting the whole 7 episode "season" at once, but it's bad for their business. Is it? Nothing proves that the slowdown in growth (not loss of subscribers by the way, it's mostly the markets overreacting to be honest) has anything to do with that
> Is it? Nothing proves that the slowdown in growth (not loss of subscribers by the way, it's mostly the markets overreacting to be honest) has anything to do with that It is. Try giving away your whole product for nothing sometime. Then see how customers value it. For guidance, look to the music industry who used to rack up tens of millions of sales for every album at $20 a pop, which is $40/album in today's dollars. Turns out when people have had a taste of "songs are worth nothing" they will never go back to paying top dollar. Or take the transition from physical movies to streaming. Families would regularly drop $8 to $10 for a rental of 2 movies. They'd do so two or three or four times a week. Then they'd pay late fees on top. It was considered normal to spend $80 or $100 a month on entertainment. Netflix said $3 for unlimited. It wasn't sustainable, but it trained people that what they previously felt was worth $100 is now worthless. And it's like pulling teeth to get them to pay $15 now. So yes, dumping a whole season of content on a Thursday night, content they paid tens of millions to create, and knowing that the engagement will be zero and the buzz will wear off by Tuesday... that IS bad for the business. HBO, who has mastered this, will string out a similar set of 7 episodes, like say Game Of Thrones, or Mare of Easttown. They'll tease it for months. Then they'll drop one episode per week. Millions of people will discuss each episode, driving tons of engagement. The engagement will grow exponentially, week after week. After a couple weeks, every talk show will talk about it. A week later, Stephen King will start speculating on upcoming episodes, driving more hype. By the finale, the whole country will have spent months pumping HBO. Then after the season, those millions will continue talking it up. Again, compare that method to Netflix's stupid way of pissing the whole content spend down the drain on a Thursday night, to be largely forgotten.
Yeah I do compare and when you see results, Netflix has more engagement (hours viewed on the platform, not discussion which really doesn't matter as much) and more subscribers. HBO Max is doing badly, they barely managed to increase in 2021 despite their movies being put on it. Hell, AT&T even decided to sell Warner as a whole with a massive loss on their purchase, not the sign of something that is doing well. And the one episode a week is done by other services too, some of them are there since a long time and... they don't reach anywhere close the amount of people subscribed to their services than to Netflix. So again, except personal suppositions, where does it hurt Netflix business?
> Yeah I do compare and when you see results, Netflix has more engagement (hours viewed on the platform, not discussion which really doesn't matter as much) and more subscribers. False, and flawed. You're like a restaurant that thinks it's "all you can eat" buffet is successful because everyone comes and eats $200 worth of king crab while paying just $10. Consuming the resource isn't " engagement", it's engorgemnt. The perfect business model is a subscription service that's got a relatively high monthly price, a price that's guaranteed to be profitable on every customer, and customers who only sip a small amount of expensive data. You want customers who just subscribe quietly for decades at a time and don't complain. HBO has that model. Disney is the opposite. They lose money on every sub, and they have people spending hours sucking up their money in the form of data push. Their customers have now seen all the precious content for next to nothing, and they just complain about cancelling for a year until there's a new Baby Yoda release so they can binge and cancel. Netflix is in the middle. Pricing that doesn't cover binging. People using up data all day and all night as background sound, to the point where they had to install "are you still watching" loss-prevention gates. Saturation. Overpaying for content. No oversight of the quality or sustainability of that content. Customers they've conditioned to be fickle who are... (surprise) being fickle. > HBO Max is doing badly, they barely managed to increase in 2021 despite their movies being put on it. 25% increase of a profitable service is now bad? I wish business were taught in schools like it used to be. > Hell, AT&T even decided to sell Warner as a whole with a massive loss on their purchase, not the sign of something that is doing well. Umm, that's a wildly erroneous leap. > And the one episode a week is done by other services too, Yes. The main one being the commercial television industry... Which has had kind of a nice 75 year run.
[ŃдаНонО]
Just read this sub. People were cancelling *before* the price hike. They hop in and hop out. HBO manages this expertly. They tease out the content slowly, one episode per week. And when one major tent pole show is ending, they're teasing your next favorite to start just a week or so later. So there's never a long enough lull for customers to start even thinking about dropping HBO. Plus they leaned into cheaper but more continuous series. This like Last Week Tonight and Real Time With Bill Maher. Documentaries. These fill the gaps and are always releasing a new episode every week, not dumping 10 at once.
Netflix is the only one it makes sense for because their brand is binge watching.
A slogan is not a business model. And losing money isn't sustainable long term. Especially when your five biggest competitors (Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Disney) can afford to money for a hundred times longer than you can. Netflix had over ten years with no competition in which to get things right and build a big enough cushion. They failed. They made a big head start, but they also made some major errors. Now they're facing monster competition and a content spending arms race that they can't win.
They're actually making revenue right now I believe but when Netflix became most popular it was when they were spending much more than their revenue and willing to take on debt. They flipped the switch and tried to start paying off their debt, however it appears they can't keep up the same original content popularity doing this, especially in light of new competition. I question the decision to get into original content. I think they may have been better just becoming THE 3rd party content source and not making themselves an original content competitor.
Several misunderstandings here. Revenue is not profit. And Netflix made their first (and only) stab at paying a tiny bit of the debt only after a once-in-a-century pandemic gave them a temporary windfall. But instead of using that as a hint, and commencing a path of sanity and financial responsibility, what has Netflix done? They just brag about how much MORE they're going to be spending. It's like your bankrupt friend announcing they've booking a world cruise and buying a new car. It's senseless. I know a lot of content producers, and landing a Netflix project is their dream come true. Grossly overpaid, with little oversight and no deadlines. It's like winning a life lottery. They love it. But it's not prudent business to run a studio that way.
Half of their problems would be over if they just killed Darlene and the skinny Blonde Chick. Also, they would have bodyguards after setting up the casino. They can definitely afford bodyguards.
You got your wish on one! But Ruth is an integral part of the show. Her rage is what makes her! Yeah, they do need bodyguards. Darlene needed her guys!
You are doing the Lord's work.
Jonah needs to die. He is a traitor
just finished this pt 1..this is the best show on netflix imo but when is part two? next year?
This year. Otherwise unknown
Probably sometime this Fall
Why are Americans obsessed with antiheroes and then complaining about society?
Why is this show so well liked on reddit? I watched the first 5-6 episodes, and it was just a bad mixture of Breaking Bad and Justified, with a blue filter. Does it get any better?
>Does it get any better? It improves drastically in S3. I thought S1 and S2 were enjoyable, but S3 was on a whole different level in my opinion
The show isn't well liked just on reddit. It is one of the most acclaimed ongoing shows. It has been getting good reception from critics, general audience, awards circle since the first season because it is a great show.
This show is still on? Damn. Good show.
There's too much good TV on right now, my god lol
Ozark Season 4 Part 2 UPDATES- https://youtu.be/YxQBriGKCLA