Just want to point out that no streaming service thus far is a "permanent home for content" just like no network is the permanent broadcaster of it. The exception being any originally made content. Disney may prove to attemot this but its clear at this point that WB isnt planning to do the same. I can say this confidently since Warner has already licensed much of the exclusive content it has for some of its services to others.
Hear in Australia they have licensed Titans to Netflix and the rest of their DCU content to Foxtel. Much of their HBO stuff like Watchman, etc is also.
DCU is a prime exanple, much of its original content isnt there anymore and there has been additions. Disney also didnt go to market with all its Marvel content.
Theres sinply too much money to be made by production companies selling the same thing twice/thrice or by the dozen.
I can stream old series of Supergirl, Arrow Flash etc from Netflix, but the current airing season of all I can only stream on foxtel. Foxtel will only have that a gew months after they air the last ep, and then it will be available on Netflix. Both those comapnies in the same market payed for that content, and at some point when the numbers dont seem worth paying for it yearly Netflix will let the older series go and another provider or Foxtel might pay to air them again.
All the foxtel originals I can only see on foxtel, same with netflix originals and prime. Yet there are shows that different seasons are available on two of these providers. With both Foxtel and Prime for example I can stream different seasons of NCIS, Blue Bloods, as well as the fore mentioned CW DC shows. I expect at some point that Pennyworth, Doom Patrol, Swamp Thing, Watchmen, Runnaways, Gifted, Cloak and Dagger currently available of Foxtel will be on one of the others at some point.
United States makes up the biggest individual market by a huge margin. For alot of reasons media cant be shared the same everywhere. With America making up a little less then half the market alone(with Netflix atleast) makes sense that whoever wins the streaming wars in the United states has the best chance of coming out on top. So I understand it's kinda closed minded that most of us are talking about these Streaming services in terms that dont apply to people in some countries.
Where do you live if you dont mind me asking?
There's no denying that America is the largest market for Netflix but the percentage of the overall market that is has changed significantly in the last twelve months.
In dec 2018 the US was 58 million of its 139 million subscribers.
Now a year later it is 61 million out of 158 million
The second largest market is my own country Australia (which totally shocks me) with 11 million subscribers a year ago vs almost 14 million now. Considering our population is only 24 million againsr 327 million in the US that is a huge shock to me. Sunscriptions in the last year grew by 1/8 our total population. And that is with us only having access to a portion of the content US subscribers do.
I guess I know why Australia was one of the first markets Disney + got launched in after the US.
Prime only arrived here an year ago, but it has doubled the available content to Au users in that year and added quite a pit of Australian classic content to its library with a lot of Australian dramas from the 90'to early 2000s and some classic Aussie kids shows (my daughter has started watching Skippy the bush kangaroo that I watched as a kid- think of Lassie but with a wild Kangaroo instead of a dog and the family he is with are the kids of a wildlife ranger)
Actually think flipper in the bush instead of the water and Kangaroo not dolphin. Vertually perfect match in set up a support characters
I keep seeing posts that bring up Disney+ as competition but imo Netflix competition is more HBO Max (which hasn't even launched yet) & Apple TV considering the wide library that will be available that appeals to multiple demographics not just pg-13 and under. Disney isn't worried about Netflix. Disney has novelty on its side from its catalog that can't be replicated by Netflix. Think about how Mario videogames are, they have novelty and can only be played on Nintendo products. Disney is kind of doing the same thing. However it doesn't mean Disney is exempt from competition, Disney's biggest competitor is YouTube.
YouTube has been shown to beat any other children's content provider by a huge margin for the past few years. From what I've seen kids prefer watching the clips or parodies of their favorite shows over watching the actual show whether its on cable or streaming service.
Last edited by ComicJunkie21; 12-21-2019 at 05:37 AM.
It has lots of content that is just meant to be entertaining and there is nothing divorced from politics, the truism of "Nazi's are bad" is a political statement, people just don't notice it when it's unchallenging to their world view (or goes completely over their heads.); I've heard these stupid complaints, "they're to left wing", "they're to right wing", they're a soulless megacorp, they provide a subscription service on a global scale, and are attempting to provide a variety of content to appeal to every possible demographic; "Political" is only really a problem when it's done in a heavy ham fisted manner that undermines the narrative.
Context is king.
X-23's most basic surface level characteristic that any idiot should grasp: Stoicism.
I don't demand that her every minor appearance be a nuance in-depth examination of her character, but is it to much to ask she be written in Archetype?! This is storytelling 101! If you want people to stay invested in a character, you need to, at the bare minimum, write them such a way that they can plausibly be believed to be the same character!
Context is king.
X-23's most basic surface level characteristic that any idiot should grasp: Stoicism.
I don't demand that her every minor appearance be a nuance in-depth examination of her character, but is it to much to ask she be written in Archetype?! This is storytelling 101! If you want people to stay invested in a character, you need to, at the bare minimum, write them such a way that they can plausibly be believed to be the same character!
Netflix funds and produces these shows, so who do you think makes it happen? You think Netflix would allow anything that doesn't support their views as originals?
Not all stories with any political tones or themes are the same. There's these things called "nuance" and "quality" that go alongside "storytelling". People defend Champions being a cancerous political propaganda comic by saying "Yeah, well.. X-Men did it!" when they aren't even remotely comparable. It's why Preacher is a classic, but the comics of the new Vertigo line are what killed the brand.
Last edited by Joker; 12-21-2019 at 10:31 AM.
Wow, you haven't listened to a god damn thing I said, the whole "Soulless Megacorp" thing definitely flew right over your head.
They don't have views, they don't have values; they have metrics, they have trends, they have demographics; they are a system set-up to produce money.
Values and views are merely something in the "units of consumption", they are only something to be exploited.
Yes, there are these things called "nuance" and "quality" that go alongside "storytelling"; I never said otherwise, in fact I'm sure I implied that was the relevant part. That has nothing to do with Netflix as a whole, they can't all be winners as they say. Hell your example illustrates my point! X-Men and Champions are both made by Marvel! Which is run by right wing trump supporter Ike Perlmutter!
You've given a flat generalization on Netflix's content as "politics over plot", but have yet to give even a single example of it, and I'm sure their are some, I've heard people complain about them (I have a friend who bitches about "Dear White People".); but I, as someone who basically only watches Netflix, have not noticed any grand proliferation.
Context is king.
X-23's most basic surface level characteristic that any idiot should grasp: Stoicism.
I don't demand that her every minor appearance be a nuance in-depth examination of her character, but is it to much to ask she be written in Archetype?! This is storytelling 101! If you want people to stay invested in a character, you need to, at the bare minimum, write them such a way that they can plausibly be believed to be the same character!