‘Emily in Paris’ proved once again what we already knew: splitting a season into two parts is a bad idea, Netflix

The fourth season of “Emily in Paris” started on August 15 and took a month-long break after five episodes.

Judging by the reaction from viewers and critics, this was yet another mistake by Netflix, which isn’t the first time a season has been split into two parts.

Clearly, there is a good reason for this approach: to keep subscribers on the platform for as long as possible.

The “all episodes in one day” format was once the company’s hallmark, but over time it became clear that weekly releases were still the most reliable form of TV series promotion.

This not only helps maintain a high level of media noise around the project, but also allows for necessary adjustments over time.

What the streaming service’s management failed to consider was the need to take time intervals into account.

Take Emily: the audience was confused when the sixth episode opened with Sylvie’s monologue at the staff Christmas party.

The autumn season in the plot gave way to winter so abruptly, and familiar characters were replaced by newcomers, that many had to rewatch the previous episode to understand the events.

Although this hardly helped.

“The cheerful outfits and unfamiliar faces make the second part seem like a new season, rather than a continuation of the existing one,” the reviewer complained.

The same pattern of confusing and annoying audiences was applied to Bridgerton, The Witcher, and Stranger Things.

Whether it is profitable for Netflix is ​​unknown, but it is already noticeable that the negativity among the audience is only increasing.

And given the abundance of competitors, this can come with financial losses.