You are welcome to look at the talkback but please consider that this article is over 1 year old before posting.
Forum - View topicNEWS: Live-Action One Piece Series Debuts at #1 on Netflix's Global English TV Rankings
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
everydaygamer
|
|
|||||
|
When I heard the idea of Netflix wanting One Piece to replace Stranger Things as the platform's big money maker I laughed because the idea was ridiculous. But now, If they invest in this it might actually happen which is just wild to think about.
|
||||||
andramus
 Posts: 187 |
|
|||||
|
I watched this series over the weekend and want it to be a global success so that more seasons can be made but isn't this article essentially just an advertisement?
I suppose there's always been a fine line between news and advertisements for entertainment media outlets. A large part of the purpose of those outlets is to keep readers informed of new and upcoming media projects. A byproduct of doing so is to promote/advertise those projects to the readers. I've probably let articles like this slide tens of thousands of times but for some reason today I let it get to me. |
||||||
|
||||||
NeverConvex
 Subscriber Posts: 2458 |
|
|||||
It seems newsworthy that the show topped these rankings, considering the history of failed adaptations? And relevant to ANN's readership; a lot of us are eager for any news that might augur whether the series will continue, be better or worse funded, etc. What else do you want them to do with it? Artificially add "balance" to their coverage of a fairly flattering fact, or look for some unflattering thing to cover in the same piece, or something? That would seem kind of silly to me; like, I don't want them to apply that same logic to coverage of (e.g.) Nobuhiro Watsuki's criminal charges and pepper those articles with random off-topic praise for his work or something. FWIW I agree with the general sentiment and ANN I imagine struggles with balancing journalistic integrity against access and personal opinion as much as many entertainment media outlets, but I'm not really understanding what you think they should have done differently in this specific case. |
||||||
|
||||||
Kougeru
 Posts: 5556 |
|
|||||
|
Personally I don't think it's newsworthy. It's One Piece, it would've been #1 even if it was the worst thing ever made out of pure interest.
|
||||||
|
||||||
MarshalBanana
 Posts: 5475 |
|
|||||
|
it's kind of unreal that a live action One Piece would go over so well with so many people. If any Anime adaptation would have succeeded critically, I would have doubted it would be the one about a pirate made of rubber with fights a detachable clown and a killer Fishman.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
NeverConvex
Subscriber Posts: 2458 |
|
|||||
|
I wonder how these figures compare to the failed/canceled Bebop adaptation?
The series had 18.5 million total views, with 140.1 million hours viewed and an average runtime of 7:34 hours. If I'm reading this correctly, it sounds like most viewers basically watched the entirety of all 8 episodes...? That seems pretty impressive, but I don't pay enough attention to these things to know how to interpret those values in context, and try to figure out if they suggest Netflix will be impressed with them or not. |
||||||
|
||||||
crosswithyou
 Posts: 2895 Location: California |
|
|||||
That's kinda like saying no media outlet should report that whatever Marvel movie ranked #1 at the box office because it's so obvious that it would. But hey, maybe you do think that. Just because something is obvious doesn't necessarily mean it's not newsworthy, imo. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 6199 |
|
|||||
Considering people spent the time after this series was originally announced going on with the obligatory “who asked for this?”, “this is going to suck”, “didn’t they learn their lesson with [insert failed live action adaptation here]”. It is newsworthy. |
||||||
|
||||||
Ashen Phoenix
 Posts: 2930 |
|
|||||
|
Speaking as someone who missed the One Piece boat when the Big Three were in their heyday, I'm genuinely happy this adaptation is being met with far more positive reactions from fans than not. Especially taking into account the abysmal track record of previous adaptations for anime/manga properties.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Avec ou Nous
Posts: 142 |
|
|||||
I feel as if every movie or show seems to claim to be the top #1 debut at some point with how companies spin and frame the numbers so it kind of comes off as white noise to me at this point. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
MFrontier
Posts: 13047 |
|
|||||
|
They actually did it!
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
That Little Rapscallion
Posts: 58 |
|
|||||
"Netflix’s live-action Cowboy Bebop garnered 21.6 million hours viewed over its first four days of release." So One Piece did a lot better it would seem. For other shows comparison Queen Charlotte debuted at 148 million hours, Outer Banks had 154 million hours, and The Night Agent was 168 million hours. Would be nice to know how many people actually completed the series but streaming platforms like to make things complicated witht his hours viewed stuff. I think audience retention is the more important thing since it's no good if they watch 1 episode and then dip. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
NeverConvex
Subscriber Posts: 2458 |
|
|||||
I'm not sure there are any real degrees of freedom being abused here, though? i.e., these seem like pretty well-defined measures, without much room for playing around in their definitions: #1 on Netflix's global English-language television rankings in its first week on the service during the period of August 28-September 3. The series had 18.5 million total views, with 140.1 million hours viewed and an average runtime of 7:34 hours. What is less clear, I think, is whether they're impressive or not, relative to similar shows that we've seen canceled. This weirdly formatted IGN piece has me thinking that it is actually impressive -- close to some of Netflix's best performers, and much, much better than Bebop. Others listed there for comparison: But looking at what we do have, Netflix’s live-action Cowboy Bebop garnered 21.6 million hours viewed over its first four days of release. Again, Netflix only provided total viewing hours at the time, so while not an exact comparison, it still has One Piece looking to be in much better shape. It’s also, by Netflix’s own numbers, better than other big releases over the last year. The Witcher Season 3, Part 1 garnered 15.2 million views and 73 million hours viewed over its first four days. Arnold Schwarznegger’s Fubar opened to 88 million hours viewed; and Manifest Season 4 debuted to 78 million hours viewed. Bridgerton spinoff Queen Charlotte, on the other hand, opened to 148 million hours viewed over its first four days, The Night Agent debuted to a whopping 168 million hours viewed, and Outer Banks Season 3 opened to 154 million hours viewed. Though, a bit frustrating that they don't seem to have ever reported 'average run-time' or 'views' (a measure apparently normalized by show run-time, roughly average % of a show watched by a viewer, I think) for the Bebop show, so we only really have 'hours viewed' for comparison. Still, ~140 million hours is a lot more than ~20 million. EDIT: Oh, That Little Rapscallion was literally looking up and posting the same kind of analysis and beat me to it.  :
I think 'average run-time' (which is nearly the full run-time of the show!) and 'views' are meant to capture this? I couldn't find Bebop's for contrast, but maybe we could find some other well-performing non-anime shows to compare to. EDIT: Oh, maybe run-time is literally just the overall run-time of the show. That's less interesting Still, the 'views' measure sounds useful. Need to find its actual definition...
EDIT, er, # 3: This isn't quite a definition, but is close?
That seems pretty usable, if not quite as transparent as I'd like. At least, I feel comfortable comparing it between currently airing shows with the same measurement present, and roughly thinking of them as "average percent of a show a viewer watched, summed over viewers". Last edited by NeverConvex on Tue Sep 05, 2023 5:17 pm; edited 2 times in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
andramus
Posts: 187 |
|
|||||
|
I suppose there were two reasons this article rubbed me the way wrong way and they sort of fed into each other.
The first reason is that the numbers mean absolutely nothing to me. I have no way to look at those numbers and gauge them as a measure of success. Honestly 18 million views globally doesn't sound like a lot to me when measured in the context of how much this series apparently cost to make. Unlike movies where you could say there were 18 million or more tickets sold the return streaming services make on an investment like this is far more opaque. The second reason is that this article feels more like a regurgitated press release than a meaningful news piece. For me personally the article would have been more worthwhile if there had been a deep dive into and analysis of the numbers that provided me with context as to why those numbers are good. All of that said articles like this one are a dime a dozen and I usually let them slide without saying anything. Today I just felt the mood hit me to comment on it but I'm not really up in arms about it. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
NeverConvex
Subscriber Posts: 2458 |
|
|||||
I think 'views' in this case has the specific meaning I gave above, from the THR article (in my final edit). Something like "summing over the percentage of the show watched by each person, how many times was the show watched in full?", if I'm understanding it correctly. i,.e., you watch the first half, I watch the second half (or we both watch the first half); together, we're "1 view". The total hours watched figure also is much easier to compare to figures from other shows (see my and Rapscallion's posts above). EDIT: re: piece being superficial -- yeah, I agree it's very light, and a dig into the meaning of the figures would have been helpful. I think it's probably not reasonable to expect that from most ANN pieces, though? This short-form article obviously cost way less labor-time than having someone spend a day or a week or some such breaking down Netflix's viewership metrics in detail and analyzing them rigorously across shows. It would be cool to see a long-form piece that dives really deeply into that, though, and maybe does a bit of statistical work to try to figure out if there's a strong relationship to shows getting continued/canceled/etc. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group