[Alupis]

> They got into content creation and they're now deep in debt despite their massive subscriber base.

I've found that while Netflix has some decent original content - the overwhelming majority of it is garbage and totally uninteresting.

Sometimes I feel some of the Netflix Originals where mothballed from normal venues, so Netflix picked it up, failing to realize why nobody else wanted to produce it in the first place.

As just an example, I was a huge fan of Arrested Development - but continuing that show where it left off after ~10 years of not being on air... it just didn't "have it" anymore...

And... when I search for a movie, it seems about 90% of the time they don't have it. Instead, they recommend a bunch of Netflix Original's that totally aren't what I'm looking for.

[addicted]

The best Netflix originals are the British shows they've rebranded as Netflix originals in the US.

The actual Netflix created ones have largely missed the mark for me.

[ljm]

And a lot of 'Netflix originals' over in the EU are essentially localised variations of a theme.

The theme is usually the end of the world, zombies, or the dead coming back to life. Or some horrible phenomena at the edge of a forest, and the once peaceful town is under attack from the supernatural.

What makes it worse is that Netflix now dubs foreign content by default to make it all look English. And they do their best to trick you.

[dreamcompiler]

You can still watch it in the original language with subtitles. It's just a setting.

But yeah, why is everything about "horror forests" nowadays? It's been done to death.

Maybe because so many people nowadays have never seen a tree?

[jrnichols]

what's frustrated me about Netflix originals is the same thing that drove me away from a lot of traditional TV - some awesome shows being cancelled after 2-3 seasons. I had hoped that Netflix would at least give their own shows a good story arc, but nope. they're doing the same thing Fox/CBS/NBC do.

i still much prefer shows without commercials, though.

[dreamcompiler]

Somebody wrote about this during the last week (can't remember where): Netflix purposely only produces two seasons of shows, because that's the right amount to convert new subscribers without alienating old ones enough to quit.

[yissp]

https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-slow-death-of-hollywo...

[Consultant32452]

I enjoy the standup specials. I remember when Comedy Central used to have stand up comedy. But I also remember when MTV was mostly music.

[Beldin]

Remark that that past evolution (of niche formats) does not bode well for the future of streaming video.

Case in point: I expect ads to arrive (within a decade) to streaming videos, much like they did for cable.

(Cable's main advantage in the early days was the lack of ads - or so I'm led to believe)

[cgriswald]

They’re already here. I even pay Hulu extra for no ads only to be greeted occasionally by a statement that due to licensing agreements a video has to have ads. And even the things that “don’t have ads” have ads for their other streaming videos, or try to cram ads in between auto plays.

[dreamcompiler]

True. In the early days of cable networks there were no ads. But slowly they came back when they realized people would tolerate them.

Now cable seems like mostly ads with a little bit of ghost hunting sprinkled in.

[b_tterc_p]

> the overwhelming majority of it is garbage and totally uninteresting.

This is true of pretty much all tv. Because most people want that.

[Alupis]

If I'm going to search through a bunch of listings, and select a show that's part of a series, all just to have something on while eating a 20 minute meal, I feel like I need to have something good on that I'm committing too.

On the other hand, if I turn on my cable box and Dog the Bounty Hunter happens to be on and halfway through an episode, I'll watch it until I'm done eating and be done with it. I don't actually care what going on in the episode, and I'm only half paying attention. It's mostly just noise and moving pictures in the background.

That's "disposable" television, and it's only something that you can get from an always on network.

Netflix requires more effort, and with that effort I feel I should get something good out of that time. Instead I spend 30 minutes looking for something to watch only to give up, switch back to network television, and eat my now cold meal.

[conductr]

Seems like they could use their content to create “channels” that essentially mimic a broadcast schedule

[xaedes]

I am still hoping for this to happen.

[b_tterc_p]

I get that people do this and the mental path that leads there. I don’t get people who are self aware of doing it and still complain. If you’d be comfortable randomly watching garbage so long as you don’t expend effort to choose it, then pick randomly. Alternatively if there’s nothing on it you want to watch, don’t watch it.

I think this comes across as condescending but I really don’t get it.

[alexashka]

A 'random offering' button or channels based on a theme that mimic traditional tv channels would be trivial to add to Netflix, and something they should seriously consider :)

[dreamcompiler]

Sturgeon's law applies.

[noelsusman]

Everyone thinks the overwhelming majority of all content is garbage and totally uninteresting. You might be surprised to learn that 31 million accounts watched Adam Sandler's most recent Netflix movie within the first three days, rivaling Stranger Things numbers. I remember the Internet laughing at Netflix for investing so much into Adam Sandler.

And Netflix (correctly) abandoned being a movie library service a long time ago. They're pretty much just HBO with a more broad appeal now.