TV/Movies Megathread

[mongers]

Is 'Revolutionary Road' the di Caprio and WInslett get back together film worth watching?

[Admiral Yi]

Is 'Revolutionary Road' the di Caprio and WInslett get back together film worth watching?

I've never lasted more than five minutes.

[mongers]

Is 'Revolutionary Road' the di Caprio and WInslett get back together film worth watching?

I've never lasted more than five minutes.

OK, thanks for that; I sort of figured it'll go that way, given the synopsis. 

[CountDeMoney]

In all fairness, Yi hasn't seen a complete film since 1997. 

[mongers]

In all fairness, Yi hasn't seen a complete film since 1997.

Well I was ready to bail at 4m29s, but thought I'd try and beat Yi's 5minutes, the 50s car were neat, the trains good, the hats fantastic, otherwise well, hmm, the audio is on in the background as I type this. 

[CountDeMoney]

In all fairness, Yi hasn't seen a complete film since 1997.

Well I was ready to bail at 4m29s, but thought I'd try and beat Yi's 5minutes, the 50s car were neat, the trains good, the hats fantastic, otherwise well, hmm, the audio is on in the background as I type this. 

It's a decent movie from an acting standpoint; neither one of them is mailing it in, they're both very good in it.  But if a lack of bombs, bullets and boobies bores you, then it's not really a flick for you.

[Ed Anger]

It's no the 'Burbs .

[Eddie Teach]

Into the forest. Slow as f***. Also the new Ghostbusters movie.

[mongers]

In all fairness, Yi hasn't seen a complete film since 1997.

Well I was ready to bail at 4m29s, but thought I'd try and beat Yi's 5minutes, the 50s car were neat, the trains good, the hats fantastic, otherwise well, hmm, the audio is on in the background as I type this. 

It's a decent movie from an acting standpoint; neither one of them is mailing it in, they're both very good in it.  But if a lack of bombs, bullets and boobies bores you, then it's not really a flick for you.

Well I watched it all the way through.

[CountDeMoney]

[Berkut]

What I find interesting about the entire Netflix business thing is that they were founded on the basic premise that the people creating content should not necessarily be the exclusive delivery mechanism for that content.

IE, the business model is based on the fundamental concept of divorcing content creation from content delivery. Absent that model, Netflix doesn't exist.

But now? We've come full circle back to exactly that, except that it is Netflix and Amazon and HBO creating the content rather than NBC, CBS, and ABC. And once they create it, they own it exclusively and jealously.

There has been a lot of change of course, but it seems at the end of the day that change becomes tactical rather than strategic. The fundamental business model seems to have returned to where it started.

[garbon]

What I find interesting about the entire Netflix business thing is that they were founded on the basic premise that the people creating content should not necessarily be the exclusive delivery mechanism for that content.

Well I guess so...insofar as Blockbuster was founded for that same premise.

Not sure, if that's a correct characterization though. Was it so philosophically minded or was it simply that we can make money getting people to get dvds via mail rather than at a brick and mortar?

[Berkut]

What I find interesting about the entire Netflix business thing is that they were founded on the basic premise that the people creating content should not necessarily be the exclusive delivery mechanism for that content.

Well I guess so...insofar as Blockbuster was founded for that same premise.

Not sure, if that's a correct characterization though. Was it so philosophically minded or was it simply that we can make money getting people to get dvds via mail rather than at a brick and mortar?

I am not talking about their DVD delivery business though, which seems pretty fucking obvious.

[garbon]

What I find interesting about the entire Netflix business thing is that they were founded on the basic premise that the people creating content should not necessarily be the exclusive delivery mechanism for that content.

Well I guess so...insofar as Blockbuster was founded for that same premise.

Not sure, if that's a correct characterization though. Was it so philosophically minded or was it simply that we can make money getting people to get dvds via mail rather than at a brick and mortar?

I am not talking about their DVD delivery business though, which seems pretty fucking obvious.

So you are talking about the founding of a business that wasn't their actual founding? When did this mythical event happen? I would guess that when they started streaming it was actually from the similar thought of their DVD business.

Basically, I'm politely calling bullshit on the notion that they were founded on the basic premise that you noted.

[The Minsky Moment]

Netflix was founded at a time when content ownership and control was highly diffuse and the cable oligopolies were in the dominant position.  Content owners had to go through cable to get distribution.  The only other route was rental or sale of individual shows/movies directly to consumers, and so that's where a new entrant like Netflix went. 

The two key developments were: (1) HBO pioneered the idea of creating premium IP that consumers would insist on having access to, thus giving the more valuable content owners better leverage against the cable players, (2) once streaming becomes a robust way for a consumer to receive content, then in theory there is an alternative to cable distribution.  In the past couple of years cord cutting is becoming more attractive as an option; I also expect that cable with its expensive bundling is training a young generation to avoid it just as the music labels trained a generation of kids to stop buying CDs and pay for downloads.  Distribution is being disrupted and the oligopolies are in trouble.