A few days ago, I spent my night watching movies on Netflix with my girlfriend. We scrolled through its virtual library, indecisive and frustrated. The “good” movies we’ve already seen two or three times. We found ourselves in the depths of the C-list movies, and after about an hour of bickering over which obscure movie to take a chance on, we re-watched Transformers for the third time.
Transformers is an entertaining movie and all, but when it comes to Netflix, I seem to continually find myself obligated to either settle on a movie I’m not entirely sure I want to watch or rewatch one I’ve already seen.
The way we have grown to use Netflix reveals some deep seated social issues. The ignorance and irresponsibility of mass consumers have shaped the program into a tool for creating binge-watching addicts.
On the technical side of things, Netflix is the best medium of its kind. It’s convenient, affordable, straightforward and simple. There is no doubt it deserves to be as popular as it is. Its nature, though, of giving complete power to the consumer, is problematic.
The over-consumption of movies redefines the purpose of a film, and creates a less fulfilling experience.
The free access to over 3,000 movies and complete television series has led to viewers who feel like they literally cannot stop watching. I’ve heard many stories of friends who let entire weekends be consumed by watching a television series from start to finish without even leaving their homes.
Many cannot seem to handle the sort of control and freedom Netflix provides; they just don’t know where to draw the line and say when they’ve had enough.
The over-consumption of movies has begun to redefine the purpose of a film as well as create a less fulfilling experience. Movies have turned into a tool of procrastination and a way to fill the void of our boredom and laziness. In the past, with DVD rentals, one or two movies a week was enough; now, two or three movies are watched in one sitting.
Since we have the capability, we jump from one movie right to the next, and we don’t allow ourselves to critically analyze or appreciate the quality of an individual film. It does not really matter if the film is thought provoking, wildly entertaining, or of good quality; Netflix invites us to watch a movie just for the sake of watching something.
It can be a movie you’ve already watched, or simply a recognizable title — as long as a movie looks mildly entertaining, it’s good enough to be added to the six hour movie marathon you have “unintentionally” started to avoid doing anything productive.
The Internet gives us access to a ridiculous amount of content, and Netflix is just one of the many tools we as consumers use to abuse this access. In an ideal world, we would learn to use this tool simply as a means to enjoy many films. Instead, we use it to rot away our time and destroy the value of a movie.
How exactly does watching a lot of films “destroy the value of a movie”? It seems naïve to assume that having the choice of watching several films in sequence (binge-watching, as they call it) will belittle people’s ability to critically engage with the material — that’s why art house cinemas have run double bills and people have hosted movie marathons long before most people watching Netflix were even born. If you’re the kind of person who likes to critically engage with films, I doubt Netflix or any similar service is going to make that more difficult.
On the contrary, I think giving people (especially those relatively new to film) the economic and personal freedom to explore a wide array of movies will end up increasing their appreciation for the form, rather than marginalizing it. It’s a mistake to assume people will devalue an art form because it becomes more accessible to them: when you make these films available to people and cheaper than going to the theater, you increase their opportunity to seek out works they wouldn’t otherwise have seen, and you make it easier for people to develop a passion for film in our increasingly technocratic, short-attention-span world. I love the experience of sitting in a theatre with a bunch of people and watching a film on celluloid; lots of people would no doubt agree with me. But the way that people consume and process art is changing, and frankly I’m thankful for Netflix taking its part to keep the medium of film afloat, and helping it adapt to our modern age.
The problem here isn’t that Netflix is encouraging us to watch a lot of movies. We’ve been capable of moving straight from one piece of music to another, or one painting to another, or one book to another for centuries.
There are two ways Netflix contributes to this issue (and ease-of-access ain’t one of ’em): one is the way that title demand fuels content licensing and availability on Netflix, and how the ensuing recursion narrows the breadth of cinema available through a major consumption platform. Historical, arthouse, or otherwise “fringe” content is pared away in favour of material that is easily compartmentalized for large, overlapping demographics. This is how they keep costs low. It also makes it much, much harder for great work without an instant broad appeal to reach an audience.
To this end, the other problem is the way Netflix encourages browsing. It rewards our immediate impulses by bringing us “similar” content. The lack of browsing by alphabet or by year is not an accident; the site’s express intent is to identify your demographic placement and keep you there, or at most hold your hand and show you where else you’re allowed to go. There are blinders in all shapes and sizes, even for the would-be connoisseur.
It’s surely a useful service in many ways (I’m a subscriber myself, with somewhat mixed feelings), but its use by many as THE primary media platform, or worse, the primary tool for recommendation and discovery, actively encourages myopia. Reduction in critical appreciation does not come from availability. It comes from bedding down in your comfort zone and letting challenges pass you by.