General Discussion Streaming Frustrations, Part 2 (2 Viewers)

[bmasters9]

Old, commercial-TV programs were made with logical commercial breaks where the music swelled and the action faded out or stopped.

Emergency! on DVD shows this perfectly-- one of my favorite episodes, a fourth-season episode called "Details" (OAD Saturday, Dec. 7, 1974 on NBC), actually has a form of swelling in the music from the cold open to the title sequence (on DVD, the modified sixth-and-final-season opening; on FETV, the opening from the first three seasons, with a fourth-season version of the title track from those first three seasons).

 

[Josh Steinberg]

WSJ had an interesting editorial by Jason Kliar (former CEO of WarnerMedia, and the founding CEO of Hulu) on the recent history of prospective near future of the streaming industry. I fear this is paywalled for many people. The link below is to the Apple News version, if you have that service. Or look it up in your WSJ sub if you have that. (This thread is the closest we’ve got to a general “what’s happening with streaming” topic )



“Jason Kilar on the Chaotic Streaming Wars—and How This Hollywood Story May End”

Jason Kilar on the Chaotic Streaming Wars—and How This Hollywood Story May End — The Wall Street Journal

The streaming services had a very rough 2022. Get ready for multiple business casualties, and a few winners.

apple.news

I think to a large extent this was inevitable, both on the cable/linear side and the streaming/subscription side. The last couple decades have had an explosion of extra channels and then untold numbers of niche streaming services, all competing for the same eyeballs and wallets.

There’s a sweet spot where you can satisfy large audiences with a mix of expensive content that appeals to wide audiences and niche content that appeals to smaller audiences, but everyone has probably gone overboard on both. Making things even harder, streaming services have been throwing tentpole movie size checks at talent for projects that are more niche in appeal.

The NY Times did a similarly themed article examine how AMC is dying, despite having one of the biggest hits on TV with their new Interview With The Vampire show. The problem is, they have little else. We’re leaving an era where a network can survive with only one or two original shows. Cable advertisers aren’t paying what they once were for ads, which makes sense in a world where people can skip over them. Their AMC+ app isn’t doing great because they’re charging a premium price for a very limited amount of content. There’s really no path towards salvaging the situation. Eventually they will be swallowed up by someone else.

A similar article about the state of the theatrical movie business in Variety or Deadline also covers a lot of the same ground and comes to a similar conclusion about costs being out of control and a big mismatch between what’s being spent vs audience potential. It noted that Tom Cruise is doing the next two Mission: Impossible movies for a combined $12 million paycheck instead of his usual $20 per picture price. He’ll instead get a larger share of the profits if there are any. Black Adam was cited as an example of what’s not working - paying Dwayne Johnson both $25 million upfront and a significant portion of the grosses, plus a nearly infinite production budget, created a financial obligation so large there was little chance the film having a chance in the realities of today’s marketplace. On the other side of that scale, budgeting $80+ million on a niche movie like Amsterdam saddles it with a requirement to make about $250 million to break even, and that’s just not a $250 million movie.

I think in the end a lot of this will sort itself. Too much content is currently being produced, with budgets out of proportion to their potential audiences. We probably need fewer services and less content. We need a more manageable amount of stuff out there.

 

[Osato]

That is up to the retailer to request from the studio (and pay additional money for).

That’s too bad it can’t be straightened out without asking for more $$.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

That’s too bad it can’t be straightened out without asking for more $$.

Perfectly understandable it'd work that way though. Upgrades aren't usually free afterall (and certainly, the Warner Archive needs to recoup their investments)... even though that's (largely) been Apple's (de facto) policy wrt their streaming customers (for both music and video content, except if you bought their SD digitals)...

_Man_

 

[Malcolm R]

On the other side of that scale, budgeting $80+ million on a niche movie like Amsterdam saddles it with a requirement to make about $250 million to break even, and that’s just not a $250 million movie.

I see this repeating with the upcoming Babylon. Budgeted around $80 million and running 3 hours and 9 minutes. I don't see much theatrical upside there.

 

[TonyD]

Have we had my discussion on Netflix and their mislabelling of some content as having Dolby Vision when it does not?

I checked three different ways.
Firestick 4k
Appletv 4k
The app included on my 4K tv

Several shows and movies are labeled as having Dolby Vision.
Crawdad Singing movie and a handful of others.
Crawdad Singing is not playing with DV.

At least one Show called 1899 is labeled as Ultra HD 4K but not DV. It has DV.
(Seinfeld is bother labeled this way and includes DV).
The BabySitter (2017) is labeled as Ultra HD 4K like 1899 is but Babysitter does not have DV

I’m bringing this up only because I just signed up for a year of NF “Premium” I think they call it.
Includes 4K. DV. DA and up to 4 streams in the same household.

The movie RRR (Hindi) is labeled Ultra HD 4K - Atmos
On Atv4K It seems to be 4K but there is no Atmos.
On Firestick 4K it’s only HD 5.1


This is frustrating.

 

[Todd Erwin]

Have we had my discussion on Netflix and their mislabelling of some content as having Dolby Vision when it does not?

I checked three different ways.
Firestick 4k
Appletv 4k
The app included on my 4K tv

Several shows and movies are labeled as having Dolby Vision.
Crawdad Singing movie and a handful of others.
Crawdad Singing is not playing with DV.

At least one Show called 1899 is labeled as Ultra HD 4K but not DV. It has DV.
(Seinfeld is bother labeled this way and includes DV).
The BabySitter (2017) is labeled as Ultra HD 4K like 1899 is but Babysitter does not have DV

I’m bringing this up only because I just signed up for a year of NF “Premium” I think they call it.
Includes 4K. DV. DA and up to 4 streams in the same household.

The movie RRR (Hindi) is labeled Ultra HD 4K - Atmos
On Atv4K It seems to be 4K but there is no Atmos.
On Firestick 4K it’s only HD 5.1


This is frustrating.

Part of it is mislabeling by Netflix. That appears to be the case with Where the Crawdads Sing, or that Netflix failed to encode the movie in Dolby Vision and HDR10 (or Sony sent them a version without DV). Interestingly, on the Netflix app for Roku, there is no Dolby Vision tag.

As for 1899, it is in fact in Dolby Vision, and even says so on the title page on the FireTV app. You are correct, though, that it does NOT indicate DV on the Apple TV app. Chalk this up as another mislabeling issue.

As for RRR not playing in Dolby Atmos, that is a limitation of the device, unfortunately, at least for the FireStick 4K, which is not supported for Dolby Atmos playback (the 4K MAX is supported). As for the Apple TV 4K, you must select the original Hindi language for Dolby Atmos on that title. The English dub is only DD+ 5.1.

You can easily report technical issues with a title by logging into your Netflix account and going to your viewing activity.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I'm lately reminded how much Amazon sucks for streaming, LOL... although I seem to finding more content of interest this go-around (w/ my free trial), but that just makes it worse, LOL...

_Man_

 

[TonyD]

I did figure out RRR and over an afternoon finished watching it.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Welp now I can’t get DV on Peacock.
Tried to watch Halloween Ends which is tagged as DV but on the tv app, the Firestick and ATV4K. No DV

From what I have read, only Xfinity (naturally), Roku, and Android devices and televisions support Peacock in Dolby Vision, and also requires a Premium or Premium Plus subscription.

It's almost March 2023 and we still can't watch Peacock Channel material in 4K/Dolby Vision/HDR on Apple TV devices.

 

[Robert Crawford]

The home theater industry whether it's software providers and/or equipment manufacturers screws up every single home video format. They never fail in that regard!

 

[Capt D McMars]

It's almost March 2023 and we still can't watch Peacock Channel material in 4K/Dolby Vision/HDR on Apple TV devices.

I had high hopes for Peacock Channel, now I know that those aren't "Feathers" in thier logo

 

[Sam Posten]

Whut?

 

[JohnRice]

I have a simple solution. If a streaming service can't get things right on the Apple TV, they don't get any money from me. There's too much available to watch anyway.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

It's almost March 2023 and we still can't watch Peacock Channel material in 4K/Dolby Vision/HDR on Apple TV devices.

I haven't really bothered to try -- almost woulda w/ Tar on there now, but think I'll just hold off for the 4K disc instead -- but are you saying even 4K/HDR10 doesn't work on the ATV4K for Peacock streaming, not just DV?

I rarely ever bother w/ Peacock myself... except when they have some rare sporting events (like the Olympics or MLB on certain Sundays) I want to see -- and I don't really care quite enough about HDR or even 4K in those cases as sports broadcasts already have enough trouble doing 1080p all that well IMHO.

The home theater industry whether it's software providers and/or equipment manufacturers screws up every single home video format. They never fail in that regard!

Unforuntately, this seems to be largely an issue of too many cooks spoiling the soup... and probably largely inevitable...

_Man_

 

[Robert Crawford]

I haven't really bothered to try -- almost woulda w/ Tar on there now, but think I'll just hold off for the 4K disc instead -- but are you saying even 4K/HDR10 doesn't work on the ATV4K for Peacock streaming, not just DV?

I rarely ever bother w/ Peacock myself... except when they have some rare sporting events (like the Olympics or MLB on certain Sundays) I want to see -- and I don't really care quite enough about HDR or even 4K in those cases as sports broadcasts already have enough trouble doing 1080p all that well IMHO.



Unforuntately, this seems to be largely an issue of too many cooks spoiling the soup... and probably inevitable...

_Man_

No Peacock 4K streaming with any type of HDR on any of my 4KATV units. Tar was one of those movies I tried. On my Roku units I do get DV or HDR on Tar or other 4K movies on Peacock.

 

[TonyD]

I have a simple solution. If a streaming service can't get things right on the Apple TV, they don't get any money from me. There's too much available to watch anyway.

I have a feeling with Peacock it’s intentional.
They are trying to force people to use their service on a Comcast device so only paying Comcast customers have the access.

 

[Capt D McMars]

I have a feeling with Peacock it’s intentional.
They are trying to force people to use their service on a Comcast device so only paying Comcast customers have the access.

Cable companies have been in a panic since thier customers are and have been dropping them like a hot potato. Tired of 600 channels when you only want 12. Now the companies that were offering the other option are immitaing thier cable cousins.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

I have a simple solution. If a streaming service can't get things right on the Apple TV, they don't get any money from me. There's too much available to watch anyway.

I only got Peacock (via some discounted annual subs) in order to convince my Mom to cut the cord (as she really only watched NBC stuff w/ her previous cable/FiOS packages). Otherwise, I probably wouldn't bother at all. $3/month(?) -- after discount -- is certainly much, much cheaper than what I was paying before for her Verizon FiOS TV package -- I just switched her to Spectrum for $45/month whereas Verizon wouldn't budge from charging over $130/month for her total package.

_Man_

 

[Todd Erwin]

I have a feeling with Peacock it’s intentional.
They are trying to force people to use their service on a Comcast device so only paying Comcast customers have the access.

Doubtful. If that were the case, why would it be available in 4K HDR on Roku and FireTV devices? Also, not everyone has Comcast services available to them.

Keep in mind that Apple is much more restrictive with regards to apps and app updates than Roku, Amazon, or Android/Google.