Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Triceron]

Well, there's another silver lining for this series having been made. It looks like Lego is revisiting their Lord of the Rings liscense, which they haven't really touched much on in about 10 years now. Rings of Power even gets name dropped in one of their statements, even though they don't seem to be making anything specific to the show yet.

A $500 Rivendell set is set to launch next month, and leaks came out today that look pretty impressive. I don't think they would have revisited the liscense if not for the show.

[Nuadu]

so entrenched in the woke propaganda they have drunk the kool-aid they are trying to peddle.

More people using the "woke" word without knowing at all what it means or how to define it. Some people don't even try to hide it anymore.

[Syegfryed]

Self reportable is meaningless. The industry market analysis decides what is successful. What any distro has to say about that is irrelevant.

Rings of Power is successful. It was one of only two streaming shows in the top 15 for the year that was not owned and distributed by Netflix. Amazon has nothing to do with that reportage. .

And how they analyze all that shit?

Because people engagement online was shit, after it aired, no one talked about the show unless it was to shit on it, it didn't won any awards, it was not even nominated from most of then,. they said time and time again that it needed to be a huge hit like game of thrones, and we got this, how it was a success?

I guess, is, what is considered a success? if they made the money back of season 1 is considered a success?

[rhorle]

at the time the show ended, there was less people watching the final episode, than had left the show after the first episode release,

The show saw an increase in minutes viewed and the finale episode was close to the opening week. So was it "less" but only by 98 minutes acording to the Nielsen numbers. Episodes 1 and 2 were 1,235m minutes. Episode 8 was 1,137m minutes. The low point for the show was episode 6 at 966m minutes. Episodes 4 and 5 declined by about 10m minutes each week. That isn't an abject failure.

[Syegfryed]

I was expecting more when you said "the top 15", but they are just the 15th place, that was a bit sad. And that is like, almost all the shows that aired, of course they would make to it somehow lol

[rhorle]

Once your chips are in the middle, it can be hard to walk away.

Is that why the haters keep on hating instead of walking away?

[Lorgar Aurelian]

God I love this thread.

Some one who apparently works directly in this line of work “numbers across multiple unbiased sources says it did well and was with there investment”

People who whine about how it did poorly “I don’t like it so your wrong and it failed!”

[Syegfryed]

Tbh, I found it difficult to rate as whole. It reminded me a bit of Book of Boba Fett in that the quality of each episode really kind waivered dramatically. I'd say at its worst it was a 3.5/10 and at its best maybe a 6/10.

I don't think its that difficult, because it was rly bad.

If we put all the good things in one basket, you have like 5 people acting that was decent, CGI and music, even if you give one point for acting, music, and CGI, they would get only a 3/10.

The rest is just bad in a objective e standpoint, writing, dialogues, editing the scenes, the rest of the acting, the cast that didn't fit the characters, pacing problems, bad choreography in all fights, is full of nonsense like cutting a rope that destroy a tower and sociopath hobbits.

I mean, we already talked a lot about the show flaws, but you get the idea of why it gets less than a 4 overall.

I'm hoping they improve it next season. Amazon has sunk so much money into the show they don't really have a choice at this point. From what I understand of some of the metrics there was a severe drop off in viewership after the premiere. So they should be amply motivated to make improvements for the second installment.

They will change, if it will improve is yet to be seen, they got someone who did witcher and wheel of time, so i don't put hopes high. Its gonna be a hell of a work to take the scraps of season 1 and do a season 2, especially when the timeline is fucked.

[callipygoustp]

Numbers don't lie.

[Fencers]

And how they analyze all that shit?

Someone asked a similar question above that I answered.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post54034767

Because people engagement online was shit after it aired, no one talked about the show

I didn't look at engagement tracking after a few weeks personally. Do you have access to ProData or Quickstats?

how it was a success? I guess, is, what is considered a success? if they made the money back of season 1 is considered a success?

It was one of the top streaming shows of the year and one of only two non-Netflix programs that managed to even chart. That is a win for Amazon. Disney, Universal, Apple, HBO, and a bunch of others threw a lot at Netflix's market viability. Only Amazon got through - twice.

Distros don't "make back their money" by airing a show on a streaming platform. That's a silly notion. Viewers are not charged per episode. No show or film, no matter the quality, is going "make back their money" on new subscriptions to a service. That's not even sensible- nothing works like that in the real world.

Amazon (and all distros) want market and platform viability. Success is having engagement so that you can leverage the value of your platform content (acquired or original) in merchandising, advertising, client packaging, licensing, etc.

Apple's Academy Award-winning film CODA, grossed less than $200k theatrically and was barely viewed on ancillary. The entire reason that the film campaigned was to establish Apple TV as a place for viable films. They spent millions on distribution, acquisition, advertising, and campaigning.

Now when you package at Apple, Apple has the power to say "We can reach X engagement and provide campaigning at Y or Z level". That's the value.

Series are the same way. Having a top show (they only care about engagement), means it can be packaged as part of Amazon's properties. 7-11 or The Four Seasons might be more willing to license Rings of Power than The Peripheral (I worked on this, but didn't do #s as expected).

ROP is also in their portfolio forever now. It's adding a pool to your house even if you don't swim. You raised the value.

- - - Updated - - -

I was expecting more when you said "the top 15", but they are just the 15th place, that was a bit sad. And that is like, almost all the shows that aired, of course they would make to it somehow lol

There are hundreds of shows produced and distributed every year. Hundreds. If you load them in Quickstats, it takes like 10 minutes to even load them all in the display grid.

I am doubting the degree to which you know about this stuff. TBF.

[bledgor]

I was expecting more when you said "the top 15", but they are just the 15th place, that was a bit sad. And that is like, almost all the shows that aired, of course they would make to it somehow lol

You are being too harsh, they only lost to such titans like Great British baking show, can't expect a little IP like Lord of the Rings to overcome such a massive foe!

[Syegfryed]

Someone asked a similar question above that I answered.

https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads...1#post54034767

I didn't look at engagement tracking after a few weeks personally. Do you have access to ProData or Quickstats?

The only data i see i guess is mob data, facebook, twitter, instagram and alike. Even youtube is data to me, and Rings of power was the lower end, waaay behind other shows that aired during that time, who received a lot of engagement likes house of the dragon, stranger things and others..

Hell, even the reddit to rings of power was dead, hashtags for rings of power was minimal. The only engagement RoP got was Hate watchers, which is indeed a lot of engagement on itself, but hardly a success to me, especially when amazon said it needed to be a big hit, and 15th place is hardly a big hit in my eyes.

It was one of the top streaming shows of the year and one of only two non-Netflix programs that managed to even chart. That is a win for Amazon. Disney, Universal, Apple, HBO, and a bunch of others threw a lot at Netflix's market viability. Only Amazon got through - twice.

Right, but they are the 15th in the top 15th, its not like they got top 10 on the 15th, this is the lower end, and they got behind worse shows or old shows. no one is going to sign for amazon because a bad show got into 15th place.

And as the image you show, show they had 9 millions min viewed in eight episodes... i could be wrong, but isn't the 1 and 2 episode 8 millions alone? how are they doing the data here? it means the rest of the episodes got only 1.4m?

There are hundreds of shows produced and distributed every year. Hundreds. If you load them in Quickstats, it takes like 10 minutes to even load them all in the display grid.

I am doubting the degree to which you know about this stuff. TBF.

Yeah, how many of those had the power of tolkien to back then up and the controversy among fans to heat up the audience and still only got to the 15th place?

And yeah, i don't know shit about other than what i see myself, thats why i ask, not trying to be the authority in the subject.

[rogoth]

God I love this thread.

Some one who apparently works directly in this line of work “numbers across multiple unbiased sources says it did well and was with there investment”

People who whine about how it did poorly “I don’t like it so your wrong and it failed!”

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good' are US exclusive, they don't factor international viewing AT ALL, in almost all territories outside the US this show bombed, pretty spectacularly, but everyone has their panties in such a bunch over the 'Nielsen' ratings or other US based metrics companies they can't see the macro perspective, and the fact that barely half the people who have an amazon prime account bothered to watch it DESPITE IT BEING ESSENTIALLY FREE speaks fucking volumes on its own, but i guess you don't care about that either?

- - - Updated - - -

More people using the "woke" word without knowing at all what it means or how to define it. Some people don't even try to hide it anymore.

oh, i know what the word means, just in case you don't, which i would suggest is a highly likely possibility since you're trying to sound pseudo intelligent by doing the whole 'hur dur i know but do you' trope:

it is a term that was invented in the 1970's derived exclusively from yet another dumbass derivation of the English language by Americans to denote a particular and almost zealous attitude towards social and racial standards in society.

in the case of modern day it's used to describe the utterly moronic pandering to minorities while simultaneously dismissing the majority and actively ridiculing said majority to curry favour with said minorities in an attempt to gain social credibility with the aforementioned minorities.

as a result of the failed 'woke' movement, the term 'get woke go broke' was coined as a way to describe this failed ideology and mentality which thanks to other more pressing societal issues has been shown to be the absolute mess that it is and as a result people have stopped following media produced with this mentality as the central focus and are actively turning against creators with this flawed and failed mindset, as seen with dozens of productions in the past 3-5 years.

if you want anymore free education i could go on, but i'm hoping this is enough illumination for you to get the point and shut the fuck up.

[Syegfryed]

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good' are US exclusive, they don't factor international viewing AT ALL, in almost all territories outside the US this show bombed, pretty spectacularly, but everyone has their panties in such a bunch over the 'Nielsen' ratings or other US based metrics companies they can't see the macro perspective, and the fact that barely half the people who have an amazon prime account bothered to watch it DESPITE IT BEING ESSENTIALLY FREE speaks fucking volumes on its own, but i guess you don't care about that either?

I also find funny when now they want go for the appeal of authority, but in other areas/threads they quickly disregard something other professionals said.

On the show, around my country it bombed as well. Tbf most of people i interact with are rly into rpg/dnd stuff, sure is not nielsen numbers and its all empirical, but you would find some people who should enjoy fantasy stuff around this sphere.

You are being too harsh, they only lost to such titans like Great British baking show, can't expect a little IP like Lord of the Rings to overcome such a massive foe!

Lmao, i didn't even catch that one, guess British cuisine is something else

[Shadowferal]

Lmao, i didn't even catch that one, guess British cuisine is something else

And this was broadcast in the US?
My my...

[Fencers]

The only data i see i guess is mob data, facebook, twitter, instagram and alike. Even youtube is data to me, and Rings of power was the lower end, waaay behind other shows that aired during that time, who received a lot of engagement likes house of the dragon, stranger things and others..

So you don't have data on engagement. It's your personal perception. Okay.

a success to me... in my eyes.

Irrelevent to me. I don't care about this show and have zero investment or care for the franchise. Your're personal opinion on the quality of the show or subjective assessment of the media performance is not of any concerned to me. Have that conversation with someone that watched this show- that ain't me.

I was only commenting on the performance of the show as a piece of media for the platform. Which is objectively impressive for a non-Netflix show. No other distro managed to chart and they all spent millions of dollars on high-profile and high-visibility properties; Star Wars, Marvel, DC, The Office, Star Trek, Real Housewives, and Kardashians.

You might not like those shows, but they are some of the most valuable media properties, and none manged to get "15th" either.

Right, but they are the 15th in the top 15th, its not like they got top 10 on the 15th, this is the lower end, and they got behind worse shows or old shows. no one is going to sign for amazon because a bad show got into 15th place.

Nobody cares about the quality of a show in that regard. That's for you to argue over on forums or whatever.

A client isn't going to look at a package and ask, "But are the elves accurate?" or whatever people were upset over. I do not watch this show.

And as the image you show, show they had 9 millions min viewed in eight episodes... i could be wrong, but isn't the 1 and 2 episode 8 millions alone?

I don't know. That's not really relevant.

how are they doing the data here? it means the rest of the episodes got only 1.4m?

That doesn't matter. It's total of minutes. That is the measure.

Amazon doesn't care if it is 100 million minutes for the first episode and the rest were 1 minute each. It's still treated as 10+ million minutes for their series. That is the measure the industry uses- your personal view of how data is determined doesn't matter. Frito-Lay and Amazon are not going to do business based on what you think is "good enough".

It is what the industry decides as the measure that matters and that is what they do business based on.

Yeah, how many of those had the power of tolkien to back then up and the controversy among fans to heat up the audience and still only got to the 15th place?

No other distro managed to chart and they all spent millions of dollars on high-profile and high-visibility properties; Star Wars, Marvel, DC, The Office, Star Trek, Real Housewives, and Kardashians.

And yeah, i don't know shit about other than what i see myself, thats why i ask, not trying to be the authority in the subject.

That is fine. I am aware the show is controversial. I have no opinion on the creative of the show. Strictly speaking on the analytics side; this was impressive for Amazon.

I think they greenlit Season 2 with new packaging recently and with a renewed production suite. That's money. They wouldn't do that if it was a poor-performing product.

- - - Updated - - -

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good' are US exclusive.

Every relevant market receives US programming and media. The US doesn't receive programming from every international market.

Non-news media only accounts for and largely cares about US markets. "International" is used as a catch-all for the entire world for a reason. The combined market power of entire continents doesn't equal the market power of like, the US East Coast or just California.

[Syegfryed]

So you don't have data on engagement. It's your personal perception. Okay.

Not just mine, but social media overall, i don't think is right to disregard how little engagement it had in the most populous social medias out there.

Your're personal opinion on the quality of the show or subjective assessment of the media performance is not of any concerned to me.

Right, but that is not personal or subjective, the show is objectively bad.

I was only commenting on the performance of the show as a piece of media for the platform. Which is objectively impressive for a non-Netflix show. No other distro managed to chart and they all spent millions of dollars on high-profile and high-visibility properties; Star Wars, Marvel, DC, The Office, Star Trek, Real Housewives, and Kardashians.

Right, what im saying is, taking account the IP, the money they put, and the controversy around it, is not that impressive. With all of that, they should have snatched top 5 easily, if it was somehow decent

That doesn't matter. It's total of minutes. That is the measure.

What i gather here, is nothing else matter, only minutes watched, and to me it sounds like it is an artificial success(let alone how minutes watched is a garbage metric to measure something, unlike, maybe number of views), and only in terms of that chart that can lead to other beneficial to the company, in advertisement.

I guess the problem rly we just have different views on what is a success and what is not. For you, and amazon, is minutes watched, and going into that chart.

I bet if they went 16th or 18th, we would have a top 20 instead, to show how much successful it was

Amazon doesn't care if it is 100 million minutes for the first episode and the rest were 1 minute each. It's still treated as 10+ million minutes for their series.

Yeah i figure that much, but iif people only watched the first, and say fuck it, i hardly call it a success, regardless if the industry want to me different

I think they greenlit Season 2 with new packaging recently and with a renewed production suite. That's money. They wouldn't do that if it was a poor-performing product.

The show was already greenlit for 4/5 seasons, i don't remember the number exactly, but they have to make then, because they already spend 1 billion on it. might as well just roll on it to not lost the money.

[Triceron]

All this argument over 'success' is pointless, because it's all relative.

I see this situation comparable to the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy or Game of Thrones last season. It's a pyrrhic victory. It's a short term win that may have long-term consequences. And if we're simply arguing numbers and technicality, it's still considered a success, right?

[Dhrizzle]

A $500 Rivendell set is set to launch next month, and leaks came out today that look pretty impressive. I don't think they would have revisited the liscense if not for the show.

I'm glad I'm not rich or I wouldn't be able to move for Lego cluttering every surface, but if they tap further into the 1980s giant cartoon robot market I'd probably go bankrupt.

- - - Updated - - -

And how they analyze all that shit?

Because people engagement online was shit, after it aired, no one talked about the show unless it was to shit on it, it didn't won any awards, it was not even nominated from most of then,. they said time and time again that it needed to be a huge hit like game of thrones, and we got this, how it was a success?

I guess, is, what is considered a success? if they made the money back of season 1 is considered a success?

The fact a lot of people decided pre-emptively to hate the show and squawk down all conversations outside of a few "echo-chambers" probably doesn't bother them much if the actual figures work in their favour.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

here's the problem: ALL the fucking dumbass numbers you're using to justify this being 'good'

I don't need numbers to justify a show I like, I personally couldn't care less how a show does number wise along as it gets another season if the story isn't over. I just think it's funny the extents you guys bend over backwards to say the show failed when apparently all reports say it was worth the investment.

I also don't even think the show is good, I enjoyed it but think it's just an ok show slightly better then wheel of time but I wouldn't say it breaks into good territory. Though to be fair Id rank all LOTR live action movies in just ok though likely at different ends of that category.

are US exclusive, they don't factor international viewing AT ALL, in almost all territories outside the US this show bombed, pretty spectacularly, but everyone has their panties in such a bunch over the 'Nielsen' ratings or other US based metrics companies they can't see the macro perspective, and the fact

Who cares if it's US exclusive if that's the norm for ratting success for the industry it's not like every independent tracking source is making up a new metric just for ROP.

that barely half the people who have an amazon prime account bothered to watch it DESPITE IT BEING ESSENTIALLY FREE speaks fucking volumes on its own, but I guess you don't care about that either?

I mean no I don't care if half of prime didn't watch it with out some reference point of what % of prime watches any show.

50% could be amazing it could be awful without further context there's no way to know so why would any one care.