5 ms·
They're starting to up their quality. Frankenstein and Death by Lightning were two standout successes recently. That said, I'm more uncomfortable with the cont
by dclowd9901 10mo ago
They're starting to up their quality. Frankenstein and Death by Lightning were two standout successes recently.
That said, I'm more uncomfortable with the continued consolidation of media ownership and more outsize influence of FAANG tech over media.
- skeeter2020 10mo agoNetflix has always had one or three stand-out projects over a year, but is that what we want from studios? It is like the tech model: 1 big success for 10+ duds (the VC show) or another superhero installment (the Google/Meta cash cow movie).
- sbarre 10mo agoYou're describing TV and movies since forever. Ever year there are a few good shows and movies and a lot of mid-to-bad shows and movies. This is not a Netflix thing, nor is it new.
- HDThoreaun 10mo agoJust not true with HBO. Most of their content is consistently pretty good
- triceratops 10mo agoHBO is expensive and most people don't have it. Ergo most people never see or hear about their lower quality content. Only the good stuff that their rich friends rave about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HBO_original_programming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HBO_original_programmi... I don't recognize half the titles on that page. They also make less content overall. This makes sense because they are one TV channel and assume you can get your reality TV fix somewhere else. Netflix wants to be the only thing you watch. So they have to serve all needs.
- HDThoreaun 10mo agoYou not recognizing their shows doesnt mean they are bad. Ive seen most of those and the overwhelming majority are at least solid. I understand netflix's business model, Im just annoyed that theyre buying HBO because they will likely make it worse. Maybe netflix wants more prestige content and will let HBO be HBO but I doubt it.
- nebula8804 10mo agoIf WB was any good, would they have been snatched up by Netflix? All these studios fought the good fight against big tech over many years but the writing was on the wall. Hopefully a future Progressive presidency reviews all these mergers and breaks up big tech big time.
- Mindwipe 10mo agoHonestly Warner would have been fine if they hadn't been saddled with the debt that AT&T used to buy them. It wasn't an issue of Warner's business performance.
- truelson 10mo agoAT&T was able offload a bunch of debt on to them, and cash out at about what they paid in 2016. Not shabby.
- johnnyanmac 10mo agoIts always Art that gets the shaft first when businesses implode. Shows the respect these people have for culture.
- cap11235 10mo agoAt this point why would you consider WB as an entity at all. Thry were just another IP bundle
- Arkhaine_kupo 10mo ago> If WB was any good, would they have been snatched up by Netflix? Yes because the situation of WB has nothing to do with their performance. In 1990s they merged with TIME publishing right before the internet killed all magazines. In 2000s with AOL right before th dot com bubble. In 2010s with AT&T who realised they needed a shit ton of money to roll out 5G so they took a massive loan and charged it to Warner debt. So WARNER keeps performing and the business side keeps adding debt from horrible decisions
- jimbokun 10mo agoBy the definition of "stand out" you can't have very many right? If all of them "stand out" then none of them do.
- phartenfeller 10mo agoIt's about all the other projects that would have had great quality but did not secure funding because Netflix prefers to fund mass-produced mediocrity. In Germany we have a saying "Even a blind hen sometimes finds a grain of corn".
- andsoitis 10mo ago> It's about all the other projects that would have had great quality but did not secure funding because Netflix prefers to fund mass-produced mediocrity. In Germany we have a saying "Even a blind hen sometimes finds a grain of corn". Did you see the show Dark?
- bookofjoe 10mo agoU.S. version: "Even a blind squirrel (or pig) finds an acorn every now and then."
- sparklingmango 10mo agoIn parallel, they're also starting to downgrade their quality. In the latest season of Stranger Things there's a wild amount of in-scene exposition, where the characters explain what's happening while it's happening. I did some digging and learned that they may be dumbing down their shows because they know users typically look at their phones while watching Netflix and users are more likely to drop off of a show if they don't know what's going on. See here: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/jan/17/not-second-screen-enough-is-netflix-deliberately-dumbing-down-tv-so-people-can-watch-while-scrolling https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/jan/17/not-sec... Edit: I did really enjoy Frankenstein.
- josefresco 10mo ago> Frankenstein and Death by Lightning were two standout successes recently. IMHO Frankenstein" was pretty terrible. The makeup was awful, the effects were cheap, the monster... wasn't a monster! The entire premise depends on him being a monster, not some sort of misunderstood, sympathetic EMO.
- breakbread 10mo agoI was surprised at how many shots that I thought were terrible CGI were in fact practical effects.
- enragedcacti 10mo ago> The entire premise depends on him being a monster, not some sort of misunderstood, sympathetic EMO. This is a misconception on a similar level to thinking the monster's name is Frankenstein: "As depicted by Shelley, the creature is a sensitive, emotional person whose only aim is to share his life with another sentient being like himself." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein%27s_monster#Personality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein%27s_monster#Perso...
- josefresco 10mo agoThanks for stating the obvious and I assure you I know the story well. In order for the entire premise to work, there needs to be this conflict or tension between the perception of the "monster" and the true reality of his humanity. This movie failed at effectively portraying this conflict by humanizing the monster too much. Just my 2 cents.
- HelloMcFly 10mo agoCompletely agree. The movie ruined Dr. Frankenstein's motives by adding his benefactor, and ruined his monster by removing the inner rage he felt and expressed towards the world the shunned him. A very, very odd decision by GDT. Similar to Spike Lee remaking High & Low, but removing the critique of capitalism and the complicity of the wealthy so he could make Denzel the true protagonist.
- UltraSane 10mo agoFrankenstein looks oddly cheap and fake with really bad lighting in many scenes. You can tell they used the volume virtual production to shoot scenes and it doesn't look great.