Another Netflix content idea: saving cancelled cult hits.
TechCrunch suggests how Netflix's plan to provide original content could succeed... by resurrecting shows like Firefly.
Amusingly describes Firefly repeatedly as a "cult hit" and posits a new twist on the legend of Serenity's production: "The cult status got so big, so quickly that Universal decided to make a feature film..."
March 19 2011
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
@theonetruebix | March 19, 17:43 CET
Also, here's what really happened with Serenity: it was actually going to be a star vehicle for Morgan Freeman as The Operative. Also, I totally made that up.
gossi | March 19, 17:48 CET
IrrationaliTV | March 19, 17:49 CET
gossi | March 19, 17:53 CET
I agree w/gossi re: Dr. H.
Kiba | March 19, 18:27 CET
Peanut Noir | March 19, 18:44 CET
It still flabergasts me that Firefly got canceled with 4.5 million viewers each week. Nowadays that's solid. Crazy.
ern | March 19, 19:30 CET
sumogrip | March 19, 19:34 CET
The completely irrational part of my brain also immediately thought "MAYBE THEY CAN SAVE FRINGE!" but I know that will never happen. Just another show that will probably be added to the long list of "Things Fox Took Away From Me Too Soon".
@ern - I was reading back when reruns started on Science Channel about Firefly's ratings when it was cancelled and I was shocked. The standards were SO much higher back then.
sarahb | March 19, 19:39 CET
They should finance more DrH
Yes, that would rock my world!
sarahb, also have "fringe" on the brain. Hoping FOX will give it a slider, wonderful show!
Also note, like BtVS, BSG ended. Not cancelled. Really draws sand in my gord when that little distinction isn't addressed.
Madhatter | March 19, 20:05 CET
For the moment, anyway. Imo what with the steady decline of traditional tv business models it's only a matter of time before this kind of speculation starts to become a reality (and at this point I'm thinking years rather than decades.)
brinderwalt | March 19, 20:19 CET
Jaymii | March 19, 20:29 CET
Simon | March 20, 01:13 CET
Mostly this is just a great opportunity for more shows that appeal to a niche audience.
[ edited by IrrationaliTV on 2011-03-20 10:00 ]
IrrationaliTV | March 20, 01:58 CET
Hmm. That sounds like big numbers but isn't that pretty much the cost of the show (at a conservative estimate, based on 10 year old TV budgets i.e. likely to be higher nowadays) ? Even $48 million would only cover the likely cost (of 24 eps) at today's rates. So they make it for no money ?
Imo what with the steady decline of traditional tv business models it's only a matter of time before this kind of speculation starts to become a reality (and at this point I'm thinking years rather than decades.)
Seems pretty clear that long-gone shows aren't gonna be resurrected (in 'Firefly's case for all the reasons that've been gone over ad nauseum in recent weeks). It might happen going forwards though but then doesn't that just mean that Netflix is effectively another cable channel ? They'd be producers/"broadcasters" of TV that charge a subscription. Kinda like HBO ?
It still flabergasts me that Firefly got canceled with 4.5 million viewers each week. Nowadays that's solid. Crazy.
Not sure 4.5 million is all that solid, even these days but yep, X-Files for instance was "in trouble" with 8 million. The TV landscape changed, people bought X-boxes (and about a bajillion other channels).
Saje | March 20, 03:02 CET
Netflix would almost certainly find it cheaper to create their own programming than to try to buy products off of their competitors, simply because Netflix is an outside threat. If it were just another network, you'd probably be right. But the networks are frightened (as they should be) about digitial distribution, and that changes the equation.
ern | March 20, 03:03 CET
Matt7325 | March 20, 03:42 CET
archon | March 20, 04:14 CET
Jaymii | March 20, 04:50 CET
Simon | March 20, 04:55 CET
Unless of course they can work out some sort of 50/50 deal. Hrm.
Jaymii | March 20, 05:20 CET
I suspect two factors played into that: they didn't want to get into the way of joss, and they knew that with a major motion picture in theatres for the same property that if they released a DVD it would boost the sales.
Fox got big things from that deal: they put out Firefly on DVD and it did exceptional numbers for them, so they made a loooot of money. Joss also returned with Dollhouse. Also, something I didn't know until very recently - Universal's licensing for 'Serenity' motion pictures has expired. So if Fox wanted to make a Firefly movie, they could, without paying a licensing fee, which would mean making another movie would be cheaper for them.
[ edited by gossi on 2011-03-20 13:24 ]
gossi | March 20, 05:23 CET
approach recently in a slightly different context: what could
Hulu do to entice me to sign up for premium service? Rescued and
new niche, content was what made sense to me.
The model I had in mind was not the one I think most of you are
considering. I was thinking more HBO than network. In that model
the original content is very much promotional in nature and is
not expected to make as much money directly.
JDL | March 20, 12:02 CET
Reading through this thread, people are conflating studio and network again. Not the same thing. They operate totally separately even if they are under the same corporate banner. Fox has to outbid ABC for a 20th show and sometimes they lose. FX has to outbid USA for a 20th show and sometimes they lose. I can definitely see a time in the future when Netflix is bidding for a show right alongside ABC/CBS/Fox/TNT/USA/FX/Showtime.
IrrationaliTV | March 20, 13:45 CET
MySerenity | March 20, 19:46 CET
Realistically, that's about as likely as Nathan winning the lotto and buying the rights to Firefly. But it's fun to think about!
narse | March 21, 07:49 CET