Netflix Wants Plots Explained Multiple Times Because Viewers Are on Their Phones, Matt Damon Says - Slashdot

Netflix Wants Plots Explained Multiple Times Because Viewers Are on Their Phones, Matt Damon Says - Slashdot
Close
binspam
dupe
notthebest
offtopic
slownewsday
stale
stupid
fresh
funny
insightful
interesting
maybe
offtopic
flamebait
troll
redundant
overrated
insightful
interesting
informative
funny
underrated
descriptive
typo
dupe
error
180615290
story
Netflix has begun asking filmmakers to adjust their storytelling approach to account for viewers who are scrolling through their phones while watching, according to Matt Damon. The traditional action movie formula involves three major set pieces distributed across the first, second, and third acts. Netflix now wants a large action sequence in the opening five minutes to hook viewers.
The streamer has also suggested that filmmakers reiterate plot points "
three or four times in the dialogue
" to accommodate distracted audiences, he said. "It's going to really start to infringe on how we're telling these stories," Damon said.
You may like to read:
Dumbphone Owners Have Lost Their Minds
Music Insiders Call for Warning Labels After AI-Generated Band Gets 1 Million Plays On Spotify
Restaurants, Bars Say They're Getting Squeezed by Rising Music Licensing Costs
'Everyone is Stealing TV'
AMC Warns Moviegoers To Expect '25-30 Minutes' of Ads and Trailers
DC Studios Chief Says Movie Industry Is 'Dying,' Claims Disney 'Killed' Marvel With Output Mandates
Valve Has 'Significantly' Rewritten Steam's Rules For How Developers Must Disclose AI Use
This discussion has been archived.

No new comments can be posted.
Netflix Wants Plots Explained Multiple Times Because Viewers Are on Their Phones, Matt Damon Says
More
Netflix Wants Plots Explained Multiple Times Because Viewers Are on Their Phones, Matt Damon Says
Comments Filter:
All
Insightful
Informative
Interesting
Funny
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Red_Chaos1
( 95148 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:12PM (
#65934904
...people can learn to put their damn phones down for a while. Understand that it's not good to constantly be attached to devices consuming metric tons of short form, stop chasing the constant dopa hit. If you're going to watch a movie or something, then actually watch it.
Share
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
dskoll
( 99328 )
writes:
However, IMO movie-makers should shorten their damn films and cut out so much fluff. I maintain that if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
markdavis
( 642305 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:38PM (
#65934960
>"However, IMO movie-makers should shorten their damn films and cut out so much fluff. I maintain that if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story."
That depends. Not all GOOD stories can be told in that short of a time. I would rather have it longer than split into a SECOND PART movie that is released a year or something later. Even worse when they fill it with fluff AND split it up into multiple movies. Ug.
In any case, no way should movies be altered to deal with idiots who can't bother to watch what they are watching.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Anne Thwacks
( 531696 )
writes:
no way should movies be altered to deal with idiots who can't bother to watch what they are watching.
Making movies that people don't watch might initially appear stupid, but the more discerning of us realize that if the viewers can't be bothered to watch, then the movie is probably repetative garbage already, and making it more repetative is probably not going to help.
Some movies should never be released. Probably quite a lot of them.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
markdavis
( 642305 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:36PM (
#65935144
>"Imagine you're Netflix, and a paying customer says "I am paying you to show me this stuff I'm not watching, and I am becoming somewhat disappointed. What are you going to do about this?What would you say to this paying customer, who is representative of millions of paying customers?"
I don't know. I guess make an alternate version available for them? Or add some plot summary available on hotkeys or menus in the app?
What would I say to the even more millions of customers asking why the movies have become incredibly stupid and redundant and start dropping service?
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
votsalo
( 5723036 )
writes:
Or add some plot summary available on hotkeys or menus in the app?
Or ask out loud your TV to give you a recap, and it does so, bringing up the relevant scenes.
Or your TV will watch you and what you do on your smartphone, determine which important scenes you didn't watch, and repeat them for you. So you don't miss a thing. Maybe bring up a pop up window on your smartphone when the villain goes for the kill.
Or you can enable the "distracted viewing" setting on your remote, so the TV will extend the movie accordingly.
In any case, they shouldn't make the movies differently.
Re:
Score:
by
Tailhook
( 98486 )
writes:
I don't know. I guess make an alternate version available for them?
That's not a bad idea. There are significant parts of movies I've re-watched a few times that I always skip. A few times I've revisited a series and watched only specific parts: Chernobyl and Mindhunter an example of this. There is a lot of potential in this idea.
Re:
Score:
by
TimothyHollins
( 4720957 )
writes:
no way should movies be altered to deal with idiots who can't bother to watch what they are watching.
Imagine you're Netflix, and a paying customer says "I am paying you to show me this stuff I'm not watching, and I am becoming somewhat disappointed. What are you going to do about this?"
What would you say to this paying customer, who is representative of
millions
of paying customers?
Do you find a way to keep taking their money, or do you close up the video business and open a tire shop instead?
Personally I would tell them to go elsewhere, but my goals in life are not about money. If your only understanding of life is "money == better person", which I presume is the driving force of big business CEOs, then money from customers trumps movie quality every day of the week.,
Re:
Score:
by
rundgong
( 1575963 )
writes:
I would rather have it longer than split into a SECOND PART movie that is released a year or something later.
That sucks for sure. But if it gets longer than maybe 3 hours or so, then I think they should just release it as a tv mini series instead. Or at least have chapters that indicate good points to take a break, so I can tell the streaming app "pause at the next chapter".
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Funny)
by
Stormwatch
( 703920 )
writes:
`rodrigogirao' `at' `hotmail.com'
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:00PM (
#65935034
Homepage
if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story.
No wonder
The Lord of the Rings
was such a critical and financial failure!
/s
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
dskoll
( 99328 )
writes:
I suffered through having to read LoTR in Grade 12 English. Of course any movie based on that would have to be interminably long.
Tolkien is one of those authors that you either love or you hate, and enough people love his work to make the movies a success.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
GoJays
( 1793832 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:18PM (
#65935094
if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story.
Schindler's List
Titanic
Ben-Hur
Spartacus
Gone with the Wind
The Matrix
The Sound of Music
Oppenheimer
Dances with Wolves
JFK
All these movies are over 100 minutes long and all of them tell a pretty good story.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
vux984
( 928602 )
writes:
Titanic? Really? I had more empathy for the guy whose car they defiled than either character. Hundreds of actual real people died on that ship so we could have a back drop to a trite and unbelievably sappy romance about fictional characters? The ending was beyond annoying too with the whole throwing a unique priceless heirloom into the ocean, you know to "let go" of Jack. you know -- that boy she knew for almost 4 whole days.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
GoJays
( 1793832 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @05:27PM (
#65935558
Titanic received Academy Awards for: Best Picture, Best Director, Cinematography, Art Direction, Costume, Visual Effects, Sound, Sound Effects Editing, Film Editing, Original Dramatic Score, and Original Song.
Tied with Ben-Hur and Return of the King for the most awards given to a single movie... It is also the
3rd highest grossing movie of all-time adjusted for inflation
[imdb.com]
Universally approved by critics, the media and viewers as a great movie.... but you don't like the love story, so it must be a horrible film.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
vux984
( 928602 )
writes:
I'm well aware. It was a subject matter that appealed to a wide audience. It had very high budget, and was a project Cameron was passionate about. It was very well constructed technically. The costuming and set design was beautiful, with fantastic attention to detail. The cinematography, visual effects, and sound editing were all top notch too. It genuinely deserved *most* of the awards it won.
But you can have a very very well produced very very stupid movie.
It was was dumb screenplay. The love story was pa
Re:
Score:
by
syn3rg
( 530741 )
writes:
Titanic received Academy Awards for: Best Picture, Best Director, Cinematography, Art Direction, Costume, Visual Effects, Sound, Sound Effects Editing, Film Editing, Original Dramatic Score, and Original Song.
I'll take that with a grain of salt, because the next year "
Shakespeare in love
[imdb.com]" beat "
Saving Private Ryan
[imdb.com]" for
Best Picture, Best Screenplay, and best Art Direction
[wikipedia.org].
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
by
diffract
( 7165501 )
writes:
The Titanic is probably the worst movie I've ever seen. 3 hours for a ship that hits an iceberg and sinks
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
by
dfarrow
( 1683868 )
writes:
It was so predictable, I called the ship sinking within the first 10 minutes!
Re:
Score:
by
techno-vampire
( 666512 )
writes:
You left these out:
Birth of a Nation
The Longest Day
Around the World in 80 Days
The Ten Commandments
The last being 220 minutes, not counting the overture, intermission and exit music. Yes, it really has a built-in intermission.
Re:
Score:
by
kbrannen
( 581293 )
writes:
Back in the old days,
:) there were multiple movies that had built in intermissions beyond "The Ten Commandments". There are at least 3 others I can think of off the top of my head:
* My Fair Lady
* The Sound of Music
* Reds
* 2001 A Space Odyssey (?)
* Fantasia (?)
(in addition to "Gone with the Wind" and "Ben-Hur" from the first list). I have vague memories of the last 2 having intermissions as well, but I'm less sure about them. I'm sure there are others.
"Monty Python and the Holy Grail" is another with an int
Re:
Score:
by
spitzak
( 4019 )
writes:
2001 had an intermission, right after the two are discussing terminating HAL inside the pod.
It also had a minute or two black screen at the start with music, which I have never seen.
Re:
Score:
by
93 Escort Wagon
( 326346 )
writes:
However, IMO movie-makers should shorten their damn films and cut out so much fluff. I maintain that if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story.
Not all movies are simple shoot-em-up or drive-and-crash-fast-cars fare that requires little-to-no character or story buildup.
It's hard to see how
Lawrence of Arabia
could've been the film it is if the studio had dictated to David Lean "You need to cut at least 100 minutes from this film before we'll release it".
And it would be a poorer world if Kurosawa had been told "Sorry, Akira, but there's no way anybody's gonna sit through 3.5 hours for this
Seven Samurai
slog of yours".
And boy, the theaters were sure
Re:
Score:
by
Registered Coward v2
( 447531 )
writes:
However, IMO movie-makers should shorten their damn films and cut out so much fluff. I maintain that if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story.
90+ is a normal runtime for films, with some today running that long. Blade Runner, Lion King, Godfather Part II, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, High Noon, Paths of Glory. Years ago they even had an intermission.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
by
OrangeTide
( 124937 )
writes:
If you only have 100 minutes to spare then consider reading a book or practicing a language or instrument. Maybe film and theater isn't for you.
Re:
Score:
by
itsme1234
( 199680 )
writes:
I maintain that if you can't tell your story in 100-110 minutes, you don't know how to tell a story.
Ironically "The Martian" (yes, starring Matt Damon) at over 2h couldn't cover quite a bit of the book. There was there enough material for a mini-series (possibly more than mini). Also the level they could've gone to explain the science behind was limitless, without straying at all from the book. Enough material to end up with quite a few cliffhangers too.
Re:
Score:
by
arglebargle_xiv
( 2212710 )
writes:
Well I dunno. Take
this story
[youtube.com] for example, you really need to watch the full ten-odd hours to see all the nuances. It just wouldn't work if you started chopping out pieces to make it shorter.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
by
TJHook3r
( 4699685 )
writes:
I'm guessing you really, really hate prog-rock? Too much filler, not enough solos/choruses?
Re:
Score:
by
Kisai
( 213879 )
writes:
Nah, if I could make the rules, I would make sure no film is ever made again.
Make everything multi-part drama's, not like a TV series, but as a 2, 4 or 6 hour "story" with firm breaks at every hour. Put that film production to good use to tell the story that needs to be told, and break it exactly where it needs to, and not these "it has to be exactly 90-110 minutes because god forbid seats are empty long enough in a theatre to clean it."
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
by
zawarski
( 1381571 )
writes:
Agreed. If I have to go pee while watching your movie, it's too long.
Re:
Score:
by
fropenn
( 1116699 )
writes:
However, IMO movie-makers should shorten their damn films and cut out so much fluff
My favorite film critic, Roger Ebert, said something like: 'no good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough.'
And he sat through many, many, many terrible movies.
Re:
Score:
by
xeoron
( 639412 )
writes:
Not only that... a lot of the younger crowd consumes Netflix with subtitles to read, because they are not listening to the words just paying attention to visuals with their phones or on other mediums.
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Insightful)
by
WimBo
( 124634 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:44PM (
#65934970
Homepage
I believe the subtitles trend is more because the sound is recorded at 7.1 channels with the dialog coming from a specific location and too much other noise everywhere else.
If you are watching on a screen with one or two speakers all that noise is indistinguishable
Parent
Share
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Informative)
by
ArchieBunker
( 132337 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:24PM (
#65935114
I'm sorry but actors do mumble today. Listen to any classically trained actor like Christopher Lee, Alan Rickman, Patrick Stewart, Vincent Price, or hell even William Shatner. Every word spoken audibly and distinctly.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
dargaud
( 518470 )
writes:
Indeed. There are actors I cannot stand because I cannot understand a single word. Not so much in US movies, but in other languages, absolutely yes (I'm multilingual).
Re:
Score:
by
h33t l4x0r
( 4107715 )
writes:
or hell even William Shatner. Every word spoken audibly and distinctly.
But - that trend - can - change. We're - human beings - with wills. Not - some - damned machines!
Re: Or, hear me out...
Score:
, Informative)
by
JabberWokky
( 19442 )
writes:
slashdot.com@timewarp.org
on Monday January 19, 2026 @05:28PM (
#65935568
Homepage
Journal
William Shatner is a classically trained Shakespearean actor who appeared in festivals and on Broadway prior to switching from stage to television. His TOS enunciation and emphasis is due mostly to his experience with radio performances (which were over the top verbally) combined with directors on TOS constantly telling him to increase the astonishment. And in reality, wasn't anywhere near as pervasive or dramatic as the pop culture version that pokes fun at Kirk.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
TimothyHollins
( 4720957 )
writes:
KHAAAAAAAAN!
Re:
Score:
by
ratbag
( 65209 )
writes:
No mod points today but your answer is absolutely correct: we have to have the subtitles on even for English-language stuff since otherwise we just get a wall of background+music+speech+effects merged into two low-quality speakers.
Re:
Score:
by
eriks
( 31863 )
writes:
That's part of the problem, but not the whole problem. Even *with* a properly configured and tuned surround-sound system there are an infuriating number of movies and TV shows that sometimes present nearly inaudible dialog for various reasons: actors "whispering" and mumbling is one very real issue, though that *could* be at least mostly corrected by the sound engineer responsible for the final audio mix-down. I think there are directors that are literally doing this on purpose to "enhance realism" or som
Re:
Score:
by
alvinrod
( 889928 )
writes:
If the movie is going to explain the plot for the third time with even more boring exposition, I'm going to be reaching for my phone. I can probably just skip the movie entirely as someone will clip the five minute scene that made it worth watching anyways.
I'm personally okay with a movie ending without understanding everything. Some films intentionally don't explain themselves. Maybe the point was for me to think about it a bit or to be left with a sense of mystery. As long as I don't feel like the movi
Re:
Score:
by
magusxxx
( 751600 )
writes:
Boss: "During the interview when I asked if you were a good multitasker I didn't mean something and your phone."
Re:
Score:
by
Kisai
( 213879 )
writes:
People won't do this for Netflix or Disney+ or any other streaming video (eg youtube)
The reason is simple, if it's not live, they can just pause and rewind it. Ruins immersion but if you want to make a video (or even a video game) and make sure people are paying attention you have to repeat plots points every 20 minutes.
Particularly with video games, you need to assume the player will need to pause even during dramatic story telling moments. So the best way to solve both issues is make sure that the viewer/
Umm, how about nooo?
Score:
by
jjaa
( 2041170 )
writes:
Just film select and actually interesting stories, not every bs every screen writer comes up with
Re:
Score:
by
gwolf
( 26339 )
writes:
Particularly when the screen writers are Gemini, ChatGPT and their friends.
This will encourage more scrolling
Score:
, Insightful)
by
FeelGood314
( 2516288 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:25PM (
#65934920
If you add more redundancy to movies people will scroll more. This is like the geniuses in California that extended red lights because people were running yellow lights. Now lots of people run lights after they have turned red.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
DeanonymizedCoward
( 7230266 )
writes:
Probably increases revenue, though... Lots easier to write and uphold tickets for running a red than quibble about whether the driver had already entered or cleared the intersection when it changed from yellow to red.
As for the Netflix thing: Yeah, this is stupid and feeds into the general inability of anyone to pay attention to anything anymore. Further enshittification of the world to accommodate the lowest common denominator. If they feel the need to do this sort of bullshit, they ought to do it by add
Reminds me of the Teletubbies
Score:
by
gweihir
( 88907 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:47PM (
#65934982
Apparently the average adult is now on the attention level of a toddler
...
Share
What is this about ?
Score:
, Funny)
by
greytree
( 7124971 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:50PM (
#65934998
I only made it halfway through the headline.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
explains all the dupes on slashdot
Dumb.
Score:
by
sabbede
( 2678435 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:57PM (
#65935018
Okay, not only insofar as it is the intentional dumbing-down of their content, it's also a dumb idea in other ways. For one, why bother caring? If people are basically watching Netflix as background noise, let them. What, you want to make sure they know what's going on when they show you they don't care? Why? They're paying their bill, that's all you need to worry about. Worried they'll realize they're wasting money and cancel? Well, stop. They've already demonstrated they're too lazy to bother.
Don't change how you do things for the people who care in order to do something you hope will make the people who don't care happier. That's a losing proposition.
Share
There is this button that lets you rewind
Score:
by
magzteel
( 5013587 )
writes:
There are these buttons that let you rewind and fast forward.
Why not let people use the rewind button to catch up on something they missed instead of making the rest of us skip forward to get past the repetition?
Cancel is the cancer of video streaming
Score:
by
devslash0
( 4203435 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @01:58PM (
#65935024
As if what they're doing wasn't enough to keep people away...
Let's see:
- Insufferable push at originals which are mostly Netflix throwing money at random scripts, hoping that something would stick. Very little does.
- Related to the point above, quatity over quality. It's a spray-and-pray, throw-enough-money-at-it-and-something-may-be-good approach.
- Constant price increases to fund their spending spree on crap.
- Interface changes over the years - even more visibility to originals.
- Big problems withs accessing your account on the go because apparently you're out of your household when being on public/work wifi.
- After all the network locking down their content, all the great titles from Disney and HBO disappeared from the platform.
- Woke D&I and political policies destroying old, great franchises left right and centre.
- Too much content, actually. Good stuff drowns in a river of shit. We really need the ability to permanently hide the content we don't want to see. Yay/Nay thumbs don't do shit.
...and much, much more.
Why would I be paying for that?
I cancelled Netflix the moment The Big Bang Theory appeared on Disney+.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
ZERO1ZERO
( 948669 )
writes:
you make good points but what is this:
I cancelled Netflix the moment The Big Bang Theory appeared on Disney+.
Why do you even care to coment on big bang theory, or Disney ? fuck em. let them do what ever they want? Why let it influence you
Re: Cancel is the cancer of video streaming
Score:
by
devslash0
( 4203435 )
writes:
Because I like TBBT and didn't want to oose access to it but there was literally nothing else on Netflix holding me there?
Re:
Score:
by
ZERO1ZERO
( 948669 )
writes:
I'm sorry for you. It's hard to see the way out when you are inside, but hopefully, one day all will be good Peace.
Re:Cancel is the cancer of video streaming
Score:
, Interesting)
by
dskoll
( 99328 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:10PM (
#65935068
Homepage
Netflix is too "woke" [sic], so you switched to Disney+?
Parent
Share
Re: Cancel is the cancer of video streaming
Score:
, Interesting)
by
cristiroma
( 606375 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:21PM (
#65935104
"Good stuff drowns in a river of shit" - Netflix in one sentence.
Parent
Share
That'll work
Score:
by
ThumpBzztZoom
( 6976422 )
writes:
Netflix Wants Plots Explained Multiple Times Because Viewers Are on Their Phones, Matt Damon Says
Sorry, I was reading this while scrolling, all I got was "Want multiple viewers on their phones, Matt Damon says."
Re:
Score:
by
93 Escort Wagon
( 326346 )
writes:
Why does Netflix want Matt Damon on his phone when he's supposed to be making a movie??
That is the next big thing!
Score:
by
bussdriver
( 620565 )
writes:
I home Netflix doesn't read your comment!
Why bother with the movie when Matt Damon can be group chatting with the audience instead? The "movie" is a set of fictional characters chatting with you interacting with their drama! Perfect for AI to simulate the characters to scale up and all they need is to digitize some famous people to draw them in and market it. (Like a cartoon blows $$$ on famous voices they do not need and probably not as good as a voice actor; it's solely for marketing.)
Re:
Score:
by
bussdriver
( 620565 )
writes:
BTW, my 93 escort wagon rusted out in 2000 but managed a while longer with some crazy welded scrap metal repairs...(like holding the back wheel on, my feet from going into the pavement, and some other bad stuff.) Some sucker bought it in 2005 and managed to blow up the engine within a year so he didn't have to suffer all the other issues waiting to happen. It was a nice little death trap that I could squeak out 50mpg on occasion.
Went to a volvo afterwards with a crappy 20mpg but it was a tank that ran 20
Meta-accommodation
Score:
, Insightful)
by
PseudoThink
( 576121 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @02:06PM (
#65935052
Our customers are distracting themselves from the distractions they are buying from us.
Idiocracy was prophecy, not fiction.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
bussdriver
( 620565 )
writes:
I bet if you block phones, they'd enjoy the movie more or realize it's shit and not... but more likely they've never get to that point because they'd walk out like a chain smoker needs "a break" and also not allow themselves to be put a situation where they are separated from their digital appendage.
Re:
Score:
by
Fly Swatter
( 30498 )
writes:
Could you repeat that? I was in another tab watching a cat video.
Explains a lot
Score:
by
Wokan
( 14062 )
writes:
I always feel completely underwhelmed by Netflix's content lately. This may very well be a big contributing factor.
Maybe they should leave the story telling to story tellers.
Re:
Score:
by
Nadir
( 805 )
writes:
I don't know what ST:Discovery you watched, because I found it pretty awful.
Next: Vertical Videos
Score:
by
allo
( 1728082 )
writes:
Netflix videos should be optimized for vertical devices.
Re:
Score:
by
rossdee
( 243626 )
writes:
You're holding it the wrong way
Re:
Score:
by
Maavin
( 598439 )
writes:
They're on their way, there:
[techcrunch.com]
[deadline.com]
They all are...
We have entered the brain dead movie viewer age.
Score:
by
Fly Swatter
( 30498 )
writes:
The time when movies actually told a story are gone. Yes it has always been about 'more booms' in lieu of plot, but now instead of just repeating the plot during the entire movie, they will need to blow the same things up several times because the first time you were too busy driving the car.
This is great!
Score:
by
oumuamua
( 6173784 )
writes:
Can't count how many times, a key plot point has come up and it is just a single sentence or less; I'm listening intensely and then the key line gets whispered, or mumbled or background music drowns it out and 'damn, missed it'
Unengaging plot
Score:
by
stanjo74
( 922718 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @03:16PM (
#65935240
I'm on my phone because the plot is unengaging. It's usually a bunch of random events and/or "everybody is an idiot" that drive the plot - there is no story line.
Repeating that multiple times doesn't fix it. Most content has turned to background noise for my living room.
Being on my phone is not the cause, it's the effect of unengaging story lines.
Share
My own experience,,.
Score:
by
Cyberpunk Reality
( 4231325 )
writes:
is that I don't watch anything produced by Netflix much anymore, and very little on Netflix at all. My subscription is pretty much running on inertia at this point. Even things that I expect to enjoy, or that I was looking forward to, I typically don't finish. When I want background tv, I put on one of 20th Century series I liked, purchased on DVD and ripped to my media server. This has been a gradual change over the last year or two, but the thread topic brought it to mind.
Re:
Score:
by
BeaverCleaver
( 673164 )
writes:
is that I don't watch anything produced by Netflix much anymore, and very little on Netflix at all. My subscription is pretty much running on inertia at this point. Even things that I expect to enjoy, or that I was looking forward to, I typically don't finish. When I want background tv, I put on one of 20th Century series I liked, purchased on DVD and ripped to my media server. This has been a gradual change over the last year or two, but the thread topic brought it to mind.
Sounds like you are their dream customer. They don't have to produce any content or pay for bandwidth to serve it to you, but you are still giving them money.
How about no!
Score:
by
gabrieltss
( 64078 )
writes:
on Monday January 19, 2026 @03:34PM (
#65935292
If people are more interested in their DAMN phone than the show they are "watching" on Netflix - screw 'em. Let them just re-watch it and maybe the next time they will actually WATCH the damn show. Producers/Directors should tell Netflix to F! off.
Share
Self fulfilling prophecy
Score:
by
BytePusher
( 209961 )
writes:
This is just shitty writing. The final season of Stranger Things did this and it made me pick up my phone out of boredom.
Re:
Score:
by
ambrandt12
( 6486220 )
writes:
Yeah... it seemed like now that they knew the end was in a few episodes, nobody gave a crap anymore.
I watched it, and at the credits... I thought "That was it? You just saved the world in a meager 15-minute battle, and you're just hanging out as friends, like nothing ever happened? And, here... I thought the finale was going to be like full movie length!"... it was almost as lackluster as the finale of Lost (the first two-three seasons were good, by S05 you could tell the crew were getting worn out and st
Why bother?
Score:
by
vanyel
( 28049 )
writes:
Anyone who's "watching" a show on a tiny screen and scrolling around on their phone couldn't care less about the plot anyhow.
Streaming Netflux Pablum
Score:
by
Gilmoure
( 18428 )
writes:
for the masses.
Basically Dick & Jane film styles.
*sigh*
Pablum is a processed cereal for infants originally marketed and co-created by the Mead Johnson & Company in 1931.
A "company" cannot WANT something
Score:
by
Princeofcups
( 150855 )
writes:
john@princeofcups.com
on Monday January 19, 2026 @04:46PM (
#65935468
Homepage
But an executive or board member at Netflix wants to dumb down content. Get the name or names and put a face on this. Try to talk to some of the people who are around these decisions. I mean, try to get in touch with that desktop support guy who's always around the sociopaths. Get the REAL news, and spread that NAME or NAMES with the story. Let's see the squirm. Again, as much as the Supreme Court wants you believe, a company is not an individual , and has no first amendment rights.
Share
The plot?!??!?
Score:
by
Original Curmudgeon
( 10281552 )
writes:
TFS seems to be suggesting that the plot of an action movie actually matters.
Actually, go ahead and explain the plot multiple times. It's an action film; I'm probably not even going to see it anyway, but if I do, I won't be watching it for the logical and intellectual stimulation of a carefully constructed plot, so I won't really be focusing too much on the intricacies of the dialogue.
so 3 plot recaps
Score:
by
Growlley
( 6732614 )
writes:
lead in , titles
,what happened previously , loads of adverts, credits. series are going to go on for every because a 30 minute story is going become a 24 episode season.
How about a clear plot...
Score:
by
mspohr
( 589790 )
writes:
I just watched the latest movie from Damon on Netflix.
No phone to help me understand the plot.
Just a dumb movie with a confused plot and random surprise twists and turns which only served to confuse things further.
I'm still not sure what the movie was about and I'm surely not going to waste time looking it up.
Mills & Boon
Score:
by
NotEmmanuelGoldstein
( 6423622 )
writes:
... the opening five minutes
...
That's been happening for about 10 years and it's not limited to action movies. "Rise of the Pink Ladies" starts with The Bee Gee's "Grease" on a massive outdoor set and the audio quality is brilliant. The singing for the rest of season (is mostly indoors), has muddied vocals and uneven lip-syncing.
... scrolling through their phones
...
Netflix got their money, why do they care about the customer's behaviour: How about more breathless moaning in scripts because people are fucking on the couch? If anything, it means the customer will watch it
In related news...
Score:
by
ZiggyZiggyZig
( 5490070 )
writes:
Someone actually wrote that it is
Dumbphone owners [who] have lost their minds.
[slashdot.org]
Ideas
Score:
by
TJHook3r
( 4699685 )
writes:
I have a few suggestions to help Netflix: 1. be sure to have exposition in virtually every conversation. (eg Stranger Things where characters will start 'wait, so this is.... ' every twenty minutes or so). 2. make sure to reference the name of the film IN conversations, maybe once per half hour. Eg casually mention 'Lord of the Rings' or 'we're in the middle of some kind of Star Wars'. 3. Be sure to run alternative shows for the terminally distracted, I'd suggest a show which is just people getting hit in t
Guess you can play your movies at 2-4x to make up
Score:
by
madbrain
( 11432 )
writes:
Or better yet, infinite x. Don't watch.
Related Links
Top of the:
day
week
month
215
comments
Music Insiders Call for Warning Labels After AI-Generated Band Gets 1 Million Plays On Spotify
191
comments
Restaurants, Bars Say They're Getting Squeezed by Rising Music Licensing Costs
186
comments
'Everyone is Stealing TV'
185
comments
AMC Warns Moviegoers To Expect '25-30 Minutes' of Ads and Trailers
183
comments
DC Studios Chief Says Movie Industry Is 'Dying,' Claims Disney 'Killed' Marvel With Output Mandates
next
Valve Has 'Significantly' Rewritten Steam's Rules For How Developers Must Disclose AI Use
18
comments
previous
Dumbphone Owners Have Lost Their Minds
136
comments
Slashdot Top Deals
The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent.
-- Sagan
Close
Working...