Subject: Re: The Cloverfield Paradox
On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 15:11:17 -0600, trotsky wrote:
> On 2/5/18 8:35 AM, rachel wrote:
>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 05:46:32 -0600, trotsky wrote:
>>> On 2/5/18 5:23 AM, rachel wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 05:03:50 -0600, trotsky wrote:
>>>>> Doesn't sound too good:
>>>> It's being released direct to video rather than in cinemas first. You
>>>> expected better?
>>> You're confused. Netflix produces their own movies now, and this is a
>>> new paradigm in the release channels for movies. Previously they
>>> released "Bright" which was both well received and watched by a
>>> gajillion people. It's weird how few people seem to have a grasp
>>> about how the business of movies is conducted.
>> Blah, blah, blah ...
>> Fact is, I don't recall this Cloverfield Paradox thing getting a wide
>> theatrical release, or even so much as seeing an ad on TV for it.
>> A movie without a theatrical release is direct-to-video, by definition.
>> Now please tell me the last time a direct-to-video sequel of *anything*
>> was anything other than utter crap?
> Wow, that's quite a pile of shit. So my little primer on distribution
> channels of movies went right over your head.
No, it was irrelevant. It was released direct to home-viewing, bypassing
the theatrical release window. And it's a sequel. That makes it a direct-
to-video sequel. Direct-to-video sequels suck. And you even *agreed* that
this particular one sucked!
Why are you now all frothy about it?