this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2023
78 points (93.3% liked)
Movies and TV Shows
1 readers
2 users here now
General discussion about movies and TV shows.
Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.
Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain
[spoilers]in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.
Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:
::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::
Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!
Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [!thebear@lemmy.film](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)
Related communities: !entertainment@beehaw.org !moviesuggestions@lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Can't exactly blame Fincher for that outcome. Jonathan Groff said as much, Mindhunters is Fincher. The creator of the show is part of its DNA. Would you really want Fincher to hand it off to someone and potentially pull a Dexter or GOT S8?
It’s like Netflix has never heard of a “loss leader”. People don’t pay exorbitant subscription fees to watch the latest Project Runway knock off show.
I also find it difficult to believe it’s more expensive than the average TV drama, considering Fincher already has a development deal with the network.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but Fincher is very particular about his shots, and as such there is a metric shit-tonne of CGI in both seasons of mindhunter. There's a few videos on youtube that demonstrate it. Again, I don't think that would inherently make it way more expensive than the typical, but his vision comes with a price tag.
Netflix is notorious for spending a metric fuckton of money to the point that a great deal of their shows are "loss leaders" (and usually followed by prompt cancellation). The "Project Runway" comparison is irrelevant - although Netflix has plenty of trash reality shows, by no means that's all they do.
I don't have a good sense whether Mindhunters would be expensive or not, but my anecdotal experience says it's not a mainstream show. It's just not the hits like Stranger Things, Wednesday or perhaps the One Piece that Netflix needs to survive. 1899 is another victim of the Netflix gambles - an extremely stylish and intricate show that died a premature death, even though it launched to great reception.
I still blame Fincher for using season 2 to set up season 3 and then give us nothing. Given Netflix's track record and Fincher not being some noob, he should have made sure each season had no whole-story dangling threads. I would settle for a short story tying it up at this point, he could do that.
This should be standard practice when a show is cancelled prematurely: give it a movie to wrap it up. That at least gives your show the reputation of being finished so that others might actually want to watch it in the future.
It's a great thought, but if Netflix cancelled a show for "poor viewership performance", does it make sense to expect them to fund an entire movie instead?
I would literally settle for a magazine short story to tie things up.
I disagree - I prefer that Fincher do his job, tell the story the best way possible instead of trying to force everything into a single season or two for "closure".
I also think the only reason why you feel this way is BECAUSE Fincher took his time to make two fantastic seasons and a killer cliffhanger. Had he not done that, folks here would probably be complaining about how Mindhunters is a rushed, crammed, underachieving show and not of the quality that we come to expect of Fincher. It would be a completely different show and not the premise we are basing the discussion on.
I'm glad it's a quality show but it's not quality because of the season 2 subplot that ended up going nowhere and leaving viewers dissatisfied. That's my problem with it. He's in the business long enough and Netflix have this pattern long enough that he should know better than to do that.
It's his alone, so don't blame him.
What?
Verbatim quote from the article. What do you think it means?
And the budget was a curse placed on him by a witch?
The man can't be intrinsic to the show, and "part of its DNA," and also absolved of the concrete reasons it got the usual Netflix treatment of two seasons and stone dead.
What do you mean? The budget is what it takes to make the show. It costs what it costs and the outcome is the show you all love. It's David fucking Fincher and he is legendary, Netflix knows it going into the deal and of course it's gonna cost them, as it should.
Of course he can, for the exact reason you stated, it's the Netflix usual schtick and MO. I'm sure Fincher's scheduling, actor contracts etc are also a factor in the 3rd season not getting made, but I find it unreasonable to pin it all on Fincher.
Bottom line is, if Netflix wanted it made, they will find a way to get it made. The quote from Fincher suggested otherwise.
Responsibility doesn't mean 'only the good parts.' The man made a show that cost a lot, for a tightfisted company that hands out third seasons approximately never, and delivered an incomplete story in two seasons. Who else on the face of god's green earth is at fault for fans expecting a third season they definitely won't get?
?? I'm not following your train of thought.
So you are expecting David Fincher to make a smashing 3rd season for a vastly lower budget, automagically get everyone and their grandma to tune into the show, make Netflix a profitable company again, fix everyone's scheduling conflicts and close all negotiations, all the while fulfilling rest of his contract obligations to make other films like Mank + The Killers?
Anything else? Why not bring peace to the Middle East and eliminate COVID? /s
Everything you said suggests you have very little understanding of how any of this works and you're just airing grievances of how Fincher is "failing" your weird expectations.
I'm not expecting anything except consistency on your part. You, personally, here, now, said: can't blame him for the outcome.
Why.
How.
It was entirely under his control.
It was a tiredly predictable situation.
What other human being could possibly be to blame for this outcome, moreso than the guy who italicized-for-emphasis IS the show?
Instead of answering, you've chosen to make up a conversation you'd rather be having, with some imaginary idiot who says a bunch of things I sure didn't.
LOL wow. You are in a worse shape than I thought.
Listen, there are plenty of things in life that are NOT ENTIRELY under one person's control, ESPECIALLY a content deal like this. Read the quote again:
In case it wasn't clear, I'll spell it out for you: Netflix does not want to renew Mindhunters S3 because it costs too much and doesn't make them enough money. Netflix made a bet with S1, S2 but folded when it comes to S3. And you still want to pin this 100% on Fincher?
Is it now? I guess Netflix should snatch you up as a VP for Da Future since you've readily predicted the whole thing with your crystal ball. Or I propose a more likely scenario: a hindsight of 10/10 because you've completely misread the situation?
Uh... the powers that be at Netflix? Plenty of people there are involved in the decision. Take your pick.
Listen, just because you are unhappy with the outcome of the situation, doesn't change the reality that this is closer to a partnership situation than David Fincher calling all the shots. It's just not how things work. But continue to play it off like Fincher some how victimized you and owe you something, if you like.
You aren't listening, at all.
I've never seen this show. I'm probably never going to. Apparently I wouldn't be getting a complete story anyway, and for reasons yooou have outlined, that aspect is the director's fault. He had two seasons to tell a complete story. He did not. He did not, knowing full well Netflix doesn't like doing third seasons. He did not, knowing his show was unusually expensive and complicated. He did not, knowing the viewership wasn't about to skyrocket from the known figures for season one.
And for some reason you said he's not to blame for the incomplete story he told.
Are you suggesting he's an idiot? Because even idiots knew about Netflix's two-season limit. It did not sneak up on him. It was tiredly predictable. It was, and remains, the most likely outcome for any Netflix series lucky enough to get a second season. No crystal ball is required for this basic pattern recognition. Sneer all you like; it is common knowledge.
Cliffhanger endings at the best of times are a frustrating gamble against cancellation. Creators are as responsible for them as they are for every the rest of their story.
Okay, you've gotta be jerking me around. You can't actually be serious. And you haven't even seen the show, so I don't even know what you're on about.
I'll just leave you with this - Mindhunters had two FANTASTIC seasons and were setting up for bigger stories to tell. The scope of the two seasons are already huge and a season 3 is completely not out of the question, i.e. they are not milking it just for the sake of continuing the show. And remember, these guys were making this back in 2017 so I guess you are wiser than them for being in 2023 and knowing more about their future?
Sneering harder won't make Netflix's long-running habit any less predictable.
All I'm on about is what you've said. You refuse to say Fincher is responsible for the state of the show: incomplete and dead. Even though he'd be an idiot to expect a third season, knowing his budget and viewership numbers, and he is so thoroughly in charge of writing that he IS the show.
And now it sounds like you are trying to cope with the show being stone dead, by suggesting a third season is "not out of the question." To paraphrase an annoying comment I recently saw: are you expecting everyone and their grandma to come running, so he can fix everybody's schedule on a vastly lower budget?
Because I don't.