Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Netflix has done remarkably well at allowing established Hollywood figures to use their platform to produce vanity projects - actors getting producer credits, that sort of thing. That’s less charitable than I mean it to be; Enola Holmes names Millie Bobby Brown as a producer and by all accounts she was fairly hands-on. But no matter how talented she is, she’s only 16 and her reputation stems entirely from one ensemble show (Stranger Things). Again, that sounds less charitable than I mean it to; all I’m really saying is she wouldn’t have got such a massive opportunity anywhere else. Netflix is happy to chuck money at projects like that and see if it sticks. Given the names they’ve been able to attract to what, in old money, would have been disparagingly called a “tv movie” or “straight to video”, it’s a strategy that’s working for them - especially if Enola Holmes is anything to go by. It managed to draw in Henry Cavill *and* Helena B.C., and has been in the U.K. top 10 since it dropped. The commissioning of a sequel is all but a formality.
Massive companies like Amazon and Apple, which are increasingly looking like conglomerates with their only tangentially connected business divisions, may well have the deep pockets needed to cross-subsidise their TV operations and out bid Netflix for big name productions like Star Trek or Borat, but I believe Netflix already learned a hard lesson in that regard when Marvel went to Disney, Disney started making streaming noises, and Netflix’s well-developed and well-received corner of the MCU came to a sudden halt, long before it ran out of stories to tell.
In short, I don’t think Netflix’s business model is threatened by Amazon or Apple throwing big money at bids for third party content, and I don’t think Netflix is going to reduce spend on its own commissions and retreat to being a video library. It has found a commissioning model that works for it, and also works for the rather big names who are clearly willing to work for somewhat less than the Hollywood A rate in exchange for the creative freedom Netflix is willing to give them.
|
I agree - good post, but to to correct one thing, Enola Holmes was not actually a Netflix production - it was developed and produced by Legendary & Warner Bros for a theatrical release before they sold distribution rights to Netflix - that being said, the presence of it's lead, her link to Netflix and the appeal of it to a young audience makes it an understandable acquisition for them... I actually think it would not have had a lot of traction had it gone via a traditional theatrical route.