Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

hollywoodreporter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 416 posts

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#311

Post by scarface74 »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #193
justahuman74 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more that Netflix just has poor execution on a lot of shows. When telling a story on TV, you often want to cut the story to the bone such that it can be understood quickly and entertain without confusing the viewer with side tangents that aren't central to the story. If a non-story-essential element is too prominent then the viewer might feel it's boring

This happened to Doctor Who. Too much emphasis on LGBTQ rather than good stories.

Would anyone say that a show emphasized heterosexuality too much?

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#312

Post by mhh__ »

WalterBright wrote: post #134
rchaud wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The implication being that anything outside of the anodyne mainstream of cable TV must be a concerted effort to brainwash the public. Netflix has many problems, the big ones being that they lost old shows like The Office and Friends, which hurts retention. And they also kill off promising new shows after 2 seasons to save money on renegotiating cast contracts. If you read comment sections however, you'll get a very d…

There's only so many times you can rewatch The Office and Friends. It can't be a major ongoing revenue source. > brainwash This has been going on forever. Check out "The Brady Bunch". Every episode revolves around a heavy-handed moral lesson. Go back even further and you've got the Hayes Code. Hollywood has always seen itself as morally superior to the rest of us, and hence entitled to preach to us. Though with all t…

You'd be surprised (or not). Personally I find it utterly bizarre but a few people I know literally do just watch the office and friends on a loop.

Quality (UK) Vs quantity (US) eh.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#313

Post by Siira »

lrem wrote: post #207
avl999 wrote: post #73

One thing I appreciate Netflix for is atleast they are willing to do the bare minimum and give me 720p on Linux. I am also an Amazon Prime subscriber but Amazon is literally forcing me to pirate their shows because they refuse to serve more than 480p on Linux. Was trying to watch Jack Reacher last weekend and the quality was so bad that it was probably 360p, gave up after 3 episodes and ended up torrenting the season…

I begrudgingly accepted this sad future and got a smart tv. The software is as awful as I assumed it will be. But every single platform trusts LG and just streams 4k without me even needing to keep up with updates.

As the parent alluded, you can just not respect copyright. They can either give you a decent experience, or they can be content with only having uneducated dummies as their customers. Alternatively, you can just not watch their shitty content.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#314

Post by hemreldop »

boredumb wrote: post #72

A pile of mid tier content that i'd flick through before exiting out after an episode Automatic previews Increasing pop politics seemingly shoe horned into everything I'd turn on Horrible comedians that were akin to ted talks/lectures or made for people who don't actually enjoy stand up comedy. Documentaries that were more ideological than interesting Signing and hiring ex politicians Searching is a chore and recomme…

No post body was provided.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#315

Post by troelsSteegin »

ghaff wrote: post #6

This chart [1] was making the rounds a while back. Whether you totally agree with its methodology or not, it certainly suggests that many people consider a huge swath of Netflix' content average at best. And for someone like me who doesn't watch a huge amount of video, that's not a great look. Tastes differ of course but my tastes aren't that out of the mainstream. And I'd rather a streaming service had a modest numb…

From the chart, Netflix has a lot of titles, relative to the other channels. I would think they could lean hard on recommending titles to niche audiences - getting viewer returns from titles in the long tail of popularity.

But, my experience as a viewer is frustrating - all I see are the Netflix recommendations for me - browsing, exploring and discovering are tedious. I see less than 5% of their catalog through their UI. I would like an "experience" over the Netflix catalog with faceted search.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#316

Post by mtts »

scarface74 wrote: post #311
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happened to Doctor Who. Too much emphasis on LGBTQ rather than good stories.

Would anyone say that a show emphasized heterosexuality too much?

Yes. Even before the source material for GOT dried up it was borderline unwatchable due to the constant nudity.

I’m really not a prude, I hope, but I prefer to keep my intriguing and backstabbing separate from my softcore pornography.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#317

Post by [deleted] »

suriyaG wrote: post #256
ralusek wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you've just done that. The answer is that it's obviously not that simple. What we know is that there has been a large percentage increase in the number of people identifying as queer. One hypothesis is that this is because there was previously a certain percentage of the population who was queer, but the societal cost for identifying as such was sufficiently high so as to prevent them from doing so. It is therefo…

I agree that your hypothesis is a possibility. But, what type of advantage does identifying as LGBTQ provide that is not in being a heterosexual?

[deleted]

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#318

Post by nonameiguess »

_Algernon_ wrote: post #304
boredumb wrote: post #72

A pile of mid tier content that i'd flick through before exiting out after an episode Automatic previews Increasing pop politics seemingly shoe horned into everything I'd turn on Horrible comedians that were akin to ted talks/lectures or made for people who don't actually enjoy stand up comedy. Documentaries that were more ideological than interesting Signing and hiring ex politicians Searching is a chore and recomme…

Only good (original) thing coming out of NF is the first season of House of Cards and Bojack Horseman. Definitely never been worth a monthly subscription. CMV

Narcos and Narcos: Mexico were both good. Dark, Katla, Frontera Verde. I guess those are all non-English speaking, or in Narcos' case, mixed language. As long as you don't hate subtitles, there's been good stuff. Russian Doll, Big Mouth, and Arcane were all pretty terrific among English speaking. Brand New Cherry Flavor wasn't mind-blowing, but more than worth watching. Same with Stranger Things. That's just content from the last couple years.

Netflix honestly has plenty of good content. You just have to not use the in-app recommendation system at all and find content through traditional sources, i.e. word of mouth, professional critics, and industry publications, then search directly. As long as they allow you to find a title by name when you already know the name, they're fine.

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#319

Post by op00to »

russelldjimmy wrote: post #165
Spivak wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if representation is fine what do you want it to look like? Because by your rules black people aren’t allowed to have fun fantasizing about being a pirate sailing the high seas in colonial England, a trans man can’t be in a WWII fiction fighting nazis, a woman can’t be in a medical drama about stopping the cholera outbreak. So if they can’t be key roles (i.e. important at all to the plot) minorities should be rele…

I agree with the other poster. It’s not relatable. No offence to the minorities. It feels like forced messaging to the rest of us. Why represent only minorities in race, ethnicity and sexuality? Why not represent people such as war widows, people with skin diseases, mental disabilities, people with above average heights, obese people, etc.? For those of us not living in the USA, it feels like cultural imperialism. “W…

“Rest of us”

Who is “us” and who is not worthy to be represented?

You realize you’re free not to watch if seeing people that look or live differently than you is upsetting, right?

Re: Netflix’s big power clash and rivalries behind the crash

#320

Post by op00to »

dazc wrote: post #299
ikr678 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shows produced outside of the US are generally better on the diversity of appearance front. UK content particular is much more watchable for me, as actors are closer to regular people you'd see on the street vs the very thin, athletic, impossibly white toothed American casting ideal.

UK produced shows are going the same way though. Inter-racial families, asian/black detectives and police chiefs, people living in million pound homes despite having average income jobs, etc. Maybe it's me but this doesn't represent regular people I see on the street?

You can tell if someone’s spouse is another race just by looking at a single person on the street? This is amazing, tell me more!
Post reply on HN