Netflix doing well now, is that good?

Netflix will struggle.

Streamers are onto "churners". So that's why now a NEW series premiere will often not all drop at once. They are following the old network model of dribbling episodes out. So thanks for screwing up the beauty of that model you month to month'ers... ;-)

It's easy to say "Netflix just has to keep making great content"

It's not that easy. I actually think we're in a bubble. A lot of marginal TV is getting made that isn't VALUED by the audience.

I am finding it INCREDIBLY difficult to get experienced crew everywhere I work. In the last 3 years I've shot in Atlanta, New Orleans, London, Naples, Vancouver, Chicago and LA and in every single market, it's REALLY hard to find seasoned crew. On the small show I did in Vancouver the most experienced focus puller I could find had only been doing it for 18 months.

In another location, most of the production office crew had never worked on a large show so they made a lot of basic mistakes and were basically overwhelmed with the scale of the show in a way that visibly impacted the quality of the show.

From writing down, the talent pool of GOOD isn't very deep. You spread those that are good thin and then add a lot of new and not so good, and you get this world we live in now with a lot of high end content stretched very thin.

In order to secure the BEST above the line talent (actors, writers, producers. directors) they are in bidding wars with each other to get that talent. So the prices keep going up. That's an artificial bubble, created by an artificial market force. Although it's recently been resolved a bit more favourably, for a long time streamers didn't pay residuals in the same way so a lot of above the line talent, so guess what. The Talent takes a massive cream of the front end cost.

A big streamer show might be 100 million for 10 eps, but you can take at least 30% of that fee UP FRONT because of all the producers and IP / development / royalty off the top.

I was in negotiation on a big Netflix show. Huge name actor (Oscar winner) attached and a seemingly large budget. But once I started some due diligence, it became apparent that the show's story ambition would be really difficult on the budget that was left after everyone up front took their cut. (VFX heavy space show)

I know some people that worked on a very large budget show for Netflix and said the biggest problem was that there wasn't any money left to make the show. It has 22 producers on IMDB.

A friend of mine is a director who has a deal with HBO. We've come to an era where streamers are doing deals to secure NAMES so they are exclusive to (in this case) HBO. Not a writer. Not a showrunner. Not a producer. A Director you've probably never heard of (but does big shows)

Creative talent are resources, but we're commodity items. We're only valuable when the market is willing to pay for us. Once there's a collapse in demand, then it will change very quickly.

This bubble will burst. It's not sustainable for streamers like Netflix to keep borrowing money to make more and more marginal content that they are forced to pay more an more for because the talent pool is so tight from writing down to dolly grips.

It's just not sustainable. It's gambling. Like the big traditional film studios long ago learned, you can't guarantee success with money for content.

JB (Also a DGA member who get's residuals)

https://www.fastcompany.com/9030785...-inside-netflixs-arms-race-for-tv-showrunners

https://deadline.com/2020/03/dga-bo...-big-gains-in-streaming-residuals-1202876775/

https://www.fastcompany.com/90250828/the-death-of-hollywoods-middle-class
 
Last edited:
John Brawley said:
...
This bubble will burst. It's not sustainable for streamers like Netflix to keep borrowing money to make more and more marginal content that they are forced to pay more an more for because the talent pool is so tight from writing down to dolly grips.

It's just not sustainable. It's gambling.
Click to expand...

It's a well worn model that has been used over and over in emerging markets. A lot of fool ... check that; investment money comes flooding into a new market hoping to cash in. Many try. Few succeed. Uber and Lyft are using the same model. They are hoping to stay in business long enough for self-driving cars to come along. Remember those?
 
John, I agree with you that it is a big challenge to crew up well in many production cities especially incentive states (it is an incredible strain on DP's particularly because it's three department's worth and so often people have moved up too quickly and/or are just looking for the next show to jump to). I like working here in LA because I've been here so long and have a deep network to pull from. If I can ever help recommend or vet referrals for you, please contact me.
 
John Brawley said:
... From writing down, the talent pool of GOOD isn't very deep. You spread those that are good thin and then add a lot of new and not so good, and you get this world we live in now with a lot of high end content stretched very thin.
Click to expand...
I've been saying this for a long time now. I also compared it to the early 1990's when Fox came on the air and the Paramount Network and WB were also gearing up for the debuts. And, all of a sudden, shows became "turrrible" (Charles Barkley), especially comedies. There was just not enough talent to go around. You'd have a show runner and an experienced hand to assist him and then a bunch of newbs.

Of course, a lot of prospects made huge money. There were writers on top shows who got guaranteed development deals in excess of $10,000,000. The problem with most of them was that those top shows became good because of the top writers, not their underlings.

PS. A friend's friend got a job working on a top show of the era . Maybe even THE top show. He had pitched a story line for an episode. He then wrote the script for it. He is credited with the entire episode. But, off the actual shooting draft, he barely had a sentence left. It was all rewritten by the show runner. For whom, this was an old hat.
 
CharlesPapert said:
and so often people have moved up too quickly and/or are just looking for the next show to jump to). I like working here in LA because I've been here so long and have a deep network to pull from. If I can ever help recommend or vet referrals for you, please contact me.
Click to expand...

Yes. Totally agree.

Crew nowadays don't commit to do a whole show. Not like the way I was brought up. They jump for the next opportunity or a chance to make $1 an hour more without any remorse or guilt. I've never done it, but if I had an opportunity that was "too good to say no" I'd still go to my "boss" and ask permission to be released from the commitment I'd made. A lot of crew just "tell" me that they're going without much notice and bye bye.

Those are the crew that I usually mark as "do not hire again". It doesn't matter at this point because there is so much work. Many of those crew haven't been "hungry" and worked in the lean times when those relationships mean a lot more.

I was trained that you sign up to a job. That means all the job till the end, till you wrap that's it...done.

Not just some of the job and leave for whatever's better / more prestigious / more money. Few seem to value building a relationship any more in that same way.

JB
 
DLD said:
More on Netflix.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/netflixs-reign-streaming-king-may-164904798.html
Click to expand...

This is the only part I disagree with:

"Disney, NBCUniversal, and WarnerMedia have decades of original video content at their disposal and do not need to rely on new productions nearly as much as Netflix. These three media giants could sit on their enormous libraries for years and still keep viewers entertained."

A blockbuster from the '90s is just not as much of a draw as one from this year. I'm more interested in the Mandalorian than I am in the rest of the Disney+ library combined
 
I posted this story before.

Back in 2015, I was in a supermarket with my then frequent companion. Walking out through the checkout line, I saw a large glossy that was dedicated to the upcoming 30 year anniversary of the Princess Bride. I then told my friend about the movie - and, especially, about having once met Robin Wright - but she knew nothing about it. Having not grown up in the US, she didn't know about the film at all. I then asked two 17-year girls that were working the counter - one was a cashier, the other helped us bag our groceries. "Have you ever seen the film?" - "No, never heard of it" - "It was a huge hit" - "When?" - "In 1987"- "Oh that's old. I am 17. I only watch films made in the 21st century".
 
That's sad. I love the princess bride. But it's a great example of the recency bias.

But it gets worse. With my toddler on the playground last year, a 10-year old shows up on the adjacent swing and starts talking to me. I asked him what good movies he's seen lately. He says he doesn't watch movies. I ask if he watches TV and Hulu. No - he mostly watches other people play video games on youtube!
 
ahalpert said:
That's sad. I love the princess bride. But it's a great example of the recency bias.

But it gets worse. With my toddler on the playground last year, a 10-year old shows up on the adjacent swing and starts talking to me. I asked him what good movies he's seen lately. He says he doesn't watch movies. I ask if he watches TV and Hulu. No - he mostly watches other people play video games on youtube!
Click to expand...

IMHO, this is somewhat of a parenting issue, even though that sounds weird. Kids over the past two or three decades simply weren't ever exposed to cinema, the same as most were never exposed to
classical music (unless they played it in band), the Great American Songbook, Jazz, Classical, experimental music. They were exposed, until the past decade, mostly to whatever dreck was churning out of the radio, whatever the parents
had playing. And most the parents had bad taste in music, film and TV because their parents didn't expose them to variety and quality.

I think that's the thing most parents don't get, you don't need to dictate what your kids like or find "good", you just need to force them to watch a variety of things and listen to a variety of music and make
sure you throw some of the good stuff in there. Both my kids are now young adults but I am happy that I exposed them to great cinema and some of it, they loved and still love to this day.

When I was producing documentaries and shorts for New Line, I made them sit down and watch the collected works of Harold Lloyd, the silent, often forgotten film comedian whose work got lost between Chaplin
and Keaton. Lloyd was actually a bigger star for a good portion of his career than either, but his works were not as well known and many were lost in a vault fire. My kids loved Harold Lloyd because they
saw the genius in his work and his comedy. I made them watch Gone With the Wind, Wizard of Oz, King Kong, Citizen Kane, and many others. I always told them, "I don't care if you like these films, I just want you
to have experienced them because they influenced every film you'll ever see in small ways and large ways." And yes, both kids love The Princess Bride, one is 21 and one is 25.

We can't expect kids to have any discernment, taste and cultural awareness if we don't expose them to great works of art, literature, music, cinema. This stuff doesn't sink in on it's own. BTW, my 21 year old generally
would have the same answer as the 10 year old you spoke with, it's sad, I agree.
 
ahalpert said:
This is the only part I disagree with:

"Disney, NBCUniversal, and WarnerMedia have decades of original video content at their disposal and do not need to rely on new productions nearly as much as Netflix. These three media giants could sit on their enormous libraries for years and still keep viewers entertained."

A blockbuster from the '90s is just not as much of a draw as one from this year. I'm more interested in the Mandalorian than I am in the rest of the Disney+ library combined
Click to expand...

And I disagree with your disagreement. A good library is incredibly attractive and valuable(invaluable?). I bet half of what I’ve watched on Disney+, so far, has been from their back catalogue. Probably 80%+ of what I’ve watched on Amazon in the last four to five months has all been 5+ to over 20 years old.
 
puredrifting said:
IMHO, this is somewhat of a parenting issue, even though that sounds weird. Kids over the past two or three decades simply weren't ever exposed to cinema, the same as most were never exposed to
classical music (unless they played it in band), the Great American Songbook, Jazz, Classical, experimental music. They were exposed, until the past decade, mostly to whatever dreck was churning out of the radio, whatever the parents
had playing. And most the parents had bad taste in music, film and TV because their parents didn't expose them to variety and quality.

I think that's the thing most parents don't get, you don't need to dictate what your kids like or find "good", you just need to force them to watch a variety of things and listen to a variety of music and make
sure you throw some of the good stuff in there. Both my kids are now young adults but I am happy that I exposed them to great cinema and some of it, they loved and still love to this day.

When I was producing documentaries and shorts for New Line, I made them sit down and watch the collected works of Harold Lloyd, the silent, often forgotten film comedian whose work got lost between Chaplin
and Keaton. Lloyd was actually a bigger star for a good portion of his career than either, but his works were not as well known and many were lost in a vault fire. My kids loved Harold Lloyd because they
saw the genius in his work and his comedy. I made them watch Gone With the Wind, Wizard of Oz, King Kong, Citizen Kane, and many others. I always told them, "I don't care if you like these films, I just want you
to have experienced them because they influenced every film you'll ever see in small ways and large ways." And yes, both kids love The Princess Bride, one is 21 and one is 25.

We can't expect kids to have any discernment, taste and cultural awareness if we don't expose them to great works of art, literature, music, cinema. This stuff doesn't sink in on it's own. BTW, my 21 year old generally
would have the same answer as the 10 year old you spoke with, it's sad, I agree.
Click to expand...

A huge part of the problem is “today’s” parenting style(which goes back probably to the mid-late 90’s, at least). They want to be their friends instead of their parents. If a kid tells their parent today that they hate them, the parent falls to pieces(because they were raised “everyone is a winner”/“everyone is special”/here is your participation trophy). They don’t know how to deal with adversity, failure, not being liked, especially by their kid, so they move Heaven and Earth to make them/keep them happy and let them run roughshod all over them. What did our parents do if we said “I hate you”? Usually something like, “So what?”.
 
Ya but ... play a youngster some Beatles or ABBA and they may like (unless they're into rap, in which case, they're near hopeless) both.

Another cashier story. A really cute 20-YO at a different supermarket was a Cuban, who grew up in Montreal and thus spoke French natively. We've joked around before, so when going through the line, I said, "Je t'aime". She blushes a little. I add quickly, "It's a famous song" - "By who?" - "Serge Gainsbourg & Jane Birkin" - "When did it come out?" - "1970". She just shook her head.
 
I can't get my kid to like anything. Lord knows I've tried. Basically anything I love she thinks is dorky and old. I even showed her The Princess Bride. She didn't love it. Not into any music made before the year 2000. The oldest movie she likes is Clueless. The only two things we've both enjoyed together is Stranger Things and the TV show Community. It just is what it is. There are worse things to be disappointed about in your children.
 
Run&Gun said:
And I disagree with your disagreement. A good library is incredibly attractive and valuable(invaluable?). I bet half of what I’ve watched on Disney+, so far, has been from their back catalogue. Probably 80%+ of what I’ve watched on Amazon in the last four to five months has all been 5+ to over 20 years old.
Click to expand...

Hey don't get me wrong - in my bid to stay awake with my newborn, I've watched 2.5 seasons of late-80s Trek and 5 Trek movies from the 80s plus a couple late-60s episodes.

BUT I started using the service (cbs all access) because they had brand new Trek shows.

So - come for the latest hits but stay for the classics?
 
I saw an ad for a new educational device to get your kids to watch the classics - has anyone tried this out yet?
orange.jpg
 
Netflix "Old Guard" (Charlize Theron) reportedly cost $70M to make. Theron's upfront demands are in the $8M-$10M range but, with Netflix, it's pretty unlikely to have any back end participation. Winnings all go to the house.
 
According to JB you can get points on the back end with Netflix now too.

Did you see these viewership numbers?

https://nofilmschool.com/netflix-top-10

The article compiled the number of times a movie was streamed in the first 4 weeks it was on the service. This is not an aggregate of all time, just knowing how many times it was streamed in the first month.

While we do not know how many of these clicks watched the entire movie, we do know that's a lot of times to press play.

Check out the top 10 list below.

Extraction – 99 Million
Bird Box – 89 Million
Spenser Confidential – 85 Million
6 Underground – 83 Million
Murder Mystery – 73 Million
The Irishman – 64 Million
Triple Frontier – 63 Million
The Wrong Missy – 59 Million
The Platform – 56 Million
The Perfect Date – 48 Million
 
Ed Sheeran (whom I have only seen photos of) has a most streamed song on Spotify with ~ 2.5 billion reps. He has made about $11M off it.

The rough payout of these services is 6-to-10 cents per man hour. So, a 100 minute film that was watched from the beginning to end by 100 million "people" (or, to be more accurate, played 100 million times to anyone) = 10,000,000,000 minutes = 166,666,666 hours or ~ $17M in compensation under a commission type system.

Now, in theatrical releases, the total box office is roughly "opening weekend x 2.5" but, considering that streaming programming is free at for anyone with the service, this may extend to "opening week x 6-10" over the course of several years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top