{"id":14942,"date":"2025-07-27T09:04:08","date_gmt":"2025-07-27T09:04:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/?p=14942"},"modified":"2025-07-27T09:04:08","modified_gmt":"2025-07-27T09:04:08","slug":"the-end-of-an-era","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/?p=14942","title":{"rendered":"The end of an era?"},"content":{"rendered":"
Back in the mid-2010s, when the idea of \u201cbinge-watching\u201d was still novel, you could impress someone you met at a party by saying you watched Black Mirror. The streaming service Netflix had already changed how people rented movies\u2014killing Blockbuster with the casual cruelty of convenience\u2014but now, it wanted to change what people watched.<\/p>\n

By the time Stranger Things dropped in 2016, the game had already changed. The show, with its mix of Spielbergian nostalgia and synth-scored sci-fi, hit audiences like a cultural bomb. Kids dressed up as Eleven for Halloween. Adults argued over the ethics of what happened in the Upside Down. Netflix had hit a bullseye. And more importantly, it had found its business model: make people stay subscribed, not just for content, but for connection.<\/p>\n

Fast forward to 2025. Stranger Things is nearing its final season. Squid Game, the Korean thriller that became a global parable about class, is also wrapping up. And the streamer, now sitting atop a global empire of 270+ million subscribers, faces the kind of existential question that haunts legacy studios and tech giants alike: What happens when your biggest hits stop hitting?<\/p>\n

Shows like Stranger Things, The Crown, The Witcher, and Squid Game weren\u2019t just were global cultural events, they brought in millions of subscribers, shaped social media discourse, and most importantly justified Netflix\u2019s spendthrift content budget to nervous investors.<\/p>\n

The blockbusters that built the brand<\/p>\n

Stranger Things wasn\u2019t Netflix\u2019s first original hit\u2014but it was the one that felt tectonic. House of Cards and Orange Is the New Black had kicked off the \u201cprestige streaming TV\u201d era, giving Netflix credibility in awards circuits and pop culture columns. But Stranger Things was different. It had meme power. Fandom. Merchandising potential. It was a world that extended beyond the screen\u2014and into Funko Pops, comic cons, and even retro-style video games. By the time Season 4 dropped in 2022, it had clocked over 1.3 billion hours of viewing \u2014 making it Netflix\u2019s second most-watched English-language series ever, only behind Wednesday. Kate Bush\u2019s 1985 track \u201cRunning Up That Hill\u201d became a Gen Z anthem nearly 40 years later, charting in multiple countries \u2014 a symbol of how a single show could ripple through pop culture, music charts, and fashion.<\/p>\n

Then came The Witcher, with its CGI monsters and Henry Cavill\u2019s brooding charisma. Adapted from Polish fantasy novels and games, the show became Netflix\u2019s answer to HBO\u2019s Game of Thrones\u2014minus the incest and prestige polish. Though critically uneven, it made money globally.<\/p>\n

But nothing prepared anyone for Squid Game. Then came Squid Game. Released with minimal fanfare in 2021, the South Korean thriller became an overnight global phenomenon. Within 28 days, 111 million accounts had tuned in. It wasn\u2019t just the most-watched Netflix show in history at the time \u2014 it reshaped the perception of international content. It proved that language was no longer a barrier; if the story was good enough, audiences would follow. It tapped into a pandemic-era malaise: economic anxiety, social isolation, the sense that we were all playing some perverse, rigged game. Netflix reported that 142 million households had watched it in the first month. It became the platform\u2019s biggest show ever at the time, helping to stem a slowdown in growth and proving the viability of non-English language content in global markets.<\/p>\n

While Stranger Things and Squid Game were pop-cultural tsunamis, they weren\u2019t alone in making Netflix what it is. The Crown lent prestige and awards legitimacy. Bridgerton brought in the romance crowd with period drama and redefined inclusivity in costume storytelling. The Witcher pulled in fantasy lovers post-Game of Thrones. Money Heist (La Casa de Papel), a Spanish-language crime thriller, became a bankable brand globally, despite originally being a flop on Spanish TV.<\/p>\n

Even lighter fare like Emily in Paris, Outer Banks, or reality TV hits like Love is Blind and Too Hot to Handle drove viewership numbers and kept the content wheel spinning between prestige projects. Netflix had a machine: fund broadly, promote smartly, find a breakout, ride the wave, and double down.<\/p>\n

But as the biggest shows begin to sunset, the cracks in the model are becoming visible.<\/p>\n

The problem with blockbusters<\/p>\n

Unlike linear TV, which offered seasons year after year at regular intervals, Netflix binge-dumped content. Stranger Things seasons dropped two years apart. Squid Game took even longer to follow up. In between, Netflix relied on a pipeline of content to keep subscribers around \u2014 a gamble that became harder as competition intensified.<\/p>\n

Enter Disney+, HBO Max, Apple TV+, and Amazon Prime \u2014 all offering their own prestige fare, some with legacy franchises (Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones), others with buzzy new titles (Severance, The Bear, The Boys). Suddenly, Netflix was no longer the only game in town.<\/p>\n

Worse still, the streamer\u2019s own release model may have backfired. Releasing an entire season in one go made for headlines, memes, and cultural moments \u2014 but those moments were fleeting. Compare that to HBO\u2019s week-to-week strategy, which allowed Succession, Euphoria, and The Last of Us to dominate conversations for months.<\/p>\n

Netflix\u2019s shift from a growth-at-all-costs model to a more mature, revenue-focused one was inevitable. With subscriber growth slowing in North America and Europe, and saturation looming in mature markets, the company has introduced ads, cracked down on password sharing, and flirted with licensing content to others \u2014 all moves that would\u2019ve seemed blasphemous five years ago.<\/p>\n

These aren\u2019t signs of desperation so much as maturation. But they do signal the end of a certain kind of Netflix era \u2014 the one defined by wild experimentation and blank-check funding for passion projects. Remember when Netflix gave the creators of Game of Thrones $200 million to make The Three-Body Problem? Or funded Martin Scorsese\u2019s $160 million The Irishman?<\/p>\n

Today, Netflix is far more surgical. And that could be good \u2014 or very bad \u2014 for riskier storytelling.<\/p>\n

So what does Netflix have coming up to replace its aging giants?<\/p>\n

First, there\u2019s the second season of Squid Game, a high-stakes gamble if ever there was one. Series creator Hwang Dong-hyuk returns, but can lightning strike twice? The sleeper hit had the advantage of novelty and zero expectations. Season two carries the weight of history.<\/p>\n

Then there\u2019s One Piece, the anime adaptation that shocked skeptics with its success. A second season is confirmed, and if it continues to grow, Netflix may have a long-running franchise on its hands.<\/p>\n

Wednesday, the gothic teen spin-off of The Addams Family, became the most-watched English-language series in Netflix history. With Tim Burton and Jenna Ortega returning for Season 2, it’s arguably Netflix’s biggest active asset now.<\/p>\n

Also in development are adaptations of The Chronicles of Narnia, fresh Avatar: The Last Airbender content (after a lukewarm start), and another round of The Witcher, albeit without Cavill. These all carry potential \u2014 but also risk.<\/p>\n

The \u201cmiddle show\u201d crisis<\/p>\n

One of Netflix\u2019s quieter dilemmas is what insiders call the \u201cmiddle show\u201d crisis. While top shows get massive budgets and marketing, and cheap reality shows get renewals because they\u2019re inexpensive to produce, mid-budget, quality series often fall through the cracks.<\/p>\n

Critically loved shows like Mindhunter, Glow, Archive 81, and 1899 were cancelled despite strong fanbases. The algorithm, it seems, doesn’t reward slow builds. Netflix has trained audiences to look for the next big thing \u2014 but that leaves little room for cult hits to grow organically.<\/p>\n

This is where competitors are gaining ground. Apple TV+ is patient and prestige-focused, willing to let shows like Slow Horses or For All Mankind build over time. HBO has decades of reputation in nurturing quality. Even Amazon is doubling down on genre bets and global reach.<\/p>\n

Netflix, in contrast, sometimes seems caught in its own system: make everything available, see what pops, cut the rest.<\/p>\n

Is Netflix currently the place for prestige drama? Bingeable fluff? Global storytelling? True crime? Live events? <\/p>\n

The platform\u2019s breadth is unmatched, but with that comes dilution. Disney+ has Marvel and Star Wars. HBO has high-end drama. Prime has genre and scale. Apple has polish. Netflix\u2026 has everything, but stands for less.<\/p>\n

Yet there\u2019s a problem with lightning-in-a-bottle shows: they don\u2019t last forever. Stranger Things is bowing out with its fifth and final season. The kids have grown up. The charm of ’80s nostalgia is wearing thin. Squid Game\u2019s creator, Hwang Dong-hyuk, always intended it as a critique of the very systems that made it a commercial juggernaut. Even The Witcher has lost its lead actor, Cavill, and faces declining buzz with each season.<\/p>\n

So what is Netflix doing to prepare for life after its flagship titles?<\/p>\n

The answer, predictably, is a little of everything. But whether it sticks is another question.<\/p>\n

The franchise factory approach<\/p>\n

In recent years, Netflix has shifted strategy. Rather than hope for breakout hits, it\u2019s trying to build franchises intentionally. That\u2019s meant spinoffs (like Stranger Things: The First Shadow, a prequel stage play, and potential animated series), sequels (Extraction 2, Enola Holmes 2), and universe-building (The Witcher: Blood Origin, though critics would rather forget it existed).<\/p>\n

It\u2019s also meant poaching talent and IP from traditional Hollywood. Deals with the Duffer Brothers (Stranger Things creators), Shonda Rhimes (Bridgerton, Inventing Anna), and Ryan Murphy (Dahmer, The Watcher) were meant to lock in brand-name storytellers. But results have been mixed. Shonda\u2019s Bridgerton universe continues to deliver, especially in international markets. Murphy\u2019s shows rack up views, but rarely become cultural events.<\/p>\n

Netflix has also bet big on international hits \u2014 Korean dramas, Japanese anime, Indian thrillers, Spanish heist sagas (Money Heist was a phenomenon). In 2023 alone, Netflix spent over $1 billion on Korean content. It\u2019s a smart hedge: local-language shows with global appeal often deliver better ROI than expensive American productions.<\/p>\n

But is any of it iconic? Does it break through the noise like Squid Game did? Not quite yet.<\/p>\n

Algorithms don\u2019t create magic<\/p>\n

Netflix\u2019s advantage, and maybe its Achilles heel, is its data. It knows what people watch, when they stop, what thumbnail makes them click. This has led to a model of commissioning content that feels more like market research than art.<\/p>\n

The result is a sprawling catalogue of \u201cgood enough\u201d shows: entertaining, formulaic, and largely forgettable. Think of the dozens of crime thrillers, rom-coms, and reality dating shows that get a weekend spike, trend for two days, then disappear into the abyss of the \u201cMore Like This\u201d section.<\/p>\n

Critics call this the \u201ccontent treadmill.\u201d It\u2019s not about making hits. It\u2019s about making enough to keep churn low and engagement high. But this risks turning Netflix into a utility \u2014 like cable TV \u2014 rather than a tastemaker.<\/p>\n

In contrast, HBO (now Max) still tries to brand itself as a curator. Apple TV+ has a leaner slate but wins Emmys. Disney+ rides the strength of 80 years of IP. Netflix has volume, but volume doesn\u2019t inspire devotion.<\/p>\n

Live sports, ads, and the YouTube pivot<\/p>\n

In 2022, Netflix launched an ad-supported tier. This marked a seismic shift in its business model, long held up as the \u201cno ads\u201d disruptor. But with subscriber growth plateauing in key markets, the company needed new revenue streams.<\/p>\n

The next frontier? Live content. Netflix has started dabbling in live comedy specials (Chris Rock: Selective Outrage) and is reportedly exploring sports rights. It recently struck a deal with WWE to stream Monday Night Raw starting in 2025. This is less about prestige, more about stickiness. Sports and live events bring consistent, appointment-based viewership \u2014 something Netflix has never had.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s also a move toward interactive and short-form content. Bandersnatch tested interactive storytelling. Korean Physical: 100 shows how global reality TV can cross borders. The streamer even acquired game studios and is quietly developing mobile games tied to its IP\u2014hoping that users won\u2019t just watch Squid Game, but play it.<\/p>\n

If this all sounds like a pivot toward being a hybrid of YouTube, cable TV, and Xbox \u2014 it kind of is.<\/p>\n

One thing Netflix still lacks is its own massive IP universe. Disney has Marvel. Warner has DC. Amazon has The Lord of the Rings. Netflix\u2019s biggest assets (Stranger Things, Squid Game, Bridgerton) are original, but don\u2019t have the longevity of 60-year-old comic book characters or fantasy epics.<\/p>\n

It tried to fix this by spending lavishly. The $200 million The Gray Man franchise (with Ryan Gosling and Chris Evans) was meant to be the next Bond. It didn\u2019t quite land. The $450 million acquisition of Knives Out sequels promised a new detective franchise\u2014only for the second film, Glass Onion, to burn hot and fast, then disappear.<\/p>\n

When you don\u2019t own the underlying IP, you don\u2019t own the future. And Netflix, for all its streaming dominance, is still renting its place in the culture.<\/p>\n

What next?<\/p>\n

The question isn\u2019t just what shows come next\u2014it\u2019s what kind of company Netflix wants to be.<\/p>\n

Does it double down on prestige? Go full global? Turn into an interactive tech platform with games and live events?<\/p>\n

To survive post-Stranger Things, it might have to do all of the above.<\/p>\n

Already, Netflix is releasing more reality TV (Love Is Blind, Too Hot to Handle), more animated fare (Arcane, The Dragon Prince), more docu-series (The Tinder Swindler, Beckham, American Nightmare). It\u2019s diversifying, not in the name of art, but insurance.<\/p>\n

But the real answer might lie in how it nurtures the next wave of talent. The next Squid Game won\u2019t be found by an algorithm. It will come from some obscure writer in Seoul, or Karachi, or S\u00e3o Paulo, with a story that cuts through noise and speaks to this chaotic, collapsing, post-pandemic world.<\/p>\n

The hits of Netflix\u2019s past were surprising, risky, plain weird even. BoJack Horseman, Dark, Sex Education, Russian Doll. The next era of Netflix might require less strategy and more instinct.<\/p>\n

Because you can build a business on data. But culture? That still takes vision.<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Back in the mid-2010s, when the idea of \u201cbinge-watching\u201d was still novel, you could impress someone you met at a party by saying you watched Black Mirror. The streaming service Netflix had already changed how people rented movies\u2014killing Blockbuster with the casual cruelty of convenience\u2014but now, it wanted to change what people watched. By the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14942","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-english-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14942","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14942"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14942\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14942"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14942"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipp-news.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14942"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}