Seems long overdue given the value that most users are getting from Netflix plus the relative inability for most traditional Hollywood studios to produce films at previous rates for the foreseeable future.
Apart from a few notable exceptions (like The Queen's Gambit), there is an enormous difference in quality between Netflix and Hollywood productions. Netflix redefined the meaning of 'pulp'.
I think it just shows you how much time people spend watching TV, so much that they have (or at least think they have) consumed all the worthy content on Netflix.
I wonder how many HNers would be happier if they replaced their excess TV consumption with something more fulfilling than working out how they can subscribe part-time to every service just so they can watch even more.
Aside, add "The Alienist" to that list. Great period piece in early New York with Dakota Fanning and Luke Evans. Has nothing to do with aliens btw.
I used to be the guy not watching tv everyday. And then I got married
Kidding. TV, especially good quality production, has been a great way for me to tune out of politics and the toxic environment of life in America. It's sad but for anyone just looking to get past the nightmare TV is a real boon.
Out of those, maybe the first 2 seasons of Narcos and House of Cards are good, Stranger Things first season was OK. Tiger king is trash tv. Ozark sucked. DWP, no comments. The Witcher was heavily panned. I have not watched the rest but based on in your comment I wouldnt trust too much on your taste.
I generally don't respond to comments as unconstructive as this one, but I'll make an exception. I've added the overall show scores from Rotten Tomatoes (critics/audience) to maybe broaden your perspective a little.
- Narcos: 89%/94%
- House of Cards: 77%/76%
- Russian Doll: 97%/87%
- Ozark: 81%/92%
- Stranger Things: 93%/91%
- Tiger King: 86%/84%
- Dear White People: 95%/50%
- The Witcher: 67%/92%
- The Umbrella Academy: 82%/87%
- The Crown: 89%/90%
- Space Force: 38%/75%
- The Alienist: 74%/84% (added by request)
The only one not well-received by critics was Space Force (which audiences liked), and the only one even close to "OK" according to audiences was DWP (which critics liked).
Except for those two, every other show on this list had a supermajority of both critics and audience view it favorably.
Feel free to update the list with ratings from any aggregator you prefer.
Also, when you say LOU2, do you mean The Last of Us II? I'd like to point out that Rotten Tomatoes is a TV/film ratings website and so does not have a rating for that video game. As such, if that is what you meant by LOU2, then you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
RT is also an aggregator of reviews, so any rating on RT of a film like Cuties is not "RT's rating", but rather a score calculated from professional TV/film critics. If you think most critics are bad at doing their job then fair enough, but this entire subthread was about a claim that Netflix has terrible programming compared to "Hollywood". Not sure who you think is better equipped to judge such things besides professional critics, except of course your estimable self.
(A) I don't think that's empirically true; it's easy to rattle off high-quality Netflix content, which is why so many people subscribe to it.
(B) I don't think that's theoretically true either, in that Netflix and "Hollywood" both get content the same way: by buying it from production companies.
All the low budget productions that used to fill out Blockbuster Video are now filling out Netflix and Amazon.
I always wondered who actually rented those movies and how they made money. I guess the formula still works because people must be watching them on Netflix...
There is a lot of money to be made in low budget productions. Because the market of consumers is big and the cost to produce them are low. And you occasionally end up with a blockbuster and have something like Paranormal Activity that cost $15k to make and made millions in the box office.