zlacker

[return to "Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros"]
1. pharte+n4[view] [source] 2025-12-05 12:50:48
>>meetpa+(OP)
I don't like this. Netflix rarely creates excellent content; instead, it frequently produces mediocre or worse content. Will the same happen for Warner? Are cinemas now second behind streaming?

Edit: I agree Netflix has good Originals. But most are from the early days when they favored quality over quantity. It is sad to see that they reversed that. They have much funding power and should give it to great art that really sticks, has ambitions and something to tell, and values my time instead of mediocrity.

◧◩
2. jmkd+x9[view] [source] 2025-12-05 13:20:11
>>pharte+n4
Cinema is indeed second behind streaming. The theatrical window is now so short (~40) days that audiences are happy to wait for the increased benefits and reduced cost of watching at home.
◧◩◪
3. PearlR+Di[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:07:29
>>jmkd+x9
This was inevitable. Technology was bound to catch up. Hollywood actually panicked in the 1960s. But those screens were tiny. Nobody wants to see the Godfather on a cheap 1974 Panasonic.

But TV today is at least 55 inch and in crisp 4k resolution. A modern TV is good enough for most content.

It is not Netflix that killed the movieplex. They were just the first to utilise the new tools. The movie theater became the steam locomotive.

◧◩◪◨
4. Retric+Jk[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:18:50
>>PearlR+Di
55” TV’s have been out for decades they really aren’t a replacement especially when put in a normal living space.

The issue IMO is so few movies are worth any extra effort to see. Steam a new marvel movie and you can pause half way through when you’re a little bored and do something else.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. sbarre+Qm[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:29:40
>>Retric+Jk
I got a 4k 55" TV for $299 earlier this year. It weighs maybe 10lbs, and is super thin and fits on the wall.

Large 4k TVs being this accessible/affordable for most households has not been an option for "decades"..

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Retric+io[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:35:29
>>sbarre+Qm
Screen size makes little difference for an individual they can just sit closer, viewing angels are the problem for a family where 55” doesn’t cut it.

4k also makes little difference here, most people really don’t care as seen by how many people use simple HD vs 4k streaming.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. vharis+sI[view] [source] 2025-12-05 16:00:53
>>Retric+io
Living rooms are not that big to start with. I don't think you actually asked anyone's opinion on this! :D

Small TVs are not comfortable to watch. No one I know is okay with getting a smaller TV and moving their sofa closer. That sounds ridiculous. If there's any comfort to this capatilistic economy, it is the availability of technology at throw away prices. Most people would rather spend on a TV than save the money.

As for the theatre being obsolete, I do agree with you, atleast to some extent. I think everyone is right here. All factors combined is what makes going to the theatre not worth the effort for most of the movies. It's just another nice thing, not what it used to be.

Also, the generational difference too. I think teen and adolescents have a lot of ways to entertain themselves. The craze for movies isn't the same as it used to be. And we grew old(er). With age, I've grown to be very picky with movies.

[go to top]