Netflix

Discuss North American DVDs and Blu-rays or other DVD and Blu-ray-related topics.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
flyonthewall2983
Posts: 8614
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Netflix

#1651 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Fri Apr 14, 2017 12:52 am

I'm big into Amazon Prime, especially since now they have available (with paid subscriptions of course) live feeds from HBO, Cinemax, Showtime and Starz. I got the Amazon TV box for Christmas and am digging all of it's functionality, which works especially with a Prime membership.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28518
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Netflix

#1652 Post by domino harvey » Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:48 pm


User avatar
knives
Posts: 13967
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Netflix

#1653 Post by knives » Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:53 pm

Its probably true with some interesting accounting. I remember the first one at least had the interesting habit of playing immediately after other films.

Isambard
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:14 pm

Re: Netflix

#1654 Post by Isambard » Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:40 pm

Could anyone offer recommendations for non-English language series on Netflix? I've only added Hotel Beau Sejour to my list because the premise sounded interesting but, beyond that, there's so little coverage that I don't know what would or wouldn't be worthwhile.

User avatar
captveg
Posts: 2595
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Netflix

#1655 Post by captveg » Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:32 pm

I think Netflix has some strong positives along with its negatives, but certainly one of its strong negatives so far is theatrical and home video distribution for its more prestigious films. Perhaps The Irishman will change that for them.

One thing I know is that I've never been so glad to have supported fund-raising campaigns than for the new MST3K and The Other Side of the Wind. I'm promised blu-ray releases of both, while those who didn't support the funding may never get a home video release of either.

User avatar
Ribs
Posts: 2847
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Netflix

#1656 Post by Ribs » Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:54 pm

As has weirdly been very ignored in all coverage of The Irishman, it's important to remember it's due to release in 2019. Netflix needs to get their act together well before then.

User avatar
captveg
Posts: 2595
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Netflix

#1657 Post by captveg » Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:01 pm

They should really think about following Amazon's strategy when it comes to feature films.

User avatar
Drucker
Posts: 4082
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am

Re: Netflix

#1658 Post by Drucker » Tue Apr 18, 2017 4:56 pm

captveg wrote:They should really think about following Amazon's strategy when it comes to feature films.
I hear about acclaimed films and have no idea going into it they are Amazon productions (Manchester by the Sea, Handmaiden) and that's definitely a success as far as I'm concerned.

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Posts: 1368
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Netflix

#1659 Post by ando » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:57 pm

Goody! An Orson Welles performance I've never seen - Jonathan Wilk, a defense lawyer in the infamous Leob-Leopold murder case. Wonder if the case has any relation to Hitchcock's Rope (Suppose a real cinephile would know :roll: , but a film from which I get far more thrills than Vertigo and Rear Window put together). Course, I'm always suspect of Welles' acting in other director's films as he often claimed to have loathed it (said Pasolini once asked him to play a pig.)

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28518
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Netflix

#1660 Post by domino harvey » Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:54 pm

ando wrote:Goody! An Orson Welles performance I've never seen - Jonathan Wilk, a defense lawyer in the infamous Leob-Leopold murder case. Wonder if the case has any relation to Hitchcock's Rope (Suppose a real cinephile would know :roll: , but a film from which I get far more thrills than Vertigo and Rear Window put together). Course, I'm always suspect of Welles' acting in other director's films as he often claimed to have loathed it (said Pasolini once asked him to play a pig.)
I hated this one, I'd temper your expectations as far as you can!

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Posts: 28518
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Netflix

#1661 Post by domino harvey » Wed Apr 19, 2017 8:12 pm

Posts about streaming and cinephiles moved here-- you won't believe what happens next!

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Posts: 1368
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Netflix

#1662 Post by ando » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:40 am

Enjoying the story of Joseph Stalin from a decidedly British point of view. Pity there isn't much time spent on the Soviet involvement in World War II in American primary schools. A major part of that conflict remains misunderstood or given short shrift by Westerners, in general. Perhaps this is changing now.

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Posts: 1368
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Netflix

#1663 Post by ando » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:12 am

domino harvey wrote:
ando wrote:Goody! An Orson Welles performance I've never seen - Jonathan Wilk, a defense lawyer in the infamous Leob-Leopold murder case. Wonder if the case has any relation to Hitchcock's Rope (Suppose a real cinephile would know :roll: , but a film from which I get far more thrills than Vertigo and Rear Window put together). Course, I'm always suspect of Welles' acting in other director's films as he often claimed to have loathed it (said Pasolini once asked him to play a pig.)
I hated this one, I'd temper your expectations as far as you can!
Pretty awful. Welles was... not good. Seemed exhausted.

Image
Ok, it'd be hard to go wrong here: Mifune.

User avatar
Aunt Peg
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:30 am

Re: Netflix

#1664 Post by Aunt Peg » Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:20 am

Does anyone know if Netflix have any plans to release their product on home media (DVD and/or Blu Ray) sometime in the future?

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 12210
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Netflix

#1665 Post by MichaelB » Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:49 am

Aunt Peg wrote:Does anyone know if Netflix have any plans to release their product on home media (DVD and/or Blu Ray) sometime in the future?
From what I gather, no.

User avatar
knives
Posts: 13967
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Netflix

#1666 Post by knives » Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:59 pm

Have they given a reason why? It's very annoying to have some of these films come with such a high barrier.

User avatar
movielocke
Posts: 2320
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Netflix

#1667 Post by movielocke » Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:52 pm

Because one makes a ton more money on all customers buy a subscription model, than on a some customers buy some things sometimes model

User avatar
MichaelB
Posts: 12210
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Netflix

#1668 Post by MichaelB » Sat Apr 29, 2017 10:07 am

And streaming to 10,000 customers is infinitely cheaper than pressing, packaging and releasing 10,000 discs.

Perkins Cobb
Posts: 2449
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:49 pm

Re: Netflix

#1669 Post by Perkins Cobb » Sat Apr 29, 2017 12:20 pm

It depends on what "product" you're talking about though ... Beasts of No Nation is still conspicuously absent on any physical media more than a year and a half after Netflix "released" it, but at least their original TV shows seem to get DVD and Blu releases sometime before the next season arrives.

calculus entrophy
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Netflix

#1670 Post by calculus entrophy » Sat Apr 29, 2017 2:28 pm

Its not quite a tin foil hat strategy to acquire physical media....rather, its because a work on physical media need only be purchased once....whereas streaming is the ultimate corporate expression because they get income over and over again from customers for the same exact content. It becomes a de facto tithe.

And here I sound like I'm from another century.....wait, here comes the 50th anniversary ultimate director's cut steelbook engraved limited edition from a new 4k scan. LOL

User avatar
knives
Posts: 13967
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Netflix

#1671 Post by knives » Sat Apr 29, 2017 3:08 pm

That's gross. Also doesn't that break antitrust laws like the vertical integration theaters of the studio era?

User avatar
captveg
Posts: 2595
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Netflix

#1672 Post by captveg » Sat Apr 29, 2017 3:09 pm

knives wrote:That's gross. Also doesn't that break antitrust laws like the vertical integration theaters of the studio era?
Nobody has cared about that once media conglomerates bought TV networks in the mid-90s.

User avatar
knives
Posts: 13967
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Netflix

#1673 Post by knives » Sat Apr 29, 2017 3:12 pm

People caring and it being legal are two very different things.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Posts: 7322
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Netflix

#1674 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sat Apr 29, 2017 4:30 pm

knives wrote:People caring and it being legal are two very different things.
For all practical purposes, not really. If neither Democratic nor Republican Presidents (and/or Attorneys-General) care, the law becomes essentially meaningless.

User avatar
Gregory
Posts: 5281
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Netflix

#1675 Post by Gregory » Sat Apr 29, 2017 6:53 pm

But media consolidation on an unprecedented scale has been legal for two decades thanks to Bill Clinton's Telecommunications Act, an almost complete rollback of New Deal regulations, leading to the vast majority of the American media being owned by just five or six corporations, allowing Clear Channel to dominate radio, etc. Many have been tracking and responding to these long trends since years before the Clinton era and well into the FCC deregulation of the Bush years, so saying that nobody has cared about it since some time in the ’90s is really not accurate, but the media giants and their lobbyists were obviously far more influential. Virtually no one in the Senate or the House opposed the ’96 Telecommunications Act (Bernie Sanders was one of the few who did).

Post Reply