> The halo effect that "Netflix Original" used to have thanks to shows like House of Cards...

It wasn't even 'original' in that it was a UK series years earlier. I understand they made changes, and, IIRC, milked it for a lot more than the UK series. But that wasn't... "original". Good original series though. There's likely more good UK stuff Netflix could mine.

> It wasn't even 'original' in that it was a UK series years earlier. I understand they made changes, and, IIRC, milked it for a lot more than the UK series.

I hear you, but the first season of the US House of Cards comprised the action of all three series of the UK version. It's hard to say that the Netflix version was not original considering it went on considerably longer.

We talkin Peaky Blinders and The Last Kingdom? Anything else?

The great British “baking show” or bake off, depending if pillsbury owns the trademark for bake off where you’re from.

I would love if Netflix picked up Utopia[1], and given current events, now would be a very interesting time to do so.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia_(British_TV_series)

Amazon has the rights atm and even tried making an American version that really really sucked and had nowhere near the cinematography and editing chops of the British version

Life on Mars suffered a similar US translation, IIRC.

C. B. Strike.

Coromoran Strike? Was a bit of a slow burn, but grew on me after a bit.

While obviously Netflix has a lot to loose here, it don’t think it’s “their fault” for dumping AAA content. The reality is that every content producer on the planet knows they’ll make more money selling their own subscription platform. Netflix can’t continue to get Marvel movies, for example, now that Disney has pulled the plug. There’s not any amount of cash Netflix could afford to pay which would be enough for The Mouse to take content off of Disney+.

This is the same for every studio out there — well-loved shows like The Office, Brooklyn 99, Parks & Rec, etc. are getting taken back by their owners. Dozens of new streaming services are appearing.

In reality, there’s not much Netflix can do about it besides double down on original content.

I think an ideal future for consumers would be federated media platforms, where all content is available in any number of media platforms, and the amount you pay is passed back to the content owners based on what you watch. But I doubt that will ever happen under current IP laws.

In capitalism, profit wins. Right now, streaming services are essentially pure profit and make money because content owners have exclusive access to their own content — who would pay for Disney+ if all of their content was available elsewhere?

It really sucks for consumers.

There's two sides of this coin. On one hand, consumers have gotten a horrendous deal in the past with cable. Expensive price, plus tons of commercials; they literally don't even broadcast a good portion of the day. Even current Netflix, with their shitty lineup, beats the deal I was getting on cable.

On the other had, consumers have now grown accustomed to really favorable deals on content. All media must be free. Everything must be rolled into one low, low price. We used to happily buy 1-4 CD(s) a week. I'm pretty sure I've spent more on CD(s) in a single transaction than on an entire year of spotify... and that was as a kid with no money.

We used to buy DVD(s) all the time. You'd spend $200-500 a year on several streaming services. I feel like I spent that just on DVD(s) as gifts for christmas every year. People don't want to pay a cent for news or subscription media. This used to be a major expenditure.

It used to be that a good chunk of your money was spent on media. You have to have entertainment to make your life better, so you pay whatever you have to. In the past there was far less competition, and consumers were getting some really bad deals. Now I think consumers are often out of wack with their expectations.

Why on earth should the government implement price fixing to limit what people make on intellectual property? Why do you think $10-20/mo is the fair price for ALL THE CONTENT IN THE WORLD, vs. the $50-100 you'd have to pay (and a cable package would be like $100-300)... In the 90s we'd pay over $100/mo for like 5 CD(s), and cable prices were insane.

This stuff isn't cheap, easy, or risk free to produce either. I've been as critical of producers as anyone, but people often lose sight of this.

Eh, our family freaking loves Netflix originals. And there are many from different countries. But I guess it's probably because we generally like to explore more than just look for something artificially hyped up through marketing.

IMO the Netflix originals over the past several years are terrible, and this pricing hike is to pay for more of them rather than buying AAA catalog content. No thanks

> the rights holders were planning to set up their own networks anyway

I really wish they'd gone through with the original Hulu plan of being co-owned by the major networks and stream all their content.

What about the outcome of a generation that watched nothing but reality TV, Fear Factor, and prank shows? Not disagreeing with you entirely, but I don't think it's scary, because it's nothing new to have swaths of people exclusively consuming low-quality junk.

Yeah it went really poorly, have you watched the news lately?

I get it that people said it about movies and tv before, but these Netflix movies aren't even movies, they are subhuman Hallmark Channel level crap.

TV that's purely entertaining has been around forever. I laugh at the Three Stooges, but I wouldn't call it "high quality."

The Three Stooges know they are stupid and are in on the joke and so is the viewer. Most of the top 10 don’t acknowledge it and the viewer is the joke. There’s a big difference.

You could literally replace "Netflix top 10" with any popular media that was a boogey man in previous generations including rap music, video games, MTV, rock and roll, horror movies, etc.

Idiocracy is the outcome