#and all those other hbo max shows

[wakeywakeyjakey]

The Batman characters I always write and view with DID (aka the “DID baddies”) are Batman, Two Face, and Scarecrow—and I LOVE that they each present with such wiiiiildy different interactions with their headmates + experiences within their headspaces.

The way I see it, Bruce and Batman coexist easily. They have the same mission so they work alongside each other and view the other as having an extremely valuable role to play in their life/are aware that they can’t function without each other. What’s cool is that they have completely different approaches to their collective goal, but ultimately they trust the other and both get where they want to be (from a big picture perspective).

Harv and Harvey coexist grudgingly and work against each other in a lot of ways (it’s a WIP) BUT they have a system (haha) for how to navigate daily life so that they both feel equally represented in their decisions. While “trust” might be too strong a word to use, they definitely both see the other as capable of living their collective life even if/when they don’t agree with the other’s decisions—and so they mostly don’t stand in each other’s way.

Jonathan and Scarecrow DO NOT COEXIST! Jonathan views Scarecrow as a liability actively ruining their life and thus works to keep Scarecrow away from the front entirely. Scarecrow views Jonathan as weak and unwilling/unable to do what needs to be done to keep them both alive. The one area of overlap is their research (and criminal endeavors) so it’s the one space they’re willing to coexist, but outside of their heists they’re almost exclusively at each other’s throats and would rather the other not have access to their life/body/decisions.

It adds so many layers to their characters and entirely fleshes out the “personas” when you come at it from the lens of DID as opposed to just viewing it as a costume they take off at the end of the night imo!

[but-thats-its-own-story]

They did it. Somehow they actually did it.

[musical-chick-13]

Okay, no, sorry, I’m still mad about this. “Be critical of the media you consume and examine why you react to it in the way that you do, support marginalized and stigmatized identities.” Yeah, until it’s about mental illness.

A woman (or even man, if he’s deemed over-emotional) makes music about suffering from mental illness and people just go, “What are they complaining about, that’s so immature, hashtag wangst.” (And then, sometimes, inexplicably, if the mentally ill woman gets better and writes happier music, they then talk about how artistically bankrupt she is now and that she should go back to hating herself.) People LOVE cis white pRoBLeMaTiC (straight) fictional men until they are realistically mentally ill, in which case they’re “whiny” and “insufferable” and deserve to die violently, apparently (or, if fandom is merciful, they’re ignored). (And then they celebrate when they DO inevitably get killed off.) “Do your duty and watch [thing I, mc13, personally find insufferable] For The (white) Gays because it has Gays.” Sure, will you watch c4 Pure, the ONLY show specifically about OCD, then? (No, the answer is no, it’s always no.)

I can’t get anyone to watch Doom Patrol. I couldn’t get people (in general-I did convince a few irl friends thank GOD) to watch Crazy Ex-Girlfriend. One of the most popular and acclaimed shows right now has a character with schizophrenia who was turned into the Big Bad Villain for no fucking reason. One of the most commonly-cited examples of Iconic™ queer media involves a mentally ill man being broken over and over and over again before The Ship™ can reasonably happen. DW introduced a major character who was at one point suffering from mental illness in her past, AND THEN ALL MENTION OF THIS WAS COMPLETELY DROPPED IN THE FUTURE, WITH NO BEARING ON ANYTHING TO THE POINT WHERE I FORGOT IT EVEN EXISTED??!?!? R*tched was a thing that existed despite the Sad Sympathetic Backstory treatment being IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION OF WHAT PURPOSE THIS CHARACTER SERVED IN One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. THEY GAVE. A SAD WOOBIE VILLAIN TREATMENT. TO THE /LITERAL PERSONIFICATION/ OF ABLEISM. THAT IS HER FUNCTION. TO EXIST AS A SYMBOL OF ALL THE WAYS SOCIETY OPPRESSES THE DISABLED AND MENTALLY ILL.

I am!!! Literally!!!!! The only one!!!!!!!!! Complaining about these things!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THE ONLY ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one else has said ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one is talking about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’m so tired!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[thenightling]

For those keeping score here are all the TV shows based on the work of Neil Gaiman from the last ten years. Lucifer - Loosely based on the version of Lucifer who quits ruling Hell and opens a piano bar, from The Sandman comics by Neil Gaiman. Originally aired on Fox and then moved to Netflix for seasons 4 through 6. Neil Gaiman also got to play God in a bonus episode for season 3. The full series can be watched on Netflix. And is available on DVD. The plot deals with Lucifer, the ruler of Hell, up and quitting and moving to Earth where he opens a night club called Lux and takes up playing piano. In the TV series he befriends (and eventually falls in love with) a woman homicide detective named Chloe Decker.

_______________________ American Gods - Based on the novel by Neil Gaiman. Aired on Starz. The plot deals with a man called Shadow Moon who gets dragged into the strange world of Old and New Gods vying for power.

________________ Anansi Boys - Originally written by Neil Gaiman as a spin-off of American Gods, the TV series version was filmed for Amazon Prime and is currently in post-production (Not yet released.) The plot deals with the sons of Anansi, the African trickster Spider-God.

__________________ Good Omens - Showrun by Neil Gaiman and based on the novel by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. Also Neil Gaiman has a small cameo in the first season. Available now on Amazon Prime. Seasons 1 and 2 are complete. Season 3 has not yet started filming and will very likely be the final season. Season 1 is currently available on DVD. The plot deals with two "differently competent" entities, an Angel and a Demon, who have come to love life on Earth and each other. And now must work together to prevent the apocalypse.

______________________________ The Sandman - First episode was co-written by Neil Gaiman, based on the stories and original characters created by Neil Gaiman with a few borrowed DC comics characters. Currently on Netflix. Season 2 is in production now. Neil Gaiman also voiced a ghostly bird in the bonus episode segment Dream of a Thousand Cats. Season 1 will be available on DVD and Blu Ray at the end of this month. The plot deals with Morpheus, the King of Dreams, who accidentally gets summoned and captured by occultists who had been trying to capture The Grim Reaper. After over a hundred and six years in captivity Morpheus finally escapes and has to track down his tools which had been taken from him when he was captured. He also comes to realize he had made many terrible mistakes in the past and struggles to set those wrongs right.

_________________________________________ The Dead Boy Detectives - First official spin-off of The Sandman. The Dead Boy Detectives were originally planned as an HBO Max series (now just Max) but moved to Netflix after the success of the first season of The Sandman. Based on characters who first appeared in Neil Gaiman's The Sandman: Season of Mists, Neil Gaiman is involved in the production. The plot is a pair of ghost teenagers decide to become detectives and are really bad at it. These two characters made a previous appearance in Doom Patrol on Max (Formerly HBO Max) but had been played by different actors.

[queerly-autistic]

I've seen a lot of OFMD fans pointing at other fan campaigns recently, especially the failed campaign to save Anne with an E, and getting disheartened by what they see, and I think something that's missing in those discussions (particularly after the weirdly negative slant at the end of that Guardian article) is that not all fan campaigns are the same.

The campaigns to save shows that started out on Netflix (Warrior Nun, Sense8, Anne with an E, Shadow and Bone, etc.) are very different to what we are facing with OFMD, because Netflix is much more protective of its IP - and yes, they even hold the IP of shows that they've cancelled tightly to their chests and very rarely let them go. Some have been able to make the jump to different platforms, but not many, and it's actually pretty hard to do so (“For most shows, shopping away from Netflix is reportedly very difficult when Netflix owns the underlying IP”).

Because of this, fans of shows cancelled by Netflix are often campaigning directly for Netflix to reverse that decision, rather than campaigning to get it picked up elsewhere. Warrior Nun (I saw people panicking at the length of effort and the numbers they had to put in before they got their success) and Sense8 were both granted final films by Netflix to wrap up their stories after long-running successful fan campaigns - they were not saved by a different platform, and likely couldn't have been because of Netflix's strict grip on its IP. So comparing ourselves to fan campaigns for shows cancelled by Netflix isn't accurate or fair to us or to those other campaigns.

It's also worth pointing out that Anne with an E was a joint venture between Netflix and CBC, and that relationship appears to have fallen apart, which may have been a factor in its cancellation (see more at this tweet). This is also likely a contributing factor as to why, despite the campaign to save it being huge, it didn't get the reprieve from Netflix that other shows have received. That is baggage that OFMD simply doesn't have.

OFMD is in a very different position to many of the shows that were cancelled by Netflix and then went on to have fan campaigns around them, in that we have confirmation from HBO Max that they are happy for it to be shopped around. HBO Max is not holding a firm grip on the IP the way that Netflix does. We are able to try to find OFMD a new home. And that's a very different sort of campaign and trajectory than trying to convince the platform that cancelled us to reverse/amend their decision (I'd also argue it's slightly easier - nothing is certain, nothing is easy, but I think we have a better chance being allowed to look for someone else to pick us up rather than relying on the company that cancelled us to show us mercy).

Yes, some fan campaigns have had many more petition signatures than us (don't sniff at 80,000 signatures in two weeks, that's huge and fast), but that is only one part of the story. Petition signatures alone won't be the thing that clinches it. There are fan campaigns with hundreds of thousands of signatures that have failed, but there are also fan campaigns with way less signatures than us that have seen their show saved. There's so many elements at play, and every single one is unique. It's very tempting to play 'like for like' with these sorts of campaigns, but it's simply not a truthful reflection of the situation.

Every show is different. Every fan campaign is different.

We have every reason to be hopeful, and every reason to keep fighting. OFMD's numbers are good, it's already incredibly marketable to other streamers, and then ON TOP of that the fan reaction has been loud enough for a lot of people to take notice.

Yes, we're in a dip right now because that's what happens - every campaign has peaks and troughs because nothing sustains at the same level forever, and, again, it's only been just over two weeks and look at what we've done - but the impact we had, and the noise we made, happened at exactly the right time and kept happening for long enough to make an impression. A lot of things will be happening behind the scenes right now that we don't know about, and there's so many factors at play that we have no control over. It's a long game.

So don't look at other fan campaigns and be disheartened by what you see. Because what you see on the surface is nowhere near close to the full picture.

Even if we don't get our S3, lets celebrate the fact that we have made a huge impression, kicked up a huge stink, and been the thorn in the side of some people who absolutely fucking needed a couple of thorns in their side. And I think that's the best legacy that our rebellious little gay pirate show could possibly have.

[the-frosty-mac]

In case any of my non-Doctor Who friends on here ever want to watch it (please please please) here is my Google Doc containing a watchlist of Doctor Who from the 2005 revival onwards, including all three televised spinoffs so far (all optional, but I would recommend at least watching Torchwood if you’re cool with adult content, and Sarah Jane Adventures if you’re fine with a kids show) in a decent order to understand the wider Whoniverse story.

In the United States, everything from 2005-2022 can currently be found on HBO Max (I refuse to use the new name) and everything from then on is on Disney+. Obviously, there are other legally dubious means of watching if you don’t want to support either corporation (cough cough) but for legal reasons, those are the official ways to watch the shows

[38sr]

I know this is gonna be a strange one, but I do have an industry question;

I've been looking for a job for the last 4 years post-grad, I've tried every bit of advice I've gotten over my 6 years in school and 4 years out. Is it too late for me?? Or more so what advice would you have at this point?? I'm starting to feel really negatively about this venture, and getting a day job has been just as difficult;;

Hello Sky! Hope it's okay to call you that. Ah post-grad job hunting.....I don't miss that period of my life at all. Before I begin, just want to preface that what I say going forward is strictly from my perspective/experience. I am not the absolute of the animation industry so if what I say doesn't align with you, you do not have to follow it haha. Alright, advice for post grad job hunting.... Well, I think I want to start off giving a bit of context for the animation landscape these past 4 years that has been rough for everyone (trust me it'll come back around to your question): 1.) COVID Pandemic

This one might be a confusing for some people because when COVID hit in 2020, the only facet of entertainment that was able to keep going was animation. If you remember, during this time streaming numbers went up because people were stuck at home, every studio was launching their own streaming platform (HBO Max, Disney+, Peacock, etc.) and celebrities were given animated shows because live-action had stopped dead in its tracks. This period allowed artists outside of California state to get hired because what's the point of capping the talent to the local area when we're already working remotely? In short, it was a boom. But an exponential boom rather than a gradual boom. You never wanna grow too fast because you'll crash out quicker (and harder) which leads us to our second factor.... 2.) Netflix's first ever round of layoffs in summer 2022, streaming actually isn't profitable?????

In short, this year is when Netflix's growth finally stopped and was the beginning of The Great Animation Contraction. Other studios who were looking to Netflix as a the new model of distributing/creating entertainment had realized Netflix wasn't invincible. As well as their business model. So naturally, they got scared and and take action (aka layoffs). I was affected by these layoffs while working at Marvel Studios and many artists got laid off at studios to save face from the mistake that was streaming (though at this point studios were still double downing on it). Also, around this time live-action was slowly restarting thanks to vaccines and social distancing protocols. So those celebrity studded animated productions dwindled down (and also they caused so much havoc for us animation workers because most of those celebrities had no animation production experience). Which now leads us to...

3.) Mergers everywhere! Yeah, uh, mergers fucking suck. People kept losing their jobs because companies kept absorbing into each other and multiplying their debts to ungodly dollars amounts! Apparently no one took a math class and understood if you multiply any number by zero you will always get a zero. These merger also caused more shows to get shelved and canned, making the job market even slimmer. And by then we get to 2023 and the....

4.) WGA, SAG and TAG Contract Negotiations By now, studios have realized that streaming is losing them money because it costs a butt load of money to not only create a streaming site, but also maintain it, update it, create new media for it, acquire established franchises for it, and maintain the current library. Streaming shows aren't being advertised like they used to on cable so shows don't last beyond one or two seasons. Worker contracts are becoming shorter and shorter (I had a co-worker who had a 3 month contract! Isn't that insane?). And what happens in the midst of this streaming meltdown?

WGA, SAG and TAG are gearing up for their contract negotiations. And as we know SAG (actors) and WGA (writers) did strike which good for them! But now there are no live-action jobs and once again, animation (TAG) is the only one running because our negotiations don't officially start until 2024. At this point, so many animated productions have been cancelled left and right for the sake of "saving money and cutting costs". And the effects were very much being felt in the animation work force. Some animation workers were starting to leave the state of California to more affordable cities, some getting day jobs as baristas, hell some leaving the industry all together. It didn't help that studios were kind of withholding production greenlights 'cause 1) they're greedy corporations 2) these strikes were putting pressure on them. And when we did enter 2024 for our contract negotiations, that contraction was at the tightest. The job market for animation had become so bone dry that you have director-level talent taking entry level jobs to stay afloat. But because of that new, emerging artists are blocked out from breaking in. Anytime a job listing would go up people would go in a frenzy and try every thing they could to get the job. That's how little shows were in production this year specifically. Of course, by now it is public that TAG has ratified the contract (meaning we will not strike). But up until then, studios were quite literally waiting with baited breath for the duration of negotiations. A ton of stuff was in development but nothing was getting a greenlight in fear of a strike. So many animation workers at this point have been laid off for at least 2 years, got priced out of LA county, or got so burned by the industry that they left for a more sustainable paycheck. At this point of the post you're probably thinking, "Why is she talking about all of this and not answering my question?"

And the reason for that is because I what to highlight you didn't miss your chance. You unfortunately graduated at a time where the circumstances were not good for breaking in for the past 4 years.

I'm not saying this to deter you from animation either. I just want to be transparent and honest about the current state of animation because it really has been bleak for the past 4 years. So it's not your fault but rather the industry was just in a seriously bad drought. Both emerging and veteran artists have been struggling to find work and when they do it didn't even last for 6 months. Hopefully, with the renewed contract studios will start greenlighting productions again so everyone isn't fighting for one job opening. But I can't tell 'cause I am not Raven Baxter haha. But what advice can I give during this tough time? Start developing your own projects. Things may be pretty dry right now but now is the time when you can create and develop your own original stuff that can be used in your portfolio. Short or long form, showing progress videos, just create. Because once you start working it's gonna be hard to find that personal project time (trust me I'm going through that right now haha). Also, you'd be surprised how just doing your own thing can garner the attention of someone who does have the power to hire you. How do you think I got to work on the shows I have in the animation industry? Almost all of my jobs happened because I was just creating my own thing and it just happened to match the sensibilities of a show produced by a Hollywood studio. And if I had any additional advice... it would probably be don't think that Hollywood is the only way you can tell your stories.

This one is more of....a recent revelation I've had after going through a pretty bad work experience but Hollywood isn't the only way you can be a storyteller. Whether it's comics, games, streaming, animation, or film....the Hollywood system isn't the end all be all. And by Hollywood system I'm referring to breaking into a big studio like Disney, Nick or something and trying to get your own movie/tv show to win an award or something. That system often works for a certain group of people and fails other groups. That's why I say develop and create your own thing because you might find something that fits your creative voice more than Disney or any other Hollywood studio. Maybe that's inconsiderate of me to say as someone who's been incredibly lucky to work in the animation industry for almost 8 years now....but I still wanna be honest that there are other avenues that isn't the Hollywood way. All in all, please don't give up or beat yourself up. The current state of animation within America was out your control and resulted in many artists struggling to find a job. You aren't too late. In fact, I would say now is your time to do your thing in preparation for when that hiring boom comes again (or you can just take another route to tell your stories). I hope that answered your question!

[perseidlion]

This is why streaming is dying.

I'm Canadian, and I used to watch Star Trek on Crave. Crave saved us for awhile from the fracturing of the streaming landscape because it stayed as an umbrella service for quite some time. I used to get Star Trek, HBO, WB shows, Starz, Sony stuff...basically Hulu + HBO + Paramount. That was actually worth it because for the same monthy fee I could get House of the Dragon, Star Trek and more.

But that wasn't going to last forever. When Paramount+ launched in Canada, Star Trek got taken off Crave. I'm a huge Star Trek fan but even I couldn't justify a FIFTH streaming service just for Trek.

So I waited until Discovery was finished. And then I binged it and season 4 of Lower Decks. And then I cancelled. I won't get it again until S3 of Strange New Worlds and Season 4 of Lower Decks are finished, then I'll binge and cancel again.

There is literally nothing else on P+ I want to watch. I looked, because if there was something I'd cancel Netflix for a bit. But it's all movies I've seen and don't want to rewatch, shows I already have access to on other streamers, or things I have no interest in.

When the networks were working together to put lots of tasty treats under one streamer, it was absolutely worth it. I'd pay $20 a month for Crave if HBO kept making good shows (instead of cancelling them, RIP Our Flag Means Death) and if P+ had lots of Trek (and...didn't keep cancelling those shows like they did Lower Decks and Discovery.) Between that and Trek that would mean I always had a show releasing on the platform that I wanted to watch.

As long as there isn't a steady diet of things that appeal to me, I WILL keep subscribing, binging, and cancelling. Churn is the reason these networks aren't profitable. But there is literally no incentive for me to NOT do that when the things I want to watch are scattered across 5-6 different streamers, each charging $15+ a month.

In trying to get their slice of the pie, the networks have guaranteed there isn't enough food on their buffet to keep people coming back for more.

It creates a vicious cycle. This fracturing means there's not enough budget to support the flagship shows/franchises. Then, they get cancelled and/or budget reduced. So they take away or vastly reduce the thing I want to watch the most.

PLUS none of the networks are nurturing the cult hits/franchises of the future. Shows that have the potential to be the reason I subscribe are being cut off at the knees after virtually no promotion.

I watch every new show like Dead Boy Detectives knowing there is a very high likelihood that this will be the only season I'll get to watch. So much potential is left on the table. If there were four or more shows like Dead Boy Detectives and Kaos getting ongoing commitments from Netflix I wouldn't even consider cancelling my subscription. Instead, I know that any show that isn't an immediate cultural moment is probably getting the axe, or getting two seasons, max. Especially if it's SF&F. Especially if it's queer.

We live in the world where even the critically-acclaimed and franchise-based House of the Dragon is getting truncated episode runs and reduced support.

Regardless of how you feel about how Game of Thrones ended, that franchise is a cultural juggernaut. House of the Dragon is legitimately good and packed with talent. The rough patches of Season 2 can be easily traced back to reduced budgets/cut episode run at the last minute that forced the production team to scramble and adapt.

Honestly. Is there anyone actually committing to their series other than FX, AMC, and Amazon with Rings of Power? Although RoP can also be considered a sunk cost fallacy since Amazon invested a SHIT TON into the IP and the series, so they need it to work. They also have a wobbly track record supporting other shows. (I will never forgive them for cancelling A Leage of Their Own.)

FX and AMC are the only networks that feel like they're actually supporting their content. And what do you get for that? Shogun, one of the best shows in recent memory. The show absolutely swept awards season (and rightfully so) and is now setting itself up to be a tentpole show in the mold of such classics of the historical fiction genre like Deadwood, The Tudors, and Rome.

Interview With the Vampire, is an AMC show which has a very active and passionate fandom eager for more of it and Anne Rice's Immortal Universe. This is a rare example of a new franchise (albeit based on an existing, well-know IP) is really finding its feet and its audience. The audience for it is not of the size of something like House of the Dragon, but AMC is feeding the audience it does have unapologetically, with queer camp horror full of messy, toxic relationships.

Then there's What We Do in the Shadows, which seems to be ending on its own terms this year. FX is a Disney subsidary which somehow manages to commit to the series it creates, which proves it can still be done.

I do hope that FX and AMC continues to support their weird and wonderful shows, and I hope they keep getting rewarded for it with high ratings and awards so that the rest of the networks will smarten up.

If we hadn't just come out of a golden age of streaming where every network was producing excellent TV, all of this heavy cancellation and fragmentation wouldn't be quite so devastating.

Entertainment seems like it's constantly in a feast or famine churn. Right now, we're careening toward famine, which is full of one-season shows, overextended franchises, flagship shows being cut/restrained and a whole lot of cheap dreck.

It's the reality TV heyday all over again and I hate it.

[batsarebetterthanpeople]

I saw some people talking shit about the interview with the writer where they said the whole crew was a polycule on the basis that they did not confirm a polycule beyond a reasonable doubt. When you say shit like that I want to remind you that Jes Tom is in the writers room, and not in filming or editing. They might not get the memo on changes made later in the process and they are involved in pitching and executing ideas, they know what the characters would do better than anyone except maybe David Jenkins because they decide what the characters do.

So if a writer is saying "we want there to be an all encompassing polycule" and an actor (Vico Ortiz) is saying "we filmed a scene where three characters implied to be in a relationship were quickly putting on their clothes after having sex" but we the audience didn't get to see either of those things than maybe it's not the fault of the writer's room that we didnt get it but some other force

Like... Perhaps... The studio not wanting to show it on their network and telling the editors to take that shit out.

Basically, the point: it gets rather annoying when people knit picking looking for a reason to be a hater after Izzys death call the lack of explicit polyamory a betrayal or worse yet say that the writer is on something and dragging us along when the writer in question is literally one of us (nonbinary) and we're so clearly on the same side. The writers like us and they like the show and they want to give us the polycule and, as with most shows, it's the capitalist's fault we didn't get that. Please direct your rage in the appropriate direction. I will be treating Jim/Olu/Archie/Zheng as well as Fang/Lucius/Pete like it's canon and I will be tweeting the foursome art at the nearest HBO max exec so they get the picture. I encourage everyone to do the same.

[jaskierx]

look, i've been an ardent defender of taika in the past, but i really do feel like he might've just decided to be done with the show, and that's why it was canceled. he's shown a complete lack of enthusiasm about it since s2 aired, and honestly he strikes me as someone who gets bored with projects very easily. there was way too much support from hbo max (merch, ad campaigns, those fucking profile icons) to make me believe otherwise. and from david's post, it doesn't sound like he'll be shopping around the show to other streamers, which is only further evidence that it was an internal decision rather than a network one.

anon i mean this with the utmost sincerity - back the fuck off

you don't know him. you don't know him from adam. you can't tell anything at all about a famous person from how they act in bts content or on social media. how do you know he gets bored with projects very easily? he works on loads of stuff, do you really think he bails the first time anything gets boring? do you think he'd have been successful in the industry if that was true?

he literally got ed's tattoos. he wears kraken jewellery. he said the role made him fall in love with acting again. he was working with his friends. s2 was filmed in his home country.

david jenkins has confirmed that taika was on board for s3.

maybe the 'complete lack of enthusiasm' was because he gets criticised for every fucking thing he says so he decided not to bother

[buffyfan145]

Don't know how I didn't know this till today but A24 and "The Iron Claw" director Sean Durkin made a Zine that features so much about the real family and how they made the movie but also they have posters in each one of Zac, Harris, and Jeremy done in the style of posters that Kevin, David, and Kerry actually did for WCCW!!! 😀 They look so cool and similar to the ones my Dad saved as he's got a whole bunch of those old wrestling magazines he saved from back then. Sharing a few Tweets of the posters.

Also wanted to let those who watched the movie there's also an episode of "Dark Side of the Ring" that was all about the Von Erich's and it was first time Kevin opened up about it. I finally was able to watch and it went into so much detail and things that were left out or slightly changed in the movie. Also I've seen Kevin's sons Marshall and Ross wrestling lately on AEW/ROH but in this doc they were getting their start and realized how much his sons resemble his brothers, especially Marshall with David and Ross with Kerry (more so Ross clean shaven as he's got a beard lately). Which again I'm hoping AEW signs them soon and since they'll be back in Texas next month.

Also curious if Zac, Harris, Jeremy, and Stanley are going to show up on AEW too instead of WWE as I saw A24 signed a new deal with WBD so their movies will go to Max/HBO for streaming/TV and they own the networks AEW airs on and MJF played Lance (as did a few other AEW wrestlers as others in a few scenes too). So if they show up on a wrestling show it'd be there especially if they sign Marshall and Ross. 😏

[overqchiever]

for those of you who say izzy's redemption arc came out of nowhere, maybe you just weren't paying enough attention this past year to realize that it was always going to happen. if you look past your bias, you will notice david jenkins has always been pretty open about loving izzy's character, to the point he has told us to rewatch season 1 solely to pay more attention to izzy and his motives.

if you need to claim that the writers are catering to izzy fans' wishes, when most of the fandom hated him after season 1 to the point of calling his fans abuse apologists (among other things) and sending them death threats, maybe you need to sit with yourself and realize you just don't like this show and the message it tries to get across. it's a show that points out how everyone is worthy of love and acceptance, even when they've done awful things in the past (sound familiar?). what matters is the growth that comes afterwards.

one point i agree with is that izzy's character arc is rushed, but for different reasons. we all know that hbo max cut down on the show's budget and doesn't pay their writers properly, which is the whole reason why they reduced the cast and the episodes to 8 instead of 10. this season has been affected in more ways than one, it's not just izzy's arc. episode 7 is proof of that.

you don't have to like izzy, but it's stupid to claim he's irredeemable when every single character is a pirate and they've done terrible things to get to where they are. you don't need to keep on being stuck on episode 10 of season 1 and ignore everything that's happened since.

i guess what i'm trying to say is that all we ask is that you are minimally respectful to us, fans, and especially to the cast and writers, because without them ofmd wouldn't exist.

[featherlesswings]

Just to let y’all know, HBO/MAX is participating in a marketing tactic that Netflix, Prime Video, and other streaming platforms have been using lately to get attention and subscribers before intentionally dropping queer shows. I can’t find the video I watched about it on YouTube, but it’s the same thing Fox, WB (now CW,) and UPN did in the ‘90s. At the time, the way to get decent ratings for fledgling networks was to make lots of content geared towards the Black community. Then when they had high enough ratings, phase those out and make shows geared towards the audience they really wanted, which was white people. So the new version of that is to put LGBTQ+ shows on streaming services, which generates free advertisement by people talking about it on the internet, whether favorably or negatively, then dropping them due to “unfortunate circumstances” and making stuff for cis het viewers instead. It’s all marketing, none of it is personal, or for love of the art, or anything. It’s such disgusting bullshit and I hate it here.

[saltpepperbeard]

I've seen some people say that we shouldn't comment on HBO/Max's posts, because all that's doing is boosting their social stats. So they can brag about engagement on all their posts about their new shows, all while we just get ignored. What do you think? I don't want to do the wrong thing and help the bad guys out with their numbers if I can help it!

Hm, I can see how that would be a concern, but I personally don’t think social media engagement is a huge bragging point for them. I think attracting new customers and maintaining those customers is a bragging point for them. In this streaming climate, the promise is always the growth of audiences, and the numbers (💀) of individuals who watch their properties.

So, in MY opinion, if their socials are flooded with nothing but people voicing their upset about a recent cancellation, particularly if they’re throwing in discussions about DEI, I can’t see how that would be good for them at all. Because people who are trying to engage with these posts on social media are seeing that Max can easily remove a popular show on a whim, for no apparent reason. And are seeing how LARGE of a show can be affected.

I will also say, I’ve worked numerous angles in marketing. When I was attempting to promote a product on Facebook for example, any engagement was good engagement. We didn’t really care about bad comments because they were just pushing us further into the algorithm.

However, when I’ve attempted to promote something that showcases the brand as a whole? We DID care about negative comments, or comments that spoke poorly about our service, because it put us in a bad light. It put our entire image in jeopardy.

SO. I say this to say, if like, a Gilded Age account is pushing a trailer, and it gets bad comments? They probably don’t care as much. But when MAX and/or HBO is pushing a trailer and it’s getting bad comments? They probably care way more. Anything that tarnishes their image in any kind of way can’t be good for them, no matter how much ✨engagement✨ they get.

And also, it just increases our noise and makes us more visible to the media, to other platforms, etc etc.

Someone else is free to chime in if they disagree or have different points, but to ME, it just seems more detrimental for them and way more beneficial for us.

[watchnrant]

Unfinished Stories: How Show Cancellations Are Hurting Streaming and Its Viewers

Why Streaming Platforms Are Breaking Our Hearts (And Their Own Shows)

Stop me if this sounds familiar: You’ve just finished binging a new show, you’re emotionally invested, and you can’t wait for the next season—only to find out it’s been canceled. Just like that, the characters you’ve grown attached to and the storylines you’re desperate to see resolved are gone, with no closure in sight. Sound familiar? It’s becoming an all-too-common experience for fans in the streaming age.

In 2023, a report by Whip Media revealed that Netflix had a 16% higher cancellation rate than other platforms, reflecting an alarming trend of axing shows—sometimes even those with dedicated fanbases and critical acclaim. The reasons behind these decisions often boil down to corporate strategy and financial metrics, but they don’t just hurt the shows—they hurt us, the viewers.

I’ll break down why so many great shows are being canceled, the emotional toll it takes on fans, and how streaming platforms are sabotaging themselves by cutting these stories short. Most importantly, we’ll explore whether anything can be done to stop this cycle of heartbreak.

When Storytelling Meets Corporate Greed: The Heartbreak of Canceled Shows

Let’s keep it real—when a show gets canceled, especially when it’s just hitting its stride, it’s not just disappointing. It’s heartbreaking. It’s more than losing a weekly escape; it’s like having a favorite book ripped out of your hands before you finish the final chapter. But why is this happening so often? The harsh truth is that, for streaming platforms, storytelling usually takes a backseat to corporate greed.

Even if a show builds a loyal fanbase or raises critical praise, it’s not safe if it doesn’t hit those immediate viewership numbers. Just look at Warrior Nun. It pulled in a perfect 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, and Netflix axed it after only two seasons. If even a show with that kind of love from fans and critics can’t survive, it’s clear that what matters to these platforms isn’t storytelling—it’s short-term financial gain.

These cancellations go deeper than just losing another show to binge. Fans pour their hearts into these stories, connect with the characters, and create entire communities around them. When a show is suddenly canceled, it feels like a personal betrayal. We’re not just talking about losing a form of entertainment; we’re talking about losing something we’ve emotionally invested in, which connects us to others who love it just as much.

The worst part? Platforms like HBO Max are particularly ruthless, with a cancellation rate of 26.9%, driven by the corporate chaos after the Warner Bros. Discovery merger. Shows disappear overnight, leaving fans scrambling. These platforms might think they’re cutting losses, but in reality, they’re cutting off their most passionate viewers—the ones who stick around and keep coming back for more.

The Emotional Fallout for Viewers

When a favorite show gets canceled, it’s not just frustrating—it’s a gut punch. You’ve invested time and energy into these characters and stories, only to have them cut off mid-journey. Streaming platforms may treat it like a business decision, but for fans, it’s personal.

We don’t just watch shows—we connect with them. These characters become part of our lives, and when their stories are left unfinished, it feels like a betrayal. In fact, a Morning Consult poll found that 59% of viewers felt betrayed when their favorite show was canceled. That’s how deep the connection runs. It’s not just about losing something to binge—it’s about losing a story you were emotionally invested in.

Then there’s the fan communities. These aren’t casual viewers—they’re the ones creating fan theories, art, and discussions that keep the show's spirit alive. When a series like Warrior Nun gets canceled, fans don’t just move on. They fight back. They raised money for billboards and campaigned hard for a revival because they weren’t ready to let go. That kind of passion doesn’t just happen with every show; when it does, it’s a connection streaming platforms shouldn’t ignore.

By cutting these stories short, platforms are alienating their most engaged fans. And once that trust is broken, it’s tough to get back. Fans are left wondering, “Why should I get invested in another show if this keeps happening?”

Corporate Greed vs. Creative Integrity

Here’s the truth: streaming platforms love to sell themselves as trailblazers for creative storytelling, but when it comes down to it, they’re often more concerned with their bottom line. It’s a battle between corporate greed and the kind of creative integrity that fans crave. And sadly, creativity is losing.

The reality is harsh—if a show doesn’t pull in massive numbers right out of the gate, it’s considered expendable. Netflix, in particular, is notorious for this. They’re not canceling shows because they aren’t good or don’t have a loyal fanbase; they’re cutting them to dodge higher production costs down the road. Remember GLOW? Remember The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance? Both were critically adored and had dedicated followers, but both were canceled because they didn’t meet Netflix’s financial metrics fast enough.

What these platforms don’t seem to get is that storytelling isn’t about instant gratification. Some of the greatest series out there didn’t start with blockbuster ratings. Breaking Bad, Parks and Recreation—those shows were slow-burns. They grew over time, finding their audience and eventually becoming cultural cornerstones. If they were released today, they might not have survived the brutal pace of the current streaming game.

Even worse, there’s a complete disregard for the cultural and emotional impact of these stories. Shows like The Get Down and Sense8 weren’t just entertaining—they mattered. They represented diverse voices and narratives that we rarely see on screen. But in the eyes of these platforms, if the numbers don’t add up fast enough, it’s game over. And with that, we lose shows that aren’t just fun to watch—they’re important.

Streaming platforms are so focused on short-term gains that they’re sacrificing long-term loyalty and, let’s be honest, the essence of why we all fell in love with TV in the first place—great storytelling. If they keep cancelling shows based on a quick profitability formula, they’re going to lose the very fans who make these platforms what they are.

Even worse, there’s a complete disregard for these stories' cultural and emotional impact. Shows like The Get Down and Sense8 weren’t just entertaining—they mattered. They represented diverse voices and narratives that we rarely see on screen. But in the eyes of these platforms, if the numbers don’t add up fast enough, it’s game over. And with that, we lose shows that aren’t just fun to watch—they’re essential.

Streaming platforms are so focused on short-term gains that they’re sacrificing long-term loyalty. Let’s be honest: The essence of why we all fell in love with TV in the first place is great storytelling. If they keep canceling shows based on a quick profitability formula, they will lose the fans who make these platforms what they are.

Diverse and Niche Shows Are Most at Risk

When it comes to shows that push boundaries or highlight underrepresented voices, it’s clear they face an uphill battle. These are the stories we’ve been waiting to see, but they’re often the first to be canceled before they can really hit their stride.

Shows with female leads, LGBTQ+ representation, and minority-driven narratives are disproportionately at risk. Take Warrior Nun, a series with a strong LGBTQ+ fanbase and a perfect 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Despite its critical acclaim, Netflix cut it after just two seasons. The same goes for Sense8 and The Get Down—both celebrated for their diverse storytelling, yet both were scrapped because they didn’t meet fast financial targets.

But it’s bigger than just numbers. These shows are more than just entertainment—they represent communities and voices often sidelined in mainstream media. Canceling them isn’t just a financial decision; it sends the message that these stories don’t matter as much. In a time when diversity should be celebrated, streaming platforms are turning their backs on the very shows that bring something different to the table.

What platforms seem to miss is that the value of these shows extends far beyond immediate viewership. They spark conversations, build passionate fan communities, and offer sorely needed representation. Cutting these series off at the knees isn’t just a loss for viewers—it’s a cultural setback.

If these platforms want to stay relevant and maintain the trust of their viewers, they need to stop treating diverse and niche shows as disposable. These are the stories that matter, and they deserve to be seen, heard, and supported.

Short-Term Success Metrics and the Decline of Quality

Streaming platforms are laser-focused on quick wins, and that obsession with short-term success directly shapes the content we get—and it’s not a good look. Because of this need for instant results, we’re seeing more shows designed for fast consumption, but they often lack the depth and substance that make for great storytelling. Instead of daring narratives that push boundaries, we get cookie-cutter series that play it safe and fail to take real creative risks.

One of the most significant shifts we’ve seen is the move to shorter seasons. Traditional broadcast TV seasons ran 20 to 24 episodes, giving characters time to breathe and story arcs space to develop naturally. However, streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime have reduced that to 8 to 10 episodes per season. Sure, it caters to binge-watchers who want tighter, faster-paced narratives, but it comes at a cost. Shorter seasons pile on the pressure for shows to perform instantly, and if they don’t? They’re gone before they’ve had a chance to grow a loyal fanbase.

This shift isn’t just killing shows before they can take off—it’s impacting the quality of the storytelling. With fewer episodes, creators are forced to cram significant plot points into a smaller space, cutting down on character depth, subplots, and organic world-building that makes a series truly immersive. Think about the traditional broadcast model: longer seasons allow for slow-burn character arcs and rich, layered stories that stick with you. Compare that to today’s streaming shows, which can feel rushed, scrambling to hit narrative highs without the time to let things develop naturally.

What’s even more frustrating is that we’re also seeing this convergence with broadcast TV. Thanks to shifting viewer habits, even those longer seasons are being chopped down to 10 to 13 episodes. But here’s the catch—while traditional TV shows still have more room to breathe, streaming platforms demand immediate results. And if a show doesn’t grab massive viewership numbers right out of the gate, it’s almost guaranteed to get the axe.

But there are exceptions to the rule. Take The Boys, for example. Erik Kripke created a series that balances shorter seasons with bold, unapologetic storytelling that stands out in a sea of formulaic content. Amazon Prime struck gold with The Boys by allowing the show to take creative risks while delivering a tight, focused narrative. The difference? Kripke’s commitment to fleshing out complex characters and tackling taboo subjects head-on proves that shorter seasons don’t have to mean sacrificing quality.

In a world where most streaming shows are playing it safe, The Boys is a reminder that you can still create something boundary-pushing, even within the constraints of shorter formats. It’s not that it’s impossible—it’s just that platforms need to be willing to take those risks more often.

What streaming platforms are missing in their race for instant success is the potential for long-term loyalty. Slow-burn stories might not immediately pull huge numbers, but they can become cult favorites. Breaking Bad wasn’t an overnight sensation, but because it was given time to build, it became one of the greatest series of all time. Streaming services are leaving that kind of magic on the table. Sure, they might win the numbers game in the short run, but they’re sacrificing the creativity and storytelling that makes fans stick around for the long haul.

Misjudging the Power of Word-of-Mouth

Streaming platforms are so focused on grabbing immediate attention with flashy marketing campaigns and big-budget productions that they often miss one of the most powerful drivers of a show’s success: word-of-mouth. Let’s be real—some of the most beloved and iconic shows didn’t start as massive hits. They grew slowly, building momentum because fans couldn’t stop talking about them. But platforms, in their obsession with quick wins, often don’t give shows the time to grow organically.

Here’s the thing: marketing can only do so much. The real magic happens when fans connect deeply with a show and start spreading the word. That’s how Breaking Bad went from under the radar to a cultural juggernaut. Same with Stranger Things—it didn’t become a phenomenon just because Netflix poured money into it. Fans built that buzz, episode by episode, conversation by conversation.

And yet, streaming platforms continue to prioritize big-budget releases over fan-fuelled shows. They bank on high-profile rollouts, hoping for immediate success, but often miss out on the organic, slow-build shows that gain momentum through fan passion. Take The Expanse or The OA, for example—these weren’t instant smashes, but the fan-driven conversations around them were intense. People shared theories, created fan art, and built communities dedicated to these shows. When platforms cancel those shows, they’re not just losing a piece of content—they’re breaking up the community that powered them.

The power of fan communities goes far beyond viewership numbers. These are the people who will fight for a show, even after it’s been canceled. We’ve seen it time and time again. Lucifer? Brought back from the dead by its fans. Manifest? Same story. The fans rallied so hard that the platforms couldn’t ignore them. And let’s not forget Warrior Nun—after it was canceled, fans took to the streets with billboards and petitions, refusing to let their show go quietly into the night. That’s the kind of energy that streaming platforms are seriously underestimating.

What streaming platforms need to understand is that viewership isn’t just about numbers—it’s about engagement. When fans invest emotionally, they spread the word. They get their friends watching. They create the kind of buzz that no marketing budget can buy. Cutting a show too soon means killing that potential for fan-driven growth, which could be the key to turning a sleeper hit into a cultural phenomenon.

At the end of the day, it’s fans who turn shows into something bigger than a streaming number. It’s their conversations, their love for the story, and their commitment to spreading the word that makes a show stick. And if platforms keep ignoring that, they will keep canceling the very shows that had the potential to become the next big thing.

Audience Disengagement and “Serial Churning”

There are only so many times you can get your heart broken by show cancellations before you start to wise up. Fans aren’t just sitting back and taking it anymore—they’re starting to play the game, hopping from platform to platform, subscribing just for one or two shows, then canceling the minute they’re done. It’s called “serial churning,” and it’s happening because fans simply don’t trust streaming platforms to keep their favorite shows alive long enough for them to commit emotionally.

Why would you invest in a new series when there’s a good chance it’ll get canceled before it even gets the time to breathe? We’ve all been burned—whether it was The OA, Warrior Nun, or some underrated gem that had so much potential but never got the chance to finish the story it started. It’s no surprise fans are more cautious now, waiting to see if a show will make it past season one before they even think about getting attached.

This “serial churning” isn’t just a theory—it’s real and growing. A 2023 report from Deloitte found that 38% of streaming subscribers are now jumping between platforms, only signing up for specific shows and canceling once those shows are over. That’s what happens when you lose your audience’s trust. They’ve seen enough shows get axed, and now they’re treating their subscriptions like they treat their favorite series: totally disposable.

Streaming platforms don’t seem to realize they’re creating their own problem. By constantly canceling shows and focusing only on short-term wins, they’re driving away the long-term loyalty that keeps subscribers coming back. Fans are no longer sticking around to browse the library; they’re hopping in, watching what they came for, and leaving just as quickly.

At the heart of this issue is trust. Fans want to know that when they invest their time into a story, they’ll get the whole experience—the closure, the character arcs, the payoff they signed up for. But when platforms cancel shows before those stories can fully unfold, they break that trust. And once that trust is gone, so are the viewers. Platforms need to wake up to the fact that fans aren’t just passive subscribers—they’re part of the story. Keep canceling shows, and you’re not just churning viewers. You’re churning away any hope of building lasting loyalty.

Case Studies of Canceled Shows and Their Fan Communities

When a beloved show gets canceled, it’s more than just the end of a storyline—it’s the collapse of an entire community. Fans don’t just passively watch their favorite series; they invest emotionally, build communities, create art, and engage in endless theories. So, when a show is axed, it’s a gut punch that goes way beyond just missing out on entertainment. Let’s dive into a few examples that show how deeply these fanbases are connected and why streaming platforms often fail to recognize the real power of these passionate communities.

Warrior Nun: A Fanbase That Refused to Go Quietly

Warrior Nun wasn’t just another action-packed supernatural series—it was a lifeline for fans hungry for more authentic LGBTQ+ representation. This show connected with its audience on a personal level, offering characters and storylines that felt both fresh and deeply relatable. So when Netflix canceled it after just two seasons, the backlash was fierce.

But these fans didn’t just mourn—they mobilized. Petitions, billboards, social media campaigns—the Warrior Nun fandom went to war for their show. The #SaveWarriorNun movement wasn’t just about saving a series—it was about saving a story that represented voices that often get sidelined in mainstream media. This community wouldn’t let Netflix’s decision go unchallenged, and their fight is still ongoing.

And this is what platforms miss: Warrior Nun fans weren’t just casual viewers. They were invested. These kinds of fan communities are the backbone of a show’s success and longevity. When you cancel a series like this, you’re not just losing viewers—you’re alienating a dedicated audience that could have stuck around for years.

Shadow and Bone: A Fantasy Fandom Teetering on the Edge

When Netflix adapted Leigh Bardugo’s Shadow and Bone, it quickly became a must-watch for fantasy lovers and die-hard Grishaverse fans. The show’s rich world-building and complex characters struck a chord, and fans didn’t take long to rally behind it. But despite the initial buzz, there’s still a lingering fear that Netflix’s infamous cancellation axe could come down on Shadow and Bone at any moment, thanks to the high production costs.

Here’s the thing—fantasy series like this take time. The Grishaverse fanbase is still growing, but they’re passionate and vocal, ready to support the series in the long run if Netflix allows it to flourish. The problem is that these shows often don’t get that chance. Platforms are too quick to judge based on instant success, missing the bigger picture. A series like Shadow and Bone has all the makings of a slow-burn classic, but it needs time to grow and fully realize its potential. Cutting it off too soon would be yet another missed opportunity.

My Lady Jane: Cancelled Before It Could Even Begin

Then there’s My Lady Jane, an adaptation that never even got the chance to hit the screen. Based on the wildly popular book by Cynthia Hand, Brodi Ashton, and Jodi Meadows, it was set to be a refreshing, comedic take on Tudor-era history—something completely unique. Fans of the book series were eager to see this quirky, genre-bending story brought to life.

But before a single episode could air, My Lady Jane was canceled—a victim of shifting priorities and cost-cutting measures behind the scenes. This kind of decision hurts the most because it wasn’t about the content itself. It was about risk. And in a world where unique, offbeat shows are already few and far between, it’s frustrating to see a potential gem scrapped before it ever had the chance to find its audience.

These case studies highlight a truth that streaming platforms often overlook: fans are more than just numbers. They’re the heart and soul of a show’s success. When a show gets canceled, it’s not just about lost episodes—it’s about lost connections, lost stories, and the collapse of entire communities that fans have built around these worlds. And the thing is, fans won’t go quietly. They fight. They rally. They push back. And in some cases, they win. Platforms would do well to recognize that losing a show means losing something much deeper—audience trust and long-term loyalty.

The True Cost of Cancellations on the Streaming Industry

The damage runs deeper when platforms cancel a show than when losing a series. It’s a hit to the very trust that viewers place in these platforms—and that’s not just an emotional cost; it’s a long-term business problem. Cancellations are starting to shape the entire streaming landscape in ways that could have severe consequences down the line.

Eroding Viewer Trust and Loyalty

Every time a beloved series gets canceled without warning, it feels like a breach of trust. Fans are left wondering, “Why bother getting invested in a new show if it’s just going to be cut short?” That hesitation is real, and it’s growing. Streaming platforms are creating an environment where fans are afraid to commit, knowing full well that their favorite characters and stories might not get the endings they deserve.

This is where the real damage starts. When a platform cancels a show, it’s not just losing a few disappointed viewers—it’s eroding the trust of an entire audience. Fans stop seeing these platforms as reliable. They stop believing their time and emotional investment will pay off. And when that happens, they’re less likely to dive into a new series. The constant cycle of cancellations is pushing fans away, making them reluctant to commit to anything new until they know it’s going to stick around.

A 2023 report by Insider Intelligence even predicts churn rates could top 40% by 2025 as viewers lose faith in platforms’ ability to see a story through. And that’s not just an issue for the fans—it’s a significant threat to streaming services. In such a competitive market, losing long-term loyalty could have substantial financial consequences.

The Decline in Content Quality

It’s not just trust being sacrificed—creativity is taking a hit, too. Platforms are so focused on profitability that they’re playing it safe, pushing out shows designed to grab quick attention but lacking real depth. Instead of bold, slow-burn stories that need time to find their audience, we’re getting formulaic content that’s all about hitting those instant viewership targets.

And let’s be honest—when you’re focused on getting quick wins, you won’t take creative risks. The result? Fewer daring narratives, less character development, and more cookie-cutter shows that feel like they’re made by algorithm rather than passion. The heart and soul of great TV—those slow-burn character arcs and richly layered plots—are being sacrificed in favor of shows that may look good in the short term but don’t have the substance to stick with viewers.

The “Enshittification” of Streaming

Then there’s the ugly side of it all—what some have called the “enshittification” of streaming. This is where platforms get so wrapped up in monetization that they start cutting corners on the very thing that made them successful in the first place: great storytelling. More and more, streaming platforms prioritize profit over quality, cranking out content designed to boost numbers but lacking the creativity and emotional depth that makes people want to keep watching.

This kind of short-sighted thinking doesn’t just hurt the shows—it hurts the platforms. Sure, they might get a temporary bump in viewership, but they’re alienating the fans who would stick around for the long haul. Platforms are so focused on squeezing out quick profits that they’re forgetting what brought people to streaming in the first place: the promise of unique, bold storytelling. And that’s a promise they’re failing to keep.

The actual cost of all these cancellations? It’s not just a few lost episodes or unfinished storylines—it’s a long-term problem for the entire streaming industry. As platforms prioritize short-term gains over building lasting relationships with their audience, they’re eroding trust, stifling creativity, and, ultimately, risking their future.

A Call for Industry Reform

Let’s cut to the chase: the streaming industry desperately needs a reset. Creativity is taking a backseat to corporate greed, and we, the fans, are the ones paying the price. The constant cancellations, the obsession with instant results, and the disregard for long-term storytelling are burning out viewers and driving a wedge between platforms and the people keeping them alive. But here’s the thing—this can change. It has to change.

Ending the Cycle of Corporate Greed

It’s time for streaming platforms to stop treating shows like disposable content. This “cancel-first, think later” approach isn’t just frustrating—it’s killing the stories that make TV worth watching in the first place. Platforms are so focused on what’s hot right now that they’re missing out on cultivating the kind of shows that build dedicated, long-term fanbases. The truth is, some of the best series didn’t become iconic overnight. Breaking Bad took time to hit its stride. Parks and Recreation wasn’t an immediate hit either.

What platforms need is patience. Not everything has to be a blockbuster right out of the gate. Give shows time to grow. Invest in the long haul. Stop looking for the next viral sensation and start backing the stories that have the potential to evolve into something lasting and meaningful. Because the alternative? It’s a graveyard of unfinished stories and frustrated fans who are done investing in shows that don’t get the time they need.

Supporting Storytelling Longevity and Artistic Integrity

Here’s what needs to happen: creators deserve the space to tell their stories from start to finish. Fans deserve to know that the time they invest in a show will pay off. That means committing to complete narratives, not cutting off stories halfway through because they didn’t blow up in the first season. Streaming platforms need to get back to what made them great—pushing boundaries, taking creative risks, and supporting the kind of storytelling that builds emotional connections over time.

We need platforms to prioritize artistic integrity over analytics. Let’s get back to original, thought-provoking, and emotionally charged content—the kind that lingers with you long after you’ve hit “Next Episode.” The audience is there for it. Fans want originality, crave stories that challenge them, and are willing to stick around if the platforms show they’re committed to letting those stories unfold.

Bringing Back Viewer Loyalty

The trust between viewers and streaming platforms is hanging by a thread. Fans hesitate to commit to new series because premature cancellations have burned them too many times. Platforms must rebuild that trust by showing they’re in it for the long run. If a show doesn’t hit massive numbers in its first season, that doesn’t mean it’s a failure. It means it’s just getting started.

By investing in slow-burn hits and giving fanbases room to grow, platforms can bring back the loyalty they’ve lost. Viewers want to commit. They want to feel like their time matters. If platforms start treating shows as more than short-term profit plays, they’ll see fans return���eager and ready to invest in the stories they know will be given the chance to thrive.

The future of streaming isn’t in chasing viral hits or cranking out disposable content. It’s in building lasting relationships with fans through great storytelling. If platforms don’t make that shift, they risk losing the very audience that made them what they are today. It’s time for the industry to wake up and realize that the power lies in the fans, the stories, and the long-term commitment to creativity and connection.

My Final Word: Why Streaming Platforms Need to Rethink Their Strategy

Canceling shows isn’t just about numbers—it’s a betrayal of the fans who pour their time, energy, and emotions into these stories. When a beloved series gets cut short, it’s not just a show ending—it’s trust being broken. After this happens enough times, viewers start asking, “Why should I get attached to another show if it’s just going to vanish?”

The way streaming platforms operate right now is pushing fans away. There’s too much focus on instant success and not enough emphasis on what really builds lasting loyalty: connection. Fans don’t just want another series to pass the time; they want stories that matter, stories that evolve, take risks, and, most importantly, finish. Yet, time and time again shows with real potential are being scrapped before they can fully take off.

This needs to change. Streaming platforms should start thinking long-term. Support the creators—the writers, showrunners, and directors—who have bold stories to tell, even if their shows don’t become instant hits. Let these stories grow, build fanbases, and reach their full potential. Stop playing it safe with formulaic content made for quick numbers and start investing in storytelling that leaves a lasting impact.

Fans aren’t just looking for something to watch—they want stories that remind them why they fell in love with TV and film in the first place. Platforms that focus on cultivating that kind of content are the ones that will keep their audiences engaged. It’s not about quick wins; it’s about creating something that resonates long after the credits roll.

If streaming platforms want to stay relevant, they need to refocus on what really matters: creative integrity and long-term fan loyalty. Otherwise, they risk losing not just a few shows but also the audience's trust, which makes them successful. And once that trust is gone, it won’t be easy to get back.

[bunnyboyzyon]

I <3 pirating movies and tv shows bc no you don't deserve my money netflix and hulu and hbo max and paramount plus and apple tv and peacock and prime video and disney plus you evil bastard

The fact I can name that many different streaming services that do the same thing is a problem in itself.

Maybe I'd pay for your service if you paid your actors and writers <3

Dms if u want places to watch live action shows and cartoons or anime (I have a different site for anime)

(also pirating sites are incredibly fucking annoying with every other click sending you to a different site and the amount of stupid pop ups on screen (most if not all of them being those annoying "Jamie is five minutes away!!!" ads or something similar), an ad blocker is almost necessary but it's possible to tough it out if you wanna do that to yourself for some reason)(and when one website goes down three more pop up like a hydra)