Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Television Entertainment

Netflix Plan To Test Varying Play Speeds Meets Filmmaker Backlash (hollywoodreporter.com) 212

Netflix said Monday it is introducing a new test feature to allow viewers to either speed up or slow down content on their smartphones, a move that quickly gained criticism from Judd Apatow and other filmmakers online. From a report: Some users spotted a new feature earlier this month that allows a viewer to choose to slow down a show as much as 0.5x the normal speed, or increase the speed up to 1.5x the normal runtime. Apatow, who co-created the Netflix series Love, slammed the feature, tweeting "No @Netflix no. Don't make me have to call every director and show creator on Earth to fight you on this. Save me the time. I will win but it will take a ton of time. Don't fuck with our timing. We give you nice things. Leave them as they were intended to be seen." He added in a follow-up tweet, "Distributors don't get to change the way the content is presented. Doing so is a breaking of trust and won't be tolerated by the people who provide it. Let the people who don't care put it in their contracts that they don't care. Most all do." A Netflix spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter, "We're always experimenting with new ways to help members use Netflix. This test makes it possible to vary the speed at which people watch shows on their mobiles. As with any test, it may not become a permanent feature on Netflix."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Netflix Plan To Test Varying Play Speeds Meets Filmmaker Backlash

Comments Filter:
  • Who's in charge? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by XanC ( 644172 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @08:57PM (#59356846)

    Surely it should be up to the viewer, right?

    • I agree with you, but previous, similar lawsuits have said that's not the case [wikipedia.org].
      • I agree with you, but previous, similar lawsuits have said that's not the case [wikipedia.org].

        OTOH, Clean Play, which dynamically edits movies in the player, has not been shut down. I don't think the directors have a legal leg to stand on here. Whether they can browbeat Netflix into changing its position is less clear.

        Personally, I think XanC has the right of it: It should be the viewer's choice.

        • Personally, I think XanC has the right of it: It should be the viewer's choice.

          Yeah. That was true in 2004, too, when justice wasn't served.

          As far as injustices go, it's not a big deal. At worst an annoyance.

        • In 2005 the Family Entertaintment and Copyright Act explicitly made what Clean Play does legal. To qualify under that act, it can't save an edited copy and can't add new content, only hide parts of the original content.

    • Hey Judd, let me introduce you to the 1980s, you must have missed it.

      We now have amazing things called VCRs, and they have fast forward and rewind, with slow motion in both directions on some fancy models.
      My crystal ball tells me that in the next decade we may get something called a DVD, and Blusomething also, that do it even better!

      You better get all your mates together to stop this insane break away from overpaying to 'enjoy' a movie in the local cinemaplex with people coughing, throwing overprices popcor

      • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @01:21AM (#59357382)
        Actually you missed an important detail. Fast forward is for skipping content, not watching/listening to it. 1.5x play speed is for actively watching/listening, not skipping content.

        That said I'm OK with 1.5x. Worked great for online college lectures. I think 1.5x could work well for films in general during all the boring slow bits between the explosions and gun fights. :-)
        • by Zumbs ( 1241138 )
          ... and I would use it to skip through the explosions and gun fights to get to the story :D
          • Fast forward is good for porn but terrible for mainstream movies of lesbian love stories, where you must skip the urge to FF to "the good stuff".

            Let the sexual tension build and build and build so it can blam with maximum effectiveness when released, as the director intended.

        • by Cederic ( 9623 )

          My video player supports multiple fast forward speeds, and my digital video players support fully variable play speeds.

          So I've been able to watch fast for a long time, not just skip content.

        • by redback ( 15527 )

          there is a few slow talking youtubers I watch on 1.5x speed

          • Don't you hate when you google for what should be a simple question, and the first hits are long videoes that allure to having an answer, and they are 10.. minutes.. long..

            Not everything has to be a video *sigh*

            • Me: *watches a single YouTube tutorial so I can fix my door hinge*
              YouTube: WHAT'S UP, HINGE-LOVER? HERE ARE THE TOP 1000 VIDEOS FROM THE HINGER COMMUNITY THIS WEEK. CHECK OUT THIS TRENDING HINGE CONTENT FROM ENGAGING HINGEFLUENCERS.

              Seriously, any DIY video I look up I have to fast-forward like 3 minutes through all the bullshit.

              (stolen from @acarboni on Twitter)

        • I think 1.5x could work well for films in general during all the boring slow bits between the explosions and gun fights. :-)

          Is that you, Mr. President?

    • Yes, the same viewer who keeps their TV on showroom mode, with crappy motion interpolation on, and a zoomed aspect ratio different than the content came in "so I use the whole TV".

      Some things are best left out of peoples hands. Or at least, in an advanced menu buried somewhere.

      • My dad hated letterbox, as he felt ripped off there was unused black screen.

        Keep in mind when they do this, losing the edge 1/3, they often over-zoom so you even more pointlessly lose some of the top, too.

    • We give you nice things. Leave them as they were intended to be seen

      *cough* George Lucas *cough*

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sg_oneill ( 159032 )

      Yes, but so is sticking a pencil in your eye. I mean you can do it, but its not a good idea.

      And FIlmmakers have every right to be cross. Nobody is making laws here, they are making business decisions and the thing with business decisions is they can be negotiated. And if the film makers don't want their work trashed , they have every right to negotiate that it doesn't

      • Re:Who's in charge? (Score:5, Informative)

        by rossz ( 67331 ) <ogre&geekbiker,net> on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @01:30AM (#59357390) Journal

        When I purchase a product, I get to decide how to use it, not the manufacturer. Their say is limited to warranty concerns.

      • And if the film makers don't want their work trashed , they have every right to negotiate that it doesn't

        Then they should no longer allow ads interrupting their work. I'm sure (or at least I hope) they didn't produce that movie with ads in mind. On the other hand, if they indeed designed their "work" around ads, all bets are off and I can skip, slow down and speed up that movie however I want, because it means their work is trash to start with and I simply un-trash it.

      • by orlanz ( 882574 )

        Filmmakers being cross is and should be irrelevant. The distributor is not changing the content being distributed. Nor are they in anyway lowering the value of the content.

        They are providing the end user the choice & ability to change the content on a viewing basis. This should always be within the full rights of the end user... irrelevant of where the choice was provided from within the supply chain. The director's opinion isn't much different from chef's that believe we shouldn't add extra pepper

    • Surely it should be up to the viewer, right?

      I think the message the directors of the film are sending is that the cadence of the artwork they have produced is intrinsically connected to the plot of the movie and thus any critique of the artwork no longer has any genuine validity because it is no longer being viewed as intended.

      Imagine if it was music sped up in the same way, it's not the same song anymore.

      • I think the message the directors of the film are sending is that the cadence of the artwork they have produced is intrinsically connected to the plot of the movie and thus any critique of the artwork no longer has any genuine validity because it is no longer being viewed as intended.

        Imagine if it was music sped up in the same way, it's not the same song anymore.

        Yeah, exactly. They put a lot of effort into making a movie exactly as envisioned and understandably don't like anyone screwing with the experience. This includes the studios, censors, theaters and other distributors. I can't really imagine watching a movie at 1.5x - why watch it at all if you're not enjoying it? The pacing, comedy timing and editing would be all wrong.

        That said I don't see a reason not to give the viewers the option to change playback speed if they want. It's their experience and they can

        • One shouldn't wreck good stuff because you wanna zoomer thru boring stuff. Don't watch the boring stuff.

          Movies are not data dumps of information. They require time to build emotions properly.

          Movies are not data dumps of information.

          Movies are not data dumps of information.

          Movies are not data dumps of information.

          • One shouldn't wreck good stuff because you wanna zoomer thru boring stuff.

            Please make up your mind. It's either good, or boring. Can't be both.
            There are movies plenty of movies with good scenes in general, but interlaced with feet-dragging scenes which bore me to death. It's obvious that the director needed a filler and inserted some dragging scenes to make the movie long enough to last 90 minutes or whatever.

            This is all not about "watching the movie as envisioned", but preventing viewers from deforming the five key turning points as explained here> https://www.storymastery.co [storymastery.com]

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Indeed and some DVD players offer this feature, so the battle is already lost.

      I use 1.5x speed on YouTube sometimes. For example Lawful Masses can be a bit rambling and he reads out entire court filings in full where as I really want the summary version and some commentary, so I speed him up.

      Haven't really found a use for the 0.5x speed yet though.

      • Indeed and some DVD players offer this feature, so the battle is already lost.

        I use 1.5x speed on YouTube sometimes. For example Lawful Masses can be a bit rambling and he reads out entire court filings in full where as I really want the summary version and some commentary, so I speed him up.

        Haven't really found a use for the 0.5x speed yet though.

        You usually have to, ummm, lot in for those types of videos.

      • by redback ( 15527 )

        I watch abom79 at 1.5x as he is a bit of a slow talker.

    • Absolutely Positively.

      Piss off filmmakers.

      Fix the problems with your dialog being super quiet and everything else being super noisy first....

      • If you've got a decent 5.1 system with a center speaker, and can adjust speaker volume per-speaker, the dialog issue is easily solved, just increase the center channel volume or turn the others down a bit. But there's a lot of bad soundbars around that don't give any control over how the audio is downmixed, and try to make up for it with some sort of usually-quite-poor dynamic range compression that results in the volume level of everything being all over the place. This is primarily a problem with hardwar
    • Surely it should be up to the viewer, right?

      No, it shouldn't. I can't address crappy, boring stuff, but you probably shouldn't be wasting hours of your life watching it in the first place. Cut your losses and bail.

      But good shows have emotion and build up, which takes time to lodge in the mind of the viewer. It's precisely this that gets eviscerated when you halve it.

      Good movies aren't a data dump of information that can be done at high speed like Neo learning drunken boxing.

    • If they where getting paid by the view they wouldn't have an issue give them 1.5x so they can watch even more of my content.

  • by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:04PM (#59356864)

    Several years back I recall there was a business that would take a customer's copy of a given movie, rip it, edit out things they didn't like in the movie (sex scenes, violence, stuff that made religion look bad, etc) and create a new version of the film. They would then make the customer a new disc for them to play for their family with this custom edit.

    This didn't go over well with some people -- namely film directors. From what I remember the company got lost in a wash of lawsuits by movie studios.

    I was watching something on the "free with ads" Vudu VoD listings a few weeks back and saw what appeared to be the exact same service offered as a live-during-playback feature. Take a film you want to see, click a few on-screen switches, and when you watch it certain stuff gets skipped in the playback. I wondered what had changed legally between then and now to suddenly make folks all right with this third-party editing.

    • by XanC ( 644172 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:06PM (#59356870)

      Yet somehow directors are okay with pan-and-scan, with airplane and/or TV cuts, etc etc.

      • by SeaFox ( 739806 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @10:20PM (#59357080)

        Yet somehow directors are okay with pan-and-scan, with airplane and/or TV cuts, etc etc.

        Are they? [variety.com]

      • Yet somehow directors are okay with pan-and-scan, with airplane and/or TV cuts, etc etc.

        Hey, artistic vision requires smut. Dialog and character development are more expendable.

      • It depends on how successful/rich they are already, and in some cases who they sold their soul to for the financing to make their artistic dream.

        An established director like Scorsese can come out against commercial edits for format and content. He gets paid up front and has the money and awards.

        Some new guy making a mass-market action movie? He definitely doesn't care about commercial edits -- he wants his movies on all possible screens for the money. Plus he probably framed the whole film at a smaller a

    • by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:46PM (#59356980) Journal
      There was a law made that specifically allows certain types of edits [wikipedia.org]. It's somewhat narrow, however, being a loophole carved out for a specific company.
    • This didn't go over well with some people -- namely film directors. From what I remember the company got lost in a wash of lawsuits by movie studios.1.

      Yes, and I remember thinking all they really had to do was package and market the versions shown on planes.

    • I wondered what had changed legally between then and now to suddenly make folks all right with this third-party editing.

      What is legally different is that back then they were ripping a new copy of the movie, whereas this new service is just time-skipping ahead in the existing stream. In disk terms that would be like automating something that goes "ok at 23:40, skip ahead 15 seconds" without actually making a copy of the disk.

    • Yes but that company got screwed not because they were changing the director's presentation but because they were creating an unauthorized copy. 1.5x is not changing the content, not creating a copy, just changing the presentation, so the legal issues will be quite different.
    • The difference is the current service, clear-play doesn't edit the actual movie. The earlier services took a video or DVD purchased by the consumer, edited it and provided a replacement video tape or DVD with the edited content. Directors sued and won on the basis that their "art" was being altered from it's intended format.

      The current service, ClearPlay doesn't change the content. Based on settings the user chooses it applies a script of skips, jumps and mutes to edit out the unwanted content from the pr
    • If you're redistributing someone else's content, re-edited for your own Christian intolerance, and not paying appropriate royalties, that is a crime and they were rightfully sued. I actually don't care if Christians want to enjoy the outside world, but constrained in their narrow worldview...just get the permission of the author and compensate appropriately.

      Edit out all the nipples you like, just pay the studios their due. I find it tacky AF, but I'm not your target audience. I can tolerate content th
  • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:10PM (#59356882)
    Some of my professors had recorded their class lectures and made them available for download. 1.5x (and of course rewind) was a godsend.

    The syllabus had the schedule to watch the videos by and the professors gave us reminders at the end of each class. This allowed them to devote all the class time to Q&A and discussion, both students asking questions and the professor posing questions to the class and individuals for discussion. Sometimes the professor discussing with the student(s), sometimes a student/student discussion refereed by the professor.

    A far far better use of that face-to-face class time, and a better way to do lectures too. YMMV depending on the class topic.
    • So in the end the class takes up more time, for the same number of credits?

      • Depends on what your loss function is. If you think you already know everything and university is about getting credits for a job, then it's a waste of time. If you went to university to learn something, then being able to watch a lecture and have 1 1/2 hours to ask questions is invaluable.
      • by drnb ( 2434720 )

        So in the end the class takes up more time, for the same number of credits?

        We learned more. Time was spent more effectively. My classmates overwhelmingly thought these classes were superior to the tradition format of a long live lecture followed by a short Q&A.

        Also note that at 1.5x you are getting through the lecture more quickly than live. The extra time spent in Q&A reduces the need for office hour visits to TAs and professors and you have to spend less of your free time puzzling things out as you study for exams. So the notion of spending "more time" in class is mor

    • Same beef here with those online video courses at some online **ahem** "universities". What makes a talking head better than having to read the same text on paper or screen? Text has the killer feature of the reader going as fast or as slow as he wants, jumping back and forward almost effortlessly (and of course: notes and bookmarks, in the case of paper).

      Guess I've become a grumpy old fart in the past couple of years, just wanting to chase all those millennials and their baubles off my lawn.

    • by spitzig ( 73300 )

      I was a TA in a high school class that did something similar. Teachers made a video of themselves teaching material. Kids watched the video at home, instead of doing homework. Kids did their homework during classtime. This allowed the kids time to ask questions as they were doing homework and work as groups more.

  • What? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Kyogreex ( 2700775 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:14PM (#59356890)

    Distributors don't get to change the way the content is presented.

    The distributor isn’t changing anything. They’re allowing the end user to change the way content is presented, which has been possible for decades when not using a streaming service.

    If presentation is really that important to them then these movies should never been widely released. After all, I might alter the contrast on my TV.

    • Re:What? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by PPH ( 736903 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:26PM (#59356916)

      Distributors don't get to change the way the content is presented.

      They actually do. If they need to shove an advertisement in someplace. And then even an absolutely critical scene supporting the plot isn't sacrosanct.

      • Hate that, when they break between scenes, when some scene transitions are one of the most powerful moments in the film.

        Wizard of Oz is often cut just as she walks to the door and opens it, revealing the world of incredible colors.

  • So I came here to complain we should be entitled to consume the content we're paying for however we want... but pretty much every other post here is making the same argument. A buddy told me Daybreak on Netflix was good, think I'll go check that out.
  • by grep -v '.*' * ( 780312 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:33PM (#59356936)
    I don't use NetFlix so can't test if it works there, but a good general HTML5 speed control for Chrome-ish browsers is: Video Speed Controller by: igrigorik (Goog-El, son of Jor-El [google.com], Hub of Git [github.com]

    Works fine for me using Brave on YT and a lot of other sites. YMMV.

    This helps slightly with Sturgeon's law -- "90% of everything is crap." if it's crap, then FF/SKIP. If I'm not quite sure yet, it's 1.6x speed until it gets interesting or NEXT.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      YouTube has speed controls built in, no need for an add-on. You can go from about 0.5x to 2.0x. It corrects the pitch of audio too.

  • by aevan ( 903814 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:33PM (#59356938)
    Frame-by-frame advance on the old VHS must have given him night terrors.
    Truly a terrible time in the industry.
  • Give? (Score:5, Funny)

    by harlequinn ( 909271 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @09:36PM (#59356946)

    "We give you nice things"

    More like they fulfill their side of a contract and get paid a shit-ton of money to do it.

    "I will win but it will take a ton of time"

    No they won't. It's America. There are a tens of thousands of talented people lined up to take his spot who will gladly let the consumer use the product as they want to. He's expendable, he just doesn't seem to know it yet (hubris will do that to you).

    • Re: Give? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Monday October 28, 2019 @10:08PM (#59357046) Homepage Journal

      Search this guy on Google News. He never runs out of things to tell other people they have to do. I suspect most serious people just ignore him at this point.

    • Re:Give? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @01:55AM (#59357406)

      "I will win but it will take a ton of time"

      No they won't. It's America. There are a tens of thousands of talented people lined up to take his spot who will gladly let the consumer use the product as they want to.

      The studios already won (mostly). CleanFlicks [wikipedia.org] tried to sell modified movies a little over a decade ago - editing out objectionable content like nudity. But because they were a conservative group fighting for the right to modify how movies are played back, most of the folks here said screw them [slashdot.org]. They lost the initial lawsuit at the federal level, and had to throw in the towel due to financial reasons They got no assistance from the typical rights and liberties groups like the ACLU.

      So in an attempt to screw over conservatives, you screwed everyone over. The highest court ruling on this matter is currently in favor of copyright holders because you tried to politicize this ("who cares if conservatives can't do this"), rather than address it objectively ("should people in general have the right to do this?").

      • Do you really believe your own nonsense? Hollywood worships money over politics. If it makes money, they'll let Mel Gibson do whatever the fuck he wants. If Christian propaganda made money, every studio would do it. Look at how many big budget movies are blowjobs to the Chinese ego. Do we love Chinese values?...hell no, but letting them be the dignified hero of a big-budget movie who saves the day...fuck yeah, it guarantees it gets past the censors. Do we actually like reality shows? Nope...I'd say m
      • Re:Give? (Score:5, Informative)

        by DRJlaw ( 946416 ) on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @08:05AM (#59357944)

        They got no assistance from the typical rights and liberties groups like the ACLU.

        So in an attempt to screw over conservatives, you screwed everyone over. The highest court ruling on this matter is currently in favor of copyright holders because you tried to politicize this ("who cares if conservatives can't do this"), rather than address it objectively ("should people in general have the right to do this?").

        The ACLU has literally assisted neo-nazis [wikipedia.org] in exercising their rights. The thing about obtaining assistance is that you frequently have to ask for it, which you may not do if you instead decide to hire a big private law firm [shermanhoward.com] to bring your case [courtlistener.com].

        The highest court ruling "in this matter" was a District of Colorado case that is binding upon literally nobody but the participants, and that has literally nothing to do with the playback speed of an unedited motion picture.

        Try again.

      • The ACLU still gives lip service to first amendment rights, but it fights for Causes now. Sorry to disillusion you.

      • by orlanz ( 882574 )

        I doubt that had anything to do with conservatives.

        That topic was about the distributor altering content that they didn't have the rights to. You can't alter content and then distribute it. Because you don't automatically get rights to distribute said altered work nor any of its derivatives (barring the usually artistic/satire/criticism/new work exemptions). If that company just acquired a license to a specific derivative work (or one generically defined in a contract so they can make derivatives) from t

    • ...you'd see a lot more funny movies. Judd Apatow is talented filmmaker and it's harder to make a good movie than you think. Seriously dude...if making a comedy as funny as Knocked Up was easy and 1000s of people could do it, we'd have 1000s of very profitable movies made as good as Judd Apatow's best hits.

      Want an example?...porn. It's pretty easy to make a hot porno and the market is swamped with a lot of hot women performing whatever sexual act you like. Anyone can make a porn and therefore, we be
  • Don't tel this guy about fast forward, rewind, or pause. He is gonna FREAK out.

  • "Save me the time. I will win but it will take a ton of time. Don't fuck with our timing."

    No. Actually he WON'T.

    They will take you to court, point to BROADCAST TELEVISION, DVD. Blu-Ray and Digital Download as prior examples, then have the case dismissed with prejudice and you get to pay all the legal costs.

    Television has been playing with timing on content, so they can fit commercials, station checks, etc in FOR LONGER THAN YOU HAVE BEEN ALIVE.

    More-over, in media like DVD/Blu-Ray and Digital Download, you'

  • to Galoob with the Game Genie?
  • by LarryRiedel ( 141315 ) on Monday October 28, 2019 @10:11PM (#59357056)
    Surely he wouldn't want to take away my right to do what I want with my own body, like my eyes and ears.
  • "We give you nice things."
    I'm pretty damned sure you don't GIVE Netflix anything.

    If you like this ability, just install supernetflix on your browser and tell Apatow to bite me.

  • Hey, I'm the viewer. I read the parts of the books I like and skip over the parts I don't -- skim boring bits, jump back and re read.

    And if I want in the middle of your video I can get up and walk out of the room!. Or read a book.

    Take your conrtol freakery and bug off.

  • So what exactly, happened with allowing advertisements every 5 minutes? That is way worse than any speedup or slowdown could do at breaking the 'experience' or 'immersion'.
  • if I could speed them up. The artists get paid if I watch it, so they don't have say.
  • Mr. Apatow, allow me to introduce you to the "Fast Forward" and "Reverse" buttons on the VCR (stands for "video cassette recorder" if you aren't familiar with ancient hardware) along with the playback-speed selection buttons they also had (all the way down to stepping one frame at a time). All Netflix is doing is continuing a long tradition of media players offering the same functionality as old-fashioned VCRs. And directors and such will deal with it the same way they've been dealing with it for decades: f

  • Judd Apatow must not know about YouTube.

    I can slow down a video by as much as 0.25x or increase it up to 2x the normal speed under the "Playback speed" setting.

  • I completely disagree with Apatow. Take the mini series War of the Worlds 2019 (France). This is so slow to get to anything good you have to watch it at x2 just to make it through the entire film. The director is sooooooo slow to get to what is going on all anyone would do is go to sleep. I completely understand that the point of this film is to make you LIVE the fear and FEEL as if you are actually there, but come on, 8 hours is a long time, so playing it at x2 you get the entire film in 4 hours and still

  • I used to listen to Monty Python tapes at 2x ('dubbing') speed.

    Twice the jokes per minute multiplied by silly voices.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by mwvdlee ( 775178 ) on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @02:44AM (#59357446) Homepage

    We give you nice things

    How generous of you to give things in exchange for just a few million dollars.

  • I cancelled my netflix account when they raised the prices. This feature would be well worth the extra cost, but I hope they'll allow faster than 1.5x. I have an audible account and listen at 2-2.5x for hours a day. I find it hard to watch movies and TV because they are so mind-numbingly slow at this point.

    I watch a lot of youtube since I learned you could boost it to 2x speed.
  • 1.5x t binge watch until the sexy parts, then it drops to .5x

  • The customer should be in control of the product. If the content producer is in control how the viewer watches the content, then it means that the viewer has become the product.
  • Is it not possible to actually speed-up (like the old videorecorder fast forward) with Netflix? Still haven't got netflix as I saw it doesn't have an opiton to position the subtitles, and a lot of times the subtitles are partially in the active picture and partially in the black bars, it should always be in the active picture, just like in our cinema's (yep, I'm not an english native speaking person and we are very accustomed to subtitles even though I speak and understand the language).
  • I remember when MP3s were new and artists were upset that people didn't have to buy the whole album. We heard a lot of bleating about how an album is one unit of art and should be enjoyed as such. Artists can be such whiny bitches. They got over that once they figured out how to be paid for individual songs (iTunes etc). Take your money and leave us to enjoy it as we wish.

  • Why speeding up movies and shows would wreck their presentation, though that has nothing directly to do with this issue.

    https://youtu.be/3Q3eITC01Fg [youtu.be]

  • What? I doubt very much the stuff they create was intended to be seen with commercials. Yes, I know Netflix doesn't do commercials (yet). But over the air TV, Cable, satellite do. With all the competition Netflix is about to get how soon before they do too. So back to my comment.... They are concerned about "timing" stuff, but not concerned if someone interrupts their "presentation" with commercials. BAH - don't see an argument there. It's a users CHOICE if they want to speed up or slow down a show, it's no

  • ... then maybe you shouldn't waste your time watching it in the first place? I think that people should be able to watch whatever they want however they want, but really, don't people have something better to do then to watch some garbage TV at high speed because they don't care about the dialog? Save yourself some time by looking up photos of boobs and explosions, already.
  • Disney better let the Simpsons be frame by frame!

  • YouTube, for instance, is nigh unwatchable without this option. Once you start watching / listening to things at higher rates of speed, it is really hard to go back and put up with "normal" speed. Part of this has to do with the fact that huge patches of every show / movie are filler, don't move anything along, or are irrelevant to the story being told. Those parts are much easier to sit through when they speed along â" otherwise, I'm just going to use the scrubber option to jump ahead and over every s
  • What gives the filmmaker more rights in terms of preferences than the viewer who paid for and is legally watching the content?

    If I want to watch it in black and white, in SD, through 3D glasses, with mono-sound, or backwards, it's none of the filmmaker's business. I've paid for a viewing... I've viewed it how I prefer.

Philosophy: A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...