Well, that's his problem: he's a prestige director with blockbuster-sized ambitions, and we're nearly 40 years removed from when that could have been an easier sell. It's definitely not the worst thing in the world to suffer from, but his problems aren't Lynch's problems.
Christopher Nolan criticizes Netflix's digital distribution model for movies
- Thread starter inm8num2
- Start date
Well, that's his problem: he's a prestige director with blockbuster-sized ambitions, and we're nearly 40 years removed from when that could have been an easier sell. It's definitely not the worst thing in the world to suffer from, but his problems aren't Lynch's problems.
Raitosaito
Member
As a big movie goer, I love the theater experience. But Nolan lives in a bubble when it come to the movies, and hates evolution to the form. He even pokes at VR in the marketing, and saying IMAX is VR. His movie making may be of high calibre, yet he has no real comprehension of how the media is evolving.
Netflix should still do a wideish runs of most of their films though.
Netflix should still do a wideish runs of most of their films though.
starchild excalibur
Member
As much as I love how consumer-friendly Netflix is, it does bother me that some of their films can only be seen on the small screen. Ironically enough I probably would have checked out Okja by now if it was released in theaters first.
I know Netflix has a tough battle with theaters not wanting to screen their stuff unless they keep it off their platform for a certain number of days, but to be honest I think I'd be okay with them giving theaters a 60-day window before giving it to their customers for "free." That way films like Beasts of No Nation can actually be seen in a way that is in service of their cinematography instead of just on a small TV.
I know Netflix has a tough battle with theaters not wanting to screen their stuff unless they keep it off their platform for a certain number of days, but to be honest I think I'd be okay with them giving theaters a 60-day window before giving it to their customers for "free." That way films like Beasts of No Nation can actually be seen in a way that is in service of their cinematography instead of just on a small TV.
Pyroclastic
Banned
this topic makes me want to go the cinema for the time in 7 or 8 years. I've been watching a lot more films recently. might as well go out and watch a few the way they were intended instead of moping about watching them at home.
my local place is £6 but only has limited screenings, the multiplexes further afield £10, though I could get one of those monthly deals if I go with any regularity.
it'll be sad to see if indie/low to mid budget films get robbed of the chance of a runaway hit at the theatre, it's hard to see that happening anywhere near as much if cinema declines along with the dvd/bluray market. same with music. you have the major label acts who do ok out of it with the occasional flash in the pan hit that would have been way better for artists even 10 years ago, and the rest are feeding for scraps.
my local place is £6 but only has limited screenings, the multiplexes further afield £10, though I could get one of those monthly deals if I go with any regularity.
it'll be sad to see if indie/low to mid budget films get robbed of the chance of a runaway hit at the theatre, it's hard to see that happening anywhere near as much if cinema declines along with the dvd/bluray market. same with music. you have the major label acts who do ok out of it with the occasional flash in the pan hit that would have been way better for artists even 10 years ago, and the rest are feeding for scraps.
Ploid 3.0
Member
Oh wow, I didn't even know this was on Netflix. I saw people reviewing it on youtube and just passed by the videos (the big animal thing). I have no idea what it's about. I guess since I already have access to it, I should watch it, not knowing what I'll be in for. I'm guessing it must be interesting if people are bringing it up here.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
After 5 films in the format, you'd think Nolan would have invested a lot more in R&D for IMAX cameras to get around the bulk and sound recording issues. As it stands, his films honestly feel more gimmicky to me than 3D films, because his films constantly shift between the IMAX-sized frame and normal aspect ratios.
If he wants to market the cinema experience something that can't be replicated at home, then damn well make it so like some of your fellow filmmakers leading the charge.
Yeah but you're asking Netflix to flush millions down the toilet to distribute their films for the 15,000 people who would rather see them in a theater for $10-15. They can just stream it to their already-paying customers for free, relatively speaking, so why bother?
I'm calling bullshit on this.
You know where Okja would of played? At best a handful of theaters across the country, mostly in NY, TX, or CA. Handmaiden did not play anywhere by me and Amazon wait months to put it online. Lost City of Z had one theater 45 minutes away. These would not have played anywhere near me nor got a wide expansion.
Even Moonlight, did not come out by me for more than a week with the Oscar win.
No, he is not right because he lives in a bubble. Don't live in a major city? Not getting anything that isn't released in less than 1k theaters. So now, we have films that the majority of theaters won't carry and blackball the distributor.... except they wouldn't fucking carry them in the first place anyways. Netflix has given me an alternative to see these films day 1, rather than wait 5 or 6 months before they decide to release it.
Blame theaters and their shitty practices, overpriced tickets, and allowing the experience to decay.
The Faceless Master
Member
that's great if you live somewhere with options.
i felt the same way when i lived in NY, tons of great theater options.
now the good options are a 3 hour drive.
bring on same day streaming.
Ploid 3.0
Member
Less reason to get netflix if I can just watch their content else where. Even if it's cheaper to just wait until it's on basic cabl.. er, netflix. Knowing that they make a lot of movies, and so much other content, I doubt I'd want to go without having a sub for myself. If they made expensive block buster budget movies, I would get a sub for my friends and family as gifts (but keep paying for my mom or something. Been trying to get her to cut directv for years).
The Faceless Master
Member
and headphone jacks.
spiderman123
Member
I love my cinematic experience however, there is a massive cost to doing it and I consider such an experience a luxury. Time and monetary
Seductivpancakes
Member
I can't believe some people actually want movie theaters to not exist anymore.
I enjoy going to the theaters and watching a film at home.
I enjoy going to the theaters and watching a film at home.
Marty Chinn
Member
Oh I'm not saying it's not worth the money, but you're in that 1% category just like me. I've got a mid range setup, but according to GAF's standards, it would be considered high end. Most people aren't going to invest in a quality setup because either they don't care for the quality difference, or they choose not to spend the money on one for whatever reasons they may have. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just most home setups are nowhere close to even being in the conversation with being compared to an actual theater.
KojiKnight
Member
I say he should be a good capitalist and let the markets decide. Personally I'd take a home day 1 experience to a theater any time... But I'm patient so it's not the end of the world either way
Personally, i think that if it wasn't held back by studios, theaters would likely be completely gone. Movies are to theaters what video games after to arcades. They are superior tailored experiences that many people will forgo for convenience and home viewing.
Personally, i think that if it wasn't held back by studios, theaters would likely be completely gone. Movies are to theaters what video games after to arcades. They are superior tailored experiences that many people will forgo for convenience and home viewing.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Yeah these people make me sick.
Well, that was sort of my point, when even Scorsese has to go to Netflix to make the film he wants it's pretty telling.
The director Bong Joon Ho is pretty big and Netflix made a lot of noise in Cannes bringing the movie there without any intention to distribute it in cinemas.
Speak for yourself. Would much rather watch a movie on a giant screen with surround sound than at home. Only benefit of watching at hone is I can pause it.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I can't imagine watching a new James Cameron film for the first time at home. I don't care how good you think your home theatre setup is. It isn't equipped to give the same effect to an event movie.
mariachi507
Member
If it wasn't for some idiot ruining the movie for me everytime I go to the theater I'd agree with him.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Go to a better cinema that enforces rules. More theatres need to adopt the Alamo approach to shitheads. It's shitheads that seem to be the biggest impediment to theatres to be honest.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
It sounds so romantic and wistful the idea of going to the theatres, but the reality of it is ridiculously overpriced nachos and a far kid kicking you in the back of the seat.
Marty Chinn
Member
Man some of you must live in areas with a ton of shitty people to constantly have these issues with people ruining movies. I honestly can't remember the last time I had some inconsiderate person or kid annoying the hell out of me at a theater and that stuff bothers me easily. I'm not saying it's never happened, but it's such an infrequent problem.
Seductivpancakes
Member
Yeah that's what I'm thinking. I haven't had an issue with shitty people in theaters in years, and I live in a big city.
I really love going to the cinema, but between me finally purchasing a pretty great TV and the ridiculous shit cinemas are pulling these days, I'm less and less inclined to go.
Like this new thing Australian cinemas are implementing: we've traditionally had regular cinemas and 'prestige' cinemas where the tickets are far more expensive but you sit in recliner seats and get food delivered to you during the film. But now they're replacing a whole bunch of the regular cinemas with a model that's somewhere in between - nicer seats that maybe recline for an extra $3 or so. Like, I don't want that shit. I just want to watch a good movie on a big screen, but between these cinemas, 3d, Gold-class etc, it's become harder and harder to just see a film through traditional means.
Also, Nolan, I love the IMAX thing, and I really want to see Dunkirk in 70mm, but the ticket prices in Melbourne are absolutely ridiculous. $38 for general admission, $50 for premium seats (which is literally, again, just nicer seats that have been plonked in the best location in the cinema, taking seats away from general admission).
When I'm paying $12 a month for Netflix, can watch what I want when I want without disturbance in pretty good viewing conditions, it's not difficult to understand why this shift is taking place. I'd be sad to see cinemas go, though.
Like this new thing Australian cinemas are implementing: we've traditionally had regular cinemas and 'prestige' cinemas where the tickets are far more expensive but you sit in recliner seats and get food delivered to you during the film. But now they're replacing a whole bunch of the regular cinemas with a model that's somewhere in between - nicer seats that maybe recline for an extra $3 or so. Like, I don't want that shit. I just want to watch a good movie on a big screen, but between these cinemas, 3d, Gold-class etc, it's become harder and harder to just see a film through traditional means.
Also, Nolan, I love the IMAX thing, and I really want to see Dunkirk in 70mm, but the ticket prices in Melbourne are absolutely ridiculous. $38 for general admission, $50 for premium seats (which is literally, again, just nicer seats that have been plonked in the best location in the cinema, taking seats away from general admission).
When I'm paying $12 a month for Netflix, can watch what I want when I want without disturbance in pretty good viewing conditions, it's not difficult to understand why this shift is taking place. I'd be sad to see cinemas go, though.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Watch Netflix give THE IRISHMAN a theatrical release after gauging the reaction to the first trailer featuring a 90s-era de-aged De Niro and Pesci.
Your avatar speaks for itself. Netflix says they love films but don't believe their lies. No matter how true lies sound, they are still lies. What Netfix really wants to be is the terminator of the theatrical experience. They want to sink cinemas into the abyss. Movie fans who love film should not be made to feel like aliens. We need to make a titanic effort to push back against this, so we can stand and be counted on the judgment day.
Alexander DeLarge
Member
Just got back from Dunkirk, I couldn't imagine watching that or something like Hacksaw Ridge, Silence or Crimson Peak in my living room for the first time. What an inferior experience that would be.... And now I'm worried about Scorsese's new Netflix "The Irishman" movie. Hopefully Scorsese insists on a theatrical release.
Posted that comment without reading the final page. I really really hope so.
Posted that comment without reading the final page. I really really hope so.
Turbo Killer
Member
Seriously, especially on this board. I thought people were smarter here.
lol @ duckroll, that was damn good.
MooseKnuckles
Banned
Yeah I don't get it at all. I have never seen a movie in a cinema and thought 'this experience would be way more immersive and enjoyable at home."
Cinemas are the best way to watch pretty much any movie.
Netflix's priority first and foremost needs to be to it's customers, so giving theaters an exclusivity window would be kind of self defeating.
Personally, I don't care about the theater experience at all, and have only gone once this year (Wonder Woman) and only because I didn't have any other choice if I wanted to see the movie without waiting. I do agree that streaming only isn't viable for big budget movies, but releasing day and date at home for the same price as a movie ticket should be an option.
If the cinema experience is so great and superior, it should be able to compete on an even playing field.
Personally, I don't care about the theater experience at all, and have only gone once this year (Wonder Woman) and only because I didn't have any other choice if I wanted to see the movie without waiting. I do agree that streaming only isn't viable for big budget movies, but releasing day and date at home for the same price as a movie ticket should be an option.
If the cinema experience is so great and superior, it should be able to compete on an even playing field.
Agreed. Every blow me away movie experience has always been in the theater. I lose myself in a theater more then home.
Alexander DeLarge
Member
The box office performance of Silence is probably the greatest tragedy in modern cinema that I can think of. At least Hacksaw did well.
Marty Chinn
Member
Yep, and conversely, there's been movies I've seen at home for the first time where they had scenes that made me wish I had seen it in a theater.
Ploid 3.0
Member
About 5 seconds after I read this heard Kevin Smith say something on his podcast that relates to all of this.
"Netflix owns us all ladies and gentlemen. It's because they constantly put shit out there that we like to watch, and if they put up something you don't like to watch, fuck it, wait two minutes and they will put up something you will like to watch." https://youtu.be/GItRR1kVwFw?t=54 he says more with Marc Bernardin adding in on it.
Maybe Netflix just don't care about theater money when they can get people singing the variety praises of Netflix service, getting more subs every day by doing what they do now. Reminds me of when Sony came out with PS1 and had such a large variety of games, games that appealed to more mature audiences.
Turbo Killer
Member
My dream is to see Blade Runner and Akira in IMAX.
Damn, it's $5.50 for matinees and goes up a dollar for the evening showings. 3d is 7.50
Raitosaito
Member
Right.
The movie going experience seems to strip away something, that as of now I can best described as "funneling the senses".
I can watch a film at home on an large HDR 4K TV, with some surround sound system and never reach that effect that a theater experience gives. There's just something being completely envelop by being transported with a film.
Maybe its the fact that things like your phone ringing, or just external audio at home can take you out, and you know those factors are there so you're never truly invested in a film at hand. But yeah, I don't like experiencing movies that way the first time.
Yes, location cause movie audiences behavior to vary greatly. I've had issues in one state, and not much in another. Chains need to have more staff examining a party for misconduct, and ruining the experience for others. It's inconsistent as of now.
brianjones
Member
Yeah there's way more potential distractions at home for me.. there's nothing stopping me from grabbing my phone but in a theatre I know better
Given the subject matter and the length of the film, is this really a surprise though? A slow character driven period piece about religion and foreign culture, running almost 3 hours long, with a chunk of it being subtitled dialogue.... a big ask for audiences.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Mel Gibson is laughing right now.Given the subject matter and the length of the film, is this really a surprise though? A slow character driven period piece about religion and foreign culture, running almost 3 hours long, with a chunk of it being subtitled dialogue.... a big ask for audiences.
Seductivpancakes
Member
Yea I have this issue were it's hard for me to sit through cringy or embarrassing scenes involving the main characters, and at home, I might be tempted to fast forward.
Except the horses he sells are the only ones faster than the cars
Cmon, you can't see the difference between a movie targeting Christian audiences as a depiction of the Passion, versus one which adapts a very personal book about doubt and faith in the face of persecution?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Of course I can. I'm just being difficult.
rainking187
Member
I'm okay with not watching stuff on a huge screen if it means I don't have to deal with people talking through the movie or high ticket prices and I can pause it if I want to get something to eat or go to the bathroom.
Faith... is difficult.
RBelong2Us
Member
Wait...the gangster movie that someone said earlier Netflix was producing for 100m that had "no big stars" is the Irishman?
Digital-Hero
Member
Sitting at home to watch a movie is much different from a theater experience (obviously). Those that say they would rather be home are the people who wouldn't mind watching great film on a tiny iPad. I think that is a disservice to that form of entertainment and also a sign of where things are going and it's altering social behavior just like cellphones. I don't think this is a good thing either. It's just more of "I'm going to retreat to my home because I can't deal with others." Seems like a millennial notion almost.