OTT & Transmedia

I saw "#Alive" a while back, Geoff Hall. It's scary, suspenseful, and fun!

I haven't seen Alive. You've yet to steer me wrong, Geoff Hall - may start it tonight.

Sam Sokolow I’ll be watching it when I return to Bristol, Sam. Let me know what you think, please.

Hi Geoff Hall - I can't speak for UK producers but I know that MGM+ is hearing pitches here in the US. A producer I know recently pitched them something.

I think more companies are gonna use pluses in their titles, Geoff Hall. I think the pluses help viewers identify streamers.

Thanks for sharing Geoff Hall - The consolidation is remarkable, curious to see where it all ends up. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for sharing, Amanda Toney. This is my first time hearing about "Our Living World." I love watching wildlife documentaries. I just added it to my Netflix list.

Maurice Vaughan I really enjoyed what I’ve seen so far, Maurice. I’ve not read the book either, and I’m not sure I’ll get around to it. Apparently, the first series will be based on the book, but the next two will be down to the screenwriters to develop the story.

I watched the first episode last night. While I was very intrigued by some of the things done, like the winking universe bit, I take major issue with the general premise that atheist scientists are akin to religious zealots in their behavior around their beliefs concerning science.

I can see a highly religious person committing suicide if they suddenly found out the god they served for most of their life didn't exist. I have a hard time believing the same thing would happen if a scientist suddenly found out that gravity doesn't exist. The point of science is to discover things. That includes that you were wrong about something. But this show makes it seems like all these high level scientists are no different than paganists learning that Zeus isn't real.

Terrence Sellers the theme of atheism is I think a dominant aspect for the writer of the book trilogy, Cixin Liu, in the context of Mao’s cultural revolution. He puts one set of beliefs against another. The ‘science’ of the revolution against those who believe something else. We know of course that Mao’s ‘scientific’ experiment failed, with millions murdered and an economy in tatters. And yes to pit such oppositional beliefs against one another is pretty primitive philosophy and denies any sense of Taoist perceptions of the State.

As for the suicide, we learn a little more later in the series. I think Liu’s philosophy goes against any mystical notions of the self; that came across in the first couple of episodes; everything that is must be verified by empirical data, for which the domain of the scientist. It’s pretty basic stuff and not very well developed and relies on dualistic notions of ontology and epistemology.

Geoff Hall I've now watched 7 episodes. I guess it can be argued that they skate around the suicide issue by saying the aliens were pushing people in certain directions. Overall, I think it's an OK show, but I wouldn't call it a great one.

Geoff Hall I agree with you about the "too slow" issue. I think some of it may be attributed to newer Scifi viewers or Scifi fans that are not fantasy fans. The fantasy genre almost always takes its time; the stories unwind. I think some of the best Scifi is also that way, it isn't all just ACTION.

To me, it's their 2.7 billion monthly active users. They dominate and are now offering YouTube TV and the NFL Sunday Ticket package. I imagine everything you can think of will eventually be available to YT users in real time.

Hey everyone. Just a quick chime-in here. I believe YouTube is actively preparing for a jump into active commercial streaming. A lot of backend stuff over the past weeks (using sneaky sneaky IT skills) has shown me that they are doing the same kind of stream polling that the big streamers do. YouTube never did that because it never mattered. Only a commercial delivery streamer like Netflix, Disney +, etc... needs that information to help them determine how to offer streaming, technology demographics (Internet type/speed/availability/limits) is vastly important to them. Anyone remember what a dud Netflix streaming was on Day One, and the following year? Hard lesson learned; people were getting DVDs because there was no cable/internet suitable in their usually rural area. Hedging bets on streaming and not taking into account the garbage Internet out there (including mine) outside of the main metropolis greatly reduced their anticipated audience. Anyway, YouTube has a massive audience. If they can be a cost-effective alternative to other streamers it's pretty much money in the bank as long as they do it intelligently. For better or worse.

James Hoey thanks James. Would YT be Producers of content or would they go down the licensing of material way? Although, come to think of it, Netflix increased their own material production, because when the market opens up, it gives them the possibility of further income, when they license their material to other streamers.

Geoff Hall I think YouTube will absolutely step into producing their own content, albeit not nearly as heavily as Netflix and others. They have a massive host of content creators that are already bringing in the viewers, no need to try to overshadow their strength. I would bet they will start to create short form content and expand from there. Married to that I would guess they will license content to thicken their deck in order to deal themselves some big-winning hands. If it were me, easiest thing to do would be license movies and other content, then start producing short-form content doing behind the scenes, recaps, etc..., of the stuff they are featuring. Ties their programming to feature streaming and announces "we're here making stuff too!"

James Hoey thanks James. I best start writing some more short-form content, then!

L. Tom Deaver let’s see what happens! Except this was posted on March 25th!

Sam Sokolow that sound like a great strategy Sam. I suppose then you could produce the first phase with development funding and then if you start the second phase or later when the income-stream starts, then initial investor is paid back with a bonus? Maybe!?

It is a great idea but it is not a new idea. I had it for my production company, Dragonslayer Entertainment, back in 2020 during the pandemic. However, you need more than good ideas to make ideas happen often times and Emmerich has a way of securing funding that I currently lack. That said, it was not just me with the idea but also 'The Witcher' had novels building the world concurrently with the games and look at Mechwarrior which did the same thing, and there was even another science fiction game and world that launched with books, game, and television series simultaneously. So it has been done but I laugh that Emmerich is the one to do it. We need a real artist and world builder to do it to be successful with the idea.

Give the money to a Nolan or a Villaneuve or from the video game world - a Todd Howard - and then you would be cooking with Crisco making a transmedia event that'd blow away even Star Wars.

Geoff, you could even do what the masters of transmedia do, Disney, with theme park rides, toys, and more. It is an old idea but video games are the only 'newish' part of it. But video games are big, big, bigger than film now and there are a lot of out of work video game developers right now to make the dream a reality.

Yes, Ashley Renee Smith! I hope they make a "Duke Nukem" movie! I grew up playing the game, and I had a toy. I'm looking forward to the "Borderlands" movie too.

I'm just glad to see Embracer Group releasing their hold on so many companies in the gaming industry. I wish Microsoft would stop buying up studios as well.

I know what you mean, Terrence Sellers! It seems like Microsoft is just devouring the landscape lately.

I have always been a believer of “If you build it, they will come.” Gaming is all over the place. Players have such diverse tastes that virtually any kind of game can find a fan base and success. Myself, I know nothing about Unknown 9. Would it benefit from a story?

Some games just don’t need them, and their fans don’t want them. A story-less game is often built that way for a reason. Any change to that formula could knock the game out of favor. But, then again, some games benefit from having a story added, or fans cry out “this one part is awesome, how about some story detail!”

When it comes to game story, if it serves then dive in. Just don’t overdo it. Too much can be as tedious as not enough. Overall, I always keep my fingers crossed for the folks who make up the stories that the fans will dive in and love it.

The Unknown 9 transmedia universe sounds exciting, Geoff Hall. There's a part in the article that says ""People will find their way through the universe via the game, and the book is [the only other thing] you need to pay for. So they can get into the lore, the narrative, the plot, and the podcast depending on their appetite and so on." I think that's gonna get a lot of people to sign up.

Maurice Vaughan yes, Maurice, that's a great strategy and one I'll learn from!

It's a fascinating idea. A friend of mine whose written films and video games talks about the close-ended nature of a film that takes you where it wants to and the open-ended nature of video games where you are creating your own narrative within the world. Marrying these ideas in any way to generate engagement in a piece of IP is a dream for a lot of companies. Will be following this.

Sam Sokolow thanks Sam. It must take an incredible investment to fulfil that project plan!