5 ms·

Streaming TV Isn’t Just a New Way to Watch. It’s a New Genre

41 points by aaronbrethorst 11y ago

voltagex_ 11y ago
I'm not sure I can get past the Sense8 insult. Maybe it's because I'm an unabashed Wachowski fan, but I found the show really really entertaining - what Heroes could have been if it was made for HBO.
- ape4 11y ago
  "a gorgeous, ridiculous series". Well it is... both.
- Maultasche 11y ago
  Sense8 didn't sound very interesting to me when I read the summary on Netflix, so I didn't look into it any further. Later I heard someone talking about how good it is, so I gave it a try. I'm glad I did because I enjoyed it very much. I very much look forward to a new season of that show.
- simoncion 11y ago
  > I'm not sure I can get past the Sense8 insult. A fellow whose entertainment tastes lie really close to mine found Sense8 unwatchable. Based on the couple of recommendations in this thread, I might give a couple of episodes a watch, but there are TERRIBLE shows that people -for whatever reason- think are GREAT. tl;dr: Taste is subjective, and terrible entertainment gets mocked? :) Edit: Just read the article and I have to ask: "What Sense8 insult?"
- tunesmith 11y ago
  That's probably my favorite show of the past couple of years. It's definitely kind of a progressive/empathy kind of show so if you're not into that, you might not like it so much, but I watched it and then watched it again with my wife.
- johansch 11y ago
  Control question: Did you feel betrayed after first watching Matrix Revolutions in 2003?
  - voltagex_ 11y ago
    Yes. Reloaded was OK.
- superuser2 11y ago
  I found Sense8's story rather weak. The characters are wonderful and well-developed, the non-heteronormativity and trans-inclusiveness are great, the production is excellent, etc... they have this great world and great setup, but they don't really do anything with it. Just discover their connection and the improbably evil and resourceful organization hunting them down for having it. That kind of world-building and character development deserves an epic story to go with it. It suffers from the Dune effect.
neutronicus 11y ago
The Wire actually holds up really well to bingeing, for anyone wondering.
- rhino369 11y ago
  It really does because it sort of treats each season as a story. Game of Thrones works sort of the same way.The first several episodes are clearly just setting the plot up, which I find boring. There is no pay off. It's actually pretty terrible to watch week to week. But shows like Mad Men or the Leftovers really require an episode by episode approach. They each have a story to tell. The seasons and series have arcs, but each episode is also story line.
  - maldusiecle 11y ago
    Mad Men feels like a sort of different case to me, because it's a show that very deliberately works on both levels. The episodes are self-contained enough that they work even if you haven't seen the whole series, but there are a lot of subtleties and dramatic ironies that you can only catch if you've seen the whole thing. It's hard to achieve that balance; my guess is that in the future most shows will aim one way or the other.
- Touche 11y ago
  I never understood the appeal of prolonged exposure to depressing subject matter.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - bjz_ 11y ago
    Emotional inoculation?
bootload 11y ago
"On the other hand, streaming shows — by which here I mean the original series that Netflix, Amazon and their ilk release all at once, in full seasons — are more than simply TV series as we’ve known them." The unacknowledged: the costs of transmission, have been passed from TV stations/producers/advertisers to the consumer.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Being fed ads was already a form of paying for those costs; they simply changed the currency. Besides, cable had already done that. Also, in many developed countries, you can watch streaming video with the lowest connection plan, so unless you'd give up on Internet access if not for video streaming, the marginal cost is zero.
  - bootload 11y ago
    "Being fed ads was already a form of paying for those costs; they simply changed the currency. Besides, cable had already done that." Good point about costs. While I can still get free to air and public TV at HD1080, there is no way stupid network TV is better. The problems with patchy Internet access is such that unless you live in an area where cable, fiber is found, you can be stuck with ADSL or Sat speed. The future isn't evenly distributed.
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      Samsung predicts producing 128TB SSDs by 2018-2020. Yeah, its a few years off, but you'll be able to have Netflix's entire library in something the size of a Tivo in your home. In the meantime, push for municipal fiber rollouts.
- muddi900 11y ago
  If there is an impression that ads are going away, it's the wrong one. In the US alone, it's an almost $200B industry. That sort of money doesn't go away.
  - 11y ago
thesteamboat 11y ago
Shouldn't the headline be "It's a New Medium"? The article mentions shows spanning many different genres and it's emphasizing the change in storytelling due to the new format. This is not meant as criticism of the submitter but rather of the NYTimes headline writer.
- smacktoward 11y ago
  You're right, "genre" is the wrong word here. I actually winced when I read the headline; it predisposed me to think the article was going to be terrible, which it wasn't (even though it repeats the headline's error in a couple of places itself).

I'm not sure I can get past the Sense8 insult. Maybe it's because I'm an unabashed Wachowski fan, but I found the show really really entertaining - what Heroes could have been if it was made for HBO.

ape4 11y ago
"a gorgeous, ridiculous series". Well it is... both.
Maultasche 11y ago
Sense8 didn't sound very interesting to me when I read the summary on Netflix, so I didn't look into it any further. Later I heard someone talking about how good it is, so I gave it a try. I'm glad I did because I enjoyed it very much. I very much look forward to a new season of that show.
simoncion 11y ago
> I'm not sure I can get past the Sense8 insult. A fellow whose entertainment tastes lie really close to mine found Sense8 unwatchable. Based on the couple of recommendations in this thread, I might give a couple of episodes a watch, but there are TERRIBLE shows that people -for whatever reason- think are GREAT. tl;dr: Taste is subjective, and terrible entertainment gets mocked? :) Edit: Just read the article and I have to ask: "What Sense8 insult?"
tunesmith 11y ago
That's probably my favorite show of the past couple of years. It's definitely kind of a progressive/empathy kind of show so if you're not into that, you might not like it so much, but I watched it and then watched it again with my wife.
johansch 11y ago
Control question: Did you feel betrayed after first watching Matrix Revolutions in 2003?
- voltagex_ 11y ago
  Yes. Reloaded was OK.
superuser2 11y ago
I found Sense8's story rather weak. The characters are wonderful and well-developed, the non-heteronormativity and trans-inclusiveness are great, the production is excellent, etc... they have this great world and great setup, but they don't really do anything with it. Just discover their connection and the improbably evil and resourceful organization hunting them down for having it. That kind of world-building and character development deserves an epic story to go with it. It suffers from the Dune effect.

neutronicus 11y ago

The Wire actually holds up really well to bingeing, for anyone wondering.

rhino369 11y ago
It really does because it sort of treats each season as a story. Game of Thrones works sort of the same way.The first several episodes are clearly just setting the plot up, which I find boring. There is no pay off. It's actually pretty terrible to watch week to week. But shows like Mad Men or the Leftovers really require an episode by episode approach. They each have a story to tell. The seasons and series have arcs, but each episode is also story line.
- maldusiecle 11y ago
  Mad Men feels like a sort of different case to me, because it's a show that very deliberately works on both levels. The episodes are self-contained enough that they work even if you haven't seen the whole series, but there are a lot of subtleties and dramatic ironies that you can only catch if you've seen the whole thing. It's hard to achieve that balance; my guess is that in the future most shows will aim one way or the other.
Touche 11y ago
I never understood the appeal of prolonged exposure to depressing subject matter.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- bjz_ 11y ago
  Emotional inoculation?

bootload 11y ago

"On the other hand, streaming shows — by which here I mean the original series that Netflix, Amazon and their ilk release all at once, in full seasons — are more than simply TV series as we’ve known them." The unacknowledged: the costs of transmission, have been passed from TV stations/producers/advertisers to the consumer.

icebraining 11y ago
Being fed ads was already a form of paying for those costs; they simply changed the currency. Besides, cable had already done that. Also, in many developed countries, you can watch streaming video with the lowest connection plan, so unless you'd give up on Internet access if not for video streaming, the marginal cost is zero.
- bootload 11y ago
  "Being fed ads was already a form of paying for those costs; they simply changed the currency. Besides, cable had already done that." Good point about costs. While I can still get free to air and public TV at HD1080, there is no way stupid network TV is better. The problems with patchy Internet access is such that unless you live in an area where cable, fiber is found, you can be stuck with ADSL or Sat speed. The future isn't evenly distributed.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    Samsung predicts producing 128TB SSDs by 2018-2020. Yeah, its a few years off, but you'll be able to have Netflix's entire library in something the size of a Tivo in your home. In the meantime, push for municipal fiber rollouts.
muddi900 11y ago
If there is an impression that ads are going away, it's the wrong one. In the US alone, it's an almost $200B industry. That sort of money doesn't go away.
- 11y ago

thesteamboat 11y ago

Shouldn't the headline be "It's a New Medium"? The article mentions shows spanning many different genres and it's emphasizing the change in storytelling due to the new format. This is not meant as criticism of the submitter but rather of the NYTimes headline writer.

smacktoward 11y ago
You're right, "genre" is the wrong word here. I actually winced when I read the headline; it predisposed me to think the article was going to be terrible, which it wasn't (even though it repeats the headline's error in a couple of places itself).