Hacker News Reader

Comment by doorbumper | Hacker News Reader

You act as though seeing it in an independent cinema is an advantage? Isn't a month of Netflix's subscription cheaper than going to the cinema? That's the real problem. Trying to charge that much for a single viewing of a single movie. Consumers will cheer for whoever is not trying to screw them over at any given time. Cinemas have taken advantage of consumers for decades, and continue to try to do so by banning content from their festivals.

View on HN

It is an advantage because it's independent of the producer. They don't have a lockdown on the content.

You can only watch a Netflix movie, on Netflix. You can't watch it on Amazon, nor Google Play.

Promoting independent access to this media is a good thing.

And paying more to see the movie just once in a controlled theater that isn't your own is so much better? You still have absolutely no control over the media and you are paying more money to more middlemen.

The experience might not be always better. An 8K (~IMAX, usually 4k though) screen and Dolby Atmos beat out what I have in my house that's for sure, but I concede that's usually overridden by noisy neighbors. But, I can chose any theater. The large players like AMC, Edwards, or even some smaller cinemas like iPic, or even Alamo drafthouse.

And you know what? When it leaves that theater, it's available on DVD or Bluray. It's available sometimes on iTunes, Netflix, or Amazon. I (usually, if it's popular enough) don't have to pick and choose what distribution channel I need to subscribe to so that I can actually watch the darn thing. If it's in theater, I can at least usually get it on DVD.

None of that applies with anything Amazon or Netflix create. (EDIT: crysin informed me that yes, Netflix has released a couple TV shows on Bluray; I didn't know that! Thanks!) It's locked down to only their platforms. I can't get the DVD to watch independent of their platforms. If they pull the content one day, it's gone, forever. If they want to one day charge an extra surcharge to watch these movies, I'll be forced to pay. If one day Netflix decides to sell the distribution rights for Okja to Amazon, well now I have to leave Netflix to go watch it.

No one benefits from these walled distribution platforms, except Amazon and Netflix. The consumer gets screwed, and judging by a lot of the comments on this site, not many people seem to mind, probably because they're already subscribed to both.

Netflix does release their popular original series on Blu-ray. I don't know if any of their movies have had that luxury yet, but they are starting to release them independent of their streaming service. As an example Daredevil and Stranger Things are both available on Blu-ray.

Have you noticed that some movies are only available at AMC theaters, or Cinemark, or Cineworld theaters?

Lockdown on content (from distributors to theaters) has been around a long time, this is nothing new.

True independent theaters play smaller, independent/art-house movies because they aren't allowed to play big-production movies without signing up for exclusive access.

Licensing and distribution is a big mess that keeps control and profits in the studio. It's also why you rarely see international movies outside their country of origin.

The sooner the industry dies and gets rebuilt, the better.

> Lockdown on content (from distributors to theaters) has been around a long time, this is nothing new.

Not in France. A seller (here distributor) has no right to choose its clients (here theater).

Promoting independent access to this media is a good thing

Is there some significant difference between me paying $9.99 for a month of Netflix to watch a movie versus me paying $11.50 to an independent movie house for a single viewing?

Is that single viewing at a movie house somehow more open than a month of streaming?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com