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

There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

indiewire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 81 posts

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#51

Post by badpun »

CydeWeys wrote: post #18
gammateam wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

House of cards: filler by season 3 and the last season turning into an incoherent mess to deal with the accepted but voluntary PR response of axing the main character, out of all possible responses. Orange is the new black: loses all forms of ‘conflict’ as a literary device by season 3 And these are the flagship titles! Low bar Edit: since downvotes pause my ability to post for hours so I cant even respond, the only…

Firing a serial sexual harasser of his own coworkers is more of an HR thing than it is a PR thing. You simply cannot keep someone like that employed; it's way too much of a legal liability. Also, many people would refuse to work with someone like that entirely, out of principle. Maybe they should have canceled the series entirely instead of continuing on without him, but keeping him employed on the show was never an…

If it an HR/legal issue, he could be brought in as a contractor.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#52

Post by friedman23 »

vonseel wrote: post #38
friedman23 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you, outside of a few productions the vast majority of netflix content isn't good. Black Mirror, Stranger Things, the new movie the Ballad of Buster Scruggs... I can't think of anything else I like from them. Amazon has the same problem, both Amazon and Netflix seem to pump out tv shows without putting that much work into them going for quantity over quality. First Amazon show I actually enjoyed was the…

Watch The OA. Refer to my comment history for other titles you might like.

of

  - Narcos
  - The OA
  - The Haunting of Hill House
  - Marvel series. All of them!
  - GLOW
  - Ozark
  - Altered Carbon
  - American Vandal
  - 13 Reasons Why
I've seen all of Altered Carbon, some of Ozark, some of Narcos, and 2 seasons of Marvel (Daredevil season 1 and 2).

None of them were particularly amazing.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#53

Post by friedman23 »

cortesoft wrote: post #12
21 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As opposed to broadcast and cable? Which is why nobody bothers checking out broadcast/cable shows anymore. They have become synonyms with crap. Netflix is playing a dangerous game here by letting content quality slip. And I don't think it's about the money, they obviously have it and are willing to spend it, but there is only so much acting/producing talent out there.

So you are basically saying everything is crap?

Are you saying that almost everything isn't crap?

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#54

Post by throwaway98121 »

vonseel wrote: post #32

Someone recently commented elsewhere that they were tired of paying for streaming access to a bunch of shows nobody wants to watch, and they wanted access to the most popular movies/network shows/whatever. I didn't comment then, but FWIW: some of the best shows available are now streaming originals from Netflix, Prime, etc. If you haven't checked out specifically any of the Netflix originals, you're missing out. It's…

We recently binge watched both seasons of Stranger Things. Stranger Things and Altered Carbon on Netflix and The Marvelous Mrs Maisal and The Expanse on Amazon have been my most enjoyed shows this year.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#55

Post by sien »

WalterBright wrote: post #28
sigi45 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everything can be that good, unfortunate. There have never been too many Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad or StarTrek Voyager. But Netflix has still lots of other shows to over. They just have all Star Trek series. They buyout really good shows (Like Black Mirror) and there catalog is only growing. That for only 10,- Euros. Spotify costs me the same! I bought DVDs and rented VHSrs before. I don't mind paying it to N…

There was a ton of "made for TV" content in the 70's and 80's, for example, TV movies. It has all vanished. It's not even on imdb.com. I wonder why nobody is streaming it. On the other hand, I've noticed that record companies are reaching further and further into their back catalogs, even going back into the 1950s, and re-releasing on CDs long unavailable stuff. (I notice this because I often buy thrift store records…

There is a bit of it on Youtube. Have you looked much there?

Even things like 'Der Fahnder' a German TV cop show. Some episodes of The Rockford Files are there. Some Barney Miller.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#56

Post by bobthepanda »

booleandilemma wrote: post #17
pgrote wrote: post #7

It is funny how the thing that is breaking the cable stronghold is the same thing that will bring it back. By 2020 there will be at least 15 competing streaming services backed by large entertainment companies. How many subscriptions will people end up paying for then? Someone will then have the idea to consolidate it into one or two packages. Rinse, repeat.

This time it’s without commercials, at least. I recently watched plain old tv again (after not watching any for several years) and I can’t believe we used to put up with those! It was like I suddenly turned off my adblocker.

Well, depends - the lowest tier of Hulu has ads. Nothing's stopping anyone from being greedy and introducing ads anyways.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#57

Post by TeMPOraL »

SpaceManiac wrote: post #42
slothtrop wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised that consumers on the whole are quick to suggest they'd rather pay for one streaming service only, by which they mean one consolidated service rather than one over a competitor. I'd rather see it as competitive as possible. It's OK NOT TO SEE EVERYTHING.

I imagine most people don't want to see everything, but want to see ten things which are split across five different streaming services (with five different bills, five different user interfaces, and five different sets of quirks) by nothing but licensing. Television is not necessarily fungible.

Indeed. Television is definitely not fungible, and TV shows are not substitute goods. What you want to watch is a combination of your interests and the cultural context in which you want to participate.

If the top 3 shows talked about by my co-workers are each exclusively on a different paid service, you can be sure I'm gonna dig out my trusty Torrent client.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#58

Post by pjc50 »

conanbatt wrote: post #44
xur17 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also had to stop using ad-block due to some work-related regulations, and I should demand compensation from the state on that. I'd love to hear more about this if you don't mind.

I work in healthcare: any plugin with access to your rendered pages is a massive liability.

Interesting that having ads profile the browser - and in many cases the ads or metrics have access to the page - isn't. I wonder if you could persuade them to drop a few domains at the router.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#59

Post by TeMPOraL »

sigi45 wrote: post #19
21 wrote: post #2

On Netflix most of their own series are low production value crap. I don't even bother checking them anymore even if the subject sounds interesting, unless I hear about them in the media first. This can't be good for them in the long run if the Netflix name becomes associated with filler content.

Not everything can be that good, unfortunate. There have never been too many Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad or StarTrek Voyager. But Netflix has still lots of other shows to over. They just have all Star Trek series. They buyout really good shows (Like Black Mirror) and there catalog is only growing. That for only 10,- Euros. Spotify costs me the same! I bought DVDs and rented VHSrs before. I don't mind paying it to N…

> They just have all Star Trek series.

That was the reason I subscribed all those years ago. They also had Star Trek movies (the pre-JJAbrams ones), but now they're gone.

This is a huge problem with Netflix for me. Things are there today for me to watch, but they're gone the next week, just when I wanted to show them to my wife.

Re: There Are Now More Shows Streaming Than There Are on Broadcast or Cable

#60

Post by redhale »

booleandilemma wrote: post #17
pgrote wrote: post #7

It is funny how the thing that is breaking the cable stronghold is the same thing that will bring it back. By 2020 there will be at least 15 competing streaming services backed by large entertainment companies. How many subscriptions will people end up paying for then? Someone will then have the idea to consolidate it into one or two packages. Rinse, repeat.

This time it’s without commercials, at least. I recently watched plain old tv again (after not watching any for several years) and I can’t believe we used to put up with those! It was like I suddenly turned off my adblocker.

Cable originally had no commercials as well...
Post reply on HN