Netflix Canada Discussion

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

I don't think they're satirizing that at all. I think they think it's funny to 'fool' people and coming close to the truth is the only way they can do that.

For example:



In this day and age doesn't sound like something that wouldn't happen.

Or:


Which if you read the entire article, obviously satire, but they chose to use a headline that's possible that more or less happened.

you're not consuming the content properly, you keep talking about reading the articles. that's not what you do, you hear the show.
it's a show, they don't make articles they produce a radio show. if you don't get it maybe just move on.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by handgroen

you're not consuming the content properly, you keep talking about reading the articles. that's not what you do, you hear the show.
it's a show, they don't make articles they produce a radio show. if you don't get it maybe just move on.

No he's right, they have articles too. This whole thing started because I mistakenly posted one making fun of it, only to realize it wasn't real.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

No he's right, they have articles too. This whole thing started because I mistakenly posted one making fun of it, only to realize it wasn't real.

Okay. That's fair enough, it's a print article, but... still.. ??? The bolded parts? How could you read that and not doubt the seriousness of the article?

A media watchdog group is promoting a bill that would force Netflix Canada to remove all foreign content and stream only Canadian productions. To tell us why, we spoke with Richard Tapliski of the Moose Media Foundation.
"Our intention is that Netflix Canada would slowly, over time, remove all foreign content," said Tapliski. "Netflix Canada needs to recognize that we have so many—well, we have several—really great Canadian productions."

In order to further illustrate his point, Tapliski compared Canadians to children, saying that Canadian content is like muesli cereal and international content is like a bowl of candy: even though one is nutritious, the other is the obvious choice.

"That is what's happening with our content," said Tapliski. "When we turn on our screens in Canadian homes, there's a whole candy store for you. Meanwhile, our bowl of muesli is tucked away in the back."
For this reason, Tapliski argues, Canadians shouldn't be allowed to choose at all.


"We need to get rid of the candy so that what we have left is this very wholesome, nutritious bowl of muesli," he said.
Listen to the full story to find out why he believes CBC's Heartland is just as good as HBO's Game of Thrones.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Okay. That's fair enough, it's a print article, but... still.. ??? The bolded parts? How could you read that and not doubt the seriousness of the article?

I take it you don't follow the news much nowadays.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by fleury

What is everyone's theory on Making a Murderer? I personally believe he did it, and probably Dassey was involved, but given our system and the reasonable doubt aspect, I think both of them should have been found not guilty. I do think the cops were a bunch of meatheads, and the defense did an amazing job, but there seemed to be so much that had to be planted and such a big conspiracy for all this to happen with none of the conspirators talking about it. I do believe they had it in for him and focused on him right away though, which was probably not right. But everyone came across as very dis-likeable on that prosecution team.

I honestly don't know if Avery did it. What I do believe is that there was not enough evidence to convict.

There was even less evidence against Dassey.

[Locke]

I think the thing that really gets me is the absolute incompetence and complete disregard for Justice from the local Police Department.

[Poe969]

so are there any new and good movies or shows to get into on Netflix? I"ve really enjoyed most of their original work, at least with shows.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Poe969

so are there any new and good movies or shows to get into on Netflix? I"ve really enjoyed most of their original work, at least with shows.

I watched Hidden Figures last night. I thought it was a really well done movie.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Weitz

I watched Hidden Figures last night. I thought it was a really well done movie.

I watched all of the Oscar Winning movies and in my opinion Hidden Figures was better than all of them.

[nik-]

I liked Hidden Figures as well, but I'm a ridiculous Taraji P Henson fanboy for some reason, so that might have made me biased.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by getbak

Another great season of Bojack. Incredible show that can make you go from howling laughter to punched-in-the-gut sadness in no time flat.

Agreed. Really enjoyed season 4.

Spoiler!

This season felt less depressing the season 3. Really liked the ending.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Finally got around to Daredevil season 2.

Really like it. Exceptionally well done. Solid from top to bottom.

Except I have to wonder about the NY court system. They go from arrest to trial to verdict in like a week in what would probably be the biggest trial in the history of the US.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Locke

I watched all of the Oscar Winning movies and in my opinion Hidden Figures was better than all of them.

Hidden Figures was good, but felt like 90s Oscar bait.
Moonlight was an artful masterpiece not often honored by the Acadamy.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by fleury

What is everyone's theory on Making a Murderer? I personally believe he did it, and probably Dassey was involved, but given our system and the reasonable doubt aspect, I think both of them should have been found not guilty. I do think the cops were a bunch of meatheads, and the defense did an amazing job, but there seemed to be so much that had to be planted and such a big conspiracy for all this to happen with none of the conspirators talking about it. I do believe they had it in for him and focused on him right away though, which was probably not right. But everyone came across as very dis-likeable on that prosecution team.

Dassey I'm pretty positive was not involved. The kid didn't know the meaning of the word "inconsistent". What went on during that interrogation was pretty shameful police work.

As for Avery. I have no clue. The documentary would have me leaning towards no. But the fact that I don't know means he should have been found not guilty IMO. The fact that key pieces of evidence were discovered by cops who were not supposed to be on the premises due to previous conflicts with Avery was a reason to dismiss the case on it's own IMO.

The trouble I have is why would these people go to such lengths to frame this loser?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Dassey I'm pretty positive was not involved. The kid didn't know the meaning of the word "inconsistent". What went on during that interrogation was pretty shameful police work.

As for Avery. I have no clue. The documentary would have me leaning towards no. But the fact that I don't know means he should have been found not guilty IMO. The fact that key pieces of evidence were discovered by cops who were not supposed to be on the premises due to previous conflicts with Avery was a reason to dismiss the case on it's own IMO.

The trouble I have is why would these people go to such lengths to frame this loser?

I think if you're going only by what is presented in the documentary (I haven't heard anything reputable come out from the prosecution side that would make me believe they were being fair in any way), there was obviously a murder (boyfriend seems most likely), who framed Avery. Corrupt police department saw this whole thing as a win for them and weren't going to look a gift horse in the mouth.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

Hidden Figures was good, but felt like 90s Oscar bait.
Moonlight was an artful masterpiece not often honored by the Acadamy.

You're going to call Hidden Figures 90s Oscar bait and then point to Moonlight?

Moonlight was pure Oscar bait. The only difference was that it worked. How many edgy themes can be wedged into a single film? Moonlight must hold the record.

They were both good movies I just found Hidden Figures to be more genuine.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Locke

You're going to call Hidden Figures 90s Oscar bait and then point to Moonlight?

Moonlight was pure Oscar bait. The only difference was that it worked. How many edgy themes can be wedged into a single film? Moonlight must hold the record.

They were both good movies I just found Hidden Figures to be more genuine.

Hidden Figures had a good story to tell. It just felt overly formulaic or cliche in how it told the story. There could have been good screen time devoted to math and physics, and instead some of it was spent on a stupid BBQ / church scene that literally had nothing to do with anything.

[KTrain]

Originally Posted by Wormius

There could have been good screen time devoted to math and physics, and instead some of it was spent on a stupid BBQ / church scene that literally had nothing to do with anything.

Except they wanted to show the women as human beings and not just math/science/engineering robots. They had lives and families outside of NASA, which made their accomplishments that much more impressive.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Locke

You're going to call Hidden Figures 90s Oscar bait and then point to Moonlight?

Moonlight was pure Oscar bait. The only difference was that it worked. How many edgy themes can be wedged into a single film? Moonlight must hold the record.

They were both good movies I just found Hidden Figures to be more genuine.

Nothing about a small movie like Moonlight felt like a prestige movie. Hidden Figures, La La La, Fences and even to a certain extent Manchester by the Sea were clearly placed to be Oscar plays.

Moonlight by comparison was small intersectional story about one person's experience. There wasn't anything cynical about Moonlight, it is authentic and honest.
Moonlight didn't even have a major studio behind it. It was an A24 film. It's an art house film and was rewarded.

I mean it probably won because if ranked balloting and a split between La La Land and Hacksaw Ridge. But that's another topic.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by KTrain

Except they wanted to show the women as human beings and not just math/science/engineering robots. They had lives and families outside of NASA, which made their accomplishments that much more impressive.

That's fine, but surely there was a more interesting story to tell there. Maybe it's just me, but it felt like filler. There are a lot of good historical-based films that don't need to go into the personal lives of the characters to be interesting. Does it make the film better at all? I understand that they had a life outside of NASA, but the parts they chose to depict in some scenes was quite boring. Yes, it showed they have a life and they did mundane things like have BBQs, go on dates, etc. This is where I feel like the whole "focus group" methodology of movie making comes into play. Some guy or girl probably said, "oh, we need to check of these boxes - romantic elements; sitting down for dinner with the family; fashion montage; etc"

This is what really kills me when watching a movie;some needless romance shoehorned in from out of nowhere just to appease some segment of the audience.