Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Triceron]

That article unfortunately happens to be behind a paywall, yes. I'll throw up some alternatives that covered mostly the same news:
https://decider.com/2018/03/15/amazo...bers-released/

The document shows that Amazon takes the total cost of the season (in this case, $72 million) and divides by the number of first streams it has (1.15 million) to calculate how much it cost to bring in each individual viewer.

If Amazon is going to base its creative decisions solely on the first stream metric, it makes sense that it chose to spend a massive sum of money on The Lord of the Rings prequel.


And I also found this one while looking for the alternative stuff above. Seems Amazon and Nielsen rating numbers don't quite match up, and Amazon's estimates are quite a bit higher in calculation.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nielsen...zon-prime-nfl/

Through six weeks, Nielsen says the Thursday night games have averaged 10.3 million viewers. Amazon says the average is 12.1 million. Amazon's estimate has been bigger than Nielsen's each week.

"I don't at all believe that Amazon's numbers are not right," said Connie Kim, Nielsen spokeswoman. "And I don't believe that our numbers are not right."

And from a Fortune article covering the same news:
https://fortune.com/2022/10/25/how-m...ielsen-rating/

For now, ad prices for the Thursday games are set using Nielsen’s numbers. But Amazon clearly has an incentive to let clients know that it believes more people are actually watching.

I'm not sure what this means exactly, but it is definitely some evidence that Amazon's estimates may be higher for a reason. And while the estimates themselves may not be wrong, we don't know exactly how they're tallying views overall. Cuz a 1-2 million more estimates than Nielsen is quite a big difference. Though I believe Nielsen ratings only count TV-based streaming, and not web if I'm not mistaken?

[Koriani]

Thanks man, I find it interesting to get that peek behind the curtain.

I'd love to know (not saying its out there to be found, I've not looked! lol) how Amazon's process (using that 'new sub/first watch' count) varies, or is similar to , how Netflix or Disney+ counts those metrics.

I find it interesting that's how they figure it - as it pretty much 'assumes' (rightly or wrongly - again we don't know how everyone else does this metric) that every new sub was there because of XYZ new show. That's an assumption I'm a bit surprised ANY company would make, but at the same time I also highly doubt its the 'only metric' they are using to make this decision. (As the quote "..if Amazon...based solely on this first stream metric" refers to that idea.)

Course, maybe I find that assumption surprising because *I* don't base any of my subscription tv-service decisions on whatever the "newest show out" is. (Its not important to me to watch something ASAP upon release *shrugs*.) So whenever I choose to subscribe, or cancel, these services it has nothing at all to do with what "first watch" metrics are assuming. And when one looks at what most people claim - that that they don't even sub to Amazon Prime "for the shows" - its an interesting 'assumption' of the company to be the exact opposite.

(Again not a commentary or whether I think Amazon is smart or stupid to use this metric. I have no idea, its not my field. Its just an interesting assumptive metric to use at all and one I never would have thought of if someone asked me to list out the "best metrics" one might use to figure out a show's/subscription success.)

Unfortunately, I also don't know enough about Nielson (despite having a friend who was a Nielson family for a year ha) to know why their numbers and Amazon's numbers would be different. They probably don't count web streaming or perhaps not even tv-streaming after the first few days (?). And not saying Amazin is lying (at all!) - but I'm sure Ms. Kim would never go on record accusing Amazon of any such thing, even IF she thought they pulled the numbers out their arse.

[Biomega]

I find it interesting that's how they figure it - as it pretty much 'assumes' (rightly or wrongly - again we don't know how everyone else does this metric) that every new sub was there because of XYZ new show. That's an assumption I'm a bit surprised ANY company would make, but at the same time I also highly doubt its the 'only metric' they are using to make this decision. (As the quote "..if Amazon...based solely on this first stream metric" refers to that idea.)

Make no mistake: what they tell the public they're doing is unquestioningly only a bare-bones, radically dumbed-down version of their actual data analysis. No company will reveal the details of that, because that's integral to their business strategy - you'd be feeding competitors priceless information if you just made that public.

There is no doubt Amazon has entire teams of analysts poring over the data they extract from viewer behaviors on a project like this. Very detailed metrics, very thorough analyses, very comprehensive data sets. Of course they can't read minds so they can't ever tell with 100% accuracy "this person subbed only because of the show", but they'll have data models that are accurate enough in giving them a very good idea about who subbed for what reason based on their respective behaviors. But those are metrics they will never ever release to the public, because they're pure business gold - data is everything these days.

Keep in mind the purpose behind information. Anything they release they do for a reason, and if it's something they don't HAVE to release (for legal reasons) then you can be assured they're doing it because they think it'll benefit them somehow. That includes releasing "metrics" that make their own product look favorably - again, this doesn't have to mean they're lying about it, it can just be a certain way of presenting technically accurate data that creates a certain impression, even if that doesn't accurately reflect internal use or interpretation of the same data.

[Triceron]

Unfortunately, I also don't know enough about Nielson (despite having a friend who was a Nielson family for a year ha) to know why their numbers and Amazon's numbers would be different. They probably don't count web streaming or perhaps not even tv-streaming after the first few days (?). And not saying Amazin is lying (at all!) - but I'm sure Ms. Kim would never go on record accusing Amazon of any such thing, even IF she thought they pulled the numbers out their arse.

I'm not really well versed at all, I'm just learning as it goes and as discussion progresses, trying to sift out between data and 'people's fee fee's' on the subject.

From what I gather, Nielsen doesn't take into account web and mobile streaming, but supposedly they're getting better at the metrics since 2020

https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/21/ni...n-prime-video/

As with Netflix, however, Nielsen is able to measure only the Amazon Prime Video streams taking place in the U.S. via TVs. This includes through connected and smart devices — like streaming media players, for example.

That limitation has been a point of criticism from Netflix, which routinely dismisses Nielsen’s accuracy because it misses streams coming from mobile devices and PCs. But insiders now say Nielsen’s numbers are fairly close, according to a Variety report from earlier this year, which detailed how Nielsen’s numbers backed up Netflix’s claims about its hit movie “Bird Box.”

Plus, those missing mobile and PC streams may not be as important in terms of U.S. viewership as you may think. Although many U.S. consumers are cutting the cord with traditional linear TV, they still often watch their streamed shows on the TV’s big screen. Hulu, for example, said last year that as much as 78% of its viewing takes place on a TV, to give you an idea.

Again, many of these articles I pull are from different years, different topic of sources, so it's not all going to align into one big picture. There's a lot of info to sift through to get a good picture, and even now I've heard talks (internally at my studio) that Nielsen ratings have become less and less relevant over the years as companies are shifting how they're approaching content roll out and viewership data.


As for how this pertains to Amazon, I do believe that Amazon may be fudging the numbers to make themselves look better, and I do consider Rings of Power to be intentionally performing at a loss in order to bring in big numbers. And frankly, it's worked for their goals, since they're touting that 100m number and breaking their own internal records (let's be clear, they never compared the show's performance to any show outside of Amazon's own lineup). I can see that working to their benefit. And they want to keep good PR and numbers high in order to potentially snag some awards, to boost Prime Video's overall credibility.

Whether or not RoP is a success when compared to other shows or on its own merit based on Amazon's first-stream system, I don't know exactly. The numbers are too fudged to really say. All I can say is whatever the outcome, Amazon seems to be doubled down on pushing this show as their headliner Prime Original series, and for that it's working out. And not really a surprise, for the amount of money they've thrown at it.

There is no amount of reasoning that can say the show lost money.

Prime Video is still seen as a "loss leader" type of product. It draws people in or keeps them subscribed to move more product.

Pretty sure a reason for the show losing money is already answered and addressed in the latter quote.

Kinda puts into perspective the kind of bullshit arguments being pedalled here to make it seem like it's unreasonable to consider Rings of Power would ever operate at a loss, while completely admitting that operating on losses is part of Prime Video/Amazon's business strategy.

Some people are just so full of shit they forget the bullshit things they say in the show's defense once they start considering actual facts about how Amazon runs its business.

[Skulltaker]

Pretty sure a reason for the show losing money is already answered and addressed in the latter quote.

Kinda puts into perspective the kind of bullshit arguments being pedalled here to make it seem like it's unreasonable to consider Rings of Power would ever operate at a loss, while completely admitting that operating on losses is part of Prime Video/Amazon's business strategy.

Some people are just so full of shit they forget the bullshit things they say in the show's defense once they start considering actual facts about how Amazon runs its business.

Which brings me back to 'what was the goal for the series', and again, I still think it was to set Prime apart from the competition. Draw in a decent number of people who are hesitant to sub to prime, and keep some of them. You'll never retain 100% of new customers you bring in. A substantial bump in sub numbers, though, would mean a shitton of increased revenue. Spend money on one end, make more money on the other.

This is why new sub numbers are very important to gauge the success of a huge show like this. Which is why social media engagement is important, and how the show resonates with the public compared to other shows, especially comparable shows that run at the same time. Which is why 'number of views' compared to 'existing customers' is important, and which is why '100 million views' doesn't mean it's a success, but probably means that it wasn't. Because even if every single view of those 100 mil was on an individually subbed prime account - which it wasn't - that means that less than 50% of all people who have access to the show decided not to watch it. Mediocre attraction, which incidentally corresponds well with the mediocre reception the show got.

[rhorle]

Because even if every single view of those 100 mil was on an individually subbed prime account - which it wasn't - that means that less than 50% of all people who have access to the show decided not to watch it. Mediocre attraction, which incidentally corresponds well with the mediocre reception the show got.

Prime Video doesn't exist in a vacuum. You don't know what percentage of viewers shows on the platform normally attracts. You, and others, keep coming to conclusions that everything is bad news with out anything to actually back it up other than your own feelings. You have the proverbial link chart trying to connect everything together in a way that allows you say "It's bad".

You don't have that data. No one does. We already know that Prime Video exists as a way to keep and create customers. Amazon has said that those who use Prime Video convert from free trials at higher rates then those who do not. They have also said retail sales increase when Prime Video shows when awards because it attracts people. There are a lot of people who know nothing of how Amazon operates yet pretend to be experts just to call the show bad.

[Shadowferal]

‘The Rings Of Power’ Season 1 Review: Amazon’s Arrogant Betrayal Of ‘The Lord Of The Rings’

Ostensibly, this is an adaptation of Tolkien’s Second Age. The story, by showrunners J.D. Payne and Patrick McKay, is drawn from The Lord Of The Rings and its appendixes, though unfortunately Amazon never bought the rights to The Silmarillion, wherein lie so many of Tolkien’s best pre-Third Age stories.

Then again, perhaps it’s all for the best that The Silmarillion remains outside the grasp of these creative butchers. Payne and McKay sold their vision of a Lord of the Rings adaptation thanks to what has been described as a ‘fidelity’ to Tolkien, yet nothing could be further from the truth now that we have the entire first season to analyze and unpack. Far from sticking to the stories and themes of Middle-earth, the showrunners created their own story entirely, abandoning Tolkien’s lore and making wild, reckless changes to the Legendarium in the process.

Perhaps worse, Amazon’s “adaptation” is badly made TV with a nonsensical story built on wild coincidences, contrived plotlines and a blatant disregard for the various building blocks that make any story complete: Logical character choices, a sense of time and place, and narrative tension—not to mention an overly large cast of mostly forgettable and uncharismatic characters, some wholly made up for the show and others changed entirely as to be almost unrecognizable.

In every way that truly matters, The Rings Of Power fails from the writing to the acting to the presentation. It fails as an adaptation, neither enriching Tolkien’s work nor remaining true to it. It fails as a good fantasy, giving us generic tropes and melodrama rather than blazing new ground. And it fails as a compelling story, filled with cheap mystery boxes and unsurprising ‘twists.’ So how bad has this show dropped the proverbial palantir?

Allow me to explain....

[Dhrizzle]

Some reviews are just too amusing;

Rings of Power Season 1 Review – How to burn a billion dollars

With many episodes clocking in at over an hour, the snail’s pace in this show is painful at times, to say the least. Pretty visuals and establishing shots can only go so far, but the actual story beats, narrative and logic are almost completely devoid from this show.

As a quick disclaimer, I am a fan of Lord of the Rings but it’s been a long time since I read the books and I only have a passing knowledge of the Silmarillion and the appendices. I appreciate that lore changes do happen but the way Rings of Power handles that – and Tolkien’s legacy – is akin to giving a baby a shotgun.

In one letter, Tolkien writes that he “cordially dislikes allegory in all its manifestations”, so when we hear a xenophobic worker in Numenor worried that elves are “taking all their jobs”, it obviously reflects the current situation going on in various parts of the world – and contradicts the writers claiming they’re honouring Tolkien.

But beyond that, the actual story here just isn’t very good. The sheer lack of logic and narrative structure belies belief. I said before about the pacing but even simple things like characters moving from point A to B are completely disregarded.

These sort of lackadaisical slips are not just frustrating to watch, they completely take you out of the world and destroy any sense of realism and immersion you may have. And that in itself is staggering for a billion dollar project.

The character development is almost non-existent through large swathes of this season, and it’s presented in a really questionable way. The show has a bizarre tendency to lean on mystery box gimmicks for things that aren’t even mysteries. Will Isildur, the man destined to cut the ring from Sauron’s hand die? We’ll have to wait to find out!

But then even through all of this, the show has a really awful way of handling its dialogue. Characters either repeat information constantly or float into grandiose but nonsensical bits of dialogue that are almost laughable for how they’re delivered. Early on, Arondir is warned not to go down a hole as he doesn’t know what’s down there, so in reply he says “that is why I must go.” I could be here all day rattling off instances of dialogue like this but suffice to say it does nothing to help this series.

Speaking of characters though, Galadriel in particular has to be one of the most unlikable protagonists in a project this year, if not in the past decade. She’s arrogant, rude, abrupt and unbelievably self-entitled, not to mention smug in most encounters. She walks around with a big scowl on her face and embodies all the characteristics you’d expect from a perfect “Mary Sue” character. The others here range from blandly forgettable to exhibiting sparks of promise (mostly Disa, Elrond and Durin) but largely, everything here is a big glossy void of…nothing.

There’s absolutely nothing here that exhibits depth, majesty or richness lore. Instead, what we get is an empty husk; a show playing puppeteer with Tolkien’s world but devoid of heart, reason and logic, with narrative faults rippling right the way through its production. With the show creators promising big changes to come in season 2, it seems even they’re aware of the issues inherent with this.

Whether people will actually return to this one in a hurry is left up for debate but based on this showing, Rings of Power is not just one of the most disappointing shows of the year, it’s shockingly also one of the worst written and produced. Glossy visuals will only get you so far and Rings of Power has done absolutely nothing to convince that its writing will improve the next time out. What a disappointment.

This show would probably work better as a comedy.

Shame the reviewer only skimmed and quote-mined Tolkien, otherwise he would have read Tolkien's explanation that there is a difference between allegory and inspiration, that writers can be inspired by events in their lives or the world without their story becoming allegorical to those events. It's known that Tolkien's experiences in WW1 informed his writing in Lord of the Rings. That doesn't mean that Lord of the Rings is an allegory for WW1.

[Syegfryed]

Shame the reviewer only skimmed and quote-mined Tolkien, otherwise he would have read Tolkien's explanation that there is a difference between allegory and inspiration, that writers can be inspired by events in their lives or the world without their story becoming allegorical to those events. It's known that Tolkien's experiences in WW1 informed his writing in Lord of the Rings. That doesn't mean that Lord of the Rings is an allegory for WW1.

Sure there is a difference, but the scene he mention is a straight up alegory, not inspiration.

It was something they totally made up for the show, does not make sense in the universe and it was not the reason why the numenorians "disliked" the elves, they consciously changed what tolkien meant to put an alegory.

[Triceron]

That doesn't mean that Lord of the Rings is an allegory for WW1.

The "They took our jobs" scene in Rings of Power wasn't written by Tolkien though.

[rhorle]

It was something they totally made up for the show, does not make sense in the universe and it was not the reason why the numenorians "disliked" the elves, they consciously changed what tolkien meant to put an alegory.

The divide between The Faithful and The Kings Men indicates a general animosity against the Elves. That can easily translate into what we saw. If you include the knowledge of potentially manipulation by Sauron it fits perfectly well. The Elves don't need to sleep and have physical strengths over men, even those gifted like the Numenoreans. Competition for crafting and sailing fits.

[Syegfryed]

The divide between The Faithful and The Kings Men indicates a general animosity against the Elves. That can easily translate into what we saw. If you include the knowledge of potentially manipulation by Sauron it fits perfectly well. The Elves don't need to sleep and have physical strengths over men, even those gifted like the Numenoreans. Competition for crafting and sailing fits.

What manipulation by sauron, he didn't do shit, they cut that out from the show, lmao

No, it doesn't fit, is nonsense headcanon and an allegory. Numenoreans are as stronger or more than elves, they were so powerful they invaded god's land, they would give two shits about "elves stealing our jerbs"

[rhorle]

What manipulation by sauron, he didn't do shit, they cut that out from the show, lmao[/I]

The guy giving the speech is the same one that got his butt kicked by who we later learned was Sauron. There was even shadowy special effects during the fight sequence. Are you saying Sauron is not powerful enough to manipulate a person?

Numenorians still had to sleep. Tolkien said elves have the greatest talent for making and discovery due to their connection to their soul. Numenoreans were gifted things to make them equal to elves in some regards but they were still weaker in some others. Just as in general Men could be stronger in some aspects. People care about silly things all the time. The "commoners" of Numenor still had to work and feed their families, right? You don't think they would be upset if elves started to take things over after such a long absence? Even more so if they were aligned with the "Kings Men" that already have been denigrating anything elvish?

[Triceron]

So Rhorle isn't following the story at all with that explanation because the story actually tried to paint Halbrand as a sympathetic underdog trying to start a new life at that point in Numenor, with no ambitions like he ended up having by the end. He even reinforces this in his explanation to Galadriel that he'd pretty much given up before he met her, and this story plays out pretty straight as him being forced to act against his own intent to start fresh when he attacks the Numenoreans.

So to now say he manipulated the Numenoreans as though it was his intent and plan all along is actually against the story being told, because we know that wasn't what he intended to do at all. If he could manipulate them easily he wouldn't have had to fight them at all nor would he have gotten jailed for it.

[Rennadrel]

The "They took our jobs" scene in Rings of Power wasn't written by Tolkien though.

I literally thought that was an attempt at trying to spoof on South Park

[Dhrizzle]

Sure there is a difference, but the scene he mention is a straight up alegory, not inspiration.

It was something they totally made up for the show, does not make sense in the universe and it was not the reason why the numenorians "disliked" the elves, they consciously changed what tolkien meant to put an alegory.

Erm, what do you think allegory is?

- - - Updated - - -

The "They took our jobs" scene in Rings of Power wasn't written by Tolkien though.

So? His explanation can apply to other writers too...

- - - Updated - - -

So Rhorle isn't following the story at all with that explanation because the story actually tried to paint Halbrand as a sympathetic underdog trying to start a new life at that point in Numenor, with no ambitions like he ended up having by the end. He even reinforces this in his explanation to Galadriel that he'd pretty much given up before he met her, and this story plays out pretty straight as him being forced to act against his own intent to start fresh when he attacks the Numenoreans.

So to now say he manipulated the Numenoreans as though it was his intent and plan all along is actually against the story being told, because we know that wasn't what he intended to do at all. If he could manipulate them easily he wouldn't have had to fight them at all nor would he have gotten jailed for it.

It isn't totally out of character for Sauron to get his ass kicked by Numenoreans, end up a prisoner and use that position to manipulate events.

[Triceron]

So? His explanation can apply to other writers too...

And it can be. But it's not relevant here, since he wasn't speaking out on behalf of the RoP writers.

It isn't totally out of character for Sauron to get his ass kicked by Numenoreans, end up a prisoner and use that position to manipulate events.

You're right, it isn't totally out of character if that's what happened.

It's not what happened though if you actually follow the story. Just like you could say it's not out of his character to manipulate every event that lead to creating Mt. Doom's eruption. That's not what happened either, and he didn't have any direct influence over those events at all as far as the story was told. He even intentionally tried to stop Adar for the sake of vengeance. There's no suggestion at all that he would have known the key to turn the Southlands into Mordor was in motion, nor was the story intended to show that he manipulated events to allow Waldreg to carry out Adar's plans.

The show does nothing to link his actions leading directly to causing the Numenorean revolt. I mean, can you even show any evidence from the show to even suggest this? There's nothing but pure speculation there, since they never show or imply he had any influence outside of the Numenor prison when he was there.

[Syegfryed]

The guy giving the speech is the same one that got his butt kicked by who we later learned was Sauron. There was even shadowy special effects during the fight sequence. Are you saying Sauron is not powerful enough to manipulate a person?

Are you for real? you are not even attemping to make an argument at this point right? he didn't manipulate shit, lmao.

Numenorians still had to sleep. Tolkien said elves have the greatest talent for making and discovery due to their connection to their soul. Numenoreans were gifted things to make them equal to elves in some regards but they were still weaker in some others. Just as in general Men could be stronger in some aspects. People care about silly things all the time. The "commoners" of Numenor still had to work and feed their families, right? You don't think they would be upset if elves started to take things over after such a long absence? Even more so if they were aligned with the "Kings Men" that already have been denigrating anything elvish?

Do you also realize they were complaining about Hallbrand taking their jobs? people from the mainland? not just elves?

The fact you are trying to defend this allegory bullshit nonsense is baffling, numenor was the peak civilization at that moment, they would not be upset or scared about "elves taking their jobs" its competely obnoxiously nonsense, because why the fuck would elves get away from their own territories to work for humans?

Its bad enough the showrunners put that into play, but to defend this, holy jesus

- - - Updated - - -

Erm, what do you think allegory is?

Do you? cause it seems you know but you pretend you don't,

YOr are you unironicaly saying this was just an "inspiration of real world events"? wink wink

[rhorle]

Are you for real? you are not even attemping to make an argument at this point right? he didn't manipulate shit, lmao.

You don't know that. It is a possibility.

Do you also realize they were complaining about Hallbrand taking their jobs? people from the mainland? not just elves?

Who came with the elf. Elf-friendly humans trying to do things they haven't earned. People complain about this stuff all the time in the real world that it is a little strange you think it is foreign to Tolkien's world. Have his humans been shown to be vastly different from real life behavior? There are a lot of things that Tolkien didn't cover because it was too mundane.

The "peak" on the show is the Kings Men on the cusp of total domination of politics and life. You know the faction that dislikes the elves and anything to do with them. It fits that the people of the island would dislike elves and things associated with them. The elves wouldn't be working for humans lmao. The elves would take over the jobs and do it themselves or have their "servants" work for them. It is strange for one so critical of "they took our jobs" to not actually understand anything behind it.

[Syegfryed]

You don't know that. It is a possibility.

Unless they retcon their own show, which is much a possibility seeing how they will change the showrunners, no it wasn't

Who came with the elf. Elf-friendly humans trying to do things they haven't earned. People complain about this stuff all the time in the real world that it is a little strange you think it is foreign to Tolkien's world. Have his humans been shown to be vastly different from real life behavior? There are a lot of things that Tolkien didn't cover because it was too mundane.

Yeah, in real world, thats why is n allegory to real world events, and not rly in tolkien world.

It makes no sense because numenorians are powerful and mighty and their nation was so greater they invaded god's land, and you think the fear of "losing their jerbs" because ONE elf show up in their shore? this is bad storytelling, bad writing.