If Netflix 'Roma' Wins Best Picture It Will Be Curtains For The Cinema - And Non-Cord Cutters

Among the movies competing for 'Best Picture' at this year's Academy Awards tonight is an aberration entitled "Roma".  It is an aberration because:  a) It was produced by Netflix, which is not a movie company - indeed, it is a streaming service, and b) This service is subsuming the rest of the entertainment industry with its $12 b a year spending, not to mention overloading the landscape with so much fare it's creating "option paralysis".

In the latter case, what we find (WSJ., 'Entertainment Overload', Exchange, p. B1, Feb. 22-23):: "Audiences have been overwhelmed by too many choices"  leading to what Einstein once called "option paralysis". (One reason Einstein opted to wear the same sport coat and trousers every day). The effect of this choice overload inevitably leads to fewer choices being made over time, given the incipient stress accompanying each decision.   

Of course, this isn't new and was originally put forward in the book, 'The Paradox of Choice', by Brian Schwartz, an emeritus professor of psychology at Swarthmore College. The basic assumption is that humans are rational agents and, when offered a set of choices - say for a product- will end up making the optimum one. But Schwartz showed this isn't the case and when humans are offered a surfeit of choice they punt! They either don't make any purchase, or they opt for the first one that comes to mind or in their field of vision.

In the entertainment sphere, including television and  film, that means fewer choices made, fewer movies viewed-  and it could also translate to the streaming screen as well.  In the WSJ piece, Schwartz observes:  "If studios end up spending millions of dollars producing too much new programming they could end up in a situation where they give people everything under the sun and they end up just watching what they watched before."

"Too many choices, America! Not good!"   to quote the late George Carlin in one of his last riffs at the  Beacon Theater in NYC.  Expanding on his premise, Dr Schwartz also noted that an influx of options makes the ultimate choice more an expression of personal identity. In other words, the excess of  choices even in the entertainment sphere, continues to balkanization into different tribes of political (and cultural) identity.

Thus, when there are only five movies to choose from at a multiplex people tend not to put too much stock into their decision.  But increase the choice load to 30 movies it becomes a question of: "Am I the kind of person who would watch this kind of movie?"

Given Netflix  produced "dozens of original films in 2018" and plans even more this year, the streaming service is a primary contributor to overchoice and option paralysis. Worse, it is responsible for many of the younger demographic going on this cord cutting binge which -frankly  - appalls those of us (like wifey and myself) who love to watch films on the big screen, either in the cinema (like 'Alita- Battle Angel' which we saw three days ago in IMAX 3D), or on our 55" TV (where we watch films we missed on the cinema screen).   

Ordinarily we wouldn't give a damn about the cord cutting, streaming cosmos, but the lemming- like abandonment is now forcing higher subscription costs on those of us who remain, as well as ever creeping attrition of viewing choices.  Recent WSJ forecasts in the 'Business &  Investing' pages are also not sanguine about the future of cable TV or Direct TV, where diminishing returns seems to be the byword.

The cord cutting phenomenon is now generating a momentum for streaming on tiny screens which is pathological as well as dumbfounding and aberrant.  This is given so much more vivid entertainment experience is accessible on large screens - especially in theaters.   This is also why - according to the  aforementioned WSJ piece:

"Some Academy members consider 'Roma' an existential threat to a movie business already struggling to get people into theaters for anything but big budget franchise pictures."   

So bottom line these Academy members are Never -Netflixers,  like wifey and myself.  Naturally then, it is logical to think if a streaming flick like Roma wins 'Best Picture'  (god forbid)  it will further accelerate cord cutting, more Netflix viewers, more streaming, which will vastly fuel even more Netflix fare - and more choice overload and option paralysis.   With ever more viewers prone to more option paralysis expect really good, standout screen choices to collapse in lieu of cheaper, easier to produce schlock.

Both cinema choices, quality, not to mention large screen, original TV movies (such as produced by HBO, Showtime) stand to suffer, as a race to the bottom ensues.

But most importantly, it would likely sever the connection between motion pictures and cinema (theater going) forever.  Henceforth, the great majority of people opting to never go out to the cinema but just remain in their personal cocoons streaming flicks on tiny screens. An "atrocity", as Janice so aptly puts it.   I wouldn't use that strong a term, but it's at least aberrational. 

Yes, Roma deserves to win an award:

 'The Best Motion Picture On A Streaming Service'. 

But emphatically not an Oscar, sorry!

------
 My own top picks:

Best Picture:  'Green Book'

Best Director: Spike Lee, 'Blackkklansman'

Best Actor: Viggo Mortensen ('Green Book')

Best Actor in Supporting Role: Mahershala Ali ('Green Book')

Best Actress:  Glenn Close ('The Wife')

Best Actress in  Supporting Role:  Rachel Weisz ('The Favorite')

Share this post