|
||||||||
SKy Movies-Too many repeats |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 919
|
SKy Movies-Too many repeats
I added the Sky Movies sub at the same time as I subscribed to my HD Box around a year ago. But I am beginning to realise that they appear to have the same restricted cycle of films to show as TCM! With the major issue that TCM is free, while Sky Movies costs.
I'd be interested in any comments from Sky Movies subscribers who've had Sky movies for some time longer than I have. Has this restricted set of films always been the case? Or is it a recent development?. If I see 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' and 'As good as it gets', 'Pirates of the Carribean' etc, in the list one more time, I'll scream, and not for the right reasons... |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
|
We never have enough time watch all the movies we want and we only watch the three HD channels.
If you're looking only for 'blockbusters' you'll have a limited choice. There are loads of gems hidden in the schedule, especially in daytime or late night slots and many I'd never heard of. I check every title on http://www.imdb.com and look at the users' scores to get an idea of how good the film is. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 387
|
I agree
We are paying so much for these premium channels yet there seems to be the same 30 films going around and around and around ..... Even when the new HD channels are added in October if this is the best Sky can do I will be ending my movies subs as they are simply not worth the money. I can not believe how often I flick though and do not see one single film that I have not seen before on Sky Movies.
I still do not understand why Sky think that they can get away with showing so many repeats? They say it is for people who may have missed them (very weak reason, very!) , as they well know so many of us have sky+ and all HD users have this facility. So for HD users 100% with Sky+ there is even less of an excuse for lots of repeats on the HD movie channels. But I would put good money on the fact that Sky will continue to do this. We all need to vote with our feet if this continues and cancel the subs so that Sky understand that this is simply not good enough Your thoughts pepople??? Perhaps even someone Sky would like to come on this forum and explain why the channels are just so poor? |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kilwinning, North Ayrshire.
Posts: 6,107
|
Quote:
We are paying so much for these premium channels yet there seems to be the same 30 films going around and around and around ..... Even when the new HD channels are added in October if this is the best Sky can do I will be ending my movies subs as they are simply not worth the money. I can not believe how often I flick though and do not see one single film that I have not seen before on Sky Movies.
I still do not understand why Sky think that they can get away with showing so many repeats? They say if it is for people who may have missed them, but so many of us have sky+ and all HD users have this facility so even less excuse for lots of repeats on the HD movie channels. But I would out good money on the fact that Sky will continue to do this. We all need to vote with our feet if this continues and cancel the subs so that Sky understand that this is simply not good enough Your thoughts pepople??? Perhaps even someone Sky would like to come on this forum and explain why the channels are just so poor? That was the reason i ended my Sky subscription many years ago, endless repeats month after month, i had enough of the "Sky Movies Loop" and just cancelled, i have saved a fortune since that day. Seems not a lot has changed then. I don't miss my Sky TV one bit. Best thing you can do is vote with your wallet and say enough is enough if it really annoys you rigney. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
|
Quote:
We are paying so much for these premium channels yet there seems to be the same 30 films going around and around and around .....
Tomorrow, excluding Premiere there's 14 more different titles. That's 36 HD films in two days!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 387
|
Yes but how many of that 36 have now been shown before?
Yes you got it 36 most of them in the last 7 days too! This is simply not on Sky - a loop! and you call this a premium service it is clearly nothing like a premium service. It would even be a bit better if they just licenced more film titles and rotated them on a less often basis? Can they really think that there is anyone out there who is happy with it like this? |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Crawley, W Sussex
Posts: 5,556
|
Quote:
We are paying so much for these premium channels yet there seems to be the same 30 films going around and around and around ..... Even when the new HD channels are added in October if this is the best Sky can do I will be ending my movies subs as they are simply not worth the money. I can not believe how often I flick though and do not see one single film that I have not seen before on Sky Movies.
I still do not understand why Sky think that they can get away with showing so many repeats? They say it is for people who may have missed them (very weak reason, very!) , as they well know so many of us have sky+ and all HD users have this facility. So for HD users 100% with Sky+ there is even less of an excuse for lots of repeats on the HD movie channels. But I would put good money on the fact that Sky will continue to do this. We all need to vote with our feet if this continues and cancel the subs so that Sky understand that this is simply not good enough Your thoughts pepople??? Perhaps even someone Sky would like to come on this forum and explain why the channels are just so poor? There is a finite amount of films, given they take many months to make this situation is not going to improve - and will look worse when the new movie HD channels come on board. Compare this with sport - sky can't even find time in the schedules to do re-runs of their EPL live matches
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Stoke on Trent
Posts: 2,297
|
Here is one positive vote for Sky Movies
I have been using this forum now for nearlly 5 years, and have been a Sky Movies subscribers since Sky Digital began.
I find Sky Movies excellent value for money. There are 3-5 movie premieres on each week, and although a couple are sometimes the cheap kind of movie, I still enjoy watching them at the weekend. There is usually something to watch when I feel the need to watch a movie. I think Sky Premiere +1 is a bit overkill, and would prefer another channel in its place, but I can see how it would be useful. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
|
Quote:
Yes but how many of that 36 have now been shown before?
Yes you got it 36 most of them in the last 7 days too! |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 387
|
Stop whinging? I have every right to complain about a service this poor, the point of this forum to talk about what we ALL think. If you don't like it then that is fine too all opinions are allowed.
I work in the TV business so I understand exactly how film licencing works and I know that Sky could do much better if they really wanted to. I don't watch sport so I will not comment on these channels as I am sure that you will know better. But I have every right as a paying customer to have an opinion about a service as poor as the Sky movie channels. Of course another option would be for Sky to reduce the channels to the level that thier acquisitions really do support, we are not stupid enough films for only 5 channels on 10+ Sky movie channel will never really work i.e. only possible with a million repeats. At least 250 different titles shown per month. That includes about 25-28 new titles every month. This means that each title is shown around 10 times per month! Terrirble!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Stoke on Trent
Posts: 2,297
|
Oh yeah, I forgot to say something in my last post.
Over the last 5 years, people have complained on this forum each year that there are too many repeats. And each year, a few people like myself post messages giving the oposite opinion. The fact is that everyone has different tastes and what one person feels as there being too many repeats, another person could feel the oposite. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
|
The simple fact is that if SKY only showed a movie once a month that would probably just fill one channel up and while multiple channels with the same amount of new and catalogue content has it's downside the upside speaks for itself.
The bottom line is that SKY have access to a set amount of new movies per month (based on theatrical window and PPV/Rental window), there is no other source of content except from the big studios from around the world and using catalogue titles offers more choice and value, no different really to the local DVD shop or online rental. As mentioned the choice is yours, I watch more than enough new movies and older titles per month to justify the cost of movies and of course the HD is pure icing on the cake. I've looked at DVD rental (online and high street) but I'd end up spending far more money per month and probably watching fewer movies
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,623
|
$ky Movies is a load of rubbish, your best off paying to see a film you really want to see on PPV or buying the dvd as you would most prob end up saving alot of money then in long run like i have since i got rid of $ky movies, as can get dvds super cheap and most movies on $ky movies old repeats anyway
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 5,718
|
I find the best course of action with Sky Movies is to subscribe for a few months, then unsubscribe for a similar amount of time. After 3-4 months of subscribing, I've usually seen all the films I want to, so as soon as I notice my viewing of the Sky Movies channels reducing to less than a few films a week, I unsubscribe. After 3-4 months of being unsubscribed, the range of films has been replenished, so I re-subscribe and have plenty of choice available to me. This on then off pattern means I don't miss any films I want to see (given most films are shown for longer than the ~4 months I usually unsubscribe for), plus I save money versus subscribing all year round.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
|
Quote:
$ky Movies is a load of rubbish, your best off paying to see a film you really want to see on PPV or buying the dvd as you would most prob end up saving alot of money then in long run like i have since i got rid of $ky movies, as can get dvds super cheap and most movies on $ky movies old repeats anyway
In your opinion ![]() However if you are only interested in the latest releases and are not a cinema goer then DVD rental is the best option both in the timeframe you can see the movie and the SD quality. Once again though it is your opinion and choice, doesn't mean it's the same for everyone which is one reason why subscription TV works, what suits one viewers doesn't suit another and thankfully we all have the choice. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: North London
Posts: 9,314
|
There's 5 new movies a week, usually at least a couple of them are worth watching, plus the classics and the replays of more recent movies I haven't had the chance to catch up on. The amount of movies I watch in a month it's definitely good value.
Looking forward to the other movie channels going HD. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
|
Quote:
I find the best course of action with Sky Movies is to subscribe for a few months, then unsubscribe for a similar amount of time. After 3-4 months of subscribing, I've usually seen all the films I want to, so as soon as I notice my viewing of the Sky Movies channels reducing to less than a few films a week, I unsubscribe.
I did the same thing each xmas for a couple of years, got about 30 odd movies for one months subscription either recorded onto SKY+ while not a movie subscriber or recorded externally which a subscriber ![]() Right now I'm back on the full package, adding movies only costs £8 and there is plenty to watch especially as a HD subscriber. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
|
Quote:
$ky Movies is a load of rubbish, your best off paying to see a film you really want to see on PPV or buying the dvd as you would most prob end up saving alot of money then in long run like i have since i got rid of $ky movies, as can get dvds super cheap and most movies on $ky movies old repeats anyway
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 129
|
I dumped movies a long time ago and I've never ever missed it, dumped sports at the same time but turn that back on from time to time for the champions league, movies and there repeats are a joke I'd go months without watching a movie.
as above best just to use the ppv stuff or join one of the internet rental schemes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,366
|
Quote:
as above best just to use the ppv stuff or join one of the internet rental schemes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 919
|
Quote:
If you're looking only for 'blockbusters' you'll have a limited choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sunny Suffolk by the Sea
Posts: 1,440
|
The funny thing is, pre Sky the BBC used to get slated for showing repeats of things in the Summer months. Mr Angry of Tunbridge Wells would regularly get a little rant on Points of View about how he was being ripped off by the BBC and the licence fee.
Here we are years on and not only are Sky outputting repeat, repeat after repeat, but they are also producing little in the way of original content, charging a lot lot more than the licence fee and saturating programs with ads. Barmy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
|
Quote:
Definitely not, they are the last thing I'd watch! There are indeed odd goodies, but why all the repeats... I'm not talking HD particularly, it's the group as a whole. It must be very cheap for Sky to run, especially when they use News International/Fox owned films.
So given there is only a finite amount of new content from the distributers which have left the theatrical and DVD rental/ppv window what exactly are they supposed to show if not repeats? No matter how you look at it it's going to annoy some people. If they go back to say only 3 movie channels pre digital there were still repeats and probably a similar amount of premieres each month. The only practical way to reduce repeats is to reduce the broadcast hours and the problem with that is catalogue content is bought by the bucket load at prices in line with the market while the premieres carry a very high premium and probably account for around 90% of the SKY movie budget. So if they slashed the catalogue titles then there would be no corresponding reduction in package price. If you say they should expand the back catalogue then there would still be repeats, maybe not quite as frequent but enough to have the same people complaining about the same issues. We always come back to there being very valid and genuine options to SKY Movies as in DVD rental (online, highstreet), VOD on BTV and VM plus retail DVD. There is really no excuse for continuing to pay for SKY Movies on the grounds you have no options
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: with Dr Kilmore
Posts: 2,276
|
I ditched Sky Movies because I was fed up with the repeats and poor offerings. Ever since Sky Movies relaunched into genre channels last year, the service has gone right downhill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ilkeston
Posts: 18,075
|
Quote:
The funny thing is, pre Sky the BBC used to get slated for showing repeats of things in the Summer months. Mr Angry of Tunbridge Wells would regularly get a little rant on Points of View about how he was being ripped off by the BBC and the licence fee.
Here we are years on and not only are Sky outputting repeat, repeat after repeat, but they are also producing little in the way of original content, charging a lot lot more than the licence fee and saturating programs with ads. Barmy. Barry Tuck, great days ![]() The problem if there is one is that many people complain for the sake of it and a lot of them don't even have SKY, at the end of the days it's multichannel TV it's meant to be dipped in and out of and not provide a full schedule 24/7 that is after all why we have the so called PSB broadcasters. In the old days as now we have little choice in paying for the BBC while SKY is an option, exercising your consumer power by not paying for SKY and making use of other PAY or non-sub alternatives is surely more satisfying. For me the SKY subscription is better value than the license fee (including all the other PSB's thrown in) based on per hour viewing against cost, it's perhaps says a lot about the old guard of the BBC and ITV that they were incapable of offering the viewer what they wanted and SKY and others have done for a price. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:38.


