An erosion of cultural heritage under the guise of infinite availability
October 26, 2018 7:34 PM Subscribe
It was announced today that Filmstruck, a curated streaming service which aimed to stream the best and most interesting cinema in existence, would be shut down effective November 26. It is assumed that corporate shareholders were pleased with the value extracted.
I'm super mad about this. I still have 25 films on my watch list and was planning for some nice arthouse evenings this winter. I hope the content gets wrapped up into some other streaming service soon.
posted by dis_integration at 7:50 PM on October 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by dis_integration at 7:50 PM on October 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
As a corollary, most of the Criterion collection is available on torrent sites. I'd rather pay $10 a month than go through that hassle, but I guess it's back to the pirate seas for me.
posted by dis_integration at 7:52 PM on October 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
posted by dis_integration at 7:52 PM on October 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
Dramafever closing down is just ugh. They'd got rid of a lot of their back catalogue last time I was on there, but given the miserable selection of Kdramas on Netflix it is still a big loss.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 7:52 PM on October 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by lesbiassparrow at 7:52 PM on October 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
It remains a point of bafflement for me how little interest there seems to be on mainstream streaming services for truly old movies. Storage might as well be zero-cost at their scale -- is the licensing costs? Can that even be possible this late on?
Having watched quite a few movies from the '30s through '60s in the past few years, I don't buy the notion that people wouldn't watch them or like them. Most of the common adages about how they're "slow" or somehow not relevant to modern audiences seems nuts to me. Yeah, 90% of everything is crap, but there's a lot of great stuff out there.
posted by tocts at 7:52 PM on October 26, 2018 [35 favorites]
Having watched quite a few movies from the '30s through '60s in the past few years, I don't buy the notion that people wouldn't watch them or like them. Most of the common adages about how they're "slow" or somehow not relevant to modern audiences seems nuts to me. Yeah, 90% of everything is crap, but there's a lot of great stuff out there.
posted by tocts at 7:52 PM on October 26, 2018 [35 favorites]
The article mentions this briefly, but you can search for your local library here and then find many Criterion films on Kanopy.
posted by Wobbuffet at 7:55 PM on October 26, 2018 [33 favorites]
posted by Wobbuffet at 7:55 PM on October 26, 2018 [33 favorites]
This is also a loss of an invaluable resource for film students, especially at colleges with smaller media libraries. So disappointing. Kanopy, Mubi, and Fandor are decent alternatives for the arthouse/cult stuff, but classics are going to be much harder to come by.
posted by mcfighty at 8:05 PM on October 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by mcfighty at 8:05 PM on October 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
Rats, if only I wasn't just hearing about it now.
posted by elgee at 8:05 PM on October 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by elgee at 8:05 PM on October 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
Before today I was mad about the fact that Filmstuck is a totally garbage site and service. It's just pure pain trying to get through a single film without it locking up or throwing "Error Code 3000" or "No Media Casting". But today, I realize that even with their complete technical incompetence, it was still the best streaming service available. As the Verge put it: The world’s greatest movies are trapped on a terrible website.
Tonight I watched Victim and am currently trying to get Winter Light to actually finish. I think that it's locked up on me about ten times during an 80 minute movie. Over the next month, I'll try to get through as much as I can of the 144 films in my watch list.
posted by octothorpe at 8:06 PM on October 26, 2018 [12 favorites]
Tonight I watched Victim and am currently trying to get Winter Light to actually finish. I think that it's locked up on me about ten times during an 80 minute movie. Over the next month, I'll try to get through as much as I can of the 144 films in my watch list.
posted by octothorpe at 8:06 PM on October 26, 2018 [12 favorites]
i spent 60 bucks last week on three criterion blurays (50% off sale)
i can still watch them
physical media ftw
$60 would pay for half a year of Filmstruck.
Like, yeah, I love physical media too (I still get discs from Netflix) but buying shit is not an answer.
posted by Automocar at 8:10 PM on October 26, 2018 [7 favorites]
i can still watch them
physical media ftw
$60 would pay for half a year of Filmstruck.
Like, yeah, I love physical media too (I still get discs from Netflix) but buying shit is not an answer.
posted by Automocar at 8:10 PM on October 26, 2018 [7 favorites]
entropicamericana: "physical media ftw"
Danny Boyle's Sunshine was the second Blu-Ray I'd ever owned. I put it in my player a few years ago, only to find that later firmware updates on Blu-Ray players made it so that you couldn't disable picture-in-picture commentary. Fox had an exchange program when the problem surfaced in 2011, but it casts doubt on the archivability of modern physical media formats: even if you perfectly preserve the data, it may be worthless if you didn't preserve the software you'd play it on at the time (including encryption keys, of course, because no one would ever try to prevent you from acquiring those).
There's a parallel in old media formats just becoming obsolete, but until the modern era there was at least the hope that if you found an intact record you could physically construct something that would be able to play it (and potentially convert it into a newer format and get some redundancy).
posted by Riki tiki at 8:25 PM on October 26, 2018 [8 favorites]
Danny Boyle's Sunshine was the second Blu-Ray I'd ever owned. I put it in my player a few years ago, only to find that later firmware updates on Blu-Ray players made it so that you couldn't disable picture-in-picture commentary. Fox had an exchange program when the problem surfaced in 2011, but it casts doubt on the archivability of modern physical media formats: even if you perfectly preserve the data, it may be worthless if you didn't preserve the software you'd play it on at the time (including encryption keys, of course, because no one would ever try to prevent you from acquiring those).
There's a parallel in old media formats just becoming obsolete, but until the modern era there was at least the hope that if you found an intact record you could physically construct something that would be able to play it (and potentially convert it into a newer format and get some redundancy).
posted by Riki tiki at 8:25 PM on October 26, 2018 [8 favorites]
I bought a year of Filmstruck in March. Haven't heard yet when I'll be refunded for the 3.5 months. I watched more TCM movies than Criterion movies, so even if Criterion goes back to Hulu or something, I won't be getting what I want.
I'm sure as Heck -- that's right I said Heck -- not subscribing to whatever AT&T wants to replace it. HBO is already $15 and they aren't going to fold all Warner Bros. content into that without raising the price. I think they are going to find it'll be hard to sell something that costs more than Netflix.
posted by riruro at 8:29 PM on October 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
I'm sure as Heck -- that's right I said Heck -- not subscribing to whatever AT&T wants to replace it. HBO is already $15 and they aren't going to fold all Warner Bros. content into that without raising the price. I think they are going to find it'll be hard to sell something that costs more than Netflix.
posted by riruro at 8:29 PM on October 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
Haven't heard yet when I'll be refunded for the 3.5 months
Really? Even though I'm no longer a subscriber, I received an email from Filmstruck before news broke on the web.
They're refunding pro-rated funds.
My problem with the service was simple: I travel a lot and was unable to watch anything on their site -- even with a VPN -- when I wasn't in America. I'd paid a year up front, from a USA mailing address and a USA credit card, but travelling in Europe and Canada made the site unviewable.
I complained (this was more than a year ago) and they refunded me a full year, along with an apology.
I used to have a ton of Criterion titles on disc. I sold them all for $12K in February as they were just sitting at home not being watched.
posted by dobbs at 8:35 PM on October 26, 2018
Really? Even though I'm no longer a subscriber, I received an email from Filmstruck before news broke on the web.
They're refunding pro-rated funds.
My problem with the service was simple: I travel a lot and was unable to watch anything on their site -- even with a VPN -- when I wasn't in America. I'd paid a year up front, from a USA mailing address and a USA credit card, but travelling in Europe and Canada made the site unviewable.
I complained (this was more than a year ago) and they refunded me a full year, along with an apology.
I used to have a ton of Criterion titles on disc. I sold them all for $12K in February as they were just sitting at home not being watched.
posted by dobbs at 8:35 PM on October 26, 2018
Gosh, I love the future. It's so convenient!
posted by praemunire at 8:47 PM on October 26, 2018 [23 favorites]
posted by praemunire at 8:47 PM on October 26, 2018 [23 favorites]
As always this all comes down to completely broken copyright laws in America and internationally.
posted by runcibleshaw at 8:51 PM on October 26, 2018 [16 favorites]
posted by runcibleshaw at 8:51 PM on October 26, 2018 [16 favorites]
This really sucks. Filmstruck is the only streaming service I pay for besides Netflix, and inertia seems to be the only reason I have Netflix because I never watch it.
I just had this conversation again the other day because people tease me for preferring physical media over streaming, which is weird in itself because I really don't give a shit how other people watch movies.
As far as I can tell streaming services are one of those mass hypnosis things that are common today, the reality seems nothing like the stories I read.
posted by bongo_x at 9:42 PM on October 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
I just had this conversation again the other day because people tease me for preferring physical media over streaming, which is weird in itself because I really don't give a shit how other people watch movies.
As far as I can tell streaming services are one of those mass hypnosis things that are common today, the reality seems nothing like the stories I read.
posted by bongo_x at 9:42 PM on October 26, 2018 [3 favorites]
I just had this conversation again the other day because people tease me for preferring physical media over streaming, which is weird in itself because I really don't give a shit how other people watch movies.
It's weird how people act like there's almost a moral imperative to abandon any technology that is more than about 18 months obsolete. Related: while "social media" is a only a few years old, the conventional wisdom seems to be that it represents a completely new era of human existence and whole-hearted participation in it is obligatory if you want to even "exist".
posted by thelonius at 9:53 PM on October 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
It's weird how people act like there's almost a moral imperative to abandon any technology that is more than about 18 months obsolete. Related: while "social media" is a only a few years old, the conventional wisdom seems to be that it represents a completely new era of human existence and whole-hearted participation in it is obligatory if you want to even "exist".
posted by thelonius at 9:53 PM on October 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
As always this all comes down to completely broken copyright laws in America and internationally.
Sorta, I mean, yeah, I can't abide the copyright laws as they currently exist, but at the same time, without them there likely is no Criterion and minimal restoration of a lot of the famous movies Criterion specializes in. Absent their ability to control the market for those films, we'd likely end up with a lot of sites streaming copies that look like the old VHS tapes of It's a Wonderful Life back when that was public domain. I'd be okay with that personally since I'd rather have some access to a bad copy than none to a good one, but I'm not sure that would actually draw many viewers in the HD age.
I used to help out at Mubi, before it was Mubi and before Netflix jumped into the streaming market, assisting a bit in setting up their database of movies. That gave me some access to conversations about their attempts to build a film library when they were working with Criterion and trying to do something more ambitious than their current 30 day 30 movie deal. While I didn't and don't have any numbers to quote, it seems to me that there is a real difficulty in hitting the right balance between carrying popular movies, basically newish stuff for mass audiences and in serving a more niche market with older and "foreign" films that has more limited appeal. I'm not sure there are enough viewers willing to pay for a service that only carries "arty" movies in bulk. They can either go the Mubi route and carry a small rotating selection to cut costs or find some other draw to offset costs if viewers demand the highest streaming quality for older movies.
I might not be right on that, there may be enough of a market, but it almost certainly isn't an easy balance to find and the margins can't be great or one of the many services that have tried to serve the art house crowd would have been able to find that balance by now. Netflix, their copycats, and "peak TV" really put a dagger in that possibly it seems. I'm curious as to what it is people wanted from Filmstruck. I didn't use the sight because I couldn't justify paying for it since I'm poor and had already seen too many of the movies, but I liked the idea of it and would have loved it if they had a forum to talk about films, so it isn't entirely clear to me what it is specifically people wanted from that site.
I wonder since there are still so many other possible choices available from film/tv history that sites like Filmstruck have only started to scratch the surface of, perhaps some other kind of collection could be put together much cheaper that could still satisfy viewers if they could become informed about it. It feels like there might be a gatekeeper historical blinder bias in play here.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:00 PM on October 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
Sorta, I mean, yeah, I can't abide the copyright laws as they currently exist, but at the same time, without them there likely is no Criterion and minimal restoration of a lot of the famous movies Criterion specializes in. Absent their ability to control the market for those films, we'd likely end up with a lot of sites streaming copies that look like the old VHS tapes of It's a Wonderful Life back when that was public domain. I'd be okay with that personally since I'd rather have some access to a bad copy than none to a good one, but I'm not sure that would actually draw many viewers in the HD age.
I used to help out at Mubi, before it was Mubi and before Netflix jumped into the streaming market, assisting a bit in setting up their database of movies. That gave me some access to conversations about their attempts to build a film library when they were working with Criterion and trying to do something more ambitious than their current 30 day 30 movie deal. While I didn't and don't have any numbers to quote, it seems to me that there is a real difficulty in hitting the right balance between carrying popular movies, basically newish stuff for mass audiences and in serving a more niche market with older and "foreign" films that has more limited appeal. I'm not sure there are enough viewers willing to pay for a service that only carries "arty" movies in bulk. They can either go the Mubi route and carry a small rotating selection to cut costs or find some other draw to offset costs if viewers demand the highest streaming quality for older movies.
I might not be right on that, there may be enough of a market, but it almost certainly isn't an easy balance to find and the margins can't be great or one of the many services that have tried to serve the art house crowd would have been able to find that balance by now. Netflix, their copycats, and "peak TV" really put a dagger in that possibly it seems. I'm curious as to what it is people wanted from Filmstruck. I didn't use the sight because I couldn't justify paying for it since I'm poor and had already seen too many of the movies, but I liked the idea of it and would have loved it if they had a forum to talk about films, so it isn't entirely clear to me what it is specifically people wanted from that site.
I wonder since there are still so many other possible choices available from film/tv history that sites like Filmstruck have only started to scratch the surface of, perhaps some other kind of collection could be put together much cheaper that could still satisfy viewers if they could become informed about it. It feels like there might be a gatekeeper historical blinder bias in play here.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:00 PM on October 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
Sorta, I mean, yeah, I can't abide the copyright laws as they currently exist, but at the same time, without them there likely is no Criterion and minimal restoration of a lot of the famous movies Criterion specializes in. Absent their ability to control the market for those films, we'd likely end up with a lot of sites streaming copies that look like the old VHS tapes of It's a Wonderful Life back when that was public domain. I'd be okay with that personally since I'd rather have some access to a bad copy than none to a good one, but I'm not sure that would actually draw many viewers in the HD age.
I'm not sure that's true. I have a friend who specializes in film restorations, and a lot of the stuff they do has been available for years; they're just putting out better-quality transfers with lots of features. Their stuff sells very well. I think Criterion's market is basically movie buffs who are willing to pay for a bluray of something like Haxan rather than watch it on YouTube for free. I'm glad they put out a lot of stuff that's super hard to find elsewhere, but I don't think they'd suffer so much if "all they had" to offer was high-quality, well-curated products. I'd rather have the option to get high-end stuff without it being the only choice.
I mean, you can buy cheap produce at the Supermarket, but people still go to farmer's markets, right?
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 2:30 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
I'm not sure that's true. I have a friend who specializes in film restorations, and a lot of the stuff they do has been available for years; they're just putting out better-quality transfers with lots of features. Their stuff sells very well. I think Criterion's market is basically movie buffs who are willing to pay for a bluray of something like Haxan rather than watch it on YouTube for free. I'm glad they put out a lot of stuff that's super hard to find elsewhere, but I don't think they'd suffer so much if "all they had" to offer was high-quality, well-curated products. I'd rather have the option to get high-end stuff without it being the only choice.
I mean, you can buy cheap produce at the Supermarket, but people still go to farmer's markets, right?
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 2:30 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
It is assumed that corporate shareholders were pleased with the value extracted.
They are very proud of it.
posted by Bangaioh at 3:14 AM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
They are very proud of it.
posted by Bangaioh at 3:14 AM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
So I was on the verge of trying Film-stuck, since I'm 120 movies into a blogging project to watch and review everything on that 1001 movies before you die list. I've been doing mostly Netflix via the DVD in the red envelopes, but there are some films Netflix doesn't have. And usually if Netflix doesn't then neither does Amazon streaming video. So this was recommended as a source for classic 1930s and 40s films which Netflix inexplicably didn't have. (I did try Fandor, but they were really thin on anything before the 1960s.)
So. What OTHER sites can I try?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:28 AM on October 27, 2018
So. What OTHER sites can I try?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:28 AM on October 27, 2018
I think Criterion's market is basically movie buffs who are willing to pay for a bluray of something like Haxan rather than watch it on YouTube for free.
Sure, that's certainly largely true, but I think there are a variety of issues here. One is that Criterion lives off some of the most famous big name titles that have been available before, but people want the best available copies of, but that's only a small part of the movies they release. It's comparatively easy to find buyers for something like Days of Heaven since it's a known American film noted for exceptional imagery. Something like Marketa Lazarova, on the other hand, hadn't had a US release before Criterion put it out and even now still has little reputation save among the select few who've actually seen it. You don't hear it discussed much elsewhere other than in the DVD reviews on its release.
That seems to be the case for much of their released catalog, if its a US film or had been famous for decades it draws attention, the other stuff doesn't get mentioned much and a lot of it is released in less fancy packaging, suggesting Criterion isn't getting as much back from those titles either. That's part of what I was wondering about for Filmstruck, is it mostly known films people go there for or do they experiment with titles they aren't familiar with a lot as well?
The right issue is also trickier than that since streaming rights don't necessarily accompany hard copy rights and rights differ from country to country, which adds to the costs of streaming. Even if there would still be cinephiles purchasing high quality blu-rays for their collections, that doesn't necessarily mean a streaming service would be supported in the same fashion especially when literally any site could put up their own stream of whatever quality to compete absent copyright. That seems like a formula that would lead to populating youtube with tv rips more than anything had there not been some copyright protections involved. But we'll likely never know the answer to that since no one's going to give up or dramatically alter copyright protection any time soon.
posted by gusottertrout at 4:07 AM on October 27, 2018
Sure, that's certainly largely true, but I think there are a variety of issues here. One is that Criterion lives off some of the most famous big name titles that have been available before, but people want the best available copies of, but that's only a small part of the movies they release. It's comparatively easy to find buyers for something like Days of Heaven since it's a known American film noted for exceptional imagery. Something like Marketa Lazarova, on the other hand, hadn't had a US release before Criterion put it out and even now still has little reputation save among the select few who've actually seen it. You don't hear it discussed much elsewhere other than in the DVD reviews on its release.
That seems to be the case for much of their released catalog, if its a US film or had been famous for decades it draws attention, the other stuff doesn't get mentioned much and a lot of it is released in less fancy packaging, suggesting Criterion isn't getting as much back from those titles either. That's part of what I was wondering about for Filmstruck, is it mostly known films people go there for or do they experiment with titles they aren't familiar with a lot as well?
The right issue is also trickier than that since streaming rights don't necessarily accompany hard copy rights and rights differ from country to country, which adds to the costs of streaming. Even if there would still be cinephiles purchasing high quality blu-rays for their collections, that doesn't necessarily mean a streaming service would be supported in the same fashion especially when literally any site could put up their own stream of whatever quality to compete absent copyright. That seems like a formula that would lead to populating youtube with tv rips more than anything had there not been some copyright protections involved. But we'll likely never know the answer to that since no one's going to give up or dramatically alter copyright protection any time soon.
posted by gusottertrout at 4:07 AM on October 27, 2018
Bah, I botched my thought at the end. I meant that in the current system streaming rights are an additional problem for sites like Filmstruck to work out a the moment, but even absent those concerns, I'm not sure there'd be enough of an audience for a film site to stay in business since they'd be facing competition from free services like Youtube, making even lower cost operations too difficult to maintain.
posted by gusottertrout at 4:16 AM on October 27, 2018
posted by gusottertrout at 4:16 AM on October 27, 2018
Librarian here. Kanopy has been mentioned above as an alternative. You might encourage your local public library to give it a whirl. We’ve had to limit streaming to a measly 5 streams per month (as we have also with Hoopla) because we can’t afford more than that (both services charge per-stream). I agree this will not help us build a user base, as many will give up in frustration and the small number of streams available to them. But we may be able to adjust more to our audience as things progress. If nothing else maybe see if your local library has some free streaming available and you can see if you like them enough to get your own.
posted by aesop at 4:18 AM on October 27, 2018 [7 favorites]
posted by aesop at 4:18 AM on October 27, 2018 [7 favorites]
Proving once again that bypassing IP laws, e.g.: torrents, private trackers, etc., is a moral imperative.
posted by signal at 4:59 AM on October 27, 2018 [7 favorites]
posted by signal at 4:59 AM on October 27, 2018 [7 favorites]
Except that if everyone pirates, then Criterion has no revenue stream and can't afford to do the amazing film restoration work that they do and no one else will. I just watched the Blu-Ray of Rebecca this week and the work that they did on it was just amazing. If it had been in public domain, then we'd just get some muddy transfer from a scratched up print and never see a film like that in it's original state.
posted by octothorpe at 6:36 AM on October 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 6:36 AM on October 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
Wobbuffet: "The article mentions this briefly, but you can search for your local library here and then find many Criterion films on Kanopy."
Our library has Hoopla instead which is a weird collection of some good stuff and lots of stuff that you'd never watch. I try to borrow DVDs from the library but I've had almost zero luck getting disks that actually play.
posted by octothorpe at 6:54 AM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
Our library has Hoopla instead which is a weird collection of some good stuff and lots of stuff that you'd never watch. I try to borrow DVDs from the library but I've had almost zero luck getting disks that actually play.
posted by octothorpe at 6:54 AM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
I miss Blockbuster. And Netflix the way it was ten years ago, with all the DVD's they have since thrown into their dumpsters.
posted by kozad at 7:20 AM on October 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by kozad at 7:20 AM on October 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
Proving once again that bypassing IP laws, e.g.: torrents, private trackers, etc., is a moral imperative.
The fact that many movies are publicly available - or available at all - is due to folks who stole prints slated for destruction after their initial run and sold or traded them, or fished them out of the trash.
This is just one more skirmish in a long-running battle between corporations trying to extract the maximum value from film and fans who see it as art or cultural history, the latter often on the wrong side of the law.
posted by ryanshepard at 7:22 AM on October 27, 2018 [14 favorites]
The fact that many movies are publicly available - or available at all - is due to folks who stole prints slated for destruction after their initial run and sold or traded them, or fished them out of the trash.
This is just one more skirmish in a long-running battle between corporations trying to extract the maximum value from film and fans who see it as art or cultural history, the latter often on the wrong side of the law.
posted by ryanshepard at 7:22 AM on October 27, 2018 [14 favorites]
Getting my money back is cool, but where else can I legally find classic movies online?
posted by Selena777 at 7:29 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by Selena777 at 7:29 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
A friend just told me about this and I was eager to sign up. How stupid and frustrating that it's over.
posted by Miko at 7:42 AM on October 27, 2018
posted by Miko at 7:42 AM on October 27, 2018
And Netflix the way it was ten years ago, with all the DVD's they have since thrown into their dumpsters.
I encourage you to give their DVD by mail service another spin—it still exists and it still works very well. They have fewer movies than they used to, though, it’s true.
posted by Automocar at 7:46 AM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
I encourage you to give their DVD by mail service another spin—it still exists and it still works very well. They have fewer movies than they used to, though, it’s true.
posted by Automocar at 7:46 AM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
My experience watching two movies on Filmstruck last night reminded me all over how really terrible a service it is. I am upset that they're shutting this down but that doesn't change the fact that it was a completely incompetent operation from the start. I'm not sure that I've ever gotten through a whole movie without the feed freezing on me and you can't ever reliably pause the film. The bugs in the app and website were there from the beginning and never got fixed. The fact that a company that big can't run a streaming service is sort of astounding.
The other big weird thing about it is the branding. Why have the two of the biggest names in classic/arthouse film distribution running is site and then call it "Filmstruck", a name that tells you nothing about its content? They should have called it TCM/Criterion. The whole thing was just so half assed and obviously underfunded that it's not really surprising that they're pulling the plug on it.
I assume that Criterion will try to hook up with another existing site like Fandor or maybe Amazon and all the Warner/MGM films will end up on whatever new site Warner Media comes up with.
posted by octothorpe at 7:57 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
The other big weird thing about it is the branding. Why have the two of the biggest names in classic/arthouse film distribution running is site and then call it "Filmstruck", a name that tells you nothing about its content? They should have called it TCM/Criterion. The whole thing was just so half assed and obviously underfunded that it's not really surprising that they're pulling the plug on it.
I assume that Criterion will try to hook up with another existing site like Fandor or maybe Amazon and all the Warner/MGM films will end up on whatever new site Warner Media comes up with.
posted by octothorpe at 7:57 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
With only a month left, this is useless advice, but all my Filmstruck problems went away when I got a Roku. Filmstruck on the Roku is rock solid (although you'll want to add things to your watchlist from the website since the search feature on the Roku is garbage and consistently leaves out films that they actually have)
posted by dis_integration at 8:03 AM on October 27, 2018
posted by dis_integration at 8:03 AM on October 27, 2018
I could never get the Filmstruck Roku app to even start.
posted by octothorpe at 8:06 AM on October 27, 2018
posted by octothorpe at 8:06 AM on October 27, 2018
The fact that a company that big can't run a streaming service is sort of astounding.
This is because there's a wrongheaded belief that you can hire programmers to write anything and it will work just as well as the stuff written by people who've been doing it for a while now. Netflix used to spit out errors all the time. Amazon Prime was awful when it started. Hulu was miserable when it launched, but even so it was better than the mishmash of individual network sites it was supposed to make obsolete (I forget if it was ABC or CBS, but one of them used to freeze up after every commercial break, forcing a complete reload). Sling is almost good enough now, however many years after its pivot into live streaming. (Apparently Sling TV launched in February 2015).
For something like this to work you have to have a lot of experience, a robust back end, proper error handling, and solid contracts for content distribution (both in geographic and ISP terms), and you really, really, really need a good QA organization. No content startup has any of that. The best plan is to partner with an existing brand, but that means giving them some of your profits, and for a niche platform there's not a lot of margin to throw around. Also everybody wants to own their brand, and if you partner with a big player they still own the brand and you're just a "channel." Being a "channel" apparently isn't enough of a thing to be worth developing. The second best plan would be to contract for a white label back end with somebody who already does streaming, but that becomes operating expenses and not capital expenses, and it's much easier to borrow money for capex.
I'm totally the target market for Filmstruck, but even more so I'm the target market for a standalone TCM isolated from a cable bill. Turner never wanted to offer that, and Filmstruck wasn't exactly TCM. It didn't have the same library or availability, and it was also hitched to the art house / foreign / film nerd thing that basically amounts to movie kale. Some people really love it, but just as I get tired of chewing before I've finished my kale, I want to like all that art house stuff but I end up basically never wanting to read my movies. I think they expected more overlap between the audiences for the two things they were gluing together, but they botched the TCM part of it and didn't present enough value without it being the full TCM experience. I wasn't going to pay eight bucks for not-quite-TCM and I wasn't going to pay twelve for not-quite-TCM plus (a subset of) Criterion, when we already had Netflix and Amazon. I especially wasn't going to pay for something with as many reported problems that could have been avoided if they'd just hitched themselves to, say, Amazon as a channel.
I think we're going to get a few more new streaming launches that repeat what happened with Filmstruck: they strike out on their own, and then they strike out because they don't have the resources (people, expertise, and funding) to run it until it works. I'm not sure the market can support that many Balkanized services (new Turner/HBO thing, new Disney thing, whatever other things are already in the works), especially if they all come in at $12 or more a month. The appeal of cord cutting is that it costs less than a cable bill. If you signed up for Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, Disney, and Turner/HBO/Whatever, you might as well just sign up for cable again. And if you don't sign up for all of them, somebody's not going to make their revenue targets.
posted by fedward at 10:13 AM on October 27, 2018 [8 favorites]
This is because there's a wrongheaded belief that you can hire programmers to write anything and it will work just as well as the stuff written by people who've been doing it for a while now. Netflix used to spit out errors all the time. Amazon Prime was awful when it started. Hulu was miserable when it launched, but even so it was better than the mishmash of individual network sites it was supposed to make obsolete (I forget if it was ABC or CBS, but one of them used to freeze up after every commercial break, forcing a complete reload). Sling is almost good enough now, however many years after its pivot into live streaming. (Apparently Sling TV launched in February 2015).
For something like this to work you have to have a lot of experience, a robust back end, proper error handling, and solid contracts for content distribution (both in geographic and ISP terms), and you really, really, really need a good QA organization. No content startup has any of that. The best plan is to partner with an existing brand, but that means giving them some of your profits, and for a niche platform there's not a lot of margin to throw around. Also everybody wants to own their brand, and if you partner with a big player they still own the brand and you're just a "channel." Being a "channel" apparently isn't enough of a thing to be worth developing. The second best plan would be to contract for a white label back end with somebody who already does streaming, but that becomes operating expenses and not capital expenses, and it's much easier to borrow money for capex.
I'm totally the target market for Filmstruck, but even more so I'm the target market for a standalone TCM isolated from a cable bill. Turner never wanted to offer that, and Filmstruck wasn't exactly TCM. It didn't have the same library or availability, and it was also hitched to the art house / foreign / film nerd thing that basically amounts to movie kale. Some people really love it, but just as I get tired of chewing before I've finished my kale, I want to like all that art house stuff but I end up basically never wanting to read my movies. I think they expected more overlap between the audiences for the two things they were gluing together, but they botched the TCM part of it and didn't present enough value without it being the full TCM experience. I wasn't going to pay eight bucks for not-quite-TCM and I wasn't going to pay twelve for not-quite-TCM plus (a subset of) Criterion, when we already had Netflix and Amazon. I especially wasn't going to pay for something with as many reported problems that could have been avoided if they'd just hitched themselves to, say, Amazon as a channel.
I think we're going to get a few more new streaming launches that repeat what happened with Filmstruck: they strike out on their own, and then they strike out because they don't have the resources (people, expertise, and funding) to run it until it works. I'm not sure the market can support that many Balkanized services (new Turner/HBO thing, new Disney thing, whatever other things are already in the works), especially if they all come in at $12 or more a month. The appeal of cord cutting is that it costs less than a cable bill. If you signed up for Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, Disney, and Turner/HBO/Whatever, you might as well just sign up for cable again. And if you don't sign up for all of them, somebody's not going to make their revenue targets.
posted by fedward at 10:13 AM on October 27, 2018 [8 favorites]
I'm the target market for a standalone TCM isolated from a cable bill. Turner never wanted to offer that, and Filmstruck wasn't exactly TCM. It didn't have the same library or availability, and it was also hitched to the art house / foreign / film nerd thing that basically amounts to movie kale. Some people really love it, but just as I get tired of chewing before I've finished my kale, I want to like all that art house stuff but I end up basically never wanting to read my movies.
I think that's pretty common. I mean I would have ponied up for access to the complete TCM library on a streaming service and I love the arthouse stuff, but I don't think the two kinds of libraries being put together make a better service overall. A classic Hollywood/UK streaming service might be workable with the kind of library of movies TCM has, and I still think there may be room for a niche site to make a much better go of the "foreign" film market if they made more effort to dig into the more mass market fare from around the world that doesn't get much of any notice outside their original markets.
Back in the day I tried to convince Mubi to see about adding things like Korean TV series and some more mass market films from the former Soviet Union and elsewhere that hadn't yet found major cult status, but could have given how enjoyable much of it is. My suspicion was that might help provide some broader appeal to the site to help support the more arthouse stuff, but it was never taken up. It could be that the rights would be harder to acquire than I imagine, but I figured it couldn't be that expensive given they'd be going from zero attention to some revenue.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:31 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
I think that's pretty common. I mean I would have ponied up for access to the complete TCM library on a streaming service and I love the arthouse stuff, but I don't think the two kinds of libraries being put together make a better service overall. A classic Hollywood/UK streaming service might be workable with the kind of library of movies TCM has, and I still think there may be room for a niche site to make a much better go of the "foreign" film market if they made more effort to dig into the more mass market fare from around the world that doesn't get much of any notice outside their original markets.
Back in the day I tried to convince Mubi to see about adding things like Korean TV series and some more mass market films from the former Soviet Union and elsewhere that hadn't yet found major cult status, but could have given how enjoyable much of it is. My suspicion was that might help provide some broader appeal to the site to help support the more arthouse stuff, but it was never taken up. It could be that the rights would be harder to acquire than I imagine, but I figured it couldn't be that expensive given they'd be going from zero attention to some revenue.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:31 AM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
One odd thing is that TCM already has a site and app, Watch TCM. It's only accessible if you get cable with TCM included but they could have just added a new authentication method to the existing site to allow paid sign-ups without a huge amount of technical lift instead of rolling a completely different site for their subscription customers.
posted by octothorpe at 10:37 AM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 10:37 AM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
It remains a point of bafflement for me how little interest there seems to be on mainstream streaming services for truly old movies. Storage might as well be zero-cost at their scale -- is the licensing costs? Can that even be possible this late on?
FWIW, both of my kids (roughly in the millenial range) hate watching b/w movies. They avoid them like the plaugue. Many of their friends are the same. God knows I tried to stoke some interest, but it never took.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:12 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
FWIW, both of my kids (roughly in the millenial range) hate watching b/w movies. They avoid them like the plaugue. Many of their friends are the same. God knows I tried to stoke some interest, but it never took.
posted by Thorzdad at 1:12 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
I'd rather pay $10 a month than go through that hassle, but I guess it's back to the pirate seas for me.
Huh. Seems like lack of money flowing into the artistic resources that I like is a problem. Surely, removing more money from those resources is the solution I'm looking for.
posted by Candleman at 1:26 PM on October 27, 2018
Huh. Seems like lack of money flowing into the artistic resources that I like is a problem. Surely, removing more money from those resources is the solution I'm looking for.
posted by Candleman at 1:26 PM on October 27, 2018
....Well, if they're too dumb to keep stuff available so we CAN pay for it...
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 1:31 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 1:31 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
There's a billion dollar industry dedicated to making and marketing movies. They spend buckets of money shaping consumer desire. The studios goal is to get people to show up within a few weeks of a movie's opening and pay movie theater prices to see movies. Then they can make more money off streaming & physical media of recently released movies. There might be some small amount of money in streaming old movies but it's not in the studios interest to promote interest in anything but the latest, hottest, sweetest, shiniest new releases with the exception of nostalgic remakes.
posted by rdr at 1:41 PM on October 27, 2018
posted by rdr at 1:41 PM on October 27, 2018
The British Film Institute (sorry, not available outside the UK) has an interesting model; they have collections of historical short films that anyone can watch for free, then a collection which you can subscribe to and watch any of (generally older or smaller films), and then online rentals for newer releases. As they are a charity and receive government funding it would be interesting to know if the BFI Player would be economically viable outside that framework (they do have annual reports online, but there's not enough information to even make a guess).
posted by Vortisaur at 2:03 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Vortisaur at 2:03 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
> One odd thing is that TCM already has a site and app, Watch TCM. It's only accessible if you get cable with TCM included
Probably contractually obligated to that, and changing the contracts would be far, far harder than writing new software (as hard as that is).
posted by flug at 2:11 PM on October 27, 2018
Probably contractually obligated to that, and changing the contracts would be far, far harder than writing new software (as hard as that is).
posted by flug at 2:11 PM on October 27, 2018
As [BFI] are a charity and receive government funding...
The NEA has been decimated, but it's interesting to think of the Library of Congress being a content provider.
posted by rhizome at 2:14 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
The NEA has been decimated, but it's interesting to think of the Library of Congress being a content provider.
posted by rhizome at 2:14 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
Well, if they're too dumb to keep stuff available so we CAN pay for it.
The content in question is available if you're willing to pay for it. There's essentially a 1:1 ratio of what Filmstruck offered to what you can buy on any number of online video stores.
What you mean is that you won't pay an economically viable price point for what you want and prefer to pirate it rather than either do without what you desire or pay the actual costs for what you want. Let's be honest here.
posted by Candleman at 2:21 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
The content in question is available if you're willing to pay for it. There's essentially a 1:1 ratio of what Filmstruck offered to what you can buy on any number of online video stores.
What you mean is that you won't pay an economically viable price point for what you want and prefer to pirate it rather than either do without what you desire or pay the actual costs for what you want. Let's be honest here.
posted by Candleman at 2:21 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
My point is — which was lost in my admittedly way-too-flip comment — is that the market is repeatedly clear about HOW it wants to pay for things, and yet, content companies keep insisting "no, we want you to do it this way." We saw it with the record labels dragging their feet on selling music digitally. We're seeing it now in the comic industry where people aren't buying floppies because they prefer trade collections, and again, people are saying "we don't want to buy physical media, we'd prefer to stream everything," and the movie/TV industries are saying "nah," and being confused when the market said "...well, fine."
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 2:31 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Rev. Syung Myung Me at 2:31 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
FWIW, both of my kids (roughly in the millenial range) hate watching b/w movies. They avoid them like the plaugue. Many of their friends are the same. God knows I tried to stoke some interest, but it never took.
So did my wife a few years ago. Now that's all she watches. It's hard to get her to watch a current movie sometimes.
We wanted to cancel or downgrade our Dish Network for years, but didn't want to lose TCM. Dish now has a small package with the channels we care about that includes TCM for $45 (?) and a pretty great new receiver.
posted by bongo_x at 2:47 PM on October 27, 2018
So did my wife a few years ago. Now that's all she watches. It's hard to get her to watch a current movie sometimes.
We wanted to cancel or downgrade our Dish Network for years, but didn't want to lose TCM. Dish now has a small package with the channels we care about that includes TCM for $45 (?) and a pretty great new receiver.
posted by bongo_x at 2:47 PM on October 27, 2018
The content in question is available if you're willing to pay for it.
Well, it varies.
Let's say you want to watch Fassbinder's 'Veronika Voss'. Yes, it's not a household name, but it's a famous-enough film in its class that you'd expect you'd be able to get your hands on it without much trouble.
JustWatch says that it's streamable on Kanopy or FilmStruck. Keep in mind that Kanopy is only available if you're a member of a library that offers it. Per JustWatch, it's not available for rent on Amazon Prime or other comparable services.
A check of Amazon for physical media turns up one remaining copy of an overpriced box set, and some import option in PAL and/or Region 2. Can your player deal with that?
There are a couple of used copies on EBay.
Barnes and Noble doesn't list it online. They tend to keep a lot of Criterion discs in their bricks-and-mortar stores, who knows, maybe a stray copy is sitting on a shelf somewhere?
If you're willing to look overseas, FNAC has it in some boxed sets, but again, you'll have Region/PAL issues if you're in the US.
Finally, the Netflix disc-by-mail service still running at dvd.com appears to have it.
Criterion's own page on 'Veronika Voss' tells you that the box set is out of print (that's the one that Amazon has one copy of today)--but you can stream it on Filmstruck.
Roger Ebert's review page hasn't been updated--it still says you can stream it on Hulu (the case before the Criterions moved to Filmstruck).
That's just after a bit of clicking around for one title. Taking FilmStruck out of the mix doesn't make it impossible to get, but it does make it a lot more difficult. The only remaining way to get the movie that is fairly straightforward is to rent the physical disc through dvd.com. There won't be any remaining for-pay streaming options for general US viewers when FilmStruck goes away.
You could still get a used copy, a foreign copy that needs a special player or transcoding for US viewers, you could luck out and have Kanopy access, you might stumble into a copy in the bin at Barnes and Noble.....or you could pirate it.
Or, you could wait until it turns up on the big screen at a local art-house cinema--taking us back to the situation in 1982 when the film was released, before widespread video rental or the Internet.
posted by gimonca at 3:12 PM on October 27, 2018 [12 favorites]
Well, it varies.
Let's say you want to watch Fassbinder's 'Veronika Voss'. Yes, it's not a household name, but it's a famous-enough film in its class that you'd expect you'd be able to get your hands on it without much trouble.
JustWatch says that it's streamable on Kanopy or FilmStruck. Keep in mind that Kanopy is only available if you're a member of a library that offers it. Per JustWatch, it's not available for rent on Amazon Prime or other comparable services.
A check of Amazon for physical media turns up one remaining copy of an overpriced box set, and some import option in PAL and/or Region 2. Can your player deal with that?
There are a couple of used copies on EBay.
Barnes and Noble doesn't list it online. They tend to keep a lot of Criterion discs in their bricks-and-mortar stores, who knows, maybe a stray copy is sitting on a shelf somewhere?
If you're willing to look overseas, FNAC has it in some boxed sets, but again, you'll have Region/PAL issues if you're in the US.
Finally, the Netflix disc-by-mail service still running at dvd.com appears to have it.
Criterion's own page on 'Veronika Voss' tells you that the box set is out of print (that's the one that Amazon has one copy of today)--but you can stream it on Filmstruck.
Roger Ebert's review page hasn't been updated--it still says you can stream it on Hulu (the case before the Criterions moved to Filmstruck).
That's just after a bit of clicking around for one title. Taking FilmStruck out of the mix doesn't make it impossible to get, but it does make it a lot more difficult. The only remaining way to get the movie that is fairly straightforward is to rent the physical disc through dvd.com. There won't be any remaining for-pay streaming options for general US viewers when FilmStruck goes away.
You could still get a used copy, a foreign copy that needs a special player or transcoding for US viewers, you could luck out and have Kanopy access, you might stumble into a copy in the bin at Barnes and Noble.....or you could pirate it.
Or, you could wait until it turns up on the big screen at a local art-house cinema--taking us back to the situation in 1982 when the film was released, before widespread video rental or the Internet.
posted by gimonca at 3:12 PM on October 27, 2018 [12 favorites]
(I can't rule out interlibrary loan, either...remember, if your local library doesn't have a copy, they might still be able to get you a copy through ILL. Ask your friendly neighborhood librarian.)
posted by gimonca at 3:20 PM on October 27, 2018
posted by gimonca at 3:20 PM on October 27, 2018
Off topic:
Related: while "social media" is a only a few years old, the conventional wisdom seems to be that it represents a completely new era of human existence and whole-hearted participation in it is obligatory if you want to even "exist".
I mean, “social media” is just an evolution of the public conversations that would happen on BBSes, and those existed for the public since 1978 or so. 40 years seems plenty of time for something to become a commonly accepted part of society that people wonder why you’re not being a part of it.
On topic:
That said, even though I’m sad that FilmStruck is going away, I feel very lucky that I live close to Scarecrow Video, and I can rent any Criterion disc I want. Just abolish the streaming services and bring back video rental stores. Problem solved! ;-)
posted by mboszko at 3:43 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
Related: while "social media" is a only a few years old, the conventional wisdom seems to be that it represents a completely new era of human existence and whole-hearted participation in it is obligatory if you want to even "exist".
I mean, “social media” is just an evolution of the public conversations that would happen on BBSes, and those existed for the public since 1978 or so. 40 years seems plenty of time for something to become a commonly accepted part of society that people wonder why you’re not being a part of it.
On topic:
That said, even though I’m sad that FilmStruck is going away, I feel very lucky that I live close to Scarecrow Video, and I can rent any Criterion disc I want. Just abolish the streaming services and bring back video rental stores. Problem solved! ;-)
posted by mboszko at 3:43 PM on October 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
Like, yeah, I love physical media too (I still get discs from Netflix) but buying shit is not an answer.
Streaming shit is not an answer either.
If you don't have your own copy, it doesn't exist.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 4:00 PM on October 27, 2018
Streaming shit is not an answer either.
If you don't have your own copy, it doesn't exist.
posted by Xyanthilous P. Harrierstick at 4:00 PM on October 27, 2018
And even my library's DVDs have sensor tape on the top that makes them go THWAP THWAP THWAP THWAP in both my DVD player and my PS3. So now my wonderful discovery of the library's DVD selection has become almost useless.
posted by rhizome at 4:13 PM on October 27, 2018
posted by rhizome at 4:13 PM on October 27, 2018
I dragged my feet long enough on signing up for a second streaming service that my free trial ran out Tuesday. I'm madder than a hornet about this.
posted by ob1quixote at 7:02 PM on October 27, 2018
posted by ob1quixote at 7:02 PM on October 27, 2018
And if you "buy" films via Apple, etc., they will vanish from your library if their contract with the content provider ends and is not renewed. That means that if you can't get your hands on a physical copy of a film, your ongoing access hinges entirely on the company you bought it from continuing to offer it forever.
I too have been struck as to the way we are rapidly reverting to the situation when I was in college, when access to most movies, period, hinged on theater showings (and for non-major U.S. theatrical releases, rep theaters only). Except that in the process we destroyed tons of local small businesses and even a widespread chain.
posted by praemunire at 8:36 PM on October 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
I too have been struck as to the way we are rapidly reverting to the situation when I was in college, when access to most movies, period, hinged on theater showings (and for non-major U.S. theatrical releases, rep theaters only). Except that in the process we destroyed tons of local small businesses and even a widespread chain.
posted by praemunire at 8:36 PM on October 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
Streaming shit is not an answer either.
If you don't have your own copy, it doesn't exist.
This is why I'm currently engaged in the project of ripping my entire DVD and Blu-Ray collection to MP4s and putting them on my personal Plex home media server before boxing the discs up for storage. These days, I use the commercial streaming services as the "try before you buy" for things that I will eventually buy on disc, sometimes for LESS than what they cost if bought digitally through Amazon/Apple/Google. I might pay a little bit more in the short term, but at the very least I know that my movies and TV shows won't magically vanish overnight through some unspeakable corporate fuckery.
That said, I was (and am) a FilmStruck subscriber, and had just signed up for a year's subscription because I appreciated the level and quality of curation on the service. But now I'm wondering if this kind of long-tail availability of a single studio or corporation's back catalogue is even still feasible in a world where the streaming networks are busily focused on cranking out their own content with little interest in remembering things from 5 years ago, let alone the whole past century.
posted by Strange Interlude at 8:41 PM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
If you don't have your own copy, it doesn't exist.
This is why I'm currently engaged in the project of ripping my entire DVD and Blu-Ray collection to MP4s and putting them on my personal Plex home media server before boxing the discs up for storage. These days, I use the commercial streaming services as the "try before you buy" for things that I will eventually buy on disc, sometimes for LESS than what they cost if bought digitally through Amazon/Apple/Google. I might pay a little bit more in the short term, but at the very least I know that my movies and TV shows won't magically vanish overnight through some unspeakable corporate fuckery.
That said, I was (and am) a FilmStruck subscriber, and had just signed up for a year's subscription because I appreciated the level and quality of curation on the service. But now I'm wondering if this kind of long-tail availability of a single studio or corporation's back catalogue is even still feasible in a world where the streaming networks are busily focused on cranking out their own content with little interest in remembering things from 5 years ago, let alone the whole past century.
posted by Strange Interlude at 8:41 PM on October 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
One odd thing is that TCM already has a site and app, Watch TCM. It's only accessible if you get cable with TCM included but they could have just added a new authentication method to the existing site to allow paid sign-ups without a huge amount of technical lift instead of rolling a completely different site for their subscription customers.
We signed up for a month of Sling during the Winter Olympics, and spent an extra $5 to add the movie package that included TCM. That subscription gave us access to whatever was live, whatever was on demand via Sling (in its capacity as an ersatz cable network), and whatever was streaming via the Watch TCM app. Those three distribution methods often seemed to have separate rules. Some stuff would be aired that couldn't be watched on demand at all (their main landing page for mobile merely says, "That's right, nearly every title playing on TCM is available to watch On Demand." [emphasis mine]); some stuff would air with some limited period of on demand access; some stuff would be on demand but not streaming, or vice versa. I'd add stuff to our favorites and then be unable to play it a few days later because the content was no longer available. It was a terrible user experience.
I get the impression that even if they could offer the whole back catalog via streaming, they don't want to do anything that would jeopardize the revenue they get with cable deals. They probably couldn't or wouldn't open up Watch TCM for that reason.
posted by fedward at 9:29 PM on October 27, 2018
We signed up for a month of Sling during the Winter Olympics, and spent an extra $5 to add the movie package that included TCM. That subscription gave us access to whatever was live, whatever was on demand via Sling (in its capacity as an ersatz cable network), and whatever was streaming via the Watch TCM app. Those three distribution methods often seemed to have separate rules. Some stuff would be aired that couldn't be watched on demand at all (their main landing page for mobile merely says, "That's right, nearly every title playing on TCM is available to watch On Demand." [emphasis mine]); some stuff would air with some limited period of on demand access; some stuff would be on demand but not streaming, or vice versa. I'd add stuff to our favorites and then be unable to play it a few days later because the content was no longer available. It was a terrible user experience.
I get the impression that even if they could offer the whole back catalog via streaming, they don't want to do anything that would jeopardize the revenue they get with cable deals. They probably couldn't or wouldn't open up Watch TCM for that reason.
posted by fedward at 9:29 PM on October 27, 2018
Let's say you want to watch Fassbinder's 'Veronika Voss'.
Oooh, now do the Voyager/Criterion "This Is Spinal Tap." I loaned my original Voyager CD-ROM to a friend and never got it back, but I keep wanting to track down the commentary tracks. I know everybody likes the track with the band "in character" but I prefer the originals.
posted by fedward at 9:37 PM on October 27, 2018
Oooh, now do the Voyager/Criterion "This Is Spinal Tap." I loaned my original Voyager CD-ROM to a friend and never got it back, but I keep wanting to track down the commentary tracks. I know everybody likes the track with the band "in character" but I prefer the originals.
posted by fedward at 9:37 PM on October 27, 2018
I guess my massive collection of DVDs, laser discs, VHS tapes, and films might come in handy after all.If only I had kept my dad’s BetaMax.
posted by Ideefixe at 9:38 PM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by Ideefixe at 9:38 PM on October 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
> This is why I'm currently engaged in the project of ripping my entire DVD and Blu-Ray collection to MP4s and putting them on my personal Plex home media server before boxing the discs up for storage.
As someone who's painstakingly done the same for their CD collection, my humble suggestion is don't waste your time and torrent untouched m2ts/vob rips, or remuxes if you don't care about the menus.
Fuck DRM and thank the kind folks who go through the hassle so we don't have to.
posted by Bangaioh at 3:50 AM on October 28, 2018
As someone who's painstakingly done the same for their CD collection, my humble suggestion is don't waste your time and torrent untouched m2ts/vob rips, or remuxes if you don't care about the menus.
Fuck DRM and thank the kind folks who go through the hassle so we don't have to.
posted by Bangaioh at 3:50 AM on October 28, 2018
My situation: Filmstruck subscriber, but I also have a couple of shelves of DVDs that I've scrounged together. One big criticism that I had of Filmstruck--they'd offer films for a limited time. I'd get notifications like "going away soon--this is your last chance to see Nights of Cabiria".
No, it isn't, because I have the disc.
posted by gimonca at 6:07 AM on October 28, 2018
No, it isn't, because I have the disc.
posted by gimonca at 6:07 AM on October 28, 2018
Streaming shit is not an answer either.
If you don't have your own copy, it doesn't exist.
This is missing the point. If we want these films available to the most people possible, telling people to go buy thousands of dollars worth of discs is actively harmful as it shuts down the conversation.
posted by Automocar at 7:42 AM on October 28, 2018 [6 favorites]
If you don't have your own copy, it doesn't exist.
This is missing the point. If we want these films available to the most people possible, telling people to go buy thousands of dollars worth of discs is actively harmful as it shuts down the conversation.
posted by Automocar at 7:42 AM on October 28, 2018 [6 favorites]
I do buy disks but I don't want all 1,001 disks as I work through the "1,001 movies that you should watch before you die". I'm only going to watch most of them once and I don't want to figure out how to store of them.
posted by octothorpe at 8:01 AM on October 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 8:01 AM on October 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
Looking at Roger Ebert's Great Movie series, there are 365 as listed on this Letterboxd list but only 269 are available on Amazon Prime, 264 on iTunes and only 185 on Google Play. And for a laugh, there's only 17 on Netflix and 9 on Hulu. Streaming still has huge holes in content availability.
posted by octothorpe at 8:15 AM on October 28, 2018 [7 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 8:15 AM on October 28, 2018 [7 favorites]
If we want these films available to the most people possible
...we resort to public libraries and video rental stores. This was a solved problem disrupted back into existence.
posted by Bangaioh at 9:11 AM on October 28, 2018 [4 favorites]
...we resort to public libraries and video rental stores. This was a solved problem disrupted back into existence.
posted by Bangaioh at 9:11 AM on October 28, 2018 [4 favorites]
As someone who's painstakingly done the same for their CD collection, my humble suggestion is don't waste your time and torrent untouched m2ts/vob rips, or remuxes if you don't care about the menus. Fuck DRM and thank the kind folks who go through the hassle so we don't have to.
I prefer not to dabble in piracy, unless that's literally the only way to get a hold of something I want to watch without having to import it and/or pay a premium for an out-of-print DVD that has quadrupled in price on the collector's market. And when it comes to ripping DVDs/BRs, DRM is barely an issue these days if you use VideoLAN's libdvdcss library with your ripper of choice. Here's a Lifehacker how-to for DVD ripping with Handbrake and libdvdcss.
In any case, once I learned how to use a couple of software tools, it wasn't really a matter of my time anymore; all I have to do is throw in a disc, tell the computer which tracks I want to turn into video files at what quality, and it does the rest while I'm at work, making dinner, cleaning the house, or even sleeping. It's literally that easy, and all you need to do is read a couple of tutorials and make sure you have enough hard drive space for everything you want to rip.
posted by Strange Interlude at 9:22 AM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
I prefer not to dabble in piracy, unless that's literally the only way to get a hold of something I want to watch without having to import it and/or pay a premium for an out-of-print DVD that has quadrupled in price on the collector's market. And when it comes to ripping DVDs/BRs, DRM is barely an issue these days if you use VideoLAN's libdvdcss library with your ripper of choice. Here's a Lifehacker how-to for DVD ripping with Handbrake and libdvdcss.
In any case, once I learned how to use a couple of software tools, it wasn't really a matter of my time anymore; all I have to do is throw in a disc, tell the computer which tracks I want to turn into video files at what quality, and it does the rest while I'm at work, making dinner, cleaning the house, or even sleeping. It's literally that easy, and all you need to do is read a couple of tutorials and make sure you have enough hard drive space for everything you want to rip.
posted by Strange Interlude at 9:22 AM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
...we resort to public libraries and video rental stores. This was a solved problem disrupted back into existence.
I mean... yes, but the problem is still here.
Where’s your nearest video rental store? If you have one within a half hour of you, you are extremely lucky.
posted by Automocar at 9:27 AM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
I mean... yes, but the problem is still here.
Where’s your nearest video rental store? If you have one within a half hour of you, you are extremely lucky.
posted by Automocar at 9:27 AM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
The point is that video rental stores used to be everywhere, but were disrupted out of business by Netflix rentals and later by streaming platforms. I worked at video stores when Netflix first launched, and the common phrase when someone was mad at us over a late fee was “I’m going to Netflix.” I’m sure a lot of people said “good riddance” when the store closed after 30 years in business, but I was sad to see it go. More to the point, I’ve never found any other place that offered even close to the same selection.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 10:04 AM on October 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 10:04 AM on October 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
I mean... yes, but the problem is still here.
My comment wasn't disagreeing with yours, merely lamenting the current status quo. shapes that haunt the dusk did that better than me.
posted by Bangaioh at 10:23 AM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
My comment wasn't disagreeing with yours, merely lamenting the current status quo. shapes that haunt the dusk did that better than me.
posted by Bangaioh at 10:23 AM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
I just checked Google Maps to see if there was a video rental place still near me and the only one that came up was AdultMart. I'm guessing that they won't have too many Ozu titles in stock.
posted by octothorpe at 10:49 AM on October 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 10:49 AM on October 28, 2018 [5 favorites]
So, I was curious about what the impact of Filmstruck's closing might be on the availability of better-known, US and English-language films, mostly Hollywood.
First item I ran into: Citizen Kane will no longer be available as part of a streaming library. It will still be available on pay-per-view on several services at $2.99/$3.99 per "rental". (And, of course, it's not particularly difficult to get a physical disc.)
This was the most common situation. Lots of well-known movies will no longer be available as part of a streaming service/library that you can subscribe to, but will still be available as pay-per-view. This includes titles like:
A Star is Born (with Judy Garland)
Cool Hand Luke
Dial M for Murder (with Grace Kelly)
Jezebel (with Bette Davis)
Sunset Boulevard (Joan Crawford)
The Philadelphia Story, and Bringing Up Baby (with Katherine Hepburn)
Yankee Doodle Dandy (James Cagney)
Maltese Falcon, and Treasure of the Sierra Madre (with Humphrey Bogart)
Key Largo, Big Sleep, To Have and Have Not (with Bogart and Bacall)
Oceans 11 (the original, with Sinatra and the Rat Pack)
Singin in the Rain (Gene Kelly)
The Bridge on the River Kwai
Lawrence of Arabia
I didn't have access to the TCM app, so I don't know if any of these would be covered by it.
Kanopy covers several of these, but is only available to persons with access to member libraries (this doesn't include my local public library--so I don't have access via Kanopy).
North by Northwest would also no longer by streamable as part of a subscription library-- note that most of Hitchcock's well-known films have been picked up by the Shudder streaming service, which specializes in horror.
Some notable movies that will still be streamable as part of a subscription library--note that most of these were not on Filmstruck:
Stagecoach (Hoopla, Roku Channel)
Magnificent Seven (Fandor, Prime Video)
Some Like It Hot (Prime Video)
The Graduate (Hulu)
The Godfather, Schindler's List, The African Queen (Netflix)
Chinatown (Prime Video, Hoopla, Crackle)
Raging Bull, High Noon (Prime Video, Hulu, Epix)
Finally, it looks like many high-demand popular movies aren't streamable as part of a subscription library at all at the moment, including:
Casablanca
Gone with the Wind
The Wizard of Oz
It's a Wonderful Life
Star Wars (1977)
All About Eve
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
The Grapes of Wrath
2001: A Space Odyssey
Some of those do have pay-per-view options. My assumption is that the rights to some of these are pricey.
That's still a lot of important movies to drop out of availability on a particular medium at once. They're not in danger of being lost by any means--but the overall effect is still troubling, somehow.
posted by gimonca at 4:42 PM on October 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
First item I ran into: Citizen Kane will no longer be available as part of a streaming library. It will still be available on pay-per-view on several services at $2.99/$3.99 per "rental". (And, of course, it's not particularly difficult to get a physical disc.)
This was the most common situation. Lots of well-known movies will no longer be available as part of a streaming service/library that you can subscribe to, but will still be available as pay-per-view. This includes titles like:
A Star is Born (with Judy Garland)
Cool Hand Luke
Dial M for Murder (with Grace Kelly)
Jezebel (with Bette Davis)
Sunset Boulevard (Joan Crawford)
The Philadelphia Story, and Bringing Up Baby (with Katherine Hepburn)
Yankee Doodle Dandy (James Cagney)
Maltese Falcon, and Treasure of the Sierra Madre (with Humphrey Bogart)
Key Largo, Big Sleep, To Have and Have Not (with Bogart and Bacall)
Oceans 11 (the original, with Sinatra and the Rat Pack)
Singin in the Rain (Gene Kelly)
The Bridge on the River Kwai
Lawrence of Arabia
I didn't have access to the TCM app, so I don't know if any of these would be covered by it.
Kanopy covers several of these, but is only available to persons with access to member libraries (this doesn't include my local public library--so I don't have access via Kanopy).
North by Northwest would also no longer by streamable as part of a subscription library-- note that most of Hitchcock's well-known films have been picked up by the Shudder streaming service, which specializes in horror.
Some notable movies that will still be streamable as part of a subscription library--note that most of these were not on Filmstruck:
Stagecoach (Hoopla, Roku Channel)
Magnificent Seven (Fandor, Prime Video)
Some Like It Hot (Prime Video)
The Graduate (Hulu)
The Godfather, Schindler's List, The African Queen (Netflix)
Chinatown (Prime Video, Hoopla, Crackle)
Raging Bull, High Noon (Prime Video, Hulu, Epix)
Finally, it looks like many high-demand popular movies aren't streamable as part of a subscription library at all at the moment, including:
Casablanca
Gone with the Wind
The Wizard of Oz
It's a Wonderful Life
Star Wars (1977)
All About Eve
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
The Grapes of Wrath
2001: A Space Odyssey
Some of those do have pay-per-view options. My assumption is that the rights to some of these are pricey.
That's still a lot of important movies to drop out of availability on a particular medium at once. They're not in danger of being lost by any means--but the overall effect is still troubling, somehow.
posted by gimonca at 4:42 PM on October 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
Estate sales and yard sales, especially here in LA,often have bulk deals on DVDs.
posted by Ideefixe at 8:29 PM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Ideefixe at 8:29 PM on October 28, 2018 [1 favorite]
I do buy disks but I don't want all 1,001 disks as I work through the "1,001 movies that you should watch before you die".
* perks up ears * We should compare notes, I'm doing the same thing and I'm about to hit a bunch of "this movie isn't available on Netflix, even on DVD" titles.
the other cineastes I know often recommend Kanopy, and say that it's somehow tied to my library card. But I'm not sure how to actually use it. Where do I log on, at the library web site or on Kanopy's own site?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:05 AM on October 29, 2018
* perks up ears * We should compare notes, I'm doing the same thing and I'm about to hit a bunch of "this movie isn't available on Netflix, even on DVD" titles.
the other cineastes I know often recommend Kanopy, and say that it's somehow tied to my library card. But I'm not sure how to actually use it. Where do I log on, at the library web site or on Kanopy's own site?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:05 AM on October 29, 2018
Oh, I've had your blog on my RSS feed for months. Good stuff.
My library had Hoopla not Kanopy but I think that I signed up via a link on my libraries website.
posted by octothorpe at 7:51 AM on October 29, 2018
My library had Hoopla not Kanopy but I think that I signed up via a link on my libraries website.
posted by octothorpe at 7:51 AM on October 29, 2018
EmpressCallipygos: The Kanopy site has all the details you need -- they have a list of all participating US libraries, and they have you enter your library card number for verification when you sign up.
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:51 AM on October 29, 2018
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:51 AM on October 29, 2018
Welp, that was fun while it lasted.
I'll be over at the black market if you need me.
posted by freakazoid at 9:35 AM on November 1, 2018
I'll be over at the black market if you need me.
posted by freakazoid at 9:35 AM on November 1, 2018
Keep in mind that Kanopy is only available if you're a member of a library that offers it.
And you don't run Linux. Windows/OSX only.
posted by rhizome at 9:38 AM on November 1, 2018 [1 favorite]
And you don't run Linux. Windows/OSX only.
posted by rhizome at 9:38 AM on November 1, 2018 [1 favorite]
If you loved the adventurous curated programming we’ve been doing with our friends at FilmStruck, we have good news for you. The Criterion Collection team is going to be carrying on with that mission, launching the Criterion Channel as a freestanding streaming service in spring 2019. For more information, read the announcement here.
posted by Bangaioh at 12:31 PM on November 16, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by Bangaioh at 12:31 PM on November 16, 2018 [3 favorites]
Yay!
posted by octothorpe at 1:01 PM on November 16, 2018
posted by octothorpe at 1:01 PM on November 16, 2018
Keep in mind that Kanopy is only available if you're a member of a library that offers it.
And you don't run Linux. Windows/OSX only.
I just saw this, but Kanopy works for me in Linux. I watch stuff in-browser.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:05 PM on November 16, 2018
And you don't run Linux. Windows/OSX only.
I just saw this, but Kanopy works for me in Linux. I watch stuff in-browser.
posted by shapes that haunt the dusk at 1:05 PM on November 16, 2018
That's great to hear about the Criteron Channel. However, the price is the same as Filmstruck, which also had TCM's stuff. But then again the Criteron Channel will likely be around a year from now. But then again, Criteron is still going to be partnered with Warner, so who knows?
posted by riruro at 2:20 PM on November 16, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by riruro at 2:20 PM on November 16, 2018 [1 favorite]
« Older Not All Its Fracked Up To Be | Does a country have the right to decide who comes... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
i can still watch them
physical media ftw
posted by entropicamericana at 7:47 PM on October 26, 2018 [33 favorites]