Live data from Hacker News

The Slow Death of Hollywood

mattstoller.substack.com

181–190 of 267 posts

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#181
> This means separating out the industry into production, distribution, and retailing.

I'd welcome that, less exclusives - better for the end user. Except retailing is obsolete in this context. In the digital world, it's only production and distribution.

And films should be available to buy digitally DRM-free, not just rented, Netflix-like.

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you live in or near a fairly large urban center, or some large college towns, you won't find movie theaters showing small films.

Why are you blaming Hollywood for the lack of local distribution? Hollywood made the movies. It's up to the local theater to actually show them. They generally don't because it's not worth the money to do so outside of big cities and college towns. (Hollywood hasn't controlled the theater industry since 1948, when the courts ruled that studios owning theaters was a violation of antitrust law. See United States v. Par…

[deleted]

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix also has lots of detailed data about what kind of ingredients people want in their sausage. Would make sense for them to start being quite specific with the suppliers what they want to get. This is not just on high level. You could track on individual episodes and even inside episodes (for example do you pause, switch to another app).

The "ingredients" in this analogy are mostly human capital/contractors and locations used in pre/production/post. For example, Netflix doesn't really have the ability to see how much the choice of caterer on set influences their churn. That's contrived, but I hope it illustrates the point. There are dozens to hundreds of these contractors who work on serious productions, and some studios are more integrated than othe…

Netflix is in fact getting quite granular with production pipelines, as evidenced by this blog post - https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/studio-production-data-s...

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#185
post #64

Hollywood is hanging itself by its own velvet rope. Remakes are seen as an excellent investment because, so long as they are properly stylized and full of dazzle, they are low-risk and have reasonable returns. Usually. This won't work for them forever, and I think everyday people are catching on to the fact that they're just being resold the same stuff they've already bought. The other day, my cousin's 11 year old so…

> everyday people are catching on to the fact that they're just being resold the same stuff they've already bought. But Hollywood have always done this - recycling old ideas in new wrapping. And Hollywood have always been criticized for being vapid entertainment, empty spectacle etc. "catching on to the fact" suggest that this is some secret insight which undermines the enjoyment of the movie. But I'm pretty sure mos…

> But Hollywood have always done this - recycling old ideas in new wrapping. And Hollywood have always been criticized for being vapid entertainment, empty spectacle etc.

Not to this degree. The last good year for movies was 1999. This is the list of major releases that year:

The Matrix

Fight Club

The Sixth Sense

Toy Story 2

The Green Mile

American Beauty

Being John Malkovic

Office Space

The Iron Giant

Magnolia

Austin Powers

American Pie

The Talented Mr. Ripley

Eyes Wide Shut

Dogma

Galaxy Quest

The Insider

Notting Hill

Man on the Moon

Analyze This

Detroit Rock City

Mystery Men

Bicentennial Man

This is not even the entire list, just the ones I enjoyed and I'm bothering to type.

You can't look at that list and honestly say nothing has changed, because it's just not true. The energy and creativity has clearly moved somewhere else, to TV and streaming services.

This year alone there's two FANTASTIC shows, Chernobyl and Stranger Things S3 that definitely deserve praise.

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#186

Hollywood is hanging itself by its own velvet rope. Remakes are seen as an excellent investment because, so long as they are properly stylized and full of dazzle, they are low-risk and have reasonable returns. Usually. This won't work for them forever, and I think everyday people are catching on to the fact that they're just being resold the same stuff they've already bought. The other day, my cousin's 11 year old so…

This won't work for them forever, and I think everyday people are catching on to the fact that they're just being resold the same stuff they've already bought.

Not according to the numbers....

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/?view2=ytdcompare

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lower cost vs cable is a mirage. Once TV is finished balkanizing into separate streaming services, expect the cost of signing up for everything you had on cable to add up to about the cost of a cable subscription.

Most people I know cycle through the streaming services instead of subscribing to everything on the market. Streaming video is a very different product than cable. A single service gives you more on-demand content than you could ever watch. There's no particular rush to see a series since every season of a show is usually available. With cable you need the hundreds of channels to have any chance of finding something…

Everything is distributed in my family. I'm on my parents netflix, my brother's hbogo, and I offer my hulu account. There's probably another half dozen close friends who've ended up with these passwords one way or another as well.

Pretty much all my peers are bumming someone's password, too.

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#188
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But Hollywood have always done this - recycling old ideas in new wrapping. Yes, but I think it's safe to say that there were a lot more original movies a few decades ago than there are now. Hollywood used to take more risks. >According to Wikipedia, Aladdin grossed "$923.7 million, against a production budget of $183 million". So despite you and your nephew, Disney seem to manage OK. Exactly. People are bemoaning th…

> Yes, but I think it's safe to say that there were a lot more original movies a few decades ago than there are now. Hollywood used to take more risks. It's harder to get people to go to the theater due to a bunch of factors like improved TV tech and increased competition for time, but "hollywood" is also capitalizing on those things. Look at how many original series are on Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, etc, and compare tha…

Not according to the numbers.

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/?view2=ytdcompare

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#189
Yes, Hollywood has long ago gone stale.

Too many movies today rely on reboots or sequels. The system itself is terribly corupt, ala Weinstein. The fame business has raised a pack of entitled, self-important cry babies.

More power to Amazon and Netflix. We deserve better.

Re: The Slow Death of Hollywood

#190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He told us he didn't want to see it because they(Disney) were just taking a 2D movie that he'd already seen and are just doing the same thing again Interestingly, the original Aladdin is no longer available for sale. Netflix, Amazon, Google Play, Walmart....whatever. You either need to buy a disc from a garage sale, or pirate it.

Not just an Aladdin thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_Vault > The "Disney Vault" was a term used by Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment for its policy of putting home video releases of Walt Disney Animation Studios's animated features on moratorium. Each Disney film was available for purchase for a limited time, after which it is put "in the vault" and not made available in stores for several years until…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN