Netflix Flexes
My takeaway from Bird Box is that if Netflix wants to make any of their original content one of the most-watched media events of the year, they can do it, regardless of the quality of the content itself.All it takes is for them to slip it in to people's "custom, curated" lists at a higher frequency, and maybe do a little subtle social-media engineering on Reddit/Facebook, and bam: instant box office smash of a derivative film with a 66% on Rotten Tomatoes.That's a huge "flex".  Big studios could pump hundreds of millions into a decent film and still have it flop.  Netflix can take a B-movie and make it a sensation with relative ease.  No wonder every game in town is trying to break into this model.  Why invest millions on a potential flop when you can engineer one with 75% accuracy whenever you wish?(though maybe I'm being just a bit too paranoid here. I have to admit some of the Bird Box magic stems from its intriguing concept. guerilla marketing doesn't work so well if what you're selling doesn't seem too interesting)edit: people are debating the idea of "box office smash" here.  I didn't use that phrase to emphasize direct earnings as a result of the film (which is "free" to watch if you pay for a subscription).  The article addresses this:> Secondly, and relatedly, Netflix is counting on subscription revenue. To that end, producing a piece of content that 58% of its subscriber base viewed in a single month is by definition a triumph (and yes, worth ~$700 million).The idea is that Netflix was able to coerce more than half of its subscribers to watch this film.  That's crazy.  The result, as we see in the article, is a tidal-wave of Bird Box achieving near-meme status.  How does that feel to someone who does not have a Netflix subscription?  What big joke/story are they missing out on?  For only $14.99 a month, they can win social acceptance by being "in the know" of the current big thing.