I subscribe to both services. Here is a screenshot of a portion of my queue:
Out of the 81 items in my queue, only 7 are available to stream. I do have a lot of older classic movies, but I see things like “I Love You, Philip Morris” (2009), “Out of the Furnace” (2013), the freaking “Matrix”, etc…all without a streaming option appearing.
So I’m wondering, if I had ONLY streaming, would I be shit out of luck in terms of the amount of titles available to me? If I went that way, what would my options be (in terms of other services) if I wanted to watch, say, “The Third Man,” or any other movie Netflix isn’t offering via stream?
By virtue of the ‘First Sale Doctrine’, Netflix can offer any disc it can buy for DVD rental*. For streaming, Netflix needs to get the rights from the owners. The owners are fucking idiots. The stance of many of them, in general, seems to be “we can’t find a way to monetize this property, so no one can monetize it and send us a cut”; they’d rather have nothing than a small bit of something. A few years back, Netflix offered Starz a metric shit-tonne of $$$ to continue streaming their content. Starz declined. From Wikipedia:
So yeah, you are shit-out-of-luck.
*While Netflix could conceivably simply buy up inventory from the same sources as you or I, they’ve made deals with studios to get the execrable rental copies and to honor ‘windowing’ agreements, which gets them the quantity of discs they need cheaper. There were whispers that the studios would throttle any retailer reselling to Netflix.
Another major issue for Netflix now is that the two major cable companies – Comcast (NBC/Universal) and Time Warner – have their own cable streaming features. So it’s in Universal’s interests, if not in yours, to restrict their movie rights to Comcast’s On Demand feature and use that as a selling point to keep you paying for Comcast instead of saying “I’ll watch everything I want on Netflix!” Time Warner also owns HBO with its own HBO Go premium service.
In other words, the streaming market is much more fragmented now, to the detriment of the consumer who wants one place from which to find all their movies (legally).
I have only the streaming service anymore. It’s amazing what is NOT available, which includes many classics. It seems to me that the streaming selection *of movies *has declined and is being supplanted by documentaries and TV shows.
Okay, well, you’ve convinced me to never drop the disc subscription! Plus I like hearing commentary, etc.
One nice thing about having disc AND streaming is that sometimes the discs aren’t available (either a long wait or they’re stuck in the “saved” section), and you can stream them instead. Also it’s nice to have the option to binge-watch 3 seasons in a weekend instead of dying of impatience waiting for the DVDs.
While Netflix has made its more-than-fair share of missteps, the complaint I read most often is “why don’t they have more movies streaming”. Sadly, people want to fault Netflix for that, but they are picking on the wrong target. Netflix would stream Game of Thrones in a heartbeat if HBO would allow it. Instead, the first Captain America, a movie that had been available for streaming, gets pulled ahead of the release of the second movie. I can guarantee you that is not Netflix’ choice. Same with 24, which I believe Amazon currently has exclusive streaming rights.
The content providers are the consumer-unfriendly ones, yet people often complain about the one company trying its hardest to give consumers what they want, when they want it, how they want it, at a reasonable price.
Jophiel hit the nail on the head. For a long time we were moving towards universal streaming (probably Netflix as champ), and then, when it became a profitable model, two of the big studios decided to jump on… but as their own providers. So we’re back to a fragmented market instead of a single-source one.
Give it a few years. I predict that (likely between Vudu and Netflix) you will be able to view any movie that’s been released on streaming from a single provider, maybe two.
That cuts both ways. HBO would gladly let Netflix stream Game of Thrones… if they’d pay enough.
The average cable bill is somewhere north of $50. There’s no way that every network and show exec who wants a piece of that is going to be happy getting part of a $8/mo Netflix subscription. So they either run their own streaming service or they tie it to a cable bill so they keep getting that sweet subscription revenue.
Having had Netflix for about 7 years (at first both streaming AND the disc option;now only streaming) I really don’t see much difference in the service. I have seen north of 13k films in my life (probably many more, but I just stopped counting) and there are hundreds of films that I could not find on Netflix when I had the disc option. I actually had Blockbuster’s disc option for a while as it became difficult to locate films of all genres on Netflix.
Netflix simply has an extremely poor offering of films and that hasn’t changed for quite some time. If you are seeking Asylum Film’s fare, anime or many of the most popular films of the last decade or so, it’s great. However, if you prefer foreign films, obscure horror titles, many classic film and even silent films, Netflix is a barren wasteland, streaming or disc option.
If or when Amazon improves their offerings, I’ll probably just drop Netflix in favor that and RedBox as they seem to be more promising.
Poor choice. The only HBO show that has shown up for streaming is The Larry Sanders Show. HBO has said they will not let their original series go to streaming. HBO is holding onto all of its property tightly, hoping to get more subscribers. Because we all know people are flocking to HBO to watch re-runs of Eastbound & Down.
Showtime, however, has no such qualms. Dexter for everyone! Though no Homeland, so they aren’t selling everything.
Saw an amusing article about GoT - if one only wants to watch that show, in Australia, you would be paying about $50/episode for it. That assumes the household only had over-the-air broadcasts prior.
nevadaexile, I’ve seen discs fall off of the Netflix rotation simply because they are out of print. Once the existing inventory is depleted through wear and tear, they simply can’t be replaced, certainly not in the quantity Netflix might need. I don’t know if that is the situation you are encountering, but it is one possibility.
Maybe, though their stated stance is that they don’t want to compete with their own streaming service. Makes no sense not to take whatever $$ someone wants to offer for old cancelled series, otherwise they’re just collecting figurative dust on their figurative shelves, but HBO is either over-valuing their programs or believes it’s streaming service is a true competitor (which it might be if it weren’t for the fact that one has to buy a cable service with 3,827 channels just to get the option to pay extra for HBO).
I stay with both as well, with just one disc at a time to have the widest possible choice combined with the convenience of streaming. But I have nearly 400 titles on my “Instant Queue” (now called My List). It clearly comes down to the individual and their tastes and interests.
I don’t agree with **nevadaexile *about their being a barren wasteland though. I used to own and operate my own foreign/indie video rental store, and Netflix has the kind of long tail I could only dream of. There are a few titles I used to have in my store that are surprisingly, and frustratingly, unavailable; but they have DVDs and Blu-rays of all kinds of films that have only a very select appeal. There’s the silent classic The Passion of Joan of Arc; the bizarre and mesmerising documentary Crumb; the proto-Girls Lena Dunham feature Tiny Furniture; the dialogue-free, gorgeously photographed Samsara. On Instant Watch they have stuff like the incredible, WTF-laden experimental French film Holy Motors; the Lars von Trier tour de force Melancholia; the classic noir masterpiece Double Indemnity. I could easily imagine them not bothering with a lot of those titles, so I guess it’s half full from my perspective.
*Such as:
–the 1995 James Mangold film Heavy, with a luminous Liv Tyler, Evan Dando, Debbie Harry, Shelley Winters, and Pruitt Taylor Vince as the title character;
–the 1997 Sidney Lumet film Night Falls on Manhattan, with Andy Garcia and Ian Holm, and some of the most gorgeous opening credits you’ll ever see;
I disagree that it makes no sense. It’s strategic bundling.
There’s somebody out there who wants to watch old episodes of Arli$$, bad enough to pay for a cable subscription and an HBO Go account. And a few people doing that is way better for HBO’s bottom line and for introducing them to new content to keep them as a subscriber than getting a small amount from Netflix.
HBO makes way more money than Netflix does, partly because they get a bunch of that money the expensive cable subscription goes for. They make as much per subscriber as Netflix does, with much lower support and marketing costs. For it to make sense for HBO to stream their shows on Netflix, Netflix would have to be able to do something like triple their fees and keep all their users.
Agree with all that, but what I think they are being foolish about is refusing to sell standalone HBO GO subscriptions to people without cable or satellite, while being lax about the sharing of passwords even among widely disparate geographical locations, streaming simultaneously.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they have an agreement with the cable/satellite providers not to do this since an independent method of getting HBO would hurt their subscription numbers. Allowing this would make the cable/sat providers value HBO a lot less and be willing to give them less money since anyone who just wanted HBO would be going the alternate route.
Oh, I don’t know. Anyone that has cable or satellite would presumably want to be able to watch it on their TV, use their DVR with it, etc. I think HBO has the power here and is failing to use it.
I’m not following you–can you elabourate? How would you “pull it locally”? And to see what Netflix has, don’t you have to sign in?
I have Netflix streaming and the two blu-ray disks at a time option. I pay $24/month and I don’t see how anyone can say that it’s not a great deal. I’ll probably never get through my queue.