News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Approved Cameras by mdoms on Saturday January 08, 2022 @06:40PM (#29857878)
> The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good

An overwhelming majority of it is total garbage. It's such a bad ratio that I treat the red N as a negative signal when I'm choosing something.

Re:Approved Cameras by vanilla_nut on Saturday January 08, 2022 @07:23PM (#29858300)
The McDonald's of TV show production. With very, very few exceptions (Midnight Mass, maybe?) I at least know what I'm getting into: designed-by-committee, very very "safe", out of place (most likely contracted) references to other Netflix shows to try to cross-pollinate viewers... not exactly a recipe for success.

Similar to how Amazon Originals now seem synonymous with "we cut the writer's outline from 12 episodes to 6, enjoy the rushed character and plot development!"

Re:Approved Cameras by Lammy on Saturday January 08, 2022 @07:47PM (#29858492)
> designed-by-committee, very very "safe"

This is why I was so surprised by some of the background references Inside Job was able to drop in its first season. (Do they still call them seasons when they release all at once? Either way it's really good)

Re:Approved Cameras by bambax on Sunday January 09, 2022 @06:23AM (#29862321)
Agreed, except your last example. Most shows are much too long now, and extend way past after they have exhausted what little they had to say.
Re:Approved Cameras by SV_BubbleTime on Saturday January 08, 2022 @09:18PM (#29859202)
Yea, I can agree to Midnight Mass. Best quality was the plot of “X discovered by Y who thought it was Z”. But now that I think about it, the cinematography was pretty good. I know some people were put off by the long monologues, so it wasn’t without some odd choices.
Re:Approved Cameras by malermeister on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:11PM (#29858692)
I thought Dark was excellent and not at all like you described.
Re:Approved Cameras by vkou on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:50PM (#29858974)
DAЯK was excellent, but as the saying goes, it's the exception that proves the rule.
Re:Approved Cameras by matheusmoreira on Saturday January 08, 2022 @07:17PM (#29858246)
Agreed. Netflix has so much pulp now it's not even funny. It used to produce much higher quality content. After other copyright holders started pulling out they seem to have started focusing on quantity.
Re:Approved Cameras by bredren on Saturday January 08, 2022 @06:47PM (#29857944)
The streaming services are in strong competition for original content. Sometimes buying exclusive rights to completed work off the shelf. This content seems to get labeled as an "XYZ original," be it Apple, Netflix or something else.

Do you differentiate between content greenlit and produced by the streaming services from those purchased? I'm curious because they are two different capabilities and it seems each service is attempting some amount of both.

Re:Approved Cameras by mdoms on Saturday January 08, 2022 @07:06PM (#29858121)
Yes, there is a clear quality difference between the stuff they acquire/license (some of which is quite good) and the utter dreck they produce themselves.
Re:Approved Cameras by felixg3 on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:03PM (#29858608)
I wasn’t aware that „dreck“ is being used in English. TIL
Re:Approved Cameras by geenew on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:41PM (#29858915)
What other language(s) is that word used in?

It's a moderately rare word in everyday spoken English.

Re:Approved Cameras by Krustopolis on Saturday January 08, 2022 @09:15PM (#29859184)
“Dreck” is a German word.
Re:Approved Cameras by mdoms on Saturday January 08, 2022 @09:31PM (#29859309)
I didn't know that! I got it from my mum who presumably got it from her British mum.
Re:Approved Cameras by throwanem on Saturday January 08, 2022 @10:14PM (#29859607)
It's traveled fairly broadly on account of having been adopted into Yiddish - I picked it up as a very young child from an issue of MAD Magazine, and was somewhat surprised to find the New Englander side of my family very familiar with it and only bemused at the happenstance of hearing it from a five-year-old.
Re:Approved Cameras by alternatetwo on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:15PM (#29858723)
There is also some original content which is quite good.
Re:Approved Cameras by tootie on Saturday January 08, 2022 @06:45PM (#29857919)
Yeah they greenlight almost anything. It means they take a lot of risks which can produce some really creative and unexpected treasures but also a ton of crap. It's basically the VC model applied to content creation. One blockbuster is worth ten flops.
Re:Approved Cameras by xuhu on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:33PM (#29858856)
Most stuff on Github is garbage as well, but all the best projects are there.
Re:Approved Cameras by quickthrowman on Saturday January 08, 2022 @08:42PM (#29858930)
This analogy doesn’t hold since the best projects aren’t on Netflix. HBO’s TV catalog destroys Netflix from a quality and critical acclaim perspective. I can’t even think of a Netflix show I’d consider to be HBO-level quality.
Re:Approved Cameras by threeseed on Saturday January 08, 2022 @07:03PM (#29858095)
> total garbage

Which historically correlates with commercial success.

It's why Netflix is more than happy to green-light awful shows such as Emily in Paris.

Re:Approved Cameras by Turing_Machine on Saturday January 08, 2022 @07:26PM (#29858332)
Definitely.

McDonalds grosses a helluva lot more than Wolfgang Puck -- $19.21 billion vs $57.50 million.