Saturday, August 27, 2011

I Dood It


Tired of spending time trying to find “mail worthy” DVDs from Netflix that are not available from the King County Library, I decided to cut my Netflix cost still further (by another one half). I dropped the mail option completely and will concentrate on just streaming for now with occasional supplementation from the Library or maybe a redbox kiosk. As a sign of how bad the pickings were getting, the last three  I received in the mail I rated 2 stars “did not like”.

The list of pros for doing this was considerably longer than the cons list. In addition to the financial saving and time saved from “mail worthy” browsing, the pros include more time for instant viewing, no bothering with mailboxes and concerns for mail security, no suffering through marginal mail movies because I paid extra for them, and no rushing to watch a movie to get it in the mail. In fairness to the Netflix mail program though, I never had any problems with mail security (but I did sometimes get a defective DVD), and there can also be pressure to stream a movie before the streaming rights expire (notice is given usually about a week ahead of the expiration date).

It is interesting to see the changes that take place when Netflix mail rights expire. My regular Netflix queue was promptly removed from the Netflix site. Using the “Watch Instantly” tab I can access genre lists to browse and sub-genre lists that can also be sorted by rating prediction, but all this is limited to movies that are available for instant viewing. A new tab or maybe one I just don’t recall is a “Just for Kids” tab with links to play now shows. The “Instant Queue” tab appears to work basically the same as before. The suggestions for viewing that were available on the “Suggestions for You” tab have now disappeared; though the tab is still there and the page acknowledges I have rated over 2,500 movies, it tells me to rate more so Netflix can help me find movies. The “Browse DVDs” tab is still available, but when I want to browse DVD choices I am presented with a page of ten marginal movies which are available only by mail and a reminder that I can have a broader selection if I sign up for DVDs by mail; there is no further overall guided browsing available now. Every movie page also has a reminder and button to sign up for mail DVDs.

Netflix is a sly business and I think the changes I have noted are designed to make it look like they want me to sign back up for mail, while at the same time actually discouraging me from doing so. That way they can say they did not kill the mail business, but that the customers chose to let it die. The changes may require some functional adjustment on my part to learn how to best use what browsing capabilities are still available, in order to find movies to get from the library or redbox. I expect the loss of this functionality is a clever ploy by Netflix to discourage getting movies elsewhere.

Since it does not make much practical difference here whether I streamed a movie rather than watched from a DVD, I am dropping any reference to streaming in the movie write ups. So again, here is what I have watched since I posted my last list. The ratings I give are on my own number system which is explained at the link on the sidebar.

Friday Night Lights (Season One) – 2006 (3.3). Big time Texas high school football in a small Texas town gets top treatment in this series which is at various times soap opera, sports movie and family drama.  Following the team and characters through the first season for the new coach, plenty of intertwining plot lines are developed as the teenagers deal with growing up under athletic, scholastic and social pressures, often with a lack of admirable adult role models. I didn’t care for the home movie look created by purposely shaky camera work, but thankfully its use diminished as the season progressed.

The Pacific – 2010 (3.1). This HBO mini series is similar to Band of Brothers in following some American fighting men in action in WWII, this time concentrating on Marines invading South Pacific islands defended by Japanese forces. The battle scenes are brutal and horrific, almost like a documentary of the great losses suffered by our forces. But this series also follows some of the men on R&R and back on the home front, concentrating on three Marines in particular. The most effective scenes emotionally are interactions between Marines and their civilian loved ones, where in spite of strong reciprocal love, there is so much the civilians can never understand about what the Marines experienced.

The Betrayal – 2008 (3.0). As part of the withdrawal from Vietnam, after the US pulverized the small neutral Kingdom of Laos with saturation bombing in order to “save it from the communists”, American support was abruptly pulled from the country without regard for the fate of Laotians who co-operated with the US. One of those was a career military man whose son was a co-maker of this interesting documentary, which tells the story of what happened to the man, his wife and ten children. Though the underlying story is horrific and the experience of the family through the years filled with pathos, there is a poetry to the film that makes the experience of watching it feel more reflective and spiritual rather than critical and profane.

No Direction Home: Bob Dylan – 2005 (3.0). Martin Scorsese put this documentary together, with archival concert, touring and personal footage and also interviews with insiders. There is no narration, though an interview with Dylan looking back provides some continuity. It doesn’t quite all come together and we really don’t learn anything new about Dylan, who comes across as not especially likeable, but the impact of the songs he wrote and is shown performing in the turbulent 60s reminds us how much his music was a part of the times that were a changing.

Catfish – 2010 (2.9). A young documentary film maker and his partner decide to make a movie about his photographer brother who has been contacted via Facebook by an 8 year old girl who paints very good pictures of his photographs. The photographer talks to the mother and the seductive older sister as the film warms up, but also briefly slows down before the three men from New York start considering making a surprise visit to Michigan. Some inventive low budget techniques are well employed and the social media subject is topical in this somewhat different and promising piece of work. Apparently the trailer misrepresents this movie as a thriller, which is pretty much of a stretch.

Cedar Rapids – 2011 (2.8). There is nothing new or special in this comedy about a dorky insurance salesman who goes to the “big city” for a convention and has what for him is an unconventional time, but there are enough laughs to make it fun. The John C. Reilly character is especially a hoot, at least until he is relegated to a sidekick role.

Defiance – 2008 (2.8). Based on a true story, this WWII tale of Polish Jews who flee the Nazis and hide out in the Belarus forests makes a longish movie with continuous action and violence and is a little short on character development and personal drama, but as another of the few films that shows armed Jewish resistance, it is worth watching.

Skin – 2008 (2.8). Based on the true story of a dark skinned girl born to white parents in South Africa, this movie follows the girl’s life into adulthood, confronting Apartheid and prejudice and trying to deal with the strains her skin color puts on her relationship with her parents. Such an interesting subject should have become a better film, but though the locations were real and the spirit of the production was genuine, the script was uneven and the direction and acting were not strong enough to compensate for the minimal time allowed for the characters to express themselves on what is the true significance of skin color or race both in societal terms and on a personal level.

The Crucible – 1996 (2.8). Arthur Miller’s play gets liberated from the stage and placed in some nice Salem sets, but the screen time is dominated by dialog deliverance. Hysterical fear of evil doers and irrational punishment of innocents by governmental power unfortunately has a way of repeating itself, from witchery to communist infiltration to terrorist cells. Good acting all around, with Paul Scofield especially effective as the chief judge.

The Third Miracle – 1999 (2.2). I suspect something got lost between the book and the script for this movie, because the story in the film does not make much sense. From talk alone we learn that a young Catholic girl refugee from WWII Eastern Europe came to Chicago and eventually abandoned her 16 year old daughter to live in a Parish convent and work as a sort of domestic. In 1979 a priest who is questioning his own faith is chosen to investigate whether the woman should be a candidate for sainthood. He flirts with her daughter and becomes immersed in the case, but neither the people nor the process make much sense as portrayed in this confused production, which wasted the talent of director Agnieszka Holland and ended without seeming to know what it was trying to say.

The Object of My Affection – 1998 (2.2). Supposedly a different kind of romantic comedy, about a relationship problem that is new to the screen, this movie was not romantic or funny and if the story had not been told before, the reason apparently was that it is not worth telling. Add a poor script, uninspired direction and weak acting and this is one to avoid. SPOILER ALERT (but don’t hesitate to read anyway): Jennifer Anniston falls for a gay guy (maybe she should try this in real life).

The Adjustment Bureau – 2011 (2.0). Maybe the short story was good and maybe the creative mind behind the script and direction is talented, but the result for me was a marginal premise for a boring story about unappealing people with a foregone conclusion. I admit sci-fi is not on my favorites list but this film was an especially weak ambassador for the genre. Bending some of the rules of what we think we know about the way things work is part of the sci-fi license, but bending them back and forth and changing the bends on the fly as this movie does is just sloppy story telling.  

6 comments:

  1. Tom, Why are you so opposed to the marketing strategies of companies trying to stay in business, or even making a profit? Movies were in the high tech business when they started and they hit another high tech surge when movies began to talk. Then they did very well as low tech for a number of years before TV's were in almost every household. Then they became threatened by the new TV technology. They accommodated that and now they are threatened by the internet and streaming technology, but I think they will do just fine.

    You can play games by canceling your mail order Netflix in favor of the streaming technology, but you are only playing into the Netflix marketing strategies. Why fight it? Just subscribe to the features you like and let the capitalists make their profit. Don't even try to second guess them because the people making the marketing strategies have more resources and are a lot smarter (because they are younger) than you or I.

    Your decision to use only the streaming functions of Netflix makes it more difficult for Jan and I to follow your recommendations. We will stay with the Netflix mail function because as yet we do not care to get set up for streaming.

    So here is the irony: your decision to buy into Netfix's marketing strategy despite your proletariat objections makes your blog less relevant to Jan and me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John, John, John. Is this a ploy to get me to resume writing Sense from Seattle? Your charges against me remind me of some of our political disagreements from that blog. With the 2012 political campaigns already started, I have been tempted to get back into the fray, but I really am trying to watch my blood pressure.

    In specific response to your comment, I say “wrong, so what, wrong and wrong”.

    I am not opposed to the marketing strategies of companies trying to stay in business or to make a profit. I love to see companies with good products or services market them well and thrive. That is what Reed Hastings did with Netflix. But when a company makes a business move in such a way that it irritates a segment of its customer base to the point of vocal aggression (remember "New Coke"?), I think that could be bad for business, and that seems to be what Netflix has done by the way it has handled this phase of the business transition to streaming.

    The “so what” goes to your comment about movies being a high tech business. Add color, widescreen, 3-D (second time around) to the production end, and VHS, DVD, BluRay and streaming to the delivery end. I have no inherent problem with such technological progress, but I don’t want to see the quality of the content diminish – we still need good stories, acting and direction.

    Some people are so angry with Netflix that they are fighting the changes, but I am not one of them. I do think that part of being a wise consumer involves seeing the marketing games merchants employ and then determining the best way to play the game or whether it is better not to play at all. For the reasons I stated in my post, I decided I am willing to pay for streaming movies but no longer need to receive movies in the mail at a separate cost. I am fascinated by the way businesses operate. As a teenager I had my own lawn mowing business. I had my own law practice for 25 years. Many of my clients were small business owners and I was an officer in our community commercial club. I follow business news closely and believe the lack of really good business people in this country is a large part of our economic woes. So, yes, I second guess the way Netflix has handled this transition. I think at best it was insensitive and at worst it was sneaky, and either way it will detract from company good will. I never concede any company is smarter than me, just because they are bigger (the bigger they are the harder they fall was true at least until we wrongly decided some businesses are too big to fail). And I do not think younger means smarter and don’t believe that you really do either (although I remind you that I am younger than you).

    Finally you are wrong in saying my decision to drop Netflix mail will make the recommendations in my blog irrelevant to you and Jan, because if a movie I recommend is one that I streamed then it is almost certainly available from Netflix by mail also. I cannot let this blog become irrelevant to you John, since you are my only faithful commentator.

    I urge you to follow your own advice, embrace technology and go along with Netflix marketing by signing up for streaming. You will surely like the convenience of it. If you are concerned about the challenge of setting up your streaming hardware, you can probably find some younger person to do it for you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jan and I watched Rails and Ties. It starred Kevin Bacon. It had an unusual twist and an unbelievably happy ending, but I enjoyed it despite the trickery. Jan slept through the last half of it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I never heard of R&T. The predictions for me are marginal. I read that the acting is good, so I guess the question is whether one likes the trick ending. Sounds like Jan needs a less snoozy time to watch movies or less snoozy movies to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We watched "A Storm in Summer" a story that takes place in the late 60's or early 70's and combines black and Jewish and age discrimination as its theme. The Jew is 70 (very, very old - don't you agree?, Tom) and the black kid is maybe 12. The writeup of the movie claims it is "heartwarming"; I say schmaltzy. But it was not a bad entertainment, and Jan stayed awake through it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Some old pros (writer Rod Serling, director Robert Wise and actor Peter Falk) were involved in "A Storm in Summer", which was made for Showtime. As we age, we seem more vulnerable to sentimental material, but schmaltzy won't do. Predictions are that I wouldn't like this movie, though it apparently had enough appeal to pause Jan's nap. My definition of "old" is my age plus 15 years.

    ReplyDelete