Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 15, 2017, 06:09:19 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Subscribe! | Shop: Amazon

***DONATION DRIVE 2 HAS BEGUN:
CLICK HERE TO BURN MONEY***
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  TV  |  Topic: Marvel's Agent Carter 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Marvel's Agent Carter  (Read 8791 times)
MediumHigh
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1444


WWW
Reply #70 on: May 16, 2016, 05:31:23 PM

Money wasted on Agent Carter could be more money spent on Jessica Jones, or the Defenders or a 3rd season of Daredevil, or Iron Fist. Its just not worth it.

If bored and want something to read click here -> http://memiorsofatroll.wordpress.com/
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2881


Reply #71 on: May 17, 2016, 01:29:56 AM

If Netflix believes there are very few people that watched Agent Carter that were not already watching the Netflix Marvel shows, there's no real incentive for Agent Carter to be brought to Netflix. If the show doesn't bring a new group of audience members to Netflix,  or lock up people subscribing to Netflix so they don't leave, then there is no incentive for them to take that show to Netflix.

I miss Good Eats.  *Sniff*
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 29385

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #72 on: May 17, 2016, 04:27:34 PM

I don't have Netflix and would for that show.

Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7826


Reply #73 on: May 17, 2016, 07:14:15 PM

https://www.change.org/p/netflix-save-agent-carter-bring-her-to-netflix

Even if you didn't like the show, sign to show your support for more Marvel stuff on tv in general :)

The way you show support for Marvel stuff on TV is by watching Marvel stuff on TV.
Furiously
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7195


WWW
Reply #74 on: May 18, 2016, 03:08:27 AM

It would help if network TV was showing something as good as Daredevil.  My 72 year old parents both loved it.  I doubt I could get them to sit through an Agents of Shield episode.

Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7826


Reply #75 on: May 18, 2016, 05:21:56 AM

Won't happen while network TV is still beholden to outdated business models.
Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27447

Badge Whore


Reply #76 on: May 18, 2016, 07:18:54 AM

I'm not even sure what you could possibly mean by that.

Network TV should go full cable with paid-for access? Hah.
Network TV should lobby Congress to adopt the British model? Hah.
Network TV should ignore Neilson ratings with regards to ad prices and instead adopt the, "Well SOMEONE is watching, look at the internet chatter," negotiation tactic? Hah.

What is it you're proposing there?

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 29385

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #77 on: May 18, 2016, 10:50:45 AM

Neilson households are a legacy thing. Should pull data directly from set-top and dvr.

Then again, they'd see how many people skip commercials, too.

Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27447

Badge Whore


Reply #78 on: May 18, 2016, 11:40:21 AM

And totally under-represent cord-cutters (or cord-nevers) and those too poor to afford cable.  Roughly 20% of the population in 2013 and growing YOY because cable sucks.
https://gigaom.com/2013/06/21/ota-60-million-antenna-users-cord-cutting/

The Neilsons are a legacy but also remain the most accurate way of determining how many people view a broadcast program without ignoring 20% of the viewership.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 29385

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #79 on: May 18, 2016, 03:06:25 PM

So you Neilson that segment to augment real data, rather than skewed "we're a neilson house" data. They ain't watchin' what I'm watchin' :)

Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7826


Reply #80 on: May 18, 2016, 03:31:16 PM

I'm not even sure what you could possibly mean by that.

Network TV should go full cable with paid-for access? Hah.
Network TV should lobby Congress to adopt the British model? Hah.
Network TV should ignore Neilson ratings with regards to ad prices and instead adopt the, "Well SOMEONE is watching, look at the internet chatter," negotiation tactic? Hah.

What is it you're proposing there?

It means that things like making seasons 20+ episodes long because you want to hit 80-100 episodes to sell a show into syndication, or planning big episodes to air during sweeps week aren't conducive to telling a good story.  Almost any show that's trying to tell an ongoing narrative suffers by being on a network. As fast as technology has been changing they way people view content, network TV has seemed remarkably slow to adapt. Or rather in some respects they've adapted to how they deliver content (putting their shows on Hulu, Amazon, and such) but they still largely haven't changed how they make content.
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 38271

Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you and other troops you control.


WWW
Reply #81 on: May 18, 2016, 03:37:13 PM

The 80-100 episode syndication barrier doesn't even exist anymore, and I'm going to be that syndication money is not what it used to be. That lends credence to your argument that network TV is woefully behind the times. They are starting to get it but it's damned slow going. They are doing more short season shows and both mid-season and summer shows are a thing now whereas in years past, summers were only for reruns and mid-season shows were meant to be replacements for cancelled shows as opposed to spring-only series.

The 20-23 episode seasons though are a huge problem with network TV, creatively speaking. If they ditched those, I think you'd see an improvement in the quality of network TV immediately. But that also means they have to make more shows as opposed to more episodes of fewer shows.

Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27447

Badge Whore


Reply #82 on: May 18, 2016, 04:36:40 PM

So you Neilson that segment to augment real data, rather than skewed "we're a neilson house" data. They ain't watchin' what I'm watchin' :)

Hate to break it to you, nobody's watching what you're watching, regardless of how they gather the data. That's why it's always getting cancelled and there's no public outcry.  awesome, for real

Yeah the syndication barrier died a while back, but doesn't matter. Local TV stations aren't buying up content to fill hours like they were, and when they do it's for popular shows instead of, "aw hell, all we can afford is that piece of garbage."  Seems TBS is more willing to shovel shit at me than Star 64 these days.

I agree being wedded to the 20+ season is a problem, but that's an industry cultural one not a business model. As Haemish points out, you're seeing some of that start to shift as Cable and Netflix yank viewers away, but you're going to need some old dogs to die before it becomes a known thing. Same as trying to milk a show that has a strong 2-3 year story arc into a 7-10 year show.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 29385

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #83 on: May 19, 2016, 09:06:21 AM

Hate to break it to you, nobody's watching what you're watching, regardless of how they gather the data. That's why it's always getting cancelled and there's no public outcry.  awesome, for real
I know, I was laughing as I typed it  Oh ho ho ho. Reallllly? We joke that we would be the most awesome Neilson house, all kinds of weird shit would be on network tv.

I think I mentioned it before, but a while back I was passively watching tv (arting or gaming or something with the tv on) and watched an episode of Broad City, a modern style of comedy show. We like it overall, it's got some raunch to it, but it's done in an almost innocent, kinda realistic way. Then Two Broke Girls was on and every other joke was innuendo and the laugh track and writing was excruciating. I found it an interesting contrast in  network vs cable style. SOmeone could write a thesis on those two shows and what it shows about both the companies broadcasting them and the audiences.

Merusk
Terracotta Army
Posts: 27447

Badge Whore


Reply #84 on: May 19, 2016, 09:47:16 AM

I figured you were self-aware enough to take the ribbing. ;)

Broad City can be amusing but the idiocy of the characters drives me away. The leads don't do the clueless schlub well enough for me to empathize with them the way a buddy series does, and they aren't narcissistic enough to make me delight in their pain the way Ab Fab did.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet within your power.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7826


Reply #85 on: May 19, 2016, 04:43:57 PM

I agree being wedded to the 20+ season is a problem, but that's an industry cultural one not a business model. As Haemish points out, you're seeing some of that start to shift as Cable and Netflix yank viewers away, but you're going to need some old dogs to die before it becomes a known thing. Same as trying to milk a show that has a strong 2-3 year story arc into a 7-10 year show.

Sure, you could say it's a cultural thing that has its roots in what used to be the business model. And yeah, Agent Carter itself is an example of networks starting to move away from that somewhat. It just seems like they're adapting at an extremely slow pace.
Evildrider
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5521


Reply #86 on: May 19, 2016, 05:08:07 PM

Pretty sure the networks are still getting more money through advertising over the long seasons than they are using a Netflix model.  The problem that occurs with the shorter seasons for them is the need to fill TV with more shows, which overall would cost more than having a show for twice as long. 

Hell I have a subscription to Netflix and unless it's a 2 day span where I binge watch a new show, I hardly use it at all.  Also that means I am waiting months barely using the service for a new season of something.  Not dumping whole seasons all at once would probably fix that problem somewhat, but then people would complain cuz they like to binge watch.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7826


Reply #87 on: May 19, 2016, 06:01:41 PM

Viewership and ad revenue are dropping every year on network TV and basic cable as well.  In most cases that's resulted in an increase in the number of ads, but that's not sustainable and in the long term only drives more people away.
Sky
Terracotta Army
Posts: 29385

I love my TV an' hug my TV an' call it 'George'.


WWW
Reply #88 on: May 20, 2016, 01:13:20 PM

We usually keep a second channel ready if watching live tv, to flip away from commercials. Some shows' commercial breaks have become so long we just stop watching them and stick with the alternate channel that had shorter commercials.

It surprises me that advertising is even a thing, given how many people go to such lengths to avoid it and generally dislike it. If anything, it works against companies in our household, because we will actively avoid companies with annoying ads. I didn't name my car Brad, bitch, shut your fucking bonghole.

jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2881


Reply #89 on: May 21, 2016, 12:47:06 AM

In the end, we have to pay for the shows somehow. We can either pay for them through subscription fees, or we can pay for them by enduring advertisements for products. Personally, I don't mind being forced to watch a few commercials. It gives me time to get another drink or answer Nature's call.

I miss Good Eats.  *Sniff*
Endie
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6231


WWW
Reply #90 on: May 21, 2016, 03:35:24 AM

Or I can use usenet to free ride and get you lot to watch the ads for me!

My blog: http://endie.net

Twitter - Endieposts

"What else would one expect of Scottish sociopaths sipping their single malt Glenlivit [sic]?" Jack Thompson
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #91 on: May 21, 2016, 03:57:52 AM

Hell I have a subscription to Netflix and unless it's a 2 day span where I binge watch a new show, I hardly use it at all.  Also that means I am waiting months barely using the service for a new season of something.  Not dumping whole seasons all at once would probably fix that problem somewhat, but then people would complain cuz they like to binge watch.

Netflix has been trying very hard to hide the dearth of content.

I've noticed that a bunch of old shows have new promo images, just to keep things from looking stale. 30 Rock has changed promo images twice recently. The way I use Netflix is one every two or three months I watch something, then the rest of the time I'm too lazy to unsub. But I'm close to unsubbing.

Quote from: velorath
In most cases that's resulted in an increase in the number of ads, but that's not sustainable and in the long term only drives more people away.

You can see this effect on websites. People block ads so the remaining ads are more frequent and obtrusive. Firefox basically doesn't work any more for most websites if you aren't using an ad blocker - it constantly hangs. Which of course just encourages people to install ad blockers.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 7826


Reply #92 on: May 21, 2016, 05:50:18 AM

Netflix has been trying very hard to hide the dearth of content.

I've noticed that a bunch of old shows have new promo images, just to keep things from looking stale. 30 Rock has changed promo images twice recently. The way I use Netflix is one every two or three months I watch something, then the rest of the time I'm too lazy to unsub. But I'm close to unsubbing.

The sad thing is that there's actually a lot of good or at least interesting things on Netflix, but their UI and means of presenting content is so fucking terrible it's almost like they're deliberately obscuring what they actually have on there. I assume some of the deals they make for content must include promises to display that content prominently. I'm completely baffled as to what else would cause the "Because you watched Nightcrawler" recommendations I'm getting right now to include Minions and Hotel Transylvania 2.
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2881


Reply #93 on: May 30, 2017, 12:01:46 PM

In the wishful thinking file: http://www.blastr.com/2017-5-30/hayley-atwell-agent-carter-season-3-could-still-happen

The most realistic possibility I see is that Season 5 (or 6 - if they renewed it this year, why not next?) of MAoS has a time travel element and someone from the current team goes back to fight Zodiac with Carter.

I miss Good Eats.  *Sniff*
jgsugden
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2881


Reply #94 on: November 30, 2017, 03:43:15 PM

Hulu has the streaming rights to this in the near future, with a slim... slim... slim... chance of new episodes to be made.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/11/29/hulu-agent-carter-exclusive-streaming/

(I think Atwell returns as Agent Carter on an ABC series show sometime in the next year or two, perhaps for a time travel arc, but that the series is never revived).

I miss Good Eats.  *Sniff*
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  General Discussion  |  TV  |  Topic: Marvel's Agent Carter  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC