Best TV shows

[Goodspeed]

Promoted Treme to must-see. Slow-roll, but highly recommend

[DrWho42]

i'll check out treme!

[pecelot]

That's a matter of length. If you only have 2 hours to tell a story, it tends to become plot-driven. I usually prefer stories with fleshed out characters.
Movies are to shows what short stories are to novels.

It's not like I enjoy every TV show either though. The list in the OP is what I'd recommend but there's a shit ton more that I quit watching within a few episodes

it's true: you can compare things like “Saving Private Ryan” with the “Band of Brothers” TV series or “The King's Speech” with “The Crown”

[lejend]

Just finished watching Lost. Not sure what to think about that ending.

[RefluxSemantic]

Kekw go watch your marvel kids

What do you have against marvel

It represents everything that's wrong with modern cinema: Flashiness over depth, no creative risk taking (in other words, the same shit over and over), no educational value, etc.
The comics might be good, idk.

I wonder if this is actually a trend, or just a thing you notice as you get older. You've seen the generic patterns before and will do a better job at recognizing those patterns, which might lead to you believing that movies nowadays are uncreative/predictable/boring, while in reality nothing has really changed.

[chris1089]

Watching the mentalist, can recommend. Lead character very good, and the other roles have enough interesting things that make you like them.

[fightinfrenchman]

Watching the mentalist, can recommend. Lead character very good, and the other roles have enough interesting things that make you like them.

I can't believe my dad is a mod on ESOC

[chris1089]

Watching the mentalist, can recommend. Lead character very good, and the other roles have enough interesting things that make you like them.

I can't believe my dad is a mod on ESOC

Had to keep up disguises and pretend to be someone else sorry.

[Goodspeed]

Show hidden quotes

Kekw go watch your marvel kids

What do you have against marvel

It represents everything that's wrong with modern cinema: Flashiness over depth, no creative risk taking (in other words, the same shit over and over), no educational value, etc.
The comics might be good, idk.

I wonder if this is actually a trend, or just a thing you notice as you get older. You've seen the generic patterns before and will do a better job at recognizing those patterns, which might lead to you believing that movies nowadays are uncreative/predictable/boring, while in reality nothing has really changed.

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comment ... urce=share

Top comment makes an interesting point too, about DVD sales no longer being a thing. The effect is movie studios focus even more on short term profits, and not as much on actually making a quality movie. Making short term profits is easier if your movie is about something people already know and like. Making something really new and creative is no longer rewarded to the same extent.

[princeofcarthage]

Well it is a business after all and most will make what sells. Although DVD source is no longer there, Netflix and other revenue streams have popped up which provides similar revenue. So the argument doesn't exactly stand. Nowadays you also have Music rights, TV rights, satellite rights and bunch of other rights companies sell to churn out maximum profits. Most movies make break even or close to it before release date.

[Goodspeed]

Well it is a business after all and most will make what sells. Although DVD source is no longer there, Netflix and other revenue streams have popped up which provides similar revenue.

Pretty sure it doesn't

[princeofcarthage]

Well it is a business after all and most will make what sells. Although DVD source is no longer there, Netflix and other revenue streams have popped up which provides similar revenue.

Pretty sure it doesn't

Is it your assumption or do you have any actual calculation or source for that?

[Goodspeed]

Fight club, a great movie that flopped in theaters, sold 13 million DVD's, let's say for a lowly $5 a piece for the sake of argument. Do you think Netflix would pay 65 million for the rights to stream it?
The point: Movies can no longer afford to flop in theaters and make up for it afterwards. That leads to (even more) risk aversion and a focus on what is easily marketable.

[fightinfrenchman]

Game of Thrones. No need to post anything after this.

Lol

[princeofcarthage]

You are actually giving one of the rare examples and the first ones that pop up on google lol. $5 includes the cost of dvd, distributors and stuff, the actual amount that goes to movies would be about 40% of that or $2. You are also giving an example from an era were DVD were on their prime and Netflix was still selling DVDs lol. When you are selling to netflix now you have near to zero costs associated with it. So basically any amount is profit as against associated costs with other media. Netflix bears all the costs including marketing and stuff post the deal. Even if Netflix pays 40% of that cost its still equal.

[Goodspeed]

If you want to get into that much detail, they obviously sold DVDs for more than $5 ($5 is a low estimate of the actual profit margin, going by google results) and they also made about 50 million from DVD rentals. But we don't know how much Netflix would pay for streaming rights.

We can use Amazon prime video as an example though because they apparently pay $0.01 per view, based on the discussion in that reddit thread. So to make up for a single DVD sale with a profit margin of $5, 500 people would have to watch the movie on prime. That's ignoring revenue from DVD rentals. Unless Netflix is overpaying content creators by an insane amount compared to Amazon, they should get similar revenue from Netflix. I think it's obvious that DVD sales and rentals brought in more profit at the time than streaming services do now. The top comment in the reddit thread, which mentions that industry insiders brought it up as a major reason movie studios became more risk averse, is additional evidence for that case.

[princeofcarthage]

So your argument is that when DVDs were launched and were at their prime/start of the boom and internet wasn't still mainstream they sold more offline than digital? You are also arguing about movie which achieved legendary status and made 50 million$+. How many movies made that figure? Also as I already stated netflix/amazon/subscriptions aren't the only source of revenue. They pay premium for exclusivity, and when they don't you can contract with multiple platforms. Films are broken down in every possible way and sold as rights. Music rights, television rights and many more. Then you have revenue streams from rental/buy from services like google movies/youtube. I am cherry picking but couple years ago an Indian film $75 million even before the movie was released. Any big budget movie would make a minimum of $20 million in such sales in India nowadays, so more in US. On top of this you have brand endorsements, merchandise sales and so much more. I am not saying all movies will have access to all revenue streams and some studios might be in bad luck but I would be hard pressed to believe they are not getting matching revenues. Maybe there was a few years gap, few years ago.

[Djigit]

[fightinfrenchman]

So your argument is that when DVDs were launched and were at their prime/start of the boom and internet wasn't still mainstream they sold more offline than digital? You are also arguing about movie which achieved legendary status and made 50 million$+. How many movies made that figure? Also as I already stated netflix/amazon/subscriptions aren't the only source of revenue. They pay premium for exclusivity, and when they don't you can contract with multiple platforms. Films are broken down in every possible way and sold as rights. Music rights, television rights and many more. Then you have revenue streams from rental/buy from services like google movies/youtube. I am cherry picking but couple years ago an Indian film $75 million even before the movie was released. Any big budget movie would make a minimum of $20 million in such sales in India nowadays, so more in US. On top of this you have brand endorsements, merchandise sales and so much more. I am not saying all movies will have access to all revenue streams and some studios might be in bad luck but I would be hard pressed to believe they are not getting matching revenues. Maybe there was a few years gap, few years ago.

I just wanted to say that I usually when I read your comments I picture in my mind an actual tiger saying them, like in that movie with the tiger (idk if the tiger talked in that movie I never saw it)

[pecelot]

it's called “Tigers on a plane” with Liam Neeson playing the alpha

[fightinfrenchman]

it's called “Tigers on a plane” with Liam Neeson playing the alpha

It's not even close to that

[gibson]

Rewatching Game of Thrones. Even in the first season which is rough around the edges you can still see the potential. Can't wait to get to the latter seasons to get pissed off about how bad they are :)

[edeholland]

@Goodspeed Have you seen Utopia? Either the 2013 British or 2020 American edition?

This 8-hour essay about the series made me watch the original British version:

[Goodspeed]

I watched the 2013 version when it came out. Certainly original, but it didn't hook me I guess. Quit after a few eps iirc

[fightinfrenchman]

Based
https://www.thewrap.com/x-men-97-1990s- ... ries-2023/