Interactive series have sown the seeds of controversy and, although we are aware of it’s huge cons, we believe that, as any trend placing consumer at the center, it shouldn’t be underestimated. We take a closer look at different examples of series where interactivity with the audience is key.

As with any other trend, enthusiastic opponents have already emerged against interactive series. Some experts state that this kind of content doesn’t adapt to what the audience want, that is, a finished product that doesn’t force them into calling the shots. Some even say, not without reason, that having to create several endings may ultimately lead to a quality decrease of the product as a whole.

Obviously, all that glitters is not gold and they may demand a huge effort. The multiplicity of plots involve a significant increase of time invested in the script, in the shooting and in post-production, and therefore higher costs. No one ever said innovating would be easy.

Seems like some companies, such as the ones we mentioned at our previous post still think interactivity is worth it. But they weren’t the only ones to jump on the bandwagon of interactivity, a term, by the way, that has proved to be especially broad.

As an example, seems like Matt Damon and Ben Affleck’s series, The Runner, is finally getting off the ground. This series will be starring a “runner” that may have to travel the USA accomplishing several tasks for 30 consecutive days in order to win one million dollars.

As for the interactive element, the audience will be given the possibility of winning a prize if they manage to “chase” the player through a mobile app. Whether we like it or not, these two Hollywood star’s risky production is the perfect combination of fiction, reality tv and mobile interactivity.

 

And talking about celebrities, seems like we finally have some more details about Mosaic, the future HBO interactive adventure with Sharon Stone and the Oscar-winning director, Steven Soderbergh.

The main difference between this series and the ones we have already mentioned is that, rather than creating different plots, the spectator may have the freedom to navigate the different fragments of the series. In other words, if the previous examples were the tv version of “Choose Your Own Adventure”, “Mosaic” would be a sort of Julio Cortazar’s Hopscotch.

Rayuela. Series Interactivas/ Hopscotch Interactive series

But if you are not willing to assume the risk and cost that the previous examples may suppose. You can always choose a model similar to Amazon Studios’ one. This giant’s producer division uses interactivity, precisely, to reduce the risks.

So they have created a production chain where film or series creators send their proposals to a web page where any internet user can vote for them. According to this ranking, Amazon decides whether to take a chance on a project or not. They do not seem to be doing bad, the award-winning Transparent is a very good example of this:

 

It is true that interactive series eliminate narrative structures but, we never get tired of repeating that this century is for the brave and that the introduction-body-ending should never be an imposition.

Here, in MediaBank team, we stand by freedom and this industry’s democratization so, back to this post’s first question: Interactive series, for or against? We are definitely in favor.

So, if you own the rights of a series, interactive or not, that you would like to trade, upload it to our platform today and we will take it to MIPCOM. Only 10 days left!