Netflix often doesn't worry about ratings of the preceeding series. Especially in a case like this, announcing a Season 3 before Season 2 shows their confidence in the quality of season 2, which is a good message to project to consumers
Plus, I'm sure the cost to produce Love is much cheaper than most other Netflix shows. No major actors, no crazy special effects or anything, episodes are only 25-30 minutes, etc.
people are gonna watch it off of Judd's name alone, plus that's more content they get to have in their library for people to stumble on forever, as opposed to movies which are dying at an alarming rate globally (or on netflix)
I agree, but unfortunately, the reason Season 3 of Bloodline will be its last (on Netflix anyway) is because of how much the cost is increasing now that they don't have the Florida tax break compared to how well received its been. So they still have to weigh cost vs ratings (or however they measure it) in some aspect.
that show is also an exception and not the rule considering it spends per episode money close to (if not more considering the range of some numbers i've seen) game of thrones. love, master of none, hell, probably even stranger things don't spend anywhere near that
bloodline was also fairly critically ignored, in a way none of those other shows really were. what other shows have netflix cancelled within three seasons like that, marco polo and the vampire one? both shows that sucked and critics ignored them bc of that. the network cares more about word of mouth and critical hype than straight up numbers.
Eh, season 1 of Bloodline was an 80% on rotten tomatoes and both seasons garnered Emmy and Goldeb Globe nominations. I personally loved S1...S2 was OK.
rotten tomatoes is a useless metric. globes are known for picking wacky things for noms/wins. i mean, mozart in the jungle surely isn't one of the best shows on tv, yet it won comedy of the year? the emmy matters, i'll give you that. no actual critics/weekly reviewers for any major pubs seem to like that show other than poking fun at its insanity edit: except mendelsohn's first season performance, which doesn't really save the show itself, but stands alone as great
The Golden Globes aren't any more disconnected from quality as any other awards show, Emmys and Oscars included. I know other awards have more prestige, but they all basically nominate the same middling stuff.
sure, absolutely. but globes are more likely to hop out ahead of other award shows and nominate a show in its first or second season that isn't getting traction elsewhere. it's happened repeatedly, even over the last few years. crazy ex girlfriend, jane the virgin, bloodlines, mozart, transparent, etc.