• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Expanse Season 3

Well Prax is a botanist. I don't that think the Roci crew gonna need one for their missions.

Now that Errinwright got arrested, i am waiting for Chrisjen Avasarala to get back to Earth and depose the Secretary General. Errinwright was right about that guy. He is spineless.

Sad to see Cotyar die.
 
Wow, another great ride! Exciting episode. Complete with touching moments. Prax and Mei reunited. Holden and Naomi . . . er, reunited. Sneaking aboard the Agatha King, switching the transponders on, and then using the missiles that Fred Johnson snatched before to finally resolve the problem was a great idea. All in all, it felt like a huge disaster that was narrowly averted in a very satisfying story.

I'm looking forward to where things will go from here.

I desperately hope that The Expanse gets picked up by Amazon or elsewhere. But, at the very least, I'm enjoying the ride in the meantime!
 
I found the scene after Errinwright was arrested and the Secretary-General goes back to being a self-absorbed douche glad the war won't tarnish his legacy now that he can shift the blame very amusing. The "what the fuck have I done?" expression on Pastor Anna's face totally sells it.
 
Why does this show do things that feel like season finales midway through the seasons, and then have the actual finales feel like the story's been interrupted in the middle? I guess it has to do with where the novel finales fall, but still, it's an awkward structure.

That's precisely it. They decided that rather than try to shoehorn in a complete novel storyline every season, they'd just take a more holistic view of the arc and allow it to flow out however felt most natural. It makes an odd structure first-run, but the writers' rationale is that we're in the streaming world where shows have long afterlives, so for most of the audience, the difference between a season finale/premiere and any other episode is pretty much erased. Either way, the next episode is immediately available, whether or not people had to wait a week or a year for it originally. Honestly, compared to some other shows, I think it helps with watching it first run, since episodes of The Expanse feel more like episodes, and not just chapters, or even worse, forty-ish minute chunks of a twelve-hour movie, as happens with some shows. Besides, the fact that the finales don't usually have the most intriguing endings compared to other episodes help with making the hiatus more bearable.

Also, since I'm seeing around the web that a lot of people (including me) couldn't make out Holden and Naomi's last lines in the closing montage, they were:
HOLDEN: You're not staying, are you?
NAOMI: (agreeing) It's time.

That'll teach them to have characters murmur important lines while naked.
 
It makes an odd structure first-run, but the writers' rationale is that we're in the streaming world where shows have long afterlives, so for most of the audience, the difference between a season finale/premiere and any other episode is pretty much erased. Either way, the next episode is immediately available, whether or not people had to wait a week or a year for it originally.

Sure, but that doesn't make it work very well in first-run. I don't like it when a story just abruptly breaks off in the middle and leaves me waiting a year or more for the continuation. I gave up two different '90s book trilogies after the second volume -- Timothy Zahn's Star Wars Thrawn trilogy and Gentry Lee's sequels to Arthur C. Clarke's Rendezvous with Rama -- because I resented the abrupt cutoffs and just didn't feel motivated to bother with the third part (although in the Rama case, the fact that the sequels just weren't very good was a factor too). Ideally, the story should work in its original form as well as later on. It's not a good thing to target one audience in a way that dissatisfies another. You want to balance things so that the story works either way it's presented, as a whole or as widely separated parts.
 
You know, some of the greatest works of literature in the last few centuries were delivered chapter by chapter as serials in the periodicals. Didn't seem to do them any harm in the long run and most were quite popular at the time, despite often long gaps (sometimes *years*) between instalments. Just ask Arthur Conan Doyle, Charles Dickens, Issac Asimov and Frank Herbert. Quality will out in the long run and if you're still watching the show now in the short term, then clearly it's doing something right too. ;)

Personally I've enjoyed the way the Expanse paces things out. With more conventional seasons you go from a thrilling cliffhanger at the end of a season to a near dead stop in the first third of the new season and then have to wait until about a third of the way through for things to regain some momentum.
The way the Expanse does things you get a stunning culmination of events almost right out of the gate and most of the rest of the season is the domino effect of consequences that propagate from that. I like that the season finales are more about foreshadowing than some cheep attempt at a cliffhanger. It helps keep the characters in focus and the larger events as a backdrop.
 
The Expanse has been great. While their season structure might be unusual, it's working well for the series. Let the story play out in a way that it requires to produce the best possible episodes without shoehorning things in (or padding out) a season to force a book to fit. It's been working great for them and they should continue with that approach.
 
Got through E3 so far, and it's been fun. It was interesting to see Earth being able to take out Mars' highly stealthy weapon platforms. I'm hoping to catch up reasonably quickly since Verizon hasn't added the new season regularly yet to FIOS (:p)
 
Hmm, I wonder how long it will be before Netflix's rights to stream The Expanse outside the US and NZ expire, if ever? I expect that would be a consideration for Amazon. I imagine Netflix will still want to stream season 3, seeing they have shelled out money for it. Having only partial streaming rights for such a serialised story likely won't be very attractive to Amazon apart from perhaps an opportunity to poach Netflix subscribers.
 
Last edited:
The semi-msm has picked up on the negotiations with Amazon, which usually means negotiations are rather advanced...
 
Hmm, I wonder how long it will be before Netflix's rights to stream The Expanse outside the US and NZ expire, if ever? I expect that would be a consideration for Amazon. I imagine Netflix will still want to stream season 3, seeing they have shelled out money for it. Having only partial streaming rights for such a serialised story likely won't be very attractive to Amazon apart from perhaps an opportunity to poach Netflix subscribers.
I imagine that's exactly what they're negotiating right now.
 
I imagine that's exactly what they're negotiating right now.
Netflix is a big user of Amazon Web Services for user metadata among other things. However, the actual content delivery of video is done from its own servers. I assume that while Amazon and Netflix have a good working relationship, Netflix holds most of the cards in this deal. Amazon will know how popular streaming of The Expanse is in the US and NZ (the latter being a tiny market so let's ignore); Netflix for everywhere else. Presumably, this sensitive data is not shared and let's assume Amazon either hasn't been tempted or isn't able to mine the Netflix user metadata hosted on its servers to deduce the streaming figures outside the US. The question is will Netflix poison the deal deliberately by demanding too high a price for relinquishing its worldwide streaming rights outside the US just to undermine a competitor?
 
As you say, those companies already have a business relationship, so if Netflix decide to play hardball it could risk damaging that relationship and jeopardise any future negotiations. Especially given that Netflix already passed on picking up the show on their own, it behoves them to go for an amicable arrangement, not a punitive one.
Most of all though, 'The Expanse' is small potatoes in the grand scheme for both companies and not worth getting into a tug-of-war over.
 
Netflix doesn't want to pick up The Expanse, so I don't see why it would play hardball here. After all, unlike broadcast TV - a zero-sum business based upon advertising revenue - Amazon and Netflix aren't even really "competing" in terms of streaming video. How many people, after all, would cancel Netflix just because Amazon Prime has an additional show? Or even five additional shows?
 
Netflix doesn't want to pick up The Expanse, so I don't see why it would play hardball here. After all, unlike broadcast TV - a zero-sum business based upon advertising revenue - Amazon and Netflix aren't even really "competing" in terms of streaming video. How many people, after all, would cancel Netflix just because Amazon Prime has an additional show? Or even five additional shows?

Except they are competing for the audience's limited subscription dollars. I haven't subscribed to Amazon because I was already subscribed to Netflix and didn't want to spend more on streaming. (Although I've been thinking about cancelling cable, which is way more expensive. But I'd rather wait until I can afford to buy a TV that gets the Internet, otherwise I'd have to watch everything on my PC.)
 
It has been rumoured (how accurately I don't know) that Bezos wants Amazon Prime video to have a series that's as big a hit worldwide as Game of Thrones. With the best will in the world, I can't envisage The Expanse giving them that.

I subscribe to both Amazon Prime and Netflix. Amazon Prime has a lot of other benefits that I wouldn't want to give up. Netflix has a better and broader choice of movies and TV shows. I suspect that someone would abandon Netflix for Amazon in order to watch The Expanse only if they were on a very tight budget. Based on my example, I expect that's a very small percentage of subscribers but I might be atypical.

@Christopher - couldn't you use an HDMI plugin stick rather than buy a smart TV?
 
Except they are competing for the audience's limited subscription dollars. I haven't subscribed to Amazon because I was already subscribed to Netflix and didn't want to spend more on streaming. (Although I've been thinking about cancelling cable, which is way more expensive. But I'd rather wait until I can afford to buy a TV that gets the Internet, otherwise I'd have to watch everything on my PC.)

You're not just paying for a streaming service when you sign up for Amazon's Prime Video, though; you're also paying for a crapload of other benefits:
https://www.cnet.com/how-to/amazon-prime-20-benefits-every-member-gets/

You're also not paying nearly as much for Amazon's services as you do for Netflix because you're paying a $100 lump sum once a year instead of between $10-15 every single month.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top