It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:41 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1713 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 65, 66, 67, 68, 69  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2017 6:38 pm 
Bringing Out El Duende
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City
Image Image
Bittoo Boss & Kama Sutra, two Hindi films I caught on the streaming service today were quite different experiences. I can't recommend Bittoo at all. Indian tv star, Pulkit Samrat, who plays a talented wedding video shooter, made his admirable feature film debut. But the film has a wayward script that goes south about halfway and not nearly enough dance numbers for this less-than-typical Bollywood flick. It's a shame, too, because Samrat moves well. Director, Mira Nair's Kama Sutra is in a different class altogether. A classic tale set in 16th century India, Nair captures a refreshingly authentic sensual Punjabi love story. It's one of my faves that is also available as a Netflix download (one of the few times I've bothered with this feature). The soundtracks to both films are superb.
Good Nair Interview


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
I know it's been a while, but Netflix can go fuck themselves with their new and useless ratings system. It's there any way to circumvent this bullshit and find their old system of ratings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2017 10:56 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm
If you still have DVD rentals you can use their old system through that part of the website.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2017 2:19 am 
Bringing Out El Duende
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City
dx23 wrote:
I know it's been a while, but Netflix can go fuck themselves with their new and useless ratings system. It's there any way to circumvent this bullshit and find their old system of ratings?

Hear, hear. Now to convert family members to APrime, whose rating system is almost as dysfunctional, but whose selection is far more varied.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2017 10:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
ando wrote:
Hear, hear. Now to convert family members to APrime, whose rating system is almost as dysfunctional, but whose selection is far more varied.

I have Amanzon Prime and have been using it as frequently as Netflix. Still, the ratings system there sucks too like you mentioned.

captveg wrote:
If you still have DVD rentals you can use their old system through that part of the website.

Unfortunately, I dropped the DVD rental part a while ago.

I wonder if the ratings system change is just a ploy so people would be fooled to watch all those shitty Netflix Adam Sandler films even though they were getting horrible reviews.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:59 pm 

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:50 pm
It came about almost immediately after Amy Schumer's last stand up special was trashed by everyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2017 12:46 am 
Bringing Out El Duende
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City
dx23 wrote:
ando wrote:
Hear, hear. Now to convert family members to APrime, whose rating system is almost as dysfunctional, but whose selection is far more varied.

I have Amanzon Prime and have been using it as frequently as Netflix. Still, the ratings system there sucks too like you mentioned.

Just a note regarding AP movie reviews: you can submit a review by hitting the "view all reviews" tab at the bottom of the feature page. It'll take you to the Amazon site where all the reviews are displayed.

Btw, having fun exploring their streaming catalogue. I use the Just Watch search engine (Instantwatch equivalent) in conjunction with Prime Movies. Smart filters.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 8:28 pm
Location: Greenwich Village
Christopher Nolan is not a fan of Netflix...Some of his points I don't necessarily agree with, like this one
[Reveal] Spoiler:
He shrugged off the notion that TV was somehow supplanting movies in popular culture.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 9:34 pm 

Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 3:04 pm
FrauBlucher wrote:
Christopher Nolan is not a fan of Netflix...Some of his points I don't necessarily agree with, like this one
[Reveal] Spoiler:
He shrugged off the notion that TV was somehow supplanting movies in popular culture.


I'm with him on many of these points. The one you've singled out...I think it's more he doesn't want to accept it, even if it seems true.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:20 pm 
Bringing Out El Duende
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City
Looks like the old rating system is back. Slipshod as it is it's better than none at all. Still, when I did a highest rating filter on instantwatcher the drop off in classics and well regarded contemporary films since my last search was depressing. APrime's been my go to service lately. Loads of junk but some interesting stuff as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:15 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Netflix just purchased Millarworld. Millarworld is the comic book company of Mark Millar and includes such properties like Wanted, Secret Service, Kick-Ass and Empress. I imagine Netflix will do series/movies of these properties and also determine which comic book companies publish new stories/ reprints of these properties.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:28 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
Location: East Coast, USA
John Shade wrote:
FrauBlucher wrote:
Christopher Nolan is not a fan of Netflix...Some of his points I don't necessarily agree with, like this one
[Reveal] Spoiler:
He shrugged off the notion that TV was somehow supplanting movies in popular culture.


I'm with him on many of these points. The one you've singled out...I think it's more he doesn't want to accept it, even if it seems true.


I don't know about that. Television seems to be supplanting film at the moment because they are heading to a meeting in the middle. As theaters and film studios have made the theatrical experience less impressive with low-res digital technology, the same technology has been embraced by television to improve its own status. Digital capture and mastering has effectively blurred the lines between what is television and what is theatrical feature, since both mediums are now often prepared and presented the same way. At the same time, digital effects have allowed television to accomplish things previously reserved for features, just as feature films will utilize many of the same digital effects tools unless budgets allow for more time and money to be spent.

Netflix is right in the middle of this, as they essentially prepare high-end television series and low-to-mid-range feature films for what is effectively a la carte television distribution. They are essentially an on demand television channel, which is really what all home streaming is.

Now, whether or not anyone wants to acknowledge this has yet to be seen, but my hope is that sometime in the next decade, there is a realization of what is happening to movies, and a re-embrace of celluloid film. Let digital mastering (and if need be, digital capture) continue for television, and focus on superior celluloid (and maybe even other analog) methods for film (and highly regarded television) production. In other words, picking up where we left off before things like Attack of the Clones. I have often wondered where we would be with film had it continued to be the dominant medium into the 21st century, anyway, considering that celluloid seemed to improve every decade it was in major use. I don't know, maybe that's a billionaire level of crazy, but I just think digital production and distribution has really ruined cinema, and has threatened the profitability of films and television produced in the future, and nowhere else is this more evident to me than the rise of prestige television, coupled with the declines in theater-going.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:11 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico
Disney is pulling out of their agreement with Netflix in 2019 because they are starting their own streaming service. Just what people asked, another streaming service. :roll: Although this kind of explains why they purchase Millarworld. Disney will probably pull all the Marvel content out of their service too. WB is already doing it with their DC Comics property as they are also starting a DC Comics-based streaming service.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:01 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:14 pm
"Netflix, Streaming Video and the Slow Death of the Classic Film"

Quote:
Netflix’s selection of classic cinema is abominable—and it seems to shrink more every year or so. As of this month, the streaming platform offers just 43 movies made before 1970, and fewer than 25 from the pre-1950 era (several of which are World War II documentaries). It’s the sort of classics selection you’d expect to find in a decrepit video store in 1993, not on a leading entertainment platform that serves some 100 million global subscribers. Netflix’s DVD subscribers enjoy a much wider selection (four million customers still opt to receive discs in the mail), but as the company shifts its focus to streaming and original content, cinephiles fear the cinematic canon is being left behind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 12:01 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
While I am grateful Netflix came through with the money to complete Orson Welles' The Other Side of the Wind, it's kind of crazy to think that, once completed, the film will be the only Welles film streaming on Netflix!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 12:49 am
Location: Transylvania
I don't blame Netflix for not having a lot of pre-1970s movies. Just because they're the biggest streaming service doesn't mean they have an obligation to be a comprehensive catalog of cinema. I'm much more likely to lay blame on the studios who are utterly failing to exploit their classic holdings in any meaningful way. Why, for example, does Warner Archive Instant, after years of being in existence, still have such a pathetically small library of films? Why haven't the movie studios banded together to create a streaming service like the broadcast TV networks did to create Hulu years ago? Why don't the studios use the model of music streaming services like Spotify and Apple music and make their catalog titles available on multiple services? And I won't accept "because they are money-grubbing dinosaurs" as a proper answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:05 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Will you accept they are lazy and not terribly forward thinking?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:07 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
Werewolf by Night wrote:
I don't blame Netflix for not having a lot of pre-1970s movies. Just because they're the biggest streaming service doesn't mean they have an obligation to be a comprehensive catalog of cinema.

It's just kind of sad because they were for a while when they were still just a disc service.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:08 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am
Werewolf by Night wrote:
I don't blame Netflix for not having a lot of pre-1970s movies. Just because they're the biggest streaming service doesn't mean they have an obligation to be a comprehensive catalog of cinema. I'm much more likely to lay blame on the studios who are utterly failing to exploit their classic holdings in any meaningful way. Why, for example, does Warner Archive Instant, after years of being in existence, still have such a pathetically small library of films? Why haven't the movie studios banded together to create a streaming service like the broadcast TV networks did to create Hulu years ago? Why don't the studios use the model of music streaming services like Spotify and Apple music and make their catalog titles available on multiple services? And I won't accept "because they are money-grubbing dinosaurs" as a proper answer.


In short because they feel their IP is very valuable and Netflix doesn't compensate them fairly for it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 2:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
knives wrote:
Will you accept they are lazy and not terribly forward thinking?

Wouldn't having a huge library of films that are in some cases approaching a century old backward thinking?

I don't know why it is Netflix's responsibility to include classic films if they don't feel there is a demand for them - if there really is a void in the marketplace for them, another service should pop up and take on the task - either one that already exists, or one that doesn't yet. But Netflix isn't the public library system, it isn't taxpayer-funded. This forum is an anomaly - classic films are not a huge moneymaker, even for repertory theaters, who often have to rely on donations and volunteers to stay afloat. Regal and AMC aren't swooping them up in large numbers because they aren't profitable. I'd imagine that's the same reason why Netflix isn't exhibiting more classic cinema. It's tough to swallow, but I don't see how it's lazy.

swo17 wrote:
Werewolf by Night wrote:
I don't blame Netflix for not having a lot of pre-1970s movies. Just because they're the biggest streaming service doesn't mean they have an obligation to be a comprehensive catalog of cinema.

It's just kind of sad because they were for a while when they were still just a disc service.

This also seems like a void in the marketplace that could be filled by a competent (read: not Filmstruck based on how they've been executing on their promises) startup, even if they kept it to streaming-only instead of discs. But Netflix was gaining steam because of new releases and a handful of all-time favorites, not obscure classic films.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 3:21 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:52 am
Location: Wilmington, NC
My only major issue with that piece (and others like it) is that it ignores the existence of public libraries and their free movie collections, which from what I can tell from my standpoint remain well-loved and well-used. In criticizing the "something that isn't streaming may as well not exist" mindset, it ends up kind of upholding it by ignoring one of the main avenues regular people have of seeing films.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 3:36 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm
I don't mean to pick personal fights and don't mean it as an attack but I seriously do not get why so many here insist that Filmstruck is this colossal disappointment - they're getting app support around, but other than that it has far exceeded my wildest expectations with at least two categories being added each month to the non-Criterion side that make me go "wow!" The Godard selection this past week, for example - not exactly deep cuts, obviously, but it's *amazing* to just have this condensed greatest hits selection added for six months so anyone can do their own little intro to Godard.

Netflix's selection is abysmal but it's an inevitability - studios only make profit because of residuals from the library, and now that Netflix is building a library of its own it doesn't need other studios' to support it. More broadly speaking I get the sense something big is brewing with Amazon, which along with Hulu has went out of its way to pick up Netflix's slack and sign the deals they need for legacy content- I honestly think that with a focused relaunch that for the first time makes Amazon's streaming interface not a nightmare to navigate could severely cripple Netflix, which has suffered weeks of bad press starting with that report they were in tremendous debt (which, obviously, most companies are, but not by that magnitude) and culminating in last night's thrilling embarrassment at the Emmys as Hulu in a single night with a single show managed to pick up more major prizes than all of Netflix's dozens and dozens of shows have managed in five-plus years combined.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Filmstruck discussion, beginning with a quotation of the beginning paragraph of Ribs' post, has been moved here


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:31 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 12:32 pm
I hope it's ok to reiterate myself a little in this topic since I realize the first part of my post had more to do with Filmstruck (and I probably should've separated it into paragraphs) and I obviously don't expect you to split up my posts when moving them over based on which parts are on-topic. When I first started using streaming video back in college (around 2010) Netflix was pretty much all there was for movies and I was able to watch a lot of classic films, including a good amount of Criterion content. Once mubi and the Hulu criterion channel came around I started to branch out but I can't imagine what it would be like now with so many streaming services and the lack of overlap between them. I think it's fair to say Netflix is the first thing that comes to mind when most people think of streaming video; now the number of services articles like the one above have to mention as alternatives is getting comically large. Like Ribs said above, I think if Amazon relaunches with a slightly better interface (with add-on subscriptions available) it could do really well. Hell, I sometimes end up just digitally renting a movie on amazon for a few dollars instead of searching around to see if it's available to stream as part of a subscription elsewhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Netflix
PostPosted: Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:45 pm 

Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am
Y'know, it's a very Trumpian perspective on film preservation, this. I'm sure we're all aware that it's a free market business, but at the same time, shouldn't something that is an industry leader in presenting an art form have some obligation to also maintain it, against the worst impulses of an increasingly lazy, compromised consumer...in a perfect world? Even TV had public access, PUblic Television, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1713 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 65, 66, 67, 68, 69  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection