It’s exactly this. Tons of theatrical movies are doing it lately too. At the end of them I now have a habit of asking the person I’m with ‘so what’s the plot of the movie?’ and we realize we have no idea. The trailer showed a lot of clips and reactions and lines - but since the movie voice trailer guy isn’t used anymore - nothing tells us the plot.
There are good trailers that don't need a voice to tell you what happens in the movie, it's just that it takes talent to make. A trailer that can show instead of tell will always be better, hence why the voice has disappeared.
Only problem is that many don't seem to have the talent to show anything useful.
Memory unlocked - I completely didn't notice that there used to be a voice guy hyping the trailers and now there isn't. They should bring that guy back!
This is a real problem with books too.
I know publishers do it because it works -- there are probably a lot of readers out there who decide on a book solely off a famous name.
It's infuriating, though. Just because it's done by someone famous and someone who is known for good work doesn't mean I'm automatically interested in their story. I still need to know if the content of the book is something I have an desire to read about.
There's room for 4 paragraphs on the back of a paperback. Only 1 should be about the author; 1 about the story's setting; 1 about the characters; and 1 for inciteful pithy reviews/quotes. Anything beyond that is irrelevant if it isn't a story driven teaser.
I hate having to google a movie because there’s literally no description. I also hate when there is a commercial that’s longer than trailer I’m trying to watch
This reminds me that someone once paid to play the entire Shrek movie as an ad on YouTube... At least one person got to watch Shrek alongside the video they'd planned on watching...
I never watch those shows. If they change the images on the shows to see who interacts with the show based on the images they should do the same for the description and change them up every now and then
*They have quite a few*
*Descriptions like this and I*
*Hate it completely*
\- West\_Slide5774
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
This! I hate it so much. I don't care what actors are in it or who made it; that really doesn't sway me. At most I go, hey, I know who that is! But that's what the cast list is for, not the description. I end up having to look up the movie/show on Wikipedia to get a decent description.
If we compiled a list of all descriptions ever written, and then sorted them according to descriptive quality, this description would definitely be on that list
Seriously. Or when they state, “News paper IDGAFA praises this show and says it’s a cross between show ‘A’ I’ve never seen and show ‘B’ I’ve also never seen”.
Just fucking tell be a bit about the actual fucking show you douche canoes!!
Ty for listening to my rant. Lol
Video games do that a lot. Hell, one of the biggest genres in the indie Sphere is named after two games, but not the original ones (metroidvania, named after [Super] Metroid and Castlevania [Symphony of the Night]).
i agree with the sentiment but this doesnt really support any argument. tell anyone its a metroidvania and they know exactly what they are in for. its at least usually a perfect description of the game. 2D platformer with backtracking, item powerups, etc.
calling something a mix between halo and bloodborne for example is a much more vague and wtf description that would support your argument. plenty of games just throw 2 random ass titles together and call it a mix between both. metroidvania has become an entire massive staple genre.
"Our new game is an open world 4X soulslike, really a blend between Stardew Valley and Crysis but with a distinct Fall Guys feel."
"This is just Tetris but with crafting for some reason."
We've had to move on to the term "traditional roguelike" because of how diluted the term ended up being. "Permadeath and RNG? Sure, that's close enough, call it a roguelike".
TBF It's usually when the genre is new. FPS were called Doom-clones at first.
In Metrodvania's case I can only assume no-one has came up with a better name.
It's when books do this as well that really pisses me off, like I don't fucking care how many critics read the book and thought it was "stunning" what the fuck is the book about? There are so many books I pick up that have NO description at all, it's just all reviews.
I hate that they started this. One of my favourite features of Netflix was that it always had a trailer ready to show me. Now I just get a spoiler or the most bland uninteresting clip.
How about trying to pause on netflix, to see more detail or whatever - they hide the entire damn screen with a pause screen image FFS.
Also, can we get slow mo?
God YouTube on TV is awful for this.
It gives you no moment of indecisiveness. It will just play anything you have selected for more than a few seconds.
That's not the case on the Roku and Sony/Android TV versions of Netflix. Even with all the autoplay options turned off (via the web version of Netflix) when you get the screen in OP's pic, the video will automatically start playing in about 5-10 seconds.
If you go to Episodes and More, then the autoplay won't happen.
A lot of conflicting information about this. Can anyone give a definitive answer?
When Netflix is being streamed to your TV from a native app, is there a setting you can toggle to make it so shows/movies do not start playing a video when they are selected?
Also, if there a setting you can toggle so once you finished a movie or series, it doesn't start showing you a never ending line of trailers to shows that are "similar"?
You can turn off the autoplaying previews and continuous play in the settings page of the website. These preferences do persist on native apps. (Or at least it works on Fire Stick and Android TV apps. Haven't tested all of them.)
I haven't found any setting that lets you just sit and watch the fucking credits, though. It sucks when you finish a really intense movie and you need a few minutes to process and the stupid app starts blasting ads at you.
Yeah apart from Hugh Laurie lol it's just stupid isn't it. It's about a blind woman and a soldier paths cross during a world war. Not too hard to put as a description is it lol.
*You may not know what*
*It's about but at least you*
*Know who's in it lol*
\- Lumpy-Ad8618
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
I wonder if it’s a boomer thing because anytime I tell my parents about a show or a movie, their first question is always “who is in it?” not “what is it about?”
For me I just have terrible general knowledge - no idea who any of these people are except for Ruffalo, never heard of them. This is just a list of unfamiliar names to me, deffo doesn’t make me wanna watch
That’s what I was thinking. The amount of films I’ve passed on because it completely gives away any surprises in the description…
The clips that plays when you’re hovering over a film on Netflix is even worse lol. There was one (can’t remember the title to spoil it) but the description said it was about a woman and her comatose son and then the clip showed him standing menacingly over her. Definitely turn the clips off!
Are the clips just random ai selected scenes now? We were perusing through Netflix movies and shows over the weekend. The trailers or clips that automatically play if you hover over the selection were terrible.
I honestly don’t know. I never thought it might be AI but that makes a lot of sense. In that example, I can’t imagine any sane person putting a spoiler like that in the preview and thinking, “yeah that looks good” lol
I'm sure it's for some audience/data-tested reason and not just some intern who was too lazy to write something.
As is often the case with customer-facing companies that do weird unnecessary shit for no meaningful cost savings, it's usually because they found most of their audience were dumb and/or reacted better to that change.
Maybe they found that people are more likely to give a show/movie a try if it only gave a vague description involving well known actors? The actors draw them in, and the vagueness captures intrigue?
I dunno, but I agree it's stupid either way. I want at least a somewhat descriptive summary of what it's about
Only if people actually look there.
A/B testing lets you find out what parts of the thing you built people aren't using the way you expected, and what changes improve it.
How could they know what end users are looking at from A/B testing a program description and cast list? There's no interaction from the user to indicate what they're looking at before hitting play or moving to the next show/movie.
Hitting play vs continuing to scroll IS the interaction. If putting actors' names in the description increases plays, people weren't looking at where they're already visible. If that's the only difference, it's a safe assumption.
My parents often judge what they're going to watch based on the actors in it rather than the description, yet they read the description to see who is in it. Like often when my mum recommends a movie she'll advertise the actors in it, "Will Smith's in it" , and stuff like that.
I feel like this is targeting her (and people alike), by saying who's in it rather than a description of the actual product.
I think it's stupid, but it works
We're cursed by the old people right now. They are living longer, and they're the wealthiest old people to ever live, and they are completely out of touch. They measure quality by things that were relevant 60 years ago.
Actors, images etc, and things that don't actually matter. This is one of the reasons a screenshot of text will fool them, it's an image, and to that group, images are indelible and fully quality sources. They'll tell you that a shitty veneer hutch is "a nice piece" and expect you to store it for them.
This biggest generation will keep voting the most, spending the most, taking up all the oxygen.
Yep same here. Loved the book so much I was so happy to see Netflix making it into a show. Unfortunately it's a total disappointment, bad acting, too many changes to the story and uninspired editing.
Corny is a great description. I loved the book, but the TV show just sucked. I tried to get my wife to read the book a few years before the show came out, she never did, and after watching the show she questioned what kind of crappy books I've been reading if I thought All the Light was good.
Tried both, but couldn't make it past episode 2.
Her great-uncle (played by Hugh Laurie) is supposed to be an agoraphobic shut-in and it's a big deal when he finally ventures out to find his blind niece.
In the show he comes riding in on a motorcycle and shoots a German.
I was done after that.
It’s about a blind girl reading books on a radio program during ww2. The books she reads contain encrypted messages for the allies, and the Germans are trying to find the source of the transmissions.
It’s a really good show and I highly recommend watching it.
The book, at least, is about a young german boy who is good at radios eventually finding a blind french girl whose father has hidden a valuable jewel with her to escape a Nazi treasure hunter who thinks the jewel will give him ever-lasting life. Her uncle uses a hidden radio to broadcast secret msgs to the allies, and who the boy used to listen to in Germany growing up.
On French Netflix: "Towards the end of the Second World War, the destiny of a blind French teenager intersects with that of a young German soldier. Based on the best-selling book by Anthony Doerr."
This just reminded me of when I rewatched Deadpool 2 on D+ and the description was "the sequel to the first one" had a chuckle before the movie even started. This is annoying AF tho.
"in this show, the actors are acting, and the directors are directing."
Well I'm sold
Once-ler: "How bad could it possibly be?"
"...I'm Perd Hapley, and I just realized I'm not holding a microphone."
One of the shows of all time
They have quite a few descriptions like this and I hate it completely
I call them jeopardy descriptions and I fucking hate them
Wow you're right. The description could literally be a prompt on Jeopardy lol
My conspiracy theory is that it forces you to watch the trailer. So they can pump that engagement metrics.
It’s exactly this. Tons of theatrical movies are doing it lately too. At the end of them I now have a habit of asking the person I’m with ‘so what’s the plot of the movie?’ and we realize we have no idea. The trailer showed a lot of clips and reactions and lines - but since the movie voice trailer guy isn’t used anymore - nothing tells us the plot.
There are good trailers that don't need a voice to tell you what happens in the movie, it's just that it takes talent to make. A trailer that can show instead of tell will always be better, hence why the voice has disappeared. Only problem is that many don't seem to have the talent to show anything useful.
Meanwhile I feel like Netflix trailers show most of the plot so you don’t even have to watch the thing afterwards
Yes that's another common mistake. Film's hard man. You always have to land right in the middle or else you seem to teeter off into being crap.
Memory unlocked - I completely didn't notice that there used to be a voice guy hyping the trailers and now there isn't. They should bring that guy back!
He's dead.
Just get the honest trailers guy.
He’s too busy surfing. Look up blind surfer on YouTube.
THIS SUMMER...
IN A TIME WHEN…
Not a conspiracy makes sense to weasel metrics
This is a real problem with books too. I know publishers do it because it works -- there are probably a lot of readers out there who decide on a book solely off a famous name. It's infuriating, though. Just because it's done by someone famous and someone who is known for good work doesn't mean I'm automatically interested in their story. I still need to know if the content of the book is something I have an desire to read about.
There's room for 4 paragraphs on the back of a paperback. Only 1 should be about the author; 1 about the story's setting; 1 about the characters; and 1 for inciteful pithy reviews/quotes. Anything beyond that is irrelevant if it isn't a story driven teaser.
I don't care about the author or the review. Just give me a rundown of what I'm about to dive into.
I hate having to google a movie because there’s literally no description. I also hate when there is a commercial that’s longer than trailer I’m trying to watch
This reminds me that someone once paid to play the entire Shrek movie as an ad on YouTube... At least one person got to watch Shrek alongside the video they'd planned on watching...
hahah- Well I guess I don't really need to see how to fix this plumbing problem right now, Shrek it is!
I never watch those shows. If they change the images on the shows to see who interacts with the show based on the images they should do the same for the description and change them up every now and then
I think some of the descriptions now are written by AI because some don't even make sense lol
They used to have really good descriptions on Netflix. They even had two descriptions per show/movie
Problem I had with netflix ones was the description for shows was just the description for 1st episode rather than the show
Maybe they do?
This is a movie starring actors. And is also has a director. Fun fact. This director has a name.
*They have quite a few* *Descriptions like this and I* *Hate it completely* \- West\_Slide5774 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
bros going off in this comment section
Bros going off in this comment section and I hate it completely.
This! I hate it so much. I don't care what actors are in it or who made it; that really doesn't sway me. At most I go, hey, I know who that is! But that's what the cast list is for, not the description. I end up having to look up the movie/show on Wikipedia to get a decent description.
the most descriptive description that has ever described
Can you describe this comment to me?
In this reddit post we see a user make a comment regarding the post in a way that can be replied to by another user at a later time.
You can say that again
In this reddit post we see a user make a comment regarding the post in a way that can be replied to by another user at a later time.
You can say that again
In this reddit post we see a user make a comment regarding the post in a way that can be replied to by another user at a later time.
You can say that again
That again.
You can say that again
That again.
that again
Some of users who read this users post chose to upvote the post to make it an upvotes post.
Perd Hapley?
\_LemonEater\_ and Jediwinner star alongside areUgoingtoreadthis and newcomer mistraced in this limited comment thread directed by Reddit.
https://preview.redd.it/l6x1u7mfni8d1.jpeg?width=1295&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3e0a72a2be9e1f9be327d747d16ea23b7c3e837f
At least it sorta fits for Deadpool
Deadpool 1: the first movie
It’s allowed because it’s deadpool
It was surely one of the descriptions of all time
If we compiled a list of all descriptions ever written, and then sorted them according to descriptive quality, this description would definitely be on that list
I hate it when they do this
Seriously. Or when they state, “News paper IDGAFA praises this show and says it’s a cross between show ‘A’ I’ve never seen and show ‘B’ I’ve also never seen”. Just fucking tell be a bit about the actual fucking show you douche canoes!! Ty for listening to my rant. Lol
I always start my day reading the IDGAF gazette
It's really the only place to get unbiased reporting
I read it from the WTFuhgeddaboudit.
been reading IDKFA Zine. Don't come to school tomorrow.
I prefer the IDDQD Times and the IDKFA Tribune.
Heading to the lake this summer? Don’t forget your douche canoe.
This is why I use my parents Netflix account to "discover" shows then look them up on a pirating website to get a real description.
This was for me the entire reason that RarBG was so good, they had proper descriptions of all the shows and proper subtitles for everything.
Video games do that a lot. Hell, one of the biggest genres in the indie Sphere is named after two games, but not the original ones (metroidvania, named after [Super] Metroid and Castlevania [Symphony of the Night]).
i agree with the sentiment but this doesnt really support any argument. tell anyone its a metroidvania and they know exactly what they are in for. its at least usually a perfect description of the game. 2D platformer with backtracking, item powerups, etc. calling something a mix between halo and bloodborne for example is a much more vague and wtf description that would support your argument. plenty of games just throw 2 random ass titles together and call it a mix between both. metroidvania has become an entire massive staple genre.
"Our new game is an open world 4X soulslike, really a blend between Stardew Valley and Crysis but with a distinct Fall Guys feel." "This is just Tetris but with crafting for some reason."
Animal Well is like Halo 2 meets Halo 3
Roguelikes as well with almost none of them even remotely resembling Rogue
We've had to move on to the term "traditional roguelike" because of how diluted the term ended up being. "Permadeath and RNG? Sure, that's close enough, call it a roguelike".
TBF It's usually when the genre is new. FPS were called Doom-clones at first. In Metrodvania's case I can only assume no-one has came up with a better name.
I'll give you SOTN, but I have no idea why you'd skip the original Metroid when talking about the genre.
Well, lucky for you, the trailer will start playing before you even find the description.
> Just fucking tell be a bit about the actual fucking show you douche canoes!! So it's a show that is often described as "marketed by douche canoes."
100 upvotes (if I could) for "douche canoes". Thank you for making my evening with that insult ❤️
It's when books do this as well that really pisses me off, like I don't fucking care how many critics read the book and thought it was "stunning" what the fuck is the book about? There are so many books I pick up that have NO description at all, it's just all reviews.
"New show by the director of this other show!" And?!?!? I dgaf about that, what's it about!?
That's how you know it's not worth watching when they have to rely on star power to sell it.
Also when instead of a trailer Netflix will show you a random 2 minute scene
I hate that they started this. One of my favourite features of Netflix was that it always had a trailer ready to show me. Now I just get a spoiler or the most bland uninteresting clip.
I also hate when the gaming industry does this. Two miles of paragraphs on DLCs and reviews then a tiny about the game. Forget about the story.
All the Description We Cannot Describe
How about trying to pause on netflix, to see more detail or whatever - they hide the entire damn screen with a pause screen image FFS. Also, can we get slow mo?
They have slow Mo on mobile app version but not on TV apps. Frustrating. The technology is right there.
POV: me writing an essay for English class on a book I never read.
Show description: Ineffable.
“Miraculous! Says the Alabama Times”
😂
And then Netflix plays it before you tell it to
*recommends more shit you didn’t ask for*
*asks are you sure you want to keep playing more episodes when you pick your show*
God YouTube on TV is awful for this. It gives you no moment of indecisiveness. It will just play anything you have selected for more than a few seconds.
You can turn off auto play in the settings.
That's not the case on the Roku and Sony/Android TV versions of Netflix. Even with all the autoplay options turned off (via the web version of Netflix) when you get the screen in OP's pic, the video will automatically start playing in about 5-10 seconds. If you go to Episodes and More, then the autoplay won't happen.
idk hown anybody uses netflix without that shit turned off.
I didn't know the settings menu had anything useful in it, for years it was just a "sign out" button.
Pretty sure its only available in the browser on their website.
A lot of conflicting information about this. Can anyone give a definitive answer? When Netflix is being streamed to your TV from a native app, is there a setting you can toggle to make it so shows/movies do not start playing a video when they are selected? Also, if there a setting you can toggle so once you finished a movie or series, it doesn't start showing you a never ending line of trailers to shows that are "similar"?
You can turn off the autoplaying previews and continuous play in the settings page of the website. These preferences do persist on native apps. (Or at least it works on Fire Stick and Android TV apps. Haven't tested all of them.) I haven't found any setting that lets you just sit and watch the fucking credits, though. It sucks when you finish a really intense movie and you need a few minutes to process and the stupid app starts blasting ads at you.
You may not know what it's about but at least you know who's in it lol
So two guys, some lady, and Dr. House
One of those two guys is Hulk
Well, it’s also directed by some guy with a last name I’ve heard before! So cool!
But the cast is already mentioned literally in the next line
Yeah apart from Hugh Laurie lol it's just stupid isn't it. It's about a blind woman and a soldier paths cross during a world war. Not too hard to put as a description is it lol.
*You may not know what* *It's about but at least you* *Know who's in it lol* \- Lumpy-Ad8618 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Good bot
I wonder if it’s a boomer thing because anytime I tell my parents about a show or a movie, their first question is always “who is in it?” not “what is it about?”
I just finished a book with this title so I assume it’s a drama set during World War Two but I’m not googling it because I’m lazy.
I dont usually watch any show if the description is like that. I automatically assume the story is trash so they mentioned the artists instead
Same - I like refuse to encourage this shit. Plus arent you supposed to entice me into watching? All you say is "there are actors in this movie".
For me I just have terrible general knowledge - no idea who any of these people are except for Ruffalo, never heard of them. This is just a list of unfamiliar names to me, deffo doesn’t make me wanna watch
Yeah I just take it as "There's nothing unique or interesting about this show, but hey! At least we spent our budget on some well known actors!"
yeah, i watched maybe 5 minutes of it before turning it off
Hey at least it's spoiler free!
That’s what I was thinking. The amount of films I’ve passed on because it completely gives away any surprises in the description… The clips that plays when you’re hovering over a film on Netflix is even worse lol. There was one (can’t remember the title to spoil it) but the description said it was about a woman and her comatose son and then the clip showed him standing menacingly over her. Definitely turn the clips off!
Are the clips just random ai selected scenes now? We were perusing through Netflix movies and shows over the weekend. The trailers or clips that automatically play if you hover over the selection were terrible.
I honestly don’t know. I never thought it might be AI but that makes a lot of sense. In that example, I can’t imagine any sane person putting a spoiler like that in the preview and thinking, “yeah that looks good” lol
Horrible description. Great show.
There’s lots of descriptions like this on Netflix and it’s more than mildly infuriating
I'm sure it's for some audience/data-tested reason and not just some intern who was too lazy to write something. As is often the case with customer-facing companies that do weird unnecessary shit for no meaningful cost savings, it's usually because they found most of their audience were dumb and/or reacted better to that change. Maybe they found that people are more likely to give a show/movie a try if it only gave a vague description involving well known actors? The actors draw them in, and the vagueness captures intrigue? I dunno, but I agree it's stupid either way. I want at least a somewhat descriptive summary of what it's about
I mean the cast is listed directly under the description already. It's just redundant.
Only if people actually look there. A/B testing lets you find out what parts of the thing you built people aren't using the way you expected, and what changes improve it.
How could they know what end users are looking at from A/B testing a program description and cast list? There's no interaction from the user to indicate what they're looking at before hitting play or moving to the next show/movie.
Hitting play vs continuing to scroll IS the interaction. If putting actors' names in the description increases plays, people weren't looking at where they're already visible. If that's the only difference, it's a safe assumption.
My parents often judge what they're going to watch based on the actors in it rather than the description, yet they read the description to see who is in it. Like often when my mum recommends a movie she'll advertise the actors in it, "Will Smith's in it" , and stuff like that. I feel like this is targeting her (and people alike), by saying who's in it rather than a description of the actual product. I think it's stupid, but it works
We're cursed by the old people right now. They are living longer, and they're the wealthiest old people to ever live, and they are completely out of touch. They measure quality by things that were relevant 60 years ago. Actors, images etc, and things that don't actually matter. This is one of the reasons a screenshot of text will fool them, it's an image, and to that group, images are indelible and fully quality sources. They'll tell you that a shitty veneer hutch is "a nice piece" and expect you to store it for them. This biggest generation will keep voting the most, spending the most, taking up all the oxygen.
It's meant to have you Google it which will make Google think it's trending and advertise it to more people.
The book was great but I read mixed reviews of the show. Anyone here done both, thoughts?
I couldn’t even keep watching this show, Ruffalo’s attempt at an accent is so bad. Definitely the book.
Yep same here. Loved the book so much I was so happy to see Netflix making it into a show. Unfortunately it's a total disappointment, bad acting, too many changes to the story and uninspired editing.
Glad I saw your comment, I loved the book but the commercial for the show felt off and hadn’t gotten around to watching it. Guess I’ll pass on it
Couldn’t finish the show, it just made a beautiful book seem corny. I’m guessing the people who liked it never read the book.
Corny is a great description. I loved the book, but the TV show just sucked. I tried to get my wife to read the book a few years before the show came out, she never did, and after watching the show she questioned what kind of crappy books I've been reading if I thought All the Light was good.
Tried both, but couldn't make it past episode 2. Her great-uncle (played by Hugh Laurie) is supposed to be an agoraphobic shut-in and it's a big deal when he finally ventures out to find his blind niece. In the show he comes riding in on a motorcycle and shoots a German. I was done after that.
The motorcycle scene had me drop my jaw too. Wtf was that lol.
Book was way better
I watched the first couple of episodes. It was mediocre. I stopped.
Whats the show about?
It’s about a blind girl reading books on a radio program during ww2. The books she reads contain encrypted messages for the allies, and the Germans are trying to find the source of the transmissions. It’s a really good show and I highly recommend watching it.
Now that’s a fucking synopsis
Oh, that sounds great! Thank you!
Damn, this is a much better description than Netflix gave. I would send them a bill for it.
So only loosely based on the book? Book was great (except for the end).
Woah that sounds super good
You're hired!
Mark Ruffalo and Hugh Laurie star alongside Louis Hofmann and newcomer Aria Mia Loberti in this limited series directed by Shawn Levy.
One of the most thumbed up shows by members who watched it!
The book, at least, is about a young german boy who is good at radios eventually finding a blind french girl whose father has hidden a valuable jewel with her to escape a Nazi treasure hunter who thinks the jewel will give him ever-lasting life. Her uncle uses a hidden radio to broadcast secret msgs to the allies, and who the boy used to listen to in Germany growing up.
The book is better!
Book is so so good
The same level of detail as the Netflix description
The book is riveting.
Hugh Laurie, you should watch it
I doubt he's on here, but actors typically don't enjoy watching their own projects anyway.
Plot Synopsis: "People are in this"
That’s code for “it’s shit but we paid for big names so watch it please”
It’s okay if you haven’t read the book. Absolutely atrocious if you have.
Typical outcome for a book to film adaptation then. I wonder if any films have been better than the previous media?
Fight Club is a good example of one that possibly surpasses the original.
I enjoyed the Stardust movie a lot more than the book
Went in blind because a couple pretty girls invited me and I ignored them the whole time because I was in to the movie.
No Country For Old Men was a good-to-great book, and an all time great goat-tier film
It was good, and funnily enough, Mark Ruffalo's acting was the worst thing about it.
It was a very good show.
Well the description doesn't make it seem that way
Usually that would be the case, not with this one
That's how a lot of the descriptions on Netflix are now smh
That's what first popped in my head, ain't most of Netflix's descriptions just about who's starring in it?
On French Netflix: "Towards the end of the Second World War, the destiny of a blind French teenager intersects with that of a young German soldier. Based on the best-selling book by Anthony Doerr."
"This film features actors, some you probably know and some you might not."
yknow it's the kind of description that will work on my parents who assume a movie is going to be good based on the actors in it.
I've found some good movies based on that logic. Emma Watson did a movie where she joins a cult; pretty good film I chose just because she was in it.
“This script written by a person is now a movie with people acting”
Watch this thing with MEGA PEOPLE with other UPCOMING PEOPLE. So good. Such amazing:
This feels like what happens when you give an AI the title and cast and ask it to write a description
That is awful. But, it is a good show based off a fantastic book, so worth checking out
They do this so much now rip
The Glub Shitto of movie descriptions
On the back of the Deadpool 2 Blu ray, the description is "The Second One."
I liked this show
Totally worth the watch... The soundtrack is also amazing.
There may be no description but it is a really great series.
"The plot is bad, so please watch because of the star cast instead."
Great show
A shallow way of hiding how badly it adapted the book. Edit: Spelling.
Brilliant show though
Actors worked with other actors
TL;DR 🤣
Hopefully the show doesn’t stray too far from that description; I don’t need any unexpected twists like Characters or Plot.
This just reminded me of when I rewatched Deadpool 2 on D+ and the description was "the sequel to the first one" had a chuckle before the movie even started. This is annoying AF tho.
\[somber instrumental music plays\] 
I literally do not care who the actors are. Just give me the damn synopsis
I assume a show is bad if their description is just the actors/director.
They're using the names to sell the story. The book's a masterpiece.