Everyone I know, excluding my old-school parents, have subscriptions to one or many subscription-based movie/TV show sites. Netflix, Hulu, HBO, etc. They all seem to more or less run the world. It matters so much to us when they take down well-loved series or put up a hot, new movie. But how, if at all, is this effecting cable companies, and people who refuse to give up their commercial-ridden television? Will television become obsolete to Smart Televisions that do not use cable?
Interesting topic! It may benefit you to look more into the "old-school parents." There are several I'm sure who don't know what Netflix is, but I also know some people as old as my grandparents who have the entire Netflix, Hulu, and HBO package. Also, what is this doing to the rising generations who are growing up with total access to movies of all ratings rather than DVDs or VCRs? I hope to read about this in the future! – bellawick5 years ago
I think it's really interesting how subscription services fall in line with what I would call customer-led consumption (?) these days. Let me explain - whereas in the past people have purchased services, we seem to be moving much more towards buying the basics and self-curating. We use self-service checkouts, we create our own music playlists, we choose our own TV and films at the times we want. How does this affect our relationship with companies as consumers? – Kayleigh Hall5 years ago
This is an interesting topic I found and it deserves most of attention, there is great need to talk about this.But in my opinion, I have issues that why people feel more comfortable to pay money to Netflix and stuff life like, and on the other side they feel like wasting money if they have to pay little amount of money for newspaper, why this is always questionable that,"now we have to pay to know what's going in the world?" – dilpreetk995 years ago
Netflix gives actors a place to work. With so much CGI, Hollywood is forcing great movie actors and actresses to Netflix and TV. When movies actors or actresses come over to TV, it makes for great TV, including Netflix even if it's an additional cost. – Lava00835 years ago
I'm curious to see people's opinions on this as I feel many series recently have been cancelled whilst they are still succeeding. Furthermore, shows have been cancelled with no real reason, for example, One Day at a Time was not an expensive series to film, it was popular and including really important issues that most tv series are not currently mentioning.
I can't quite remember where I heard it, but on a podcast I was listening to I heard a pair of critics say that Netflix focuses on getting new subscribers rather than ratings like normal tv stations pay attention to. And because they'll get more subscribers from creating a new interesting show that people have to see, they focus more on making new content than adding to their own content. – jefishere5 years ago
Gillian Flynn's debut novel "Sharp Objects" received a lot of mixed attention when it was released in 2006, but it was popular enough to recently be adapted to the screen by HBO as an eight episode mini-series that aired in 2018. With Amy Adams in the lead, she was tasked with delivering the difficult narrative of a woman processing great mental and physical trauma, and doing this through a visual medium is often shocking and difficult for audiences to endure. I found myself looking away during particularly graphic depictions of self-harm, and each time Adams's body is put on display, with the plethora of words written across her in scars, I found myself gritting my teeth and squinting.
I haven't read the source material, but I imagine that the impact of a traumatic story of this nature would be more impactful through film or television, and my experience with the series (I was fully glued to the screen, binging the entire series) has driven me to ask – is this type of portrayal of the procession of trauma primarily beneficial for the general public? I imagine that the answer would be close to the consensus of shows like "13 Reasons Why" that are controversial because they can simultaneously help raise awareness while also triggering some viewers, but I'm particularly interested in this mini-series because it is far more graphic (due to the HBO platform, I'm sure) and handles the processing of trauma with greater complexity.
I would like to see this topic explored with a specific look at the "Sharp Objects" mini-series, but references to similar visual narratives would be great as a basis of comparison and/or evidence to support the benefit or harm of depictions such as these.
Analyze how that in recent movies and TV shows, there seems to be an increase of inclusive characters and current event topics that make a temporary or permanent appearance in these shows and novels. Some people believe that this shows that society is moving closer to accepting and including everyone equally; others believe that some shows or movies do not need to be inclusive all the time, or current events do not always need to be tied into everything.
Consider comparing TV show characters' dynamics and demographics from early 2000s to now, and even looking at how the dialogue between these characters has changed. What did someone say on TV 10 years ago that we cannot mention now?
While addressing this issue take note of tokenism. It's especially apparent in sitcoms from the late 90's and early 2000's. Have we moved past token characters to more nuanced and genuine ones? If so, where is it done well? – Zuzia5 years ago
It's a firm belief of mine that there should be a reason behind what race/gender/sexuality you choose to make a character, because it should have a significant baring on their personality, experiences, and reasoning. Avoiding the trap of tokenism by not having 'the gay character' or 'the black character' is important. Write to make a good story - don't write to fill a fill a hole because all you'll do is shovel shit. – Jacob J.5 years ago
This article could touch on the reaction to inclusivity. Does affirmative action make us look at media with certain individuals with more respect, understanding and normativity or does it cause us to assume they only achieved that position because they look/identify a certain way? – Emiris5 years ago
I was born in New York though I have always held European citizenship. I have noticed after viewing mostly European films and a few series over the many years I have resided here, that after returning to watch an American series, there is overt political propaganda in the story lines. Perhaps, this was always the case to an exten, but I did not notice it as a child. However, now it seems the messages are clear and I find that it is often unhelpful propaganda which tends to divide people rather than unite or bring a sense of well-being. Certainly it is not the only contributing factor but do you agree that Television is contributing to the societal divisiveness and strife the United States has been facing for decades?
I haven't watched TV in years for (partially) this reason. Of course every story needs a theme (as it is THE MEssage), but I would agree that contemporary media is becoming more divisive as writers lash out at perceived threats. Especially since the current administration is the most divisive in recent history, it makes sense that the state of american politics is reflected in the media we produce. – Jacob J.5 years ago
This topic could use Orange is the New Black as a reference (featuring LGBTQ ideals), or the newer The Society (featuring Socialism, deaf actors and stereotyping male power as problematic). Perhaps comment on the overarching political tilt and what it seems to want to achieve. – Emiris5 years ago
Recently, the online outcry over the horrific design of Sonic and the very poor execution of Game of Thrones' final season lead to a) a total redesign of Sonic commissioned by the film studio and b) over a million people signing a petition request a complete re-make of the final Game of Thrones season. This seems to be a new trend; people massing online to demand corporations adapt a piece of art (I know it seems a bit iffy to call the Sonic movie art, but hey, what else is it?) post production to suit consumer needs. What does this trend signify? How could it go wrong? Should we really have this power? Is it democratization, or making us somehow even more subservient to capital? Could be cool.
Since seeing these responses to Sonic and GoT, I had a very similar reaction, and I would love to see this topic explored more fully. I think the question of creator vs audience power would provide the best, narrowed focus if someone chose to approach the topic with depth instead of breadth. The pressure of the audience can be intense for creators, especially when they are working with franchises that have such a large following, and I imagine this has an impact on the process of creation and final quality of the art itself. Artists compromising their visions to cater to the demands of the large portions of the public could set a dangerous precedent in which art becomes more of a product with the intention of making the most money by reaching the most people instead of reaching them with a new perspective, idea, or story that means something more than the dollars and cents. Excellent topic! – Aaron6 years ago
Part of the reason GoT ended the way it did was to showcase the tyrannical nature of power, regardless of gender, with Dany representing a feminist sentiment and, though valiant in her acts, ultimately becomes corrupted by absolute power. Maybe touch on how even though this message may have meant to be informative about absolute power corrupting absolutely, it was still a political message that made the show seem weak in the end by focusing more on a political angle. This could also comment on overarching moral in good stories vs. political ideals. – Emiris5 years ago
Part of marketing is the driving up of hype, but in fact little active promotion is needed by many films and TV these days as most fans drive the movement with their own social media discussions and excitement. But is this proving detrimental to the work? For instance, with the close of the saga 'Game of Thrones' the hype and expectation around the wrapping of the series was incredibly high, with people taking time off work/study etc. to catch the "on time" release on Netflix around the world. But what seems to have come out is a post malaise of criticism about the ending that for some may have soured the entire show. Now is this a fair state of affairs? Was the ending really poor or is this simply a reaction to heightened expectations that just can not be met?
It would be interesting to explore the fan expectations, hype and marketing surrounding the completion of 'Game of Thrones', 'End Game' (throwing as hugely hyped film into the mix) and 'Big Bang Theory' (maybe even look back at other colossal series ends such as 'How I met your mother' and 'Breaking Bad') to examine how their completions differed and seemed to have resulted in a very different spectrum of responses from fans.
What makes an ending great? How do you manage fan hype? Can anything live up to a finale expectation?
This is really awesome and what you wrote shows how much you really like. – Markh326 years ago
I love the question you pose at the end of the first paragraph. Was it really that bad of an ending, or did we have unbelievably high hopes? It definitely gets the reader thinking about the topic. Personally, once I got past the disappointment the ending actually made a lot of sense. The other examples of shows are good to include as you're appealing to different genres. It will allow more readers to think about the questions you're asking in context to shows they enjoy.
– briannat6 years ago
Around WWII the television began to become more and more welcomed as a member of the average household in America. In the 1950's the television became the primary means of influencing public opinion on world events and politics. Later in the 90's we see the reflection of the culture surrounding television programming in postmodern writers like Don Delillo and David Foster Wallace. How have the infusion of the passivity of television-watching culture influenced the literature of subsequent decades? How has the expectation of the average reader been affected by this mass incorporation of this form of media in the average household?
You could also mention the shortening of people's attention spans, and could tie in the influence of social media here too. – Andi6 years ago
Disagree. I believe it was during the Cold War, not WW2. – T. Palomino2 years ago
Also, I feel like some sources and examples would support and illustrate your claims. – T. Palomino2 years ago
