criterionforum.org

dx23 wrote:I wonder now if he is going to readjust the pricing structure.

Dear ______,

It is clear that for many of our members two websites would make things more difficult, so we are going to keep Netflix as one place to go for streaming and DVDs.

This means no change: one website, one account, one password…in other words, no Qwikster.

While the July price change was necessary, we are now done with price changes.

We're constantly improving our streaming selection. We've recently added hundreds of movies from Paramount, Sony, Universal, Fox, Warner Bros., Lionsgate, MGM and Miramax. Plus, in the last couple of weeks alone, we've added over 3,500 TV episodes from ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS, USA, E!, Nickelodeon, Disney Channel, ABC Family, Discovery Channel, TLC, SyFy, A&E, History, and PBS.

We value you as a member, and we are committed to making Netflix the best place to get your movies & TV shows.

Respectfully,

The Netflix Team

Well, this is the company that, at the height of the social networking movement, erased their Friends functionality...

Drucker wrote:In a time where people want one device that makes calls, emails, stores their music and movies, lets them read the news, book a dinner or theater tickets simultaneously...I could see how he'd under-estimate people's desire for convenience.

I don't want any of this junk. I just want somebody to mail me discs with movies on them. I am so screwed.

I didn't realize people still had jobs like this in The States:

CNNMoney clip

So first they changed the pricing and got backlash. Then they tried to trick you into saying "They are done with Price Changing" by splitting the 2 up instead, yet still charging more than what it was before. Then they decided to bring it all back into 1 payment (in other words, "back to normal"), yet the price is still more than it was before any of this.

So are we back at the beginning with it costing more? Even though they went back on the "price changes", but really didn't.

Yeah, the split into two companies was supposed to have been the explanation for the price change after the fact, but has only proven to be yet another insincere attempt at damage control.

Ernie Kovacs (one of the most bizarre comics of the last century) Collection added today. It's hard to describe his style but once you watch his act you certainly never forget it.

As far as the changes go, I'm glad they ditched Qwickster. Netflix as a service is far from perfect, I'd love for them to have a much larger selection to be honest, but they are still the best DVD/BD rental service around.

As a company I think they are headed towards a free fall, simply because they have a man in charge who is not up to speed with his customers. Admitting that Qwikster was a mistake is great, but a really great company with a CEO who knows how to take his company even bigger places in the future would have seen how bad an idea Qwikster was an not implement it in the first place.

ando wrote:Ernie Kovacs (one of the most bizarre comics of the last century) Collection added today. It's hard to describe his style but once you watch his act you certainly never forget it.

They added a listing for it, but the discs can't be added to one's queue. It says 'unavailable.'

I think he means that the Ernie Kovacs set is available for streaming only. Bleccchhh.

You did the best you could, Andy Rendich. Hyuk!

I'm on a Hayao Miyazaki retrospective (the only feature I've seen being Spirited Away) starting with the 2 Miyazaki films on the streaming service: Howl's Moving Castle and Lupin the 3rd: The Castle of Cagliostro. Both deserve better viewing options (not even in HD ) but I've gotta start somewhere...

Chart: Netflix Streaming Performance by Major Internet Service Provider, or, Charter Is Finally Good at Something.

Well, after a long drought two notables were put up on the streaming service today: The Funeral (1996, Abel Ferrara) and Peckinpah's Pat Garrett & Billy The Kid (1973) - the dreaded 106 minute cut (there are 3). But even this is better than the latest spate of endless television series.

Is The Funeral OAR?

tarpilot wrote:Is The Funeral OAR?

No.

No, indeed. Netflix streaming is gradually turning into a queue for film purchases. The Funeral really needs to be seen in 1.85 : 1. But it'll do for now.

...my God, that ending. Gotta find the thread for this movie (if it exists).

Brutal and devastating, isn't it? I think the nearest we came to a discussion of the film was during the Abel Ferrara on DVD thread.

Yes, thanks. Best thing I've seen (for the first time) on Netflix since Panic In Needle Park - my taste running, obviously, to the dark side. The cast was absolutely first rate. I think they, with Ferrara, transformed a rather mediocre script into an exceptional film.

Reed and a New York Times writer compete to see who can sound more like a petulant douchebag. I'm calling it a draw.

Meanwhile, in my own reluctant adventures in Netflix streaming, Caprica looks beautiful, but Luther is unwatchable, with seismic motion stuttering on every camera movement. (I wonder if that's how PAL/NTSC conversion looks via streaming? Either that or it's just their umpteenth un-QC'd encode.)

Perkins Cobb wrote:Reed and a New York Times writer compete to see who can sound more like a petulant douchebag. I'm calling it a draw.

Hastings: "I watch mostly independent films."

Why the hell isn't that reflected in their recent buying decisions? #-o

Think most of the questions are spot-on, other than the fixation with Toy Story 3.

Noiradelic wrote:Think most of the questions are spot-on, other than the fixation with Toy Story 3.

I dunno, it seemed like the interviewer was trying really hard to bait Hastings, and while I don't particularly care for Hastings that still seems terribly unprofessional. I mean, is "Your hope is to eventually put places like HBO out of business, right?" a joke, or what?

I think because of Hastings/Netflix's very public bungles, the interviewer was being adversarial and asking tough questions, many of which I think people want answered. With the HBO question, I think he was suggesting that this streaming model for new TV shows could eventually eclipse broadcast TV -- not that HBO is going to be on the ropes any time soon (a little over the top, perhaps).

The Steve Jobs question was cheap; there was no way Reed could win that one, and he was smart enough not to play. On the other hand, his other answers all seemed pretty out of touch with reality, and as with the Qwikster "apology," he's trying out spin in a way that comes across as supercilious. I mean, his answer to the question about his arrogance is itself supremely arrogant.

And, as with most of the other articles I've read, the NYT guy misses the big question: he focuses on the Starz stuff Netflix has lost (a drop in the bucket) but doesn't ask how Reed plans to acquire the vast amount of disc-only titles that have never been available for streaming. Or why he's forcing customers to streaming before he's able to supply them with a Blockbuster-sized shelf of streaming new releases. As a substitute for the "Toy Story 3 fixation," the reporter might've asked why Reed is putting all his eggs in a business plan than only offers 3 out of the 10 most recent Best Picture nominees.

Noiradelic wrote:

Perkins Cobb wrote:Reed and a New York Times writer compete to see who can sound more like a petulant douchebag. I'm calling it a draw.

Hastings: "I watch mostly independent films."
Why the hell isn't that reflected in their recent buying decisions?

Because he's a fucking liar.