Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: 2020 Aug
Thanks: 22
Given 47 thank(s) in 37 post(s)
Country:
Posts: 193
Threads: 3
Joined: 2017 Sep
Thanks: 174
Given 164 thank(s) in 83 post(s)
Country:
Don't believe everything you read, numbers were clearly manipulated y WB
ZSJL was the biggest streaming movie ever.
Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: 2020 Aug
Thanks: 22
Given 47 thank(s) in 37 post(s)
Country:
2021-04-08, 06:22 AM
(This post was last modified: 2021-04-08, 06:36 AM by tjmackey.)
deleted user
Unregistered
Thanks:
Given thank(s) in post(s)
Hoo boy ... okay, what follows is a controversial opinion and it's just my 2 cents.
I call nonsense on the numbers too. No way a bunch of people signed up to watch that "Judas" propaganda. But I can totally believe they would want to create that impression.
That Judas movie has ~30k ratings on imdb compared to ZSJL's ~250k, and those numbers are probably fake too. If you look on rotten tomatoes, it has only around 1k ratings, while ZSJL has 25k. So 25 times more people went to rate Justice League than the other movie, but somehow more people signed up to HBO for the former? And even with that, the numbers are probably still manipulated and skewed heavily in the favor of Judas. RT for one has been known to intervene when a movie didn't get the ratings that a certain group thought it should get. And professional critics ... well those have been bought shills a long time ago.
My guess is that if those sign up numbers are real, then they weren't because of Judas but some other movie that came out during the same time.
Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: 2020 Aug
Thanks: 22
Given 47 thank(s) in 37 post(s)
Country:
2021-04-08, 06:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 2021-04-08, 06:50 PM by tjmackey.)
as far as I'm aware, these were not figures quantifying new users/subscribers.
It was about viewing time. And the article also acknowledges that SnyderCut's runtime may have played a factor in making it trickier to quantify how much view-time it accumulated over a specific weekend. And that's on top of measuring streaming viewership ALREADY being a tricky practice to begin with.
It seems like it would be easier for a regular consumer to decide to sit down and watch a 2 hour long JUDAS AND THE BLACK MESSIAH in one sitting than it is for them decide to sit down for a 4 hour version of a movie that already came out... let alone finish it in one go.
Trying to track viewership numbers is a tricky thing. It's also a very different thing to quantify compared to how much chatter there is about it online.
Anecdotally, I know I get a skewed perception of how big a new movie or TV show is because of the online communities and company I keep at a given moment. If what I experienced was true, TV/movies like 30 Rock, Parks & Rec, Community, Arrested Development, Scott Pilgrim vs The World, or Fight Club must clearly have been the biggest deals at the time.
But no. The actual Neilsen ratings or box office on those things upon release were very low compared to what a big deal they seemed to be for me. Instead, it was generic thrillers and bland CBS sitcoms that hit the high numbers.
I learned early on that Internet/Social Media chatter about something often doesn't correlate to high viewership or box office returns. From my position, these were just very passionate communities of fans that are vocal enough online for journalists to take notice here and there. But when it comes to actually supporting these things when they need it the most, it doesn't always translate to real world success. I assume piracy doesn't help either.
I completely get being skeptical of these kinds of numbers. I completely acknowledge that ROTTEN TOMATOES is a heavily compromised company that plays ball with the studios. Especially since it was owned or partly owned by either Warner Bros or Comcast/Universal at different points. Ever since the early 2000s, I've never been happy about that site becoming such a big presence in movie journalism anyway (I despise applying 'metrics' to film criticism and journalism to begin with).
But in this case, I just don't see much point in WB intentionally cooking anything to make their additional $70million investment into SnyderCut come across less successful.
JUDAS wasn't even a WB production. I think it was mostly just a distributor of a film that had to use four separate production companies to finance its reported $26 million budget.
Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: 2020 Aug
Thanks: 22
Given 47 thank(s) in 37 post(s)
Country:
deleted user
Unregistered
Thanks:
Given thank(s) in post(s)
Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: 2020 Aug
Thanks: 22
Given 47 thank(s) in 37 post(s)
Country:
2021-04-08, 06:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 2021-04-08, 06:54 PM by tjmackey.)
I don't get nasty. I get wordier and long-winded by saying more words for extended periods of time.
My main takeaway is... one certainly doesn't have to put too much stock into these reported numbers. But there are enough reasons to be skeptical about them without having to resort to a WB CONSPIRACY.
We got the SnyderCut. Perception around Snyder has shifted to the positive with Whedon being trashed. Snyder emerged stronger. I don't think SnyderCut has to be THE MOST SUCCESSFUL STREAMING MOVIE EVER for this to be an absolute win after his family went through such a devastating tragedy.
deleted user
Unregistered
Thanks:
Given thank(s) in post(s)
Hah. Must have become jaded. So many places on the internet now where people won't even listen to each other's arguments.
No I agree, it's a win either way. I'm sure the execs know the truth, and if the truth is good, maybe they will want to make something cool. We'll see.
Posts: 107
Threads: 0
Joined: 2020 Aug
Thanks: 22
Given 47 thank(s) in 37 post(s)
Country:
2021-04-08, 08:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 2021-04-09, 12:27 AM by tjmackey.)
|