It has been interesting to see Netflix change its tune a bit with respect to how it gives films like Roma a cinema release. They realised that if they wanted to work with big name directors they had to give the films a chance in theatres to at least make them awards contenders. I assume that in a perfect world, something like Roma would win the Best Film Oscar and Netflix could run a commercial saying that it's available "right now".
In the last few weeks we've had cinema releases of Roma, 22 July and Bird Box in London. That said, they're very limited releases, and so far I've not been to see one, even though I know that Roma is probably designed for the big screen. I find myself going to the cinema less because of other patrons - mostly getting their phones out and using them in my eyeline. I will happily tell you off if you do that! But I also know the power of the big screen. I will always see the work of Christopher Nolan on the biggest screen I can - there's a lovely proper IMAX screen in London. And funnily enough, only this weekend I got into a discussion with someone who'd just seen the latest Mission Impossible film on their TV. They weren't nearly as impressed by the action as I had been in the cinema. I re-watched it at home, and I could quickly see that it was missing something. The chase sequence in Paris on a big screen (ideally IMAX in that case) is as visceral as anything I've seen in an action film in ages. But some of it was lost on the small screen. The same was more true of the film's big final helicopter chase sequence. That lost a lot more on TV. I was furious when Annihilation *only* got a Netflix release in the UK. That was a film that was made for the cinema but then the distributors, Paramount, got cold feet after the US release, and it went straight to Netflix in the rest of the world. That screamed out to be seen on the big screen! It'll be interesting to see how all of this plays out over the longer term. At the moment, Netflix feels like it's trying everything. It's working with big name directors and is clearly trying to win awards for those films. But then it has also been picking up films that distributors run scared of: Mowgli, The Cloverfield Paradox or internationally, Annihilation. Finally there are those feel-good films that they're edging in on too - which I suspect are doing quite well. I think they have no fewer than four Christmas films to take on Lifetime at its own game. Then there a steady stream of romcoms that cinemas seem to have given up on (I hear positive things about Dumplin'). And they're getting into SF and horror - perhaps more successfully with the latter (e.g. Apostle). I don't know if the volume is sustainable - both from Netflix's overall financial model (burning through cash even though subscriber numbers are growing), but just telling me about them. If they're releasing two movies a week, how do they effectively market them? Just putting new titles on the home screen isn't enough. I need a reason to click on an icon. Finally, I can't be the only person who is drowning under sheer weight of volume of new programming! It can begin to feel like a chore getting through the sheer volume... Adam On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 6:07 AM Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: > NPR has run several stories about streaming services producing films this > year (though being NPR, they’ve run the same story all year, bookended each > time with an eight second sound bite from the latest writer or producer so > it seems like a new story each time). My biggest hangup with streaming > distribution services is they generally do not pay a reasonable amount to > content creators of media they do not own. The same cannot be said of those > they do own... if anything they are overpaying to try to lure better > talent. > > But my second biggest hangup is that there doesn’t seem to be an effective > means in place of providing anything close to a ratings system. Content > creators themselves don’t know who if anyone is watching their media. TV > ratings are obviously imperfect as a barometer, but they can be used with > other methods of data collection to paint a picture of an audience. And I > feel eventually writers and producers will get frustrated p*ssing their > content into the wind. And eventually investors who don’t see the return on > their investment will start backing away from streaming services, resulting > in only the major studios (or their patent companies) owning and operating > them. > > As for the movie-going experience, I despise it in almost every instance. > There are a few film franchises I enjoy seeing on the big screen with a > roomful of people (James Bond and Star Wars being the two biggest > examples... Chris Nolan’s Batman trilogy is not only best viewed in a > theater, I find those films almost unwatchable at home), but otherwise the > cinema business has ruined movie-watching for me. And the more they try to > improve it, the worse it gets. > > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 10:09 PM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This piece in the NYT focuses on the question I pondered as I walked out >> of my local theater last night. I had seen Netflix’s fabulous film Roma, in >> one of the few Bay Area theaters where it is being shown. It also debuted >> this weekend streaming on Netflix (highly recommended). >> >> I chose to see this in the theater because I had read good things and >> wanted the Big Screen experience, and also the community experience. This >> proved even richer than I anticipated, as several rows behind ne were full >> of migrant farm workers from Mexico, who had interesting and positive >> responses. I could tell they were particularly pleased to see a film in >> that theater full of small details that made sense to them, and not most >> others (I gathered certain songs and foods had a deep, nostalgic >> resonance). >> >> I like going to the movies - I see 1 to 3 films a month in the theater, >> even though I know I could see most at home in 3-4 months. But I see to go >> even more often; I found it economically advantageous many years ago to pay >> for premium cable and streaming services because it represented a savings >> over the cost of taking 5 people out to the movies (plus parking, gas, >> popcorn and often dinner, or babysitting fees). Now, with kids grown, I am >> cutting back on premium cable ( but keeping streaming, which my adult kids >> still piggyback on). >> >> Netflix releases 90 films a year (compared, the article says, to >> Universal, one of the more productive traditional studios, which releases >> 30). Most of the Netflix films will never be exhibited in a theater - and >> the highbrow offerings get only a limited, qualifying theatrical release in >> NY and CA. Some movie makers (and all exhibitors and traditional studios), >> think everything streamed should be classes as television. >> >> As I drove home last night I was wondering if Roma should be thought of >> as a new kind of “Made for TV” movie. After all, there were some fabulous >> examples of that in the past. But I don’t think so - Roma and Amazin’s >> Moonlight, and an increasing number of productions to come, are full >> fledged films and deserve to be regarded as such. I would like to see as >> many of these as possible have at least a few weeks in theatrical release - >> perhaps, as at Whole Food, people with streaming subscriptions could get >> some kind of discount. But the main thing is Netflix and other streamers >> have a lot of cash (for now) and an insatiable need for content, and are >> willing and able to greenlight a more diverse range of projects than the >> mainstream studios that seem focused only on sequels and common denominator >> blockbusters. >> >> >> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/16/business/media/netflix-movies-hollywood.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > Kevin M. (RPCV) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
