The Atlantic published an article on March 11, 2019 by David Sims, "Steven Spielberg vs. Netflix." Spielberg believes content from Netflix should not be considered for Academy Awards, and he's mounted a campaign against Netflix in this regard. I wholeheartedly support Mr. Spielberg, and I wrote the following response to Mr. Sims.
Hello, Mr. Sims:
I’m responding to your article, “Steven Spielberg vs. Netflix.”
By the way, I’m not an employee or member of the film industry. However, I’m an extremely well-informed consumer and a very objective fan of the film industry.
That said, I’m in complete support of Steven Spielberg’s position that film content from internet-based providers should be restrained from consideration for Academy Awards and similar recognition. Why?
The “theatrical” release of film is and should be “self-explanatory,” it means films are actually EXHIBITED in a motion picture theater. There’s an enormous difference between the “theatrical experience” of motion pictures versus the “broadcast” of a film on television or via the internet, social media, or platforms specifically designed for “personal or individual” access via personal digital assistants and related computer-based devices. To compare the theatrical distribution of motion pictures versus "personal or individual" computer-based platforms is, most respectfully, ridiculous or worse, just stupid. Here’s why:
1. Unlike television, smart phones, desktop and laptop computers, and home theater systems, only theatrical exhibition offers no distractions between the viewer and the motion picture screen, which additionally, is intentionally large (30 to 90 feet wide by 10 to 30 feet tall or larger) to capture the "audiences" undivided attention.
2. The film’s director, writer, and other film industry professionals (sound, lighting, production design, etc.) intentionally craft a film using various cinematic techniques, including color and/or black and white, film noir, bird’s eye view, worm’s eye view, wide shot, 3-D, stereo, wide-angle shot, horizon shot, close-up, special effects, etc.) to tell-the-story in such a manner as to prompt “audience" involvement in the story.
3. As originally intended by legendary “Hollywood” studio executives, the “theatrical exhibition” of motion pictures is the absolute closest thing to the “theatrical experience” of watching a Broadway play, which like a stage play, or going-out-to-dinner, or attending an athletic event (football, basketball, soccer, baseball, track and field, golf, etc.) is intentionally an external “audience” event outside the home.
4. Theatrical film exhibition as successfully practiced since the dawn of the film industry (and effectively managed by the National Association of Theatre Owners) is strategically designed to provide an “audience” with the absolute best SOUND and VIDEO experience to accurately convey the creative intent of a film’s director, writer, and other film industry professionals. In fact, the film industry is overwhelmingly responsible for more technological achievements in sound, cameras, film processing, digital film production, make-up, special effects, animation, computer science, etc. than any other media, especially television! For example, you do realize, don’t you, the film industry is solely responsible for the wide screen format, not television. You do realize, don’t you, the film industry is solely responsible for stereo sound, not the recording industry.
5. Most importantly, there’s a significantly greater financial risk to produce and distribute a "theatrical motion picture" for diverse U.S. domestic “audiences” and international “audiences” than to produce a “video" product for narrowly defined vertical product pipelines established for television, direct-to-video, or Netflix. In this regard, Netflix wants the recognition of the Hollywood system and the Academy Awards® but without incurring the financial risk of releasing its product in actual exhibition theaters where “audiences” of people go to see motion pictures. That’s blatantly disingenuous, deceitful, cheap, and even lazy.
The key word above is “audience,” not convenience. Theatrical film production is akin to an “entertainment or sporting event,” that literally involves leaving home and going “out.” The “convenience” provided by Netflix for “personal or individual” access via personal digital assistants and related computer-based devices (again, television, smart phones, desktop and laptop computers, and home theater system) does not establish equivalency. Simply put, a frozen TV dinner (Netflix) is not equivalent to dinner at the Olive Garden Restaurant (theatrical film exhibition).
Frankly, in my view, the overwhelming majority of films seen on Netflix are not worthy of theatrical exhibition, because most function as “TV” (grab the remote, hit pause, and I’ll come back to it) movies - period. Yes, sadly, there are several theatrically released films that also function more like “TV” content than as a film we must-leave-home-and-go-see-it-at-the-movie-theatre-ASAP! Nevertheless, it’s counterproductive to combine these two platforms. If Netflix wants its “product” to be considered akin to feature films then it must release such films “theatrically” as required for all films released via the theatrical motion picture platform.
Just because a Chevrolet (Netflix) has four-(4) wheels, heating, bucket seats, air conditioning, cruise control, power steering, power brakes, etc., does not mean it’s equivalent to a Mercedes-Benz S-Class Sedan (Disney). In fact, Disney clearly recognizes this fact, because theatrical exhibition is the exclusive platform to launch its extremely successful (Mercedes S-Class Sedan) Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) content (i.e., Iron Man, The Avengers, The Hulk, etc.); conversely, Disney confined its "Chevrolet” MCU content such as Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Punisher, The Defenders, Daredevil, and Jessica Jones to Netflix, or to ABC-TV (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.), or to Hulu (Runaways), or to Freeform (Cloak & Dagger). It’s just that simple.
Again, the key word above is “audience,” not convenience. Theatrical film production is akin to an “entertainment or sporting event,” that literally involves leaving home and going “out.” The “convenience” provided by Netflix for “personal or individual” access via personal digital assistants and related computer-based devices (again, television, smart phones, desktop and laptop computers, and home theater system) does not establish equivalency.
Again, simply put, a frozen TV dinner (Netflix) is not equivalent to dinner at the Olive Garden Restaurant (theatrical film exhibition). Steven Spielberg is correct that film content from internet-based providers should be restrained from consideration for Academy Awards and similar recognition.
I welcome your feedback.
Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com
Reynolds' Rap
March 12, 2019
© 2017-2019 Tripoetry. All Rights Reserved.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
