Digital video recorders are a double-edged sword for the broadcast networks and a single-edged one for cable channels, according to a lengthy report from Sanford C. Bernstein Co. media analyst Michael Nathanson.
With DVR penetration near the 30% mark, Nathanson investigates who is using the technology and what it means for the entertainment industry. Though some of his findings are expected (the wealthiest are the biggest users of the technology), others are surprising (consumers record more broadcast shows than cable shows). Even more provocative is Nathanson's pitch that broadcasters and cable networks should push for a cut of the revenue cable and satellite operators get from selling cable boxes with DVR capabilities.
"The emergence of this technology over the past decade has quickly altered the economics of the television industry," Nathanson wrote. The bad news is that overall, live television viewership dropped 4% in the 2008-09 season. Nathanson doesn't attribute that drop entirely to DVRs, but it is probably a factor. More disturbing is that the big four broadcast networks had declines of 13% in live viewership.
The good news, Nathanson said, is that the gradual change in ratings to include DVR viewership is helping broadcast television more than cable. DVR viewership has boosted broadcast ratings by 17%, and the skipping of commercials even went down a little this year compared with last year, according to Nathanson. "Our analysis shows that consumers are overwhelmingly 'DVRing' broadcast content compared to cable network content," he said.
Content companies, Nathanson argued, should try to use the growing popularity of DVRs as leverage to squeeze money out of the cable and satellite companies that sell the service to consumers. "DVRs are being sold to watch content," Nathanson said in an interview.
That's true, but somehow we anticipate that distributors will respond that programmers asking them for a cut of the revenue they get from DVRs would be like auto manufacturers asking gas stations for a piece of the revenue they make from selling fuel.
-- Joe Flint
Will time be kind to the intriguing 'FlashForward'?
There are a number of reasons to regard “FlashForward†(7 p.m. Central Thursday, ABC; three stars; see more on that star rating below) with some trepidation.
Elements that generally work in the two-hour pilot’s favor â€" a big budget, a flashy central concept and a handsome ensemble cast â€" also work against it, because those are the hallmarks of several ABC pilots that have crashed and burned in their debut seasons.
Clearly, ABC wants a successor to “Lost,†and, hey, nobody’s arguing against that. But you start to wonder if that quest is like trying to clone a unicorn â€" a messy and expensive gambit that will only result in someone getting gored.
Yet I am certain I will keep watching “FlashForward,†despite some wobbles in its pilot. I had more reservations about last fall’s two-hour pilot for “Fringe,†and that show managed to right itself in the second half of its first season. Assuming “FlashForward†can tone down a tendency toward pomposity and create a mythology and characters worth following, it may well be a worthy addition to the roster of sci-fi tinged TV programs.
You may know the central gimmick to this show, and if you don’t, a video clip of the first 18 minutes of “FlashForward†will make it clear:
The gist is (and skip this sentence if you don't want to know the gist): Every human being simultaneously loses consciousness for a little more than two minutes. The visions that people experience during those two minutes make up a key building block of the show, and those dreams and clues cause both disquiet and joy for a wide array of interlinked characters
What’s rather odd about “FlashForward†is the way that the characters start treating that bizarre event matter-of-factly. Sure, there are disasters that result from the worldwide loss of consciousness, but unlike “Lost,†the planes that crash don’t have much of an impact on the story.
But, like “Lost,†“FlashForward†plays around with the notion of free will and whether we are slaves to fixed timelines. Television seems determined to explore the religious debates about predestination that have been going on for hundreds of years, but with less Calvinistic rigor and more explosions and Sonya Walger.
(It almost makes you long for the straight-up alien invasion of ABC's upcoming "V" remake, which arrives Nov. 3. At least there, you know what you're up against: Aliens. Math, physics and debates about determinism -- not so much.)
“FlashForward†did itself a favor by casting Walger, who plays Penny on “Lost.†Walger, as Olivia Benford, is an instantly sympathetic presence. (She’ll soon by joined by “Lost’s†Dominic Monaghan, who became part of the cast after the pilot.)
What “FlashFoward†lacks, at this point, is a Sawyer or a Hurley; don’t look to this serious pilot for wisecracks or regular-Joe wisdom. The show’s somewhat grim male lead is Olivia’s husband, Mark (Joseph Fiennes), an FBI agent who tries to figure out what the J.J. Abrams is going on (and surprisingly enough, Abrams is not involved in this project, which is based on a 1999 book by Robert J. Sawyer).
Other standouts in the pilot include John Cho as Mark's partner, Demetri Noh, and Brian O'Byrne as Aaron Stark, a power-company employee mourning the death of his daughter.
The real challenge for “FlashForward’s†creative team is to do what the writers of “Lost†did â€" make the characters interesting enough to follow, no matter how twisty the show’s mythology gets. That may be a struggle when broadcast networks seem to want flashy, promotable moments (whether or not they make any sense), rather than meaty character drama that takes time to build.
So the three-star rating above is conditional. I'll exercise my free will and give "FlashForward" the benefit of the doubt, hoping it doesn't repeat the histories of "The Nine," "Day Break" and "Invasion" -- once-promising shows that never quite lived up to their promise. (Trust me, my effusive review of the similarly high-concept pilot for "The Nine," which quickly went nowhere, haunts me to this day.)
But perhaps we'll be lucky, and, as it goes forward, "FlashForward" won't make you constantly think of the shows that it recalls, such as "Lost." Perhaps "FlashForward" will evolve into something unique. That would be the most surprising development of all.
Review: A seductive revival of 'South Pacific' in San Francisco
Mercury News theater critic Karen D'Souza calls 'South Pacific' a seductive revival of an American classic that will take your breath away.
For Juliette Binoche, September Is Multimedia Month
After baring her soul on dance stages, movie screens and gallery walls all over New York, the Oscar-winning actress can officially say that — artistically speaking — she's pretty much done it all.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar