Amazon Prime

it-was-probably-always-going-to-end-this-way-for-amazon’s-wheel-of-time-show

It was probably always going to end this way for Amazon’s Wheel of Time show


Opinion: Wider TV trends helped kill a show that was starting to live up to its promise.

Moiraine contemplates The Blight. Credit: Amazon Studios

Moiraine contemplates The Blight. Credit: Amazon Studios

Late on Friday, Amazon announced that it was canceling its TV adaptation of Robert Jordan’s Wheel of Time series, after several uncomfortable weeks of silence that followed the show’s third season finale.

Fans of the series can take some cold comfort in the fact that it apparently wasn’t an easy decision to make. But as we speculated in our write-up of what ended up being the show’s series finale, an expensive show with a huge cast, tons of complicated costuming and effects, and extensive location shooting only makes mathematical sense if it’s a megahit, and The Wheel of Time was never a megahit.

Adapting the unadaptable

I was sad about the cancellation announcement because I believe this season was the one where the show found its footing, both as an adaptation of a complex book series and as a fun TV show in its own right. But I wasn’t surprised by it. The only thing I found surprising was that it took this long to happen.

Two things conspired to make it impossible for this Wheel of Time show to ever reach the Last Battle. One has to do with the source material itself; the other has to do with the way the TV business has changed since Game of Thrones premiered in 2011.

The Wheel of Time actively resists adaptation. It’s a sprawling 14-book series spanning dozens of named point-of-view characters and impossibly dense politics. And it even spans multiple eras stylistically—the early books were more Tolkien-esque in their focus on small bands of adventurers and a limited number of perspectives, where later books could go for multiple chapters without putting you in the head of one of the series’ half-dozen-ish main protagonists. And even among the series’ die-hard fans, most will admit that there are storylines, characters, or entire books that feel inessential or annoying or repetitive or sloggy or wheel-spinning.

Any adaptation would need to find a way to stay true to the story that the books were telling, and to marry the tone and pacing of the early, middle, and late-series books, while wrestling with the realities of a different medium (in particular, you cannot realistically pay for infinite episodes or pay infinite cast members, especially for a live-action show).

Image of the battle of the Two Rivers

By season 3, the show had become adept at translating big book moments for the screen.

That high degree of difficulty was surely one reason why it took someone so long to decide to tackle The Wheel of Time, even in the post-Peter Jackson, post-Harry Potter, post-Marvel Cinematic Universe, post-Game of Thrones creative landscape where nerd-coded sci-fi and fantasy were suddenly cool, where multi-part book adaptations were drawing dollars and eyeballs, and where convoluted interconnected stories could be billion-dollar businesses. The only stab anyone took at an adaptation before Amazon happened a full decade ago, when a fly-by-night production company aired a hastily shot adaptation of the first book’s prologue in an apparent attempt to keep the TV rights from expiring.

It’s also what makes the cancellation news so much more frustrating—over three seasons, showrunner Rafe Judkins and the cast and crew of the show became adept at adapting the unadaptable. Yes, the story and the characters had changed in a lot of major ways. Yes, the short eight-episode seasons made for frenetic pacing and overstuffed episodes. But if you grit your teeth a bit and push through the show’s mess of a first season, you hit a series that seemed to know what must-hit scenes needed to be shown; which parts of the books were skippable or could be combined with other moments; which parts of later books to pull forward to streamline the story without making those moments feel rushed or unearned. It was imperfect, but it was a true adaptation—a reworking of a story for a much different medium that seemed to know how to keep the essence of the story intact.

Ambition meets reality

Image of Rand trying to do something with the Power that cannot be done

Like Rand al’Thor struggling with the One Power, The Wheel of Time struggled against the realities of the current TV landscape. Credit: Prime/Amazon MGM Studios

The thing that doomed this particular Wheel of Time production from the start was the sky-high expectations that Amazon had for it. Both Wheel of Time and the heartbreakingly bland Rings of Power were born of Jeff Bezos’ desire to find his own Game of Thrones, which became an unexpected smash-hit success that dominated the cultural conversation through the 2010s. Most TV shows either launch strongly before slowly fading, or they build an audience over a few seasons and then fade after reaching their peak. Game of Thrones defied these trends, and each new season drew a larger and larger viewership even as the show’s quality (arguably) dipped over time.

Asking Wheel of Time to replicate that success would be a tall order for any television show in any era—pop culture is littered with shows that have tried and failed to clone another network’s successful formula. But it’s an especially difficult hurdle to clear in the fractured 2020s TV landscape.

Streaming TV’s blank check era—which ran roughly from Netflix’s introduction of its first original shows in 2013 to 2022, when Netflix reported its first big dip in subscribers just as a long era of low-interest lending was coming to an end—used to give shows a ton of runway and plenty of seasons to tell their stories. Shows like Orange is the New Black or BoJack Horseman that found some modicum of critical acclaim and ratings success tended to get renewed multiple times, and six or seven-season runs were common.

A commitment to reviving old critically beloved bubble shows like Arrested DevelopmentCommunityFuturama, and Gilmore Girls also sent a message: Freed from the restrictive economics of the Old TV Model and fueled by the promise of infinite growth, we can make whatever TV we want!

Those days are mostly gone now (except perhaps at Apple TV+, which continues to leverage its parent company’s deep pockets to throw gobs of money at any actor or IP with a moderately recognizable name). In the two years since TV streamers began cutting back in earnest, industry analysts have observed a consistent trend toward shorter seasons of fewer episodes and fewer renewals for existing shows.

Those trends hit at the exact wrong moment for The Wheel of Time, which was constantly straining against the bonds of its eight-episode seasons. It’s impossible to say empirically whether longer seasons would have made for a better show, and whether that “better show” could have achieved the kind of word-of-mouth success it would have needed to meet Amazon’s expectations. But speaking anecdotally as someone who was just beginning to recommend the show to people who weren’t hardcore book readers, the density and pacing were two major barriers to entry. And even the most truncated possible version of the story would have needed at least six or seven seasons to wrap up in anything resembling a satisfactory way, based on the pace that was set in the first three seasons.

The end of Time

The arms of the Car'a'carn

Wheel of Time fans didn’t get to see everything translated from book to screen. But we did get to see a lot of things. Credit: Prime/Amazon MGM Studios

Tellingly, the Wheel of Time‘s creative team hasn’t released faux-optimistic boilerplate statements about trying to shop the show to other networks, the kind of statements you sometimes see after a show is canceled before its creators are done with it. The same economics that made Amazon drop the show also make it nearly impossible to sell to anyone else.

And so The Wheel of Time joins TV’s long list of unfinished stories. There are neither beginnings nor endings to the turning of the Wheel of Time. But this is an ending.

Photo of Andrew Cunningham

Andrew is a Senior Technology Reporter at Ars Technica, with a focus on consumer tech including computer hardware and in-depth reviews of operating systems like Windows and macOS. Andrew lives in Philadelphia and co-hosts a weekly book podcast called Overdue.

It was probably always going to end this way for Amazon’s Wheel of Time show Read More »

amazon-secretly-slowed-deliveries,-deceived-anyone-who-complained,-lawsuit-says

Amazon secretly slowed deliveries, deceived anyone who complained, lawsuit says

In a statement to Ars, Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel said that claims that Amazon’s “business practices are somehow discriminatory or deceptive” are “categorically false.”

Nantel said that Amazon started using third-party services to deliver to these areas to “put the safety of delivery drivers first.”

“In the ZIP codes in question, there have been specific and targeted acts against drivers delivering Amazon packages,” Nantel said. “We made the deliberate choice to adjust our operations, including delivery routes and times, for the sole reason of protecting the safety of drivers.”

Nantel also pushed back on claims that Amazon concealed this choice, claiming that the company is “always transparent with customers during the shopping journey and checkout process about when, exactly, they can expect their orders to arrive.”

But that doesn’t really gel with Schwalb’s finding that even customers using Amazon’s support chat were allegedly misled. During one chat, a frustrated user pointing out discrepancies between DC ZIP codes asked if Amazon “is a waste of money in my zip code?” Instead of confirming that the ZIP code was excluded from in-house delivery services, the support team member seemingly unhelpfully suggested the user delete and re-add their address to their account.

“Amazon has doubled down on its deception by refusing to disclose the fact of the delivery exclusion, and instead has deceptively implied that slower speeds are simply due to other circumstances, rather than an affirmative decision by Amazon,” Schwalb’s complaint said.

Schwalb takes no issue with Amazon diverting delivery drivers from perceived high-crime areas but insists that Amazon owes its subscribers in those regions an explanation for delivery delays and perhaps even cheaper subscription prices. He has asked for an injunction on Amazon’s allegedly deceptive advertising urging users to pay for fast shipments they rarely, if ever, receive. He also wants Amazon to refund subscribers seemingly cheated out of full subscription benefits and has asked a jury to award civil damages to deter future unfair business practices. Amazon could owe millions in a loss, with each delivery to almost 50,000 users since mid-2022 considered a potential violation.

Nantel said that Amazon has offered to “work together” with Schwalb’s office “to reduce crime and improve safety in these areas” but did not suggest Amazon would be changing how it advertises Prime delivery in the US. Instead, the e-commerce giant plans to fight the claims and prove that “providing fast and accurate delivery times and prioritizing the safety of customers and delivery partners are not mutually exclusive,” Nantel said.

Amazon secretly slowed deliveries, deceived anyone who complained, lawsuit says Read More »

you’ll-be-paying-extra-for-ad-free-prime-video-come-january

You’ll be paying extra for ad-free Prime Video come January

might want to level up —

Subscribers will have to opt-in to a pricier ad-free plan.

screenshot of Prime Video homepage with logo to the left

Amazon Prime Video

Amazon confirmed today in an email to Prime members that it will begin showing ads alongside its streaming Prime Video content starting January 29, 2024. The price will remain the same, but subscribers who don’t wish to see any ads will have to pay an additional $2.99 per month on top of their monthly or yearly Amazon Prime subscription. The change was first reported back in September.

“Starting January 29, Prime Video movies and TV shows will include limited advertisements,” Amazon wrote in an email sent to Amazon Prime subscribers. “This will allow us to continue investing in compelling content and keep increasing that investment over a long period of time. We aim to have meaningfully fewer ads than linear TV and other streaming TV providers. No action is required from you, and there is no change to the current price of your Prime membership.”

Subscribers who want to avoid ads can sign up for the extra monthly fee at the Prime Video website.

Prime Video isn’t the only streaming platform looking to increase revenues via ad-supported tiers and price hikes in a challenging economic environment: both Disney+ and Netflix, among others, have hiked their prices in recent months. HBO Max, Peacock, and Paramount+ all introduced lower-priced ad-supported options, and Netflix launched an ad-supported tier last year for $6.99 per month.

Netflix did recently grant subscribers an ad-free episode for every three episodes watched, as well as downloadable content. However, this was apparently designed to help advertisers “[tap] into the viewing behavior of watching multiple episodes in a row,” per the November Netflix announcement.

Disney+ and the Disney-controlled Hulu increased prices starting in October. The ad-free tier of Disney+ rose from $11 to $14 a month, while ad-free Hulu increased from $14 to $18 a month. Both services are also offered together for $20 a month, and the ad-supported tiers maintained their current pricing; both strategies seem intended to drive viewers to either sign up for multiple services or drop down to an ad-supported tier. This is the second price hike for both services in the last calendar year.

Apple TV+ announced monthly price hikes for several online services in October, including its catchall Apple One subscription service in October. Apple TV+ jumped from $6.99 to $9.99 per month, while Apple Arcade went from $4.99 to $6.99 monthly. Apple News+ used to cost $9.99 per month, but now it’s $12.99. “Raising these prices helps Apple stay attractive to shareholders even amidst the tricky economic context—or at least it will if consumers agree to keep paying,” Ars Senior Editor Sam Axon wrote at the time. “Raising prices too much could drive customers away; Apple seems to be betting that that will not be the case this time.”

You’ll be paying extra for ad-free Prime Video come January Read More »