Netflix

Netflix recently announced that Friends was being removed from their streaming service, starting on January 1, 2019. There was a public outcry and that decision was promptly reversed and the 90’s sitcom will now stay on Netflix throughout 2019, thus once again confirming Hollywood’s sneaking suspicion that all they really need to do to make money is pull something off the shelf from twenty years ago, put it in a shiny new package, and sell it to us again. Yet as Marvel and their Defenders learned, there is perhaps only one force in the entertainment industry that can stop even this impulse, and its spelled M-I-C-K-E-Y… Why, because money.

Disney+ Alias No More Marvel
It was also announced last week that Daredevil was to be canceled by Netflix, despite being ranked as the 4th Highest In Demand Series on the streaming service. With Matt Murdock going to the trash heap along with Iron Fist and Luke Cage, the rest of the Marvel lineup is sure to be next. Jessica Jones and the Punisher both have seasons that are currently being filmed or are in post-production, and it is unlikely that the streaming giant will cancel those properties with seasons so near completion, but do not hold your breath for a Jessica Jones season 4 or a Punisher season 3. The writing on the wall has become clear, Netflix is stopping production on all new Marvel content.

Now that is not to say that these five super-powered friends will be leaving your subscription in 2019. No, Netflix still owns the streaming rights, so all 13 season -8,500+ minutes of gritty-street-level-superhero goodness- will still remain on the platform. There just won’t be any new content added. So, the real question that seems to be on everyone’s mind is why? Why would Netflix and Disney choose to end their lucrative deal together? Why would Netflix who owns the shows, but not the heroes themselves, choose to stop making more wonderful Marvel content? The short answer is Disney+… which is a terrible name.

Disney+ will be Disney’s new exclusive online streaming platform, because the House of Mouse will not be content till they dominant all forms of media, entertainment, culture, and several small developing countries. It will debut sometime in late 2019 -which is coincidentally right after the last Marvel season will air on Netflix- and it is going to be a juggernaut. This is not going to be like CBS All Access or some other crappy streaming service created by some low-rate network that got it in their head that people wanted to pay an additional 75 dollars a year so they could have unlimited access to The Big Bang Theory and whatever NCIS they think up next, NCIS: Topeka? No, Disney is pulling all Marvel, Star Wars, Muppet, Pixar, and other properties that they own off the streaming platforms of their new competitors. You do not realize how much content and intellectual property that Disney owns until you start to see all of them disappearing from the streaming services that you are already paying a few hundred-dollars-a-year to watch… or are just using your upstairs neighbor’s password for… Thanks Charlie.

“But wait,” we hear you saying, “didn’t you just say that Netflix owns the Marvel shows, even if it does not own the characters?”

You are paraphrasing, but yes.

Heroes for Hire: Out of Business
Netflix does own the rights to the Defender properties, which means that they can choose to keep making more seasons if they desire, but they are desiring not to do so. Some people, are pointing to the reduced viewership of the Marvel properties on the streaming service as reasons to why they were cancelled, but that cannot be confirmed. Netflix is notoriously stingy with releasing its viewership data, but we all know the seasons that most people are talking about. With that said it is no surprise that Iron Fist was the first to be canceled, even though it had a decent second season. Similarly, Daredevil struggled in its second season, but just produced a critically acclaimed -and very enjoyable- third season. Now, the lowering viewership may have been a factor, but it probably wasn’t the main contributing factor.

After all, the rating could not have been that bad. These shows were more solid than terrible, and superhero properties are still selling out movie theaters and taking over the small screen to an almost chokingly massive degree. Marvel is a brand that sells and Netflix could have ridden the train for at least a few more years, but what would be the benefit to Netflix? We do know a few things about the viewers of Marvel/Defender properties, of which we count ourselves among. First of all, those people that watch shows like Jessica Jones and Luke Cage are more likely to watch other Netflix original shows. Secondly, the Marvel shows were no longer bringing in new subscribers to Netflix. Now, that may not have been true when the first season of Daredevil aired in 2015, but the shows seem to be making no noticeable impact on subscribers or revenue. That means that they are not offering any positive financial benefit, and because the vast majority of the show’s watchers are already engaging with other Netflix shows regularly, it also means that cancelling them will have no negative financial impact.

In short people are not going to stop watching Netflix because there is no Iron Fist season 3. Lastly, as Disney goes ahead with its plan for global domination Netflix is going to lose all its Marvel and Star Wars movies, and Disney+ will be launching a plethora of Marvel and Disney live-action and animated shows. The Netflix Defenders are heavily Marvel branded and tied-in to the MCU, which means that continuing their production is only going to serve to give Disney -their now competitor- more free advertising and remind viewers that they could just cancel Netflix and subscribe to Disney. In a way, it is an incredibly smart financial move on the part of Netflix. They risk nothing, but by doing it they cut off a source of free advertising for their newest and biggest competitor… but there is a catch.

The Punishing Reality
All the speculation that people have had over seeing a Heroes for Hire or any new Defender properties made on Disney+ is a fantasy. The Netflix shows are too gritty to fit into Disney’s sterilized kid-friendly world. Marvel has been less and less enthusiastic about the links between the gritty shows and the colorful witty movies, even going so far as to say “no”to any cameos from Daredevil and friends in Infinity War. So leaving the Defenders and their sex-scenes and bloody-violence to wither and die in the back queue of Netflix also serves the purpose of Marvel and their overlords in the Empire of Mouse. basically, it will benefit both companies to try and forget that these shows ever happened, so if we do see them again it will probably only be in cartoon form, where they can be contained and utilized in a more child-friendly way.

However, do not give up hope of ever seeing superheroes on Netflix again. Netflix has entered into an agreement with Mark Millar to start making properties of his Millarverse with adaptions of Jupiter’s Legacy, American Jesus, Empress, Huck, and Sharkey the Bounty Hunter possibly on the table for a new connected universe. So, the dominance of superheroes in our media remains strong, even if the Defenders will fall by its wayside.

Firefly

At the end of last year Disney purchased Fox Studios for $52.4 billion. That means Disney now has access to movies such as Avatar, franchises such as the Simpsons, and of course the X-Men and Fantastic Four. However, some more dedicated fans have also pointed out that this new mega-mouse-monopoly-merger means that Disney now has rights and ownership of the Internet’s darling show, Firefly. This, of course, has led to a myriad of speculation, reddit threads, and wishful thinking that often leads to some version of the question, “What if Disney revived the franchise?” Well, we here at The NYRD can understand why you may think that is a good thing, but we are also here to say, “no it is now.” Firefly is dead and -we’re sorry- but it should stay that way.

A Blip in the Verse
Now, understand one thing. We are giant Firefly fans. We even enjoyed Serenity. However, that is why we must now decline any revival of the show, especially one helmed by Darth Mickey Mouse. However, what we disagree with is this need to touch and re-touch everything we have done in the past. Just because we can do something, does not mean that we should, especially when big corporations get involved. Not everything we love needs a revival, or a reboot, or a sequel, or a prequel, or a spinoff. Disney is a mega-corporation interested in only one thing, making money. If they were to revive Firefly they would do it in the most commercially exploitative way possible. They would, dumb it down, water it down, and up sell the hype. It is doubtful Joss Whedon will come back. He has been in some hot water lately, and Disney may not want to touch him.

Besides, there was something very special about the fourteen episodes of the show we got. Each was a small bit of heaven bequeathed to us by the kinder gods of imagination. They were perfect in their own way, and that is exactly why we need to give up this unending piece-meal crusade to bring them back. Sometimes, the rarity of something increases the value of it in our hearts. Only having fourteen Firefly episodes means that we know them, and love them all. They are a small collection, but highly cherished. Why do we need to ruin what we have? To expand that collection would be to invite the bad as well as the good.

And, let’s face it. More Firefly episodes almost assuredly means poor quality episodes. Do not forget that the show originally aired in 2002, sixteen years ago. The cast -though spry and amazing people- have all aged. The concepts have become warm and rosy nostalgia in the minds of fans. Sixteen years of speculation, fan-fiction, and endless discussions have taken place. Nothing that gets produced today will ever match up with the hype and expectation that has been built up over this past decade and a half. Anything that Disney or Whedon produces now will only fall short of what we expect, or what we want, or what we have irrationally hoped to receive. This is Phantom Menace Syndrome in overdrive, and it would surely mean, even worse fate than cancellation for Firefly -a slow commercialized mediocre death- and a tainting of the rosy-remembered episodes we already have to cherish. If you need any proof that that is exactly what will happen, you only need to gaze a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.

Not the Last Jedi
Disney has already taken a beloved space franchise and exploited it for all it was worth. They ignored the advice of its creator, ignored the franchise’s former die-hard fans, had no proper plans to make quality movies, and instead treated it like a license to print money and exploit fans and children alike. Obviously, we are talking about Star Wars and we are not saying that all of the new stuff is bad, but let’s face it… it’s not great either. Disney will release one Star Wars movie every year until the universe suffers from heat death. That means, those three amazing, awesome, unforgettable movies that got made between 1977 and 1983, are now only three movies amidst an ever expanding library of sub-par movies and kid shows. They are no longer special. Instead they were merely a good pilot to a never ending feature-length annual TV show.

Your children and your children’s children will probably not even remember them. Instead, they will grow up liking Episode IXX, The Real Last Jedi, We Swear, or they will have more fond memories of The Young Yoda Adventures. The original trilogy will just become some dusty old movies that their grandparents enjoy. -C’mon, those graphics are lame. There isn’t even any CGI in them- Now, maybe that is not inherently bad in-itself, but it is a little sad. The original Star Wars trilogy united people across generations. Now it is all about the original trilogy versus JJ Abrams, versus whatever-the-hell Clone Wars is. Even some of the Clone Wars cartoons are confusingly considered canon and non-canon. Meanwhile Disney sells toys and merchandise and games and everything. Then, when it all stops being profitable they can just start again. Reboot it or reuse it, or just plain tear it down. Disney’s revival of Star Wars means that it is completely at the mercy of Disney’s bottom line, and that is terrifying.

Whatever your thoughts of The Last Jedi, or The Force Awakens, or even Rogue One, you know that there is something off about them, a plot mistake that you force yourself to overlook; an uncomfortable presentation of your favorite character or event; or even just a minor nagging detail that you choose to forget or use as a justification as why you hated the movie. The truth is that the Original Star Wars Trilogy, was not perfect either. You remember it as being so, because you saw them as a kid, or you haven’t sat down and watched them in a few years, or you just have them so memorized by heart that it is hard to breakaway form what they are to speculate about what they could have been. Whatever the reason, all we have to say is “Ewoks.” Realistically, they are horrible ideas, but we give the original trilogy a pass, because it is a classic. New Star Wars movies, however, are not classics. In fact, they have an impossible standard to live up to and we hold them to it. It is a standard we do not even hold the Return of the Jedi to. And so we find ourselves in a love-hate relationship with Star Wars now. We go to see the movies, but we are secretly disappointed by them, and half of us defend them, while the other half try to tear them down. This would be the fate of any Firefly revival.

Serenity Valley Was Always Lost
Don’t give into that temptation. A Firefly reboot would be infuriating, but a Firefly revival would just be disappointing. Not because the cast is not awesome, or because the concept is any less fun, but because it could not keep up the quality or with the expectation of fans. In the end, it will just split the nerd community along generational lines, and show the cracks in our fandom. it would be a sure fire way to ruin something perfect in our lives, something that we hold dear, like the memory of a long gone pet, or that sweet small kiss we received from Becky Stanholme right before her parents moved her away to Canada. It was only a brief moment, but sometimes that is enough.

Why do we have to touch everything. Why must we continually dip into the well of nostalgia. The water may seem inviting, but ultimately it is poisoned. Now the disease may be slow-moving, but it will eventually spell the doom of all it touches. It creeps into our systems and corrupts us and our most beloved memories. So, dear Disney, if you are reading this. Do not revive Firefly. Let us keep our memories pure and unfettered, just this once.

Last week, ABC and Disney premiered their newest show, The Muppets. An adult-oriented behind the scenes look at the lives of the Muppets. It seemed to hit all the right notes and was met with generally positive reviews, but of course it did. Hey, it’s the Muppets. They may just be inanimate objects operated by hands and string, but they are people too, as real as you and Chuck Norris. However, it wasn’t always like that. In fact, the Muppets started from very humble beginnings and from what Jim Henson once called, “ridiculous optimism.

Jim and Friends
In 1954 Jim Henson started working with a partner at the University of Maryland creating puppets for children’s programming airing in the DC area. While working with Jane Nabel -who would later become Jane Henson- Jim created the Muppets, starting with the unforgettable frog himself, Kermit. It is said that Jim Henson coined the term “muppet” as a combination of marionette and puppet. Starting in 1955, Kermit and Rwolf, became regulars on the Sam and Friends show. Initially Rwolf was the more popular of the duo, going on to appear as a sidekick to Jimmy Dean on several episodes of the Jimmy Dean Show, starting in 1963. This was mostly due to Rwolf’s mastery of the piano.

It wasn’t until 1969 with the premiere of Sesame Street that Kermit really found his groove. Kermit was one of the original Muppets to appear on the children’s classic show, and ten years later when Jim Henson decided to create a Muppet television series that could be enjoyed my adults and children alike, it was Kermit the Frog who emerged as the heart and leader of the Muppet troupe. The Muppet Show, first aired on September 5, 1976. A sketch comedy that featured parodies, musical performances, and a flock of big name celebrities. The show was a hit and introduced the world at large to the Muppets including such new characters as Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, The Great Gonzo and Animal.

After the success of The Muppet Show, the Muppets went on to make three movies, The Muppet Movie, The Great Muppet Caper and The Muppets Take Manhattan. At nearly the same time, the Walt Disney Company entered into talks to buy the Muppets from Henson -because they have some sort of need to own the world- but the deal fell through with the death of Jim Henson in 1990. The company passed to his son and daughter Brian and Lisa Henson, who in association with Disney produced The Muppet Christmas Carol and Muppet Treasure Island. Disney finally acquired the full rights to the Muppets in 2004, except for the Sesame Street characters, which were sold to Sesame Workshop, and the Fraggle Rock characters which were retained by the Henson Company. The mouse-run organization has since produced The Muppets, and Muppets Most Wanted, along with the new show simply titled The Muppets. They have also produced a slew of award winning YouTube videos -bet you didn’t know YouTube videos could be award winning?

As a result of the Disney purchase the name Muppet became trademarked, which means the NYRD is currently in serious violation of copyright laws, because we unabashedly use that term like forty times throughout this article. It also means that any other creatures created before or after the Disney acquisition could not be called Muppets. Thus creatures like Falkor from Never Ending Story or Pilot from Farscape, are not Muppets. They are just puppets created by the Jim Henson Creature Workshop. Sesame and Fraggle characters have a special exclusive licensing agreement with Disney, so they can still be called Muppets, but that is also why you don’t see Kermit the Frog appear anymore on Sesame Street. Also, please note that Yoda is and has never been a Muppet. He’s a Jedi and there is a difference.

The Wonderful Land of Oznowicz
However, we hardly need Disney’s corporate branding to tell us what is and isn’t a Muppet. There is something special about the lovable group of felt covered creations that just makes them different from other puppets. For example take Miss Piggy… please… Everyone’s favorite pig, was originally meant to be a background character, a generic female pig puppet, but a few months before the start of The Muppet Show, Jim Henson received a request to perform on a TV special with a “young starlet” character. So Piggy was done up, her eyelashes were extended, her hair was changed, and the puppet was given to a young man named, Richard Frank Oznowicz, known mostly by is stage name, Frank Oz. Much like Oz, Miss Piggy was originally born under a different name, Miss Piggy Lee, but she dropped the last name. In a sketch where it was scripted for her to fight with Kermit, Miss Piggy did an impromptu karate chop and the character was born, along with her long standing relationship with Kermit.

That seems to be how the Muppets are really created. They aren’t just made with foam and glue, they evolve. New Muppet characters are often passed around among Muppet performers until one human seems to click with the new creation, and then the character’s personality, voice, mannerism, and more develop from there.  By most accounts the personality of Kermit the Frog seems to be very much based off of Henson himself, as he was the original puppeteer. Maybe that is why each Muppet feels as if they have a unique personality, as if they are really alive. Functionality wise some Muppets are simple, requiring only one person to operate, but then there are others that require an army of humans and technology. Yet, each of them feels like a person. This is partly because Jim Henson was the first person to pioneer the idea that the Muppets were not just puppets controlled by people, but actual creatures.

The Muppets were the first puppet characters to use the TV camera as a framing device. Before that puppeteers were either hidden behind a visible stage on screen, or the puppets sat next to them, like a ventriloquist. With no human operator on screen and no indication of a human presence the Muppets became people unto themselves. It also helps that, unlike other puppets, the Muppets are very articulated. In other words, it is not the movement of the mouth, but the hands, feet, and other appendages that help create the illusion of reality. Humans operators work below the Muppets, using their right hand to operate the mouth and their free hand to operate the Muppet’s arms. As a result, many of the Muppet characters tend to be left handed. This illusion of reality is so strong that we don’t even like to think about humans playing a part in making the Muppets who they are. In fact even talking about their operation in this past paragraph as made us feel wrong inside, and there is a reason for that.

Getting Inside the Muppets
We want to believe that the Muppets are alive. They are our friends and people we grew up with. Did you know there is a concept that something can be real, even if it is imaginary? Dr. Jennifer Barnes has a great TED talk on this very subject. She talks about how we form relationships with fictional characters. We come to empathize with them. They are real to us even at the same time they are imaginary. It’s why we cry when George R. R. Martin works his sadistic magic or why we cheer when  Rocky wins the Cold War. In fact, it has been observed on Sesame Street and in other similar programs that children who interact with Muppets, treat them as living creatures, even if they can see the person who is operating and talking for that Muppet. It is a special kind of suspension of disbelief that our minds can entertain, especially when it comes to Kermit and his friends. It doesn’t matter who has their hand in it, we still identify them as distinct individuals from their controllers, and so does all of Hollywood.

The Muppets have appeared in a lot of things. The Muppets have a star on the Holylwood Walk of Fame, in addition to Kermit’s own individual star. The Muppets have presented at both the Oscars and Emmy’s. They’ve made cameos in various non-muppet movies, including Rocky III. They have had guest appearance on shows like The Cosby Show, and West Wing. They have been interviewed on late night and daytime TV. Kermit the Frog was one of the first guests Jon Stewart ever had during his early days on The Daily Show. They have guest hosted several TV shows including The Tonight Show, Extreme Makeover, and even Larry King Live. They have made numerous public appearances during the Rockefeller Tree Lighting, New Year’s Eve in Times Square, and Kermit even gave a TED talk. Kermit appeared on Hollywood Squares and as a commentator on VH1’s I Love documentary series. All of this contributes to how we see and think of the Muppets. They aren’t just creatures they are working actors and genuine celebrities.

When you watch The Muppet’s Christmas Carol, and you see Kermit the Frog acting as Bob Cratchit, you don’t think, “They made Bob Cratchit a green frog?” No, you think, “Oh Kermit is playing Bob Cratchit,” in the same way you think of Michael Cane as playing the part of Ebeneezer Scrooge. We instinctively see the Muppets as people, even as a part of our brain acknowledges that they aren’t. Maybe it helps that we were introduced to the Muppets as a character troupe on a variety show, but there is something more to it.

What is the difference between a real person and a puppet or a cartoon on TV? They both have personalities. You feel an emotion for both of them? You enjoy their company? Maybe a better question is, what is the difference between Jon of Arc and Miss Piggy? You have never met either of them, unless of course you met Miss Piggy. You probably know more about Miss Piggy than Joan of Arc. You probably feel more attachment for the Pig of the Muppets over the The Maid of Orléans. Yet, of those two it is Joan of Arc who was a real flesh and blood human. So maybe in some sense, Piggy, Fozzy, Gonzo, Rizzo, and Kermit are real in some way. They are obviously more real to us than people we acknowledge as having been actual famous humans. The Muppets are loved, they are respected, and they have a positive impact on the world. If only that could be said of every real person out there.