Fox Chief Disses Netflix: "Churn-Like Environment" Doesn’t Appeal to Filmmakers

Yeah... Hollywood stopped caring a long time ago... and so did we. Disney is next.. No fricken way im paying for their streaming service. No better way to kill the star wars franchise than to nickel and dime the fans.. i cannot believe they killed the Netflix deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
In fairness, I agree that there are quite a few things that Netflix has produced that traditional TV networks would and probably did pass on. That doesn't mean they aren't good shows, they simply aren't what a mainstream network would have produced.
 
Once networks starting doing only reality/talent oriented shows, I quit watching. Netflix produces compelling drama series that have become nearly extinct on regular cable. HBO is another example of producing shows that the population likes and will pay for.

Network TV passing or not producing a certain type of show DOES NOT mean society won't watch. They just go to other sources to get it (Netflix, Amazon, HBO).


And just because certain film-makers don't like Netflix doesn't mean none will. If there is money to be made, someone will fill the void.
 
Last edited:
Look, netflix isn't competing with hollywood blockbusters. Not even a little. On that she's right.

On the other hand, hollywood is also cranking out a shit ton of direct to DVD flicks, even with big name stars, to try to get cable and streaming licensing revenue. The talent hates the harsh production limitations, and the "churn like environment". They have publicly stated as much. That's where Netflix and amazon are intruding.

They are also intruding on the medium budget labors of love/cynical oscar grab movies.

At best this is a veiled threat to those looking at crossing the line for a better work environment. If you ever want blockbuster, summer tent pole sized budgets, don't cross the line.
 
raz-0 said:
Look, netflix isn't competing with hollywood blockbusters. Not even a little. On that she's right.
Click to expand...

And yet... they get my money every month, along with millions of other subs... I have not gone to the theater in almost a year. ... Hollywood is in denial.
 
She is either delusional, butt hurt in some way, or is trying to somehow spin Hollywood out of the hole that it has dug for itself … probably a combination of all of those.

"There’s nothing better about watching a film on Netflix or Amazon. There just isn’t."

Really? Let's just test that theory. For about the price of just one ticket to the movie theater I can:

watch the movie with my whole family;
pause the movie when any of us have to go to the bathroom;
pop my own popcorn and drink my own soda for about one percent of the price I would pay at the theater;
rewind the movie if I missed something or want clarification on a puzzling aspect;
CONTROL THE VOLUME LEVEL SO THAT IT'S NOT BLASTING OUT MY EARS;
sit in seats that are way more comfortable than the theater;
not have to listen to someone else talking behind me;
use my cell phone if I want;
not have to go anywhere, can wear whatever I want, and don't have to wait in a line.

Advantages of going to the theater for a movie:

I get to watch it on a huge screen.

Yep. She's right. There really isn't anything better about watching a film on Netflix or Amazon.
 
While not a movie Stranger Things is one of the best shows I've watched in years. No problems giving Netflix my monthly $$.
 
cptnjarhead said:
And yet... they get my money every month, along with millions of other subs... I have not gone to the theater in almost a year. ... Hollywood is in denial.
Click to expand...

Netflix gets mine too. My point was that Hollywood doesn't seem to get that Netflix is selling a different product, and that product is winning in the marketplace. They just see their existing models and the market intrusion.
 
raz-0 said:
Netflix gets mine too. My point was that Hollywood doesn't seem to get that Netflix is selling a different product, and that product is winning in the marketplace. They just see their existing models and the market intrusion.
Click to expand...

The movie industry isn't any different than the traditional TV networks and cable companies that can't understand why their 70 year old business model is faltering in today's world. Similarly, the CEO of Blockbuster couldn't understand internet based movie rentals, digital distribution and streaming or automated rental kiosks. By the time Blockbuster realized it needed to evolve to meet market demands, companies like Netflix and Redbox put them into the ground, or at least into a state it couldn't recover from.

These days we can stream 4K video into our homes thanks to internet technology the industry couldn't have imagined in their most ludicrous science fiction films 70 years ago. 65" screens and multi-channel surround sound systems can be found in virtually any middle class home in the country. The allure of going to the theater has almost been diminished completely. The only reason to go to a traditional theater is to see a movie before the people with the patience to wait for home release can see it. People work long hours and have busy and sometimes erratic schedules. We want to watch everything on demand when our schedules permit. Many of us don't get days off, but count our free time in hours. Traditional TV and film distribution and content provider models simply do not work anymore and are more trouble than they are worth.

As others have mentioned, the traditional cable, network and film providers have gone crazy with shitty reality TV shows and sequels or remakes of things from the 1970's, 1980's and even 1990's. The older providers simply aren't willing to provide the type of entertainment people want. Sure we like many of those 200+ million dollar movies that rakes in a billion bucks, but Hollywood and the like won't give the time of day to anything but that type of content and that mindless crap isn't the only thing people want to watch.

I can easily name off half a dozen shows or films on Netflix that I'd rather watch than anything shown on network television. I couldn't give two squirts of piss about the Bachelor or Survivor Season 17 or whatever the fuck they are on now.
 
Last edited:
I mean she isn't wrong. Movie theaters have a superior display of the product (normally). Bigger screen, more powerful and sometimes better calibrated stereo, and a huge room.

However, as has been pointed out, they aren't putting out good films and the pricing of Netflix is still less than or equal to a ticket for one person to go see a movie, sometimes more.

Netflix is the future. Movie studios need to decide if they are in the past, or if they want to continue living.
 
For $10 a month I can either:

A: Have Netflix and it's multitude of shows, many netflix produced

B: Go see 1 movie in the theater.


WTF do they think I'm gonna do??
 
Dan_D said:
I can easily name off half a dozen shows or films on Netflix that I'd rather watch than anything shown on network television. I couldn't give two squirts of piss about the Bachelor or Survivor Season 17 or whatever the fuck they are on now.
Click to expand...

Come on they just announced celebrity big brother this winter.... you know your in for that. /s :>
 
thekipper said:
For $10 a month I can either:

A: Have Netflix and it's multitude of shows, many netflix produced

B: Go see 1 movie in the theater.


WTF do they think I'm gonna do??
Click to expand...

Why go to the theater and buy a $10 drink and a $10 popcorn on top of the ticket price for yourself. And of course that much for each person that sees it with you. Duh! /s
 
I can't even remember the last time I've been to the theater or what movie it was I saw.
 
Reminds me of the smack talk from the Blockbuster CEO when Netflix started eating their lunch. Stacey Snider really should be learning and evolving the company. But then again, what does she care? She knows she would be paid a bazillion dollars if she ran Fox into the ground and sold it off for pennies on the share. (while all firing all the staff with no severance pay of course)
 
VIC-20 said:
Reminds me of the smack talk from the Blockbuster CEO when Netflix started eating their lunch. Stacey Snider really should be learning and evolving the company. But then again, what does she care? She knows she would be paid a bazillion dollars if she ran Fox into the ground and sold it off for pennies on the share. (while all firing all the staff with no severance pay of course)
Click to expand...

That smack talk is exactly what I was referring to here:
Dan_D said:
Similarly, the CEO of Blockbuster couldn't understand internet based movie rentals, digital distribution and streaming or automated rental kiosks. By the time Blockbuster realized it needed to evolve to meet market demands, companies like Netflix and Redbox put them into the ground, or at least into a state it couldn't recover from.
Click to expand...

What's idiotic is how obvious it was to everyone but him just how wrong he was when he said that crap.
 
Dan_D said:
That smack talk is exactly what I was referring to here:


What's idiotic is how obvious it was to everyone but him just how wrong he was when he said that crap.
Click to expand...
What's funny is the built in blockbuster online app that was installed on my fiance's roku takes me into another program that isn't BBO that I've never heard of.

Blockbuster was just way to late to the party. They were happy with what they had.
 
Krazy925 said:
What's funny is the built in blockbuster online app that was installed on my fiance's roku takes me into another program that isn't BBO that I've never heard of.

Blockbuster was just way to late to the party. They were happy with what they had.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's part of the Sling service now and isn't an independent application anymore.
 
Dan_D said:
Yeah, it's part of the Sling service now and isn't an independent application anymore.
Click to expand...
Weird. I don't remember it pulling up Sling.

I'm totally clicking it when I get home now though.

I have to admit when I was working at Blockbuster from 2005-2006 we didn't think Netflix was going to be able to overtake Blockbuster simply because the bandwidth wasn't there in our opinion.

Boy were we ever right. Not.
 
Krazy925 said:
Weird. I don't remember it pulling up Sling.

I'm totally clicking it when I get home now though.

I have to admit when I was working at Blockbuster from 2005-2006 we didn't think Netflix was going to be able to overtake Blockbuster simply because the bandwidth wasn't there in our opinion.

Boy were we ever right. Not.
Click to expand...

The bandwidth was getting there back in those days. 20Mbit+ cable wasn't that unusual in major urban and suburban areas. Since those years, many new housing developments all over the country were built with fiber networking from the very start. The housing boom helped spread the bandwidth in those suburban locations back then. I lived in an area back in 2007 or 2008 that was already two or three years old that was all fiber. Hell FIOS hit inner city areas of Dallas and its surrounding cities back in the early 2000's. Don't forget, Netflix really began with its online DVD rental service. There model was much cheaper than Blockbuster and you didn't have to leave your house to use it. Streaming service was a natural extension of Netflix's business model and by the time they really started to shift that direction, the bandwidth was far more prevalent.
 
Dan_D said:
The bandwidth was getting there back in those days. 20Mbit+ cable wasn't that unusual in major urban and suburban areas. Since those years, many new housing developments all over the country were built with fiber networking from the very start. The housing boom helped spread the bandwidth in those suburban locations back then. I lived in an area back in 2007 or 2008 that was already two or three years old that was all fiber. Hell FIOS hit inner city areas of Dallas and its surrounding cities back in the early 2000's. Don't forget, Netflix really began with its online DVD rental service. There model was much cheaper than Blockbuster and you didn't have to leave your house to use it. Streaming service was a natural extension of Netflix's business model and by the time they really started to shift that direction, the bandwidth was far more prevalent.
Click to expand...
I just remember having to sell BBO against them in the suburbs of Oakland/SF. We aren't exactly luddites over here. I don't even think we had the option for Cable internet in my neighborhood until 2001/2002.

Netflix's mailing business didn't hurt blockbuster as badly as people might think because they had a two movie out program that was similarly priced but could be exchanged in store.

I had forgotten Enron helped them build one of the early version of BBO.

God I miss my child molester manager from there. I don't know why but Blockbuster will always have a soft spot in my heart. Even though it is a piece of shit.
 
Krazy925 said:
Weird. I don't remember it pulling up Sling.

I'm totally clicking it when I get home now though.

I have to admit when I was working at Blockbuster from 2005-2006 we didn't think Netflix was going to be able to overtake Blockbuster simply because the bandwidth wasn't there in our opinion.

Boy were we ever right. Not.
Click to expand...
Even without the online streaming aspect, the fact that I could have a movie show up in my mailbox in 2 days, it cost me way less than blockbuster, and came with the envelope to send it right back without needing to drop it off anywhere... that absolutely eliminated retail movie rental stores for me.

As far as the suburbs in the bay area went, yeah cable wasn't everywhere but by 2005 10mb+ was available in most areas and growing for sure, and that was enough for streaming. You were a blockbuster employee, so you gotta remember that they might have been feeding you quite a bit of bs with regards to the competition :p
 
Merc1138 said:
Even without the online streaming aspect, the fact that I could have a movie show up in my mailbox in 2 days, it cost me way less than blockbuster, and came with the envelope to send it right back without needing to drop it off anywhere... that absolutely eliminated retail movie rental stores for me.

As far as the suburbs in the bay area went, yeah cable wasn't everywhere but by 2005 10mb+ was available in most areas and growing for sure, and that was enough for streaming. You were a blockbuster employee, so you gotta remember that they might have been feeding you quite a bit of bs with regards to the competition :p
Click to expand...
We were torrenting pretty heavily because it didn't introduce some of the issues that were happening at the time with streaming.
I remember a guy getting the game pass that lived around the corner, he would take home ps2 games and burn them/back them up. He cancelled his sub after a month :D

My buddy who got me the job and I both got 5 free rentals a week that we never used. By the time we came back 2 years later, blockbuster was out of business.

Funny thing is I hear similar issues with loading/latency in the cable cutter solutions I have read reviews on in 2016/17.
 
Krazy925 said:
We were torrenting pretty heavily because it didn't introduce some of the issues that were happening at the time with streaming.
I remember a guy getting the game pass that lived around the corner, he would take home ps2 games and burn them/back them up. He cancelled his sub after a month :D

My buddy who got me the job and I both got 5 free rentals a week that we never used. By the time we came back 2 years later, blockbuster was out of business.

Funny thing is I hear similar issues with loading/latency in the cable cutter solutions I have read reviews on in 2016/17.
Click to expand...
Well... there's also the issue of companies oversubscribing their networks. There's also a definite difference in latency on the internet in general now compared to the late 90's. Back in '97 I had a cable modem in the bay area, 10 up 10 down, got ping times of 10 or less to most servers within the state and that's what a true low ping bastard was. These days I'm lucky to see ping times of 30 or less even with 10 times the amount of downstream bandwidth.
 
Dan_D said:
That smack talk is exactly what I was referring to here:


What's idiotic is how obvious it was to everyone but him just how wrong he was when he said that crap.
Click to expand...

Perfect example of history repeating itself. Apparently the Blockbuster CEO even mailed a kitchen sink to Netflix to troll them. Maybe Netflix should mail out that same sink back to Fox?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
Merc1138 said:
Well... there's also the issue of companies oversubscribing their networks. There's also a definite difference in latency on the internet in general now compared to the late 90's. Back in '97 I had a cable modem in the bay area, 10 up 10 down, got ping times of 10 or less to most servers within the state and that's what a true low ping bastard was. These days I'm lucky to see ping times of 30 or less even with 10 times the amount of downstream bandwidth.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. I used to see sub 10ms pings all the time. Now, I'm lucky to get 43.
 
Ahh, Fox. An oldie, but a goodie...



If all those shows get cancelled... they got a shot!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top