4 ways Netflix/Marvel changing daredevil release will backfire if the rumours are true

4 ways Netflix/Marvel changing daredevil release will backfire if the rumours are true

Tonytony breaks down 4 ways in which Netflix and marvel will backfire if the rumours are true.

Editorial Opinion
By tonytony - Jan 05, 2016 02:01 PM EST
Filed Under: DC Comics

1.) Questions about Netflix claims to success and how it is measured will no longer be avoidable.

Image result for netflix


Simply put every industry insider knows that Netflixs Kryptonite is its viewing figures.

I read a report talking about how netflix publicises and celebrates it success but hides all their failures because they dont release viewing figures or ratings. The suggestion is that investors are potentially being duped by them and they have a highly inflated share price.
At the moment this is a convenient situation because if they put out a show and its not well recieved they could hide it or even claim it was their biggest hit and no one would be the wiser.

After this they will face greater scrutiny and more people will challenge any claims they have of success. other shows like the flash, supergirl and gotham put out viewing figures week in week out, this opens them up to criticism and praise but more importantly all praise heaped on these shows for success is substantiated with hard numbers. This is very different to netflix whose response is usually something coy or totally ambigous with no verifiable numbers.
To illustrate this point i ask how many people watched house of cards season 1 that went on to watch season 3? I only know one person who did that. But yet its still presented and thought of with the hype in season 1.

This lack of viewing figures is a protection mechanism that netflix can use to manipulate perception of success of its shows even when they stop being successful. we have had external companies try to do external research to measure netlfix success but really you know that if the figures were good consistently then netflix would release them.

As a matter of interest according to the research more people watch supergirl on average each week(8million) than watched house of card and and daredevil put together and even then i think thats being generous to netflix. Just think about that for a minute.

In the long term its not a place they want to be and the question about viewing figures is something netflix dodges like the plague. But if they follow through they will have to accept that it will come to them hard. Once success is put into context most people will realise netflix shows are not as successful as perhaps the General audience think, this will no doubt affect their share price and perception of success netflix surrounds itself with.



2. Quality of Netflix shows will come under scrutiny-


Internet fanboys often ask these sort of questions, i liked daredevil season 1 but it was overhyped like crazy and more importantly it was made on a budget.
I didnt mind as You can get away with this because Daredevil uses his hands and does martial arts. But with Jessica Jones it was pretty evident that it was done a budget, in fact it felt like a cheap show, she is supposed to be similar to supergirl from a flight and even super strenght perspective, it was very very cheaply done. But most people accept it for what its trying to do rather than what it actually is this is the story of disney side of marvel in a ntushell. Again if you look at the production values for these shows they are in some cases less than some of the other tv shows we currently watch. The most expensive shows on Netflix is marco polo at $9million dollars an episode and i genuinely enjoyed that as i felt i was getting value for money and watching something bridging cinema and the small screen. Unfortunately this is not the case with most Netflix shows so they will have to raise production quality or simply find people genuinely asking whats the hype about? and why do we pay for this when we can get better produced and made shows on NBC or CBS.




3. Confirms without a doubt that the disney side of marvel is petty 
Image result for petty


The damage to marvel in the short term is purely from a perception and reputational perspective. Over the years alot of the internet debate which in some cases has become nasty as WB/Sony/Fox fans  point fingers at the disney side of marvel for various reason. The thing is if you cast your mind back before Disney's side of marvel entered the fray, comic book movies where succesful, spiderman and batman and the xmen movies were all making money and the fans (all of them) where happy for the genres success overall. Since the disney side of marvel have entered the fray they have spent all their time attacking everyone else and willing any comic book movie made by other studios to fail Anyone who watched the antony mackie interview and are fans of the genre would quite simply have been appaled by anthony mackie. 
There were rumours that what they did to the xmen and fantastic four comics where done out of spite, but their fans defended them and closed their eyes to everything that people in the middle could see and continued to defend the indensible.
But After this there can be no question that Disney side of marvels aim is to spite other companies.

If i had to use an analogy the best I can think of 50 cent ,
Image result for 50 cent manufactures rap beef



about a decade ago i remember 50 cent had hit his peak but instead of focusing on making good music he spent all his time attacking any other rapper that he was insecure about, it didnt change the fact that his music was getting worse all he did was slow down the industy from moving onto something better.  You see all the energy spent trying to hang on to his position should have been put into making good music as ultimately that is the only way to hang onto the top spot

This is how i see the disney side of marvel, trying hard to troll and undermine other studios but DC is the studio that wont go away and focusing on doing its thing.  but all this situation tells me is that Disneys marvel are worried about their position, the last couple of Disney marvel movies have been so and so and havent had the impact they would have liked but instead of focusing on quality and improving their selves they are simply attacking others . Bashing others might lose the attacked fans but it wont make them like you and leads to my next point.


4. All fans of other studios can now categorically point to disney marvel behaviour - from the actors to the comic guys and even tv guys and say without a doubt these are bad guys of the industry and have reducing themselves to the troll of the industry.
Image result for disney marvel trolling




This is really important and i think finally closes this argument about what company is the transgressor in alot of the disputes we have had online. 
The pathetic thing is that it wont affect batman v superman opening weekend but it does show them up as the haters in the industry trying hard to disrupt other movies from succeding. Not the tag you want.


anyhow its a different perspective and i hope you have enjoyed reading this as i have enjoyed writing this.  sound off with your thoughts below.

Ultimate Luke Cage Debuts, Wolverine's Mission Continues, And More In February's ULTIMATE Marvel Comics
Related:

Ultimate Luke Cage Debuts, Wolverine's Mission Continues, And More In February's ULTIMATE Marvel Comics

ZATANNA: DC Comics' Mistress Of Magic Returns In New Series From Writer/Artist Jamal Campbell
Recommended For You:

ZATANNA: DC Comics' Mistress Of Magic Returns In New Series From Writer/Artist Jamal Campbell

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

GiantNerd
GiantNerd - 1/5/2016, 2:53 PM
I remember WB trying to do something similar with BvS when they attempted to set the release date the same weekend in early may, around the same time Marvel has been releasing new movies since 2008.

Before they realized how dumb that would be that is.
ScarletWarlock
ScarletWarlock - 1/5/2016, 3:06 PM
I stopped reading after it said Daredevil was overhyped. I can understand this is an editorial and so it is an opinion, but this is obviously written for someone to read, and the majority who will read this are going to disagree with that statement, and you also state it as fact. It wasn't overhyped, people are allowed to like something you don't. Like I said, you don't have to like it, just don't act as though you found the objective truth, and everyone is blind to it.

A lot of this article seems keen on downplaying everything that Marvel does and somehow finding the negative in every situation. I'm not being rude or going to accuse you of being bias because maybe this is just how you perceive these things, I just really don't like negativity, and this is definitely a pessimistic attitude towards the situation and over all, from my perspective, a misguided opinion, especially since as someone who has studied film for a long time, the production value for JJ and DD are incredible.

Anyways, I'm just saying for future reference, and I know this is a pain, but maybe try not to insult the reader as much? It was most likely not done on purpose,and you aren't writing for some professional paper, but I just think it would be better to produce something more friendly and positive in the future. Genuinely no offense, friend, and as writing this I did finish the whole article, but I do agree on SOME points, and I appreciate your effort in writing editorials regardless, my first and only editorial was shit and I had arguably the worst user on this site(he's banned now) comment on it and insult me in every possible way, so I apologize if I seem too over dramatic or critical, because it sucks, it really does.
kinghulk
kinghulk - 1/5/2016, 4:09 PM
i cant wait i get to go watch BvS then watch DD season 2, or watch dd then see Bvs later in the day who cares when they come out we can watch them whenever we want and they are gonna be awesome.
Futers11
Futers11 - 1/5/2016, 4:26 PM
What a load of crap
ossie85
ossie85 - 1/5/2016, 4:36 PM

Netflix don't publish viewership details for 2 reasons (In my opinion)

a) - Why would they? They don't get any advantage in showing them

b) - The number of viewers isn't actually that important for Netflix - the number of new subscribers is. Yes, they have to keep its current subscribers, but when they release something new they look at the number of new subscriptions they get. Because that is the income flow.

I.e. if Daredevil had 100,000 views and 80,000 new subscribers, they'd consider it more of success than say House of Cards Season 3 if they had a 1,000,000 views but only 10,000 subscriptions.

I wouldn't confuse 'not telling you facts' with 'lying' though. Netflix, like any other company, can't legally lie to shareholders.

And Disney make money. I don't think they'd keep making something if it didn't make a profit.

I've watched all 3 seasons of House of Cards btw.

I don't think Disney are the monsters you have them out to be - at least not any worse than any other company. They are arguably more successful for sure, but to blame them for internet arguments is giving them too much credit. Hitler comes up a lot on the internet, and I don't think it was his intent to cause internet arguments!

Disney have produced quantity and quality - therefore what else are we going to talk about? WB, Fox, Sony are all producing less quantity (quality is subjective), so of course Disney are talked about more.


ossie85
ossie85 - 1/5/2016, 4:43 PM

Might say another point, though I genuinely don't believe there was malice in it... But WB scheduled Batman v Superman on the same date as Captain America 3, before backing down - saying they didn't think Disney would be ready.

I'm not saying that WB 'trolled' Disney, but I have a feeling that if it was the other way around, a different reaction might have been had.
gamecreatorjj
gamecreatorjj - 1/5/2016, 4:46 PM
@Scorpion8125 While I agree this article is full of shit (coming from the perspective that it's a pretty shitty thing to release on such a big blockbuster release date), often it is more important for a company to appear profitable than to actually be profitable.

So it is more advantageous for Netflix to produce multiple seasons for a show that isn't even popular because it makes them look like they are in higher demand than they actually are. This could be why Netflix is producing so many series, when only a few years ago they had 2 or 3.

From a corporate standpoint, it's less about making money and more about the appearance of making money (or not making money). Sometimes NOT appearing profitable is the ultimate way to success. Youtube and Amazon, I believe still haven't been in profit. Now they are making money, but it's through fancy accounting that they are never technically in profit.

It all goes back to Hollywood accounting, the original Star Wars films have never actually made a "profit." This is why David Prowse isn't incredibly wealthy. In his contract he was assured a certain percentage of the profits from the films, but because of some tricky accounting he hasn't received as cent of those percentages.

I'm a little rusty on my knowledge regarding to big business, so the Amazon/Youtube thing could no longer be accurate, I just know it was a few years ago. It was all a big deal when Youtube was bought by Google.
Erik10101
Erik10101 - 1/5/2016, 5:24 PM
I love reading these comments; it's always funny to see how easily people tear down tonytony's often biased/baseless articles.
Erik10101
Erik10101 - 1/5/2016, 5:32 PM
@tonytony

I think this editorial has a fatal flaw; you didn't put any thought into WHY Marvel would change Daredevil's release date (if this rumor is even true).

Your thought: Marvel wants to hurt BvS's box office totals.

These are two completely different mediums. Netflix can be watched at any time during the weekend and in any increment of the full 13 hours. BvS is just two hours. Besides, it opens at 7:00pm on Thursday while Daredevil releases on midnight. So, there's plenty of time during the weekend for both to be seen. It's not like they're competing directly against each other especially because many people already have Netflix subscriptions.

My thought: Daredevil S2 airing on the same date as BvS gets the show more attention. People like you are just reminding people of its release date. So really, this is just a smart business move. BvS is not affected by the release date in any negative way. Daredevil is not affected by the release date in any negative way.


I respect that you care so much about this "nefarious agenda" Marvel/Disney have, but the arguments you make are always poor, unsupported, or biased. I've noticed improvement in your writing style, but the content needs work.
Pedrito
Pedrito - 1/5/2016, 6:18 PM
Why are DC fanboys so scared of just a Netflix release?
Netflix releases stuff all the time and nobody questions when they do it.
Chill, people.
TheManFromMars
TheManFromMars - 1/5/2016, 11:44 PM
You have issues.
pesmerga44
pesmerga44 - 1/6/2016, 7:44 AM


This is a badly written article full of bias against the MCU. If DD season 2 is releasing the same day as BvS who cares. You seriously think people who were going to see BvS that weekend aren't because DD season 2 is coming out? Also sorry people on the internet don't think DD was overhyped. You think that and opinion does not equal fact. Lastly I love people who think Disney is this malicious company trying to take down all the poor innocent other companies. Remember WB tried to bully it's way into the May release date even though Marvel/Disney had already claimed that spot and backed off. Then remember Fox completely changed it's script with X-men DOFP to add Quicksilver when Marvel announced they were using the twins. Don't believe me Josh Helman who played young Stryker was originally casted as Juggernaut. They had casted an actor for the character and got rid of him to add in Quicksilver to spite Marvel. Here is a source for you something you don't have in your editorial even though you like to fling around all these accusations. http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/03/13/turns-out-juggernaut-was-originally-in-x-men-days-of-future-past
Matador
Matador - 1/6/2016, 10:26 AM
I stopped reading after number 3 so I went to go do a number 2. Enjoy!

sickboy76
sickboy76 - 1/6/2016, 11:09 AM
Tonytony's new cosplay for 2016
BatmanHeisenberg
BatmanHeisenberg - 1/7/2016, 12:33 AM
It literally will not effect the BvS BO whatsoever, and the BvS release won't effect the DD viewership, really, at all.
SAMURAI36
SAMURAI36 - 1/14/2016, 11:32 AM
This is an excellent article. I will be emailing this link out to others.
unsocial
unsocial - 1/14/2016, 1:30 PM
Umm... Wasn't Anthony Mackie's comments something of a response to Zack Snyder's comments about the MCU being too cookie cutter? Also there was an article from a long time ago where WB actually met with Kevin Feige to get pointers on making a shared universe. Also the Sony/Marvel deal?

This is a rather biased article. It's worth mentioning a couple of very huge points that could undermine what's said in it.

1) The internet gives basically everyone with an internet connection a forum to opine on basically anything and reach lots of people quickly. Harlan Ellison said in video once that before the internet wacky fan opinions were the fodder of self published fanzines that usually had nearly no readership. Now that same fan based content has proliferated greatly due to the internet and forums like this. Also opinions don't necessarily have to be accurate or intelligent to become popular.

Point is no studio needs to be behind any of the us or them fan banter at all. Effectively it only takes one person to say something once on the net and subsequently if enough folks believe it to be true it will be a popular opinion.

2) The percentage of the audience that actually takes to the internet to banter about such things as irrational fan opinions is pretty small. So small I doubt they'd waste that much time or energy dealing with it.


tonytony
tonytony - 1/14/2016, 9:06 PM
@Unsocial no he wasny redponding to a comment by zack snyder that was sebastian stan. mackie was doing what most disney marvel trolls do.

secondly I can say I am genuinely way more informed and write with far more intelligence than anyone else on this site. even where I am clearly right with what I am predicting people like you still want to close ears because im not blindly saying everything about marvel is good.
View Recorder