If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Digital Spy)   "Netflix reveals its top 20 most binged first shows"   ( digitalspy.com) divider line
    More: Cool, Twitter, Stranger Things, Crown et al, digitalspy Twitter account, up-to-the-minute entertainment news, Digital Spy Facebook, Day... virginity... love, research firm Nielsen  
•       •       •

8045 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 08 Feb 2018 at 4:20 AM (23 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



113 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-02-07 10:29:13 PM  
I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.
 
2018-02-07 10:54:09 PM  
What are 20 shows I haven't watched
 
2018-02-07 10:54:38 PM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


Narcos is excellent. It's based on Pablo Escobar's drug cartel. (At least the first 2 seasons)

Also, I'm admittedly surprised that there isn't a single Marvel property on there.
 
2018-02-07 11:21:01 PM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


I may bleed out from the sharp edge of your comment.
 
2018-02-08 02:29:15 AM  
I can see why Breaking Bad got #1. The writing is just so awesome. The spinoff Better Call Saulis just as good.

The first season of Narcos was great too.
 
2018-02-08 02:37:19 AM  
"binged"?

Is "searched" no longer the appropriate term in England?
 
2018-02-08 02:47:09 AM  
season one of the burning yule log left me hanging at the end of episode 3. will someone put more wood on the fire, or will it burn out in season 2? will santa make a visit? will there even be a season2?
 
2018-02-08 02:58:20 AM  
Just saw Spectral. Surprisingly decent for a sci-fi war movie.
 
2018-02-08 03:11:50 AM  
Netflix terms "binge-watching" as getting through at least one season of a show within seven days of starting it

I don't think I've ever done that. Though I took their advice and checked out my viewing history. Looks like the first thing I ever watched was Daredevil season one. And I did manage to get through 5 episodes in 3 days before I switched over to Person of Interest.
 
2018-02-08 04:31:14 AM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-08 04:47:57 AM  

cretinbob: Breaking Bad sucked.


name checks out.
 
2018-02-08 05:03:33 AM  
...in the UK. Interesting that The Inbetweeners was pretty high on the list. Absolutely fantastic show. Reminded me of my (mostly male and awkward) friends group in high school.
 
2018-02-08 05:06:56 AM  
Without RTFA I assume at least 17 of them no longer available on Netflix. I feel that the disappointing lack of 3rd party content is a real threat for the company going forward - eventually it's going to hit a tipping point where people are going to revolt about having to pay the same amount for Netflix-only content as they used to for an entire content library. Amazon streaming, Roku, and the like are in an all-out war about who is getting exclusive rights to each show or movie, and as far as I can tell Amazon is winning the battle.
 
2018-02-08 05:20:04 AM  

Shaggy_C: Without RTFA I assume at least 17 of them no longer available on Netflix. I feel that the disappointing lack of 3rd party content is a real threat for the company going forward - eventually it's going to hit a tipping point where people are going to revolt about having to pay the same amount for Netflix-only content as they used to for an entire content library. Amazon streaming, Roku, and the like are in an all-out war about who is getting exclusive rights to each show or movie, and as far as I can tell Amazon is winning the battle.


Netflix is playing the long game. The more content you create the less content you have to rent. They might be house-poor for a bit but I think they'll be ok.

/maybe the real future money isn't in the hosting but the creating?
 
2018-02-08 05:20:37 AM  

Shaggy_C: Without RTFA I assume at least 17 of them no longer available on Netflix. I feel that the disappointing lack of 3rd party content is a real threat for the company going forward - eventually it's going to hit a tipping point where people are going to revolt about having to pay the same amount for Netflix-only content as they used to for an entire content library. Amazon streaming, Roku, and the like are in an all-out war about who is getting exclusive rights to each show or movie, and as far as I can tell Amazon is winning the battle.


You'd be would wrong.
 
2018-02-08 05:21:06 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: "binged"?

Is "searched" no longer the appropriate term in England?


Binged - as in "to binge" like in binge-watched.

Not Binged as in "to Bing" lol.
 
2018-02-08 05:33:22 AM  

Giant Clown Shoe: Netflix is playing the long game. The more content you create the less content you have to rent. They might be house-poor for a bit but I think they'll be ok.


This is true, but again they're somewhat limiting themselves versus a traditional production company. If 20th Century Fox creates a smash hit movie, they will sell more tickets at the box office, see higher DVD sales, and ultimately get money from all of the streaming sources that pay to play it. It becomes a huge, long-term money maker in the form of royalties.

If Netflix makes a smash-hit show, they get the same money as they would if they hadn't done it. I'm sure there are some incremental subscribers for certain shows, but it's not going to be the huge boon to the company's finances.

Of course, on the opposite end of the spectrum, if 20th Century Fox makes a complete flop of a movie, they lose tons of money. Netflix makes a flop, and they still get their subscriber fees. So it's much more 'low risk, low reward' in terms of the production model.

Long term, I get the feeling that eventually the cost-benefit ratio is going to move the company to go to a place where they spend only as much money as they need to on new content to keep subscriber growth at a certain level and not a penny more. Shows will get more bland and budgets will be reserved for the 'proven winners' so we will see more sequels and prequels rather than experimental film, much like how the big studios just churn out inane superhero movies.

Again, this is long term; they're a ways away from doing that today, but I think the lack of 3rd party content is worrisome. Why would people want to pay a full year of monthly fees for 3-4 shows that they binge over the course of 20 days throughout the year? You will eventually have to cut prices or move to a pay per view model. I certainly wouldn't short the stock, but I'm not buying at these prices, that's for sure.
 
2018-02-08 05:38:49 AM  

Space Station Wagon: You'd be would wrong.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-08 05:39:56 AM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.


You should check out The Big Bang Theory.  It's high-brow comedy for connoisseurs like you.
 
2018-02-08 05:48:54 AM  

Shaggy_C: Giant Clown Shoe: Netflix is playing the long game. The more content you create the less content you have to rent. They might be house-poor for a bit but I think they'll be ok.

This is true, but again they're somewhat limiting themselves versus a traditional production company. If 20th Century Fox creates a smash hit movie, they will sell more tickets at the box office, see higher DVD sales, and ultimately get money from all of the streaming sources that pay to play it. It becomes a huge, long-term money maker in the form of royalties.

If Netflix makes a smash-hit show, they get the same money as they would if they hadn't done it. I'm sure there are some incremental subscribers for certain shows, but it's not going to be the huge boon to the company's finances.

Of course, on the opposite end of the spectrum, if 20th Century Fox makes a complete flop of a movie, they lose tons of money. Netflix makes a flop, and they still get their subscriber fees. So it's much more 'low risk, low reward' in terms of the production model.

Long term, I get the feeling that eventually the cost-benefit ratio is going to move the company to go to a place where they spend only as much money as they need to on new content to keep subscriber growth at a certain level and not a penny more. Shows will get more bland and budgets will be reserved for the 'proven winners' so we will see more sequels and prequels rather than experimental film, much like how the big studios just churn out inane superhero movies.

Again, this is long term; they're a ways away from doing that today, but I think the lack of 3rd party content is worrisome. Why would people want to pay a full year of monthly fees for 3-4 shows that they binge over the course of 20 days throughout the year? You will eventually have to cut prices or move to a pay per view model. I certainly wouldn't short the stock, but I'm not buying at these prices, that's for sure.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-08 05:50:41 AM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


Now you've done it. Don't you know you aren't allowed to say that you don't like something that is popular. Now you're going to be called "edgy" and insulted repeatedly for daring to have your own opinion and not following the crowd... just like I'm going to be for posting this. Drat.
 
2018-02-08 05:53:54 AM  

Hand Banana: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Now you've done it. Don't you know you aren't allowed to say that you don't like something that is popular. Now you're going to be called "edgy" and insulted repeatedly for daring to have your own opinion and not following the crowd... just like I'm going to be for posting this. Drat.


img.fark.netView Full Size


welcome to fark
 
2018-02-08 05:54:24 AM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


That's ok, I thought the big Lebowski sucked

/now I've done it
//but seriously, it did
 
2018-02-08 05:54:35 AM  

BafflerMeal: [img.fark.net image 500x207]


You annoy me. Thankfully, I can rectify that rather easily. favorited!!
 
2018-02-08 06:06:34 AM  

Shaggy_C: BafflerMeal: [img.fark.net image 500x207]

You annoy me. Thankfully, I can rectify that rather easily. favorited!!


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-08 06:07:11 AM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


I tried Breaking Bad too, and while I could appreciate its quality and could see the appeal to others, I didn't enjoy it myself. The best thing about BB for me was the scenery.
 
2018-02-08 06:12:24 AM  

Leandros A: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

I tried Breaking Bad too, and while I could appreciate its quality and could see the appeal to others, I didn't enjoy it myself. The best thing about BB for me was the scenery.


I just don't enjoy the story. It's not my thing. 


On a related note, why are there so many shows on Netflix about drug dealers? What's the appeal? I am genuinely asking, as I don't understand. Is it that they are "anti-heroes"? Is it like a sort of "modern western" deal?
 
2018-02-08 06:13:04 AM  

HedlessChickn: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Narcos is excellent. It's based on Pablo Escobar's drug cartel. (At least the first 2 seasons)

Also, I'm admittedly surprised that there isn't a single Marvel property on there.


I wanted to love Narcos.  I would have if I spoke fluent Spanish.  I found myself trying to translate what they were saying without reading subtitles, then I'd get lost.
 
2018-02-08 06:19:31 AM  

ModernLuddite: Leandros A: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

I tried Breaking Bad too, and while I could appreciate its quality and could see the appeal to others, I didn't enjoy it myself. The best thing about BB for me was the scenery.

I just don't enjoy the story. It's not my thing. 


On a related note, why are there so many shows on Netflix about drug dealers? What's the appeal? I am genuinely asking, as I don't understand. Is it that they are "anti-heroes"? Is it like a sort of "modern western" deal?


Yes to both, I think. Terrorists, drug dealers, and inmates are an awfully big chunk of the line up. I think we're in a cultural moment right now where "complexity" is defined as "humanise the bad guy enough to make the audience uncomfortable for liking him, then keep going until the discomfort goes away, and then you're done."
 
2018-02-08 06:21:52 AM  
Nice! The inbetweeners made the list.  Great show.
 
2018-02-08 07:04:04 AM  

Hand Banana: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Now you've done it. Don't you know you aren't allowed to say that you don't like something that is popular. Now you're going to be called "edgy" and insulted repeatedly for daring to have your own opinion and not following the crowd... just like I'm going to be for posting this. Drat.


Yup, disliking popular movies and shows isn't allowed on Fark.  I get that treatment all the time when I voice my honest opinion about the Disney reboot of Star Wars and preference for the pre-reboot canon.

They call you "edgy" or a troll, or insult your intelligence.  This place really can be a groupthink hive mind at times, especially with regards to popular entertainment.
 
2018-02-08 07:32:53 AM  

Silverstaff: Hand Banana: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Now you've done it. Don't you know you aren't allowed to say that you don't like something that is popular. Now you're going to be called "edgy" and insulted repeatedly for daring to have your own opinion and not following the crowd... just like I'm going to be for posting this. Drat.

Yup, disliking popular movies and shows isn't allowed on Fark.  I get that treatment all the time when I voice my honest opinion about the Disney reboot of Star Wars and preference for the pre-reboot canon.

They call you "edgy" or a troll, or insult your intelligence.  This place really can be a groupthink hive mind at times, especially with regards to popular entertainment.


not liking something because of your personal taste is quite passe .. but to say 'it sucked' about BB is demonstrably false, and a sign of some kind of personal defect
 
2018-02-08 07:40:28 AM  

doosh: I can see why Breaking Bad got #1. The writing is just so awesome. The spinoff Better Call Saulis just as good.

The first season of Narcos was great too.


Better Call Saul was actually good IMHO (Breaking Bad was just slow and boring).

Wtf. do people watch Orange is the New Black?
 
2018-02-08 07:49:23 AM  
I watched the absolute shiat out of Sunny when they had it.
 
2018-02-08 07:51:20 AM  

Ketchuponsteak: Wtf. do people watch Orange is the New Black?


scared to have "lesbian prison sex videos for women by women" pop up in their browser history?
 
2018-02-08 07:55:43 AM  

Silverstaff: Hand Banana: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Now you've done it. Don't you know you aren't allowed to say that you don't like something that is popular. Now you're going to be called "edgy" and insulted repeatedly for daring to have your own opinion and not following the crowd... just like I'm going to be for posting this. Drat.

Yup, disliking popular movies and shows isn't allowed on Fark.  I get that treatment all the time when I voice my honest opinion about the Disney reboot of Star Wars and preference for the pre-reboot canon.

They call you "edgy" or a troll, or insult your intelligence.  This place really can be a groupthink hive mind at times, especially with regards to popular entertainment.


You love Jar Jar WE GET IT!
 
2018-02-08 08:08:33 AM  
Stranger Things is great. I am disappointed that Netflix didn't return the message sent by a group looking to make a freeware game based on it for the Commodore 64 in the style of Maniac Mansion and Zak McCracken. It would have been lovely both as a game and a tribute to it's '80s setting to have a game on actual '80s hardware.

Stranger Things for Commodore 64 (Prototype)
Youtube VoFBX3ELzbU
 
2018-02-08 08:09:35 AM  
Ive binged only one thing on that list and it was Sons of Anarchy.  OTOH I wore out BSG, all the Trek series, Clone Wars, Futurama and Archer.  They used to have some good anime series on there also.  Add to that some of the documentary series and I guess my tastes arent in line with the general subscriber.

/Looks like BSG was my first binge series 6 years ago and I knocked it out in 2 weeks. I didnt know you could see your all time viewing history.  Thanks article.
/since Archer is great, I tried Pacific Heat and thought it sucked.
//currently watching The Man in the High Castle on Amazon and 7 eps in, Im not sure what my opinion of it is.
 
2018-02-08 08:10:27 AM  

Shaggy_C: Giant Clown Shoe: Netflix is playing the long game. The more content you create the less content you have to rent. They might be house-poor for a bit but I think they'll be ok.

This is true, but again they're somewhat limiting themselves versus a traditional production company. If 20th Century Fox creates a smash hit movie, they will sell more tickets at the box office, see higher DVD sales, and ultimately get money from all of the streaming sources that pay to play it. It becomes a huge, long-term money maker in the form of royalties.

If Netflix makes a smash-hit show, they get the same money as they would if they hadn't done it. I'm sure there are some incremental subscribers for certain shows, but it's not going to be the huge boon to the company's finances.

Of course, on the opposite end of the spectrum, if 20th Century Fox makes a complete flop of a movie, they lose tons of money. Netflix makes a flop, and they still get their subscriber fees. So it's much more 'low risk, low reward' in terms of the production model.

Long term, I get the feeling that eventually the cost-benefit ratio is going to move the company to go to a place where they spend only as much money as they need to on new content to keep subscriber growth at a certain level and not a penny more. Shows will get more bland and budgets will be reserved for the 'proven winners' so we will see more sequels and prequels rather than experimental film, much like how the big studios just churn out inane superhero movies.

Again, this is long term; they're a ways away from doing that today, but I think the lack of 3rd party content is worrisome. Why would people want to pay a full year of monthly fees for 3-4 shows that they binge over the course of 20 days throughout the year? You will eventually have to cut prices or move to a pay per view model. I certainly wouldn't short the stock, but I'm not buying at these prices, that's for sure.


So much wrong in your post.  I will address the two biggies.
NetFlix Losing Cotnent
1. Syndication rights.  Netflix knows who is watching what and when.
    They pay a certain amount for shows and they know when eyes are on them and are not.  So they can choose to not reup if no one is really watching it.

2. Whoever owns the rights will go for where the money is.  And sometimes a content provider/network will pay for exclusivity on syndicated shows.

3. Content provider has their own service.

Mostly 1-2 and a small percentage of 3.  And all of the networks have to deal with 1,2,3 as well.  Your local Fox affiliate is not going to run Seinfeld forever and neither is Netflix.

If Netflix makes a smash-hit show, they get the same money as they would if they hadn't done it. I'm sure there are some incremental subscribers for certain shows, but it's not going to be the huge boon to the company's finances.

Actually Netflix partners with film studios and local production companies around the world to produce content together.  They both foot the bill and share the profits, from wait for it, syndication rights.

So Netflix will partner with Sony Pictures for a Latin American series.  Sony and Netflix will not provide it as local content in Latin American countries(as traditional television watching is still like it was in the 50s-1990s) so they then license the content to local networks.  So Netflix pays half of what they would pay to produce it themselves, and then they split the money made from the syndication rights with Sony.

They are doing this all over the world.
 
2018-02-08 08:15:53 AM  
So shorter viewing seasons allow you to binge a season within a week? Interdasting.
 
2018-02-08 08:16:15 AM  
I'm really surprised Archer isn't on this list.  And I'm really surprised Peaky Blinders is.

Otherwise, not too many shockers on this list.
 
2018-02-08 08:22:19 AM  

Great_Milenko: I'm really surprised Archer isn't on this list.  And I'm really surprised Peaky Blinders is.

Otherwise, not too many shockers on this list.


Haven't been able to get past the Peaky Blinders name, I find it annoying.
 
2018-02-08 08:23:58 AM  

cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.


It's ok, there's no shame in having terrible taste.
 
2018-02-08 08:24:15 AM  

Bslim: Great_Milenko: I'm really surprised Archer isn't on this list.  And I'm really surprised Peaky Blinders is.

Otherwise, not too many shockers on this list.

Haven't been able to get past the Peaky Blinders name, I find it annoying.


In the context of both the historical events and the show itself it makes sense.

It does sound daft as hell however when said out loud.
 
2018-02-08 08:27:04 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: "binged"?

Is "searched" no longer the appropriate term in England?


Would you be surprised if that was an autocorrect for 'googled' in the next version of MS Word?
 
2018-02-08 08:33:42 AM  

HedlessChickn: I'm admittedly surprised that there isn't a single Marvel property on there.


that was my reaction
 
2018-02-08 08:34:14 AM  

HideAndGoFarkYourself: HedlessChickn: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Narcos is excellent. It's based on Pablo Escobar's drug cartel. (At least the first 2 seasons)

Also, I'm admittedly surprised that there isn't a single Marvel property on there.

I wanted to love Narcos.  I would have if I spoke fluent Spanish.  I found myself trying to translate what they were saying without reading subtitles, then I'd get lost.


Then go on YouTube for Spanish lessons from the Narcos Cast.  It will help you out a bunch.
 
2018-02-08 08:37:31 AM  

theflatline: So much wrong in your post.  I will address the two biggies.
NetFlix Losing Cotnent
1. Syndication rights.  Netflix knows who is watching what and when.
    They pay a certain amount for shows and they know when eyes are on them and are not.  So they can choose to not reup if no one is really watching it.


You're making this sound like it is Netfilx's choice. It is not. Disney and Fox are merging, and the likely result is that they will be pulling all of their Fox content from Netflix (like they did Disney previously) because they want to have more control over the direct to consumer channel. This is a major risk for Netflix, because now your subscription dollars are going to have be allocated across two different platforms to get what you used to get all in one place. I don't see how you can possibly ignore increased competition as irrelevant when looking at the company's future potential.
 
2018-02-08 08:44:00 AM  

HedlessChickn: cretinbob: I tried Breaking Bad, really I did, but it sucked.

There I said it.

Breaking Bad sucked.

The rest of that list looks like nothing I'd be interested in either.

Narcos is excellent. It's based on Pablo Escobar's drug cartel. (At least the first 2 seasons)

Also, I'm admittedly surprised that there isn't a single Marvel property on there.


The last season of Narcos is excellent.

I  am a big movie/media buff and I can suspend disbelief when watching a series of cinema, but narcos first two seasons not so much.

The reason is I have lived on and off in Colombia since 1988 and Narcos took way too many liberties in the first season.

1.Pablo was pear shaped and 5'4 in lift shoes, and shaped like a pear.  Not a towering Brasilian.
2.No one in the first season was even Colombian except for maybe guys.  They were all Mexican.
3.Medellin has a very distinct accent(Paisa) no one had it.
4.Luis Guzman, his Spanish was incredibly by NYC Rican standards, which is horrific to begin with.

They did get the clothes, cars, and locations correctly, because it was actually filmed in Colombia.

Pablo's wife in real life was a hag.
 
2018-02-08 08:51:55 AM  
with the exception of Stranger Things, and maybe Homeland, that list is a whole lotta meh.
 
Displayed 50 of 113 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report