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. dpark+zp[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:41:49
>>Retric+io
> Screen size makes little difference for an individual they can just sit closer

This is silly. Most people don’t want to sit in a chair 3 feet from their TV to make it fill more of their visual area. A large number of people are also not watching movies individually. I watch TV with my family far more than I watch alone.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. Retric+ur[view] [source] 2025-12-05 14:49:29
>>dpark+zp
> This is silly.

Tell that to every streaming on their tablets sitting on their stomachs. People even watch movies on their phones but they aren’t holding them 15’ away.

Also you don’t need to sit 3’ from a 37” TV.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. dpark+4w[view] [source] 2025-12-05 15:10:17
>>Retric+ur
No one says the experience of watching on their tablet matches the experience of watching a movie in the theater.

But this isn’t the point. TVs are furniture. People generally have a spot where the TV naturally fits in the room regardless of its size. No one buys a TV and then arranges the rest of their furniture to sit close enough to fill their visual space. If the couch is 8 feet from the TV, it’s 8 feet from the TV.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. Retric+qw[view] [source] 2025-12-05 15:12:24
>>dpark+4w
People watching their tablet on a couch in from of a 55+” TV with a surround sound speaker system says on some level it’s a better experience. I’ve seen plenty of people do this to say it’s common behavior.

> No one buys a TV and then arranges the rest of their furniture to sit close enough to fill their visual space. If the couch is 8 feet from the TV, it’s 8 feet from the TV.

It’s common on open floor plans / large rooms for a couch to end up in a completely arbitrary distance from a TV rather than next to a wall. Further setting up the TV on the width vs length vs diagonal of a room commonly provides two or more options for viewing distance.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧
11. dpark+MY[view] [source] 2025-12-05 17:07:03
>>Retric+qw
> People watching their tablet on a couch in from of a 55+” TV with a surround sound speaker system says on some level it’s a better experience.

It’s a more private/personal experience. Turning on the TV means everyone watches.

> It’s common on open floor plans / large rooms for a couch to end up in a completely arbitrary distance from a TV rather than next to a wall. Further setting up the TV on the width vs length vs diagonal of a room commonly provides two or more options for viewing distance.

You’re essentially arguing that people can arrange their furniture for the best viewing experience. Which is true, but also not what people actually do.

The set of people willing to arrange their furniture for the best movie watching experience in their home are the least likely to buy a small TV.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨
12. Retric+jd1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 18:10:43
>>dpark+MY
> Turning in the TV means everyone watches.

People still do this while home alone, you’re attacking a straw man.

> least likely to buy a small TV.

People can only buy what actually exists. My point was large TV’s “have been out for decades they really aren’t a replacement” people owning them still went to the moves.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨◲
13. dpark+Df1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 18:22:06
>>Retric+jd1
> People still do this while home alone, you’re attacking a straw man.

Maybe? You’re making blind assertions with no data. I have no idea how frequently the average person sits in front of their 60” TV by themselves and watches a movie on their tablet. My guess is not very often but again, I have no data on this.

> My point was large TV’s “have been out for decades they really aren’t a replacement” people owning them still went to the moves.

And we come back to the beginning where your assertion is true but also misleading.

Most people have a large tv in their homes today. Most people did not have this two decades ago, despite then being available.

The stats agree. TV sizes have grown significantly.

https://www.statista.com/chart/3780/tv-screen-size/?srsltid=...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦▧▨◲◳
14. Retric+Xl1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 18:49:26
>>dpark+Df1
> Maybe? You’re making blind assertions with no data.

I’ve seen or talked to more than five people doing it (IE called them, showed up at their house, etc) and even more people mentioned doing the same when I asked. That’s plenty of examples to say it’s fairly common behavior even if I can’t give you exact percentages.

Convince vs using the TV remove was mentioned, but if it’s not worth using the remote it’s definitely not worth going to the moves.

[go to top]