Carol, you were right about Brother Bear, Tarzan, and Winnie the Pooh. I was primarily looking for younger skewing titles which caused me to leave out Pirates of the Caribbean. I didn't realize Holes was Disney, but you may well be right. I guess the point was that I was thinking doom and gloom when they announced the purge on January 4 and was pleasantly surprised by some of the films left.PS: Yeah, should have known about Treasure Planet considering I covered it in my blog.
This is kind of a win some-lose some situation. Although I'm not into Disney myself, I can see why a lot of people would be freaking out about so many popular titles for children fleeing the service...but it's clearly all part of Netflix's main plan which is to rely less on expensive movie studio deals (and believe me that Disney one was not cheap) and become more reliant on their own content. Basically, Netflix will be producing more and more original material which they will own forever and not have to pay a dime for and saving money since they aren't spending as much on content. Basically, the idea is to become an HBO type service with a healthy selection of new movies (despite all the purges, there's a LOT of well reviewed films from the last few years on here, practically everything that wasn't a big ticket item for a major studio) and a bunch of original shows.Of course, for movie lovers that's not the best news, but Netflix was frankly getting gouged with the initial deals they signed with the studios. Like practically every movie before 1980 is worthless to most modern viewers and Netflix themselves have suggested that ANY content from the last few years is more valuable to them than almost any older content...so it is kind of hilarious that a studio like Warner Brothers wants to charge top dollar for a pre- 1980 catalog that would make up like .1% of all the viewing hours on Netflix. In my personal opinion, the studios should eventually realize that they're in the same situation music studios are with services like Spotify...most of the content is basically worthless in the age of so many streaming options and piracy that they might as well just dump EVERYTHING on there just for the historical value.Obviously, part two of Netflix's plan is to continue to dominate the industry to the point where they get more favorable deals with the film and television studios for content, but I guess we'll have to see how that plays out...
Thanks, Anonymous. I'm going to copy your comment to the main Discussions page, because it covers more than just the Disney deal. But it's fine here, too, because the Disney deal is part of it.
I have to disagree that most pre-1980s movies are worthless. You are ignoring some great silent films like Birth of a Nation and Wings; the best work of directors like Orson Welles, Carol Reed and Hitchcock; and great actors like Gary Cooper, Cary Grant and James Stewart. Was there schlock before 1980--of course, but there is also a lot of post-1980 schlock, including a lot of the film's showing up on Netflix recently that are direct-to-DVD (presumably because no one would watch them in a movie theater) or films with some of the worst performances by big-name actors. If Netflix wants to have a good selection of films, it's going to have to stop showing junk. Netflix has two problems. Unlike Amazon, they seem to be totally averse to doing deals with independen t studios. Amazon now has exclusive deals with A24, Music Box Films and Europa (home of the Taken series) and will be taking over Netflix's exclusive deal with Open Road Films (distributor of Spotlight) beginning in 2017. HBO and Starz have the big studios (except for Disney) but there are a lot of small, independent studios putting out some very good content. I don't know why they have not pursued these studios. Often their content is so under the radar that they could probably stream on Netflix within 60 days of their theatrical release.Second, Netflix has to move away from this notion that it can show movies on its streaming service at the same time as the movies are released in theaters. Netflix outbid others for one of the best films at Sundance, yet the movie sold for a lesser amount to a distributor because the distributor guaranteed a theatrical release with a lot of money behind it. Beast of No Nations may be a very good movie but it grossed $50,000 at movie theaters and there are many people who believe that its extremely short theatrical release and low gross were the reasons it was not nominated for any Oscars. It is going to take a long time, if ever, to convince a lot of actors (Adam Sandler excepted) and directors to release movies theatrically and streaming at the same time. In fact, Netflix bought the streaming rights, not the theatrical rights, to most of the movies they bought at Sundance. I have no idea when these films will show up on Netflix but I wouldn't expect to see them without at least a 60-90 theatrical "window", which is what Amazon is doing. There are not a lot of films that I would rush out to see if I knew they would be available on Netflix within 90 days. I would be shocked if the new Disney films came to Netflix within six months, and the Marvel and Star Wars movies probably won't appear on Netflix for 9 to 12 months. (I think the latest Avengers movie on Starz was released theatrically more than nine months ago.). These movies have incredibly long box office lives, then there is a window for DVD sales and VOD. If Netflix thought we would wait to see the Disney films, why can't we wait 60 to 120 days to watch their first-run films, particularly if they bring better actors, directors and scripts to Netflix? Again, the issue isn't money--Netflix is happy to throw money around. The real issue is prestige, which most actors, screenwriters and directors equate with an exclusive theatrical release. I'm not saying that Hollywood is necessarily right and Netflix is wrong; that's just the way things work. And by buying just streaming rights, Netflix seems to be admitting that it can't beat the system.
Thanks, Wellesley72. It's interesting to see how the movers and shakers move things around, and shake things up. It doesn't feel like we have much power or say in how it turns out. I'm not completely sure how I feel about it all.
Thanks for the reply, Wellesley72. I agree with all your comments. My intent on saying that older movies were "worthless" was from a fiscal perspective as the majority of Netflix users aren't interested in old content (hence why Netflix attests to why practically any content from the last few years is more valuable to their bottom line). I personally love any great cinema from any time period.
With about 50 Disney titles streaming, that seems about right to me. It's just like one of my favorites, "the Classics". I used to get upset when a bunch were about to expire. Then I realized that the titles are rotated. So I had a bunch of new titles to watch, then a few months later all the other ones came back. As for kids, I wouldn't worry too much. The kids section is delightful and the biggest problem is getting my grandchildren to decide upon one to watch. They enjoy having their own section in which they can pick anything they want to watch - without Gram entering the room to see them watching "The Walking Dead"!
Disney deal with Netflix was a waste of money for them. We have less Disney content this year than we had last year. So much for there promise of more Disney content.
According to a blog post on the Netflix Media Center web site, the first of Disney's movies under its deal with Netflix (movies theatrically released after 12/31/15) will hit Netflix in September. Most (but certainly not all) of the Disney content coming off is straight-to-DVD content or movies televised on the Disney Channel. My guess is that most of this content is being repurposed onto one of Disney's "free" cable channels or onto Disney's premium cable channel. (Yes, in addition to all the existing Disney channels available on cable and included in most cable packages, there is also a premium Disney channel you can buy for an extra monthly fee!). While I am sure that doesn't make you feel any better, this is the same old story for any licensed content--it eventually has an end date. Why is it not being renewed? Either Disney doesn't want to renew the licenses or Netflix doesn't want to pay for the expiring content. Given the amount of money Netflix is spending on its own "originals" aimed at children, my guess is that Netflix doesn't want to pay for content you can find elsewhere. Again, not a great answer if you like Disney content. You can do a search with the word Disney on the Netflix site that will bring up a partial list of Disney content that is available on Netflix.
Hulu has a bunch of new Disney content. I really wanted to drop them in November when my discount ends but now I have no choice to stay with them. I really have no chose to stay with Amazon Prime either. Because of the cheap CEO not getting more licensed content I am forced to sub to three services to get as much as I want and I am still missing stuff I want to see.
Zootopia the only new Disney movie on there so far. Great movie too bad we lost more than we gained. Just hope the new Alice in Wonderland and the new Jungle book goes on NF.
Hi Tony - In the article about the Miramax "refresh," there was mention of the Disney deal, which said, "That means The Jungle Book, Captain America: Civil War, Zootopia and Alice Through the Looking Glass as well as Finding Dory, Doctor Strange and Rogue One: A Star Wars Story." Like you, I'm hoping that part of the article was right on.
Apparently there is a rumor that Disney might be purchasing Netflix. Should be interesting to see if this turns into anything.http://exstreamist.com/is-disney-going-to-buy-netflix-rumors-circulating/
Interesting - thanks for sending this along, Apple. Netflix has seemed so invested in its "original content" plan, it somehow doesn't make sense that they're ready to sell out, and take the money and run. Maybe they're starting to see that original content might not be such a sure thing. And it is 50 billion smackeroos we're talkin' about.
I would not mind Disney buying Netflix. First thing to do is fire the current CEO Reed Hastings would be a great start. Then actually license more content and bring back some ABC shows they actually took off. They can still make there crap original content which I mostly hate but not the 50% which would mean way less licensed content crap that the CEO is pulling now.
The new Jungle book movie is coming to Netflix this month November in the US not just Canada so looks like the new Disney deal is finally doing some good.
Some Disney content came in today. Both The Emperor's New Groove and Lilo and Stitch returned and other content appearing include The Lizzie McGuire movie, Sky High, The Pacifier, the first Chronicles of Narnia, Glory Road, Hannah Montana: The Movie, Heavyweights, and Mr. Magoo.Suspected for a while now that we'd be getting some library titles from Disney's vast collection. And although it's not the A-list animated ones some people like myself were hoping for, it is hopefully the tip of the iceberg.
An interesting article on this subject. http://decider.com/2016/11/14/every-disney-movie-and-show-on-netflix/
It seems the rumor is here to stay.http://exstreamist.com/another-rumor-of-disney-buying-netflix-has-popped-up/
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/08/disney-will-pull-its-movies-from-netflix-and-start-its-own-streaming-services.html"Netflix said Disney movies will be available through the end of 2018 on its platform. Marvel TV shows will remain."
Netflix is SO screwed.
Wellesley72 August 8, 2017 at 2:53 PMDisney reports that it is ending its deal to release new movies on Netflix as of the end of 2018. Beginning in 2019, Disney will release movies on a streaming platform owned by it. This applies to all Disney, Pixar, Marvel and LucasFilm movies. It does not have any effect on the Marvel series created for Netflix nor does it necessarily mean that ABC or Disney TV content will not be licensed to Netflix although the new Disney movie streaming site may also contain TV content. A real kick in the teeth to Netflix. Can't tell yet whether movies licensed to Netflix under the existing deal would stay on for a period of time past 2018.
You mean the marvel filth produced by NF stays. NF ruined Marvel for me. I hope Netflix stock tanks more and they eventually go bankrupt.
Some more details. New Disney streaming service will contain those Disney and Pixar titles that would otherwise would have stayed with Netflix. No decision yet on what will happen to Marvel and LucasFilm titles. Could go to new Disney streaming service, could go elsewhere, could stay with Netflix.Also, all new titles on Netflix will stay on Netflix until end of 2019.New Disney streaming service will also contain some new and old TV content. While Marvel Netflix originals will stay, no indication if there will be an expansion of the MCU beyond the current series and The Punisher.
Tony Ramirez August 8, 2017 at 2:55 PMhttps://forums.macrumors.com/threads/disney-to-pull-movies-from-netflix-launch-new-streaming-services.2060709/Told you so. So by 2019 Notflix will be all original content. CW WB will have there own service so they will gone too. Terrible.I however will sub to Disney. I love Boomerang and Funimation, Hulu but NF mot so much.
So they keep there mature rated filth from Marvel a discrase to the marvel name. I guess baboom intro garbage is safe.
Yeah, I'd say that Netflix Originals will be safe on Netflix. That's hardly a "disgrace". If you don't even like the sound of the Netflix logo, why do you still have Netflix? It's eventually going to be all Netflix Originals. That's been obvious for years
When it is all originals I will drop them. Believe me there is a few things I still watch on there until they steal that away for me for the next sex profanity laced original to replace it.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=19&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwitm8-o58rVAhVE64MKHeiABVgQqQIIcygAMBI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Falishagrauso%2F2017%2F08%2F09%2Fdisney-backing-out-of-its-netflix-distribution-deal-isnt-as-bad-as-fans-fear%2F&usg=AFQjCNECxPh2Lb9uHUq_9QylD-m5dSbSVAWhat a moron. I hate these 20 year old writers. Get lost.
i have my doubts about Spider-Man: Homecoming being part of the disney deal of upcoming movies considering sony released it, not disney, even though it was in partnership with disney-owned marvel. i guess we'll find out in the next 6 months.i can kinda see how they would have those limited appearances like epix had where something like Dear White People got the briefest (1 month?) availability despite netflix optioning it as a tv series. (it's always weird to me when their spinoff "originals" don't have the preceding movie to stream.)
Here we go again. I'm getting tired of content owners building their own streaming platforms. Personally, it feels like strong-arming to me. (Pay us directly for our content or you don't get access to it.) Perhaps that's a bit hyperbolic but it does feel that way sometimes.I will not be paying Disney simply to see a handful of movies each year. (I have little interest in their shows or ESPN.) I'll simply stick them in my DVD list.It's disappointing because Netflix has to shift to deal with these massive changes. As more and more major content providers pull out then Netflix will have no choice but to up the number of shows they produce.These content providers see a cash cow and they're all running toward it at full speed. I realize it's the nature of the beast and that ranting won't change anything. Simply put, no company will get my money if they choose to put most of or "premium" parts of their catalog behind a single pay wall.Bye-bye Disney.
It will be interesting to see how Disney prices its streaming service and what content it includes. To the extent it includes Marvel or LucasFilm titles, I plan on borrowing those from my local library and not paying Disney for them. Disney itself has admitted that it could probably make more money by licensing its content right now than setting up its own streaming system. So why do it, particularly when they already are a part-owner of Hulu? Who knows.Streaming services are becoming like cable channels used to be--they are multiplying like rabbits. Soon, everyone will have a streaming service, and it will be cheaper just to buy a cable subscription. Or maybe cable TV will just shrivel up and die. As for Netflix, the loss of First-run Disney movies seems to put them further behind Amazon and Hulu. All of the other major motion picture studios are tied up with HBO, STARZ or Epix, and Netflix has been a lot less successful in creating movies that are compelling to watch than Amazon.. Except for The Weinstein Company and IFC, Netflix has no real output deals with indie studios. I think their concept of releasing films simultaneously on Netflix and in theaters is ridiculous. Most of the small studio releases on Amazon are roughly 90 to 120 days after they have been released in theaters. If I don't see a movie in a theater, I am happy to wait 90 days to see it on Netflix.
While I'm pretty sure that I'll be adding at least one streaming service in the next year or two, I don't think I would pay for a Disney-only service, either. I'd rather rent the movies and then buy them if I really like them.
Out of curiosity, I checked my library's website. They have more than 800 Disney dvds. They let you check out 10 at a time, and you can keep them up to 3 weeks. For free. For those of us with limited budgets, multiple streaming services to cover each of several categories of films/series (Disney, BBC, classics, anime, etc.) is a burden. And as Netflix's variety diminishes, it won't be the one-stop shopping we have enjoyed in the past. I feel my patience with the imposition of greed running out.
So instead of the convenience of going to just going in the NF app and watching a movie you have to walk all the way to your library and get a scratched up SD DVD that might not even work. Wow convenience Notflix.
Walking to my mailbox for a DVD is also very convenient. You have already voiced your opinion multiple times, Tony, that you would pay for a Disney streaming service. You are getting what you want. Stop complaining about how others choose to use their money and local resources, please.
@Wellesley: The price point will be very interesting. Disney has seemingly been in the process of pricing out regular families from their parks for awhile now. Perhaps they're looking for another way to price gouge their hardcore fans. (Please forgive the grumpiness of that last sentence.)As for cable, I personally can never see myself going back. All the choices have simply made me more aware of what I'm paying for and more aware of what kind of value I'm getting from each service. I think that our entertainment choices and services will increasingly depend on what's important to us as the choices we have explode. We're moving from a one size fits all model to every shirt in the store comes in ten different sizes model. I think it may also mean sacrifice. For example, you may have to give up a new sports streaming service to keep your current favorite streaming service.@Nica: I agree. If I want to see a movie badly enough there are plenty of other ways I can access it without being forced to go through one single channel. My family has found that we're starting to juggle our streaming services. We'll add and remove as our needs and interests change.@Carol: You are a better person then me. My patience ran out about a year ago. For me the crux of the issue is the company's intention. For example, when CBS all access started one of it's selling points was that the new Star Trek show would be shown only on that platform. They're not even going to air it on TV past the pilot episode. I love Star Trek but the fact that the new show is being purposefully held back makes me disinclined to even get excited about it let alone pay for it.Compare that to BritBox. It has a ton of BBC content but the BBC didn't pull all of their shows from Acorn, Netflix or PBS when they started up. It was another way for them to directly provide their shows to an American audience. The other roads to their content are still open.This move makes me feel like Disney falls into that first camp to a certain degree and there is where my personal issue with it comes into play.
What CBS is doing with Star Trek is pathetic. Especially annoying are the bloggers who write the new Star Trek is coming to Netflix then in small text except in the USA and Canada. Big deal and the fact the NF won't let you use VPN anymore I never played around with this forces you to use there POS CBS all access if you live in the states.
Tony, you can always wait until all episodes of the Star Trek series are streaming on CBS All Access, get a free trial subscription and binge-watch them.Or you can movie to Canada. Not only can you watch the new Star Trek series, you can also watch first-run Disney/Pixar/Marvel/ Star Wars movies since Disney has a deal with Netflix to stream them in Canada and (for now) is only pulling its movies (at least, Disney and Pixar movies) fro Netflix US.
There is no free trial on the no ads version which I would use. I refuse to use any ad supported version.
Stupid millennials more are saying it is okay.https://www.inc.com/emily-canal/netflix-lost-disney-but-its-first-ever-acquisition-might-help-it-succeed.htmlAnd enough with the freaking acquired of Millarworld which produces "adult" comics which means more MA rated original garbage replacing good shows.
i wasn't sure she was a millennial until this:"Netflix, which was co-founded by Hastings and Marc Randolph, has transformed from an online movie rental business into a giant content generator since it was launched in 1997. Just two years after its inception, Netflix began offering unlimited streaming. It went public in 2002 and continued to reinvent itself while other video rental services, such as Blockbuster, got crushed by the cord-cutting phenomenon."sigh
Not every streaming service will last...NBC today is shutting down SeeSo... https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/9/16120606/seeso-shutting-down-streaming-service-comedy
yeah all these channels trying to create their own site are going to notice the same thing, the people getting rid of cable and the people that are not going to spend money on every single channel are just going to watch for free by antenna or stealing. You want to make money, continue your deals with netflix, free money no expenses of streaming service on your own.
Did SeeSo have ads? Any service that has ads especially if you have to pay will fail. Young people hate ads. I hate ads.
@Apple. I have never understoood the purpose beyond CBS All Access. Unless they plan on having dozens of originals (as opposed to just The Good Wife and the new Star Trek series), either all of their present and recent content can be DVRd or watched on Netflix or Hulu, and their older content is on Hulu.I have Comcast service at a vacation home and just saw that you can watch AMC or FX programming without commercials for $6 add-on each. Are these the precursors to AMC and FX streaming services? (Of course you can watch most of this content on Hulu commercial-free for $11.99.)As for Disney, I can understand an ESPN streaming service since about $12 of my cable bill gives me the privilege to watch ESPN (which I rarely do). They have grossly overpaid for sporting rights, and many people are just unwilling to pay for ESPN. WIll the ESPN site be ad-free? It will not be showing NFL or NBA games. On the other hand, ABC/Disney has traditionally sold most of their programming as a bundle to get it onto to basic cable. If they start unbundling, will the decline in revenue from cable be offset by revenue from streamers?As for the Disney streaming channel, it sounds like Disney came out with a concept before it has thought through what will be on the service. All Disney and Pixar movies or just first-run (after theatrical release) movies? If they start up in 2019 and Netflix has the rights to 2016-2018 movies until the end of 2019, there is not going to be a lot of content on the service in 2019 since they won't show 2019 movies until 6 to 9 months after they are released in theaters. And they only release about 6 Disney/Pixar movies a year. That means they are going to have to come up with more original content (which costs money) and/or forego licensing fees from Netflix and Hulu to place old content on their Disney streaming service. Where do the Marvel/Srar Wars films go? Maybe this all works out in the long-term (and it's always dangerous to bet against the Mouse), but I'm not sure I want to be a Disney investor until I see how this experiment works. And I have NO interest in subscribing to a Disney streaming service. My local library has plenty of access to Disney titles in HD and is only a five-minute walk from my house.
The next step, unfortunately for viewers like you and me, is no physical media release at all ( I.e. Blu-ray or DVD). There was an article on thedigitalbits.com about Netflix's acclaimed movie BEASTS OF NO NATION, and how Netflix was actually, in effect, holding this movie hostage, because no one can see it unless they subscribe, and since Netflix has stopped promoting it anywhere, it's kind of "dying on the vine" instead of finding itself an audience outside of Netflix. This may be the case with all future studio releases.
i used to think netflix originals didn't come out on dvd, even if just for rental through netflix, as a deterrent against piracy, but it's another instance of netflix competing with itself. they don't care enough about their millions of discs subscribers to release most of their originals on physical format. by contrast, those titles that do come out, which are especially those that are outside financed like house of cards and orange is the new black, don't seem particularly collectable to me because it seems safe they will be available for some time on netflix streaming (except maybe arrested development). i like that people can rent these at redbox or by amazon or cable VOD and am curious if netflix gets a cut (daredevil, yes, but the rest?).overall i decry the move away from physical formats. it's not because of an attachment to the discs themselves. it's an indicator that digital and streaming are it, and this thread perfectly shows how precarious it is to rely on streaming providers to watch a movie or show. blu-ray HD is superior to digital, especially via streaming, i still enjoy audio commentaries and featurettes, and sometimes i like the packaging/design. it seems digital is never going to adopt these extras overall, and even if it did there's something to be said for not having a bunch of digital clutter on a hard drive (that can fail) or always needing a strong broadband connection just to watch something.
I found two articles I thought fit in nicely with this current discussion. 1) https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/11/dont-ruin-streaming-by-turning-it-into-cable/ A well thought out piece about the changing scene of streaming.2) http://decider.com/2017/08/12/can-disneys-streaming-service-beat-netflix-maybe-by-producing-exclusive-content/Toward the end of the article, I thought they brought out an interesting point as to one reason Disney may be making this move.
I guess one good thing is if Disney has there family content separate then you don't have to worry about objective content. Boomerang new service is great for this.NF is terrible mixing there family and mature junk. Also the kids profile does have some movies and shows that are not really kid friendly. They are not mature but not for 8 year olds.
http://cordcuttersnews.com/netflix-talks-keep-marvel-star-wars-movies-2019/Not bad this is how I wanted it. I want the Marvel and Star Wars content to stay on NF. That way all the family friendly content can go on its Disney service which I sign up and even prepay for a year if possible day one it comes out.This is so I can use the Disney app and not have to worry about mature or pg-13 content. Too keep that on NF for Marvel and Star Wars (so far SW never had MA content) is a good thing.