4 ms·

> An Even Better Thing is to introduce people to multiple cinematic cultures (and multiple cultures in general), not just the global monoculture that pushes the

> An Even Better Thing is to introduce people to multiple cinematic cultures (and multiple cultures in general), not just the global monoculture that pushes the cultural and political agendas of the country that makes it, and expresses its own preoccupation and worldview as if the rest 95% of the world doesn't matter. An Even Worse Thing is when we allow a super-governmental organisation to dictate what they deem to be acceptable level of non-culture to be forced upon us. Yeah, globalism sucks, and preserving your own culture is generally a good thing, especially in a day and age where Americana is encroaching so heavily on every aspect of life. But this is not the way to do it. > Especially since there are tens of different cultures and perspectives within the EU to represent. These can be added, or fail to be added, to streaming services, on their own merit. Have you ever seen films from your own country? I, as a Dutchman have, and I can say that most of them suck and there's a very good reason you don't see them on stuff like Netflix.

maeln 8y ago
> Have you ever seen films from your own country? I, as a Dutchman have, and I can say that most of them suck and there's a very good reason you don't see them on stuff like Netflix. This also seems like a recursive problem. US/Hollywood have huge marketing power, thanks to this, they can ensure that the movie they produce should make a decent profit, they can then invest more money to make better production. On the other end, local european production don't have that marketing power, most "local" movie will fly under the radar, whatever they quality might be. They sometime make it to the box office in their country but there is just not enough interest to adapt it for other country. Due to this, it's also normal that local production tend to have less production quality. But if you look, a lot of actor, director, etc, involved in hollywood production come from other countries. So there is talent everywhere in the world, it's mostly a money problem. If this protectionism result in more diversity in movies, it might be a good thing. Also, let's be honest, it shouldn't be that hard for Netflix&co to comply. They will just buy the rights to a shitload of shitty TV-movies that nobody wants and be done with it. It's already what they do in France, you would be surprised by how much crap that you never heard about is produced.
- AllegedAlec 8y ago
  > This also seems like a recursive problem. US/Hollywood have huge marketing power, thanks to this, they can ensure that the movie they produce should make a decent profit, they can then invest more money to make better production. No, it's a problem of target audience. If you produce films for a Dutch audience, you have two options: either appeal to a sense of Dutch pride or history, or go for something so generic that a decent swath of the population will like it; otherwise you won't have enough of an audience to make a profit. This is what they do, so Dutch films are generally about about our navy in the 16th to 18th century, about WWII, a romcom or some adaptation of a Dutch Children's book. You cannot locally produce a film about something which lies outside of the realm of interest of most Dutch people; Hollywood can, since they have a larger audience, and therefore do have the ability to target niche markets. > On the other end, local european production don't have that marketing power, most "local" movie will fly under the radar, whatever they quality might be. There's more than enough marketing power; you don't need to market these films outside the country they're produced in, so you can keep the marketing campaign fairly lean and targeted. > Also, let's be honest, it shouldn't be that hard for Netflix&co to comply. My stance is not on how hard it is or is not to comply, it's about the audacity of governments to demand this in the first place.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >No, it's a problem of target audience. If you produce films for a Dutch audience, you have two options: either appeal to a sense of Dutch pride or history, or go for something so generic that a decent swath of the population will like it; otherwise you won't have enough of an audience to make a profit. This is what they do, so Dutch films are generally about about our navy in the 16th to 18th century, about WWII, a romcom or some adaptation of a Dutch Children's book. You cannot locally produce a film about something which lies outside of the realm of interest of most Dutch people; Hollywood can, since they have a larger audience, and therefore do have the ability to target niche markets. Well, EU has 400 million people. One can very well create a movie that appeals to EU audiences. We have lots of shared sensibility and modern problems and history (and it doesn't have to be BS like "16th century dutch navy" or "17th century french villagers"). Movies like Blow Up or Dolce Vita or For a Fistful of Dollars etc where shown successfully all over Europe at one time (and we still have films by people like Lars Von Trier, Almodovar, and so on). Just because you make something that has a Dutch or Swedish or French etc sensibility, it doesn't mean it can't have pan-European (or even global) appeal. Trainspotting is as British as it gets, for example, but hit Europe big, as did La Haine, La vita e bella, Amelie, and others. Besides, not all movies have to be blockbusters and multi 100 million dollar productions. Even from the US, I'd rather have the chance to watch some Hal Hartley or Jarmusch, or Cronneburg, that barely pushed 5-10 million dollars in the box office than the nth repeatitive formulaic shit from Hollywood.
coldtea 8y ago
>An Even Worse Thing is when we allow a super-governmental organisation to dictate what they deem to be acceptable level of non-culture to be forced upon us. Only if what that "super-governmental organisation" dictates something against the wish of the people. I'm not a huge EU commission fan myself, but I surely do. And I'd bet at least the French, for one, are equally delighted with this (and I'd say Italians as well). Unlike Americans who leave it all to the invisible hands of the market, and its "free" movements (easily distorted by all kinds of monopolies, power imbalances, private interests, foul play, cartels, and such), many Europeans (including me) believe in deciding as societies, and forcing our decision onto the corporations peddling their stuff. And since you propose people to "vote with their wallet", so to speak, for that to happen people must have the option to do so, e.g. a variety to choose from. With these laws such services will be forced to give European people the option to watch EU content as well. >I, as a Dutchman have, and I can say that most of them suck and there's a very good reason you don't see them on stuff like Netflix. Well, there are people in EU who are hot on US culture and think that their own cultural production "sucks". But there are also people who think that its Hollywood films that suck, have naive simplistic plots and world-views, too much spandex and explosions, and so on. When US films didn't dominate the market, we had lots of excellent European directors that have heavily inspired US filmmakers as well, as admitted by Coppola, Tarantino, Scorsese and so on.

maeln 8y ago

> Have you ever seen films from your own country? I, as a Dutchman have, and I can say that most of them suck and there's a very good reason you don't see them on stuff like Netflix. This also seems like a recursive problem. US/Hollywood have huge marketing power, thanks to this, they can ensure that the movie they produce should make a decent profit, they can then invest more money to make better production. On the other end, local european production don't have that marketing power, most "local" movie will fly under the radar, whatever they quality might be. They sometime make it to the box office in their country but there is just not enough interest to adapt it for other country. Due to this, it's also normal that local production tend to have less production quality. But if you look, a lot of actor, director, etc, involved in hollywood production come from other countries. So there is talent everywhere in the world, it's mostly a money problem. If this protectionism result in more diversity in movies, it might be a good thing. Also, let's be honest, it shouldn't be that hard for Netflix&co to comply. They will just buy the rights to a shitload of shitty TV-movies that nobody wants and be done with it. It's already what they do in France, you would be surprised by how much crap that you never heard about is produced.

AllegedAlec 8y ago
> This also seems like a recursive problem. US/Hollywood have huge marketing power, thanks to this, they can ensure that the movie they produce should make a decent profit, they can then invest more money to make better production. No, it's a problem of target audience. If you produce films for a Dutch audience, you have two options: either appeal to a sense of Dutch pride or history, or go for something so generic that a decent swath of the population will like it; otherwise you won't have enough of an audience to make a profit. This is what they do, so Dutch films are generally about about our navy in the 16th to 18th century, about WWII, a romcom or some adaptation of a Dutch Children's book. You cannot locally produce a film about something which lies outside of the realm of interest of most Dutch people; Hollywood can, since they have a larger audience, and therefore do have the ability to target niche markets. > On the other end, local european production don't have that marketing power, most "local" movie will fly under the radar, whatever they quality might be. There's more than enough marketing power; you don't need to market these films outside the country they're produced in, so you can keep the marketing campaign fairly lean and targeted. > Also, let's be honest, it shouldn't be that hard for Netflix&co to comply. My stance is not on how hard it is or is not to comply, it's about the audacity of governments to demand this in the first place.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >No, it's a problem of target audience. If you produce films for a Dutch audience, you have two options: either appeal to a sense of Dutch pride or history, or go for something so generic that a decent swath of the population will like it; otherwise you won't have enough of an audience to make a profit. This is what they do, so Dutch films are generally about about our navy in the 16th to 18th century, about WWII, a romcom or some adaptation of a Dutch Children's book. You cannot locally produce a film about something which lies outside of the realm of interest of most Dutch people; Hollywood can, since they have a larger audience, and therefore do have the ability to target niche markets. Well, EU has 400 million people. One can very well create a movie that appeals to EU audiences. We have lots of shared sensibility and modern problems and history (and it doesn't have to be BS like "16th century dutch navy" or "17th century french villagers"). Movies like Blow Up or Dolce Vita or For a Fistful of Dollars etc where shown successfully all over Europe at one time (and we still have films by people like Lars Von Trier, Almodovar, and so on). Just because you make something that has a Dutch or Swedish or French etc sensibility, it doesn't mean it can't have pan-European (or even global) appeal. Trainspotting is as British as it gets, for example, but hit Europe big, as did La Haine, La vita e bella, Amelie, and others. Besides, not all movies have to be blockbusters and multi 100 million dollar productions. Even from the US, I'd rather have the chance to watch some Hal Hartley or Jarmusch, or Cronneburg, that barely pushed 5-10 million dollars in the box office than the nth repeatitive formulaic shit from Hollywood.

coldtea 8y ago

>An Even Worse Thing is when we allow a super-governmental organisation to dictate what they deem to be acceptable level of non-culture to be forced upon us. Only if what that "super-governmental organisation" dictates something against the wish of the people. I'm not a huge EU commission fan myself, but I surely do. And I'd bet at least the French, for one, are equally delighted with this (and I'd say Italians as well). Unlike Americans who leave it all to the invisible hands of the market, and its "free" movements (easily distorted by all kinds of monopolies, power imbalances, private interests, foul play, cartels, and such), many Europeans (including me) believe in deciding as societies, and forcing our decision onto the corporations peddling their stuff. And since you propose people to "vote with their wallet", so to speak, for that to happen people must have the option to do so, e.g. a variety to choose from. With these laws such services will be forced to give European people the option to watch EU content as well. >I, as a Dutchman have, and I can say that most of them suck and there's a very good reason you don't see them on stuff like Netflix. Well, there are people in EU who are hot on US culture and think that their own cultural production "sucks". But there are also people who think that its Hollywood films that suck, have naive simplistic plots and world-views, too much spandex and explosions, and so on. When US films didn't dominate the market, we had lots of excellent European directors that have heavily inspired US filmmakers as well, as admitted by Coppola, Tarantino, Scorsese and so on.