TV/Movies Megathread

[Habbaku]

The Netflix model won't work with so much competition.
I can't see the satelite TV model re evolving on streaming.
So the future is pay for what you watch?

The number of streaming subscribers is through the roof. For some reason, I'm sure Netflix will manage to survive even if it drops down to 100 million subscribers instead of 150.

[Tonitrus]

They could survive, but even if a 33% loss in subscribers doesn't look bad as a total, simple number...that often times turns into an avalanche/landslide, where the stock starts tanking, original content starts needing to be cut back, outside producers of content look to other services with exclusivity deals and then eventually the other 100 million subscribers decide it not worth it anymore and go elsewhere.  Then as their stock/value weaken even further, they get bought up by a competitor or merge with one, and then the fun games of industry consolidation begins.

[Sheilbh]

All the new streaming services including, soon, Britbox () just make me think of Project Kangaroo. The UK's broadcasters were working together having developed their own free streaming services, to launch a commercial streaming service of all of their programming outside the UK (and I think it would also be the way iPlayer, 4OD etc would be delivered in the UK). I think the plan was also to have films they'd produced on their.

This was in 2009 so I think a few years before Netflix made the big move into streaming.

But it got stopped by the competition authority because it was a threat to the still nascent video on demand industry. Now they're re-launching substantially the same product but ten years later and without any of the first mover advantage

[Sheilbh]

I Do Not Care If We Go Down In History As Barbarians

I am not clever enough for this film, but it is really really good. Basically this is a film about a theatre director who has been given some funding by a local council to do a piece of street theatre.

As her topic she takes Romania's role in WW2. The film engages with the way that Romania's post-Communist narrative has kind of embraced Antonescu and Romania as a victim (only) of the Communists. It even shows a clip of an early 90s TV film which is basically Antonescu hagiography. As part of her project she decides to show the Odessa massacre of Transnistrian Jews. To do this she has a "cast" of local volunteers who are the Germans, Romanians and Soviets and it rambles around with her developing and rehearsing. She deals with the extras who don't really want to work with Roma or the young men who are really enthusiastic and excited and excited when they get to wear an SS uniform but won't even touch a Soviet one.

In the background she has long debates with the local official who authorised the project but is starting to get worried about the direction she's going. Given that these often quote Arendt, Benjamin and Wittgenstein at lengh, it is surprising that they're probably the most engaging bit of the film as the two debate a sort-of natural selection of massacres: why do we care about some, need to show and memorialise some and not others. He could have been played as a penny-pincher but is actually played really touchingly and intelligently and has a few good points even as he's asking her if, instead of showing a massacre by Romanians (which actually happened), she could just show Romanians forcing Jews onto trains for the camps (which also happened).

The final third is just a recording of the show in front of, I think an unsimulated audience reacting to this project.

Given everything I've said it shouldn't be an enjoyable watch but somehow it is and even a black comedy at some points. Recommend if you think any of that sounds interesting, because otherwise it's two and a half hours of filming Euro-philosophising street theatre.

[Josephus]

I think Netflix will do fine because it's the "trademark" of streaming, that is it's like Facebook and Google, ubiquitous everywhere. But at some point subscribing to cable may be cheaper than subscribing to a dozen streaming platforms.

[Habbaku]

Subscribing to cable is already cheaper than a dozen streaming platforms. But who do you know that actually subscribes to that many?

I have HBO, Prime, and Netflix, and don't know anyone that does more than 4-5, and those are people that watch a lot of TV.

[viper37]

Ok, seriously, I wasn't expecting a 98% score on RT.  But everything is relative, and for an Emmerich movies, that sits in the middle of the line:
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/roland_emmerich

Look the two previous movies' score: 29% and 10%.  Highest score was 65% for ID4 (but don't tell Duque, he didn't like the movie   )

As far as Emmerich movies go, I'm all ears for Universal Soldier with Dolph and JCVD. 

I just learned yesterday he produced that too   Brings back memories

[celedhring]

Subscribing to cable is already cheaper than a dozen streaming platforms. But who do you know that actually subscribes to that many?

I have HBO, Prime, and Netflix, and don't know anyone that does more than 4-5, and those are people that watch a lot of TV.

I have Amazon (mostly because I have Amazon Prime), a local Spanish platform with a great library of artsy films and classics, and then I switch between Netflix/HBO depending on new releases. (i.e. right now I'm on HBO because of Watchmen, then will switch to Netflix when Witcher comes out).

I never have any lack of stuff to watch, really.

[Razgovory]

I have Netflix and Amazon, but rarely watch anything.

[Berkut]

Saw Midway today with my Dad.

I thought it was pretty well done. They took sime liberties with the visuals, which was annoying, but the bsaic history was treated well, IMO.

I think they could have just ditched to Doolittle raid story altogether, and spent that screen time on showing the Japanese view of the battle better.

[Sheilbh]

Interesting piece on Chinese funding for Midway too (and generally for Pacific WW2 films which, unsurprisingly, do well in China):
https://www.wsj.com/articles/hollywood-revisits-battle-of-midwaywith-backing-from-china-11573214401

Plus I found the minor cuts Chinese censors wanted interesting:

Chinese censors required cuts to the film before it could be shown in their theaters on Friday, Mr. Emmerich said, including a scene in which one military official is told that superiors in Washington disagree with his plan. State censors have previously zeroed in on plot points that depict insubordination.

[Zoupa]

Scathing review of Midway:

https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2019/11/09/everything-about-blockbuster-midway-sinks-faster-than-japanese-carriers-at-midway/

[Valmy]

Damn. Berkut is clearly too forgiving to write for the Military Times.

[grumbler]

Scathing review of Midway:

https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2019/11/09/everything-about-blockbuster-midway-sinks-faster-than-japanese-carriers-at-midway/

That review told me a lot more about the writer than the movie.  He whined about some pretty petty shit.

[Malthus]

Saw Midway today with my Dad.

I thought it was pretty well done. They took sime liberties with the visuals, which was annoying, but the bsaic history was treated well, IMO.

I think they could have just ditched to Doolittle raid story altogether, and spent that screen time on showing the Japanese view of the battle better.

Cool. Now I want to see it. 

I'm certainly interested in the battle. I wouldn't want to see it if it fundamentally screwed with the history, though.