Live data from Hacker News

Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

nplusonemag.com

251–260 of 363 posts

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#251

Definitely not surprising. The quality of Netflix originals is on a decline for years. I see this label as a warning nowadays. There are enough good quality movies and shows. My life is too short to spend it with mediocre entertainment that leaves no lasting impression or thoughts. I don't need to pass time I want to make most out of it.

Agreed, previously, seeing Netflix Original would be like seeing a Lexus in a sea of Toyotas. Now I just think "store brand".

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#252
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is still good cinema and television, it's just shockingly difficult to find. The first person who figures out how to sort the wheat from the chaff and does so with no interior motive could be a millionaire immediately.

"could be a millionnaire immediately" is precisely the kind of techbro ulterior motive that creates these situations in the first place.

Exactly. Value extraction posing as value creation :)

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#253
post #17

Wait. They’re turning movies into audio books. That’s a good first step. Next to save bandwidth they’ll drop video and just display text on screen.

I often wonder about how much electricity is wasted (recording, encoding, transmitting, decoding) on videos where the video itself seems to add no actual value, and it would be just as effective as audio-only (or text-only) content instead. A study of YouTube videos in 2022 found that more than 15% of "videos" (i.e. billions of videos) contained only still images[1]. My wife watches a ton of short-form video (and in turn shows me the ones that she likes) and I'm baffled by how many are just scrolling text with people dancing in the background, or people holding up signs, or someone just talking into the camera (often sitting in the driver's seat of a car).

[1] https://journalqd.org/article/view/4066

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love apocalyptic movies (even ones that are not considered great) but the few I started watching on Netflix were really bad.

Can you name a good apocalyptic movie? I'm really struggling to come up with one. Twister, sort of, and that's neither good nor apocalyptic really. Edit: Twelve Monkeys. I think that counts.

Apocalypse Now, Apocalypto

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#255
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Covering the main character's face in a helmet isn't great for drama.

Sylvester Stallone thought the same about Judge Dredd. That was such a great movie because of the decision. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/judge-dredd-1995

I prefer the later version with Karl Urban - and to me it was expressive too.

Here’s a fun interview that includes a related question:

> Did having the helmet affect your acting at all? How did you maneuver around wearing that for the entire movie, and could you see through it?

> Oh yea [I could see through it], it took a bit to figure it out, it really did, and it was a challenge, you know, the challenge was how to communicate with an audience. And not only because my eyes weren’t visible, but because of the fact that the character of Dredd operates within a very narrow bandwidth, he is a man who has been trained to keep his emotions in check, so consequently it was very important for me to identify how I could humanize the character as much as possible. The sense of humor became very important, that dry, laconic sense of humor, and finding out where’s this character’s compassion? Where does his empathy lie?

NOTE: minor generic plot references follow.

https://reelreactions.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/reel-reaction...

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#256
post #191

Nowadays, whenever I browse Netflix, I feel like that Bruce Springsteen song, "57 Channels (And Nothin' On)."[a] Sure, there are lots of choices, but they all kinda suck . I find myself wondering, why? The OP weaves an insightful, opinionated narrative that explains how we got here. Much of it rings true. This passage, in particular struck a chord with me: > Several screenwriters who’ve worked for the streamer told m…

Well, people that want to half-watch TV deserve stuff made for them too.

Netflix has shows made for really watching too. I don't know if they are rebellious acts from their makers, brought without an option, or actual choices, but Netflix does have them.

My impression is that Netflix cornered themselves into the same AAA race to death that the major movie studios are in. Everything is too expensive, so they can't accept risks, so nothing is really good (nor really bad). Micromanaging is just one more visible consequence of that, between lots and lots that stay hidden but are as important to the final result.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#257
post #191

Nowadays, whenever I browse Netflix, I feel like that Bruce Springsteen song, "57 Channels (And Nothin' On)."[a] Sure, there are lots of choices, but they all kinda suck . I find myself wondering, why? The OP weaves an insightful, opinionated narrative that explains how we got here. Much of it rings true. This passage, in particular struck a chord with me: > Several screenwriters who’ve worked for the streamer told m…

There is still good cinema and television, it's just shockingly difficult to find. The first person who figures out how to sort the wheat from the chaff and does so with no interior motive could be a millionaire immediately.

This App Store review makes Mubi sound promising:

"MUBI IS TERRIBLE! *---- 6y ago • Nick2866 MUBI is terrible there's no good action or horror films it's crazy because almost all of the movies on the app I haven't even heard of and I'm a big movie buff. So just don't waste your time with MUBI just get Netflix or amazon prime."

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#258
post #191

Nowadays, whenever I browse Netflix, I feel like that Bruce Springsteen song, "57 Channels (And Nothin' On)."[a] Sure, there are lots of choices, but they all kinda suck . I find myself wondering, why? The OP weaves an insightful, opinionated narrative that explains how we got here. Much of it rings true. This passage, in particular struck a chord with me: > Several screenwriters who’ve worked for the streamer told m…

TV was also like this though. It's one of the first things you learn in a 20th century media class. Early TV shows were adapted from radio play scripts, and later written by radio play scriptwriters moving into the new format. That structure and its conventions stayed strongly influential right up until the end of prominent network TV shows. TV show creators understood and planned for people watching their shows in a…

My completely unscientific impression is that other services are making the effort to produce high-quality films and series, including Apple TV+ (Slow Horses, Silo, For All Mankind, Foundation, etc.), Max/HBO (Barry, Curb Your Enthusiasm, GoT, The Last of Us, etc.), FX (Shogun, The Bear, The Old Man, Fargo, etc.), and AMC (Better Call Saul, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, The Night Manager, etc.). Whatever you think of the quality of shows in those services, they at least show genuine effort to make things that don't suck.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#259

Netflix thought they could take on Hollywood and beat them at their own film game. But in the process they realized that it’s not actually a game worth winning, and more importantly, that YouTube and TikTok are their real competition, not Hollywood. The future of most media is video-based, and I think Netflix probably understands this and is trying to get away from the historical model as movies you watch online and…

> YouTube and TikTok are their real competition

Even in real-time... My wife will literally watch Facebook Reels on her phone while we sit on the couch at night to watch something on Netflix together.

Anyway, I was thinking about this too when the article talked about the data from Amazon showing that viewers preferred stuff from the 90s and 00s over their newly produced content: How are Netflix, Amazon, etc. doing with young adults? If the audience is all Millennials and Gen-X folks, because Gen-Z folks are exclusively watching short-form video instead, it would make sense that stuff from the 90s and 00s would be the most popular. Like I think this is a well-established phenomenon with music, where a person's lifelong preferences will be fixed on whatever they first heard during their high school or college years. I will absolutely pay for a streaming service that gives me access to all the movies and TV series from, say, 1990-2015 and never adds any new content.

Re: Casual Viewing – Why Netflix looks like that

#260
post #10

Netflix is going to kill their golden goose. It's already dying slowly, but they really should be just taking more risks. It's a streaming company run by people who seem to hate movies or tv.

People have predicted that for years, but so far it looks like Netflix is still one of the few that manage to do streaming profitably.

Turns out that catering to dumb consumer zombies is still a safe bet.

Post reply on HN