I think talking about a show "around the water cooler" makes a show generally more enjoyable. The "water cooler" can be both in person, friends or coworkers, or just online.

I do think some shows, typically "bad" shows, using this method is fine. Since you can just skip/speed through a bad episode and just remember the good stuff. As an example Star Trek Discovery is a perfectly OK show. A solid, "Yeah, it's not so bad." Watching it week to week is generally a bore, but speed running it makes it worth it.

[–] golli@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I think there should be more variety in how shows are released and it should be based on what the creators feel like suits them best.

Something like Severance definitely benefits from the weekly release to give everyone time to speculate and keep up the suspense for longer.

With others it's nice to just get the full season at once. I wouldn't even say "bad" shows, but shows that are skewe more towards pure entertainment, action and mindless distraction (which do have their purpose). Something like say Reacher would fit that category imo

Andor struck an interesting middle ground imo by releasing 3 episode blocks at a time. For me that worked great. It gave us a similar amount of content like a long movie per week, which considering the quality was basically film level was the right balance between giving enough to feel like it was a full load of content, but not so much that you cant keep up and appreciate it.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I do like small chunks. I think 2 episode premiere plus a 2 episode finale is great. I think Andor did an excellent job with mini movies every week. I'm happy different shows experiment. Overall as long as we have a week to week momentum, I'm in.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 1 points 22 hours ago

used to be 1 week per show, now its the whole season in a given year, then they skip a year or 2, plus limited to very little episode per season.