Norman Lear package to Amazon

88 views
Skip to first unread message

Bob Jersey

unread,
Jul 14, 2021, 10:27:58 PM7/14/21
to TVorNotTV
Deadline: "227" and "Diff’rent Strokes" will launch on Prime Video tomorrow, July 15. "The Jeffersons," "Sanford & Son," and "Sanford" will launch on the SVOD service later in 2021.

"All in the Family," "Good Times," "Maude," and "One Day at a Time" will also launch July 15 but on IMDb TV. This will be the first time that episodes of "Maude" and all seasons of "All in the Family" are available to stream.

Most series' entire runs will be available, while some will release in two-year spurts.


B

Kevin M.

unread,
Jul 14, 2021, 10:39:36 PM7/14/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
Well the world don’t move to the beat of just one streaming service; what might be right for you, might not be available in your area. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/280d918e-b297-40db-8a94-af42afeb59fen%40googlegroups.com.
--
Kevin M. (RPCV)

Doug Eastick

unread,
Jul 15, 2021, 10:42:24 AM7/15/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
IMDb TV?

I'll have to look into that.



--

Adam Bowie

unread,
Jul 15, 2021, 11:16:54 AM7/15/21
to tvornottv
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 3:42 PM Doug Eastick <eas...@mcd.on.ca> wrote:
IMDb TV?

I'll have to look into that.


I'm especially interested in this because the Bosch spin-off show - featuring most of the same characters - is going to be in IMDb TV, and ias yet. it's not available in the UK. 

As I understand it, it's basically a free ad-supported streaming service. 


Adam

Doug Eastick

unread,
Jul 15, 2021, 11:31:48 AM7/15/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
https://m.imdb.com/tv/



Not available in Canada.

Oh, I should mention, if someone is a bit of a tech geek and want a free-ish VPN service for a year, you can use the AWS free tier for a year and run an OpenVPN server in one of their datacenters.   I set one up in Ohio for my son as it was better for his video game he was playing. Email me if interested and I can point you in the right direction.






--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.

PGage

unread,
Jul 15, 2021, 10:27:51 PM7/15/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
I’ve been using it, reluctantly (lots of ads).

--
Sent from Gmail Mobile

David Bruggeman

unread,
Jul 16, 2021, 12:30:19 AM7/16/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
IMDBtv is also home to the new episodes of Leverage (Timothy Bottoms the only original lead not involved here, Noah Wyle plays a new character on the team).

David

Kevin M.

unread,
Jul 16, 2021, 12:31:30 AM7/16/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 9:30 PM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV <tvor...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
IMDBtv is also home to the new episodes of Leverage (Timothy Bottoms the only original lead not involved here, Noah Wyle plays a new character on the team).

So it doubles as a reunion of The Librarians


David

On Thursday, July 15, 2021, 7:27:51 PM PDT, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:


I’ve been using it, reluctantly (lots of ads).

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 7:42 AM Doug Eastick <eas...@mcd.on.ca> wrote:
IMDb TV?

I'll have to look into that.



On Wed., Jul. 14, 2021, 10:27 p.m. 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV, <tvor...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Deadline: "227" and "Diff’rent Strokes" will launch on Prime Video tomorrow, July 15. "The Jeffersons," "Sanford & Son," and "Sanford" will launch on the SVOD service later in 2021.

"All in the Family," "Good Times," "Maude," and "One Day at a Time" will also launch July 15 but on IMDb TV. This will be the first time that episodes of "Maude" and all seasons of "All in the Family" are available to stream.

Most series' entire runs will be available, while some will release in two-year spurts.


B


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.
--
Kevin M. (RPCV)

David Bruggeman

unread,
Jul 16, 2021, 12:50:32 AM7/16/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
Errr, I meant to say Timothy Hutton...apologies to both Tims.

D

PGage

unread,
Jul 22, 2021, 8:45:27 PM7/22/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
I was just finishing. Re-watch of original Leverage (commercial-free on AMC+) in preparation for “Lev Redemption” when this was first posted; now have completed Redemption. I want to learn more about IMBdTV.

I have watched it a bit before (to catch a few episodes of Banacek). My daughter did a “Fringe” rewatch there a while back. 

On the one hand, I just despise commercials, and pay on Hulu and Paramount to avoid them. IMDb apparently does not even offer a premium, commercial free option. I hate it. Buy, not as much as I hate the horrid Peacock, so either the ads are less obnoxious, or there are fewer of them. OTOH, they have a pretty decent lineup of classic shows (is Redemption their first original?).

Is there a reason that insisting on an ad supported model is better financially than at least offering a subscription model? It kind of feels to me like someone is trying to seduce me back into accepting commercials as a fact of TV watching life, maybe hoping that will get me to watch broadcast TV ads again (not bloody likely). 

BTW, Redemption was definitely lesser Leverage, but still recognizably Leverage, and so still preferable to many shows that are not Leverage.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.

Kevin M.

unread,
Jul 22, 2021, 10:14:21 PM7/22/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 5:45 PM PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:
I was just finishing. Re-watch of original Leverage (commercial-free on AMC+) in preparation for “Lev Redemption” when this was first posted; now have completed Redemption. I want to learn more about IMBdTV.

I have watched it a bit before (to catch a few episodes of Banacek). My daughter did a “Fringe” rewatch there a while back. 

On the one hand, I just despise commercials, and pay on Hulu and Paramount to avoid them. IMDb apparently does not even offer a premium, commercial free option. I hate it. Buy, not as much as I hate the horrid Peacock, so either the ads are less obnoxious, or there are fewer of them. OTOH, they have a pretty decent lineup of classic shows (is Redemption their first original?).

Is there a reason that insisting on an ad supported model is better financially than at least offering a subscription model? It kind of feels to me like someone is trying to seduce me back into accepting commercials as a fact of TV watching life, maybe hoping that will get me to watch broadcast TV ads again (not bloody likely). 

I suspect the reason is they are throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. Cable is dying, but advertising isn’t going away, so there is interest in seeing if any form of ad-supported model will still work.


BTW, Redemption was definitely lesser Leverage, but still recognizably Leverage, and so still preferable to many shows that are not Leverage.

The only reason I discovered Leverage was because most of the cast and creative team were from the Librarian movies and subsequent Librarians series, which I quite enjoyed.

 

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 9:30 PM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV <tvor...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
IMDBtv is also home to the new episodes of Leverage (Timothy Bottoms the only original lead not involved here, Noah Wyle plays a new character on the team).

David

On Thursday, July 15, 2021, 7:27:51 PM PDT, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:


I’ve been using it, reluctantly (lots of ads).

On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 7:42 AM Doug Eastick <eas...@mcd.on.ca> wrote:
IMDb TV?

I'll have to look into that.



On Wed., Jul. 14, 2021, 10:27 p.m. 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV, <tvor...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Deadline: "227" and "Diff’rent Strokes" will launch on Prime Video tomorrow, July 15. "The Jeffersons," "Sanford & Son," and "Sanford" will launch on the SVOD service later in 2021.

"All in the Family," "Good Times," "Maude," and "One Day at a Time" will also launch July 15 but on IMDb TV. This will be the first time that episodes of "Maude" and all seasons of "All in the Family" are available to stream.

Most series' entire runs will be available, while some will release in two-year spurts.


B


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/500237070.20166.1626409810101%40mail.yahoo.com.

--
Sent from Gmail Mobile

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.
--
Kevin M. (RPCV)

Tom Wolper

unread,
Jul 22, 2021, 10:50:53 PM7/22/21
to TV or not TV
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 8:45 PM PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:

On the one hand, I just despise commercials, and pay on Hulu and Paramount to avoid them. IMDb apparently does not even offer a premium, commercial free option. I hate it. Buy, not as much as I hate the horrid Peacock, so either the ads are less obnoxious, or there are fewer of them. OTOH, they have a pretty decent lineup of classic shows (is Redemption their first original?).

Is there a reason that insisting on an ad supported model is better financially than at least offering a subscription model? It kind of feels to me like someone is trying to seduce me back into accepting commercials as a fact of TV watching life, maybe hoping that will get me to watch broadcast TV ads again (not bloody likely).

I think everybody's still trying to figure their business models out. When DVRs came out they quickly became popular because viewers could skip through commercials as well as watch whenever they had the time. Pirated video is commercial free. Streaming channels know that there is a limit to how many subscriptions people will shell out for and they're trying to create a free model with cheaper programming.

I agree that at some point the commercial load will be a deterrent. I was looking through the Pluto movies recently and came across Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in America. On the Pluto channel it had a 5 hour slot. I saw it decades ago, want to see how it holds up, and found out it's a 4 hour movie. Which is an hour's commercials to watch it. Pluto also has an On Demand section and I looked for the movie there. It also shows a 5 hour run time which means I have no interest in watching it that way.

PGage

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 12:39:30 AM7/23/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
While I will tolerate some ads to see classic TV shows not otherwise accessible, I absolutely will not watch a movie with even one commercial in this day and age.

On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 7:50 PM Tom Wolper <two...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think everybody's still trying to figure their business models out. When DVRs came out they quickly became popular because viewers could skip through commercials as well as watch whenever they had the time. Pirated video is commercial free. Streaming channels know that there is a limit to how many subscriptions people will shell out for and they're trying to create a free model with cheaper programming.

I agree that at some point the commercial load will be a deterrent. I was looking through the Pluto movies recently and came across Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in America. On the Pluto channel it had a 5 hour slot. I saw it decades ago, want to see how it holds up, and found out it's a 4 hour movie. Which is an hour's commercials to watch it. Pluto also has an On Demand section and I looked for the movie there. It also shows a 5 hour run time which means I have no interest in watching it that way.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.

Steve Timko

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 3:40:02 AM7/23/21
to TV or Not TV


On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, 5:45 PM PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:

Is there a reason that insisting on an ad supported model is better financially than at least offering a subscription model?

Their subscription model is Amazon Prime. They are trying to catch the audience who don't want to pay.
If you can tolerate commercials in a movie, "Ice Cold in Alex" is available on IMDB. Sylvia Syms is gorgeous. Good flick.


PGage

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 8:49:27 AM7/23/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com

I don’t understand what you mean. How is their subscription model Amazon Prime? 

I do understand how ad- supported television works, and why it would make sense to offer that service. I am wondering why IMDbTV does not also offer a subscription, non-ad option (as, say Hulu and Paramount+ does? 


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.

Tom Wolper

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 9:22:05 AM7/23/21
to TV or not TV
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 8:49 AM PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don’t understand what you mean. How is their subscription model Amazon Prime? 

I do understand how ad- supported television works, and why it would make sense to offer that service. I am wondering why IMDbTV does not also offer a subscription, non-ad option (as, say Hulu and Paramount+ does?

Amazon owns IMDB. Prime is the subscription service and IMDB TV is the free, ad supported, one. If you look up a movie on IMDB and click/tap on "viewing options" a link to Amazon Prime, if it's available there, will come up as first result.

PGage

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 9:55:32 AM7/23/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
Right. I do have Prime. But there is no way to watch most of the ad supported television programs on Prime without ads.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.

Ben Combee

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 4:26:14 PM7/23/21
to TV or Not TV mailing list
Some content is licensed to only show on AVOD (ad-supported
video-on-demand) services so ads are required. That's the same way as
it works for a lot of what's on The Roku Channel.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYKnvNeNh9wDx0%2Bss2Gr5NkhgChXUV%3D8ReiYBq-n3b1v9g%40mail.gmail.com.

PGage

unread,
Jul 23, 2021, 6:16:39 PM7/23/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
So, this starts to make sense, like IMDbTV has programs Prime could not make available ad-free for licensing reasons. And now that you mention it, i think I have seen a note on some subscription services that they are required t o show ads for some programs.

But then I guess the question is why would a license holder require ads rather than subscription payments?

Tom Wolper

unread,
Jul 24, 2021, 10:45:04 AM7/24/21
to TV or not TV
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 6:16 PM PGage <pga...@gmail.com> wrote:
So, this starts to make sense, like IMDbTV has programs Prime could not make available ad-free for licensing reasons. And now that you mention it, i think I have seen a note on some subscription services that they are required t o show ads for some programs.

But then I guess the question is why would a license holder require ads rather than subscription payments?

Here's my uneducated guess: When creative people talk about making TV shows for Netflix, they say Netflix pays out up front and there are no residuals. The deals the guilds have with the media companies have breakdowns for residuals in different platforms. If the streamer gets the show from the license holder to be added to the ad free library the guilds will still demand compensation for their members. If the streamer shows the TV shows with ads, residuals can be apportioned according to the ad revenue.

PGage

unread,
Jul 24, 2021, 2:47:37 PM7/24/21
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
This would be consistent with the observation that the ad supported programs seem to be older shows. Maybe newer shows are more likely to have negotiated a way to deal with subscription fees?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.

Adam Bowie

unread,
Jul 27, 2021, 5:35:56 AM7/27/21
to tvornottv
As I understand it, the reason that things like IMDBtv exist is that so not everything is in one basket. Just how many subscription video on demand services (SVOD in the industry parlance) is one home likely to subscribe to? And because so many of them have minimal or indeed no advertising at all, and there's still an awful lot of TV advertising money floating around, the advertising-based video on demand services (AVOD) exist basically to hoover up that money. And they are popular, even if you and I don't like commercials, and can't even do that record-the-show-on-my-DVR-so-I-can-fast-forward-through-the-ads thing that I would do with cable channels.

I would be surprised if there were specific contractual limitations placed on certain shows that they had to appear on ad-based platforms. There are definitely rules in place to prevent self-dealing, where, say, Warner's HBO-Max pays less-than-market-rate for a Warners TV production, particularly if there are profit participants. There was that case about Bones and Hulu getting it cheap when Fox had an ownership stake. They had to pay out.

In terms of new contracts, I spoke with a TV producer a couple of years ago who said that when you deal with Netflix etc, you go in knowing that you're going to make x% on the deal. Netflix pays more than a network would, but you are going to get zero residuals afterwards. If the show catches fire, you're not going to be like Warners and Friends, licencing it repeatedly for the next 25 years. Netflix buys everything outright, and I suspect these days even takes all the subsidiary rights. Their mooted new gaming offering springs to mind. I doubt Shona is getting extra if they make a Bridgerton mobile game - not that she did badly out of her Netflix deal anyway!

On the other hand, when Warners make Manifest for NBC, the fee that NBC pays is less than it costs Warners to make. They hope to make up the difference licencing it on to Netflix and international broadcasters. And of course, if the series catches fire, then they can cash in vastly more than simply selling it for a flat-fee to Netflix. I wonder if Warners playing hardball over that very show right now is what is keeping NBC/Netflix from renewing it? It is complex, because while the show in on Netflix in the US after its NBC window, in other territories the picture is more complex. In the UK, for example, it's on the Comcast owned Sky and not on Netflix at all. Netflix likes more and more to do global deals.



Adam

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYK-bkdX2R%2B%3D-3MD4D7zAxsw2ipACyc-O2etijthN5g1PQ%40mail.gmail.com.

PGage

unread,
Feb 27, 2022, 11:24:03 PM2/27/22
to tvor...@googlegroups.com
Matt Belloni Is reporting in Puck News that Timothy Hutton was all set to Star in the Leverage re-boot, with an oral (but not signed written contract) in place, when he was written out after he was accused of having raped an actress when she was 14, and he 22, in 1983. The accusation was investigated by Canadian police, who eventually found no grounds to proceed. Hutton feels both vindicated and screwed, and is suing producer Dean Devlin.

This at least explains why Hutton is not in the show (a significant loss IMO), but Belloni doesn’t care much about that.

The facts of the matter are one thing, but the law controlling this is complex and in flux. Hutton is arguing the producer had the right to fire him, but that the oral contract gave him “pay or play” status, meaning even  if they don’t use him, they still have to pay him $135K X the 13 guaranteed episodes $1.75M.

Twitter may have decided to always believe the accuser, but is that sufficient cover for employers in these situations? Hutton may lose simply if he can’t convince the court he had a valid oral contract (I’m no lawyer, but it sounds like he did), but if he clears that bar the case may help clarify things going forward.



On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 9:50 PM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV <tvor...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Errr, I meant to say Timothy Hutton...apologies to both Tims.

D

On Thursday, July 15, 2021, 9:30:10 PM PDT, David Bruggeman <bru...@yahoo.com> wrote:


IMDBtv is also home to the new episodes of Leverage (Timothy Bottoms the only original lead not involved here, Noah Wyle plays a new character on the team).


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages