-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Christopher Nolan criticizes Netflix's digital distribution model for movies
- Thread starter inm8num2
- Start date
Skellig Gra
Member
I'm talking about Netflix made movies (which I assume is what Nolan is referring to). They aren't very good. Plus show me a Netflix Original that looks as good as something like Planet of the Apes
The experience at home is good enough so that I don't have to deal with assholes at the theater.
MontyBrown
Banned
Love them which is why I have the right setup at home actually m8
Lots of other people work too and they have time to go to a movie. Incredible.
Hari Seldon
Member
Fuck movie theaters. I really really want to see Dunkirk, but not enough to put up with the negative experience of a movie theater.
SocksAndShoes
Banned
...
Why in the world would Netflix want to help theaters?
Why in the world would Netflix want to help theaters?
torre_avenue
Banned
I don't think that's the problem, more that theaters are refusing to let Netflix movies be exhibited because Netflix refuses to give theaters a window of exclusivity. Their reasoning is that if given the choice to pay $12-$20 to see a film in a theater versus at home, consumers will pick the home everytime. And why shouldn't they? Theater tickets are pricy, refreshments pricier, seats are uncomfortable, people can be rude and ruin the experience, and so on and so forth. There's nothing a theater can do to beat Netflix without cutting into said chain's profit margin.
The theater industry has basically done the bare minimum to get people into theaters because they've had no competition, and now that they do, they're floundering to innovate.
Walter White
Member
Some movies require the spectacle of the big screen and sound systems to get the full experience or for one to fully appreciate. No way you're getting that at home, no matter your pricey audio/video-phile set up.
I, for one, appreciate the old school film makers like Nolan and Tarantino, still sticking to film, practical effects (when available), and all that stuff. It is not the same experience watching at home.
I, for one, appreciate the old school film makers like Nolan and Tarantino, still sticking to film, practical effects (when available), and all that stuff. It is not the same experience watching at home.
Puck Beaverton
Banned
It would probably help if Netflix picked better films to distribute. Amazon is blowing them away in that department.
RBelong2Us
Member
I live in the bay area. Plenty of theaters have movies for $6 on Tuesdays and there are smaller theaters that have even deals where you can pay whatever you want for a film (I believe it's on Wednesdays)
I live on Long Island, in one of the most expensive and densely populated counties in the country.
I'm surrounded by 5 theaters (3 major, 2 mom and pop) and they all offer similar matinee specials.
And like you, I saw Baby Driver for 5 bucks. Loved every second of it.
Agreed. I never go outside the house!
Netherscourge
Banned
"At its best" is when there is nobody in the theater but me and whoever is with me.
So, I'd say 1/10 times I go, late at night, it's better than watching at home.
Where I live if you go to the movies between 4 and 6 tickets are $5.
AuthenticM
Member
completely agree with him.
That's quite a mighty leap he's making to Netflix conspiring against theatres.
And they're funding the projects so, who is he to say how they distribute them, especially when they're in the primary business of streaming?
The only thing that's bizarre is his leap of logic here, even if he prefers the traditional way that Amazon is using. I don't see anything inherently wrong if Netflix gives people both options day 1, regardless of performance.
And they're funding the projects so, who is he to say how they distribute them, especially when they're in the primary business of streaming?
The only thing that's bizarre is his leap of logic here, even if he prefers the traditional way that Amazon is using. I don't see anything inherently wrong if Netflix gives people both options day 1, regardless of performance.
RBelong2Us
Member
wtf are people talking about...."get with the time Nolan"
uhhh we have 2 movies that made over a billion worldwide in theaters this year lol
uhhh we have 2 movies that made over a billion worldwide in theaters this year lol
radios shipping overview
Member
This analogy only works if you think the convenience brought by streaming technology is infinitely preferable to the experience of seeing a movie on a huge screen with a great sound system.
Some of their film festival pick-ups have been good. I would definitely agree that their full-on Netflix-made movies aren't too hot, though.
serenewarfare
Banned
You never know what the loss/gain in revenue difference is if they give people other avenues to watch their content besides subscribing to them. If they keep those things exclusive as a blanket policy, they don't have to worry about that. It may be a net negative.
Sure, we can speculate and say we know one way or the other as to why people subscribe to Netflix, but ultimately only Netflix really knows that.
And the "theater experience" is an intangible thing that no one can place a value on, so running a business based off of it would be dumb.
They haven't really made a series like Planet of the Apes so I don't have a comparison but stuff like Marco Polo or Narcos is easily comparable to similar movie releases.
Fancy Clown
Member
Yup. I get the convenience of watching at home, but there's nothing like the shared experience of a going out to a dope theater and falling into the film through a massive screen. It's worth the occasionally shitty people you have to put up with.
Netherscourge
Banned
Put them on Netflix at the same time they are in theaters, and it would probably make 2 billion worldwide.
The Jackdog
Member
honestly digital distribution might be the only place Okja COULD of made money.
thats not a high ticket sales movie
This is the very definition of old man yells at cloud. You're old news, Nolan. People watch movies on their phones these days for fuck's sake.
It's honestly a bizarre rationalization he's trying to make. Netflix subscribers are paying for that exclusive Netflix-produced content. We should also pay to watch it first on theaters? What? Nolan pls.
Personally, each year I care less about going to movie theaters. And hell, I believe I'm getting better stories on TV shows anyway.
It's honestly a bizarre rationalization he's trying to make. Netflix subscribers are paying for that exclusive Netflix-produced content. We should also pay to watch it first on theaters? What? Nolan pls.
Personally, each year I care less about going to movie theaters. And hell, I believe I'm getting better stories on TV shows anyway.
serenewarfare
Banned
Can you say with certainty that the only reason people paid to see those movies is because they were in a theater? Would they not have paid a similar price (if not even a bit more) to have the convenience of watching it at home?
I am wannabe filmmaker and I barely go to the cinema. Big ass TV's & great sound systems have come drastically down in price in the past few years. If I could just buy cinema releases right to my home I would. Weed, beers and a comfy sofa with the ability to pause when I need a piss.
Puck Beaverton
Banned
Okja benefits showing up on Netflix, to be fair.
True Savior
Member
Movies should naturally be watched in a theater and a production company which denies that possibility, like Netflix, is a complete aberration.
Well said.
Nolan is for artificial and antiquated restrictions, and ignorant of the ramifications on subscribers of Netflix starting to put theatres above their core business.
Super odd statement and it doesn't seem like he's thought it out from a business perspective either.
demosthenes
Member
No thanks.
Netflix has some problem with distributing things, distributing movies they finance on streaming only isn't one of them? You subscribe to Netflix for one thing only, at least Amazon Prime offers other benefits than just streaming. People would probably be upset if Netflix financed movies were available in theaters but not on Netflix yet, because if you wanted to go see it right away you'd need to pay an additional fee to go see it. Netflix stuff tours at cinema festivals and has critic screenings, right? I don't necessarily see what the problem is then.
We wanna talk about Netflix distributing things terribly, let's talk about Netflix securing rights for anime but not adding it until it's completely finished airing, forcing people who actively follow anime to use other means if they want to watch a show weekly. Amazon's anime distribution method is now also pretty bad, with an additional subscription required on top of Amazon Prime required to watch their simulcasts, but I guess at least they offer it unlike Netflix. Crunchyroll, Funimation, etc. are the only ones who really get it and they've been in the business for years at this point, yet big companies like Netflix and Amazon don't really get the market for people who watch simulcasts at all.
We wanna talk about Netflix distributing things terribly, let's talk about Netflix securing rights for anime but not adding it until it's completely finished airing, forcing people who actively follow anime to use other means if they want to watch a show weekly. Amazon's anime distribution method is now also pretty bad, with an additional subscription required on top of Amazon Prime required to watch their simulcasts, but I guess at least they offer it unlike Netflix. Crunchyroll, Funimation, etc. are the only ones who really get it and they've been in the business for years at this point, yet big companies like Netflix and Amazon don't really get the market for people who watch simulcasts at all.
My girlfriend is an AT&T customer, which offers bogo movie tickets every Tuesday, so we watch a movie for a combined $12 every week. Tuesday is also half off popcorn day, so for $3.xx more, we get a giant popcorn.
Why would think releasing a movie in theater would prevent you from doing that?
No. Nothing beats watching a movie in a theater.
Would like films to hit home video and streaming services quicker out of theaters though, perhaps like a month after initial release.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Interesting that Nolan talks about a 90 day window when the same window before Netflix was more like 180 days and most films today are more like 30-60 before paid VOD. I wonder if this number will go up or down over time and whether people should invest more or less in theatres going forward. Hmm.
Hari Seldon
Member
What I do if I want to recreate the theater experience at home is when I sit down to watch a movie, I force myself to watch 30 minutes of commercials before I actually watch the movie.
The Faceless Master
Member
maybe i'd feel different if i had a local Alama Drafthouse and not a local shitshow.
home > *
home > *
I'm just saying there's room for both.
Mushroomer25
Member
He nails it. Simultaneous release on streaming will never work for theaters, which means Netflix's films will be effectively limited to the small screen. That is doing the creators a monumental disservice, and it comes off as arrogant. The films themselves also suffer, since Netflix doesn't actually market them to a wider audience. They feel front page placement on their service (for a few days, tops) is a meaningful alternative to an actual advertising campaign.
Even a short exclusivity window solves this problem for everyone involved. Netflix is the holdout.
Even a short exclusivity window solves this problem for everyone involved. Netflix is the holdout.
Grizzlyjin
Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
I gotta side with Nolan on this. Netflix is all about quantity over quality. I'd take Amazon over Netflix any day of the week if we're talking about studio production and distribution output. I'm starting to think that Netflix's aversion to even very limited theater runs is just to avoid the critics tearing their films apart. They stumble across something good every once in awhile, but for the most part it's garbage. And that 90 day window wouldn't drop the perceived value of the films on the service, it's 3 months. It makes me go Hmm.
Not really.
I'm sure they make more money if you subscribe for a month than if you buy a $10-15 movie ticket.
Skellig Gra
Member
They have some good tv shows, don't get wrong. My point is that their output is different than cinema level stuff and both are good(for different reasons). We don't need less options like the other guy wishing cinemas would die.
How can you say with certainty the opposite, though? People like to go outside and do things. Going to the cinema is like going to a party or a public event. It's exciting and fun.