It’s Official: Streaming Is Now Just Cable, But Somehow Much Worse – SlashFilm


Streaming can’t be that bad, right? Viewers at home now have the ability to find thousands upon thousands of titles at their fingertips, making film and television more accessible now than arguably any other moment in history. Savvy filmmakers continue to take full advantage of platforms like Netflix and Apple TV+, which give the opportunity to make the kinds of bold yet risky features that traditional studios have suddenly become terrified to produce and distribute for the big screen. And best of all, we’re able to enjoy such convenience without the intrusion of pesky ads and commercial breaks. It’s a win-win-win … isn’t it?

Well, if only it were that simple. Disney, WBD, and Comcast would love nothing more than to have customers believe that their respective streaming bundles are the inevitable next step to a brighter and more viewer-friendly experience, but that’s not quite the case. For one thing, our media landscape remains just as fractured as ever. Rather than having a smorgasbord of options laid out right in front of us, as was the case during the days of cable, the reality is working-class families still need to shell out more money for access to increasingly splintered entertainment choices. Want to curl up with comfort-food viewing after a long day of work? Well, “Abbott Elementary” fans, “Fallout” obsessives, and those of us going through “Brooklyn Nine-Nine” all over again better be prepared to purchase three separate — and pricey — bundling subscriptions.

Oh, and despite all that money already down the drain, you’re still expected to foot the increasingly expensive bill to go ad-free (which, of course, was supposed to be the entire point of streaming). We’re supposed to believe that bundling is the cost-effective future? Let’s just say that we remain highly skeptical.

#Official #Streaming #Cable #Worse #SlashFilm