5 ms·

It was my understanding that Netflix wanted to show their movies in French cinemas, but French regulations would prevent them from doing that while also streami

It was my understanding that Netflix wanted to show their movies in French cinemas, but French regulations would prevent them from doing that while also streaming the movies for subscribers.

guelo 9y ago
That's right, France actually has a law that after a movie is shown in a theatre it can't be streamed for 36 months.
- robotpony 9y ago
  This is the crux of the issue: that cinema hasn't caught up with streaming services. There's no reason to force people to wait to stream a movie, i.e., they could show movies and stream simultaneously, maximizing consumer choice (rather than maximizing cinema profits).
  - bunderbunder 9y ago
    > There's no reason to force people to wait to stream a movie Wait, what, really? > maximizing cinema profits Ah, no, there it is. This is a fight for survival. Cinema can't catch up; it's an industry that was built for business conditions that existed in a bygone world, back when the equipment for distributing and viewing high-quality video recordings was so prohibitively expensive that it didn't make sense for people to have it in their homes. It's going to (largely) disappear, but it can maybe squeeze out a few more years of existence by trying to use regulation, business deals and whatever other tricks to try and create a simulacrum of the conditions its existence is based on. Like for any middleman, those conditions are precisely a lack of consumer access via alternative channels.
    - robotpony 9y ago
      I should have said that there is no technical reason for delaying a streaming release, nor does it really affect the quality of the watching experience (assuming people have good streaming setups).
    - tracker1 9y ago
      There's something fun and social about seeing some movies in the theater. I think options like ipic, AMC cinema suites and others, not to mention real IMAX are things you won't ever get at home. That said, I can see the decline. I cringe every time I think of how much more concessions get priced upwards, in addition to ticket pricing. I don't think the market will bear too much more.
- tanilama 9y ago
  Wow, that is really backwards. How could any French streaming service survives the law? I am surely don't want a service that only has movies 3 years old.
leggomylibro 9y ago
>Netflix and Amazon are going to continue their quest to destroy cinemas, and in this case, French business. If true, that quote from the comment you're responding to is probably a good representation of the attitude that France approaches that regulation with. Hearing an argument like that uttered unironically can be baffling, but it is how the thought process can go in France. Those cinemas, they might well argue, are French businesses which inherently deserve to exist - and damn the consequences.
- Jesus_Jones 9y ago
  Remember that netflix also wanted to put a movie in us theaters. One chain said okay. Then the other movie companies said we will blacklist you and not send you an movies to show. This is just about commercial competition, the 'real movie theaters' are trying to block netflix et al. Netflix should just buy their own damn theater in LA and show movies there to get them on all the awards shows.
  - clintonb 9y ago
    > Netflix should just buy their own damn theater in LA and show movies there to get them on all the awards shows. That's what used to happen. The Fox and Paramount theatres in Oakland, CA used to be owned by Fox and Paramount, respectively.
  - extralego 9y ago
    I wonder what is preventing them from doing that, other than fear that it’s patrons would rather stay at home. I wouldn’t be so fast to assume that, though. Many people, including myself, love viewing films in theatres.
    - TomMarius 9y ago
      I would definitely go see a Netflix movie in a cinema, most probably even often, e.g. 3 times a month.
    - brmgb 9y ago
chomp 9y ago
Yes. The CNC wanted Netflix to show their movie in more than a measly 6 cinemas since it was showing at Cannes, and the windowing regulations require 3 years before a movie can go from cinema to streaming. This is mostly a protectionist cinema regulation, though there are talks to reduce it going on right now. I'm not at all a fan of regulatory capture, but I do understand that you can't pay lip service to the spirit of Cannes - celebrate film and cinema, don't promote your streaming services.
- kodablah 9y ago
  > I don't understand where this cheerleading [...] started [...] these companies aren't banned at all. They are free to show them [...] regulations require [...] regulatory capture After reading, I think it's clear why this "cheerleading" is occurring and it doesn't matter size. Most people probably think like I do and think that film should be judged on its own merits. If film celebration was really the primary goal, these types of rules would not be in place and they really would be "free to show them"...but we know that's not the case which means that film celebration is not the primary goal.
- mmanfrin 9y ago
  and the windowing regulations require 3 years before a movie can go from cinema to streaming I'm confused as to how you think this is acceptable and that Netflix is in the wrong for "promot[ing their] streaming service"?
- s2g 9y ago
  So you watch it at home and suddenly it’s not art anymore.
  - tlholaday 9y ago
    What you watch at home is `video`. What you watch in a movie theater is `cinéma`.
    - openforce 9y ago
      I feel that difference will blow in the next decade. It will just be content, wherever you watch.
mc32 9y ago
I think the problem is explained by this[1] post in the previous discussion. Essentially, you have to wait some time [36 mos.] before you can contractually stream after initial theatrical showing, which of course, is contrary to Netflix's whole money making model. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16678392 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16678392

It was my understanding that Netflix wanted to show their movies in French cinemas, but French regulations would prevent them from doing that while also streaming the movies for subscribers.

guelo 9y ago

That's right, France actually has a law that after a movie is shown in a theatre it can't be streamed for 36 months.

robotpony 9y ago
This is the crux of the issue: that cinema hasn't caught up with streaming services. There's no reason to force people to wait to stream a movie, i.e., they could show movies and stream simultaneously, maximizing consumer choice (rather than maximizing cinema profits).
- bunderbunder 9y ago
  > There's no reason to force people to wait to stream a movie Wait, what, really? > maximizing cinema profits Ah, no, there it is. This is a fight for survival. Cinema can't catch up; it's an industry that was built for business conditions that existed in a bygone world, back when the equipment for distributing and viewing high-quality video recordings was so prohibitively expensive that it didn't make sense for people to have it in their homes. It's going to (largely) disappear, but it can maybe squeeze out a few more years of existence by trying to use regulation, business deals and whatever other tricks to try and create a simulacrum of the conditions its existence is based on. Like for any middleman, those conditions are precisely a lack of consumer access via alternative channels.
  - robotpony 9y ago
    I should have said that there is no technical reason for delaying a streaming release, nor does it really affect the quality of the watching experience (assuming people have good streaming setups).
  - tracker1 9y ago
    There's something fun and social about seeing some movies in the theater. I think options like ipic, AMC cinema suites and others, not to mention real IMAX are things you won't ever get at home. That said, I can see the decline. I cringe every time I think of how much more concessions get priced upwards, in addition to ticket pricing. I don't think the market will bear too much more.
tanilama 9y ago
Wow, that is really backwards. How could any French streaming service survives the law? I am surely don't want a service that only has movies 3 years old.

leggomylibro 9y ago

>Netflix and Amazon are going to continue their quest to destroy cinemas, and in this case, French business. If true, that quote from the comment you're responding to is probably a good representation of the attitude that France approaches that regulation with. Hearing an argument like that uttered unironically can be baffling, but it is how the thought process can go in France. Those cinemas, they might well argue, are French businesses which inherently deserve to exist - and damn the consequences.

Jesus_Jones 9y ago
Remember that netflix also wanted to put a movie in us theaters. One chain said okay. Then the other movie companies said we will blacklist you and not send you an movies to show. This is just about commercial competition, the 'real movie theaters' are trying to block netflix et al. Netflix should just buy their own damn theater in LA and show movies there to get them on all the awards shows.
- clintonb 9y ago
  > Netflix should just buy their own damn theater in LA and show movies there to get them on all the awards shows. That's what used to happen. The Fox and Paramount theatres in Oakland, CA used to be owned by Fox and Paramount, respectively.
- extralego 9y ago
  I wonder what is preventing them from doing that, other than fear that it’s patrons would rather stay at home. I wouldn’t be so fast to assume that, though. Many people, including myself, love viewing films in theatres.
  - TomMarius 9y ago
    I would definitely go see a Netflix movie in a cinema, most probably even often, e.g. 3 times a month.
  - brmgb 9y ago

chomp 9y ago

Yes. The CNC wanted Netflix to show their movie in more than a measly 6 cinemas since it was showing at Cannes, and the windowing regulations require 3 years before a movie can go from cinema to streaming. This is mostly a protectionist cinema regulation, though there are talks to reduce it going on right now. I'm not at all a fan of regulatory capture, but I do understand that you can't pay lip service to the spirit of Cannes - celebrate film and cinema, don't promote your streaming services.

kodablah 9y ago
> I don't understand where this cheerleading [...] started [...] these companies aren't banned at all. They are free to show them [...] regulations require [...] regulatory capture After reading, I think it's clear why this "cheerleading" is occurring and it doesn't matter size. Most people probably think like I do and think that film should be judged on its own merits. If film celebration was really the primary goal, these types of rules would not be in place and they really would be "free to show them"...but we know that's not the case which means that film celebration is not the primary goal.
mmanfrin 9y ago
and the windowing regulations require 3 years before a movie can go from cinema to streaming I'm confused as to how you think this is acceptable and that Netflix is in the wrong for "promot[ing their] streaming service"?
s2g 9y ago
So you watch it at home and suddenly it’s not art anymore.
- tlholaday 9y ago
  What you watch at home is `video`. What you watch in a movie theater is `cinéma`.
  - openforce 9y ago
    I feel that difference will blow in the next decade. It will just be content, wherever you watch.

mc32 9y ago

I think the problem is explained by this[1] post in the previous discussion. Essentially, you have to wait some time [36 mos.] before you can contractually stream after initial theatrical showing, which of course, is contrary to Netflix's whole money making model. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16678392 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16678392