| One of the beauties of writing about Hollywood is that everyone has an opinion about your work. You too watch movies and listen to music, and so you also know what would make a good TV show, or why a particular song is at the top of the charts. I mean this sincerely. I am not a critic, so readers don't attack me in the same way they would someone who doesn't like their favorite movie. I do not work in the entertainment industry, and yet I am allowed to opine on its inner workings as though I know precisely what it takes to make a hit show. (I don't.) Best of all, I like hearing what other people have to say because it sometimes stimulates an idea, or makes me realize something I did not consider. Early in the pandemic, I answered a bunch of questions about the state of the business from readers and followers on social media. Now that we are almost a year in – with many months to go, at a minimum – I thought I'd try again. I may do this once a quarter this year. But that depends on you coming back with good questions. Armchair experts, bring it on! If you had to stick a percentage on it - how close to being back to normal are TV/movie productions? When are they expecting to be back to 100%? -- Kasey Moore, writer at What's on Netflix This depends a lot on geography. Los Angeles has opened up and shut down and opened up again. The number of new applications for filming permits in LA dropped in December as cases spiked. Filming has resumed in most of the major domestic production hubs, including Atlanta and New York. Some international territories, like South Korea and New Zealand, resumed work almost right away. Others, like London, have stopped and started. I spoke to a few people this week who estimated production is somewhere between 60% and 80% of normal. That makes sense since we saw a dip in the overall number of shows released last year, but not a steep one. Is there still a bunch of stuff left in our strategic national streaming content reserve, or are the big platforms starting to run out? Or has production resumed enough to fill out the schedules? -- Casey Newton, author of the Platformer newsletter People love to talk about how they've run out of things to watch. Someone explain this to me. There are so many new programs released every year – some 500 last year in scripted TV alone – that you can't watch them all in one year. I am still catching up on shows I wanted to watch in 2015. The real challenge is that people don't know how to find new shows. Discovery is a huge problem in TV right now. Music has it mostly figured out. Spotify feeds you playlists catered to you. But does anyone trust the Netflix recommendations as much as they do those on Spotify? As for Casey's actual question, we have plenty of new shows coming because of the aforementioned return to production. Just Friday, FX announced release dates for new seasons of "Cake," "Mayans M.C.," "Breeders" and a new show called "Hysterical." There won't be as many new shows, but that's why streaming services are splurging on movies at Sundance, buying up international shows and funding unprecedented levels of animation. Why has no one created a new, actually creative sitcom in years? Is this format dead? Was Dan Harmon's Community the last one? -- Adam Singer, chief marketing officer at Think3 Someone didn't watch "Ted Lasso"! Hollywood studios want more comedy. They want shows that are endlessly rewatchable and allow you to turn off your brain for a moment. There is a dearth of those because of the push to make dark dramas that win awards and comedies with a message. But seriously, watch "Ted Lasso." Is Apple TV+ becoming a studio, or on its way there? -- Gidon Feen, director of special projects at Securing America's Future Energy Most of its biggest shows are produced by outside studios, and its biggest movie from last year, "Greyhound," was acquired after it was completed. But Apple is ramping up more quickly than people realize. It will likely spend at least $2 billion or $3 billion on original programming this year. It's spending more on movies and kids' shows. But it's not a proper studio yet. Has YouTube killed the movie star? My teenage kids always reference popular YouTubers and TikTokers. I never hear them talk about big names in Hollywood - and they don't recognize big names when I mention them. I wonder if Hollywood will lose status as that generation grows older? -- Todd Anderson, editor/partner at AV Nirvana Is Hollywood becoming a feature in a streaming world? Streaming isn't standalone for everyone (Amazon Prime, HBO Max). Does the fact its not the "main event" for many streaming operators mean Hollywood / content has become a "feature" instead of the main event? – Andrew Jude Rajanathan, Mindshare Worldwide Both of these questions hint at the idea that Hollywood is dying, and both suggest binary thinking. Either Hollywood stars are big, or TikTokers are big. Either Hollywood is just a feature tech companies use to sell you toothpaste, or it's not. Social media stars and influencers have earned a seat at the table with the biggest celebrities on the planet. Most kids follow more YouTubers than they do movie stars. But that doesn't mean movie stars or pop stars or TV stars are going away. Just look at the popularity of Olivia Rodrigo, who got famous on a Disney show, or Noah Centineo, who became famous in a Netflix movie. There is also a clear divide in entertainment right now between companies that create entertainment for the sake of entertainment, and companies that make entertainment to sell you something else. Disney and Netflix make all their money from movies and TV shows, and the ancillary businesses they inspire. Apple and Amazon are tech companies that use entertainment to get you to shop or buy a phone. Comcast and AT&T are in between. They acquired pure entertainment companies and continue to operate them as standalone divisions. Is one better than the other? Disney and Netflix have the biggest streaming services, so you could argue entertainment isn't just a feature. But Apple and Amazon seem to be in Hollywood for the long haul, and it's never going to be more than a feature to them. In sum, the answer is neither, both and all! After all the backlash on James Corden in "The Prom," why was he nominated for the Golden Globe? -- Heike Young, director of content strategy at Salesforce Why not end with a fun one? The Golden Globes nominees are selected by a few dozen members of the press from international news outlets, and they have the taste you'd expect from a bunch of foreign journalists. They love celebrities (hence the love for Lily Collins and "Emily in Paris" and for Corden). They love British shows, and "The Crown" in particular. They like to be courted (who doesn't?), and Netflix excels here. The streaming service mounts the most aggressive awards campaigns of any company. -- Lucas Shaw The best of Screentime (and other stuff) | 
Post a Comment