Netflix vs The Big Screen
11/December/2025
I’m watching recent developments in Hollywood with both fascination and more than a little trepidation, as someone pursuing a profession in film and media. The news that Netflix is bidding to acquire Warner Bros., including its film and television studios, streaming assets and historic film library, could mark a turning point. If the deal goes through, it might fundamentally reshape how films are distributed, how cinemas operate and even what opportunities exist for emerging filmmakers in the UK.
On 5 December 2025, Netflix announced a definitive agreement to acquire Warner Bros., valuing the transaction at roughly $82.7 billion (equity value about $72 billion). (Netflix) The deal not only brings together Netflix’s global streaming reach with Warner’s century-long legacy of storytelling from Oscar-seared films to blockbuster franchises, but also consolidates a huge swath of future content under a single corporate umbrella. (Forbes)
That consolidation has sent ripples across the industry. Some hail the deal as a streaming ‘superpower’, a union that could deliver more content to more viewers than ever before. Which, in my opinion, is not always a good thing! Others, including cinema trade bodies and unions representing actors, directors, and crew, are warning that this could spell trouble for theatres, independent cinemas, and the broader ecosystem that relies on a steady flow of theatrical releases. (Los Angeles Times)
In a time when cinema ticket sales are rocky, if not dwindling, this matters deeply. I fear that we may be entering a more precarious yet potentially transformative era for film distribution.
We are increasingly seeing fewer films making it to the big screen, and often the ones that are have very short runs before going straight to streaming. The European cinema-exhibition body UNIC (which represents cinema exhibitors across 39 territories, including the UK) has already raised serious concerns that the acquisition could trigger “significant cinema closures” and job losses. (Screen Daily) In their view, combining the world’s largest streaming platform with one of Hollywood’s most important theatrical pipelines threatens the consistent supply of films that cinemas need to survive.
The underlying problem? Streaming-first business models don’t tend to prioritise theatrical distribution. Over the years, Netflix has expressed scepticism about traditional theatrical windows, favouring immediate or near-immediate digital releases. Which, for them, makes sense as it directs people straight to their platform, but it cuts out the already struggling cinemas and makes a film feel more like content.
If they bypass cinemas or even shorten film runs further, it would likely hit the mid-budget, independent, or niche British films especially hard, the kinds of films that don’t rely on blockbuster box office but whose very existence benefits from a diverse theatrical ecosystem and audience reach.
On the flip side, the deal could turbocharge streaming, which brings both opportunity and risk. By combining Netflix’s global audience and distribution infrastructure with Warner Bros.’ deep vault of IP, from classic films to blockbuster franchises, the merged entity would wield enormous influence over what audiences see and where they see it.
For filmmakers and producers, especially those early in their careers, this might open up new paths to distribution. If Warner Bros. films move more quickly to streaming or straight-to-streaming, that could mean faster exposure, lower distribution costs, and potentially greater predictability compared with the unpredictability of theatrical success. And for smaller-budget or independent films, the kind that traditionally struggle to secure or manage theatrical runs, a streaming-first release could offer a more reliable route to reach audiences.
But this also raises concerns about creative diversity and fair competition. With fewer major studios controlling more films, TV shows and distribution channels, there’s a danger of a homogenised output in which big-IP franchises get priority, while smaller, riskier, or more experimental projects get sidelined.
As someone early in their career, I watch this shift with a conflicted mind. On one hand, the new media behemoth could lower barriers, giving films that would once have struggled to find theatrical backing a better chance at reaching audiences via streaming. It could also mean greater access to resources, talent, and international visibility that only a global platform like Netflix can offer.
On the other hand, if the theatrical release pipeline shrinks significantly, the traditional ‘cinema launch, build prestige, festival buzz, long-tail audience' path may become much harder to navigate, especially for British films that often rely on a combination of theatrical exposure, local support and indie-level budgets.
For UK filmmakers who dream of cinematic release and seeing their name at the end of the credits as the last lights come up, that dream might not vanish, but it could become harder to realise. Instead, we may have to lean into streaming-first strategies or accept smaller, niche audiences, particularly for non-blockbuster films.
I suspect we’re heading into a hybrid era, where some films, especially big franchise or high-profile projects, still get theatrical releases, while many others go straight to streaming. But that hybrid model may be under pressure.
With a merged Netflix and Warner Bros., the balance could tilt more heavily toward streaming. The incentive to preserve cinemas may weaken, especially if streaming yields more predictable returns and less marketing overhead.
If that happens, cinemas may survive but only as boutique, niche, or “event” venues; the broader, everyday film-going culture might shrink. Independent theatres and arthouses may struggle more than multiplexes. UK audiences and UK filmmakers might lose some of the variety and risk-taking that smaller films bring.
For me, and for anyone starting out in film in the UK, this feels like a call to sharpen our strategy. We need to think early about distribution: where our films fit, which platforms make sense, and what trade-offs we’re willing to accept among reach, creative control, and the cinematic experience.
We may also need to be more flexible, more entrepreneurial. Instead of relying on a traditional theatrical release, we might need to embrace streaming-first or digital-leaning strategies to succeed as the next generation of filmmakers. But that doesn’t mean giving up on cinematic ambition, just recognising that “cinema or bust” may no longer be realistic for many films.
Finally, there’s value in fighting, or at least asking, hard questions about consolidation, diversity, and access. If fewer conglomerates control more content, the voices and stories that get made may narrow. For UK film to remain vibrant, inclusive and diverse, emerging filmmakers must stay aware of the stakes.
The proposed Netflix and Warner Bros. deal isn’t just another merger. It could shatter the traditional economic foundations of how films are made, distributed and consumed. For cinema-goers, filmmakers, and the communities surrounding film culture, the stakes are high.
As someone still finding my way in this industry, I believe this is a moment for reflection, vigilance, and making the most of the direction film viewing is taking, while also using it as an opportunity to innovate. Because the decisions made now, by streaming giants and regulators alike, may define what the next generation of British film looks like.
