5 ms·

Hopefully they spend more resources on better content. I personally find many netflix originals to be template series not worth watching unless you stretch your

Hopefully they spend more resources on better content. I personally find many netflix originals to be template series not worth watching unless you stretch your imagination well beyond sanity and suspend disbelief with the aid of some kind of medication. Having said that, in my experience their app and streaming quality is just perfect. Unlike hbo’s. It would be a shame if these layoffs would be among tech departments because i imagine their engineering is awesome. As a bonus i read somewhere that they use freebsd and that’s a huge plus in my books. Shows that they understand tech well beyond the basics.

sumy23 4y ago
We might simply be at peak content. Better content requires better talent. The pool of talent is finite. Perhaps there aren't enough talented writers and producers to make better content happen.
- bergenty 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - pstuart 4y ago
    I don't think everyone feels the same way you do about women.
    - bergenty 4y ago
      I don’t think anyone likes to be force fed content that instantly breaks immersion because it doesn’t mirror reality at all.
      - marssaxman 4y ago
        If that's your perception of reality, perhaps it's good that you're being pushed out of your comfort zone.
        bergenty 4y ago
        I don’t think it’s a matter of perspective, it’s the bending of objective facts.
        lovich 4y ago
        What “woke” content is bending objective facts? The only one I can think of in the past few years was The Wheel of Time keeping the family trait and bloodlines plot line(including one character recognizing another characters heritage based solely on their looks) while not keeping that casting consistent. The other end is shows like Foundation which might look like a woke cast at first but if you pay close attention you’ll realize that the galaxy spanning Empire has the diverse population due to being diverse while all the smaller planetary kingdoms are ethnically homogenous in casting which I thought was a clever attention to detail while satisfying politics. Netflix is pretty smack in the middle in that they produce content for the woke crowd, but that’s just by focusing on including diverse characters. They tend to not get into complicated plots that are defeated by casting. Unless my take on that is wrong I can’t see how minorities’ or womens’ existence can be bending any objective facts
        arthurcolle 4y ago
        Wheel of Time is on Amazon Prime Video not Netflix
        lovich 4y ago
        And The Foundation is on Apple TV, I was using the examples to compare Netflix’s offerings compared to what I saw of as the most glaring example of wokeness “bending objective facts” and the best example of including diversity without weakening the story and in fact strengthening it. Netflix’s offerings in comparison are middle of the road and kinda just have the people exist as either main characters are the quirky friend(tall girl for example) but nothing that bent objective facts
- quartesixte 4y ago
  There are definitely enough talented writers, it’s just that the Hollywood system is notorious for gatekeeping good writers, and thats if the writer had the perseverance and material support to even finish a spec script. It’s a pool with a lot of constraints on it, many of which are artificial.
  - namelessoracle 4y ago
    Netflix started to disrupt Hollywood, but it looks like Hollywood figured out how to manage Netflix. Rumours abound of conflict between the tech branch and content branchs (which is mostly Hollywood types now) of the company.
  - sumy23 4y ago
    > There are definitely enough talented writers Based on? There aren't even many good technical writers, which is a lot easier than writing fiction.
    - francisofascii 4y ago
      Based on the extremely low number of available writing jobs.
    - gamblor956 4y ago
      I know a few dozen struggling screenwriters who are trying to get (a) their screenplays produced or (b) contracted to write scripts. Note that these are all female screenwriters with an actual track record in industry (in this case, episodic broadcast TV). It really boils down to a few gatekeepers (mostly old white guys) giving the screenwriting jobs to the same idiots over and over again. For example, the guys who wrote Morbius have never written a successful film that made money back at the box office but already have 1 new screenplay in production and have been contracted to write several more; meanwhile the screenwriter of Crazy Rich Asians (which not only outgrossed Morbius but nearly grossed as much as Morbius' screenwriters' other films combined) has only been hired for a single film (Raya and the Last Dragon) since.
      - 4y ago
- hulitu 4y ago
  There is enough "better content". Unfirtunately it is not available on Netflix.
- dekhn 4y ago
  One thing I realized from "Everything Everywhere All At Once" is that although I never heard of the directors before (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniels_(directors) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniels_(directors)), and never would have predicted that movie and it content, the moment I started watching it, I realized there was another pair of people to put on the List of People I Trust To Make Good Stuff. For example, I'd like them to go back and make Cat's Cradle, or even better, Sirens of Titan. How many other second-tier directors who could make great films are out there not getting funded?
  - sumy23 4y ago
    > How many other second-tier directors who could make great films are out there not getting funded? I don't know, how many? Your example of Daniels is interesting because Daniels were discovered, so it doesn't help me understand how many people are out there that could do a great job but don't have the opportunity. I've consumed a lot of amateur writing, music, and comedy. Most people just suck at creative endeavors. On the other hand, I once saw the most beautiful performance by a girl busking on the street. Fast-forward a few years, and now she's doing world-wide tours constantly and has a great musical career. With YouTube, Twitch, Spotify, and TikTok, it's never been easier for talented young artists, writers, and directors to rise up from obscurity.
MonkeyClub 4y ago
> with the aid of some kind of medication. In other words, they found a couple of plot recipes that stoners like, and are cashing in on that. Which isn't reprehensible or anything in itself, it's just not worth so much of the hype it's getting, but that's hype after all. But I do dislike the overall cultural dumbing down.
rawoke083600 4y ago
yea, absolutely ! Im tired of teens with super or supernatural powers !
puranjay 4y ago
Increasingly found that HBO is the only service worth paying for. They're the only ones capable of putting out high quality, well-produced shows. The rest are all 80% misses, 10% hits, and 10% "I got time and nothing else to do"
- lovich 4y ago
  Apple TV has been putting out quite a bit of art in the decent to great category at the moment imo. I think that might be a function of trying to buy their way into a crowded market so I guess we’ll see how long it lasts
Barrin92 4y ago
They're already spending countless of billions. Higher quality artistic output isn't primarily a question of money, you really can't buy yourself originality and creativity. The entire structure and model of the business leads to produce exactly what Netflix makes. Season after season of mediocre TV that keeps people subscribing, using the same formulas over and over for more growth. Just like traditional TV at this point. Occasionally they'll get a good indie hit but that's about it. It's telling that much of the best content, like Dark or some of the South Korean shows is not coming out of the typical studios.
- OJFord 4y ago
  Well.. you kind of can? For at least as long as other providers are producing content you think is good. The creativity comes from humans who work somewhere; you can you can't buy creativity but you can 'buy' humans. Also you can buy the rights to old good stuff. Might not make good business sense (some (weird! senseless!) people will only watch new stuff) but it'd please me. My favourite stuff's all older than I am (i.e. I don't think you can claim it's just fond childhood memory or whatever) and there's plenty of greats I've yet to see, why restrict myself to this year's crap (and perhaps hit or two).
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Buying rights is more difficult with so many platforms banking on their own backlog of content. It locks up much of the highest quality content by making their owners think they can be Netflix too. (Some of them are right.)
- jerojero 4y ago
  I sort of disagree. In the beginning of Netflix they were releasing hit after hit in terms of artistic/innovative media. I think they had a very different approach, they were looking for special products but it is clear as they grew big they started focusing on cheap to make, low retention but high viral potentiality shows. That's a business decision. They made a decision to go for quantity over quality, and that's fine for the short-term. I think Netflix simply didn't find the right balance. It's okay to have cheap shows to fill in the blanks, I mean, I enjoy some of them. But the biggest problem is that they give up on pretty much every other more "artistic" work too easily; even when these can only become popular years later.

sumy23 4y ago

We might simply be at peak content. Better content requires better talent. The pool of talent is finite. Perhaps there aren't enough talented writers and producers to make better content happen.

bergenty 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pstuart 4y ago
  I don't think everyone feels the same way you do about women.
  - bergenty 4y ago
    I don’t think anyone likes to be force fed content that instantly breaks immersion because it doesn’t mirror reality at all.
    - marssaxman 4y ago
      If that's your perception of reality, perhaps it's good that you're being pushed out of your comfort zone.
      - bergenty 4y ago
        I don’t think it’s a matter of perspective, it’s the bending of objective facts.
        lovich 4y ago
        What “woke” content is bending objective facts? The only one I can think of in the past few years was The Wheel of Time keeping the family trait and bloodlines plot line(including one character recognizing another characters heritage based solely on their looks) while not keeping that casting consistent. The other end is shows like Foundation which might look like a woke cast at first but if you pay close attention you’ll realize that the galaxy spanning Empire has the diverse population due to being diverse while all the smaller planetary kingdoms are ethnically homogenous in casting which I thought was a clever attention to detail while satisfying politics. Netflix is pretty smack in the middle in that they produce content for the woke crowd, but that’s just by focusing on including diverse characters. They tend to not get into complicated plots that are defeated by casting. Unless my take on that is wrong I can’t see how minorities’ or womens’ existence can be bending any objective facts
        arthurcolle 4y ago
        Wheel of Time is on Amazon Prime Video not Netflix
        lovich 4y ago
        And The Foundation is on Apple TV, I was using the examples to compare Netflix’s offerings compared to what I saw of as the most glaring example of wokeness “bending objective facts” and the best example of including diversity without weakening the story and in fact strengthening it. Netflix’s offerings in comparison are middle of the road and kinda just have the people exist as either main characters are the quirky friend(tall girl for example) but nothing that bent objective facts
quartesixte 4y ago
There are definitely enough talented writers, it’s just that the Hollywood system is notorious for gatekeeping good writers, and thats if the writer had the perseverance and material support to even finish a spec script. It’s a pool with a lot of constraints on it, many of which are artificial.
- namelessoracle 4y ago
  Netflix started to disrupt Hollywood, but it looks like Hollywood figured out how to manage Netflix. Rumours abound of conflict between the tech branch and content branchs (which is mostly Hollywood types now) of the company.
- sumy23 4y ago
  > There are definitely enough talented writers Based on? There aren't even many good technical writers, which is a lot easier than writing fiction.
  - francisofascii 4y ago
    Based on the extremely low number of available writing jobs.
  - gamblor956 4y ago
    I know a few dozen struggling screenwriters who are trying to get (a) their screenplays produced or (b) contracted to write scripts. Note that these are all female screenwriters with an actual track record in industry (in this case, episodic broadcast TV). It really boils down to a few gatekeepers (mostly old white guys) giving the screenwriting jobs to the same idiots over and over again. For example, the guys who wrote Morbius have never written a successful film that made money back at the box office but already have 1 new screenplay in production and have been contracted to write several more; meanwhile the screenwriter of Crazy Rich Asians (which not only outgrossed Morbius but nearly grossed as much as Morbius' screenwriters' other films combined) has only been hired for a single film (Raya and the Last Dragon) since.
    - 4y ago
hulitu 4y ago
There is enough "better content". Unfirtunately it is not available on Netflix.
dekhn 4y ago
One thing I realized from "Everything Everywhere All At Once" is that although I never heard of the directors before (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniels_(directors) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniels_(directors)), and never would have predicted that movie and it content, the moment I started watching it, I realized there was another pair of people to put on the List of People I Trust To Make Good Stuff. For example, I'd like them to go back and make Cat's Cradle, or even better, Sirens of Titan. How many other second-tier directors who could make great films are out there not getting funded?
- sumy23 4y ago
  > How many other second-tier directors who could make great films are out there not getting funded? I don't know, how many? Your example of Daniels is interesting because Daniels were discovered, so it doesn't help me understand how many people are out there that could do a great job but don't have the opportunity. I've consumed a lot of amateur writing, music, and comedy. Most people just suck at creative endeavors. On the other hand, I once saw the most beautiful performance by a girl busking on the street. Fast-forward a few years, and now she's doing world-wide tours constantly and has a great musical career. With YouTube, Twitch, Spotify, and TikTok, it's never been easier for talented young artists, writers, and directors to rise up from obscurity.

MonkeyClub 4y ago

> with the aid of some kind of medication. In other words, they found a couple of plot recipes that stoners like, and are cashing in on that. Which isn't reprehensible or anything in itself, it's just not worth so much of the hype it's getting, but that's hype after all. But I do dislike the overall cultural dumbing down.

rawoke083600 4y ago

yea, absolutely ! Im tired of teens with super or supernatural powers !

puranjay 4y ago

Increasingly found that HBO is the only service worth paying for. They're the only ones capable of putting out high quality, well-produced shows. The rest are all 80% misses, 10% hits, and 10% "I got time and nothing else to do"

lovich 4y ago
Apple TV has been putting out quite a bit of art in the decent to great category at the moment imo. I think that might be a function of trying to buy their way into a crowded market so I guess we’ll see how long it lasts

Barrin92 4y ago

They're already spending countless of billions. Higher quality artistic output isn't primarily a question of money, you really can't buy yourself originality and creativity. The entire structure and model of the business leads to produce exactly what Netflix makes. Season after season of mediocre TV that keeps people subscribing, using the same formulas over and over for more growth. Just like traditional TV at this point. Occasionally they'll get a good indie hit but that's about it. It's telling that much of the best content, like Dark or some of the South Korean shows is not coming out of the typical studios.

OJFord 4y ago
Well.. you kind of can? For at least as long as other providers are producing content you think is good. The creativity comes from humans who work somewhere; you can you can't buy creativity but you can 'buy' humans. Also you can buy the rights to old good stuff. Might not make good business sense (some (weird! senseless!) people will only watch new stuff) but it'd please me. My favourite stuff's all older than I am (i.e. I don't think you can claim it's just fond childhood memory or whatever) and there's plenty of greats I've yet to see, why restrict myself to this year's crap (and perhaps hit or two).
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Buying rights is more difficult with so many platforms banking on their own backlog of content. It locks up much of the highest quality content by making their owners think they can be Netflix too. (Some of them are right.)
jerojero 4y ago
I sort of disagree. In the beginning of Netflix they were releasing hit after hit in terms of artistic/innovative media. I think they had a very different approach, they were looking for special products but it is clear as they grew big they started focusing on cheap to make, low retention but high viral potentiality shows. That's a business decision. They made a decision to go for quantity over quality, and that's fine for the short-term. I think Netflix simply didn't find the right balance. It's okay to have cheap shows to fill in the blanks, I mean, I enjoy some of them. But the biggest problem is that they give up on pretty much every other more "artistic" work too easily; even when these can only become popular years later.