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. bunder+No1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 19:00:03
>>Retric+Jk
Movie theaters still win on a couple fronts, but not by enough to overcome the downsides like the “person behind you chewing popcorn with their mouth open” factor. Also, movies are getting long enough to really need an intermission or two. Legs need stretching, bladders need emptying. If Hollywood and the theaters won’t provide that, at least at home I can use the pause button. I’m looking for a pleasant evening, not a simulation of what it’s like to be on a three hour flight.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Kwpols+eT1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 21:28:56
>>bunder+No1
It’s saying something that your post lists all the negative aspects of movie theaters and positive aspects of watching at home without actually specifying why “Movie theaters still win on a couple fronts”.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. PearlR+tv2[view] [source] 2025-12-06 02:20:25
>>Kwpols+eT1
I went to see Avatar on a Imax screen. It was already about a month after the release so it was pretty quiet.

But those kinds of movies are rare- and it is expensive. You have to drive and park for half an hour, pay 30 euro for two tickets and ofcourse the drinks. Not something I want to do every week.

[go to top]