ReportWire

Tag: buffering

  • Your Favorite Streaming Service Is Only Getting More Expensive

    [ad_1]

    Four of the biggest have doubled in price since launching.
    Graphic: Vulture

    This post was originally published September 8, 2025, and has been updated to add new price increases to Disney+ and Hulu as well as HBO Max.

    If there’s one thing streaming services love more than a rebrand or a bundle, it’s a price hike. Over the past few months, Disney+, Hulu, Peacock, Apple TV+, HBO Max, and even humble BritBox have raised their subscription rates. Asking customers to shell out more each month has been a part of the streaming business going back to the early days of Netflix, when it incrementally increased prices on certain tiers on an almost annual basis, and since more services began popping up to compete with the service in the past five or six years, they’ve been predictable additions to your streaming bills, some notable exceptions aside.

    To illustrate their ubiquity, we’ve rounded up as many as we could below — focusing on the major streamers’ so-called “standard” paid monthly subscriptions with and without ads. For ease of comparison, we omitted bundles and tiers like Netflix “Premium” and Hulu + Live TV, as well as any services which haven’t been around for at least two years or haven’t had some sort of price increase. We’ll update this story with more services, too — and with the inevitable new price hikes when they roll out in a quarter or two.

    A few insights we noticed as we browsed the numbers:

    ➼ The prices for plans at Netflix, Disney+, Apple TV+, and Peacock have more than doubled since their respective launches.
    ➼ Hulu’s ad-supported rate actually dropped at one point — very much an anomaly.
    ➼ Since launching in 2019, The Criterion Channel has never raised its prices.

    Current monthly rates labeled in blue.

    2011: Launched at $8
    2014: $9
    2015: $10
    2017: $11
    2019: $13
    2020: $14
    2022: $15.50
    2025: $18

    2022: Launched at $7
    2025: $8

    Since launch, Netflix has dramatically expanded its original and licensed programming, expanded to new global markets, and introduced live sports and video games to their service, so beyond inflation, it’s had overhead to account for over the years. Users may wonder why the ad-supported price introduced in 2022 was lower than what ad-free users were paying for Netflix in 2011; that’s because Netflix reasoned that it could make more revenue per user on the ad-supported plan even if it was less than half the cost of the standard ad-free plan, and priced it accordingly. Plus, as it also started cracking down on password sharing, it wanted to make sure folks unwilling to finally pay for their own full-price account had an affordable alternative to consider before walking away completely.

    2015: Launched at $12
    2021: $13
    2022: $15
    2023: $18
    2024: $19

    2010: Launched at $8
    2019: $6
    2021: $7
    2023: $8
    • 2024: $10
    • 2025: $12

    Hulu’s 2019 adjustment to its ad-supported plan was a rare price drop — at the time a hedge against users rebelling that the cost of its live TV service would be going up. More recently, the $4 hike between 2022 and 2024 has been designed to prompt users to switch to the Disney Bundle, which offers both Hulu and Disney+ at a deep discount.

    2019: Launched at $7
    2021: $8
    2022: $11
    2023: $14
    2024: $16
    2025: $19

    2022: Launched at $8
    • 2024: $10
    • 2025: $12

    Like other services that launched the heyday of the early streaming wars, Disney+ was priced to move — a bet that $7 per month was a nice carrot for families and older fans of Star Wars and Marvel alike. Five years, one pandemic, a long Hollywood strike season, and two Bobs later, that $7 looks quaint by comparison. As for the relatively huge hikes to the cost of the ad-free plan, chalk that up to a the same thinking about the aforementioned Disney bundle, plus the industry-wide push to get people to watch ads again.

    2020: Launched at $15
    2023: $16
    2024: $17
    • 2025: $18.50

    2021: Launched at $10
    • 2025: $11

    HBO Max/Max/HBO Max’s pricing has gone up incrementally compared to its competitors in part because started out a higher price point than any other post-Netflix streamer, thanks to the HBO of it all. But in that same time, Warner Bros. Discovery and CEO David Zaslav have become known for axing content across the service, from classic HBO shows to Sesame Street. Will the departure of Discovery content (once WBD’s breakup and/or sale is finalized) drop the price? Don’t hold your breath.

    2016: Launched at $9
    2024: $12

    2024: Launched at $9

    Prime Video doesn’t call its “ad-free” option here another stand-alone plan, but customers can pay an additional $3 per month to remove ads. Otherwise, strikingly, Prime Video’s rate remained the same until it began rolling ads onto its platform. Of course, many folks haven’t even clocked how stable the base rate for Prime Video has remained because the most common way they get Prime Video is through Amazon’s much broader (and somewhat pricier) Prime subscription service, which offers everything from “free” package delivery to discounts on gasoline.

    2021: Launched at $10
    2023: $12
    2024: $13

    2021: Launched at $5
    2023: $6
    2023: $8

    With its 2023 hike, Paramount+ also added Showtime to its ad-free plan and did away with Showtime’s standalone streaming service. On the bright side, it hasn’t added a special surcharge for Taylor Sheridan series — yet.

    2020: Launched at $10
    2023: $12
    2024: $14
    • 2025: $17

    2021: Launched at $5
    2023: $6
    2024: $8
    • 2025: $11

    At one point, Peacock was literally giving itself away for free — sort of, anyway. That’s no longer the case of course, but it’s another streamer, like Disney+ and Apple TV+, that learned from the Covid era that it couldn’t underprice its offerings forever. What’s more: The NBA is coming to Peacock, wrested away from David Zaslav in the last rights negotiation for an annual bill of $2.45 billion. Now both of Peacock’s standard plans cost more than Netflix’s. Plus, John Tesh wasn’t going to let NBC and Peacock use “Roundball Rock” for free. Somebody had to pay up.

    2019: Launched at $5
    2022: $7
    2023: $10
    • 2025: $13

    A service without a robust licensed library that focuses mostly on originals would not have been appealing for $13 a month in 2019, but to be honest, it’s not too shabby in 2025. Apple has established itself with enough hits like Severance and The Morning Show and Ted Lasso to make the price point work, and even feel like a modest value compared to other major players like HBO Max or Peacock.

    2020: Launched at $9
    • 2024: $10

    2023: Launched at $5
    • 2024: $7

    You’re not just getting AMC’s programs and live feed with this service; the streamer also bundles in content from horror-rific Shudder plus indie movies from Sundance and IFC, along with a sample of stuff from sister streamer Acorn TV (see below.) If the ad-free tier still seems a bit expensive, that’s in part because cable operators would freak if AMC offered it too cheaply.

    Current monthly rates labeled in blue.

    2016: Launched at $6
    2023: $7

    2017: Launched at $7
    2019: $8

    2019: Launched at $10
    2024: $11

    2023: Launched at $6

    2017: Launched at $7
    2023: $9
    2025: $11

    2023: Launched at $6
    2024: $7

    2022: Launched at $9
    2023: $10
    2024: $11

    2013: Launched at $5
    2022: $7
    2025: $9


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Eric Vilas-Boas,Josef Adalian

    Source link

  • What Is Disney Thinking?

    [ad_1]

    “If the goal was to simmer down the temperature, it didn’t. It became volcanic.”
    Photo-Illustration: Vulture; Photos: Getty Images

    Bob Iger and Disney are used to dealing with all manner of PR crises; it comes with the territory when you’re operating one of the best known and most beloved brands in the world. But what has happened with Jimmy Kimmel over the past 24 hours has been something far different (and scarier) than a mere public-relations kerfuffle: FCC chairman Brendan Carr, a MAGA loyalist, threatened to damage a key part of Disney’s broadcast-TV business if its ABC network didn’t “take action” against Kimmel to address his concerns over a few sentences from his September 15 episode that the right-wing outrage machine had deemed problematic. Within hours, ABC announced that Kimmel’s show was being pulled from its lineup “indefinitely,” his future at the network suddenly became unclear — and Iger’s legacy as CEO was very much at risk.

    Keep in mind the timeline of how this madness has played out: On Monday night, Kimmel delivered his monologue, which included a small, admittedly awkward sentence. On Tuesday, Fox News posted video from the monologue; by Wednesday morning, podcaster Benny Johnson, a key ally of the Trump White House, released a podcast with this YouTube subject line: “Jimmy Kimmel LIES About Charlie Kirk Killer, Blames Charlie For His Murder!? Disney Must Fire Kimmel.” The guest of honor on the pod: Carr, who said ABC could “do this the easy way or the hard way.” The rest played out in front of our eyes last night: Nexstar announced it was pulling Kimmel’s show, Sinclair quickly followed suit, and within 15 minutes, an ABC publicist was texting reporters its now-famous seven-word statement: “Jimmy Kimmel Live will be preempted indefinitely.”

    This story is far from over, and it is too soon to render judgment about What It All Means. As of Thursday afternoon, Kimmel’s show had not been canceled and he is still an employee of the Walt Disney Company, despite Donald Trump celebrating the comedian’s demise Wednesday night. Indeed, according to a person familiar with the matter, the whole purpose of ABC’s vague statement was to give the network, Kimmel, and ABC’s major-affiliated-station groups time to react to Carr’s threats in a way that ensured the show remained on the air. “There is a desire to find, and folks are working toward, what a path forward looks like for the show,” one Disney insider says of the company’s thinking. Another person familiar with the matter says that Iger and Disney TV boss Dana Walden jointly made the decision to cancel the show’s Wednesday taping, with Walden personally calling Kimmel to deliver the news. Sources say the talks between Kimmel and Disney continued on Thursday with the goal of finding a way for the host to get back on TV “as soon as possible.”

    All this may sound like spin from Disney, and if this ends with Kimmel leaving the network, that is surely how it will be interpreted in many quarters. The courts of social media and punditocracy have already — and somewhat understandably — charged and convicted ABC with bending the knee to the Trump administration. Whatever happens next, there is no taking back the decision to pull Kimmel’s show, for any length of time, in response to a coordinated, deliberate attack on him and ABC by Carr and right-wing influencers and podcasters.

    But you don’t have to excuse what Disney did Wednesday to accept the possibility that the purpose of its actions were not to punish Kimmel but to get through this crisis with Jimmy Kimmel Live! standing. One veteran Hollywood insider not connected to Disney said the utter blandness of ABC’s Wednesday statement is evidence that the company was winging it and essentially stalling for time. “There was not an ounce of spin in what they said,” this person says. “That means they had nothing to say that could please the government, their employees, the affiliates, or talent. And I don’t blame them. I probably would have done the same.”

    While folks on the right celebrated what they deemed a victory, ABC’s move ended up turning a story mostly limited to the right-wing information bubble into international news. Countless Democratic officials, including former president Barack Obama, denounced what had happened; cable news offered nonstop coverage for hours; creators threatened to boycott Disney unless Kimmel returned to the air; Jon Stewart decided he would host a special edition of The Daily Show Thursday to respond. “Now what you have is a cascading effect,” the veteran Hollywood exec says. “If the goal was to simmer down the temperature, it didn’t. It became volcanic.”

    Nobody should be pulling out the violins for Iger or Disney, but U.S. corporations do not have a ton of experience dealing with a government as ruthless and shameless at going after its targets as this Trump White House has been. While Trump’s bluster was plenty loud during his first term, folks like Carr literally wrote a playbook —  Project 2025 — on how to learn from the mistakes of that administration and better execute their vision of America. With Carr, networks now have not an objective regulator, or even someone with a partisan agenda, but something unprecedented in recent history: a mercenary who seems intent on using the regulatory state to serve the personal whims of the president. Trump perceives late-night comedians and network newscasters as his enemies; Carr has gone after both within his first year on the job.

    Even people outside Disney are shocked at what he has done. “Brendan Carr is drunk with power and glee,” a longtime TV-industry executive says. “He’s like the nerd who was bullied in high school, gets power, and has gone crazy with it.” Furthermore, a person familiar with the matter says that as right-wing outrage over Kimmel’s comments grew, employees inside ABC began getting threats to their personal safety. That has factored into Disney’s handling of the situation, a person with knowledge of the situation said.

    Still, it’s not as if Iger & Co. have not had time now to prepare for these sorts of incidents and devise a clear strategy to fight back. Even if this ends with Kimmel back on the air, Iger’s silence has caused at least some short-term damage to Disney’s brand and his personal image. He has long been regarded as among the most talent-friendly of CEOs, and Kimmel has been among the most loyal of Disney soldiers. Would it have really hurt the cause for Iger (or Walden) to come out with a statement Thursday morning defending Kimmel while showing sensitivity to Charlie Kirk’s death?

    But Disney clearly decided to play things safe and not add any fuel to the fire by saying anything until it decides what comes next. While nobody from Disney or Kimmel’s team would comment on Thursday afternoon, it seems likely the two sides have been in discussions about what, if anything, Kimmel needs to say to make ABC comfortable with putting him back on the air. (The show will remain off the air Thursday night.) Just as important, the network is likely in discussions with Nexstar and other affiliate groups about what they will require in order for them to resume airing Kimmel’s show. ABC would want to get both of them back onboard, but Nexstar — which is trying to get a huge merger deal approved by the FCC — in particular has proved it’s in full suck-up mode to Carr and Trump. “Nexstar saw all this as an opportunity to score points with the FCC,” an industry insider says. And with fellow affiliate group Sinclair joining the Kimmel pile on, it has even more leverage with Disney.

    That said, if ABC can come to an agreement with Kimmel over an appropriate response, Disney could, in theory, decide to just live with Nexstar and Sinclair boycotting Kimmel’s show. While it would mean some loss of ad revenue, it’s not as if late night is a giant profit center for networks; just the opposite. This isn’t 1995, or even 2005, where a Kimmel blackout in, say, 20 percent of the country would be a financial disaster. Much of Kimmel’s viewership now takes place on YouTube and Hulu. Disney could even go with a nuclear option and just make Jimmy Kimmel Live! a Hulu exclusive and let affiliates fill the hour with local news. CBS’s decision to cancel The Late Show With Stephen Colbert at the end of this season makes such a move even less risky, since it’s not as if ABC would be the lone big-three network without a late-night show.

    Regardless of the outcome, what is becoming sadly clear is that this will not be the last time big media companies are forced to deal with the MAGA machine moving swiftly, and with full government support, to achieve its goals. And broadcasters like ABC will keep butting up against this dynamic again and again because they program not only prime-time entertainment shows but topical talk series and newscasts. “It’s the worst time ever to be at a broadcast network, especially if you work in PR. Literally every day now, someone is going to say something,” the Hollywood veteran says. And while such controversies happened long before Trump, the mood in Hollywood is different now. “Before, when you had a backlash, it felt like social justice. Now, it feels like the full power of the U.S. government coming for you.”

    [ad_2]

    Josef Adalian

    Source link

  • What Paramount Buying Warner Bros. Could Mean for Hollywood

    [ad_1]

    Photo-Illustration: Vulture; Photos: Getty Images

    Paramount Skydance, backed by the family of CEO David Ellison, is getting ready to make a bid to take over all of Warner Bros. Discovery before the two companies can go through with their plan to split, per a new report from The Wall Street Journal. If such a deal happens, it would put networks as diverse as CBS, CNN, TCM, and MTV under one roof and result in the combination of two historic Hollywood studios, Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. There has been speculation in multiple media outlets for months about something like this happening — the idea of HBO Max and Paramount+ combining into a single app is a no-brainer — but the speed with which it could be coming together, so soon after Skydance closed its deal for Paramount, does feel a tad surprising. Deadline is also confirming the WSJ story, though it throws a bit of cold water on how much urgency there is to the bid: “Nothing new there, he’s just taking a closer look, assessing the pros and cons,” says a Paramount source quoted by the trade outlet.

    We’re probably still a long way away from such a deal actually becoming reality (if it does), and to be clear: No offer has been made. It’s also not clear how WBD management and shareholders would react — though WBD stock soared nearly 30 percent after the WSJ story broke — or whether news of this possible bid brings out other potential buyers. It’s still early days.

    That said, given how much Hollywood loves a merger these days, it’s always worth thinking about what comes next and what such a mash-up of media giants might bring — for good and (mostly ill). Some immediate questions and thoughts about the possibility of Para Bros.:

    ➼ If the Ellisons get control of WBD, they get control of CNN. Given how much Paramount has pushed CBS News rightward in the past couple weeks, it’s easy to imagine the Trump White House won’t stand in the way of the Ellisons taking over WBD. In fact, one could see it happily pushing for a deal that would put CNN in the hands of owners even more accommodating than its current overseers.

    ➼ Bari Weiss, founder of the right-wing outlet The Free Press, is rumored to be in line for a major gig at CBS News. If this deal happens, will she end up overseeing a CBS News powered by CNN — or all of a combined CNN-CBS News?

    ➼ Will the studio attrition from five major studios to a mere four accelerate moviedom’s seemingly endless doom cycle of sequels, reboots, and tired IP retreads? Coming just a half-dozen years after Disney’s $71.3 billion swallowing of 21st Century Fox, the Para Bros. merger would necessarily trigger a cascade of industry executive layoffs but also drastically reduce the number of studio suitors vying for hot, original movie projects. That would leave less room for new filmic voices and engender frictionless pushback against the kind of corporate groupthink responsible for the boring sameness behind our current multiplex malaise. (Exhibit A: This summer delivered the worst cumulative box-office returns since 1981 adjusted for inflation and discounting COVID lockouts.)

    ➼ Given the trend toward streaming consolidation (see Hulu on Disney+), importing the relatively small content offering of Paramount+ into HBO Max feels like a given under any merger scenario. That said, David Ellison has already started working to dramatically improve the tech of Paramount+ and HBO Max has had its own user-experience issues. It’s quite possible the end result of a deal would be the creation of a totally new platform with, yes, another new name. HBO Max, we hardly knew ye.

    ➼ The amount of layoffs that would result from this merger is depressing to consider. As it is, Paramount Skydance is already planning to pink-slip thousands of employees this fall. The pain will be real and deep.

    ➼ Will putting DC and Star Trek in the same corporate family give us the Star TrekSuperman crossover some Trekkers have fantasized about? Who knows, but the IP-sharing potential of a Warners/Paramount combo is huge. The same company would control The Godfather and The Sopranos, Top Gun and Barbie, I Love Lucy and Friends.

    ➼ Assuming Para Bros. stays in the cable business, would ancient enemies Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network team up to give the new entity enough IP to better take on Disney? Or would the new company care about kids and animation at all?

    ➼ And the most important question of all: Will David Zaslav, fresh off his role in the new Sphere remix of The Wizard of Oz, get himself a cameo in the next Yellowstone spinoff? Or will he ride off into the retirement sunset, having successfully added tens of millions to his net work this decade?

    Chris Lee contributed to this report.


    See All



    [ad_2]

    Josef Adalian

    Source link

  • The 8 Biggest Takeaways From Netflix’s Latest Ratings Dump

    The 8 Biggest Takeaways From Netflix’s Latest Ratings Dump

    [ad_1]

    The Crown; One Piece.
    Photo-Illustration: Vulture; Photos: Netflix

    Another six months, another Netflix data blast — this time dumped unceremoniously in a blog post on the Thursday before Memorial Day weekend. Still, more information is better than no information, and the streamer’s second “What We Watched” engagement report, compiling views between last July and December 2023, is its latest officially zoomed-out picture of how Netflix movies and TV shows are doing — despite the shortcomings of crunching the numbers in aggregate on a spreadsheet that, combined, is nearly 16,000 rows long.

    The biggest movie of the back half of 2023 wasn’t a major awards contender nor a bombastic blockbuster — it was an adaptation of Leave the World Behind, which despite an apocalyptic premise often feels more like a stage play than it does a feature film. And the biggest single season of TV wasn’t buzzy awards bait or even one of a revived catalogue hit like Suits — it was an American-produced, live-action adaptation of a Japanese comic full of superpowered pirate antics and snot-nosed crying. Both were notable titles, to be sure, but it would have been hard to predict that either of them would wind up as chart-toppers.

    One new wrinkle in the new report: It’s now accounting for a title’s runtime, incorporating it into a “views” stat (time spent watching divided by a title’s length). This evens the field somewhat between movies and TV shows, something that Kasey Moore, founder of the pioneering tracking site What’s on Netflix, finds useful. “Incorporating the new views metric highlights the two purposes of movies and series in my eyes,” he tells Vulture. “TV shows still suck up the majority of viewing hours, but lots of people do come in for the movies, contrary to popular belief.” Moore was also struck by the continued popularity of children’s programming on Netflix. “So much of the top 100 (views or viewing hours) are family, kids, and animated titles,” he says, noting that the most popular titles are from outside studios such as DreamWorks, Illumination, Moonbug, and Nickelodeon, “which must be a source of concern.”

    Moore also noticed how the premiere of a new season of a show brings new attention to past installments of the series. “When new seasons of Sweet Magnolias and Virgin River both released, it saw meaningful bumps in those earlier seasons. You can see it, too, with Squid Game: The Challenge giving a bump to Squid Game.”

    With considerations like those in mind, we’ve combed through the sheet and pulled out the eight most noteworthy highlights therein.

    Maybe all you really need to engineer a global hit on Netflix is Julia Roberts and an argument for physical media. But even accounting for her star wattage, Sam Esmail’s Leave the World Behind, which topped the second half of the year’s film charts in just three weeks (it was released December 8), is a curious worldwide hit. (The last movie Esmail directed made less than $20,000 at the box office.) Consider the three runners-up that its 121 million views eclipsed: Gal Gadot’s blockbuster Heart of Stone (109.6 million views across more than 20 weeks), a host of family-friendly fare including Adam Sandler’s Leo (96 million views in 40 days), and the dystopian Spanish-refugee saga Nowhere (86.2 million views in over 16 weeks).

    The movie that beat those movies is an anti-blockbuster that — some shocking imagery and set pieces aside — remains a mostly quiet adaptation of a mostly quiet book that never escapes the Long Island suburbs. In some ways it feels closer to The Killer or May December than a traditionally explosive title like Zack Snyder’s first Rebel Moon entry, which debuted December 21 and by the end of the year had not yet beaten longtime Netflix library title Paw Patrol: The Movie.

    One Piece, based on Eiichiro Oda’s long-running manga, notched 71.6 million views globally — almost 20 million more than the runner-up, Germany’s Dear Child. Netflix’s track record with live-action adaptations is spotty at best (Cowboy Bebop’s second-week viewership fell like a rock and it was swiftly canceled), but it’s still cultivated an anime fanbase with high-profile legacy acquisitions like Pokémon and Neon Genesis Evangelion, as well as new simulcasts like Vinland Saga — to say nothing of the 41(!) separate batches of licensed One Piece anime episodes on the platform that added up to 50 million views globally in the second half of 2023. Those numbers are linked; the question going forward will be what Netflix can do with a Japanese title not named One Piece.

    One of the first big moves Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos made on the feature-film front was signing Adam Sandler to a multi-picture deal in 2014. A decade later, that pact is still bearing fruit: Two of the Sandman’s movies — the animated Leo (96 million views) and the teen comedy You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah (60.6 million views) — ranked among the streamer’s 15 biggest films in the second half of 2023. But Sandler’s value is not just in his new material. Three other Netflix-produced movies featuring the former SNL legend (2019’s Murder Mystery and its spring 2023 sequel, as well as 2020’s Hubie Halloween) managed to draw more than 10 million views years after their releases, as did both of Sandler’s Grown Ups movies. And proving once again that critical acclaim and audience taste aren’t always in sync, some of Sandler’s more acclaimed roles didn’t do quite as well: Uncut Gems notched a relatively modest 3.1 million views during the report period, while Noah Baumbach’s The Meyerowitz Stories (New and Selected) managed a mere 900,000 views. On the other hand, both did better than the critically panned Sandy Wexler (600,000 views).

    Last month, a New York Times story about new Netflix film chief Dan Lin carried a rather ominous headline for fans of the streamer’s more prestige plays, warning its new strategy was “more about the audience, less about auteurs.” If that’s the case, it’s quite possible Lin could be reacting to the underwhelming performance of some of Netflix’s most acclaimed films last fall. For instance, despite near-universal raves for Colman Domingo and Rustin, the film generated a meager 2.6 million views during its first two months on the platform. The Todd Haynes–directed May December did better, but its 6.8 million views doesn’t even place it (or Rustin) among Netflix’s top 400 (that’s not a typo) movie titles during the second half of 2023.

    And while the much more high-profile Maestro came out too late in the year (December 20) to get a fair read on its overall audience, Bradley Cooper’s opus never once landed in Netflix’s weekly top ten lists, and its overall audience during the last 11 days of the year — 6.7 million views — suggests that the film did not go on to become a blockbuster once its seven Oscar nominations were announced in January. By comparison, the Annette Bening/Jodi Foster team-up Nyad, with 16.3 million views (and a two-week run on Netflix’s global top-ten list in September) was a relative smash. But even it ended up with far fewer views than Love Is in the Air, a Hallmark-style rom-com from Australia (tagline: “When skies clear, hope shines through”) that tallied up an impressive 27.3 million views — and likely was produced at a fraction of the cost of those other movies.

    Matt Rife and Shane Gillis might not be universally beloved by comedy critics, but they’re very popular with Netflix subscribers. Despite coming out late in the year, Rife’s November release Natural Selection generated 12.7 million views, making it one of the year’s biggest comedy specials on the streamer, while Gillis’s Beautiful Dogs wasn’t too far behind, with 12 million views (though, since it came out September 5, it had more time to build an audience). Tom Segura’s Sledgehammer, released in July, was another comedy over-performer, generating 11.8 million views.

    But in another example of how much timing matters when looking at Netflix’s engagement report, consider the performance of Dave Chappelle’s last special, The Dreamer. It dropped on the very last day of 2023, giving it very little time to generate views that count toward the semi-annual rankings. It nonetheless managed a solid 2.2 million views during that 24-hour frame. But per Netflix’s weekly top-ten lists, the special would go on to amass at least 12.8 million more views during its first two full weeks on the platform, for a total of at least 15 million views — bigger than the specials from Rife and Gillis. Those numbers might explain why Netflix execs keep making deals with Chapelle, despite his fondness for making anti-trans remarks during his sets.

    The sixth and final season of The Crown did not go out with a bang: It generated a modest 25.2 million views in Netflix’s new engagement report, which is slightly less than season one of Young Sheldon (26.1 million) generated, despite not being available in every Netflix territory and it not landing on Netflix U.S. until late November (it had been on the platform in smaller countries before then). To be fair, The Crown released its final season in two batches, giving its final episodes just a few weeks to amass eyeballs. But the show also disappeared from Netflix’s global top ten by early January 2024, hinting the show didn’t exactly stay on fire once the window for this engagement report closed. No doubt there will be a long tail for The Crown as some viewers finally catch up and some die-hard royalists rewatch. But the intensity of audience interest that greeted past seasons of the show definitely seemed to cool as things wrapped up.

    In a sign that people really, really love Wednesday, the fall 2022 release generated a total of 98.4 million views in 2023 — including 23.9 million views just in the second half of the year. Needless to say, that’s a bigger audience than 90 percent of Netflix’s original scripted series, including ones which actually premiered during the last six months of 2023. Case in point: Big Mouth, which in its early years felt like one of the hottest shows on Netflix, amassed a surprisingly small 8.5 million views for its seventh season, which dropped in October. The fact that year-old episodes of Wednesday drew three times as many views as brand-new installments of Big Mouth probably explains why the latter show will debut its final season next year.

    What’s on Netflix has helpfully added up viewing data from both of Netflix’s 2023 engagement reports, allowing for a better look at how titles performed for the full year. And while Leave the World Behind remains popular no matter how you look at it, it’s clear that for Netflix, J.Lo really is mother: Her May 2023 release The Mother ended up generating a phenomenal 153.7 million views for the full year (25.5 million of which came in the second half of 2023), making it the biggest title on the streamer last year. It was followed by Extraction 2 (151.7 million) and Murder Mystery 2 (129.7 million) as the most popular movies for all of 2023.

    But once again, the weirdness of how Netflix releases data means you need to be careful in drawing conclusions about a title’s overall popularity. While Mother was the No. 1 movie of 2023 for Netflix, lots of people waited until January (or later) to catch Leave the World Behind, allowing it to eventually pass Mother on Netflix’s top-ten movies of all time list.

    In terms of series, while One Piece ruled the second half of 2023, it pales next to several other releases from earlier in the year. The Night Agent, for example, snagged 99.2 million views last spring, then tacked on another 19 million last summer and fall for an annual total of 118.2 million views — by far Netflix’s biggest series last year. It’s followed by Wednesday (98.4 million for the year) and Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story (89.6 million). One Piece is certainly still generating views, of course, and its tally will jump once the next engagement report comes out. But it’s unlikely to catch Night Agent or even Wednesday.

    [ad_2]

    Josef Adalian,Eric Vilas-Boas

    Source link