Bunny?!? Ball Ball!
...on a different note, a quick musical interlude...

*hands the OP a drink*

"I had the same result when I made a thread praising Duke Nukem Forever, mac. Whether or not something is successful shouldn't matter as much as how much you enjoy it. Know what I mean?"

*I finish my own drink before going to play Daikatana*

Zimerius,

Again, enjoy what you enjoy! Don't let outside "noise" tarnish what you feel for a piece of art. Some of us dislike the project for various reasons, but you'll always have that with art. If you enjoy it, forget "the noise!" Life's too short, ok?

But when the show made a big deal of respecting Tolkien (while undermining many aspects of his work that hardcore fans find important -- even having actors exclaim that Tolkien needed "updating" for a modern audience), that led to backlash. And with Netflix' The Witcher, Amazon's The Wheel of Time, Willow, etc... it all just felt so similar in messaging and divergence from the source.

I had dinner with Peter Jackson just prior to TLotR. While I'm sure he had an ego (you have to in order to direct film), he was quite quiet and reserved... and... kept expressing that he was working on a project that he hoped would honor the creator and his source material (Tolkien). You could feel that he felt he was earnestly working on something -- almost in a religious fashion -- that was to glorify Tolkien's work, not primarily his own ego. That's odd to find in "Hollywood" (even Hollywood via NZ), but possible.

To me, it's just too bad that Amazon spent so much money but didn't spend the the same energy to get experienced, passionate showrunners who knew how to hit a homerun -- for fantasy fans, Tolkien fans, and the general audience. I know a few who have the chops (older A-listers), but they don't particularly want to work for Amazon... and I don't know that they would want to follow Jackson's trilogies (yes, even The Hobbit).

Anyway, if Rings of Power brings you joy, sobeit! I say this as a fan of Dennis L McKiernan's Mithgar series (books) which started life as a direct sequel to The Lord of the Rings (before being declined by the Tolkien estate and all the names changed!). Most hate it. I 100% love it. ;)

By what objective metric was it a "colossal failure"?
For reference, the data I mentioned earlier shows that
- It had 25 million viewers for its premiere, and the show had 100 million viewers by the end of 2022 (dunno how many it would be now)
- The show has an 87% on rotten tomatoes, a 70% metacritic score
- The audience scores at the above are at 50%
- Someone pointed out earlier that 37% of the audience stuck it out till the end of the season

So in your mind, the last 2 points make the show a "colossal failure", despite the first 2? Because I've seen no other metrics shared. You could say "Amazon is lying about its data!" which, fair, it could be, but you then don't have any other data to go by except critical reviews (which you could again claim Amazon bought out), or user reviews (which Amazon claims is due to review bombing). It was also famously the most expensive show to make, ever, but I'm not sure how you would leverage that against whether it was a success or failure, considering Amazon has no issue shelling out the cash, and they're not expecting to get that back in ticket sales or something.

So we either know nothing, or we know that the Rings of Power tv show is a record breaking show for Amazon Prime that received generally positive critical reviews and mixed user reviews.

It is clear that the viewership numbers (and completion numbers) were lower than popular streaming shows.... and FAR lower than streaming hits. Compound this with the nearly 1B price tag of the show and Rings of Power was (and is) a colossal commercial failure. If Amazon hadn't gotten so much social media criticism, they would never have released the viewership numbers (they've held off reporting before) -- they would simply have said "the numbers were strong" and left it at that.

As for the viewership of episode 1... that shows initial interest, but viewership did not hold at that interest (although you could make an argument if the series was 4 episodes long). Also, that isn't 100m complete views... just people who initiated streaming. As can be seen in the Amazon numbers, most did not complete the show.

Again, you can enjoy it (I enjoy Heaven's Gate, one of the largest failures in movie history!)... but RoP is a colossal commercial failure. It's even referenced in multiple articles as "too big to fail" (I can post those as well if needed)... and that's the very reason Amazon hasn't given up on it even after dismal numbers.


"according to The Hollywood Reporter, only 37 percent of domestic audiences and 45 percent of overseas audiences watched the show from beginning to end.
...
... the simple fact is that Rings of Power needed to have a stronger start to secure a devoted fanbase for its future seasons.
...
Industry insiders claim that a series needs at least a 50 percent completion rate to be considered a solid show, but it's important to note that actual hit shows have a much higher rate..."

("Rings Of Power Was A Gigantic Failure With Viewers In One Crucial Way", Giant Freakin Robot)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/rings-of-power-was-a-gigantic-failure-with-viewers-in-one-crucial-way/ar-BB1ondJR

-------------------------------------


"... sources confirm that The Rings of Power had a 37 percent domestic completion rate (customers who watched the entire series). Overseas, it reached 45 percent. (A 50 percent completion rate would be a solid but not spectacular result, according to insiders). The show has not been a major awards contender, either, overlooked by the major guilds with the exception of one SAG-AFTRA nomination for stunt ensemble.
...
Data from Nielsen on minutes watched reveals that when it comes to original shows generally, Amazon has lagged. In 2022, Netflix hoovered up the top 10 spots for original streaming series, with Amazon’s The Boys in 11th place — ahead of The Rings of Power at No. 15. Using the same measurement, none of the top 15 originals of 2021 came from Amazon. (Netflix again took all the slots except for Hulu’s The Handmaid’s Tale in 10th place, Apple’s Ted Lasso at 12, and Disney+’s WandaVision in the 14th spot.)

Many current and former Amazon executives, as well as showrunners who have series at the streamer and agents who make deals there, believe that this is no accident. They describe Amazon Studios as a confusing and frustrating place to do business. When it comes to movies, where Amazon’s footprint is expanding following the $8.5 billion acquisition of MGM a year ago, a veteran producer says that, in recent years, 'there has been no sense of what the philosophy is.'"

Inside Amazon Studios: Big Swings Hampered by Confusion and Frustration, The Hollywood Reporter

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/inside-amazon-studios-jen-salke-vision-shows-1235364913/

-----------------------------------


‘The Rings Of Power’ Was A Massive Flop That Most Viewers Gave Up On, (Forbes)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2023/04/05/why-the-rings-of-power-was-a-huge-flop-that-most-people-never-finished/

----------------------------------

"Amazon has been suspiciously quiet about 'The Rings of Power' viewership in the 2 weeks since the first season concluded" (Business Insider)

So in answer to my question, your reply was "only 37% of viewers stuck around till the end of the season" (despite still getting 100 million viewers) as the basis of establishing that The Rings of Power was a "colossal failure" (and I guess the fact that it was "only" the 15th most streamed original program of 2022, with 9.4 billion minutes viewed, according to Nielsen).

Got it!

Those numbers can well be just noise without context, even if accurate.

Success here is very hard to judge, even for those who can access all important info, such as how many more users start to use the service because of the show, how the add revenue was increased and how much more can Amazon increase it (including charging more per add/time and show more adds until is not tolerable), what investors and how much can we gather for the next hyped project.

Oh, I absolutely agree. I wouldn't try to venture the opinion that the show was a colossal success, so I am very confused by those who so confidently assert that it is a colossal failure.

37% of initial viewers completed 1 season?

Im impressed!
I had difficulty keeping my lunch down over the trailer!

Id swear I felt seismic activity when the show was announced. Turns out, it was just old man Tolkien rolling so intensely in his grave.

Ba dump bump TSH!

ps, why is it so important to argue what strangers like....good fun?
edit....forgot a word..borked a few others with typos. Rut ro!

I don't know why anyone would watch anything from Amazon Studios as it's now pretty obvious they are run by resentful, woke retards purely driven by racial grievance. They purposely tried to destroy and "deconstruct" Tolkien because they saw it as the work of a conservative, white catholic man.

I don't think I've ever seen an adaptation that had such an undisguised seething hatred of the work it was adapting.

The Last Jedi maybe?

I agree with you on the fact that the show was not a colossal success story. But for the other facts, i feel your choice of text format feels to much as poor rich man's attempt at ridicule.

You made your standpoint clear

How so?

I'm completely baffled by your response, but certain sorry that you took something I said as condescension. I thought my intention was clear and I was simply backing my thoughts with personal experience.

I can only imagine you're taking offense to my relating having had dinner with Jackson. It's true. And it wasn't used as anything more than to relate what I saw as his passion for Tolkien and Jackson's broad strategy for translating his work (something I argue was missing in RoP). If you took this as a slight...?

I sincerely ask that you elaborate on where you feel I "went overboard?" Or you can message me.

You didn't read the articles... and I suspect you didn't even read my reply. Possibly you didn't understand one or both? I don't say this as denigration, but since I have worked in this industry for decades sometimes I forget that others aren't always versed in how the industry works and what all this means (again, we -- you included -- have careers, skills, expertise or experiences that sometimes we take for granted that others don't share these same careers, skills, expertise, or experiences).

You may be looking at numbers thinking those sound great, but I'm looking at them and seeing that they aren't great... or even good (although this is detailed in those articles). If so few are watching the show, Amazon isn't gaining eyes or subscriptions based on their 1B+ expenditure. Anyway...

If you did (read them, the articles), it is clear that the audience percentages were extremely low and the viewership numbers you referenced were incomplete (most of those views were partials, not full episodes and not the full season). Also, it was clear there was a huge initial attachment rate on episode one but then the show "fell off a cliff" by episode 2. This is not the sign of a healthy "hit" and especially not when the show cost 1B+.

I can appreciate if you were simply saying you love the show (there are a number of fans on these boards), but at this point the viewership numbers and Amazon's expenditure are pretty clear... and continually arguing that RoP was / is a commercial success is IMO foolhardy and sans backing.

So with that, enjoy what you want and believe what you want, but please refrain from misconstruing a situation based on your wants (or enjoyment).

Unless you (babark) really need to keep discussing this, Kai2 out

Yea, exactly what i thought, felt. Condescending indeed though, with now your well established seniority taken into account, i can only accept the matter for what it is worth.

To go in detail.

You

The start begins with pointing out my subjective based approach to the whole discussion

from there we have a paragraph explaining about the chosen Public Relations path for rings of power

then we can read about your dinner with PJ (sorry mr Jackson)

followed by what you think is keeping rings of power from its success

ending with again a focus on the subjective nature of our, human rating the world system possible indicating i'm not aware of this myself

me

i start quite passive aggressively with my more or less general response which was indeed called forth by reading your last comment as seen opposed to this post (to be clear, me post #62, kai2 post #60) but not entirely aimed at you as well as providing my own take to the discussion about rings of power being a success yes or no.

Then i describe shortly how i was surprised by the % of people who dropped the show

followed by a bit of weird double natured comment about how many Amazon subscribers did watch.

I end with summarizing a summary of an interview with the rings of power program director.
In that summary the rings of power is described as 'the biggest show for Amazon' in terms of viewers, internally described as a huge success, a show that managed to surpass expectations.

I guess, i find it condescending because a show of uhm, feelings, surprise and maybe uncertainty is met with an explanation