←back to thread

641 points shortformblog | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.284s | source
Show context
softwaredoug ◴[] No.42949755[source]
These are movies nobody is lining up to syndicate, for a company desperate for cash. Why not dump them on YouTube and get a bit of ad revenue? It’s low effort relative to the income it generates. Even if it’s unlikely to make much money.
replies(1): >>42949880 #
ninth_ant ◴[] No.42949880[source]
The why not is because it potentially devalues the prestige of the individual work’s IP, and the brand in general.

This is short-term optimization, par for the course with the new Disovery-owned Warner Bros.

replies(5): >>42950203 #>>42950258 #>>42950274 #>>42951067 #>>42953932 #
marinmania ◴[] No.42950203[source]
I thought that at first, but if you look at the movies its hard to say any have much prestige? And you could probably make the case that getting more eyeballs on it will, if anything, make them a bit more valuable in 10 years. I still remember watching the same shitty movies on cable over and over as a kid just because they were available, and I imagine those movies have a higher place in the collective memory now because they were available.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7Eup7JXScZyvRftA2Q5h...

Though I would imagine if you were Tom Hanks or Ryan Reynolds you may be upset some of your least popular work is now the most accessible.

replies(1): >>42964786 #
1. philistine ◴[] No.42964786[source]
Well, if any of these movies ever end up in a box like this I'm going to feel ripped off. That's the prestige those movies have now lost.

https://shop.warnerbros.co.uk/products/warner-bros-100th-ann...