Netflix Now Only Has 31 Movies from IMDB's Top 250 List

Post by knicholes » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:42 PM UTC

paol wrote: post #318

bcrescimanno wrote: post #304

TL;DR: A former Netflix employee isn't surprised because films very little business sense for Netflix. Former Netflix employee here--though I left in late 2013. I remember sitting at a company meeting and Reed Hastings explaining that AAA film content was never going to be the bread-and-butter for Netflix for several reasons. Most importantly: Between traditional, "linear" television and Netflix, the experience that…

If that's the case, that leaves the problem (from the consumer's point of view) of where to get access to a complete(ish) catalog of films. Netflix actually achieved this back in the disc-by-mail days. So we're actually moving backwards. I'm not particularly ashamed to say I turn to unlicensed torrents for this purpose, but I would prefer if it weren't necessary.

Post by mhurron » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:44 PM UTC

forgetsusername wrote: post #213

gdulli wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea of having one bill for 200+ channels, a single remote/device, no need to change (ugh) apps or inputs on the TV when I go from one service to another. It seems like consolidation was a lesson we learned a few decades ago and are in danger of forgetting. I may only watch 10 channels out of 200+ but from month to month it's not always the same 10. A service like Netflix that would augment real, current T…

> A service like Netflix that would augment real, current TV with a library of older shows/movies would have been worth a separate bill. Yeah, for you (and me), as a customer. But what advantage is there for the content creator? You're not going to not watch Game of Thrones because it isn't on Netflix. You'll find a way. The content creators have (and in my opinion, rightfully so) the leverage.

Post by ensiferum » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:45 PM UTC

UVB-76 wrote: post #302

ensiferum wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well p2p such as torrent is for the bottom feeders. There are better methods available.

If you're referring to topsites, they are archaic, their rules are outdated, and they optimize for speed over quality of releases. In terms of breadth and quality of content, private torrent trackers are far and away the best download method.

Post by ArkyBeagle » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:45 PM UTC

Coincoin wrote: post #13

Here in Canada almost all English language content is licensed to a single company, Bell. They systematically deny any access to Netflix and started their own service, Crave TV. They are the one responsible for the great Proxy/VPN banning this year. They are taking advantage of a government granted monopoly they had in the 1900's and now control a disproportionate amount of the media in Canada.

Post by HeyLaughingBoy » Wed, Oct 12, 2016, 4:47 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #343

jackfrodo wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the definition of "binge-watching"? For me, that would be three episodes of Bojack Horseman, or about 75 minutes of content. On the other hand, I would happily watch a Tarantino film, say 140 minutes, in one sitting. I guess it doesn't count as a "binge" but it keeps me in front of Netflix longer than a television show.

Binge-watching is putting on a show and leaving it on for a good chunk of the day. Think watching a whole season of a show over a weekend, so at least 4 hours per day. And you can do this with every original Netflix series from the first day the show is launched - you don't have to wait a week per episode.