By George, I think they've got it.
In fact, take "I think" out. They've got it: The most important development, maybe, in the whole history of web TV launched a few hours ago, and for once, the hype is justified. Hulu is amazing. Simple. Elegant. Dynamic. And vast.
Hundreds of shows, movies, clips - thousands of hours. Enough to fill, or waste, a whole lifetime. I am blown away by Hulu.
Now, please keep in mind - this is a first impression, and I'll check back later in the day when the servers are being overloaded by millions of viewers; that's where the rubber meets the road for sites like this. But I've gotta imagine NBC and Fox have anticipated this, too.
What is "Hulu?" The omnibus site created by Fox and NBC, featuring (most) of their shows plus many classics, and a vast amount of other stuff as well. Like the ABC and CBS sites, you'll get current episodes, and the full season as well. But, alas, Hulu makes their (nice) episode sites feel clunky and a little moldy.
Yes, there's advertising here, but in a funny way, you'll almost welcome it. "So this is the price to pay...?" Big deal. Worth it. An example: I picked, for no particular reason, the pilot episode of the classic "Firefly." You get a choice - either the full trailer for "Leatherhead," or "regular commercial interruptions" (which, like at, say, ABC, involves a 30-second spot at the outset.) If you pick "Leatherhead," then no other commercials.
Again, an insignificant price to pay.
Hulu gives the illusion of totality, but it is an illusion. I don't (for example) believe I saw any episodes of "American Idol," though "1 vs. 100" is here. What's the logic for inclusion on Hulu? I'm not sure it's evident, and I'm not sure I care either. "Idol" isn't going to be here, of course, because Fox already has a lucrative deal with iTunes. So what. We can live with that. And besides, YouTube and Idolstalker already have this show covered thoroughly.
A quick note on screen quality: It's generally adequate. The actual video screen will fill about a quarter of your's, and it's surrounded by clutter of various sorts, some of it distracting. Naturally, you'll then click on "full screen." Under normal circumstances, "full screen" can be a ticket to on-line hell, with either horrific quality or a frozen hard drive. Not here: Full screen resolution is pretty good, and I had no technical problems to speak of.
As mentioned, I'll check back later, but you should check it out now. Hulu is amazing. I promise.
Comments (2)
I have to disagree. Ive been using the hulu beta for a few months. As of yesterday, to me, Hulu is the opposite of amazing. It's just another site where it's hit or miss what you can get..."The illusion of totality" is dead on, even an understatement:
Only about three of the top 20 shows of the year are available, and of the three, one is already available on ABC.com and the other is Deal or No Deal. Most of the other available current shows like ,The Office and 30 Rock, are also already available on their network sites - so redundant..(and the hulu ads I find almost identical to and just as annoying as ABC's...)
Very few good cable shows are on there (no shield, closer, sopranos, wire, saving grace, mad men, etc.)
Only current seasons of "today's hits" are available (see The Office, Heroes, Prison Break....and again, some are already on the network sites) .... And often, only a few episodes of said current season (check out availablity of Monk or Psych or ER) are online.
There is a HUGE array of crappy reality shows.
Older shows are available in limited doses, and it's the same stuff you find elsewhere online, sometimes for free.
Shows advertised as being on there, like Damages, aren't. Others hyped are only available in clip form. Special Victims Unit, for example. Ah, the ol bait and switch!
And the clips? Clips are everywhere. Who cares about clips for a tv drama?
To me, it seems like the networks are still being stingy with their top shows. hulu is hyp-o
I find it troubling that these types of web sites are now being touted as "amazing", "dynamic" and "vast" when they are nothing more than poor clones and remakes of their—mind you, copyright-infringing—predecessors. It is both a massive slam dunk for their PR representation, and embarrassingly disconcerting for the news media, that this web site is garnering the press coverage that it has. "Hulu is hyp-o" from the commenter before me sums up my feelings as well.