It's just a flesh wound... | Script Revolution
Forums » Screenwriting » It's just a flesh wound...

It's just a flesh wound...

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
Vic Burns's picture
Joined: Feb 2017
It's just a flesh wound...

I read a lot posts in the trades etc commenting on how the streamers are commissioning work ahead of the curve.

The studios tell us that rom coms and old school one liner action, popcorn flicks are dead...

Conversely, Amazon et al are commissioning work based on clicks and algorithms pointing favourably to these genres.

You gotta believe in the cool kids huh?

Love you - out



Steve Garry's picture
Joined: Sep 2016

Just five minutes ago I wrapped up Spurlock's marvelous 'Super Size Me 2: Holy Chicken!' documentary, which is about showing how you do the same, but different, to achieve success.  In doing so, you break all of the 'expert' consultant's methodologies.  So, cool kids?  

(Spurlock definitely collected advice from 'experts and consultants', and his business model was not too unusual, but his marketing and product were original)

Craig Griffiths's picture
Joined: Sep 2017

Streamers also have a slightly different goal. I know this is going to sound strangely academic, but they are not about immediacy.  Studios want the opening weekend. They want to recoup everything now or as fast as they can.  They know their curve drops off quick, mostly because of streamers.

Streamers on the other hand are all about retention. Let say people in general like 40% of the same thing. Most people will like a broad comedy or some form of bond like action.  The next 60% is what makes us different.  So the streamers have to have content that covers a wide diverse set of tastes to keep a wide audience paying every month.  If I see one or two movie a month appear on a streamer I'll gladly cough up the cash. 

Streamers also don't have a time frame. I have rewatched entire series on a streamer. It is like watch the streamer waiting for something in my 60% bracket. I think the streamers will win out as they have a longer timeframe for their return on investment.

Lily Blaze's picture
Joined: Aug 2019

Hah. Vic, the cool kids always rule lol.

For me, streaming services are interesting to watch as they develop. No commercials, three act structure is thrown out the window, shelf life is immortal since it's all virtual, and people can re-watch endlessly. The downside for me is the selection. I'm not a romance fan, so I scroll through a lot to find something I'd want to watch. I guess I'm not one of the cool kids and I'm okay with that. Streaming services are winning and losing at the same time.

CJ Walley's picture
Joined: Jul 2016

See also "there's no demand for westerns".

This all really highlights the importance of not only being able to appreciate the marketplace but also understand how it can differ between sectors.

Xavier Zinn's picture
authenticated user
Joined: Jan 2021

What I've noticed is everything is strangely just OK. The general consensus in my household is it's Neflix good, which means it's good enough to watch but not to re-watch or even watch until the end if we get interrupted - it's like everything its perpetually between 60 and 70 %.  Yes there is the rare gem, and it clearly stands out, but mostly everything is painted with the same brush - mediocre

Craig Griffiths's picture
Joined: Sep 2017

@Xavier, okay covers a larger audience. Plus they need a huge amount of content. So mass production is never perfect.